Ash disposal question

Start a giant tomato patch with it. Next August compete in the Pittston festival for the best tasting fruit. Yummy.

Berlin wrote:

NoSmoke wrote: guy and is from North Carolina so he is using bituminous data and not anthracite data.

The ash is the same. There's no magical and mystical difference to between anthracite and bituminous coal. Anthracite has lower volatiles because of the greater pressures exerted on it. That's about it as far as differences in composition.

They guys isn't using ANY sound data from anywhere if he's pissing himself over coal ash. What it contains isn't different than the dirt under your feet. The concentration of toxic trace elements aren't substantially different or more highly elevated than the soil in general. Coal ash hysteria is one more way for greenies to scare people away from coal - that's all there is to that hype.

Good answer.

Berlin wrote:

NoSmoke wrote: guy and is from North Carolina so he is using bituminous data and not anthracite data.

The ash is the same. There's no magical and mystical difference to between anthracite and bituminous coal. Anthracite has lower volatiles because of the greater pressures exerted on it. That's about it as far as differences in composition.

They guys isn't using ANY sound data from anywhere if he's pissing himself over coal ash. What it contains isn't different than the dirt under your feet. The concentration of toxic trace elements aren't substantially different or more highly elevated than the soil in general. Coal ash hysteria is one more way for greenies to scare people away from coal - that's all there is to that hype.

But, isn't the collected fly ash from a power plant a concern? Think about it; many tons of coal are burned the fly ash is captured in a bag house or something similar. This concentrates the fly ash. Eventually the bag house needs to be emptied. Isn't it more hazardous now that it's concentrated? I would think so. That's why other minerals are added to the combustion fuel so that the resulting products of combustion, are less hazardous. It's all just a giant high temperature chemistry reaction. Yes, they use fly ash as a concrete ingredient, but isn't that just a method to bind the bad stuff so it can't harm the environment vs. putting it in a landfill where it might wash away. What am I missing?

Yanche wrote:

Berlin wrote:

NoSmoke wrote: guy and is from North Carolina so he is using bituminous data and not anthracite data.

The ash is the same. There's no magical and mystical difference to between anthracite and bituminous coal. Anthracite has lower volatiles because of the greater pressures exerted on it. That's about it as far as differences in composition.

They guys isn't using ANY sound data from anywhere if he's pissing himself over coal ash. What it contains isn't different than the dirt under your feet. The concentration of toxic trace elements aren't substantially different or more highly elevated than the soil in general. Coal ash hysteria is one more way for greenies to scare people away from coal - that's all there is to that hype.

But, isn't the collected fly ash from a power plant a concern? Think about it; many tons of coal are burned the fly ash is captured in a bag house or something similar. This concentrates the fly ash. Eventually the bag house needs to be emptied. Isn't it more hazardous now that it's concentrated? I would think so. That's why other minerals are added to the combustion fuel so that the resulting products of combustion, are less hazardous. It's all just a giant high temperature chemistry reaction. Yes, they use fly ash as a concrete ingredient, but isn't that just a method to bind the bad stuff so it can't harm the environment vs. putting it in a landfill where it might wash away. What am I missing?

I'm not sure what you're missing. Fly ash isn't hazardous waste either and although it occasionally tends to contain slightly different (higher or lower %) elements in itself -thus not NOT leaving them in the bottom ash, it really isn't different than most US soils either. If the flyash and the bottom ash were mixed, you'd have more or less the same concentrations of minerals and trace elements that you have in anthracite or bituminous ash from a home heating appliance. For example, typically coal is about 10% ash, thus when you burn coal, you end up with some elemnts/minerals entering the air and most inorganics staying with the ash - fly ash has about 10x the amount of uranium of the coal that was burned (slighly less with a small amount entering the air and a small amount staying in the bottom ash). http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html

In an industrial boiler with a powerful forced draft (and often pulverized fuel) you end up with certain things in the fly ash (vitrified light minerals) and heavier minerals and elements separate in the bottom ash - although there's a lot of overlap and it depends on the method and design of combustion. Some things are more concentrated in the flyash, but, not so substantially that it produces any dramatic or significant threat; obviously those that wish to scare everyone wish to skew things to make the great unwashed think so, but that's not really accurate for them to do and the facts speak for themselves. Fly ash isn't added to concrete to "bind it up" it's added because it is a very good portland cement replacement and it serves the duel use of disposal of a large amount of material as well as replacing a more costly material making it a smart economic decision.

Yanche, other 'minerals' are only added to the combustion process in a fluidized bed combustion furnace, In any various type of pulverized or stoker fired plant typically nothing is added to the combustion process but coal. There is after treatment of the exhaust gasses to "scrub" and remove sulfur and now mercury using various minerals and liquids, but typically limestone wet or semi-dry for SO2 reduction - this material is captured and not allowed to leave the stack.

I really did not think this was a big deal; but you know the type...no matter what you say his mind is made up and I am killing my children by tossing some coal/wood ashes in my garden, that the ground is going to absorb, the plants will uptake, which we will eat, and my kids will certainly die.

Phoooooooeyyyyyyyyyy!

I do appreciate the information though; at least now I have some information that I can counter with in confidence should this be brought up again.

They put coal ash (cinders) on the roads during the winter where I live. If you have low spots to fill in, use it there. If not put it in the garbage - it's ash not hazardous waste.

Charlie

Silly really...

Most folks won't even think twice about disposing alkaline batteries in trash. Coal ash is essentially dirt/rock with the carbon removed (and some sulfur). One has to ask... what's better in a landfill.

I am in an excellent position to prove that ash is non-toxic.

As a farmer I have my soil tested a lot and I had soil samples taken a few years ago before I started adding coal ashes to my garden spot. Because we use dairy cow and sheep manure for fertilizer here, and grain designed for dairy cows has zinc and copper added to it, we always test for heavy metals to be sure we are not overloading our soil. No manure has been spread here since the last soil sample has been taken, so it is easy to get another sample this Spring and have it tested again and get an idea of what it was like before and after.

When I post those soil samples, you guys and gals may be surprised though; our soil here has something that few "greenies" will acknowledge; our soil is nearing the upper limits of organic matter. While you never hear them mention this, soil can actually have too much organic matter, which impedes the ability of water to move through the soil. Too much is just as bad as not enough, but when they compare soil health on organic farms, they are comparing it to the mid-west where they typically knife in anhydrous ammonia due to the vast acreage in row crops and a limited supply of manure. We have access to manure and lots of it, so you will never see the "greenies" compare their organic soil to ours, as we have them beat. Still we are in the same "hate them" category as coal fired power plants because our cows and sheep "pass gas" and so that methane is considered a contribution to greenhouse gas.

It is not what they include in their doom and gloom reports; it is what they leave out!

Holy good grief... lol! I didn't know it was so complicated... I've started dumping it in the trash, bagged of course. I like my trash guys, don't really want to treat them to a free coating of ash when they dump the cans.
As to letting it cool... I have two ash pans, so I pull the full one out and replace it with the empty, then let the full one cool- I only have to change it about every other day anyway. The only problem I've had so far is getting a free "ash bath" every time I dump the darn thing into the bag. LOL I learned pretty fast to take it OUTDOORS to transfer from the ash pan into the bag. This sure has been an education! Thanks so much, all for the advice!

just put in in a pile down by the road with a sign on it that says -posted. do not take ! It will be gone by morning!

I gave some to a guy a work that had a driveway that would ice up wicked bad. He could park his car and watch it slide. He put the ash down and the car walked up the driveway like it had tracks. He now has a Magnum stoker so I guess my ash is no longer needed

MarySthewriter wrote:Holy good grief... lol! I didn't know it was so complicated...

That is what I said when they did a Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan for my flock of sheep. In order to pertain to the Regulations that exist for the manure they make, I have a 150 page plan. Had to have my soil tested, their manure tested, soils mapped, and concrete containment put down...and that was just to deal with their manure. The Comprehensive Grazing Plan...which is where they could graze and when, is even worse. That one is about 200 pages long!

Now Maine just passed an animal carcass disposal law, so now I need a plan in case my flock of sheep dies...and no they cannot just be buried. I need to compost them. That plan will be about 67 pages long. It is kind of silly because the last time I lost a pile of sheep suddenly (they call it a Catatrophic Carcass Disposal Plan which is different then a Routine Carcass Disposal Plan) I just took them up to the dairy farm and composted them with the cows that died. That worked, but that practice was outlawed, along with giving them away to coyote hunters who use them for coyote bait. Jeesh, talk about making it hard on a farmer...

Some days it sucks being a sheep farmer. Here is a photo of a bad day...

NoSmoke wrote:

MarySthewriter wrote:Holy good grief... lol! I didn't know it was so complicated...

That is what I said when they did a Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan for my flock of sheep. In order to pertain to the Regulations that exist for the manure they make, I have a 150 page plan. Had to have my soil tested, their manure tested, soils mapped, and concrete containment put down...and that was just to deal with their manure. The Comprehensive Grazing Plan...which is where they could graze and when, is even worse. That one is about 200 pages long!

Now Maine just passed an animal carcass disposal law, so now I need a plan in case my flock of sheep dies...and no they cannot just be buried. I need to compost them. That plan will be about 67 pages long. It is kind of silly because the last time I lost a pile of sheep suddenly (they call it a Catatrophic Carcass Disposal Plan which is different then a Routine Carcass Disposal Plan) I just took them up to the dairy farm and composted them with the cows that died. That worked, but that practice was outlawed, along with giving them away to coyote hunters who use them for coyote bait. Jeesh, talk about making it hard on a farmer...

Some days it sucks being a sheep farmer. Here is a photo of a bad day...

Sad day.jpg

If the coddled city-dwelling idiots had just half an idea of the regulatory burden the producers in this country face every day, then, there might be some hope.

How true...

One year when Michelle Obama did a organic garden at the White House...with full press of course...a farmer listed all the Regulatory Processes they failed to do that us Farmers would have had to go through.

Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan because they imported organic matter (manure)
Farm Plan because they used Federal Money
List of Personal Property owned and leased by them including any corporations they belong too
Proof of Farm Training and Experience (This would have stopped the process for Michelle)
Verification of other Non-Farm Income
Environmental Impact Statement
Highly Erodible Land Assessment
Wetland Assessment
Soil Conservation Plan
Archeological Assessment (this is required on any farm, not just Federal Property)
Wildlife Impact Study
Return on Investment Analysis

We have been on this farm since 1746 and despite that we are still not grandfathered on these issues. It took me 2 years to get the permitting in order to clear a forest into a field. The thing was, I have photos taken from a Soil Conservation Plan from 1965 that shows this same location being a field, so I was not making a new field, just clearing trees that grew up in a field since 1965, even though my family originally cleared the field in 1838.

When I took this farm over in 2008, I decided I was going to go by the rules and regulations, but I had no idea how involved that was. It is insane what farmers have to do to farm today...insane!

NoSmoke wrote:How true...

One year when Michelle Obama did a organic garden at the White House...with full press of course...a farmer listed all the Regulatory Processes they failed to do that us Farmers would have had to go through.

Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan because they imported organic matter (manure)
Farm Plan because they used Federal Money
List of Personal Property owned and leased by them including any corporations they belong too
Proof of Farm Training and Experience (This would have stopped the process for Michelle)
Verification of other Non-Farm Income
Environmental Impact Statement
Highly Erodible Land Assessment
Wetland Assessment
Soil Conservation Plan
Archeological Assessment (this is required on any farm, not just Federal Property)
Wildlife Impact Study
Return on Investment Analysis

We have been on this farm since 1746 and despite that we are still not grandfathered on these issues. It took me 2 years to get the permitting in order to clear a forest into a field. The thing was, I have photos taken from a Soil Conservation Plan from 1965 that shows this same location being a field, so I was not making a new field, just clearing trees that grew up in a field since 1965, even though my family originally cleared the field in 1838.

When I took this farm over in 2008, I decided I was going to go by the rules and regulations, but I had no idea how involved that was. It is insane what farmers have to do to farm today...insane!

I am so disgusted by our government, damn it to hell farmers are so F______ important to our country how can those jackasses do that to you? It's making me