photo chemistry poll ( color and b/w and alt process and ? )

"What always seems to get lost in these (all too frequent) APUG discussions about darkroom chemicals and septic systems is that a septic system is a highly reducing environment full of sulfide ion. Any hexavalent chromium is going to be rapidly reduced to either the trivalent or divalent state and depositied as highly insoluble sulfides. None is going to get into the ground water. They will remain as a sludge until the tank is pumped out. The same goes for silver, selenium, and most other metal ions. Sewage treatment plants have a similar reducing environment."

— Gerald C Koch, Are there B&W Chemicals that are Safe for Septic Tanks?, (there was a url link here which no longer exists), 03/07/2011

This is in complete agreement with the previously published citation. Again, it's not about justifying one's skirting of sanitation laws. It's about falsely implying that normal use of a home b&w darkroom may destroy one's septic system in as little as three years, and the unintended damage such a false assertion may cause to Billy's new interest in film developing.

These are two different issues entirely.

Ken

Again, it's not about justifying one's skirting of sanitation laws. [

Click to expand...

that is exactly what this is about ... justifying dumping photochemical waste down the drain.

your relentless arguing for the sake of arguing, so everyone thinks you are the
smartest guy in the room makes apug look bad, and at the moment makes you look like a
person who believes it is ok to skirt the laws and pollute because a chemist who
lives across the country, having no idea what your ( or anyone else's local/state/federal laws are ) said photo waste is OK for septic systems.


please start that thread about how dumping b/w, color and alt process waste
is OK for septic systems, sewer systems and the environment, everyone here looks forward to reading it .
and please publish your conversation with your local + state DEM/EPA officials, ( you can ask for my friend D - in the EPA(federal) )
make sure you mention the toners often talked about and used here ( sulfide, selenium, thiocarbamide, uranium )
as well as dichromate bleach, e6 + c41 chemistry, and exhausted potassium cyanide, sodium+ammonium thiosulfate fixers.


these are the things i was speaking of in my opening post, its too bad you are too busy arguing why it is ok to dump in and potenially foul a septic system rather than reading the opening post.

instead of people trying to be vocal arguing why it is OK to dump down the drain and it does "nothing" ...
people should be vocal about following NedL's lead, he has the right idea, bringing the stuff to hazmat.

jnanian said:

that is exactly what this is about ... justifying dumping photochemical waste down the drain.

Click to expand...

Ken Nadvornick said:

As I noted earlier, if the law mandates it, then the law needs to be respected. If one disagrees with the law, then one needs to work toward changing the law to more accurately address and mitigate the risks involved.

Click to expand...

..

When septic tanks in my area are inspected, all they seem to check is whether the tank needs pumping or not. They don't run any chemical analysis in the effluent to see if you are pouring anything harmful into the tank. If it was that important, wouldn't they check that? I don't think they are really concerned, despite what the laws are. The bottom line is, if you were pouring something harmful into it, the bacterial action in the tank would be suppressed, and waste material would build up a little more rapidly. If it needed pumping, you would be told this. You have it pumped, and all is well.

Mandating an inspection on a regular basis thus takes care of any problems that might occur due to people putting substances down their drain that might cause a problem. They know that people probably won't know, or won't follow any laws concerning it, so the regular inspections are way of dealing with this. I believe they have probably determined through experience that a three-year inspection is quite adequate in dealing with these concerns. I would guess a similar inspection is mandated in most localities.

In any case, I don't believe darkroom chemicals pose any danger to septic systems. Contrast the small amounts of chemicals poured down the drain to the very large amount of water going into the tank on a regular basis. We run water for cooking, cleaning, washing dishes, showering, brushing our teeth, flushing the toilet, washing clothes. It all gets highly diluted. And anything in the tank that shouldn't be there likely will get pumped out eventually, and who knows, might even end up in the same place or a place similar to what one might take to a hazardous waste disposal site.

Considering the latter, and with regular inspections as additional protection, I have absolutely no problem with pouring darkroom chemicals down my drain.

jnanian said:

that is exactly what this is about ... justifying dumping photochemical waste down the drain.

Click to expand...

Only in your mind. You regularly bring this subject up on APUG to rage against everyone else.

After a war the solders are in a celebratory parade in the city. One mother calls out to the other people attending the parade and announces that all the other solders are out of step in unison with her beloved son. Jes' sayin'

The gum wash out process , is to remove unwanted pigment which is hardened with exposure, its more of a physical release,
I use regular water for all silver halide materials, I do add the softening agent to the hypo clear.


Could you explain further how the salts present in tap water are beneficial to the wash process.?

Bob Carnie said:

....
Could you explain further how the salts present in tap water are beneficial to the wash process.?

Click to expand...

I'm interested too. When I first started playing with salt prints a curious thing happened. For normal B/W photopaper I mix my developer, stop and fixer with RO water, but wash with water from our well ( that has been through a calcite filter and a water softener ). With salt prints, I noticed that I got some fogging in the highlights unless I used RO water for the wash.

This in a salt print that has:

1) Been washed for 5 minutes twice with RO water and a pinch of salt ( to make soluble silver chloride )
2) fixed twice in hypo
3) rinsed with RO water
4) soaked for 3 minutes in a solution of sodium sulfite.

After all that, what could be left to react with minerals dissolved in our well water? Our water is not very hard, and the main things left after the softener should be some potassium and chloride ions, I think...

I never did it again, but I still think it's a little strange that something could affect the paper so late in the process.
The fog had a strange mottled look to it.. I wonder if it is even anything to do with silver or some reaction involving calcium carbonate additive from the paper itself...

I have not set up my darkroom yet, for several reasons, one of which is what to do with the chemicals. Its been awhile, however, for 30 years using a septic, I never had a problem (that I know of) dumping both color and B&W into the septic. Upon selling the last house, and having the septic inspected, no problems what so ever were discovered. That said, ignorance is no excuse so I am trying to resolve my current situation. Unfortunately I live in the boonies so there are not many alternatives.

I have the choices:

• Dump down the drain after mixing the developer and stop bath
• Recover silver from the hypo
• Take the chemicals to a close by hazardous waste disposal that if provided free to us

Here the UK the advice seems to be for amateur photographers to wash the chemicals down the public sewer. I have looked for specific regulations but have been unable to find any.

Hi,
I need your help please. I'm looking for a silver diffusion developer. (Something like Agfa or Gevaert Copyrapid developer)
Where can I buy it?

rpc

they do soil tests in these areas, and mitigate if the tests aren't "clean"
they obviously don't do that in your neck of the woods (wherever that might be )
mitigation includes removal of soil, disposal of contaminated soil and putting new soil down ...
( think mitigation of a gas station if there is a tank-leak )
( thousands of dollars ... )

also, you mentioned something like $85 for a "pumpout"
around here it is 3x that amount ... when we were still on septic
- 4-5 years ago - it was over $200 ... it is even more now.

again, every location is different, laws are from slacker to stormtroopers

its obvious, you don't really care about any of this ...
and your point that you enjoy dumping into your septic system
is loud and clear ...

good luck with whatever it is you are doing.

===
hi bakody

i sent a pm to you, not sure if you got it.
if you google " Copyrapid developer " one of the first few hits is
a patent with a developer recipe on page 2
i have attached it to this post ...
i had never heard of this process or developer type before.
not sure if you can use it with current papers, not sure if the
recipe on that page is real or just a jumble of ingredients
( from what i understand sometimes recipes are intentionally wrong or vague so who knows )
and not sure if it is a special "receiver" paper you will need to transfer the image ...

have fun!

On the subject of septic fields ...

(has quite a ring to it, doesn't it?)

As I understand it one of the things that can seriously damage a septic system is to put too high a volume of liquid through it. If you hear about a situation where photographers are dealing with a damaged septic system, you might suggest that they check the flow rates on their film and print washers.

MattKing said:

On the subject of septic fields ...

(has quite a ring to it, doesn't it?)

As I understand it one of the things that can seriously damage a septic system is to put too high a volume of liquid through it. If you hear about a situation where photographers are dealing with a damaged septic system, you might suggest that they check the flow rates on their film and print washers.

Click to expand...

the funny thing is that soaking prints and film and dumping and soaking more and dumping ( from all reports i have read )
actually cleans film and fiber pritns better than running 1000gallons an hour ...

Down the drain, through the sewage plant, and into the Rio Grande where it ultimately mixes with the millions of gallons of heavy metals dumped into the Animas by the EPA. One of the EPA spokes-people actually said on the local news "dilution is the cure for pollution."

mts said:

Down the drain, through the sewage plant, and into the Rio Grande where it ultimately mixes with the millions of gallons of heavy metals dumped into the Animas by the EPA. One of the EPA spokes-people actually said on the local news "dilution is the cure for pollution."

Click to expand...

Well shucks, iff'n it is good enough for the EPA its good enough for me!