Category Archives: Ozone pollution in Front Range

CO state regulatory agencies, COGCC, ECMC, Environmental damage from O&G, General Environmental Reference, Ozone pollution in Front Range, Polis administration, SB-181

STAR gets a stay: how a grassroots effort won the day…for now

1 Comment

As this blog reported earlier (“The fate of the Aurora Reservoir began today”, 11/20/25), the residential neighborhoods clustered around the southwestern corner of the Aurora Reservoir, containing several thousand residents, had banded together under the non-profit STAR — for Save The Aurora Reservoir.  Faced with the prospect since 2022 of over 100 wells being drilled by Crestone Energy within several miles of their community, STAR organized, campaigned, raised thousands of dollars in funding, and hired the best attorney in the state to argue their case  — Mike Foote, who helped write the law, SB19-181, under which this application was now to be judged by.

That law redefined the purpose for which the oil and gas industry is  regulated in Colorado. In 2019. When the law was passed, that regulatory agency was called the COGCC, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, which largely existed to “foster the industry.” Ever since it was created in the mid-20th century,  ostensibly, a “balanced” approach, on paper,  between the environment and development was supposed to be taken by the COGCC; but that was never the case in reality. SB19-181 changed that: the COGCC was renamed to the Energy Carbon Management Commission (ECMC) would by law prioritize protecting the health and safety of people and the environment above fostering the industry. Also mandated by the new law was the creation of a professional board of five commissioners, with a professional staff to support it, which would replace the previous volunteer board. However, as with many such laws, this qualitative rule was not backed up by any quantitative regulatory standard through which to evaluate the health and safety of people and the environment. Rather, it would depend solely on decisions that would be made by the five commissioners.

Would this new law really matter?

There was reason to doubt that the ECMC would take its new role seriously. It took some time before SB19-181 went into effect, due to the process by which a law which requires regulations gets translated into rules by which a regulatory agency interprets the law. It would take nearly two years for that to happen.

In the meantime, the COGCC continued to function, pretty much unchanged from its previous behavior of rubber stamping any new application for an O&G well. As far as I am aware, the COGCC never denied a single application, and it would allow 1,000 new O&G wells to get drilled each year since 2019. It really seemed like not much had changed.  Some say this has been due to the political influence under Governor Polis, elected in 2018, who has been favorably disposed to the O&G industry, judging by his actions. Under the Polis administration, around 5,000 new O&G wells have been drilled in the state, the majority of them in the Front Range, scattered from south Denver to the Pawnee Grasslands north of Greeley.

So even after the ECMC came into being in 2022, there did not seem to have been much of a change in how things worked in how the public at large was affected by the O&G industry in the field. Citizens who have been sickened in their homes from breathing polluted air created by fracking operations, or had the quality of their lives destroyed by the noise from drilling, or the increased truck traffic in their area, and have complained loudly as individuals to the COGCC, were ignored.

The citizens of STAR had been anxiously waiting for their day in court, so to speak, since this hearing began on November 20. Would their efforts to protect their community pay off? Or would this commission behave like its predecessor did, and merely rubber stamp what the industry wanted to do, as in the past? One can imagine their apprehension.

The way that the ECMC works under hearings like this now, in the era of the internet and Zoom technology, is under much more public scrutiny than in the past. These public hearings are announced in advance, with the Zoom link published to allow literally anyone to view the proceedings. There is literally no room to hide for the 5 ECMC commissioners — which the reason that SB19-181 was created. Before that law was passed, the COGCC functioned as a body appointed by the governor from within the ranks of state employees, already serving in other capacities. There were a total of around a dozen people, comprised of a mix of backgrounds, including the CDPHE (Colorado Dept of Public Health & Environment) and the CPW (Colorado Parks & Wildlife). However, their role in the COGCC was simply advisory, and decisions were made a simple majority; of course, the O&G appointees outnumber the rest. Although ostensibly a “balanced” board,  the COGCC clearly supported the industry throughout its history.

The Fateful Decision

ON THE DAY of the decision, Wednesday, December 10, I listened to the hearing itself…an arduous process…for about 45 minutes…but gave up at that point. Unless you were intimately knowledgeable with the case, the minutiae of detail was mindnumbing to follow. The meeting continued for another couple of hours.

Here is one screenshot, which pretty much conveys what the rest of the nearly 3 hr long meeting looked like:

ECMC commissioners address the STAR case

In this shot, Commissioner Brett Ackerman was speaking; each commissioner got their turn. He was quite articulate, speaking like a lawyer, and I recall him covering many detailed points. In particular, he pointed out how many emails he had received that were from the same form letter — which he said he did not consider very effective. He preferred to receive individually written letters, he said. Sounds like he does not know what activism looks like to most people.

In the end, I found out later, all the commissioners, except Commissioner Cross, who’s in the upper right in this screenshot, voted to stay the application from Crestone Energy.  This was definitely a win for STAR, and Mike Foote, their attorney; the only better decision would have been a denial of the application. What a stay means is that the applicant, Crestone Energy, must develop a new plan which, as the commissioners stipulated, needs to have less potential impacts on the Aurora community. It did not appear that the commissioners gave any indication of what a new application must adhere to; so, we the public, are still pretty much left in the dark as to what will eventually happen. Will Crestone’s lawyers hobnob with the commissioners, out of sight of the public? Who knows…

The head commissioner, Jeff Robbins, pictured at the upper left, pointed out that around 300 people had attended the Zoom meeting. They definitely took note of how many people were watching — and commented that this had been the most viewed hearing in the ECMC’s short history.

The Aftermath

The next day (12/11/25), this article appeared in the Colorado Sun:

Planned drill site near Aurora Reservoir delayed by state regulators in a win for neighborhood group

which said it all: STAR had won the day. But, boy, it had been a long time coming…

However, the story is not over; and it will depend on the new plan that Crestone Energy develops, and then proposes to the ECMC, likely sometime in 2026.

Stay tuned…

 

Air quality monitoring, APCD, AQCC, CDPHE, ECMC, Environmental damage from O&G, Local government (city & county), Ozone pollution in Front Range, SB-181, Weld County

“The need to transition off fossil fuels”…a LTE hits a home run!

Leave a comment

In case you missed it, there was an impressive event that happened recently with regard to environmental activism: a Letter To the Editor (LTE) about the danger of fossil fuels was published in three local papers  — Greeley Tribune; Loveland Reporter Herald, and Longmont Call Times — simultaneously! This is an unprecedented accomplishment, which deserves some recognition.

The author, Carol Hawkins, has been part of the Larimer Alliance for some time; and during that time, has sought a resolution to her situation, but has come round to the same grim realization of others in the community: until the state regulators of O&G see the light, and begin to limit the issuing of new drilling permits, local residents are almost powerless to stop them. All that SB-181 accomplished, it would seem, it to guarantee at least as 2,000 foot setback from any new well.

Below is Dr. Hawkins’ LTE, taken from the Greeley Tribune, 11/19/25:

Colorado faces a difficult choice, transition off fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy or continue to jeopardize our environment and health. Transition will cause economic and social disruption for workers and communities.  Any “just transition” requires solutions that mitigate the negative consequences while simultaneously eliminating the deadly pollution caused by burning fossil fuels.

I have lived in Weld County since purchasing my house in 2017. I lived in Maine at the time, near the end of an ”unexpected journey” watching my partner die from Alzheimer’s. I decided to move back to Colorado where I had family and a history of living in the state since the early 1970s. I wanted familiar surroundings. I searched online and found the perfect bungalow, my retirement home, in Ault, a rural town in a good location between Greeley and Fort Collins. I had no idea of the influx of fracking about to come. Shortly after moving, I received a forced pooling notice. I went from grief and PTSD to a sense of doom. Fracking! What did this mean for my quiet life and my health?

The facts about fracking and the impacts were easy to find, but fighting the frack hasn’t been easy. Weld County, otherwise known as “Welled” County, remains the most polluted and fracked in the state. My neighbors, many who work in oil and gas, are mostly working class, and others are first-time home owners looking for affordable housing or long-time residents. Local government is staffed by those who appear unaffected by fracking. When wells were drilled next to the Highland School campus, located in the middle of town, I called the Ault Town Office and Weld County Oil and Gas to question why the drilling was so close to the school when SB 181 called for 2,000-foot setbacks. The Ault Town Office said that they had no knowledge of drilling near the school, although it was happening just down the street, and the Weld County Oil and Gas Office laughed off my reference to SB 181 with the comment “those rules are easy to get around.” And I’ve come to learn that he is right. All you have to do is look at the loopholes. One is home rule, the other is reverse setbacks.

I then turned to the state and began to protest permits, but soon learned that state regulators and the governor support the fossil fuel industry. However, outside of Colorado, a global consensus calls for a “just transition” away from fossil fuels. The planet is heating, driven by greenhouse gases from extracting and burning fossil fuels like oil and fracked gas. Agreements from COP28 called for net-zero emissions by 2050.

Current research, developed by analyzing efforts toward a “just transition” around the world, provides principles that guide policy development: governmental support, dedicated funding streams, strong and diverse coalitions, and economic diversification to address the short-term impacts and long-term needs of workers and communities.

Colorado must come together around this framework of principles for a “just transition,” but the transition from fossil fuels to renewables will still disrupt existing economies, and some communities may face economic hardship due to the loss of jobs and tax revenue from the fossil fuel industry. However, we must make the hard choice to experience the gains from a clean energy economy and healthy environment.

Colorado’s current environmental damage and health impacts are not sustainable and challenge communities reliant on oil and gas to make the hard choice — we need a “just transition” off of fossil fuels. Stop the permits and clean up the mess while supporting displaced workers and disproportionately impacted communities, like Ault.

[Carol Hawkins is a retired English professor who moved back to Colorado from Maine in 2017. She was served a forced pooling notice in 2018 and has been part of the resistance to fracking ever since. Her focus centers on health impacts and damage to our environment, with a particular interest in health care and job training for displaced oil and gas workers, along with support for disproportionately impacted communities like hers in Ault. Dr Hawkins noted that all three papers are owned by a single company, which could be a factor in her LTE appearing in all three simultaneously.]

General Environmental Reference, Larimer County Commissioners, Local government (city & county), Ozone pollution in Front Range

The BOCC makes fateful decision about PRPA’s gas plant

2 Comments

There was a mighty display of direct confrontation between the local environmental community and the entrenched power structure around our local utility company, the Platte River Power Authority (PRPA), at a fateful meeting of the Larimer County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) on Monday, April 21, 2025. It is fair to say it was somewhat of a shootout, with each side firing its best arguments before the three attentive commissioners, attempting to persuade them of the merits of their case, and pointing out the weaknesses in the arguments of the opposing side. Not unlike the shootout at the OK Corral, one side or the other was going to win, a fight to the death, so to speak. The consequences of it will be felt for decades, and it was a telling moment for just how much the country commissioners are aligned with the transition to renewable energy.

The entire recording can be seen here

What was being debated was whether the BOCC should approve or deny the 1041 Permit for the PRPA to build a gas-fired power plant to supplement its generating capacity as it retires the coal burning part of the plant. That is the huge smokestack that you can see west of I-25 as you drive north towards Cheyenne.

If the gas plant is built, it will mean the PRPA will not be 100% fossil free in 2030, which was their original goal in 2018. Instead, PRPA will be relying on natural gas, i.e. methane, a notoriously potent greenhouse gas, for decades to come to assure its generating capacity. This would, I can only imagine, have the effect of blunting any push into using renewable technology to its utmost. This is particularly true of making use of virtual power plant technology, which the PRPA has kept under wraps, saying almost nothing how they intend to roll that out (more on that in future posts about how other utilities are using it).

The environmental community was not calling for an absolute denial of building the gas plant; they were only saying that the BOCC should get an independent opinion from an unbiased source, preferably NREL, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, to analyze this. Because the unfolding scenarios for how the utility industry is changing are so complex in the current times, it takes the expertise of such a reputable research facility to address the issue with confidence. Obviously, the environmental community was not trusting the analysis from PRPA, for reasons which made abundantly clear during their presentation.

Though I would normally not covera meeting in such detail, this was such an historic event it deserves it. So, here is how the meeting went down:

First, a PRPA attorney spoke for 15 minutes on their reasons why they believe the gas plant is needed. Then there was extended dialogue between the PRPA staff (primarily Jason Frisbie freely speaking his mind with no time limit) and the commissioners for about the next hour…while the public attendees waited their turn. (This is how things work at such public meetings: the incumbent party has the advantage of tiring out the public before they even get to speak.)

During the following public comment period, each speaker had just two minutes. There were a number who spoke in favor of the gas plant. So, after about an hour and 10 minutes, the first of the environmental contingent began to speak (about 1:39 into the meeting. Note that the meeting does not start until about 20 minutes into the recording.)

I could not attend in person, but did watch the meeting carefully via Zoom, and took these screenshots of those who spoke.

(Note: click an image to see an enlarged version)

First to speak was Mike Foote:

Mike Foote, attorney, speaking for NCP4CE

Mike’s comments mainly concerned that PRPA’s plan will violate the county’s Land Use Plan because of insufficient evaluation of its environmental impacts. It sure seemed pretty convincing to me!

Showing Rawhide generation by fuel source

This slide shows how the electricity generated by natural gas (PRPA does have gas-fired peaking units now), using PRPA’s own data, was sold outside its service area, and not locally needed. Another convincing point: since PRPA is covering its existing demand without gas, why is the gas plant needed?

Next was Barb Krupnik-Goldman: she addressed  ozone as as key concern, which reported on PRPA’s refusal to cooperate with requests to minimize current ozone production.

Ozone issues with PRPA

Next was Kevin Cross:

Analysis of ‘dark calm’ scenario

Kevin’s slides pointed out drawbacks in PRPA’s scenarios about renewable energy, which emphasized “dark calms” in winter months when it may not be able to provide sufficient electricity to meet demand.

As for ozone precursors, the Rawhide plant is, by far, the largest source of ozone precursors in the county:

Table of NOx emissions sources

Finally, the Sierra Club was represented by Doug Henderson, who roundly called out PRPA for not making a convincing case for investing $300 million in a new gas plant.

Screenshot

A major point of the environmental contingent was that PRPA’s own analysis showed that a new gas plant really wasn’t necessary.

During all this commentary, there was much commentary by the commissioners themselves, particularly Commissioner Kefalas, who asked many questions.

In hindsight, some of my colleagues and I wonder why the cost factor was hardly raised. Past estimates put the rate increase at 6 percent per year for 10 years; which, in the end, is around an 80% increase! We should be asking PRPA more detailed questions on anticipated rate increases as they move forward with this enormous project.

As I did not observe the entire meeting (it went on for over five hours) I cannot say exactly when the commissioners came to a final vote; but one of those who did was Kevin Cross, convenor of the Fort Collins Sustainability Group, who has been at the forefront of this battle from the beginning.

However, in the end, the decision was not satisfactory to the environmental community; I will post here the statement made the following morning by Kevin’s statement:

Good morning, CCLC and NCP4CE Member Representatives and Allies –

First, I want to thank everyone on these listservs who contributed toward our legal expenses to oppose the Platte River Power Authority’s gas plant application to Larimer County.  Altogether, we raised just under $22,700, which in turn is just shy of the amount we’ll need to pay our able attorney, Mike Foote, for his work to date.

I am sorry to report that the outcome of the continuation hearing last night was not great, despite a number of initial good questions and statements from the commissioners, in particular from John Kefalas and Jody Shadduck-McNally.  It was apparent from the outset that the commissioners were more interested in imposing “conditions of approval” rather than an outright denial of the application, as we were urging.  Conditions of approval could have included things that we would have been at least somewhat satisfied with, however, such as a limit on the generating capacity of the new plant and limits on when it could operate, e.g. on Ozone Alert days.

In the end, though, the conditions of approval were watered down to the point of being nearly meaningless.  The PRPA will need to prepare a couple of reports, one explaining how joining the Southwest Power Pool in 2026 will help them use more renewables, and one justifying their decision to build a 200 MW gas plant rather than a 160 MW gas plant – which would still be too big.  Limitations on operating hours and emissions were rejected by the PRPA, and the commissioners did not push back, despite, of course having he power to do so.  It wasn’t helpful that county staff was in full support of the proposal, and didn’t provide any support to those commissioners who may have wanted to take a firmer line.

I am anticipating that there will be stories on all this in both the Coloradoan and KUNC, and will share those with you all if and when they appear.  And – we are not “done” with our opposition to the gas plant yet, but it’s too early to talk about “next steps” yet.  I will let you all know when we’re ready to do that.

With appreciation for everyone’s support,

Kevin Cross

Board Member, Northern Colorado Alliance for a Livable Future

Air quality monitoring, APCD, CDPHE, CO state regulatory agencies, General Environmental Reference, Ozone pollution in Front Range

The APCD & CDPHE kick the ozone can down the road…

Leave a comment

As if we weren’t hearing enough bad news about the environment these days, the Air Pollution Control Division (APCD) announced through the proper channels of public obsfucation, the Regional Air Quality Council (RAQC — what, you never heard of them? Can’t imagine why that is..) that it wanted the EPA to take it easy on Colorado, and allow us a little more time to let us continue polluting our air at unhealthy levels because, well, we’re just not making any progress here.

Does that sound like a lame excuse to you? Sure does to me.

This was explained in this recent Colorado Sun article:

Colorado is giving up on near-term ozone improvements in favor of longer outlook

Though the details of what was being asked sound complicated, they’re not, really; these state offices basically asking for extensions on complying with the law on ozone air pollution.  Nothing new there.

So I won’t belabor the fact that Colorado has been out of ozone compliance for over 14 years, and that we have made precious little progress in that time.  But that’s not the only thing that bothered me about this article; what really bothers me is that the state still gets all of its data from oil and gas operators on pretty much the honor system from the O&G industry — which, I don’t know about you, does not inspire confidence in my belief in the data.

How do I know this? Because the article refers throughout to the “modeling” done by the state. As someone who had done his fair share of modeling in my time, the most crucial part of the models are their input data. And what are we modeling? The number of O&G wells and other O&G infrastructure.

Where does the state get their data? Well, from the O&G industry, of course. Do you think the O&G has any great incentive from the state to provide them with good data? Let me think about that….

Do you think the state has anywhere near sufficient inspectors to check on the timeliness and completeness of the data being supplied by the O&G industry?  That is a question I certainly do not have to think about; and can tell you with confidence that the answer is “No, they don’t.”

So, when the state says they are “modeling” the emissions from the O&G industry, don’t let that fool you into thinking the state is doing something that is independent from the industry, and which can be used as leverage to pressure them into doing anything differently. Not in the least…basically, the APCD and the O&G industry are playing an elaborate hoax on the public, and saying implicitly, “Just trust us!”

Do we have a choice?

Well, actually, we do: the state could be doing better air quality monitoring that would enable it to really verify what the O&G industry is saying it’s emitting.

But as long as we have a CDPHE that is captured by the industry — meaning it doesn’t want to do anything that the industry doesn’t doesn’t want to do — then nothing is going to change.

Which is why the Larimer Alliance is shifting its focus to what seems to be the real problem: it’s not the O&G industry as much as it is the CDPHE itself.

But what can we do about that? Well, stay tuned, boys and girls, because that’s another story for another time.