REPORT ON WORKSHOP SESSION: ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPACTS OF ZERO, OR DE-MINIMS, IMPACT POLICIES

摘要

The purpose of this Thursday afternoon workshop keynoted by George McMahon was to address the economic and social impacts of zero, or de-minims, impact policies. The participants summarized their discussion into the following key points regarding the use of zero discharge as a regulatory standard. 1. Zero-discharge is an unrealistic, outdated concept. As a society, we need to create regulations that are adaptive to scientific findings and societal goals, and are results oriented. 2. Stormwater regulations, in particular, need to be scientific and technology based/focused. 3. Results-oriented solutions should be pursued in development of technology standards. 4. Watershed management plans need to drive the stormwater permits. Structural and non-structural measures need to incorporate or mimic natural processes that operate in a watershed. An excellent example of where the participants thought that the regulatory standard of zero discharge would fail is the area of pathogen control. The potential for pathogens in water is typically assessed using indicator organisms. The first question that was raised during the discussion is "Does the management tool (the measurement of indicators) accurately reflect the risk?" The second was regarding the costs and risks of the "cure." The costs of stormwater-runoff disinfection are exceptionally high and the potential for causing disinfection by-products exists. Stormwater pathogens are an example of the need for advanced cause-and-effect research to avoid the risk of inappropriate regulation. The workshop participants observed that education of the permit writers and general public is also lacking. The participants agreed that the goal of all regulations should be to achieve clean water. However, it was believed that a zero-discharge regulatory standard might be insufficient (as well as unachievable based on the limitations of current technology) to get 'clean water' in urban receiving streams. The limitations of current technology) to get 'clean water' in urban receiving streams. The zero-discharge regulations do not address historical pollution contributions. It was realized that much of the impetus for zero discharge is a result of court cases and the desire of communities and permit writers to set a regulatory limit that can be measured and defended. It was expressed that the education of the regulators, the legal profession, the environmental groups and the general public would lead to results-based permits. These permits would allow people to determine the techniques to achieve the desired results, and to determine acceptable costs.