Coyote Gulch

Friday, December 28, 2007

San Juans: Mercury pollution

The Mountain Studies Institute is reporting high levels of mercury in the San Juans, according to The Durango Herald. From the article:

High levels of mercury are falling in the San Juan Mountains, according to early results from a study. The Mountain Studies Institute reported the finding in its December newsletter. Mercury is a poisonous substance that comes from a variety of sources, including coal power plants. The institute, which has offices at Fort Lewis College and in Silverton, collected rain and snow on Molas Pass from April through November. Early results from the study show mercury concentrations ranging from 3 nanograms to 29 nanograms per liter. Readings of 12 nanograms per liter are considered high, while 6 nanograms are considered low, according to the institute...

No one has pinpointed the sources of local mercury pollution, but mercury can travel around the world before it settles in lakes. The Mountain Studies Institute also is studying the history of local mercury pollution, to see if there was a change when the New Mexico power plants went online. That analysis is not yet finished...As part of the study, the institute is testing zooplankton in mountain lakes. Those results should be available soon.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
"colorado water"
5:09:19 PM

? for President?
Political Wire: "A new Research 2000 poll in Iowa shows the Democratic presidential race is a virtual three-way tie, with John Edwards rising to tie Sen. Barack Obama for the lead and Sen. Hillary Clinton just one point behind. Edwards and Obama each get 29% support, with Clinton behind with 28%. On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee remains in the lead with a 7-point edge over Mitt Romney, 34% to 27%. Fred Thompson is a distant third with 11%, followed by a three-way tie for fourth between Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and Ron Paul, with 8% each."
"2008 pres"
4:52:52 PM

Energy policy: Coal

Here's a look at the problem of combustion waste from coal-fired power plants, from The Cortez Journal. They write:

[Raymond] Hunt's not upset about global warming or the pollutants that pour out of the [San Juan Generating Station's] smokestacks. He's mad about coal combustion wastes -- CCWs, as activists call them -- the solid remnants left over from burning coal. Hunt says they've sickened his family and neighbors, even killed his sheep. Each year, power plants in the United States collectively kick out enough of this stuff to fill a train of coal cars stretching from Manhattan to Los Angeles and back three and a half times. It's stored in lagoons next to power plants, buried in old coal mines and sometimes just piled up in the open. It is the largest waste stream of most power plants, and a recently released study by the Environmental Protection Agency found that people exposed to it have a much higher than average risk of getting cancer. Yet the federal government refuses to classify the waste as hazardous, and has dragged its feet on creating any nationally enforceable standards. And with new attention focused on coal power's impacts on the air, this great big problem may get worse, and continue to be ignored...

By the mid-1970s, the two plants together were cranking out nearly 4,000 megawatts of power and sending it to some 4 million homes in California, Nevada and Arizona. They spewed thousands of tons of particulates, sulfur dioxide and a host of other pollutants into the air. But that wouldn't last: New national air quality laws, paired with regional activism, forced the power companies to install pollution control devices so that, by the early 1980s, the plants' plumes had receded and the haze was reduced enough for the environmental community to breathe a sigh of relief. But because every pound of pollution kept out of the air ends up in the solid waste stream, the pollution control methods in the stacks only made the problem on the ground worse. The solid waste consists of fine and dusty fly ash, a gravelly, gray material called bottom ash, and the rela tively benign glassy clinkers or boiler slag. The stack scrubbers that pull sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide out of the smoke create perhaps the most malignant material, called scrubber sludge. All of that was typically piled up near the plant, where it could blow into the air, or get washed into an arroyo, or leach into the ground. In the early 1980s, people who lived along the Shumway Arroyo and drank from wells began getting sick. Hunt suffered from muscle spasms, lost 60 pounds and had a cornucopia of other problems. "I looked like a P.O.W. after World War II," Hunt says. His wife and kids got sick; his neighbors, too. Though Hunt's illness was never definitively traced to a specific cause, he and other activists are pretty sure some of the stuff in coal combustion waste made it into his water.

Around the time Hunt got sick, researchers found unusually high levels of selenium -- which tends to be highly concentrated in coal combustion waste -- in the Shumway Arroyo. And some of his symptoms match up with selenium poisoning. The illnesses may also come from lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury or sulfates, all of which are commonly concentrated in coal combustion waste. Whatever the poison, it soon became clear that the water was tainted. Those who were sick sued the Public Service Company of New Mexico, which operates the plant; the company never admitted fault, but ultimately settled with the affected families. It also tightened up its waste disposal, becoming one of the first power plants in the nation to go to a zero discharge permit, which means it can't release any water onto the land. After a lot of legal wrangling, Hunt settled, too. But the sheep butcher never settled down. He got mad, instead, and enlisted attorneys, a hydrologist and a handful of environmentalists to join his fight, which has spread outward from the one plant near his house, to the ways in which industry disposes of coal combustion wastes in general. And when he wants to show people another example of a giant disposal pit, he needn't travel far -- there's one right across the river. About five miles south of Hunt's place, a flat-topped mound spreads out under the soot-stained smokestacks of the Four Corners Power Plant, operated by Arizona Public Service. Unlike the beige, scrub-covered mesas nearby, this one's uniformly shaped; its dusty soil is gray and smooth, deep-orange water pools on its surface, and nothing grows here. That's because this isn't a mesa. It's some 40 years' worth of accumulated coal combustion waste -- somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 million tons -- from three of the plant's five generators (the other 50 million tons of waste is buried nearby, in the massive Navajo surface mine). For people who worry about coal combustion waste and the way it's regulated, this place is Exhibit A. "My first thought when I saw this," says Lisa Evans, an attorney for Earthjustice, "was, this can't be the United States." Except that it is. And, by all accounts, there's nothing about the massive pile that violates state or national guidelines. Therein lies the rub for folks like Evans and Jeff Stant, a consultant for the Clean Air Task Force and one of the nation's pre-eminent activists when it comes to CCWs.

Coal waste is clearly dangerous, they say, but the EPA refuses to treat it as hazardous waste. Instead, it falls under the rules for non-municipal, non-hazardous waste, which provide only general guidelines. The result is a hodgepodge of regulation that varies from state to state and even from one dumpsite to another at the same power plant. It's not that the EPA hasn't considered clamping down. In 2000, the agency determined the need for national regulation, acknowledging that "these wastes could pose risks to human health ... and there is sufficient evidence that adequate controls may not be in place." But seven years have passed, and the EPA hasn't followed through. That's in spite of the fact that its own research has found that placing CCWs in unlined ponds or piles can significantly increase health risks for those living nearby (and there are hundreds of unlined sites across the country); and in spite of the fact that the agency has confirmed at least 24 cases in which human or ecological health has been compromised by CCW dumping.
"2008 pres"
11:07:00 AM

Constitutional amendment to deal with ag water and growth?

Two Front Range men have hit on an amendment that may cool development on the dry side of Colorado, according to The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel. From the article:

In an attempt to limit growth and water use along the Eastern Slope, two Front Range men have drafted ballot language to cap the amount of new water local governments can allot for residential uses. Ballot language submitted to the Colorado Legislative Council last week would prohibit cities in nine counties, including Arapahoe, El Paso and Jefferson counties, from increasing residential water use by more than 1 percent a year from 2009 through 2012. "I think water is the best way to control growth on the Front Range, because people understand it," said Daniel Hayes, a Fort Collins resident and one of the measure's authors. Hayes said capping growth on the Front Range will make water grabs less likely and ensure that agricultural communities do not suffer from developers' lack of foresight. Under the constitutional amendment, local governments could not use water designated for agricultural uses without the approval of the Legislature and the governor. No organizations are backing Hayes' effort, but he said he has $50,000 available for a media campaign. Through those funds, he said, he hopes to garner the 76,047 voters' signatures needed for inclusion on the 2008 ballot.
"colorado water"
10:32:11 AM

Energy policy: Oil and gas

Here's a look at health issues and oil and gas development from The Rocky Mountain News. From the article:

Regulators from the Environmental Protection Agency down to state and local health departments are in the earliest stages of trying to understand what, if any, connection there is between complaints from rural residents about fatigue, headaches, rashes and other ills and fumes or tainted water resulting from drilling. "EPA hasn't gone out there to do much sampling, but from the data we're seeing, we're not seeing a smoking gun," said Susan Griffin, a Denver-based toxicologist with the agency, in an interview this fall. "That's just based on data we've received, and I think we could be doing a whole lot better." Mounting anecdotal evidence, however, has caught the attention of state lawmakers. New legislation calls for greater consultation between the state's Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and Colorado's Department of Public Health and Environment. A rulemaking process to spell out just how that would work is under way...

A recent Rocky Mountain News series reported that oil and gas companies have at times reached secret settlements with people complaining about contamination related to oil and gas impacts. Some of those cases include purchases of residents' homes and water wells. No one has tallied how many such settlements have occurred in Colorado, though one activist group counted at least five in Garfield County.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
"2008 pres"
10:25:15 AM

Tamarisk management

Tamarisk control is the subject of this article from The Colorado Springs Gazette. They write:

The Fountain Creek Vision Task Force, formed last year to examine ways of improving the polluted and eroded creek, is looking at how to deal with a massive infestation here. At a recent meeting, members learned there is more to it than just pulling weeds. "I don't think there's a way to stop it, but there's a way to control it," said E.Z. Zanghi, a representative of Kansas-based Top Cut Dirtworks, who gave members a presentation about his company's way of combating tamarisk...

In Colorado, it has driven out native cottonwoods along most major rivers and streams and occupies 45,000 acres. A report by the Grand Junctionbased Tamarisk Coalition, formed to combat the plant, said last year the Arkansas River is the most infested in the state. And two of its tributaries, Fountain Creek and the Huerfano River, have the most tamarisk of any tributaries in the state. The report said the Arkansas River and communities that depend on its water are losing 53,834 acre-feet of water -- more than 17 trillion gallons -- a year to tamarisk. A tamarisk plant can drink 24 gallons more a day than the average American uses in a day (176 gallons).

The coalition has identified several options for controlling tamarisk, none of them foolproof. Options range from cutting it to spraying chemicals to importing animals and even beetles to eat it. But tamarisk can regrow easily, even from a dead plant, so most methods require frequent monitoring and followup treatment. The cutting must often be done by hand because tamarisk lives in rugged stream-side environs. At the Fountain Creek task force meeting, Zanghi said his company uses a combination of techniques. The company has two spiderlike backhoes called "menzimunches," which move on mechanical legs and can reach areas other heavy machines can't, he said. They tear out the tamarisk and spray chemicals on the trunk right away. "You've probably got three minutes after you cut it," he said. "The sap automatically seals itself off. You can spray whatever you want, anything, and it will kill the top, but it won't make it down to the bottom of the trunk." They remove the dead tree immediately and burn it. "When you do this, tamarisk does not rebuild. They don't start reproducing because there is nothing left but pure white ash," he said...

Money remains the key issue. Tamarisk treatment is expensive, $800 an acre for tributaries and $1,000 or more for rivers, according to the Tamarisk Coalition. To remove the tamarisk on the Arkansas River alone would cost $45 million. El Paso County has been working for years to fight tamarisk along Fountain Creek, which mainly grows from Fountain to the south, said Mark Johnston, the county's natural resources manager. But much of the tamarisk-infested land is private property. Last year, the county offered a program to reimburse farmers for 50 percent of the cost of removing tamarisk, but only two took advantage of it. Fountain Creek Vision Task Force members said they would support a program to help landowners pay for removal, but they wouldn't want to mandate it. "It's not realistic and it's disrespectful to demand people spend $100,000," said board member Juniper Katz. Johnston said the county would consider expanding such programs next year, as well as increasing education for property owners on the impact of tamarisk.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
"colorado water"
10:19:27 AM

Snowpack

Here's a look at the early snowpack for the water year from The Fort Collins Coloradoan. They write:

The snow that fell on Fort Collins on Thursday pushed December snowfall to more than double the 30-year average, making it the eighth-snowiest December in 119 years. With 47 total inches of snow in the last two Decembers, 2006 and 2007 rank as the snowiest consecutive Decembers in the city's recorded weather history, said Nolan Doesken, state climatologist and Colorado State University senior research associate. December 2006 brought 29.3 inches of snow, the second most in recorded history...

This December has been one of the snowiest in history, but Fort Collins is only slightly above the average snowfall for the year. As of Thursday night, the city has had 22.3 inches of snow. The 30-year average is 20.1 inches. "We were falling quite below average until this series of moderate storms," Doesken said. December 1913 saw a record 40.3 inches of snow, but the years on either side of that - 3.3 inches in December 1912 and .8 inches in 1914 - were meager. At least 1 inch of snow has covered Fort Collins for 21 consecutive days, Doesken said..."This year we have only half as much water content in the snow as we did last year," Doesken said. "That's what determines how long (the snow) lasts."

More coverage from The Aspen Times "reg". They write: "This month is shaping up as the second snowiest December in Aspen since someone started keeping records in 1934. The official weather station at the Aspen Water Plant measured 57.5 inches of snowfall as of 8:30 a.m. Thursday. A snow-filled forecast for the last four days of December virtually guarantees this month will top the 58.30 inches that hit Aspen in December 1951. The record for the month is 72 inches in December 1983, according to city data. That record could be challenged with a little luck."

Here's a look at our old friend La Niña from The Colorado Daily. They write:

"The high pressure cells that typically develop over the eastern central Pacific Ocean during a La Niña phase appear to be setting up further to the north than in other such winters," [Klaus] Wolter said in a press release. This year's La Niña is also unusual for its timing: La Nina most often develops in the spring, Wolter said, but this one began in August. Boulder headed "into this winter a bit drier than its neighbors to the north and south," he said, and snowpack in other parts of the state was at about 10 percent of normal. But the recent chain of wet Pacific storms have rescued parts of the state from a dry fall. "We had a very dry November," said Mike Chamberlain, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in Grand Junction. "But this December is turning out to be the wettest on record, and we have not even finished the month."

La Niña might be effecting Steamboat Springs' snowfall. Here's an article about early winter snowpack from The Steamboat Springs Pilot & Today. They write:

Powder skiers won't believe it and snowblower operators won't want to hear it, but all of the snow that has fallen on the Yampa Valley this holiday week hasn't been enough. At least, it hasn't been enough to push the moisture contained in the accumulated snow to 100 percent of norms for Dec. 26. The Natural Resources Conservation Service is reporting that snowpack across the Yampa and White river drainages is 84 percent of average. That report comes in the midst of a period in which the Steamboat Ski Area has counted four feet of snow in the past week...

Longtime weather observer Art Judson said he has recorded 58.1 inches of snow this season at his measuring station between downtown Steamboat Springs and the ski area. The season total nearly doubled in the last six days, with 27.8 inches falling on his weather station, Judson said. Of that, 13.3 inches fell from Sunday through Tuesday. Close to home, the snowpack at 9,400 feet on the west side of Rabbit Ears Pass contains 8.1 inches of water, compared to a norm of 9.2 inches Dec. 26. At the 10,500-foot summit of Buffalo Pass, the Tower measuring site is reporting almost 12 inches of moisture, significantly less than the average of 19 inches. One of the stars of the early snowpack season in the Yampa Basin is the measuring site on the upper Elk River, which is reporting 6.7 inches of moisture -- 106 percent of average...

There is good news early this winter for people living downstream on the Rio Grande and Arkansas rivers, where basin snowpack is at 142 percent and 116 percent of average, respectively. The San Juan River has a good chance to funnel above-average water into Lake Powell this spring -- snowpack there is 135 percent of average. On Wolf Creek Summit, in the extreme southern Colorado Rockies, the snowpack contains 19.8 inches of water compared to the average of 13.5 inches for the date. The snowpack on Wolf Creek Summit typically peaks May 5, at 37.2 inches.

More snowpack news from The Crested Butte News. From the article:

This season Crested Butte received almost seven feet of snow in the first two weeks of December, more than many other places in the state. Almost another foot of snow has fallen in the second half of the month. The last comparable snowstorm in Crested Butte was in January 2005, when over eight feet fell in a two-week period. According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service's SNOTEL information, the snow water equivalent around the Gunnison Basin jumped from a meager 30 percent of average during the last week of November, to 130 percent of average immediately after the initial two-week storm cycle in December.

According to UGRWCD manager Frank Kugel, the Gunnison Basin snowpack has dropped a bit following the big storms, to 120 percent of average. Kugel says that is still good news for water users who will be relying on the snowpack to translate into a good spring runoff.
"colorado water"
10:02:21 AM

e-mail John: