Connect with us

Colorado

Environmentalists decry softening of proposed regulation of drilling’s impact on Colorado’s poorest communities

Published

on

Environmentalists decry softening of proposed regulation of drilling’s impact on Colorado’s poorest communities


Environmentalists and the oil and gas industry are battling over new state regulations that one side says would protect vulnerable communities that suffer the most from pollution and the other agues would effectively ban new wells in Colorado.

The latest clash involves the ongoing debate about how close those wells should be to homes.

Next month, the Colorado Energy and Carbon Management Commission must approve rules that define “cumulative impacts” of pollution and address how they affect what are known as disproportionately impacted communities across the state.

Gov. Jared Polis signed a bill last year directing the energy commission to establish rules regarding the cumulative impacts of drilling by considering how the oil and gas industry’s work can harm air and water quality, wildlife and public health, as well as increase odors and noise, in communities that are disproportionately impacted by pollution.

Advertisement

The cumulative impacts rule comes on the heels of the commission’s decision this week to approve a comprehensive plan from Crestone to drill up to 166 petroleum wells near Aurora Reservoir, despite strong opposition from a nearby neighborhood where homes cost between $600,000 and $1 million.

At issue in the newest debate is a provision that would have required a company to receive consent from every resident or building owner within 2,000 feet of a proposed drilling site. Right now, rules state drilling sites must have a 2,000-foot setback from homes, hospitals, schools and office complexes, but there are exemptions that allow companies to drill and those permits are rarely denied.

Environmentalists say those exemptions provide numerous loopholes that allow the industry to drill wherever it wants, and this latest provision was needed to protect the communities that suffer the most from air pollution, noise, traffic and other issues caused by drilling.

“It creates more room for the industry to continue to produce oil and gas in disproportionately impacted communities,” said Patricia Garcia-Nelson, an advocate for GreenLatinos Colorado.

“Blunt instrument to ban the industry”

The energy commission has been working on drafts of the new cumulative impacts rule for months, and those early versions — reviewed by environmentalists, oil and gas companies and lawyers — included the requirement for consent from neighbors. That changed last week when the commission’s staff released the latest draft.

Advertisement

Dan Haley, president of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, said the industry urged the commission to drop the consent requirement.

“We feel those setbacks are unnecessary because they are a one-size-fits-all blunt instrument to ban the industry from Colorado,” he said.

The state already has rules in place to protect communities, Haley said.

Depending on the specific project, the state can require operators to use electric drilling rigs or install a closed-loop system that cuts toxic emissions. Regulators also can impose rules that reduce traffic, noise and odors, too.

“It’s not just about emissions,” Haley said. “Sometimes it’s about truck traffic. Sometimes it’s about odor. There are a lot of tools at the ready to make sure the communities are protected.”

Advertisement

Haley also noted that effectively banning new wells in the state would force Colorado to buy its gasoline and petroleum products from other sources. That would have an environmental impact, too, because the product would have to be shipped, trucked and piped into the state.

Colorado is the fourth-largest state supplier of crude oil and eighth-largest natural gas producer, according to the Energy Information Administration. The industry contributes nearly $2 billion in state and local tax revenue in Colorado.

“The commission has listened to their concerns for years, which is why we have the most protective environmental standards in the world right here in Colorado,” Haley said of environmentalists. “Some of these groups are not going to be satisfied until there’s a ban on oil and gas in Colorado.”

Considering cumulative impacts

Environmental advocates say the state regulators who make decisions on drilling permits ignore communities where residents are mostly Latino, Black or Indigenous and whose income levels are often lower than the state average. A consent provision would have given them a stronger voice in decision-making for drilling permits.

“I’ve been doing testimony in front of the commission since 2017 and we keep hearing the same ‘the sky is falling’ claims from the industry, but… the concerns of the community have never changed, and they’re never been addressed,” Garcia-Nelson said. “It’s really heartbreaking.”

Advertisement

To explain how cumulative impacts on a community should be considered, Garcia-Nelson, who lives in Greeley, offered as an example the neighborhood near the JBS Foods meatpacking plant on the north side of the city.

Three oil and gas operations sit within a half mile of the plant. There are homes less than a half mile from the plant and the drilling sites, and they’re all close to the Cache la Poudre River, she said.

If cumulative impacts were to be considered before issuing a drilling permit, regulators would need to consider how all of those industrial operations combine — air pollution, water pollution, traffic, noise and foul smells — to affect nearby residents rather than solely judging the impact of the single permit under consideration, as is the practice now.

Allowing residents to give consent would help people in a city surrounded by oil and gas drilling, Garcia-Nelson said.

“In Greeley, you can’t get away from it,” she said.

Advertisement

“Only one set of concerns being addressed”

When the energy commission’s staff released the latest draft on Aug. 2, the provision that would have required consent to override setbacks was struck from the proposal.

Environmentalists were livid that the provision not only was gone, but that it had been removed seemingly out of the blue after months of drafts included it. Now, their written rebuttals are due Friday and they have little time to organize opposition ahead of rulemaking hearings that begin Sept. 3.

“It literally seems like the ECMC accepted every one of the industry’s concerns and stripped out every one of the community’s concerns,” said Rebecca Curry, an attorney for Earthjustice, a nonprofit law center that takes on legal cases for environmental groups. “They made a bunch of changes that go in the wrong direction.”

Andrew Forkes-Gudmundson, senior manager for state policy at Earthworks, said about a third of the oil and gas developments in the past few years have been within 2,000 feet of neighborhoods. And most of those neighborhoods qualified as disproportionately impacted by the state, which uses a population-based formula that takes into account ethnicity and race, income, housing costs and language barriers.

Those communities are least likely to fight back because they do not have the time and resources to read hundreds of pages of technical material and sit through lengthy meetings.

Advertisement

“They’re most susceptible to having developments move in with little pushback,” he said.

That’s why regulators need to consider measures that protect those communities that suffer the most from toxic air pollution, Forkes-Gudmundson said. And it seems those regulators are going to ignore a legislative mandate to consider those neighborhoods in their decisions, he said.

“There’s only one set of concerns being addressed, and it’s certainly not to the disproportionately impacted communities who could have oil and gas developments in their backyards,” he said.

Get more Colorado news by signing up for our Mile High Roundup email newsletter.

Originally Published:

Advertisement



Source link

Colorado

Colorado fire department to break ground on new station to accommodate community growth

Published

on

Colorado fire department to break ground on new station to accommodate community growth


One community in Douglas County is preparing to break ground on a new fire station.

Castle Rock Fire and Rescue Department’s Station 156 will be located in the northeast portion of town. 

Advertisement

CBS


The new station will serve Cobblestone Ranch and Terrain, two growing subdivisions. It will include a 13,000-square-foot fire station and a 13,000-square-foot logistics center.

“When I started 1986, we had two fire stations,” Fire Chief Norris Croom told CBS Colorado. “We were an all-volunteer department.”

In the 40 years Croom has been with the fire department, a lot has changed.

“7,500 people were in town,” Croom said. “Right now, we’re at about 87,000 people, and this will be our sixth fire station.”

Advertisement

Croom is presently the chief of a fire department that’s four times bigger and serves a much larger community.

“Just mind boggling that it’s grown so fast,” said Judy Barnett, who lives in the Castle Oaks community.

For 30 years, Barnett has also watched the town grow from her backyard.

“Just overnight, you look out, and there’s another house,” Barnett said.

Her rural home in northeast Castle Rock is getting more suburban, with the addition of communities like Cobblestone Ranch and Terrain.

Advertisement

“The Terrain pretty much surrounds us on the west side,” Barnett said.

Croom says his department is being stretched thin in those areas.

“We’re seeing response times as long as 14 to 15 minutes,” Croom explained.

But, soon, Castle Rock Fire and Rescue will break ground on a solution, a new fire station on Castle Oaks Drive.

“We believe that we’ll be able to cut those response times in more than half,” Croom said.

Advertisement

Fleet maintenance work is done at Castle Rock’s public safety training facility, but that work will soon have a new home. A logistics center will be built along with the new fire station.

Croom says the logistics center will provide a centralized location for equipment and space for maintenance work.

“As far as our equipment is concerned, we’ve got it stored throughout all of our different stations,” Croom said. “So, if you need hazmat equipment, you might have to go to Station 5. If you need wildland equipment, you might have to go to this station. We’ll be able to take all of that out of those stations and consolidate it into one central location.”

The total cost of the facility is $21.5 million. It’s being paid for with TABOR timeout dollars, a general fund loan, capital impact fees and certificates of participation. Twelve firefighters will be needed to staff the new station. Croom says the money to hire more firefighters comes from a ballot measure passed by Castle Rock voters in 2024.

“We do worry about fires as of lately. We’re surrounded by scrub oak,” Barnett said. “As dry as it is, it, you know, and it wouldn’t take much.”

Advertisement

The new Station 156 is just minutes from Barnett’s home, and will serve her community, as well as Terrain and Cobblestone Ranch.

“I think that’s great because, of course with all the growth around here, there’s a lot more chance of having a fire,” Barnett said. “The hard thing about growth is all the people, but then that good thing is that we get those kind of amenities.”

The station will break ground next week, and it’s expected to be operational in 2027.

“As the town continues to grow and as the community continues to grow, us being able to keep up with that growth is significant,” Croom said.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

Colorado National Guard deploys to the Middle East

Published

on

Colorado National Guard deploys to the Middle East


(COLORADO) — The Colorado National Guard will be deployed to the Middle East in support of an international peacekeeping force with a departure ceremony scheduled for Friday, April 3.

According to the Colorado National Guard, the deployment is in support of Multinational Force and Observers, an international peacekeeping force that supervises the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty and enforces its terms.

More than 200 soldiers of the Colorado Army National Guard’s 1st Battalion, 157th Infantry Regiment will be at the Wings Over the Rockies Air and Space Museum, 7711 East Academy Boulevard in Denver, for the departure ceremony.

“The Soldiers of this battalion are highly trained, motivated, and ready to assume the mission of the Multinational Force and Observers in the Sinai,” said 1-157th Commander U.S. Army Lt. Col. Adam W. Rhum. “We are proud to be part of this long-standing and successful peacekeeping operation, and we are committed to upholding the legacy of those who have served before us in support of the treaty of peace between Egypt and Israel.”

Advertisement

The treaty was a result of the Camp David Accords and ended the state of war that had existed between the two countries. The MFO is an independent international organization created by agreement between Egypt and Israel to oversee the peace and is supported by 14 nations, according to the Colorado National Guard.

“The 1-157th has a lineage dating back to the Colorado Gold Rush, officially becoming the ‘First Colorado’ Infantry Regiment in 1883. The regiment served with distinction in World War I and World War II, where it was attached to the 45th Infantry Division and fought in major campaigns including Sicily, Anzio, Italy, and southern France,” said the Colorado National Guard.

The unit is headquartered at Fort Carson.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Colorado

As Colorado faces historically bad snowpack, a new study links low snow with more severe wildfires that damage forests

Published

on

As Colorado faces historically bad snowpack, a new study links low snow with more severe wildfires that damage forests


A new study out of Western Colorado University has implications for the wildfire season ahead as nearly the entire West faces record-low snowpack conditions.

The paper, published last month in the peer-reviewed journal “Environmental Research Letters,” found that not only is an early-snow melt associated with earlier fire seasons and a more acreage being burned, it’s also linked to more severe wildfires.

“When we have a low-snow winter, those high elevation forests will have lower live fuel moisture and ultimately more flammable conditions during the summer,” said Jared Balik, the lead author of the study. “That in turn, promotes greater burn severity, greater fire severity, that increases the risk of forest loss or conversion of forest to shrubland or grassland.”



The study used satellites that measure pre- and post-fire conditions to estimate burn severity of fires across 11 Western states — including Colorado — from 1985 to 2021, Balik said. Using that 36-year dataset and regional snowpack metrics, he said researchers were able to create models to explore the interactions between snowpack levels and wildfire seasons.

Advertisement

Balik said the study’s results confirmed what fire ecology scientists have long known: That the earlier the snow melts, the sooner the fire season can begin and that an earlier meltout typically creates drier conditions that make landscapes more susceptible to fires starting and spreading.



“Together, those two factors provide both more time and opportunity for fires to ignite and spread,” Balik said. “But we were curious, knowing that, what the implications of a low-snow year were for the severity of wildfires. What does snowpack mean for the effects of fire on our landscapes?”

Snowpack acts like a ‘savings account’ for forests

The impact of the snowpack on fire intensity — or how much of a forest’s trees and vegetation a wildfire consumes — had not previously been well studied, Balik said. Fire severity is important because while forests can survive low intensity fires, he said forests tend to have a more difficult time regenerating after high intensity fires that can kill adult trees and damage the next year’s seed source.

“These high severity fires can really change ecosystems,” Balik said. “They can cascade into other impacts on how those ecosystems store carbon, how they hold water in subsequent seasons and changes to the quality of habitat they provide for wildlife.”

Across the entire West, the study found that higher snowpacks were associated with less severe wildfires during the subsequent fire season, while lower snowpacks were linked to more severe wildfires.

Advertisement

Low snow reduces the soil moisture during the growing season, which results in trees and other plants drying out, Balik said. That increases how much of the forest will burn if a fire starts and how likely trees are to die as a result of the fire.

“Winter snowpack really acts as a kind of a seasonal water savings account for these western forests,” he said. “When that account runs low, the soils and vegetation dry out earlier, and those forests become more vulnerable to more severe fire.”

Colorado’s fire season has already begun

Balik said the study’s findings are made all the more noteworthy as Colorado and the West face some of the worst snowpack conditions on record.

Colorado’s snowpack has trended near all-time lows for much of the season and, as of the start of April, is likely worse than it’s ever been for this time of year, according to the state climatologist’s office.

“We’ve already seen a fire south of Colorado Springs. There’s already huge fires in Nebraska,” Balik said. “Sure enough, we’ve had a low-snow winter and the fire season has effectively begun.”

Advertisement

With climate change, which is caused by burning fossil fuels that release heat-trapping gasses into the atmosphere, he noted that scientists predict the West will see warmer temperatures and lower snowpacks.

Looking at long-term snow patterns across the West, Balik noted that the four corners states, including Colorado, have seen the strongest evidence of long-term snowpack declines. While the snowpack in recent years has trended lower, he noted “there’s a lot of interannual variation,” due to climate patterns like the El Nino and La Nina.

Balik said the study shows that as climate change drives snowpack declines throughout the West, the region should anticipate longer fire seasons with fires that are not only larger but are more severe.

“This work really suggests that we need to start thinking about fire season as less of a summer phenomenon and more of a phenomenon that kicks off once the snow is gone,” he said.

The research also highlights that communities should make the most of winters with good snowpacks by focusing on prescribed burning and other wildfire mitigation measures when there is the opportunity, Balik said.

Advertisement

While the snowpack this winter suggests that the West could be heading into a dangerous fire season, he noted that weather patterns could still change for the better and people can reduce the risk of wildfires by acting responsibly.

“If we get a wet summer or a really wet spring, that could still make a difference,” Balik said. “And of course, it also very much depends on what people do. A lot of the most damaging fires are started by people. If we act responsibly when we’re out recreating, maybe we can start one fewer fire.”





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending