Pages

Thursday, April 02, 2009

Ah, These Clever Chinese

There’s been a lot of gloom and doom in the papers: America doomed! World Ending at 11! and so forth. Meanwhile, as happens during times of transition and profound change, out in the real world things are rustling in the shrubbery. Very clever people starting things up in their garages or, in the case of China – a behemoth with a ginormous garage – starting things up in a big way.

Check out the New York Times story at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/global/02electric.html?th&emc=th#

Unlike America, China has the unique ability to “decree” that things happen quickly and on a large scale. This makes them a formidable country. They also have the luxury of leapfrogging 19th century technology, thereby saving themselves a step or two in their progress. Interestingly, a couple of guys in Israel, I think, are also thinking about a similar plan: electric cars, public plug-in stations and battery switch-out shops. Drive in, switch out your battery, drive out. Slick.

As the story points out, China’s still stuck with dirty coal, however, I won’t count out a gazillion people who can be “decreed” to build stuff. Think of all that wind and sun out on the high Mongolian plains blowing the yaks around.

If America is going to stay in the race, we’ve got to seriously think about “decreeing” as well as figuring out ways for a bazillion kids tinkering in garages will be able to feed their clever inventions into a system that’s ready for them – not faced with government protected crony monopolies stamping out innovation and competition, hogging resources and stifling the wily and the nimble.

The 21st century race is going to go the smart and the flexible. It’s possible that the era of the plodding, too big to fail and too big to change quickly dinosaurs – GM, AIG, MegaCorps is over. More important, as discussion about reforming medical care heats up, maybe voters need to think about this: How many people would leave their present jobs and become an entrepreneur knowing their family’s health coverage was always there and not tied to a specific job? In short, make a change, start a business, invent a widget. That’s the stuff that made America a powerhouse and can do so again. Just takes a little smarts on the part of the voters and government alike.

69 comments:

Watershed Mark said...

Great article Ann.
Many thanks for keeping a sharp eye out for the good stuff..

Terrific commentary: “In short, make a change, start a business, invent a widget.”

Churadogs said...

So, we need to make it easier to do that by, say, making medical care de-linked from a particular job (single payer national health care for example, good everywhere in the US of A) and de-link pensions so they're portable and can be added to no matter where you're working.

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

In case you were not able to see my replies on the 2nd of April in a comment section which has drifted off the page, I'm gonna repost them here ..

---------------------

Mark,

I'm getting bored (or should I write "board"?) with this.

According to the Arizona Department of Water Resources, the Phoenix Active Management Area "currently is in an overdraft condition in the amount of approximately 251,000 acre feet annually." (See http://www.azwater.gov/dwr/WaterManagement/Content/AMAs/PhoenixAMA/default.htm ... this same website indicates that Phoenix will not likely be able to achieve their goal of sustainability by 2025.)

The top 6 results in the google search for Phoenix aquifer overdraft all say that Phoenix is using more groundwater than is sustainable.

Mark, You are full of crap. You didn't even take the time to research my offhand claim before you jumped down my throat on the topic.

You are wrong. The magic internet proves it.

You should now either apologize or offer an explanation for why the Arizona DWR official information seems to disagree with you.

I apologize if this seems harsh, but every time I look into the issue at all, the information seems to confirm my original belief and seems to be calling you out as dead wrong.

Remember, you are the one who picked this battle ... you thought you could score points ... and you were dead wrong. What does this say about the quality of your input for Los Osos's wastewater treatment needs. If, on a matter where you think you are right you are proven so horribly wrong, it would seem to tell us that you are not a trustworthy source, no matter how well intentioned you might be.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Ann, please forgive my off topic response in this thread, but what I found online last night was just too good to not tag onto Shark's comment.

This is off the newly released EIR which can be found here:
http://www.lowwp-eir.net/lowwpeir/pdf/RTC/02240002%20-%20Sec03-00%20Responses.pdf

Below is the County's response to wsm:


ECOfluid, Mark Low, January 14, 2009 (Letter P07)
Response to Comment P07-1
The comment describes an alternative wastewater treatment technology; while the comment and
attachments provide a good overview of the technology, the various statements regarding the superior
nature of the system are necessarily generic and not fully supported. While the technology appears to
be a good fit in some installations, as described in the literature, there is no information specific to the
Los Osos application. However, the project selection process through the Design/Build Request for
Qualifications mentioned in the comment was specifically designed to elicit alternative technology
proposals. Costs provided in the comment, although incomplete as to the details of what is and is not
included, are consistent with the cost ranges referenced to “page 454” (page 7-47 table 7-7).
Response to Comment P07-2
This comment provides cost estimates for various versions of the USBF technology. These cost
estimates lack sufficient detail to determine what elements are or are not included. The current
County cost estimates are fully described in the Fine Screening Report (August 2007) and provide the
detail needed for reviewers to determine each element, and the included factors, in the estimate. For
instance, cost estimates in all County documents include all elements of an alternative: land costs,
permitting, engineering, appurtenant structures (maintenance and administration buildings) etc. This
comment provides no supportive evidence for the estimates. The range of treatment alternatives
considered for inclusion in the EIR is based on life-cycle costs, long-term operational issues, ability to
consistently meet discharge objectives, etc. and not simply on initial capital costs.
Response to Comment P07-3
This comment expresses a concern regarding the evaluation of alternative conveyance collection
systems. See Topical Response 5, Alternative Collection Systems.

(EIR comment Pg 305 - Responses)

Shark Inlet said...

Mark's reply to me (via e-mail):


The Phoenix “Active Management Area” you are using to support your incorrect conclusions about the "City of Phoenix" encompasses an area that is much greater than the area our discussion is focused on.
The City of Phoenix is NOT in “overdraft” and you are incorrect when you state otherwise. If and when you do some actual research you will know what I do.

I won’t be helping you with that research, because everything that I present, you consider flawed in some special way.
You might simply make a few calls and quickly find out that the City of Phoenix is a world class water management agency that is not in “over draft.”

You are in error. Get the requisite material and study it so you hopefully won’t keep making such a fool of yourself.
Patting yourself on the back is particularly silly, given you are so completely off base and incorrect.

Your “quick” Google searches aren’t working like you think they are.
Whining about your lack of understanding isn’t serving you well either.

Spinning your statement “Phoenix is in over draft” to include something called “Phoenix AMA” isn’t working.
Get back to us when you have some actual factual information regarding your assertion regarding “Phoenix being in over draft”.

Crack!



(In case you were wondering about the ethics of my making Mark's e-mail public, please remember that it is Mark who has argued here that he considers all e-mail public ... so he certainly won't mind.)


Mark, your reply boils down to saying something like "people who say 'LA' must only mean Los Angeles and cannot mean the greater LA area."

It's a childish reply and you know it.

No where did I write "the City of Phoenix". I did not mean it and if you assumed, incorrectly that I meant just Phoenix but not the neighboring towns who also draw on the same aquifer, you were being both obtuse and very uncharitable.


Now, let's get to the heart of the matter. The Phoenix AMA (you write as if you don't know what it is) compromises the cities in the Phoenix metro area (see: http://ag.arizona.edu/arizonawet/shoppingcart/PhxAMA_Cities_noWater.jpg).


Even so, the point is clear ... even if you use weasel words to try to make yourself look technically correct, this issue started by you telling me that I was horribly mistaken. At least I have shown that my statement was well-founded and now you have shown that you are essentially wrong.


Do you want to pursue this more and make yourself look worse?

Unknown said...

"...the City of Phoenix is a world class water management agency..."

Does that mean they are using ECOfluid technology...???

Mike Green said...

Sharkey bubbled:
"(In case you were wondering about the ethics of my making Mark's e-mail public, please remember that it is Mark who has argued here that he considers all e-mail public ... so he certainly won't mind.)"
Hoo that is one BAAAAD argument.
No bone for the shark.
I dunno, I think I would rather have NO emails published by WM
Ethics bedamned, what ever happened to common decency?

Unknown said...

There hasn't been any "common decency" in Los Osos since the extremists started warring against the CSD...

Thank Gail, Lisa, Julie, Al, Chuck, Ann, Joey, Jeff, Kieth... GRO, OsosChange and the rest of the wonderful "leaders"... They have taught us well....

Mike Green said...

So, let me get this straight,
I gotta thank all those folks for Shark's post?

Tell me, just who can I thank for yours?

Shark Inlet said...

Mike,

Mark has told us that he doesn't consider e-mail privacy a matter of common decency.

After he shared a private e-mail I sent him, I complained. He acted as it was me who had the problem. I told him I didn't want him to do it again. He did.

Fool me once ...

No matter ... he was very clear that he doesn't mind people sharing his e-mails.

I would not share anyone else's e-mail without permission.

Also, it seemed that his answer to my public comments belonged in public ...

Watershed Mark said...

Phoenix is NOT in over draft…Next.

From: Shark Inlet [mailto:sharkinlet@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 5:55 PM
To: Mark Low
Subject: Re: While cleaning out my junk folder I found your message..

I replied in Ann's blog.
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Mark Low Mark@nowastewater.com wrote:
Watershed Mark said...
Realistic1 said...
Shark,
My best friend has lived in Phoenix for 40 years. She has been telling me for 20 years that the biggest issue on the City's plate is overdraft due to out of control building. Her water bill has more than quadrupled in the past five years and the City has implemented serious, mandatory conservation.

R1- You may want to send this information to your friend so she can compare it with her bills you wrote about above:
I think anyone (except maybe Steve, Lynette and Mr. Dean “I forgot his last name”) will agree that your assertions based upon what your friend said, do not hold up in the face of the facts below.

Water conservation 602.261.8367
The City of Phoenix has 3 rate periods per year:
Low-Medium-High
2009 1.99/2.44/3.16
2008 1.83/2.20/2.81
2007 1.65/1.97/2.50
2006 1.50/1.77/2.24
2005 1.38/1.63/2.06
2004 1.30/153/1.94
2003 1.26/1.49/1.89
2002 1.24/1.47/1.87
2001 $1.17/$1.39/$1.76

The prices above represent the cost for 1 unit of water which is 748 gallons and very detailed billing information such as the rate periods, etc. can be found here.

Steve,

The Phoenix “Active Management Area” you are using to support your incorrect conclusions about the "City of Phoenix" encompasses an area that is much greater than the area our discussion is focused on.
The City of Phoenix is NOT in “overdraft” and you are incorrect when you state otherwise. If and when you do some actual research you will know what I do.

I won’t be helping you with that research, because everything that I present, you consider flawed in some special way.
You might simply make a few calls and quickly find out that the City of Phoenix is a world class water management agency that is not in “over draft.”

You are in error. Get the requisite material and study it so you hopefully won’t keep making such a fool of yourself.
Patting yourself on the back is particularly silly, given you are so completely off base and incorrect.

Your “quick” Google searches aren’t working like you think they are.
Whining about your lack of understanding isn’t serving you well either.

Spinning your statement “Phoenix is in over draft” to include something called “Phoenix AMA” isn’t working.
Get back to us when you have some actual factual information regarding your assertion regarding “Phoenix being in over draft”.

Crack!
1:52 PM, APRIL 03, 2009


From: Shark Inlet [mailto:sharkinlet@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 9:13 AM
To: Mark Low
Subject: In case you were unable to read my April 2 comment before it drifted off Ann's main page ...

Mark,

I'm getting bored (or should I write "board"?) with this.

According to the Arizona Department of Water Resources, the Phoenix Active Management Area "currently is in an overdraft condition in the amount of approximately 251,000 acre feet annually." (See http://www.azwater.gov/dwr/WaterManagement/Content/AMAs/PhoenixAMA/default.htm ... this same website indicates that Phoenix will not likely be able to achieve their goal of sustainability by 2025.)

The top 6 results in the google search for Phoenix aquifer overdraft all say that Phoenix is using more groundwater than is sustainable.

Mark, You are full of crap. You didn't even take the time to research my offhand claim before you jumped down my throat on the topic.

You are wrong. The magic internet proves it.

You should now either apologize or offer an explanation for why the Arizona DWR official information seems to disagree with you.

I apologize if this seems harsh, but every time I look into the issue at all, the information seems to confirm my original belief and seems to be calling you out as dead wrong.

Remember, you are the one who picked this battle ... you thought you could score points ... and you were dead wrong. What does this say about the quality of your input for Los Osos's wastewater treatment needs. If, on a matter where you think you are right you are proven so horribly wrong, it would seem to tell us that you are not a trustworthy source, no matter how well intentioned you might be.


Reply on Ann's blog if at all.

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

The prices above represent the cost for 1 unit of water which is 748 gallons and very detailed billing information such as the rate periods, etc. can be found here.

Mike Green said...

A public in your own cartinilageous (sp?) mind!
My public is the one that wants to know about drying clothes and adriondack chairs and nitrogen loading and fixed bidding schemes .
Phoenix? A cheap airfare hub
your mail to WM?
TMI

Watershed Mark said...

This exchange was posted here earlier today.
Looks like Steve was looking for some sort o recognition for his mistakes.

Crack!
1:52 PM, APRIL 03, 2009
Realistic1 said...
Shark,

Told ya it was a sucker's bet....
2:00 PM, APRIL 03, 2009
Watershed Mark said...
Don't worry R1, there is plenty of misperception regarding water.
Your friend demonstrates that beautifully.
3:36 PM, APRIL 03, 2009

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

You did not address the question.

If Phoenix is not in overdraft, how is it that the Arizona Department of Water Resources says that it is?

Clearly you've got some 'splainin' to do if you want to be treated seriously.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Gee, wsm completely ignores the County's response to him in the EIR that I posted above. Guess they didn't find his information very compelling as it was missing what they wanted to know.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,
They didn't.
Lynette,
Be patient.
How is that "Mr. Dean (I forgot his last name) project" coming along.

Have you found out who is he yet?
You aren't ignoring that issue are you?

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

Clearly you won't let this go ... but you are also writing something that seems to directly contradict your state government. Explain.

Unknown said...

STEP is out, so the ECOfluid "free agent" sales person has nothing further to try selling to Los Osos or SLO County....

His credibility and inability to present data and costs in support of a working treatment system has long turned to dust, all that is left is his multitude of hollow words... The County answered his questions, nothing further is to be gained by trying to converse with WM...

Shark Inlet said...

Mike ...

My reasons are all found in the book of Proverbs.

M said...

Just curious. What happens when 2,3,400 property owners every month can't meet their sewer bills?
Sincerely, M

Unknown said...

They will 'thank' Lisa, Julie, Chuck, Gail, Ann, Ron, Jeff, Kieth and the rest of the sewer obstructionists for creatting such a costly mess...

Remember the pre-recall CSD had a fully designed and permitted WWTF and they had actually begun construction...

Remember the obstructionist each and everytime you have to pay your sewer bill...they never had a Plan, never even attempted to start an honest plan, simply followed McPherson and threw away tax dollars to fight the Water Board... Yup, I'll sure bless Gail, Ann and Lisa every time I see them...!!!!!!!!

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,

You wrote “Phoenix is in over draft” I proved it isn’t.

The "Phoenix Active Management Area" is not "Phoenix", no matter how hard you try to make it so.

Just like R1 writing about water rates quadrupling in the last few years, you are both completely off base and incorrect.

Watershed Mark said...

M,
You are asking perhaps a $100,000,000.00 question.
It appears it was way over MIKE's head.

Unknown said...

M... It's easy to sit back and ask that question at this stage...but don't you understand where the delays/extra costs are coming from...???? Didn't you understand that this is exactly what the pre-recall Board warned the community about...???? I don't have much sympathy for a community who let a gang of thugs take control and then robbed the treasury for their own good....

The CSD5 were so blind that they thought a series of never-ending delays would create such a costly expense that most of us would be unable to pay a damn sewer bill and somehow, if by chance a sewer was actually built, then a magic gift would be bestowed on Los Osos and the extra costs would be forgiven.... They ignored the community, they selfishly thought they could force the County or the State or maybe even the Federal Government to step in and "rescue" Los Osos from a costly sewer... They thought wrong...!!!! There never was a 'holistic' sewer that could have prevented the disaster we're now in..... Now many of us may not be able to pay for the sewer, but put the blame exactly where it belongs...the CSD5...!!! We will either pay the bills or we will move... It isn't pretty either way, but this community did it to ourselves 4 years ago....

I've been putting money aside each month as if I were paying the sewer bill, if you haven't, then you are setting yourself up for a major financial problem... I don't intend to lose my home over a sewer bill for a sewer that would have been completed by now....!!!!!!

Watershed Mark said...

Actually there is "technology that is significantly less expensive", it just wasn't studied, reviewed and reported.

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

"then that technology becomes the new standard and all others fall away"...

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,
If you been putting $250.00 aside for years to pay for a sewer, no wonder you want a needlessly expensive result.

Watershed Mark said...

R1,
Perhaps your "friend" has an undetected leak or a fixture that is in disrepair.
These kinds of issues can lead to excessive ue of water and high water bills.

You and your friend just can't blame Phoenix for a quadrupled water bill.

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

If you think that you've demonstrated Phoenix isn't in overdraft, you are confused ... very confused ... more confused than I had formerly believed. In short, if you really believe that what you wrote proves anything you are a fool ... the sort of fool we are warned about in Proverbs.

The entirety of Phoenix (and suburbs) is in the Phoenix AMA and the vast majority of population of the Phoenix AMA is from Phoenix and it's suburbs. The facts are not on your side. Deal with it.

The key point here is this ... the aquifers you are sitting on in your area are being overused according to your own state government. That's what I said, that's what I mean and that's the truth.

Your continued arguing about this is exactly like Ron telling us that Maria supported dissolution even though the videotaped evidence and she, personally, told us otherwise. No wonder you admire him ... you are both wrapped up in your own beliefs about how smart you are and you both try to avoid reasonable questions (like, for example, where do you get off saying your aquifers are in fine shape if those who understand the aquifers tell us otherwise?).

If you have a shred of wisdom (and at this point in time, the evidence points us toward believing you don't) you will simply not ever make comments here again. Run away now that you've been shown to be a weasel worded fraud of a self-important salesman who can't even communicate effectively with the people who might possibly buy your product.

What a maroon!

Unknown said...

Currently City of Phoenix is in "overdraft"...

"The City of Phoenix lies within the Phoenix Active Management Area (AMA), one of several water planning and regulatory areas established by the legislature through the 1980 Arizona Groundwater Management Act (or “Groundwater Code”). This comprehensive legislation and associated regulations establish groundwater rights, conservation requirements, subdivision “assured water supply” standards and a host of other features designed to protect groundwater supplies which have been “overdrafted” in the area. The key goal established by the Groundwater Code for the Phoenix AMA is “safe-yield” by the year 2025."

http://www.wuwc.org/html/mem_issues_city_phoenix.html


Interestingly, no mention is made in any research showing the ECOfluid system in operation, or approved, for any town, city or area of Arizona....

...and as far as can be determined, neither Phoenix or Arizona have any authority to determine the WWT for Los Osos...

Guess we have to rely on SLO County Engineering...

Unknown said...

BRAVO SHARK...!!!!!!!

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,
You said Phoenix is in over draft.
It isn't, deal with it.

If you had said the Phoenix Active Management Area is in drought you would have been correct, but you didn't and therefore are not.

Game over, you lose.

Shark Inlet said...

My gosh you are thick, Mark.

I never wrote "The City of Phoenix and only the City of Phoenix is in overdraft." If you think I did, find the quote.

Do you ever use "Los Angeles" to refer to the greater metro area? Do you ever write of "San Francisco" or "New York" or "DC" or "Chicago" or "Boston" to refer to the collection of communities in that area? That is common practice.

Why do you insist that meant the City of Phoenix and not the metro area when I wrote "Phoenix"? For you to jump down my throat on this matter rather than clarify shows that you were more about gunnin for bear than anything else ... like the truth, for example.

If you think I lost because you feel that you have the right to redefine (and misdefine) my words, you are wrong.

Nope, I did not lose here ... I showed both that what I originally wrote was 100% reasonable and that you are pedantic, obtuse and uncharitable.

I am still waiting for your apology for insisting I meant something ("the City of Phoenix and only the city") which I did not and then calling me a liar because of your silly and incorrect assumption.

M said...

I didn't ask how, or why payments are what they are going to be. I asked how is that lost revenue collected affect repayment of whatever loan we end up with?
Nice cavalier attitude richard. Coming from someone that won't have to make a choice of sewer or moving.
Sincerely, M

Unknown said...

Don't blame Richard, he warned us before the recall....

'Thank' Lisa, Julie, Chuck, Gail, Ann, Ron, Jeff, Kieth and the rest of the sewer obstructionists for creating this costly mess...!!!!

Remember the pre-recall CSD had a fully designed and permitted WWTF and they had actually begun construction...

If you aren't prepared to pay the cost of the CSD delayed sewer, then prepare to move... It really has been your choice from the moment you voted for the recall... You knew the consequences...

Richard LeGros said...

M,

Revenue 'lost' by folks failing to make their monthly WWTP payments or yearly bond payments on their propperty taxes will result in the County placing liens against their property. These liens will be paid off at the time of the homes' sale. The sale will either by the homeowners choice or by forelosure by the County to collect unpaid taxes.

These are the choices we now all face. Sadly, an unpleasant reality.

-R

Watershed Mark said...

Hi Lynette,

I have posted so initial thoughts to the Reposes to the Comments over in Ochs Nation
A more full response will be forthcoming which I will probably post on Ann’s Land when I have it complete.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,
You said Phoenix is in over draft.
It isn't, deal with it.
Game over. You lose.

Watershed Mark said...

M,
The sewer doesn't attach to Richard's home, a I understand it.
It's strange when he writes "we"...

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

You are clearly not qualified to sit at the adult table at Easter. Go back to the kids table or demonstrate your competence.

Seriously ... if you appear to be both obtuse and pedantic you should either duck out of this discussion while you still have 5% of your dignity or you should ... somehow ... attempt to restore your dignity.

That being said, if you respond with anything but an apology to me or an explanation of how your words were misunderstood you will have proven yourself to be, as my family says, perfect for ignoring.


ps - at least Richard lives here and cares about our community. You appear to be in neither category.

Unknown said...

Blog comments in response to the County's reply to the first inadequate ECOfluid submittal only amount to a childish game of trying to save face. Had the ECOfluid submittal to the County been prepared in a professional manner as initially requested, it would not have been rejected... However, we have all seen Mark's blog game and are not surprised that he was rejected and is now trying to cover his inadequacies as a salesperson...

Game Over... SLO Won, Snakeoil Zero....!!!!

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,

Please show us the Bio-Lac™ submittal.
I can’t find it anywhere…

Happy Easter, Steve.

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

I'm sorry ... if you request Mike provide documentation for anyting, you should first at least justify your claim that the Phoenix metro area doesn't take more water out of their aquifer than they put back into it via various recharge methods.

Until you do that you have no right to demand anything from her or anyone else who actually lives in Los Osos.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,
Phoenix is not in over draft.
Why is it so difficult for you to admit you you were wrong andI am correct?

Watershed Mark said...

Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...
Mark,

I'm sorry ... if you request Mike provide documentation for anyting, you should first at least justify your claim that the Phoenix metro area doesn't take more water out of their aquifer than they put back into it via various recharge methods.

Until you do that you have no right to demand anything from her or anyone else who actually lives in Los Osos.


Steve,
Is MIKE a woman? Are you an adult?

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

Until you justify your claim that the Phoenix AMA is not in overdraft you shouldn't bother adding any comments here because you've been shown to be a liar or an idiot. (We're not actually sure which ... do you want to clarify?)

Until you apologize for deliberately twisting the truth you should probably best keep quiet.

On the other hand, the County has already told us that you are an incompetent moron ... maybe your continued comments here will convince even the most Hamlinish child that they were right.

Mark,

What I don't get is why you would bother wasting your time here?

You've not made a sale. You won't make a sale. You've been shown to be a moron or a liar.

Are you just trying to save face? That ship left months ago when you started unreasonably going off on me about the whole Phoenix thing?

Phoenix is in overdraft. Your state government says so ... the experts say so ... everyone knows so. You claiming otherwise only makes us realize that you are a waste of our time.

For the sake of Christ, grow up and start acting like an adult.

Unknown said...

Hi Steve... As could have been predicted, the WM is going to pout and throw his blog tantrums after (surprise) NOT being selected by the County... We've all tried to give him advice, none of which was actually listened to... We all asked for his support data... In short we led him right up to actually preparing a supportable submittal... but you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make a jackass drink...although from the looks of WM's last several postings, it appears he's drinking some strong stuff... maybe right out the end of his own wrecklamator... He can pout and cry all he wants, but he's out of this game...

Bottom line is: No Ecofluid system in Los Osos... and No commission check going to Arizona.... ***Crack***
Game is Over....!!!!!

Shark Inlet said...

Arizona might very well have a law preventing discrimination against the retarded.

No offense to my good friends from Arizona, but you might want to consider a law regulating internet use so that only adults can have full posting rights.

Kate and Casey and Lois and Renee, you have my sympathies ...

Watershed Mark said...

MIKE,
Just as I thought no Submittal from Parkson/Bio-Lac(tm)...

Steve,
Phoenix is NOT in over draft.

Unknown said...

I do have friends and relatives in Arizona... They also have been tuneing in and reading the humorous postings of the mental midget... My brother said that indeed Phoenix was not in an over draft, but was only in a rough draft...

It's also interesting to note that US Senator John McCain's wife may have a relative connection to Los Osos...

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

Are you now going to claim that there never was a Holocaust ... because, after all, the vast majority of the jews who were mercilessly killed were living in Poland, not Germany, before 1939?

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

I'm calling you out for your crap.

The City of Phoenix, which you suggest is fine, isn't the entity which matters. There appears to be no single aquifer which serves only the City of Phoenix and no other areas. That being said, it is clear thast you are trying to escape accountability for your own words.

If you can justify your statement that the City of Phoenix is not taking more water out of the aquifer than they put into the aquifer we'll know that you aren't 100% full-o-crap.

Okay, the gauntlet has been thrown. Are you man enough to respond on topic ... or are you gonna try to weasel out again ... like a little girl?

Hell, our San Francisco gay liberal democrats are more manly than you! At least they would have some solid thought behind their rhetoric.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Go Shark!!!!!!

I will add one more thing to what I blogged somewhere about the WRAC meeting - No Tom Murphy!!!

I'm hoping this is a trend! Maybe f-o-c will vanish too!!

alabamasue said...

'Toons-
Wait until Tuesday. Murphy may have one last "AFLAC!!" quack left in him.

Aaron Ochs - Managing Editor of The ROCK said...

This could all be solved with a pie-throwing contest.

Mike Green said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AOeSrLCD-U&feature=related

Shark Inlet said...

I think I figured out why Mark thinks Phoenix is not in a state of overdraft (besides, his insistence that I was speaking to the City of Phoenix only and not the greater metro area ... something that only people local to the Phoenix area ... are likely to do).

I suspect that by Mark is interpreting the word "overdraft" to mean something like "taking more water out of the aquifer than you are putting in" but I mean that water table is considerably below it's historic level.

The City of Phoenix could be recharging their aquifer at the same rate they are taking water out and yet, because the water table is 300-500 feet lower than it's historic levels, it is in a state of overdraft from my point of view but Mark thinks things are fine.

I guess it all depends on whether one uses the word "overdraft" in the right way or not and whether one feels that the word "Phoenix" means only the City but not the region.

Yet again, it boils down to this ... Mark has chosen to misinterpret my words and he is now insisting that he was right all along and that I was wrong all along ... but I've presented ample evidence that my original statement was reasonable and yet Mark still contends that I was wrong ... and without any cogent explanation.

Unknown said...

Mark who...???

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Thanks Mike!!!!

300-500 lower? How on earth could that NOT spell overdraft? Putting the same amount in as you are taking out does nothing to replace all that earlier overdraft. Looks like "Bush" math to me.

Sewertoons AKA Lynette Tornatzky said...

Actually, Cheney math, but didn't the problems really begin the last 2 years of the Clinton administration (Summers) and just progress (O'Neill, Snow, Paulson)?

Watershed Mark said...

Lynette,
As you seem to want to demonstrate you memmory for the folks, what about Mr. Dean "I forgot his last name"?

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,

Let me again try to help you understand what is actually going on in Phoenix, Arizona home to 1,552,259 residents, and is the anchor of the Phoenix Metropolitan Area with 4,179,427 residents.

Phoenix is NOT in over draft.
Phoenix’s excess water supplies are being stored or “recharged” underground in aquifers for future use.
Phoenix is NOT in over draft.

I think you are beginning to get it, but it really doesn’t matter to me.

Maybe you, R1’s or MIKE’s “friends” can call Phoenix (their number is located in the brochure) and try to get them to admit that they are in over draft. Good Luck!
I cut and pasted the comments below to be sure they stayed up as part of the record and to prove once again stupidity is its own reward.




Shark Inlet (a.k.a. Stiv Neener) said...
Mark,
I'm calling you out for your crap.
The City of Phoenix, which you suggest is fine, isn't the entity which matters. There appears to be no single aquifer which serves only the City of Phoenix and no other areas. That being said, it is clear thast you are trying to escape accountability for your own words.
If you can justify your statement that the City of Phoenix is not taking more water out of the aquifer than they put into the aquifer we'll know that you aren't 100% full-o-crap.
Okay, the gauntlet has been thrown. Are you man enough to respond on topic ... or are you gonna try to weasel out again ... like a little girl?
Hell, our San Francisco gay liberal democrats are more manly than you! At least they would have some solid thought behind their rhetoric.
7:44 PM, April 04, 2009
Sewertoons said...
Go Shark!!!!!! I'm hoping this is a trend! Maybe f-o-c will vanish too!! 8:21 PM, April 04, 2009
On Ochs Nation April 4, 2009 4:02 PM Lynette wrote:
The costs on vacuum were only kept down by the number of houses - two, three or four on a single vacuum pit. This would not go in the right of way, but on private property. I suspect most property owners would object, as the property value would be lessened on the "chosen" property. So without these cost savings - as described by the manufacturer - it does not save money.

The problems as "solved" by Ripley did not give him the confidence to do an RFQ for step apparently. He was in attendance at the WRAC meeting today. Disheartened no doubt by the WRAC's not giving step a thumbs up. I guess all the big mouths who claimed that they could save money with their technology couldn't put their money where their mouths were.

I have heard that we are at the very top of the list for SRF money.

Lynette,

I will stop asking questions when they are answered.

-Can you please point us to the County Low Pressure Collection Tech Memo that contains detailed the Vacuum collection information you are quoting from?
-Why wasn’t Vacuum Collection reviewed, studied or reported on in the County’s process?
-Why are you trying to spin on it now all by yourself with no county documentation to back you up?
-Why are you trying so hard to bury Los Osos?
-When are we going to hear more about Mr. Dean "I forgot his last name”? This question is of particular importance as it speaks directly to your lack of integrity. If you “made it up” or lied, why not admit it, so you can be forgiven?

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

Here's the truth ... and you know it ...

The City of Phoenix and the greater Metro area have been overusing their aquifers for many decades and once it became clear that the aquifers were being overused, the CAP was proposed and built. One condition for taking water from the CAP was that the region would need to use water from the project to recharge the aquifer.

Unless you are telling us that the recharge has been completed in the recent past ... so recent that the state of Arizona DWR website hasn't noted it ... the recharge is still going on ... hence the overdraft.

I can see how you made two horribly incorrect assumptions about what I wrote and thus felt I was wrong ... but your mistaken assumptions are your mistakes, not mine.

Heck, you admitted as much earlier when you told us that I was right about the Phoenix metro area ... it would appear that all your bloviating now is just to save face when an apology would do far more toward that end.

Do you think that people here didn't notice that you called me a liar and that your best reason for doing so was that with one (mis)definition of overdraft and only for the City of Phoenix (but not the greater metro area) you are sort of correct.

Why not just admit you made a mistake, so you can be forgiven?

Watershed Mark said...

Steve,

Phoenix is NOT in over draft, no matter how hard you try to spin it.

I think I understand your need to try and "save face" given you needed to amend your intial and still incorrect comment about Phoenix to include other municipalities.

You are incorrect about Phoenix, get over it, or not.
The record proves I am corrnect and you are wrong.

Steve,
The truth is: Phoenix is not in over draft and you know it.

I think that covers it, even if you can't.

Watershed Mark said...

Steve:
You are incorrect about Phoenix, get over it, or not.
The record proves I am correct and you are wrong.

Arizona grey water law

This is the model to emulate, especially our slightly improved version: Greywater Laws and Improvements (pdf, 250k). Their three tiered system makes so much sense it is hard to justify regulating grey water any other way.

California is currently rewriting its greywater law.

I love it California will be or should be following Arizona.

Shark Inlet said...

Mark,

The Arizona grey water law link does not have data showing the state of the Phoenix aquifers ... only that recharge is required. Duh! I already wrote that (above). On the issue of whether you are full-o-crap or not, the questions are whether you are gonna (unreasonably) insist that everyone in the whole world means "City of Phoenix and no other communities at all" when they use the word "Phoenix" and level of the water table in the aquifers in your area.

So then ... are you gonna actually look for the data or are you gonna spout "facts" ex-rectum like normal?