Sorry, that was unnecessarily snotty on my part. I understood what you meant; apologies...
Analog & digital photography and our environment
-
- Thread starter film_guy
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Huge filter collection for sale!
- Started by Early Riser
-
For Sale FS: Yamasaki Tele-Congo 240mm f/6.3 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale E6 and Color Chemicals, Stainless Steel Tanks Reels and film storage sleeves.
- Started by orbitaldebris
-
For Sale SILVESTRI RING N 1
- Started by Philippe-Georges
-
For Sale LINHOF AERO TECHNIKA 45 LENS COVER
- Started by Philippe-Georges
Forum statistics
Sorry, that was unnecessarily snotty on my part. I understood what you meant; apologies...
Kino, the resin I bought was a 3 part mixture. One part was a mixed bed resin which was a mixture of anionic and cationic resin beads. The other part (3rd component) was a neutral porous material that sucked up any organic materials. It was similar to activated charcoal only more efficient. That is one reason why the hardware store variety is less efficient. It uses charcoal and only one resin; it has lower capacity, but it is less expensive. I have not tried to work out any conditions for these filters, but have a batch of them in the DR waiting for a chance to do the work.
PE
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,832
- Format
- Hybrid
My presumption is that HP does re-use the cartridges - probably via a third-party arrangement with a re-filler. As AgX noted - you can buy "re-filled" printer cartridges at Staples.
Mind you that I am a sole user (as you seem to be). As I noted, in the brochure the label was valid for the return of up to 12 cartridges - so it is an attractive means of responsible disposal for businesses - who are far and away much larger consumers of printer cartridges and are very unlikely to want to refill their own.
Refilled dye cartridges may not contain the same generation of ink dye as the one supplied by the printer manufacturer, and therefore image stability may suffer.
PE
PE
PE,
In case someone, who has no chance to get his developer waste incinerated, wants to employ a resin/carbon filter. How would he run the treatment?
As you indicated a common kitchen water `purifyer´ could do the job. I don’t know how many brands and systems are out there. But obviously you assume they all contain anion- and cation-exchanging resins, plus that active corbon bed. (Those resins employed in dishwashers only contain a cation-exchanging resin.)
Must the alcality be adjusted?
Would one run be sufficient? Would several runs lower the organic load?
How does one know that the cartridge is exhausted (or rather filled)?
(Whith reference to that current thread on food containers, of course the use of such a cartridge gives way to an erronous use.)
And in the end one need to get rid of the cartridge too. Thus also delivering it to be incinerated. This time however as a smaller volume…
In case someone, who has no chance to get his developer waste incinerated, wants to employ a resin/carbon filter. How would he run the treatment?
As you indicated a common kitchen water `purifyer´ could do the job. I don’t know how many brands and systems are out there. But obviously you assume they all contain anion- and cation-exchanging resins, plus that active corbon bed. (Those resins employed in dishwashers only contain a cation-exchanging resin.)
Must the alcality be adjusted?
Would one run be sufficient? Would several runs lower the organic load?
How does one know that the cartridge is exhausted (or rather filled)?
(Whith reference to that current thread on food containers, of course the use of such a cartridge gives way to an erronous use.)
And in the end one need to get rid of the cartridge too. Thus also delivering it to be incinerated. This time however as a smaller volume…
These household or home filters generally only contain resins that remove the positively charged salts such as calcium and iron, and the carbon will remove the organics. Both work to capacity. In household filters, they assume low levels of organics and metal salts, and that is why I said this was inefficient. It can show you the way to go. You would probably have to stack 2 or 3 of these filters for a batch of sludge from your processing work, and run the developer and fixer through them.
Acids and bases would have to be neutralized.
As I stated above, I have the filters here and intend to do some experiments to quantify it. If it works out, then I can get some 'real' resins and test them out and develop a more practical home method that would allow a dry, small volume package to be put out as chemical waste.
I did this all at Kodak in the 70s, but would have to recreate it here and now, and determine the cost effectiveness. The home filters are a nice starting place for anyone interested in trying though.
PE
Acids and bases would have to be neutralized.
As I stated above, I have the filters here and intend to do some experiments to quantify it. If it works out, then I can get some 'real' resins and test them out and develop a more practical home method that would allow a dry, small volume package to be put out as chemical waste.
I did this all at Kodak in the 70s, but would have to recreate it here and now, and determine the cost effectiveness. The home filters are a nice starting place for anyone interested in trying though.
PE
My posts are regarding a toner cartridge for a B&W laser printer.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,832
- Format
- Hybrid
not that it might not be fun to create a 2-stage macgyver/ mad scientist filter bed
but wouldn't it be more cost effective to have things carted away or use a trickle tank? it really isn't too much effort or cost ...
but wouldn't it be more cost effective to have things carted away or use a trickle tank? it really isn't too much effort or cost ...
I'm in the situation that a collecting truck comes to the community regularly where I can deliver several seperate 10-liter tanks with exhausted developer and exhausted fixer.
However there are members around who have no discarting service around who might want to keep the waste for better times (concerning a discarting service), or where there might be severe limitations on the volume of fluid waste.
For those a type of filtration cartridge PE is thinking of might be an outcome.
OK, I contacted the utility service that provides our sewer treatment. I cannot dispose of spent developer and fixer down the drain. I need to treat it or take it to a treatment center, get an account, etc. I want to look into treating it.
So I have looked at the water purification section of the local big-box hardware store and I see filters that will remove organic compounds, and I can certainly use the iron wool or aluminum foil process for removing silver. I ran university research lab for several years where we processed our own water using these types of cartidge filters (several types in series, each providing a different filtering effect), but those filters operated under pressure... the normal pressure of a city water system.
Will these filters from the hardware store work if the solution is simply gravity fed... a holding tank connected to a filter draining into another holding tank? Or does it need to be pressurized? Should I consider something else?
I admit that I know nothing about this kind of setup and my question may be dumb...
So I have looked at the water purification section of the local big-box hardware store and I see filters that will remove organic compounds, and I can certainly use the iron wool or aluminum foil process for removing silver. I ran university research lab for several years where we processed our own water using these types of cartidge filters (several types in series, each providing a different filtering effect), but those filters operated under pressure... the normal pressure of a city water system.
Will these filters from the hardware store work if the solution is simply gravity fed... a holding tank connected to a filter draining into another holding tank? Or does it need to be pressurized? Should I consider something else?
I admit that I know nothing about this kind of setup and my question may be dumb...
Before you go to all that trouble - did you check whether or not there is a hazmat drop-off location in your community?
In Tucson (where we are P/T residents) there is a readily accecessible hazmat drop-off location. It's open several days a week (including Saturdays) and you just drive into their "thru-garage" and pop to trunk. They unload the cans, bottles of whatever nasties you have and send you on your way. No account needed.
I have called the local hazmat service provider for our community and have not gotten a final answer... I am investigating the 2 solutions in parallel.
We have 2 scheduled hazmat pickups each year (paint, distillates, oil, grease, etc... and I would assume I could put it out with that), and the CSR on the phone told me that she thought I would have to set up an account and schedule pickups if I didn't want to sit on it for the twice a year pick-ups. But I'm waiting for the area manager to call me back.
At my current pace it would only be about 2-3 gallons/month (depending on the mix of 4x5 and 120), so holding it would not be too big a problem, but if I can reasonably treat it and then put it down the drain, that's better for me and my limited space.
We have 2 scheduled hazmat pickups each year (paint, distillates, oil, grease, etc... and I would assume I could put it out with that), and the CSR on the phone told me that she thought I would have to set up an account and schedule pickups if I didn't want to sit on it for the twice a year pick-ups. But I'm waiting for the area manager to call me back.
At my current pace it would only be about 2-3 gallons/month (depending on the mix of 4x5 and 120), so holding it would not be too big a problem, but if I can reasonably treat it and then put it down the drain, that's better for me and my limited space.
I see your question as essentially boiled down to the environmental ramifications of semiconductor manufacturing and the life-cycle of the manufactured components versus that of film and processing chemisty.
The advantage, recycling-wise, that I see with film and associated chemistry manufacturing is that the products are relatively widely segragated already, in their manufactured state. Recycling chemistry and even film or paper is straight-forward, compared with what it would take to truly recycle the hazardous chemicals and elements from semiconductors.
The problem with semiconductors such as IC's (intergrated circuits) is that implanted within the silicon chips are grids of arsenic, phosphorus and boron, the three common 'dopants' used to make silicon either positive or negatively doped. And these doped regions are microscopic in size, and physically located in microscopic proximity to one another. Meaning that if you were to attempt to remove the arsenic doped into the source regions of each microscopic transistor, you'd have to essentially reverse-engineer the entire semiconductor manufacturing process. You'd have to lay down lithography masks to etch away each region, for instance. And you don't have access to the litho mask for each layer within the chip: they're proprietary.
So the common recycling strategy is to 'assume' that the chips, in their packages, are 'inert'. Whether or not they really are is a more difficult question to answer. Perhaps these chips can be ground up into a slurry, and then their constituent chemical elements reduced, isolated and seperated chemically. Of course, this begins to sound like a process just as environmentally problematic as the original manufacturing process itself.
I think therefore that analog/chemical photography products are far less problematic to manufacture and recycle. Whether they are, in actual fact, manufactured and recycled in an environmentally conscious manner is not a technological problem, but rather a regulatory issue.
Recycling integrated circuits, on the other hand, is a big problem that hasn't been solved yet.
Just my 2 bits.
The advantage, recycling-wise, that I see with film and associated chemistry manufacturing is that the products are relatively widely segragated already, in their manufactured state. Recycling chemistry and even film or paper is straight-forward, compared with what it would take to truly recycle the hazardous chemicals and elements from semiconductors.
The problem with semiconductors such as IC's (intergrated circuits) is that implanted within the silicon chips are grids of arsenic, phosphorus and boron, the three common 'dopants' used to make silicon either positive or negatively doped. And these doped regions are microscopic in size, and physically located in microscopic proximity to one another. Meaning that if you were to attempt to remove the arsenic doped into the source regions of each microscopic transistor, you'd have to essentially reverse-engineer the entire semiconductor manufacturing process. You'd have to lay down lithography masks to etch away each region, for instance. And you don't have access to the litho mask for each layer within the chip: they're proprietary.
So the common recycling strategy is to 'assume' that the chips, in their packages, are 'inert'. Whether or not they really are is a more difficult question to answer. Perhaps these chips can be ground up into a slurry, and then their constituent chemical elements reduced, isolated and seperated chemically. Of course, this begins to sound like a process just as environmentally problematic as the original manufacturing process itself.
I think therefore that analog/chemical photography products are far less problematic to manufacture and recycle. Whether they are, in actual fact, manufactured and recycled in an environmentally conscious manner is not a technological problem, but rather a regulatory issue.
Recycling integrated circuits, on the other hand, is a big problem that hasn't been solved yet.
Just my 2 bits.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |