The Environmental Protection Agency has reached a tentative settlement in a lawsuit over the agency's failure to make Pennsylvania abide by the same clean water requirements as other states in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
The 2020 lawsuit demanded the agency enforce the Chesapeake Clean Water Blueprint, a multistate compact which sets limits on the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment flowing into the bay from watershed states.
The suit contended the agency did not do enough to compel Pennsylvania to create and implement a plan to meet pollution goals.
Harry Campbell, science policy director for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, predicted the proposed settlement will bring new attention from the agency to address problems.
"It will help direct and concentrate the energies and authorities under the Environmental Protection Agency to help pinpoint those locations that are significant sources of pollution at the local level," Campbell outlined. "Then deliver the resources and mechanisms to help solve those pollution sources."
He pointed out the majority of the pollution is farm runoff. The suit was filed in 2020 by the states of Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, as well as the District of Columbia, Anne Arundel County, Maryland along with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and other environmental groups.
The Clean Water Blueprint set a total maximum daily load for pollutants in the watershed, in order to rehabilitate waters in the bay and tidal rivers. Campbell noted Pennsylvania's inaction has had huge impacts on the bay.
"Pennsylvania is a significant part of the overall Chesapeake Bay Watershed," Campbell explained. "The Chesapeake Bay Watershed is 64,000 square miles in size. The Susquehanna River basin or watershed is almost 28,000 square miles in size."
He added the Susquehanna River is the largest source of freshwater entering the bay.
Under the proposed agreement, the EPA will focus on Pennsylvania counties contributing the most pollution and have the largest impact on local rivers and streams. Campbell stressed while the agency will look at urban problems like stormwater runoff, the greatest impact on the watershed is from agriculture.
"Agricultural activities represent the largest source of nitrogen, phosphorus, as well as sediment pollution; not only to our local rivers and streams, but also to the Chesapeake Bay," Campbell emphasized. "Just over 60% of the nitrogen that Pennsylvania delivers to the Chesapeake Bay is from agricultural activity."
Disclosure: The Chesapeake Bay Foundation contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Rural/Farming, Sustainable Agriculture, and Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A new report found four dams in the Columbia River Basin are big emitters of methane.
Research from the organization Tell The Dam Truth showed the four lower Snake River dams in eastern Washington emit the equivalent of 1.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year.
Robin Everett, deputy western region field director for the Sierra Club, said it undercuts some of the claims the dams are helping provide the region with clean energy.
"It's really clear from this report that we have to take this a lot more seriously that there are some real impacts as far as emissions go from these dams," Everett asserted.
The reports showed the dams produce the equivalent emissions of burning 2 billion pounds of coal annually. Defenders of the dams counted they are important for barging and irrigation for the area's agricultural lands.
But Everett pointed out the dams have another effect on the region: they block the dwindling population of salmon and steelhead from traveling upstream on the Snake River. She noted it not only hurts fish populations but the tribes relying on them.
"We have an obligation for them to be able to fish and if there are no fish to fish, we have broken the treaties," Everett contended
Chinook salmon are also an important source of food for orca on the West Coast. Everett added protecting salmon is important for tribes and the region as a whole.
"Our moral obligation to the salmon and the orca that depend on them are met as well," Everett concluded.
Disclosure: The Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, and Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A proposed pumped-storage hydroelectric facility for Cuffs Run near the Susquehanna River in York County has been challenged by the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.
The foundation filed a motion to intervene in the proceedings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is considering granting a preliminary permit to build a 1.8-mile-long dam for the project.
Harry Campbell, science policy and advocacy director for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said they are working to stop the project in order to protect the unique Cuffs Run area and its ecological benefits for future generations.
"If approved, this project would destroy it about 580 acres of prime farmland, fields and forests, some of which have not been disturbed in about 100 years," Campbell pointed out. "Those farms, fields and forests exist harmoniously with and in support of a plethora of plant and animal life."
The foundation is circulating an online petition and encouraged Pennsylvanians to provide comments before Sunday.
The stream is home to naturally reproducing brook trout. Advocates worry the $2.5 billion project would also be harmful to the Susquehanna River. Campbell noted about 40 families would be displaced.
"For those who call Cuffs Run home, it's more than just a place to live. It's their heritage and they want it to be part of their legacy," Campbell asserted. "This project just simply is the wrong idea in the wrong place. In order to honor that heritage and that legacy, we need to preserve this area."
Campbell emphasized the Cuffs Run project is about 993 acres of land draining into a 2.5-mile unnamed tributary. He added in terms of stream habitat, the rocks, pebbles and woody material have been identified as among the best in the region for supporting critters living in the water.
Disclosure: The Chesapeake Bay Foundation contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Rural/Farming, Sustainable Agriculture, and Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Tennesseans want more say in how the Tennessee Valley Authority plans for their future electricity needs and a bill now in Congress could give the public more influence.
The "TVA Increase Rate of Participation Act," would require a more open decision-making process for the utility.
Brianna Knisley, director of public power campaigns for Appalachian Voices, said the TVA is currently developing its new Integrated Resource Plan to meet future energy demands. The bill would require more public participation in the plan's proceedings.
"Right now the stakeholders who get to provide input early on in the IRP process are all hand-selected by TVA," Knisley pointed out. "You can't choose to be in that IRP working group. And those are the only folks who get substantial input in the architecture of the IRP, as it's being designed."
The utility serves more than 10 million people across six states. The TVA said it is reviewing the legislation. A draft of the plan will be published at a later date. The TVA said it already has a "robust stakeholder engagement plan."
After the plan is released, Knisley noted public input happens during what's known as the scoping phase of the National Environmental Policy Act. Open houses are set up, where the TVA answers questions from the public. Knisley encouraged Tennesseans to raise any of their concerns during the public and virtual hearings.
"I think additional public input into our region's long-term energy plan is only going to strengthen outcomes," Knisley contended. "And make that long-term energy plan better meet the needs of the Tennessee Valley, as a whole."
She added it is important for Tennesseans to work with Congress on the best way to improve public input in the TVA decision-making process.
Disclosure: Appalachian Voices contributes to our fund for reporting on Energy Policy, Environment, Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email