The frustrations could represent a vocal minority. But noise has increased in Colorado, especially along the Western Slope, after the Gold King Mine spill and new EPA mandates to curb carbon and water pollution.
Right-leaning groups, including Americans for Prosperity and the Independence Institute, organized a series of meetings in Colorado called “EPA’s Coming Storm.” The tour was promoted by Colorado Senate Republicans and ended in Denver on Thursday after three previous meetings.
The one-sided gatherings served to highlight the perceived negatives with the new EPA rules, including requiring a reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions and extending federal regulation over small bodies of water.
The carbon rule calls for a reduction in emissions by 28 percent in Colorado and 32 percent nationally by 2030, when taking into account emissions from all sources. States are tasked with coming up with their own plans to meet requirements.
The water rule clarifies regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act to protect streams and wetlands. That authority has been murky because of confusing and complex guidelines following Supreme Court decisions. Polluters have escaped fines for violations because of uncertain jurisdiction. But ranchers and farmers worry that even small ditches and ponds would be subject to federal regulation, raising costs and overall compliance burdens.
Both rules face legal challenges.
Republican Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman recently entered Colorado into a multi-state lawsuit seeking to block implementation of the carbon rule, putting her at odds with Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat and supporter of the rule, who has asked the Colorado Supreme Court to weigh whether Coffman is within her authority to sue.
The water rule was temporarily blocked after a federal appeals court in early October ruled that there could be a “substantial possibility of success” in challenging it.
Alex Fitzsimmons, manager of policy and public affairs for the American Energy Alliance, said the carbon rule amounts to backdoor cap-and-trade. Operators could trade carbon credits in Colorado or even across state lines.
“This is really about President Obama’s climate legacy,” Fitzsimmons said in addressing the small audience in Denver.
Greg Sopkin, an energy attorney and former chairman of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission, raised fears of rates spiking for consumers.
“What they are proposing is socialization of costs,” Sopkin said. “Raise everybody’s costs, that’s socializing.”
State Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, added: “When I was growing up, in science, I thought carbon dioxide was important. ... How is it then that all of a sudden it’s the nastiest thing on Earth?”
Scientists, of course, point out that it’s the increase of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere that’s the problem, not the gas itself.
Given the spike in carbon as it relates to climate change, Hickenlooper in September released a climate plan for the state. His administration is confident that Colorado is well-positioned to satisfy federal regulations.
“The climate plan helps develop our strategies for protecting public health as our climate changes,” said Dr. Larry Wolk, executive director and chief medical officer of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. “It also demonstrates our commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions through EPA’s Clean Power Plan and Colorado’s own initiatives.”
Pete Maysmith, executive director of Conservation Colorado, said it is appropriate that the last of the “Coming Storm” hearings was held just before Halloween, as the intent was to scare the public, he said.
“This road show to do fear mongering around environmental protections would be very suited in a Halloween horror movie than in real life,” Maysmith said.
“We know that Coloradans are eager to lead when it comes to renewable energy and clean energy,” Maysmith added. “This is political gamesmanship. It’s a show trial.”
pmarcus@durangoherald.com
