Weld County Claims Clean Air Will Hurt Economy

Oil and gas industry apologist Weld County is at it again. This time, the Weld County Assessor is claiming that clean air rules that would help reduce smog in the Denver metro area--including in Weld County-- would actually "hurt" the County. Chris Woodruff, the Assessor, asserts that clean air could lead to lower tax revenues from oil and gas development, which in turn, he claims, would "hurt" Weld County.

Give me a break. Weld County government officials aren't just seriously misguided, they're liars. Chris Woodruff's claim that clean air rules will hurt Weld County is simply untrue. Why? Two reasons:

First, current regulations to reduce emissions of smog forming pollution from oil and gas development were, in fact, the most stringent rules adopted to reduce smog in the Denver area back when they were adopted in 2004. Guess what? Weld County is still raking it in; it has not experienced anything close to economic crisis and it has not had to ask voters to raise the mill levy.

Second, Chris Woodruff seems to be ignorant of the fact that ozone levels in Greeley, the seat of Weld County, exceeded federal health standards five days last summer. That's five days last summer that air quality was so poor that the Colorado Department of Health asked children with asthma to stay inside and play. That's five days last summer that seniors in Greeley faced a 20% or higher chance of going to the emergency room. I may be crazy, but I really don't think this helps for Weld County's economy a single bit.

The sad fact of the matter is that Weld County government officials care more about catering to the oil and gas industry than they do about the health of families.

Weld County will not lose tax revenue as a result of clean air. No, what Weld County stands to lose is far more valuable--the health of its children, its image, and its clean air. It's a shame the Weld County assessor doesn't care about the true costs of air pollution.

Denver Ozone in 5280 Magazine

This month's 5280 Magazine features an in-depth and well-written article on Denver's ozone pollution. The article, by Hillary Rosner, quotes Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action, among others. Check it out at local newsstands and independent bookstores.

EPA Claims Denver's Air is Clean

In a bizarre finding, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced that Denver's air is "clean." This is despite the fact that last summer, we experienced 66 exceedances of the federal health standard for ozone, also known as smog.

The EPA's finding is even more bizarre given that the State of Colorado has admitted that, in the face of booming oil and gas development, current regulations are failing to protect families and communities from ozone pollution in Denver. The Air Quality Control Commission is considering a proposal to ratchet down on emissions of smog forming pollution from oil and gas developments, but the current proposal falls short of guaranteeing the clean air we need. And we won't know until December 17th what the Commission will decide.

The state of Colorado is, in a sense, being handed a get out of jail free card by the EPA. Denver has, by all measures, violated federal health standards for ozone. Such violations usually trigger strict federal regulations, potential losses in federal dollars, and a "nonattainment" designation. Rather than designate Denver to be a "nonattainment" area, the EPA gave Colorado a chance to show that it could reduce ozone pollution quicker than normal.

Well, as we've seen, Colorado blew that chance, but its been given a second opportunity to show it can protect clean air. Will Colorado rise to the challenge? We really won't know until December 17th. In the meantime, all we're asking for is clean air. If the Air Quality Control Commission adopts strong rules to reduce smog forming pollution from oil and gas developments in the Denver metro area, then all should be well. However, we stand ready to call foul on the EPA and the state of Colorado if smog reduction rules fall short of protecting the health of our children and communities.

Lives Per Gallon: Terry Tamminen to Discuss New Book

Terry Tamminen, author of Lives per Gallon: The True Cost of our Oil Addiction, will be discussing his new book at the Boulder Book Store this Wednesday at 7:30 P.M. More information is below.

Tamminen's new book is truly a powerful book, and given his role in recent policy developments favoring clean air and renewabl energy, it will be worthwhile to check out what he has to say.

His new book really gets to the bottom of Denver's unhealthy ozone pollution, which in so many ways ties back to the production and consumption of oil. Check out his fact sheet on the true costs of oil consumption.


WHO: Terry Tamminen is an architect of California’s climate change and energy initiatives, which are the most progressive energy independence plans in the country. A dedicated environmentalist, he served as Special Advisor to Governor Schwarzenegger, head of the California EPA, and now has written Lives Per Gallon.

WHAT: Terry is touring America talking about his book and the issues. He knows that America’s addiction to oil is taking a huge toll on our health, environment, and national security, and that oil and automobile companies have conspired for decades to hide the damage their products have done to America and the world.

Lives Per Gallon is a diagnosis of our petroleum problem and a prescription for change. The choice is clear: continue paying with our health, or kick our addiction and evolve beyond an oil-dependent economy. By forcing corporate giants to pay the true cost of their business practices, the economics change in favor of more sustainable, healthier products. Terry shows how we can evolve beyond oil to products that are far cleaner and truly sustainable.

WHEN: Wednesday, November 29, 7:30pm

WHERE: Boulder Book Store, 1107 Pearl St., Boulder, CO 80302, 303-447-2074

WHY: Now is a window of opportunity for change on national policy as a result of the midterm elections. Be part of the debate and the drive for energy independence in America. The event is a perfect opportunity to ask questions about local issues, policies, or federal legislation. Learn what California has done and what your state and Washington can do to make a difference.

Seasonal Ozone Trends in Denver

With cooler weather and less sunshine, ozone, or smog, levels in Denver have finally dropped to healthy levels. What are healthy levels of ozone? Well, according to the latest review from the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, 8-hour ozone concentrations that exceed 60 parts per billion are unhealthy. Heeding this advice, we too feel that anytime 8-hour ozone concentrations in the Denver metro area exceed 60 parts per billion, our health is at risk.

It's striking to see how ozone levels trend in the Denver metro area by the seasons. Just looking at one monitor, the Chatfield monitor south of Denver, you can see how ozone levels are generally low in the fall and winter, then rise in the spring and summer. The chart below shows how peak 8-hour ozone concentrations have trended so far in 2006 at Chatfield.

The seasonal trends in ozone are also striking in another way. Folks with the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division and especially the Regional Air Quality Council often claim that Denver's high ozone pollution is related to exceptional weather events, as if ozone pollution is a totally random occurrence. This makes no sense, especially when one looks at the chart above.

Ozone in Denver clearly rises in the spring and summer, usually to unhealthy levels, and drops in the fall and winter. These trends are pretty clear, there really doesn't seem to be any relation between ozone and exceptional weather.

The only thing exceptional about Denver's ozone pollution is that we've allowed it to reach unhealthy levels, placing children and seniors at great risk.

Denver Smog Reductions Delayed

Smog reductions for Denver are on hold until December 17th, at which point the Air Quality Control Commission will decide whether to adopt strong smog reductions, or a "compromise" rule that was introduced at the last minute by the Air Pollution Control Division.

The Air Pollution Control Division had originally proposed to require all condensate tanks in the Denver metro area that emit 11 tons/year or more to reduce emissions of smog forming compounds by 95%. At the 11th hour, the Division caved in to the oil and gas industry and decided to adopt what is called a "system-wide" approach, which would require a 73.3% overall reduction in smog forming pollution from condensate tanks. What's the system-wide approach?

The system-wide approach to reducing smog forming pollution works like this: a company may have 100 condensate tanks and from those tanks, that company would be required to reduce overall emissions by a certain percentage, in this case 73.3%. In practice, pollution is controlled at some tanks, while at others, no pollution is controlled. This approach allows what industry calls "flexibility," but what it really allows is no accountability.

That's because its virtually impossible for citizens, the state, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to monitor compliance. We never know which tanks are supposed to have pollution controls, where these tanks are located, and whether or not the required emission reductions are even being achieved. It's nothing more than a guessing game.

The only way a system-wide approach can be adopted is if there's a big enough cushion to account for the guessing. In other words, a 73.3% reduction just doesn't cut it. We need a higher percentage, at least 80% or more, if we're to be assured of the smog reductions we need.

And of course, with the smog reductions we need in place, our children can breathe easier next summer and be assured of a healthy future.

Denver Post Supports Smog Reduction Rules

The Denver Post voiced its support for a proposal that would clean Denver's air by reducing smog forming pollution from oil and gas development north of Denver. The Post joins the growing list of local governments, citizens, and organizations voicing support for the State's proposal to require condensate tanks that emit 11 tons/year or more of smog forming pollution to reduce emissions by 95%.

The Post stated, "there's no need for energy production to jeopardize the public health or Colorado's clean skies." How true.

And remember, a hearing is slated for this Friday and Saturday before the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission. The Commission will decide at this hearing whether to adopt smog reductions in Denver. Hopefully the advice of the Post, among others, will be heeded.

Smog Reduction Hearing This Friday and Saturday

The Colorado Air Quality Control Commission is slated to hear, and hopefully adopt, a proposed rule that would further reduce smog in the Denver metro area. A hearing is scheduled for this Friday and Saturday. Smog is linked to asthma, reduced birthweight, wheezing among infants and children, and increased emergency room visits.

Children with asthma are especially at risk from smog pollution in Denver.

While smog reduction in Denver is a no-brainer, the oil and gas industry has seen fit to oppose efforts to reduce smog pollution. True, the state's proposed rule would reduce emissions of smog forming compounds from condensate tanks that emit 11 tons/year or more by 95%. Condensate tanks collect liquid hydrocarbons produced during oil and gas production. They spew out smog forming compounds, including benzene, toluene, and other toxic air pollutants. The state's proposal to require pollution from reductions is well-placed, however.

Under current rules, uncontrolled smog forming compound emissions from tanks (also known as flash emissions) were projected to be 146.1 tons/day in 2007, with controlled emissions projected to be 91.3 tons/day. Yet according to emissions inventory, as of 2004, uncontrolled emissions had already reached 176 tons/day and controlled emissions had reached 150 tons/day—almost 65% more than projected. It's now projected that uncontrolled emissions will reach 236.4 tons/day by 2007. Even if projected 2007 flash emissions were controlled by 47.5%, this would amount to a pollution rate of 112 tons/day, over 20 tons/day higher than the 91.3 ton/day projection.

What's more, the state's current proposal is truly modest. According to the state, 2,246 tanks in the Denver metro area release 11 tons of VOCs/year or more and will be required to reduce emissions. This represents only 44% of the 5,012 tanks that now operate in the Denver area. Of these tanks batteries, 1,132—over half—already have controls installed and are reducing pollution by 95% or more.

Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action will be urging the Air Quality Control Commission to adopt the proposed smog reductions. If not, Denver faces the prospect of being designated a "nonattainment area," which in essence declares that Denver's air is unhealthy and polluted. Is this really what Denver wants? We hope not.

New Website

Just a reminder, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action has a new website at http://ourcleanair.org.

Industry Opposed to Smog Reductions in Denver

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association and its member companies Kerr-McGee and Noble Energy are opposing smog reductions in the Denver metro area. In a rebuttal statement filed with the Air Quality Control Commission, Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action fired back that industry's opposition jeopardizes clean air and the health of children and communities in the Denver metro area by promoting more ozone pollution.

The industry parties are asking the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission to adopt an alternative rule that maintains the status quo. Their rule calls for the retention of the current system-wide approach to reducing smog forming compound emissions from condensate tanks north of Denver and calls for less frequent monitoring and recordkeeping than is currently required.

The sytem-wide approach to reducing smog forming pollution works like this: a company may have 100 condensate tanks and from those tanks, that company would be required to reduce overall emissions by a certain percentage. In practice, pollution is controlled at some tanks, while at others, no pollution is controlled. This approach allows what industry calls "flexibility," but what it really allows is no accountability.

Ken Wonstolen with the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, seen here voicing opposition to a bill that would protect landowners from oil and gas development in Colorado, opposes state efforts to hold the oil and gas industry accountalbe to clean air in Denver (picture Durango Herald).

That's because its virtually impossible for citizens, the state, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to monitor compliance. We never know which tanks are supposed to have pollution controls, where these tanks are located, and whether or not the required emission reductions are even being achieved. It's nothing more than a guessing game. In the end, we don't really know whether pollution reductions have been met until the end of summer. By then, it's really too late to do anything about excessive smog.

Reducing smog in Denver shouldn't be left to a guessing game. We need certainty. We need to know which tanks are supposed to be controlled, where they are located, and whether or not industry is meeting smog reductions.

The state's proposed rule would add much-needed certainty to reducing smog forming compound pollution in Denver. Rather than a system-wide approach, the state is proposing to simply require all condensate tanks that emit 11 tons/year or more to reduce emissions by 95%.

Industry is pushing to keep the system-wide approach to reducing air pollution to avoid accountability. With Denver on the verge of violating federal health standards for smog, we need accountability, we need certainty, and we need clean air. The Air Quality Control Commission is slated to adopt smog reduction rules this Friday, hopefully they'll reject industry's opposition to clean air in Denver.