Stormwater Management: More Trees, Less Concrete

Chicago built a giant stormwater/wastewater retention tunnel as part of the city’s Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP).  It’s similar to the tunnel system recommended years ago for Detroit (which Detroit couldn’t afford).

But following storms earlier this week, Chicago’s Deep Tunnel filled to capacity and overflowed, spilling polluted stormwater into Lake Michigan.  CBS in Chicago (WBBN) reported, “ ‘All the tunnels combined, it’s 2.3 billion gallons of capacity that we maxed out,’ MWRD supervising civil engineer Ed Staudacher said.”

The lesson over and over again is that big, downstream, end-of-the-pipe processes and facilities by themselves aren’t the solution to combined storm and wastewater overflows in large metropolitan areas.

Another lesson is that concrete and steel remedies such as the retention-treatment basins (RTBs) that are being expanded in Detroit’s system cost more but aren’t as effective as well planned, region wide green infrastructure.

In New York City, Philadelphia and Los Angeles, for example, forward thinking leaders designed and are completing projects to plant a million trees each.

Trees generate oxygen, remove pollution, store carbon, save energy, improve water quality and slow stormwater runoff.

If each of the 120 upstream communities in the Great Lakes Water Authority (GLWA) system rallied service clubs, chambers of commerce, church groups and Boy Scout and Girl Scout troops to plant with thoughtful placement 1,000 trees per community per year, we’d have a million new trees in eight or nine years.  It’s doable.

Making a Joke of Green Infrastructure

A grandfather, wishing to teach his grandchildren how some governments work, began, “Once upon a time, the mayor of a once grand city decided that planting lots of trees throughout the city would improve the environment in several ways.”

The grandfather went on, “When the mayor was driving to work one morning, he noticed a city worker digging a row of holes down the side of the road.  But as soon as the holes were dug, another worker came over and filled them up again. The mayor stopped to investigate.  When he asked what was going on, a workman responded, ‘We’re usually a three man crew, but the one who plants the trees didn't show up this morning.’ ”

Seriously, we in southeastern Michigan need to establish a new benchmark for planting trees. Consider New York City.  In November 2013, the mayor planted the 800,000th tree in a project called MillionTreesNYC “ … which began in 2007 with the goal of reaching one million trees planted by 2017. The initiative is now expected to reach one million trees by 2015, two years ahead of schedule.”

Over the last several years, Detroit, through its water and sewer department (DWSD), a regional planning agency (SEMCOG) and a contractor, has tried to plant about 4,000 trees per year, purportedly to help offset combined sewer overflows (CSOs) that run in the billions of gallons, polluting the Detroit River and Lake Erie.

Anybody want to guess how many gallons 4,000 trees absorb in a year?  (Hint: It’s not in the billions of gallons.)  

Granted, Detroit will never be able to match New York City in tree planting, but c’mon, is 4,000 per year the best we can do?

Let’s hope our new regional water authority (GLWA) and state officials have something better in mind.

Of Trees, Stormwater and Boondoggles

The Detroit Water & Sewerage Department (DWSD) spent years in collaboration with the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) getting ready to plant trees in Detroit neighborhoods and parks as part of a larger plan to control combined sewer overflow.  Scores of meetings were conducted and thousands of personnel-hours expended. DWSD contracted with Greening of Detroit, a non-profit organization, to do the actual planting.  

In a typical year like fiscal 2012-2013, approximately 1500 trees were planted over several weeks in the fall and another 1500 over several more weeks the following spring.  

All three organizations knew or should have known that, at the rate of 3000 or so trees per year, they wouldn’t even be replacing the trees in the watershed that are lost every year through blight, wind, rot, insect infestation, lightning and old age.  

Thus, combined sewer overflow (the justification for the project) is not reduced by a single drop.  I would love to see what the actual total cost of this boondoggle is.

The inclination of DWSD, SEMCOG and Greening to plant trees sparsely along residential streets and in city parks suggests to me that those organizations are more interested in the decorative value of planting trees, much like the city’s discontinued neighborhood beautification program, only now it’s being paid for by DWSD’s ratepayers, as well as taxpayers generally.

Compare the work done privately by John Hantz of Hantz Woodlands.  He, too, spent several years jumping through hoops to get his tree planting project approved by the city. He assembled some vacant city lots, rounded up 1200 volunteers and on one Saturday last month, planted 15,000 trees.

Impressed?  Then look at this.   A private-public partnership in New York City had anticipated planting 100,000 trees per year with a goal of one million trees planted by 2017.  But they’re almost at 900,000 now, so they’ve reset the completion date to 2015.  Granted, Detroit is no New York City, but consider how NYC did it.  They organized with the help of one auto company (Toyota), several foundations and a very active celebrity.  Detroit has all of that and more.  It’s just a matter of how it’s put together and by whom.

We deserve a bigger bang for our buck.