There are 9.8m people in London. If everyone was pouring the dregs of their coffee into the surface water drainage it’d be an environmental mess.
Contaminated fluids including dregs of coffee belong in the sewage system, not the surface water drainage system. This is literally the same as pouring coffee into a river or a lake - that’s where the surface water system is designed to run to directly, untreated. In London, that’s the Thames receiving that directly.
I agree pouring coffee into a bin was bad advice, but pouring coffee into the gutters is also wrong. She should have taken it with her and poured it down a sink or toilet.
There are two drainage systems under the roads. One is the clean surface water drainage which is designed to take rain water quickly and freely to nearby rivers and water courses - that is where she poured her waste water. The sewage system is separate and is for foul water - that is what sinks, toilets etc drain into - and should drain to sewage treatment plants to be cleaned.
The gutters on the sides of the side of streets do not connect with the sewers, so people should not be pouring contaminated water down them. It’s basically the same as just pouring coffee directly into the river or a lake.
That is not correct - the surface drainage system should be regarded as separate from the sewage system, even though both run under the roads. There is the surface water system and the foul water system. It’s true that in some places surface drainage may go into the sewage system but that is the exception rather than the rule. Surface drainage is usually designed to move as rapidly as possible into nearby fresh water to prevent flooding.
Surface drainage water is allowed to drain freely into water courses, rivers and lakes, completely untreated. The sewage system is for contaminated water (from toilets and sinks etc) and is designed to go to treatments plants where it SHOULD be treated. It is true that that treatment is not happening, and when there are storms the sewage system can be overrun with water companies currently getting away with dumping contaminated sewage into the rivers which is a scandal.
I disagree; the whole purpose of the enforcement officers is to enforce the environment act. This thread alone shows why - it seems few people are aware there are 2 totally separate water drainage systems under the roads - the clean one for rainwater drainage, and the dirty one for sewage.
People seem to think if you pour something down a rain by the side of the street it will reach the sewers - it will not; it will run with other surface water untreated into the water courses, rivers or lakes. The sewers are totally separate and drain to treatment plants where the water should be treated before being released into the water system.
Unfortunately the article skirts over that whole element of the story. Its making this woman seem like she’s a victim instead of educating herself and others.
It’s irresponsible; the rain gutters are for clean surface water wash off and drain freely into water courses, rivers, lakes etc untreated; they’re totally separate from the sewers even though both systems run under the roads. Organic liquids should be disposed off via the sewage system - so down a toilet or a sink - where the water should be treated before being released back into the water table.
If everyone were disposing of contaminated water in the surface drainage system we’d be in big trouble.
Yes, it is contaminated water and should not be poured into the surface drainage system. It doesn’t connect to the sewers, it is separate and drains freely into rivers, lakes etc.
Yeah that advice was bad from the council. Dirty water goes in a toilet or a sink so it reaches the sewage system where it is supposed to be treated. Only clean water such as rain water goes in the surface water drainage system - it drains freely into the water table untreated. They are 2 totally separate systems and there seems to be shocking ignorance about their existence and what a gutter on the road is. People seem to think it drains into the sewers.
That is incorrect - there are 2 water drainage systems in the UK. Surface water / rain goes into the surface system and that flows freely into the water table untreated (rivers, lakes etc). It is not designed for dirty water.
The sewage system is totally separate - that is for contaminated water (toilets, sinks) and that goes to sewage treatment plants. It should be treated before it is released into the freshwater system.
So yes, it IS polluting the fresh water by putting things into the rain drainage system.
This story is really poor and badly reported, as it doesn’t explain WHY the Environmental Protection Act 1990 has these fines in place and why what this women did was wrong. Instead it’s a clickbait story that implies the woman is a victim.
In the UK (and like many places) there are 2 systems of water drainage in urban areas - the surface water drainage (which is for rainwater) and the sewage system (which is dirty and drains toilets, home sinks, etc).
The surface water drainage runs eventually into fresh water such as lakes, rivers, and the sea, untreated. So if you pour coffee down a rain drain, it is contaminating the fresh water. It may seem ridiculous to fine someone for the dregs of one coffee, but if everyone were putting waste water in the rainwater drains / gutters it would have a detrimental impact on the ecosystem. It’s already a huge problem as people DO put contaminated water into these drains, probably due to widespread ignorance.
The sewage system is for contaminated waste; that water is collected and treated and either reused for drinking water or then released back into the fresh water system. Finish your coffee OR take it with you to a place where you can dispose of it into the sewage system.
She needs to pay her fine, educate herself and understand she is not a victim here. She did something wrong.
I’d go with Fedora. If you will be their source of help, then it makes sense you know it. It’s also a widely known, stable distro with good and reliable packaging.
Mint is a good distro but there is a huge load of outdated advice out there, and I think it’s getting risky as a result. Like I still keep seeing tips to add 3rd party repos to install software, rather than pointing to things like Flatpak. However it remains very userfriendly and there is loads of support out there, so it’s still a great choice.
Another consideration is Fedora offers a better selection of DEs to use “officially”. Personally I like KDE, but also having Gnome available as a default option is good. Mint is somewhat limited in that respect by focusing on Cinnamon, Mate and XFCE as the official spins. They’re all decent but I feel like people coming into Linux should be introduced to the big 2. When I mained Mint a few years ago, I moved to KDE and it was actually a little frustrating how bloated it got to have lots of unneeded Cinnamon tools left behind, and some essential to the system.
I’d avoid Ubuntu. It’s big but it’s increasingly compromised by Cannonical’s behaviour, and personally I object to Snap. Snap as a technology is fine but the Snap store is closed source and controlled by Cannonical. And in Ubuntu so many apps are forced onto users as Snaps now - for example web browsers which are slow to start up. This is not a good experience for users.
So interesting rabbit hole: Aldi was originally 1 company but split between two brothers into Aldi Nord and Aldi Sud (Aldi North and Aldi South) in the 1960s in Germany. The two companies share the same Aldi name, and work somewhat together but are separate and have their own territories. They are owned by the families of the original owners, and they do not compete directly against each other.
Aldi Sud covers southern Germany, eastern and southern Europe, the UK, Ireland, Australia and the USA. In the UK Aldi has got a reputation as a good employer, a discount supermarket that offers quality, and is the fastest growing supermarket. All the competitors now do “price matches” to Aldi to try and keep up. Aldi in the USA, Ireland and Australia are seemingly run very similar to the Aldi in the UK and of course in it’s base in Germany.
Meanwhile, Aldi Nord covers northern Germany, the Benelux countries, France, Spain and Portugal amongst others. It seems Aldi does not have as good a reputation in some of these countries? I can see stuff about aldi being dirty, with poor products and poor customer service. Not sure how true that is, but that is definitely not Aldi’s reputation in the UK where I live. Clean, good quality and happy staff is my experience.
So when you see Aldi in the anglosphere part of the internet, it’s all about Aldi Sud. Also total random aside but the 2 companies do compete in the US: Aldi Sud runs Aldi, while Aldi Nord sort-of-owns Trader Joe’s (it’s a “sister company” owned by the owners of Aldi Nord).
EDIT: Also in the UK, Aldi and Lidl are very similar in quality and style. Although Lidl does more fresh baked goods, and I personally prefer it but Aldi is nearer for me so I shop there.