A challenge t o the environment As an interested layman, let me use this page to throw out a challenge to the professional in the field of environmental quality: Can modern technology devise a better method o f sewage disposal than using scarce and expensive drinking water io transport human waste from the bathroom to the river or the treatment plant? Present approaches seem at a dead end-more sewers for more people, more dollars for more treatment plants, more elaborate techniques of primary, secondary, and now tertiary treatment-and still the effluent damages water quality. Is it possible that the very symbol of modern civilization-the flush toiletwas a tragic mistake? And with present treatment plants barely able to handle current loads, what of the future? The first annual report of the Council on Environmental Quality states: “The waste loads from municipal systems are expected to nearly quadruple over the next 50 years.” Later, the report says: “We need to examine alternative approaches to pollution control.” Yes, surely there must be a better method. Visualize a different approach-the dry method of sewage disposal: The gurgling “water closet” is scrapped and ground up into ideal material for road ballast. In its place is a seat over a cabinet containing a removable canister, made of waterproof but biodegradable material. After each visit, the user sprinkles a powder over his deposit until the surface is dry and fully covered. There is no offensive sight or odor for the next user. Many years ago in the White Mountains, we used pulverized soil in outdoor toilets for this purpose, and the organisms it contained attacked the waste material, breaking it down into humus. Research will find a better material, some active biological agent (including a deodorant) that will hegin the decomposition process. No strong-smelling “chemical toilets” with their offensive odors, sights, and sounds. Twice a week, the householder presses a top tightly over the canister and places it outside for collection. A special truck picks it up, manned by wellpaid, respected technicians. Their hands are never soiled and they experience no unpleasant sights or
____
od the city has paid a farmer to make a field available. The topsoil is scraped aside, the canisters are placed in the trench, and the trench is then re-covered. A heavy roller passes over the field to crush the canisters beneath the soil and to hasten their decomposition, When the farmer plants his next crop, the roots sink down into rich nutriment. In several years, the same field can be used again. Clearly, research will be needed at many stages to make this new process effective: What kind of plastic or other material is best for a degradable canister? What kind of powder should be used? Should the filled canisters be sterilized before burial and, if so, by what process? How deep should they be buried in dry soil?-in wet soil? Are precautions needed to protect groundwater? How soon can a field be reused?to name just a few questions. Incidentally, the dry method may solve the nasty problem of using holding tanks aboard pleasure craft. Instead of waiting at marinas for the unappetizing operation of pumping out such tanks, the yachtsmen would take the canisters ashore in a moment or two. So here is a layman’s suggestion-a promising area for research by the new Environmental Protection Agency. Pilot projects might be tested in small towns without sewers that are planning sewage systems and treatment plants, or in a small lake in danger of pollution, where boat owners are reluctant to use holding tanks.
Harold H . Leich is a graduate of Dartmouth College and American
University. H e has had a life-long interest in outdoor recreation
Readers are invited to respond to Mr. Leich’s challenge; address your letters to ES&T. Volume 5, Number 1, January 1971 11
