# Americans Ponder Major Investments in Wastewater Infrastructure



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

*US needs $203 bln for wastewater infrastructure-EPA *

WASHINGTON, Jan 16 (Reuters) - The United States needs to invest $202.5 billion in its wastewater infrastructure due to aging facilities, rising water quality standards and population growth, the Environmental Protection Agency said Wednesday. 

That is 8.6 percent more than the capital investment the federal agency said was needed in 2000, according to its report to Congress, with $134.4 billion needed for waste treatment systems, $54.8 billion for sewer overflows and $9 billion for stormwater management. 

Noting that wastewater treatment utilities often use bonds and loans to pay for large projects, the report said that covering the costs will likely fall on utilities' customers and local governments. 

The environmental agency provided an annual average of $1.3 billion in grants to states from 2000 to 2004 for infrastructure to control wastewater. States were able to provide another $3.1 billion in funding on average each year. 

The EPA is attempting to address the gap between funding and needs. The agency suggested utilities introduce water conservation, continually improve their facilities and rely more on rates than taxes to recover costs. 

The report was based on data collected in 2004.


----------



## jchernin (Jul 21, 2005)

in sonoma and lake counties (california), we send much of our wastewater to geothermal geysers. we then inject the water into the ground, where it turns to steam and generates electricity as the world's largest geothermal energy complex.

the complex accounts for a quarter of all green power produced in california.

INFORMATION: http://www.geysers.com/


----------



## xXFallenXx (Jun 15, 2007)

^^ i didn't know that, how cool!
that could be a good thing do do on a more widespread basis in the future.


----------



## Mr. Met (Jan 9, 2008)

just add on to our near $10 trillion debt


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

*NY $430 million for wastewater projects *
6 April 2009

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - The Environmental Protection Agency has awarded more than $430 million to New York state for wastewater infrastructure projects.

The grant, which the EPA says is the largest single grant in its history, is part of $4 billion awarded to wastewater projects across the country under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

The state Environmental Facilities Corporation will use the grant to provide money to municipal and county governments and utilities.

In the first round of awards, 10 projects in Cayuga, Erie, Onondaga, Orange, Orleans, Rockland, Suffolk and Westchester counties will receive a total of $170 million for water treatment plant and sewer upgrades.


----------



## ChrisZwolle (May 7, 2006)

> That is 8.6 percent more than the capital investment the federal agency said was needed in 2000,


So, just about inflation. Sensation about noting.


----------



## Onn (Oct 11, 2008)

There is a huge sewage project going on in my city right now, but it's being paid for by the city. My town is the one of a few in the country where sewer water and drainage water was always transported through the same pipes. They just started on a massive project to create a whole new sewer system to divide the two types. They had to clear acres worth of forest to do this, and there are cranes sticking out of holes from 400 feet below, in two areas around the city. We have about 100,000 people, so I guess the city's the size now where this needs to be done.


----------



## He Named Thor (Feb 15, 2008)

Yeah, our city has already been doing some serious work on our water system, after getting into trouble with the EPA. Not a surprise that this is a problem with other cities too.


----------



## hoosier (Apr 11, 2007)

If we hadn't neglected our infrastructure for so long, we wouldn't be facing these enormous bills now.

Lesson: don't neglect infrastructure!!:bash:


----------



## nomarandlee (Sep 24, 2005)

> http://www.waterandwastewater.com/www_services/news_center/publish/article_001669.shtml
> 
> *PBS Frontline presents "Poisoned Waters" *
> By PBS
> ...


This was a real good program that went into depth on this subject. Check it out online if you haven't seen it.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/poisonedwaters/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/poisonedwaters/etc/synopsis.html

Poisoned Waters


----------



## simcard (Feb 18, 2009)

Onn said:


> There is a huge sewage project going on in my city right now, but it's being paid for by the city. My town is the one of a few in the country where sewer water and drainage water was always transported through the same pipes. They just started on a massive project to create a whole new sewer system to divide the two types. They had to clear acres worth of forest to do this, and there are cranes sticking out of holes from 400 feet below, in two areas around the city. We have about 100,000 people, so I guess the city's the size now where this needs to be done.


what city are you talking about?


----------



## hkskyline (Sep 13, 2002)

*U.S. water infrastructure needs seen as urgent *

NEW YORK, May 8 (Reuters) - The crumbling U.S. infrastructure is routinely in plain sight, from potholes strewn across interstate highways built during the Eisenhower administration to rusting Depression-era bridges connecting those old highways.

At its most extreme, neglect can turn catastrophic: Experts had long expressed concern that New Orleans' aging levees could fail in the face of a major hurricane and they did dramatically in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

By contrast, the condition of the nation's water infrastructure is often hidden from view. Drinking water and efficient sewage disposal is taken for granted along with the safety of the buried pipes, but was much on the minds of several guests at this week's Reuters Infrastructure Summit.

Out of sight, water infrastructure remained largely out of mind for U.S. policymakers in the federal economic stimulus effort. The $787 billion program allotted less than $10 billion for drinking and wastewater projects.

State and local officials will not turn the cash away but they say much more is needed to fix and add capacity to the nation's water systems.

"It's something that concerns me, because we pay so much attention to things we see and this is something we don't see -- until it's too late," Maryland State Treasurer Nancy Kopp told Reuters in a recent interview.

"In Maryland and other eastern states there have been repeated episodes in which pipes carrying clean water or sewage have collapsed," Kopp said. "Over the next 20 or 30 years, water systems are likely to hit obsolescence."

CONSERVE OR BUILD?

In Western states where epic water projects from the mid-1900s helped propel growth, many policymakers were likewise underwhelmed by stimulus spending for water works.

California, the most populous state, is receiving less than $1 billion for water projects and the money will not fund the kind of engineering feats that cross hundreds of miles to sustain coastal population centers with water from distant mountains and a handful of rivers, which water-issues researcher Peter Gleick applauds.

Instead of helping to build a new batch of monumental water works, California should focus on making use of its water more efficiently, Gleick, of the Pacific Institute of Oakland, California, said during the Infrastructure Summit.

"About 30 percent of the water used in urban California could be saved with existing technology," Gleick said.

Paying households to adopt the technology would also help avoid the economic and environmental costs of building traditional and pricey water projects such as dams.

"In a sense, a million low-flow toilets is the same as building a dam, but faster and quicker," Gleick said.

But if the federal stimulus effort was meant to spur job growth, it flubbed it in giving water such a small slice of its pie, Scott Paul of the Alliance for American Manufacturing said during the Summit.

"Water systems have the biggest bang for the buck," said Paul, noting his group recently commissioned a study that found water projects topped infrastructure categories in terms of job creation with 19,769 jobs created from every $1 billion spent.


----------

