Water conservation and efficiency are more important than ever in light of this water-climate linkage. Addressing climate change clearly involves major upgrading of our water distribution systems  to protect and enhance carbon sinks and prevent emissions. Leaked water is non-revenue water, and the Hudson Valley’s water distribution system is known to be [leaky] vulnerable to leakage.  Ensuring that water efficiency and conservation are a priority in those upgrades also benefits public health and quality of life. These benefits are interconnected. Water conservation, efficiency, repair of leaks and monitoring of water distribution all improve drought preparedness. They help avoid the need for more energy-intensive ways to create new water supply, such as desalination and wastewater reuse.  They also help avoid the need for increased wastewater treatment (which is also energy intensive) and expanded related infrastructure.  

To fulfill the potential of water stewardship and innovation as a climate response, we lay out strategies in six areas: 

• Watershed planning and green infrastructure for water quality and climate resilience

• Water conservation and efficiency

• Water supply monitoring and tracking

• Flooding adaptation and resilience

• Wastewater treatment efficiency and nutrient management

• “Blue-green” economic development to connect best practices with economic opportunities. 

  
Watershed Planning and Green Infrastructure for Water Quality and Climate Resilience 

Protection of watersheds and water quality are climate mitigation as well as adaptation measures, since both help to avoid the need for new and sometimes energy intensive water supply options, while improving the resilience of watersheds to provide water of sufficient quantity and quality for human uses.  Water stewardship organizations are increasingly working together to revive and strengthen watershed and water supply planning programs.  Watershed planning is a complex, location-specific activity that calls on expertise from many disciplines and requires engagement of diverse community stakeholders to make value judgments about local priorities. It requires serious, multi-year investment of person-power but pays off richly. 

Given the stresses on water resources, watershed planning is not simply about ensuring supply but must focus on improving conservation and efficiency.  In 2011, the American Planning Association called on planners to: “Give priority to measures which improve water use and energy efficiency, such as conservation and reuse, as opposed to measures which would simply increase water supply... Implement operations and pricing policies that reward conservation and accurately reflect distribution costs. Balance ‘duty to serve’ requirements with other community goals, including growth management and water supply and rate stability.” 

“Green infrastructure” is the creation of low-impact landscape and design strategies that manage stormwater runoff and floods while also providing benefits such as cooling and visual appeal. In 2019, Congress enacted the Water Infrastructure Improvement Act, which defines green infrastructure as "the range of measures that use plant or soil systems, permeable pavement or other permeable surfaces or substrates, stormwater harvest and reuse, or landscaping to store, infiltrate, or evapotranspirate stormwater and reduce flows to sewer systems or to surface waters." This perspective has been effectively demonstrated at the site level (e.g. the green roof over SUNY Orange’s Kaplan Hall in Newburgh) and in larger landscapes such as the downtown area in Hoboken, NJ.  It  has much to contribute to climate-smart local, regional and state water supply and watershed planning policies and decisions. 

Planning for green infrastructure was going on as long ago as 2010-2011.  The Hudson Valley Regional Council supported the planning and conceptual design of several dozen green infrastructure projects as municipally owned sites.  The City of Newburgh also created a guidance document for green stormwater infrastructure that has not yet been significantly put to use. This design work could provide a foundation for fast track green infrastructure projects in valuable locations.  

Smart growth - which incentivizes and guides development into areas of existing infrastructure - is a critical underpinning of land use and local government recommendations under the Climate Act to avoid sprawl, reduce transportation emissions and protect natural systems.  Smart growth depends on the availability of water and wastewater infrastructure in priority growth areas.  But there is no guarantee that a water supply or wastewater system serving an area has sufficient capacity to support significant new development.  For smart growth to be feasible, adequate capacity must be  planned in the infrastructure serving designated growth areas. Right now, NY State’s approach to water resources monitoring, planning and management is inadequate for achieving this goal in many geographic areas. 

Increased funding is needed for source water protection, watershed planning, and watershed restoration in New York.  The state should increase staffing and other resources for using available information to track water withdrawals in areas with potential risks of water shortages and scarcity, including areas of more rapid development that draws on groundwater for water supplies. The state should also explore strategies for supporting local and regional studies of groundwater availability in these areas.  

A structured, multi-agency approach to regional water planning should be used to avoid future stresses on water supply resources that would otherwise harm affected communities, the regional economy, and environmental resources.  In fact, much of this is outlined in existing state  law (primarily the Environmental Conservation Law, or ECL) that has not been fully implemented. To realize the potential for this renewed planning effort, the state should revive statewide water supply planning, using existing ECL provisions as a foundation.  This includes steps to: 

• Increase resources and incentives for existing watershed planning and management programs, including Drinking Water Source Protection Program, DOS watershed planning, 9-element and TMDL planning, flood risk management planning, etc. 

• Implement a system of regional water supply planning, prioritizing areas with current or projected deficits in source water availability and piloting approaches in the Hudson Valley. 

• Develop watershed protection and source water protection plans and local regulation to protect and augment aquifer recharge.

• Build upon existing source water protection efforts, with a priority on source waters that are high-yield, highly vulnerable, and stressed regarding water supply or water quality;  

• Ensure tracking of demand for projected developments, especially in connection with these source waters; 

• Clarify what authority and responsibility is currently held by DOH,DEC, local governments or other entities to limit new development where available water is not sufficient.

As these plans are developed, strategies should be put in place to use the statewide and especially regional water supply plans as the basis for regulatory decisions. 

A model to consider adopting is Massachusetts’ Sustainable Water Management Initiative (SWMI).  Now a statewide legal framework, SWMI was developed by the Executive Office of Energy and Environment through formation of a broad stakeholder advisory group which conducted a two-year planning process.  After piloting in four water utility districts, SWMI was adopted as a statewide water management framework.  In essence, it is a program to guide allocation of water resources for human uses while operating within the limits of natural systems.  Ten years since its adoption, the framework is generally accepted and operates smoothly.  

Flooding Adaptation and Resilience

Given the erratic patterns and extreme levels of flooding that we are already seeing, all possible attention should be paid to flooding adaptation and resilience by local governments, stewardship organizations, affected communities and public safety/ emergency management agencies - preferably in a coordinated fashion. All these parties need high-quality education and training about basic climate change science and predictions, including a focus on uncertainty and how to think about and apply this in planning and management decisions.      

Generally speaking, implementing site-scale green infrastructure for stormwater management is useful for reducing local flooding across properties, roads and parking lots.   

To protect public safety, there is a need for tighter municipal regulation of development in flood-prone areas. One good approach is using the FEMA Community Rating System framework for reducing risks and thereby gaining reduced insurance rates for property owners.  Difficult though it is, local governments and communities should begin to explore the subject of strategic relocation out of flood-prone areas.   

To deal with upland flooding in developed areas, resulting from large, sudden rainfalls, communities should plan for evacuation and for longer-term retrofitting of places at risk (like basement apartments) or creating voluntary, flexible options to make sure that people in those places can access emergency shelter or find alternative places to live.

Depleted aquifers increase flood risks; conversely, there is a reduction in flood impacts by augmenting recharge through watershed protection, source water plans and local regulation.  If flooding events increase in number and severity, as predicted, this will likely put stress on New York City’s water supply system. Because of resulting increases in turbidity that watershed land management will not be sufficient to control, the City may have difficulty complying with the Filtration Avoidance Decision, potentially making it necessary to invest in a costly filtration system for its drinking water supply. 

Stormwater management is closely connected with flood management, and good stormwater management can contribute to other aspects of resilience.  For example, using stored stormwater for irrigating trees and other landscaping can be key to promoting cooling on the hottest days.  As extreme heat events increase, the critical public health risks of heat stress may be reduced by using water to enhance growth of trees.  Urban areas with ample tree canopy cover can remain much cooler compared to areas with few trees, reducing peak loads on the power grid and the risk of power outages, and potentially saving lives. These cooling benefits are particularly important  in economically vulnerable communities and others with less access to air conditioning. 

One good way to capture these benefits is an education and technical assistance initiative to support best practices in stormwater management and flood resilience.  Expand the notion of vulnerability assessment to include not only flood likelihood and physical damage, but secondary impacts in the community and opportunities to engage and prepare people in advance. 

Climate informed watershed planning   

As climate pressures increase and climate change impacts are better understood, the practice of watershed planning can and must be modified to take new factors into account.  These include possible migration patterns of plant and animal species, the capacity of the land to absorb storm- and floodwaters, and strategies for restoring ecosystems that will fit emerging conditions. There is no standard method for approaching this, but the fast growing recognition of water stresses suggests that more aggressive attention to protection and restoration is a core element.   All watersheds are impacted by human activity, but urban watersheds are especially linked to the public health benefits of clean air and water, cooling, pollinator and wildlife access, making climate-informed watershed planning a focal point for achieving local environmental justice.  Developing a model climate-informed watershed plan in an urban watershed such as the Quassaick in Newburgh would advance this work and provide a replicable model for other urban watersheds.  

Conservation & Efficiency

Today, there are disincentives to water conservation in the pricing of water and in local policy.  For example, water utilities may derive major revenues from expanding water supply rather than conserving.  However, to encourage conservation and efficient use, we need to establish a hierarchy of water supply options, with conservation and efficiency at the top and the most water intensive supply sources (desalination and wastewater reuse) understood as the option of last resort.  This will require substantial redesign of the policymaking and regulatory system including information flows, incentives and disincentives, and rules for managing water resources.  

The response could be a comprehensive, multi-stakeholder, state-level process to reassess and redesign the incentives and rules connected with the entire system of water supply management, with the goal of incentivizing the most climate-positive, environmentally benign and affordable approaches to water supply delivery.  

• Establish water conservation and efficiency as an important goal for all state agencies and train and staff appropriately; hire conservation experts at the DPS / PSC. 

• Direct DPS staff to set water conservation as an important goal in oversight of water utilities. 

• Consider implementation of a Systems Benefit Charge for water utilities, similar to that in the energy field, for improved water use efficiency programs.

• Continue to adopt specific metrics in NYS Code for water efficient fixtures, appliances, and lawn watering equipment, in line with WaterSense standards.

• Define requirements, provide support and guidance (such as guidance documents, model ordinances and policies); ensure oversight by the state for the creation of water conservation plans and programs (including independent assessment),ensure regulating bodies have appropriate enforcement capability and staff with the needed expertise.

• Establish metrics for conservation programs based on demands that most stress water supply.
  

Because the public has lived under water policies that have had limited enforcement, and because there is widespread perception that water is abundant in our region, encouraging water conservation in the general public is not easy.  However, it is entirely possible and widely accomplished.  A public-facing program should be designed and funded to advance:

-- water-efficient lawn and garden practices, an area of enormous potential savings

-- water-efficient residential toilets, showerheads, faucets

-- appliance and fixture upgrades

-- efficiency measures for commercial and industrial facilities, targeted especially to water-intensive practices

There are well established tools and tactics for these purposes.   

A study commissioned by the Rockland Water Coalition in 2020 drew out more systemic recommendations as well.  This gives us a menu of institutional measures for water conservation and efficiency that include:  

• Water audits – for larger users, including residential and industrial

• Rebates for efficiency measures

• Giveaways of less expensive items such as pre-rinse spray valves and low-flow shower heads;

• Advanced billing practices; 

• Public education;

• Requirements for more efficient industrial equipment and equipment for water-intensive commercial enterprises such as hospitals and healthcare facilities, laundromats, data centers, and restaurants,;

• Identification of high demand customers and evaluation of demand reduction measures targeted to these customers; 

• Direct install programs for more efficient fixtures in low income housing where cost-effective.

• Continue to adopt specific metrics in NYS Code for water efficient fixtures, appliances, lawn watering equipment, in line with WaterSense standards.

• Consider implementation of a Systems Benefit Charge for water utilities, similar to that in the energy field, for improved water use efficiency programs.

• Develop and maintain model ordinances and models at the state level for water conservation policies

• Require water conservation rates, based on best practices 

• Consider a requirement for replacement of inefficient appliances and fixtures at the time of property sale.

Programs using these tactics need and deserve significant public investment and may also attract private sponsorship or social venture development. 

Water that leaks out of community water distribution systems causes increased costs for consumers and wastes energy used for pumping and treating the water. Reducing these losses can save money, reduce GHG emissions and leave more water in natural ecosystems for recreation, habitat and other benefits. There is a need for a comprehensive approach to prevention and repair of leaks throughout the water distribution system. 

The remedy is to establish stricter standards for reducing water losses in water distribution systems and expand resources for leak detection and system maintenance where needed.         

• Require water utilities to conduct annual water loss audits, using the latest AWWA Water Loss Audit version.

• Establish stricter standards for repair and maintenance. Empower state agencies to enforce existing requirements for utility water conservation plans with real consequences for non-compliance.

• Require cost-effective but aggressive loss reduction in particular for stressed water systems with established minimum water loss (e.g. 15%)

• Establish best management practices for reduction of leaks.

• Limit or halt new development in stressed systems facing need for new water supply until water loss has been significantly reduced.  

• Educate local governments on the importance of budget planning for water infrastructure maintenance and leak prevention.

• Communicate success stories through established networks of water system operators.

Water Supply Monitoring and Tracking

We can’t plan if we can’t measure. There is currently no formal tracking of demand in approved and proposed projects in some areas of the state that have faced water shortages in the past. The state is, by default, leaving it up to local, county, or regional government entities to track water availability and how it compares to current and projected water use in growing areas. Planning  ahead is the best way to avoid the need for expensive and possibly energy intensive new water supply projects.  Watershed protection, conservation, efficiency, and leak prevention and repair take time to develop - and funding.  Formal tracking of demand should be mandatory to make these options more viable.

A more robust process for monitoring water availability in groundwater and surface water bodies, and tracking water use and development plans, can be implemented at the regional scale through coordination by county and regional government agencies.  These issues relate not only to quantity and availability issues for potable water, firefighting, and other essential uses, but to water quality related to public health, biodiversity, economic development, and recreation.   The Hudson River has no river basin commission for this kind of coordination and oversight such as the Delaware River Basin Commission and others that cover large parts of NY State.  New Jersey’s state program for assessing and tracking water use and availability in every watershed is an example of a much more coordinated, proactive and robust approach to these critical needs. 

There is a need for a system to ensure tracking of existing water withdrawals and projecting future water demand for new development through a coordinated program of water use tracking and planning.

It is also important to clarify the authority and responsibility that are currently held by DOH, DEC, local governments or other entities to limit new development where available water is not sufficient, and consider what new authority may be needed.  Bring together relevant agencies to explore the best practices of the model programs above as a foundation for planning a program for our region.

Wastewater Management  

Wastewater treatment facilities consume significant energy and frequently emit greenhouse gases, including methane when organic wastes are allowed to settle.  Recent research indicates that the greenhouse gas emissions from wastewater are higher than previously known – globally 5% or more.

The Waste Advisory Panel to the Climate Action Council recommended “taking the ‘waste’ out of wastewater” through coordinated recovery of materials and energy.  Sewage sludge purification and composting is a technically viable industry but is inconsistently allowed under local law. Numerous energy technologies exist for recovering kinetic energy from the effluent of these plants, such as low-impact microturbines.  Also, the power source for a wastewater treatment plant can be renewable through solar power (as done now in Wappingers Falls) or biogas from anaerobic digestion (as done now in Rockland County).  Community scale owners of facilities would benefit from technical assistance to understand these options and more plentiful funding resources to pursue them, but some show motivation to experiment with existing possibilities. 

The Scoping Plan calls for a systematic approach to maximize capture of  materials and energy from wastewater treatment systems.   Efforts to upgrade the many aging wastewater treatment facilities in the Valley are ongoing, and will hopefully benefit from state funding resources as a result of this commitment.   To lay groundwork, DEC should update its 5-year survey of wastewater treatment plants and include energy sources, greenhouse gas emissions, and opportunities for renewable power supply including solar and the anaerobic digestion of the biosolids that are associated with these plants.  Some facilities have such systems in place, such as Rockland County’s.  In addition, new technologies to improve wastewater treatment efficiency should be continuously monitored by regulators – for example, MICROrganic Technologies, a Castleton-based startup that has created a “microbial fuel cell” for capturing energy from wastewater, supported by Columbia University’s technology incubator with funding from NYSERDA.    

It is desirable to update state-level wastewater policy to require and fund energy efficiency and other sustainability measures in community wastewater systems, including energy recovery and production in ways that do not exacerbate GHG emissions or other environmental impacts. The Hudson Valley Regional Council is addressing this need with funding to provide technical assistance to smaller communities. New policy and planning initiatives can develop a more sustainable, holistic approach for wastewater management, including green infrastructure principles and strategies.

• Develop a coordinated initiative to recover materials and energy from wastewater treatment, including the recycling of water where possible, by involving technology research and finance innovation and working with motivated wastewater treatment facilities to pursue opportunities.    

• Expand economic incentives and financing mechanisms for maximizing the efficiency of wastewater treatment processes and powering them with renewable sources such as solar PV or locally produced biogas. 

• In areas without sewers, consider a policy to avoid sewering larger new areas or extending existing sewer service to outlying areas to avoid the impacts on energy, watershed integrity, promotion of sprawl, and other effects of larger centralized wastewater systems.

Blue-Green Economy: Water Restoration and Innovation  

Every aspect of protecting, conserving and restoring water resources translates into jobs and business opportunities.  Hubs for water technology advancement exist around the world -- from Seattle with its maritime focus to Milwaukee with its long-time prominence in water infrastructure, plumbing and appliance technology.  

The Hudson Valley is home to a unique network of water solutions experts, from major environmental and research organizations to major technology companies such as Xylem and startups with noteworthy water and wastewater technologies such as Micro-Organic Technologies. The region has built collective expertise, over decades, through major initiatives including cleaning up PCB deposits in the Hudson and maintaining New York City’s drinking water supply. Water innovation is supported by a Pew Center of Excellence in Water Innovation, jointly operated by Clarkson University and SUNY ESF.

In the Hudson Valley, there is clearly mature expertise around public purposes connected with cleaning up the Hudson and protecting its watersheds.  This translates into a range of civil and chemical engineering specialties that are in continuing demand for climate change adaptation.  The unfinished cleanup of PCB residues in the Hudson River bottom is a reminder of the work still to be done. The possibilities of commercializing this expertise to inform other regions, or creating internal markets for technologies that have both environmental and economic benefits, are still to be understood. 

Conclusion 

This review points to a need to re-envision public water policy and planning statewide.  This could be led by any of the key NY state agencies currently involved with water, including DEC, DOH, the Environmental Facilities Corporation (EFC), DOS, NYSERDA, and the Department of Public Service (DPS) overseen by the Public Service Commission. Just as agencies have been brought together with a mandate to figure out how to achieve the Climate Act’s commitment, they can be brought together to re-envision improved water management in light of climate change.

A great deal of the work called for here can be planned and launched in the existing policy framework, and useful policy tools can be piloted at the local to county scale. Work toward these goals is well underway by the Hudson River Watershed Alliance, Riverkeeper, the Hudson River Estuary Program, Scenic Hudson, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Rockland Water Coalition and other stewardship organizations, as well as university research centers,  private companies and investors.  But more is needed. Scaling up the work of watershed planning, green infrastructure development, and state-of-the-art wastewater treatment are areas of water innovation that form the basis for a blue-green economy in our region, including social ventures designed to achieve ambitious water protection goals.  In developing these responses, the Hudson Valley has considerable strengths to work with, and promise for economic as well as environmental benefits.