The Cadmus Blog

Managing Water Flow, Not Just Pollution

Among water managers, experts and consultants I respect, I hear more and more discussion of the need to sustainably manage water flow and less and less about managing water pollution per se.

Section 101 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) states: “it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters be eliminated by 1985.”  Notwithstanding tremendous progress over the years, this aspirational goal of “zero discharge” ran up against the hard realities of limited dollars, limited technology and, as it turned out, limited legal authority in the CWA to regulate nonpoint source pollution (e.g., agricultural runoff), impervious surfaces and stormwater resulting from local land use decisions.

We have done a fairly decent job as a nation, in controlling traditional point-source pollution from large municipal and industrial sources coming out of the end of a pipe.  To the extent we have made substantial progress on this front, we now realize how much more needs to be done “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters” also mentioned in Section 101 of the CWA.

Why strive to manage flow and not just pollutants?  First, managing pollutants only causes managers and regulators to focus narrowly on the chemical component of aquatic ecosystems.  This is important from a human health perspective, and it has been addressed effectively over the years.  But it tends to overlook the physical and biological pieces of the puzzle. 

In recent years scientists have come to appreciate the importance of the “natural flow regime-its variable pattern of high and low flows throughout the year as well as across many years…”  A fine statement of the case for paying attention to the flow regime, not just minimum flows and water quality, was the publication of Rivers For Life: Managing Water For People And Nature by Sandra Postel and Brian Richter (Island Press 2003).

Each element of the natural flow regime does important work for river systems.  According to Postel and Richter:

Flood flows cue fish to spawn and trigger insects to begin a new phase of their life cycle…while very low flows may be critical to the recruitment of riverside (or riparian) vegetation. 

Dams, diversions, levees and other structural interventions disrupt water flow and, just as importantly, the transport of sediment which nourishes floodplains, deltas, and estuaries (think about the disappearing Gulf coast!).

Another reason to focus on managing flow as a paramount objective is the need to be more efficient and conserve water.  Whether in the Colorado River Basin or the southeastern United States, drought, climate variability and growing populations are stressing water supplies.  Emphasizing water reuse and recycling gets you two birds with one stone: you conserve water while reducing discharges of water of varying levels of pollution.

Focusing on water flow inevitably leads you to manage the landscape to protect forests, wetlands and other natural vegetation to reduce agricultural nonpoint source pollution and urban stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces such as roads, sidewalks, parking lots and roofs.  This, in turns, allows for reduction in pollutants, water temperature and velocity of the runoff which protects water quality and biota in streams and tributaries.  It helps maintain a more natural flow regime generally.

These are very provisional thoughts, but I think the focus on flow management, not just pollutants, has much to recommend it.  It can yield lower costs in reducing chemical pollution while generating multiple environmental benefits or ecological services such as habitat, water and energy savings, carbon sequestration, mitigation of urban heat islands, biodiversity and aesthetic beauty.  What’s not to like?

Go with the flow.

G. Tracy Mehan, III
Principal

August 7, 2008

The Next Generation Environmental Assurance Function

Corporations are facing new and more challenging demands related to the many roles society expects them to play. In the past, corporations simply were expected to comply with regulatory requirements. Today their reputations increasingly are being linked to environmental sustainability and corporate social responsibility. Consequently, the historic function of providing assurance to management that the company’s operations are in compliance is changing in fundamental ways along the lines of resources, transparency, third-party attestations, metrics, and liability reporting.

Resources:  In the past, the assurance function was staffed primarily by technical experts (e.g., in air pollution control or industrial hygiene) who could verify compliance with applicable governmental requirements. As other issues have emerged (e.g., stakeholder requests for information about contributions to local communities, the sustainability of current operating practices, and the long-term health and environmental impacts of operational emissions), new skills and expertise are required to maintain an effective assurance function that increasingly addresses issues related to life cycle analysis, stakeholder engagement, and finance.

Transparency:  Demands for corporate transparency are not going away. In fact, we expect external stakeholders will request even more information, particularly so they can better understand a company’s motivation and philosophy towards the environment and social responsibility. As a consequence, the assurance function is looking beyond the corporation as staff members participate in annual shareholder meetings or in focus sessions to discuss performance and answer stakeholders’ questions about current and new compliance and sustainability programs.

Third-party opinions:  As the assurance function has looked increasingly outwards, the public’s demands for independent affirmations of corporate performance have grown. As a result, third-party opinions in the form of attestations, certifications, and ratings have become commonplace features of the assurance function.

Metrics:  Many companies adhere to the philosophy that “What gets measured gets managed,” and the use of metrics in the assurance function has grown tremendously over the past several years. Our corporate social responsibility work leads us to conclude that organizations should define new sets of performance metrics—and many already have. Doing so means thinking outside the “compliance assurance box” to establish indicators—such as reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and the verification of those reductions.

Liability reporting: Since the passage of Sarbanes-Oxley and the advent of its new accounting standards, environmental assurance has captured the attention of the financial and accounting worlds. New requirements and standards for reporting environmental liabilities have created the need for validation of how companies estimate and report environmental costs related to their operations and assets. Pressure from shareholders and regulators is driving companies to look for increased assurance that their environmental costs and liabilities are accurately characterized, measured, and verified.

The environmental assurance function is undergoing a transformation. Its continued success as a key business function will be related to the specific steps a company takes to address stakeholder requests for more information and how it communicates the materiality of key environmental and social issues.

Jane E. Obbagy
Vice President

July 25, 2008

Thinking About Global Climate Change

It is astonishing how fast the phrase “global climate change” has become commonplace in the U.S.  Although there are still skeptics about the human-induced aspects of climate change, it is well accepted that human activities are responsible for the increase of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases such as methane.  Many scientists and policy-makers are calling for a drastic reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.  In fact, just this month, two sobering reports on the effects of climate change have come out.  One report “Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing Climate,” predicts that man-made global warming will increase the number of extreme weather events such as the devastating floods in the Midwest, drought conditions in the Southeast, and the unusual number of tornados in the U.S. during the first half of 2008.  Second, U.S. intelligence agencies have produced a National Intelligence Assessment of the national security implications of climate change.

While the debate on how to stabilize atmospheric carbon dioxide levels wages on within the scientific and policy-making arenas, a number of mitigating options are being examined and evaluated.  In their article in the August 13, 2004 issue of Science, Stephen Pacala and Robert Socolow, recognizing that there is no “silver bullet” that will accomplish the necessary reductions, presented an approach using “stabilization wedges” to mitigate emissions of carbon dioxide.  The stabilization wedges involve a variety of commercial/industrial technologies, such as carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) at coal and natural gas-fired power plants; design of energy-efficient buildings (e.g., using Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System™); and effective land management (e.g., reduced deforestation and conservation tillage to cropland).  Others involve individual efforts such as driving efficient vehicles (e.g., hybrid cars); reducing vehicle use (e.g., using public transit); and making behavioral changes to improve water and energy efficiency.

Solving this global problem will not be easy at the individual and national levels; nevertheless, we must start somewhere.  Personally, I believe we, as a nation and as individuals, should invest in a diverse portfolio of stabilization strategies, and I am excited to talk to my fellow staff about how they—through the course of their professional work and in their personal choices—are supporting many of these strategies.  For example, Cadmus promotes EPA’s ENERGY STAR® Program, supports the development of a regulation on geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide, and supports education and certification for LEED.  Cadmus staff support the Watertown (Mass.) Solar Challenge Committee, boast about the use of energy efficient upgrades to their homes, and make fuel-efficient choices in coming to work.  Hopefully, we can continue to collectively minimize our “foot-prints” and work with our government and multi-national corporations to deploy the various carbon dioxide stabilization strategies.

Chi Ho Sham
Vice President

June 24, 2008

Cadmus on first glance seems like a progressive outfit. When considering renewable sources of energy along with the fact that most environmental problems today are man-made, you may wish to consider unified field based technologies of consciousness. Otherwise, as history has so aptly demonstrated, partial scientific understanding of laws of nature just leads to one crisis after another.

Scott Lary

July 28, 2008

Climate change is certainly an interesting focus of our work at Cadmus, and these are exciting times for those of us who have been supporting EPA’s efforts related to geologic sequestration (GS) of CO2.  EPA’s Administrator signed a proposed regulation with standards for GS wells on July 15, 2008—this was the Agency’s first proposed rule to address climate change. 

EPA needs to follow accelerated rulemaking to keep pace with the anticipated rapid development and implementation of GS.  To that end, Cadmus supported the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program on an ambitious effort to prepare a proposed rulemaking package in nine months.  We have been busy preparing technical and issue papers on GS technologies, estimating the cost of the proposed rule, and planning workshops at which experts from around the world shared expertise that was critical to the development of the technical specifications in the proposed regulation.

Many people at Cadmus have been working with the UIC program for years, and it is exciting that this long-standing injection technology is turning into a promising option to reduce CO2 emissions and address climate change.

Shari Ring
Senior Associate 

July 21, 2008

First Entry

This is the first entry to a new Cadmus blog aimed at providing insight on some of the critical and current environmental, energy, and public health challenges facing our clients—and society at large.  On a regular basis, Cadmus experts will use this space to weigh in on issues that are in the news or on our minds.   We’ll offer opinions and solutions and we hope that you’ll share your thoughts and give us feedback on what we’ve proposed. 

Why are we starting a blog?  Well, for one, we think we have ideas and innovative approaches that can be applied to solve many of the difficult issues stressing our natural environment and threatening public health.  This blog is one way to share and improve those ideas and approaches.  More importantly, we believe that the complex and deeply intertwined challenges that we face today—from climate change, to the availability of clean and safe water, to the impact of indoor environments on children’s health—require dialogue and multi-disciplinary thinking.  Blogs and other Web 2.0 tools allow for that kind of exchange to happen in a way that can involve not only our in-house experts, but anyone with an interest and an idea to share.  As a firm, we’ve always believed in the power and necessity of cross-discipline and cross-media approaches to solving environmental and public health problems, so this opportunity to engage a broader community of thinkers is something we find very exciting.

While I plan to periodically contribute to this blog, I intend to leave most of the heavy lifting to my talented and knowledgeable colleagues, whose expertise and passion for their work will more often than not result in thoughtful—and thought-provoking—content.  While they’ll set the initial direction for each discussion on this blog, it will only succeed and serve its intended purpose if you share your thoughts, ideas, and feedback.  So please do.   We hope you find our contributions informative and valuable and we look forward to learning from yours.

Warm regards,

Ian Kline, President and CEO

June 1, 2008

Erik Harper

June 13, 2008