In Pennsylvania, environmental advocacy groups are awaiting the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision which could affect the future of Commonwealth-owned properties' responsibility to pay stormwater fees as property owners do.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation is urging the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to overturn a decision by the Commonwealth Court, which stated the Borough of West Chester's stormwater fee is a tax as applied to West Chester University of Pennsylvania property within the borough.

Trisha Salvia, staff attorney for the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, said the Commonwealth Court ruled the fee should be treated as a tax when applied to the university and government entities, which under other circumstances do not have to pay a tax. She added stormwater is one of the fastest growing issues when it comes to water pollution, because of new development, population growth and more impervious surfaces being created.

"The Chesapeake Bay Foundation filed an amicus brief in support of the borough of West Chester's argument that the Commonwealth Court misapplied the law and that it should be reversed so that they can apply stormwater fees and it's not a tax," Salvia explained.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation contended labeling the fee as a tax for the university property could potentially lead to broader implications for Commonwealth properties across the state, threatening the collection of stormwater utility fees and shifting the burden onto private citizen ratepayers.

Salvia pointed out the foundation and other organizations are interested in this case because it can have statewide implications. She added how the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decides is important, because across the state and country, a lot of townships, municipalities and authorities are instituting stormwater fees.

"Municipalities and local governments need to find a way to meet their permit requirements, help clean up the water, keep up with development, growth, but also upgrade their infrastructure," Salvia outlined. "And that's through stormwater fees."

Salvia noted the case is currently under review by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and the ruling could potentially affect the future of stormwater management and water quality in the Commonwealth.

It's that time of year, when a strong winter storm might produce giant waves along Lake Superior shorelines that aren't frozen over.

Minnesota researchers are looking at how to harness those forces and turn them into usable energy. Superior's waves can sometimes top out at 10 to 15 feet in height before crashing into the shore.

University of Minnesota Duluth Assistant Professor of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Craig Hill and his team have been looking into wave pattern data to learn just how powerful they can be.

Additional work will focus on deploying efficient devices that can convert wave energy into storable electrical energy. Hill said the Great Lakes region is a good "testing lab."

"We occasionally get these big storms," said Hill, "where we could, if the technologies were out there, we could power tens of thousands of homes from the waves in those storms."

Hill said one challenge is that Great Lakes waves are more intermittent compared to coastal areas on either side of the U.S.

He said those regions are seeing acceleration of this type of work, but noted that Superior can still be an ally in the movement, especially for testing.

He added that if the technology is perfected, waves could be one of many sources used in the transition away from fossil fuels.

Climate change is resulting in less ice cover on Lake Superior. Hill suggested that they can take that unfortunate impact and turn it into an opportunity.

"That has a big impact on the wave conditions," said Hill. "That has a big impact on the coastlines around the Great Lakes. And so, there might be opportunities to test out the devices year-round in the coming future here, on Lake Superior."

Hill said securing enough research funding is another challenge.

And before this technology is turned into a commercial-scale option, experts will have to ensure fish, aquatic mammals and shorelines aren't negativity impacted.




get more stories like this via email

This week, four tribal nations and environmental groups urged the Michigan Court of Appeals to overturn the state's approval of Enbridge's Line 5 tunnel project.

Attorneys for the groups argued the pipeline expansion threatens the Great Lakes and disregards tribal and ecological concerns. They are asking the state to consider a wider range of alternatives to the dual pipelines that carry crude oil and natural gas liquids beneath the Straits of Mackinac.

Carrie La Seur, legal director of the group For Love of Water in Traverse City, said the aging pipelines pose a real spill risk to lakes Michigan and Huron, citing Michigan's Environmental Protection Act for support.

"We argued that Michigan's Environmental Protection Act requires a really comprehensive look at feasible and prudent alternatives to any action that would create environmental damage," La Seur explained.

Enbridge released a statement saying in part the state's decision to approve the application for the Great Lakes Tunnel Project came after a tremendous investment of time and deliberation by the Michigan Public Service Commission and staff. For nearly four years they carefully examined the complex issue and considered many viewpoints, questions, concerns and ideas.

La Seur said the pipeline project is massive and unprecedented, involving drilling more than 300 feet beneath the land and extending more than four miles. She warned it could create even greater risks and complications.

"It would be transporting flammable product. It would require a lot of very challenging maintenance if there were ever a problem. Any type of spill cleanup would be extremely challenging," La Seur outlined. "There are all kinds of reasons why this tunnel presents some unique challenges."

The court has yet to make a decision in the case. Enbridge also needs a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which delayed its review of the project in 2023. The Corps plans to release its draft environmental report this spring.


get more stories like this via email

The U.S. Forest Service is facing a lawsuit from Montana conservation groups for authorizing a major logging project in a critical wildlife habitat. The Round Star logging project, located 13 miles west of Whitefish, would cover over 9,000 acres of forest land in an area inhabited by Canada lynx and grizzly bears. Both are federally protected under the Endangered Species Act, which means they should take priority in logging plans.

Steve Kelly, president of the Council of Wildlife and Fish, is one of the plaintiffs.

"It's already been logged heavily, so we're really talking about some of the last places that lynx can even survive locally, never mind connectivity from one place to another," he said.

According to Alliance for the Wild Rockies, the Round Star project doesn't properly take into account the cumulative effects of nearby projects, which total about 42,000 acres of logging and burning and 100 miles of new roads.

A federal court judge in 2023 ruled against the Forest Service on a project in the Kootenai National Forest that similarly threatened grizzly bear habitats. Kelly wonders why the agency continues to attempt passing projects without adequate analysis of their effects.

"The court now is quite adept at figuring out who's doing what and why and applying the law. So there's really not much wiggle room anymore for the agencies to slide one by," he continued.

Canada lynx require habitat with dense forests and deep snow that also support populations of snowshoe hare, which make up about 75% of the lynx diet.


get more stories like this via email