RE: [compost_tea] Testing procedures for various brewers

From: Mike Bosko <mjbosko_at_jmtsystems.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:37:27 -0700

Thanks for the reply Jeff. But first, I don’t want to put stock in any
compost being uniform. That was the basis of my question. I can’t see how
we can say, yet, that any compost, even under environmentally controlled
conditions, is uniform.

The way you have written your reply is how I’d really like to think about
it, really. But its just not satisfying my curiosity… Although I value your
insight, knowledge and experience with teas, I’m thinking of it more in
terms of scientific proof instead. Thinking in terms of our methods for
testing and approving, or disapproving, given brewers -- and the lax
controls we’re allowing (the way it looks from my seat way over here in the
back of the class) – it makes me sway to imagine what would happen if Dr. E’
s papers were sent to the journals on such basis (I know they are not!, just
an analogy). I’d think that their audience would expect more controls, er,
proof in the puddin’.

?? Just something I’ve been pondering ??

-m

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Lowenfels [mailto:jeff_at_gardener.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 6:29 PM
To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [compost_tea] Testing procedures for various brewers


<<So… when I see test results of a given brewer, I question – are we seeing
the results of the materials extracted from the compost, the brewers
capability to grow aerobic colonies or a mixture of both? I’m making my own
judgment that it’s the latter. In that case, how can we say a certain
brewer is better or worse than another by looking at the test results? Are
there not too many variables>>>

I don't think it matters as much as you may think it does.
First, you can take the very best Alaska Humus, with its unbelievable
numbers and in the wrong machine get low numbers. Obviously you have to
start with a compost that you know has numbers....but really, you can tell
if a machine is working if you have any kind of decent compost/humus/Vermi.
And, I can tell you that even something as stable as Alaska Humus has
variability from batch to batch, so I don't put as much stock as you want to
in uniform compost.
To me, the SFI numbers tell it all. Forget that most manufactures will try
and use the best stuff they can to get the highest numbers. Remember the
line at the bottom with the "minimum standards" for each category? If the
numbers from a machine meet or beat those, I know am going to get great
coverage. So I then look to cost, size, maintaince, speed and
nutrient/humus/Compost content. It is those ranges on the SFI reports that
are comparable to each other. That is what counts IMHO.

Cheers,

JEff



Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
click here
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.3551198.4824677.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17074186
12:HM/A=1663535/R=0/SIG=11ps6rfef/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=3050
4&media=atkins>


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




Received on Thu Jul 17 2003 - 01:00:31 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:29:23 EST