Aquaponics, all wet.

[mornings]

I can't seem to get a rise here. So, I'll offer a challenge.

I believe I can show conclusively that vermiponics (as I describe it) will, hands down, beat aquaponics for growing vegetables. It is just as productive but more economical and has less risk of failure.

But, that is not the challenge (although, I will be happy to give more detail on vermiponics). If vegetables can be better grown better in vermiponics than aquaponics, aquaponics devoid of a vegetable justification is washed up, as there are better and more economical way to grow fish. Why do aquaponics?

Happy Holidays all.

m

[Ravnis]

Considering that a lot of systems have worms growing in them as well as fish, I have trouble understanding how worms alone would be "better". Most of us don't intend to eat the worms, but want to eat the fish.

I fail to understand the better more economical ways to grow fish statement. I understand that growing in a pond at lower density has lower overall cost, but also less production per given volume.

[mornings]

Ravnis,

Worms are not simply a substitution for fish.

1) Fish emit ammonia and solids that are not in a nutrient form. These emissions are also toxic. It takes a lot of effort to get these emissions into nutrient form. Worm castes include little or no ammonia; therefore, with worms-only, there is little or no need need for a bio-filter (in fairness, this is not a perfect comparison. Worms do need a small flood and drain bed to live). The worm castes are just about a perfect food for plants.

2) Fish require a lot of oxygen; worms do not, at least not much from the water. A major part of the expense for an aquaponic system is the volume of water and the volume of pumping necessary. The oxygen needed in "vermiponics is more like hydroponics -- just enough for the plants.

3) Fish are risky. Burn up a pump, break a pipe in the middle of the night . . . the fish all die. When the fish die, it takes time to get back up to speed. With worms, it's no big deal.

Right now, e.g., I have a basic problem with my green house (Ignorance mostly. I basically didn't understand what I would need). Temps have dropped in the green house and I've stopped feeding the worms. Plants are OK. Fish would have died (especially tilapia); worms just go into a kind of hibernation. When I fix the GH problem, everything will go back to normal within a day or so.

4) There are built-in incompatibilities between fish and plants, temperature being a major one. Even water flow required for fish can be a detriment to plants.

5) To grow your fish quickly, they need expensive, high protein food (even if you grow your own, it's still expensive). Worms will eat just about anything.

6) Fish have a kind of a sawtooth productivity, that is, you start with a hand full of fish and grow them. At the same time your nutrient output of fish can't exceed, basically, the size of your fish. When you harvest your fish, you start over at the bottom of the sawtooth. With worms, once you have a sufficient population, you simply feed them according to the nutrient need -- the worms are self adjusting, to what ever one feeds them.

7) I don't sell worms but I could. If you are selling fish, you might cover your feed costs (competing with the Chinese is not easy); Let's be generous and say you can get $8 a pound. Then you've got some very serious handling costs. Worms sell for $15 to $25 a pound depending on volume. One can just dump the worms into a paper bad with some bedding and ship them in anyplace in the US (try that with fish).

In general, one can grow the same quantity and quality vegetables in vermiponics as one can with aquaponics but with a much smaller system; much less operating costs; much smaller investment; less risk.

When I looked carefully at the incremental costs of adding the system with fish to one for only vegetables (either hydroponic or vermiponic), I found that I could grow the fish in a pond for much less (which I do).

m

[Dufflight]

What is vermiponics. Is it just worm in GB's with no fish. I find that in AP there are a ton of worms working away and its the fish waste that they are living on. Growing fish in a pond is okay but at what speed do they grow and will birds end up eating more of them. In a tank you can see what you have and plan around it. You can also grow plants in soil. I know of people that add hydro nutrients to there dirt garden. There plants grow faster and they don't have to build a hydroponic system and run pumps. One guy just grew worms to get rid of the manure from his horses. Once he got over the million + in worms he had to run a light over them at night to keep them in the container otherwise it was like a large red moving blanket in his back yard.

[mornings]

What is vermiponics[?]. Is it just worm in GB's with no fish. Duff,

Admittedly, vermiponics suffers from something of an identity crisis (I suppose, like aquaponics, once upon a time . . .). I read Gene Logsden's writing and experiments back in the 70s for combining aquaculture with agriculture, fish with plants. He had no name for it and the aquaculture people thought he was a nut. 40 years later, a small crowd of aquaponic devotees, say, "was it not always so?"

But whatever vermiponics is, what you describe is not what I do or have. Even though I started out to replace the fish with worms, I quickly learned that,

1) It really won't work well. If you simply deleted the fish from a system that has worms, you will be stuck with several difficult and expensive problems (I know from experience).

And, 2) what I am doing is principally vermi-composting -- in water. It is a world of difference from aquaponics. The science and biology are not the same. Nor are the costs or the risks.

If you have worms with your fish, you are also vermi-composing (and saving yourself a lot of headaches) for about half your nutrient. But, having the fish in an integrated plant growing system makes it a much more elaborate and costly project.

I'm not an expert on pond grown fish, although I have no trouble and very little cost growing catfish in a pond. I have a neighbor who puts Tilapia in a pond in a May and harvests them in September with little problem or cost. But I quite readily admit that growing vegetables in an economic way is my focus. I have been an organic gardener and farmer for almost 40 years, and my proposition is, growing fish, integrated with vegetables, is not the most productive way to grow vegetables.

m

[GaryD]

Hi Dufflight,



I find that in AP there are a ton of worms working away and its the fish waste that they are living on.

Indirectly that might be the case, but my understanding is that, while decaying material does pass through the worms, it's actually the bacteria and other microbes that are their main meal.


And, 2) what I am doing is principally vermi-composting -- in water. It is a world of difference from aquaponics. The science and biology are not the same. Nor are the costs or the risks.

mornings......While I buy the cost and risk benefits associated with Vermiponics, I'm curious about your observation about the 'science' - what differences do you perceive?

Gary

[mornings]

. . . my understanding is that, while decaying material does pass through the worms, it's actually the bacteria and other microbes that are their main meal.Gary,

I don't think that is true. I don't have my worm book handy to quote, but worms break down and digest various carbohydrates and convert them in to proteins. But they cannot do so on their own. They require that either the bacteria in the gut of an animal pre-digest the food (in the animal's gut) or the food be pre-digested through fermentation (which, of course, is a similar process).

Yes, many of these same bacteria reach and pass through the gut of the worm. The digestive processes of the worm (mostly, enzymatic -- not strong) tend to encourage the bacteria beneficial to its pre-digestor (as it were) and discourage or destroy pathogens. This makes a lot of sense from an evolutionary perspective. The worms not only clean after animals, but they improve their environment -- so they can benefit the worms!

But, I don't remember anything saying the worms actually digest bacteria or fungi or viral material.

All of this is why they are very beneficial to composting.

...While I buy the cost and risk benefits associated with Vermiponics, I'm curious about your observation about the 'science' - what differences do you perceive?Part of the answer is above.

Fish have a completely different role to play in the scheme of things. Fish are essentially pre-digestors, much like cattle or rabbits or any animal creating manure or even insects. For a plant to utilize the wastes of any of these, there must be a go-between (many are possible). These go-betweens must include various micro-organisms; earthworms can aid this process greatly.

We call the "wastes" of a worm castes because they are not manure and they are essentially plant ready.

I've only touched the surface of the subject here but I think you get the idea. Amazing critters, really! There are about 1800 terra species of earthworms and they mostly have different functions depending on locale and environment. I am told that I have 7 varieties in my garden, none of which are manure worms.

The implications of these differences are important to growing plants, no matter how it is done. The implications, for example, to aquaponics, that is, where worms reside in the gravel with fish effluents, the worms cut costs by basically doubling the nutrient stream and do away with the necessity to filter out fish feces.

Once the fish are not in the system, well, it is those implications I am trying to understand and exploit. Many of these are what are cutting my costs to grow plants.

m

[lazyfish]

I like the direction this tread is going.

I want to utilize worms in my system also!!!! however i don't want to use them to replace the fish as mornings does, only to complement them.

There i was after preparing a lovely Christmas dinner now i am stuck with a large amount of kitchen waste, I have a pretty large AP system, i am satisfied with the production, but i want more. I want a way to add ALL my kitchen scraps and AP waste directly to the AP system, to improve efficiency and sustainability. The aim is to achieve digestion of 100% of the organic waste that leaves my kitchen.

Basically i was thinking of a 55gal drum half fill with gravel and worms that flood and drains very slowly (every other day), you put the waste in the top and the worms digests it underwater(to keep the sent down) then the liquid drains into a grow bed.

That's it, simple i know, i am hoping between the worms and the flood and drain effect this digester can handle the load of a family of four.

but i have no experience keeping worms and don't know if the drum will work, i am currently in the planing\research stage so i will be watching what you guys do closely and using it in my efforts.

[mornings]

Lazyfish,

Worms are a good idea, even if you grow fish and just put the worms in the gravel. In fact, if the system is outside in warm weather, the worms are likely to show up in your beds anyway.

About half the waste from fish is in the form of ammonia they breath out and urinate. The other half is in their feces. But the feces don't break down easily and can give you other problems. One solution is to filter the solids out, the other is to let the worms take care of them and get roughly twice the nutrient from the fish.

They will also take care of small roots and other organic solids that can clog your system.

The worms will adjust their population and size to the organic matter available. Just throw in a few, they will take care of the rest.

If you are going to feed the worms directly, a word of caution. The food must have already been acted upon by bacteria when they eat it. You might want to grind it up, leave it set for a few days. This is a form of vermi-composting but its a little different than the bin variety because it's in water. Be sure the food you put in the gravel for the worms is being eaten/digested by them quickly. If not, the worm food might give your fish a problem.

I'm feeding my worms fermented rabbit food and de-fatted soy bean meal. I ferment the mix for 10 days or so. Then, about 24 hours before I feed a batch to the worms, I add a few tablespoons of ground lime. This reduces the acid in the brew and kills off much of the bacteria. You may not have to do any of this IF the worms are eating up the food quickly. I've added dried soy bean leaves directly to gravel with no problem at all. They eat up quickly. Just be aware.

m

[mornings]

Gary,

I may have misspoken. In Edwards & Lofty's book, "Biology and Ecology of worms" it says,
"The worms ingest organic matter, fungi, protozoa, algae, nematodes and bacteria. This is passed through the digestive tract. The majority of the bacteria and organic matter pass through undigested (although the organic matter has been ground into smaller particles). This forms the casting along with metabolite wastes such as ammonium, urea and proteins. The worms also secrete mucus, containing polysaccharides, proteins and other nitrogenous compounds. . . "[my emphasis]
I'm still not sure this means that worms actually digest the various micro-organisms in any quantity or that they provide nutrient for worms . . . even though they definitely ingest them.

m

[GaryD]

Hi Mornings,

"Organic Growing with Worms" (David Murphy) is one of my favourite books on worms.

Murphy says....".....it seems that the preferred food of most works is micro-organisms - algae, bacteria, fungi, micro-arthropods and protozoa."

"Although they inevitably swallow some "parent" material as well, it is the bacteria they are interested in."

Gary

[mornings]

Gary,

I'm not a entomologist and I, like most of us, have to look for credibility in those we get our facts from. I know nothing of David Murphy but C A Edwards is probably the premier entomologist on worms in the world, and has been for 4 decades. His book, "The Biology and Ecology of Worms" is the "bible" on worms.

That earthworms ingest all manner of micro-organisms, seems beyond dispute. That the volume of nutrient that worms output, so to speak, could come from only the mass of micro-organisms, or that the worms might depend on this same mass to support their own bodies, seems to not even make good arithmetic sense. Also, it is quite well known that beneficial micro-organisms rapidly increase to much larger populations when worms are present.

Also, I have been saying that what comes out of a worm is immediately available to plants. I have also implied that worms make a better environment for the micro-organisms. In effect, that is true, but it is also a gross oversimplification on my part. It is my guess that David Murphy is also oversimplifying.

The part that micro-organisms play in that process is enormous . . . and very complex. And, it is not only complex, it is adaptive, i.e., where ever worms go, they adapt there work to what ever micro-organisms are available.

Another way to look at this, an evolutionary view, is that if worms didn't adapt and if they didn't enhance the environment by doing away pathogens and make better and more abundant plant life for their pre-digestors and the beneficial micro-organisms, they simply wouldn't exist.

m

[francois]

hi there
WORMS:
i want to make WORMS a permanent link in my system
at the moment my system has lots of worms in my growing trays,they feed on what comes out of my fish dam.all my fish waste run directly into my growing trays.
BUT:
i want to change this. i want to add a process where the worms can feed and remove most of solid waste.(sump come wormfilter)
i use brewed vermitea on my plant as foliar feed with great success.
i feel using fish and worms in a system reduces the risk.
they eat the waste, helps with getting rid of waste in a very good way.
worm castings have a PH 7.0 and are rich in nutrients.
i find in winter it can play a major role.(fish eat less)
THEN:
a extra source of fish food at no cost.

[mornings]

i want to make WORMS a permanent link in my system . . . i want to add a process where the worms can feed and remove most of solid waste.(sump come wormfilter) . . . THEN: a extra source of fish food at no cost.francois,

What do you mean by a "permanent link" and why do you want to do this?

It seems to me the worms are already providing the function you want: cleaning up the solids and providing extra nutrient for your plants.

Not sure it makes sense to feed fish that are worth $6-8 a pound with worms that are worth $15-25 a pound. More importantly, the food value to your fish will likely be small and, if it is significant, there will be a cost: without feeding the worms a separate diet, the worms will not reproduce beyond your original system needs and, if you take the worms out in any significant way, they will no longer serve their most beneficial function. If you feed the worms directly, you will likely create some other problems (I can tell about those if you are interested).

m

[GaryD]

Hi Mornings,



In effect, that is true, but it is also a gross oversimplification on my part. It is my guess that David Murphy is also oversimplifying.


You could be right....but that's not a bad thing when the game is underpinned by people like Edwards.....or Murphy.

Every now and then, ordinary people (like you and I) fool around with something and produce extraordinary results when other (possibly) much smarter people would have known better than to try.

The reaction to your thoughts on other forums is interesting. Some people are so firmly rooted in dogma that they can't see the wood for the trees.

Gary

[Ravnis]

My guess is that the negative reaction is that he states it is better than aquaponics and better depends on ones goals. My goal is to raise fish and the vegetables are a side benefit. Aquaponics has been proven to utilize less water than pure aquaculture however energy requirements are increased. So you trade energy cost for water cost.

If ones goal is to just raise vegetables, it might be a better setup to just use wicking beds with worms and throw scraps on top and let the worms do their process. Almost no energy input and composting and growing at the same time.

[GaryD]

Hi Ravnis,



My guess is that the negative reaction is that he states it is better than aquaponics and better depends on ones goals.

In most of what he writes, Mornings is very careful to make it clear that his principal interest was in growing vegetables.....so for him vermiponics probably is better than aquaponics.



If ones goal is to just raise vegetables, it might be a better setup to just use wicking beds with worms and throw scraps on top and let the worms do their process. Almost no energy input and composting and growing at the same time.

I must confess I love the ideas that underpin wicking beds......so much so that, for many purposes, I'd be very happy to operate small recirculating aquaculture systems with wicking beds as an alternative to conventional aquaponics....with lots of advantages.

Gary

[mornings]

Ravnis, Gary,

I must confess, I don't really understand wicking. And, Ravnis, you are exactly right. What one's goals are, have everything to do with how one should proceed.

But let me say something about scale. If one is doing a back yard hobby, experiment or even endeavoring to simply feeding one's family, all these efforts are noble, make all other attempts at agriculture pale by comparison and, compared amongst themselves (gardening, aquaponics, etc.), there's not much difference economically (the largest single cost/overhead is just having a place to do it). This last is because they are all relatively so efficient, their differences are minuscule. Everyone should have a garden, no matter how one does it!

However, if one is trying to feed not just one family but, say, 100 families, everything changes, including how we measure, the standards we use and the complexity of what we must measure.

I'm not an expert on aquaculture (or anything else, really) but I have a friend with USDA Ag Extension who has been in aquaculture for about a half decade. He disagrees with Ravnis. He found, after some very serious and lengthy studies, the only possible justification for aquaponics, on scale, was vegetables. When I showed him my version of vermiponics, it was he who concluded that "aquaponics was all wet".

As far as people being disagreeable, I have no one but myself to blame. For sure, I never mean harm in any way, and no one should take anything I say personally . . . but I dearly delight in making people uncomfortable, particularly with the concepts with which we have become comfortable.

m

[Ravnis]

You may have already read this, but if not I invite you to check it out.

http://www.aces.edu/dept/fisheries/aquaculture/documents/309884-SRAC454.pdf

I would point out this is from over 3 decades of research...by ag extension agents. It points out some of the problems you've mentioned as well as some ways that could overcome them in certain markets. As has been pointed out multiple times on this site, having a market for goods will ultimately be the deciding factor as to whether your business is viable. I have shared my tilapia with friends and they all say that the flavor is better than what they can buy in the store and would pay a higher price for this.

As Gary pointed out, you are not the only one to think that leaving out the fish and growing with worms might be more effective for just plant growth. I have been following Jim JOyners post with interest myself. I have even considered making up a system, but as I pointed out, wicking beds would be simpler, cheaper, more efficient. There are probably some cons too it I have not discovered as until you do something, you never fully understand what is involved in the undertaking.

But thank you very much for playing devils advocate and raising questions. Different perspectives are what helps advance a technology. Isn't that what aquaponics is , a technology for growing fish and vegetables?

[GaryD]

Hi Ravnis,


I'm not an expert on aquaculture (or anything else, really) but I have a friend with USDA Ag Extension who has been in aquaculture for about a half decade. He disagrees with Ravnis. He found, after some very serious and lengthy studies, the only possible justification for aquaponics, on scale, was vegetables. When I showed him my version of vermiponics, it was he who concluded that "aquaponics was all wet".
Morning's friend with USDA is not the only aquaculture/horticulture specialist to come to this conclusion.

I've heard both Dr Wilson Lennard and Dr James Rakocy refer to vegetable production as being the clear commercial focus of aquaponics.....and Tom Speraneo was quoted as saying that the ratio of fish to plants that came out of his systems was (by weight) 45-70:1....depending on the plant type.


But thank you very much for playing devils advocate and raising questions. Different perspectives are what helps advance a technology.

I agree wholeheartedly.....but being a Galileo in a "flat earth" world is invariably an uncomfortable place to be. Fundamentalists in any sphere of endeavour can be difficult people to deal with.....particularly those with a vested interest in the status quo.

German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer accurately described the process that relates to the revision of ideas when he said “Every truth passes through three stages before it is recognized. In the first it is ridiculed, in the second it is opposed, in the third it is regarded as self-evident”

Gary

[Ravnis]

http://ag.arizona.edu/azaqua/ista/ista6/ista6web/pdf/676.pdf

Here are some numbers comparing field growth and commercial scale growth with aquaponics. Aquaponics production is between 3 to 17 times the growth in the field depending on what is grown. I have not found any studies comparing hydroponics vs aquaponics yet.

I would suspect wicking beds would be close to the aquaponics numbers, maybe a little lower as there could be less oxygen in the root zone due to no recirculation (maybe throw an air stone in the water resevior.)

If land space is an issue or water is an issue then aquaponics will beat field growth considerably. If you have plenty of fertile land and water, then field growth will win out.

The USDA studies failed to take into account a major change since the studies were done, and that is the requirements by the EPA to control runoff of nitrates into the rivers and other waterways. IF these get implemented then Aquaponics would beat current field production methods hands down.

For large scale production composting windrows with worms and then plants planted in that might be a very cheap and effective way to grow on a large scale. Since all you want is worms and plants.

A major marriage of the technology that might be a good combination is an aquaponics setup for a fingerling system, a pond for fingerling growout, and wicking beds with worms that are filled with water from the aquaponics setup and pond.

[mornings]

Ravnis,

Thanks much for that link. I have the other pdf (if anyone could wear out a pdf by reading it, I would have done so over the last couple years or so) but that one fills in a lot. It's gonna take a while to digest all that.

I don't have a link to it, but I have their other piece on growing Tilapia at UVI, if anyone is interested.

It's interesting that he said, "The basil would generate 4.6 times more income than the fish. However, the fish contribute additional value to the system through consistent nutrient generation and the elimination of the need for excessive water quality monitoring or frequent water replacement." But, he never talks about the economic contribution from the fish, only that they provide a good service as a bio-reactor. I think worms will do a better job for less operating cost and investment. He also does not compare fish production in aquaponics with fish other methods.

Seems obvious his focus is vegetables.

m

[Taz]

mornings

have you got a thread on here or a link to somewhere where I can some pics of a Vermiponics system. I'm interested to see how you have it set up. I have done a few searches and can't seem to find much.

From what I can gather, you pretty much pump (I'm guessing on a timer) water from a tank or bucket (with no fish) to a gravel GB and let it drain (ala flood and drain) back to the tank. In the gravel you have submerged bucket with holes in it that you put your kitchen scarps in (same way as a worm compost bin?). Throw in a heap of worms, plant and off you go? If I've got this right seems logical and easy!

cheers taz

[mornings]

Taz,

I posted some pictures when I introduced myself. But, honestly, the set up looks just like an aquaponics system. That is true because it started out as an aquaponic prototype.

I am building a larger, commercial version of what I think will be truly vermiponic. But it's going to look a lot like a cross between aquaponics and hydroponics. About the only thing that changes are the ratios and specific values, not the components or principles.

There will be a water tank -- for storage, not raising fish. Obviously there will be a pump. There will be a bio-filter but it will double as a residence for worms and a collector for solids. Nothing very earth shaking. There will be grow beds. I am opting for floating rafts but it could just as well be gravel beds; the difference having to do with what I want to grow (lettuce and greens) and the implied economics.

Right now I'm struggling to understand greenhouse technology and how to apply it to aquaponics/vermiponics. . . . the coldest winter in 30 years. Nothing like an initiation by fire (or cold as it were) . . .

Hope that helps. I'm happy to answer any questions I can.

m

[Taz]

mornings

The part I'm not 100% sure about is how you plan to put the vegi scraps into the GB's.

Was I correct in saying it only needs a submerged bucket with holes to allow the worms to come and go as they please to access the scraps?

Or do you just dig them in as per a normal dirt garden.

I have seen an idea somewhere (I think it might have been on youtube) where they had lengths of PVC pipe with holes drilled in the lower three quarters or so and had then submerged in the ground and used them for compost, the worms in the soil could come and go as the pleased. Thought it was clever, efficient.

thx