Pages

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Yes, but Does It Violate The Geneva Convention?

This from the Jan 21 L.A. Times, a story by DeeDee Correll: Judge Paul Sacco, a municipal judge in Fort Lupton, Colorado, has started sentencing kids who play their boom boxes or car stereos too loud to one hour sitting in a courtroom Friday night listening to . . . well, here’s Ms. Correll:

“The guiding principle in Municipal Judge Paul Sacco’s courtroom is an eye for an eye. Or rather, an ear for an ear.

So when teenagers land in front of him for blasting their car stereos or otherwise disburbing the peace in this small northern Colorado city, Sacco informs them that they will spend a Friday evening in his courtroom listening to music – of his choosing.

No, they can’t pay a fine instead, he tells them. So, he adds with a snicker, ever heard of Barry Manilow? .

For the last decade, Sacco, 55, has administered a brand of justice somewhere between “cruel” and “unusual.”

Young people in Fort Lupton know that if they’re caught, they’re in for a night tht could begin with the “Barney” theme song, move on to an opera selection and end with Boy George’s “Do You Really Want to Hurt Me.” . . . .

Sacco’s answer to that last question is: Yes, he does.” . . . .

The program’s recidivism rate is less than 5%; once subjected to a night in City Hall, the offenders rarely return. Interestingly, the offense rate also seems to have plummeted recently. “ . . . . “The latest crop of offender said they won’t let themselves get caught again. ‘If you see a cop car, turn your volume down,’ said Gehrig, a convenience store clerk.

It could’ve been worse, he point out, with ABBA or 1980s hair metal.

“A little Manilow here and there,” he confided, ‘isn’t too terrible.”

Left Hand, Right Hand

Reverend Rick Warren, pastor of the Saddleback Church and vocal supporter of California’s Proposition 8, which removed the right to marry from gay Californians, thereby sticking them back into a kind of second class citizenship category (I do, I do, but not you), offered up the invocation at the inauguration and prayed, “Help us, oh God, to remember that we are Americans, united not by race or religion or blood, but to our commitment to freedom and justice for all.”

Except for gay Californians, of course.



After which, Obama’s speech included this clarion call, “The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit, to choose our better history, to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that we are all equal, all are free and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.”

Except for gay Californians, of course.

The L.A. Times Jan 21 editorial caught the oddness of this separation between speech and action. “Obama is caught up in semantics, apparently believing that gays and lesbians should be allowed to engage in civil unions with all the rights of marriage, as long as they aren’t called marriages. That’s an evasion that was rightly rejected in May by the California Supreme Court when it overturned a previous ban on same-sex marriage, because such semantic distinctions tend to cast doubt on a union’s legitimacy.

“At the time of Obama’s birth in 1956, some states could not have allowed his interracial parents to marry. He, of all people, should know better.”

So should Pastor Warren. Unfortunately, there is too often a disconnect between religious/personal belief and actual, real-time, on the ground civil reality. Pastor Warren cannot pray for God to help him to remember “justice for all,” then publicly support removing civil rights from a certain group of citizens. And Obama cannot remind us of a “God-given” promise that “all are equal, all are free and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness,” . . . . except for gay people.

The clunk you hear with this kind of rhetoric is the sound dissonance makes when “semantic generalities” hit real-time lives. Both of these very public figures should know better, indeed.

100 comments:

Watershed Mark said...

Ann Calhoun wrote:
Both of these very public figures should know better, indeed.

Ann, I love it!
All politics are local, indeed.

Watershed Mark said...

Here was a young man who rose to the presidency with stunning speed and is now encountering challenges he never dreamed of. In significant ways, his speech abandoned the liberalism of his campaign rhetoric in the face of a hard new reality.

• He celebrated “the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things” as the source of American greatness.
• He acknowledged that the free market’s “power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched.”
• He evoked the enduring wisdom of America’s Founders, our founding documents, and our traditional virtues.
• At times he sounded just his predecessor in the weeks and months after September 11, 2001:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30379

Watershed Mark said...

The Michael Brandman website is available here: http://www.brandman.com/

According to a very nice receptionist their site was somehow "troubled" via the Google and other search engines.

I will now be able to send Mr. Brandmanthe information about ECOfluid and its energy saving technology that cost less and is efficient and easy, by comparison, to operate.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

When you write "Unfortunately, there is too often a disconnect between religious/personal belief and actual, real-time, on the ground civil reality. Pastor Warren cannot pray for God to help him to remember 'justice for all,' then publicly support removing civil rights from a certain group of citizens." you presume that Prop 8 was about the removing of rights. Warren would disagree, so he doesn't see his actions and words as being in conflict.


Would any of this dialog be different if Prop 8 were about outlawing divorce?

What if the CA supreme court had redefined marriage to allow for the marriage of a 10 year old to a 30 year old and Prop 8 had been about defining marriage to exclude such a union?


Such questions allow us to quickly realize that what is considered a "right" by some is considered a "want" by others. That's where the law and especially the constitution provide some clarity. That being said, I am sure that Warren and most of those who voted for Prop 8 is about taking rights away because Prop 8 defined marriage to mean that there never was a right to marriage outside the one man and one woman context. The authors and voters essentially said that the CA supreme court overreached when they reinterpreted the CA constitution to mean something which the authors never meant. This doesn't mean that 8 will stand or the issue is over at all, but that saying it is a "rights" issue presumes that 8 was wrong, something that clearly the voters disagreed with.

Watershed Mark said...

Talk about separation of church and state:

When President Obama re-took the oath of office in the White House after all the Galas were over he did so without his hand on the Bible.
You'd think someone would have picked up on that and corrected it before the photograph memorializing the "event", was taken. May God Bless President Obama and God Bless America.

alabamasue said...

There is no constitutional protocal that says one taking the oath of office has to place his/her hand on a book of any sort. Mr. Roberts misspoke the words of the presidential oath, so it was re-done, although who really cares about that? So sorry you are hurting because your candidate, Creepy McCain and his running mate Stupid Palin. Better luck next time.

the world is black. the world is white. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
the world is black. the world is white. said...

http://www.tsrocks.com/t/three_dog_night_texts/black_and_white.html


The ink is black, the page is white
Together we learn to read and write
A child is black, a child is white
The whole world looks upon the sight, a beautiful sight

And now a child can understand
That this is the law of all the land, all the land

The world is black, the world is white
It turns by day and then by night
A child is black, a child is white
Together they grow to see the light, to see the light

And now at last we plainly see
We'll have a dance of Liberty, Liberty!

The world is black, the world is white
It turns by day and then by night
A child is black, a child is white
The whole world looks upon the sight, a beautiful sight

The world is black, the world is white
It turns by day and then by night
A child is black, a child is white
Together they grow to see the light, to see the light

The world is black, the world is white
It turns by day and then by night
A child is black, a child is white
The whole world looks upon the sight, a beautiful sight

The world is black, the world is white
It turns by day and then by night
A child is black, a child is white
Together they grow to see the light, to see the light

C'mon, get it, get it
Ohh-ohhhh, yeah, yeah
Keep it up now, around the world
Little boys and little girls
Yeah, yeah-eah, oh-ohhh

Churadogs said...

Black and White's first comment was dumped in the trash can by me. Now, B&WW,please make your same cogent, interesting comments in response to Inlet but without all the pottymouthing. Your points were well taken and certainly worth adding to the dialogue. No need for calling Inlet names. Doesn't help your argument one whit.

Churadogs said...

Mark sez:"In significant ways, his speech abandoned the liberalism of his campaign rhetoric in the face of a hard new reality"

His speech abandoned nothing. If voters had been paying attention, they would have known that Obama never was some kind of barn-burning "liberal." The right wing press and pundits liked to present him that way, but in reality, he was and is and will be an incrementalist, a consensusist, a practical compromiser, a "centrist" focusing on what works rather than some think-tank ideaology. His first national speech at the previous Democratic convention made that clear, we are not red and blue states, but United States. Only a practical-reality centrist would have come up with that accurate imagery. And his reiteration of the "basic first principles" on which this country was founded made that clear as well. He wasn't heading back to some left wing looney bin, but back to center, back to the old verities that have been lost since the so called Reagan Revolution and the Grover Norquist Era.

Watershed Mark said...

ABS:
I am a wastewater treatment technology pundit, not a political pundit.

There is little if any Constituional protocol on much of what has been done in, to and from DC., but that is another very long "off topic" story.

I'll try to set a good example and remain tightly focuse o where I can tosome "real" good.

I am encouraged by what I have seen s far from our new President and his Press Secretary.

I will assume you voted for Obama and as he did win the election and is now our President, why are you still so bitter?

Watershed Mark said...

So Ann,

Obama as Secretary of State and Hillary as President would have made you happier?

I love it that President Obama understands we are "United States"...

Watershed Mark said...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/ For a Change.

alabamasue said...

Mark,
You are not a wastewater treatment technology "pundit", which, according to my dictionary, means "expert or authority". You're just a guy trying to make a buck off of someone else's hard work, whether it's wastewater, gold mines, asset management, or any other scheme you have going. Hey- whatever blows your skirt up. And, no, I'm not bitter. I have a great deal of fun laughing at your egocentric blatherings!

Watershed Mark said...

Their memories are short, for they have forgotten what this country has already done, what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage. What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.

Watershed Mark said...

ABS,

I see you like to disagree. Great let us agree to to disagree.

Do you think Paavo and the SLOCO BOS are "expert or authrity" in wastewater?

Why so petty and bitter? BWAHAHAHA!

Watershed Mark said...

...Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Do you still have a copy of what B&WW wrote? If so, it might be nice to just re-post it here without the stuff that you found objectionable. I didn't get to see it and even if what B&WW is a hit-n-runner, it would be nice to advance the dialog on this sticky issue where people tend to be far to quick to fall into an extreme camp.

Face it ... life is sticky and complex and we all need to be gracious with those we disagree with. At the same time, this doesn't mean that we abandon our own opinions ... just that we be willing to openly dialog with others in an attempt to achieve greater understanding if not agreement.

Watershed Mark said...

As I am crafting an important document today and after reading and rereading President Obama's speech on of the many documents I have open on my desktop today, I have this for Bitter Sue:

In reaffirming the greatness of our nation we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted, for those that prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things -- some celebrated, but more often men and women obscure in their labor -- who have carried us up the long rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.

Watershed Mark said...

Hey B&WW please email a copy of the deleted post if you saved it to Mark@NOwastewater.com , if you feel like it...

I pledge to you B&ww not to reveal you or spread the comments to anyone.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve wrote: Face it ... life is sticky and complex and we all need to be gracious with those we disagree with. At the same time, this doesn't mean that we abandon our own opinions ... just that we be willing to openly dialog with others in an attempt to achieve greater understanding if not agreement.

Steve, why not begin a blog called "Face it" and then you might understand what Ann puts up with. Perhaps because this is her land, she can till or not till as she sees fit.

Unknown said...

Mark...YOU really are an ignorant ass....!!! You don't have a clue what we're discussing, so why don't YOU go play in your very own Website and let us with property and property taxes discuss what evidently has you confused...

You have not been called out in a public place and threatened as I witnessed last weekend when a past director was verbally assaulted by one of the extreme sewer obstructionists... There is also some criminal actions currently centering around a recent former director and a local developer...
All of which points out how extreme the sewer obstructionists are still going and are still trying to convince us that they were right in halting any sewer... The Post-Recall gang were NOT the saints Ann would paint... There is much more going on than you can imagine...

Shark has always been one of the best voices in the convoluted and deliberately lied about history surrounding the Los Osos sewer... Your volumes of postings are now going to heal the rift in this community...!!! Only folks like Steve will help us all see the middle ground... I am being deliberately biased on this blog because I still see terrible actions by the thugs I call the sewer obstructionists... It is beginning to appear that at least two of the thugs will see the inside of a cell...

So Mark, it is YOU who has no credibility on this blog or in the County... You might want to do some research into what Shark says... You just might have your eyes opened before you pour out anymore of your nonsense...!!!

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

I too would be interested in what was deleted. I was severely potty-mouthed in an earlier thread and that posting was NOT deleted. Was wb&ww's posting so much worse than that? (But then, my opinions went against Ann's opinion on that topic.)

Watershed Mark said...

Ann, I am sorry for this repost> I inadvertantly posted it on "Where's Waldo? If you clip one let it be from there not here, Please.

From: Mark Low [mailto:Mark@NOwastewater.com]
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:03 PM
To: john beardwood
Subject: Supes Approve Another Million

Hello Jack,

Great news piece!
I love it when someone actually knows, then does their job.

When are the Supes going to put out an accounting of who the money is being spent?
Can we at least see the billings from the companies they hired?

Billings as in any business help “tell the tale”.

My best regards,

Mark Low
602.740.7975 voice
480.464.0405 facsimile
Mark@NOwastewater.com
P.O. Box 1355 Mesa, Arizona 85211
Spero Meliora "I aspire to greater things"

Supes Approve Another Million
By Jack Beardwood
With the hope of receiving funds from President Barack Obama’s economic stimu¬lus program, the County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to ante up another $1 million for development of a Los Osos sewer project.
John Deodati, department administrator for the County Public Works Department, told The Bay News that the additional money will allow them to expedite the project application process, improving their chances to qualify for federal funds. It will help them get the EIR certified and allow for an application for a State Revolving Fund loan to be completed sooner, he explained. A consultant would be hired to administer the state loan applica¬tion.
Deodati said it does not mean that they will skip any portion of the environmental review process and that the county has not chosen a technology or location for the project.
Everyone should read Beardwood’s front page Baywood News piece: http://baynews.ca.newsmemory.com/
A few questions for you MIKE:
When did the SLO BOS vote to “take” the project? How much money will it take to study whether or not, to “take” the project? As the DEIR comment period is still open through 1-30-09 and no technology has been chosen why is an RFQ out for a gravity ox-ditch? If all monies for water and wastewater projects are being funneled through the SRF program why does the county need outside consultants? I thought that the county had the “where with all” to get the job done(Lynette?). Seems what they have is the people’s money to hire outside/private industry to augment their efforts, so when will the people be able to see the billings? What is California’s State Government’s deficit at the moment-$38B? it was to be $16B April/May 2008, what’s up with that? What is SLO County’s fiscal deficit?
Then there is this:
Take all of your wasted honor
Every little past frustration
Take all of your so-called problems
Better put them in quotations

Say what you need to say (8x)
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say

Walking like a one man army
Fighting with the shadows in your head
Living out the same old moment
Knowing you’d be better off instead
If you could only

Say what you need to say (8x)
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say

Have no fear for giving in
Have no fear for giving over
You better know that in the end
It’s better to say too much
Than never to say what you need to say again

Even if your hands are shaking
And your faith is broken
Even as the eyes are closing
Do it with a heart wide open

Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say

Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to
Say what you need to

Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say

Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say

Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
(Fade)
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say
Say what you need to say

The EIR states that the “environmentally superi¬or” project would be located on the 645-acre Tonini property along Turri Road east of town. It would utilize a gravity-fed collection system.
See Supes, page 5

Supes, from page 1
Critics claim the county is not fully considering alternative technologies and that the community cannot afford what is now estimated to be a $ 165 million project.

Watershed Mark said...

When are the Supes going to put out an accounting of who the money is being spent?

Should read:

When are the Supes going to put out an accounting of how the money is being spent and on whom, what when and why?

Watershed Mark said...

Lynette wrote on Where’s Waldo:
Legally, this might work, to not show the total bill, but this secrecy looks very suspicious from where I sit - and I am not alone in this position.
11:46 AM, January 21, 2009
Lynette,
You are not alone.

More President Obama:
Their memories are short, for they have forgotten what this country has already done, what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage. What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.
So let us mark this day with remembrance of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At the moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words to be read to the people:
"Let it be told to the future world...that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive... that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it]."

Isn’t this a great county we live in?

Shark Inlet said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossposting reads (in part) "crossposting is generally considered bad form because it multiplies traffic without adding any new content."

Shark Inlet said...

http://www.copyright.com/Services/copyrightoncampus/content/digital.html reads in part:

Forwarding E-Mail:

The copyright in an e-mail belongs to the author of the e-mail. The copyright in an e-mail attachment belongs to the author of the attachment. You must obtain permission from the applicable copyright holder(s) or their agent(s) prior to forwarding an e-mail or e-mail attachment.

Shark Inlet said...

Addendum ...

But we all know that some people will forward e-mails without permission so it may be wiser not to assume that people will do the right thing.

Shark Inlet said...

Apologies for putting several apparently off-topic posts here. I figure that some people might find these comments interesting so I thought that Ann's blog comment section would be the best place to put these comments which, in the mind of many, won't in any obvious way relate to what Ann wrote or any of the earlier comments either.

Shark Inlet said...

If my words did glow with the gold of sunshine
And my tunes were played on the harp unstrung,
Would you hear my voice come thru the music,
Would you hold it near as it were your own?

Its a hand-me-down, the thoughts are broken,
Perhaps theyre better left unsung.
I dont know, dont really care
Let there be songs to fill the air.

Ripple in still water,
When there is no pebble tossed,
Nor wind to blow.

Reach out your hand if your cup be empty,
If your cup is full may it be again,
Let it be known there is a fountain,
That was not made by the hands of men.

There is a road, no simple highway,
Between the dawn and the dark of night,
And if you go no one may follow,
That path is for your steps alone.

Ripple in still water,
When there is no pebble tossed,
Nor wind to blow.

But if you fall you fall alone,
If you should stand then whos to guide you?
If I knew the way I would take you home.

La dee da da da, la da da da da, da da da, da da, da da da da da
La da da da, la da da, da da, la da da da, la da, da da.



CRACK!

Watershed Mark said...

So Steve that's it, that's your best effort? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAH

I’m glad you got that off your chest there big fella! Are we going to be seeing answers to some of the other outstanding requests for “back-up” Dano? CRACK!

Too bad there wasn’t any copyrighted material attached to the email that has your panties in a bunch...Besides, the link you supplied may have authority over you as it seems to apply to those constrained on campus and this is Ann’s real cyber world. I understand that plagiarism can be a real problem on campus these days.

Let me reiterate: email lasts forever and there is no expectation of privacy…in the real world. CRACK!

It is often said that: Imitation, is a form of flattery. Gosh, I think I am blushing…Nah BWAHAHAHAHAHAAA

Churadogs said...

Toonces sez:"I too would be interested in what was deleted. I was severely potty-mouthed in an earlier thread and that posting was NOT deleted. Was wb&ww's posting so much worse than that? (But then, my opinions went against Ann's opinion on that topic"

Oh,dear, Toonces, you need to get over yourself. I banned a certain person from this site some time ago, Inlet said, No Fair, gotta give a warning. So I said, Ok>, will give a warning. So I gave a warning when you were potty mouthed to all the little children. One didn't listen. (Some of you never do) So, then I dumped. Had nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing. I suggested this latest juvenile try again. Apparently, some of you have the memory of houseflies, and no, it wasn't worse than your potty mouthing. Same juvenile stupidity.

Mark sez:" will assume you voted for Obama and as he did win the election and is now our President, why are you still so bitter?"

Once again I'm absoulutely astounded at where people get stuff. Where on earth did you get "bitter" out of my comment? That's amazing.

Inlet sez:"Do you still have a copy of what B&WW wrote? If so, it might be nice to just re-post it here without the stuff that you found objectionable."

No, didn't waste my time. I invited him/her to try again. At your suggestion some time ago, I gave a warning then dumped, since some of you babies have trouble remembering rules or anything else.

MIke sez:"All of which points out how extreme the sewer obstructionists are still going and are still trying to convince us that they were right in halting any sewer , , "

I would suggest, Mike, that you go home and look in a mirror. Then go back and re-read all your postings, then ask yourself, in what way have YOU contributed "light" to the issue instead of too often stupidly vile, juvenile raging, pointless stupid "heat?" Or just making stuff up, deliberately lying in order to deceive and mislead, all in your rage against . . who, exactly? Your constantly used mantra, "anti-sewer obstructionists," defines almost nothing and enlightens exactly zero. You are the mirror image of the very people you rail against.

Inlet sez:"But we all know that some people will forward e-mails without permission so it may be wiser not to assume that people will do the right thing."

My Mommy once told me, never put something in writing that you wouldn't want read out in a court of law. Same advice applies to an email. Those things end up going everywhere. My Mommy also told me never to assume people will do the right thing. Sound advice then, sound advice now.

Watershed Mark said...

Watershed Mark said...
Watershed Mark said...
ABS:I will assume you voted for Obama and as he did win the election and is now our President, why are you still so bitter? 7:03 AM, January 23, 2009
Dear Ann, You aren’t bitter. My comment was directed to ABS. Where did you get that I said you or Obama voters are bitter? I see that my using RL’s email to Steve may still be offending some and for this I am sorry. I won’t be apologizing any time soon, because I did what I felt best for the community. Putting an ex CSD Board members “honest” thoughts about the LO/BP septic tank discharge on the record was a calculated action in this “process”. Remember RL has proclaimed to be a legal beagle of sorts and as such don’t put anything in writing, much less send it around the world for anyone to read at anytime now and later anywhere. Oh well he does live outside the P Zone which means he “thinks” he will not be affected by what happens, silly boy. My intent is to have as full a record to be able to draw from when necessary. When the specter of “free money” i.e. “stimulus” presented, everyone not doing the right thing was giddy about being able to “proceed” in a hurry with “old plans”, which in my opinion demonstrates the flawed nature of their designs. As support for my statement, I offer: the County authorized another $1M it doesn’t have to hire help and this from RL:
Richard LeGros said...
Hi All,Just to add to the discussion.
The County, if it wants to use pursue stimulus money for a 'shovel-ready' collection system, then the one designed for Tri-W is the only one ready to go.
Several problems come to mind if the County wants to use the old collection system design and permits:
1. That collection design belongs to the CSD, no the County.
2. The collection system was designed by MWH; which has sued the CSD for breach of contract. Will the fact that MWH has sued, and that that lawsuit is stayed by the Bankrupcy, cause a problem for the County trying to get hold of the collection design?
3. The County needs permits to build the old collection system (county, CCC, EPA, Native Americans, etc), along with an approvwed DEIR. If the County wants to build the old collection system they may need to reactive the old CCC permit and adopt the old DEIR in order to acquire the needed permits/approvals to build the collection system.
4. The regulatory / resource agencies (which will control the dispersement of stimulus money) MIGHT say to the County....'hey, you already have a designed and approved project (Tri-W). Why not just build that one? Just saying that you can't/won't for 'political reasons' is not good enough as the Tri-W project was technically sound, has vested permits AND was actually under constrution. You want the money, you restart Tri-W."
Regards, Richard LeGros
12:31 PM, January 19, 2009
It is important to stay focused on the prize. For me it is implementation of a very robust and stable, 50% energy conserving treatment technology that costs 70% less than what the county’s consulting engineer’s study surmised. When I get to the heart of that matter my work here will be complete. Then I can head over to Morro Bay where Carollo is employed to upgrade the their treatment facility to tertiary. ECOfluid can retrofit as efficiently and at cost savings same as new. I believe my agenda is clear and right as rain. As I wrote earlier I don’t write ANYTHING I don’t want EVERYWHERE and FOREVER. Given the technology today, I make certain that all the young people in my life understand this concept.

7:58 AM, January 24, 2009


Watershed Mark said...
My agenda comports with this one.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/energy_and_environment/

I can deliver energy savings immediately.

LO/BP is an important project for many reasons, I wish more folks could get their heads and hearts around that fact.

8:06 AM, January 24, 2009

Shark Inlet said...

No worries, Ann,

I figured if what B&WW wrote really was cogent and interesting you would have perhaps kept it and that perhaps it would be easy to edit out the ... um ... objectionable portions. If you didn't, no problem because if B&WW wants to repost, he has been given the invitation to do so.

Now, on a technicality, I don't believe that way back during the Crapkiller kerfluffle that I told you "No Fair, gotta give a warning." I said that you would probably want to give fair warning ... 'round here fair is as you define it :)

Lastly, I would suggest that anyone who wants a system that differs in any substantial way from the one the County is proposing in the draft EIR would want to spend their own money real quick on a report by wastewater individuals to convince the County that their favorite system is really up to snuff for the Los Osos situation. After all, anyone who didn't submit documentation that convinced the County already of the merits of their system clearly needs to do more work and because the time is late, a considerable amount of money will need to be spent. Anything else is just a waste of time.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,

I'm interested in the county's responses to the comments regarding the DEIR. I want the process to be fair and just, which includes a accurate comparison of technology.
If you do not understand that “there are none so blind as those who will not see”, you cannot understand what the "process" was designed to "yield".

Why release an RFQ for a gravity ox-ditch before the DEIR has been "processed"? What is the big hurry? There is no pressure from the WB as long as the county's "process" continues.
Is there any doubt on your part, there will be no further WB action if the septic tank discharges have not ceased before 2011?

Do you know how long it will take to bury a gravity sewer in the sands of LO/BP? Morro Bay could have its treatment upgrade completed before LO/BP is sewered.
If there is a need for speed use small diameter directional boring, you’ll save a bundle of money doing so. I think you’ll see Morro Bay will soon understand the value of a grinder pump system like Eone as they begin to address the replacement of their rotted sewerage.

To suggest that private industry should try to outspend a financially strapped government agency which has, until now, been hell bent on ignoring technology you have to be kidding, delusional or worse.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!

It's about politics, not salesmaship, Steve.

The comments now on the record have never been made before.
The replies should be as well...

Shark Inlet said...

Mark makes some points which are worth responding to ... not because I believe that time spent interacting with Mark will benefit Mark or myself, but because it may benefit this discussion forum.

Mark seems to believe that the process was stacked from the get go. That may be the case ... but even if it is, his company is still obliged to play the game if they want to win. In sports, even if the ref is biased against your team, you cannot win if you don't play. On the other hand, if your team really is superior, even a biased ref will not typically be able to prevent you from winning.

Part of the County process is submitting documents as they request which demonstrate the superiority of your system for the Los Osos problem. For example, if the County has a bias in favor of a sewer because they think the RWQCB wants or will require a sewer, the County will need to be Convinced that an onsite solution will actually work before they'll be willing to adopt such a system. That will often take quite a bit of investment. Mark claiming a bias on the part of the County doesn't make it so and it doesn't mean that his job is over (other than to complain to us here) but that his job will require investment of time and money. As a believer in the free market system, he should realize that if he is willing to make the investment and if his product really is superior, he'll win out ... if not in Los Osos, but somewhere else and eventually nationwide.

To complain that he's being asked to outspend government is simply whining and nothing else. Big boys are often asked to demonstrate their claims by investing and big boys who believe in their products often have to invest to beat the guy with deep pockets. Where would Apple be today if back 25 years ago they had taken Mark's attitude of "well, the other guy has a ton of money and that's not fair?" No where! The fact that they had a product which was sometimes clearly better than the Microsoft product made them willing to invest a ton of money in product development and advertising. Did it pay off? Yes. How about Sun Microsystems? They also had to spend a ton because they thought their product was superior to other options at the time. The problem was this ... their product wasn't as good as other options.

So ... it's all on Mark's shoulders. If he didn't submit documentation which would convince the County early on, either his system is not as superior as he claims or he didn't do his job of selling them on the solution.

Frankly, if the writing was on the wall for as long as he claims that it was, he should have hired NWRI or some other independent organization to validate that his solution was, indeed, superior for our town. Had he done so right before AB2701 went into effect and if his system really is superior, he would have had a rock solid document which the County could not have ignored. He would have sold his system!

Perhaps Mark will say "hey, it's not fair to make me invest in a way which others don't have to." Fair 'nuff. Welcome to the real world, Mark. People with new and better ideas often face an uphill battle to get their systems adopted. The free market often requires investment on the part of the individual selling their services. If you aren't willing to put the money in, you don't win. If you need to find investors to obtain the requisite funds to get the job done, so be it ... you must convince them first.

Again, the whole point here is that even though Mark says it's all political, he is wrong ... it is about which system really is best and whether those proposing one system or another are willing to do whatever is necessary (like hiring NWRI) in a timely way (like two years ago) to convince us that their "solution" really is a solution.

Again, it may not be too late, Mark, but it certainly is close and you spending time here fussing at us when you should instead be getting real and unbiased experts to verify your claims of better, faster and cheaper. If your system is unambiguously best it should be something that you can prove even if it costs you money.

So, do you believe enough in your system that you're willing to invest a ton of your money to provide convincing info that your system is a solution for the problems of the town you say that you love or do you maybe love Los Osos, but not that much or do you not really believe in your system's superiority?

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,

I do not expect to alter your thinking but I will for the sake of the discussion add these points. I have lived in the real world my entire life and understand fully the challenges associated with the work I am doing in SLO CO. Life isn’t fare and I don’t expect special treatment. If the process isn’t fair you and the people of LO/BP will NEEDLESSLY pay more to build and operate a facility which will not affect my bottom line one iota. You are paying for it. There are hundreds of LO/BP’s in the states and tens of thousands in the developing world, some of which I am working on. You would be surprised how well received a technology that conserves energy and costs less is received outside of LO/BP. I just happen to believe LO/BP provides a wonderful opportunity to hold the current paradigm accountable.

I'm interested in the county's responses to the comments regarding the DEIR. I want the process to be fair and just, which includes a accurate comparison of technology.
This will be a watershed event. My effort here in the LOSTDEP (even talking with you now) will serve me later. It’s a free country so I am making, what I believe to be, the necessary “investment” and only time (not you or anyone else) will tell if pays off in California, now and or in the future. My efforts aren’t costing you or anyone in LO/BP anything, so you can offer your advice, just don’t be uptight when I don’t take it.

For you to compare an unregulated industry (when it began, during the time you referred to) like computers and software to the highly regulated wastewater treatment industry killed your credibility. NWRI makes recommendations, Frost and Sullivan bestows awards. Unfortunately, neither carry the kind of weight you think they might. Even the NSF “seal of approval” which companies pay a fee to obtain and an annual fee to retain doesn’t insure that any treatment system will be “picked” over another. The NSF “seal” isn’t required for onsite systems used in California. Because you didn’t read the “DEIR Comments and supporting exhibits” email I sent you before your panties got tied in a knot over getting information from me via email, you are destined to continue to be willfully ignorant about ECOfluid and how well it works. Why do you suppose a secondary ox-ditch for $25M was offered by the consulting engineer via the county in its premature RFQ? I didn’t see any “independent organization” or even case studies for ox-ditch and gravity offered anywhere in the memos or process, why not? Please correct me if I am incorrect and feel free to agree with me if I am not.

I have been asking to see all that data which supports how “superior” the leaky energy intensive gravity and treatment plant results are in comparison to the case studies I have put forward. I guess there isn’t any as I can find none.

A secondary treatment selection for $25M demonstrates everything that is wrong with the current state of the industry and an $8.8M ECOfluid USBF Tertiary MBR WRF proves it. The system energy use is the Achilles Heel of this current process, if it is “fair”.

Thinking that this “game”, as you called it, runs on logic is cute and I wish it were true, but I am sorry to say “it ain’t so”. My point about outspending an unaccountable government agency is lost on you, but not on those “others” following the “process”. You see when Haynes decided to eliminate the “tag” from their t-shirts it was done to save money. What is the county’s incentive to conserve money and energy when all “it” has to do is use regulatory tax measures and fees to pay for their unaccountable decisions? This paradigm doesn’t hold true in the free market as you know.

Supes Approve Another Million
By Jack Beardwood
With the hope of receiving funds from President Barack Obama’s economic stimu¬lus program, the County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to ante up another $1 million for development of a Los Osos sewer project.
John Deodati, department administrator for the County Public Works Department, told The Bay News that the additional money will allow them to expedite the project application process, improving their chances to qualify for federal funds. It will help them get the EIR certified and allow for an application for a State Revolving Fund loan to be completed sooner, he explained. A consultant would be hired to administer the state loan applica¬tion.
Deodati said it does not mean that they will skip any portion of the environmental review process and that the county has not chosen a technology or location for the project.

If that is the kind of “belief in a system” you want me to buy into… No thank you, please!

The “process” must “play out” to the end, bitter or sweet. Until then we are watching history being made. So sit back relax and enjoy the show, or not.
...I will admit that watching the BOS on-line pass out another million dollars of the people's money like it was Halloween candy made me tense and I’m not paying for it…

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

You appear to simply be saying that you don't feel you should have to spend any money to convince the County. Having an unbiased expert agree with you would go a long way to convincing others, but if you don't want to try to convince the County, I can't make you.

That is fine and that is your choice. And if what you say about your system is right ... if it is as good as you say, it is also too bad that you are unwilling to spend the money necessary to earn your company the business you should be getting. It is also too bad for Los Osos, the town you say you love.

We've got to wonder, however, how much you really love Los Osos, how much you really believe in your product and how well it would meet our needs if you are unwilling to do whatever necessary to demonstrate your product is superior.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

ws mark, maybe you can point us to a town where YOUR EFFORTS have gotten this technology installed. Sometimes there is that "something extra" that either gets a project going -- or stops it, regardless of the merits of the technology.

Shark Inlet said...

Oh ... on another thing ... if NWRI doesn't have the sort of credibility which would convince the County ... why were they continually trotted out before Los Osos as the end all and be all of wastewater treatment analysis?

Is there simply no expert who you would trust to pass judgment on your device and how appropriate it would be for Los Osos? Is there no one who could speak to the County as an unbiased expert? If not, one has to wonder if your device really is any good.


And on the whole computer thing ... I chose computers because I know a bit about the history and the big players. Would you prefer I have discussed power companies and energy? The key point is that sometimes you need to invest to get results. Do you disagree? Do you disagree with the free market? Don't you think that public agencies should have the right to make decisions based on the information they have been given?

Had you simply offered the County proof that your device is as good for Los Osos you say it is, the County would have adopted it. Face it, you believe that your device is awesome, but if you can't get unbiased experts to speak to the question of how well it would meet our needs, you haven't done your job of selling your device to those who are making the decision.

Stop fussing at me about this as if I am the person making the decision and get to work!

Watershed Mark said...

Lynette, I'll consider your request "after" you provide that leaky sewerage data that proves it superior to low pressure small diameter directional bore drill installed and treatment facility results.
Oh and get a life while you are at it.

Steve, Read the information I sent you for third party validation/opinion.
Tell us about power companies, go right ahead. Don’t forget about the solar technology in the 70’s , 80’s and 90’s part. I can hardly wait!

The tech memos are proof the county didn't study USBF.
Start acting like you are making a decision or at least attempt to hold those who will accountable, you will be paying for it.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Keep feigning and dodging ws mark. You aren't fooling us. And you are in no position to bargain. If YOU had sold this stuff ANYWHERE, you would be crowing about it.

Watershed Mark said...

Read the package I sent to you Lynette, then show me the data that proves the county's gravity/ox-ditch is as you believe superior. What are you hiding? Why?

Churadogs said...

Mark sez:"What is the county’s incentive to conserve money and energy when all “it” has to do is use regulatory tax measures and fees to pay for their unaccountable decisions? This paradigm doesn’t hold true in the free market as you know."

Well, there's the question. "Unaccountable decisions." I give you as exhibit A, the RWQCB's Mad Hatter Mad Pumping Scheme/ACL/CDO Inquisition as an example of "unaccountable decisions." The county can pick any system they like, even one that's isn't the best, and they can simply state that their pick is their pick in their best judgement, and it doesn't matter from that point forward. To my knowledge, there is no LAW that requires them to pick thus and such. They have enormous leeway and since it's not their money they'll be spending, they dont' care. And they're under no obligation to give the public a simplified cost-out of the various systems they've studied so the public can choose. (The public is free to read the mountain of documents and ferret that info out if they like) They will only present some general overall systems and a vague overall total possible price. The public will have no idea if there are any systems that could be done for 1/2 the price. Won't matter, those will have been dismissed and the dismissal defended as a matter of "best overall judgement."

Sure the county would like, for political reasons, to come up with a total win/win, but since that seems unlikely in the case of Los Osos, they may well settle for whatever's expedient, meets the minimum standards, is scientifically/engineeringly defensable, even at minimum levels, covers the various competing demands (regulatory vs enviro vs. cost vs politics), pays off the various debts and promises,covers their various political interests, keeps the county out of court, and protects the county's interests (not Los Osos citizens' interests). And if that results in second best technology or more expensive technology, so what? The community will be the only ones that can make sure they're getting the best product. If they don't, too bad. They'll get the bill and whatever they get for a sewer system. Oh, well.

Watershed Mark said...

Ann wrote: since it's not their money they'll be spending, they dont' care. ...The community will be the only ones that can make sure they're getting the best product. If they don't, too bad. They'll get the bill and whatever they get for a sewer system. Oh, well.

Ann, you have been a remarkable source of information and inspiration.When I tuned in to your blog, I learned much I did not know. Together Everyone Achieves More.

As my fourth grade teacher said- "If I really reach just one of my stuidents this year, I have done my job well."

You have reached me. Thank you, for all you have done and are doing now. I that know you, like myself, will continue to continue because to not continue to illuminate in an attempt to educate would be "Mad"...More Tea?

TCG said...

Anyone who claims that the County does not care about the cost to the property owners and other residents of the sewer project that they are developing either is not informed, or extremely biased.Either way, they are spreading false opinions.

Watershed Mark said...

TCG wrote: "County does not care about the cost to the property owners and other residents of the sewer project that they are developing"

Prove it.

I'll repeat the truth for you again: A secondary treatment selection for $25M demonstrates everything that is wrong with the current state of the industry and an $8.8M ECOfluid USBF Tertiary MBR WRF proves it.

Ignoring, up till now, a 70% savings capital build cost for a solution that does not have to be upgraded to tertiary is evidence the county isn't interested in saving money.

Watershed Mark said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Watershed Mark said...

From this week's President Obama's Radio address on line here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/president-obama-delivers-your-weekly-address/

We won’t just throw money at our problems - we’ll invest in what works. Instead of politicians doling out money behind a veil of secrecy, decisions about where we invest will be made public, and informed by independent experts whenever possible. We’ll launch an unprecedented effort to root out waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in our government, and every American will be able to see how and where we spend taxpayer dollars by going to a new website called recovery.gov.

When these ideals are contrasted with the statment made by Paavo Ogren in August of 2007 regarding the "cost of technology" the people will be better served.

franc4 said...

Mike the moron sez;

"You just might have your eyes opened before you pour out anymore of your nonsense...!!!"

....what's that saying about the pot calling the kettle black?

I can't imagine the 3 or 4 of you left to argue issues you don't really understand (or ever will), have a life other than your computer keyboard.....and find time to berate, belittle and are just plain rude to people with real "smarts", Ann in particular.
Your all nuts. Get a life....or a job or something. Religion would be a good start, because y'all need help....'specially you, Mike. You are one sour apple who can't get over a "certain ex-member" of the CSD, can you? What a lost soul are you.

Unknown said...

Hey Franc... glad to see you haven't lost your scent of humor...

Your "friend", the former CSD director, certainly has stepped up in the world since leaving her family behind... From the looks of her latest "home", one could surmise that she'll be moving over to Dan Devaul's place... Guess she and her "friend" are just raking in the big bucks with her LoFlo toilets...although there is a rumor floating around that I'm sure must be false... Maybe you franc could explain what's happening with your "friend"...??? She's not in jail yet...is she...???

Watershed Mark said...

Moron (psychology), disused term for a person with a mental age between 8 and 12, slang for a stupid person.

"Moron" was coined in 1910 by psychologist Henry H. Goddard[3] from the Greek word moros, which meant "dull" (as opposed to "sharp"), and used to describe a person with a mental age located between 8 and 12 on the Binet scale.[4] It was once applied to people with an IQ of 51-70, being superior in one degree to "imbecile" (IQ of 26-50) and superior in two degrees to "idiot" (IQ of 0-25). The word moron, along with others including "retarded", "idiotic", "imbecilic", "stupid", and "feeble-minded", was formerly considered a valid descriptor in the psychological community, though these words have all now passed into common slang use, exclusively in a derogatory context.[5]

Following opposition to Goddard's attempts to popularize his ideas,[6] Goddard recanted his earlier claims about the moron: "It may still be objected that moron parents are likely to have imbecile or idiot children. There is not much evidence that this is the case. The danger is probably negligible."[7]

Might be time to change bottles MIKE...

Unknown said...

...so Mark, are you confirming that she is in jail...???

Watershed Mark said...

You seem obsessed? What's up with that?

Churadogs said...

Mark sez:"Moron (psychology), disused term for a person with a mental age between 8 and 12, slang for a stupid person."

Well, that certainly describes some of the folks who post here. 8 - 12 year olds? Yep. That describes some of 'em. Alas.

Watershed Mark said...

My 11 year old doesn't behave as badly as MIKE.

More Inagural Adress:
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.

These words ring true...unless you are cynic.

Shark Inlet said...

I wonder whether Mark will now tell us that the Obama presidency has changed the way science is done or how one proves one's case in an argument.

After all, "prove that I'm wrong" never used to be considered authoritative.

Watershed Mark said...

I am still looking forward to the "big energy" story Steve.

Shark Inlet said...

Mark suggests that Apple needing to invest a ton of cash in R&D and advertising to gain a place in the Microsoft dominated market is in no way analogous to his company's situation ... either suggesting that he doesn't believe his firm should actually have to invest funds to convince the County or that he believes that the deck is so stacked that there is no point in his even participating in the County process. I suggested that, like Apple, with enough investment of time and effort and, was able to take over a portion of the market because, for some needs, their product is superior.

If Mark's company is superior to others on the market, they will be able to demonstrate it by providing unbiased reviews which are specific to the areas they hope to serve. That being said, Mark can trot out the experts who have reviewed his technology and who say that it is superior to other options. If he can't, either the technology is not superior for Los Osos or he is unable to get experts to confirm what he, as a salesman, is telling us. Simply put, if he can't afford to pay for an unbiased review by folks who are, indeed, experts, he needs to convince investors to help promote his superior product.

Mark does ask about Energy.

First coal was king ... then oil and gas. Then nuclear and solar and soon biofuels and after that it might be depolymerization. At each stage, the upstart with the better idea had to fight uphill to convince experts that the method was more cost effective and safe. For electricity in particular, regulators got to approve or deny each proposed idea.

An onsite wastewater system is in some ways akin to a rooftop solar system tied into the grid ... until it was allowed, people were not allowed to use it. However ... these devices are common nowadays because someone who believed in the idea was able to convince regulators that it was feasible and better.

If Mark really has a better system, he can demonstrate it to those who regulate and pay for such systems just like those who promoted rooftop solar. A similar story could be spun for hundreds or thousands of innovations in both regulated and unregulated industries.

Those with a truly superior product can demonstrate it if they simply have the resources to do so. So Mark, are you willing to do what you need to do to promote your device? Are you willing to demonstrate your claims to the experts and decision makers? Or, are you just gonna whine at us about how unfair life is and how unfair it is for me to ask you to try to demonstrate your technology to those who decide at the time when it will impact their decision. Too little, too late doesn't give you the right to complain. It is not 'Toons job to provide to you proof that some other system is better than yours, it is your job to convince experts that your system is best. The scientific method, my friend, learn it!

Where would Apple be today if Steve Jobs pouted in a corner because others didn't immediately buy macs? Where would nuclear and solar be today if people in those industries fussed and whined that gas and coal weren't playing fair instead of actually demonstrating that the would work well in some situations?

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,
Quit fussing and attributing words to me I never wrote to obscure your stupidity when you are called on it.

You never address the point. (cute)
In this case it's "REGULATION" vs. non regulation and profit vs. not for profit overpriced public works projects.

Quit whinning read what I sent you then write something.

Unknown said...

..ahh, the modern sales technique...if you don't like the answer you get, you call the client stupid... Great technique Mark, did your 11 year old teach you that...??? You really are an ass...!!!! No wonder the County wants nothing to do with you...!!!!

Watershed Mark said...

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.

Sorry MIKE...

Unknown said...

...so far the ground has stayed firm, not straying a nano-inch... but could you explain exactly what political argument changed that would require SLO County to accept your hyperbole about ECOfluid...???

So far your volumes of stale smoke have done nothing positive to make any of the community believe ECOfluid will be in the County Plan toward cleaning the drinking water in Los Osos... If fact, the County appears to have said thanks, but no thanks to you Mark...

You have made no friends in the County through your blogging and badgering efforts... We have heard so much, so often, from the sewer obstructionists, that you have become just another one and simply blended into the background noise....

Watershed Mark said...

Critical Thinking requires at least:

Taking apart ideas or information and studying various parts.

Evaluating for logical "CONSISTENCY".

Reading critically- selecting important, relevant information concerning a topic or question.

Sorry MIKE, I didn't receive or read any county or consulting engineer's memo that states "If fact, the County appears to have said thanks, but no thanks to you Mark..."
Why not get yourself a copy of the 1MGD generic proposal and DEIR comments I have sitting on the county's clearing desk?
At least then you could say you have seen the documentation even if you don't read it like Steve and Lynette.

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

Just because I don't agree with your claims about your method doesn't mean that I didn't read what you sent.

What I was complaining about when you sent me some 20 megabytes and 400 pages of "documentation" was that I asked a simple question and you dumped a tome on my desktop and said "hey, read all of that" instead of pointing to the specific sections which directly addressed my question.

Perhaps an analogy would work best.

Shark: Mark, you are wrong.
Mark: Prove it.
Shark: Read the great books of the western world and it will be obvious.
Mark: Um ... that doesn't seem like proof.
Shark: If you can't prove I'm wrong, I must be right ... QED.

You see ... just making a claim doesn't mean you are right. You actually have to demonstrate you are right.

Churadogs said...

Inlt sez:"You see ... just making a claim doesn't mean you are right. You actually have to demonstrate you are right."

Unless you're the RWQCB, of course. Then whatever you say is . . . is . . . Pure Alice in wonderland.

Watershed Mark said...

Now we are getting somewhere.
Let's see how the county answers the comments regarding the DEIR.

I think this is important:

San Luis Obispo county
Department of Public Works
Public Improvement
standards
2007 update

7. Wastewater disposal
7.2.4 Testing
Prior to final approval, all sewer lines shall be cleaned and tested for leakage by
standard hydrostatic or low pressure air test, for deflection by mandrel test, and
for standing water/other debris by TV inspection. All cleaning and testing shall
take place after all utilities are installed, and up to, but not including the final
paving is completed. Any damage to the system during final paving and cleanup
shall be corrected prior to final approval.


4. The allowable leakage in the test section shall not exceed 500 gallons
per mile, per 24 hours, per inch diameter of pipe tested at the fivefoot
test head.

…………….The word “infiltration” does not appear in this public improvement standards document.
40 miles of gravity sewer @ 10” having an allowable leakage rate of 499 gallons per mile is 199,600 gallons per day.
Infiltration rates would be higher given the pressure at varying depths and low lying water table areas.

How is leakage checked and verified after the pipe is buried?

Watershed Mark said...

And Infiltration is not addressed at all...

Unknown said...

Mark, if you are not familiar with underground leak testing of waste water treatment pipes, then you should do a bit more research (and not on worthlesspedia) by calling some testing companies...

The leakage rates are a maximum allowance with most new systems not coming even close to the max... but uneducated folks who don't understand engineered systems construction could jump to the conclusion you continue to emphasize... Good Luck getting the County to respond to you...

Watershed Mark said...

So show me the data MIKE.
Why isn't it in plain sight?

If the county responds it will be to the benefit of those paying to build and operate a system.

Watershed Mark said...

Oh, Low Pressure and Vacuum systems areengineered to "leak not".
But then given your extensive engineering expertise you already know that.

Unknown said...

Sorry Mark, even vacuum systems have leakage factors to be considered as there are joints/couplings/tee's, ect, whether welded or joined by other methods...

I'm not sure what you are calling "vacuum systems, but I've done some process systems and associated piping capable of holding 100 microns down to about 0.01 microns... I suspect you are thinking low pressure piping which does have capability of leaking...even a pin-hole in a weld is a leak if you really want to be honest...but you don't, you only want to stir the emotions...

You still haven't impressed the County from all reports... but do have fun...

Watershed Mark said...

So Sorry MIKE,

Without linkage I cannot accept your position. Do try again.

When a vacuum or low pressure system is tested it doesn't leak anywhere near the allowable 499 gallons per day, per diameter inch, per mile. Which makes i better in my book.

Unknown said...

Vacuum pipe"...it doesn't leak anywhere near..." But Mark, it does leak and is just as succeptable to damage as any other pipe... It's not a perfect world and low pressure or "vacuum" pipes are not perfect either...so get off the pipe issue...there are other negatives as well as positives with every system... but a lot depends on the acceptance by the client...

...based on your blog presentations, there is no way you would ever be accepted...that's just the way the world is, YOU as a sales person do not set the rules... but I doubt you will ever understand that... So, have fun with the County, it appears you are not getting past the first cut...

Watershed Mark said...

If it leaks it would leak anywhere near what a gravity system leaks.

I don't represent a collection company but common sense tells us that "efficiency" of low pressure or vacuum system would be detected and corrected at the time of install vs a gravuty being allowed to leak bunches from day one before it is "buried".

MIKE why didn't any of the tech memos go into "any" of this in detail?

Hint:gravity would not float to the top. Low pressure would.

Sorry MIKE...

Watershed Mark said...

"If" a low pressure system leaked it would NOT leak anywhere near what a gravity system leaks.

I say let's have the companies that build these systems put their tech on the table like me.

Hiding behind a public improvement standard used only once at the time of install does nothing to endure the performace of the "gravuty" engineering, technology or product after it gets buries.

With low pressure two feet deep any breakage would beredily detected and corrected.

Comparing the twp technologies given cost and performace is what was supposed to happen in the "study" but adly dis not.

Unknown said...

You just don't get it Mark...

Go back and read Shark's Apple Computer anology... You got a steep hill to climb and you are only wasting time on this blog... We don't have approval, it's between you and the County Engineers... Have fun....

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry MIKE. you just don't get it.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

ws mark, what do you think a few bloggers on this site can actually "DO" for you? Do you think any of us actually works for the County? Or the EIR authoring company? Do you think you have "won" us over with your rude "sales techniques?" The teams that can actually build something are applying with the RFQ process. Filled out that paperwork yet?

No, it is YOU who does not get it.

alabamasue said...

'Toons,
Maybe mark believes that if we would just trust him, we would all just up and flood the BOS with "you HAVE to use ECOfluid/Eone!!!" That's not how it works, and he knows it. I think he learned his marketing skills from Tom Murphy (and we all know how well that worked out...) Wonder how that RFQ is coming together.

Watershed Mark said...

We really are making progess:

I think an RFQ that is released before an EIR is complete and certified seems premature.

Letting the BOS know your thoughts regarding the technology that was not evaluated is a good idea ABS, because your paying for a decision that no one who is voting for it will.

Unknown said...

Apparently YOU did not do a very good job as a sales person IF the County did not evaluate YOUR latest product in the light YOU think it should...

Sorry Mark, YOU do not set the rules... Don't YOU understand that your latest product will not be selected...

It may very well be a good device, but YOU personally have a reputation that casts a very negative light on anything YOU would represent... YOU are seen as being in the mix of just another of the 12 ever present dissenters... Try as YOU might, YOU are outside looking in... YOU might as well head off to Florida to sell your next greatest product... Beef Jerky or Sun Tan Lotion...???

Churadogs said...

Mark sez:"I think an RFQ that is released before an EIR is complete and certified seems premature."

Yep, sure does, unless you live in Alice in WonderlandVille where it's Verdict First, Evidence Later!

Mark also sez:"With low pressure two feet deep any breakage would be readily detected and corrected."

That's the kind of info that needs to be debated and discussed and answered in the DEIR and needs to be of concern to the community, since "the community" will be "fined" for any discovered leakes, the community needs to ask itself both "what are the odds," but "what's the best case/worst case costs for both repair and for fines for long-hidden "spills" (since the RWQCB charges by the guesitmated gallons) between gravity and low pressure STEP" for example. It's all part of comparing the long term O & M & R costs between the two collections systems. If those issues aren't in that section and aren't addressed, The Community, including you all, had better start smelling little ratlets scuttering about the house.

Watershed Mark said...

The "leakage"(and infiltration)factor of gravity sewerage has not been addressed in this DEIR.

Common sense would manadte that a fulland fair discussio needs to be had by everyone especially those being paid to study, pickand approve a solution to the septic tank discharges in the PZ.

An E/ONE collection solution would include on lot costs and would off set the very little energy it takes to operate the grinder pump.


Why wasn't this very clever and cost effective system evaluated?
Did the consulting engineer know about it?

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Well then, step will never get fined, as the leaks with it occur most often at the connection to the house. It will be the homeowners' responsibility to pay to fix the leak -- and if it is undetected -- big cost savings there!

Gee, I thought the long term O & M costs were in Chapter 3 of the Fine Screening Analysis - isn't that cited in the DEIR…?

(Thanks alabamasue for your remarks!)

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

I wonder of the neighborhood stench factor of many pumping trucks pumping tanks every day has been factored into the DEIR? (Not the low frequency pumping of now - pump every 5 years now? - Hah!! Not even close!)

Watershed Mark said...

E/ONE Grinder Pump Systems is not STEP/STAG Lynette.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann refers to Los Osos as "Alice in WonderlandVille where it's Verdict First, Evidence Later!".

Now I understand why the recall passed. A lot of voters decided they didn't like a sewage treatment plant in the middle of town (you know, like Santa Cruz and Beverly Hills, really horrible places to live because they stink so dang much) and voted for others who didn't like a sewage treatment plant in the middle of town because they forgot to ask for evidence that the alternative to TriW was gonna actually be cheaper as was claimed by the recall campaign.

I believe there are four kinds of folks who supported the recall. In decreasing order, percentage wise:

1 - individuals who voted for the recall because of the promise of saving money (hehehe, let's not tellum anythin about the real plan)
2 - NIMBYs who misunderstood the likely effect of the TriW plant on smells and looks
3 - Technology/Environment wonks who wanna use only the latest technology even if only experimental because it is really cool
4 - process wonks who might very well have misunderstood the whole process who would rather have a do-over on the whole game just because they didn't like the holding penalty early in the 1st quarter.

The problem here is this ... none of those who supported the recall were really thinking holistically by honestly considering the cost question.

We are now in a new stage of this seemingly never-ending process.

If we get misled again by folks in one or more of these four categories, we are probably gonna pay yet again. The County proposal is already clearly inferior to TriW from the point of view of aquifer recharge and cost ... let's not screw it up again by insisting that the County go with some niobidium reverse microfiltration onsite system that produces drinking water from used automotive oil that is powered by the cold fusion add-on (if we are willing to pay extra just to be really sustainable).

Just like voting for the CSD in the first place cost us a lot, the recall cost us a lot.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

ws mark says:
"E/ONE Grinder Pump Systems is not STEP/STAG Lynette."

I was talking to Ann, ws mark.

So - have you put a team onto the RFQ process? If not, I don't know if that lesser technology will have a place at the bidding table. So far it is gravity and step/steg.

Watershed Mark said...

The DER public comment period isn't over yet.
Next comes the county responses.

Which, in my humble opinion, if the "process" is authentic makes an RFQ premature at this time.

Unknown said...

If Mark doesn't like the process, then why is he still playing...???

Mark does not make the rules to this process...!!! Mark does not live in LO, let alone California... Mark is ONLY concerned with making money for Mark...!!!! Mark has got to be one of the least intelligent salesmen around to not see that this blog that he posts some 10 times as much as anyone else, is not going to get the County to change the rules...!!!! If Mark thinks he has the ability to cause the County to change something just because he doesn't like the process, then Mark should go to the authorities who govern the process and quit whinning...!!! Mark should also realize that such action could earn the pat on the head and thanks, but no thanks... No matter, it appears Mark has shot his wad and then shot his foot and maybe trying to shoot the other foot... I'm will to be that in no way is Mark going to sell anything to SLO/LO...!!!!

Watershed Mark said...

E/ONE is superiour to every other collection technology reviewed

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Fine ws mark, if you believe it is superior -- and cheaper or at least competitive, then you will be putting out the effort to get a team together and doing the RFQ on the County's timetable. No one said you had to like the timetable or think it was authentic. It IS THE ONLY timetable the County is working with. Capiche?

Watershed Mark said...

Let's see what the responses are to the comments to the DEIR.

Watershed Mark said...

Sorry MIKE, you just don't get it.

Unknown said...

Well Mark, this is a waste of time chatting with you...

If you really have something worthwhile, do submit it to the County... I'll hear about your submittal, good or bad... I still am willing to bet that whatever your next best mousetrap submittal is, you still will not be in the final cut... Have fun with the County...

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE, I appreciate that you are helping to make my point, however, you still don't "get it".

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

ws mark, if we don't "get it" to your satisfaction, maybe its because you are in the way of us "getting it." There appears to be a spilt between what you think your point is and what we think it is.

Watershed Mark said...

Lynette, after you get that leakage data to us we can talk more about what you are not getting.