Standards in composting
02-JUN-2006
The
compost industry needs to establish a standards system to raise its level of
professionalism and accountability, argues Bob Yost
Professionally produced compost is a consistent, stable product. It is manufactured
using highly defined and controlled processes and procedures designed to achieve
specific analytical and product performance goals. Compost deserves to be evaluated
and valued based on its quality of performance.
Compost is often viewed as anything from old manure to a specific, highly refined
product. Yet compost is not well aged manure, or ground wood. Calling it compost
does not make it compost. Well aged manure is simply old manure.
Compost products are not created equally and do not offer the same benefits,
and they are not universal in their applications. Without type specifications,
the ability to define a product's value to the marketplace is diminished. If
you have two bottles of wine, and one is vintage wine and the other is only
table wine, why should they be valued the same?
Compost standards are needed not only to define the type and use of the products,
but also to move the industry to an increased level of professionalism and accountability.
Another reason for product standards is to provide landscape architects and
buyers with a method of evaluating products by category or class, and thus assist
them in choosing the right product for their projects. Why put a $1000 tree
in $0.10 dirt? They need to know what they want, and be assured that they are
getting it.
One argument against the establishment of standards or classes is that utilization
of standards would cause an individual product manufactured to lose its individuality.
There is some merit to that concern; however, I believe that there is a much
better chance of establishing value for the products by using consistent, definable
product standards.
The major difficulty is in determining a standard or classification system
that ¿eeveryone' can agree on. Another issue is whether standards should be
based on specific analytical data, or on product performance or application
criteria. I favour basing a system on application criteria . that is, the best
applications for the product.
The architect or buyer is looking for a product that will meet their goals
for their project. Trying to evaluate or compare products based on analytical
data alone often causes confusion and users would have to become soil scientists
to make a correct choice.
A product standard or classification system needs to incorporate three major
areas of evaluation:
- analytical - including product maturity and stability testing as well as
consistent analytical methods
- manufacturing processes used
- product application/use - including allowance for best management practices
and soil type.
The system also has to be objective enough to prevent a slight variation in
any one item from causing rejection of the product, since we are dealing with
ranges as opposed to guaranteed analytical data. When a system incorporates
these three areas and then categorizes or classifies a product based on the
overall evaluation of them, the buyer will have a simple way to ask for and
purchase products.
I have witnessed the need for standards or specifications in the Rocky Mountain
region of the US. Here, the composting industry was shackled by consternation
and inequity regarding project design, product uses, purchasing decisions, value
assessment and competitive balance. Architects and buyers were also frustrated
with inconsistency in testing methods and data presentation that made it impossible
to compare submitted information. As a result, in 2001 I developed a compost
classification system for our company based on an aggregate industry template.
Input from soils labs and a soil scientist was also used.
The concept is simple. A buyer can specify a class of product based on its
application and potential impact to their project. Four product classes are
used, based on a combination of 16 factors covering analytical, manufacturing
and performance criteria. The classification system also requires that the producer
have the product tested by a laboratory using methods defined by the US Composting
Council (USCC). These methods . formally entitled ¿eTest Methods for the Evaluation
of Compost and Composting' . are used in the USCC's Seal of Testing Assurance
programme.
Our approach is an example of one attempt to establish a standards system for
compost. Other regions and organizations are evaluating different systems, and
the USCC currently has a standards committee that is considering the issue as
well.
If our industry is to transcend the 'well aged manure' mentality and image
of the past, it must establish standards for the products it produces. Professionalism
should be a required specification.
BOB YOST is Vice President of New Business Development
at A1 Organics, Colorado, US.
e-mail: bobyost@a1organics.com
Add RSS Feed