Y
ou could go swimming
right now, but you
didn’t necessarily plan
on it. You knew it was going
to rain, but did you expect
giant puddles to swallow the
sidewalk, the road or your
shoes for that matter? In this
beautifully constructed city
that we call home, the last
thing that we think about is its
imperfection. Ann Arbor, new
and old, consists of aesthetic,
impressive architecture and
infrastructure that not only
meets the logistical demands
of the city, but also perfectly
complements the abundant
natural
scenery
that
surrounds it. Nevertheless,
what if I told you that’s not
good enough?
When vast puddles form
after one mild rain in areas
around
campus
that
are
frequently occupied by foot
traffic,
one
consequence,
among many, of an ineffective
stormwater system becomes
completely
obvious.
The
design
of
our
current
stormwater
and
sewer
systems
pertain
to
past
observations of precipitation
and land use which have
evidently shifted over time
with changing climate and
urbanization. Thus, what we
can truly recognize is that
the city of Ann Arbor has
always considered molding
public infrastructure in a
way that best suits the needs
of the times. Now, it’s time
that it continues taking steps
toward executing plans to
renovate
infrastructure
in a way that supports the
University
of
Michigan’s
goals
for
sustainability
while
maintaining
strong
output
in
all
important
economic
sectors.
Perhaps
more
importatly,
strong
infrastructure
and
the
removal of excess stormwater
has
exponential
effects
for
our
environment,
particularly when it comes to
preventing erosion and water
contamination.
In
order
to
do
this
effectively, the city has to
have a particular mentality
already
reflected
in
those
who
specialize
in
environmental
and
urban
sustainability.
Branko
Kerkez, assistant professor
of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, is the leader
of a national research team
organized under the National
Science Foundation’s Smart
& Connected Communities
program.
This
team
is
composed of researchers from
various
other
institutions
who are investigating the use
of smart stormwater systems
in
reducing
flooding
and
improving water quality. In
essence, Kerkez is looking to
improve the functionality of
current stormwater systems
by implementing sensors and
other autonomous technology
to enhance system capacity
during large storm events.
However,
rather
than
completely
replace
old
infrastructure,
Kerkez
emphasizes the benefits and
practicality of implementing
green
infrastructure
into
existing
infrastructure:
“Instead of saying new and
expensive construction is our
only option, can we use what
we have in a better way?”
The
sensors
being
developed by the research
team
are
multifaceted
to
account
for
all
aspects
of
water
passing
through
a
stormwater
system.
In
essence, they will run on
real-time
control
systems
that
allow
a
stormwater
system
to
enable
flood
control
with
a
detention
basin as well as to enable
water quality control with
a retention basin based on
the precipitation conditions
present. The research team
expresses
confidence
that
the hybridization of these
stormwater
system
sites
will benefit the quality of
the water and the health
of the overall surrounding
ecosystem,
claiming
that
temporarily
converting
a
detention basin to a retention
basin and vice versa can
increase
the
removal
efficiency of total suspended
solids
by
60
percent.
In
addition, sensors will control
the function of above-ground
and underground valves for
the system to most effectively
regulate groundwater flow
and measure moisture and
water quality at any given
time. As a result, retrofitting
existing stormwater systems
with
cost-effective
smart
technology
will
give
the
overall
stormwater
system
an
adaptive
capability
to
constantly redesign itself in
response to changing weather
conditions.
With this newly designed
system
providing
clear
benefits for water quality
and several advantages to the
functionality of stormwater
systems,
it’s
natural
to
agree with the efforts of
Kerkez
and
the
research
team in implementing sensor
technology to enhance this
aspect of the city; However,
this doesn’t necessarily mean
that it’s easy for all of us to
agree with efforts like these.
While we as a generation
have come across countless
opportunities to improve the
quality of our surrounding
environment, we have always
felt some reluctance toward
seizing them because they
often involve a change in
lifestyle or an advancement
that feels like it could be too
advanced for what we’re used
to. In other words, while it
is natural to pursue in life
what is morally correct, it is
perhaps even more natural
to remain stagnant and live
life how we’ve always done
it.
I
believe
this
closed-
mindedness
is
what
is
undermining our local and
global environment as we
speak.
Thankfully, the governing
bodies of the University have
recognized the importance of
adjusting our infrastructure
to suit the environmental
demands of the times — teams
from Facilities & Operations
are currently in the process
of installing a stormwater
infiltration system on Central
Campus
near
the
Diag,
where the massive ponds of
water collect during rains.
However, many institutions
and industrial corporations
everywhere
have
failed
to
take
similar
strides
toward
managing
their
infrastructure effectively in
relation to the environment.
Showing
that
we
care
about creating a healthier
environment in accordance
with
a
more
efficient
infrastructural design is only
half of the journey, and, for
most, it’s the only half that
we have control over. So we
can leave it to Kerkez and the
professionals to execute these
ideals that are progressing
toward
sustainability,
but it’s important that we
instill these ideals into our
professionals and authorities
with an urgency that makes
them prevalent and necessary
to be addressed so that we
as a society can progress our
environmental and economic
sectors equally.
Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A— Thursday, October 25, 2018
Emma Chang
Ben Charlson
Joel Danilewitz
Samantha Goldstein
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Lucas Maiman
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland
Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Ali Safawi
Ashley Zhang
Sam Weinberger
DAYTON HARE
Managing Editor
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
ALEXA ST. JOHN
Editor in Chief
ANU ROY-CHAUDHURY AND
ASHLEY ZHANG
Editorial Page Editors
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
ALEX KUBIE | COLUMN
When Trump makes landfall
I
remember
the
tweets.
The (almost too fitting)
image
of
former
Presidential
candidate
Donald
Trump
holding up the
rainbow
flag
in front of his
thousands
of
supporters,
as
if that colored
piece
of
cloth
even knew the
truth
of
what
lay ahead. I even
remember
the
assurances
of friends and loved ones to
not worry; Jared and Ivanka
were sure to serve as a buffer
between the most powerful
man in the world and the
already-fragile
rights
that
had
just
delicately
been
established.
Yet,
just
like
many
preceding
presidential
administrations,
a
people
to fear — to unite against
through deep-seated bonds of
animus — was needed.
While Muslims, those of
Mexican descent and even
victims
of
sexual
assault
were cast aside, a group
that lawmakers and elected
officials have exploited for
the past century as a means to
elicit political gain once again
returned to the forefront of
our chief of state’s vitriol: the
LGBT community.
Now,
this
past
week,
reports of a memo by the
Trump
Administration
“to
establish a legal definition
of sex under Title IX, the
federal civil rights law that
bans gender discrimination
in
education
programs
that
receive
government
financial
assistance”
has
surfaced.
This
narrow
definition “defining gender
as a biological, immutable
condition
determined
by
genitalia at birth,” would
“eradicate federal recognition
of the estimated 1.4 million
Americans who have opted
to recognize themselves —
surgically or otherwise — as
a gender other than the one
they were born into.”
While this may not come
as
a
surprise
for
many,
the
administration
has
previously moved to limit
the
rights
of
transgender
individuals, the memo
serves as the boldest
course of action yet to
strip the transgender
community — people
who are our neighbors,
who pay taxes, who
serve this country —
from their respective
rights
and
dignity.
It further targets an
already
vulnerable
class of citizens that
faces both legal and societal
discrimination.
A
transgender
student
on campus, who wished to
remain anonymous out of fear
for his identity, spoke about
the news of the proposed
memo with grave concern.
“I was hopeful that the
coming election would bring
some change for transgender
people
in
the
state
(of
Michigan), and now to know
the federal government is
trying to completely — and
legally — erase us is just so
terrible.”
While
the
upcoming
midterm
elections
may
not
put
Trump
and
his
administration
directly
on
the ballot, it can serve as a
first step in electing leaders
who will fight for the rights
of all people at both the local
and national level. Following
the
2015
Supreme
Court
decision that legalized same-
sex marriage, the sense of
urgency among gay people
— and within the national
dialogue as a whole — has
seemed to dissipate. If this
week has not made it apparent
enough, the fight for total
equality in the eyes of the law
is far from settled.
We are now faced with
emerging fateful challenges.
The
architect
of
the
enshrinement of LGBT rights
has departed the Supreme
Court.
The
United
States
Secretary
of
Education
refuses to act on pertinent
issues such as transgender
bathroom
access.
The
supposed-leader of the free
world, when prompted with
the issue of gay rights, jokes
about his own Vice President
“want(ing) to hang them all!”
There is now much left to
wonder where the issue of gay
rights proceeds from here.
While
much
progress
has been realized in the
recent past, we cannot grow
complacent in our current
state of existence. Nor shall
we become fearful at the sight
of such hatred’s re-elevation
to
our
nation’s
highest
positions.
What
reverberates
in
my mind in the face of such
growing antagonism are the
words of former President
Barack
Obama
upon
the
2015 ruling of Obergefell v.
Hodges in which same-sex
marriage was granted across
the nation: “Progress on this
journey often comes in small
increments. Sometimes two
steps forward, one step back,
propelled by the persistent
effort of dedicated citizens.
And then sometimes there are
days like this, when that slow,
steady
effort
is
rewarded
with justice that arrives like
a thunderbolt.”
Though
our
brooding
storm may be marked with
ominous
precipitation
and
despair, through persistence
and
unwavering
solidarity
with the LGBT community,
out
of
this
same
storm
can
come
that
unbending
thunderbolt of justice once
again.
Ann Arbor is preparing for the storm, are you?
KIANNA MARQUEZ | COLUMN
Alex Kubie can be reached at
akubie@umich.edu.
Kianna Marquez can be reached at
kmarquez@umich.edu.
KAYLA CHINITZ | OP-ED
An overshadowed opinion on Israel
W
hen people think
about
religious
diversity
on
campus, they may not always
consider the diversity that
exists
within
religious
minorities. Since I arrived
at Michigan, there has been
one dominant political voice
coming
from
the
Jewish
community: a voice which
does not speak for me.
As a Jewish student who is
religiously engaged and loves
celebrating my cultural roots,
I feel distressed by the toxic
environment surrounding the
debate over Israel. Though a
diversity of opinions exists
within
the
U-M
Jewish
community, I’m saddened by
the fact that many of these
viewpoints are overshadowed
by
a
vocal,
conservative-
leaning perspective. And I
am not alone. The polarized
political
dichotomy
on
campus excludes the many
progressive Jews who want
Israel to exist as a Jewish
homeland, but are appalled
by the indifference to the
suffering
of
Palestinian
civilians in Gaza and the
West Bank.
I believe calling out the
current Israeli government for
its humanitarian violations
is a political statement, not
hate speech against Jews. I
also believe criticizing the
government and its policies
should not be generalized to
imply anti-Semitism, unless
these criticisms specifically
negatively target Judaism or
Jews in general.
We should be quick to
condemn anti-Semitism, as
with all forms of religious
discrimination, but we should
not
misconstrue
political
sentiments as anti-Semitism.
Anti-Semitism is real and it
exists on this campus, but
when people equate political
statements to a blind hatred
toward Jews, they obstruct
the possibility for nuanced
conversation
and
joint
productive action.
I don’t want the Jewish
state to disappear, but I
am also not offended by
criticism of Israel; in fact, I
welcome it. I’m not going to
blindly support the Israeli
government while it carries
out
severe
human
rights
violations, and I’m not going
to
support
Israel’s
prime
minister
while
he
denies
these acts.
Though
politically
conservative
voices
supporting Israel’s current
policies are more prominent
on campus, they should not
be viewed as more legitimate
than
underrepresented
voices. The Jewish student
body does not speak with one
unified voice – and that’s ok.
As a Jew who is hurt deeply
by
anti-Semitism,
a
rigid
definition of anti-Semitism
that broadly equates criticism
of Israel with hatred toward
Jews does not represent me.
As I find myself caught in
escalating campus tensions
concerning Israeli politics,
I feel a responsibility to
critique Israel’s policies not
in spite of my identity as a
Jewish student, but because
of it.
Kayla Chinitz is an LSA sophomore.
HANNAH MYERS | CONTACT HANNAH AT HSMYERS@UMICH.EDU
ALEX
KUBIE
CONTRIBUTE TO THE CONVERSATION
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and op-eds.
Letters should be fewer than 300 words while op-eds should be 550
to 850 words. Send the writer’s full name and University affiliation to
tothedaily@michigandaily.com.
If this week
has not made it
apparent enough,
the fight for total
equality in the
eyes of the law is
far from settled.
I don’t want the
Jewish state
to disappear,
but I am also
not offended
by criticism of
Israel; in fact, I
welcome it.
I believe
this closed-
mindedness
is what is
undermining our
local and global
environment.