EPA-R2-73-23Z
MAY 1973            Environmental Protection Technology Series
Methods  for
Pulp  and Paper Mill Sludge
Utilization and Disposal




                    \**+J
                              Office of Research and Monitoring
                              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                              Washington, DC. 20460

-------
            RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the  Office  of  Research  and
Monitoring,  Environmental Protection Agency, have
been grouped into five series.  These  five  broad
categories  were established to facilitate further
development  and  application   of   environmental
technology.   Elimination  of traditional grouping
was  consciously  planned  to  foster   technology
transfer   and  a  maximum  interface  in  related
fields.  The five series are:

   1.  Environmental Health Effects Research
   2.  Environmental Protection Technology
   3.  Ecological Research
   4.  Environmental Monitoring
   5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies

This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION   TECHNOLOGY   series.    This   series
describes   research   performed  to  develop  and
demonstrate   instrumentation,    equipment    and
methodology  to  repair  or  prevent environmental
degradation from point and  non-point  sources  of
pollution.  This work provides the new or improved
technology  required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality
standards.

-------
                                                           EPA-R2-73-232
                                                           May 1973
            METHODS FOR PULP AND PAPER  MILL

            SLUDGE UTILIZATION AND DISPOSAL
                             By

                 Dr. Thomas R. Aspitarte
                 Mr. Alan  S. Rosenfield
                  Dr. Bernard C. Smale
                  Dr. Herman R. Amberg
                   Project 12040 ESV

                 Program Element 1B2037



                     Project Officer

                    Mr.  Ralph.H. Scott
 Pacific  Northwest Environmental Research  Laboratory
        National Environmental Research  Center
                Corvallis, Oregon 97330
                      Prepared for

            OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND MONITORING
          U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  AGENCY
                 WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402
              Price $2,10 domestic postpaid or $1.79 QPO Bookstore

-------
             EPA Review Notice
This report has been reviewed by the
Environmental Protection Agency _, and
approved for publication.  Approval does
not signify that the contents necessarily
reflect the views and policies of the
Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial
products constitute endorsement or recom-
mendation for use.
                   ii

-------
                         ABSTRACT
Many pulp and paper mills are now faced with a serious
problem in disposal of primary treatment plant sludge.
The system selected by mills for sludge disposal or
utilization must be one that has a minimal overall impact
upon the environment.

The original project was designed to evaluate four methods
by which such fibrous sludge may be utilized.  These
methods of sludge disposal were:  (1) incineration in an
air entrained dryer-incinerator, (2) burning in hog fuel
boilers, (3) incorporation into soil as an amendment, and
(4) hydromulching for soil stabilization.

During the course of this study, other possible uses for
sludge were suggested and investigated.  This report
therefore includes data from such experimental observations,

Disposal of sludge in incinerators or hog fuel boilers
will cost between $11 and $13/dry ton.  At the mill site
sludge could be made available for other means of disposal
at costs between $7 and $20/dry ton, depending on the
degree of dewatering and form in which it would be handled.

Incorporation of sludge in farm soil was found to be. an
excellent method for disposal of large quantities of sludge,
In combination with crop production, however, certain
problems could arise.  At high levels, such as 600 tons
per acre, a year fallow appears necessary in order to
obtain significant increases in crop yield.  Crop yields
in fresh mixtures of low sludge levels and soil were
satisfactory provided adequate nitrogen was added.

Sludge alone or in combination with bark was competitive
as a hydromulch material in establishing grass stands on
steep embankments.

This report was submitted in fulfillment of Project 12040
ESV under the partial sponsorship of the Environmental
Protection Agency, in cooperation with Crown Zellerbach
Corporation, Camas,  Washington.
                           iii

-------
                         CONTENTS
Section
  I        Conclusions
  II       Recommendations
  III      Introduction
  IV       Sludge Characteristics
  V        Incineration--Air Entrainment
  VI       Incineration--Hog Fuel Boilers
  VII      Sludge Processing and Costs
  VIII     Laboratory Studies
  IX       Greenhouse Studies
  X        Field Plot Studies
  XI       Mulching
  XII      Miscellaneous Uses
  XIII     Acknowledgments
  XIV      References
  XV       Appendices
Page
  1
  5
  7
  9
 15
 33
 47
 57
 61
 89
103
117
119
121

-------
                            FIGURES

                                                         PAGE

 1   PRIMARY TREATMENT PLANT SHOWING SLUDGE
     DISPOSAL AREA                                        16

 2   AIR ENTRAINED INCINERATOR—SIDE VIEW                 17

 3   AIR ENTRAINED INCINERATOR                            18

 4   PRESSED SLUDGE—BURN WITH HOG FUEL                   20

 5   DRY SLUDGE—BURN WITH HOG FUEL                       21

 6   CARBON DIOXIDE RESPIROMETERS FOR DETERMINING
     SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION RATE                            48

 7   TONS SLUDGE UTILIZED AT VARIOUS LOADINGS AT
     DIFFERENT C:N RATIOS                                 50

 8   TONS SLUDGE UTILIZED AT VARIOUS LOADINGS AT
     DIFFERENT C:N RATIOS                                 51

 9   SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION—NO NITROGEN ADDED              52

10   SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION—OPTIMUM NITROGEN ADDED         53

11   SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION IN 120 DAYS FOR SANDY AND
     CLAY SOIL                                            54

12   EFFECT OF NITROGEN ADDITION AND SLUDGE ON
     SUNFLOWER YIELD                                      60

13   EXPERIMENTAL PLOT LAYOUT FOR SLUDGE UTILI-
     ZATION PROJECT                                       62

14   AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF SLUDGE AMENDED PLOTS            63

15   COMPARISON OF TWO PLOTS RECEIVING TOTAL OF
     600 T/A SLUDGE                                       87

16   EFFECT OF SLUDGE ADDITION ON WILTING OF CORN         88

17   HYDROMULCH APPLICATION ON SIMULATED HIGHWAY
     ROAD CUT                                             90

18   GRASS GROWTH—HYDROMULCH PLOTS,  4/13/71              93


                              vi

-------
                                                     PAGE

19    DESIGN SHOWING HYDROMULCH PLOTS                 95

20    EFFECT OF HYDROMULCH LAYER ON TEST CROPS        97

21    RANDOMIZED PLOT DESIGN FOR BULK MULCHING
      EXPERIMENT                                      99

22    STRAWBERRY AND RASPBERRY PLOTS SHOWING
      ENCLOSURES AND SLUDGE DEPTHS                   101

23    STRAWBERRY AND RASPBERRY PLOTS SHOWING
      ENCLOSURES AND SLUDGE DEPTHS                   102

24    MOREL MUSHROOMS FOUND GROWING ON SLUDGE
      PLOTS                                          104
                            vii

-------
                          TABLES
No.                                                  Page
 1    Average Sludge Properties—Various Samplings    10
 2    Ash Content of Sludge Samples                   11
 3    Elemental Analysis of Ash Samples               12
 4    Primary Treatment Plant Operating Data          22
 5    Operating Costs for Incinerating Primary
      Treatment Plant Sludge                          23
 6    Maintenance Downtime—Equipment Evaluation      24
 7    Particulate Efficiency Tests on Incinerator
      Scrubber                                        27
 8    Particulate Emissions on Incinerator Scrubber   28
 9    Material Balance Data--Measured Quantities      30
10    Material Balance Data—Calculated Quantities    31
11    Hog Fuel and Sludge Properties—Port Townsend
      Trial                                           34
12    Furnace Operating Data—Camas Sludge and Port
      Townsend Hog Fuel  Burning Trial at Port
      Townsend                                        35
13    Hog Fuel and Sludge Properties--Camas Trial     37
14    Furnace Operating Data—Camas Sludge and Hog
      Fuel  Burning Trial at Camas                    38
15    Cost of Pressing^ Burning Sludge in Camas
      Hog Fuel Boiler                                 4o
16    Reduction of Sludge Volume by Dewatering
      Steps                                           41
17    Estimated Cost of Pressing and Semi-Drying
      Sludge                                          44
18    Operating Costs for Baling Semi-Dried Sludge    45
                           viii

-------
Mo.                                                  Page

19    Cost to Transport Sludge—Dry Ton Basis         46

20    Microbial Activity in Clay and Sandy Soil
      After 120 Days Incubation                       56

21    Treatment Ranking Using Duncan's New
      Multiple Range Test                             58

22    Experimental Design for Sludge Disposal
      Field Trials                                    64

23    Statistical Ranking According to Duncan's
      New Multiple Range Test for Corn Yield,
      Tolerance Design for 1970, 1971, 1972           69

24    Statistical Ranking According to Duncan's
      New Multiple Range Test for Bean Yields,
      Tolerance Design for 197P, 1971, 1972           69

25    Summary—Tolerance Design                       70

26    Effect of Sludge on Bean Maturity Rate When
      Grown on Tolerance Plots                        74

27    Statistical Ranking According to Duncan's
      New Multiple Range Test for Corn Yield,
      Yearly Amendment Design for 1970, 1971, 1972    76

28    Statistical Ranking According to Duncan's
      New Multiple Range Test for Bean Yields,
      Yearly Amendment Design for 1970, 1971, 1972    76

29    Summary—Yearly Amendment Design                77

30    Total Quality Scores of 1972 Corn and Bean
      Crops on Disposal Design Plots                  80

31    Effect of Clarifier Sludge on Corn and Bean
      Yield in Field Plot Disposal Studies            8l

32    Statistical Ranking According to Duncan's
      New Multiple Range Test for Corn and Bean
      Yield--Disposal Design for 1970, 1971, 1972     82

33    Effect of 8 and 30 Months Residence of
      Sludge Amendments1 on Occurrence-of Surface
      Fungal Growths                                  84
                             ix

-------
No.
34    Ash and Volatile Solids Content of Sludge
      Amended Soils                                   85
35    Application on Hydromulch Plots                 89
36    Hydromulch Application and Efficacy Rating      92
37    Effect of Hydromulch on Tomato Yield            9&
38    Raspberry and Strawberry Yield on Hydromulch
      Plots                                           98
39    Summary of Strawberry and Raspberry Yield
      Data Under Bulk Mulch Conditions               100
40    Comparison of Materials for Oil Spill Clean-up 107
4l    Ensilage Mixtures for Cattle Peed Studies      108
42    Silage Study                                   110
43    Grain Consumption and Weight Gains or Losses
      for Dairy Steers                               111
44    Comparison of Plant Growth in Standard
      Synthetic and Sludge-Based Potting Media       115
45    Influence of Sludge on Control of Tomato
      Root Knot Nematode                             116

-------
                         SECTION I

                        CONCLUSIONS

1.  Sludge properties vary considerably, but can be
characterized for disposal by frequent samplings and tests
such as Canadian standard freeness, ash content and fiber
size distribution (fiber fractionation).  Generally, all
relate to the types of pulps and paper products being
manufactured.  Elemental analyses of the ash reveal that
the inorganic portion of the sludge originates from clay,
silt, and sand, carried by wood mill effluent, and from
various additives required for paper making.

2.  Disposal of primary treatment plant sludge from an
integrated pulp and paper mill can be accomplished by an
air-entrained incinerator.  Over a 3 year period, operating
costs for incinerating sludge were $9.78-11.68 per ton for
a 20,000 ton/year plant.  Plant capital cost (1968-1969
basis) was $350,000.  Total disposal costs, including
primary treatment (clarifier and filter operation) were
$12.84-14.6o/ton.  Maintenance cost was almost 1/3 the
operating cost.  Tests show that the system can meet air
pollution standards for a waste material incinerator with
a wet fan-type dynamic scrubber made of stainless steel.
Material balance data around a sludge dewatering device
requires frequent measurements of consistencies and the
measurement of one flow to or from the device.

3.  Pressed and fluffed primary treatment plant sludge can
be burned in a steam generating boiler with hog fuel.
There should be minimum effects on the operation if sludge
content of the fuel mix is no more than 5$.  Reduction in
thermal efficiency of the boiler is related to the higher
ash content and lower calorific fuel value  (of the organic
portion) of sludge, both compared to hog fuel.  There would
be an approximate $1.50/ton savings by burning sludge in a
hog fuel boiler over burning it in a separate incinerator
with no heat recovery.  Part of this savings could be
offset because the boiler would have to be cleaned more often,
due to ash accumulation.

4.  Prom a primary treatment plant, sludge can be prepared
for disposal as a dewatered material at about 20$ solids
content, or as a pressed material at about 38$ solids
content.  Semi-drying sludge to 77$ solids, followed by
baling, densifies the sludge to about 34 Ib dry material/
cu ft.  This is triple the solids density of either dewatered
or pressed sludge.

-------
The cumulative costs per dry ton of sludge for dewatering,
pressing, semi-drying and baling are respectively $3.06,
$7.383 $13.86 and $19.89.

Hauling costs are dependent upon hauling distance, sludge
consistency and method of transport.  Such costs were
found to vary from $l4-17/dry ton for hauling bulk,
pressed and fluffed sludge a short distance to $49/dry ton
to haul the same type of sludge about 250 miles by truck.
These costs do not include selling costs, profit or
special handling charges.

5.  Soil respirometer experiments showed that extensive
sludge breakdown was obtained when levels of sludge were
added to nitrogen containing clay soil.  In nitrogen
deficient sandy soils supplemental nitrogen was necessary
to obtain significant sludge decomposition.  Additional
nitrogen was needed in both soils to optimize sludge
utilization when high levels of sludge were added.

6.  Sunflower plant growth responses in sandy and clay
soils amended with sludge and nitrogen were studied in
greenhouse experiments.  Amendments of sludge and nitrogen
improved sandy soil more than clay soil as shown by
increased sunflower yield.  For example addition of 100
tons/acre (T/A) sludge to clay soil with supplemental
nitrogen caused a 1.7 fold increase in sunflower yield.
With sandy soil the same treatment resulted in a 2.7 fold
increase in yield.

7.  Large amounts of sludge were readily degraded by mixing
into soil.  After three years decomposition, plot levels
decreased from the initial two foot level to a level almost
equal to control plots not receiving sludge.  Volatile
solids and improvement in yields of corn and beans were
obtained with high sludge incorporations which were
evaluated under the tolerance design.  Amendments of 100
and 200 T/A did not adversely affect corn and bean yields
the following crop season provided supplemental nitrogen
was added to satisfy both plant and microbial requirements.
When 400 and 600 T/A sludge additions were allowed to
decompose without supplemental nitrogen for at least a year,
test crops showed increased yield, earlier maturation and
reduced irrigation requirements.

-------
8.  Grass plantings by the hydromulch process indicate
that pulp and paper mill sludge or a mixture of sludge and
bark is equivalent to the wood fiber product currently used
as a mulching agent.  The lower freeness or drainage rate
of sludge over wood fiber allows application to be made at
a higher solids content.  The cost of a delivered semi-
dried bale of sludge in a local area should make sludge
or sludge-bark mixtures competitive products.

9.  Hydromulching and bulk mulching of raspberries,
strawberries and tomatoes caused a reduction in weed
activity.  However, with increases in sludge depth,
decreases in crop yield were observed.

10.  Morel mushrooms well in excess of natural occurrence
were observed growing on various sludge amended plots in
the spring of 1971 and 1972.  All attempts to grow these
mushrooms by design were unsuccessful.

11.  Dried, oil-treated sludge can be used as an oil
absorbing material for oil spill clean up.  However, on
basis of cost and storage problems, it does not appear
competitive with other marketed materials.

12.  Sludge was not toxic to ruminants when used as a
feed supplement at levels up to 15$ of the grain ration.
It has a very low feeding value since the test steers
were observed to lose more weight as the percentage of
sludge was increased in place of corn.

13.  Dried sludge has application as a bedding material
for dairy cattle.  It readily absorbs liquids and is
competitive to shavings which are becoming increasingly
more costly and difficult to obtain.

14.  Sludge-perlite (1:3) and sludge-vermiculite (1:1)
mixtures were satisfactory potting media for containerized
production of several plant species.  Douglas fir responded
well in a mixture of equal portions of sludge and bark.
All two-component sludge mixtures were noticeably improved
as potting media with addition of river sand.

Root knot nematode galls on tomato transplants were
markedly reduced by incorporation of sludge in nematode
infested soil at rates equivalent to 100 and 200 T/A.

-------
                        SECTION II

                      RECOMMENDATIONS

High maintenance costs in the incinerator were caused by
the abrasive action of high ash content sludge on various
pieces of equipment and ducting.  To reduce these costs,
affected areas in equipment should be modified or made
more resistant to this abrasive action.  Reduction of
abrasive material may be accomplished by treatment of
effluents containing high levels of inorganics.  Considera-
tion may also be given to the development of high volume
centrifugal cleaners for de-ashing effluents or high
consistency cleaners for processing low consistency sludge.

Disposal of large quantities of sludge was found to be
feasible under field conditions in a clay soil.  Similar
evaluation is needed in sandy soils to not only determine
increase in soil productivity and tilth, but to also study
sludge effect on water retention and sand stabilization.

Preliminary experiments on use of sludge as a cattle
bedding material showed promise.  There is a potential use
of sludge as bedding in place of more expensive and less
available wood shavings.  The possibility of using sludge
as a poultry litter absorbent has been suggested and
requires evaluation.

The proliferation of edible "morels" in sludge amended
plots was found to be extremely interesting.  Answers to
cause could easily found an industry for growing morels
which to date have not successfully been artificially
produced.

Major utilization of sludge would result from development
of sludge containing "synthetic soils" for use in contain-
erized crop production.  Favorable results obtained in
greenhouse studies show potentiality for sludge use in
soil mixes.  Future work should include evaluation of
various synthetic mixes and test species representing the
spectrum currently grown in containers.

Observed control of root-knot nematode by sludge incorpora-
tion indicates need for further and more extensive study.
Sludge additions to soil containing other soil borne
parasites or pathogens may be worthy of investigation.

-------
                        SECTION III

                       INTRODUCTION

Most pulp and paper mills in the United States today
provide primary treatment for the removal of settleable
solids from their effluents.  Disposal of the resultant
solids presents a problem facing the industry.

Initially, land storage and land fill within a short
distance of the mill were used for sludge disposal.
However, since the material dried and decomposed slowly,
this approach at best was only a temporary expedient.
Although by-product utilization presents some possibilities,
contamination and extreme variability of product mitigates
against extensive development of markets.

Burning of sludge in hog fuel power boilers is being
practiced at a number of mills, but there is little
reported data and information on this method.  Information
on the effect of sludge upon steam generation and atmospheric
emissions has not been available.  Burning of sludges in
specially designed incinerators is widely used for domestic
wastes and is used at several paper mills (1).

Sludge utilization as an agricultural amendment presents
a potential for large scale sludge disposal either by
incorporation into the soil or as a mulching material.
Since many pulp and paper mills are located in areas
accessible to rather large tracts of suitable agricultural
land, development of this disposal method appears to have
considerable merit.

Early in 1968 Crown Zellerbach Corporation received a
research and development grant from the Environmental
Protection Agency for a project to be conducted at the
company's Camas Mill.  The study was designed to study
four different methods of sludge disposal with the
objective of obtaining sufficient information and data
for the design of full scale disposal systems.  The
methods of sludge disposal investigated and reported in
this paper were:  (1) incineration in an air entrained
dryer-incinerator,  (2) burning in hog fuel boilers,
(3) incorporation into soil as an amendment, and (4)
hydromulching for soil stabilization.

-------
                        SECTION IV

                  SLUDGE CHARACTERISTICS

In considering the various possibilities for disposing of
pulp and paper mill primary treatment plant sludge, the
properties related to disposal should be characterized.
Basically, the sludge is a fibrous material, and so
Canadian standard freeness, ash content, and fiber size
distribution (fiber fractionation) are logical properties
to evaluate.  The various strength tests, associated with
pulp and paper making fibers, would only have meaning if
the sludge were screened and cleaned.  In this case, the
sources contributing to the sludge and the type of mill
generating the material would affect the feasibility of
fiber recovery.  Source of sludge for this project is an
integrated pulp and paper mill, producing bleached kraft
and sulfite grades.  Table 1 gives average sludge properties,
taken during five different sampling periods.

During 1968, samples were taken of the primary treatment
plant coil filter cake, going to land fill.  This was
prior to the building of the air-entrained incinerator.
These sludges could be characterized by high ash, low
freeness, and high amounts of -150 mesh size solids.
Improvements in the wood mill effluent grit collector and
diversion of a mill parking lot storm sewer into a city
storm sewer lowered the ash content, raised sludge freeness,
and lowered the amount of -150 mesh solids.  The range of
property values has also tended to decrease over the period
of treatment plant operation.  This is somewhat evident
in the range of ash content values shown in Table 2.

Again referring to the previous table, the data do show
that removing wood mill effluent from the primary treat-
ment plant causes a decrease in ash content.  A special
project done by the mill indicated that almost 1/2 of
the ash in the sludge comes from the wood mill.  Also,
about 70$ of the grit, or abrasive material in sludge ash,
is from wood mill effluent.  The elemental analyses of
sludge ashes were determined spectrographically by the
State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Resources
and are shown in Table 3.
                             9

-------
                                     TABLE 1
AVERAGE
Canadian
Sample Standard
Date Freeness, cc
Feb.-
Mar. 3
1968* 209
June-
July,
1968** 370
o Au§- ^»
1970 380 '
Sept.
13-15,
1971 621
Nov. 25-
Dec. 26,
1972 556
SLUDGE PROPERTIES— -VARIOUS SAMPLINGS
% Ash,
O.D. Fiber Fractionation^ % on Mesh
Basis 14 20 35 e>5 150 -150
26.5 9.6 7.8 10.4 9.3 8.0 54.9
29.7 10.4 8.9 9.4 7.9 8.1 55-3
17.4 , 12.6 11.9 12.1 9.6 7.6 46.2
20.7 13.7 11.1 10.4 7.4 9.8 47.6
19.0 19.6 10.7 10.9 10.6 9.4 38.8
 *Average of 54 samples of filter cake.
**Average of 28 samples of filter cake.

-------
                       TABLE 2
ASH CONTENT OF SLUDGE SAMPLES
Sample Source,
Number , Period
Filter Cake,, 54,
2/1/68-3/17/68
Filter Cake, 28,
6/5/68-7/2/68
Press Cake, 25,
Vl/7 0-6/2 3/70
Press Cake, 5,
8/17/70-8/21/70*
% Ash,
Average
26.5
29.7
26.5
18.5
O.D. Solids
Minimum
10.3
15-5
19.6
16.5
Basis
Maximum
55.1
41.3
35.4
22.4
 Press Cake,  -,
 9/13/71-9A5/71

 Press Cake,  12,
 11/25/72-12/6/72
20.7


19.00***
  *Wood mill effluent diverted to alternate settling
   pond.

 **Composite of samples taken over the period.

***Samples composited for ash determination.
                          11

-------
             TABLE 3



ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS OF ASH SAMPLES
Sample Source
and Date Over 10$ 1$-10$ 0.19&-15&
Coil Filter -
2/1/68-3/17/68
Coil Filter -
6/5/68-7/2/68

Press Cake -
4/1/70-6/23/70

Si

Si


Si,
Al

Al,
Na,
Ti
Al,
Ca,
K,
Fe,
Ca,
Ti
Fe, Mg, Mn
K
Fe, Mg, Mn
Na,
Ti
Mg, K
Na,

0.0156-0.1^
Pb,
Sr
Ba,
Sr

Mn,
Cu,
Sr
Ba,

Pb,


Pb,
Ba,

0.001^-0.01^
Zr,
Cr,
Ni,
Zr,
Mo,
T\T '
Ni,
Zr,


Sn,
Cu,
B
Cr,
Cu,

Cr


Below
0.001$
--

—


Ni



-------
The high amounts of silicon, aluminum, potassium, and iron
would confirm the presence of mud, clay, and silt brought
in with logs to the wood mill.  They enter the effluent
from the log washing and hydraulic barking systems.  Much
of the inorganics originate from materials, such as alum,
clay, silicate, and other additives, used in various
specialty grades in the paper mill.  Summarily, the type
of operations carried on by the mill will affect sludge
properties.
                            13

-------
                         SECTION V

               INCINERATION—AIR ENTRAINMENT

The EPA grant to Crown Zellerbach Corporation shared in
the expense of building an air-entrained incineration
plant for the disposal of sludge from the Caraas pulp and
paper mill primary treatment plant.  The existing facility
consisted of a 330 ft diameter clarifier which delivers an
underflow sludge at 2-6$ solids content to two 11 ft
diameter by 10 ft wide coil filters.  These further dewater
the sludge to 18-22$ solids.  Prior to building the disposal
plant, the filter solids were conveyed to land fill.  Figure
1 shows the original primary treatment plant and Figure 2
shows the air-entrained incinerator.

The air-entrained system flow sheet, shown in Figure 3,
starts with a V-type press which expels liquid from the
sludge to increase the solids content to 37-40$.  The
pressate liquid is returned to the clarifier.  From the
top of the press, the press cake is discharged to a screw
conveyor which transports it to a fluffer.  This is a high
speed hammer mill which breaks up the cake for better
drying and incineration.  Material then drops into the hot
gas stream from the incinerator to be carried up through
the dryer.  This is a vertical conical shaped vessel with
two necked-in sections in the upper part.  In each of the
sections there is a velocity control cone on a central shaft
which can be raised or lowered to alter velocity and reten-
tion time in the dryer.  Dried material and conveying gas
are separated in a cyclone.  The gas is drawn through all
this process by a large induced draft fan.  Water is sprayed
into the fan to scrub particulate, and then the water
containing particulate, is separated from the gas in a
cyclone.  Gas is discharged to the atmosphere.

Dried material at 70-85$ solids content drops out of the
cyclone through a rotary air lock valve into a stream of
conveying air.  This stream carries the sludge into the
upper part of the cylindrical shaped incinerator where
it enters centrifically and burns.  Natural gas is burned
with its own combustion air in the lower part to heat up
the incinerator on start-up.  When sufficient heat is
generated from sludge combustion to support burning
(autogenous reaction), then gas use is limited to maintain-
ing burner control only.  At times, gas is burned to
furnish supplementary heat if the fuel value of the sludge
                            15

-------

FIGURE 1.  PR I MARY TREATMENT PLANT SHOWING SLUDGE DISPOSAL AREA.

-------
         w^
FIGURE 2.  AIR ENTRAINED INCINERATOR-SIDE VIEW.
                    17

-------
               CLARIFIER
      OVER-
      FLOW
   TO
LANDFII
S   BURNER
                                 PRESSED-FLUFFED SOLIDS
                 INCINERATOR           DRY SOLIDS           SCRUBBER
                                                   TO CLARIFIER  *
                                                              AIR
                                                              LOCK
                                                              VALVE
                     ASH TO LAND FILL
                              FIGURES.  AIR-ENTRAINED INCINERATOR
                             ^

-------
is low.  Secondary air enters the incinerator tangentially
above the gas burner.  Ash drops out of the bottom onto a
water cooled metal chain drag conveyor.  Water is also
sprayed onto the ash to cool it prior to its transfer to
a rubber conveyor belt, going to land fill.  By a transfer
chute, sludge from the coil filter can go to land fill on
this belt when the incinerator is down.

For many of the disposal methods investigated, large
amounts of pressed and fluffed sludge were taken from the
system.  This could be done by not running the fans, dryer,
and incinerator.  A flange is removed from under the
fluffer, and sludge falls onto a portable conveyor which
can be elevated to take the sludge up into a dump truck
for transport to the site of use.  Most of the sludge for
the experimental farm and for the burning trial in the
Camas hog fuel furnace was obtained this way.

A short conveyor and silage blower were used to fill chip
truck trailers for the hog fuel trial at our Port Townsend
kraft mill located in the State of Washington.  Figure 4
shows a flow sheet which would be used by mills for
disposing of sludge by burning in hog fuel furnaces.

Smaller amounts of coil filter sludge at 18-22$ solids
were obtained for some uses.  The first farm application
was collected by using a front end loader and dump truck
to remove material from the land fill area.  This method
was not used after start-up of the incinerator in 1969.
Only small amounts of dried sludge at 70-85$ solids can
be obtained during operation of the incinerator by drawing
them off with a vacuum source from a port in the material
conveying duct to the incinerator.  It is possible to
operate the system as a dryer by burning only gas, and
removing dried sludge from below the rotary air lock valve.
This system is shown in Figure 5.

In disposing of paper mill primary treatment plant sludge
by incineration, the objectives were to obtain the operating
costs, note any operational problems, and to determine
whether the process would meet emission standards set for
air, solid waste, and water effluent.  All operating data
on the plant were logged, and the air-entrained incineration
system was given a separate account number so that all
costs could be tabulated.  The basic data given in this
report were accumulated from monthly summary sheets prepared
                            19

-------
           CLARIFIER
  OVER-
  FLOW
      Mill
ro
o
  TO
LANDFILL
                              HAUL OR CONVEY
                                                              HOG FUEL
                                                              FURNACE
                 FIGURE 4.  PRESSED SLUDGE-BURN WITH HOG FUEL

-------
   CLAR I FIER UNDERFLOW
                       THICKENER
TOCLARIFIER^
   ID
ro
H
    FLUFFER
                     AIR
                     HEATER    ~7
                                 BURNER
                                                        CYCLONE
                                          AIR
                                          LOCK
                                          VALVE
                                                                    EXHAUST
                                                            INDUCED
                                                            DRAFT
                                                            FAN
                                                                IQHQG FUEL
                                                                ="* FURNACE
                                                        OR BALER
                                         CONVEYOR AIR FAN
                              COMBUSTION
                                AIR
                                FIGURE 5.  DRY SLUDGE-BURN WITH HOG FUEL

-------
by both the operating and accounting departments of the
Camas Mill.  All special testing and projects were under-
taken by personnel assigned from the Central Research and
Environmental Services Divisions of Crown Zellerbach
Corporation.

A summary of 3 years operation is given in Table 4.


                           TABLE 4
PRIMARY TREATMENT PLANT OPERATING DATA
Year
Total Tons Sludge to Plant
Total Tons Sludge Incinerated
Total Tons Sludge to Land Fill

-------
                 TABLE 5
OPERATING COSTS FOR INCINERATING PRIMARY
         TREATMENT PLANT SLUDGE
Year
Tons Sludge Incinerated
Direct Costs, $
1.  Operating Labor--
    Ind. Fringe Benefit
2.  Repair Labor--
                       1970      1971      1972
                       16,041    14,249    17,067

                       23,146    22,246    27,272
Ind. Fringe Benefit
3. Repair Materials
4. Misc. Supplies, Expense
5. Electrical Power
6. Natural Gas
Totals, $
Indirect Cost (20$ Labor), $
Fixed Costs., $
1. Depreciation,
10$ Cap. Cost
2. Taxes and Insurance,
1.85$ Cap. Cost
Totals, $
Return on Investment, 8$, $
Total Cost, $
Incineration Cost/Ton, $
Filtration Cost/Ton, $
Total Disposal Cost/Ton, $
7,610
46,901
—
6,120
10,005
93,782
6,151
35,000
6,470
41,470
28,000
169,413
10.56
2.76
13.32
20,488
30,536
89
4,915
10, 140
88,415
8,547
35,000
6,470
41,470
28,000
166,431
11.68
2.92
14.60
20,490
23,852
389
6,412
93489
87, 904
9,552
35,000
6,470
41,470
28,000
166,926
9.78
3.06
12.84
                   23

-------
The entire primary treatment plant and sludge disposal by
incineration system can be operated by one man per shift.
Labor cost is split 50-50 between each, and only the
incineration half is shown in Table 5.  All controls are
centrally located, and the major pieces of equipment are
adequately instrumented.  The operator is responsible for
sampling.various flows for consistencies.  The whole
operation is supervised at the Camas Mill by the sulfite
pulp mill.

The major operating cost is maintenance, attributable to
wear caused by grit and ash in the sludge.  Table 6 shows
a breakdown in hours of maintenance time on specific
pieces of equipment for the years 1971 and 1972.
                           TABLE 6

         MAINTENANCE DOWNTIME—EQUIPMENT EVALUATION
 Year                         1971              1972
                                   % of              % of
                          Hours    Time     Hours    Time

 Conveyor and V-Press     187      11.26    218.5    12.44
 Fluffer                   74.5     4.48     87.5     5.04
 Cyclone,  Dryer,  Rotary
   Air-Lock Valve         136       8.18    257      14.64
 Incinerator              4l8.5    25.19    275      15.67
 Ash Conveyor              56.5     3.40     36       2.05
 Scrubber and Its Fan     131.5     7.92     89       5.07
 Other Fans                26.0     1.56     20       1.14
 Instruments—Controls     173-5-    10.43     77.5     4.42
 Misc. Downtime,
   General Maintenance     458.5    27.58    694      39.53

      Totals             1662.0   100.00   1754.5   100.00


 The  V-press required 11-12$  of the  total down-time.   The
 conveyor  chute to the  press  caused  some early  problems,
 mainly  due to plug-ups.   These have  been minimized  by
 redesign  of the  chute  and better  control on the  V-press
 inlet mechanism.  Filter  sludge now  is  automatically
 transferred to the conveyor  belt  to  land fill  when  the
                            24

-------
chute plugs, and this relieves the operator of a nasty
clean-up problem when plugging occurs.  Press screens
show wear and must be changed several times a year*
There has been some maintenance on the eddy current press
speed control.

An important factor in drying and burning sludge is to
have the material from the press well fluffed or opened
up.  This is done by dropping pressed sludge through a
fluffer, or hammer mill.  In 1970, fluffer hammers were
replaced 44 times, and fluffer screens 12 times.  This
was a major maintenance item.  Use of hardened alloy
hammer tips and a reduction in ash content of the sludge
decreased hammer replacements to about once a month during
1971 and 1972.  Screen replacements were down to one or
two a year.

High ash content of the sludge has contributed to erosion
of high velocity areas of the dryer, cyclone, and ducts
to and from them.  Flatbacks have been installed at elbows
and places of wear.  Wiper blades on the rotary air-lock
valve require frequent replacement.

Downtime on the incinerator has been for slag removal,
modifications to the ash discharge, and replacement of
refractory.  The latter wears out by erosion in areas of
high velocity.

The other major item of maintenance has been the wet fan
dynamic scrubber and the cyclone separator, following the
fan.  The original equipment was made of mild steel, and
the fan housing and separator body were coated with
asphaltum.  Thickness gage tests showed wear in high
velocity areas.  Corrosion tests also showed that mild
steel would corrode in this environment, but that 304
stainless steel would be satisfactory.  All these items
have now been replaced with stainless steel, and maintenance
costs have been reduced.

Generally, an air-entrained incineration system can be
expected to have high maintenance costs due to high
temperature-high velocity gas and solids flows,  and due
to the abrasive property of high ash sludge.

The current regulation on particulate emissions for
incinerators is 0.1 grain/standard dry cu ft gas at 70° F.,
corrected to 12$ C02.   Due to velocity problems in the

-------
scrubber outlet stack, early tests had to be made by
measuring particulate to the scrubber and particulate in
the scrubber water.  The difference was assumed to be
emitted to atmosphere.  Results, shown in Table 7,
indicated that the system could meet the regulation.

More recent tests were conducted after the scrubber stack
was modified to give a better velocity profile.  The
results in Table 8 are measurements being emitted to the
atmosphere.  Both tests gave values below 0.1 grain/standard
dry cu ft, at 70° F., corrected to 12$ C02.

To satisfy both the operating division and the pollution
control authorities, one has to know both the flows and
amounts of solids in the streams going to and coming from
the various units in the system.  Many of the streams
carry solids, and flows can be large.  Selection of
methods for measurements should be both practical and
reliable.  Consistency, or solids content, is normally
taken on all flows.  Large liquid flows are usually measured
with weirs.  Smaller streams, such as the filter filtrate
and press pressate could be measured with weirs, or
possibly orifices, if the flow is pumped.  Attempts have
been made to measure slurry flows by counting the strokes
and knowing the displacement of positive displacement
pumps.  This is not always reliable because solids can
lodge under check valve seats.

Dewatered solids are usually transferred from one piece
of equipment to another by belt conveyors.  This offers
the possibility of measuring flows by the use of belt
weighing devices.   Solids flow can be measured on a filter
drum by taking a measured area of the filter cake, and
relating the dry solids in it to the total filter mat.
This is determined by knowing the filter drum speed,
diameter, and width.  Uniform cake thickness is assumed.

The primary treatment plant operator takes consistencies
on the following streams:

                    Clarifier Influent
                    Clarifier Effluent
                    Sludge to Filter
                    Filter Cake
                    Filtrate
                    Press Cake
                    Pressate
                            26

-------
                                         TABLE 7
ro
PARTICULATE EFFICIENCY TESTS ON INCINERATOR SCRUBBER
Test
No.
1
2
3
Scrubber
Flow, ACFM
22,530
22,530
22,230
Temp . ,
Wet
Bulb
237
237
275
°F.
Dry
Bulb
142
142
140
Particulate,
Ib/hr
In Out*
13.4 0
16.0 0.6
19.63 3.26
Emission,
Grains/Std.
Dry Cu Ft
0
0.0176
0.107
Scrubber
Effic.,
%
100
96
83.4
       ^Measured in scrubber water discharge and subtracted from inlet particulate.
      **Corrected to 14.7 psia, 12$

-------
ro
oo
                                           TABLE 8
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS ON INCINERATOR SCRUBBER
Test
No.
1
2
Scrubber
Plow. ACFM,
70° F.
32,650
33,300
Gas
Temp. ,
117
'117
Duct
Veloc. ,
fps
4-7.0
48.3
Carbon
Dioxide
2.5
2.0
Wate r
Vapor
7-3
6.3
Particulate,
Gr/Std Dry
Cu Ft, 70° P.*
0.051
0.066
       •^Corrected to 14.7 psia, 12^

-------
Clarifier effluent is measured by a Parshall flume, and
this is assumed to be practically the same as the influent.
A flow pipe and V-notch weir were built to measure pressate
flow, and this can be measured.  The operator also measures
sludge flow by taking V by V filter cake samples off
the filter drum.  Prom all these data, all flows can be
determined by using the MATERIAL BALANCE FORMULA, given in
Figure 1A in the Appendix.

For a period of 5 days, extensive samplings and data were
taken to check the reliability of testing procedures.
The regular test data taken by the primary treatment plant
operator were supplemented by numerous tests and readings
taken around the clock by project personnel.  Measured
quantities are given in Table 9.

From these data, the calculated quantities of Table 10
were obtained.

Using the two manually measured or observed flows of
pressate and filter cake pads, the O.D. tons of solids
going to the incinerator (as press cake) were calculated.
The filter cake daily tonnages were consistently higher.
Differences between influent, effluent, and press cake
solids are assumed to be either positive or negative
accumulations in the clarifier.  There are no definite
conclusions to be drawn about the accuracy of either
measurement for material balance data.  The results point
out, however, that some flow within the system should be
continually measured and accumulated by an integrating
recorder to obtain meaningful data on the amount of solids
going through the disposal plant.
                            29

-------
                                         TABLE 9

                       MATERIAL BALANCE DATA—MEASURED QUANTITIES
u>
o
Day Ending

Consistencies, %

Clarifier Influent
Clarifier Effluent
Sludge to Filter
Filter Cake
Filtrate
Press Cake
Pressate

Ash Content,  O.D. Solids
	Basis, %	

Filter Cake
Press Cake
Incinerator Ash

Gal/Day to Clarifier  x  1000
Pressate Flow, gpm*
Hours Incin.  Operation
Gas Usage, cu ft/day
                                     8/17/70   8/18/70   8/19/70   8/20/70   8/21/70
0.033
0.004
2.67
16.58
0.037
40.90
0.342
0.031
o.oo4
2.525
16.94
0.045
41.68
0.364
0.018
2.425
17.00
0.046
39-80
0.435
0.021
2.356
15.86
0.039
37.71
0.410
0.0295
0.0002
2.548
17.28
0.031
38.00
0.479
16.01
16.52
92.8
55,899
35
24
16,700
21.87
22.43
61.81
55,416
29.1
24
13,000
18.18
19.65
91.09
57,758
33.8
18
8,600
17.68
17.19
92.92
56,773
31.5
24
13,400
16.26
16.49
91.14
57,800
31.45
22.5
18,600
       •^Calculated from weir  readings on pressate  flow.

-------
                                 TABLE 10

               MATERIAL BALANCE DATA—CALCULATED QUANTITIES
Day Ending

Solids in Influent, tons
O.D. Tons Press Cake*
O.D. Tons Press Cake**
Solids in Effluent, Tons
Accum. in Clarifier, Tons*
Accum. in Clarifier, Tons**
% Losses in Effluent
Lb  Loss/1000 Gal.
Therms Gas Used/Ton Sludge
8/17/70   8/18/70   8/19/70   8/20/70   8/21/70
77.0
57.5
64.7
7.1
12.4
5.2
9.24
0.33
3.07
71.6
48.9
66.7
6.9
15.8
-2.0
9.68
0.35
2.81
43.7
44.0
49.9
10.8
-ll.l
-17.0
24.8
1.55
2.06
49.7
50.5
63.5
7.1
-7.9
-20.9
14.3
0.50
2.81
71.2
5^.5
60.7
4.8
11.9
5.7
6.77
0.23
3.60
  *Calculated  from weir flow readings,  pressate  cons.

 **Calculated  from 4"  x 4"  pad taken from coil filter,  filter speed,  filter
   area,  filter cake cons,  (mill data).

-------
                        SECTION VI

              INCINERATION— HOG FUEL BOILERS

Pressed and fluffed sludge was taken from the Camas Mill
primary treatment plant to the Port Townsend Mill for a
trial of burning with hog fuel in a steam generating dutch
oven furnace.  Sludge was transferred with a silage blower
into chip truck trailers, transported to the mill and dumped
onto the purchased chips conveying system.  A transfer
conveyor moved sludge from the chip area to an empty hopper
in the steam plant.  Fuel mixes for burning were made by
taking relative amounts out of the sludge and hog fuel
hoppers with a scoop, operated from an overhead monorail
track.  The actual ratios of fuel components were determined
by manual separation of sludge and hog fuel from composite
samples taken from the furnace feed chutes.  Fuel usage,
steam production, C02 in the flue gas, and ash pit pressure
were monitored during the run.

For the hog fuel burning trial at Camas, pressed and
fluffed sludge was taken from the incineration plant by
the method of portable conveyor and dump truck.  An area
adjacent to the hog fuel pile was used for stock piling.
Hog fuel is pushed into a trough, which is kept. filled
with fuel.  Drag chains in the bottom of the trough move
the material against a dam, and this gives a continuous
uniform volume flow of fuel.  At the point where the
material is transferred to conveyor belts, sludge was
manually shoveled onto the belt at a rate estimated to
give the desired proportion of sludge.  This flow was then
taken to the furnace directly.  The furnace was loaded for
10 minutes out of each hour, and a composite sample of
each load was taken for moisture, ash, and heating value
tests.  The amount of sludge in each mix was calculated
by knowing the ash content of the sludge, the hog fuel,
and the fuel mix.  An example of the method is given as
follows :
          Sludge                =        A
          Hog Fuel              =  2.74$ Ash
          Fuel Mix              =3.64$ Ash
              a                 =  Fraction Hog Fuel
              K                 =  Fraction Sludge
          a + b                 =      ..
          0.0274 a + 0.1968 b   =  0.0364  (2

Substituting; (1-a) for b, and solving the second equation
gives a = 07947, and then b = 0.053, or the fuel is 94.7$
hog fuel and 5.3$ sludge.
                            33

-------
 The  objectives  of the  sludge-hog fuel burning trials  were
 the  following:

     a.   Determine the  ratio  of sludge to  hog fuel which
         can be  burned  in a steam generating boiler.

     b.   Note the  effects on  operation and steam production.

     c.   Determine the  cost of this  method of disposal.

     d.   Note effects on smoke emissions to the atmosphere.

 The  trial  at the  Port  Townsend Mill was primarily to  test
 this method of  disposal in order to allow for future
 planning.   Hog  fuel and sludge properties for this trial
 are  given  in Table 11.


                          TABLE 11

              HOG  FUEL AND SLUDGE PROPERTIES—
             	PORT TOWNSEND TRIAL	


                                       Sludge      Hog  Fuel

 O.D.  Solids,  %                         37.25       56.75

 Ash,  O.D.  Basis,  %                    19.68        2.14

 Aver. Wet  Density, Ib/cu ft            26.7        24.3

 Heating  Value,  O.D. Basis, Btu/lb       6130        9250
These fuel properties are the normally expected values
except that sludge solids content is slightly lower than
average.  It is interesting to note that the two materials
have similar bulk densities.  This enabled the operator to
make fuel mixes fairly accurately by volumetric measurement.
Furnace operating data are shown in Table 12.  The average
conditions in the boiler were set during the first 4 hours
of the run.  Thermal efficiency of the boiler with hog fuel
has been assumed to be 58.2$.  When sludge and hog fuel
were added, the early effects were an increase in ash pit
pressure on the forced air fan and a lowering of the

-------
                                         TABLE 12
                  FURNACE OPERATING DATA--CAMAS SLUDGE AND PORT TOWNSEND
                          HOG FUEL BURNING TRIAL AT PORT TOWNSEND
oo
Ul
Period of Run, hr.
Tons Dry Fuel Mix/Hr
Sludge in Dry Fuel, %
Ash in Dry Fuel, %
Tons Dry Sludge Used/Hr
Dry Fuel Therms Input /Hr
Steam Prod., M Ib/hr*
Thermal Effic. of Boiler, %**
Tons Ash/Hr
COP in Flue Gas, %
Ash Pit Pres., " HpO
Reduction in Thermal Effic., %
Reduction in Dry Fuel Heat
Value, %
4
5.25
0
2.14
0
972
49.6
58.2
0.1124
8-12
0.2
_-

—
17
3.12
12.5
5.32
0.390
553
26.6
58.0
0.1660
6-8
1.15
0.3

4.3
12
2.50
22.3
6.04
0.557
42g
18.2
53.7
0.1511
6-8
1.20
7.7

7.6
   4

  2.75
     0
  2.14
     0
   508
  19.8
  47.2
0.0588
   6-8
  1.20
  18.8
        *Lb Steam  (1000 Btu/lb),  corrected  for  feed water  temp.,  etc.
       **Assumes evaporation of moisture  in  fuel  and  1000  Btu/lb  steam produced,

-------
content of the flue gas.  This indicates that more air is
needed to burn the fuel.  Upon continuation of the run at
the high sludge fuel content of 22.3$, the reduction in
thermal efficiency becomes proportional to the lower heat
value of sludge.  The final portion of the run without
sludge shows that the accumulation of ash from the sludge
has given the furnace a residual of lowered thermal
efficiency and reduction in steam production.

In order to extend the information gained from the trial
at Port Townsend, a 4 day run of burning sludge-hog fuel
mixes was planned for a hog fuel boiler at Camas.  This
provided a better opportunity to note effects on furnace
operation, steam production, and emissions of smoke to
the atmosphere.  Sludge and hog fuel properties for this
trial are given in Table 13.

The furnace operating data for the Camas Mill sludge-hog
fuel burning trial is given in Table 14.

The amounts of sludge in the fuel were calculated by the
ash content method, described earlier in this section.
Gas is burned in the furnace as auxiliary fuel, and its
heat contribution in therms (100,000 Btu's) is included.
During daylight hours of the trial a trained observer
noted Ringlemann No. on the boiler stack emission.  The
only value over 1.0 resulted from an overloading of the
furnace.  As previously mentioned, the boiler was operated
by filling with fuel every 10 minutes out of each hour.

Results show that the reduction in boiler thermal efficiency
is related to the higher ash content and lower calorific
fuel value of sludge, compared to hog fuel.  The latter
on an ash-free basis would be about 8100 Btu/lb for sludge
and about 9550 Btu/lb for hog fuel.

As the tons of ash accumulate in the furnace, the thermal
efficiency of the furnace also drops, and this is illustrated
to be true whether sludge has been burned or not (the data
taken on 11/3)•  The conclusion from both the Camas and
Port Townsend trials is that if a high-ash sludge (approx.
20$) is to be burned in a hog fuel boiler, it should be
no more than 5$ of the fuel mix.   Even at this low level,
based on ash accumulation and a 7 day furnace cleaning
cycle without sludge, the furnace would have to be cleaned
every 5 days.
                            36

-------
                                TABLE 13

               HOG FUEL AND SLUDGE PROPERTIBS--CAMAS TRIAL


  I.   Sludge  Sample,  Collected 10/12/70.

         O.D.  Solids,  %     =38.3
         Ash,  O.D.  Basis,  % = 19.68


 II.   Heating Values on Sludge and Fuel Mixes, Btu/lb, O.D.  basis.

         Sludge collected on 10/12/70                             6,500
         Hog Fuel Mix  5-3$ sludge), day ending 10/15/70          9,118
         Hog Fuel Mix  13.3$ sludge), day ending 10/16/70         8,835
         Hog Fuel Mix  17.1$ sludge), day ending 10/17/70         8,831
         Hog Fuel Mix  8.0$ sludge), day ending 10/18/70          9,030


III.   Hog Fuel Properties

               Day Ending           10/15     10/16     10/17     10/18

         O.D. Solids, %              48.5      47.0      47-5      48.9
         Ash, O.D. Basis, %          2.74      3.04      2.02      2.39
         Heating Value, Btu/lb,
            O.D. Basis*             9,270     9,200     9,320     9,250
*Calculated from hog fuel mix data.

-------
                                        TABLE 14
                    FURNACE OPERATING DATA—CAMAS SLUDGE AND HOG FUEL
                                 BURNING TRIAL AT CAMAS
CD
Day Ending
Tons Dry Fuel Mix/Day
Sludge in Dry Fuel, %
Ash in Dry Fuel, %
Tons Dry Sludge Used/Day
Therms Gas Used/Day
Therm Equiv.-Dry Fuel/Day
Steam Prod., M Ib/day
Thermal Effic. of Boiler, $**
Tons Ash/Day
Maximum Ringlemann No.
Reduction in Dry Fuel Heat
Value, %
Reduction in Boiler Thermal
Effic., $****
10/15
35.4
5.3
3.64
1.88
6,270
6,450
855
67.0
1.29
1.2***

1.6

1.6
10/16
39.4
13.3
5.25
5.24
6,410
6,970
866
65.3
2.07
0.7

4.1

3.9
10/17
41.7
17.1
5.04
7.12
5,560
7,370
833
65.4
2.10
0.7

4.9

3.8
10/18
36.4
8.0
3.77
2.91
5,575
6,575
782
64.8
1.37
0

2.2

4.7
 11/3*

  18.5
     0
     ?
     0
10,950
 3,425
   931
  62.6
     7
     9
       *Day before furnace cleaning.
      **Assumes evaporation of moisture in fuel and 940 Btu/lb steam produced  (feed
        water temp. 258° F.).
     ***High Ringlemann No. due to overloading the furnace.
    ****Assumes thermal effic. with no sludge is 68.1$.

-------
A cost estimate has been made for disposal of sludge in a
hog fuel boiler.  The bases for the estimate are given as
follows :

    1972 Operating Costs — Assume 17,076 tons to boiler.
    Plant cost for pressing sludge = $120,000.
    Sludge contains 60$ water.
    Dry fuel heating value = 6315 Btu/lb.
    Steam cost $0.55/1000 Ib.
    Hog fuel contains 52$ water.
    Dry hog fuel heating value = 9250 Btu/lb.
    Maintenance cost 30$ of total incineration cost,
       same for miscellaneous supplies, expenses.
    Power cost 40$ of total incineration cost.

                        Calculation

Difference in cost between burning one dry ton sludge
versus one dry ton hog fuel:

    Loss in Btu value = (2000) (9250 - 6315) = 5870 M Btu
    Added Water Evap. = (2000) (1050) (0.42)  =  880 M Btu

               Total Difference             = 6750 M Btu

    Loss/ton sludge, assuming steam @ 940 Btu/lb:
          (0.55) (250) =  $3.95Aon sludge
                 ~~
The cost estimate for burning pressed sludge in a hog fuel
boiler assumes that the material can be furnished to the
boiler at no handling charge.  This means that dewatering
and pressing facilities are located adjacent to the hog
fuel storage area, and that the two fuels can be blended.
Table 15 shows that there would be a savings of about
$1.50 by disposing of sludge in a hog fuel boiler over
incineration.
                            39

-------
                          TABLE 15
             COST OP PRESSING, BURNING SLUDGE  IN
             	CAMAS HOG FUEL BOILER	
               (Based on 1972 Operating  Costs)

Direct Cost—Pressing Sludge               $/yr.      $/Ton
1.  Operating Labor - Ind. Fringe Ben.     27,272     1.596
2.  Repair Labor - Ind. Fringe Ben.         6,150     0.360
3.  Repair Materials                        7,lbO     0.419
4.  Misc. Supplies, Expenses                   117     0.007
5.  Electrical Power                        2,560     0.150
               Totals, $                   43,259     2.532
Indirect Cost—Pressing Sludge
1.  Mill Burden (20$ of labor)              6,684     0.392

Fixed Costs—Pressing Sludge
1.  Depreciation, 10$ Cap. Cost            12,000     0.702
2.  Taxes & Ins., 1.85$ Cap. Cost           23220     0.130
               Totals, $                   14,220     0.832
Return on Investment, 8$                    9,600     0.562
Total Costs, Pressed Sludge, $             73,763     4.318
Primary Treatment Plant Sludge Cost, $     52,225     3.060
Loss in Fuel Value, Burning Sludge, $      67,270     3.950
Cost to Burn in Hog Fuel Boiler, $        193,258   11.328*
Cost to Incinerate Sludge, $              219,151   12.84
*The contingency of more frequent furnace cleanings is not
 allowed for in the estimate.  Also, no cost is shown for
 blending sludge into the hog fuel.
                            40

-------
                        SECTION VII

                SLUDGE PROCESSING AND COSTS

Devices used for dewatering sludge from the underflow of a
primary treatment plant are filters and centrifuges.  At
Camas a coil filter is used, which is a type of belt
filter.  Its main advantage is that it does not blind due
to the continuous flexing of the layers of coils which
form the belt.  Sludge generally comes off the filter at
18-22$ solids and is transferred by belt to land fill or to
a V-press.  Filtrate is returned to the clarifier.  The
press further dewaters the sludge to 37-40$ solids, and
pressate is also returned to the clarifier.  The press
cake is conveyed to a fluffer which breaks it up and fluffs
it.  This material can be flash-dried by dropping it into
a stream of hot gas and carrying it through a retention
vessel.  It can then be separated from the gas and collected
at from 50-80$ solids.  In dried form, the product can be
densified by baling.

At each stage of dewatering sludge, in addition to a rise
in solids content, there is a change in its density and a
change in the solids contained in a cubic foot of the
material.  These figures are given in Table 16.
                          TABLE 16

       REDUCTION OF SLUDGE VOLUME BY  DEWATERING STEPS


                     Density,   % Solids,   % Dry Solids/
 Dewatering Device   Ib/cu ft    Average    cu ft Sludge

  Filter Cake          67.5        20           10.8

  Press Cake             30        38           11.4

  Dryer and Baler      43.7        77           33.7


There is not much difference between the Ib dry solids/cu
ft of sludge in filter cake and press cake because press
cake is rather bulky.  Attempts to bale and densify press

-------
cake were not successful as contained water creates a
continuous water phase which causes the bale to fall apart
when the baling pressure is released.  Pressed sludge can
be bulk handled by air blower conveying, front end loaders,
clamshell scoops, etc.  Filter cake sludge is a fairly
sloppy product which is hard to handle.  For purposes of
disposal, semi-drying and baling should be considered.
Bales have been made successfully from sludge dried to
77-80$ solids content.
For all the stages of sludge dewatering, a figure of $3.06/
dry ton has been added as the cost of operating the
clarifier and coil filter.  This requires one operator
on a half-time basis.

The degree to which sludge is dewatered and the form in
which it is transported will depend on its end use.
Whether it can be stockpiled or whether it can be used as
received will also affect its form and determine how it
is to be shipped.  Pressed sludge is the most convenient
form because it is the easiest to handle.

The cost of pressing sludge, developed in the previous
section on disposing of sludge in a hog fuel boiler (see
Table 15), assumes an installed equipment cost of $120,000.
This includes a transfer conveyor, feed chute, press,
press cake conveyor, and fluffer.  Power usage is estimated
to be 40$ of the power needed for the total disposal by
air-entrained incineration, and maintenance would be 30$
of that for the total plant.  This brings the cost of
pressing sludge to $4.32/dry ton, or with the prior
dewatering cost, a total of $7.3b/dry ton.

The cost for semi-drying sludge has been estimated, based
on the following:

    Dry one ton sludge from 40$ O.D. to 77$ O.D.
    Drying efficiency of 70$.
    Fuel cost @ $0.08/therm (100,000 Btu).
    Assume maintenance 75$ of incineration cost.
    Production of 17,067 tons/year.
    Use 1972 incineration cost data.
    Capital cost of plant is $300,000.

The capital cost of the semi-drying plant is less than the
incinerator because there would be no ash handling equipment,

-------
The following calculation is made to show the cost for
fuel used for drying:

                       Calculations

Natural Gas Cost/Ton Sludge:

        Water removed/ton dry sludge -1.2 tons
        (1.2)(2000)(1050) = 2520 M Btu Required
        2520 4 0.70 = 3600 M Btu supplied
        Cost = (3600)(0.08)(0.01) = $2.880/ton

The estimated cost of pressing and semi-drying sludge is
shown in Table 17.  Semi-drying would be practical only if
sludge were to be made a product of commerce.

Attached to a plant for semi-drying sludge would be a
baling machine.  This would operate continually with the
dryer, and so a full-time operator is provided.  The cost
of baling sludge along with the drying cost is given in
Table 18.

Pressed and fluffed sludge can be conveyed or blown into
trucks or barges for hauling or transport.  The unloading
facility would require special equipment, except for dump
trucks.  A ground area with cover could be provided for
some storage.

Bales of semi-dried sludge could be transported by long-
haul trucks or barges.  Bale weights might be 1000-1400 Ib
gross weight, requiring fork lift trucks or hoists and
slings for loading and unloading.

The costs to transport sludge on a dry ton basis are given
in Table 19.  These estimates are based on costs incurred
in moving sludge for some of the large-scale disposal
projects conducted under this EPA grant.  The cost for
barging was given by the Crown Zellerbach Traffic Department,
It should be emphasized that all the amounts cited herein
do not include selling costs, profit, or special handling
charges.

-------
                          TABLE I?
ESTIMATED COST OF PRESSING AND SEMI-DRYING SLUDGE
(Based on 1972 Operating
Direct Cost
1. Operating Labor — Ind. Fringe Ben.
2. Repair Labor — Ind. Fringe Ben.
3. Repair Materials
4. Misc. Supplies, Expenses
5. Electrical Power
6. Natural Gas
Totals, $
Indirect Cost
1. Mill Burden (20$ of Labor)
Fixed Costs
1. Depreciation, 10$ Cap. Cost
2. Taxes and Ins., 1.85$ Cap. Cost
Totals, $
Return on Investment, 8$
Totals, $
Primary Treatment Plant Sludge Cost, $
Costs)
$/Yr
27,272
15,380
17,880
292
6, 412
49,153
116,189
8,530
30,000
5,550
35,550
24,000
184,269
52,225

$/Ton
1.596
0.901
1.047
0.017
0.375
2.880
6.816
0.500
1.757
0.325
2.082
1.404
10.802
3.06
Total Cost of Semi-dried Sludge, $        236,494    13.862
                             44

-------
                         TABLE 18
        OPERATING COSTS FOR BALING SEMI-DRIED  SLUDGE
Basis:  1972 production of 17,067 tons, one man/shift,
        capital cost for baler of $68,000, installed.
Direct Costs                               $/Yr       $/Ton
1.  Operating Labor—Ind. Fringe Ben.      54,544     3.192
2.  Repair Labor—
    Ind. Fringe Ben. (4$ Cap.)              2,720     0.159
3.  Repair Materials (4$ Cap.)              2,720     0.159
4.  Electrical Power, 50 H.P.               1,000     0.059
5.  Baling Materials, $1.00/ton            17,067     1.000
               Totals, $                   78,051     4.569

Indirect Cost
1.  Mill Burden (20$ of Labor)             11,453     0.671
Fixed Costs
1.  Depreciation, 10$ Cap. Cost             6,800     0.398
2.  Taxes & Ins., 1.85$ Cap. Cost           1,260     0.074
               Totals, $                    8,060     0.472
Return on Investment, 8$                    5,440     0.312
Total Baling Costs, $                     103,004     6.024

Cost of Semi-dried Sludge, $              236,494    13.862
Total Cost Semi-dried, Baled Sludge, $    339,498    19.886
                            45

-------
                                       TABLE 19

                        COST TO TRANSPORT  SLUDGE—DRY TON BASIS
   A.  Long Distance Haul  (500 miles  round  trip).

                                      Long-Haul  Truck
   Capacity

   Dewatered  State of Sludge

   Sludge Capacity., Dry Tons
   Cost Transport/Dry Ton, &
   Cost of Sludge/Dry Ton, $
   4Q,000 IP Payload
           Semi-Dried,
              Baled
Pressed*
 ,
 41.20
  7.38
jt  Total Delivered Cost Aon,  $    48.58
              18.5
              20.25
              19.89

              40.14
   B.  Short Distance Haul  (20 miles  round trip)

                                 	Dump Truck
   Capacity

   Dewatered  State of Sludge

   Sludge Capacity, Dry Tons
   Cost Transport/Dry Ton, $
   Cost of Sludge/Dry Ton, $
      10-11 cu yd
Pressed

  1.75
 10.00
  7.38
           Semi-Dried,
              Baled
   Total Delivered Cost/Ton,  $     17.38
                                  Barge
                              46^,000 cu ft
Pressed*

   262
 13.18
  7.38

 20.56
Semi-Dried,
   Baled

     850
    6.48
   19.89

   26.37
                             Long-Haul Truck
                            4b",OOP Ib Payload"
Pressed*

  9.1
  6.82
  7.38
                          14.20
Semi-Dried,
   Baled

   18.5
    3.41
   19.89

   23.30
   *Does not include cost of  facility  for unloading.

-------
                        SECTION VIII

                    LABORATORY STUDIES

Two  soils were used for the  respirometer  studies to
determine decomposition rate of  sludge material.  One
soil was obtained about 8 miles  north of  Pasco, Washington.
This soil was characterized  as a Rupert sand which is the
predominate soil of the Pasco area and is similar to a
Quincy sand.  The other soil was obtained from a farm
located about 3 miles northwest  of Camas, Washington.  A
portion of this farm was leased  for later field plot trials.
Soil from this area is  characterized as being a Hesson
clay loam.

Soil moisture was determined by  weighing samples before
and  after 24 hours at 105° C.  Water holding capacity or
saturation capacity of  soil and  sludge was calculated from
the  quantity of water retained by samples in Gooch crucibles
after immersion in water and then allowed to drain to
constant weight in a moisture-saturated atmosphere.  Ash
was  determined by firing a weighed oven dry sample at
4-00° C. for 12 hours and calculating loss of volatile
material. Carbon and nitrogen analysis of sludge using
conventional methods was determined and calculated to have .
a C:N of 234:1.

An adaptation of conventional respirometer technique (2)
Was  used to determine rate and extent of Camas sludge
decomposition.  Respirometers^ as shown in Figure 69
consisted of pint milk  bottles containing 200 grams (AD)
soil mixed with varying sludge concentrations with or
without supplemental nitrogen.   Nitrogen additions were
in the form of ammonium nitrate.  Water was added to the
mixture and maintained at 65$ of the moisture holding
capacity of soil and waste.  Temperature was maintained
at 30° C. in the incubated cabinet.

All treatments were triplicated  and bottle location was
randomized in the respirometer incubator.   Sufficient air
pressure was maintained to establish a minimal positive
flow of air which passed through traps designed to scrub
the air clean of ambient C02.  This flow flushed C02
formed by microbial decomposition of sludge into test
tubes containing approximately IN caustic.  C02 concentra-
tion was then determined by standard titration procedures
                            47

-------


FIGURE  6.  CARBON DIOXIDE RESPIROMETERS FOR
   DETERMINING SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION RATE.
                    48

-------
using standardized IN HC1.  Tubes were replaced before
caustic absorption capacity was exceeded with fresh caustic
tubes.  COQ evolved was recorded on a cumulative basis.
The experiments were terminated after 120 days.

Because of space limitations two experiments were designed
so that sludge additions ranging from 50 T/A to 600 T/A
could be evaluated.  In the first experiment sludge was
added to the two test soils at rates of 50, 100, 150 and
200 T/A.  Nitrogen was supplemented to give carbon-nitrogen
ratios of 25:1 and 100:1.  Controls covered sludge additions
without supplemental nitrogen and nitrogen additions
without sludge.  Nitrogen amounts added were equivalent to
those involved with sludge levels at C:N ratio of 25:1.

In the second experiment sludge was added at rates of 100,
200, 400 and 600 T/A.

Data from the two experiments, which are detailed in
Tables I, II, III and IV in the Appendix, were combined
and are presented in Figures 7, 8, 9> 10* and 11.

Figures 7 and 8 depict decomposition rate as tons utilized
when sludge was incorporated into sandy and clay soil
with supplemental nitrogen.  Figure 7 shows the sludge
additions as 50, 100 and 150 T/A and Figure 8 shows the
higher additions of 200, 400 and 600 T/A.  Ordinates
differ between Figures 7 and 8.  In Figure 7 the ordinates
show a possible maximum of 60 tons sludge utilized.  In
Figure 8, which also depicts higher sludge additions, the
ordinates show a possible maximum of 280 tons sludge
utilization.

The graphs displayed in Figures 9 and 10 present some
interesting relationships in respect to sludge levels,
nitrogen requirement and soil type.  For example, there
was sufficiently available nitrogen present in clay soil
to allow considerable breakdown of sludge when added at
50, 100, 150 and 200 T/A rates.  At 400 and 600 T/A
additions supplemental nitrogen was required to enhance
decomposition.  Conversely, with sandy soil, additional
nitrogen was needed at all sludge incorporations to obtain
significant sludge breakdown.  It was interesting to note
with the sandy soil treatments that higher nitrogen additions
enhance sludge decomposition when sludge was applied at
the 50, 100 and 150 T/A rates.  When applied at 200, 400
and 600 T/A rates, no significant differences were noted
in decomposition of sludge with the various nitrogen additions

-------
o
LU
M
CO

CO
   60 -,

   50 -

   40 -

   30-

   20-

   10-

    0
M
O

ID
—l
CO
CO

o
60-

50-

40-

30-

20-

10-

 0
           SLUDGE:  50T/A
        Clay
        Soil
        Sandy
        Soil
             C:N
                        C:N
30 60  90 120 Days
                                      SLUDGE:
                                    Sandy
                                    Soil
                                    100 T/A
                                         C:N
                                     30 60  90  120  Days
                                                            SLUDGE:  150 T/A
                                                               Clay
                                                               Soil
                                                     Sandy
                                                     Soil
                                                                           25
                                                                            0
                                                                           100
                                                               30  60  90 120 Days
    FIGURE  7.  TONS SLUDGE UTILIZED AT VARIOUS LOADINGS AT DIFFERENT C:N RATIOS.

-------
Q
LU
M
CO
00
o
LU
M
O
ZD
—I
00
oo
O
280-i
240-
200
160-
120
 80
 40.
  0

280
240,
200.
160
120.
 80
 40.
  0
          SLUDGE:  200T/A
         Clay Soil
         Sandy Soil
                        C:N
                        C:N
                         0
                  90 120 Days
 SLUDGE:  400 T/A
Clay Soil
               C:N
                                                     0
                                       I    i    r
Sandy Soil
                20
                10
                40
                                                      0
 30  60  90  120  Days
                                                                             C:N
                                                              ,SLUDGE: 600T/AX*10
                                          40
                                           0
                                                                Sandy Soil
                                                                                 0
                                                                 30   60  90  120 Days
  FIGURE 8.  TONS SLUDGE UTILIZED AT VARIOUS LOADINGS AT DIFFERENT C:N RATIOS.

-------
300-
270-
o 24°"
UJ
M
	 i
^^•J
h—
ID
UJ
0
O
CO
00
0

210-
180-
150-
120-
90-
60-
30-
0
o
t:
00
O
Q_
O
o
III
LLJ
o
s
UJ
O
UJ
Q_
60 -,
50-
40-
30-
20-
10-
0
       Clay Soil
                      Sludge
                       T/A
                        50
      Clay Soil
                        600
        30  60   90  120

       Days incubation
Sandy Soil
                                                  Sludge
                                                   T/A
                600
                400
                200
                100
                150
                 50
Sandy Soil
 30  60   90   120
  Days  Incubation
FIGURE  9.   SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION-NO NITROGEN ADDED.

                          52

-------
rsi
CO
CO
o
CO
o
0.
o
o
uu
Q
LU
S
0.
300-t
270-
240-
210-
180-
150-
120-
 90-
 60-
 30-
  0
 60-f
 50-
 40-
 30-
 20-
 10-
  0
                       Sludge
                         T/A
        Clay Soil
Sandy Soil
                                                    Sludge
                                                     T/A
        Clay Soil
Sandy
 Soil
          30  60   90   120
           Days Incubation
  FIGURE 10.  SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION
                  NITROGEN ADDED.
                                    30   60   90   120
                                     Days Incubation
                                  -OPTIMUM
                            53

-------
CO
O
Q_
^
O
O
UJ
O
50-

40-

30-

20-

10-
        Clay Soil
           200  400   600
          Tons Per Acre
                                                  C:N
                                   Sandy Soil
                                Sandy Soil
                                                   C:N
                                                     0
                                   200   400   600
                                 Tons Per Acre
         FIGURE 1L   SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION IN 120 DAYS
            FOR SANDY AND CLAY SOIL

-------
Figures 9, 10 and 11 present information shown in previous
figures in a different fashion.  They compare decomposition
rates on the ordinates as percent sludge decomposition and
as tons of sludge utilized in the test soils.  Curves in
Figure 9 depict no nitrogen additions or controls, whereas
curves in Figure 10 were derived from treatments involving
optimum nitrogen additions.

Evaluation of data depicted in Figures 9 and 10 lead to
the following conclusions:

    1.  When data are observed with respect to amount of
        sludge added to that decomposed, then with
        increasing sludge amounts, up to and including
        the 400 T/A addition rate, more was decomposed.
        As shown in Figure 9 when sludge was added at a
        rate of 400 T/A, about 120 T/A were utilized
        after 120 days incubation.  With the 50 T/A
        addition less than 30 T/A were used.  Effect of
        nitrogen used to enhance sludge breakdown is
        shown in Figure 10.

    2.  When data are reviewed in relation to completeness
        of breakdown, which is shown in curves having
        percent decomposition ordinates, the lower sludge
        levels were more completely utilized in 120 days.
        For example 50 T/A addition was about 55$ utilized
        in 120 days in clay soil without nitrogen and about
        62$ utilized in sandy soil with optimum nitrogen.
        On the other hand, when sludge was added at a
        400 T/A rate in clay soil without nitrogen about
        26$ was utilized in 120 days and about 37$ utilized
        in sandy soil with nitrogen.

Data in Figure 11 again demonstrates the necessity of
nitrogen supplement to enhance sludge disposal in the
nitrogen deficient sandy soil or when exceptional high
levels of nitrogen poor material, such as sludge, are
being disposed.

As shown in Table 20, microbial activity after 120 days
incubation of mixtures of test soils and various levels
of sludge and nitrogen in clay soil results in a more than
ten-fold increase in mold and bacterial numbers.  This
was noted in the 400 and 600 T/A treatments with or without
nitrogen supplement.  However, a far greater increase in
microbial activity was noted in sandy soil.  Here, mold
was found to increase approximately 20 fold whereas
bacterial numbers increased from approximately 1,000,000/
gram soil to 563,000,000/gram.

                            55

-------
                                         TABLE 20

            MICROBIAL ACTIVITY IN CLAY AND SANDY SOIL AFTER 120 DAYS INCUBATION
VJl
o\
 Sludge
Addition
Tons/Acre

     0
   100
   200
   400
   600

   100
   100
   100
   100

   200
   200
   200
   200

   400
   400
   4oo
   400

   600
   600
   600
   600
                Nitrogen
                Addition
                   C:N

                   0
                   0
                   0
                   0
                   0
                   Clay Soil^
                  Microorganisms/gr
 0
40:
20:
10:

 0
40:
20:
                   0
                  40:
                  20:
                  10:

                   0
                  40;
                  20:
                     1
                     1
                     1
                     1
                     1
                  10:1
   1
   1
   1
   1
   1
                  10:1
         Molds
 pH   (1 x 10-3)

5.7       183
6.8       170
6.8       173
6.6       853
7.0      1876

6.8       170
6.5       430
6.5       320
6.9       276

6.8       173
7.4       220
6.8       135
6.8       233

6.6       853
6.8       540
7.1       733
6.9       873

7.0      1876
6.7       577
6.7      3417
7.2       870
 Bacteria
(1 x 10-fe)

     14
     29
    230
    230
    455

     29
     45
     50
     45

    230
    174
    125
     76

    230
    243
    220
    169

    455
    655
    667
    235
Sandy Soil
^lic roorganisms/gr

pH
6.8
6.9
7.3
7.3
6.9
6.9
6.9
6.9
7.6
7.3
6.4
7.0
7.5
7.3
6.8
6.7
7.0
6.9
7.2
7.4
7.8
Molds
(1 x 10"3)
7
93
58
66
25
93
93
115
73
58
40
440
16
66
185
78
42
25
148
103
110
Bacteria
(1 x ID'6)
1
26
23
69
239
26
240
242
200
23
394
106
162
69
393
217
342
239
317
563
400

-------
                        SECTION IX

                    GREENHOUSE STUDIES

Two air dry kilograms of Pasco sandy and Hesson clay soils
were mixed with sludge to give field additions equivalent
to 50, 100, 150, and 200 tons sludge per acre.  Nitrogen
as ammonium nitrate was supplemented and evenly distributed
throughout sludge-soil mixtures in amounts to give sludge-
nitrogen C:N ratios, of 25:1 and 100:1.

Each of the mixtures were adjusted to 65 percent of their
moisture holding capacity.  According to pot culture
technique of Stephenson and Schuster (3), aliquots of a
nutrient solution, without nitrogen,, but containing
essential elements for plant growth were added to each pot.

All treatments were triplicated and pot placement randomized
in the greenhouse.  Ten sunflower seeds (Mammouth) were
pressed into the soil contained in two quart milk cartons
and covered to a depth of J inch.  Milk carton height was
adjusted to one inch above soil level by trimming off
excess.  Within a week of seedling emergence, plants were
selected for uniformity within each pot and culls removed
by cutting stems at soil surface.

Plants were watered on an individual pot basis whenever
soil surface appeared dry and leaves showed signs of
incipient wilt.  Maintaining the sunflower test plants
under this water regime did not adversely affect plant
growth, but did minimize unwanted leaching losses of
water soluble components from the sludge-soil mixtures.

Above ground portions of test plants were harvested when
developing flower buds first became visible.  Yield was
measured as fresh and dry weights.  Test soils were removed
from their containers, freed of residual roots, pulverized
&nd replanted with sunflowers.  A total of four crops were
grown in each container of soil.  Nutrient solution was
applied to test soils at each planting.  No additional
nitrogen was added after the first crop.  Length of
growing period varied with season and ranged from 57 days
to 76 days.

Experimental design and ranking (4) of yield data are
shown in Table 21.  Individual crop yields are shown in
Table V in the Appendix.  Sludge amendments of 100, 150,


                            57

-------
                                                 TABLE  21



                           TREATMENT  RANKING  USING DUNCAN'S  NEW MULTIPLE RANGE TEST
                                                            Sunflower  Dry Weight—Grams
Ui
Treatment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Sludge
Tons/A
0
50
100
150
200
50
50
100
100
150
150
200
200
0
0
0
0
Duncan's Ranking


Sandy Clay Sandy Soil
Clay Soil
Additional Soil Soil Treatment
Nitrogen Yield Yield No. Yield





0
0
0
0
0
25:
100:
25:
100:
25:
1.88 4.63 17 0.93
1.78 2.35 16 1,48
1.98 1.85 2 1.78
1.93 2.15 1 1-88
1.90 2.18 5 1-90
l 2.70 6.35 4 1.93
1 1.93 3.65 7 1.93
1 5.08 7.75 3 1.98
1 2.13 3.65 13 1.98
1 4.98 6.68 9 2.13










100:1 2.28 3.45 11 2.28
25'
100-





p
f-)
4
1 5.13 6.15 15 2.35
1 1.98 3.60 6 2.70
3.03 4.45 14 3.03
2.35 1.95 10 4.98
1.48 0.50 8 5.08
0.93 0.35 12 5.13






Treatment
No. Yield






















17 0.35
16 0.50
3 1.85
15 1.95
4 2.15
5 2.18
2 2.35
11 3.45
13 3.60
7 3.65
9 3.65
14 4.45
1 4.63
12 6.15
6 6.35
10 6.68
8 7.75
































     (1),  (2),  (3) and (4) enuivalent nitrogen as added in treatments 6, 8,  10 and 12 respectively.



     Non-bracketed means are significantly different at 5$ level.

-------
and 200 T/A in both  soils in  combination with  supplemental
nitrogen at a C:N of 25:1 significantly improved  sunflower
growth over that of  controls.  Growth of sunflower,
however, was markedly lower where  sludge amendments were
made without nitrogen.  Yields were not improved  with
sludge addition and  nitrogen  at a  C:N of 100:1.

Statistical comparison of growth curves in Figure 12 shows
the magnitude of difference between 25:1 and 100:1 C:N
ratios for the two soils.

The overall responses to treatments in sandy soil were
quite similar to those in clay soil.  However  the yield
levels were considerably different, i.e., mean yield in
control clay soil (no sludge — no nitrogen) was 4.63 grams 3
whereas in control sandy soil (no  sludge — no nitrogen) it
was 1.88 grams.  Incorporation of  sludge at 100 T/A and
a C:N of 25:1 in clay soil increased mean crop yield to.
7.75 grams , a 1.7 fold increase.   Conversely with sandy
soil receiving equivalent sludge and nitrogen, the increase
in yield was 5.08 grams or a 2.7 fold increase.
     various levels of sludge were added to clay soil and
   supplemental nitrogen provided, no significant differences
in crop yield were obtained even though these yields ranged
from 1.85 grams to 2.35 grams and were approximately one
naif the 4.63 gram yield obtained with control soil.  A
similar crop yield reduction resulted when nitrogen was
added without sludge.

Sandy soil without sludge responded more favorably to
nitrogen additions than did the clay soil.  In sandy soil,
as shown in Table 21, nitrogen additions to control soil
(treatments 14 and 15) significantly increased sunflower
yields.  More nitrogen (treatments 16 and 17) decreased
yield.

Figures 2A, 3A,  4A and 5A in Appendix present photographs
°f each harvest before sunflowers were cut down,  dried
and weighed.  Numbers under each container correspond to
treatment outlined in the tables.
                            59

-------
1 7-1
C A
oo-
iES-
^^ VI
"*= 7
_2 3 -
Q.
   2-
   1 -
   0
        Means not followed by the same letter are significantly
        different at 5% level.
                                      SANDY SOIL
       Control
                                         C:N = 25:1
                                          C:N = 100:1
                                          No N Added
                                          No Sludge
                                          N  • Same as (1)
      0
             50
                     100
150
200
to
E
Q.
^r
o
   8 -
   7
   6
   5
   4
   3
   2 -
   1 -
   0
       Control
                                       CLAY SOIL
                                         C:N = 25:1
                                         C:N = 100:1
                                      r   Sludge
                                         No N Added
                                     d   No Sludge
                                         N  = Same as (1)
             50       100      150     200
               Sludge Addition Tons/Acre
    FIGURE 12.  EFFECT OF NITROGEN ADDITION AND SLUDGE
                ON SUNFLOWER YIELD.
                            60

-------
                          SECTION X

                     FIELD PLOT  STUDIES

A  five  acre  field  about  three miles  from the  clarifier was
leased  for the  study.  Historically  it was  in permanent
pasture of grass and clover  for ten  years and of only fair
productivity.   The Hesson clay  topsoil and  brown-yellow
silty clay subsoil of this area has  a marked  tendency
toward  clod  formation when depleted  of organic  constituents.

The  field was plowed in  July of 1969 to  a depth of 6 inches.
During  the summer  and fall months  the plots were periodically
disced  to control  weeds.   Ninety-six plots, measuring 10
by 38 feet,  were layed out with the  long sides  at right
angles  to the slight slope of the  field.  Each  treatment
was  replicated  four times  and each plot  was divided into
4  subplots to permit evaluation of nitrogen additions on
crop growth  and sludge decomposition.  Three  rates of
nitrogen fertilization were  used based on carbon:nitrogen
(C:N) ratios of 10:1,  50:1 and  100:1.  The  experimental
design,,  location of randomized  plots, position  of subplots
with respect to nitrogen additions and crop locations as
well as  row  placement  are  shown in Figure 13.   An aerial
photograph in Figure 14  shows plot location and alignment.
The  rates and frequency  of sludge  application and the number
of seasons crops were  cultivated are shown  in Table 22.
The  main disposal  designs  studied  were:   (A) Tolerance,
(B)  Yearly Amendment and  (C) Disposal.

The  Tolerance approach to  sludge utilization was planned
to determine the effect of a single  incorporation of high
levels of undecomposed sludge on the 1970 crops of sweet
corn and snap beans.   Recropping these plots in 1971 and
1972 was planned so  that there would be a time  interval
for  disappearance  of potential  sludge induced phytotoxicity.

Sludge addition in the Yearly Amendment objective was made
in a manner simulating farmer use of crop residues or
cover crops.   Beans  and corn were grown on these plots
each of the three years.

The most efficient land use and maximum rate of sludge
disposal would probably be achieved under the Disposal
objective.   Yearly sludge incorporation into these plots
was  carried out over the  three year period of the study
with test crops of beans  and corn cultivated in the 1972
season only.


                            61

-------
A
B
C
D
                   22'
fai
   CjN
A = 1:10
B = 1:50
   C:N
C = 1:100
D = 0
ro
         FIGURE 13.  EXPERIMENTAL PLOT LAYOUT FOR SLUDGE UTILIZATION PROJECT.

-------


LO


                                  -

            FIGURE 14.  AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF SLUDGE AMENDED PLOTS.

-------
                   TABLE 22

     EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN FOR SLUDGE DISPOSAL
                  FIELD TRIALS
A.  Tolerance - Add sludge once only, in fall; plant
    crop each spring.

                                Split Plot C:N
Plot Addition,
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
B.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
C.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Tons/Acre
0
200
400
600
0
200
400
600
Crop
Corn
Corn
Corn
Corn
Beans
Beans
Beans
Beans
Yearly Amendment - Add
each spring.
0
100
200
400
0
100
200
400
Disposal - Add
summer; plant
0
100
200
400
0
100
200
400

Corn
Corn
Corn
Corn
Beans
Beans
Beans
Beans
sludge
A B
Lbs N Lbs N
10:1
91.6
91.6
183.3
274.9
91.6
91.6
183.3
274.9
50:1
18.3
18.3
36.7
55.0
18.3
18.3
36.7
55.0
C D
Lbs N Lbs N
100:1
9.2
9.2 .
18.3
27.5
9.2
9.2
18.3
27.5
sludge each fall; plant

45.8
45.8
91.6
183.3
45.8
45.8
91.6
183.3
each fall;

9.2
9.2
18.3
36.7
9.2
9.2
18.3
36.7
work

4,6
4.6
Q P
^y * C—
18.3
4.6
4.6
9.2
18.3
in during
.0 	
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
crop

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

crop after 3 years.
Corn
Corn
Corn
Corn
Beans
Beans
Beans
Beans
45.8
45.8
91.6
183.3
45.8
45.8
91.6
183.3
9.2
9.2
18.3
36.7
9.2

I8i3
36.7
4.6
4.6
9 2
18.3
4.6
4.6
9.2
18.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
 Sludge for the initial amendments was collected after
 dewatering by vacuum filter and stored adjacent to the
 experimental plots in late spring of 1969.   Application
 and soil incorporation of this 20$ consistency sludge was
 difficult.   The capability of dewatering sludge to 38$
 consistency was realized with installation of the inciner-
 ator and Reitz press.   The drier sludge was used for the
 1970 and 1971 amendments and was far superior to the 20$
 consistency material with respect to ease of handling,
 application and incorporation.

 Sludge incorporated in 1969 and 1970 equivalent to a total
 of 800 T/A  to the  Yearly Amendment and the  Disposal plots
 altered their surface  composition to essentially that of
 sludge.   The final sludge application scheduled for
 September 1971 could not be made with power equipment as
 the spongy  or marsh-like consistency of the 400 T/A plots
 would not support  weight of the farm equipment.   Therefore
 the third 400 T/A  amendment to  Yearly Amendment and
 Tolerance plots was canceled.

 Except for  the difficulties encountered in  1969 with
 application and rotovation of the  20 percent  consistency
 sludge and  those involving successive yearly  additions of
 400 T/A,  standard  farm  equipment worked well  in mixing
 sludge with soil.   Two  tractors were  used,  one  to  pull an
 International Harvester Corporation  manure  spreader and
 the  other,  a 45 H.P. Ford diesel,  with a Wagner loader
 attachment,  was used to load sludge  on the  spreader.  The
 Pord  tractor was also equipped  with  a heavy duty E-60
 Howard Rotovator.

 Weight/volume  relationships of  the 20  and 38$ solids  sludge
 were  used to  determine  the plot  requirements.  The  20$
 solids required two and  the 38$ solids  required  three
 spreader  loads  to give  a 100 T/A rate.

 Uniform distribution of  sludge was accomplished by  repeated
passes over  the length  of  the plot with no more than 2
 spreader loads.  The resulting 4 to 5 inch  sludge layer
was then rototilled into  the soil.

 Plot perimeters were aligned and surfaces leveled by hand
tools  and the initial 1/3 of the specified nitrogen was
applied in the form of  34$ ammonium nitrate.  Subsequent
applications of nitrogen were made in February and late
                            65

-------
March.  During the first year of study in which 10:1 C:N
ratios were part of the experimental design, the ammonium
nitrate was applied in four portions with the final portion
spread May 1.  A 0-20-20 fertilizer application (N-P-K) at
a 500 pound per acre rate was made to all plots in line
with the general agricultural practices for farm land in
this area.

Weed growth during fall-winter fallow was controlled with
sprays of Paraquat CL at 2 quarts per acre.

Plots were rototilled as early in May of each year as soil
conditions would permit using a 4 H.P. hand operated
tiller.  Use of the small rototiller was necessary for
cultivation of individual subplots to avoid intermixing
of subplots of different nitrogen levels.  In 1969 only,
preplanting herbicide treatments were made on all plots
for weed grasses with Eptam 60 at 2 quarts per acre.  An
additional preplant treatment of corn plots was made for
broadleaf weed control with Atrazine at 2.5 Iks per acre.

Uniform non-skip delivery of Tendercrop variety bean seeds
into furrows was accomplished with a planter made of a
plastic wide neck funnel inserted into a 3^ ft length of
3/4 in. electrical conduit.  Golden Jubilee variety corn
was planted in hills about 1 foot apart using a commercial
hand planter set to deliver 3 to 4 seeds.

Plant stands were thinned when they were 3-4 inches high
to a spacing of 3-4 inches in the case of beans and 1 foot
spacing or 1 plant per hill in the case of corn.

Plots were irrigated at 10 to 12 day intervals using 7
overhead sprinklers each of which delivered about 5 gallons
per minute.  Irrigation for 3-4 hours applied about 0.8 in.
water at which time the sprinklers were moved to the next
area.  The need for water was determined by the condition
of soil in the control plots as the soil in these plots
was consistently depleted of moisture more rapidly than
sludge amended plots.

Weed growth during the 1970 growing season was minimal as
a result of preplanting herbicide treatments and discing
procedures.  No special attention was given plots other
than irrigation as needed.  Slight herbicidal damage to
corn in the form of leaf burn and stunting did occur and
                            66

-------
preplant chemical weed control measures were eliminated in
subsequent years.  With no herbicide used prior to seeding
or as a pre-emergence treatment, weed growth in non-sludge
and low rate sludge plots was extensive even before
emergence of corn and bean plants.  Hand cultivation and
between row low pressure spray applications of Paraquat CL
using a hand sprayer were effective control measures.
Herbicide was also applied to the perimeter of plots to
reduce mid and late season encroachment of weeds from turf
areas separating the plots.

Only mature pods and mature full ears were picked on the
first harvest date of each crop.  The randomly occurring
unfilled ears of corn with less than 50$ kernel development
were not included in yield data of final harvest.

The influence of sludge amendments on corn and bean growth
was determined 1 month before harvest for each of the 3
crop years as Total Quality Scores (TQS).  As shown on the
following page, the TQS is the sum of numerical ratings
assigned to five of the following growth criteria with a
maximum score of 20 indicative of near perfect growth and
development:
                           67

-------
   Growth
  Criteria
              Numerical Rating
                    2
Seedling
Emergence3
  95-
  100
 75-
 94
 50-
 74
 49
  0-
  24
General
Appearance
 Very
 Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very
Poor
Color
 Dark   Light     Yellow
Green   Green      Green
                                           Yellow   Chlorotic
Leaf
Abnormalities    None
          Few   Moderate
                    Many
                     Very
                     Many
Average Crop
Height, cm
    Corn
 More
 Than    200-
  300    300
                                    100-
                                    200
                     50-
                     100
                       0-
                       50
    Beans
 More
 Than
   40
                                     20-
                                     30
                     10-
                     20
                       0-
                       10
Yields  from  subplots on the harvest  dates were made  in pounds
and tenths of pounds.  A portable  Horns  beam  scale was  used
to weigh harvested  crops contained in plastic bags.
TOLERANCE DESIGN

Plot Quality Evaluation,  1970

Detailed data concerning  total  quality  scores  and yields
are shown in Tables VI, VII, VIII  in  the Appendix for  the
Tolerance Design portion  of the field plot  studies.  For
convenience summaries of  these  data are given  in Tables
23, 24 and 25.
                           68

-------
                                                      TABLE
                                                             23
                   STATISTICAL RANKING ACCORDING TO DUNCAN'S NEW MULTIPLE RANGE TEST FOR CORN YIELD,
                                         TOLERANCE DESIGN FOR 1970, 1971. 1972
1970
Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield
No. Tons/A Addition Lbs
2A 200 10:1 0
3A 400 10:1 0
4A 600 10:1 0
1A 0 91. 6# 1.9
4D 600 0 21.5
IB 0 18. 3# 22.8
3D 400 0 24. 7
4B 600 50:1 26.4
2B 200 50:1 32.7
1C 0 9.2# 33.5
4C 600 100:1 3^.5
3B 400 50:1 41.4
2D 200 0 46.9
3C 400 100:1 4?. 3
ID 0 0 55-5
2C 200 100:1 69.9
STATISTIC
1970
1971 1972
Plot Sludge Nitroge, Yield Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield
No. Tons /A Addition Lbs No. Tons/A Addition Lbs
1A 0 91. 6# 1.5
IB 0 18. 3# 20.2
ID 0 0 26.3
1C ' 0 9-2# 27.3
2A 200 10:1 34.0
2D 200 0 34.8
2C 200 100:1 35.0
4A 600 10:1 35.7
2B 200 50:1 44.1
4D 600 0 46.4
4B 600 50:1 46.5
3D 400 0 47.3
3A 400 10:1 47.6
4C 600 100:1 49.3
3C 400 100:1 51.5
3B 400 50:1 52.9
TABLE 24
1A 0 . 91. 6# 12.6
IB 0 l8.3,f 25.7
ID 0 0 28.4
3D 400 0 28.9
2A 200 10:1 30.6
2D 200 0 32.7
1C 0 9-2# 33-3
2B 200 50:1 35.0
2C 200 100:1 39-0
3A 400 10:1 41.7
3B 400 50:1 42.8
3C 400 100:1 43.4
4c 600 100:1 45.6
4D 600 0 46.8
4B 600 50:1 48.6
4A 600 10:1 50.9

AL RANKING ACCORDING TO DUNCAN'S NEW MULTIPLE RANGE TEST FOR BEAN YIELDS.
TOLERANCE DESIGN FOR 1970, 1971, 1972
1971 1972

Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield
So. Tons/A Addition Lbs Ho. Tons/A Addition Lbs No. Tons/A Addition Lbs
5A 0 91. 6#
7A 400 10:1
8A 600 10:1
6A 200 10:1 0
7B 400 50:1 1
8B 600 50:1 2
8D 600 0 2
5B 0 18.3# 3
7C 4OO 100:1 5
Sc 600 100:1 5
6B 200 50:1 5
7D 400 0 7
5C 0 9.2# 17
6D 200 0 21
6C 200 100:1 26
5D 0 0 32
0 5A 0 91. 6# 0.3
0 6A 200 10:1 0.3
0 7A 400 10:1 1.8
.1 8A 600 10:1 2.6
.4 5B 0 18. 3# 4.6
.7 5C 0 9.2# 13.1
.8 5D 0 0 17.4
.1 6B 200 50:1 18.4
.0 7B 400 50:1 19.3
.U 7D 400 0 20.1
.8 8D 600 0 20.1
.3 6D 200 0 21.2
.1 6C 200 100:1 23.4
.8 8B 600 50:1 24.4
.1 7C 400 100:1 26.8
.2 8c 600 100:1 27.4
5A 0 91. 6# 0.4
6A 200 10:1 0.9
5B 0 18. 3# 8.8
5D 0 0 17.9
5C 0 9.2# 22.2
7D 400 0 27.9
6B 200 50:1 28.5
7A 400 10:1 30.1
8A 600 10:1 30.5
7C 400 100:1 30.7
6C 200 100:1 31.2
6D 200 0 31.5
7B 400 50:1 33.7
8D 600 0 38.5
8B 600 50:1 39.1
8C 600 100:1 42.7

Any two values not bracketed by same line are significantly different;  any two values bracketed  are not  significantly
different at 5# level.

-------
                                                             TABLE  25

Sludge
T/A
0
0
0
0

200
200
200
200
400
400
400
400
600
600
600
600
Nitrogen
Addition
Ibs N
91.6
18.3
9.2
0
CiN
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
SUMMARY — TOLERANCE DESIGN
Total Quality Scores

igfrg
0
14
15
18
2
16
18
12
0
12
16
9
0
12
16
7
Corn
Ig7_l
8
16
16
16
18
18
19
17
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19

1972
7
14
17
16
18
17
17
16
18
18
17
16
20
20
20
20

igVo
1
9
11
17
6
12
14
10
0
10
12
9
0
11
11
8
Beans
1971 1972
3
10
14
15
6
17
17
17
16
17
18
17
16
19
19
18
Yield, Ibs/sub-plot
Corn
1970
1.9
27.8
33.5
55.5
0
32.7
69.9
46.9
0
41.4
47.3
24.7
0
26.4
34.5
21.5
1971
1.5
20.2
27.3
26.3
34.0
44.1
35.0
34.8
47.6
52.9
51.5
47.3
35.7
46.5
8:1
1972
12.6
25.7
33.3
28.4
30.6
35.0
39.0
32.7
41.7
42.8
43.4
28.9
50.9
48.6
45.6
46.8
Total
16.0
73.7

llo!2
64.6
111.8
1^3.9
114.4
89.3
137.1
142.2
100.9
86.6
121.5
129.4
114.7

M°.
0
3.1
17.1
32.2
0.1
5.8
26.1
21.8
0
1.4
5.0
7.3
0
2.7
5.4
2.8
Beans
Ml
0.3
4.6
13.1
17.4
0.3
18.4
23.4
21.2
1.8
19.3
26.8
20.1
2.6
24.4
27.4
20.1
Mi
0.4
8.8
22.2
17.9
0.8
28.5
31.2
31.5
30.1
33.7
30.7
27-9
30.5
39.1
42.7
38.5

Total
0.7
16.5
52.4
67.5
1.2
52.7
80.7
74.5
31.9
54.4
62.5
55.3
33.1
56 1 2
75.5
61.4
*Total quality scores not observed in 1971.

-------
Sludge amendments to field plots in the fall of 19&9 at
200, 400 and 600 T/A resulted in soil conditions that
were unfavorable to late-season growth of the 1970 corn
crop.  The moderately stunted and yellow plants that
developed on plots receiving even the minimum amendment of
200 T/A were rated with a Total Quality Score (TQS) of 12
compared with the TQS of 18 given seedlings on comparable
control plots.  However, plots fertilized with nitrogen
at a 100:1 carbon-nitrogen ratio as shown in Table 25
produced corn stands with TQS of 18 that were comparable
to controls.

Corn yields in 1970 from plots amended with sludge but not
fertilized with nitrogen were from 14 to 60 percent lower
than yields from the untreated (no nitrogen fertilization)
control plots.  Nitrogen additions at C:N of 100:1 increased
the corn production of all sludge amended plots with the
highest yield in 1970 harvested from the 200 T/A plots
supplemented with nitrogen at the C:N of 100:1.  Yield of
55.5 Ibs from corn grown on untreated control plots was
approximately 20 percent less than the nearly 70 Ibs
obtained from the 200 T/A sludge-nitrogen plots.  Yields
from control plots were reduced by all of the tested
levels of nitrogen fertilization.

Soil conditions in plots at all levels of sludge without
nitrogen supplement were highly unsatisfactory for growth
of the bean test crop in 1970.  Low TQS of 10, 9> and 8
were obtained at rates of 200, 400 and 600 T/A.  Nitrogen
fertilization equivalent to the C:N of 100:1 offset some
of the adverse growth conditions, but even at the optimum
sludge-nitrogen C:N of 100:1, bean growth on the 200 T/A
plots was rated li compared with the 17 for non-nitrogen
fertilized control plots.

Bean yields in 1970 of practical significance were obtained
only from crops grown on the 200 T/A sludge amended plots.
The phytotoxic properties of sludge even at the low 200
T/A rate resulted in an approximate 1/3 lower yield than
that obtained from comparable controls.  Nitrogen additions
to amended plots at apparent optimum C:N of 100:1 did not
return yield to the level obtained from the unarnended, and
non-nitrogen fertilized plots.
                            71

-------
Plot Quality Evaluation--1971

Growth and development of corn test plants on all plots
amended with sludge only and sludge-nitrogen combinations
was superior to that on control plots as shown by TQS.
The unfavorable soil conditions associated with the 400
and 600 T/A amendments observed in the 1970 corn crop were
totally absent in the 1971 corn crop and TQS of 19 resulted
even at the excessive nitrogen level based on the C:N of
10:1.  In addition the TQS of corn at the 200 T/A amendment
was lower than those at the 400 and 600 T/A in the 1971
crop, just the reverse of the TQS of corn observed in
1970.  These latter data suggest that peak productivity
of the 200 T/A amended plots was in 1970 and the 400 and
600 T/A plots respectively have reached or are approaching
their stage of maximum production.

The corn yields in 1971 paralleled the TQS with production
from all sludge amended plots greater than those of
controls.  Maximum harvests were obtained from the 400 T/A
sludge addition fertilized at the C:N of 50:1 and 100:1.
Yields lend support to the concept that peak production is
related to both the rate of sludge amendment as well as
the elapsed time between incorporation and plot use for
crop culture.

TQS observations were not made for the 1971 bean test
crop.  Bean yields in 1971 from the three sludge amendment
rates alone and in combination with nitrogen at C:N of
50:1 and 100:1 were all greater than those from control
plots.  The shift in peak yield production from low to
high sludge amendment with successive (years) corn crops
is not nearly so discernible with the bean test crop.
The relationship does occur however with peak yields at
200 T/A in 1970 and at 600 T/A in 1972.


Plot Quality Evaluation--1972

In the third year following the single sludge application
to field plots, growth of the corn test crop was most
favored by the 600 T/A amendment.  Near optimum and
essentially identical growth responses 1 month before
harvest resulted in TQS of 20 for all conditions relative
to nitrogen supplements.  In contrast, control or unamended
plots produced corn rated 7 and 16 in the case of the
high and no nitrogen supplemented plots, respectively.


                            72

-------
Corn yields from the 1972 crops were greatest with the
600 T/A sludge amendment and were not influenced by
nitrogen fertilization.  As shown in Table 23 no statistical
differences were noted in yields from corn grown on
nitrogen supplemented subplots and comparable controls.

Statistical data in Table 24 also show that growth of
beans in 1972, as with corn, was favored by the 600 T/A
amendment.  The highest TQS were obtained with nitrogen
additions at the C:N of 50:1 and 100:1 and with no
nitrogen supplement.

The 1972 bean yields from sludge amended plots exceeded
those from controls.  High, but non-significantly,
different yields were produced both with nitrogen supple-
ments at C:N of 50:1 and 100:1 and without the nitrogen
additive.  Those data shown in Table 25 indicate nitrogen-
added at the time of sludge incorporation, which was
necessary for the first and second crop years, was not
required for high yields in the third year.

The quality of land used in the present study is shown by
the corn and bean yields obtained from the unamended
control plots.  The summary Table 25 shows bean yields
from non-nitrogen control plots in 1970 of 32.2 Ibs
decreased to a level of only 17 Ibs or so in the two
following years and corn production of 55-5 Iks in 1970
decreased to 26.3 Iks in 1971 and 28.3 Ibs in 1972.
Supplemental nitrogen alone was not sufficient to offset
this yield reduction for either crop.

During the initial or 1970 bean crop harvest, observations
indicated a more rapid development of pods to the fresh
or processing market stage on the sludge amended plots.
Harvests in the following two years were made at one week
intervals as pods reached the stage suitable for table
use.  Peak yields were obtained in the second picking from
plots amended with 600 T/A, compared with the even distri-
bution of control yields over the 2 and 3 harvest dates.
As shown in Table 26 with the 1972 crop, all 400 T/A plots,
except the sludge-nitrogen combination at the 10:1 C:N,
and all 600 T/A plots produced peak yields of fresh market
quality beans one week earlier than did the untreated or
nitrogen amended control plots.
                            73

-------
                                     TABLE  26

         EFFECT  OF  SLUDGE  ON  BEAN MATURITY RATE WHEN  GROWN ON TOLERANCE PLOTS
6A
6B
6c
6D

7A
7B
7C
7D

8A

8C
8D
      Sludge
      Tons/A

          0
          0
          0
          0
        200
        200
        200
        200

        400
        400
        400
        400

        600
        600
        600
        600
Nitrogen
Addition
  Lbs-N

   91.6
   18.3
    9.2
      0

   C:N

   10:1
   50:1
  100:1
    0
                             Picking Dates—1971
                                                             Picking Dates—1972
   10:
   50:
  100:
    0

   10:
   50:
  100
    0
9/2
Lbs
0
0.2
1.2
1.5
0
1.5
2.8
2.8
0.1
2.1
3 0
2.8
0.3
2.7
2.4
1.7
9/9
Lbs
0.1
lf-5
4.7
18.2
0
6.2
8.4
IB. 5
0.2
9.5
11.3
8.2
0.4
15.0
l4.6
11.1
9/19
Lbs
0.2
2.8
17-2
7.8
0
10.7
12.3
9.9
1.6
7.8
12.4
9.1
i-2
6.6
10.3
7.3
Yield
Lbs
0.3
4.6
13.1
17.4
0
18.4
23.4
21.2
1.8
^•S
26.8
20.7
2.6
24.4
27.4
20.1
Lbs
0
1.1
6.2
6.3
0
9.8
9.7
10.6
9-2
12.6
ll.b
9.9

10.5
14.7
15.5
12.8
9/14 .
Lbs
0.
3.
9.
5.
0.
9.
9.
9.
HoT
9.
8.
8.
8.
8.
11.
10.
l
5
1
3
1
?l
4
°l
1
l
4
8
4
1
1
9/24
Lbs
0
1.6
4.3
3.9
0.1
0.9
8.1
8.1
6.7
7.6
7.6
5.1
8.4
12.4
12.5
11.1
9/2b
Lbs
0.1
2.6
2.7
2.4
0.7
2.7
1 4.1
3.9
3.5
4.2
3.5
2.9
3^6
4.5
Yield
Lbs
0.4
8.8
22.2
17.9
0.8
28.5
31.2
31.5
30.2
33.7
30.7
27.9
30.5
39.1
42.7
38.5
Data included in each blocked area across the page are not significantly different from
each other but are significantly different from values outside blocked area.

-------
YEARLY AMENDMENT DESIGN

Plot Quality Evaluation—1970

Detailed data concerning total quality scores and yields
are shown in Tables VI, IX and X in the Appendix for the
Yearly Amendment Design portion of this study.  For
convenience summaries of these data are given in Tables
27, 28 and 29 in the text.

Results and discussion concerning the Yearly Amendments of
200 and 400 T/A are contained in the Tolerance portion of
the report since during the first crop year at these common
rates of amendment, no difference existed in the two
disposal approaches.

The 1970 corn stands on plots amended with sludge at 100
T/A were equivalent to or slightly better than those of
controls with TQS of 19 and lb respectively.  These low
levels of amendment were not phytotoxic and did not cause
a nitrogen deficiency in test plants.  Yield was not
altered by the 100 T/A sludge addition, and tilth and
color of soil were noticeably improved over those of
controls.

As shown in Table 29 Total Quality Scores of 20 for bean
crop on the 100 T/A amended plots compared with the 17 for
controls reflects the near ideal soil conditions resulting
from the organic amendment.  Data in Table 28, however
show that only a slight yield increase in the 100 T/A
amendment occurred and is not statistically different from
yield obtained from the control (no sludge-no nitrogen).


Plot Quality Evaluation--1971

Soil conditions of Yearly Amendment plots were markedly
altered by the second sludge amendment and at the 200 and
400 T/A rates resulted in delayed or pre-emergence seedling
death, light green leaves indicating nitrogen deficiency,
and marked stunting of the corn test crop.  Successive
annual additions of the 100 T/A amendment in combination
with nitrogen at C:N of 50:1 in contrast produced favorable
soil conditions and corn stands superior to those of control
plots as shown by the TQS of 19 compared with 18 for
controls.
                            75

-------
                                                          TABLE  27

                       STATISTICAL RANKING ACCORDING TO DUNCAN'S NEW  MULTIPLE RANGE TEST  FOR  CORN  YIELD,
                                         YEARLY AMENDMENT  DESIGN FOR  1970,  1971,  1972
1970 1971 1972
Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield
No. Tons/A Addition Lbs No. Tons/A Addition Lbs No. Tons/A Addition Lbs
12A 400 10:1 (
9A 0 45. 8# 3,<
11A 200 10:1 4.C
10A 100 10:1 10.'
12D 400 0 27.6
12B 400 50:1 28. <
9B 0 9-2# 29.?
11B 200 50:1 39.-
12C 400 100:1 42. (
9C 0 4.6# 42. £
11C 200 100:1 47. £
10B 100 50:1 49.:
9D 0 0 51.!
IOC 100 100:1 52 J
11D 200 0 54..
10D 100 0 55.!
STATISTICAL
) 9A 0 18. 3# 0
) 10D 100 0 0.2
) 11C 200 200:1 0.5
j 11D 200 0 0.5
j 12D 400 0 1.2
) 12C 400 200:1 3.6
) 12B 400 100:1 3-7
} 12A 400 50:1 5.8
) 11B 200 100:1 6.0
3 11A 200 50:1 6.4
> IOC 100 100:1 13.4
L IDA 100 50:1 31.6
3 9D 0 0 32.8
4- 9C 0 4.5# 40.3
L 10B 100 100:1 40.5
3 9B 0 9.2# 47.2
TABLE 28
9A 0 18. 3# 0
11D 200 0 2.6
11C 200 200:1 3.1
11B 200 100:1 4.3
11A 200 50:1 6.1
9B 0 9.2# 6.9
10D 100 0 21.4
IOC 100 200:1 27.5
12D* — — 27.8
12B* — — 28.3
9D 0 0 30.8
9C 0 4.5# 32.0
12A* — — 32.9
12C* ~ « 35.3
10A 100 50:1 37.8
10B 100 100:1 39.8

RANKING ACCORDING TO DUNCAN'S NEW MULTIPLE RANGE TEST FOR BEAN YIELDS,
YEARLY AMENDMENT DESIGN FOR 1970, 1971, 1972
1970 1971 1972

Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield Plot Sludge Nitrogen Yield
No. Tons/A Addition Lbs No. Tons/A Addition Lbs No. Tons/A Addition Lbs
15A 200 10:1 0
16A 400 10:1 0
13A 0 45. 8# 0.1
14A 100 10:1 0.2
16B 400 50:1 1.6
16C 400 100:1 4.8
16D 400 0 6.0
15B 200 50:1 10.4
13B 0 9.2# 17.9
14B 100 50:1 27.3
13C 0 4.6# 33.2
15D 200 0 34.3
15C 200 100:1 36.0
13D 0 O 37.2
14D 100 0 40.3
14C 100 100:1 41.4
13A 0 18. 3# 0
16D 400 0 0
15A 200 50:1 0.3
14A 100 50:1 0.9
16C 400 200:1 0.9
16B 400 100:1 1.5
15D 200 0 2.1
16A 400 50:1 3.8
14D 100 0 6.7
15B 200 100:1 7.5
13B 0 9.2# 7.9
15C 200 200:1 8.1
14C 100 200:1 15.9
14B 10O 100:1 19.0
13D 0 0 22.6
13C 0 4.6# 24.5
13A 0 18. 3#
15A 200 50:1 0.
15C 200 200:1 1.
15 B 200 100:1 1.
15D 200 0 1.
14A 100 50:1 2.
13B 0 9.2# 4.
16D* — — 4.
14D 100 0 5,
16B* — — 6
l6c* — ~ 6
13C 0 4.6# 9
16 A* — — 16
14C 100 200:1 18
14B 100 100:1 19
13D 0 0 27
0
6
2
I
1
5
7
3
1
7
2
0
7
J

*400 T/A addition third year was not possible — yield values not comparable.

Any two values not bracketed by same line are significantly different; any two values bracketed are not significantly
different at 5# level.

-------
                                                      TABLE 29

Sludge
T/A
0
0
0
0
100
1OO
1OO
100
200
20O
200
200
400
400
400
400
Nitrogen
Addition
Ibs
45.8
9.2
4.6
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
SUMMARY— YEARLY AMENDMENT
DESIGN
Total Quality Score

1970
0
14
15
18
7
16
19
19
2
16
18
12
0
12
16
9
Corn
1971
14
18
15
16
17
19
17
12
13
14
14
4
10
13
13
3

1972
0
9
13
15
14
10
7
8
6
4
3
2
12
14
13
10
Beans
1970 1971
0 — *
9
11
17
6
13
16
20
6
12
14
10
0
10
12
9

1972
0
6
10
10
7
14
12
/ 6
5
6
6
6
11
8
8
8

1970
3-0
29.9
42.8
51.8
10.3
49.1
52.4
55.8
0
39-3
47.5
54.1
0
28.0
42.0
27.6





Yield, Ibs /subplot
Corn
1971
0
47.2
40.3
32.8
31.6
40.5
13.4
0
0
6.0
0.5
0.5
0
3.7
3.6
1.2

1972
0
6.9
32.0
30.8
37.8
39.8
27.5
21.4
0
4.3
3.1
2.6
0
28.3
35.3
27.8

1970
0.1
17.9
33.2
37.2
0.2
27.3
41.4
40.3
0
10.4
36.0
34.3
0
1.6
4.8
6.0
Beans
1971
0
7.9
24.5
22.6
O.Q
19.0
15.9
6.7
0
7.5
8.1
2.1
0
1.5
0.9
0

1972
0
4.5
9.2
27.4
2.1
19-3
18.7
5.3
0
1.7
1.2
1.8
0
6.1
6.7
4.7
*Total quality scores not observed in 1971.

-------
The level of optimum sludge amendment relative to corn
yield was as earlier indicated by the TQS 100 T/A in
combination with nitrogen at C:N of 50:1.  On the basis of
two crop seasons, yearly amendments of no more than 100
T/A in combination with nitrogen would permit more or less
continuous and concurrent use of farm land for sludge
disposal and crop production.

Quality Test Scores of beans were not determined for the
1971 Yearly Amendment Design because of the marked sensi-
tivity of beans to the first of the three amendments.
Bean yields in 1971 following the second addition of sludge
at 100 T/A were from 60 to 80 percent less than yields
from these plots in 1970.  Bean yields from incorporation
of sludge under the Tolerance design at 200 T/A as a single
amendment without nitrogen in the fall of 1969 were essen-
tially identical in 1970 and 1971.  Split application of
sludge at the 200 T/A rate, with half portions applied in
1969 and 1970, however, resulted in a many-fold reduction
in the 1971 yield.

The toxic factors of sludge are more apparent and yield
reductions of corn and beans are greater when sludge
incorporation into soil is by Yearly Amendment than by
Tolerance design.


Plot Quality Evaluation—1972

Total quality scores of corn in 1972 plot evaluation were
lower than those of controls at both the 100 and 200 T/A
amendment levels with the exception of the sludge-nitrogen
combination of 100 T/A—10:1 C:N.  No consideration
relative to original experimental design should be given
the 400 T/A amendment of the Yearly Amendment approach
as the third aliquot of sludge could not physically be
worked into test plots.

Corn yields resulting from yearly amendments of 100 T/A
at C:N of 10:1 increased over 3 years from 10.3 to 37.8
Ibs per subplot.  At the same sludge level but with lower
nitrogen fertilization level of 50:1 C:N, yield was evenly
distributed over a 3 year period.  Extreme reductions in
yield resulted from yearly amendments of 200 T/A however.
The third successive amendment at the 400 T/A rate could

-------
not be physically incorporated into plots and as a conse-
quence was eliminated from study.  In view of the reduced
yield in the 1972 crop on the 400 T/A plots, it appears
reasonable to assume adverse effects equal to or greater
than those obtained with the third incorporation of 200 T/A,

The 100 T/A sludge amendment applied to soil with nitrogen
at C:N of 50:1 and 100:1 for 3 successive years produced
bean plants of better quality than those of controls.
The TQS obtained for plants on sludge amended plots of 14
and 12 for the low and high C:N respectively and those of
6 and 10 for comparable controls show the moderately
superior condition of beans on the sludge amended plots.

No major differences in yields were observed between the
1971 and 1972 bean crops grown at all nitrogen levels on
the 100 T/A Yearly Amendment plots.  The maximum yield in
1972 from the 100 T/A plots however was 40 percent less
than that from the control plots.  Reductions in yield
of up to 90 percent or so resulted from successive yearly
incorporation of 200 T/A rates.


DISPOSAL DESIGN

Plot Quality Evaluation—1972

Growth of corn and beans on the Disposal plots paralleled
that of the test crops on the Yearly Amendment plots.
The TQS shown in Table 30 indicates that optimum growth
under both objectives occurred at the 100 T/A level with
the nitrogen addition most favorable in the Disposal
approach at C:N ranging from 50:1 to 100:1 and in Yearly
Amendment, from 10:1 to 50:1.

Corn yields as depicted in Tables 31 and 32 were signifi-
cantly greater with 100 T/A amendments from the Yearly
Amendment than from the Disposal plots.  In contrast, no
differences occurred in bean production from 100 T/A plots
amended under the two objectives, but yields were well
under those from control plots.
                            79

-------
                TABLE 30

TOTAL QUALITY SCORES OF 1972 CORN AND BEAN
      CROPS ON DISPOSAL DESIGN PLOTS

Sludge
T/A
0
0
0
0

100
100
100
100
200
200
200
200
400
400
400
400
Nitrogen
Addition
Ibs
45.8
9.2
4.6
0
C:N Ratio
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
Total
Plot
No.
1?A
17B
17 C
17D

18A
18B
18 C
18D
19A
19B
19C
19D
20A
2 OB
20C
20D
Quality Scores

Corn
0
8
12
17

8
11
6
5
4
6
6
6
12
11
12
7
Plot
No.
21A
21B
21C
2 ID

22A
22B
22 C
22D
23A
23B
23C
23D
24A
24B
24C
24D

Beans
1
4
10
15

4
7
10
6
5
6
6
7
9
7
8
6
                    80

-------
                   TABLE 31

EFFECT OF CLARIFIER SLUDGE ON CORN AND BEAN YIELD
         IN FIELD PLOT DISPOSAL STUDIES

Sludge
Tons/A
0
0
0
0

100
100
100
100
200
200
200
200
400
400
400
400
Nitrogen
Addition
Lbs-N
45.8
?'£
4.6
0
C;N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0

Plot
No.
17A
1?B
17 C
17D

18A
18B
18C
18D
19A
19B
190
19D
20A
2 OB
20C
20D

Lbs
Corn
1.0
5.0
21.0
40.7

20.7
26.7
21.6
10.8
22.8
6.2
6.2
7.3
26.5
20.9
12.5
14.3

Plot
No.
21A
21B
21C
2 ID

22A
22B
22C
22D
23A
23B
23C
23D
24A
24B
24C
24D

Lbs
Beans
0
1.5
5.3
23.2

1.6
10.4
19.2
5.8
0.8
1.7
5.7
0.9
7.3
3.3
3.5
4.6
                       81

-------
CO
CO
                                     TABLE  32


        STATISTICAL RANKING ACCORDING TO DUNCAN'S  NEW MULTIPLE  RANGE  TEST FOR
               CORN AND BEAN YIELD--DISPOSAL DESIGN FOR  1970,  1971,  1972
Plot
No.
17A
17B
19B
19C
19D
18D
20C
20D
18A
20B
17 C
18C
19A
20A
18B
17D
Sludge
Tons /A
0
0
200
200
200
100
400
400
100
400
0
100
200
4 00
100
0
Nitrogen
Addition
45.8$
9.2#
50:1
100:1
0
0
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
4.6#
100:1
10:1
10:1
50:1
0
Corn Yield Plot
Lbs No.
1.0 21A
5.0 23A
6.2 23D
6.2 21B
7.3 22A
10.8 23B
12 . 5 24B
14. 3 24c
20.7 24D
20.9 21C
21.0 23C
21.6 22D
22 . 8 24A
26.5 22B
26.7 22C
40.7 21D
Sludge
Tons /A
0
200
200
0
100
200
400
400
4oo
0
200
100
400
100
100
0
Nitrogen
Addition
45.8
10:1
0
9.2
10:1
50:1
50:1
100:1
0
4.6
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
Bean Yield
Lbs
0.0
0.8
0.9
1.5
1.6
1.7
3-3
3.5
4.6
5.3
5.7
5.8
7.3













10.4
19.2
23.2
   Any  two values not bracketed  by  same  line  are  significantly  different;  any two
   values bracketed are not  significantly  different  at  5$  level.

-------
 CHARACTERISTICS  OF  SLUDGE AMENDED  SOILS

 The  initial incorporation of  sludge  into  field plots at
 the  100, 200 and 400 T/A rates produced an  immediate
 improvement in soil tilth.  The 600  T/A amendment however
 was  so  voluminous that even with batch wise  rotovation of
 the  total amount in 3 or 4 separate  portions the top 6
 inches  or so of  the plot was  not satisfactorily mixed with
 the  deeper portions.  Improved tilth at all  amendment
 rates,  including the 600 T/A  was noted during the 1970
 spring  plot rotovation and preparation for  seeding.

 Large pancake-like  fungal growths  occurred on the surface
 of sludge amended plots from  early spring in 1970 and 1971
 through both crop seasons.  Observations  in April and
 August  of 1972 as shown in Table-33  established a positive
 correlation between the presence of  fungi and the yearly
 addition of sludge.

 Sludge  incorporation in the fall of  1970  and 1971 to
 Yearly  Amendment and Disposal plots  became increasingly
 more difficult with each amendment.  Formation of sludge-
 clay aggregates  of  fist size  and larger throughout plots
 produced isolated islands of  sludge  in various stages of
 decomposition.   Incomplete mixing  of the  third sludge
 addition with soil  and partially composted amendment of
 previous years was  wide-spread during the third and final
 year of sludge addition.

 Following crop harvest in 1972, soil samples were obtained
 from all plots for  ash and volatile  solids analysis.
 Sample  cores collected from five random areas within each
 sub-plot were combined, mixed and  a  500 g portion air
 dried and stored for later analysis.

 Volatile solids  levels as shown in Table 34 in the fall
 of 1972 of all soils amended with  sludge between 1969 and
 1972 were greater than those of unamended control soils.
 The increase in volatile or organic  components of soil
was proportional to the quantity and frequency of sludge
 addition.  A total  of 600 T/A applied in yearly amendments
 of 200 T/A increased residual organic content in 1972 by
 190 to 220 percent, while application in 1969 of the entire
 600 T/A in the Tolerance design increased the organic
 fraction in 1972 by only 80 to 90 percent.  Undegraded and
                            83

-------
                    TABLE 33

   EFFECT OF 8 AND 30 MONTHS RESIDENCE OF SLUDGE
AMENDMENTS ON OCCURRENCE OF SURFACE FUNGAL GROWTHS

Disposal
Design
Yearly
Amendment
8 Mo. Residence









Disposal
8 Mo. Residence










Tolerance
30 Mo. Residence


Controls


Sludge
T/A
100



200



400



100



200



400



200

400
600
None


Nitrogen
C:N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
All Levels

All Levels
All Levels
All Levels
84
Fungal Growths
(Avg. No./
Replicate )
12
11
12
12
12
11
9
3
6
13
9
9
9
8
16
12
11
13
15
5
7
12
8
10
None

None
None
None


-------
                                            TABLE 34

                 ASH AND VOLATILE SOLIDS CONTENT OF SLUDGE AMENDED SOILS
CO
VJ1
    Sludge
      T/A

        0
        0
        0
        0
100
100
100
100

200
200
200
200

200
200
200
200

400
400
400
400

600
600
600
600
Percent
Disposal
Design
Control
Control
Control
Control

Y.A.*
Y.A.
Y.A.
Y.A.
Y.A.
Y.A.
Y.A.
Y.A.
T*
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
Nitrogen
Ibs
91.6
18.3
9.2
0
C:N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
Plot
No.
1A
IB
1C
ID

10A
10B
IOC
10D
11A
11B
11C
11D
2A
2B
2C
2D
3A
3B
3C
3D
4A
4B
4c
4D
Ash
90
90
90
90

84
81
82
85
68
68
69
71
87
87
87
87
85
84
35
85
81
81
81
82
Volatile
Solids
10
10
10
10

16
1Q
JLo
15
32
32
31
29
13
13
13
13
15
16
15
15
19
19
19
18
                                                                         Increase  In
                                                                      Volatile  Solids,
                                                                          Percent
 60
 90
 80
 50

220
220
210
190

 30
 30
 30
 30

 50
 60
 50
 50

 90
 90
 90
 80
     *Y.A. - Yearly Amendment; T - Tolerance  Design.

-------
partially degraded components of the 3 yearly amendments
of 200 T/A are the dominant factors in the accounting for
the 6-8 inch greater elevation of the Yearly Amendment over
the 600 T/A Tolerance plots.  The photograph in Figure 15
shows the difference in plot volume when sludge was added
at a rate of 200 T/A each of 3 years or 600 T/A in the
first year.

Corn crops within 2-3 weeks of harvest on the 400 and 600
T/A Tolerance plots were free from symptoms of water
stress during a 2 week hot spell in late August 1972,
while the corn on all other amended and unamended plots
showed marked wilting from water deficiency.  As shown in
Figure 16 the temporary wilting was most evident immediately
prior to irrigation.  Frequency of irrigation minimized
adverse effects of water stress on yield, but under general
field conditions amendments such as sludge that prevent
such stress could be of agricultural importance.
                            86

-------


                    *A
      Plot on left received 600 T/A in Fall of 1969.
      Plot on right received 200 T/A/yr for 3 years.
FIGURE 15.  COMPARISON OF TWO PLOTS RECEIVING TOTAL OF
           600T/A SLUDGE.

                          87

-------
                 A.
         i inn
0" Tons/Acre Sludge
                                  '
No Nitrogen
            9.2# Nitrogen
    Closeup of Left Subplot in "A"
                  B.
          400 Tons/Ac re Sludge
No Nitrogen
9.2# Nitrogen
                                  Closeup of Left Subplot in "B"
          FIGURE 16.  EFFECT OF SLUDGE ADDITION ON WILTING OF CORN.

-------
                         SECTION XI

                          MULCHING
 ROAD CUT HYDROMULCH
 Disposal of paper mill sludge  as a hydromulch material
 offers  a substantial volume  outlet.   The  major use  is  in
 formulation of a grass planting slurry which is sprayed  on
 highway cuts.   The mulch provides the medium for holding
 seeds until they germinate.  It also  holds moisture and
 fertilizer  so  that after the application, no further
 attention is necessary.   The mulch will slowly decompose
 adding  humus to the  soil.                                *

 To simulate  a  highway-cut embankment^  a 30°  angle hillside
 slope was levelled and  covered  with 3-4 inches  of top
 soil.   As shown in Figure 17 the  slope  was divided  into
 5 plots  each 5  ft  wide by 14 ft long.   Type  of  equipment
 used and method  of application  are also shown.  Amounts  of
 grass seed and  fertilizer used  for each of the  3 plantings
 are shown in Table 35.
                         TABLE 35

             APPLICATIONS ON HYDROMULCH PLOTS


Application Date        4/13/71      9/24/71      4/26/72

Lb Grass Seed/Acre*         260          390          390

Type Fertilizer, %
   (N-P-K)              5-10-50     23-19-17     23-19-17

Lb Fertilizer/Acre         1270          415          415


^Highway grass seed mix of 50$ English rye and 50$ creeping
 fesque.
                            89

-------

              5' x 14' Hydromulch Plots
                             Application of Hydromulch
  Hydromulch Mix
  Tank, Mixer, Pump

FIGURE 17, HYDROMULCH APPLICATION ON SIMULATED
          HIGHWAY ROAD CUT.
                         90

-------
Each grass seed-fertilizer combination which was slurried
for hydromulching was mixed in a 100 gallon feed tank.
Slurrying was accomplished with an air motor-driven portable
mixer.  Slurries were pumped from the tank by a gasoline-
driven portable pump and sprayed on each plot.

Giving each application a weighted rating, i.e., its
average, it appears that almost any formulation except
3000 and 6000 Ib/acre of sludge would equal or excel the
wood fiber product.  From Table 36, this would include
mixtures rated 3 or lower.  The choice of hydromulch
product then depends on comparative prices of the material.
The cost without profit of a delivered bale of semi-dried
sludge in a local area is about $20/dry ton.  Pressed
sludge, delivered in bulk, would be $14-17/dry ton.  With
a reasonable addition of profit and selling cost to the
above, the product should be competitive to materials now
being used.

Because the basic operation of hydromulching is spraying
on material as a slurry, an important objective is to
apply at high solids content, or consistency.  Generally,
paper mill sludges have a low enough freeness, or drainage
rate, to stay well mixed in water.  The data of Table 36
show that in all cases, sludge and sludge-bark mixtures
can be applied at higher consistencies than the wood fiber
hydromulch.

Variable amounts of sludge and sludge-bark mixtures were
compared to a control wood fiber hydromulch.  Plots were
not watered during the growing period of 60 to 90 days.
At the end of the growth period each plot was visually
rated for growth and coverage.

Differences can be noted in the photographs shown in
Figure 18 taken of one planting series; however the
final evaluations were based on overall plot growth.
These ratings for each series are'shown in Table 36.

-------
                         TABLE 36

        HYDRQMULCH APPLICATION AND EFFICACY RATING


 Plot      Lb Wood    Lb Sludge    Lb Bark      Application
Rating   Fiber/Acre     /Acre     Dust/Acre   Consistency,  ?

                          4/13/71

   1          —        1000    +   1000           1.96
   2        2000          —          —           l-4l
   3          --        2000          —           1.96
   4          —        1500    +   1500           2.27
   5          —        3000          —           2.27


                          9/24/71

   1          —        4000          —           2.90
   2          —        2000    +   2000           2.90
   3          —        1500    +   1500           2.15
   4          —        3000          —           2.50
   5        2000          —          —           1.10


                          4/26/72

   1          --        3000    +   3000           3.04
   2          —        4000          —           2.44
   3        2000          —          ~           0.98
   4          —        6000          —           2.41
   *          —        2000    +   2000           2.44
                            92

-------

                           xS







               50% SLUDGE-50%
              <

2000#lAcRE

                                                            .
1

            WOOD-FIBER HYDROMULCH^ 2000#lAcRE
                   100% SLUDGE, 2000#1A:RE
               50? SiUDGE-50% BARK, 3000#1A:RE
                   100% SLUDGE, 3000#JA:RE
  FIGURE IS,  GRASS GRO^fTH-HYDROMULCH PLOTS V13/7L


                              93

-------
CROP MULCHING

Hydromulching

Evaluation of mulching potential of sludge was made with
raspberry, strawberry, and tomato test crops grown in
10 x 38 ft plots.  Plot design is shown in Figure 19.
Four plots of a single row of Willamette variety of red
raspberry transplants were established with 4 foot spacing
between plants.  Four plots of Northwest variety strawberry
plants were set in 3 rows per plot with spacing of 3^ feet
between rows and l£ feet between plants.  The Earlianne
tomato test crop was not planted until after sludge
application.  Three plots of tomatoes on 3^ foot centers
were set into soil by removing an approximate 4 inch
diameter disc of the sludge blanket for each transplant.

Sludge was applied as a slurry or hydromulch for the
hydromulch study.  In order to facilitate application, an
approximate 1.3^ slurry of sludge was maintained in
suspension by constant stirring and sprayed on surface of
plots through a specially designed nozzle.  Plants
established in plots prior to hydromulching were covered
to keep foliage free of sludge.

One of the four prepared plots of raspberry was used in a
special treatment not related to mulching study.  This
single plot was amended with sludge at a 200 T/A rate and
nitrogen to give a C:N ratio of 100:1 prior to planting
of test plants.

Effectiveness of the sludge hydromulch in weed control
was measured by weight of weeds harvested and time interval
required to remove weeds.  Both weed yield and removal
intervals decreased with increased thickness of mulch.

The hydromulch layer was ineffective in control of such
weed species as Canadian thistle and Quack grass.
                       Tomato Yield

Tomatoes were picked through the growing season as they
ripened.  Final harvest was made the day following the
first killing frost.  Total number and weight of harvested
fruit along with percentage by weight and number exhibiting
soft spots are given in Table 37-

-------
10'
                                  Mulch Layer
 - Tom™ 0 — — 1        Lbs/sq ft   Tons/Acre
 : i i i i i i I i i i\            o           o
        Tomato
 nnnnni         0.55        11.9?
        Tomato
 Ull III llll         0.76        16.55
       Mushroom
 Nitrogen   I Nitrogen  I   Sludge Incorporation 200 T/A
       Raspberry
 * * • ..... • • •   Sludge Incorporation 200 T/A
       Raspberry
 ...........         0. 37        8. 09
       Kaspperrv
 ...........         0.51        11.11
       Raspberry
                                  0            0
       Strawberry
 • •••••••••••••••••••
 ••*•••••••••••••••••
       Strawberry
    • •••••••••••••••••••
    • •»•••••••••••••••••
       Strawberry
    • •••••••••••••••••••
    • •••••••••••••••••••
                              n
                              U.


                              n
                              U.


                              n
                              U.
                                           o /ic
                                           0.4!?
                                          n
                                          11.
       strawberry
••••••••••••••••••••
••••••••••••••••••••
                                  n
                                  U
          38
FIGURE 19.   DESIGN SHOWING HYDROMULCH PLOTS.
                         95

-------
                           TABLE 37

             EFFECT OF HYDROMULCH ON TOMATO YIELD
     Hydromulch                                  Percentage
      Addition          Total       Total       Soft Tomatoes,
 Tons/ALbs/sq fT   Lbs/Plot   Number/Plot   By WtBy NoT
  Control—No Mulch      343        1226        8.4      7.8

   12       0.55         250         773        3.9      4.1

   17       0.76         247         786        2.7      3.6
Tomatoes transplanted through a mulch layer equivalent to
12 and 17 tons/acre resulted in poor growth and reduced
yields.  Light green color of foliage developed early in
season with plants grown on mulched plots, indicating an
adverse effect.  Sludge layer did however provide a barrier
between fruit and soil.  Fruit resting on soil had a higher
incidence of "soft spot" than tomatoes resting on the
hydromulch sheet.
              Raspberry and Strawberry Yields

In 1970 excessive weeds plagued control plots.  Their
removal disturbed strawberry plant growth which subsequently
resulted in 1971 yield decrease.  There were considerably
less weeds on treated plots and their removal had less
impact on plant growth.

Results shown in Table 38 show a very low strawberry yield
in control plot compared with yields normally obtained in
that area.  Data do indicate, however, that hydromulching,
even though effective in weed control, decreased strawberry
yield.  When hydromulch layer was increased in thickness
from 5.3 to 11.8 T/A, yields decreased from 171.3 to 87.9
Ibs.  These data are similar to those in the raspberry
plots.  Photographs in Figure 20 depict hydromulch appearance
and its effect on strawberry, raspberry and tomato plants.

-------
     ,.,. .,

            , -
               «*•
     Strawberry •• Control
      Raspberry - Control
      Tomato - Control
  0.54lbs/sqft
                              ^^^^^^^H^|^^M|UB^^^g^ ,
                                           I

  0.51 Ibs/saft
0.76lbs/sqft
FIGURE 2Q  EFFECT OF HYDROMULCH LAYER ON TEST CROPS.
                         97

-------
                          TABLE  38
             RASPBERRY AND  STRAWBERRY YIELDS  ON
                      HYDROMULCHED  PLOTS
    Crop

 Strawberry

 Strawberry

 Strawberry

 Strawberry


 Raspberry

 Raspberry

 Raspberry
Sludge
Tons/Acre
0
5.3
8.5
11.8
0
8.1
11.1
Addition
Lbs/sq ft
0
0.24
0.39
0.50
0
0.37
0.51
Pounds — Total Yield
45.8
171.3
99.1
87.9
38.6
12.5
25.6
Bulk Mulching

After 1970 and 1971 harvest data were collected, the
strawberry and raspberry plants were thinned to uniformity.
The revised experimental scheme, shown in Figure 21 was
designed to obtain greater replication, evaluate mulching
rather than hydromulching and to determine effect of varying
sludge depth.

After 1971 harvest each plot was divided into 10' x 10'
subplots leaving 4 feet of guard plants on each end.
Subplots were divided with 2" x 10" planks.  Raspberry
plants grown on sludge incorporated plots were also used
in the design.

Sludge having a wet density of 42.3 Ibs/cu ft or 10.6 Ibs/
cu ft (dry basis) was placed in the enclosures to measured
depths varying from 1.5 to 6 inches.
                            98

-------



•






-
D A C
•






•
B D C
•






•
C B A
•






•
BAD

*
iniii
llllll
imii
i
D A, C
9
imii
mm
mm
i
B D C
*
******
••••••
••••••
mm
•
C B A
•
••• •••
••••••
•• ••• •
• • ••• •
•• ••• •
•••• • •
i
BAD
Raspberry Plots
Mulch Layer
Thickness Tons
Subplot (Inches) Per Acre
A 0 0
B 2 38. 4
C 4 76. 8
D 6 115.2
Strawberry Plots
Mulch Layer
Thickness Tons
Subplot (Inches) Per Acre
AGO
B 1. 5 28. 7
C 3. 0 57. 4
D 5. 0 95. 9
FIGURE 21.  RANDOMIZED PLOT DESIGN FOR
    BULK MULCH ING EXPERIMENT.

                 99

-------
Analysis of data summarized in Table 39 and shown in more
detail in Tables XI and XII, in Appendix, indicate a
significant difference in yields obtained with treatments
on strawberry plots.  However no significance could be
obtained with sludge addition on raspberry plots.


                          TABLE 39

       SUMMARY OF STRAWBERRY AND RASPBERRY YIELD DATA
                 UNDER BULK MULCH CONDITIONS
   Crop
Sludge
Tons/Acre
rry 0
rry 28.7
rry 57.4
rry 95.9
ry 0
ry 38.4
ry 76.8
ry 115.2
Addition
Tnches Thick
0
1.5
3.0
5.0
0
2.0
4.0
6.0
Total Ounces Per 3
Plots (10' x 10' )
1761
1689
1434
1203
555
564
728
839
*







Raspberry

Raspberry

Raspberry

Raspberry

*Any two values bracketed by  same  line are not  significantly
 different at 5$ level.
Pictures in Figures 22 and 23 show sludge application in
enclosures and randomization of subplots.
                            100

-------
FIGURE 22.
STRAWBERRY AND RASPBERRY PLOTS SHOWING ENCLOSURES
          AND SLUDGE DEPTHS.

-------

FIGURE 23.  STRAWBERRY AND RASPBERRY PLOTS
  SHOWING ENCLOSURES AND SLUDGE DEPTHS.
                 102

-------
                         SECTION XII

                     MISCELLANEOUS USES
 MUSHROOM CULTURE
 Dense mats of mycelia composed of separate  brown and white
 strands were observed during the  spring of  1970 in plots
 where sludge was incorporated into soil the previous fall.
 Two species of fungi are  associated with these  colored
 mycelia.   The brown color characterizes the dominant growth
 of the Morchella species  or the "morel",  and the white
 mycelium that of the pedodendron  species.   These two fungi
 are invariably found in mixed mycelial  association.   Growth
 of Morchella sp.  appears  to be dependent  upon association
 with Oedodendron (5).

 The observed mycelium was very productive of morel sporophores
 Sludge amendments favored growth  of morels  of excellent
 quality and large size (Figure 24).

 The unexpected and large  numbers  of morels  collected from
 sludge amended plots were indicative of a possible key
 role for  clarifier sludge as  a component of a morel  culture
 medium.   Commercial mushroom  interests  have  long sought a
 successful morel  culture  medium.   However the physical or
 chemical  factors  required to  shift  the  mycelium to fructi-
 fication  or morel development  have  not  been  found.

 To  test the effect of  sludge  amendments on morel production
 a special test plot was established.  Sludge at 200  T/A
 was  rototilled into a  10  by 38 foot  plot.  The  sludge
 amended plot was  inoculated with  a heavy suspension  of
 mycelial  fragments  and spores  prepared  from morels collected
 earlier.   Ammonium nitrate was  added to £ of the plot to
 give a C:N of  100:1.  Reduced  light  intensity and  increased
 humidity  of plot was produced by  constructing a box-like
 cover which fitted  20 inches above the bed with sides
 extending downward  to within 6  inches of the soil  surface.

 Morels continued to appear during the springs of 1971 and
 1972.  Production of morel was almost without exception
 associated with sludge amended plots.  The mushrooms
developing  in the grassy walkways between beds were
 consistently located on the downhill drainage or runoff
 side of sludge supplemented plots.  However> no morels
occurred on the special plot with the box cover during
either spring of 1971 or 1972.

                            103

-------


    A.  Morels Growing on Sludge
       Amended Plot

    B. Morel Harvest Showing Size.
FIGURE 24.  MOREL MUSHROOMS FOUND GROWING
ON SLUDGE PLOTS.
                  104

-------
Some limited  studies were  conducted by Dr. C. Fordyce  (5)
of the  U. S.  Department of Agriculture at Beltsville,
Maryland, who became interested in morel growth on the
experimental  plots.  His work showed Morchella grew well
with abundant sclerotia formation when ammonium nitrate
and yeast extract were added to sludge.  His studies also
indicated differences in utilization of sludge by different
strains of Morchella.  Use of sludge as casing medium  for
Agaricus campestrls, the mushroom of commerce, was not
satisfactory  as A. campestris could not penetrate the
sludge  layer.  Contamination of sludge under mushroom
house conditions by Trie he-derma and Aspergillus species
was observed  by both the USDA and a commercial grower.


OIL ABSORBENCY

Clarifier fibers from two  mills were evaluated by automobile
garage operators for possible use as a garage floor absorbent
sweeping compound.  These  materials absorbed oil well, but
overall performance was rated below the products normally
used such as  rice hulls and sawdust.  The major objection
to rice hulls as a sweeping compound is the severe dust
problem which exists with  this material.  Dried sludge,
on the other  hand, was judged good from a dust standpoint.

Garages pay 5 to 6 cents per pound for rice hulls and other
sweeping compounds such as vermiculite.  Dried, particulated
clarifier fiber would probably cost less than 2 cents per
pound in bags.  Added to this would be selling expense and
distribution  cost.

This study shows that clarifier sludge would probably have
to be sold at a lower price or be physically improved in
order to compete with established sweeping compounds.

A possible suggested use for paper mill sludge has been as
an oil absorbent for accidental oil spills on water.
Laboratory work in evaluating oil absorbency indicates
that on a dry basis, sludge can absorb about 1.2-1.7.times
its weight.   This is equivalent to a usage of one cu ft of
sludge for 6 gallons oil spill.   To convert sludge into a
product having oil absorbing capabilities, it must be
oil-treated and dried to facilitate handling and storage.
The oil-treated product should also be baled.   The estimated
delivered cost of 1000-1400 Ib bales to a destination of
                            105

-------
250 raiOfi s is about $40/dry ton solids, allowing for a 3
year cash flow pay-out time.  As an example, a 46,000 cu ft
"barge load would absorb 276,000 gallons of oil.  This would
be a reasonable amount for dockside leakage at a port
location.  Tanker spills at sea are usually much larger,
and it would be impractical to use sludge for clean-up.
Information in Table 40 compares sludge to other products
for oil spills.

From data in Table 40, it can be concluded that on the
basis of cost and storage volume, sludge is not a competi-
tive material for oil spill clean-up.
CATTLE FEED

The following evaluations of sludge for silage and as a
source of feed for ruminants were conducted at Louisiana
State .University  (LSU) under the direction of Dr. Louis L.
Rusoff, nutritionist, Department of Dairy Science.  Source
of sludge was from a southern mill which produces unbleached
kraft pulp that is converted to various grades of coarse
paper and linerboard.  Sludge from primary treatment was
centrifuged to a consistency of about 20$.  This material
was used for the studies described.  Approximate analysis
of the dry product showed that it contained the following:
               Crude Protein            2.0
               Crude Fat                1.8
               Crude Fiber             66.4
               Lignin                  12.7
               Ash                     17.1
Silage Feeding Studies

For the initial silage study additives such as Johnson
grass, cottonseed meal, urea and ground corn were used in
different combinations with the sludge in experimental silos,
The silos were 55-gallon drums filled with compressed
material.  The ensiled material was stored in the silos for
a period of 4 months.  The combinations of additives and
sludge are shown in Table 4l.
                            106

-------
                   TABLE
COMPARISON OF MATERIALS FOR OIL SPILL CLEAN-UP

M
O
-1



Material
Ground Pine Bark (Undried)
Ground Bark (Air Dry)
Sawdust (Air Dry)
Chemical Dispersant
Catalyst Powder
Sludge (Dried, Oiled)
Volume Required,
cu ft/million gal. oil
450, ooo
310, 000
330, 000
2,670
800
167,000
Dock- Side Cost,
^/million gal. oil
33,800
58,100
61,900
95,000
106,000
113,000

-------
TABLE 41
ENSILAGE MIXTURES FOR CATTLE FEED STUDIES
Silo
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Dry
Sludge
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
100
Johnson
Grass
50
^5
45
44
—
—
--
M «
Cottonseed Ground Whole
Meal Urea Molasses Corn Corn
-
5 .
5
15— —
50
1 - 49
1 - — 49
_ _ _ _~ __

-------
The results obtained with the various combinations of
additives and sludge which were ensiled are shown in Table
42.  These results indicate that the pulp mill sludge is
very difficult to break down compared to regular feed
ensiling materials.  Silage can be made from grass and
corn after a 30-day storage period.  The additives, Johnson
grass and corn, formed silage, but the sludge remained
unchanged during the four-month period.  The best looking
silage was No. 3 which contained 5$ molasses and 45$
Johnson grass and 50$ sludge.

In checking the palatability of these ensiled mixtures,
dairy steers consumed some of the first three mixtures
(silos No. 1, 2 and 3)^ but did not relish it very much.
The results indicate that sludge is not suitable for silage
making.  Modification or partial degredation of the cellulose
material by acid or enzymes would probably result in
improved fermentation, but this would be a costly process.
Because of the low cost of cellulose-type feeds, it is
economically unattractive to modify the sludge.  For
example, hay is presently selling for $14 to $20/ton in
the Camas-Washougal area.


Sludge Feeding Studies

In addition to the silage studies, rations containing
various amounts of sludge were fed to four groups of dairy
steers (approximately 300 Ib in weight) consisting of two
animals per group.  The sludge used in these trials was
dried in a forced-air oven at 80° F.  The dried material
was then ground in a hammermill so that it could be mixed
with the other ingredients in the grain ration.  The
composition and chemical analyses of the rations were as
follows:
                               Quantity in Founds
        Ingredient         U      II      TTT      TV

     Corn                  72      67       62      57

     Cottonseed Meal       20      20       20      20

     Sludge                 0       5       10      15

     Molasses               55        55

     Steamed Bonemeal       22        22

     Salt                   1111


                            109

-------
                                       TABLE Zj.2


                                      SILAGE STUDY
                                                      After Ensiling  (4 mos.)
H
O
Silo
No.
1
2
3*
4
5
6
7
8
Contents
50$ freshly cut Johnson grass
50^ paper by-product
5$» cottonseed meal
45$ Johnson grass
50$ paper by-product
5^ molasses
45$ Johnson grass
50$ paper by-product
\% urea
5$ molasses
44$ Johnson grass
50^ paper by-product
50^ ground corn
50$ paper by-product
1?& urea
49$ ground corn
50$ paper by-product
1% urea
49$ whole corn
50^ paper by-product
100^ paper by-product
Condition
Good Odor
Brown
Color &
Poor Odor
Good Odor
&
Color
Ammonia
Odor and
Dark Color
Poor Color
Pair Odor
Poor Color
and Odor
(NHo) Wet
Poor Color
and Odor
(NHU)
WetJ
Breakdown
of Sludge
None
None
Slight
Slight
None
None
Hone
Corn
Broken Down
None
pH
5.2
5.0
4.75
b.b1
4.4
8.7
8.6
7.45
      *Best product.

-------
The four groups of dairy steers were fed the rations for .a
14-day period.  No forage  (hay, silage or pasture) was fed
so that the palatability and the value of the rations
could be checked.

The results of the cattle  feeding studies are presented in
Table 43.  The results indicate that the dried sludge is
not toxic to ruminants at  levels up to 15$ of the grain
ration.  However, it appears that the dried sludge has
very low feeding value since the steers lost more weight
as the percentage of sludge was increased in place of the
corn.


                           TABLE 43

         GRAIN CONSUMPTION AND WEIGHT GAINS OR LOSSES
                      FOR  DAIRY STEERS
                            Daily Feed     Daily Weight
               Sludge,      Consumption    Gain or Loss,
Ration       # of Ration        Ibs        	Ibs	

I Control         0             15             +0.5

II                5             14             - 1.0

III              10             13             - 1.3

IV               15             11               1.5
The addition of 15$ sludge in the ration resulted in a
weight loss of about 21 Ibs in the two-week trial period.
The animals receiving Ration IV were actually about 28 Ibs
lighter than the controls.  Again, it appears that hydrolysis
or modification of the cellulose is needed to make it
nutritionally available to ruminants.  The pulp mill cellu-
lose sludge evidently is quite resistant to breakdown by
the microbial population in the rumen.
                            Ill

-------
CATTLE BEDDING

A small scale experiment was conducted to determine the
practicability of using clarifier sludge as a bedding
material for dairy cattle.  Because of relatively heavy
winter rains in the Camas area dairy cattle become extremely
muddy if allowed to run in the fields.  They are usually
confined in corrals with concrete slabs and generally have
access to a "loafing shed".

The dairy farm chosen for this evaluation had a "loafing
shed" comprised of a row of box stalls on each side and a
concrete runway through the center, extending the length
of the shed.  The box stalls are 7 feet long and 4 feet
wide—sufficient room for a cow to lie down comfortably.
A gravel base was used in the stalls to allow moisture to
filter down.

At present dairy men preferably use wood shavings as
bedding material in the box stalls.  The shavings are
thrown into the "head" end of the stall and gradually work
their way out the back onto a concrete slab where, along
with the manure, they are scraped up and hauled out to
the fields.  Shavings are an excellent bedding material.
However, they are becoming increasingly scarce and
expensive—having jumped in price from $4.00 to more than
$5.00 per unit in the past year.

Three stalls were used in the experiment.  About 11 Ibs of
sludge were used in each stall.  This was good for four
days, after which time an equal amount was again thrown
into the head end of the stalls.  After 4 days the third
and final application was made.

Performance of the material as a bedding was judged as
being satisfactory.  It behaved in a similar fashion as
shavings in respect to movement to the clean-out area.
Sludge absorbed manure readily and as it became wet had a
tendency to stick less to the cow.  In order to determine
sludge efficacy in keeping cows clean, a trial of consid-
erable duration would be required.

It costs about 2*r cents per day per stall for shavings.
Sludge would have to sell for less than $16.00 per ton
delivered in order to compete with shavings.
                            112

-------
GREENHOUSE APPLICATION

Sludge was evaluated as a potential component of synthetic
potting media widely used in containerized agriculture.
The containerized approach to production of ornamental
species has essentially eliminated the practice of adding
new soil to root area of the enlarging plant at each of
the several "repottings".  The current nursery method
involves initial transplanting or seeding in a container
sufficiently large to accommodate plant size at market
stage.  Potting medium requirements under these conditions
of continuous and long time use are different from those
of conventional or short time use.  Synthetic soils should
then be equivalent to or better than typical soil mixtures
used for such purposes.  These synthetic soils should
exhibit characteristics such as:  be light in texture;
have low silt-clay content; have high water holding
capacity; be resistent to compaction; have an attractive
appearance; and present an environment unfavorable to plant
pathogens.

A fertilizer mixture containing urea 4 Ibs, superphosphate
4 Ibs, sulfate of potash 2 Ibs and limestone 2 Ibs was
incorporated into a cubic yard of soil.  Standard green-
house potting soil employed in studies was a volume based
mixture of river loam-sand-peat moss at a ratio'of 7:2:5.
Potting media were wetted in excess and held overnight in
the greenhouse.

Standard vegetable and ornamental crop varieties were
planted into test media as seeds or transplants.  Test
plants originating as rooted cuttings were transplanted
and maintained in greenhouse potting mixture for about one
month prior to use.  The root ball of the cuttings were
freed of easily removed soil prior to transfer.

Standard potting soil, sand, peat moss, perlite, vermiculite,
clarifier sludge and bark dust were evaluated alone or in
various combinations as potting media.

Tests involving root knot nematode employed a standardized
method in which tomato transplants served as the host plant.
Heavily infested root knot soil maintained by continuous
cropping with tomato was used to prepare nematode infested
test soils.  One volume soil inoculum was thoroughly mixed
with 3 volumes of standard potting soil.  Sludge was mixed
with inoculated soil at 50, 100, and 200 T/A rates.  Two
                            113

-------
Bonney Best tomato seedlings 4 to 5 cm tall were transplanted
in 2 inch plastic pots with sludge amended soils and control
soils, and were grown in the greenhouse for 4 to 6 weeks.

Rating of root knot, following removal of soil from around
plant roots, was made by evaluating relative gall size and
number of galls on roots.

As shown in Table 44 two synthetic potting mixtures,
using either vermiculite or perlite with sludge, were
satisfactory growth media for containerized production of
azalea, rose and zinnia.  Greater size increases and
superior appearance of Douglas fir seedlings, however,
were obtained with all three component mixtures of sludge-
bark-sand.  The sludge-vermiculite mixture in all combina-
tions tested were effective for tomato growth.  Addition
of sand as a component produced tomato plants that were
superior to all other mixes.

Synthetic soil mixes with sludge as a component did not
add noticeably to the gross weight of synthetic media,
plant and container.  The light weight characteristic of
synthetic soils is of considerable importance in growth
medium selection.  Some nurserymen have abandoned standard
potting mixtures because of weight.

Limited studies were made on the availability of water for
plant growth in synthetic soils containing sludge and
standard potting soil.  Measurement of water holding
capacity was made by observing the time interval between
water application and incipient wilt.  With zinnia test
plants grown in sludge mixtures, wilting was delayed more
than 8 hours beyond that of standard soil.

The 200 T/A sludge amendment of root knot nematode inoculated
soil yielded tomato plants nearly free of root galls.  Data
shown in Table 45 indicate reducing sludge application
from 200 T/A to 100 T/A and 50 T/A reduced disease control
from 98$ to 77$ and 71$ respectively.  Varied organic
amendments have been reported effective in nematode disease
control and include chitin, straw, activated sludge and
waste paper (6).
                            114

-------
                                  TABLE W

            COMPARISON OP PLANT GROWTH IN STANDARD SYNTHETIC: AND
                         SLUDGE-BASED POTTING MEDIA
       Test Plant and
        Potting Media
 Av.alae  Plant
 "HStandard Media
 2.   Sludge-Vermiculite
           1:1
           1:2
           2:1
           ?:1
 3.   Sludge Only
 •I-.   Vormiculitc  Only

Pour.las  Fir Seedlings (^)
TIStandard Media
 2.   Sludge-Bark
           1:1
           1:2
           1:3
           2:1

3. .Sludge-Bark-Sand
           1:1:1
           1:2:1
           1:3:1
           1:2:2
           1:2:3
4.   Sludge Only
5.   Bark Only
6.   Sand Only
Plant
Growth
Rating
 3

 2
 1
 1'.
3
•3
2
3
3
                                            Test Plant and
                                             Potting Media
                                      Tomato Plant (3)
          1'."" Standard Media
          2.  Sludge-Sand
                    1:1
                    1:2
                    1:3
                    2:1
                    3:1
          3.  Sludge-Vermiculite
                    1:1
                    1:2
                    v- ?
                    -1- • j
                    2:1
                    3:1
          Ji.  Sludge-Perlite
                    1:1
                    1:2
                    1:3
                    2:1
                    3:1
          5.   Sludge-Sand-Vermiculite
                    1:1:1
          6.   Sludge-Sand-Perlite
                    1:1:1
          7.   Sludge-Sand
                    1:1
                    1:2
                    1:3
          8.   Sludge  Only
          9.   Verraiculite Only
        10.   Perlite Only
        11.   Sand Only
                                      Plant
                                      Growth
                                      Hating
                                                                       3
                                                                       2
                                                                       3
                                                                       3
                                                                       2
                                                                       1
                                                                       3
                                                                       3

                                                                       2
                                                                       2
                                                                       2
                                                                       2
                                                                       2
                                                                       2
                                                                       3
                                                                       3
                                                                       1
                                                                       2
                                                                       2
                                                                       2
(l) Azalae test duration - 8 weeks.

(2) Douglas fir test duration - 6 months.

(3) Tomato test duration - 7 weeks.

(4) Number 4 equals highest rating.
                                      115

-------
                            TABLE 45

           INFLUENCE OP SLUDGE ON CONTROL OF TOMATO
                      ROOT KNOT NEMATODE
 Sludge  Addition   Average  Number   Percent  Gall   Standard
    (Tons/A)           of Galls        Reduction    Deviation

         0               91              —            26

        50               26              71            17

      100               21              77             7

      200               5              98             5
Nematode control resulting from decomposition of organic
soil amendments has been widely observed.  Amendments in
biological control have not provided sufficient control to
satisfy farm requirements.  Comparative control of sludge
to other amendments is not known.
                            116

-------
                       SECTION XIII

                      A CKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge the help and cooperation
given by Crown Zellerbach management and personnel.

Those involved at the mills were:

      Mr. J. B. Palmer, Camas Mill Manager
      Mr. T. I. Meehan, Sr., Camas Mill Manager
      Mr. J. J. Goss, Port Townsend Mill Manager

Engineering, maintenance and operational problems were
handled by Messrs A. 0. Muench, P. Vajda, W. Worvell,
B. C. Smith, M. Dulley, B. Jessett, P. Williams and
H. Hamby of the Camas Mill.

Installation of incinerator and sludge drying facilities
were by Reitz Manufacturing personnel Mr. T. Yamada ana
associates.

The technical aspects of the evaluation program were
undertaken at the Crown Zellerbach Central Research
Division and Environmental Services Division by the
following personnel:

      Dr. H. R. Amberg, Director, Environmental Services
         Division (Project Officer)
      Dr. T. R. Aspitarte, Manager, Environmental Services
         Division
      Mr. A. S. Rosenfeld, Research Engineer, Environmental
         Services Division
      Dr. B. C. Smale, Senior Research Biologist,
         Environmental Services Division
      Dr. J. F. Cormack, Supervisor, Environmental Services
         Division
      Mr. J. G. Coma, Supervisor, Central Research Division,
         Process Engineering
      Mr. 0. L. Hamblen, Technician
      Mr. R. Bafus, Technician
      Mr. H. Husby, Technician
      Mr. C. Esser, Technician
                            117

-------
The support of the project by the Environmental Protection
Agency and the help provided by Dr. L. W. Weinberger and
Mr. G. R. Webster is gratefully acknowledged.  We were
particularly pleased with the help and guidance provided
by Mr. R. H. Scott, the project officer and Dr. H. K.
Willard of the Pacific Northwest Research Laboratory
located at Corvallis, Oregon.

The helpful suggestions of Dr. C. Fordyce, Jr., Plant
Pathologist USDA at Beltsville, Maryland, concerning morel
culture were appreciated.
                            118

-------
                        SECTION XIV

                        REFERENCES


1.  Coogan, F. J. and Stoval, J. H., "Incineration of
    Sludge from Kraft Pulp Mill Effluents,11 Tappi3 40
    No. 6, pp 9^A-96A (19b5).

2.  Bollen, W. B. and Lu, K. C., "Effect of Douglas  Fir
    Sawdust Mulches and Incorporations on Soil Microbial
    Activities and Plant Growth," Soil Science Society
    American Proceedings, 21, pp. 35-41  (1957).

3.  Stephenson, R. E. and Schuster, C. E., "Laboratory,
    Greenhouse and Field Methods of Studying Fertilizer
    Needs," Soil Science, 52, pp. 137-153  '  '  '
4.  Li, J. C. R., "Introduction to Statistical  Inference,"
    Printed by Edwards Brothers Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
    (1957).

5.  Fordyce, C.  Personal Communication.  U. S. Department
    of Agriculture, Beltsville, Maryland, (1970).

6.  Good, J. M., "Bionomics and Integrated Control of  Plant
    Parasitic Nematodes." Journal of Environmental Quality,
    1, No. 4, pp. 382-386, (1972).
                            119

-------
                         SECTION  XV

                         APPENDICES
                                                  Page  No,
                          Tables

I        Sludge Decomposition as  Measured  by
         Carbon Evolution with  Soil Respi-
         rometers.  Experiment  1.                   123

II       Sludge Decomposition Measured  as
         Percent Evolved with Soil Respi-
         rometers.  Experiment  1.                   124

III      Sludge Decomposition as  Measured  by
         Carbon Evolution with  Soil Respi-
         rometers.  Experiment  2.                   125

IV       Sludge Decomposition Measured  as
         Percent Evolved with Soil Respi-
         rometers.  Experiment  2.                   126

V        Greenhouse Studies to  Determine Effect
         of Sludge and Supplemental Nitrogen on
         Sunflower Growth.                          127

VI       Total Quality Scores of  1970-1972 Corn
         and Bean Crops on Tolerance and Yearly
         Amendment Design Plots                     128

VII      Effect of Clarifier Sludge on  Corn
         Yield in Field Plot Tolerance  Studies      129

VIII     Effect of Clarifier Sludge on  Bean
         Yield in Field Plot Tolerance  Studies      130

IX       Effect of Clarifier Sludge on  Corn
         Yield in Field Plot Yearly Amendment
         Studies                                    131

X        Effect of Clarifier Sludge on  Bean
         Yield in Field Plot Yearly Amendment
         Studies                                    132

XI       Strawberry Yields Under Mulch
         Conditions—1972 Crop                      133
                            121

-------
                                                  Page  No,
XII      Raspberry Yields Under Mulch
         Conditions--1972 Crop                       134
                          Figures
1A       Material Balance Formula                    135
2A       First Sunflower Crop                        136
3A       Second Sunflower Crop                       137
4A       Third Sunflower Crop                        138
5A       Fourth Sunflower Crop                       139
                            122

-------
                                       TABLE I
                  SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION AS  MEASURED  BY CARBON EVOLUTION
                         WITH SOIL RESPIROMETERS.   EXPERIMENT 1.
LO
Sludge
Addition
(Tons/Acre )
0
50
100
150
200
50
50
100
100
150
150
200
200
0
0
0-
0
Nitrogen
Addition
(C:N)

0
0
0
0
0
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1
1*
2*
3*
4*


30 Days
Sandy
14
128
155
286
250
1115
726
1496
1142
1578
1179
1938
1364
9
13
17
21
Clay
75
579
781
842
910
1031
846
1439
1115
1319
967
1408
932
86
71
65
75
Milligrams Carbon Evolved
50 Days
Sandy
24
258
361
647
553
1721
1044
2228
1467
2879
1527
3865
1810
23
28
22
28
Clay
141
1111
1864
1966
2459
1447
1310
2335
1968
2076
1630
2039
1627
151
124
129
100
90 Days
Sandy
33
369
566
996
854
2017
1238
2752
1785
3740
1959
4857
2320
47
36
29
41
Clay
181
1663
2550
2566
3526
1671
1736
2952
2627
2810
2305
2625
2339
200
166
189
138
120 Days
Sandy
39
490
653
1414
1115
2176
1414
3210
2040
4352
2448
5440
2856
204
57
150
131
Clay
272
1958
3264
3060
4216
1850
1958
3482
3128
3427
2815
3074
2992
245
296
277
199
*Same nitrogen amount used for
 3* 150 T/A - 25:1,  4* 200 T/A
                                       50 T/A -  25:1.  2* 100 T/A -  25:1.
                                    25:1.

-------
                                       TABLE II
                    SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION MEASURED AS PERCENT EVOLVED
                         WITH SOIL RESPIROMETERS.  EXPERIMENT 1.
ro
  Sludge
 Addition
(Tons/Acre)

     50
    100
    150
    200

     50
     50

    100
    100

    150
    150

    200
    200
Nitrogen
Addition
(C:N)
0
0
0
0
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1


30 Days
Sandy
3.6
2.1
2.7
1.8
31.8
20.7
21.3
16.5
15.0
11.2
13.8
9.7
Clay
16.5
11.1
8.0
6.5
29.4
24.1
20.4
15.9
12.5
9.2
10.0
6.7
Percent Sludge Decom]
bO Days
Sandy
7.4
5.1
6.1
3.9
49.0
29.7
31.7
20.9
27.3
14.5
27.5
12.9
Clay
31.7
26.6
18.7
17.5
41.2
37.3
33.3
28.0
19.7
15.5
14. 5
11.6
90 I
Sandy
10.5
8.1
9.5
6.1
57.5
35.3
39.2
25.4
35.5
18.6
34.6
16.5
Dosed
!>ays
Clay
	 -_j 	 **
47.4
36.3
24.4
25.1
47.6
49.5
42.0
37.4
26.7
21.9
18.7
16.7


120 Days
Sandy
14.0
9.3
13.4
7.9
62.0
40.3
45.7
29.1
4l.3
23.2
38.7
20.3
Clay
	 i "
55.8
46.5
29.1
30.0
52.7
55.8
49.6
44.6
32.5
26.7
21.9
21.3

-------
                                       TABLE III
                  SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION AS MEASURED BY CARBON EVOLUTION
                         WITH SOIL RESPIROMETERS.  EXPERIMENT 2.
VJi
  Sludge
 Addition
(Tons/Acre)

      0
    100
    200
    400
    600

    100
    100
    100

    200
    200
    200

    400
    400
    400

    600
    600
    600
Nitrogen
Addition
(C:N)
0
0
0
0
0
10:1
20:1
40:1
10:1
20:1
40:1
10:1
20:1
40:1
10:1
20:1
40:1
Milligrams Carbon Evolved
30
Sandy
21.1
78
306
195
187
1162
1036
1090
1402
1716
1234
1143
1276
1040
1150
997
941
Days
Clay
29
663
662
442
187
1201
1527
1269
1453
1808
1789
2434
2864
2211
2129
2024
728
60
Sandy
22.9
209
643
412
305
2159
2095
1755
3134
3498
2121
2312
2888
2889
2120
2443
2162
Days
Clay
81
1731
2410
1280
3^4
2121
2311
2092
3191
3396
2932
4988
4754
3711
3598
3092
1481
90
Sandy
23.5
308
886
530
409
2782
2535
2035
4374
4635
3084
3324
4416
3622
2997
3658
3418
Days
Clay
175
2413
3980
2197
694
2787
2785
2717
4309
4162
4159
5817
5528
4678
4273
3673
20
120
Sandy
25.3
519
1328
787
671
3213
2988
2399
5404
5778
3678
4331
5732
4099
3678
4213
4448
Days
Clay
219
3087
5324
3770
1208
3345
3206
3234
5045
4791
4793
6205
6062
5469
4961
4190
2391

-------
                                   TABLE  IV
                 SLUDGE DECOMPOSITION MEASURED AS PERCENT EVOLVED
                     WITH SOIL RESPIROMETERS.  EXPERIMENT 2.
  Sludge
 Addition
(Tons/Acre)

    100
    200
    400
    600

    100
    100
    100

    200
    200
    200

    400
    400
    400

    600
    600
    600
Nitrogen
Addition
(C:N)
0
0
0
0
10:1
20:1
40:1
10:1
20:1
40:1
10:1
20:1
40:1
10:1
20:1
40:1
Percent Sludge Decomposed
30
Sandy
1.1
2.2
1.4
1.8
16.6
14.8
15.5
10.0
12.2
8.8
8.1
9.1
7.4
10.9
9.5
9.5
Days
Clay
9.5
4.7
3.1
1.8
17.1
21.8
18.1
10.3
12.9
12.7
17.3
20.4
15.8
20.2
19.2
6.9
bO
Sandy
2.9
4.6
2.9
2.9
30.8
29.9
25.0
22.3
24.9
15.1
16.5
20.6
20.6
20.1
23.2
20.5
Days
Clay
24.7
17.2
9.1
3.3
30.2
32.9
29.8
22.8
24.2
20.9
35.5
33.9
26.4
34.2
29.4
14.1
90
Sandy
4.4
6.3
3.8
3.9
39.6
36.1
29.0
31.2
33.0
22.0
23.7
31.5
25.8
28 5
34! 8
32.5
Days
Clay
3^.4
28.4
15.7
6.6
39.7
39.7
38.7
30.7
29.7
29.6
41.4
39.^
33.3
40.6
3^.9
19.5
120
Sandy
7.5
9.5
5.6
6.4
45.8
42.6
34.2
38.5
41.2
26.2
30.9
40.8
29.2
34.9
40.0
42.3
Days
Clay
44.0
37.9
26.9
11.5
47.7
45.7
46.1
35.9
35.0
34.1
44.2
43.2
40.0
47.0
39.8
22.7

-------
H
ro
                                               TABLE V


                    GREENHOUSE STUDIES TO DETERMINE EFFECT OF SLUDGE AND SUPPLEMENTAL

                                      NITROGEN ON SUNFLOWER GROWTH

Treatment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Sludge
Tons/A
0
50
100
150
200
50
50
100
100
150
150
200
200
0
0
0
0

Additional
Nitrogen
0
0
0
0
0
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1
25:1
100:1
1
2
3
4
Yield — Grams Sandy Soil
1st
Crop
2.0
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.7
3.1
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.9
2.2
2.5
0.4
0
0
2nd
Crop
1.5
1.7
2.2
1.9
2.2
2.4
1 Q
7.8
2.4
7.5
2.3
6.5
2.1
2.5
1.7
1.9
0.7
3rdT
Crop
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.5
2.3
4.6
2.3
5.4
2.8
7.7
2.9
10.2
2.5
5.9
4.7
4.0
3.0
4th
Crop
1.8
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.6
2.4
1.8
4.0
1.3
2.7
1.9
1.9
l.l
1.2
2.6
0
0

Mean
1.88
1)78
1.98
1*93
1.90
2.70
1.93
5.08
2.13
4.98
2.28
5.13
1.98
3.03
2.35
1.48
0.93
1st
Crop
7.7
1.5
1.3
1.6
1.6
2.6
1.6
5.8
1.4
5.7
1.5
5.1
1.4
5.4
4.3
1.0
0
Yield — Grams
2nd
Crop
1 n mm
2.2
1.7
2.2
2.8
2.5
5.6
1.8
5.9
1.6
5.5
2.0
6.6
2.3
1.0
0.8
0.5
0
3rd
Crop
4.2
2.7
2.7
2.9
3.4
11.9
6.6
13.2
5.0
10.7
3.0
8.1
4.0
6.2
0.9
0.5
1.4
Clay Soil
4th
Crop
4.4
3.6
1.3
1.3
1.2
5.3
4.6
6.1
6.6
4.8
7.3
4.8
6.7
5.2
1.8
0
0


Mean
4.6^
2.35

2!l5
2.18
6.35
•3.65
7.75
3.65
6.68
3.45
6.15
•3.60
4.45
1.95
0.50
0.35
   (I),  (2),  (3) and  (4) equivalent nitrogen added in Treatments 6, 8, 10 and 12 respectively.

-------
                                                                  TABLE VI
                                           TOTAL QUALITY SCORES  OF 1970-1972  CORN AND  BEAN  CROPS  ON
                                                  TOLERANCE AND  YEARLY AMENDMENT  DESIGN  PLOTS
H
ro
CD
Tolerance Design

Sludge
T/A
0
0
0
0

200
200
200
200
400
400
400
400
600
600
600
600
Nitrogen
Addition
Ibs
91.6
18.3
9.2
0
C:N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
Corn
Plot
No.
1A
IB
1C
ID

2A
2B
2C
2D
3A
3B
3C
3D
4A
4B
4C
•to

70
0
14
15
18

2
16
18
12
0
12
16
9
0
12
12
7

11
8
16
16
16

18
18
19
17
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19

72
-
14
17
16

18
17
17
16
18
18
17
16
20
20
20
20
Plot
No.
5A
5B
5C
5D

6A
6B
6C
6D
7A
7B
7C
7D
8A
8B
8c
8D
Beans

70 71
1 (1)
9
11
17

6
12
14
10
0
10
12
9 ,
0
11
11
8


72
3
10
14
15

6
17
17
17
16
17
18
17
16
19
19
18

Sludge
T/A
0
0
0
0

100
100
100
100
200
200
200
200
400
400
400
400
Yearly Amendment
Nitrogen
Addition
Ibs
45.8
9.2
4.6
0
C;N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
Design
Corn
Plot
No.
9A
9B
9C
9D

10A
10B
IOC
10D
11A
11B
11C
11D
12A
12 B
12 C
12D

70
0
14
15
18

7
16
19
19
2
16
18
12
0
12
16
9

71
14
18
15
16

17
19
17
12
3-3
l4
14
4
10
13
13
3

72
0
19
13
15

14
10
7
8
6
4
3
2
12
14
13
10
Plot
No.
13A
13B
13 C
13D

14A
14B
14 C
14D
15A
15B
15 c
15D
16A
16B
16 c
16D
Beans

70 71
0 (1)
9
11
17

6
13
16
20
6
12
14
10
0
10
12
9


72
0
6
10
10

7
14
12
6
5
6
6
6
11
8
8
8
         (1) TQS not determined for 1971 crop.

-------
                    TABLE VII
      EFFECT OF CLARIFIER SLUDGE ON CORN YIELD
           IN FIELD PLOT TOLERANCE STUDIES
2A
2B
2C
2D

3A
3B
3C
3D

4A
4B
4C
4D
Sludge
Tons /A
0
0
0
0

200
200
200
200
400
400
400
400
600
600
600
600
Nitrogen
Addition
Lbs-N
91.6
18.3
9.2
0
C;N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
Pounds Corn

1970
1.9
27.8
33.5
55.5

0
32.7
69.9
46.9
0
41.4
^7.3
24.7
0
26.4
3^.5
21.5

1971
1.5
20.2
27.3
26.3

3^.0
44.1
35.0
34.8
47.6
52.9
51.5
^7.3
35.7
46.5
^9.3
46.4

1972
12.6
25.7
33.3
28.4

30.6
35.0
39.0
32.7
41.7
42.8
43.4
28.9
50.9
48.6
45.6
46.8
3 Years
Total
16.0
73.7
9^.1
110.2

64.6
ill. 8
22:2
89.3
137.1
142.2
100.9
86.6
121.5
129.4
114.7
                        129

-------
                    TABLE VIII
     EFFECT OF CLARIFIER SLUDGE ON BEAN YIELD
          IN FIELD PLOT TOLERANCE STUDIES
6A
6B
6C
6D

7A
7B
7C
7D

8A
8B
8C
8D

Sludge
Tons/A
0
0
0
0

200
200
200
200
400
400
400
400
600
600
600
600
Nitrogen
Addition
Lbs-N
91.6
18.3
9.2
0
C;N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
Pounds Beans

1970
0
3.1
17.1
32.2

0.1
5.8
26.1
21.8
0
1.4
5.0
7.3
0
2.7
5.4
2.8

1971
0.3
4.6
13.1
17.4

0.3
18.4
23.4
21.2
1.8
19.3
26.8
20.1
2.6
24.4
27.4
20.1

1972
0.4
8.8
22.2
17.9

0.8
28.5
31.2
31.5
30.1
33.7
30.7
27.9
30.5
39.1
42.7
38.5
3 Years
Total
0.7
16.5
52.4
67.5

1.2
52.7
80.7
74.5
31.9
54.4
62.5
55.3
33.1
66.2
75.5
61.4
                         130

-------
                                     TABLE  IX
                EFFECT OF  CLARIFIER  SLUDGE  ON  CORN  YIELD IN FIELD PLOT
                              YEARLY AMENDMENT STUDIES
H
(jJ
H

Sludge
Tons/A
0
0
0
0

100
100
100
100
200
200
200
200
400
400
400
400
1970
N-Addition
Lbs-N
45.8
9.2
4.6
0
C:N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0

Lbs-
Yield
3.0
29.9
42.8
51.8

10.3
49.1
52.4
55.8
4.0
39.3
47.5
54.1
0
28.0
42.0
27.6
1971
N-Addition
Lbs-N
18.3
9.2
4.6
0
C;N
50:1
100:1
200:1
0
50:1
100:1
200:1
0
50:1
100:1
200:1
0

Lbs-
Yield
0
47.2
40.3
32.8

31.6
40.5
13.4
0
6.4
6.0
0.5
0.5
5.8
3-7
3.6
1.2
1972
N-Addition
Lbs-N
18.3
9.2
4.6
0
C:N
50:1
100:1
200:1
0
50:1
100:1
200:1
0
50:1
100:1
200:1
0

Lbs-
Yield
0
6.9
32.0
30.8

37.8
39.8
27.5
21.4
6.1
4.3
3.1
2.6
32.9*
28.3*
35.3*
27.8*
     10A
     10B
     IOC
     10D

     11A
     11B
     11C
     11D

     12A
     12B
     12 C
     12D

    *Was not possible to add 400 T/A  rate  for  third year.
     for experimental design.
Values not consistent

-------
                                     TABLE X
               EFFECT OF  CLARIFIER  SLUDGE  ON BEAN YIELD IN FIELD PLOT
                               YEARLY AMENDMENT  STUDIES
ro
ft ^ ^
Sludge
Tons/A
0
0
0
0

100
100
100
100
200
200
200
200
400
400
400
i
400
1970
N- Addition
Lbs-N
45.8
1:1
0
C:N
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0
10:1
50:1
100:1
0

Lbs-
Yield
0.1
17.9
33.2
37.2

0.2
27.3
41.4
40.3
0
10.4
36.0
34.3
0
1.6
4.8
6.0
1971
N-Addition
Lbs-N
18.3
9.2
4.6
0
C:N
50:1
100:1
200:1
0
50:1
100:1
200:1
0
50:1
100:1
200:1
0

Lbs-
Yield
0
7-9
24.5
22.6

0.9
19.0
15.9
6.7
0.3
7.5
8.1
2.1
3.8
1.5
0.9
0
1972
N-Addition
Lbs-N
18.3
9.2
4.6
0
G:N
50:1
100:1
200:1
0
50:1
100:1
200:1
0
50:1
100:1
200:1
0

Lbs-
Yield
0
4.5
9.2
27.4

2.1
19.3
X — '
18.7
5.3
0.6
1.7
w i
1.2
1.8
16.0*
6.1*
6.7*
4.7*
     14A
     14B
     14C
     14D

     15A
     15B
     15 C
     15D

     16A
     16B
     16C
     16D

    *Was not possible to add 400 T/A rate for third year.
     experimental design.
Values not consistent for

-------
                                           TABLE XI

                       STRAWBERRY YIELDS UMDER MULCH CONDITIONS—1972  CROP
CO
u>
   Treatment
Control
Plot IB
Plot 2C
Plot 4B
   Total

1.5" Layer
Plot 1A
Plot 2B
Plot 3A
   Total

3.0" Layer
Plot 2A
Plot 3C
Plot 4C
   Total

5.0" Layer
Plot 1C
Plot 3B
Plot 4A
   Total
 16
-S
  7
  8
  8
  5
  2
 35

 26
-85
  7
 21
  9
 10
                               85
                               56
                               67
 33
 52

134
 33
 33
 26
-52-
        15
        19
        27
       -51
  8
 28
 24
  9
 23
 18
"35
       123
       147
59
95
78
64
       84
       86
      105
      275
 45
102
                                                    52
        64
        99

       5BH
                                                           42
        48
        88
        67
 30
 95
 ri
 44
 92
 81
517
 46
 78
  0
 34    37
 18
 33
 37
HSB
                                                                       40
                                                                      -s
 26
 50
 51
157
                                                            155
                                                                                   17
                                                                                  17
                                                                   35
              467
              614
              608
             T5B9~
289
5
                    283
                    465
                    455

-------
                                                TABLE XII
    Treatment
    Control
    Plot IB
    Plot 2C
    Plot 4B
       Total

    2" Layer
    Plot 1A
M   Plot 2B
u>   Plot 3A
•^      Total
          •er
4"
Plot
Plot 3C
Plot 4C
   Total

6" Layer
Plot 1C
Plot 3B
Plot 4A
   Total
RASPBERRY YIELDS UNDER MULCH CONDITIONS— 1972 CROP

O/22
7
3
8
IH
8
3
7
TB
10
7
4
2T
5
5
5
15

b/25
12
5
14
10
4
10
2T
13
9
11
33
8
8
11
57

t>/2b
31
14
22
57
17
10
28
55
20
34
21
75
17
30
13
55

b/30
17
28
24
55
25
7

7T
17
36
17
75
29
43
21
53
Days
7/3
35
28
31
32
8
46
35
38
56
27
12T
27
67
37
13T
Picked — Yield in Ounces
7/5
20
12
6
3S
21
2
19
32-
8
24
17
17
34
17
5B~
7/8^
33
17
14
44
__
22
55
22
55
34
ITT
32
71
34
137
7/10
11
12
8
3T
18
__
23

13
28
15
55
8
30
12
50-
7/13
15
17
17
15
3
22
3(J
10
31
14
55
10
31
18
55
7/15
11
15
11
37
15

17
32-
9
28
10
9
29
11
35
7/17
11
19
9
26
•> ••
25
5T
7
26
15
13
50
17
HO"
7/21
5
8
il
19

19
3H
4
33
5
3?
9
46
15
70-
Total
208
178
169
555
250
37
277
553
171
367
190
184
444
211


-------
                 MATERIAL BALANCE FORMULA
Basic Requirement:  Measure all consistencies and one wt/unit
time. Example below is for a sludge filter,  but could be for a
clarifier, press, or dryer.
Clarifier Underflow
     X
  Cons. =
                                             Filter Cake
                                Filtrate—measure wt/unit time
                              A Cons. = C2
         LetX
            Y
            A
Wt. Clarifier flow/unit time
Wt. filter cake/unit time
Wt. filtrate/unit time—measured
      Total Weight Balance
      Solids Balance
      Substituting for X
      Solve for Y

        and
              Cj(Y + A)
              Y

              X
Y + A
C3Y + C2A
C3Y + C2A
AJCZ_1C1|  All
            Knowns
Y + A
                          FIGURE 1A
                           135

-------
U)
     r>^
     R-
      ***%
     4***


ii

      1
—rau
    • ttq^pcrwirre

MILK  MILK
                               8
                                                     14    15    16   17

                                                       10   11
                                                    12
                                                13
14  15
16   17
                             FIGURE 2A   FIRST SUNFLOWER CROP.

-------
                                              10    11   12   13   14  15
                                                             f
                                                       :J3n >
                                                       16   17
UJ

   i

     MILK
*»<--   *A~
                              J
                          I &&.  I ^_^» i
                                      8
                                          '11   *f-.ij  J
                                                         •
10    11   12   13   14
                                                                     15
                                                        16   17
                        FIGURE 3A   SECOND SUNFLOWER CROP.

-------
H
U>
00
                                                                     15    16    17
                                       8
10
11   12    13   14  15
16   17
                        FIGURE4A,  THIRD SUNFLOWER CROP,

-------
   -f   A'^>
    V*  .  i
UO
                                                                     16    17
                       FIGURE 5A  FOURTH SUNFLOWER CROP.

-------
  SELECTED WATER
  RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
  INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
                   /. Report No.
                     3. Accession No.
                                    W
  4. Title
 METHODS FOR PULP AND  PAPER MILL SLUDGE
 UTILIZATION AND DISPOSAL
  7. Author(s)  Thomas R. Aspitarte, Alan  S.  Rosenfeld,
 Bernard  C. Smale, Herman R. Amberg
                                    5. Report Date

                                    6.

                                    8. Performing Organization
                                      Report No.

                                    10. Project No.
  9. Organization

 Crown  Zellerbach Corporation
i Environmental Services  Division
I Camas, Washington
i
1 './.. Sponsoring Organization

 'i. Supplementary Notes

      Environmental Protection Agency Report No. EPA-R2-73-232, May 1973
                                    11. Contract!Grant No.

                                      12040 ESV
                                    13, Type of Report and
                                      Petiotl Covered

                                     Final Report for period
                                     May 1968 - May 1973    \
  16. Abstract
 The disposal of pulp and  paper mill sludge  in a manner which has minimal
 effect on  the environment has become a serious problem.  This project
 was carried  out to evaluate  four methods of disposal, namely:
 (1) incineration in an air entrained dryer-incinerator,  (2)  burning in
 hog fuel boilers,  (3) incorporation into soil as an amendment,  and
 (4; hydromulching for soil stabilization.   Other possible uses  are
 discussed.   Burning sludge in incinerators  costs between $11 and $13/dry
 ton, including all prior  dewatering steps.   Sludge can be made  available
 at various degrees of dewatering at costs of from $7 to $20/dry ton.
 Incorporation into farm soil offers the possibility for disposal of
 large quantities of sludge.   At low levels  (100-200 tons/acre)  crop
 yields are satisfactory,  provided adequate  nitrogen is added.   A high
 level incorporation (600  tons/acre) requires a year of fallow preceding
 crop planting.   Sludge alone  or in combination with bark can be used
 as a hydromulch in establishing grass stands on steep embankments.
 17a. Descriptors
 Sludge Disposal*,  Soil Treatment*, Agriculture, Industrial Wastes,
 Pulp  Wastes*, Sludge*, Wood Wastes*,  Capital Costs,  Operating Costs
  Crop  Production*, Decomposing Organic Matter, Effluents, Odor, Phyto-
  toxicity, Solid Wastes,  Camas Washington, Crown Zellerbach Corp.,
  Cattle Feed, Cattle  Bedding, Nematode Control, Morel Growth, Synthetic
  Potting Media
 17c. CO WRR Field & Group  05E
 18. Availability
19. Security Class.
   (Report)

20. Security Class.
   (Page)
21. No. of
   Pages

22. Price
Send To:
                                               WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTC*-
                                               U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                               WASHINGTON, D, C. 20240
 Abstractor Thomas R. Aspitarte    \Institution
    102 (REV JUNE 1971)
                                                SPO 913.?» f

-------