San Fransisco’s push for low-flush toilets has created a serious problem. There is not enough water flowing through the system, and so the back up has created a gigantic, city-wide stink. This can be fixed but only by pouring massive, unthinkable amounts of bleach into the sewer system, a prospect that has many people very alarmed. It’s the old story: intervention begets intervention. Perhaps we should think a bit less about “saving” water and start thinking about saving civilization.
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/15836/bleaching-ourselves-to-death/
Bleaching Ourselves to Death
Previous post: Hidden Assumptions in Option Pricing
{ 24 comments }
Maybe I need a vacation, but I do have to say stuff like this cheers me up. lol
Flush twice. One for Al, one for Gore.
Most of this is driven by the strange idea that when water goes down the sink, it vanishes from the face of the Earth. The problem is in potable water, meaning dumping a ton of bleach into the sewers will pollute usable water. And considering San Francisco is facing a water shortage problem right now, polluting what little there is available isn’t a wise move.
May I recommend the book “Flushed With Pride” by Sir Thomas Crapper.
Jeffrey:
You have once again found the Achilles heel of the environmentalists – the failure to distinguish between intended and actual outcomes.
There is no difference between the intended and actual outcomes. The intended and actual outcome is that the environmentalists get to coerce the people into doing what they want. Whether or not the environment improves is immaterial to them.
I wish it were that simple. They honestly believe their agendas will actually work.
Maybe some of the 19 year old Sociology majors do. But no one higher up the food chain does.
I actually had someone from Greenpeace, while trying to get me to give money to her, claim that they were AGAINST the Clean Air Act of 1970!
Oh dear, it appears San Fran needs a giant enema…..
Where’s the Joker when you need him???
Janet Reno is ready to administer it in a fashion that would make Gadhafi blanch.
Wow–now that’s an unintended consequence! Never would have occurred to me that low-flush toilets would actually lead to a city-wide problem, but then, that’s kind of the point of ‘unintended’ consequences.
As I pointed out on another board. Charging water at their highest rate of $5.50/100cu ft , that 20 million gallons they save per year would still just cost $150000 dollars to purchase. So in sum, the are spending $10′s of millions to save hundreds of thousands.
Oh, you’re just being logical.
I agree, environmentalists don’t care about logic, facts, figures, or evidence.
You’re the one who claims a water shortage.
There’s plenty of water. Problem is legislation keeps pricing too low to justify cleaning it (or desalinizatoin) for use. San Francisco lacks necessary clean water to maintain its population:
http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/111186/the-ten-biggest-american-cities-that-are-running-out-of-water
This is entirely because good old San Francisco, like just about everywhere else, has decided that water supply is a government function.
And since they are now using less water, but have the same government costs to run the system, they will have to increase the price per unit of water used in order to maintain the system.
So let’s summarize: The cost of new toilets, plus the cost of de-stinking the clogged sewers, plus the increased prices for water because of the decreased use. Isn’t dogmatic environmentalism magical? Less efficiency and more cost.
Why would they? Emotions are what sells.
Bleach kills the bacteria which break down the sludge. In my home system it’s strictly verboten.
Sssshh
Don’t tell that to anyone in Frisco, I want to see what happens next
This article proves that the market is good for your health. Cheers
Does this mean that San Francisco is inhabited by Sludgepackers?
I feel better about dropping a $G on a new well pump now… still have to flush the gov’t toilet 3 times.
Comments on this entry are closed.