I agree with James strongly at this point. As an the AD industry, I think it is important to note that most of the environmental concerns that people have regarding AD generally have to deal with the original waste stream (eg the arsenic) or downstream management (eg overloading digestate on fields), not specifically the AD process. It does not seem reasonable that we are given responsibility to rehabilitate all of the industrial and ag processes that we provide a strong treatment solution for. We are a small piece of the solution, but cannot be considered a silver bullet for all environmental problems surrounding ag and industry. We should think of a little manifesto that helps make that more clear.
In areas where AD may have some negative effects (rumored bacteria increases or high NOX levels form biogas motors), I think we should be diligent, but we should have a strong stance on these types of issues to that environmentalists (knitting their own yogurt, classic) do not through us out in the proverbial bathwater. Cheers A On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:21 PM, James Fidell <[email protected]> wrote: > On 15/06/11 18:15, Edgar Blanco-Madrigal wrote: > > Not surprising that an interest group from America subtly tries to >> create a concern to serve its own purpose, rather than to address a >> serious issue. This is well in keep with the folks that ban the >> teaching of Darwinian principles, "pro-life" taliban campainers and >> the like. How can you call serious a comment that only references its >> own propaganda to back its arguments?! >> > > That arsenic ends up in the soil (and presumably therefore eventually > gets into the water supply) as a result of spreading manure from > chickens fed arsenic-based growth promoters doesn't appear to be a > particularly contentious point as far as I can tell from the research > I've been able to find on the net this evening, and that's after > filtering out anything clearly written by people who knit their own > yoghurt. > > However, if manure destined to be spread on soil is first put through > an AD system and the spent digestate then spread, I'm not sure what > relevance the entire arsenic issue has to the AD process. Either it's > there and will end up in the soil either way, or it isn't and won't. > > James > > > _______________________________________________ > Digestion mailing list > > to Send a Message to the list, use the email address > [email protected] > > to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page > > http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org > > for more information about digestion, see > Beginner's Guide to Biogas > http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/ > and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/ > > -- Alexander Eaton Sistema Biobolsa IRRI-Mexico RedBioLAC sistemabiobolsa.com www.irrimexico.org www.redbiolac.org
_______________________________________________ Digestion mailing list to Send a Message to the list, use the email address [email protected] to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org for more information about digestion, see Beginner's Guide to Biogas http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/ and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
