Don’t ignore the science of Florida’s deep-injection wells solution

In response to the column in the Sun Sentinel titled “$300 million scheme to send polluted water underground is untested and unwise,” I feel compelled to point out several inaccuracies regarding deep injection wells, or as this Board refers to them for specific relief purposes, emergency estuary protection wells (EEPWs).

I live in Martin County, which is ground zero for blue-green algal blooms. I see the problem first hand, and I encounter people impacted by it every day, both as a resident and a South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Governing Board member. I hear pleas from property owners, families and businesses owners who live and work along the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries, asking for immediate relief. They want something done to mitigate the harmful Lake Okeechobee discharges that have plagued their coastal estuaries, not in 10 years, not in 20 years, now!

As an engaged Governing Board member frequently in the field with the very scientists that have made a career studying this proven deep injection technology, I feel the narrative of this column ignores key scientific information. To call this immediately implementable and cost-effective tool a “boondoggle” or a “scheme” when people are suffering is offensive and ignores its historic success in Florida. Furthermore, I take great offense to the following statement presented in the column: “I’m told that the idea for this new well program came from the sugar cane industry…” This shaded remark couldn’t be further from the truth. The concept of EEPWs is laid out in the 2015 University of Florida Water Institute Study.

The 2015 study highlights how these wells could be used as a stopgap measure while long-term restoration projects are completed. The study states: “Deep injection wells could be part of a long-term solution to reduce damaging discharges to the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries, or they could provide an interim solution until additional storage, treatment and conveyance capacity can be constructed south of Lake Okeechobee.” Would one call the 2015 University of Florida Water Institute Study a boondoggle or scheme?

Here are several other facts that were unfortunately not included in the piece:

Emergency Estuary Protection Wells would only have to be used in emergency situations when heavy rainfall causes the lake to rise so fast that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has no choice but to release that water to the estuaries for public safety. This is not wasting water. This water would have otherwise been “wasted” via the estuaries causing environmental harm in the process.

EEPWs are a proven technology that involves pumping stormwater 3,000 feet underground into a formation known as the “boulder zone,” a transmissive rock layer that easily accepts water.

EEPWs are operated at low pressures that DO NOT cause fracturing of rock layers. This is not “fracking” in any way, shape or form.

SFWMD scientists estimate that some EEPWs could be operational in as little as two to three years.

Currently, the state of Florida has more than 250 Deep Injection Wells that have had great success for the last 15 years. (For example, in the Sun Sentinel’s own backyard of Fort Lauderdale, there are 47 permitted Deep Injection Wells.)

Additionally, the column featured several sound bites from the Everglades Foundation that had no basis and were unfounded to say the least. SFWMD has had dozens of public meetings and discussions of these wells over the past two years and not once has the Everglades Foundation ever taken the opportunity to comment during those proceedings. If this group claims that the science is untested or unproven, they should have spoken during one of our many public meetings and brought this information to the Board’s attention. Instead this Board had to rely only on what scientists and engineers present to us, instead of a special interest group that has submitted no solid scientific information.

This brings me to what I consider the most egregious case of what the column flat out gets wrong. The statement which refers to the “reservoir south of the lake” aka the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) Storage Reservoir reads, “Federal money toward the project is in next year’s budget.” Wrong, wrong, wrong! As of right now, no federal funding has been appropriated for the EAA Storage Reservoir project. And to make an assertion that the SFWMD is “ignoring its mission” is false and only reiterates that no research was done to contribute to this article.

What is holding the reservoir up now is not SFWMD, it is Congress. The District is awaiting the federal government’s authorization from the U.S. Senate, which is allowing the latest Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) bill authorizing the EAA Storage Reservoir to sit in limbo. WRDA only contains authorization of the project and calls for expediting funding, which is unlikely to occur seeing that the federal government is already $1 billion behind Florida in funding for Everglades restoration projects.

The facts are that this technology can be used to bring some relief to the estuaries in a few years, while the restoration projects like the EAA Storage Reservoir that will fix the problem long term will take much longer, maybe more than 50 years, to complete. And that is only if the federal government authorizes the projects and Congress funds them as promised every year. As new administrations and legislators come and go from office, restoration projects experience starts and stops and, sometimes, are ultimately cancelled. In fact, the EAA Storage Reservoir plan, in some form or another, has existed and attempted to be built since 2006.

This Board believes wholeheartedly that long-term restoration projects are the answer, but we are also realistic that political priorities change, and even designing and building these massive projects takes time. In the interim, the estuaries need solutions like EEPWs, and this Board won’t rest until relief is a reality for the coastal communities.