Paraquat Alternatives: Safer for Your Health and the Environment

Farmers are seeking alternatives to paraquat due to its poor safety profile and the application restrictions imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). New EPA advice released in 2021 severely limited who can apply paraquat to crops and increased the training required for certification. With lawsuits pending connecting paraquat to serious health concerns, Syngenta, the maker of paraquat, announced that it will stop global production of the herbicide by June 2026. Many farmers are seeking safer, more readily available options.

Paraquat has one of the highest fatality rates of all herbicides. Immediate health risks of ingesting paraquat include severe gastrointestinal issues and dehydration. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports that within days to weeks of ingesting a small to medium amount of paraquat dichloride, people can develop conditions including heart, kidney, liver and lung failure.

Studies have linked long-term Paraquat exposure to Parkinson’s disease. People injured after using the herbicide have filed paraquat lawsuits against Syngenta and other chemical manufacturers for losses. Safe alternatives to paraquat offer similar benefits without the high risk to human and animal health.

Only certified pesticide applicators can use paraquat because the EPA has classified any herbicide containing paraquat as a restricted-use product. This means it has the potential to cause adverse health and environmental effects without proper precautions.

Pesticide applicator certification occurs at the state, local or tribal level, depending on where you’re applying chemicals. To apply paraquat in more than one jurisdiction, you must obtain certification from each area in which you operate. Individuals may also pursue either private or commercial federal pesticide applicator certification.

The EPA issued the Paraquat Human Health Mitigation Decision in 2016. Additional regulations issued in 2021 further restrict application methods and safety requirements for workers exposed to the chemical. These actions aim to increase public knowledge about the potential risks associated with paraquat and provide guidelines for safer use.

Regulators in California will complete a full safety reevaluation under Assembly Bill 1963 by January 2029. While the bill originally planned to halt the sale and use of paraquat in the state, changes during the legislative process mean that the herbicide remains available while under review. This is still a major move because California is the nation’s largest paraquat user by volume.

At the same time, 10 states — Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia — have active bills to restrict or ban paraquat. Many states are moving away from the herbicide. In a January 2026 social media post, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the agency would reassess the safety of the herbicide paraquat. Syngenta also announced that it would stop making paraquat by June 2026.

Farmers can choose several synthetic chemical alternatives to paraquat that have fewer use restrictions and better safety profiles. These may include popular products such as Roundup, which contains glyphosate, and dicamba.

However, many chemical alternatives still pose serious risks to human, animal and environmental health. Certain jurisdictions have banned some of the most common direct paraquat alternatives, such as diquat.

Some chemical pesticides require heavy and frequent application for maximum effectiveness. This increases the potential environmental and health hazards associated with their use. According to a WWF Germany report, low use rates can help mitigate the negative impacts of paraquat alternatives. Additional safety measures, including using appropriate spray adjuvants, pressure nozzles and spray carrier volume, can help further reduce risks associated with chemical herbicides.

One of paraquat’s most attractive qualities is its fast control of a wide range of weeds. Many of the chemical alternatives to paraquat offer more limited use. As a result, farmers must use multiple chemicals and more frequent applications, which could mean greater harm from pesticides to workers and the environment.

The following herbicides are among the most commonly used chemical substitutes for paraquat, each with a different weed control spectrum and safety profile.

Glufosinate-ammonium is a weedkiller that blocks an enzyme called glutamine synthase, causing tissue damage and rapid death in most annual grasses and broadleaf weeds. Farmers use it in citrus, corn, soybeans and several other crops, and it’s widely applied as a burndown treatment and an option in glufosinate-tolerant farming.

Compared with paraquat, it has lower acute toxicity, but it is still considered toxic and has documented concerns about reproductive toxicity at high exposure levels in animal studies.

Carfentrazone-ethyl is a weed killer that works on contact by damaging plant cell membranes, so treated weeds usually die in about one to three days, and it does not keep working in the soil. It controls many small broadleaf weeds, but does not work well on grasses. Farmers often mix it with a grass herbicide like clethodim for better overall weed control.

Farmers use it for cereals, corn, legumes, potatoes and tree fruit such as avocado and citrus. It is used as a leading paraquat alternative for managing weeds in Florida citrus groves.

Diquat is a weed killer in the same chemical family as paraquat and works in a similar way by damaging plant cells during photosynthesis, making it the most similar alternative now used in the U.S. It’s also got similar toxicity to paraquat, and diquat is banned in the European Union, the U.K. and Switzerland because of concerns about how it can negatively affect people and animals. It’s still allowed in the U.S. under tighter rules.

Farmers use diquat mainly to dry down potato vines before harvest, control aquatic weeds and as a pre-harvest aid in some crops. Because it has the same general mode of action as paraquat, weeds that are resistant to paraquat can sometimes also be resistant to diquat.

Saflufenacil is a weed killer that works fast on contact to burn down broadleaf weeds. It also provides short-term protection in the soil and controls weeds for four weeks, but it may also affect some crops. In contrast, paraquat only works where it touches the plant.

Farmers often use saflufenacil before planting soybeans, corn, lentils and sunflowers. It’s also used after planting fruit trees and vineyards. It’s helpful for controlling many glyphosate-resistant weeds, but has limited activity on grasses, so it is usually mixed with other products for full control.

Several nonchemical, natural alternatives to paraquat exist, including cover crops, managed grazing, manual weeding and thermal weed control. Consumers are increasingly concerned with the use of chemicals on food crops. Farmers are aware of these concerns and may reduce chemical use with more natural alternatives to paraquat.

Geography and climate play a role in choosing natural weed control methods. For example, in tropical regions where overground biomass (rather than soil) holds most plant nutrients, options such as planting groundcover crops are viable. Some farmers have found that on-site bioferments produce immediate weed burn-down without the hazards associated with chemical herbicides.

Natural alternatives to paraquat eliminate the immediate and long-term health risks of chemical herbicides. Additionally, some natural paraquat alternatives can become vital components of farm systems. For example, hybrid rye is a cover crop that farmers can also harvest to mill or use as animal feed.

Farmers can also see other significant benefits when choosing natural alternatives. Cover crops and other regenerative practices improve soil quality over time, resulting in higher yields. At the same time, not purchasing agrichemicals can save farmers significant amounts of money.

While natural alternatives eliminate the acute health risks associated with paraquat, their effectiveness depends on scale, climate, crop type and labor availability — most work best as part of an integrated approach rather than as standalone replacements.

Integrated weed management is the use of multiple strategies — such as mechanical, chemical and biological methods — to manage weeds in an economically and environmentally sound manner. For example, a citrus farmer may use carfentrazone-ethyl herbicide along with managed grazing to control weeds.

Cover crops help control weeds by shading the soil and competing for water and nutrients. After they die, they create a layer of mulch that physically blocks many new weeds from breaking through the surface.

They work best in orchards, vineyards and other perennial systems. They can provide weed control while also being a harvestable crop. For example, cereal rye can suppress weeds and be harvested as grain, giving growers two benefits from a single planting.

Cover crops aren’t a quick replacement for pre-plant herbicide burndown in annual row crops, because they usually require a multi-season transition to grow and manage effectively.

Thermal weed control uses tools that create heat to kill weeds. This includes flame weeders, steam or hot foam sprayers. The heat kills on contact without the need for herbicides, so there are no herbicide residues left on crops, soil or water. Flame weeding is the most commonly used thermal weeding technique, and it’s more cost-efficient than hand weeding, but can have a high initial equipment cost. Steam machinery can also be expensive, while hot foam may be a more cost-effective option.

In general, thermal weeding techniques such as flaming don’t leave chemical residues, don’t produce hazardous drift and don’t carry over chemicals into the next farming season. They also don’t contribute to herbicide-tolerant or resistant weeds. However, thermal weeding is generally slower than chemical burndown, depends on good weather conditions and can be too expensive unless farmers invest in specialized equipment.

Managed grazing means bringing animals like cattle, sheep or goats into fields so they eat the weeds between crop rows, which can greatly cut down on the need for herbicide sprays. Some types of planting areas, such as orchards, pastures and oil palm plantations, benefit from managed grazing.

In Malaysia, oil palm farms that added cattle grazing reported about 30 to 50% lower herbicide costs with no drop in yields. However, these systems can be poorly managed, and maintaining crop and soil health as well as the well-being of livestock can be challenging.