Switchboard, from NRDC › Henry Henderson's Blog

Studying Separation: New analysis points to need for barrier to block Asian carp in the Chicago River

2012-01-31T15:31:36Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

No big decision is made overnight. And many of the biggest take years to come together… before finally, at a critical moment, all of the necessary pieces fall into place.

That is what is happening in the discussion around Asian carp and other invasive species that use the Chicago waterway system as a highway to move between this continent's two greatest fresh water systems: the Great Lakes and the vast inland network of the Mississippi River. We have known for over a decade that silver and bighead carp are on a warpath toward our Lake Michigan fisheries, and while I have previously called the response to date a “slow-motion tragedy,” we still have a unique opportunity to do something about this biological invasion before it happens.

And rarely has a solution so straightforward presented itself: separate the ecosystems by restoring the natural divide that once maintained their biological integrity.

A decade ago, the City of Chicago looked at the invasive species issue and suggested that course of action. Our colleagues at the Alliance for the Great Lakes and Great Lakes Fishery Commission followed up with a 2008 report that recommended that work move forward. And two years ago, in response to some truly crazy rhetoric, NRDC released a high-profile report looking at where barriers could be placed in the Chicago River system to have the least impact on the region’s fading water infrastructure---offering some interesting strategies to revitalize our water infrastructure in the process. Last year, we built on that further, working with MacArthur genius architect Jeanne Gang on her spectacular book re-imagining the Chicago River, Reverse Effect.

Today is the next chapter in this iterative process. The Great Lakes Commission and Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Cities Initiative have released a new, in-depth analysis of the issue. Their $2 million study comes to much the same conclusions as we and other groups have made: separation is not only doable but necessary and can be a vehicle to fixing much of what ails the Chicago River’s sewage, flooding and transportation issues if the proper resources are marshaled. And I couldn’t help but notice immediately the endorsements of Illinois Governor Pat Quinn and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel at the front of the report, calling it “a critical step forward” that “reflects an emerging vision for Chicago’s waterways, a future that includes cleaner water, less flooding and more efficient transportation.”

According to the Commission and the Cities Initiative – whose membership includes all eight Great Lakes States and dozens of cities along the Great Lakes, including the City of Chicago – the cost of separation could be as low as less than $1 per month, or $11 annually, if spread across the Great Lakes region, while providing billions of dollars of long-term savings from all of the costs of dealing with invasive species that we would avoid. This is an important report that refocuses the laborious anti-Asian carp efforts that have so far been heavy on short-term gimmicks towards a real and long-term solution for the larger invasive species. Virtual fences and species-specific poisonings simply cannot stop all the plants, tiny animals and tinier viruses that make up the rogue’s gallery of aquatic nuisance species highlighted by the Army Corps of Engineers as dangers for traversing Chicago’s waterways.

And while no big decision is made overnight, there is no reason to dither on the big ones either.

This report continues the drumbeat for decisive action. Unfortunately, while consensus on the need to separate the waterways is growing two issues stand in the way of a timely solution to stop the invasions. First, while any solution must address the issues of the region’s shrinking transportation sector, the focus on preserving the system as it exists today, rather than looking at how it can bring deeper commercial connections is counter-productive. More damaging is the Army Corps' go-slow approach to studying the problem, which will not offer even a final report until at least 2015 (that is before any of the public input processes can begin---let alone construction!). Most scientists I have spoken with worry that there just isn’t time for that sort of delay.

The GLC has done a great job moving the ball ever further in the battle to protect the Great Lakes. My hope is that this report is the next salvo that pushes our representatives in Washington, DC to move the much ballyhooed "Stop Asian Carp Act," which has been advanced by a who’s who of Great Lakes Senators and Representatives including Senators Durbin of Illinois and Stabenow of Michigan. That bill would force the Corps to move more quickly, but unfortunately, despite broad support in the region, it has been stuck for years in a dysfunctional Congress.

I am cautiously optimistic that this new study by the Great Lakes states and cities will help bring all the pieces together and show that separation not only can be done, but that it must be done if we want to safeguard if the Great Lakes are to be protected. We need a smart decision here -- and we need it soon -- before it’s too late.

Note: It is worth noting that NRDC was involved in the GLC’s advisory panel for this report along with a wide variety of business interests, NGO and governmental representatives. The panel acted largely as a sounding board for presentations and had no input on the content of today’s report. We saw the report for the first time today, just like everyone else. The full advisory panel is available online.

Asian Carp = Invasive Species image by jmogs via Flickr

Ohio Coal Closures: A business decision that pays dividends for neighboring communities and Lake Erie's fish

2012-01-26T19:31:47Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

Good news for human health and a clean energy economy out of Ohio today: an announcement that FirstEnergy is closing units at six of the nastiest coal plants in the nation. Four of the plants sit on the shores of an endangered Lake Erie; taking a significant toll on the nearby communities and Great Lakes in general.

The Bay Shore and Lake Shore plants are particularly emblematic of the problems and unintended impacts of coal in the region. Probably not surprisingly, NRDC has been actively fighting them; in fact a pair of attorneys from my office were all set to spend the next month in Columbus to handle a mountain of depositions. This may be great news for their home life, but it is unequivocally fantastic for plenty of other reasons. Sadly, there are plenty of folks with axes to grind that will spin this in quite the opposite way, despite the fact that these plants have been on their way to the scrap heap for a while now. Don't believe the hype: this is a business decision, nothing more.

In addition to the immediate environmental benefits of this decision, I’m encouraged by two things. First, the Company seems to be taking efforts to help the more 500 workers who will be impacted by the decision. Second, the Company has made investments in clean energy that will ultimately create more jobs in Ohio and the region, buying 100MW of Iberdrola’s massive Blue Creek Wind Farm in Ohio’s Van Wert and Paulding counties. And I have encouraging reports from NRDC’s advocate who deals with FirstEnergy in Ohio that they are finally taking energy efficiency seriously. And as we have covered extensively on OnEarth and Switchboard, the state’s clean energy manufacturing sector is just beginning to boom.

But back to the plants... FirstEnergy temporarily idled its Lake Shore plant near Cleveland in 2010 because of lower regional power demand (due both to the unfortunate Great Recession and the entirely positive shift toward more energy efficiency) and the increasing costs of running a plant built in 1916 still using a 50 year old boiler. The plant was grandfathered in under the Clean Air Act and the company had avoided putting major new environmental controls on it for decades, even as it emitted a horrific plume of toxins and particulate matter on the surrounding community. The facility a target of the environmental justice movement for years because of its outsized impact on the African American community.

FirstEnergy’s nearly-60-year-old Bay Shore plant shares many of Lake Shore’s problems. But in addition to spewing toxic air pollution and climate changing-CO2 the facility is also one of the nation’s most efficient fish-killing machines (my colleagues have aptly compared it to the classic Dan Aykroyd “Bass-o-Matic” skit from Saturday Night Live). Located at the confluence of the Maumee River and Lake Erie, the plant sits astride one of the world’s most prolific fish spawning areas. Its water intake system and scalding water kill 46 million fish and 2 billion fish larvae annually, taking a significant bite out of the region’s $1.4 billion recreational and commercial fishing economy. Just to put the numbers into perspective, the State of Ohio says that the plant’s aquatic annihilation totals more fish than all the other plants in the state combined.

Also distressing, scalding hot water releases from both plants may very well be helping to kill the Lake they sit on. Lake Erie, once a symbol of the healing power of the Clean Water Act, is being crippled by massive algae blooms so large that they can be seen from space. No doubt, the releases from farm fertilizer and water treatment plants provide the food, but the hot water dumped into the shallow Lake likely makes conditions even more ideal for the dangerous algae, which is a threat to human health and has even killed hapless dogs that lapped up some of the tainted water.

Make no mistake, these plants were operating well-beyond their intended lifespan for a reason: it has been cheap to be dirty. And utilities have taken advantage, holding off on modernizations so that the Clean Air Act’s provisions would not kick in to force older plants like these to be retrofitted with modern pollution controls to protect the surrounding communities. While most of the nation’s utilities have been way out in front of decade-delayed updates to the Clean Air Act, some clung to their old and inefficient plants to ring the last dregs of profit from their smokestacks. Now that the EPA has finally taken action to better regulate Mercury and Hazardous Air Pollutants (which will produce benefits well in excess of the regulation’s cost---EPA guesses the annual cost of complying with the new rules will be $9.6 billion, compared to a total health benefit as high as $90 billion in 2016), FirstEnergy has made the high-level corporate decision to shut these plants down rather than retrofit them.

For the people of Ohio (and the fish of Lake Erie), this is a big day. As I look south from downtown Chicago, I can only hope that the folks managing our town’s similarly toxic coal plants will come to a long-due similar decision so that the same toll can be stopped in our town.

Pipeline Pols: Apologists Advocate for Higher Gas Prices in the Heartland

2012-01-22T02:46:06Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

I was surprised to see Illinois GOP Chairman Pat Brady had been scheduled to take part in a big Keystone XL pipeline rally this week in the Quad Cities. Given the decision to deny the ill-conceived project’s permit this week, I have no idea if the event is still on. But it begs the immediate question about Mr. Brady’s announced intention to participate in the event, which is: “what is a politician from Illinois doing promoting a project that has almost no impact on the state--aside from raising our gas prices?”

Oh, he probably wouldn’t be talking about that unfortunate economic impact on Illinois citizens.

My guess is that he has been recruited to join the chorus of the pipeline pushers who parrot the line of the multimillion-dollar American Petroleum Institute ads that have been blanketing the airwaves to claim fantastic things for the pipeline and demonize efforts to hold the project to sound technical and legal review. In those ads, the Keystone pipeline is pitched as a massive job producer that will put gas in your tank, sourced from our friendly neighbors to the north. It is absolutely Orwellian---the pipeline is completely opposite to what Big Oil and their apologists in Congress (and now here in Illinois, too) are screaming at anyone who will listen.

So, what was Keystone XL? A proposed massive pipeline that would run 2000 miles from the tar sands patch in Alberta where the dirtiest oil on the planet is strip mined or steamed out of the ground, all the way down to Houston. It would bring highly acidic, corrosive and carbon-intensive oil to refineries located in a tax-free international business zone to be turned into fuel and shipped off to foreign markets. That’s right, despite all the hullabaloo about getting us off of Middle Eastern oil, this would be an export pipeline. Big Oil and its political cronies will continue to push for the project, but we Americans need to know that this oil is not intended for our gas tanks…China and other international markets are the target of this project.

Despite the rhetoric, one of the main reasons that this is Big Oil’s pet project is that it would allow the Canadian oil to by-pass the Midwest and go to international markets, resulting in increased gas prices in much of the middle of the country. That includes Illinois---which is why it is so surprising that any Illinois politician would cheerlead for the project. Don’t take my word for it. Check out my colleague Josh Mogerman’s recent blog which plucks the real reasons for this project out of Canadian news coverage---and the Canadian promoters are pretty open about why this project is so important: it could mean $130 billion dollars more in their pockets (and out of yours). Or, you can get it directly from the horse’s mouth by reading the pipeline builder’s own regulatory filings.

The other big reason that Big Oil is willing to call in all their chits with politicians in DC and state capitols around the country is that, long-term, they don’t think we are a great customer for Canada’s tar sands. And they are right , because we are using less and less oil as the nation works to loosen ourselves from the grip of our oil addiction The President’s recent fuel economy standards win will continue the trend. But we are their only customer at the moment.

Up in Canada, they are digging faster and faster, increasing their output at massive rates. The U.S. is already a net exporter of finished petroleum products (yeah, you spend a lot, but they get way more for all that gas and diesel sold abroad), so the Canadians desperately want to sell to developing markets like India and China. Moving their gunk oil through Houston and its robust oil transportation system is the quickest way to make that happen. Now that the Keystone XL project is stalled, their dreams of additional billions in profits are in trouble. (A a similar project in Canada is stalled as record numbers of Canadians come out to express concern over climate and safety issues associated with highly acidic crude that was involved with some very high profile spills of late, including the million gallons spurted into the Kalamazoo River last summer.)

So, when so much is riding on a project and things start to go bad, what do you do? If you are Big Oil, you create a cynical campaign promising lots and lots of jobs to a public desperate to get people working again. Never mind that the job numbers have been debunked over and over again (they claimed a quarter million not long ago, but even the 20,000 that they promise now is completely overblown), if you put out giant TV ad buys and hand out talking points to politicians sympathetic to your aims some of those things are going to stick, even if they are lies. It has not worked yet, but there are a number of efforts afoot in DC to revive the project on Big Oil’s behalf.

So, do you think Mr. Brady of Illinois will mention that whole gas price thing when he joins the chorus to mourn the Keystone XL pipeline? Eh…probably not.

Chicago River: President's Hometown Joke Underscores Choice Between Dead Zone or Clean Waterway Future

2012-01-13T17:17:22Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

I was truly pleased to see President Obama visit with the beleaguered staff at the Environmental Protection Agency this week. Given the withering and unfair attacks launched at the EPA from some in Congress who would undo the protections that Americans have come to rely on for their health and safety, it was good to see the President standing with the people charged with safeguarding our air, water and health.

There was one section of the speech that caught my eye. Said the President:

"In my hometown, the Chicago River -- you probably could not find anything alive in there -- (laughter) -- four decades ago. Now it’s thriving..."

In Chicago, NRDC has been engaged in a bunch of fights on behalf of our hometown waterways; among the most prominent is the effort to get action on the rapidly encroaching menace of invasive Asian carp making their way into the Chicago River and Great Lakes.

It is my fervent hope that the folks in various federal agencies tasked with keeping the invasive fish out of the River and Great Lakes are paying attention to what the President said about a thriving, clean river in Chicago.

It is important that they do…after all, it was just a few weeks ago that the Army Corps of Engineers released a laundry list of “tools” that could be employed in the war on Asian Carp that included the “creation” of a “dead zone” in the Chicago River system.

Think about that for a second.

After decades of effort to rejuvenate the waterways that were once merely a convenient cesspool for the deposition of offal and carcasses from the millions of livestock that met their end in Chicago’s famed Union Stock Yards, the idea of intentionally developing a section of the river that could not support any life is thoroughly shocking. But the Corps is hardly the only group to make such a galling suggestion.

I wonder if anyone would have the guts to advance such claptrap related to the nation’s other waterways. I fear that the Chicago River’s gruesome reputation leaves it open to incredible misuse simply because we do not expect better. But while there is still much to do to right the river, the President is correct to note that the green waters cutting through our fair city have come a long, long, long way.

Back in 1992, while I was Commissioner of the Environment for the City, a notable disaster forced many to change their minds about the river. When a hole was accidentally blown into the one of the many tunnel systems that lay under the Loop and surrounding business districts, the river flooded the entire downtown. My staff and I went into basement after basement to sample what we assumed would be toxic chemical laden remnants of the deluge. Instead of dangerous waste, we found schools of flopping fish in the lower levels of most buildings. Indeed, the river has been supporting growing and diverse fish populations for over 25 years.

The Clean Water Act holds out the goal of American waters that are both “fishable and swimmable.” In the Windy City, we have done a great job of moving closer to that fishable goal. And recent changes, like the recent MWRD disinfection decision, leave me hopeful about swimmable too. However, all of that can be quickly undone should we choose to look the other way as short-sighted solutions to our growing invasive species problem move us backwards or the pro-pollution folks in Congress swinging at the EPA get their way in rolling back the Clean Water Act. Just look back at old descriptions of the Chicago River to see what is at stake.

Casting Towards the Skyline image of Canal Origins Park by reallyboring via Flickr

SS Badger Coal Ferry: Is this the history we want to celebrate in the Great Lakes?

2011-11-09T19:26:42Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

The We Energy spill last week is not the only coal ash mess testing the Great Lakes. The Chicago Tribune ran a great story this week about the region's last coal-powered steamship, The Badger, which dumps four tons of coal ash directly into Lake Michigan every time it sails in its route between Ludington, MI and Manitowoc, WI. The boat faces a deadline to stop dumping the toxic stuff into our water, which the Badger’s owners agreed to honor nearly four years ago when they promised the EPA that they would upgrade the boat’s engines and cease dumping in the Lake. But, in what my colleague Thom Cmar calls "...a stunning example of special interest legislation flying under the radar," some in DC are trying to prolong the practice by sliding a rider into the Coast Guard budget and bestowing the smoking hulk with a historic designation in honor of its "historic propulsion system." (Note: the “historic” system was already out of date when the Badger first sailed.)

So much for progress and innovation in the Halls of Congress...and for protecting the health and safety of the American people…

Update: If you wondered, like I did, what this dumping looks like---YouTube has the answer:

S S Badger image by soumit via Flickr

The Mess Near Milwaukee: Coal Ash Spills into Great Lakes and Underscores Political Folly in DC

2011-11-06T08:45:18Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

In case you missed it, an aging pile of toxic coal ash adjacent to a Wisconsin coal plant collapsed into Lake Michigan early Monday morning. Yeah, that’s the beloved lake that is a source of recreation and drinking water for millions and one of the few rallying issues left in our political lives that actually has bipartisan support.

Monday, a bluff next to We Energy’s Oak Creek Power Plant collapsed sending dirt and coal ash barreling down to the Lake with enough force to topple structures and toss aside a pickup truck. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that a "fuel sheen” could be seen on the Lake. Bad news. Worse news is that, even though some described the incident as a “freak accident,” it was not. This was a preventable mess. My colleague Meleah Geertsma notes that Dr. Donald Reed of the Southeast Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission raised concerns about the structural stability of the bluff in meetings with the company and during proceedings in front of the Public Service Commission several years ago. According to "Dr. Don," the bluffs are inherently unstable, such that a collapse was entirely foreseeable and hardly an "accident" as the company calls it. And Milwaukee media reported that the area was given a pass on environmental reviews of construction projects that might have otherwise noted structural problems.

In addition to spilling toxic waste into the Lake and destabilizing the bluff on which the coal plant sits, the nasty event turbo-charged the already caustic arguments over how to deal with coal ash that lies in huge, under-engineered waste ponds all over the country.

We have a serious problem with coal ash right now. You would think that the gob-smackingly amazing TVA disaster in Tennessee two Christmases ago would have galvanized the nation into addressing the coal ash risk facing the nation. The TVA disaster came about when the dikes holding back a giant slurry pond, containing a billion gallons of the heavy-metal-rich coal ash, gave way, swamping the Emory River and wiping out a number of homes in the path of the streaming coal ash.

The mess in Milwaukee is nowhere near the same scale, but it is a reminder that the longer we wait to deal with the issue, the more of these incidents will happen, threatening water resources and economies all over the country as this stuff continues to pile up. The Wisconsin incident could be a dangerous glimpse into the future if we don’t get this right. The We Energy mess involves the collapse of a 50 year-old ravine that had been filled with coal waste claimed to be “structural fill.” This so-called “structural fill” is one of the fastest growing use for coal ash.

But in their current anti-regulatory frenzy, some in Congress are trying to stop the development of commonsense rules that would safely deal with disposal of coal ash. Just two weeks ago, the House passed a bill stripping the EPA of authority to protect the public from coal ash, which is known to be rich in all sorts of nasty stuff that is bad for children and other living things. Here’s how the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s energy reporter Tom Content describes the issue, which is pooh-poohed by industry sources who should know better:

Coal ash landfills are common across the country, including Wisconsin. These landfills are monitored for contaminants that are found in coal ash, including mercury, cadmium and arsenic, which are associated with cancer and other serious health effects.

…

In its own update on the bluff collapse, We Energies said, "Coal ash is not hazardous material. It is unlikely there will be any health impacts at all from this event."

That sort of statement is disappointing. No. That’s too weak. That sort of statement is outrageous, selfish and fundamentally unacceptable. It is the sort of statement that drips with cynicism and accordingly poisons the atmosphere of our nation’s public discussion about how to address the future. Most immediately, it prevents us from putting together a practical regulatory framework that will protect our health and safety, and give the business community the workable standards and certainty necessary to prevent future disasters. But in a broader sense, this is the sort of corporate response fueling protesters in many of our nation’s cities right now.

Hopefully the incident will be a wakeup call to both the Republicans and Democrats in the Senate who care about the Great Lakes---and there are a lot of them who understand the health of the Great Lakes to be a non-partisan cause. They should lead the charge to protect the water resources that are so central to their constituents’ lives by putting an end to this short-sighted effort to prolong the coal ash disposal problem and look past the industry pressure to a solution that protects Americans (and the Great Lakes, which are lined with aging coal facilities that crank out tons and tons of this waste) from this unnecessary threat.

"Power Plant" image of Oak Creek Plant by JohnnyFixedGear via Flickr

Reverse Effect: A Genius Solution for the Chicago River and Asian Carp from Jeanne Gang

2011-11-03T02:04:47Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

This week sees the release of a very important book by visionary architect Jeanne Gang, Reverse Effect: Renewing Chicago’s Waterways. The book sprouts from the collaboration between Jeanne Gang, her excellent colleagues at Studio Gang, very smart students at Harvard’sGraduate School of Design, and NRDC’s Chicago office.

Several years ago when NRDC began the hard work needed to find solutions to the many problems that the Chicago River brings to the Great Lakes and the people of Chicago, I knew that we needed to fundamentally re-imagine the role of the waterway within the City and the Great Lakes ecosystems. And we would have to rethink the fatal actions of 100 years ago, when the Chicago River was reversed so that it would send sewage and water-borne diseases away from the Lakes and into the Mississippi River. Reverse Effect significantly moves that “rethinking” to a new level of sophistication.

This is a book about solutions. Solutions to the flooding and contaminated sewage that continues to flow into the Chicago River. Solutions to the looming threat of invasive species, particularly the insidious Asian carp attempting to use the Chicago River to access the Great Lakes. Solutions to quality of life problems that persist in many of our City’s neighborhoods, and are desperately in need of new amenities.

This stands as Jeanne’s first major public project since the MacArthur Foundation awarded her its “Genius” grant earlier in the year, and the book shows how appropriate the award is. It outlines a powerful vision for what the river can do for Chicago---and how re-thinking the role of rivers in the urban environment can give birth to a new, life-expanding approach to our Nation’s waterways. The ideas are big. They are also practical. And they are grounded in what Americans have historically done to seize the future, improve our quality of life and expand opportunities for our society. The book reflects a deeply American approach to challenges: meeting them with enthusiasm, imagination and a pleasure in solving problems with the sort of “can do” intelligence necessary to battle the nested blights plaguing the troubled waterways: polluted water, flooded basements, closed beaches, and invasive species threatening the future of our fresh water.

In 2010, NRDC released a report focused on the twin goals of blocking invasive species and the need to clean up the Chicago River. Entitled “Re-Envisioning the Chicago River,” the report proposed physical barriers to restore the natural separation of the Great Lakes and Mississippi River watersheds to repel the movement of Asian carp into the Great Lakes, while also dealing with the region’s crumbling water infrastructure and the flooding problems created by its combined sewer overflows with a heavy emphasis on “green infrastructure” (the use of things like open space, green roofs, and permeable pavement to collect, hold and filter rainwater rather than dumping it into already over-taxed sewers and mixing it with sewage and other contaminants).

The report was Jeanne’s jumping off point for this book project. We were focused on immediate actions to address the invasive threat and flooding problems, in ways consistent with future reform of the failing existing infrastructure. But when Jeanne became engaged with the project, she began pressing forcefully on what those “future solutions” needed to be. She brought to the task a rich understanding and experience in combining environmental, engineering and design systems to drive improvement of urban environment. She chose to focus the work of the studio course she taught at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design in spring 2011, on the “redesign of the Chicago River.” The very able students in the class, drawn from all over the world, looked at how to take the next steps to redesign the River, and thought big. The exciting urban potential of the students’ work is at the core of the book, which delves deep into the history, current conditions and inspirational potential future. The result is bracing, exciting, bold---and it is fun.

In the concluding essay, Jeanne notes:

This thought experiment takes the form of a series of steps. The moves it describes are like a possible game of chess, in which everyone wins if Chicago makes the right choices. I present it here not as a formal, shovel-ready plan, but in the hopes that its ideas will spark energy and enthusiasm among architects, designers, experts, policy makers, community members and all of the other people who will be needed if we are to successfully renew our waterways.

And that is exactly right. There is big thinking in this book, from Jeanne, her colleagues at Studio Gang, the Harvard students and from my colleagues in NRDC’s Chicago office. Not all of it is “shovel-ready”--- that makes it no less practical, functional or reasonable. Any of us who have paid attention to the role of innovation, invention and creative enterprise in American history knows that envisioning a new future is intensely practical----in fact, it is the beginning of the deed itself.

No single solution can be immediately deployed that will address the many ills of the Chicago River---or those in most of our urban waterways. What is required is steady, thoughtful and determined work. Jeanne has pushed that effort forward with Reverse Effect.

Reverse Effect in production image courtesy of Studio Gang.

Keystone XL: A Pipedream Built on Myth

2011-09-29T15:47:49Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

I was recently asked to submit an OpEd on the Keystone XL pipeline for the Illinois Business Journal in the MetroEast area of the state where I grew up. It is an interesting place for the project to be debated, as the issues fueling debate nationally are clearly on display at of the ConocoPhillips refinery in Wood River, IL, and the first Keystone pipeline which helps supply it.

The issue of tar sands oil's pollution liabilities (it is chock full of extra sulfur, heavy metals, and carbon) was front and center in the battle over air pollution permits for the refinery's recent expansion. And of course, the safety issues that have drawn the ire of Nebraska's Governor and concerned citizens throughout the nation are made clear by the pathetic record of the first Keystone pipeline which terminates in the MetroEast region to feed the Wood River refinery. (Sadly, the steel mills in the region will not have a chance to offer up raw materials for Keystone XL---if it is built, the pipeline will utilize foreign steel.)

In recent weeks, I've seen a number of disheartening displays of disingenuous claims made by the pipeline backers in Illinois. So, I wanted to be quite clear about the documents that I refer to in my Op Ed and have pointed readers back to this post to get the scoop. In my attempt to push back on the myths of Keystone XL's supposed job creation, lowering of gas prices and energy security impacts, I pointed to the following documents:

Myth - Job Creation: This week Cornell University’s Global Labor Institute released a report about the massively inflated job claims made by the project cheerleaders. According to the Global Institute’s director, “It is GLI’s assessment that the construction of Keystone XL will create far fewer jobs in the U.S. than its proponents have claimed and may actually destroy more jobs than it generates.” You can find the report at http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

Myth - Lower Gas Prices: Because tar sands oil requires special technology to process, it is sold at a discount to Midwestern refineries that can access the Oklahoma oil terminals where most of the oil is delivered. Keystone XL would open the way to new Houston refineries with technology to refine the heavy tar sands crude, thereby eliminating the need for the discount product in the Midwest, resulting in a guaranteed increase at the pump for much of the country. TransCanada, the pipeline’s builder, makes this clear in their filings, which include the statement: “The resultant increase in the price of heavy crude is estimated to provide an increase in annual revenue to the Canadian producing industry in 2013 of US $2 billion to US $3.9 billion.”

Myth - Energy Security: The idea that the pipeline will add to “energy security” in the United States is non-sense. Keystone XL is about opening foreign markets. Presently, tar sands sales are limited by a lack if access to international markets. The connection to Houston refineries is key to world shipping since they are located in a tax-free international business zone attached to a robust international oil transportation network. At least one refiner has said that they will export all the fuel that they make---it will not end up in American gas tanks. So much for securing American energy supplies. Google the news coverage in Canada, to follow what Alberta’s energy minister really says about this issue. Additionally, the U.S Department of Energy’s evaluation of the pipeline project does not support the notion that more tar sands means less Middle Eastern oil would be imported. Petroleum economist Philip Verleger lays it out in the Minneapolis Star Tribune at http://www.startribune.com/opinion/otherviews/117832183.html. And have a look at this document from Ensys, which did the evaluation for DoE.

The Keystone XL Pipeline is being misrepresented as the cure to our energy ills, be they economic or national security. Instead, the pipeline will render us mere conduits, allowing special interests to reach more lucrative markets, while we Americans assume all the spill liabilities for Canadian and other oil interests. Don’t buy into the pipe dream. It is not in our Nation’s best interest.

Of Bridges and Boathouses: Mayor Emanuel's Chicago River Investment

2011-09-28T16:21:16Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

Chicago is filled with remnants of days gone by, buildings and infrastructure created to serve people and the economy, some still in service, some no longer used, and some serving a new purpose of helping us remember and focus on who and what we are as citizens of a great metropolis. Throughout the City, “vestigial infrastructure” reminds us of our past and suggests how to address our future. Consider the near South Side, where the river hosts huge drawbridges, once used by the railroads that serviced the stock-yards and lumber yards, and now stand unused, permanently arcing up into the sky. These massive bridges bear witness to a time when Americans built big, built for the future, and built to last.

Last week, I stood in the shadow of one of these bridges near Ping Tom Park at the edge of Chicago’s Chinatown and the Chicago River. The occasion was a very interesting press briefing from Mayor Rahm Emanuel and USEPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. The Mayor and Administrator were in Ping Tom Park to roll out plans for a series of new boathouses that will be built along the River in neighborhoods throughout town. The drawbridge that loomed behind the podium provided a striking backdrop to the news conference, evoking a tradition of purposeful investment in infrastructure to meet the needs of the City and its people.

So, while some dismissed the announcement as political theater, and a stream of pretty words about curious investment in the waterways that wind through the city, I think the announcement marks a strong commitment to the future of the River, committing the power and resources of the City and USEPA to making the River safe for kayaking, canoeing and boating.

The Mayor’s announcement was a strong, public down payment on the vision of transforming the Chicago River into a clean, safe, and usable “backyard” for Chicago. As has been noted by many, Chicago’s beautiful Lake Michigan shoreline is the front yard for Chicagoans. The new mayor wants to really clean up our backyard--the River--so it can be used similarly.

It’s quite a job. The folks kayaking and rowing in the river now risk an array of diseases that stem from the fact that 70% of the volume of water is partially treated sewage from water treatment plants. This must change, and soon. After one of the longest cases ever before the Illinois Pollution Control Board, the sewage agency responsible has finally agreed to disinfect the sewage effluent from their plants. Another case brought by NRDC with other environmental groups, to stop uncontrolled sewage overflow into the River, is before the federal District Court.

And the Mayor’s boathouse announcement, made with the head of the USEPA, further advances the march to a cleaner river. It signals City and Federal commitment to the hard work necessary to clean the river.

Another happy-making aspect to the announcement is that the exceptionally talented architect Jeanne Gang (NRDC Midwest Council member, and MacArthur “genius”) has been tapped to do some of the boathouse design work. Jeanne Gang creates thoughtful, sustainable and elegant buildings with special attention to water environments. She has been working with NRDC to create a new vision for the Chicago River, which will soon be published as “ReverseEffect" (she talked about the project recently on Chicago Public Radio's "Eight Forty-Eight").

Certainly, in the short-term, there are risks with having more people on the dirty waterway. The City will need to be sure there is clear communication about the dangers associated with it, but I think that the signal Mayor Emanuel sends with the announcement of the boathouse projects, is clear: the River must be valued as an amenity, anchoring economic activity, quality of life improvements and aesthetic grace to neighborhoods well beyond the Loop. In my mind, it’s long past due, deserving of the smart, sharp, modern infrastructure that is meant to serve the City and built to last.

Chicago River Press Conference 1 image by jmogs via Flickr

Grading Senator Kirk's Lake Michigan Report Card

2011-08-12T22:48:15Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

Illinois Senator Mark Kirk released the first of what is promised to be an annual “Report Card for Lake Michigan” this week. Senator Kirk is a long-time Great Lakes advocate, having targeted sewage management, beach water quality, industrial pollution and Great Lakes funding as central issues of his previous service as Congressman from the 10th Congressional District of Illinois, which abuts Lake Michigan.

Let me emphasize how heartening it is to see that, as a Senator, he continues to embrace Great Lakes quality and protection as central issues. Far too many elected officials today are turning away from core commitments to environmental protection in DC’s poisonous current climate. The Senator’s “Report Card” is a positive signal that his interest in our Great Lakes has not been corroded and suggests that the Great Lakes, which constitute 95% of America’s fresh surface water, remain capable of garnering broad, bi-partisan support.

But, maybe I am getting a little ahead of myself….Let’s look at that Report Card, which highlights six critical issues and assigns grades on current efforts to address them:

Beach water quality (D)
Sewage pollution (C)
Mercury contamination (“incomplete”)
Water level shifts in the Lakes (D)
Toxic cleanups (B)
Invasive species (C)

These combine into an overall grade of a solid “C” from the Senator for the state of Lake Michigan. Not anywhere near the head of the class; but in no danger of flunking out either…

While we could quibble with some of the letter grades assigned, Senator Kirk deserves much credit for putting together a valuable document that can help stimulate really important policy discussions about the health of the Great Lakes and what we need to do to make it better. But I must register concern that some of the basic causes and solution sets for the problems outlined have become hopefully politicized in Washington, which is probably inconvenient for Kirk. Some examples:

There is no way to talk about the beach water quality, sewage pollution or Lake levels without talking about climate change. The increasing ferocity of storms we are currently experiencing is exactly what has been forecast by leading scientists and our infrastructure simply isn’t up to what the future will be dishing out. Violent rainstorms quickly overwhelm the aging combined sewers in the region, which invariably results in dumping of sewage into the Lake (or, in Chicago’s case, into the Chicago River which also backs up and forces regulators to open the locks to flush polluted water out into the Lake to relieve pressure). And scientists have made clear that they expect the changing climate to ravage Lake levels in coming decades. While Congress has disappointingly abdicated its responsibility to address the issue, that does not mean action has dissipated. The Supreme Court has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to deal with greenhouse gas pollution. Yet many in Congress are blocking the Agency from taking this legally required action. Senator Kirk should keep this connection in mind when the issue is raised in the Senate as part of a spate of bills and spending packages coming from the House of Representatives.
The Senator is absolutely correct in pointing to mercury, the powerful neurotoxin that has become so pervasive that eating fish from the Lakes unsafe for children, pregnant women and people with immune deficiencies. Progress on fixing this problem requires that we look at the major sources of continuing mercury pollution to the Great Lakes (and other waters of the United States): air emissions from coal fired power plants that need to be cleaned up or closed if we are to fix the problem he identifies. The way to achieve this pollution is readily at hand: through the Clean Air Act, which will require coal fired plants to clean up or close. In this regard, the Clean Air Act is under relentless attack in Congress by some officials who seek to prevent application of the Act to the sources of mercury pollution. A strong defense of the Clean Air Act as the solution to the mercury poisoning that rightly concerns him is critical. His voice in support of the Clean Air Act in this context would be powerful and very welcome in dealing with the problem.
And finally, we agree on the looming threat of invasive species, though perhaps not on the scope of the problem. Senator Kirk focuses largely on Asian carp. And certainly carp are a massive concern in this area---but they shouldn’t be THE concern. The report card focuses on keeping carp out of the Great Lakes by turning up the voltage on the failed electric barrier. But that does very little to address the 40 other species that the Army Corps of Engineers has identified as dangers to move between the Lakes and Mississippi Rivers through Chicago’s waterways. And it does nothing to address the quagga mussels that are transforming Lake Michigan by literally sucking the life out of the ecosystem, having already devoured more than 80% of the phytoplankton that is the base of the food chain. If we don’t do anything about that, the ecosystem may just collapse. And if we focus solely on Asian carp, we will be stuck with ineffective half-measures like the electric carp barrier rather than doing the hard work of finding a way to put a permanent physical barrier in place to put an end to the movement of invasive species between the continent’s two greatest aquatic systems once and for all.

OK, so we differ a bit on the grades. But again, I think the Senator is highlighting all the right issues and points to some very important policy solutions. At a time when the budget axe looms over everything in Washington, DC, it is supremely comforting to know that Senator Kirk (and fellow Illinois Senator Dick Durbin) understands the issues and stands ready to fight on behalf of the Lakes.

I recognize that these are tough political battles. Kudos to the Senator for this initial report card. If this is going to be an annual thing, I hope that some of these core issues will make their way into the mix next year. For many voters in Illinois, his engagement on these issues will help them put together their own report card on the state’s delegation in DC.

Low Lake Levels image by Michigan Sea Grant via Flickr

Tugboat Troubles and Serious Storms: Reminders that Chicago needs to rethink its waterways

2011-07-28T22:45:58Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

It’s official. Saturday was the rainiest day in Chicago’s history. And after big storms last night, it has been the rainiest month on record for this town. That’s why a little story in the Chicago Tribune caught my eye this morning. Despite the deluge, it seems that a tug boat nearly sank in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal this morning…

As we fight over how best to deal with Asian carp and the 40 other dangerous invasive species that the Army Corps of Engineers recently identified as threats that could use the canal and Chicago Waterways to expand their economy-crushing advances between the Mississippi and Great Lakes ecosystems the story is all-too-often reduced to barges vs. fish. Over and over again, we are told that the vaunted Chicago canal system is a marvel of engineering that sits at the center of this region’s economy---too important to be monkeyed with even to protect the billions of dollars generated by the Great Lakes fishing industry each year. And yet, today we see that the highly engineered nature of the waterway can be problematic for its most basic functions. Last night's storms overwhelmed the system forcing combined sewer overflows throughout the waterways. And storms last week actually forced the Chicago River to be re-reversed to flush sewage out into Lake Michigan. Despite all that water, is it possible that the tugboat was an unwitting victim, stuck in flow so artificially low that it scraped otherwise avoidable objects on the canal bottom? (According to press accounts, the tugboat didn't sink because it was sitting in only 12 feet of water.)

Look, I don’t want to make too much of one isolated incident. But really, it is time to rethink the system. Chicago’s storms once again brought massive flooding to communities and basements and result in sewage discharges to the Great Lakes. Our water infrastructure is just not up to the task of dealing with heavy violent rainstorms that are dumping lots of water on this town with increasing frequency. And the movement of goods needs to be accurately included as part of that conversation. The current Chicago area canal system is inadequate for a 21st century economy, and the approach of the Army Corps of Engineers and others is not focused on bringing changes to that reality---that needs to be faced and changed. Currently, the Chicago waterways move about 1% of goods passing through the Chicago region. We need more barges, not less. The only way to make that happen is to improve infrastructure, invest and better connect the waterways with the broader rail and commercial infrastructure that has proliferated in Chicago. That comes with a massive re-imagining of the system (which also includes our sewers) and, yes, a permanent physical barrier that will end the migration of invasive species once and for all. One thing is clear: doing nothing to fix and improve the waterways is unacceptable. It condemns the region to sclerosis, decline and marginal, backwater status in the Global Economy. And to soggy, disease-breeding basements, contaminated beaches and a sewer for a River.

We cannot just accept flooded basements. We cannot just accept Asian carp swimming into Lake Michigan. We cannot accept other invasive organisms sloshing their way out of the Lake and into our other inland waterways (like quagga mussels, which now threaten Hoover Dam!). And we cannot accept those economically important barges running aground in the suburbs.

Update (7/29): The Chicago Tribune reports this morning that tour boats and water taxis are unable to operate because water levels on the Chicago River are so high that they have lost clearance under the bridges downtown. Admittedly, the canal and river are very different, but they are part of the same system---weird!

Cermak Bridge Barge Passageway image by puroticorico via Flickr

Pipeline Problems: The mess remains one year after Kalamazoo River oil spill

2011-07-27T20:20:22Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

At this time last year, I was a very unhappy man. Hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil were speeding down the Kalamazoo River towards the Great Lakes from southwest Michigan after a pipeline burst in the wee hours of the night. My staff was concerned because it looked to us as though the petroleum in the river was of a particularly nasty variety---tar sands---but nobody seemed to understand or care despite the likelihood of an even uglier mess. Looking back a year later, the cleanup continues on the banks of the Kalamazoo River and it is clear that we were asking the right questions. The oil spill packed a bigger wallop than anyone expected at the time because of the unique properties of tar sands oil. In the last twelve months we’ve learned a lot about the particular type of tar sands oil that spurted into Michigan’s waters. I must say, I am not comforted by what we have found or the lessons that seem unlearned from the spill.

Last July, we made inquiries with a number of authorities trying to get information on what had spilled after noticing that the pipeline likely serviced BP’s Whiting Refinery in Indiana, one of the biggest refiners of Alberta’s heavy tar sands oil. Knowing that tar sands oil is considered by many to be the dirtiest on the planet due to its increased levels of heavy metals, assorted contaminants and higher carbon liabilities, we were concerned. In the havoc of the spill, we found technical information hard to come by and little understanding of why we were asking the question---so we worked with OnEarth magazine to send a reporter to the spill site to get some answers. She was stonewalled. Told over and over again that tar sands oil was not involved… Until she found the source of the oil and helped force the CEO of Enbridge Energy, owners of the pipeline, to admit that the gunk that had spilled was indeed tar sands oil, despite repeated assertions to the contrary.

Why does it matter? After all, once we established it was tar sands oil, the EPA said that the type of oil would not impact how they moved forward with the cleanup. You see, tar sands are not your typical oil. It is a thick, heavy, dense petroleum steamed or strip mined out of Alberta’s sandy soil that is the consistency of peanut butter at room temperature. Honestly, at the time, we did not even really appreciate how bad the news would be. It has since become clear that raw tar sands oil---diluted bitumen (or “DilBit’)---spilled in Michigan. This stuff is fundamentally different from other forms of oil moving through American pipelines. It is so thick and sludgy that it requires a mix of condensed natural gas to thin it in combination with added heat and pressure just to move it through a pipeline.

At the time of the spill, it seems nobody was aware that this form of petroleum was in the mix. And lack of transparency is a problem, given some of DilBit’s unique properties. First responders were not warned that outside of the pressurized environment of the pipeline, the liquefied gasses separate (creating a potentially explosive and deadly cloud rife with benzene and noxious gases) and the heavy bitumen sinks to the bottom of the river. The State of Michigan released a report showing that hundreds of people along the river have suffered through an array of respiratory illnesses thanks to their exposure to the spilled DilBit. And, of course, cleanup crews were focused on skimming the surface, not the much bigger mess gumming up the river bottom.

OnEarth sent the same reporter back recently to check up on the cleanup. This is how she described the accident:

When that combination, known as DilBit, spilled out of the ruptured pipeline, the benzene and other chemicals in the mixture went airborne, forcing mandatory evacuations of surrounding homes (many of which were later bought by Enbridge because their owners couldn’t safely return), while the thick, heavy bitumen sank into the water column and coated the river and lake bottom, mixing with sediment and suffocating bottom-dwelling plants, animals, and micro-organisms.

Surface skimmers and vacuums were no help, and a full year later, EPA officials and scientists are still working on a plan to remove submerged oil from about 200 acres of river and lake bottom. EPA officials had given Enbridge an August 31 deadline to get all the oil out, but they now say a full cleanup could take years. “Where we thought we might be winding down our piece of the response, we’re actually ramping back up,” said Mark Durno, one of EPA’s on-scene coordinators. “The submerged oil is a real story -- it’s a real eye-opener. … In larger spills we’ve dealt with before, we haven’t seen nearly this footprint of submerged oil, if we’ve seen any at all.”

Look, this isn’t just me---watch the excellent video below put together by the Kalamazoo Gazette this week. In particular, check out the EPA staffer’s nearly identical description of the spill and his thoughts about how this spill cleanup was completely counter to EPA’s expectations going in. He notes that: “I don’t think anybody anticipated that we would spend…more time dealing with the submerged rather than surface oil…”

Well, we did.

And Enbridge should have…if they were willing to fess up to what was coursing through their aging lines.

But history repeats itself. Last month ExxonMobil said that tar sands oil was not involved in the Yellowstone River spill and the stuff had never run through those pipelines. Oops. A few days later, Reuters proved them wrong---surprising both state and federal regulators. We still don’t know what kind of tar sands oil had been moved through the impacted line, but we will eventually.

As our January report on pipeline safety showed, pipelines transporting DilBit are at greater risk of busting. Alberta’s newer lines, designed to move this stuff, burst far more often than American pipelines. But now that DilBit is coming with much greater frequency (Canadians used to partially refine it north of the border before sending it to us, but have maxed out that capacity---we will be getting 1.5 million barrels a day of this stuff in the next decade as deliveries ratchet up), so it is likely that Kalamazoo will be a cleanup learning lab gleaning information that will be sadly more and more important should our incident rates catch up with those in Canada. The Enbridge line that burst in Michigan was built in the 60’s and not designed for the higher temperatures and pressure it was running at…which seems like a problem to me. But regulators don’t have specific rules regarding this new and more dangerous type of oil---so we are left with aging, ticking time bombs. As ugly as things are along the Kalamazoo, it would have been far worse had the oil hit Lake Michigan. And the same pipeline runs through areas much closer to the Lakes.

This week the anniversary of the Kalamazoo River spill brings a bit of horrible irony. Do you know how they marked the anniversary in DC today? With a vote to speed up approval of a proposed mega-pipeline which would run tar sands from Alberta all the way down to Texas over some of the nation’s most sensitive water resources. Yup, the House of Representatives passed a bill to circumvent environmental analyses of the Keystone XL project in an attempt to force the administration to make a decision on the 1700 mile line, whether all the questions are answered or not. One of the chief advocates moving for this action is Congressman Fred Upton of Michigan. Guess what river runs through his district…?

A year ago, I was an unhappy man. After the vote this week, I might feel even worse…

Photo of Kalamazoo River clean up crews from July of 2011 via USEPA. Video produced by the Kalamazoo Gazette.

Giving Chicago the River It Deserves: big win on disinfection

2011-06-07T22:50:54Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

When NRDC decided to open an office in Chicago, one of the first issues that we tackled was the sorry state of the waterway system that runs through the glittering city’s heart. I am pleased to report that as a result of brilliant legal work and pressure brought to bear in the press in coordination with other river advocates, the foul state of the Chicago River is about to change. The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District voted late today to end the practice of dumping undisinfected effluent into local waterways. In more colorful language---the water that makes up 70% of the volume of the river will no longer be rife with the various bacteria and waterborne diseases that made it one of the nation’s most unique and infamous waterways. This means that the Chicago River can finally become the amenity that so many in this region desperately want, rather than an uncomfortable reminder of the embarrassing cesspool described in The Jungle.

My colleague Ann Alexander made waves recently when she said, “you can't have a third-world river running through the heart of a world class city.” With this move, we can start to ensure that the kayakers, rowers and other people drawn to the river can begin to do so safely. And the millions of dollars invested along the riverbanks---whether it be the gorgeous River Walk downtown or homes built along Bubbly Creek---can begin to really impart value on our economy. This is a huge, huge win for NRDC, Friends of the Chicago River, Openlands, Sierra Club, and ELPC. But it is a bigger win for Chicagoland. We can now start working towards the river that this City deserves.

Wolf Point Turnaround image by recycledfilm via Flickr

The Chicago River is Broken

2011-06-01T01:22:21Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

In recent weeks a couple of high profile boat rides have been used to highlight giant problems facing this region. The first, a cruise taken by Illinois Senators Durbin and Kirk to see dilapidated water infrastructure that threatens public health throughout Chicagoland. The second, a boat ride for press to roll out new tools in the fight against one of the nation’s most feared invasive species. What do they have in common? They both made their way down the Chicago River. It is time to connect the dots folks. We can fix both issues, but it means fixing the River.

The boat rides capped off a few weeks in which the River got a lot of attention. That included multiple challenges to the ongoing pollution of the Chicago waterway system with human waste and chemicals in violation of the Clean Water Act from both USEPA and local advocates. We have filed a lawsuit against the agency primarily at fault for this unacceptable situation---the ironically named “Water Reclamation District of Great Chicago (MWRD). The USEPA has joined the criticism last week with an official letter to the State of Illinois, calling on its officials to enforce Clean Water Act standards in the River system. Senators and other elected officials have also joined the public outcry for cleaning up the waterway and restoring it to meet acceptable standards for public health and safety.

But this is not just an icky sewer problem. The second boat ride was a rollout for new tools that would be employed in the Chicago River and its 70-odd miles of canals (the Chicago Area Waterway System, or CAWS) to stem the advance of the Asian carp, which are using the waterway’s connection to the Mississippi River system to threaten the Great Lakes. That’s not news to anyone who has been paying attention---plenty of species have headed out the opposite way. Zebra and quagga mussels, round gobies and noxious plants have colonized the Great Lakes before advancing to the Mississippi watershed through the CAWS where they continue a campaign of damage to water quality and infrastructure. In fact, the electric fence that is supposed to protect Lake Michigan from the Asian carp menace was originally designed to stop round gobies from moving towards the Mississippi (spoiler alert: it didn’t).

More expansively: these “gee whiz” approaches to whacking big head and silver carp aren’t up to the real fight. High intensity “water guns”…nano poisons. They represent a “seek and destroy” mentality that misses the big problem here: the CAWS is always going to be a threat to funnel critters between the ecosystems. Asian carp aren’t the only ones cruising on it. But there is so much attention to the big, bad jumping fish that those tasked with fighting the onslaught are contorting themselves to battle only Asian carp. That ignores all the other species queued up. And leaves us still oddly exposed to the next invasion---whether it be smaller animals, plants or viruses.

For both issues, poo in the water and invasive species, the solutions are pretty clear---and related. Fixing the waterway can improve water quality, stop chronic basement floods throughout the region and rebuff ALL invasive species trying to muck up two of the most important water resources in this hemisphere. NRDC has already outlined how simple barriers, with off-the-shelf technology, can effectively shut the invasive species threat permanently with a reasonable price tag. Augmenting the overtaxed water system with the green technologies that the City of Chicago is already using, we can cut down or eliminate the massive pollution plume that results from the outdated combined sewer system that plagues this region---and complicates the carp solutions. And by rejoining the rest of the civilized world by ending the practice of dumping effluent laden with living germs from “human waste” that we can eliminate the rogue’s gallery of waterborne diseases harbored in the river that flows through our glittering Loop.

Looking at each of these separately, it is easy to get caught up in myopic fights. But take a step back. Together, these actions protect billions in fishing and tourism industries for the Lake while also cementing value along the riverbanks where so many people now live and recreate. I’d love to say that we can tie this all up in a cheap and easy package with a bow on top. We cannot. The issue of commerce on the river needs to be addressed in a way that puts more goods on the river, not less. We think that is doable and will be a big part of studies to come. And admittedly, these solutions come with a price tag, but the status quo is anything but free---it costs us more and more each day.

Given the attention that the fights over carp and disinfection have elicited, there are actually resources that will flow into the region to address them. It is a unique spot that requires thoughtful planning. Money coming in to deal with disinfection of water dumped into the river highlight the broader inadequacy of our water system and the need to use innovative tools, such as green infrastructure to help keep stormwater from overwhelming it. And there is growing agreement that the Asian carp issue is not a “Chicago problem,” though it will require a “Chicago solution.” That also means money spent in the river system. We can either spend the cash on underwhelming measures and ineffective gadgets like bubble walls, water guns and electric fences---or we can look at the big picture and fix two of our most vexing issues at once. Considering these issues in tandem, not apart, will help to ensure that whatever solutions come together will help to fix the river once and for all---ending the flooded basements and ecological damage that have been a building plague over the last century.

In the meantime, maybe this sums up the current status of both issues:

I think they meant "silver carp" image by Ro'smom via Flickr

You Can't Have a Third World River Mucking Up a World-Class City

2011-05-18T21:17:36Z

Henry Henderson, Director, Midwest Program NRDC, Chicago, Illinois

This week, I cannot help but think back to one of the most infamous water pollution stories in Chicago’s history---the Dave Mathews Band. You may remember that their tour bus emptied its toilet tanks into the Chicago River while passing over a bridge, unwittingly drenching passengers on a sightseeing boat. What I have come to realize was that the issue was not the dumping of sewage, but the failure to go through the only authorized distributor in the area: the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District.

For years many in Chicagoland have fought to clean up the Chicago River. And while huge strides have been made, one massive obstacle has prevented real action---sadly, it’s the regulators responsible for the Chicago Waterways. MWRD has made our exceptional river into an embarrassing national exception as one of the only waterways where the dumping of partially treated sewage is accepted. The District’s water treatment plants have for decades made a practice of releasing “undisinfected effluent” into the river. That is a nice way of saying water rife with…ahem…poo germs and a rogue’s gallery of waterborne diseases that we associate with the third world, not our glittering Loop. Despite political pressure from the Feds, the State, the City and a mess of motivated environmental organizations the District’s elected board has steadfastly fought for the right to dump their dirty water---and spent millions of taxpayer dollars to fight off efforts to bring their operations in line with every other major city in the nation (Detroit, Philadelphia, Portland, Cleveland, New York and even Gary, IN disinfect---as do most of the major cities across the globe).

But this week, happily, cracks have appeared in the united front.

If you’ve watched the news, you have likely seen the story broken by the Trib’s Michael Hawthorne about the Environmental Protection Agency signalling that they have enough of the District’s dumping and sent a letter to the State of Illinois instructing them to put higher water cleanliness standards in place “expeditiously.” The District claimed that was a waste of money... Yesterday, the nonprofit organization American Rivers announced that the Chicago River was amongst the waterways ignominiously included in their list of the nation’s most endangered rivers due to the ongoing disregard for ecological and human health from MWRD. The story ran on every TV station in town and included this story on FOX-Chicago News:

Chicago River on Most Endangered Waterways List: MyFoxCHICAGO.com

It is an interesting piece for two reasons. First off, I love my colleague Ann Alexander’s quote. “Fact is, you cannot have a third world river running through the heart of a world-class city.” That really sums up the embarrassing disservice that the District inflicts on our region. Secondly, the comments from Commissioner Mike Alvarez make clear that the unified pro-poo front that has dominated the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District is disintegrating. Commissioner Deborah Shore released a similar statement this morning noting that it was, finally, time to disinfect. These sentiments were also carried by Mayor Emanuel who noted that we have to keep our yards clean: both our beloved front yard, Lake Michigan, and our neglected back yard, the river. Statements from Senator Durbin and a forceful editorial in today’s Chicago Tribune continued the drumbeat. It is time for MWRD to get in line. And it feels to me like this is going to happen quickly.

But despite my excitement at the possibility of finally getting traction towards a solution to the longstanding problem, there is some danger on the horizon. Cleaning the river is an opportunity to really start fixing our region’s dilapidated water infrastructure. As we noted when announcing a suit against MWRD earlier this month, there is apparently a consent decree being brokered between EPA and the District. And from what we have seen it is incredibly weak. It lacks the bite or resources that were included in a recently inked deal with the water regulators in Cleveland (Ann’s blog post really lays out the issues nicely). Most notably, it lacks a real push on green infrastructure---using natural elements to collect, hold and clean stormwater before it gets into a sewer system and causes basement flooding or river sewage pollution. It is absolutely, positively central to a real fix of our problems in Chicagoland. Why should Cleveland get a thoughtful, modern, flexible solution and not Chicago? Beats me, but with all the pressure for river cleanup I can see a willingness to push a bad agreement through quickly so that folks can wash their hands of this ugliness as quickly as possible without really fixing the problem. That would be a third world solution for a world-class problem…

Chicago River from the Lake Street Bridge image via WikiCommons