Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Sceptic Tank inspection.

Options
  • 06-02-2012 9:54pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,167 ✭✭✭


    Just reading about the proposed legislation regarding the sceptic tank inspections. I understand that only about 20% of tanks will be inspected and those that will be are in potential contamination areas.... whatever that means.

    I am in an interesting position in that my tank, built in the 50's, is covered by two huge flat stone slabs that needed a tractor lift to open them for cleaning. Will the Inspectors bring that with them?:confused::confused::confused:

    TT


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 786 ✭✭✭qrrgprgua


    TopTec wrote: »
    Just reading about the proposed legislation regarding the sceptic tank inspections. I understand that only about 20% of tanks will be inspected and those that will be are in potential contamination areas.... whatever that means.

    I am in an interesting position in that my tank, built in the 50's, is covered by two huge flat stone slabs that needed a tractor lift to open them for cleaning. Will the Inspectors bring that with them?:confused::confused::confused:

    TT


    Do you have a well for Drinking water on your land?

    If so you could be causing you and your family a higher risk of cancer if the tank leaks.

    effect.JPG


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,167 ✭✭✭TopTec


    qrrgprgua wrote: »
    Do you have a well for Drinking water on your land?

    If so you could be causing you and your family a higher risk of cancer if the tank leaks.

    effect.JPG

    You will have to explain your mental leap from me highlighting my two large stone slabs to me potentially contaminating my land and my family?

    TT


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,493 ✭✭✭irishgeo


    TopTec wrote: »
    Just reading about the proposed legislation regarding the sceptic tank inspections. I understand that only about 20% of tanks will be inspected and those that will be are in potential contamination areas.... whatever that means.

    I am in an interesting position in that my tank, built in the 50's, is covered by two huge flat stone slabs that needed a tractor lift to open them for cleaning. Will the Inspectors bring that with them?:confused::confused::confused:

    TT

    its going to carnage this septic tank inspection lark, 80% of homes in mayo have tanks that are that old.

    so do you legally have to allow the inspectors on your land?

    i doubt they will bring a tractor. more than likely a light and a camera on a pole they drop down one of the pipes on the tank.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,879 ✭✭✭signostic


    I think you will find when comes to inspection time, the onus, will be on the owner of the septic tank to have it in a proper state so that it can be inspected by the inspectors. I don`t think that when inspectors come on a farm to inspect livestock they are expected to go to field, round up the animals and put them into the pen.
    I guess they will put this in the regulations governing septic tanks when the time comes.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,167 ✭✭✭TopTec


    I have just read some of the draft legislation covering this. Inspectors cannot enter a premises or onto land without the owners permission. However, it is an offence to deny the inspector or anyone he deems necessary, access.

    I call that being had by the short and curlies!

    TT


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 413 ✭✭neiphin


    dont register
    dont pay


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭woody1


    ive read that dont register dont pay argument a few times ,

    it says that the septic tank and house charge are both statutes and
    that you have to consent to them to be charged ,
    you consent by registering, and then if you dont pay your breaking the law,
    but
    if you dont register then youve not consented and you cant be prosecuted for not paying..

    does anyone know if this is accurate, if it is then i cant believe it hasnt got more publicity,
    sounds too good to be true to me


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,803 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    woody1 wrote: »
    sounds too good to be true to me
    It is. It's nonsense, made up by people who like to pretend they know more about the law than judges.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,422 ✭✭✭Avns1s


    In reality, I don't see the septic tank issue as any big deal. As rural dwellers, we would each like to think that we are taking care of the environment in which we have chosen to reside. That would include ensuring that our septic tanks are working properly and not polluting all around them. If your neighbour had a tank that was spilling over into your garden where your kids play, you would want to be able to do something about it and pretty quickly at that. This law in relation to groundwater is no different. Just because it may not affect your drinking water does not mean that it's not affecting someone elses water.

    In any case, it would seem that the new legislation is now watered (no pun intended) to the point of having a register of septic tanks so that in the event of a problem, the relevant authorities can try and identify the source and that inspections will be based in those areas where there is a genuine risk to groundwater.

    It would seem as though most tanks are working sufficiently to be deemed functional. If my neighbour had one that wasn't able to be deemed functional then I would want it dealt with.

    The major anomaly as I see it, is that it is the councils that are the enforcers of this legislation and ironically, they would be the greatest polluters of all by virtue of sewage discharges into the sea, and also lakes and rivers.

    Another anomaly is that rural dwellers are responsible for the costs of dealing with their sewage into the septic tanks through regular emptying and potential upgrading. This might be rectified when water charges become the norm for all and our urban cousins are being charged for the fresh water they take through their meters and also for the treatment of the same amount of foul water.


  • Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional West Moderators Posts: 16,724 Mod ✭✭✭✭yop


    Avns1s wrote: »
    In reality, I don't see the septic tank issue as any big deal. As rural dwellers, we would each like to think that we are taking care of the environment in which we have chosen to reside. That would include ensuring that our septic tanks are working properly and not polluting all around them. If your neighbour had a tank that was spilling over into your garden where your kids play, you would want to be able to do something about it and pretty quickly at that. This law in relation to groundwater is no different. Just because it may not affect your drinking water does not mean that it's not affecting someone elses water.

    In any case, it would seem that the new legislation is now watered (no pun intended) to the point of having a register of septic tanks so that in the event of a problem, the relevant authorities can try and identify the source and that inspections will be based in those areas where there is a genuine risk to groundwater.

    It would seem as though most tanks are working sufficiently to be deemed functional. If my neighbour had one that wasn't able to be deemed functional then I would want it dealt with.

    The major anomaly as I see it, is that it is the councils that are the enforcers of this legislation and ironically, they would be the greatest polluters of all by virtue of sewage discharges into the sea, and also lakes and rivers.

    Another anomaly is that rural dwellers are responsible for the costs of dealing with their sewage into the septic tanks through regular emptying and potential upgrading. This might be rectified when water charges become the norm for all and our urban cousins are being charged for the fresh water they take through their meters and also for the treatment of the same amount of foul water.

    A few point there on that;
    "septic tanks through regular emptying"
    A working septic should never need to be emptied.

    I paid over 4,000 euro for my treatment system even though none of the houses around me have them, including 2 built since, I have one of the dries sites around due to it been used for holding the stone while the railway line was been built.

    I paid Mayo Co Co 4800 euro for development costs, I have 4 large potholes for 5 years on a very very busy road, I have filled them time after time.
    I don't have lighting,
    I don't have footpaths,
    I don't have wired phoneline, if I want one I have to pay 900 euro to Mayo Co Co to cut a 10" line in the road, then get the hole due to take it off the pole and to the house.
    I don't have a bin service, I have been lucky that a company has agree to take a detour off their route to service a few houses.

    Where I live Irish rail upgraded the line, they tarmaced all along the fences where the water used to escape, so with any major rain there is a big flood.
    I rang Mayo Co Co and told them this, they said "it wasn't an issue until you built your house, all the waste water off the road used to go onto your site"....

    Not having a go or anything and apologise to the OP for going totally off topic.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,422 ✭✭✭Avns1s


    yop wrote: »
    A few point there on that;
    "septic tanks through regular emptying"
    A working septic should never need to be emptied.

    I paid over 4,000 euro for my treatment system even though none of the houses around me have them, including 2 built since, I have one of the dries sites around due to it been used for holding the stone while the railway line was been built.

    I paid Mayo Co Co 4800 euro for development costs, I have 4 large potholes for 5 years on a very very busy road, I have filled them time after time.
    I don't have lighting,
    I don't have footpaths,
    I don't have wired phoneline, if I want one I have to pay 900 euro to Mayo Co Co to cut a 10" line in the road, then get the hole due to take it off the pole and to the house.
    I don't have a bin service, I have been lucky that a company has agree to take a detour off their route to service a few houses.

    Where I live Irish rail upgraded the line, they tarmaced all along the fences where the water used to escape, so with any major rain there is a big flood.
    I rang Mayo Co Co and told them this, they said "it wasn't an issue until you built your house, all the waste water off the road used to go onto your site"....

    Not having a go or anything and apologise to the OP for going totally off topic.

    I think only your first point relates to my post.

    I was quoting what the Minister said yesterday in relation to the emptying. It's not quite true that "a working septic tank should never need emptying". You are close though. A working septic tank should need emptying very very rarely BUT there is always an amount of "solids" that will build up and sludge the tank over time. I do know of tanks where the washing machine, sinks, etc are piped into a spearate soakaway that have not been emptied in 20 years or more and are working away perfectly.

    Never say "never"!! :D:D


  • Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional West Moderators Posts: 16,724 Mod ✭✭✭✭yop


    Avns1s wrote: »
    I think only your first point relates to my post.
    Never say "never"!! :D:D

    Apologise yes! It was the only one! :)

    My parents hasn't been touched in 30th years!!! Then again as you said the washing machine is out to a separate soak pit, while ours, which is on our planning permission, is into our tank!

    This will rumble on and on, but as I said previously I won't be paying it, they can deduct it from the development fees I paid. :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,167 ✭✭✭TopTec


    What I object to is paying the small amount this year and probably larger amounts next year to register my tank and it is more than likely I will never have an inspection. In effect I would be paying to have other peoples tanks inspected. I had the tank cleaned out when I bought my small cottage 2 years ago. I consider myself a responsible citizen.

    Like Yop I have no mains water or sewage. I pay for my phone and power, the little lane I live on has only my repairs over the past 2 years. I have no benefit whatsoever from my taxes except when I leave my home to travel into Ballina.

    Reading all the reports today it seems that the Governement is confused about what should go into a tank and what shouldn't. I was always told "No Suds". So my kitchen grey water now goes into a soakaway. Is that right?

    I can see this ending up the same way as Home Inspection Packs did in the UK. People paid several hundred pounds to become registered HIP inspectors then once the politicians had finished squabbling, after a couple of years, HIP's were scrapped leaving a lot of people out of pocket. Septic Inspectors here are being asked to pay 1,000 to be registered. I wonder how many will take this up?

    TT


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,422 ✭✭✭Avns1s


    TopTec wrote: »
    Septic Inspectors here are being asked to pay 1,000 to be registered. I wonder how many will take this up?

    TT

    Have you a link for that??

    I understood that the inspecions were to be carried out by the staff of the Councils, not by private inspectors?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,167 ✭✭✭TopTec


    It is in the original draft legislation. I will find it and post the link.

    "
    2.3. Inspector & Annual Fee

    Each inspector will have to pay a registration fee of €1,000 (max), and will have to pay the same fee every time they re-register. This money is to cover the costs of the EPA; largely in the preparation and control of the National Inspection Plan.



    See here:


    http://www.siteassessor.com/blog/water-services-amendment-bill-2011-explained-90.html#h0-2-3-inspector-aamp-annual-fee

    TT


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,422 ✭✭✭Avns1s


    TopTec wrote: »
    It is in the original draft legislation. I will find it and post the link.

    "
    2.3. Inspector & Annual Fee

    Each inspector will have to pay a registration fee of €1,000 (max), and will have to pay the same fee every time they re-register. This money is to cover the costs of the EPA; largely in the preparation and control of the National Inspection Plan.



    See here:



    http://www.siteassessor.com/blog/water-services-amendment-bill-2011-explained-90.html#h0-2-3-inspector-aamp-annual-fee

    TT

    That site looks like it's a private site selling "training" and "registration" to become a "site assessor". It has probably thrived on the fear and misinformation about this particular legislation.

    Any link to an official government site?

    Sorry for being somewhat pedantic about it but this is really the first time I have heard of this. I find it hard to believe that the inspectors would come from the private sector when there has to be many council engineers/planners etc on the payroll who aren't too busy with the fall off in planning applications and the reduction in roads funding etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,646 ✭✭✭washman3


    TopTec wrote: »
    Just reading about the proposed legislation regarding the sceptic tank inspections. I understand that only about 20% of tanks will be inspected and those that will be are in potential contamination areas.... whatever that means.

    I am in an interesting position in that my tank, built in the 50's, is covered by two huge flat stone slabs that needed a tractor lift to open them for cleaning. Will the Inspectors bring that with them?:confused::confused::confused:

    TT

    i attended a meeting along with 600 others last night in coulty Limerick on the septic tank issue.
    OP i can virtually guarantee you here and now that your 2 large concrete slabs will be the least of your worries.
    probably 90% + of septic tanks throughout the country are not working properly,at least to the standards required by the EPA, who will ultimately have the final say on this.
    just because grandad's 60 year old tank "appears" to be working properly is nonsense. the method of inspection here will be very modern indeed, a far cry from the old flashlamp in the hole inspection.!!
    remedial works will be compulsory,problem is,at what cost.
    no mention of a possible grant for these remedial works have come from the minister Phil Hogan.
    the tank issue has been compared to the introduction on the NCT on cars 10 years ago. people were assured then that the NCT was just a directive from the EU which we had to obey.
    yet when the contract was issued to a private contractor the situation changed completely. the NCT then became a cash-cow for the contractor who were virtually answerable to nobody. the inspection veered far away from merely the safety issues it was introcuced to address.
    could we be in for a repeat on the septic tank issue?
    do we trust the present government?
    a government whose leader only last week described the ordinary Irish citizen as a mad borrower who sank this country.?
    i would urge everyone not to register for this charge until such time as we have a concrete statement of what exact standard is required and exactly what % of the final cost can be retrieved via a grant.
    this is not scare-mongering,i am all for clean water and a proper environment, but we are all entitled to the full facts here.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,167 ✭✭✭TopTec


    This is the bill in its full form. You will be interested in the section marked Appointment of inspectors. The section relating to the fee is slightly further down and I quote -

    the fee payable to the Agency, which shall not exceed €1,000, which shall accompany an application for appointment or renewal of appointment as an inspector,

    I have read in several online articles, including the one I have previously linked to, that the fee has been announced as 1,000 euro.

    Having said that it may be reduced now that the Minister has announced a reduction in the householder charge for inspection for the first few months. I suspect the local councils would hope to recover the cost of registration from the fee paid by the householder. Hence the susipcion that this is a stealth tax.

    http://www.environ.ie/en/Environment/Water/WaterServices/PublicationsDocuments/FileDownLoad,28352,en.pdf

    TT


  • Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional West Moderators Posts: 16,724 Mod ✭✭✭✭yop


    Thats the thing though isn't it.

    How many times have the government tried things and had to roll it back because they had thought it through.
    Voting machines, decentralization, cutting old age pensions, a few more cuts I can't think off the top of my head, rolling out fibre with Iaranroid Eireann and ESB which lies along the lines but never used etc etc etc.

    Now this, it was 50 euro last week, now 5 euro.
    They still don't know what the qualification of a good or bad tank is.
    They now claim its those who live beside a stream.

    All they will do is like everything else is put in an "action group" to look at it, pay them each 70k a year to come up with some BS report.

    The monkeys are running this country, they haven't a clue. I for one am not and will not pay them 1 single euro for house reg or septic tank reg.

    I have said it on another forum, my parents who are not well off at all, were left my grans house, they can't rent it out as it needs improvements, but they don't have any money to do it up. So it sits there. Yet they had to pay the 200 euro 2nd home tax.

    Yet 2 of my mates who have parents in the same setup and they refuse to pay the 2nd home tax. 3 years later no one has come near them.

    So is someone telling me that the government are going to find people to check each house?

    Why don't they get an action group on getting our postcodes sorted out or going after real social welfare fraud.
    The muppets can't even get people to read the water meters!!!!!

    Its a farce, don't sign up and feed the bondholders.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,493 ✭✭✭irishgeo


    1000 euro for the privilege to look at **** all day.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,907 ✭✭✭woody1


    TopTec wrote: »
    What I object to is paying the small amount this year and probably larger amounts next year to register my tank and it is more than likely I will never have an inspection. In effect I would be paying to have other peoples tanks inspected. I had the tank cleaned out when I bought my small cottage 2 years ago. I consider myself a responsible citizen.

    Like Yop I have no mains water or sewage. I pay for my phone and power, the little lane I live on has only my repairs over the past 2 years. I have no benefit whatsoever from my taxes except when I leave my home to travel into Ballina.

    Reading all the reports today it seems that the Governement is confused about what should go into a tank and what shouldn't. I was always told "No Suds". So my kitchen grey water now goes into a soakaway. Is that right?

    I can see this ending up the same way as Home Inspection Packs did in the UK. People paid several hundred pounds to become registered HIP inspectors then once the politicians had finished squabbling, after a couple of years, HIP's were scrapped leaving a lot of people out of pocket. Septic Inspectors here are being asked to pay 1,000 to be registered. I wonder how many will take this up?

    TT

    just to clear this one up, the EPA manual for septic tanks and treatment systems for 2010, ( and the previous ones ) says

    Under no circumstances should rainwater,
    surface water or run-off from paved areas be
    discharged to on-site single-house treatment
    systems. However, grey waters (washing
    machine, baths, showers, etc.) must pass to
    the treatment system.


    i used to do percolation tests ( up to last year ) and ive had that question asked of me a lot...

    as for who will be doing the inspections i would imagine that just like
    the current percolation test system , the councils will form a panel
    of approved inspectors , who would be engineers, architects, whoever that have done a course probably provided by the epa... id be surprised if the council did it themselves, i cant see them assuming responsibility for saying whether a system is working or not, theyd rather get an outside person to do that...


  • Registered Users Posts: 109 ✭✭The Engineer


    yop wrote: »
    A working septic should never need to be emptied.

    This is not true. A working septic tank needs to be emptied regularly. How regularly "regularly" is depends on the loading from the house and the capacity and make up of the tank. As a good rule-of-thumb, the tank should be big enough to allow at least 2 years of sludge build-up, as anaerobic digestion will then kick in and make the overall process more efficient.

    PS. Sorry to hear of all your other issues…I once had to take my car in to have work done on all four alloy wheels due to our wonderful roads, and I have come across tons of sites with water issues due to hydraulic constraints caused by new road construction. It's not rocket science - if you import tons of material and heavily compact it to build a new road / railway, it will cause a hydraulic barrier and water will back-up! One guy down in Tipperary successfully argued this case with the Local Authority and they paid for site works to upgrade his septic system.


  • Registered Users Posts: 109 ✭✭The Engineer


    woody1 wrote: »
    as for who will be doing the inspections i would imagine that just like the current percolation test system , the councils will form a panel
    of approved inspectors , who would be engineers, architects, whoever that have done a course probably provided by the epa... id be surprised if the council did it themselves, i cant see them assuming responsibility for saying whether a system is working or not, theyd rather get an outside person to do that...

    Firstly, Architects have no training in carrying out this sort of work - not having a go, just stating a fact! Remember, the inspection is likely to require the design of upgrades on many of the "legacy sites".

    Secondly, the EPA will not be providing a course here. They are often mistaken as running the Site Suitability Assessment course, but it is FÁS that runs that one!

    Thirdly, nobody seems to accept responsibility for anything at the minute. Local Authorities have panels of Site Assessors, but there is usually a disclaimer for the homeowner to do their own research before employing an assessor. The EPA Manual has a MASSIVE disclaimer in it.

    Most Site Assessors do not have the relevant experience / qualifications / insurance cover to design an on-site wastewater treatment system. The key word here is design. An assessor's PI insurance for assessments does not extend to design or making design recommendations, as required in the EPA Code of Practice Site Characterisation Report Form. Now…who exactly is assuming responsibility for what?! :confused: What we do know for sure is that it is the end-user that is liable under statutory law.


  • Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional West Moderators Posts: 16,724 Mod ✭✭✭✭yop


    This is not true. A working septic tank needs to be emptied regularly. How regularly "regularly" is depends on the loading from the house and the capacity and make up of the tank. As a good rule-of-thumb, the tank should be big enough to allow at least 2 years of sludge build-up, as anaerobic digestion will then kick in and make the overall process more efficient.
    .

    Well mine must be total magic then is it? We are in now heading for 8 years with ZERO issues, my parents tanks hasn't been emptied in 30 years.
    My brother is 12 years in his house and the same.

    Over the last few weeks I have spoken to many people who have been chatting about their tanks and I could give you another 5+ examples of tanks installed for 10 years without needing to be emptied.

    So our "regular" is between 8 and 30 years :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 317 ✭✭MOSSAD


    It's not so much the inspection of the tank, but the **** who will be sent out to inspect. I mean, look at county council planners.


  • Registered Users Posts: 145 ✭✭mallachyrivers


    I just can't understand how a tank could be sceptical!


  • Registered Users Posts: 109 ✭✭The Engineer


    yop wrote: »
    Well mine must be total magic then is it? We are in now heading for 8 years with ZERO issues, my parents tanks hasn't been emptied in 30 years.
    My brother is 12 years in his house and the same.

    Over the last few weeks I have spoken to many people who have been chatting about their tanks and I could give you another 5+ examples of tanks installed for 10 years without needing to be emptied.

    So our "regular" is between 8 and 30 years :D

    When you say "ZERO issues", do you mean that the quality of effluent coming out at the back end of the tank is of a good enough quality to discharge to groundwater? Do you mean that your percolation area is perfectly sited, designed and constructed so as not to be even a remote risk to the environment? Or, do you mean that the tank is out of sight and out of mind and is receiving effluent when you flush the toilet, etc. and it's draining off somewhere?

    In all seriousness Yop, when was the last time someone inspected the tank, reviewed it's structural integrity (i.e. checked for cracks, missing t-pieces, etc.) and measured the depth of the sludge layer? Has anyone ever checked out the quality of effluent leaving the second chamber of the tank (assuming that the tank is twin-chambered)? If the answer is never, then you cannot say that the system has given "zero issues", as there may be lots of environmental issues that you are unaware of.
    I just can't understand how a tank could be sceptical!

    LOL! If you saw enough of these tanks, you'd understand!


  • Administrators, Computer Games Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 32,272 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Mickeroo


    When you say "ZERO issues", do you mean that the quality of effluent coming out at the back end of the tank is of a good enough quality to discharge to groundwater? Do you mean that your percolation area is perfectly sited, designed and constructed so as not to be even a remote risk to the environment? Or, do you mean that the tank is out of sight and out of mind and is receiving effluent when you flush the toilet, etc. and it's draining off somewhere?

    In all seriousness Yop, when was the last time someone inspected the tank, reviewed it's structural integrity (i.e. checked for cracks, missing t-pieces, etc.) and measured the depth of the sludge layer? Has anyone ever checked out the quality of effluent leaving the second chamber of the tank (assuming that the tank is twin-chambered)? If the answer is never, then you cannot say that the system has given "zero issues", as there may be lots of environmental issues that you are unaware of.


    I get what you're saying about structure and that, but if a septic tank is working properly I thought it shouldn't need to be emptied regularly at all, otherwise whats the point in having it?


    Well said on the house tax Yop, if you don't register then they won't be after you simple as. Its the same with TV licenses, if new houses never bother getting a TV licenses then they never get hassled, its only if you actually go and get one in the first place that they'll be after you.


  • Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional West Moderators Posts: 16,724 Mod ✭✭✭✭yop


    When you say "ZERO issues", do you mean that the quality of effluent coming out at the back end of the tank is of a good enough quality to discharge to groundwater? Do you mean that your percolation area is perfectly sited, designed and constructed so as not to be even a remote risk to the environment? Or, do you mean that the tank is out of sight and out of mind and is receiving effluent when you flush the toilet, etc. and it's draining off somewhere?

    In all seriousness Yop, when was the last time someone inspected the tank, reviewed it's structural integrity (i.e. checked for cracks, missing t-pieces, etc.) and measured the depth of the sludge layer? Has anyone ever checked out the quality of effluent leaving the second chamber of the tank (assuming that the tank is twin-chambered)? If the answer is never, then you cannot say that the system has given "zero issues", as there may be lots of environmental issues that you are unaware of.



    LOL! If you saw enough of these tanks, you'd understand!

    Listen, I am not having a go at you, but remember back in 1998, 1999 we had a load of IT head who were scaring people about the Y2K bug, they made millions as planes were going to crash, ATMs pump out money etc, but you know what it didn't happen and it wasn't because all the bugs were fixed, it was small issues on some servers and PC's, not every single software or hardware system. So as I said I am not making little of what you said as there is of course perfect logic in it, but it reminds me of that.

    This just looks like this again. Are you honestly trying to tell me that there is some measurement out there that defines the parameters for the "perfectly treated sh1t3"? That someone will be there with a measure to know what they are at, and at the same time not have a "connection" who for those with concrete tanks, who can do a "For you today me do special offer" on a treatment system.

    I paid 250 euro for an "independent" engineer to come out to do the percolation test, assigned by the Co Co, my own engineer and a friend who is an engineer said a figure 8 would be very sufficient as the site is very dry, but alas no. What is even funnier said engineer and this is fact, didn't even leave his car. As 2 neighbours noted his presence outside the house.

    So that was the 250. I paid 4k euro+ for the treatment system.
    I had an engineer I paid nearly 8k euro to sign it all off.

    Now if that has issues it can come down on 1 of the 3 individuals above, not me or they can as I keep saying use my development tax to fund it.

    I'll put it this way:
    Has anyone inspected the 1000's of leaks on the public water schemes which is costing millions?
    Can we take it that lucky towns who have public sewage schemes have perfect piped systems with no leaks at the joints etc......
    Has anyone been inspecting the wards in our hospitals for bugs and where people are dying on trollies?


    As I said I am not having a go at you, I am just commenting on the text and the checks that you as well as I know will never ever be carried out.
    They will hook people in then bend them over year after year.


    I am not a tax dodger, I am self employed and pay my VAT and tax on time ever 2 months/year but on these 2 taxes they are nothing but stealth to feed the bondholders. If they were brought in 10 years ago with the sole reasoning of ensuring that septic tanks complied for ENVIRONMENTAL reasons or to support the local councils then fair enough, but even bosco knows that this is going straight out to Europe.

    Out of interest, your last line of "LOL!  If you saw enough of these tanks, you'd understand!"..... does that mean you inspect tanks, hence it could offer employment to you???

    Once again its not a personal attack on you, its just my opinion. :o,


  • Advertisement
  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,803 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    yop wrote: »
    Listen, I am not having a go at you, but remember back in 1998, 1999 we had a load of IT head who were scaring people about the Y2K bug, they made millions as planes were going to crash, ATMs pump out money etc, but you know what it didn't happen and it wasn't because all the bugs were fixed, it was small issues on some servers and PC's, not every single software or hardware system.
    Not having a go at you in turn, but you clearly weren't working on mainframe or midrange software systems back then. There were millions of man-hours put into fixing y2k bugs.

    Granted, the media did what they always do and made up stories about planes crashing, but if we hadn't done what we did to fix the bugs, entire supply chains and financial systems would have imploded. It wouldn't have been as "sexy" as plane crashes or ATMs spewing money, but it wouldn't have been pretty.

    It really grinds my gears to hear people say there was no y2k problem. The vast majority of people will never realise just how big the y2k problem was, and just how much work went into fixing it.

    Dragging this back on topic: in many ways this is analogous. The vast majority of septic tank owners believe that their tank is working perfectly because they have no evidence to the contrary. The only way we could tell whether our ERP systems were y2k-ready was to test them. The fact that they appeared to be working perfectly in the 1990s didn't mean that they were.


Advertisement