by SUSAN MANN
Given the chance, Grey County farmer Karl Chittka says he’d probably use a liquid fertilizer fomenting controversy in nearby Dundalk.
“I’m pretty sure that it will be better than the land application of biosolids has been and that hasn’t been all that bad either,” he says of the fertilizer Lystek International Inc. is proposing to manufacture from municipal biosolids.
Chittka has used biosolids on his 300-acre farm in Southgate Township before. Five years ago, after an application, he found an increase in dew worms. He anticipates the Lystek product “will enhance the soil conditions of the land” and he’d rather use it than chemical fertilizer.
But Dundalk area residents oppose the company’s proposal to set up its Southgate Organic Material Recovery Centre in Southgate Township’s Eco-Industrial Park southwest of the village. The company plans to convert municipal biosolids – trucked in from as far as 120 kilometres away– into a fertilizer product. Lystek expects to be up and running this summer or fall.
Residents groups as well as individual members of the public are appealing the company’s building permit, obtained Feb. 2, under Section 25 of the provincial Building Code Act. Glen Drummond, past president of the Southgate Public Interest Research Group, says they have concerns about the validity of the zoning bylaw, truck traffic going through Dundalk and the appropriateness of locating the facility on a floodplain.
Spokespeople from Ontario Federation of Agriculture and the National Farmers Union Ontario Branch say they aren’t familiar with the product. The NFU doesn’t support spreading untreated sewage sludge and wants to see third-party testing of treated sludge to ensure all heavy metals, toxic residues and pharmaceuticals are removed says Ann Slater, NFU’s Ontario coordinator. Don McCabe, Ontario Federation of Agriculture vice president notes there are regulations governing the application of the product and farmers will need to ensure it works for them.
The Christian Farmers Federation of Ontario doesn’t have a policy on the spreading of sewage sludge, says general manager John Clement.
Chittka says the biggest problem with biosolids is the odour and the amount of pathogens. Since the liquid Lystek product will be injected into the ground rather than being spread and incorporated the way biosolids are there will be reduced odour.
Kevin Litwiller, Lystek director of business development, says pathogens are destroyed during a patented process that essentially pasteurizes the material using heat, alkali and a process called “high shear mixing.” The end product is also enriched to meet the fertilizer needs of farmers.
Maureen Reilly, an environmentalist and director of Sludge Watch, a moderated list serv that compiles information about issues connected to biosolids, says she is concerned about the toxic chemicals, pharmaceuticals and heavy metals in the material. “Why would we build new facilities to facilitate putting this where we grow our food?”
She claims there’s nothing about the treatment of the biosolids that addresses the heavy metals, such as mercury, cadmium and lead. “The Lystek material has the same heavy metals as the untreated (sewage) sludge.”
Litwiller says the Environment Ministry is responsible for regulating heavy metal levels in biosolids at the municipal wastewater treatment plant. The biosolids Lystek receives from municipalities has to “meet or exceed the Environment Ministry’s guidelines as it relates to acceptable levels of metals or we cannot accept it nor process it.”
Reilly also questions why the material would be spread in the vicinity of Dundalk when government farmland inventories show there is already too much phosphorous in Grey and Dufferin counties.
Lystek is pursing registration of its commercial fertilizer product with the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Fertilizers and supplements sold or imported into Canada are regulated under the federal Fertilizers Act. The company already has a CFIA registration for a commercial fertilizer made from municipal biosolids at the Guelph wastewater treatment plant. Although the product in Southgate will be manufactured using the same process used at the Guelph facility, the company has to obtain separate registration, Litwiller says.
Without the CFIA registration, Lystek’s finished product would be regulated under the agriculture ministry rules for non-agriculture source material, he explains.
Litwiller says both provincial and federal government agencies oversee Lystek’s entire process and industry and the company will meet or exceed all the guidelines stipulated by those agencies.
They already have two area farmers who say they’re interested in buying the fertilizer and that would “pretty much speak for our entire capacity for our first year of operations,” he adds. As well, the company has a contract with the City of Toronto for biosolids and “we have some other discussions ongoing.”
The company has applied for Environment Ministry approval to take in 150,000 cubic metres of biosolids annually at peak capacity. Litwiller anticipates it will take three years of operation to reach peak capacity.
The plant would also accept septage from licensed haulers.
Lindsay Davidson, Environment Ministry spokesman, says by email the ministry hasn’t made a decision yet and will consider any public comments on the application until a decision is made.
The application can be viewed at the ministry’s Owen Sound district office. BF
Comments
Maureen Reilly's opinion is based on facts. Whereas Kevin Litwiller's sales pitch is based on the thermophilic test for fecal coliform inhibiting the growth activity of most gram negative Enterobacteriaceae that ferment lactose. While most Enterobacteriaceae in sludge go dormant under high stress conditions such as he describes, once released into the environment they may reactivate and cause odors. Furthermore, other bacteria not included in the testing are far more difficult to inactivate. Moreover, the thing to keep in mind is that the guidelines are put in place to protect the dumpers from liability, not the farmers land and health. for further information, see "MYTHS PROMOTED TO SELL OR GIVE AWAY SLUDGE AND/OR RECYCLED WATER". http://thewatchers.us/myths/sludge-myths.html
Jim Bynum, vp
Help for Sewage Victims
Where does all that crap ends up anyways in the rivers and lakes.Why not throw some on field crops for nonfood crops in moderation, can,t be any worst off than straight into our drinking water and water we all get to enjoy.
Thousands of careful research investigations have shown that organic matter recycled from waste water treatment facilities significantly improves soil and crops and that risks from pollutants and microbes are very low. This organic matter is processed from material that comes from everyone in the community, is full of nutrients that passed through people first, and, when dried, is in a form that has proved free of microbial risks. You can verify the scientific soundness of recycling through reports issued by the Water Environment Research Foundation and by agricultural research universities. Importantly, public waste water facilities have an opportunity to support the local economy in making the nutrients collected during sewage treatment available free or at low cost to nearby farmers. Your local treatment plant managers are committed to public health and environmental quality, and this valuable recycling program is an expression of that commitment.
Bill Toffey
Mid-Atlantic Biosolids Association
Farmers contemplating using sewage sludge products-- no matter how treated-would be wise to get factual and recent science-based information about this risky practice, information not provided by the industry that profits from land application.
Sludge is not just human waste; it contains a vast array of industrial pollutants, many of which are highly toxic and persistent, can leach into ground water, or end up in the food chain. Every industry , business, hospital, or metal plating shop that is connected to sewers, can legally pipe much of their hazardous waste into sewage treatment plants. Here these pollutants, together with viable pathogens, are REMOVED from the waste water, only to CONCENTRATE in the resulting sludge. No economical process exists that can remove these pollutants.
A recent court ordered the US Department of Agriculture to compensate a dairy farmer whose land was permanently poisoned by repeated sludge applications so he no longer could grow crops. In addition, his prize winning dairy herd was wiped out when hundreds of cows became sick and died after ingesting forage grown on the contaminated land.
Farmers and land owners are liable if wells get polluted, neighbors get sick, or animals die as a result of sludge use. In addition their and their neighbor's property becomes devalued. Is the short-term yield increase, caused by the nitrogen and water in sludge worth the long-term DECREASE in yields? Both the US and Canadian regulations permit cumulative pollutant loading of soils, until there is a 50% yield reduction.
After becoming fully informed about the risks, and not just the short-term benefits of using sludge on their crops, farmers might end up agreeing with their neighbors, many farm groups, major produce processing companies, and non-industry funded experts, that using biosolids is not such a good idea. For more information, visit
www.sludgefacts.org
Caroline Snyder Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Rochester Institute of Technology (NY)
The David Suzuki Foundation is opposing sewage sludge spreading - treated or otherwise - on farmland.
John Werring spoke for the Suzuki Foundation on radio. It is an excellent interview and can be heard at
http://www.bayshorebroadcasting.ca/downloads/audio/open_line_a_-_lystek....
.......................................................
Here is the Lystek presentation that is causing much concern - do the numbers add up?
http://www.lystek.com/en/media/DundalkOMRCPresentation.pdf
Lystek Operations report:
http://commonground-spirg.squarespace.com/storage/Lystek%20Design%20and%...
.......................................................
Questions:
Why hook up to the local sewage plant?
Why is the proposed Lystek plant planning to hook up to the Dundalk sewage treatment plant?
Since the Lystek facility's purpose is to process sludge and septage, surely it should treat its own septage. There is no need for them to hook up to the local sewer plant.
( The concern is this: will Lystek be taking a tipping fee for materials they then pipe down to the municipal plant?)
Where will all the water to dilute the sewage sludge and run the plant come from? How much water will they
use for each operation requiring water?
They say they will bring in 43,000 tonnes of sludge and septage a year yet send out 50,000 tonnes of finished 'product'.
What is this extra 7,000 tonnes of material?
If its water...where will they get the millions of litres of water? Can the local watershed stand to have millions of litres shipped away from local groundwater and streams?
These are their figures for year one of operations.
At full scale multiply these numbers by about 4.
Hazardous materials
They say there are to be no hazardous materials on site.
Isn't potassium hydroxide a hazardous material? Isn't sodium hydroxide hazardous?
How many truck loads of these materials will come in every month?
Stormwater
Stormwater on site will be held in a stormwater trench then released to flow offsite. What quality standard will this water be required to meet? How often will it be tested?
Land base of farms needed - 6,000 to 24,000 acres of land will be needed for spreading (at the CFIA label application rate limit)
In year one they plan to distribute 50,000 tonnes of low viscosity processed sewage sludge - what they plan to register as "Low Analysis Farm Fertilizer"- to farms in a 20 to 30 kilometer radius. But the maximum application rate according to their fertilizer label is 4 tonnes per hectare. Over 6,000 acres will be needed in the first year. Soils in the area are already alkaline. Why would they need more alkalinity?
Low Nutrient Analysis
Normally fertilizers in Canada must have over 24% major crop nutrients: nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium. Since Lystek material does not meet this standard (it is either 6% or 9% or 10% nutrient NPK depending on which piece of their literature you read) it is registered as a "Low Analysis Farm Fertilizer". In other words it is a low nutrient material. Why does Lystek describe their material as a high nutrient fertilizer? Is this legal?
Viscosity
The material is low viscosity - so that it flows easily through the hoses and tynes when being pumped into the soil.
But that means it will also flow easily down through the soil profile - down toward groundwater. It will move swiftly into and through tile drains into surface water. The company claims the viscosity moves sludge from 2,000,000 cP down to 6,000 cP.
But low viscosity is not what you want in a fertilizer. Just the opposite. You want fertilizer to stay in the root zone, not move easily in the soil. Will the low viscosity mean that toxic compounds in the processed sludge fertilizer will move more easily into crops and into groundwater?
Application Rate
According to Lystek : "Lystek processed materials can meet all of these fertilizer demands without any practical limitation to annual application rates to land". They plan to create a material that is ultimately not regulated under the Ontario Nutrient Management Act. Does this statement mean that they do not intend to respect limits to the agricultural application rates for their product?
Local impacts, food impacts
The local community is understandably concerned about the impact of the plant on their quality of life, and food consumers should be concerned that 50,000 to 200,000 tonnes per year of material with chemicals, toxic metals, and pharmaceuticals is headed to the soil where we grow our food.
Maureen Reilly
Sludge Watch
The majority of tax payers in Southgate Twp are NOT "willing hosts" to the proposed biosolids plant for many many reasons, such as odours, toxins, chemicals, drugs and heavy metals polluting the soil and waterways. Unfortunately, Southgate Twp council has not been transparent; there has been no public consultations; they are not interested in the scientific facts about human and industrial sludge; it seems like a lot of decision making has been conducted behind closed doors!
Katie Harrison
Southgate Ratepayer
We are seriously considering the purchase of a property that is only a few thousand feet from the proposed Fertilizer Plant site. We intend to use the property as a horse farm requiring pasture and hay to be grown on the land. We have never seen a fertilizer plant and do not know EXACTLY what is does to the air quality in the immediate area. The above info is certainly alarming with regard to the land. Is there ANY chance that the plant will not be built?
**NB Editor - I'd prefer not to give names since we are literally at the offer stage of buying the property and this has only just been brought to our attention. We have a small hatch to escape through.......
I don't know if living near the facility will be good or bad. My only comment is this...if in the future you need or want to sell the property will you be able to do so? You, yourself have doubts, or you would not have placed a comment on this site.
Pretty much anything can be sold so long as the price is low enough. So keep that in mind if you are buying this place.
Post new comment