3 ms·
Part of the article's suggestion is to better differentiate monitoring points, so as to divide farm-related hits from urban hits. That said, in cities that hav
by ethbr1 2y ago
Part of the article's suggestion is to better differentiate monitoring points, so as to divide farm-related hits from urban hits.
That said, in cities that have combined storm and sewer system, the latter is a lot more difficult.
But in general, it is a uniquely politically-palatable continuous monitoring solution.
The public doesn't want to think about what happens underneath a toilet or drain, so no one cares if someone is sampling and testing it.
- Terr_ 2y agoAlso, it's not so finely-grained that it seems like a privacy problem.
- worstspotgain 2y agoSF has a combined sewer system, but it has zero farms. One question is whether it was more likely to be a signal from wild birds (into the runoff system) than humans (into the sewer.) There's very little rain in the summer months, the average for July rounds off to 0.0in. I don't remember if there was any significant rain in May or June, but I'd be surprised if it was more than 1-5% of the total. I guess there's lawn irrigation, though.
- dredmorbius 2y agoSF has pretty limited lawn irrigation as well. Depending on how the sewerage system is divided, some parts of the city have effectively none.
- worstspotgain 2y agoThere are three sewersheds [1] but we don't know which one the signal was detected in (or do we?) If it was the Northpoint one (~ NE quadrant) there aren't as many lawns there. There are a few small parks, street cleaning and whatnot. [1] https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/CalSuWers-Dashboard.aspx https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/Cal...