WATER
Rough Draft
Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote an interesting line in the poem The Rime of
the Ancient Mariner, “Water, water everywhere, Nor any drop to drink.”
Over the years, this saying has been altered slightly to, “water, water
everywhere but not a drop to drink.” Whichever wording you seem to care
for, the meaning of this phrase could strike home in the United States.
This paper will attempt to discuss some of the many ongoing issues with
water concerns around the country.
Facts about the National Water Crisis
∙ In
the coming decades, population growth is expected to be greatest
where demand on existing water resources is at or near capacity and where
aging infrastructure is already strained.
∙ Aquifers
are suffering from declining water levels, saltwater intrusion,
and inadequately replenished fresh groundwater.
∙ In
some areas, demand for potable water exceeds available
resources.
∙ Fresh
water supplies are being compromised by the ever-increasing
demands of energy production, agriculture, and industry. In turn, these
essential activities are threatened by decreasing water supplies.
∙ Globalization
is eroding the U.S. lead in supplying water technologies
and international competitors are making significant inroads into the U.S.
marketplace.
∙ The
traditionally low cost of water (and low profitability for the
private sector) coupled with the perceived risks of investing in new and
unproven technologies are preventing the commercialization of
world-leading research and innovative technologies.
Threats to America's Water Supply
The water supply of the United States, as well as the entire world, is
currently facing a number of different threats. They in turn threaten the
health and economic well-being of the citizens. These threats to the water
supply include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
increased demand by energy production
agricultural run-offs
leaching of radioactive materials and heavy metal
depletion of aquifers
contamination of aquifers. (1)
Increased Demand: Energy Production
In the United States, nuclear and fossil-fueled power plants withdraw 143
billion gallons of fresh water every day from rivers, lakes, streams, and
aquifers. This is roughly equivalent to the daily domestic water usage of
140 New York Cities or the daily water needed to irrigate the fields of
nearly 17 Nebraskas.
These same plants consume 2.2 to 5.9 billion gallons of water every day,
primarily through evaporation of steam generated to turn their turbines.
While substantially less than the amount withdrawn, consumed water is a
problem in areas where water supplies are already stretched since this
water is lost to other users in the region such as farmers.
U.S. coal plants alone were responsible for 67% of the water withdrawals
and 65% of the consumption in 2008.(2)
Agricultural Run-offs
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, in an article by Scott K.
Johnson, a hydrogeologist and educator, an EPA report suggests that
about a third of U.S. rivers are contaminated with agricultural run-off. His
article further discusses how difficult it is for the group to complete a
national survey on the health of US waters due to a lack of a
comprehensive national study system. States are often the only
information providers and this has proved lacking. 2013-2014 is going to
be the first chance for the original 85 teams to verify if things are
improving. And this will only occur if the teams are able to study the same
areas that were used in the 2008-2009 samples. (3)
Knowing that agricultural run-off is a problem, the real question is will
farmers attempt to curb the issue. When the Clean Water Act was adopted
in 1972, farms were largely exempted from its requirements. That means
getting farmers to adopt practices that limit runoff has been a voluntary
activity. The Environmental Working Group, a Washington outfit known for
its work on agricultural issues, based on the numbers compiled by the
group suggest that in absolute terms, we are basically making no headway
on the pollution problem. (4)
Radioactive Materials
Washington
Six tanks at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation are leaking an estimated
1,000 gallons of nuclear waste each year. And with billions of dollars in
automatic spending cuts about to occur, the US government may not have
the funds to clean up the mess. The Hanford Nuclear Reservation, which
was established in 1943 as part of the Manhattan Project, is mostly
decommissioned but still holds two-thirds of the nation’s radioactive waste
in its 177 tanks. The millions of gallons of radioactive material, which still
remain from Cold War-era plutonium production, are highly dangerous and
are quickly dripping into American soil. Leaks were discovered years ago,
but the Department of Energy said the problem had been solved when it
was initially discovered in 2005. (5)
Pennsylvania
Recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) documents show that
Pennsylvania’s drinking water has been contaminated with radioactive
waste from natural gas drilling; energy companies have been extracting
natural gas with a new drilling technique called “hydrofracking”; this
process results in millions of gallons of wastewater that is contaminated
with dangerous chemicals like highly corrosive salts, carcinogens, and
radioactive elements; EPA documents reveal the process has been
contaminating drinking water supplies across the country with radioactive
waste; in Pennsylvania more than 1.3 billion gallons of radioactive
wastewater was trucked to plants that could not process out the toxins
before it released the water into drinking supplies. Pennsylvania is not the
only state adversely affected by natural gas drilling. Drilling companies
from Pennsylvania trucked their wastewater to processing plants in New
York and West Virginia. (6)
Missouri
Today, West Lake's radioactive waste – all 143,000 cubic yards of it – sits
on the outskirts of a former quarry with practically none of the standard
safety features found in most municipal landfills. No clay liner blocks toxic
leachate – or "garbage juice" – from seeping into area groundwater. No cap
keeps toxic gas from dispersing into the air. This unprotected waste sits
on a floodplain 1.5 miles away from the Missouri River. Eight miles
downstream is a drinking water reservoir that serves 300,000 St. Louisans.
Worst of all: The materials dumped in this populous metropolitan area will
continue to pose a hazard for hundreds of thousands of years. (7)
Radioactive List
30 States are listed on the National Priorities List for Radiation. (8)
Heavy Metals
According to Michael Aucott, a research scientist for the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection, the United States is using less
heavy metals overall then it use to during the 1980s-2000s. This is great,
but his focus is on what happens to the heavy metals that are already in
various landfills. Due to the dangerous toxicity of the materials, his
concern is what happens in the landfills that are filled with these
materials. After all of his research, his conclusion is uncertain. Aucott
could only find a few examples of landfills that have documented
construction plans and even less landfill sites that have operated for over
60 years. His worry is that no models or studies have been able to
illustrate what will happen hundreds and/or thousands of years after the
fact. (9)
SPOKANE – A week before trial was to begin in U.S. District Court in
Yakima over Teck Metals, Inc.’s (Teck) liability for contamination from
smelter discharges in Canada, the company has conceded its waste is
leaching heavy metals in the upper Columbia River in Washington.
The trial was to have focused on whether Teck’s waste from the company’s
smelter in Trail, B.C. has “released” hazardous substances in the United
States. Teck now admits that it does, making a trial on these issues
unnecessary.
The admission, in the form of a legal stipulation that was entered by the
federal court today, comes after eight years of litigation by the Colville
Confederated Tribes and the state of Washington. Teck admits it
intentionally discharged nearly 10 million tons of slag—waste separated
from ore during smelting—along with industrial sewage containing
hundreds of thousands of tons of toxic metals such as mercury, copper,
cadmium, arsenic, lead, and zinc to the river in Canada over the last
century. (10)
Other Areas of Note
42 States are Contaminated with 141 Unregulated Chemicals
Public water supplies in 42 U.S. states are contaminated with 141
unregulated chemicals for which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
has never established safety standards, according to an investigation by
the Environmental Working Group (EWG). Another 119 regulated,
chemicals—a total of 260 contaminants altogether—were found by the
environmental group in a two-and-a-half-year analysis of more than 22
million tap water quality tests. The tests, which are required under the
federal Safe Drinking Water Act, were conducted at nearly 40,000 utilities
that supply water to 231 million people. (11)
Uranium Production has Polluted Water
Producing uranium for nuclear power plants has contaminated U.S. surface
and groundwater supplies in 14 states. (2)
Mountaintop Removal Mining
Mountaintop removal mining has buried almost 2,000 miles of Appalachian
streams, contaminating drinking water and destroying aquatic ecosystems.
(2)
All 50 States have Water Pollution Issues
The Times obtained hundreds of thousands of water pollution records
through Freedom of Information Act requests to every state and the E.P.A.,
and compiled a national database of water pollution violations that is
more comprehensive than those maintained by states or the E.P.A. In
addition, The Times interviewed more than 250 state and federal
regulators, water-system managers, environmental advocates and
scientists. That research shows that an estimated one in 10 Americans
have been exposed to drinking water that contains dangerous chemicals or
fails to meet a federal health benchmark in other ways. Polluters include
small companies, like gas stations, dry cleaners, shopping malls and the
Friendly Acres Mobile Home Park in Laporte, Ind., which acknowledged to
regulators that it had dumped human waste into a nearby river for three
years. They also include large operations, like chemical factories, power
plants, sewage treatment centers and one of the biggest zinc smelters,
the Horsehead Corporation of Pennsylvania, which has dumped illegal
concentrations of copper, lead, zinc, chlorine and selenium into the Ohio
River. Those chemicals can contribute to mental retardation and cancer.
Some violations are relatively minor. But about 60 percent of the polluters
were deemed in “significant noncompliance” — meaning their violations
were the most serious kind, like dumping cancer-causing chemicals or
failing to measure or report when they pollute. (12)
Fracking
Without a question, one of the biggest concerns about fracking is what is
happening as a result of the procedure in terms of potential problems
created. The first big issue is whether or not fracking pollutes. This debate
is ongoing with experts on both sides of the issues.
Fracking: The Process
Fracking - also called hydro-fracking or, officially, horizontal drilling coupled
with multi-stage hydraulic fracturing - is a relatively new process of natural
gas extraction. Here's a step-by-step look:
1. A well is drilled vertically to the desired depth, then turns ninety
degrees and continues horizontally for several thousand feet into the shale
believed to contain the trapped natural gas.
2. A mix of water, sand, and various chemicals is pumped into the well at
high pressure in order to create fissures in the shale through which the gas
can escape.
3.
Natural gas escapes through the fissures and is drawn back up the well
to the surface, where it is processed, refined, and shipped to market.
4. Wastewater (also called "flowback water" or "produced water") returns
to the surface after the fracking process is completed. In Michigan, this
water is contained in steel tanks until it can be stored long-term by deep
injection in oil and gas waste wells.
Fracking is fundamentally different than traditional gas extraction methods.
∙ Fracking
wells go thousands of feet deeper than traditional natural gas
wells.
∙ Fracking
requires between two and five million gallons of local freshwater
per well - up to 100 times more than traditional extraction methods.
∙ Fracking
utilizes "fracking fluid," a mix of water, sand, and a cocktail of
toxic chemicals. While companies performing fracking have resisted disclosure
of the exact contents of the fracking fluid by claiming that this information is
proprietary, studies of fracking waste indicate that the fluid contains:
formaldehyde, acetic acids, citric acids, and boric acids, among hundreds of
other chemical contaminants. (13)
Scientific study confirms groundwater contamination by hydraulic fracturing
For years companies engaged in high-volume, horizontal hydraulic
fracturing, also known as hydrofracking or simply fracking, used for the
extraction of natural gas and oil from shale deposits, have claimed that
this process is safe for the environment and for people. The results of new
research published in the online edition of the Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences (PNAS, 24 June 2013) lend strong support to the
conclusion that toxic chemicals associated with hydrofracking are leaking
from gas wells into surrounding ground water. (14)
Study: No Groundwater Contamination from Arkansas Fracking
There’s no evidence of groundwater contamination from shale natural gas
production in Arkansas’ Fayetteville play. So says a new study by a team
of Duke University-U.S. Geological Survey scientists. Their key conclusions:
"Our results show no discernible impairment of groundwater quality in
areas associated with natural gas drilling and hydraulic fracturing. … Only a
fraction of the groundwater samples we collected contained dissolved
methane, mostly in low concentrations, and the isotopic fingerprint of the
carbon in the methane in our samples was different from the carbon in
deep shale gas in all but two cases.” – Avner Vengosh, professor of
geochemistry and water quality at Duke's Nicholas School of the
Environment "These findings demonstrate that shale gas development, at
least in this area, has been done without negatively impacting drinking
water resources." – Nathaniel R. Warner, Duke PhD student and study lead
author. (15)
Depletion of Aquifers
Over the last century, the U.S. has depleted enough of its underground
freshwater supply to fill Lake Erie twice, according to a new study from the
U.S. Geological Survey. Here's another way to understand how much water
we've used. Just between 2000 and 2008, the latest period in the study
and the period of fastest depletion, Americans brought enough water
above ground to contribute to 2 percent of worldwide ocean level rise in
that time. Water collects in underground aquifers in many ways,
sometimes over thousands of years. When people pump it to the surface
to irrigate their crops, for example, some of it does seep back into the
Earth and into the aquifer. Rainfall and rivers all carry water back into the
ground and in some areas, the local government even pumps water
underground in an effort to maintain their aquifers. Nevertheless, those
two Lake Eries' worth of water refers to how much net groundwater the
U.S. has lost, as people are taking it out much faster than it's going in.
(16)
Groundwater is the water that seeps into the earth and is stored in
aquifers—areas of soil, sand, and rock that are capable of holding liquid.
The water sits in between particles or in cracks and fissures. These
saturated underground areas—some replenished by rain and snow, others
not—can be found close to the Earth’s surface or hundreds of feet
underground. Nearly 50 percent of people living in the U.S. get their
drinking water from groundwater. But its biggest use is irrigation. (17)
The aquifer, formed millions of years ago by rivers and streams, is “the
single most important source of water in the High Plains region, providing
nearly all the water for residential, industrial, and agricultural use,”
according to the Water Encyclopedia.
It stretches under 174,000 square miles of eight states, from Texas, New
Mexico and Oklahoma, up through Kansas and Colorado and perhaps most
significantly, Nebraska, where it feeds much of the state; it also feeds
smaller portions of Wyoming and South Dakota.
The Ogallala was first pumped 100 years ago to irrigate farms and
ranches. People continue to use it as if it were a renewable resource, but
of course it isn’t. It is being drained faster than nature can recharge it,
especially in the most arid areas, like Boise City, where high winds
accelerate the evaporation of what little moisture there is.
So the aquifer is dropping lower and lower, and some geologists fear it
could dry up in as soon as 25 or 30 years. This is a major issue confronting
not just those eight states but the entire country. (18)
Contamination of Aquifers
U.S. coastal counties depend on groundwater for 18% of their fresh,
potable water. This groundwater is at risk from an increasing coastal
population and coastal storms.
Population pressures in coastal Georgia – saltwater intrusion below the
surface.
Nearly all coastal aquifers around the world experience some form of
naturally occurring saltwater intrusion. However, when an aquifer is
pumped faster than it is replenished, it causes saltwater to intrude the
aquifer. The Upper Floridan aquifer lies beneath portions of coastal South
Carolina, Georgia, and northern Florida and is the primary source of
freshwater for 24 counties in coastal Georgia. The aquifer has been used
extensively since it was first pumped in the 1800s and faces increasing
demand from Georgia’s rapidly growing coastal population. Withdrawals
from the aquifer to support public supply, industry and irrigation have
resulted in groundwater declines in the coastal zone, and consequent salt
water intrusion in Brunswick, Georgia. This contamination has created
competing demands for the remaining freshwater and has further restricted
use of the Upper Floridan aquifer.
Coastal storm surge in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana – saltwater intrusion
at the surface
Coastal aquifers are also vulnerable to saltwater flooding due to storm
surge and sea level rise. St. Tammany Parish is located on the northern
shore of Lake Pontchartrain in Louisiana and has a rapidly growing
population. Underlying St. Tammany Parish is the Southern Hill Aquifer
System, asole-source aquifer system supplying the Parish with the
majority of its freshwater. After coastal storm surges from Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita blanketed much of the area, it was found that saltwater
intruded portions of the shallow aquifer through many of the wells along
Lake Pontchartrain's shoreline.
Every coastal area of the United States is experiencing salt intrusion at
this time. (19)
Water Pollution Intrusion in Aquifers
Federal officials have given energy and mining companies permission to
pollute aquifers in more than 1,500 places across the country, releasing
toxic material into underground reservoirs that help supply more than half
of the nation's drinking water. In many cases, the Environmental
Protection Agency has granted these so-called aquifer exemptions in
Western states now stricken by drought and increasingly desperate for
water. EPA records show that portions of at least 100 drinking water
aquifers have been written off because exemptions have allowed them to
be used as dumping grounds. "You are sacrificing these aquifers," said
Mark Williams, a hydrologist at the University of Colorado and a member of
a National Science Foundation team studying the effects of energy
development on the environment. "By definition, you are putting pollution
into them. ... If you are looking 50 to 100 years down the road, this is not
a good way to go." As part of an investigation into the threat to water
supplies from underground injection of waste, ProPublica set out to
identify which aquifers have been polluted. We found the EPA has not even
kept track of exactly how many exemptions it has issued, where they are,
or whom they might affect. What records the agency was able to supply
under the Freedom of Information Act show that exemptions are often
issued in apparent conflict with the EPA's mandate to protect waters that
may be used for drinking. Though hundreds of exemptions are for
lower-quality water of questionable use, many allow grantees to
contaminate water so pure it would barely need filtration, or that is
treatable using modern technology. (20)
Laws and Regulations
The Clean Air Act (CAA) is the comprehensive federal law that regulates air
emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Among other things, this
law authorizes the EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) to protect public health and public welfare and to regulate
emissions of hazardous air pollutants.
One of the goals of the Act was to set and achieve NAAQS in every state
by 1975 in order to address the public health and welfare risks posed by
certain widespread air pollutants. The setting of these pollutant standards
was coupled with directing the states to develop state implementation
plans (SIPs), applicable to appropriate industrial sources in the state, in
order to achieve these standards. The Act was amended in 1977 and 1990
primarily to set new goals (dates) for achieving attainment of NAAQS since
many areas of the country had failed to meet the deadlines.
The Clean Air Act is the law that defines EPA's responsibilities for
protecting and improving the nation's air quality and the stratospheric
ozone layer. The last major change in the law, the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990, was enacted by Congress in 1990. Legislation
passed since then has made several minor changes. (21)
The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating
discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and
regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was
enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. The
"Clean Water Act" became the Act's common name with amendments in
1972. Major amendments were enacted in the Clean Water Act of 1977 and
the Water Quality Act of 1987. (22)
There are other key laws and protections in place for water quality but
these two are the most important from a federal standpoint.
State Water Rights
State water laws have evolved under differing traditions and conditions.
Each state’s system of water allocation, which defines type and quality of
use, is based on the state’s approach to water rights. Western states
follow variation on the prior appropriation doctrine, and eastern states
generally apply riparian rules and state permits for use. Some state water
laws rely on common law doctrines and court decisions resolving private
disputes; in other states, the legislature has established sophisticated
statutory and administrative arrangements to define water rights and
allocate resources.
Two factors that have emerged in the past 30 years affect state water
allocations: federal actions and improved hydrological science.
Constitutional, statutory, and regulatory constraints have been imposed on
water rights and resources management under reserved water rights claims
for tribal and federal lands and under such federal laws as the Endangered
Species Act and the Clean Water Act. Conflicts between water quality
goals and water quantity management have also emerged.
Privatization of Water Rights
The New Oil aka Water
Should private companies control our most precious natural resource?
“Water has been a public resource under public domain for more than
2,000 years,” says James Olson, an attorney who specializes in water
rights. “Ceding it to private entities feels both morally wrong and
dangerous.” Olson is addressing the Sitka Alaska Bottling Company which
is working to move water from Alaska to India.
Everyone agrees that we are in the midst of a global freshwater crisis.
Around the world, rivers, lakes, and aquifers are dwindling faster than
Mother Nature can possibly replenish them; industrial and household
chemicals are rapidly polluting what’s left. Meanwhile, global population is
ticking skyward. Goldman Sachs estimates that global water consumption
is doubling every 20 years, and the United Nations expects demand to
outstrip supply by more than 30 percent come 2040.
“Markets don’t care about the environment,” says Olson. “And they don’t
care about human rights. They care about profit.” (23)
Sell China water from Great Lakes?
The Nestlé company has been a chief litigant in the struggle over water
from the Great Lakes region in addition to water supplies in other states.
They have been fighting to gain and keep control of water rights for the
purpose of selling water for profit. Although many attempts have been
made to prevent Nestle from selling off the water, Nestle has managed to
continue selling a 160 million gallons of water a year from the Great
Lakes. (24)
Native American Lands
Native American lands present some interesting complications. Recently,
U.S. and foreign mining companies have been bidding to gain access to
mining rights again. Historically, this has been a disaster for Tribal lands
as big companies such as: Kerr-McGee, Atlantic Richfield, Exxon and Mobil
move into the lands and destroy the ecosystems of the area. Even now
several moves are being made to allow access to these lands. Further,
many of the companies that have been allowed to mine have a history of
leaving the mines uncapped with no regard for any of the wildlife or the
people living in the community. Tribes have asked federal officials to help
police the mines but those cries have gone unheard.
Radiation and heavy metals from uranium mines continue to pollute the
land, air and water today and very little action is being taken to stop it.
This contamination escapes into the air which blows to the East and South
and seeps into the water, reaching the Cheyenne and Missouri Rivers. It
poisons grain grown in these areas that is fed to cattle that provide milk
and beef for the rest of the nation. As White Face explains, “In an area of
the USA that has been called ‘the Bread Basket of the World,’ more than
forty years of mining have released radioactive polluted dust and water
runoff from the hundreds of abandoned open pit uranium mines, processing
sites, underground nuclear power stations, and waste dumps. (25)
Tribe opposing mine has its own water quality problems
The Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa has been a sharp critic of
the potential threat of pollution from a proposed iron ore mine, but the
tribe is also grappling with environmental problems of its own.
Federal records show numerous violations of water quality standards at the
tribe's wastewater treatment system serving residents of Odanah in
Ashland County.
The violations include excessive levels of E. coli and phosphorus, as well
as periods when the tribe failed to report data at all.
The Bad River Band has recently been given approval by the EPA to set
water quality standards for the reservation and upstream users.
In a 2012 series on water pollution, The New York Times reported on water
polluters in all 50 states. In Wisconsin, the Bad River had the highest
number of violations between 2004 and 2008 - 241. It was followed by the
Red Cliff Band with 159. Five of the top 10 violators were Wisconsin tribes.
(26)
Water Wars
Dr. Peter Gleick is a scientist, innovator, and communicator on global
water, environment, and climate issues. He co-founded and leads the
Pacific Institute in Oakland – an independent non-governmental
organization addressing the connections between the environment and
global sustainability.
Dr. Gleick states:
OK, put away your guns. We’re not talking shooting wars, at least not yet,
at least not in the U.S. We’re talking politicians shooting off their mouths,
political wars, and court battles. But water is serious business.
But it is a different story around the world, where there is a long and sad
history of violent conflict over water. At the Pacific Institute we maintain
the Water Conflict Chronology, documenting examples going back literally
5,000 years.
As others have pointed out, water can be – and often is – a source of
cooperation rather than conflict. But conflicts over water are real. And as
populations and economies grow, and as we increasingly reach “peak
water” limits to local water resources, I believe that the risks of conflicts
will increase, even here in the United States, and not just in the
water-scarce arid west.
Recently, tensions over water bubbled up in an unlikely spot: the
Georgia-Tennessee border. There has been a bit of a border dispute in this
region for a long time. Nearly two hundred years actually. Until recently,
no one paid much attention to it, and it hasn’t been an issue with any
particular salience or urgency. There was a flurry of attention around the
issue during a severe drought in 2008, and then it died down again. Until
now.
What is the issue? If the border can be redrawn (or “corrected” as Georgia
puts it), it would give them access to the northernmost bank of the
Tennessee River, and a new right to water resources that Georgia would
now, desperately, like to tap to satisfy growing demands in the Atlanta
region.
In mid-February, the Georgia House of Representatives voted 171-2 to
adopt a resolution seeking to reopen the controversy and regain access to
the Tennessee River. At the moment, Tennessee lawmakers are more
amused than alarmed, but they also say they will act to protect their water
from “Peach State poachers.” An editorial in the Chattanooga (Tennessee)
times Free-Press said:
“We hope Atlanta can find an appropriate solution. But the river in our
backyard is not it.”
And recently elected Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam pledged in his campaign
that he would:
“protect our precious resources and will fight any attempt to … siphon
off our water.”
This isn’t the only water dispute involving Georgia. For decades, the state
has been in a legal battle with Alabama and Florida over the shared
Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint river system (I can say that fast, out
loud, but it took practice). That dispute has been before the U.S. Supreme
Court for years.
And this isn’t the only state-to-state water dispute in the U.S. to flare up
in recent months. The Republican River flows through the states of
Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas, but sharing the river has been a recurring
political dispute for decades. In the latest chapter, the Special Master
overseeing an agreement forged in 1943 recently rejected a request by
Kansas to punish Nebraska for using too much water. Kansas asked for
$80 million from Nebraska for violations of the Republican River Compact
of 1943. The Special Master agreed that Nebraska farmers violated the
compact in 2005 and 2006 and took 71,000 acre-feet of water too much,
but only proposed awarding a payment of only $5 million. He also denied a
Kansas request to shut off water for some Nebraska farmers along the
river.
And don’t get me started on the Colorado River, shared by seven U.S.
states and Mexico, or the Great Lakes, shared by eight states and Canada.
(27)
Funding Concerns for Water Improvements Have Improved
Under President Bush, Congress had been unable to move any
comprehensive legislation on water quality issues since 1990. This had
been stalled for various reasons but each year, Congress had attempted to
work towards an agreement which had failed to make it out of both
houses. Further, Congress had requested less money.
The Obama Administration has put a lot on the table in the way of
funding. Although nothing comprehensive has been put into law and only
minor changes have been put forth, most of the focus has been on getting
money to the states via a state revolving funds system. Further, the
administration has put major projects on the agenda: The Great Lakes
region, reversals to pre Bush water quality standards, EPA given more
toxins to regulate, and child health concerns will be addressed in water
quality standards.
It is estimated that 95% of the current funding for water related issues
comes from state and local governments. This creates issues as well
because states, localities, and private sources cannot meet the funding
gap alone.
Since the Clean Water Act was passed more than 30 years ago, the federal
government's funding for clean water infrastructure in America has
decreased by 70 percent. Although the Obama Administration has taken
steps to pump money into clean water programs, the gap has widened
beyond a quick fix approach.
The United States Conference of Mayors forecasts water and wastewater
investment needs of up to $4.8 trillion over the next 20 years. (28)
Current Administration Fails to Protect Water Quality
EPA has failed to protect Idaho's Water
Idaho contains over 106,000 miles of rivers and streams, and over 100
lakes and reservoirs within state boundaries. These rivers, lakes, streams,
and wetlands not only provide great natural beauty, but they supply the
water necessary for drinking, recreation, industry, agriculture and aquatic
life. Unfortunately, only a small fraction of these waters are meeting
minimum standards for desired water quality. According to the Idaho
Department of Environmental Quality ("DEQ"), only 27% of Idaho's
streams are currently meeting state water quality standards for one or
more pollutant. The DEQ has failed to even monitor 37% of all waters
within the state. (29)
EPA’s new water quality criteria fail to protect human health as required by
the BEACH Act.
NEW YORK, N.Y. (June 20, 2013) – The Environmental Protection Agency
has failed to meet its legal responsibility to adopt water quality criteria
that address the health threat posed by pollution at U.S. beaches,
according to a notice of intent to sue filed by a coalition of local and
national organizations concerned about beach water quality. The groups
are Clean Ocean Action, Hackensack Riverkeeper, Heal the Bay, Natural
Resources Defense Council, NY/NJ Baykeeper, Riverkeeper and
Waterkeeper Alliance. (30)
U.S. judge says EPA fails to protect Everglades from pollution
A frustrated federal judge ordered the head of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to appear in a Miami courtroom in October to explain
how the agency will enforce the Clean Water Act in the Everglades after
"failure to comply with the law for more than two decades."
In a scathing 48-page ruling released on Wednesday, Federal District
Judge Alan S. Gold accused the EPA, the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection and the South Florida Water Management District
of deliberately ignoring and refusing to enforce the laws limiting the
amount of phosphorus discharged into the Everglades. (31)
Groups Petition U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for Water Quality
Standard in Appalachia to Protect Communities from Mountaintop Removal
Mining Pollution
A coalition of Appalachian and national groups pressed the Environmental
Protection Agency for stronger protection for their waters from the most
extreme form of coal mining, mountaintop removal.
In a formal petition for rulemaking, 19 Appalachian local, regional, and
national groups are petitioning the EPA to set a numeric water quality
standard under the Clean Water Act to protect streams in Kentucky, West
Virginia, Virginia, Tennessee, Ohio, and Pennsylvania from pollution
caused by mountaintop removal mining. This petition is backed by robust
scientific studies that demonstrate that the dumping of mountaintop
removal mining waste leads to harmful levels of conductivity – the ability
of a waterway to conduct an electric current. Elevated conductivity is toxic
to aquatic life, and studies show it is having an extreme ecological effect
on Appalachian waters and streams. (32)
PEW Disappointed in EPA Plan to Study Impact of Industrial Livestock
Operations on Chesapeake Bay
The Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, announced today that it will
assess the effectiveness of state efforts to keep livestock waste out of the
Chesapeake Bay. The move is intended to resolve a lawsuit (Fowler v.
EPA) filed against the agency to more rigorously protect the Chesapeake
Bay from pollution. In response, The Pew Charitable Trusts is urging
President Barack Obama to fulfill his 2008 commitment to “strictly regulate
pollution from large factory livestock farms.”
“Pew is extremely disappointed that instead of strengthening national
rules to protect all of our waterways from livestock waste, the EPA is
conducting more assessments,” said Seth Horstmeyer, who directs Pew’s
efforts to reform industrial agriculture. “Small businesses and coastal
communities rely on clean water for drinking, food, commerce and tourism.
The Obama administration should keep its promise to strengthen rules
needed to protect our waterways from animal waste. The time to act is
long overdue.” (33)
Stormwater Report: Supreme Court Holds That Stormwater Discharges From
Logging Roads Do Not Require Clean Water Act Permits
On March 20, 2013, the Supreme Court held, in Decker v. Northwest
Environmental Defense Center, that the Clean Water Act and the industrial
stormwater regulations from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) did not subject stormwater discharges from logging roads to a
mandatory permit requirement. In reaching this conclusion, the Court
deferred to EPA's interpretation that the regulations did not treat timber
harvesting as an "industrial activity." Justice Scalia, dissenting, argued
that such deference was not warranted and would have reached the
opposite conclusion. (34)
The water issues of America have been put on the backburner for over
twelve years. The Bush administration reduced huge amounts of
regulations dealing with environmental concerns that directly and indirectly
caused massive pollution. The Obama administration was unable to pass
any sweeping changes since the focus was on the economy. As such, the
issues have compounded and been largely ignored. Second term Obama is
trying to pull pollution issues into the focus but he is dealing with a lot of
issues that Americans see as more important.
Chemical Regulations are Changing
U.S. Bolsters Chemical Restrictions for Water
The Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would overhaul
drinking water regulations so that officials could police dozens of
contaminants simultaneously and tighten rules on the chemicals used by
industries.
Currently, only 91 contaminants are regulated by the Safe Drinking Water
Act, though more than 60,000 chemicals are used within the United States.
No chemicals have been added to that list since 2000. (35)
At its current pace, the Environmental Protection Agency will take more
than a decade to judge whether 83 chemicals prioritized for review are
toxic to humans, the Government Accountability Office says. The EPA has
banned or limited five chemicals since 1976, when the Toxic Substances
Control Act passed, out of the tens of thousands used commercially in the
United States. In February 2012, the agency prioritized 83 chemicals for
risk assessments, initiating seven assessments that year, with plans to
start 18 more during this year and next. At its current rate, the EPA will
take more than a decade to finish the reviews. (36)
American Business Practices Dealing with Water
American businesses can actually petition for permits to pollute. If a
company produces a known hazardous material, it can dump the material
into landfills and even waterways if the city, county, regional, and/or state
government grants the petition. At this point, the federal government
allows the lower ruling body to dictate policy. Only in the event of some
major incident will the federal government step in to overrule the lower
ruling. The EPA has been attacked in the last decade due to materials
being dumped in areas where a small amount of runoff as per the original
permit, pooled with other contaminants, sometimes even the same
materials to unsafe levels. Again the EPA was blamed for not studying the
possible conditions which could lead to health concerns. Several rivers and
bodies of water have actually been so saturated with flammable liquids
that the water itself has caught fire or in a few cases was used to put out
a fire with unexpected results. When this situation occurs towns are forced
to find other water sources.
Small businesses in some areas can actually pollute without fear of
prosecution or fines because it is legal. A few states and local
governments allow polluting if the company is under a certain size and it is
unaffordable for the company to meet all the normal state guidelines.
Some materials are of course not allowed to be dumped in any amounts
but again the EPA has a history of reactive policies rather than proactive
policies. As mentioned, the EPA has a current list of 85 items to test but
they are not moving quickly to determine the risk of these items.
Aging Infrastructure is adding to US Water Problems
U.S. water infrastructure needs $384-billion upgrade, EPA says
The federal government must spend at least $384 billion to improve the
nation’s drinking water infrastructure in order to ensure the safe delivery of
water to Americans for the next 20 years.
That’s the conclusion of a survey conducted by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the fifth time the Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs
Survey and Assessment was conducted. The survey projects needed
upgrades to pipes, treatment plants and water distribution systems.
The report, which by law must be submitted to Congress every four years,
examined 73,400 water systems. In many cases, drinking water
infrastructure was reported to be 50 to 100 years old.
Among the most pressing needs:
∙ $247.5 billion to replace or refurbish aging or deteriorating water lines
∙ $72.5 billion to construct, expand or rehabilitate water treatment
infrastructure
∙ $39.5 billion to construct, rehabilitate or cover finished water storage
reservoirs. (37)
Much of the country's water infrastructure was built in the period following
World War II or earlier, although the age of infrastructure will vary with
the age of your community.
The Clean Water Act spurred the construction of wastewater treatment
plants beginning in the 1970s, and so many of those plants are now 30
years old or older. (38)
At the dawn of the 21st century, much of our drinking water infrastructure
is nearing the end of its useful life. There are an estimated 240,000 water
main breaks per year in the United States. Assuming every pipe would
need to be replaced, the cost over the coming decades could reach more
than $1 trillion, according to the American Water Works Association. (39)
Each day, leaking pipes account for an estimated 7 billion gallons of water,
according to the American Society of Civil Engineers. (40)
Sequester Concerns
Cuts are in the works for the Environmental Protection Agency. This will
reduce the effectiveness of both the CAA and the CWA. Critical research
that is not performed by private industry and/or universities will be
undermined.
EPA Programs Face Uncertain Fate With Bid To Cut Staffing To 1991 Levels
(Daily News - 04-11-2013)
EPA's fiscal year 2014 budget proposal includes a plan to cut staffing from
17,055 full-time equivalents (FTEs) down to 16,870 -- the lowest level
since FY91 -- which is creating uncertainty over how fewer staff might
affect key programs, with EPA already saying the FY14 plan may leave up
to 45 Superfund site cleanups without funding.
Key House Appropriator Downplays Bid To Boost EPA's FY14 Water Funds
(Daily News - 04-16-2013)
Rep. Michael Simpson (R-ID), chair of the appropriations panel that
oversees EPA's budget, is downplaying states' push to reject President
Obama's proposed major cuts to EPA's water infrastructure funds in fiscal
year 2014, saying his panel's total budget is billions of dollars below the
level advocates say is necessary for infrastructure projects.
Industry Urges EPA To Retain Self-Audit Policy After Upcoming Review
(Daily News - 04-18-2013)
Industry groups are urging EPA against scrapping its policy for
self-disclosure of environmental violations that EPA may revise or reduce,
with businesses pitching changes to help EPA save resources and warning
of increased costs to states and EPA because ending the policy would
require significant increases in facility inspections.
Push To Craft New EPA Water Fund Draws Criticism From States, Advocates
(Daily News - 04-23-2013)
Efforts by municipalities to create a new low-interest EPA loan program to
fund large water infrastructure projects are running into headwinds in the
Senate, where states are seeking to strip domestic procurement, labor and
environmental review requirements and win a bigger role in the program
than what cities have proposed.
Key Lawmakers Seek FY14 Funds For EPA To Pilot Integrated Water Plan
(Daily News - 05-07-2013)
Pushed by wastewater industry groups, key House lawmakers are urging
appropriators to earmark $5 million in EPA's fiscal year 2014 budget for a
series of pilot projects to test the agency's policy for integrating
wastewater and stormwater infrastructure planning, though supporters of
the pilot are pessimistic given the austere budget climate.
Facing Hurdles, Backers Step Up Push To Maintain SRF Funds In FY14
(Daily News - 05-07-2013)
Congressional and other supporters of EPA's water infrastructure loan
programs are urging appropriators to maintain level funding for the
programs in fiscal year 2014, and prevent rescissions of unobligated funds,
after EPA proposed cutting the funds and a key appropriator downplayed
the relative benefits of the funding increase being sought. (41)
Regulations have been reduced allowing industry to set its own standards.
Water infrastructure projects have been pushed back yet again. Water
related concerns have taken a backseat to the push for stimulating the
economy.
End Notes
1 http://www.watercampws.uiuc.edu/index.php?menu_item_id=8
2
http://democrats.naturalresources.house.gov/sites/democrats.naturalresources.house.gov/fil
es/documents/FactSheet_081612_final.pdf
3
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/04/about-a-third-of-us-rivers-contaminated-with-agric
ultural-runoff/
4 http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/11/water-pollution-and-the-farm-economy/
5 http://rt.com/usa/washington-radiation-leak-nuclear-635/
6
http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/radioactive-waste-contaminates-drinking-waterepa-does-nothing
7 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/st-louis-is-burning-20130510
8 http://www.epa.gov/radiation/cleanup/usa.html#or
9 LF_Metals_2006(1).pdf Michael Aucott Review
10 http://www.atg.wa.gov/pressrelease.aspx?id=30634#.UdtzZDuOQ_A
11 http://environment.about.com/od/waterpollution/a/tap_water_probe.htm
12 http://projects.nytimes.com/toxic-waters/polluters/wisconsin
13 http://cleanwater.org/page/fracking-process
14 http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/07/09/frac-j09.html
15
http://energytomorrow.org/blog/2013/may/study-no-groundwater-contamination-from-arkan
sas-fracking
16
http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2013-05/us-depleted-two-lake-eries-worth-und
erground-water-1900-study-finds
17 http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/freshwater/groundwater/
18 http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/aquifers-depletion-poses-sweeping-threat/
19 http://stateofthecoast.noaa.gov/water_use/groundwater.html
20
http://pipeline.post-gazette.com/news/archives/24953-epa-allowed-waste-injection-to-pollu
te-at-least-100-aquifers
21 http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/
22 http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/cwa.cfm?program_id=45
23
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/10/08/the-race-to-buy-up-the-world-s-wat
er.html
24 http://www.examiner.com/article/sell-china-water-from-great-lakes
25
http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-secret-fukushima-is-poisoning-the-bread-basket-ofthe-world/5338136
26
http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/bad-river-band-has-its-own-water-quality-problem
s-bf8ui6t-193429261.html
27
http://scienceblogs.com/significantfigures/index.php/2013/02/28/water-wars-here-in-the-us/
28
http://www.environmentalleader.com/2012/09/11/us-water-infrastructure-needs-the-private
-funding-gap/
29 http://www.advocateswest.org/bulletin/epa-has-failed-protect-idahos-water
30
http://www.riverkeeper.org/news-events/news/water-quality/groups-file-notice-of-intent-to
-sue-epa-for-failure-to-protect-beachgoers-from-water-pollution/
31
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/state-regional/us-judge-says-epa-fails-to-prote
ct-everglades-from/nL6JJ/
32
http://earthjustice.org/news/press/2013/groups-petition-u-s-environmental-protection-agen
cy-for-water-quality-standard-in-appalachia-to-protect-communit
33
http://www.pewenvironment.org/news-room/press-releases/pew-disappointed-in-epa-plan-t
o-study-impact-of-industrial-livestock-operations-on-chesapeake-bay-85899481527
34
http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/all/Citizen-Suit-Watch-Stormwater-R
eport-Supreme-Court-Holds-That-Stormwater-Discharges-From-Logging-Roads-Do-Not-Requi
re-Clean-Water-Act-Permits-Federal-District-Court-Rejects-a-Similar-Stormwater-Citizen-Sui
t-Against-A-Utility#.Udul_DuOQ_B
35 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/business/23water.html?_r=0
36
http://www.fiercegovernment.com/story/epa-chemical-reviews-prioritized-will-still-take-deca
de/2013-04-29
37
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-water-survey-20130604,0,5727
068.story
38 http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/sustain/localofficials_facts.cfm
39 http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/drinking-water/
40 http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/01/20/water.main.infrastructure/index.html
41
http://environmentalnewsstand.com/index.php?option=com_customproperties&view=show&ta
gId=4&Itemid=528
Key federal statutes governing water resources in the United States
The Clean Water Act (CWA); 33 U.S.C. s/s 121 et seq. (1977)
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA); 43 U.S.C. s/s 300f et seq. (1974)
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
Endangered Species Act
Rivers & Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899
National Environmental Policy Act
Water Resources Permitting
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention 16 USC 1001
Refuse Act of 1899, navigable waters 33 USC 407
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (Ocean Dumping)
North American Wetlands Conservation Act
Wild and Scenic Rivers
Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990
Water Resources Glossaries
http://water.usgs.gov/glossaries.html
Water Basics Glossary
Hydrologic Definitions
Water Science-Glossary of Terms
National Water Quality Assessment Glossary
Glossary of Water-Quality Monitoring Terms
Water Resources Data - Definition of Terms
Glossary of water-use terminology - Estimated Use of Water in the United
States in 1990
● A-Z Index of Hydrologic Terms
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Possible Resolutions
The United States federal government should establish an energy policy substantially
decreasing water use in the United States.
The United States federal government should abolish the
Environmental Protection Agency.
The United States federal government should substantially strengthen regulation on industrial water
pollution in the United States.
The United States federal government should establish a policy to repair and/or maintain
aquifers in the United States.
The United States federal government should substantially increase its water infrastructure.
The United States federal government should establish a comprehensive agriculture runoff
policy in the United States.
The United States federal government should nationalize water rights in the United States.
The United States federal government should establish a comprehensive policy to conserve
water in the United States.
Affirmative Ground (depending on the resolution)
The water topic has hundreds of operations that fall into normal concerns that include:
health, regulation, enforcement, energy, agriculture, ecosystems, infrastructure, and others.
Negative Ground
Case Side Attacks
Harms ­ Although teams do not usually attack this area much any more, the area is rich with
information that will counter most of the claims that affirmatives will make. Further, a lot of the
information will be attacked on the merits of the author making the claims. Several harms are
reported by organizations that have a history of radical claims against big business and
government.
Significance ­ Statistics and moral claims will be available on both sides of this debate. The
science of studying water issues has improved and the information will be very balanced. Again
not a major attack area these days unless you have a specific indictment.
Inherency ­ This could be an interesting area to address as the Obama Administration has been
attempting to pump awareness into environmental issues. Again not a huge impact area for
debate, but with the EPA missing managing so much, anything could happen.
Plan ­ Spikes will most likely focus on the funding. Money is just not there with the sequester
issues.
Solvency ­ Alternative causality is going to be solid attack area. Depending on the resolution,
studies will point to other issues as being key components of the problem. Air pollution and
natural erosion issues are bound to become a focus as the attention will be diverted away from
the affirmative claims.
Topicality ­ Most cases will be straight up topical, but look for teams to claim effects topicality
with too many steps to achieve solvency. A few cases will be extra topical as they do something
way beyond the topic in order to claim a solvency mechanism.
Disadvantages ­ This topic provides for a lot of disadvantage ground because water “fixes” are
going to be very expensive.
Economic Trade Offs: Military, Foreign Aid, Education, Health Care, Social Security, etc
Federalism/Bureaucracy
Congressional and Court Legitimacy
Politics
Indian Treaties
Taxes and Regulations
Property Rights
States Rights
Species Protection Issues
Eminent Domain
Counter Plans ­ States counter plan will have actual ground with a water topic. Most of the laws
dealing with water are at a more localized level than a federal level. As such, the counter plan will
have real weight and precedence behind it. Private Investments counter plan will also be more
viable because of the huge cost of water investments. An interesting counter to the private
investment counter plan would be a capitalism kritique with a moral attack on the distribution of a
life giving necessity.
Kritiques and Critical Arguments ­ These will be always be present. Capitalism will be a real
stretch as the idea of the government getting clean water to individuals is pretty important.
Technology Bad, Deep Ecology, and more revert to nature type critical positions would have
more impact.
Timeliness ­ The water issues of America are important. Our students are watching as our most
precious natural resource is being tainted. Most of our students have been involved in some kind
of water related issue.
Scope ­ This topic is large and allows for useful research. This topic would be more than just a
mental exercise as the policies passed by the affirmative teams will have real world implications.
Some plans will become laws and mandates in the years to come. Students will have a working
knowledge of their environment and some of the positive and negative impacts upon it.
Range and Quality ­ The water topic will allow a debater to grow as they feel more confident. A
novice student will be able to understand the idea of drinking contaminated water and steps they
can take to prevent the problem. An experienced debater will be able to break down a
complicated policy and look at the implementation of the policy and figure out steps to make it
better. Teams should be able to run cases that will also impact their community directly. The
students should be able to tie this topic into their studies as well using history, government, and
science.
Material ­ Information on this topic is easily found via the internet using non specialized sources.
Typical search engine searches produced more than enough useful links and materials for the
novice as well as the advanced debater. Free publications are available from every state and
federal government covering a wide range of information. Environmental groups are also great
sources for information and their data is online as well. Local colleges and universities are also
great providers of additional information on natural resources.
Interest ­ The topic of water is so vital it will keep judges, debaters, and coaches interested
throughout the year especially when they find out how critical the U.S. water concerns are
becoming.
Balance ­ Both the affirmative and negative teams will have ample ground to debate this topic.