blog

There’s a vigorous debate going on in my region about “septic vs. sewer.” Specifically, whether or not the homes that still have septic tanks should be forced to connect to the sewer system. Following is a compilation of comments that I’ve posted recently on this topic in local eco groups. I hope you will find it useful.

One point I like to emphasize is that there are other options besides septic and sewer. They work with nature, and they turn “waste” into a resource.

“Plan C”: Three Proven Alternatives to Septic and Sewer

1) The Watson Wick

“Whereas almost all flush toilets either send black water to the municipal sewers and water treatment plants or to a septic system which leach the black water far beneath the soil (and out of the reach of most plants´ roots), the Watson Wick System allow the nutrients that are in black water to be utilized by plants while completing eliminating any sort of risk associated with the pathogens that our waste contains.” (https://permaculturenews.org/2017/11/14/watson-wick-flush-toilet-system/)

2) Constructed Wetlands

EPA site referencing various docs

“A constructed wetland is used to recreate the treatment processes that occur in natural wetlands. Natural wetlands generally have visible water in the system. (NOTE: Natural wetlands are not to be used to treat wastewater. Constructed wetlands are sized and designed specifically to treat wastewater.)”

“Septic tanks are used as the precedent treatment process to constructed wetlands. Once the wastewater leaves the septic tank, it enters the wetland. The pathogens and nutrients entering the wetland are believed to be removed from the effluent by microbes living on the surfaces of the media and plant roots.” (https://ossf.tamu.edu/constructed-wetland/)

3) Compost Toilets

(Note, although DIY models are effective and inexpensive, and are popular with the “off-grid homestead” crowd, there are also a number of commercially manufactured models, which look similar to Porta-potties or RV toilets)

“Compost toilets produce no waste, no sewage, no wastewater, no odor and no environmental pollution. They conserve water while producing soil fertility.” (From Humanure Handbook author Joe Jenkins, who I consider the foremost authority on compost toilets in the USA, and maybe even the world)

My overall opinion:

Before even thinking about forced conversion, the best solutions to the actual problem are cheaper and closer at hand. Assuming that the real goal is to address pollution in our waterways (as opposed to, say, a goal of generating revenue by forcing people onto sewer), we can get more bang for our buck by doing the following before we consider the expensive step of switching septic to sewer:

– Fully enforce the restrictions on fertilizing lawns in the summer (wet season)

– Ensure that septic tanks get inspection/checkup in a timely manner

– Strongly encourage rainwater collection (via cisterns, earthworks, and Ocean-Friendly Gardening techniques such as rain gardens, bio-swales). Did you know — every 1,000 sf of roof in this region can collect THIRTY THOUSAND gallons of rainfall a year. That is one huge amount of water that currently mostly gets sent straight into the stormwater/sewer system and waterways, since our soil is such a porous sieve. Rainwater harvesting is a major missing piece in a resilient sewer OR septic system.

– Replace depleted vegetation by planting shrubs, trees, tall native grasses; and strongly discourage the current mainstream “land-scalping” practices such as excessive pruning and mowing. Stop mowing all the way to the edge of ponds and other bodies of water; plant reeds and other tall vegetation there

– Avail ourselves of UF-IFAS (University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences) and other expert sources to identify and install vegetation that will uptake the largest amount of stormwater and/or nutrients

Here is what I consider the most effective leverage point for action: Conserve trees and wetlands, or restore trees and wetlands where they have been lost.

“A single acre of wetlands can hold up to 1.5 million gallons of rain or melting snow. Otherwise it winds up in the sewer system. Trees help keep water out of sewer systems, too. In fact, the group American Forests estimates that as Washington, D.C.’s tree canopy thinned by 43 percent between 1973 and 1997, the amount of stormwater running into the city’s aging sewer system increased by 34 percent.” (From AmericanRivers.org)

I’ve been engaged in an ongoing effort to dramatically reduce my food refrigeration footprint. You can read about my past experiments here:

The Fridgeless Experiment (Oct 16, 2019; original article published in 2011 in Austin EcoNetwork News)

Fridgeless Experiment Part 2 (Jan 2, 2019)

Fridge Experiment Continued (Jun 23, 2019)

My latest experiment (which I wrote about in the June 23 post) was to unplug the fridge for a few days at a time, plug it back in for 2-3 days (long enough for the freezer-packs to freeze back up), then unplug it for a few days til the cooling function was nearly gone, at which point plug it back in til the freezer-packs refroze, and so on like that. While this reduced my electricity usage considerably, and kept the food cool, it required a lot of my attention. And I also found out that the fridge tended to pick up yucky food odors easily while it was turned off, even though it stayed cool the whole time. Something about lack of air circulation, I’m sure.

Finally, the other day, I hit on what appears to be a great solution for me: I found a used micro-fridge for sale on Craigslist. Plugged in on the warmest setting, it keeps my veggies and yogurt cool, yet is very quiet and does not cause any spikes in electricity usage as a big fridge does. This is the first time I have used a refrigeration device while still being able to keep my daily usage to less than 1kWh. With the big fridge, it was always 2 or 3 kWh per day in the summer; 2 kWh per day in winter.

From now on, the big energy-hog fridge is reserved for special events (such as our 4th of July block party, when it will be needed to store watermelons and the “Happy Birthday America” cake and such) or times of multiple houseguests/housemates. And come to think of it, my most frequent houseguests share a lot of my lifestyle habits, so the tiny fridge will suffice almost all of the time.

It was great logging on to my FPL Energy Dashboard this morning and seeing that ZERO for yesterday. (Zero does not literally mean I used no electricity; it just means the total came in under 1kWh.)

The approach of the Fourth of July (Independence Day in the USA) always gets me enthusiastic about energy independence.

A lot of people in the permaculture/homestead/prepper crowd talk about wanting to go “off-grid”; how they can’t wait til the day they move out to the country and build their “off-grid sustainable homestead.” They get all starry-eyed and romantic with talk of some unspecified tomorrow.

But the time to boost your energy self-reliance is NOW, right where you’re living. You don’t need to be off the electric power grid to wean yourself off electricity. Right now, you can get to the point where you’re so free of dependence on electricity that a power outage barely fazes you; just becomes an opportunity for you to help and comfort your less-prepared neighbors.

And right now, you can start building your rainwater collection capacity and/or storing an emergency cache of tapwater, and reducing your water needs to a few gallons per person per day, so a water shutoff won’t cause you much trouble. (By the way, India’s sixth-largest city is experiencing acute water shortage as its four largest reservoirs have run dry. People are having to line up to get water from government tanks, and restaurants are shutting their doors.)

In my book, I mention money savings as one incentive to reduce our dependence on remote centralized infrastructure. But the cost savings pale in comparison with the real payoff, which is increased peace of mind.

Today’s photos show the cookstove I set up with scrounged concrete blocks. It’s inspired by the Winiarski Rocket Stove, a supremely wonderful invention of the Aprovecho Research Center. Rocket Stoves are highly efficient compact stoves that allow people to cook a meal with just a couple handfuls of deadwood twigs.

The super-efficient Rocket Stove design and cooking technique, perfected over years of research, has been a godsend in non-industrialized nations, reducing the time that people (usually women and children) must spend gathering fuelwood each day, and also reducing the incidence of respiratory problems from carbon smoke emission. But we in the rich industrial world would do well to learn how to build and use high-efficiency biomass stoves also. The incidence of hurricanes and other natural disasters that leave almost no part of the country untouched by power outages should provide sufficient incentive.

But another incentive is that it’s just plain fun and cool to be able to cook a meal with a small pile of deadwood twigs! I once gave a Rocket Stove demo at a homestead in Texas, and it provided hours of entertainment for the group of a couple dozen adults and their kids who had come to learn and practice. (Oh, and if you’re like me and you ever have trouble starting a fire, ask the kids for help — they’re great at it!)

I’m a little out of practice, but was able to use my makeshift version of a Rocket Stove today to heat up a kettle of water for coffee and dish-washing. Locally available deadwood in the form of palm-tree detritus proved to be an effective fuel.

Today online I found an old friend, Capturing Heat — Five Earth-Friendly Cooking Technologies and How To Build Them by the Aprovecho Research Center. I had a copy of this 36-page booklet years ago but donated it to some group or organization. Now the booklet is available as a PDF, which I just downloaded by visiting the above link and hope you will too. Learn how to build your own solar cooker, Winiarski Rocket Stove, haybox, and more.

Happy Independence Day, Week, Year, and Life!

If I were to give any hard and fast advice right now to everyone, it would be, “Don’t live where you can’t take the weather. Don’t live in a place where the weather doesn’t suit your constitution and where you are uncomfortable outdoors most of the time.”

If cold weather livens you up, live in a cool place. If cold weather makes you not want to get out of bed in the morning, live in a place where the weather is mostly warm.

I realize that sometimes people temporarily lose the option to choose where they live; for example, if you are caring for an aging parent and they live in a place where the climate does not suit your body.

But as much as possible, prioritize weather in choosing where you live. If you hate the weather most of the year where you live, and cannot bear to be outdoors or have your windows open most of the time, you are going to have an extremely high eco footprint and (not incidentally) high financial overhead. You will also probably not be very healthy or feel very good.

If you hate the weather where you live, move. Life is too short.

If you love the weather where you live, a wide array of free and low-cost pastimes will always be available to you. One of the most delightful pastimes available to a human being is simply taking a walk (or bicycle ride, or wheelchair ride) in a place you love and have chosen as your home. Even just sitting outdoors is a joy — if you love the prevailing weather and can at least tolerate the most extreme weather of your place. If you cannot, you become a prisoner.

Oh, and if you are one of these people who can’t bear temperatures over 78F or below 70F (yes, these people exist — I meet them all the time), then pick one end of that range and work on stretching your tolerance, because your temperature envelope is way too narrow for your own health. (I hear that there’s actually a term for this temperature intolerance; the Prairie Home Companion calls it “Larvaelitis.” Who wants to be a squishy larva? Not me!)

You could also arrange to live part of the year in one climate and part in another. Many people I know do that, and not all of them are rich or even middle-class.

A corollary to “Live where you love the weather” is “Live where you can appreciate the native plants and wildlife.” If you live in Arizona or Florida, don’t try to turn your yard into Connecticut or Michigan. If you can’t respect and appreciate the native plants and wildlife where you are, move.

Further Reading:

Sometimes it’s the social or economic “weather” rather than the meteorological weather that tells you it’s time to move. From Strong Towns, a highly thought-provoking article, Sometimes You Need To Move.

And regarding physical temperature conditions of various cities around the world, I just found this article by Nolan Gray (who, according to his bio, writes for two of my favorite movements/groups, CityLab and Strong Towns). Mr. Gray divides cities into nine categories, ranging from 1 (cities where you don’t need either heat or A/C) to 9 (cities where you need both heat and A/C). He does not go into the role of trees and vernacular architecture, as well as old-fashioned lifestyle practices, which used to get lots of people through summers A/C-free, in places where supposedly air conditioning is an absolute necessity now. Still, it’s an interesting read and will be helpful to folks who have not yet found a climate they like or at least can tolerate.

As I mentioned in my first post on “dissensus,” it can be better for society when people don’t reach consensus, and, as a result, people try many different things. The world becomes a vast laboratory in which (we hope) the odds of someone hitting on something that works are increased. And once something works, others can imitate it.

That’s all well and good for society or civilization. But what about for the individual? In his book Green Wizardry, John Michael Greer brings up the example of deciding where to live. If I knew for sure this place would be erased by rising sea levels in a few years, I might not have chosen to buy a house here. But I don’t know that, and I love living by the ocean, and houses here cost a fraction of what they’d cost in Austin or D.C. or Tokyo or any other place I’ve lived.

If my decision turns out to be wrong, I could become a climate refugee. And even if the sea doesn’t swallow up our houses, something else could force me to leave here, and my life plan which is enabled largely by a low cost of living could totally collapse. Where would I be then? A casualty of my “wrong” decision?

When I thought about it, I realized that “dissensus” applies on an individual level too. I know people who are so afraid to make a wrong decision that they never commit to anything; they just spend their lives in a holding pattern. Always living life with one foot out rather than both feet in.

At some point even a choice that turns out to be the wrong choice is better than no choice, because the experience contains information, and because recovering from it makes a person more resilient; builds skills and courage.

Sometimes I practice imagining that I have lost everything (material). After awhile, it just stopped fazing me. One time I got a vision of just me sitting on top of a giant notebook, riding it over the rising waters like a kayak, with a pen for a paddle. Somehow that made me feel very confident of being able to handle anything that might come up.

There are many kinds of “rising waters” in life. Illness, natural disaster, economic recession, loss of relationships. Add to that bad financial investments, dead-end career decisions, and other personal wrong turns, and a person could really get overwhelmed trying to pick a course of action.

But I’ve realized that even if I make some decision that turns out to be really wrong, I will manage. I’ve tried so many different things in my life, and made just enough decisions in my life that had hard outcomes, that I’ve lost my fear of making some big “wrong” decision. My tentative conclusion is that “dissensus” works on an individual level as well as collective.

In closing, I’m making yet another plug for Green Wizardry. If you like the spirit of my blog, you will love Greer’s book.

My large, 20-year-old refrigerator, which came with the house, seems to use about 50 to 60kwh of electricity a month. It accounts for more than two-thirds of my electric power consumption, and it uses about twice as much electricity as a modern energy-efficient fridge. I’ve been engaged in an ongoing exploration to reduce my fridge footprint without buying a new fridge.

For a couple of months last winter, I simply left the fridge unplugged. With the fridge out of the picture, power consumption as shown on my utility bill varied from 17 to 30 kWh per month. (By the way, I still used the fridge to store veggies and such. Because my kitchen is located on the north side of the house, and because the weather was cool, the unplugged fridge functioned as sort of an above-ground root cellar.)

But in summer in Florida, that is not a workable strategy if a person wants any kind of cool storage. My next idea was to unplug the fridge for a few days at a time, plug it back in for 2-3 days (long enough for the freezer-packs to freeze back up), then unplug it for a few days til the cooling function was nearly gone, at which point plug it back in til the freezer-packs refroze, and so on like that.

By freezer-packs, I mean plastic bottles that I have rescued from the recycling bin and filled with water, as well as actual freezer-packs that have been left by housemates, guests, etc. Most of my freezer is taken up by freezer-packs; I rarely use frozen food. Also I don’t make or keep ice at home for my personal use. In other words, my freezer is set up just to keep the fridge cold.

Another tip: The last couple days of “off” mode, move your refrigerated items into the freezer compartment. In other words, at that point your freezer compartment is serving as a cooler.

So far, my experiment seems to be working, and my electricity consumption with this method appears to be 40 to 60 percent lower than in “regular fridge use” mode. The optimum ratio between plugged-in and unplugged appears to be about 2-3 days on; 5 days off. These findings are preliminary; I will keep you updated.

A friend of mine who knows a lot about machines and appliances assures me that leaving the fridge unplugged for a few days, then plugging it back in for 2-3 days, will not hurt it even on an ongoing basis.

I strive to minimize electricity consumption because doing so is a great way for households and communities to be more self-reliant, less dependent on remote service providers. I also do it because electricity production uses a lot of fossil energy, and there is a considerable amount of lossage in the process from burning fuel to generating electric current. Fossil-fuel production eats up a lot of land and degrades ecosystems. Minimizing electricity use, and popularizing a low-electricity lifestyle in the wealthy industrialized nations, are among the top things that I believe helpful to people and the planet.

Further Exploration:

If you don’t already know your electricity consumption, try to find out. If you get a utility bill, it should show up on the bill. If you live in a duplex or apartment where the electricity is included in your rent, your landlord might be able to help you get this information.

Average electricity consumption for households in the USA is 900 kilowatt hours per month. The Riot for Austerity “90 Percent Reduction” target is 90 kWh per month. Figure out where your household stands, and see if you can find some low-hanging fruit to reduce your dependence on electricity. Michael Bluejay’s website on saving electricity is a great resource for figuring out how much power your various appliances use.

Some people seem to have been born conservation-minded, or were raised to be that way. But even people who didn’t start out green-minded can become that way at any point during their lives. There are many points of entry into low-footprint lifestyles; here are some I’ve noticed:

• Religion/spirituality: Most, if not all, religions and spiritual practices call upon their members to be good stewards of the earth. Also, to care for fellow human beings who are poor and less fortunate. These duties can motivate a congregation to set up (as just a couple of examples) a food forest or wildlife habitat on its premises. Both of these are footprint-reducing actions.
• Child-rearing: People want their kids to have good food. They want them to have safe water to drink and swim in. And they feel a call to leave the world a better place for future generations. These concerns can spur people to boycott bottled water; to purchase local organic produce; to grow their own food; to clean up their local bodies of water, among other actions.
• Health concerns: The wish to lead a long healthy life can serve as the impetus for all sorts of actions, including but not limited to the ones mentioned under “child-rearing.”
• Finances: Limited budget is a great force for green living, motivating people to cut their household energy use, consumer purchases, gasoline consumption, and more.
• Interest in engineering/technology: Engineering is an endeavor to optimize the design of things and processes, minimizing resource use while maximizing results. In an environment that nurtures creative thinking and rewards humanitarian instincts, engineers can blossom into conservation wizards.
• Municipal governance: Expensive municipal problems (for example, stormwater infrastructure overload) can motivate local government leaders to open their minds to solutions beyond the mainstream (for example, cisterns, bioswales, rain gardens).
• Aesthetics: People who insist on surrounding themselves with beauty (a very healthy thing to insist on!) might find themselves purchasing vintage clothes, which are often prettier and better-made than new; or replacing a harsh, sterile turf-grass lawn with an inviting landscape of wildflowers and soft native grasses.
• Interest in nature, the outdoors: Exposure to the wonders of nature brings love and reverence, which in turn instill the urge to protect.

Can you think of any more to add to this list?