Glenn2
Well-known
Kodak used to market silver recovery filters that were just a canister filled with steel wool. Iron is higher in the electromotive series and replaces the silver in solution. You were meant to pour your exhausted through the filter, then send the filter back to Kodak when its iron was used up.
Some friends built an electroplating device for fixer silver recovery. It worked very well and they were able to get around an ounce per gallon from fixer used on x-ray film. A local company that made high pressure pipe had to x-ray all their pipe to certify its rating and this provided fodder for their machine. The machine used a rotating stack of thin stainless steel disks for the cathode. After ~1/2" of silver had built up, the disks were removed and flexed to break off the metal.
With silver currently at $23.20 a troy ounce recovery is certainly worth while. http://goldinfo.net/gold1.html
Glenn
Some friends built an electroplating device for fixer silver recovery. It worked very well and they were able to get around an ounce per gallon from fixer used on x-ray film. A local company that made high pressure pipe had to x-ray all their pipe to certify its rating and this provided fodder for their machine. The machine used a rotating stack of thin stainless steel disks for the cathode. After ~1/2" of silver had built up, the disks were removed and flexed to break off the metal.
With silver currently at $23.20 a troy ounce recovery is certainly worth while. http://goldinfo.net/gold1.html
Glenn
JohnTF
Veteran
Freakscene
Obscure member
I tested these and the leave the fixer in a bucket with steel wool method. The fixer left after both processes still contains too much fixer to safely discharge under most local laws.
X-ray fixer is typically used a lot more than photographic fixer. A film fixer, for long term stability of the negs, should not have more than 6 g per litre of silver in it. You can, if you are patient enough, recover about 4 g of that - or ~15g/gallon. But there is typically a lot of silver sulfide in it too, so you're getting less silver than you think.
There are better methods for silver recovery, including one outlined here: http://www.japanexposures.com/2007/10/25/disposal-of-consumed-fixer/
Marty
ironhorse
Joe DuPont
Marty, thank you for sharing your expertise in answering this question. I have been looking for a straight answer for a while.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
That was an excellent read from a pretty great period here.
Freakscene
Obscure member
You're welcome. I did environmental assessments for a lot of photo labs back in the day.
The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there. (David Cecil, not LP Hartley as often/usually assumed).
In 40-50 years, half a generation, a lot of 20th century technology and knowledge will be lost, and I don't think there is anything we can do about it.
Marty
charjohncarter
Veteran
I haven't read all the post, so if this is a repeat, jump on me. But there are so few developers in this world today that the impact is next to zero. I recycle my stuff, but it is nothing compared to the cosmetics that are dumped in the SF bay from Oakland.
BernardL
Well-known
Seems to me this discussion is the ecological equivalent of "penny-wise, pound-foolish"
Cadmium-Nickel batteries remained legal in portable tools decades after it was banned in photographic products, and I'm convinced that far more Cadmium was released into Nature from uncontrolled disposal of such tools than ever was from photo papers.
It is (at least here in EU) the perfectly legal use of pesticides in agriculture that has caused an order-of-magnitude decrease in the population of insects (anyone can see just looking at your windscreen during a summer road trip, no rocket science or advanced statistics here), and, as a consequence, birds as well. Not photo chemicals.
Discussing the discharge of photo chemicals from amateur darkrooms is a pastime for a photo forum. Disclosure and message to the holier-than-thou: I took my decades-old Mercury intensifier to a recycing facility, and I reduce my dichromate to Cr(III) before disposal.
Cadmium-Nickel batteries remained legal in portable tools decades after it was banned in photographic products, and I'm convinced that far more Cadmium was released into Nature from uncontrolled disposal of such tools than ever was from photo papers.
It is (at least here in EU) the perfectly legal use of pesticides in agriculture that has caused an order-of-magnitude decrease in the population of insects (anyone can see just looking at your windscreen during a summer road trip, no rocket science or advanced statistics here), and, as a consequence, birds as well. Not photo chemicals.
Discussing the discharge of photo chemicals from amateur darkrooms is a pastime for a photo forum. Disclosure and message to the holier-than-thou: I took my decades-old Mercury intensifier to a recycing facility, and I reduce my dichromate to Cr(III) before disposal.
peterm1
Veteran
How bad is film/darkroom chemistry for the environment?
Given almost no one uses it anymore (comparatively speaking). Not very. Don't obsess.
Given almost no one uses it anymore (comparatively speaking). Not very. Don't obsess.
traveler_101
American abroad
Quite probably true but I don't like violating the law. Is there anything wrong with collecting the used fixer and bringing it to a hazardous waste collection site? That's what I have been doing. What do they do with it? Should I affix a sticker: "contains silver"? Currently I have written "photographic materials" and "poisonous" on the bottle. Most of the stuff in the collection shed where I drop off the fixer is classified as solvents, oils, paints etc. No specific place for fixer. I put it under solvents -
What about D-76? I am reluctant to put that down the drain though I have done - mixed with stop bath (I use diluted vinegar) which supposedly compensates for the alkaline nature of the developer. But the developer also has carcinogens in it - according to the label. I am planning on using Fomadon LQN (like Ilfosol 3) and Adox HR developer. What to do with these poisons?
skopar steve
Well-known
What about toners. I hear they are dangerous.