<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16945" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Lu and Robert:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>A 13 litre toilet is a total waste unless you weigh
800 lbs and eat 50 lbs of food a day. I have 13 litre toilets but am not
on any system (private well and septic). The toilets do not use anywhere
near 13 litres more like half that and are fully adjustable. They are a
good design and only need one flush no matter who uses them. I know this
is not a defence for my flamboyancy but more of a statement to promote common
sense.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jet toilets are not bad. A lot of none North
Americans like bidets and they use more water and little toilet
paper.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Transporting waste with water has been a
fundamental paradox of the industrial age. Turns out we are just like
bacteria after all.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>What is worse is that most infrastructures in most
cities have leaking sewers. Those below ground water elevation infiltrate
millions of gallons per day and to repair is very expensive and not perfect or
permanent. Construction of new subdivisions are of poor quality and poorly
inspected. I have been in new installs that have yet to be hooked into the
system and they are flowing 1/4 pipe. All ground water
infiltration. Some municipalities are so anal and political or afraid
to tell people to disconnect their sump pumps and down pipes from the sanitary
that they actually design in overcapacity at the WPCP. The nutrient load
and the cold water adversely affect the zoogleal bacteria to such a point that
the biomass is now full of lower species of fungi and they have a nasty
by-product that produces a polysaccharide and foam. Frozen brown foam
laying all over a plant then thawing to rot and stink is the norm. Now to
combat the stink they have elaborate deodourizers spaying a mercaptan around the
perimeter of the plant. (bandaid)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Banning 13 litre toilets is smoke and
mirrors. It will be used to complicate the issue and divert the real
problem. Inflow and infiltration I/I (eye eye) is the major problem but it
cannot be corrected if municipalities continue to allow sewers to be built in
shifiting beds. Poorly prepared and full of ground water. Europe and
the States are going back to smaller areas collecting smaller volumes and
treating the waste at a smaller plant which is local. No more super plants
treating waste water that travels 100 miles to be treated. The giant sewer
running from the Duffins Creek plant in Whitby north to Sutton is cracked and
sitting beneath the water table; mostly gravel bed. It is leaking after 30
years of service and cannot be fixed but only left to further decay. This
thing is a giant tile bed and will drain the morains along its route, mixed with
dilute waste to arrive for treatment barely capable to support bacterial
growth. It will have to be replaced.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Municipalities know they have a problem and know it
is the collection system. They spend millions annually studying the
problem and collecting recommendations to fix but the cost of the jobs make the
task un-reachable especially during these times. The cities which have
built sewage collection systems in the water table now have a giant drainage
tile system and sewage collection system hopefully all going to one spot but I
know better. They can shut off some of the inflow or intentional illegal
hook ups and that takes care of the problem of flash flows when it rains.
Keeping the ground water out? that is an entire different
headache.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>2 cent Randy</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>ps to not get rid of waste immediatley after it has
left the body is dangerous, however I believe urinating while showering keeps
your feet free from fungal infection.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=mill@continuum.org href="mailto:mill@continuum.org">Robert
Milligan</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=butterflybluelu@rogers.com
href="mailto:butterflybluelu@rogers.com">Louisette Lanteigne</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=all@gren.ca
href="mailto:all@gren.ca">all@gren.ca</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, January 03, 2010 2:11
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [All] Fw: Canadian Ban
needed on 13L Toilets</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Hi Lulu,
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I agree as a first step, but then ban the 6L, then the 4.8, ending up
with energy (methane & hydrogen) & humus producing</DIV>
<DIV>anaerobic humus toilets -- and do it all sooner rather than later. In
letter to the Winnipeg Free Press, a lady said (in partial support), "<SPAN
class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 14px; LINE-HEIGHT: 18px; FONT-FAMILY: arial"> In the
case of a standard toilet, it is a waste of resources to flush away feces with
drinking water and then spend millions of dollars on a sewage system, then
separate them in a sewage treatment plant.<SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; LINE-HEIGHT: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Helvetica">" <A
href="http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/null-39356472.html">http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/null-39356472.html</A></SPAN></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Best Wishes & Happy New Year,</DIV>
<DIV>Robert</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>On 3-Jan-10, at 12:43 AM, Louisette Lanteigne wrote:</DIV><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top>
<DIV>Hi folks</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As I was digging around the economics of the Lake Erie Pipeline
when I stumbled across some interesting toilet info. Now I'm
requesting a national ban on 13 L toilets. The note is below if
your curious.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Lulu :0)<BR><BR>--- On <B>Sun, 1/3/10, Louisette Lanteigne
<I><<A
href="mailto:butterflybluelu@rogers.com">butterflybluelu@rogers.com</A>></I></B>
wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From:
Louisette Lanteigne <<A
href="mailto:butterflybluelu@rogers.com">butterflybluelu@rogers.com</A>><BR>Subject:
Canadian Ban needed on 13L Toilets<BR>To: <A
href="mailto:braidp1@parl.gc.ca">braidp1@parl.gc.ca</A>, <A
href="mailto:mintc@tc.gc.ca">mintc@tc.gc.ca</A>, <A
href="mailto:scarpf@parl.gc.ca">scarpf@parl.gc.ca</A>, <A
href="mailto:Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca">Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca</A>, <A
href="mailto:DucepG@parl.gc.ca">DucepG@parl.gc.ca</A>, <A
href="mailto:LaytoJ@parl.gc.ca">LaytoJ@parl.gc.ca</A><BR>Date:
Sunday, January 3, 2010, 12:34 AM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=yiv675297625>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top>
<DIV id=yiv258215542>
<DIV>The US has banned the use of 13 litre toilets since 1994
and the state of California is phasing out 6L toilets in
favour of high efficiency toilets that use 4.8 litres or less
but in Canada, we still allow for the sale of the 13 litre
toilets and it puts a heavy burden upon municipalities and
Canadian Taxpayers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>According to a report by the Canadian Water and
Wastewater Association, in 2005 it is estimated that one
in four toilets installed in Canada were
the wasteful 13L toilets. Those "new" toilets resulted in
8690 megalitres of water being wasted needlessly, enough to
fill 3476 Olympic Sized Pools. To view this report, visit
here:</DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://www.cwwa.ca/pdf_files/13L%20Toilets%20Sales%20Report.pdf"
target=_blank
rel=nofollow>http://www.cwwa.ca/pdf_files/13L%20Toilets%20Sales%20Report.pdf</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Consider that water-efficient toilets use about 60
percent less water than the old style 13-litre toilets and
that, on average, every Canadian flushes over 80 litres of
water down the toilet each day. Mandating efficient six-litre
toilets would result, over time, in a water savings well in
excess 500-billion litres a year.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Across Ontario there are numerous rebate programs in
place to replace older model toilets but it would be far more
cost effective to simply ban the sale of them. Most of these
units are produced in the US where they can't lawfully use
them. It would not significantly impact Canadian industries to
change the laws.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The ban on 13 litre toilets would save
municipalities money on energy costs. According to a report
produced by Power Application Group on behalf of the
Independent Energy System Operator (IESO), water treatment and
pumping and sewage treatment makes up 33% of municipal
electricity usage. To view the report visit here:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://www.ieso.ca/imoweb/pubs/bi/Ontario_Municipalities-An_Electricity_Profile_January2008.pdf"
target=_blank
rel=nofollow>http://www.ieso.ca/imoweb/pubs/bi/Ontario_Municipalities-An_Electricity_Profile_January2008.pdf</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A ban on 13 Litre toilets would help to offset the
need for municipalities to seek "new" water sources.The
reduced energy costs for municipalities across the country
would be significant and it would help to reduce carbon
emissions and facilitate cost savings for Canadian consumers.
It's a win win situation.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thank you kindly for your time.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Louisette Lanteigne</DIV>
<DIV>700 Star Flower Ave.</DIV>
<DIV>Waterloo Ontario</DIV>
<DIV>N2V 2L2</DIV>
<DIV>519-885-7619</DIV></DIV></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>_______________________________________________<BR>All
mailing list<BR><A
href="mailto:All@gren.ca">All@gren.ca</A><BR>http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>All mailing
list<BR>All@gren.ca<BR>http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/all_gren.ca<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>