Sewer to nowhere post---2

Forget the sewer, worry about how you are going to feed Your family. Pavo looked os incredulously at me when I said you better check out your pension plan and reinvest before it becomes worthless. Oh, by the way, say goodbye to the dollar. It really doesn't matter who's in office. Come on down to the Bay and play Samba....... Sun 12 to 2 June 10, 2008 Crude Up and Kills Created Money by The Mogambo Guru
"This is the Big, Big Reason (BBR) that I am now looking for a cushy job as an oil company CEO, because I would make a lot of money for doing practically nothing and apparently knowing even less. It's perfect for me!" Oil executives were summoned to Washington, D.C to testify before Congress, and the Congressional weenies wanted the oil company weenies to somehow magically make the price of oil go down by, I assume, calling someone on their cell phones and saying "Drop the price of oil!" Part of the questioning by the Congressional weenies involved the enormous sums these oil weenies were making, which was posited as being excessive, and which was immediately proved when not one of them was smart enough to know why oil costs so much in dollars! Hahaha! Morons! This is the Big, Big Reason (BBR) that I am now looking for a cushy job as an oil company CEO, because I would make a lot of money for doing practically nothing and apparently knowing even less. It's perfect for me! And furthermore, if I had been there at this little inquisition, I could have grabbed the microphone and said, "I'll gladly answer that question, Senator! The reason that oil costs so much in dollars is that the purchasing power of the dollar has dropped by 40% in 5 lousy years, thanks to you letting the Federal Reserve create so much damned money, you lowlife scumbag! If the dollar still had its buying power, oil would still be $25 a barrel like it was in 2002, but nooOOoooo! You dumb, stupid, ignorant Congressional morons decided to borrow and then spend so insanely much money that the Federal Reserve was required (and only too happy!) to create all the money and credit needed to finance the disgusting orgy of your irresponsible government spending, now totaling $9.4 trillion in national debt, because if the Fed did not create the money, your enormous borrowing needs would have sucked up every freaking dime of savings in the country a dozen times over, driving interest rates through the roof, called the 'squeezing out effect'. That's why oil costs so much, you ignorant, preening Congressional moron!" My rude and insulting approach differs from that of Chris Mayer, writing at Agora Financial's 5-Minute Forecast, who calmly explains, "Since January 2001, you can explain the move in the price of oil largely as a function of increasing money supply. As the amount of money grows, the price of oil rises. In fact, almost 87% of the move in the price of oil can be explained by the increase in money supply." Apparently, this kind of stupidity is rampant all the way through the federal government, as evidenced by Junior Mogambo Ranger (JMR) Rob H. reporting that he has looked at the Department of Defense's new "official" guidance for inflation indices to use for all submitted cost estimates and budget requests, and found "the one-liner" that made him laugh: "1.034% inflation per year" for the next 30 years! Hahaha! One percent inflation for the next third of a century, when the MZM money supply is increasing at almost 20% a year right now! And destined to go up from here! Hahaha! Wiping a tear of laughter from my eye, I note that the dollar has lost 40% of its value in the last five years, inflation in food and energy are running at greater than to 20% a year, and yet Congress wants to know why oil costs so much and the DOD forecasts inflation at less than one-third of one lousy percent per year! Hahaha! Peter Schiff of Euro Pacific Capital says inflation will be a "big problem for us is if the Chinese substantially allow their currency to rise", which he figures could increase at least fivefold against the dollar over the span of a year or two." The advantage to the Chinese is "That [it] reduces the price of oil by 80 percent for 1.3 billion Chinese. Consumption would go through the roof, and that will drive prices through the roof for us." And he thinks the dollar will down, not only against the Chinese yuan (CNY), but against all other currencies, and by a lot, too! He says, "At a minimum, the dollar will lose another 40 to 50 percent of its value. I'm confident that by next year we'll see more aggressive movements to abandon the dollar by the [Persian] Gulf region and by the Asian bloc. That's where the stuff really hits the fan." And by stuff you know what he means, and if you know what that kind of loss of buying power of the dollar means, then you know why he refers to it as "stuff"! P.S. To get The Daily Reckoning sent directly to your inbox, sign up for our free emai

JUST ANOTHER PEAK OIL MESS.

Death Grip to Sewer Nowhere

As our Oil based society sputters to a grinding halt and oil prices start seizing up the economy, the Los Osos Wastewater Engineering Team, TAC, and critics seem locked in a death grip to sewer nowhere. The oil party is really over and it's end game in suburbia unless you are willing to change your lifestyle. What do you think the sewer will cost per month with raw materials prices continuing to skyrocket to 3X their now prices by 2012?

What do you think energy will cost when PG&E ISO graph spikes into the red 20 times a summer? PG&e is afraid crashing the power grid will be the norm by 2012. In LO that means all the pump stations going to back up diesel constantly threatening us with Men's Colony nightmare spillages right here in LO and crappy PM-10 polluted carcinogenic air quality with every blackout. Where's the EIR section on that sustainability issue or other oil shock scenarios?

Yet the project marches on oblivious to the real world around it. Purposely ignoring the fact that the County is taking to the 'home equity' cleaners a majority of low income, Hispanic, and Filipino homeowners so that the suburban Los Osos wealthy, across the imaginary line, can get entirely off the hook in the LO water basin cleanup.

Under the PZ model of enforcement, Los Osos can be "built out" via twisted environmental justice logic, bad science and predatory taxation. This sewer is not about engineering basin cleanup, it's about engineering social demographics. With HELOC's freezing over faster than you can blink, where's the money to do the on site improvements, retrofits, or anything for that matter? Have you tried to get an equity line of credit lately?

Statewide Initiative?

We are in new territory here. Our only savior now would be a fast track Statewide initiative to allow sustainable onsite solutions to be unquestioned if they meet NSF 40 and 41 standards. We need a rewrite of Porter Cologne to grandfather in existing rural septic systems to prevent major impacts to small scale, regional, sustainable, family farms or semi-urban micro-farming .

These farming entities will be taking up the slack with the coming peak oil induced food shortages and high food prices related to transportation of food items. It is really bad news for all of us to eliminate or make cost prohibitive badly needed agricultural housing by water quality fiat just when we will need the labor pool and housing stock to hold down food prices.

So what do we REALLY NEED? We need instant approval by the County of greywater systems, composting toilets, other emerging technologies and source sequestering for any rural property owner requesting it. Approval not along with a septic system, but as a stand alone solution.

The time has come for a State Proposition like Prop. 13 for water and water related energy efficiency. It should include conservation, reuse, energy efficiency, emerging technology acceptance, and small farm protection. Then wastewater engineering wouldn't be just a government cover for economic discrimination and resource mandated government land grabs. Oil and commodity shock coupled with unfunded mandates will even drive out even the upper middle class here. As Los Osos, so goes County rural lands.

Low income housing? It's a joke that the County makes any claim that they are not displacing low income housing residents in Los Osos PZ and now the Rural County areas. They are directly involved by not challenging the existing (PZ) and proposed RWQCB mandates as environmental justice CEQA flaws.

If the County was serious about low income housing they would challenge the RWQCB's negative CEQA declaration. Don't hold your breath. You will never see an environmental justice update on the County general plan that discusses the prohibition zone model of enforcement or a study of possible discrimination against the urban poor on the Los Osos PZ. Why? Because they stand to make 2.2 Billion dollars in assessment gains in the prohibition zone alone if the urban poor can be displaced for wealthy remodelers and homebuilders.

YOU are off the environmental justice books Los Osos for one reason, $$$$$. That's a fact.

Predatory Everything.

Predatory government mandates want to tax your equity away from you without a reality check. Just put peak oil, energy shock, GHG and global warming impacts on the tab later?
All this while you try to pay off your predatory loan on your up side down mortgage.
Driving to work paying predatory gas prices driven up by speculators.
So you can get to work for your predatory employer who hasn't given you a raise ever.
And that's why you have to put your groceries on your predatory credit card that will go to 30% if you miss a payment.

With 15 foreclosures and 200 tax liens in Los Osos now, what do you think the social cost of the LOWWP will be with 2012 raw material and energy prices factored in?
What will the sewer cost then?
320 Million?
500 Million?
This is the X million dollar question that the County is even afraid to ask itself. You won't see peak oil and energy shock in the EIR ever. Peak oil and commodity price run ups will just twist the project into an economic monster beyond our imagination.

As Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke so aptly puts it and Kunstler elaborates in the following article, things are far from normal. The fatal flaws I submitted to the LOWWP a year ago are rearing their ugly heads now, just a year out. They will never be attended to at your expense. Oil Shock, the real estate bubble, and the predatory lending meltdown (and bailout) are not part of the EIR squabble.

Instead we will get a 250 page EIR on glossy paper with color graphics paving the way between tax limbo and cost overrun hell. Only bailout now is a fast track Statewide initiative to allow sustainable on-site solutions. Anything else will be just part of the peak oil and financial meltdown wreckage. I hope that explains why you haven't seen much of me lately. I have a point of view that will never see the light of TAC.

Steve Paige

"Far from Normal"

By Howard Kunstler
Author of The Long Emergency

Those were the words that Fed chairman Ben Bernanke used to describe the financial markets (and by extension the economy) these heady spring days when everybody else with a rostrum, it seems, has pronounced the so-called liquidity crisis contained. There's a great wish for American finance to return to business-as-usual -- raking in fantastic fees for innovating new modes of tradable paper, and engineering mergers and buy-outs that generate huge fees plus $100 million kiss-offs for corporate CEOs in the noble struggle to dismantle America's productive capacity -- but apparently events are still out of hand.

The Federal Reserve itself has been instrumental in promoting abnormality by doing everything possible to prevent the work-out of bad debts in the system. Since money is loaned into existence, and loans are debts, the work-out of bad debt suggests the discovery that a lot of money has disappeared -- which is exactly the case. The Fed has postponed the work-out by sucking up truckloads of impaired, untradable securities in exchange for loans to giant banks who don't have enough cash on hand to pay their janitors.

Personally, my theory has been that the specter of peak oil pretty clearly implies the inability of industrial economies to continue producing real wealth in the customary way. In the face of this, either consciously or at a more mystical level, the worker bees in banking recognize that, in order to maintain their villas in the Hamptons, money has to be loaned into existence some other way (than in the service of industrial productivity).

We've tried just about everything else. There was the so-called service economy, an attempt to replace manufacturing with hamburger sales. Then there was the information economy, in which work would be replaced with knowing about stuff. Then there was the tech thing, which was about bringing internet companies that existed only on the back of cocktail napkins to the initial public offering stage of capitalization -- which allowed a few-hundred-or-so thirty-year-old smoothies to retire to vineyards in the Napa Valley, while hundreds of thousands of retirees lost half the value of their investment portfolios. Then there was the housing boom, which was all about the creation of more suburban sprawl under the theory that houses (or "homes" in the jargon of the realtors) represent an obvious sort of wealth, and therefore that using houses as collateral would allow humongous sums of money to be loaned into existence -- along with massive fees for structuring the loans into bundles of bond-like thingies.

This has all failed now because the racket went too far. Every possible candidate for a snookering got snookered. Too much collateral for which there were no takers went into the ground. The insane run-up in house values made a downward price movement inevitable, and as soon as the turnaround happened, it fell into the remorseless algebra of a deflationary death spiral. More importantly, however, this society ran out of tricks for loaning money into existence and instead began to experience the pain of money thought-to-be-in-existence being defaulted into a vapor -- and worse, these defaults led to logarithmic chains of money destruction in its places of origin, the investment banks that had created the racket.

The important part of this is that the money is gone. What makes matters truly eerie is that the "bubble" in suburban houses has occurred at exactly the moment in history when the chief enabling resource for suburban life -- oil -- has entered its scarcity stage.

The logical conclusion of all this is not what the American public wants to hear: we have become a much poorer society and are now faced with the unavoidable task of making major changes in how we live. All the three-card-monte moves at the highest level of finance lately amount to an effort to avoid the unavoidable, acknowledging our losses. Certainly the political fallout of all this will be awesome. But it's not about politics, really. It's about the entire society's inability to form a workable new consensus of reality.

It's hard to predict how long these institutions at the heart of our economic system can linger in the "far from normal" limbo of pretending that money has not been defaulted out of existence. Since the same process is underway in Great Britain and Spain, places beyond the control of Bernanke, Secretary Paulson, and the Boyz on Wall Street, and since actions and reactions there will affect the destiny of money here, its hard to escape the conclusion that we're at most months away from the brutal recognition that Wall Street has managed to bankrupt itself (and, by extension, the United States). This is dark heart of the matter of which no one dares speak.

Meantime, on the ground, every mook and minion in the land sees the gas pumps levitate beyond the $4 hash mark, and notes with bugged-out eyes the double-digit price stickers on common supermarket items, and feels the rush of blood from the extremities when some check-out clerk at the WalMart declares that a certain proffered credit card is maxed out, and some strangers in overalls -- the neighbors say -- managed to hot-wire the GMC Sierra in the driveway, and took it away.... The candidates for president will have a lot to talk about. I wonder if they'll dare to.

Howard Kunstler

Dear John and Pavo,

Like I said before in my 40 page essay on fatal flaws for the LOCSD FSR critique, peak oil will kill any sewer or water recovery project that doesn't have a net energy demand above zero. And now it's the law.
In the preamble to AB 32 it is mentioned that the waste processing in Los Osos must have the energy footprint of 1990 level discharge handling. Since the Waterboard has claimed that each septic system is a waste handling "facility" with potential fines going back to 1988, then your community sewer would have to have the same energy footprint as the 1990 septic systems. That footprint is near zero CO2 gas production. But the first question is why do we need to meet the goal? The answer is greenhouse gas emissions and energy disruptions.


Could you figure out a no mix toilet like the one above if it saved you $150.00 a month? Is this any harder to accept than a one gallon, noisy, scary to kids, vacume operated retrofit toilet?

AN ELEGANT ZERO ENERGY WASTE SOLUTION IS POSSIBLE.....

Separating urine from the waste flow of your home and septic maintenance would empirically remove 60 to 80 percent of the P,N, and K Using near zero energy consumption. By sequestering urine and recycling it's constituents you close the nutrient cycle in the most elegant way.

Urine contains 75% of the pollutants at 1/1000 the volume of ordinary household wastewater. Remove your garbage disposal discharge and compost your garbage and that figure goes to 82%. A small amount of work removes 82 % of the pollutants from the LO basin. If your septic tank is emmiting 35 mg/l Nitrogen and you remove 82% of the Nitrogen you are emmiting 6.3mg/l from your existing septic tank. The TRI-W sewer project was approved at a discharge of 7mg/l.

All it takes on site is a 200 gallon storage tank and a Swedish no-mix toilet like the one above and a small amount of toilet training by you.

So what do you do with a bottle of pee in your front yard?

You close the nutrient loop and recycle it. And in doing so gain energy "credits" that pay for your energy "sinks" in handling the urine. This is not a sewer. You solve the problem with a recycling program. The program would look something like this:

1) Every six months a LOCSD maintenance worker comes to your property in his or her biodeseil or LPG powered 5000 gallon truck and pumps your sequestering tank, cleans your septic system filter, checks the health of your septic tank, and is gone. No tank replacement unless it has bee proven in testing to leak. The filter vault is hand installed after your existing septic tank.
Here's a hyperlink to many studies describing fully the Swedish no-mix recycling system.

2. Off site the truck collects the urea from 25 other homes then returns to the County owned biomass processing facility where the urea is converted to co2 reducing sustainable managed agriculture like redwood stands, bamboo, or switchgrass for biodiesl production that the County uses to run it's two truck recycling fleet. the biomass is a CO2 credit.

3) Before the urea is used on crops it is polished of micro-polutants and disinfected by solar collectors heating large insulated tanks. After polishing the recyclable product is offered for sale to regional farmers at a fraction of the cost of standard fertilizer because of natural gas shortages. Read about it in Richard Heinberg's Museletter's article: What Will We Eat as the Oil Runs Out?

4) Displacing natural gas fertilizer, and creating "Biomass factories" are energy credits for the whole reprocessing operation which is an energy sink. Instead of money being spent on a huge energy and maintenance CO2 source, it is spent on creating a CO2 sink or credit. The result is you have a sustainable method of solving the 83-13 Nitrogen problem.

5) Instead of spending 62 million on miles of potentially leaky sewer pipes and maintaining them you spend 35 to 50 Million total on recycling urea and basin wide solids reprocessing from managed basin wide septic tank waste recycling program.
The urea is recycled and the solids are recycled at a third the cost of the FSR-LOWWP with a net zero energy input. Your total bill? Less than 50.00 dollars a month and the process meets AB-32 GHG APCD requirements for 2020 in 2011! Los Osos becomes a leader on waste managment and recycling. Los Osos goes sustainable.

6) At your house you use the reduced pollutant managed septic system normally. You are part of the groundwater recycling system. You reduce water consumption by 6 gallons per person per day or 6 X 17,000 or 102,000 gallons a day basin wide. Your relative clean septic discharge goes into your leachfield minus the 82% of removed pollutants.

By your courageous act of "toilet training" you have saved the water basin AND the planet from CO2 in one fell swoop! Congratulations you own the Prius of community wastewater solutions and basin water balance objectives!

So instead of discriminating against the urban poor by excessively taxing existing homeowners for a community sewer in the smaller, poorer, Prohibition zone; you implement a basin wide septic maintenance plan that requires sequestering using dual bowl toilets and parallel storage. You then have achieved the same total N removal as the TRI-W waste discharge permit in the basin at 1/3 the cost with a greatly reduced or near zero energy footprint for pollutant removal. Why this is so cheap that we could toss in a vote to repay the 6M we owe the state if the RWQCB3 would forget it's fines.

A footnote on AB-32:

AB 32 Global warming 31662 Section(B)

(1) Design the regulations, including distribution of emissions
allowances where appropriate, in a manner that is equitable,
seeks to minimize costs and maximize the total benefits to
California, and encourages early action to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions.
(2) Ensure that activities undertaken to comply with the
regulations do not disproportionately impact low-income
communities.
(3) Ensure that entities that have voluntarily reduced their
greenhouse gas emissions prior to the implementation of this
section receive appropriate credit for early voluntary reductions.
(4) Ensure that activities undertaken pursuant to the
regulations complement, and do not interfere with, efforts to
achieve and maintain federal and state ambient air quality
standards and to reduce toxic air contaminant emissions.
(5) Consider cost-effectiveness of these regulations.
(6) Consider overall societal benefits, including reductions in
other air pollutants, diversification of energy sources, and other
benefits to the economy, environment, and public health.
(7) Minimize the administrative burden of implementing and
complying with these regulations.

Your Friend,
Steve Paige
LOCAC Land use committee member.
SLO Green Build
LOCSD Waste Water Advisory Board Co-chair.
(All comments are my own opinion and do not reflect the opinion of any board or committee.)

Reclamator vs. Urine Sequestering vs. conventional sewer, who wins?

Sequestering with 80% N,P,K recycling and energy free greywater discharge wins hands down.

Everybody in our family has sequestering down.....

Let's pretend the Zero discharge is not a 'valid' discharge order. The change in enforcement of 83-13 from a "cap on existing discharges" to "zero discharge" was never registered with the State Office of Planning and Research required for CEQA compliance and exemption (N.O.E.). FOIA request is in the works. I can't find it at the RWQCB web.

Zero discharge would not meet APCD-PM10 requirements for local air pollution with its bumper to bumper carcinogenic diesel belching trucks shipping a zillion gallons of water out of the basin every day and causing a huge bottleneck in SLO at the freeway. ( This is of course while the APCD is trying to buy up gas lawnmowers to reduce emissions.) Oh yes and then there's the GHG gases.


Behavioral sequestering costs homeowners 30 dollars a month N,P, and K can be sold to further reduce cost or pay for processing which would earn GHG credits because of the vast amounts of natural gas it takes to make Nitrogen fertilizer.

Urine sequestering is mentioned in the County-LOWWP EIR Scoping document. GHG comparisons will mandate an EIR study of Energy footprint comparisons of N,P,K, removal for all methods, sewered community, on-site systems, and sequestering or combinations of the three.

Infrastructure footprint- Energy to manufacture and install equipment.
Sequestering cost least( $2,500. dollars), has less equipment, consumes no energy, smallest energy footprint for equipment. Equipment has less enviormental impact compared to replacing septic systems with expensive on site equipment or installing hundreds of miles of sewer lines and a sewer plant. All water is discharged on site through the existing septic field and greywater system.

Water cycle GHG footprint Basin recharge of reduced N water.

Energy depletion hardening. Protecting the N removing system from peak oil, natural gas and electrical shortages.
Urine sequestering is hardened from energy shortages for 1/2 year at a time compared to hours for other systems.

Sustainability----Cycle is sustainable and meets peak oil mandate.
Urine sequestering is the only sustainable option on the table. All other options require energy to move waste, reprocess and discharge water back to the basin. The P,N, and K can be removed and recycled to local farms in the Los Osos Valley at a constituent delivery rate that optimizes farm plantings uptake cycle reducing evap. losses or N lost to ground. Nitrogen fertilizer may not be available by 2012 on a sustained basis.

Sullivan brief

Bubbles in Sewer Babylon.

Real Estate Bubbles in Sewer Babylon..........Click Here

As we approach another zenith in the Sewer of Babble I wanted to point out that the plus side of the debacle here is that Real Estate prices are depressed in Los Osos. For the flippers in Los Osos and the number of listed properties I would have to say most of you are hanging on by your nails. I bought here to live here. Let's keep it that way.

ON SITE NITROGEN SEQUESTERING INSTALLED AND FINALED

Questions and answers about the final installation:

What have you done on your property to reduce nitrogen from going into the groundwater?

My name is Steven Paige, I own a home on a 25 by 125 foot lot in the prohibition zone. I submitted plans for to reduce nitrogen emissions by 60 to 80 percent from my septic outfall with the County on May 11, 2006 after receiving approval from Harvey Packard. The project was completed and received final inspection by the County on October 23, 2006 and is now in operation.

How does your system work?

My system is very simple. I have two toilets side by side. One is a bidet used for urine only. The other is a toilet used for solids. The urine only bidet faucet is spring loaded and washes the dry bidet bowl with about 1/3 cup per washout. All the urine goes into a parallel holding tank that is pumped and removed from the water basin once or twice a year. One truck can haul a years supply from twenty to fifty households.

How do you verify how much nitrogen is removed?

A C-42 licensed hauler fills a test container and the container is sent to a testing lab and tested for total nitrogen. That small amount is multiplied by the volume removed from the holding tank. The sequestered nitrogen content is subtracted from the assumed EPA output from a normal two person household giving you the percent reduction in contamination.

What does it cost to operate the system?

The total output with flushing water is about 200 gallons a year for two people and the estimated cost for hauling is about $150.00 per year. The system cost less than $1500.00 to install. I also save on my water bill by about 1/5 because of my reduced flushing volume from the bidet. The small square tank in the picture holds access to the Liquid waste tank.

What if you sell your house?

I have a deed restriction for waste nitrogen sequestering recorded with the County that would show up on the title report. Attached to it is exhibit one, a "Nitrogen Sequestering Homeowner's Manual" that would also show up in the title report.

How well is the system expected to work?

Using accepted EPA data, Standardized Medical data on nitrogen in urine and empirical mathematics it can be determined that sequestering is equal to or better than the Nitrogen reduction assumed and permitted for the TRI-W sewer project of 7 ml/l remaining in the balance of septic waste.

How did you come up with the idea?

It is a well researched idea originating in Sweden. Swedish studies are geared toward using human liquid waste after deodorizing and disinfection as commercial nitrogen fertilizer because making standard Nitrogen fertilizer is very energy intensive. Eighty percent of the cost for Nitrogen fertilizer is related to the cost of Natural Gas used to make it. The Swedish see urine as a desirable future resource much like any other recyclable.

How would you apply your situation to the CDO process?

I would allow Urine sequestering to be used as a carrot to avoid the CDO process. I would use the once or twice a year pumping tickets and Lab results as verification. I myself asked for a waiver when I submitted my plans for review 5 months ago. I will push soon for another option.

Would you expect this to affect the zero discharge enforcement on your property?

Yes I believe it will. If you encourage people like myself that want to meet much higher standards for their on site waste disposal you get immediate positive temporary remediation of the Nitrogen problem. I would encourage this with a proportional discharge order instead of a zero discharge order for small lots compared to one acre parcels that are approved to discharge as per the basin plan.

A Proportional discharge order would mean that a 50 by 100 foot lot would be allowed 16% to 25% of the pollutant discharge for an acre. As a member of LOCAC land use committee I have seen contemporary one acre approvals include houses with many homes approved on one acre. With one acre as the standard, smaller lots should be allowed a proportional discharge.

An additional settlement agreement for proportional discharge and Urine sequestering would encourage water conservation. People not wanting to jeopardize the value of their property would install a system like mine that any plumber could install. To meet the requirements of the settlement they would have to practice careful water conservation and sequester, pump, and haul urine outside the basin. The agreement would have them hook up to the sewer when available but still be allowed to sequester and discharge if problems arose with the time line construction.

The water board would benefit by having the nitrogen removed immediately. They also would optimize air pollution compared to pumping whole tanks. Sequestering would reduce conformance air pollution by 95% thus avoiding "parallel standards" challanges for CEQA exemptions in air quality aginst the RWQCB. Sequestering/conservation would eliminate Prop 218 benefit challenges that on site secondary treatment may raise if allowed. The solution is a front end solution that would go away when the sewer is hooked up to the house.

Intensive water conservation of this order would require:

• Micro flush 1/3 cup urine flushing in the bidet or European dual flush toilets.
• Second generation HE washing machines.
• Zeroscape landscaping.
• Ultra low flow shower heads.
• Ultra efficent dishwashers.
• Removal of garbage disposals for another 15% Nitrogen reductions (85% total).
• Careful use of water.

With a proportional discharge order from the RWQCB you not only encourage a more usable and efficient sewer system within Prop 218 law but you also jump start smart growth temporary solutions that are married to the future solution of basin groundwater overdraft. Behavior modification is the most efficent method of compliance in the short term.