A huge mass of used wet wipes has changed the course of an English river
businessinsider.nl
businessinsider.nl
They could improve this, but that would cost money, which means rich people would make less profit or pay more taxes.
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-56590219 adds "It's believed that wet wipes make up at least 90% of the material causing sewers to block."
That would lessen with a ban on selling plastic-based wet wipes.
Not sure how the English handle this kind of taxation but in the US most municipalities would spread the cost of a project like this over all users or add as some assessment to property taxes.
In other words, not just “rich people” would pay for it.
There are still quite a few otherwise modern cities in the US that also have this legacy problem (shared sewer + storm drain). My guess is that the cost is considered to be far too high to rip up and rebuild these systems.
If the costs are high, then raise taxes - progressively - to rebuild these systems.
no one wants taxes to raise. poor, middle, rich, you name it. because it just means less money at the end of the month.
If my taxes go up 1% while those making $1M+/year go up by 10%, in order to get improved sewage treatment systems and more, then I'm all for it.
While rich people tend to use their free time for something beside going to the local English beach for a swim.
Universal single-payer health care is cheaper and with better overall health benefits than the current US system has. I would gladly pay higher taxes than pay for my own health insurance as it means more money at the end of the month.
How much money should you get at the end of the month for letting the water be more polluted with untreated sewage?
Promoting single-family homes, prohibiting detached housing, zoning laws that require parking and minimum lawn sizes, etc. all drive up the cost of housing for people who don't have as much money.
It's also cheaper to maintain infrastructure (streets, water, sewer, etc.) in older more densely packed (and also less expensive / poorer) neighborhoods than in more expansive suburbia. As https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/5/7/the-more-we-bui... puts it "The poorest neighborhoods are, in essence, subsidizing the rich ones."
It seems like people just throw their electronic and other hazardous waste away without much consideration as well.
We end up sacrificing a lot for the lowest common denominator. We have to ban things, or license them, or regulate them, or have strict enforcement. Generally, if we can't do without it, like AC refrigerant, it sticks around with heavy penalties and still gets abused. If we can do without it, it just gets banned.
Quite what these people are using so many wet wipes for is beyond me. Changing babies and removing make up are the only common uses I can think of, but why not just put them in the bin?
It's amazing to what one can get used to. My washlet has a heated seat, now regular seats feel very cold.
Do you simply not know how to wipe your bum properly? My two-year-old has the basics of it, even if he hasn't quite got his technique down yet.
It’s also worse if you spend significant time using a bidet, then find yourself without one.
Ouch.
It is just bullshit marketing, but technically it’s true. Flushable means “can be flushed,” not that it’s a good or responsible idea.
A way out? Nope. It's a maddening process we all have to fully and completely enjoy, ad nauseam, to the very end.
Wet wipes would classify as trash but likely slip through the incoming strainer. Other things the waste treatment people hated were tampons and condoms.