Pesticide Exposure Potential from Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as Compared to Ground Applications on Row Crops in Iowa
Jenna L. Gibbs, PhD, Gibbs Consulting LLC/University of Iowa, Dept of Occupational and Environmental Health; Lindsay P. Heck, University of Iowa, Department of Occupational and Environmental Health; Thomas Peters, University of Iowa, Department of Occupational and Environmental Health
jennagibbs@aghealthandsafety.com
Jenna Gibbs is a PhD Industrial Hygienist, with more than a decade of experience in researching and providing outreach on issues dealing with workplace safety and controls- particularly chemical and respiratory hazards. She received her MPH and PhD in Industrial Hygiene at the University of Washington and has worked in both government (NIOSH) and academic (University of Iowa) settings. She now owns and operates her own industrial hygiene science and outreach consulting business.
Learning objectives:
1. Participants will be able to understand 3 characteristics of UAVs that make them more capable of reducing potential pesticide exposures as compared to more traditional application methods.
2. Participants will be able to understand how UAVs are used to apply pesticides on row crops.
3. Participants will be able to describe differences (of droplet characteristics and drift potential) when comparing pesticide applications via UAV or via implement sprayers.
Worldwide, the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for pesticide application has grown tremendously in the past decade. Its adoption has been slower on Midwestern row crops. The working efficiency of UAVs could result in more acres covered with less volume of pesticide. Producers are interested in this aspect due to potential reductions in production costs. However, UAV application may also reduce worker exposure to pesticides due to increased automation durining the handling and application process. This study compared pesticide application characteristics (including droplet characteristics and drift potential) from UAV application methods to those from traditional ground (implement) sprayer methods on corn in Iowa. Droplet sizes measured during both UAV spray trials were substantially smaller than those deposited during implement spray trials. Vertical coverage of droplets was more uniform for UAV methods than implement methods. Interestingly, although UAVs utilized smaller droplets than the implement methods, researchers still observed greater potential for downwind pesticide drift during both of the implement spray trials. The findings indicate a strong potential for “spot” or “band” spray coverage using the UAV methods. This is likely due to their smaller size, reduced spray volumes, and increased agility as compared to more traditional methods. This information is important when considering UAV’s potential to lessen worker and bystander pesticide exposures.
|
Jenna Gibbs’ presentation begins at timestamp 9:35. |
