Are you sure?

Environmentalists claim that it is possible to ban atrazine without causing serious economic harm.

• Syngenta, the main manufacturer of atrazine, is distributing an alternative product in Europe called terbuthylazine.
• This alternative may be safer for the environment, but the company has forestalled marketing it in the U.S. 
• Much of Europe has banned atrazine and is doing fine economically.
• New farming techniques are more cost-effective than any herbicide and can preclude the necessity of using atrazine.
• For example, Iowa farmers have discovered that they can plant their corn crops in elevated ridges and remove weeds mechanically, increasing their profitability and eliminating the need for atrazine.

Supporters of atrazine say that banning the chemical could have negative effects on the US economy.

• A U.S. Department of Agriculture-sponsored study concluded that an atrazine ban would cost the nation $810 million in 1992. 
• Atrazine increases crop yields while using less land and fewer resources (such as fossil fuels).
• According to the manufacturer's estimate, atrazine saves farmers an average of $35 per acre. 
• Atrazine has allowed farmers to stop no-tillage weed control methods, which has reduced soil erosion by 65-95%.

Environmentalists disclaim economic fears by emphasizing the availability of alternatives.

"The good news is that there are readily available, affordable, and safer alternatives."
-Jon Devine, Esq., Senior Attorney, Natural Resources Defense Council