I was raised in a city that, for its reputation as one of the most polluted in the world, holds a rare treasure. It’s called el Desierto de los Leones, an amazing national park in the middle of Mexico City. I loved running into a beautiful forest of pines and finding refuge from my everyday problems. The only issue was that after running around for a couple of hours, my lungs felt the burn of smog from the industrial might of the city. It was a reminder that no matter how much I wanted to escape to the wilderness, the industrial age insisted on negatively affecting my health.

El Desierto de los Leones

In 1997, I decided to move to Durango, Colorado, because the mountains to the north of the city reminded me so much of my beloved Desierto. After a few months of hiking the amazing areas and wilderness that surround the Four Corners, a weird physical memory started coming back to me: the shortness of breath attributable not to physical exertion but to smog and ozone. I remember being absolutely shocked the first time I could not see Shiprock due to the smog being created by the San Juan Power Plant and the Four Corners power plant.

I was so sad to see such beautiful lands where few people live could become so polluted for the benefit of companies that do not even care about the communities that surround their power plants. Many of the Dine who live near power plants and the power lines that head toward Phoenix from these plants do not even have electricity. They suffer all the harm of pollution with none of the benefits.

Smog over Shiprock, Photo by Sam Green/Cortez Journal

While living in Durango, I saw people who suffered the most from these power plants put up a fight against the Desert Rock Power Station, another power plant planned for that area. Diné Care, Dooda Desert Rock and the San Juan Citizens Alliance, three small grassroots groups, stopped what the coal industry saw as a given in its tracks. They did this by direct action– organizing and advocating. Lori Goodman, Founder of Diné Care, and Mike Eisenfield, Organizer at San Juan Citizens Alliance, became heroes to me for standing up for the Latino community by fighting for our rights.

San Juan Generating Station

The majority of communities in Colorado who live near power plants are people of color and low-income. The fossil fuel industry has always found the way to build these plants near the least politically empowered communities. But the Latino community has been learning from our Dine brothers; we will no longer remain silent on what is happening in our neighborhoods. We will organize and make sure that our demands are heard– we do not want power plants in our communities.  
On November 9, 2015, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) will be hosting the first of several public hearings in Durango, Colorado. Mike Eisenfield and Lori Goodman will be testifying in support of the Clean Power Plan, which sets first-ever limits on carbon pollution from power plants. The public meetings are a great opportunity for us to support the Clean Power Plan, which improves the health of Latinos and all Coloradans. If you and your family live in or near Durango, I encourage you to join Mike and Lori at the hearing in hope that one day we gaze upon Shiprock with no smog surrounding it.

-Eddie

Conservation Colorado Expresses Support for Committee Passage of Oil and Gas Liability Bill

In response to the Colorado State House Health, Insurance, and Environment Committee’s passage of HB 1310, a bill to protect homeowners from damage caused by oil and gas drilling, Conservation Colorado Executive Director Pete Maysmith released the following statement:

There’s little doubt that oil and gas drilling is a heavy industrial activity with many impacts, especially when it occurs near schools or in residential areas. Most homeowners never imagined having to deal with these types of issues when they bought their homes in suburban areas. Adjacent homeowners have little to no say in when or where drilling happens, so it only makes sense that they be granted the right to seek compensation for any damage done to their homes. This bill provides that clarity, ensuring that homeowners can be compensated for any damages caused by oil and gas.

We’ve long looked for solutions that enable a better balance between energy development and public health and safety. This bill, along with a handful of others being heard this session, gets us further along that path.

More information on the bill and the issue can be found here:

• “Lawmaker seeks to make oil and gas companies liable for mistakes,” Fox 31 News, March 5, 2016

• “Coming Soon: Adams County” and “Coming Soon: Arapahoe County,” Conservation Colorado

• League of Oil and Gas Impacted Coloradans

Contact: Jessica Goad, Communications Director, 720-206-4235

###

For Immediate Release: March 24th, 2016

When Colorado’s Joint Budget Committee finalized the budget today, Republicans moved to effectively shut down the air quality program at the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, apparently as a form of protest against Governor John Hickenlooper’s work to ensure that Colorado leads the way on cutting carbon pollution in the Clean Power Plan.

In response, Conservation Colorado Executive Director Pete Maysmith released the following statement:

It is shocking that Republicans would take their blustery, ideological war against clean air protections to this level. As if it weren’t enough to stand in the way of cutting carbon pollution, they have now put the jobs of nearly 100 of our state’s public servants on the chopping block. This means that many sources of pollution that threaten Coloradans’ health will go unchecked.

We need only look to Flint, Michigan, to see what occurs when state public health agencies don’t have the funds to ensure that our drinking water is safe or our air is free of toxins. Just as those responsible for the crisis in Flint have begun to have their day of reckoning, so will these anti-science, anti-public health politicians who will apparently do anything to hold back progress.

On Tuesday, a motion to include the “personal services” and “operating” lines of the stationary sources program–accounting for 95.6 FTEs and $8.5 million–was denied on a party-line vote of 3-3. The Joint Budget Committee finalized the budget today, meaning that the long (budget) bill will not have these line items in it. So, CDPHE will not be able to access the funding it needs to enforce a variety of existing air quality standards and pollution controls.

Here are more details about what this means:  

– Far more issues are at stake than just the Clean Power Plan. The work that would be blocked includes the entirety of the stationary sources program (including the oil and gas section), compliance and enforcement, and the indoor air program.

– The line item covers more than half of the employees and work of CDPHE’s air pollution control division. These employees are largely responsible for permitting and inspections, so without them, the clean air program will be effectively shut down.

–  96 employees would be laid off by July 1st.

–  The state would be unable to issue any air permits to companies or conduct any inspections of stationary sources of air pollution.

–  If Colorado does not have have a functioning air quality agency, the EPA would most certainly step in and regulate.

Contact: Jessica Goad, Communications Director, 720-206-4235

For Immediate Release: May 2, 2016

Today the Colorado Supreme Court announced decisions in two cases regarding communities and how they interact with industrial oil and gas drilling (City of Fort Collins v. Colorado Oil and Gas Association and City of Longmont v. Colorado Oil and Gas Association). The Court ruled against both Fort Collins’ moratorium and Longmont’s ban on oil and gas drilling.

In response, Conservation Colorado Executive Director Pete Maysmith released the following statement:

We’re still evaluating the specifics of these decisions, and the Fort Collins decision appears to be particularly narrow. But, at first glance, they are disappointing.

We believe that good policy-making happens from the ground up and that local communities are best-suited to make decisions about what happens with oil and gas drilling within their borders. Local governments should have the ability to call a timeout on drilling in order to better understand its impacts and ensure safety and public health, just as they are allowed to do with other industries.

We will continue to stand with the communities that are being dramatically impacted by oil and gas drilling. Their concerns have not gone away with today’s rulings.

These decisions also show that the oil and gas industry’s threats of litigation are a hammer that the industry has no qualms about wielding against local governments if they decide to engage in land use planning. In order to combat this hammer, local governments must be empowered with better tools to protect their citizens from heavy industrial drilling.

Conservation Colorado filed an amicus brief in support of the City of Fort Collins’ appeal.

Contact: Jessica Goad, Communications Director, 720-206-4235

###

Today the Colorado Supreme Court announced decisions in two cases regarding communities and how they interact with industrial oil and gas drilling (City of Fort Collins v. Colorado Oil and Gas Association and City of Longmont v. Colorado Oil and Gas Association). The Court ruled against both Fort Collins’ moratorium and Longmont’s ban on oil and gas drilling.

In response, Conservation Colorado Executive Director Pete Maysmith released the following statement:

We’re still evaluating the specifics of these decisions, and the Fort Collins decision appears to be particularly narrow. But, at first glance, they are disappointing.

We believe that good policy-making happens from the ground up and that local communities are best-suited to make decisions about what happens with oil and gas drilling within their borders. Local governments should have the ability to call a timeout on drilling in order to better understand its impacts and ensure safety and public health, just as they are allowed to do with other industries.

We will continue to stand with the communities that are being dramatically impacted by oil and gas drilling. Their concerns have not gone away with today’s rulings.

These decisions also show that the oil and gas industry’s threats of litigation are a hammer that the industry has no qualms about wielding against local governments if they decide to engage in land use planning. In order to combat this hammer, local governments must be empowered with better tools to protect their citizens from heavy industrial drilling.

Conservation Colorado filed an amicus brief in support of the City of Fort Collins’ appeal.

###

For Immediate Release: May 2, 2016
Contact: Jessica Goad, Communications Director, 720-206-4235

Members of the Colorado state House State Affairs Committee this afternoon passed H.B. 1468, a bill to fix a loophole that allows oil and natural gas companies to write off a portion of their severance taxes. According to analysis by staff on the Joint Budget Committee, this loophole will cost Colorado taxpayers up to $100 million this year and $10-20 million per year in coming years.

In response, Conservation Colorado Executive Director Pete Maysmith released the following statement:

Our severance tax policy is woefully inadequate and lags behind other oil-and-gas producing states. We should be leading the nation in smart conservation measures, but having the lowest effective severance tax rate in the West is not cause for celebration. Without this loophole being closed, our effective severance tax rate will plunge even lower and communities will be significantly harmed.

We should not be known as the state that willfully allowed BP and other multinational oil companies to take money from our schoolkids, local communities, and infrastructure projects. Companies that want access to Colorado resources like oil and gas must be required to fairly compensate the people who live here.

I urge every member to support this bill, particularly legislators from oil-and gas producing districts whose constituents will directly feel the loss of millions of dollars in fiscal impacts if this loophole isn’t closed.

More information:

• An April 25th decision from the Colorado Supreme Court on a lawsuit brought by BP in 2005 found that oil and gas companies can write off their “capital costs,” or the “amount of money that an investor could have earned on a different investment of similar risk.”

• In other words, the Supreme Court found that oil and gas companies could write off theoretical expenses.

• Colorado already has the lowest effective severance tax rate in the West and the second-lowest overall oil and gas tax rate.

• This is in large part due to a separate severance tax provision that allows property taxes to be used as severance tax credits (the “ad valorem” provision).

• Companies are not required to pay any severance taxes on low-producing wells (also known as “stripper wells”).

• These tax credits have resulted in oil and gas companies in Weld County paying out $0 in severance taxes for four out of ten years from 2003-2013.

• The state Senate also heard a bill this afternoon (S.B. 218) that would allow the money owed this year to be paid back out of the general fund reserve (the “rainy day” account) before tapping funds for local governments and water projects. But a long-term fix is needed, which is the goal of H.B. 1468.

###

For Immediate Release: May 9th, 2016
Contact: Jessica Goad, Communications Director, 720-206-4235

For Immediate Release: May 12th, 2016                                                          
The Environmental Protection Agency today announced finalization of the first-ever nationwide standards for methane and hazardous air pollution from new sources of oil and gas development.

Methane traps more heat in the short term than carbon dioxide, and toxic chemicals from the oil and gas industry can make smog worse, trigger asthma attacks, and cause heart problems and even premature death.

According to the EPA, these standards will reduce 510,000 short tons of methane, 210,000 tons of volatile organic compounds, and 3,900 tons of air toxins in 2025. They are projected to result in $690 million in climate benefits, outweighing the costs.

In response, Colorado public health and environmental leaders made the following statements:

I’m proud that Colorado has led the way in developing policies to reduce waste and cut methane pollution from oil and gas operations, which have served as a national model and helped the EPA get to where it is today with these standards. People living in the oil and gas patch have a right to clean air, and these rules are an important step in that direction.  

With that said, there’s still more work to be done. In addition to new oil and gas wells, we must also take action to address the millions of tons of methane pollution already leaking into the air from existing oil and gas sources. Luckily, the Obama administration has committed to tackling this problem, and we stand ready to work with them in achieving this goal.

– Pete Maysmith, Conservation Colorado

The EPA rule to regulate new sources of methane pollution is a step in the right direction. Further including existing sources will protect our constituents from unhealthy air pollution associated with the methane and toxic chemicals emitted from existing oil and gas infrastructure and equipment, and protect us from the consequences of climate change that our cities and counties face on a daily basis.

– La Plata County Commissioner Gwen Lachelt, 505-469-0380

I want to be able to take my son out to play and experience the majestic beauty of Colorado, without worrying if the air he breathes is going to harm him. I want him to have a safe and stable future, in a safe and stable climate. As parents we have a moral obligation to fight for our children’s health, safety and well-being. Clean air to breathe and a livable climate are things that we take for granted every day, but they are quickly slipping away. These important new methane standards from the Obama administration are a crucial step to fighting pollution and providing a safe and secure climate for the future of our children.

– Anne Ekblad, mom and activist for Moms Clean Air Force, 970-481-3184

As a registered nurse working with kids who have asthma, allergies and respiratory illnesses, I see the impacts of poor air quality on kids everyday. I applaud the EPA for taking this essential step in reducing methane emissions and other toxins from new oil and gas sources. But truly meaningful action on methane can only come with management of both new and existing sources.

– Mikaila Gawryn, Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, 425-221-8039

Contact: Jessica Goad, Communications Director, 720-206-4235

###

Conservation Colorado today endorsed Initiative #75, the ballot measure entitled “Local Government Authority to Regulate Oil and Gas Development.”

Conservation Colorado Executive Director Pete Maysmith released the following statement:

We have long believed that local governments should have a say in decisions directly affecting their communities, including if, when, and how drilling occurs within their borders. We made our position clear when we fought for this commonsense policy during our work with the governor’s oil and gas task force, our involvement with the Fort Collins Supreme Court case, and our advocacy for similar bills in multiple legislative sessions. Since little progress has been made in these arenas, we believe there is tremendous merit in putting this measure on the ballot and letting the voters decide.

As oil and gas development creeps closer to homes and schools, it’s critical that we empower local governments to better balance energy development with public health and safety. We are proud to lend our support and resources to this effort.

The post Conservation Colorado Endorses Ballot Initiative #75 appeared first on Conservation CO.

For Immediate Release: July 29th, 2016

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management today released its final decision about the future of the spectacular Thompson Divide region. The agency has decided to fully cancel the 25 illegal oil and gas leases in the Thompson Divide, but has not added new stipulations to all of the 27 leases located outside of the Thompson Divide.

In response, Pete Maysmith, Executive Director of Conservation Colorado, released the following statement:

We’re pleased that the BLM has finally decided to cancel the illegal leases in the heart of the Thompson Divide. Drilling in this area would have put the area’s ranching and tourism economies at risk. However, all of the leased regions covered by BLM’s plan deserve protections for their incredible wildlife habitat, recreation value, and wild character. The plan fails to protect stunning places west of the Thompson Divide, like Mamm Peak and Battlement Mesa, that should be managed with a keen eye for their remarkable conservation values.

This decision also highlights the complete failure of leadership by Representative Scott Tipton. Rather than play the role of statesman and bring all sides to the table to broker a real compromise, Rep. Tipton has politicized the issue, ignored his constituents, and released draft legislation that was verbatim to previous proposals written by the oil and gas industry.

Contact: Jessica Goad, Communications Director, 720-206-4235

 ###

The post Conservation Colorado Statement on BLM’s Thompson Divide Decision appeared first on Conservation CO.

Colorado has long been a leader for the nation in finding policy solutions that strike the right balance between responsible energy development and protecting our clean air, clean water, and treasured lands.

Our state’s past innovation and opportunities for the future were recently highlighted at a panel that Conservation Colorado helped organize in collaboration with the University of Colorado Wirth Chair in Sustainable Development.  The full video can be seen here:

The panelists — Dan Grossman, National Director of State Programs, Environmental Defense Fund; Will Allison, Director of the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Dept. of Health and Environment; Patrick Von Bargen, Executive Director, Center for Methane Emissions Solutions; Dr. Tanya Heikkila, Professor, CU School of Public Affairs; Jim Armstrong, President, Apogee Scientific —  had three major takeaways:

1. Colorado’s methane regulations are good for the economy and the environment

One in three Americans lives in a county with oil and gas operations, and right now, methane is leaking from over a million oil and gas wells. That’s over 7 million metric tons of methane spilling into the air each year – enough gas to heat 5 million American homes (at a cost of over $1 billion in lost methane).

Methane is the primary component of natural gas, so wasting methane means losing money for oil and gas taxes and royalty revenues. Those lost funds would have supported education, infrastructure such as roads and bridges, and conservation efforts in areas directly affected by energy development. Curbing methane pollution is also critical because it is 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide in the first 20 years after its release, and is already responsible for a quarter of man-made climate change.

The good news is that cleaning up methane waste is a win-win. Oil and gas companies can benefit by bringing more natural gas to market, and entrepreneurs are breaking new ground and creating jobs in an ever-growing methane mitigation industry.

Addressing methane waste helps clean up our air. The same strategies used to cut methane will also help reduce ozone-forming pollutants and toxic emissions such as benzene, which threaten the health of those living closest to development. The Colorado methane rules will be critical to reducing ozone along the Front Range to comply with the new federal ozone standards. As Will Allison, Director, Air Pollution Control Division at the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment put it: 

“These [regulations] are a good step, but not the end game . . . the EPA recently lowered the health based ozone standard. This makes our challenges here on the Front Range all that much greater.”  

Regulations to plug methane leaks are supported by companies in the oil and gas industry. In fact, a recent study by the Center for Methane Emissions Solutions found that representatives from oil and gas companies overwhelmingly agreed that the benefits of Colorado’s regulations outweigh the costs. Companies capture lost product for additional income and reduce emissions without incurring significant costs.  Additionally, because of the required inspection schedule, the oil and gas companies have seen improved on-site safety and training for their employees.

2. There is need for more stringent federal regulations

Colorado can’t do it alone. No matter how strong Colorado’s air rules are, we’ll need our neighboring states to match our proactive approach in order to protect our air. As Dr. Tanya Heikkila, Professor at the CU School of Public Affairs, explained:

“We need to find better ways of engaging in productive dialogue and productive policy making [around climate change and methane], and I think Colorado has shown some leadership on this issue – we need to share our lessons beyond our state boundaries.”

Currently, both the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and Environmental Protection Agency are working to cut methane waste and pollution. The BLM has a “no waste” mandate and is responsible for ensuring a fair return to taxpayers when publicly-owned oil and natural gas minerals are developed. The EPA can address methane pollution on state and private lands, which will ensure we don’t leave any loopholes where development takes place.

As Dan Grossman, National Director of State Programs for Oil and Gas at the Environmental Defense Fund described:

“Our Colorado regulations are strong and are working well, but we need to continue to improve them.  What I see is a continuing circle of improvement in state and federal regulations so that we can get entire the oil and gas sector under a very cost effective regime that will reduce methane and VOCs across the country.” 

3. New technologies can help solve our problems

While hydraulic fracturing is a relatively new system, its widespread use has triggered a response from the industry for methane mitigation and new technologies to reduce pollution.

According to Jim Armstrong, President of Apogee Scientific, “We need have systems that can go out there and economically find larger ‘super emitters’ that may be one hundred times larger than the smaller leaks. We need uniform regulations.” Mr. Armstrong’s company, Apogee, specializes in a new mobile infrared technology that can detect emissions from up to 100 feet away.

And Patrick Von Bargen, Executive Director of the Center for Methane Emissions, discussed a new program through the Department of Energy which has funded research and development on monitoring systems. Their target is to reduce the cost of monitoring leaks by a factor of ten, which will be cost effective and available commercially in two to three years. These new technologies can provide breakthroughs with an enormous reduction of cost.

Colorado’s forward-thinking work on our state rules has provided a model for the nation, and we have proven that methane rules can coexist with responsible energy development. But there is more work to be done, and we need to fight to make it happen.

The post The Future of Methane in Colorado appeared first on Conservation CO.

In response to the Colorado Secretary of State’s announcement that two ballot measures addressing the harmful impacts of oil and gas development did not make this year’s ballot, Pete Maysmith, Executive Director of Conservation Colorado, released the following statement:

This is not the end of this fight. The underlying problems with oil and gas development that have led to these citizen-led efforts must be addressed. People who live in the oil and gas patches are worried and scared for their futures, and their struggles are not going to go away just because the oil and gas industry was able to crush a local, homegrown effort to fix them. The unprecedented spending of millions of dollars by out-of-state oil and gas companies to stifle our democratic process and to keep these initiatives off the ballot shows the extraordinary lengths that they are willing to go to in order to keep the people of Colorado from being able to vote on issues affecting their own state.

Without solutions, oil and gas issues will continue to fester, grassroots outrage will continue to grow, and the oil and gas industry will continue to lose its credibility. Conservation Colorado remains committed to working with and on behalf of communities that are suffering from the impacts of oil and gas development, and elevating their voices in the face of massive spending from one of the most powerful industries in the world.

The following impacts of oil and gas development in Colorado show just how desperately policy solutions are needed:

• Residential drilling is already an issue and more is coming soon in suburban areas. For example, 64 percent of Adams County is under lease or has had its mineral rights sold for oil and gas drilling.

• Local governments in Colorado have the ability to regulate and zone a variety of industries, so there is no reason that oil and gas should be exempt. Making oil and gas subject to local zoning just means they must play by the same rules as everyone else, and this “floor not a ceiling” standard for state preemption is consistent with how many of our federal environmental laws work.

• Homeowners have no ability to prevent oil and gas wells from being placed as close as 500 feet from their homes. Unlike local governments, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission does not provide public hearings before it sites oil and gas facilities in residential areas.

• The 2013 setback rules are rife with loopholes and suffer from a lack of enforcement. For example, before a multi-well facility can be placed within 1,000 feet of a home, the company must demonstrate that better alternatives are not available and the well is “as far as possible” from homes. However, the COGCC continually allows companies to disregard this requirement and allows multi-well facilities as close as 500 feet from homes.

• There is only a 1,000-foot setback requirement from school buildings which can be waived through a variance process. Colorado has no setback requirement from school playgrounds or athletic fields, and the COGCC allows wells just outside school property boundaries.

• Oil and gas companies caused 615 toxic oil and wastewater spills in Colorado in 2015, a rate of nearly two spills per day.

• Colorado’s severance tax is among the lowest in the U.S. Because of exemptions and loopholes, Colorado’s effective severance tax rate has been less than one percent. Wyoming has a six percent effective severance tax rate and, as a result, is able to provide free college tuition to its residents.

The post Conservation Colorado Statement on Oil and Gas Measures Falling Short of Making the Ballot appeared first on Conservation CO.

Recent campaign finance disclosures make clear what many have been speculating for a while now: the oil and gas industry is the driving force behind the ballot initiative that would make it harder for Colorado citizens to amend their own state constitution. Watergate’s “Deep Throat” informant taught Americans to follow the money, and in our new analysis, we did just that. We discovered that the paper trail of support for the “Raise the Bar” initiative leads directly to oil and gas companies and their front groups, and that oil and gas is by far the biggest financial backer of Raise the Bar.

At issue is Amendment 71, which would require 55 percent of voters to approve an initiative (rather than the current standard of 50 percent plus one). It would also force organizers to get petition signatures from two percent of voters in every state Senate district in order to get the measure on the ballot (the law currently stipulates that they must get five percent of the number of people who voted in the last election statewide).

Experts note that this would cost proponents of future ballot initiatives millions of dollars to run a campaign to put a measure on the ballot — prohibitively expensive for all but the biggest business interests. Recent citizen-led efforts to pass initiatives to regulate oil and gas activity are perhaps why the oil and gas industry is so interested in this change.

Our new analysis shows that as of the most recently available campaign finance documents, the oil and gas industry has given $1,711,300.00 of the $2,725,760.50 in contributions that the official Raise the Bar Issue Committee has received. That’s 63 percent of the contributions, making it the largest sponsor of the initiative (the remainder being real estate, banks, investment companies, and others). Click here to see the data.

The majority of that money is from a $1 million donation that a group called “Protecting Colorado’s Environment, Economy, and Energy” gave on September 8th. This is an oil and gas front group supported by millions of dollars in from Anadarko and Noble Energy, two out-of-state oil companies. It has played a major role in oil and gas issues in Colorado since its establishment in 2014, with one of its major accomplishments being a campaign to keep two measures to strengthen restrictions on oil and gas drilling off the ballot earlier this year. And the group recently wrote that being able to stop commonsense oil and gas measures is one of the three top reasons to support Amendment 71.

Importantly, our analysis does not include the additional money that Protecting Colorado is spending directly on Amendment 71 (rather than giving it to the “Raise the Bar” Issue Committee). Currently Protecting Colorado has $2.8 million cash on hand, and it has changed its primary purpose to include support of Amendment 71.

In another twist, it is worth noting that Coloradans for Responsible Energy Development — the oil and gas “education” organization that runs seemingly non-stop advertisements about the benefits of fracking — has given $501,109 to Protecting Colorado thus far this year.

A number of important policy changes have been enacted by citizens in Colorado with use of ballot measures, from  minimum wage laws to marijuana legalization. There are already numerous “checks” in place to ensure policy proposals are supported by voters from across the state, including the very vote on the ballot on election day.

In the end, as the Denver Post put it, “citizens liberal, moderate and conservative would soon come to hate” the provisions of Amendment 71. The interests that are for restricting the rights of citizens to change their own constitution are the same ones who would have the money and resources to change it in the future — and that’s just not right.  

We will update this post as more campaign finance data become available.

The post With $1.7 Million in Donations, the Oil and Gas Industry Has Given 63 Percent of the Contributions to “Raise the Bar” appeared first on Conservation CO.

The post What a Trump Presidency Means for Colorado’s Environment — and How We’re Fighting Back appeared first on Conservation CO.

For Immediate Release: March 24th, 2016

When Colorado’s Joint Budget Committee finalized the budget today, Republicans moved to effectively shut down the air quality program at the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, apparently as a form of protest against Governor John Hickenlooper’s work to ensure that Colorado leads the way on cutting carbon pollution in the Clean Power Plan.

In response, Conservation Colorado Executive Director Pete Maysmith released the following statement:

It is shocking that Republicans would take their blustery, ideological war against clean air protections to this level. As if it weren’t enough to stand in the way of cutting carbon pollution, they have now put the jobs of nearly 100 of our state’s public servants on the chopping block. This means that many sources of pollution that threaten Coloradans’ health will go unchecked.

We need only look to Flint, Michigan, to see what occurs when state public health agencies don’t have the funds to ensure that our drinking water is safe or our air is free of toxins. Just as those responsible for the crisis in Flint have begun to have their day of reckoning, so will these anti-science, anti-public health politicians who will apparently do anything to hold back progress.

On Tuesday, a motion to include the “personal services” and “operating” lines of the stationary sources program–accounting for 95.6 FTEs and $8.5 million–was denied on a party-line vote of 3-3. The Joint Budget Committee finalized the budget today, meaning that the long (budget) bill will not have these line items in it. So, CDPHE will not be able to access the funding it needs to enforce a variety of existing air quality standards and pollution controls.

Here are more details about what this means:  

– Far more issues are at stake than just the Clean Power Plan. The work that would be blocked includes the entirety of the stationary sources program (including the oil and gas section), compliance and enforcement, and the indoor air program.

– The line item covers more than half of the employees and work of CDPHE’s air pollution control division. These employees are largely responsible for permitting and inspections, so without them, the clean air program will be effectively shut down.

–  96 employees would be laid off by July 1st.

–  The state would be unable to issue any air permits to companies or conduct any inspections of stationary sources of air pollution.

–  If Colorado does not have have a functioning air quality agency, the EPA would most certainly step in and regulate.

Contact: Jessica Goad, Communications Director, 720-206-4235

The post Republican Legislators Move to Shut Down Colorado’s Clean Air Program, Lay Off 96 Workers appeared first on Conservation CO.

Conservation Colorado Executive Director Pete Maysmith made the following comments about President-elect Donald Trump’s cabinet nominees:

Scott Pruitt for Environmental Protection Agency Administrator

“It is extremely disconcerting to hear that President-elect Trump has nominated a climate denier to lead the EPA. His record of putting profits ahead of people is crosswise with Colorado’s commitment to a clean future. We urge Senators Cory Gardner and Michael Bennet to vote against this reckless nominee and instead prioritize the health of Colorado’s air, land, water, and people.”

Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers for Secretary of Interior

“There are several red flags in Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers‘ record that raise serious questions about her vision for our public lands and cultural heritage:

• Co-sponsoring and voting against protections for national parks and monuments by attempting to undermine the Antiquities Act, which has created some of Colorado’s most cherished landmarks including Dinosaur National Monument, Great Sand Dunes National Park, and Browns Canyon National Monument.
• Co-sponsoring a bill to sell off millions of acres of public lands
• Refusing to accept climate science, stating that she is “still learning” about climate change
• Continued antipathy towards the Endangered Species Act, which has been a critical factor in driving protections for Colorado’s sage grouse populations
• Taking $355,340 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry over her career
• Her lifetime score of 4 percent on the League of Conservation Voters’ National Environmental Scorecard

Governor Rick Perry for Department of Energy

“We are also incredibly concerned about his prioritization of fossil energy over clean renewable technologies. Colorado is home to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and is a leader in cleantech research and industry, which have supported myriad jobs and economic development in our state. We need a Secretary of Energy who embraces the inevitability of a clean energy future rather than someone who wants to hamper these booming industries and take us backward.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

The post Reactions to Trump Cabinet Nominees appeared first on Conservation CO.

This year holds a lot of promise, in spite of a disappointing start to 2017 for environmental issues on the federal level, with President-elect Trump’s nomination of several very concerning cabinet nominees.

But the election has not changed what we plan to do here in Colorado. We will still work to clean up our air, make our water use more efficient, protect our public lands, and ensure that every person in Colorado lives in a healthy environment. We are prepared to fight even harder to make change on the state level to protect Colorado’s air, land, water, and communities.

One of the most important places we can make change on the state level is in our legislature, which convenes on Wednesday, January 11th. Little changed in the balance of the state legislature this year except that the conservation majority in the state House grew and is now 37 Democrats and 28 Republicans (the state Senate is comprised of 18 Republicans and 17 Democrats).

Conservation Colorado has four main areas where we want to see change — and we have reason to be optimistic for each of these in the upcoming year. These priorities reflect the fact that Coloradans care deeply about our way of life. For example, the Conservation in the West poll found that 89% of Colorado voters cite a “healthy, outdoor lifestyle” as a key reason they live in the state, higher than quality of public schools or taxes.

Here are four important places where we could make major progress this year through the state legislature and other ongoing efforts:

1. Making change the Colorado way — by leading the nation and creating clean energy jobs.

Colorado often charts its own path, especially when it comes to energy and the environment. For example, we were the first state to have a voter-approved renewable energy standard back in 2004. We passed groundbreaking rules to control methane pollution three years ago, and last year we were the first state to designate our own Public Lands Day. In the face of intransigence from Congress and President, it’s more important than ever that we continue this legacy of leading the nation.

This means we will fight to have the cleanest air in the nation and to make sure that our clean tech sector thrives. We plan to help ensure that communities in rural Colorado are economically diversified, especially those that have been historically dependent on resources like coal. We know the renewable energy sector can be a big source of jobs — 62,000 of them, in fact — and we want to see that job growth continue while keeping our air clean.

We must also fight against any attacks on Colorado’s right to decide what is best for our state. This also means we will defend against any attacks on Colorado’s right to choose our own path that come from the Trump administration, such as throwing our lands open to drilling or rolling back critical environmental laws like the Endangered Species Act.

2. Preparing for the future: transportation and growth

Colorado’s population is set to double from 2000 levels by 2050. We need to prepare now for the coming growth and influx of people to our state. We must make sure there is enough water to go around; that safety, traffic, and public transportation are vastly improved; and that there are plenty of protected open lands for future generations to enjoy.

In 2017, there’s huge potential for success. We’re currently working with a large coalition on a transportation package. In addition to the needed funding for repairing roads and bridges, we’re asking for major investments in improving transit, walking, and biking options. A strong commitment to improving this infrastructure now will pay off in making our cities more accessible and our air cleaner in the future.

We’re going to be working on transportation and growth in several other ways. In 2016, the state legislature helped make Colorado the best state in the nation to buy an electric vehicle with improved tax credits. Now we must make sure it is the best state to drive an electric vehicle by investing in charging stations and other infrastructure.

3. Protecting the health of our children

Our children are our future. They are also one of the most susceptible populations to environmental pollution, whether that is polluted air or tainted water.

Especially in low-income communities, which in Colorado are often dominated by a racial or ethnic minority group, children much higher chances of suffering from asthma or other diseases related to pollution. Every child has a right to live in a healthy community, and we must take every action possible to protect our kids.

Specifically, this means we are going to work to ensure that oil and gas infrastructure does not encroach on our communities, which can damage air and water quality in our neighborhoods. We will also work to defend the gains we’ve made on clean air and clean energy, considering that children are one of the most susceptible populations to air pollution.

4. Preventing waste and pollution: Using our resources sustainably

We can’t take our natural resources for granted, and we must use what we have carefully. That means ensuring that they are not wasted — whether that is energy lost on its way from the power plants to our homes and businesses or water that could have been used more efficiently. We must also ensure that the natural resources we have are clean and pristine, and not polluted by accidents or thoughtlessness.

We’ll do this by fighting to hold industry accountable, especially for activities like mining where the waste can affect the health of people nearby. We’ll work to cut down on waste in our energy infrastructure as well as water systems.

All in all, we’re feeling optimistic about this year’s legislative session. There’s a lot we can do on the state level to protect our environment, and Colorado is poised to lead the way for the nation. We are looking forward to making progress with champions on both sides of the aisle to protect what we love about Colorado: our way of life.

The post Our Four Priorities for the Colorado Legislature in 2017 appeared first on Conservation CO.