Another wasteful project. More money, more chlorine, more disease, more medical bills, more health industry failures, less nutrition in foods, less potable drinking water, more hurricane damage to repair, more pollution dumping into the gulf expanding the dead zones. Lowering of the water table. Controlling water that should be free and charging outrageous prices. Not sustainable. Not environmentally sound. If anyone can find one advantage let me know.
Published by Guy McGowen, President/CEO/Chief Science Officer
Another wasteful project. More money, more chlorine, more disease, more medical bills, more health industry failures, less nutrition in foods, less potable drinking water, more hurricane damage to repair, more pollution dumping into the gulf expanding the dead zones. Lowering of the water table. Controlling water that should be free and charging outrageous prices. Not sustainable. Not environmentally sound.
If anyone can find one advantage let me know.
3 Comments
Note: high quality drinking water does not include chlorine. But does include seasalts
Published by Guy McGowen, President/CEO/Chief Science Officer
Sorry Gerry you were left in the dark for so long. I will explain in order of importance. #1. Drinking water was and is never supposed to be treated with chlorine. The original concept of a waste treatment facility in 1920 in NY had a bubbler unit to eliminate the deadly dangers of allowing chlorine into household drinking water. A number of health related industries convinced government officials to allow it. If your next comment is an allowable amount, scientifically speaking "there is no acceptable amount". #2. Rain water collection provides all of the water anyone could ever use in a lifetime. With modern technology waste recycling insitu is now possible with the residue being potable water and organic material for you compost pile. In addition during this process a biogenerator can be attached to collect loose electrons for your energy. #3. The money saved from NOT building infrastructure or 100 years of maintenance is vast. To make this easier for you to understand. Ground water will never be needed again, there will never be a need to dump waste in landfills or river to ocean again. Thus is NOT futuristic. It has been in use for 40 years where multinational companies and government politicians can not reach. We shall see how fast the swamp is drained so the American people can join the 21st century.
Published by Guy McGowen, President/CEO/Chief Science Officer
Guy, this is hardly a balanced and rational argument. The scheme is designed to REDUCE reliance upon groundwater, so why say that it will lower the water table? How can you justify your statement that the scheme to produce more, high quality drinking water will lead to "more disease, more medical bills, more health industry failures" and even "less nutrition in foods". I'm all for a lively debate about water resources, environmental impact and the issues around resilience of a large, centralised potable water treatment plant in what may increasingly become a hurricane-risk area. However I hope that we can keep the discussions on this forum factual, professional and rational.
Published by Jeremy Biddle, Engineering Director at Bluewater Bio