Humanitarian Government #18: Common Held Assets

Humanitarian Government #18: Common Held Assets

Again hello!

What does clean air, clean water, good health, a modern day level of existence and even essential survival all have in common?

In today's world: mankind having to step in and speed up what Mother Nature has done for millennia.

So today, I'm going to go into what we can do as a society to make sure clean air and water is for everyone, cleaning up toxic waste, cleaning up human generated non-toxic waste and probably even the direction of research to get those things done in better ways in the future.

Again, Erf is Old English and means 'inheritance' or 'legacy'. This reminder is for those folks that picked up this article and wouldn't understand the reference. It also is what I call a post-collapsed America who is digging out from that economic and governmental collapse.

Sub-Issue: Air

Without air, we last about three to ten minutes depending on age, where you live, and a few other factors. You should have learned from any elementary grade level science course that you need to breathe to keep your brain ticking over and without your brain, you don't exist except as potential worm food.

Now, I've mentioned how energy is produced in Erf in my housing article: mainly solar and wind via solar panels/shingles and mini-turbines with nuclear supporting Big Biz and what energy can't be created to run large, high-density population cities. Hydro would also be around, but re-engineered to be less ecologically damaging.

But any type of industry creates some sort of impact and we can't prevent that unless we build space stations or Dyson rings or something and do our industry there. But even that sort of activity would still impact our environment.

Now, I'm aware, as most of you I assume, that the current billionaires are big on bunkers. Now, I don't know their designs but if I was designing a bunker for long term use, there would be plants everywhere and the bunker sealed against outside air getting into my bunker. This isn't because I want security in the way you might think. This is to keep outside air that is contaminated with heaven knows what chemicals, diseases, and such out so I can stay healthy for longer.

To make solar shingles/panels other than the biological based ones, you first need oil. When you drill or produce oil, you generally also produce or hit natural gas or other fossil sources of resources. Not that that's bad, except how we work things.

Right now, Big Oil imports oil and processes that from around the world. But it's a particular type of oil, heavy crude. The oil the US produces now is more along the lines of a lighter, 'sweeter' oil and Big Oil doesn't want to fuss with it because it's more expensive to drill for, more to process, and building new processing plants and such isn't their priority. Of course, profit is their driving force. So the screams of energy independence from what I'm now calling 'control-based' political party isn't really a thing. It's a dog whistle. We have the room, means, and even ways of taking Big Oil out of the picture and make it simply Oil Biz. In using that room and means, we could also make Big Utilities into Utilities and reserve their position and uses for Big Biz or whatever 'Corporate' Biz we have that needs large amounts of energy and such.

But all that doesn't explain clean air. Or does it?

Most or all man-made chemicals used in a variety of other industries have issues. Noxious fumes that aren't just smelly is just one of those issues. Burning coal and oil do the same, only that produces CO2 and such that not only affect the US, but the world. Like the water-cycle, air isn't just local: between winds and various other forms of weather, the air we breath is next to the same as anywhere else. However, the closer you get to a chemical plant or energy plant in today's world, the more particulates and such you get before disbursal is enough to first not smell and then in low levels that may still be too much and creates health issues.

So, how do we work this sort of issue?

For one: I suggest every man-made chemical be evaluated. How it's made, how much is made, what impacts are on the environment, if in production for more than five years I'd have a study done of health and environmental impacts, and how to handle it effectively in all ways. Those ways would be creation, neutralization, how to deal with any byproducts, and whatever else science can throw in. In short: time and money and I know Corporate America doesn't want to do that and tries to keep that in-house. Guess what? Not in Erf. Erf learned it's lessons when it comes to Corporate America, and the backlash on the drive of profits at the expense of everything else was harsh.

In short, various methods of cleaning the current air and also methods of keeping contaminates from getting into the general air would be mandatory. That means filters of various types in both buildings and stand alone but powered by renewable systems or passive.

China had major issues a few years back, maybe a decade-ish. People were able to remove particulates out of the air, generally forms of carbon, and press diamonds. Yes, it was that bad. Shelter in place in some cities was the rule at those times. During that time, China was opening up a coal burning plant nearly every week, but has now turned to renewables and leans on that more than fossil fuels.

LA in particular, and even before that various Eastern US cities had air that was just as foul before environmental regulations were put into place. I am one of those children from LA that still has issues secondary to bad LA air at the time, but also further irritated by tobacco smoking from two heavy smokers. I'm just hoping I don't end up with lung cancer even though I haven't lived in a smoking environment for several decades.

We also have a government run by those who want to reduce and has done so in many ways, regulations to protect our water and air. I know the reasons why: Corporate America can cut corners again, create issues, and skip out on the aftermath of what they've done. Just for a fatter bottom line.

Sub-Issue: Water and Sewage

Much like air, water is essential to life. For this natural and world-wide held resource a person can last three to ten days without. Also, the water-cycle is like air: you get concentrated issues wherever something is dumped or otherwise disposed of and leaks into any water tables. That created the most wide-spread issue that modern man needs to deal with today.

Today's Corporate America has messed up (I'm trying to keep my language clean). In fact the company who created, and found issues, and failed to stop the production of PFAS did the entire world a disservice. Also, they need to be held responsible for their actions.

Now, that company is in existence today, is a multi-billion dollar profit world-wide company, and who knows what it is developing to replace PFAS due to the fact States and areas are enacting restrictions or out right bans on the production of any chemical that can fall into the PFAS category. It's also a company with a rich history of doing the same thing, having issues, pawning those issues onto the local governments and people and skip out on their responsibilities. Erf refuses to allow anyone or anything to skip out on responsibility and especially companies that refuse to account for their actions and decisions. So, as soon as Erf blooms into existence, some of the first things the Legislative and Executive Counsels would pass into new laws would be a code of ethics that any company that does business in the current US would have to sign and re-sign on a regular basis, and also be held to that code of ethics. Another part of that would payment and manpower to clean up the mess they've made. Our government today, even if partially working, is too indebted to Corporate America to do the hard work and curb the excesses they create.

Now that company wouldn't necessarily be put out of business. Like all Corporate America in all branches, there are ways of existing that doesn't require today's forms of structures, doesn't require cost cutting and such to make money, profits within reason can be made, and they can also be responsible for their current model and outcomes. So, essentially, Corporate America would be forced to invest in getting to a 21^st Century version of business rather than the early 19^th and 20^th centuries versions of doing business. That may mean they change tracts on what they make their money from.

Why is that? Well, whatever you put into the water cycle isn’t going to stay put, and the cycle isn’t just localized, either. PFAS entered the water systems through multiple pathways from the very beginning of its creation and manufacturing. Not to mention that research on the very employees making the chemicals showed negative impacts — and that was internal research. Of course, waste or dumping has occurred for nearly everything ever created via chemical nature since the dawn of man-made chemical compounds. Use of PFAS was also used in things like Teflon…so no, I have no love of industries that like to say one thing and it’s not, and yet also still use or make available such products. Damnit, use your brains, corporations: is it better to gain an honest profit that doesn’t make messes and health issues, and yet you complain of those messes and health issues? Or make profits for profit’s sake and spend money and time fighting, cleaning up your messes, and fixing health issues, all for even a fraction of those costs? Think: you’d get more of a profit and longer lasting if you did the right thing in the first place.

In that vein, any company that produces any chemicals or byproducts that tend to be dumped in water ways, filling wells or other methods of disposal that is quick, easy, and cheap would have to eat up costs and manpower to clean up things. So, Superfund sites would be paid for more by business rather than taxpayers. Yes: when the government is paying most of the costs of cleaning up prior businesses messes, that's on you, the taxpayer. So not only are we getting shafted by low wages, longer hours, less benefits, higher prices for whatever is made or used, but we also pay via our health and our children's futures.

They would also have to pitch in heavily for what would be a new water system throughout Erf.

Central processing, except in very rural areas, would be the norm. But even in those areas that would still use septic tanks and well water would also be affected by this new water system.

I've already mentioned HDPE piping in my Housing article, but let me go into that further.

Now there are a multitude of positives for this piping, beyond color coding. It’s flexible, it can be replaced with minimal excavation, as in you can put in new piping pulled through an existing pipe that burst. Guess what? Those water lines that take forever to fix? Not so much. I’m sure most of you have seen those cable line placers? Well, same thing, almost the same for installing HDPE pipes. So that headache isn’t exactly removed, but it is minimized on disruptions, not only environmental disruption, but also traffic. Longevity is another benefit: 50 to 100 years of use. It’s flexible, doesn’t leach things into the water, and doesn’t have water loss from the system. It doesn’t take nearly as deep to place as most other piping, too; the deepest is about four feet. It can range up to about 3 feet for warm areas. But that four feet? That’s for very cold regions. Otherwise, it can withstand temperatures as low as -94°F. How? Well, that flexibility and even the changes in ductility in freezing conditions are such that they allow for the expansion of freezing water without cracking. So, if you dig down four or even five feet underground on initial installation, most places will have a tough time getting pipes to burst. What I found for the best installations is to bury the piping below the frost/freeze line and even put insulation in the coldest of areas to protect the piping.

When it comes to HDPE, as stated in my Housing article, it can be color coded. Blue is used for water systems in urban settings. Let’s make that a standard, applying it to clean water only. Orange is known for water supply and drainage identification; let’s change the water supply to sewage. Let’s make that very clear: trust me, you don’t want to find out why you shouldn’t mix the two. Red HDPE is typically used for identifying fire hoses and emergency plugs. Now, if you’re also going to have a storm water management system, I’d also use the orange for that, especially since that water will be from draining off roads, sidewalks, and the like.

Also, I’m not sure how it would work, but I’ve also read about in-pipe water turbines that generate power while that water moves. Yeah…see? Another source of power that a city can defray costs by selling that excess electricity to ‘Big Energy’ power grids. Sorry, Big Energy, if you want to charge anyone for power, you’d better look to the very companies you are putting the costs of giving that energy to, instead of the ‘little folk’. Yes, for those of you not in the know, that’s precisely why your electric bill is going up. Oh, one last positive: HDPE is also recyclable. So pull it out, process it, and reform more piping. Gee, nice, right?

The drawback, like all long-lasting items, is cost. Even in houses, this type of piping can be used, for that mythical house I proposed in 'Housing'? Well, guess what? You can have damn good flexing water supply/sewage systems, too. Also, as stated in that section, wiring of all sorts. However, I’ll argue that reduced maintenance and fewer issues would outweigh the cost issue in either setting.

I know the production would be the hardest issue to deal with. However, this is where education and supporting the sciences would come into play: research and development (to include making sure of few or no issues post-production/use) could be developed. Currently, science is being vilified and I will lay that partially on Corporate America, too. If you have a population that isn't educated enough to know about pollution and it's history, cancer clusters and such can be swept under the rug and regulations be loose.

But that's for clean water to homes or businesses but also sewage from homes/businesses to water treatment plants.

Ugh, and I do mean ugh, we’ve a vast amount of chemical treatments done between the time water hits the treatment facility and getting to your home. For those of you not interested, well, skip this or slog through, your choice.

The first step is some sort of chemical additions that help remove impurities in preparation for other steps. The next three steps all involve what is called ‘flocs’. Flocs are particles in the water that shouldn’t necessarily be there. So, it starts with binding the small flocks, then larger ones, with the last being that the flocs settle on the bottom, with the clear water above that mess. I've also been told that this step is only one continuous step instead of a break down. As stated, those who work in water treatment can either correct me or put out an article of their own and submit it to me. I'll go ahead and publish it as a correction.

Filtration comes next. In this step, if there is still a coal industry, this might keep it alive or increase its use a bit. Still, I’d like to see significant improvements in coal mining and a substantial reduction in black lung. Sorry, companies, you’ll be eating costs for a while, so no…no increases on costs unless so tangible that costs have to be passed down, that isn’t purely for profit.

These filters have five types that I could find. Three of which use carbon and remove PFAS. Granted, PFAS is a problem worldwide as already stated on why and how. Now, smaller household systems do exist and in some areas, if pushed, Corporate America has put in those systems.

The other two are Ion Exchange and Reverse Osmosis. Ion Exchange uses resin beads to swap out PFAS for harmless ions. Reverse Osmosis forces water through semipermeable membranes that can trap PFAS. Very similar to a particular brand of non-alcoholic wine, but their Reverse Osmosis is geared to alcohol (chuckles). Now, I would have that more for a second step within a two-step filtration system (Maybe first, water treatment people…let me know which would be better). The second would have the water go through ‘normal’ filter systems. That’s sand, gravel, or charcoal. That was from one source of information. I also remembered something about nanofibers being used for cleaning water from wells in remote regions known for their polluted water tables. This one removes 80-90% of PFAS, but also bacteria, viruses, and organic pollutants. So, the last one is nanoalumina fibers.

Hell, if you really want to get nit-picky about your water, your water treatment can use more than one system for getting rid of PFAS and contaminants. It depends on what the local population is willing to pay. I’ll get to that sort of thing, too.

Next is disinfection. Everyone should know about chlorine treatment. It’s even used during camping or keeping gallons of water at home from previously used bottles, such as well-washed milk gallons, juice, or other water types, to prevent the water from growing anything nasty. Even treated water sitting around in jugs needs something to prevent the growth of unwanted organisms. Nature always finds a way, right? The other method involves using ozone, essentially mixing ozone gas into the water. Both kill any remaining pathogens.

Once disinfected, the treatment adjusts the pH of the water. This is to improve taste and reduce pipe corrosion. Fine, OK, I get that you want to reduce pipe corrosion.

Now, I can make a few arguments on this. Yes, treatment changes the water taste; there are ways of fixing that. Acidic water does corrode metal piping. Last is fluoridation. Now, I have issues with this. My family (parents, siblings, and other more distant family) all have the same problem: we’re the unlucky ones who react opposite to what fluoridation is supposed to do. When I was a girl, the town I lived in at one point had only well water. No fluoridation. Guess what? Never a cavity. Before? I lived in a fluoridated area, and after we moved from that small town, it was the same. Both times, I had so many cavities it wasn’t funny. I ended up needing dentures when I was just 32, and at that time, I lost my remaining baby tooth (yes, long story, not pertinent other than this fact) and a dozen adult teeth. I’m suggesting that fluoridation would be on an individual basis despite the lack of convenience.

Healthcare, which in Erf would be Universal and full body, would also feed into this in a variety of ways: cancer from products not compatible with humans, dental (as covered above) being impacted in various ways, and more. So, despite the screaming of Big Biz, I will say this: you made the messes, you have issues with people for various reasons not having kids or having lower fertility or birthrates and more. You have to take into account your issues are a cycle, too. A cycle of wanting one thing, spreading that into power, yet the very base of that money and power is the very thing you are poisoning and harming. Deal with it.

Sub-Issue: Toxic Waste

I've already mentioned in passing in air about dealing with toxic wastes.

Filters, compartmentalizing and closed systems to keep those toxins from being released, processing and neutralizing cancer and health impacting items and more should be mandatory.

Also, Big Biz needs to be chipping in for science to keep these from being issues in the first place or to be able to clean up those issues. As always and on all levels, accountability and responsibility for not just yourself is something mandatory in Erf.

When it comes to certain things, and currently PFAS is at the top of the list, they aren't able to be removed and treated easily. PFAS in particular is nasty and there is no other way other than capture to deal with it. This is why Big Biz needs to be more mindful and take the brunt of issues if they move forward on making things and having it create health or environmental, or both issues.

Sub-Issue: Trash

Topic: Plastic

I've mentioned I lived overseas for a bit in my lifetime. I learned a lot there and wished I could force the changes here in the US because it's a needed thing.

Plastics are an issue and in more than one category. We need to address that.

One is that if you recycle plastics, it's not a simple melting down and re-purposing it. It takes another set of chemicals to break it down so it can be reused. Those chemicals are more expensive than creating new. However, creating new also uses a finite resource.

Now, we also have certain plastics that are easier to recycle. I'm not sure of the economics of making though, nor the chemical processes. However, this is another issue that science needs to be employed in helping solve and/or find ways of making those cheaper, easier, less toxic and more. Will that be more time and money? Yes. Like all developments, things take time and to be honest, the habit of Big Biz wanting a return of investment immediately or very fast along with making profit as fast as possible needs to be curbed and retaught.

For one, developments aren't something to be feared or restricted except as I've already stated about toxicity and impacts. Having something without planned obsolescence is also something that should literally be planned on and figured into a slower form of economic advancement. Especially if ways of not recovering most of what whatever is made from aren't available or not created. The lack of planned obsolescence would give time to find ways of recovering limited and/or finite resources before some of the usefulness of whatever is too much to deal with effectively.

This means the gold, copper, and whatever metals used for things like electronics would need ways of being recovered and reused. This creates jobs and a new market: going through trash areas, finding items that haven't decomposed but could be either recycled or recoverable, markets for recovered materials to be processed for 'new'. The issue of uncovering trash collecting areas that have are decades old would need special handling, and that even includes more modern ones. The methane alone release would need to be controlled. People who have issues going through these areas of course wouldn't be prone to take these jobs, but the amount of jobs from uncovering to post-processing would be quite a bit.

Topic: Paper

Paper is handled in three ways in Europe. Plain paper is recyclable directly. We have that tech here and we also do that. That can be made into new paper, hand made paper or whatever. With the lack of arsenic inks and news print, the amount of paper today is still large, but not nearly as much as even twenty years ago.

Then we've plastic-coated papers like for juice boxes and such. Now, wax used to be used. Do we have enough to switch over and/or is it appropriate for a coating for certain things? I'm not sure to be honest. Again: I'm not an expert on anything.

But in Europe, that kind of paper is separated out from regular paper and in some areas shipped or locally burned in energy production furnaces that also burn so hot that the air around that plant is fairly clean and no smell. We could do that here, but of course, that energy could go into a back-up grid or movable batteries that can be movable for disaster energy back up beyond what I mentioned in Housing.

Topic: Cardboard

In the US and on military bases/posts, there are bins that you bring your broken down boxes to be reused. The boxes that are no longer able to used are dealt with on a regular schedule. For Erf, that is still an option, but also the burning would also work if need be.

This isn't saving a finite resource, because most or all of paper production is from a renewable plant-based source or sources. It's more of an issue of trying to keep that renewable plant-base longer to help clear and create air.

Topic: Glass

Glass is also separated in Europe: brown, other than brown, and clear. This is another item I'd love to address: glass may be heavier, but just the practice of recycling sterilizes the material, and can be formed into damn near anything.

I'm well aware that glass is heavier for transport and breakable in relationship to plastics. However, again, glass is easier to recycle, isn't nearly as toxic as plastics, and made from materials that nature provides and are at least semi-renewable. Sand isn't as renewable as some would think, but still, it's something that can be used once originally, then kept using in that original form until...well, for glass until it melts back into a puddle. Contrary to popular belief, glass isn't a solid: it's a liquid that is semi-solid and will 'melt' or eventually 'puddle' if left on it's own for a few decades.

However with glass, specialized lids and such, it could in part replace plastic or plastic-coated papers. Colored glass is generally tinted with some sort of chemical or metal and if for things like soda/pop bottles, could be used that way with either a paper or molded logo/name like the antique Coke bottles. Same for clear glass. Brown would be, like in Europe, more for beers. But also like the US before drug companies and medications were compounded by hand, used for medications. Am I saying getting rid of plastics? No, just restricting them for only certain uses like for medical treatments or other areas of life that require one-use and then disposed of in such a way it could be done without issues.

Topic: Biological and degradable

The last is compost-able/biological-based. Now with community gardens, new farming methods to exclude uni-crop farming and such, in the US we have issues.

In Europe and most of Asia, the only real 'trash' is compost-able. But lets look at that.

For one, especially with community gardens and grow rooms, compost could be, at least in part, a good way of keeping land from burning out, or even grow trays. In more rural areas, there is actually a bigger issue.

For one, we import and/or use tons of nitrogen in farming and that creates nitrogen run off and then issues with bacterial or plant blooms in water that can cause issues. But what if we could farm in ways that naturally returns nitrogen to the environment? That's the lack of uni-crop farming in action. I mentioned how in my Food article on how to handle that kind of farming. One wouldn't specialize in one crop, but you wouldn't need your own equipment for anything between ground-prep to harvesting. This would reduce the costs of farming, and keeps our land healthy.

Not to mention our over production and pickiness on how produce in particular looks.

Heirloom plants do several things: they are varieties of plants that have been bred for taste and sometimes hardiness combined. There are also plants that we don't raise that are naturally hardy and can be planted in less than forgiving lands and still be very productive. Both forms have positives. I will say some might be only worthwhile to grow in controlled environments such as grow troughs/trays inside. This is because these are so hardy they are hard to control otherwise. We don't need a repeat of kudzu that we have in the south.

Not only that, community gardens and grow rooms also can create a lessening of needing certain vegetables and even fruits. That means some land could be used in other ways. Not to mention, overages need to be managed better so we can sell most in other markets and used fully in Erf.

But that's not the real issue: over growth and food waste is.

We've developed issues with how something looks and attached that with taste and use. A carrot with three splitting roots, making it look something like a fixed, orange octopus with only three tentacles, is just as good as one of those perfect carrots in a supermarket. In fact, depending on the source of seed or root top, it might be better. That's where heirloom comes in. Commercial fruits and vegetables are bred for looks and possibly hardiness rather than taste. Not to mention, we've grains and vegetables that are literally made to withstand things like Round-up (an herbicide) specifically for easier plant control. These are also sterile and you have to buy your seed from the very companies (or branch from under the same corporate umbrella) every year. There are other issues involved that are becoming more and more prevalent.

So what am I saying?

For one, over growth and pickiness causes at least a third of all grown items ending up in land fills or compost piles all over the country. The compost creates methane...and methane is the number one greenhouse gas, not CO2.

The second is we're ending up being reliant on corporations who could withhold seed or other starters for plants and essentially telling corporations silently that they could control your food supply and force behaviors that aren't acceptable in any form or at any time.

The methane could, in theory, be worked around. By capturing that gas and using it in ways that could be put to practical use. The second about corporations possibly controlling your food supply can also be worked around legislatively. It's to make it illegal to create sterile crops and find alternative ways of pest and weed control. In short: we're taking easy ways of things that would take time and effort to be more effective, more of a cycle rather than a point A to point Z type of system that doesn't circle back to point A and continue on.

Sub-Issue: Cable/Internet

Now, tech such as Cable/Internet is a double-edge sword. It's good for having a variety of entertainment and having massive amounts of information at your fingertips. However, it's vulnerable to other issues and also fairly unregulated.

I know...we've legislation even in the US about certain things for regulation. Age-sensitive information being behind walls is one. But, the way to keep that behind walls and out of overly curious persons is another thing, especially children. We also have unsavory groups and persons stalking around and causing mayhem and sorrow among other things. Another issue is misinformation being propagated like a virus.

Now, cable/internet is also damn near required to get a job, especially in urban areas. Applying to schools is also partially for fully on-line, too. Not to mention education in some areas and may be the same method for communication.

So, common held.

One, we could use HDPE that is combined with EMI (Electronic Interference shielding) to help with those issues. They do exist already, which is great. There is also Faraday Cages and again, these already exist and shield such items and quite common now. Put together, that would be an excellent way of keeping internet issues to...a minimum in ways. Again: cost is the issue.

However, again: what is it worth to have something more durable and long lasting until something better comes up but also required to at least be side-by-side older tech more as a primary with older tech being as a back up? Because it would be a type of replacement, but not fully disabled or dismantled until yet another form replaced the 'new' tech. Get the picture?

But this would be fully nation wide. So, again: jobs.

As far as keeping sites and separating ages and such, that I will leave to cyber security experts. Surveillance is already heavy in just about any class or way you can think of when it comes to electronics and connectivity. Granted, I'd love to get rid of all of that, however unless we go back to quick destruction papers and inks, I don't see that happening soon, and what is used as walls now isn't very reliable or sensible: anyone can come up with a birth date to get under most of those walls.

Sub-Issue: Transportation

I'm not going into this right now, that will be in another article soon. Transportation is essential in a country such as ours, and with the changes already proposed, transportation would also change.

Closing

That's it for now. If anything has been missed, its because I'm one person tackling something that covers millions of people and not being privy or knowledgeable on everything, I can only think of so much. So, sorry and you can contact me about anything I've missed.

Until next time, have a safe and good time.