Sewer Fees To Increase 3-5% Every Year Until 2035

In the realm of OMG! $3,600 per year by 2035....

Sewer Fees To Increase 3-5% Every Year Until 2035

Take Back the Power!

Or, How We Can Really Make the Power Companies Even More Dependent on We the Ratepayers

This posting is ostensibly about power generation, so why am I, Oregon Water Thorn, tackling this topic?  Because the issue of distribution and big utilities can, naturally, be translated to water or sewage distribution/collection.  Think about the parallels:

I have a friend that lives over in Bend that was griping the other day about the local electric utility raising rates. A normal response, in fact, a great response, because the rate hike prompted a declaration that the family would lower their electricity use to avoid paying more. Assuming that the electric utility's goal was to cover the increasing costs of electricity generation, then this family's response is perfect. After all, conservation is the cheapest, fastest, and easiest way to increase system capacity regardless of whether a given distribution system delivers electricity or water services. In short, these kinds of homeowners end up working towards the utility's goal of maximizing the resource in the cheapest way possible.

But I know that most homeowners don't understand the real power that comes with distributed power generation. And I use the dualistic word "power" in this context in the "We the People" sense because without we the ratepayers, utilities would not exist.

Given this fundamental linkage between paying rates and the big utility (to draw the obvious comparison for you, paying taxes and the big guv'mint), I don't understand why Tea Party types don't all have grid- or non-grid-tied photovoltaic, or wind, systems on their land. This is the common person's arena where they can jump in to free themselves of the big utility. Free themselves of rate increases. Become independent in that true American homesteading fashion. And, with grid-tied systems, an individual property becomes part of the electric production network which makes the utility just that little bit beholden to you for their stock in trade.

Power to the people, by the people, for the people.

The photovoltaic, or PV, system on the roof of our state capitol building is a most elegant representation of this concept and, in my opinion, one of the best investments Oregon has ever made. And it makes me wonder, why aren't more of us free of monthly power bills?

I suspect it is because of the upfront investment that's needed to take back the power. In a sense, it is the very corporate concept that it takes money to make money that prevents a lot of cash-strapped folks I know from making the investment. But I also know a lot of non-cash-strapped folks that could easily make the investment and that are the classic Tea Party type complainers.

So I have to ask, what is freedom worth? What is it worth to a nation of so-called rugged individualists to be truly independent in such a fundamental part of their lives? Apparently it is not worth much if the ever increasing complaints about rates are any measure.

So to return to my by-line, do I need to draw the parallel with water and wastewater? What is it worth to the folks that want small government to reduce the capacity of our water and wastewater systems? What is it worth to get off the grid of our municipal water and wastewater plants by using less, by harvesting rainwater, by reusing wastewater or greywater on our land? What is it worth to be free of that tie? Again, apparently not much, given the number of people I know that want to tie themselves to the big wastewater treatment system.

The Genesis of Idiocy

Here is a great posting from Elizabeth Royte illustrating how truly people believe there is a sucker born every minute, and how, as directed by the Almighty,  you must take advantage of those suckers:

New charity water on the scene: this time from Israel

Steering effectively or defectively?

I received this the other day from the Oregon DEQ Online Subscriptions hotline and it spurred some questions in my mind. The press release talks about developing a steering committee for an issue that I've touched on in the past, the groundwater pollution problem in Central Oregon (DEQ calls it the S. Deschutes/N. Klamath Groundwater Protection Project).

In short, the DEQ appears to be embarking on a Groundwater Management Area type effort and has solicited applications for membership on a steering committee for the project. In this case, membership "qualifications" consist of needing to live in or somehow represent the region of discussion and the applicant's experience.

Now that word "experience" piqued my interest and so I looked at the form that people needed to fill out to apply. Did it ask about people's educational or professional backgrounds? Hobbies? No. It asked why people were interested, if they wanted to represent an organization or not, if they had the time to commit to the committee. Maybe the nebulous question of "Why do you think you would be a good steering committee member?" gets at experience but it's certainly not obvious that that is the point of the question. After all, I could be a good steering committee member because I read the materials and stay awake during meetings (in other words, I educate myself and I participate).

Perhaps the experience question was settled to DEQ's satisfaction during the interview part of the selection process. We'll never know. It appears that DEQ is not willing to be transparent enough to put even the interview questions online. (Which begs the question of whether each applicant was even asked the same questions.)

In any case, to get back to my original point of query, experience in water, groundwater, water quality or other such related fields does not appear to be a prerequisite for participation. That is not necessarily unusual. The question that niggles in the back of my head is whether the people on this committee will be open and willing to listen to the experts that would need to be brought in on a complex issue like this. That the people on this committee have not already made up their mind about what has to happen, or not, and how things have to happen, or not.

I assume there are at least a few of the diehard opponents to the previous groundwater protection efforts who have ended up on the committee. After all, these are the folks that have committed themselves to running the marathon in their fight against the guv'mint. There were only 22 applications so the odds are excellent that the committee is stacked opinion-wise against taking action. This does not bode well for a balanced process, especially if the reasonable folks participating get out-blown by the folks experienced at being blowhards in public settings.

So is DEQ prepared to facilitate these kinds of meetings? Do they have the know-how, the experience, the huevos to really facilitate and achieve a balanced discussion in the Oregon Way to come up with a solution that protects public health and the environment? History says not. History says that DEQ will sway to the tune of the squeakiest wheel regardless of science or public good. In fact, history says that DEQ will avoid the Oregon Way altogether.

Needless, to say, given the track record, I will not hold my breath. But it is worth watching because, ultimately folks, this affects the top of the Deschutes watershed.

Nature Deficit Disorder

Interesting reading from Sightline Daily - I like Richard Louv's book related to "no child left indoors" even if the sound bite smacks of a Bushism. After all, if a generation has no relationship to natural things in the natural world, why would they think there's anything worth protecting? I walked into a Kohls department store the other day in search of a toaster oven to replace our malfunctioning model and was stunned to think that the employees spend their entire day in a box with no windows with the current version of Muzak playing and the stench of new plastics. Then they get in their car, turn on the air conditioning and drive home. If they have a garage, they drive the car into the garage and never step foot outside. Once inside, flip on the TV or the computer and plug in for the rest of the evening. I think it's horrifying - how much of our population lives like this?

(BTW the exterior of this particular Kohls has fake windows plastered on the exterior of the building. I suppose this is to meet some kind of architectural design code for the local planning folks. Too bad they couldn't require real windows.)

http://daily.sightline.org/daily_score/archive/2010/06/02/screen-time-vs-green-time

DEQ summer 2010 Newsletter

No major news but some might find it interesting...

http://www.deq.state.or.us/pubs/newsletter/oregonenvironmentsummer2010.htm

Reverse auctions for stormwater mitigation

Here's a study out of Cincinnati, Ohio where they did a reverse auction to ask people how much they had to be paid to take a rain barrel or rain garden on their property to reduce stormwater runoff in a small watershed. It is a good description of how to do this kind of thing to get people to adopt a new technology/approach, but the report stops short of providing monitoring results (in other words, do these things actually have a measurable effect on runoff in the watershed).

http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/pubs/600r08129/600r08129.htm

Depave in Portland

Portland made the national EPA publication, NPS News-Notes:

EPA’s Nonpoint Source News-Notes, Issue #90 (June 2010)

NPS News-Notes Issue #90 is now online at www.epa.gov/newsnotes/pdf/90issue.pdf. The newsletter’s cover page includes links to each section, article and announcement listed below. For previous issues of News-Notes, see www.epa.gov/newsnotes.

(8) Over-paved? Group Reduces Impervious Surfaces in Portland

In Portland, Oregon, a volunteer group is leading an effort to remove unnecessary asphalt and concrete areas and replace them with gardens and natural areas. “Depaving” contributes to Portland’s ongoing efforts to manage stormwater runoff by reducing impervious surfaces and creating more vegetated areas that absorb rainfall and intercept surface runoff. Launched in 2007, Depave (www.depave.org) has quickly gained momentum throughout Portland—expanding from one major event in 2008 to six in
2009…"

Water-friendly Dishwasher Detergents Now on Oregon Grocery Shelves

Questions:  What about laundry detergents?  Interesting that this is a blanket rule that covers the whole state, even those areas that are not sensitive to increased phosphate levels (in other words, there are areas of the state that are more sensitive to increased nitrogen than increase phosphate).  And interesting that commercial and industrial products are not included.  Are we to believe that all those restaurants can continue to pollute? 

>>>>>>>>>

New low-phosphate dishwasher detergents are now on grocery store shelves across Oregon, to comply with a new law that goes into effect July 1.

            The new Oregon Department of Environmental Quality requirement mandates that all automatic dishwasher detergents for residential use have low-phosphate formulas.

“Implementing this law is part of DEQ’s ongoing efforts to improve the health of water in Oregon’s lakes, rivers and streams and protect people, pets and fish,” said DEQ Director Dick Pedersen.

           

Phosphorus that goes down the drain creates water pollution problems. When phosphorus gets into rivers and especially lakes, it acts as a fertilizer for algae and plants in the water. This can lead to oxygen depletion, suffocating fish and other aquatic life. In some cases, excess phosphorous can lead to blooms of blue-green algae that produce toxins and poisons that can cause serious illness or death in pets, livestock, wildlife and humans. 

            Sewage treatment plants can remove much of the phosphorus from our wastewater, but they cannot remove all of it before it reaches rivers, lakes and streams.  

The new law requires that dishwasher detergents contain no more than 0.5 percent phosphorus. Because soaps designed for washing dishes by hand are already phosphorus-free, the new requirement affects only soaps used in automatic dishwashers.

Some experts have estimated that dishwasher detergent accounts for 10 to 12 percent of the phosphorus in wastewater.

            In 1992, the Oregon Legislature adopted phosphorus limits for cleaning agents including soaps and laundry detergents. The new requirements adopted by the Oregon legislature in 2009 relate to automatic dishwasher detergents only and reduce the limit from 8.7 percent to 0.5 percent.   

      

“We were very pleased to have support from the national American Cleaning Institute on this important legislation. This is an excellent addition to Oregon’s already existing limit on phosphorous in laundry detergents,” said Senator Jackie Dingfelder (D-Portland), lead sponsor of the legislation and chair of Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee. “With fewer phosphates entering our waterways, Oregon will have healthier rivers, streams, and lakes for us all to enjoy.”

The legislature amended the bill to bring the implementation date in line with other states proposing similar bans.

            The other states joining Oregon in the move away from phosphate-laden detergents July 1, 2010 are Washington, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana,

New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin.

            The new law does not apply to commercial and industrial dishwasher products. 

           

            If you notice dishwasher detergent at a store that does not comply with the new law, call

Bernie Duffy of the DEQ Water Quality Program at 541-278-4601 or toll free in Oregon 800-452-4011 to report name of the store and the address.

For more information about the new dishwasher detergent law: www.deq.state.or.us/wq/pubs/factsheets/programinfo/PhosphateLimits09-ER-005.pdf