EPA’s new clean-water rules: What a rancher, builder, and scientist say – The Christian Science Monitor

Report on Proposed Revisions to the U.S. Clean Water Act and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Introduction: Regulatory Changes and SDG Alignment

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a significant revision to the “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule, which defines the scope of waterways protected under the Clean Water Act. This proposal, intended to align with the 2023 Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA, narrows the definition of federally protected waters. The revision has profound implications for the achievement of several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those related to water, climate, biodiversity, and sustainable economic development.

2.0 Impact on SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

The proposed rule change directly challenges the objectives of SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) by potentially removing federal protections for a vast number of water bodies.

• Reduced Scope of Protection: The new definition limits federal jurisdiction to “relatively permanent” waterways with a “continuous surface connection” to traditional navigable waters.
• Threat to Water Quality: Critics argue this ignores critical hydrological connections, such as groundwater and ephemeral streams, which are vital for maintaining the quality of larger water systems and drinking water sources.
• Wetlands at Risk: An estimated 55 million acres of wetlands could lose federal protection, jeopardizing their natural filtration capabilities, which are essential for purifying water before it enters rivers, lakes, and aquifers.

3.0 Environmental Consequences for Climate and Biodiversity Goals

The proposal raises significant concerns for environmental sustainability, impacting progress toward SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and SDG 15 (Life on Land).

3.1 Climate Action (SDG 13)

Wetlands are critical carbon sinks, and their degradation poses a direct threat to climate mitigation efforts.

1. Carbon Sequestration: Healthy wetlands store over 30% of the Earth’s soil carbon.
2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The destruction of these ecosystems, which could be facilitated by deregulation, releases stored carbon as methane and carbon dioxide, accelerating climate change.

3.2 Biodiversity and Ecosystems (SDG 14 & SDG 15)

The health of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems is intrinsically linked to the protection of wetlands and tributaries.

• Habitat Loss: Removing protections threatens habitats essential for countless species of fish, birds, and other wildlife, undermining efforts to halt biodiversity loss.
• Ecosystem Services: The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that U.S. wetlands provide trillions of dollars in annual benefits, including flood control, fisheries support, and recreation, all of which are vital for resilient ecosystems and communities.

4.0 Socio-Economic Dimensions and Stakeholder Interests

The debate over the WOTUS rule highlights the tension between environmental protection and economic activities, affecting SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

4.1 Agriculture and Food Security (SDG 2)

The agricultural sector seeks regulatory clarity to ensure operational stability.

• Regulatory Certainty: Industry representatives emphasize that fluctuating regulations create uncertainty for farmers, who require clear guidelines for land and water management to support sustainable food production.
• Adapted Practices: Agricultural groups note that they have already implemented practices to mitigate water pollution, demonstrating a capacity for balancing production with environmental stewardship.

4.2 Construction and Urban Development (SDG 11)

The home building industry views the proposed rule as a means to address housing shortages by reducing regulatory burdens.

1. Development Feasibility: Proponents argue that streamlining regulations for non-permanent water bodies could open up additional land for development, potentially easing housing crises.
2. Balancing Growth and Environment: The challenge remains to ensure that this development is sustainable and does not come at the expense of critical environmental protections and community resilience to flooding.

1. SDGs Addressed in the Article

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

• The article’s central theme is the U.S. Clean Water Act, which regulates pollutants in waterways. The debate directly concerns the protection of water quality and the safety of drinking water, which are core components of SDG 6. The text explicitly mentions that advocates for broader regulations aim to “protect public health – especially safe drinking water.”

SDG 15: Life on Land

• The proposed changes to the “Waters of the United States” rule specifically impact the protection of wetlands. The article states that “as much as 55 million acres of wetlands will no longer be subject to the law.” Wetlands are critical inland freshwater ecosystems, and their protection is a key aspect of SDG 15.

SDG 13: Climate Action

• The article connects the health of wetlands directly to climate change. It quotes a scientist explaining that “Healthy wetlands can capture and store carbon,” and when they are damaged, “they can release that stored carbon as methane, carbon dioxide, or other heat-trapping gases that can accelerate climate change.” This links the regulatory changes to climate mitigation efforts.

SDG 14: Life Below Water

• By regulating pollutants in streams, tributaries, and other waterways, the Clean Water Act aims to prevent pollution from land-based activities from reaching larger bodies of water and eventually the ocean. The article discusses regulating the “amount and type of pollutants allowed in bodies of water,” which is fundamental to protecting marine and aquatic ecosystems from pollution.

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

• The perspective of the Home Builders Association introduces the connection between environmental regulations and housing development. The article notes that easing these regulations “should open up additional lands for development” and could be “a tool to address the housing crisis,” linking the issue to the goal of providing adequate and affordable housing.

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

• The article highlights the economic dimension of the regulations, noting that people in “agriculture, construction, and other businesses say the regulations are burdensome.” This reflects the tension between environmental protection and economic activities, a key consideration in achieving sustainable economic growth.

2. Specific Targets Identified

Under SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

1. Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials.
   • The entire article revolves around the Clean Water Act, which “regulates the amount and type of pollutants allowed in bodies of water.” The example of changing agricultural practices to prevent the insecticide diazinon from appearing in the San Joaquin River is a direct illustration of efforts related to this target.
2. Target 6.6: By 2020, protect and restore water-related ecosystems, including mountains, forests, wetlands, rivers, aquifers and lakes.
   • The debate over removing federal protections for up to 55 million acres of wetlands is directly relevant to this target. The article also mentions the economic benefits of these ecosystems, such as providing “$7 trillion in benefits each year” through services like water quality and flood control, underscoring the importance of their protection.

Under SDG 15: Life on Land

1. Target 15.1: By 2020, ensure the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems and their services, in particular forests, wetlands, mountains and drylands.
   • This target is central to the article’s focus. The EPA’s proposal to reduce the number of protected wetlands directly impacts the conservation and sustainable use of these specific inland freshwater ecosystems.

Under SDG 13: Climate Action

1. Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.
   • The discussion about how the destruction of wetlands can release stored carbon and accelerate climate change highlights the climate implications of the EPA’s regulatory proposal. The debate over the rule is a debate over a national policy that has clear consequences for climate change, making it relevant to this target.

Under SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

1. Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums.
   • The Home Builders Association’s argument that the proposed changes could “open up additional lands for development” and help address the “housing crisis” in California directly connects the environmental regulation to the challenge of providing adequate housing.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied

1. Acreage of protected wetlands: The article provides a direct, quantifiable indicator for measuring the impact of the proposed rule change. It states, “as much as 55 million acres of wetlands will no longer be subject to the law.” This figure can be used to measure progress (or regression) towards protecting these ecosystems (Target 15.1, Target 6.6).
2. Concentration of pollutants in water bodies: An implied indicator is the level of specific pollutants in rivers and lakes. The article gives a concrete example: “we had [the insecticide] diazinon show up in the San Joaquin River.” Measuring the presence or absence of such chemicals is a way to track water quality (Target 6.3).
3. Economic valuation of ecosystem services: The article mentions specific monetary values that serve as indicators of the benefits provided by wetlands. These include “$7 trillion in benefits each year” for the U.S. and “$23 billion in residential flood mitigation benefits each year” for the Upper Midwest, which can be used to measure the value of restored ecosystems (Target 6.6).
4. Carbon storage capacity of wetlands: An indicator for climate action is the amount of carbon stored in ecosystems. The article states that “wetlands track and store more than 30% of soil storage carbon on Earth,” implying that the loss of wetlands can be measured by the corresponding loss of carbon storage capacity (Target 13.2).
5. Amount of land available for housing development: From the perspective of SDG 11, an implied indicator is the quantity of land that becomes available for construction due to regulatory changes. The article mentions that the proposal “should open up additional lands for development” to address the housing crisis (Target 11.1).

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: csmonitor.com