Effluent and grey water are different things I believe. Effluent, generally, has human waste in it and is very concentrated. Grey water does not have human waste in it and what pollutants it has are not very concentrated. I'm not sure what type of water your referring to with "recycled" but I doubt they want to simply purify effluent and serve it up to drink, it has to be diluted a ton first.
Effluent and grey water are different things I believe. Effluent, generally, has human waste in it and is very concentrated. Grey water does not have human waste in it and what pollutants it has are not very concentrated. I'm not sure what type of water your referring to with "recycled" but I doubt they want to simply purify effluent and serve it up to drink, it has to be diluted a ton first.
I know the difference. (Think I may have mentioned that earlier in the thread.)
And that's my problem, they are planning on recycling effluent with reverse osmosis here and adding it to the drinking water.
It's like most things scott. It relies heavily on the process and we can't measure the outcome or haven't as yet. I mean that in terms of health and disease control. Surely as a kid you were brought up to be careful what you ingested? Well I'd say I was that way too. If it comes down to us having to drink recycled effluent, then I guess it does, but I'd prefer we explored and implemented a whole lot more alternatives first. I'm never going to be happy about them mixing it with the "natural" water supply. I really can't seperate it out from the politics. It requires me to "trust" in the powers that be and I'm sorry but that's just not going to happen.
If my efforts at water conservation aren't yielding good enough results then I still believe we have a lot more avenues open to us BEFORE EVERYONE is forced to DRINK water that has been recycled from a huge reservoir of COMBINED effluent. Is that making any sense?
I wonder why you are so readily for it. I mean why you are so behind this particular solution as opposed to trying other options first?
I'm behind most of the options, except probably desalinisation, which seems to me to be a ridiculously expensive and wasteful one. Unless it could be done using solar energy it just sounds like a bad option that should be a last resort only.
Recycling just makes sense. In the capital cities most of that waste water is currently going out to sea in a treated form so clean that its essentially drinkable already. That is incredibly wasteful. You already 'trust in the powers that be' everytime you drink tap water anyway. Its not as if its come directly from some pure mountain stream straight to your house. Its already highly processed and treated to make it safe to drink. The technology is available to recycle waste water, and its already done successfully in many other countries, so why not do it? I've travelled in places where all the water you drink from the tap is recycled, and I'm still alive. I have never heard a good argument against recycled water on health grounds. If you know of one I'd be glad to read about it.
From your posts it sounds like you'd rather see the water that currently goes out to sea used for irrigation or industry, rather than domestic water supply. Ok, but how do you keep it separate? You'd have to build massive amounts of new infrastructure if you wanted to have two separate water supply systems (one for domestic water and one for industry). I can't imagine that using it for irrigation would be a very efficient option either, as the major irrigation areas are so far away from the capital cities. Again, you would need to build huge amounts of new infrastructure to shift that water from the cities to agricultural areas. Keeping it in the city just makes sense.
It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!
I went out of my way to say my point was not directed at you. The point is there is not a cookie cutter solution. If there was I'd be raking you over the coals for not living in high density housing. After all if I can live in high density housing everyone should. And if I ride my bike to work and don't turn on the heater in January then you should do the same. I can manage to commute to work without using public transportation or cars then you should do the same. What a great solution. Toronto can get rid of public transportation and everyone can just bike to work. Think of all the greenhouse gas emissions being saved.
Cookie cutter solutions are not answers and trying to act like what's right for you is right for everyone is fanaticism. It's bullshit when coming from religious folks and equally bullshit coming from the eco folks.
dude ... why take it personally ... whoever your comment was intended for is irrelevant - i'm responding to it regardless ...
why take such a defensive position?? ... i don't see how i am proposing a "cookie cutter" solution ... i simply believe lawns are stupid - the balance between pros and cons definitely leans heavy towards cons ... you can have your lawn - a lot of people do ... just don't take it so personally when someone thinks they are a waste ...
funny, i started a thread a few weeks ago about our dangerously disappearing clean water supply, and all the political/foreign policy implications, and i was basically ignored b/c the article was published on AlterNet. i was told they just like to scare people. unlike the assholes in the bush administration, i assume.
best to pretend we have no water supply problem, i guess.
here's a plan: we all (except for the naysayers, like jlew) start conserving water and begin living as if we get it, that yes, there is a crisis on the horizon. then when the crisis hits and jlew's throat is parched and his body stinks for lack of passably clean water to bathe in, we can enjoy our lemonade on ice as they watch us from the sidelines.
tho they'll prolly get one or two softies to give them a drink, since people who are aware of the threat will most likely also be openhearted and generous. i think the assholes depend on that generosity, so they assume they don't need to worry about the problem themselves.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
funny, i started a thread a few weeks ago about our dangerously disappearing clean water supply, and all the political/foreign policy implications, and i was basically ignored b/c the article was published on AlterNet. i was told they just like to scare people. unlike the assholes in the bush administration, i assume.
best to pretend we have no water supply problem, i guess.
Under our current water distribution laws and infrastructue the availability of clean water is a local issue. We in North America cannot help Australia. Where I live we generally have an abundance of clean water. This does not help those who live 2,000 miles away.
The water issue may be of national concern but has to be addressed locally.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Under our current water distribution laws and infrastructue the availability of clean water is a local issue. We in North America cannot help Australia. Where I live we generally have an abundance of clean water. This does not help those who live 2,000 miles away.
The water issue may be of national concern but has to be addressed locally.
it won't stay that way for long, because eventually, whoever has it will be the ones holding all the power on the world stage. much like oil is now, only worse, because we CAN live with very little- or NO- oil, but we can't live w/o water.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
here's a plan: we all (except for the naysayers, like jlew) start conserving water and begin living as if we get it, that yes, there is a crisis on the horizon. then when the crisis hits and jlew's throat is parched and his body stinks for lack of passably clean water to bathe in, we can enjoy our lemonade on ice as they watch us from the sidelines.
tho they'll prolly get one or two softies to give them a drink, since people who are aware of the threat will most likely also be openhearted and generous. i think the assholes depend on that generosity, so they assume they don't need to worry about the problem themselves.
Water unlike oil is a renewable natural resource. You act like what you conserve today is going to be there for yuo 50 years down the road. Water generally doesn't work that way and good luck drinking your 50 year old water.
Conserving water is key up to the point where the use of water does not exceed nature's ability to renew the water source. What this level of water conservancy is depends entirely on where you live. So please no cookie cutter solutions.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Water unlike oil is a renewable natural resource. You act like what you conserve today is going to be there for yuo 50 years down the road. Water generally doesn't work that way and good luck drinking your 50 year old water.
Conserving water is key up to the point where the use of water does not exceed nature's ability to renew the water source. What this level of water conservancy is depends entirely on where you live. So please no cookie cutter solutions.
why are you assuming i'm suggesting "cookie cutter" solutions? i'm not acting as if i will be drinking 50 yr old water. my point is that at the current rate of use- and misuse/waste- we're gonna be in trouble in the near future, renewable or not. it's not possible to keep up with the rate of use if we continue as we are, unless they come up with a variety of solutions that can reverse what we're doing. but i fear that the mere hint of such a technology would give people a false sense of security and would then lead to more carelessness. you disagree?
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Awesome for Canada. In Vancouver we'll be maintaining our lush green lawns while you may be having your 2 minute showers. Cool.
that's interesting because even in rainy vancouver - they have water restriction programs and if climate change impacts your snowpack - you will have further restrictions ... and what is also interesting is those restrictions focus specifically on lawn sprinkling ...
the availability of clean water is a problem worldwide - if it's an issue where you live - imagine what it's like elsewhere ...
that's interesting because even in rainy vancouver - they have water restriction programs and if climate change impacts your snowpack - you will have further restrictions ... and what is also interesting is those restrictions focus specifically on lawn sprinkling ...
the availability of clean water is a problem worldwide - if it's an issue where you live - imagine what it's like elsewhere ...
Global warming's impact on snowpack has been to greatly increase it. We did not have a single bit of lawn watering conservation this past summer. As water can't really be saved for future use any decision to implement water conservation programs is based as it should solely on the immediate area's ability to renew the water resource. A water conservation plan is available for use but naturally occuring conditions call for when it's implemented. Given all the restriction on the sale and transportation of water I cannot see water being an issue in the Pacific Northwest for a very long time and if it does become an issue we have water conservation policies and plans in place. Same as what every city in the world should have. It's a local issue and looking for help from federal governments seems quite silly. Hell, locally you even get to decide what industries you allow into the area so for the most part the quality of water resources is locally managed.
As far as the conditions in any area in Canada outside the GTA I'd stop relying on CBC. They really don't know their ass from their elbow. They tried to tie Tofino's recent water shortage to global warming when they knew that to be false and was soley due to the city not investing in infrastructure as it grew. They have an agenda and a message to spread and don't let the truth get in the way of it.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
it won't stay that way for long, because eventually, whoever has it will be the ones holding all the power on the world stage. much like oil is now, only worse, because we CAN live with very little- or NO- oil, but we can't live w/o water.
we see that now with the "water grab" in las vegas. i've been fighting the pipeline that will take water from my area to pipe to las vegas which doesn't have water for it's exploding population.
those of us that do have the water to sustain the coming climate changes are currently fighting off those that don't. it's only going to get worse.
here's a plan: we all (except for the naysayers, like jlew) start conserving water and begin living as if we get it, that yes, there is a crisis on the horizon. then when the crisis hits and jlew's throat is parched and his body stinks for lack of passably clean water to bathe in, we can enjoy our lemonade on ice as they watch us from the sidelines.
tho they'll prolly get one or two softies to give them a drink, since people who are aware of the threat will most likely also be openhearted and generous. i think the assholes depend on that generosity, so they assume they don't need to worry about the problem themselves.
great plan I am more then half way to my recommended daily intake of 2 liters today. how about you?
Global warming's impact on snowpack has been to greatly increase it. We did not have a single bit of lawn watering conservation this past summer. As water can't really be saved for future use any decision to implement water conservation programs is based as it should solely on the immediate area's ability to renew the water resource. A water conservation plan is available for use but naturally occuring conditions call for when it's implemented. Given all the restriction on the sale and transportation of water I cannot see water being an issue in the Pacific Northwest for a very long time and if it does become an issue we have water conservation policies and plans in place. Same as what every city in the world should have. It's a local issue and looking for help from federal governments seems quite silly. Hell, locally you even get to decide what industries you allow into the area so for the most part the quality of water resources is locally managed.
As far as the conditions in any area in Canada outside the GTA I'd stop relying on CBC. They really don't know their ass from their elbow. They tried to tie Tofino's recent water shortage to global warming when they knew that to be false and was soley due to the city not investing in infrastructure as it grew. They have an agenda and a message to spread and don't let the truth get in the way of it.
the report indicates a decrease in snowpack ... as for the lawn restrictions - i believe you are on a constant restriction program (ie. only allowed to water lawns on certaiin days) as of a certain period (spring) ...
and as for tofino - there may have been some poor insight in infrastructure changes but drought cannot be blamed on that ... or again a decrease in snowpack ...
I'm behind most of the options, except probably desalinisation, which seems to me to be a ridiculously expensive and wasteful one. Unless it could be done using solar energy it just sounds like a bad option that should be a last resort only.
Recycling just makes sense. In the capital cities most of that waste water is currently going out to sea in a treated form so clean that its essentially drinkable already. That is incredibly wasteful. You already 'trust in the powers that be' everytime you drink tap water anyway. Its not as if its come directly from some pure mountain stream straight to your house. Its already highly processed and treated to make it safe to drink. The technology is available to recycle waste water, and its already done successfully in many other countries, so why not do it? I've travelled in places where all the water you drink from the tap is recycled, and I'm still alive. I have never heard a good argument against recycled water on health grounds. If you know of one I'd be glad to read about it.
From your posts it sounds like you'd rather see the water that currently goes out to sea used for irrigation or industry, rather than domestic water supply. Ok, but how do you keep it separate? You'd have to build massive amounts of new infrastructure if you wanted to have two separate water supply systems (one for domestic water and one for industry). I can't imagine that using it for irrigation would be a very efficient option either, as the major irrigation areas are so far away from the capital cities. Again, you would need to build huge amounts of new infrastructure to shift that water from the cities to agricultural areas. Keeping it in the city just makes sense.
Scott I'm not against recycling. I just think we need to make much better use of the water that we do use domestically ie, it needs to be utilized SEVERAL times on a property, not this comes in fresh from the tap and is whisked away through the sewarage thing after one use we've got going on. I don't even have a problem with water being recycled and then sent back for a second and third use on a property. (This is suburbia I'm talking about btw although it wouldn't hurt industry or ag either, for those that aren't doing it.) My issue, and I think you'll find many other people's issue, is adding the recycled waste water to the drinking water supply. If recycling must be done, then keep the two supplies seperate.
Personally I'd like some assistance in adding a grey water unit to my house and I'd like to see EVERY OTHER HOUSE in the city have one as well. I'd like the water from the gray water unit used to flush my toilet (or see another way of dealing with toilets entirely. one that doesn't use water. ESPECIALLY drinking water) I'd like that my shower water is used in the laundry to wash my clothes. I'd like the water that I capture from the guttering to be collected in a tank and used for the washing machine, the shower, everything really. The way I see it people can do many things to keep water on their property for the purposes of gardening so drinking water should NEVER BE USED FOR THAT. (there goes all the turf companies) I don't understand why people aren't given an allocation of water, so many litres per year to do with as they wish and to know that they can re-use it more than once and once their quota runs out, that's it.
And if all that's going on at my place, and my neighbours places, that we are doing EVERY SINGLE THING we possibly can to use less water, recycle what we use, conserve the natural resource, then I've got no problem with industry and agriculture having to think of new and smart ways of conserving too. I know that MANY are already, but there are plenty that aren't.
I'm not really in favor of desalination plants myself. Too much focus on doing it using existing energy solutions, so like you, I'd prefer if that's going to happen then bring on the solar or any other alternative.
The issue as I see it when it comes to drinking recycled effluent is that these things take time to surface as a health problem. So why get started? It's gonna be too late if they start adding recycled water to the natural supply and THEN discover down the track that it's causing all kinds of sickness. PROVE that is doesn't first and they might see more people embrace it as an option. And when it comes to costs being prohibitive in terms of setting up real water solutions, I'm not buying it. Lets face it there seems to be plenty of money to bandy about when they're talking war, plenty of concessions and tax breaks for big business to get started and to stay in business. The money is there it's simply a matter of them deciding what is important. So far all I've seen is band aid solutions from both State and Federal governments. If they can afford to dot desalination plants all over the country, (which I suspect will end up in private hands anyway, which means SOMEONE is making money from a basic human need) then they can afford to rethink our sewarage and REALLY drought proof us. You'll forgive me, of course I'm very happy you're still alive to tell the tale , but just because YOU drank recycled water and survived doesn't mean that everyone will.
Anyway, I FINALLY remembered the name of that bloke that I've got a lot of time for. Peter Andrews. I found his story quite remarkable and well worth paying attention to. One has to wonder if he's out there with his nutty ideas, just how many other "nutters" there are that aren't getting airplay that have some very smart and REAL solutions to this problem.
Scott I'm not against recycling. I just think we need to make much better use of the water that we do use domestically ie, it needs to be utilized SEVERAL times on a property, not this comes in fresh from the tap and is whisked away through the sewarage thing after one use we've got going on. I don't even have a problem with water being recycled and then sent back for a second and third use on a property. (This is suburbia I'm talking about btw although it wouldn't hurt industry or ag either, for those that aren't doing it.) My issue, and I think you'll find many other people's issue, is adding the recycled waste water to the drinking water supply. If recycling must be done, then keep the two supplies seperate.
Personally I'd like some assistance in adding a grey water unit to my house and I'd like to see EVERY OTHER HOUSE in the city have one as well. I'd like the water from the gray water unit used to flush my toilet (or see another way of dealing with toilets entirely. one that doesn't use water. ESPECIALLY drinking water) I'd like that my shower water is used in the laundry to wash my clothes. I'd like the water that I capture from the guttering to be collected in a tank and used for the washing machine, the shower, everything really. The way I see it people can do many things to keep water on their property for the purposes of gardening so drinking water should NEVER BE USED FOR THAT. (there goes all the turf companies) I don't understand why people aren't given an allocation of water, so many litres per year to do with as they wish and to know that they can re-use it more than once and once their quota runs out, that's it.
And if all that's going on at my place, and my neighbours places, that we are doing EVERY SINGLE THING we possibly can to use less water, recycle what we use, conserve the natural resource, then I've got no problem with industry and agriculture having to think of new and smart ways of conserving too. I know that MANY are already, but there are plenty that aren't.
I'm not really in favor of desalination plants myself. Too much focus on doing it using existing energy solutions, so like you, I'd prefer if that's going to happen then bring on the solar or any other alternative.
The issue as I see it when it comes to drinking recycled effluent is that these things take time to surface as a health problem. So why get started? It's gonna be too late if they start adding recycled water to the natural supply and THEN discover down the track that it's causing all kinds of sickness. PROVE that is doesn't first and they might see more people embrace it as an option. And when it comes to costs being prohibitive in terms of setting up real water solutions, I'm not buying it. Lets face it there seems to be plenty of money to bandy about when they're talking war, plenty of concessions and tax breaks for big business to get started and to stay in business. The money is there it's simply a matter of them deciding what is important. So far all I've seen is band aid solutions from both State and Federal governments. If they can afford to dot desalination plants all over the country, (which I suspect will end up in private hands anyway, which means SOMEONE is making money from a basic human need) then they can afford to rethink our sewarage and REALLY drought proof us. You'll forgive me, of course I'm very happy you're still alive to tell the tale , but just because YOU drank recycled water and survived doesn't mean that everyone will.
Anyway, I FINALLY remembered the name of that bloke that I've got a lot of time for. Peter Andrews. I found his story quite remarkable and well worth paying attention to. One has to wonder if he's out there with his nutty ideas, just how many other "nutters" there are that aren't getting airplay that have some very smart and REAL solutions to this problem.
oh! hehe! I don't drink tap water, well RARELY anyway, so I aint trusting the powers that be at all!
hi jeanie
arizona law stated that water from the kitchen was blackwater. the same classification as toilet water. after fighting for 2 years; i got the law changed because of the way they made their decision; which was that the study found bacteria and viruses. i argued that the bacteria and viruses were beneficial. after much argument; they could not prove me wrong and they changed the law. i then installed a composting toilet and a greywater system which irrigated my landscape. here's how it worked:
i bought a fiberglass tank which held about 125 gallons. the tank is needed because the drain field cannot drain as fast as your shower or tub needs to drain; therefore the water went into the tank; then slowly drained to irrigate. i used solid pipe to take the water to where i wanted to irrigate; then used drain field pipe.
i hope this helps.
hi jeanie
arizona law stated that water from the kitchen was blackwater. the same classification as toilet water. after fighting for 2 years; i got the law changed because of the way they made their decision; which was that the study found bacteria and viruses. i argued that the bacteria and viruses were beneficial. after much argument; they could not prove me wrong and they changed the law. i then installed a composting toilet and a greywater system which irrigated my landscape. here's how it worked:
i bought a fiberglass tank which held about 125 gallons. the tank is needed because the drain field cannot drain as fast as your shower or tub needs to drain; therefore the water went into the tank; then slowly drained to irrigate. i used solid pipe to take the water to where i wanted to irrigate; then used drain field pipe.
i hope this helps.
It does. Thanks. I'll pick your brains about it later.
Well I think it's gonna get down to money and availability. Oh and work.
I wanna get one of those nifty grey water units but they have to be plumbed in by a licenced plumber. Same as any tank we get has to be registered I think. I mean I'd love to know enough about plumbing to do a whole bunch of water diversion stuff here. You know like reroute the outlet in the bath and the sink in the bathroom to go to the toilet flush and the taps for the washing machine. The chemical toilet sounds like a great idea for the bush house though. I'm just not sure how we'd go about it. Or how much it would cost. Was it really expensive for you?
Well I think it's gonna get down to money and availability. Oh and work.
I wanna get one of those nifty grey water units but they have to be plumbed in by a licenced plumber. Same as any tank we get has to be registered I think. I mean I'd love to know enough about plumbing to do a whole bunch of water diversion stuff here. You know like reroute the outlet in the bath and the sink in the bathroom to go to the toilet flush and the taps for the washing machine. The chemical toilet sounds like a great idea for the bush house though. I'm just not sure how we'd go about it. Or how much it would cost. Was it really expensive for you?
the name of the loo was sun mar. it was about $1200 USD.
i got a book about basic plumbing and self taught myself. fortunately i was in the bush where the inspectors wouldn't come. :eek:
the name of the loo was sun mar. it was about $1200 USD.
i got a book about basic plumbing and self taught myself. fortunately i was in the bush where the inspectors wouldn't come. :eek:
Yeah, well that's why I'm thinking it'll be easier to impliment a lot of things out on the patch and we'll have to succumb to plumbers here in the burbs. :rolleyes:
Maybe I can start practicing out at the bush?
I'm not sure we can afford the $1200 right now, which I'm guessing would be around $1300 AUD. We do have one of the old pit dunnies at the shack and we did used to have the same at the house but Gran got it all fixed up and indoor with the first extention. Not sure I'd be keen to go back to that old outback dunny thing. It stunk, it was FREEZING cold and full of critters!! :eek:
Comments
You got to spend it all
I know the difference.
And that's my problem, they are planning on recycling effluent with reverse osmosis here and adding it to the drinking water.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200607/s1700516.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/water/stories/s1699774.htm
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
I'm behind most of the options, except probably desalinisation, which seems to me to be a ridiculously expensive and wasteful one. Unless it could be done using solar energy it just sounds like a bad option that should be a last resort only.
Recycling just makes sense. In the capital cities most of that waste water is currently going out to sea in a treated form so clean that its essentially drinkable already. That is incredibly wasteful. You already 'trust in the powers that be' everytime you drink tap water anyway. Its not as if its come directly from some pure mountain stream straight to your house. Its already highly processed and treated to make it safe to drink. The technology is available to recycle waste water, and its already done successfully in many other countries, so why not do it? I've travelled in places where all the water you drink from the tap is recycled, and I'm still alive. I have never heard a good argument against recycled water on health grounds. If you know of one I'd be glad to read about it.
From your posts it sounds like you'd rather see the water that currently goes out to sea used for irrigation or industry, rather than domestic water supply. Ok, but how do you keep it separate? You'd have to build massive amounts of new infrastructure if you wanted to have two separate water supply systems (one for domestic water and one for industry). I can't imagine that using it for irrigation would be a very efficient option either, as the major irrigation areas are so far away from the capital cities. Again, you would need to build huge amounts of new infrastructure to shift that water from the cities to agricultural areas. Keeping it in the city just makes sense.
-C Addison
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
dude ... why take it personally ... whoever your comment was intended for is irrelevant - i'm responding to it regardless ...
why take such a defensive position?? ... i don't see how i am proposing a "cookie cutter" solution ... i simply believe lawns are stupid - the balance between pros and cons definitely leans heavy towards cons ... you can have your lawn - a lot of people do ... just don't take it so personally when someone thinks they are a waste ...
best to pretend we have no water supply problem, i guess.
good plan.
for anyone interested, here's the article:
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=260676
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
tho they'll prolly get one or two softies to give them a drink, since people who are aware of the threat will most likely also be openhearted and generous. i think the assholes depend on that generosity, so they assume they don't need to worry about the problem themselves.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
The water issue may be of national concern but has to be addressed locally.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
it won't stay that way for long, because eventually, whoever has it will be the ones holding all the power on the world stage. much like oil is now, only worse, because we CAN live with very little- or NO- oil, but we can't live w/o water.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Conserving water is key up to the point where the use of water does not exceed nature's ability to renew the water source. What this level of water conservancy is depends entirely on where you live. So please no cookie cutter solutions.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
why are you assuming i'm suggesting "cookie cutter" solutions? i'm not acting as if i will be drinking 50 yr old water. my point is that at the current rate of use- and misuse/waste- we're gonna be in trouble in the near future, renewable or not. it's not possible to keep up with the rate of use if we continue as we are, unless they come up with a variety of solutions that can reverse what we're doing. but i fear that the mere hint of such a technology would give people a false sense of security and would then lead to more carelessness. you disagree?
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
that's interesting because even in rainy vancouver - they have water restriction programs and if climate change impacts your snowpack - you will have further restrictions ... and what is also interesting is those restrictions focus specifically on lawn sprinkling ...
the availability of clean water is a problem worldwide - if it's an issue where you live - imagine what it's like elsewhere ...
As far as the conditions in any area in Canada outside the GTA I'd stop relying on CBC. They really don't know their ass from their elbow. They tried to tie Tofino's recent water shortage to global warming when they knew that to be false and was soley due to the city not investing in infrastructure as it grew. They have an agenda and a message to spread and don't let the truth get in the way of it.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
we see that now with the "water grab" in las vegas. i've been fighting the pipeline that will take water from my area to pipe to las vegas which doesn't have water for it's exploding population.
those of us that do have the water to sustain the coming climate changes are currently fighting off those that don't. it's only going to get worse.
great plan
http://www.gvrd.bc.ca/air/pdfs/ClimateChangeImpactScenarios.pdf
the report indicates a decrease in snowpack ... as for the lawn restrictions - i believe you are on a constant restriction program (ie. only allowed to water lawns on certaiin days) as of a certain period (spring) ...
and as for tofino - there may have been some poor insight in infrastructure changes but drought cannot be blamed on that ... or again a decrease in snowpack ...
http://www.alternet.org/story/64948/
Also, the idea that Canada has an abundance of water is a myth. The USA has an equal amount of renewable water resources.
You got to spend it all
Scott I'm not against recycling. I just think we need to make much better use of the water that we do use domestically ie, it needs to be utilized SEVERAL times on a property, not this comes in fresh from the tap and is whisked away through the sewarage thing after one use we've got going on. I don't even have a problem with water being recycled and then sent back for a second and third use on a property. (This is suburbia I'm talking about btw although it wouldn't hurt industry or ag either, for those that aren't doing it.) My issue, and I think you'll find many other people's issue, is adding the recycled waste water to the drinking water supply. If recycling must be done, then keep the two supplies seperate.
Personally I'd like some assistance in adding a grey water unit to my house and I'd like to see EVERY OTHER HOUSE in the city have one as well. I'd like the water from the gray water unit used to flush my toilet (or see another way of dealing with toilets entirely. one that doesn't use water. ESPECIALLY drinking water) I'd like that my shower water is used in the laundry to wash my clothes. I'd like the water that I capture from the guttering to be collected in a tank and used for the washing machine, the shower, everything really. The way I see it people can do many things to keep water on their property for the purposes of gardening so drinking water should NEVER BE USED FOR THAT. (there goes all the turf companies) I don't understand why people aren't given an allocation of water, so many litres per year to do with as they wish and to know that they can re-use it more than once and once their quota runs out, that's it.
And if all that's going on at my place, and my neighbours places, that we are doing EVERY SINGLE THING we possibly can to use less water, recycle what we use, conserve the natural resource, then I've got no problem with industry and agriculture having to think of new and smart ways of conserving too. I know that MANY are already, but there are plenty that aren't.
I'm not really in favor of desalination plants myself. Too much focus on doing it using existing energy solutions, so like you, I'd prefer if that's going to happen then bring on the solar or any other alternative.
The issue as I see it when it comes to drinking recycled effluent is that these things take time to surface as a health problem. So why get started? It's gonna be too late if they start adding recycled water to the natural supply and THEN discover down the track that it's causing all kinds of sickness. PROVE that is doesn't first and they might see more people embrace it as an option. And when it comes to costs being prohibitive in terms of setting up real water solutions, I'm not buying it. Lets face it there seems to be plenty of money to bandy about when they're talking war, plenty of concessions and tax breaks for big business to get started and to stay in business. The money is there it's simply a matter of them deciding what is important. So far all I've seen is band aid solutions from both State and Federal governments. If they can afford to dot desalination plants all over the country, (which I suspect will end up in private hands anyway, which means SOMEONE is making money from a basic human need) then they can afford to rethink our sewarage and REALLY drought proof us. You'll forgive me, of course I'm very happy you're still alive to tell the tale
Anyway, I FINALLY remembered the name of that bloke that I've got a lot of time for. Peter Andrews. I found his story quite remarkable and well worth paying attention to. One has to wonder if he's out there with his nutty ideas, just how many other "nutters" there are that aren't getting airplay that have some very smart and REAL solutions to this problem.
http://www.abc.net.au/austory/content/2005/s1383562.htm
The transcript:
http://www.abc.net.au/austory/content/2005/s1386591.htm
oh! hehe! I don't drink tap water, well RARELY anyway, so I aint trusting the powers that be at all!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
you don't trust the powers that be, yet you trust a faceless corporation enough to drink their product? hmm.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I don't trust anyone cate. Period. End of story.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
hi jeanie
arizona law stated that water from the kitchen was blackwater. the same classification as toilet water. after fighting for 2 years; i got the law changed because of the way they made their decision; which was that the study found bacteria and viruses. i argued that the bacteria and viruses were beneficial. after much argument; they could not prove me wrong and they changed the law. i then installed a composting toilet and a greywater system which irrigated my landscape. here's how it worked:
i bought a fiberglass tank which held about 125 gallons. the tank is needed because the drain field cannot drain as fast as your shower or tub needs to drain; therefore the water went into the tank; then slowly drained to irrigate. i used solid pipe to take the water to where i wanted to irrigate; then used drain field pipe.
i hope this helps.
It does. Thanks.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSSYD21064820071101?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews&rpc=22&sp=true
Oh I saw this! It's just appalling! :(
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
so pick
I wanna get one of those nifty grey water units but they have to be plumbed in by a licenced plumber. Same as any tank we get has to be registered I think. I mean I'd love to know enough about plumbing to do a whole bunch of water diversion stuff here. You know like reroute the outlet in the bath and the sink in the bathroom to go to the toilet flush and the taps for the washing machine. The chemical toilet sounds like a great idea for the bush house though. I'm just not sure how we'd go about it. Or how much it would cost. Was it really expensive for you?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
the name of the loo was sun mar. it was about $1200 USD.
i got a book about basic plumbing and self taught myself. fortunately i was in the bush where the inspectors wouldn't come. :eek:
Yeah, well that's why I'm thinking it'll be easier to impliment a lot of things out on the patch and we'll have to succumb to plumbers here in the burbs. :rolleyes:
Maybe I can start practicing out at the bush?
I'm not sure we can afford the $1200 right now, which I'm guessing would be around $1300 AUD. We do have one of the old pit dunnies at the shack and we did used to have the same at the house but Gran got it all fixed up and indoor with the first extention. Not sure I'd be keen to go back to that old outback dunny thing. It stunk, it was FREEZING cold and full of critters!! :eek:
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift