🚀 go-pugleaf

Several folks have asked why it is a "disaster" to
dump  sewage  2 miles off shore but ok to dump the
the sewage 4 miles off-shore?

I AM NOT AN EXPERT - but I think I can shed a little
light on the matter.  Hopefully the wiser and better
informed in net.land can improve this response.

A few facts:

1.  This is not the raw sewage that overflows into 
Santa Monica bay when it rains, (Or is dumped in Boston
Harbor), but primary sewage, which has had 70% of the 
solids removed.

2. The usual outfall is under a "thermal" layer -
it dumps into a colder colder current that does relatively
little mixing with the currents that come on shore.

3.  This difference matters:  there is far more in the inter-tidal
zones and shallows coastal  zones than beach bums - this is where
much of the plantets life is (both bio-mass and bio-diversity).
The deep "blue ocean" can be credibly compared to a desert -
but far vaster (see the standard princeton press book
"Why big fierce animals are rare (author escapes me)" for 
a balanced view of this point.

4.  THus, if you're going to dump sewage, 'tis far
better to dump it in a deep ocean current than in 
shallow coastal waters.

5.  My opinion is that this sewage shouldn't be dumped in
the first place.  San Diego should be skinned alive
(or at least made to bathe in sewage) for not having 
already built the secondary sewage treatment plant.
If people like me want to live in a "developed" desert,
we should pay the *real* cost....Sadly, developers
are typically in such a hurry to make a profit that these
costs are either passed on to future generations or
paid for by raping the natural environment.

(i'll get of my soap-box now)

-tyler

-- 
                ------------------------------------------------------------
Tyler Holcomb   *   "Remember, one treats others with courtesy and repsect *
tylerh@juliet   *   not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but     *
  caltech.edu   *   because you are."  - paraphrased from Garth Henrichs   *