Universities CoUnCil on Water resoUrCes
JoUrnal of Contemporary Water researCh & edUCation
issUe 143, pages 42-48, deCember 2009
the energy-Water nexus: potential roles for the
U.s. army Corps of engineers
hal Cardwell 1, alexey voinov 1,2, and norman starler 1
1U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, VA;
2Currently at International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation (ITC), The Netherlands
In a future that is increasingly defined by energy and water stresses, the federal government will be forced to act. But what should the
federal role be, and what roles should individual
federal agencies play? How can or should federal
agencies support state, private, and local initiatives,
and where does the federal government have the
mandate and responsibility to lead? Research,
national standards and regulations, and incentive
systems have established federal activities that
are all vital and appropriate roles to address these
stresses. Because the nexus between energy and
water cuts across so many areas, multiple federal
agencies will be involved. One of these agencies
will undoubtedly be the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (the Corps). In preparation for this call
to action, below we review the current civil works
mission of the Corps, give our perspective of what
a Federal energy-water initiative might be, and
propose roles of the Corps in implementing such
an initiative.
Overview of the Corps and its Civil
Works Mission
The Corps likes to trace its ancestry back to before
the founding of the republic. George Washington
appointed the first engineer officers of the Army
on June 16, 1775, and the Department of the Army
established the Corps of Engineers as a separate,
permanent branch on March 16, 1802. Since then,
the Corps has been involved in supporting both
military and civilian needs and currently plays an
important international role in the reconstruction
in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On the civil works side, the Corps civil works
programs include engineering, design, construction,
rehabilitation, and operation and maintenance of
water resources projects having a replacement
value of over $150 billion. The Corps is the
lead federal agency for reducing damages from
riverine and coastal flooding, for navigation on the
nation’s waterways, and has a newer mission area
in ecosystem restoration. In addition the Corps is
the largest provider of hydroelectric energy in the
U.S., provides many recreational opportunities at
its facilities, and provides water supply storage
at many reservoirs. Beyond its project-focused
mission areas, the Corps regulates construction and
dredge-and-fill operations in navigable waters and
wetlands, plays a significant role in responding to
natural disasters, and provides planning assistance
to states.
Unlike many other Federal agencies, the Corps
has no single organic act that specifies its mission
and authorities. Instead, it derives its “civil works”
authorities from many statutes, including the
Flood Control Act of 1936, the Water Supply Act
of 1958, the River and Harbors Act of 1960, and
the 1972 Clean Water Act. More recently, Corps
project and programmatic authorities have been
authorized every few years through the Water
Resources Development Act (most recently in
2007). The Corps’ civil works mission is funded at
approximately $4.5 billion annually by the Energy
and Water Development and Related Agencies
Appropriation Act. Most projects also require cost-
sharing funds supplied directly by non-Federal
sponsors (e.g., local governments). The Corps’ civil
works mission is authorized and funded separately
from its military support activities.
The Corps is organized into eight divisions in the
U.S. and 38 subordinate districts geographically
42
J OURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY WATER RESEARCH & E DUCATIONUCoWr

defined by watershed boundaries (Figure 1) and
research and development and support activities
such as the U.S. Army Engineering Research
and Development Center and the Institute for
Water Resources. The Corps is comprised of
approximately 34,600 civilian and 650 military
members, including military and civilian engineers,
physical, biological and social scientists and other
specialists.
The Energy-Water Nexus and the
Federal Role
Over the past few years, there has been increased
recognition of the nexus between energy and
water management; the role of this paper is not to
delve into that nexus per se (for a more complete
discussion of that nexus, see Voinov 2009 in this
issue). Instead, this paper focuses on what can or
should the Federal government do to best help the
nation meet emerging challenges on the Energy-
Water nexus front? What will the public demand
that the Federal government do? What will be the
most feasible activities, politically and technically,
to address these challenges?
A first step for the Federal government may be
to promote a national focus on demand issues – for
both water and energy – to reduce the potential
challenges in supplying more of both, or at least to
buy time to develop other solutions to energy-water
issues. Such a focus would maintain traditional
federal roles in research, national standards and
regulations, and incentive systems. It would be
relatively inexpensive to implement and it would
contribute to national economic development and
Figure 1. USACE Districts and Divisions
The Energy-Water Nexus: Potential Roles for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 43
UCOWRJournal of Contemporary Water researCh & eduCation
OTHER COMMANDS
Engineer Research and Development Center
Huntsville Engineer Support Center
Transatlantic Support Center
USACE Finance Center
Marine Design Center
Institute for Water Resources
249th Engineer Battalion
L EGEND
DIVISION HQ L OCATION
DISTRICT HQ L OCATION
DISTRICT AND DIVISION
C O -LOCATED
DIVISION B OUNDARY
DISTRICT B OUNDARY
S TATE B OUNDARY

homeland security. The initiative might include
research to develop quantum leaps in water and
energy efficiency and promoting national standards
and incentive systems that spur innovation. It
may also focus on developing and distributing
information on best practices and opportunities
that reduce demand in economically and socially
attractive ways. But a major federal focus on
demand reduction would involve not only research
and incentive systems, but outreach and education
campaigns and a national call to make efficiency
a national trait. Such a campaign would follow in
the same footsteps as the various other national
drives (e.g., the race to the moon, environmental
awareness campaigns, and the war on drugs.).
The Energy Policy Acts of 2005 and 2007
take steps toward a Federal focus on efficiency,
as do other bills and initiatives in Congress and
in executive branch agencies. In part this is in
response to individual states taking the initiative
in seeking alternatives to traditional energy and
water supply and developing restrictions that are
causing a patchwork of standards nationally and
thus reducing national economic competitiveness
and efficiency. A more comprehensive focus on
demand management at the Federal level can move
the country in quantum leaps towards radically
lower energy and water demands and toward
world leadership in energy and water efficiency
technologies. Such progress would spur economic
growth, and, by reducing reliance on imported
energy sources, positively contribute to national
security.
The components of this multi-agency Federal
initiative on demand management would include:
• Research and development to enhance the
available water and energy supplies through
new technologies, market mechanisms
(e.g., metering and water banking),
increased efficiency of water and energy
storage and transmission infrastructure.
• Development of a next generation of
national standards and Federal regulation
and incentive programs, such as those that
have shown success such as the Corporate
Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards,
the energy star and water sense programs
and national building, appliance and
plumbing codes and standards.
• Information and data sharing. Multiple
Federal water and energy agencies (e.g.,
Corps, U.S. Department of Energy,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
U.S. Geological Survey, and Bureau of
Reclamation) should develop an open-
access information and knowledge base
that would contain data, tools, methods,
and models to facilitate the assessment of
energy and water supplies, demands and
linkages, as well as promote collaborative
decision-making at local and regional
levels.
• Outreach and public awareness. Aggressive
outreach and education programs, aimed
not only at the public but also at specific
water and energy use sectors, can rapidly
increase public adoption of water and
energy efficiency technologies. The U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s extension
service is one model to build upon
and coordinated with. Other avenues
include public service announcements
to promote conservation, efficiency, and
lower consumption. A concerted effort
to educate the public about opportunities
and economic and social benefits will be
necessary to imbue efficiency as a national
trait.
The overall principle would be that instead of
focusing solely or primarily on supply, Federal
agencies should be also focusing on demand,
helping manage it by both increasing efficiency
and decreasing consumption.
We note that this new federal focus on demand
management is not meant to supplant, but instead
to complement the historically important federal
roles in research, management, and development
for energy and water supply challenges.
Role of the Corps
But where does the Corps fit in? How can
the Corps, with its extensive energy and water
resources infrastructure across the nation, its
expertise in energy and water resources planning,
its research and development laboratories, and
its natural resource management and regulatory
responsibilities, support coordinated Federal
Cardwell, Voinov, and Starler 44
Journal of Contemporary Water researCh & eduCationUCOWR

actions to address energy-water challenges? First
of all, the Corps can make the most of its existing
infrastructure through infrastructure rehabilitation
and optimization. Multi-purpose Corps reservoirs
have storage already dedicated for water supply,
and many have significant hydropower operations.
The Corps can help augment water and energy
supply by ensuring that its facilities operate at
maximum effectiveness. Such steps would include
rehabilitation of existing hydropower facilities,
optimizing operations across turbines at an
individual site and across hydropower generation
facilities in a given river system, reviewing and
revising operational rules to increase benefits, and
improving forecasting and monitoring capabilities
to increase operational capabilities.
Secondly, the Corps can use the resources of
the Army’s research and development laboratories
and the experience in its water supply regulatory
program to develop expertise on demand and
energy-water linkages. The military has long
invested in research on energy and water efficiency
in support of the “war fighter.” Combining the
Army’s expertise with expertise from the Civil
Works mission could help the nation make quantum
leaps in energy and water use efficiencies. In
addition, the Corps responsibility under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act means that most new
water-supply projects must undergo a review by
the Corp of the need for additional water supply
and the alternatives that are practical to meet these
needs. This requirement necessitates an expert
analysis of both the yield of new and existing
supply options, as well as demand estimates. It
also implicitly requires tools and processes for
government regulators to engage in a dialogue
with communities about the acceptable risk of
water shortages and of lifestyle choices.
The Corps is in a position to develop and
disseminate expertise, both in the analytic tools
and technologies to estimate and increase demand
and supply reliability, and in the collaborative
process tools for dialogue about risk and tradeoffs.
With increased consideration of energy-water
linkages and technological improvements, and a
richer dialogue with communities on water and
energy issues, “soft” solutions may emerge as the
“Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable
Alternative” that is mandated by the 404 regulatory
process. By becoming a center of expertise for water
demand management, the Corps can support state
and local governments and other federal agencies
in addressing water and energy challenges.
Thirdly, the role of the Corps can continue to
evolve from a project-by-project orientation to a
systems perspective in planning and operations.
Such a systems perspective would consider the
complex feedbacks and connections between
energy and water in Corps’ navigation, ecosystem
restoration, flood damage reduction, and other
projects.
By teaming with the Department of Energy’s
National Laboratories and other experts in energy
assessment, the Federal government’s expertise
can be pooled to evaluate the systemic interactions
in energy and water resources planning. For
example, this could include assessing the potential
impacts of investments in navigation systems
relative to the energy-water interactions associated
with moving commodities. In addition, it could
include assessing energy-water connections when
analyzing the potential impacts of flooding or of
water shortfalls. Such systemic consideration
of energy-water connections would also benefit
planning for emergency response.
Hurricane Katrina showed the extent of
linkages between energy, water, and emergency
management as energy production, refining and
distribution systems were significantly affected and
the Mississippi River was closed to navigation for
coal barges. Such a systems perspective would be
a natural extension of the Corps’ existing planning
expertise and would result in better information
in the formulation and evaluation of plans for
new projects, major rehabilitation and operations.
Dziegielewski and Kiefer (2006:43) point out that
The restrictive nature of existing Federal laws,
policies and funding has left the Corps in a
classic catch-22 situation. States and localities are
taking the initiative for seeking out water supply
alternatives, which is consistent with Corps
policy. However, in doing so, … these entities
more often than not perceive Corps involvement
as a barrier and are more likely to encounter the
Corps in regulatory proceedings than engage the
Corps as a partner... This “problem” presents the
Corps with its single best opportunity to help,
which is to lead regional water supply planning
The Energy-Water Nexus: Potential Roles for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 45
UCOWRJournal of Contemporary Water researCh & eduCation

studies that would facilitate the design of the most
cost-effective and environmentally-friendly water
supply options, thus reducing the cost and length
of the permitting process.
This approach is again centered on the supply
side. By bringing expertise on demand management
technologies and water-energy linkages, the Corps
only becomes a more valuable resource for locals
and states to assist in their planning processes.
Note that at present some states turn out to be much
more restrictive and conscious in their development
plans than the Federal level. So, there may be no
catch-22 situation if we bring the demand side
into concern. Presently states are starting to seek
alternatives to traditional energy and water supply,
and develop restrictions that are even more stringent
than required by federal regulation. In response the
Federal government is creating obstacles for the
States to move to less damaging technologies and
more sustainable futures by proposing restrictions
on states from imposing emission standards that
are more stringent than Federal level1.
Fourth, to fully support a federal response
to energy-water issues, the Corps must engage
more fully in outreach and education programs.
Such activities would naturally flow from
various Corps activities and policies on public
involvement in planning, risk communication,
and public interactions in the Corps natural
resource management community. Such an
extension of the Corps’ evolving role as a natural
resource manager could be expanded to distribute
information aimed at different sectors on water
efficiency technologies and energy-water linkages
and assessment methods. In this task the Corps
can take advantage of its distributed network of
Districts, Divisions and local installations to offer
educational materials to the public, water-intensive
industries, and municipalities.
Finally, to help the nation address energy
water challenges, the Corps must continue to
develop innovative approaches to governance
and collaborative problem solving. Recognizing
the primacy of states in water allocation, and the
pivotal role of local communities and the private
sector, the Corps must continue to forward
collaborative approaches to water resources
governance. These approaches have been espoused
by the 2004 Cooperative Conservation initiative
(see www.cooperativeconservation.gov), the
Corps’ guidance on collaborative planning (see
www.usace.army.mil/publications/eng-circulars/
ec1105-2-409/entire.pdf), the National Science
and Technology Council’s strategy for federal
science and technology to support fresh water
availability and quality www.svp.iwr.usace.
army.mil/docs/CollaborativeTs&PsNov1606.
pdf, and the Obama administration’s clarion call
for a more collaborative and participatory
government (www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/
TransparencyandOpenGovernment).
With complex energy-water interactions and
problems becoming increasingly salient to the
general public, federal water managers will need
to develop and promote new collaborative ways
of problem solving. The Corps new Center of
Expertise on Conflict Resolution and Public
Participation (www.iwr.usace.army.mil/cpc) has
been recently created to address these challenges
in concert with other Corps elements and with
its partner Conflict Resolution Centers across the
Federal family (e.g. U.S. Institute for Environmental
Conflict Resolution, DOI’s Center for Alternative
Dispute Resolution, EPA’s Conflict Prevention
and Resolution Center). The Corps’ Shared Vision
Planning (www.SharedVisionPlanning.us) process
institutes an on-going collaborative learning effort
when there is an iterative exchange between
Federal, state, and local levels on priorities, data,
analysis, scenarios, and decisions. It is an open-
ended adaptive process that is the only possible
way to manage open, evolving systems, such as
watersheds.
While Shared Vision Planning has been mostly
used in application to water resources, there is no
reason it cannot be used in other situations where
resource planning and environmental decision-
making and conflict resolution is required. The
Corps can work with other Federal and state partners
to further develop and popularize such alternative
dispute resolution methods and technologies.
Key Partnerships and Collaborations
To address the above priority areas, the Corps
will need to engage others in the federal family.
Although the Corps will need to work with many
federal and state agencies, four key partnerships
immediately come to mind:
Cardwell, Voinov, and Starler 46
Journal of Contemporary Water researCh & eduCationUCOWR

• In the area of infrastructure rehabilitation
and optimization, the Corps will need to
work with experts at DOE to improve
hydropower turbines and their efficiency,
as well as to optimize the production across
turbines and across production facilities.
• The Corps will also need to share
experiences with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission on their
approaches to hydropower dam operation
and in adopting collaborative approaches
to hydropower regulation.
• The Corps will need to continue to
collaborate closely with EPA to develop
and disseminate expertise on water supply
and demand expertise for evaluating
water supply permits. Furthermore, any
outreach and education initiative would
have much to learn from and share with
EPA’s Water Sense program to increase
public awareness for water conservation.
• Finally, the Corps will need to partner
with the Bureau of Reclamation
and the Tennessee Valley Authority
to share experiences on everything
from infrastructure rehabilitation and
optimization to system-wide planning and
operations to public outreach and education
for water resources management.
Summary
The Corps’ historic role and expertise in water
resources management in the United States is a
resource that can and must be put to the service
of helping the nation address its energy-water
challenges. The Corps’ contribution to this
national effort will include contributions from its
world class research activities, from its role in
managing infrastructure, and from its regulatory
responsibilities. By partnering with expertise in
other Federal and non-Federal organizations, the
Corps will be able to help the U.S. meet these
challenges.
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this paper do not
necessarily reflect the views of the Institute for
Water Resources or Voinov’s organization.
End Note
1. See: EPA gets push on emissions controls
Congressional backers of laws in Md., 11 states try to
force agency to act: http://www.baltimoresun.com/
news/local/politics/bal-te.emissions13aug13,0,3089
789.story, Democrats Face Off Over Emissions Bill.
California Lawmakers Lead Opposition to a Draft That
Would Prevent States From Taking Tougher Action
Than The Federal Government. h t t p : / / w w w .
commondreams.org/archive/2007/06/08/1750/.
Author Bios and Contact Information
Hal Cardwell is with the Corps of Engineer’s Institute
for Water Resources, and is presently leading the Corps
new Conflict Resolution and Public Participation Center
www.iwr.usace.army.mil/cpc/, as well as the conceptual
development, case studies, and outreach to promote
collaborative modeling approaches for water conflict
resolution www.sharedvisionplanning.us. Prior to
coming to the Corps in 2002, Dr. Cardwell was with Oak
Ridge National Laboratory’s Environmental Sciences
Division for a decade, including five years on loan to
the US Agency for International Development (USAID)
working globally and then in Panama on water issues.
Dr. Cardwell is functionally fluent in Spanish, holds
a Ph.D. in Geography & Environmental Engineering
from the Johns Hopkins University. He can be reaches
at 703-428-9071 or Hal.E.Cardwell@usace.army.mil.
Alexey Voinov (PhD) is Associate Professor at the
International Institute for Geo-information Science and
Earth Observation (ITC). Prior to that Dr.Voinov was
coordinating the Chesapeake Research Consortium
Community Modeling Program, and was also Principle
Research Scientist at John’s Hopkins University. He has
spent one year with the AAAS Science and Technology
Fellowship program working with the Army Corps of
Engineers Institute for Water Resources. Before that he
was with the Institute for Ecological Economics, first
at Univ. of Maryland, and, later - Vermont, working on
integrated studies of the ecological and human dynamics
and sustainability sciences. His academic and teaching
interests evolve around modeling of various ecosystems,
with applications to environmental and integrated
assessment, management and decision support. He is a
keen advocate of stakeholder involvement in modeling
and decision making. Dr. Voinov is Editor of the
Journal for Environmental Modeling and Software and
President of the International Environmental Modeling
and Software Society. His recent book is on “Systems
Science and Modeling for Ecological Economics”
The Energy-Water Nexus: Potential Roles for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 47
UCOWRJournal of Contemporary Water researCh & eduCation

(Academic Press/Elsevier). He can be contacted at
+31(0) 53 487 4507 or email: aavoinov@gmail.com.
Norman Starler is a lead economist for the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources,
where he works in the areas of policy analysis, benefit-
cost analysis and future directions. Prior to joining the
Institute for Water Resources, Dr. Starler served in
the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for seventeen years where he was senior examiner for
both the Army Corps and the Bureau of Reclamation.
Prior to serving with OMB, Dr. Starler was the Senior
Economist for the Bureau of Reclamation. Additionally,
he has extensive experience with the Department
of the Interior’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Department of Agriculture’s Economic Service and
with two universities – State University of New York
and South Dakota State University. Dr. Starler holds
a PhD in Economics from Iowa State University. He
can be reached at 703-428-6670 or norman.h.starler@
usace.army.mil.
References
Dziegielewski, B., and J. Kiefer. 2006. U.S. Water
Demand, Supply and Allocation: Trends and Outlook,
IWR Report Number 07-R-3, Institute for Water
Resources, USACE, Alexandria, VA. Avaialble
at: www.iwr.usace.army.mil/inside/products/pub/
iwrreports/2007-R-03.pdf.
Voinov, A. and H. Cardwell. 2009. Energy-water nexus:
why should we care? Journal of Contemporary Water
Research and Education 143.
Voinov, A. 2008. “The Energy & Water Nexus. Why
Should the Corps Care?” IWR Report Number 2008-
VSP-01, Institute for Water Resources, USACE,
Alexandria, VA. Available at: www.iwr.usace.army.
mil/inside/products/pub/iwrreports/2008-VSP-
01.pdf.
Cardwell, Voinov, and Starler 48
Journal of Contemporary Water researCh & eduCationUCOWR