Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, August 27, 1993 TAG: 9311190361
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: ROBERT MCCONNELL
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
I am speaking of nothing less than the loss of the Chesapeake Bay -- but I am also talking about its salvation.
So massive is the required change in our society that nothing less than significant new contributions from America's farmers, utilities, industries, motorists and citizens must be obtained -- very soon.
While evidence of the Bay's decline has been piling up for two decades, this analysis is supported most recently by a careful review of the Chesapeake Bay Commission's 1992 Annual Report, issued to the General Assemblies of Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Although the report's conclusions are couched in the "politically correct" parlance required of a group dominated by politicians and bureaucrats, its message is clear.
Consider the report's following conclusions:
The Commission admits that its key goal of reducing nitrogen levels in the Bay 40 percent by 2000, necessary to restore vital oxygen to the deeper Bay, is now unattainable without draconian measures affecting every facet of life in theregion. Nitrogen in excessive quantities leads to harmful algal growth, destroying bottom grasses called submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) and depleting essential oxygen. Ironically, even if the Commission's goal could be met, latest research indicates the Bay's water quality would fail to improve as much as initial computer models had predicted.
Due to extreme nitrogen enrichment, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) has been dying at such a rapid rate that now perhaps only 10 percent remains from its pre-1950 distribution in the Bay. These bottom grasses, which serve as essential food and hiding place for invertebrates and juvenile fishes, and whichproduce vital oxygen, should cover most of the Bay to a depth of two meters. At present, they do not cover the Bay floor even to one meter.
Airborne nitrogen from inside and outside the Bay's watershed has recently been identified as a major source, and perhaps the major source, of this nutrient. Motor vehicles, agriculture, power plants and municipal stormwater runoff constitute major sources, yet registrations of motor vehicles in the signatory states alone are expected to increase up to one-third by 2020.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, even with full enforcement of the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air Act, airborne nitrogen (in the form of NOx) is projected to increase at least 6 percent by 2010. Much of this pollutant is borne into the Bay's watershed from as far away as the Midwest byvailing westerly winds, suggesting that a national solution ultimately will be needed.
Vast quantities of sediment are piling up behind hydroelectric power dams on the Susquehanna River. Soon the reservoirs will be filled to capacity. The resultant runoff will increase the influx of sediment (loaded with degrading nitrogen and phosphorus) from the Susquehanna into the Bay by a factor of three, potentially negating even the modest present goals for Bay enhancement.
Further threats to the Bay include the following:
Oyster harvests are in a free-fall due to overharvesting and disease. The latter probably is related to declining water quality. These organisms are not only an important part of the Bay's economy, they are essential agents in filtering and purifying Bay waters. Should they disappear, the already low water quality of the lower Bay will be gravely impacted.
Water demand itself is rising. Commercial water use alone nationwide rose 9 percent between 1985 and 1990. As basic industries are replaced by a service and information economy in the Bay's watershed, demand in this sector (which includes motels, restaurants, colleges, office buildings, etc.) will continue to increase, further stressing an already gravely threatened ecosystem.
Furthermore, fossil-fueled and nuclear power plants demand enormous quantities of water for cooling pur poses, while dissipating as much as two- thirds of the energy in the fuel directly to the environment as waste heat. In 1990, nearly 200,000 million gallons per day were cycled through such plants nationwide and returned as hot, oxygen-depleted water to the water bodies from which they were obtained. Construction of such plants is continuing at a rapid pace in the Bay's watershed, even though their need has not been demonstrated.
It is becoming abundantly clear that restoring Chesapeake Bay can be accomplished only by a combination of the following actions:
Fundamental changes in agricultural practices to virtually eliminate runoff contaminated with nitrogen from animal wastes and fertilizer, a substantial source of Bay degradation.
Strict enforcement of 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments mandating a 60 percent reduction of nitrous emissions from motor vehicles. This itself may entail substantial increases in fuels taxes to reduce consumption, and raising fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks. It also should include a moratorium on new major road construction and substantial regional investment in mass-transit.
A moratorium on new fossil-fuel plant construction in the Bay's watershed should be enforced until all cost-effective energy conservation measures have been enacted, and all feasible renewable energy sources developed. For example, numerous scientific and engineering studies have documented cost-effective measures which could reduce energy consumption at least 50 percent without reducing the quality of life.
The fundamental threat posed by the relentlessly growing human population in the Bay's watershed must eventually be addressed. Initially, this can be partially mitigated by zoning regulations which virtually eliminate sprawl development and by mandatory water and energy conservation measures, to reduce per capita consumption. Restrictions on discretionary operation of motor vehicles may eventually be necessary if stricter fuel-efficiency standards and mandated production of zero-emission vehicles, such as California now requires, do not reduce nitrogen emissions and other contaminants.
Eventually the advisability of tax policies which subsidize population growth must be questioned, as well as c onstitutional provisions which prohibit states from controlling migration into environmentally threatened areas. There is virtually no doubt that "business as usual" ultimately will destroy the Bay as a viable ecosystem. How, or indeed whether, Americans address this and similar environmental issues will largely determine the stability of American society in the 2lst century.
\ Robert McConnell is professor of geology and environmental sciences at Mary Washington College in Fredericksburg.
by CNB