 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / March 2004Pointers about disposal of chems into septic system (or not at all)?
I'm not talking huge quantities- maybe 10 rolls/week. I have the option of storing dead chems and taking them about 50 miles every 6 months (or however long it takes) and paying a fee to dispose of them. However, if I don't have to and I'm not going to cause any environmental issues, then of course it'd be easier just to dump the stuff down the drain... this is bw dev only. occasional pmk pyro but usually rod, tmax, microdol and acufine...on top of that sodium sulfite ...usually huge dilutions 1:100 and greater. thoughts, opinions? Thanks! Cheers, -sd http://www.zoom.sh Dude, you're gonna get a Dell ! Sorry Some Dude, I couldn't resist. Seriously, there are a lot of differing opinions on whether it's safe to dispose of photo chemicals in a septic system. The old school of thought was that as long as it was a small portion (maybe less than 10%) of the total household waste each day, then it was safe. Others feel any amount will slow down or even destroy the action of the bacteria on waste and cause the tank to stop working properly and need to be pumped out. The EPA doesn't like this anymore and it is not alowed for comercial users. You just mentioned developer, but what about fixer, and are you planning to make prints, resulting in more developer and fixer? You are probably safe if you keep the volumes small, maybe a few gallons a week total and have a larger family creating lots of other water flow for the septic system. Or, you could just collect the used chemicals in a 5 gallon bucket and allow the water to evaporate, resulting in a small volume of solid waste to pay for disposal occasionaly. Bernie > Others feel any amount will slow down or even destroy the action of the bacteria on > waste and cause the tank to stop working properly and need to be pumped out. > The EPA doesn't like this anymore and it is not alowed for comercial users. I have been on several and am on a septic system now, I also worked briefly as a plumber helper as did my brother. Anyway every septic system needs to be periodically pumped. Usually but not all systems incorporate two areas. One is the solids trapping tank, the other is an out flow drain field or hidden ditch were liquids run off. So any water basically flows out the top/or side of the concrete box. Once the tank is full its full. Chemistry is not going to stop the tank from working, what they will do is back up noxious fumes into your house and perhaps kill everyone inside.  SignatureWould you like to know the precise date of your own death? What if anything is too serious to be joked about? Do you ever spit or pick your nose in public? >Chemistry is not going to stop the tank from working, >what they will do is back up noxious fumes into your house and perhaps kill >everyone inside. If one pours a couple of gallons of Dektol into a septic, I assure you it will kill all of the working bacteria in it. Between the high pH and the hydroquinone, there won't be any oxygen in the tank. Now as to fumes, this is usually not an issue. There isn't much of anything in the common darkroom which produces such fumes short of mixing pot. ferricyanide and acid. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com Please remove the "_" when replying via email > >Chemistry is not going to stop the tank from working, > >what they will do is back up noxious fumes into your house and perhaps kill [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > much of anything in the common darkroom which produces such fumes > short of mixing pot. ferricyanide and acid. I was not referring to bacteria, the mechanics of the system only. Anyone with cast iron outflow pipes should reconsider pouring any volume of acid down the drain. Perhaps I should also state that I personally dispose of all chemistry using another method rather just blatently pouring it down the drain. SignatureWould you like to know the precise date of your own death? What if anything is too serious to be joked about? Do you ever spit or pick your nose in public? >Dude, you're gonna get a Dell ! Grumble, mumble, growl ! Pothead, grumble, grumble, embarrassing my company ! GROWL ! Only good thing was that marketing ..... well lets say they had their ears cleaned. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com Please remove the "_" when replying via email > I'm not talking huge quantities- maybe 10 rolls/week. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > -sd > http://www.zoom.sh I did some research into this subject awhile ago... IIRC - Kodak _used_ to say a normal B&W d-room does not harm a normal septic system... Apparently they do *not* recommend _any_ d-room use with a septic system. I came to the conclusion that most chemicals used in a darkroom are safe. *However* , heavy metals (chemicals) are dangerous and hazardous to the us and the environment. So, that includes used fixer - get it recycled, hospitals, universtities and some labs will take your fixer off your hands and get the dissolved silver out for free (they might make a few cents off you ;-)). Selenium toner, or any other metallic toner also poses risks to the environment and our health... (These dodgy heavy metals again) I use a Vitamin C based developer which uses a minimal amount of chemical for paper and film too (sometimes now because of my new-found appreciation for a certain staining-type developer ;-)). I also use a water stop for all processes and vertical processors for paper printing. For washing I use a variation of the Ilford system for film as well as paper. This method uses _complete_ changes of water, rather than a flowing system. This minimises water use and seems to work well. For B&W only: I have heard that the worst offender is the exhausted fixer due to silver concentrations. Probably the best way to deal with it is to accumulate it and then dispose of it through a friendly lab in town. There are also Kodak filters, but not suitable for very low volumes. There are inexpensive electrostatic precipitators that bond the silver out of solution, but they do leave some in solution. And I have heard you can just pour old fixer into a can with some steel wool and a reaction will bond the silver to the steel wool for disposal. I'd love to see perspectives on this. I have a precipitator, but don't know how effective it is. > I'm not talking huge quantities- maybe 10 rolls/week. > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > -sd > http://www.zoom.sh > For B&W only: I have heard that the worst offender is the exhausted fixer > due to silver concentrations. Probably the best way to deal with it is to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I'd love to see perspectives on this. I have a precipitator, but don't know > how effective it is. PERSPECTIVE Fixer is loaded with thiosulfate. Thiosulfate might be thought of as being sulfer sulfite. Oxygen being a stronger oxidizer than sulfer, the sulfite will be converted to sulfate. So we end up with some sulfate, silver sulfide, and sulfer. Silver sulfide is EXTREMLY insoluable. If I could find the article again I'd point you to it. Kodak states that some spent fix in the sewage is OK because the silver is soon the sulfide. As we all know the sulfide of silver is the silver to have in a print for extreme print longevity. But sulfides can be oxidized to the sulfate and silver sulfate is slightly soluable. Sewage systems are aerobic. I can only conclude that Kodak has reason to believe that there is enough sulfer coming into the system to maintain the silver as a sulfide. Kodak is saying that silver plus thiosulfate equals no problem. That may be true; Kodak is lax where pollution is concerned. Dan On 3/12/2004 3:06 PM Dan Quinn spake thus: >> For B&W only: I have heard that the worst offender is the exhausted fixer >> due to silver concentrations. Probably the best way to deal with it is to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > sulfite will be converted to sulfate. So we end up with some sulfate, > silver sulfide, and sulfer. By the way, you might want to know that most people spell it "sulfur". (The other word you often spell creatively is often spelled "odor".) SignatureThe Bush administration should restrain itself from its imperial arrogance that has so alienated countries around the world. Their contempt for the United Nations in the dash to war with Iraq; their support of the coup in Venezuela in April 2002, and the continuing hostility toward President Chavez; the pressure on nations of the world to exempt the US from the International Criminal Court, now joined by their contemptuous attitude toward President Aristide must be halted. It is time for the people of the USA to make this point clear even if the administration continues to walk around with wax in its collective ears, with eyes closed, and ranting about its version of the world as defined by Bush. - Excerpt from TransAfrica statement on the situation in Haiti, 2/17/04 (http://www.transafricaforum.org/) ... > PERSPECTIVE > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >no problem. > That may be true; Kodak is lax where pollution is concerned. Dan mar1304 from Lloyd Erlick, In a regular black and white darkroom, I think the worst effluent is silver. The chemicals making up our solutions are fairly innoucous. And even the silver we release is not hugely adverse, as Dan points out above. The largest portion of our silver effluent is in spent fixer. So it's conveniently contained, at least. There are plenty of photo shops/labs that will take spent fixer, so dumping it shouldn't be a necessity. It can accumulate in septic tanks and fields, eventually making a small problem much larger. And plenty of urban locations are zoned for darkroom activities, and permit disposing of darkroom waste down the drain. In my previous location, I could have operated an abbatoir or a fur dressing plant, among other things. There was a fur dresser across the street for decades. I used to look into their basement chem lab and see all the dirty, dusty, grungy scales and bottles. I'm positively surgical by comparison, you could eat out of my processing tray if I didn't catch you. regards, --le ________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, 2219 Gerrard Street East, unit #1, Toronto M4E 2C8 Canada. --- voice 416-686-0326 lloyd AT the-wire DOT com http://www.heylloyd.com ________________________________ > ... > > PERSPECTIVE [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > 2219 Gerrard Street East, unit #1, > Toronto M4E 2C8 Canada. From what I have read, I'd agree that the big offender (In B&W chemistry) is the fixer, since that's where most of the silver ends up. My question is "Assuming that we remove all the silver from the discarded exhausted fixer, will any of the remaining chemical cause an adverse effect on a septic system?" While another poster made a point of identifying sulphate and sulfur, I don't know if the mere existence of these compounds is a problem in a septic system. Can anyone identify a problem with the remaining chemical composition of exhausted fixer? In addition, its important to note that we would dispose of a gallon or so of exhausted fixer (only when indicated by test) infrequently, while hundreds of gallons of water flush through the septic system each day. Dilution of the chemicals is almost instantaneous - I dispose of my developers and fixers while doing a running water rinse, and that alone will cause significant dilution even before the septic tank. If the exhausted developer is cleansed of silver, is there any other impact of gradual (1 qt per darkroom session) disposal over time, for example? Septic systems are anaerobic - there is no oxygen atmosphere, and oxygen dependent reactions may behave quite differently. What impact does this have on the chemistry? As a final comment - if you own a septic system, be sure to have it serviced (sludge pumped) once every 3 - 5 years for a modern design. They get expensive to repair if the leachfield becomes plugged! I have never had a problem with mine for that reason (knock on wood). Where I live, the pumped sludge has to go through the municipal tertiary sewage plant, where heavy metals are removed. However, I think that taking your accumulated fixer to a commercial lab chemical processor is still the environmentally safest bet. > From what I have read, I'd agree that the big offender (In B&W chemistry) is > the fixer, since that's where most of the silver ends up. My question is > "Assuming that we remove all the silver from the discarded exhausted fixer, > will any of the remaining chemical cause an adverse effect on a septic > system?" While another poster made a point of identifying sulphate and > sulfur, I don't know if the mere existence of these compounds is a problem Isn't sulfur a common part of acid rain? It's an okay additive in organic gardening. Nick RE: Nick Zentena <zentena@hophead.dyndns.org> wrote > Isn't sulfur a common part of acid rain? It's an okay additive in > organic gardening. Gypsum is CaSO4, calcium sulfate. In a septic system, if it interacts at all, it would form H2SO3 sulfurous acid and highly insoluable sulfides. What with the complex chemical reactions takeing place, I'd guess other, exotic sulfur containing compounds are formed. Sulfurous and sulfuric acids are the sulfur acids in acid rain. I think it's the acid part which is ruining the rain. Dan >I'm not talking huge quantities- maybe 10 rolls/week. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >thoughts, opinions? Pour the developers in a bucket and top with a piece of wire mesh. Put a brick or something on top and allow them to oxidize outside and then simply toss it either down the drain or on the local batch of weeds. Save your fixer and take that to the local lab which will gladly recover the silver. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com Please remove the "_" when replying via email Will do! Thanks for all the responses, folks! Oh yeah, thats the good stuff. Perhaps I can make Special K out of the remaining fixer. I can't believe after all these years only one person made that Dell reference...I must be lucky or something.. :) >>I'm not talking huge quantities- maybe 10 rolls/week. >> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com > Please remove the "_" when replying via email Cheers, -sd http://www.zoom.sh |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.