Tag: Pesticides

  • EU environmental watchdog criticises calls to stall pesticides cut

    EU environmental watchdog criticises calls to stall pesticides cut

    [ad_1]

    The EU’s environmental watchdog has hit back at calls to stall a 50% cut in the use and risks of synthetic pesticides and a 20% cut in fertiliser use by 2030, arguing that the Ukraine crisis provides scant justification for delay.

    EU states with the backing of powerful farm unions and centre-right parties have blocked the proposed pesticide reform unless the European Commission completes a second impact study by 28 June to assuage food security fears.

    Among campaigners and scientists, anxieties are rife that the bloc’s flagship green farming pledge could be unceremoniously buried.

    Dario Piselli, a European Environment Agency (EEA) expert and author of a new analysis published on Wednesday, said there were “compelling” reasons not to hesitate further with the draft law.

    “There’s limited justification to use the war as a reason for postponing action,” he told the Guardian. “Food security as an issue is not only to do with immediate food supply – and a lot of the concerns there have subsided a bit compared to the beginning of the war – but with medium-long term security which is influenced by other things [like] climate change and the impact of a loss of biodiversity on food production.”

    Since 1990, farmland bird and grassland butterfly populations have plunged by more than 30% in Europe, while almost one in 10 of the continent’s bees face extinction, mainly because of habitat loss caused by intensified agriculture.

    In 2020, pesticide thresholds for human safety were breached at more than one in five rivers and lakes across Europe, the EEA paper says and 83% of agricultural soils tested in 2019 were also found to contain pesticide residues.

    Almost the same percentage – 84% – of people tested across five European countries in 2021 were found to contain at least two pesticides in their bloodstreams, according to a large human biomonitoring study cited by the paper.

    Environmentalists say this is partly down to increased pesticide sales volumes in the EU, which remained stable between 2011 and 2020 at about 350,000 tonnes a year, compared with annual averages closer to 220,000 tonnes between 1992 and 2003.

    One EU country, Denmark, has cut sales by using pesticide taxes linked to product toxicity, but the commission does not expect the present modest rises in pesticide prices to affect demand.

    By contrast, fertiliser sales in countries such as Germany have fallen by up to 40% after prices doubled between May 2020 and the end of 2022, owing to high gas costs and war-related supply disruptions.

    One EU diplomat said this had caused “mixed feelings” in Europe’s capitals about the commission’s green farming reform. “Last year the Germans were desperate to push the proposal forward but how this will end up I don’t know,” the official said.

    Another EU diplomat added: “If the pesticides regulation is dead, there is no one to blame but the commission itself. The moment it stepped away from a scientific and evidence-based approach in favour of ideology and dogmatic solutions, it condemned its flagship legal proposal.”

    The commission’s targets for EU nations, which take into account actions already taken, would force Italy to cut its pesticide use and risks by 62%, Germany by 55% and France and Spain by 54%, according to a report in Politico.

    Hostility to the measures is strong among Europe’s agricultural business class and in several governments, where the EU’s green deal commissioner, Frans Timmermans, is viewed darkly.

    “Unless EU citizens suffer from hunger and protest in the streets, he does not care,” the first diplomat said.

    In a concession to such sentiments, Brussels last year shelved a proposed ban on pesticide use in ecologically sensitive areas – so long as low-risk pesticides were used instead. But it will not abandon the goal of a less chemically drenched countryside, despite the “complex” impacts of the Ukraine conflict on food security, said Stefan De Keersmaecker, a commission spokesperson.

    “We must continue making progress in the discussions so that the proposal can become a reality to protect farmers, pesticide users, citizens, vulnerable populations, and the environment,” he said. “European citizens have a clear desire to reduce the use and risk of pesticides.”

    [ad_2]
    #environmental #watchdog #criticises #calls #stall #pesticides #cut
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • EU firms accused of ‘abhorrent’ export of banned pesticides to Brazil

    EU firms accused of ‘abhorrent’ export of banned pesticides to Brazil

    [ad_1]

    Pesticides banned in the EU because of their links to human health risks are being exported and used on farms in Brazil supplying Nestlé, an investigation has revealed.

    Europe is home to some of the world’s biggest and most profitable chemical companies, including the Swiss-based Syngenta and the German multinationals BASF and Bayer.

    But a number of the pesticides and fungicides they produce have been banned by European health officials after they were linked to cancer, reproductive problems and neurodegenerative diseases.

    Despite the ban, millions of pounds worth of the products are still being exported to Brazil, where they are used on farms that supply the international sugar market, according to a new investigation by Lighthouse Reports and Repórter Brasil.

    Documents from the Brazilian agriculture ministry obtained through a freedom of information request reveal that a fungicide made by BASF and based on epoxiconazole, a chemical banned in the EU, was sprayed over two sugar plantations that supply Nestlé.

    One of the farms using this banned fungicide is part of the giant Brazilian sugar corporation Copersucar, which sold €1bn (£880m) of sugar to Europe in 2020.

    In São Paulo state, Usina Atena, a Brazilian sugar plantation, is under investigation after a complaint from a neighbouring resident about the health impacts from the spraying of chemicals on the farm.

    Justice ministry officials in São Paulo found the farm had the Syngenta fungicide Priori Xtra. This contains the active substance cyproconazole, which is banned for use in the EU.

    They also found the insecticide Regent 800WG, produced by BASF, and Certero, made by Bayer, which include the active ingredients fipronil and triflumuron. Both substances are banned in the EU.

    The ECHA has classed epoxiconazole as a suspected carcinogen, and similar concerns were highlighted by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

    A man in a hard hat stands before a huge mound of sugar in a warehouse
    Sugar at a Copersucar warehouse in Santos, Brazil. The company sold €1bn of sugar to Europe in 2020. Photograph: Patricia Monteiro/Bloomberg/Getty

    Marcos Orellana, UN special rapporteur on toxics and human rights, called the continued export of the chemicals by EU-based companies an “abhorrent practice” and urged the EU to implement a ban.

    CropLife International, which represents agri-chemical companies including BASF, Bayer and Syngenta, said the active ingredients in the pesticides had “valid use registrations in several OECD countries”.

    It said in a statement: “A non-registration or deregistration in the European Union does not automatically mean a product cannot be used in another country. Pesticides are not automatically ‘more hazardous’ or ‘less necessary’ because they are not authorised in Europe.”

    Bayer and BASF maintain that all their products are safe for humans and the environment.

    Copersucar said it complied with Brazilian and international legislation, exporting its products within safety standards in the regions where it operates.

    A spokesperson for Nestlé said all its suppliers must meet Nestlé’s responsible sourcing standard, including in relation to good agricultural practices. “We continue to closely follow regulatory developments everywhere we operate to ensure full compliance for all our products. Nestlé is not involved in campaigning against an export ban on pesticides and active ingredients banned in the EU.”

    Officials at DG Sante, the EU body responsible for regulating pesticides, said the export of banned pesticides would be phased out in line with the chemicals strategy for sustainability, although no timetable had been set for implementation.

    [ad_2]
    #firms #accused #abhorrent #export #banned #pesticides #Brazil
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Eastern Europeans face Brussels backlash over Ukraine grain bans

    Eastern Europeans face Brussels backlash over Ukraine grain bans

    [ad_1]

    Press play to listen to this article

    Voiced by artificial intelligence.

    European Union politicians and officials have rounded on the front-line Eastern states of Poland, Hungary and Slovakia for imposing import bans on Ukrainian farm produce, denouncing the curbs as illegal and counterproductive.

    The three countries banned imports of Ukrainian grain and other food products over recent days, arguing the export surplus had flooded their markets and threatened the livelihoods of local farmers.

    The curbs have set the group on a collision course with Brussels while at the same time threatening the EU’s fragile solidarity in backing Ukraine’s fightback against Russia’s war of aggression.

    EU diplomats believe the import bans contravene both international and EU law — and will fail to achieve their goals.

    “Unilateral bans of individual countries won’t solve anything,” Czech Minister of Agriculture Zdeněk Nekula said.

    “We must find agreement throughout the EU on the rules under which agricultural commodities will transit from Ukraine to European ports, and that production from them goes further to countries outside the EU that are dependent on Ukrainian production.”

    The issue risks turning into a ticking time bomb.

    Ukraine’s economy heavily relies on grain exports, which before the war were enough to feed 400 million people. When Russia invaded last year and blocked much of Ukraine’s global exports, the EU quickly installed so-called “solidarity lanes,” dropping all inspections on imports.

    As a result, grain imports into surrounding countries shot up — much to the anger of local farmers who say they can’t compete. Instead of transiting through the countries to the rest of the world, the grain stays on the local markets, the countries argue.

    With the summer harvest season ahead, the situation might get even tenser. Both Poland and Slovakia are heading into national elections later this year where the rural vote will be crucial.

    “Solidarity lanes aren’t working. We have no effective tools controlling the transit,” Poland’s Ambassador to the EU Andrzej Sadoś told POLITICO. “We have in our silos some 4 million tons of Ukrainian grain and we need some time to stabilize the situation.”

    The problems had been largely ignored by the European Commission so far, he said, forcing the Polish government to act.

    GettyImages 1250853197
    Romanian farmers protest in the front of the European Commision headquarters in Bucharest | Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images

    “Individual farmers started to block terminals and train connections. They were protesting. We were very close to an escalation,” said Sadoś. He stressed that the ban, due to expire on June 30, is only temporary.

    ‘Unacceptable’ moves

    One EU diplomat accused Warsaw of indulging in “gesture politics.”

    “The situation has come to a head, it wants to send a signal that it’s supporting its farmers,” this diplomat said. “But it’s really not the most elegant solution, especially with regards to solidarity for Ukraine.”

    Others even doubt whether the measures are legal in the first place.

    In public, the EU’s executive branch, the Commission, has taken a measured approach, telling journalists in Brussels on Monday that “at this stage, it’s too early” to give a definite answer on the legality of the move. It did, however, note: “Trade policy is of EU exclusive competence and, therefore, unilateral actions are not acceptable.”

    The private steer from Brussels appears to be more adamant about illegality. Czech Agriculture Minister Nekula, for example, said the EU’s Agriculture Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski — who is himself Polish — had told him that such measures “are unacceptable.”

    Asked whether the bans were legal, another EU diplomat said: “I don’t think so.” That’s because, the diplomat argued, trade is an exclusive competence of the EU, meaning individual countries cannot simply unilaterally block imports from a country. Yet another EU diplomat supported that argument, pointing to World Trade Organization rules.

    The terms of EU-Ukraine commerce are also supposed to be safeguarded by the terms of a free-trade area applied since 2014.

    Poland rejects the idea that it is breaking the rules, citing national laws that allow it to do so for public safety reasons.

    It’s not just Poland, however, and each of the three countries is trying to avoid the Commission’s wrath by making different arguments in its defense.

    Slovakia, for its part, argues it was forced to act on Monday after Poland and Hungary moved at the weekend to block imports.

    “There was a risk their routes will redirect towards us and will cause even more pressure on our small domestic market,” a Slovak official said, adding that tests had also shown an excessive level of pesticides in wheat.

    Contrary to Poland and Hungary, Slovakia said it would keep transit open.

    GettyImages 1236745097
    European Commissioner for Agriculture Janusz Wojciechowski speaks during a debate on the Common Agricultural Policy | Pool photo by Christian Hartmann/AFP via Getty Images

    A way out?

    Wiesław Gryn, one of the main leaders of farmer protests in Poland, said a better way would be to focus on banning products that are made in violation of EU standards, rather than imposing a temporary blanket ban.

    “Stopping Ukrainian exports for two months won’t do much because at least six months are needed to export the 4 million tons [that is already in Poland],” he said.

    To address the issue, the EU has disbursed some €30 million to Poland, some €16.8 million to Bulgaria and €10 million to Romania.

    That isn’t nearly enough, said Sadoś, the Polish ambassador. “We need systemic solutions, not just support for the farmers,” he said. Poland wanted to keep supporting Ukraine through imports, he said, “but the price cannot be … the bankruptcy of millions of Polish farmers.”

    Such systemic solutions, in Sadoś’ view, would be to give importers a window of 24 hours, for example, for shipments to reach a transit port to ensure that the products don’t stay in Poland.

    That is legally complicated, however, and would involve more checks and paperwork — potentially holding up trade flows even more, say critics.

    Lili Bayer and Gregorio Sorgi contributed reporting.



    [ad_2]
    #Eastern #Europeans #face #Brussels #backlash #Ukraine #grain #bans
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.eu )