Should EM Mudballs Be Used for Treating Rivers and Seafro

1

Should EM

TM

mudballs be used for treating waterways and seafronts in Penang?

By Yap Soo HueyJune 2010TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTION 1

BACKGROUND 2

REASONS FOR CONCERNA. Positive Results Require Informed Planning 3B. Impact on Microbial Biodiversity 5C. Myths and Lack of Impartial Evidence 6D. Dangers of False Positives 9i. Examples of possible false positives due to microbial activity 9ii. Possible false positives and negative impacts of EM

TM

mudball components 10iii. Risk of Complacency 10E. How is EM

TM

Different from Standard Bioremediation 11F. Infinite Financial Cost of EM

TM

12

RECOMMENDATIONS 12Why monitor use of EM

TM

in Penang waters? 13Who should be involved? 13Where should monitoring sites be set up? 13When should monitoring take place? 14What parameters should be monitored? 15How can monitoring be achieved? 16

CONCLUSION 17

NOTES 17

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 18

BIBLIOGRAPHY 18

INTRODUCTIONEM

TM

technology has been adopted by the Malaysian state of Penang as a cheap and rapidmethod of reversing the decrepit state of its waterways and popular coastlines. “EffectiveMicroorganisms” or EM

TM

is a commercial mix

†,1,2

of microorganisms that promises tobreakdown sludge, purify water and return life to polluted waters. As part of the PenangGovernment Initiative for Environmental Management (PGI-EM)

3

, EM

TM

was used in 2009 inseveral projects sponsored by civil society groups or corporate social responsibility (CSR)programs, including in Sungai Kelian in Tanjung Bungah

4,5

, Parit 4 in Bukit Mertajam

6,7

, SungaiMas in Batu Ferringhi

8,9

, Sungai Pinang in Georgetown

5,10

, Sungai Juru in Seberang Perai

11

andthe northeastern island coastline along Pesiaran Gurney

12

. Continuation of some of theseprojects and commencement of other EM

TM

projects are expected to continue into the future.Despite the Penang state government’s endorsement

3,13,14

of EM

TM

technology, the use of EM

TM

to treat Penang waters has sparked lively debate. On the one hand, the benefit and promise of

2

EM

TM

are multi-fold. Firstly, treatment of Sungai Kelian has been lauded by proponents as astunning success

4,13,15

, and therefore, is reported

5

via mainstream media as evidence that EM

TM

is an effective alternative to conventional treatment methods that may involve dredging of riversand removal of pollutants for off-site decontamination. Secondly, the cost of a one-time additionof EM

TM

into target sites is cheaper and may produce more rapid result than conventionalmethods. Thirdly, use of EM

TM

is more plain and attractive to the general public compared withconventional methods that usually require complex study of treatment site and more involvedeffort by qualified personnel. EM

TM

is applied to waters by mixing EM

TM

activated in 5%molasses solution with soil (clay or red earth) and fermented sawdust/bran, and then formingthe mixture into “mudballs” that are allowed to dry before being thrown by hand into targetsites

4,14

. EM

TM

projects have engaged communities by getting people together for EM

TM

mudballmaking sessions and to collectively throw these mudballs into target sites. Fourthly and perhapsmost significantly, the attractiveness of using EM

TM

has garnered considerable publicity

3,5-12,14,15

,thereby raising public awareness of environmental concerns and generating invaluablecommunity participation and even sense of ownership in addressing environmental problems.On the other hand, EM

TM

is plagued by naysayers whose reasons for concern include the lackof transparency and lack of scientific credibility of EM

TM

technology, the enabling of negligencefrom addressing sources of pollution, and the concern that EM

TM

effects are only temporary soEM

TM

products will have to be continually used in Penang homes and industries indefinitely or continue to be added at regular intervals into Penang waters.The aim of this review is to (1) provide scientific background for EM

TM

technology and microbialtreatment of polluted waters, (2) explain potential risks of EM

TM

to Penang, and (3) makerecommendations to waylay concerns. Wherever possible, statements made are referenced topublicly accessible information and links are provided in the ‘Bibliography’.1. BACKGROUNDTerms “Effective Microorganisms”, “EM” and “EM Technology” refer to a proprietary blend

†,1,2

of microorganisms developed by horticulturist Dr Teruo Higa

‡

. The EM Research Organisation(EMRO) was founded by Dr Higa in 1994 to manage EM

TM

trademarks and intellectual propertyof EM

TM

products and technology

18

. EM

TM

products are sold internationally through EMROpartner organisations and its licensed distributors

19

. In Penang, EM

TM

is actively marketed byEM

TM

consultancy company EM AdminS and its director Mr Soo Lee Choo

5,15

. Mr Soo is acommittee member in the PGI-EM taskforce set up to monitor use of EM

TM

in Penang

3

.EM

TM

was developed by researching combinations of microorganisms obtained from theHorticultural Laboratory of Ryukyus University in Okinawa, Japan

20,21

. The microbialcombination patented as EM

TM

was developed to reduce the need for fertilizers and pesticidesin agriculture

20-22

. In simple terms, the 3 key fundamental principles for the use of EM

TM

inagriculture are

22

:i. Microorganisms in EM

TM

facilitate breakdown of organic matter and other insolublesources of nutrients, and converts nitrogen from air to ammonia for use by plants, therebymaking plant nutrients in the soil more readily absorbable and reducing the need for chemical fertilizers.

[Note: Existing microorganisms in normal unfertilized and untreated soil are normallysufficient to carry out these reactions, so addition of EM

TM

is only strictly necessary if ahealthy microbial population is not present. Use of EM

TM

disturbs balance in the existing

3

microbial population and establishes EM

TM

as the dominant population. Higa and Patterson(1994) clearly state that the aim of EM

TM

technology is to dominate and control the microbialpopulation in soil and if EM

TM

is not applied at a sufficiently high dose, they “will have littleor no effect”.]

ii. By becoming the dominant microbial population in soil, EM

TM

competes with andsuppresses the growth of other microorganisms, which includes harmful and lessdesirable microorganisms, and thereby reducing the need for pesticides.

[Note: As above, a sufficiently high dose of EM

TM

is required.]

iii. Higa and Patterson (1994) concede that if agriculture was carried out sustainably (ie.without over-taxing the land), there should already be an abundance of nutrients readilyavailable for plants that can be naturally recycled by existing populations of microorganisms in soil without the need for EM

TM

. They argue, however, that these idealconditions may only occur in small-scale farming and/or where crop-rotation is practiced,whereas the present day purpose for agriculture is to economically maximize yield fromland throughout the year.The rationale for using EM

TM

to treat polluted waters is that microorganisms may degradesludge and wastes as part of their growth. The use of microorganisms to treat pollution is not anovel concept. The same principle is foundation for processes known as ‘bioremediation’

§

.Bioremediation processes have been informally practiced since the early 1900s, and recognisedfor effective treatment of contaminated materials since early 1980s. High profile examples of bioremediation are reviewed by Swannell, Lee and McDonagh (1996)

23

.

Conventionalbioremediation practices are now well-accepted and have resulted in a wealth of excellentscientific information, refined understanding and technical expertise with well-documented track-record of success. Documentation of EM

TM

technology is discussed in Section C.2. REASONS FOR CONCERNA) Positive Results Require Informed PlanningAs explained above, EM

TM

has little to no impact if its application is insufficient. For EM

TM

toestablish itself, it has to be able to:- adapt to and/or convert the environment where it is introduced, as well as- compete with and ultimately dominate over pre-existing microbial populations.Various factors affect how much and how often EM

TM

should be applied to be effective. Theseinclude (i). Composition of EM

TM

and (ii). Environmental Factors.i. Composition

†1,2

of EM

TM

:a. Lactobacilli/Lactococci (

L. plantarum

,

L. casei

and

L. Lactis

)

24-26

: The 3 lactic acid bacteriaspecies reported to be part of the EM

TM

mixture are widely used in the food industry andknown for their tolerability of a wide range of pH and temperatures. This improves thelikelihood of their survival in some environments, but the ease of establishing themselvesand/or persisting in an environment is still dependent on a combination of environmentalfactors.

[Note: Lactobacilli/Lactococci, also known as “lactic acid bacteria”, produce lactic acid asthey grow. They are used in many industrial purposes to acidify (reduce pH) of theenvironment into which they have been introduced. Their effect on acidity may alter the