I have read both threads about kvas but may not have grasped everything in detail - I would appreciate if I could get a confirmation/clarification on a few points: (a)container does not need to be closed (b)container should not be shaken (Would shaking the container have an adverse effect / formation of CO2/gases ?) (c)after several days the sediment is removed. (d)If (a) is true, is the only way one can tell that the kvas is bad is if it smells bad ? Other than the above, I am also interested in using kvas for fermenting grass/compost etc.. In one of the posts, it was mentioned that kvas should be diluted 1:10 and could be used as EM/directly for fermenting. I guess that the fermentation still needs to be done anaerobically. I have taken two 15l paint buckets and have filled them with vegetable scraps, grass etc. sprinkling kvas (diluted 1:8) on each layer and compressing each layer (eg. 2cm) until filled. Not sure if fermentation will work as one of the buckets seemed to be creating gases/ I needed to put some stones on the lid to keep it closed. I'm not sure if opening the bucket will kill the whole process/how long should I wait before opening ?

Title: A bothersome black-spot [of roses ] experience. Author: Rosen, H. R. Published in: Am. Rose Ann. (1936), pages 121-6. Abstract: "The efficiencies of fungicides in controlling black-spot of roses were in the descending order Kolotex (a mixt. of dusting S, Pb arsenate and colloidal clay), Bordeaux mixt. (4:4:50), Palustrex Sulfonate B (2 tablespoonfuls per gal. water) and neutral and basic Cu acetates (0.5 lb./50 gal.). Palustrex, the Cu acetates, Cu2O (1-2 lb./50 gal.) and basic Cu sulfate (2 lb./50 gal.) seriously injured the foliage. With certain varieties of roses, S dusts caused greater defoliation in hot weather than did the Cu fungicides." --------------------------------------------- Title: Spraying, pruning and die-back [of roses ]. Author: Rosen, H. R. Published in: Am. Rose Ann. (1935), pages 43-7. Abstract: "Bordeaux mixt. (4:4:50), Cu acetate (1-2 lb./50 gal. H2O) and Palustrex sulfonate B (2 tablespoonfuls/gal. H2O) were approx. equally effective in controlling powdery mildew and blackspot when Aresco was added as a wetting agent at the rate of 1 teaspoonful/gal. of spray. At the rate of 2 lb./50 gal., Cu acetate gave no observable spray deposit on the leaves, but it burned the foliage badly and caused much leaf shedding; no injury occurred when it was used at the rate of 1 lb./50 gal. With Palustrex sulfonate B serious burning of the leaves occurred on bushes sprayed with the last of the material remaining in the tank; the material also had a marked tendency to gum up the spray equipment." ------------------------------------------------ Title: Red copper oxide as a rose spray. Author: Horsfall, J. G. Published in: Am. Rose Ann. (1936), pages 117-20. Abstract: "Good control of black-spot of roses was obtained by spraying the bushes at bi-weekly intervals with Cu2O (2 oz./50 gal.). Although the spray may speckle the leaves of certain varieties with injury spots, unlike Bordeaux mixt. it causes no distortion of the foliage. There are indications that the efficiency of the spray, in the control of both black-spot and mildew, particularly the latter, can be increased by the addn. of a small amt. of emulsified oil." --------------------------- Also see 1922 American Rose Society link: http://books.google.com/books?id=uUkYAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA83&lpg=PA83&dq=%22Bordeaux+Fungicide%22+roses&source=bl&ots=BHrR8K-njM&sig=yobSZUKyI33FFfNEVskZMlIHcPo&hl=en&ei=BYrnS42IA8H88Aa8mY3xCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCkQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false --------------------------------------------------------- Here is a link that might be useful: 1922 American Rose Annual link

chas045, you are correct that measuring in oz may not have high enough resolution. It did occur to me that I should have set the scale to measure in grams. 1/100 of a gram is better than 1/100 of an oz. However, the visual inspection with the microscope convinced me that there was no corrosion on the aluminum. Optically, light wavelengths are not far from atom sizes. The change in light on a reflective surface can be effected by thickness of a few atoms. The anti-reflection coating on a camera lens makes the lens reflection bluish. A few atoms of oil (oil slick) on a puddle of water make the reflection of light in rainbow colors. The microscope inspection of the aluminum foil showed no difference at all on the tested surfaces. Like all metals, including stainless steel, can be subjected to corrosion when two dissimilar metals are in an electrolytic solution, depending on their respective locations on the Periodic Chart. That�s what happens a lot when you see discoloration or pitting on aluminum. It is a scientific mystery that, aluminum being the third most abundant substance on earth, our body has not developed much use for it. There are not too many aluminum compounds which are toxic to the body (as I remember), because of that, sometimes I think by reacting to impurities, aluminum can render some toxic substance harmless. dcarch

Hello "orange-peel" fans!!! >>> Sorry Darren-painter... * The 1st mistake was using a "paint" where it shouldn't be...right on chalky-texture & bare drywall paper!! * PVA (poly-vinyl-acetate) primer should've been used. IDEALLY b4 AND after spraying texture. Not many painter do, but it's the "ideal" way. * At a minimum, priming HAS to be done after texture is dry. * Primers & paint are 2 different things. A decent primer will seal-off the VERY POROUS drywall paper & the sprayed texture. Paints will just largely soak-in...and unevenly at that! >>> Your texture did what it would naturally do...crumble & get pasty when wet! It's just drywall-mud & water sprayed on wall. * When this mix dries, it's basically "chalk-lumps"! What happens when you sand drywall joints?? Same thing...lots of dust! * Your "paint film" will peel off these texture-lumps VERY easily, since they're BARELY adhered to the drywall paper. A paint film applied to this will start to form a skin, and easily peel off the chalky texture. * If wall had been PRIMED b4 texturing, it has a better "grip" to the primer than to bare drywall paper. >>> Your primer was peeled off by the tape because it takes time to form a tough-enough bond to wall. Primers are made to seal, not be tested by tape!! * You need to slit the primer/paint film with a knife at the tape-edge when done painting. * The film that bridges onto the TAPE, is stronger than the bond to the primed wall...FOR MANY HOURS after paintings' done!! * This "bond-forming" takes DAYS. Painted walls aren't considered CURED/hardened-off for a MONTH. * I purposely wait till next day to slice at the tape-edge! That way it's a nice dry cut. >>> To summarize, your texture-situation is completely normal. >>> Up here, I grew up seeing "orange-peel" everywhere. I still think it's odd seeing SMOOTH walls! I don't care for smooth...too annoying seeing little flaws/waves. >>> You'll also have to get used to using REAL primer, and TWO topcoats of paint. THAT'S what produces the best finishes. Have a good one! Faron