Good Idea Gone Bad - San Fran Version

San Francisco made a committment to reduce the city's water consumption. Yes, usage went down but not without some unintended consequences: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/01/low-flow-toilets-cause-stink-in-san-francisco/

ewww

I've been wondering when that was going to start becoming an issue...

I'd also bet the sludge is accelerating the deterioration of old iron pipe sewage drainage systems. Just wait until they get the bill on THAT, not to mention the EPA issues from groundwater contaminated by sodium hypochlorite and human waste.

We are much too smart for our britches.

Stand up comics have understodd about low flow toilets for many years.

"How's it gonna save water when you gotta flush it three times?"

Some years ago I was watching an episode of This Old House where they were working on a place in San Francisco. In the episode they talked about the city's wastewater system, and mentioned it's one of the few places in the country where the storm sewers are supposed to be connected to the sanitary sewers (most parts of the country want them separated so as not to overload the treatment plant every time it rains.) I understood they do it this way to maintain adequate flow through the pipes.

There is a science to designing sewers - you have to take the diameter of the pipe into account as well as the slope, to make sure that solids don't drop out of suspension halfway to the end.

The 'rotten egg' smell is hydrogen sulfide gas produced by decomposing waste, vegetation or just about anything degradable that makes its way into the waste pipe. Hydrogen sulfide is common in dry weather and low flow periods as there's no additional water to flush the lines (even if a municipality prohibits all storm drainage there's still a huge amount of infiltration). It's a Catch 22 being they could use the extra storm water in low flow conditions but don't want the increased storm flow in the rainy season... and there's no way to balance the flow, it's all or nothing.

King Of The Hill had an episode about this.

If you want a quick primer on sewers and CSO's, or storm over flows, read "Zodiac" by Neal Stephenson. It's a fun book and the sewer lesson is a bonus.

All other cities let their CSO's drain directly into the closest body of water during a storm. So consider that all that crap in the sewers going right into the water after a storm. I know in Richmond you do not swim in the James River until a few days after a storm rolls through. Otherwise you're asking for all sorts of nasty infections.

That's why I bought a Ferguson.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IL2YRDzpTL4

BAHHHH WOOOOSH

Wow.... reading the comments makes me worry about the future of our species.

In reply to Bobzilla:

I found this one appropriately funny:

Apparently SF has also banned the comprehension of irony.

oldsaw wrote: In reply to Bobzilla: I found this one appropriately funny: Apparently SF has also banned the comprehension of irony.

And an actual case of irony!

Such an over/misused term.

SVreX wrote: We are much too smart for our britches.

No pun intended.

Maybe I should've titled the thread:

"I Left My Shart in San Francisco"?

In reply to slefain:

Now that's a man's flush

I thought San Francisco already was a good idea gone bad... just... in general.

hah! My appartment has a low flow toilet with some kind of dealy in the tank that prevents the repeated flushing neccessary after a hearty steak dinner. I remedied this with some calculated power drilling. When my mom said "do you really think you should be messing with their stuff?" I responded "they should be happy, I fixed it without them having to go through the hassle of paying a guy to come and tell me 'yeah, whoever designed this should get fired, there's nothing I can do.'" All in the name of saving water...

Also, am I crazy, or are they trying to fix a problem caused by an attemt to save water by adding a toxin into the water? Won't that be worse than just using some more water? Last time I checked, extra water didn't screw up water near as much as bleach screws up water.

Rufledt wrote: Also, am I crazy, or are they trying to fix a problem caused by an attemt to save water by adding a toxin into the water? Won't that be worse than just using some more water? Last time I checked, extra water didn't screw up water near as much as bleach screws up water.

Yeah, why wouldn't they just flush it through with ocean water rather than dumping bleach in? The salt in the water will kill off most of the harmful bacteria and the extra flow will prevent blockages from happening in the first place. Cheap, effective, and it's right there. It's San Fransisco, not Tucson.

Here at work, we've got the flushless urinals and recycled water in the bowls. To say the bathrooms stink is an understatement.

And you really don't want splash.

Water? You mean like outta the toilet?

seems like this really is an issue with the system in San Fransisco. Many other cities have banned the old high flow toilets for years without an issue such as this.

Remember the episode of dirty jobs where mike went in and cleaned the sewer in San Fran? The sewers there are all older than dirts elder brother, all brick and tiny.

Anyway, I liked the dual flush toilets I found in Europe, on a recent trip..

The use and conservation of water is a huge concern for the future. I'll bet we're going to have some more issues with this shortly until we all figure out what is the best way to proceed. I'm pretty sure we'd all make the choice to have clean water to drink, rather than clean water to flush if push came to shove.

Jay wrote: Yeah, why wouldn't they just flush it through with ocean water rather than dumping bleach in? The salt in the water will kill off most of the harmful bacteria and the extra flow will prevent blockages from happening in the first place. Cheap, effective, and it's right there. It's San Fransisco, not Tucson.

I was wondering that myself. Seems that pumping sea water into the sewers occasionally should be more environmentally friendly than bleach.

not a bad idea.. but how would that affect the corrosion already down there?

In reply to MadScientistMatt:

That depends if sea water is compatible w/ the 'bugs' at the treatment plant. Same w/ chemical treatments like bleach or biocides that would prevent hydrogen sulfide. Any chemicals would have to be metered in and monitored as to not kill the bugs. Lose the bugs and the plant shuts down.

Maybe SF should offer a $$ reward for anybody who can solve this dilemma.

if everyone would just move away from San Francsco, then it wouldn't be a problem.

the world at large would be a better place, too.

novaderrik wrote: if everyone would just move away from San Francsco, then it wouldn't be a problem. the world at large would be a better place, too.

That doesn't remove the smug problems; it just spreads them over a wider area.