Energy policy — geothermal: Governor’s Energy Office San Luis Valley geothermal workshop recap
February 28, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Matt Hildner):
…a group of state officials, business owners and the just plain curious sat down Saturday to talk about a resource beneath their feet at a geothermal workshop hosted by the Governor’s Energy Office…
Nearly 150 million acre-feet of water, much of it hot, sits beneath the valley in the confined aquifer, the deeper of the valley’s two major groundwater formations. Paul Morgan, senior geothermal geologist with the Colorado Geological Survey, said the state was gifted with a high heat flow. That characterization included the Rio Grande Rift, the geological formation that runs beneath much of its namesake river, but Morgan said there is not a lot of specific data about the resource in the area. “We don’t know a lot about most of the San Luis Basin,” he said.
What is known suggests that hot water at a temperature of 200 degrees Fahrenheit can be found in most parts of the valley at about 5,000 feet below the surface. The depth and temperature qualify it as a low grade and likely not of the quality that would be needed to produce electricity. Morgan suggested that the depth to the resource could be as shallow as 2,000 feet in areas where the aquifer had up-flow zones. But he added that the valley’s resource would be suitable for ground-source heat pumps. “They’re very good at heating, but they can’t compete with swamp coolers in terms of the economics of cooling,” Morgan said…
The water use that comes with geothermal development would be regulated by the Colorado Department of Natural Resources. Users who don’t reinject the water they’ve used to harvest the heat will face a requirement to replace or augment their depletions, said Pat McDermott, staff engineer for the department in the valley. And eventually, should enough users tap the resource, McDermott said his office would have to ensure that new users don’t impact the temperatures of existing wells. “As it gets more and more evolved over time, well-to-well impact on temperature is going to become a big deal,” he said.
Energy policy — geothermal: Hot Springs in the Upper Arkansas Valley topic of lecture March 8
February 28, 2010
From the Salida Citizen:
The geothermal phenomenon in the Upper Arkansas Valley is the topic of a lecture at 7 p.m., March 8 at the Buena Vista Community Center, Pinon Room. This lecture is offered to the public as part of [Greater Arkansas River Nature Association] GARNA’s ongoing “Our Sense of Place”, a year long program teaching about our place in respect to the Arkansas River bioregion. Each topic explores a different topic of the natural world of the Upper Arkansas River Valley to acquaint and promote a ‘rootedness’ in the place we call home.
Dr. F. B. Henderson III, will delve into the geological explanation and history of the multiple Arkansas Valley hot springs. He will talk about what ‘geothermal’ means, where the sources are located, and how they have been used. Fred will also talk about the potential uses of geothermal energy in the future as well as Federal and State regulations and land owner rights protection…
Program cost is free for GARNA members and $5 for non-members. Please call 539-5106 for additional information.
Sterling: Council sets water rate structure
February 28, 2010
From the Sterling Journal Advocate (Judy Debus):
A schedule of revised rates will be determined and presented at the next meeting as exhibits A and B of the previously tabled resolution. The rates will include a minimum charge based on meter size and a volume surcharge of 5 cents per 1,000 gallons beyond the minimum usage. The rate increases will be phased in over the next three years. For example, the proposed minimum charges for a 1-inch meter are $34 in 2010, $54.36 in 2011 and $67.97 in 2012. The minimum volume for a meter of that size is 2,000 gallons.
More infrastructure coverage here.
Parker: Rueter-Hess Reservoir ready to store water
February 28, 2010
From The Denver Post:
Parker Water & Sanitation District officials announced that construction of the Rueter-Hess Reservoir — which is 180 feet deep and spans 1,400 acres — has reached a stage where water can be received. State officials have approved a request to allow water in nearby Newlin Gulch to be stored in the reservoir.
Southern Delivery System: Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway Board approves project
February 28, 2010
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The Fountain Creek Watershed Flood Control and Greenway District board voted unanimously to approve the $1.4 billion water delivery project, and to recommend approval to the El Paso County Commissioners, one of the final agencies that must approve the project before contract negotiations with the Bureau of Reclamation begin…
SDS requires contracts with Reclamation to use Fryingpan-Arkansas Project facilities. Reclamation approved the project in a record of decision last year, but has not set a date to begin contract talks. “We can begin contract negotiations without those approvals, but we can’t sign a contract until everything else is done,” said Kara Lamb, Reclamation public information officer.
The Fountain Creek board approval came with a couple of new conditions, approved by the board in January. Its approval signifies that the project is in compliance with the district’s visions and goals and serves the best interests of health safety and welfare in the district, according to the resolution passed by the board. The district includes all of Pueblo and El Paso counties.
On the advice of its technical advisory committee and citizens advisory group, the board requested detailed site development plans for the parts of the project that are in the Fountain Creek floodplain between Fountain and Pueblo. The district was given land-use authority in the corridor when the state Legislature created it last year. The district also requested that it be included in the integrated adaptive management plan, which is a requirement of Reclamation approval. The process reviews water quality and quantity issues periodically to determine if further mitigation is needed. The district also included Pueblo County’s permit condition that requires stormwater controls to ensure that SDS does not increase flooding potential beyond current conditions.
Meanwhile, Chris Woodka (The Pueblo Chieftain) sat down recently with Gary Barber, the interim director of the district, to look at what’s happened so far and what the board looks to do in the future. From the article:
The board has had eight months of intense on-the-job training, cooperating with Fountain to permit a new subdivision and recommending against locating a gravel mine near Pikes Peak International Raceway between Interstate 25 and Fountain Creek. The El Paso County Commissioners later approved the gravel pit, contrary to the recommendations of the district and its own planning commission. While all of the members of the district board are experienced public officials, they were in new territory, acting on the advice of attorneys from both counties.
Now, they have an administrator to work on some sticky issues. Barber has plunged into his role, and stresses the “interim” nature of it. Without more funding, the district itself could be interim, he told the board Friday at its monthly meeting. The district only has $100,000 funding this year and a like amount in 2011, thanks to an agreement with the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District and Colorado Springs. It is also cooperating in a two-year, $400,000 effort with Lower Ark and Colorado Springs to complete a corridor master plan. Additionally, Colorado Springs is paying the district $300,000 over three years to study flood-control options on Fountain Creek.
The board also adopted a fee schedule for evaluating land-use proposals and agreed to administer Pueblo grants on Fountain Creek Friday…
The big payday for the district would come in 2016, when the Southern Delivery System is scheduled to be completed. Under Pueblo County’s 1041 agreement, the district would get $49.4 million more over five years from Colorado Springs…
Showing a map with three stars identifying two ongoing projects in Pueblo — a side retention at the North Side Walmart and the Fountain Creek confluence park — and Colorado Springs’ Clear Springs Ranch, Barber said more should be added. “I call it ‘the string of pearls offense.’ I would like to see a dozen projects up and down the creek,” Barber said. He told the board the next year should be spent planning the projects, and the district should launch them in 2011. Without other sources of funding in sight, 2012 could be the year to ask voters to chip in with a tax, he said.
Finally, the district is in line to manage $1 million in grants that Pueblo County garnered for Fountain Creek, according to a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
“The city is not saying we can’t do these grants,” Scott Hobson, assistant city manager for community development, told the board. “We applied for these grants prior to the formation of the district. We would have partnered with the district.” The grants are for demonstration of a streamside sediment removal system, work toward creating a greenway park on Fountain Creek from Eighth Street to the Arkansas River confluence and for a side retention pond near the North Side Walmart. The district is in a better position to organize the projects, because the city is involved with other projects as well. The city would have to use contractors to coordinate the projects anyway, Hobson said. “It’s difficult for us to move forward aggressively,” he said.
Gary Barber, the interim executive director of the Fountain Creek district, said it is a natural fit for him to get involved with the active management of the Pueblo projects. “I’m going to do the job anyway, spend my time doing this,” Barber said, saying he has already attended about a half dozen planning meetings.
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The Arkansas River basin was at 98 percent of average following a storm that left a foot or more of new snow in the mountains. Statewide, snowfalls are about 90 percent, with 80 percent for basins in the northern half of the state.
After the storms, 3-4 feet of snow with snow water equivalent of 8-10 inches were recorded at most upper elevation Central Colorado measurement points by the Natural Resources Conservation Service…
While the Colorado River Basin was at 82 percent of average, the Roaring Fork basin was at 93 percent…
In the southern mountains, snowfall totals are more impressive, according to the NRCS. Totals measure 60-100 inches, and 15-30 inches in snow water equivalent, in the upper measurement sites on the western slopes of the San Juan Mountains in the Southwest corner of the state. The Rio Grande Basin was at 110 percent of average, with the heaviest snowpack on the west side of the basin in the San Juans.
For the Pueblo area, snowfall has totalled almost 20 inches so far this year, slightly below normal. Precipitation, however, is above normal at nearly 1 inch, compared with 0.56 inches on average. Lake Pueblo continues to fill and is reaching its limits for the flood conservation pool…
Streamflows throughout the region continued to be at about average levels overall, according to U.S. Geological Survey data. Other than the Northwest corner, the state is safe from drought, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor.
From the Loveland Reporter-Herald (Katie Westervelt):
Nolan Doesken, state climatologist, said such numbers [low snow water equivalent] aren’t uncommon. He also said larger storms typically occur in March and early April and that snow levels can improve.
Noah Newman, a research associate at the Colorado Climate Center, says it is all about wait and see. “We like to track things on a longer-term basis,” said Newman. “Reservoir storage is close to its average. No one is dependent on just one water source.”[...]
Dana Strongin, spokes-woman for the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, said the two large river basins, Upper Colorado and South Platte, are at 82 percent and 83 percent of the average, respectively. With the snowiest months approaching, she said it is too early to hit the panic button.
Oak Creek: Looking for answers about treatment plant performance
February 28, 2010
From the Steamboat Pilot (Zach Fridell):
During an Oak Creek Town Board meeting Thursday night, Public Works Director Bob Red ding said the treatment facility is strained as it produces 400,000 gallons per day in the summer. When the plant was built in 2004, however, the town was told the plant should be able to produce 1 million gallons. Engineering consultants from the Civil Design firm in Steam boat Springs visited the plant Thursday morning, Redding said, and found that at least a portion of the pipe feeding into the plant is 8 inches in diameter, though it should be 12 inches. The line feeding the plant is about 2 miles long, Redding said, and Board Member Chuck Wisecup said most of that was 10- or 12-inch pipe, but it apparently drops to 8-inch pipe either at the plant or just before. Mayor J Elliott said the worst-case scenario is that the town would have to replace a portion of that pipe, though it’s not clear whether that would solve the problem or if the plant would have to be expanded to meet the expected output. Engineers are working to find a copy of the original blueprints from the state because the state originally funded a portion the plant’s construction, Redding said.
More infrastructure coverage here.
Senate Joint Resolution 10-004 passes state house
February 28, 2010
From The Durango Herald (Joe Hanel):
The federal government puts up the money in low-interest loans as long as the state pays for a fifth of the costs and the state Legislature OKs the projects on the list. The list includes dozens of projects around the state, including sanitation systems in Cortez, Durango, Bayfield and Pagosa Springs, plus water delivery systems in Cortez, Mancos, Durango, western La Plata County and Pagosa.
This year’s resolution [Senate Joint Resolution 10-004: Water Projects Eligibility Lists] (pdf), though, turned into a partisan fight over wages. The Obama administration’s Environmental Protection Agency insisted that high wages, on par with union paychecks, be paid on the federally funded projects, even those already in progress. “We’re in pretty tough times here, and to add 5 to 20 percent cost increases to projects that are already under way, it’s unbearable,” said Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma.
The sponsor of Senate Joint Resolution 4 called the EPA’s conditions “regrettable,” but he has heard from many cities that they can handle the extra cost with little trouble. Cortez, for example, faces a $43,000 cost increase, said Rep. Randy Fischer, D-Fort Collins…
In the end, SJR 4 passed the House 62-3. It was a different story earlier this month in the Senate, where the sponsor was Sen. Bruce Whitehead, D-Hesperus. The resolution passed the Senate, but only on a 20-14 party-line vote – rare for a resolution that usually gets near-unanimous support.
More 2010 Colorado legislation coverage here.
Monte Vista: City council approves water rights option purchase
February 27, 2010
From The Monte Vista Journal (Dianne James):
The Monte Vista City Council on Thursday, Feb. 18, approved the purchase of an option to buy water rights from Sun Peaks corporation…
This equates as the 384.5 historic “consumption use” allocated to use (net water available to use). The Anderson Ditch up to 189 acre-feet of acquisiion/yield. Van Wormer told the council how the ditches’ volumes vary at different times of the year, going “up and down seasonally.” The current depletions are the amount of water pumped out of the aquifer for use by the city. “Because there is no ditch water running during January, February and March, the current depletions of 6.1 acre feet we use for municipal use, and we don’t have this ditch water to act as a replacement” the city is in deficit of 6.1 acre-feet, which equals about 10 months of deficit…
“We’re actually buying about 300 acre-feet from Sun Peaks.” He couldn’t guarantee that the price of water would not go up. Price per acre-foot, he said, was less than appraised value, speculating the ‘floor’ on costs in the Valley might be lower. No contract, by the other party, was signed. However, Van Wormer said that the water rights holder, rather than sell them to another party, wants to sell it to Monte Vista. The option to buy takes the water rights out of the market, locking them up until Monte Vista can get the finances in place to purchase them.
More Rio Grande River Basin coverage here.
Brighton adds UV disinfection to Greensand Drinking Water Facility
February 27, 2010
From the Brighton Standard Blade (Gene Sears):
According to Brighton spokeswoman Jodie Carroll, the city received about $1.4 million to install the UV disinfection system that will provide 34,000 Brighton residents with long-term, improved protection from bacteria, pathogens and other drinking water contaminants. Ultraviolet disinfection uses light to destroy pathogens, and their ability to reproduce, without treatment chemicals or large, expensive infrastructure. In an arid state such as Colorado, it is essential that water systems fully utilize sources with variable water quality to provide safe and affordable drinking water to the public. “We look forward to the Greensand plant beginning operations this spring with the improved water treatment system in place,” said Brighton Mayor Dick McLean. “Looking back about 20 years ago, we were compelled to recommend other drinking sources for pregnant women and children under the age of one because of our water quality. Today, we have excellent and safe water in our distribution system. The funding and jobs stimulus provided by the Recovery Act are leveraging upgrades which will even further reduce the risk of harmful microorganisms and other contaminants to our residents.”
More water treatment coverage here.
Snowpack news: Will Dillon Reservoir fill this year?
February 27, 2010
From the Summit County Citizens Voice (Bob Berwyn):
Last weekend’s storm boosted the Colorado River Basin snowpack from 75 percent up to 81 percent, but Denver Water managers said they’re still not sure if Dillon Reservoir will fill to capacity this spring…
For now, reservoir storage is in far better shape than it was in 2002, a landmark year that brought unprecedented modern-era drought to Colorado. Since then, Denver Water and other Front Range providers have rethought their operating plans to maintain more reserve storage for the worst-case scenarios.
Reclamation praises Orchard City Irrigation’s management of Fruit Growers Reservoir
February 27, 2010
From the Delta County Indpendent (Hank Lohmeyer):
Dan Crabtree, a BuRec official in Grand Junction, said that in addition to the agency being satisfied with OCID’s management, the reservoir “is in good shape.” His comments came during the OCID annual meeting that was held on Jan. 30 at Orchard City Town Hall.
The District also has moved forward with maintenance initiatives on its system in the last year. A badly corroded valve body and water bypass assembly that is part of the dam was completely rebuilt at a cost of $10,500. Mike Thomas, board president, reported that irrigators’ water shrink (the amount of water lost to the ditch system “leakage”) had been cut by half in parts of the OCID irrigation system. Last year, 42 water carrying weirs and flumes were either adjusted or replaced cutting the amount of water lost, Thomas said. Of those 42, four were on the Fogg Ditch and 38 were on the Butte Ditch. Thomas reported that the OCID’s new online system for water monitoring, water use reporting, and other information “is working really well.” The system is designed to track District water information and user data on a daily basis. “It is running with about 95 percent accuracy,” Thomas said…
In other business at the OCID’s annual meeting, the water commissioner’s office reported that Fruitgrowers Reservoir was filling at 26 to 27 acre feet per day, and was at that time on track to fill by the end of February.
More Gunnison River Basin coverage here.
Water, water, everywhere this week at the legislature
February 26, 2010
Here’s another good roundup of the shenanigans going on at the state legislature, from Marianne Goodland writing for the Sterling Journal Advocate. From the article:
The morning began with a presentation to the joint Senate and House committees on agriculture and natural resources on “Water and the Colorado Economy,” commissioned by the Front Range Water Council. (The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District is a member of that group.) The study’s purpose was to illustrate the economic value of water, the economic interdependence of Colorado regions and the economic contribution of those regions to the state economy…
The committees also heard a presentation on the Colorado River Water Availability Study, a report that has been in the works since 2007. Jennifer Gimbel, director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board, said that study is intended to evaluate water availability in the future. The study is broken into two phases. The presentation Wednesday was on the first phase, which looked at current water availability, historic water availability and future water availability based on climate models. The second phase, which will be completed later this year, is looking at projected demands and “what if” scenarios. The Phase I report will be available on the CWCB Web site, cwcb.state.co.us, in the next two weeks…
Many of the legislators in attendance are not members of the agriculture committees, and for some it was their first exposure to water issues. After the luncheon, Rep. Kathleen Curry, U-Gunnison, said there is a need for more education on water issues for legislators. (Curry was one of the state’s first woman managers of a water conservancy district, in Gunnison from 1998 to 2003.)
More 2010 Colorado legislation coverage here.
Snowpack news
February 26, 2010
Click on the thumbnail graphic to see today’s Colorado snowpack chart from the Natural Resources Conservation Service.
From The Denver Post:
Heading into March, Colorado’s snowiest month, snowpack has improved by nearly 10 percent across most of southern Colorado the past two weeks, according to the Natural Resources Conservation Service, which conducts the snow measurements. Southern Colorado is near or above the 30-year average for snowpack, but the state is at 90 percent, as the rest of the stag lags in snow this season.
The South Platte River basin, which includes Denver, is at just 83 percent of average, but that’s the best in northern Colorado. The North Platte River basin is at 77 percent and the shared basin of Yampa and White rivers is at 76 percent as of Thursday.
Energy policy — nuclear: Piñon Ridge Mill permit a long way off
February 26, 2010
From the Montrose Daily Press (Dick Kamp):
Four more public hearings will be conducted by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, said spokesman Warren Smith. They’re not required by law, “but these are our opportunity to gather local input on the mill.” Montrose County commissioners are to comment by April 21 on an Energy Fuels environmental report submitted to the Health Department, and the department’s public hearings likely would come afterward.
A decision on the state license could be made by Feb. 14, 2011, said Marilyn Null, spokeswoman for the department’s Hazardous Material Waste Management Division.The department will be accepting written comment from the public throughout the licensing procedure.
Here’s a report from a recent meeting, from Karen James writing for The Telluride Watch. From the article:
Colorado is among 37 “agreement states” to which the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission transfers authority to regulate and license uranium. As a result the [Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment] is in the process of conducting a 12-14 month comprehensive technical review of the 15-volume license application, submitted in November 2009 by Energy Fuels Resources Corp…
Frank Filas, environmental manager for Energy Fuels, gave a presentation about the proposed facility. Afterwards about 70 speakers provided their input with 40 percent opposed to and 60 percent in favor of the mill.
As during the January meeting mill, advocates spoke largely about economic development and the need for jobs in the West End of Montrose County. Energy Fuels has said that the mill would create up to 85 new jobs averaging $40,000 to $75,000 a year plus benefits, and 80 percent of which would come from the local population, in addition to supporting 200 ancillary mining and trucking jobs at nearby mines and generating tax revenues for public services and infrastructure if built.
“This is more than just 85 jobs in the west end,” said Mathew Burtis, business manager for the United Association of Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 145 in Grand Junction, who said he spoke on behalf of local membership and the national organization. “The big picture for us is this is going to help steer the full industry for our 320,000 members…” he said, later adding, “We have a lot of people who have been out of work for a long, long time.”
The need for America to produce its own nuclear energy for reasons of national security, and to address climate change, ran a close second to job creation for mill advocates, who seemed delighted that, just one day before, President Obama had announced that the federal government would guarantee $8.3 billion in loans for the construction and operation of two new nuclear reactors at a plant in Georgia – signaling a resurgence of the nation’s long dormant nuclear industry…
But mill opponents continued to voice concerns about the potential negative impacts of the mill, in particular the long-term health effects of radiation exposure they fear could leak from the facility no matter how well designed or regulated. Janet Johnson of Grand Junction, who said she has lived in proximity to a uranium mill for all but four years of her life when she went away to college, gave poignant testimony about her brother and cousin’s early deaths at the ages of 53 and 43, respectively. She noted that both had worked in uranium mills, to which she seemed to attribute their demise. “I have cancer, as do many of my classmates and many of the people I grew up with,” she added. Speaking of the radiation that is inherent to uranium, she said: “I know that you can’t keep it all out of the water, out of the air or out of the things we eat,” going on implore the CDPHE panel to consider that future jobs in the area could also be lost as a result of the mill…
With an operating life of 40 years the proposed Piñon Ridge mill would initially use 144 gallons of water per minute to process 500 tons of ore per day, seven days a week, 350 days per year. At that rate it would produce 770,000 pounds of uranium oxide annually – enough to produce 1,500 megawatts of electricity each year, according to the company, which hopes to expand its operations to eventually process 1,000 tons of ore per day. At 500 tons per day it would also produce 2.7 million pounds of vanadium oxide annually for use in steel production.
The Mesa Land Trust signed up ranches for conservation easements left and right in 2009
February 25, 2010
From the Grand Junction Free Press (Wyatt Haupt):
The largest piece of the conservation pie was Lobe Creek Ranch, which accounted for more than 3,300 acres. Lobe Creek Ranch is owned and maintained by the Aubert family, who also agreed to conserve its Leslie Place Ranch. The combined land deals totaled about 3,700 acres in Glade Park, based on land trust data. Mary Hughes, development officer of land trust, said the family placed conservation easements, which “ensures the property will never be developed or subdivided.” She added, “They own the property. They maintain the property (and) they continue to ranch the property.”
CWCB: State Senate snips the construction fund after all
February 25, 2010
Southern Delivery System: Colorado Springs weighing the synergies of allowing northern El Paso County water providers to use project for raw water transport
February 25, 2010
From the Colorado Springs Independent (Pam Zubeck):
All concerned say that cooperation would help water districts that rely on dwindling groundwater supplies, while stemming sharp rate hikes for Utilities’ customers in coming years. From now until 2016, when water is first delivered, rates will increase 12 percent a year. And that’s just for half the project; the other half, which includes a reservoir, will be built later. If other communities pay to piggy-back onto the pipeline, say some city officials, everybody wins. “That’s the whole goal, is to use that pipeline to its maximum capacity to reduce the impact of SDS on ratepayers,” Vice Mayor Larry Small says…
…recent analysis shows the SDS pipeline won’t be fully used year round, says Gary Bostrom, with Utilities’ water services division. Between November and April, when water demand is low, consumers will use 10 million to 20 million gallons a day from Pueblo Reservoir. That leaves plenty of room for more water to be pumped into storage, whether for pipeline customers or others, to be used during summer months, Bostrom says. “There is ample space in Southern Delivery for regional purposes,” he says…
Bostrom insists the city doesn’t intend to sell its water rights, only to deliver water for others. But even that might bring a squall of costs and red tape. First, city codes restrict water service to within the city limits or to subdivisions agreeing to be annexed. To accommodate outlying partnerships requires changes to the code, and perhaps the City Charter. Second, Pueblo Reservoir storage contracts are available only for those entities located within the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, a multi-county area that’s been taxed for years to build and maintain the reservoir. Some subdivisions interested in SDS don’t lie within the district, Utilities officials say. Then there’s return flows. Fountain Creek is subject to government protection against pollution and erosion. Lastly, the Bureau of Reclamation, which runs Pueblo Reservoir and permits water projects, might need a say-so about new partners’ plans, such as Petersen’s idea to enlarge Upper Williams Creek reservoir. That would take time and money. Colorado Springs’ arduous application process, which included a National Environmental Policy Act study, took nearly six years and cost $19 million. Bostrom says the city will try to recoup a portion of that from any future partners, and Utilities spokeswoman Janet Rummel says SDS construction costs also could become part of any partnership deal…
A fly in the ointment is a recent analysis showing that if [Colorado Springs'] 200 square miles are built out in 30 to 40 years, the city will need 17 million gallons more water than SDS can deliver. The city’s federal application predicted SDS would satisfy needs through 2046. That leads Wayne Vanderschuere with Utilities’ water services division to warn, “I would be concerned about making promises that we may not be able to keep.”
Greeley leases 4,000 acre-feet of Colorado-Big Thompson water to the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District for augmentation
February 25, 2010
From The Greeley Tribune:
GMS and WAS plan to use the water as augmentation supply for the 2010-11 operating season.
Greeley partners with agricultural users on various projects including the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, Greeley Irrigation Company, Water Supply and Storage Company, and Greeley-Loveland Irrigation Company. In addition, the city has leased an average of 8,000 acre-feet of water to agriculture over the last four years. The lease of Greeley’s 4,000 acre-feet is estimated to supply the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District with a net supply of 1,600 acre-feet.
More Greeley coverage here.
Snowpack news: Roaring Fork Basin totals moving towards average
February 25, 2010
From The Aspen Times (Scott Condon):
The [Roaring Fork Basin] snowpack was 92 percent of the average established between 1971 and 2000, the Natural Resources Conservation Service reported Tuesday…
The snowpack was 97 percent of average Tuesday at a site between Aspen and the Independence Pass summit, according to the conservation service. That site is at 10,600 feet in elevation. The snowpack in the Crystal Valley has been higher all winter than the Fryingpan’s tally. Schofield Pass was at 100 percent Tuesday while McClure Pass was at 99 percent. North Lost Trail, near Marble, was at 92 percent. In the Fryingpan Valley, snowpack fared well at higher elevations but was substantially below average at lower elevations. At Ivanhoe Lake, the snowpack was 93 percent of average Tuesday. That site is at 10,600 feet in elevation. At the Kiln site, at an elevation of 9,600 feet, the snowpack was just 72 percent of average. At Nast Lake, even lower in elevation, the snowpack was just 68 percent of average Tuesday, the conservation service data showed.
Snowpack remains above average in the southern part of the state and below average to the north. Vail Mountain’s snowpack was 77 percent of average Tuesday while Copper Mountain was at 75 percent. Rabbit Ears Pass, in the Steamboat Springs area, had a snowpack only 53 percent of average. Down south, the Wolf Creek summit had a snowpack 120 percent of average on Tuesday. Lizard Head Pass, near Telluride, was at 113 percent of average. Three major river basins in the southern part of Colorado were at or above average, including the Gunnison basin, 100 percent; Dolores basin, 109 percent; and San Juan, 112 percent.
From Steamboat Today (Tom Ross):
Tuesday’s snow depth measurement at the top of Buffalo Pass showed 101 inches of accumulated snowpack. It sounds like a lot of snow, but overall, the water stored in the snow in the Yampa and White river basins is just 77 percent of average, according to the federal Natural Resources Conservation Service. On the west summit of Rabbit Ears Pass, the snowpack is even lower, just 53 percent of average. In North Routt, at the Elk River site, it’s a healthier 89 percent.
Nestlé Waters Chaffee County Project: County Planning Commission embraces changes to permit to allow trenching instead of boring to cross the Arkansas River
February 24, 2010
From The Mountain Mail (Sue Price):
The recommendation by Chaffee County Planning Commissioners to amend the special land use permit application includes installation of two pipelines in the trench – one for the company and one in partnership with the Town of Buena Vista…
Nestlé earlier received approval to drill a directional bore under the river, but elected to revise plans for an open cut to accommodate a request made in January by Buena Vista officials who want to install an additional pipeline for future use by the town. The Nestlé company agreed to install a 16-inch pipeline for Buena Vista, at no cost to the town, while they install their 6-inch pipeline within a 16-inch casing. The construction site is south of the U.S. 24 bridge across the river at Johnson Village between CRs 301 and 312. Don Reimer, Chaffee County planner, said his staff personnel considered 15 criteria including noise and geologic and wildfire hazards, before announcing they were agreeable to amending the special use permit. Holly Strablizky, land use counsel for Nestlé, said, “To minimize impact, we thought it was a good thing to team with Buena Vista as long as we can complete the work by March 15 as stipulated by the Colorado Division of Wildlife. “If county commissioners don’t approve the amendment or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers cannot issue the permit in time, we will go back to our original plan.”[...]
Bobbi McClead, natural resource officer with Nestlé, explained new technology would employ an aqua barrier cofferdam – inflatable plastic structures – in the river to dewater a portion of the stream at a time to allow trenching. Pipelines will be placed 8 feet beneath the river bed. “The plan uses the best available technology in construction to prevent erosion, sedimentation in the river and is protective of wildlife and wildlife habitat during construction,” McClead said. When construction is completed, Nestlé will revegetate the disturbed area with native plants and seed-mixes to leave the area “in original or better” condition, she said.
More Nestlé Waters Chaffee County Project coverage here and here.
Moffat Collection System Project: U.S. Representative Jared Polis, while not taking a stand yet, is expressing ‘increasing concern’
February 24, 2010
From the Boulder Daily Camera (Laura Snider):
“(Polis) is not taking a position on the Gross Reservoir expansion yet,” said Andy Schultheiss, district director for the Democratic congressman’s Boulder office. “But we’ve been studying the issue for quite some time now, and we’re increasingly concerned. … We’re going to pursue this in the next couple of weeks.” Schultheiss gave his comments at a public meeting in Nederland on Tuesday night that was organized by state Rep. Claire Levy, D-Boulder, to discuss the reservoir project. Half a dozen staffers from Denver Water were on hand for two hours to answer questions from the more than 40 residents who attended the meeting…
Schultheiss is concerned about the quality of the draft environmental impact statement prepared for the project, which he called “a piece of junk.” He also said alternatives to meeting Denver’s water demands need to be more fully explored…
“It seems to me that what needs to happen here is that we need to slow down and take another look at the big picture of water supply on the Front Range,” he said…
Levy also has concerns about the project, including whether stricter conservation measures can be put into place before more water is diverted from the already depleted Fraser River — a tributary of the Colorado River — across the continental divide in Grand County. “I don’t feel that they’ve adequately justified the need for the project,” she said.
More Moffat Collection System Project coverage here and here.
Update: From the Associated Press via Steamboat Today (Mike Lawrence):
The water would have been taken out of the river at one or two pumping stations about 75 miles west of Steamboat. It would have been stored in a reservoir capable of holding 45,000 acre-feet of water in Cedar Springs Draw, off the main stem of the Yampa. That potential reservoir’s size could have exceeded the more than 33,000 acre-feet of storage in Stagecoach Reservoir near Oak Creek and the 25,450 acre-feet in Elkhead Reservoir near Craig. Within three months after Shell’s application, 25 local groups and municipalities — including Routt County, Oak Creek, Yampa and the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District — filed opposition to the application.
The city of Steamboat Springs argued that its water rights in the Yampa River Basin “may be adversely impacted if the subject application is granted without adequate protective terms and conditions.” Shell representatives met with local officials in Steamboat last year to discuss the application and its potential impacts. Litigation was possible.
From The Denver Post (Mark Jaffe):
Shell said in a statement it has decided not to pursue the Yampa water right at this time “in light of the overall global economic downturn that has affected our project’s pace.”
The controversial proposal — seeking about 8 percent of the Yampa’s average spring flow — drew opposition letters from 27 businesses, environmental groups and federal, state and local agencies. “The Yampa is the last river in Colorado with natural peak and low flows,” said Kent Ventrees, who teaches river recreation at Colorado Mountain College. “This is outstanding news for the Yampa.” The natural river sustains endangered fish species and flows through Dinosaur National Monument, where National Park Service officials worried that Shell’s plan would hurt the park.
Shell was seeking a water right to pump water into a new reservoir covering 1,000 acres and 15 billion gallons. The water — taken from a point west of Craig — would have been shipped to the White River basin for use in Shell’s oil-shale program…
Shell’s water-right application was vulnerable to challenges because the water could not be directly put to use, said Drew Peternell, Colorado water- project manager for Trout Unlimited. “They don’t even know how much water they need,” Peternell said. “It was very close to speculation, which is not allowed in Colorado water law.”
More coverage from Dennis Webb writing for The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. From the article:
Shell spokeswoman Carolyn Tucker said that doesn’t mean the pace of the project has slowed. Rather, it is just maintaining its research focus while adjusting to economic realities. “The global downturn has effects on Shell just like it does on any other company. Some of the resources and some of the plans we’ve made early on don’t ring as true. We have to be more flexible as a company, and some of the research dollars have to be doled out more sparingly,” she said. Tucker added, “We’re not pulling out, we’re not shutting down. We’re just being as flexible as we can with the economic times.”[...]
Shell said it plans to submit permit applications for its first research and development pilot project late this year or early in 2011. “We hold a variety of water rights in northwest Colorado and we have for many years, so we do have water,” Tucker said. Shell had set out to diversify its water rights by seeking 375 cubic feet per second from the Yampa to fill a 45,000-acre-foot reservoir in Moffat County…
David Abelson, oil shale policy advisor for the Western Resource Advocates environmental group, said the WRA opposed the water right application on behalf of four environmental groups. Altogether, he said, 28 statements of opposition were filed against the application, from water districts, local governments, the Colorado Division of Wildlife, several federal agencies and other interests. The Yampa is the state’s only major river with water left to appropriate, Abelson said. “We’re extremely pleased about the decision to save the Yampa for another day,” he said. He said he believes Shell’s decision also supports his organization’s long-held view that oil shale development is not ready for prime time. “The technology is not developed, oil shale has never been economically competitive, and there’s nothing to suggest that either of those hurdles are about to be overcome,” he said…
Theo Stein, spokesman for the state Department of Natural Resources, said of the Shell announcement, “I think that this is an illustration of how complex the interweaving of oil shale issues and water issues is, and the need for a careful and thoughtful (oil shale leasing) process that the Interior Department is managing.”
Snowpack news
February 24, 2010
Click on the thumbnail graphic to see the snowpack update map for today, from the National Resources Conservation Service.
Meanwhile the University of Utah has developed new techniques for forecasting snow to liquid ratio (SLR), according to a release published Monday:
University of Utah scientists developed an easier way for meteorologists to predict snowfall amounts and density – fluffy powder or wet cement. The method has been adopted by the National Weather Service for use throughout Utah – and could be adjusted for use anywhere.
Based on a study of 457 winter storms during eight years at 9,644 feet in the Wasatch Range at Utah’s Alta Ski Area, the researchers determined that forecasters could predict snowfall density – known as snow-to-liquid ratio (SLR) – most accurately using only two variables: temperatures and wind speeds at mountain crest level.
The American Meteorological Society is publishing the study in the February issue of its journal Weather and Forecasting.
“We’ve developed a formula that predicts the water content of snow as a function of temperature and wind speed,” says the study’s senior author, Jim Steenburgh, professor and chair of atmospheric sciences at the University of Utah.
“This is about improving snowfall amount forecasts – how much snow is going to fall,” says Steenburgh. “As a nice side benefit for the ski community, this will tell you whether you’re going to get powder or concrete when it snows. We are working on incorporating this into the UtahSkiWeather.com website” run by the university.
The new method “is also helpful to avalanche forecasters,” says the study’s first author, Trevor Alcott, a doctoral student in atmospheric sciences. “We’re forecasting snow density, which is related to the stability of freshly fallen snow.”
A Better Handle on Snowfall, Skiing and Avalanche Conditions
The National Weather Service (NWS) in Salt Lake City has used the method since November, says Randy Graham, the science operations officer.
“Forecasters really like it because it gives us a more realistic depiction of how snow density will vary across the Wasatch Range and with elevation,” he says. “Instead of anticipating a singular density of snow or fluffiness of the snow over the Wasatch, Trevor’s and Jim’s tool has allowed us to have different snowfall densities in our forecasts for different areas based on forecasts of [crest-level] temperature and wind.”
“We’ve always had some insight into the difference between a real powder day versus a really wet snowfall event,” Graham adds. “What this tool has enabled us to do is to better differentiate how dense the snow is going to be over an area with really complex terrain – the state in general, but in particular the Wasatch Range.”
Bruce Tremper, director of the Utah Avalanche Center, isn’t familiar with the new method, but says predicting “new snow density is a very important factor in avalanche forecasting. If low-density snow falls first – light powdery snow – then heavy, wetter snow falls on top, it instantly creates a slab of ‘upside-down snow’ as we sometimes call it. These slabs can easily be triggered by people.”
Resorts “really care about the water equivalent of the snow,” Graham says. “It’s really important to them. Powder is better. And it’s important for them to know what kind of avalanche [prevention] work they’re going to have to do.”
Alcott, an NWS intern, extended the technique so it can be used throughout Utah, and says the agency’s Elko, Nev., office may use the method to improve forecasts. It could be extended to other regions by making local snow measurements in different locations and using them to devise predictive formulas for snow density.
Graham says the method “is a really good example of taking a complex problem, boiling it down to the most important variables to describe the problem, and then coming up with a technique that can be applied in operational forecasting.”
The study was funded by the National Weather Service, its parent agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Science Foundation.
Flakey Forecasting
Steenburgh says that to accurately predict snowfall amounts, “getting the snow density right is critical. To forecast snowfall amount, you need to know how much water is going to fall and how dense the snow is going to be.”
Meteorologists predict how much water a storm will produce and translate that to snowfall based on predicted snowfall density, which is the snow-to-liquid ratio (SLR) – the ratio of the depth of new snowfall to the depth of water from melting that snow. SLR reflects how powdery or wet and heavy the snow will be.
“The best way to think of it is how much does an inch of water translate to in terms of inches of snowfall? So a snow-to-liquid ratio of 5-to-1 means 5 inches of snow for every inch of water, or a water content of 20 percent,” says Steenburgh.
Higher SLRs mean the snow is more powdery. Typical Utah SLRs are:
Heavy, wet Utah snow has an SLR around 7 (an SLR such as 7-to-1 is commonly referred to only by the numerator), with a water content of 14 percent.
Average Utah snow has an SLR of 14, or 7 percent water content. Steenburgh says “that is still pretty dry, especially when you compare it with coastal ski areas” with SLRs around 9 or 10.
Very dry, light snow has an SLR of 25. That’s the same as 4 percent water content. Anything above SLR 25 is extremely dry, fluffy snow known as “wild snow.”
Steenburgh says the driest snows ever recorded had SLRs of 100 in Japan and Colorado. Alcott says the record high 24-hour SLR at Alta – known for its powder – is 50.
Learning to Predict Powder
To devise their method, Alcott and Steenburgh studied the relationship between measured snow density or SLR and various recorded atmospheric measurements at a single site at Alta, named the Collins Snow Study Plot.
Steenburgh says he and Alcott chose to study that site “because Alta gets a ton of snow [almost 43 feet annually]. You get as many samples in Alta in one year as you get in Salt Lake City in 10 years.” In other words, Alta provided numerous snowstorms that could be analyzed and used to develop a formula for predicting snow density.
Alta snow safety crews measure snow depth at the Collins site twice daily. Precipitation measurements are made automatically each hour.
Alcott and Steenburgh analyzed temperatures, wind speeds and other factors such as relative humidity for 457 “snow events” or storms at Alta during November through April of 1999 through 2007.
The depth of new snow was divided by the depth of water measured by a rain gauge to determine actual snow density and see what variables best correlated with it.
The study showed that only two variables – crest-level wind speeds and temperatures – were most critical in predicting snow densities. In fact, for all the storms studied during 1999-2007, those two variables alone explained 57 percent of the variance in snow density. And for large, wet storms, crest-level wind speed and temperature explained 73 percent of the variance in the snow density or SLR.
That means that much of the storm-to-storm difference in whether new snow is powdery or wet can be predicted by the new technique.
“It’s the KISS method – keep it simple, stupid,” Steenburgh says. “How much can we strip down the number of variables analyzed and get a good result?”
He says the new technique “does a good job of predicting how the snow density changes from storm to storm, and it does especially well for the larger storms.”
Alcott says the Weather Service’s previous method was less accurate because it tried to predict snow density based on surface temperature at the forecast location – a method developed in the Great Plains – rather than what the study showed was more accurate: temperatures and wind speeds above mountaintops where snow is forming.
Secrets of the Snows
In analyzing Alta snow conditions as they developed their formula for predicting snow density, the researchers discovered some interesting aspects of Alta snow:
- The fluffiest snow tends to occur when a storm contains less than 0.8 inches of water in 24 hours, when crest-level wind speeds are 18 to 26 mph and when temperatures are 0 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit, with snow heavier at either colder or warmer temperatures due to the type of ice crystal formed at different temperatures.
- Snowfall density can vary radically from day to day. For example, during Jan. 3-12, 2005, it ranged from heavy, wet snow with a snow-to-liquid ratio of 5.2, to “wild” powder with and SLR of 35.1.
- Snow densities at Alta have the widest range in February, from a wet SLR of 3.6 to fluffy powder at 35.1.
- The most extreme powder – “wild snow” with snow-to-liquid ratios of 25 or more – peaks in mid-winter. Of 26 wild snow events during the eight-season study period, 24 occurred in December, January and February, with none in April.
- Extremely wet snow, with SLRs less than 7, occurred in 28 of the 457 storms during the 1999-2007 study period, or 6.1 percent of the storms.
Secretary of Interior Salazar announces “WaterSMART” initiative
February 23, 2010
From the Deseret News (Amy Joi O’Donoghue):
“The federal government’s existing water policies and programs simply aren’t built for 21st century pressures on water supplies,” he said. “Population growth. Climate change. Rising energy demands. Environmental needs. Aging infrastructure. Risks to drinking water supplies. Those are just some of the challenges,” he said in a press release. To fund the initiative, the 2011 budget proposed by President Barack Obama includes an additional $36.4 million for water programs. Salazar, as part of his order, wants his department to increase the available water supply in the West for agricultural, municipal, industrial and environmental uses by 350,000 acre feet by 2012.
