|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
Subject: TWL: Lectrasans and Saxton Bill
From: Keith (klemmons@XXX.XXX)
Date: Mon Apr 01 2002 - 15:27:32 EST
Oops. I probably should have included this in my posting this morning.
Another note from Peggie:
__________________
A common misconception is that the current Lectrasans and the like will
be obsolete after the passage of the bill. Not true. It's a very common
mistake (and btw, the same one the knee-jerk irrational environmental
Nazis have consistently used to cram
holding tanks down our throats): Folks have assumed that because the
STANDARD only calls for a bacteria count of <1,000/100 milliliter,
that's
how many there are in the current Type I and II devices. In fact, the
discharge from just about every Type I currently made actually meets or
even exceeds proposed NEW standard. The discharge from a Lectra/San has
always averaged 0-<5 bacteria/100 milliliter...the same is true of the
PuraSan.. The bacteria count in the discharge from a Groco ThermoPure
has always been -0-.
As for BOD, whether the waste is solid, pureed, or totally liquefied,
the BOD will remain the same because pureeing or liquefying doesn't
change it, it only purees or liquefies it. But again, almost every Type
I including the Lectra/San, PuraSan, and Groco ThermoPure meets the
proposed new standard.
The Saxton Bill only proposes to change the standards to bring them in
line what is already being done...no new technology is required to meet
it.
If the above weren't the case, every mfr of Type I and II treatment
devices would be lobbying against the Saxton Bill...when in fact,
they're all very much FOR it because it would expand the market for
their products into inland lakes and rivers that have been "no
discharge" under federal law since 1978.
Right now, fewer than 10% of boats with toilets have the power
resources--or owners willing to spend $1000 or more--to support
treatment devices. More than 50% of registered boats are on inland
waters where even those who would install a Type I can't use treatment
devices. The hope is that the wider market from treatment instead of
holding will provide the incentive necessary for equipment mfrs to
develop less expensive, less power-hungry devices--something the specter
of universal "no discharge" definitely discouraged.
Peggie
-- __________________ Keith There are three simple rules for making a smooth return to your slip. Unfortunately no one knows what they are.
|