This past weekend I had the pleasure to accompany 30+ of my civil engineering students to Chattanooga to compete against 27 other engineering schools and 900 students in the annual southeastern ASCE student contest. Great fun. if you don’t believe concrete canoes can float, just try racing them! And if you think kids can’t make very cool, very stable and very strong bridges, you missed out, along with another dozen or more contests that challenge their skills, communication and cooperation. I will post some photos but congrats to all the participants. And especially congrats to our FAU students who competed well, showed themselves well and learned a lot in Tennessee!
The number of people that recall the Dust Bowl of the 1930s is dwindling and that may portend poorly for society (likewise the loss of Depression memories and two world wars). The Dust Bowl was aptly names for the regular storms of windblown dust that pummeled farm fields and blew away valuable topsoil needed by farmers. Why it occurred was more interesting and foretelling.
The amount of farming had exploded in the late 1920s as a result of record wheat price, motorized tractors and government programs encouraging farmers to plow up the prairie and plant. The crops replacing the native plants did not have the same root structure and were less drought tolerant as a result. When wheat prices collapsed, the fields were left fallow exposing the topsoil to the elements. Since the topsoil was no longer anchored to the soil by plants, the wind and lack of rain caused much of the topsoil to migrate with the wind as dust. Topsoil was lost, rain ran off, transpiration decreased, and the cycle just go worse. Up to 75% of he topsoil was lost.
Rains returned in the 1940s but much of the dry farming (no irrigation) practice was immediately converted to wet framing using deep wells to capture water from aquifers. The result was healthier crops, more consistent yields and protection of the remaining topsoil as a result. Or is it?
Visit California today. They are in the midst of severe drought conditions. Farmers have attempted to protect themselves by drilling more wells – deeper wells which diminish water supplies to the shallower neighboring wells. Water levels decline, land subsides, the aquifer collapses, and there is little recharge. Some areas of the central valley have sunk over 8 feet in the past 100 years. But we have up until this point, had healthier crops and more productive yields, which protects the valley until the rains return. Or does it?
While the lack of rainfall is a natural cycle, there is an argument to be made that man-made impacts have exacerbated the situation. In the Dust Bowl states, the initial error was plowing up the native grasses without understanding how they had adapted to the mostly dry conditions on the prairie. Many of the prairie states receive under 20 inches or rain each year, and scarcely any during the summer, which limited evapotranspiration, which limits thunderstorm and regional rainfall activity. Less ET = drier conditions. So growing crops is not what one would immediately identify and a “normal” land use for the prairie. We altered the environment, but the Midwestern farming thought process doesn’t work in the dry prairie. Irrigation was needed, but the lack of surface water limited irrigation unless wells are used. Wells were drilled which returned and improved crop yields, but the well use has caused massive decreases in aquifer levels in the prairie states. The amount of water is finite, so as long as withdrawal exceed recharge, and with only 20 inches of rain that mostly runs off the land, there is a point in time when the well runs dry. As the well runs drier, productivity will fall. The interim fix is drill deeper, but the bottom of the aquifer is in sight. Then, fields will be fallow, agriculture will be impacted dramatically, and it is not inconceivable the Dust Bowl type conditions could reoccur. Policies by man exacerbate the problem because the prairie productivity is accelerated will above its natural condition.
Likewise much of the land subsidence problem in California is irrigation driven – water is pulled through wells in an ever increasing competition to maintain one’s crop yield. Water wars and fights with one’s neighbors over wells drying up is increasing more common as irrigation needs increase and recharge to the aquifer is diminished. Much of California is even drier than the Dust Bowl states, and more reliant or wells and irrigation. Less water also means less ET which means less local rainfall. So while California has done much to protect itself over the years from drought, the current experience says that declining aquifer levels means we have exceeded the productivity of that state as well. So is the California Dust Bowl coming?
Man is an ingenious creature. We overcome much that the Earth throws at us. But at the same time, we rarely consider the consequences of our actions in overcoming the challenges Earth poses. These two examples show how our efforts to solve one problem, may actually damage the long term sustainability of these areas. Short term gain, long term problem.
Interesting that while we all love low gas prices and the low cost of energy is fueling an expansion of our economy, including the first gains in middle income salaries since 2008, the states reliant on oil and gas may be facing real problems financially. A year ago I read an article that noted the reluctance of North Dakota residents and politicians to invest in roads and other infrastructure despite the influx of oil money. Keep taxes low was the mantra. SO they did. A recent Governing magazine article notes that a dollar drop in oil means $7.5 million decrease in revenues for the State of New Mexico. Since oil has lost about $30 a barrel in the past year – that is $200 million loss. Louisiana sees a $12 million cost/dollar drop so they have $171 billion less to work with. Alaska, perhaps the most oil dependent budget (90 percent) has a $3.4 billion shortfall, but $14.7 billion in revenues. Texas, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Kansas are other states facing losses. Fast growing states like North Dakota and Wyoming now have hard decisions to make. Growth in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Arkansas may be cut by 2/3 of prior estimates as a result. A double hit on anticipated revenues.
The comparison is interesting financial straights experienced by the “property value” states like Florida, Nevada and Arizona before and after the economic collapse in 2008. Florida politicians couldn’t wait to cut taxes and slow spending during boom years, then got caught badly after the 2008 recession when property values dropped in half and state sales tax revenues (tourism) dropped steeply. They ran out of reserves and refused to raise taxes (after cutting them), so cut things like education and health care to balance the budget. Not sure how either helped low and middle class Floridians get back on track since Florida has primarily create low wage jobs since that time, not high paying jobs. We are paying the price still. I am guessing Nevada and Arizona are similar.
We clearly have not learned the lessons of the many mill towns in the south or the rust belt cities of the Midwest that encountered difficulties when those economies collapsed. Everyone refused to believe the good times would end. Now Detroit is half of its former self and Akron has the same population as it did on 1910.
The moral of the story is that booms great, but short term. Diversity in the economy is a key. Florida will continue to be subject to economic downturns more severe than other states when it relies primarily on tourism and retirees to fuel the economy. Detroit relied on automobiles, Akron rubber and chemicals, Cleveland steel, etc. Some day the Silicon Valley will suffer when the next generation of technology occurs that makes the current works obsolete. It is what happens when you are a “one economy” town. It is also what happens when you believe the booms are “normal” and fail to financially plan by putting money aside during the boom to soften the subsequent period.
An argument could be made that if the federal government had not enacted tax cuts in 2000 when the budget was finally balanced and surpluses were presumed to loom ahead, we could have banked that money (or bought down our debts), and the amount of borrowing would have been less in 2008. Buying down debt when times are good is good business. So is putting money in reserve. The question is why the politicians do not understand it. We can run government like a business financially, but takes leadership to do it. It takes leadership to explain why reserves are good and tax cuts are a future problem. It takes leadership to make hard decisions like raising taxes, spending more on infrastructure, requiring people to move out of flood plains, not rebuilding in vulnerable areas, and curtaining water use policies when they damage society. Leadership is making decisions that help the needs of the many, versus the needs of the few. Oh wait, I see the issue now. We need Spock to lead us…
Power costs are stable. Gas prices decreased markedly in 2014 Oil futures are low compared to 2013 and earlier. . Production is constant. Low energy likely is fueling an economic expansion. Gas economy in vehicles is at an all-time high. Fuel efficiency lowers GHGs and cuts oil imports. America is less reliant on foreign oil. We have more money in our pockets. Utility power costs and vehicle costs are lower. Generator operations are lower. Life is great. Or is it?
Well, that depends on who you talk to. Politicians in states with in oil and gas based economies are scrambling to deal with large deficits in their budgets. The railroads are not happy over the Keystone pipeline vote. Green energy manufacturer are unhappy. Environmentalists are unhappy. Heck even the Koch brothers are probably not completely happy
The first issue is methane gas. Pipelines and fracking operations lose about 6% of the gas. A Washington Post article estimates 8 million metric tons of methane is lost each year. That is where we are trying to capture and transport it. The Bakken fields lack pipelines for gas, so much if it may be flared. The amount of fracking will continue (Florida Power and Light has said it will get into the business – but outside of Florida), so more exploration will likely lead to more methane escaping. Why do we care? Methane is 22 to 80 times the greenhouse gas that carbon dioxide it (depending on who you talk to). It accounts for 9% of GHG emission in the US – a third of that from the oil and gas industry. That gas is concentrated in the western US which makes them ripe for regulation.
Enter cap and trade. The cap and trade “industry” has been opposed by the oil and gas industry for years. However there are a number of groups –from Indian tribes to NextEra Energy are posed to benefit from cap and trade (C&T) rules. They have reduced their carbon footprint enough that they can sell carbon credits. It is doubtful that this Congress with pass C&T legislation, but much of the regulatory focus could be shifted if C&T was in place. C&T could accelerate green energy efforts.
Green energy folks want continued subsides or policies that encourage increased green power supplies, improve technology and reduce prices – all at the same time. Rolling out a major change in the energy picture is a huge investment that will not gain traction without policies to encourage it At least for now, green energy creates more jobs per KW-hr than conventional oil and gas, primarily in research and development and product manufacturing. Sewing up the patents would portend positively for America in the 21st century, much as sewing up the car, gas engine, and nuclear patents did for the 20th century. He who owns the technology should benefit. Unfortunately that isn’t the Koch brothers who are unhappy with green energy but are happy that lower oil prices might decrease the competition in the future when oil prices inevitably rise. But America would be better off in a non-oil based economy in 50 years if we developed an energy policy to address these issues with a long-term view.
However, that would take a lot of business and political leadership to overcome some of those who do not want change. These are people who have more money than the Concord coach makers who could not fight the technology change to automobiles in the early 20th century. It also takes a vision of what America should look like in 50 years. We might be short on those visionaries. And how will utilities be a part of it.
ASCE came out with more bad news about infrastructure. 60 Minutes did a piece about deterioration of bridges. The magazine American City and County has published a couple articles about the risks of aging infrastructure. Asset management is practiced by few governments, and even fewer small ones. The public doesn’t want to foot the bill and lobbyists want taxes cut further. Where does it end?
The infrastructure crisis is a political and business leadership crisis. Or vacuum. The economy of America and much of the developed world was built on advanced (for their time) infrastructure systems constructed by governments with a vision to the future. Some of this infrastructure was repurposed (federal interstate system for example), but much of it has addressed critical issues that hampered our development. For example, the lack of water severely inhibits many third world nations. Even when they have water, it is unsafe to drink or use. In America, at the turn of the 20th century 1:100,000 people DIED each summer from typhoid. Just typhoid, not all the other waterborne disease options. Many more were sick. And the population was much smaller. Talk about reduced productivity. Now we have advanced water systems, disinfection practices that protect people and pipes, and few event get sick from contaminated water. Those that do, become headlines. You don’t want to be a headline. Productivity is up. But we expect good water and can’t see the pipes.
Sewer is an even better example. People just don’t want to know. Flush and it’s gone. But the equipment, treatment and materials may be even more complex than the water system. But few people get sick from sewage because of the systems we have built. Now think about third world examples. Or conditions you have seen in documentaries, the news or movies. Being in sewage is not a great place to be. Even the manhole thriving cockroaches agree..
Stormwater is probably the laggard here, in part because changes in development patterns have overwhelmed the old systems. Miami Beach experienced this when redevelopment replaced small houses on permeable lots with large housed with mostly impermeable property. Oops. Meanwhile road and bridges have received a lot of funding – with much to do (see bridge that collapsed on I-75 in Cincinnati a few weeks back). Most states fund transportation at a magnitude more than water and sewer.
What is the problem? Local officials do not convey an understanding of these complex system to the public very well. In part this may be because understanding the maintenance needs is difficult and highly variable. And many do not fully comprehend the assets they have, their condition, life expectancy or technological needs. No one knows when things will fails, so maintenance or replacement of some equipment or pipeline is always the thing cut in the budget, with no real understanding of the consequences.
The public does not see the asset, assumes it will have a long life, so is unconcerned until they are affected. Then it is personal. The public does not understood the impact or value that these assets have to society – they tend to be personal focused, not societal. That is a leadership issue. That leadership starts with vision and communication from those that understand the issue to the elected officials that need to advocate for their infrastructure. Elected officials need to take ownership of infrastructure. It is like your house – you need to upgrade and protect it constantly. You do not let that roof leak keep leaking! Elected officials that do not invest in infrastructure, are letting the roof leak. Making is someone else’s problem for political expediency is not leadership.
Despite the infrastructure crisis, the good news is that construction of piping is increasing – both new and replacement. Every so many months, the magazine Utility Contractor will note current trends and pipe seems to be going up. That’s good but there is a long way to go. Better news – the construction of buildings is increasing. That could lead to more revenues. In Florida, all of a sudden finding experienced construction workers is a problem. Things are definitely better economically, but are we taking advantage to improve the local infrastructure, or is you economy simply an infrastructure disruption away from another fault?