It is International Compost Awareness Week this week...........with functions around the globe. The USA, Canada, UK and Australia are examples.
The message below is focussed on the East Coast of Australia, but relevant all over Australia.
Composting, the ‘intelligent’ alternative
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
That’s the message from the Centre for Organic & Resource Enterprises (CORE) at the launch of the sixth International Composting Awareness Week (ICAW). Organised in conjunction with Compost Australia (a division of the Waste Management Association of Australia), the week of events from May 1-7 will promote the benefits afforded to us all when our business communities and households get involved in composting.
“Composting is the responsible and sustainable thing to do for our planet,” according to CORE.
The major objectives of ICAW are to increase the diversion of organics from the main waste collection program through increasing awareness and participation in centralised composting, kerbside collections, home composting and community composting.“Each year over half the household garbage we produce is made up of food and garden organics. Most of this organic waste can be recycled by composting it”, said Eric Love, chairman of CORE.“If all this organic material was diverted from landfills and properly composted, it could be used to reverse the affects of climate change.
By applying this compost to gardens, farms and other land uses, millions of tonnes of carbon will be stored in the soil. This acts to lower the atmospheric temperatures that lead to changes in our climate.”
ICAW also aims to increase awareness and knowledge about the correct use of "soil-improving composts"; help reduce and recover food waste; and highlight the environmental and social benefits of composting including the opportunities to reduce our carbon emissions.
“Composting is not new. Compost has been used in crop production for over 4,000 years. Artificial fertilisers only became widely available a century ago. Australia is an old and eroded continent that is suffering from land degradation,” said Love.
Emissions from landfills are part of the Australian Federal Government’s carbon abatement initiative. If everyone composted, the total waste going to landfill could decrease by up to one third and emissions and disposal costs will drop, according to CORE.
Peter Wadewitz, chairman of Compost Australia said, “Compost produced by the recycled organics industry is already providing Australian landscape, horticulture and agricultural industries with affordable solutions to improve productivity and environmental outcomes.“Recycled carbon based products are also being effectively used to treat contaminated stormwater runoff and enabling the water to be reused, or more safely released into our waterways.”
Kimbriki Resource Recovery Centre is getting into the action of ICAW by offering talks, demonstrations and tours at its Ingleside/Terrey Hills site on May 3, 4 & 5 (at 10am and 2pm).
It will also give away 500 bags of Kimbriki Compost each day. Peter Rutherford, Kimbriki’s senior ecologist, will demonstrate simple ways to make great compost at home, and explain how this relates to healthy plants and healthy people. Australian Native Landscapes’ soil expert, Rob Niccol, will discuss composting and soil health; explain about the value of compost in larger projects and how it is being used to supplement Australia’s dwindling soil resources. He will also demonstrate the latest in mulch blowing technology and conduct a guided tour of the large-scale compost making operation at Kimbriki.
For more information visit: www.compostweek.com.au
Showing posts with label effluent reuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label effluent reuse. Show all posts
Thursday, May 05, 2011
Friday, September 17, 2010
Urban Agriculture - Concepts for 2050
While 2050 might be 40 years in the future, planning and development thinking has already been evolving about what agriculture might be like.
There have been options mulled over including : -
There have been options mulled over including : -
- agriculture and horticulture as part of green roofs on multi story buildings
- use of the vertical surfaces of building to have plants growing on the facades
- use of warehouses to convert to hydroponic production [ currently being done in some rundown city areas in the USA]
- local community gardens
- locally reprocessed and used organic wastes and water
and the most recent scenario is even more ambitious.
It is the integration of production, processing and sale of fresh produce including fish farming and potentially some animal production such as chickens and other poultry in an integrated manner in a single facility.
It also potentially offers urban recycling as presumably a facility might also require composts and recycled water.
The link is: -http://www.justmeans.com/Agropolis-Future-of-Urban-Agriculture/30772.html
It is an intriguing concept and it would have many advantages for many cool regions of the world.
It is reproduced below. Read and think........
Last week at the Nordic Exceptional Trendshop 2010, held in Denmark, one presentation took urban agriculture to the next level. A collaboration with NASA, you might even say it launched urban agriculture out of this world, and into the future.
The idea is called Agropolis, a combination grocery store, restaurant, and farm all in one building, employing the most advanced technologies in hydroponic, aeroponic, and aquaponic farming. As it stands, Agropolis is still just a mere idea, with little more than some cool graphics to back it up.
But regardless, Agropolis ushers forth a new wave of thinking about urban food systems.
The team behind the Agropolis concept proposes that this new generation of store would be an ecosystem unto itself, a finely tuned orchestra of parts in balance, that would not only be totally envrionmentally sustainably and friendly, but also just plain producing the freshest food around.
But what would all these innovative, NASA-inspired state of the art hydroponics and other high-tech solutions look like in practice? ............According to the vision of Agropolis, a customer would walk into a store that is covered in green. Vegetables growing on the walls as far as the eye can see. And below the floors one would see tilapia swimming, working in tandem with vegetables in an aquaponic system. You would buy a tomato that was literally just picked, from a plant that you can see in front of you. The store would bring a whole new meaning to local, and one-up the notion of hyper local, since all the food available to eat or buy would have traveled zero miles from the farm to the store. At most, just a few steps.
It all sounds grand, and more than a little space-age. But the challenge given to the team that came up with Agropolis wasn't entirely outside reality: Create a farm without relying on arable lad. As the Earth's healthy soil and other resources dwindle, it may not be out of the realm of possibility that a system like Agropolis be needed, particularly in urban areas.
And while urban agriculture has come a long way, incorporating all kinds of creative and innovative ideas and technologies, in order to make it work on a large and global scale it may be time for something as futuristic and high-tech as Agropolis. But imagine if, in fifty years, or some other future point, our grocery stores did include built in farms, how our relationship to food would change. For one thing, the variety of food we eat might change--are there some vegetables and fruits that can't be grown using these artificial systems? Would we only eat tilapia, and no other meat?
Other vertical and urban farm project proposals include a variety of "staple" crops and animals that all work seamlessly together. But is biting into a fresh, hydroponic, LED light feeding tomato really as good as getting one from your local organic farmer who's tomatoes ripen in the sun?
What will the foodies of this imagined future look like?
In this brave new world of urban agriculture, one this is certain: While Agropolis insists that the store/restaurant/farm will be a sort of ultimate consumer experience, it'll be a much different experience than what we have access to now.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Separation Toilet for Liquids and Solids - Practical or Not?
Europeans rally behind the 'NoMix-tech' toilet
by Elizabeth Armstrong Moore
The NoMix toilet, which rather appropriately collects urine in the front and faeces in the back, has gained wide support by consumers throughout seven countries in Europe as a means of reducing pollution and conserving water, according to a new paper by scientists in Switzerland.
"NoMix" toilets, collect urine and faeces separately.
The just-publicized article, which calls on authorities to push for early adoption of the high-tech toilet, appears in the semi-monthly journal Environmental Science & Technology by ACS Publications.
Of the 2,700 people surveyed in Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark, 80 percent say they support the idea behind the technology, and between 75 and 85 percent report that the design, hygiene, smell, and seat comfort of the NoMix toilets equal that of conventional ones.
Moreover, roughly 85 percent say they are open to the idea of using stored urine as fertilizer.
Researchers Judit Lienert and Tove Larsen write that the toilet collects urine separately, with the main advantage being that urine contains 80 percent of the nitrogen and 50 percent of the phosphorus that arrives at wastewater treatment plants. Those two elements trigger such things as algae blooms that can enter waterways and threaten fish.
Apparently, a full decade into the 21st century, the rather simple NoMix model is a relatively novel technology whose acceptance (beyond the NoMix-loving Swiss) had not been scientifically measured until now.
partially sourced from www.news.com
--------------------------------------------
This all sounds wonderful, except that in countries like Australia where low flow units are common, it is already an issue that total liquid flows down the sewer pipes can be too low for effective effluent transfer. That is, liquid is needed to get the waste from your place to the treatment location.
Maybe in hilly Switzerland it all goes downhill..........
These systems sound wonderful, but practical issues like that above need to be considered too.
There are systems that use on site composting with liquids separation........that would be a suitable option too, that avoids waste transfer. There are many other options, and most are practical and fit in with existing technology.
One of these is the Gough Hybrid Toilet. A low flow unit originally designed for small island communities with poor water supply, it has also been extensively used in toilet facilities designed for roadside and resort use in remote areas, as well as holiday homes or in areas with low water supplies. On site treatment is used, the output is predominantly liquid and can be reused for irrigation. See www.gough.com.au
The concept of better toilets is not new, but is a separation model the best option? Not always the ideal would be my view, and there are many options.
The current Australian concept of a dual option, low volume flush [ commonly 6L/3L with a suitable pan design] would seem a simple solution when combined with low health risk effluent treatment and recycling.
by Elizabeth Armstrong Moore
The NoMix toilet, which rather appropriately collects urine in the front and faeces in the back, has gained wide support by consumers throughout seven countries in Europe as a means of reducing pollution and conserving water, according to a new paper by scientists in Switzerland.
"NoMix" toilets, collect urine and faeces separately.
The just-publicized article, which calls on authorities to push for early adoption of the high-tech toilet, appears in the semi-monthly journal Environmental Science & Technology by ACS Publications.
Of the 2,700 people surveyed in Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark, 80 percent say they support the idea behind the technology, and between 75 and 85 percent report that the design, hygiene, smell, and seat comfort of the NoMix toilets equal that of conventional ones.
Moreover, roughly 85 percent say they are open to the idea of using stored urine as fertilizer.
Researchers Judit Lienert and Tove Larsen write that the toilet collects urine separately, with the main advantage being that urine contains 80 percent of the nitrogen and 50 percent of the phosphorus that arrives at wastewater treatment plants. Those two elements trigger such things as algae blooms that can enter waterways and threaten fish.
Apparently, a full decade into the 21st century, the rather simple NoMix model is a relatively novel technology whose acceptance (beyond the NoMix-loving Swiss) had not been scientifically measured until now.
partially sourced from www.news.com
--------------------------------------------
This all sounds wonderful, except that in countries like Australia where low flow units are common, it is already an issue that total liquid flows down the sewer pipes can be too low for effective effluent transfer. That is, liquid is needed to get the waste from your place to the treatment location.
Maybe in hilly Switzerland it all goes downhill..........
These systems sound wonderful, but practical issues like that above need to be considered too.
There are systems that use on site composting with liquids separation........that would be a suitable option too, that avoids waste transfer. There are many other options, and most are practical and fit in with existing technology.
One of these is the Gough Hybrid Toilet. A low flow unit originally designed for small island communities with poor water supply, it has also been extensively used in toilet facilities designed for roadside and resort use in remote areas, as well as holiday homes or in areas with low water supplies. On site treatment is used, the output is predominantly liquid and can be reused for irrigation. See www.gough.com.au
The concept of better toilets is not new, but is a separation model the best option? Not always the ideal would be my view, and there are many options.
The current Australian concept of a dual option, low volume flush [ commonly 6L/3L with a suitable pan design] would seem a simple solution when combined with low health risk effluent treatment and recycling.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Recycled Effluent Safe - Public Health Study Finds
Recycling of water is now a major effort in Australia, a very dry continent.
Serious drought over about 10 years has driven urban water users and the various urban water authorities to invest in a range of water recycling schemes. Some are very sophisticated, others less so.
The Ministerial Council on the Environment has promulgated new Guidelines to Using Recycled Water and many jurisdictions have started to use these guidelines to develop recycled water schemes too.
The following is a media release that reports on a public health examination of recycled water use and abuse in a major scheme NW of Sydney, Australia.
It is generally good news..........treated recycled effluent was ok, even with some misuse and abuse of the water.
-----------------------------------
As purple taps become an increasingly common sight in new Australian suburbs, a study has found no corresponding jump in gastro cases linked to the recycled water they deliver.
Researchers checked two years' worth of patient records from GPs located in Australia's largest residential recycled water scheme, in Sydney's northwest, and they found nothing out of the ordinary.
More than 18,000 homes are in the Rouse Hill Recycled Water Scheme and residents are told the extra water they have on tap, coming from a nearby waste-water plant, is not for drinking.
Similar schemes have been rolled out in new suburbs across the country, but the Monash University study was the first to check for any related impact on public health.
"They have recommendations on how the water should be used but (authorities) obviously can't police that," says Associate Professor Karin Leder, of the university's School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine.
"But what we can say ... in practice, we were unable to identify any observable health risks."
Dr Leder says the recycled water was "very heavily treated" and "any health risk would be very unlikely" but there was still a chance, in the event of a treatment failure, that it could contain pathogens or bacteria capable of making people sick.
The study did uncover some well-meaning households which used recycled water to top up their swimming pool, against advice.
"Even if people are using the water exactly as recommended there is the potential for ingestion - drinking very small amounts of water - during activities like car washing," Dr Leder says.
Researchers reviewed 36,000 patient visits across 11 doctors' clinics to check for any spike in acute gastroenteritis, acute skin complaints or acute respiratory conditions. Rates of illness were no different to surrounding suburbs with no access to recycled water and, Dr Leder says, this was a positive sign for the water-saving scheme. "Australia should continue to pioneer ... these kinds of recycled water schemes," she says. "When properly managed, they are a safe option that can be considered among the many options that might be available for recycling water."
Serious drought over about 10 years has driven urban water users and the various urban water authorities to invest in a range of water recycling schemes. Some are very sophisticated, others less so.
The Ministerial Council on the Environment has promulgated new Guidelines to Using Recycled Water and many jurisdictions have started to use these guidelines to develop recycled water schemes too.
The following is a media release that reports on a public health examination of recycled water use and abuse in a major scheme NW of Sydney, Australia.
It is generally good news..........treated recycled effluent was ok, even with some misuse and abuse of the water.
-----------------------------------
As purple taps become an increasingly common sight in new Australian suburbs, a study has found no corresponding jump in gastro cases linked to the recycled water they deliver.
Researchers checked two years' worth of patient records from GPs located in Australia's largest residential recycled water scheme, in Sydney's northwest, and they found nothing out of the ordinary.
More than 18,000 homes are in the Rouse Hill Recycled Water Scheme and residents are told the extra water they have on tap, coming from a nearby waste-water plant, is not for drinking.
Similar schemes have been rolled out in new suburbs across the country, but the Monash University study was the first to check for any related impact on public health.
"They have recommendations on how the water should be used but (authorities) obviously can't police that," says Associate Professor Karin Leder, of the university's School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine.
"But what we can say ... in practice, we were unable to identify any observable health risks."
Dr Leder says the recycled water was "very heavily treated" and "any health risk would be very unlikely" but there was still a chance, in the event of a treatment failure, that it could contain pathogens or bacteria capable of making people sick.
The study did uncover some well-meaning households which used recycled water to top up their swimming pool, against advice.
"Even if people are using the water exactly as recommended there is the potential for ingestion - drinking very small amounts of water - during activities like car washing," Dr Leder says.
Researchers reviewed 36,000 patient visits across 11 doctors' clinics to check for any spike in acute gastroenteritis, acute skin complaints or acute respiratory conditions. Rates of illness were no different to surrounding suburbs with no access to recycled water and, Dr Leder says, this was a positive sign for the water-saving scheme. "Australia should continue to pioneer ... these kinds of recycled water schemes," she says. "When properly managed, they are a safe option that can be considered among the many options that might be available for recycling water."
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Could Farming in the Tropics Promote a Killer Disease?
This is the premise being actively promoted in a new study of the disease meliodosis, based on results from the Northern Territory of Australia. Meliodosis is deadly........without active and well managed treatment you die. At least in the NT, there is a good quota of experience with the disease and mortality rates are now around 20%. Still, that is very high.
The disease also occurs in SE Asia in the tropics - Thailand, Laos, Malaysia etc, and is something to be mindful of when involved in agriculture in these areas.
Read the press release.........
Gardening and farming in the Australian tropics creates an environment "ideal" for the spread of a killer bacteria, a scientist has warned. Darwin-based researchers have worked to identify the soil types favoured by the bug Burkholderia pseudomallei, which is now at the centre of an outbreak of a pneumonia-like illness in the NT capital. Ten people have been infected, and two have died, from the illness Melioidosis since the wet season began late last year.
Dr Mirjam Kaestli says the bacteria was thought to favour damp soil and areas where there was standing water, but her research also found it thriving in household lawns and dry paddocks across rural Darwin. "These findings raise concerns that pseudomallei actually might spread due to the influence of our land management changes," says Dr Kaestli, who is a research fellow at the Tropical & Emerging Infectious Diseases Division at the Menzies School of Health Research. "Residential gardening and farming generates conditions which are ideal for the proliferation of these pseudomallei.
"We primarily found the bacteria in irrigated lawn areas like on residential properties ... also soil disturbance caused by livestock animals seem to increase survival chances for pseudomallei in areas otherwise not favourable."
It is thought the constant aeration of paddock soils from hoofs, along with raised acid levels from urine, encourage the growth of the bacteria.
The Royal Darwin Hospital treats up to 40 cases of melioidosis every wet season and, while it has a 20 per cent mortality rate this has halved over the past 15 years because of improved diagnosis and treatment. It is listed as an emerging disease, with cases rising in Thailand, and Dr Kaestli warns there were concerns the number would also increase in Australia.
Melioidosis cases have been detected as far down the eastern seaboard as Brisbane.
"Because we have seen this association with disturbed soil, and because there are more and more developing of previously undisturbed area, I would not be surprised if we are seeing higher numbers in the future," she said. People with type-2 diabetes, chronic lung and renal disease, heavy alcohol consumers or those who use of immunosuppressant drugs are known to carry an increased risk of contracting Melioidosis. Dr Kaestli said people in the tropical areas should take precautions by wearing shoes when working in the garden, washing their hands later with an anti-bacterial and taking extra care to keep cuts dirt free.
Her study is published in the journal PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases.
The disease also occurs in SE Asia in the tropics - Thailand, Laos, Malaysia etc, and is something to be mindful of when involved in agriculture in these areas.
Read the press release.........
Gardening and farming in the Australian tropics creates an environment "ideal" for the spread of a killer bacteria, a scientist has warned. Darwin-based researchers have worked to identify the soil types favoured by the bug Burkholderia pseudomallei, which is now at the centre of an outbreak of a pneumonia-like illness in the NT capital. Ten people have been infected, and two have died, from the illness Melioidosis since the wet season began late last year.
Dr Mirjam Kaestli says the bacteria was thought to favour damp soil and areas where there was standing water, but her research also found it thriving in household lawns and dry paddocks across rural Darwin. "These findings raise concerns that pseudomallei actually might spread due to the influence of our land management changes," says Dr Kaestli, who is a research fellow at the Tropical & Emerging Infectious Diseases Division at the Menzies School of Health Research. "Residential gardening and farming generates conditions which are ideal for the proliferation of these pseudomallei.
"We primarily found the bacteria in irrigated lawn areas like on residential properties ... also soil disturbance caused by livestock animals seem to increase survival chances for pseudomallei in areas otherwise not favourable."
It is thought the constant aeration of paddock soils from hoofs, along with raised acid levels from urine, encourage the growth of the bacteria.
The Royal Darwin Hospital treats up to 40 cases of melioidosis every wet season and, while it has a 20 per cent mortality rate this has halved over the past 15 years because of improved diagnosis and treatment. It is listed as an emerging disease, with cases rising in Thailand, and Dr Kaestli warns there were concerns the number would also increase in Australia.
Melioidosis cases have been detected as far down the eastern seaboard as Brisbane.
"Because we have seen this association with disturbed soil, and because there are more and more developing of previously undisturbed area, I would not be surprised if we are seeing higher numbers in the future," she said. People with type-2 diabetes, chronic lung and renal disease, heavy alcohol consumers or those who use of immunosuppressant drugs are known to carry an increased risk of contracting Melioidosis. Dr Kaestli said people in the tropical areas should take precautions by wearing shoes when working in the garden, washing their hands later with an anti-bacterial and taking extra care to keep cuts dirt free.
Her study is published in the journal PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Oestrogen in the Water
Several years ago we were involved in an environmental report on effluent reuse for Alice Springs in Central Australia. One of the issues highlighted by us was the potential for oestrogens to move through the effluent system and ultimately into the environment - and water - as the effluent was discharged. This issue was not recognised by many then as a significant issue, yet it is becoming much more of a problem.
While this system did not involve effluent reuse for potable water, at least in the short term, there was strong evidence of this problem as a potential issue to be considered. More compelling evidence is now accumulating of a worrisome trend in the western world of increasing amounts of oestrogen accumulating and causing detriment, not only to the environment and animals, but to mankind itself.
When the following article and similar starts to appear in the mainstream press, then it is time to really take note. It is reproduced in its entirety, and was in the Weekend Australian in Australia, January 10, 2009.
It is seriously worth noting.
------------
It's wise to be wary of the pill
Angela Shanahan January 10, 2009
Article from: The Australian
THIS week news of an important report was published in L'Osservatore Romano which, if you will excuse the painful pun, should have been a godsend to eager environmentalists. After all these people are great doomsayers and the contents of the report was the stuff of science fiction horror stories.
According to the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, an alarming rise in male infertility in developed nations is possibly caused by the quantities of synthetic female hormones, particularly estrogen, in the food chain and water. These quantities are directly attributable to increased use of the contraceptive pill and hormone replacement therapy.
The original report published in German has been widely publicised but mysteriously, the only response to this terrible scenario, which seems to be with us just as surely as global warming, were a couple of letters in this publication and in The Sydney Morning Herald that could have come straight from a 19th-century Old Bigot's handbook of insults. They hysterically decried the whole thing as a Vatican misogynistic plot. Never mind that it didn't come from the Vatican. But apparently, in some people's minds, any taint of Catholicism is enough to justify screaming "ignorant, stupid, unscientific" and of course predictably "misogyny".
Strange then that in 1998 women's groups and environmentalists formed an alliance in Japan against the legalisation of the contraceptive pill. Apparently some Japanese women and environmentalists, including the Women's Network for Ecology, were worried enough about the effect of introducing synthetic hormones in a country that relies on very intensive agriculture and aquaculture to campaign against its legalisation. That is aside from widespread suspicion among Japanese women that there is a definite link between the use of the pill and breast cancer in their Western sisters.
The evidence that synthetic hormones can have grotesque environmental effects has actually been around for a long time and it is mounting. As long ago as the 1980s, studies were done in the US which showed the effects of estrogen pollution on wildlife, famously alligators in Florida with deformed genitals. But more recently, in February 2008, the University of Cardiff published a study that claimed a link between sexual deformities in birds around sewerage outlets of large British cities and the increased amount of estrogen finding its way into rivers and estuaries.
Recently during research for a story on the viability of using recycled water in Canberra, I came across several papers that pointed to the problem of estrogen in recycled water. Indeed, according to Canberra Hospital professor Peter Collignon, an opponent of recycling sewage water into the potable supply, estrogen can be more of a problem in recycled water than microbes because it cannot be filtered out and we simply do not know how well it breaks down. Just as the Romans drinking from lead cups unwittingly caused infertility in themselves, perhaps we are seeing after 30 years of contraceptive pill use the long-term effects of introducing artificial estrogen into our wider environment. So you see this is not just a preoccupation of the misogynistic old Vatican.
But how can it be misogynistic to point out that artificial hormones can have a bad effect on men as well as women? And who exactly are the misogynists? Is it the people warning of the possible dangers of long-term exposure to artificial estrogen for both sexes, or the hysterical letter writers and doctors who seem to be saying, "There dear, just go ahead and take your pill and everything will be all right?"
As a woman I think Australian women ought to think again about this great biochemical boon to the human race, or perhaps I should say to men. Australian women have one of the highest rates of contraceptive pill use in the world. Most women feel obliged to use it as soon as they become sexually active and the average time women stay on the pill is 10 years. That is 10 years of suppressing one's normal hormonal cycle and replacing it with artificial hormones with all the physical and psychological ramifications, including the decline of libido.
However, even though we have the highest rate of breast cancer in the world, and there is a lot of research pointing to the pill as at least a partially causative factor, many doctors (even some of my own acquaintance) have no compunction in prescribing it to girls who have just reached puberty. In fact one doctor I know told me she feels legally obliged to give it to any sexually active girl, no matter what age. Furthermore, not only is long-term pill use implicated in infertility and sexually transmitted disease, what is worse is it has not prevented our abortion rate from being one of the world's highest.
There are so many reasons for being wary of the contraceptive pill. Why are we not questioning its prevalence?
The reason is, of course, that it is the sacred cow of the sexual revolution. One imaginative letter writer claimed the Catholic view of the pill was that it was "the great Satan", and actually that is not a bad description. It was marketed as an instrument of sexual freedom, and it has provided that, particularly for men. But one might ask if for women it has been the means of sexual liberation or just a way of turning us into empty vessels for sex? Is it like the sexual revolution itself: a pretty and alluring package that turns out to be - for both sexes - like a series of empty boxes, one inside the other. At the end, there is nothing but an empty box.
The environmental effects of the pill on men may in fact gradually reveal the extent of the damage to our whole society, something that Francis Fukuyama points out in his essay, The Great Disruption: that we can't just introduce something such as this for 30 years and not expect unforeseen consequences, moral, social and, of course, physical. But tragically it will be young men and boys who suffer before women will also free themselves of this burden.
----------
There are not many clear references, but the message is quite clear, unambiguous and getting even more so......is mankind killing itself off?
While this system did not involve effluent reuse for potable water, at least in the short term, there was strong evidence of this problem as a potential issue to be considered. More compelling evidence is now accumulating of a worrisome trend in the western world of increasing amounts of oestrogen accumulating and causing detriment, not only to the environment and animals, but to mankind itself.
When the following article and similar starts to appear in the mainstream press, then it is time to really take note. It is reproduced in its entirety, and was in the Weekend Australian in Australia, January 10, 2009.
It is seriously worth noting.
------------
It's wise to be wary of the pill
Angela Shanahan January 10, 2009
Article from: The Australian
THIS week news of an important report was published in L'Osservatore Romano which, if you will excuse the painful pun, should have been a godsend to eager environmentalists. After all these people are great doomsayers and the contents of the report was the stuff of science fiction horror stories.
According to the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, an alarming rise in male infertility in developed nations is possibly caused by the quantities of synthetic female hormones, particularly estrogen, in the food chain and water. These quantities are directly attributable to increased use of the contraceptive pill and hormone replacement therapy.
The original report published in German has been widely publicised but mysteriously, the only response to this terrible scenario, which seems to be with us just as surely as global warming, were a couple of letters in this publication and in The Sydney Morning Herald that could have come straight from a 19th-century Old Bigot's handbook of insults. They hysterically decried the whole thing as a Vatican misogynistic plot. Never mind that it didn't come from the Vatican. But apparently, in some people's minds, any taint of Catholicism is enough to justify screaming "ignorant, stupid, unscientific" and of course predictably "misogyny".
Strange then that in 1998 women's groups and environmentalists formed an alliance in Japan against the legalisation of the contraceptive pill. Apparently some Japanese women and environmentalists, including the Women's Network for Ecology, were worried enough about the effect of introducing synthetic hormones in a country that relies on very intensive agriculture and aquaculture to campaign against its legalisation. That is aside from widespread suspicion among Japanese women that there is a definite link between the use of the pill and breast cancer in their Western sisters.
The evidence that synthetic hormones can have grotesque environmental effects has actually been around for a long time and it is mounting. As long ago as the 1980s, studies were done in the US which showed the effects of estrogen pollution on wildlife, famously alligators in Florida with deformed genitals. But more recently, in February 2008, the University of Cardiff published a study that claimed a link between sexual deformities in birds around sewerage outlets of large British cities and the increased amount of estrogen finding its way into rivers and estuaries.
Recently during research for a story on the viability of using recycled water in Canberra, I came across several papers that pointed to the problem of estrogen in recycled water. Indeed, according to Canberra Hospital professor Peter Collignon, an opponent of recycling sewage water into the potable supply, estrogen can be more of a problem in recycled water than microbes because it cannot be filtered out and we simply do not know how well it breaks down. Just as the Romans drinking from lead cups unwittingly caused infertility in themselves, perhaps we are seeing after 30 years of contraceptive pill use the long-term effects of introducing artificial estrogen into our wider environment. So you see this is not just a preoccupation of the misogynistic old Vatican.
But how can it be misogynistic to point out that artificial hormones can have a bad effect on men as well as women? And who exactly are the misogynists? Is it the people warning of the possible dangers of long-term exposure to artificial estrogen for both sexes, or the hysterical letter writers and doctors who seem to be saying, "There dear, just go ahead and take your pill and everything will be all right?"
As a woman I think Australian women ought to think again about this great biochemical boon to the human race, or perhaps I should say to men. Australian women have one of the highest rates of contraceptive pill use in the world. Most women feel obliged to use it as soon as they become sexually active and the average time women stay on the pill is 10 years. That is 10 years of suppressing one's normal hormonal cycle and replacing it with artificial hormones with all the physical and psychological ramifications, including the decline of libido.
However, even though we have the highest rate of breast cancer in the world, and there is a lot of research pointing to the pill as at least a partially causative factor, many doctors (even some of my own acquaintance) have no compunction in prescribing it to girls who have just reached puberty. In fact one doctor I know told me she feels legally obliged to give it to any sexually active girl, no matter what age. Furthermore, not only is long-term pill use implicated in infertility and sexually transmitted disease, what is worse is it has not prevented our abortion rate from being one of the world's highest.
There are so many reasons for being wary of the contraceptive pill. Why are we not questioning its prevalence?
The reason is, of course, that it is the sacred cow of the sexual revolution. One imaginative letter writer claimed the Catholic view of the pill was that it was "the great Satan", and actually that is not a bad description. It was marketed as an instrument of sexual freedom, and it has provided that, particularly for men. But one might ask if for women it has been the means of sexual liberation or just a way of turning us into empty vessels for sex? Is it like the sexual revolution itself: a pretty and alluring package that turns out to be - for both sexes - like a series of empty boxes, one inside the other. At the end, there is nothing but an empty box.
The environmental effects of the pill on men may in fact gradually reveal the extent of the damage to our whole society, something that Francis Fukuyama points out in his essay, The Great Disruption: that we can't just introduce something such as this for 30 years and not expect unforeseen consequences, moral, social and, of course, physical. But tragically it will be young men and boys who suffer before women will also free themselves of this burden.
----------
There are not many clear references, but the message is quite clear, unambiguous and getting even more so......is mankind killing itself off?
Sunday, January 04, 2009
How Will Food Production Change over the Next 25 Years?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7795652.stm
This link will take you to a recent article on food production systems and the cry for a more efficient way of producing food. It is uk centric, but does have some relevance world wide. I am not sure that some of the claims regarding environmental damage and similar issues are as clear cut as the passing remarks indicate.
Cities require huge volumes of food to be transported into and through them. With Asia about to develop even more mega cities [ 9 million and up population], this situation is about to get a lot worse. The sheer logistics of providing food for those cities is mind blowing. If you have ever crossed the causeway between Singapore and Johore Bahru and noted the lines of trucks carrying food, that gives an idea of the logistical problems of feeding a city, in this case Singapore that has effectively outsourced ALL food production.
Two recent Australian ventures are tackling some of these issues by building monstrous greenhouses, for year round production, essentially hydroponically, or close to that by various soilless cultural options. One is in the New England area - 20 ha of tomatoes - year round, and the other announced last week will be on the South Coast near Sydney in an even larger operation through a joint Dutch / Australian venture. These sophisticated growing systems have superior management of water, compost, plants , disease and nutrition and aim to reduce growing costs while enhancing environmental performance. Both rely on Australia's abundant sunshine which allows year round production. Both are on major link roads to metropolitan areas, with excellent transport connections.
Some Australian agricultural science operatives have proposed green roof and wall systems for FOOD production, not just for carbon dioxide capture and heat reduction on the inevitable concrete surface, using a few ornamentals. The food production option has a huge amount of merit, as does the revival of the household veggie patch, which was common in the pre 1970s periods in many suburban yards - world wide.
There is a need to also get real about form and function in the food we choose and eat. It might be nice to consider that every carrot must be equal in size, shape and colour......but does it always matter? In some cases it might....odd shapes can hide disease at times, but in most cases it is IRRELEVANT to taste. Having a few less than perfect forms means far less wastage of produce to meet unrealistic at times consumer demands. Unless they will pay enormous prices - a bit like the high priced "perfect" fruit used for Japanese gifts.
While the article referred to above makes a low key plea for organic production, the reality is that certified organic production will NOT produce enough to feed the masses. A recent article on the "Politics of Food" by an Oxford professor debunks that myth. But we will have to do more with organic residuals - compost manures and related materials, as that is where many of the residual nutrients finish up, and those nutrients can be reused to grow additional food. Getting them back to the production areas is an issue in itself, unless production areas change. In Australia the vineyards have made enormous progress in use of efficient watering systems, organic compost and semi organic production - saving money and doing it better.
On this issue of food availability, it is also noted that the worlds food deficit areas are mostly where the abject poverty and malnutrition occurs. And the Politics of Food book, rightly infers that producing more in those areas, with more science and even a good dose of GM crops, and solving a few conflicts would aid that issue enormously.
Subtly, food production areas are changing in Australia, with poultry production relocating away from outer metropolitan city areas back to rural areas closer to the production areas for grain, and processing is moving too, to where the birds are grown. It is cheaper to produce both eggs and poultry in those areas close to grain areas and move the finished product. Moreover, the residuals are being used on land around the poultry production areas to grow hay and other crops. Sensible thinking.
We in Australia do not have the monster cities of Europe, Asia or the Americas, and suitable agricultural land is reasonably available, except that many of the great horticultural areas with good soils close to major cities are being converted to land for houses. That has been happening for many years. And it may not be stoppable. In Australia availability of water may be an issue, although treated effluent is potentially suitable for some horticultural uses eg open space irrigation, even to be able to free better water for food production. Do you realise that Sydney, developed when a single use of stored dam water was acceptable, places about 90% of the cities effluent into the adjacent ocean, although that is being reduced - albeit quite slowly.
But we as a society need to think through these type of choices. If regular food production is forced further away from consumers, will it be come too expensive? You cannot grow mangoes in Melbourne; they will always need to be transported from production areas in the tropics. That inherently makes them costly in Melbourne.
As more Australians live in the tropics however, a diet change to locally grown produce might be a good option. That might mean asian vegetables - and some are very good- rather than the usual temperate peas, parsnips and potatoes. And all of the last three will always be imported to the Australian tropics - we do not have a highland area nearby to grow them although some may argue the Atherton Tableland might fit - but not really high enough.
Think of your choices......
This link will take you to a recent article on food production systems and the cry for a more efficient way of producing food. It is uk centric, but does have some relevance world wide. I am not sure that some of the claims regarding environmental damage and similar issues are as clear cut as the passing remarks indicate.
Cities require huge volumes of food to be transported into and through them. With Asia about to develop even more mega cities [ 9 million and up population], this situation is about to get a lot worse. The sheer logistics of providing food for those cities is mind blowing. If you have ever crossed the causeway between Singapore and Johore Bahru and noted the lines of trucks carrying food, that gives an idea of the logistical problems of feeding a city, in this case Singapore that has effectively outsourced ALL food production.
Two recent Australian ventures are tackling some of these issues by building monstrous greenhouses, for year round production, essentially hydroponically, or close to that by various soilless cultural options. One is in the New England area - 20 ha of tomatoes - year round, and the other announced last week will be on the South Coast near Sydney in an even larger operation through a joint Dutch / Australian venture. These sophisticated growing systems have superior management of water, compost, plants , disease and nutrition and aim to reduce growing costs while enhancing environmental performance. Both rely on Australia's abundant sunshine which allows year round production. Both are on major link roads to metropolitan areas, with excellent transport connections.
Some Australian agricultural science operatives have proposed green roof and wall systems for FOOD production, not just for carbon dioxide capture and heat reduction on the inevitable concrete surface, using a few ornamentals. The food production option has a huge amount of merit, as does the revival of the household veggie patch, which was common in the pre 1970s periods in many suburban yards - world wide.
There is a need to also get real about form and function in the food we choose and eat. It might be nice to consider that every carrot must be equal in size, shape and colour......but does it always matter? In some cases it might....odd shapes can hide disease at times, but in most cases it is IRRELEVANT to taste. Having a few less than perfect forms means far less wastage of produce to meet unrealistic at times consumer demands. Unless they will pay enormous prices - a bit like the high priced "perfect" fruit used for Japanese gifts.
While the article referred to above makes a low key plea for organic production, the reality is that certified organic production will NOT produce enough to feed the masses. A recent article on the "Politics of Food" by an Oxford professor debunks that myth. But we will have to do more with organic residuals - compost manures and related materials, as that is where many of the residual nutrients finish up, and those nutrients can be reused to grow additional food. Getting them back to the production areas is an issue in itself, unless production areas change. In Australia the vineyards have made enormous progress in use of efficient watering systems, organic compost and semi organic production - saving money and doing it better.
On this issue of food availability, it is also noted that the worlds food deficit areas are mostly where the abject poverty and malnutrition occurs. And the Politics of Food book, rightly infers that producing more in those areas, with more science and even a good dose of GM crops, and solving a few conflicts would aid that issue enormously.
Subtly, food production areas are changing in Australia, with poultry production relocating away from outer metropolitan city areas back to rural areas closer to the production areas for grain, and processing is moving too, to where the birds are grown. It is cheaper to produce both eggs and poultry in those areas close to grain areas and move the finished product. Moreover, the residuals are being used on land around the poultry production areas to grow hay and other crops. Sensible thinking.
We in Australia do not have the monster cities of Europe, Asia or the Americas, and suitable agricultural land is reasonably available, except that many of the great horticultural areas with good soils close to major cities are being converted to land for houses. That has been happening for many years. And it may not be stoppable. In Australia availability of water may be an issue, although treated effluent is potentially suitable for some horticultural uses eg open space irrigation, even to be able to free better water for food production. Do you realise that Sydney, developed when a single use of stored dam water was acceptable, places about 90% of the cities effluent into the adjacent ocean, although that is being reduced - albeit quite slowly.
But we as a society need to think through these type of choices. If regular food production is forced further away from consumers, will it be come too expensive? You cannot grow mangoes in Melbourne; they will always need to be transported from production areas in the tropics. That inherently makes them costly in Melbourne.
As more Australians live in the tropics however, a diet change to locally grown produce might be a good option. That might mean asian vegetables - and some are very good- rather than the usual temperate peas, parsnips and potatoes. And all of the last three will always be imported to the Australian tropics - we do not have a highland area nearby to grow them although some may argue the Atherton Tableland might fit - but not really high enough.
Think of your choices......
Friday, October 10, 2008
KISSS for Green Roof Applications
There is a new product by the KISSS group that is well suited to green roof applications. It is called Ebb and Flow mat
The KISSS Ebb and Flow Mat represents a giant leap forward in green roof technology. The mat is an integrated extensive green roof system that provides not only irrigation, but drainage and root protection. The Ebb and Flow Mat has several advantages over other systems, Most importantly, it is an "active" drainage system that intelligently manages the moisture level of your green roof soils. Additionally, this system is the most cost effective system on the market today.
The KISSS Ebb and Flow System is simple to install and saves a tremendous amount of labour. Additionally, it is easy to work with in the event that a roof leak should occur.
Simply roll out the Ebb and Flow mat onto the roof and overlap the mats as shown below. Finally, install your drainage system. Then you have an active drainage system, irrigation system, and root barrier all in the one system.
The KISSS Ebb and Flow System is simple to install and saves a tremendous amount of labour. Additionally, it is easy to work with in the event that a roof leak should occur.
Simply roll out the Ebb and Flow mat onto the roof and overlap the mats as shown below. Finally, install your drainage system. Then you have an active drainage system, irrigation system, and root barrier all in the one system.
The KISSS Ebb and Flow Advantage
The perfect solution for an extensive green roof on structures that are sensitive to water loading. This system provides an active drainage layer while elimination water holding on structure.
Integrated design and roll out installation reduces labour and eliminates the need for many of the standard components within other green roof systems, making it the lightest and most economical system in the market today.
The system can be manufactured to be compatible with conventional green roof systems and add supplementary drainage, as well as effective irrigation.
Light weight, flexibility, and low cost make it a prefect fit for any retro-fit with a restrictive weight allowance or budget.
Green Roof Frequently Asked Questions
Green Roof Frequently Asked Questions
How does it work?
The KISSS Green Roof product irrigates the soil media above it, and assists in the drainage of the soil to keep it at optimum moisture content. It does this without the soil being saturated, as saturated soil forces out air. Air in the soil media is just as important as water to plants, and especially on a roof where the minimum amount of soil media should be used to minimize the loading on the roof, and maximize the run-off in heavy rainfall. The difference between the KISSS system and other green roof irrigation systems is that it can drain the soil media at a gentle rate, and if the media is drier than the irrigation system, the system will provide more water to the media via capillary action. This keeps the top few centimetres reasonably dry which reduces evaporation and weeds germinating, but keeps the lower layers moist which encourages deeper root growth.
What soil/media can be used?
Plants of any kind can be grown on a green roof and the only limiting factors are enough soil media for support, moisture, air and nutrients. We suggest a light weight media product and there are a few in the market eg CocoEarth media mixed with sands of a particular grade to give stability and hold water and nutrients that are required. These can be provided by the installer.
How durable is the material?
The materials in the KISSS product are not biodegradable. They are synthetics that are made from polyester and polyethylene and do not break down in soil and do not compress easily. The materials are made in such a manner so that the water and nutrients runs along the fibres but do not fill the fibres and only the pore spaces in between the fibres hold the water, soil and nutrients.
What about roots damaging the materials?
The KISSS Green Roof product irrigates the soil media above it, and assists in the drainage of the soil to keep it at optimum moisture content. It does this without the soil being saturated, as saturated soil forces out air. Air in the soil media is just as important as water to plants, and especially on a roof where the minimum amount of soil media should be used to minimize the loading on the roof, and maximize the run-off in heavy rainfall. The difference between the KISSS system and other green roof irrigation systems is that it can drain the soil media at a gentle rate, and if the media is drier than the irrigation system, the system will provide more water to the media via capillary action. This keeps the top few centimetres reasonably dry which reduces evaporation and weeds germinating, but keeps the lower layers moist which encourages deeper root growth.
What soil/media can be used?
Plants of any kind can be grown on a green roof and the only limiting factors are enough soil media for support, moisture, air and nutrients. We suggest a light weight media product and there are a few in the market eg CocoEarth media mixed with sands of a particular grade to give stability and hold water and nutrients that are required. These can be provided by the installer.
How durable is the material?
The materials in the KISSS product are not biodegradable. They are synthetics that are made from polyester and polyethylene and do not break down in soil and do not compress easily. The materials are made in such a manner so that the water and nutrients runs along the fibres but do not fill the fibres and only the pore spaces in between the fibres hold the water, soil and nutrients.
What about roots damaging the materials?
Roots can invade the materials and run between the fibres, but will not penetrate the fibres themselves therefore the fibres still maintain their functions. The drip line that is in the system to supply the water to the geotextiles is encased in the geotextile for protection and also to make sure the water flows uninhibited across the fibres. The system is made to encourage the roots to invade the system to provide a source of water and nutrients and not to just rely on the soil above the system.
Can the system provide nutrients to the soil/media?
Can the system provide nutrients to the soil/media?
Liquid injection can be used with the KISSS system to add nutrients at any time. The benefit of the KISSS system is that the roots are in direct contact with the fibres in the system so that if nutrients are supplied through the water then the roots get access to these in solution immediately, thereby reducing the amount of fertiliser required. Controlled release fertilisers can be used on top of the plant material or soil media and the rainfall and moisture in the atmosphere will make these available over time, but 30% less fertiliser will be required than the rate for potted plants.
What can I grow on the green roof?
What can I grow on the green roof?
You can grow just about anything from lawn to shrubs to small trees to cactus to ferns to veggies for the family and it all depends on what you want and the aspect and climate of your roof. The simplest solution is to just turf your roof and have a veggie patch or flower garden. Small areas can be grown with a simple UV stabilised corflute structure that can be laid out on the mat and filled with media and planted out with whatever you desire.
What if I don’t want a green roof but want to grow my veggies or herbs?
What if I don’t want a green roof but want to grow my veggies or herbs?
KISSS has an answer with the combination of their ebb and flow mat and the veggie box on the mat. This can be planted out with flowers, herbs or veggies. The unit is 4.5m long by 1.2m wide and 200mm high. It can produce a wide range of veggies and herbs for all the family and can sit in the backyard on the ground and be connected to the tap and only requires two irrigation cycles of one hour each per week in summer and once a week in winter. It uses drip technology inside the ebb and flow mat to spread the water to the soil. The Cocoearth media is optional and can also be sent in the mail and you will require 12 blocks for a 4.5m long unit costing $80 plus postage and handling. Nutrients can be added by liquid form or organic fertiliser mixed in by shovel or chemical fertiliser as slow release. The corflute box is UV stabilised and light weight, and the system will last for 7 years under normal sunlight if the materials are not damaged by mechanical means or animals.
For more details see - http://www.kisss.com.au/kisss_ebb_flow_mat/green_roof_applications
For more details see - http://www.kisss.com.au/kisss_ebb_flow_mat/green_roof_applications
Monday, July 07, 2008
Oxygation Improves Sub-surface Drip Irrigation Efficiency
Glasshouse results have been repeated in field trials with oxygation.
We are very pro the concept of subsurface drip irrigation, as there are potential increases in watering efficiency, avoidance of wind which can influence irrigation distribution, opportunities to use recycled effluent - away from contact with people, and opportunities to arrange irrigation scheduling at your most convenient time - baesd on water availabiity and site usage. It has a lot going for it! It can also significantly reduce vandalism on sprinkler systems, often a scourge for operators.
We favour the system developed in Australia [see http://www.kisss.net.au/], which offers improved and more even distribution, especially for open space and or turf areas. We even have a few posts about the system [see posts list]. And there are other supplier systems too, but not as efficient as KISSS.
While we were aware of the potential for using air injection with subsurface irrigation, and there have been some detailed research papers published, the media release [amended slightly] below has confirmed the very real potential for the air injection option in real world situations. Yes......it was on heavy soils, something that is not that common for horticulture and definitely not an ideal soil for well used turf eg ovals, sporting fields. However, extension of the thinking may even allow further reductions in water use on predominantly urban turf areas, if similar results are obtained for lighter soils.
Air injection is not overly expensive, and can be easily installed on existing irrigation systems.
[media release partially sourced from Qld Rural News]
Irrigators may not be familiar with the term "oxygation", but for cotton water use efficiency researcher, Lance Pendergast, it is a sub-surface drip irrigation system that has delivered 12–23pc yield increases.
Mr Pendergast is a Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries rural water use efficiency development extension officer based at Emerald, and is finalising his PhD research examining the potential for SDI oxygation technology.
The 5.2 hectare sub-surface drip irrigation trial site on Tony Ronnfeldt's Emerald Irrigation Area farm, Nyang, was established seven years ago by the Department of Natural Resources and Water. This project was to evaluate water use efficiency and levels of herbicide, pesticide and fertiliser chemicals in irrigation runoff of SDI compared with conventional furrow irrigation. The site has 12 individually irrigated experimental blocks with SDI lines buried 300mm under the soil surface which are scheduled to deliver the precise volume of water to maintain optimum soil moisture in the crop root zone.
With a question mark over the below-expectation yield performance of cotton crops irrigated by SDI, Mr Pendergast's PhD project was to see if promising glasshouse experimental results using oxygation translated to the field. The trials were overseen by Central Queensland University's Professor David Midmore and have examined the potential benefits of oxygation – a technique that involves entraining air into irrigation water delivered via sub-surface drip lines. "Because of the high moisture holding capacity of the heavy soil, it was determined that the cotton plants were being subjected to episodic water logging events after each irrigation," Mr Pedergast said. "Although each event was short term, the cumulated effect incurred a final yield penalty preventing SDI irrigated cotton from achieving its full potential."
Mr Pendergast began field trialling oxygation technology three years ago using Mazzi injectors that were adjusted to deliver a 12pc air by volume mix into the water lines to alleviate the root zone water-logging. When comparing the crop performance of sub-surface drip between oxygated and non-oxygated blocks, there was a significant yield increase achieved through oxygation for the 2004-05 and 2005-06 trial crops (27pc and 16pc respectively). "The oxygation trials show that we can achieve significant increases in both yield and water use efficiency using this technique," Mr Pendergast said. "When we add up the water saving advantages and improved yield of oxygated sub-surface drip, growers who are prepared to adopt and manage the technology are in a better position to justify the high SDI capital cost of around $3500 to $4500/ha."
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Restoring Mined Land
Vermont visionary wins first Fuller Award with green plan for Appalachia.
In the quest for coal, over a million and a half acres of Appalachia have been strip-mined, whole mountains removed, trillions of gallons of toxic slurry left behind, and communities devastated.
Not exactly a promising place for a new green economy to arise.
Or maybe it is.
For his startling and bold proposal to clean-up this disaster, Comprehensive Design for a Carbon Neutral World: The Challenge of Appalachia, John Todd, a research professor in the Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources at the University of Vermont, won the first annual Buckminster Fuller Challenge.
The $100,000 prize from the Buckminster Fuller Institute was awarded in a ceremony in New York City on June 23, 2008 at the Center for Architecture.
"Dr. Todd's proposal sets forth a profound vision to heal the environmental and economic scars of the Appalachian region and a detailed strategy to build a dynamic sustainable economic basis for lasting renewal," wrote the award jury in picking his submission out of entries from around the world.
The jurors, including Vandana Shiva and William McDonough, were impressed with how Todd proposed to "use biological processes to restore degraded coal lands in Appalachia, and use the process to return atmospheric carbon to the soil," they wrote. To develop his proposal, Todd—who was named a "Hero of the Earth," by Time Magazine in 1999—drew on the concept of ecological succession. Over time, damaged land can rebuild soils, support pioneer plants and grasses, then shrubs, fast-growing trees, and finally, a mature forest. Todd has taken this classic idea of ecology and applied to the human economy.
"Deep in Nature's operating instructions is a model of future economic development," he said, "and these instructions can guide us as we seek new ways of living," in the mountainous coal-laced region that extends from Pennsylvania to Alabama.
Todd's proposal outlines four stages of recovery and development. In the first, healing is the primary focus. Drawing on his extensive experience with "living machines"—biological technologies that echo natural systems to produce clean water and environmental clean-up—Todd foresees plant-based systems that will detoxify the vast lagoons of coal slurry in the region, build new healthy soils, and yield raw products for economic purposes. "Coal miners and some of their machinery could be employed in the process," he notes.
In the second stage, reforestation begins. Some reclaimed land will be dedicated to short-rotation fast-growing woody crops to be harvested for biomass. Other long-standing forests will capture carbon from the atmosphere, slowing global warming.
In the third stage, the economic benefits of the biomass emerge. "Already suitable Appalachian wind sites have been discovered that can provide competitive sources of energy," Todd writes, "paired with another renewable energy source like woody biomass from willows and poplars, a viable energy system can be developed."
And this biomass can be used not just for electricity but for "refining fuels, and manufacturing a wide range of products ranging from plastics to polymers and adhesives," he says.
In the fourth stage, succession is at work not just in the land but in human communities and management of the land. Initially, philanthropic organizations would purchase damaged sites and shepherd their recovery. These restored lands would be passed along to new capitalized corporations that would develop forestry and other businesses there.
Then, following their mandates, these companies would divest the land to employees and qualified land stewards, restoring an ownership culture to impoverished communities. Finally, the process would begin again on other newly acquired lands.
And this replication process could extend far beyond Appalachia, presenting a method for increasing carbon storage in soils around the world and a model for reclaiming "coal-fields from Afghanistan to areas of Poland and Eastern Europe where coal has been extracted in devastating ways," the jury wrote. Because of its sweeping scope, the jury felt that Todd's proposal embodied the vision of social transformation sought by Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983), an architect, author and futurist best known for designing the geodesic dome.
"My father identified himself as a Comprehensive Anticipatory Design Scientist," said Allegra Fuller Snyder, Fuller's daughter, in a release. "My father, who knew, and admired, Dr. Todd's work in the 1970s, would certainly agree" that Todd too embodied this broad label. "Nature has had 3 billion years to experiment," Todd said. "So why shouldn't we learn from that about how to go about our business now?" "This is a struggle of mythic proportions. Big Coal is very powerful, but what will eventually stop them is a carbon tax on producers," he said.
Then, he believes, begins a carbon-neutral post-coal future for Appalachia that could have a working economy with a decade. As this struggle proceeds, John Todd believes that his proposal can "inject into the process a sense of alternative hope," he said.
This article appeared in ENN News on 24 June 2008. However, the concept regarding the early regenerative processes is similar to the soil rebuilding processes in desert soils and subsequently has been researched by the CRC for Mine Reclamation in WA, Australia in relation to mines in the low rainfall regions of Western Australia......currently the worlds quarry for iron ore!
It is the classic sequence of using organic matter - potentially coming form organic waste - to rebuild the biology of soils. Along the path, soil physical conditions are also rebuild, often due to biological activity of larger creatures such as insects, worms and similar organisms.
In tropical regions this process is relatively quick........with warmth and rainfall aiding the processes. Even gardeners commencing with a bare, soil damaged house block can see these processes transform their land in a few short years.
In the quest for coal, over a million and a half acres of Appalachia have been strip-mined, whole mountains removed, trillions of gallons of toxic slurry left behind, and communities devastated.
Not exactly a promising place for a new green economy to arise.
Or maybe it is.
For his startling and bold proposal to clean-up this disaster, Comprehensive Design for a Carbon Neutral World: The Challenge of Appalachia, John Todd, a research professor in the Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources at the University of Vermont, won the first annual Buckminster Fuller Challenge.
The $100,000 prize from the Buckminster Fuller Institute was awarded in a ceremony in New York City on June 23, 2008 at the Center for Architecture.
"Dr. Todd's proposal sets forth a profound vision to heal the environmental and economic scars of the Appalachian region and a detailed strategy to build a dynamic sustainable economic basis for lasting renewal," wrote the award jury in picking his submission out of entries from around the world.
The jurors, including Vandana Shiva and William McDonough, were impressed with how Todd proposed to "use biological processes to restore degraded coal lands in Appalachia, and use the process to return atmospheric carbon to the soil," they wrote. To develop his proposal, Todd—who was named a "Hero of the Earth," by Time Magazine in 1999—drew on the concept of ecological succession. Over time, damaged land can rebuild soils, support pioneer plants and grasses, then shrubs, fast-growing trees, and finally, a mature forest. Todd has taken this classic idea of ecology and applied to the human economy.
"Deep in Nature's operating instructions is a model of future economic development," he said, "and these instructions can guide us as we seek new ways of living," in the mountainous coal-laced region that extends from Pennsylvania to Alabama.
Todd's proposal outlines four stages of recovery and development. In the first, healing is the primary focus. Drawing on his extensive experience with "living machines"—biological technologies that echo natural systems to produce clean water and environmental clean-up—Todd foresees plant-based systems that will detoxify the vast lagoons of coal slurry in the region, build new healthy soils, and yield raw products for economic purposes. "Coal miners and some of their machinery could be employed in the process," he notes.
In the second stage, reforestation begins. Some reclaimed land will be dedicated to short-rotation fast-growing woody crops to be harvested for biomass. Other long-standing forests will capture carbon from the atmosphere, slowing global warming.
In the third stage, the economic benefits of the biomass emerge. "Already suitable Appalachian wind sites have been discovered that can provide competitive sources of energy," Todd writes, "paired with another renewable energy source like woody biomass from willows and poplars, a viable energy system can be developed."
And this biomass can be used not just for electricity but for "refining fuels, and manufacturing a wide range of products ranging from plastics to polymers and adhesives," he says.
In the fourth stage, succession is at work not just in the land but in human communities and management of the land. Initially, philanthropic organizations would purchase damaged sites and shepherd their recovery. These restored lands would be passed along to new capitalized corporations that would develop forestry and other businesses there.
Then, following their mandates, these companies would divest the land to employees and qualified land stewards, restoring an ownership culture to impoverished communities. Finally, the process would begin again on other newly acquired lands.
And this replication process could extend far beyond Appalachia, presenting a method for increasing carbon storage in soils around the world and a model for reclaiming "coal-fields from Afghanistan to areas of Poland and Eastern Europe where coal has been extracted in devastating ways," the jury wrote. Because of its sweeping scope, the jury felt that Todd's proposal embodied the vision of social transformation sought by Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983), an architect, author and futurist best known for designing the geodesic dome.
"My father identified himself as a Comprehensive Anticipatory Design Scientist," said Allegra Fuller Snyder, Fuller's daughter, in a release. "My father, who knew, and admired, Dr. Todd's work in the 1970s, would certainly agree" that Todd too embodied this broad label. "Nature has had 3 billion years to experiment," Todd said. "So why shouldn't we learn from that about how to go about our business now?" "This is a struggle of mythic proportions. Big Coal is very powerful, but what will eventually stop them is a carbon tax on producers," he said.
Then, he believes, begins a carbon-neutral post-coal future for Appalachia that could have a working economy with a decade. As this struggle proceeds, John Todd believes that his proposal can "inject into the process a sense of alternative hope," he said.
This article appeared in ENN News on 24 June 2008. However, the concept regarding the early regenerative processes is similar to the soil rebuilding processes in desert soils and subsequently has been researched by the CRC for Mine Reclamation in WA, Australia in relation to mines in the low rainfall regions of Western Australia......currently the worlds quarry for iron ore!
It is the classic sequence of using organic matter - potentially coming form organic waste - to rebuild the biology of soils. Along the path, soil physical conditions are also rebuild, often due to biological activity of larger creatures such as insects, worms and similar organisms.
In tropical regions this process is relatively quick........with warmth and rainfall aiding the processes. Even gardeners commencing with a bare, soil damaged house block can see these processes transform their land in a few short years.
Friday, November 02, 2007
Better toilets for all
The 2007 World Toilet Summit has opened in the Indian capital, Delhi, with more than 40 countries taking part.
The four-day meeting will examine solutions and technologies that can be used to provide a basic need for nearly half the world's population.
According to estimates, 2.6 billion people around the world lack access to a hygienic toilet. The U.N. hopes to halve this figure by 2015 as part of its millennium development goals. In India alone, more than 700 million people have no access to proper waste disposal systems.
While hygienic toilet facilities are seen as a normal facility in developed countries, anyone who has worked or lived in developing regions knows of many horror stories about using a toilet. After the event, it may become a funny story.........but the reality is that it is really not a joke!
With a wide range of composting, low water use, waterless, biological, sewered, and various other toilet facilities available at modest cost, a major improvement in poor country facilities is needed. The effect that improved hygiene has on overall well being of the population is enormous, but seems to have often been forgotten or ignored.
See http://www.worldtoiletsummit2007.org/
The four-day meeting will examine solutions and technologies that can be used to provide a basic need for nearly half the world's population.
According to estimates, 2.6 billion people around the world lack access to a hygienic toilet. The U.N. hopes to halve this figure by 2015 as part of its millennium development goals. In India alone, more than 700 million people have no access to proper waste disposal systems.
While hygienic toilet facilities are seen as a normal facility in developed countries, anyone who has worked or lived in developing regions knows of many horror stories about using a toilet. After the event, it may become a funny story.........but the reality is that it is really not a joke!
With a wide range of composting, low water use, waterless, biological, sewered, and various other toilet facilities available at modest cost, a major improvement in poor country facilities is needed. The effect that improved hygiene has on overall well being of the population is enormous, but seems to have often been forgotten or ignored.
See http://www.worldtoiletsummit2007.org/
Friday, September 14, 2007
Great Turf - Great Frontage .........Great Business!
Appearances do count but water is precious………..do YOUR bit for the environment!
Peter Harrison –office@abovecapricorn.com.au
Many businesses want their premises to look smart, neat and tidy, both inside and out. The old adage of “initial impressions count” might have been said with business in mind.
Effort and money goes into a neat, turfed street frontage at a business. In the NT, watering of the area is vital to maintain appearances, with most having some form of pop-up sprinklers. But they are often a cause of frustration.
In numerous areas, vandals or other incidents damage the sprinkler, they commonly over spray on to hard surfaces and with our intermittent power supply , suddenly the timer operates in the middle of the day, spraying customers. As well, many, if not all over irrigate or supply water in a fashion that does not provide a suitable soil moisture regime, which should be deeper watering, less frequently.
The modern solution is the Kapillary Irrigation Sub Surface System, or KISSS. Already widely used in eastern states to improve water efficiency it can be a great option here too. More information at www.kisss.net.au. This system is usually cost comparable with sprinklers, but with superior operational benefits.
· “Anytime” watering when plants need it most without interfering with business operations
· Wide area underground watering
· Extremely high water use efficiency – commonly save 50% over sprinkler use
· NO over spray on hard surfaces or roadways
· Reduced cost of irrigation, due to reduced water use and low pressure systems
· Lowered maintenance
Even without improved water use efficiencies, addressing issues of suitable species choice, adequate plant nutrition, weed management, thatch and mowing height and frequency can save you many dollars. Consider revisiting what you do in these areas; seek professional advice, do not rely on your mowing contractor – they make money by cutting more grass and selling more services. You want to reduce their costs, while maintaining or improving aesthetics.
As well as improved water use efficiency, many premises may wish to consider rainwater capture off the roof. This is a very practical option for business, as large roof areas of shed facilities used in conjunction with, for example 30 - 60KL of tank storage [above or below ground in many different forms] can provide adequate water for many on site uses, for around $5 - 7000. This water use includes toilet flushing, vehicle washdown and some irrigation. It reduces polluted stormwater flows, and improves the harbour water quality by reducing these inflows, for most stormwater ends up there. Yes…….there is a cost, but green businesses are often perceived as “good” businesses by customers.
With all of us needing to do more environmentally, these options are technically and financially feasible for the NT.
Peter Harrison –office@abovecapricorn.com.au
Many businesses want their premises to look smart, neat and tidy, both inside and out. The old adage of “initial impressions count” might have been said with business in mind.
Effort and money goes into a neat, turfed street frontage at a business. In the NT, watering of the area is vital to maintain appearances, with most having some form of pop-up sprinklers. But they are often a cause of frustration.
In numerous areas, vandals or other incidents damage the sprinkler, they commonly over spray on to hard surfaces and with our intermittent power supply , suddenly the timer operates in the middle of the day, spraying customers. As well, many, if not all over irrigate or supply water in a fashion that does not provide a suitable soil moisture regime, which should be deeper watering, less frequently.
The modern solution is the Kapillary Irrigation Sub Surface System, or KISSS. Already widely used in eastern states to improve water efficiency it can be a great option here too. More information at www.kisss.net.au. This system is usually cost comparable with sprinklers, but with superior operational benefits.
· “Anytime” watering when plants need it most without interfering with business operations
· Wide area underground watering
· Extremely high water use efficiency – commonly save 50% over sprinkler use
· NO over spray on hard surfaces or roadways
· Reduced cost of irrigation, due to reduced water use and low pressure systems
· Lowered maintenance
Even without improved water use efficiencies, addressing issues of suitable species choice, adequate plant nutrition, weed management, thatch and mowing height and frequency can save you many dollars. Consider revisiting what you do in these areas; seek professional advice, do not rely on your mowing contractor – they make money by cutting more grass and selling more services. You want to reduce their costs, while maintaining or improving aesthetics.
As well as improved water use efficiency, many premises may wish to consider rainwater capture off the roof. This is a very practical option for business, as large roof areas of shed facilities used in conjunction with, for example 30 - 60KL of tank storage [above or below ground in many different forms] can provide adequate water for many on site uses, for around $5 - 7000. This water use includes toilet flushing, vehicle washdown and some irrigation. It reduces polluted stormwater flows, and improves the harbour water quality by reducing these inflows, for most stormwater ends up there. Yes…….there is a cost, but green businesses are often perceived as “good” businesses by customers.
With all of us needing to do more environmentally, these options are technically and financially feasible for the NT.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
New Duckweed Water Treatment System Installed at Wickham
A new duckweed barrier water treatment system was installed for WA Water Corporation at Wickham in the Pilbara in mid June 2007, with the duckweed itself to be placed on site in July.
This is part of a serious evaluation of the concept for use in warmer areas of Australia where duckweed thrives year round.
The barriers provide the ideal still water conditions for duckweed growth in sewerage lagoons where there is adequate nutrients, plus plenty of sun, for growth. The duckweed aids in the elimination of the algal growth in the effluent which currently impacts effective reuse of the effluent for irrigation.
Currently the TSS level in the pond is very high [mainly algae], and it is expected that this will fall dramatically as duckweed growth accelerates and covers the pond. Reduction in bacterial levels are also expected, along with small reductions in nutrient levels [ which are still of benefit in most agricultural water reuse situations].
This is part of a serious evaluation of the concept for use in warmer areas of Australia where duckweed thrives year round.
The barriers provide the ideal still water conditions for duckweed growth in sewerage lagoons where there is adequate nutrients, plus plenty of sun, for growth. The duckweed aids in the elimination of the algal growth in the effluent which currently impacts effective reuse of the effluent for irrigation.
Currently the TSS level in the pond is very high [mainly algae], and it is expected that this will fall dramatically as duckweed growth accelerates and covers the pond. Reduction in bacterial levels are also expected, along with small reductions in nutrient levels [ which are still of benefit in most agricultural water reuse situations].
The photos are of before and after installation of the barriers. These systems significantly "quiet the water" , even with very windy conditions and allow for adequate growth of duckweed. Wind at the time of these photos was around 30km/hr.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)