[Bioconversion] processing p**p
Thomas Pirotte
Thomas.Pirotte at coxhealth.com
Wed Jun 13 07:57:04 CDT 2007
You are "pasteurizing," and for that, the magic number is about 55 C; 60
C to be on the safe side. Time would be an hour or so. Such
temperatures are easily obtainable in a low-tech, box-type solar cooker
(details of construction and use available). There are published data
in at least one microbiology journal to frank the fact that coliforms in
water are killed by solar cooking/heating - so this isn't just hopeful
theory.
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 19:44
To: 'Discussion of biological conversion to fuels and chemicals'
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.or
g
_______________________________________________
Bioconversion mailing list
Bioconversion at listserv.repp.org
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/bioconversion_listserv.repp.or
g
More information about the Bioconversion
mailing list