| |
|
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
|
|
Captain's Quarters: "The new Rasmussen poll out this morning shows Fred Thompson continuing to lead the GOP presidential primary race, 27%-24% over Rudy Giuliani. Rasmussen declares the contest 'stabilized', with Fred holding an advantage among conservatives...The rest of the crowd has all but disappeared. Mike Huckabee, who continues to impress in debates and on the stump, tops the second tier at 3%, with all other candidates only polling 4% combined. The race has settled to the four men at the top, but the others may remain in the race, hoping for a VP spot, if it doesn't go to whomever among the top four fails to win the nomination. Of those, Huckabee and Duncan Hunter appear to have the best chance of vying for a #2 slot."
"2008 pres"
6:44:13 PM 
|
|
From The Denver Business Journal: "Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter and Sen. Ken Salazar flew over natural gas-rich areas of the Western Slope in a helicopter Tuesday and renewed their calls for delays and partial bans on new drilling in the area.
"colorado water"
6:31:03 PM
|
|
From today's Denver Post, "Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is the Democratic Party's choice to chair the 2008 Democratic National Convention, officials announced Monday. Officials say the chairwoman and co-chairs are to preside over convention proceedings to 'ensure order, decorum and efficiency.'...In Pelosi, Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean has picked the first woman to become speaker of the House, a post she has used to try to remove U.S. troops from the war in Iraq."
"2008 pres"
6:25:22 AM
|
|
Funding to help clean up and move the uranium tailings pile near Moab is winding it's way through the U.S. Senate, according to The Deseret News. From the article:
Progress on a Senate spending bill has put $23.9 million for cleanup at the Moab Atlas Tailings Site closer to reality, according to Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah. The funding is among millions the Senate is appropriating for various projects. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved two spending bills Thursday that push numerous Utah projects a step close to completion. The bills still must be considered on the Senate floor and then differences between the House and Senate worked out before voting on a final version that will be sent to the president. Bennett, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the $23.9 million set aside for the Energy Department's work at the Moab site, on top of the fact that the department selected a contractor last week, is encouraging.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Here's an article that looks at uranium supplies, from EnergyBiz Magazine. They write:
Will nuclear energy's progression be slowed by an inability to get uranium to feed the reactors? Some say that underutilized mines have taken a toll and will lead to hardship. Others disagree, saying that the mines can gear up and the free market can respond to changing conditions. A recent study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology says that the nuclear industry has lived off commercial and government uranium inventories that are nearly depleted. Globally, uranium production now meets only 65 percent of current reactor requirements, which has led to uranium prices rising from $7 a pound in 2000 to as much as $120 per pound just recently...
Current demand throughout the world is met by accessing mines, using utility inventories and through new fuel efficiencies that make plants more productive. It's also met by decommissioning nuclear weapons. The United States, for example, gets about half its uranium from obsolete Russian nuclear missiles under a non-proliferation nuclear treaty called Megatons-to-Megawatts. That program ends in 2013. But fears of global warming and projected fuel shortages are propelling nuclear power forward after nearly three decades of sitting on the sidelines. Globally, the International Atomic Energy Agency is predicting as many as 100 new reactors in 20 years, causing the demand for uranium to rise 200 million pounds to 240 million pounds, annually. The agency says uranium resources are more than adequate to meet projected requirements. At the same time, newer technologies are emerging and may allow spent fuel to be re-processed and then re-used, all of which would prolong that time frame. And advanced breeder reactors that are expected to be commercially available within two decades are able to produce as much fuel as they consume. They, furthermore, use a different type of uranium than plants today and one that is far more prevalent. Much of the uranium used in this country is mined in Australia, Canada and Nambia while small amounts are derived in the western United States. But those foreign sources will also get fully tapped by other nations -- China, India and Russia -- with aggressive nuclear plans, says MIT. If the United States can even access those supplies, it will pay high prices. "The take-home message is that if we're going to increase the use of nuclear power, we need massive new investments in capacity to mine uranium and facilities to process it," says Neff.
Please be sure to read the whole article.
"2008 pres"
5:53:39 AM
|
|
Bump and update: Now this is a big deal. District 7 Water Court Judge Gregory G. Lyman sided with the plaintiffs in an action seeking to establish that groundwater wells, used in the production of coal-bed methane, should be regulated under the "Water Right and Determination and Administration Act of 1969." From the order, "...the Court reaches the unavoidable conclusion that non-exempted mineral-related activites, such as oil and gas activities, are subject to the scrutiny of state water law."
The order also states ruled that the use of the water wells in oil and gas production is a beneficial use, writing, "The Court finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact which prevents the Court from concluding that the pumping of water from the targeted aquifer in CBM [Coal bed methane] production is an application of a quantity of water to accomplish an intended purpose."
The court agreed that the CBM wells are wells [under the law] ("Well means any structure or device used for the purpose of with the effect of obtaining ground water for beneficial use from an aquifer."), that the water was "tributary" and that "material injury, quantity of water produced, and quality of water produced are...immaterial". In addition, the court ruled that, "the State Engineer cannot allow out-of-priotity water diversions for CBM without a well permit, and where necessary, a decree adjudicating an augmentation plan."
We'll see where this one ends up, we're sure there's a lot of court ahead. Here's a background article from The Durango Herald [Thanks for keeping the link alive!]. More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Email us at Coyote Gulch [AT] Mac [DOT] com and we'll send you a copy of the order. We haven't found it online yet.
From the press release from White & Jankowski LLP:
The District Court in and for Water Division 7 (the "Water Court"), one of seven courts in the state of Colorado charged with protecting Colorado's water users, issued an order on July 2, 2007, that will force the coalbed methane industry to comply with Colorado water law. For decades, the methane industry had refused to protect Colorado water users, and the Colorado State Engineer's Office, charged with water administration, had turned a blind eye to the situation. Jim and Terry Fitzgerald and Bill and Beth Vance, two families who have ranched in the Bayfield, Colorado, area for over 30 years, and whose ranching ways of life are dependent on the use of seeps and springs on their property, asked the court to declare the State's failure to protect their water right unlawful.
Thanks to water attorney Amy W. Beatie the heads up.
Here's the coverage from today's Denver Post. They write:
Attorneys representing the state engineer's office argued that water produced during coalbed methane production was a waste byproduct and subject only to Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission rules. BP America Production Co., which owns 1,200 coalbed methane wells in La Plata County in southwestern Colorado, supported the state's position...
Nate Strauch, a spokesman for the state attorney general's office, said the ruling was still being reviewed and it has not been decided whether to appeal. BP officials said they were also reviewing the court's decision. "The company will continue to comply with the state's water laws," said Dan Larson, a Denver-based BP spokesman. "This decision creates confusion over the application of those laws, and we trust the state will move quickly to clarify these issues," Larson said. Industry officials have said that a ruling for the plaintiffs would be detrimental for the energy industry. "Paying $200 for a well permit or the expense associated with an augmentation plan is hardly catastrophic for this industry," said Sarah Klahn, a Denver attorney representing the plaintiffs. "They're going to continue to get gas out of the ground. They're just going to do it in a way now that protects landowners."
"colorado water"
5:36:37 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2009 John Orr.
Last update: 3/15/09; 1:07:05 PM.
|
|
|
