[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Organic Fertilizer Manufacturing
Between the theoretical extremes of "factory farming" and "sustainable
agriculture" lies a continuum of intermediate mixes of industrial and
personal farming. I'd like to present a system for manufacturing a high
quality fertilizer from (urban) organic waste. Our company develops
environmental remediation projects in organic waste derivatives and water
treatment. Thanks, Rees Clark
One Man's Sludge Is Another Man's Opportunity
>From A. Rees Clark, PhD
Environmental Concerns Inc.
Suppose that the sewage sludge, manure, lawn and garden debris and
industrial and commercial food processing wastes now being generated in
your community were not going to the landfill but instead were the basis
of a valuable commodity, in demand worldwide. Suppose that the technology
for conversion of these wastes into the new product provided local jobs
and contributed to long term renewal of our agricultural resources.
Suppose all this cost less than competing methods of disposal. Suppose
that a waste control strategy based on this technology transferred power
and control to local interests instead of remote bureaucracies. Would you
be interested enough to read on?
Environmental Concerns Inc. (ECI) is a small group of environmental
entrepreneurs dedicated to bringing innovative technologies to the
marketplace of environmental remediation. Most good ideas originate in
small companies, and we are working with selected process developers to
market their proven technologies.
We at ECI are pleased to report that a new process that manufactures a
high quality fertilizer from a variety of organic waste streams is now
available to waste generators, both industrial and municipal. Our friends
at FPM Corp. are making a silk purse of 5-5-5 NPK fertilizer out of sewage
sludge, manures, and other organic waste feedstocks (a sow's ear if ever I
heard of one).
Organic waste like sewage or food processing waste has most of the
nutrients required for plant growth, including trace nutrients. But it
normally does not provide the stimulus of high levels of nitrogen,
phosphorus and potassium (NPK) that farmers and horticulturists want to
provide the rapid growth that helps them make a profit. The FPM process
adds very small amounts of such materials as dolomite and rock phosphate,
for example, to the organic waste stream to boost the quick-growth
chemicals needed for commercial agriculture. This combination, which we
call enriched organic fertilizer (EOF), has been shown to provide rapid
plant growth that exceeds the productivity of chemical fertilizers in the
current crop, while providing slow enrichment that rebuilds the soil for
many seasons to come. In most cases, the 5-5-5 NPK fertilizers provide
higher yields than chemical fertilizers with concentrations as high as
15-15-15. The superiority of the EOF is most pronounced after several
seasons or crop rotations allow soil redevelopment.
Chemical fertilizers are superb at giving quick return, but overuse can
actually damage soils by overdrawing locally available minor nutrients and
by concentrating the fertilizers and their byproducts. Organic fertilizers
are great at soil amendment, but they do not give the economic return
needed for commercial agriculture.
The FPM process combines the best of both. It gives the user all the
benefits of organic fertilizer (such as manures and composts), plus the
benefits of a small boost of growth stimulating major nutrients.
Productivity studies have been conducted by recognized institutions in the
US and overseas. Some exemplary results (apologies to nonfarmers) based on
side by side comparisons include: (1) russet potatoes, increased
production 2.28 tons/acre; 17% increase in volume of potatoes 10 oz or
more and a 1.5% decrease in hollow heart; (2) alfalfa, average increase of
protein content of over 20%; (3) carrots, So. California truck crops 30%
increase by weight; (4) tomatoes, consistently larger and of subjectively
better texture. A major US Department of Agriculture comparative study is
now in progress.
Because the process uses waste products as its feedstock, raw material
costs and therefore fertilizer prices are low. Fertilizer manufacturing
can actually be a profitable local industry in medium to large cities,
where production can be be based on sewage plus garden and food waste, and
in agricultural areas, where crop residues and manures can be the
feedstock. This process cleans up the environment, reduces dependence on
chemical fertilizers, and improves the quality of agricultural produce.
Here are the general economic characteristics of the enterprise. The
standard system can produce up to 300 tons of fertilizer per day (which
equates about one to one with the raw material we dispose of). This is not
a design or an idea or a project or a term paper; the plant is operating
in the northwestern US, and visits can be arranged for qualified project
developers or prospective plant owner/operators. Approximately $4 million
is required to develop a facility for processing 300 tons of organic waste
per day--about half the waste stream of a city of 300,000 people; this
compares favorably to other competing capital programs. There are two main
sources of revenue. Comparable fertilizers (based on equivalent plant
yield and soil amendment) sell at wholesale for $150 to $200 per ton and
at retail for up to $750 per ton. Waste generators in the USA pay from $10
to $150 per ton to dispose of waste materials that are suitable for the
process. Production costs are low.
Our role at ECI is to identify and develop fertilizer manufacturing
opportunities. We're now working on projects in the USA and overseas, and
we are interested in identifying potential projects, especially outside
the USA. Prospective developers will need to be interested and skillful
in (a) attracting or controlling a waste stream, (b) obtaining local
regulatory approval(s), (c) marketing fertilizer in your regional
agricultural context, and (d) capital formation. If you are (a) a
generator of organic waste (industrial, agricultural or
municipal--including sewage treatment), (b) a waste hauler, (c) a
regulator, or (d) another concerned person and you want more information
on why we're so enthusiastic, let me hear from you.
Permission to copy is granted if full attribution is included.
A. Rees Clark, PhD
Environmental Concerns Inc.
1065 12th Ave NW E1
Issaquah, WA 98027
(206)391-1951
reesc@aol.com
(This article is also available in Spanish.)