But who will handle the poo?

[cobra2411]

Ok, so I've been thinking more about what a stateless society will look like and how it will function and thinking of sewer / water service as well as other services that are cost intensive to roll out. It's very unlikely that such a system can be segmented to work while giving people the freedom to choose and enter voluntarily into contracts.

 

Sure, DRO's can handle the contracts to make sure everyone is charged fairly and so forth, but it's going to be all or nothing for many people. If you have the space you can drill a well and use a septic system, but many homes are built on lots that are simply too small. Even if entire neighborhoods cut their sewer lines and make a processing plant there it still is the entire neighborhood that has to deal with it - all or nothing. 

 

The more I thought about it I remembered that boats use incinerator toilets and wondered if such a system could be installed on a smaller lot or even inside a home to handle sewer and render the solids down to ash. Liquids could be handled by first using ultra-low flow fixtures and either a holding tank or a leach field designed for liquid only. Holding tanks could be pumped at the same time the ash is removed and everything serviced by poo companies. Cisterns can be used for potable water to supply the house and be refilled similar to oil heating tanks. Not sure it would work for the smallest of the small houses, but it's all consumption based, so who knows... 

 

So I thought I'd share my ideas and thoughts and see if anyone else has given this any thought. 

[JamesP]

Before sewer systems, there were septic tanks. If an existing sewer system proved ineffective or a new development was too far from a city sewer to make integration into that system feasible, they could build individual septic tanks or possibly a community one. There are challenges to both of course.

[ribuck]

... services that are cost intensive to roll out ... It's very unlikely that such a system can be segmented to work while giving people the freedom to choose and enter voluntarily into contracts

 

What do you see as the problem? Networks (such as sewers) work just fine in a competitive environment. You might choose to sign up with a local provider that owns just a hundred metres of sewer pipe to the next street, but it's your provider's problem to negotiate service agreements with other parts of the network. If your provider can't get a good deal (perhaps because there's only one provider in the next street), your provider can extend their pipe in the other direction to reach a different provider, or they can implement some other system (such as incineration). Just having the ability to do this is usually enough to get a better deal from their service partner.

 

It's similar to your internet connection. You sign up with your chosen ISP, and you leave it to them to negotiate service agreements with the rest of the internet.

 

Anyway, individual septic tank systems are still used in much of the world (including much of England). It's no big deal. A truck comes once a year to pump out the tank. Composting toilets work fine too. There are enough disadvantages with the usual western model of sewerage that, if someone was designing the system from scratch today, it would certainly be quite a different system.

[Alan C.]

The market is already addressing the issue of waste disposal. I currently provide IT support for a company which designs systems to turn biosolids into energy via plasma gasification and other processes.

 

We can't know for certain which is the optimal method for dealing with waste in the absence of profit and loss.

[Omegahero09]

There might also be people willing to buy your waste as well, especially depending on where you live.Compost generators are a thing, farmers that have enough livestock can move their animal's waste into underground domes to convert the waste into energy.There are loads of options, just remember- if there is a demand, capitalists will supply it. 

[J-William]

Points for a great thread title...

 

But I really don't think poo will be a problem. If poo accumulates around someone's house it won't take long before they are willing to spend any amount of money to get rid of it!

and capitalism is all about solving problems that people are willing to throw money at.

 

Hundreds of years ago when people were infinitely poorer and ignorant... they still didn't like having poo sit around their houses, so in a wealthy and health conscious society there will be loads of entrepreneurs lining up to solve the problem.

[dsayers]

There are a couple problems with questions phrased as "who will... without the government." First of all, it suggests that the moral argument (government is immoral) is secondary at best. Secondly, it suggests that if people want something, they will just sit around and wait for others to provide it. Both are the opposite of the truth.

 

The internet and cellphones are modern day examples of networked goods provided by rival companies working together for the benefit of the sum of their customers. The real question is: Who WON'T provide these things without a government to get in their way?

[nathanm]

Remember, if you ever debate with someone who is totally full of biosolids, just plasma gas their argument.

[cobra2411]

What do you see as the problem? 

Seems like an awful lot of work to roll out multiple sewer lines to neighborhoods. With networks it's easy to string another fiber cable along and go on your way.

 

Now I don't see it as an insurmountable problem and I understand that asking about some of the more intricate details on how a stateless society is like asking for the complete wiring diagram for the most popular car made in 2047. I was just please that I thought of some alternatives and wanted to see what others though.

[AccuTron]

The market is already addressing the issue of waste disposal. I currently provide IT support for a company which designs systems to turn biosolids into energy via plasma gasification and other processes.

 

We can't know for certain which is the optimal method for dealing with waste in the absence of profit and loss.

 

Along with the boat incinerator toilets, how do these approaches stack up in energy costs?

 

 

 

 

Seems like an awful lot of work to roll out multiple sewer lines to neighborhoods. With networks it's easy to string another fiber cable along and go on your way.

 

Now I don't see it as an insurmountable problem and I understand that asking about some of the more intricate details on how a stateless society is like asking for the complete wiring diagram for the most popular car made in 2047. I was just please that I thought of some alternatives and wanted to see what others though.

 

For what it's worth...Running cables means running expensive copper with insulation, made to exacting standards, special training, having pole installation equipment, etc.  The industry required to run in the background just to end up with cables on a spool is extensive, energy intensive, and specialized.

 

Running sewer lines takes attention to detail in planning and installation, but mostly uses backhoes and shovels, and it's material is mostly low-tech concrete.  Sometimes the physical size of something belies what else is behind it.

 

I read of a study called Dust To Dust, about the ACTUAL cost of a car model, including all the materials arriving at the car factory, if the workers arrived more by car or public transit, and the cost to dispose/recycle the vehicle.  Turns out, the Hummer is the greenest, since it's mostly common iron which has probably a recycled content, basically low tech, and recycles easily.  The lightweight body panels of fuel efficiency hide the fact that they are much more energy intensive to mine and transport as raw materials, then blend as alloys.  Likewise, recycling is more complex.  And the fancier electronics of today's cars trace back to various factories using various metals from various world mines and various world smelters, and which later will be a bitch to recycle.