One of the many issues America faces today is the water crisis. The water system is failing, affecting individual households and communities.
Every day, the authorities face a huge challenge in solving the issue and replacing the water infrastructure.
The American Society of Civil Engineers, or the ASCE, stated that the government must invest around $3.6 trillion in infrastructure by 2020. Such an investment can increase the support system of America to the standard levels. This investment can also repair the nation’s stormwater and wastewater systems over 20 years.
In some parts of America, unmanaged stormwater systems affect the streams and rivers and cause health problems.
Furthermore, most of the drinking infrastructure is aging and almost falling apart.
According to studies, there are about 240,000 water main breaks annually in America. For every pipe that needs to be replaced, the cost in the coming years can reach up to $1 trillion, according to the American Water Works Association (AWWA).
Indeed, America's water problem is diverse and worsens over time. If it is not addressed immediately, the repair cost might be higher.
Thus, this article aims to discuss the aging water infrastructure in the United States. It will tackle the brief history of American water systems and provide samples of the government's current efforts to solve the issues of people on the water.
Brief History of the Water Systems in America
Congress amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act in 1972 or the Clean Water Act (CWA).
In this system, the state and the local governments are responsible for establishing the federal standards. Also, this act has updated the construction grants program, which allows municipalities to receive funds to help them restructure their publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs) or sewer systems and make them compliant with federal laws.
Meanwhile 1986, President Ronald Reagan and Congress were concerned about the grant program's expenses. Thus, they changed the source of the fund to the State Revolving Loan Fund or SRF.
Under the SRF, the federal government can provide each state with a grant or capital according to a statutory formula. Then, each state can allow the municipalities to loan funds to repair and upgrade their POTWs and adjoining structures.
In 1996, Congress amended the Safe Drinking Water Act and paved the way for creating the SRF drinking water. This is similar to states that use federal funds and loan them to community water systems to improve water systems.
According to the 2002 Gap Analysis of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), from 1982 to 2002, communities spent $1 trillion on treating drinking water and disposing of wastewater.
However, this is not enough to keep up with the needs of the public since these facilities have become as old as the years have passed.
The data shows that there are 14,478 POTWs, which serve about 75% of the population of about 238 million Americans. POTWs have a life cycle of 20 to 50 years, while pipes can last 15 to 100 years, depending on weather conditions. Some pipes in northeastern cities can last up to 200 years.
Due to people's departures, transfers from the Northeast to the South and the West have caused some areas to decline and be excluded from the cost of the upgrades. Other regions need immediate service expansion.
It must be noted that those who wish to expand their plants due to population growth are not eligible for SRFs.
Despite the standards set by authorities since 1972, about 4 million Americans lack access to basic sewage treatment. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that aging pipes and the system's inadequate capacity result in about 900 billion gallons of untreated wastewater being discharged into the waterways annually.
Apart from the miles of sewer pipes, America has 1.2 million miles of main water supplies, equivalent to 26 miles of water mains for each mile of interstate highway.
Meanwhile, about 21,000 non-profits and 52,000 community water systems (CWSs) exist. About 611 systems serve over 100,000 people, but these huge systems are only 1. percent of the 3 percent needed in the country.
On the other hand, over 41,000 systems serve less than 3,000 people, about 83% of systems from 17% of the need.
This diverse system size complicates the efforts to create a comprehensive financing system that appropriately addresses other water systems' needs.
The Need
Every state has an SRF priority list. It includes each project per state that needed funds from the loan.
However, it is not a complete list of all the needed projects. Some defer the system upgrades because they believe that Congress will one day bring back the construction grants program.
Meanwhile, raising the sewer or water rates is not the best option because the impact rate will increase, especially for low-income customers.
In addition, the state does not prioritize the large system because it can secure low interest rates on the bond market.
Indeed, state lists can give information. However, these are still incomplete.
As such, it is best to rely on the EPA's quadrennial state surveys to determine the level of the nationwide need.
According to a recent EPA survey on the needs, the US government must invest around $271 billion in the next 20 years to upgrade the stormwater or wastewater system and around $384 to upgrade clean drinking water.
Stormwater is one of the largest expenses of most local communities.
The survey conducted by the EPA accounts for 21% only of the stormwater needs.
For years, the EPA and the states have debated the type of documentation needed to justify the costs of the survey.
Many states have tried to explain the benefits of water quality and the costs of a stormwater project completely. The American Water Works Association (AWWA) estimates that the United States must invest around $1 trillion over 25 years to replace all drinking water pipes, sewer lines, and stormwater plants.
AWWA has also included the need to replace the pipes in this estimation, which is not reflected in the EPA survey.
Apart from lacking a vivid national situation, the public is worried and uninformed about the nation's water infrastructure.
For example, reports show that water main breaks are due to their effect on traffic and not because of the amount lost or the cost needed to recoup the water. The general wastes the water, and they don’t find the need to save it for the future.
Nowadays, people view it as a certainty, not a commodity that needs monitoring, conservation, and valuation.
Current Federal Programs
The federal government has various fund mechanisms besides the local and state funds. Here are some of the examples of federal programs:
Clean Water State Revolving Fund of the EPA
The EPA grants funds to the states that provide loans to the communities to build the wastewater treatment infrastructure, estuary programs, and non-point pollution management.
Community Development Block Grant of the Department of Housing and Urban Development
This provides block grant funds for states to distribute in communities and metropolitan areas. The communities use the fund for various activities, including enhancing wastewater and water infrastructures. According to government officials, 10% of the funds are used for this purpose.
Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration, Public Works, and Economic Development Program
This program funds small communities to construct public facilities, including drinking water facilities. It also aims to reduce unemployment in these areas.
US Army Corps of Engineers
This assists with various water and wastewater infrastructure projects in locations authorized by Congress.
Water and Waste Disposal Program of the Department of Agriculture, Rural Utilities Service
This provides funding opportunities for water and wastewater infrastructure projects in areas with fewer than 10,000 people.
Public-Private Partnerships
One alternative to financing and delivering water infrastructure projects is through Public-Private Partnership (P3 or PPP) programs.
In this program, the public agency will enter into agreements with a private association that deals with construction, engineering, design, and operating companies to construct and rehabilitate water facilities. The program also includes maintaining infrastructure facilities like treatment plants, rail lines, and bridges.
This business model transfers project risks, such as schedule delays and cost overruns, to the private partner. The entire water system is sometimes privatized.
Furthermore, in the P3 model, private associations often finance the project's upfront costs with the assurance of repayment plus interest on a certain period.
In the water business sector, repayment can be made from the fees paid by sewer and water service customers. Indeed, P3 can deliver more than what traditional procured goods and services can offer. However, some municipalities only consider the P3 arrangement when their system has failed or cannot look for additional revenue through bonding.
As in Flint, Michigan, municipalities sometimes lack the upfront money to solve rising problems, such as sewer overflows or water standards violations.
Indeed, the P3 model can finance the plants and the underground infrastructure. But sometimes, the replacement of the pipes can face challenges such as the need for the right of way, prevention of the gas and cable line, and obstruction of public transit.
The replacement of pipes is the most expensive part of several water infrastructure projects, and municipalities are not always ready to decide what roles the private sector should play in the project.
Finally, P3s in the water sector often encounter problems from the public. People are concerned that private entities are controlling services. As such, P3s are underutilized in the water sector today.
Berkey Water Filters
Invest in a water filter like the Berkey Water Filters to combat hard water from old pipes.
The Berkey Water Filters can remove fluoride, arsenic, MTBE, and other heavy metal ions.
The system is made of high-quality materials that can last a long time. Go ahead and check the products section here.
Conclusion
Given the various challenges and system risks, the country needs a national and strategic plan to address its current water concerns. Indeed, the aging water infrastructure can affect the health of people and the environment across the country.
The BPC's Executive Council on Infrastructure has recommended attracting additional private capital to help improve America's infrastructure. With the release of the proposals, the BPC has exerted extra effort to find a solution to the funding gap authenticated by the Government Accountability Office and the EPA.
Apart from identifying the best ways for the agency to attract more private capital, the project aims to explore whether or not the current programs of the federal government are the most efficient and effective way to assist communities in their critical and expensive water needs to survive.
← Older Post Newer Post →