There was so much confusion on yesterday's blog comments, I called the Water Management District and tried to sort it out. This is about the good, the bad and the ugly use of what we flush. I suppose you ALL read my post of Nov. 14 where it was said: “...a state lab confirmed Lake Okeechobee water so dirty that it might as well have come directly out of the rear end of a cow." If you didn't read that one you won't like this one either. I see the fog descending over most of our readers. You can run but you can't hide from this ick water - it is our future according to a permit now signed by County leaders. We all know better treatment is needed of our toilet water so we can reuse it. After all, you wouldn't just put used toilet water in a bucket and spread it on your lawn. Well, maybe our readers would.
We must make appropriate use of reuse water (drawing a bath for Natacha for instance or filling the coffee pot at County Hall). The trick with reuse is in the details of water quality treatment objective; whether they can be achieved, and where the water ultimately goes.
Sometimes I think the motive for encouraging us to save water is only so developers can develop. However, I was told that South Florida Governing Board Member and Chair, Eric Buermann, made an interesting statement that the water permit issued today did not factor in additional water to support moving the UDB. He did say that he didn’t know whether the permit could be used to support moving the UDB but that it wasn’t intended to do that. If that is true, maybe reuse is not such a bad thing. Personally, I don't want to help developers I want to help the environment.
"EPOCs" (emerging pollutants of concern), including endocrine disruptors, antibiotics, viagra, birth control pills and over the counter drugs, etc. remain an issue, as do nutrients like phosphate, especially if the water will end up in a sensitive fish and wildlife area, like a wetland or an estuary.
Less treatment for nutrients may be needed for irrigation or even drinking water uses. That is right: Drinking water can get by with less treatment!
One thing we must never forget:
It is important to understand how permeable our aquifer is, and water that is put into a canal or trench for "recharge" or even for irrigation is not just going to stay at the point of discharge. It will sink in to our aquifer.
The State regulatory criteria for advanced treatment and reuse DO NOT include any requirements at all for EPOCs, since this term by definition refers to unregulated compounds (we know we should be CONCERNED about them but we don't regulate them). The State says their criteria for nutrients are 10X to 100X higher than needed to protect sensitive systems such as the Everglades or Biscayne Bay. Case in point is Homestead's wastewater plant, which does use "advanced treatment" but is already allowed under state rules to discharge to the aquifer a short distance from a canal that goes to Biscayne National Park. That water is very high in bad nutrient stuff and most likely contains A LOT of those unregulated EPOCs I just spoke about (that feminize male fish in the St. Lucie Estuary).
Does it not seem ironic that the State doesn't think the water should go to ocean outfalls, because it appears to impact reefs, but they think it is OK to put it in the Bay or in the Everglades - even though the nutrient targets and things like endocrine disruptors are not addressed by state regulations? What is their REAL motivation? Do you think it really is about making a calculation to show there is plenty of water quantity for growth? I don't have all the answers but I certainly am not short on questions. And let me finish with my favorite comment from yesterday's post:
Anonymous said...
"This is all about keeping the development train on track and little to do with meeting the needs of everglades restoration, enhancement of coastal wetlands and Biscayne Bay, etc. Instead of the County and SFWMD curtailing development, placing limits on rock mining, and protecting and conserving groundwater, taxpayers will be footing the enormous bills for reverse osmosis and other treatment systems, wastewater reuse infrastructure, etc. while rock miners will get to keep mining and developers will get to keep building and sprawling. If John Renfrow was the LBA's boy when he was head of DERM he must be The MAN now!"
5 comments:
so you readers don't care about water, nukes, pollution...what can I write about that will get you motivated to comment so I can write comments back?
I am motivated due to the fact that if the county will treat toilet water for consumption,
They should be the first to receive that pipeline at the
S.C. Center (Big Brown Eyesore).
Now, I ask the question.....
What about the Reverse Osmoses Water Plant approved by BCC in Hialeah for ??? For What???
Why Hialeah? Why not further south in Sweetwater where the Tamiami C-4 Canal produces sufficient H2O - ready for RO filtration to feed our water shortage farther south?
The nuke problem? Don't see one.
I've swimmed, fished and injested that warm sudzy H2O many times the past 20 years - No problema.
I kept saying and saying and saying that everyone should see Urinetown The Musical while it's still a joke.
Too late, I fear.
"Twenty years we've had the drought
And our reservoirs have all dried up
I take my baths now in a coffee cup
I boil what's left of it for tea
And it's a privilege to pee"
Why Hialeah? Because they annexed a big swath of land on the other side of the UDB line. A year ago they moved the Urban development boundary to encompass this land (controlled by Armando Codina) but they had to show a NEW water source. The x mayor said "we will put it in a water plant". And here is where you all come in to the picture: We are all paying for the infrastructure -- the water plant. The county is picking up the tab. The lies we are told...criminal.
I really like the idea of water reuse.
On the other hand, FPL and WASD are planning on reused water to help meet the needs for their proposed nuclear power plant. Where else are they going to get the water? And speaking of the proposed nuclear facilty, environmental groups need to start strategizing to counter the marketing that FPL will be utilizing saying that more nuclear will help to solve global warming.
Post a Comment