DOC PREVIEW
Berkeley ENVECON 162 - Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics

This preview shows page 1-2-3-4-5 out of 14 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 14 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 14 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 14 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 14 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 14 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 14 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Giannini Foundation ofAgricultural EconomicsAgricultural and Resource Economics Update(University of California, University of California)Year  Paper UpdateVNARE Update Volume 8, Numbe r 4This paper is posted at the eScholarship Repository, University of California.http://repositories.cdlib.org/giannini/areu/UpdateV8N4Copyrightc2005 by the authors.ARE Update Volume 8, Numbe r 4AbstractPesticide Use and Air Quality in the San Joaquin Valley.Sales and Brand Loyalty.Coho Salmon Recovery in California: A Summary of Recent Economic Evi-dence.VOL. 8 NO. 4 MAR/APR 2005Also in this issue.........Sales and Brand LoyaltyRui Huang, Jeffrey M. Perloff and Sofia B. Villas-Boas...............6Coho Salmon Recovery In California: A Summary Of Recent Economic EvidenceAlix Peterson Zwane and David L. Sunding...................8In the next issue.........Olive Oil: A “Rediscovered“ California CropbyOlga Senise Barrio and Hoy F. CarmanPesticide Use and Air Quality in the San Joaquin ValleybyRachael E. Goodhue, Kiara Groves and Rick T. RoushAir quality in the San Joaquin Valley is a significant concern for residents and policymakers alike. According to the California Air Resources Board (ARB), “The San Joaquin Valley experiences some of the worst ozone and particulate air pollution in the U.S., with both high levels and frequent episodes” (ARB, 2004, p.1). Sufficiently high concentrations of ozone in the troposphere, which begins at ground level, can be harmful to human health, causing respiratory sicknesses and irritation. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxide combine with sunlight to form ozone. VOCs are emitted by a number of sources, including vehicles, livestock waste and pesticides.The federal Clean Air Act requires each state to develop an implementation plan to improve air quality and meet air quality standards, including a standard for tropospheric ozone. The San Joa-quin Valley Air Basin has failed to meet these standards, and is classified as an extreme nonattainment area. As part of efforts to bring it into compliance, the California Department of Pesticide Regu-lation (CDPR) will seek to reduce emis-sions of VOCs from pesticides through regulations, and through research and extension efforts regarding alternatives. At a February 23, 2005 meeting of its Pest Management Advisory Commit-tee, CDPR announced that it intended to reduce VOC emissions from pesticides in the San Joaquin Valley by setting a maxi-mum emission potential (EP) of 20 per-cent. This requirement mandates that all emulsifiable concentrate pesticides with an emission potential currently above this level must be reformulated in order to continue to be used in California. The purpose of this analysis is to pro-vide information that can aid in assess-ing the potential costs of the 20 percent maximum EP reformulation require-ment, by providing information regard-ing the scope of the requirement’s impact on agricultural production. Determining the net benefit would require information regarding the profit difference between growers’ next best alternatives for each commodity-pest pair, given all the pes-ticide products affected by the require-ment, and the effect of these alternatives on VOC emissions.BackgroundA CDPR report (cited at the end of this article on page 5) regarding estimated VOC emissions from pesticides for 1990-2002 is a key summary document that is helpful for discussion of pesticides’ contributions to VOCs. In the San Joaquin Valley, the major pesticide contributors are fumigants and products with emulsifiable concentrate (EC) formulations. Three fumigants, metam sodium (29.9 percent), 1,3-dichloropropene (14.2 percent), and The California Department of Pesticide Regulation proposes to limit the maximum emission potential of pesticides formulated as emulsifiable concentrates to 20 percent. Many crops use pesticides that do not meet this requirement currently.Intensive Use Intensive UseIntensive Use Single Active SingleAny Use All ECa IngredientbProductcNumber of Commodities 58 40 14 12Value of Production ($1,000)$14,326,571 $9,050,031 $3,351,680 $3,001,680Share of 2002 CA Production78.5% 49.6% 18.4% 16.5%a. Total application-acres for all EC products are 50% or more of total harvested acres.b. Application-acres are 50% or more of total harvested acres for EC active ingredient with greatest application-acres.c. Application-acres are 50% or more of total harvested acres for EC product with greatest application-acres.Table 1. Use of EC Pesticides with an Emission Potential Greater than 20 Percentmethyl bromide (6.4 percent) accounted for about 47.5 percent of all VOC emissions from pesticides during the May-October ozone season for 2002. Because fumigants are themselves VOCs, they have an emission potential of 100 percent. By nature, they cannot be reformulated, and are excluded from CDPR’s proposed reformulation requirement. For ECs, it is mostly the formulation ingredients (rather than the active ingredients) that collectively account for about 37 percent of VOC emissions. EC products with the active ingredient chlorpyrifos are the third largest contributor, accounting for 8.5 per-cent of all VOC emissions from pesticides during the May-October ozone season for 2002. The most impor-tant crops in generating emissions from ECs are cotton (estimated at 13 percent of the total VOCs), almonds (8 percent) and oranges (5 percent). However, these summaries overlook the complexities of the contribu-tions from these crops. First, each crop uses multiple pesticides that emit VOCs. Second, eliminating cur-rently available products by requiring reformulation may result in greater total pesticide use by growers, due to the need to use less effective alternatives for cer-tain pests. Even if this increase in applications does not result in a net increase in VOC emissions, it may have other adverse environmental or human health effects. In cotton (for aphids) and citrus (for citricola scale), the EC formulation itself is currently believed to be critical to the effectiveness of chlorpyrifos at controlling spe-cific pests. In these two cases, chlorpyrifos EC seems to be the safest and most effective way to control the pests, at


View Full Document

Berkeley ENVECON 162 - Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics

Download Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?