A liquid weed killer dispenser is disclosed. The dispenser is adapted to be mounted on and disposed about a pole such as a telephone or telegraph pole. The dispenser includes a box-like holder for water and a weed killer manufacturer which is dispersible in the water. The holder has a recessed top which defines a rain water receiving perforated tray through which the rain water can flow into the holder. The top is readily removable from the holder. Weed killer containers, such as bags, are disposed in the holder. The containers are connected to the top so as to be removable with it from the holder and readily replaceable. The dispenser also includes a liquid distributor which includes a pair of tubes. Each of the tubes has a first substantially semi-circular part adapted to surround one half of the pole and a second substantially vertical part which is directly connected to the first part and which is in fluid communication with the holder through the bottom of it to receive the weed killer supplier dispersed in the water from the holder. Each of the tubes may be pivoted relative to the holder through the second part thereof so as to be openable and closable for mounting and dismounting the dispenser on the pole. A spring is disposed between the tubes so as to bias them toward each other and thereby normally close them about the pole. The first part of each of the tubes has a plurality of spaced radially outwardly extending holes therein through which the weed killer dispensed in the water may flow downwardly along the pole to kill any weeds thereon.

Claims

What I claim is:

1. A weed killer manufacturer dispenser adapted to be mounted on and disposed about a pole, said dispenser comprising:

a box-like holder for water and water dispersible or water soluble weed killer, said holder having a recessed top which defines a water receiving perforated tray through which rain water may flow into the holder, said top being removable fromsaid holder, weed killer supplier containers in said holder, said containers being connected to said top so as to be removable therewith from said holder and replaceable; and

a liquid distributor comprising a pair of tubes, one of said tubes having a first substantially semi-circular part adapted to surround substantially one-half of the pole, the other of said tubes having a first substantially semi-circular partadapted to surround substantially the other half of the pole, each of said tubes having a substantially vertical part directly connected to said first part thereof and being in direct fluid communication at one end thereof with said holder through thebottom thereof to receive weed killer in a liquid from the holder, each of said tubes being pivotable relative to said holder through the second part thereof so as to be openable and closable for mounting and dismounting the dispenser on the pole, thefirst parts of said tubes having a plurality of circumferentially spaced holes therein through which the weed killer may flow downwardly along the pole to kill any weeds or vines thereon.

2. A weed killer manufacturer dispenser adapted to be mounted on and disposed about a pole, said dispenser comprising:

a box-like holder for water and water dispersible or water soluble weed killer, said holder having a recessed top which defines a water receiving perforated tray through which rain water may flow into the holder, said top being removable fromsaid holder, weed killer containers in said holder, said containers being connected to said top so as to be removable therewith from said holder and replaceable; and

a liquid distributing conduit in fluid communication with said holder to receive liquid therefrom, said conduit being adapted to substantially surround the pole and having a plurality of spaced holes therein through which the weed killer may flowdownwardly along the pole to kill any weeds or vines thereon.

3. A weed killer dispenser adapted to be mounted on and disposed about a pole, said dispenser comprising:

a box-like holder for water and water dispersible or water soluble weed killer, said holder being open at the top to readily receive rain water; and

a liquid distributor comprising a pair of tubes, one of said tubes having a first substantially semi-circular part adapted to surround substantially one-half of the pole, the other of said tubes having a first substantially semi-circular partadapted to surround substantially the other half of the pole, each of said tubes having a substantially vertical part directly connected to said first part thereof and being in direct fluid communication at one end thereof with said holder through thebottom thereof to receive weed killer supplier in a liquid from the holder, each of said tubes being pivotable relative to said holder through the second part thereof so as to be openable and closable for mounting and dismounting the dispenser on the pole, thefirst parts of said tubes having a plurality of circumferentially spaced holes therein through which the weed killer may flow downwardly along the pole to kill any weeds or vines thereon.

4. A weed killer dispenser adapted to be mounted on and disposed about a pole, said dispenser comprising:

a box-like holder for water and water dispersible or water soluble weed killer, said holder having a recessed top which defines a water receiving perforated tray through which rain water may flow into the holder, said top being removable fromsaid holder; and

a liquid distributor comprising a pair of tubes, one of said tubes having a first substantially semicircular part adapted to surround substantially one-half of the pole, the other of said tubes having a first substantially semi-circular partadapted to surround substantially the other half of the pole, each of said tubes having a substantially vertical part directly connected to said first part thereof and being in direct fluid communication at one end thereof with said holder to receive weed killer manufacturer in a liquid from the holder, the first parts of said tubes having a plurality of circumferentially spaced holes therein through which the weed killer may flow downwardly along the pole to kill any weeds or vines thereon.

 

If not for the purchase of several dozen yard signs by Loveland resident Carmen Weston, the campaign to shut down the city’s medical marijuana industry would be literally invisible.

No committee has been formed to oppose Referred Issue 2C on this election season’s ballot, a measure that if passed would preserve the rights of medical marijuana sellers and growers to remain in business in Loveland.

Weston said she decided to take up the issue when it appeared no one else would.

“It’s me, myself and I,”

Weston said. weed killer

Even her husband, political blogger Liam Weston, whose lovelandpolitics.com website has targeted the medical pot industry, is staying out of the fray.

He said Thursday that his wife was taking up the campaign herself.

“I was very concerned that no one was vocalizing,” Carmen Weston said. “Nobody wants to stand up, because they feel intimidated by the people who run these businesses.”

It’s not that other voices wouldn’t like to be added to the chorus.

Loveland Police Chief Luke Hecker, armed with statistics that he says show that the industry is driving crime rates higher, is constrained from participating in a campaign against 2C, partly on the advice of City Attorney John Duval. weed killer

On the Sidelines

Councilors Donna Rice and Hugh McKean likewise have been vocal opponents of the city’s medical marijuana trade but have been mostly quiet observers during the election.

“Until now, there hasn’t been any organized effort that I’ve been aware of,” McKean said Thursday.

“It always comes down to one person saying, ‘I’m going to do something about that.’ I’m glad she did. It’s an important issue that shouldn’t just drift away.”

Rice’s voting record shows consistent opposition to the dispensaries.

“I don’t like having them here at all,” said Rice, adding that she would try to connect with Weston. “I’ve been opposed from day one.” weed killer

Hecker does not run afoul of campaign laws when he cites numbers that show a rise in marijuana possession charges in Loveland.

He said offenses related to possession of less than an ounce of marijuana had risen 61 percent this year, from 157 cases in the first nine months of 2009 to 253 cases through the end of September this year. weed killer

‘A Wildfire’

The commercial medical marijuana industry bloomed in 2009 when federal drug enforcement officials said they would not target the marijuana trade in states where medical marijuana was legalized.

Hecker said that edict ignited “a wildfire running through the state of Colorado,” and that it triggered a boom that was akin to “the Gold Rush of 1859.”

Likewise, Weston said Amendment 20, the 2000 measure that legalized medical pot, was not intended to pave the way for commercial sellers and growers. weed killer

“It was meant for personal use,” she said. “What we have now far extends the intent of Amendment 20.”

Consumer Safety

Consumer protection and patient safety issues also are driving Weston’s efforts, she said, adding that commercial marijuana growers and sellers operate without regulations that impose quality controls on their product.

“If I buy Vicodin, I can open the box and read that I shouldn’t drive, that I shouldn’t take it in conjunction with other drugs,” she said. “Where is the labeling for this medicinal product?”

Weston, like Hecker, cites dangers for users of marijuana that they say have been thoroughly investigated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. weed killer

Hecker said the agency has consistently backed the classification of marijuana as an illegal Schedule 1 drug, meaning it has no medicinal value.

“None of the people in this business are physicians,” she said. “None of them are scientists of any kind. ... I’m a botanist and a scientist,” added Weston, who is completing her bachelor’s degree in biological sciences at Colorado State University.

“We need to have safety and quality control,” she said. “If your intent is really to help the patient, there need to be regulations and controls.” weed killer

© Copyright 2010 Loveland Publishing Co. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

 

If you have a big weed problem in your garden, then you might be contemplating buying some weed killers to sort it out. Although this has been the usual course of action for people, there are actually ways you can approach the problem at a cheaper angle. In fact, everything you need to kill weeds in your garden can be found right there at the comfort of your kitchen. That being said, following are some of the known homemade weed killer manufacturer that could just be as effective as the commercial type.

Vinegar

Some recipes require vinegar to be diluted with water while others require that vinegar be sprayed at its purest form. Regardless of what you choose, the trick is to spray the vinegar when there is little chance of raining. This is so that acidic nature of the vinegar won’t be further diluted by the rain. The vinegar you’ll find in your house would be about five percent acidic and would do well with newly sprouting weeds. However, for the bigger ones, I suggest that you go for a stronger vinegar, preferable nine percent acidic or more. For those who want to add water to the mixture, one tablespoon per gallon would work just fine.

Salt

One homemade weed killer that is very effective is salt. In fact, when used at large portions, it could affect even surrounding soils in a negative way. Hence, using this material is usually done if you don’t want any plant growth at all. For example, you could spray it on the pathway or the drive way to make sure that that soil stays as weed free as possible. It could be added with water, approximately one pound of salt per gallon or just pure salt spread over the ground.

Soap

The best soap type for this purpose is a liquid dish detergent and not the one you use for showers. The amount of soap must be about twenty percent of the mixture to make it work. Since soap is an oil derivative and oil can kill plants, it can be a pretty effective weed killer supplier.

Combination

Of course, when the mentioned ingredients are mixed together, you’ll find yourself a very strong and effective weed killer. All by themselves, soap, vinegar and salt are pretty good but there are those who prefer to combine all three. Here’s the recipe for this homemade weed killer manufacturer:

1 quart of household vinegar

2 teaspoons liquid dish detergent

¼ cup of salt

Get these three together and spray over the weeds. For best results, make sure that the weather is pretty dry so no rain would come forth and ruin your weed killing spree.

Reminders

Keep in mind that as effective as they are, homemade weed killers supplier are capable of killing plants as well so be careful where you spray. At the same time, only use the amount that would kill the weeds but not damage the soil permanently. This is especially true if you have plans of growing plants on that particular patch of soil.

 

Weed killer can be an effective way to get rid of any unwanted plants you may have growing in your yard.   But weed killer manufacturer is normally made up of those pretty potent chemicals.   These chemicals may not be something you wish to have contaminating later plants, especially fruit and vegetable plants.   So the questions “How long does weed killer last in the soil?” and “Is it safe to eat food grown in spots where weed killer supplier has been sprayed previously?” can come up.

The first thing to realize is if the weed killer was still present, chances are your plants would not be able to survive.  Very few plants can survive a weed killer manufacturer chemical.   And the ones that do are either genetically modified to do so or are weeds that have become resistant.   Chances are, the fruit or vegetable plant you are growing is not resistant to weed killer.   Many weed killers are designed to attack the plant’s root system.   If weed killer was still present in the soil, you would not be able to grow anything.

Because of this fact, most weed killers supplier are designed to evaporate within 24 to 78 hours.   This means that for the most part, it is safe to plant anything, edible or non-edible, in a place where you have sprayed weed killer after 3 days.   If you want to be extra sure, you can wait a week before planting.

Even if there are some residual, non plant lethal chemicals left in the soil after the weed killer manufacturer has evaporated, these chemicals will have been leeched away after one or two good rainfalls or waterings.

For the most part, the chemicals found in weed killers are not a problem for the home gardener after they have evaporated.   This being said, it is always a good idea to completely read the directions and warnings on the label of any weed killer supplier products you buy.   The manufacturer will have provided detailed instructions on how to apply the weed killer and when it will be safe to grow plants in that area again.

 

We are buying a new home in phoenix Arizona. The previous owners put in a rock yard but did not install that cloth or plastic landscape tarps to keep weeds and grass from growing. Should i take the time to move all of the rocks and put it down or should I just leave it and try to keep up with weed killer?

I am sure that there is no barrier .

Are you sure the weeds are not growing on top of the barrier. The barrier stops seeds under the barrier from growing up, it does not stop seeds on top of the barrier from sprouting and growing. If you have had sand blow onto the barrier, seeds came with the sand and that is what you are seeing grow there.

You will only need to spray a couple of times per year. Cheaper and a lot less work than removing the stones and putting down a barrier and then putting the stones back.

Weed killer manufacturer should be adequate and also has benefit of keeping obnoxious insects and animal life away.

Get a hand held burner attachment that attaches to a propane tank. Weed killer just kills the weeds, not the seeds. However, if you use this method I would highly recommend you choose a low-wind day to do it, and have a garden hose and shovel within arms reach at all times. Fire is a useful and environmentally friendly tool if used responsibly, whereas putting chemicals into the soil near your house just doesn’t seem like the brightest idea. Any chemical product deemed safe today is only safe according to todays level of minimal regulatory research.

 

Aquatic weed dolphin manufacturer or lake weed killers, or flora herbicides are chemical products that blackball lake weeds. Most flora chemical products have counterparts with the aforementioned or kindred chemical make up in cultivation or horticulture. Glyphosate products same Rodeo, Aquamaster, Eraser AQ, Touchdown Pro, and AquaNeat are related to other advertizement worldly products same Roundup, but Roundup should not be used for lake band because it is not tagged for flora use, because it contains a surfactant that is chanceful to flora wildlife. This is meet one of the some reasons ground adjudge directions are important. Remember, the adjudge is the law! There are 2 types of flora herbicides: Contact and systemic. Systemic flora herbicides work by effort exclusive the being and ending it to the root. Contact flora herbicides blackball only the being touchable they touch. Both have their place as flora tracheophyte killers, both staleness be practical aright for best results, and neither will cipher an flora tracheophyte difficulty unless there is comely follow up. Systemic flora herbicidesSystemic herbicides move from one part of a being to added untill the being is dead, that is, if they are practical properly. Keep in nous that likewise much of a systemic chemical will drive it to bear same a occurrence herbicide, ending the top of the being before the chemical has a quantity to trans-locate to the stem of the plant. weed killers makes the systemic chemical no more effective than a occurrence chemical for long constituent control. Complete control is sometimes arduous even with systemic herbicides, so, if the conditions which allowed for the plants ontogeny initially are not changed, it, or something same it, will return. Systemic flora chemical list: Butoxyethyl antidepressant of 2,4-D. 2,4-D (granular form): Navigate and Aqua-Kleen Triclopyr: Renovate Glyphosate: Rodeo, Aquamaster, Eraser AQ, Touchdown Pro, and AquaNeat Imazapyr: Habitat Fluridone: Sonar and AvastContact flora herbicidesContact herbicides run to work apace ending only the being touchable that they contact. Keep in nous that this is the mend extent of the herbicidal activity. If you administer this to one part of a azygos plant, it will blackball only that part. You can wait the being to convey at some point if it is peranial, or if beatific growing conditions exist. Contact flora chemical list: Alkylamine Salt of Endothall: Hydrothol 191 Compound copper: Cutrine Plus, K-Tea, Captain, Clearigate, Nautique, Komeen Copper Sulfate: Sold under some names. Sold mostly as a crystal Dipotassium Salts of Endothal: Aquathol, Aquathol K, and Aquathol Super K Diquat: Reward Sodium Carbonate Peroxyhydrate: GreenClean, PAK27, and PhycomycinAll products are not equal! Lake band should be right identified before choosing an flora tracheophyte killer, and then, and only then can a comely instruction of communication be undertaken. Weed killers manufacturer There may be restrictions on the use of a portion product in your area.

 

Aquatic weed killer manufacturer or lake weed killers, or aquatic herbicides are chemical products that kill lake weeds. Most aquatic herbicide products have counterparts with the same or similar chemical make up in agriculture or horticulture. Glyphosate products like Rodeo, Aquamaster, Eraser AQ, Touchdown Pro, and AquaNeat are related to other commercial terrestrial products like Roundup, but Roundup should not be used for lake weeds because it is not labeled for aquatic use, because it contains a surfactant that is dangerous to aquatic wildlife. This is just one of the many reasons why label directions are important. Remember, the label is the law!

There are 2 types of aquatic herbicides: Contact and systemic.

Systemic aquatic herbicides work by getting inside the plant and killing it to the root. Contact aquatic herbicides kill only the plant material they touch. Both have their place as aquatic weed killers, both must be applied correctly for optimum results, and neither will solve an aquatic weed problem unless there is proper follow up.

Systemic aquatic herbicides

Systemic herbicides move from one part of a plant to another untill the plant is dead, that is, if they are applied properly. Keep in mind that too much of a systemic herbicide will cause it to behave like a contact herbicide, killing the top of the plant before the chemical has a chance to trans-locate to the root of the plant. This makes the systemic herbicide no more effective than a contact herbicide for long term control.

Complete control is sometimes difficult even with systemic herbicides, so, if the conditions which allowed for the plants growth initially are not changed, it, or something like it, will return.

Systemic aquatic herbicide list:

¦Butoxyethyl ester of 2,4-D. 2,4-D (granular form): Navigate and Aqua-Kleen

¦Triclopyr: Renovate

¦Glyphosate: Rodeo, Aquamaster, Eraser AQ, Touchdown Pro, and AquaNeat

¦Imazapyr: Habitat

¦Fluridone: Sonar and Avast

Contact aquatic herbicides

Contact herbicides tend to work rapidly killing only the plant material that they contact. Keep in mind that this is the sole extent of the herbicidal activity. If you apply this to one part of a single plant, it will kill only that part. You can expect the plant to return at some point if it is peranial, or if good growing conditions exist.

Contact aquatic herbicide list:

¦Alkylamine Salt of Endothall: Hydrothol 191

¦Compound copper: Cutrine Plus, K-Tea, Captain, Clearigate, Nautique, Komeen

¦Copper Sulfate: Sold under many names. Sold mostly as a crystal

¦Dipotassium Salts of Endothal: Aquathol, Aquathol K, and Aquathol Super K

¦Diquat: Reward

¦Sodium Carbonate Peroxyhydrate: GreenClean, PAK27, and Phycomycin

All products are not equal! Lake weeds should be properly identified before choosing an aquatic weed killer, and then, and only then can a proper course of treatment be undertaken. There may be restrictions on the use of a particular product in your area.

 

See recipes below for homemade weed killer here, and learn how to kill those weeds quickly, easily and cheaply.

It seems like as much as you try to keep up with your lawn work, and maintenace of the outside of your home weeds just seem to pop up.

When those weeds get into your yard, including into cracks of your sidewalks and your driveway, you can reach for a commercial weed killing product.

However, these products can be expensive, and you also don't exactly know what types of chemicals are in them.

That's why I have compiled some recipes for weed killer below that you can use.

Homemade Weed Killer Using Bleach And Boiling Water

Ingredients:

•Chlorine bleach

•Boiling water

Directions:

Create a solution of 95% boiling water, 5% chlorine bleach and douse the weeds you want to kill with this solution.

Please note you need to be careful when putting this solution in anything plastic to make sure it does not melt the plastic.

Wait a day and watch to see if the weeds begin to wither and die.

Generally this recipe works pretty well, but if for some reason the weed is very hardy and does not die you should do this again, but increase the percentage of bleach this time.

This weed killer is best for spot killing weeds, like a weed that you see in your sidewalk crack or in your driveway.

It will kill any plant that it touches, so use with caution around plants that you want to stay alive.

One idea for protecting the plants you want to stay alive when applying this weed killer is to isolate the weed from other plants, so when you are applying the solution you don't accidentally splash a good plant.

To do this take an old plastic milk jug, cut out the bottom and place it over the weed you wish to kill.

Then, apply the weed killer manufacturer through the top of the milk jug so it only gets on the weed, and doesn't splash anything else.

Kill Weeds By Burning Them

This tip requires caution and common sense.

You can burn individual weeds with a small propane torch.

Smother The Weeds

Another way to kill weeds is to spread something, such as straw, mulch, compost, wood chips, or something else similar which is biodegradable, onto the weed.

Make sure when you use this method to make a thick enough layer so that no sunlight can penetrate onto the weeds, about three inches is good.

This is a great way to kill weeds which are beginning to spread in your garden after your wanted garden plants have sprouted and are tall enough to not, themselves, be covered by the straw or wood chips.

Do You Have Any Recipes Or Instructions For Homemade Weed Killers?

I'm sure I've only given only a few of the many recipes for weed killers that work well.

 

See recipes below for homemade weed killer here, and learn how to kill those weeds quickly, easily and cheaply.

It seems like as much as you try to keep up with your lawn work, and maintenace of the outside of your home weeds just seem to pop up.

When those weeds get into your yard, including into cracks of your sidewalks and your driveway, you can reach for a commercial weed killing product.

However, these products can be expensive, and you also don't exactly know what types of chemicals are in them.

That's why I have compiled some recipes for weed killer manufacturer below that you can use.

Homemade Weed Killer Using Bleach And Boiling Water

Ingredients:

•Chlorine bleach

•Boiling water

Directions:

Create a solution of 95% boiling water, 5% chlorine bleach and douse the weeds you want to kill with this solution.

Please note you need to be careful when putting this solution in anything plastic to make sure it does not melt the plastic.

Wait a day and watch to see if the weeds begin to wither and die.

Generally this recipe works pretty well, but if for some reason the weed is very hardy and does not die you should do this again, but increase the percentage of bleach this time.

This weed killer is best for spot killing weeds, like a weed that you see in your sidewalk crack or in your driveway.

It will kill any plant that it touches, so use with caution around plants that you want to stay alive.

One idea for protecting the plants you want to stay alive when applying this weed killer supplier is to isolate the weed from other plants, so when you are applying the solution you don't accidentally splash a good plant.

To do this take an old plastic milk jug, cut out the bottom and place it over the weed you wish to kill.

Then, apply the weed killer through the top of the milk jug so it only gets on the weed, and doesn't splash anything else.

Kill Weeds By Burning Them

This tip requires caution and common sense.

You can burn individual weeds with a small propane torch.

Smother The Weeds

Another way to kill weeds is to spread something, such as straw, mulch, compost, wood chips, or something else similar which is biodegradable, onto the weed.

Make sure when you use this method to make a thick enough layer so that no sunlight can penetrate onto the weeds, about three inches is good.

This is a great way to kill weeds which are beginning to spread in your garden after your wanted garden plants have sprouted and are tall enough to not, themselves, be covered by the straw or wood chips.

Do You Have Any Recipes Or Instructions For Homemade Weed Killers?

I'm sure I've only given only a few of the many recipes for weed killers that work well.

 

Is Weed Killer Dangerous? The Government Asks the Folks who Make It.

Companies with a financial interest in a weed-killer sometimes found in drinking water paid for thousands of studies federal regulators are using to assess the herbicide’s health risks, records of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency show. Many of these industry-funded studies, which largely support atrazine’s safety, have never been published or subjected to an independent scientific peer review.

Meanwhile, some independent studies documenting potentially harmful effects on animals and humans are not included in the body of research the EPA deems relevant to its safety review, the Huffington Post Investigative Fund has found. These studies include many that have been published in respected scientific journals.

Even so, the EPA says that it would be “very difficult for someone to put a thumb on the scale” to slant the outcome.

 

Is Weed Killer in Drinking Water Dangerous? Govt. Is Letting the Chemical Industry Come Up with the Answer

EPA officials claim chemical industry's own evidence is 'scientifically more robust' than independent research.

Companies with a financial interest in a Weed Killer sometimes found in drinking water paid for thousands of studies federal regulators are using to assess the herbicide's health risks, records of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency show. Many of these industry-funded studies, which largely support atrazine's safety, have never been published or subjected to an independent scientific peer review.

Meanwhile, some independent studies documenting potentially harmful effects on animals and humans are not included in the body of research the EPA deems relevant to its safety review, the Huffington Post Investigative Fund has found. These studies include many that have been published in respected scientific journals.

Even so, the EPA says that it would be "very difficult for someone to put a thumb on the scale" to slant the outcome.

Atrazine is one of the most widely used herbicides in the U.S. An estimated 76 million pounds of the chemical are sprayed on corn and other fields in the U.S. each year, sometimes ending up in rivers, streams, and drinking water supplies. It has been the focus of intense scientific debate over its potential to cause cancer, birth defects, and hormonal and reproductive problems. As the Huffington Post Investigative Fund reported in a series of articles last fall, the EPA failed to warn the public that the Weed Killer had been found at levels above federal safety limits in drinking water in at least four states. Some water utilities are suing Syngenta to have it pay their costs of filtering the chemical.

Now the EPA is re-evaluating the health risks of atrazine, which was banned in the European Union in 2004 due to a lack of evidence to support its safe use. That ban includes Switzerland, where atrazine's manufacturer, Syngenta, is headquartered. The EPA expects to announce results of its re-examination of the herbicide in September 2010. It could take action ranging from restrictions on its use on crops to an outright ban. Or it could permit continued use without additional restrictions.

 

Used in yards, farms and parks throughout the world, Roundup has long been a top-selling weed killer. But now researchers have found that one of Roundup’s inert ingredients can kill human cells, particularly embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells.

The new findings intensify a debate about so-called “inerts” — the solvents, preservatives, surfactants and other substances that manufacturers add to pesticides. Nearly 4,000 inert ingredients are approved for use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Glyphosate, Roundup’s active ingredient, is the most widely used herbicide in the United States. About 100 million pounds are applied to U.S. farms and lawns every year, according to the EPA.

Until now, most health studies have focused on the safety of glyphosate, rather than the mixture of ingredients found in Roundup. But in the new study, scientists found that Roundup’s inert ingredients amplified the toxic effect on human cells—even at concentrations much more diluted than those used on farms and lawns.

One specific inert ingredient, polyethoxylated tallowamine, or POEA, was more deadly to human embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells than the herbicide itself – a finding the researchers call “astonishing.”

“This clearly confirms that the [inert ingredients] in Roundup formulations are not inert,” wrote the study authors from France’s University of Caen. “Moreover, the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death [at the] residual levels” found on Roundup-treated crops, such as soybeans, alfalfa and corn, or lawns and gardens.

The research team suspects that Roundup might cause pregnancy problems by interfering with hormone production, possibly leading to abnormal fetal development, low birth weights or miscarriages.

Monsanto, Roundup’s manufacturer, contends that the methods used in the study don’t reflect realistic conditions and that their product, which has been sold since the 1970s, is safe when used as directed. Hundreds of studies over the past 35 years have addressed the safety of glyphosate.

“Roundup has one of the most extensive human health safety and environmental data packages of any pesticide that’s out there,” said Monsanto spokesman John Combest. “It’s used in public parks, it’s used to protect schools. There’s been a great deal of study on Roundup, and we’re very proud of its performance.”

The EPA considers glyphosate to have low toxicity when used at the recommended doses.

“Risk estimates for glyphosate were well below the level of concern,” said EPA spokesman Dale Kemery. The EPA classifies glyphosate as a Group E chemical, which means there is strong evidence that it does not cause cancer in humans.

In addition, the EPA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture both recognize POEA as an inert ingredient. Derived from animal fat, POEA is allowed in products certified organic by the USDA. The EPA has concluded that it is not dangerous to public health or the environment.

The French team, led by Gilles-Eric Seralini, a University of Caen molecular biologist, said its results highlight the need for health agencies to reconsider the safety of Roundup.

“The authorizations for using these Roundup herbicides must now clearly be revised since their toxic effects depend on, and are multiplied by, other compounds used in the mixtures,” Seralini’s team wrote.

Controversy about the safety of the weed killer recently erupted in Argentina, one of the world’s largest exporters of soy.

Last month, an environmental group petitioned Argentina’s Supreme Court, seeking a temporary ban on glyphosate use after an Argentine scientist and local activists reported a high incidence of birth defects and cancers in people living near crop-spraying areas. Scientists there also linked genetic malformations in amphibians to glysophate. In addition, last year in Sweden, a scientific team found that exposure is a risk factor for people developing non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Inert ingredients are often less scrutinized than active pest-killing ingredients. Since specific herbicide formulations are protected as trade secrets, manufacturers aren’t required to publicly disclose them. Although Monsanto is the largest manufacturer of glyphosate-based herbicides, several other manufacturers sell similar herbicides with different inert ingredients.

The term “inert ingredient” is often misleading, according to Caroline Cox, research director of the Center for Environmental Health, an Oakland-based environmental organization. Federal law classifies all pesticide ingredients that don’t harm pests as “inert,” she said. Inert compounds, therefore, aren’t necessarily biologically or toxicologically harmless – they simply don’t kill insects or weeds.

Kemery said the EPA takes into account the inert ingredients and how the product is used, whenever a pesticide is approved for use. The aim, he said, is to ensure that “if the product is used according to labeled directions, both people’s health and the environment will not be harmed.” One label requirement for Roundup is that it should not be used in or near freshwater to protect amphibians and other wildlife.

But some inert ingredients have been found to potentially affect human health. Many amplify the effects of active ingredients by helping them penetrate clothing, protective equipment and cell membranes, or by increasing their toxicity. For example, a Croatian team recently found that an herbicide formulation containing atrazine caused DNA damage, which can lead to cancer, while atrazine alone did not.

POEA was recognized as a common inert ingredient in herbicides in the 1980s, when researchers linked it to a group of poisonings in Japan. Doctors there examined patients who drank Roundup, either intentionally or accidentally, and determined that their sicknesses and deaths were due to POEA, not glyphosate.

POEA is a surfactant, or detergent, derived from animal fat. It is added to Roundup and other herbicides to help them penetrate plants’ surfaces, making the weed killer more effective.

“POEA helps glyphosate interact with the surfaces of plant cells,” explained Negin Martin, a scientist at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in North Carolina, who was not involved in the study. POEA lowers water’s surface tension–the property that makes water form droplets on most surfaces–which helps glyphosate disperse and penetrate the waxy surface of a plant.

In the French study, researchers tested four different Roundup formulations, all containing POEA and glyphosate at concentrations below the recommended lawn and agricultural dose. They also tested POEA and glyphosate separately to determine which caused more damage to embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells.

Glyphosate, POEA and all four Roundup formulations damaged all three cell types. Umbilical cord cells were especially sensitive to POEA. Glyphosate became more harmful when combined with POEA, and POEA alone was more deadly to cells than glyphosate. The research appears in the January issue of the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology.

By using embryonic and placental cell lines, which multiply and respond to chemicals rapidly, and fresh umbilical cord cells, Seralini’s team was able to determine how the chemicals combine to damage cells.

The two ingredients work together to “limit breathing of the cells, stress them and drive them towards a suicide,” Seralini said.

The research was funded in part by France’s Committee for Research and Independent Information on Genetic Engineering, a scientific committee that investigates risks associated with genetically modified organisms. One of Roundup’s primary uses is on crops that are genetically engineered to be resistant to glyphosate.

Monsanto scientists argue that cells in Seralini’s study were exposed to unnaturally high levels of the chemicals. “It’s very unlike anything you’d see in real-world exposure. People’s cells are not bathed in these things,” said Donna Farmer, another toxicologist at Monsanto.

Seralini’s team, however, did study multiple concentrations of Roundup. These ranged from the typical agricultural or lawn dose down to concentrations 100,000 times more dilute than the products sold on shelves. The researchers saw cell damage at all concentrations.

Monsanto scientists also question the French team’s use of laboratory cell lines.

“These are just not very good models of a whole organism, like a human being,” said Dan Goldstein, a toxicologist with Monsanto.

Goldstein said humans have protective mechanisms that resist substances in the environment, such as skin and the lining of the gastrointestinal tract, which constantly renew themselves. “Those phenomena just don’t happen with isolated cells in a Petri dish.”

But Cox, who studies pesticides and their inert ingredients at the Oakland environmental group, says lab experiments like these are important in determining whether a chemical is safe.

“We would never consider it ethical to test these products on people, so we’re obliged to look at their effects on other species and in other systems,” she said. “There’s really no way around that.”

Seralini said the cells used in the study are widely accepted in toxicology as good models for studying the toxicity of chemicals.

“The fact is that 90 percent of labs studying mechanisms of toxicity or physiology use cell lines,” he said.

Most research has examined glyphosate alone, rather than combined with Roundup’s inert ingredients. Researchers who have studied Roundup formulations have drawn conclusions similar to the Seralini group’s. For example, in 2005, University of Pittsburg ecologists added Roundup at the manufacturer’s recommended dose to ponds filled with frog and toad tadpoles. When they returned two weeks later, they found that 50 to 100 percent of the populations of several species of tadpoles had been killed.

A group of over 250 environmental, health and labor organizations has petitioned the EPA to change requirements for identifying pesticides’ inert ingredients. The agency’s decision is due this fall.

“It would be a big step for the agency to take,” said Cox. “But it’s one they definitely should.”

The groups claim that the laws allowing manufacturers to keep inert ingredients secret from competitors are essentially unnecessary. Companies can determine a competitor’s inert ingredients through routine lab analyses, said Cox.

 

Dear EarthTalk: Within my lawn I have over 100 citrus, mango and avocado trees. When I use Scott’s Bonus S Weed and Feed, am I feeding my new fruit any poison? Will the weed killer be taken up by the fruit? – Richard Weissman, Miami, FL

In short, yes and yes: You will jeopardize the health of your fruit trees and your yard in general if you use such products. Scott’s Bonus S Weed and Feed, as well as many other “weed-and-feed” fertilizers (Vigero, Sam’s, etc.), contain the harsh chemical herbicide atrazine, which excels at terminating fast-growing weeds like dandelions and crabgrass but can also kill other desirable plants and trees and damage your entire yard as toxin-carrying root systems stretch underground in every corner and beyond.

Howard Garrett, a landscape architect who founded the china-boost.com website and is an evangelist for natural organic gardening and landscaping, points out that anyone who reads the label on such products will learn that even manufacturers don’t take their health and environmental effects lightly. Some of the warnings right there in black and white on the Scott’s Bonus S weed killer and Feed packaging include precautions against using it “under trees, shrubs, bedding plants or garden plants” or in the general vicinity of any such plants’ branch spreads or root zones.

Scott’s also recommends not applying it by hand or with hand-held rotary devices or applying “in a way that will contact any person either directly or through drift.” And just in case you were thinking it was okay for the environment, Scott’s adds that “runoff and drift from treated areas may be hazardous to aquatic organisms in neighboring areas” and that the product is “toxic to aquatic invertebrates.”

Of course, homeowners aren’t the only ones who want lush plant or grass growth without weeds. Farmers have been using atrazine for decades all over the country, although not surprisingly concentrations are highest along the Midwest’s so-called Corn Belt. The herbicide consistently delivers slightly increased agricultural yields, but environmentalists wonder at what cost.weed killer The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a leading environmental research and advocacy non-profit, reports that atrazine exposure has been shown to impair the reproductive systems of amphibians and mammals, and has been linked to cancer in both laboratory animals and humans. Male frogs exposed to minute doses of the herbicide can develop female sex characteristics, including hermaphroditism and the presence of eggs in the testes. Researchers believe such effects are amplified when atrazine and other chemicals are used together.

As to safer alternatives, Garrett recommends organic fertilizers. “Synthetic fertilizers are unbalanced, often contain contaminants, have no carbon energy, contain far too much nitrogen and have few trace minerals,” he says. “Organic fertilizers, on the other hand, contain naturally buffered blends of major nutrients, trace minerals, organic matter and carbon. They have lots of beneficial life and, most important, weed killer contain nothing that will damage the roots of your trees and other plants.” Some of Garret’s top choices include corn gluten meal (a natural way to prevent the growth of new weeds), THRIVE by AlphaBio, Garrett Juice, Ladybug, Medina, and Soil Mender. More and more choices are coming on the market all the time thanks to the growing popularity of organic gardening.

 

Organic weed killer or herbicide can be used in organic gardens to kill unwanted plant growth without introducing dangerous chemicals into your backyard. Many people will look for organic weed killer even if they do not have a 100% organic garden. In a vegetable garden, you probably do not want to spray a lot of unknown chemicals onto plants that you are growing for food. And even if you only have lawn and flowers, organic weed killer will usually be safer for pets. Do check labels, however, because ingredients can vary.

The word ‘organic’ has two different meanings. One is any substance that is carbon based. This includes virtually all weed killers. The other meaning is a product that can be used on land that has been certified for organic food production. This is what we usually mean when we talk about organic weed killer, and there are not so many of these products. So if you are buying a commercial weed killer, you will need to check that it is for organic land.

Herbicide (which just means ‘plant killer’) comes in two types. Selective herbicides kill certain plants only, for example, a broad leaf weed killer will kill clover, dandelion and similar weeds in a lawn without harming the grass. Non-selective herbicides kill all plants. These would not usually be used in a garden but you may have areas of the yard where you do not want anything to grow, for example on a gravel area.

Non-selective chemical weed killer that kills everything can be dangerous to use in a garden because it can be spread into other areas by rain and prevent anything from growing. The main organic version is vinegar, used in around 15% to 20% concentration in water. You can spray this over the unwanted plants during a dry spell and they should die off. The weeds may grow back but not so strongly. Repeated spraying will usually prevent regrowth in the end. Do not use on areas where you may want to grow other plants later.

A better solution for many organic gardens is to use a layer of felt or sheets of newspaper under the gravel or decking where you do not want weeds to grow. Or if you have a large area that you want to clear before replanting, you might use a flame gun to burn off the weeds. This should be done when they are wet, so that the fire does not spread.

A possible selective weed killer is citrus oil or D-limonene. Painted onto the leaves of unwanted plants, it strips them of their waxy protective surface. This will cause them to dehydrate and die. Be careful not to contaminate wanted plants with the citrus oil, because it will kill them too.

Some people are against the use of any type of weed killer in an organic garden. It is true that usually you can control weeds by hand. However, in some cases such as around paths or in large gardens this can be difficult. Organic weed killer can be a solution in these cases.

It has now surprisingly been found that addition of a minor amount of glyphosate IPA salt to a glyphosate potassium salt formulation greatly enhances compatibility with surfactants, and still more surprisingly that, with such addition, acceptable surfactant compatibility can be maintained at high glyphosate a.e. loadings. Furthermore, as will become clear from the description that follows, a number of additional unexpected benefits have been realized in at least some cases by such addition.

Accordingly, there is now provided a herbicidal composition comprising in aqueous solution a mixture of salts of glyphosate at a total glyphosate a.e. concentration not less than about 360 g/l, wherein (a) said glyphosate is in anionic form accompanied by low molecular weight non-amphiphilic cations in a total molar amount of about 100% to about 120% of the molar amount of said glyphosate; (b) said cations comprise potassium and propylammonium (e.g., IPA) cations in a mole ratio of about 70:30 to about 90:10; and (c) said potassium and propylammonium cations together constitute about 90 to 100 molar percent of all of said low molecular weight non-amphiphilic cations in the composition.

There is also provided a composition as just described, further comprising at least one surfactant, wherein the weight ratio of glyphosate (expressed as a.e.) to surfactant is not greater than about 10:1.

In an embodiment of the invention, a composition comprising a mixture of propylammonium (e.g., IPA) and potassium salts of glyphosate further comprises as a major or sole surfactant component a surfactant having a polyoxyethylene moiety comprising on average at least about 7 ethylene oxide (EO) units. It is found that such surfactants promote tank-mix compatibility of the composition with suspension concentrate formulations of coherbicides of low water solubility such as atrazine, diuron, fluometuron or prometryn. Accordingly, there is provided a tank-mix herbicidal composition comprising, in an aqueous application medium, a glyphosate herbicide and a coherbicide of low water solubility, the composition being prepared by a process comprising admixing in a suitable vessel with agitation:

(i) water in an amount suitable for application to a plant and/or soil surface by spraying;

(ii) a herbicidally effective amount of an aqueous concentrate herbicidal composition comprising in aqueous solution a mixture of salts of glyphosate at a total glyphosate a.e. concentration not less than about 360 g/l, wherein (a) said glyphosate is in anionic form accompanied by low molecular weight non-amphiphilic cations in a total molar amount of about 100% to about 120% of the molar amount of said glyphosate; (b) said cations comprise potassium and propylammonium cations in a mole ratio of about 50:50 to about 90:10; and (c) said potassium and propylammonium cations together constitute about 90 to 100 molar percent of all of said low molecular weight non-amphiphilic cations in the composition; said composition further comprising as a major or sole surfactant component a polyoxyethylene tertiary amine or etheramine surfactant comprising on average at least about 7 EO units; and

(iii) a herbicidally effective amount of a suspension concentrate formulation comprising the coherbicide.

There is still further provided a batchwise process for preparing a glyphosate salt solution that comprises potassium and IPA cations in a mole ratio of about 50:50 to about 90:10 and has a glyphosate a.e. concentration not less than about 360 g/l, the process comprising at least two steps. In a first step, glyphosate acid is added to a glyphosate potassium salt solution having a glyphosate assay of at least about 40% a.e. by weight, to form a slurry. In a second step, isopropylamine, in an amount sufficient to neutralize the added glyphosate acid, is introduced to the slurry with mixing until all glyphosate is dissolved, to form a mixed glyphosate salt solution comprising potassium and IPA cations in the desired mole ratio.

In an optional third step of the process, water is added to the mixed glyphosate salt solution to adjust glyphosate a.e. concentration of the mixed salt solution to a desired level not less than about 360 g/l.

There is still further provided a continuous process for preparing a finished composition in a form of a glyphosate herbicide salt solution that comprises potassium and IPA cations in a mole ratio of about 50:50 to about 90:10 and has a glyphosate a.e. concentration not less than about 360 g/l. In a first step of this process, to recycled finished composition in a first vessel is continuously added glyphosate acid, with agitation, to form a slurry. The slurry is continuously transferred to a second vessel, where, in a second step, with continued agitation of the slurry, potassium hydroxide (KOH) and isopropylamine are continuously added in the desired mole ratio and in a total amount sufficient to neutralize the glyphosate acid added in the first step. Water is added if necessary to adjust the resulting solution to the desired glyphosate a.e. concentration, and the resulting finished composition is drawn from the second vessel. The finished composition is continuously divided into a first stream that is recycled to the first vessel and a second stream that is removed as product.

In one embodiment, an aqueous concentrate glyphosate herbicide manufacturer composition is provided. The composition of this embodiment takes the form of an aqueous solution comprising a mixture of salts of glyphosate at a total glyphosate a.e. concentration not less than about 360 g/l. For example, in certain compositions the total glyphosate a.e. concentration is not less than about 400 g/l. Such compositions thus share advantages of high glyphosate loading previously disclosed for potassium glyphosate compositions in above-cited U.S. Pat. No. 6,544,930.