Anecdotes on stormwater design, management, and regulation by a non-engineer
The purpose of this series is to present case studies and general thoughts on stormwater. When possible, I want to share interesting examples that may offer opportunities to challenge existing paradigms and spark discussion. As an ecologist/toxicologist, I have very much enjoyed this now 20+ year foray into what is often an engineer’s wheelhouse. My hope is that I can offer a different angle on stormwater, as we seem to be increasingly affected by high storm intensities and more stringent regulations across the country.
A Little Historical Context…
Stormwater has, and continues to be, largely the purview of engineers. Engineered designs for managing stormwater have existed for thousands of years and can be seen in both the “ancient” old (Mesopotamia) and new (Mayan and Aztec) world. Designs were empirical and began out of necessity for safety and to protect land uses, such as residences and agriculture. In modern times, empirical observations have been converted into modeling tools to simplify the process greatly.
These days, stormwater issues are getting more complex. Heavy, widespread water pollution generally began in the mid-1800s with the Industrial Revolution but became a more obvious problem following World War II. The first major U.S. water quality law was enacted in 1948 and became much more prominent in 1972 as the Clean Water Act (CWA) we know today. The CWA addresses stormwater because it clearly has the potential to carry pollutants, particularly when it originates from large industrial sites.
More recently, we have become much more aware of the key role of long-term planning when it comes to stormwater. Trying to engineer your way out of a stormwater problem will likely be much more expensive than simply planning well and maintaining a properly designed system.
Although stormwater engineering was once simply about preventing stormwater from being destructive, it has now become at least as much about maintaining water quality. As pollutants become more prevalent in more confined and constrained systems, effects on human health and the environment are likely to be more pronounced, especially when existing ecosystem services are inadequate to mitigate impacts. Moreover, ecosystems expected to treat stormwater, such as wetlands and streams, are now likely protected themselves, and opportunities for “dilution being the solution to pollution,” while still a valid concept, are becoming rarer. Our ecosystems simply do not have the capacity to handle everything we are throwing at them.
That’s the context for this series: How we control and treat stormwater in the context of interesting observations and experiences. The intent is to share stories and thoughts to create conversation and reflection on stormwater played against the regulatory background.
Authors Note
I am an ecologist with a postdoctoral background in environmental toxicology and have been professionally engaged as a consultant in water quality issues since 1989. Recently I have become engaged in a number of legal discussions and disputes regarding water quality; in particular, industrial stormwater, and I continue to be interested by issues that come up during the course of a general stormwater practice.
I am a pragmatist: I have practiced long enough that I have left idealism behind. Idealistic approaches are valid as a theoretical baseline, but anything beyond that must have scientific or well-documented empirical support. Otherwise, idealism is just sort of adorable, if not misguided, and can lead to real problems.
As an ecologist, I respect our ecosystems as much as anyone. Our goal is to protect human health and the environment. Some parts of this series may appear to some that I’m “siding” with industry or other client concerns, but my intent is always to balance idealism against practical and scientific reality.
In summary: “The road to hell is often paved with good intentions.”
Let’s walk the road together and see what we can figure out.
