Re: [compost_tea] Another type chamber, Ted

From: Anthony Quinlan <boofq_at_wn.com.au>
Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 18:34:32 +0800

I would like to throw my two cents in here.
After spending a month on the US west coast in march. I saw pretty much eve=
rything there could be seen with respect to ACT from San Francisco to Seatt=
le.

>From the small KIS to the big mac of BOB's 2500G trailer set up and every t=
hing in between, I've now had a fair time digesting what I saw.

At the end of the day the ideal scenario would be to have the compost free =
running in solution, this is what I started to do and learnt the hard way. =
I've have a 5G KIS and still put the compost in free, its an excellent mach=
ine and very effective for a garden situation, but for a 500 acre vineyard =
you have to be practical.

On a small scale- no problem you can easy de-clogg your watering can or wha=
tever, but like many here I am about large scale applications and filtering=
 is just not the way to go about it -
1. its a pain in the rear and
2. your going to take out much of what your after- fungi.

without blowing Bob's trumpet too loud, I believe his chamber system is awe=
some. A lot of work has gone into his technique and in terms of practicalty=
 its probably the most efficient I've come across.

AQ


  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Robert Norsen
  To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 2:51 PM
  Subject: Re: [compost_tea] Another type chamber, Ted


  Ted - excuse me but the chamber you described is a dead chamber where the=
re is little air being introduced to keep the stuffed, soaked mud chamber f=
rom becoming anaerobic and where there is some washing action on the outsid=
e of this perforated cylinder.
     
  You compare that with your "open kettle" system where you put the nutrien=
ts and compost in loose, stir it with air, then filter the compost from the=
 tea at the end of the brew cycle. I think your system is a big improvement=
 over the two systems you describe. Yes I am very familiar with those syste=
ms. Yours is better.

  Now imagine a chamber where the compost and nutients are in a chamber wit=
h enough room and in water so they are free to move. Now introduce air in =
the bottom to induce violent bubble action in the compost/water mix. Now l=
et the rising bubbles pump water in near the bottom thru a screen/ filter =
and out thru a screen/filter near the top. retaining the compost but washin=
g the microbes into the TEA. In this very active "washing" chamber the act=
ion is enough to keep most of the filter area "washed open' The freedom of=
 action is like your open kettle method but much more intense. It cleans t=
he compost so that wood chips that go in covered with hard-to-remove surfac=
e of microbes become "polished", clean within an hour. Less compost is need=
ed since all the life on the compost is removed to the TEA it. The life an=
d soft particulate on the compost is removed to the tea where it circula te=
s lazily in the high nutrient laden water with a high DO2 condition imposed=
 by the many cubic feet of air pumped thru the extractor chamber every minu=
te.

  This system was designed 7 years ago to escape the bag and chamber syste=
ms then on the market and to remove the centrifugal pump the little guys we=
re subjected to every 3 to 5 minutes all thru the brew process.

  Over 7 years, out of many hundred users, scattered all over the world, T=
ed, you told me of one who doesn't like this system. You won't and they ha=
ven't identified themselves or described their problem so I can't know what=
 they found wrong. If they would let me know the problem I might be able t=
o correct it. It bothers the heck out of me to have a dissatisfied custome=
r.

  We have a hundred or so SFI reports. As do some independent testers. Pa=
ul Sachs has made a great independent series of tests at the N Y SFI labs. =
He recorded them and he presents them in an easily read chart at his web si=
te, www.norganics.com

  I wish I could tell you the name of this amazingly effective yet simple, =
inexpensive bewer system.and about the wide range of capacity it comes in b=
ut advertizing is verboten on the list - Maybe Sunday I can reveal those de=
tails Bob

  Ted Peterson <ted.peterson_at_tcsn.net> wrote:
    I did desting with a bunch of different filters and even using panty ho=
se. I looked at biomass because I don't have the ability to distinguish di=
fferent fungi. So I sampled before I filtered and after and made slides. =
I found the most reduction in biomass using panty hose yet there was still =
enough to work because that method was used on a vinyard and we did get dis=
ease suppression. I think the recommendation is 5% fungi by volume or some=
thing close to that for foliar application and that was about what we ended=
 up with by my estimates. I bought different grades of agricultural filters=
. These are bags that come in different mesh. I think Steve posted a hand=
y conversion table. I just bought sizes from 200 which is small to 1000 wh=
ich is quite large. They guy who sold me the bags asked what i was doing w=
ith them and he said that three layers of window screen would allow the sma=
ller pieces and fungi through and keep out t he larger pieces. He said 3 l=
ayers of screen compared to about 300 - 500 mesh. He recommended a bunch o=
f different ways to filter.

    Here is what I did:

    I built a frame out of pvc. I used 1/2 inch pvc pipe and flexible hose=
 that fit into the 1/2 inch fittings. The frame had two legs with T-connec=
tors at the bottom and quad-connectors 18 inches above that. The flex hose=
 was connected to the frame had two legs and round plastic circles at the b=
ottom and at 18 inches that were perpendicular to the legs. The circles we=
re a little smaller than the diameter of the bags (_at_ 10 inches diameter). =
I got a soaker head which is a metal cylinder with holes in it and cleaned =
out the insides that are filled with a foam filter. I wrapped three layers=
 of window screen around it and tie-wrapped them in place.

    Before I filter, I insert the frame into the bag then positon the soake=
r head which is connected through a standard 5/8 inch hose to my Wayne extr=
action pump inside the bag about to the bottom of the bag. I can pump abou=
t 150 gallons before the organic and other matter build up on the filter su=
rface. Shaking it up and down knocks most of it off. If any get through t=
o the soaker head, I simply shake it in the brew and it comes right off. T=
he reason I use the frame is to give the suction head the largest possible =
area to extract the tea through.

    When I work this way, I get about a 10 to 20% reduction in biomass afte=
r filtering. To me, that is an acceptable loss considering that the free s=
uspension method extracts far more fungi, in my experiments, that any bag o=
r chamber system. I determined this by using the exact same compost in the=
 exact same amounts and the exact same volume of water with the exact same =
nutrients and brewing for the exact same amount of time using the different=
 systems. In my experiments:

    1. Bag systems were the least successful. Silt buildup on the bottom o=
f the brewer was noticible but not extreme depending on the compost. Aerati=
on was very difficult because air had to get into the center of the bag to =
stop anaerobic conditions
    2. Chamber systems were more successful than bags but as the filter bec=
ame clogged effeciency and extraction dropped. Silt buildup here was signi=
ficant enough to promote anaerobic conditions on the bottom rather quickly.=
  Aeration was more difficult because like bags, air had to get into the co=
mpost in the center of the chamber.
    3. Free suspension and direct aeration that keeps the compost suspended=
 produced the greatest biomass and ran the longest before anaerobic conditi=
ons took over.

    Anaerobic conditions occurred in bag and chamber systems before free su=
spension systems however, eventually all became anaerobic over time.

    Ted Peterson
    EW/SOE


    ----- Original Message -----
      From: Mike Harvey
      To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 7:40 PM
      Subject: Re: [compost_tea] Parts for tea brewers


      How do you filter out all the compost particles without filtering out=
 the fungi??
      Mike Harvey
        From: Ted Peterson


        If you are using linear air pumps and doing no mechanical aeration =
(impellers and such) why don't you do away with the bag and dump the compos=
t directly into the water? I have been doing this for two years with my br=
ewers and have great results. Plant assays and soil tests confirm my tea i=
s working as it should or better.

        Ted Peterson
        EW/SOE
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: savenmoney
          To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 8:44 AM
          Subject: [compost_tea] Parts for tea brewers


          Hi I am a potato grower in Colorado and we are going to use compo=
st
          tea this year to try to cut back on the chemicals we use. I have=
 
          bought most of my pumps, tanks and things but am having a hard ti=
me
          finding tea bags. Do I have to buy the mesh and then sew it into=
 a
          bag or is there a place I can buy them. Also what size mesh is t=
he
          best 20, 30, 35. I have also bought some air stones for diffuser=
s
          they are a silica diffuser made with alumina, has anybody used t=
hem,
          and will they produce to small of a bubble.

          Thanks
          Justin Rogers








        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       


---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/compost_tea/
      
    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    compost_tea-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com
      
    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service=
.





Received on Fri May 21 2004 - 09:28:35 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 14:15:20 EST