While some may have nostalgia for the old farm with a little red barn that housed a few chickens, a couple of pigs and a dairy cow, it is better for both the environment and the economy that agriculture has modernized.

Today’s farmer has taken, and is taking, key steps to protect our natural resources while maintaining economic sustainability. Farmers are a critical part of creating the solutions to today’s environmental challenges while fostering economic growth and job development.

Being part of the environmental solution includes resolving the algae problem in Lake Winnipeg.

People across the country are concerned about the health of the lake. Nutrients are fertilizing algae blooms that consume oxygen in the water, which in turn harm fish populations and other natural life in the lake. Algae-covered beaches limit everyone’s enjoyment of the lake and harm businesses that rely on Manitoba’s short tourist season.

There have been countless studies and action plans, but solving this complex problem remains elusive.

• Letters: Stronger actions needed on Lake Winnipeg
• Related: ALUS and corporate partners launch Lake Winnipeg project

Some have pointed fingers at Manitoba’s farmers as contributing to problems at Lake Winnipeg. This ignores the significant strides that agriculture has taken to ensure the right nutrients are put in the right place and at the right time to maximize crop growth and limit nutrient runoff.

Gone are the days of the little red barn where manure was spread on the field surface without knowing its nutrient content or what that crop needed in terms of added nutrients. Modernization of agriculture has revolutionized nutrient management.

Take today’s hog operations in Manitoba as an example. Before applying manure, farmers are required to file manure management plans with the provincial government. These plans are tailored to the specific crop being grown and include soil sampling to prevent over-application of nutrients.

More than 90 per cent of hog manure in Manitoba is injected below the soil surface or incorporated into the soil immediately after application to prevent runoff and to position this valuable nutrient next to the seed where it is needed. Before application, the manure is sampled to get an accurate understanding of its nutrient content.

Advances in technology are making manure application more precise. Modern equipment can test the flow as it is being applied using near infrared technology and vary rates on a real-time basis. Farmers use global positioning technology, ultrasonic speed sensors and radar to ensure that manure is applied in the right place and at the right rate.

The technology allowing farmers to maximize the benefits of this natural fertilizer also helps minimize nutrient leaching into waterways, including Lake Winnipeg. Similar advances in precision farming allow those who use synthetic fertilizers to apply plant nutrition in a way that maximizes its value.

Modern agriculture uses plant nutrition more precisely and efficiently while reducing the potential for negative environmental impacts and producing more food for consumers in Canada and around the world.

This is what being part of the solution means to Manitoba’s farmers.

Being part of the solution can also mean taking action beyond the farm. Farmers are prepared to do this and are ready to participate in a broad effort to develop solutions to the challenges facing Lake Winnipeg.

As a first step, we need to bring together expertise from all parts of the Lake Winnipeg basin – call this the Lake Winnipeg Task Group. This group, which can be called together by the Province of Manitoba, should include representatives from livestock agriculture, grain and oilseed farmers, First Nations and Manitoba municipalities, including the City of Winnipeg. It should also include third-party scientific expertise to steer the discussions.

The task group should be given a mandate to outline science-based measures designed to reduce nutrient flow into the lake.

Some potential action items have already been discussed, such as rehabilitating marshes that filter incoming water, ensuring untreated sewage does not flow into the Red River and increasing the understanding of the “right source, right place, right rate and right time” principles for nutrient application in agriculture.

The task group should be charged with presenting ways to break down barriers to adoption of these known solutions, as well as new ideas to keep Lake Winnipeg healthy.

Finally, the task group should be forward looking and action oriented, rather than a body that rehashes the finger pointing of the past.

– Cam Dahl is the general manager of the Manitoba Pork Council.

The post Opinion: Agriculture is part of the solution for Lake Winnipeg appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“This has been a big topic of conversation where I work in the state of Indiana,” said Dan Quinn, an assistant professor of agronomy and extension corn specialist at Purdue University. He spoke at the recent CropConnect conference in Winnipeg.

“I work primarily in corn, and Indiana is different in terms of climate and overall production than up here in Canada.”

Why it matters: Producers may wonder about the impact on crops from smoke-filled skies and reduced sunlight.

Data from Canada’s National Forestry Database and the National Interagency Fire Center in the U.S. shows an uptick in forest fires over recent decades, noted Quinn. While a hotter, drier climate and more climate variability played a role in that increase, he said the most significant factor is forest management.

“In the early 1900s, a lot of the forests were managed by prescribed burns, which helped mitigate some of the fuel load in these forests.”

But after a number of controlled burns got out of control, forest managers reduced the practice. Even where prescribed burns are done today, it’s getting more difficult. Specific weather conditions are needed for a prescribed burn, and a hotter, drier climate has reduced those windows.

Urbanization is another factor, with more populated centres near forests and uncomfortably close to potential wildfire sites.

A higher number of wildfires led to worry that the smoke would stunt crops, or at least not do them much good.

“My main answer to farmers when I get this question is ‘yes and no, and it’s complicated,’” Quinn said.

That’s probably not what farmers want to hear from their extension agronomist, he acknowledged, “but the way it breaks out is that wildfire smoke can negatively impact the crop, but it can actually positively affect the crop.”

The cons

Crops may be harmed for two reasons.

“The first one that everybody points to is the haze,” said Quinn. “If we have reductions in sunlight, that is going to impact the crop negatively. Wildfire smoke reflects sunlight. It can actually reduce that solar radiation and reduce photosynthesis and those crops.”

The other reason is higher levels of ground-level ozone, which can oxidize plant tissue.

“In really severe cases, when this happens, you can actually see tissue burned,” Quinn said.

It’s nearly impossible to study the direct effects of smoke on crops in a controlled environment. Researchers instead use analogues like cloud cover and other forms of shading to emulate the effects.

One Iowa study by Mark Jeschke from Pioneer Seeds, referenced by Quinn, looked at differences in photosynthetic active radiation given different levels of cloud cover.

Under partly cloudy skies, there was a 23 per cent reduction in photosynthetic active radiation. Under full cloud cover without rain, there was a 52 per cent reduction, and under full cloud cover with rain, there was a 62 per cent reduction.

Another study in Ohio inadvertently looked at the impacts of wildfire smoke. It was tracking solar radiation across June and July for the years 2017 to 2021. During 2021, the study captured the impact of significant wildfire haze that blanketed the state.

“In 2021, you can see a seven per cent reduction in overall solar radiation in June and a six per cent reduction in overall solar radiation in July compared to the other four years,” said Quinn.

He was also able to extract information from weather sensors in Northern Indiana, which track solar radiation.

“I pulled data from a stretch from June 24 through July 1 in 2023,” he said. “On June 25, 26 and 27, we were seeing a lot of that wildfire smoke.”

Solar radiation on those days was almost halved, he noted, “and the total solar radiation was reduced by about 32 per cent across that entire week.”

Whether a drop in radiation affects yield depends a lot on the timing of the smoke event.

Quinn pointed to a 2019 shading study from China, which showed a 50 per cent reduction in corn yield when solar radiation was reduced by 50 per cent between silking and maturity. Similarly, a 1992 University of Massachusetts study showed a 23–66 per cent reduction in corn yield when solar radiation was reduced by 50 per cent from 44 days after emergence to maturity.

In Ontario, a study in 2009 by the provincial agdepartment showed a three per cent yield reduction when radiation was halved prior to silking, a 12 per cent reduction when it was cut during silking, and a 21 per cent reduction when the cut came post-silking.

The pros

Those shading studies only tell part of the story. Wildfire smoke reflects sunlight, Quinn noted, but it also scatters it.

“If you scatter sunlight, it increases diffuse photosynthetic active radiation. That just means it can redistribute that sunlight; it means greater penetration of light into the canopy and actually can increase photosynthesis.”

This diffusion is most beneficial for taller crops that have multi-layered canopies, like corn.

Wildfire smoke may also reduce leaf surface temperature.

“When that wildfire smoke comes in, it may actually lower that leaf surface temperature and reduce plant transpiration, which gives that crop a little bit of a break,” said Quinn.

Again, timing is key.

“This is primarily beneficial during hot, dry conditions earlier in the season. It can also be negative if it’s later in the season and we’re trying to get that crop to mature.”

Last June, a plume hit Quinn’s area when corn was in its vegetative stage, so it may have been beneficial.

“We saw a 20-degree Fahrenheit (11 C) reduction in average air temperatures when the wildfire smoke came in late June, and we saw indications of lower transpiration rates and lower water loss for those crops,” he said.

Lower temperatures can also increase photosynthesis. A 2008 study out of Georgia showed a decline in one net photosynthetic unit for every one degree C increase in temperature.

While it’s difficult to quantify, Quinn said last year’s smoke in Indiana likely resulted in a net positive for corn grown in the state.

“Management practices may also play an important role,” he said. “There’s some indication that hybrids and plant densities can actually respond differently to changes in solar radiation. More research is just needed in this area.”

The post How is corn impacted by wildfire smoke? appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Our recent investigation of microplastic levels in Canadian municipal biosolids found that a single gram of biosolids contains hundreds of microplastic particles. This is a much greater concentration of microplastics than is typically found in air, water or soil.

Municipal biosolids are produced at wastewater treatment plants by settling and stabilizing the solid fraction of the municipal wastewater inflow.

In Canada and around the world, municipal biosolids are used to improve agricultural farmland because they are rich in nutrients such as phosphorus and nitrogen.

Municipal biosolid applications are carefully regulated in Canada for heavy metals, nutrients and pathogens. However, guidelines for emerging contaminants, such as microplastics, are not currently available.

While wastewater treatment plants are not explicitly designed to remove microplastics, they are efficient at removing nearly 90 per cent of microplastic contaminants. The removed microplastics are often concentrated in the settled sludge and eventually end up in the biosolids.

Previous studies have shown that municipal biosolid waste is an important pathway for microplastics to enter broader terrestrial ecosystems, including agricultural fields.

In collaboration with scientists from Environment and Climate Change Canada and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, we conducted the first pan-Canadian assessment of microplastics in municipal biosolids. We analyzed biosolid samples from 22 Canadian wastewater treatment plants across nine provinces and two biosolid-based fertilizer products.

We found hundreds of microplastic particles in every gram of biosolids. The most common type of microplastic particles we observed were microfibres, followed by small fragments. We found small amounts of glitter and foam pieces too.

Microplastic concentrations in municipal biosolids are substantially higher than other environmental networks in Canada like water, soil and river sediments. This provides further evidence that microplastics are concentrated in biosolids produced at wastewater treatment plants.

Wastewater treatment plants are well-equipped to remove large plastics like bottle caps and plastic bags from municipal wastewater. However, microplastic particles are so small they can’t be caught by treatment infrastructure, so they concentrate in wastewater sludge.

As wastewater streams concentrate microplastics, they also offer an opportunity to reduce the plastic pollution that is entering the environment. Researchers across Canada are working to find insights on the short- and long-term ecological consequences of microplastic pollution on soil ecosystems and one solution is already clear.

Microplastics can be reduced at sources via systematic reduction in single-use plastics, washing clothing with synthetic fibre less frequently and removing microfibres using washing machine filters. These approaches will help minimize the amount of microplastics that get into the wastewater stream and, ultimately, into the broader terrestrial and aquatic environments.

Building new technologies at our wastewater treatment plants to remove microplastics through physical or chemical means should also be explored.

We need to better understand the impact of high concentrations of microplastic on agro-ecosystems where biosolids are applied, including its impacts on soil-dwelling organisms like earthworms and insects. We also need to start building national guidelines for microplastic levels in biosolids and agricultural soils.

– Branaavan Sivarajah is a postdoctoral fellow, Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, Carleton University, Jesse Vermaire is associate professor, Institute of Environmental Science, Carleton University.

The post Comment: How microplastics are making their way into our farmland appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

During a press event on July 17, Manitoba Environment and Climate Minister Kevin Klein noted that, in 2013, Lake Winnipeg was designated the most polluted lake in Canada. He went on to say that, since 2016, the Manitoba government has been working diligently to protect the province’s lakes, and ensure they are clean and accessible for future generations.

It will take a heck of a lot more than just money to save our lake.

Ten years ago, Lake Winnipeg won the “most threatened lake of the year award,” a testament to bad, short-sighted and ill-informed decisions.

The only way to address this situation is through political honesty, hard work and making tough choices and sticking to them. Our future and the future of all our waters depends on such action.

There has to be action with a determined will of the people and governments to save Lake Winnipeg and our water sources. The continual rhetorical propaganda that we have been subjected to has the effects of a placebo. The lake has literally been studied to death.

I, along with many Manitobans, have been voicing grave concerns about Lake Winnipeg and how the algae situation has amassed in the past 25 years.

It will not be possible for Lake Winnipeg or any of our water sources to survive as long as politics keeps playing the deceitful role of patty-caking the needed efforts of recovery by dealing with the symptoms. Wherever possible, nutrient pollution must be eliminated.

In March, Canada pledged funding for the Great Lakes after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s talks with U.S. President Joe Biden.

Laws are needed to protect the Great Lakes from farm runoff, according to a joint commission study. The study is quoted as reporting that “voluntary measures to protect the Great Lakes from farm manure (have) proven inefficient and governments should now turn their minds to legislation.”

Does that sound familiar? It should, for it also applies to Lake Winnipeg.

Manitobans and renowned scientists have been expressing those same views for years about the polluted situation of those waters. The lake is not polluting itself.

Manitoba must initiate action to deal with the source and cause of pollution.

Yes, protecting our lake for future generations is a must.

John Fefchak
Virden, Man.

The post Letters: Stronger actions needed on Lake Winnipeg appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“We have this common problem of pollution. It doesn’t spare anyone,” said Gladys Chigamba, a research scientist at Lilongwe University in Malawi.

Chigamba and three other women from Malawi, Kenya and Tanzania, visited Manitoba through a partnership between the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the African Centre for Aquatic Research and Education (ACARE).

They visited the Experimental Lakes Area, a “freshwater laboratory” of 58 lakes in northwestern Ontario. They also attended events to network with other scientists and share research.

The Manitoba Co-operator spoke with the four women at an Oct. 6 event at IISD’s offices.

The scientists work on the African Great Lakes in east Africa. The best Manitoba comparison might be Lake Winnipeg, said Pauline Gerrard, deputy director of the Experimental Lakes Area.

Pollution in general is an issue in both places, the women said.

The scientists learned about a project to study the effects of 6PPD-quinone, a chemical found in tires, on rivers and lakes. The chemical wears off tires onto roads and then washes into the water table, they explained. Some said they’d like to test for the chemical.

They also viewed a study on microplastics, which are microscopic bits of plastic that end up in the environment. Researchers are studying the impact of plastics on lake organisms, Gerrard said and Elizabeth Wanderi, from Kenya, said she’d like to study them in her country.

As in Manitoba, eutrophication — huge algae blooms caused by an excess of nutrients in water — is a big problem in the African Great Lakes, the women told the Co-operator.

Agriculture along the lakes and rivers is a big issue, said Wanderi, so nutrient loading is a problem.

In Kenya, a lot of the population is concentrated on the banks of rivers and streams, Wanderi said. They see it as their land, so any laws designed to conserve water are seen as challenges to their property.

The public struggles to understand the need for conservation, said Margret Sinda, from Malawi.

“They don’t understand that if they don’t find fish, it’s because it’s depleting,” she said.

Food insecurity complicates conservation efforts, said Catherine Fridolin, from Tanzania.

“It’s very difficult to go tell those fishermen to stop fishing just because the fish are depleting while they’re dependent on the fish resources for food,” she said.

“if you tell them that this is closed season, it’s very hard for them because it’s like you’re telling them that now they will not have anything to eat,” added Sinda.

Communities must be included in policy making, Fridolin said. The government needs to see how it can help communities while working to manage resources.

Governments also need to put more effort into conservation, said Sinda.

In Malawi, the government funds research but she does not consider it to be enough. A lot of the research depends on donors, which aren’t reliable sources of funding.

The post African freshwater scientists visit Manitoba lakes appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

That means higher prices as natural gas prices rise, something that’s been kicked into overdrive with the war in Ukraine and Russia’s attempt to blackmail Europe by shutting down its Nord Stream 1 pipeline. 

It’s caused many to wonder if there are alternatives, like manure, sewage sludge or compost, that could reduce costs for farmers and consumers. 

There is a hitch, however. In recent years, research has shown microplastics have increasingly permeated organic fertilizers and agricultural soils, raising environmental and health concerns. While its impacts are still being gauged, some of the known culprits include littering and abrasive particles from tire wear. Plastic films laid out on certain horticultural crops to prevent temperature fluctuations or water evaporation from soils, known as mulch films, are also suspected to emit them. 

Meanwhile, organic fertilizers, compost and sludge soak up household and industry microplastics, accounting for a large part of the problem. 

Microplastics pollution is at its worst in agricultural soils of urban regions, where locals typically produce high quantities of sludge and compost that are then applied as organic fertilizers. In Germany, for example, the problem is particularly acute in the country’s industrial west, the Ruhrgebiet, or larger cities such as Hamburg or Hanover. 

Science on microplastics is still very much in its infancy. Research so far has suggested they play havoc with soil structure, release contaminants and harm the soil biosphere. 

It is even believed microplastics can enter crops and thus the food chain destined for food and human consumption. To date, they have been found in mussels and fish, birds, marine and terrestrial mammals and yes, human beings.
Experiments conducted in laboratories (in vitro) have confirmed some of these hunches. In a 2019 paper, for example, scientists sprinkled microplastics on soil containing ryegrass and earthworms, resulting in the germination of fewer seeds, shorter shoots and greater soil acidity. 

As for microplastics’ health impacts, scientists think they present risks at three levels: first through the plastic particles themselves, secondly through the release of persistent organic pollutants absorbed by the plastics, and thirdly, the leaching of additives from the plastics. 

The complexity involved in the analysis of micro- plastics’ endless combination of sizes, shapes and chemical signatures means there is little research about their health impacts. 

Alarmingly, environmental legislation, regardless of the jurisdiction, typically does not have anything to say on the subject, handing a free pass to contaminate fields. 

Changing this will require urgently equipping law- makers with better scientific research. In the mean- time, however, there are practical steps policymakers, farmers and citizens can take to slash dependence on synthetic fertilizers amid the war in Ukraine. 

The first is to relocalize food production and make it less dependent on trade, as Europe had already begun to do during the COVID-19 crisis. We can also start to improve the recycling processes of alternative organic fertilizers to substitute synthetic fertilizers in line with the EU’s Nutrient Management Plan from its circular-economy strategy. 

Absent any measures, microplastic pollution will continue to accumulate in our ecosystems and possibly even bloodstreams. 

Martin Henseler is a research engineer at Equipe d’Economie Le Havre Normandie, Université Le Havre Normandie.

The post Comment: The problem of microplastics appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Thousands of irate farmers had driven tractors to The Hague hours earlier in their third large protest in a matter of weeks.

Tractor convoys set out in the early morning, first for the city of Utrecht and later to The Hague, causing long traffic jams across the Netherlands. More than 375 km of roads were blocked, drivers’ organization ANWB said.

In The Hague, farmers defied orders to limit their protest to designated areas, driving their tractors into the city centre despite being told to park them on the outskirts of town and use available buses to reach their planned rally venue.

Authorities had earlier called in the army’s support to place large vehicles across several roads to block main routes to the Binnenhof, the seat of the Dutch parliament.

The farmers’ original plan had been to occupy the Binnenhof with their tractors, but authorities declared the square off-limits.

The farmers launched their campaign after a court ruling in May found the Netherlands in violation of European emission rules.

Livestock farming is a leading cause of nitrogen pollution, along with construction and transportation. But farmers argue they have made substantial efforts to cut emissions and their role in providing food for the nation is under-appreciated.

“Last year you didn’t hear anything about nitrogen, and now suddenly it’s a mortal question,” farmer Micha Bouwer of the Farmers Defence Force told state broadcaster NOS.

“These are all people in the city who have two plants on their balcony and say ‘nature is suffering’.”

Although no concrete steps against the farmers have been announced, one political party has suggested the Netherlands reduce the number of live animals it breeds. The suggestion provoked an outcry from farming groups.

Dutch researchers on Wednesday said nitrogen emissions per capita are far higher in the Netherlands than anywhere else in the European Union.

Emissions in The Netherlands, a small, densely populated country, are four times the EU average, research institute TNO said, with 61 per cent coming from agriculture.

— Reporting for Reuters by Stephanie van den Berg, Toby Sterling and Bart Meijer.

The post Angry farmers cause Dutch police to close off parliament square appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

In Canada, bans on plastics have so far been left up to municipalities, some of whom are taking action. Both Montreal and Victoria have recently decided to ban plastic bags in stores, with business owners subject to huge fines if caught providing them. Other municipalities and provinces are contemplating similar bans, in the wake of China’s recent ban on the import of certain recyclable products. Increasing public awareness also appears to be gaining widespread momentum globally and across Canada.

National and regional plastic bag bans have been successfully implemented widely internationally: in Asia, Europe, Australia, and North America. But plastic bags are not the only single-use plastic items being targeted — polystyrene is on the hit list as well.

Food businesses in Washington, D.C. and San Francisco, Calif. will no longer be able to use containers or other food-service products made of polystyrene. In Maine, the Brunswick Town Council voted unanimously to ban polystyrene food containers. All retailers, restaurants and vendors are prohibited from using polystyrene foam packaging, including take-out containers, meat trays and egg cartons.

In Canada, some players are taking their own steps to reduce plastic use, regardless of government policy. In 2009, Loblaws, Canada’s largest grocer, implemented a seemingly insignificant $0.05 charge on plastic grocery bags. This unassuming action has reportedly diverted 11 billion plastic bags from our landfills and oceans over the last nine years. In February 2016, Walmart Canada followed suit. Public sentiment on environmental stewardship has changed significantly over just the last few years, as more Canadians are expecting industry to act. But some still have reservations.

Some have claimed that plastic bags serve an important food safety function and protect the public from harmful bacteria, outbreaks, and foodborne illnesses. A University of Arizona study in microbiology suggested that the combination of reusable grocery bags and food can be harmful to many. According to the study, coliform bacteria and Escherichia coli (E. coli) were found in half of the reusable grocery bags sampled.

The Mercatus Center in the U.S. claimed that discouraging the use of single-use plastic bags is almost pointless, given the insignificant variance in carbon footprint between bagging alternatives, including paper bags. And data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency suggests that only 0.28 per cent of all the garbage generated by municipalities, by weight, comes from plastic bags. These groups believe that banning the use of plastic bags is more about appearances and idealism than about protecting the environment.

Clearly the ban of plastic bags is a divisive issue. The resistance is real, and several cities have been hesitant to move forward on legislation, some plastic bag legislation has even been rescinded. Toronto once had a levy for plastic bags, and an outright ban on plastic bags was sought in 2012, but was rejected in 2013.

Plastic bags are a convenience, and habits are hard to break. What could potentially be an inconvenience to food shoppers can, and in some cases has, become a political nightmare.

But the problem will not go away, as the planet is currently drowning in plastic pollution. A study led by the Five Gyres Institute in Los Angeles estimates that at least 5.25 trillion plastic particles weighing 268,940 tons are currently floating in our oceans. Most of us cannot see the problem, but it is out there. The situation is being made worse by countries like Canada, whose food industry continues to generate more waste from single-use plastic food packaging every year.

Given that 26 per cent of all households in Canada consist of only one person, and the number of Canadians living alone is going to continue to grow, the single-serve economy will expand as well. This means single-use plastic packaging and containers could increase at alarming rates.

Banning plastics is one swift way to deal with the issue, and offer a temporary path to more impactful, sustainable strategies. The use of bioplastics, made from materials like algae and shrimp shells, may be the future.

Compostable single-use coffee pods are increasingly common in Canada, for example. Recently, a Dutch supermarket chain opened the world’s first plastic-free food store. This project was only made possible by using innovative solutions to plastic packaging. You will find only biodegradable flexible bioplastic packaging and bags in the store. So technically, everything sold there — everything — could be eaten.

The challenge with these alternatives, of course, is the cost. Bioplastics are more than twice as expensive as regular products. But given how rapidly the narrative around climate change is shifting, the “green” premium is increasingly worthy of consideration by industry. Once supply chains mature and become more developed to allow more access to affordable feedstocks, production costs and end prices for bioplastics will likely drop as well.

The notion of reduce, reuse, recycle has been preached for years now. Outright bans fit well within such a paradigm. But the concept of replacing single-use plastics requires the achievement of a revolution in consumer mentality.

As such, a much more interesting challenge is that of keeping grocery shopping from becoming either a burden on the environment or an inconvenience to customers.

Sylvain Charlebois is professor of food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University. Tony Walker is assistant professor at Dalhousie University’s School for Resources and Environmental Studies.

The post Opinion: Plastic bag politics appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The scientists, from University of California-Davis, say they’ve found about 40 per cent of the nitrogen oxide emissions in the Golden State is coming from fertilized soils in the agriculture-rich Central Valley.

In the study, published January 31 in the journal Science Advances, the authors compared computer models with estimates collected from scientific flights over the San Joaquin Valley. Both the model and flight data suggested that between 25 and 41 per cent of NOx emissions come from soils with heavy nitrogen fertilizer applications.

Smog-forming nitrogen oxides, or NOx, are a family of air-polluting chemical compounds. They are central to the formation of ground-level ozone and contribute to adverse health effects, such as heart disease, asthma and other respiratory issues. NOx is a primary component of air pollution, which the World Health Organization estimates causes one in eight deaths worldwide.

Technologies like the catalytic converter have helped greatly reduce NOx emitted from vehicles in urban areas. But some of the state’s worst air quality problems are now in rural areas.

“We need to increase the food we’re making,” said lead author Maya Almaraz, a National Science Foundation post-doctoral. “We need to do it on the land we have. But we need to do it using improved techniques.”

The study suggests potential solutions for reducing NOx soil emissions, primarily through different forms of fertilizer management

The post Soils make smog too appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Atrazine, widely used as a weed killer, is known to have harmful effects on aquatic wildlife and presents a risk to human health by altering the action of certain hormones, according to some studies.

In a study published recently in Water Research, a team led by INRS professor, Patrick Drogui compare various processes used to degrade atrazine.

A process known as photo-electron-Fenton (or PEF) seems particularly effective for removing low concentrations of atrazine and its byproducts in surface water sampled from agricultural areas.

More than 99 per cent of the atrazine was removed following just 15 minutes of treatment in prepared samples, reducing the concentration of the product to below detectable levels.

In natural surface water samples where the product was found, the results were very similar, with reductions ranging from 96 to 99 per cent. The findings pave the way for more work that could see the technique leave the lab for real-world application, Drogui said.

“The challenge is to develop low-cost industrial technologies that can be used to treat large volumes of water and simultaneously remove micropollutants like pesticides and their metabolites, which can be more toxic than the original compounds,” he said.

Although PEF is a clean, effective technology, it will take some more work to combine it with a biological treatment process in a water treatment plant and make it more energy efficient.

The post Cleaning up chemicals appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.