EBMUD is asking for residents to reduce their water consumption by 19%. We are already water efficient in this house. The way I could possibly meet that target is to buy a new 3-gallon per wash clothes washer, convert all my toilets to composting toilets and insist that all of us at the house share bathtub water.
Not realistic (yet), so I'll probably be getting charged extra dollars and get marked as a water waster.
Businesses only have to cut back 5%. Perhaps I can get the house reclassified as a business. Ideas could be urban institute of permaculture, urban farm, urban permaculture demonstrator...
The graywater issue here is pretty complex. Dpt. of environmental health is pretty candid about the fact they've only issued two graywater permits ever, but have never issued citations for illegal systems. The clean water act is pretty clear that only rainwater should fall on the ground...The problem with graywater is when it includes dishwasher or clothes washer runoff----the rinse cycle usually has a pH of 12. San Diego soils are not very absorbent, so surfactants will pool in riparian habitats when there are infrequent rains. A well run system with a separation tank (draft off the middle, top and bottom sludge goes into blackwater system) would probably be good. None of the people I know in DEH would hassle anyone for a well run system. I hope you'd agree that a government agency protecting habitat is a good thing....
I used a grey water system connected to the washing machine and we used soap designed for the purpose. It was not legal but no one checked on us and it worked great for watering by hand with a hose.
I'm with you on the decentralized vs centralized government. It's not a subject often discussed or understood. Centralized systems escalate services to the point of complexity making ordinary people dependent on the system for vital services.
However when it comes to international trade it is important for small countries to be able to protect themselves from the subsidized food commodities of the US (for example). The US has used aggressive economic tactics to invade the economies of other nations by flooding the region with cheap food thus putting local farmers out of business and making the citizens dependent on imports from the US. This does not make for a resilient local population when such a food source is, for example, suddenly diverted to biofuels thus raising the price. It also cuts a nation off from its own feedback loop thus endangering us all when it comes to watching resource depletion. Do you have another suggestion other than protectionism to stop the global produce market and revitalize local production? In a "free" market ie: NAFTA, the surplus of wealthy countries will trump localized production.
'Flooding the market with cheap food'. As the world's bread basket we're damned if we do, damned if we don't. You'll have to explain to me how giving in to international pressure to provide cheap food as an export (which by the way helps offset the trade deficit) is a bad thing. That said, as a (shamefully admitting) government employee, I can attest that it is the nature of every beaurocracy to grow. Agencies constantly seek out ways to increase their roles and responsibilities. Local or centralized I don't care; just reverse the trend so they all start to shrink. If folks want to grow their own food, they should be able to. If they want to water carrots with graywater, they should be free to do so.
"Government protecting habitat..." Oh, if only it did. No, I think people should protect the environment, pay their own bills, and provide assistance to others. I am pissed that so many people want "the government" to do something about an issue they care about personally. My mother says this is a Republican attitude I've got; I disagree and think it's merely a responsible attitude.
The San Diego water district wants to control the resource of water; that's what I object to. They ought to be protecting public health, establishing realistic guidelines about how to reuse your water, rather then insisting that the only way to manage this resources is with a vast centralized endeavor.
It is a crime in San Francisco to collect the rain that falls on your own property. How arrogant of the agency that got that regulation passed!
Regards the "Breadbasket" thread: Amanda is far smarter and more knowledgeable than either of us about the politics of food; if she asserts that aggressive US marketing practices are eliminating the ability of overseas communities to provide for themselves, I'm taking that to the bank.
Don't shamefully admit that you work of the government. It's a good thing there are principled people employed by the rest of us. My housemate Karl works for the EPA. I should do a blog entry about him.
I am at a loss about how to shrink government, but yes, I too would love to see that.
Amanda, I see relocalization as a form of protectionism, effectively. Is it possible for an affluent region to support its population's lifestyle, if all the goods, services and energy had to be provided from within a given radius? Specifically, could Oakland generate enough electricity, fuel, food, clothing, education, and so on, from within its own borders?
When we can do that, when each region can provide for all the needs of its inhabitants, then we will be in a position to shrug off our corporate masters.
San Diego water authority wants to control the resource of water? The vast majority of this resource is imported by the water authority. Without this layer of infrastructure, there wouldn't be a city. We import water then overhydrate lawns (and sidewalks in the process) 70% of domestic water usage here is used outside the houses.
Once again, the solution is financial. A tiered water billing program is working wonders. If you choose to soak the landscape daily, you'll get into the upper tier.
Oh---and government protecting habitat. I've gotten up at 1 am on Hazmat to meet up with County DEH on a very cold night to slog through muck to stop sodium hydroxide from spilling into a waterway. We've braved raw sewage to frantically divert away from Least Tern habitat. When local environment is threatened there are people ready, willing, trained and equipped to deal with it. I was full time on the Environmental Response Team (ERT) for almost a year. I can say, first hand,without any qualifiers, the government does a pretty damned good job of protecting the environment. When we used to train for SWAT at Camp Pendleton, if there was a rattlesnake on the range, you rescheduled the range. The military was very clear they care more about the rattlesnake than you......
About the "food basket" thing...
once upon a time all countries sustained themselves with what they could grow.
Sometimes disease would come and reduce the population or natural disasters would strike down a harvest...but somehow magically other countries survived without the "food basket" that is America.
Now without checking my facts I'm pretty sure that this time I speak of was fairly recent as well.
What other countries weren't doing was spending their time churning out acres and acres of plastic crap, that serves no purpose what so ever, to sell to western countries.
Hmm, relocation as a form of protectionism. So is that a pass or fail thing? We can't do it of course. We can't support a region of what are basically addicts of petroleum economy consumer goods especially given the infrastructure created by this economy. It would be like talking to unreformed heroin addicts about not using. Some do try, though.
Here's a good article about Raj Patel, who wrote a new book called Stuffed and Starved. He talks about the global food crisis and mentions a few of the issues I was talking about.http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
f=/c/a/2008/05/10/DD4510JR56.DTL
Commenting by HaloScan
