Bug Off!
Balancing a field's soil biology and chemistry decreases the need forchemicals by 30% to 50% because healthy, nutritionally balanced plantsare more resistant to stress from drought, weeds, disease and insectattacks.KEEP YOUR CROPS FROM BEING EATEN ALIVEThe best way to protect your crops from being eaten alive by pests isto put them on a balanced diet. Insects and diseases are opportunistswho find their hosts by "listening" for imbalance. A plant weakened bypoor soil conditions puts out a frequency recognized by insects asfood. An insect can't recognize the frequency of a healthy planthowever, and will pass it up for an unhealthy one every time.According to one of the nation's leading biologists, Dr. Bruce Tanio,"If you balance the nutrition in the plant no insect in the world willattack that plant."FEED THE SOIL AND ALLOW THE SOIL TO FEED THE PLANTRecent studies have shown that farmers who use biological fertilizeramendments to feed the soil and "allow the soil to feed the plant"routinely reduce the amount of herbicides and pesticides they apply by10% or more per acre the first season and 30% per acre over threeyears -- without losing yield. In many cases, with balanced plantnutrition, yields have actually increased. Some growers have alsoreported reductions as high as 50%.At $10.50 an acre that's $5,250 in additional profit on a five-hundredacre farm!
Thursday, 7 August 2008
7 Simple Strategies to Save BIG Money on Input Costs
Are You Still Fuming Over the High Cost of Fuel and Fertilizer?
Tuesday, 10 June 2008
Reducing Farm Costs
Balancing a field's soil biology and chemistry decreases the need for chemicals because healthy, nutritionally balanced plants are more resistant to stress from drought, weeds, disease and insect attacks.
Keep Crops From Being Eaten Alive
The best way to protect your crops from being eaten alive by pests is to put them on a balanced diet. Insects and diseases are opportunists who find their hosts by "listening" for imbalance. A plant weakened by poor soil conditions puts out a frequency recognized by insects as food. An insect can't recognize the frequency of a healthy plant however, and will pass it up for an unhealthy one every time.
"If you balance the nutrition in the plant no insect in the world will attack that plant."
Feed The Soil So It Feeds The Plant
Farmers who use biological fertilizer amendments to feed the soil and "allow the soil to feed the plant" reduce the amount of herbicides and pesticides they apply over the years without losing yield. Yields commonly increase with balanced plant nutrition
For a free farm report, "7 Simple Strategies to Save Big Money on Inputs, this Season"
Keep Crops From Being Eaten Alive
The best way to protect your crops from being eaten alive by pests is to put them on a balanced diet. Insects and diseases are opportunists who find their hosts by "listening" for imbalance. A plant weakened by poor soil conditions puts out a frequency recognized by insects as food. An insect can't recognize the frequency of a healthy plant however, and will pass it up for an unhealthy one every time.
"If you balance the nutrition in the plant no insect in the world will attack that plant."
Feed The Soil So It Feeds The Plant
Farmers who use biological fertilizer amendments to feed the soil and "allow the soil to feed the plant" reduce the amount of herbicides and pesticides they apply over the years without losing yield. Yields commonly increase with balanced plant nutrition
For a free farm report, "7 Simple Strategies to Save Big Money on Inputs, this Season"
Thursday, 8 May 2008
IPM Quick Tips for Common Pests Posted
IPM Quick Tips for Common Pests Posted 
The University of California IPM Statewide Integrated Pest Management Program released several new titles in its "Quick Tips" series of references in April. The new fact sheets, which are available online, address a variety of insect and disease pests. Titles include "Mosquitoes," "Peach Leaf Curl," "Powdery Mildew," "Spider Mites" and "Thrips."
Posted: May 5, 2008
Survey Reveals Winter Honey Bee Losses
Survey Reveals Winter Honey Bee Losses
A survey of 19 percent of the bee colonies in the U.S., conducted by USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and the Apiary Inspectors of America, showed winter losses of more than 36 percent. The research was part of ARS efforts to find the cause of Colony Collapse Disorder. The level of bee losses attributed to Colony Collapse Disorder remained about the same as last year, with a little over one-third of those who lost bees reporting the disappearance of all adult bees from some colonies.
Posted: May 6, 2008
Report Examines Biofuel Effect on Biodiversity
Report Examines Biofuel Effect on Biodiversity (6th May 2008)
Increasing production of crops for biofuels is exacerbating agriculture's impact on biodiversity in many parts of the world, finds a new report by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. The report, "Biofuel and Global Biodiversity," is by Dr. Dennis Keeney and Claudia Nanninga and is available online. The paper includes case studies of three regions that have been growing much of the feedstock for biofuels around the world: the U.S., Brazil and Malaysia/Indonesia. The report found that in the U.S., increased corn planting is reducing the diversity of crop rotations and threatening wetlands and acreage set aside for conservation.
Food Service Contractor Pledges Support for Local, Sustainable Food
Food Service Contractor Pledges Support for Local, Sustainable Food
| Related ATTRA Publication: Bringing Local Food to Local Institutions |
Newton, Massachusetts based food service contractor Unidine became the first food service management organization servicing health care to commit their support for nutritious, local, sustainable food by signing Health Care Without Harm’s (HCWH) Food Service Contractor Pledge. The Pledge is a commitment which outlines steps the Food Service industry can take to support their client hospitals' interest in local sustainable food, and steps it will take as an organization to educate, track and report its progress on adoption of nutritious, local, sustainable food. Health Care Without Harm reports by supporting the Pledge Unidine commits to a framework to support local, sustainable food, such as sourcing of rBGH free dairy, working with local farmers and community based organizations to increase the availability of fresh local foods, support for labeling of genetically engineered foods, and annual reporting on their progress.
Posted: May 7, 2008
Crop Newsletter Now Online
Crop Newsletter Now Online 
The former printed newsletter, Integrated Crop Management (ICM) News, has been replaced with an online resource. Gerald Miller, director of Iowa State University Extension to Agriculture and Natural Resources, says the change will help subscribers stay informed about crop issues during the upcoming growing season. Iowa Ag Connection reports subscribers can choose to be notified about new articles daily or weekly. They can read articles online as well as print single articles or weekly compilations.
Posted: May 7, 2008
New Web Site Helps Maryland Farmers Exchange Products
New Web Site Helps Maryland Farmers Exchange Products 
AgTrader Exchange network is a new site developed by the Environmental Finance Center at University of Maryland to help farmers throughout the Chesapeake Bay region exchange products such as manure, compost, hay, fodder crops, fruits and vegetables, organics, equipment, livestock and more. All trades (purchases, sales and swaps) through the Web site are strictly between buyer and seller. You register first, then post products anytime, without having to fill out forms. Pricing and delivery are left up to buyer and seller to work out. American Agriculturalist reports the site also features a directory for businesses and a resource section showing a calendar of events and important news for the Chesapeake Bay ag community.
Posted: May 7, 2008
Grazing Management: A Key to Sustainable Pasture Health
Grazing Management: A Key to Sustainable Pasture Health
Introduction:
Grazing is a vital part of many farming systems. It can be a sustainable way to manage land and produce food, but it's important to do it right. Grazing management is the process of planning and implementing grazing practices that will protect the land and ensure the health of the pasture.
There are many factors to consider when developing a grazing management plan. These include the type of livestock, the climate, the soil, and the desired vegetation. Some of the key principles of grazing management include:
Rotational grazing: This involves moving livestock from one part of the pasture to another, allowing each area to rest and recover.
Appropriate stocking rates: This means not putting too many animals on the pasture, which can damage the land and lead to overgrazing.
Timing of grazing: Grazing should be done at the right time of year, when the vegetation is most nutritious.
Resting periods: Pastures need time to rest and recover between grazings.
Pasture assessment is an important part of grazing management. It helps to identify areas of the pasture that need attention, such as areas that are overgrazed or areas that are not getting enough use. There are a number of different ways to assess pasture health, including:
Visual assessment: This involves walking through the pasture and looking for signs of overgrazing or undergrazing.
Soil analysis: This can be used to assess the condition of the soil and to identify any nutrient deficiencies.
Vegetation analysis: This can be used to assess the diversity of the vegetation and to identify any invasive species.
Conclusion:
Grazing management is a complex but important part of sustainable land management. By following the principles of grazing management and regularly assessing pasture health, farmers can ensure that their pastures are healthy and productive for years to come.
#grazingmanagement #pastureassessment #sustainablelandmanagement #livestock #agriculture #environment #conservation
🐄 🌾 🌱 📑 💰 📈 📊 💹 🔱 ⚖️ 🌍 🌎 🌏
Learn more about grazing management from your local extension office or agricultural college.
Get involved in a local grazing management program.
Share this blog post with other farmers and ranchers.
How to Help Farmers Exchange Products to Save Money and Resources
How to Help Farmers Exchange Products to Save Money and Resources
Introduction:
Farmers are constantly looking for ways to save money and resources. One way to do this is to exchange products with other farmers. This can help farmers to reduce their reliance on outside suppliers, and it can also help them to get the products that they need at a lower cost.
There are a number of benefits to exchanging products between farmers. These benefits include:
Saving money. Farmers can save money by exchanging products with other farmers. This is because they can get the products that they need at a lower cost. For example, a farmer who produces manure can exchange it with a farmer who produces hay. This can save both farmers money, as they can avoid having to purchase the products that they need.
Reducing reliance on outside suppliers. Farmers can reduce their reliance on outside suppliers by exchanging products with other farmers. This can help them to be more self-sufficient and to have more control over their food supply. For example, a farmer who produces fruits and vegetables can exchange them with a farmer who produces livestock. This can help the first farmer to ensure that their livestock have a steady supply of food, and it can help the second farmer to get the fruits and vegetables that they need.
Building relationships. Exchanging products with other farmers can help to build relationships between farmers. This can be beneficial for both farmers, as they can learn from each other and share knowledge. For example, a farmer who is new to organic farming can exchange products with a farmer who has been practicing organic farming for many years. This can help the new farmer to learn about organic farming practices and to get the products that they need.
Here are some specific examples of products that farmers can exchange:
Manure and compost. Manure and compost are valuable resources for farmers. They can be used to improve soil health and to increase crop yields. For example, a farmer who produces manure can exchange it with a farmer who produces hay. This can help both farmers to improve their soil health and to increase their crop yields.
Hay and fodder crops. Hay and fodder crops are essential for feeding livestock. Farmers can exchange these products with each other to ensure that their livestock have a steady supply of food. For example, a farmer who produces hay can exchange it with a farmer who produces livestock. This can help both farmers to ensure that their livestock have a steady supply of food.
Fruits and vegetables. Fruits and vegetables are a valuable source of nutrients. Farmers can exchange these products with each other to get the fruits and vegetables that they need. For example, a farmer who produces fruits and vegetables can exchange them with a farmer who produces livestock. This can help both farmers to get the nutrients that they need.
Organics. Organic products are becoming increasingly popular. Farmers can exchange these products with each other to get the organic products that they need. For example, a farmer who produces organic fruits and vegetables can exchange them with a farmer who produces organic livestock feed. This can help both farmers to get the organic products that they need.
Equipment. Farmers often need to use specialized equipment. Farmers can exchange equipment with each other to get the equipment that they need without having to purchase it. For example, a farmer who owns a tractor can exchange it with a farmer who owns a combine harvester. This can help both farmers to get the equipment that they need.
Livestock. Livestock can be a valuable asset for farmers. Farmers can exchange livestock with each other to improve their herd or flock. For example, a farmer who owns a dairy cow can exchange it with a farmer who owns a bull. This can help both farmers to improve their herd.
Conclusion:
Exchanging products between farmers is a great way to save money and resources. It is also a great way to build relationships between farmers and to learn from each other. If you are a farmer, I encourage you to consider exchanging products with other farmers in your area.
#farmersexchange #productexchange #savemoney #resources #selfsufficient #foodsupply #relationships #knowledge #learning #fruitsandvegetables #organics #equipment #livestock #sustainability #climatechange #environment #zerowaste
🐄 🌾 🌱 📑 💰 📈 📊 💹 🔱 ⚖️ 🌍 🌎 🌏
Find a local farmers' exchange in your area.
Use an online platform to exchange products with other farmers.
Start exchanging products with other farmers in your community.
Excellence in Conservation: How to Make a Difference / Excellence in Conservation: Tips for Protecting Our Natural Resources)
Excellence in Conservation: How to Make a Difference / Excellence in Conservation: Tips for Protecting Our Natural Resources)
Introduction:
Conservation is the practice of protecting and preserving natural resources. It is an important practice because it helps to ensure that future generations will have access to the same natural resources that we have today.
There are many different ways to contribute to conservation. Some people volunteer their time to help protect wildlife or clean up their local environment. Others donate money to conservation organizations. Still others make changes to their own lifestyles in order to reduce their impact on the environment.
No matter how you choose to contribute, you can make a difference in the fight to conserve our natural resources.
Excellence in conservation is something that we can all achieve. By setting goals, getting involved, making changes in our own lives, and educating others, we can all help to protect our natural resources for future generations.
Here are some tips on how to achieve excellence in conservation:
Set goals. What do you want to achieve in terms of conservation? Do you want to reduce your carbon footprint? Do you want to help protect a specific species of wildlife? Once you know what you want to achieve, you can start to develop a plan to reach your goals.
Get involved. There are many organizations that are working to conserve our natural resources. You can get involved by volunteering your time, donating money, or simply spreading the word about conservation.
Make changes in your own life. There are many small changes that you can make in your own life to reduce your impact on the environment. For example, you can recycle, compost, and conserve water.
Educate others. One of the best ways to promote conservation is to educate others about the importance of protecting our natural resources. You can talk to your friends and family about conservation, or you can volunteer to teach conservation classes.
Here are some additional tips that can help you to achieve excellence in conservation:
Do your research. Learn as much as you can about the different ways to conserve our natural resources. There are many resources available online and in libraries.
Be creative. There are many different ways to conserve our natural resources. Don't be afraid to think outside the box and come up with your own ideas.
Be persistent. Conservation is an ongoing process. Don't get discouraged if you don't see results immediately. Keep working at it, and you will eventually make a difference.
Conclusion:
Excellence in conservation is something that we can all achieve. By setting goals, getting involved, making changes in our own lives, and educating others, we can all help to protect our natural resources for future generations.
#conservation #excellence #naturalresources #environment #climatechange #sustainability #volunteering #education #tips #advice #resources
🌳 🐿 🦋 💧 ♻️ 🌎 🌍 🌏
Set some goals for yourself in terms of conservation.
Get involved in a conservation organization.
Make some changes in your own life to reduce your impact on the environment.
Educate others about the importance of conservation.
How to Help Producers Manage Cattle Feed Costs in a Sustainable Way / How to Reduce Cattle Feed Costs and Protect the Environment
How to Help Producers Manage Cattle Feed Costs in a Sustainable Way / How to Reduce Cattle Feed Costs and Protect the Environment
Introduction:
Cattle feed is one of the most significant costs for cattle producers. In recent years, the price of cattle feed has been on the rise, due to factors such as drought, crop failures, and increased demand for livestock products. This has put a strain on the profitability of many cattle operations.
However, there are a number of things that producers can do to help manage their cattle feed costs in a sustainable way. By following these tips, producers can save money on feed, while also helping to protect the environment.
1. Choose the right feed for your cattle.
The first step to managing cattle feed costs is to choose the right feed for your cattle. There are a variety of different types of feed available, and each type has its own advantages and disadvantages. Some factors to consider when choosing feed include the type of cattle you are raising, their age, and their production goals.
For example, if you are raising beef cattle, you will need to choose a feed that is high in protein. However, if you are raising dairy cattle, you will need to choose a feed that is high in energy.
2. Use byproducts and commodities.
Byproducts and commodities can be a great way to reduce feed costs. These products are often available at a lower cost than traditional feed, and they can still provide your cattle with the nutrients they need. Some examples of byproducts and commodities that can be used in cattle feed include wheat middlings, corn gluten feed, and soybean meal.
3. Contract for feed in advance.
If you know that you will need a certain amount of feed in the future, you can contract for it in advance. This can help you to lock in a lower price for feed, and it can also help you to avoid unexpected price increases.
4. Feed your cattle efficiently.
There are a number of things that you can do to feed your cattle more efficiently. For example, you can make sure that your cattle are eating at the right time of day, and that they are not wasting feed. You can also try to reduce the amount of waste that is produced by your cattle.
5. Consider alternative feeding methods.
There are a number of alternative feeding methods that can be used to reduce feed costs. For example, you can try grazing your cattle on pasture, or you can use a system of rotational grazing. You can also consider using a feedlot system, which can be more efficient than traditional feeding methods.
6. Use technology to your advantage.
There are a number of technological tools that can help you to manage your cattle feed costs. For example, you can use software to track your feed costs and to identify areas where you can save money. You can also use sensors to monitor your cattle's feed intake and to ensure that they are getting the nutrients they need.
7. Get involved in the sustainable agriculture movement.
There are a number of organizations that are working to promote sustainable agriculture. By getting involved in these organizations, you can learn more about sustainable feeding practices and you can help to support the movement.
Conclusion:
By following these tips, producers can help to manage their cattle feed costs in a sustainable way. By saving money on feed, producers can improve their profitability, while also helping to protect the environment.
#sustainableagriculture #cattlefeed #feedcosts #management #efficiency #alternativefeedingmethods #environment #climatechange #costsavings #efficiency #management #nutrition #feeding #tips #advice #resources #education #technology
🐄 🌾 🌱 📑 💰 📈 📊 💹 🔱 ⚖️
Learn more about sustainable feeding practices by visiting the website of the Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) program.
Get involved in the sustainable agriculture movement by joining an organization like the American Grassfed Association or the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.
Share this blog post with other cattle producers who are interested in saving money on feed and protecting the environment.
Conservation Tillage Monitored Via Satellite
Conservation Tillage Monitored Via Satellite
The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is using satellites to determine how much acreage is being farmed using conservation tillage. A group of scientists and researchers have created and evaluated conservation tillage maps using Landsat TM 5 imagery. This satellite mapping technique shows promise for streamlining national efforts to monitor changes in conservation tillage adoption over time. The method may be able to evaluate the efficacy of conservation tillage placement, and reduce the need for time-consuming field surveys to ensure compliance with federal cost-sharing programs.
Related ATTRA Publication: Conservation Tillage
The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is using satellites to determine how much acreage is being farmed using conservation tillage. A group of scientists and researchers have created and evaluated conservation tillage maps using Landsat TM 5 imagery. This satellite mapping technique shows promise for streamlining national efforts to monitor changes in conservation tillage adoption over time. The method may be able to evaluate the efficacy of conservation tillage placement, and reduce the need for time-consuming field surveys to ensure compliance with federal cost-sharing programs.
Related ATTRA Publication: Conservation Tillage
IPM Quick Tips for Common Pests
IPM Quick Tips for Common Pests
The University of California IPM Statewide Integrated Pest Management Program released several new titles in its "Quick Tips" series of references in April. The new fact sheets, which are available online, address a variety of insect and disease pests. Titles include "Mosquitoes," "Peach Leaf Curl," "Powdery Mildew," "Spider Mites" and "Thrips."
The University of California IPM Statewide Integrated Pest Management Program released several new titles in its "Quick Tips" series of references in April. The new fact sheets, which are available online, address a variety of insect and disease pests. Titles include "Mosquitoes," "Peach Leaf Curl," "Powdery Mildew," "Spider Mites" and "Thrips."
Ohio State University Releases Organic Transition Guide
Ohio State University Releases Organic Transition Guide
Ohio State University's Organic Food and Farming Education and Research (OFFER) Program has released A Transition Guide to Certified Organic Crop Management, says Ohio Ag Connection. The 74-page guide is designed to explain the rules and realities of organic farming of grains, fruits and vegetables. Topics include steps in the organic certification process, plus Midwest certification agencies; Seed, land use, planting stock, crop rotation and harvesting/handling standards; Pest, weed, disease, crop nutrient and soil fertility management standards; Exemptions, exclusions, record keeping, and allowed and prohibited substances. Copies are $15 each, with checks made payable to OSU/OFFER sent to OFFER Program, 201 Thorne Hall, OSU/OARDC, 1680 Madison Ave., Wooster, OH 44691.
Related ATTRA Publication: National Organic Program Compliance Checklist for Producers
Ohio State University's Organic Food and Farming Education and Research (OFFER) Program has released A Transition Guide to Certified Organic Crop Management, says Ohio Ag Connection. The 74-page guide is designed to explain the rules and realities of organic farming of grains, fruits and vegetables. Topics include steps in the organic certification process, plus Midwest certification agencies; Seed, land use, planting stock, crop rotation and harvesting/handling standards; Pest, weed, disease, crop nutrient and soil fertility management standards; Exemptions, exclusions, record keeping, and allowed and prohibited substances. Copies are $15 each, with checks made payable to OSU/OFFER sent to OFFER Program, 201 Thorne Hall, OSU/OARDC, 1680 Madison Ave., Wooster, OH 44691.
Related ATTRA Publication: National Organic Program Compliance Checklist for Producers
Industrial Farm Animal Production Report Released
Industrial Farm Animal Production Report Released
Beginning in 2006, The Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production (PCIFAP) undertook an exhaustive examination on the impacts to humans, animals and the environment of intensive food animal production. Areas studied by the Commission included the spread of zoonotic diseases and other public health threats, environmental degradation, animal welfare concerns, and socioeconomic effects on rural communities. The final report, Putting Meat on The Table: Industrial Farm Animal Production in America (PDF/6.2MB) is now available. The report offers practical recommendations designed to address public health, environmental, and animal welfare concerns; ensure a safe, abundant food supply; and foster sustainable and economically viable models of animal agriculture.
Beginning in 2006, The Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production (PCIFAP) undertook an exhaustive examination on the impacts to humans, animals and the environment of intensive food animal production. Areas studied by the Commission included the spread of zoonotic diseases and other public health threats, environmental degradation, animal welfare concerns, and socioeconomic effects on rural communities. The final report, Putting Meat on The Table: Industrial Farm Animal Production in America (PDF/6.2MB) is now available. The report offers practical recommendations designed to address public health, environmental, and animal welfare concerns; ensure a safe, abundant food supply; and foster sustainable and economically viable models of animal agriculture.
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
Intelligent Design? Utilities Embrace An Efficiency Evolution
Sent to you by vetkasi via Google Reader:
via Worldwatch Institute - China Watch, Food, Renewable Energy, News, Natural Disasters & Peacemaking, e2 - Eye on Earth, News Story, Commentary by Ben Block on 4/3/08
Kara Mertz tries to run an eco-conscious home. She buys wind energy credits to offset her electricity usage, and she owns a solar water heater. But her carbon footprint is still significant, thanks in part to the 20 gadgets her teenage son is constantly recharging. Fortunately for Mertz, her hometown of Boulder, Colorado may soon have options that allow far greater control over energy use. Last month, power company Xcel Energy selected Boulder to become the world's first "Smart Grid City," an experiment in one of the latest efficiency technologies. If the new system generates enough savings to rationalize the high implementation cost, a revolution of energy-efficient power grids and improved renewable energy use may sweep the world.
"How much of [my son's electronics] are sucking off the grid and we don't realize it?" said Mertz, who serves as assistant to the city manager. "If all of a sudden we look at where money is going, it's very enlightening."
Grid of the Future
Smart grids rely on advanced metering systems to form a direct connection between residents and power companies. Based on a home's average electricity use, the meters calculate the next day's expected electric bill, identify how much power various appliances require, and provide homeowners with options to reduce their energy costs. The homeowner can then, for example, turn off the pool heater when electricity is most expensive, or use air conditioning when electricity is cheapest - making it possible to coast through the "peak" hours of high electricity demand.
The advanced meters also tell utility companies as soon as a power outage occurs. This instantaneous information allows the utility to address problems faster and prevent massive blackouts by rerouting electricity around the grid's troubled areas.
"One aspect [of a smart grid] is that it can help promote energy efficiency; another is it can help improve reliability...it's multi-dimensional," said Don Von Dollen, a smart grid program manager at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) in Palo Alto, California. EPRI estimates that power outages and power quality disturbances alone cost U.S. businesses more than $120 billion a year.
The "grid of the future" may also fuel an increase in renewable energy demand. Currently, wind turbines or solar panels generally feed into the grid only when the wind blows or the sun shines. But with smart grids, a utility may be able to "turn off" natural gas or coal-fired power plants at times when renewably sourced energy is available-and re-route the power, Von Dollen explained. This is much more efficient for the power companies, he said.
For years, energy-efficiency education campaigns have struggled to motivate widespread reductions in energy use. Smart grids, in contrast, offer a way for consumers to directly realize the economic benefits of efficiency, potentially spurring greater action. To research the effects of smart grids on consumer purchasing behavior and energy use, Xcel Energy will collaborate with the University of Colorado at Boulder. "It's a case study of such an important environmental aspect," said Alison Peters, managing director of the university's Deming Center for Entrepreneurship.
The Challenge Ahead
Minnesota-based Xcel Energy selected Boulder for its pilot initiative due to the town's geographic isolation, population size, and technologically savvy and environmentally conscious residents. In recent years, Boulder has ratified the Kyoto Protocol, passed America's first city-wide carbon tax, and even purchased the URL http://www.environmentalaffairs.com/ to link to the municipality's Web site.
City officials are hoping the Smart Grid project will help Boulder meet its carbon-cutting goals. The city's 2006 greenhouse gas emissions inventory showed an increase in emissions over 2005, with as much as 61 percent of the total coming from electricity generation. "We love being the guinea pig," Mertz said. "There's a critical mass of people in this community who are interested in how they're using their energy."
Xcel's $100 million experiment in Boulder is the first city-wide showcase of the various smart grid technologies now available. In California and Texas, power companies are installing certain elements of smart grid technologies, such as updating millions of meters. Both states forced the changes and are compensating utilities for some of the immediate costs. The price of converting only portions of California residents' meters is estimated at $3 billion.
"Just changing millions of meters is a huge job," said Tom Nelson with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who standardizes electricity meters. "It's not just changing out the meter. They have to communicate which meter is at which house for the billing department."
Other U.S. states and some parts of Europe are also developing smart grids. "A lot of other states are watching what goes on in Texas and California to see if they should follow them or learn from them," Von Dollen said. "There's a greater urgency within Europe than there is in the U.S. But as far as deployments, the U.S. is a little farther ahead."
According to Kurt Yeager, director of the Galvin Electricity Initiative, a campaign to improve the U.S. grid system, despite incentives provided in the recent energy bill, more government involvement is needed at the federal level. "The biggest impediment to the smart electric grid transition is neither technical nor economic," Yeager told a Congressional committee last year. "Instead, the transition is limited today by obsolete regulatory barriers and disincentives that echo from an earlier era."
In 2007, carbon dioxide emissions from U.S. power plants jumped 2.9 percent, the greatest single-year increase since 1988. They have risen 11.7 percent since 1997 as the demand for electricity continues to rise, according to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency data.
Ben Block is a staff writer at the Worldwatch Institute who covers everything environmental for Eye on Earth. He can be reached at bblock@worldwatch.org.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Worldwatch Institute - China Watch, Food, Renewable Energy, News, Natural Disasters & Peacemaking, e2 - Eye on Earth, News Story, Commentary using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
More Companies Discontinuing Farm Animal Confinement
Sent to you by vetkasi via Google Reader:
via Worldwatch Institute - China Watch, Food, Renewable Energy, News, Natural Disasters & Peacemaking, e2 - Eye on Earth, News Story, Commentary by Ben Block on 4/7/08
More companies around the world are adjusting their farm-animal confinement policies and requesting clarification of consumer labels to reflect these changes. The moves come largely in response to U.S. voter-led initiatives and the implementation of farm policy reforms in the European Union.
Animal confinement - forcing dense populations of chickens, pigs, or young cattle into cages, crates, or tight pens to more efficiently utilize farm space - is a common practice in the United States, Europe, and increasingly the developing world. Led by growth in China, Brazil, and India, industrial livestock production has grown at twice the rate of traditional forms of animal husbandry, according to a United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization report. The World Society for the Protection of Animals expects factory farming in those countries to "explode," placing billions more animals into confinement.
Growing public awareness of the environmental, public health, and animal welfare challenges associated with animal confinement has lead several major grocery stores, fast food chains, and meat producers to phase out some of these practices. U.S. companies that have responded to consumer concern in recent years include Safeway, North America's third largest grocery retailer; leading pork producer Smithfield Foods; and hamburger giant Burger King.
Mounting legislation is forcing companies to curtail confinement as well. The E.U. voted to ban veal cages, breeding pig crates, and windowless "battery cages" for hens, and the laws first went into effect last year. A campaign is now under way in the largest U.S. agricultural state, California, to hold an animal welfare referendum during the November election. A handful of other U.S. states have passed bans on veal and pregnant sow crates, but the California initiative would make it the first to outlaw all three confinement practices.
"There's a big ripple effect. These laws...send a signal to industry all across the country that accelerates progress nationwide," said Paul Shapiro, senior director of the factory farming campaign with the Humane Society of the United States. The Humane Society has been organizing several of the state ballot initiatives and pressuring companies to change their practices. "The problem isn't persuading Americans that crates are inhumane. The problem is getting bills through...agricultural committees that kill [the bills]."
At a time when 73 percent of emerging human diseases are derived from animals, placing farm animals in constant close contact has led to bacterial resistance and other health concerns. Concentrated animal waste can pollute waterways with high nitrogen and phosphorus loads, and both manure and livestock release methane, a greenhouse gas more potent than carbon dioxide. Close confinement can interfere with natural animal tendencies as well. "It's the lack of normal behavior in confinement that I find most disturbing: chickens pecking at each other, pigs gnawing on cages," said Alan Goldberg, a professor of toxicology at Johns Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health.
Businesses that oppose animal confinement have requested that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) establish a "naturally raised" label for meat and other animal products, to differentiate from the current "natural" label, which they say is misleading. Chipotle Mexican Grill, the country's largest restaurant seller of naturally raised meat, is among businesses that note that while "natural" addresses how the meat is processed, it does not provide information on how the animals are raised, such as whether they are confined.
The "naturally raised" label that is currently being proposed, however, refers mainly to how an animal is fed or medicated, and would still allow farms to utilize conventional confinement operations. Thousands of organic food companies and consumer advocates have submitted complaints that the label would be deceptive, which the USDA is now reviewing. "Review of consumer research and comments indicate that the prohibited use of antibiotics, growth promotants, and animal by-products are the main factors consumers associate with meat and meat products from livestock they perceive as naturally raised," said Martin O'Connor, chief of the agency's standards, analysis, and technology branch in their marketing service's livestock program, in a presentation he delivered last year to the meat industry. O'Connor said the agency should announce a decision by August 1.
To address the many concerns associated with factory farming, including confinement, the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production will release suggested changes at the end of this month. Although the commission is focused on U.S. industries, as meat consumption increases internationally and as industrialized countries import more livestock from the developing world, the report could have implications for shaping sustainable animal welfare policies worldwide, said Emily McVey, the commission's science advisor.
"More of our food is coming from other parts of the globe: Asia and South America," said Michael Blackwell, a member of the commission and former U.S. chief veterinarian. "Better [U.S.] public policy is needed to improve other sources from around the world."
Ben Block is a staff writer at the Worldwatch Institute who covers everything environmental for Eye on Earth. He can be reached at bblock@worldwatch.org.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Worldwatch Institute - China Watch, Food, Renewable Energy, News, Natural Disasters & Peacemaking, e2 - Eye on Earth, News Story, Commentary using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Wind Power Growth Blows Past Projections
Sent to you by vetkasi via Google Reader:
via Worldwatch Institute - China Watch, Food, Renewable Energy, News, Natural Disasters & Peacemaking, e2 - Eye on Earth, News Story, Commentary by Worldwatch Institute on 4/10/08
Washington, D.C.-Global wind power capacity rose 27 percent in 2007 to more than 94,100 megawatts, led by capacity additions in the European Union, the United States, and China, according to the latest Vital Sign Update from the Worldwatch Institute.
New wind installations were second only to natural gas in the United States as an additional source of power capacity and were the leading source of new capacity in the EU. In China, the estimated 3,449 megawatts of wind turbines added last year propelled China past the government's ambitious wind power target for 2010.
The addition of a record-breaking 5,244 megawatts of wind capacity in the United States in 2007-enough to power 4.5 million U.S. homes-was driven by the federal production tax credit and by renewable energy mandates in 25 states and the District of Columbia. The nation's wind capacity now totals 16,818 megawatts, second only to Germany. The production tax credit is set to expire at the end of this year. "If Congress acts quickly to extend the tax credit, the U.S. will likely pass Germany to lead the world in wind power within the next two years," according to Janet Sawin, a Worldwatch senior researcher and the author of the update.
Germany remains the world leader in wind power capacity, with almost 24 percent of the global total (22,247 megawatts), but it experienced a lackluster year in 2007. Still, renewable energy resources now generate more than 14 percent of Germany's electricity needs, with about half of this coming from wind. Spain led Europe in new installations in 2007, now ranking third worldwide in total wind capacity (15,145 megawatts). France, Italy, Portugal, and the United Kingdom all experienced significant growth last year as well. In all, EU wind power capacity rose 18 percent in 2007, and the region is home to 60 percent of global installed capacity.
China was the biggest surprise in 2007. Barely in the wind business three years ago, China trailed only the United States and Spain in new wind installations in 2007, and ranked fifth in total installed capacity (6,050 megawatts). However, an estimated one-fourth of this capacity remains unconnected to the grid due to planning problems.
This explosive growth occurred amidst a backdrop of serious turbine shortages, a challenge that is expected to be ameliorated sometime in 2009. Despite higher costs due to turbine shortages, rising material costs, and increased manufacturing profitability, wind power remains competitive with new natural gas plants, and all conventional power plants have seen similar construction-cost increases. Wind power will become increasingly competitive with coal as more countries put a commodity price on carbon.
The global wind market was worth an estimated $36 billion in 2007, accounting for almost half of all investment in new renewable electric and heating capacity. As many as 200,000 people are now employed in the wind industry worldwide. These numbers will only rise in the coming years as the EU seeks to meet aggressive 2020 targets for renewables and as the United States, China, and other nations realize their enormous potential for wind power.
"The wind industry has consistently blown by past projections," says Sawin, "and it will likely continue to do so for years to come."
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Worldwatch Institute - China Watch, Food, Renewable Energy, News, Natural Disasters & Peacemaking, e2 - Eye on Earth, News Story, Commentary using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Can Amazonian Beef Be Sustainable?
Sent to you by vetkasi via Google Reader:
via Worldwatch Institute - China Watch, Food, Renewable Energy, News, Natural Disasters & Peacemaking, e2 - Eye on Earth, News Story, Commentary by Ben Block on 4/11/08
The second article in a three-part series exploring the growing pressures facing the Amazon forest and its people. Read part one, "In Brazil, Violence Looms at the Forest Edge".
One of Brazil's largest beef-export companies is expanding its Amazon operations, thanks in part to funding from the World Bank's private sector arm, the International Finance Corporation. The IFC says its investment is part of an historic effort to make cattle ranching in the region more sustainable, but many environmentalists are skeptical.
The $90 million investment will help Bertin Ltda., Brazil's leading beef and hide processor, expand its slaughterhouse in the southern Amazonian state of Pará-an area marred by illegal deforestation and ranch expansions, some of which have turned violent in recent years. To ensure that the cattle are not raised on illegally acquired land and without harm to the forest, Bertin has agreed to demand environmental permits for each lot of livestock that enters the facility.
"This will result in more efficient use of pasture land, and ultimately raise suppliers' income and reduce pressure on critical forest resources," said Karina Manasseh, an IFC spokeswoman.
Environmentalists, however, have raised concerns that the project lacks transparency and that the investment will only worsen deforestation, exploitative labor, greenhouse gas emissions, and illegal land grabbing. The IFC has acknowledged that these issues are potentially problematic with Bertin's operations, but it says the new system will prohibit the processing of cattle purchased from ranches that do not follow the strict regulations.
The debate comes as Brazil's livestock industry is booming, especially in the Amazon. In 2003, Brazil became the world's largest exporter of beef, and second in overall beef production according to a report from Amigos da Terra, the Brazilian affiliate of Friends of the Earth. Ten million Amazonian cattle were slaughtered last year, 46 percent more than during 2004.
The growth in global demand for beef was the primary cause of a 60 percent increase in deforestation during the later months of 2007. And as the ranches have expanded over the past decade, forest clearings contributed between 9 and 12 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions, the Amigos da Terra report said.
Bertin's ability to monitor whether its suppliers comply with the IFC's environmental and labor criteria is dependent on an internal tracking system that the slaughterhouse will administer. A pilot project has begun that will include about 500 ranchers, but it is not yet clear how Bertin will ensure that each ranch is accurately disclosing the origins of its cattle, including how and where it was raised.
Critics of the IFC scheme say it will be near impossible to determine whether ranchers are selling cattle raised on sustainable pastures. "Bertin has many potential suppliers of beef; it's very difficult to keep track of all these small ranchers, even the big ones," said Robert Goodland, a former World Bank advisor and now a senior fellow at the World Resources Institute. "And Bertin doesn't really want to check up too thoroughly, otherwise it wouldn't be able to get all the beef it needs. So there's no incentive to follow the law."
Amigos da Terra director Roberto Smeraldi also criticized the IFC investment, saying the sites chosen for the Bertin project's environmental assessment did not accurately reflect the potentially wide-sweeping damage to the region that the expanded operation could bring. "[The IFC] cannot just have this type of superficial approach to what's the end use of their money when...you have all sorts of issues of legality for the environment, labor rights, land tenure," Smeraldi said.
Daniel Nepstad, an ecologist with the U.S.-based Woods Hole Research Center, disagrees. Nepstad is organizing the sustainable purchasing operations for Bertin through the Amazon Institute for Environmental Research, and he said the slaughterhouse could easily have found non-IFC funding. But Bertin opted to follow the IFC guidelines to better position itself as a responsible producer in a competitive global market, Nepstad said. "Capital for this company is insignificant."
Nepstad says the project will ultimately force ranchers who follow illegal practices to sell their cattle to slaughterhouses that are located farther away, and that often offer lower compensation, than Betin's operation. He says this will provide further incentives for ranchers to comply with the IFC's and other guidelines.
Yet in the Amazon, as elsewhere, it may still cost more to play by the rules. If ranchers want to convert already-cleared land into pasture, this requires the use of fertilizer and significant water resources, at a price tag four times higher than if they were to illegally clear new land. "It's cheaper to deforest new areas than to invest in recuperating," Smeraldi said.
Nepstad said proper incentives need to be made available to convince ranchers to stop deforestation, such as national or international conservation funds. "We need to make it viable for land owners to legalize their operations," he said.
Ben Block is a staff writer at the Worldwatch Institute who covers everything environmental for Eye on Earth. He can be reached at bblock@worldwatch.org.
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Worldwatch Institute - China Watch, Food, Renewable Energy, News, Natural Disasters & Peacemaking, e2 - Eye on Earth, News Story, Commentary using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Tuesday, 8 April 2008
Pursuing Conservation Tillage Systems - George Kuepper (2001)
Nitrogen & Phosphorus Removal
Biological Nitrogen Removal
Nitrogen appears in organic wastes in various forms. In wastewater, four types of nitrogen are common: organic nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, nitrite nitrogen, and nitrate nitrogen. These different forms constitute the total nitrogen content. The predominant forms of nitrogen in wastewater are organic nitrogen and ammonia (NH3). Organic nitrogen is converted to ammonia in the first step of the nitrogen cycle. In order to remove nitrogen from wastewater, the ammonia must be oxidized to nitrate (NO3). This process is commonly referred to as nitrification. An oxic environment must be maintained for a sufficient period of time to promote nitrification.At the Water Reclamation Facility, oxic conditions are maintained by a number of rotor surface aerators. In the presence of dissolved oxygen, the microorganisms convert stored BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) to CO2, water, and increased cell mass. Biological nitrification occurs, producing nitrite in an intermediate step and ultimately producing nitrate. Following nitrification, nitrogen can be removed from the wastewater by reducing the nitrate to nitrogen gas (N2), which is released to the atmosphere. This process is commonly referred to as denitrification. Denitrification requires anoxic conditions, as well as an organic carbon source, to proceed. Introducing an anoxic zone into the flow scheme provides for denitrification of nitrate. In this zone, operated with no dissolved oxygen (DO), the endogenous oxygen demand of mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) plus the carryover of BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) from the anaerobic zone causes denitrification of the nitrate produced in the aerobic zone. During anoxic conditions, dissolved oxygen is not available to the microorganisms for respiration. Because of this, the oxygen molecules are stripped from the nitrate, causing the production of nitrogen gas(N2) . Carbon dioxide and water are also produced in the process, which results from the degradation of BOD. In addition, a portion of the alkalinity consumed during the nitrification process is restored through the denitrification process. When the mixed liquor flows to the secondary anoxic zones, there will be a relatively small concentration of extra cellular BOD in the wastewater. However, denitrification will still proceed since the microorganisms utilize internal storage products to reduce nitrate (endogenous denitrification).
Biological Phosphorous Removal
Phosphorus is an essential element in the metabolism of organic organisms. A minimal concentration is necessary to achieve optimum operation of biological treatment systems. The BioDenipho process incorporates anaerobic selector technology to promote biological phosphorous removal from the wastewater. It combines the flexibility and energy efficiency of the BioDenitro Process with the advantages offered by an anaerobic selector. This results in a highly-efficient Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) system. A three-stage anaerobic selector is incorporated prior to the distribution chamber. The anaerobic residence time is approximately 3 hours based on a flow of 3.0 MGD for U.F. Water Reclamation Facility. This is not long enough to promote the buildup of sulfides or other noxious products associated with anaerobic treatment processes. Each stage of the anaerobic selector contains a submerged mixer designed to provide gentle agitation of the mixed liquor while minimizing turbulence at the liquid surface. The mixer is driven by a gear-reduced, waterproof submerged motor. Aeration of the mixed liquor in the oxidation ditch can be provided in a number of ways. The most common method is to intensely agitate the surface of the liquid, which is open to the atmosphere, with a large brush aerator. There are many variations in the type of equipment employed; however, all aeration systems have the common purpose of vigorously mixing an oxygen-containing gas with the mixed liquor. Submersible mixers are used in the anaerobic zones, oxidation ditches and secondary anoxic zone. Maxi-rotors are used for aeration in the oxidation ditches. Centrifugal pumps are used for return activated sludge pumping. The anaerobic selector separates activated sludge metabolism into two steps: BOD uptake and BOD oxidation. The return activated sludge (RAS) enters the anaerobic selector, where it is mixed with influent wastewater. By passing the RAS and influent through the anaerobic selector, microorganisms capable of using stored polyphosphate as an energy source are proliferated. This energy is used to transport BOD into their cellular structure when free or combined forms of oxygen are not available for respiration. In the anaerobic zone, where substrate (BOD) concentration is high, the absence of oxygen causes the microorganisms to release the stored intracellular polyphosphates by decomposition to simple orthophosphates. The decomposition of polyphosphate to orthophosphate results in an increase of soluble phosphorus in the mixed liquor and also releases energy. The energy is used by the microorganisms to transport soluble BOD through the cell wall and store the soluble BOD inside the cell. Thus, the BOD concentration in the mixed liquor is reduced without the use of oxygen. Typically, the anaerobic selector is a three-or-four stage reactor equipped with submersible mixers to maintain biosolids in suspension. Return activated sludge (RAS) is discharged to the first stage selector, while raw influent is directed to the second stage. By staggering the RAS and raw wastewater influent location, the volatile fatty acids and soluble BOD, which promote phosphorous release, are not consumed during RAS denitrification. As an added benefit, the anaerobic selector inhibits the growth of filamentous bacteria that cause bulking sludge. In the subsequent anoxic phases, nitrates are present from prior oxic phases. Microorganisms capable of biological denitrification are favored in this phase. The carbon source required for biological denitrification is provided by the BOD in the influent wastewater; no additional carbon source is required. In the oxic phase, the organisms in the presence of dissolved oxygen convert the stored and extracellular BOD to CO2, water, and increased cell mass. A portion of the energy from this reaction then goes to recreating the intracellular polyphosphate using the orthophosphate released in the anaerobic zone. Since new cells are grown, the amount of phosphate removed from solution is greater than the amount previously dissolved in the anaerobic zone, thus affecting net phosphate removal. In the second stage, denitrified RAS is contacted with the influent wastewater in the absence of free or combined forms of oxygen. The anaerobic environment stresses the microorganisms, which begin to break down stored polyphosphate into orthophosphate. Throughout the remainder of the anaerobic selector, orthophosphate is expelled from the microorganisms releasing energy that is used to absorb BOD into their cells. In subsequent anoxic and oxic phases, the BOD is oxidized and the cells reproduce. In the oxic phases, these new cells, along with old cells, replenish the phosphorous reserved within their cells. This results in a net phosphorous uptake. Phosphorus removal from the wastewater is ultimately achieved by wasting phosphorous-rich sludge from the system. Phosphorous is removed from the system as a fixed biological material in the waste sludge. The amount of phosphorous in the sludge will be dependent upon the amount of BOD and phosphate in the influent and the volume of sludge produced.
Next: BioDenipho Phases
Nitrogen appears in organic wastes in various forms. In wastewater, four types of nitrogen are common: organic nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, nitrite nitrogen, and nitrate nitrogen. These different forms constitute the total nitrogen content. The predominant forms of nitrogen in wastewater are organic nitrogen and ammonia (NH3). Organic nitrogen is converted to ammonia in the first step of the nitrogen cycle. In order to remove nitrogen from wastewater, the ammonia must be oxidized to nitrate (NO3). This process is commonly referred to as nitrification. An oxic environment must be maintained for a sufficient period of time to promote nitrification.At the Water Reclamation Facility, oxic conditions are maintained by a number of rotor surface aerators. In the presence of dissolved oxygen, the microorganisms convert stored BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) to CO2, water, and increased cell mass. Biological nitrification occurs, producing nitrite in an intermediate step and ultimately producing nitrate. Following nitrification, nitrogen can be removed from the wastewater by reducing the nitrate to nitrogen gas (N2), which is released to the atmosphere. This process is commonly referred to as denitrification. Denitrification requires anoxic conditions, as well as an organic carbon source, to proceed. Introducing an anoxic zone into the flow scheme provides for denitrification of nitrate. In this zone, operated with no dissolved oxygen (DO), the endogenous oxygen demand of mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) plus the carryover of BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) from the anaerobic zone causes denitrification of the nitrate produced in the aerobic zone. During anoxic conditions, dissolved oxygen is not available to the microorganisms for respiration. Because of this, the oxygen molecules are stripped from the nitrate, causing the production of nitrogen gas(N2) . Carbon dioxide and water are also produced in the process, which results from the degradation of BOD. In addition, a portion of the alkalinity consumed during the nitrification process is restored through the denitrification process. When the mixed liquor flows to the secondary anoxic zones, there will be a relatively small concentration of extra cellular BOD in the wastewater. However, denitrification will still proceed since the microorganisms utilize internal storage products to reduce nitrate (endogenous denitrification).
Biological Phosphorous Removal
Phosphorus is an essential element in the metabolism of organic organisms. A minimal concentration is necessary to achieve optimum operation of biological treatment systems. The BioDenipho process incorporates anaerobic selector technology to promote biological phosphorous removal from the wastewater. It combines the flexibility and energy efficiency of the BioDenitro Process with the advantages offered by an anaerobic selector. This results in a highly-efficient Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) system. A three-stage anaerobic selector is incorporated prior to the distribution chamber. The anaerobic residence time is approximately 3 hours based on a flow of 3.0 MGD for U.F. Water Reclamation Facility. This is not long enough to promote the buildup of sulfides or other noxious products associated with anaerobic treatment processes. Each stage of the anaerobic selector contains a submerged mixer designed to provide gentle agitation of the mixed liquor while minimizing turbulence at the liquid surface. The mixer is driven by a gear-reduced, waterproof submerged motor. Aeration of the mixed liquor in the oxidation ditch can be provided in a number of ways. The most common method is to intensely agitate the surface of the liquid, which is open to the atmosphere, with a large brush aerator. There are many variations in the type of equipment employed; however, all aeration systems have the common purpose of vigorously mixing an oxygen-containing gas with the mixed liquor. Submersible mixers are used in the anaerobic zones, oxidation ditches and secondary anoxic zone. Maxi-rotors are used for aeration in the oxidation ditches. Centrifugal pumps are used for return activated sludge pumping. The anaerobic selector separates activated sludge metabolism into two steps: BOD uptake and BOD oxidation. The return activated sludge (RAS) enters the anaerobic selector, where it is mixed with influent wastewater. By passing the RAS and influent through the anaerobic selector, microorganisms capable of using stored polyphosphate as an energy source are proliferated. This energy is used to transport BOD into their cellular structure when free or combined forms of oxygen are not available for respiration. In the anaerobic zone, where substrate (BOD) concentration is high, the absence of oxygen causes the microorganisms to release the stored intracellular polyphosphates by decomposition to simple orthophosphates. The decomposition of polyphosphate to orthophosphate results in an increase of soluble phosphorus in the mixed liquor and also releases energy. The energy is used by the microorganisms to transport soluble BOD through the cell wall and store the soluble BOD inside the cell. Thus, the BOD concentration in the mixed liquor is reduced without the use of oxygen. Typically, the anaerobic selector is a three-or-four stage reactor equipped with submersible mixers to maintain biosolids in suspension. Return activated sludge (RAS) is discharged to the first stage selector, while raw influent is directed to the second stage. By staggering the RAS and raw wastewater influent location, the volatile fatty acids and soluble BOD, which promote phosphorous release, are not consumed during RAS denitrification. As an added benefit, the anaerobic selector inhibits the growth of filamentous bacteria that cause bulking sludge. In the subsequent anoxic phases, nitrates are present from prior oxic phases. Microorganisms capable of biological denitrification are favored in this phase. The carbon source required for biological denitrification is provided by the BOD in the influent wastewater; no additional carbon source is required. In the oxic phase, the organisms in the presence of dissolved oxygen convert the stored and extracellular BOD to CO2, water, and increased cell mass. A portion of the energy from this reaction then goes to recreating the intracellular polyphosphate using the orthophosphate released in the anaerobic zone. Since new cells are grown, the amount of phosphate removed from solution is greater than the amount previously dissolved in the anaerobic zone, thus affecting net phosphate removal. In the second stage, denitrified RAS is contacted with the influent wastewater in the absence of free or combined forms of oxygen. The anaerobic environment stresses the microorganisms, which begin to break down stored polyphosphate into orthophosphate. Throughout the remainder of the anaerobic selector, orthophosphate is expelled from the microorganisms releasing energy that is used to absorb BOD into their cells. In subsequent anoxic and oxic phases, the BOD is oxidized and the cells reproduce. In the oxic phases, these new cells, along with old cells, replenish the phosphorous reserved within their cells. This results in a net phosphorous uptake. Phosphorus removal from the wastewater is ultimately achieved by wasting phosphorous-rich sludge from the system. Phosphorous is removed from the system as a fixed biological material in the waste sludge. The amount of phosphorous in the sludge will be dependent upon the amount of BOD and phosphate in the influent and the volume of sludge produced.
Next: BioDenipho Phases
Friday, 29 February 2008
Whither the Grapes of Worth?
| |||||
| February 21, 2008
The Svalbard Global Seed Vault opened in Norway this week, providing a permafrost home for the genetic diversity of the world's food plants. According to the Norwegian Ministry of Agriculture and Food, the vault can store 4.5 million different seed samples, duplicating seed collections from genebanks around the world. Genetically modified organisms (GMO) are currently not allowed in the vault without special approval. Though the underground facility is fortified against global warming, French Chardonnay is not, and a non-GMO version could become a thing of the past if temperature trends continue. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is in unequivocal agreement that human-induced global warming will melt glaciers, elevate sea level, and disrupt existing weather patterns in the long run. Meanwhile, fluctuations are helping some wine producers. And with genetic engineers tinkering away, seasoned oenophiles and dedicated box wine consumers alike may one day praise Florida white. Wine grapes are particularly sensitive crops with narrow average temperature ranges for viable and good vintages. Traditional growing regions have become less able to sustain these ideal temperatures, triggering a great grape migration—the vines are creeping away from the equator, into regions once considered beyond the vintner's territory. The Pacific Northwest has already seen a boom, and the Wall Street Journal reported in 2007 on a shift of production into Canada. As the winters in British Columbia become less severe, the lessened risk of frost gives farmers a chance to plant higher value European varietals. According to a study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, climate simulations indicate that the United States could lose up to 81 percent of its premium production acreage by the end of the 21st century. The effects of climate change can also be felt on the palate. "Maybe 20 percent of the wine from California is now dealcoholized—not all of it, not every year, but the dirty little secret is that global warming is pushing up the sugar levels, pushing up the alcohol levels," said Michael Veseth, author of The Wine Economist blog, in a 2007 interview with Foreign Policy. Some producers in traditional wine regions hope biotechnology will allow them to circumvent the problems associated with rising temperature and erratic weather. Scientists recently sequenced the genome for pinot noir grapes, meaning a genetically modified breed might be in store. Many winegrowers and consumers contend that the terroir and local environment matter highly in the final taste of a wine, so genetic manipulation could be used to keep vines rooted in their traditional locations. For those growers and consumers who believe that the grape itself dominates the final taste, genetic manipulation opens the door to wider migration. Genetic changes might also help grapes fight off diseases, which is of particular interest to places like Florida, where wine grapes suffer from bacterial, fungal, and viral afflictions. Long before Gregor Mendel and his peapods, farmers were using processes of selection and crossbreeding to improve the quality of crops, but in modern times companies like Monsanto have taken breeding high tech. The first genetically engineered plant—tobacco—was field tested in Belgium in 1986. And ever since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration declared in 1992 that genetically engineered foods are "not inherently dangerous," exempting them from special regulation, GMOs have found their way into markets across the globe. Resistance and debate still rages over whether GM crops are dangerous to humans or regularly contaminate non-GM crops in the growth vicinity. French consumers have reached a general conclusion: They do not want any more genetically modified foods in their glasses or on their plates. According to a survey by the French Ministry for Ecology, 72 percent of the French "consider it 'important' to be able to consume products without genetically modified organisms." France recently filed a request with the European Union to formally ban the commercial use of Monsanto corn (MON 810), the only GM crop grown in the country. Yet some French farmers and seed companies fear the parliament will go too far in crafting a new law on GMOs. "Today there are 102 million hectares sown with GMO seeds around the world. What we fear is that if France rejects GMOs we will be left behind and be dependent on other countries technology," said Philippe Pinta, president of a French agriculture lobby, as quoted by Reuters. In the next few years, international policies on climate change and GMOs will directly affect where this market is headed. For now, traditional growers are left fretting about Canadian wines that consistently win competitions. | |||||
What can you tell me about organic parasite control in cattle?
S.M.
Missouri
Answer: I am pleased to provide you with information on organic parasite control in cattle.
Flies
Flies of concern may include members of the family Muscidae that includes house flies, stable flies, horn flies and face flies. Although certain flies favor barns or confinement settings and others are found more in pasture, some eat filth, others such blood and others feed on secretions, all flies reproduce rapidly and can cause trouble that it is worth the effort to prevent. The life cycle is complete metamorphosis: depending on conditions, fly eggs may hatch in a day. Fly larvae (maggots) pass through three larval instars and a pre-pupal stage within about a week, and adult flies begin laying eggs within a couple days.
These flies are pests because at a minimum they cause animals discomfort, and are estimated to reduce weight gain by 25% (18) and decrease milk production up to 15-30% (15) or even 40-60% (18). Flies can transmit all manner of diseases (2) including bacterial diseases such as cholera and anthrax, and eggs of parasitic worms (10). The threshold that indicates a high level of activity for stable flies is just 10 flies per animal. Other flies not discussed here include external parasites that live part of their breeding cycle on/in animals.
The most economic and practical method of controlling flies is to reduce their breeding. The most effective way of reducing fly breeding is to eliminate areas that provide fly habitat where larvae feed and develop in wet or moist manure and other decaying organic matter. Observe the area where flies are a problem and figure out where the flies are breeding. Different flies have slightly different life cycles for breeding as well as different habits for being pests on animals. All the other approaches listed below are complimentary, and will be most effective when used together with good sanitation.
Reduce fly breeding areas around barns and buildings
• Remove or move manure, bedding, waste and other sources of food for fly larvae. For most flies, the breeding cycle may range from 10 to 60 days (shorter in warm conditions and longer when the weather is cool). Move fresh manure, bedding and spilled feed and from barn areas every 2-3 days (10) if possible to break this breeding cycle.
• Keep animal barns and yards dry. Repair any leaky pipes promptly. Address any other sources of water that may help create areas that are ideal places for flies to lay eggs and their larvae (maggots) to develop. Clean drainage ditches. Cover silage.
• Keep drinking water fresh and clean. Dump water where it will be used by plants or dry quickly. Avoid creating places that stay soggy.
Keep flies out
• Ventilate barns to maintain good air circulation.
• Put up physical barriers such as screening on windows, and keep doors closed whenever it is practical.
Reduce Fly Breeding areas in Pasture
• Manage pastures using strategies such as rotational grazing to interrupt pest life cycles. Fly eggs, maggots, pupae and adults all die after a while.
• Disperse, break up and dry out manure paddies by dragging a harrowing. This is especially important early in the season before populations multiply.
• Encourage dung beetles by avoiding pesticides such as synthetic parasiticides (Ivermectin) or using them judiciously. Dung beetles break apart and incorporate fresh manure into the soil, eliminating breeding areas and thus reducing horn fly populations.
• Incorporate pastured poultry into your garden, pasture or farming system to eat fly larvae and help keep populations down. Both domesticated and wild birds in animal pastures, including chickens, ducks, geese, guinea hens, and cattle egrets will pick through paddies and eat fly eggs and larvae. Chickens are even adept at catching adult flies. Eggs or other poultry products may be an enterprise for farm income diversity.
• Compost organic materials using aerobic methods. A hot compost pile (where heat is generated by decomposition) will kill fly larvae, and presents an inhospitable place for adult flies to lay their eggs.
Fly traps: many possible designs and variations are allowed for use in organic production
• Indoor traps include sticky traps or fly tape. Place these near beams and walls so they do not catch bats, and away from any barn swallow nests. Pheromone traps may be more effective against certain species of flies.
• Outdoors-an inverted cone traps consist of a cone with a hole in the top that opens into a space enclosed with screening from which flies cannot escape. Smelly bait under the cone will attract flies so they fly up through the hole in the top of the cone into the enclosed space where they die. These traps should be placed in full sunlight, sheltered from strong winds, and within 6 feet of active breeding areas, such as at the ends of barns manure piles or calf hutches.
• Walk-through traps can help reduce flies—especially horn flies--on larger animals. Strips of canvas dislodge flies from animals’ backs and sides. Attracted to the light, they fly up and become trapped between two layers of screened mesh. Plans are available from various sources including ATTRA. Please note that some plans for walk-through fly traps recommend the use of treated lumber. Organic producers must find alternatives to using this prohibited material. Please see ATTRA’s publication entitled Organic Alternatives to Treated Lumber. Walk-though traps can be placed anywhere where animals must pass, such as the entrance to the milking barn, and to sources of water. While cattle may need to be trained to walk through such an unfamiliar space at first, they may later walk through to achieve its benefits even when it is freestanding in a pasture.
• Use bug zappers to kill adult flies. These are most effective when the bulbs are replaced frequently enough to keep the ultraviolet wavelength attractive to insects. Keep records of their date of installation; a light that appears all right to the human eye may not maintain that proper wavelength.
Biological control
• Recognize and encourage predators: Hister beetles are small, shiny black beetles that eat fly eggs—one beetle can eat as many as 24 eggs per day. Predatory mites also eat fly eggs and small maggots (15).
• Release fly parasites such as parasitic wasps. The Cornell website on biological notes the use of the parasitic wasp Muscidifurax raptor for control of the housefly Musca domestica and stable fly Stomoxy calcitrans, as well as different types of bacteria, fungi, and nematodes for flies. The wasp Muscidifurax raptor may be most effective in hot and humid conditions. Other wasps or mixtures of wasps may be more effective in other areas. Consult with an insectary or supplier of beneficial insects about which parasitic wasps are most appropriate for your species of fly, type of livestock and region. A supplier should also be able to provide recommendations on the best conditions, locations, frequencies, and numbers of releases. Remember to protect these beneficial insects from getting too hot, cold, wet or dry. Releases may be most effective when done weekly, and will probably need to be done every year because their numbers decline in winter.
The ATTRA publication Farmscaping to Enhance Biological Control includes a description on page 7 of birds and bats as insect eaters (biological control agents), and its Sources of More Information section includes sources of bat houses. Please see also the article (C ) that describes one person’s experience with using releases of parasitic wasps for fly control around goats. Release of predators is reported to be quite cost-effective.
• Provide habitat for bats, and birds such as purple martins (in the parts of the country where they live). Several species of bats and birds will inhabit appropriately constructed and well-placed nest boxes or other types of enhanced or artificial housing, and help by eating flies.
Allowed pesticides
Some pesticides are allowed for use in organic production a complement if other methods are unsuccessful or insufficient. Such materials should be used to complement, not substitute for other methods as listed above. Before you use any organic or biological pesticide, you must include it in your organic system plan that is approved by your organic certifier. Botanical and allowed synthetic pesticides may be found in various product formulations at feed stores and farm coops. Organic or natural materials often have inert ingredients or synthetic carriers that are not allowed. Botanical pesticides also need to be labeled for use on cattle or other animals where you intend to use them. All synthetic pesticides, including insecticidal ear tags, are prohibited in organic production. It is good to check with your veterinarian to see if she or he has any experience in administering organic pesticides in animal production.
Lice
Lice are classified into two main orders, described in more detail below. Both orders are fairly specific in their host relationships. They spend their life cycle on their host, and are spread by direct contact.
Chewing lice (Order Mallophaga) feed on feathers, hair, skin, and other external tissues of animals. They are often referred to as bird lice, because they thrive in bird feathers and may puncture the skin at the base of feathers. Bovicola bovis is the species that most often affects cattle.
Sucking lice (Order Anoplura) are blood-sucking insects that are found on mammals only, not on birds. Important parasites, they live on mammal blood and can transmit diseases. Legs are good at grasping the hair of their hosts. Their mouthparts have styles that pierce the skin and small hooks hold on while they are feeding. Please see the more detailed description of the life cycle of lice in the article (B) about lice on goats.
According to Organic Valley Co-op, in a webpage entitled Controlling External Parasites on the Organic Farm (5), important lice pests of cattle include one species of chewing louse and four species of sucking lice. They affect cattle by causing irritation, blood loss, loss of appetite, and decreased gain. Factors associated with infestations are close confinement and cold weather. Control measures are similar for chewing and sucking lice. The life cycle of cattle lice is about 24 (3) to 30 (12) days. Reproduction increases in winter, such that young dairy animals can be heavily infested with lice (3). Eggs hatch in about 7 days (10). Because most treatments will not control eggs, they will need to be repeated to kill the new eggs that hatch out. Check animals at 14-day intervals to determine if the infestation has been eliminated or brought under control (3).
Prevention is the most important. If an infestation appears, treat it promptly with the control options that are allowed in certified organic production. Most of the ideas below come from the Organic Valley reference (5).
Prevention:
• Prevent infestations by isolating and observing any new animals for three weeks.
• Prevent direct contact between healthy animals and those that are infested with lice.
• Provide good quality feed with appropriate mineral supplements. Offering minerals free-choice allows cattle to meet their own needs (5). Provide free choice kelp to young stock in winter to reduce lice (9).
• Reduce animal stress by following all the requirements in the organic standards, especially including access to the outdoors, pasture for ruminants, fresh air, direct sunlight, shade, shelter and the opportunity to exercise.
Treatment:
• A thin coat of vegetable oil in the affected area will suffocate insects (5) and can probably kill insect eggs. Another resource suggests raw linseed oil applied with a stiff brush (8). The application technique sounds effective for application. Since the effect of oil is physical, any natural vegetable oil should work and be allowed.
• Soap dissolves the waxy cuticle (5)(9) or exoskeleton of lice. Repeat in one week to get the lice from newly hatched eggs. Please note that this is not a recommendation for special lice shampoos. Any type of soap will harm insects. Just choose one that will not be too irritating to your animals.
• Liquid enzymes dissolve the insect’s exoskeletons (5). Be sure these are natural enzymes derived from non-pathogenic bacteria or fungi, or from edible, non-toxic plants, and not genetically modified (11)
• Diatomaceous earth has naturally pointed edges that pierce insects’ exoskeletons (5). Be sure to use natural, non-heated forms (11), not the type that is sold for pool filtration (5).
• Use garlic powder as a topical treatment and feed as a tincture. Garlic containa allicin that acts as an insect repellant and antimicrobial (5).
• Rub white hellebore root on the affected area, or make a liquid mix of 4 quarts boiling water and 4 oz. white hellebore and wash the animal’s effected parts when the mix has cooled down (7).
• Various other herbal preparations are described in (8) including pyrethrum powders; Essential oils such as anise, camphor, eucalyptus, pennyroyal, pine rosemary & sassafras: 1 part of each with 2-3 parts olive or other oil. Rub in well. (Grainger and Moore, 1991); Wash morning and evening with powdered lobelia seeds (2 oz. in 1 qt. boiling water). Let stand a few hours and apply with sponge. (Dadd, 1897, p. 196); Raw linseed oil applied with a stiff brush (Alexander, 1919, p. 74 and Udall, 1943). Please check with your certifier to be sure all of the ingredients mentioned in these treatments would be allowed.
The website of Farmer Research in the Northeast describes the problem of lice as follows, and proposes a research project. The results are not yet posted. You may wish to contact this group to follow up on what they have learned.
“The proposed research project will test three different treatments for lice infestations in dairy and beef heifers. This is a problem with livestock in the winter, especially pubescent and young adult animals. The usual treatment for organic farmers is to wait until the animals can go out in the spring sun and the condition clears up. But when the condition is more pronounced it can cause reduced weight gain and irritation to the animal’s skin to say nothing of their increased stress level. This increase in stress can be debilitating, leading to other health problems. At the last Animal Health Study Group meeting we had, lice was listed as one of winter’s problems. Also whenever I visit livestock farmers in the winter this problem is expressed. The producers requested a study of some treatments for lice that would be permitted in a certified organic system. The proposed study will compare three treatments and a control. The treatments include a homeopathic remedy (30c Stapysagria), a powder of four parts neem and one part turmeric, and Pyganic, a commercial product that recently became labeled for livestock treatment. Each farmer will also keep at least two control animals. Treatments will be given weekly and repeated three times after the lice infestation is recognized in the winter of 2004-2005. Results will be tabulated in the next week. If there are no positive responses from the treatment, then the protocol will be repeated.”
References:
1) Fanatico, A. 1996. Alternative Fly Control. Butte, MT: National Center for Appropriate Technology. (out of print)
2) Macey, Anne, Ed. Canadian Organic Growers, Inc. 2000. Organic Livestock Handbook, Fly and Rodent Control chapter, pages 50-63.
3) University of Nebraska at Lincoln, Dairy Cattle Insect Management: Fly Control and Cattle Lice sections.
4) Biological Control: A Guide to Natural Enemies of North America
Note: This site provides photographs and descriptions of over 100 biological control (or biocontrol) agents of insect, disease, and weed pests in North America. It is also a tutorial on the concept and practice of biological control and integrated pest management (IPM). Excellent photos and lifecycle descriptions.
5) Organic Valley Co-op. Controlling external parasites on the organic farm.
6) Farmer Research in the Northeast. Faciliator: Diane Schivera. Organic Lice Control for Heifers
7) Dr. H.J. Karreman, DMV. January 2002 Newsletter. Penn Dutch Cow Care
8) Dr. Hubert J. Karreman, VMD. Treating Dairy Cows Naturally.
9) Paul Dettloff, DVM. Alternative Treatments for Ruminant Animals
10) Little, V.A. 1963. General and Applies Entomology. Harper and Row Publishers.
11) Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI). June 2004. OMRI Generic Materials List, under Livestock Production Materials: enzymes.
12) Those Pesky Lice! By Cheryl K. Smith. Dairy Goat Journal May/June 2005
13) UC IPM Online. April 2004. Pests of Homes, Structures, People and Pets: Flies
14) Integrated Pest Management for Fly Control in Maine Dairy Barns. University of Maine Cooperative Extension Bulletin #5002.
15) Integrated Management of Flies in and around Dairy and Livestock Barns, DAIRY MANAGEMENT Pest Management Fact Sheet, 6/1994.
16) Make Your Own Fly Trap
Horse Talk New Mexico Horse Directory
17) David Shetlar, PhD. The Ohio State University, photos of Old Fly Traps.
18) West Virginia University Extension Service. October 1995. Stable Fly Biology and Management.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)