What's Polluting Colorado's Air? If You Plan To Move Here You Owe It To Yourself To Know

Top: Main air pollution locations in the state of Colorado. Bottom the top 10 greenhouse gas emitters projected through 2030.

As my respiratory problems have grown increasingly worse over the past five years, I found this information from a Denver Post expose (January 19, p. 1A), e.g.   
 

What's polluting Colorado's air? 125 million tons a year of heat ...

Excerpt:

"Effects of fossil fuels Fossil fuels producers in Colorado — the expanding oil and gas industry that runs more than 53,000 wells around the state along with processing facilities, storage and pipelines — have emerged collectively as a major polluter, emitting about 15.6 million tons a year, state records show"

to be especially informative.   And we learn further:

"More than 125 million metric tons of hazardous and heat-trapping gases pollute Colorado’s air every year, hurting public health and accelerating warming of the planet at a time when world leaders are trying to clean up the atmosphere and fight climate change."

Watching me cough one night in a particularly spasmodic way, almost like a flu cough, Janice asked what was wrong. I mentioned a constant 'tickle' in the chest which triggered a similar cough that was most productive each morning. By that I meant coughing up thick plugs of phlegm and mucus.  Five years ago I experienced nothing like what I am dealing with currently.  What changed? Well, fracking and its incessant injection of pollutants into Colorado's air. 

As The Post article notes, the state's expanding oil and gas industry operates more than 53,000 wells across the state along with processing and storage facilities. Collectively these emit more than 15.6 million tons of pollutants per year.  These include hazardous chemicals such as: thousands of tons of sulfur dioxide, benzene, hydrogen cyanide, nitric oxide, perchloroethylene,  - as well as thousands of tons or particulates which cause heart and lung problems.   Add in 130, 670 tons a year of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and you indeed have a toxic brew.  One which now adversely affects nearly 17 percent of state residents, including me. (One reason I often kid Janice about moving back to Barbados.)

The Post expose shows:  "the top VOC polluters emit 5,376 tons a year and the top nitrogen oxide polluters emit 12, 145 tons."   Adding: "This pollution causes respiratory problems, headaches and nausea, as well as irritating the eyes, nose and throat.  VOCs also damage the liver, kidneys and central nervous system."

And to think that 19 years ago when we first moved here from Maryland, the state had pristine skies and atmosphere. Visitors like my sister-in-law Krimhilde marveled at how beautiful the setting was and how they didn't have to breathe the diesel fumes like in Port-of-Spain, Trinidad.  Alas, had Krimhilde lived and visited us now she'd be appalled.    

The Post piece notes that EPA data show that Colorado joined 14 other states (North Dakota, Montana, Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri, South Dakota, Wyoming, Arkansas, Texas, Minnesota, Utah, Idaho and Oklahoma) where "increased overall emissions increased from 2005 through 2014."   Colorado officials also have disclosed the latest inventory shows overall air pollution peaking at around 132 million tons before closure of coal-fired power generators led to a leveling and slight decline of overall pollution.  Well, we must be thankful for small mercies as it declined to 125.7 million tons per year.   

The top twenty polluters' sites are shown in the map at top, from The Post article.  The top 20 greenhouse gas polluters include: Xcel Energy's Comanche, Craig, Pawnee, Hayden, Cherokee and Ft. St. Vrain power plants - along with a mix of other industrial sources. The latter include the Swiss-owned Holcim cement factory near Florence, and the Canadian-owned Suncor energy oil refinery north of Denver.  

 Meanwhile, the biggest VOC polluters include the crude oil pipeline company Plains Marketing (with a base in Denver) and the Suncor oil refinery. THe biggest nitrogen oxide polluters include power plants run by the Tri-State facility in Craig and Colorado Springs' Martin Drake coal plant along with multiple other oil and gas industry polluters.   

Yes, folks, the oil and gas industry is terrific for the state economy and some of the best paying jobs, as the Colorado Oil and Gas Association never ceases to tell us.  But the $64 question is whether this great fossil fuel economy will be sufficient to provide the funds to take care of all the health issues that erupt in the state's residents in the years to come.  

Think about that the next time you consider uprooting and moving to our once quality air state.

EPA Backs Off On Claim That Fracked Water Has No Adverse Effects

It is deeply disturbing to discover the content and quantity of toxic chemicals, like benzene and lead, being injected into the ground without the knowledge of communities whose health would be affected."
 - Sen. Diana DeGette,  commenting on 2010 fracking report

After six years and $29 million spent, the EPA - facing a Trumpist takeover- has admitted there is no way to say for sure that fracking poses no risk to drinking water. A new report issued last Thursday said that fracked water is a risk to drinking water "in some circumstances"  but a lack of definitive information precluded a definitive statement on how severe the risk is.

The exact wording of the report is:

"Because of the significant data gaps and uncertainties in the available data, it was not possible to fully characterize the severity of impacts nor was it possible to calculate or estimate the national frequency of impacts on drinking water resources".

This is at least an improvement on its earlier position in a misguided draft from last year, saying that "fracking had not caused widespread, systemic harm to drinking water in the United States".

But this was always in contradiction to an inquiry by the House Energy and Commerce Committee in 2010-11, which report found that fourteen of the nation's most active hydraulic fracturing companies used 866 million gallons of chemical fracturing products, and more than 650 of the chemicals named in the report were known carcinogens, supposedly regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act. (Which was rendered toothless for fracking by lobbyists) Among the most toxic of the chemicals used (11.4 million gallons in all) were: benzene, toluene, xylene and ethylbenzene.

Among the toxic fracking chemicals and their adverse effects uncovered by the inquiry:

-Benzene: a powerful bone-marrow poison (aplastic anemia) associated with leukemia, breast and uterine cancer

- Styrene, which may cause eye and mucous membrane irritation, neurotoxic effects in the central and peripheral nervous systems.

- Toluene, which may cause muscular incoordination, tremors, hearing loss, dizziness, vertigo, emotional instability and delusions, liver and kidney damage, and anemia.

- Xylene, with cancer-causing (mainly in the kidneys, liver) and neurotoxic effects, as well as reproductive abnormalities.

- Methylene chloride, which may cause cancer, liver and kidney damage, central nervous system disorders and COPD



Then there was the 2014 study, from Yale University and published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, surveyed 492 people living in 180 randomly selected households in southwestern Pennsylvania, an area containing more than 600 active natural gas wells. A full 39 percent of those living less than a kilometer (0.6 miles) away from a well, researchers found, said they’d experienced upper respiratory symptoms, including coughing, itchy eyes and nosebleeds, compared to 18 percent living 2 kilometers away or more. And 13 percent of those living close to wells reported skin conditions like persistent rashes and unexplained hair loss, compared to just 3 percent of the others.

In Pennsylvania, where drilling has exploded in the past eight years, whistle-blowers  accused the state Department of Health of deliberately ignoring health complaints. Critics added that the state has yet to conduct even one study on fracking’s potential health risks.  Clearly, the state has been in the paws of the fracking industry.

In other words, there's no issue on the harm, and the only responsible reaction has to be invoking the precautionary principle.  That is,  it is the frackers' job to prove their chemicals are harmless, not the job of environmentalist to prove they're harmful.

Given the preceding, it was no surprise that in the wake of the EPA reversal industry groups and their PR affiliates went bonkers. A number of these groups claimed that the Obama administration had yielded to political pressure on its way out the door.   But this is lame. More probably, the Obama administration recognized that with the revival of Rick Perry as head of DOE, in conjunction with the Trumpista EPA picks , the result could be destruction of the key  files showing the adverse effects - so decided to expose them now before the takeover - given the "barbarians" are at the gate.

This is especially important now given the Trumpistas also plan to kick millions off Obamacare. So when they do get seriously ill - including cancers - from fracked water, they will have no way to recover.  At least now they will know one reason for those cancers if they are in proximity to fracking wells.

One oil industry exec called the EPA report "absurd reversal "  and insisted it "changed a science-based conclusion to one based on political ambiguity". 

Erik Melito, a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute, quoted in The Denver Post, claimed:

"The agency has walked away from nearly a thousand sources of information from technical reports and peer-reviewed scientific reports demonstrating that hydraulic fracturing does not lead to widespread, systemic impacts to drinking water resources."

Of course, this is hogwash and what you'd expect from an oil industry PR hack. Anyone likely to believe this asshole or his cohort really needs to get hold of Naomi Oreskes' work 'Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming'  - on the PR Departments that serve the  frackers and their lot.  All of which are reminiscent of the vermin PR meisters exposed in Toxic Sludge is Good for You, by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, based on the 1990s tactic of toxic industries to try to soft sell the use of their sludge in fertilizers. .

Oreskes explained that the job of corporate PR depts. is not to necessarily show they're right, but merely to spur and stir phony debate. Once the debate is consolidated, it becomes a matter of endless back and forth, "he said, she said" etc, and the ruse succeeds by staving off regulation because, hey, "the issue isn't settled". But in reality it is, as much as the fact that 6 million Jews perished in a holocaust.

But one thing we know is that PR must bow to physical reality. That includes the videos of fracked water set on fire,  as it comes out of water taps  e.g.
Scene from the Josh Fox documentary ‘Gasland’ in which a homeowner lights his tap water.

Never mind the squeals of the stuck pig fossil fuelers, John Noel of Clean Water Action, puts it in perspective:

"We are glad the EPA resisted the oil and gas industry spin and delivered the facts".

As for Melito and his ilk, he's been exposed after he said, quoted in the Post:

"We look forward to working with the new administration to instill fact-based science into the public policy process."

Translation: "We look forward to Trump's EPA appointees destroying all the data and files for the fact-based science so we can have carte blanche in wasting the water supplies of the nation with our proven, toxic shit."

Sadly, the deluded Trump voters who make light of Rick Perry's DOE appointment, as well as Scott Pruitt's to the EPA, appear unaware of how all these impact the well being of their kids and grand kids. These and millions more will have to live in the wasteland world the Trumpistas leave us. For those of us getting on in years it makes little difference as we already lived our lives, and one more condition - say on top of existing cancers - won't make a lot of difference.  But for the youngest citizens to now be faced with a host of diseases - many from exposure to fracked water- is something that ought to outrage any normal, sane mind.  Especially as their health care will now be dismantled as well, preventing them from coping with what's coming.

Frackers Break the Law Again with Toxic Dumping in Colorado

Let's concede the frackers and all those who support them are shameless liars, apart from their yen to destroy the environment. Their talk about preserving both the environment and economy is great for PR - and likely emanates from one or more PR outfits - but isn't credible when one beholds how they consistently violate laws.

One of these laws in Colorado, since 1997, prohibits injecting or dumping diesel without a permit - which assigns specific regions for emitting effluent. This is important because diesel contains benzene and other carcinogenic chemicals that can easily spread in groundwater - and so can cause major health problems. Will the indiscriminate frackers or their supporting whore politicos pay for cancer treatments? I doubt it.

According to a Denver Post report ('Fracking Probe Finds Illegally Injected Diesel in Colorado',  August 14, p. 31) an investigation leading to a report released Wednesday - by attorneys for an environmental protection group- revealed 9, 173 gallons of diesel illegally injected while fracking wells in Colorado.  To many people in the state these illegal injections bring to mind the horrific consequences of the Parachute creek frack liquid spill which contaminated thousands of cubic meters of water.

Of course, industry groups have challenged this report as they challenge any semblance of negative news around fracking and its consequences. Their job is to spout PR to try to assuage the gullible.  Their claim (ibid.) is that the substance injected in 280 of the 351 wells reported was kerosene, not diesel. (Hey, doncha know kerosene is good for ya! See also the terrific PR -skewering book, "Toxic Sludge Is Good For You")

Fortunately, Environmental Integrity Project spotted this codswallop and called it out for what it was, noting: "kerosene and diesel have long been recognized as virtually the same thing...and the companies still lacked the proper permits to dump it."

Williams, PDC and ExxonMobil subsidiary XTO Energy, were a few of the companies identified as dumping without permits.

These issues assume increasing importance given that Colo. Sen. Jared Polis has taken his two initiatives for local control of fracking off the table for the November ballot  - leaving the way open for nonstop pollution of our soil, air and water. The so-called "compromise" erected in the initiatives' place is a joke - translating into "we will examine the issues with a new commission and make recommendations." All Coloradans ought to be outraged.

Do the people have any say any more, or are we forever hostage to the frackers - as here in Colorado? Evidently, that may well be the case. Neolib governor John Hickenlooper constantly advises Coloradans that just because they own a home and property at XYZ location doesn't mean they control or own what lies beneath the surface land. He has consistently said it is the state and "other interests" which control and own the "mineral rights" - which means any of these claimants can rip out what's beneath your place anytime they desire.

Got a beautiful backyard with nice trees, and a small creek and all. Say hasta la vista to them if the powers that be, including corporations,  want those minerals!

Now Fracking Pollutes the Soil As Well As Water

The news in the Sunday Denver Post (1B) that 200 gallons of toxic effluent spills per day on Colorado soil from fracking, should not have blown anyone’s mind. Indeed, we already knew the multifold ways in which fracking contaminates the air and water. But that it is allowed to flow into fertile soil, thereby leaching into ground water too is an added abomination.

Although some PR guys claim it is “safe” – most of us don’t buy it. According to Matt Lepore, head of the “Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission” (basically a PR cover for the oil industry):

"The whole point is that it is safe, that the harm to the environment has been minimized.”

 He was referring to the industry’s latest cleanup method of using mixing machinery and microbes on the affected soil.  But as the Post observes: “It is not proven”.

 In other words we have only the industry’s-  excuse me, their front organization’s – words to go by. But given they are mainly devoted to the articulation of PR can we trust them?

 The Post expose found that 716,982 gallons of the petroleum chemicals spilled during the past decade have stayed in the ground after the initial cleanup. This has contaminated soil, sometimes spreading into groundwater- based on a Denver Post analysis of COGOC data. Incredibly, their maestro had the never to say the cleanup method was “safe” despite the Post finding the stuff is invading the soil, groundwater.  According to the Post (ibid.):

“There’s about one gallon of toxic liquid penetrating soil every eight minutes.”

In addition, the Post notes: “drillers churn up 135 to 500 tons of dirt with every new well, some of it soaked with hydrocarbons and laced with potentially toxic minerals and salts.”

Given this, is it any wonder adults – kids living near frack sites often have severe health complaints, ranging from horrific rashes to bleeding orifices to breathing problems? According to Eugene Kelly, chief of soil and crop science at Colorado State University – quoted in the piece:

“The overall impact of the oil and gas boom is like a death sentence for soil. It could be the next limiting component when we talk about feeding the planet and having a sustainable lifestyle- - because all the good stuff is gone and the soil is being degraded.”

Most citizens, including here in Colorado, have no remote idea how fast, far and wide the fracking craze is expanding.  According to the Post (p. 2B):

“3,000 new wells are drilled each year, adding to the nearly 52,000 active wells statewide.”

Most of this is done in agricultural areas northeast of Denver. In other words, we are sacrificing our 'bread basket'  for oil, natural gas. I’d say we’re sacrificing our water and health for oil –natural gas too.   No wonder groceries are already 50-70% more expensive than they were last year. Between the frackers' consumption of limited water in drought conditions, and their fouling of fertile soil, what would you expect?

Yet every time I turn on the tube now I hear and see one political whore or other insisting we “must become energy independent”.  The question I’d like to pose these poltroons is:

“Look, you want to be energy independent, or you do want to live? You can't have both! If we become energy independent so much carbon will be removed from the Earth and injected into the atmosphere that the runaway greenhouse effect will be triggered and we're all gone in 200 years.....or less.”

 Meanwhile, the Post’s examination of data found that the number of spills reached an all time record last year at 578 (according to the COGOC data).  In addition:

“State data also show that 12.3 percent of the past 1,000 spills (since June 24, 2012) already had contaminated groundwater before companies began cleanups.”

Beyond the contamination of soil and groundwater, the Post's data analysis showed that drilling of new wells unearthed an estimated 652,000 tons a year of sludge-like drill cuttings. These are supposed to be taken to special landfills but more often than not  spread them instead on “leased fields”.

 Naturally, the industry would rather look for short cuts given the costs to haul and bury ruined soil, which can require hundreds of truck to carry away – not to mention labor and landfill fees. The Post then cited just the volume created after the March, 2013 Parachute Creek spill in western Colorado.  It notes:

“The Williams and Bargath companies recovered 11,800 gallons of liquid hydrocarbons. They’ve excavated 2, 275 tons of contaminated soil, hauling it for burial at the ECDC facility in Utah.”

Process the dimensions and scale of this filth, polluting our landscape and the need to haul ever more away as the existing landfills grow into mountains.  It seems that Jared Polis’ idea of brining a ballot measure in for November – to allow communities to decide whether to allow fracking and how to regulate it- is more needed than ever.

Another urgent reason to allow this is the recent news (Denver Post, May 8, 1A) that scientists have found that Colorado's front Range oil and gas boom has been emitting three times more methane than previously thought. The rate, at 19.3 tons an HOUR. This is serious given the EPA has determined methane is 20 time more potent (i.e. higher forcing component) than CO2.   This study was done at the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration's Cooperative Institute for Research on the Environment.

The NOAA scientists also measured industry emissions of cancer -causing benzene and smog forming organic compounds at levels seven times higher than government agencies originally estimated.

Polis, like many of us, understands that if something isn’t done soon, the entire country will be turned into one giant, diseased shit pile.  Oh, excuse me, except for the rarefied and isolated one percent – ensconced in their high mountain redoubts far from the stink, fiery drinking water and cancers that the rest of us “little guys” will have to bear.

All for energy independence!