Is Green Infrastructure Enough?

Replacing open space and forested areas with moderate to high-density development and then using green infrastructure (GI) will not mitigate the damage to water resources . While GI is a critical tool for managing stormwater, it cannot fully replicate the comprehensive hydrological functions of mature, natural ecosystems like forests. 

Replacing forests and open spaces with impervious surfaces fundamentally alters the natural water cycle, leading to increased runoff, reduced groundwater recharge, and higher pollutant loads. Green infrastructure can help manage these impacts, but preserving existing natural landscapes is considered the most effective and economical way to protect water resources. This is why the Rural Crescent was an essential element of a sustainable region.

Comparing Natural Landscapes, Development, and Green Infrastructure

Feature	Natural Forested Landscape	Development (with Gray Infrastructure)	Development (with Green Infrastructure)
Stormwater Runoff	Very low; most rainfall is intercepted, absorbed, and infiltrated.	Very high; impervious surfaces like roofs and pavement prevent infiltration, leading to rapid runoff and potential flooding.	Reduced; GI practices like rain gardens and permeable pavements capture and slow down runoff, lessening flood risk.
Water Quality	High; natural vegetation and soils filter pollutants effectively.	Low; runoff collects pollutants like heavy metals and nutrients from surfaces and transports them into waterways.	Improved; GI systems are designed to filter pollutants from stormwater before it reaches rivers and streams.
Groundwater Recharge	High; rainfall slowly infiltrates deep into the soil, replenishing aquifers.	Very low to none; impervious surfaces block infiltration.	Can be improved; some GI, like infiltration trenches, is specifically designed to promote groundwater recharge where natural soil conditions permit.
Habitat & Biodiversity	High; provides a complex ecosystem for a wide range of species.	Very low; natural habitat is removed.	Can be enhanced; even small GI installations can provide habitat for pollinators and birds, improving connectivity.

Key Considerations

• Preservation First: The most effective approach to protecting water resources is to preserve natural open spaces, forests, and wetlands in the first place. Development should be directed toward areas with less ecological value.
• GI as a Mitigation Tool, Not a Replacement: Green infrastructure is essential for making developed areas more sustainable and resilient. It effectively lessens the negative impacts of development by mimicking natural processes, but it does not eliminate them entirely. It is a critical tool for mitigation, not a 1-to-1 replacement for a natural landscape.
• The Role of High-Density Development: Paradoxically, when development is necessary, higher-density, compact development can be better for regional water quality than low-density sprawl. This is because it consumes less land overall, allowing more extensive natural areas to be preserved. Integrating GI into this compact development is a key strategy for smart growth.
• Limitations of Green Infrastructure: The effectiveness of GI can be limited by factors such as space constraints in dense urban areas, soil conditions, maintenance requirements, and initial costs. Furthermore, some GI designs may not be suitable for infiltrating water if there is a risk of mobilizing existing ground contaminants

Dirty by Design- Subordinating Human Health to Data Centers

After the December  2025, power auction results confirmed a 6,623 MW shortfall in the reliability target, PJM and Virginia regulators are pivoting toward a strategy that treats data centers not just as consumers, but as a "distributed power plant" of last resort.

Here is the breakdown of how this "backup generator" strategy is being formalized between PJM, Dominion Energy, and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).

The DEQ "Emergency" Redefinition

The Virginia DEQ issued a critical guidance memo (APG-578) in late 2025 that effectively opens the door for this strategy.

• The "Planned Outage" Loophole: Historically, data centers were only allowed to run their diesel generators during "sudden and unforeseeable" emergencies. The DEQ has now expanded this to include "planned outages" or "grid stress events" scheduled by the utility with 14 days' notice or less.
• Consent and Compliance: By redefining these as "emergencies," DEQ allows data centers to bypass certain air quality restrictions that usually prevent them from running Tier II (dirtier) diesel engines for non-emergency power.

"Demand Response" vs. "Interruptible Service"

PJM is currently finalizing a "Large Load" proposal for FERC that would fundamentally change how data centers in the Dominion Zone connect to the grid:

• Interruptible by Default: New data center interconnections are increasingly being offered "interruptible" status. This means they are allowed to connect to the grid only if they agree to drop their load (switch to backup generators) when the grid hits 95% capacity.
• The Reliability Gap: The 6,623 MW auction shortfall essentially becomes a "paper gap" if PJM can count on data centers to voluntarily remove themselves from the grid during peak winter or summer events.

The Environmental Trade-off

This strategy has sparked a fierce debate in Northern Virginia (Loudoun and Prince William Counties):

• Localized Pollution: A study from Virginia’s legislative research arm (JLARC) warned that if the thousands of data center generators in "Data Center Alley" all turned on at once, they could release 9,000 tons of nitrogen oxides—roughly half of the total annual emissions for all sources in Northern Virginia.
• Noise and Health: Residents are concerned that "grid stress" events (like a 3-day cold snap) could result in thousands of diesel engines running for 72 hours straight in residential corridors.

Why this matters for the 2027/2028 Planning Year

Because the December 2025 auction failed to secure enough "firm" power (coal, gas, or nuclear) to meet the 20% reserve margin, the grid will enter the 2027/2028 year with only a 14.8% margin.

To bridge that 5% gap, PJM is betting on:

1. The DEQ Policy: Ensuring data centers can legally run their backups.
2. Dominion’s New GS-5 Rate Class: A new rate category for 25MW+ customers that incentivizes them to move their own power generation on-site (BYOC - "Bring Your Own Capacity").

While this keeps the "lights on" for residents, it effectively turns Northern Virginia into a de facto diesel power plant whenever it gets too cold or too hot, bypassing the spirit of the Virginia Clean Economy Act (VCEA) which sought to eliminate carbon emissions.

The Virginia DEQ recently acknowledged that they have never performed a cumulative modeling exercise for these clusters. Under the new DEQ guidance, if PJM declares a "Grid Stress Event" (such as a 48-hour cold snap), the "generator zones" in Ashburn and Gainesville would effectively become the primary power source for the data centers. This would mean thousands of diesel engines running simultaneously in close proximity to schools and homes, potentially releasing half of the region's annual Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) budget in just a few days.

PJM price control creates shortages at record high prices

The results of the PJM Base Residual Auction for the 2027/2028 Planning Year were released on December 17, 2025.  For the first time ever, the entire 13 state PJM footprint (serving more than 65 million people) failed to meet its target reliability standards due to explosive electricity demand from data centers and price controls.

The price for the December 2025 auction was capped due to a legal settlement aimed at preventing a "runaway" price spike that could have crippled household and business budgets across the entire 13-state PJM region.

Without this cap, it is estimated that the price would have hit at least $529/MW-day in the range of pervious auctions, but the ceiling was held it at $333.44/MW-day. Though this effectively saved ratepayers an estimated $9.9 billion in this auction, PJM was unable to obtain all the power they needed to reach their reliability target. PJM was able to purchase only 63% of the 17,922 MW needed to reach the 20% reliability target.

Key Auction Results

The auction cleared a total of 134,479 MW of capacity, falling significantly short of the intended targets.

• Clearing Price: Prices hit the FERC-approved cap of $333.44/MW-day across the entire PJM footprint.
• Total Market Cost: The total cost to secure this capacity reached $16.4 billion, a record high (up from $16.1 billion in the July 2025 auction and $14.7 billion in the 2024 auction).
• Reliability Gap: The auction was short by 6,623 MW, leaving PJM with a 14.8% reserve margin—well below its 20% reliability target. (See DEQ below)
• Resource Mix: 43% Natural Gas, 21% Nuclear, 20% Coal, 5% Demand Response, and roughly 5% from renewables (Wind, Solar, Hydro).

Major Factors in the Auction failure

The extreme results were the product of several converging factors:

• The Data Center/ AI Boom: Forecasted peak load for 2027-2028 year increased by roughly 5,250 MW, with a staggering 97% (5,100 MW) of that growth attributed specifically to data center demand.
• Stagnant Supply: Only 774 MW of new generation was available, as new projects struggle with slow interconnection queues and high construction costs.
• Retirements: The grid continues to lose "firm" generation as older coal and gas plants retire faster than new resources can be connected to meet state mandated climate targets like the Virginia Clean Economy Act and similar “Clean Energy Standard” laws in Maryland and Illinois.
• Regulatory Caps: Without the court-ordered and FERC-approved price caps, PJM estimated prices would have hit $529/MW-day.

Critical Implications

The 2025 auction marks a turning point for energy policy and consumer costs in the Mid-Atlantic and Midwest.

For Consumers

• Higher Bills: Electricity bills for households and businesses across 13 states (including PA, NJ, VA, and OH) are expected to rise. Analysts estimate retail rate increases of 3.7% to 10.6% in the short term, with some regions potentially seeing much steeper hikes by 2027.
• For a residential customer in the Dominion Energy territory, for the 2026–2027 timeframe the estimated monthly cost for 1,000 kWh is expected to rise to ~$150.00 – $165.00. Up from ~$116 in 2020. This includes~$24.00 – $28.00 from VCEA Riders.
• Affordability Crisis:  Ratepayers are subsidizing the infrastructure necessary to power the explosive demand growth from the data center/ AI boom. These are the richest corporations on earth.  In addition, this has sparked intense political backlash from state governors.

For Grid Reliability

• Operational Risk: Being 6.6 GW short of the 1-in-10-year reliability standard means the grid has a thinner margin for error during extreme weather events (e.g., Winter Storm Elliott-style scenarios or heat wavers).
• Emergency Measures: PJM may need to rely on "Incremental Auctions" in 2027 or ask retiring plants to stay online via "Reliability Must-Run" contracts to bridge the gap.

• The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is currently considering allowing data centers to run backup diesel generators during planned outage events.  There are currently 4,000 MW of backup generation in Northern Virginia alone.  These generators are generally Tier II or unrated diesel engines (designed only for emergency use) and are a highly polluting energy source. Increased operation would increase the emission of harmful air pollutants, posing a significant public health burden, but essentially solving PJM’s reliability margin.
• Reform Pressure: There is mounting pressure on PJM and FERC to accelerate the "interconnection queue"—the process of approving new power plants—which currently has over 57 GW of projects waiting to proceed. There is also currently tremendous pushback from residents over the transmission lines necessary for this.

The "Shapiro Settlement"

In late 2024, Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro filed a formal complaint with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). He argued that PJM’s auction design was "deeply flawed" and would lead to unjustified price increases.

• The Deal: To resolve the complaint, PJM and FERC agreed to a temporary "Price Collar" for the 2026/27 and 2027/28 auctions.
• The Goal: The cap was meant to act as a "circuit breaker" or "guardrail" to give the grid operator time to fix its backlogged process for connecting new, cheaper power plants (like solar and batteries) without exposing consumers to infinite price hikes in the meantime.

Market Power Concerns

The price collar was put in place because regulators were concerned about "Market Power." In a typical market, if prices go up, new competitors rush in to sell their product. However, growth in demand from data centers has been unprecedented. PJM has a massive backlog of new power projects waiting to be built. The energy sector is highly regulated and controlled. The base residual auction was designed to attract new investment by offering high prices. However, the energy market is highly regulated to assure reliability of the grid and growth in a planned manner, and it has been decades since the power grid has experienced growth. 

The cap exists because regulators decided it was unfair to make consumers pay "scarcity prices" for a shortage that was created by local politicians who approved millions upon millions of square feet of data centers without considering the power demand or transmission necessary. The state politicians who passed the Virginia Clean Economy Act and similar “Clean Energy Standard” laws in Maryland and Illinois that requires the  retirement of dispatchable fossil fuel generated power faster than new resources can be connected to meet state mandated climate targets . And of course the grid operator's own administrative delays for permits, and transmission lines, and completed construction that their bureaucracy helped create. Now residents are pushing back. 

An Early Cold Snap and WSSC aging Pipes

A colder-than-average December is triggering an increase in water main breaks and leaks across Montgomery and Prince George’s counties. The Potomac River temperature is a powerful predictor of water main breaks and leaks. As the river temperature drops, water main breaks/leaks increase, as shown in the chart below.

from WSSC

Between November 26 and Tuesday, the river temperature dropped about 17 degrees from 49 to 32 degrees, triggering a significant uptick in the number of water main breaks and leaks. WSSC Water has experienced 293 breaks/leaks since November 26. 

There is a direct connection between dropping water temperatures in the Potomac River and the increase in water main breaks.  According to the WSSC, they typically see an increase in breaks a few days after the Potomac River temperature hits a new low as the colder water hits the distribution system. The dropping water temperature can “shock” water mains, and though the pipes become accustomed to the cold water; whenever water temperatures hit a new low, there follows a spike in breaks.

On average, WSSC crews repair more than 1,800 water main breaks and leaks each year, with the vast majority of them, approximately 1,200, occurring between November and February. WSSC has already repaired approximately 300 breaks since November this year.  Last winter as seen below, the total number of breaks was above average. There is a large percentage of the distribution system that is quite old.

WSSC Water spends approximately $17 million each year for emergency water main repairs alone, with about $10 million spent November through February. During a typical year, WSSC Water crews repair more than 1,800 water main breaks and leaks, approximately 65 % of which (1,152) occur between November and February. 

Aging infrastructure is a critical factor in breaks and leaks. The older pipes are “shocked” by the colder water, causing them to break. Approximately 42% of the water mains in WSSC Water’s system are more than 50 years old. 

During a typical year, WSSC Water crews repair nearly 1,800 water main breaks and leaks, approximately 63% of which (1,127) occur between November and February. 

 

WSSC Water asks for patience, during the busy winter months. All water main breaks and leaks are inspected and prioritized for repair, taking into account the damage being caused, the safety of the area and the number of customers impacted. With the escalating number of water main breaks, response time can be delayed due to the limited number of crews working across the 1,000-square-mile service area. 

According to WSSC a leak that is not causing damage can be left running to ensure customers have water service until a crew is available to make repairs. Water mains in the WSSC Water distribution system range from three inches to 96 inches in diameter. WSSC Water’s emergency water main break and leak repair costs have increased significantly in recent years. In FY 25, WSSC Water spent $33 million responding to 2,259 breaks and leaks, with $22 million spent between November and February, the four busiest winter months: 

• FY 25: $33 million | 2,259 breaks and leaks
• FY 24: $20 million | 1,697 breaks and leaks
• FY 23: $17 million | 1,566 breaks and leaks

While emergency repairs address immediate service needs, areas experiencing repeated water main breaks will be addressed through WSSC Water’s Capital Improvements Program (CIP), which focuses on long-term system reliability and infrastructure renewal. The Fiscal Years 2026-2031 CIP is $4.8 billion. 

WSSC Water, serving 1.9 million customers in Prince George’s and Montgomery counties, maintains nearly 6,000 miles of water mains covering a 1,000-square-mile area. With such an extensive, aging distribution system spanning the two counties, WSSC Water encourages customers to report water main breaks and leaks as quickly as possible.

Responding to these emergencies has slowed WSSC’s ability to replace the older water mains and WSSC continues to work to update the system. WSSC serves 1.9 million customers in Prince George’s and Montgomery counties, with approximately 5,900 miles of water mains covering a 1,000-square-mile area. With such an extensive, aging distribution system spanning the two counties it is hard to keep up and very difficult to move forward to reduce the age of the system of pipes.

New Report Exposes our Region’s Water Vulnerability

 

From a new release from the ICPRB:

We have always assumed when we turn on the tap, there will be water; but that is not true for everyone and may not always be true for us in the DMV. New research from the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB) notes that changing weather patterns and increased water demand from data centers are putting a strain on the region’s water supply. Without significant investment in water infrastructure this may have dire consequences according the ICPRB.

The report, 2025 Washington Metropolitan Area Water Supply Study - Demand and Resource Availability Forecast for the Year 2050, shows that the region will have plentiful water most years, but there is an increasing chance — up to about 1 percent in 2030 and up to about 5 percent in 2050 — that there will be water shortages. This is when there is not enough water to meet the demands of the water users while still leaving enough water in the Potomac River to protect the sensitive aquatic habitat below Little Falls Dam.

According to the report, despite exponential population growth in the region, overall water use had stayed remarkably stable over the past several decades due to the use of low flow fixtures and appliances. Water use in general peaked in 2005; however, the ICPRB predicts an increase in water demand in the coming decades, with a 17 % increase in water use by 2050. This translates to a rise from approximately 465 million gallons per day (MGD) to about 538 MGD. For the first time, the study specifically evaluated the impact of data centers. It found that their upstream water use is expected to grow substantially, potentially consuming up to 80 million gallons on peak days by 2050. So that population water use will continue to decline.

In addition to more overall water demand, the river’s flow may be impacted by predicted changes in temperature and precipitation through a process that has been characterized as “hot drought” by ICPRB. “Results from our study indicate that extreme hydrological droughts may become more severe due to increasing temperatures," explains Dr. Cherie Schultz, Director of ICPRB’s Section for Cooperative Water Supply Operations on the Potomac. “A major uncertainty in many regions, including the Potomac, is the response of future stream flow to the competing effects of temperature change and precipitation change. Rising temperatures will tend to decrease flows due to increases in evaporation, while predicted increases in precipitation will tend to increase flows,” continued Dr. Schultz. “It is changing weather patterns combined with the increase in demand that may be putting the whole system at risk,” states ICPRB Executive Director Michael Nardolilli.

The study estimates that during an extreme drought event, changes in river flow could range from a 3% increase to a 25% decrease for the period 2010–2039. This potential for flow reduction worsens over time, with a projected range of a 9% increase to a 32% decrease in flow for the period 2040–2069, depending on how sensitive flows are to rising temperatures. The study uses climate change data derived from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) to model these future impacts. Though, the water supply planning is primarily tested against the risk of a future extreme drought similar in severity to the 1930 drought  the worst the region experienced on record.

The data center forecast estimates are based on grid-connected energy forecasts, which are rapidly evolving as the sector continues to expand. In the Washington metropolitan area, data centers could use as much as 80 million gallons on peak days by 2050. This could signal the growing significance of data centers in the region’s water demand. The report notes that balancing energy, water, regulations, and infrastructure constraints may be needed to strengthen resiliency in this sector. One step forward would be to improve transparency around data center water use. The majority of the Washington metropolitan area’s water supply is provided by the Potomac River.

from ICPRB

While most regions have two or more sources of water, the Potomac River is the only source of drinking water for the residents of Washington D.C. and Arlington County. Two upstream reservoirs, Jennings Randolph and Little Seneca, are available to release water to augment Potomac River flow should the river get too low to meet the region’s demands. In addition, off-Potomac reservoirs, Fairfax Water's Occoquan Reservoir and WSSC Water's Patuxent reservoir, are used to partially meet these suppliers' demands. According to the study, four out of nine modeled scenarios predict that in the event of an extreme drought, the upstream reservoirs will run out of water as early as 2030, indicating that short-term measures should be taken to improve reliability.

Some short-term solutions are already in the works. Improvements in ICPRB’s river flow forecasts can help water resource planners better predict when to release water from upstream reservoirs. A water reuse project recently announced by DC Water, dubbed Pure Water DC, aims to create a more resilient water source for residents of the District. Two drinking water reservoirs currently in the planning stages, Loudoun Water’s Milestone Reservoir (expected operational by 2028) and Fairfax Water’s Edgemon Reservoir (expected operational by 2040), were already included in the report’s calculations.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, initiated a D.C. Metropolitan Area Backup Water Supply Feasibility Study last fall which could lead the way to possible long-term solutions. However, with federal funding issues hanging in the balance, it is unclear when that study will be completed.  “We can no longer ignore the fact that parts of the DC region have only one source of drinking water – the Potomac River – and just a one-day back-up of water supply. Today’s release of the 2025 Washington Metropolitan Area Water Supply Study highlights the need to expedite the study so that we can reduce the vulnerability of the DC region from a cutoff of drinking water because of drought or contamination events (both accidental and deliberate),” explained Nardolilli.

“This report confirms the need for innovative and cooperative approaches, as well as funding, to secure the water supply for our region,” said WSSC Water General Manager and CEO Kishia L. Powell. “The Potomac River has provided the vast majority of the region’s drinking water for generations. But climate pressures and growing demand will impact our ability to meet the region’s needs in just a few years. This report makes clear that we need to continue with substantial investments to safeguard public health, enhance reliability and resiliency, and ensure the long-term economic vitality of the region.”

 An earlier study released by ICPRB found that a significant water supply disruption could result in losses of almost $15 billion in gross regional product and hundreds of millions in tax losses, all within the first month. “For nearly 50 years Fairfax Water, WSSC Water, the Washington Aqueduct and ICPRB have been working together to ensure adequate water supply for the Washington Metropolitan Region now and into the future” said Fairfax Water General Manager and CEO Jamie Bain Hedges. “This study further advances our collective mission to supply life’s most essential service for decades to come.” The water supply study released on December 5^th is conducted every five years by the Section for Cooperative Water Supply Operations on the Potomac (CO-OP) of the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB) on behalf of the three major water suppliers: Fairfax Water, WSSC Water, and the Washington Aqueduct. This is the first year that the study has explored the impacts of data centers on the water supply.

Chesapeake Bay states Approve a new Watershed Agreement for the Next Era of Bay Restoration

 

From an EPA press release:

The Chesapeake Executive Council met at the National Aquarium last week to formally approve a revised Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement. Since 1983, the Chesapeake Bay Program has used the “voluntary agreements” to guide restoration of the Chesapeake Bay, the nation’s largest estuary and its watershed.

The ceremonial signing of the agreement is the culmination of work that began more than three years ago, when the partnership began to hammer out a path forward that outlined the next steps necessary to meet the pollution reduction goals and estuary health outcomes that the previous Watershed Agreement had hoped to complete by 2025. The partnership prepared recommendations that addressed lessons learned about the science of restoration while focusing on the future of the Chesapeake Bay Program beyond 2025. At last year’s meeting, the Executive Council formally tasked the partnership with revising the Watershed Agreement this past year. 

The result is a new agreement that builds on what has already been achieved—and the work still to be done—while using the latest science, elevating conservation as a key focus, and ensuring, as much as possible, that its goals are clear, measurable and time-bound. The target completion dates were extended or modified to push deadlines to 2030, 2035, or 2040.

“Today we made a commitment to the Chesapeake Bay and a commitment to the people of Maryland and our neighboring states,” said Maryland Governor Wes Moore. “The revised Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement will make our rivers and streams cleaner. It will bolster Maryland’s seafood, tourism and recreational businesses. Most importantly, it will ensure we protect the precious heirloom that is the Chesapeake Bay so we can pass it down to the next generations in a better condition than we received it.”

The revised Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement contains four goals:

1. Thriving Habitats and Wildlife
2. Clean Water
3. Healthy Landscapes
4. Engaged Communities

The partnership will now update or develop new Management Strategies for each outcome that outline how it will be achieved and include considerations such as monitoring, assessing and reporting progress, as well as where coordination with partners and stakeholders is needed.

Additionally, the structure and governance of the partnership was streamlined and simplified.  The Chesapeake Bay Program will implement these revisions and regularly report progress to the Principals' Staff Committee for their final approval expected by July 1, 2026.

“Throughout my Administration, protecting the Chesapeake Bay, one of our most treasured natural resources, has not been an afterthought, it has been a commitment we have reaffirmed each and every day. Through transparent engagement with our Bay Program partners and Virginia stakeholders, we have demonstrated that targeted investments combined with voluntary partnerships equal real results. Virginia is poised to meet our goals and accelerate our progress, and I am pleased that the actions taken by the Chesapeake Executive Council have set the partnership on a path for continued improvement by understanding the need for realistic targets and structural efficiencies.” Glenn Youngkin, Governor, Commonwealth of Virginia

Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro was unanimously elected to be chair of the Executive Council, succeeding Maryland Governor Wes Moore, who has served in the role for the past two years. “My Administration has accelerated Pennsylvania’s progress in restoring local waterways across the Commonwealth and reduced our share of pollution to the Bay, ensuring every Pennsylvanian has access to clean air and water while supporting our farmers and our agriculture industry,” said Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. “I’m honored to be elected as the next chair of the Chesapeake Executive Council by my fellow governors and I’m looking forward to continuing this work to get stuff done together for the people we serve.” 

The Executive Council was formed as part of the Chesapeake Bay Agreement of 1983 and consists of the governors of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, the mayor of the District of Columbia, the chair of the Chesapeake Bay Commission and the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, who represents the federal government. 

“The Chesapeake Bay is one of our country’s most important resources,” said U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Deputy Administrator David Fotouhi. “The efforts of the Chesapeake Bay Program over the past 42 years have shown the power of collaboration and cooperative federalism in restoring and protecting our nation’s waters. Partnerships such as the Chesapeake Bay Program help to carry out President Trump’s agenda to provide clean air, land and water for every American and support economic growth.” 

Does Prince William have a Housing Crisis?

Every residential development rezoning to increase allowed density that has been approved has been justified by “Prince William’s housing crisis”. The data supports that Prince William County is experiencing a severe housing affordability crisis, which the Board of County Supervisors and other officials often refer to as a "housing crisis". The problem is less about a lack of available physical housing units, though Prince William County failed to meet the MCOG’s overall housing target, and more about a significant shortage of homes that residents, particularly those with low and moderate incomes, can afford to rent or buy. 

Supervisors, staff and residents use the term "crisis" to describe the situation because:

• Housing costs are soaring while wages are not keeping pace. The median sales price for a home in the county was around $565K in October 2025, which is significantly above the national average.
• Many households are "cost-burdened," meaning they spend more than 30% of their income on housing. An analysis found that over 50% of the county's renters fall into this category.
• There is a significant shortage of affordable units. A 2023 report noted a deficit of 8,800 affordable rental units alone, and projections for 2040 indicate a potential shortage of 14,000 to 23,000 housing units in total if 2019 trends continued.
• Essential workers like teachers, firefighters, and nurses often struggle to live in the community they serve.

The Housing Affordability Crisis in Prince William County

The core issue is affordability, driven by a persistent mismatch between housing supply (especially for lower and middle-income residents in areas with transit and services) and demand.

Key Data Points

• Cost Burden for Renters: A staggering 50% of renter households in Prince William County are considered "cost-burdened," meaning they pay more than 30% of their monthly income for housing. This leaves less money for necessities like food, healthcare, and transportation.
• Affordable Rental Shortage: The county is reportedly short at least 8,800 affordable rental units. The greatest need is clustered at the Extremely Low Income level (30% of the Area Median Income (AMI) and below).
• Homeownership Out of Reach: The median sale price for a home has risen significantly. Based on mortgage standards, someone making the median annual income in the county often cannot afford a median-priced home. Essential workers like teachers, nurses, police, and firefighters are often priced out of the market.
• Supply Shortfall: The county has consistently failed to meet the annual production targets set by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG). For example, Prince William County's target was 2,353 new units in 2024, but only 1,202 were built.

Prince William County and local organizations are actively pursuing several strategies to address the crisis, focusing on increasing supply, improving affordability, and preventing homelessness.

County-Level Policy Solutions

• Affordable Dwelling Unit (AfDU) Ordinance: The county recently adopted its first-ever AfDU ordinance (effective December 2025), which offers density bonuses to developers who include affordable housing units in their projects. This targets households earning 80% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI), with greater incentives for those at 50% AMI or below.
• Housing Trust Fund (HTF): A Housing Trust Fund has been established, with a commitment of $5 million annually through 2029, to provide gap financing for affordable housing developments.
• Comprehensive Plan Updates: The county's planning process is focused on finding new land capacity through rezoning and increasing residential densities, particularly in transit-oriented communities, to meet the future housing demand.

Homelessness Prevention and Assistance

Local non-profits and county services are focused on immediate and long-term support for those in crisis:

• Coordinated Entry System (CES): This system is the single point of access for all people experiencing or at risk of homelessness in Prince William County. It assesses needs and connects households to resources like emergency shelter, rapid re-housing, and permanent supportive housing.
• Rental/Mortgage Assistance: Programs like the Emergency Housing Assistance Program (EHAP II) offer financial help to eligible households facing housing hardships.
• First-Time Homebuyers Program (FTHB): This program provides loans for down payment and closing cost assistance for low- and moderate-income residents.

The consensus from county staff, elected officials and advocates is that an "all-of-the-above" approach—combining policy, funding, and community collaboration—is necessary to overcome the housing affordability challenge. However, developers seem to be driving the direction of the response through rezoning of greenfield rather than smart solutions. 

The termination of the Rural Crescent policy in the adopted 2040 Comprehensive Plan (approved in late 2022) has two major impacts on the housing and conservation discussion:

1. It removes the primary planning tool for limiting sprawl and protecting open space.
2. It dramatically expands the potential land available for increased housing density. Yet, the development community continually looks to expand density beyond the planning in the Comprehensive Plan- Pathway to 2040.

 Shift in the County's Plan (BOCS)

The termination of the Rural Crescent (which previously restricted development to 1 unit per 10 acres) was explicitly justified and motivated by the need to address the housing affordability crisis by making more land available for residential development.

• The New Land Use Designations: The 2040 Comprehensive Plan replaces the "Rural Area" with designations like "Agricultural and Forestry" (upzoned from 1 unit/10 acres to 1 unit/5 acres as proposed in the draft) and "Conservation Residential" (allowing for clustered homes at up to 1 unit per 2 acres with 60% of the land preserved in easement).
• Massive Increase in Development Potential: This change essentially doubles the potential development density in large swaths of the county, which translates to the potential for thousands of new homes—which some claim can now be closer to the "affordable" threshold (though not necessarily meeting the deep affordability needs).
• Alignment with Affordable Housing Goal: The BOCS's adoption of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan aligns its land use policy (which governs where and how much can be built) with its Housing Chapter policies (AfDU Ordinance and Housing Trust Fund), providing the land supply needed to meet the affordability goals.

The Prince William Conservation Alliance (PWCA) and other groups were the most vocal opponents of this change.

• Loss of a Core Tool: The Rural Crescent was the single most important tool for Prince William County to combat sprawl and protect the county's western watersheds and historical resources. Its termination was a major loss that enables "haphazard" development.
• The New Battleground is fighting poorly conceived individual rezoning applications in the former Rural Crescent area, which would convert thousands of acres of rural land to data center and industrial use, and higher density housing zoning than the watershed can support impacting water resources necessary to supply the Occoquan Reservoir.
• Focus on Environmental Conditions: Any new development in the "Agricultural and Forestry" or "Conservation Residential" areas should strictly adheres to environmental protections, limits on public sewer extensions (which facilitate high density), and open space preservation as approved in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan which had the input of consultants and professional staff. 

---

Updated Comparison Summary

Feature	BOCS Approved Plans (Post-2040 Comp Plan)	Prince William Conservation Alliance (PWCA) Ideas	Relationship
Land Supply	Significantly increased by eliminating the 1:10 density restriction in the former Rural Crescent and allowing for higher densities (1:5 and 1:2 clustered).	Strong opposition to this land supply increase, arguing it is unsustainable, leads to sprawl, and strains infrastructure.	Direct Conflict
Affordability Tool	AfDU Ordinance and Housing Trust Fund remain the core tools for subsidizing affordability.	Supports the Housing Trust Fund but insists new density must be focused on existing urbanized areas and transit corridors, not the former rural area.	Divergence on Location
Environmental Focus	Emphasizes "Conservation Residential" policies to cluster development and preserve some open space (60%) on site.	Demands maximum enforcement of conservation measures and opposes the extension of public sewer/water into the former Rural Crescent as a prerequisite for higher density.	Tension over Enforcement

 In short, the County Staff is attempting to solve the housing crisis by making more land available for development through the new Comprehensive Plan, while simultaneously using the AfDU Ordinance to mandate a portion of that new supply be affordable. The BOCS is approving almost all rezonings to generate tax money from data centers to fund their programs and further increase housing density. They have forgotten that it is necessary to also protect the Occoquan Watershed to provide drinking water to the eastern portion of Prince William County.  As the Prince William Conservation Alliance (PWCA) points out this environmentally damaging overreach, the housing crisis should be solved through higher density and redevelopment in the existing urban core

NERC Predicting Blackouts Over Winter

From a NERC Press Release:

NERC’s 2025–2026 Winter Reliability Assessment (WRA) finds that much of North America is again at an elevated risk of having insufficient energy supplies to meet demand in extreme operating conditions. Although resources are adequate for normal winter peak demand, any prolonged, wide-area cold snaps will be challenging and may result in blackouts. This is largely due to rising electricity demand, which has grown by 20 GW since last winter, significantly outpacing winter on-peak capacity. This, coupled with the changing resource mix, is affecting the winter outlook.

“Electricity demand continues to grow faster than the resources being added to the grid, especially during the most extreme winter conditions where actual demand can topple forecasts by as much as 25%--as we saw in 2021 in ERCOT and SPP,” said John Moura, NERC’s director of Reliability Assessments and Performance Analysis. “This latest assessment highlights progress on cold weather readiness but underscores that more work remains to ensure energy and fuel supplies can be reliably delivered even during the harshest conditions.”

Although evidence from the past two winters indicates notable improvement in the delivery of natural gas to bulk power system generators, natural gas availability for generators remains precarious during extreme winter conditions due to the uneven application of voluntary freeze protection mitigations impacting production and transportation.

“Natural gas is an essential fuel for electricity generation in winter. Winter fuel supplies for thermal generators must be readily available during the periods of high demand for both electricity and natural gas that accompany extreme cold weather,” said Mark Olson, NERC’s manager of Reliability Assessment. “Although we are seeing evidence of improved performance, grid operators in areas that rely on single-fuel gas-fired generators are exposed to unanticipated generator loss during cold snaps when gas supply interruptions are more prevalent,” said Mark Olson, NERC’s manager of Reliability Assessment. 

NERC’s cold weather Reliability Standards address recommendations from winter storms Elliott and Uri reviews. The most recent standard, EOP-012-3, became effective on October 1, 2025, among the improvements in the new version are enhanced and expanded requirements to ensure that Generator Owners (GO) implement corrective actions to address known issues affecting their ability to operate in cold weather in a timely manner.

This year’s assessment, previewed in the 2025-2026 WRA video and summarized in the WRA infographic, makes a series of recommendations to reduce the risks of energy shortfalls on the bulk power system this winter:

• Cold Weather Preparations: GOs should complete winter readiness plans and checklists prior to December, deploy weatherization packages well in advance of approaching winter storms, and frequently check and maintain cold weather mitigations while conditions persist. 
  
  
• Load Forecasting: Be cognizant of the potential for short-term load forecasts to underestimate load in extreme cold weather events and be prepared to take early action to implement protocols and procedures for managing potential reserve deficiencies. .
  
  
• Fuel: They should prepare their operating plans to manage potential supply shortfalls and take proactive steps fand should maintain awareness of potential extreme cold weather developing over holiday weekends and the implications for fuel planning and procurement that may result over long, holiday weekends.  
  
  
• Regulation and Policy: State and provincial regulators can assist grid owners and operators in advance of and during extreme cold weather by amplifying public appeals for electricity and natural gas conservation, and supporting requested environmental and transportation waivers.

Undertaken annually in coordination with the Regional Entities, NERC’s WRA examines multiple factors that collectively provide deep and unique insights into reliability risk. These factors include resource adequacy, encompassing reserve margins and scenarios to identify operational risk; fuel assurance; and preparations to mitigate reliability concerns.