You Helped Us Win
There was a bill in the legislature trying to reverse the 2012 Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling that denied the right to exercise eminent domain for pipelines carrying oil.
UPDATE 4/2/14: !2:00 p.m. flash! We’ve just learned that this bill was “postponed indefinitely”, or killed, this session. The battle is not yet over. Industry will not quit and neither will the humans.
UPDATE 4/2/14: SB-93 passed out of the House Judiciary Committee on March 13th. The second reading in the House will be on Friday, April, 4th – there is still time to contact your state Representatives to stop this bill. Our non-partisan message is that this is a property rights issue.
UPDATE 3/19/14: SB-93 passed out of the House Judiciary Committee on March 13th.
UPDATE 3/12/14: We now know that this bill will go to the House Judiciary Committee TOMORROW 3/13. Our non-partisan message is that this is a property rights issue. It’s still best to contact your Representative below, but if you can also reach out to any of the members of the Committee, that would be helpful: House Judiciary Committee
Contact your State Representative to let your feelings be heard.
Sign the Petition
In 2012 the Colorado Supreme Court held that the statutory language of 38-5-105 did not encompass a petroleum pipeline company and that therefore the petroleum pipeline company was not entitled to exercise eminent domain. This authority was used by petroleum companies for decades before the Supreme Court weighed in. In particular, the Court said that a statute must authorize condemnation expressly or by necessary implication in order for a governmental entity to exercise the power of eminent domain. (Larson v. Sinclair Transp. Co., 2012 CO 36, 284 P.3d 42 (Colo. 2012)). The practical outcome of the decision was that the statute authorizes condemnation for the construction of electric power infrastructure only, not for petroleum pipelines. The proposed language of SB14-093 will permit condemnation for pipelines carrying petroleum products.
Not Too Late to Urge Colorado Senators to reject the appointment of Glenn Vaad for PUC Commissioner
While Vaad’s ties to ALEC are important, most legislators may care more about his record. We also now understand that the nominee expressed an agnostic position regarding climate change. This view was given at a meeting with partner organizations and is absolutely untenable. Vaad has a record of voting against clean energy policies. He voted:
- Against increasing the Renewable Energy Standard (HB1001) in 2010
- Against Energy Efficiency Requirements (HB 1107) in 2008
- Against Prohibiting Restrictions on Energy Efficiency (HB 1270) in 2008
- Against Oil and Gas Commission Reconfiguration (HB 1341) in 2008
The PUC regulates telecom and transportation as well as utilities and his other votes indicate he won’t effectively regulate industry for the public good. To check out Vaad’s full voting record see VoteSmart.org.
Contact Your State Senator
Continue reading Continued Action Item: Speak Out Against PUC Nominee Glenn Vaad
Comment Period Extended Until May 9th, 2014
Coloradans approve of new GHG regulations. Help us show the EPA this is true Comment Now
The EPA is in the final stage of rulemaking on how they will regulate greenhouse gas emissions from new electric generation plants, including coal, natural gas, petroleum coke, and other fossil fuels. There have been over 2.5 million comments on the proposed rule, so get your voice heard and tell the EPA to ensure that the GHG emission standards are strict and properly reflect the negative health and climate impacts.
Summary of the Major Provisions of the Proposed Rules:
This action proposes a standard of performance for utility boilers and IGCC units based on partial implementation of carbon capture and storage (CCS) as the BSER. The proposed emission limit for those sources is 1,100 lb CO2/MWh. This action also proposes standards of performance for natural gas-fired stationary combustion turbines based on modern, efficient natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) technology as the BSER. The proposed emission limits for those sources are 1,000 lb CO2/MWh for larger units and 1,100 lb CO2/MWh for smaller units. At this time, the EPA is not proposing standards of performance for modified or reconstructed sources.
For more information on the proposed rule.
Comment Period Open Until March 7th
The US Department of State released the Environmental Impact Statement for the new proposed route for the Keystone XL pipeline and they are soliciting comments. Read the final EIS and comment to get your voice heard.
On February 5, 2014, the Federal Register published a Notice that invited members of the public to comment on any factor they deem relevant to the national interest determination that will be made for the Presidential Permit application.
This began a 30-day public comment period that will close on March 7, 2014. There are two ways to submit comments on the national interest determination. Members of the public are encouraged to submit comments to regulations.gov . Comments may also be mailed directly to:
U.S. Department of State
Bureau of Energy Resources, Room 4843
Attn: Keystone XL Public Comments
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520″
Come to the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission Public Hearing
February, 19th 12:00 pm – 3:00 pm and 5:00 pm – 7:00 pm
Aurora Municipal Center
15151 East Alameda Parkway, Aurora, 80012
The Colorado Legislature has declared it to be the policy of the state to “achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity in every portion of the state,” to attain and maintain Federal standards on air quality, and to prevent the significant deterioration of air quality in places where the air quality is better than federally mandated. The Air Quality Control Commission of the State of Colorado is charged with making these policies into enforceable regulations. This is a commission of 9 volunteers appointed by the Governor who care passionately about air quality. This is not the Colorado Oil and Gas Control Commission, who some see as having the interests of a small group of constituents at heart. The Commissioners of the AQCC are working hard to ensure that the air quality regulations they enact are the best possible regulations for public health.
Rewind to November, when Governor Hickenlooper stood with representatives of Environmental Defense, a former EPA Region 8 administrator, and the “big three” oil and gas developers in the state, Anadarko, Encana, and Noble Energy. These groups worked to come to a consensus on rules that will positively impact public health as well as will be attainable by the developers. Do these rules promise to allow zero oil and gas emissions to escape into the air? No. Will they go a long way toward cleaning up the VOC’s and methane that are part of today’s development? Yes. They can be stronger, but they must not be any weaker.
Over the past three months, small developers and industry groups have worked hard to attack these rules in hopes that they will be weakened. The rules are long and tedious, but can be understood to address two issues. First, they will require the oil and gas industry to use better technology – technology that the big three may already be using – to reduce VOC and methane emissions. Second, the rules require the industry to inspect their infrastructure and fix leaks when they are detected.
Continue reading Oil & Gas Rulemaking Public Hearing & Comment Session