When it comes to painting an accurate picture on behalf of the onsite industry, we need a whole lot more pit bulls like Eric Larson — experts and supporters willing to grab onto a message and refuse to let go until the general public has a better understanding of what installers do.

Larson, a former system designer and advanced system service provider in Milaca, Minnesota, forcefully took control over a local debate when he saw misinformation discrediting the value of onsite wastewater treatment. Responding to two editorials in the local media, Larson stood up for much-maligned decentralized wastewater treatment in the face of a proposed municipal sewer extension. And we should be proud of him jumping in to counter ignorance.

First, a commentary in the Mille Lacs County Times near the Twin Cities failed to grasp one reason for a steep drawdown of the water level on White Bear Lake, a large, popular lake in suburban St. Paul, Minnesota. Then a school superintendent promoting extension of a municipal sewer pipe to allow for a school building project implied that septic systems do not protect the groundwater aquifer. Being familiar with both situations, Larson couldn’t let the issues go unanswered.

ONSITE A BETTER WAY

In his letter, Larson noted that the school superintendent’s swipe at septic systems is a common misunderstanding. It’s a lingering criticism based not on the quality of decentralized wastewater treatment, but that great need to regulate and maintain private, individual systems.

“Properly designed, installed and maintained septic systems do protect both surface and groundwater,” Larson wrote. “In fact, because septic systems discharge into soil, they are designed to treat to a higher standard than municipal wastewater treatment plants, which discharge to surface water and can include dilution as part of the final treatment.”

Regarding the aquifer depletion at White Bear Lake — which has seen a drawdown of several feet over the years — Larson pointed out that fully developed municipal sewer around the suburban lake is part of the problem. He said that well-maintained septic systems would have returned clean water to the local aquifer instead of the sewer pipe diverting downriver.

“White Bear Lake has essentially been sent to the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi River,” he wrote. “Imagine the millions/trillions of gallons of freshwater that was under White Bear Lake and has been systematically sent to the ocean over decades.”

SALT IN THE WOUND

I reached out to Larson — now developing a new remote monitoring system for the septic service industry — to ask how he decided to get involved in these local issues. He said he’s grown weary of the “If it’s sewer, it’s safe” message and needed to speak out for the onsite industry.

“You don’t need this kind of salt in the wound,” Larson says. “The last thing we need are stories like this that distort and don’t tell the whole story. We need to be ambassadors for what we do. If we can’t be ambassadors for what we do for a living, that’s a red flag.”

Lost on the general public is the message that Minnesota discharge regulation of the onsite industry is far more stringent than that of municipal treatment, Larson contends. While septic systems have to meet a 10 mg/L of nitrogen standard before being released into the soil, municipalities aren’t required to meet those standards for surface discharge. People don’t realize dilution is a factor in discharge to waterways, and that dilution also exports water that could replenish local aquifers.

Message one is that properly working septic systems treat wastewater better. And message two is that septic systems in places like White Bear Lake would keep water local.

“In general, the concept of conserving groundwater is very little known, disturbingly so,” Larson says. He believes the drawdown of White Bear Lake, for example, may have been averted if well water had been used, treated and allowed to return to the local aquifer.

WE’RE COST-EFFECTIVE

Cost of treatment is another issue where education is key, according to Larson. There needs to be a new attitude that onsite can be a permanent solution to wastewater treatment rather than the 20th century perception that “septic is what you did until you got sewers.”

Contrary to common perceptions, lifetime cost calculations ultimately favor onsite treatment over the Big Pipe, Larson says. If you build today’s systems to be a permanent solution and implement regular maintenance plans, the design life will be extended and cost homeowners less in the long run than sewer hookup and monthly bills, he says.

Sara Heger, a Ph.D. engineer and researcher at the Water Resources Center at the University of Minnesota, understands Larson’s motivation to try to educate the public about the advantages of onsite. She is frequently called on to correct misinformation or oversimplifications when onsite issues arise in Minnesota and beyond.

“Once a month I see something that makes me say the true story isn’t being told here,” Heger says. “What we’re doing every single day is trying to educate people about their septic systems and the additional benefits they provide as opposed to centralized systems.”

A recent example is a series of Minnesota Public Radio reports about water quality on some of the state’s most popular recreational lakes. There is a tendency to blame septic systems for the problem and point to expensive municipal treatment as a solution. But in reality, if the blame falls on septic systems, it’s systems that have failed, and often municipal treatment isn’t a cost-effective option. And there are other factors, like agricultural runoff or other nonhuman sources, that may be to blame, she says.

As for the knocks onsite has to endure, Heger says, “If someone heard this they would think septic systems around lakes would be a bad thing. But we don’t know what it would look like if we had compliant systems around the lake.”

IT’S GETTING BETTER

Heger credits busy installers who take the time to respond to criticism of the onsite industry. “How do we as an industry stay on top of all of these things? It’s all you can do to be involved in your local community.” That’s where installers can lean on their state and national trade associations and professional educators for help.

It’s not all negative news. The onsite message is starting to come through, Larson says. He cites lobbying efforts from the National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association and recognition by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that onsite is part of a national wastewater solution as positives.

“People are becoming more accepting of septic systems. They realize it’s an infrastructure and it’s much different than it was 25 years ago,” he says. “There are a lot of really good, well-trained operators in our industry now. We have a fully developed code in Minnesota. Contractors for the most part are doing a very good job. The percentage of noncompliant systems in Minnesota has dropped dramatically over 20 years.”

But that doesn’t mean we can rest on our laurels. The industry needs a voracious pack of pit bulls to pin their ears back and stay on message. A bright future for the onsite industry depends on it.