Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: Meh... (Score 1) 242

by SpankiMonki (#49762449) Attached to: California Votes To Ban Microbeads


Gainsville's treated waste water flows into the Trinity, where it then flows into Lake Ray Roberts, then flows into the Trinity, then flows into Lewisville Lake. Dallas pumps water from Lewisville Lake into treatment plants, then to customers. After the water is consumed, the sewage is sent to waste water treatment plants, and back into the Trinity to be used by communities DOWNSTREAM. This is the traditional process that for some bizarre reason you really really want to call "toilet to tap".

There, did I directly answer your question? Did I stick to the facts?

Here's another fun fact: the above outlined traditional process is not "toilet to tap" (which is simply a euphemism for the more accurate term of "water recycling"). Water recycling uses completely different infrastructure and technology, and implements a completely different resource flow. Ultimately, water recycling systems allow a community to re-use it's own waste water, instead of simply flushing it downstream - which is what Gainesville does to Dallas and ever other fucking municipality DOWNSTREAM from them.

There are no water recycling facilities on any part of the Trinity River watershed, so nobody that drinks water from the Trinity River or any reservoir fed from it is drinking "toilet to tap".

I've given you the definition you asked for three times now, and nobody is so stupid that they could fail to see any distinction between the systems in question. I'm guessing you suffer from some pathological need to be right coupled with low self esteem. When someone points out your mistakes, you feel intellectually threatened and react with childish denial. Kinda sad, really.


Comment: Re: Meh... (Score 1) 242

by SpankiMonki (#49761225) Attached to: California Votes To Ban Microbeads

So "toilet to tap" is the same thing we've been doing for a very long time.

That's not what I said. That's what you keep saying, and it's incorrect. As you requested, I laid out an accurate definition of toilet to tap showing significant distinctions from what "we've been doing for a very long time" compared to how toilet to tap systems actually function.

But hey, you don't see any real differences between reservoirs and rivers - and you spout complete nonsense about Dallas pumping water out of the Trinity and into city reservoirs. So it's hardly surprising that you can't see any distinction between a system that passes it's treated waste water downstream and a system that uses hundreds of millions of dollars in additional advanced technology infrastructure in order to pass potable water back upstream for a community to reuse.

Comment: Re: Meh... (Score 1) 242

by SpankiMonki (#49759873) Attached to: California Votes To Ban Microbeads

I guess your wish to remain ignorant is interfering with your ability to perform a simple internet search. Here, let me help you. What you describe as "toilet to tap" is:

"Cities take water from rivers or wells, contaminate it as they use it, and send it to wastewater treatment plants for sufficient cleanup to return to the rivers, where it heads downstream to the next city."

Your definition of "toilet to tap" is the same water cycle that's been going on since municipal wastewater treatment facilities came into existence (in other words, long before the term "toilet to tap" was even coined).

What the rest of the world describes as "toilet to tap" is a system where a community's sewage is processed through "highly engineered, well-monitored, advanced treatment processes that remove contaminants", typically involving microfiltration, reverse osmosis, and ultraviolet disinfection. The processed water is then reintroduced to the environment upstream of the community that originally created the wastewater.

If you like, I can further help you become better educated on the subject of reclaimed water...I've got all day. But if you can't see the difference in the definitions above, there's little that can be done to help you.

Comment: Re: Meh... (Score 1) 242

by SpankiMonki (#49759533) Attached to: California Votes To Ban Microbeads

You've not contradicted me, just argued with me. Why are you being contentious over something you didn't even really disagree on?

Because pulling water from reservoirs, treating it, and delivering it to customers doesn't fit the definition of "toilet to tap". You may want to define "toilet to tap" that way, but the rest of the world doesn't.

Comment: Re: Meh... (Score 1) 242

by SpankiMonki (#49759315) Attached to: California Votes To Ban Microbeads

Dallas pulls from the Trinity River (less now than when it was founded, at least percentage-wise).

Dallas doesn't pull any water from the Trinity River. It pulls water from reservoirs, and not all of them are fed by the Trinity.

It does pump the water into some city resevoirs, which are then used as settling tanks.

Dallas doesn't pump water into any reservoirs. Dallas pumps water *from* reservoirs into treatment facilities and then to customers.

The only problem with that is White Rock Lake ... [snip]

White Rock Lake hasn't been used for drinking water in decades.

Toilet to tap is common. Most of the water I've drunk was toilet to tap.

The vast majority of re-claimed water in the US is used for irrigation and industrial uses, not drinking water. Unless you've lived in a few specific communities in CA or FL, you have probably never drank any re-claimed water. Toilet to tap is not common in the US, and it is non-existent in Dallas.

Comment: Re:not the real question (Score 4, Interesting) 200

Name 1 reason an active port under an uncontrollable passengers seat needs to have access to avionics or any critical system?

History. As was pointed our to me in an earlier discussion on this topic, bean counters might have played a role in consolidating ALL electronic systems in an aircraft, thus tying its avionics with its in-flight entertainment systems.

Comment: Re:What else is new? (Score 1) 335

by SpankiMonki (#49720903) Attached to: Stock Market Valuation Exceeds Its Components' Actual Value

How many stories have you heard about people who won large sums of money but ended up bankrupt a few short years later?

Haven't you seen the news stories of the guy that dies and leaves millions to charity but nobody suspected he had money?

I knew an older gentleman in my pre-teen years. He was rich, literally worth tens of millions in today's dollars but you'd never would have known.

Anecdotal. And none of those anectodes prove that those with the resources to pay others to manage their finance have more expertise than those that don't.

The solution of this problem is trivial and is left as an exercise for the reader.