Darn Septic Tanks!

Ai Print · May 22, 2017

Well, looks like I am going to be drinking a lot more of my Arizona Zero Calorie Ginseng Tea!

Because the empty gallon containers are what I am going to be storing 10-20 gallons a month of spent B&W darkroom chemistry in being on a septic tank. I have spent over 3 months trying to figure this out and taking it to the local Household Waste drop-off is the only way.

And at $7.5 per gallon total to dispose of the stuff, it's going to add up to about a grand a year easy, especially when conducting workshops. This essentially doubles the cost to process film and paper, at least it is still all a tax deduction.

I love my new house & the space it has for the darkroom and I knew the septic tank would create challenges.....but this is a royal PITA.

Just a word of caution when considering a home or business with a septic tank and a darkroom in mind....

Photo Engineer · May 22, 2017

My uncle was a photographer for years and had a septic tank for all sewage and had no problems.

I wonder what the difference is?

PE

MattKing · May 22, 2017

It may be worth your while to consult with a waste systems engineer. You may be able to safely dispose of most of your waste through the septic field.
Is evaporation/disposal of dry remnant an option for you?

Leigh B · May 22, 2017

I had a septic tank at the home where I grew up.

Several years of heavy darkroom activity caused no problems then or later.

- Leigh

Ai Print · May 22, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
My uncle was a photographer for years and had a septic tank for all sewage and had no problems.

I wonder what the difference is?

The advice is always conflicting, Kodak itself of course highly discouraging on the activity, as recent as a conversation some 90 minutes ago.

For me it is two things that are taking me squarely away from even thinking of dumping a single component:

1. The sheer volume some months is just too much, too risky on a very expensive to replace leach field.

2. We are on a very local well-centric water infrastructure on a mesa so ground water contamination is probably the biggest red flag for me.

It is what it is, I can deal with it. Maybe hire some interns when I get too old to deal with it.

Sal Santamaura · May 22, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
My uncle was a photographer for years and had a septic tank for all sewage and had no problems.

I wonder what the difference is?...

The difference between then and now is that, back then, "no problems" meant the septic system continued functioning as designed. Now, "no problems" means that plus the leach field puts nothing into the water table that's prohibited. Dan doesn't say his septic system has malfunctioned in any way. Perhaps he's just trying to comply with laws/regulations?

Edit: I type too slow. Dan was addressing the question while my post got excessively wordsmithed.

Lachlan Young · May 22, 2017

Isn't it something to do with the biocidal nature of the silver in the used fix? If it is, then I'd guess a silver recovery system might be worth a look?

Ai Print · May 22, 2017

Lachlan Young said:
Isn't it something to do with the biocidal nature of the silver in the used fix? If it is, then I'd guess a silver recovery system might be worth a look?

Like I said in the first post, I have been working on this for three months. There is no real safe way to do this and ensure the safety of our drinking water unless I have it properly disposed of.

This is probably a topic that will need to be addressed more and more as water becomes more scarce.

Ian Grant · May 22, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
My uncle was a photographer for years and had a septic tank for all sewage and had no problems.

I wonder what the difference is?

PE

As long as the silver is removed from fixers or blix there shouldn't be issues, of course volume and dilution could be an issue if there was heavy darkroom use. Small scale use with no silver removal it's unlikely there would be problems.

I spent a few years overseeing photo effluent disposal - we worked with a US company (mostly ex EK people) selling their equipment, and I liaised with the chief chemist for Thames Water (London) as well as other authorities. This was to ensure that we had no problems at a local level that meant except in areas where the discharges were large in a sparely populated area there were no issues - Thames Water had one (it's closed now) a large out of city lab (specialising in Mail Order) in a small village.

As long as you have a lot of dilution into the septic tank it's not an issue. The alkali dev and the slightly acidic fix, and spent stop bath, almost neutralise and the huge dilution from the wash etc mean tht's OK to a normal sewer, however when that gets the substantial dilution from the normal household sewage and more importantly general wash water it won't effect a Septic tank.

Ian

kb3lms · May 22, 2017

If you really can't use the septic system for disposal (I do, without issue) I'd second looking at evaporation. That should just leave you with solid waste.

Kino · May 22, 2017

In relation to what humans produce, the output of darkrooms is insignificant...

"Phenol, catechol, and hydroquinone, are urinary end-products of the metabolism of benzene, nutrients, drugs, and endogenous substances."
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1365/s10337-005-0570-3

Recover your silver, mix developer, fix and stop to ph neutral and put it down the drain.

Ai Print · May 22, 2017

Ian Grant said:
As long as the silver is removed from fixers or blix there shouldn't be issues, of course volume and dilution could be an issue if there was heavy darkroom use. Small scale use with no silver removal it's unlikely there would be problems.

I spent a few years overseeing photo effluent disposal - we worked with a US company (mostly ex EK people) selling their equipment, and I liaised with the chief chemist for Thames Water (London) as well as other authorities. This was to ensure that we had no problems at a local level that meant except in areas where the discharges were large in a sparely populated area there were no issues - Thames Water had one (it's closed now) a large out of city lab (specialising in Mail Order) in a small village.

As long as you have a lot of dilution into the septic tank it's not an issue. The alkali dev and the slightly acidic fix, and spent stop bath, almost neutralise and the huge dilution from the wash etc mean tht's OK to a normal sewer, however when that gets the substantial dilution from the normal household sewage and more importantly general wash water it won't effect a Septic tank.

Ian

I had read this awhile ago when searching and while highly encouraging and logical, I still think the overall community needs make me want to take the disposal route. If Kodak or another official source gave it the green light, I might feel different but we have what we have on it to date, official and otherwise.

If down the road, some better option comes my way, I will certainly consider it. But for now, I have certainty and I am no longer stressed about it.

Photo Engineer · May 22, 2017

After some thought, I believe that volume and dilution were his keys to "success". He was on city water and no one nearby used wells either. They had good drainage.

I wish you good luck.

PE

Lachlan Young · May 22, 2017

Ai Print said:
Like I said in the first post, I have been working on this for three months. There is no real safe way to do this and ensure the safety of our drinking water unless I have it properly disposed of.

This is probably a topic that will need to be addressed more and more as water becomes more scarce.

Agreed - it's increasingly tightly regulated over here in areas where groundwater is the chief water source & the drive seems to be towards getting rid of traditional soakaway tanks & replacing them with what are effectively miniature sewage treatment plants.

resummerfield · May 22, 2017

Kino said:
In relation to what humans produce, the output of darkrooms is insignificant...

"Phenol, catechol, and hydroquinone, are urinary end-products of the metabolism of benzene, nutrients, drugs, and endogenous substances."
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1365/s10337-005-0570-3

Recover your silver, mix developer, fix and stop to ph neutral and put it down the drain.

+1. Also, consider several open containers outside, to let the liquid evaporate before taking to disposal center.

pbromaghin · May 22, 2017

MattKing said:
Is evaporation/disposal of dry remnant an option for you?

Heck, you're in Colorado. Try evaporation. It works for old paint.

Ai Print · May 22, 2017

pbromaghin said:
Heck, you're in Colorado. Try evaporation. It works for old paint.

I would think the smell would be quite off putting to the wildlife we currently enjoy coming through our property, not to mention impossible to do in the Winter months.

I'm just glad I even found a solution, $100-ish a month for disposal is enormously better than the alternative in the grand scheme of things.

NedL · May 22, 2017

Please consider that you don't need to do everything with full trays and dump everything after every session. There are many possibilities and I think photographers have a tendency to get set in their ways and not be even willing to consider good alternatives. Here are some options that will dramatically cut down on volume of waste:

1. Use replenished developer. Especially for printing, but consider for film too if you develop lots of rolls. You might even discover that you like it better.
2. Use stop bath until it's done ( if you use acetic, the smell will disappear ), only then dump it in the same container w/ minimal developer discharges ( I'm getting to that )
3. Use fixer as recommended by the manufacturer. Just keep tabs of how many sheets or rolls go through it. It's very easy, it only takes 1/2 a second to make a tally mark, and you won't be throwing away lots of fixer.
4. Washes. Sit down and do some calculations regarding dilution. For film, I usually chuck the 1st and 2nd wash into the "developer discharges container", but I'm nearly certain just the first wash would be fine. I don't pay per gallon at my haz. disposal site... up to 15 gallons per visit for residents. For prints. I wash them individually: the first wash is with a smallish amount of water and goes into the discharge container. After that it goes into the septic.

I have a routine like this for salt printing and other processes with lots of silver nitrate and toner discharges. That's the one that generates the highest volume for me, but it's still only a few gallons per month.

Seriously, there are options that will greatly reduce the volume of waste if you are willing to try them.

Good luck!

removed account4 · May 22, 2017

sometimes the volume of water drained into the septic system doesn't allow it to function the way it is designed, so it might not just
be the stuff that isn't water you putting in your system but the water that pushes everything through faster than it should go.
some cities that had their storm drains run into the municipal sewer system had similar problems, every time it rained, raw sewerage ended up in the bay...

Kino · May 22, 2017

Ai Print said:
I would think the smell would be quite off putting to the wildlife we currently enjoy coming through our property, not to mention impossible to do in the Winter months.

I'm just glad I even found a solution, $100-ish a month for disposal is enormously better than the alternative in the grand scheme of things.

I wonder if you'd investigate just how these companies dispose of your photo effluent and report back to us? I'd like to hear about their methods.

I am cynical and think their methods are no more effective that many mentioned here. Just as much e-waste supposedly recycled in the USA winds up in lower income countries, where it devastates the environment and poisons the workers when they extract the precious metals and dump the remaining refuse in landfills. Are we paying a "feel-good" fee for these services, or are they really effective?

Not trying to pick a fight; I would be very happy to be proven wrong, but I have a nagging feeling...

Ai Print · May 22, 2017

NedL said:
Please consider that you don't need to do everything with full trays and dump everything after every session. There are many possibilities and I think photographers have a tendency to get set in their ways and not be even willing to consider good alternatives. Here are some options that will dramatically cut down on volume of waste:

1. Use replenished developer. Especially for printing, but consider for film too if you develop lots of rolls. You might even discover that you like it better.
2. Use stop bath until it's done ( if you use acetic, the smell will disappear ), only then dump it in the same container w/ minimal developer discharges ( I'm getting to that )
3. Use fixer as recommended by the manufacturer. Just keep tabs of how many sheets or rolls go through it. It's very easy, it only takes 1/2 a second to make a tally mark, and you won't be throwing away lots of fixer.
4. Washes. Sit down and do some calculations regarding dilution. For film, I usually chuck the 1st and 2nd wash into the "developer discharges container", but I'm nearly certain just the first wash would be fine. I don't pay per gallon at my haz. disposal site... up to 15 gallons per visit for residents. For prints. I wash them individually: the first wash is with a smallish amount of water and goes into the discharge container. After that it goes into the septic.

I have a routine like this for salt printing and other processes with lots of silver nitrate and toner discharges. That's the one that generates the highest volume for me, but it's still only a few gallons per month.

Seriously, there are options that will greatly reduce the volume of waste if you are willing to try them.

Good luck!

I was already thinking of compiling tips like this, thanks, this is quite helpful!

mshchem · May 22, 2017

Recycle spent fix and blix. No Selenium into the tank. If you are hauling wash water and piddling amounts of developer to a waste water treatment plant you are doing more harm to the environment than good. Septic fields are a very very sustainable way to treat waste.
MHO Mike

Arklatexian · May 22, 2017

NedL said:
Please consider that you don't need to do everything with full trays and dump everything after every session. There are many possibilities and I think photographers have a tendency to get set in their ways and not be even willing to consider good alternatives. Here are some options that will dramatically cut down on volume of waste:

1. Use replenished developer. Especially for printing, but consider for film too if you develop lots of rolls. You might even discover that you like it better.
2. Use stop bath until it's done ( if you use acetic, the smell will disappear ), only then dump it in the same container w/ minimal developer discharges ( I'm getting to that )
3. Use fixer as recommended by the manufacturer. Just keep tabs of how many sheets or rolls go through it. It's very easy, it only takes 1/2 a second to make a tally mark, and you won't be throwing away lots of fixer.
4. Washes. Sit down and do some calculations regarding dilution. For film, I usually chuck the 1st and 2nd wash into the "developer discharges container", but I'm nearly certain just the first wash would be fine. I don't pay per gallon at my haz. disposal site... up to 15 gallons per visit for residents. For prints. I wash them individually: the first wash is with a smallish amount of water and goes into the discharge container. After that it goes into the septic.

I have a routine like this for salt printing and other processes with lots of silver nitrate and toner discharges. That's the one that generates the highest volume for me, but it's still only a few gallons per month.

Seriously, there are options that will greatly reduce the volume of waste if you are willing to try them.

Good luck!

What most of you are talking about regarding water supply is based on the fact that you live in more or less arid areas. The worry for us (me), where I live, is, in a normal year, we have an over supply of water (we have had about an inch of rain a day for three days now and our city water supply comes from large lakes which ultimately drain into a river or two and then into the Gulf of Mexico). However some politicians will hear that Arizona and California have a water problem and try to pass laws that apply to us all. This is a big country and one size seldom fits all. Tis a worry.........Regards!

NedL · May 23, 2017

mshchem said:
++ No Selenium into the tank.
MHO Mike

+1
You can use selenium toner replenished too. Just filter it every once in a while to get those black specs out. Then the only waste is what gets carried into the wash. And then several washes into the disposal jug.

lantau · May 23, 2017

Kino said:
I wonder if you'd investigate just how these companies dispose of your photo effluent and report back to us? I'd like to hear about their methods.

I am cynical and think their methods are no more effective that many mentioned here.

My collected waste goes to a ' problem waste' collection, which will visit the town four times a year. The stuff goes into a high temperature incinerator designed for hazardous waste. I guess the solid residue goes to a landfill that prevents leach into the ground.

Household waste is incinerated in large facilities, but these cannot handle hazardous material.

Darn Septic Tanks!

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency