How Do We Fund Water Safety And When Do We Start?
Lead water lines constitute a national problem. What can be done?
The nation’s water infrastructure has taken another hit – and it will be a costly one. Just one day after U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials put state drinking water systems on notice that the agency was about to step up its enforcement of lead contamination rules for drinking water, a price tag was attached to how much it might eventually cost if that enforcement includes replacing all lead water lines nationwide.
Global researcher Fitch Ratings estimates that capital costs to replace the more than 10 million lead water service lines throughout the United States could be up to $50 billion. The EPA previously estimated that water infrastructure improvements needed through 2030 would top out at $385 billion, but that included just partial replacement of lead pipes and did not include the most recent estimates related to lead contamination remediation needs.
The American Society of Civil Engineers gave the nation a “D” for drinking water infrastructure and said that entirely too many water distribution systems are “nearing the end of their useful lives.” The tragedy in Flint, Mich., was a wake-up call as people learned that thousands of children and adults had been impacted in horrific ways because of lead in their drinking water.
Flint is not the only city facing water contamination issues and many states have started to respond. While officials in Texas say that no state or federal regulations have been violated, several water suppliers in Travis County have higher lead levels than the recommended amount. The regulatory authority is the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
Contamination itself is not the only problem. Most water systems lack the financial resources to fund a major water infrastructure project such as a system-wide replacement of water lines. Borrowing money is not an option in many incidents because public entities can only manage a certain amount of debt. The funds that are available in most cities are dedicated for other water projects and shifting the money to contamination projects means that other critical water projects must be halted. Simply meeting regulatory requirements is a financial stretch for too many water systems.
The entire nation is facing a backlog of deferred maintenance projects and the need for modernization of facilities, equipment, and new delivery methods continues to grow. The only way that many regions can fund the projects that citizens need is to collaborate with private-sector partners and accept private-sector capital. It is hard to understand the reluctance of some to such collaboration. Surely there are ways to work together to ensure that the nation’s water is safe for consumption and that structure engagements are also acceptable to taxpayers and the public at-large.
This article originally published by Strategic Partnership Inc.
