The Obama administration is focusing on helping utilities and urban areas cope with the effects of flooding and sea-level rise from climate change, but some groups say what is really needed is clearer and comprehensive policy.
The Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released “tools” and “toolkits” last week to help cities, water utilities and other groups develop climate plans to account for drought, sea-level rise and flooding from global warming.
The EPA said its latest version of the Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool, or CREAT, is part of the administration’s “commitment to strengthen America’s climate resilience.”
Resilience refers to adapting to the effects of global warming without discussing the more controversial subject of how to cut greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels. Climate resilience is part of Obama’s broad climate change agenda, and a piece that he has generally found broader support in addressing, while other aspects of his plan have landed EPA in court.
“Water utilities operate on the front lines of climate change and face the challenges of increased drought, flooding and sea level rise,” said Joel Beauvais, deputy administrator of EPA’s water office on Thursday in rolling out an updated version of CREAT. “EPA is working to strengthen America’s communities by providing climate preparedness tools like CREAT that local leaders can use to make smart decisions.”
NOAA also announced on Friday the release of a multi-agency effort called the U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit, which is part of President Obama’s 2013 Climate Action Plan. While the EPA’s climate change plan is focused on water utilities, NOAA’s is focused on assisting urban areas cope with severe weather, flooding and extreme heat facing the nation’s densely populated areas.
The agency said nearly 325 million people live in the United States, and about eight out of 10 live in or near a city or town. “Extreme events that hit these urban areas — heat waves, heavy downpours, floods, and storm surges — often come with devastating and lasting impacts to property, lives, and livelihoods,” NOAA said. “Economic inequality, environmental degradation and deteriorating public infrastructure can make some communities more vulnerable to weather and climate extremes than others.”
Although many of the communities and industries that helped the agencies design the programs support the tools, others see a need for a more comprehensive policy from EPA and the administration.
For example, nutrient pollution from wastewater treatment facilities has caused algae blooms that are exacerbated by a warming climate, said Brett Walton of Circle of Blue, an investigative group focused on water issues. The blooms have become a growing problem for cities’ water supplies because they can be toxic.
The EPA is studying the problem, which is laudable, but “despite the urgency, the EPA lacks basic information for understanding the scope of the problem and recognizing potential solutions,” Walton said in a Thursday blog post.
There are also a host of issues over how and when water is used, and what processes are dispatched to either purify water for drinking, prepare contaminated water for waste treatment and how to reuse water for industrial purposes and electricity generation. And even if water treatment facilities take action to adapt to climate change, if they don’t change how they use energy, they can increase carbon pollution blamed for heating the Earth’s atmosphere.
The federal government, according to groups, is only in the beginning stages of addressing the changing face of the nation’s water needs and the climate effects.
The Energy Department has been meeting with water utilities to discuss greater collaboration on a range of policy concerns known as the “energy-water-food nexus.” Under the nexus, states and the Obama administration have been trying to develop a framework to address the growing link between energy, water and agriculture policies.
At a meeting last month between seven major water utility groups and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, the groups presented a list of challenges they face, in addition to areas where they would like to see greater collaboration with the government.
The utilities listed climate change planning and resilience as one priority in addressing the energy-water nexus, but it was one of several areas the industry said it is facing, according to the American Water Works Association. The top issue the sector is facing is regulation and the need for urgent regulatory improvements, according to a readout from the meeting with Moniz.
Beyond climate change change concerns, the water groups want to make utilities more energy efficient, while looking to adopt practices that will save them money through greater collaboration with electric companies.
A top concern is getting legislative, regulatory and policy priorities right to “support” what the water groups refer to as “Life Cycle Environmental Responsibility.”
The phrase, generally, “refers to our hope that the [Energy Department] can rely on our research to work with policy leaders in D.C. and the states to craft laws, policies, and regulations that recognize that all water is a part of the water cycle,” said Carrie Capuco, the communications director for the Water Environment & Reuse Foundation, in an email.
Her group is one of the seven collaborating with Moniz on developing an energy-water nexus framework. “Consequently, stormwater, wastewater, water reuse, and desalination regulations (in addition to environmental and public health) should be comprehensive and support a ‘one-water’ operational approach,” said Capuco.
Currently, water policy is fragmented among state, local, municipal and federal authorities, with multiple regulations treating water differently depending if it’s used for drinking water or being treated by a wastewater facility.
A definition of life cycle responsibility used by the Energy Department said “in some instances, addressing local environmental issues in energy-water systems can indirectly lead to impacts at other locations or in other environmental domains.”
Some of the big issues facing this form of regulation include the underground injection of waste water from oil and gas production from fracking. The underground disposal has caused earthquakes.
Another issue involves “existing regulations” that target wastewater treatment, but not the energy used by the treatment plants that can lead to increased carbon pollution. In addition, overuse of fertilizers and the planting of energy crops are other areas of concern.
