Search This Blog


One Last Time

I alerted my expert in this field (fourth item, last comments) to this editorial, and here was his reply:

Thanks for the article. Grey water has been used for years in areas of Europe for nonpotable uses. However because of the detergents, etc. it still needs minimal treatment so as to not contaminate grounds undergoing irrigation, etc. As you can visualize, one would need a separate collection and distribution system and this would be very costly and duplicative. The goal is to save and reuse some water. This is more cost-effective when one completely treats the total effluent [this is being done] to potable or acceptable standards for domestic and industrial reuse. There is no shortage of is only misplaced. The technology of treating any water [including seawater] to potable standards has and is being well demonstrated....thus there is no availability problem, only the monetary cost and justification. For Shreveport to discuss the topic of reuse is amateurish.....all they have to do is to employ the proper technology in treating Red River water and they can satisfy any demands made, even split treatment for different users. It just requires a cost-effective justification which the City cannot generate at this point in time. Summation---a dreamy editorial that has little substance nor practicality..........

He has remained anonymous to this point. That will change in my next posting.

No comments: