Read Microsoft Word - 4823731D-45D6-288351.doc text version

Amy Freeze ENVS MES / Stan Laskowski CAPSTONE December 2007

Part One: Heavy Rainfall Events Continue to Overwhelm Urban Infrastructure: A Case Study of the August 2007 Storms in Chicago

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

1

Part One: Heavy Rainfall Events Continue to Overwhelm Urban Infrastructure: A Case Study of the August 2007 Storms in Chicago

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................. Background ........................................................................................................ Introduction: Community Action May Alleviate Runoff Threats During Major Storms ................ Case Study: Chicago's 20-year Rainfall Event of August 2007 ............................................. How the Storm Developed on August 23, 2007..................................................... The Meteorological Set up of the Storms............................................................ Too Much Rain in Too Short of Time ................................................................. Stormwaters Overwhelmed the Combined Storm Sewers ........................................ Water Quality Affected by Overflow in August Storms .......................................... Handling Stormwater in an Urban Environment ............................................................ An Infrastructure Answer to Stormwater Management: TARP Improves Water Quality .... TARP: Even More Relief is on the Way ............................................................ Combined Sewer Overflow 2007 Coincides with Permit Announcement for Corporate Pollution ....... BP Permit Plan .......................................................................................... Public Fights for Water Quality......................................................................... Concept: Handling Stormwater with Community Action ................................................... Chicago is Not Alone: Combines Sewer Overflows are a Water Quality Threat Nationwide ......... CSOs in the Great Lakes................................................................................ Climate Change Brings More Stormwater: Increasing Intensity, Duration, and Frequency (IDF) .... More Climate Studies Suggest Wetter Trends....................................................... Preparing Public for Future Stormwater............................................................. Conclusion: Alert Plan is Necessary ..............................................................................

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

2

Executive Summary

Recent storms in Chicago reveal an immediate and sustainable approach to responsible watershed management in urban communities. The concept does not cost the millions of a reservoir design, does not take time to build, and does not require legislated policy to enforce. It does require environmental education. The idea is a Stormwater Action Alert Program designed to urge water conservation and other water quality actions. The following report supports the concept with research, provides questions and answers on how the program might work, and outlines the reasons this idea has potentials to succeed.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

3

Background

Responsible watershed management has become the subject of increasing public attention due to a combination of natural events and costly infrastructure changes in communities across the country. Water policies, projects, and practices are literally surfacing from the ground up. From porous pavements to a long list of best management protocols, there's an overflow of effort to find the best way to protect water quality--and stormwater is often the focal point. Stormwater is the costliest, most overwhelming threat to local infrastructure and property. The issue is so important that watershed management plans are being rewritten to handle stormwater more effectively. Yet no matter how much attention it gets, it seems that stormwater cannot be contained.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

4

Introduction

Chicago's most significant severe weather event in a decade took place August 23, 2007. The storm's flooding rains are an example of why the efforts with stormwater runoff must be taken to the next level. Too much rain, too fast still creates flooding in Chicago. More than three billion dollars (and more than 30 years) has been spent on the Tunnel and Reservoir Project (TARP) in Chicago. TARP has helped immensely with handling stormwater and improving water quality across the watershed. However, heavy downpours can still overwhelm the local drainage system. That is what happened August 23rd when overwhelming stormwater caused untreated runoff to overflow into local rivers, and millions of gallons of raw sewage was dumped into Lake Michigan. A closer look at this particular storm shows there may have been time to alert water consumers to take actions (and decrease the water stress on the City's treatment facilities.) Quick action may have prevented the numerous combined sewer overflows into local waterways. While it's too late for that storm, climate research shows that there will be more storms with even heavier rains in the future. Water consumers need to be both alerted to changes in technology that saves water and urged to change their water habits. A program to raise public awareness about stormwater runoff might make the difference in flooding rain events in the future and lead to better water quality.

Community Action May Alleviate Runoff Threats during Major Storms

The concept for how to contend with future storms came during an ironic twist of fate during the August storms. The same week that heavy downpours and severe storms overwhelmed water treatment plants, there was a boisterous rally against British Petroleum's Whiting Refinery for its newly granted permits. The new permits would allow BP to increase pollution in Lake Michigan. Public outcry in the form of petitions and rallies (even gas station strikes) showed a strong community desire to protect local water quality. Their actions prompted questions about how to take water quality actions a step further. If the public will rally against the private sector to protect the lake, would they also consider taking personal actions during a storm if it were threatening to water quality? Would actions by individuals combine to make any difference at all when it comes to the millions of gallons of water a storm produces? If overwhelming stormwaters are forecasted, could elevating awareness urge water consumers to act? And if they act once to protect water quality ­ will that help them develop water habits that lead to responsible water use all the time? The August 2007 storms were an example of how runoff is still a major issue in Chicago, and the BP incident was an example of how it might be fixed: community actions.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

5

Case Study: Chicago's 20-year Rainfall Event of August 2007

August 2007 turned out to be the 4th wettest August ever in Chicago and the wettest August ever in Northeastern Illinois since records began (134 year of record keeping.) One particular wet weather event went down in the history books for Chicago. It was both a severe weather event with damaging winds and a 20 year precipitation event with overwhelming rain.

Forecasted: The storm on Thursday, August 23rd, 2007, followed several days of rain. Watches and warnings for severe, threatening weather were posted more than 24 hours in advance. The warnings were warranted. The storm was so severe that it caused one death, 2.2 million dollars of property damage within the city limits of Chicago, and resulted in poor water quality for local rivers and Lake Michigan.

How the August 23rd Storm Developed

Understanding how the storms develop and the ability to know well in advance the severity of the storm plays an important role in believing that alerts could make a difference. Here is how this storm developed. The weather pattern had already been unsettled for several days when forecasted thunderstorms arrived. The storm system intensified and became severe over Northwestern and West Central Illinois in the early afternoon. The storms accelerated east-northeast, moving at nearly 70 mph toward Chicago. The severe weather produced long swath of wind damage. There were multiple injuries, including one fatality from falling debris. There was damage to buildings, damage to electrical lines, and damage to infrastructure (the worst Chicago has seen in many years from a single storm event.) It took over a week to completely restore power in hardest hit areas. In Chicago area, tens of thousands of trees were downed (many of those destroyed.) The storm was classified a Derecho, which is a long-lived, violent line or cluster of thunderstorms that produce widespread and significant wind damage. The National Weather Service did survey the damage, part of the storm was declared an EF1 tornado (86-110 mph possible during a 3 second wind gust) in Winfield, IL. See the damage reports in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

6

Figure 1 Severe Weather Reports

Figure 2 Tornado Track

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

7

Photo 1 These large cumulonimbus clouds are the thunderstorm on August 23rd. The large wall cloud can be see for dozens of miles with the naked eye, and for hundreds of miles by Doppler Radar. Viewers submitted Photo 1 and Photo 2 to MyFoxChicago.com.

Photo 2

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

8

The Meteorological Setup to the Storms

Severe thunderstorms often bring flooding rains. These types of storms can be forecasted hours, even days in advance allowing for early warning. The way they are forecasted is by looking at atmospheric data available online. Below is the data used to forecast the August 23rd storm. A strong shortwave (a disturbance in the mid or upper part of the atmosphere which induces upward motion) formed over Iowa, ahead of the main storm, and was marching eastward. The storm system was tracked for several days (up to 24 hour Severe Thunderstorm Watch for the Chicago area.) Figure 3 Water Vapor Imagery Figure 4 Visible Satellite

The other component to this storm besides flooding rains was severe wind (excess of 56 mph.) Water vapor imagery (Figure 3) also showed drying/subsidence behind shortwave, indicating strong winds. The mesoscale setup showed unusually strong winds aloft, observations showed winds of 45-50kt at 3km, less than two miles above the surface. A visible satellite (Figure 4) showed a lack of cloudiness that allowed for abundant sunshine and strong surface heating, with temperatures above 85 degrees in Chicago. On a synoptic/large scale analysis there was a pool of very moise air (with >70F surface dew points) ahead of the shortwave. These ingredients of subsidence (lift,) heat, and moisture were an ideal combination for severe weather outbreak. Below is a damage photo from the August 23rd in Lincoln Park, submitted to MyFoxChicago.com (NWS)

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

9

Photo 3

Figure 5 Wind Profile Figure 6 Winchester Wind Profiler

Additional data observed during this storm indicated the possibility of strong, damaging winds. This factor brought to light the possibility of tree damage and power outage. Without power residents could lose sump pumps that prevent basement flooding. Realizing this possibility is another benefit from understanding the threats that particular storms produce. These winds did occur during the storm as seen above. Significant veering and curvature were observed in wind profilers (Figure 5.) Also, observed winds from the surface to 3km were largely unidirectional, with strong shear which often produces damaging thunderstorm winds. The Winchester, IL wind profiler (Figure 6) also depicted the 45kt close to the surface. The storms were powerful and fast-moving, but they also created instability in the atmosphere that lingered. This produced repeated heavy downpours called training thunderstorms (or storms that repeat over the same areas.)

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

10

Too Much Rain in Too Short of Time

Forecasted a severe weather event that is isolated is one scenario. But the August 23rd storm blew through after days of heavy rainfall. The consecutive days of rain produced too much moisture in too short of time. A Hydrologist for the NWS, William Morris, confirmed the storm was a part of the 20-year rain event. While the heavy precipitation was an unusual occurrence, there is a one in 20 chance of a storm like this one occurring in any given year. The weather observers across the region recorded the daily data. The Community Collaborative Rain, Snow, and Hail Network (CoCoRAHS) submitted reliable rainfall totals. Figure 7 lists their reported 4-day rain totals.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

11

Figure 7

Another rain gauge network tracked the August 23rd storm. The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRD,) keeps a close eye on every rain storm because they treat stormwater runoff throughout Chicago. The MWRD has 12 strategically placed rain gauges, see Table 1 for locations. The cumulative amount of rainfall collected by these gauges, from August 19th to August 24th is displayed in Table 1A. The amounts are significant. Clearly, the water drainage system did not have a change to empty itself. The rains that week caused more than 100 combined sewer overflows... more than 24 hours in advance of the August 23rd storms that would force an overflow into Lake Michigan. Rain gauges like these are important tools to show that too much water is arriving in too short of time for the system to manage all the water effectively.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

12

Table 1A Gauge Number 1 2 3 6.35 5.42 3.08 Precipitation (in inches) Glenview North Side WRP North Branch Pump Station 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 6.11 4.60 4.53 5.26 4.71 5.11 5.14 Out 4.48 Wilmette West Side Springfield Racine Avenue Pump Station MOB Melvina Ditch 87th and Western 95th Street Calumet WRP Gauge Name

Stormwaters Overwhelmed the Combined Storm Sewers

Beginning August 19th, the MWRD rain gauges recorded heavy rainfall with their state of the art information database showed that trouble developed early in the week, with the large amounts of water runoff. The system was overloaded. And the August 23rd thunderstorm downpour was the tipping point. When there is too much water too fast, the MWRD system overflows. The untreated stormwaters must be spilled into local waterways. The "TARP SYSTEM SYNOPSIS" and the "WATERWAYS CONTROL STORM SYNOPSIS" (see Tables 2 through 7) showed as early as the 18th the water had overwhelmed the system. During the rainfall on the 18th, the average precipitation over the MWRD gauge network was 2.45." The TARP system was able to relieve 1.6 million gallons from the system. There were 58 combined sewer incidents the 18th into local waterways. The hi-tech data collection capability of MWRD shows that early warnings (for possible CSOs) are possible. (Lanyon) The synopsis reports show the total number of CSOs was 189 on the 23rd and 24th. The MWRD overflows happened system-wide. One overflow occurred on the North Shore Channel at the Wilmette Pumping Station was particularly severe, it released untreated water into Lake Michigan. This type of overflow had not happened in five years in Chicago. The release into the Lake was 224 million gallons (from the August 23rd storm alone.) According to MWRD 2006 report, every million gallons of untreated waste entering the north side plant contains an average of 7,394 pounds of solids and 102 pounds of ammonia. That means the overflow dumped out had more than 1.6 million pounds of solids and ammonia into the lake, which are containments that deteriorate water quality. (MWRD)

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

13

Water Quality Affected by Overflow During August Storms

Water quality tests taken by the MWRD were taken immediately before, during, and after the CSOs. On August 23rd the North Branch Pumping Station took a Fecal Coli form Sample of 350000 per 100mL. The samplings at surrounding beaches had E. coli readings of 8 to 24190 mpn/100mL in the hours following the CSO. While the dispersement is quick in a Lake, the release was not the largest in history (and the intakes for drinking water treatment are a long distance from where the overflow occurs,) water quality is still affected. The CSOs into stream, creeks, and rivers have a more immediate affect... but these waterways can also naturally treat contaminated water to a point. The bottom line is that the water quality is affected. How severely depends on the amount of CSO and the type of waterway. See Table 8 for water quality data from August 23-24, 2007. To understand the impact of sewage into waterways, see the history of CSOs in Chicago for condition of water quality prior to modern infrastructure (page 16 of this report "CSO History in Chicago.")

Lake MichiganWater Quality Testing: Water quality tests done by MWRD before, after, and during overflows are done at the Lake-front locations like beaches. Additional water quality testing for the Lake happens with the city of Chicago's lake survey monitoring program which began in the 1930s. The number of surveys, stations sampled and the degrees of accuracy with which the analyses are performed have increased greatly over the years. With data gathered on a continuing basis, it has been possible to determine long term trends in lake water quality, which show considerable improvement since 1970. The lake surveys are conducted from the Chicago Water Department tugboat. Here's how they do it: the water for sampling is drawn through an intake pipe mounted on the back of the boat. The intake opening is approximately three feet below the water surface and the water samples are

collected while the tug is in motion, utilizing a small impeller pump. The water is delivered to a sampling sink tap located within the stern cabin. This arrangement allows the surveys to be conducted during inclement weather, providing lake conditions are not too adverse. Annual water quality reports are released by both city agencies. Whenever water quality is threatened, the public should be advised, alerted, and concerned! A recent Cornell research project concluded that pollution deserves a place alongside heart disease and cancer on the list of leading causes of death worldwide. This concept that pollution is not just ugly to look at it-but that it can be a hazard to human health is a strong message. Contamination of water, air, and soil leads to 40 percent of the planet's death toll, according to a study conducted by David Pimentel, Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. "In the United States alone, 76,000 people are in the hospital each year, with 5,000 deaths, just due to pollution of air, food or water. Cancers are increasing in the U.S., and AIDS is on the rise," Pimentel said. The project focuses on how deteriorating environmental conditions are affecting the spread of diseases. According to the results, 62 million deaths each year are due to organic or chemical pollutants. Pimentel said that diseases like malaria, E. coli, salmonella, AIDS and tuberculosis are escalating due to the increased environmental pollution. Pimentel pointed out that mosquitoes spread a lot of serious diseases, like West Nile Virus and malaria. And dumping sewage (which mosquito feed on) into waterways is one of the most common sources of pollution that ultimately leads to the spread of disease. According to the Pimentel study, microbes introduced into the water can carry E. coli and salmonella. Rainfall, temperatures and water quality can affect food production, and are issues of land and water, subject to pollution. "I hope the study can be used to bring greater attention to the problems of water and air pollution and the worldwide malnutrition problem, especially in developing countries. We ought to

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

14

know what we're doing to ourselves," Pimentel said. World public health can be dependent on water quality. When local waterways are threatened, water consumers should monitor how the water is being handled. (Potter) Storms that could overflow the system are more than an eyesore--they are a threat to water quality. The information on storm-caused CSOs should be public information (like MWRD does via their website,) and the information should be relayed to water consumers as quickly as possible. An alert program would fulfill that obligation and could also help the MWRD get more compliance with stormwater education programs.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

15

Handling Stormwater in an Urban Environment: Chicago

To understand how and why combined sewers overflow, it's important to look at how they began in the first place. To clean up the water following the cholera epidemic of the mid 1800s and help avoid flooding, Chicago built a combined serer and stormwater system. Like most cities at the time, Chicago built this system as one underground system that combines both wastewater and stormwater. Today, Chicago and 51 older municipalities of Cook County have combined sewer systems which are managed by MWRD (see Table 9 "Areas Served By Combined Sewers.") Combined sewers are hash marked which equals about 40% of the system, which means those areas have just one channel that moves both the sewage and stormwater away from the city toward treatment plants. This combined system is large enough to easily handle the city and suburban wastewater that needs to be treated. However, the infrastructure has limits and sometimes stormwater does overwhelm the system. The built environment and climate change continue to make the situation severe on occasion.

CSO History of Chicago: Street gutters initially served as drains in Chicago that went right to the water, which was also a source for drinking. As the city grew, engineers used underground pipes to route the wastewater directly into Lake Michigan, but Chicago's inhabitants continued to be plagued by disease. The cholera epidemic of 1854 killed more than five percent of the city's population, and deaths from typhoid and dysentery continued to rise. In 1887 Rudolph Hering, chief engineer of the city's drainage and water supply commission, proposed digging a canal at the south branch of the Chicago River that would carry wastewater away from Lake Michigan and down the Mississippi River, via the Des Plaines and Illinois rivers. This project involved a complex and revolutionary idea to reverse a portion of the Chicago River. The plan would help improve water quality by pumping sewage away from the city and the drinking supply. The Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago was formed as a result of this plan. They facilitate pumping stations and water treatment plants placed across the region. By 1900 the 28-mile canal Hering had proposed was complete. It became known as the "Sanitary and Ship Canal," and by 1908, it had resulted in a 91 percent drop in the rate of typhoid deaths in the city. When it was created, Chicago's sanitary district covered 185 square miles of the city and some of the western suburbs. In 1955 the American Society of Civil Engineers recognized the city's efforts by selecting the sanitary district as one of the seven engineering wonders in the U.S. Today, the district is comprised of 858 square miles, including nearly all of Cook County. It serves Chicago, 114 smaller cities and villages, and 20 local sanitary districts. But portions of the district, like much of the nation's wastewater infrastructure, are at risk for poor water quality. (MWRD)

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

16

Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago continues to be the organization responsible for Chicago's water quality. In November 2007, all seven of the MWRD facilities received achievement awards from the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA). The awards honor outstanding compliance of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit limits. This perfect feat required an incredible 12,375 chemical standard measurements at or below limits in a single year across the MWRD system. The plants are responsible for handling stormwater in an urban environment, which is a huge challenge. But the department is and has always been a leader in their field dating back to the initial infrastructure and the reversal of the Chicago River which is documented in the book The Chicago River: A Natural and Un Natural History, by Libby Hill. The drawing on page 13 depicts Chicago River in 1929.

How much can MWRD handle? When there is too much stormwater, the combined sewer system overflows releasing untreated waste and stormwater into the Chicago River, the Des Plaines River, the Calumet River, several local creeks, and Lake Michigan. This practice harms the health and habitat of the waterways. As little as one-half inch of rain can cause combined sewer overflows. (MWRD)

When there is too much stormwater entering Chicago's combined wastewater and stormwater sewers, the sewers regularly overflow into underground tunnels, and sometimes the tunnels fill up as well forcing the release of untreated waste and stormwater is released into the local waterways. Water runoff quality is a particular concern for areas that drain directly to the river system. Impacts include sediment contamination, toxicity to aquatic life, bacterial contamination, and excessive phosphorus and other nutrients that cause unwanted algae growth in rivers and lakes. When CSOs occur, they can impact every major waterway in Chicago including: North Shore Channel, North Branch of the Chicago River, the Chicago River, South Branch of the Chicago River, the South Fork of the South Branch of the Chicago River, the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, the Calumet River, the Grand Calumet River, the Little Calumet River, the Calumet-Sag Channel, the Des Plaines River, Salt Creek and Weller Creek. Due to the heavy urbanization in the Chicago area, CSO discharge points are numerous along these waterways. Backflows to Lake Michigan happen when there is a large volume of water in the sewer system and the tunnels. In severe storm conditions excessive runoff requires the opening of gates that allow flow of contaminated waters to Lake Michigan. Urban stormwater is contaminated with a number of pollutants including sediment, heavy metals, petroleum-based hydrocarbons, nutrients, pesticides, chlorides, bacteria and oxygen-demanding organic matter. Backflows can contribute various pollutants to Lake Michigan that degrade near-shore water quality. Elevated pathogen levels that occur with backflows can result in beach closings, and other public health concerns. In order to reduce overflows in the lakes and the rivers, a major infrastructure project began more than 30 years ago called the Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP).

An Infrastructural Answer to Stormwater Management: TARP

The MWRD's ongoing Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP) project was implemented to alleviate the polluting effects of CSOs and to provide relief from local flooding. The "underground river," nicknamed the Deep Tunnel is located 300 feet below the surface. TARP is a man-made waterway which

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

17

provides holding capacity of 18 billion gallons (combined stormwater and sewage.) This is only a "holding place" until water can to be pumped to the water reclamation plant for full treatment. Now, more than 30 years later, the tunnel project is doing what it was designed to do: help improve water quality of the Chicago River and the Calumet River. Here's how it works: Currently, in periods of heavy rainfall, a series of drop shafts allows the combined storm runoff and sewage to flow into the Deep Tunnel system, where it is held and gradually released for treatment. The system consists of 109 miles of underground tunnels, about 300 ft. below the city. Before the Deep Tunnel capacity was there, sewage would spill into the local waterways. Even now, if it is a severe storm with overwhelming rains, the city is forced to open sewer system gates into Lake Michigan. The reversals to Lake Michigan since TARP came online in 1985, have decreased impressively (see Table 10.) The August 2007 Lake Reversal at the North Shore Channel Wilmette Pumping Station was the first CSO to occur since 2002 (the previous release in 2002 was significantly larger than the recent 2007 release.) There are several factors that affect reversals including both intensity of the storm and where the rain is falling. The area where the August 2007 reversal occurred was the North Shore Channel. This area is more sensitive because of geographical characteristics, plus the heaviest rain did occur on the north side of the city. It has been documented that a 2.5" rainfall on the North Side in less than 24 hours can result in a reversal at the Lake (river CSOs occur with much less rainfall.) The South Basin is slower to drain (larger holding capacity) and its proximity to the treatment facility. Soil content, as well as the date of the last rainfall are also critical factors. For example: wet versus dry conditions can have an impact on whether a reversal will likely occur or not. Since 1985, 28 reversals have occurred to Lake Michigan. When they occur, MWRD begins water quality testing immediately to evaluate the dispersal of overflows across the Lake. The local water intake facilities are also alerted to the release and account for their occurrences. TARP has proved its worth in storing stormwater until waters recede and allow for adjustments to be made in MWRD treatment plants. A measure of TARP's influence is documented the local river ecology, (significant improvements in plant and animals in the area.) Since TARP came online there has been a dramatic rise in the number and the type of different fish species in the Chicago River as shown in Table 11. (Lanyon) Since TARP went online, there have been other measurable benefits. It's estimated that since the first of the tunnels went online in 1985 throughl 2001, more than 578 billion gallons of CSOs have been captured and conveyed to the water reclamation plants for full treatment. This improvement has helped waterways increase in both the fish population and number of species present as documented (Table 11.) Residential basement flooding has been reduced and there are fewer floodwater discharges to Lake Michigan. But more needs to be done before Chicago has storm water completely under control. Todd Main, director of policy and planning with Friends of the Chicago River, said, "Our goal is to make the Chicago River fishable and swim able by 2020 and to do that we need dedicated leadership to secure the local, state, and national funding." TARP funding was initially 75 percent EPA, followed by additional funding from the state revolving loan fund and parts of McCook Reservoir will be built with money from

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

18

the Army Corps of Engineers. The existing infrastructure will also be updates with plans outlining a replacement of aged infrastructure in three of the MWRD plants, at a couple billion dollars.

TARP: Going Deeper... Even More Relief is on the Way

The 7-billion gallon McCook reservoir, in the southwest suburbs, will follow in two stages in 2015 and 2023. The Thornton Transitional Reservoir, currently in use in the south suburbs, will be replaced in 2014 by a permanent, 7.9-billion-gallon reservoir a short distance away. These reservoirs are the final piece of TARP, see Figure 8.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

19

Figure 8

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

20

Aside from MWRD, Chicago's Department of Water Management additionally spends approximately $50 million per year to clean and upgrade its 4,400 miles of sewer lines and 340,000 related structures already in place. Figure 9 shows the current floodwater management projects across Chicago: Chicago's city organizations acknowledge that the "built" infrastructure (including their upgrades and even TARP) may not meet all of the needs for managing wastewater and stormwater. The MWRD believes that managing stormwater needs to be in line with Chicago's "Emerald City" reputation for green initiatives. General Superintendent of MWRD Richard Lanyon says best management practices that were not on the table 20 years ago--are now considered routine, including the following: McCormick Place expansion, Bubbly Creek rehabilitation, and the retrofit for former USX Steel. (Lanyon)

McCormick Place Expansion When McCormick West Convention Center/McCormick Place was built in Chicago, the storm runoff from the roof goes into the sewer system but it has an underground drainage into Lake Michigan (it's a 27 acre site so the commitment and expense to do this was a huge accomplishment!) (Hanneman) Bubbly Creek Restoration For over 100 years, the South Fork of the South Branch of the Chicago River carried away the waste of the Union Stock Yard and surrounding industries. This former marsh became a dumping ground where polluting chemicals underwent microbial decomposition, producing methane and hydrogen sulfide gases that bubble to the surface, thus, earning the South Fork its nickname of Bubbly Creek. Now the MWRD is separating the sewer there for a restoration. The goal is to not have Bubbly Cree return to the monstrous liability made famous by Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. The creek is on its way to becoming a cleaner creek and a way to safely processes urban stormwater. (Wetlands Initiative) USX Steel Retrofit The retrofit of former USX Steel site to allow the area's stormwater to have a "first flush" into the sewer system allowing dirty water to be treated, then directly additional stormwater runoff directly into Lake Michigan. (Clean the River)

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

21

Figure 9

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

22

CSO of August 2007 Coincides with BP Permit Controversy

During the August 2007 rains and overflows... an environmental controversy began to swirl over the British Petroleum Whiting Refinery that makes pollution releases into Lake Michigan. Ironically, the very same week that rain storms resulted in a large dump of untreated sewage into Lake Michigan, BP grabs headlines for its new pollution permits (allowing for contaminates into the Lake.) Notably, the differences from BP's permits and a stormwater release is that one dump is regulated, the other is not. Also, the BP release is made up of refinery waste including large amount of ammonia and heavy metals. (Wastewater also has ammonia and heavy metal make up, although it's believed to be in a more diluted form.) The irony is that while a nature-driven emergency dump, and a planned, permitted dump may not be created equal... they both lead to poor water quality. The evolution of what happened next is evidence that increased information leads to community action. (Indiana Chamber)

BP Permit Plans

First, the details of BP's new permit. BP's Whiting Refinery was granted an expansion permit which included the increase (within EPA limits) of pollution into Lake Michigan. BP obtained regulatory approval to increase average daily discharge limits for ammonia from 1,030 to 1,584 pounds per day and for total suspended solids (TSS) from 3646 to 4925 pounds per day to help modernize the BP Whiting refinery and greatly increase the amount of Canadian heavy crude it can process. Valerie Corr, a BP spokeswoman said on the company website in August, "We're confident we can modernize the Whiting refinery so it can make an additional 620 million gallons of gasoline per year for Chicago consumers from Canadian crude oil in a way that protects Lake Michigan and complies with the law. Both Indiana environmental officials and the EPA are satisfied that our project is safe for the lake," she said. But the release would happen less than three miles from Chicago's beaches and the actions were not acceptable to many people. Even Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley acknowledged that the new wave of discharges may well fall within the legal limit but he claimed that being within the limits was not good enough, and threatened legal action against the Refinery. (Hawthorne) The rebuttal from BP's company website: "It is understandable that people who live and enjoy Lake Michigan would be concerned about any such increases. We hope you will consider the following: First and foremost, our treated water discharge is 99.9% water. We absolutely do not release sludge or toxic waste streams into Lake Michigan. As part of the project, we plan to invest about $150 million to enhance our existing wastewater treatment capability to ensure continued operation in compliance with the law and protection of the environment. We have worked openly and closely with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, IDEM and environmental organizations throughout the permitting process. All state and federal requirements were met with every step having been done properly with the oversight of regulators whose charge it is to ensure that aquatic and human life are protected. Our water discharge from the Whiting Refinery complies with the law now, and will in the future. We continuously strive to be a responsible company. For example, as part of one of our key environmental performance programs, the Whiting Refinery reduced total suspended solids from its water discharge by 40 percent in just the past four years. This is

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

23

just one of the ways we have demonstrated our focus on continual improvement in environmental performance. Our commitment to continuous improvement will carry on as we modernize the refinery. BP is committed to environmental and community leadership, including holding open dialogue with stakeholders to address questions and concerns. These are commitments the Whiting Refinery has worked hard at during the 117 years it has been in business ­ and we know that is the only way for us to be successful in the decades to come."

Public Fights For Water Quality

BP's efforts to make more petroleum (even their claim to reduce oil costs,) even their "proof of performance" showing improvements in suspended solid reduction did not deter the criticism or pressure for them to avoid additional lake pollution. Photo 5: Eddie Veddar of Pearl Jam

Protect the Lake and Environmental Illinois stood their ground fighting the new permit. Even rock stars spoke out against BP. Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam announced from a Lollapalooza rock stage that if people made a fuss, the public outcry would make the difference. It did. A petition surfaced with more than 70,000 supporters. The signatures came below this statement: "I believe the proposal to allow increased dumping of ammonia and toxic sludge into Lake Michigan from British Petroleum's oil refinery in Whiting, Indiana is unconscionable. Certainly a company that claims to be `Beyond Petroleum' can also be beyond polluting our waters. Please halt progress on this proposal now and find a way to deal with the waste this plant produces other than dumping more of it into Lake Michigan." And of those, 12,000 people also signed a boycott pledge to BP which reads: "I'm going to buy gas somewhere else today, and every day until you agree to avoid any increase in pollution into Lake Michigan." (Protect the Lakes) Environmental columnist Rich Trzupek called the attack on BP hypocritical because the City treatment plant was also releasing polluted wastewater into Lake Michigan. "Discharge shows Chicago's hypocrisy," Trzupek wrote September 8, 2007:

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

24

"Having jumped on the `BP is poisoning the lake' bandwagon, the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago dumped a load of waste into Lake Michigan that vastly exceeded anything the oil giant has contemplated." The Trzupek article accounts the storm pushed the MWRD's north side treatment plant's capacity to treat waste to the breaking point, "unleashing a torrent of raw sewage into the lake." Trzupek claimed the dump of more than 1.6 million pounds of solids and ammonia into the lake was worse than BP's plans. Even if BP operated its treatment plant at the maximum discharge levels allowed (which it would not), Trzupek wrote, it would take about eight months to match the amount in the wastewater release that happened in one day. The article points out candidly that "a discharge more than 200 times larger than what BP proposed should capture attention, at the very least, you would think they would have headed over to the treatment plant with buckets and started bailing." Perhaps it is not the city alone, nor the MWRD who should be bailing. Citizens, even rock stars who stood on stage enraged by BP's permit request should think about getting their own (figurative) bucket and helping to improve water quality in their own way. Ironically, in the hours surrounding the storm, a news article out of Warrenville, Illinois announced "BP America today promised to operate its Whiting refinery to meet the lower discharge limits contained in the refinery's previous wastewater treatment permit." The company agreed to stay within lower limits. But the citizen interest in water quality was displayed! If those same 70,000 individuals who signed the petition were educated about the problems with CSOs and acted to reduce the water overload that can occur during storms in the name of "water quality," would CSO's be prevented? Even lessened?

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

25

Handling Stormwater with Community Action

The MWRD that handles the bi-zillion gallons of water around Chicago has these directions on their website: "During periods of high flow, every gallon of wastewater and stormwater kept out of the sewer system is a gallon that will not add to a CSO discharge. Examples of ways to reduce the wastewater load include avoiding unnecessary water usage, toilet flushing, dishwashing, clothes washing, and showering. Additionally, individuals and businesses could install rain barrels/cisterns to collect rainwater runoff from their roofs. This water would be used for garden/lawn watering and similar uses, thereby reducing both the impact of heavy rain events and the use for potable water for non-potable uses." MWRD water management philosophy is that simple changes in water use can add up. These water usage concepts might work day to day. For example, they encourage water consumption during offpeak hours. Is it possible that public use habits could reduce usage enough water to prevent the CSOs that occurred August 23rd? If water consumers were to follow the actions detailed by MWRD--- would it be enough to help? It's true that reducing the wasted water going down the drain can add up. First, consider a storm, and all the H2O. One inch of rain on a thousand square feet equals 623 gallons. One inch of rain on one acre equals 27,151 gallons. That's a lot of water. If it's coming fast, it will be overwhelming. The MWRD says Chicago has 100 gallons per capita per day usage. Consider the 70-thousand people that signed the anti BP petition, perhaps those 70,000 people complied with a stormwater action alert asking them to change habits prior to, during, and immediately after the storm event. Consider data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The reduction of usage can be estimated through the calculations below. These estimations are for illustration only and are unlikely to add up in this exact amount during peak water events. These estimations are to show the overall concept of the potential to reduce water entering the treatment plants. Reducing Usage Adds Up According to USGS Household Chore Avoided Dish Washing Clothes Cleaning Bathing Toilet flushing (at least one time) One rain barrel on a property Total Saved Per Person Number of Gallons Saved up to 20 up to 10 up to 50 up to 3 up to 80 up to 183 gallons

More H2O Math: 70,000 people x 163 gallons (of water used per person) = 11,410,000 gallons of water used If half of that amount of water were saved, it's still 5,705,000 gallons and well over the 224 million gallons was dumped in the August 23 storm.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

26

From the USGS: Household Chore Bathing Showering Teeth brushing Hands/face washing Dishwashing Dishwashing by hand Clothes washing, using a machine Toilet flushing Glasses of water drunk Water Used (in gallons) 50 gallons 2 gallons per minute 1 gallon 1 gallon 20 gallons per load 5 gallons per load 10 gallons per load 3 gallons 1/16th of a gallon (per 8 oz. glass)

Simple math is by no means an exact calculation of what must occur. The usage would have to be diminished in the same regional areas where the rain was occurring-- and at the appropriate times, plus there would have to be a large amount of compliance. Plus, consider how much can really be captured in practices like rain barrels. For every inch of rain that falls on a catch area (i.e. a roof) of 1,000 square feet expect to collect approximately 600 gallons of rainwater. Rainwater harvesting systems do lose some of the rainwater. Afterall, most rain barrels are only 50-80 gallons. But the overall concept is that if there are a core group of people out there willing to take action for water quality, a program should be designed to alert them to when, where, and why they need to take action. And Chicago's August rain storm was just one event, one example. There are many cities facing the issue of CSOs and poor water quality.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

27

Chicago is Not Alone: Combines Sewer Overflows are a Water Quality Threat Nationwide

Not just Chicago, but a large area of the country could benefit from an action alert program. Combined sewer overflows are a water quality threat both to the environment and to humans. Among the principal pollutants in CSOs are microbial pathogens and toxins (ammonia, metals, oil and pesticides) that wash from streets into the sewer system during a rain or snowmelt event. See Figure 10. Figure 10: CSO Communities in the US

Approximately 40 million people in 32 states live in cities with combined sewer systems; most of these systems are found in Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois. Alliance for the Great Lakes Dale Bryson aggressive letter about water quality and the Clean Water Act stating that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) policy mandated that communities dramatically reduce or eliminate their CSOs. He said the EPA began working with municipalities to improve antiquated sewage systems and establish a short-term plan to control these discharges as well as a long-term control plan. To date, some communities have stepped up to make plans while others have not. (Bryson) CSOs are still a major water pollution concern for 772 cities, according to the EPA's 2004 Report to Congress: Impacts and Control of CSOs and SSOs (sanitary sewer overflows, which are associated with another type of sewer system.) Although some major cities like New York City and Philadelphia have combined sewer systems, most communities with CSO problems have fewer than 10,000 people, according to the EPA report. One of the problems that make CSOs worse than in other area is size of the community and their tax base. Larger municipalities are more likely to have sufficient tax base and water users to finance remedies to CSO problems. (Tibbetts) The CSO is also a difficult problem to oversee and control because it's a natural threat that leads to a CSO. CSOs annually result in an estimated 850 billion gallons of untreated wastewater and stormwater being discharged into U.S. waterways, according to the EPA report. That's a lot of water to regulate! For example, the EPA and Great Lakes state governments completed only 66 inspections of combined sewer overflow systems in 2004, primarily in Illinois, Indiana and Ohio. In the four years prior to 2004, the states

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

28

reported only 35 inspections across 358 CSO communities. While EPA has brought a number of cases in court, only three states - Michigan, Ohio and Indiana - have initiated any enforcement action against municipalities violating Clean Water Act CSO requirements. (Clean Water Act)

CSOs in the Great Lakes

Great Lakes Public Interest Group (PIRG) contributed to the report, "Backed Up: Cleaning Up Combined Sewer Systems in the Great Lakes." The report studied municipalities in the Great Lakes and other Midwest states including: Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Their report found that more than three out of five of the municipalities in the Great Lakes states do not meet minimum Clean Water Act requirements for combined sewer overflows. In some cases the compliance rates are even worse. Sixty-two percent of the municipalities are not meeting the basic maintenance or reporting requirements for combined sewer overflows, and 54 percent do not have approved long-term plans required by law for upgrading sewage collection or treatment systems, the researchers found. (PIRG/ENS) The researchers found that more than half of Great Lakes municipalities do not have long-term plans in place to clean up the problem of combined sewer overflows. A total of 54 percent of the towns and cities still do not have approved long-term control plans. Twenty-two percent of these municipalities have not submitted the plans to the states for approval. The coalition says, "Because the planning process is truly long-term, and may require up to 20 years to complete, the backlog in development and approval of plans could leave the Great Lakes exposed to raw sewage from CSOs for decades to come." While it is clear that Chicago is leading the way in the stormwater arena from their CSO management, to their BMPs, to hi-tech upgrades, to innovative policies and procedures-- there is a new way for them to approach stormwater management. If Chicago could first attempt, and then succeed with an aggressive action alert program, it might benefit many other cities that do not have the funding and policies to currently handle their CSOs. A stormwater action alert plan would not only benefit the communities struggling presently but could also serve as a "buffer" tool for dealing with the forecasted changes ahead for wet weather. The water conservation concept is important not just for storm water events but also for non storm times because the water stress on combined sewers is so significant. The emphasis can extend from water habits to the significant advances in water appliance technology including low flush toilets, low flow faucets, and many other appliances. The adaption of habits along with new technology is an important combination as many US areas will face probable climate change. Chicago is one area that could see increases in heavy precipitation in the future.

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

29

Climate Change Brings More Stormwater: Increasing Intensity, Duration, and Frequency (IDF)

The scientific assessments by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently concluded that "the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate." Looking at climate data, there's no question that climate is changing (the argument over the cause to global warming is another paper!) Of particular concern: the increasing intensity, duration, and frequency of extreme rainfall events. This increase is occurring across the country and could bring overwhelming stormwater. Illinois is one example of a climate getting wetter. Climatologist Jim Angel has researched Northeast Illinois annual precipitation which he says averages about 37 inches (Figure 11). "Past annual values have ranged from less than 25 inches to more than 45 inches (and variability is expected.) Around 1970, the Region became noticeably wetter and this continued into the 1990s," according to Angel. Data from official reporting sites suggest that the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s were relatively wet decades compared to the earlier records. Precipitation for the first nine months of 2007 is 34.25 inches, which is 5.56 inches above normal. Angel notes that the global climate change occurring may or may not be directly related to regional weather changes over the Chicago area. Yet, the data in these climate records obviously shows a trend toward wetter weather as shown below in the graph (no matter what the direct cause.)

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

30

Figure 11

* The Northeast Illinois region includes the counties of Boone, McHenry, Lake, DeKalb, Kane, DuPage, Cook (Chicago,) LaSalle, Kendall, Grundy, and Will. The smooth line in each of the graphs is a sixth order polynomial - a technique for fitting a smoothed curve to a set of points. Its use here is to illustrate the key features in graphs. This technique has no predictive skill of future patterns.

More Climate Studies Suggest Wetter Trends

Despite the cause of increased precipitation trends, studies show the weather is trending wetter; and the storms are increasing in frequency and intensity. A study "Heavy Rainstorms in Chicago: Increasing Frequency, Altered Impacts, and Future Implications," showed wetter trends using data collected from rain gauges in the Chicago area. The information collected from a network of gauges was used to assess the temporal and spatial distributions of heavy rainstorms (1989-2001.) The 12-year average was 4.4 storms per year, 40 percent more than in the 1948 to 1980 period, reflecting an ongoing Midwestern increase in heavy rains. The total rainfall from the 53 heavy rainstorms (12 year analysis) was

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

31

the most intense over Chicago, reflecting previous observations that the influence of the city (possibly urban heat island) and Lake Michigan on the atmosphere causes an increase in heavy rains. Impacts from the record high number of eight storms in 2001 revealed that efforts to control flooding including TARP, did reduce street and basement flooding in the moderate intensity storms, but the two most intense storms, each with 100-year rainfall values, led to excessive flooding and a need to release flood waters into Lake Michigan. Results suggest continuing increases in the number of heavy rainstorms in future years, which has major implications for water managers in Chicago (and elsewhere.) The results from this study also suggest that there will be more storms in the future beyond the scope of TARP. (Changnon) In another study, "Summer Flooding at Chicago and Possible Relationships to Urban-Increased Heavy Rainfall," Changnon looked at two types of flooding in the Chicago metropolitan area: minor and major. Minor type floods (in basements and underpasses) usually result from localized heavy rains ( 3hour duration) with return intervals of 1 to 2 years, and more major floods result from rains with return intervals of 2 to 5 years (or more). He cited urban factors (urban heat island) might lead to increases in warm season rain events in Chicago with 1- to 4-year return intervals. He concluded that these return occurrences lead to 10 to 100 percent more flooding events in Chicago than expected. The range of increase varied (but was an increase) and his suggestion was that the increases in storms should be accounted for in drainage designs. His solution is a logical, yet expensive one! (Changnon) Another researcher, Yiping Guo, looked at intensity duration and frequency. Guo reported that while hydrologic design standards for urban drainage systems are commonly based on the frequency of occurrence of heavy rainfall events-- even more heavy rain should be expected. Observations of recent climate history indicate that the frequency of occurrence of heavy rainfall events is on the rise. In Guo's study, the rainfall intensity­duration­frequency (IDF) relationships were determined to represent the climate conditions of the first and second halves of the last century. He stated that this increasing trend will likely continue in the future due to global warming. Using these IDF relationships, the impact of the observed increase in heavy rainfall events on the design and performance of urban drainage systems were quantified. The purpose of his research was to show the need for updating rainfall IDF relationships to reflect changing climate conditions. In other words, he concluded that the design of new and retrofitting or replacement of old urban drainage systems needs to use IDF relationships to maintain design standards. Guo's suggestion was that the climate used to design current projects might not have accounted for climate change. (Guo)

Preparing the Public for Future Stormwater

Many efforts are underway to keep the system state of the art in places like Chicago. But the infrastructure changes will take time and money. And while they are underway, stormwaters will come. And rain will need a place to go. The biggest problem in preserving water quality begins with managing rainfall. Tipping the scale in favor of improvements takes more than just a "stormwater education." A plan is necessary which urges actions. Instructions that are given in a direct, instructive, and repetitive manner is essential. An article by Miguel De Oliver in Environment and Behavior, "Attitudes and Inaction: A Case

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

32

Study of the Manifest Demographics of Urban Water Conservation" states many people care about the environment but their attitudes were not reflected in action. His article analyzes the response to a residential urban water conservation program by using municipal water consumption data at the census tract level in San Antonio, Texas. Oliver found that people take action for the environment based on demographic variables like income, education, and political affiliation. They also were influenced by voluntary and mandatory measures. Results reveal substantial disparities between what people said they cared about and what they actually did. Mandatory measures were adhered to more so than voluntary suggestions. New York Times writer Andree Brooks wrote about water conservation in 1994 his article about how water use reduction was not happening despite all the encouragement to do so. His article began, "The right to an abundance of domestic water at little cost is something Americans have traditionally taken for granted, like free speech. And they revel in the opportunity." Opportunites to educate the public on new technology for water control including low flow appliances and other conservations steps could prove to be another significant step forward in the conservation movment. Many failed attempts at water conservation were written about in the article. Then, Doug Kleine, executive vice president of the Soil and Water Conservation Society was quoted, "You have to continually remind people and find ways to eliminate obstacles to behavior change," Mr. Kleine said. "You can't just tell them once." (Brooks)

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

33

Conclusion: Alert Water Consumers to Take Action

To many water consumers, stormwater is just the water running by while it rains. Not everyone realizes that the water is being polluted as it races by their feet. Even fewer realize that when dirty water rolls down the drain it will go one of few places: perhaps into a treatment plant to be "cleaned," sometimes it goes straight back to the streams, or in the case of combined sewers it might be spewed out in overflow to a local waterway. Water consumers do not think about the fact that the water which falls from the sky may someday, someway become the water that streams from their faucet. As awareness grows in the mainstream about water quality concerns, there are those who will turn off the water while they brush their teeth to conserve a gallon or two; some may pick up their pet waste; and even more will dispose of their oil properly. While environmental education s l o w l y seeps into the average household, storms are happening that overwhelm infrastructure and affect water quality. There is a way to approach responsible watershed management in communities which does not cost the millions of a reservoir design, does not take time to build, and does not require legislated policy to enforce. The next step in responsible watershed management is to understand the weather and the geographical make-up of a watershed. Define what runoff parameters pose the greatest threat to water quality. Then alert the average water consumer to urgent action. Community Action Alerts during storms could improve urban water quality because action alerts will motivate people to do something urgently. Also, new information continuously surfacing about the environment and its relationship to public health and ecology should be motivating for many water consumers. An example of where community action might have made a difference was the storms in August 2007. There was time to issue alerts and there was time for water consumers to act. For days, rainfall was overwhelming the system.. During a live broadcast on Fox News Chicago, the forecast warned hours in advance that the heaviest rain would occur in the Northern Suburbs. This is the location where the CSOs occurred. See Figure 12-13 of live TV coverage from August 23, 2007 on Fox News Chicago. Figure 12 Figure 13

While the storms were fast moving... there were warnings posted more than 24 hours in advance by the Storm Prediction Center in Norman Oklahoma calling for the "slight risk" of severe weather development in the area. Also, Severe Thunderstorm Warnings were posted by the National Weather Service. Flood Advisories and Warnings had also been issued for all the local waterways that were high by

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

34

the Hydrologist at the NWS. The storms were well forecasted and even during the storm development there was live television coverage available to inform people in the area about the storms potential for high winds and flooding rain. Water consumers may have chosen to act to keep water out of the sewers if they knew what to do and when to do it. A stormwater action alert plan needs to be prepared, tested, and evaluated. Water consumers would need to comply for the plan to produce results. And the process would take time to show effectiveness. But if consumers are given a new opportunity to think about how their actions affect the environment, it is a step in the right direction. Ralph Waldo Emerson said, "The ancestor of every action is thought." Stormwater does not have to be a burden, it can be a resource we use and protect, but it takes ideas and action!

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

35

Sources

Angel, Jim. Personal Interviews. [email protected] 217-333-0729 September ­ December 2007 Angel, Jim. "Rainfall Trends in Northeast Illinois." Illinois State Climatology Report. June 2007. http://www.sws.uiuc.edu/atmos/statecli/Events/NE-IL-trends/rainfall.htm#Fig1 DA 9/10/07 Brooks, Andree. "Your Home: Reducing Water Usage." New York Times. September 4, 1994. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940CE4DE1438F937A3575AC0A962958260&sec=& spon=&pagewanted=all DA 10/6/07 Changnon, Stanley A. and Nancy E. Westcott. "A record number of heavy rainstorms in Chicago in 2001." Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 73-85, 2002. DA 10/6/07 Changnon, Stanley A. and Nancy E. Westcott. "Heavy Rainstorms in Chicago: Increasing Frequency, Altered Impacts, and Future Implications." Journal of the American Water Resources Association, Paper No. 01262. vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 1467-1475, 2006. DA 10/6/07 Changnon, Stanley A. "Summer Flooding at Chicago and Possible Relationships to Urban-increased Heavy Rainfall" Water Resources Bulletin. Paper No. 79094, pp. 70-86, 2004. DA 10/6/07 Chicago Stormwater Management Guide. Public Act 93-1049 Act by the Illinois State Legislature on November 17, 2004, 2006. http://www.mwrd.org/Engineering/Stormwater/default.asp http://www.cdfinc.com/CDF_Resources/Chicago%20GuideTo%20Stormwater%20BMPs.pdf DA 9/22/07 "Controlling and Abating Combined Sewer Overflows." Office of Inspector General Evaluation Report. Report No. 2002-P-00012, pp. 1-60. August 2002. DA 11/22/07 De Oliver, Miguel. "Attitudes and Inaction: A Case Study of the Manifest Demographics of Urban Water Conservation" Environment and Behavior, vol. 31, no. 3, 372-394, DOI: 10.1177/00139169921972155, 1999 Environmental News Service. "Great Lakes Fouled With Mix of Storm Water and Sewage" Washington, DC. May 23, 2005. http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/may2005/2005-05-23-05.asp DA 11/22/07 Guo, Yiping. "Updating Rainfall IDF Relationships to Maintain Urban Drainage Design Standards." Journal. Hydrologic Engineering. Vol. 11, Issue 5, pp. 506-509: . Hamilton, Ontario, Canada DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2006)11:5(506) September/October 2006

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

36

http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=JHYEFF0000110000050005060000 01&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes DA 11/04/07 Hawthorne, Michael. "City Fights BP Permit." Chicago Sun Times. September 2, 2007. The Grinning Planet. "ATOMIC CANNONBALL OFF THE HIGH DIVE" . . . AND OTHER CAUSES OF WATER POLLUTION: A List of Water Pollution Causes." June 2006. http://www.grinningplanet.com/2005/09-06/water-pollution-causes-article.html 9/20/07 Hanneman, Joe. "Chicago Digs Deep McCormick Place Storm Tunnel" McCormick-Place.html DA 10/12/07 Underground Construction.

November 5, 2001. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-5055259/Chicago-digs-deep-

Hill, Libby. The Chicago River: A Natural and Un Natural History. Lake Claremont Press. Lake Claremont, IL. pp. 1-292. 2000 Horist, Jill. Personal Interviews. Manager of Public Affairs. Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago, [email protected] 312-751-7909 September ­ December 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "1996 Global Temperature Changes 1861­1996." http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/UniqueKeyLookup/SHSU5BUP43/$File/il_impct.pdf DA 10/02/07 Lanyon, Richard. "Floodwater Release into Lake Michigan Threshold Storm Rainfall Amount." Metropolitan Water Recalamation District of Chicago, 1996-2007 Study. August 3, 2007. Lanyon, Richard. Personal Interviews. Superintendent Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago. [email protected] 312-751-7900 September ­ December 2007. Metropolitan Water Reclamation Distric of Greater Chicago. "Water Quality Assessments 2006 Annual Report." no. 07-38, June 2007, p. 5,16,17. www.mwrd.org/reports DA 11/01/07 National Weather Service. "Severe Weather Event August 23, 2007" http://www.crh.noaa.gov/crnews/display_story.php?wfo=lot&storyid=9877&source=2 DA 9/30/07 Potter, Megan. "Study Claims Pollution Causes 40% of Deaths," The Cornell Sun. August 2007 http://cornellsun.com/node/23801 10/20/07

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

37

Protect the Lakes. BP Petetion Protect the Lakes. August 2007. http://www.protectthegreatlakes.org/news-releases/great-lakes-news/ DA 10/20/07 "Statement on BP Permit for Whiting Refinery: Rules Followed, Project Should Move Forward." Indiana Chamber. August 27, 2007. http://www.indianachamber.com/newsdetail.asp?ID=3406 DA 10/20/07 Tibbetts, John. "Spheres of Influence Combined Sewer Systems: Down, Dirty, and Out of Date" Environmental Health Perspective. EPA Report: vol. A464­A467, pp. 113-117, July 2005. Trzupek, Richard. "Discharge shows Chicago's hypocrisy." Northwest Indiana Times. September 8, 2007. http://nwitimes.com/articles/2007/09/08/opinion/guest_commentaries/doc77e75926ef27b9d28625734f0 075fbc9.txt 11/22/07 Trzupek, Richard. Person Interview via email. [email protected] September ­ November 2007. The Wetlands Initiative. "Bubbly Creek Wetlands Initiative." http://www.wetlandsinitiative.org/BubblyCreek.html 11/22/07

CAPSTONE/Freeze Part One

38

Information

Microsoft Word - 4823731D-45D6-288351.doc

38 pages

Find more like this

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

1225861


You might also be interested in

BETA
Microsoft Word - 4823731D-45D6-288351.doc
NRDC: Rooftops to Rivers -- Green Strategies for Controlling Stormwater
Microsoft Word - CHIPO P. MUBAYA