From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 04/24/02-09:06:44 PM Z
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Keith Gerling wrote:
>
> As for your concerns about the clean-conscience dumping of chemistry into
> the middle of nowhere, I fail to see how that is any different than dumping
> it into a city sewage system: your waste winds up in the environment
> anyway - with the advantage that its eventual resting place will be further
> away from where you live, breath, and drink.
These things have so many variables and unknowns that generalizations are
treacherous (especially by non-specialists).... BUT, it is my
understanding that city sewage systems have treatment plants or
facilities... or are supposed to. That water passing out of the city sewer
pipes is chelated, and otherwise treated. It is also *said* that given the
much larger volume of water at one time (with its own chemical content,of
course, but presumably DIFFERENT chemicals) in the city sewer any given
photo chemical you use at home will have a lesser concentration.
My own "solution" to the problem is the idea of a small home recycling
unit. I don't mean a silver extracter -- they have them now in various
forms. But some years ago I saw a standing unit at a Photo Expo with a
footprint only about 2 feet by 2 feet, selling at the time for maybe
$7000. I didn't know enough about the process to really assess it, but it
was supposed to clean enough water in a day to take care of a small lab,
maybe 50 gallons. I wonder why we haven't (or I haven't) heard any more?
I mean if the price came down the way computer prices do, it should be
available now for about $100.
Judy
> With some degree of expense and inconvenience, users of silver and
> dichromate-based processes have at their disposal methods that can be used
> to reclaim or neutralize the waste products. I've always felt that
> cyanotype was the friendliest of the chemical processes. And then there's
> always anthotype...
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: acolyta@www.napc.com [mailto:acolyta@www.napc.com]On Behalf Of
> epona
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:14 AM
> To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
> Subject: environmental question
>
>
> Hello list,
>
> What, in all your esteemed opinions, would be the photographic process
> to leave the least impact on the environment?
>
> Hypothetically, say I lived in a hut in the middle of nowhere. I would
> not, with a clean concience, be able to dump my used chemistry on the
> ground or in my composting toilet or what have you.
>
> Just curious.
>
> Cheers,
> Christine
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.
> It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this
> emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and
> stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead; his eyes are closed."
> -Albert Einstein
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 05/01/02-11:43:31 AM Z CST