BBC uncovers 6,000 possible illegal sewage spills in one year ( www.bbc.com )

cerement , 5 days ago

“The other six … refused to share data about when they might be spilling … They said it could prejudice an ongoing criminal investigation”

y’all understand that American corporations are a warning, not a guidebook, right?

ianovic69 , 5 days ago

potentially illegal.

LNRDrone , 5 days ago

What the fuck? Having to ever discharge raw sewage at all sounds like there's something clearly wrong with the infrastructure, but 6000 times a year? That sounds like releasing raw sewage is just a part of their every day water treatment plan at this point.

tal , 5 days ago (edited 5 days ago)

Having to ever discharge raw sewage at all sounds like there's something clearly wrong with the infrastructure

This is very common, unless you live in a very young city. It's due to the use of combined sewers, which were around until comparatively recently due to the evolution of cities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_sewer

A combined sewer is a type of gravity sewer with a system of pipes, tunnels, pump stations etc. to transport sewage and urban runoff together to a sewage treatment plant or disposal site. This means that during rain events, the sewage gets diluted, resulting in higher flowrates at the treatment site. Uncontaminated stormwater simply dilutes sewage, but runoff may dissolve or suspend virtually anything it contacts on roofs, streets, and storage yards.[1]: 296  As rainfall travels over roofs and the ground, it may pick up various contaminants including soil particles and other sediment, heavy metals, organic compounds, animal waste, and oil and grease. Combined sewers may also receive dry weather drainage from landscape irrigation, construction dewatering, and washing buildings and sidewalks.

In the US, unless you're west of the Mississippi, there's good odds that your city may still have combined sewers. If you're in Europe, there's very good odds that you have combined sewers.

The earliest sewers were designed to carry street runoff away from inhabited areas and into surface waterways without treatment. Before the 19th century, it was commonplace to empty human waste receptacles, e.g., chamber pots, into town and city streets and slaughter animals in open street "shambles". The use of draft animals such as horses and herding of livestock through city streets meant that most contained large amounts of excrement. Before the development of macadam as a paving material in the 19th century, paving systems were mostly porous, so that precipitation could soak away and not run off, and urban rooftop rainwater was often saved in rainwater tanks. Open sewers, consisting of gutters and urban streambeds, were common worldwide before the 20th century.

In the majority of developed countries, large efforts were made during the late 19th and early 20th centuries to cover the formerly open sewers, converting them to closed systems with cast iron, steel, or concrete pipes, masonry, and concrete arches, while streets and footpaths were increasingly covered with impermeable paving systems. Most sewage collection systems of the 19th and early to mid-20th century used single-pipe systems that collect both sewage and urban runoff from streets and roofs (to the extent that relatively clean rooftop rainwater was not saved in butts and cisterns for drinking and washing.) This type of collection system is referred to as a "combined sewer system". The rationale for combining the two was that it would be cheaper to build just a single system.[4]: 8  Most cities at that time did not have sewage treatment plants, so there was no perceived public health advantage in constructing a separate "surface water sewerage" (UK terminology) or "storm sewer" (US terminology) system.[2]: pp. 2–3  Moreover, before the automobile era, runoff was likely to be typically highly contaminated with animal waste. Further, until the mid-late 19th century the frequent use of shambles contributed more waste. The widespread replacement of horses with automotive propulsion, paving of city streets and surfaces, construction of municipal slaughterhouses, and provision of mains water in the 20th century changed the nature and volume of urban runoff to be initially cleaner, include water that formerly soaked away and previously saved rooftop rainwater after combined sewers were already widely adopted.

When constructed, combined sewer systems were typically sized to carry three[2]: pp. 2–4  to 160 times the average dry weather sewage flows.[5]: 136  It is generally infeasible to treat the volume of mixed sewage and surface runoff flowing in a combined sewer during peak runoff events caused by snowmelt or convective precipitation. As cities built sewage treatment plants, those plants were typically built to treat only the volume of sewage flowing during dry weather. Relief structures were installed in the collection system to bypass untreated sewage mixed with surface runoff during wet weather, protecting sewage treatment plants from damage caused if peak flows reached the headworks.[6]

Cities are very slowly moving to sewers that are separate from rainwater systems, but it's costly, since two intermingled systems have to be untangled and it's under a whole city.

EDIT: It looks like you're a Finn?

https://www.hsy.fi/en/water-and-sewers/how-the-water-supply-works/

There are two sewerage systems in use in the Helsinki metropolitan area. Separate sewerage is used in Espoo, Vantaa and Kauniainen, as well as outside downtown Helsinki. In these areas, only wastewater is led to a wastewater treatment plant in a sewer while stormwater is discharged into the nearest water body.

Downtown Helsinki is mainly a combined sewerage area where both wastewater and stormwater are led to the Viikinmäki wastewater treatment plant in the same sewer. The combined sewerage area is being gradually separated in connection with network renovations in cooperation with the city.

autotldr Bot , 5 days ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

---

They said it could prejudice an ongoing criminal investigation by the Environment Agency (EA) and Ofwat into their activities.The regulator – the Environment Agency – which had the data, disagreed, and in January handed it to the BBC.Speaking to the BBC before the election, Helen Wakeham, head of water at the EA, said the whole point of monitoring was to increase transparency, and they wanted to make the data more publicly available.

Over 18 months we analysed data from nearly 10,000 monitors which had recorded more than 1.5 million hours of discharges.BBC analysis suggests dry spills may have started on more than 200 days in 2022, lasting more than 29,000 hours – including during the record summer heatwave when people were cooling off in England’s rivers and seas.“We are most concerned about those [spill] events happening in places where people are likely to go in the river,” said Professor Barbara Evans, chair in public health engineering at the University of Leeds.Consumption of water contaminated with human or animal faeces exposes people to parasites and bacteria such as cryptosporidium and E.coli, which cause diarrhoea and vomiting, or viruses like hepatitis A which can lead to liver infection.

This enables the EA to investigate potential cases of dry spills and to decide whether it will take any action.The BBC has been analysing data behind the 2022 report, but in responding to our findings, the water companies argue that the datasets are unverified and contain errors.Examples of potential dry spills in the data were presented to each water company.

No other country in the world publishes this sort of data.”In May, Anglian Water was found guilty of failing to provide data to the Environment Agency for their investigation – and it will be sentenced in July.

South West Water said: “We are clear that storm overflows must only be used when absolutely necessary to protect people’s homes and regard all unpermitted dry spills as unacceptable.”Yorkshire Water and Northumbrian Water said they: “Do not believe the [BBC’s findings] are true reflection of dry discharge numbers.”United Utilities said: “The information you have received from the Environment Agency reflects unvalidated, raw signals and not validated start/stop times.”Anglian declined to provide a formal comment on the BBC analysis, but in correspondence to the BBC said that the monitor data was not enough to determine dry spills due to monitor malfunctions, and said the methodology was flawed.The three companies investigated by the BBC last year also responded to our new findings.A Thames Water spokesperson said: “There are a number of methodologies for defining and calculating why and how dry day spills occur.“We regard all discharges of untreated sewage as unacceptable, and we have planned investment in our sewage treatment works to reduce the need for untreated discharges.”A Wessex Water spokesperson said: “Naturally occurring groundwater can enter sewers, often from private pipes and in dry weather, which can cause overflows to operate for days or even months.“We agree overflows are outdated so we’re investing £3 million a month to help reduce how often they automatically operate.”A spokesperson for Southern Water said: “In areas with high levels of residual groundwater, spills can happen outside of periods of rainfall.

Water and sewerage companies are responsible for outlets known as combined sewer overflows (CSOs), which release sewage from treatment works or the sewage network into the UK's waterways.The majority of CSOs record when they discharge.For this analysis, the BBC took the start-stop times of individual discharges from the CSOs and converted them into the standard 12/24-hour counting blocks used by the EA to determine "spills".In the specific case of United Utilities, the BBC found that some of the discharge data provided to the EA did not correspond to their 2022 annual report summarising this data.

---

The original article contains 1,558 words, the summary contains 623 words. Saved 60%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!