To Poop or Not to Poop, That is Not a Question


#1

"Let's be friends!"

We all poop. Peter Piper pooped, the popes all pooped, heck, even Penelope pooped. But even though poop is an undeniable fact of life – Benjamin Franklin might well have said "In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes, and poop" – does poop occupy its rightful place in the grand pantheon? Not even close.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://fromfilmerstofarmers.com/to-poop-or-not-to-poop-that-is-not-a-question/

#2

I have read (can’t remember where) that urine is actually the more valuable waste in terms of its nutrient content. If so, it should be much easier to make use of than feces. For those without a bladder or prostate infection, urine comes out sterile and the storage, application and cleanup are far easier than dealing with poop. You may want to investigate and discuss the comparative advantages of these two wastes.


#3

Yes, while they’re both pretty close in phosphorous and potassium content, urine has much more nitrogen (and is why little boys get told to pee around the lemon trees, which like nitrogen). Feces does have much more carbon though. But in regards to other nutrients in general? I don’t recall. I’ll have to read up on that again, although I’d presume that they’re both quite necessary.

One of the big arguments seems to be whether they should be kept separate or composted together. I suppose it’s time I investigate that a bit.