1. FOOD West liquefier -Organic Refuse Conversion Alternative(ORCA)
By: Maryam DeHaghin
Department: Family and Consumer Science

2. Overview Daily Food Waste is a recurrent issue across many industries
These establishments have continuously explored the ability to recycle their DFW as a sustainable, means to transform eatable-organic food into a reusable effluent, preventing it from entering into the landfills.
Solid waste management is one the greatest issues
Facing L.A. running out of landfill area
Converting the food scraps into an effluent & send to Hyperion is a good alternative.
Thus, decreasing the carbon footprint, reducing the costs of its disposal , and saving energy.
in specific Universities, Colleges, Schools, restaurants and food service organizations.
finding the best way in which the refuse that we produce is disposed off carefully to ensure that it does not affect the environment negatively

3. Food Waste Liquefier Study
LMU’s Dining Services department (Sodexo) purchased the ORCA Totally Green Machine
This food liquefier machine converts food waste into a water effluent, which is sent to the sewer.
Model OG Average Daily Waste Degraded,1200 lbs
LMU kitchen Staff load the ORCA machine periodically daily
Micro-organisms sprayed into the machine daily, constantly eating waste foods, break down within 24 hours

4. Food Waste Liquefier Study
Uses approximately 175 gallons of water per day, and generates approximately 300 gallons of water per day.
Effluent flows into floor drain, then to the sewer
The other consideration lies in looking at how the treatment of this waste will affect the environment
It has been found that food waste is composed of roughly 70% water. This water content affects disposal in that it may contaminate water sources that are used for other purposes if not effectively managed at the time of disposal .

5. Food Waste Liquefier Study
The ORCA Totally Green web site claims that …“The end result is a nutrient-rich water effluent that can be put into
the sewer or even reused for irrigation”…
Purpose
To identify the chemical and biological constituents in the effluent from the Orca food waste reduction system; discover if it the effluent was safe for humans and plants.
Secondary intention of study is to identify if the effluent benefits LMU garden campus as a fertilizer.

6. Research Design and Methods
The design of study- experimental
12-weeks, A variety of tests were conducted
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Nitrates
Phosphates
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Bacterial Analysis
Total coliform
E.coli
Oil and Grease (sent to an external lab)
a variety of tests such as BOD, Oil and Grease, Total Solids, Nitrate, Total Phosphates, Total coliform, and E.coli were performed on the chemical, physical and biological water quality of ORCA effluent samples, the results were then compared to the values of a typical domestic raw sewage.

7. Research Design and Methods
The Microbiological tests focused on determining concentrations of the fecal indicator bacteria including total Coliforms, E. Coli, Enterococci, followed by species’ identification of the cultured-isolates determined that potential pathogenic strains were present.
The water effluent coming from the ORCA machine is unlike any other typical effluent
There are no standard testing methods
Used standard methods for waste water

8. Question
In terms of not having standard regular water data to compare the fecal indicator bacteria level, how can we define the results?
(FIB) standards
None for grey-water
Recreational (swimming) and drinking water.
With regard to fecal indicator standards there are none for grey-water, just for recreational (=swimming) and drinking water. For recreational standards, standards for FIB in single samples of water should not exceed the following in terms of MPN/100 ml(Most Probable Number) : total coliforms, 10,000; fecal coliforms or E. coli, 400; enterococci, For drinking water, essentially there should be no FIB present . The FIB measured in our samples obviously exceeds these standards. Conservatively speaking, ORCA effluent should be treated as raw sewage given the possible presence of human pathogens -- not for human contact

9. Explanation
For recreational standards, the standards for FIB in single samples of water should not exceed the following in terms of MPN/100 ml(Most Probable Number)
Total coliforms ,000
Fecal coliforms or E. coli
Enterococci

10. Table 1: MPN for ORCA Effluent Samples
Date
Dilution
Totals
E. Coli
Enterococci
4/10/12 -3
>2,419,200
<1
47,500
2,419,2000
36,800
32,900 -4
12,999,000
40,000
2,909,000
91,000
3,873,000
60,000
4/18/12
8,500
7,200
4,000

11. Bacterial Analysis High levels of fecal indicator bacteria (mainly
total coliforms and enterococci).
Some may be opportunistic human pathogens (e.g. Klebsiella pneumoniae)

12. Research Results
The results for MPN (Most Probable Number)/100 ml from this project were periodic but the results from the Vitek bacterial analyses were more consistent.
Looking at the Total coliform/E. coli group, the most abundant was Klebsiella pneimoniae.
According to the CDC, Klebsiella is a type of Gram-negative bacteria that can cause different types of healthcare- associated infections. These can include pneumonia, bloodstream infections, wound or surgical site infections, and meningitis.

13. Figure 1

14. Conclusion ORCA effluent contains a high nutrient value
However, bacterial data indicates potential human health concerns
Therefore, ORCA effluent belongs in the sewer and should not be used around campus on plants.
sing this machine

15. Discussion ORCA reduce the load of solid waste going to our landfills.
Decreased the carbon footprint
Reducing the costs of its disposal and save energy
* * *
Under specific conditions we might be able to use the Orca Effluent for irrigation-(non-edible plants)
Kill the bacteria ( Ultra violate and Ozone process)
By inactivation of pathogenic organism to prevent the spread of waterborne Diseases
Minimize the bacterial level
Excluding row foods
Excluding plastic bands and napkins

16. Discussion( Limitations)
Finances limited the conduction of multiple tests. It also limited the use of outside labs to confirm and countercheck the results that were obtained.
Not enough education among Kitchen staff in terms of not including some items and materials such as plastic bands, paper tissues to the machine.
Collecting and testing the same sample the same day and time(only after lunch time)

17. Discussion( Limitations)
Only one machine was studied. This therefore means that the results that were obtained in this case can only be applied to the particular machine that was studied.
The content of this waste may influence the final chemical and biological composition of the wastewater that is produced thereafter. The variation of this in different locations coupled to the earlier stated soil difference may affect the results obtained.
Results that were obtained in the undertaking of the research were not compared with any other results.

18. Future research
Continuing the research project for more data and identification of bacteria present. The confirmation of bacteria present will validate or deny the safety claims made by the ORCA company.
 Testing different samples at different times of the day could also be interesting plan to see variability of BOD5day after major meals such as breakfast, lunch, and dinner and see if there is a significant difference in levels of BOD5day values.
Lastly, no other study has been conducted on the ORCA machine as suggested by literature searching. This project is part of a larger characterization of the ORCA effluent that has not been researched before.