May I ask you why you are passionate about septic systems as compared to gravity flow or pump and grind systems.
Answer:
It has to do with the environment. There is no septic system these days that cannot be installed where there is an engineered sewerage system and yet do a better job with waste water and sludge. In short, septic systems have been given a rough ride by engineers wishing to install large scale systems.
Question:
Why is it that we are bombarded with the misinformation that large scale systems are better?
Answer:
Yes, we are indeed! In fact in some states it is written into the constitution that all households have a stake in some large scale system or other.
In my experience, with what you have in Grand Bend, where you have a sandy soil base, the use of a septic system is optimal. One has to know how much sand is needed and other things if you go with a cheaper system, but still they should be adequate. A well designed septic system that goes the next step, and you have the perfect ecological system for people and communities, but that seems to escape the sewerage engineers.
Question:
You have spent over forty years battling against a pump and grind system, why do you think the consulting engineers suggest such a system when a septic system would be more environmentally friendly and an improvement on the large scale system, which after all introduces other problems and environmental issues, not the least being that people are encouraged to waste water and produce more sewerage.
Answer:
Well, there is the fact that there is less competition with large scale systems. It is possible for engineers to work with property developers that can borrow large amounts to control the building of homes within an area that has a particular type of large scale sewerage system. If you design the sewerage system, you, in essence, have designed the density of homes going into that area. This gives developers enormous control over the households going into an area. With a population of septic systems, they would not have nearly as much control.
In addition, there is a tendency for sewer engineers, developers and local government authorities to plan out their own future incomes through regional designs that suit their profit ambitions.
Sewerage systems have a hidden agenda or effect which is inescapable, and that is to control the housing of an area to the benefit of government revenue streams. Thus, it is that sewerage engineers can shape the political landscape of the households of a community they create.
Government people are given by sewerage consultants long and badly written engineering studies that always seem to narrow down to the system that they can make money from themselves without doing proper work. It's easy to take off the shelf information of previous projects, dress it up, and present it as an original study without doing the work properly. Often the consultants will present a system and have done no work at all on alternatives. The so called study may not even cost the consultants much money because it is off their shelf and dressed up to look good.
Specialization, in particular systems is a consequence of this pattern of advice giving. It is assumed that because others have adopted a particular system that is best for another area. Thus, almost no real environmental assessment is done. The engineering consultants receive disproportionate payments for work that is poor and in the worst cases off the shelf. The consideration of alternatives is some times minimal.
Moreover, if you fight these people, you are made to feel you are being antisocial. People will vilify you saying you have destroyed potential property values in their development.
This all works to support a bad solution for the environment. It is often very difficult to resist because house owners are most often not part of the infrastructure creation process.
Question:
So you would say that the deterioration in quality of the environment begins with the putting in of an infrastructure that is not really friendly to the environment, but is presented by engineers not trained in ecology or environmental arts as being friendly.
Response:
In America, the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA has a program under the National Small Flows Clearinghouse to help small communities design appropriate waste water systems. This is still inadequate to meet the challenge here in America, but it represents a wonderful departure from the past.
The fact is that using the terminologies of infrastructure and development intimidate communities who are prey to engineering and business sharks flogging a bad design for the environment. Once they have the infrastructure in place it is easy for these people to take over whole communities with the government's assistance. They will even work to crate the type of government structure that suit their goals. It can become insidious. Since they make disproportionate profits relative to their actual contributions, they end up as the powerful. Small scale efforts are treated rather shoddily even though those systems may be vastly superior and maintain forests, natural life and cleaner water for the environment.
Summing up:
Thank you for spending time to explain these issues. It would seem that what is best for the natural environment and waste water treatment will involve a battle against government, vested sewerage business interests, and developers, and those that developers pay. What an awesome challenge for the average community.
Governments unthinking about the environment encourage bad development of community systems because they want to spend money to be popular as jobs and business support.
Will ye no think kindly on those who would be your friends! May the sun shine with your thoughts, today, and happiness grow in your heart! May you allow yourself some peace of mind.
