<b><b>Once again The Walrus has found himself in a sticky situation. Clearly striding beyond the call of duty, our undercover operator spent part of this month testing the efficacy of sewage systems</b></b><br><b>This year, floating to the top of the alphabet soup of Building Regulations changes are the letters H, J and L. Part H, for the non-technical reader, is the section of the regulations that deals with the nitty-gritty of drains and sewers. </b><br><b>Recently, I had reason to cross swords with a sewerage undertaker (a man who wears the world&amp;’s worst job like a badge of honour) on the subject of the new Part H and the joys of Sewers for Adoption. The point at issue was whether a small diameter pipe serving a handful of new houses was the right size for the job. Or whether a much bigger and more expensive system (which would have to be paid for by me, of course) would be more appropriate. </b><br><b>Unusually, a research project at a nearby seat of learning gave us both the opportunity to carry out a test to see which would work better in practice: my limit-state approach, or his big-is-beautiful system. </b><br><b>Space (and good taste) prevents a …