You may have to pay taxes on losses. Some items that are required in a company P&L are not allowed for tax purposes. Methods of depreciation for example. Accounting rules require them to be prudent. The tax man doesn't care about that.
Renationalise water.
- Thread starter trummy
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
I always think that sewage discharges are a bit of a red herring. Obviously, they aren't nice - but truth is they are so biodegradable that three weeks after the discharge you wouldn't know it had happened. On the other hand, all of the microplastics we release in to the water... all of the hormones that modify physiomorphology of aquatic species... all of that goes uncommented on. We've had a 30 year + case study in the UK of the effects of public vs private ownership, as (per a previous poster) water in Scotland was never privatised. I'm not sure there is a clear case for one or the other (both operate in the same regulatory environment - it's that which needs to change - interestingly, Brexit gave us the chance to change it. Will we? (no)).
Disclosure: Worked as a microbiologist / chemist at sewage treatment works, donkey's years ago. Including testing storm discharges.
Disclosure: Worked as a microbiologist / chemist at sewage treatment works, donkey's years ago. Including testing storm discharges.
An Ankoù
Landlord.
Agree with biodegradability of sewage in water, but would argue it's not a red herring when discharges are many times more frequent than once every three weeks.
As this is your field and as you mention hormones, I'd be interested to know your thoughts on levels of oestrogen and estrogenic compounds in tap water, most of which, I understand, comes from animal feeds and slurry rather from human sources. Fascinating, too, to read that detectable levels of cocaine are present in more than a few supplies.
Regular discharges are the reality of history, regulation, and climate. Sewage treatment infrastructure (certainly in the UK) was designed so that untreated discharges were inside predicted limits based upon climate and population. Even in the 90's we used to talk about "1 in 30 (years) weather events" - well, those events are no longer 1 in 30s. There are lots of questions that find answers in sewage. If you wanted to know how many people live in an area, you could run a census - or you could ask your sewage treatment works about their cake tonnage (ahem... dried solids).
Yes - absolutely you can detect cocaine residue in sewage samples. You could also approximate COVID levels based upon tests at sewage treatment works, but just like population surveys, it isn't politic to do so.
Sewage treatment scientist work very closely with trade effluent controllers, so the source of pollutants is very well known and documented. My own specialism was analytical methods - so bringing analytes inside detection limits via economic and practical test methods. It sounds complicated - but basically it is about detecting things at very dilute concentrations.
I'm a PhD chemist... a working chemist from chemical industry (no longer - I left science some years ago). I'm generally 'pro chemistry' - but am in no doubt about the levels of estrogenic compounds in our environment - their effects on (human) male sperm count, vitality etc. their similar effects on aquatic ecosystems. I think we focus on all the wrong things - I think of sewage as a red herring because.. really... if you can stop it, it cleans up real quick. The other stuff is far more concerning but is underplayed.
As a novice brewer, I am reading up on the chemistry aspects. I must say I think they may be a little overplayed :)... but this is something I'm willing to be wrong about... and will do more reading and perhaps even some practical work before I can fully pass judgement. I wish there was a full mash school for brewing novices - because I would sign up in a heartbeat.
Yes - absolutely you can detect cocaine residue in sewage samples. You could also approximate COVID levels based upon tests at sewage treatment works, but just like population surveys, it isn't politic to do so.
Sewage treatment scientist work very closely with trade effluent controllers, so the source of pollutants is very well known and documented. My own specialism was analytical methods - so bringing analytes inside detection limits via economic and practical test methods. It sounds complicated - but basically it is about detecting things at very dilute concentrations.
I'm a PhD chemist... a working chemist from chemical industry (no longer - I left science some years ago). I'm generally 'pro chemistry' - but am in no doubt about the levels of estrogenic compounds in our environment - their effects on (human) male sperm count, vitality etc. their similar effects on aquatic ecosystems. I think we focus on all the wrong things - I think of sewage as a red herring because.. really... if you can stop it, it cleans up real quick. The other stuff is far more concerning but is underplayed.
As a novice brewer, I am reading up on the chemistry aspects. I must say I think they may be a little overplayed :)... but this is something I'm willing to be wrong about... and will do more reading and perhaps even some practical work before I can fully pass judgement. I wish there was a full mash school for brewing novices - because I would sign up in a heartbeat.
An Ankoù
Landlord.
I believe there are such courses. I think Brewlab in Sunderland runs one. If not, they would certainly be able to point you in the right direction.
My experience of home brewing is that some standard practices of yesteryear have become myths to be debunked decades later. Why do you think brewing chemistry might be being overplayed?
For my part, I'm wary that practices that might suit the mega-litreage of industry might not always translate back to the 5-gallon bucketful.
Your red herring is a red herring…. We know we are illegally discharging, some is even deliberate and goes against the long established ‘permit to discharge’ for the outfall.
Scotland does not operate under the same regulatory environment, very similar not not the same.
We had the ability to change irrespective of Brexit, and still do. We haven’t due to the level of lobbying from the Water industry, and numerous governments refusals to adequately fund the EA. Our drinking water is regulated by the DWI, it has’teeth’ and they are not scared to use them, no marking our own homework with those guys…. The EA needs to follow the same practices.
Most river pollution comes from Farming
That sounds like a bit of a s**t job
I've seen sewage discharge turn a local river grey...killed loads of trout. They got a fine (not the trout). Big deal...if I drop litter or fly tip I get prosecuted.
Perhaps locking up a few in charge would turn a few heads.
Perhaps locking up a few in charge would turn a few heads.
What annoys me is the water company gets a huge fine and its our money that pays it.
Last edited:
Yeah.."the company"...there's no person being held accountable.
An Ankoù
Landlord.
I beg to differ, @Laner , most river pollution comes from @Clint 's annual decrudding of his fermenters.
I don't get it either. When I worked in the real world, hundreds of years ago, the Health and Safety at Work Act (HASAW) was coming into its prime and there was a great banging on about how there was always somebody who had to ultimately carry the can for infringements and culpable accidents. Even the CEO if he/she hadn't put proper structures in place. Nowadays, nobody seems to be held responsible for anything and yet if I'm spotted taking a pîss in the countryside, it;s me who gets my collar felt and not the guy who failed to put up signs declaring the fence to be electrified and who neglected to give me appropriate training in country rambling. Farmers, I detest the blighters.
But were would you get your fine steak from if there wern't any
