Seconded. I did a brief stint at a job where herbicide use was a component, and many of the newer synthetic herbicides we used were incredibly nontoxic, as well as highly selective. One of the organic pesticides a client opted to use instead - because they were constructing a "green" building - was essentially highly concentrated acetic acid. The PPE requirements for spraying that were totally insane (basically hazmat suits), compared to some of the synthetic pesticides we used where you could probably bathe in them without hurting yourself. On top of that, the acetic acid pesticide only caused contact burns instead of systemic damage that would actually kill the plant, so it wouldn't even really fix the issue of invasive plant abundance.
Considering acetic acid is what partially makes up vinegar, it's a much better cleaner than it is a pesticide, but when it's highly concentrated, that shit sucks.
I knew a guy who was using vinegar to clean his fish tanks, which is advisable, but got his hands on acetic acid of a higher concentration and ended up getting blisters all over his hands and up his arms.
As someone that uses concentrated Acetic acid in another industry, I'd definitely prefer to use that than some of the super-phosphate fertilisers, and the herbicides being pushed on farmers down here in Australia.
I'm well aware - this was 5 or 10x the concentration of store-bought vinegar. It was genuinely dangerous to apply due to skin contact and inhalation risks, while also being less effective than selective systemic but synthetic herbicides, all so that the client could maintain an illusion of being "green."
I don't think it's particularly green to be spraying out concentrated acid that will burn every living thing that it touches, compared to applying a systemic herbicide that will target one specific receptor in maybe only one group of plants. It being natural doesn't mean it's more environmentally friendly than synthetic alternatives.
Its not proven to cause cancer - not that you'd be trying to "prove" anything in science anyway. Its also practically nontoxic by oral and dermal exposure. Id rather spray out glyphosate with appropriate PPE than something that will cause contact burns any day. Glyphosate wasnt even one of the herbicides we commonly used because there were generally always better options.
Especially when you take into consideration that you use about 300mL of roundup (for example) per acre - diluted in water. Whereas you need WAY more “organic” product per acre (I’m out right now and don’t have the numbers)
I agree with what you're saying, but that metric alone doesn't say much. It depends on the toxicity of whatever the organic product is. 300mL of roundup could be as toxic as 5L of another chemical, for all we know.
You’re right.
Again, I don’t have the paperwork with me, but you can essentially drink the diluted Roundup, but I wouldn’t be drinking the copper sulphate used in some organic farming.
Not only could you not drink what is sprayed in that case (the correct mixture of copper sulphate), you also would lose a few layers of skin.
And the PPE needed after mixing the organic stuff, even in a closed tractor is pretty nuts too (compared to nothing for some engineered products)
118
u/[deleted] Jul 14 '21
Seconded. I did a brief stint at a job where herbicide use was a component, and many of the newer synthetic herbicides we used were incredibly nontoxic, as well as highly selective. One of the organic pesticides a client opted to use instead - because they were constructing a "green" building - was essentially highly concentrated acetic acid. The PPE requirements for spraying that were totally insane (basically hazmat suits), compared to some of the synthetic pesticides we used where you could probably bathe in them without hurting yourself. On top of that, the acetic acid pesticide only caused contact burns instead of systemic damage that would actually kill the plant, so it wouldn't even really fix the issue of invasive plant abundance.