Aquaponics Digest - Fri 02/11/00
Message 1: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
from "Steve"
Message 2: Re: Chris Weaver's system, was Re: Heating
from Chris Weaver
Message 3: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
from Jim Sealy Jr
Message 4: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
from "TGTX"
Message 5: growing area...
from laberge@cil.qc.ca (LABERGE MARC)
Message 6: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
from Jacky Foo
Message 7: Re: growing area...
from "James Rakocy"
Message 8: Re: Please Clarify
from wills/nachreiner
Message 9: Re: Chris Weaver's system, was Re: Heating
from Ronald Polka
Message 10: Re: growing area...
from "Barry Thomas"
Message 11: Re: growing area...
from "Barry Thomas"
Message 12: Re: Steve's DO problems, was Re: Fw: pump operations
from S & S Aqua Farm
Message 13: Re: growing area...
from "James Rakocy"
Message 14: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
from Jennifer Maynard
Message 15: dead fish
from dbenhart@essex1.com (David Benhart)
Message 16: Re: dead fish
from Jim Sealy Jr
Message 17: top secret... Feeding options --- manure!!!
from William Evans
Message 18: Re: dead fish// and backup
from Ray Schneider
Message 19: Re: dead fish
from dbenhart@essex1.com (David Benhart)
Message 20: Re: Steve's DO problems, was Re: Fw: pump operations
from "Steve"
Message 21: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
from Marc & Marcy
Message 22: Re: dead fish
from Marc & Marcy
Message 23: Re: dead fish
from Vik Olliver
Message 24: Re: unsubscribe
from "Angela Nobles"
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 1 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
From: "Steve"
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 00:03:34 -0600
Shucks!!
I thought I had found a way to not have to run back to the house when
"nature calls"...so much for the "port-a-potty" on top of my fish tanks!!
:)
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "david w atkinson"
To:
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 12:16 AM
Subject: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
> On some farms in Africa they build the chicken coops over part of the
ponds
> so the chicken waste helps to 'fertilize' the pond. Creating greenwater
> that has the nutrients that fish feed on. Others use rabbits, or even
> both. Adding a twist is also to include ducks or geese.
>
> The idea is that the waste provides nutrients for algae and other such
> similar life forms that the fish feed on. It translates to savings on
your
> farm inputs. By this I mean, you already paid for the chicken feed and/or
> the rabbit feed. Their waste which may normally be dumped becomes a
'free'
> resource to feed the fish, thus reducing the real costs of buying feed for
> them as they are fed 'naturally'.
>
> So you see, the fish are not really eating the waste of the chicken or
> rabbits. The animals mostly recommended to be used with the fish are
those
> that do not consume high protien, for instance, man. HUMAN WASTE IS
> DEFINATELY A NO NO. :>)
>
> Hope the above information helps you Donna. Others out there who are a
bit
> more technical than I on the matter can correct me in areas where I may be
> wrong.
>
> David A.
> >From JAMAICA W.I.
> (atkindw@cwjamaica.com)
>
>
> At 09:29 PM 02/10/2000 -0500, you wrote:
> > I really want to do an aquaculture/hydroponic greenhouse operation that
> >will help support me snip ...,
>
> snip .... tell us about them.
> > Donna
> >
> >
>
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 2 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Chris Weaver's system, was Re: Heating
From: Chris Weaver
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 05:13:45 -0500
> Paula:
Actually, it is mainly an intensive recirculation fish farm (densities 1 lb/gal,
150,000 lbs/year). We do aquaponics as well though. There is 65,000 gallons of
water in the system and we replace 5-10% per day (12,000-24,000 litres).
If you can do better than my utility companies, please send me a proposal. In all
seriousness though, our electricity is almost half of what our natural gas bill
is. I also think that by recovering heat from the outflow (12,000-24,000
litres/day) and utilizing more solar heating, we can reduce our heating costs by
1/3 to 1/2. This is where the "tinkering sprit" comes into play. If I bought all
of the solar and heat recovery technology, I would probable have to assume a 10
year pay back due to the high cost of this technology even though it really isn't
ingenious technology after all.
Chris
>
>
> Chris - that's a interesting solution to raising water temps. What kind of
> system do you have that requires 20,000 litres of make-up water per day?
> Are you running an aquaculture or aquaponics set-up in that house? AND,
> can I supply your gas and electric next year? :>)
>
> Paula
> S&S Aqua Farm, 8386 County Road 8820, West Plains, MO 65775 417-256-5124
> Web page http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 3 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
From: Jim Sealy Jr
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 05:14:46 -0600
The manure is worth more than the fish if you vermicompost it and sell
the worms and the castings. I hope to have my vermicomposting operation
up to 3 acres by July. If you play your cards right you can get a local
cattle sale barn or feeder operation to truck you all the manure you can
stand. Going price here runs $.12/lb for high quality castings and $9/lb
for worms in bulk lots. Takes a while to build up your worm stockpiles
enough to handle any great quantities of manure though and could put you
in the poorhouse if you tried to just go out and buy enough to start out
big. That 3 acre patch I'm talking about amounts to about 20,000 lbs of
worms...
Jim
CAVM wrote:
>
> Donna,
>
> Since we are in the animal waste processing business we have looked into the
> same thing you are asking about. I have not reached any conclusions about
> using manure directly into the fish water as far as nutrient benefit. But we
> have about decided that it has too many risks considering all the things that
> can go wrong with fish even in clean water.
>
> The manure can be used effectively to grow algae or duckweed, as has been
> mentioned here before. This involves and additional tank and more labor but
> may be a lot better option in long run. It can also be used as fertilizer in
> a garden or farm that produces some of the feed ingredients for the fish, of
> course.
>
> Cornelius A. Van Milligen
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 4 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
From: "TGTX"
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 06:25:03 -0600
. Has anyone
> ever seen/experienced any fed-by-animal-manure methods of raising fish?
> Please tell us about them.
> Donna
Hi D.
For large ponds with vast dilution ratios, maybe this is O.K. The massive
amounts of bacteria and algae in those systems can outcompete the small
input of manure. Usually these are a couple of dozen ducks in and around a
large pond.
Don't do this for small, intensive recirculation systems. Just don't do it.
But this reminds me of the few suprise "animal visitors" in my last
aquaponics system. I built this system from scratch. There was nothing
there but a prairie hillside and piles of junk there before I started the
greenhouse. I built a ~8500 ft^3, 3-bay greenhouse with 6 in ground tanks
measuring about 7' wide by 27' long by about 4' deep. Lined with 20 mil
poly. Filled up the tanks with water before I had the greenhouse totally
enclosed. In the morning, I would occasionally find my mallard drake and
his hen swimming happily with the tilapia fingerlings/juveniles in one of
the tanks and then mallard mayhem would ensue as I would act up with the big
angry man voice and the quacking and the splashing and the fish net to grab
the birds and extract their wet floppiness and banish them to the poultry
area down the hill once again. They were expected to repeat the
performance without learning from the trauma. To a mallard, Agua es Vida!
Later on, after the greenhouse was supposedly closed, I found, on 2 separate
occasions, rattlesnakes that had crawled in some crack in the greenhouse
somewhere somehow, and fell into the in- ground fish tanks. I did the big
angry man voice to no avail, and the certainty in my tone wasn't quite as
forceful as with the mallards. I had to dispatch these beautiful reptiles
with a pair of lopping shears after I fashioned a snake head noose out of a
loop of nylon rope and a length of PVC pipe and captured them by their heart
shaped viper 'noggins. When I closed the noose on the swimming head of
these vipers, they expressed their extreme displeasure with my animal
control program.
My wife decided to go fix breakfast. My son watched and thought it was
cool.
The kids were extra alert around the fish tanks when they first stepped in
the greenhouse for the day.
Then of course there was the occassional field mouse found in the fish tank,
and the sparrows that set up housing inside the greenhouse for up to a week
sometimes until I could herd them out of the door with the big angry man
voice and the arm waving.
So much for absolutes in "Controlled Environment Agriculture". But we
strive, we try.
Fun with Aquaponics.
Ted
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 5 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: growing area...
From: laberge@cil.qc.ca (LABERGE MARC)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 09:55:58 -0500
Hello all,
I have another question...
The formula is taken from UVI from Aquaponics Journal fall 1997.
57 grams of feed per day gives me 1 square meter of growing area for
lettuce. Since the growing area will be a rotating crop, not all plants are
equal. Say I take the average plant age of the growing area and the answer
is 1/2 of the mature plant, could I then multiply the growing area by 2
since my plants are not all adults.
This would only consider plant age and not plant height ( is it right to
assume a plant of 1/2 the age will be 1/2 the size for leafy crops.
Also this would not take into account luxury consumption and storage of
nutrients of small plants .
Marc Laberge
Mont Tremblant
Quebec, Canada
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 6 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
From: Jacky Foo
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 16:01:23 +0100
D.Bennett wrote:
>The ABC TV show 20/20 a week ago got a lot of mileage
>AGAINST the organic industry due to the assertion that
>manure is full of salmonella and killer e-coli.
mmiller@pcsia.com wrote:
>As for the safety of this method, consider the total living population in
>those parts of the world that used chicken manure fertilized ponds and
>compare it to that of the USA. If it were all that dangerous, they would
>be dying like flies and not growing in numbers.
The Integrated Bio-Systems Network deals with such matters.
http://www.ias.unu.edu/proceedings/icibs/ibs/ibsnet
there is certainly much truth in what ABC TV says and so is in what Miller
wrote. The greatest danger is in the people who dont have any proper
understanding of the matter and then tries to copy what is done in another
country.
In this case. it is in what you give to your animals and the farming method
used. This influences the microbial content in the animal and in the
manure. Thus a free ranch chicken in the USA and a egg-layer chicken in
Bangkok will have different microbial content. Industrial system use
commercial feed that has antibiotics, enzymes, hormones in them. Yes, you
can get manure that is full of salmonella and killer E coli in chicken
manure in Bangkok too and a health chicken shit from a chicken running
around a backyard in a small farm in the US.
In developing countries where medium-size commercial animal farm operations
are integrated with aquaculture, you will notice that all of them have
anaerobic digesters which treat the manure first (often for more than 30-60
days) before it is sent to the ponds. This removes the risks of pathogen
contamination. Again, please note that in developed countries, you are
designing digesters that keep the manure in digesters for only a few
days.....here agai you are increasing the risks.
regards
jacky foo
note: join the MFA Internet Conference (March-Oct 2000) where you will find
many papers on integrated bio-systems.
http://www.ias.unu.edu/proceedings/icibs/ic-mfa
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 7 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: growing area...
From: "James Rakocy"
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:01:44 -0400
----- Original Message -----
From: LABERGE MARC
To: aqua
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 10:55 AM
Subject: growing area...
> Hello all,
> I have another question...
> The formula is taken from UVI from Aquaponics Journal fall 1997.
> 57 grams of feed per day gives me 1 square meter of growing area for
> lettuce. Since the growing area will be a rotating crop, not all plants
are
> equal. Say I take the average plant age of the growing area and the
answer
> is 1/2 of the mature plant, could I then multiply the growing area by 2
> since my plants are not all adults.
>
> This would only consider plant age and not plant height ( is it right to
> assume a plant of 1/2 the age will be 1/2 the size for leafy crops.
> Also this would not take into account luxury consumption and storage of
> nutrients of small plants .
>
> Marc Laberge
> Mont Tremblant
> Quebec, Canada
>
Marc, I just gave a talk on ratios at the U.S. Chapter meeting of the World
Aquaculture Society in New Orleans. A lot of study is still needed on
ratios, but I tried to give some comparisons from studies and commercial
systems. Some of this was guesstimation. I've enclosed my abstract and
text slides. I don't have time to explain my slides except for few points.
You will see where the 57 g/m2/day came from. McMurtry varied all the forms
ratio expression at once by holding the fish and feed constant. He did not
capture the optimum ratio in his experiments. However, production was much
greater in his second experiment at a lower feeding rate. I take this as
evidence that solids accumulated in the sand, which was not changed between
experiments, and mineralization of the solids in the second experiment was
increasing nutrient availability. Still the optimum levels was not
determined. As for Bioshelters, the data is quite different due to
immediate solids removal with a microscreen filter. My estimate of
1400/m2/day is too high. Reduce that to 1150 g/m2/day. John Reid was at
the meeting and said he didn't feed as much as I had estimated. Paula, how
did I do on your system? Jim R.
RATIO OF PLANTS TO FISH IN AQUAPONIC SYSTEMS
James E. Rakocy*
University of the Virgin Islands
Agricultural Experiment Station
RR 2, Box 10,000, Kingshill, VI 00850
james.rakocy@uvi.edu
Aquaponics is the combined culture of plants and fish in recirculating
systems. One advantage of incorporating hydroponic plant culture with
intensive fish production is that fish continuously generate plant
nutrients, which significantly reduces the cost of nutrients and nutrient
monitoring compared to conventional hydroponics. Aquaponic systems should
be designed so that nutrients do not accumulate to toxic levels nor become
deficient, thereby requiring increased nutrient supplementation. Therefore,
an important design feature is the ratio of plants to fish. The best
expression of the desired design ratio is grams of fish feed per square
meter of plant growing area per day (g/m2/day). The plant-to-fish ratio can
be expressed with less precision as the growing area of plants compared to
the surface area of the fish rearing component, which is usually designed to
maintain a maximum density of 60 kg/m3 (0.50 lbs./gallon) in aquaponic
systems. Optimum plant-to-fish area ratios vary from 2:1 to 11.5:1 or
greater.
There are many factors that contribute to this large discrepancy. A major
factor is the residence time of particulate organic matter in the system,
which directly correlates with the amount of mineralization, a process of
microbial decay that releases organically-bound nutrients to a soluble form.
If solids are immediately removed from the fish tank effluent using a
microscreen drum filter, as practiced at a facility with the 2:1 ratio, or
some other means, then a smaller plant-to-fish ratio can be used.
Increasing the proportion of fish raised relative to plants is advantageous
in temperate greenhouses where environmentally-controlled space is
expensive. If particulate organic matter is retained for a longer period in
the system, a larger plant-to-fish ratio is needed. A facility with a
11.5:1 ratio removes settleable solids twice daily and fine solids,
collected by a filter, one or two times weekly. Systems utilizing sand and
gravel substrates for hydroponics are sometimes designed to capture and
retain all particulate organic matter in the substrate. Theoretically, a
larger plant-to-fish ratio would be required, but this is generally not the
case. There are three apparent reasons: 1) organic loading is lighter
(hence, less fish production); 2) cation exchange capacity of the media
increases, removing nutrients from solution; 3) earthworms are often placed
in the media to assimilate organic matter.
Other factors that affect the plant-to-fish ratio are system volume and
plant type. Systems that use granular substrates or nutrient film technique
(NFT) have considerably less water in the hydroponic component and lower
total water volumes than raft hydroponics for comparable fish production.
Theoretically, a steady state should be reached between nutrient generation
and uptake. However, in practice nutrients generally accumulate, and
systems with less water would need a larger plant-to- fish ratio to prevent
nutrients from accumulating to toxic levels (>2,000 mg/L as TDS). Systems
with slow-growing or small plants would need a larger plant-to-fish ratio
than systems with fast-growing or large plants because the nutrient uptake
rate is lower.
RATIO OF PLANTS TO FISH IN AQUAPONIC SYSTEMS
James E. Rakocy
University of the Virgin Islands
Agricultural Experiment Station
RR 2, Box 10,000
Kingshill, VI 00850
james.rakocy@uvi.edu
AQUAPONICS - combined culture of fish and plants in recirculating systems
ADVANTAGE - fish continuously generate nutrients
- reduces cost of nutrients and nutrient monitoring
DESIGN GOAL - use a ratio of plants to fish that prevents nutrient
accumulation
or deficiency
QUANTITATIVE RELATIONSHIP OF PLANTS TO FISH
Weight of fish feed per unit plant growing area per day (g/m2/day)
Ratio of plant growing area to surface area of fish rearing component (p:f)
Ratio of plant growing area to total system water volume (m2/m3)
SURFACE AREA TO VOLUME RATIO (m2/m3)
Indicates concentration factor.
Given a constant feeding rate (g/m2/day), a higher
surface to volume ratio would have higher nutrient
concentrations if all nutrients not removed by plants
RATIO STUDY AT UVI
Raft, bibb lettuce (18 crops), partial solids removal
Surface to surface ratio (p:f): 1.3
Surface to volume ratio: 0.8 m2/m3
Feeding rates (g/m2/day) 14, 29, 43, 57, 72, 86
Production (kg/m2/crop) 2.3, 2.6, 2.7, 3.1, 2.8, 2.4
McMURTRY EXPERIMENT 1
Sand, Laura tomatoes, no solids removal
Surface to surface ratio (p:f) 1.2 1.5 2.3 3.5
Surface to vol. ratio (m2/m3) 2.4 3.0 4.7 6.9
Feeding rates (g/m2/day) 110 76 51 33
Production (kg/m2) 13.6 11.3 9.8 9.4
McMURTRY EXPERIMENT 3
Sand, Kewalo tomatoes, no solids removal
Surface to surface ratio 1.2 1.5 2.3 3.5
Surface to vol. ratio (m2/m3) 2.4 3.0 4.7 6.9
Feeding rates (g/m2/day) 54 36 24 15
Production (kg/m2) 19.9 14.7 12.1 9.8
SUMMARY OF McMURTRY EXPERIMENTS
Laura tomatoes
Feeding rates (g/m2/day) 110 76 51 33
Production (kg/m2) 13.6 11.3 9.8 9.4
Kewalo tomatoes
Feeding rates (g/m2/day) 54 36 24 15
Production (kg/m2) 19.9 14.7 12.1 9.8
RATIOS USED BY S & S AQUA FARM
Gravel, mixed vegetables, no solids removal
Surface to surface ratio (p:f) 4.4
Surface to vol. ratio (m2/m3) 4.9
Feeding rate(g/m2/day) ~50
RATIOS USED BY BIOSHELTERS
NFT, basil, complete solids removal (fast)
Surface to surface ratio (p:f) 2
Surface to vol. ratio (m2/m3) ~0.60
Feeding rate(g/m2/day) ~1400
UVI COMMERCIAL SYSTEM
Raft, lettuce, complete solids removal (slow)
Surface to surface ratio (p:f) 11.5
Surface to vol. ratio (m2/m3) 2.3
Feeding rate(g/m2/day) 56
RATIO COMPARISON (P:F)
UVI experimental 1.3
UVI commercial 11.5
McMurtry (best) 1.2
S & S Aqua Farm 4.4
Bioshelters 2
RATIO COMPARISON (M2/M3)
UVI experimental 0.8
UVI commercial 2.3
McMurtry (best) 2.4
S & S Aqua Farm 4.9
Bioshelters 0.6
RATIO COMPARISON (G/M2/DAY)
UVI experimental (best) 57
UVI commercial 56
McMurtry (best) 54
S & S Aqua Farm 50
Bioshelters 1400
SOLIDS REMOVAL
UVI experimental partial
UVI commercial complete (slow)
McMurtry (best) none
S & S Aqua Farm none
Bioshelters complete (fast)
NUTRIENT SUPPLEMENTATION
UVI experimental Ca, K, Fe
UVI commercial Ca, K, Fe
McMurtry (best) none
S & S Aqua Farm none
Bioshelters Ca
CONCLUSION
Much more research is needed on ratios
Design ratio studies to produce fish at 60 kg/m3 (0.5 lb/gal)
Ratios vary with substrate, plant type and degree and speed of solids
removal
Raft, gravel and NFT systems have proven long-term viability
Ratios currently used are good starting points for refinement
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 8 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Please Clarify
From: wills/nachreiner
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 12:04:41 -0600
I broached this question a while back and am glad its come around again.
In my opinion as a producer of organic products, its not organic unless it
is independently certified to be organic. There is too much fraudulent use
of the term. On the other hand, dealing with the organic agencies is very
frusterating. I am not sure what their rules are regarding aquaponics.
They tend to be very "whats good for the soil" oriented. They also are
fighting the efforts by Alaska salmon fishermen through their Senator Ted
Stevens to label wild fish as organic. This opens up a whole can of worms
for hunted wild animals and other plants and animals that grow under
uncontrolled conditions to be declared organic. While most aquaponics
systems will be very controlled, the lack of soil and other fish issues may
resonate with some echo effects from the other issues.
The forthcoming national organic standards could, but probably won't
clarify the questions. Anyway, has anyone contacted any of the organic
certifiers, eg QAI, OGBA, OCIA, Oregon Tilth, FVA, California Organic,
about whether their produce and or fish could be certified?
At 01:36 PM 2/6/2000 EST, you wrote:
>Friends,
>A local produce buyer has asked, "What is the differenc between organically
>grown produce and hydroponically grown produce?"
>
>Also would there be any advantages either way?
>
>I would sppreciate your input
>
>PP
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
Box185 Plain,Wi 53577
(608) 546-2712
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 9 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Chris Weaver's system, was Re: Heating
From: Ronald Polka
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 11:41:32 -0700
>Actually, it is mainly an intensive recirculation fish farm (densities 1
lb/gal,
>150,000 lbs/year). We do aquaponics as well though. There is 65,000
gallons of
>water in the system and we replace 5-10% per day (12,000-24,000
litres).
>
>If you can do better than my utility companies, please send me a
proposal. In all
>seriousness though, our electricity is almost half of what our natural
gas bill
>is. I also think that by recovering heat from the outflow
(12,000-24,000
>litres/day) and utilizing more solar heating, we can reduce our heating
costs by
>1/3 to 1/2. This is where the "tinkering sprit" comes into play. If I
bought all
>of the solar and heat recovery technology, I would probable have to
assume a 10
>year pay back due to the high cost of this technology even though it
really isn't
>ingenious technology after all.
>
>Chris
>
Chris
Thanks for the excellant data on growout density and yield. Have you
considered an economic analysis of a ground source heat pump for
recovering energy from the system wastewater. A surface water heat pump
configuration in your wastewater stream could recover the heat that you
put into the water as it went into the system and probably lower the
wastewater temperature below its supply temp. Whether this is more cost
effective than a standard heat exchanger remains to be seen. However, the
only way you can recover the majority of the exiting heat would be with a
plate to plate heat exchanger, rather expensive. It sounds like a system
of the size you have could use a 4 or 5 ton heat pump coupled to the
wastewater. Installed cost might run $5,000 to $6,000. An analysis of
fuel savings might show that you can save money over the long haul. For
details on this technology check out the Geothermal Heatpump page at the
Oregon Institute of Technology website at
http://www.oit.osshe.edu/~geoheat/ghp/ghptable.htm
An excerpt of their report on ground source heat pump economics is quoted
below.
An Information Survival Kit
for the Prospective
Geothermal Heat Pump Owner
Frequently Asked Question No. 2
How does the cost of heating with a GSHP compare to other heating
methods?
Answer
This has a great deal to do with your local rates for electricity and
other fuels. The comparison involves the efficiency of the
device, the type of fuel used and the cost of that fuel.
Commonly used heating fuels have the following approximate heating
content:
Fuel oil - 138,000 Btu/gal
Propane - 90,000 Btu/gal
Natural gas - 100,000 Btu/therm (1,000 Btu/ft3)
Electricity - 3,413 Btu/kWh
A common index of the cost of heat is "dollars per 1,000,000 Btu of
useful heat." In order to calculate useful heat (heat actually
delivered to the house), it's necessary to adjust for the efficiency of
the heating device and the cost of the fuel. The following
equations can be used for this purpose:
Fuel oil 7.25 x $/gallon
Efficiency
efficiency
Old - 0.65
New
std. - 0.78
Moderate - 0.84
High - 0.92
Propane 11.1 x $/gallon
efficiency
Natural gas 10.0 x $/therm
efficiency
Electric 293 x $/kWh
resistance
ASHP 293 x $/kWh
COP
COP
Warm climate - 2.5
Cold Climate - 1.8
GHP 293 x $/kWh
COP
COP
Warm climate - 3.9
Cold Climate - 3.1
As an example, let's look at a location in a moderately cold climate when
the fuel costs are as follows:
Electricity, $0.07/kWh; fuel oil, $1.05/gal; propane, $1.20/gal; and
natural gas, $0.60/therm. This would result in the following
useful heat costs:
$ per Million Btu
Fuel oil
9.06
Propane
15.86
Natural gas
7.14
Electric resistance
20.51
ASHP
9.54 (2.15 COP)
GHP
5.86 (3.5 COP)
Obviously, it is necessary to know the total amount of heat required for
the year to calculate annual savings. The above values,
however, provide an indication of the percentage savings to be expected
from a GHP system compared to other options for
heating.
Savings are also generated during domestic hot water heating and cooling.
These will be small compared to the heating savings
in all but southern climates. See the next question for some examples.
Ron Polka
Southwest Technology Development Institute
New Mexico State University
Box 30001, Dept 3SOL
Las Cruces, NM 88003
rpolka@nmsu.edu
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 10 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: growing area...
From: "Barry Thomas"
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 19:04:02 -0000
Jim,
So to predict the needed growing area for any instant, you look at the
expected feeding rate at that time (which is based on predicted fish
density) and work it back from there?
As Marc (Laberge) pointed out, this seems to assume that the ability of
the growing area to remediate the effluent is a constant - it doesn't
appear to matter whether the area contains plants at all, let alone
plant type or stage of growth.
How closely do the predictions (using these ratios) actually match?
Also, are equal masses of fry and mature fish equal in terms of their
I/O?
Barry
barrythomas@btinternet.com
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 11 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: growing area...
From: "Barry Thomas"
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 19:29:44 -0000
Sorry, ignore that last post - typing before thinking. :(
Still quite interested in this though:
> Also, are equal masses of fry and mature fish equal in terms of their
> I/O?
Thanks,
Barry
barrythomas@btinternet.com
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 12 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Steve's DO problems, was Re: Fw: pump operations
From: S & S Aqua Farm
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:21:34 -0600
At 03:42 PM 02/10/2000 -0600, Steve wrote:
>Yes, I use an NFT System. I have 2 - 4" PVC with tomatos, 2 - 6" PVC with
>tomatoes and Jalapeno peppers suspended above my tanks and another system on
>a table with NFT flow and another 12 tomato plants. I also have about 15 +/-
>water hyacinths in my settling tank. (Yes, I know the 4" is too small for
>tomato's but this was my first venture so I decided to leave it alone...what
>the heck.)
So, have you decided to go with continuous pumping in your system? If so,
has it improved your DO levels? I'm really curious to find out how your
system will perform. I'm figuring you're using what was excess
non-productive space. Let us know how your crop progresses.
>By the way, I know I am not a customer of yours, but I have tried to steer
>one of my friends to your system. "If I had to do it all over again...." We
>know how that goes.....
>I'm going to close....because I don't know if this is going to get through
>to you.
Next time you have problems, please contact me directly and forward a copy
of your "bounce" message. I'll send it to the ISP, and maybe we can figure
out what the problem might be.
Paula
S&S Aqua Farm, http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 13 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: growing area...
From: "James Rakocy"
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 17:34:36 -0400
Barry, Instantaneous matching is not practical. You get a rough
approximation with the ratios listed. It is better to stagger fish and
plants to level out the nutrient input and removal. We use four fish
rearing tanks per system with four stages of growth so that daily feed input
ranges from 30-40 lbs. This is certainly better than batch culture where
you may go from 10 lbs at stocking to 160 lbs at harvest. We also stagger
our lettuce production so that 1/4th of the plants are harvested each week.
However, you do not have to stagger the plant production. When plants are
young, nutrients will accumulate. In the last stages of growth, the
accumulated nutrients will be drawn down. This works better for raft
culture than NFT where you have less water. Plants do well over a wide
range of total dissolved solids (TDS, nutrient salts). Our lettuce will
grow just as well at 200 mg/L as 2,000 mg/L provided you have the same
balance of individual nutrient ions. In 3 years of continuous operation,
TDS ranged from 218 to 779 mg/L in our commercial raft system. We prefer
working in the lower end of the range. The ratio of plant growing area to
water volume gives important information about the response of your system
to nutrient accumulation. Assume that is better to have nutrients
accumulate slightly than decrease (I doubt if you will ever get steady
state). At a decreasing rate you may get nutrient deficiencies that are
hard to identify and rectify As an exaggerated example, if the plant
growing area was 100 m2 and the water volume was 1 m2, nutrients would
accumulate very rapidly to toxic levels. The ratio here is 100:1 for m2/m3.
On the opposite hand, if you had 1 m2 of plant growing for a 100 m3 system,
you would hardly see any accumulation and the plants would probably
experience nutrient deficiencies. The ratio here is 0.01 for m2/m3. The
ratios I found vary from 0.6 to 4.9 for m2/m3. I'm sure the TDS levels in
these systems vary considerably to reflect fluctuating feeding rates, stages
of plant growth and type of plants. We are lucky that plants can do well
over a wide range. Jim R.
----- Original Message -----
From: Barry Thomas
To:
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 3:04 PM
Subject: Re: growing area...
> Jim,
>
> So to predict the needed growing area for any instant, you look at the
> expected feeding rate at that time (which is based on predicted fish
> density) and work it back from there?
>
> As Marc (Laberge) pointed out, this seems to assume that the ability of
> the growing area to remediate the effluent is a constant - it doesn't
> appear to matter whether the area contains plants at all, let alone
> plant type or stage of growth.
>
> How closely do the predictions (using these ratios) actually match?
>
> Also, are equal masses of fry and mature fish equal in terms of their
> I/O?
>
> Barry
> barrythomas@btinternet.com
>
>
>
>
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 14 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
From: Jennifer Maynard
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 18:11:07 -0400
Dear List, Why is everyone of the Officials so bent out of shape over
amnimal faeces in fish ponds and trying to upset aquaculture. We go
fishing in the wild. There are fish, birds, rodents, etc in the wild
pond. No one is there to remove thier faeces, nor to remove their
carcus when they poo or die there. We get our sons off to the woods, we
fish and we cook fish grampa, dad and son and we eat.
I would have thought the what really messes up our fish animal
relationship is the human garbage the gets into Nature's Aquaculture
Raceway. Or the chemicals that are put in there. African chicken pens
over fish ponds in zones where people cant afford to buy chemicla
pesticides, where people live far away from the water source and might
not contaminate it with human faeces. Where all that is in it is the
grass fed chicken poo. What could be wrong wiht that.
Perhaps I have missed what the officials say you aquaponikers are
putting into the water, but I don't understand their concern. Please
explain to me. It seems that you are cleaner that the streams that they
nave allowed to become polluted.
Jennifer
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 15 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: dead fish
From: dbenhart@essex1.com (David Benhart)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 16:38:50 -0800
Hello to all.
Have mostly lurked on the list,We have a small S+S system in attached
8 by 16 foot greenhouse, raising talapia and greens for the family.
Never quite understood all the fuss about backup system for this or
that. OK now I get it!!!!
fed fish this morning at 530 am, went to work, came home at 3 to find
that a ground fault breaker had tripped this morning at 6 am! lost
every one of my talapia.
Can anyone help with a suggestion on a battery type backup for my air
stones?
I think if somehow a relay of some type could be rigged to start a
battery run air pump none of this would have mattered.
Dave Benhart
Shore Acres Greenhouse.
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 16 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: dead fish
From: Jim Sealy Jr
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 16:56:25 -0600
A simple fix for small systems is to use a battery operated pump
normally found in fishing boats. Hook this to a deep cycle battery, and
hook the battery to one of the small automatic battery chargers. This is
a common set-up around here in bait shops. You'll also want an automatic
switch as used on emergency lighting systems. As long as there's a.c.
power to the switch, it's off, once the a.c. is interrupted, the switch
goes on and your back-up system kicks in..
Jim
David Benhart wrote:
>
> Hello to all.
> Have mostly lurked on the list,We have a small S+S system in attached
> 8 by 16 foot greenhouse, raising talapia and greens for the family.
> Never quite understood all the fuss about backup system for this or
> that. OK now I get it!!!!
> fed fish this morning at 530 am, went to work, came home at 3 to find
> that a ground fault breaker had tripped this morning at 6 am! lost
> every one of my talapia.
> Can anyone help with a suggestion on a battery type backup for my air
> stones?
> I think if somehow a relay of some type could be rigged to start a
> battery run air pump none of this would have mattered.
>
> Dave Benhart
> Shore Acres Greenhouse.
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 17 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: top secret... Feeding options --- manure!!!
From: William Evans
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 15:09:22 -0800
Jennifer Maynard wrote:
>
> Dear List, Why is everyone of the Officials so bent out of shape over
> amnimal faeces in fish ponds and trying to upset aquaculture.
,,, "they" want the biosolids contract...
,,, they want to keep selling lots of fish feed...
,,, they want to keep selling lots of fertilizer to grow the fish
feed...
,,, they want to keep the efficacy of manure "hush hush" - it works too
well...
,,,they want to keep up vet side of the house....
........." we need to vaccinate against these dreaded pathogens!"
,,, fill in the blank:>_________
bill evans
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 18 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: dead fish// and backup
From: Ray Schneider
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 18:31:37 -0500
Some of the computer back up units might be useful in this regard, so
long as they don't depend on actually being attached to a computer. I
just bring it up as a possibility, it would have to be researched.
Another possibility is to use a stepdown transformer and a simple
powersupply circuit -- then you could dispense with the ground fault
breaker so long as no high voltage was available -- it's hard to hurt
yourself with 12 volts -- although at high current you can get into
trouble. A friend of my father lost a finger by getting his wedding
ring caught between two terminals of a 24 volt aircraft battery.
Cauterized the wound though.
Cheers, Ray
David Benhart wrote:
> Can anyone help with a suggestion on a battery type backup for my air
> stones?
> I think if somehow a relay of some type could be rigged to start a
> battery run air pump none of this would have mattered.
>
> Dave Benhart
> Shore Acres Greenhouse.
--
Ray Schneider
rschneid@shentel.net
On the Search for the PERFECT tomato.
Come See Me at:
http://www.user.shentel.net/rschneid
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 19 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: dead fish
From: dbenhart@essex1.com (David Benhart)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 17:58:31 -0800
wow I mean WOW!!
so simple, I fish all the time and didn't even think of this. I probably
have all of these things in my garage. (don't tell my wife, I told here I
cleaned it out.)
Thank-you Jim and Ray ect for your help!!!
Dave
Jim Sealy Jr wrote:
> A simple fix for small systems is to use a battery operated pump
> normally found in fishing boats. Hook this to a deep cycle battery, and
> hook the battery to one of the small automatic battery chargers. This is
> a common set-up around here in bait shops. You'll also want an automatic
> switch as used on emergency lighting systems. As long as there's a.c.
> power to the switch, it's off, once the a.c. is interrupted, the switch
> goes on and your back-up system kicks in..
> Jim
>
> David Benhart wrote:
> >
> > Hello to all.
> > Have mostly lurked on the list,We have a small S+S system in attached
> > 8 by 16 foot greenhouse, raising talapia and greens for the family.
> > Never quite understood all the fuss about backup system for this or
> > that. OK now I get it!!!!
> > fed fish this morning at 530 am, went to work, came home at 3 to find
> > that a ground fault breaker had tripped this morning at 6 am! lost
> > every one of my talapia.
> > Can anyone help with a suggestion on a battery type backup for my air
> > stones?
> > I think if somehow a relay of some type could be rigged to start a
> > battery run air pump none of this would have mattered.
> >
> > Dave Benhart
> > Shore Acres Greenhouse.
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 20 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Steve's DO problems, was Re: Fw: pump operations
From: "Steve"
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 20:07:08 -0600
Hi Paula,
Thanks for your interest. Yes, I did go to continuous pump. My DO has gone
from barely 2 ppm to almost 5ppm. All of my "babies" are smiling. I might go
to 6 on/2 off and try that. But, I'm concerned about "wear & tear" on the
pump. Also, someone said that to keep restarting the pump , even only
3x/day, would probably consume more power than to actually just leave it
running. (I don't know.)
"Quickie Question": I'm wondering if I should research my local hydroponic
store for some P & K additive for my tomatos. (I'm sure he would love to
sell me some!) Do you think this would benefit the tomatos and not harm the
fish?...or just leave them with the fish effluent for feed. (Also, don't
know how I would apply it even if I did need to...eyedropper to the base???)
Thanks.......Steve (PS, I haven't had the problem in reaching the list since
I switched to IE 5.0 from Netscape...don't know if that was the problem.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "S & S Aqua Farm"
To:
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2000 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: Steve's DO problems, was Re: Fw: pump operations
> At 03:42 PM 02/10/2000 -0600, Steve wrote:
>
> >Yes, I use an NFT System. I have 2 - 4" PVC with tomatos, 2 - 6" PVC
with
> >tomatoes and Jalapeno peppers suspended above my tanks and another system
on
> >a table with NFT flow and another 12 tomato plants. I also have about 15
+/-
> >water hyacinths in my settling tank. (Yes, I know the 4" is too small for
> >tomato's but this was my first venture so I decided to leave it
alone...what
> >the heck.)
>
> So, have you decided to go with continuous pumping in your system? If so,
> has it improved your DO levels? I'm really curious to find out how your
> system will perform. I'm figuring you're using what was excess
> non-productive space. Let us know how your crop progresses.
>
> >By the way, I know I am not a customer of yours, but I have tried to
steer
> >one of my friends to your system. "If I had to do it all over again...."
We
> >know how that goes.....
>
> >I'm going to close....because I don't know if this is going to get
through
> >to you.
>
> Next time you have problems, please contact me directly and forward a copy
> of your "bounce" message. I'll send it to the ISP, and maybe we can
figure
> out what the problem might be.
>
> Paula
> S&S Aqua Farm, 8386 County Road 8820, West Plains, MO 65775 417-256-5124
> Web page http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
>
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 21 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: Feeding options --- manure!!!
From: Marc & Marcy
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 19:09:05 -0700
..snip..
> Perhaps I have missed what the officials say you aquaponikers are
> putting into the water, but I don't understand their concern. Please
> explain to me. It seems that you are cleaner that the streams that they
> nave allowed to become polluted.
No officials are concerned about aquaponikers. A member of
this group asked a question about a way to make some money
using aquaponics and another question about using manure
directly into the water.
The answer was that customers would be put off by the direct
introduction of manure into fish growing tanks. Raw manure
on fields would cause a consumer backlash as well.
Since the person was inquiring about raw manure as food or
fertilizer it was responsible to let them know it would most
probably hurt their business and their ability to make a
living.
If a living is important then there's an old saying that
"the customer is always right".
Marc
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 22 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: dead fish
From: Marc & Marcy
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 20:00:26 -0700
> Jim Sealy Jr wrote:
>
> > A simple fix for small systems is to use a battery operated pump
> > normally found in fishing boats. Hook this to a deep cycle battery, and
> > hook the battery to one of the small automatic battery chargers
I wanted to reinforce the concept of an "Automatic" battery
charger. The common inexpensive type of battery charger will
overcharge a battery and can damage it. The automatic
charger will slow or stop the charging.
Marc
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 23 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: dead fish
From: Vik Olliver
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2000 17:48:42 +1200
David Benhart wrote:
> I think if somehow a relay of some type could be rigged to start a
> battery run air pump none of this would have mattered.
Two solutions:
1. If you've got an air pump that runs on 20-30W then you can power it
off a computer real cheap UPS for 4-5 hours, more ofr a more expensive
UPS. "Dead" UPS's that have been biffed can be revived by re-wetting the
sealed batteries. If that works replace the little batteries with big
ones and you have a helluva backup supply.
2. If you have a battery-powered pump and batteries, wire it through a
suitably-rated relay so that the pump is normally on. Then use mains to
supply volts to the relay (either use a mains relay or a "wall-wart"
transformer) so that it is turned off by the mains. Mains fails, relay
clicks in, air pump goes whirrr.
Vik :v)
--
A member of The Olliver Family http://olliver.penguinpowered.com
PGP signature available there.
.------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------.
| Message 24 |
'------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------'
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
From: "Angela Nobles"
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 23:08:38 CST
I don't want to unsubscribe but I hope to be able to come back to it soon.
|
