Can’t imagine taking a dip in the Chicago River? The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency hopes to change your mind soon.
On May 12, the Illinois EPA received a letter from its parent agency demanding that the Chicago River be cleaned and made suitable for recreation. Prior to the agency’s ruling, the river was used to expel sewage away from the Windy City.
“Historically the river has not been viewed as a resource, but rather as a conduit for waste.” Jennifer Hensley, the Volunteer Coordinator for the Illinois Sierra Club, said. “Fortunately attitudes toward the river have changed, and as a result we are seeing increasing amounts of recreation and interest in the river’s health.”
Also, less than a week after the letter was made public, American Rivers-a national environmental group- released their annual list of America’s Most Endangered Rivers. Discovering that 70 percent of the Chicago River’s water is sewage, it ranked fourth.
According to Maggie Carson, the Public Information Officer for the Illinois EPA, the Illinois EPA agrees with the letter they received:
“The Illinois EPA has wanted some action to be taken for some years, but the process has taken much longer than expected because the MWRD has believed the benefit is not worth the cost,” Carson said.
Even with the EPA and the American Rivers’ findings, not everyone is in favor of disinfecting the Chicago River. Terrance O’Brien, the Board President of the Municipal Water Reclamation District, said in a press conference on May 13 that disinfecting the river would be both “costly” (estimating that it would take $3.3 billion) and “ineffective” in enticing swimmers. Debra Shore, the Commissioner of the MWRD, disagreed.
“I believe the federal approach outlined in the letter to the Illinois EPA is reasonable and moderate and a good idea.” Shore said. “The MWRD has said all along that if the agency is mandated to disinfect, it will do so. Up until now, neither the federal nor the state EPAs have required this additional treatment step.”
In terms of cost of disinfecting the Chicago River, Shore cited the federal EPA’s estimate, a sum much less than the $3.3 billion O’Brien had previously predicted.
“The District’s estimate of $1 billion includes the cost at Stickney, by far the District’s largest treatment plant.” Shore said. “The recent federal EPA letter says that disinfection should be mandated at two of our plants, but not at Stickney, which would cut the costs by 50 or 60 percent. The estimates of costs at the MWRD’s North Side and Calumet plants are approximately $241 million for the capital costs and about $10 million a year for operating costs.”
If Illinois does not disinfect the river soon, the U.S. EPA said it will intervene. In the meantime, environmentalists are looking forward to its clean future.
“In the short-term, recreational users of the Chicago River will be able to enjoy a day of fun on a resource that runs through the middle of our city without fear of illness from touching the water or a capsized canoe.” Hensley said. “Long-term, it is a step closer to returning the flow of the Chicago River to Lake Michigan, which we depend on for our drinking water and recreational opportunities.”