ARS on Twitter
RSS
The Newest Luxury: SQUAT Toilets
Posted by Raven on August 2nd, 2007
Toilets are coming under attack from environmental green freaks.
The Western World’s dependence on flush toilets could be its environmental downfall.
Toilets that use less water, such as the “squat toilet” in which one squats over a hole in the ground, are prevalent in parts of Asia, Europe and Africa.
But a new historical study suggests that after decades of flushing, it will take radical innovations for the mainstream West to adopt any new system.
“Most people can hardly imagine that other ways of handling human waste have ever existed,” said study author Maj-Britt Quitzau, an environmental sociologist with the National Environmental Research Institute of Denmark. “But actually, systems did exist prior to the flushing toilet where human waste was collected within the cities and re-used in farming areas.”
Figures…Denmark…where the flushing is rare, right? Maj-Britt Quitzau (WTF kind of name is THAT anyway??) do you use a squat toilet? More likely, she uses one of those butt sprayer potties. So ladylike.
Scientists have long known that flushing away human waste comes with environmental consequences, such as using precious, potable water.
Each year, a typical person will use almost 4,000 gallons of drinking water to flush away 75 pounds of feces and 130 gallons of urine, according to a 2001 study by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency.
While drinking-water shortages plague millions in such places as India and in some African nations, Westerners continue to oppose alternatives to the flushing toilet.
Ah huh…I see now. Let’s get rid of flushing toilets to save the world. And provide millions of gallons of water to nations where it would evaporate in less time than it takes to read this post.
To understand the West’s preference for flushing toilets, Quitzau surveyed historical research on attitudes toward human excrement and the technological development of water and sewage systems.
She then analyzed statistical data on current attempts to introduce alternative solutions.
The research suggests that in order to succeed, toilets designed to save water must hurdle our culture’s long history of city planning and well-intentioned obsession with hygiene.
Westerners have not always been addicted to flushing toilets.
In the 1850s, for example, a recycling “earth toilet” was as American as apple pie.
She’s suggesting we go back to the days of pioneers and homesteads. Times where the population was tens of millions less; when people didn’t rely on jobs off the farms and when diseases, although life threatening due to lack of medical innovations and medicines, were not as contagious or prevalent. Did Ms. Britt figure in any of these factors? I doubt it.
It consisted of a seat placed over a container filled with dry earth. After use, more dry earth was piled into the container.
Instead of throwing away the waste in the container, farmers put it to use in agricultural fields as compost.
And who will eat veggies and fruits grown in fields of human shit and piss? NOT ME. Again with the diseases found in human wastes, the germs, people would get grossly ill. Unless, of course, we REGULATE the people who are allowed to use these Earth Potty’s.
Although many Westerners would never consider turning in their flushing toilet for a night pot or a cesspool, some pioneers are thinking outside the bowl.
Composting toilets (which rely on bacteria to convert fecal matter into fertilized soil) require no water, and urine-separating toilets rely on a minimal amount of water to wash waste into one of two compartments in the bowl.
The technologies remain relatively unpopular because people in developed countries are programmed — and their houses and cities are built — to flush it all away.
Just gross. And totally unnecessary. And so Greeny- Eurotarded.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Give me a break! I couldn’t even read this entire post.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:00 pm
For heaven’s sake, I have a decomposing toilet – it’s called a septic tank system. I can use it without putting stress on the recycling capabilities of the earth, because my house is in the country. The hole in the ground is a primitive thing, useful, but unnecessary in the modern world. Or is the author suggesting that the old-time technology be used in crowded cities, apartment houses, and subdivisions? Ridiculous!
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:53 pm
8O
But the clean drinking water for the CHILDREN!! THE CHHIILLLLLDRRREEENNNN! WON’T YOU THINK OF THEM!!! YEEAAAARRRGGGGHH!!!
:roll:
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:59 pm
Seen a lot of them in the Med back when. 2 deplyments, 74-75 and 75-76 aboard the Good Ship Independence CV-62. Hey, they work, OK.
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:06 am
Flush that idea fast!
I’ve been to Japan many times for long periods and they’re no fun when you’re SICK!
August 4th, 2007 at 1:33 am
… if the islamos can get foot baths at taxpayer expense, then why can’t infidels get… butt baths? Butt who would do the spraying? After the spraying is accomplished, would we have to blow dry our butts or just wait it out? Or do some shaking like our dogs do when they’re wet? – Ayatollah Assahola 2007
August 4th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
The Greenies won’t much like it when the flies bite them on the ass. Greenies won’t use pesticides, you know. :mrgreen:
August 4th, 2007 at 6:33 pm
They can have my flush toilet when they pry it from my cold, dead ass.
August 5th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Using the libtards own theory of Darwin, wouldn’t this show de-evolution?
August 5th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
I think we should give up all the things that our technology and our economy have provided so that people who live in mud huts and breed like rabbits can…well…continue to live in mud huts and breed like rabbits.
October 12th, 2009 at 12:16 am
[...] And Rightly So has some disconcerting news. Toilets are under attack by environmentalists!!! It’s bad enough that every time I look at that singer that wants us to all use one sheet of toilet paper all I can think of is that she uses one sheet of toilet paper. Now this! [...]