by

                                                                              John A. Alexander, PhD, IOM, LFIBA







For decades it has been known central sewage plants that incubate bacteria to eat raw sewage solids were not doing an adequate job. Millions of people have been sickened because of the systems shortcomings, but were willing to put up for the mostly minor inconvenience the partially treated sewage was creating.

This is no longer acceptable. The so called secondary treatment is breeding immune pathogens by the trillions. One person carrying these 'new' pathogens, then flushing his toilet could pass material into the secondary treatment incubator, breeding contaminated, immune pathogens and also passing on immunity to formerly benign bacteria. The one ill person is capable of starting an epidemic worse than the 1918 flu epidemic. We already have pandemics killing as many as 70% of those stricken. We must eliminate the incubator.

John Alexander Research has been seeking the answer for 40 + years. We are not foolish enough to think we are the only ones capable of finding solutions. We do have answers that will not only eliminate secondary treatment but will go much further. We can eliminate the sludge disposal problems, help reduce global warming, reduce energy demand, solve the water shortage problems and for many, reduce utility bills and help relieve the financial burden of the country.

The agglutinator was invented, or rather evolved, based on worked done by giants of the past. The concept of physical chemical sewage treatment has been known for many years. The main reason for non-acceptance was scarcity, cost and danger. John Alexander Research has found unlimited quantities of the necessary chemicals to activate the system, which not only creates the proper reaction, but supplies virtually all the needed energy. The needed chemicals could even be taken from sea water at slightly more cost. The extraction process could also displace much of the demand for coal and oil without contamination.

The agglutinator function is two-fold. It allows precipitation of virtually all solids. Based on our concept, we call this Ph pasteurization. Both the precipitated solids and the recovery water are pathogen free, as determined by the largest virology labs. They always hasten to state that man is not sure he has identified all viruses. We suggest no one ingest the recovered water. We have developed another method of producing safe, delicious drinking water for about 3 cents per gallon, available to most people on earth.

The sludge being pathogen free has become one of our most valuable resources. We can make pathogen free fertilizer that can be distributed even in drip irrigation systems. We can use it for a substitute for coal and can create building products from it.

The agglutinator has the capability of utilizing septic tanks without the use of leach lines. We highly recommend the survival of septic tanks and leach lines as the safest and least expensive way to reduce the potential of spreading deadly pathogens. For central sewage plants already in existence, we recommend eliminating the secondary stage by merely installing an agglutinator. This reduces operating costs and the need for more real estate.

We believe domestic water shortage can be eliminated by separating gray water from black water. If toilets are flushed with gray water, the in house use of water is reduced by 42% on average. If greater water savings is needed, an in-situ agglutinator can be added, which then reduces the water need by roughly 80%. A cistern to hold roof run-off, along with recycling, could eliminate the need for any municipal sewer or water.

Industrial can be recycled in-situ in order to reduce water and sewer charges. The removal of heavy metals facilitates their reuse. A&W Smelters has been doing this for 30 years. There is no need for industry to be concerned about their water supply being cut off, or being fined for contamination. The money saved makes this one of the best investments a company could make, so it is not a hard sell.

Agriculture is our biggest user of water. The agglutinator is capable of reducing agricultural water demand by more than 50%. Energy requirements can be reduced by as much as 75%. The vast contaminated aquifer from leach lines and run-off water can be recycled ---- making trillions of gallons of water available. This also recovers much of the waste created by selenium and salt contamination.

Dairies, pigs and chicken farm problems are being forced to close down. They produce odors, flies and add to global warming. They contaminate aquifers and use about 50 gallons of water per cow per day. It is possible to recycle 80% of this water. Odors can be stopped including global warming gasses. No evaporation ponds would be required. The sludge is also pathogen and odor free and can be used as fuel, fertilizer and building materials. The savings in land area alone would pay for most agglutination systems.
Test by:       Quality Water Laboratories, Bellflower, CA

Results of Treatment:       using the JOHN A. ALEXANDER Agglutinator Unit


Date:      April 30, 1976


Municipal Sewage:      Sample-2


From:       Fountain Valley, California / municipal sewage


TEST PARAMETER:                   RAW SEWAGE       EFFLUENT PRODUCT              %
                                              QUANTITY VALUES       QUANTITY VALUE        REDUCTION

pff Units                                            10.9                      7.8

Specitic Conductance @25o C

Micromhostcm                                 4650.                       650.                             86.0

Total Dissolved solids. mgl 1             2350.                       404.                             82.8

Suspended solids. mgl 1                     384.                          1.0                            99.7

BOD, 5day @ 20oC. mgl 1                   490.                        16.0                            96.7

Dissolved Oxygen. mgl  1)                      2.                          5.1                             8.3

Chemical Oxygen Demand, mgl 1          741.                          6.0                           99.2

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, mgl 1              98.0                          5.32                         94.6

Ammonia Nitrogen (as N) mgl 1            50.4                          4.20                         91.7

Organic Nitrogen, (as N) mgl 1             47.0                          1.12                         97.6

Nitrate Nitrogen, (as N)  mgl 1              0.45                         0.05                         88.9

Sodium (as Na)   mgl 1                     750.                           47.0                          93.7

MBAS (Surfactants) mgl 1                  14.0                            0.1                           99.7

Turbidity, Jackson Units                                                     500.
 
Phosphates, Total (as PO.), mgl 1                                          5.9

Chtondes (as Cl), mgl 1                                                    207.

Sulfates (as So4) mgl 1                                                    200.

Alkalinity (as CaCo2)

    
Hydroxide, mgl 1                                                        608.

      Carbonate, mgl1                                                        888.

      Bicarbonate, mgl 1                                                        0.

      Total                                                                     1496.
1.Dissolved Oxygen value reported corresponds to amount when sample was received. Three days elapsed between the date sample was taken and date received.

2.Values published are from tests carried out by Quality Water Laboratories, Bellflower, CA Laboratory No. 5298, April 30, 1976 on municipal sewage from Fountain Valley, CA
                        DRUG RESISTANT BACTERIA IN CONVENTIONAL WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS

Contrary to popular myth, many pathogens survive their passage through a sewer treatment plant unscathed, thus remaining to constitute an increased public health risk. The fact that this situation has been accepted may be attributed, in part, to economics and antiquated water quality standards. Nonetheless, readily available scientific and medical literature is replete with data demonstrating and confirming this fact. Studies reported in the scientific and medical literature dating back to at least the 1970 s show failure of treatment to kill or remove all pathogenic bacteria.   Thus, this is hardly new knowledge. Fontaine, et al., (1976); Grabow, et al., (1973), Linton, et al., (1974); Walter, et al., (1985)]

These surviving pathogenic bacteria often include bacteria resistant to individual and multiple antibiotic drugs. Multiple drug resistant bacteria are particularly problematic due to the increasing number of therapeutic options. Scientists have been able to distinguish resistant bacteria from those still sensitive to antibiotics, and resistance has been demonstrated in various species of bacteria for antibiotics including   tetracycline, kanamycin, chloramphenicol and  streptomycin, ampicillin, nalidixic acid, refampicin, and sulfisoxazole. Even more recently the big gun vancomycin  seems to be in trouble. From a total of 900 separate tests, over half contained multi-drug resistant plasmids, or DNA strands containing specific genetic information coding for drug resistance traits.

A less understood and even more troubling mechanism for the transfer of multi-drug resistant bacteria is also found at the local sewer treatment plant.  As bacteria wind their way through these treatment processes, the selective pressures against them increase. In consequence, there is a great effort by bacteria to pass on survival enhancing genetic information. Additionally, as environmental stresses increase, the bacteria up-regulate numerous other survival mechanisms to assure they and their genetic material survives. These survival mechanisms can include increased chlorine resistance.

In one of the several published studies looking at the perpetuation of multiple drug resistance in sewage, researchers followed bacteria through a sewer treatment works. Fecal coliforms were the test organism. These bacteria were isolated at various locations in the plant as sewage was passing through the treatment process.  They were isolated from: a)  the inlet,  b) the primary sedimentation tank, c) the activated sludge digestion tank, d) the final settling tank, e) the outlet, f) the return activated sludge drain. They were then examined for multi-drug antibiotic resistance.   The study looked for the presence of drug resistant plasmids or mobile genetic elements (MGE s). [Neilson et, al., (7.8)]
While this is interesting, there was a new finding that raised considerable concern. The further along that the wastewater had progressed through the treatment process, the greater the tendency was to encounter multi-resistant strains.   Additionally, the study demonstrated that these multi-resistant bacteria also simultaneously carried and then passed around their multiple transferable drug-resistant plasmids (MGE s). Thus, the take home message is that drug resistance and the transfer of multi-drug resistance among and between species occurs in wastewater treatment plants. [Nippon Koshu Eisei Zasshi 1990 Feb; 37(2) 83-90.]   This information is over a decade old.

Previous studies have shown that waste effluents from hospitals containing higher levels of antibiotic-resistant enteric bacteria than waste effluents derived from other sources [1,2,3,4,5,6].  Centers dealing with the very sick, the very old, and the immuno compromised are generally regarded as the centers for the development and perpetuation of drug resistant pathogens.  These centers also utilize vast amount of chemo-therapeutic agents and other materials that may foster increased resistance. Their untreated discharge to the local sewer system is thus a concern because of the likelihood of introducing MGE s with new and more virulent traits.    Additionally, if the sewer mains are leaking, this increases the potential risk for materials reaching the environment aquifers, rivers, or beach and oceans.


Citations:

1] Fontaine, T.D., III,   and A. W.  Hoadley.   1976.  Transferable drug resistant associated with coliforms isolated from hospital and domestic sewage. Health Lab Sci  4: 238-245.

2] Grabow, W. O. K. ., and O. W.  Prozesky.    1973.   Drug resistance of coliform bacteria in hospitals and city sewage.   Antimicrob Agents Chemother 3:175-180.

3] Linton, K. B.., M. H.  Richmond, R. Bevan, and W.  A.  Gillespic 1974 Antibiotic resistance and R factors in coliform bacilli isolated from hospitals and domestic sewage.   J.  Med.  Microbiol.    7: 91-103.

4] Walter, M.  V.., and J.  W.  Vennes.    1985.  Occurrence if multiple-antibiotic- resistant enteric bacteria in domestic sewage and oxidation lagoons    Appl. Environ.  Microbiol.    50: 930-933.

5] Rhodes G, Huys G,  Swings  J,  McGann  P,  Hiney  M,  Smith  P, Pickup  RW.    Distribution of oxytetracycline resistant plasmids between areomonads in hospitals and aquaculture environments:   implication of Tn1721 in dessemination of the tetracycline resistance determinant tet A.   Appl   Environ  Microbiol   2000 Sep; 66(9):3883-90.

6] Grol  A,  Symanska  B,  Wejner  H,  Kazanowski  A,  Wlodarczyk  K. The role of mechanically purified city sewers in the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria of the Enterobacteriaceae family.   Med  Dosw  Mikrobial  1989:41(2):100-5

7] Nielsen KM, Smalla K, Van Elsas JD.   Natural Transformation of Acinetobacter sp.  Strain BD413 with cell Iysates of Acinetobacter sp, Pseudomnas fluorescens, and abd Burkholderia cepacai in soil microcosms.    Sappl Environ Microbiol 2000:66,206-12.
8] Nielson KM, Gebhard F, Smalla K, Bones AM, Van Elsas JD.   Evaluation of possible horizontal gene transfer from transgenic plants to soil bacterium Acinetobacter calcoaceticus in soil microcosms.    Theor  Appl Genet  1997:95, 815-21.

9] Gebhard F, Smalla K.    Transformation of Acinetobacter strain BD413 by transgenic sugar beet DNA.    Appl Environ Microbiol 1999:4, 1550-54.

10] Marcinek H, Wirth R, Muscholl-Silberhorn A, Gauer M.   Enterococcus faecalis gene transfer under natural conditions in municipal sewage water treatment plants. Appl Environ Microbiol 1998 Feb; 64(2):626-32.

11] Iversen A, Kuhn I, Franklin A, Mollby R.    High prevalence of vancomycin- resistant enterococci in Swedish sewage.    Appl Environ Microbiol 2002 June; 68(6): 2838-42.

12] Riberio Dias JC, Vicente AC, Hofer E.    Fecal coliforms in sewage waters.    1. Resistance to antibiotics, heavy metals and colicinogeny.    Appl Environ Microbiol 1982 Jul; 46(1):227-32.

13] Nakamura S, Shirota H.    Behavior of drug resistant fecal coliforms and R plasmids in a wastewater treatment plant.    Nippon Koshu Eisei Zasshi 1990 Feb; 37(2):83-90.

14]  Rein haler  FF,  Posch  J,  Feiert  G,  Wust  G,  Haas  D,  Ruckenbauer  G,  Mascher  F, Marth  E.    Antibiotic resistance of E. coli in sewage and sludge.    Water Res 2003 April; 37(8):1685-90.

15] Cenci G, Morozzi G, Daniel R, Scazzocchio F.   Antibiotic and metal resistance in “Escherichia coli” strains isolated from the environment and from patients.  Ann Sclavo 1980 Mar-Apr; 22(2):212-26.

16] Heberer T, Reddersen K, Mechlinski A.    From municipal sewage to drinking water:  fate and removal of pharmaceuticals residues in the aquatic environment in urban areas.    Water Scien Techn 2002:46(3):81-8.

17] Kummerer K.  Drugs, diagnostic agents and disinfectants in wastewater and water - a review.    Schriftenr Van Wasser Boden Lufthyg 2000, 105:59-71.

18] Murray GE, Tobin RS, Junkins B, Kushner DJ.    Effects of Chlorination on antibiotic resistance profiles of sewage-related bacteria.    Appl Environ Microbiol 1984 Jul; 48(1):73-7.

19] Stampi S, Zanetti F, Crestani A, De Luca G.    Occurrence and seasonal variation of airborne gram negative bacteria in a sewage treatment plant.    New Microbial 2000 Jan; 23(1):97-104.

20]  Laitinen  S,  Kangas  J,  Kotimaa  M,  Liesivuori  J,  Martikainen  PJ,  Nevelainen  A, Sarantila  R,  Husman  K.    Workers  exposure to airborne bacteria and endotoxins at industrial wastewater treatment plants.    Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1994 Nov; 55(11):1055-60.

21] Brandi G, Sisti M, Amagliani G.    Evaluation of the environmental impact of microbial aerosols generated by wastewater treatment plants utilizing different aeration systems.   J Appl Microbiol 2000 May; 88(5):845-52.      
"DEADLIER THAN THE BOMB"