Madison Hiking Utility Rates: Local Power, Anyone?

Tuesday's MDL reports the Madison City Commission plans to raise my neighbors' rates for electricity, water, and garbage. on electricity, the city says, Don't blame us!

Ericsson described the municipal electric utility as only a "distributor of power" and not a producer. He said that the city had to increase its rates partly due to the increased cost of electricity that Madison was billed from its suppliers -- the Western Area Power Administration and Heartland Consumers Power District.

According to Ericsson, the city electric utility wasn't itself generating many new expenses and thereby creating bills that needed payment.

"We're buying some capital things, but not a lot of things," Ericsson said [Chuck Clement, "City Moves on Utility Rate Hikes," Madison Daily Leader, 2010.11.09].

Come now, Commissioner Ericsson. How can you blame Russell Olson and all the nice people at Heartland? Instead of shifting blame, the city could Power Forward™ with some local energy production, if it would just listen to its creative neighbors and local entrepreneurs.

Meanwhile, just how much will electricity bills rise in Madison?

In 2010, city electricity customers would pay about $105 per month for 1,200 kilowatt-hours of electrical power. With the rate increase, customers will pay about $114 for the same 1,200 kwh, an increase of $9 per month [Clement, 2010.11.09].

Quick comparison: Here at Madville Times World Headquarters, safely removed from the city limits of Madison on the western shore of freedom-loving Lake Herman, my family used an average of 1431 kilowatt-hours per month over the past year (minimum: 566 kWh from mid-September to mid-October of this year; maximum 3765 kWh during the December 2009–January 2010 billing cycle, including that cold Christmas blizzard). That's includes our heat, which is all electric. Average monthly bill with Sioux Valley Energy: $93.

More electricity, less cost. Ah, country living....

Water is cheaper in town, since the city has its own wells, while we Lake Herman denizens have our water piped in from Chester (or De Smet?) and support a network of 2200 miles of pipe. Hmm... have your own source, pay less... is that another argument for Madison to develop its own local power sources, or maybe even get gung ho like the Army and set a goal of energy self-sufficiency?
-----------------------------
Update 2010.11.13 08:30 CST: General Manager Mike McDowell writes from Heartland Consumer Power District's new multi-million-dollar headquarters that Madison's increased electrical rates aren't Heartland's fault, either.

Senator Johanns: Move Keystone XL Away from Ogallala Aquifer and Sand Hills

Hat tip to Great Plains Tar Sands Pipelines!

Here's what I've been waiting for: A Republican to stand up to TransCanada and try to protect his constituents from the Keystone XL pipeline. Senator Mike Johanns of Nebraska wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this week to declare that he cannot support the Keystone XL pipeline based on the information thus far presented by TransCanada and the State Department in its inadequate draft environmental impact statement (DEIS).

Routes of TransCanada Keystone pipeline system, with initial/projected maximum oil capacities. Image from Great Plains Tar Sands Pipelines.

Senator Johanns shares the concern of many Nebraskans and other folks who drink water that Keystone XL poses an unacceptable risk to the Ogallala Aquifer, which supplies (Johanns quotes from the DEIS) "78% of the public water supply and 83% of irrigation water in Nebraska." Johanns also objects to the absence of substantial discussion of the unique Sandhills ecosystem, whose sandy soils might allow oil spills to penetrate the soil faster than they would elsewhere.

Senator Johanns hammers on the point that the DEIS assumes Keystone XL must cross the border at Morgan, Montana. He acknowledges that the nearly straight line from Morgan to Steele City, Nebraska, crosses the least land and thus poses what on paper looks like less environmental impact than routes that detour here and there from that straight line.

So the Senator from Nebraska proposes a whole 'nother route:

Understanding the primary role that distance plays in the consideration of pipeline alternative routes, I was disturbed by the fact that the DEIS contains no substantial discussion of a route that would run parallel to the existing Keystone route from Steele City, Nebraska, north to the U.S. border in Cavalier County, North Dakota. This route would be far shorter than the proposed route, and shorter than every alternative considered in the DEIS. And if—as the DEIS has argued—shorter distance generally coincides with a less severe environmental impact, then one could conclude that such a route would be better for the environment [Senator Mike Johanns, letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, 2010.10.14].

Uff da. Check that map: The purple dashed line is the hypotenuse Johanns doesn't like. The red line is the Keystone I route that runs through eastern South Dakota.

Now there's a tricky question: do we cause less environmental damage by digging a new, shorter route or by laying Keystone XL along the longer existing route? Do we double the leak risk for eastern South Dakota, or do we split the risk with our West River neighbors? Do we subject a whole new crop of landowners to TransCanada's intrusions, or do we subject landowners on the Keystone I route to another year of the same distress they went through in 2009?

You know, we could avoid difficult questions like this altogether by simply denying TransCanada the permit for its harmful, unnecessary, and potentially defective pipeline. Senator Johanns isn't quite to that point: he says "it is in our national interest to obtain oil from allies" and that "appropriate use and construction of oil pipelines can directly meet this national interest." But if the State Department doesn't consider the Keystone I parallel route for Keystone XL, the Nebraska Republican may be ready to join the chorus saying a flat No to Keystone XL.
---------------------------
Update 19:14 CDT: The State Department has given no indication of when it might approve the Keystone XL permit [James MacPherson and Josh Funk, "Canada-US pipeline on hold amid oil's recent woes," AP via Rapid City Journal, 2010.10.17].

More Stimulus "Failure": $61 Million for Lewis and Clark Water

Oh, that darn stimulus package: it keeps doing things! Good things for South Dakota!

The latest benefit accruing to South Dakota thanks to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: $4.5 million for the Lewis and Clark Regional Water System. That's in addition to $56.5 million in stimulus dollars pumped into the project last year.

Counter to all the popular South Dakota grumbling about big government, local boosters insist that slurping up 45 million gallons a day of Missouri River water is vital for the growth of rural communities like Madison, Parker, and Bereseford.

Local boosters should note that Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin voted for the stimulus package that is keeping Lewis & Clark's workers on the job, while Mis-Representative Kristi Noem still says she would have voted against the stimulus.

Noem continues to insist, counterfactually, that the stimulus failed. How's it feel to be a failure, Lewis & Clark?

Got High Water? Thank Neighbors' Drainage

The Brookings Register runs two articles that we should read together:

First, Ryan Woodard hears from a county official that the recent flooding on Six Mile Creek and elsewhere in Brookings County was of unprecendented intensity:

“I’ve had people on Six Mile Creek that were here in ‘69 say this is the highest they’ve seen it,” Brookings County Emergency Manager Todd Struwe told Brookings County commissioners this week.

“I’ve been here 18 years. I’ve never seen the water this high and I’ve never seen it come this fast” [Ryan Woodard, "Flood's Intensity Unprecedented, County Officials Say," Brookings Register, 2010.10.01].

The Register's John Kubal then turns to Dr. Carter Johnson to discuss the potential impacts of climate change on the Prairie Pothole Region (you know, the great American duck factory we live on). Dr. Johnson discusses a lot of the economic value we get from our prairie wetlands for free—lumber, hunting, water purification. Then Dr. Johnson turns to the economic costs of draining the wetlands, which include more intense floods:

Contrast some of the above with the draining of wetlands and tiling of fields, which leads to water going into small streams and creeks. Johnson noted that people living along the Missouri River saw floods in the 1990s "made worse by the fact that we drained wetlands" [John Kubal, "Could Our Duck Factory Go Dry?" Brookings Register, 2010.10.04].

Dr. Johnson proceeds to other important findings from his climate change research. But it's worth noting that, when it comes to our wetlands, we perhaps need to worry less about Al Gore's jet plane and more about our own digging and physical transformation of our land.

Got high water? Ditch and yard and back forty filling up faster after a big rain than they used to? It could be that, in addition to the heavier rain falling on your land, you're getting heavier drainage from your upstream neighbors. When farmers lay tile under their land and when developers dig up and tile and pave new subdivisions, they remove earth from the prairie-wide filtration system. Water that used to sit and seep out of those acres now comes rushing downstream. That's exactly what's supposed to happen: you plant corn or build a new McMansion, you don't want it sitting in water. But that drainage also shifts your water problem to folks downstream... who have a higher likelihood of seeing their homes and businesses washed away.

Report: Big Stone Coal Ash Polluting Water with Heavy Metals

A new report from the Environmental Integrity Project, in cooperation with Earthjustice and the Sierra Club, identifies the Big Stone power plant among 39 sites nationwide where coal ash is leaching arsenic and other heavy metals into drinking water and surface water. These 39 sites are in addition to 31 EIP identified in a February 2010 report and 67 identified by the EPA.

What does EIP's report say specifically about Otter Tail's Big Stone facility in northeast South Dakota?

1. There is "Demonstrated damage to groundwater moving off-site (at northern and eastern property boundaries and south toward the Whetstone River)."
2. "21 of 25 monitoring wells report exceedances of groundwater standards downgradient of CCW disposal units in two aquifers. Arsenic has been up to 13 times and lead up to 7 times the MCL, boron up to 34 times the Lifetime Health Advisory and sulfate up to 224 times the SMCL at 56,000 mg/L. Despite mounding of groundwater at the property lines, no monitoring of nearby ponds or private wells has occurred."
3. There are 119 wells within 5 miles of the plant, as are the Whetstone River and Big Stone Lake. ["In Harm's Way: Lack of Federal Coal Ash Regulations Endangers Americans and Their Environment," Jeff Stant, project director & editor, Environmental Integrity Project, Earthjustice, Sierra Club, 2010.08.26]
   

South Dakota's Department of Environment and Natural Resources doesn't think the pollution comes from Big Stone's coal ash. According to EIP, DENR says the contamination comes from "water softener brine wastes." I wonder if that came up at all while the legislative interim committee took public comment Tuesday as part of its review of the DENR.

Now remember, Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin says we don't need EPA regulations on coal ash, since that might hurt business.

Let's hope that, as the EPA beings public hearings on its proposed coal ash rules next week, it ignores the profit-über-alles propaganda of Herseth Sandlin (oh, and Heartland Consumer Power District) and pays attention to the real contamination produced by Big Stone and other coal-burning power plants around the country.

Madison Hesitates to Extend Sewer to Lake County International

The City of Madison won't take s--- from just anyone... at least not without serious consideration. At last night's city commission meeting, commissioners acknowledged a written request from Jeff Bloom to hook his expanding farm implement business, Lake County International, into the municipal sewer system. Bloom requests permission to connect a two-inch force main to an existing city sewer line just east of the F&M. Bloom says Lake County International will pay all connection costs.

Process a little more poop, make pure profit—no-brainer for the city, right? Wrong:

Before the commission officially acknowledged the request, Commissioner Dick Ericsson said officials should seriously consider whether it was proper for Madison to connect its utility system to a new customer located outside of the city limits. Ericsson said the city wanted to act as a good neighbor, but the commissioners would need to discuss where they would draw the line in connecting outside users to a municipal utility [Chuck Clement, "City Officials to Consider Providing Service to Lake County International," Madison Daily Leader, 2010.08.23].

I've wondered if the city would cut any breaks for Lake County International the way the city did for competitor James River Equipment for its efforts to expand jobs and economic activity in the greater Madison area. Lake County International is a Chamber of Commerce member, just like James River Equipment, contributing to efforts to improve the local business climate. Lake County International isn't even asking the city to pick up the costs for its infrastructure the way James River (or, for that matter, East River Electric) did. Lake County International would cover its own costs and increase city revenues. Given that the city has nearly maxed out its credit card on projects like the five-million-dollar loan to improve the wastewater treatment plant, the city shouuld be leap at the chance to bring in more revenue. Saying yes isn't a matter of being a "good neighbor"; it's just good business sense.

I suppose Lake Herman folks dreaming of a central sewer system might want to take notice of the city's hesitance to play ball with outsiders. Twelve years ago, a system running around the lake and then piping our waste straight to Madison for treatment was the closest thing to a financially feasible option Banner Engineering could dream up. Supporters have explained that Madison would only benefit: more users means more revenue for the city's sewer. But if a big business right on Madison's doorstep gets Commissioner Ericsson's wary eye, what chance would crotchety Lake Herman have of hooking a 200-property sewer system into Madison's poop processor?

Gut Check for Conservatives: Support Obama's Defund of Lewis and Clark

Here's more federal money for Dr. R. Blake Curd to send back to Washington: funding for the Lewis and Clark water system. President Barack Obama is proposing "just" $2 million for the water project in his FY 2011 budget. That's a lot to you and me, but L&C project chief Tory Larson says that "won't even keep the lights on."

Essentially, according to Larson, the President is defunding this project and saving Uncle Sam and you the taxpayer money. But I guarantee my conservative neighbors who run my fair city and its economic development organs will soon be begging our Congressional delegation to pour more federal money into Lewis and Clark to run that big water pipe up to Madison.

So to my Glenn Beck-lovin' neighbors, I pose this question: Jason, Linda, Neal, cousin Aaron, where do you stand on this specific project? Is this federal spending acceptable? Or do we thank the President for cutting the appropriation, ask him to cut further, and build our own water system with local money?

Lake County Clean Water Committee Holds First Meeting

Lake County did a little trendsetting last night, convening the first meeting of its new official clean water committee. We are one of the first counties in South Dakota (if not the first) to create such an official committee to focus on protecting our local watersheds.

I attended as an appointed member. Fifteen of my neighbors were there as well (see roster below). Don't worry: we didn't impose a 50% water tax or hire a county septic tank inspector. Our committee doesn't have authority to impose anything, only propose.

Right now the committee is in planning stage. We need to get clear on our mission before we start lining up projects and resources to accomplish that mission. Defining that mission won't be too hard, since we have the prior work of the volunteer Interlakes Water Quality Committee on which to build. That group gathered years of data, identified nearly a hundred problem areas, and sketched perhaps a dozen projects that would benefit water quality around Lake County. Rather than reinvent the waterwheel, our committee plans to pick up as much as possible where IWQC left off.

What will we focus on? Martin Jarrett, committee chair, offered several goals: reduce phosphorus, nitrogen, and sediment run-off; reduce algae blooms and bacteria contamination; and increase water clarity. We'll draw up a mission statement next month that will likely revolve around those goals. Then be ready to hear a lot about grasy waterways and buffer zones.

We didn't spend much money last night: the county might reimburse us for mileage, but that's it so far (Commissioner Pedersen didn't mention whether they'll discount my mileage if I bike in). But the committee did discuss the need for a paid employee. Some folks on the committee would prefer the job be handled by interns or other part-timers to save money. Others see a need for a full-time person who can stick around and build a little institutional memory. Some members of the old IWQC said their group ran out of steam in part because there's only so much one can ask of volunteers, and that water quality work requires a regular, long-term commitment worth a salary.

Should the committee decide (and the county commission agree) to hire a water quality employee, the cost would not come entirely from the county coffers. During the meeting, Jay Gilbertson said his organization, East Dakota Water Development District, could make matchin funds available. Martin Jarrett noted the Lake Madison Development Association had planned to offer $5000 to the IWQC to support an employee for the water project district that voters on Lakes Madison and Brant defeated last summer. Jarrett suggested the LMDA might consider offering a similar amount to support a county water official.

But before we try hiring someone, we need to define exactly what work we want to do. That work is pretty clear: there are too much nutrients, too much sediment, and too much fecal bacteria in our lakes and streams. Our lakes get too green and too silty. We need to protect our watercourses and wetlands to improve everyone's quality of life in Lake County.

We'll define that mission at next month's meeting. The Lake County Water Quality Committee plans to meet the fourth Thursday of every month. So next meeting will be Thursday, February 25, at 7 p.m. (site to be determined—stay tuned!).

-------------------------------------
In attendance at last night's meeting:

• Martin Jarrett, chair
• Chuck Robbins
• Charlie Stoneback
• Dale Droge
• Kent Petersen
• Craig Johanssen
• Scott Pedersen, representing the county commission
• Linda Hilde
• Michelle Goodale, district manager, Lake County Conservation District
• Brian Schultz, representing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service district office headquartered here in Lake County
• Jan Nicolay
• Jay Gilbertson, manager of East Dakota Water Development District
• Charlie Johnson
• Walt Schaefer
• Larry Kotten
• Cory Allen Heidelberger
  

Clay Rural Water Says No to Hyperion

I went to bed last night with an extra spring in my snore: Rebecca Terk of Flying Tomato Farms had just broken the news that Clay Rural Water System voted unanimously to reject Hyperion's request that CRWS supply up to 12 million gallons of water per day to Hyperion's proposed oil refinery near Elk Point. Supplying Hyperion would have required CRWS to tentuple its current 1.2 million gallon/day capacity. The dealbreaker, however, was Hyperion's Wimpy request that CRWS pay for the new water infrastructure today, with the promise that Hyperion would pay them back several Tuesdays from now.

Clay Rural Water's vote is an encouraging sign that not all South Dakotans can be driven to crazy, unsustainable actions by the wild promises of Big Oil. But it does not leave Hyperion high and dry. CRWS's nay may actually be just what Hyperion wanted. Hyperion didn't bother to send a rep to last night's meeting. The company actually provided CRWS with a model "Form of Intent Not to Serve"—when a corporation pays its lawyers to take time to write up a legal document for you, beware.

The denial statement, adopted by the CRWS board, says CRWS consents to Hyperion seeking water from other suppliers. This negates the possibility that CRWS could use federal regs to stop other suppliers from seeking Hyperion's water business. It could well be that Hyperion knew all along that CRWS lacked the resources to become a heavy industrial water supplier and just wanted to play a little CYA before it went seeking a biger aquifer-draining supplier.

But for now, Clay Rural Water customers can be happy that they won't experience a sudden drop in pressure in the shower if the Hyperion refinery ever fires up.

Clay Rural Water Considers Hyperion Water Request Tonight

Thirsty? Hyperion is. They are asking Clay Rural Water Systems to agree to provide 10–12 million gallons of water per day to their proposed oil refinery near Elk Point.

The intrepid Rebecca Terk of Flying Tomato Farms reminds us that Clay Rural Water meets tonight, Thursday, Jan. 28, at 7:30 p.m. She gives directions (30376 SD Hwy 19, 11 miles north of Vermillion) and offers to arrange rides to this really important public meeting.

Why is this meeting important? Terk notes that CRWS has six reservoirs with a total capacity of 1.04 million gallons. Hyperion could drain those reservoirs before morning coffee and still be thirsty for more.

So if you're thirsty... or if you just want to keep your taps running in Clay and Union County, you might want to drop by the Clay Rural Water meeting tonight and ask the directors how they plan to water a big slurping oil refinery and their current customers.

DENR Releases Draft Report on Water Quality: Improved Ag Practices Needed

The Department of Environment and Natural Resources wants your input on the 2010 Integrated Report on surface water quality in South Dakota. The draft report (available in here in big honkin' 7-megabyte PDF glory) details water quality conditions in lakes and streams across the state. The big picture (click to enlarge):

Figure 7: 2010 South Dakota Water Body Status
(DENR draft 2010IR, p. 56)

Blue is good—i.e., the stream or lake meets the environmental standards for all of the activities the state's scientists say it should support (swimming, breeding fish, irrigation, etc.). Red is bad—the stream or lake exceeds the total maximum daily load (TMDL) of nitrates, phosphates, sediment, coliform bacteria, or other pollutants that the water body can handle safely and naturally.

Lake County sits atop a nicely blue spur of the Lower Big Sioux watershed. Lakes Herman, Madison, and Brant all check out, Category 1, good for all designated uses. Our lakes got rated for high "Trophic State Index" (that's high nutrients, high algae) back in 1999, and the DENR assigned us TMDL to work toward. Sounds like we're doing o.k.... so light work at our first county water quality committee meeting Thursday, right? ;-)

Actually, no. The majority of lakes in the state are still classified as eutrophic or hypereutrophic, thanks to ag runoff and soil erosion into our shallow lakes. Plus, the east fork of the Vermillion River isn't in such good shape; the stream that drains the county line between Lake and McCook has high fecal coliform concentrations—i.e., cooties from cow poop. Maybe I'll wait on that kayak trip....

Statewide, the draft report says two thirds of our streams fail to meet water quality standards for all of their designated uses. Lakes are in better shape, with one in five lake assessed failing to meet standards for all designated uses. In all, DENR plans to list 45 lakes as impaired and requiring TMDL development.

So where does this pollution come from? Well, in the lakes, as the Farm Bureau likes to say, Thank a Farmer™:

The major problems of South Dakota lakes continue to be excessive nutrients, algae, and siltation due to nonpoint source pollution (primarily agricultural). Although land-use practices have improved in many agricultural watersheds, internal phosphorus recycling continues to negatively impact the trophic state of many lakes. Aging reservoirs have also become more eutrophic as many are now approaching their expected life spans. Water quality degradation due to acid precipitation, acid mine drainage, or toxic pollutants, is presently not a problem in South Dakota lakes [DENR, draft 2010 Integrated Report, p. 50].

Fecal coliform bacteria from ag operations and from wildlife cause problems in the largest portion of impaired South Dakota streams, followed by suspended solids (silt from erosion) and E. coli.

So on the good side, we don't have a lot of chemical industrial pollution, although I suspect frequent reader Mr. Kurtz can tell us a thing or two about the impacts of mining in the Black Hills. The draft report also notes that DENR has started water monitoring in Union County to get baseline data that will allow us to assess the impact of the Hyperion oil refinery (or the Hyperion landfill, or whatever comes first).

But we've got plenty of work to do to address the problems caused by our #1 industry, agriculture. More grassy waterways, more conservation acres, more erosion control—let's keep working to turn more of that map blue!

Lake County Names 13 Citizens, 1 Hothead Blogger to Water Quality Committee

Recently Steve Sibson called me a "government insider." I told Steve pretty much anyone who knows me and Madison politics would find that statement laughable.

Alas, I take it all back. Steve is right: the Lake County Commission just made me a "government insider" by appointing me along with 13 other neighbors to the new Clean Water Quality Committee. The roster, as printed in the nice letter from Bert Verhey that I just retrieved from my frigid mailbox:

• Craig Johannsen, Winfred
• Jan Ncolay, Chester
• Chuck Robbins, Wentworth
• Larry Kotten, Wentworth
• Cory Allen Heidelberger, Lake Herman
• Dale Droge, Madison
• Terry Ryan, Madison
• Linda Hilde, Madison
• Walter Schaefer, Winfred
• Martin Jarrett, Madison
• Michelle Goodale, Madison
• Bryan Schultz, Madison
• Charles Johnson, Winfred
• Kent Petersen, Madison
  

Clean Water Quality Committee—hmmm... does that mean we aren't going to discuss the quality of dirty water?

The CWQC starts meeting as soon as one of us calls a meeting. Yahoo!

GAO Report: Ethanol Has High Water Cost, Especially in South Dakota

I've written previously that, among other things, increasing corn ethanol production may drain water supplies and be harm water quality. The General Accounting Office has issued a new report that supports the idea that, even if ethanol is a good domestic alternative to foreign fossil fuel, we need to consider the other resources we'll pour into the ground to get it.

The report notes that South Dakota is part of a twelve-state region that produced 89% of America's corn in 2007 and 2008 and 95% of the corn ethanol in 2007. The states in USDA Region 7 (that's us, along with North Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas) rely heavily on irrigation to get corn to grow. In our neck of the woods, growing one bushel of corn requires 865 gallons of irrigated water. In the other big corn-producing states (the rest of the Midwest, from Minnesota and Iowa over to Michigan and Ohio), it rains enough that the same bushel of corn requires only 19 to 38 gallons of irrigation.

Given an average yield in 2008 of 153.8 bushels per acre, another section of grassland turned to corn grown with irrigation will consume another 88 million gallons of water. That's as much water as South Dakotans consume for domestic use every eleven days. And that's a single section turned to corn. Look bigger: South Dakota's ethanol refineries use 291 million bushels of corn each year. That corn took a staggering 252 billion gallons of water to grow, almost 90 years worth of South Dakota domestic water consumption.

Ninety years of domestic water supply, traded for one year of ethanol production. How long can we sustain that trade-off?

p.s.: U.S. Farm Service data suggest that between 2002 and 2007, 475,000 acres of grassland in North and South Dakota were newly plowed for crop production.

Save Money, Save Lives: Skip Black Friday for Advent Conspiracy

What would Jesus do on Black Friday? I doubt he'd be clipping coupons.



It's consumer frenzy time again. Gorge yourself at the table Thursday, gorge your shopping cart at the mall Friday. I feel ill already.

KELO runs the usual "buy buy buy!" propaganda under the guise of sage advice for shoppers. "Especially with the economy absolutely, you have to get out there and get the most for your little bit of money and hopefully it will stretch further," shopper Joyce Plastrow tells KELO's Courtney Zieller. Coupon clipper Amanda Roth gets her second plug in a month for her blog efforts to help consumers buy-more-save-more.

So why not do something a little more Christmas-y: buy nothing. Give your money to someone other than Wal-Mart. Give your money to build water wells in Africa. Give to the Advent Conspiracy, which says $10 buys clean water for one child for life.

According to Living Water International, every 15 seconds, another child dies because of lack of clean drinking water. Run that countdown while you wait for an open cash register at Best Buy.

This Friday, do something that will matter more and last longer than any of the plastic junk you're thinking about buying from China. Do Reverend Billy proud. Stay home Friday. Donate online. Do the Lord's work, not the economy's.

Lake County Water Data Shows Need for Environmental Action

Dakota Water Watch has issued a report on this year's water monitoring projects around eastern South Dakota. For Lake County lakes, the news mixed:

1. Lakes Madison and Brant showed higher than average water clarity, as measured by Secchi disk readings. Lake Herman was a little murkier than the average for all bodies of water monitored. Round Lake was really murky in the summer, but cleared up fast come September and October.
2. Brant Lake had the lowest E. coli readings in the county. Lake Madison had higher but still not bad bacteria counts. Lake Herman's bacteria counts were higher yet, including one spike in June to 232 colony-forming units per 100 mL, the highest reading found during the entire 2009 monitoring project. 232 cfu/100mL is still below the EPA standard (and newly adopted South Dakota standard) of 235 cfu/mL as the maximum single sample level for immersion recreation waters... but it's awfully close.

One way to read this data: Folks on Lake Madison continue to owe Lake Herman a big thank-you for filtering out the crap and supporting their McMansion property values (top current asking price: $870K on Woodland Drive). Of course, I'd still rather live on the rich folks' settling pond than the rich folks' jet ski range.

The non-class-warfare way to read this data: we need to take action to improve water quality on Lake Herman. While my neighbor Larry Dirks continues to fantasize about building a giant central sewer system with someone else's tax dollars, I would suggest some practical action we can take locally, through combined action of the Lake Herman Sanitary District and Lake County:

1. Begin inspection of all on-site septic systems. There are some folks on Lake Herman and around the county who may have bought property and don't even know where their septic tanks and drainfields are, let alone whether they are in working order. Whether we require inspection and cleaning according to some timetable or pass a transfer inspection requirement like what Iowa just enacted this summer, we should inventory and monitor the onsite systems around the county.
2. Enforce zoning regulations. I've heard some folks grumble about houses being built on land around the Madison Country Club that doesn't have the right soil for an effective drainfield. The county and the state DENR have some pretty clear rules about soil quality and other requirements for installing onsite wastewater systems. If a lot doesn't meet those rules, the county needs to get serious about saying to developers they either can't build there or they need to make improvements.
3. Establish more buffer zones: the south side of Lake Herman has cattle pasture right at the water's edge. Many of our tributaries have cultivation very close to the watercourse. Lake County should seek funds to support its own CRP-style program to expand the riparian buffers in these areas to absorb more nutrients before they reach the lake.
   
4. Continue monitoring. We can't make good policy without good data. The East Dakota Water Development District and Interlakes Water Quality Committee have provided a valuable service by starting the water monitoring project that has gathered this data about our lakes for three years now. Lake County's soon-to-be-formed water quality committee should recommend continuing this project so we can base our local water policies on science, not wishes and guesses.

Flush High Water Bills with Greywater!

Noting a recent surge in wastewater-related posts, an eager reader mentions greywater for conservation. He notes that long-time Madison resident and inventor Paul Redfield plumbed in a system that piped his laundry and shower water into his toilet tanks. I've heard others mention how silly it is that we Americans use gallons of drinkable water to flush away a cup of urine or a little bit of poo. My correspondent wonders how many millions of gallons of water we might save by repurposing our greywater.

Ah! A numbers question!

A little Googling takes me to this Miller-McClune article about California's relaxation of its greywater rules last summer. California officials estimate a family of four recycling just its laundry greywater can save 22,000 gallons of water per year.

Let's see... family of four... Madison has about 6500 people... carry the two... almost 36 million gallons of water per year, just from recycling laundry greywater. 36 million gallons: that's over a month's worth of the water the Lewis and Clark water pipeline is supposed to bring our fair city after 2019.

Or, for my dry little family of three, 22,000 gallons equals seven months of household water consumption. Yowza!

Now don't just go busting through your drywall and looping new pipes through your walls; greywater takes a little thought. And don't go running that shower drain straight out to your garden: the state has rules on that.

But if you plumbers out there are looking for a little recession business, greywater systems might be the ticket. Tell your customers you can save them money: Go green, go grey!

Now That's Green Thinking: Treat Wastewater with Algae

An eager reader informs me that her click on one of the Google ads here led her to something interesting: Algaewheel, and Indianapolis company that has developed technology to treat wastewater with algae. They've licensed the technology to another Indiana company, Oldcastle Precast, which has successfully installed algae tech in commercial and residential applications.

The folks at Algaewheel cite the following benefits of their green wastewater treatment system:

1. Save energy: Wastewater treatment plants account for 3% of U.S. electrical demand. Algae run on solar power. Algaewheel tech could cut that energy demand by half or more.
2. Produce energy: The company touts the biomass produced in the treatment process as an excellent power source.
3. Save the planet: Algae treatment is carbon neutral. It also captures nitrous oxide, which conventional wastewater treatment systems emit and which is 300 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
4. Save money: Algaewheel says their systems cost the same or less to build and save money long-term with less maintenance and fewer chemical inputs.

Hmm... if the Lake Herman Sanitary District can't afford to build a central sewer system, maybe we can build some neighborhood treatment greenhouses—one at Dirks Resort, one on Territorial Road, one on the golf course—charge 'em up with algae from Lake Herman, and burn the biomass to generate our own electricity. Wow—maybe we can use that budget reserve after all!

Lake County to Form Water Quality Board: Will It Have Teeth?

The Lake County Commission held a special meeting last night at Madison's 4-H grounds to discuss the formation of a new water quality board. About three dozen area residents attended and contributed their thoughts on what such a board should try to achieve.

Commissioner Scott Pederson led the discussion, and I must admit, he does a pretty good job of laying out the issues, inviting questions, and building on the input of audience members. He did put one audience member on the spot: after a fair amount of generally favorable responses and input, Pederson turned to Steven Kant, who opposed the formation of the water project district on Lake Madison last summer, and asked if he had any problem with this new plan.

Kant was already on the record two months ago saying he supports a county-sponsored water quality board. Kant recognizes that a county effort will be able to spread out the tax burden to everyone in the watershed (watersheds—there are three in Lake County) and solve problems beyond the lakeshores.

But Kant also laid down a clear challenge: he looked the four commissioners (Roger Hagemann was absent) in the eye and said the county lacks the guts to enforce the policies the new water quality board may offer.

Case in point: drainage. This issue caught me by surprise; I was expecting a happy discussion of grassy waterways and pollutants. But early in the conversation, John Hess brought up the issue of all the drain tile being installed to move water around the county. Evidently Game Fish and Parks and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife agents have been coming to the county lately to express concern about the amount of water being drained off farmland. When farmer lays tile and drains his water, the next guy downstream gets wet. You get a domino effect of folks tiling to move the extra water they receive from other folks' tiling.

A lot of that water ends up in the wetlands. Now you may think, "Oh, wetlands! The wetter the better!" But as Commission Chris Giles noted, where a foot and a half of water may be good, two foot and a half may be bad for wildlife habitat and feeding patterns. It may also be bad for roads: Farmer Bob may get an inch of water off his planting acres a few days sooner in spring, but that water may collect and wash out roads a section or three downstream, as has happened with a road in Lakeview Township.

GF&P and USF&W have gotten more vocal lately in opposing increased drainage, but evidently the Lake County Commission has not seen fit to oppose any tiling requests. If the new water quality board gets serious, it may find that it's in the county's best interest to stop moving water around and let it settle and filter where it naturally lies.

And that would mean telling certain landowners, "No, no more tile."

Drainage is just one issue, and it's not exclusively an agricultural issue. Homes and businesses building big driveways and parking areas, homeowners dropping rip-rap along the lake, rural homes building septic systems with insufficient drainage, homeowners pouring way too many chemicals on their lawns—all that contributes to water quality problems.

We have to change the way we live and work to address water quality issues. The county has people ready to work on water quality issues—the sign-up sheet drew at least a dozen volunteers for the county to choose from when it appoints this new board in January. The big question is, will the county make the tough choices to put the board's recommendations into action?

Public Gets Involved in Lake Herman Sanitary District Budget -- Mission Accomplished!

Remember what I said about the dismaying apathy around my lovely Lake Herman when it comes to political matters?

Well, we may have shaken some activism loose. The Lake Herman Sanitary District budget process was a success, drawing a dozen residents to participate by calling, writing, or showing up at the two (not on, but two!) meetings we held to discuss and set the budget. A dozen may not sound like much to you, but in a neighborhood with maybe just a couple hundred registered voters, that's like having 250 people show up at a Madison City Commission meeting (if only!).

You can read the press release on the process at the district website; suffice it to say I'm pleased that citizens took the time to say what they want this humble little branch of their local government to do.

Now, if we could just get someone to run for that vacant seat...

100% Tax Cut? Find Out at Tonight's Lake Herman Sanitary District Meeting!

Don't forget: Lawrence Dirks and I (and maybe some interested citizens!) will sit down tonight to see if we can agree on a budget for the Lake Herman Sanitary District. The budget on the table calls for zero levy. We can't do the water quality projects some folks hoped for, but there may still be possibilities.

Our budget is due in the county auditor's office October 1, and we don't have any other meetings planned before then, so tonight's the night. Come listen, come add your thoughts, and see if we vote the right way.