The 4350water Blog highlights some of the issues relating to proposals for potable reuse in Toowoomba and South East Qld. 4350water blog looks at related political issues as well.

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Few thirst for recycled tap water ...

From San Diego:

August 16, 2004

You don't mind using recycled sewer water to keep golf courses lush. It can even be used by factories to manufacture goods. You even like the idea of returning water that went down the drain to the bathroom to flush the toilet.

But the closer it actually gets to you, the less palatable it is. And you still hate the idea of having it come out of the tap.

Those were the results of a recently completed survey tracking the attitudes of San Diego County residents on recycled water.


The survey by the San Diego County Water Authority will be used by water planners to chart the county's water future, said Bill Jacoby, the authority's resources manager.

More than 90 percent of respondents agreed with using recycled water for freeway landscaping and golf courses. Eighty-seven percent support bringing it inside buildings to flush toilets. A building housing a pharmaceutical company in Torrey Pines is doing this now.

There is 70 percent approval for using it on crops as agricultural irrigation.

When it comes to pouring it into recreational lakes, support drops to 49 percent. And forget about drinking it. Even with additional treatment, 63 percent oppose using it for potable, or drinkable, water.

Why?

Of the opponents, 34 percent either don't trust or feel uncomfortable with the process. That's followed by 17 percent who are concerned it will affect their health. Seventeen percent said they don't have enough information.

Even though the public remains firmly against drinking recycled water, the acceptance for other uses is encouraging, Jacoby said.

Every gallon of recycled water frees up a gallon of potable water, which can be sent to homes.

The county uses about 13,000 acre-feet of recycled water annually, Jacoby said. One acre-foot equals about 326,000 gallons, enough to serve the needs of two average households for one year.


The bulk of the recycled water is produced by the city of San Diego Water Department at two treatment plants. In the 1990s, the city aggressively pursued the cleaned-up sewage as the solution to the drought that plagued Southern California early in the decade.

The toilet-to-tap plan would have pumped recycled water into a reservoir, which would be treated a second time before it was delivered to customers' taps.

The San Diego City Council killed the program in 1999 in the face of strong public opposition.
The Water Department has not given up on the idea.


It is about to embark on a program to increase the use of recycled water in the areas that show strong support.

One treatment plant handles 25 million gallons of sewer water daily. It recycles about 5 million gallons, and the remainder is sent into the ocean.

Unlike the toilet-to-tap plan that was sprung on the public, city water officials plan extensive community outreach to try to convince people of the benefits of recycled water.

San Diegans currently use 200 million gallons daily. That figure is expected to rise 25 percent by 2030. Officials see recycled water as an answer to the anticipated increase.

"They want to go about this very methodically and scientifically," said Kurt Kidman, a Water Department spokesman. "We want this to be a real solution to our long-term needs."

Scientists agree that recycled water can help solve many supply problems. But they warn that the program must be executed carefully.

Dave Schubert, a scientist at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, said the recycled water is commonly disinfected with chlorine to kill bacteria inherent in sewage.

Many times, water agencies add too much chlorine, which can cause pipes to corrode and irritate the stomach if ingested, Schubert said. On other occasions, not enough chlorine is used, which allows bacteria to live and could cause disease.

Because of these potential errors, he is concerned about bringing cleaned-up sewage closer to humans. He points to instances where recycled water pipes were connected to the plumbing for potable water without the owner's knowledge. As recycled water grows in popularity, these incidents could become more common.

"You should minimize the use in areas where there is a lot of plumbing," said Schubert, who also sits on the San Diego County science advisory board. "In residential neighborhoods, it could be a problem."

The water authority telephone survey of 710 people, 406 of whom were San Diego residents, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.7 percentage points. The full results of the survey can be viewed on the water authority's Web site www.sdcwa.org

See - Recycled sewage survey.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Concerned Ratepayer has obviously spent a lot of time studying this site, so I wonder why they neglected to mention that a lot a has happened since then, including the fact that an independent panel of community representatives (an "American Assembly") met in July 2005 and reviewed the City of San Diego Water Reuse Study 2005 Interim Report. The report put up 6 options for greater water reuse in San Diego - they ranged from simply extending the city's current non-drinking water uses to schemes where the majority of the watsewater will be used for indirect potable reuse. The non-partisan committee unanimously recommended that the indirect potable reuse options be adopted.

Also worth mentioning that the 1999 decision by the San Diego City Council to drop indirect potable reuse was the result of political comapaigning, not scientific data.

8:18 AM, January 16, 2006

 
Blogger Concerned Ratepayer said...

November 23, 2005

Council sued for secretly promoting recycled sewage project

A taxpayers group has sued the city of San Diego, claiming that city staffers are secretly promoting a controversial plan that would convert wastewater into drinking water.

The city shelved a similar idea six years ago, after much public outcry.

Mark Mazzarella, a lawyer for the Association of Concerned Taxpayers, accused the city of running a "stealth program" to move the concept forward again despite potential health and cost concerns.

"We think they should stop until other alternatives are explored," Mazzarella said at a news conference outside City Hall, near a gushing fountain.

The city said the claims don't have merit.

"You'd be hard-pressed to find a more open process," Marsi Steirer, deputy director of the city's Water Department, said of San Diego's effort to find a way to recycle water.

The idea to convert city wastewater into drinking water is steeped in controversy. Some fear the water will be tainted and cause health problems, and that only poor people will be stuck drinking it. Rich people can buy bottled water, they say.

Proponents say the water is perfectly safe and that the process has improved since 1999, when the idea was proposed.

In a nutshell, the concept works this way: Wastewater is cleansed of contaminants and then piped to a reservoir, where it's mixed with river water. Before being sent to homes, the water is treated again.

Opponents call it "toilet to tap." Or "Frankenwater." City officials call it "reservoir augmentation."

Orange County is one of the few areas that repurifies wastewater. However, critics contend, San Diego's effort would be far broader than its neighbor's.

When the City Council killed the initial proposal in 1999, it ordered that no more work be done on the project.

The lawsuit contends that the city has broken that council order and is promoting the concept behind the scenes. Libertarian Steven Currie is listed as a plaintiff, along with the taxpayers group.

"It was time to blow the whistle," said Bruce Henderson, who has attacked many city initiatives, including the downtown ballpark.

Henderson said he is acting as a spokesman for the Association of Concerned Taxpayers and is not personally involved in the suit.

Henderson also attacked the 1999 plan.

He claims that the city has not adequately considered other options – including conservation – and is setting the stage so only this particular option will be feasible.

The city has done nothing inappropriate, Steirer contends. In 2004, the City Council reopened the issue and asked that all recycling efforts, including blending treated water with reservoir water, be studied.

The city is under federal pressure to improve water use. It dumps 175 million gallons of partially-cleansed wastewater into the ocean daily, instead of finding ways to put it to use.

"If this is a stealth campaign, it's the worst one I've ever seen," said Bruce Reznik of San Diego Coastkeeper, an environmental group that supports repurification.

The city's efforts to find a way to recycle water have been the subject of several newspaper stories and public forums, he noted.

The controversy is picking up steam because an advisory panel of San Diegans recently said it supported the purification system that would turn wastewater into drinking water.

Its recommendation will soon go to the City Council's Natural Resources Committee.

10:34 AM, January 16, 2006

 

Post a Comment

<< Home