Transcript EPA's Green Infrastructure Program

EPA’s Green Infrastructure Program
February 2015
Chris Kloss
US EPA Office of Water
1
Why the Interest in Green Infrastructure?
• Wet weather events (i.e.,
stormwater runoff) impair
water quality by causing sewer
overflows and contributing
significant pollutant loads from
MS4s.
• Combined sewer systems in
more than 700 municipalities
in 31 states and the District of
Columbia discharge an
estimated 850 billion gallons of
CSOs each year.
• In 2011, stormwater caused
more than 10,950 beach
closing and advisory days (47%
of total); sewage spills and
overflows caused more than
1,500 (6%).
• Investment needs estimated to
be several hundred billion
dollars.
Street flooding after ½” rainfall in Ocean City, NJ, August 9, 2011
American Society of Civil Engineers, (2010), Report Card for America’s Infrastructure.
U.S. EPA, (2010), Clean Watersheds Need Survey: 2008 Report to Congress, Office of Wastewater Management, EPA
832-F-10-010.
Natural Resources Defense Council, Testing the Waters, 2012.
2
Why the Interest in Green Infrastructure?
• Green infrastructure can
significantly reduce
stormwater runoff
volumes & peak flows –
critical for CSO control
and addressing the
water quality impacts of
stormwater.
• Provides additional
community benefits:
 Reduces heat island effect
 Improves air quality
 Provides wildlife habitat
and recreational space
 Improves energy
efficiency
 Improves urban aesthetics
 Increases property values
 Often less expensive than
conventional approaches
3
Climate Impacts on Water Resources
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Decrease in the duration and extent of
snow cover in most of North America
Increase in the frequency of heavy
precipitation events across the U.S.
Increase in streamflow in the eastern U.S.
Decrease in annual precipitation in the
Central Rockies and Southwest
Decrease in mountain snow water
equivalent in Western North America
Decrease in runoff and streamflow in the
Colorado and Columbia River basins
Decrease in the proportion of
precipitation falling as snow in the West
Increase in the periods of drought in the
West
Decrease of 25-40% by 2050 and
potentially 70-90% 2100 of the Sierra
snowpack
Prettyboy Reservoir, Maryland during 2002 drought. Photo
courtesy of National Weather Service.
Bryson B. Bates, Z.W. Kundzewicz, S. Wu, and J.P. Palutikof, Eds., Climate Change and Water,
Technical Paper of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC Secretariat, Geneva,
2008.
David S. Beckman, N. Garrison, R.C. Wilkinson, and R. Horner, A Clear Blue Future: How
Greening California Cities Can Address Water Resources and Climate Challenges in the 214st
Century, Natural Resources Defense Council, August 2009.
Water Supply Sustainability
5
Source: NRDC, 2010
U.S. Water Supply
•
•
Universal access
to potable water
supplies.
World’s 2nd
highest per capita
use: ~ twice that
of Europe.
Average 100 >150 gal/day per
capita.
250
200
Daily Domestic Demand (gallons per capita)
•
150
100
50
0
Global Average
Canada
France
Germany
Italy
Netherlands
United Kingdom
United States
Country
A.Y. Hoekstra and A.K. Chapagain, Water Footprints of Nations: Water Use
by People as a Function of Their Consumption Pattern, Water Resources
Management (2007) 21:35-48.
6
Water Use
Typical Daily Water Use.
Use
Potable indoor uses
 Showers/Baths
 Dishwashers
 Kitchen
 Faucets
 Other uses, leaks
Subtotal
Non-potable indoor uses
 Clothes washers
 Toilets/urinals
 Cooling
Subtotal
Outdoor uses
Total non-potable indoor
and outdoor uses
Domestic
% of Daily Total
(Gallons per Capita)
Office Buildings
7.8% (12.8)
0.6% (1.0)
--6.6% (10.9)
6.7% (11.1)
21.7% (35.8)
----3%
1%
10%
14%
9.1% (15.0)
11.2% (18.5)
--20.3% (33.5)
58.0% (95.7)
--25%
23%
48%
38%
78.3%
86%
% of Daily Total
*Domestic kitchen use accounted for in dishwasher and faucet categories.
American Waterworks Association Research Foundation (AWWARF), Residential End Uses
of Water, Denver, CO, AWWARF, 1999.
Pacific Institute, Waste Not, Want Not: The Potential for Urban Water Conservation in
California, November 2003.
7
Integrating Green Infrastructure
Bioretention Cell in El
Monte, CA. Photo
courtesy of Bill
DePoto.
Seattle bioswale. Photo courtesy
of Seattle Public Utilities.
Permeable pavement
and bioretention in
Albuquerque, NM.
Photo courtesy of
AridLID.org.
8
Syracuse Connective Corridor
• Part of the Save the Rain CSO Program.
• Creates a visual and physical link along the
major street connections between Syracuse
University and the downtown business
districts.
• Uses tree trenches and porous pavement in
traffic-calming designs that feature bicycle
lanes, landscape buffers between vehicular
and enhanced pedestrian zones.
Connective Corridor Phase 1, Project 1: University Ave,
Onondaga County, NY.
9
Lancaster, PA Green Alley
10% Added Cost + 200,000 gallons captured/year
Before (July 2011) ~$20.30/SF
Conventional reconstruction
(8-inch reinforced concrete)
After (February 2012) ~$22.40/SF
Green alley retrofit
(permeable pavers with infiltration)
Green alley retrofit
trench)
(permeable pavers with infiltration)
trench)
Parks
Brandon Park;
Lancaster, PA
Cliveden Park;
Philadelphia, PA
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/climate_res.cfm
12
Increasing Resiliency with Green Infrastructure
•
Flooding
– Menomonee River
revitalized brownfield site
now mitigates impacts of
localized flooding up to the
100 year storm event.
– 70 acre stormwater park
provides a high-value
community recreation asset.
•
Groundwater recharge
– LA study indicated that BMPs
could produce benefit of
additional groundwater
supplies that have a 2005
value of $7.2 billion (Devinny
et. al. (2005))
Menomonee River Green Infrastructure Project, Milwaukee, WI.
Photo Courtesy of MMSD.
13
Syracuse War Memorial Arena
The War Memorial project is the first system in the country designed to use harvested rainwater (15,000 gallon
cistern system) for a hockey rink and is one of only a handful around the world
14
Green Infrastructure Collaborative
•
•
•
Launched October
8th.
Intended to leverage
efforts, build
knowledge, and
facilitate more rapid
adoption.
30 organizations
have signed on to
work with federal
family to advance
green infrastructure.
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/gi_partners.cfm
15
Green Infrastructure Collaborative
•
•
Federal letter of support introduced July 16, 2014
Seven federal agencies identified activities that they will
undertake to lead by example and promote local green
infrastructure use.
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/greeninfrastructure/upload/Federal-Support-for-Green-Infrastructure-Collaborative_508.pdf
16
Green Infrastructure Provides Place-Based Solutions
• Reintroduces community
green space and recreational
opportunities.
• Provides climate resilient and
adaptive approaches.
• Allows infrastructure
investments to occur in
coordinated fashion.
• Connects urban population to
the natural environment.
• Integrates into other land-use
programs and strategies.
• Creates local job
opportunities.
Photo above: Stormwater management
and urban community garden in Kansas
City, MO. Photo courtesy of Tetra Tech.
Photo to left: Planter Boxes &
Vegetated Curb Extensions in Kansas
City, MO. Photo courtesy of TetraTech.
17
NY Estimated O&M Costs
18
Job Opportunities
• Prince George’s County’s plan to meet the
Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
– $1 billion over 10 years.
– Plan would also create more than 5,000 new jobs
focused on green infrastructure and the county will
need 40,000 stormwater devices: rain barrels, rain
gardens, water-absorbing sidewalks.
– Will potentially spur the development of a “green”
industry in the county.
19