« Indiana Government - Campaign contributions by Daniels' appointees | Main | Indiana Government - Courier Journal series on video gambling »
Sunday, December 12, 2004
Environment - Two important stories today
Great Lakes. "The Great Divide: Battle line drawn in water wars - Region growth crossing into areas where Lake Michigan water forbidden," is the headline to this story today by Brendan O'Shaughnessy in the Munster Times. Some quotes from this lengthy story:
INDIANAPOLIS | There is a line, an invisible divider, that cuts through the heart of the Calumet region. On one side sits the area's greatest natural asset, which provides almost unlimited access to about 90 percent of the country's fresh surface water supply. On the other side, in some spots in view of Lake Michigan, are those who can't touch the region's "blue gold."More on the Great Lakes plan can be found in this ILB entry from Nov. 21st, quoting from an LA Times story (that unfortunately is no longer freely available).As with the Greek mythic figure Tantalus, the water may always be out of reach for some. In an increasingly thirsty world, the line can mean more than just clean, cheap public drinking water. It can determine economic development and sprawl, as the region's population shifts year by year to the wrong side of the great divide.
"It's not going to be easy to get water if you're below the line," said Jeff Edstrom, a Chicago environmental consultant who is working on a new region water study. "A place like Lowell can see the water -- but never get it."
Like oil before it, fresh water is expected to become a hot commodity this century. Outlandish plans to divert lake water to arid regions -- such as a pipeline to the Southwest or ship tankers headed for Asia -- have some government officials and environmentalists on edge and have prompted a new international agreement that will have far-reaching effects, including in Indiana.
Governors from the Great Lakes states took public comments this fall on a draft framework for managing the lakes, including conservation and clear guidelines for withdrawals. The controversial plan, known as Annex 2001, could be signed by the governors in spring 2005 and sent to Congress and state legislatures after that. Annex 2001 would set in stone practices for limiting use of Great Lakes water to those inside its watershed basin, which is the boundary separating the direction water flows.
In the Calumet region, the basin line runs a jagged path that can shift over time. Like a minicontinental divide, rain falling on the northern side of this line eventually drains into Lake Michigan. On the southern side, rain drains into the Kankakee River Basin to the Mississippi River and into the Gulf of Mexico. This water is lost to the vast underground aquifers that provide up to 40 percent of the lake's annual resupply.
Growing communities in the south end of Lake and Porter counties draw from abundant but not infinite supplies of groundwater, which can be more costly, unreliable and unhealthy than lake water.
Ironically, projections show Northwest Indiana expects to use less of its abundant lake water supply; the need for groundwater will grow in the region's south-county areas.
"I'm not sure if it's the holy grail, but Lake Michigan is the top choice for water here," said Randy Moore, manager of Indiana American Water's Northwest operations, which provide most of the region's public supply. "It's by far the cleanest in this area, so it doesn't require the same level of treatment as groundwater."
[Update 12/13/04] The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette has this editorial today on "Protecting the Great Lakes."
Sewage Treatment in Floyd County. The Louisville Courier-Journal has a report today titled "Changes offered to Floyd ordinance: Easing of sewer rules suggested." Some quotes:
A committee reviewing Floyd County's ordinance guiding subdivision development has recommended easing some of the requirements for the use of sewer systems and increasing the local regulation of runoff from subdivisions. * * *The Plan Commission created the committee to review the subdivision ordinance, which was enacted Jan. 1, and to consider a number of changes proposed by citizens' groups and developers soon after it became law.
The committee recommendations include:
Making it optional for developers to connect new subdivisions to municipal sewer systems if they are within one-third of a mile of the development. The language in the ordinance now requires such connections. Eliminating language in the ordinance that requires developers to provide easements for sewer-system connections if there is a plan to build a public system in the area within 10 years. Requiring protective buffers of trees and other landscaping between all truck docks and public streets. Making homeowners associations, rather than the county, responsible for the maintenance of dams and replacement of roads lost because of dam failures in subdivisions. Requiring the Plan Commission to investigate complaints about runoff from subdivisions under construction within 10 days and requiring developers to solve such complaints quickly. Panel president concerned. Plan Commission President Paul Riggs said he is concerned about some of the recommendations, particularly those that weaken language encouraging the connection of new subdivisions to sewers.
Riggs said he realizes sewer construction is an important issue in the county, with many residents who now use septic systems concerned they might be forced to connect to sewers. But the county's comprehensive plan encourages sewer use, Riggs said, and recommended changes to the subdivision ordinance that aren't in line with the comprehensive plan may not be approved. * * *
Brian Zipperle, a resident of the Greenville area and a member of the committee, said he hopes the recommendations will be adopted quickly. One of his concerns — and a major concern of many of his neighbors — wasn't addressed by the committee, Zipperle said. That concern is about standards for the operation of new sewage-treatment plants.
One issue sidestepped. Many residents wanted high performance standards — requiring the best treatment technology available — to be required in the ordinance. Some developers and engineers argued, however, that local standards shouldn't be set higher than the standard technology approved by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management.
The committee decided not to take on that tough issue, Zipperle said, because a lawsuit had been pending that involved the Plan Commission and a development company. Since then the litigation has been withdrawn, Zipperle said. So he plans to bring the issue up at the public hearing that will be held on the recommendations.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 12, 2004 05:18 PM
Posted to Environment