Ozonated Water Replacing Chemicals In More Vineyards

You may also like...

15 Responses

  1. Gary Thompson says:

    I used ozogation in my vineyard in 2012 & 2013. I have excellent fungus and mildew control. My vine health is excellent. My harvest in 2013 of 2.5 acres of four year old plants and 3.0 acres of three year old plants was 10.7 pounds/plant. We are in the processi of pruning at this time. It appears (barring late frost) we will have higher production in 2014. Visitors to my vineyard always comment on the good plant health the healthy appearance of the grapes on the vines. I deliver to two wineries and both have been very complementary of the quality of the grapes. My workers are not held out of the vineyard be cause of chemical application. I love it because I do not have to wait for a perfectly calm day to spray. I have not discover any negatives at this time.

    • Mark Ganchiff says:

      Hi Gary,
      Thanks very much for your comment. It would be interesting to hear from anyone else who uses ozogation in their vineyard too.
      kind regards
      (using Mark’s log-in)

  2. Jonathan Millner says:

    Thank you for writing this article. I have to admit I’m pretty curious about this concept and it’s efficacy.

  3. Micah Zuorski says:

    What kind of PPE do you need for applying ozone as a pesticide? The guy on the tractor in the picture isn’t wearing any respiratory protection, but those fumes would be dangerous to breathe in.

    • Mark Ganchiff says:

      Hi Micah,
      Thanks for your question. I thought it was best if Ernie Wilmink respond to it. Ernie’s response appears below.
      Kind regards
      Danny (using Mark’s log-in)

      I suppose Mr. Zuorski means ppm. First of all, ozone is not a pesticide, but a Regulatory Approved Antimicrobial Agent. The Ozogation system is recognized by the EPA as a Pesticide Device and carries therefore an EPA Establishment Number.
      In conjunction with the ppm question, related to concentration in ppm, flow rate and turn over rate a minimum of 750 Mv in ORP level is needed to accomplish total disease control. As the ozone is mass transferred into water before spraying onto the vines, no fumes will attack the driver of the towing vehicle.

      • Bruce Bordelon says:

        The question is about PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) that would be required for the applicator to be wearing at the time of application.

        • Mark Ganchiff says:

          Hi Bruce,
          Thanks for clarifying the acronym…here’s Ernie’s response below.
          kind regards
          Danny (using Mark’s log-in)

          Concerning PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) No measurements of O3 are found surrounding The Applicant of Ozonated Water outside on vines exceeding the OSHA Regulations. (.1 ppm exposure over a period of 8 hrs.) Therefore PPE is not needed.

  4. Irving Geary says:

    I have seen presentations from Ernie and read about the studies in Nebraska. My question is have there been any side by side studies of the machine in the east or upper Midwest? Nebraska is quite dry compared to IA, MN, or NY. Being dry and growing hybrids you could spray very little in some dry states. I want to see side by side studies in humid, wet states with a control and standard spray program. I’m not saying I don’t think it works. I’m saying I need to see studies to believe. Is there anyone out there who has one in these areas who could do a study. Mr. Hunter, maybe you could set up a side by side study in cooperation with Mr. Willmink and give us some field results from a growers perspective.


    • Mark Ganchiff says:


      We agree. There should be scientific studies of ozogation in the Midwest. Some of the big Midwestern and Eastern horticulture schools need to publicly state that they prepared to research ozone in the vineyard. As for Mr. Hunter, we could not confirm that he is a real person, so we took his comment down. We would like to hear from more Midwestern growers who have experience with ozone.


  5. Patrick says:

    I do not think this technology has much of a future in humid Eastern vineyards. (a) Ozone is an ERADICANT, not a protectant; there is no residual activity, so the vineyard needs to be re-sprayed every time there is a reinfection with inoculum(and how does one determine that??) (b) Ozone is non-selective, so it will kill beneficial organisms as well. (c) Grapevine foliage can be damaged by high ozone levels, as was demonstrated decades ago by Cornell. So, perhaps this technology will eventually be adopted by growers in dryer regions, where disease pressure is already low. But I doubt it has much future in high rainfall/humidity areas.

    • Dear Patrick,

      This past season Agriozein’s Turn Key Ozogation Systems performed very well in high rainfall/humidity areas
      around the US and Europe.
      I would like to ask everybody to read in detail our web-site and especial the Testimonials and Press releases from the Alsace France, Burgundy France, Minnesota USA, South Nebraska USA, Kansas East and South East USA etc..

      High Humidity works as a Double Waffle Effect on the Application and therefore supports the Technology.
      A Complete Air Conditioned Ozone Generator is necessary to keep the Humidity out of the Generator and the Temperature Controlled.

      • Wayne Wilcox says:

        I believe that the comment regarding humidity was in reference to the increased pressure for the development of fungal diseases that are associated with significant rainfall during the growing season, i.e., those other than powdery mildew. Mr. Wilmink’s response appears to be addressing humidity-associated physical and engineering issues, not the biological issue that was raised. And the observation that “Ozone is an ERADICANT, not a protectant; there is no residual activity, so the vineyard needs to be re-sprayed every time there is a reinfection with inoculum” is a fundamental one that bears real scrutiny and has not been addressed.

        On more than one occasion, I have participated in online discussions concerning this topic, which have included Mr. Wilmink. Briefly: Ozonated water is an oxidant, it provides activity by “burning up” organic materials that it contacts (at proper concentrations it will oxidize microbes but not the sprayed plant). I have no doubt that it can provide effective control of powdery mildew in this manner, since the PM fungus grows primarily on the surface of the infected plant, thus the sprayed PM colony is eradicated upon sufficient contact with the ozonated water. However, I have serious doubts that it can control other grape fungal diseases of humid climates such as downy mildew, black rot, Botrytis, bitter rot, etc. for the simple reason that colonies of these fungal pathogens become established WITHIN the infected tissues, where they are protected from any potential eradicative activity of ozonated water applied to the vines. As Patrick correctly notes, since there is no chemical residue following treatment (hence, no protective activity in advance of an infection event), and since non-PM diseases can’t be eradicated as just discussed, any given application will only affect those diseases if timed to coincide with the very start of the infection process, before a spore has germinated and penetrated the leaf or berry tissue (a window just several hours long). Thus, as Patrick also correctly observes, control of such diseases would essentially require an application during each and every infection event throughout the season. Indeed, the general experience with Oxidate, a dilute hydrogen peroxide product that also exerts its activity via oxidation, is that it provides meaningful control of powdery mildew but not these other diseases that I’ve mentioned above.

        As leader of Cornell University’s grape pathology program, my one and only concern in matters such as this is that growers and their advisers be provided the facts so that they can make informed decisions for themselves. Personally, it’s a lot more exciting for me to talk about a novel technology such as this than another traditional fungicide in a well-characterized group. But first, I have to be convinced that it works, and I’m not (other than for powdery mildew, as mentioned before). I am more than willing to conduct controlled evaluations of this technology and to make my results available to the public, but there are costs involved (use of the machine, temporary labor), which nobody has shown an interest in bearing although it has been discussed. Perhaps that will change.

  6. Great research is performed all over the World concerning the effectiveness of Ozogation in the Wine Industry.
    Just received a copy of an Article in the France Papers with a Statement of Professor, Researcher Regis Vezian,
    from the Ecole d’Engineers de PURPAN in Toulouse France, passionate about Innovative Technologies.
    He confirmed the Ingenuity of AgriOzein International LLC.
    For a full copy of this article, please send us an e-mail at ernie@agriozein.com

  7. Mark Ganchiff says:


    Ernie, give this man a machine and protocol to operate under. All of these debates stay debates until someone actually shows pretty conclusively that it works or does not work. Wayne is a pretty self admitted skeptic of it… He’s head of grape pathology. It’s his job to be skeptical, but if you won him over and he was willing to sign off on it, I think I’d be likely to sign off on it too. Imagine this, paper comes out that the head of cornell grape pathology program endorses use of ozone in vineyard. The day that happens, there would be a lot more ozonators sold. If something like that doesn’t happen though, those of us kind of on the fence about whether this actually does solidly work or not and in what cases will just continue to be on the fence.

  8. Wendy McFadden-Smith says:

    I approached the company about getting a unit to do trials and the company would not provide one. Said that I had to purchase it. If they had been willing to provide the equipment for rigorous testing, maybe they’d have more academics supporting its use.