Comparing price-per-containers of SONAR Q vs AS is comparing apples and oranges. For one, they're two different "tools" for different types of situations. Secondly, you're technically buying "active-ingredient" rather than pints or pounds. Both factors play heavily in the comparison-game.

Definitely use the liquid ("AS" = Aqueous Suspension, although some say it stands for "Algae Stimulator") for susceptible floating species, and also for submerged targeted species in static-water ponds (with little risk of overflow). Use the Q (pellets) for submerged species in ponds with potential for minor to moderate flow-through/discharge. If a significant flow-through event is imminent or highly likely (probable) within 30-days post-treatment, then SONAR may be a big and expensive gamble - regardless of the selected formulation.

As for relative formulation cost-comparisons, use the following example to establish the cost-per-lb of active-ingredient (a.i.).

NOTE: These costs are random figures used for illustration purposes only.

Ex: 1 pint (1/8th gal) of SONAR AS (a 4-lb/gal a.i. formulation) contains 8 oz (mass) of fluridone (the product's a.i.). If the pint costs $330, the cost per lb of a.i. = $660

Ex: 8 lbs of SONAR Q (which is a 5% a.i. formulation) contains 6.4 oz. (mass) of fluridone. If the 8 lb pail costs $250, the cost per lb of a.i. = $625

In the above examples, the 8# pail of SONAR Q is a better value "per lb of a.i." than the pint of AS formulation. But, the AS would still be the better choice for treating duckweed. However, see what happens when the 1-gal jug-price for SONAR AS is used in the cost-comparison.

Ex: 1 gal jug contains 4 lbs a.i. and costs around $1,700. So, its cost per lb of a.i. = $425 (which is 35% LESS than the pint-container's cost per lb of a.i.)

Kelly Duffie
Cypress, TX