Montrose County opposes instream flow right for San Miguel River above the confluence with the Dolores River

From the Montrose Daily Press (Katharhynn Heidelberg):

A recent decision by the Colorado Water Conservation Board makes that balance [between water for development and jobs in the west side of the county and water for endangered species] trickier to attain. Contrary to the county’s hopes, the board voted Jan. 25 to declare its intent to appropriate an instream water right on a river portion stretching 17 miles from the Calamity Draw confluence to where it meets the Dolores River. The instream flows assure that fish species of concern, in this case the flannelmouth and bluehead sucker, have sufficient water to survive.

More San Miguel watershed coverage here and here.

2010 Colorado gubernatorial election transition: Governor Hickenlooper pow wows with Club 20

From The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Charles Ashby):

Gov. John Hickenlooper, House Speaker Frank McNulty and other high-ranking state officials all told members of Club 20 the same thing: They’re trying to find ways to reduce government spending and help encourage businesses to begin hiring again. “The issues that we’re talking about are those exact same kitchen-table issues,” McNulty said. “How do we make sure that we have a budget that works? How do we make sure that we’re doing what he can to help Coloradans get back to work?”[…]

Hickenlooper said since the 2003 drought, the same year he became Denver’s mayor, the 1.2 million customers of Denver Water reduced their consumption by 35 percent. “The new head of Denver Water and the new Denver mayor are focused to get that down to 50 percent,” he said. “That’s not the whole solution, but I think we can get the other urban areas to use that same sense of frugality, that we don’t need to have bluegrass lawns everywhere and we don’t need to water them three days a week.” Hickenlooper said he won’t sacrifice the state’s agricultural industry or the push for new jobs just so cities can grow larger.

More 2010 Colorado election coverage here.

Energy policy: What is the value of water used in generating electricity?

You can download Western Resource Advocates‘ report here. Here’s an excerpt from the executive summary:

Water has tremendous value — people, crops, industry, and the environment all rely on this limited resource. In the arid and semi-arid West, the value of water is even more pronounced, rising precipitously in times of drought and scarcity. Climate change models project increased rates of evapotranspiration throughout the West, more severe droughts, and reduced runoff in the Colorado River. Accordingly, the value of water in the Southwest will continue to rise.

In 2005, power plants in six states — Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming — consumed an estimated 395,000 acre-feet (AF) of water. These plants impact our region’s rivers and aquifers, and tie up water that could meet growing urban, agricultural, or environmental needs.

Electric utilities’ choices can have vastly different impacts on water resources. A wet-cooled coal plant, for example, typically uses three times as much water as a combined-cycle gas plant; wind turbines, solar photovoltaic panels, and energy efficiency use no water; and employing dry cooling in a thermoelectric power plant can reduce water use by 90%. Yet most electric utilities and regulators do not adequately consider water in their future resource plans. Electric utilities typically appropriate or purchase water rights for new thermoelectric power plants, but the cost of these water rights does not reflect the opportunity cost of water use over the life of the power plant — 40 to 50 years or longer.

While the value of water is highly varied, it is not zero. This report attempts to develop a range of values of water for use in electric resource planning. Western Resource Advocates (WRA) analyzed the prices paid for water by the three different sectors that compete with power plants: municipal, agricultural, and environmental (Figure ES 1). In addition, we assessed the authority of regulators in the six states to consider water in evaluating utilities’ electric resource plans. We found that, across the region, the degree to which water influences regulators’ and utilities’ electric resource planning decisions varies significantly.

More energy policy coverage here.

Pueblo: No hexavalent chromium in water supply

From NewsFirst5.com (Greg Boyce):

Water samples were sent to MWH Labs, a laboratory that is equipped to test for this specific chemical and all samples showed a result of “Non-Detected” for dissolved hexavalent chromium. The Board of Water Works will continue testing for chromium VI in each quarter of 2011.

More water pollution coverage here.

Colorado River basin: Releases from Lake Powell to Lake Mead are underway

From KSL.com (John Hollenhorst):

In recent weeks, the level of Lake Powell has been dropping sharply. The agency that controls the reservoir is releasing 11 billion gallons [33,757 acre-feet] of water each day to help bring up the level of Arizona’s Lake Mead. Lake Powell always comes down this time of year, but the releases now are significantly more than usual. “That level of release hasn’t occurred since the late ’90s,” said Richard Clayton, a hydraulic engineer for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. His job is to oversee releases from the Glen Canyon Dam. The high wintertime releases have triggered controversy. But the bureau has a message for boaters who worry Lake Powell might drop too far: “Don’t worry. Be happy.” The releases are prompted by expectations of the best spring runoff in more than a decade. Bureau experts predict, but can’t guarantee, that Lake Powell will eventually rise higher this summer than it did last year…

The release of water has caused Lake Powell to drop more than 13 feet, while Lake Mead has risen about 10 feet since early November. From a Nevada perspective, that’s good news. For a full decade, the big reservoir behind Hoover Dam has taken a battering from the region’s long-term drought. Lake Mead is currently about 42 percent full, and its surface area has shrunk drastically. Lake Powell currently stands about 57 percent full. This year, a new agreement reached by the seven states on the Colorado River will likely require additional releases from Lake Powell to Lake Mead. If spring runoff is high enough to trigger the so-called “equalization” agreement, it will require releases from Lake Powell sufficient to bring Lake Mead up to an elevation of 1,105 feet above sea level, according to Clayton. It currently stands at about 1,091 feet. “If we wait until April and don’t make appropriate changes to operations now,” Clayton said, “we won’t have enough time to release the required volume by the end of the water year.”

More coverage from The Arizona Daily Star (Pat Jacobs/Sharon Megdal/Warren Tenney/Carol Zimmerman). From the article:

Each year, the secretary of the interior looks at river flows and the expected water levels in Lake Mead and Lake Powell. Using this information, the secretary will declare the river water supplies are normal, in surplus, or in shortage. The key factor in the decision is the amount of storage (as measured by water elevation above sea level) in Lake Mead. Last year, Lake Mead at its lowest was only seven feet above the shortage trigger point of 1075 feet (it’s risen about eight feet since then). If a shortage is declared, Arizona and specifically [the Central Arizona Project] would be the first to lose access to a portion of our Colorado River allotment. As part of the agreements with California, Nevada and the federal government which led to the construction of the CAP system, Arizona consented to junior (lowest) priority to Colorado River water.

It’s important to note that even if levels in Lake Mead were to drop to 1,025 feet (a Level 3 shortage), Tucson and the other cities using CAP water would not lose access to any of their allocations. Municipalities and Native Americans have the highest priority rights to CAP water.

More Colorado River basin coverage here.

Australia: Cyclone Yasi bears down on Queensland

I’m thinking of my new friends from Australia this morning. Less than a week ago we were talking about the Australian mega-drought. Today Australians are fleeing cyclone Yasi. Good luck y’all. Click here for the time lapse sequence for the storm.

Here’s a report from ABC News. From the article:

North Queensland residents are starting to feel the full force of one of Australia’s worst cyclones, with the category-five storm due to cross the coast near Innisfail about midnight (AEST). Yasi has closed to within 90 kilometres of Innisfail and the weather bureau’s 10pm warning stated it had slowed and was moving west south-west at 25kph. Hundreds of thousands of people are sheltering in evacuation centres and homes across the region as strong winds and heavy rain lash hundreds of kilometres of coastline…

[Queensland Premier Anna Bligh] says the potentially deadly system is the “most catastrophic storm ever seen” in the state and will pack winds of up to 300 kilometres per hour.

Energy policy — oil and gas: The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation is looking into diesel in hydraulic fracturing fluid in Colorado

From KJCT8.com:

Commission Director David Neslin said Tuesday that the commission is looking into whether diesel fuel has been used, and if so, when, in what amounts and whether its use was consistent with Colorado regulations. Neslin says a fundamental part of the commission’s regulatory mission is protecting groundwater.

More oil and gas coverage here and here.

Brush: Wastewater treatment plant construction update

From the Brush News Tribune (Jesse Chaney):

Since the project started in November, a team of workers from Moltz construction of Salida has demolished some of the old structures, excavated the land and started building the new configuration. “We’re staging it to keep the facility operating and treating while they’re actually building the new one,” said Brush Wastewater Manager Dale Colerick. “By doing that, we are able to minimize the footprint of what we have and reutilize some of the old components to keep the costs down.

Colerick said the crew is currently working on the first phase of the project, which involves the demolition of one of the old trickling filters. The trickling filters contained a bed of rocks, where a colony of microorganisms converted waste into biological solids. The first phase also includes the construction of the new headworks structure that brings the wastewater into the facility, the primary clarifiers and pump station used to remove solids from the water, and the new bioreactors that will house the microorganisms. He said the new plant will house the headworks inside a building rather than out in the open, which will help reduce odors. He said the exhaust from the building will be channeled through a natural bio-filter.

The second phase will start when the new headworks, primary clarifiers and bioreactors are in place, Colerick said. At this point, the old primary clarifier will be converted into a secondary clarifier, and work on a new ultraviolet disinfection system will begin. He said the new clarifiers will be deeper and narrower than the old ones, which will reduce their surface area by 40 percent and therefore limit odors. He said the ultraviolet system will replace the chlorine-based system currently in use. He said the ultraviolet method will allow the facility to do away with chlorine, which must be neutralized before the treated water can be discharged to the South Platte River.

During the third and final stage of the project, he said, the crew will rehabilitate the old secondary clarifiers and upgrade the old sludge digester.

More wastewater coverage here and here.

Colorado Springs: Arkansas River Basin Water Forum April 27-28

From The Pueblo Chieftain:

Nominations are now being accepted for the 7th Annual “Bob Appel — Friend of the Arkansas” award that is presented each year at the Arkansas River Basin Water Forum…The award is designed to honor an individual who has over the years demonstrated their commitment to improving the condition of the Arkansas River as it flows from its headwaters near Leadville to the state line.

More Arkansas River basin coverage here.

Colorado Springs: Peak to Prairie Landscape Symposium Friday and Saturday

From The Pueblo Chieftain:

The annual Peak to Prairie Landscape Symposium will be Friday and Saturday at the Doubletree Hotel, 1775 E. Cheyenne Mountain Blvd. Homeowners and industry professionals can learn about the latest landscape-design trends, and regional experts will talk about water-wise methods, plant selection, installation and maintenance…

Hours are 8:45 a.m. to 5 p.m. Friday and 8:45 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. Saturday. Cost is $80 for both days, including Friday lunch; or $60 for Friday and $40 for Saturday. To register, go to www.peaktoprairielandscapesymposium.org.

More conservation coverage here.

Energy policy — oil and gas: Diesel fuel as a component of hydraulic fracturing fluid

$A picture named marcellushydraulicfracturing.jpg$

From Bloomberg (Kim Chipman):

The providers injected 32.2 million gallons of unauthorized diesel fuel, or fluids containing the fuel, to extract gas from wells in 19 states from 2005 to 2009, Representatives Henry Waxman, Edward Markey and Diana DeGette wrote today in a letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson. BJ Services led with 11.5 million gallons followed by Halliburton at 7.2 million, they said.

Companies using hydraulic fracturing — a technique that shoots water, sand and chemicals into shale to extract natural gas — aren’t required to get permits unless they use fluids containing diesel, which the EPA said is a threat to drinking water. No companies sought such permits, the lawmakers said.

“This appears to be a violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act,” according to the letter from Waxman of California, Markey of Massachusetts and DeGette of Colorado. “It also means that the companies injecting diesel fuel haven’t performed the environmental reviews required by the law.”

Schlumberger Ltd., the No. 1 provider of oil-field services, Halliburton, the second biggest, and BJ Services agreed with the EPA in 2003 to stop using diesel fuel in fracturing fluids for coalbed methane production. Such wells tend to be closer to sources of drinking water than other oil and gas production wells.

More coverage from David O. Williams writing for the Colorado Independent. From the article:

The process was exempted from the Safe Drinking Water Act under the Energy Policy Act that was passed during the Bush administration in 2005 – except in cases when diesel fuel is used. Oil and gas industry officials claim the fracking process has been used safely for decades, but conservationists and a growing number of community activists in heavily drilled areas of the country claim the process has led to groundwater contamination.

From the Houston Chronicle (Peter Fowler):

Industry representatives said the EPA didn’t require permits for using diesel in hydraulic fracturing until June 2010 – after the period in the congressional study. “The letter relies entirely on the notion that historically the EPA has regulated hydraulic fracturing, and that’s not the case,” said Matthew Armstrong, an attorney with Bracewell & Guiliani who represents a number of energy companies…

Concerns include the potential for the chemicals to get into drinking water or for natural gas to migrate into water wells. The industry says such incidents are rare and can be avoided. Most hydraulic fracturing fluid uses water as its primary component, but in formations where water is absorbed too easily – such as in certain kinds of clay – diesel is used as an additive. It usually is just one component of the chemical used in the mix. Armstrong said about a third of the 32 million gallons referred to in the letter was straight diesel fuel.

The EPA and industry agreed in 2003 that diesel wouldn’t be used in hydraulic fracturing jobs in coal bed methane formations, because drilling in those formations tends to be closer to drinking water sources. But oil field services giants Halliburton and BJ Services, among other companies, say that agreement doesn’t apply beyond drilling operations in those formations.

The EPA first said it would require companies to seek permits to use diesel in non-coal bed operations last June, in a posting on the agency’s website. That wasn’t a proper way to change the rules, Halliburton said in a statement. “This action did not follow the standard administrative processes required in adopting new federal regulatory requirements, and the companies involved had no knowledge this change was being made by the EPA,” the company said.

Halliburton is among the companies represented by the Independent Petroleum Association of America and the U.S. Oil & Gas Association, which are challenging the EPA’s new requirement. A federal appeals court in Washington recently denied the EPA’s motion to dismiss the case, and the court will hear arguments later this year…

About half of the 32.2 million gallons of fluid containing diesel was injected in Texas, followed by Oklahoma, North Dakota, Louisiana and Wyoming.

More coverage from Allison Sherry writing for The Denver Post. From the article:

Because the EPA has had the authority to regulate this area since 2005 and hasn’t done it has left oil and gas companies practices open for interpretation. “No one is really contesting the EPA’s authority but it can’t just decide one day that it wishes it would have regulated this in the past,” said Matt Armstrong, a DC-based leading industry lawyer. “It’s an attempt to sort of create a media circus around this issue.”

More oil and gas coverage here and here.

2011 Colorado legislation: HB 11-1068 — State Engineer Approve Ag Water Transfer