Sludge Watch ==> Australia notes that biosolids are cheap

[Maureen Reilly]

Sludgewatch Admin:

Biosolids are cheap.  Isn't this an example of 'damning with faint praise'?

Would it be unkind to note that if cost is the only determining factor, 
farmers would do better to invite their urban neighbors over to provide 
their 'fertilizing contributions' directly to the fields.
But farmer costs are not the issue.

The issue is: should we be using sewage sludge on our food chain lands?

The problem is that sewage sludge 'biosolids' contain hospital pathogens, 
industrial chemicals, endocrine disrupting compounds, unbalanced levels of 
nutrients, and antibiotic resistant bacteria.
That is why is should not be characterized as 'fertilizer'.

These sludge land spreading programs providing free services and tipping 
fees to farmers to take urban wastes look dangerously close to unregulated 
landfills.


.............................................

Biosolids a cheaper option than fertislier

Tuesday, 05/02/2008

Farmers in South Australia are looking to use treated waste as an 
alternative to paying high prices for fertiliser.

Currently up to 30,000 tonnes of biosolids a year, from a waste treatment 
plant on the outskirts of Adelaide, are being spread by farmers onto their 
soil.

Biosolids contain trace elements that improve soil condition.

Bute farmer Max Venning has been using biosolids on his property for twelve 
years and says the entire community is contributing to this free fertiliser 
alternative.

"There's a lot of expensive ingredients that go into biosolids, from caviar 
to hamburgers", he says.

"You've got some pretty important people contributing to the manufacture, 
from the members of the Adelaide Club down to your humble blue-collar 
workers".

http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/2007/s2154503.htm