From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 04/30/00-08:00:15 PM Z
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000, Linda Phillips wrote:
> Good point, Liam. You're right. The laws weren't made for the little guys
> like us. So lets just IGNORE them.
Linda, I wanted to stay out of this both because I've been overextended
and underdeployed, didn't want to spend another half hour writing, &
because I figured that what I have to say would ruffle some feathers & I
have enough hassles -- but frankly, your sarcasm -- uncalled for and
unearned, in fact presumptuous, to put not too fine a point on it -- moves
me to note the following:
A few years ago the chemistry police came around to my department at
school, saying I had to save the wash water from gum printing (this in a
school that pours fixer down the drain I must add -- then AND now) to be
purified somehow -- I don't know exactly where, because the school didn't
have those facilities, but I was supposed to put it in 50 gallon drums
(and then move in, maybe).
Since I couldn't get the students to reliably empty a tray of any sort, or
wipe out the sink, I figured that was a lost cause, and if it was
necessary I'd stop teaching gum.
So then I spent 3 days on the phone going up the ladder at the EPA,
finally got to someone whose name was Lieutenant, or maybe it was Captain
someone or other, who assured me he was "in charge." I explained my
problem, and he asked me one question: How much ammonium dichromate did I
use? I thought for a while and estimated, probably almost a pound a year
among myself and my students. He laughed. They were worried, he said,
about airconditioning systems that use a pound in three quarters of an
hour. Our usage, he assured me, was not a problem, the "water system"
easily filters, or chelates, or whatever it does, with such small amounts.
Now granted, this is New York City with a high water flow. 100 people,
maybe a thousand, are probably flushing their 7-gallon toilets as I
put two litres of wash water down the drain. Those with septic tanks or
other facilities might wish to investigate more.
But one other thing. Actually two other things. No, make that three:
1. Mike Ware told me that the form of the chrome when we discard it is
something like "stage one" -- I don't know the chemistry, don't probably
have that term right -- but it is the least harmful, actually in large
water amounts not very harmful at all, he said. This fact was later
verified by an archivist-conservator who is also a photographer and "alt"
printer. They'd both heard it from environmental-police types.
2. Over the years I've watched exponential improvement in small facility
recycling equipment at Photo Expo, for both silver and other effluents.
The last Expo I attended, I saw a liquid recycler (footprint maybe 2 by 2
feet) that would handle (this from vague memory of course) about 7 gallons
in 24 hours. The cost then was about $5,000. If necessary I'd get one of
those for myself -- they're probably better and cheaper now.
3. I'll match my "citizenship" (not to mention Liam's) against anyone's,
yours for instance. Perhaps the tone of your comment above wasn't a fair
representation of your attitude, but it suggested a sense of moral
superiority that is in itself, at least in my experience, a risky business
-- especially coming out of the limited knowledge and experience you
profess to have acquired to date, that is, two whole days' worth.
Judy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 06/13/00-03:09:51 PM Z CST