DIRECTOR'S CORNER
Environmental protection in a growth-driven economy
Adapted from a speech presented at Environment Virginia, March 31, 2004
I would like to share some of my thoughts regarding the most basic concept of environmental protection in the 21st century.
If the Commonwealth of Virginia is going to continue to lead in the field of environmental protection, to assure the citizens of the Commonwealth that their environment is healthy - the air is pure, the water is clean and the land safely managed as prescribed by Title XI of the Virginia Constitution, I believe we have to begin to discuss the future of the environment in terms of the growth Virginia is experiencing and will continue to experience, as well as our economy and the forces driving future development.
- What demands will that growth place upon our natural resources?
- What is the best way to plan for and address those demands while protecting our environment?
We can start by taking a quick look at the population and employment growth projections for Virginia. According to the Virginia Employment Commission, population is expected to continue to increase from the 2000 level of 7.2 million, to 8.2 million people by 2010 and to more than 9 million people by 2020, and 10 million people by 2030. There will be nearly 3 million more Virginians in the year 2030 than there are today, and employment will track population growth as well.
If we look at the areas expected to see the majority of these jobs, the Virginia Employment Commission projects increases of 20 per cent or greater to be in the "golden crescent" of Virginia.
- Northern Virginia/metropolitan Washington - 37 percent
- Virginia Beach - 20 percent
- Richmond - 20 percent
- Charlottesville - 20 percent
That growth must influence the manner in which we approach environmental protection, because if we don't do our jobs well, that growth can have a seriously negative impact on the environment. Wetlands protection, solid and hazardous waste management, air quality, water quality improvement, water supply, open space preservation, habitat protection and transportation are all in need of creative, cooperative approaches to keep our Commonwealth's environment and citizens healthy.
Our problem and challenge is to address a paradox.
We need safe and healthy places for our neighborhoods and homes, places to work and places to play.
Whether at work or at home or at school, we all want and need modern conveniences - we have computers at home, at work and at school. When we're between those locations we have cell phones and PDAs and laptops and all of the other conveniences of the 21st century. Our demand for electricity is growing, but we're often opposed to constructing new power plants.
We all expect to be able to wash our cloths and dishes and flush the toilet. But while our population is growing, we're often opposed to expanding wastewater treatment plants or building new ones.
We all want abundant, affordable food to eat but we're often opposed to modern farming techniques. And we continue to see more and more conflicts between suburban development and farming operations, and including practices such as biosolids applications.
So, what do we do about this paradox?
Too often, in my experience, there is strong opposition to a proposal for a power plant or food processing operation or wastewater treatment plant without any effort to offer a viable alternative, to suggest a better mousetrap if you will, alternative technologies or better locations.
I recently heard that there's a flood coming - this growth is like a flood, and too many of us are just putting sandbags around our own homes. That doesn't stop the flood. It may make it more of someone else's problem, but it does nothing to stop the flood or address the larger concerns.
I personally believe we will be much better off if we stop ignoring the obvious. What's obvious to me is that it is not only the job of government to solve these problems, it is the job of business and non-profit organizations and every citizen to work together to become part of the solution.
This is how I believe we can solve the paradox:
- Work together on developing creative solutions that address growth impacts in a way that will minimize environmental impacts.
- Solve problems for the "common wealth" - not just our parochial interests - and understand that not all points of view can be fully satisfied every time.
Let me put this in some context by giving a couple of examples of working together to solve a problem. The first one is a classic example of how this can and should work. It involves DEQ, a regulated industry, water quality and an environmental interest group.
Tributyltin (TBT) is a pollutant associated with the ship repair industry. There are several shipyards in Hampton Roads that must deal with TBT as they go about their daily business. During some ship repairs, storm water can become contaminated with TBT. There are extremely low limits in discharge permits, on the order of grams per year - not kilograms per day - due to the toxicity of this particular chemical.
About two years ago we realized that meeting the requirements the way they were prescribed in the permits was not working because of technology limitations. The permit limits could have been strictly enforced, but if the treatment technology to meet those limits day in and day out was not available that didn't really benefit water quality.
It may have penalized the dischargers, but it would not have improved the environment. After some hand wringing and threats of a legislative solution, the ship builders, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and DEQ got together and figured out a way to use the existing technology, meet the water quality standards and re-write the requirements so that water quality was protected and permit limits were obtainable.
As we are faced with more and more difficult decisions regarding human health and the environment, someone has to make the "hard decisions." It's easy to say no, to blame someone else, to stand back and throw stones or hand grenades. Anyone can do that. What's hard, what takes time and talent and creativity and commitment is to be part of the solution, to be constructive and to understand and embrace win-win concepts as in the TBT example. We need to work together on the hard decisions. We need to develop new approaches to managing environmental impacts.
It does work. I cited the TBT example, but there are also exciting examples of regional cooperation among local governments that benefit the environment.
This has happened in the Roanoke Valley and the Winchester/Frederick County area. The local governments are working together to improve air quality. Faced with nonattainment status if they failed to act, they got together with DEQ and EPA and crafted a plan. They didn't have to do it on their own. They could have waited until someone made them. They could have fought any new requirements. But they realized there are some serious benefits to acting quickly and voluntarily and cooperatively. That made sense to the leadership in those communities. They're working together on an environmental problem to improve the quality of life in their neighborhoods. I think that makes sense.
I believe now is the time to approach our environmental challenges constructively and realistically. I would like all of us work together more, and fight and litigate less. Let's join forces to find solutions for our "common wealth."