[Bioconversion] processing p**p

Tue Jun 12 20:45:48 CDT 2007

Phil,

Most colioforms are killed at 56 C, which is being obtained during 
composting or at low redoxpotential which is being obtained in anaerobic 
digestion. Take your pick.

Horst Doelle
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Philip Anderson" <solarphil at comcast.net>
To: "'Discussion of biological conversion to fuels and chemicals'" 
<bioconversion at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Bioconversion] processing p**p

> Thanks Tom. Do you know the temperature and sustained cooking period
> required to kill colioforms and other bad guys?  Seems I've heard that
> aerobic compost production purifies the stock too, at fairly low temps.
>
> We could include in the anaerobic digester design a stainless removable 
> tray
> on which the remaining solids settle.  Then remove the tray to a solar 
> oven
> comprising an insulated box with thermosiphon air panel on the south
> circulating solar heated air all around the tray, without venting --will 
> get
> quite hot.
>
> Phil
>
> Philip Anderson
> Sustainable Living Design
>
>
> Life support & life style in partnership
> with Nature and in harmony with the heart
>
> 11801 Pine Court
> Monrovia, MD 21770-8802   USA
>
> Phone (301) 335-6051
> Fax (301) 865-3642
>
>  solarphil at comcast.net
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bioconversion-bounces at listserv.repp.org
> [mailto:bioconversion-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Thomas 
> Pirotte
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:27 AM
> To: Discussion of biological conversion to fuels and chemicals
> Subject: [Bioconversion] processing p**p
>
> Sorry if I'm contributing out of turn:
> If all you are trying to accomplish with your human waste processing is
> the elimination of infectious bacteria, they are quite easy to kill by
> heating.  The volumes are small...   and, solar ovens (usually used to
> cook food, but easily adaptable) would provide plenty of heat!
> Thomas P. Pirotte, M.D.
> Springfield, Missouri
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bioconversion-bounces at listserv.repp.org
> [mailto:bioconversion-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Philip
> Anderson
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:08
> To: 'Discussion of biological conversion to fuels and chemicals'
> Subject: Re: [Bioconversion] methane digester and greenhouse gas
> reductionfordemonstration post-carbon world home
>
> Thanks, Hooroo.
>
> Regarding the sums,the CO2 released by today's feedstock is today's CO2,
> which is better than introducing ancient CO2 from fossil fuel
> combustion,
> which is an unnatural addition to today's CO2 pool and cycle.  However,
> I
> would like to know if I am reducing today's CO2 release by
> anaerobic-methane-combustion-CO2 versus the release of CO2 of the same
> feed
> stock by decomposition in Nature.  This would be a great plus in a world
> where we need to not only reduce human-induced CO2 emmission but natural
> emission as well, since the atmosphere is overloaded and the Nature's
> carbon-fixers are depleted.
>
> Regarding the extent of conversion of human waste, you are saying the
> longer
> the anaerobic digestion takes place, the more complete the conversion to
> a
> benign compost.  Question is are we talking months or years after
> feedstock
> introduction ceases.  I need to know how long I need the offline tank
> rest
> to assure a benign compost.  The second, active tank can stay online for
> years if need be to allow the resting tank to complete the anaerobic
> digestion.
>
> PHil
>
>
> Philip Anderson
> Sustainable Living Design
>
>
> Life support & life style in partnership
> with Nature and in harmony with the heart
>
> 11801 Pine Court
> Monrovia, MD 21770-8802   USA
>
> Phone (301) 335-6051
> Fax (301) 865-3642
>
>  solarphil at comcast.net
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bioconversion-bounces at listserv.repp.org
> [mailto:bioconversion-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Paul
> Harris
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:09 AM
> To: Discussion of biological conversion to fuels and chemicals
> Subject: Re: [Bioconversion] methane digester and greenhouse gas
> reduction
> fordemonstration post-carbon world home
>
> G'day Philip,
>
> Without doing the sums anaerobic digestion wins, as it relaces fossil
> fuels as well as capturing a 20 times more potent GHG!
>
> The longer the retention time and the more steps/hosts waste goes
> through the safer it is (and the more robust the system is!).
>
> Hope this helps,
> HOOROO
>
> Philip Anderson wrote:
>>
>> Greetings bioconversioneers!  I$B!G(Bm back after a year -Phil
> Anderson
> - and
>> still working on a house plan which demonstrates living in partnership
> with
>> Nature, including benign, site-produced energy and net zero greenhouse
> gas
>> production.
>>
>> I want to produce methane gas for cooking in the first cell of a
> constructed
>> wetlands blackwater treatment system. This first cell is in effect a
> septic
>> tank which I will seal (polyethylene tank) to use like ARTI$B!G(Bs
> domestic
>> biogas plant (http://www.arti-india.org/content/view/45/52/) which
> operates
>> without animal fodder (so it is feasible to be used off the farm in
>> America).  But our plant will also digest human waste in addition to
> food
>> scraps and landscape cuttings as ARTI$B!G(Bs uses.
>>
>> I will construct two first cells (two $B!H(Bseptic tanks$B!I(B) in
> the
> wetlands
>> blackwater treatment system, so one can be online while the other
> rests
> and
>> its digested residue is harvested as compost.
>>
>> Please comment:
>>
>> 1.  Is this system actually reducing the greenhouse effect which the
>> feedstock would have produced in Nature aerobically?  See
> Wikepedia$B!G(Bs
>> equation for methane combustion below.  Per unit of feedstock what
> produces
>> more greenhouse effect:   anaerobic digestion where the methane is
> captured
>> and burned releasing CO2 and water, or aerobic digestion where CO2 is
>> released without burning?
>>
>> Per Wikepedia:  $B!H(B Burning
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combustion>
> one
>> molecule <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecule>  of methane in the
> presence
>> of oxygen <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen>  releases one molecule
> of
>> CO2 (carbon <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide>  dioxide)
> and
> two
>> molecules of H <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water> 2O:
>>
>> CH4 + 2O2 $B"*(B CO2 + 2H2O $B!H(B
>>
>> Another way to phrase the question: given the same unit of feedstock
> is
> less
>> C02 released to the atmosphere by the anaerobic-methane-combustion
> system
>> than the aerobic system?
>>
>> 2.  I$B!G(Bm thinking that at least the burning of the methane from
> the
>> $B!H(Bseptic$B!I(B cell /tank (rather than its finding its way out
> to
> the
>> atmosphere), is reducing the greenhouse effect since methane has about
> 20
>> times more greenhouse effect than C02, and the combustion formula
> shows
> one
>> methane molecule yielding only one carbon dioxide molecule in the
> combustion
>> reaction  --95% reduction in greenhouse effect?   Or would the same
> unit
> of
>> feedstock produce the same amount of CO2 via either process (aerobic
>> production of CO2 or anaerobic production of methane which is then
> burned
> to
>> produce CO2)?
>>
>> 3.  Is the feedstock in aerobic digestion converted to a material
> which
> can
>> be used as compost or is it unsafe sludge? How long does it take to
> produce
>> a safe compost, and how do we know when this process is complete?
> Again,
> my
>> design calls for two anaerobic cells, one of which will be online
> /handling
>> blackwater while the other is cleared of the digested material for use
> as
>> compost.
>>
>> Again, the benefits I would like to have from this system:   compost
> from
>> human waste, site-produced cooking fuel and net zero or even reduced
>> greenhouse effect as compared with the gases produced by the natural
> aerobic
>> and anaerobic decomposition of the same feedstock.  Do I have the
> system
> I$B!G(B
>> m aiming for?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bioconversion mailing list
>> Bioconversion at listserv.repp.org
>>
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/bioconversion_listserv.repp.or
> g
>
> -- 
> Mr. Paul Harris
> Room G8, Leske Building
> Faculty of Sciences,
> The  University of Adelaide, Roseworthy Campus, AUSTRALIA 5371
> Ph    : +61 8 8303 7880
> Fax   : +61 8 8303 7979
> mailto:paul.harris at adelaide.edu.au
> I now use "MailGuard" - if you do not get a reply please make contact
> again (by fax?)
> http://www.adelaide.edu.au/directory/paul.harris
> Member IOBB http://www.iobbnet.org/drupal/
>
> CRICOS Provider Number 00123M
> ----------------------------------------------------------- 
> This email message is intended only for the addressee(s)
> and contains information that may be confidential and/or
> copyright.  If you are not the intended recipient please
> notify the sender by reply email and immediately delete
> this email. Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email
> by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly
> prohibited. No representation is made that this email or
> any attachments are free of viruses. Virus scanning is
> recommended and is the responsibility of the recipient.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioconversion mailing list
> Bioconversion at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/bioconversion_listserv.repp.or
> g
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioconversion mailing list
> Bioconversion at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/bioconversion_listserv.repp.or
> g
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioconversion mailing list
> Bioconversion at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/bioconversion_listserv.repp.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioconversion mailing list
> Bioconversion at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/bioconversion_listserv.repp.org 