|
|
Thursday, April 3, 2008
|
|
| |
Greg Laden's Blog: "You know about giardia. Giardia intestinalis. It causes a nasty gut infection, and you get it by drinking water pretty much anywhere in the US (potentially). It is very hard to get rid of.
"Giardia adapt to immune system attacks (of their host) in a way that passes that adaptation down to their offspring without genes. It is a Lamarkian process. Giardia have no mitochondria, yet many of the genes known to be in mitochondria in eukaryotes are found in the giardian nucleus. So, ancestral giardia probably had mitochondria, but all those genes got transferred over to the nucleus."
Category: Colorado Water
9:12:34 PM 
|
|
Userland servers are down again. They're the hosting service for Coyote Gulch. We're having the same problems upstreaming as yesterday. If you're seeing this things are clearing up.
1:26:08 PM
|
|
Here's a recap of last night's comment open house for Colorado Springs' proposed Southern Delivery System, according to The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
Puebloans had plenty to say about the Southern Delivery System, but many felt the opportunity to express their concerns to the Bureau of Reclamation was watered down. "It's a sham," said Pueblo City Councilman Ray Aguilera. "It's a way for the federal government to avoid answering questions." Aguilera was referring to the open house format chosen by Reclamation to gather public comments on a proposal by Colorado Springs, Fountain, Security and Pueblo West to construct a pipeline from Pueblo Dam to meet future water needs. Reclamation is hosting the open houses throughout the region, and they continue from 6 to 9 p.m. today at the Koshare Indian Museum, 115 W. 18th St., La Junta. Public comments will help shape the environmental impact statement required for the project.
Aguilera was frustrated because Reclamation officials indicated at a meeting last month that the open houses would be the proper place to raise concerns. Aguilera said he favors Colorado Springs taking water from the Arkansas River east of the confluence of Fountain Creek to ensure water quality, and he would like to see flood control on Fountain Creek addressed by the SDS evaluation. "Yes, the water Colorado Springs has belongs to them, but the land to transport that water belongs to us," Aguilera said. "Colorado Springs always seems to think their needs are greater than anyone else's." Councilman Randy Thurston said he too was surprised by the format of the open house, but as the evening drew on - Thurston was one of the last to leave - he appreciated the style of the meeting. "I would have rather seen a presentation, but this worked well," Thurston said. "You had experts who were available to work with people."[...]
Part of the problem was that most of the 125 people who attended the open house came shortly before or after it began at 6 p.m. at the Sangre de Cristo Arts & Conference Center. The result was a high ratio of public to experts. "What we wanted to do was get the individuals involved and solicit comments to collect information," said Kara Lamb, public information officer for Reclamation. She said the comment process is important because past scoping meetings in 2003 and alternatives roundtables in 2005 shaped the criteria and alternatives for the EIS. "Public comment is a driving force in the process," Lamb said. "People want a place to express their emotions, but we're looking for technical comments to get a good study." Ray Petros, Pueblo County's land-use attorney, said the detailed studies produced by Reclamation, available on the Web site, are not readily accessible for most people. "They should be more user-friendly, to explain the impacts," Petros said. "They should compare all the alternatives to existing conditions and give a better qualitative description of the project."
Meanwhile, the Pueblo Board of Water Works, which has signed an intergovernmental agreement which supports SDS, still has concerns about technical details which apparently are not addressed in the draft EIS, but were raised at alternatives meetings in 2005, said Terry Book, water board director of operations. The water board is concerned there is not physical capacity at the joint use manifold, where water is drawn from Pueblo Dam, to support SDS and all of the other uses. Pueblo has a contract to eventually use three-fourths of the capacity of the manifold, while the Fountain Valley Authority, Pueblo West and the proposed Arkansas Valley Conduit share the rest. SDS would increase the use of the manifold by 40 percent, which could be done by changing valves within the dam, Book said. Even with that, there could be diminished head pressure and gravity flows in Pueblo's supply lines depending on configurations. "Our contract with the bureau gives us guarantees, and that's our leverage," Book said.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here.
Category: Colorado Water
7:41:32 AM
|
|
We sat down with Kara Lamb and Peter Soeth last Friday to get the scoop on the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel from Reclamation's point of view. As a result of the news coverage Reclamation has been cast as a non-responsive government bureaucracy, one of "The Three Stooges," unconcerned with the safety of people living below the LMDT and the damage a blow out would cause to the Arkansas River fishery.
As is often the case Ms. Lamb and Mr. Soeth paint a different picture. Mr. Soeth writes, in email, "Reclamation does not have any data that indicates there is a risk at this time but since there are concerns raised by the residents there, Reclamation is proceeding to address those concerns." Their view is that Reclamation has managed the LMDT responsibly, periodically inspecting conditions of the tunnel (No one has been in the tunnel since 1959), constructing bulkheads, reviewing available data on flows to the LMDT, installing a warning system and monitoring wells. They coordinate with Lake County emergency personnel regarding notification and evacuation and test the system periodically to make sure that it is operable. The question asked by both representatives of Reclamation was, "What has changed," in the LMDT, that sparked the disaster declaration in early February from the Lake County Commissioners?
Reclamation is not sitting on their hands however. They're working on a new risk assessment, begun in November 2007, to get a snapshot of the tunnel today, to determine the risk to the tunnel. For example, the factor of safety, using slope stability analysis, of the slope immediately above the portal, under certain conditions, in the LMDT is higher (1.6) than the requirement for Reclamation embankment dam projects (1.5). The risk assessment should expand on this an will be available publicly as it is finished. They are coordinating their efforts with the EPA, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and Lake County. The key piece of information right now is what caused the author of the EPA letter in November, signed by Regional Administrator Robbie Robert, to raise the blow out alarm? Reclamation thinks that it may be from a Reclamation report from the 70's. The possibility of a blow out was listed in one part of the report but a section later on explained why that was not of high concern.
All 3 agencies met last October with Lake County officials to share data and discuss the rising water level behind the blockage. Everyone was focussed on lowering the water level in the Leadville Mining District, all sides agreed that the Lake County Commissioners should petition the feds to authorize more work and fund it. Flooding in the Village at East Fork was mentioned during an October meeting of the Board of Commissioners, however, there was no urgency communicated regarding a blow out. The blow out scenario was not shared by the groups when they met in October, nor is it laid out in Reclamation's studies of the problem. It would seem that the politicians involved manufactured the emergency to grease the wheels of action. That worked like a charm.
Reclamation was surprised by the disaster declaration on February 13th. State Senator Tom Wiens' letter to Governor Ritter states, "Your direct involvement is necessary because the Bureau is refusing to adequately address this urgent situation." He goes on to describe the potential for a blow out and compare the situation to that of the Teton Dam failure in Idaho, adding, "The Teton Dam was also owned and operated by the Bureau." At Teton it can be argued that Reclamation went ahead with a project ignoring the geologic cross-section at the dam location. At LMDT there is no indication that Reclamation is ignoring warnings or that the data shows something that they are missing. In fact, they are committing resources to the risk assessment and testing the warning system. They also tested the treatment plant to be sure that they can handle additional water as it is delivered by the EPA.
The collapse in the glacial moraine is in the first part of the tunnel behind the two bulkheads. The blockage is somewhere near the Pendry fault. Water is flowing through and along the fault. Reclamation has constructed 2 bulkheads in the first part of the tunnel. The first was installed in 1978, the second in 1991, with large cobbles and gravel in between. Designed to keep water moving in the tunnel the second bulkhead consists of a steel and wood lattice interlaced with steel reinforcement. In other words, Reclamation wants the tunnel to continue draining the area as long as water flows through it. Mr. Soeth added that the LMDT is in a perfect location to intercept the natural flow of groundwater in the area. Analysis of the water from the LMDT indicates that most of the water treated is groundwater not water from the mine pool, according to an EPA report. Couple that with the geology of the area around the collapse, and increased precipitation for the last couple of years, and you have a partial explanation for the increase in the quality of water moving to treatment. Reclamation disclaims the notion that they should have been keeping the tunnel in good repair. They maintain that their responsibility is the treatment of the water flowing from the tunnel. Funding through the budget process has been adequate over the years to maintain operations, they said.
Dye tests performed by the EPA failed to conclusively show water moving from the superfund site through the LMDT. The rise in water level in that part of the site can also be due to EPA water collection efforts around exposed mine tailings and the volume of water being treated in the other treatment plant, operated by Newmont Mining Corporation, that is treating water from the Yak Tunnel in California Gulch. In all, varying head pressures in area monitoring wells, tortured geology in places, faults and groundwater intrusion all add to the unknowns about the LMDT.
The problem of jurisdiction is also confusing. Reclamation and the EPA have been operating under the assumption that the state of Colorado, through the Department of Public Health and Environment would eventually take ownership of all the federal facilities in and around the California Gulch superfund site. Colorado has been slow in moving. Reclamation is only responsible for the LMDT itself and the treatment of water from it. The EPA and various mining companies own the superfund site and its problems. Reclamation plans however to treat water on an emergency basis without waiting for enabling legislation. U.S. Representatives Udall and Lamborn have introduced legislation to give Reclamation ownership of the tunnel in perpetuity, as has U.S. Senator Ken Salazar. Reclamation has no comment on the legislation but will provide testimony when there is a hearing. Reclamation's perspective is that they will do what they are instructed to do by the Congress. They're currently working with the EPA on a long-term solution.
Leadville lost their liability insurance, motels lost some bookings, several real estate deals blew out. Below the tunnel some are sleeping soundly, others are not. Reclamation is continuing their risk assessment and the politicians have quieted a bit. Commissioner Ken Olsen is calling for the EPA to slow down a bit to do more dye tests and engineering. In a bit of irony he was also in a tug of war with the EPA. The agency plans to start pumping the LMDT, through an enlarged monitoring well, upstream of the blockage, with the pipeline crossing Mr. Olsen's business property. On Saturday, March 29th, it was reported that the Olsen's had backed off their claims for surface damages. Earlier this week Lake County Commissioner Michael Hickman called out the state in a letter to Governor Ritter writing, "Your agency designated to respond to this environmental emergency has yet to do so."
It looks like the state is going to throw some dough and expertise at draining the Leadville Mining District, according to The Pueblo Chieftain. From the article:
State officials are expected to announce a plan in the next day or so to pump water out of one of the tunnels threatening to flood parts of Leadville and contaminate sections of the Arkansas River. Evan Dreyer, press secretary for Gov. Bill Ritter, said Wednesday that the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment is nearing completion of a plan to drill into the collapsed Canterbury Tunnel just north of Leadville and pump water out of it.
Dreyer said that Jim Martin, executive director of the department, has been working on the situation since Lake County commissioners declared a state of emergency more than a month ago, which Ritter followed with his own executive order calling on the state to do whatever it could to assist. "Obviously money is an issue here, and trying to apportion appropriate responsibilities and appropriate dollars complicated all of this, but the department is working on that as well," Dreyer said. "It intends to have a quick resolution to that. I talked to Jim Martin (Wednesday) and I know that they're working on a plan that involves a dollar amount. I don't know exactly how much. I don't know specifically for what. There should be something on the table within a week. It might be ready (today)." Meanwhile, Sen. Tom Wiens, R-Castle Rock, managed to tack an amendment onto next year's $17.6 billion state budget that would earmark $2 million toward the Canterbury Tunnel drilling. That money, however, isn't a sure thing because while the Colorado Senate approved adding it to the budget, the House didn't when it reviewed the budget last week. And even if that money stays in, it only calls on the Colorado Department of Local Affairs to "consider as a high priority" granting the department the money to address the problem.
Wiens said he offered the amendment because he didn't believe the state was doing enough to address the problem. He said the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are making good on promises to pump and treat water from the contaminated Leadville tunnel, but the state has been coming up with excuses why it can't help. "The Canterbury Tunnel should have approximately 1,300 gallons a minute of water coming out, so we have that clean water coming down into the LMDT that constantly builds and builds and builds," Wiens said. "We are not going to be successful in avoiding a major environmental disaster unless we move forward on a multipronged approach that everyone agreed to do from the beginning. Unfortunately, that is not happening." Wiens read a letter to fellow senators in asking for the $2 million written by Lake County Commission Chairman Michael Hickman, who said the state was dragging its feet in addressing the problem. In that letter sent to Ritter on Tuesday, Hickman praised the EPA and bureau for quickly addressing the problem, but said the state public health department was intentionally doing nothing. "Your agency designated to respond to this environmental emergency has yet to do so," Hickman wrote. "Colorado water is at risk now, not in the future. If you turn your back at this crucial moment and the Lake County public water supply and the Arkansas River suffers damage, it will be on your leadership watch."
It's good to see the state involved with lowering the water levels in the mining district. Reclamation and the EPA have been expecting help and involvement for a while now. Coyote Gulch would caution that there is not consensus on the blow out danger that originally was the basis for the county disaster declaration.
More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.
Category: Colorado Water
7:29:51 AM
|
|
From The Pueblo Chieftain: "Local coal-bed methane producers are unhappy with a draft of the proposed new oil and gas rules released Monday, even though the document has been scaled down. Pioneer Natural Resources, a methane company and one of Las Animas County's biggest employers, said that while it's still too early to speak on the proposed rules set by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, the company agrees with comments made Monday by Meg Collins, Colorado Oil & Gas Association president."
More from the article:
The draft, designed to strike a balance between industry and the environment, would bring coal-bed methane well standards in line with certain San Juan Basin standards. Operators would have to try to find all plugged and abandoned wells within one-quarter mile of a proposed well and determine if the wells are at risk of leaking methane into water sources. They also would have to test the soil for methane and strictly monitor water wells within the one-quarter mile range. The new rules also would prohibit construction of oil and gas activities within 500 feet of drinking water sources, and five miles upstream from a public water supply intake.
Huerfano County has had several water concerns associated with coal-bed methane drilling. In June 2007, water wells in the River Ridge Ranch area became contaminated with the volatile gas. The state commission required coal-bed methane company Petroglyph to shut down all 56 of its methane wells in the area. Petroglyph is currently in the process of finding the source of the gas and removing it from the aquifer that supplies drinking water to residents. The company also is installing exterior strobe light alarms that will alert homeowners in River Ridge if it is not safe to enter their homes.
New wildlife standards proposed in the draft rules, while less extensive than originally proposed, would require companies to shut down for up to 90 days to protect wildlife habitat. However, the rule allows companies and surface owners to work with the commission or other state agencies to find an alternative to stopping production. Collins said the rules go far beyond the intent of the legislation approved by the Colorado Legislature last year. She said many of the concerns the association expressed to the commission remained in the draft, but in a different form...
The commission has scheduled a pre-hearing conference for May 15 in Denver.
Category: 2008 Presidential Election
7:06:13 AM
|
|
|
|
© Copyright
2008
John Orr.
Last update:
5/1/08; 7:36:31 AM.
|
|
|
