Lectra-san. What a mess.
Marty Gras
truck that would come once a week. This was an expensive solution and could
also be difficult when the weather turned nasty. So this year marina has
required that all winter liveaboards install lectra-san waste treatment
units on their boats.
I myself thought that this was a great Idea.
Well Im now sorry they were ever installed and so are many at the marina
Since the installation there is a brown film on the water that is only in
the area where the liveaboards are located. The area in the marina where the
liveaboards are located is a small cove that is sheltered from the weather
this along with the high concentration of boats all discharging overboard is
making one hell of a mess. After all of the labor and expense they are
considering going to the pump-out system again.
The lectra-san units seem to work well and I still think they are an great
improvement over raw sewage discharge.
Gary
Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
Keith
forced everyone to install.
--
Remove "NOSPAM" in above address to send mail. I hate spammers!
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
propaganda in the NGs...the last time, you claimed that the area around the
boats with Lectra/Sans was littered with floating sewage. That was
de-bunked as impossible because the Lectra/San macerates to liquid...so now
it's a "brown film on the water"...something the treatment process makes
impossible.
You very carefully worded your comments to imply that you're among those
who've allegedly been forced by the marina to install a
Lectra/San...without actually saying that you have. I don't know what your
agenda is...but you'd have a whole lot more success in selling it if you had
the slightest clue what you're talking about! But those who'd like to know
how the Lectra/San actually works, the quality of the discharge from it and
the answers to just about any question anyone can think of about it can
find the facts on the Raritan website at http://www.raritaneng.com
What is the name and exact location of this marina? I remember from
previous conversations that you're in NJ on the Delaware River, and Raritan
is "just up the road" in Millville NJ...very conveniently located to be able
to investigate first hand any problems the use of the Lectra/San may be
causing there.
Peggie
Marty Gras <mrpa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:82eueu$f1a$2...@autumn.news.rcn.net...
Phoenix
If Gary doesn't provide the marina's name (after making the "brown film"
allegations) you can be sure that it is one of your competitors who is
trying to bad mouth a product he can't compete with.
I think most of the people who read the NG understand if Gary's comment was
a valid one that he would be glad to provide additional information to help
solve an environmental problem at his marina. If not, we know his is full
of it.
--
Jim
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering <peg...@bellsouth.net>
wrote in message news:6sQ24.319$DZ5....@news1.atl...
hkr...@erolsantispam.com
Maybe, maybe not. Life isn't as simple as you seem to be.
--
Harry Krause
------------
When you leave walk out backwards, so I'll think you're walking in
Gould 0738
by Mr. Paper seem to deal with the discharge of
bodily waste from pleasure boats?
Can this possibly be a sign of robust mental health?
Methinks there must be an agenda hidden in there, someplace.
Like Peggie, I also noticed that the complaint went from "chunks" of human
waste floating around the marina to a "brown film" on the water when Mr. Paper
was assaulted by facts. On the very rare occasions that anybody has been
looking overboard when the Lectra San has been
operated on our boat, there has never been
anything observed on the water's surface after use.
If there is indeed a "brown film" (could be),
it is more likely the result of some boaters failing to follow the marina's
(supposed) edict that they *must install a 'Lectra San*
after the pumpout barge was discontinued.
Bet a dollar to a doughnut (hmmm, isn't that about even odds these days?) that
the marina did *not* go aboard each of the boats in question to inspect for
compliance with the alleged 'Lectra San edict.
________
Chuck Gould
Float and let float.
Marty Gras
If there is no solids discharge then why is it now illegal to use your
system in some NJ waters.
Gary
Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote in message
<6sQ24.319$DZ5....@news1.atl>...
Marty Gras
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote in message
<6sQ24.319$DZ5....@news1.atl>...
>Gary, this is the second time you've posted false anti-Lectra/San
>propaganda in the NGs...the last time, you claimed that the area around the
>boats with Lectra/Sans was littered with floating sewage.
I never stated that. What I was complaining about at the time was people who
were discharging raw untreated sewage overboard.
That was de-bunked as impossible because the Lectra/San macerates to
>liquid...so now it's a "brown film on the water"...something the treatment
process >makes impossible.
How does the Lectra/San change the color of the discharge?
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> >propaganda in the NGs...the last time, you claimed that the area around
the
> >boats with Lectra/Sans was littered with floating sewage.
>
> I never stated that. What I was complaining about at the time was people
who
> were discharging raw untreated sewage overboard.
One thing about this medium: everything we say is in writing and can be
retrieved and reposted. Shall I repost your complaint--unsolicited and
unconnected to any other discussion about marine sanitation,
btw--specifically about the water around a group of liveaboards using
Lectra/Sans..claiming that it's littered with floating sewage? Shall I also
repost all the replies to it?
> That was de-bunked as impossible because the Lectra/San macerates to
> >liquid...so now it's a "brown film on the water"...something the
treatment
> process >makes impossible.
>
> How does the Lectra/San change the color of the discharge?
The discharge is a bit cloudy...However, your complaint was about the
alleged "brown film" ON the water all around boats using Lectra/Sans ...the
Lectra/San leaves no film, of any color.
Btw...you neglected to include the name and location of the marina in
question in your reply. Gee...what a surprise...
Peggie
Phoenix
If you truly have a problem at your marina, why don't you post the name of
the marina and you can help solve your problem. Stating anonymous
"problems" caused by a product is a fairly typical way of someone trying to
degrade the competition when they can not compete on a level playing field.
You state you are interesting in solving the problem of floating film in
your marina, why don't you post the name of the marina so someone can help
you solve the problem?
--
Jim
"Marty Gras" <mrpa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:82jfr0$ikh$1...@autumn.news.rcn.net...
> Peggie
>
> If there is no solids discharge then why is it now illegal to use your
> system in some NJ waters.
> Gary
> Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
>
> Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote in message
> <6sQ24.319$DZ5....@news1.atl>...
> >Gary, this is the second time you've posted false anti-Lectra/San
> >propaganda in the NGs...the last time, you claimed that the area around
the
> >boats with Lectra/Sans was littered with floating sewage. That was
> >de-bunked as impossible because the Lectra/San macerates to liquid...so
now
> >it's a "brown film on the water"...something the treatment process makes
> >impossible.
> >
Gould 0738
requirements than the Federal Govt.
There are some places where you have to contain dirty dishwater, too. Soon it
could be illegal to use soap to wash a boat in some locales. Kids under 12 are
required to wear PFD's in Washington State (on boats under 19 feet) which is
more restrictive than federal regulations.
A "no discharge" zone doesn't prove or even imply that there are solids in the
discharge of 'Lectra San units.
Still waiting for the name of the marina, here. Why the mystery? Why the weak
attempt to change the subject? Why now argue that there must be solids in the
discharge when a post or two ago you claimed to have never stated there were?
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
Gould 0738 <goul...@aol.comspamkill> wrote in message
news:19991207155446...@ng-cr1.aol.com...
> Any state or other governmental agency can create legislation with
stricter
> requirements than the Federal Govt.
Actually, they can't. Any state or political subdivision thereof may decide
how far to go--or not--in taking advantage of the strictest provisions of
any federal law, but no state (or political subdivision thereof) may enact
any law that supercedes federal law.
> There are some places where you have to contain dirty dishwater, too.
To my knowledge, only on one lake in NH are vessels (important word here)
required to hold gray water ("galley, bath and shower water"). What
confuses the bejabbers out of people is the designation "houseboat"...which
may be a vessel...or may just be a floating house, subject to different
rules than vessels.
> Soon it
> could be illegal to use soap to wash a boat in some locales. Kids under 12
are
> required to wear PFD's in Washington State (on boats under 19 feet) which
is
> more restrictive than federal regulations.
Which federal regs?
> A "no discharge" zone doesn't prove or even imply that there are solids in
the
> discharge of 'Lectra San units.
Correct. However, it does strongly imply that pumpout equipment mfrs have a
vested interest in making the most from the cash cow that the federal grants
to marinas to install pumpout facilities created...the more "no discharge"
zones, the more equipment they sell.
> Still waiting for the name of the marina, here. Why the mystery? Why the
weak
> attempt to change the subject? Why now argue that there must be solids in
the
> discharge when a post or two ago you claimed to have never stated there
were?
I'm still waiting for the answers to those questions too...and betting we
won't ever get them.
Peggie
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> system in some NJ waters.
Because one has nothing to do with the other. And once again, you've
demonstrated that you're totally clueless about how a Lectra/San
works...even about the issues.
Either you're the worst informed enviro-frootloop on the planet (which is
saying a LOT!)...or you're just a lonely soul who's figured out a way to
make yourself the center of attention for a while every now and then.
Either way, I have better things to do that play your game any longer.
Peggie
Marty Gras
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote in message
>> If there is no solids discharge then why is it now illegal to use your
>> system in some NJ waters.
>
>Because one has nothing to do with the other. And once again, you've
>demonstrated that you're totally clueless about how a Lectra/San
>works...even about the issues.
>Either you're the worst informed enviro-frootloop on the planet (which is
>saying a LOT!)...or you're just a lonely soul who's figured out a way to
>make yourself the center of attention for a while every now and then.
>Either way, I have better things to do that play your game any longer.
>
>Peggie
Its not a game, Its an issue of clean water.
By the way where do the solids go if not into the water?
Gary
Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
Also the name of the marina is not the issue, that is unless these units are
not used elsewhere.
Marty Gras
Steven Shelikoff wrote in message <384D94C0...@averstar.com>...
>Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote:
>>
>> Gould 0738 <goul...@aol.comspamkill> wrote in message
>> news:19991207155446...@ng-cr1.aol.com...
>> > Any state or other governmental agency can create legislation with
>> stricter
>> > requirements than the Federal Govt.
>>
>> Actually, they can't. Any state or political subdivision thereof may
decide
>> how far to go--or not--in taking advantage of the strictest provisions of
>> any federal law, but no state (or political subdivision thereof) may
enact
>> any law that supercedes federal law.
>
>
>Steve
As do all other states.
Steven Shelikoff
>
> Gould 0738 <goul...@aol.comspamkill> wrote in message
> news:19991207155446...@ng-cr1.aol.com...
> > Any state or other governmental agency can create legislation with
> stricter
> > requirements than the Federal Govt.
>
> Actually, they can't. Any state or political subdivision thereof may decide
> how far to go--or not--in taking advantage of the strictest provisions of
> any federal law, but no state (or political subdivision thereof) may enact
> any law that supercedes federal law.
You better tell that to California. They do it all the time.
Steve
--
/ / /
\ \ \ mailto:shel...@averstar.com
/ / /
Phoenix
What is the name of the marina that is having the problem with lectra-san
making a mess?
--
Jim
"Marty Gras" <mrpa...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:82k4n0$39f$1...@autumn.news.rcn.net...
>
> Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote in message
> >> If there is no solids discharge then why is it now illegal to use your
> >> system in some NJ waters.
> >
> >Because one has nothing to do with the other. And once again, you've
> >demonstrated that you're totally clueless about how a Lectra/San
> >works...even about the issues.
>
>
>
> >Either you're the worst informed enviro-frootloop on the planet (which is
> >saying a LOT!)...or you're just a lonely soul who's figured out a way to
> >make yourself the center of attention for a while every now and then.
> >Either way, I have better things to do that play your game any longer.
> >
> >Peggie
>
>
> Its not a game, Its an issue of clean water.
>
> By the way where do the solids go if not into the water?
>
> Gary
> Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
>
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> enact
> >> any law that supercedes federal law.
> >
> >You better tell that to California. They do it all the time.
> >
> >Steve
>
>
> Gary
I've seen it happen twice that a state legislature managed to enact a law
that supercedes federal law...but both only lasted on the books till
somebody noticed and challenged it in court. It may appear to happen more
often...but what misleads you is either the "fine print" that provides for a
process that allows it...or that a completely different set of laws apply
than you think apply...or the media jumps on some agenda instead of doing
its own homework and reports it wrong.
Peggie
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> Its not a game, Its an issue of clean water.
And if you'd bother to do ANY homework at all, you'd know that a)
solids--or lack of them--have nothing to do with water quality...it's the
bacteria in waste that harms water quality...and b) the discharge from a
Lectra/San is so clean (i.e. has such a low bacteria count) that it meets
federal water quality standards for swimming areas...
It's obvious you don't want to learn, but others may...and they'll find all
kinds of information--as opposed to propaganda--on the Raritan website at:
> Also the name of the marina is not the issue, that is unless these units
are
> not used elsewhere.
You made a claim that our device was creating environmental problems in a
particular marina. Either name the marina, or admit your claim was a lie.
Peggie
Del Cecchi
Is Eutrophication and Biological Oxygen Demand not the problem in salt
water that it is in fresh water? Here in Minnesota, the only salt water
is used to cook pasta.
And it is a personal thing but I don't care how fine you grind it, and
how much clorine or boiling it, I don't care to swim in sewage. So
please don't put in stuff about swimming beaches. After all, if I boil
a turd, it may be sterile but it is still a turd.
remember I live around fresh water where nowadays dumping sewage is
frowned upon. I know little about ocean ecology with respect to
effluent. So as far as I know, it is fine in the ocean.
Del Cecchi
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> Is Eutrophication and Biological Oxygen Demand not the problem in salt
> water that it is in fresh water?
Both are issues that pertain to sewage treatment plants--where, btw, most
holding tank contents end up--where "sewage" includes anything that goes
down a pipe or a storm drain...but, while used to make emotional
environmental arguments, not in marine sanitation that only includes human
waste. For instance, the discharge from a Lectra/San creates no more BOD
than do 4 oak leaves falling into the water. For a complete understanding I
recommend that you also go to the Raritan website...and if you do, I promise
you'll find facts--and from a number of respected sources too--not
propaganda....and I think you'll also find it very interesting reading.
> Here in Minnesota, the only salt water
> is used to cook pasta.
All the non-navigable inland lakes and rivers in the US were declared "no
discharge" by the Federal Water Pollution Act of 1977. And the Great Lakes
have been "no discharge" longer than that.
> And it is a personal thing but I don't care how fine you grind it, and
> how much clorine or boiling it, I don't care to swim in sewage.
But unless you only swim in chlorinated "cement ponds," you do. And even
worse, you drink it, cook your pasta in it and bathe in it...'cuz most of
the man-made inland lakes are the water supply for the towns and cities
downstream of 'em.
> So
> please don't put in stuff about swimming beaches. After all, if I boil
> a turd, it may be sterile but it is still a turd.
The duck and Canada geese poopulation (typo deliberate) contributes more
fecal matter to a body of water in a day than all the boats do in a year.
Then there are the people who are in boats that have toilets...You don't
really think all the people in ski boats, fishing boats and runabouts that
don't have toilets (and btw, less than 10% of all the boats in the US are
over 20') are only jumping into the water to cool off? Or that all those
little kids at the beaches on your lakes--or even the adults--are holding it
till they come out of the water and go to a rest room? And none of them are
doing anything illegal!
When it comes to this issue, perception becomes many people's reality...no
discharge from boat toilets is perceived as no effluent in the water.
Sorry...but that's just not true. In many cases the discharge from the
Lectra/San has been found to be CLEANER than the water it's going into!
> remember I live around fresh water where nowadays dumping sewage is
> frowned upon.
So do I...But where do you think the local sewage treatment plant discharge
goes, Del? Into the local streams and rivers.
> I know little about ocean ecology with respect to
> effluent. So as far as I know, it is fine in the ocean.
'Tis indeed a different issue in salt water, but heavy concentrations of
untreated sewage can be just as damaging in coastal waters as in fresh.
However, since the Lectra/San requires salt (it creates chlorine by charging
the ions in salt water with electrical current), 99% of 'em are on boats in
coastal waters...the rest use salt feed tanks. So the whole discussion is
really about salt water, not fresh...if you recall, this whole discussion
began with Gary's claims regarding the use of Lectra/Sans in a coastal salt
water marina.
I'm not promoting an agenda here...only trying to counter emotional argument
with factual information. I fully support "no discharge" in some areas in
both salt and fresh water, for one or more of a variety of reasons:
insufficient natural cleansing....especially high ecological
sensitivity...swimming areas...and others. But the facts don't support a
need for universal "no discharge." Unfortunately, facts are seldom included
in the arguments, for or against...or if ANY are, only those that do promote
an agenda.
So if you want to sure that the water you're cooking your pasta in is 100%
"pure," I guess you'd better start cooking it in Evian, Del...but I'm not
sure what's been in it either! :-)
Peggie
hkr...@capuantispam.net
>
> On Tue, 07 Dec 1999 19:19:23 -0600, Del Cecchi <dce...@ibm.net>
> wrote:
>
> So as far as I know, it is fine in the ocean.
> >
>
> Best shrimping in Charleston is right about the 3 mile limit where we
> used to mascerate the big tank in the Hatteras.....
>
> Fishin's real great right about there, too! All the ships dump as
> soon as they get out there......
>
> I like shrimp....Fed 'em for years!
> Larry
Still can't spell hepatitis, eh, Larry?
--
Harry Krause
------------
I'm not crazy, I just have a unique sense of reality.
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
>
> C'mon, let's not stoop to bullshit (or people shit, for that matter).
I have no intention of stooping to that kind of language...
> Virtually all of the people who are "jumping in the water" are urinating,
And virtually all the toilet flushes are also urine...so what's your point?
> The issue is people taking a DUMP in the water.
And ducks...and geese...and kids...the lady I watched walk out of the water
at a local beach with a naked baby in one arm and trailing his diaper behind
her in the water in the other hand...the two jerks who idled into the midst
of several of us on moorings and swimming in my YC cove and proceeded to
jump in, pull down their pants and leave behind "political statements" re
their opinion of private YCs...
Do you honestly believe that "no discharge" laws are gonna prevent ANY of
that?
Do you think I'm gonna believe that although you won't even swim in water a
kid just pooped in, you will--due to the differences in pathology between
human and water fowl fecal matter--drink water a duck just pooped in?
You're just trying to create an issue out of a non-issue in order to promote
an agenda...enuff awreddy!
Peggie
> --
> --
> Karl Denninger (ka...@denninger.net) Web: http://childrens-justice.org
> Isn't it time we started putting KIDS first? See the above URL for
> a plan to do exactly that!
Larry KN4IM
div/Raritan Engineering" <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>The discharge is a bit cloudy...However, your complaint was about the
>alleged "brown film" ON the water all around boats using Lectra/Sans ...the
>Lectra/San leaves no film, of any color.
>
>Btw...you neglected to include the name and location of the marina in
>question in your reply. Gee...what a surprise...
>
>Peggie
>
Hmm....Shit floats.....Electrasan shit sinks! Pretty neat trick,
Peggie!
Larry
Larry KN4IM
Larry KN4IM
div/Raritan Engineering" <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>I'm still waiting for the answers to those questions too...and betting we
>won't ever get them.
>
>Peggie
>
I'm still trying to figure out what happens to the "solids".
I don't remember having to shovel them out from the bilge under the
Electrasan.....so, which way did they go?
Larry.....They just VANISHED!
Larry KN4IM
div/Raritan Engineering" <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>And if you'd bother to do ANY homework at all, you'd know that a)
>solids--or lack of them--have nothing to do with water quality...it's the
>bacteria in waste that harms water quality...and b) the discharge from a
>Lectra/San is so clean (i.e. has such a low bacteria count) that it meets
>federal water quality standards for swimming areas...
>
QUICK! Someone go get a glass!! I wanna see Peggie DRINK IT!
Larry.....Bullhockey.
Karl Denninger
>fecal matter to a body of water in a day than all the boats do in a year.
>Then there are the people who are in boats that have toilets...You don't
>really think all the people in ski boats, fishing boats and runabouts that
>don't have toilets (and btw, less than 10% of all the boats in the US are
>over 20') are only jumping into the water to cool off? Or that all those
>little kids at the beaches on your lakes--or even the adults--are holding it
>till they come out of the water and go to a rest room? And none of them are
>doing anything illegal!
Uh, Peggie.
C'mon, let's not stoop to bullshit (or people shit, for that matter).
Urine is sterile when it is voided by a healthy person. It doesn't STAY
that way (it turns out to be a fairly decent culture media for various
things once out of the body), but it certainly is at the point it is
emitted from a healthy body.
FECES, on the other hand, is full of all kinds of nasty bacteria and, in
some cases, viral material as well.
Virtually all of the people who are "jumping in the water" are urinating,
and that contributes a big fat statistical goose-egg to the bacterial
content.
The issue is people taking a DUMP in the water.
--
Gould 0738
California emissions laws for automobiles are a good example, as is the PFD law
in Washington State. The federal government has *no* requirement that PFD be
worn by anybody aboard a pleasure boat, only that the devices be available in a
number equal to the number of passengers. In Washington, kids under 12 years of
age must wear a PFD in a boat less than 19 feet in length (unless within a
completely enclosed cabin).
No state can make a law that would abridge the rights guaranteed by the
amendments to the Constitution, however.
Regarding: 'Lectra San solids. They get pulverized into a slurry by the
macerators.
The discharged material is also disinfected
to a standard well above much of the outfall from local sewage treatment
plants, which is where the "pumped out" material from holding tanks must go.
Add in the exhaust from the pump out barge, and the holding tank- to pump out-
and eventual treatment ashore option is probably a greater gross polluter than
a properly operating Type I MSD.
Not to mention: The vast majority of people with a "Y" valve option plumbed in
between the marine toilet and the holding tank cheat like crazy. A very low
number of used boats ever arrive at a resale dock with the Y valve set to pump
the crap into a holding tank. Even if holding tanks could be proven to be a
superior technology, the percentage of disuse of the devices would
still reduce their pollution control effectiveness to far less than a Type I
MSD.
Curtis CCR
Steven Shelikoff <shel...@averstar.com> wrote:
> Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote:
> >
> > Gould 0738 <goul...@aol.comspamkill> wrote in message
> > news:19991207155446...@ng-cr1.aol.com...
> > > Any state or other governmental agency can create legislation with
> > stricter
> > > requirements than the Federal Govt.
> >
> > Actually, they can't. Any state or political subdivision thereof may
decide
> > how far to go--or not--in taking advantage of the strictest
provisions of
enact
> > any law that supercedes federal law.
>
> You better tell that to California. They do it all the time.
You'll probably find that the only time California or any other state
supercedes Federal Law is when the Federal Law says its OK to do so.
Its not uncommon to see wordage in statutes saying something along the
lines of "nothing in this section (chapter, part, whatever) prevents
states from doing more."
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Karl Denninger
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> Uh, Peggie.
>>
>> C'mon, let's not stoop to bullshit (or people shit, for that matter).
>
>
>
My point is that trying to claim that the people jumping in the water to
take a leak is a "sanitation" issue is pure hogwash.
>> The issue is people taking a DUMP in the water.
>
>And ducks...and geese...and kids...the lady I watched walk out of the water
>at a local beach with a naked baby in one arm and trailing his diaper behind
>her in the water in the other hand...the two jerks who idled into the midst
>of several of us on moorings and swimming in my YC cove and proceeded to
>jump in, pull down their pants and leave behind "political statements" re
>their opinion of private YCs...
>
>Do you honestly believe that "no discharge" laws are gonna prevent ANY of
>that?
No. But I also don't make claims for devices (in print or otherwise) when
I know full well that 80% of the time what goes IN is sterile to start
with.
Macerators and the like (including your pet device) are perfectly fine for
#2s. They serve a purpose for them too. But for urine they're a complete
waste of a good device.
Never mind the law, mind the FACTS.
>You're just trying to create an issue out of a non-issue in order to promote
>an agenda...enuff awreddy!
>
>Peggie
On the contrary; I'm trying to prevent the hype-monsters from having yet
another go at it.
Steven Shelikoff
>
> Gary,
> What is the name of the marina that is having the problem with lectra-san
> making a mess?
Ooh, I know, I know! But I won't say if Gary doesn't want it known.
However, I might just take a ride over there and see if I spot a brown
film on the water.
Steve
Steven Shelikoff
>
> > but no state (or political subdivision thereof) may
> > enact
> > >> any law that supercedes federal law.
> > >
> > >You better tell that to California. They do it all the time.
> > >
> >
> > As do all other states.
> >
> > Gary
>
> I've seen it happen twice that a state legislature managed to enact a law
> that supercedes federal law...but both only lasted on the books till
> somebody noticed and challenged it in court. It may appear to happen more
> often...but what misleads you is either the "fine print" that provides for a
> process that allows it...or that a completely different set of laws apply
> than you think apply...or the media jumps on some agenda instead of doing
> its own homework and reports it wrong.
Peggie, California has had stricter emmission standards than the federal
standards for many years, since the 70's at least. You would think that
if this were illegal, someone would have challenged it by now.
Steev
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
news:384E7541...@averstar.com...
> Peggie, California has had stricter emmission standards than the federal
> standards for many years, since the 70's at least. You would think that
> if this were illegal, someone would have challenged it by now.
That CA has tougher standards doesn't mean that CA law supercedes Federal
law. I think you'll find that federal law permits a state to justify and
apply for permission to enact tougher standards. The same kind of thing
exists in marine sanitation laws...although the federal STANDARD on all
navigable waters allows treatment, the LAW permits states to apply for and
receive permission from the EPA to make any portion of 'em "no discharge."
Peggie
Russ Glindmeier, CFP
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote in message ...
That's the beautiful thing about standards........there are so many to
choose from.
Russ
Phoenix
If Gary doesn't want anyone to know the name of his marina, that is great,
but do let us know if their is any truth to his story about the Lectra-San
and the brown film.
--
Jim
"Steven Shelikoff" <shel...@averstar.com> wrote in message
news:384E764D...@averstar.com...
> Phoenix wrote:
> >
> > Gary,
> > What is the name of the marina that is having the problem with
lectra-san
> > making a mess?
>
> Ooh, I know, I know! But I won't say if Gary doesn't want it known.
> However, I might just take a ride over there and see if I spot a brown
> film on the water.
>
> Steve
>
Steven Shelikoff
>
> Steven Shelikoff <shel...@averstar.com> wrote in message
> > Peggie, California has had stricter emmission standards than the federal
> > standards for many years, since the 70's at least. You would think that
> > if this were illegal, someone would have challenged it by now.
>
> That CA has tougher standards doesn't mean that CA law supercedes Federal
> law. I think you'll find that federal law permits a state to justify and
> apply for permission to enact tougher standards. The same kind of thing
> exists in marine sanitation laws...although the federal STANDARD on all
> navigable waters allows treatment, the LAW permits states to apply for and
> receive permission from the EPA to make any portion of 'em "no discharge."
So basically, a state can enact a law that supercedes federal law if the
federal law allows for it.
Steven Shelikoff
>
> Steve,
>
> If Gary doesn't want anyone to know the name of his marina, that is great,
> but do let us know if their is any truth to his story about the Lectra-San
> and the brown film.
Well, I called the marina to get the scoop on the poop for liveaboards
and they said I need to speak to Angie, who's at lunch and will be back
at 1330. I'll be in a meeting from 1300-????, so we may have to wait
till tomorrow for the answer.
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> federal law allows for it.
By Jove, I think he's got it! :-)
Marty Gras
Phoenix wrote in message <9Zb34.918$Jp2....@typhoon.southeast.rr.com>...
>Gary,
>If you truly have a problem at your marina, why don't you post the name of
>the marina and you can help solve your problem. Stating anonymous
>"problems" caused by a product is a fairly typical way of someone trying to
>degrade the competition when they can not compete on a level playing field.
>
>You state you are interesting in solving the problem of floating film in
>your marina, why don't you post the name of the marina so someone can help
>you solve the problem?
The way to solve the problem is to change the law regarding the discharge of
treated waste and make it illegal.
Im sure that The lectra/San units work as stated but they still discharge
the solids into the water.
Gary
Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
P.S. The name of the marina is riverside Marine.
Steven Shelikoff
>
Good, then we're all in agreement. Now I just wonder what percentage of
federal laws that mandate environmental standards are supercedable by
the states and municipalities? I'd guess probably near 100% of them.
Marty Gras
Gary
Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
Steven Shelikoff wrote in message <384E9A6B...@averstar.com>...
>Phoenix wrote:
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> If Gary doesn't want anyone to know the name of his marina, that is
great,
>> but do let us know if their is any truth to his story about the
Lectra-San
>> and the brown film.
>
>Well, I called the marina to get the scoop on the poop for liveaboards
>and they said I need to speak to Angie, who's at lunch and will be back
>at 1330. I'll be in a meeting from 1300-????, so we may have to wait
>till tomorrow for the answer.
>
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> federal laws that mandate environmental standards are supercedable by
> the states and municipalities? I'd guess probably near 100% of them.
Logical guess, but you'd be wrong. Seems to be mostly in the coastal
areas...and not all of them...New England is a "hotbed" of marine
environmental protection...FL is making a lot of noise, but not really doing
all that much yet...the PNW gets heated up about forests, not nearly as much
about the ocean as NewEnglanders, though and SoCal focuses on air pollution
more than water pollution. That leaves a lot of states in between that
either don't have any legislation in place--at least none that affects
boaters...or don't bother to enforce it.
Peggie
Steven Shelikoff
>
Well, just because a state hasn't chosen to supercede the federal law
doesn't mean it can't. My guess is that written into most of the
federal laws regarding environmental standards is language giving states
and municipalities the option to enact stricter, but not more lenient,
standards. If the states couldn't do that, we wouldn't be having these
"hotbeds" of local activity.
Del Cecchi
>
> fecal matter to a body of water in a day than all the boats do in a year.
> Then there are the people who are in boats that have toilets...You don't
> really think all the people in ski boats, fishing boats and runabouts that
> don't have toilets (and btw, less than 10% of all the boats in the US are
> over 20') are only jumping into the water to cool off? Or that all those
> little kids at the beaches on your lakes--or even the adults--are holding it
> till they come out of the water and go to a rest room? And none of them are
> doing anything illegal!
>
My personal water comes out of a well, as does all the water for the
Rochester Municipal water system. So it starts out as rain that sinks
into the ground and is filtered through the overlaying soil in the
recharge area and then 50 miles of sandstone to get under Rochester. So
there is not much poop in it when it gets here. :-)
And Eutrophication is an issue on all lakes, whether from Municipal
sewage systems or from non-point source runoff washing the phosphorous
and nitrate into the water.
I was asking because I was curious whether there is something different
about salt water or is it just that it is much much much bigger than a
lake?
If one waits long enough, bacterial action will degrade the organic
matter in the effluent so all that is left is the phosphorous and
nitrate which accellerate plant growth.
And all the stuff about evian and effluent from sewage treatment plants
is smoke. It has been a long time since sewage treatment plants were
allowed to grind it up real fine, clorinate it and dump it.
I don't have any agenda, although I can see where you would be paranoid,
given the rest of this thread, so I will just stop now.
Remember I live in Minnesota where everything is a no discharge zone, so
this is intellectual curiosity not an agenda.
Sorry if it sounded like an attack.
del cecchi
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
>
> I was asking because I was curious whether there is something different
> about salt water or is it just that it is much much much bigger than a
> lake?
Salt water and fresh definitely do present different issues, which is the
reason non-navigable inland lakes (i.e. reservoirs for the most part) were
designated as "no discharge" right from the get-go in 1977. But I'm not
conversant enough with the fine points to argue them here.
> If one waits long enough, bacterial action will degrade the organic
> matter in the effluent so all that is left is the phosphorous and
> nitrate which accellerate plant growth.
Yup...something the "tree huggers" tend to forget.
> And all the stuff about evian and effluent from sewage treatment plants
> is smoke. It has been a long time since sewage treatment plants were
> allowed to grind it up real fine, clorinate it and dump it.
Also a big "yup"...but what's overlooked by just about everyone is the fact
that the residual sludge in sewage treatment plants is still carted away and
spread over lands purchased by counties and municipalities for that purpose.
> I don't have any agenda, although I can see where you would be paranoid,
> given the rest of this thread, so I will just stop now.
Didn't think you had one...but after 12 years of dodging bullets from the
folks who do, paranoia is something I have to deal with from time to time,
not anything I'm afflicted by...although I have to admit that dealing with
some of it does make me a wee tad testy on occasion. :-)
> Remember I live in Minnesota where everything is a no discharge zone, so
> this is intellectual curiosity not an agenda.
And I'm on an inland non-navigable lake, also "no discharge," so I know
exactly where you're coming from.
> Sorry if it sounded like an attack.
Nope...your questions were valid...and you raised points that I welcomed the
opportunity to address.
Peggie
Del Cecchi
>
> Gary wrote:
>
> >The way to solve the problem is to change the law regarding the discharge of
> >treated waste and make it illegal.
> >Im sure that The lectra/San units work as stated but they still discharge
> >the solids into the water.
> >
> >Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
> >
> >
>
>
> Your municipal sewer plant will shut down after about 5 minutes if becomes
> illegal to
> discharge treated waste.
>
> The "pump out only" crowd adopts some unique perspectives on things.
>
> What happens to the solids, Mr. Paper,
> after they pass through the municipal treatment facility? Do you suppose they
> just magically disappear? So called "solids" in human waste are some enormous
> percentage water, anyway.
>
Round these here parts, the solids settle out in settling ponds and are
carefully disposed of on land, usually by spreading on agricultural
land. Or if you buy Milorganite, on your lawn. :-)
The liquid is treated twice more to remove nitrate and phosphorous and
is said to be cleaner than the river they dump it into.
Lectra-San probably is a perfectly acceptable solution for boats on
large bodies of water like the ocean. But don't try to compare it to a
modern municipal sewage treatment facility.
Del Cecchi
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> and floatation should be self evident about the third or fourth flush.
You're referring to your own contributions to the NG?
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> large bodies of water like the ocean. But don't try to compare it to a
> modern municipal sewage treatment facility.
And Raritan doesn't. However, it doesn't have to deal with the same
treatment issues that municipal sewage treatment facilities do, either.
What it does do is: totally liquify solids and paper and reduce bacteria
count to 20% or less of that required of Type I MSDs...and it does so
without putting toxic chemicals into the environment.
All this flap over 1-2 flushes a day that actually need to be treated at
all--'cuz the rest are urine and flush water only--is really a bit silly,
doncha think?
Peggie
Larry KN4IM
Electro-San and let it dump it's totally pure, drinking water quality
effluent into a kiddie pool from WalMart. The output color, quality
and floatation should be self evident about the third or fourth flush.
If it's as good as Peggy says it is, we'll just turn the kids loose on
the pool for the rest of the afternoon.
Larry....yecch!
On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 14:51:03 -0500, "Marty Gras" <mrpa...@aol.com>
wrote:
>The marina that requires The Lectra/San is Riverside Marine.
>
>Gary
>Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
>
>Steven Shelikoff wrote in message <384E9A6B...@averstar.com>...
>>Phoenix wrote:
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> If Gary doesn't want anyone to know the name of his marina, that is
>great,
>>> but do let us know if their is any truth to his story about the
>Lectra-San
>>> and the brown film.
>>
>>Well, I called the marina to get the scoop on the poop for liveaboards
>>and they said I need to speak to Angie, who's at lunch and will be back
>>at 1330. I'll be in a meeting from 1300-????, so we may have to wait
>>till tomorrow for the answer.
>>
Gould 0738
>The way to solve the problem is to change the law regarding the discharge of
>treated waste and make it illegal.
>Im sure that The lectra/San units work as stated but they still discharge
>the solids into the water.
>
>Gary
>Another member of the Loyal Order Of Bayliner Owners
>
>P.S. The name of the marina is riverside Marine.
>
Ilegal to discharge *treated* waste?
Your municipal sewer plant will shut down after about 5 minutes if becomes
illegal to
discharge treated waste.
The "pump out only" crowd adopts some unique perspectives on things.
What happens to the solids, Mr. Paper,
after they pass through the municipal treatment facility? Do you suppose they
just magically disappear? So called "solids" in human waste are some enormous
percentage water, anyway.
Solids from a 'Lectra San are reduced to
infintesimal particles held in suspension in the discharge. The virus and
bacteria content of the discharge is low enough to meet any federal pollution
standards for sewage processing.
Must rain sometimes on the East Coast, but maybe you don't have the problem we
face here in one of the more notoriously wet climates. Millions of gallons of
raw sewage flow through many of our treatment plants every time there's a big
rain storm.
The storm drains overtax the treatment facilities' abilities to handle the rate
of flow.
This problem is being corrected, and is not as bad as it once was, but it is
still a fact of real life.
Waste processed aboard in an approved
treatment device does not get flushed through an overtaxed treatment plant in a
rainstorm. Waste processed aboard in an approved treatment device doesn't find
its way overboard as a result of "Y" valve cheating by boaters with a full
holding tank
or an aversion to having to pump out.
So where does the brown scum on the water come from? Holding tanks dumped via
a macerating pump connected to a thru hull leave a notoriously gross brown
scum.
The quantity involved in flushing a single session of solid waste is going to
be very small indeed. Save up 50 gallons of the stuff and then empty the tank,
and it's brown scum city. Unless all the live aboards in that marina are
dumping and flushing simultaneously (odds are about one in a zillion), the
source of your objectionable brown scum is more than likely going to turn out
to be holding tank scoff laws who did *not* install the 'Lectra San devices.
Did the marina ask to see receipts for purchase and installation? Did they send
somebody around to check for compliance? Your brown scum arrived after the pump
out service was discontinued. The boaters who did not install a Type I MSD are
now doing what, exactly, with their waste?
If every boater had a properly functioning Type I MSD we could do away with the
pumpouts and their associated costs, both public and private, and the waters
would be at least as clean as they are now.
Marcus G Bell
> Must rain sometimes on the East Coast, but maybe you don't have
> the problem we face here in one of the more notoriously wet
> climates. Millions of gallons of raw sewage flow through many of
> our treatment plants every time there's a big rain storm. The
> storm drains overtax the treatment facilities' abilities to
> handle the rate of flow. This problem is being corrected, and is
> not as bad as it once was, but it is still a fact of real life.
Around here, the rainwater and sewage lines are separate. Valves
at key locations route runoff water into the sewer or keep it in
its own system. In light runoff situations, the treatment plant
gets it all. When a big rain hits, the first bit of runoff goes
into the plant, then the self-actuating valves open to dump the
rest into the rivers untreated. The idea is that once the streets
and storm drain system are flushed of the nasties that collect
between rains, the rest of the water is clean enough. Every once
in a while, one of the valves gets stuck and a plant gets
overwhelmed, or some "unclean" runoff makes it to a river, but
otherwise it's a neat system.
-- -- Marcus. ( be...@mail.med.upenn.edu )
Marcus G Bell
> >
> > The duck and Canada geese poopulation (typo deliberate)
> > contributes more fecal matter to a body of water in a day than
> > all the boats do in a year.
Karl Denninger (ka...@Genesis.Denninger.Net) wrote:
> ... Urine is sterile ... FECES, on the other hand... The issue
> is people taking a DUMP in the water.
I kind of thought the issue was people taking a dump in a
Lectra-San, and what comes out of IT.
Regardless of what people do when they jump in the water to "sneak
one off", be it #1 or #2, is there any dispute about the magnitude
of duck and goose poop levels relative to the output of boats (day
vs. year)? Is it safe to say that the number of people taking a
dump in the water is probably somewhere above zero, but that it
nonetheless merely adds to non-human waste not coming from MSD
output? Is it therefore quite possible that the MSD's in question
are quite clean relative to the stuff already in the water,
whether or not the non-treated human waste is factored in?
Larry KN4IM
wrote:
>
>Regardless of what people do when they jump in the water to "sneak
>one off", be it #1 or #2, is there any dispute about the magnitude
>of duck and goose poop levels relative to the output of boats (day
>vs. year)? Is it safe to say that the number of people taking a
>dump in the water is probably somewhere above zero, but that it
>nonetheless merely adds to non-human waste not coming from MSD
>output? Is it therefore quite possible that the MSD's in question
>are quite clean relative to the stuff already in the water,
>whether or not the non-treated human waste is factored in?
>
>-- -- Marcus. ( be...@mail.med.upenn.edu )
Shhh.. Marcus! Don't be lookin' for statistics. Some government
bureaucrat with nothing to do will read this post. Next thing you
know a "Call for Papers" will come out of NIH with the promise of a
$4.8M grant to find out. Once locked onto that spigot 8 universities
will create 8 new departments to study the problem, of course never
coming to any conclusion that would turn off the spigot. A whole new,
self-perpetuating industry will result, with increasing budgets for
the next 30 years, or until the major participants reach retirement
age. At that point the system will be so big we won't be able to stop
the roller coaster because 2,734 people are permanently employed by
the project and it will be political suicide to throw them out of work
to work for the opposition party.
Geez, next thing you know you will have, quite inadvertently of
course, created the Bureau of Wastewater Studies which will grow into
another NASA!
Save us all a lot of money and be CAREFUL what you think about!!
Larry....and the taxpayers.
Larry KN4IM
div/Raritan Engineering" <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> The output color, quality
>> and floatation should be self evident about the third or fourth flush.
>
>You're referring to your own contributions to the NG?
>
I ask ya....Is THIS a way to move product??
Phoenix
On Lake Lanier one of the biggest problems with bacterial count is from the
Canadian Geese who stop over on their southern migration and then decide to
stay.
So many Geese have decided living in Atlanta is better than migrating that
they finally have started a hunting season for Geese to try to keep the
population in control.
--
Jim
"Marcus G Bell" <be...@mail.med.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:82nbns$ukt$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
> > <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > The duck and Canada geese poopulation (typo deliberate)
> > > contributes more fecal matter to a body of water in a day than
> > > all the boats do in a year.
>
> Karl Denninger (ka...@Genesis.Denninger.Net) wrote:
> > ... Urine is sterile ... FECES, on the other hand... The issue
> > is people taking a DUMP in the water.
>
> I kind of thought the issue was people taking a dump in a
> Lectra-San, and what comes out of IT.
>
LaBomba182
>From: "Marty Gras"
>The way to solve the problem is to change the law regarding the discharge of
>treated waste and make it illegal.
>Im sure that The lectra/San units work as stated but they still discharge
>the solids into the water.
>
>Gary
Well at least we now know what his agenda is. Capt. Bill
Karl Denninger
Marcus G Bell <be...@mail.med.upenn.edu> wrote:
>> <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > The duck and Canada geese poopulation (typo deliberate)
>> > contributes more fecal matter to a body of water in a day than
>> > all the boats do in a year.
>
>Karl Denninger (ka...@Genesis.Denninger.Net) wrote:
>> ... Urine is sterile ... FECES, on the other hand... The issue
>> is people taking a DUMP in the water.
>
>I kind of thought the issue was people taking a dump in a
>Lectra-San, and what comes out of IT.
Well, actually the issue appeared to me to be marine heads in general, but
ok, if you please. :-)
>Regardless of what people do when they jump in the water to "sneak
>one off", be it #1 or #2, is there any dispute about the magnitude
>of duck and goose poop levels relative to the output of boats (day
>vs. year)? Is it safe to say that the number of people taking a
>dump in the water is probably somewhere above zero, but that it
>nonetheless merely adds to non-human waste not coming from MSD
>output? Is it therefore quite possible that the MSD's in question
>are quite clean relative to the stuff already in the water,
>whether or not the non-treated human waste is factored in?
Yep.
This, by the way, is one reason that the "zero discharge" game is such
a joke. Great Lakes boaters CANNOT (legally) discharge, but you can bet
they do as long as they're out of sight of other people at the time.
Recreational boaters with properly installed MSDs should be given a pass
on the "zero discharge" rules - it would actually IMPROVE the overall
situation.
The real problem is that a holding tank is an incredibly good breeding
ground for bacteria. You're FAR better off to get that stuff through a
MSD and off the boat (and into the water) than to have it sit in a
holding tank for even 10 minutes. As I've pointed out, urine is a
sterile thing at the outset, but a pretty good culture medium for
bacteria and as such pissing into the holding tank just adds more
FOOD for the bacteria to work on!
The correct solution, damn the laws, is to dump urine and the flushwater
for it over the side DIRECTLY and pass feces through a MSD and then
eject *it* as well. This is true in ALL waterways, inland or not.
The reason is that the holding tank CREATES new bacteria (they grow and
breed in there!) that weren't in the original human waste. That means, in
the end, that when you get pumped what comes out has a *HIGHER* biological
hazard quotient than originally existed when you eliminated it! Likewise,
if you hold the stuff until you get beyond "the line" and then run it
through a macerator and dump it, you actually do more harm.
And yes, I know that's not what the law says (and I follow the law even
though its stupid). But from a standpoint of biological threats and
actions geared towards what actually has the least impact rather than
what some stuffed shirt in Washington says, its the truth.
Finally, why is it that you don't see composting toilets on boats? Would
not these be the ideal solution to the problem? What am I missing there?
--
--
Karl Denninger (ka...@denninger.net) Web: http://childrens-justice.org
Isn't it time we started putting KIDS first? See the above URL for
a plan to do exactly that!
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
the toxic odor-control chemicals used in holding tanks do more damage to
septic systems and sewage treatment plants than the occasional flush of raw
solids from boats could possibly do the environement.
> Finally, why is it that you don't see composting toilets on boats? Would
> not these be the ideal solution to the problem? What am I missing there?
There are composting toilets, but they have drawbacks too...starting with
the size the darn things have to be in order to work. Sun-Mar makes the
best ones...their smallest self-contained unit--that will only handle the
needs of two people on a continuous live-aboard basis, and only 3-4 for
weekends--needs a space that's about 20" deep x 25" wide (including the room
for the handle that rotates the drum) x 29" high. About the only boats that
have heads big enough for it to fit in are houseboats. Because human solids
have a high liquid content, it's also necessary to add about a cup of dry
organic material (peat moss is the ideal medium) with each deposit...which
means carrying a supply aboard... and then there's the matter of draining
off liquids, 'cuz wet soggy organic material won't compost, it just rots.
The units do include an evaporating chamber (warming plate and fan), but
liquids are often more than it can handle...so they have to be drained
off...which--because the marine sanitation laws don't distinguish between
urine and solids...it's all "waste"--means they can't just go overboard,
they have to go into a holding tank. And finally, they have to be vented
through the deck or roof with a 3" vent stack...not do-able on a lot of
boats. But if you do have the space and install and maintain it to specs, a
composting toilet can be an excellent alternative. When installed, operated
and maintained according to specs, there's no odor, and the finished compost
is no different--except it's human--from the bagged fertilizer found at
garden supply stores...a dry sanitary loam-like "dirt." It cannot legally
be dumped overboard, but it can be bagged and discarded with the rest of the
trash or spread on the marina's flower beds If you want to know more about
'em, check out the Sun-Mar website at http://www.sun-mar.com
Another alternative is an incinerating toilet, but IMHO, incinerating
toilets are totally unsuitable for boats. Contrary to common
mis-conception, solids and paper aren't reduced to ash with just a "whoosh"
of high heat...it takes a burn of at least 1.5 hours at something over 1100
degrees, and even that doesn't always reduce all the solids completely. So
they can't run on 12v...only can use 110 or 220 AC power or propane...and a
LOT of it! And no matter what the mfrs claim, the smoke--which also has to
have a 3" vent stack--STINKS!
Peggie
Karl Denninger
>the toxic odor-control chemicals used in holding tanks do more damage to
>septic systems and sewage treatment plants than the occasional flush of raw
>solids from boats could possibly do the environement.
Yep. I have a porta-potti for my cuddy, and the "stuff" that goes in there
when I recharge it is basically quaterny ammonia! NASTY stuff. Yes, it
reduces the contents to a liquid slurry within a day or two, but dumping
THAT down the toilet at the local marina (or at my home) has to be
significantly worse than just taking the dump over the side in terms
of ecological impact.
In quiet waters I just do my thing over the side or in the water, assuming
its a #1. No harm, no fowl :-) The only reason I don't do that with #2s
is that its inherently messy and wiping becomes a problem :-) When there
are a bunch of people on board or around, though, I use the head.
>> Finally, why is it that you don't see composting toilets on boats? Would
>> not these be the ideal solution to the problem? What am I missing there?
>
>There are composting toilets, but they have drawbacks too...starting with
>the size the darn things have to be in order to work.
That makes sense. Size is one of those things you just can't get around
on a boat..... Oh well. I looked into the composting - I can see the
biggest issue might end up being the heater and fan requirements - 4 Watts
doesn't sound like a lot (for the fan), but its a third of an amp at 12V,
and that's not in the parasitic category. For the heater, forget it
unless the engine is running (125W!)
>Another alternative is an incinerating toilet, but IMHO, incinerating
>toilets are totally unsuitable for boats.
Yep.
I still say the law is an ass, and there ought to be two toilets in
the head for non-portapotty applications - a "universal" urinal
(usable by women and men) for #1s that goes right over the side,
some kind of MSD for #2s and toilet paper that gets treated immediately
and then dumped. The longer the discharge is held the more bacteria
can grow; the best bet from a biological hazard point of view is to
treat the waste immediately and get rid of it.
This (the fact that MSDs typically do not "clean themselves") is one of
my problems with them. I see no reason for a marine head such as the
"LectraSan" not to (1) take in the waste, (2) process it, (3) eject it,
and (4) flush itself out with seawater all as part of the same operation,
essentially returning it to a clean and (somewhat) sanitary state after
each use. If you're running with seawater the amount of water used is
not an issue, as you have all of it you can ever want - so why not do
it this way?
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> my problems with them. I see no reason for a marine head such as the
The Lectra/San is not a marine toilet (head)...it's a CG Certified Type I
treatment device into which the discharge from the toilet (and any head can
be used with it) goes for maceration and treatment before being discharged
overboard.
>...not to (1) take in the waste, (2) process it, (3) eject it,
> and (4) flush itself out with seawater all as part of the same operation,
> essentially returning it to a clean and (somewhat) sanitary state after
> each use.
That's essentially what a Lectra/San does, but it treats and macerates each
flush multiple times before ejecting it overboard. Because it takes time to
kill off sufficient bacteria and also to macerate to the standard required
(completely liquid, as opposed to only "pureeing"), the amount of time the
device would have to run after each flush and/or power requirements to do it
your way makes it impractical. However, we're only talking about the time
it takes to accumulate and multiple-treat 1.75 gallons that are continually
being forced overboard by new incoming, not a 10-50 gallon tankful, so the
Lectra/San does come close to doing what you describe.
Peggie
Gould 0738
>A simple test would settle all this bickering. We'll all crap in an
>Electro-San and let it dump it's totally pure, drinking water quality
>effluent into a kiddie pool from WalMart. The output color, quality
>and floatation should be self evident about the third or fourth flush.
>
>If it's as good as Peggy says it is, we'll just turn the kids loose on
>the pool for the rest of the afternoon.
>
>Larry....yecch!
>
To make the test fair, set up another pool and fill it with the outflow from
the local shoreside sewer plant. Then compare.
Offshore boats carry watermakers, and a
'Lectra San is not a substitute! :-)
'Lectra San is not as sophisticated as a sewer plant, but it does a more
efficient job of processing human waste in small quantities. The viral and
bacteria counts
of the discharge are well below federal standards for discharge of treated
sewage.
Use of the device is at least as benign as a pump out, all things considered,
and less detrimental to the environment than Y valve
cheaters (who are everywhere).
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> <jfga...@spamfree.mediaone.net> wrote:
>
> >On Lake Lanier one of the biggest problems with bacterial count is from
the
> >Canadian Geese who stop over on their southern migration and then decide
to
> >stay.
Actually, that's not how we got them...someone--obviously descended from the
same gene pool that brought us kudzu--decided they would make nice permanent
residents and imported a bunch of 'em.
> They come to florida, too; but they have to leave 1-day short
> of six months, or their health insurance lapses.
Unfortunately, GA has no such deterrents to permanent waterfowl welfare. And
the word must have spread to FL...'cuz we also have a rather large flock of
seagulls--200 miles inland!
Peggie
>
> --
> - Lee Lindquist One whistle, captain.
> lee_lindquist 'at' hotmail 'dot' com
bmc...@ti.com
one and the same. Newer cities have separate systems. San Francisco is an
old city with the sewer and storm drains the same. Comes when ages ago,
they just dumped the untreated sewage in the ocean / bay. I can remember in
the late 50's being on the CG cutter for a ride as a Boy Scout, seeing the
brown floaters at the mouth of the Oakland estuary, where the city of
Oakland had the outfall for their "treated" sewage. Several years ago, San
Francisco installed hugh catch basins in the sewer system, to hold the rain
water / heavy fog runoff and the domestic sewage and allow the treatment
plant to handle it over a longer time. Pretty much works in SF with a 22" a
year rainfall, as opposed to Seattle with a 22" a month (week?) rainfall.
We have some major raw sewage dumps in the Winter when the N. Calif. rivers
flood the local plants.
Bill
Marcus G Bell <be...@mail.med.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:82nac2$s63$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
Larry KN4IM
div/Raritan Engineering" <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>That's essentially what a Lectra/San does, but it treats and macerates each
>flush multiple times before ejecting it overboard. Because it takes time to
>kill off sufficient bacteria and also to macerate to the standard required
>(completely liquid, as opposed to only "pureeing"), the amount of time the
>device would have to run after each flush and/or power requirements to do it
>your way makes it impractical. However, we're only talking about the time
>it takes to accumulate and multiple-treat 1.75 gallons that are continually
>being forced overboard by new incoming, not a 10-50 gallon tankful, so the
>Lectra/San does come close to doing what you describe.
>
>Peggie
>
Is it dinner time, yet?......I'm hungry!
Peter W. Meek
>> On Thu, 09 Dec 1999 13:42:23 GMT, "Phoenix"
>> <jfga...@spamfree.mediaone.net> wrote:
>>
>> >On Lake Lanier one of the biggest problems with bacterial count is from
>the
>> >Canadian Geese who stop over on their southern migration and then decide
>to
>> >stay.
>
>Actually, that's not how we got them...someone--obviously descended from the
>same gene pool that brought us kudzu--decided they would make nice permanent
>residents and imported a bunch of 'em.
I doubt if anyone imported them; they "import" themselves
every year as part of migration. They do tend to stay as
permanent residents (giving up migration) anywhere that
people feed them or make year-round grazing sites (lawns,
golf courses, etc.). In Michigan we have a dual problem:
one of the migration groups that flies through here is
in trouble (habitat loss in the summer breeding grounds in
Canada, and hunting) plus we have an ugly mess from the
year-round geese. Our solution: a very short, low-limit
hunting season *during* migration, and a long, high-limit
"special" season before and after the migration. We're sending
through the migratory geese almost unscathed and trying to
reduce the number of pests.
--
--Pete
pwm...@mail.msen.com (Peter W. Meek)
rec.boats caps and burgees available at:
http://www.msen.com/~pwmeek/cap-main.html
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
> every year as part of migration.
Actually, they were. It seems that geese, like people, tend to homestead
where their own kind are...and in someone's infinite wisdom, a certain
number were brought to Lanier to encourage others to stay. It was expected
that natural predators, such as wide mouth bass, fox, racoons etc, would
keep the flock in balance...and that more would be inclined to follow their
natural instinct to migrate than have. But they turned out to be more
prolific than the predators can keep up with, and the boating population has
fed them so well that we're into about the 10th generation of welfare
waterfowl. As soon as the goslings can swim, their parents bring to the
marinas to teach them how to beg...now, most of them are so tame that
they'll take food right out of your hand. And geese aren't the only
ones...we had a Muscovie at the club that actually walked the docks...she
knew which boats were soft touches, and which ones weren't. I used to come
out on deck with my first cup of coffee on Sunday mornings to find her
sitting on my dock finger next to my boat, patiently dozing and waiting for
her handout.
Peggie
Steven Shelikoff
[...]
> out on deck with my first cup of coffee on Sunday mornings to find her
> sitting on my dock finger next to my boat, patiently dozing and waiting for
> her handout.
Must have been a liberal.:)
Marcus G Bell
> > out on deck with my first cup of coffee on Sunday mornings to
> > find her sitting on my dock finger next to my boat, patiently
> > dozing and waiting for her handout.
Steven Shelikoff (shel...@averstar.com) wrote:
> Must have been a liberal.:)
If I had told that story, you could have said:
"Must have been tasty."
Gould 0738
referred to by Peggie are a couple of examples of the disasters we can create
when trying to tweak the environment.
In the Northwest, those folks who keep grass lawns spend a lot of time and
money
(and spread hundreds of tons of toxic chemicals that work their way into the
watersheds) in an effort to eradicate dandelions. Dandelions were unkown in the
NW until the 19th century, when they were imported as a cultivated garden
plant.
Same with Morning Glory and Blackberries. There was apparently a species of
wild blackberry here when the first Euro Americans arrived, but the variety
that the settlers introduced is now responsible for the blackberry thickets
that
attempt to overwhelm every vacant lot west of the Cascades.
One of the nicest features of the 'Lectra San is that it is so environmentally
benign.
There is no need for "Y" valve cheating, and in fact the Coast Guard inspectors
ordinarily don't care very much about the rest of the sanitation system once
they see an Type I MSD aboard.
No formaldehyde or other deadly chemicals are introduced into the waste stream
as with so many holding tanks (considering the way in which most people use a
holding tank), and there is no doubt that every flushful is completely treated
before discharge back into the aquatic environment. The hypochloric acid
created by the internal electrodes kills the viruses and bacteria, and then
reverts back to sea water as soon as it is flushed out the through hull.
Most folks down on the LS don't unerstand it.
BTW, in response to some of the accusations about solids being flushed through
the unit, it should be known that while the inlet fitting is at the bottom of
the treatment tank, the outlet fitting is at the top. Treated material has to
go "up" and through a PVC elbow before being routed
off to a through hull. This design eliminates
the possibility of anything "heavy" escaping the treatment tank before it
becomes liquified.
BW
>BTW, in response to some of the accusations about solids being flushed through
>the unit, it should be known that while the inlet fitting is at the bottom of
>the treatment tank, the outlet fitting is at the top. Treated material has to
>go "up" and through a PVC elbow before being routed
>off to a through hull. This design eliminates
>the possibility of anything "heavy" escaping the treatment tank before it
>becomes liquified.
I gotta quit reading this thread around lunchtime....
BW (Jeff Buege)
Captain of "Belvedere"
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
Doesn't bother me. But then you have to remember that I'm a woman...and
women have been up to our elbows in this stuff ever since Eve slapped the
first first leaf on Cain's bottom! :-)
Peggie
Marcus G Bell
> ...and women have been up to our elbows in this stuff ever since
> Eve slapped the first first leaf on Cain's bottom! :-)
Leaves are a poor substitute for real toilet paper. Sort of like
new glossy catalogs are not as good for that purpose as the good
ol' newsprint Wishbook. The Wishbook gave you something to do
while you had your quiet time, too. Shop while you plop.
Having wiped my share of infant bottoms, I can safely say that
your outlook on the feces of your OWN infant is quite different
from that of another. Your own baby's poop is just something to
clean up and get it over with. Other babies' poop is
DISGUSTING.
Jim
Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering wrote:
>
> > I gotta quit reading this thread around lunchtime....
>
> Doesn't bother me. But then you have to remember that I'm a woman...and
> women have been up to our elbows in this stuff ever since Eve slapped the
> first first leaf on Cain's bottom! :-)
>
> Peggie
Ed
KN4IM) wrote:
<SNIP>
>
>Geez, next thing you know you will have, quite inadvertently of
>course, created the Bureau of Wastewater Studies which will grow into
>another NASA!
>
>Save us all a lot of money and be CAREFUL what you think about!!
>
>Larry....and the taxpayers.
And lord knows, NASA hasn't accomplished a thing over the years except
a pretty cool hoax of a moon landing, right?
-Ed G
Rick
> Peggie Hall/Peal Products div/Raritan Engineering
>
> > ...and women have been up to our elbows in this stuff ever since
> > Eve slapped the first first leaf on Cain's bottom! :-)
>
> new glossy catalogs are not as good for that purpose as the good
> ol' newsprint Wishbook. The Wishbook gave you something to do
> while you had your quiet time, too. Shop while you plop.
>
> Having wiped my share of infant bottoms, I can safely say that
> your outlook on the feces of your OWN infant is quite different
> from that of another. Your own baby's poop is just something to
> clean up and get it over with. Other babies' poop is
> DISGUSTING.
>
> -- -- Marcus. ( be...@mail.med.upenn.edu )
Just returned from a vacation to Bali (Indonesia). Toilets if you can call
them especially in the country areas consist of a hole in the ground, no
toilet paper. One of the gals we were travelling with used the first few
pages of a paperback she had started to read. So what do the locals do
about wiping, ah , you do not shake the left hand of the locals.
Rick
David Smalley
>
> On Wed, 8 Dec 1999 23:13:25 -0500, "Peggie Hall/Peal Products
> div/Raritan Engineering" <peg...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >> The output color, quality
> >> and floatation should be self evident about the third or fourth flush.
> >
> >
> I ask ya....Is THIS a way to move product??
Yup.
--
DAVe
David Smalley
I can't wait till they pull off the Martian hoax.
--
DAVe