Cr@p. I've been using it for decades.
Cr@p. I've been using it for decades.
When i we're a lad etc we used to buy the bloody stuff wholesale made more 'xplosives with that than most anything else till i found an old book on the subject;)
However we used to have a proper chemists shoppe in town and you could buy whatever you wanted there with a polite "now be careful carrying that home on the bus won't you, and don't sit near anyone smoking"
Never had any problems at all ever, and no one got killed - well mate did get a little maimed - but nowt serious;!....
There seems to be an assumption on this forum that stuff isn't dangerous unless you drop dead within a few minutes of handling it.
Can I put this another way, equally valid to your anecdotal explanation of its safety. Has anything bad ever happened to you since you were a lad? Maybe it's due to the Sodium Chlorate? Prove it isn't. :)
And yes, I've used the stuff, too. Maybe it's harmless and the EU banned it out of spite or on a whim. Or maybe we've both been lucky.
Trouble is, this *is* the approach that EU loonies take.
Having a background in chemistry (although many years ago) was wondering by what mechanism Sodium Chlorate depletes the ozone layer. An hour of googling has not provided an answer. Anyone here know why or can provide a link which explains the process?
I have never heard of any connection AT ALL between sodium chlorate use and any illness whatsoever. IT is after all salt, with an oxygen atom added.
The EU works on the exact opposite principle to common sense British law and way of working. We say everything is legal except if its specifically illegal. The EU works on the opposite principle. Everything is forbidden unless its definitely (been tested by a bent test system to be certifiably ) OK and needed (by a big company to make a profit).
Sodium chlorate is cheap, highly effective and not made by big chemical companies.
So it had to go.
The stupid 'precautionary' principle is then rolled out to justify it.
Prove that it doesn't ;-)
But its not in the interests of any large agrochemical company to do that, they have MUCH more expensive stuff to sell.
The only references I could find stated that it does NOT deplete ozone. :)
Ammonium sulphamate?
An extra 3 oxygens, actually.
I take it that you would happily bathe in sulphuric acid - water with a sulphur added.
Or breathe hydrogen cyanide - acetylene with a harmless little nitrogen atom added.
I used to find Root Out effective gainst brambles, not so sure it had the same long-lasting effects as sodium chlorate though.
Neither of those two are known carcinogens.
Acetylene isn't harmless on its own
The next thing you will tell me is that Dihydrogen oxide is dangerous because its a simple hydrogen molecule with added oxygen....
BTW do you actually know anything about chemistry, about the difference between oxygen, nitrogen and sulphur ?
How many oxides or oxidites or oxidates are more dangerous than their reduced elements?
That's all I could find, too, but I thought I'd ask a simple scientific (unbiased) question in the NG. I had wondered if it was the manufacturing process for Sodium Chlorate which "depleted" ozone, but I couldn't find anything to support that either.
So how come that pdf links Sodium Chlorate to ozone depletion?
How come its described as a pesticide, when its a herbicide?
Herbicides are a subgroup of pesticides, which are themselves a subgroup of biocides.
Still doesn't answer my question though. Maybe I'll send an email to PHE (who swallowed HPA a few years ago) and ask them to clarify. I wonder what waffle I'd get back...
Ordinary salt is nearly as good and may even be free.
The danger is the flammability of the dead weeds?
Or for that matter as a fumigant. It decomposes on heating to 300C to give sodium chloride and oxygen.
According to Wiki,
However, sodium chlorate by itself doesn't seem to qualify either as a fumigant or as an insecticide, and bearing in mind the amount produced annually, mainly for bleaching paper pulp, the amounts used in horticulture generally, let alone by domestic gardeners, must be pretty trivial.
Well, strike me pink! I never knew that 'pesticide' could apply to plant and fungal organism as well as animals.
Because the dictionary definition of 'pest' is a person or animal (or the plague) not a plant or fungus.
YOu know what really happened. Big Pharma wants to sell more expensive and less effective weedkillers, so has a quiet word with Mr EUrocrat and says 'get that Chlorate banned' and the Eurocrat says 'on what grounds' and the Big Pharma says 'who cares' and adds sarcastically 'try Ozone depletion' and the Eurocrat is so stupid he didn't spot the sarcasm, and the rest of te politicians who are involved later are even more stupid, being drunk at the time anyway...
You think I am joking, don't you?
The current documentation/legislation seems to include herbicides within the generic term pesticides. I guess weeds are pests.
I recently did a 'Grandfather Rights' training course to enable me to continue using agricultural herbicides and foir this 'pesticide' definitely included 'herbicide'.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.