The Potential of Biofumigation in Solving Air Pollution in Developing Countries

Abstract

Biofumigation is a sustainable strategy to manage soil-borne pathogens, nematodes, insects, and weeds instead of methyl Bromide in developing countries including Egypt. Initially it was defined as the pest suppressive action of decomposing Brassica tissues, but it was later expanded worldwide to include animal and plant residues. Most data on the efficacy of biofumigation are from in vitro studies using fungal pathogens. Biofumigation also attracted the interest of nematologists, and plant pathologists. Moreover, this is a new trend to find out a substitute for Methyl Bromide that was banned worldwide since 2005, and no one interested in that time to find new and environmentally safe compounds that can work efficiently like the Methyl bromide did. We face this ecological problem in Egypt. However, concerns about the negative impact of synthetic nematicides on the environment and on general public health led to a re-evaluation of these products. For example, high use of the soil fumigant methyl bromide and resulting contamination of ground, surface and drinking water in The Netherlands led to a ban on its use in the 1980s. Later, methyl bromide was listed as an ozone depleting compound at the 4th meeting of the Montreal Protocol in Copenhagen, 1992, and in accordance with the US Clean Air Act its use as a fumigant is now banned in several nations. In last two decades, there is a worldwide awareness and interest to Air Pollution problems. In 1992 methyl bromide (MB) was added as controlled substance to the Montreal Protocol. The problem in developing countries including Egypt is more difficult to solve, as there is still a weak and not rigid environmental laws to respect and there is no multiple alternatives to follow by our Egyptian farmers. On the other hand, the developed countries must phase out most uses by 1 January 2005, with the possibility of critical use exemptions where alternatives have yet to be implemented. All the signed parties could not resolve differences in opinion on the amount and time period for these critical use exemptions which led to the scheduling of the first Extraordinary Meeting of the Parties (ExMOP1) in March 2004. They accord together to the amount of MB for most of the CUEs for 2005, the level of production necessary to satisfy the CUEs (taking stocks into account), and conditions for granting and reporting on CUEs. One of the most relevant to replace this toxic compound is biofumigation. Biofumigation refers to the suppression of soil-borne pests and pathogens by biocidal compounds released by Brassicaceous green manure and rotation crops when glucosinolates (GSLs) in their tissues are hydrolysed. We studied the effect of different brassicaceous green manure on the biological environment in soil and in their ecosystem. We concluded that, biofumigation can easily replace the mis/excessive use of methyl bromide and with some subsidizes programs for the poor farmers in developing countries. We have to enhance and encourage poor farmers especially in developing countries to make greater reductions in MB consumption. We have to mention that, with this climate change problem, we have to focus on this modifications in developing countries which focusing in their economics on agriculture and hence using this methyl bromide with weak control measures and hence we have to force them to use this safe, environmentally-friendly measures like biofumigation. Moreover, we have to add this item as an extension to the Montreal Protocol in 1992, and COP10. Finally, I invite the European Community to modify this Regulation (EC) 2037/2000 on ‘Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer’, by using this biofumigation as an alternative measure to control this fatal problem. Finally, I encourage the UNEP to find out and to finance an innovative program for the new alternatives for this highly toxic compound especially for those farmers and consumers in the developing countries.