The Bay Area he not nor has it ever been a desert. Now we are going to drink recycled urine. How about building reservoirs?

Yeah, we’re in a Mediterranean savannah, not a desert. But we still don’t have enough water, and anything that avoids drought surcharges is good. If they are returning treated water into the aquifer, it’s hard to see the problem.

But it's ok to build a bazillion homes still.....

Pipe this stuff to everyone's homes to use for landscape - highest use of water by far per home

PP

You didn’t get the memo. They don’t want you to have a lawn.

There are two major objections to potable reuse. 1. Injection into the groundwater aquifer. It has been illustrated that our underground aquifer is NOTHING like the geology beneath the Orange County Plant 21. We live on an enclosed basin so anything that is put into it will remain indefinitely in the "bathtub" as it has no natural outlet. Once you contaminate the aquifer even by an accident or presently unknown pollutants that are harmful to life (human, animal, agriculture) that have not been filtered out or removed, it is extremely difficult and costly to remove them and purify the water for portable use. Don't put them in the aquifer water in the first place.
2. Potable reuse need not happen if all new construction required double plumbing to recycle grey water for non-potable uses. More hotels, housing (condos, apartments, residences) retail centers and office buildings are putting pressure on the water supply. Curtailing development might be one solution to managing the demand for potable water.
All we need in the Tri-Valley is to have our aquifer contaminated either by choice (injection of treated sewage/water) or inadvertently by an accident of rupture of the injection system and a REAL environmental disaster will come to life here. Not to mention what will happen to property values in the area whether it is a desert or a savannah. Using some common sense and restraint might be the best course of action.

What’s missing in this discussion is that “Potable Water Reuse”, otherwise known as Toilet to Tap, is not about drought or water conservation, it’s about growth. The growth limits in the Tri-Valley are tied to the LAVWMA waste water discharge pipes that carry treated waste water from the DSRSD sewage treatment plant over the hill to discharge into the bay. That pipeline (actually two) is sized to accommodate the growth plans of the Tri-Valley cities General Plans as they existed 10-15 years ago. This was intentional as a growth control measure implemented by the then slow-growth Councils in the Valley (remember Ben Tarver?). Since then, Pleasanton’s Housing Cap was overturned and massive high-density housing projects have been proliferating, especially in Dublin. If nothing is done, development will grind to a halt as the capacity of the pipeline will soon be reached. If we can’t get rid of the sewage we can’t build anymore.

The solution to keep the growth machine going forward unabated? Instead of pumping sewage over the hill, inject it into the groundwater basin and make us drink it. That way pro-growth City Councilmembers can sound like environmentalists trying to save water while they are actually shilling for developers. A win-win for everyone!

The science, public health, and the cost considerations clearly need to be understood before moving forward on this. This is the second time in 20 years that local governments and developers tried to implement Toilet to Tap. But let’s at least be honest about the motivations and who benefits.

It is true that our aquifer is different, and so they need to study what would happen with our aquifer. But what makes you think they won’t study that? It’s a requirement of the process, and any failures will surely be litigated before they build.

As for growth, yes, if you don’t like growth, you’re out of luck here.

What would be nice is purple pipes to all new houses and retrofit to many old ones. I don’t know if we have enough recycled water for that. But we should not be implementing our own grey water systems. That can lead to excess environmental damage and safety problems.

I still have my 300 gallon tank for recycled water. Turn the taps back on and I will be over picking up water to use for my lawn and landscaping.

We need more high density housing near mass transit. Stop saying growth is bad. Stop with all the NIMBYISM. Water recycling is a good idea.

BobB

You want to drink someone’s urine?

What's missing from this thread is that we live next to the Pacific Ocean...the largest body of water on earth. We should be building de-salinization plants...San Diego did it, but they had to fight the environmentalists in court and they won. How do you think Israel survives in a real desert? Oh, wait...bad idea because we might hurt some fish.
We have had two recent bond measures to build reservoirs and nothing has come of it so don't think the state is going to do anything other than take our money. Recycled water for agriculture and de-salinization plants for people.

Desalination is extremely expensive, energy intensive, and yes, harmful to fish and the ecosystem. Despite this, there is a desalination plant being built in Antioch for the Contra Costa Water District.

The unsustainable development and water use patterns of our society is the issue. We want more, more, more and are willing to do anything to get it, no matter the financial, social, or environmental costs.

I thought that the Pleasanton residents had already rejected this in March 2000 when over 70% voted to refuse to drink sewer water in March 2000 Measure J:

"Should wastewater from treated sewage that has been further treated with reverse osmosis (RO) technology be injected into the Valley's groundwater basin that serves as the potable (drinking) water supply for Pleasanton and the Livermore Amador Valley?" was rejected.

Most purification technologies do not allow the swill of traces of prescription and illegal drugs as well as hormone drugs such as estrogen that enter the sewage system to be removed from the sewage water; therefore, the waste water is never actually purified. In addition, people being treated by radiation and chemotherapy medical treatments also happen to create sewage that enters the sewage system. Traces of this would be in the sewer water as well.

Instead the residents are being sold that is "safe" just so tens of thousands of homes can be built in the area. See Web Link

We all drink urine. It is called the water cycle. Astronauts do it too. Look it up. Stop the ignorance and NIMBYISM.

Fear uncertainty and doubt. Don't be ignorant.

@Matt,

High density development near mass transit is sustainable development.

MS. Where does the middle east get all of its water? Rain or desalination? Stick to protesting Costco and Stoneridge Drive extension. You were wrong on those and desalination. Go away.

BobB
Not when streets, schools, and apparently water and sewage are not upgraded to support.

There is nothing wrong with small communities. If you like San Francisco great - move there. I personally despise cramped quarters, lack of green spaces, crowded everywhere, and the general lack of an intimate community feel. Not to mention the general disrespect for people, property, and city.

@PP,

"Small communities" that are right next to Silicon Valley aren't sustainable. As to infrastructure needed to sustain the growth we are experiencing, I'd say we are doing fairly well.

"... general disrespect for people, property, and city"

I haven't seen any of that in Dublin, and they've had a lot more high density growth than we have.

BobB

You should rent the movie Soylent Green. Made in the 70’s but you would like it.

@Pete,

I saw it when it was released. New York City looks better today than when that movie came out.

California legislators are pushing for new regulations that will allow more indirect recycled water use (think irrigation and aquifer recharge), they also want to see direct use, i.e. recycled water that undergoes advanced treatment methods and is added to our drinking water supplies (aka “toilet to tap”). The problem? There are no current water treatment methods that will eliminate thousands of unhealthy chemicals in wastewater, especially contaminants of emerging concern and endocrine disruptors (CECs and EDs)! The state (SWRCB and Advisory Panels) continues to ignore more than 50 years of credible scientific inquiry, all of which point to serious health risks posed by recycled water for any use (IPR or DPR).

Land use is also water use, drinking sewage water is a convenient way to increase water supplies, and free up space in the sewar, for the population increases that come with pushing housing density. The problem is that the consequences for public health are sobering and of unknown magnitude.

There is no new water being made -- all water is recycled.

Ever been to Las Vegas? Did you drink or shower in tap water? They get 90% of their water from Lake Mead and their water treatment plant dumps the treated wastewater back into Lake Mead. How about all the cities along the Mississippi River. They all get their water from the river and dump treated water back into the river for downstream cities to enjoy.

Get over it.

@JT,

There are no problems with water recycling. Everyone drinks recycled water. Stop the fear mongering.

Thank you, Matt Sullivan, for helping us understand this issue in our community, yet again. I dread the day when we don't have your input to the process. That said, it would be appreciated if you could refrain from any sarcasm. I get it; it's funny. But it adds to confusion for people who are not intimately familiar with the area, issues and even language. I would prefer that your language be direct and sincere at all times, since it's the best voice we have in this community, which I have heard.

BobB, please consider the use of another moniker, as there seems to be more than one BobB (if in fact your name is actually Bob B) in the community and you are not representing the other Bob B(s).

@PI,

BobB is a registered user.