Scuba Forum / General / December 2006
The enemy is in Reef Rescue's sights, and knows it!
|
|
Thread rating:  |
mike gray - 06 Dec 2006 19:33 GMT Sewage operator ponders options
By Antigone Barton
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
The sewer plant that sought permission last year to continue discharging partly treated waste into the ocean for another five years now has asked the state to hold off on issuing a permit while the plant investigates alternative ways to dispose of the waste.
For the past year, the sewer plant serving Delray Beach and Boynton Beach has continued to discharge 13 million gallons a day of partly treated sewage without a current permit while negotiating a plan to monitor the effects on a nearby coral reef. The state received that plan Tuesday, setting the stage for a new permit, Department of Environmental Protection spokesman Stephen Webster said.
But a DEP official agreed to delay drafting a permit until the sewer plant's board meets next week to discuss other disposal methods.
As the plant's proposal to further filter and disinfect the sewage and then inject it deep into the ground would take at least two years to implement, the agency probably will proceed with its plan to issue a two-year permit. That permit would require testing but set no limits on the amounts of potentially algae-feeding pollutants the plant can discharge, DEP assistant district director Tim Rach said.
County environmental officials have asked the state twice to restrict the amount of nutrient-laden pollutants that the plant can discharge into the ocean. Palm Beach County Environmental Resources Management officials have cited reports linking a bloom of toxic algae on the reef to the amounts of nutrients the plant discharges into the sea, and cited the economic value of the reef, estimated to bring $194 million a year to Palm Beach County and to sustain 6,000 jobs here.
The DEP did not respond to the requests, said resources management Director Richard Walesky, but the DEP's Rach recently said the agency has not seen proof that partly treated sewage harms the ocean.
(This is the kind of horseshit we face. The department of environmental protection is unaware of thousands of studies proving harm, resulting in closure of hundreds of thousands of sewer outfalls. They say this sh.t with a straight face. - esg)
After divers noticed toxic algae on the Gulf Stream Reef directly downstream of the plant's discharge pipe four years ago, they formed the nonprofit Reef Rescue which reported the bloom to DEP officials. When DEP officials did not respond to that report, the group submitted three more reports, using data from the sewer plant and showing a correlation between the amount of nutrients discharged and the growth of the algae.
The DEP has since invited Reef Rescue to review the plant's monitoring plan.
DEP Secretary Colleen Castille sent an e-mail to Reef Rescue Director Ed Tichenor in August saying she and other agency officials, "frankly just don't believe it is good policy to have low-treated wastewater spewed onto our reefs."
Studies dating to the '90s have linked ocean sewage discharge to algae blooms and the resulting death of coral reefs.
Recently, however, the DEP chalked up county environmental officials' concerns to "some sort of relationship between the county and the Reef Rescue group," Webster said.
Tichenor reacted by saying, "That's like, if we say it's a good idea to wash your hands after you go to bathroom, and the county agrees with us, that means we have a relationship?"
Walesky said, "We certainly share some of the conclusions they've drawn from the utility's data."
********************************************************************
We MUST KEEP THE PRESSURE ON!
Support Reef Rescue.
Matthias Voss - 06 Dec 2006 23:05 GMT > Sewage operator ponders options > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > the state to hold off on issuing a permit while the plant investigates > alternative ways to dispose of the waste. Time is money ... Wasted time is more money.
> For the past year, the sewer plant serving Delray Beach and Boynton > Beach has continued to discharge 13 million gallons a day of partly > treated sewage without a current permit while negotiating a plan to > monitor the effects on a nearby coral reef. The state received that plan > Tuesday, setting the stage for a new permit, Department of Environmental > Protection spokesman Stephen Webster said. Why only partly treated? What about nitrification-denitrification, phosphat-fallout processes?
> But a DEP official agreed to delay drafting a permit until the sewer > plant's board meets next week to discuss other disposal methods.
> As the plant's proposal to further filter and disinfect the sewage and > then inject it deep into the ground would take at least two years to > implement, the agency probably will proceed with its plan to issue a > two-year permit. That permit would require testing but set no limits on > the amounts of potentially algae-feeding pollutants the plant can > discharge, DEP assistant district director Tim Rach said. Filter and desinfect sounds a bit scary to me, though I am unaware of the current SOTA in your sewage water treatment. A biological final treatment should cure this satisfactorily.
> County environmental officials have asked the state twice to restrict > the amount of nutrient-laden pollutants that the plant can discharge > into the ocean. If it doesn't contain heavy metals (sic), why not use it as a fertilizer?
Some cities here sell the decomposed stuff as fertile soil. All it does is smell a little like ammonia, until this has been broken down by oxygen and UV rays.
> Palm Beach County Environmental Resources Management > officials have cited reports linking a bloom of toxic algae on the reef > to the amounts of nutrients the plant discharges into the sea, and cited > the economic value of the reef, estimated to bring $194 million a year > to Palm Beach County and to sustain 6,000 jobs here. Excellent. This is the road to sustainable development. Put a value on the environment.
> The DEP did not respond to the requests, said resources management > Director Richard Walesky, but the DEP's Rach recently said the agency > has not seen proof that partly treated sewage harms the ocean. The usual blinders. Cyano bacteria would say the same.
> (This is the kind of horseshit we face. The department of environmental > protection is unaware of thousands of studies proving harm, resulting in > closure of hundreds of thousands of sewer outfalls. They say this sh.t > with a straight face. - esg) Closure? What do they do instead? Invest in new processing plants?
> Studies dating to the '90s have linked ocean sewage discharge to algae > blooms and the resulting death of coral reefs. Not only reefs. Dinoflagellates and others release powerful gaseous toxins known as nerve gas.
Hold on.
Matthias
mike gray - 07 Dec 2006 14:05 GMT >> Sewage operator ponders options >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Time is money ... Wasted time is more money. Their strategy to date has been deny and delay. This may be capitulation, or it may be another red herring. There is an ongoing study by NOAA, at taxpayer expense, to determine whether the western Atlantic currents actually flow north, as Reef Rescue assumed.
They could continue to operate forever without a permit if they can come up with creative ways to delay the inevitable.
>> For the past year, the sewer plant serving Delray Beach and Boynton >> Beach has continued to discharge 13 million gallons a day of partly [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Why only partly treated? What about nitrification-denitrification, > phosphat-fallout processes? There are many alternatives to dumping partly treated sewage in the ocean. There are only a few (three?) plants in the US that actually fully treat effluent. It's expensive. Deep well injection is probably the best alternative here in SoFla, cheap and effective as the limestone filters out the poop. There is also surface treatment, but that takes a lot of land and land is very costly here.
>> But a DEP official agreed to delay drafting a permit until the sewer >> plant's board meets next week to discuss other disposal methods. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > If it doesn't contain heavy metals (sic), why not use it as a fertilize This is done and is an alternative. A close cousin is dumping it in huge leaching fields, making new wetlands as has been done in western Delray. Problem is, there's no more land to do this on, the cities and counties have sold all public lands to developers.
> Some cities here sell the decomposed stuff as fertile soil. All it does > is smell a little like ammonia, until this has been broken down by [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Closure? What do they do instead? Invest in new processing plants? Exactly. I am old enough to remember when all sewerage from waterfront communities went right into the ocean. There are only six active sewer outfalls left in SoFla, many states have none. This one is especially damaging as it dumps right onto the reef line. All must be shut down as soon as possible.
One idiot asked, "If we don't dump it in the ocean, what can we do with it?" Well, what the hell do they do with it in South Dakota????
>> Studies dating to the '90s have linked ocean sewage discharge to algae >> blooms and the resulting death of coral reefs. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Hold on. Once again, we need the MONEY it takes to bring the public pressure (at which we've been VERY successful) and the legal pressure (which is what has these folks scared).
Go to WWW.REEF-RESCUE.ORG and help us out.
m
Lee Bell - 07 Dec 2006 16:11 GMT > There are only six active sewer outfalls left in SoFla, many states have > none. This one is especially damaging as it dumps right onto the reef > line. All must be shut down as soon as possible. What Mike didn't mention, at least I didn't see him mention, is that the DelRay outfall was originally permitted for a site about a mile further out to sea and in much deeper water. Had it been put where it was supposed to be in the first place, chances are good we would not be addressing this issue now.
As for sanitizing the effluent, there's more to the problem than that. No matter how sanitary it is, it still contains the same chemicals, some of which are believed (with lots of evidence) to foster rapid algae growth, exactly what has been noticed on the reefs just north of the outfall. This indirect effect of the effluent is more significant to the reefs survival than the fact that it's only partially treated sewage.
Lee
mike gray - 07 Dec 2006 17:32 GMT >>There are only six active sewer outfalls left in SoFla, many states have >>none. This one is especially damaging as it dumps right onto the reef [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > be in the first place, chances are good we would not be addressing this > issue now. True, it was supposed to go out another mile and a half, and that's apparently what the sewer plant paid for. Most of the other outfalls do go out into deeper water.
But that is not a solution. Now that we're finally diving the real deep reef system along the Miami Terrace, which is an elaborate reef system that runs from south of Miami up to Boca, we're finding stuff that is truly amazing. That system is about 15 miles out, and beyond PADI's recreational limits (650 - 2000 feet). (See WWW.HBOI.EDU )
The answer is not to dump our sh.t in between, instead of on top of, the reef systems. The answer is to treat it and/or dump it where it won't damage the environment. That can be done, it takes money that the towns don't want to spend. We have to force them to make an investment in 21st century technology.
m
Matthias Voss - 08 Dec 2006 13:48 GMT > The answer is not to dump our sh.t in between, instead of on top of, the > reef systems. The answer is to treat it and/or dump it where it won't > damage the environment. That can be done, it takes money that the towns > don't want to spend. We have to force them to make an investment in 21st > century technology. Agreed, with one alteration. It shouldn't take money, but make money.
Matthias
Matthias Voss - 08 Dec 2006 13:45 GMT > Their strategy to date has been deny and delay. This may be > capitulation, or it may be another red herring. There is an ongoing > study by NOAA, at taxpayer expense, to determine whether the western > Atlantic currents actually flow north, as Reef Rescue assumed. Let me assure you it does.... Part of it comes down again at the Canarys. How should it be able when it didn't go up first? Can't remember the Inuit saying there are holes grwing in the water.
As long as the Gulf stream keeps flowing...
>> Why only partly treated? What about nitrification-denitrification, >> phosphat-fallout processes? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > filters out the poop. There is also surface treatment, but that takes a > lot of land and land is very costly here. A major difference between US and Europeen waste treatment may be the different strucures of waste disposal.
We don't scramble waste and flush it down. We have a multifold way of handling.
- Used clothing is been collected and exploited largely by private companies
-paper and glass are recycled by public service companies, who exploit the raw material commercially.
- packing materials are being collected in bins, and part of a recycling process, where it is up to the operator to really recycle it, like mixed plastics into fence poles or benches ( ubiqitous...), or to exploit the thermal energy by selling it to power plants
- biologic waste is either being composted in your own garden, or collected in special bins and either being composted on public certtified/private plants, or exploiteds because of their caloric contents.
There is a general tendency towards the caloric use of waste, because concerns because of fine toxic aren't any more justified in face of the SOTA filtering technologies.
The remains can be used as road construction material, sometimes with a barrier against diluents.
>>> But a DEP official agreed to delay drafting a permit until the sewer >>> plant's board meets next week to discuss other disposal methods.
>>> As the plant's proposal to further filter and disinfect the sewage >>> and then inject it deep into the ground would take at least two years [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>> the amounts of potentially algae-feeding pollutants the plant can >>> discharge, DEP assistant district director Tim Rach said.
>> Filter and desinfect sounds a bit scary to me, though I am unaware of >> the current SOTA in your sewage water treatment. A biological final [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Problem is, there's no more land to do this on, the cities and counties > have sold all public lands to developers. Store it, bag it, sell it. To dust bowl country, wherever. Put a quality ascertaing label on it.
>>> (This is the kind of horseshit we face. The department of >>> environmental protection is unaware of thousands of studies proving [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > damaging as it dumps right onto the reef line. All must be shut down as > soon as possible. You know they said of catalytic exhasust treatment, the gas coming out of a cars exhaust was cleaner than the ambient air? Same here for sewage water. Where in former times we had aboundant life in the near vicinity of outlets, nowadays sealife is as sparse as it is everywhere, due to the biologic end treatment of sewage.
> One idiot asked, "If we don't dump it in the ocean, what can we do with > it?" Well, what the hell do they do with it in South Dakota???? Diminish the metrics, recycle, and use vertical treatment reactors to save space, underground or above level. The final outflow may me non toxic, and close in its biological oxygen need to natural fresh water.
Matthias
>>> Studies dating to the '90s have linked ocean sewage discharge to >>> algae blooms and the resulting death of coral reefs. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Go to WWW.REEF-RESCUE.ORG and help us out. Cam - 08 Dec 2006 14:08 GMT > You know they said of catalytic exhasust treatment, the gas > coming out of a cars exhaust was cleaner than the ambient air? > Same here for sewage water. > Where in former times we had aboundant life in the near > vicinity of outlets, nowadays sealife is as sparse as it is > everywhere, due to the biologic end treatment of sewage. They say the same thing about the sewage plants here but I don't want to be the guy who demonstrates it. Every time a camera crew shows up at one of the treatment plants someone dips a glass in the outflow and takes a swig. Our big problem is the storm sewers. Every time it rains a load of dog sh.t gets flushed into the lake. It's better now than it used to be but they still close half the beaches for half the summer. Scoop it up. I think there's a pretty good chance that we'll be the first generation to ever improve the environment before handing it down. But that's going to take a lot of work at the local level to get the job done. I'd like to commend Reef Rescue for doing their part.
Cam
Lee Bell - 08 Dec 2006 15:10 GMT >> > Atlantic currents actually flow north, as Reef Rescue assumed.
> Let me assure you it does.... Part of it comes down again at the Canarys. > How should it be able when it didn't go up first? > Can't remember the Inuit saying there are holes grwing in the water. > As long as the Gulf stream keeps flowing... Let me assure you that the question is not as easy as you think. The Gulf Stream runs a few miles off shore along Florida's east coast. While it consistently runs north, the currents along the reefs are not as consistent. The Gulf Stream throws off eddies all along its route that, depending on where you are, can be flowing north, south, east or west. Some of the currents are pretty consistent. Others aren't.
I'm more than a little shocked to see the words "Reef Rescue assumed." in the sentence above. I'd be very surprised if that is a correct statement. As I recall, Reef Rescue has tested the waters at the reef and found the same pollutants there, that were being pumped out to the south. If I'm correct, then Reef Rescue knows which way the currents are flowing over the reefs that are most vulnerable. There's only one place those chemicals can be coming from.
As a further note, Reef Rescue has also charted algae blooms against high points in the outfall's flow, times when the sewage treatment people pumped more, and higher concentrations of the stuff that's doing the damage than their permits allow.
Not only did they put the outfall in the wrong place, they are pumping more than they are allowed by their permit, 12 months after their permits expired . . . and nobody's doing a damned thing about it.
Lee
Matthias Voss - 08 Dec 2006 15:39 GMT All this cited below reminds me of a tactic I used in sports training.
" did it hurt like that already three laps before?"
" yesssiddoes"
"OK, when it ain't gotten worse, you may continue for another five laps"..
Matthias
>>>>Atlantic currents actually flow north, as Reef Rescue assumed. > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Lee mike gray - 08 Dec 2006 16:27 GMT > I'm more than a little shocked to see the words "Reef Rescue assumed." in > the sentence above. I'd be very surprised if that is a correct statement. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > reefs that are most vulnerable. There's only one place those chemicals can > be coming from. There's no shortage of studies of what's going where, including a NOAA current monitor now sitting on top of Lynn's Reef.
These studies are actually promoted by the sewer plants because they are conducted with federal, not local, funds and they delay action "pending the outcome of studies..."
Scientific study of the obvious is the foot-dragger's favorite tool.
> . . . and nobody's doing a damned thing about it. Wrong! Reef Rescue is doing something about it and making progress. We WILL get this outfall shut down.
m
Lee Bell - 08 Dec 2006 16:52 GMT > Scientific study of the obvious is the foot-dragger's favorite tool. Ain't that the damned truth.
>> . . . and nobody's doing a damned thing about it.
> Wrong! Reef Rescue is doing something about it and making progress. We > WILL get this outfall shut down. Not once has anybody said, move the damned outfall and not once has anybody said, your permit is expired, stop dumping or else, and meant it.
Reef Rescue is doing the best it can, but it ain't done anything but make noise so far. We'll keep our fingers crossed, and our support flowing, in hopes that you'll be right. We may not succeed in doing a damned thing, but one thing is certain. If we don't, nobody else will.
Keep up the good work.
Lee
mike gray - 08 Dec 2006 18:12 GMT > Not once has anybody said, move the damned outfall and not once has anybody > said, your permit is expired, stop dumping or else, and meant it. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > hopes that you'll be right. We may not succeed in doing a damned thing, but > one thing is certain. If we don't, nobody else will. Moving the outfall is not an option. An alternative to dumping in the ocean is.
It's a long, slow process. Even when we finally force the plant to develop an alternative, there are the engineering studies, bond issues, and construction before the outfall is finally plugged. The sh.t will flow for a couple years after we have won.
I'd like a judge to say "stop", because the daily fines would then begin to accumulate, contingent on a realistic plan to replace the plant. But an immediate end to dumping is unrealistic.
And SoFla has five more outfalls, each of which will dump for another century if we don't take a few years to shut them down.
m
Scott - 08 Dec 2006 18:24 GMT > And SoFla has five more outfalls, each of which will dump for another > century if we don't take a few years to shut them down. If you havent already, you need to do a public outreach, as in seminars and such to get the local bluehairs on board. Tell them what will happen to their property taxes if this isnt addressed pro-actively and quickly.
Some couldnt care less, but some will be outraged to learn their sewage is being used to kill the ocean.
|
|
|