Talk:Biosolids

--Alex 18:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Possible Merge and Re-name?

I think that sludge, sewage sludge treatment, and this article should all be merged somehow, as they all contain very similar topics. Also see the Talk:sewage sludge treatment as I have added some info on the solids processes. JAK83 03:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Not a bad idea. I would rename sewage sludge treatment to just sewage sludge then merge in sludge and make sludge a disamb to include industrial sludge, water treatment sludge, etc. I would leave biosolids as a separate article due to the political and social aspects it has that are not shared by sludges that are not distributed as CFR 503 biosolids. --Justanother 04:41, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that biosolids needs to remain a separate article. OptimistBen (talk) 07:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I also agree with OptimistBen that "biosolids" is a very distinct term from the more generic "sludge", or even "sewage sludge". "Sewage sludge" could be a section of the general sludge article, and could have it's own standalone article if enough content is there. Any of these can (and perhaps should) mention biosolids, but this article should remain separate. —DIV (128.250.247.158 (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2009 (UTC))

Non-Neutral page.

The information in the introduction of this article and throughout the article is very one-sided and non-neutral to the topic of biosolids, and their use. This is very anti-biosolid and does not present an accurate depiction of the information.

TRL 17:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree, this article is very biased.

I agree with writers above regarding the use of the term biosolids. The definition of biosolids in the introduction is very biased and one-side and does not depict an accurate use of the term. Biosolids are the nutrient rich organic material resulting from treatment of domestic sewage at a wastewater treatment facility. When used according to regulations biosolids are a beneficial resource containing plant nutrient and organic matter that can be applied and recycled as a soil amendment and fertilier. See references below that support the definition of biosolids. http://www.nebiosolids.org/intro.html http://www.biosolids.org/media_main.asp?sectionid=49&pageid=177&pagename=What%20Are% 20Biosolids —Preceding unsigned comment added by EMJ83 (talk • contribs) 21:30, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

September 17, 2007

The word "biosolids" is generic

About 15 years ago in an effort to deceive the public as to the true content of treated municipal sewage sludge (the landspreading of which is "regulated" at 40 CFR Part 503), the waste industry and EPA changed the name to the euphemism "biosolids". However, so many camels have gotten their noses under the "biosolids" tent, that the word is no longer specific to human sewerage, and is now used for a number of other waste products. (check Google to confirm):

-textile biosolids - winery biosolids - unprocessed dairy biosolids - chemical biosolids - animal biosolids - cow biosolids - poultry biosolids - chicken biosolids - swine biosolids - pig biosolids - paper mill biosolids - brewery biosolids - abattoir biosolids - horse biosolids - meat processing biosolids - sewage biosolids.

Cornell (University) Waste Management Institute correctly refers to this toxic/pathogenic waste as "sewage biosolids".   The federal Clean Water Act defines sewage sludge as a "pollutant".

On Octobver 21, 2001, an EPA administrator stated: "My personal view is, I don't think we should be using euphemisms," said Alan Hais, the EPA's program manager for sludge regulations. (Mr. Hais is now an employee of Water Environment Federation, the lobbying and PR arm of the sludge industry.)hshields16Hshield16 17:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Here is a reference that ought to be integrated in the article [1] MaxPont (talk) 09:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe npov tag can be removed based on edits September 18, 2007 by Rhallanger, version=158625067. Is this dispute resolved? --Paleorthid (talk) 00:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• I'm removing the tag. — Reinyday, 21:29, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Grade A and Grade B

Grade A and Grade B biosolids should be described in the article. Badagnani (talk) 22:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Lead content

The lead content of biosolids should be mentioned. Badagnani (talk) 22:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Other content

Chemotherapy and other prescription drugs that don't breakdown in treatment?

Other issues

Something really needs to be said about how the Biosolids distributors pay farmers to use this stuff ($100 a truckload) and are legally active in localities to keep biosolids use legal.

Biosolids were banned Appomattox Virginia, 4 poor farmers successfully sued and overturned the law since biosolids are legal to distribute in Virginia.

Globalize

above 'issues' need some reference (as well as signatures) - it appears to me this article really needs some globalization, it's more than a US topic/issue Red58bill (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I've removed some obvious POV from the History section, which appears to have come verbatim from: this page There appears to be much unreferenced material in the following sections on the US situation that was directly cribbed from other internet sources as well, and when I find sources, I'll cut that too .... suggest someone who has actual references improve the article before it gets reduced to a couple paragraphs .... or it may be preferable to merge to a section of some other waste topic Red58bill (talk) 16:47, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Improved US section, removing POV material and citeing facts ... would be good if someone could do the same for the EU section ... Biosolids are not doom and gloom, nor anyones salvation, but a "work in progress" toward a much more sustainable way to deal with one area of the waste stream Red58bill (talk) 03:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)