Daniel Salzler No. 1205
EnviroInsight.org Four Items June 9, 2023
—————Feel Free To Pass This Along To Others——————
If your watershed is doing something you would like others to know about, or you know
of something others can benefit from, let me know and I will place it in this Information .
If you want to be removed from the distribution list, please let me know.
Please note that all meetings listed are open.
Enhance your viewing by downloading the pdf file to view photos, etc.
The attached is all about improving life in the watershed.
If you want to be removed from the distribution list,
please let me know. Please note that all meetings listed are open.
Check our website at EnviroInsight.org
1. Water Worries Prompt Arizona To Limit Growth In Phoenix Outskirts. The move won’t affect the city much, but stems from a report that examined demand for water over the next century.
By Jim CarltonFollow and Eliza CollinsFollow. Wall Street Journal June 1, 2023 7:22 pm ET
PHOENIX—Arizona paused new approvals on subdivision development in some of this city’s far-flung suburban areas, following a report that determined the fast-growing metropolis doesn’t have enough water to meet estimated demand over the next 100 years.
The report released by Gov. Katie Hobbs on June 1st will primarily affect areas surrounding Phoenix where developers plan large-scale subdivisions that rely on groundwater which has been found in short supply. The state had already determined there wasn’t enough groundwater to support major planned projects in the Buckeye area in western Maricopa County, but this expands the shortfall designation to other high-growth areas including the Queen Creek area in the eastern part of the county.
Subdivisions already approved for development aren’t affected.
“If we do nothing, we could face a 4% shortfall in groundwater supplies over the next 100 years. We have to close this gap and find efficiencies for our water use,” the Democratic governor said in a press conference.
She said the findings triggered a law that pauses approvals of new development permits that would rely on groundwater “ensuring that we don’t add to any future deficit.” Arizona requires certification of a 100-year supply of water to build in most places.
The new rules won’t have much impact on the city of Phoenix and more than a dozen of the biggest cities in the metropolitan area of about five million people because they already have designations of “assured water supply,” said Sarah Porter, director of the Kyl Center for Water Policy at Arizona State University. Although the state has found a groundwater shortage for the whole county, those cities have other sources they rely on more, state officials say.
2. Supreme Court Further Erodes EPA’s Power. Justices limit agency’s authority over wetlands after curbing its role in coal-plant emissions last year. By Jan WolfeFollow and Jess BravinFollow Updated May 25, 2023 5:46 pm ET Wall Street Journal
The Supreme Court limited the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority over wetlands in a decision with broad ramifications for the environment, agriculture, energy and mining.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the Thursday opinion that the Clean Water Act covers only wetlands with a “continuous surface connection” to navigable waters, overturning a 2006 precedent recognizing federal protection for wetlands with a “significant nexus” to such bodies. The new interpretation, Alito wrote, “accords with how Congress has employed the term ‘waters’ elsewhere in the Clean Water Act.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling in the case comes less than a year after it curbed the EPA’s authority to limit emissions from coal plants. In that blockbuster case, West Virginia v. EPA, the court said the EPA had overstepped when it devised the Obama-era regulatory scheme known as the Clean Power Plan.
Joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, Alito praised the Clean Water Act as a “great success” since its 1972 enactment that restored polluted lakes and rivers across the nation. “Today, many formerly fetid bodies of water are safe for the use and enjoyment of the people of this country,” Alito wrote. He characterized the decision as resolving a “nagging question” over the act’s outer boundaries, which the vague language Congress used to define its scope—it protects the “waters of the U.S.”—left unclear.
The court, he wrote, had now provided an answer that would spare property owners the sometimes great expense and even potential criminal liability for misjudging whether their projects were covered by the Clean Water Act.
In a separate opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh criticized Alito’s narrow reading of the act, saying it would undermine federal protection of the Chesapeake Bay and Mississippi River.
“[T]he Court’s new and overly narrow test may leave long-regulated and long-accepted-to-be-regulable wetlands suddenly beyond the scope of the agencies’ regulatory authority, with negative consequences for water of the United States,” Kavanaugh wrote, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Kagan, joined by Sotomayor and Jackson, went further in a separate opinion. The majority, she wrote, put “a thumb on the scale for property owners—no matter that the Act (i.e., the one Congress enacted) is all about stopping property owners from polluting.”
The “ruling returns the scope of the Clean Water Act to its original and proper limits,” said Damien Schiff, an attorney with the organization who argued the case. “Courts now have a clear measuring stick for fairness and consistency by federal regulators.”
President Biden saw it differently.
“Today’s decision upends the legal framework that has protected America’s waters for decades,” he said. “It also defies the science that confirms the critical role of wetlands in safeguarding our nation’s streams, rivers, and lakes from chemicals and pollutants that harm the health and wellbeing of children, families, and communities.”
Biden said the administration will “carefully review this decision and use every legal authority we have to protect our Nation’s waters for the people and communities that depend on them.”
Environmental groups decried Thursday’s decision. “Almost 90 million acres of formerly protected wetlands now face an existential threat from polluters and developers,” said Sam Sankar, vice president of programs at Earthjustice.
“What the court has done is rewrite the law in an extraordinarily aggressive way, going beyond even what the Trump administration would have done,” Sankar said. “When Justice Kavanaugh—no fan of regulation—is saying you’ve gone too far, that is a really compelling point.”
The Clean Water Act prohibits the “discharge of pollutants,” including rocks and sand, into “navigable waters.” mThe EPA has interpreted its jurisdiction broadly to include some wetlands that aren’t directly connected to a body of water, an interpretation it says is necessary to protect against water pollution and consistent with Congress’s intent in passing the landmark environmental-protection law.
There has been fierce debate about what areas fall within the statute’s jurisdiction ever since its enactment.Property owners hoping to build on or dredge wetlands are often required to seek permits from the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, which helps enforce the Clean Water Act.
Trade groups representing oil companies and mining firms had filed briefs urging the court to reach the outcome it did. The EPA’s broad approach to wetlands had created regulatory uncertainty, these groups said.
Farmers’ advocates applauded the high court’s decision, saying it would make it easier for them to do their job with less interference from federal agencies.
The “ruling returns the scope of the Clean Water Act to its original and proper limits,” said Damien Schiff, an attorney with the organization who argued the case. “Courts now have a clear measuring stick for fairness and consistency by federal regulators.”
President Biden saw it differently.
“Today’s decision upends the legal framework that has protected America’s waters for decades,” he said. “It also defies the science that confirms the critical role of wetlands in safeguarding our nation’s streams, rivers, and lakes from chemicals and pollutants that harm the health and wellbeing of children, families, and communities.”
Biden said the administration will “carefully review this decision and use every legal authority we have to protect our Nation’s waters for the people and communities that depend on them.”
Environmental groups decried Thursday’s decision. “Almost 90 million acres of formerly protected wetlands now face an existential threat from polluters and developers,” said Sam Sankar, vice president of programs at Earthjustice.
“What the court has done is rewrite the law in an extraordinarily aggressive way, going beyond even what the Trump administration would have done,” Sankar said. “When Justice Kavanaugh—no fan of regulation—is saying you’ve gone too far, that is a really compelling point.”
The Clean Water Act prohibits the “discharge of pollutants,” including rocks and sand, into “navigable waters.” mThe EPA has interpreted its jurisdiction broadly to include some wetlands that aren’t directly connected to a body of water, an interpretation it says is necessary to protect against water pollution and consistent with Congress’s intent in passing the landmark environmental-protection law.
There has been fierce debate about what areas fall within the statute’s jurisdiction ever since its enactment.Property owners hoping to build on or dredge wetlands are often required to seek permits from the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, which helps enforce the Clean Water Act.
Trade groups representing oil companies and mining firms had filed briefs urging the court to reach the outcome it did. The EPA’s broad approach to wetlands had created regulatory uncertainty, these groups said.
Farmers’ advocates applauded the high court’s decision, saying it would make it easier for them to do their job with less interference from federal agencies.
“It means farmers will be able to farm, whether it’s to plow up a field and plant food crops or create drainage for their property that lets them farm more efficiently,” said Rep. John Duarte (R., Calif.), who grows wine grapes, some nuts and trees in California and has been involved in disputes over water regulations on his land.
3. EPA Spurns Trump-Era Effort to Drop Clean-Air Protections For Plastic Waste Recycling. Affirming long-standing incineration regulations, the Biden administration has withdrawn a plan to help ease the way for unchecked pyrolysis and gasification of plastic.
Reversing its own Trump-era proposal, the Environmental Protection Agency has spurned a lobbying effort by the chemical industry to relax clean-air regulations on two types of chemical or “advanced” recycling of plastics.
The decision, announced by the EPA on May 24, covers pyrolysis and gasification, two processes that use chemical methods to break down plastic waste. Both have largely been regulated as incineration for nearly three decades and have therefore had to meet stringent emission requirements for burning solid waste under the federal Clean Air Act.
Pyrolysis, or the process of decomposing materials at high temperatures in an oxygen-free environment, has been around for centuries. Traditional uses have ranged from making tar from timber for wooden ships to transforming coal into coke for steelmaking.
“Instead of leading to the recovery of plastic and supporting the transition to a circular economy, pyrolysis and gasification lead to the release of more harmful pollutants and greenhouse gases,” 35 lawmakers wrote the EPA last summer. They urged the agency to fully regulate the emissions from chemical recycling as waste combustion and to cease efforts to promote the technology as a solution to the global plastics crisis.
“Chemical recycling contributes to our growing climate crisis and leads to toxic air emissions that disproportionately impact vulnerable communities,” the legislators wrote.
The decision, announced by the EPA on May 24, covers pyrolysis and gasification, two processes that use chemical methods to break down plastic waste. Both have largely been regulated as incineration for nearly three decades and have therefore had to meet stringent emission requirements for burning solid waste under the federal Clean Air Act.
Pyrolysis, or the process of decomposing materials at high temperatures in an oxygen-free environment, has been around for centuries. Traditional uses have ranged from making tar from timber for wooden ships to transforming coal into coke for steelmaking.
“Instead of leading to the recovery of plastic and supporting the transition to a circular economy, pyrolysis and gasification lead to the release of more harmful pollutants and greenhouse gases,” 35 lawmakers wrote the EPA last summer. They urged the agency to fully regulate the emissions from chemical recycling as waste combustion and to cease efforts to promote the technology as a solution to the global plastics crisis.
“Chemical recycling contributes to our growing climate crisis and leads to toxic air emissions that disproportionately impact vulnerable communities,” the legislators wrote.
In a notice to be published in the Federal Register, the EPA left the door open to changing its mind later. It said it has received 170 comments on the 2020 proposal and that it was “evident that pyrolysis is a complex process that is starting to be used in many and varied industries.” The agency said it would need significant time and personnel to analyze the comments and other information to gain a full understanding of pyrolysis.
The world is making twice as much plastic waste as it did two decades ago, with most of the discarded material buried in landfills, burned in incinerators or dumped into the environment, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a forum for developed nations.
Annual production of plastic is expected to triple by 2060 to 1.23 billion metric tons yearly, with OECD countries like the U.S. producing far more per person than their counterparts in Africa and Asia. Only 9 percent of plastic waste is successfully recycled, the organization reports.
The American Chemistry Council, a lobbying group that is working to advance policies that promote chemical recycling, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But last summer, Joshua Baca, vice president for plastics at the council, said that the regulatory changes were necessary.
“The appropriate regulation of this is really critical if you want to scale advanced recycling, and you want to use more recycled material in your products,” Baca said.
The lobbying group has also helped persuade 24 states, most recently Indiana in April, to pass legislation recognizing advanced recycling as manufacturing rather than waste management, another path toward easing regulation of the fledgling industry.
Environmental advocates celebrated the EPA’s decision, saying it would help their groups and local communities fight for cleaner air amid the expansion of chemical recycling. Source: Inside Climate News. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/03062023/epa-pyrolysis-plastic-recycling-clean-air/
4. Five Ways For You And Your ChildrenTo Save Water This Summer. Hey there! It’s Wayne Drop, your favorite water-saving pal from Water – Use It Wisely. As school ends and summer begins, it’s time to unleash your water-saving powers at home! I’ve got five splash-tastic ways to conserve water during your epic summer break. After all, it’s a break from school, not from saving water.
1. Turn Off the Faucet When Brushing Teeth
Did you know that leaving the faucet running while brushing your teeth can waste up to four gallons of water per minute? That’s a lot! To save water and make a difference, simply turn off the faucet while you brush. It’s a simple habit that will help conserve water and protect our planet. While you’re at it, remind your parents to turn off their faucet when they brush their teeth, too!
2. Take Refreshing, Short Showers.
There’s nothing quite as refreshing as a cool shower when the summer heat gets too intense. Keep it short to save water. Challenge yourself to take quick showers and finish up before your favorite song ends. By reducing your shower time by just two minutes, you can save up to 1,000 gallons of water over the summer.
3. Capture Rainwater for Plants
When the rain sprinkles down during those summer monsoons, stay calm, cool, and collected. Set up a rain barrel or place buckets outside to capture rainwater. You can use this collected water to hydrate your plants or wash your bikes. Not only will you save water, but your plants will also thank you for the pure rainwater they receive!
4. Be a Leak Detective.
Did you know that even a small leak can waste hundreds of gallons of water? Prevent water from going to waste. Become a leak detective at home.
Check faucets, toilets, and pipes for any leaks. If you spot a leak, ask an adult to fix it promptly. Remember, we want to make sure every drop is used wisely!
5. Be The Smartest Water-Saver In The Room.
Expand your water-saving knowledge by exploring the kids’ section of our website.For example, match the hidden water saving features:
You’ll find a treasure trove of educational resources, fun activities, and interactive games that will teach you more about water conservation. From coloring pages to quizzes, there’s something for everyone to enjoy while becoming a water-saving superhero!
Source: https://wateruseitwisely.com/blog/5-ways-to-save-water-over-summer-break/
Copyright EnviroInsight.org 2023
