(Dear Hugo: you suggested to Hanns-André to move your discussion to e-mail. Please don't do that, as your discussion is indeed interesting for many people. Rather, I have re-arranged the threads. I have moved the part on the Terra Preta Conference in Hamburg to Events and to WG 5, and I have re-named this thread to match better what we discussed.)
Dear all,
It is good that we are having this conversation about Terra Preta Sanitation. I would like to go back to some points Ralf made:
Ralf said:
We can also call it Black Earth but why should all be in English? This is the inspiration of the probably most sucessful sanitation and biowaste management ever on Earth. In order to honour those Indios we use this name.
Ha-ha, isn't it funny to use a Portuguese term to "honor" the Indios (= (language of the conquerers)?

For Brazilian people, I believe that Terra Preta sounds exactly the same as for English people Black Earth...
It covers around 10% of the Amazon region around Manaus, not of all the vast Amazonian Rainforests.
What is the significance of Manaus in particular? How can one then know if it is a big area (in the scheme of things) or not? If I am not wrong then Manaus is a city in the center of the Brazilian Amazon, the entire administrative region "Metropolitana de Manaus" has "101,474 km ²" (from Wikipedia), representing 1.5% of the Amazon (7 million km ² according to Wikipedia dt). Today, it has 2 million inhabitants (not for TP reasons but because free trade area, since large-scale computers and flat screens are built there at the expense of the environment).
Now to TP sanitation. Please show me where the hype is? Hardly anybody works on this so far.
To me it is quite a big hype. I say that because in plenty of news articles, it is mentioned (e.g. in that big Geo article from last year) - alongside other, more established technologies. Journalists love it and keep bringing it up as if it would save the world now (the "lost/rediscovered" knowledge of the Indios is saving our world now...). Also e.g. in the SSWM toolbox (
www.sswm.info) it (terra preta toilets) is represented side by side the more established toilet types - as if it had already reached the same level of maturity. In my opinion, it is still at a research stage, far from being "proven" at any significant scale in practical applications.
In addition we want to compost urine so we do not need diversion any more, luckily. Urine application mimics chemical agriculture and is a dead end road.
I disagree that urine is a "bad fertiliser", there are plenty of results from countries where it has given them impressive boosts in yield. See the publications by SEI on that topic. See the work of SEI and IFAD in Niger for example (if anyone is interested in the Niger example: just put the name Dagerskog in the search field of the SuSanA library, or click here:
www.susana.org/library?search=dagerskog)
You would argue that these results are only in the short term and that in the longer term, the soil would degrade? Well, nobody recommends to only use urine. Of course it is always better to add as much organic matter (compost) as possible, too. But that doesn't diminish the importance of urine as a cheap, pathogen-free fertiliser, supplying N, P, K, S and other micronutrients.
we should forget about people in more densely populates areas dealing with their own excreta
I agree with that statement.
The well proven fact of endocytosis, the direct uptake of living bacteia like E-coli and Salmonella into plants advises us against direct food production in excreta.
I disagree with this statement completely. Your statement should be taken as the opinion of
one expert, but many other experts do disagree. I want to remind the readers that this discussion has already been debated on the forum previously, with very detailed postings by the Swedish expert Hakan Joensson for example (and a discussion on organic agriculture with detailed input from Gerhard Pelzer), see here:
forum.susana.org/forum/categories/17-fer...le-plants-preferably
Finally, let me pose another question, which I think is very important. You speak about Terra Preta
Sanitation.
Where is the evidence that this process of lacto-fermentation kills the pathogens to a significant degree (in particular the worm eggs)? If not, can it really be called sanitation. Shouldn't sanitation sanitise - at least to some degree (or at least "contain"). How exactly are the worm eggs dealt with in Terra Preta sanitation? Or is your argument that the worm eggs don't need to be killed if one does not use the compost for food production in any case (multi-barrier approach)?
I look forward to reading your replies and the replies of others, too, of course. I think we can all learn a lot here - even if in the end we might have to agree to disagree.
Kind regards,
Elisabeth