EM (Effective Micro-Organism) Mudballs To Help Disinfect Contaminated Flood Waters

[webfact]

EM balls produced by royal project

The Nation

The Learning Centre under the Royal Self-Sufficiency Economy in Chumphon's Muang district is set to produce 500,000 EM (effective micro-organism) mudballs to help disinfect contaminated flood waters in many areas, provincial governor Phinij Charoenphanich said yesterday.

The centre has produced around 100,000 of these balls, which are ready for delivery to many provinces in the North and Central regions. One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water and those interested can call 1567.

Wiwat Sallayakamthorn, chairman of the Institute of Sufficiency Economy, launched the project seeking support from many charities and agencies to teach locals the technology. EM mudballs produced under this project have proved to be successful in dealing with contaminated water.

Debris and garbage can be seen floating in the floods in Nakhon Sawan, and so far, only urban areas have been cleared, municipality chief Jitkasem Nirojthanaphat said. He added that though thousands of tonnes of garbage had been collected, there was plenty more floating around.

Jitkasem said eight of Nakhon Sawan's 15 districts were under 2 metres of water and it would take at least a month for the flooding to recede.

Meanwhile, liquid disinfectant is being used in Lop Buri's Tha Wung district to deal with widespread contamination, though garbage collection and initial restoration work is underway. Tha Wung hospital also reopened yesterday after months of closure, though it can only deal with non-serious cases. All complicated cases, including the delivery of children, have been transferred to other facilities.

A restoration plan for historic sites damaged by the flooding has been completed and should be submitted to the Cabinet next week, Culture Minister Sukumol Kunplome said, adding that traditional performances would be provided at shelters and communities no longer flooded to help ease stress for those affected.

National police chief General Priewpan Damapong had mobilised officers in 26 flooded provinces to help affected residents as well as guard the 214 sluice gates and 458 pumping stations from possible destruction by frustrated villagers.

He also ordered police commanders to be prepared to provide security for six months after the floods have receded.

-- The Nation 2011-11-02

[cloudhopper]

"One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water"

That is a very dubious assertion IMO.

[whybother]

"One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water"

That is a very dubious assertion IMO.

4-square metres .... but how deep?

[pedro01]

"One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water"

That is a very dubious assertion IMO.

4-square metres .... but how deep?

errrr..... 4 metres

[whybother]

"One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water"

That is a very dubious assertion IMO.

4-square metres .... but how deep?

errrr..... 4 metres

errr ... where does it say that?

Square is area. Cubic is volume.

[bkkjames]

How do they work on heavy oils, pesticides and other assorted goodies?

[maidu]

contamination is a real big issue, now that much of the water will now be 'standing' for up to several weeks. The water soaks in everywhere - even within concrete walls where it can seep. Where do people defecate? what about dead animals floating/sinking all around? Thail cities and towns are not clean in the best of times. Mud balls? sounds a lot like the little round placebos that Asian pharmacies hand out; they don't do harm, but they do a bit of good because of the psychological effect of people thinking it's helping the symptom.

[pcgeekz05]

Atleast they came up with something useful...... I hope..

contamination is a real big issue, now that much of the water will now be 'standing' for up to several weeks. The water soaks in everywhere - even within concrete walls where it can seep. Where do people defecate? what about dead animals floating/sinking all around? Thail cities and towns are not clean in the best of times. Mud balls? sounds a lot like the little round placebos that Asian pharmacies hand out; they don't do harm, but they do a bit of good because of the psychological effect of people thinking it's helping the symptom.

[geriatrickid]

This article is misleading. If these are the balls made from risk husks (bran) than they are first soaked with bacteria that feed on various organic wastes.(The korean and Japanese versions use clay or molassses). Usually the beasties added are yeast, photgenic bacteria and I think lactobacillus, or whatever the safe bacteria is that makes lactic acid. If they were disinfectants they would kill off the bacteria meant to consume the organic material. I think these are intended for use in standing bodies of water such as fish ponds to control algae and the bacteria that give rise to pond scum. To the best of my knowledge they are not very effective against viruses, molds or fungi.

The benefit will be that the if used in sufficient quantity, the e.coli population should be controllable and the stench of poo will not permeate the air..

[newermonkey]

"One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water"

That is a very dubious assertion IMO.

4-square metres .... but how deep?

4 square meters is 4 square meters whichever way you look at it 1+1+1+1 =4 get it?

[animatic]

The idea is useful, but what is the mechanism they are using.

Really not enough info. But I suppose anything that helps in some manner,

is better than absolutely nothing.

[noahvail]

"One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water"

That is a very dubious assertion IMO.

4-square metres .... but how deep?

4 square meters is 4 square meters whichever way you look at it 1+1+1+1 =4 get it?

Let's just assume the article meant 4 CUBIC meters. They will need about a billion of them to work on all the flooded areas.

Edited November 2, 2011 by noahvail

[whybother]

"One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water"

That is a very dubious assertion IMO.

4-square metres .... but how deep?

4 square meters is 4 square meters whichever way you look at it 1+1+1+1 =4 get it?

But it's nothing in relation to volume of water.

[msg362]

"One EM ball can disinfect 4-square metres of polluted water"

That is a very dubious assertion IMO.

4-square metres .... but how deep?

4 square meters is 4 square meters whichever way you look at it 1+1+1+1 =4 get it?

4 square metres is flat,an area isn't a volume,you need to know how much VOLUME they allegedly can 'disinfect' ( they can't actually but never mind) that is metres CUBED a volume

SQUARE metres is Metre X Metre, CUBIC Metres is Metre X Metre X Metre

Sorry to be so pedantic but it seems it's necessary to spell it out

Edited November 2, 2011 by msg362

[Thai at Heart]

They will largely achieve nothing because there isn't enough bacterial population within them to have any significant impact on the waste etc.

If the water has been stagnant for a very long time, the existing bacteria will have removed most of the dissolved oxygen, so anaerobic bacteria activity takes over, hence the smell. If you add more vegetable material to the water with insufficient oxygen, you will simply remove more oxygen and promote more anaerobic activity in the water and make it even more putrid.

There are other far far more effective products and techniques being used to clean up the mess, it is just they don't get any press. I know, because I am supplying one of them.

[farangnahrak]

I don't think EM Balls actually work, and instead waste volunteer resources when they could be better used for packing sand bags and relief supplies. For example, these two papers say EM balls have almost zero effect for cleaning water:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/ku342v2820237404/

http://wiredspace.wits.ac.za/handle/10539/8556

[farangnahrak]

I just ran into this:

"กล่าวได้ว่าการเติม EM นอกจากจะไม่ช่วยสร้างออกซิเ จนแล้ว ยังส่งผลทำให้เกิดปัญหาน้ำเ น่าเสียที่รุนแรงขึ้นกว่าเด ิมจากการลดลงของปริมาณออกซิ เจนในน้ำ รวมถึงเพิ่มสูงขึ้นของปริมา ณสารอินทรีย์

It can be said that not only does EM not increase [water] oxygen levels, but worsens water pollution by reducing water oxygen levels and increasing water micro-organism levels."

http://www.eng.chula...h%2Fnode%2F3915

Edited November 5, 2011 by farangnahrak

[animatic]

Like I said, not enough actual information about them their content and function.

Clearly the writer intended cubic meters, but bad translation ensued.

If the water is moving and these things can interact with toilet discharge water

and make less the chances of cholera and dysintary for instance, I am all for them.

If they are expected to be used in completely stagnant water, then it's a bad idea because of the oxygen depletion.

Of course while there will be stagnant waters after the lions share of flood waters has finally passed.

As the flood water is still moving NOW, and people are emptying 'chamber pots' out their windows, etc, this may be helpful. If we knew what the hell it actually does.

'Need to know only' feel better Placebo,

or functional, but ill thought out low tech science.

Who can tell from this report?

Edited November 5, 2011 by animatic

[farangnahrak]

Clearly the writer intended cubic meters, but bad translation ensued.

I'm not so sure about that . . . if it only treats the photosynthesizing bacteria type, then it only matters for surface level bacteria (ie the depth doesn't matter). I browsed the website of a company selling these balls, and they claim it can treat 1 square meter (with also no mention of depth).

However, the paper I linked above clearly showed the balls have no effect on surface level cyanobacteria blooms. So go fig . . . This makes me think that scientists had no actual part in making these things . . .

I wonder if it's made by the same company that produces GT200 bomb detectors?

[mrfarang]

The EM balls project is royally sponsored, so it will work. There's no question about it and people should not doubt the ability of the EM balls. Shame on those who cast doubts on this project.

[jomomojo]

EM works to some extent. There are other bioremediation products on the market that are arguably better.

A way to think about how EM works is that instead of killing all microorganisms, it accelerates the growth of "good" bacteria, which overwhelm the population of "bad" bacteria by starving them of food sources. In other words, instead of an anti-biotic, it is a pro-biotic.

As for 4 sq or cubic meters per bokashi ball...it's cubic meters. But its effectiveness on volume of water treated is dependent on many variables, such as sunlight, temperature, pH, and how the bokashi balls are made, to name a few.

The articles linked above do indicate limitations of EM. They are also written by academics who's primary purpose is to disprove a hypothesis. That's what scientists do, and it's not always a bad thing. Food for thought: in the Chula article listed above it critiques EM for reduced dissolved oxygen (DO) levels in water. Of course it does because you are adding bacteria to water. Bacteria feed off DO. Over time though, the DO levels usually rise back up once bacteria levels are stabilized. A quick read of the article gave no indication of time frame. Same for BOD and COD - when first applied those levels will rise, but overtime will fall lower than original. How much time is also dependent on many variables.

The main benefit of EM is that it is relatively easy and inexpensive to make. The main criticism of EM from the scientific community is a lack of peer reviewed efficacy. This is acknowledged by the founder of EM, Dr. Higa. Based on several moths of work related matters on this subject, I feel it's safe to state EM's applicability to the flooding situation here is not a silver bullet, but it's not shooting blanks either. It's reference to being a magic wand bomb sniffer, while understandable, is off base.

The wikipedia entry has a relatively balanced summary of Effective Microorganism

[Thai at Heart]

I just ran into this:

"กล่าวได้ว่าการเติม EM นอกจากจะไม่ช่วยสร้างออกซิเ จนแล้ว ยังส่งผลทำให้เกิดปัญหาน้ำเ น่าเสียที่รุนแรงขึ้นกว่าเด ิมจากการลดลงของปริมาณออกซิ เจนในน้ำ รวมถึงเพิ่มสูงขึ้นของปริมา ณสารอินทรีย์

It can be said that not only does EM not increase [water] oxygen levels, but worsens water pollution by reducing water oxygen levels and increasing water micro-organism levels."

http://www.eng.chula...h%2Fnode%2F3915

As I said, it may well make the situation worse. As for 4 sq m. I wonder how many million, gazzillion they will need to cover this area.

[farangnahrak]

They are also written by academics who's primary purpose is to disprove a hypothesis. That's what scientists do, and it's not always a bad thing.

Only a bad scientist would ignore results that don't favor his hypothesis.

If they worked, there would be scientific literature to support it. I'm not a bio-chemist, but I haven't been able to find a single article stating EM balls can clean waste water. Anyone find any?

[MESmith]

They are also written by academics who's primary purpose is to disprove a hypothesis. That's what scientists do, and it's not always a bad thing.

Only a bad scientist would ignore results that don't favor his hypothesis.

If they worked, there would be scientific literature to support it. I'm not a bio-chemist, but I haven't been able to find a single article stating EM balls can clean waste water. Anyone find any?

EM can be added to septic tanks to help digest the cr@p.

[animatic]

I the Thailand Today locked thread there is a discussion of these with a bit more info.

It most clearly says 5 CUBIC METERS in the discussion.

One thing that worries me is that they leave it to ferment and 'grow white mold or fungus'.

One of my biggest fears from Bangkok post flood is an over abundance of mold/fungus in walls and dark, damp, warm places. Which is almost ANYWHERE in Bangkok. This can be very, very, deadly. I just had to rebuild part of my place because of mold infestation from floods last year.

So we are now throwing fungus ridden rice balls into the water....YIKES.

Yes to the probiotics aspect, but probiotics fights fungus in your colon.

What exactly do these buggers do, and for how long?

[geriatrickid]

They are also written by academics who's primary purpose is to disprove a hypothesis. That's what scientists do, and it's not always a bad thing.

Only a bad scientist would ignore results that don't favor his hypothesis.

If they worked, there would be scientific literature to support it. I'm not a bio-chemist, but I haven't been able to find a single article stating EM balls can clean waste water. Anyone find any?

EM can be added to septic tanks to help digest the cr@p.

Septic tanks are enclosed containers.

The areas where the EM balls will be used are vast open areas with a refreshment rate that will replenish any modest dip in the targeted bacteria.The end result will be minimal impact in those areas with open water flow.

Where the EM balls may prove of use are in the stagnant pools left once the flood waters recede.

The end result will be that the EM balls will be considered "failures", all because they were not used for the intended purpose.

[jomomojo]

They are also written by academics who's primary purpose is to disprove a hypothesis. That's what scientists do, and it's not always a bad thing.

Only a bad scientist would ignore results that don't favor his hypothesis.

If they worked, there would be scientific literature to support it. I'm not a bio-chemist, but I haven't been able to find a single article stating EM balls can clean waste water. Anyone find any?

EM can be added to septic tanks to help digest the cr@p.

There's lots of peer reviewed scientific literature analyzing the use of bacteria to bioremediate wastewater. I've read a lot of it. The conclusions are mixed, but recent developments in the field have indicated the science behind bioremediation to be effective at managing wastewater. Google Scholar it if you have a lot of hours to kill.

As for EM, it is a form of bioremediation. How effective it is and for what applications is up for debate. Attached is an article written by two engineers skeptical of its effectiveness. As noted in the article, using biological agents to treat waste water is not new and has been proven effective in the activated sludge water treatment process for the past 100 years. Also attached is the original study conducted by Dr. Higa if anyone wants some non-light reading.

As mentioned above, throwing it in fast moving water is a waste. HowEffectiveareEM.pdf

C5-10-198.pdf

Edited November 6, 2011 by jomomojo

[farangnahrak]

There's lots of peer reviewed scientific literature analyzing the use of bacteria to bioremediate wastewater. I've read a lot of it. The conclusions are mixed, but recent developments in the field have indicated the science behind bioremediation to be effective at managing wastewater. Google Scholar it if you have a lot of hours to kill.

As mentioned above, throwing it in fast moving water is a waste. HowEffectiveareEM.pdf

I've searched Google Scholar and found no articles supporting the efficacy of EM for waste-water treatment during flooding. Your linked article has no experiments, no references, no peer review, and no real conclusions as to the effectiveness of EM.

The attached paper concludes that adding molasses stunts growth of a particular photosynthetic bacteria by 25% - however it was done in a 10mL test tube in very controlled laboratory settings (ie it doesn't match the flood water environment nor chemistry). Is this particular bacteria even the cause of putrid water here in Thailand?

Edited November 6, 2011 by farangnahrak

[jomomojo]

There's lots of peer reviewed scientific literature analyzing the use of bacteria to bioremediate wastewater. I've read a lot of it. The conclusions are mixed, but recent developments in the field have indicated the science behind bioremediation to be effective at managing wastewater. Google Scholar it if you have a lot of hours to kill.

As mentioned above, throwing it in fast moving water is a waste. HowEffectiveareEM.pdf

I've searched Google Scholar and found no articles supporting the efficacy of EM for waste-water treatment during flooding. Your linked article has no experiments, no references, no peer review, and no real conclusions as to the effectiveness of EM.

The attached paper concludes that adding molasses stunts growth of a particular photosynthetic bacteria by 25% - however it was done in a 10mL test tube in very controlled laboratory settings (ie it doesn't match the flood water environment nor chemistry). Is this particular bacteria even the cause of putrid water here in Thailand?

Re: Google scholar, try "Enzymes and Bioremediation". You will not find anything related to the efficacy of EM. You will find a bunch of dense articles on how enzymes can effectively remediate wastewater under certain conditions. The only connection with EM is that it contains yeast, which is an enzyme. Correlation, not necessarily causation.

Re: certain strains of bacteria. I don't know. Putrid water can be caused by lots of different strains of bacteria. The water would have to be tested and analyzed to answer that question. I

Your point regarding testing in laboratory conditions is very valid - and caused me many hours of headaches. Most test results in this field come from academic laboratories or the companies making these types of products. In a real life situations, like the one we are in now, there are too many different variables that allow for a lot of room of valid skepticism. The only way to find out if it will work or not is to try it.

To clarify, I'm just trying to provide some information based on previous research and experiences using EM and other bioremediation products. I do not favor one over the other. I'm simply saying that if they are used properly they potentially can help. How to use them properly can turn into a very complicated conversation with lots of room for debate. The people who make these products, well, at least some of them, know how to use them.

There was a previous post on this thread from a user who mentioned he/she is supplying a similar product as EM. Maybe they can share more info or send a PM.

[Thai at Heart]

Interesting to see that the EM balls are now being debated in the press and their use is being stopped according to the other paper. Aside from the low likelihood that they will make anything better even in perfect conditions, the great likelihood that they make things worse, surely means they shouldn't be used, or at least under very strict guidelines about where and how to apply them.

However, very interesting that on the TV channels this morning the manufacturers are running around defending it. If only every other solution got so much press. What they desperately need is to boost the dissolved oxygen, although, I haven't seen too many aerators that can effectively aerate 500sq km of water 1m deep.

Edited November 7, 2011 by Thai at Heart