mooge
Well-known
Hi all,
I figure when I pour 600mL of HC-110, Dil-B down the drain (or dead fixer, or that pink stuff that washes out ), it's probably not going to create some sort of environmental disaster, but it's probably not that great.
but just how bad are the chemicals involved? anyone know?
cheers.
I figure when I pour 600mL of HC-110, Dil-B down the drain (or dead fixer, or that pink stuff that washes out ), it's probably not going to create some sort of environmental disaster, but it's probably not that great.
but just how bad are the chemicals involved? anyone know?
cheers.
mooge
Well-known
nyah, I bike and bus to school. 
I was gonna put this in the Film vs Digi section... but such debates are kind of inconclusive- it would really depend on how you shoot.
... don't you guys have electronics recycling in the states?
I was gonna put this in the Film vs Digi section... but such debates are kind of inconclusive- it would really depend on how you shoot.
... don't you guys have electronics recycling in the states?
lacavol
Established
We have recycling here in LA, just drop off any Saturday that it isn't raining at various stations. Of course it rarely rains here in the desert. Water is a major import. As Mark Twain said "Whiskey is for drinking and water is for fighting."
You don't know where it goes from there though, there have been news investigations. I think it's getting better as the private firms are on notice.
You don't know where it goes from there though, there have been news investigations. I think it's getting better as the private firms are on notice.
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
nyah, I bike and bus to school.
I was gonna put this in the Film vs Digi section... but such debates are kind of inconclusive- it would really depend on how you shoot.
... don't you guys have electronics recycling in the states?
I'm fairly certain that the environmental impact of film is quite a bit less than digital. This is based on nothing but my own assumptions, but I have a feeling that it is true. Just buying something new is environmentally (not to mention financially) detrimental.
Last edited by a moderator:
heatherselkie
Member
Hmm, one of the things to lure people away from film was the environmental factor. my mom had a dark room for years but got sick from the chemicals-but we are a sickly hypersensitive allergic bunch my family.
Last edited by a moderator:
jpberger
Established
This is all a little beside the point insofar as the real issue with darkroom chemistry is that it needs to be treated with respect and disposed of responsibly. The potential for environmental or health effects is real and should not be trivialised, yet if chemistry is handled properly it's not dangerous. Small amounts of fixer arn't a big deal but silver persists in the aquatic environment so large amounts (say from a dentists office or big lab can be a problem) you might as well give it to a photolab to get rid of-- they should be happy to do it because the silver is reclaimed for profit. Developer is a potential alergen so you should avoid all skin contact and inhalation. Proper ventilation is really important. Developer is also a problem insofar as it's a reducing agent-- if you were to say dump a whole bottle of rodinal down the drain you could potentially be killing fish big time by sucking all the oxygen out of a water body. However by diluting your spent developer with lots and lots of water you minimise the potential for harm-- run the water starting several minutes before you begin to dump. Stop is acetic acid -- i.e vinegar so again if dilute not a big deal. Film doesn't need to be washed with a million gallons of water- the ilford wash technique of filling the tank inverting five times and repeating the fill and dump cycle with 10-20-and 40 inversions works just fine and uses only five or so litres.
Last edited:
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
Yeah, this is a question that has crossed my mind often since I started home-developing my B&W and colour film.
I have taken some of my used photo chemicals to the haz-mat waste service here (run by my municipal gov't -- they take noxious stuff for free to keep it out of the waste stream) but generally I dispose down the drain.
I did lots of research about this online earlier this year because I didn't want to screw up the environment with my hobby. Basically, for small-scale users (like us) things can pretty much go down the sink with lots of water -- as was stated here earlier.
The only thing that really concerns me is the C-41 kit I use -- the box has a big ominous "X" on it, as well as an evil graphic of a dead tree and a dead fish. I think the developer & blix in C-41 kits is considerably more toxic than B&W, but that's just a hunch.
I just know that when I'm pouring that warm Blix into my Paterson tank, the horrific smell tells me there's something very bad about that stuff...
I have taken some of my used photo chemicals to the haz-mat waste service here (run by my municipal gov't -- they take noxious stuff for free to keep it out of the waste stream) but generally I dispose down the drain.
I did lots of research about this online earlier this year because I didn't want to screw up the environment with my hobby. Basically, for small-scale users (like us) things can pretty much go down the sink with lots of water -- as was stated here earlier.
The only thing that really concerns me is the C-41 kit I use -- the box has a big ominous "X" on it, as well as an evil graphic of a dead tree and a dead fish. I think the developer & blix in C-41 kits is considerably more toxic than B&W, but that's just a hunch.
I just know that when I'm pouring that warm Blix into my Paterson tank, the horrific smell tells me there's something very bad about that stuff...
Steve Karr
Film tank shaker
I recycle & am Vegetarian ... but I also shoot 8x10 wet plates so I think its a wash...
Last edited by a moderator:
sam_m
Well-known
I live on rain water and have on-site sewage (septic tank, ALL water is recycled and used on the lawn and trees, not the veges though, just to be safe!) so I walk down to the road and splash it across the road. I figure when it rains it will get so diluted that it will be no worse than the polutants in the rain itself.
Freakscene
Obscure member
I am an environmental scientist. I frequently work on determining safe release concentrations for toxicants. What is safe depends on what you are discharging and where it goes.
Photo chemicals are fairly innocuous. The ANZECC Guideline, one of the scientifically best supported systems for determining safe release concentrations of toxicants, says that it is safe to release 1.4 micrograms per litre of silver into a marine environment and 0.05 micro grams per litre into freshwater.
http://www.mincos.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/316136/gfmwq-guidelines-vol2-8-3b.pdf
But that is just silver. Silver plus silver thiosulfate might be lower. Or higher. We need to work on that. And that's at the discharge to the environemnt; and it depends on processing. So it depends on where what you discharge goes, what happens to it before it is discharged
The safe discharge concentrations for everything else in photography are higher. But also remember that using is not manufacturing. Ektalure (now discontinued) had chromium in it, and Neopan 400 120 format had perfluoroctanesulfornic acid (PFOS) in it, both of which led to the demise of those products. They are both environmentally damaging and hazardous for human health.
I have never seen a total energy + chemical analysis from manufacture to purchase for any photo products, but I am guessing that if comparing the old tech from the analogue media vs the plastic and new tech digital media, the digital would be worse. The components take more making. But it's just a guess. I could work it out - seriously, that's what I do - but I'd need data that I think Kodak, Fuji, Epson, Nikon, Canon etc would be reticent to give out. In 50 years all companies will give it freely, or we'll be back to living in caves.
That might not be so bad.
Marty
Photo chemicals are fairly innocuous. The ANZECC Guideline, one of the scientifically best supported systems for determining safe release concentrations of toxicants, says that it is safe to release 1.4 micrograms per litre of silver into a marine environment and 0.05 micro grams per litre into freshwater.
http://www.mincos.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/316136/gfmwq-guidelines-vol2-8-3b.pdf
But that is just silver. Silver plus silver thiosulfate might be lower. Or higher. We need to work on that. And that's at the discharge to the environemnt; and it depends on processing. So it depends on where what you discharge goes, what happens to it before it is discharged
The safe discharge concentrations for everything else in photography are higher. But also remember that using is not manufacturing. Ektalure (now discontinued) had chromium in it, and Neopan 400 120 format had perfluoroctanesulfornic acid (PFOS) in it, both of which led to the demise of those products. They are both environmentally damaging and hazardous for human health.
I have never seen a total energy + chemical analysis from manufacture to purchase for any photo products, but I am guessing that if comparing the old tech from the analogue media vs the plastic and new tech digital media, the digital would be worse. The components take more making. But it's just a guess. I could work it out - seriously, that's what I do - but I'd need data that I think Kodak, Fuji, Epson, Nikon, Canon etc would be reticent to give out. In 50 years all companies will give it freely, or we'll be back to living in caves.
That might not be so bad.
Marty
Last edited:
btgc
Veteran
Bring exhausted fixer for proper disposal (I take it to local photolab), silver is extracted from it, too.
Last edited by a moderator:
George Bonanno
Well-known
I'm serious...
I'm serious...
Ya know, this year I dumped most of my expired photo chems on my onion, basil and tomato plants. That included many gallons of HC110B, Rodinal 1:31, Ilford rapid fixer and Photoflo. The onions died almost overnight but the tomatoes and basil survived very nicely. In fact the tomato plants harvested a bumper crop. It's now Fall here in NNJ and there are still around 40+ green tomatoes on the vines ready for the grill before the frost sets in. So... what's the story Jerry ?
My take is it's all the good stuff from that 120 Lucky and Shanghai filum I've been shooting in Brooklyn and NYC events.
I'm serious...
Ya know, this year I dumped most of my expired photo chems on my onion, basil and tomato plants. That included many gallons of HC110B, Rodinal 1:31, Ilford rapid fixer and Photoflo. The onions died almost overnight but the tomatoes and basil survived very nicely. In fact the tomato plants harvested a bumper crop. It's now Fall here in NNJ and there are still around 40+ green tomatoes on the vines ready for the grill before the frost sets in. So... what's the story Jerry ?
My take is it's all the good stuff from that 120 Lucky and Shanghai filum I've been shooting in Brooklyn and NYC events.
MartinP
Veteran
Someone stated that silver is a dangerous heavy-metal. No it's not a heavy-metal and no it's not especially dangerous (unless a large lump of it falls on your head - it is certainly quite dense, but that is not the chemical meaning of "heavy-metal"). The commercial limits on fixer are, for example, due to large lab-sized quantities of the silver compounds working as a bactericide and zapping some of the bacteria used for sh!t-digestion in your sewage works.
The biggest use of modern fixer (ammonium thiocyanate) is swimming pools. You swim in it, rather more diluted of course. It is used to regulate the chlorine etc. in the water.
Stop bath is the stuff you put on your chips (fries for the N.Americans).
Developers vary. If you really want to use a mercury-based process from 150 years ago then you can, and could end up as "mad as a hatter" (Google it for an interesting example of industrial pollution). Modern commercial developers are relatively innocuous, especially in amateur quantities. You can look at Xtol or Ilfosol for easy-to-use ascorbate (vitamin-c) based developers, for example.
The biggest use of modern fixer (ammonium thiocyanate) is swimming pools. You swim in it, rather more diluted of course. It is used to regulate the chlorine etc. in the water.
Stop bath is the stuff you put on your chips (fries for the N.Americans).
Developers vary. If you really want to use a mercury-based process from 150 years ago then you can, and could end up as "mad as a hatter" (Google it for an interesting example of industrial pollution). Modern commercial developers are relatively innocuous, especially in amateur quantities. You can look at Xtol or Ilfosol for easy-to-use ascorbate (vitamin-c) based developers, for example.
Last edited:
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Thanks, Marty. I'd been waiting for your $0.02.
mooge
Well-known
wow, lots of info here...
... and I just noticed I hit the 300 post mark recently. man, I better get back to work!
thanks !
... and I just noticed I hit the 300 post mark recently. man, I better get back to work!
thanks !
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Marty,
This is indeed what most people tend to forget. Same with cadmium. Very nasty stuff -- but in the quantities in which it was found in Super XX and Forte Polywarmtone, substantially irrelevant in the home darkroom. It was the manufacturing plant that mattered.
A story that will amuse you concerns Ilford. They concentrate their waste water and store it in a cistern for regular collection. Years ago, they got a 'phone call from the disposal agency asking about the cadmium content. It took a while before they worked out that they must indeed have put some cadmium into the water, processing Polywarmtone. What they couldn't work out was how the hell anyone could detect this, even in concentrated waste water. The answer, apparently, was gas chromatography, and the concentration was parts per billion.
Later, they found that one of their American customers thought that 3 parts per billion was a higher concentration than 3 parts per million. Well, a billion is bigger, isn't it... Maybe he sat on the waste-water management board.
A rule of thumb I've used for years is that laws banning all release of photographic chemicals into municipal sewage systems were passed by arts graduates, whereas ones that limit discharges were passed by those who knew what they were talking about.
And Martin's point about silver not being a heavy metal is one I've given up trying to get across to anyone who doesn't have at least a modicum of scientific knowledge. My favourite silver figure is from the CDC in Atlanta. As far as I recall, spills of under 1 tonne don't need to be reported. I love the idea of spilling a tonne of silver and not bothering to pick it up.
Cheers,
R.
Freakscene
Obscure member
Hi Roger,
Absolutely. Users generally don't get regulated anyway, even if it's illegal to dump photochemicals try doing it and see if you get caught (I don't seriously recommend that).
Yes, unfortunately LCMS and GCMS methods are too sensitive when you want to be practical and not sensitive enough when you want to be scientifically precise. It's been a fact of my existence for a long time. Similar happens with DNA based detection systems for organisms.
I suspect some controls were passed when there were a lot more darkrooms. The weakest link in the average assessment chain is the estimation of use and the frequency or coincidence (Sting et al. would call it synchronicity) of release. These inherent difficulties mean you need to set controls based on overestimates of the number of darkrooms and assuming almost everyone puts their chemicals down the sink at the same time. It's a general problem with pollution impact assessment. It's also safer to say "no" and to try to scare _most_ users away from discharging. Ultimately most people are compliant, even if they don't care too much about the environment.
Having said that, I don't think that I'd be super keen on eating vegetables or fruit regularly waters with fixer. The reality of "developing" (sorry, too tempting) argyria - silver accumulation, characterised by skin going dark bluish-black in the sun - however, is mainly cosmetically impairing rather than toxic. Blumberg and Carey (1934) reported argyria in a severely underweight adult female who had ingested about 6.4 g of silver nitrate over a year. East et al. (1980) reported symptoms of argyria in one adult after 6 months of exposure to unknown quantities of silver acetate. Stay away from large amounts of organically chelated or colloidal silver, or you'll go blue. But you would have a hard time making yourself sick, let alone dying.
Silver is toxic to bacteria. The acute toxicity of silver compounds to higher animals appears to occur only when HUGE amounts are consumed. Oral LD50 values for mice reported for colloidal silver and silver nitrate are 100 mg/kg and 129 mg/kg, respectively; for silver cyanide, the LD50 for rats is 125 mg/kg. An LDLO of 2820 mg/kg for rats is reported for the relatively insoluble silver oxide (Venugopal and Luckey, 1978). Similar values for humans are likely and I can find no reports in the literature of acute silver poisoning in a human.
Print carefully, wear gloves, don't drink from the trays. Obey the law to avoid prosecution. Enjoy.
Marty
Blumberg, H. and T.N. Carey. 1934. Argyremia: Detection of unsuspected and obscure argyria by the spectrographic demonstration of high blood silver. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 103: 1521-1524.
East, B.W., K. Boddy, E.D. Williams, et al. 1980. Silver retention, total body silver and tissue silver concentrations in argyria associated with exposure to an anti-smoking remedy containing silver acetate. Clin. Exp. Dermatol. 5: 305-311.
Venugopal, B. and T.D. Luckey. 1978. Metal Toxicity in Mammals: 2. Chemical Toxicity of Metals and Metalloids, Chapter 1. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 32-36.
Absolutely. Users generally don't get regulated anyway, even if it's illegal to dump photochemicals try doing it and see if you get caught (I don't seriously recommend that).
Yes, unfortunately LCMS and GCMS methods are too sensitive when you want to be practical and not sensitive enough when you want to be scientifically precise. It's been a fact of my existence for a long time. Similar happens with DNA based detection systems for organisms.
I suspect some controls were passed when there were a lot more darkrooms. The weakest link in the average assessment chain is the estimation of use and the frequency or coincidence (Sting et al. would call it synchronicity) of release. These inherent difficulties mean you need to set controls based on overestimates of the number of darkrooms and assuming almost everyone puts their chemicals down the sink at the same time. It's a general problem with pollution impact assessment. It's also safer to say "no" and to try to scare _most_ users away from discharging. Ultimately most people are compliant, even if they don't care too much about the environment.
Having said that, I don't think that I'd be super keen on eating vegetables or fruit regularly waters with fixer. The reality of "developing" (sorry, too tempting) argyria - silver accumulation, characterised by skin going dark bluish-black in the sun - however, is mainly cosmetically impairing rather than toxic. Blumberg and Carey (1934) reported argyria in a severely underweight adult female who had ingested about 6.4 g of silver nitrate over a year. East et al. (1980) reported symptoms of argyria in one adult after 6 months of exposure to unknown quantities of silver acetate. Stay away from large amounts of organically chelated or colloidal silver, or you'll go blue. But you would have a hard time making yourself sick, let alone dying.
Silver is toxic to bacteria. The acute toxicity of silver compounds to higher animals appears to occur only when HUGE amounts are consumed. Oral LD50 values for mice reported for colloidal silver and silver nitrate are 100 mg/kg and 129 mg/kg, respectively; for silver cyanide, the LD50 for rats is 125 mg/kg. An LDLO of 2820 mg/kg for rats is reported for the relatively insoluble silver oxide (Venugopal and Luckey, 1978). Similar values for humans are likely and I can find no reports in the literature of acute silver poisoning in a human.
Print carefully, wear gloves, don't drink from the trays. Obey the law to avoid prosecution. Enjoy.
Marty
Blumberg, H. and T.N. Carey. 1934. Argyremia: Detection of unsuspected and obscure argyria by the spectrographic demonstration of high blood silver. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 103: 1521-1524.
East, B.W., K. Boddy, E.D. Williams, et al. 1980. Silver retention, total body silver and tissue silver concentrations in argyria associated with exposure to an anti-smoking remedy containing silver acetate. Clin. Exp. Dermatol. 5: 305-311.
Venugopal, B. and T.D. Luckey. 1978. Metal Toxicity in Mammals: 2. Chemical Toxicity of Metals and Metalloids, Chapter 1. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 32-36.
Last edited:
tammons
Established
B+W chems not bad so down the drain they go.
I use mostly coffee for developer anyway so thats no big deal.
Color slide and C41 chems are toxic from what I understand.
Silver is a heavy metal but not toxic to the human body in the way
other heavy metals are like cadmium and lead etc.
Silver nitrate drops are put into newborn babies eyes
in the hospital to kill bacteria etc.
Silver kills bacteria, fungus etc on contact, IE colloidal silver is commonly available in healthfood stores.
That said it might not be a good idea to flush a lot of fixer into your septic tank since that works on a bacterial reaction.
Silver will cause Argyrosis (blue skin) if you get enough of it into your body, which I think is around 4-8 grams. Basically your skin turns bluish purple but you will not die from it.
People that typically get Argyrosis get it from drinking too much and usually too strong colloidal silver home made solutions.
Colloidal silver solution is used to treat lyme disease, and works wonders on fungal infections. Cured my constant ear problems with 3 drops in each ear. It is also used as a water purifier.
Where people get into trouble is when they start drinking large doses of home made super strong colloidal silver to treat such things as lyme disease.
I calc'd out roughly one day that to get 4 grams of silver into your body at normal colloidal silver concentrations you would need to drink a couple of gallons a day for 10 years.
Here is a photo of a blue guy.
http://www.silvermedicine.org/argyria.html
I use mostly coffee for developer anyway so thats no big deal.
Color slide and C41 chems are toxic from what I understand.
Silver is a heavy metal but not toxic to the human body in the way
other heavy metals are like cadmium and lead etc.
Silver nitrate drops are put into newborn babies eyes
in the hospital to kill bacteria etc.
Silver kills bacteria, fungus etc on contact, IE colloidal silver is commonly available in healthfood stores.
That said it might not be a good idea to flush a lot of fixer into your septic tank since that works on a bacterial reaction.
Silver will cause Argyrosis (blue skin) if you get enough of it into your body, which I think is around 4-8 grams. Basically your skin turns bluish purple but you will not die from it.
People that typically get Argyrosis get it from drinking too much and usually too strong colloidal silver home made solutions.
Colloidal silver solution is used to treat lyme disease, and works wonders on fungal infections. Cured my constant ear problems with 3 drops in each ear. It is also used as a water purifier.
Where people get into trouble is when they start drinking large doses of home made super strong colloidal silver to treat such things as lyme disease.
I calc'd out roughly one day that to get 4 grams of silver into your body at normal colloidal silver concentrations you would need to drink a couple of gallons a day for 10 years.
Here is a photo of a blue guy.
http://www.silvermedicine.org/argyria.html
Last edited:
Freakscene
Obscure member
"Heavy metal" is an undefined term. Silver does not biologically act like some other transition metals like chromium that are highly acutely and chronically toxic and accumulate in biological systems.
John H. Duffus ""Heavy metals" a meaningless term? (IUPAC Technical Report)" Pure and Applied Chemistry, 2002, Vol. 74, pp. 793-807.
Marty
John H. Duffus ""Heavy metals" a meaningless term? (IUPAC Technical Report)" Pure and Applied Chemistry, 2002, Vol. 74, pp. 793-807.
Marty
kossi008
Photon Counter
I take my silver to the local municipal waste disposal place in canisters marked "contains silver". The guys down at the plant take it, listen to my explanation and say "OK", but their faces say "Yeah, whatever", so I have the strong suspicion that I am in fact pouring it down the drain after all... well, I tried...