Sustainable Horticulture

Nursery Industry Explores Biodegradable Containers

Posted by sustainable_hort on May 31, 2010  |  No Comments

Plastic containers revolutionized plant production. Now a significant percentage of plants are grown in some type of container. At the retail level, containers not only hold plants and soil, but they have become a visual part of the marketing.

Yet, environmental concerns increased with plastic products, both in how they are made and how they become a waste stream. So, container manufacturers began to look at other materials. The challenge was to find materials that could contain the soil and plants as they moved through the production and marketing system, yet breakdown after they were used, usually in composting systems.

Numerous substrates are being used and tested to create a range of biodegradable pots including waste paper, peat, coir, cornstarch resins, wheat, bamboo, and even cow manure.

Finding plastic replacements for containers has become an important research topic, with the American Nursery and Landscape Association (ANLA) starting research several years ago to identify useful container substrates (see below). The key challenge is finding compounds and resins that, when combined, will stand up to normal environmental pressures.

“We need materials that will stand up to the south’s warmer temperatures, heavy irrigation schedules, and high levels of nitrogen,” explained Agricultural Research Service horticulturist Donna Fare. She said these environmental factors work together to break down non-plastic pots in the field. Fare is heading up the ANLA-sponsored research project in McMinnville, Tennessee, which will finally test a chicken-feather based container during this year’s growing season.

Recycled Plastic a First Option
Many nursery container producers have morphed from using virgin plastic to using recycled materials. This is a major step toward sustainability, since it at least recovers the plastic already in use in the nursery industry, plus absorbing some of the consumer waste stream.
For instance, ITML Horticultural Products Inc. has a line of recycled containers, called Elite and Euro System Nursery Containers, made with “100% recycled, indestructible polyethylene material.”

Another example is the Root Pouch containers from Averna and Associates. These pouches are made from polyethylene terephthalate (PETE), which comes from recycled plastic beverage bottles, which are turned into non-woven fabric. It is used to manufacture a full line of nursery containers including propagation liners and various sizes of plantable pouches, available in different densities and degradable life spans.

Finally there are oxo-biodegradable products, which I have not found yet in the industry. Wikipedia defined the plastic as follows:

“Oxo Biodegradable (OBD) plastic is polyolefin plastic to which has been added very small (catalytic) amounts of metal salts. These catalyze the natural degradation process to speed it up so that the OBD plastic will degrade when subject to environmental conditions to produce to water, carbon dioxide and biomass. The process is shortened from hundreds of years to months for degradation and thereafter biodegradation depends on the micro-organisms in the environment.” I am going to look into this more, so keep reading.

What are Biodegradable Containers?

While there are differences between aerobic and anaerobic degradation, “biodegradable” is usually considered as a material can be broken down into its organic components. Essentially, biodegradable materials avoid increasing landfills by eventually returning them to the soil through effective composting.

As a note, the “effective composting” is a key step to making any of these containers actually biodegradable. In fact, some national and international standards have stricter criteria, defining compostable as having three requirements:

• First, again they must “biodegrade” which is defined as “breaking down into carbon dioxide, water and bio mass.”
• Secondly, they must “disintegrate,” so after three months of composting and subsequent sifting through a 2 mm sieve, there is no more than 10% residue remaining.
• Finally, no “eco toxicity,” so the bio-degradation does not produce any toxic material and the compost can sustain plant growth.

Unfortunately, these global standards exist to certify compostable plastics (ASTM D6400) and compostable packaging (ASTM D6868), under controlled composting conditions typically found only at industrial composting facilities. It is uncertain whether many of these new “plastics” will degrade quickly and effectively in standard landfills or backyard compost bins.

Molded Fiber Early Option

But, many decades ago, molded pulp or fiber first found uses in the horticulture industry. Molded pulp products are made from natural cellulose fibers, including waste papers and peat, and are biodegradable breaking down in compost systems and most landfills. These molded fiber products, were often used in early propagation stages in combination with rigid plastic trays.

But, as plants moved into gallon sizes, most growers continue to use plastic pots, especially if they are shipping plants. The early fiber pots were just not rigid enough to withstand damage during handling.

One of the earlier producers of non-plastic containers was active here in Oregon…Western Pulp Products. The company has more than a 50-year history of making containers using waste paper, collected by charitable organizations (“post-consumer”), while other sources are “pre-consumer,” including Kraft, waxed, and other waste paper. Only the metal rings and hanging wires are not decomposable.

“Even the wax paraffin used to bind the pulp will degrade during composting or in the soil,” said sales manager Jim Lee

While their products are not considered “organic,” they can be used to grow organic plants, according to Lee. He said their growers received approval from Oregon Tilth that organic vegetable transplants can be grown in their molded fiber containers but the plant must be removed from the container before it is planted in the soil. 


Jiffy pots are another decade-old name in nursery containers, entering the market in the mid-1950’s. The George Ball Company bought the U.S. rights from the Norwegian firm that developed the technology. They found numerous uses in nursery propagation, becoming a standard tool for growing plants. But, again, they tended to be too fragile for field and shipping uses.

Wide Range of Substrates Now Available
Many of the newer biodegradable containers are actually manufactured by processes similar to the Western Pulp method…a plant based substrate held together with a binding agent. The choice for substrates continues to expand.

One example are the Fertil biodegradable plant pots, made from 100% natural biodegradable wood fibers, composing 80% of the substrate, plus 20% peat moss. Meanwhile, Summit Plastics Company has a biodegradable line, “Eco 360,” that features containers made of corn, wheat and wood fibers.

Another company, T & R, Woodburn, Oregon, is offering a new line of containers called Ecotainable®. Manufactured by Kelmar’s Creations, the products use ‘patented’ bioresin materials, made from wheat, tapioca, potato starches and corn, to form pots and other products.

CoCo Coir Pot, made by Green Neem, is a biodegradable cultivation pot made of coconut fibers, which have exceptionally high permeability to water, air and roots. Coir products are now available through several companies.

Cow Pots is taking a different approach, using “odor-free, 100% composted cow manure” as the substrate. They claim the manure also adds more nutrition when the plant is growing or transplanted.

Fungi Grows Containers
A radically different approach is the EcoCradle products.
The new product is made from agricultural byproducts including cottonseed hulls, buckwheat hulls and rice husk that are mixed with a filamentous fungi — mycelium — as a bonding agent — and allowed to grow inside molds. The mycelium secretes an enzyme that decomposes the organic waste as it grows. After seven days at room temperature in the dark, a compact, ultra light, malleable material is formed that can resist high temperatures, according to company literature.

Downsides?
While there is an increasing availability of alternative containers, most nurseries have been slow to switch from plastic. Even Northwoods Nursery, Molalla, Oregon, well known for its many sustainable efforts, is still using plastic pots.

“We are just not sure they will hold up over a longer time frame,” said Laura O’Leary, sustainable director for Northwoods. While the nursery has implemented other “sustainable practices,” including recycling plastic containers, they are still holding back on moving to these newer options, she said. Like many nurseries, they plan to test new products, hoping to find products that prove tough.

In addition to needing perfect conditions to decompose, some manufacturers are also cautioning consumers that the pots need to be handle correctly when planting to avoid problems.

For example, Bonnie Plants, uses biodegradable pots extensively, with the smaller versions made by Jiffy. They listed the following rules for using their pots:
• To ensure success, drench the pots thoroughly just before planting.
• Remove the shrink-wrap label from the rim of the pot by cutting it with scissors.
• Also tear away the top of the pot so that the rim is not exposed above ground after planting. If the pot dries out, it can rob moisture from the roots when capillary action pulls water up to the dry rim.
• Finally, tear away the bottom half of the pot before placing the plant in its hole to exposes some roots to direct contact with the soil.

Like any new technology, biodegradable containers will need further refinement and testing to create products that growers will use confidently, especially if plants are shipped.

While there are ongoing research projects (see above) testing how well plants grow in these non-plastic choices, work done over a decade ago showed that plants would grow as well, or better, in biodegradable pots. So, it seems that chief concern remains durability. Once that is solved, biodegradable products could have a bright future in the nursery industry.

You can continue to follow this topic here. I am convinced that we will find more and more organic “waste” products that can be turned into various compostable or plantable pots and containers. Ultimately, they will prove their economic advantage.

Show Me the Research – Glyphosate and GM Problems Expand

Posted by sustainable_hort on May 24, 2010  |  No Comments

Monsanto’s PR team must be up nights…since the good news just keeps coming up around GM technology and their popular herbicide product…Round-Up. We have discussed several resistance issues recently (see both earlier “Show Me the Research” posts), but the concerns and problems are expanding.

First, Round-Up’s affects on plant health.
Microbiologist Robert Kremer USDA-ARS (US Department of Agriculture- Agricultural Research Service) was interviewed recently in the online “The Organic & Non-GM Report,” where he explained his concerns with glyphosate’s (Round-Up) impact on plant health. He was quoted as saying the compound “This system is altering the whole soil biology.” He expanded the observations, noting that “glyphosate can have toxic effects on microorganisms and can stimulate them to germinate spores and colonize root systems. Other researchers are showing that glyphosate can immobilize manganese, an essential plant micronutrient.”

In this month’s issue, the editors interviewed retired Purdue University Emeritus Professor of Plant Pathology, Dr. Don Huber. He said that glyphosate can “significantly increase the severity of various plant diseases, impair plant defense to pathogens and diseases, and immobilize soil and plant nutrients rendering them unavailable for plant use.” And that glyphosate stimulates the growth of fungi and enhances the virulence of pathogens such as Fusarium and “can have serious consequences for sustainable production of a wide range of susceptible crops.”

This all builds on an important work I have written about before…”Healthy Crops, A New Agricultural Revolution” by Francis Chaboussou. In it, he looks at 75 years of similar research on not just glyphosate, but many pesticides, herbicides and nitrogen-heavy fertilizers, and their negative impacts on disease and pest problems. I felt he showed clearly that while the compounds might solve a problem, they usually created others. Others that then required spraying of toxic compounds, which have the same affect. And the circle goes ‘round and the grower pays. Less toxic approaches might actually reduce other input costs…it at least deserves a closer, open-minded look.

GM Bt Cotton Causes Pest Explosion
And then, from China comes a report about a recent disaster that resulted from planting Bt cotton. Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) is one of best know “natural” insecticides, with the organism successfully controlling several pest outbreaks (various caterpillars). Then, it was inserted genetically into crops, including cotton, where it offered bollworm control. And that part of the equation worked, so growers could stop spraying toxic chemicals. Looked like a win-win.

But then, the fields became infested with another pest, the Mirid Bug, causing serious damage. Scientists determined that the June spraying for bollworms had also knocked back the entire insect community, including other pest species and their natural predators. With no controls, in this case, the Mirid Bug won the race, finding a vast, rich food source, and quickly expanding its populations. It has even moved into other crops such as apples, strawberries, pears, peaches and vegetables, where it had never been a problem. All this started following the switch to Bt crops in 1997, showing up first in cotton in 2000, and moving to other crops by 2005. It seems their only short-term answer is go back to spraying, after paying more the Bt-cotton.

So, again unintended consequences. The GM technology still holds promise to help with world nutrition. The idea and reality of foods that create extra vitamins (improved rice variety) with the help of added genetic information could save lives. But, first it is caution with this new “tool.” It needs more study, more testing in the complexity of an environmental system, to understand those consequences. From these latest reports, it seems to solve single problems only to create others. Not a sustainable system.

For more:
• “Scientist warns of dire consequences with widespread use of glyphosate”, The Organic & Non-GMO Report, May 2010, @ http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/may10/consequenceso_widespread_glyphosate_use.php

• “Scientist finding many negative impacts of Roundup Ready GM crops, USDA doesn’t want to publicize studies showing negative impact2, The Organic & Non-GMO Report, January 2010, @ http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/jan10/scientists_find_negative_impacts_of_GM_crops.php

President’s Cancer Panel Suggests Organic Foods!

Posted by sustainable_hort on May 13, 2010  |  7 Comments

Scooped the New York Times
Well, that is probably an overstatement. But, in my last post on April 26, I discussed the problems Monsanto is having, and the increasingly negative research around the herbicide, Round-Up. Well, on May 3, the New York Times ran a lengthy article by By WILLIAM NEUMAN and ANDREW POLLACK covering the same research and topic. Granted, the article went into more depth, and had some wonderful graphics to explain the resistance situation. Yet, I covered it first here, so I maybe I’d better check their story again for plagiarism.

President’s Cancer Panel Suggests Organic Foods!
But, seriously, the paper did release some important news regarding the state of chemicals in our environment, including our food, and their impact on cancers.

As the New York Times column described this President-appointed panel, it is the “Mount Everest of the medical mainstream.” Columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote on May 5 about the report the panel will release today is “an extraordinary document,”…one that “calls on America to rethink the way we confront cancer, including much more rigorous regulation of chemicals.” This report could have the same impact that the Supreme Court’s decision to legally define CO2 as a “pollutant” had on environmental issues and many industrial practices.

Why? Because the panel is not a known environmental organization, not some left leaning alternative medical group, but one of the most trusted medical evaluators. It was formed and first staffed in 1971 by President Nixon. The current two-member panel, Dr. LaSalle D. Lefall, Jr., a professor of surgery at Howard University, and Margaret Kripke, a professor at University of Texas’ M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, was appointed by former President Bush. They met with nearly 50 medical experts over several years before creating the report.

Their concern, though it sounds measured, will still leave the average person with questions. Since I have not been able to read the full text yet, I will save more comments for a later post. My main point here is that one of the key solutions to avoid problems is to eat organic food. The column stated that one of the panel’s recommendations read…
“Give preference to food grown without pesticides, chemical fertilizers and growth hormones.”

Again, I am not a purist when it comes to the organic vs. conventional argument. I grew up surrounded by orchards (see below), and spraying was a regular event. We did close up the house and wait for a while until the spray had dried. But, still, realistically, I was exposed to higher levels of pesticides that anyone gets today… and I am still relatively healthy. So, while I grow my food and my farm’s produce organically, I was not sure that the chemicals absorbed eating a supermarket diet was a crucial problem. Now I am not as complacent. While I turned to organic growing methods for many reasons, this report seems to add more weight to the consumer side of this equation. It needs to be carefully communicated to, and considered by, the eating public. Yes, everyone.

But, more important is there seems to be at least a partial answer…the expansion and support of a local, urban and regional, food shed where producers (farmers and micro-farmers) sell directly to the end-user…you. Your food is fresher, you know who grew it and where it came from, and it probably tastes better. Meanwhile long-term issues, including energy use and transportation challenges facing the current world food network, are also addressed.

It takes more hands, so it might even create long-term jobs though it tends to be a physical, demanding career. Satisfying, but one that rides with the seasons, can be stymied by weather, and depends on a consumer willing to spend more time and money to get higher quality food. This report may push consumers in this direction.

Saving the Apple
As I mentioned, I grew up in Washington’s Yakima Valley, and apples were just part of my life. They were common in the acres of orchards surrounding my hometown. during my teenage years, I irrigated those trees, I kept them from freezing in early spring, and picked tons of fruit each fall. I fondly remember varieties such as the Winsap, McIntosh and Gravenstein.

A short article in the New York Times covered efforts to save heirloom varieties from extinction. The non-profit group, Renewing America’s Food Traditions (RAFT), has declared 2010 the “Year of the Apple.” RAFT is concerned that we are losing most of the old varieties to a select group of commercial choices. They are offering a 32-page booklet, The Forgotten Fruits Manual & Manifesto, written by Gary Paul Nabhan. Nabhan is best know for his 2002 work, Coming Home to Eat, and editing the more recent, Savoring and Saving the Continent’s Most Endangered Foods.

Just a couple of quick facts he presents in the booklet:
• He estimates we have lost 86% of what was once upwards of 16,000 named varieties.
• 11 varieties now have 90% of market…
•…and 46% of those are Delicious…almost half! Despite their name, they were really created to look good (“bright red and shiny”), have a consistent size, and ship and store well. Flavor is a minor consideration. I know because this is the variety I picked most often, while I looked for other varieties to eat…even then.

If you want to learn more, check the RAFT web site at www.raftalliance.org. Check “resources” and look for “The Forgotten Fruits Manual & Manifesto.” It is a free and downloadable PDF.

Finally, I hope to start soon two new series: An expansion of topics first covered in “Can Nurseries be Sustainable?”, and Green Industry Marketing, with strategies and topics to help nurseries, greenhouse, garden centers and landscape contractors identify, locate and reach potential customers, all the while continually communicating with their existing customers. Both aspects are important for the survival of green businesses.