Sewage discharges vs. pumping overboard

[MurrayM]

What about puke?

 

[Bigsfish]

Well, it might be food for something.

 

[Delfin]

Just a small point. You can hold -> treat -> discharge, but you can't treat -> hold -> discharge.

I guess I am a bit confused. Treatment, in this context, may mean incineration, chlorination, formaldehyde treatment and I am sure a few others. If formaldehyde, a la the TDX system referred to, the longer the effluent is exposed to the dosage of treatment chemical the better, or at least according to the public health data I can find. So could you help me understand why treating waste, then holding it before discharge with the e coli killing chemical sloshing around in a tank isn't allowed?

 

[tadhana]

Here, for your reading pleasure is the core of the marine sanitation prohibition.

PART 159 - MARINE SANITATION DEVICES
Subpart A - General
Sec. 159.1 Purpose.
This part prescribes regulations governing the design and construction of marine sanitation devices and procedures for certifying that marine sanitation devices meet the regulations and the standards of the Environmental Protection Agency promulgated under section 312 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.1322), to eliminate the discharge of untreated sewage from vessels into the waters of the United States, including the territorial seas. Subpart A of this part contains regulations governing the manufacture and operation of vessels equipped with marine sanitation devices.

Sec. 159.3 Definitions.
In this part:

Discharge includes, but is not limited to, any spilling, leaking, pouring, pumping, emitting, emptying, or dumping

 

[Mule]

I guess I am a bit confused. Treatment, in this context, may mean incineration, chlorination, formaldehyde treatment and I am sure a few others. If formaldehyde, a la the TDX system referred to, the longer the effluent is exposed to the dosage of treatment chemical the better, or at least according to the public health data I can find. So could you help me understand why treating waste, then holding it before discharge with the e coli killing chemical sloshing around in a tank isn't allowed?

Very, very good question. I have never been able to understand that. The Raritan Electro Scan-San treatment system uses high amperage DC current to foster a chemical reaction thereby making acid to kill the germs. That is the way I understand the process anyhow. This leads back to Delfins question.
. WHY?

 

[catalinajack]

Very, very good question. I have never been able to understand that. The Raritan Electro Scan-San treatment system uses high amperage DC current to foster a chemical reaction thereby making acid to kill the germs. That is the way I understand the process anyhow. This leads back to Delfins question.
. WHY?

Why? Because that's the law. Makes no sense but a whole bunch of do-gooding legislators can brag about how they protected our waters. So, instead of encouraging the use of these systems, they render them useless in NDZs thus unwittingly encouraging dumping. No one has ever postulated that legislators as a group are not ignorant much less intelligent. Louie Gomer?

 

[Mule]

2 Good examples. I have 2 Electro scans. Each needs ( at factory prices) $650+ worth of parts. P0 hated them as much as I, and that is a lot of hate. I am exploring options, (live aboard) to repair the forward seldom used head electroscan and going with a large holding tank for the other, on the stern.
Perfect example of a person with the straw man syndrome. The One without a brain you mentioned.

 

[FF]

"Perfect example of a person with the straw man syndrome. The One without a brain you mentioned."

Que Bono?

Laws are not written for the public to benefit,

the politico gets mileage from being "Anti Pollution" ,

and any one that points out the vapidity of the law , is labeled "Pro Pollution".

 

[Mule]

One day, about 5 years ago, I looked across the small basin known as Banana River Marina at 100+ manatees sunning, that is about (give or take) 100,000 pounds of warm blooded eating crapping machines and wondered if I should consider flushing my 1/3 full 12 gallon holding tank because of the possible pollution it may cause.

Good point FF.

 

[Delfin]

Here, for your reading pleasure is the core of the marine sanitation prohibition.

PART 159 - MARINE SANITATION DEVICES
Subpart A - General
Sec. 159.1 Purpose.
This part prescribes regulations governing the design and construction of marine sanitation devices and procedures for certifying that marine sanitation devices meet the regulations and the standards of the Environmental Protection Agency promulgated under section 312 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C.1322), to eliminate the discharge of untreated sewage from vessels into the waters of the United States, including the territorial seas. Subpart A of this part contains regulations governing the manufacture and operation of vessels equipped with marine sanitation devices.

Sec. 159.3 Definitions.
In this part:

Discharge includes, but is not limited to, any spilling, leaking, pouring, pumping, emitting, emptying, or dumping

The law seems pretty clear. You can't discharge untreated sewage in U.S. waters. My question relates to why it would be illegal to treat sewage, then hold treated sewage, then discharge treated sewage, but it would be legal to hold untreated sewage, then treat sewage, then discharge treated sewage. In both cases, it is treated sewage that is being discharged and that, based on the law, is allowed except where otherwise prohibited.

"You can hold -> treat -> discharge, but you can't treat -> hold -> discharge." dhays?

 

[Delfin]

One day, about 5 years ago, I looked across the small basin known as Banana River Marina at 100+ manatees sunning, that is about (give or take) 100,000 pounds of warm blooded eating crapping machines and wondered if I should consider flushing my 1/3 full 12 gallon holding tank because of the possible pollution it may cause.

Good point FF.

If it makes eco-warriors feel any better, whale poop is considered an important contributor to the sequestration of CO2 because of the critical effect it has on krill populations in the ocean. Based on that, every time I flush treated sewage I know I am doing my little part to save the planet from Man Made Global Warming. I'm doing it for the children.

Look at This: Enormous Whales Have Enormous (and Interesting) Poop - 80beats : 80beats

In all seriousness, mariners flushing their toilets as they meander around the water is a net benefit to the ecosystem. The big problem is the bacteria and viruses that are particularly problematic to humans contained in sewage, if not to other critters. Once waste is treated and discharged away from stagnant or confined waters there is no real downside for the ecosystem, even if it creeps people out. And having cleaned river otter poop off my deck more than once, I can't say that a part per million of untreated otter poo is any more noxious to me than the same concentration of treated human poo. And if I am being realistic, the latter is preferable.

For years, the City of Victoria has simply pumped the sewage produced by the entire population out past Race Rocks. No one every found any significant contamination of sea life that I know of, even though in the immediate area of the discharge you can find "degraded kelp" from exposure to 21 million gallons of raw sewage per day. Someone will have to explain to me how 80,000 peoples' untreated waste dumped into a single location of the Strait of Juan de Fuca every single day produces barely perceptible harm, but my flushing my treated waste all over the place while motoring along would be a problem.

 

[Mule]

Delfin, I like the way you think!

 

[dhays]

I guess I am a bit confused. Treatment, in this context, may mean incineration, chlorination, formaldehyde treatment and I am sure a few others. If formaldehyde, a la the TDX system referred to, the longer the effluent is exposed to the dosage of treatment chemical the better, or at least according to the public health data I can find. So could you help me understand why treating waste, then holding it before discharge with the e coli killing chemical sloshing around in a tank isn't allowed?

As I understand it (and my understanding is often wrong) it is because the treatment systems reduce the amount of bacteria in the waste, but they don't eliminate it. Over time, since there are plenty of nutrients, the bacterial count will increase since a holding tank is a perfect breeding ground for E. coli.

Think of a carton of pasteurized milk. The pasteurization process reduces the bacterial count in the milk, but doesn't eliminate it. Leave that milk carton out on the counter and it will spoil quickly as the bacteria multiply. Leave it in the fridge and it will spoil more slowly, but the bacteria will still proliferate.

 

[psneeld]

And a few oz of bleach before dumping the tank full of pre treated sewage would most likely eliminate it to even lower levels of ecoli than from the original treatment.

Plus my research has shown that tiny amount of free clorune released into the open environment will cause no harm.

Guess we can be trusted to handle giant boats, just not a simple sewage system but land based systems that arent managed well either are OK.

 

[Bigsfish]

So the key statement to me is "to eliminate the discharge of untreated sewage from vessels into the waters of the United States,". Unless a person is considered a vessel it is leagal to eliminate oneself over the side.

 

[Delfin]

As I understand it (and my understanding is often wrong) it is because the treatment systems reduce the amount of bacteria in the waste, but they don't eliminate it. Over time, since there are plenty of nutrients, the bacterial count will increase since a holding tank is a perfect breeding ground for E. coli.

Think of a carton of pasteurized milk. The pasteurization process reduces the bacterial count in the milk, but doesn't eliminate it. Leave that milk carton out on the counter and it will spoil quickly as the bacteria multiply. Leave it in the fridge and it will spoil more slowly, but the bacteria will still proliferate.

Could be true, but I was just wondering where this concept was codified into law.

 

[Delfin]

One of the things that makes some people highly skeptical of pronouncements about what is, and is not, harmful is the tendency of those declaring things harmful of being sometimes less than reliable sources of information. For example, if you use formaldehyde for disinfecting and treating raw sewage, but read that California has declared that formaldehyde is "non bio-degradable", you might not want to use it.

http://rvlife.com/california-bans-formaldehyde

Unfortunately, that is chemical nonsense, because formaldehyde is a naturally occurring substance that is completely bio-degradable, at least according to chemists.

www.americanchemistry.com/Media/PressReleasesTranscripts/ACC-news-releases/Formaldehyde-Is-Biodegradable.html

All this means to me is that you have to do your own research and thinking when it comes to figuring out what the "right" thing to do is. Including how to handle Marine sanitation.

 

[Peter B]

Very, very good question. I have never been able to understand that. The Raritan Electro Scan-San treatment system uses high amperage DC current to foster a chemical reaction thereby making acid to kill the germs. That is the way I understand the process anyhow. This leads back to Delfins question.
. WHY?

Sorry to be a bit pedantic, Mule, but small point of order here...the current mentioned above works like that in a salt water chlorinated swimming pool, and produces high levels of chlorine, by splitting the NaCl (salt) into Na & Chlorine, which is highly alkaline, (not acid) and that does the sanitising. However, main point is...it works. Here in Aus one can, I believe, discharge this treated effluent, in most places as long as not in anchorages, enclosed waters like marinas, close to seawater farms, and other declared NDZs.

 

[markpierce]

I avoid entering swimming pools or other waters. Especially crowded public pools. A short, warm shower suffices.

 

[FF]

If one looks at depression era photos of Coney Island Beaches, they were awash with happy folks (that could get there for 5c) swimming in untreated sewage.

No harm seems to have come to our parents , or grandparents.

 

[ulysses]

Sorry to be a bit pedantic, Mule, but small point of order here...the current mentioned above works like that in a salt water chlorinated swimming pool, and produces high levels of chlorine, by splitting the NaCl (salt) into Na & Chlorine, which is highly alkaline, (not acid) and that does the sanitising. However, main point is...it works. Here in Aus one can, I believe, discharge this treated effluent, in most places as long as not in anchorages, enclosed waters like marinas, close to seawater farms, and other declared NDZs.

Pretty close but not exactly correct. The salt is split with the CL turning into Hypochlorous ACID. The "alkalinity" of the water is its ability to neutralize acids. What is produced on the CL side is indeed an acid.

 

[rwidman]

........... All this means to me is that you have to do your own research and thinking when it comes to figuring out what the "right" thing to do is. Including how to handle Marine sanitation.

Nope - As you point out in your post, politicians have already determined what the "right" thing to do is.

 

[FF]

"Nope - As you point out in your post, politicians have already determined what the "right" thing to do is."

Politicos dont give a damn about the right thing to do,,

Only about the right thing to say. AKA , Boob bait for the Bubbas.

 

[Bigsfish]

Politicians will say anything to get votes and seat in their parasite jobs.