[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A couple questions about sludge(biosolids) and compost



Hi K Stoner and list members,
Another resource of interest would be the US Composting Council website.
Below is a recent posting from their listserv.  Biosolids is a recent topic
there also.

Also, Look What's New at BioCycle!  See http://www.jgpress.com

Also, www.iatp.org/edrc/  (Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy) has a
Food Safety and Health newsletter and discussion including  biosolids  at
web site.

The question of biosolids land application surely hinges on the input of
the sources; households, industrial, commercial source inputs are poorly
controlled so the toxic loading of the output is always unknown as well as
variable - until tested.  And a complete array of tests is of
prohibitively expensive in most small batch applications.    This is also
true for compost feedstock origins and its suitability for food production
and health impacts.  Consequently a seal of approval for compost quality is
being put forward; also USCC has a testing protocol.

How are the criteria for compost quality applicable for biosolids land
application?  if applied to roadways, golf courses, parks, playgrounds,
forests are we just to ignore the impacts on soil biology, or do we assume
that the eco- filtering delivers  insignificant "just a little  teensy bit"
that won't bother the soil food web function, and (probably) does not
bioaccumulate in any (known, or poorly reported) pathway for humans,
children humans??

  What precautions are appropriate when there is a generalized uncontrolled
experiment going on with heretofore unknown molecules in unprecedented
concentrations with unknown distribution and fates and synergistic
properties that trigger bio-physiological-genetic mimetic
effects?.............pray for relief.
Bruce Bacon

>>======>X-Sender: alexassoc@mail.earthlink.net
>>>Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 15:53:27 +0000
>>>To: compost@compostingcouncil.org
>>>From: Ron Alexander <alexassoc@earthlink.net>
>>>Subject: Re: [USCC] Waste News - "Composters adopt a seal of approval"
>>>Mime-Version: 1.0
>>>Reply-To: compost@compostingcouncil.org
>>>Sender: compost-admin@compostingcouncil.org
>>>X-Mailman-Version: 1.0rc1
>>>Precedence: bulk
>>>List-Id: US Composting Council Compost Discussion List
>>><compost.compostingcouncil.org>
>>>X-BeenThere: compost@compostingcouncil.org
>>>
>>>Regarding The USCC's Seal of Testing Assurance (STA) Program:
>>>
>>>The STA Program has two major goals:
>>>1. To Improve Customer Confidence in Compost Selection and Utilization
>>>2. To Enhance Compost's Position as a Mainstream Horticultural,
>>>Agricultural,     and Retail Product
>>>
>>>Why is the STA Program necessary? Because, unlike many of the individuals
>>>discussing the Program on the list server, many composters are not
>>>1. Testing their compost products on an on-going basis,
>>>2. Disclosuring their test data to customers, or
>>>3. Providing end use instructions to their customers.
>>>
>>>Further, we do have companies misrepresenting their products as composts,
>>>when they are not. Landscape architects and DOT representatives are
>>>finding it difficult to specifiy compost, because of misrepresentations by
>>>producers, and articles, like the one in the 1999 summer issue of Organic
>>>Gardening Magazine, further tarnish the reputation of compost and the
>>>composting industry.
>>>
>>>This is why user confidence in compost products, in many areas of the
>>>country, is not where it should be! People need to understand that the
>>>word 'compost' is a bad word in certain parts of the country. Therefore,
>>>we need to develop programs which improve user confidence, and which
>>>assist market/customer oriented composters differentiate themselves from
>>>composters who are not. Or in other words, assist composters who are more
>>>aggressively investing into their programs, and into the composting
>>>industry (by testing, promotion, education, etc.) stand out and even help
>>>them justify their higher product prices.
>>>
>>>Further, we must assist end users choose the compost products which best
>>>suits their application. This task could be augmented by standardizing the
>>>test methods we use and the way we report our test results. My recent
>>>discussions with landscape architects confirm these conclusions.
>>>
>>>The USCC simply wants to help increase market demand for compost products,
>>>as well as improve it's value. We are not trying to be judge and jury.
>>>Unfortunately, the Waste News article did not clearly articulate all that
>>>was discussed with them. Trust me when I say that there will be 'issues'
>>>that certain composters, labs, regulators, etc. will take with the STA
>>>Program (Matt Cotton, who manages the CCQC program in California can
>>>attest to that), BUT comments received from the end users, specifiers, as
>>>well as the majority of composters, thus far, indicate that the Program
>>>will be a huge success. And, if we promote it properly to potential end
>>>users and specifiers, there is no doubt that it will give participants a
>>>competitive advantage - and increase product demand.
>>>
>>>If anyone has any specific questions regarding the STA Program, please
>>>feel free to contact me at 919-380-9939.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Ron Alexander
>>>USCC Market Development Committee Co-Chair
>>>STA Program Manager
>>>
X-Sender: wayne.thompson@edaphos.com
Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 18:04:43 -0600
To: compost@compostingcouncil.org
From: Edaphos <wayne.thompson@edaphos.com>
Subject: [USCC] TMECC 06.01 FIELD SAMPLING OF COMPOST MATERIALS
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: compost@compostingcouncil.org
Sender: compost-admin@compostingcouncil.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0rc1
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: US Composting Council Compost Discussion List
<compost.compostingcouncil.org>
X-BeenThere: compost@compostingcouncil.org

Dear USCC ListServ Members:

The most current draft (01/00) of TEMCC 06.01 FIELD SAMPLING OF COMPOST
MATERIALS is now available for viewing at:
  http://www.compostingcouncil.org/tmecc/Chapter_06.html

Many thanks to all that provided feedback on the previous draft !!!


  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Wayne Thompson, Co-Editor TMECC
    Test Methods for the Examination of Composting and Compost
    cell  713 301 4174
    voice 713 524 6115
    http://compostingcouncil.org/tmecc/
    http://edaphos.com/tmecc/
  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 08:04:08 -0600
From: Russ Bulluck <lrbulluck@ucdavis.edu>
Subject: Re: A couple of questions about manure and sewage sludge

Cass Peterson wrote:

>
> As for Question 2 (the use of sewage sludge in landscaping), I personally
> see no reason sewage sludge could not be appropriately used for some
> landscaping purposes, like highway median plantings, shopping center
> landscaping or golf course fairways.

I agree.  However, many sewage sludge composts are high in heavy metals (such
as copper and lead) even from unindustrialized sources, and will often have a
"Lifetime loading rate," meaning that once that rate is applied, no more of
that particular soil amendment (or ones containing the same metal) can _ever_
be used on that soil.

Russ Bulluck
Visiting Post-Doctoral Fellow
Department of Plant Pathology
UC-Davis
Davis, CA  95616
lrbulluck@ucdavis.edu
- -------------------------------------------------------------
The soil population is so complex that it manifestly cannot
be dealt with as a whole with any detail by any one person,
and at the same time it plays so important a part in the soil
economy that it must be studied.
- --Sir E. John Russell
The Micro-organisms of the Soil, 1923
- -------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 16:48:33 -0500
From: "Kimberly Stoner" <kstoner@caes.state.ct.us>
Subject: Re: A couple of questions ..

Dear Sanet:
Sanet is such a wonderful resource.  On the suggestion of James Kotcon of
West Virginia, I looked at the information on sewage sludge at the Cornell
website and I found a great report, written by the Cornell Waste Managment
Institute.  It is called "The Case for Caution: Recommendations for land
application of sewage sludges and an appraisal of the US EPA's part 503
sludge rules." It is a very thoughtful and detailed examination of what we
know and what we don't know (a lot) about sewage sludge and its effects in
the environment.

Those of you who would like to see it can go to:
http://www.cfe.cornell.edu/wmi/PDFS/LandApp.pdf

There is much more information about waste management and composting at the
Cornell Waste Management Institute site.

Thanks!
Kim
Kimberly Stoner
CT Agricultural Experiment Station
P.O. Box 1106
123 Huntington Street
New Haven, CT 06504
203-974-8480
Kimberly.Stoner@po.state.ct.us


To Unsubscribe:  Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".  If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".

All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
===============================================================================
========posts from USSC listserv Re: Biosolids Composting Questions============
===============================================================================
X-Sender: clh1@mail.nacs.net
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 14:13:58 -0500
To: compost@compostingcouncil.org
From: GCEA-Cuyahoga Leaf Humus <clh1@nacs.net>
Subject: Re: [USCC] Biosolids Composting Questi
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: compost@compostingcouncil.org
Sender: compost-admin@compostingcouncil.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0rc1
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: US Composting Council Compost Discussion List
<compost.compostingcouncil.org>
X-BeenThere: compost@compostingcouncil.org

I don't think anyone is bashing bio-solid compost, just the ones that do
not know how to do it right.  Everyone has a preference, we like leaf
humus, sue us.  If your product does not burn crops and it can be used
without a close pin attached to the nose, then you have no problem.

Sheila Carlson
GCEA-Cuyahoga Leaf Humus
323 Lakeside Avenue, W, #400
Cleveland,OH 44113
Phone: 216-687-1266
Email CLH1@nacs.net

At 09:13 AM 1/28/00 -0400, you wrote:
>In GENERAL (emphasis on the "general"), you will not find a feedstock-based
>compost that  performs better than biosolids compost.  It has a better nutrient
>package than yard trimmings compost and less likely to immobilize nitrogen.
>It has more organic matter and a lower salinity than most manure composts. High
>salinity is one of, if not the most, frequenty reason for compost having
>negative effects (immaturity being another  problem).
>
>In regard to safety and quality, I am as confident about biosolids compost as
>any other type. Pathogens, and the pathogen regrowth problem, potential
>plagues
>all composts, especially if regrowth is a consequence of over-heating and/or
>immaturity.  Plus, except for a few states, biosolids compost is the ONLY
>compost that users have some assurance that PFRP has been met.  Further, I
>find
>that as a group, compost operators/managers at biosolids facilities are the
>most knowledgable and most conscientious.  They have been at it longer than
>MOST others and are better trained at the science and art of composting
>(again,
>as a group, and speaking generally).
>
>The only real problem with biosolids and biosolids compost is IMAGE (and I
>continue to speak generally).  Perhaps marketers of yard trimmings and
>agricultural composts feel the need to bash biosolid compost because they don't
>want the competition from a normally better-performing product.  Perhaps people
>have a philisosphical problem with a product that comes from an
>"industrial-scale" facility. Perhaps they are guided by misinformation. Perhaps
>they just like to bash something and biosolids is an easy target.  BUT PLEASE
>STOP IT.  The image-bashing can spread to all organic products, and besides, I
>am tired of reading it.   ( From: Robert Rynk <rrynk@jgpress.com> )
>
>GCEA-Cuyahoga Leaf Humus wrote:
>
>> Frank where is your compost facility?  And I agree totally on purchasing
>> leaf humus over bio-solid compost.
>>
>> Sheila Carlson
>> GCEA-Cuyahoga Leaf Humus
>> 323 Lakeside Avenue, W, #400
>> Cleveland, OH 44113
>> telephone: 216-687-1266
>> Fax: 216-443-3737
>> Email: CLH1@nacs.net
>>
>> At 02:42 PM 1/27/00 -0500, you wrote:
>> >This is detailed in Farrell's article in the Science and Engineering of
>> >Composting, Hoitink and Keener, editors, Renaissance 1993.
>> >
>> >Noting Yanko's 1988 research showing regrowth of pathogens in many
>> >facilities,  he bemoaned the high temp requirements of the PFRPs as
leading
>> >to sterilization and regrowth of pathogens.
>> >
>> >His radical suggestion:
>> >
>> >"If close temperature control of each portion of material processed
could be
>> >achieved, it might be possible to operate in the temperature range of
45 to
>> >50 degrees C and destroy all pathogens.....The advantage of this mode of
>> >operation would be a more stable compost that would be less likely to
>> >support regrowth of fecal bacteria."....p 296.
>> >
>> >The point is that high temperatures do not yield a stable compost and that
>> >lower temperatures yield a more stable compost faster.
>> >
>> >The fact that this point is lost on many composters including commercial
>> >ones and people handling biosolids wastes is part of the reason people are
>> >concerned about these materials.
>> >
>> >Composting is and will always be a skill, and require more than just 'hot
>> >enough for long enough' to win the confidence of the buying public. That
>> >there is such a thing as too hot, and a need to maintain materials
within a
>> >range well below what is currently practiced, is a vital bit of
information
>> >missing from the composter's knowledge base, as I see it.
>> >
>> >Without visiting the plant and talking to the people in charge, I would
>> >always buy leaf humus ahead of anything containing biosolids, and this is
>> >only one of many reasons I feel that way, for my work in the residential
>> >marketplace.
>> >
>> >Good composting,
>> >
>> >Frank Teuton
>> >
>> >
>> >>Regarding higher pathogen levels after composting - is the compost
process
>> >>getting excessively hot? If so, it can sterilize the compost thereby
>> >>rendering it subject to easy reinoculation by contaminated equipment
(such
>> >>as the loader mentioned below).
>> >>
>> >>Joe Jenkins
>> >>
>> >>At 10:27 AM 01/27/2000 -0500, you wrote:
>> >>>In a message dated 1/24/00 2:24:06 PM, jdl@recycle.com writes:
>> >>>
>> >>><< 2) We find ourselves in the somewhat anomalous situation of having
>> >higher
>> >>>pathogen quantities after composting than before.  If temperatures were
>> >>>reached and maintained for pathogen kill during composting, what
would be
>> >>>some reasons for the increase of measured pathogens during the
composting
>> >>>process?  Anybody got any ideas about this one?
>> >>>
>> >>>JD - not knowing the details of the operation, I'd hazard a guess
that you
>> >>>might be re-innocculating your otherwise pathogen-reduced compost. This
>> >can
>> >>>happen in a number of different ways (use of the same loader to
>> >>>deliver/mix/turn new and post-PFRP compost, bird droppings, run-on of
>> >>>stormwater from newer to older compost,  etc.).  I have even seen this
>> >happen
>> >>>in yard debris and other not-as-likely-to-have-high-pathogen-count
>> >>>feedstocks. Here in CA we require PFRP for all feedstocks, so we've got
>> >lots
>> >>>off folks taking readings and having lots of results. Another
possibility
>> >is
>> >>>contamination through sampling and re-growth due to less than ideal
sample
>> >>>handling conditions. Our technicians at the California Compost Quality
>> >>>Council typically spritz all sampling equipment with alcohol and
>> >hand-deliver
>> >>>the refrigerated sample to minimize any re-growth potential.  You could
>> >also
>> >>>check your water source, though this is less likely a culprit in my
>> >>>experience. Again, these are some thoughts, not knowing much about the
>> >site
>> >>>or your operating methods. Hope this is useful.
>> >>>
>> >>>Matthew Cotton
>> >>>Integrated Waste Management Consulting
>> >>>19375 Lake City Road
>> >>>Nevada City, CA  95959
>> >>>530-305-2060
>> >>>Fax 530-265-4547
>> >>>cotonmatt@aol.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>Joseph Jenkins
>> >>PO Box 607, Grove City, PA 16127
>> >>814-786-8209 (phone and fax);
>> >>
>> >>Publisher of the Humanure Handbook and the Slate Roof Bible -
>> >>Both Amazon.com #1 Bestsellers in their respective categories.
>> >>
>> >><http://www.jenkinspublishing.com/>Jenkins Publishing
>>______________________________________________________________________________
>
>Robert Rynk
>JG Press. Inc.
>419 State Ave.
>Emmaus, PA 18049
>
>610-967-4135  fax: 610-967-1345
>email: rrynk@jgpress.com
>
>websites:
>www.biocycle.net
>www.inbusiness.org
>
>_______________________________________________
>Compost maillist  -  Compost@compostingcouncil.org
>For information on subscribing, unsubscribing, digest or other options, go
to:
>http://mailman.cloudnet.com/mailman/listinfo/compost

==================================================================



To Unsubscribe:  Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg".  If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".

All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail