Colorado counties are reviewing and in some cases developing new rules for oil and gas production and exploration in response to the Niobrara shale boom
October 31, 2011
As more leasing and drilling is getting closer to the suburbs county governments whose responsibility includes lands overlying the Niobrara play are looking at updating regulations. Here’s a report from The Denver Post (Mark Jaffe). Click through and read the whole thing for all the detail. Here’s an excerpt:
Arapahoe and Douglas counties, like El Paso, are preparing to adopt oil and gas development rules. “We are fast-tracking rules,” said Arapahoe County Commissioner Fred Weddig. “We felt like we are playing catch-up.”
The trend, however, has provoked concern from state regulators and the industry.”Colorado already has the most comprehensive rules in the nation,” said Tisha Schuller, president of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, a trade group. “County rules could completely stifle the industry.”
David Neslin, director of the state’s Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, said, “We believe oil and gas development is most effectively and efficiently regulated at the state level.”[...]
The activity in the counties is being driven by the feeling that they are ill-prepared to cope with a drilling boom and that the state regulations don’t address some residents’ worries…
Neslin said state rules enable it to put additional conditions on permits in more developed areas — and counties can participate as a “local designee” in the permitting process…
“There are questions of quality of life,” said Jill Duvall, a homeowner who organized the Elbert County Oil and Gas Interest Group, or ECOGIG. “There are questions about protecting property values. The state rules focus on drilling a well.”[...]
Both Duvall, from Elbert County’s ECOGIG, and a group from southern Larimer County, the Mineral Rights Information Gathering Committee, are seeking meetings with Gov. John Hickenlooper. “The rules in place didn’t have suburbia in mind,” said Fred Mitchell, a committee member. “Those rules don’t address the impact on quarter-acre lots. Nobody envisioned this in their backyard.”
As is often the case in oil and gas the people with the dollar signs in their eyes because they own some mineral rights may be in for an awakening. Wyoming is not seeing production equal to Colorado’s “Jake” well that helped start the current Niobrara boom. Here’s a report from Jeremy Fugleberg writing for The Billings Gazette. From the article:
While many well results in the formation are largely still not public, Wyoming Oil and Gas Supervisor Tom Doll said the wells drilled so far are only producing a fraction of the totals from a Colorado well that inspired exploration into the Niobrara in Wyoming. “The reason we’re not seeing a lot of drilling activity in the Niobrara is those wells are not coming in as strongly as people thought,” he told the state Legislature’s Joint Minerals, Business and Economic Development Interim Committee at its meeting in Cheyenne on Friday.
Bruce Hinchey is president of the Petroleum Association of Wyoming, the state’s oil and gas industry trade group. He said the low production rates are discouraging companies from drilling more wells more quickly in the state’s southeast…
EOG Resources’ Jake 2-01H well in Weld County, Colo., started the Niobrara excitement in 2009 when it produced the equivalent of 1,500 barrels of oil a day. It still produces between 250 to 300 barrels of oil a day, the company said in August. Wyoming’s Niobrara wells start at 400 to 700 barrels of oil a day, slip by half within three months, and slow another half within four to six months, Doll said. “None of these wells are the equivalent of the Jake-type well that everyone got excited about,” he said…
Hinchey told the legislators he and others have always been quick to caution people about the Niobrara’s potential. Some expected it to be like North Dakota’s booming Bakken oil field, or Wyoming’s huge Jonah natural gas field near Pinedale, he said. “It is not that,” he said. “And we’ve been saying that all along.”
Colorado River basin: More storage, more growth or a commitment to conservation and preservation?
October 31, 2011
The Pueblo Chieftain ran three columns in yesterday’s edition. First up is Chris Woodka’s musings about the river, preservation and growth in the West. Here’s an excerpt:
Back in 1974 [ed. during a rim to rim hike of the Grand Canyon], my young mind didn’t quite grasp that the pristine river I enjoyed so much was a product of timed releases between Lake Powell and Lake Mead. I did understand enough to know the beautiful canyon walls and mesas were the product of millions of years of relentless, unchecked erosion. Those kind of thoughts were running through my head the other evening as I sat in the Cornerstone Arts Center Celeste Theater in Colorado Springs listening to two legal experts tangle over the worthiness of the Colorado River Compact in a changing world…
The irony of talking about Colorado River issues in a city 80 percent dependent on Colorado River water brought over the Continental Divide did not escape me — you learn to think like this as a water reporter…
One of the speakers, Colorado Supreme Court Justice Gregory Hobbs, took the point of view that more storage is essential to continued enjoyment of the benefits of the Colorado River. Hobbs argued that building more projects along the Colorado River is not only probably, but necessary and desirable. “It’s high-risk water, but it’s going to be there in some years,” Hobbs said. “We can’t just pretend we don’t need more storage and risk drying up all the agricultural land.”
The other speaker, University of Wyoming legal professor Larry MacDonnell, argued that it’s time to start folding up the tents because the Colorado River basin is running out of water. Climate change is going to increase the pressure on the river’s resources. It’s foolish to try to develop any more, he argued. “Is this a sensible use of water?” MacDonnell asked, after listing several projects he considered folly. “In compromise, projects have been built that waste water.”[...]
The states along the Colorado River need to weigh how much more the river can deliver to avoid gobbling up more farm land in the support of growth. The preservation of its awesome beauty should be a major focal point. A frank discussion could lead to surprising conclusions about conservation, growth, land use and, ultimately, the storage of water that makes all that possible.
Meanwhile, Aaron Million’s column talks about developing the water left under the Colorado River Compact and Upper Colorado River Compact for the benefit of Colorado. Here’s his guest column from The Pueblo Chieftain. Here’s an excerpt:
The Upper Basin has over-delivered this region’s water supplies to the Lower Basin in every 10-year running average. Those waters are allocated to the Upper Basin. Why does it matter?
The Upper Basin has major natural resource concerns directly related to diminished water supplies and future increasing demands. Why not consider the Flaming Gorge Project? As a proponent of the project and the principal architect, I’m not afraid of an in-depth, critical environmental review…
…half the Upper Basin has moved forward to develop the supplies that the historic agreements gave to them. Both New Mexico, arguably up against that state’s compact allocation, and Utah, via the Lake Powell Project, have moved toward developing their respective water resources. Colorado and Wyoming need to do likewise. A new water supply would alleviate a myriad of environmental and socio-economic pressures throughout the region, allow aquifers to replenish, protect and enhance flows for use in agriculture, provide for the huge shortfall projected in municipal supplies and add huge new storage capacity with the addition of Flaming Gorge and other new reservoirs along the route. Preliminary scientific data indicates major water surpluses and supplies are available in the Green River-Flaming Gorge system to help alleviate pressures in water-short areas elsewhere, from Cheyenne to Pueblo. And the project, projected to move about 200,000 acre-feet, would take pressure off of western Colorado watersheds…
The build-out cost for this project is about $3 billion — one third of Western Resource Advocates’ estimate. How do we know its $3 billion and not $9 billion? Because we asked several nationally recognized pipeline and construction firms to give us estimates…
This state needs and deserves a straight-up evaluation of the Flaming Gorge project. The scare tactics of the environmental community are sophomoric, unnecessary and will not serve the interests of this region. Why not allow the project to be fully vetted? It’s currently in the federal environmental review process.
Finally, here’s Western Resource Advocates’ Karn Sheldon weighing in on the project from The Pueblo Chieftain. She writes:
Western Resource Advocates wants to see a water supply that sustains urban, agricultural and environmental needs. We want water that is affordable and reliable for all Coloradans. While The Pueblo Chieftain may disagree with our assessment that the Flaming Gorge Pipeline proposal is an implausible illusion (“Strange priorities,” 10/14/11), there are several important facts that should not be confused with opinion:
- The pipeline proposal would annually move 80 billion gallons of water 500 miles up and over the Continental Divide, from the Green River in southwestern Wyoming to Colorado’s Front Range. State agencies estimate the cost of the plan at $7 to $9 billion, which would make this the most expensive water in Colorado history. To put that into perspective, the most costly recent water project completed in Colorado is Aurora’s “Prairie Waters,” with a price tag of about $700 million.
- According to The Chieftain, “there is growing support for the pipeline in both Wyoming and Colorado.” But all available evidence indicates exactly the opposite. A statewide poll released in September by Trout Unlimited showed that 79 percent of Wyoming residents oppose the pipeline. “It makes perfect sense to me that so many people in Wyoming oppose this project,” said Wyoming Gov. Matt Mead, who has also said that the plan is “not well thought-out.” Sweetwater County Commission member John Kolb called it “a sham.”
- Million has tried to reclassify his pipeline plan as an energy project in order to find a federal agency that will agree to give him a permit. Million claims that the pipeline would generate 550 to 1,000 megawatts of hydroelectric power, but by first moving water over the Continental Divide, the pumping stations would consume more energy than they could generate.
Science Daily: ‘Geothermal Mapping Report Confirms Vast Coast-To-Coast Clean Energy Source in U.S.’
October 30, 2011
Click on the thumbnail graphic to the right for the map of geothermal resources produced by the mapping project. Here’s a report from Science Daily. From the article:
The results of the new research, from SMU Hamilton Professor of Geophysics David Blackwell and Geothermal Lab Coordinator Maria Richards, confirm and refine locations for resources capable of supporting large-scale commercial geothermal energy production under a wide range of geologic conditions, including significant areas in the eastern two-thirds of the United States. The estimated amounts and locations of heat stored in Earth’s crust included in this study are based on nearly 35,000 data sites — approximately twice the number used for Blackwell and Richards’ 2004 Geothermal Map of North America, leading to improved detail and contouring at a regional level.
Based on the additional data, primarily drawn from oil and gas drilling, larger local variations can be seen in temperatures at depth, highlighting more detail for potential power sites than was previously evident in the eastern portion of the U.S. For example, eastern West Virginia has been identified as part of a larger Appalachian trend of higher heat flow and temperature.
Conventional U.S. geothermal production has been restricted largely to the western third of the country in geographically unique and tectonically active locations. For instance, The Geysers Field north of San Francisco is home to more than a dozen large power plants that have been tapping naturally occurring steam reservoirs to produce electricity for more than 40 years.
However, newer technologies and drilling methods can now be used to develop resources in a wider range of geologic conditions, allowing reliable production of clean energy at temperatures as low as 100˚C (212˚F) — and in regions not previously considered suitable for geothermal energy production. Preliminary data released from the SMU study in October 2010 revealed the existence of a geothermal resource under the state of West Virginia equivalent to the state’s existing (primarily coal-based) power supply…
Areas of particular geothermal interest include the Appalachian trend (Western Pennsylvania, West Virginia, to northern Louisiana), the aquifer heated area of South Dakota, and the areas of radioactive basement granites beneath sediments such as those found in northern Illinois and northern Louisiana. The Gulf Coast continues to be outlined as a huge resource area and a promising sedimentary basin for development. The Raton Basin in southeastern Colorado possesses extremely high temperatures and is being evaluated by the State of Colorado along with an area energy company.
Here’s the link to Google’s enhanced geothermal systems website.
NIDIS Weekly Climate, Water and Drought Assessment Summary of the Upper Colorado River Basin
October 30, 2011
Here’s the link to the summaries from the Colorado Climate Center. Click on the thumbnail graphic for the precipitation summary.
From the Valley Courier (Ruth Heide):
Since the plan is still pending in the courts, the fees collected this year have been held in escrow by the sponsoring district, the Rio Grande Water Conservation District (RGWCD), which continues to upfront the costs of its first sub-district as well as other pending sub-districts throughout the Valley. The purposes of these sub-districts include repairing the damage from well users to surface water rights, helping the state meet its Rio Grande Compact obligations to downstream states and replenishing the Valley’s underground aquifers…
The Valley’s first sub-district, affecting 175,000 irrigated acres and 500 or more individual property owners, lies north of the Rio Grande in what is known as the closed basin area of the San Luis Valley. The sub-district lies in three of the Valley’s six counties (Alamosa, Rio Grande and Saguache.) RGWCD Attorney David Robbins said the Colorado Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the sub-district plan of management case on September 28. He expected a ruling from the court in two to four months. Groups forming other water management sub-districts throughout the Valley are waiting for the court’s ruling before finalizing their sub-districts. Meanwhile, they are accumulating data required to form their sub-districts…
[Rio Grange Water Conservancy District Manager Steve Vandiver] reported during the water district board’s quarterly meeting this week that so far expenses for the first sub-district have totaled $1.37 million, with expenses on the other five sub-districts totaling about $350,000. One of the expenses for the first sub-district is water acquisition to replace injurious depletions to surface rights. The sub-district by court order must begin replacing those depletions in 2012. The sub-district is acquiring several options on water that can be used for replacement water in 2012 and is looking at several other possibilities, according to Vandiver. He said the sub-district has options on 3,500 acre feet for 2012 with another 1,500 acre feet being held for the sub-district if it is needed. Until the groundwater model runs are completed, the sub-district does not have a total for the amount of replacement water that will be required in 2012, he explained…
Well users who are not part of management sub-districts face the potential under pending state well regulations of having to shut down their wells or develop individual augmentation plans. Robbins said individual plans are no easier to develop than the sub-district plans, and some Valley residents have already begun that process. “If you are going to change water rights from irrigation to replacement, the same sort of responsibilities exist to surface streams,” [RGWCD Attorney David Robbins] said. “The same standards apply … the same obligation applies to make up projected depletions with the replacement supplies.”
Brighton sanitary sewer rehabilitation project in the works, it should finish by year end
October 30, 2011
From The Brighton Blade:
The project is expected to start on the south side of Bridge Street, near Main Street, and work east. This portion should take about two weeks. The project then moves to the north side of that intersection and moves east. The work should be done by the end of the year. When it’s finished, the city says customers will have a new, rehabbed sewer system. Affected customers will get 24 hours notification of pending work from the contractor, Western Slope Utilities.
The EPA has issued a permit for the proposed Piñon Ridge Mill tailings cell and evaporation ponds
October 30, 2011
From The Telluride Daily Planet (Kathrine Warren):
The permit approves the construction of a 40-acre tailings impoundment and a 30-acre evaporation pond facility, which will manage the tailings and wastewater the future mill produces…
The permit came with a number of conditions, but Energy Fuels’ Director of Communications and Legal Affairs Curtis Moore said the conditions are reasonable. “We have no problem complying with them,” Moore said. “In a lot of respects it shows how closely the EPA first analyzed our project and they took the comments very seriously.”
The approval requires Energy Fuels to submit a comprehensive ground and surface water-monitoring plan, which will be subject to additional review. The water plan will be subject to additional EPA and state reviews and approval. The conditions also ensure that the mill is in compliance with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
“With the EPA approval, the permitting and environmental risk to our project is now behind us,” Energy Fuels CEO and President said Stephen P. Antony in a press release. “This is significant for Energy Fuels and the domestic uranium industry, as it is the first EPA approval of a conventional mill tailing facility since the NESHAP regulations were revised. Achieving this milestone brings Energy Fuels one big step closer to production of American uranium and vanadium.”
Aside from building permits from Montrose County, Energy Fuels now has just one more government permit pending from the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division for non-radioactive air emissions. If approved, this would be the first uranium/vanadium milling facility built in the United States in 25 years.
More coverage from Katharhynn Heidelberg writing for the Montrose Daily Press. From the article:
This is a major step forward for us,” said Curtis Moore, spokesman for Energy Fuels Corp., which hopes to build the Piñon Ridge uranium mill outside of Paradox. “This is one of the major approvals we needed for the Piñon Ridge mill.”
Montrose County two years ago granted Energy Fuels’ special-use permit to site the mill in an area zoned for general agriculture. Earlier this year, the company received its radioactive materials license from the state.
More coverage from Joe Hanel writing for The Durango Herald. From the article:
Thursday’s approval from the EPA gives Energy Fuels permission to build a 30.5-acre tailings cell and up to 40 acres of evaporation ponds. The mill will extract uranium from ore by grinding the rock and mixing it with water. Acid extracts the uranium and vanadium, and the waste rock and water is pumped into a tailings cell. Water that can’t be recycled from the tailings cell is pumped into the evaporation pond, according to the EPA.
More coverage from Nancy Lofholm writing for The Denver Post. From the article:
[Energy Fuels spokesman Curtis Moore] said the recent court ruling that halted the Department of Energy’s uranium leasing program because not enough analysis of potential environmental impacts was done will not have much impact on Energy Fuel’s project. The company has four mines to supply the mill, all on private or state land. The court ruling affects only leases on federal lands. “We only have seven DOE leases, and we had no immediate plans to do anything on those leases,” Moore said. “Our focus has mainly been on private lands.”
Hilary White with the Sheep Mountain Alliance, one of several environmental groups opposing the mill and the comeback of the uranium industry in general, said she thinks Moore is being too optimistic. “I think the court ruling affects all of the uranium industry tremendously,” White said. “It’s another difficulty they (Energy Fuels) will have to deal with as they try to find investors for the mill.”
If the Piñon Ridge mill is built, it will be the first new mill in the country since the Cold War and will be only the second mill operating in the United States. The other is in southeast Utah.
Silt: The town board is hoping to score $1.8 million in federal dough for improvements to the water treatment plant and water lines
October 29, 2011
From the Glenwood Springs Post Independent (John Colson):
Town Administrator Pamela Woods said the money would come from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which offers funding in its Rural Utilities Service and Rural Development programs.
The town Board of Trustees gave its approval for the grant application on Oct. 24.
According to Woods, the improvements include replacement of old water lines along Grand and Orchard avenues. The existing four-inch lines, made of deteriorating concrete and asbestos, are to be replaced by six-inch or eight-inch PVC lines, she said.
In addition, the town hopes to build a redundant pipeline underneath I-70, adjacent to the existing water line that serves customers between the interstate and the river. The extra line is needed, she said, in case the existing line were to fail for some reason.
The town also hopes to do some upgrades to the water treatment plant, “so we don’t have to use as much chemicals to keep down the TTHM,” Woods explained, referring to the contaminant total trihalomethanes.
The Fountain Creek Watershed, Flood Control and Greenway District reviewed the Corridor Master Plan at Friday’s meeting
October 29, 2011
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
The district Friday reviewed the progress of the newly completed Fountain Creek Corridor Master Plan and an El Paso County stormwater study. In addition, the district suggested areawide flood plain regulations developed by Colorado Springs and reviewed a U.S. Geological Survey study of the impact of building a dam or a series of dams on Fountain Creek. It also looked at a more immediate plan by communities throughout the watershed to apply for a $7.5 Great Outdoors Colorado grant that would support 20 separate projects. The district is still developing the application.
While the master plan is done, the others are at various stages of development and acceptance in communities throughout the watershed. And, although those in the district have been involved for years with the creation of plans, there are worries that the communities they represent know little about the work they have been doing. For instance, a recent press release about the completion of the master plan was published by only The Pueblo Chieftain, and some members of the public weren’t sure how it fits in…
In presenting the master plan, Kevin Shanks of THK Associates said it is heavy on demonstration projects that bring people to Fountain Creek rather than treat it simply as a polluted waterway prone to flooding. “If people can come out and enjoy it, they will be more receptive to a mill levy later on,” Shanks said. “I have a strong feeling that people need to be out there now.”
The district has delayed asking for a mill levy — the 2009 legislation that created it allows for up to 5 mills, but initially would look at much less than that — because of the economy. Voters would have to approve the tax, and the board wants something to show before asking for a tax…
Not everyone was happy about the discussion of only small flood control projects and recreational improvements, particularly landowners whose property was damaged during last month’s flooding. “Someday, someone has got to do something to keep the water from flooding and doing us all in,” said Jane Rhodes, who owns farmland on Fountain Creek in Pueblo County. “Every time, it’s everywhere else but us. There are no detention ponds or reservoirs.”
Meanwhile, the Union Pacific Railroad has removed the deck of an abandoned trestle across the creek near Pueblo but the piers remain. Here’s a report from Chris Woodka writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
The Union Pacific Railroad hired contractors to remove iron deck supports from the bridge. The job was completed last week. “The railroad did not commit to removing the piers, but the trusses were a flood issue,” said Scott Hobson, assistant city manager for community development. “It would look better with the piers removed, but we need to look at options to remove them. For the short term, we were able to take the trusses down.”
The piers are 50-60 feet apart and collected piles of trees and debris during last month’s elevated creek levels — the U.S. Geological Survey called it a 10-year flood event. Large logs moved through the openings under the bridge, but there is still potential for large amounts of material to collect during a heavier flood, Hobson acknowledged.
Colorado River basin: On Wednesday the Interior Department released the final EIS for mineral exploration and production near the Grand Canyon
October 28, 2011
Here’s the release from the U.S. Department of Interior:
The Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Northern Arizona Proposed Withdrawal has been released for public review. The EIS analyzes the potential effects of withdrawing Federal lands from locatable mineral exploration and mining near the Grand Canyon. The Final EIS also identifies the preferred alternative of withdrawing about 1 million acres from new mining claims.
The withdrawal would primarily affect uranium, which is the most economically viable mineral in the area.
While the preferred alternative would not allow new claims in the segregated area, approved mining operations could continue and new operations could be approved on valid existing mining claims. In addition, other Federal lands in Arizona and other parts of the country would remain open to hardrock mining claims.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar on June 20, 2011, announced that the EIS preferred alternative is the 20-year withdrawal of mining claims and exploration on nearly 1 million acres north and south of the Grand Canyon National Park. Those lands are managed by the BLM and the Forest Service.
The release of the Final EIS initiates a 30-day review period after which the Secretary can make a final decision.
In advance of the decision, Secretary Salazar imposed an emergency six-month segregation on the lands being evaluated. That means no new mining claims can be filed on those lands. The emergency segregation ends Jan. 21, 2012.
The Northern Arizona Proposed Withdrawal Final Environmental Impact Statement
The Northern Arizona Proposed Withdrawal Draft EIS
The Draft EIS public comments
More coverage from John M. Broder writing for The New York Times. From the article:
Wednesday’s action starts a 30-day comment period, after which the Interior Department is expected to make the rule final.
The proposed rule would allow a small number of existing uranium and other hard rock mining operations in the region to continue while barring all new mining claims.
“The Grand Canyon is an iconic place for all Americans and visitors from around the world,” said Bob Abbey, director of the Bureau of Land Management.
“Uranium remains an important part of our nation’s comprehensive energy resources, but it is appropriate to pause, identify what the predicted level of mining and its impacts on the Grand Canyon would be, and decide what level of risk is acceptable to take with this national treasure.”
More coverage from Bob Berwyn writing for the Summit County Citizens Voice. From the article:
The final environmental study analyzes the potential effects of withdrawing federal lands near the Grand Canyon in Arizona from new uranium mining claims by identifying a preferred alternative that would withdraw about 1 million acres, subject to valid existing rights. The withdrawal would prevent new mining claims. Approved operations could continue and new operations could be approved on valid existing mining claims.
Even with the proposed withdrawal, the BLM estimates that as many as 11 uranium mines could be operational over the next 20 years under the preferred alternative, including the four mines currently approved.
Led by Arizona Sen. John McCain, a group of Republicans in the U.S. Senate — under heavy lobbying from mining interests and the nuclear power industry — has introduced legislation that would prevent the BLM from withdrawing the lands from mining.
More coverage from David O. Williams writing for the Colorado Indpendent. from the article:
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued a final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that identifies the full withdrawal as the preferred alternative. The EIS will be published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the Federal Register on Thursday, triggering a 30-day public comment period. After that, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar can finalize the controversial move that Republicans have been lining up to try to block legislatively…
Once finalized, the withdrawal – which precludes any new claims under the 1872 Mining Law – does not block current mining operations in the area or new mining on valid, existing claims.
Outdoor recreation groups, conservationists and hunting and fishing groups praised the final EIS.
“A healthy and sustainable Colorado River free from toxic contamination means that families and outdoor enthusiasts will continue to visit and enjoy the communities close to its banks,” Protect the Flows spokeswoman Molly Mugglestone said in a release. “Healthy rivers translate to the healthy local economies that power a robust multi-billion-dollar national recreation economy.”
Green Mountain Reservoir operations update: Reclamation is cutting back releases to 600 cfs in the Lower Blue River by Saturday night
October 28, 2011
From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):
This morning (October 28), we began curtailing releases from Green Mountain Dam to the Lower Blue River. We are stepping releases down in 50 cfs increments. At 8 a.m., we dropped from 800 to 750 cfs. This evening around 8 p.m., we will drop another 50 from 750 to 700 cfs. We will follow a similar pattern on Saturday. By Saturday evening, releases from Green Mountain Dam will be around 600 cfs. It is likely the reductions could continue to drop during the first week of November. I will keep you posted of future changes.
More Colorado-Big Thompson Project coverage here.
Here’s the link to the webpage for the 2011 workshop presentations. I found out about the materials via a tweet from @ColoWaterWise.
More conservation coverage here.
The Yampa River has been named among 100 high-value natural and cultural heritage lands nationwide by ‘America’s Great Outdoor Initiative’
October 28, 2011
From Steamboat Today (Tom Ross):
It’s intended to reconnect Americans to the natural world while creating travel, tourism and outdoor recreation jobs across the country. The Rocky Mountain Greenway on the Front Range is the other Colorado project named to the program this week. Although the details about what the new designation might mean are few, local conservationists agree that the program adds gravity to ongoing efforts to conserve agricultural lands and protect watersheds…
Steamboat resident Kent Vertrees, who represents recreation interests on the state-supported Yampa/White River Basin water roundtable, said the new designation will open more doors for conservation efforts in the area. He was among a group of Routt County residents who participated in an informal 60-minute conversation with Salazar earlier this month when the secretary of the interior dedicated the new dinosaur exhibit at Dinosaur National Monument near Jensen, Utah.
“This will bring more awareness to our area,” Vertrees said. He has been leading Colorado Mountain College students on trips to Dinosaur and said one of the provisions of America’s Great Outdoors calls for communities to foster a greater connection between youths and natural attractions.
More Yampa River basin coverage here.
From The Durango Telegraph:
The erratic “Arctic Oscillation” could make for dramatic short-term temperature swings this winter. But how exactly it will affect La Niña’s propensity for warmer and drier conditions in the south and cooler and wetter weather in the north, is up in the air. “The Arctic Oscillation can generate strong shifts in the climate patterns that could overwhelm or amplify La Niña’s typical impacts,” Mike Halpert, deputy director of NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center said.
According to NOAA, the ever-present Arctic Oscillation fluctuates between positive and negative phases. The negative phase pushes cold air into the U.S. from Canada, causing outbreaks of cold and snow such as the “Snowmaggedon” storm of 2009. Strong Arctic Oscillation episodes typically last a few weeks and are difficult to predict more than one to two weeks in advance.
Sudden cold snaps aside, NOAA says the Southern Plains should prepare for continued drier and warmer than average weather, while the Pacific Northwest is likely to be colder and wetter. This comes as bad news for Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico, which are unlikely to get enough rain to alleviate the ongoing drought. Texas, the epicenter of the drought, experienced its driest 12-month period on record from October 2010 – September 2011.
NOAA expects La Niña, which returned in August, to gradually strengthen and continue through the winter. Southwest Colorado is generally believed to be on the dividing line between dry and wet and is expected to have a winter similar to last year’s.
For a detailed look at NOAA’s winter weather outlook, go to: www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20111020_winteroutlook.html
Colorado-Big Thompson Project update: 313 cfs in the Big Thompson below Olympus Dam through the weekend
October 28, 2011
From email from Reclamation (Kara Lamb):
This is an update to our fall operations of the Colorado-Big Thompson Project. Tonight, Thursday, October 27, we begin making some changes around the project for our annual maintenance program.
This evening, the pump to Carter Lake will be turned off.
Also tonight, we will begin increasing the releases from Olympus Dam to the Big Thompson Canyon. Changes will be made over a series of intervals beginning at 11 p.m. and ending around 2 a.m. Friday morning. The release below the dam will go from 54 cfs to about 313 cfs. It will stay around 313 cfs through the weekend.
Over the weekend, we will curtail the inflow to Horsetooth Reservoir slightly during some maintenance work. However, inflow to Horsetooth is scheduled to go back up on Monday afternoon, October 31. The reservoir elevation will continue slowly dropping through the weekend and begin rising again on Monday when inflow goes back up.
Water levels at Lake Estes are expected to fluctuate as is normal for this time of year.
More Colorado-Big Thompson coverage here.
The EPA has given tentative approval for the proposed Piñon Ridge Mill tailings cell and evaporation ponds
October 28, 2011
Here’s the letter from EPA Assistant Regional Administrator Stephen S. Tuber to the Energy Fuels Company.
More coverage from the Associated Press (Catharine Tsai) via The Pueblo Chieftain:
Federal regulators have approved Energy Fuels Resources Corp.’s plan to build a roughly 30-acre tailings cell and about 40 acres of evaporation ponds at its proposed Pinon Ridge uranium mill in Southwest Colorado, but there are conditions. The Environmental Protection Agency said in a letter Wednesday that the approval is contingent on the agency approving a plan by the company to monitor ground and surface water.
More coverage from Gary Harmon writing for The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. From the article:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued a construction approval to Energy Fuels Resources Corp. for the construction and operation of uranium byproduct material impoundments at the Piñon Ridge Uranium Mill.
Company officials still have to obtain air-quality permits from the state and are hoping to begin construction in 2012.
CPDHE: Cotter Mill public meeting November 2, no official announcement about possible reopening
October 28, 2011
From The Pueblo Chieftain (Tracy Harmon):
According to Jeannine Natterman, public information officer for the Colorado Department of Public Health, “As far as I know, no,” Cotter is not planning to reopen the mill. Natterman said in March 2009, Cotter officials notified the state they intended to rebuild the mill and process ore from the Mount Taylor Mine located near Grants, N.M.
Officials continue to leave the reopening option available, but have not made a final determination on whether such a move would be feasible for the company.
“That’s how they (Cotter officials) are avoiding announcing a full-blown closure,” said Sharyn Cunningham, co-chair of Colorado Citizen’s Against Toxic Waste.
Cotter officials must renew the mill’s radioactive material’s license through the state health department and will be required to submit an application by Dec. 31. The license is required for Cotter to continue cleanup work on the mill property, Natterman said, and the license also would be required for the eventual reopening of the mill…
EPA and state health officials have slated topics of discussion for a public meeting from 7 to 9 p.m. Wednesday at Harrison School, 920 Field Ave., which will include the renewal process for the company’s radioactive materials license. Also slated for discussion are decommissioning, the status of impoundments used to store radioactive tailings and the latest data on the Lincoln Park groundwater situation.
Yesterday, Karen Crummy reported in The Denver Post that Cotter officials were planning to reopen the mill. She cited the 2009 letter about processing ore from New Mexico. Here’s an excerpt:
Additionally, Hickenlooper said he will dispatch his chief of staff, Roxane White, to the Cotter Mill next month to evaluate cleanup efforts at the site declared a Superfund environmental disaster in 1984. “This is very important to the people down there,” he said. “I’m definitely looking at it, and Roxane is looking at it, so we can understand it in some detail and assure ourselves that there isn’t risk to human health or the environment.”[...]
Cotter is currently demolishing its buildings and disposing of the debris in one of the leaking tailing ponds. In a June 24 letter, Cotter said it intended to “maintain its Radioactive Materials License for the purpose of processing Mount Taylor ore.”[...]
Western Mining Action Project attorney Jeff Parsons said he believes Cotter is trying to drag out final shutdown of the mill to avoid what are expected to be detailed reviews of the cleanup. Because the mill is a Superfund site, the EPA must sign off on final plans.
“This is Cotter’s way of trying to push off the serious work, and the state is enabling them by not looking into the claim about Mount Taylor,” said Parsons, who is representing residents suing to force Cotter to post a larger bond to guarantee cleanup of land and water near the mill.
More coverage of next Wednesday’s public meeting from Tracy Harmon writing for The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
The meeting is scheduled from 6 to 9 p.m. Wednesday at Harrison School, 920 Field Ave. Representatives from the state Department of Public Health and Environment and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will lead the meeting.
Topics of discussion at the formal meeting Wednesday will include the renewal process for the company’s radioactive materials license. Also slated for discussion are decommissioning, the status of impoundments used to store radioactive tailings and the latest data on the Lincoln Park ground water situation. Health officials will include an update on the northwest ground water contamination plume under the neighboring Shadow Hills Golf Course just south of the mill. Another topic of discussion will be the recent presence of TCE, or trichloroethene, in ground water at the mill. TCE is an industrial solvent generally used to remove grease from metal. According to a July report generated for Cotter by an environmental consultant, trichloroethene has been detected in ground water at levels that exceed EPA limits. The report also said the source of the TCE contamination has not been identified. In July, a phased soil gas investigation was proposed to identify potential sources of the contamination and to further map out the extent of the ground water plume. The meeting also will include a Superfund cleanup update. There also will be time for local citizens to speak privately to either state health or EPA representatives.
More Lincoln Park/Cotter Mill superfund site coverage here and here.
Southeast Metro Stormwater Authority celebrates fifth anniversary
October 27, 2011
Here’s the release from the SEMSWA via the Englewood Herald. From the release:
The Southeast Metro Stormwater Authority has celebrated its fifth anniversary of operations in the southeast Metro Denver area. SEMSWA, formed by a five-party intergovernmental agreement signed in September 2006, is responsible for stormwater management in the City of Centennial and the urbanized unincorporated portion of Arapahoe County. The authority was formed to provide a funding mechanism for the planning, construction and maintenance of drainage and flood control facilities, and to comply with federal environmental regulation to protect and enhance water quality in neighborhood greenways, flowing creeks and Cherry Creek Reservoir.
More stormwater coverage here.
The Rio Grande Water Conservancy District ponies up $5,000 for the study of the effects of ‘Dust on snow’ events
October 27, 2011
Click on the thumbnail graphic to the right for a satellite (MODIS) view of the April 29, 2009 dust storm over the Four Corners. Here’s a report from Ruth Heide writing for the Valley Courier. From the article:
[Chris Landry with the Center for Snow & Avalanche Studies] recorded 11-12 events last year, the last of which was perhaps the largest of the year. He said last winter was also extremely windy, with more than 100,000 miles of wind passing by the center’s sensor over the course of the winter. Landry explained to the water board that one source area responsible for Colorado’s dusty snow is a vast dry lake bed lacking vegetation on a reservation in Arizona.
He added that the Rio Grande Basin may be most affected by dust on snow events because this basin has less snow cover than other basins in the state. The water district board voted to support Landry’s studies with $5,000.
Colorado Division of Water Resources Division Engineer for Division III Craig Cotten said this is a new tool in helping determine runoff forecasts, and although it is not part of the formula used to develop the annual forecasts it is a beneficial tool.
More Rio Grande River basin coverage here.
Leadville: New wastewater treatment plant for Mountain View Villages is up and running
October 27, 2011
From The Leadville Herald (Ann E. Wibbenmeyer):
After setting up a special sanitation district that encompasses the east and west villages, [Gordon Heaton] was able to fund a new sanitation system that treats sewage from both sides of the highway. When the Colorado Department of Transportation repaved the highway, he was able to put conduits under the road in preparation for the new system. This was in 2007 or 2008. The new system was complete and began operation in April 2010.
The system, a sequencing batch reactor, uses bacteria to eat ammonia and then to eat raw organics, according to Steve Hansen, engineer with Ambiente H2O Inc., which installed the system…
The system now installed in the mobile-home park has two stages covered with concrete, said Hansen. This helps with both the smell and climate control. The bugs will stay warm and happy to keep eating, he said. The third compartment allows for settling. When all is working as it should, clear water settles to the top.
What is then released to Tennessee Creek is cleaner than what is already flowing in the creek, said Hansen.
From the Fort Collins Coloradoan (Kevin Duggan):
A memo by the Larimer County Agricultural Advisory Board states NISP would not necessarily accelerate the selling and subdivision of farms to meet the water needs of growing cities as predicted in a study released earlier this year by Save the Poudre, which opposes the project. “The need for NISP is the result of growth, which has occurred or will occur, rather than NISP being a cause of that growth,” Val Manning, chair of the advisory board told the county commissioners Tuesday…
The board also found construction of Glade Reservoir north of Ted’s Place would not take significant agricultural land out of production because the property already is owned by Northern Water, which has proposed building NISP. There’s no evidence the project would increase salinity levels in Weld County fields and reduce crop productivity as stated in Save the Poudre’s report, “The Farm Facts about NISP,” the board stated…
The board’s analysis questioned Save the Poudre’s contention that the amount of “free water” available for diversion during years of high flow would be eliminated by NISP because water rights for the project are junior to other claims on the river’s water. [Board member George Wallace] told the commissioners some downstream farmers have become accustomed to using “free” water for production during years of high flow and they would be affected by reduced availability.
More Northern Integrated Supply Project coverage here and here.
The world population is now seven billion (give or take) and water use is rising faster than the population
October 27, 2011
From Reuters (Deborah Zabarenko):
Water use has been growing at more than twice the rate of population increase in the last century, said Kirsty Jenkinson of the World Resources Institute, a Washington think tank. Water use is predicted to increase by 50 percent between 2007 and 2025 in developing countries and 18 percent in developed ones, with much of the increased use in the poorest countries with more and more people moving from rural areas to cities, Jenkinson said in a telephone interview. Factor in the expected impacts of climate change this century — more severe floods, droughts and shifts from past precipitation patterns — that are likely to hit the poorest people first and worst “and we have a significant challenge on our hands,” Jenkinson said.
Will there be enough water for everyone, especially if population continues to rise, as predicted, to 9 billion by mid-century? “There’s a lot of water on Earth, so we probably won’t run out,” said Rob Renner, executive director of the Colorado-based Water Research Foundation.
“The problem is that 97.5 percent of it is salty and … of the 2.5 percent that’s fresh, two-thirds of that is frozen. So there’s not a lot of fresh water to deal with in the world.”
Hot spots of water risk, as reported in the World Resources Institute‘s Aqueduct online atlas here , include:
– Australia’s Murray-Darling basin;
– the Colorado River basin in the U.S. Southwest;
– the Orange-Senqu basin, covering parts of South Africa, Botswana and Namibia and all of Lesotho;
– and the Yangtze and Yellow river basins in China.
More coverage from The Washington Post (Juliet Eilperin):
As the global population reaches the 7-billion mark, these sort of ecological distortions are becoming more pronounced and widespread. Sometimes local needs are depleting water, fish and forests; other times food and fuel needs in one region of the world are transforming ecosystems in another. Under either scenario, however, expanding human demands are placing pressure on resources, particularly on world water supply and fisheries.
Robert Engelman, executive director of the Worldwatch Institute, noted that societies have repeated this pattern of depleting one natural resource and then turning to another, whether it’s the whale oil that gave way to fossil fuels or the guano that has been substituted by chemical fertilizer. But the current scale of exploitation has become so vast, Engelman said, that it now exacts even larger consequences.
The Fountain Creek Watershed, Flood Control and Greenway District is awaiting a stormwater assessment and management study due in December
October 27, 2011
From the Colorado Springs Independent (Pam Zubeck):
That September deluge provided the latest evidence of the need to control stormwater runoff. The question is how, considering the backlog of projects in the Springs alone amounts to as much as $500 million, and efforts to collect the now-defunct stormwater fee have been a nightmare.
[Larry Small, manager of the district] believes the first step is overseeing a study to identify the region’s drainage costs and funding options. It’s funded by Colorado Springs Utilities ($20,000), El Paso County ($10,000) and the Pikes Peak Regional Water Authority ($7,500), a coalition of water users outside the city. “I think we have to get this study put together first,” Small says, “and then get the governments together in the region and say, ‘How do we want to tackle this, and how do we tell people the benefits?’”[...]
Small says the study will quantify costs regionally (including Pueblo County), report timeframes for building projects, and suggest funding mechanisms, such as a stormwater authority that might rely on property taxes over a wide area, possibly two counties…
Lisa Ross, the city’s acting stormwater manager, says the EPA is getting tougher on pollutants and monitoring. She encourages flood-control projects such as detention ponds that allow pollutants to drop out of the water before flowing to creeks…
Stormwater has always been a loser. In 2005, City Council, in part to placate Pueblo, formed the Stormwater Enterprise and followed in 2007 with fees levied on all property owners. Many refused to pay the “rain tax,” and the city has had trouble collecting since. The enterprise was dismantled in 2009. Collection letters, court judgments and “till taps,” wherein deputies seize money from businesses in satisfaction of court orders have only brought ill will.
More stormwater coverage here.
Precipitation news: Arapahoe Basin is reporting 11 inches of new snow, Loveland — 21 inches.
October 26, 2011
From the Associated Press via the Colorado Connection:
Northern Colorado got the most snow. Greeley picked up about a foot and Jamestown, in Boulder County, received 18.2 inches. Between 12 and 16 inches of snow fell at Rocky Mountain National Park…
At the Estes Park Mountain Shop outside the park, at least 8 inches of snow had fallen by midmorning.
Up to 8 inches of snow was expected in the San Juan Mountains in southwestern Colorado…
Two resorts that are already open got fresh snow. On Wednesday afternoon, Arapahoe Basin was reporting 11 inches of new snowfall within the past 24 hours, while Loveland was reporting 21 inches.
More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Peter Roper/Anthony A. Mestes/Matt Hildner/Tracy Harmon). From the article:
Statewide, snow from the first storm of the season knocked out power and heat to thousands of homes and businesses on the Front Range and brought more snow to Colorado’s mountains…
Randy Gray, a weather service forecaster, said the snow in the Pueblo area melted almost as fast as it fell, bringing about 0.3 inches of rain with it. The snowfall amounted to about 9 inches in the Rye area and 7 inches in Beulah…
Wednesday’s heavy, wet snow dropped more than 7 inches of snow in Canon City. The snow was light throughout most of the day becoming heavier about 2 p.m. In Custer County, snow accumulations ranged from 3 to 5 inches on the south end of the county to 10-12 inches to the west end of the county, according to road and bridge officials. In the town of Westcliffe accumulations were about 6 inches and road conditions were slushy and icy…
At Monarch Mountain, about 4 inches of new snow had fallen by mid-afternoon Wednesday, said Greg Ralph, marketing manager…
The storm hit hardest in the San Juan Mountains, where Wolf Creek Ski Area reported 18 inches of snow by early evening…
Walsenburg reported 6-8 inches of snowfall.
Aspen: City Council approves application for a ‘minor water power project license’ from FERC
October 26, 2011
From the Aspen Daily News (Curtis Wackerle):
City Council on Monday voted unanimously to abandon its application for a “conduit exemption” in favor of a “minor water power project license” from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is a more rigorous review process. The city estimates that the change will mean an additional $250,000 in expenses…
Council also approved a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Colorado Division of Wildlife that aims to protect the riparian environment of the creeks. The MOU requires the city to maintain a minimum stream flow of 13.3 cfs below its existing diversion structure on Castle Creek, which will be used to siphon water for the hydro plant, and a minimum stream flow of 14 cfs in Maroon Creek below the diversion structure there.
The MOU, in trying to get at optimal stream health as opposed to minimum stream flows, also establishes a 10-year monitoring program. If macroinvertebrate population, fish population or biomass decreases, and they can be tied to hydro plant operations, the city will be required to take steps to reverse the damage to the creeks, including scaling back diversions, according to the MOU…
When Maureen Hirsch, who is one of eight plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed last month, suggested that permanent streamflow monitors be placed on the creek and that the monitoring go on for more than 10 years, Aspen Mayor Mick Ireland told her it would be very difficult to work with her and others who are suing the city.
“This is very hostile litigation,” Ireland said, holding up a copy of the complaint. “It’s very aggressive and divisive and I can’t say that I really appreciate it.”
