Category: Infestation Control

  • Brazilian Tobacco Suitable to Ship to China

    Brazilian Tobacco Suitable to Ship to China

    Image: SindiTabaco

    On Aug. 9, the Interstate Tobacco Industry Union (SindiTabaco) hosted a meeting to formalize the closure of the tobacco pre-inspection procedure for the 2023/2024 crop year, one of the requirements of the bilateral trade protocol between Brazil and China. The meeting was held in hybrid format, with the virtual presence of the technicians from the General Administration of Customs China (GACC) and the representative of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply (MAPA) and of the National Organization for Brazilian Phytosanitary Protection (ONPF), Pedro Carneiro Abreu.

    Other authorities from Brazil and China attended the event as well.

    “This is a primordial moment for compliance with the protocol. The samples were collected in a very effective manner, and it is with great satisfaction that I inform you that no pests were detected in the collected samples. This once again corroborates the quality of the Brazilian tobacco. China is one of our largest importers of tobacco, and this partnership plays a fundamental role for the continuity of the businesses between the two countries. We are sure that we will continue making strides in this relation,” commented Abreu from MAPA Brasilia.

    “Our participation consists in representing this commitment, which is also shared by minister Carlos Favaro, besides acknowledging this activity as relevant for the entire country. In our understanding, this expresses our responsibility with regard to the Chinese inspection organs,” said Jose Cleber de Souza, superintendent at MAPA RS.

    The MAPA was in charge of collecting the processed tobacco samples and sending them to the Central Analytical Laboratory of the University of Santa Cruz do Sul (UNISC) for laboratory tests that confirm the phytosanitary status of the product prior to shipment. Roque Danieli, tax auditor and head of MAPA’s Plant Health and Inputs Inspection Service in RS, presented details about the pre-inspection activities.

    “During these 23 days in which we worked jointly with the GACC representatives, in virtual format, it was possible to attest to the quality of the 2023/2024 crop and demonstrate that, at field level, the 2024/[20]25 crop is now under cultivation with all the necessary cares in compliance with the requisites set forth on the protocol. The integrated production system gets the credit for the fact that tobacco is the commercial crop that uses the least amount of pesticides at field level, a result of the constant work of the farm extension agents. We hope that the presentation of the works is cause for satisfaction, and next week, we shall send the final report to Brasilia to be forwarded to the GACC,” Danieli said.

    Zhang Nan Zhengrong, Leader of the China Leaf Company Delegation, presented the pre-inspection report to the attendees of the meeting jointly with the technician responsible for the Central Analytical Laboratory of UNISC, professor Adriana Dupont Schneider. She gave details of the analyses.

    “This year, we analyzed a total of 54 lots with samples collected in eight companies. The laboratory activities took 24 days, and they certified the phytosanitary safety with regard to the nine quarantine pests set forth in the agreement, of which, six are types of insects, two weeds and the fungus known as blue mold. All the results were negative for the pests included in China-Brazil trade protocol,” said Schneider.

    “Tobacco is an agricultural crop that suffers harsh criticism but has been vigorously defended by the MAPA,” said SindiTabaco President Iro Schuenke. “This has a lot to do with the social and economic importance of the crop for our country, especially for the South Region. China is our second-largest importer, coming only after Belgium, and every year purchases big amounts of our tobacco. And this is the moment for a special mention of the farmers that cultivate tobacco in Brazil who, along with the farm extension agents, have performed all the necessary works for our compliance with the necessary requisites that have kept Brazil as top leaf exporter over the past 30 years.”

  • Holding the Line

    Holding the Line

    Photo: Schmidt Pest Management Consulting

    The war on tobacco insect pests continues.

    By George Gay

    On being asked recently whether the war against tobacco insect pests would ever be won, most of the experts and interested parties contacted, referring mainly to post-harvest tobacco in transit or storage, said no, qualified in one way or another. But Vernon Schmidt of Schmidt Pest Management Consulting wondered whether “winning” or “losing” was the best way to judge what was happening overall. The important point in the battle against the tobacco beetle and tobacco moth, he said, concerned whether industry players were working together, communicating well and implementing fundamental pest control strategies. In other words, was the industry stewarding its resources well to allow it to use the tools available to it wisely and thereby minimize tobacco and tobacco product losses?

    “Communication lines need to remain open, and cooperative research needs to be supported by the players within the industry in order for us to stay ahead of the insect pests,” said Schmidt in an email response. “This is the brilliance of Coresta and the work of its Subgroup on Pest and Sanitation Management in Stored Tobacco [PSMST].”

    Worryingly, however, he added a caveat that is unlikely to have come out of the blue. “Pulling out of cooperative endeavors and doing it on our own will not be a winning strategy,” said Schmidt, who was closely associated with Coresta and the PSMST in the past, and who is likely to be so again shortly after a break made necessary by his transition from an employee of Reynolds American to starting his own consultancy.

    And Schmidt had other warnings. There would be no success without the industry’s putting in the hard work of implementing fundamental pest control practices, and there would still be challenges, he added, even where the fundamentals were in place. Phosphine resistance remained a challenge and would continue to worsen if the industry did not address the causes. Insisting on quality phosphine fumigations remained a must, and consideration had to be given to eliminating ineffective fumigations, such as container fumigations, or, at least, implementing measures to improve them greatly by, for instance, requiring barrier sheeting be placed on the floors of containers before loading to minimize gas leakage.

    And in what seemed to me to be a minor bombshell, Schmidt admitted that the way in which phosphine worked as a fumigant still needed to be understood better and should continue to be investigated cooperatively. Such investigations, he added, would likely lead to a revision of the Coresta Fumigation Guide and require a new round of global training.

    Exploring Alternatives

    At the same time, the 30-year search for an alternative to phosphine should continue, again co-operatively, said Schmidt. There was promising work underway investigating a potential alternative to phosphine, sulfuryl fluoride, which offered a completely different mode of action from phosphine. This had the potential to break phosphine resistance where it existed and, additionally, preserve phosphine as an excellent tool for the industry.

    And moving away from fumigation techniques, Schmidt said controlled atmosphere (CA) and freezing treatments should be implemented where feasible.

    Rene Luyten, a director at b-Cat, which installs CA chambers, made the point that tobacco insects were difficult to control, partly because they were able to adapt to new circumstances. In other words, while it was possible to eliminate such insects in individual tobacco batches, there were often routes through which others could enter those batches. In part, this was down to the very nature of tobacco, which is a bulk product subject to transportation, division into smaller consignments and storage. Additionally, tobacco doesn’t exist in isolation but is sometimes stored alongside other products that also provide homes and breeding grounds for insects of concern.

    Indeed, Luyten said it was possible to have in-house clean tobacco free of insects or to receive clean tobacco on one day and the next day to have a huge issue with insects. Of course, the severity of the problem would depend, in part, on the location of the warehouse, with those in warmer climes likely to experience more insect activity. But such issues could arise in many places, added Luyten, even when everybody in the tobacco chain did their best to avoid infestation. Fumigators might comply with best practices that conformed with the guidelines laid down by Coresta. And warehouses might employ best practices in respect of storage, including the use of good sanitation programs. But it wasn’t always possible to have control of all factors, such as when a neighboring warehouse storing raw food didn’t employ strict and proper sanitation protocols.

    Controlled atmosphere technology offers a “green” solution for pest control.
    (Photo: b-Cat)

    Positives and Negatives

    Schmidt, too, saw positives and negatives stretching along the supply chain. A positive would see farmers eliminating carry-over tobacco, but the fact that farmers were unable to treat their post-harvested tobacco was a negative, he said. The receipt by processors of infested tobacco was a negative while the lethal effects to insects of processing was a positive. Reinfestation during transport was a negative while monitoring programs for transported tobacco provided a positive. Good segregation practices during storage constituted a positive, but undetected phosphine resistance was a negative. Continually improved cleaning programs at manufacturing plants constituted a positive, but insect harborages that could not be eliminated without dismantling equipment comprised a negative.

    There is at least one caveat you have to add to the idea that the war against tobacco insects cannot be won. It can be won in the sense that insects of all types and in all their life stages can be eliminated from tobacco just before it is manufactured. Luyten said an increasing number of tobacco manufacturing plants were installing CA technology, which he described as a “green and natural treatment method” offering a 100 percent mortality rate among insect pests in all their life stages. In fact, b-Cat’s main building program currently involves installing CA facilities, including remote control and monitoring systems, at manufacturing sites.

    Away from the major manufacturing sites, things are rather different. For instance, Guy Harvey, the CEO of Transcom Sharaf in Africa, who is based out of Mozambique, said businesses in that part of the world used only chemical fumigation, though this was not for want of trying other methods. Harvey said his company had completed trials on the use of CA in Mozambique but that it seemed the industry was not ready for it yet, which I took to mean that companies further down the supply chain were not willing to help pick up additional costs arising from CA. Certainly, in Harvey’s view, the capital costs of CA were holding back its use in Mozambique.

    This might be unfortunate, though it has to be remembered that fumigation can be effective. Nico Vroom, who runs the consultancy N.I.C.O, also believes the war against tobacco insects will never be won, but he believes, too, that infestations can be kept to a “manageable level” through the use of good fumigation practices and through the employment of recent technological advances, such as sensors for constantly monitoring tobacco.

    While complete victory in the battle against tobacco insects is some ways off, infestations can be kept to a “manageable level” through the use of good fumigation practices and through the employment of recent technological advances, such as sensors for constantly monitoring tobacco.
    (Photo: Transcom Sharaf)

    Ongoing Monitoring

    One respondent who didn’t give an unequivocal “no” in answer to the question about whether the industry was winning the war against insects was Steven Bailey, managing director of the Barrettine Group, which manufactures the Mobe Combo insect monitoring trap. Bailey said he thought it unlikely that the industry was winning the war, but that it might be holding its own. Traditional treatment methods using fumigants were limited to only a few. He was unaware of any new pesticides coming through beyond, perhaps, sulfuryl fluoride, he added, and due to high regulatory and approval costs, didn’t expect there to be any anytime soon. This, together with ongoing phosphine-resistance issues, was a concern, but CA treatments in conjunction with insect monitoring and traditional methods were helping the industry to stay on top of the problem. The importance of ongoing insect monitoring was therefore essential in pinpointing infestations so that control measures could be carried out as soon as identified, thus preventing any infestation from escalating. 

    One of the matters that gets little airing in respect of tobacco insects concerns responsibility. Who is or should be responsible for ensuring tobacco is taken in at its destination—at the manufacturer’s site—insect-free? 

    Well, according to Rainer Busch of NewCo, currently, the shipper is obliged to fumigate tobacco before loading, even though it is very difficult for the shipper to control what happens to that tobacco during transport and when it is opened at its destination. And if the tobacco was found to have insect infestation at its destination, to have been infested during transport, it was necessary to refumigate it or put it through another treatment. It would therefore be better economically and financially to avoid having to carry out two treatments by switching the fumigation or other treatment from the point of shipment to the destination.

    It would seem that while the industry might not be winning the war against insects, it is not losing all the battles. Evripidis Christidis of Missirian told me that the application of integrated pest management techniques was helping the industry to win in the region in which his company operates—the region where classical oriental tobacco is produced. In general, the amount of leaf tobacco currently lost to insects was proportionally less than it had been during past decades. But, he added, this sort of success required close attention being paid in five areas:

    • Personnel training and awareness;
    • Facilities management, including cleaning and sanitation, operating with open structures and creating barriers to insects, such as air curtains and mesh nets, and segmenting the green and final products;
    • Selection of suitable means of transportation;
    • Pest monitoring, with pheromone traps, and the use of UV lamps and space/surface fogging when necessary during tobacco storage; and
    • Pest control methods.

    Another factor that had helped the industry attain better results was the use of only specialized and licensed contractors to perform control and prevention activities, said Christidis. And yet another had been the introduction of Coresta standards for the fumigation in respect of resistant beetle populations, which basically involved higher phosphine concentrations and longer exposure times. A radical but expensive proposal would involve vacuum or nitrogen packing of the final leaf product.

    Learning Lessons

    The importance of Coresta was raised by most respondents, and so it is unfortunate that the Covid-19 pandemic has interfered with some of its work, including the PSMST’s Infestation Control Conferences that, until the pandemic struck, had been held annually around the globe. Of course, there have been other problems caused by the pandemic. Shipping delays have created tobacco transport congestion, and there have been interruptions caused by staff shortages, supply chain difficulties and other transport issues. But the pandemic has also caused a lot of rethinks, some of them positive. Luyten told me that while the start of the pandemic had caused concern, it turned out the past two years had been the best ever for b-Cat’s business. When travelling became almost impossible, it was discovered that internet communications using Teams or Zoom could easily stand in for some face-to-face meetings. “I do hope that everybody is having the same idea,” said Luyten, “that we have learned from this pandemic that travelling, which was a common thing, is not always needed. We all can save a lot of time and help the planet.”

    Which brings us, perhaps, to the most important question. In fighting tobacco insects, are we winning or losing the environmental battle? And there seems to be some good news here. Schmidt told me that industry practices had little negative environmental impact. Beneficial insects were not threatened by current common practices, he said, and phosphine readily broke down in ultraviolet light. At the same time, however, continued training on best practices would help with reducing the improper use of insecticides and excessive fumigant use.

    George Gay is Tobacco Reporter’s European editor, but his territory spans the globe. Based in London, George has covered the tobacco industry since 1982, initially for a U.K.-based publication and since 2004 for Tobacco Reporter. George’s understanding of industry issues, combined with his keen sense of observation and dry wit, have earned him a loyal following among Tobacco Reporter’s readers.
  • Now You’re Cooking!

    Now You’re Cooking!

    ThermoNox CEO Martin Hoffmeir with his equipment

    ThermoNox eradicates tobacco pests by raising the temperature.

    By Stefanie Rossel

    When it comes to cured tobacco, “Don’t let the bugs bite” gets a whole new meaning. Avoiding infestation of the valuable raw material with cigarette beetle (Lasioderma serricorne) and tobacco moth (Ephestia elutella) during storage, manufacture and distribution remains a challenge. The worldwide annual loss of stored tobacco is estimated at between $400 million and $800 million.

    The insects are prolific. In a tobacco bale, the female cigarette beetle can produce up to 32 billion descendants per year. They thrive in warm and humid warehouse environments in which the larvae feed on dried tobacco, pressed lamina or cut rag. By contaminating the product with their excretions, they make it unusable. The creatures are notoriously difficult to eliminate: Equipped with a special breathing system, cigarette beetles can survive a long time without gas exchange and with extremely little oxygen. In each of their lifecycles—beetle, egg, larvae, pupae, cocoons—the bugs adapt to their environment for survival.

    But even these survival artists have a weak spot, and this is where ThermoNox comes in. The Bavarian family-owned company has developed a patented low-heat treatment method of the same name, which makes use of the fact that insects, including adults, larvae and eggs, cannot survive temperatures of 46 degrees Celsius (115 degrees Fahrenheit).

    The process is similar to that of frying an egg.

    Unlike humans, insects can’t control their body temperature. When exposed to that heat for some time, the proteins in the vermin’s body will irreversibly “denature”—they coagulate and become hard and inactive. The process is similar to that of frying an egg.

    Designed for eradicating pests from empty rooms and manufacturing lines, the system works with strategically placed electrical ovens supported by special fans. By recirculation, they heat the ambient air to 120 degrees Fahrenheit for 15 hours to 30 hours. The lethal temperature is then maintained for 10 hours to 25 hours. “Machinery must be unplugged and free from product as we work with a gentle but defined heat to avoid any damage on the equipment,” says Martin Hofmeir, ThermoNox’ CEO. “Our goal is to reach every little corner and hiding place of all insect development stages.”

    Using the ThermoNox system, cigarette manufacturers isolate infested machines with simple foil during treatment.

    Accepted standard

    Thermal disinfestation is one of four pest control standards approved by Coresta. Tobacco fumigation with phosphine gas, which has been employed for decades, is still the most used method, requiring low initial investment and involving low long-term cost. As the complete warehouse can be sealed for fumigation, the process allows for high-volume treatment. If protocols are followed, it leaves no chemical residues after the treatment. However, because the treatment isn’t always applied properly, increasing resistance against phosphine among cigarette beetles has been observed worldwide.

    Another accepted standard is controlled atmosphere (CA), a relatively new method to the tobacco industry. The process consists of a specially constructed, gastight chamber in which a commodity is treated in an artificially engineered atmosphere. In the case of infested tobacco, it’s a low-oxygen treatment in which the oxygen level in the chamber is reduced to below 0.5 percent to ensure a 100 percent mortality rate in all life stages of the insects. While involving initial investment to set up the gastight chamber, it can treat all types of leaf tobacco without affecting taste and color. It’s unsuitable for high-volume treatment, however. To make CA effective, procedures need to be strictly followed.

    A third, but rarely used, process is freezing the tobacco to below 20 degrees Celsius. While efficient, the technology is expensive and not suitable for handling the high volumes common to cigarette production. It is therefore presently used only to treat high-value cigar leaves.

    External requirements for thermal disinfestation are less demanding. Cigarette production floors are separate rooms, hence factors such as the outside temperature and the climate zone in which a factory is located play no role. Because the tobacco industry works with batches, individual cigarette-making lines are often separated. This means a simple foil can be used to enclose an infested machine and place the ThermoNox system around it. “Thus, we can provide a comparatively fast treatment on the spot,” Hofmeir points out. For ThermoNox to treat an entire room, building or factory floor, it is typically sufficient to simply shut off the ventilation system and close all doors and windows. This is a considerable advantage over tobacco infestation control systems, such as phosphine fumigation or controlled atmosphere, which require hermetically sealed rooms and require significant preparations.

    But then, the two latter procedures are used exclusively to treat stored product—an application where thermal disinfestation, being a physical procedure, reaches its natural limits. “Due to their insulating effect, tobacco bales cannot be disinfested with heat,” explains Hofmeir. “By contrast, phosphine fumigation and controlled atmosphere are quite sensitive in use, and you cannot employ them in machinery disinfestation. Phosphine will affect non-ferrous metals, which is a huge disadvantage if you think of expensive, high-tech tobacco machinery. In the tobacco sector, we see the unbeatable strength of our process in the treatment of empty rooms and manufacturing lines. ThermoNox is the only thermal heat infestation control system that has been officially endorsed by German original equipment manufacturer Hauni for its machines.”

    ThermoNox has franchised its technology to partners worldwide and carried out disinfetions is 45 markets.

    Reliability

    The fact that ThermoNox is such a well-known name in the tobacco industry is due to coincidence rather than marketing. Hofmeir’s father developed the system in the early 1990s to combat pests, such as flour and rice beetles, in the family’s grain mill. The method soon became popular with the hospitality industry where it helped fight bed bugs and other insects. In 2007, British American Tobacco approached the Bavarian company, looking for a disinfestation solution for its German cigarette factory in Bayreuth. Since then, the ThermoNox system has been used by all leading tobacco companies.

    Preventing reinfestation after successful disinfestation requires a comprehensive integrated pest management system that incorporates all parts of the upstream production process, according to Hofmeir. “This includes meticulous monitoring of the raw material as well as keeping all areas of production and machinery pest-free. Additionally, strict spatial separation of raw material, intermediate and finished products is necessary, preferably with a one-way system and locks. Pest control actually is the last method of choice in IPM.”

    The tobacco sector, he adds, is characterized by good pest monitoring in its manufacturing lines. The raw material is also carefully controlled and treated on its various paths through the supply chain. “Since we securely kill off all development stages of tobacco pests with our method, disinfestation intervals are generally longer than with fumigation.”

    In recent years, Hofmeir has observed a globally growing trend toward sustainability and away from toxin use across all industries. “This awareness starts with the consumer and moves backwards through all supply chains,” he says. “But apart from meeting this trend, our method simply is the most successful in its area of application, which is a win-win for all stakeholders. The increasing resistances against various chemical substances accelerate the switch to thermal disinfestation even more.”

    The company has franchised its technology to partners around the world and has successfully carried out disinfestations in 45 markets and all sorts of industries. Hofmeir emphasizes that his company aims for moderate growth because it refuses to compromise quality of execution. “In the end, we will help every customer who needs our help,” he explains. “Asia, of course, is a huge market with a lot of potential. This is true for the tobacco sector as well as for other industries.”

    ThermoNox has also felt the changes in the industry, including the shift of tobacco production from stagnating Western markets to more promising countries in Asia and elsewhere. “Our main markets, however, are the food sector, followed by the hospitality industry. Hence developments in the tobacco industry don’t hit us as hard as, for instance, the almost 100 percent decline in the tourism sector caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, which meant a massive decrease in orders in bed bug disinfestation.”

    Despite such challenges, Hofmeir remains optimistic. “As a family-owned business with franchise partners, we have a different approach than large corporations that have to meet shareholder expectations. As a company, we continuously develop further with the challenges of our customers. This way, we won two new industries as our customers in recent years. Hence if one door closes a little, another one will open.”

    Stefanie Rossel is Tobacco Reporter’s editorial contributor. An experienced trade journalist, she combines sharp reporting skills with in-depth knowledge of the tobacco and vapor industries. Prior to joining Tobacco Reporter, Stefanie was editor-in-chief at Tobacco Journal International, where she worked for a decade. Fluent in English, German and French, Stefanie covers tobacco news around the world. She is based in Germany.