September 3 Colorado Energy Cheat Sheet: Time running out for Colowyo Mine; Bennet, Hickenlooper concerned about EPA ozone rule; Animas River updates
Filed under: CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, Legislation, renewable energy, solar energy, wind energy
Colorado’s Colowyo Mine–and the entire northwest part of the state–face a final decision September 6, and the Denver Post editorial board notes the significance, concluding that the judge should rule in Colowyo’s favor, as the “economic health of northwestern Colorado depends on it”:
The clock runs out this weekend on a federal judge’s extraordinary order giving the Interior Department just 120 days to fix what he said were flaws in an environmental analysis of an eight-year-old expansion permit for the Colowyo coal mine in northwestern Colorado.
At the request of WildEarth Guardians, a group opposing all fossil fuel extraction in the West, Judge R. Brooke Jackson mandated the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) take a closer look at “the direct and indirect environmental effects of the Colowyo mining plan revisions” and wrap it up by Sept. 6.
It’s unfortunate that Interior Secretary Sally Jewell decided against appealing Jackson’s ruling, but she has also said federal officials were “doing everything we can” to avoid a mine shutdown.
And she may be right. On Tuesday, OSMRE released a revised environmental assessment in what may be record time for such a document, as well as an official finding of no significant environmental impact. We hope it will be enough to satisfy the judge.
The Post says to find otherwise “would be a blow to common sense.”
A $200 million blow to Moffat and Rio Blanco counties, to more than 220 employees who would directly lose their jobs and hundreds of families, friends, neighbors and businesses that would suffer.
The Post also pointed to the absurdity of of reexamining the Colowyo mine plans, as burning coal is an expected outcome of mining coal:
But coal will remain a part of America’s energy portfolio for many years and it has to come from somewhere. And the existence of a mine presupposes the product will be used. As attorneys for Colowyo Coal Co. noted in a legal filing, “Combustion of the mined coal is a necessary and foreseeable consequence of granting a federal coal lease.”
None of that matters, however, to the anti-fossil fuel activists at WildEarth Guardians.
We’ll have an update next week.
Washington, D.C., Sept. 2 – Less than a week after U.S. Senator Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) warned that a plan to dramatically tighten the federal ozone standard “doesn’t make any sense” and is “not going to work,” Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) is also going public with his reservations. In short, Hickenlooper is questioning the Obama administration for proposing an ozone standard at levels “where you know you’re not going to be able to achieve it.”
In a TV interview with CBS Denver, Gov. Hickenlooper said he’s unconvinced that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should tighten standard from 75 parts per billion (ppb) into the range of 65 to 70 ppb. Here are the governor’s full comments from CBS Denver’s Aug. 31 story:
“I’m still very concerned. … I’ve heard (from) both sides that there isn’t sufficiently clear evidence that this is a significant health hazard. Now I haven’t looked at that yet and our people are still looking at it…
“To set up a standard where you know you’re not going to be able to achieve it, and obviously we’re at a unique disadvantage because we’re a mile high. So when you’re at 5,000 feet your ozone challenges are significantly more difficult.”
Having both of Colorado’s top Democrats express even limited concern about the EPA’s plans is significant, and both Hickenlooper and Bennet, with caveats, appear not to be sold on the reductions projected by the agency. Both refer strongly to Colorado’s unique situation, and the West in general, with regard to background-level ozone and effect that would have on making any attainment of the new standards difficult, if not impossible, for many areas of the state, and not just the Front Range.
Video of Sen. Bennet last week, saying the EPA plan is “not going to work”:
Tony Cox, a member of the faculty of the University of Colorado School of Public Health and the editor in chief of the peer-reviewed journal Risk Analysis wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal outlining the problematic health analysis instrumental to the EPA’s push for the ozone rule:
Fortunately, there is abundant historical data on ozone levels and asthma levels in U.S. cities and counties over the past 20 years, many of which have made great strides in reducing ambient levels of ozone by complying with existing regulations. It is easy to check whether adverse outcomes, from mortality rates to asthma rates, have decreased more where ozone levels have been reduced more. They have not. Even relatively large reductions in ozone, by 20% or more, have not been found to cause detectable reductions in deaths and illnesses from cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses, contrary to the EPA’s model-based predictions.
How the EPA and society proceed when confronted with a divergence between optimistic model-based predictions and practical reality will say much about what role, if any, we collectively want science and objective analysis to play in shaping crucial environmental and public-health regulations.
The cynical use of asthma patients to promote a pro-regulation political agenda that won’t actually help them undermines the credibility of regulatory science and damages the public interest.
A battle over wind turbines in eastern El Paso County between residents and county officials appears to have been concluded:
El Paso County attorneys and lawyers for disgruntled residents reached an agreement this week to end a months’ long lawsuit over a controversial wind farm, the county announced on Wednesday.
On Sept. 1, an El Paso County district court approved the mutual decision to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice, a move that protects the El Paso County commissioners from being sued over their decision to approve the large wind farm project near Calhan. Tuesday’s court ruling ended months of legal back-and-forth between the county officials and bitter eastern county residents, many of whom vehemently oppose the project out of fear of compromised property values and health effects.
Despite the lawsuit, residents remained divided over the project. Many long-time ranchers in the area supported the wind farm, and told the commissioners that they were happy to see some economic vitality come back to the region. But other residents fought bitterly against the entire wind farm project, and still others opposed only the above-ground powerline. Members of the property rights coalition paid their own legal fees, held regular meetings with updates and even created anti-wind farm t-shirts to sell to members.
Another Senate Democrat has signaled his support for exporting U.S. oil — as long as it is part of a broader clean energy plan.
The declaration from Sen. Michael Bennet came during the Rocky Mountain Energy Summit, when the Coloradan was asked if he backed oil exports.
“In the context of being able to move us to a more secure energy environment in the United States (and) a cleaner energy environment in the United States, yes,” Bennet said.
A spokesman for Bennet said the senator believes a move to lift the 40-year-old ban on crude exports “would have to be part of a more comprehensive plan that includes steps to address climate change and give the country and the world a more sustainable energy future.”
Bennet’s comments make him the latest Senate Democrat to suggest he is open to oil exports — even if the support is predicated on other changes.
Another renewable company and recipient of government largesse is on deathwatch:
Abengoa, a renewable energy multinational company headquartered in Spain, has been a favorite of the Obama administration in getting federal tax money for clean energy projects.
Since 2009, Abengoa and its subsidiaries, according to estimates, have received $2.9 billion in grants and loan guarantees through the Department of Energy to undertake solar projects in California and Arizona — as well as the construction of a cellulosic ethanol plant in Kansas.
But in the space of less than a year, Abengoa’s financial health has become critical, leading investors to worry whether the company can survive.
A new tree census finds there are a lot more in the world than previously thought:
There are just over three trillion trees in the world, a figure that dwarfs previous estimates, according to the most comprehensive census yet of global forestation.
Using satellite imagery as well as ground-based measurements from around the world, a team led by researchers at Yale University created the first globally comprehensive map of tree density. Their findings were published in the journal Nature on Wednesday.
A previous study that drew on satellite imagery estimated that the total number of trees was around 400 billion. The new estimate of 3.04 trillion is multiple times that number, bringing the ratio of trees per person to 422 to 1.
While the density of foliage was surprisingly high overall, the researchers cautioned that global vegetation is still in decline. The number of trees on Earth has fallen by 46% since the beginning of human civilization, according to the report. The researchers said they believed the findings would provide a valuable baseline for future research on environment and ecosystems.
Animas River Updates
You can taste the trout again, say Colorado officials:
Colorado health officials said Wednesday trout from the Animas River are safe to eat even after being exposed to contaminants from a massive wastewater spill last month.
“Most fish tissue analyzed after the Gold King mine release showed metals below detectable levels,” the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment said in a news release. “All results were below the risk threshold.”
“Because there is a potential for fish to concentrate metals in their tissue over time, the department and Colorado Parks and Wildlife will continue to monitor levels of metals in Animas River fish,” the release said. “New data will be analyzed and results reported when available.”
The hurdles for cleanup in areas like Gold King mine and the Animas River are steep:
DENVER – Despite cries for a focus on reclamation following the Gold King Mine spill, restoring thousands of inactive mines across Colorado and the nation may prove difficult, if not logistically impossible.
Ron Cohen, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Colorado School of Mines, said the technology and funding is lacking to properly perform the reclamation work needed.
“The reality is, and my prediction is, that this is going to be a problem for a long, long time,” Cohen said. He has been briefing federal lawmakers on oversight following the Gold King disaster. “Is there political will in the federal government now to come up with more monies for cleanup? I don’t think that’s going to happen.”
There has been a refocus on reclamation in the wake of the Gold King incident, in which an error by an Environmental Protection Agency-contracted team on Aug. 5 sent an estimated 3 million gallons of orange old mining sludge into the Animas River. The water initially tested for spikes in heavy metals, including lead, arsenic, cadmium, aluminum and copper.
It isn’t the first time Colorado has seen its rivers turn orange because of spills from an old mining operation. Each time an incident occurred, the focus was shifted to reclamation, yet the pervasive problem lingers.
Part of the dilemma has to do with money. Estimates place national reclamation of inactive mines as high as $54 billion. Mining laws that govern the industry in the United States date back 143 years. The federal government is prohibited from collecting royalties on much of hard-rock mining, thereby leaving the coffers dry for reclamation.
Read the whole thing.
Notification of downstream officials and residents in the aftermath of the Animas River spill was late and, in some cases, not available to other states’ officials (namely New Mexico), as well as Native American tribal officials and others residing along the path of 3 million spilled gallons of toxic, metallic wastewater. A new system is now in place, according to the Associated Press:
DENVER — A massive wastewater spill from an old gold mine in Colorado has prompted state officials to expand the list of downstream users they will warn after such accidents.
Last month, Colorado health officials notified only agencies inside the state after 3 million gallons of water tainted with heavy metals gushed out of the Gold King mine near Silverton and eventually reached the Animas, San Juan and Colorado rivers in New Mexico and Utah.
In the future, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment will warn downstream states as well, department spokesman Mark Salley said.
Colorado officials didn’t know the magnitude of the spill when they issued their warnings, he said.
August 27 Colorado Energy Cheat Sheet: Bennet says ozone rule “not going to work”; net metering gets a boost from PUC
Filed under: CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, Hydraulic Fracturing, Legislation, PUC, preferred energy, renewable energy, solar energy, wind energy
Sen. Michael Bennet, joined a bipartisan group of officials in Colorado questioning the proposed Environmental Protection Agency’s new ozone rule proposal at the recent Colorado Oil and Gas Association Energy Summit in Denver:
Senator Bennet and Gardner participated on a panel hosted by the Colorado Oil and Gas Association on August 26. Below is the question posed to Senator Bennet, and his response:
Manu Raju, Politico: Senator Bennet, a big issue here in the room is the ozone standards. Environmental groups, EPA officials are concerned about excessive levels of ozone; that they could lead to premature death and respiratory problems. The business community warns that the standards EPA is proposing would be very bad here in Colorado; it would cost a lot of jobs. The current ground-level ozone standard set in 2008 is 75 parts per billion. EPA’s proposal is lowering it to 65 to 70 parts per billion, and it could go even lower. Question to you: Do you think the EPA proposal is fair? Should they go to 65 parts per billion?
Senator Bennet: I’m deeply concerned about it. I think we should understand how they arrived at that conclusion, because the way some statutes are written, they don’t sometimes have the flexibility we think they should have. And this is the perfect example of applying the law and doing it in a way that doesn’t make sense on the ground. Because of the pollution that’s come in from other Western states, from across the globe, from wildfires in the West, we have significant parts of our state that would be in non-attainment [unintelligible] from the very beginning of the law. That doesn’t make any sense. That’s not going to work.[emphasis added] Having said that, we need to care a lot about our kids and the elderly and the quality of the air that they breathe, and we need to care about children in our state that have asthma. So my hope is that we can work together to get to a rational outcome, but I’m not—The one that’s been proposed is not yet there.
Earlier this month, The Center for Regulatory Solutions issued a report that included opinions from Democrats, Republicans, and other elected officials from across the state opposing or pushing back against the EPA ozone rule. A sampling of those statement can be found in our August 13 edition.
Net metering, a handout from folks who don’t own solar panels to those who do, in the form of retail price reimbursement for the electricity they generate–gets a boost from a unanimous Public Utilities Commission decision to keep the current rates in place:
Colorado’s Public Utility Commission ruled Wednesday afternoon that no changes were needed to the state’s net metering process, meaning that homeowners with solar arrays will continue to receive retail rates for energy they produce.
“The PUC voted (3-0) today to maintain the status quo for the net metering program and close the docket,” PUC spokesman Terry Bote confirmed via email.
Net metering provides a credit for every kilowatt-hour an array puts on the grid at the same price residential customers are charged for electricity – about 10.5 cents.
Xcel Energy, the state’s largest electric utility, has been pushing a plan to cut the incentives for each kilowatt-hour produced to a fraction of a penny, but solar users and industry groups have lobbied hard against changes that would remove a key financial incentive.
“This appears to be the outcome we have been working towards in more than a year of work on this docket,” said Rebecca Cantwell, executive director of the Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association. “We have worked in full collaboration with other members of the solar industry, and this represents a tremendous amount of hard work from many people. Xcel officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
“Key financial incentive” = subsidy.
From my op-ed late in 2014, as the PUC was steering through a slate of meetings to determine the “value of solar”:
At issue is the method of calculating the “value of rooftop solar,” as the Public Utilities Commission chairperson put it this year. Solar proponents believe the credits for excess electricity generated by solar panels and pushed back onto the grid should continue to get 10.5 cents per kilowatt-hour — the average of annual residential retail rates.
Xcel is arguing for a reduction to 4.6 cents, saying the costs associated with maintaining the grid made the reimbursement unfair.
Xcel representatives called maintaining the 10.5-cent credit a “hidden cost” for its 1.2 million Colorado ratepayers. “Everybody needs to pay for the cost of the grid,” said spokesperson Hollie Velazquez Horvath.
Rooftop solar uses the grid in multiple ways. For customers pulling energy when the sun isn’t out (or near maximum generation) or pushing electricity onto the grid at the peak of summer, the grid balances supply and demand, regulating and stabilizing electrical output. It also acts as the exchange mechanism when a customer goes from generating and reselling excess electricity, to periods when the customer needs more electricity than the solar panel provides.
Customers who generate enough “revenue” from their net metering credits end up paying little or nothing for the grid costs. The costs get shifted to the utilities’ non-solar customers.
In other words, solar proponents advocate that non-solar ratepayers continue to subsidize grid maintenance for solar customers and then purchase electricity from those same solar customers at a price higher than they would pay for Xcel to generate the power.
The PUC has closed the docket on this proposal, but the legislature may look to take up the issue of net metering in future sessions.
Speaking of Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO), the Democrat up for reelection in 2016 has some words of advice for embattled Democratic Party presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton on #KeystoneXL:
DENVER — Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) on Wednesday dinged Hillary Clinton for punting on the issue of Keystone XL oil pipeline.
“I think she should take a position,” Bennet said of his party’s presidential frontrunner at a Colorado Oil and Gas Association conference here. “She should take a position for it — or she should take a position against it.”
Speaking at a forum moderated by POLITICO, Bennet said he supports building the pipeline. He is up for reelection next year in this perennial swing state and could face a tough battle if the GOP fields a formidable opponent.
A Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry panel of five of the state’s Congressional delegation was split on whether federal or state and local authorities were the best in dealing with oil and gas regulations–an issue Colorado registered voters in a recent Independence Institute poll said should go the state’s way, 37 to 5 percent, over DC-based rulemaking:
On energy legislation, the three Democrats and two Republicans who represent portions of metro Denver took not two but three different stances on which government should be most responsible for oversight of the oil and gas industry:
Democratic U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette of Denver said that while she respects the laws the state has drafted, the federal government must play a role in regulating the effects of drilling on waterways that flow between states.
Coffman said that regulations should fall to the state government, where bodies like the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission are much more in touch with the needs of local residents.
And Democratic U.S. Rep. Jared Polis of Boulder — who last year backed two state constitutional amendments to increase the role of cities and counties in regulation of drilling before pulling the measures— said it is actually local governments like those in Weld County that should decide where and how oil rigs should be allowed to operate in their communities. “I don’t trust the D.C. politicians. I don’t trust the Denver politicians,” said Polis, a fourth-term congressman. “This is a decision that should be made at the local level.”
Don’t be too impressed with Polis’s “local level” mantra as anti-fracking activists look to resurrect ballot issues designed to ban oil and gas development under the guise of “local community control.” Polis backed similar measures in 2014 before they were pulled in favor of Governor John Hickenlooper’s oil and gas commission.
The Clean Power Plan may have been finalized on August 3, but serious questions about the EPA’s assumptions for the rule remain, as an analysis by Raymond L. Gifford, Gregory E. Sopkin, and Matthew S. Larson show (all emphases added):
• EPA scaled back on carbon dioxide reductions from coal plant improvements and energy
efficiency in its Final Rule under the Clean Power Plan, but nevertheless increased its
carbon reduction mandate from 30 percent to 32 percent by 2030. EPA did so through its
use of “potential renewables” as the variable driving eventual state carbon budgets. EPA now
forecasts that incremental renewable energy electric generation (Building Block 3) will more
than double, from 335,370 gigawatt hours in the Proposed Rule to 706,030 GWh in the Final
• EPA uses a complicated and unprecedented methodology to achieve its new renewable
energy forecast for the years 2024 through 2030. Looking to historic renewable capacity
additions during 2010-2014, EPA selects the maximum change in capacity for each renewable
resource type that occurred in any year over the five-year period, and adds this maximum
capacity change year-over-year from 2024 through 2030. The maximum capacity addition
year selected by EPA for each resource is more than twice as much as the average over 2010
• EPA’s methodology fails to account for the fact that expiration of the production tax
credit, or PTC, drove the development of renewable energy resources during 2012.
Renewable energy capacity additions fluctuated substantially between 2010 and 2014,
especially the largest component of Building Block 3, onshore wind power. EPA uses the
anomalous year, 2012, to predict future growth of wind power. In 2012, the wind production
tax credit was expected to expire at the end of the year, causing producers to rush to install as
much wind capacity as possible. Other renewable resource types also showed non-linear and
unpredictable trends during 2010 – 2014.
• EPA’s renewable energy expectations diverge by an order of magnitude from the EIA’s
base case renewable energy capacity and generation forecasts over the 2022 – 2030 period.
Notwithstanding these incongruences with EIA’s forecasts, EPA suggests that its forecasted
renewable energy additions would occur in the normal course even without the CPP.
• EPA assumes that fossil fuel generation could be displaced based on the average capacity
factors of renewable energy resource types (e.g., 41.8 percent for onshore wind power).
However, utilities and restructured market system operators assign a much lower capacity value
for wind power, in the 10-15 percent range, because wind production is often not available during
peak load conditions. To the extent that the EPA’s assumed renewable energy displacement of
fossil fuel resources does not occur because wind, solar, or other intermittent generation is not
available, system capacity will in real terms be lost absent planners assigning a much lower
capacity value to the given renewable resource (and in turn adding additional capacity, be it
fossil-based or renewable).
The authors conclude:
Setting aside enforceability, the President gave EPA a goal in his Climate Action Plan: achieve a 30% carbon emission reduction by 2030. EPA proceeded to solve for that goal with a capacious construction of the BSER [Best System of Emission Reduction] under the Clean Air Act. While gas “won” in the near-term under the Proposed Rule, in the end renewable energy resources assume a Brobdingnagian role in determining the level of carbon emission reductions that are purportedly possible under the BSER. EPA’s Final Rule constructs a method that solves for a conclusion, instead of having a method that yields a conclusion. Of even greater concern, EPA’s use of renewable average capacity factors instead of capacity credit exacerbates reliability risks to the electric system during peak load conditions. The end result may be unknown, but the method of getting there is highly questionable at best.
Despite tanking oil prices, a new outfit, Evolution Midstream, announced a planned $300 million launch, saying of the current situation that “this too shall pass.”
Paving the way for the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, the billionaire Tom Steyer funded and pushed a “state-level advocacy network” to prop up the controversial plan and give endangered politicians cover.
Colorado’s oil and gas production projected to fall, according to a University of Colorado study.
Animas River updates
EPA officials knew of a “blowout” potential as much as a year before the Animas River spill, but even the release of this info took place late on a Friday, in what AP reporter Nick Riccardi called a “very late-night document dump on Gold King mine”:
U.S. officials knew of the potential for a catastrophic “blowout” of poisonous wastewater from an inactive gold mine, yet appeared to have only a cursory plan to deal with such an event when a government cleanup team triggered a 3-million-gallon spill, according to internal documents released by the Environmental Protection Agency.
The EPA released the documents late Friday following weeks of prodding from The Associated Press and other media organizations. While shedding some light on the circumstances surrounding the accident, the newly disclosed information also raises more questions about whether enough was done to prevent it.
The Aug. 5 spill came as workers excavated the entrance to the idled Gold King Mine near Silverton, Colorado, unleashing a torrent of toxic water that fouled rivers in three states.
A June 2014 work order for a planned cleanup noted the mine had not been accessible since 1995, when the entrance partially collapsed.
“This condition has likely caused impounding of water behind the collapse,” the report said. “Conditions may exist that could result in a blowout of the blockages and cause a release of large volumes of contaminated mine waters and sediment from inside the mine.”
An EPA internal review post-spill revealed that they never checked the water levels or the pressure contained within the mine despite their June 2014 work order:
Dangerously high water pressure levels behind the collapsed opening of the Gold King Mine were never checked by the Environmental Protection Agency, in part because of costs and time oversights.
The revelations came Wednesday as the EPA released an internal review of a massive Aug. 5 blowout at the mine above Silverton. The report called an underestimation of the pressure the most significant factor leading to the spill.
According to the report, had crews drilled into the mine’s collapsed opening, as they had done at a nearby site, they “may have been able to discover the pressurized conditions that turned out to cause the blowout.”
EPA officials claim they were caught unaware:
EPA supervisor Hays Griswold, who was at the scene of the blowout Aug. 5, told The Denver Post in an interview this month conditions in the mine were worse than anticipated.
“Nobody expected (the acid water backed up in the mine) to be that high,” he said.
The report says, however, that decreased wastewater flows from the mine, which had been leaching for years, could have offered a clue to the pressurization. Also, a June 2014 task order about work at the mine said “conditions may exist that could result in a blowout of the blockages.”
The inability to obtain an actual measurement of the mine water pressure behind the mine’s blocked opening “seems to be a primary issue,” according to the review. It went on to say if the pressure information was obtained, other steps could have been considered.
It did not elaborate on what those steps could have been.
“Despite the available information suggesting low water pressure behind the debris at the adit entrance, there was, in fact, sufficiently high pressure to cause the blowout,” the review says. “Because the pressure of the water in the adit was higher than anticipated, the precautions that were part of the work plan turned out to be insufficient.”
Stan Meiburg, EPA’s deputy administrator, said during the call that “provisions for a worst-case scenario were not included in the work plan.”
The 3 million gallon orange spill was, apparently, the worst-case scenario.
The internal investigation called the agency’s preparedness when it came to analysis of the water issue as “insufficient.”
It may take a while–many years–to know how the toxic minerals and metals released by the EPA will settle in the sediment of the Animas River and further downstream:
As communities along the Animas River continue to wonder about the long-term consequences of the Gold King Mine spill, one of the biggest questions remaining is the orange sediment lying along riverbeds and riverbanks.
What’s in it? How long will it be there? How might it affect our drinking water and our health? These are all concerns for community members, and many experts say we may not know until time goes by and a few spring runoffs continue to wash it downstream.
The EPA isn’t getting off the hook with the release of internal reports admitting lack of preparation or failure to measure water levels, or even late-night docu-dumps:
Republicans say the administration has been too wrapped up in guarding the world against climate change to address environmental dangers closer to home and should be held accountable, according to Texas Republican Lamar Smith, who is leading a probe into the spill in the House.
“Even in the face of self-imposed environmental disaster, this administration continues to prioritize its extreme agenda over the interests and well-being of Americans,” said Smith, chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.
The committee has scheduled a Sept. 9 hearing on the spill and has requested the head of EPA and the contractor involved in the mine incident to testify. It appears from the internal reports that the contractor involved in the spill was the same one that drafted the blowout report.
The report that was released “in the dead of night” Friday raises new questions about the depth of EPA’s culpability, according to Smith. “The actions that caused this spill are either the result of EPA negligence or incompetence,” he said. “We must hear from all those involved to determine the cause of what happened and how to prevent future disasters like this.”
The agency’s lack of timely dissemination of documents and details has been a theme since the spill erupted earlier this month.
But partisan flaps at the federal level between Republicans in Congress and one of the administration’s favorite agencies is not the only scene of squabbles, as local officials allege Republican Attorney General Cynthia Coffman had a partisan agenda in mind when scheduling meetings in Durango in the aftermath of the spill.
And finally, Silverton decided to seek federal funds for clean up operations after years of reservations over possible “Superfund” designation:
After two decades resisting Environmental Protection Agency funds for cleanup of the festering mines that dot its surroundings, Silverton on Tuesday announced it is seeking federal help.
A joint resolution passed by the town’s board and the San Juan County Commission says officials will work with neighboring communities to petition Congress for federal disaster dollars they hope will address leaching sites quickly.
“Silverton and San Juan County understand that this problem is in our district, and we feel we bear a greater responsibility to our downstream neighbors to help find a solution,” the resolution said.
The decision is a paradigm shift for the small town of about 650 year-round residents in the wake of a 3 million-gallon wastewater spill Aug. 5 at the Gold King Mine in the mountains to the north.
August 13 Colorado Energy Roundup: EPA dumps on Colorado with Clean Power Plan, Ozone rule–then releases a toxic mess!
Filed under: CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, Legal, Legislation, PUC
To say the Environmental Protection Agency has been in the news lately would be an understatement. Just this time last week, less than 24 hours after triggering a spill of toxic sludge including heavy metals into the Animas River in SW Colorado, most folks were unaware of the situation due to a lack of EPA communication–but more on that in a minute.
They were too busy focused on the new carbon-cutting Clean Power Plan rules being dumped on the state by the regulatory side of the agency.
Here’s a recap of the CPP, as Independence Institute’s Mike Krause can explain:
Or more in depth from former Colorado Public Utilities Commission chair, Ray Gifford:
Last week the EPA finalized the rule, as we told you in last week’s edition of the Energy Roundup, with the Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman considering joining a multi-state lawsuit challenging the CPP’s legality, and legislators possibly returning to some form of transparency or oversight for the CPP state implementation plan, now with pushed back deadlines (and therefore more sessions to seek legislation).
The Independence Institute has a CPP backgrounder that provides further details.
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy discussed the launch of the CPP in a video on Tuesday.
Hot on the heels of the CPP, the EPA expects to finalize rules for ground-level ozone some time in October. But large and small businesses alike, from the National Association of Manufacturers to Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry, joined the Center for Regulatory Solutions (CRS), a project of the Small Business Entrepreneurship Council (SBE Council), in a press call yesterday to announce a new study that looked at the effects of the ozone rule on Colorado. The sheer volume of bipartisan commentary opposing the proposed ozone reduction is particularly eye-opening in these normally contentious times, and shows a break with the EPA on new regulations–the ozone rule might be a step too far following so closely behind the CPP:
“This ozone proposal gives the federal government far too much control over state and local planning decisions that shape the Colorado economy,” said Karen Kerrigan, President of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council. “Colorado is one of the biggest success stories of the federal Clean Air Act, but now the EPA is moving the goalposts. The standard is so strict – approaching background levels in some areas – that the vast majority of the state economy will be found in violation immediately. Violation of the ozone standard gives EPA the authority to effectively rewrite state and local environmental laws the way Washington wants.”
“No wonder this EPA proposal has been met with such strong and diverse opposition from across Colorado’s political spectrum. Washington officials, all the way up to President Obama himself, should listen to the voices coming from Colorado and across the country and once again give the current standard a chance to work.”
A sample of the key findings:
By lowering the National Ambient Air Quality Standard from 75 parts per billion (ppb) into the 65 to 70 ppb range, EPA would force, with a single action, at least 15 counties in Colorado to be in violation of federal law. These happen to be some of Colorado’s most populated counties, concentrated in the Denver metropolitan area, but a number of counties on the Western Slope may be dragged into non-attainment as well. Together, these 15 counties are responsible for 89 percent of Colorado’s economy and 85 percent of state employment. (Page 3)
Under the Clean Air Act, cities and counties that do not meet the NAAQS for ozone are placed into “non-attainment,” or violation of federal environmental standards. Once in non-attainment, local and state officials must answer to the federal government for permitting and planning decisions that could impact ozone levels. State officials are required to develop an “implementation plan” that imposes new restrictions across the economy, especially the transportation, construction and energy industries. The EPA has veto power over these implementation plans. States that refuse to comply, or have their implementation plans rejected, face regulatory and financial sanctions imposed on them directly from the federal government. (Page 19)
The report, entitled “Slamming the Brakes: How Washington’s Ozone Plan Will Hurt the Colorado Economy and Make Traffic Worse” has revealed that opposition to the ozone rule with a river of comments from Colorado state and local officials.
Here’s a sample of the bipartisan criticism:
State Senator Cheri Jahn (D):
“Coloradans care deeply about the environment. After the great progress we have made on air quality, our state should be praised, not punished. This ozone proposal out of Washington, D.C. scares my constituents, because it could hamstring our regional economy and cost jobs.
We have worked so hard to bring manufacturing jobs to Colorado, and by moving the goal posts on ozone, the EPA is going to chase manufacturing jobs away from our state. This plan could also gum up the approval process for badly needed road and transportation investments, which will make our traffic worse, and make it much harder to attract new industries, grow existing businesses, and strengthen Colorado’s middle class.”
State Senator Ellen Roberts (R):
“If the EPA carries out this ozone plan, Western Colorado will be placed at a terrible economic disadvantage. We have worked hard to responsibly care for our environment even as we grow and diversify our economy.
Tightening the ozone standard any further just does not make sense when the existing standard, which is less than 10 years old, is working. I urge the EPA to reconsider this plan and leave the 2008 standard in place.”
State Senator Jerry Sonnenberg (R):
“The EPA’s proposed new standards would drive small family farms such as mine out of business. We have never been able to afford new equipment and if the only way to comply with this new standard is with new equipment, my family would have to leave agriculture. Even if we could meet the standards with expensive upgrades to our machinery, the increased costs to finance those upgrades, as well as the fuel and the fertilizer, takes a marginally profitable farm and turns it into one that can’t make its payments.
Unless you want to see the family farm only as a memory, one must make the EPA understand that their new standards will have a devastating effect on rural America and the agriculture economy.”
Routt County Commissioners Douglas Monger (D), Cari Hermacinski (R), Timothy Corrigan (D):
“We set and meet high standards because we know it is good for our people and our state. So you might expect us to support the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed standards for ground-level ozone. Those standards, however, are too overbearing and are meeting with a lot of resistance even in places where air quality regulations are welcome…
These standards must not be implemented. If they go forward as proposed, they will do more than put good people out of work and cause hardships for communities that have done so much to protect the land, air and water around them. They will turn away a lot of people who have been receptive to the idea that government can be trusted to do environmental regulation the right way.”
NAM also released a video ad buy, to be seen across Colorado over the next few days:
Only the sheer quantity of toxic material–some 3 million or so gallons of Sunny-D colored water laden with heavy metals–comes close to the media coverage of one of the biggest environmental stories in recent Colorado history.
Most of the stories have been widely publicized and shared, so here is a quick look at this EPA-related (not strictly energy-related) blockbuster news blitz from just the past two days alone, in reverse chronological order (most recent first):
The EPA is not letting the public know the names of the government contractors responsible for spilling three million gallons of toxic wastewater from a southern Colorado mine. The agency is holding the information close — so close, the Colorado attorney general’s office doesn’t have it.
A spokesman with the Colorado attorney general’s office told The Daily Caller News Foundation the EPA had not disclosed the names of the federal contractor that caused millions of gallons of wastewater into the Animas River — leaked contaminants include zinc, copper, cadmium, iron, lead and aluminum.
The EPA is not letting the public know the names of the government contractors responsible for spilling three million gallons of toxic wastewater from a southern Colorado mine. The agency is holding the information close — so close, the Colorado attorney general’s office doesn’t have it.
A spokesman with the Colorado attorney general’s office told The Daily Caller News Foundation the EPA had not disclosed the names of the federal contractor that caused millions of gallons of wastewater into the Animas River — leaked contaminants include zinc, copper, cadmium, iron, lead and aluminum.
“Very difficult,” said Alex Mickel, who has turned hundreds of customers away from his Mild to Wild Rafting each day since the Environmental Protection Agency accidentally unleashed a 3 million gallon torrent of toxic mine water into the headwaters of the Animas last week.
“We are anticipating around $150,000 to $200,000 in lost revenue,” Mickel said. “But from an emotional standpoint, it’s difficult to see a beautiful river damaged in this way.”
The attorneys general of Colorado, New Mexico and Utah said Wednesday that a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency is an option in the wake of a massive mine wastewater spill caused by the agency.
All three, however, agreed that it’s too early to say if they will sue.
“I would hope that it would not be necessary,” Colorado’s Cynthia Coffman, a Republican, said of a suit in an interview with The Denver Post. “The statements by the (EPA’s administrator) indicate the EPA is accepting responsibility for the accident. The question is: What does that mean? What does accepting responsibility mean?”
Gov. John Hickenlooper on Tuesday drank a hearty gulp of the Animas River in an effort to highlight that the river has returned to pre-contamination conditions.
The governor and his health department director, however, cautioned that citizens should not be freely drinking from the river, because the water was unsafe for consumption even before the Environmental Protection Agency released an estimated 3 million gallons of mining wastewater into it.
But the drinking exercise indicated that state officials are more than confident that the river does not pose a toxic risk to humans, as they publicly stated on Tuesday.
“Am I willing to go out there and demonstrate that we’re back to normal?” Hickenlooper asked out loud after The Durango Herald raised the idea with the governor. “Certainly. I’m happy to do that. I’m dead serious.”
Navajo Nation is furious with the EPA, not just because the agency accidentally spilled three million gallons of toxic mine waste in the region, but because the agency is allegedly trying to get tribal members to waive rights to future compensation for damages incurred by the toxic spill.
“The federal government is asking our people to waive their future rights because they know without the waiver they will be paying millions to our people,” Navajo President Russell Begaye told Indianz.com. “This is simple; the feds are protecting themselves at the expense of the Navajo people and it is outrageous.”
Republican congressmen are calling for the EPA to be held accountable for spilling 3 million gallons of toxic mine wastewater into the Animas River last week, especially since the agency is a government entity and won’t be punished to the same degree a private company would for spilling waste.
“The EPA must be held accountable for its actions,” Rep. Lamar Smith told The Daily Caller News Foundation in an emailed statement. “If a private company caused such a disaster, it would be hit with substantial penalties and would be required to pay for cleanup.”
“In this case, it will be the taxpayers who foot the bill,” the Texas Republican said. “The EPA has an obligation to the families and businesses that have been devastated by this spill.”
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s clumsy, tone-deaf response to the toxic disaster on the Animas River was an embarrassment even to the EPA. One agency official managed to admit the reaction was “cavalier,” but that’s putting a mild face on it.
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said Tuesday in Washington, D.C., that she takes full responsibility for the spill, which she said “pains me to no end.” She said the agency is working around the clock to assess the environmental impact.
Hickenlooper sees a silver lining:
“Colorado’s governor thinks a mine spill accidentally triggered by an EPA crew will move the state and federal government to more aggressively tackle the “legacy of pollution” left by mining in the West.
Gov. John Hickenlooper said Tuesday that much of the wastewater has been plugged up, but the state and the Environmental Protection Agency need to speed up work to identify the most dangerous areas and clean them up.
The former geologist says that if there’s a “silver lining” to the disaster, it will be a new relationship between the state and the EPA to solve the problem.”
Gov. John Hickenlooper on Tuesday stood on the banks of the Animas River and said last week’s spill of 3 million gallons of contaminated mining waste water into its flow was “in every sense, unacceptable.”
He said the long-term effects of the spill, which happened as the Environmental Protection Agency was investigating the contaminated mine, are unknown.
The governor said he has spoken with the head of the EPA, Gina McCarthy, and described her as “committed” and “firm” in her resolve to respond to the spill. McCarthy will be in Durango and New Mexico on Wednesday, she said Tuesday on Twitter.
“I think we share the anger that something like this could happen,” Hickenlooper said. “But I think that said, our primary role is now: that’s behind us and how are we going to move forward.”
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy apologized Tuesday for a mine spill in Colorado that her agency caused last week and planned to travel to the area Wednesday, amid increasing criticism from lawmakers about the EPA’s response.
Ms. McCarthy said at a news conference in Washington that she was still learning about what happened, responding to a question about whether the EPA was reviewing changes in how it cleans up old mines. “I don’t have a complete understanding of anything that went on in there,” she said. “If there is something that went wrong, we want to make sure it never goes wrong again.”
Unlike BP, which was fined $5.5 billion for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, the EPA will pay nothing in fines for unleashing the Animas River spill.
“Sovereign immunity. The government doesn’t fine itself,” said Thomas L. Sansonetti, former assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s division of environment and natural resources.
And of course, some folks don’t think the EPA should be blamed . . .
Filed under: CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, Hydraulic Fracturing, Legislation, PUC, preferred energy, renewable energy, solar energy, wind energy
Colorado’s expected targets on carbon reduction from the finalized Clean Power Plan unveiled Monday:
Colorado’s 2030 goal of a 28 percent reduction in overall carbon dioxide emissions — or a 40 percent reduction in the pounds of CO2 emitted per megawatt hour of electricity generated — was set using a 2012 benchmark.
“Having them stick to that baseline year of 2012, we don’t necessarily get credit for being early thinkers and early movers,” said Dr. Larry Wolk, executive director and chief medical officer of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
Colorado’s Attorney General Cynthia Coffman has vowed to review the new rules and could consider joining a multi-state lawsuit against the Clean Power Plan:
Attorney General Cynthia Coffman said the plan “raises significant concerns for Colorado” and that she’s considering joining other states in a legal challenge.
Citing concerns about potential job losses and an unrealistic set of goals and timelines, Coffman said in an e-mail she will ” carefully review the EPA’s plan and evaluate its long term consequences for our state.”
“But as I put the best interests of Colorado first, it may become necessary to join other states in challenging President Obama’s authority under the Clean Air Act.”
It is not clear at this time how long Coffman will take to render a decision on whether or not to join that lawsuit, but the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment’s Dr. Wolk said that the agency is pushing forward:
“It is the right thing to do,” Wolk said.
If there’s a legal challenge to be had related to EPA authority, that’s a matter specific to the attorney general, he said.
“But it is not something we would use to deter our efforts, which have been underway for several years,” Wolk said.
Governor John Hickenlooper’s office told the Denver Post, “We respect the due diligence of the attorney general in reviewing the plan and will watch the next steps closely.”
Hickenlooper has already made it clear his administration welcomed the Clean Power Plan, and would not join an effort to thwart that plan at the state level.
The final rule moves the deadline for state implementation plans back, and the CDPHE has given an initial nod to allowing the legislature to vote on the agency’s plan:
The final state plan will go to the legislature for approval before submission to the EPA. An initial state plan will be due September 2016 with an option for states to request a two-year extension to September 2018 for submission of the final plan.
How much input the Colorado legislature will have remains to be seen due to the possibility of legislation in 2016 and even 2017. Colorado may file for an extension, giving the legislators additional opportunities to consider enabling legislation, procedural requirements such as a stronger or even mandatory role for the Public Utilities Commission, or other variations on how Colorado submits its CPP SIP. The 2015 session saw SB 258, the Electric Consumers’ Protection Act, pass out of the Senate in bipartisan fashion but ultimately die in Democratically-controlled House. The bill would have sought transparency for the CPP state plan by requiring PUC hearings and deliberation, as well as an up or down vote by the Colorado legislature as a whole.
The Independence Institute published a backgrounder in April, during the rule finalization process, that took a look at possible economic and legal implications of the CPP:
– Will require a new regulatory regime, and holistically seeks to remake the nation’s energy policy;
– Will incur massive costs;
– Will greatly affect energy reliability across the country;
– Is likely illegal; and
–Won’t have any measurable impact on global CO2 emissions.
A quick look at Colorado’s CO2 emission levels from the 2012 baseline show a 40.5 percent reduction in carbon by 2030, from 1973 pounds per megawatt hour down to 1174. Interim goals would reach approximately 31 percent reduction between 2022 and 2029, with states receiving some flexibility on reaching the step reductions. The EPA estimates that by 2020, Colorado would see a 14 percent reduction–without any Clean Power Plan guidelines.
States’ goals fall in a narrower band, reflecting a more consistent approach among sources and states.
At final, all state goals fall in a range between 771 pounds per megawatt-hour (states that have only natural gas plants) to 1,305 pounds per megawatt-hour (states that only have coal/oil plants). A state’s goal is based on how many of each of the two types of plants are in the state.
The goals are much closer together than at proposal. Compared to proposal, the highest (least stringent) goals got tighter, and the lowest (most stringent) goals got looser.
o Colorado’s 2030 goal is 1,174 pounds per megawatt-hour. That’s in the middle of this range, meaning Colorado has one of the moderate state goals, compared to other state goals in the final Clean Power Plan.
o Colorado’s step 1 interim goal of 1,476 pounds per megawatt-hour reflects changes EPA made to provide a smoother glide path and less of a “cliff” at the beginning of the program.
The 2012 baseline for Colorado was adjusted to be more representative, based on information that came in during the comment period.
The full text of the EPA’s outline for Colorado is here:
So why can the EPA project an additional 14 percent reduction of carbon emissions by 2020 without the Clean Power Plan?
Energy In Depth has the details, via the Energy Information Administration:
According to a report released today by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), monthly power sector carbon emissions reached a 27-year low in April of 2015. In that same month, natural gas was, for the first time, the leading source of American electricity. As the EIA puts it:
“The electric power sector emitted 128 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (MMmt CO2) in April 2015, the lowest for any month since April 1988…Comparing April 1988 to April 2015 (27 years), natural gas consumption in the sector more than tripled.” (emphasis added)
EID concludes, “As the EIA’s report clearly shows, these environmental benefits are due in large part to an American abundance of safely produced, clean-burning natural gas.” EPA’s administrator Gina McCarthy has repeatedly pointed to natural gas as a “bridge” or key component in reducing carbon.
But natural gas as a “building block” for CPP compliance is threatened by the next EPA rule to come down the regulatory turnpike, the ground-level ozone rule to be finalized in October, according to the Institute for Energy Research.
Studies have considered the cost to the economy and the toll in human terms due to job loss:
President Barack Obama’s plan targeting coal-burning power plants will cost a quarter of a million jobs and shrink the coal industry by nearly half, according to a new report by the American Action Forum (AAF).
The president released final regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Monday, which require every state to meet strict emission standards for coal-burning power plants in the next 15 years.
The so-called “Clean Power Plan” will cost the industry $8.4 billion, nearly 10 times more expensive than the most burdensome regulation released this year, according to AAF, a center-right think tank led by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office.
“This week, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its final greenhouse gas (GHG) standards for existing power plants,” according to the report, authored by AAF’s director of regulatory policy Sam Batkins. “The final plan will shutter 66 power plants and eliminate 125,800 jobs in the coal industry.”
Job loss will be substantial due to the shuttering of coal-fired power plants, including those in Colorado.
It will also likely be heavily localized, as the tenuous situation in northwest Colorado facing the Colowyo Mine and Craig’s coal-fired plant illustrate–and this comes before the state considers how to implement the Clean Power Plan.
Moffat County, where both the mine and power plant reside, would see just a few hundred jobs on the chopping block, but this would devastate the area, as a recent video from Institute for Energy Research showed:
Reaction to the rule varied across the spectrum, and the Denver Business Journal gathered a handful of the more pointed statements from both sides:
Joel Serface, managing director of Brightman Energy, a renewable energy development company.
“The Clean Power Plan is a huge opportunity for Colorado’s economy. By tackling the rising economic costs of climate change, we can modernize our energy infrastructure, stimulate innovation and help create thousands of good, new Colorado jobs in high-growth sectors like wind and solar.”
State Sen. John B. Cooke (R-Weld County):
“The Governor needs to commit himself to a true public process, including a rigorous review by the people’s representatives in the Colorado General Assembly, before giving a green light to Colorado’s implementation of this new federal mandate. These rules are being challenged in federal court by sixteen states, and I hope that Colorado’s Attorney General will join that lawsuit now that the EPA rules are final. The fact is, the Clean Air Act passed by Congress does not authorize these costly dictates, and there is a good chance the US Supreme Court will block these rules for that reason.”
Filed under: Abound Solar, Archive, CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, HB 1365, Legal, Legislation, PUC, renewable energy
The Clean Power Plan’s timeline for compliance may see an extension, and the final rule itself may be revealed next Monday:
The final version of President Obama’s signature climate change policy is expected to extend an earlier timeline for states to significantly cut planet-warming pollution from power plants, according to people familiar with the plan.
If enacted, the climate change plan, the final version of which is expected to be unveiled as early as Monday, could stand as the most significant action ever taken by an American president to curb global warming. But some environmental groups have cautioned that a later deadline for states to comply could make it tougher for the United States to meet Mr. Obama’s climate change pledges on the world stage.
The plan consists of three major environmental regulations, which combined are intended to drastically cut emissions of greenhouse gases. The rules take aim at coal-fired power plants, the largest source of greenhouse emissions, and are intended to spur a transformation of the nation’s power sector from fossil fuels to renewable sources such as wind and solar. Under the rules, the Environmental Protection Agency would require states to draft plans to lower emissions from power plants. The agency is also expected to issue its own model of a state-level plan, to be imposed on states that refuse to draft their own plans.
The final rules would extend the timeline for states and electric utilities to comply, compared with a draft proposal put forth by the E.P.A. in June last year, according to people who are familiar with the plan but who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about it.
The Independence Institute’s backgrounder on the Clean Power Plan and its devastating effects on our energy choice and enormous costs to taxpayers and the economy in general can be found here.
Much of the public land in the Rocky Mountain west is administered not by the states but by the federal government all the way from DC–and the debate over who should ultimately preside over these vast swathes of federal land has seen a resurgence:
Not since the Sagebrush Rebellion in 1979 has the debate over whether it’s time for federal lands to fall to states’ control gained such attention, and the anti-federal-government sentiment and talking points aren’t likely to dissipate as the West heads toward the next presidential election.
The fight stirred in 2012 when the Utah legislature passed the Transfer of Public Lands Act to demand authority over millions of acres of federal land by last New Year’s Eve. It didn’t happen.
Eight states cumulatively considered 30 bills around the issue this year. In March, Republicans in the U.S. Senate passed, without a single Democratic vote, a symbolic resolution in support of transferring or trading land to states. The resolution, though, doesn’t give Congress or any federal agency additional power to make deals.
And in the last Colorado legislative session there were three bills around the subject. Only one passed. House Bill 1225, a bipartisan bill supported by environmental groups, strengthens communities’ position in saying how local federal lands are managed.
Opponents of devolving control of public lands to the states cite the enormous costs of maintaining them, arguing states are not prepared to shoulder the added burden of hundreds of millions of dollars in annual upkeep.
For example, a single wildfire could cripple Colorado, said Governor John Hickenlooper’s advisor:
The federal government also picks up the costs for wildfires on federal lands. But just one massive wildfire in Colorado — a state that can have several in one year — could obliterate the state budget, said John Swartout, a Republican who is Hickenlooper’s top policy adviser on land, wildlife and conservation issues.
“The solution is constructive engagement,” Swartout said. “Are we always going to be happy with all the decisions? No. But we’re going to get a lot farther helping create the final solution.”
More than 1/3 of Colorado is subject to federal jurisdiction. Whether or not the debate develops into a political conflagration or peters out in favor of other issues remains to be seen, but expect energy producers and environmental activists to keep a close eye on how the narrative proceeds.
WildEarth Guardians won’t hesitate to launch a legal battle, as a recent look at the group’s lawsuit filings shows:
Though a relatively small organization with only 26 people on staff, WildEarth Guardians’ litigious nature has established the environmental advocacy group as a dominant voice in the national debate about environmental policy.
From 2010 to present, Guardians have initiated a total of 152 cases in federal district courts and 55 in the Circuit Court of Appeals for a total of 207 cases. In 2010 alone they filed 61 claims — an average of about one per week.
However, Guardians’ pervasiveness in the courts has not gone without criticism.
In a 2012 analysis of WildEarth Guardians’ legal activity, the conservative group Americans for Prosperity claimed that Guardians has been “misusing the judicial system, exploiting poorly-written laws and taking advantage of taxpayers to pursue a narrow, litigation-driven, special interest agenda.”
For Coloradans, especially those in Craig and surrounding areas, lawsuits from the group have drawn the ire of residents and businesses for favoring costly litigation as a first-stop solution:
Lee Boughey, senior manager of corporate communications and public affairs for Tri-State, said in a statement that the courts should not be a first resort.
“Environmental policy, regulations and law should be set by state legislatures and Congress, and based on sound science, a thorough cost-benefit analysis and appropriate timeframes for implementation. These are difficult issues, and it is a far better for all stakeholders to commit to work together to develop sound regulatory policy that take these consideration into account, as opposed to running straight to the courts,” he said.
The group remains adamant, saying, the “legal system is oftentimes the last recourse of justice for interests and peoples that have been marginalized or whose issues haven’t been heard.”
In the case of Colowyo Mine, the marginalized appear to be the local residents, workers, and communities.
A pair of energy-related ballot measures will appear in November in Boulder, including a Climate Action tax:
Boulder officials also want to ask voters to extend the portion of the utility occupation tax on energy bills that replaces Xcel Energy’s franchise fee and provides roughly $4.1 million to the city’s general fund each year. It is not the portion of the tax that funds analysis and legal efforts toward municipalization, which is not on the ballot. The municipal energy utility would also have to pay a similar amount into the general fund, but that utility may not be up and running by 2017, when the tax expires. The proposed ballot measure would extend the tax through 2022.
The Climate Action Plan tax, which funds energy-efficiency programs and solar rebates, will also appear on the ballot. That tax expires in March 2018, and city leaders believe the programs ultimately will be paid for out of utility rates. However, that won’t be possible until the utility is up and running. The proposed ballot measure would extend the tax through March 2023 so that those programs could continue regardless of progress on the municipal utility.
July 16 Colorado Energy Roundup: Sec. Jewell adds Colowyo Mine visit; renewable energy mandate upheld
Filed under: CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, Legal, preferred energy, renewable energy
A week after the Department of the Interior declined to move forward with an appeal in the Colowyo Mine case, and facing mounting pressure to visit the northwest portion of Colorado during a scheduled trip to Aspen, Sec. Sally Jewell appears to have conceded to a meeting with county commissioners:
Moffat County Commissioner John Kinkaid said Wednesday that Jewell has added a meeting with northwest Colorado county commissioners to her itinerary Friday following her speech at the Aspen Institute.
“We look forward to meeting Secretary Jewell this Friday evening,” Kinkaid said. “I hope that she will be able to give us some assurances that our miners can keep working.”
He said he expected the meeting to include commissioners from Moffat and Rio Blanco counties, whose communities would bear the brunt of a mine closure. The meeting will take place in Glenwood Springs.
Jewell had come under pressure to visit the area after it was announced that she would deliver remarks Friday at the Aspen Institute, about a three-hour drive from Craig, where residents are alarmed about the future of the mine.
We’ll keep you posted on developments of the planned meeting.
The mandate, which voters passed in 2004 and expanded in 2010, was challenged by the free-market advocacy group Energy and Environment Legal Institute. The group argued that the renewable energy requirements violate the U.S. Constitution.
The lawsuit claimed that the requirement that large utilities such as Xcel Energy get 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources violates constitutional protections for interstate commerce.
The plaintiffs argued that because electricity can go anywhere on the grid and come from anywhere on the grid, Colorado mandate illegally harms out-of-state companies.
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver disagreed. The three-judge panel ruled that the mandate does not wrongly burden out-of-state coal producers. The judges also pointed out that Colorado voters approved the mandate.
The full text of the ruling can be found here.
For those who do not think increased energy costs–whether from increased cost of supply of fuel, onerous regulations, or government picking (more expensive) energy winners–affect lower and middle income families in Colorado, a new examination of the state’s Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LEAP) reveals how devastating even modest price increases in energy can be:
About 430,000 households in Colorado — 22 percent of all households — are eligible for federal energy assistance.
These households have incomes below 150 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $36,372 for a family of four.
About 13 percent of Colorado households are below the federal poverty line of $24,250 for a family of four.
The federal Low-Income Energy Assistance Program, or LEAP, administered by local agencies, provided $47 million for heating bills during the 2014-15 season.
The article laments that program has a low reach at the present time, with only 19 percent of those eligible receiving outreach.
But the article’s lede is buried–even small, incremental increases have a large and outsized effect on low-income folks given the portion of income they spend on energy:
Xcel, the state’s largest electricity utility, calculates monthly payments based on 3 percent of a household’s income.
Average households pay 2 percent to 3 percent for energy, compared with low-income households, which often pay as much as 50 percent.
“That leaves very little for food, clothing, medicine,” said Pat Boland, Xcel’s manager of customer policy and assistance.
“Once we get them in the door, we want to keep them in the door,” Boland said in a presentation.
According to the article, Black Hills reaches only 10 percent of those eligible within its system. It pays for the assistance by charging other ratepayers, and is considering a rate hike to cover the program, which is currently losing money. That hike, along with three other rate increases since 2008, make Black Hills among the most expensive electricity providers in the state, the Post article said.
Despite a quiet 2015, fracking is still maintaining a low boil on the backburner of the state’s energy debate, and there is every indication that it won’t be simmering any time soon, and Democratic Rep. Jared Polis told the Associated Press that options remain:
Polis said fracking could be on the 2016 ballot if state officials don’t further regulate the industry. He stopped short of saying whether he would organize the effort, but he wants lawmakers and regulators to adopt three proposals that weren’t formally recommended by the task force.
One would let local governments impose stricter rules than the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, charged with regulating drilling statewide. Another would change the commission’s role from facilitating oil and gas development to simply regulating it. The third would set up a panel to resolve disputes between energy companies and local governments or property owners before they land in court.
It remains to be seen whether or not activists, with or without Polis’s sponsorship, pursue a strategy like they did in 2013, targeting friendly and even tossup municipalities with fracking bans and moratoria, or wait for statewide opportunities in the 2016 Presidential election cycle.
The Bureau of Land Management has closed off nearly 100,000 acres of federal land from future leasing:
The Bureau of Land Management rejected all 19 protests from conservation groups, the oil and gas industry and other interests in approving a new resource management plan for the Colorado River Valley Field Office.
The Colorado River Valley Field Office, in Silt, manages more than 500,000 acres of land and more than 700,000 acres of subsurface federal minerals in Garfield, Mesa, Rio Blanco, Pitkin, Eagle and Routt counties. The agency says the majority of the 147,500 acres with high potential for oil and gas production under the office’s jurisdiction are already leased and will continue producing under the plan.
The plan closes 98,100 acres for future leasing, including in the Garfield Creek State Wildlife Area near New Castle, areas managed for wilderness characteristics, areas of critical environmental concern, municipalities and designated recreation areas.
A second Craig-area coal mine apparently also will have to undergo a remedial federal environmental review process if it hopes to avoid a shutdown based on a recent court order.
The Trapper Mine near Craig is now looking at going through the same kind of review currently underway in the case of the Colowyo Mine between Craig and Meeker following a federal judge’s ruling in May.
U.S. District Court Judge R. Brooke Jackson, in a suit brought by WildEarth Guardians, found that the federal Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement illegally approved expansions of the two mines because it failed to provide public notice of the decisions and account for the environmental impacts.
The Trapper Mine faces discrepancies over permitted areas and coverage under filings with Judge Jackson, who did not impose a similar ruling as that issued for the Colowyo Mine.
In a notice filed last week to alert the court about the new information, the Trapper attorneys said they support doing remedial environmental analysis involving the Trapper Mine after the Colowyo review is done.
Bob Postle, manager of the program support division for the OSMRE’s western region, said the notice has “just been filed, and we’re now working through how we’re going to address it.”
Given the discrepancies, it isn’t clear at this moment whether a new or remedial environmental review is necessary, according to Trapper’s legal counsel.
In a meeting with Republican Senator Cory Gardner, western slope businesses and entrepreneurs described facing onerous regulatory burdens imposed by DC bureaucrats:
A Moffat County sheepherder, Delta hardware shop owner and Grand Junction manufacturer all walked into a meeting Friday with U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., each with much the same punchline in mind.
The common theme: The federal government is reaching too far into their businesses, discouraging them from seeking out new ways of doing business and growing.
Constraining regulations have “taken the creativity out of business,” Jim Kendrick, owner of Delta Hardware, told Gardner. “The move is to make us all do business the same way. That’s stifling growth.”
Gardner met with two dozen western Colorado business and economic leaders at Colorado Mesa University in hopes of finding ways to improve the state’s sputtering rural economy.
“I spend all my time on regulatory compliance and none of it on product development,” one Department of Defense contractor said. That would result in pushing more business to bigger vendors able to hurdle all of the regulatory red tape due to a larger staff.
Filed under: Abound Solar, CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, Hydraulic Fracturing, Legislation, preferred energy, renewable energy, solar energy
Last week at the Steamboat Institute, Independence Institute Energy Policy Center Director Amy Oliver Cooke moderated a panel entitled “The Coming Storm of Federal Energy Regulations and Their Impact on Colorado Business”–with attorney Ray Gifford discussing the Environmental Protection Agency’s “Clean Power Plan,” Dan Byers of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce offering an explanation of the newly proposed EPA ground-level ozone rule, and Lee Boughey of Tri-State Generation and Transmission revealing the impact of the WildEarth Guardians lawsuit and the Colowyo Mine:
Blowback over the controversial support of WildEarth Guardians and the lawsuit threatening the Colowyo Mine stirred up trouble not only for New Belgium Brewing Company but over 450 other businesses and organizations listed as WEG supporters who quickly pulled their names from a list of “supporters” on the activist group’s website:
Some businesses listed said they never gave anything to the group responsible for a lawsuit that put Colowyo Coal Mine at risk of closing.
The Craig Daily Press published its first story about local liquor stores and restaurants pulling New Belgium and Breckenridge Brewery beer on June 8, and shortly thereafter, WildEarth Guardians staff deleted its webpage called “Businesses for Guardians.”
The newspaper then published the cached webpage of supporters, and less than 24 hours later, the environmentalists republished the webpage.
On that page, a total of 605 businesses across Colorado and New Mexico were listed as supporters. As of June 18, that number shrunk to 151 businesses listed as supporters.
A complete list of all companies previously named as “Businesses for Guardians” has been archived here as well.
“You don’t mess with my community,” one resident told the Craig Daily Press.
There’s no doubt the Colowyo Mine issue is already impacting the economy of the northwest corner of Colorado:
After less than six months of being in business, the owner of Stacks Smokehouse closed the doors to his restaurant due to Craig’s economic uncertainty in light of what’s happening at Colowyo Coal Mine.
Steve Fulton said his business — which opened in the former Double Barrel Steakhouse building on Feb. 20 — dropped 40 percent days after the community met on June 3 for a public meeting with Colowyo representatives.
Two Colorado counties have seen tremendous growth in jobs, despite the recent oil and gas downturn:
Two Colorado counties were among the three large U.S. counties with the fastest job growth rate in 2014, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports.
And Colorado overall ranked No. 3 for the rate of job growth among states.
In the counties ranking, Weld County topped the list for a second straight year. Weldco tied with Midland County, Texas, with a best-in-the-nation 8.0 percent increase in employment between December 2013 and December 2014, BLS said.
In 2013, Weld County posted 6 percent job growth.
And Adams County came in at No. 3 in the nation with a 6.4 percent growth rate.
In fact, Weld County saw a 19.6 percent gain in natural resources and mining employment over the 12-month period, adding a net 2,074 jobs, BLS estimates.
And Adams County is home to companies that service the energy industry.
Only North Dakota (4.5 percent) and Nevada (4.2 percent) outpaced Colorado’s job growth rate of 3.9 percent, according to the BLS.
Meanwhile in Indiana (from a press release):
Indianapolis – Governor Pence sent a letter today to President Obama informing him that unless the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan is demonstrably and significantly improved before being finalized Indiana will not comply. The Governor’s letter in full can be found attached.
“As I wrote to Administrator McCarthy on December 1, 2014, the proposed rules are ‘ill-conceived and poorly constructed’ and they exceed the EPA’s legal authority under the Clean Air Act,” wrote Pence. “If your administration proceeds to finalize the Clean Power Plan, and the final rule has not demonstrably and significantly improved from the proposed rule, Indiana will not comply. Our state will also reserve the right to use any legal means available to block the rule from being implemented.”
“Our nation needs an ‘all of the above’ energy strategy that relies on a variety of different energy sources,” said Pence. “Energy policy should promote the safe, environmentally responsible stewardship of our natural resources with the goal of reliable, affordable energy. Your approach to energy policy places environmental concerns above all others.”
In addition Pence noted, “Higher electricity prices brought by the EPA’s plan will inhibit our ability to advance our manufacturing base and the jobs it creates.”
The EPA’s Clean Power Plan calls for a 20 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from 2005 levels in Indiana by the year 2030. The proposed rules do not dictate how states achieve reduction. Instead, the rule suggests four building blocks as guidelines for compliance. The rules will increase the cost of electricity and force the premature closure of coal-fired power plants, leading to concerns of electricity shortages. On December 1, 2014, Governor Pence and Indiana State agencies submitted letters to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy detailing the proposed rules’ impact on Indiana and urging their immediate withdrawal.
More than 26,000 Hoosiers are employed in the coal industry in Indiana. Governor Pence has pledged to fight the EPA’s regulations with all legal means at Indiana’s disposal. Governor Pence’s comments today come on the heels of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia dismissing State of West Virginia et al v. Environmental Protection Agency, Case No. 14-1112. Indiana was one of fourteen petitioners in the case, which asked the Court to review the legality of the EPA’s proposed regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants. The Court of Appeals’ decision was based on procedural, not substantive, issues and does not preclude future litigation challenging the regulation. Indiana intends to renew its challenge in the courts following the release of the final rule.
The EPA is expected to release the final rule in August.
A quick reminder of why government choosing energy winners and losers is a bad idea–an expensive burden on taxpayers and ratepayers alike.
June 18 Colorado Energy Roundup: Pushback on EPA ozone rule effect on rural US, oil and gas operations get the thumbs up from Colorado communities
Filed under: Archive, CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, Hydraulic Fracturing, preferred energy, solar energy, wind energy
The Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed ozone rule–reducing acceptable ground-level ozone from 75 ppb to between 65 and 70–has drawn criticism from 22 medically trained members of Congress (E&E Greenwire, behind paywall:
In a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, the 22 Republican members of the House and Senate raised questions about the analysis underlying EPA’s conclusions about the public health benefits of a lower ozone limit.
EPA in November proposed to tighten the national ambient air quality standard for ozone from 75 parts per billion — last set in 2008 during the George W. Bush administration — to between 65 and 70 ppb after finding that the 75 ppb limit was no longer adequate to protect public health.
“As healthcare professionals, we rely upon the most accurate health data,” the group of lawmakers wrote. “From this vantage, we believe that the proposal’s harms outweigh its claimed benefits and are concerned it could ultimately undermine our constituents’ health.”
Of the lawmakers signing the letter, 13 have doctor of medicine degrees. Some of the other signatories have been trained as dentists or eye doctors. Two are registered nurses. Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who has a doctor of medicine degree, led the effort.
From the letter to McCarthy:
Studies show that income is a key factor in public health, a link confirmed by our first-hand experience as medical professionals caring for patients, including the low income and uninsured. As well, stakeholders have noted serious questions regarding the health benefits EPA claims to support the proposal, and we are concerned that the uncertain benefits asserted by EPA in its ozone proposal will be overshadowed by its harm to the economy and human health. In light of the long-term continuing trend towards cleaner air, as well as ongoing work by states toward further improvements under existing regulations, we encourage EPA to protect American jobs, the economy, and public health by maintaining the existing ozone NAAQS [National Ambient Air Quality Standards].
The letter, citing a study from the National Association of Manufacturers, points out that at a 65 ppb threshold for ozone, rural areas like Yellowstone and the Grand Canyon National Parks would fall into “non-attainment” of the new standard, and as much as over half the entire nation. This would lead, naturally, to job loss and economic turmoil, “making the proposal the most expensive regulation in U.S. history.”
Oil and gas development a boon to one Colorado community, whether or not the company’s investment pans out:
DE BEQUE — A natural gas project by Black Hills Exploration & Production in the De Beque area is involving some upfront investment risks by the company, but with the potential of large rewards for not only Black Hills but the region’s economy and tax base.
Whatever happens, the investment already is paying off for local farmers and ranchers, thanks to a pipeline and water pump station project that officials celebrated the completion of Friday. Black Hills paid for the $8 million project to help supply water for its hydraulic fracturing of wells, but most of the water will be used for irrigation, including by the town, which will reduce De Beque’s need to exercise its senior water rights at the expense of area ranchers.
The water project is an upfront investment that won’t fully pay off for Black Hills unless its De Beque drilling project proceeds to the development phase. But John Benton, vice president and general manager of Black Hills E&P, likes the fact that the company has built something of such value to the De Beque area no matter how its drilling project pans out.
“Regardless of whether we go forward or not with our program, it’s created something that will benefit the community for years to come,” he said.
If the project proceeds, Mesa County could see not only more jobs but an increased tax base.
Not all Colorado communities are filled with activists seeking to ban or otherwise hinder oil and gas development in their back yard:
A few years after a series of anti-oil-and-gas ordinances and ballot initiatives cascaded through several towns in Colorado, some local governments are speaking up in favor of the state’s multibillion-dollar energy industry.
In the last few months, trustees in the tiny town of Platteville in Weld County and commissioners from counties near Denver have signed letters and passed resolutions that speak in favor of the industry and its high-paying jobs.
“If there’s someone who comes in and wants to ban fracking, at that time we’ll vote on it,” Bonnie Dunston, Platteville’s mayor, told the Denver Business Journal.
“But we’re not going to ban fracking. Oil and gas does a lot for us, for our town, our community, and we’re just saying that we’re going to keep oil and gas going here in Platteville,” she said.
Douglas, Arapahoe, and Jefferson county officials have all recently either affirmed support for responsible development within the oil and gas industry or indicated their opposition to bans of any kind, according to DBJ. The officials noted that, while the counties did not see as much direct involvement within their borders compared to places like Weld County, many of their residents worked within the industry.
Filed under: CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, New Energy Economy, preferred energy, renewable energy, solar energy, wind energy
Unlike Colorado’s failed attempt to provide state oversight to proposed Environmental Protection Agency’s “Clean Power Plan” regulations, Kansas’ legislature has passed requirements for any CPP state implementation plan, including no plan at all, should it conflict with ongoing litigation against the EPA’s power to bring forth the CPP:
Kansas governor Sam Brownback (R) signed a bill setting parameters for how the state complies with the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed Clean Power Plan.
The bill, HB 2233, requires state agencies responsible for drafting a state implementation plan (SIP) to examine potential electricity rate impacts that may arise from complying with the EPA rule to address CO2 emissions from existing power plants. The law mandates that the Kansas Department of Health and Environment identify ways to avoid unreasonable costs under a best system of emissions reductions, which may include emissions trading or emissions averaging across the generation fleet. Brownback signed the bill into law on 28 May.
The law creates an oversight committee of state lawmakers that will track the progress of and vote on the SIP. The Clean Power Plan Implementation Study Committee will run from 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2017.
Like other states such as New Mexico, Kansas state agencies have called the EPA’s CPP into question, “citing concerns over its legality, federal overreach into grid reliability and a limited timeline for implementation.”
Those concerns have prompted Kansas to join other state attorneys general in legal challenges targeting EPA’s ability to bring forth regulations like those under the CPP:
Attorney general Derek Schmidt (R) is among 19 state attorneys general who have called on EPA to withdraw its proposed CO2 standards for new power plants, and the state is participating in two lawsuits challenging the Clean Power Plan proposal.
The new law allows state regulators to not submit a plan if the attorney general determines that such a plan would conflict with Kansas’ legal position in current or pending legal challenges against the rule.
In testifying for Colorado’s Electricity Consumers’ Protection Act (SB 258), attorney Mike Nasi outlined possible legal objections to the EPA’s proposed rules.
Colorado’s SB 258 would have tasked the Public Utilities Commission, with input from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, as well as approval from the state legislative body, with creating a CPP SIP for the state that considered costs and required a full, public, and deliberative process rather than unilateral executive agency rulemaking from CDPHE under the Governor John Hickenlooper’s direction.
With the defeat of the bill, Governor Hickenlooper announced that, unlike Kansas’ measured approach, Colorado would capitulate to the EPA’s CPP and push forward with state implementation.
Colorado environmentalists and renewable energy advocates enjoy touting other states’ efforts on issues including renewable energy standards and renewable subsidies.
But this year, Kansas modified its RES, making the mandate a “voluntary goal”:
Kansas governor Sam Brownback (R) yesterday signed into law a bill converting the state’s renewable energy standard to a voluntary goal.
The bill, SB 91, replaces the state’s standard, which required 20pc renewable energy use by 2020, with a voluntary target on the same timetable. SB 91 also exempts existing renewable energy facilities in the state, mostly wind farms, from property taxes and gives new renewable energy facilities a 10-year property tax exemption.
Wind accounted for 21.7pc of Kansas’ generation mix in 2014, according to the American Wind Energy Association.
While the bill was supported by some state wind industry and business groups, environmentalists have criticized it, saying it should have at least called for a higher voluntary goal to give utilities “something to aspire to.”
In a free market, utilities and others involved with energy production will voluntarily move to where the market leads–they will “aspire to” serve their customers with an energy fuel mix that best suits the state’s and individual utility’s needs and consumer’s wants.
Government should not be picking energy or electricity winners and losers, and moving from a legal mandate to voluntary guidelines is a step in the right direction for free market energy, as is limiting a property tax exemption from permanent to a sunset at 10 years.
June 11 Colorado Energy Roundup–Battle brewing over possible Colorado mine closure; Rep. Polis keeps options open on anti-fracking ballot measures
Filed under: Archive, CDPHE, Environmental Protection Agency, Hydraulic Fracturing, Legislation, New Energy Economy, renewable energy, solar energy, wind energy
New Belgium Brewing Company has long touted its environmental sensitivity as part of its corporate culture and marketing–featuring its commitment to sustainability and other environmental goals prominently on its web page and in press releases and other materials.
But that support, and past funding of radical environmental groups, has drawn the ire of another Colorado business and its supporters on Colorado’s western slope, who face shutdown of the nearby Colowyo Coal Mine because of the exact policies fostered by their Front Range counterparts.
In other words, the brewery may have finally blown a (fat) tire on its way to greener pastures and killing fellow Colorado businesses and jobs:
Craig — Liquor stores and restaurants across Craig are pulling Colorado craft beers off their shelves due to the beer companies’ financial support to WildEarth Guardians, the environmental group that put Colowyo Coal Mine at risk of being shutdown.
Stockmen’s Liquor pulled 12 brands of beer — including New Belgium Brewery — because they are listed as WildEarth Guardians supporters.
“We pulled those beers because their support of WildEarth Guardians… who said their ultimate goal is to shut down coal mines,” said Lori Gillam, owner of Stockmen’s. “Craig is a coal mine town.”
WildEarth Guardians has a list of business supporters on its website, and New Belgium and Breckenridge Brewery are among their backers. Yet, after this story was published, the WildEarth Guardians removed the list of supporters off of its website. However, readers can view the cached website by clicking here.
Advised of the brewing Craig brouhaha over its support of WEG, New Belgium released this statement:
“At New Belgium Brewing, we support non-profit partners who advocate for healthy watersheds. Wild Earth Guardians first contacted New Belgium in 2008 seeking grant money for restoration projects along the Colorado River. We supported these efforts because Colorado businesses, residents and the environment are dependent upon sound water management,” according to the press release. “Specific to any work Wild Earth Guardians has done regarding the ColoWyo and Trapper mines, we were unaware of it at the time and that is outside the scope of our grant allocations. We have no further funding pending at this time.”
But this measured and somewhat distancing response strays from previous environmental forays for the company, who helped sponsor “Frack Free Colorado” and an anti-fracking rally in 2012, among other anti-fracking activities.
New Belgium started a political action committee in 2014 to help candidates it believed furthered environmental policies the company supported.
But this battle has just begun. More than 900 residents in northwest Colorado gathered to hear what the closure of the coal mine might mean:
U.S. District Court Judge R. Brooke Jackson gave the federal Office of Surface Mining 120 days to bring the permit into compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, a time frame that left company and state officials flabbergasted.
“I believe that public involvement and compliance with NEPA are fundamental to federal agencies like OSM making informed decisions concerning federal resources,” said Colorado Department of Natural Resources director Mike King on Monday in a statement.
“However, the court has provided an unrealistically short timeframe to remedy a complicated NEPA process; threatening a mine shut-down on a federal permitting decision that has been in place for eight years and that Colowyo has been implementing during that time is an unacceptable result,” he said.
King said the state is weighing legal options, including joining a Tri-State appeal of the judge’s order and request for a stay. If granted, a stay would allow the mine to remain open until the appeals process is concluded.
Without that, it’s possible the mine could be forced to close after 120 days, putting at risk the livelihoods of Colowyo’s 220 employees as well as the region’s locally owned businesses supported indirectly by the mine.
It was a lawsuit by WildEarth Guardians that prompted Judge Jackson’s May 8 decision.
Moffat County liquor store owner Lori Gillam told The Colorado Statesman that the brewing companies supported WildEarth Guardians have been removed from her store’s shelves.
“I have 12 holes on my shelves right now because of them supporting WildEarth Guardians,” Gillam told the Statesman.
“WildEarth Guardians has said they want to ban coal — they want it gone — and we’re a coal-mining town. It’s important for us to support the people who support us and not the people who want to destroy our community,” Gillam said.
We’ve included the entire list of WildEarth Guardians’ corporate supporters, in addition to the link above, in case the cached version is removed.
Despite Governor John Hickenlooper’s attempts to downplay any possible fracking measures on 2015 local ballots or the 2016 November election, Democratic Congressman Jared Polis (R-CO) has not sounded the death knell for any possible anti-fracking proposals in the near future, and given his position in sponsoring a large number of those scuttled in 2014, may have more of an influence than the governor:
Boulder Congressman Jared Polis, who backed the ballot proposals and then agreed to remove them a year ago, says it’s too early to say what might be proposed for the 2016 Colorado ballot.
“Given the pending Fort Collins and Longmont lawsuits that will hopefully confirm local authority to regulate fracking, and that we are 18 months out from the 2016 election, I can no more predict whether a ballot initiative is needed or would be viable in 2016 than I can predict who is going to win the World Series that year,” Polis told the Daily Camera. “But if the governor is clairvoyant, I’d love to schedule a trip to Vegas with him soon.”
Polis sees more uncertainty in the outcomes of the Fort Collins and Longmont appeals than we do. A Boulder County judge overturned Longmont’s fracking ban last July. A Larimer County judge overturned Fort Collins’ five-year fracking moratorium in August. Everywhere it has contested such community actions, the Colorado Oil & Gas Association has won, citing preemption by the state, which “fosters” oil and gas development by statute.
The Boulder Daily Camera editorial concludes that Hickenlooper’s “declaration of surrender” on fracking is, the editorial board hopes, “premature.”
Only a few people like Polis–who has the desire and the dollars to make ballot measures happen–know more about possible anti-fracking measures than the governor.
And for now, it appears the Congressman is keeping all options on the table.
WildEarth Guardians would like to thank the following businesses for generously supporting our work. If you would like to be added to our “Businesses for Guardians” webpage, please contact us today and learn how!
Advantage Energy Solutions, LLC, Corrales, New Mexico
Agua Fria Nursery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Altitude Salon, Englewood, Colorado
Andiamo!, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Arizona Cyclist, Tucson, Arizona
Arizona Nature Aquatics, Tucson, Arizona
Arizona Sonora Desert Museum, Tucson, Arizona
Ark Bookstore, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Armendaris Ranch, New Mexico
Armstrong McCall Of Albuquerque, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Arrows and Eskers, Los Angeles, CA
Art For Transformation, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Artichoke Café, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Asian Adobe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Asian Palate, Buena Vista, Colorado
Aspen Websites, Colorado Springs, Colorado
Atrisco Café and Bar, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Ava Morris Pottery, Tesuque, New Mexico
Avanyu At La Posada, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Aveda – Rachel Thompson, Denver, Colorado
Aveda Park Meadows, Littleton, Colorado
Aventouras, Evergreen, Colorado
Avery Brewing Co, Boulder, Colorado
Baca St Yoga, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bacco Trattoria & Mozzarella Bar, Boulder, Colorado
Bahti Indian Arts, Tucson, Arizona
Banfi Vintners, Glen Head, New York
Bank of the West, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Barb’s Frame of Mind, Tucson, Arizona
Baroness Wine Distributor, Denver, Colorado
Beadweaver, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bear Mountain Lodge, Silver City, New Mexico
Beauty & The Beads, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bellaluca Café Italiano, Truth or Consequence, New Mexico
Benihana, Denver, Colorado
Bernard Ewell Fine Arts Appraisals, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Betty’s Bath And Day Spa, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bhakti Chai, Boulder, Colorado
Big Sky Community Corporation, Big Sky, Montana
Bike Coop, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bike’n’sport, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bill’s European Auto Repair, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bioneers, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bioshield Paint Co, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bird’s Eye View GIS, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bishop’s Lodge, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bittersweet Designs, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Black Mesa Winery, Velarde, New Mexico
Black Range Lodge, Kingston, New Mexico
Blue Canyon Gallery, Magdalena, New Mexico
Blue Corn Café, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Blue Willow Restaurant, Tucson, Arizona
Chaine Pena Business Body
“We support WildEarth Guardians because we believe in a wild world that supports all wild creatures.” ~ Chaine Pena, Boutique Specialist and Yoga Teacher at BODY Santa Fe
BODY of Santa Fe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Bolder World, Boulder, Colorado
Bookworks, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Boulder Beer Company, Boulder, Colorado
Boulder Dushanbe Teahouse, Boulder, Colorado
Boulder Spa, Boulder, Colorado
Boulder Theater, Boulder, Colorado
Boulderado Hotel, Boulder, Colorado
Bounce Back Integrative Veterinary Rehabilitation, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Breckenridge Brewing Co, Denver, Colorado
Brian Cobble Etchings, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Briar Rose Bed And Breakfast, Boulder, Colorado
Bright Funds, San Francisco, California
Broken Saddle Riding Co, Cerrillos, New Mexico
Broken Spoke, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Brooklyn Pizza Company, Tucson, Arizona
Buffalo Thunder Resort, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Buglet Solar, Golden, Colorado
Bumble Bee’s Baja Grill, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Butterfly Thai Yoga, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cafe Cafe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Café Castro, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Café Dominic, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cafe Marcel, Tucson, Arizona
Cafe Pasqual’s, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Captain Marble, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cardrageous, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Caring Clinic, Boulder, Colorado
Carole LaRoche Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Casa Benavides, Taos, New Mexico
Casa De Brio Equestrian Center, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Casa De Estrellas, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Casa Natura, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Casa Nova, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cate Moses Public Relations, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Celestial Massage, Denver, Colorado
Celtic Jewelry, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Center For Contemporary Arts, Santa Fe, New Mexico
CG Higgins Confections, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Chapare, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Chapelle Street Casitas, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Charmed Planet Photography, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cheesecake Factory, Boulder, Colorado
Cherry Creek Shopping Center, Denver, Colorado
Chile Shop, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Chocolate Maven, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Chocolate Smith, Santa Fe, New Mexico
ChoLon, Denver, Colorado
Christine Loizeaux, Santa Barbara, California
Christy’s Sports, Denver, Colorado
Church of Satin, Tucson, Arizona
Cibolo Nature Center, Boerne, Texas
Cid’s Food Market, Taos, New Mexico
Circo Vino, Tucson, Arizona
City O’ City, Denver, Colorado
Clafoutis, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Claire Haye Gallery, Arroyo Seco, New Mexico
Clayworks, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cleopatra Café, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Collected Works Bookstore, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Colorado Ballet, Denver, Colorado
Colorado Hot Air Balloon, Dillon, Colorado
Colorado Wolf and Wildlife Center, Divide, Colorado
Comedy Works, Denver, Colorado
Common Era, Boulder and Denver, Colorado
Communications Infrastructure Inc., Stevensville, MT
Confluence Kayak, Denver, Colorado
Connolly Ranch, Napa, California
Conservation Photography, Fort Collins, Colorado
Contemporary Driftwood Furniture, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Corks The Wine Store, Denver, Colorado
Corrales Solar, Corrales, NM
Cosbar, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Costume Salon, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cottonwood Printing, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Counter Culture, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cowgirl Hall of Fame, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Creativity For Peace, Glorieta, New Mexico
Critters and Me, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cupcake Clothing, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Cupcakeology, La Vernia, Texas
Daily Grind, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Daisy Paw, Louisville, Colorado
Davis Therapeutic Massage, Denver, Colorado
DDC Freight Processing Outsourcing LLC, Evergreen, Colorado
Dean Allan Design, Denver, Colorado
Debbie DiCarlo, Richfield, Ohio
DecorAsian, Longmont, Colorado
Deer Hammer Distillery, Buena Vista, Colorado
Delectables, Tucson, Arizona
Dell Fox Jewelry, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Dennis Conner’s America’s Cup Experience, San Diego, California
Denver Bike Sharing, Denver, Colorado
Denver Botanic Gardens, Denver, Colorado
Denver Film Society, Denver, Colorado
Denver Museum of Science and Nature, Denver, Colorado
Denver Urban Homesteading, Denver, Colorado
Denver Zoological Foundation, Denver, Colorado
Desert Bloom Florist, Portsmouth, Rhode Island
Desert Dwellers, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Design Training Collaborative, Placitas, New Mexico
Dickey’s BBQ, Colorado Springs, Colorado
Dinner For Two, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Direct Power And Water Corporation, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Dirty Dawgs, Tucson, Arizona
Doodlets, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Dublin Square, San Diego, California
Durango & Silverton Narrow Gauge Railroad, Durango, Colorado
Durango Cyrus Café, Durango, Colorado
Dust in the Wind, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Dusty Dog Ranch, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Earthship Biotechture, Taos, New Mexico
East by Southwest, Durango, Colorado
Ecco Espresso Gelato, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Eddie Bauer First Ascent, Bellevue, Washington
Eden Medispa, Santa Fe, New Mexico
El Dorado Hotel & Spa, Santa Fe, New Mexico
El Farol, Santa Fe, New Mexico
El Meson, Santa Fe, New Mexico
El Meze, Taos, New Mexico
El Monte Sagrado, Taos, New Mexico
El Rancho De Las Golondrinas, Santa Fe, New Mexico
El Tesoro Cafe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Eldora Mountain Resort, Nederland, Colorado
Eldorado Country Pet, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Eldorado Physical Therapy, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Elevation Coffee, Taos, New Mexico
Emerald Earth, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Emily Branden Creations, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Envision, Boulder, Colorado
Eric Reinemann Artist, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Ernesto Mayans Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Eskimo Ski And Board Shop, Centennial, Colorado
eTown, Boulder, Colorado
Evolve Fitness, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Eye Candy Graphics, Denver, Colorado
Fair Wheel Bikes, Tucson, Arizona
Fair Laundromat, Tucson, Arizona
Far Flung Adventures, El Prado, New Mexico
Farfel’s Farm, Boulder, Colorado
Farina Pizzeria and Wine Bar, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Fast Frames of LoDo, Denver, Colorado
Fat Tire Cycles, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Feathered Friends, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Findley Lake Nature Center, Findley Lake, New York
Fine Art Framers, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Firebusters, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Flagstaff Sports Exchange, Flagstaff, Arizona
Food Conspiracy Co-op, Tucson, Arizona
Foreign Traders, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Foundation For Deep Ecology, San Francisco, California
Four Seasons Encantado Resort, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Four Star Tattoo, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Fourth World Cottage Industry, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Frame of Mind, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Frame Shop of Boulder, Boulder, Colorado
Frog Works, Littleton, Colorado
Fuego Baseball of the Pecos League, Houston, Texas
Gaiam Living, Boulder, Colorado
Gale Gotto Fine Art Photography, Golden, Colorado
Galloway Images, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Garcia St. Books, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Gathering Of the Nations Miss Indian World, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Gauchezco Vineyards, Mendoza, Argentina
Gearing Up!, Taos, New Mexico
Gelato Benissimo, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Ghost Ranch, Abiquiu, New Mexico
Gila House Hotel/ Gallery 400, Silver City, New Mexico
Glacier Club, Durango, Colorado
Glenna Goodacre Studios, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Gold Hill Inn, Boulder, Colorado
Goodman Realty Group, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Gorge Bar and Grill, Taos, New Mexico
Grand Imperial Hotel, Silverton, Colorado
Grand Rabbits Toy Shoppe, Boulder, Colorado
Great Divide Brewing Co, Denver, Colorado
Great Frame Up, Boulder, Colorado
Great Old Broads For Wilderness, Durango, Colorado
Great Southwest Adventures, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Gregory Sellars Window Cleaning, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Grove Market & Café, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Guadalupe Café, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Guadalupano Imports, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Gulf Restoration Network, New Orleans, Louisiana
Gypsy Jewel, Boulder, Colorado
Haagen Dazs, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Hacienda Nicholas, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Hair, Mind And Body, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Haircut Place, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Hapa Sushi Grill & Sake Bar, Boulder, Colorado
Harbor Court Hotel, San Francisco, California
Harp of the Spirit, Los Alamos, New Mexico
Harry’s RoadHouse, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Hazel & Dewey, Denver, Colorado
Heart Gallery of New Mexico, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Heath Concerts, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Herb Store, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Herbs Etc., Santa Fe, New Mexico
Heritage Hotels And Resorts, Albuquerque, New Mexico
High Desert Healthcare & Massage, Santa Fe, New Mexico
High Desert Arts, Santa Fe, New Mexico
High Finance Restaurant, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Hiland Frames, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Himalayas Restaurant, Boulder, Colorado
Holland Marketing—Out of Africa, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Holly In Hanoi, Boulder, Colorado
Hotel Santa Fe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
House of Commons Tea Room, Denver, Colorado
Houston Wholesale Cars LLC, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Hutton Broadcasting, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Hydro Flask, Bend, Oregon
Ice House Lodge, Telluride, Colorado
Il Piatto, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Ima Glass Studio, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Imbibe, Albuquerque, New Mexico
In Transit, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Incana Designs, Santa Fe, New Mexico
India Palace, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Inn And Spa At Loretto, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Inn At Cherry Creek, Denver, Colorado
Inn At Sunrise Springs, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Inn of The Anasazi, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Inn on the Alameda, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Insight Construction, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Insituto De Ecologia Unam, Mexico
I-Scoot, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Isleta Eagle Golf Course, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Jack Hadley Music, Boulder, Colorado
Jackson Hole Conservaton Alliance, Jackson, Wyoming
Jambo Café, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Jazzercise, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Jemez Springs Bath House, Jemez Springs, New Mexico
Jess Alford Photography, Tijeras, New Mexico
Jewel Mark, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Jinja Bar & Bistro, Santa Fe, New Mexico
John Fielder’s Colorado, Denver, Colorado
Jon Paul Gallery, S. Lake Tahoe, California
Joni Bilderback, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Joseph Thomas Colorado Images, Colorado
Kanon Collective, Denver, Colorado
Kathy Olshefsky, Artist, Lamy, New Mexico
Katydid Books and Music, Jerome, Arizona
Kelli Brown, Artist, San Antonio, Texas
Kendall Mountain Café, Silverton, Colorado
Keshi, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Keva Juice, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Keystone Prairie Dogs, Auburn, Washington
Kimpton Hotels, San Francisco, California
Kioti, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Kip’s Grill & Cantina, Pagosa Springs, Colorado
Kokopelli Rafting Adventure, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Kristen Olsen, Artist, Denver, Colorado
La Boca, Santa Fe, New Mexico
La Casa Sena, Santa Fe, New Mexico
La Cocina de Luz, Telluride, Colorado
LaKind Dental Group, Santa Fe, New Mexico
La Mesa of Santa Fe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
La Montañita Coop, Albuquerque, New Mexico
La Posada, Santa Fe, New Mexico
La Siringitu Cafe, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Lara Nickel, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Laroche Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Larry’s Hats and Antiques, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Lars Strong, Artist, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Late Nite Grafix, Inc., Santa Fe, New Mexico
Laughing Lizard Inn and Cafe, Jemez, New Mexico
Lawrene Huff, Artist, Kamogawa-Shi
Le Bon Voyage, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Leanin Tree Museum, Boulder, Colorado
Lensic Performing Arts Center, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Lexus of Albuquerque, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Linson’s Design Source, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Liquid Light Glass, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Living Light Gallery, Taos, New Mexico
Los Poblanos Organics, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Los Rios River Runners, Taos, New Mexico
Lucille’s, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Lumenscapes, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Lyric Brick Company, Jamestown, Colorado
Madame M’s Enchanted Parlor, Taos, New Mexico
Mandrill’s Gym, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Manitou and Pike’s Peak Railway Co., Manitou Springs, Colorado
Maria’s New Mexican Kitchen, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Marja Custom Catering, Santa Fe, New Mexico
“We support WildEarth Guardians because we believe in protecting New Mexico’s wild animals and the Rio Grande.” ~ Mark Gonzales, Mark Pardo Salon Spa in Albuquerque
Mark Pardo Salon Spa, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Mark White Fine Art, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Marsello Brushwork, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Massage Therapist Debra Kopp, Boulder, Colorado
Massage Therapist – Valerie Baldovi, Colorado Springs, Colorado
Masterful Mosaics, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Mavrick Lobe, Massage, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Maya, Santa Fe, New Mexico
McGuckin Hardware, Boulder, Colorado
Mediterranean Restaurant, Boulder, Colorado
Mercury Cafe, Denver, Colorado
Mercury Framing, Boulder, Colorado
Michael Thomas Coffee Roasters, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Millicent Rogers Museum, Taos, New Mexico
Mira, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Mojave West, Sausalito, California
Mouthfuls, Denver, Colorado
Museum Hill Café, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Nancy Bazar, Artist, Seattle, Washington
Nancy Brown Custom Jeweler, Santa Fe, New Mexico
National Association of Broadcasters, Washington, DC
National Distributing Company, Albuquerque, New Mexico
National Ecological Observation Network, Boulder, Colorado
Nature’s Own, Boulder, Colorado
Nevad Wier, Santa Fe, New Mexico
New Belgium Brewing Company, Fort Collins, Colorado
New Mexico Biopark Society, Albuquerque, New Mexico
New Mexico Family Chiropractic, Santa Fe, New Mexico
New Mexico Technet, Albuquerque, New Mexico
New Planet Beer Co, Boulder, Colorado
New Rochester Hotel, Durango, Colorado
New Sheridan Hotel, Telluride, Colorado
New York Deli, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Night Sky Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Nila Bindu Jewelry, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Ohori’s Coffee Roasters, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Ojo Caliente Mineral Springs Resort, Ojo Caliente, New Mexico
Ojo Sarco Pottery, Chamisal, New Mexico
Old Wood, Las Vegas, New Mexico
Origins, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Orlando’s New Mexican Café, Taos, New Mexico
Osprey Packs, Cortez, Colorado
Osuna Nursery And Greenhouses, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Ouray Meyers, Artist, Taos, New Mexico
Outdoor Divas, Boulder, Colorado
Outside Magazine, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Paige Barton Jewelry, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Paley Center For Media, New York, New York
Pamela Wilson, Occupational Therapist, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Pamoja Project, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Pantry Restaurant, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Parlour Salon, Denver, Colorado
Parts Unknown, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Pasta Jays, Boulder, Colorado
Patagonia, Denver, Colorado
Patagonia, Reno, NV
Paws & Claws Pet Salons, Tucson, Arizona
Payne’s Nurseries, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Peaceful Paws For Dogs, Boyceville, Wisconsin
Peas ‘n’ Pod, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Pecos Valley Grassfed Beef, Ribera, New Mexico
Penny Weights, New Canaan, Connecticut
Pepper Pod Restaurant, Hudson, Colorado
Petco, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Peter Noom Carpentry, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Peyote Bird, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Peyton Wright Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Phantom Canyon Brewing Co., Colorado Springs, Colorado
Photo Eye Books And Prints, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Pierpont Cabinets, Lamy, New Mexico
Pink Fog Studies, Glendale, Colorado
Pizza Centro, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Pizzaria Espiritu, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Planetarium At SF Community College, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Plants of the Southwest, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Plant Trees 4 Life, Aspen, Colorado
Posters of Santa Fe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Potomac Garage Solutions, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Prairie Dog Glass, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Pranzo Italian Grill, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Proscape Landscape Management, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Prost Brewing, Denver, Colorado
Purple Adobe Lavendar Farm, Abiquiu, New Mexico
Purple Sage, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Pyramid Cafe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
R. Mole Sculpture, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Rancho De San Juan, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Ray Rafiti Photography, Fort Collins, Colorado
RC Bicycles, Tucson, Arizona
Re-Threads, Taos, New Mexico
REI Boulder, Boulder, Colorado
REI Santa Fe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Rift Gallery, Rinconada, New Mexico
Rioja, Denver, Colorado
Riverbend Hot Springs, Truth or Consequences, New Mexico
Rock, Paper, Scissors Spa, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Rodeo Plaza Flowers, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Rooftop Pizzaria, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Root Down, Denver, Colorado
Rosebud Video Productions, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Running Hub, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Sacred Geology, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Salon Del Mar, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Salsa Rueda, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Saltanah Dancers, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Sam’s No 3 Diner, Denver, Colorado
Samuel Design Group, Santa Fe, New Mexico
San Francisco Street Bar & Grill, Santa Fe, New Mexico
San Isidro Permaculture, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Sanctuary, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Sanctuary Home, Denver, Colorado
Sandra Rhodes Crafts, New Haven, Connecticut
Santa Fe Baking Company, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Bar And Grill, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Basket Company, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Brewing Company, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Candle, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Computerworks, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Dry Goods, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Film Festival, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Hemp, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Massage, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Mountain Adventures LLC, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Pedicabs, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Permaculture, Inc, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Opera, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Reporter, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Stoneworks, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santa Fe Sun Monthly, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Santacafe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Schaffner Press, Tucson, Arizona
Scheinbaum & Russek Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Second Street Brewery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Secret River Design, Washington DC
Sense Clothing, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Serac Adventure Films, Boulder, Colorado
Seventh Ray Skin Care, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Shake Foundation, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Shevek & Co. Restaurant, Silver City, New Mexico
Shiloh Pet Supply, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Sierra Grande Lodge, Truth or Consequences, New Mexico
Silver Gate Lodging, Silver Gate, Montana
Silver Sun, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Silverton Mountain, Silverton, Colorado
Silver Sea Jewelry, Tucson, Arizona
Sister Hawk, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Six Directions Gallery, Taos, New Mexico
Ska Brewing, Durango, Colorado
Sky Bar, Tucson, Arizona
Smith Family Garden Luau, Kapaa, Hawaii
Smith Optics, Ketchum, Idaho
Snooze SouthGlenn, Centennial, Colorado
SOL Lingerie, Denver, Colorado
SOSF Bike Tours, San Francisco, California
Southern Colorado Repertory Theatre, Trinidad, Colorado
Southern Wine & Spirits of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Southwest Airlines Co, Dallas, Texas
Southwest Nordic Center, Taos, New Mexico
Spa Namaste, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Spears Horn Architects, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Sprouts Farmer’s Market, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Sputnik, Denver, Colorado
Square Root Salon, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Squeaky Clean Car Wash, Santa Fe, New Mexico
St. Julien Hotel, Boulder, Colorado
Stanley Hotel, Estes Park, Colorado
Starbucks, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Stella Luna, Taos, New Mexico
Stephanie Huerta, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Steve Wong, Dream Analysis, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Steven Lemle, Artist, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Stone Age Climbing Gym, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Stone Forest Inc, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Stray Dog Cantina, Taos, New Mexico
Studio Nia Santa Fe, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Studio Thrive Fitness, Denver, Colorado
Sweet Action Ice Cream, Denver, Colorado
Sweet Medicine Enterprises, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Sweetwater Harvest Kitchen, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Syrup, Denver, Colorado
Taj Mahal Cuisine of India, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Taos Fly Shop, Taos, New Mexico
Taos Inn, Taos, New Mexico
Taos Mesa Brewing, El Prado, New Mexico
Taos Pilates Studio, El Prado, New Mexico
Taos Pueblo Tourism, Taos, New Mexico
Taos Ski Valley, Taos, New Mexico
Tattered Covers, Denver, Colorado
Teahouse, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Teca Tu, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Telluride Brewing Company, Telluride, Colorado
Telluride Mountainfilm, Telluride, Colorado
Telluride Ski and Golf Club, Telluride, Colorado
Telluride Sports, Telluride, Colorado
Ten Thousand Waves, Santa Fe, New Mexico
10th Mountain Division Huts, Aspen, Colorado
Terra Bella, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Terra Flora, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Tesuque Glassworks, Tesuque, New Mexico
Thai Café, Santa Fe, New Mexico
The Barber’s Shop, Albuquerque, New Mexico
The Bike Coop, Albuquerque, New Mexico
The Book Stop, Tucson, Arizona
The Golden Eye, Santa Fe, New Mexico
The Lotus, Madrid, New Mexico
The MacSpa, Denver, Colorado
The Medwick Foundation, Tucson, Arizona
The Mining Exchange Hotel, Colorado Springs, Colorado
The Oxygen Spa, Silver Springs, Maryland
The Screen, Santa Fe, New Mexico
The Shed, Santa Fe, New Mexico
The Spanish Table, Santa Fe, New Mexico
The View Restaurant At The Historic Crags Lodge, Estes Park, Colorado
Theobroma Chocolatier, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Thirty Mile Resort, Lakewood, Colorado
Three Dog Bakery, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Thru the Lens, Durango, Colorado
Tia Sophia, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Tierra Hermosa Pottery & Supply, Taos, New Mexico
Tohono Chul Park, Tucson, Arizona
Tom Bihn, Seattle, Washington
Tony Bonanno Photography, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Tom Brady, Astrologer, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Tomasita’s, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Touched by Flowers, Vero Beach, Florida
Trader Joe’s, Santa Fe and Albuquerque, New Mexico
Trading Post Cafe, Ranchos De Taos, New Mexico
Tranquility Floatation Massage & Healing Center, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Trattoria Stella, Denver, Colorado
Travel Bug, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Tucson Herb Store, Tucson, Arizona
Tucson Thrift Shop, Tucson, Arizona
Twisted Pine Brewing Co, Boulder, Colorado
Uncharted Outposts, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Veda Spa & Salon, Denver, Colorado
Video Library, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Vinaigrette, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Vine Street Pub & Brewery, Denver, Colorado
Visa-LANB, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Vital Yoga, Denver, Colorado
Wallaroo Hat Company, Boulder, Colorado
Walnut Room, Denver, Colorado
Walter Burke Catering, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Wash Park Grille, Denver, Colorado
Watercourse Foods, Denver, Colorado
Westin Riverfront Resort & Spa, Avon, Colorado
Whole Foods, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Whoo’s Donuts, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Wild Animal Sanctuary, Keenesburg, Colorado
Wild Birds Unlimited, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Wild Earth Llama Adventures, Taos, New Mexico
Wild Faces Wild Places Photography
Wileyware, Seattle, Washington
William Matthews Gallery, Denver, Colorado
Wines Off Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado
Wingswest Birding Tours, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Wise Fool New Mexico, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Wolf Den Bed and Breakfast, Twin Lakes, Colorado
WolfHorse Outfitters, Gila and Aldo Leopold Wilderness, New Mexico
Woodhouse Day Spa, Denver, Colorado
Yin Yang Chinese Restaurant, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Yoganow, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Z2 Entertainment, Boulder, Colorado
Zaplin-Lampert Gallery, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Zen Dog Boutique, Denver, Colorado
Zia Diner, Santa Fe, New Mexico
Zoe Boutique, Tucson, Arizona
Zoe & Guido’s, Santa Fe, New Mexico