Water Infrastructure getting more attention, discourse, and... funding?

Water infrastructure issues are getting more attention across the country as communities struggle with water availability and aging infrastructure issues during the hottest months of the year. States, communities, and private organizations (both non-profit and for-profit) across the US are calling attention to the problem and pledging to commit finances and legislation to try to address these water-related challenges.

Water availability issues, such as those faced in the U.S. West and in rapidly growing regions across the whole country struggle with not only having to maintain and repair their systems to meet the capacity and level of service for which they were designed, but also having to consider future growth and increased strain on water sources as populations expand, or as drought constricts the amount of water available. Aging infrastructure is an issue facing many communities because infrastructure projects built decades ago with large investments are now facing the end of their useful designed life, and the funding for replacements is harder to come by due to strained economic and political conditions. This is having an effect on water quality in many areas, as well as leading to infrastructure failures and water restrictions.

So what does all this mean? Well, it will likely lead to rate increases, a trend which has already begun and will continue. This has implications for lower income communities who already pay a greater share of their income for water services. Rate increases will likely be more noticeable in smaller communities, where the lack of economies of scale precludes the utility from spreading the costs over more people.

This could lead to increased violations of water quality regulations under the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. Both health-based and non-health based violations could go up as a result of water systems not being able to pay for needed infrastructure upgrades.

It could also lead to consolidation of water utilities, especially by larger and more financially viable water systems or even private companies.

The United Nations recently decided that access to safe drinking water was a human right. Here in the United States, we have been fortunate to have relatively cheap access to very high quality drinking water. However, water infrastructure is a huge challenge that casts a spotlight on several related issues including funding for infrastructure projects, affordability and rate setting, environmental justice, water availability and population growth, and climate change.

What Hurricane Sandy tells us about Infrastructure

We've all heard by now some of the critical infrastructure that has been damaged by Hurricane Sandy in New York, New Jersey and the rest of the affected area. Subway tunnels, power plants, sidewalks and roads, communication systems, internet and cable networks, and water and sewer pipes are some of the infrastructure damaged in the 100-year storm. State officials, FEMA, and the White House have dealt with the hurricane impressively, responding quickly and providing relief to people whose properties were damaged. I am amazed at how well people cooperated together to make sure people were safe.


New York Governor Andrew Cuomo spoke Wednesday at a press conference, stating that climate change cannot be ignored by politicians anymore, who are playing a game of Russian Roulette by failing to address the issue. He advocated for upgrading and re-designing New York's infrastructure, much of which is outdated and in-need of maintenance or re-design.

The hurricane affords us the chance to dissect just how extreme weather events and infrastructure planning are related. I want to make sure I mention that although New York has huge infrastructure demands with a growing population and aging sewers, roads, and facilities, it has a comparatively proactive tax structure with which it tries to meet those demands. However, those remaining infrastructure deficiencies contributed to the scope of the damage incurred during the hurricane.

Water professionals and researchers (ahem) have been advocating for investment into our crumbling infrastructure for decades. In 2008, the American Society of Civil Engineers released a Report Card for New York detailing infrastructure deficiencies, stating that the state's bridges, roads, and mass transit system were vulnerable. The potential for more frequent extreme weather events as a result of climate change only makes the issue more important. However, a slumped economy and political grid-lock have stood in the way of significant upgrades or new policies. After the hurricane, New York, New Jersey and other affected states will acquire federal emergency funding to repair and upgrade infrastructure that probably needed upgrading before the storm hit.

Federal emergency funding is often used to repair infrastructure because of accidents that could have been avoided with a more proactive planning approach. This is borne of two things: lack of funding, and lack of political capital.

Lack of Funding: Cash-strapped communities all over the U.S. do not have access to the funds they require to make critical infrastructure upgrades. This forces them to wait for an emergency situation to qualify for federal or state emergency aide to address the problem. One example in Logan, Utah was a 2009 landslide that destroyed a 100-year-old, leaky, earthen irrigation canal on a steep hill. The landslide killed three people. As a result, federal funding was dispersed to the community, and a more efficient canal system will be installed at the federal taxpayer's expense.

Lack of Political Capital. Infrastructure is not a sexy issue, even though it is such an important part of our daily lives. In our democratic society, raising taxes for roads or pipes can be met with opposition, and looming elections can motivate a policymaker to simply "kick the can down the road." As a result it takes a trigger event - an accident, storm, etc. - before the general population supports a response, even if the issue has long been recognized by "insiders" as needing attention.

As a result, trigger events are often necessary to unlock the political and monetary capital needed to make significant infrastructure investments. However, this is problematic for two reasons.

1) It externalizes the cost for local infrastructure upgrades to federal taxpayers. When a disaster occurs, communities can apply for federal emergency funding, relegating the cost for local infrastructure upgrades to federal taxpayers. In addition, federally-funded projects incur extra costs to cover NEPA and other federal requirements and processes, increasing the overall cost of the project.

2) It creates emergency situations. Investment into climate change-resilient, safe infrastructure would ensure that a community could withstand extreme weather events more effectively. Failure to do so creates a scenario where emergency situations are not only inevitable, they are needed in order to address infrastructure needs in a totally reactive policy environment. The policy approach is therefore "repair the past" rather than "plan for the future." The uncertainty brought by climate change only increases the responsibility on policymakers and politicians to prioritize infrastructure investment as a matter of national security and ethics.

Proactive planning at the state and local level can make communities more resilient to emergency situations, avoid certain negative outcomes, and help them rely less on federal emergency funding to correct pre-existing infrastructure issues. As a result, federal emergency funding can be better allocated across the country to address what proactive local and state planning could not foresee.

See New York Times, the Scientific American,

Pres Obama visits Hoover Dam: Will he prioritize water projects in next term?

On October 2nd, President Obama visited Hoover Dam in Henderson, Nevada the day before the first presidential debate. It was his first visit to the spectacular piece of history and water infrastructure. Unfortunately, the visit did not inspire him to include any promises to address sustainable water management in the debate the next day in Denver, Colorado.

Both presidential campaigns have so far been conspicuously silent on many environmental issues including climate change and water conservation. They have both generally addressed the need for upgraded infrastructure and energy independence, but the specifics on how these goals will be met sustainably have not been mentioned.

Source: Pete Souza

The focuses of the campaigns each cycle are often a reflection of the concerns of the voting public. Therefore, the silence on environmental issues is an indication that these issues matter less to most voters compared to the more salient issues like the economic recovery and job creation. This is unfortunate, because environmental crises are not far-off issues. Many western cities are reaching critical crisis points because of aging or inadequate water infrastructure, lack of funding, and growing populations that place demands out of proportion to the already stressed water supply. Nationwide policy on sustainable water management, along with creative and reliable funding mechanisms are needed now.

Investing in water infrastructure solutions would address economic recovery needs and create jobs, and now is an opportune time for either presidential candidate to connect those dots.

Broken Pipe (and dam) Dreams EDITORIAL

The Western expansion of the 19th century began with the Louisiana Purchase, which effectively doubled the size of the country. Thousands began settling further and further west, building towns and farms. The idea of land ownership for the individual was heralded as being the very definition of liberty.

As people settled into the more arid landscapes in the intermountain west, infrastructure projects became essential to the long-term survival of the new settlements. Dams captured water during its most abundant season - the spring runoff - and canals diverted that water to the farms and towns when and where it was needed.