reefhunter October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 What can we do to keep the enviromental impact of the hobby to a minimum? I think this is important for new reefers to know. I know that we shouldn't throw metal halide bulbs in the landfill... but how bad is it? How do we properly dispose of them? We have had threads about RODI wastewater and its uses... We were discussing DI resin in another thread today and that doesn't seem to be too bad to trash... but what about everything else? Ok to throw away old ballasts? Old chillers? Old pumps? I dump used carbon in my backyard... is this bad? I dump water change water in my backyard... is this bad? What about used phosphate removal media? What about T5 and actinic bulbs? Am I missing anything else? Even the small things... we should all carry containers around with us when shopping or picking up fish/frags to avoid the use of plastic baggies... I have thrown away hundreds of plastic bags!
trockafella October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 Hunter thats a really good post.. Makes you sit and ponder about it... I do so many of those things aswell and dont even consider the long term effects... Im looking forward to seeing some answers to those questions... I can confirm that grass doesnt like saltwater, Ive killed off some nice patched with water change water..
hlem October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 I would say if we can reuse, replenish or re-anything, it will help the environment. Even if it will take some work to do, like the resin recharge. not sure what to do with old bulbs, ballast, or broken equipments...
Origami October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 T5 and other fluorescent bulbs have mercury in them. It's better to treat them as hazardous waste and not send them to the landfill. Your local fire department may be able to advise you of when they do their periodic hazardous waste collection. Non-electronic fluorescent light ballasts are often "tar" ballasts. The potting compound (tar) that's in them can contain suspected carcinogens. It's best to treat them as hazardous waste, too, and not send them to the landfill. Back before 1980, they often contained PCB's (polychloro biphenyls), a potent carcinogen. We replaced that, apparently, with some other supposedly less toxic compound. Your old carbon I think is perfectly fine to dispose of in any way you choose. Except for the possible build up of salts in your soil and the impact it might have on local plant life, you're probably ok to dispose of it in the manner that you are today. I send mine to Loudoun County Water via my direct connection (the drain) where I let them process it, disposing of any contaminants as they deem necessary. Of course, this has an environmental impact, too, as it takes energy to clean this up. I had to look up the MSDS for GFO. It's hazardous to ingest - don't eat it. The dust can be an irritant. It's toxic to lungs & mucous membranes. Ecotoxicity data is not available. Byproducts of degradation are just as toxic as the original product. It is not a known carcinogen. Disposal recommendations (according to one MSDS): "Whatever cannot be saved for recovery or recycling should be managed in an appropriate and approved waste disposal facility. Processing, use or contamination of this product may change the waste management options. State and local disposal regulations may differ from federal disposal regulations. Dispose of container and unused contents in accordance with federal, state and local requirements." I suppose that since GFO can trap (and thereby concentrate) a variety of bad stuff, including arsenic, the general advice by authorities is to treat it as hazardous waste.
Jon Lazar October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 The Stafford county landfill accepts flourescent bulbs for recycling.
reefhunter October 28, 2009 Author October 28, 2009 when you say flourescent... those are T5, T12 and Actinic bulbs?
Amuze October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 I usually save one of the baggies if they are double bagged. I found use for them when moving livestock or selling something. Yes, they are cheap to buy, but it's still good to save them just the same some people save their grocery bags.
steveoutlaw October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 I think that one of the easiest things you can do is to make sure you have good pressure on your RODI unit. If you don't have very good water pressure than you are going to produce a ton of waste water for very little good water. The more pressure there is, the more effective the RO membrane is.
Jan October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 Great post Hunter. You opened a door that absolutely needed to be opened. Thank you!
Jan October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 You're the best Tom. thank you. Only you would think of MSDS . So how am I, the layperson that has no clue about HazMat (well not really), expected to properly dispose of chemipure elite and other sunstances that contain GFO? I had to look up the MSDS for GFO. It's hazardous to ingest - don't eat it. The dust can be an irritant. It's toxic to lungs & mucous membranes. Ecotoxicity data is not available. Byproducts of degradation are just as toxic as the original product. It is not a known carcinogen. Disposal recommendations (according to one MSDS): "Whatever cannot be saved for recovery or recycling should be managed in an appropriate and approved waste disposal facility. Processing, use or contamination of this product may change the waste management options. State and local disposal regulations may differ from federal disposal regulations. Dispose of container and unused contents in accordance with federal, state and local requirements." I suppose that since GFO can trap (and thereby concentrate) a variety of bad stuff, including arsenic, the general advice by authorities is to treat it as hazardous waste.
extreme_tooth_decay October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 I suppose that since GFO can trap (and thereby concentrate) a variety of bad stuff, including arsenic, the general advice by authorities is to treat it as hazardous waste. Doesn't carbon trap bad stuff as well? I know it doesn't trap arsenic, but it certainly traps some toxic stuff, doesn't it?
reefhunter October 28, 2009 Author October 28, 2009 (edited) STEVE! Thats a huge one... I just upgraded my RODI with a booster pump... 35psi to 70 psi and I get 10x the water and I dont even hear the waste stream so I know its reduced... big water saver! Thanks Trockafella and Jan... if we keep getting good information (doesn't tom always give good info!) maybe we will need to sticky this... Edited October 28, 2009 by reefhunter
Brian Ward October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 water change water should always be disposed of via city sewer, if available to allow for processing of the biological contents of tank water. There are tons of bacteria and other organisms in the tank water that should not be poured into the sewer or groundwater system. I'm not sure what effect this would have on a septic field.
Origami October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 Doesn't carbon trap bad stuff as well? I know it doesn't trap arsenic, but it certainly traps some toxic stuff, doesn't it? My thoughts are that it's mostly collecting organics that can be further decomposed by bacterial action in the environment. Mostly these are proteins, phenols, organic acids, carbohydrates, & hormones, and the like. That is, it's capturing mostly biodegradeable stuff that can be broken down by bacterial action outside the aquarium environment, after disposal. There's going to be other stuff that's dragged along with the organics and concentrated, but I'm thinking that this is substantially less, and that skimmate is probably more concentrated in this regard than what we'd find trapped in the carbon.
reefhunter October 28, 2009 Author October 28, 2009 Interesting about the water change water Brian... I am dumping my water change water directly on a hill that drains into a creek that goes into a pond across the street... could I be causing this pond harm? Should I put the water change water into my septic field? I don't like putting more water than I need to down the septic.
Origami October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 Every little bit helps, I guess. The fact is, our hobby demands leave most of us with a pretty big carbon footprint no matter how you look at it. I mean, just look how much electricity we use to run our systems. I recently took a 300W main pump off line and replaced it with another, saving 75 W (and about $75 a year in operating costs). I'm about to replace it with another pump that saves another 75W. All told, the pump will pay for itself in 2 years and will reduce my carbon footprint as well.
reefhunter October 28, 2009 Author October 28, 2009 (edited) When I took down my big tank and put up this smaller tank with much more efficient equipment I noticed a large decrease in my electricity bill... my tank was using more energy than the two renters living in that space now... Edited October 28, 2009 by reefhunter
Jon Lazar October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 We should also consider the impact of livestock collection. Sure, we grow corals and trade frags, but as a hobby we take far, far more from the ocean than we grow through aquaculture.
Origami October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 You're the best Tom. thank you. Only you would think of MSDS . So how am I, the layperson that has no clue about HazMat (well not really), expected to properly dispose of chemipure elite and other sunstances that contain GFO? Material Safety Data Sheets are a part of life in a company subject to OSHA scrutiny.... As for "proper" disposal, contact your local fire department and ask them for advice. I guess that you could bag it, label it, and hand t to them at some scheduled collection opportunity. You would have to call them and see when that is, though. (I can't honestly claim to be as mindful of all of these considerations that we've raised here today.)
Brian Ward October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 Interesting about the water change water Brian... I am dumping my water change water directly on a hill that drains into a creek that goes into a pond across the street... could I be causing this pond harm? Should I put the water change water into my septic field? I don't like putting more water than I need to down the septic. I really don't know when it comes to the septic fields. From what I've been told, yes you are potentially doing damage to the pond because you may be introducing non-native species into the water. But I'm not sure that the biological agents in your septic tank will prevent that from happening.
zygote2k October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 Every little bit helps, I guess. The fact is, our hobby demands leave most of us with a pretty big carbon footprint no matter how you look at it. I mean, just look how much electricity we use to run our systems. I recently took a 300W main pump off line and replaced it with another, saving 75 W (and about $75 a year in operating costs). I'm about to replace it with another pump that saves another 75W. All told, the pump will pay for itself in 2 years and will reduce my carbon footprint as well. Carbon footprint? Isn't that eco-babble for another way to tax one of the building blocks of life? Granted we have polluted our Earth with wastes, but to say that carbon is responsible for global warming or any of the other things that are happening with the atmosphere is pure nonsense. Here's an easy way to reduce your use of electricity: use eductors on more pumps instead of adding more powerheads for circulation.
Jan October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 True. "Right to know". Been out of it for a while. Fire departments don't typically handle small scale controllable situations like this. When they do it's usually their HazMat unit for emergencys only. I think this is important to know. I'll call the county and post my findings. Thank you. quote name='Origami2547' date='Oct 28 2009, 02:03 PM' post='286707'] Material Safety Data Sheets are a part of life in a company subject to OSHA scrutiny.... As for "proper" disposal, contact your local fire department and ask them for advice. I guess that you could bag it, label it, and hand t to them at some scheduled collection opportunity. You would have to call them and see when that is, though. (I can't honestly claim to be as mindful of all of these considerations that we've raised here today.)
Coral Hind October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 Should I put the water change water into my septic field? If you do put the water change water down the septic system I would try to time it with either a washing machine or dishwasher cycle so as to dilute the saltwater. Depending on how big your septic tank is and the size of your water change, you could kill the bacteria in the septic tank if it became to salty. Home Depot will take your used MH and fluorescent lamps. Just place them in the orange CFL recycling bin or hand them to the customer service counter. Icecap also collects used MH bulbs as part of their new green program.
lanman October 28, 2009 October 28, 2009 Carbon footprint? Isn't that eco-babble for another way to tax one of the building blocks of life? Granted we have polluted our Earth with wastes, but to say that carbon is responsible for global warming or any of the other things that are happening with the atmosphere is pure nonsense. Here's an easy way to reduce your use of electricity: use eductors on more pumps instead of adding more powerheads for circulation. A carbon footprint is defined as: The total amount of greenhouse gases produced to directly and indirectly support human activities, usually expressed in equivalent tons of carbon dioxide (CO2). That's an easy one - stop breathing!! Just how much of the "Greenhouse Effect" is caused by human activity? It is about 0.28%, if water vapor is taken into account-- about 5.53%, if not. Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect (4). Interestingly, many "facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold. Water vapor, the most significant greenhouse gas, comes from natural sources and is responsible for roughly 95% of the greenhouse effect (4). Among climatologists this is common knowledge but among special interests, certain governmental groups, and news reporters this fact is under-emphasized or just ignored altogether. Conceding that it might be "a little misleading" to leave water vapor out, they nonetheless defend the practice by stating that it is "customary" to do so! i.e. - if all human activity were to cease, we could alter the amount of greenhouse gases by a whopping 0.28% So - who's going to be the first in line to completely end your contribution to the greenhouse effect?? Line forms right behind Al. We ARE wrecking this beautiful big blue marble. We are polluting the air and the oceans, cutting down the forests, and building huge 'heat-sinks' called cities. What we are NOT doing, is making a significant contribution to the warming of the earth. This huge political football is distracting attention from the things we really CAN do to save this planet and our species from extinction. Or should I tell you how I really feel? bob
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now