|
Subject: biofilter or what?
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 17:52:53 -0000 (GMT)
From: Terry Kok |
|
Everyone,
There seems to be a bit of confusion. Trickling
biofilters work to decrease BOD and to convert ammonia
to nitrite to nitrate but what happens next to the
waste water? In a Living Machine this goes through a
number of further biological cleansing stages
(requiring more equipment/space). KAM made it quite
clear a couple of months ago that a full scale system
was not an option. I argued that it was a necessity if
we were to actually recycle our water/wastes and that
food, fresh water, and pure air were the desired
outputs.
It seems to me that this team is still working towards
a full scale system. That's fine with me. If we are
going for a full-up system (eventually) I would like
to say that the biofilter can be fully integrated into
the plant beds and that 2 separate systems are not
needed.
If we are starting with just a biofilter, what happens
to the waste water that exits the biofilter? According
to environmental restrictions, this cannot be dumped
on the ground. The reason why I suggested a simple
grass or algae based system is that, at least we could
convert the wastes to biomass and end up with
distilled water. A biofilter does not do this.
I would also like to point out that the anaerobic
phase (created by storing the grey water in the hab
tank before processing in an aerobic biofilter and/or
integrated plant bed) is not a good idea. Anaerobic
conditions cause a loss of nitrogen to the atmosphere
and generate noxious gasses. There won't be enough
methane generated to do anything useful with.
Terry R. Kok - Green CELSS Task Force focalizer
biostar_a@yahoo.com
_
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com
- ---------------------------------------------
Mars Society Life Support Task Force
Email - life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
http://home.marssociety.org/tech/life-support/
Arctic Base - http://arctic.marssociety.org/ |
| |
Subject: biofilter or what?
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:58:31 -0000 (GMT)
From: John Ives-Halperin |
|
It might be worth pointing out a fundamental design stance the Maryland team
is taking. Again, referring to the edicts of ecological engineering, the
design goal is to provide as many interrelated ecologies and ecological
niches. The theory being that the more ecological niches in the system the
more robust the system, the less prone to failure, and the greater the
ability to respond to upsets and changes. Odum believed that 2 acres was the
minimum to support human life on Mars with an ecologically engineered
solution. On the face of it this is not practical. It certainly does not
meet the design criteria for FMARS. So, the question is, what compromises
can we make that maximize passive technologies (ecologies) while minimizing
the space used. (Sorry about the pun :)
I believe Terry has a point when he says the "... [the Maryland] team is
still working towards a full scale system." Although we know this does not
meet the mission criteria, our stance was to start from this design and work
down towards a minimal footprint and maximal functionality. This process may
be too time consuming and may not get us where we ultimately want to be.
Continuing with this effort is an executive decision. For the moment I vote
for continuing, but look for guidance from the group and a go/no go from the
"authorities" at FMARS.
Now, to the details of Terry's comments.
The system incorporates a recirculating trickling filter and wetland. Thus,
the effluent of the biofilter (trickling filter) enters the wetland for
further treatment. This could, and probably would, be an algae based
wetland. The effluent from the wetland is "divided" between water that moves
to storage and re-entering treatment by returning to the trickling filter.
As I write this I am struck by how much our thinking seems to agree with
Terry's. Perhaps what we have here is a "failure to communicate" more than a
design dispute.
I also agree with Terry's point about gas production in the anaerobic phase.
It will probably not produce enough methane to be useful and will produce
unpleasant odors. However, we need a way to capture (and recycle) biosolids
and trash before they enter the rest of treatment system. Any suggestions?
Hoop
- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
[mailto:owner-life-support@chapters.marssociety.org]On Behalf Of Terry
Kok
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 1:53 PM
To: life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
Subject: [life-support] biofilter or what?
[to Life Support Task Force, from Terry Kok ]
Everyone,
There seems to be a bit of confusion. Trickling
biofilters work to decrease BOD and to convert ammonia
to nitrite to nitrate but what happens next to the
waste water? In a Living Machine this goes through a
number of further biological cleansing stages
(requiring more equipment/space). KAM made it quite
clear a couple of months ago that a full scale system
was not an option. I argued that it was a necessity if
we were to actually recycle our water/wastes and that
food, fresh water, and pure air were the desired
outputs.
It seems to me that this team is still working towards
a full scale system. That's fine with me. If we are
going for a full-up system (eventually) I would like
to say that the biofilter can be fully integrated into
the plant beds and that 2 separate systems are not
needed.
If we are starting with just a biofilter, what happens
to the waste water that exits the biofilter? According
to environmental restrictions, this cannot be dumped
on the ground. The reason why I suggested a simple
grass or algae based system is that, at least we could
convert the wastes to biomass and end up with
distilled water. A biofilter does not do this.
I would also like to point out that the anaerobic
phase (created by storing the grey water in the hab
tank before processing in an aerobic biofilter and/or
integrated plant bed) is not a good idea. Anaerobic
conditions cause a loss of nitrogen to the atmosphere
and generate noxious gasses. There won't be enough
methane generated to do anything useful with.
Terry R. Kok - Green CELSS Task Force focalizer
biostar_a@yahoo.com
_
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
http://photos.yahoo.com
- ---------------------------------------------
Mars Society Life Support Task Force
Email - life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
http://home.marssociety.org/tech/life-support/
Arctic Base - http://arctic.marssociety.org/
- ---------------------------------------------
Mars Society Life Support Task Force
Email - life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
http://home.marssociety.org/tech/life-support/
Arctic Base - http://arctic.marssociety.org/ |
| |
Subject: biofilter or what?
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 17:26:18 -0000 (GMT)
From: Tania M. Slawecki |
|
My questions/comments below:
At 09:58 AM 06/07/2000 -0400, John Ives-Halperin wrote:
> Again, referring to the edicts of ecological engineering, the
>design goal is to provide as many interrelated ecologies and ecological
>niches. The theory being that the more ecological niches in the system the
>more robust the system, the less prone to failure, and the greater the
>ability to respond to upsets and changes. Odum believed that 2 acres was the
>minimum to support human life on Mars with an ecologically engineered
>solution.
To support how many people? Any other critters? Fish? Livestock?
>I also agree with Terry's point about gas production in the anaerobic phase.
>It will probably not produce enough methane to be useful and will produce
>unpleasant odors. However, we need a way to capture (and recycle) biosolids
>and trash before they enter the rest of treatment system. Any suggestions?
>
>Hoop
My understanding of how John Todd et. al. handle the "unpleasant odors"
from the anaerobic phase is that they can be filtered through a finished
compost bed which can be covered with vegetation. We haven't tried this
yet. The biosolids can be periodically removed from the anaerobic tanks
and be used for vermiculture...the castings then used to fortify garden
beds, and the worms fed to fish in aquaculture tanks. There is no waste.
Todd supposedly has worked out a very stable aquaculature system that can
be integrated with the Living Machine... supposedly he has a recent paper
out on it, though I only head Michael Shaw mention it and I haven't seen it
yet.
As for locating the anaerobic tanks, they at usually underground - like
most septic tanks - so that they don't freeze. The nice thing is that
they could be UNDER the facility so as to not occupy surface room. You
also want to be able to pump out the biosolids, so it should be accessible.
Those a my little thoughts....
~Tania
Tania M. Slawecki
Center for Sustainability at Penn State
www.personal.psu.edu/tms9
- ---------------------------------------------
Mars Society Life Support Task Force
Email - life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
http://home.marssociety.org/tech/life-support/
Arctic Base - http://arctic.marssociety.org/ |
| |
Subject: biofilter or what?
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 18:21:29 -0000 (GMT)
From: John Ives-Halperin |
|
Tania,
Sorry I forgot to mention the important number in my reference to Odum. He
meant per human and total support, mostly by plant life. In any case, it is
a theoretical number but it feels about right to me.
We also have built and run installations (some with Michael and John some
without) that employ "biofilters" for handling odors. Vermiculture is an
excellent idea and we have also used this for essentially zero waste
installations. The question was how to handle solids not using an anaerobic
chamber. I don't have any good ideas on that. Also, burying the chamber has
a number of problems. One you mentioned, getting access to chamber. Also,
keep in mind, digging a deep hole below the frost line for FMARS could be a
serious problem. Finally, it is not clear to me that we can even entertain
having components "outside" of the habitat.
Hoop
- -----Original Message-----
From: tms9@psu.edu [mailto:tms9@psu.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 10:26 AM
To: John Ives-Halperin; Terry Kok; life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
Subject: RE: [life-support] biofilter or what?
My questions/comments below:
At 09:58 AM 06/07/2000 -0400, John Ives-Halperin wrote:
> Again, referring to the edicts of ecological engineering, the
>design goal is to provide as many interrelated ecologies and ecological
>niches. The theory being that the more ecological niches in the system the
>more robust the system, the less prone to failure, and the greater the
>ability to respond to upsets and changes. Odum believed that 2 acres was
the
>minimum to support human life on Mars with an ecologically engineered
>solution.
To support how many people? Any other critters? Fish? Livestock?
>I also agree with Terry's point about gas production in the anaerobic
phase.
>It will probably not produce enough methane to be useful and will produce
>unpleasant odors. However, we need a way to capture (and recycle) biosolids
>and trash before they enter the rest of treatment system. Any suggestions?
>
>Hoop
My understanding of how John Todd et. al. handle the "unpleasant odors"
from the anaerobic phase is that they can be filtered through a finished
compost bed which can be covered with vegetation. We haven't tried this
yet. The biosolids can be periodically removed from the anaerobic tanks
and be used for vermiculture...the castings then used to fortify garden
beds, and the worms fed to fish in aquaculture tanks. There is no waste.
Todd supposedly has worked out a very stable aquaculature system that can
be integrated with the Living Machine... supposedly he has a recent paper
out on it, though I only head Michael Shaw mention it and I haven't seen it
yet.
As for locating the anaerobic tanks, they at usually underground - like
most septic tanks - so that they don't freeze. The nice thing is that
they could be UNDER the facility so as to not occupy surface room. You
also want to be able to pump out the biosolids, so it should be accessible.
Those a my little thoughts....
~Tania
Tania M. Slawecki
Center for Sustainability at Penn State
www.personal.psu.edu/tms9
- ---------------------------------------------
Mars Society Life Support Task Force
Email - life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
http://home.marssociety.org/tech/life-support/
Arctic Base - http://arctic.marssociety.org/ |
| |
Subject: biofilter or what?
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 22:53:0 -0000 (GMT)
From: Stephen Braham |
|
- ------=_unique-boundary-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Hiya Guys :)
[in response to Hoop and Tania]
>We also have built and run installations (some with Michael and John some
>without) that employ "biofilters" for handling odors. Vermiculture is an
>excellent idea and we have also used this for essentially zero waste
>installations.
My probable issue with that would be trying to understand what might be useful as well
during Mars Transit and arrival/stay. Could be tough to keep a vermiculture happy.
It's even more of a problem in the High Arctic, when they'll hit -30C or so! I don't think
there are any subsurface macroforna there.
>The question was how to handle solids not using an anaerobic
>chamber. I don't have any good ideas on that. Also, burying the chamber has
>a number of problems. One you mentioned, getting access to chamber. Also,
>keep in mind, digging a deep hole below the frost line for FMARS could be a
>serious problem. Finally, it is not clear to me that we can even entertain
>having components "outside" of the habitat.
Components on the surface outside would probably be fine (forgetting transit fidelity),
but subsurface is out:
(1) As Hoop says, it's darn tough to dig deep, and you hit permafrost within a few feet. In
winter, of course, there's hardly and frost-free zone.
(2) Getting clearance to dig a hole that deep in a protected area would be tough.
(3) There's a lot of concreted rock in that area.
Another issue, of course, is how do we do this with only Arctic species?
Steve
- ------=_unique-boundary-2--
- ---------------------------------------------
Mars Society Life Support Task Force
Email - life-support@chapters.marssociety.org
http://home.marssociety.org/tech/life-support/
Arctic Base - http://arctic.marssociety.org/ |
| |
|
|
|
|
|