Transcript No Slide Title

Feed the Poor and Afflicted
Protect the Earth
Celebrate Life!
THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL
WHAT IS THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL ?
Montreal Protocol is an international treaty that regulates the phase out of all ozone depleting substances
(not only methyl bromide)
CURRENT PHASE OUT SHEDULE for METHYL BROMIDE.
Montreal Protocol
Article 2 countries
Montreal Protocol
Article 5 countries
January 1, 1995
Freeze on level of
1991 (=baseline)
Freeze on baseline
1991 + 10%
January 1, 1999
Reduction to 75% of
baseline 1991
1991 + 15%
Reduction to 75% of
baseline 1991
Reduction to 50% of
baseline 1991
1991 + 15%
Reduction to 40% of
baseline 1991
January 1, 2001
EC Directive
20372000
January 1, 2002
January 1, 2003
Reduction to 30% of
baseline 1991
Reduction to 25% of
baseline 1991
January 1, 2005
Phase out
CU and QPS still
allowed
Reduction to 80% of
baselineof average 9598
Phase out
CU and QPS still
allowed
January 1, 2015
Phase out
CU and QPS still allowed
Phase out
CU and QPS still allowed
Phase out
CU and QPS still
allowed
Montreal Protocol phase out does not include amounts for quarantine, pre-shipment AND critical uses
Article 2 countries = developed countries according to the Montreal Protocol
Article 5 countries = developing countries according to the Montreal Protocol
What is QPS & CUE?
(Quarantine & Pre-shipment; Critical Use Exemption)
Quarantine applications with methyl bromide are needed to prevent
the migration of pests when importing or exporting different products.
(quarantine fumigation of containers shipped to Australia to prevent
infestation of Syrex wasp in Australia).
Pre Shipment application is use of methyl bromide to sanitize goods
before export (rice, grain, nuts etc.)
Growers can apply for CRITICAL USES (CUE)_ when no alternative is
effective or the alternative is economically not feasible. (Only after
2015 for most A5 countries)
The Montreal Protocol does NOT Limit QPS Use
Science
WHAT IS ODP VALUE OF METHYL BROMIDE ?
ODP means Ozone Depleting Potential
(Standard is R11 with ODP = 1)
ODP from Methyl Bromide
1992 =
0.7
1994 =
0.6
1998 =
0.4 – 0.2
2001 =
0.2 – 0.0
See also
•
Some considerations on Methyl
Bromide published by Prof.
Casanova : page 6
•
The Methyl Bromide Fact Sheet:
page 17
•
Methyl Bromide impact on ozone
layer: page 19
The Effect of Methyl Bromide on The Ozone is Much
Lower Than originally Estimated.
Science
Ozone depletion potential of
methyl bromide
0.7
0.6
0.4
Reality
1991
1994
• Discovery of additional natural sources
•Salt marshes
•brassica plants
•rice paddies
2001
?
• +/- 30% of natural sources of methyl bromide remain
unidentified
• Total global phase out by 2004 = <1% improvement in
ozone recovery by 2050
Freezing the phase out at current levels for an additional 10 years will
have no adverse effect on ozone recovery.
Science
Original Assumptions vs Current Assumptions
Annual Emissions,ODP MT
30,000
With phase-out schedule
adopted in Vienna, 1995
20,000
With phase-out schedule
adopted in Montreal, 1997,
and ODP change to 0.4
10,000 M.T.s
10,000
20
10
20
09
20
08
20
07
20
06
20
05
20
04
20
03
20
02
20
01
20
00
19
99
19
98
19
97
19
96
19
95
19
94
-
The ODP Re-calculation Reduced Emissions More
Than Any “Control” Measure
Science
Sources
Ocean:
56 (5-130)
Sinks =Absorption
Oceans: 77 (37-133)
Soil fumigation: 26.5 (16-48)
OH and radiation: 86 (65-107)
Fumigation of durables: 6.6 (4.8-8.4)
Soils: 46.8 (32-154)
Fumigation of perishables: 5.7 (5.4-6.0)
Plants: unknown
Fumigation of structures: 2 (2-2)
Petrol: 5 (0-10)
Burning: 20 (10-40)
Wetlands: 4.6
Marshes: 14 (7-29)
Rapeseed: 6.6 (4.8-8.4)
Paddyfields: 1.5 (0.5-2.5)
Fungi: 1.7 (0.5-5.2)
TOTAL Sources= 151 Gg/year, with an
interval of variation between 56 and 190
Gg/year
TOTAL Sinks= 210 Gg/year, with an interval
of variation between 134 and 394 Gg/year.
Source Prof Casanove Paper
Is There Really an Emissions Problem?
Science
•
Unlike every other ODS, most
methyl bromide comes from
natural sources.
•
According to the World
Meteorological Organisation
(WMO), farming and other uses
emit about 27,000 metric tons of
methyl bromide a year. (17 % of
the total).
•
•
But the oceans emit more than
twice that amount – 56,000 metric
tons – and wetlands and rapeseed
plants together emit another 11,000
metric tons
Another 60,000-70,000 metric tons
of naturally produced methyl
bromide comes from unknown
source
METHYL BROMIDE SOURCES
agricultural
sources
17%
agricultural sources
natural sources
natural sources
83%
Do you believe that
controlling 17% of all
the methyl bromide
produced will save the
ozone?
Science
A Short History of the Ozone Hole
Science
Another Year to Year Comparison
Science
The Ozone Hole 1979- 2003
What is Happening Here ?
Science
Could there be other factors affecting the Ozone layer?
“We were able to show, for instance that when El Chichon went off in
1981 and then Pinatubo in the 1990s, both had significant effects
on the ups and downs of ozone depletion. Pinatubo, in particular,
had a measurable effect in the northern mid-latitude depletion via
chlorine chemistry on the volcanic particle surfaces in the
stratosphere. That was a pretty major finding and really helped to
explain why, at that time of history, the ozone in our latitudes looked the
way it did.”
– Dr Susan Solomon, Science Watch 2001
Some Ozone Depletion is Caused by Nature
Science
Earth's ozone depletion is finally slowing
30 July 03 NewScientist.com news service
Almost 30 years after it was first reported that
pollutants were destroying the Earth's protective
ozone layer, there is clear evidence that the global
CFC ban has had an impact. For the first time, it
has been shown that the rate of ozone depletion in
the upper stratosphere - 35 to 45 kilometres up - is
slowing down. "This is the beginning of a recovery
of the ozone layer," says Michael Newchurch, at
the University of Alabama in Huntsville, who led
the new research.
Journal reference: Journal of Geophysical Research (DOI:10.1029/2003JD003471)
The Ozone “Problem” is Getting Better
Overview of the Science
•
The ODP for methyl bromide continues to go down (and probably will
go down even further)
•
The ozone layer appears to be “improving” (much of the science
remains to be clarified)
•
The lowering of the ODP for methyl bromide may have made the need
for further reductions unnecessary.
•
There is a growing evidence that man-made methyl bromide does NOT
significantly impact the ozone layer
In light of these findings why rush the Phase-out?
Are We Protecting The Environment?
Environment
Are We Protecting the Environment?
• Is safe drinking water important?
• Is protecting the health of workers important?
• Is it sound environmental policy to put more land into
production?
• Is a clean, safe supply of food important?
Do the proposed “alternatives” to methyl bromide meet
these criteria?
Ai
Ca
rc
in
Alternative
og
en
cit
rq
y
ua
Co
lit
nc
y
G
iss
er
ro
ns
ue
un
s
dw
at
Ec
er
on
Co
om
nt
ic
am
W
F
in
ee
ea
at
si
d
io
bi
Co
n.
l
i
ty
nt
Di
ro
se
l
as
e
Co
Ne
nt
m
ro
at
l
od
e
Re
Co
gi
nt
st
ro
ra
l
t io
Sc
n
al
(
C
ab
ur
ilit
re
y
nt
Te
)
ch
ni
ca
lF
Av
ea
ai
la
sib
bi
ilit
lity
y
M
ul
ti
Ye
ar
Su
cc
es
s
Environment
Methyl Bromide
1,3-D
Metam Sodium
Iodomethane
Sulfuryl Fluoride
Solarization
Solarization + Manure
Biofumigation
Furfuryl
Agrizide
= No concern
= Uncertain
= Problem area

Groundwater issues limit the use of 1,3-D in the U.S. e.g., the product cannot be used in southern Florida
because of this problem.

The full impact of the alternatives on the environment has not been well documented or discussed.

Only 1,3-D, Metam Sodium, and Sulfuryl Fluoride are currently registered and available for use.

The non-chemical alternatives have not been widely tested in real production agriculture.
The “Alternatives" Have Problems of Their Own
Environment
Fluoride Action Network
March 29, 2004
Groups challenge EPA's approval of Dow's Sulfuryl fluoride:
EPA allows 5 times higher levels for Infants than Adults
•
EPA identified fluoride as the major toxicological endpoint of concern for
exposure to Sulfuryl fluoride. In its Risk Assessment, which served as the basis
for approval, EPA made an unprecedented decision to allow an acceptable
dosage for infants (0.571 mg/kg bodyweight/day) which is five times higher than
for adults (0.114 mg/kg/day).
•
Workers are at risk not only from the acute toxicity of Sulfuryl fluoride but also
the potential for brain, lung, kidney, and bone effects.
What Will You Do If an Alternative “Goes Away”?
Environment
European Community Establishes a Tolerance of 1 ppm for Fluoride Residue in Wine
excerpt from:
Federal Register: July 6, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 130)
Rules and Regulations
Page 41594-41601
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
ACTION: Final rule.
... III. Emergency Exemption for Tebufenozide on Grapes and FFDCA Tolerances
Grapes are California's number one ranked crop in dollar value, accounting for over 90% of the grapes grown in
the United States. The European export market for California wines accounts for well over $250 million. The Grape
Leaf folder causes injury in the larval stages by rolling and feeding on the leaves, reducing photosynthetic function.
The Omnivorous leaf roller directly reduces grape yields by injuring the flowers and developing berries it feeds on.
The Omnivorous leaf roller also allows entry of bunch rot organisms that damage entire clusters which may result
in rejection at the winery.
Cryolite is the registered alternative most often used to control both Grape Leaf folders and Omnivorous leaf
rollers. However, for the 2000 crop year, nearly all major California wineries with export markets have advised
their growers that they will not accept grapes which have been treated with cryolite or any other product
which would affect the level of fluorides in wine. The European Community recently established strict
tolerance levels of 1 ppm with respect to fluoride residues.
How Might This Affect Trade with The E.U.?
Environment
Methyl Bromide is;
 NOT a carcinogen (magazine articles are not studies)
 NOT a mutagen
 NOT a groundwater pollutant
 NOT persistent in the soil or environment
 NOT the ozone depleter it was once thought to be
Economically, and Environmentally, Methyl Bromide is the
Right Choice
Update on Status of Methyl Bromide
• Critical Use Exemptions for 2005
• QPS use in A5 and A2
• Country issues with the Protocol
We Need to Feed The World
Methyl Bromide Won’t Be Phased Out In 2005
Methyl Bromide Usage in 2005:
 The E.U. will have 4,126 M.T. (9M pounds) as Critical Use Exemptions
 The U.S. will have 19M pounds (8,961 M.T.’s) as Critical Use
Exemptions
 The E.U. will have approximately (1,012M.T.) for use as QPS.
 The U.S. will have approximately 1-2M pounds for use as QPS.
 Article 5 (Developing nations) will use approximately 4 M pounds for
use as QPS.
Methyl Bromide will Continue to be Used In 2005
CRITICAL USES in EU for 2005
TOTAL APPROVED VOLUME
MEMBER STATE
Approved, EMOP, Recommended by
March 2004
MBTOC, June 2004
for 2005
for 2005
Total approved and
recommended
for 2005
Belgium
France
Germany
Greece
Italy
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Spain
Switzerland
United Kingdom
43.57
407.00
0.00
186.00
2133.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
1059.00
0.00
128.08
11.67
7.64
45.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
40.00
0.00
0.00
8.70
6.33
55.24
414.64
45.25
186.00
2133.00
0.00
40.00
50.00
1059.00
8.70
134.41
Grand Total
4006.65
119.58
4126.23
Approved and recommended volume for CUE = 4126 = 21,47% of the EU baseline 1991
CUE is 21% of Baseline
CRITICAL USES in U.S for 2005
TOTAL APPROVED VOLUME
EPA Category
Commodity Storage Total
2003 Application
EPA
EMOP
2005
Nomination
Approval
280,500
193,255
193,255
Cucurbits Total
2,950,780
2,618,624
2,618,624
Eggplants Total
116,613
162,259
162,259
Forest tree seedlings Total
799,036
424,419
424,419
20,282
20,282
20,282
3,432,036
1,657,782
1,657,806
498,449
64,842
64,842
Peppers Total
4,379,398
2,392,652
2,392,652
Post harvest/food processing
Total
1,912,757
1,182,389
1,064,822
Strawberry nurseries Total
1,061,250
121,227
121,231
494,994
494,994
178,198
46,270
0
0
Tomatoes Total
10,642,860
6,316,840
6,316,840
Turfgrass Total
1,500,000
776,447
455,977
34,152,723
21,868,889
19,714,113
38.9%
35.0%
Ginger Total
Orchard nurseries Total
Ornamental Nurseries Total
Sweet Potato Total
Tobacco Total
Grand Total
% of Baseline
60.7%
CUE is 35% of Baseline
Other Issues With The Protocol
You May Have Read or Heard About Some “Issues” A5
Countries are Having with the Protocol
 There are 11-15 Developing Nations (A5) who are currently
“out of compliance” with the Montreal Protocol.
 A proposal has been put forward to the meeting of the
Parties in Prague to grant “flexibility” when dealing with A5
phase-out dates.
 Some A5 countries are having difficulty meeting phase-out
schedules due to the ineffectiveness, or lack of alternatives
This should have been expected, instead of “pushing” to get countries in
compliance, UNEP should take the time necessary to completely and
fairly address each countries specific problem.
Is the Protocol Helping These Countries?
Overview of Phase-Out
 QPS is not limited by the Protocol
 The Scientific evidence against methyl bromide is not unequivocal.
 There is no drop-in replacement for methyl bromide.
 Alternatives are either not available or are not efficacious.
 Alternatives have their own serious flaws.
 Some A5 countries are currently “out of compliance” with the Protocol
 Some A5 countries are having difficulties implementing their accelerated phaseout schedules.
 A2 countries will have CUE in 2005
Why Not “Go Slow”?
ECONOMIC IMPACT
Economic Impact
Export Value of Selected Commodities That
Use Methyl Bromide
Country
Total by
Country (000’s)
Pakistan
69,669
Philippines
79,903
Malaysia
121,344
Thailand
411,252
Viet Nam 3.7 BILLION DOLLARS! 554,319
India
616,120
Source FAO
Sri Lanka
755,027
Indonesia
1,080,715
Total
3,688,349
Why should You risk so much?
Economic Impact
Value (in 000 of U.S.$) of Ten Commodities Imported
into The U.S. in 2003
Country
Sri Lanka
Tobac.
Raw
Coffee
Cocoa
Beans
Fresh
Veg.
525
0
0
Taiwan
0
0
0
Malaysia
0
0
6,607
Phillippines
Thailand
New Zealand
Indonesia
Fresh
Fruit
Tree
Nuts
Roast
Coffee
Spices
Logs
and
Chips
Hard
wood
Lumber
Total By
Country
89
911
212
6,254
0
0
7,991
630
5,312
644
44
936
0
1,542
9,108
0
0
7
40
419
3,935
83
15,709
20,193
15
0
182
181
36,709
1,830
241
0
2,691
48,456
23,062
2,019
0
667
7,151
8,013
603
3,597
90
4,255
49,457
682
504
0
1,506
65,819
116
12
19
1,416
130
70,204
12,028
78,127
193,595
54
0
2,182
12,882
119,525
79
8,116
426,588
42,904
80,665
193,595
3,039
78,559
48,615
16,002
134,507
1,668
32,443
631,997
$631,000,000 in Exports Why Take a Chance?
Economic Impact
Value of Selected Imports
(Values in 000’s of U.S.Dollars)
Total
Cassava
Total
Coffee
&Cocoa
Tobacco
&
Durables
Total
Citrus
& Kiwi
India
297,897
0
9,582
285,609
574
76,802
30,270
64
71
217
701,086
235
5,044
49,707
1,094,688
51,731
4,654
2,934
29,561
529
1,611
1,240,694
Malaysia
3,002
16,318
164,338
362,245
32,063
12,121
12,603
4,723
6,359
17,063
630,835
Pakistan
1,645
370
1,305
261,618
0
11,529
8,862
134
0
837
286,300
Philippines
384
8,734
47,094
343,431
5,084
1,214
182
101
7
506
406,737
Sri Lanka
108
1,393
1,531
66,115
2,853
353
2,106
406
12
151
75,028
Thailand
160
50
35,759
856,529
560
3,883
511
14
25
2,915
900,406
Viet Nam
0
0
1,584
283,012
0
4,651
40
0
0
69
289,356
303,431
31,909
310,900
3,553,247
92,865
115,207
57,508
35,003
7,003
23,369
4,530,442
Total
Total
Rice
Total
Fresh
Fruit
Country
Indonesia
Total
Spices
Total
Dried
Fruit
Total
Nuts
Source FAO
$4,530,442,000 =Value of Your Imports
Total
Vegs.
Total By
Country
Economic Impact
Estimated Fumigation of Imported Goods
Based on estimated U.S.D.A. fumigations by sector
Total
Cassava
Total
Coffee
&Cocoa
Tobacco
&
Durables
Total
Citrus
& Kiwi
Total
Spices
Total
Dried
Fruit
Total
Rice
303,431
31,909
310,900
3,553,247
92,865
115,207
57,508
35,003
7,003
23,369
5%
0%
10%
3%
10%
5%
10%
5%
50%
40%
15,172
0
31,090
106,597
9,287
5,760
5,751
1,750
3,502
9,348
Total
Nuts
Est. USDA % Treated
Dollar Value of
Commodity
This totals
$188,255,860 of
Imports which
are fumigated
Why Take the Risk?
Total
Fresh
Fruit
Total
Vegs.
Economic Impact
Estimated Fumigation of Imported Goods
Based on estimated U.S.D.A. fumigations by sector
What is the Minimum Impact Potential?
•
•
2% of Total
Fumigated
If 2% of total imports and exports are
fumigated. The total value of those
fumigated products is $162,000,000
If only 0.05% of total imports and exports
are fumigated with methyl bromide the
total value of these products is
$41,000,000
Total Imports & Exports
for the Region are
approximately
$8.1Billion Dollars
Why Is Safe Food, The Environment, and the Economy
Being Jeopardized?
Review of the Issues
 The science is unclear and doesn’t support any further phase-out.
 The emissions goals of the protocol have already been achieved.
 The ozone layer is recovering faster than expected.
 90% of the methyl bromide (or more) produced is produced naturally!
 The economy of your country may be very adversely impacted by any
further phase-out of methyl bromide!
 Alternatives are not as effective, or have other problems
Why Would You Consider Phasing Out QPS?
What Actions Can You Take?
 Continue to use methyl bromide for QPS uses
 Contact your Ag Ministries, and the Ministry of Environment, to let
them know that you need methyl bromide to remain competitive.
 Propose that for Article 5 nations consumption be frozen at the
current levels until technically and economically feasible alternatives
are available.
 Propose that for Article 5 nations there be no CUE but rather a freeze
at the current levels of consumption until alternatives are available.
 Make that the phase-out is not used by the E.U.as a barrier to trade
for Article 5 nations (this must not be allowed).
 Don’t endanger your countries trade and economy without some
guarantees.
If You Expect Change..You Must Act