Seattle Waste Spill

[rslifkin]

Why can't they just release the stormwater? If these release events are mostly happening during weather events (RAIN), it seems the stormwater runoff would be the main culprit in these events. I find it hard to believe that people are using their bathrooms so much more on a rainy day to overwhelm the system. So why isn't the system designed to release the excess stormwater into the waterway rather than untreated sewage?


Disclaimer: I am not smart.

It depends on the sewer system. Some older systems merge the 2 flows at a point where they can't just dump one but not the other. Newer systems usually have a bit more flexibility there.



In Rochester, where I live, they mostly solved the problem with a series of huge underground tunnels to act as a storage tank. So if there's a ton of flow, the tunnels fill up to hold the excess until the treatment plant can catch up. Every once in a while there's still some overflow, but it's pretty rare and typically a (relatively) small amount.

 

[slowgoesit]

Any Star Trek Fans here ?

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" -Spock.

People have to live somewhere. They need food to eat. Farms and primary residences are vital to civilization. Do any of you pay attention to local politics ?? When was the last time your city or county was flush ( did you see what I did there ? ) with cash ?? To build a sewage plant that is able to handle all weather and personal GI issues, 100% of the time would be outrageously expensive. Cities just can't afford it so they build a plant that can will work 95% of the time.....but it takes so long to design, plan, get grants, do impact studies, fight legal battles and then build it, that by the time it comes on line the population has grown so there is more waste than they designed it for. Then consider that we are having more and more extreme weather events and its no wonder that these plants can't keep up. When they release a gazillion gallons of raw sewage its not out of apathy or ignorance.....its because they have limited resources to build and maintain the plant. Sure, they could have built one that could handle more throughput, but then they wouldn't have been able to build a new high school, or buy a new firetruck, or keep the streetlights on all night.

So.....back to the Spock quote. People need to have working plumbing in their homes. The cities do the best they can with the tax revenue they get and the people charged with allocating those funds. Yes, there are times when their efforts are inadequate, but I'd like to think they are doing everything they possibly can, they best way they know how. Why is it so unfair to ask boaters to do everything they possibly can. Getting sewage out of residential areas is a public health issue. It is a necessary process that everyone benefits from. Boating is optional.

Not disagreeing with what you said above, but I think the problem most people have with the issue being discussed is that municipalities often DO only build to the 95% or thereabouts solution, for many reasons, be it $$, land availability, etc, and then the remainder of the time (5% in this example) the plants are overwhelmed, and the effluent is dumped directly into the waterway . . . generally with no negative consequences . . .
BUT (there's always a but) Laws are then passed by Governments (the same governments that directly or indirectly control the municipalities, and sewage plants) requiring BOAT OWNERS/OPERATORS to build/install/maintain their systems to a 100% solution, and fines/penalties are set up to levy against boat owners who, often through no fault of their own, only reach the 99% solution bar . . . . That's hypocrisy, it's unreasonable, and unfair, and I believe THAT is what gets boat owners knickers in a such a wad . . . .

 

[backinblue]

Thanks! You are spot on. Most of us are not opposed to having and using holding tanks, but the hypocrisy is hard to take. You also have to wonder if the cost and effort to keep this small amount of waste out of the ocean could not be better spent.

 

[backinblue]

And while we are collectively shaking our heads, let's not forget this one:

https://time.com/66459/portland-reservoir-pee/

 

[Art]

I think it`s already "too late".

Hi Bruce

It's "Too Late" is a dangerous mind set... and, believe me I believe I know what you are referring to. I too often run into that mindset's road block. In reality... we [humans] either intelligently "Save Earth's Ecosystem" or civilization will eventually [somewhere within the next 100 to 150 years] become extinct [i.e. die off]. It's just that simple.

Busy today... I'll PM you a bit about myself and my company; as well as my company's and my trajectory.

Best,

Art

 

[SteveK]

Have not seen it mentioned. I will add that sanitary and storm infrastructures originally were combined. As a city grew this system cannot treat the sewage fast enough during a heavy rain event.
While new construction now separates the two, they eventually still end into one pipe unless diverted into new facilities. However if most of the time the old system works, then there is no rush to plan for the one off overflow.

 

[psneeld]

Thanks! You are spot on. Most of us are not opposed to having and using holding tanks, but the hypocrisy is hard to take. You also have to wonder if the cost and effort to keep this small amount of waste out of the ocean could not be better spent.

No one can dump raw within 3 miles of land.


Some have systems that allow TREATED sewage to be dumped except in NDZs.


As states start to make NDZs that are unreasonable for the few that have treatment systems, we think it is unreasonable except, yes a few places may deserve no discharge at all.


In places that have handy pumpout facilities, I use those. But I resent that entire coastal areas with adequate flushing are NDZs after be conscientious and installing a treatment system for those times dumping treated sewage would be acceptable to most water users.


The people who have been discussing dumping untreated sewage anywhere.... I see their point but I disagree with them as I say buy a system and try to be part of the solution rather than being part of the problem.

 

[AlaskaProf]

Any Star Trek Fans here ?

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" -Spock.

People have to live somewhere. They need food to eat. Farms and primary residences are vital to civilization. Do any of you pay attention to local politics ?? When was the last time your city or county was flush ( did you see what I did there ? ) with cash ?? To build a sewage plant that is able to handle all weather and personal GI issues, 100% of the time would be outrageously expensive. Cities just can't afford it so they build a plant that can will work 95% of the time.....but it takes so long to design, plan, get grants, do impact studies, fight legal battles and then build it, that by the time it comes on line the population has grown so there is more waste than they designed it for. Then consider that we are having more and more extreme weather events and its no wonder that these plants can't keep up. When they release a gazillion gallons of raw sewage its not out of apathy or ignorance.....its because they have limited resources to build and maintain the plant. Sure, they could have built one that could handle more throughput, but then they wouldn't have been able to build a new high school, or buy a new firetruck, or keep the streetlights on all night.

So.....back to the Spock quote. People need to have working plumbing in their homes. The cities do the best they can with the tax revenue they get and the people charged with allocating those funds. Yes, there are times when their efforts are inadequate, but I'd like to think they are doing everything they possibly can, they best way they know how. Why is it so unfair to ask boaters to do everything they possibly can. Getting sewage out of residential areas is a public health issue. It is a necessary process that everyone benefits from. Boating is optional.

Well said. Thank you.

 

[Group9]

The parallel that "If they do it, then we should be able too as well" is just a silly twist of logic.

You still don't get it, and it doesn't look like you ever will.

 

[kthoennes]

Yeah, I think a lot of posts are missing the point. I'm a public sector management guy, I certainly understand you can't build major facilities for every possible contingency or 100-year event, despite the media and public clamor to the contrary whenever a rare event occurs. I didn't even have a stroke when Sioux Falls dumped millions of gallons into the Big Sioux River (and over the namesake falls, eew) during a massive rain event years ago, if the alternative was flooding the basements of thousands more homes. As it was, hundreds of homes flooded anyway and I can just imagine the square *miles* of soaked basement carpet and wallboard that ended up in the landfill -- talk about negative environmental impact.

The issue is proportionality of enforcement and regulation. It's not "wars kill millions so no big deal if I kill one person." Here, I think this is a better analogy: I brush a piece of lint off my suit jacket and I'm fiercely regulated, and inspectors and law enforcement (CG, water cops) do inspections of my clothes closet regularly for loose lint on my suit jackets, and I have to display a tag or verify that I dutifully brushed all the lint off my suit jackets before wearing them outside the house. Meanwhile a textile mill down the road "accidentally" releases enough stray fibers to clothe every soldier in the Chinese army and most other humans on the Asian continent and all those regulators and enforcers just shrug or they impose nominal fines on public entities (which really makes no sense because it's all taxpayer money anyway).

(And I'm not saying textile mills necessarily pump mountains of lint into the air, I'm sure they're regulated too, I'm just using that example to make the point about proportionality of regulation and enforcement on -- literally -- peeing into the ocean. And I'm sure that the water treatment plant in Sioux Falls gets an annual inspection (I assume, maybe) but I'll bet that some schlub in an active boating area of the US with a 1983, 32' boat gets his holding tank and macerator line inspected by water cops more often on average than the average public water treatment facility that process tens of millions of gallons.)