Sewage dumping

[Swarf, Mostly!Participant @swarfmostly]

Posted by larry phelan 1 on 24/10/2021 15:27:34:

Anyone fancy a dip in the sea ?

No ?

Thought not !

Back in the 1950s/1960s, one of my hobbies was SCUBA diving. I belonged to a club that met twice weekly in a large indoor swimming pool in London. One summer evening as we were exiting the changing rooms the pool attendants stopped us from entering the water – a couple of 'Pompey Kippers' had been spotted in the deep end (12 feet). The pool vacuum cleaner didn't seem to be working. The members were grumbling, they wanted to get on with their training.

I don't remember volunteering but I was soon in the water with a snorkel and a dustpan & brush. It was a memorable exercise in practical hydrodynamics – the specific gravity of a 'Pompey Kipper' is very close to that of fresh water end everything that I tried to catch in the dustpan seemed determined to wash out again!! Anyway, my efforts were eventually successful. I guess the chlorination system was effective enough (that pool held 250,000 gallons of water), I've survived to the age of 84+.

Regarding a different aspect of water purity; my understanding is that sewage treatment plants work primarily by filtration and also by microbial action. They are good at removing suspended matter but not so good at removing dissolved substances. I was told by a pharmacist that the effective dose of a medication is that part of the dose that's not rejected by the liver (or was it the kidneys?). That suggests that large amounts of medication substances pass into the sewage stream, only to re-enter the drinking water system lower downstream. It's said that the water from the River Thames has been through seven people by the time it reaches Teddington!!! I've read somewhere that sperm counts of UK males are declining, largely because of the contraceptive pill residues making that circuit!

Best regards,

Swarf, Mostly!

[KWILParticipant @kwil]

Posted by Ady1 on 24/10/2021 10:21:10:

Politics is unavoidable

Private companies can't pay out large dividends if they invest in decent utilities infrastructure

So everything hangs on by its fingernails

water and power being good examples

That's why they nationalised our utilities after the war, to make them fit for purpose

Thames water has not paid a dividend for 4 years, just think of the cost of the new super sewer they are building to stop the overflows into the Thames in London.

[Dave Shield 1Participant @daveshield1]

Do not think it was better run under goverment or coucil control. I joined working in the water industry just after privitisation an I had never seen so much worn out rusty uncared for plant in my in my life. Down west they solved the problem by putting it in the sea. The council took the water rates money and spent it else where.

[derek hall 1Participant @derekhall1]

Hi

Further to Dave Shield 1..

I joined A W in 1978 and left many years later and I can confirm that most equipment was installed in the 1950's….the new stuff that replaced it was worse…

[Clive HartlandParticipant @clivehartland94829]

I have just read on another forum the MP's, 256 of them voted to allow water treatment companies to discharge sewage into the rivers and the sea!

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Posted by Clive Hartland on 24/10/2021 22:12:02:

I have just read on another forum the MP's, 256 of them voted to allow water treatment companies to discharge sewage into the rivers and the sea!

Possibly shareholders? Don’t know, but possible – or possibly benefitting from lobbyists?

[Clive HartlandParticipant @clivehartland94829]

It seems this sewage bill will come up for a second reading shortly, perhaps there will be a change.

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

Seems strange that when it rains people all rush to the loo and do the washing to create a load of extra sewage. Or could it be that the real problem is not the water companies but householders who have their gutters connected to the sewage system instead of soakaways.

[DMBParticipant @dmb]

I'm thinking that the board of Directors of each water company make decisions to maximize profits for their shareholders, to the detriment of proper investment in the infrastructure to prevent sewage discharges. Company gets fined, passed on to us customers in increased bills. Directors who made those decisions are unaffected apart from the effect upon their personal water bills and it wouldn't surprise me that they get their water free as part of their perks.

It's time for a law change to make all Company Directors personally responsible for their decisions where those decisions affect their customers financially.

Why should us water consumers effectively be hammered with the fines and the decision makers get off the hook? They are highly paid and should be hammered accordingly.

They will soon pull their socks up and we will finally see proper action instead of bullshit excuses.

Edited By DMB on 25/10/2021 09:42:51

[J HancockParticipant @jhancock95746]

It was on the BBC R4 news item this morning.

£60.000,000,000 paid out to shareholders over the years could have something to do with it.

That's sixty billion pounds.

[DMBParticipant @dmb]

There you go

[DMBParticipant @dmb]

Clive said 256 MPs voted for continuing to dump sewage in rivers and sea.

At General Elections, I'm a floating voter and if the majority of those 256 were from one party, I would not vote for that party.

I ignore all the would be MPs who promise to work wonders and shit miracles and decide my vote on past performance,or lack of.

Points awarded for getting Brexit done but deducted for damn great tax increases currently being threatened, if those increases adversely affect me.

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Posted by DMB on 25/10/2021 09:56:15:

Clive said 256 MPs voted for continuing to dump sewage in rivers and sea.

At General Elections, I'm a floating voter and if the majority of those 256 were from one party, I would not vote for that party.

I ignore all the would be MPs who promise to work wonders and shit miracles and decide my vote on past performance,or lack of.

Points awarded for getting Brexit done but deducted for damn great tax increases currently being threatened, if those increases adversely affect me.

If you used several criteria, to decide on your vote, you simply wouldn’t – or be left with the candidate that only has a single item on their agenda.

[Swarf, Mostly!Participant @swarfmostly]

Posted by J Hancock on 25/10/2021 09:42:15:

It was on the BBC R4 news item this morning.

£60.000,000,000 paid out to shareholders over the years could have something to do with it.

That's sixty billion pounds.

First of all, I hold absolutely no brief for excessive and obscene capitalism. Still, we need to appreciate the realities.

I suspect that many of those shares are held, not by individuals but by insurance companies. The dividends they receive from those shares are their return on investments from which they pay both the customers who hold private pensions from them and the company pension scheme administrators for whom they manage funds. Just ponder on how your Company Pension scheme grows its funds! So, if you have a private or company pension, you could, now or later, be receiving some of that 'filthy lucre'!!

My own view is that there should be a legal category of organisation which I would term a 'Public Utility'. This would be 'not for profit' but would be required to balance short and long term expenses and, at the same time, keep prices down for the benefit of customers. It would not have share-holders.  I would put the supply of the essentials of life (e.g. water, energy, communication etc.) in the hands of only such organisations. We live in an era when you can run a company that manufactures tin-openers despite being completely ignorant of how tin-openers are made – 'management' is apparently a thing in its own right, I've always wondered about that.

My understanding is that a Company Director is required, by law, to care for the interests of the share-holders, that and only that! If he/she is shown to have put any other interest first, whether it be customers, staff, the environment or whatever, they incur severe legal penalties. I know there are 'mutual companies' like John Lewis and a polyester resin company whose name I've forgotten, where the staff are the share-holders but even they are not bound to consider customers, the general public or the environment.

I acknowledge that the fact that I'm not running the planet shows that my ideas have deficiencies!!!

Best regards,

Swarf, Mostly!

 

Edited By Swarf, Mostly! on 25/10/2021 10:50:00

[Oven ManParticipant @ovenman]

Posted by Swarf, Mostly! on 25/10/2021 10:47:12:

Posted by J Hancock on 25/10/2021 09:42:15:

It was on the BBC R4 news item this morning.

£60.000,000,000 paid out to shareholders over the years could have something to do with it.

That's sixty billion pounds.

First of all, I hold absolutely no brief for excessive and obscene capitalism. Still, we need to appreciate the realities.

I suspect that many of those shares are held, not by individuals but by insurance companies. The dividends they receive from those shares are their return on investments from which they pay both the customers who hold private pensions from them and the company pension scheme administrators for whom they manage funds. Just ponder on how your Company Pension scheme grows its funds! So, if you have a private or company pension, you could, now or later, be receiving some of that 'filthy lucre'!!

My own view is that there should be a legal category of organisation which I would term a 'Public Utility'. This would be 'not for profit' but would be required to balance short and long term expenses and, at the same time, keep prices down for the benefit of customers. It would not have share-holders. I would put the supply of the essentials of life (e.g. water, energy, communication etc.) in the hands of only such organisations. We live in an era when you can run a company that manufactures tin-openers despite being completely ignorant of how tin-openers are made – 'management' is apparently a thing in its own right, I've always wondered about that.

I fully support this 'public utility' idea that Swarf Mostly suggests. What I can't get my head around is the concept of multiple fibre systems installed up and down the road. To me a single system reaching every house and publicly owned would be a sensible approach. Just imagine what it would be like if haulage companies started building their own road network.

Peter

[JAParticipant @ja]

Everything written so far is true. However these arrangements are made by our MPs. Years ago the party in power sold off, or encouraged councils to sell off, these utilities to their mates.

It is no good blaming these gentlemen since the electorate voted them in to office. It is called democracy and I don't know a cure.

JA

This could end the thread.

Edited By JA on 25/10/2021 11:33:10

[J HancockParticipant @jhancock95746]

The sewage dumping is really just the publicly visible sign of a 'policy' going/gone wrong.

In general, the State owned corporations of the past were run on a 'cost-plus' basis.

Debt was 'impossible' without Exchequer approval.

Equally , 'profit' was non-existent because the only shareholder was the State.

Then , massive amounts of public money were invested , just to make these 'industries ' ready for the big sell-off , on the cheap.

For a while , that investment coped with the increase of demand which a rising population imposed on it.

Not anymore , that investment has been worked to death , just at a time which requires yet another massive

injection of money to manage the new 'future'.

.

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

The current local government/council strategy in scotland is to build huge numbers of houses to bring in large amounts of council tax payers

This is matched with zero schools, zero hospitals, zero surgeries and zero dental practices

The extra council tax raised goes to pay for bloated eternally increasing pensions

so the system is working exactly as it should, if you don't care about society

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

So we privatised electricity generation, a large part of which is now owned by EDF, an arm of the French government, and a lot of our rail freight operation is run by DB SCHENKER, an arm of the German government. What we appear to have achieved is a transfer of what we used to own to foreign governments. Who did this? The same lot who have now voted to allow the water companies (who we also used to own) to pump sewage into the rivers. Perhaps if our civil servants were technically competent we wouldn't be in this mess, but never fear, if the ancient Romans ever invade again our leader will be able to converse with them

[JAParticipant @ja]

Thinking a little more about democracy, it is probably the only thing that has prevented our MPs from privatising our government with the new owners then selling it to the Germans or French.

Some will do anything for money.

JA

[Ady1Participant @ady1]

The EU experience showed me that there are plenty of high ups in this country who would quite happily hand us all over to overseas interests if the price is right

laissez faire capitalism like socialism needs to be done in moderation for it to work successfully for society

Our job as the little people in a democracy is to stop the big people doing stupid stuff and taking things too far

[Bob McParticipant @bobmc91481]

On the BBC News website political section, there is an item about the amount of sewage being discharged into the rivers and a graphical representation of the amounts.

It does not mention any discharges into the sea but that's where it will all end up eventually.

There were over 3 million hours worth of raw sewage discharged in 2020 into rivers with United Utilities having the majority of 726,450 hours worth of discharges the reason being overflow water during periods of prolonged heavy rain.

As far as I am concerned there should be no raw sewage dumped into rivers. I was surprised that an old pop singer of the 70's.?or was it 80's..? can't remember…didn't like his songs anyway.. ..Fergal Sharkey, who seems to be a 'clean up the waterways' figure head campaigner has voiced his opinion that it is a disgrace.

It seems to me that there has been no concerted effort to address the problem over many years which won't get any better if the infrastructure is left to carry on as normal…with the effect that eventually the rivers will become sewage ways. And here we are lecturing about climate change when every river in England is polluted.

[Author]

Posts