HARRISBURG, Pa. – Pennsylvania is falling behind in its efforts to clean up water flowing into the Chesapeake Bay.

Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia are supposed to achieve 60 percent of court ordered Chesapeake Bay pollution reduction goals by 2017.

But according to Harry Campbell, executive director of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation's Pennsylvania office, an assessment released Friday by the Environmental Protection Agency shows the state is only on track to meet that goal for reducing sediment pollution.

"But is languishing significantly behind on its efforts to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus pollution, mainly from agricultural runoff sources," he adds.

States have until 2025 to have full pollution-reduction practices in place. The EPA can apply sanctions if goals are not being met, and the agency did withhold, and then release, $2.9 million in funding last year.

The Susquehanna River is the largest source of pollution flowing into the bay. In January, the state unveiled a clean water reboot plan that Campbell says could get pollution reduction efforts back on track.

"But unfortunately, without the necessary funding it will not succeed,” he explains. “And sadly, it is still unclear when or if those vital resources will be made available."

The EPA recommends inspecting 10 percent of the 33,000 farms in the watershed every year, but the state Department of Environmental Protection doesn't have enough inspectors to do that.

Campbell points out the know how is there. Much of the science and technology needed to reach the EPA goals was developed right here in Pennsylvania.

"What we lack is the leadership, the commitment and the investment to do what needs to be done, and clean our waters, and ultimately the Chesapeake Bay," he states.

Campbell says Pennsylvania needs to take decisive action now, before the EPA does it for the state.





get more stories like this via email

The Inflation Reduction Act turns two today and one expert contended its impact in the state of Nevada has been significant.

Shannon Heyck-Williams, associate vice president of climate and energy for the National Wildlife Federation, said the legislation has kicked off growth in the clean energy economy in the Silver State and across the nation. She added the benefits made possible through the law have led to the creation of thousands of jobs and unleashed billions of dollars in private-sector investments at the state level.

"A lot of that growth is from renewable energy development," Heyck-Williams pointed out. "Solar power in particular is taking off in a big way in Nevada, and bringing that clean energy to the state and to the residents there."

She noted as the transition to electric vehicles also gains momentum, the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law include investments for EV charging infrastructure. There are close to 2,200 charging stations throughout Nevada, according to PlugShare. Since transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, Heyck-Williams stressed investments in infrastructure are key.

The cost of the climate provisions in the measure, at around $730 billion, has drawn criticism, since it surpasses what was initially expected. But the Center for American Progress claims over the next decade, the savings made possible through the legislation will exceed the costs.

Heyck-Williams said the law is also helping to lessen the economic burden of energy-efficiency upgrades for homes and businesses.

"It includes credits to help homeowners be able to upgrade their appliances," Heyck-Williams outlined. "To be able to finally afford that new electric vehicle, to be able to replace dirty school buses for their kids with electric, clean school buses."

Heyck-Williams emphasized climate change is already here and is a serious problem communities in Nevada are facing. She contends the major federal investments are critical tools for a cleaner future.

"If they are implemented as planned, they should reduce those emissions by about 40%," Heyck-Williams reported. "Which is significant and puts us on track in the direction that we need to go, to actually get to a midcentury goal of net-zero emissions overall."

Pittsburgh is emerging as a leader in innovative solutions like electric vehicles and clean energy to combat the climate crisis. The group Elected Officials to Protect America says in 2022, electric vehicle registrations increased by about 82% from the previous year.

Rep. Emily Kinkead, D-Allegheny County, envisions Pittsburgh as a future leader in the green economy, bolstered by strong labor unions and academic institutions.

"So whether it's solar for schools, or capping oil wells or any number of things that move us away from fossil fuels, transitioning over to electric vehicles. Transitioning away from fossil fuels is a huge way that we can make sure that we are protecting our citizens now," she explained.

The state is using funds from sources like the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes a historic investment of $370 billion to fight climate change over the next decade. Pennsylvania's goal of reducing emissions by 50% by 2030 is the same target President Joe Biden set for the nation.

Erika Strassburger, Pittsburgh City Council member, said the biggest benefit of the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure law - especially in western Pennsylvania and Pittsburgh - is that they've been major job creators.

"You don't have to go too far outside of Pittsburgh, to the Mon Valley, to see 600 new jobs created in a battery manufacturing plant that will help the electrification of our vehicles and of our systems. And those are jobs that wouldn't have otherwise been created without these federal investments," she explained.

Strassburger pointed out federal funding will allow Pittsburgh to invest $15 million in electric vehicles for its city fleet, and she added that the transition is expected to save energy, reduce gas consumption, and ultimately save taxpayer dollars in the long run.

"If we can expand that, which is our intention to reduce the energy burden - for starting with 100 City of Pittsburgh residents by the end of this year, and then over the next six years, do so for 10,000 residents across the region - that means that the greatest benefit we're seeing is people paying less out of their paycheck toward energy" she continued.

Pennsylvania has seen a significant increase in EV purchases. At the start of this year, more than 47,000 electric vehicles were registered in the state.

Iowa has thousands fewer square miles than Nebraska but it has almost 3,000 more concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs.

Opponents of the giant facilities argue there are enough. The increase in CAFOs nationwide has fueled opposition from nearby residents, along with environmental and animal rights groups.

In Iowa, one grassroots group has prevented around 100 of them from being built. Barb Kalbach, president of Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, attributes Iowa's dismal water quality in large part to runoff from animal waste, applied to farm fields along with commercial fertilizer. Kalbach thinks rural Nebraska communities should also oppose such developments.

"That manure has to go somewhere," Kalbach pointed out. "It's not a question of, 'Well, should I, or I shouldn't I, put it on the ground,' you know? It's got to go. They've got to empty the pit, and so it's going to go. And if you have any kind of water issues whatsoever, people need to organize immediately."

The Environmental Protection Agency calls animal manure "a primary source of nitrogen and phosphorus to surface and groundwater." Roughly 20% of public water supplies and private wells in Nebraska test above recommended nitrate and nitrogen levels.

Jonathan Leo, a Nebraska environmental and land-use attorney, said CAFO owners usually contract with local farmers to use the animal waste. He noted for the largest operations, the massive amount of waste makes a methane digester system imperative.

"It breaks down manure into methane, which is a major greenhouse gas, for sale as an energy source to third parties," Leo explained. "And digestate, which is sold to off-site farmers as a nutrient additive to soil."

Leo and others helped residents of a small Nebraska town prevent development of a CAFO by an Iowa producer for more than 6,000 head of swine. Leo pointed out many who opposed it were farmers themselves.

"We worked with them about how to organize and understand their county's ordinance, with respect to CAFO permitting," Leo recounted. "And they appeared before their county board and their planning commission in a way that their own supervisors said, 'We've never seen this kind of citizen activism before.'"

The defeated operation would have been about a half-mile uphill from a stream which feeds a state recreation area lake used for swimming, boating and fishing.

As a result of a lawsuit by Food and Water Watch, the Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to begin studying the polluting effects of CAFOs, after years of being urged to do so.