Yucca Vs. Soapwort Vs. Aritha/Soapnuts?

**mellie** · January 3rd, 2009, 11:37 AM

It just occurred to me that since Saponins are a fish poison, perhaps it is unwise to use soapnut shampoo if it might end up in the groundwater/water system?

Here is an interesting article:

http://answers.google.com/answers/th...id/193674.html

"...Unfortunately, the poisoning of streams to capture fish has had
ecological consequences. The efficiency of this method has ensured
that its increasing use as populations increase may result in the
extirpation of susceptible fish species from their native streams..."

But then again, I don't know - aren't all soaps and detergents likely toxic to fish?

**ktani** · January 3rd, 2009, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by mellie

It just occurred to me that since Saponins are a fish poison, perhaps it is unwise to use soapnut shampoo if it might end up in the groundwater/water system?

Here is an interesting article:

http://answers.google.com/answers/th...id/193674.html

But then again, I don't know - aren't all soaps and detergents likely toxic to fish?

Great link!

**ktani** · January 3rd, 2009, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by mellie

It just occurred to me that since Saponins are a fish poison, perhaps it is unwise to use soapnut shampoo if it might end up in the groundwater/water system?

Here is an interesting article:

http://answers.google.com/answers/th...id/193674.html

But then again, I don't know - aren't all soaps and detergents likely toxic to fish?

It appears that removing dynthetic detergents can be done.

"Surfactant removal from water solutions by means of ultrafiltration and ion-exchange"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...fb7d6bbda09dc5

They are and have taken steps to remove phosphates from detergents.
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/chemi...007_234_en.pdf

**ktani** · January 3rd, 2009, 12:42 PM

2008

It is easier to remove an offending chemical from a conventional detergent formula than it is to detoxify saponins, IMO.

"Study links population to intersex fish

Last year .... Sierra Club asked the Environmental Protection Agency to ban the use of certain toxic chemical compounds in industrial and household detergents because the ingredients .... believed to cause male fish to develop female characteristics. .... Sierra Club also asked the Environmental Protection Agency to bar .... use of these products in areas where wastewater treatment plants aren't equipped to remove nonylphenol ethoxylates, or NPEs.

.... compounds, derived from petroleum, are used mainly in detergents but also in paper manufacturing and flame retardants.
NPEs .... more tightly restricted in Canada and Europe than in the United States, which issued water-quality limits for the key ingredient, nonylphenol, or NP, in December 2005. Detergent manufacturers Procter & Gamble of Cincinnati and Unilever have substituted other chemicals in their products .... Wal-Mart is seeking to phase NPEs out of its stores by rewarding companies that find alternatives."
http://lateline.muzi.net/news/ll/eng...l?cc=25551&ccr=

**mellie** · January 3rd, 2009, 01:06 PM

I certainly don't want to use something that could potentially have that deliterious (sp?) an effect.

I wonder if natural soaps, such as Dairy Whip and castile soaps, are toxic to fish as well? I can't find any research on it..

**ktani** · January 3rd, 2009, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by mellie

I certainly don't want to use something that could potentially have that deliterious (sp?) an effect.

I wonder if natural soaps, such as Dairy Whip and castile soaps, are toxic to fish as well? I can't find any research on it..

In that link you posted it referred to closed water systems in one part, so it depends on how much of a toxic solution is going into how much water.

**ktani** · January 3rd, 2009, 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by mellie

I certainly don't want to use something that could potentially have that deliterious (sp?) an effect.

I wonder if natural soaps, such as Dairy Whip and castile soaps, are toxic to fish as well? I can't find any research on it..

Here you go.
"Acute and subacute toxicity studies using potassium salts of fatty acids indicate that soap salts are relatively non-toxic to birds. .... are slightly toxic to both coldwater and warmwater fish species. .... potassium salts are highly toxic to aquatic invertebrates."
http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/fac...s/4083fact.pdf

"All soaps and detergents are toxic to fish. Some are more toxic than others .... what product you choose is less important than how and where you do the job. If you are using a soap or detergent, do not wash the car on a hard surface that drains to the street or a storm drain. .... could allow toxic levels of chemicals to reach the nearest stream or other water body. Park the car over a permeable surface like grass .... will absorb any soap or detergent and allow it to biodegrade."
http://www.watoxics.org/homes-and-ga...ing#washingcar

**mellie** · January 3rd, 2009, 01:24 PM

I just found this:

http://www.greenlivingtips.com/artic...detergent.html

Soapnuts and fish

Just because something is natural, it doesn't mean it's totally harmless. The saponin in soapnuts in large enough quantities can have a toxic to fish. It's been used for centuries as a way to stun fish in ponds that then float to the surface for easy gathering. Saponin does break down quite readily, so it doesn't pose a significant environmental threat, but as a precaution, don't let runoff from soapnut solutions end up in stormwater drains and certainly don't empty buckets of the solution directly into waterways.

**mellie** · January 3rd, 2009, 01:28 PM

A comment added to the article above was interesting:

I know that large amounts of saponin has a certain level of toxicity to gill fish. Can you tell me if traces left in the shells would harm the worms in my composter?

You should test some to be 100% certain. The question MAY be are they truly "spent"? And that is if saponin has an effect on worms. Fish are killed because the intake of high levels of saponin goes through their gills and directly enters their bloodstream. The fish meat is obviously harmless to humans, and it does make for an efficient way to harvest fish. However, as any of us that fish or have ever had an aquarium, we know that most fish are extremely sensitive and react adversely to even minor environmental or chemical changes. My gut tells me that worms are much heartier creatures - they can live and flourish in garbage of all kinds for Pete's sake. However, it's better to be safe than sorry. Just test some in a bucket. USE UNSPENT SHELLS TO SEE IF THEY REACT TO THE SAPONIN. If truly "spent" (none or only minute saponin content), I wouldn't be concerned at all.

**ktani** · January 3rd, 2009, 01:36 PM

From your earlier link

"...Unfortunately .... poisoning of streams to capture fish has had ecological consequences. .... efficiency of this method has ensured that its increasing use as populations increase may result in the extirpation of susceptible fish species from their native streams .... He cites extensive references ....

Clearly .... not be wise to release commercial quantities into the storm water system .... into a river or lake system. .... might be less problem releasing it into a sewage system where the sewage is later treated.

.... a lot of work being carried out into various aspects of saponins .... lots of positive ways to present the product without over-emphasising possible direct benefits in water run-off."
http://answers.google.com/answers/th...id/193674.html

More research is required, IMO.