The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued this press
release, which covers the implementation of the Clean Water Act in South Bend,
IN through an over $500 million dollar improvement of the city’s combined sewer
system. This decree, issued in December 2011, will directly affect those of us
permanently or temporarily (as students) residing in the South Bend area
through increased public health and conservation of the environment. Currently,
the city’s combined sewer system (the means by which the city funnels a
combination of wastes including sewage, industrial waste, debris, and rain
runoff towards the wastewater treatment plant) is overloaded and dumps more
than two billion gallons of untreated waste into the St. Joseph River every
year. The United States Justice Department and the EPA found this practice in
violation of the Clean Water Act, and are therefore demanding the overhaul of
this system, which will decrease the instances of these overflows occurring by
95%.
I
decided to post this article because it directly involves all of us attending
(or teaching) at Notre Dame. Personally, I have recently discovered the “East
Race,” the portion of the St. Joseph River which the article purports the
enforcement of the Clean Water Act will greatly improve. Additionally, I
thought it fit nicely into our class discussions about the responsibilities of
both local communities and national governments in the protection of their
resources. Because the city of South Bend was found in violation by national
bodies, the Justice Department and the EPA, it brings to mind the instance of
local disregard for national environmental laws found in the Ok Tedi Mine in
Papua New Guinea. There the locals were unopposed to the pollution occurring as
a result of the copper industry because of the economic benefits it offered the
community. The national government enforcing the Clean Water Act in South Bend
is one example occurring in our midst where the effectiveness of a regulatory
national government in prioritizing protection of the environment, even in
light of the economic situation of the local community (South Bend), can be
seen. Furthermore, this article shows how the economic situation of a country
can enable or disable these sorts of government enforcement of national
environmental laws, because it is rare in developing countries that both the
state and federal governments are able to share and shoulder the costs of the
renovation of the system in need.
Ultimately,
this article also shows the idea of political ecology at work. The movement to
improve the combined sewer system must necessarily take into account the
economics, politics, and social context of the South Bend community. The
renovations will only be achieved through collaboration between these sectors,
and it is only through this collaboration that the long-term effects of
improved public health and quality of local environment may begin. Were you
aware of this issue in South Bend? What do you think about the fact that,
without the government’s urging, the city would have continued to pollute its
river in such a manner? What questions do you think this article raises about
the feasibility of protection of environments in newly industrialized countries
who lack the finances to do so?
nice analysis and final questions. **week's highlighted post**
ReplyDeleteThe article begins with the striking expectation of a 95% reduction in raw sewage discharge by South Bend, IN. This assessment perhaps anticipates wariness induced by the project cost of over $500 million, or the involvement of the federal government. While there is undoubtedly some degree of coercion by the U. S. Attorney’s Office and the EPA, it is encouraging to see groups on local and national levels working together. The consequences for violating the Clean Water Act were not just monetary penalties, but also promises to change and investments in generating cleaner and healthier systems. It is interesting that this is indeed an issue that affects all of us; having said that, it is also an issue that I was not aware of. It is interesting to learn of it at a point when it has clearly become a large enough problem to warrant more attention, but also when it is hopefully going to being to change for the better. Because the St. Joseph River is a tributary of Lake Michigan, this will further impact an even greater community of people, and perhaps set precedent for change elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that the EPA literally had to force South Bend to perform this development project gives rise to two different issues that burden the city. Obviously, first of all, is the fact that South Bend has an amount of combined sewer overflows going into the St. Joseph River that is dangerously high and illegally breaking the Clean Water Act. However, the other issue is South Bend's economy. If South Bend has waited so long to implement this expensive development project that the EPA has forced us to do, we must have been pretty reluctant to put in the money. The trade-offs are difficult to predict. The expensive development project means significantly higher taxes for sewer usage for local residents and businesses. However, the development project also means a healthier South Bend environment and possibly even cost saving for South Bend Water Sanitation and eventually the community through a more efficient sewer system resulting out of the development project.
ReplyDeleteGood comments!
ReplyDelete