If you need serious nitrogen removal....

Don't monkey around! 

Hidden camera catches monkey wiring control panel

These are cold weather results from a real Eliminite system serving a small restaurant.  And, it does not have a phone line connected to it. 

That whole phone line thing has real Big Brother feel to me anyway....Think about it.  Like, do they know how many times you use the toilet?  Or how long you stay in the shower? Is there anything in your home that is gathering and sending personal data night and day to some unknown person somewhere? 

Don't we generally refer to that as spyware, phishing, a virus?  Eavesdropping.....how about an invasion of your privacy?

Eliminite is more reliable, has better results and is less expensive.   And, we respect your privacy.

More Real-World Eliminite Results

"Blind Samples" samples were collected by State Officials from three systems on the same day.  All three are single family residences in similar locations and have been in use for several years.  System N and System F both have NSF 40 and 245. Which system has the best total nitrogen results? 

System N effluent contains TWICE the nitrogen as the Eliminite system and System F effluent has THREE TIMES the nitrogen as the Eliminite.  This is not a one time occurrence, Eliminite consistently beats the others.  Keep in mind, these tests were taken in warm weather....once the temperature falls a bit, N and F results degrade steeply.  A recent cold weather (January in Montana) sample from a single family residence on Montana:  13 mg/L total nitrogen.  Even our inexpensive standard residential models in the long bitter cold of Montana winters run around 12-15 mg/L total nitrogen.  If you need it, we can easily obtain single digit results. Consistently and reliably.

Capital cost for all three are close but I have seen cost estimates for the others and we even beat them on price.  Electrical costs for the other two are probably 5-8 times higher than Eliminite and our systems require far less maintenance. 

So why are the other companies so big and well known?  One word:  Lobbyists.  They all have government relations departments that push and manipulate the regs to favor their particular stinkbox.  Just look it up on their websites.   Eliminite out performs most onsite systems and, if you factor in cost, it may be the best value in onsite treatment technology available, but we are at a competitive disadvantage because we don't have a team of lobbyists providing favors to the gullible government officials they were able to inveigle with their silver tongues.

I am working on obtaining an approval in Maryland (they have HUGE onsite problems there which are not being helped by the fact that the state is forced to water down their regs because the approved systems cannot meet the standards).  I was informed that the manufacturers of the existing systems there would likely sue the state if we were even allowed in for an test run.  Sounds like the work of lobbyists to me. 

In Montana, System N and F, last time I looked, do not have a single installation that even comes close to meeting our liberal standard of 24 mg/L TN. Not one.  In fact, most of the really fancy filter fabric contraptions can't meet that standard either (This leads to monkeying around with the samples so they can claim a 60% reduction in TN.  If I user their numbers for influent strength, Eliminite generally obtains an 80-90% reduction in nitrogen......you guys can't beat us so put on some dry  "huggies", change the sheets and stop your whining.)  

If you are tired of hearing all their excuses about high cost, paying dearly for inferior results, putting up with all the maintenance expense, the smell, the noise, high electric bills, I you have "seven tons of toxic peat moss" rotting in your yard (I'll write more about that later. you can take a look at Leesburg Today 7/19/07 if you are interested), if "fluffing" little foam croutons sounds stupid to you too, if you can't stand having those guys in your backyard hosing off  fish tank filters full of feculent feces, if pumping sewage on sandboxes just does not seem to make sense, you can call or write to me, I'll tell it like it is.  I want to show you real world results that come from reliable designs and expert engineering.  I can show you our system that is biologically complex and mechanically simple. (Thanks to my good friend Richard for that line).  Whatever you do, don't commit intellectual suicide by swallowing anything these guys try to feed you without questioning it.  Ask them how their system compares to Eliminite and watch them pucker up...or say, "Oh..I never heard of them."   They have heard of us...they just don't want YOU to hear of us.

Green Plastic Tanks and Pipes Everywhere

I took a photo of a system that made me laugh.  It's one of those "pod" types with lots of green plastic tanks and pipes everywhere.  In fact, in the photo, you can't even tell which pipes go to which tanks.  The system was pretty large and I couldn't get all of in the photo.  But, it really paints a picture of what is wrong with this industry.  Now, I am going out on a limb here, and you will probably recognize the manufacturer, but hey, this is the world wide web and people have a right to know and a right to see these kinds of contraptions. You may even recognize the people in the picture.  The photo is below.

I gotcha', didn't I?    But you already had a picture in your mind...

Great Article--worth the time!

I couldn't have said it better myself:

Entrepreneurs Under Attack

"Every day, federal, state, and local governments stifle small businesses to privilege well-connected incumbent companies. It's a system of protectionism for influential insiders who don't want competition."

First Sample 98% Nitrification, Second Sample 80% Reduction in TOTAL Nitrogen

I wrote about the highway rest area wastewater treatments systems we designed and built for the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT).  (MDT made a determination that it was in the best interest of the public that Eliminite be the sole source provider of wastewater treatment systems for all its facilities.  This "Public Interest Finding" was approved by the Federal Highway Administration.) 

This particular WWTS was started in the winter and, at this location, it gets cold and stays cold.  We collected a sample in January which showed that even in the extreme cold, the system was providing about 98% ammonia conversion to nitrate. 

We collected the second sample a week ago and found that the systems nitrogen removal was already at 80%.   I expect the Nitrogen levels to continue to fall.

This is excellent treatment considering the high nitrogen concentration of the incoming wastewater.  In fact, we are already operating better, with a cold weather startup, than most "advanced" systems receiving residential wastewater.  (take a look at the "Best Available Technology" data from an NSF 245 system I posted a few weeks ago.)

Here is some icing on the cake.....No alarms, no failures, no problems. We started the system and it has been operating perfectly.  No media to wash off...no cubes to fluff.

Yes.  This has really irritated the peddlers of competing systems.  You can imagine the incessant puling and crying.  They are even trying to have the PIF rescinded.  The fact is, we received the job through a fair bidding process.  Eliminite came in tens of thousands of dollars less and we were awarded BOTH jobs saving the taxpayers tons of money AND using local suppliers to the max.  But they have friends in high places...so the hell with the best interest of the taxpayers. 

I did have to point out some shenanigans with one vendor however.  The peddler sort of ignored the engineers design flow and submitted his proposal with a system that was 1/3 of what the  manufacturer would require.  I guess he figured that he would spring the news on the taxpayers later.   My guess is they would have blamed the upgraded system on the Department of Environmental Quality.   I pointed this little "oversight" out to the contractor and he asked the vendor for a system meeting the engineers design requirements.  You can guess what happened next,  the correctly designed system was much more expensive than the Eliminite system and Eliminite won the job.  Oh...but the whining....I would bet there isn't a single pair of dry big boy "Huggies" in their entire organization!  Wait until they find out that we just beat them on a school wastewater treatment system yesterday.

I am always happy to discuss how our little Montana company is able to provide system that out perform the others.  So give me a call...fire off an email.

Montana's highway rest areas are more picturesque than other states resorts!

They have better wastewater treatment systems also. 

Eliminite has been selected as provider of all wastewater treatment facilities for Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) highway rest areas and other facilities.  Through its process, in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration, MDT determined that it is in the best interest of the public for Eliminite to provide wastewater treatment systems for all its facilities. The systems are compact, reliable and specifically designed to treat the high nitrogen wastewater (ammonia =180 - 250 mg/L) common to highway rest areas. 

***UPDATE***

(The prime engineers on this project refused to collect actual wastewater influent samples and instead, guessed at the BOD and TN values.  They are not good guessers, Actual BOD Influent averages about 1200 mg/L.  Actual TN Influent averages about 450 mg/L)

The foot print of the entire treatment system is about 20' x 40' and uses all locallly supplied precast concrete tanks.  That makes good sense for our local economy because area suppliers can provide equipment rather than shipping money out of state to import equipment from out of state, or country, suppliers. 

We can do this in any location using locally available tanks, and components because the design of the system is flexible and can be modified to accommodate almost any tank configuration.  This not only provides a boost to the local guys but also results in significantly lower overall cost.  As you all know, "pod" type systems must be shipped in from somewhere.

This system was started and sampled in the dead of winter and is already achieving about 98 % conversion of ammonia to nitrate.  No alarms, no malfunctions, no phone dialer.  The average mean temp was around 20 degrees F for the operational period.

You can check out  the pressurized drainfield at  http://www.squirtonsite.blogspot.com/

Is NSF certification anything more than a "Pay to Play scheme"?

I am sure many of you have asked the same question.  How often do we hear of NSF certified systems that fail to meet even the most magnanimous state standards?  The game is interesting, states develop standards for say, nitrogen, which, I have to assume are based upon some need for a nitrogen standard.  They don't pull these things out of mid-air...do they?    Onsite systems are then supposedly required to comply with the standards.  This seems to be true unless the system has an NSF certification.  Once the system is approved by the state, the certification trumps any actual field data however consistently bad it is.  I was told by one regulator that once the system is in the state with NSF, it is nearly impossible to get them out due to the threat of lawsuits by the aggrieved manufacturer.  This means that while the system is "certified" on paper to meet the standard, the actual data show something different that the regulatory community can not or will not correct. 

NSF, from what I have heard uses municipal wastewater that has been through a primary sedimentation process.  This sounds like "normal' residential wastewater, don't you think? 

The lowest flow certification is for 500 gal/day.  Any person that knows anything about this field knows that homes NEVER produce this much wastewater unless something in the home is broken.  If your state standards say they do, your standards are wrong.  Seriously, we are talking about potty breaks, showers and laundry not Blue Fin Tuna farming. Oh....Do Americans really still have "laundry day"?  I suppose so but only if the laundry is done at the local laundromat.  Right?  Think about it.

Why would "laundry day" matter?  I suppose if the system happens to be a Failure -prone Aerated Septic Tank, the worry would be washout. (although, since those things don't work anyway they might as well be clean and meadow fresh)  If we are talking about the systems using filter fabric the concern is hydraulic overload and biological clogging of the fabric. 
So I take a look at this system, call it brand x, and review its sample data from a single family home producing around 150-200 gal/day and can see that it doesn't have a prayer of meeting the 245 standard of 50% removal it reportedly received while treating 500 gal/day in the NSF program.  What is the real story here?   

Just for fun I have pasted sample data from an NSF certified system (in red below) and sample data from a non-NSF certified Eliminite 120C (in green) collected during the same third party test. Remember this is ACTUAL data collected by a state funded third party.  The NSF system is listed, for instance,  as Best Available Technology (BAT) In Maryland.  Really, Best??

Eliminite 120 C Standard Model

Date          TN

7/10/2009 11.928



7/17/2009 6.475


7/24/2009 5.171


7/31/2009 4.740

8/7/2009 4.677

8/14/2009 5.084


8/21/2009 8.685


8/31/2009 3.639


9/4/2009 10.224


9/11/2009 8.345


9/18/2009 9.213


9/30/2009 4.568


10/9/2009 6.580


10/16/2009 7.120


10/23/2009 3.520


10/30/2009 11.345


3/25/2010 11.475


4/16/2010 13.460


4/29/2010 6.370


4/30/2010 11.280


5/4/2010 9.680


5/11/2010 10.111


5/18/2010 7.870


5/25/2010 3.430


6/1/2001 4.560


6/8/2010 4.670


6/15/2010 5.375

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 
NSF 245 Certified System
Date            TN
7/10/2009 33.541



7/17/2009 60.700


7/24/2009 85.064


7/31/2009 69.130


8/7/2009 46.800


8/14/2009 34.991


8/21/2009 40.183


8/31/2009 56.636


9/4/2009 51.200


9/11/2009 66.248


9/18/2009 56.500


9/30/2009 67.000


10/9/2009 40.100


10/16/2009 34.700


10/23/2009 33.270


10/30/2009 21.338


3/25/2010 35.100


4/16/2010 69.200


4/29/2010 78.200


4/30/2010 84.800


5/4/2010 67.230


5/11/2010 35.700


5/18/2010 34.900


5/25/2010 66.783


6/1/2001 54.321


6/8/2010 33.760


6/15/2010 67.000