T&T: Waste handling

[Ken Bloomfield]

On our list, the debate -- as is so often the case -- has become simply 
a debate between (a) discharge raw, or (b) hold for pumpout.  What I 
have seen, and believe strongly, is that neither solution is optimum.  
The dislike for the dump-raw approach is pretty obviously that it is a 
bad thing to do in many areas for both scientific (less powerful) 
reasons and for intuitive/perceptive (more powerful) reasons (the eeehew 
factor).  The pumpout dislike is for the trouble of finding a reasonably 
convenient (or even existent) working pumpout station consistent with 
where you will naturally be on an extended cruise.  This is real, not 
imagined and especially true during the winter months in my area.  I 
believe that most of the arguments in favor of "pumpout only" solutions 
begin with the words "in my marina" -- indicating they emanate from 
someone who routinely returns to their marina and therefor pumpout is 
easy and has no reason to avoid.  That describes me much of the year, 
but at least once per year, I am on a 2000+ mile journey and then things 
are VERY different.  Thus the arguments tend to come from two different 
experiential backgrounds, hence the various viewpoints.

It doesn't have to be this way!  There is a mid path that should be 
reasonable.

Good solutions that would address treatment prior to discharge in an 
effective manner seem to me to be vastly better.  Above all, they ought 
to mostly meet the major complaints of both side of the 
argument/debate.  In addition, I believe they would be more effective 
overall, as they would be most likely to be complied with.  Having had 
both Purasan and Electrosan systems over time, I am singularly 
unimpressed with their longevity and effectiveness.  I would place a 
wager that of the many boats in our marina that have them, -- that 70%+ 
of them are not really working properly.  I do believe that a reliable 
system could be installed, and that it would be an effective solution.  
Someone said that sh*t is sh*t, but that is not quite accurate.  Well 
macerated and disinfected sh*t is really just sludge, and not 
hazardous.  I realize that this would throw the zero-discharge area 
issue into the ring, but I suspect that it is overused in many cases.  
No doubt, there are some areas that simply could not stand simply 
receiving  a shovel full of simple dirt on a daily basis, but I suspect 
they are few and far between.  My bottom line point (pun intended) is 
that trying to either do nothing or enforce an impractical rule is a 
stupid approach that is destined to fail.  However, a compromise 
solution would likely result in better results all round.

Just as an aside, the pump that was mentioned in one posting that 
consists of a tubing that is longitudinally squeezed by a roller I 
believe is normally called a "peristaltic pump".  I had reason to work 
with the Canada Center for Inland Waters for a number of years and these 
certainly were popular in their wastewater research department.  They do 
work very well for high-solids waste and as mentioned do not require the 
pump parts to experience the wastewater first hand.  The pump tubing 
needs periodic replacement, that's about all.

Ken Bloomfield
50' Marine Trader -- Tellico Lady
Maryville, TN