Rain water harvesting and slow sand water filters

Filter 4 and 5 now have re-circulation systems installed. Both of these filters had failed miserably in April/May of this year due to lack of water throughtput, and excessive organic debris present in the input water. Since the re-circulation systems have been installed and running for 2 months, the water in both filter systems has improved tremendously. The foul odor is gone, and the water is clear again. The details follow.

There have been 5 options for re-circulating water used here. Totally manual, an electronic timer, a modified ball valve, a modified standard hose bib, and a drip irrigation timer.  All five work. The modified standard hose bib was the most difficult to set up and the least professional – it is not shown, even though it does work.

The manual method (adding water from a bucket filled by a hand operated pitcher pump) and the electronic timer will work with a non-pressurized system. The manual method is the most time consuming and requires daily attention.

The electronic timer switch is the Amico DC 12V Digital LCD Power Programmable Timer Time Switch Relay 16A      sku 40037612     This timer will handle 16 amps.  We are also now testing out a PV array set up to charge and run small dc motors of the size used in the pumps on the recirculation systems shown here. So far, a 50 watt PV array produces waaayyyy more power than is needed to keep the motors running during the summer months when there is little or no rainfall. The recirculation is not really needed in the fall, winter, or spring, so the lack of sunshine is irrelevant.

Much more info as I get time. . .   .   right now “I got all the freaking work I need”.

This is the ball valve. It is in use on filter 4 along with the electronic timer, for test purposes only. Either this or the electronic timer will work alone. The extended arm on the ball valve allows very fine adjustment of flow rate.The electronic timer is not needed, we are just testing it out.

This is the programmable timer. It will work with or without a pressurized system. It just turns the motor off and on at specified times. Up to 17 choices in 24 hour time period. This is in use with filter 4. So far the timer works like a charm. The "manual" button allows the water to be turned on and off anytime without disturbing the programmed times.

this is a schematic of the timer circuit hookup. The battery symbol represents the 12 volt power supply for the motor and the timer. The timer must have the power supply hooked up before the relay inside it will function. The capacitor is necessary to keep the relay contacts from being burned by arcing as the motor has significant inductance.

This is the schematic of the filter 4 system that uses flow regulation and flow frequency control using the electronic timer switch.

This is the raindrip timer. It works with a pressurized system. This is in use on filter 5. It is set to allow flow for 1 minute every hour on the hour.

This is the schematic of the recirculation system with the raindrip timer.

Important:

We have been researching rain water harvesting laws for some time now. This is an almost impossible task; as each state’s website is different and the regulations are unbelievably complex. Legal assistance is needed to accurately interpret the laws, rules and regulations. Please see our previous posts for extensive info on rain water harvesting laws; but keep the following in mind:

There are 50 state governments (not counting the District of Columbia or the Philippines) and 3007 counties with some form of government in the U.S. and over 18 thousand cities/metropolitan areas and then there are the homeowner’s associations with covenants, and restrictions that are limited only by abiltiy to pay for legal assistance. These local laws may make rainwater harvesting against the law; even though it may be even encouraged by state governemnt.  It is not possible for us to ever get all of these micro-communities documented. The best we do here is the State and Federal regulations.

Just as an example of what we search through, this is Virginia’s water law page: approximately 1200 laws to search through– and that is after we took the time to actually find the page. Each state is different.

So far we have looked up rain water harvesting laws in: Arkansas, Kansas, South Carolina, Illinois, Wisconsin, South Dakota, New Jersey, Washington state, Oregon, Utah, Colorado.  What we found coincides very closely with the information in our original post regarding rain water harvesting in the U.S.

The pattern we are finding shows increasing freedom regarding rain water harvesting for the individual, along with, in some cases, increasing regulations depending on the intended use of the harvested rain water. Please note: neither I, nor anyone else here has studied law in college. We are not lawyers. To pay a lawyer to do this research would be cost prohibitive, to say the least.

We are reading these laws and regulations from the state government websites. There are links so each person can make their own judgement as to the meaning.

On October 20, 2011;  I wrote a bit on this blog about moss eating away at roof surfaces. Since then I’ve done more research. Moss does not “eat away” at your roof. Moss is a bryophyte. It does not have roots and gets its food from water and sunlight – not the substrate (the stuff it grows on). It eats away at nothing. Check the science. Its the stuff that often is present with moss (and often hidden by the moss) that does the damage; along with sunlight, below freezing weather, moisture and power washing. Sunlight, and high pressure power washing do way more damage to a roof than moss can ever do.

The original  post was a result of observing how the moss interacts with the rain water runoff from the roof, and I got carried away with the details. Since then, I’ve done more research. One important observation I have made here is that where the moss was most prevalent, the water was of the best quality. A new filter was added receiving water from an area on the roof with very little moss. Subsequently, that new filter was overwhelmed with debris and excessive organic contaminants. Also, I’ve actually gone up on the roof here to take a very close look at the moss growing there. The roofing material does “appear” to be slowly breaking down where the moss is growing; however it is also breaking down where the moss is minimal and the sunlight is maximum. So what’s up with this? Are the contractor’s who insist that moss eats away at your roof correct? Possibly. Moisture definitely does lots of damage – over time – and moss can hold moisture. I’ve had a roofing expert out here to inspect the roof. He said nothing about the moss being a big problem. He explained that the insulation under the roof in the attic, the ridge vent functionality and moisture present in the air are the biggest problems. Moss is an indicator of other problems, not a problem in itself.

Consider the links below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lichen

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moss

http://dmr-gutters.com/rf/moss.htm#composite

The last link is the most interesting from the point of discovering where the idea that “moss eats away at your roof” comes from. The person who has this website is an experienced contractor. At the top of the page that the link takes you to, you will discover his explanation of how “moss” destroys composition roofing. If you read it carefully, you will see that he already has seen and knows from experience what we have discovered from our academic research on this touchy topic. Now, read all three of these links and the previous post on this blog here for numerous other (scholarly) links and the truth of the matter will become obvious.  The moss is not what actually breaks down the roofing material; its what is present (usually) with the moss. Lichens, bacteria, moisture, organic debris, and sunlight are the issues that are most destructive to composition roofing material. The only thing that is obvious from a visual inspection however, is that when there is moss on a roof, the material breaks down quickly. The science described in the links above, including the links in the previous article on this blog, show that its not the moss that breaks down the roofing, and actually sunlight is more destructive to roofing material than moss or, moisture, or lichens.  Also, if you read the contractor’s website closely, you will see that he accurately describes the tremendous damage “power washing” does to a roof – it literally rips the sand off of the shingles exposing the petroleum based subsurface to the sunlight, which will break down that petroleum base in a few years. So, the scenario is typically this: A homeowner gets moss on their roof, calls a contractor to power wash the moss off. Then, 3 or 4 years later their roof fails. They blame the moss. Totally wrong. Prevarication of facts and big misunderstanding.

Now, from all this people get the idea that moss is really bad stuff. Moss killer is all over the place in the hardware stores. People put chemicals on their lawn to kill that nasty moss. Some people are smart, however. They have a moss instead of a lawn. Weeds seldom penetrate the moss and it does not really need watering here in the Pacific Northwest. Low maintenance, soft and pretty. Hmmmm.

If you keep the organic debris off of the roof, and sweep the moss with a stiff broom while the moss is wet and before it gets established, it is possible to keep the roof basically moss – free and poison – free, with minimum damage to the roof. This will also help to prevent the stuff (lichens and bacteria)  that really does “eat away at your roof” from ever getting started.

If anyone has information that shows the science here is wrong, or that my interpretation is wrong, please post it with a link to the source and we will change this post accordingly. No link, no change. Your are entitled to your opinion; but it will change nothing here.

First of all, look to the table of contents page on this blog to get detailed info (from links to sources) on rain water harvesting laws, or lack of them,  in the U.S. .  These laws are changing rapidly and becoming more and more permissive regarding rain water harvesting.

Update June 9, 2014: All 50 state government websites and/or associated websites have been checked. The only state where it is against the law (for some people) to collect rain water is Colorado, its legal in all other states. Know that some counties and cities may have laws that differ from their state government laws.

Update December 15, 2013: The number of state government sites checked is now up to 24. Still no laws found against rain water harvesting by individual homeowners.

Update: August 21, 2013: So far I have looked up regulations on 18 states in the U.S. :  Maine, Tennessee, Georgia, Washington state, Oregon, Utah, Idaho, Missouri, South Dakota, Illinois, Wisconsin, Kansas, Arkansas, New Mexico, Colorado, South Carolina, and New Jersey

I have found absolutely nothing specifically prohibiting rain water harvesting by individuals in all cases. There are regulations on industrial pollution, new construction, and large amounts of water diversion –  typically over 100,000 gallons. There are, also, hundreds of counties, cities, and residential districts that may indeed have laws against rain water harvesting by individuals, but not at the state government level.

Directly below is a document endorsed by the mayor of Albuquerque, New Mexico regarding  rainwater harvesting:

http://www.ose.state.nm.us/water-info/conservation/Albq-brochures/rainwater-harvesting.pdf

Here is one regarding state sponsored rain water harvesting in the U.S. state of New Mexico:

http://www.ose.state.nm.us/water-info/conservation/rainwater-harvesting.pdf

Here is another link to a story about rainwater harvesting becoming legal in Colorado:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/us/29rain.html?_r=0

and from the above story, here is an update to one of the links they had that was changed: (we found the study they speak of that shows the inaccuracy of the assumptions used to form the original restrictive Colorado laws regarding rainwater harvesting). This link goes directly to the PDF file that contains the study “Holistic Approach to Sustainable Water Management in Northwest Douglas County” the part regarding rainwater recharge of ground water starts on page 25 of the report. It shows that lots of the rain in Colorado never actually made it to the ground water before development began. This is a complex study but it is clearly written and you must read it to understand the issues:

http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/water/pdf/Rice–HolisticApproachtoSustainableWaterManagementinNorthwestDouglasCounty.pdf

Lots of “prepper” blogs refer to the “southwestern states” as having and creating laws that make it “against he law” to harvest rainwater. Here is the story on the southwestern states straight from those states. If one reads this document, one will discover that the laws are not becoming more restrictive, they are actually becoming way, way less restrictive:

http://www.cap-az.com/Portals/1/PublicInformation/AwardForResearch/Gaston–Rainwater-Harvesting–May-2010–CAP.pdf

Now, links to some of the blogs I found that really screw up the information about rainwater harvesting so as to spread hate, discontent, fear, uncertainty and doubt. There are so many “prepper” blogs that have hyped – up rants about how repressive government is ripping away at the “average citizen’s rights”. Some of this may be true, but not so with rainwater harvesting. While it is imperative that big government be kept in check, we do no good by doing so with un-truths, exaggerations and prevarication of the facts.

Some disturbing misunderstandings and inaccuracies here:

http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/1gwwuq/til_that_harvesting_rainwater_is_illegal_in_many/

This one is not as bad as the previous, but there are posts here that show peoples ignorance:

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=85310

This one is full of mis-information:

http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/04/collecting-rainwater-now-illegal-in-many-states-2513766.html

More misinformation here. This fellow has millions of gallons of water stored. If you do some research you will discover that this guy owns 170 acres of land in/near the city’s watershed, and only about 15 miles from Medford, Oregon. He has been there for, apparently, many years, and has had these ponds for many years. It is claimed that he did get approval from the government for the ponds, but then they went back on their word and came after him. It gets real hot and dry in the summer in Medford, Oregon. They need all the water they can get. He has 170 acres of land with lots of water on it. Now, the city wants his water. Again, follow the money trail. Somewhere, someone stands to make a lot of money on water. The sad thing is that lots of people there really need water in the summer. Is it “big government” or, “big business” or both that are at the source of this issue? Let’s look at this from this guy’s perspective (assuming he is telling the truth).  He buys land, or inherits it from his kinfolk. He is miles from urban sprawl, and has no desire to harm anyone else (we assume). It is obvious that the nearest neighbors have all the water they will ever need. Along come land developers – the city grows exponentially. Now they need more water to serve the newly created municipalities; and even more to create more development. They want his water. They find a way to get at it through government regulations.  Sound crazy? No. This similar scenario, on a much larger scale, actually happened in California early in the 20th century with the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir dam. Read more here.

read about the issue near Medford here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2187977/Man-jailed-30-days-building-reservoirs-HIS-OWN-LAND-water-20-Olympic-sized-pools.html

This is not about the average person collecting several hundred gallons of water in rain barrels; but this issue is worth watching closely. But lets know the truth. Read this stuff below in the next link for yourself – fox news really hypes it up good:
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2012/08/16/man-jailed-for-collecting-rainwater-in-illegal-reservoirs-on-his-property/

More fear, uncertainty, doubt, hate and discontent, and inaccurate information in this link.  At this site there are two links to stories of situations that are indeed good examples of government overstepping its authority; but these issues are not about rainwater harvesting being against the law; however they are (apparently) accurate and do represent abuse of power:

http://offgridsurvival.com/rainwaterillegal/

Some mis-information here:

http://www.permies.com/t/7164/energy/Collecting-rainwater-illegal-states

More inaccurate info here:

“There are several states where rain collection is restricted or illegal. It’s totally illegal, for example, in Oregon and Utah.”Sorry dude’s, but you’re totally wrong. Check the other links on this blog you are reading. Utah just lifted some restrictions on rainwater harvesting, and Oregon only regulates some types of rainwater harvesting.

http://www.raincontrolaluminuminc.com/is-collecting-rain-water-illegal-in-florida/

More fear, uncertanty and doubt here:

http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/education/mom/linda/2010/mom410.html

I could go on finding links for hours. They are all over the net. The only upside to all this inaccurate hype, is that people may be made aware that there are potentially others who will want to control their access to water, but be careful, always, ALWAYS, follow the money trail. Government officials can be influenced by money from wealthy corporations. This is the real threat to our “freedom”. And if you are led to a conclusion by deliberate un-truths, exaggeration, and mis-information, does the end really justify the means; and how would you feel when you found out that all the info you got to justify your stance was basically bs?  Duped? Lied to? Go figure.

If anyone has information showing that the stuff I post here is wrong, or inaccurate, please post your reply here with a link to the source, and we’ll change this post to reflect the new information.

If you post your opinion (a statement with no link to the source) your post will be marked as such and we will change nothing. You are entited to your opinion. Spamdexing and deliberate attempts at free advertising will be deleted immediately.

Update July 15, 2013:

New Jersey regulations do not appear to make rain barrels, or rain water harvesting for the individual home owner against the law. There are programs in the state that encourage rooftop rainwater harvesting:

The official website of the state of New Jersey regarding water:

http://www.state.nj.us/nj/green/water/

At the above page click on the link that says “all about water”

http://www.nj.gov/dep/watersupply/

Then click on the link that says “Water allocation and registrations”

that takes you here: New Jersey state website about water rules:

State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Division of Water Supply and Geoscience

http://www.nj.gov/dep/watersupply/g_reg.html

New Jersey water supply allocation rules 2008:

http://www.nj.gov/dep/rules/rules/njac7_19.pdf

The PDF at the above link is 90 pages. The definitions section clearly states: nothing about rain water harvesting for or against. Also the water “owned” by the state is clearly defined as not including rain, but just about everything else.

Rutgers (in N.J.) paper on rain water harvesting:

http://njaes.rutgers.edu/pubs/publication.asp?pid=FS1162

at the page the above link takes you to click on the “download pdf” button

This should offer you the down load of:

“Rooftop Rainwater Harvesting For Plant Irrigation I:Design

Concepts and Water QuantityFact Sheet FS1162

Cooperative ExtensionSalvatore S. Mangiafico, Environmental and Resource Management AgentChristopher C. Obropta, Extension Specialist in Water ResourcesElaine Rossi-Griffin, Program Coordinator, Environmental Science”

from Page 4:

“Legal ConsiderationsThe authors know of no regulations at this timegoverning cistern installation for private use in NewJersey except that using cisterns in a drinking watersystem is typically not allowed (NJDEP 2004). Otherstates may have regulations stipulating, for example,the allowable size and material of storage tanks, orthe maximum allowable amount of water that can beharvested. State laws and local ordinances should beconsulted when designing any rainwater harvestingsystem.”

Update June 26, 2013:

Illinois: Rainwater harvesting is highly regulated and the “regulations” are incredibly complex. That said, the codes there have recently been changed to allow, what appears to be “rain barrels”. Here is a quote from the regulations:

“Section 890.2105 Permits  Where permits are required by the authority having jurisdiction, it shall be unlawful for any person to construct, install, alter, or cause to be constructed, installed, or altered any alternate water source system in a building or on a premise without first obtaining a permit from the authority having jurisdiction.A plumbing permit is not required for the following: ILLINOIS REGISTER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH  NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS a) Exterior rainwater catchment systems used for outdoor drip and subsurface irrigation with a maximum storage capacity of 360 gallons.b) Rainwater catchment systems for single family dwellings where all outlets,piping, and system components are located on the exterior of the building. This does not exempt the need for permits if required for electrical connections, tank supports, or enclosures.”

If someone says “rainwater harvesting in Illinois is against the law”, they are partially correct. . .  however, in reference to rain barrels, they are wrong. This is why I have given Illinois, a near failing grade on rainwater harvesting. Way ,way, wwwaaaayyyy too many regulations. Here is the URL of the pdf document I accessed on June 26, 2013 at 0930 PDT:

http://www.pcaofchicago.com/Docs/Documents/Part_%20890_Plumbing_Code_Amendments_4_10_13.pdf this is from section 890.2105 which turns out to be page 137 on a “fit page width” pdf reader.

Update June 19, 2013:

A recent search that found this blog was asking why it is against the law to capture rainwater in Kansas. The following link to the Kansas gov’t site shows clearly that it is not against the law for people to capture rainwater in Kansas for their own personal use; even lots of it for a small farm is ok to catch. At the page the link takes you to, go all the way down the page to where the “Rainwater harvesting Q&A” section is located. There you will read the info straight from the source. If you read it carefully, you will find that the Kansas government has the foresight to require more than 15 acre-feet per year to be regulated. This makes total sense, but can easily be misconstrued to mean that nobody can collect rain water. This is a good example of how facts get distorted by mis-information and those who wish to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt. What the regulations are actually saying is that a person can’t “hog” all the water.  Like making their own personal lake. The gov’t is actually trying to keep big businesses from taking water from the citizenry; this is NOT about the gov’t trying to take water away from the citizenry. . . .   it is still a good idea to keep a close watch on government, and a closer eye on corruption and the money trail. Closer reading of the document, suggests that individual cities in Kansas may have ordinances regarding rain water harvesting that are in addition to the state’s laws.

Update: June 21, 2013

Another search about the legality of harvesting rain water found this blog; this time regarding the state of Wisconsin

We found 2 pages with info at the Wisconson DNR site.

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WaterUse/documents/PermittingFactsheet.pdf

At the above link is the explanation of what they mean by “withdrawal”  below is the info in quotes:

“What is a withdrawal? What does it mean to withdraw?Withdraw or withdrawal means the taking of water from surface water or groundwater.There are many different methods for withdrawing water including wells, intake pipes,and ditches. When someone withdraws water, it is taken out of or redirected from its natural course making it unavailable for other purposes,even if only temporarily”

The next link is to info that specifies when a permit is needed:

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WaterUse/permits.html

“Water use permitting Background Effective December 8, 2011, a Water Use permit is required before persons may withdraw water in quantities that average 100,000 gallons per day (equivalent to 70 gallons per minute for 24 hours straight) or more in any 30-day period from groundwater or surface water in the Great Lakes Basin [PDF 764KB]. Examples include public water systems, high capacity well owners, and others who withdraw water from lakes and streams such as fish farms and golf courses.There are two types of Water Use permits:Water Use General Permit – Required for withdrawals that average 100,000 gallons per day or more in any 30-day period but do not equal at least 1,000,000 gallons per day for 30 consecutive days.Water Use Individual Permit – Required for withdrawals that equal at least 1,000,000 gallons per day for 30 consecutive days.”

It is hardly concievable that a rain barrel setup at the average homeowner’s residence will use more than 100,000 gallons in a month.

My interpretation is : its not against the law to set up rain barrels in Wisconsin.

What’s yours? Does anyone from Wisconsin have any more info?

As I continue to read through regulations on this issue, a pattern is emerging:

1. Most state governments desire to protect citizen’s right to access clean safe water.

2. Wealthy people who desire to either hoard, or hog water for their own “profit” are the ones who scream the loudest and spew forth prevaricated, biased information; when state governments tell them they cannot, blatantly, obviously, and deliberately prevent others’ access to water.

3. Regulations on rain water harvesting are changing rapidly. Washington state, Utah, and Colorado have recently changed their laws on rain water harvesting to allow individuals the freedom to set up rainwater catchment systems without requiring permits.

4. Government is NOT getting “more restrictive” regarding rain water harvesting, quite the opposite, restrictions are being removed rapidly.

5. Cities and counties often have restrictions that state governments do not have, and don’t control. This may be where some of the negative attitudes are coming from that are so prevalent on some “prepper” blogs and websites.

6. We the people are the government.  If you must point a finger, be sure there aren’t 3 more pointing right back at you on your own hand !!!!!

Again, if anyone reading this has any information that adds to or contradicts anything on this blog, post it here with a link to the source, please.

After the failure of filter 5 in late May of this year, we changed the top 6 inches of sand from .15 mm effective size, to .25 mm effective size sand. We are now using a re-circulation system on this filter.

So far, there has been a gradual improvement in the clarity of the water. The foul odor has also gone.

More later. . .   .

Following the failure of filter 4, in early June, 2013 the following modifications were made on June 5, 2013 when the filter was restarted:

The top 3 inches of sand was removed and changed from .25mm effective size to .35 mm effective size. The inside of the barrel was scored horizontally using #60 grit sandpaper. This was done around the entire inside surface in a 3.5 inch wide band at the top layer where the .35 mm sand sits on top of the .45mm sand.

The sand used on the top is #30 Unimin industrial quartz processed using a 30 mesh stainless steel screen. The sifted sand used consists of the 60 percent retained by weight on top of the 30 mesh screen. The 30 mesh screen is square weave stainless steel; .012″ wire size, and .0213″ opening (.54mm). Supplier is McNichols. The part number of the wire screen is: 3830123610.

The flow rate at initial set up was .203 cubic meters per hour. This works out to an output of 55 litres per hour.

30 gallons of clean filtered water was run through the filter to clean it out.

This is a summary in outline form of the last four posts:

Critical considerations when setting up a small slow sand water filter:
A. Sand size
.35 mm effective size is the best overall choice

B. Input water turbidity
Turbidity levels below 5 NTU are best.

C. Constant water flow must be available
Water must flow through a biological sand filter (slow sand filter) constantly.
They cannot be allowed to sit idle, and the water must come from the same
source all the time. Some sort of recirculation of already filtered water must
be provided during dry spells when rainwater is being filtered

D. Container must not be smooth on the inside
The inside of a plastic container must be rough and not smooth. #60 grit
sandpaper can be used to score the inside of the container horizontally.
If the inside is smooth, contaminated water will slip down the sides
between the sand and the plastic.

E. A first flow diverter may be necessary
A first flow diverter (often callled a first flush diverter) must be used in
most cases, unless the roof surface is completely in the open and there
is minimum air pollution surrounding the area.

F. Stop output flow when wet-harrowing
When wet harrowing the filter, the output must be completely shut off
before the procedure starts.

G. Pre-filtering of roof water runoff is absolutely necessary in most situations
Some sort of prefiltering of roof water is necessary, such as a first flow
diverter, a roughting filter, screens on the gutters, or inserted into the
downspouts.

If the above recommendations are not followed, failure is highly likely.