In a water-rich region, sustainable approaches prove challenging
With six major rivers, thousands of creeks and streams and an average of more than three feet of annual rainfall, Southwestern Pennsylvania has one of the most abundant and reliable supplies of fresh water in a world getting thirstier by the day. It’s an advantage that cannot be overstated. And how it is managed today could profoundly shape the quality of life in the region tomorrow.
Water is one of many issues critical to the sustainability of a region. But none is more complex, more important or more illustrative of the choices and challenges that southwestern Pennsylvania faces in engineering a sustainable future.
Although a precise definition of what it means to be a sustainable region remains elusive, the basic objectives include economic prosperity, equal opportunity and a quality environment for current and future generations. Economic issues, such as employment, come into play, as do education, governance, social justice and health.
A region’s capacity to strategically address such issues is crucial, said Court Gould, executive director of the nonprofit Sustainable Pittsburgh. “At the heart of sustainability is the ability to plan not just for today but for tomorrow. And one of the truest measures of sustainability is the degree to which you can adapt and change.”
Water is essential to human survival. We drink it, cook with it, wash with it. Nearly 500 million gallons a day are consumed by the region’s industries. Some 490 million gallons a year support agriculture and food processing. Our rivers carry 41 million tons of freight annually. Water-related services, products and components account for $5 billion in direct economic activity. Without an abundant water supply the region could not sustain its $13.7 billion-and-growing energy sector. And a burgeoning world water market is increasing the demand for water-related products, services and technical expertise, creating opportunities for the region’s industry.
Yet, the region has poorly protected its water resources, as illustrated by Pittsburgh Today water quality maps (www.pittsburghtoday.org/view_NonattainingStreams.html).
The Pittsburgh Metropolitan Statistical Area and eight surrounding counties hold 6,561 miles of streams and rivers that fall short of meeting federal Clean Water Act quality standards. Acid mine drainage, part of the region’s mining and industrial legacy, remains a stubborn problem. Allegheny County, in particular, is crowded with impaired waterways, mostly due to a leaky, aged and overburdened network of storm and sanitary sewers that allows sewage to overflow into streams and rivers when a storm produces as little as one-tenth of an inch of rain.
A sustainable approach requires much better strategic thinking around water issues than what stream and river conditions suggest has taken place in the past. And to some extent, that is happening. A Water Economy Network was recently established, for example, to bring the collective expertise of businesses, university researchers and non-governmental organizations to bear on such issues as advancing water innovation, leveraging market opportunities, nurturing the region’s competitive advantage in the water market and preserving the resource.
But gaps in governance remain. Most of the watersheds that reside in southwestern Pennsylvania lack the regulatory oversight of a basin commission, such as those that govern the Susquehanna and Delaware rivers and their tributaries with the responsibility of protecting both the quality and quantity of water.
The closest the region comes is the Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission, which is based in Cincinnati and has regulatory authority over issues related to water quality in the Ohio River basin, which includes the Allegheny, Monongahela and Beaver rivers and a few other tributaries that flow through southwestern Pennsylvania. The commission is moving to expand its regulatory reach to include oversight of water quantity issues. But most of the waterways in southwestern Pennsylvania remain outside its jurisdiction.
Drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale is providing economic benefits today and has the potential to do so in the coming years while diversifying and strengthening the region’s energy portfolio – factors that can help sustain a high quality of life. It also has the potential to cause harm to streams and rivers. And currently, there is no government mechanism to regularly monitor streams for contaminants that may result from accidents or unauthorized discharges. That job has largely been left to private conservation groups, such as the Isaak Walton League and Trout Unlimited, whose volunteers are only able to cover a fraction of the vulnerable waters.
Sewage overflows in the past 10 years have resulted in recreational users of the region’s three rivers being warned of unhealthy bacteria levels an average of 68 days during the 138-day boating season, according Allegheny County Health Department data.
The good news is a solution is in the works. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has ordered the problem to be fixed, which requires reengineering an outdated sewer network that accepts both storm water and sewage but can no longer handle the volume that occurs when it rains. Last year, the Allegheny County Sanitation Authority put forth a plan to do so.
But the fragmented structure of the sewer network is presenting an obstacle to engineering a sustainable solution to the problem, which would include ways to reduce the amount of storm water that enters the sewer system, preferably using green technologies to some degree, such as permeable pavement and rain gardens. ALCOSAN’s primary responsibility is to treat sewage it receives at its plant along the Ohio River, while the infiltration of storm water occurs at points along a collection system shared by 83 municipalities, where ALCOSAN jurisdiction is limited.
Given the governance structure, it’s not surprising that ALCOSAN’s $2.8 billion solution to the overflow problem focuses on storing excess sewage in underground tunnels and expanding its capacity to treat it, Gould said. “As a regional authority, it doesn’t have jurisdiction over the headwaters so, predictably, it comes up with a storm water plan that doesn’t address upstream source reduction. It’s an example of our government system being out of step with how the natural and engineered systems work and how that affects our capacity to be agile and adapt.”