From: "Diane Roy" <Dianeroy@peoplepc.com>
To: <asa@calvin.edu>, <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 19:46:09 -0700
From: dfsiemensjr@juno.com=20
I am delighted to find a reference to J. Woodmorappe as an authority. =
I
have carefully read his _Noah's Ark: A Feasibility Study_ (1996). He =
has
a number of solutions for disposing of animal wastes on the Ark. One =
(pp.
27, 32, 78) suggests a drain at the lowest point. This means that my =
son
can dispose of his bilge pump if only he will drill a hole at the =
lowest
point in the hull of his boat. So simple, yet so profound.=20
The Roy's reply was:
This is a typical misrepresentation that verges on outright lying. On
=
pages 27 and 78 Woodmorappe proposes using an outfall per Turnbull =
(1967). Page 32 simply mentions the draining of liquid waste over =
board but not how. Do you know what an outfall is? A gated outfall is =
entirely logical and workable as it allows liquid to flow only one way =
-- out of the vessel. With the animals on the 2nd and 3rd floors, =
manure would be dumped to the bottom floor. Liquid could be channeled =
on the upper floors to "pipes" which run down to the gated outfalls. =
Only when the "water" pressure in the pipe exceeds the water pressure =
outside will the gates open. As the vessel rocks from side to side, the
=
outfall on the higher side of the vessel would experience less pressure,
=
the gated outflow opens and the liquid inside flows outward, dumping =
urine overboard. Such outfalls need not be on the bottom of the vessel,
=
but may also be on the sides near the bottom.
Siemens' response
Let's see if I am capable of understanding this. A channel with a one way
valve will allow the wastes to drain by gravity. From the upper deck,
there is clearly no problem. It will not ship water except when the waves
are high. The middle deck may find swells reaching the floor level. But
there should be enough time for outflow. Now the claim seems to be that a
check valve on the bottom level will allow wastes to drain from below the
water line. How far would the Ark have to rock to raise these drains out
of the mater? My understanding is that wastes drain into a sump. Do they
also flow to a higher level?
Continuing the original:
Another
suggestion is to introduce earthworms into the waste sump (pp. 34f). =
This
is plausible for horse and sheep manure that is urine free, but cow
manure, even without urine, is too moist and will drown the worms.=20
The Roy's responded:
On page 27, Woodmorappe propose the separation of cattle manure from =
urine. This would allow for dryer manure which worms could survive in.
=
Worms are just one proposal for dealing with manure, what may not work =
for one type of manure may work on another.
Compared to woodmorappe you are a chimp, chump.
Siemens response:
Let me back up my original statement. That earthworms require aerobic
conditions is specified in C. A. Edwards, "Breakdown of Animal,
Vegetable and Industrial Organic Wastes by Earthworms" in C. A. Edwards
and E. F. Neuhauser, editors, Earthworms in Waste and Environmental
Management. SPB Academic Publishing bv, The Hague, 1988), p. 24; and V.
R. Phillips, "Engineering Problems in the Breakdown of Animal Wastes by
Earthworms," ibid., p. 113. They specifically note that earthworms can
live in horse and sheep dung, if it is without urine, but fresh cattle
manure is too moist. Separating the urine from cow dung will not cut it.
You apparently did not read my statement carefully enough. And
Woodmorappe, for all the references he cites, did not go far enough. Only
when some of the water has drained or evaporated from cow manure can
earthworms colonize it. This is no problem in a pasture, but difficult in
the closed environment of the Ark. My analysis indicates that it would
be difficult to provide space for a worm farm aboard, so that there would
be more shoveling and hauling than 8 people could accomplish, but God can
always miraculously provide.
Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 20 2000 - 18:21:02 EDT