MES Capstone Summary
Beth Gingold
Master of Environmental Studies, University of Pennsylvania, May 2007

The provision of an adequate supply of clean water for competing uses is becoming increasingly difficult in Puerto Rico. The growing population, urbanization and industrialization has led to increased water consumption and increased competition for the island’s limited water supply. At the same time, sedimentation of the island’s reservoirs has led to decreased storage capacity, and contamination of groundwater has led to decreased aquifer withdrawals (Hunter and Arbona, 1995).

Effective land use policy must weigh both the private and public costs and benefits of converting forests to alternate land uses. This project assesses the private and public impacts of forest to pasture conversion in the montane regions of Puerto Rico. In many tropical montane areas, forest conversion to pasture is a financially profitable land use option for landowners. At the same time, this change in land use has consequences for the public provision of ecosystem services, including the quantity and quality of water available to downstream users. These public consequences are often assumed to be negative, and there are many programs in the tropics designed to promote forest conservation. However, the scientific and economic literatures suggest that forest conversion to pasture may have both positive and negative impacts on public benefits. This project provides insight into conditions under which conversion from forest to pasture may be socially optimal by evaluating the hydrologic externalities associated with forest-to-pasture conversions in the humid subtropical lifezone of Puerto Rico.

In Puerto Rico, as in many other parts of the tropics, forest conservation provides public benefits. In particular, due to Puerto Rico’s dependence on reservoirs for its water supply, erosion control is a socially valuable function of forests. The idea that forests provide public benefits has been used to justify public spending on forest conservation. However, the conversion of forests to pasture not only results in private benefits to the landowner, but in some cases may provide public benefits greater than the costs of increased erosion. Other ecosystem services provided by forests may be significant enough to outweigh the private benefits of pasture in some areas, but not in others. It is important for policy-makers to consider such trade-offs and recognize the importance of site-specific variables and appropriate targeting when designing land use policies.

For an extended description of methods and results, including data collection and model information, please see full capstone.

Table 4.1.16. Private and public costs and benefits of subtropical wet forests in Puerto Rico. Unless otherwise stated, all units are in $/ha/yr. Range of values reported in literature for tropical forests (Almeida and Uhl, 1995; Aylward and Echeverría, 2001; Pearce, 2001; Aylward, 2002) compared with estimates compiled for subtropical wet forest zone in Puerto Rico.

Photo courtesy of Beth Gingold.

MES Capstone Summary
Tanya Dapkey
Master of Environmental Studies, University of Pennsylvania, 2008

Water is a vital resource for our society; without it we could not have evolved on this planet. Determining current water quality, therefore, is a crucial aspect in sustaining a developed society. There is a long history of using aquatic insects to monitor water quality in freshwater systems. Since aquatic organisms show a tendency to bioaccumulate pesticides and herbicides, examining and identifying the full range of macroinvertebrate communities within aquatic habitats provides an accurate stream health assessment and can test for specific contaminants. Benthic invertebrates provide us with the most accessible, abundant, and cost effective life form for biological sampling and assessment of stream quality. They occupy all microhabitats in fresh water systems, their life histories and pollution tolerance are well known, and their sedentary life style provides us with the most accurate perspective on the local ecosystem. Diversity of these animals is relatively high, with 100-200 estimated species in any given stream, and we can gain specific knowledge of habitat, degradation, and the type of pollution by finding and examining specific groups.

The type and quantity of insects truly reflect the stream’s health; when a site is in good condition, pollution intolerant species are abundant with a relatively high richness. On the other hand, at a site where there are higher numbers of pollution tolerant species, the stream health is lower. While extremely useful, his method relies on the accurate identification of species by amateur or professional taxonomists.

In 1999, the EPA established protocols for rapid bio-assessment of fresh water habitats in the United States. When followed, these protocols yield accurate stream assessments, even when performed by volunteer organizations and amateur taxonomists. However, the water quality rating for a site changes whether you use order, family or species-level identifications. If these volunteer groups are only able to identify to the higher taxonomic levels, streams everywhere could be assessed incorrectly.

A new molecular sampling approach sequences a short portion of the macroinvertebrate’s mitochondrial DNA, the COl gene, to create a unique “barcode” (Hebert et al. 2003). Species are identified by matching their CO1 gene sequence to a reference library of CO1 sequences. DNA barcoding is quickly becoming an important taxonomic tool. By elevating the identification of these animals from morphological to genetic we can provide greater accuracy.

In this project, replicate quantitative samples of macroinvertebrates were taken from two sites along the White Clay Creek in Pennsylvania. I compared and contrasted the ability to measure differences in water quality between the two sites when the macroinvertebrates were identified to the family-genus level by an amateur taxonomist, to the genus-species level by a professional taxonomist and finally to species level by the barcoding technique. This project incorporated two methods that have never been linked together before, macroinvertebrate biomonitoring and DNA barcoding, in an effort to gain a greater understanding of how traditional taxonomic approaches compare to species identification by DNA barcoding, and how this may affect interpretation of water quality. Out of the three methods, barcoding proved to be the one that determines the most insect species with a high accuracy.

Barcoding is a useful tool in species identifications and could be used as an automated, time- and cost-efficient (as compared to traditional taxonomic methods using multiple man hours) method for aquatic biomonitoring. By combining classic techniques with the barcode method, the true diversity and abundance of a community can become more precise. By appraising these communities in such detail we hope to provide a more subtle and accurate study for determining water quality and the effects of non-point source pollution.

Works Cited:

Hebert, Paul D. N., Alina Cywinska, Shelly L. Ball, and Jeremy R. deWaard. 2003. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B. 270, 313-321.

Hodkinson, Ian D. and John K. Jackson. 2005. Terrestrial and Aquatic Invertebrates as Bioindicators for Environmental Monitoring, with Particular reference to Mountain Ecosystems . Environmental Management. 35(5),649-666.

All photographs taken by Tanya Dapkey.

• From Darryl Fears at the Washington Post: Energy firms queried on gas-extraction technique
• From Steve Levine at Foreign Policy: The shareholder challenge to the natural gas revolution
• From Mike Lee at Bloomberg: Exxon, Chevron face pressure on fracturing disclosure

Recently Project Kaisei’s co-founder and Wharton alumni, Doug Woodring, has joined forces with the Clinton Global Initiative to create the Plastic Disclosure Project (PDP), which is an investor led initiative that will ask corporations to measure and reveal their production and use of plastic and waste practices.  Woodring, discusses the challenge his organization faces in tackling such a multifaceted problem, one which relies on seemingly disparate factors such as science, policy, education, innovation of materials, remediation and recycling in order to be fully addressed. The book “Cradle to Cradle” has a philosophy—rooted in design principles—that posits the notion that industry needs to rethink the product lifecycle. For example, recycling alone is short-sighted, instead the way forward would be to think in terms of the reuse and repurposing products. All the worlds ants have a higher biomass content than all the worlds humans yet over thousands of years ants have never destroyed their environment as humans have done in a mere 100 years.

Challenges of Raising Awareness

Unlike air pollution which we can see and smell, most think plastic is harmless, or merely an aesthetic eyesore when seen on the ground or in the water, Woodring says, and is perceived of as less of a planetary problem by the public. What many don’t realize is that plastic does not biodegrade. It can stay in the environment for up to 400 years breaking down only to microscopic sizes and contaminating the food chain with toxins.

With thousands of types of plastic, and waste infrastructure that has not kept pace with our consumption, it is little wonder then that roughly 90% of plastics are not recycled. Woodring adds that mass scale recycling would be more surmountable if this number were reduced worldwide to 50-100 (types of plastics) by legislation and industry cooperation. Plastic use around the world continues to grow as wealth rises. He points out that the problems of plastic are then magnified in countries that do not have environmentally friendly recycling or disposal systems such as the Philippines where garbage is burned and plastic toxins subsequently end up directly into rainwater and the ocean.

The Plastic Disclosure Project

Point of purchase marketing, displays, advertising and labels do not need to be plastic. Essentially, too many items are plastics that simply do not need to be. Woodring says that the initial product design stage is an opportunity for the right creativity and longevity in mind that could help create more environmentally friendly products. The Plastic Disclosure Project is an opportunity for corporations to measure their plastic footprints in their daily operations.  For companies akin to the current carbon footprint framework, and carbon disclosure requirements imposed on manufacturers, the Plastic Disclosure Project, with the ecological issues that Project Kasei is highlighting, attempts to serve as a uniting force. For example, through this project, the group can help corporations eliminate some R&D costs by making introductions to new solutions and materials that they may not have previously come across.  This will help make “sustainable designs” become a broad-based reality in a shorter period of time.

Role of Government and Corporations

Woodring adds that government needs to incentivize and enable consumer and commercial re-use and recycling. They could play a role in strengthening the product-consumer relationship so consumers are aware of their product’s life cycle and the effect it has after disposal. Legislation in the vein of this philosophy, for example, is “life cycle assessment” in Europe, which set up manufacturing standards and requirements for companies. Woodring believes that companies must actively think about their plastic footprint, use, and waste. There are tons of simple things they can do to curb some of the problems. We don’t need trillions of government dollars to solve the brunt of this problem. Better design vis-à-vis reduction and new materials can lead directly to innovation, jobs and environmental betterment. These companies need to have leaders at the helm who see beyond upfront costs, recognizing the positive loyalty that can be generated from a strong focus on the environmental impact of their products. Simply put, incremental 2% changes at this point are not sufficient to effectively curb the negative repercussions of an over-abundance of worldwide plastic production and use.

Barriers Moving Forward

Woodring explains that there are financial barriers to really make this a reality. For example, Coca-Cola devoted R&D to develop a fully recycled bottle but has not yet been able to scale this up for all of their global demand simply because of capacity constraints. He sees the opportunity for a large company to take the lead and make a single huge stride. He uses the example of Europe’s electronic waste laws were a good step, but if a company like Wal-Mart, for example, which has annual sales bigger than GDP of 144 countries, exerts their clout to pressure the entire industry to change, that would result in true progress. Small changes can make a big difference says Woodring who uses the example of how products come from China in bags that get thrown away.  A company like Wal-Mart could fairly easily make a large-scale precedent-setting effort to figure out a way to remove these pointless polluters from the supply chain.

World’s first city water department

In 1793, 5,000 Philadelphians died from yellow fever and tens of thousands more were sickened by the disease, which had become an annual summer occurrence. Though there was disagreement as to the precise cause of the disease (it was actually carried to Philadelphia on trade ships and transmitted by mosquitoes), many citizens nevertheless looked toward the growing accumulation of sewage and other pollution in the city’s wells and streets, and began pressuring city leaders to establish a reliable supply of clean water. Additional large outbreaks of the fever in 1797 and 1798 finally prompted the creation of the “Watering Committee” in January of 1799. This entity, the precursor to the modern Philadelphia Water Department (PWD), was the first in the world to provide water to a major city. (PWD, “Clean Water for Life,” reproduced by Adam Levine on PhillyH2O.org. See notes.)

Motivated to act quickly, the committee sought solutions and commissioned architect Benjamin Henry Latrobe to build Philadelphia’s first Water Works at Centre Square, the present day site of City Hall. Latrobe’s design called for steam engines—a brand new technology in 1799—to power pumps at two locations. The first would pump water from the Schuylkill River at Chestnut Street to a tunnel high enough that it would flow by gravity to a second steam-powered pump at Broad and Market. This pump would elevate the water to a storage tank from whence it could be distributed by gravity through a network of wooden pipes laid out in alignment with the street grid. (Gibson, “Fairmount Waterworks”) Private businesses and residents could access the system by paying a “Water Rent” and building a connecting lateral pipe. The system went into operation in 1801. Latrobe’s design for the distribution pipes remains the essential layout today, as well as the pattern for other utility distribution systems, such as gas and electricity. (PWD, “Clean Water for Life”)

The Centre Square Water Works exemplified a philosophy prevalent at the time of designing for both function and aesthetics, though not necessarily linking the two. Set in a public park, the structure at Centre Square exhibited a neoclassical style that did not contribute to its function as a pump house, but attracted visitors and praise for its beauty. Unfortunately, the capacity of the reservoir was minimal, the pumps were unreliable and expensive to operate, and the yellow fever epidemics did not subside. After a decade of operation, the Watering Committee began exploring options for a better system.

Fairmount Water Works

From the conceptual, engineering and aesthetic standpoints, the Fairmount Water Works was one of the greatest American architectural achievements of the 19th century. At the height of its glory, from roughly 1830 to 1850, it attracted tourists from all over the world and was second only to Niagara Falls in the Western Hemisphere for number of visitors. (FWWIC, “Background bits and factoids”) For nearly 100 years, from the operation of the first pump in 1815 until advanced filtration equipment at other locations rendered it obsolete in 1909, the Fairmount Water Works was Philadelphia’s primary source of drinking water, pumping several million gallons of water each day from the Schuylkill River to the reservoirs atop the hill named “Faire Mount” by William Penn, where the Philadelphia Museum of Art currently stands. (Fairmount Park Conservancy, “Third Annual Water Works Celebration”)

The Fairmount Water works was the brainchild of Frederick Graff, who had worked under Benjamin Latrobe on the Centre Square Water Works and became superintendent of that facility in 1805. Responding to the primary concern that the tanks at Centre Square held only a 25-minute back-up supply, Graff proposed that a three million-gallon reservoir be built on Fairmount, by far the highest point in the city at that time, with pumps to carry water from the Schuylkill. The water could then be piped by gravity to the Centre Square facility and distributed throughout the city using the existing pipe system. (Gibson, “Fairmount Waterworks”)

Construction of the Water Works began in 1812, and the first of two pumps, again powered by steam engines, began working in 1815. Shortly thereafter, the city began replacing the old wooden street pipes with new cast-iron equipment to increase the distribution capacity. In 1819, a new water main was installed from the Fairmount reservoir directly to Broad and Chestnut, bypassing the Centre Square building entirely. No longer needed for water storage, the Centre Square building was briefly used as a watch tower and storage facility, and finally torn down in 1828-29. (Gibson, “Fairmount Waterworks,” and PWD, “Clean Water for Life”)

Though the steam pumps worked effectively, they were expensive to operate and in 1819 the Watering Committee decided to abandon this cutting-edge technology in favor of something older: water power. The Fairmount Dam, completed in 1822, was thought to be the largest in the world at that time. (PWD, “Clean Water for Life”) It used the force of the river to pump water into the reservoir. This step greatly reduced operating costs, and ushered in the most prominent years in the facility’s history. According to Jane Mork Gibson’s “Fairmount Waterworks,” the water department in 1844 took in $151,501 in revenues on $29,713 in operating expenses.

Along with the construction of the actual dam, the conversion to water power necessitated structural changes to the facility and the addition of a mill house to contain the water wheels. A forebay was dug out to channel the water into the mill house. Following the tradition of Latrobe, Graff designed structures in the neoclassical style to be appealing and blend aesthetically with their surroundings. Sculptures and fountains were added. The adjoining grounds were laid out as gardens with walking paths that climbed to the reservoir and connected to the Upper Ferry Bridge, a 330-foot single-span bridge that crossed the Schuylkill at the current site of Spring Garden Street. Built in 1813, the “Colossus of Fairmount,” as it was called, was the longest single span in the world at the time. (FWWIC, interpretive display)

After the dormant steam engines were finally dismantled in 1832, the engine house was converted into a dining saloon in 1835. Gazebos were added that same year at the east edge of the dam and at an overlook half way up Fairmount. These structures still stand today. And among the most appealing of the visual attractions was the machinery of the wheels and pumps themselves: Graff designed the mill house with visitor galleries to allow the public to see the Water Works in action.

Depiction of the Fairmount Water Works around 1865, still a popular tourist destination. Upper Ferry Bridge has been replaced with a suspension bridge (right side). (Philadelphia Water Department Historical Collection/Courtesy of Jay Snider)

The genius of unparalleled function together with highly appealing form made the Water Works Philadelphia’s most visited location, and drew praise even from the proudest European visitors. English writer and social critic Frances Trollope raved about the site in her otherwise disparaging 1832 Domestic Manners of the Americans:

The water-works of Philadelphia have not yet perhaps as wide extended fame as those of Marley [at Versailles], but they are not less deserving it. At a most beautiful point of the Schuylkill River the water has been forced up into a magnificent reservoir, ample and elevated enough to send it through the whole city. The vast yet simple machinery by which this is achieved is open to the public, who resort in such numbers to see it, that several evening stages run from Philadelphia to Fair Mount for their accommodation. But interesting and curious as this machinery is, Fair Mount would not be so attractive had it not something else to offer. It is, in truth, one of the very prettiest spots the eye can look upon.”

Charles Dickens commented in American Notes for General Circulation that the Water Works “are no less ornamental than useful, being tastefully laid out as a public garden and kept in the best and neatest order.” And inventor Thomas Ewbank wrote about the Water Works in an 1850 volume about hydraulic machinery, “no hydraulic works in the Union can compete, nor do we believe they are excelled by any in the world.” (Quotes referenced by Gibson, “Fairmount Waterworks”) Perhaps the greatest tribute to the facility was its influence on other urban water systems throughout the United States and the world. According to Gibson, Graff was engaged as a consultant for 37 other water works, and more than 30 in America were modeled after Fairmount. (Gibson, “Fairmount Waterworks” and FWWIC, “Remarkable Facts”)

Though the main buildings of the Fairmount Water Works still stand, its status as an engineering marvel and sole provider of water to the city did not last. Once the city consolidated with its districts in 1854 to form the modern-day city limits, the steam-driven pumps at other locations were incorporated into Philadelphia’s water system. During the latter half of the 19th century, Philadelphia’s explosion in population and industry created tremendous pollution problems, as both industrial and human wastes were dumped into the Schuylkill River. In the 1880’s and 1890’s, the city began to experience outbreaks of typhoid fever, which unlike yellow fever, is transmitted by water-borne pathogens. Pressure mounted toward the turn of the century for the city to add more modern water purification technology, in accordance with the increasingly accepted germ theory of disease. With no possibility of adding a filtration plant to the Fairmount Water Works, the addition of filtration at other locations rendered the Fairmount system obsolete, and it was decommissioned in 1909. The mill house reopened as an aquarium in 1911—an innovative concept in itself at the time—and remained in operation until 1962. The Philadelphia Museum of Art opened atop Fairmount on the original site of the reservoirs in 1928. The buildings and grounds of the Water Works experienced ups and downs during the second half of the 20th century, but in the last decade significant progress has been made in restoration. The marvelous Fairmount Water Works Interpretive Center opened to the public in 2003; a new upscale restaurant opened in the engine house in 2006; and many of the gardens and connecting paths have been restored, making the site an attractive destination for visitors once again. (Fairmount Park Conservancy, “Third Annual Water Works Celebration”)

Fairmount Water Works today (Adam Levine)

Fairmount Park, America’s first riparian buffer

Before the demise of the Water Works, its popularity, profitability and forward-thinking proponents helped drive development of the first American effort to protect a watershed by preventing development along its banks—a concept now called a “riparian buffer.” As far back as 1826, Philadelphia’s leaders had recognized a connection between clean water and parkland, and recommended that the areas surrounding the Water Works be protected as public gardens, abandoning a number of proposals to bring industry into the space. (PWD, “Clean Water for Life”) The industrialization of many towns upriver added increasing amounts of pollution to the Schuylkill River. The land bordering the river in Philadelphia consisted still of country estates, not industry, and the city leaders wanted to keep it that way. In 1844, the city purchased the Lemon Hill estate, north of the Water Works, for the express purpose of protecting water quality by preventing industrial development. After Frederick Graff’s death in 1847, his son Frederick, Jr., took over as superintendent of the Water Works and immediately began campaigning for more land to be set aside upstream. (Gibson, “Fairmount Waterworks”) The Sedgley Estate was purchased in 1855, and the two estates together with the land surrounding the Water Works were officially established as Fairmount Park. (FWWIC, fact sheet) Additional parcels were added over the ensuing decade, culminating in the acquisition of the estates on the western bank of the Schuylkill in 1866 and 1867, and the establishment of the Fairmount Park Commission in 1867. (PWD, “Water for the City”)

Innovation goes underground

Visionary though Fairmount Park may have been, the land immediately bordering the Schuylkill was not the only source of pollution in the city’s water supply. Following the consolidation of the city and its surrounding districts in 1854, Philadelphia suddenly swelled from two square miles in area to its modern-day size of 130 square miles. Population grew from 81,000 in 1800 to 565,000 in 1860, and then to over a million by 1890. (Levine, PhillyH2O.org) Though no factories could be built along the Schuylkill just upstream of the Water Works, massive amounts of industrial and human waste were finding their way into the many creeks and streams that flowed through the city and eventually emptied into the Schuylkill or Delaware rivers. To handle the skyrocketing population, more and more toilets and “privies” were built with direct connections to sewer pipes that generally emptied directly into the nearest stream. Many of these streams became so foul that city officials feared public health concerns, as diseases were thought to be transmitted via “miasmas,” the odors or vapors rising from collections of filth.

With this in mind, the city began to enclose its many streams and tributaries in underground tunnels, effectively converting the streams into sewers. The tunnels also provided drainage for stormwater in the city—the focus of present-day concerns. Approximately 200 miles of city streams were buried in this fashion. Completed primarily in the latter half of the 19th century, the conversion of streams did accomplish the goal of removing the reek from the public domain. It also had the advantage of allowing the city to prepare infrastructure in advance of anticipated growth. Many of these streams were buried while the surrounding land was still undeveloped, allowing city engineers to level the land, build streets in a grid without the irregularity of stream valleys or the expense of bridges, and prepare connections to the new sewers for new residential and industrial landowners. In many cases the tax revenues generated by the new residents quickly paid for the cost of encasing the creeks. (Levine, “Sewers, Pollution and Public Health in Philadelphia”)

Trio of maps depicting, from left to right: Philadelphia’s original surface streams, current surface streams, and current combined surface and “sewerized” streams. Click on individual maps for larger versions. (Philadelphia Water Department Historical Collection)

Unlike the development of the Water Works and Fairmount Park, however, the practice of burying streams was neither visionary nor innovative. This was a common practice for cities at that time, and was based more on economic opportunism and outdated understanding of disease than on long-term benefits for the city. While the open accumulations of filth were hidden, disease rates did not drop; in fact, the incidence of typhoid fever, transmitted by water-borne bacteria, reached epidemic proportions in the 1880’s, 1890’s and 1900’s as more and more raw sewage was dumped into the Schuylkill and Delaware rivers above the water intake points. The city ultimately reacted by adding modern water purification, with citywide filtration in 1912 and chlorination in 1914, and typhoid deaths dropped to negligible levels. (“Water for the City,” PhillyH2O.org) However, the city’s sewers continued to dump untreated wastewater into the rivers until sewage treatment plants were slowly brought online during the 20th century. It was not until the 1970’s and 1980’s, after the Clean Water Act was passed, that Philadelphia’s improved its wastewater treatment sufficiently to allow aquatic life to recover in the urban portions of the Schuylkill and Delaware rivers. (Levine, “Sewers, Pollution and Public Health in Philadelphia”)   But because the original pipes, to this day, transport both wastewater and stormwater together, the old system has left a legacy that still needs to be addressed.

Mill Creek once drained most of West Philadelphia, from Overbrook to the Schuylkill at the present site of the University of the Sciences. It was encapsulated between 1869 and 1895. This photo was taken in 1883 at 47th and Haverford. (Philadelphia Water Department Historical Collection)

Green City Clean Waters

Philadelphia’s current wastewater treatment plants collect sewage from the entire sewer system, filter out solid and chemical pollution, kill bacteria, and discharge the treated water into the rivers. Under normal circumstances, the system works well enough that the treated water is actually cleaner than the water flowing in the rivers. However, because 60% of the sewer system is combined sewage and stormwater drainage, a tremendous amount of runoff enters the system when it rains. Even during small rain events, the capacity of the sewage treatment plants can be exceeded. To prevent a backup, which would force stormwater mixed with raw sewage up into streets and basements, the system is designed to discharge the overflow directly into the city’s rivers. This occurs at 164 points throughout the city, called combined sewer overflows (CSO’s). The problem has grown worse in recent decades as more and more of the city has been built out with impervious surfaces, such as roads, parking lots and roofs, which prevent the ground from absorbing rainfall, directing more into the drainage system. Currently, an average of 15 billion gallons of water mixed with raw sewage overflows untreated into regional waterways each year. (Neukrug, interview)

As these outflows are technically in violation of state and federal regulations, the Philadelphia Water Department has been charged with finding ways to reduce this flow. The traditional approach would be a massive public works project to dig up the majority of the city and construct new, separate stormwater infrastructure, or to increase the capacity of current combined pipes and treatment plants. PWD has estimated the cost for such a project on the order of $10 billion, making it effectively impossible. (Neukrug, interview)

The alternative is something that has never been attempted before on a citywide scale, according to PWD Deputy Commissioner Howard Neukrug: to decrease the actual amount of stormwater entering the system by increasing infiltration of rainwater into the ground. The “Green City, Clean Waters” program, proposed by PWD in 2009, would spend approximately $2.1 billion over 25 years to redefine Philadelphia’s approach to stormwater management. Through partnerships with other city agencies, landowners, non-profit groups and community associations, the program encourages physical alterations to properties in order to promote absorption of water directly into the soil. Examples of these alterations include porous pavement, rain gardens, green roofs, and vegetated sidewalks and street “bumpouts.” The plan calls for efforts in eight distinct areas: streets, homes, schools, public facilities, parking areas, open space, businesses, and alleys/driveways/walkways. A new water rate structure has also been put into place to encourage better on-site stormwater management.

PWD hopes that Green City, Clean Waters can ultimately cut overflow discharges in half. Equally exciting, though, is the potential for added benefits and synergy with the city’s aggressive overall greening efforts. Features that increase water infiltration usually add vegetation to a property, meaning more trees, more gardens, and more green patches and strips along roads. There is a significant community-building element to the program in the form of plans for community parks, urban agriculture, and retrofitting of bleak asphalt schoolyards with trees, gardens and porous court surfaces. Green City, Clean Waters dovetails with the city’s recently announced plan to add 500 acres of strategically selected open space. And there are positive impacts on air quality, carbon sequestration, job creation and property values.

Green City, Clean Waters has placed Philadelphia back in its historic position of leading the way in the management of water. Many cities in the United States and the world face similar challenges with old infrastructure and increasing stormwater impacts, and managers from other water departments are closely watching the progress of Philadelphia’s proposed solution. PWD has contact with other cities “on a daily basis,” according to Neukrug, hearkening back to the days when Frederick Graff, designer of the Fairmount Water Works, was contracted by dozens of other cities to help with their water systems. The program has not yet been formally approved: since it is so radically different from traditional approaches to stormwater management, it presents particular challenges to regulatory agencies like EPA to create a system of regulations that can effectively monitor all elements of the plan. But if it is approved, and if it is successful, Green City, Clean Waters has the potential, like the Water Works once did, to blend the functional elements of effective water management with the aesthetic elements of a greener, more beautiful, and more livable city.

Links and Acknowledgments

• For the full interview with Howard Neukrug, see Howard Neukrug discusses “Green City, Clean Waters.”
• Much information in this article was initially researched by historian Jane Mork Gibson and PWD historical consultant Adam Levine. This material, along with a wealth of additional information, maps and photos, can be found on Levine’s excellent website PhillyH2O.org.
• The Fairmount Water Works Interpretive Center maintains a fascinating, family-friendly collection of exhibits in the atmospheric depths of the old mill house. For information, visit Fairmountwaterworks.org.
• For information about Green City, Clean Waters, visit this page at the Philadelphia Water Department’s Office of Watersheds.

References

• Fairmount Water Works Interpretive Center (FFWIC), interpretive displays and fact sheets: “Background bits and factoids,” “Remarkable Facts,” untitled fact sheet
• Gibson, Jane Mork, “Fairmount Waterworks,” Philadelphia Museum of Art Bulletin, Volume 84, Numbers 360 & 361, Summer 1988
• Levine, Adam, “Sewers, Pollution and Public Health in Philadelphia,” Pennsylvania Legacies, May 2010
• Neukrug, Howard, personal interview, October 20, 2010, available at Pennelements Howard Neukrug discusses “Green City, Clean Waters,”
• Philadelphia Water Department, “Clean Water for Life: Philadelphia Water Department 1801-2001” exhibit, on view at Municipal Services Building, 1401 JFK Blvd., and reproduced online by Adam Levine at PhillyH2O.org

WWF’s Living Planet Report highlights that fresh water ecosystems have been on an as rapid or more rapid decline than any other kind of ecosystem. Biodiversity is imperative for working to ensure better management of rivers, lakes and wetlands. Tickner says that through WWF’s, they’ve realized it is difficult to achieve anything if your only concern lies in biodiversity. He adds, if you try to ring fence water for biodiversity without considering the human dimension, you simply won’t get anywhere and it’s politically and economically naïve approach. This is why WWF’s approach to fresh water conservation has focused a great deal no water management. Tickner offers his tackling water challenges, new technologies, and WWF’s working engaging with both the public and private sectors.

What shifts do you see in ways stakeholders are approaching water issues?

If you examine some of the great challenges facing the world in the 21st century, water runs through most of them. Take for instance poverty reduction, adapting to a new climate, food security and the interaction with irrigation, energy security (irrigated biofuels, hydropower and cooling water for thermal power stations), conflict over water resources. If you are particularly concerned about biodiversity, water is an underpinning success factor in our ability to tackle any of those challenges on a sustainable basis. There is a little bit of a paradigm shift happening around the world in the world water management community and in the business community as well. For the last 200 years our approach to water has been how much do you we need and where do we get it from; it’s been very supply side driven. With increases in population, changes in consumptions, and impacts of climate change, I think we’re seeing a shift towards trying to balance demand and supply rather than thinking let’s just supply more and more. Of course there are tremendous challenges in that. As population grows, there are large chunks of the global population trying to develop economically and improve their lives for understandable reasons. How do we agree where the trade offs are and who gets what water in a way that is transparent, equitable, productive but also sustainable and doesn’t drain the aquifers or the rivers dry? That is the angle we are approaching water at and it means not just talking to the biologists and the conservations but to a wide range of people that come at things from different political and economic angles.

Water pricing may not be the silver bullet it is often made out to be, why is that?

Those that come from things at a more economic or business angle see water pricing as a key part of the equation. I have no doubt that water pricing will be an important part of the solution in some places in some times but I don’t think it’s quite the silver bullet that it’s sometimes thought to be. There are few issues to think about such as why do you want to put a price on water? Broadly speaking there are two reasons: to establish revenue streams which can be used to maintain the infrastructure needed for water management and that includes both the physical infrastructure such as the pipes and dams. It also goes towards institutional infrastructure which includes the water supply company and management authorities. Somebody somewhere needs to pay for all that. You can either pay for it through your taxes or through some kind of water charge. Here in the UK we pay water bills to private companies. And broadly speaking that’s used to maintain that infrastructure. In most places that kind of water charging is probably a good thing because it’s transparent.

The second reason is to try and encourage more efficient use of water. So the idea is where water is scarce you might charge more for it. Now as an initial take that sounds like basic economic logical sense since scarcity of a resource usually drives higher prices. However, there are a few issues around those complications that we need to be very careful of. Firstly there is an issue that water isn’t just another commodity like oil or gold. Those things are important and if they run short people’s lives can be inconvenienced and there can be some economic impact. In the case of water, if it runs short or runs out and people don’t have access to it, they are dead given three or four days. Water is more important than other commodities and that is reflected in some of the politics of water. Water uses fight each other over the resource because it’s that important. You have to recognize the importance of water when you think about raising the price of it.

What about the safeguards that can be used?

There are safeguards you could theoretically put in place so everyone has a guaranteed right to a certain amount of water and there are economic tools for that such as the rising block tariffs and the like. But they rely on good data that shows the economics of who is paying what and the effect that has on demand. It also requires good hydrological data. Those tools need to be quite responsive because in many parts of the world, the availability of water changes from season to season, sometimes more frequently than that. Big problems underpinning this globally are an absence of good data particularly around ground water; especially in parts of the world such as sub-Saharan Africa. Also in light of the politics around the water, simply saying if water is scarce and we need to charge more for it is a pretty crude response.

Should beverage corporations such as Coca-Cola begin to share more of their data?

Private sector corporations such as Coca-Cola have invested a lot in looking at water data. In some poor countries there is lack of data. Basic hydrological gaging stations along rivers and groundwater-monitoring stations are either minimal or non-existent. In countries such as India, there is a data but it is a classified state secret and not publicly accessible. So it wouldn’t surprise me if there were some private sector institutions out there that knew more about the resources in some places compared to other stakeholders. I certainly think that there is a role for that. As the debate around the involvement of the private sector in water management moves towards the discussion of shared risks, I can imagine some companies will see some kind of shared benefit towards pulling resources to address risk. There could be a good business case for them in providing some of the data they have invested in gathering.

Do you think technologies like desalination could provide the solution needed for water scarcity?

There is increasing interest in desalination including in the financial sector. As demand increases, no matter how well we manage water, desalination probably will play a role. A few issues that people should think about before going for such options are its expense. In relatively poor countries, it may not be the best economic option. The Mckinsey Report on water shows that sometimes big capital expenditures projects like desalination aren’t always the best option to go for if you’re trying to close the gap between demand and supply on water.

The energy consumption of desalination is another issue. Although technology is improving, it still is an energy hungry business. When you get energy from fossil fuel sources, there are issues around increasing carbon emission and climate change. Anyone interested in water if they’re sensible would want to minimize impacts on global climate change. So at the very least there is an irony there and another issue around desalination is how you deal with hyper saline effluent which often comes from it. Where do you put that and potentially what impact does it have on the ecosystems or even other water sources. I think there is an obvious geographical issue around as well. If you live by the coast it’s an obvious option but if you are in central Africa or central Asia, it’s difficult since water is heavy and would be expensive to pump around continents so it’s geographically limited.

My major concern is that it’s a supply side solution. A more sensible question in the 21st century is that if we need more water perhaps we are using too much water to begin with. We need to manage it more effectively and efficiently. I think there is a logical sequence of first improving water management and then thinking if you’ve done all you can and there is still a gap, than look at desalination as one option. There are a whole range of complexities on desalination that often go ignored.

Could you describe some of the work you are doing engaging with the private sector?

One example is we are working with SABMiller helping to assess their water footprint particularly as it affects subsidiaries is water scarce countries. We are working in countries such as South Africa, Ukraine, Peru and Tanzania. Their footprint varies from place to place. For example if barley and maize are attained from irrigated land, its footprint is higher than in rain fed countries with lower temperatures. To properly address their water risk and impact, you need to go beyond just their watering plant and think about farmers that supply the ingredients. Some of the work has included engagement with farmers so they become more water efficient. However an issue is what happens to water they save or don’t use from efficiency gains? In practice, unless there is some regulation to stop it, the next farmer downstream will use that water instead so we still have the same water scarcity risk. Any company in that situation needs to manage this risk and start engaging with the rules of the game around who gets what water to ensure that some of the water saved goes towards maintaining river flows and aquifer levels so that broader water scarcity risk for everyone including yourself is reduced. Engaging with the supply chain and not just their breweries and bottling plants is the direction we’re heading in when we work with such corporations.

Her professional career began as a career diplomat in Canada; she has been Deputy Minister of Health in Canada, and Deputy Director of UNICEF, with the rank of Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations. She is currently a chairwoman, director and advisor to several organizations focused on improving the management of water such as the Global Water Partnership and the Water Resource Advisory Committee for Suez. Among some of the biggest achievements in water over the last decade she sights is when the former International Monetary Fund Director Michel Camdessus helped produce an influential report that was influential in opening discussion on the financial conditions in the water sector. She credits his work for helping lead to establishing more mechanisms to build up utilities so they would have a greater demand for water financing.

Catley-Carlson also sights while on the board of the International Water Management Institute, over 700 scientists spent half a decade assessing if there was enough water to feed the planet. With agriculture taking up 75 to 80% of available water and a world population that is only growing, such issues are critical to examine. Catley-Carlson discusses her view and experience on pertinent water issues such as water pricing and markets. She also sheds lights on countries that have been able to tackle some of the biggest global challenges such as water scarcity and disaster relief.

Pricing Water

Catley-Colsen believes that while water pricing is essential in all water systems it needs to be coupled with subsidies to assist poor populations. The reason being, without some sort of payment in the form of a tariff or tax, a water system will not keep functioning. Parts of it may continue to work for the wealthy and middle class but system risks breaking down for the poor. Ideally, tariffs support staff, chemicals and reservoirs. She gives reference to an Indian sign that said ‘the poor cannot afford free water’ explaining that free water usually means no water. Time and time again, she says systems that work are the ones where people pay an amount towards the up keep of a water system. In agriculture the fact that water is not unrealistically or even not priced at all leads to why there is an overuse of water. She points out that most irrigation system function at 40 to 60% efficiency globally. In other words, they are putting out more water than needed and it dries down the water tables. Proper water pricing she explains could help create an economic mechanism that made that more difficult to do and prevent some critical problems such as ground water overdrawing. It is not just in developing countries but also developed countries such as the United States and Canada (particularly in the agriculture sector) where she believes a pricing mechanism could be used much more effectively.

Water Scarce Countries

While there are a number of countries that are considered water stressed where scientists estimate will go dry in the next two decades, looking at how they use water is critical. Catley-Colsen uses Jordan as an example since as it is of the driest country in the world where 90% of its water is used in agriculture. She points out that Amman is a very thirsty city and if water used for agriculture was cut down by10%, it would be more than enough to supply the demand of the whole city. She explains that the amount that goes to drinking water in any country is a small amount, usually about 7%. However, economics and politics often come into play failing to provide even allocations.

She sights Morocco and Tunisia as examples of countries that have put together fairly strong water ministries that have had good records of reconciling various uses and alternatives uses for water. For example, in Morocco its tourism visa ve agriculture or new residential areas visa ve agriculture has been effective. Other countries that have strong water governance systems include South Africa, Israel, Germany, France, and Netherlands where Catley-Colsen points out makes it easier to deal with conflicts that may arise.

From her experience at both CIDA and UNICEF, she says that drinking water projects have a certain similarity. She points out that such projects require a small allocation of water and the main problem lies in that many communities that face scarcity issues are poor communities where there is a lack of attention or exclusion from government services. Where things get really different is in the water resource itself and the economic use of water she says explaining that is there this realm, there is likely to be an awful lot of different circumstances. She cautions against applying a one size fits all policy to water resource management anywhere in the world. What she does recommend which is she was part of at the Global Water Partnership is create things such as a tool box of different mechanisms, legislations, regulations and institutional ideas that have been useful in one country or another for the management of water. Examples of topic include water markets work, establishing transboundarary organizations, and dealing with conflict resolution on water issues. She says having access to a number of instances puts a water resource manager in a certain country in a better position to start thinking about which ones might have the greatest utility.

Disaster Relief and Risk Management

Disaster Relief and risk management are difficult to implement in countries where communication and levels of education are poor. However, Catley-Colsen believes that the international community has an obligation to keep trying to build a high degree of trust and readiness to bring various countries on board to engage in this issue. She points out that Bangladesh is best example of all as it used to have hundreds of deaths if not thousands when great monster storms hit. Government official began to take the issue very seriously around 10 or 15 years ago. They engaged in wide spread flood response appointing district officers to ensure people knew where high ground were and came up with early warning and communication systems. She says that the country is very much a success story because while they still get terrible floods and drastic weather conditions that still cause terrible damage, the death toll and extent to which property and livestock are damage has been decreased heavily by better preventative measures.

The Delaware River is the last remaining undammed river in the eastern United States and is under constant threat from pollution, development, flooding, dredging, deepening, and overuse by the millions of people that rely on its waters for drinking water, commerce, and recreation. The Delaware runs through four states, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. Although its watershed comprises only four-tenths of a percent of the entire contiguous United States land, it provides drinking water for 5% of the nation’s population, including New York City and Philadelphia. Despite these overwhelming challenges, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN) has been largely successful in protecting the river.

The Delaware Riverkeeper Network is a non-profit 501 (c) (3) membership organization established to protect and maintain the Delaware River and its tributaries. Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper, leads a team of scientists, lawyers, public policy experts, DRN members, and community volunteers working to monitor and restore the Delaware River. The Delaware Riverkeeper Network achieves its goals through public advocacy, awareness, litigation, and habitat restoration.

“All of the DRN’s programs are geared towards advocacy,” van Rossum says, “it is only when our advocacy fails that we resort to litigation to protect the river.” The word ‘riverkeeper’ was a name once given to game wardens who protected rivers from poachers and hunters, but van Rossum describes her role as the Delaware Riverkeeper as a “voice for the Delaware River.” She admits this is a job too large for one person to assume, so the staff and volunteers of DRN assist in making her voice heard by the communities and companies along the Delaware River and its tributaries, as well as the government bodies and regulatory agencies that oversee the Delaware. The DRN has several programs, including the Awareness-to-Action and Habitat Restoration programs, which as van Rossum describes, “are designed to get citizens informed, aware, and directly involved in restoring their streams.”

DRN acquires its funding primarily through grants, donations, and memberships. DRN refuses corporate donations. Van Rossum insists that the DRN “would never be influenced to change our positions on an issue because of a corporate donation but the perception matters a much as the reality. Not everyone knows us so well and it could raise the appearance of impropriety or influence if we were to take those dollars …we are here for the river, not for corporations.” Despite the DRN’s refusal of corporate donations, they still succeed at reaching their annual budget of around $1 million.

Since its establishment in 1988, the DRN has had great success in protecting the river through its advocacy programs. The DRN has not only prevented the construction of dams like the Dark Hollow Dam, Chubb Run Dam, and the once proposed Rock Run Dam, but they have also had great success in the removal of existing dams like the Felix and Manatawny Dams. The DRN has also worked to protect certain animal populations at risk in the Delaware River. Their efforts helped to place the Red Knot on the list of the Endangered Species Coalition’s Top 10 most threatened species of our nation. They also secured legislation to place a moratorium on the harvest of horseshoe crabs in the Delaware Bay in order to protect this primary food source of the Red Knot and critical component of the Delaware Bay ecosystem. In the spring season, billions of horseshoe crab eggs serve as a vital food source for the Red Knot along its 9,300 mile migration from the west coast of South America. In addition to saving these species, several key sections of wetlands and old growth forests along the Delaware and its tributaries are now protected from development thanks to the work of the DRN.

Autumn along the Delaware River. Photo courtesy of Delaware River Network

When advocacy efforts fail, the DRN does not stop. When necessary, DRN’s lawyers and scientific experts take their work to the courtroom. In addition to their own staff, the DRN has partnerships with the Beasley School of Law at Temple University and the University of Pennsylvania Law School. van Rossum, a lawyer herself, states that the courtroom is always the last resort, but it is a vital tool that is all too often necessary. The DRN is currently involved in court cases against major threats to the river using federal laws such as the Clean Water Act, National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Administrative Procedures Act. The DRN is currently in litigation with the Army Corps of Engineers over the Delaware Deepening project, which would release heavy metals and other pollutants into the river, putting drinking water supplies at risk for contamination and pushing some animal species on the brink of extinction such as the Atlantic and Shortnose sturgeon. The Deepening project will also threaten with irreparable harm, a wide array of other economically and ecologically important species. The DRN has successfully prevented environmental damage in their case against the SugarHouse Casino, whose developers had planned its construction along the Delaware River, with its sewage and wastewater to be discharged into the River.  DRN advocacy played a critical role in convincing Sugarhouse to move the project up and out of the water and 50 feet back from the bank rather than in the River’s flowing water and on the River’s edge.

One of the DRN’s most significant legislative victories was the Delaware River Basin Commission’s (DRBC) designation of certain stretches of the Delaware as Special Protection Waters (SPW). The SPW designation offers a “crucial level of protection thanks to the DRN’s efforts over the past 20 years,” van Rossum states.  The success of this designation plays an important role in the DRN’s fight against the controversial gas drilling in the Pennsylvania and New York portions of the Delaware River watershed. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) and the DRBC oversee both water withdrawal and wastewater discharge permits, agencies which the DRN is currently involved with in multiple law-suits. By using the protections put in place by the SPW designation, the DRN has helped to place a moratorium on gas drilling sites that could impact the Delaware River.

While the DRN battles for stricter gas drilling regulations within the Delaware River watershed, they continue to work with local municipalities and communities to address other issues with an individual focus. “Still, the issue of conflicting regulations is often a big problem, and that is why our focus is on getting regulations passed at federal level and with DRBC,” van Rossum states. The DRBC was established in 1961 by the President Kennedy and the governors of Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and Delaware to create a federal agency with powers over all state and local governments within Delaware River watershed. “Historically, the DRBC has been good,” she says, “but in recent years the powers of the DRBC have become a political football, a bargaining tool of Rendell and his administration.”

A bird's eye view of the Delaware River Photo courtesy of Delaware River Network

According to van Rossum, the inclusion of politicking into the DRBC and the failure of federal agencies, especially the Army Corps of Engineers, to honor and fully implement environmental protections laws is one of the biggest disappointments of recent years. van Rossum claims, “the Army Corps of Engineers has continuously avoided fulfilling federal laws such as the Clean Water Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air Act, and Coastal Zone Management Act and denies their obligation to obtain permits and approvals from states for their actions. The pollution of the Delaware was once so bad; you could smell it flying over in a plane. It was the federal laws that cleaned it up, and now it is the lack of their enforcement that is polluting the river again.”

Despite these challenges, Maya van Rossum continues her fight as the Delaware Riverkeeper. When asked of her fondest memories serving as the Delaware Riverkeeper and what legacy she would like to leave, she laughs and recalls one humorous event. “I remember walking into the courtroom with my big belly, pregnant with my first child, testifying against the construction of a 50-ft tall high-hazard dam on the Neshaminy Creek and winning.” She says her living room wall bears a painting of the Creek to remind her. She also remembers some incredibly sad times too, like knocking on doors in the pouring rain on her first Mother’s Day as a mother to get Trenton residents to come to public hearings and protest the construction of the Route 29 tunnel. “Not many came,” she says, “yet today people complain about the needless construction of the tunnel. It is really devastating.” She says her feelings are mixed, “I feel great when I go through areas we’ve won and devastated when I’m in an area we’ve lost.” However, van Rossum says she doesn’t think too much about the past, she and the Delaware Riverkeeper Network have plenty of work to do for the future. “We’re always onto the next fight, there are so many,” she laughs, “I barely have time to breath in between.”

To learn more about the Delaware Riverkeeper Network and become a member, please visit www.delawareriverkeeper.org or call 215-369-1188.

2nd Annual Choose Clean Water – Chesapeake Bay Restoration Conference

Washington, DC
January 10-12

The 2nd Annual Choose Clean Water Conference looks to continue where the 1st Annual Choose Clean Water Conference left off. Choose Clean Water is a coalition of conservation groups, businesses, and non-profit organizations that work to raise awareness to water issues of the Chesapeake Bay. Last year, speakers focused on issues like the revision of the Clean Water Act and the new TMDL plan. This year, the Conference will address developing issues in the Bay like the impacts of Marcellus Shale gas drilling on the Bay. Last year, attendees included EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, Senator Ben Cardin, and Congressman Elijah Cummings. To learn more, visit http://www.choosecleanwater.org.

Marcellus Shale Gas Environmental Summit

Pittsburgh, PA
March 28-30

The Marcellus Shale Gas Environmental Summit is being held to address the challenges facing the Marcellus Shale natural gas industry. Although the summit is not solely focused on water issues, there are serious concerns over water contamination by the processes used to extract the natural gas. The summit will consist of members of the natural gas industry, scientists, regulators, and environmental organizations. Throughout the two-day event, several workshops and activities will take place, some of which will focus entirely on water safety and water regulations. To learn more, visit http://www.shalegasevent.com

The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management

Water & Environment 2011, London
April 6-7

The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) is hosting its annual conference in London this year. Many of the conference’s workshops will be focused on how businesses can help advance water management in third-world countries by developing new cost-effective technology. Unlike many other conferences, the Water & Environment 2011 conference will make nearly all of its exhibits, forums, and speeches available to the public at no charge. Richard Benyon MP, current Minister for Natural Environment and Fisheries for UK, and Tony Juniper, former Executive Director of Friends of the Earth, are two of the keynote speakers for the upcoming conference. To learn more about the conference, please visit http://www.ciwem.org

2011 World Environmental & Water Resources Congress

Palm Springs, California
May 22-26

The theme of 2011 World Environmental & Water Resources Congress is “Bearing Knowledge for Sustainability”. The 2011 Congress will provide environmental professionals and water resource managers with the opportunity to learn how to incorporate sustainable ideas into the management of water resources. Many technical presentations and symposia will instruct attendees on how to incorporate sustainable practices into managing watersheds, urban runoff, and wastewater treatment. In addition to these presentations, the Congress will host several informative tours and social engagements. More information can be found at http://content.asce.org/conferences/ewri2011.

Water and Society 2011: First International Conference on Water and Society

Las Vegas, NV
December 5-7

The First International Conference on Water and Society was established with the goal of encouraging cooperation between the sciences and humanities to create a more effective approach to solving water issues. Many water issues, such as water rights and the legislation that protects water resources are inherently interdisciplinary. The Conference is being organized by the Wessex Institute of Technology and has been designed to facilitate an international and interdisciplinary discussion of water issues with the hopes of developing innovative ideas to address these issues. Some of the topics to be addressed include transnational water rights, irrigation and desertification, water and disaster management, and future water rights. To learn more, visit http://www.wessex.ac.uk/11-conferences/waterandsociety-2011.html

1. Aral Sea

Image dates: 1973, 1986, 1999, 2004

Aral Sea 1973

Aral Sea 1986

Aral Sea 1999

Aral Sea 2004

Click images for larger view. Satellite images courtesy of NASA.

To the east of the Caspian Sea, the Aral Sea straddles the border between Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. Diversion of the Amu Karya and Syr Darya rivers for agriculture has, over the last 50 years, reduced one of the largest lakes in the world to a fraction of its former size. The retreating lake has left increasingly salinated soil exposed to the wind, which has contributed to widespread air pollution, respiratory problems and crop damage in the region.

Sources:

• “Aral Sea, Central Asia: 1964, 1973, 1987, 1999.” Campbell, R.W. Earthshots: Satellite Images of Environmental Change U.S.G.S. (ed. 2001).
• “Vital Water Graphics – An Overview of the State of the World’s Fresh and Marine Waters.” (2008).

2. Lake Manchar

Image dates: Sept.15 & 18, 2010

Lake Manchar Sept 15

Lake Manchar Sept 18

Click images for larger view. Satellite images courtesy of NASA.

Connected to the Indus River by a series of canals, Pakistan’s Manchar became dangerously saline as prolonged drought and upstream water removal greatly exceeded inflow. Additionally, Manchar has not been effectively protected from contamination due to agricultural runoff. Despite the salinity and toxicity, the lake is still a local source of irrigation water as well as drinking water, and has been linked to water-borne illnesses and arsenic poisoning in the region. In 2010, severe monsoon rains caused major flooding along the entire Indus River Valley, and by September the Sindh Province was inundated. As the Indus River Valley continues to recover from the damage, the threat from water-borne disease is very high.

Sources:

• “Lake Manchar is Dead.” Shahid Husein. Down to Earth (8.30.2004).
• “Respiratory effects in people exposed to arsenic via the drinking water and tobacco smoking in southern part of Pakistan.” Arain, M.B., et al. Science of the Total Environment (2009) 5524-5530.
• “Non-Food assessment of drought: Balochistan and Sindh.” United Nations, Pakistan. (2001).
• “Accumulation of arsenic in different fresh water fish species – potential contribution to high arsenic intakes.” Shah, A.Q., et al. Food Chemistry 112.2 (2009) 520-524.

3. Lake Chad

Image dates: 1963, 1972, 1987, 2001

Lake Chad 1963

Lake Chad 1972

Lake Chad 1987

Lake Chad 2001

Click images for larger view. Satellite images courtesy of NASA.

Along the edge of the Sahara, Lake Chad is located at the confluence of four countries – Niger, Nigeria, Cameroun, and Chad. With a flat, shallow drainage basin of 2.5 million square kilometers and a maximum depth of only around 5-8 meters, Lake Chad is prone to dramatic fluctuations in size. As the primary source of freshwater in the region, the lake has lost much of its volume in recent years due to inconsistent management of groundwater resources. Changing climate patterns have also exacerbated the shrinking of Lake Chad, and accessible fresh water as well as food security remain major concerns for the region.

Sources:

• Lake Chad. USGS Earthshots
• “Groundwater management perspectives for Borno and Yobe States, Nigeria.” Bunu, M.Z. Journal of Environmental Hydrology (7.19.1999).
• “On the shores of Lake Chad, UNICEF intensifies its fight against malnutrition.” (9.28.2010) UNICEF Press Centre.
• Atlas of Our Changing Environment. United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP).

4. Hamoun Wetlands

Image dates: 1976, 2000

Hamoun Wetlands 1976

Hamoun Wetlands 2001

Click images for larger view. Satellite images courtesy of NASA.

The Hamoun wetlands are located along the border of Iran & Afghanistan. Fed by the Helmand River, the wetlands have traditionally served as an oasis supporting abundant wildlife and the region’s marsh Arabs, a people whose livelihood and culture is adapted to life in a wetland environment. A persistent drought, water removal for irrigation and increased pressure on the water resources of the Helmand from refugees of the current Afghan war have contributed to the near total loss of the Hamoun in Afghanistan.

Sources:

• “From wetland to wasteland: The destruction of the Hamoun Oasis.” Weier, J. NASA Earth Observatory (12.13.2002)
• “Sistan oasis parched by drought.” Partow, H. UNEP (2002)
• “History of environmental change in the Sistan Basin based on satellite image analysis: 1976-2005.” Partow, H., et al. UNEP (2006).

5. Dead Sea

Image dates: 1973, 1987, 2002

Dead Sea 1973

Dead Sea 1987

Dead Sea 2002

Click images for larger view. Satellite images courtesy of NASA.

At the lowest point on the Earth’s surface, water that enters the Dead Sea has nowhere to go but up. Diversion of over 90% of the Jordan River by neighboring Israel and Jordan has contributed to rapidly lowering water levels, increasing water scarcity in an already water-poor region. Evaporation ponds developed for mineral extraction in the southern Dead Sea exacerbated the water loss, and by the mid-1980’s it had split into two separate lakes. A pipeline connecting the Red Sea and the Dead Sea is being considered as a possible solution.

Sources:

• “For Dead Sea, a slow and seemingly inexorable death.” Anderson, J.W. Washington Post (5.19.2005).
• UNEP
• “Environmental science: New life for the Dead Sea?” Glausiusz, J. Nature 464. (2010)1118-1120.
• “The Dead Sea Basin: Assessment of current situation and prospects for the future.” (2006) The Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies Environmental Policy Center.
• Atlas of Our Changing Environment. United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP)

Reedville, Virginia is like most small fishing villages along the Atlantic Coast. The town has a couple churches, some bed and breakfast inns, an annual fishing contest, and even a fishing museum. However, Reedville is strikingly different than most other fishing towns. It is completely dependent on one fish and one fishing company – the menhaden and Omega Protein, Inc. Despite the town’s quaint appearance, Omega Protein’s dominance over the menhaden fishery  “reduction” industry has led Reedville to become the second largest port in the country in terms of total poundage. At one point, the menhaden industry made Reedville the wealthiest town in the country per capita, but today the historic Victorian mansions that line Reedville’s main street are the only surviving testaments to the heyday of the once vibrant fishing town.

Unlike most other fisheries, the menhaden harvest is not driven by the demand for human consumption, but rather for the use of its byproducts. Once menhaden are landed, they are “reduced” to liquids and fish meal which are used to develop popular products like Omega-3 vitamin supplements, fertilizer, livestock feed, dog food, fish bait, and even cosmetics. Although the entire Atlantic menhaden stock is considered healthy, some members of the fishing industry and the scientific community are worried that the commercially and environmentally valuable menhaden stock of the Chesapeake Bay is being depleted by overfishing and pollution.

The menhaden is a small silver fish, measuring only twelve to fifteen inches in length and weighing on average around a half-pound. What they lack in size, though, they make up for in numbers. The entire Atlantic stock has averaged above seven billion fish annually over the last thirty years and their schools can number in the millions. The size of their stock is their only real defense mechanism, making them an easy prey and an important food source for larger predator fish and birds. Like most forage fish, menhaden are filter feeders that help energy move up the food chain. The menhaden’s diet is made up almost entirely of plankton, allowing them access to a virtually unlimited supply of food. Unlike most other filter feeders, however, menhaden feed primarily on phytoplankton instead of zooplankton. This unique variation makes the menhaden an important player in the sensitive Chesapeake Bay ecosystem.

To understand the ecological significance of the menhaden, it is important to have a basic understanding of the Bay ecosystem. The Chesapeake Bay is the country’s largest estuary and is home to over 350 species of fish, shellfish, and plants. However, their survival is threatened by the declining water quality of the Bay. The poor health of the Bay ecosystem is mainly contributed to the excessive levels of nutrients, particularly nitrogen and phosphorous. These nutrients come primarily from discharged wastewater, air pollution, and urban and agricultural runoff from fertilizer and livestock waste. As the Bay region’s population has increased over the years, the land surrounding the Bay has been transformed from forests to farms and residential areas. These forests that once prevented excessive levels of these nutrients from reaching the Bay are now gone, and the menhaden is now one of the Bay’s last natural defenses.

Fishermen retrieving a net full of menahden. Photo courtesy of Chesapeake Bay Foundation/cbf.org

The menhaden’s filtering capabilities enable them to consume large amounts of these excess nutrients. According to the Chesapeake Ecological Foundation, a single menhaden can filter one million gallons every 180 days, and the entire Atlantic menhaden population has the potential to remove 25% of the Bay’s nutrients in one year through its consumption of plankton. By consuming such vast quantities of these microscopic plants, menhaden help to prevent the growth of algae blooms and allow sunlight to reach plants growing at the bottom of the Bay. As these bottom-dwelling plants grow, they increase the water’s oxygen levels, making conditions healthier for the rest of life in the Bay.

Unfortunately, the exact size of the Bay’s menhaden population is unknown, so it is impossible to know for sure whether it is shrinking and if so, by how much. What is known, however, is the number of menhaden being taken from the entire Atlantic coast each year. More pounds of menhaden are caught each year than most other fish combined. In fact, the menhaden is the second largest fishery in country, trailing only behind the Alaskan pollock fishery. According to the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, the historical average of menhaden landings from the Atlantic Coast varies between 300,000 and 400,000 metric tons, accounting for around 40% of the entire Atlantic coast fishing industry. If the Gulf of Mexico’s menhaden landings are included, this number nearly doubles. While these numbers may seem staggering, what is more surprising is that nearly 90% of all menhaden landed in both the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico are landed by Omega Protein, Inc.

The menhaden is one of the oldest and successful commercial fisheries in the country, dating back to the days of the Native Americans and the colonial fishing industry of the 18th and 19th centuries. It is widely believed that the menhaden was the fish that the Native American Squanto used when he taught the pilgrims to plant fish with their corn to increase crop production. Since then, the country has always relied on menhaden as an effective fertilizer. The fishing industry has always relied on menhaden not only for fish bait, but as a food source to sustain other commercial fish species. Despite the entire fishing industry’s dependence on the menhaden fishery, Houston-based Omega Protein has managed to dominate the menhaden fishery over the last century through its operations in the Gulf of Mexico and the Chesapeake Bay.

Omega Protein employs between 250-300 people throughout the fishing season, and maintains a large fishing fleet consisting of 32 spotter planes and 41 fishing vessels. Like many industrial fishing companies, Omega Protein uses a fishing method called purse-seining which allows for entire schools to be captured at once. Omega Protein’s spotter planes constantly fly over the Bay and the Atlantic, searching for schools of menhaden. Once a school is located, they alert the waiting fishing vessels to its location. These fishing vessels are seiner boats, which travel to either side of the school and surround it with a large net called a purse seine. Once the seine is around the entire school, the seiner boats converge and pull the net together, trapping the entire school. The seiner boats then align themselves along a main fishing vessel and the fish are pumped into a holding area in the vessel’s hull and taken back to the processing plant in Reedville. The use of purse seines is extremely effective, however many foreign countries and states such as Maryland and Florida have banned the practice due to the risk of bycatches and concerns that it leads to overfishing.

Despite the enormous amount of menhaden that Omega Protein takes from the ocean, the company has been designated a leader in the industry for environmental stewardship and sustainable fishing practices. Omega Protein has been certified as a ‘Friend of the Sea’ and was awarded the Friend of the Sea Award in 2009 by the Friend of the Sea, an international non-profit organization that monitors and certifies fishing companies that engage in sustainable fishing practices. In addition to each state’s fisheries management agency, Omega Protein and all other fishing companies that land fish from the Atlantic are regulated under the Atlantic State Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC). The ASMFC is comprised of fifteen states along the eastern United States that share a stake in the proper management of the Atlantic’s fisheries. Each state is represented by an individual appointed by the governor, a state legislator, and an executive from the state fisheries management agency.

Vacuuming menhaden into the main fishing vessel. Photo courtesy of NOAA Magazine - www.noaanews.noaa.gov

From 2006 through 2013, an annual harvest cap of 109,020 metric tons of menhaden has been put in place by the ASMFC. Although the cap may be exceeded if previous years’ harvest falls below the cap, the ASMFC has warned that a higher cap may hinder the ability of Atlantic menhaden to survive. The ASMFC has also stated the need for a study of the Chesapeake Bay menhaden population so it can be used as a biological reference point. In spite of these regulations, 2010 has been a successful year for Omega Protein and other menhaden fishing companies. The annual Atlantic menhaden harvest has increased by 45% from the 83,000 metric tons caught in 2009 to 121,000 metric tons caught in the 2010 season. Also, in October Omega Protein received $18.7 million from the Gulf Coast Claims Facility for the damages caused by the Gulf oil spill earlier this year. Omega Protein has also strengthened its argument against claims that its menhaden harvest is destroying the water quality of the Bay. A preliminary study from Virginia Institute of Marine Science suggests that menhaden may play a smaller role than expected in the filtering of the Chesapeake Bay and may actually increase nitrogen levels during certain life stages.

However, conservation groups like the Chesapeake Ecological Foundation and Save the Menhaden Coalition continue to fight for the protection of menhaden and the Bay through public education, partnerships with government agencies, and by conducting original research. These groups and other members of the fishing industry are concerned with the indirect impacts of the menhaden harvest. For example, the striped bass which was once a primary predator of menhaden has shifted its diet in recent decades to a diet of shellfish and alternative prey. This shift is believed to be the cause of an increase in disease and mortality rates among striped bass.

Regardless of whether the claims of environmentalists are true, both sides of the debate agree that humans and countless other plant and animal species depend on the menhaden. This tiny fish has always played a vital role in the fishing industry and in important ecosystems like the Chesapeake Bay. Without the menhaden, there is no doubt that the environment and national economy would suffer severe consequences. While the scientific community, conservationists, and the fishing industry remains focused on the menhaden, it is only a small part of the much bigger challenge facing the restoration and protection of Chesapeake Bay’s waters.

Ecological disasters, not unlike death, can be awkward to talk about. Do you focus on the details (the science), or do you move towards the sentiment? Refuge succeeds by embracing both. Grieving for a lost parent, and grieving for a lost place, Terry Tempest Williams tells both an intimate personal story, and a larger story of the land. What Refuge shows us is that the two are intricately connected.

Although her memoir takes place in 1983, the story of the Great Salt Lake and the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge is the same today. With a physical shape that Williams learned at an early age to equate to a “large, shallow dinner plate,” the Great Salt Lake’s water level and size fluctuates from year to year depending on weather, river flow, and evaporation conditions. In the last two years the lake has approached an all time record low. In 2008, the lake was only forty percent the size of what it reached just 25 years ago at its highest recorded level of 4,212 feet above sea-level. In 1986, the Great Salt Lake was 10 feet higher than when Brigham Young first climbed over the Wasatch Mountains in 1847, looked down upon the briny land, and said to his followers, “This is the right place.” Lows and Highs are a part of Utah existence.

But in Refuge, Williams goes beyond documenting a new record high and the ensuing havoc on the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge—she documents the cultural ecology of the Refuge. By interweaving personal history, family history, and natural history, Williams paints a picture sentence by sentence of her relationship with the land. Just as most humans seek or have a place of renewal and peace, The Bear River Refuge is Willams’, and we travel along with her as she watches it drown. The ensuing story is a lesson in life, preservation, and perseverance.

What is the best way to write about emotional connections to nature? And how do you sustain a book about such depressing subjects as cancer and habitat loss? The answer is well-written, beautiful prose. Williams, a published poet, knows how to write a sentence. She also knows how to engage the reader. And when it comes to environmental journalism and environmental advocacy in general, an ability to evoke empathy is not only helpful, but also crucial. This is not the empathy that’s evoked by those commercials where that Sarah MacLachlan song plays over pictures of the world’s most pitiful pitbulls, it’s the empathy that makes you fear for loss, and makes you want to experience something while you can, to savor and preserve. While the book itself revolves around death and destruction, the overall sensation is that of restoration. Striking, lyrical, swoonable, and devastating, Refuge is a classic in environmental literature worth another look.

In Fight for the Bay, Howard R. Ernst’s follow-up to his 2003 book, Chesapeake Bay Blues, Ernst sharpens his focus on the Chesapeake Bay and examines the reasons behind country’s failure to restore the Bay. In addition to Ernst’s in-depth analysis, he includes his suggestions for returning the once vibrant ecosystem to its original state. Throughout the book, Ernst cites specific evidence of the failing Chesapeake Bay ecosystem, which he cleverly uses a metaphor for the failure of the political and economic machines to produce any enforceable regulations for its mitigation. Throughout the book, he insists a stricter regulatory approach is essential to managing and improving the bay.

He begins with an overview of the three different schools of thought within modern environmentalism and uses them as a basis for the rest of his book’s central arguments. The Dark Green Movement, which Ernst suggests as the only effective approach, believe that humans and nature are inseparable. The Dark Greens’ core principle is that humans have an inherent right to a healthy environment and an obligation to protect it. The Light Greens believe that humans and the environment are separate entities, and that maintaining a healthy environment is only a responsibility, not a right. The Cornucopians, whom Ernst holds primarily responsible for the degradation of the Bay, put their economic self-interest first and believe that any environmental damage they create is a necessary means to an end.

Ernst categorizes the past and present movements to protect and restore the bay as Light Green, because they fail to achieve any enforceable regulations. He cites the lack of regulation of certain sectors of agriculture such as the poultry and fishing industries as examples of how the Light Green approach has failed to protect the bay. In one of many frightening examples, Ernst tells the story of a fish called the menhaden within the context of Garrett Hardin’s famous Tragedy of the Commons. With oyster populations depleted, the menhaden is one of the Bay’s last filter feeders able to recycle the excess nutrients that are depleting the Bay’s oxygen levels and killing off other fish. However, the annual menhaden harvest is larger than all the other Bay species’ harvests combined. The majority of menhaden are being used to produce Omega-3 fish oil and the rest are sold as products such as fertilizer and livestock feed. Ironically these products end up back in the Bay as excess nutrients. The immense profits of menhaden make it near impossible for lawmakers pass any legislation that would decrease the menhaden harvest and restore balance to the sensitive ecosystem.

Ernst also includes a satirical view of state senators, congressmen, governors, and even our nation’s presidents that have made empty promises to enact legislation to protect the Bay. This section exemplifies one of the most depressing and honest arguments of Ernst’s book – industries and individuals are destroying the Chesapeake Bay with virtually no financial or legal repercussions.

Ernst concludes his book with an interesting collection of essays by prominent figures sharing their experiences of working for environmental advocacy within the Bay. Although Ernst seems to offer little hope for the future of the Chesapeake Bay, he provides an excellent overview for readers interested in grasping a better understanding of the current political and economic systems that prevent progress towards the restoration and increased protection of the Chesapeake Bay.

In July, Pakistan was hit with its worst floods in 80 years leaving 20% of the country underwater. The photography of the floods posted on Snapistan not only captured the devastation but also the strength and perseverance of the everyday people of Pakistan as they try to rebuild their lives.

How did Snapistan come about?

It started off with an idea that my friend Aizaz and I had. We started planning the layout and the development right after our A level exams and decided to release it on the 14th of August 2010. Besides Aizaz and myself, we have a sturdy team of about 10-12 photographers from Lahore, Islamabad and Karachi so far. Other than the core team, anyone can email us and have their pictures displayed (provided they meet the criteria). But we’d like to think that all of our viewers are Snapistanis.

How bad do you feel the misconceptions of Pakistan are?

I think that there are a lot of misconceptions especially within people from a similar age bracket as mine. I don’t really blame them for not doing their research but the way the news channels portray Pakistan drains it of any of the appealing characteristic it has. When the only things worthy of reporting in the international front are terrorism, bombings and natural disasters, it’s imperative to bring about a glimmer of hope even if it’s through something like Snapistan. When someone goes online and googles Pakistan, it would be great that they see something like what we have on our website. Honestly speaking gore, corruption and scandals isn’t a realistic portrayal of everything Pakistan represents. Our country is far from perfect, but we need to be given credit for what we do right. I hope the pictures show the rest of the world, that we’re a country worth giving a chance to.

There is a disconnect in Pakistan between the rich and poor, do you think the floods brought people together?

For sure. With Facebook as a medium through which NGOs and zealous volunteers could get their messages and plans across, it was great to see so many people proactive during the first few weeks of the flooding. It definitely connected the youth to a point where everyone was aware of what was going on and trying to pitch in. For most, it was a reality check that brought them out of the sphere of their own problems and issues. However, the vigor with which the relief efforts are being carried out is slowly dying down.

Photo courtesy of www.snapistan.com

Have the floods helped create a culture of social awareness and activism among the youth that perhaps wasn’t there before?

There’s definitely a move towards getting involved instead of waiting for someone else to step up. The creation of a culture of social awareness has been heavily aided by the developments in the field of communication. Because of this ease in ‘getting the word out’, we see new organizations being created within Pakistan that are actually making a difference in the society.

How important do you think photography and art are in conveying these environmental issues?

Photography plays a huge role in convincing people to change their negligent behavior towards nature. Pictures create awareness far more rapidly for the issues at hand since seeing the problem creates much more of an impact than just reading about it. We at Snapistan believe photographs give you a perspective that headlines and statistics just can’t possibly manage.  So when it comes to things like photojournalism and trying to convey ideas, photography has been known to be really moving and we hope that strength of photography is what will make Snapistan flourish.

How popular has it been, do you get submissions from people around the country?

According to our statistics we have around 500 combined unique page views on the site and Facebook page per week. We’ve been features in a few magazines, but the general buzz has been on the internet. We’ve managed to reach 1000+ fans on our Facebook page as well.  It’s picking up pace steadily, let’s hope it reaches a greater amount of people.

Photo courtesy of www.snapistan.com

The shale is a dense, fine-grained rock formation that was created over 350 million years ago by the repeated deposits from ancient oceans. It contains trapped within it the remains of Devonian-era organic matter, long since turned to methane – the form that natural gas takes before it is processed.

The gas found in the shale is not trapped in large cavities, but rather in the pores of the rock itself. It is not possible to extract the gas from shale using conventional drilling methods. Instead, the rock must be fractured to release the trapped gas and to create spaces into which it can flow.

The development of horizontal drilling allows for several horizontally drilled well bores to branch off from a single, vertically drilled well. Hydraulic fracturing — which uses fluid to create and enhance cracks in the rock formation to allow trapped gas to escape — made formerly unreachable sources of fossil fuels not only reachable, but economical as well. (For a brief description of the drilling process, see sidebar.)

In a May 2008 report published in the industry newspaper American Oil & Gas Reporter, Penn State researchers Terry Engelder and Gary Lash described what a few early investors in the development of the Marcellus Shale already suspected – that the potential production of shale gas could be massive, even making up for dwindling resources elsewhere. Engelder and Lash estimated that the Marcellus Shale contained almost 50 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas resources, making it the largest shale gas deposit in North America.

By this time, more energy companies had begun to invest in the Marcellus’ prospects. Between 2007 and 2010, the number of drilled gas wells in Pennsylvania went from one to over 2,000 (see National Geographic’s “Mapping a Gas Boom”). ‘Unconventional’ fossil fuel sources were a boon to U.S. energy needs. In 2009, the U.S. became the largest natural gas producer in the world.

As Pennsylvania began to emerge as a leading source of shale gas, public scrutiny over the costs, rather than the benefits, of shale gas production increased. The drilling activity in the Marcellus Shale is taking place in the most densely populated area of the country.

Discolored and cloudy drinking water. Photo by www.spectrum.ieee.org

One issue has been the risk of gas ‘migration.’ After residents of Dimock, PA. reported that their drinking water was discolored, cloudy, smelled bad and was causing health problems like dizziness and skin lesions, tests by the DEP revealed elevated levels of methane in the water aquifer (see Photo). Further investigation found that improperly cemented well bores were the cause of the contamination.

Another issue is the content of the fracturing fluid itself. Though less than one percent of the total volume of fracturing fluid is composed of additives, millions of gallons of fluid are used for each fracturing event, so the volume of additives can be in the thousands of gallons. One argument for increased regulation of the gas industry centers on the toxicity of many of these additives, which can include potent carcinogens like benzene, as well as chemical compounds that act as endocrine disruptors.

There is another issue surrounding the water used in fracturing — not what goes in, but what comes out. The waste stream created by drilling in the shale has three main components: drill cuttings, which are the bits of rock carved out by the drill; drilling ‘mud,’ which is a friction-reducing liquid used to keep the drill cool; and brine, which is naturally occurring salty water trapped in the rock alongside fossil fuels.

Once a well has been fractured, the fracturing fluid returns to the surface, propelled by the force of subterranean pressure. Drill cuttings, drilling mud and brine are also returned to the surface with the fracturing fluid in a process called ‘flowback.’

The fluid is usually stored in large tanks and holding ponds at the well site. It is treated on site to separate out the solids and contaminants captured during flowback, then reused in another fracture or sent to nearby water treatment plants, where it is treated, filtered and released into waterways.

Shale also contains a variety of heavy metals, most notably uranium.The presence of radioactive material in the shale adds a twist to the already contested process of hydraulic fracturing.

Preliminary research by University of Buffalo geologist Tracy Banks and her colleagues, presented at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America in Denver, Colorado, suggests that the process of hydraulic fracturing is having a previously unrealized effect on the radioactive material found in the shale.

Her team found that uranium is chemically bound to the trapped methane gas. In an emailed response to questions, Dr. Banks said that she believes “the drilling fluids and fracturing of the shale will mobilize uranium.” Additionally, the researchers found that the effect of the fracturing fluid on the mobilized uranium causes it to solubilize — become dissolvable in water.

The health risks suggested by these findings are not primarily related to uranium’s radioactive properties. As Dr. Banks explained, “Uranium is very weakly radioactive but it can still be toxic when its concentration is below a level detectable with a Geiger counter.”

The pursuit of U.S. energy independence, the rising cost of fossil fuels and the lower potential environmental cost of natural gas have increased the pressures to gas producing areas across the U.S. In Pennsylvania, the promise of big payoffs to leasing landowners as well as increased revenue from taxes and fees to local and state coffers during a time of serious economic shortfalls helped spur rapid growth of gas industry assets while federal and state regulators have struggled to keep up.

Though the method of extracting gas from unconventional sources using hydraulic fracturing has resulted in increased domestic energy independence and lower-cost, cleaner burning alternative to oil-based fuels, there is widespread concern over the lack of comprehensive understanding of the methods and materials used.

Response in the form of regulation has varied from state to state, since amendments in 2005 to the Clean Water Act exempted hydraulic fracturing fluids from EPA oversight, leaving states to maintain their own regulatory framework.

At the University of Buffalo, research continues into the effect of hydraulic fracturing on the uranium in the Marcellus Shale. In New York, a statewide moratorium on hydraulic fracturing is in place until updated permitting regulations can be established.

In comparison, Pennsylvania’s response has been less straightforward. The eastern third of the state falls under the purview of the Delaware River Basin Commission, which has the power to enact regulations to protect the waters of the Delaware Watershed. The DRBC declared a moratorium on drilling until it could draft new regulations to address the risks to water resources. Meanwhile, development continues apace across central and western parts of the Commonwealth.

In 2010, the DEP has logged more than one thousand violations by gas companies drilling in Pa., many involving improperly managed or damaged storage facilities, mishandling of waste materials and discharge of pollutants into nearby waters.

It remains to be seen whether the Clean Streams Law, the state’s primary platform for water pollution prevention, will provide sufficient protection in light of newly discovered risks. Dr. Yvette Bordeaux, Director of the Master’s Programs in Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania, succinctly stated the challenges: “The trick is to make sure that everybody does the right thing.”

This People & Power segment was produced by Grain Media, an award winning London-based collective of creative minds, specializing in TV, film, and web-video production.  They produce a diverse range of programming, from documentaries and factual content, to promos, commercials, and dramas.  In 2008 alone, the company filmed in 24 different countries and produced over 300 edits.

Grain Media co-founder Orlando von Einsiedel–film maker, writer, and ex-pro-snowboarder–has produced and directed several acclaimed and award-winning documentaries, promos, and short features for a diverse range of TV networks and brands.