Water is and will continue to be one of our most precious resources, yet we take its availability and quality for granted. As the population within the watershed continues to grow, so will the need for clean water for our consumption and daily uses.

On June 21, 2000 the BBWEF held its third annual conflict resolution seminar entitled "Flushing in the New Millennium - Reclaiming Water for Beneficial Use and Water Conservation". The seminar was made possible in part by a grant from the Barnegat Bay Estuary Program.

Before the panelists began their presentations, Ms. Bonnie Parker gave opening remarks. She asked everyone to begin the evening by honoring the spirit of water and to remember to care for this life giving substance in everything that we do.

Each of the three panelists was given fifteen minutes to speak and questions were answered at the end of the presentations.

Mr. Kecskes went on to review the hydrologic cycle. Water evaporates off of oceans and lakes and eventually forms clouds. The water will then come back to the earth as rain. As the water falls to the earth it will take different pathways. It will either evaporate, be taken up by plants, recharge aquifers (ground water), or runoff into rivers and streams (which will eventually be discharged into the bay). The ground water systems are where the human population in Ocean County gets most of its fresh water supply and provides the base flow for rivers and streams. If ground water levels are high then salt water will be kept out of the aquifers.

Mr. Kecskes then discussed an important factor that affects stream flow: evapotranspiration. Between November and May stream flow is high. During the spring and summer months, May through October, stream flow naturally decreases. At this time, the human population is increasing water withdrawals from aquifers. We are turning sprinkler systems on and washing our cars at a time when stream flow is naturally low. We are competing for the water that would otherwise recharge streams.

Mr. Kecskes defined the natural water budget of the planet. On average, there is about 31 inches of precipitation per year. Of these 31 inches, 19 inches evaporates and is taken in by plants. This leaves 12 inches that can be used for ecological purposes and sustain the human population's water needs. New Jersey receives 12.4 billion gallons of water per day (bgd). Of this, 6.2 bgd is taken in by plants and evaporates. This leaves 6.2 bgd available to flow into streams and rivers, to seep into ground water, and to retard salt water from moving into estuaries and aquifers.

Mr. Kecskes addressed the man-made water budget achieved through plumbing systems. He restated the fact that about 12.4 bgd of water falls on New Jersey in the form of precipitation. Of this, 6.2 bgd are being used by plants and evaporating. This leaves 6.2 bgd available for the environment and for human activities. Currently, about 75%, or 1.2 bgd, of the 1.6 bgd used by humans in New Jersey is used in a depletive manner. This leaves approximately 5 bgd to go into ground water systems and recharge stream flow. This water supports the environment by feeding wetlands and streams and preventing salt water intrusion. It is during drought when problems occur. When there is a drought, less water, for example only 10 bgd, comes into the system. Of this, 6.2 bgd is still used by plants and evaporates, and 1.1 bgd is used by humans (who reduce their water use by about 10%). This only leaves 2.7 bgd, which is not enough water to maintain a healthy environment. This decreased level of water entering the system is responsible for fish kills and streams drying up. When depletive water usage occurs during droughts, there is less water in rivers and streams than in sewer systems. Mr. Kesckes explained that we need to rethink our plumbing systems.

Mr. Kecskes discussed USGS studies that show that current withdrawals from aquifers are reducing streamflow in the Toms River/Metedeconk River system by about 11%. This number will increase as the population increases, since it is estimated that currently permitted withdrawal levels will reduce streamflow by 26%. If withdrawals get much higher there could be a huge environmental impact including the drying up of rivers and streams that have been around for hundreds of thousands of years.

Mr. Kecskes gave the implications of a decreased water supply. If too much water is taken from the aquifer, salt water intrusion will occur. This is a very expensive problem to take care of. He also explained that water quantity and water quality are interconnected. If less water is available to flow in rivers and streams, there will be a decreased dilution of pollutants in these water systems.

Mr. Kecskes went on to explain a new mode of wastewater management. Instead of sending treated wastewater out into the ocean and "dewatering" Ocean County, wastewater should be reused. It is only through conservation and water reuse that this problem can be solved. The 40 mgd of water that is pumped into the ocean could recharge the water pumped from the Cohansey aquifer.

Mr. Kunze concluded by explaining that changing from ocean discharge to inland discharge can be done. But it will not be as simple as switching a light from on to off. It will require a lot of change which will only occur at a high price. Perhaps it would make more sense to initiate a phase approach in the reclamation/reuse of a portion of the plant flow.

Mr. Dimino began by explaining that in NJ there are 14 major discharges into the ocean. This is equivalent to about 1 billion gallons a day (bgd) of fresh water being dumped into the ocean. This costs the state about 1 billion dollars per year in operating budgets for the treatment facilities. He pointed out that our current system needs to be rethought. We are spending money to discharge fresh water that we could reuse.

Mr. Dimino then discussed the feasibility of wastewater reuse in Ocean County. Cape May County did a feasibility study to examine reuse, but no reuse options were cost effective to implement. In order to make any changes there has to be a cost benefit. For example, the Linden NJ Roselle Sewage Authority has an agreement with COGEN East Coast Power (ECP). The sewage utility will sell ECP 2 mgd of treated wastewater for $250,000 to $400,000. This will benefit the sewage utility ratepayers, and ECP will save money because it currently pays $2,000,000 for potable water. On top of the monetary benefits, the ocean will be getting 2 mgd less fresh water.

Mr. Dimino then described the two critical factors that will allow the implementation of wastewater reuse. First, the reuse must be cost effective. There is a market for used fresh water in retirement villages, golf courses, and cogeneration facilities. The money for the pipeline from sewage utilities to the new locations will need to be provided from the state. Second, wastewater reuse must be as regulatory free as possible. Mr. Dimino concluded by stating that each utilities authority should at least look at the feasibility of wastewater reuse options.

What can we do?

Mrs. Pearl Schwartz, Ocean County Chapter of the New Jersey League of Women Voters, addressed the question of what citizens can do to help conserve our water resources.

Mrs. Schwartz began by describing the importance of prevention of water loss. Prevention is one of the three keys to keeping a healthy water supply. She explained that paving over open space prevents water from recharging aquifers. The more land we lose to urban sprawl, the more fresh water we lose to the ocean. In order to prevent this water loss we need to buy more natural land.

Mrs. Schwartz then explained that the water quality in the watershed needs to be improved. Ground water is very difficult to clean up. Education and prevention are the best solutions to stop nonpoint source pollution. She handed out a booklet, "What you can do to Prevent Nonpoint Source Pollution in the Barnegat Bay Watershed," that has tips to help the public recognize nonpoint source pollution such as fertilizer, pesticides, motor oil, etc.

Mrs. Schwartz concluded by asking us to remember to practice water conservation. She explained that we need to conserve water all of the time, not just during a drought. She encouraged low flow toilets, low water use shower heads, looking for leaks, and anything else that promotes the conservation of water.

Questions and Answers

Mrs. Schwartz asked Mr. Kecskes about the effects global warming will have on the water supply. He explained that precipitation levels may actually increase with increased temperatures.

One citizen brought up the importance of turf in conserving the water supply. He explained that native, drought-resistant grasses should be used instead of grasses needing a lot of water. If tall fescue or Bermuda grass is used rather than Kentucky blue grass less water, pesticides, and fertilizers will be needed to promote a healthy lawn. Mr. Dimino said that regulations for water discharge onto lands involve too much monitoring work and liability, and suggested that representatives from the state, utilities authorities, turf industry, and possible water reuse groups need to meet to come up with realistic water quality standards.

Other residents commented on the decreased amount of dilution in the bay because of increased depletive withdrawals of water.

In response to a question about cost estimates for re-routing the three ocean discharge pipes from the OCUA, Mr. Kunze said that pipe re-routing is just one cost element: upgraded treatment processes to improve water quality would also be costly. Mr. Kecskes said that re-use options will appear expensive compared to other ways of acquiring water, but that they become more financially attractive if there are fewer other sources of water. Mr. Dimino said that first there is a need to look at potential wastewater reuse in the area, and if potential uses are there, then a feasibility study should be done. A member of the audience said that if there are regulatory incentives for wastewater reuse, for example if reuse is required in order for a development to be built, reuse would be more likely to occur. All agreed that more studies are needed to investigate wastewater reuse.

Summary

In summary, the panel addressed the issue of wastewater reuse. From both an economic and ecological standpoint, current wastewater discharge practices need to be changed. Instead of discharging treated fresh water into the ocean where it cannot be used to recharge aquifers, rivers and streams, wastewater can be reused. Changing water discharge practices will not be easy. Not only will this change have a monetary cost, it will take time and further studies to determine how feasible the change is. In order to switch from ocean discharge to inland discharge two things must occur. First, pipelines must be built from the sewage utilities to nearby inland rivers and streams or other discharge locations. This will cost a considerable amount of money that may need to be funded by the state. Second, water quality standards will have to be met for inland discharge. The reuse of treated wastewater will more readily occur when it is as regulatory free as possible. To make inland discharge a real possibility, there has to be a monetary benefit. Perhaps creating a market for reclaimed water will enable the change to occur. Water reuse is only one part of the solution maintaining a healthy water supply. Conservation, education, and prevention efforts need to be continued in order to keep salt water intrusion and pollution levels at bay.