Energy & Politics
This section is both the most difficult to write and also the most important section (aside from an understanding of split-estate law) because so much has been happening and so little of the nature of the process has been explained. Rather than weave any set of certainly believable scenarios, we’ll attempt to put things in a reasonable context and time line. We desperately hope this will encourage you to act. At the very least you should begin voicing your educated opinion on what you read, as well as pose some tough questions to those who enabled or allowed what’s described below to happen in our county.
Not all Renewable Energy is Created Equally
We all understand that the move to renewable energy sources is desirable. It will come at a cost, but hopefully the benefits will one day balance the equation. Geothermal energy production is highly desirable because it’s about as dependable a source of 24 hour day energy as a coal plant, but without the pollution. Colorado has had no geothermal development to speak of aside from small-scale local usage. So, given the mandate requiring certain, increasing amounts of renewable energy be used in CO, it seems to make sense to take a hard look at geothermal. Unfortunately, to date, companies who have done this for decades have found our prospects unattractive.
Colorado Government and Renewable Energy
Governor Ritter has taken an active role in promoting all approaches to conservation and renewable energy, and for the most part we all applaud those efforts. He created the Governor’s Energy Office in April of 2007, which was preceded by an agency called the Governor’s Office of Energy, Management and Conservation. You can go to the website for renewable energy at http://www.colorado.gov/energy/index.php?/renewable/
In any case, at some point, greater and greater interest was building for the possibility of geothermal electricity generation at Mt. Princeton. Please go to this page to get some idea of the level of interest and enthusiasm as of May, 2008: http://salidacitizen.com/2008/05/hot-springs-eyed-for-renewable-energy-project/ (As an important note, there has been much speculation about the reported ownership division presented in this article. A clear statement from those mentioned would be helpful in understanding just what is happening!)
The Colorado School of Mines
A final paper, based on field work of the Colorado School of Mines (CSM) and Boise State University in the Chalk Creek area entitled “Characterization of the Upper Arkansas River Basin, Chaffee County Colorado” was published June 13, 2008. It is a comprehensive look specifically aimed at studying the geothermal system and hydrology of this area. It is not a short read and quite technical, but of tremendous use to Mt. Princeton Geothermal LLC. It can be found at http://pal.boisestate.edu/images/3/30/Finalreport2008.pdf
The study represents a lot of good, hard work that was enabled by the residents of this valley – they allowed access to their land so that various testing methods could be experienced by the students. Aside from being educational to those interested in looking deeply into the geological complexities of this valley, the results of this study provided a private company with exactly the data it hoped it could use in a for-profit venture. If you’ve read this far and understand the troubles now besetting the very same residents, the ones who kindly allowed the CSM access to their land (split-estate/1916 Homestead act), you may begin to understand the resentment that is building in this valley.
But on with the story. The GEO’s FY 2007-8 annual report (download here) stated the following:
“The Colorado Geothermal Working Group’s 2008 action plan objectives are to:
- Encourage the development of Colorado’s first geothermal electricity production facility….” Furthermore, it stated that “At the Colorado School of Mines (CSM), professors have been expanding Program support for geothermal resources. Three professors from CSM supported a summer program for 12 students at Mt. Princeton to identify resource potential for Colorado’s first geothermal electricity project.
Mt. Princeton in the Cross Hairs
So it’s clear that the GEO and other agencies from which it received information had chosen Mt. Princeton as their declared first geothermal plant target and that the CSM studies had been designed to further that goal. But here is the problem. The stated goal of the GEO in that same document with regard to public education is to “Assist the public to easily find information, while being exposed to information they may not realize they need. Connect users with exceptional outside resources when necessary and relevant.” (Emphasis ours). We believe that we have, at the very least, been poorly served, if not misled, by the GEO. Among many issues of note where, as best we can determine, no public information assistance was forthcoming, was ANYONE in this area advised of the public input and comment time period for the PEIS process? Surely that would be a highly relevant bit of information.
As the GEO is the governor’s agency, we believe his involvement in this entire process needs to be carefully assessed. Please go to the follow Mountain Mail article of May 12, 2008: http://www.themountainmail.com/main.asp?SectionID=4&SubSectionID=4&ArticleID=13663.
You will see that Mt. Princeton Geothermal, LLC was fully represented, as was the GEO. To make matters worse, Dr. Henderson is quoted as saying, “As a first step, Colorado School of Mines students will conduct geophysical surveys.” So it seems clear to us that both the GEO and the CSM were, for all intents and purposes, working on behalf of Mt. Princeton Geothermal, LLC, a private for-profit corporation. In light of what is transpiring now, one of the stated goals of the Governor’s Office of Energy was to communicate to the public information they may not realize they need. Surely the implications of mineral leasing and the adverse consequences to the residents with split-estate law would be part of that information!
If the Governor should attempt to distance himself from this apparent direct connection to one private company, he will have a hard time. Aside from being directly involved in continuous public “education” – more like sales pitches, a subsidiary office under the GEO, the Clean Energy Fund (if we’ve kept this straight), granted the LLC $60,000 this year to further their drilling program. See this page: http://denver.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2009/05/11/story9.html
If all this wouldn’t make you just a bit upset as a resident in Nathrop, we haven’t even discussed the role of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in all this. Residents were being sold on the wonders of the facility to come their way (the size of a greenhouse was the tall tale – just for fun go to this site and think of the greenhouses you’ve seen): http://www.rasertech.com/geothermal
Nominating Land for Geothermal: Easier than You Think
In the meantime, “someone” nominated 800 acres of BLM mineral leases surrounding Mt. Princeton Hot Springs. This is an extraordinarily easy process – any citizen over 18 with $105 plus $0.10 per acre can nominate any collection of BLM ground above a 160 acre total to the agency. If they deem it leasable, it goes to auction. It is my understanding that Dr. Henderson claims to have not nominated the ground, which is likely the case. But anyone acting as a proxy for himself or the company could do it. And it just appears to be the best possible collection of acreage for a geothermal project in this area. We’ll leave you to your own conclusions.
The BLM determined, we’re convinced, with all the “appropriate” encouragement that could be brought into play that this acreage was suitable for mining operation; the residents awoke one day to the news that the 800 acre parcel was to be auctioned November 12, 2009. Only by concerted individual efforts was this auctioned delayed just in time. Once a lease has been sold, the owner of the lease has up to ten years to work it with very little effort. There seems to be some confusion on this point but our reading of the lease indicated that, after a successful purchase, a timely annual lease rental payment is all that is required to hold the lease. There was some discussion of a small extra requirement at year six, but Dr. Henderson’s recent quote in the Chaffee County Times that the developer only has one year to “create what will lead to the development of the resource” is, as best we can determine, patently false.
So there you have some idea of what has transpired so far. The BLM has indicated that it intends to modify the lease to some degree, then auction it again in February. If that were to occur, all the foreseeable and unforeseen consequences to the area’s beauty, water and people would be in play again, regardless of who purchased the lease. DO NOT FORGET – THIS SAME PROCESS COULD HAPPEN TO YOU IF YOU DON’T OWN THE MINERAL ESTATE UNDER YOUR GROUND. To repeat, this is not just a Nathrop issue.
Call to Action
Ask the people and agencies involved how the community’s “Education” failed us so badly. Insist that they assume some responsibility to help us put things right. Help us effectively encourage the BLM to stop and reconsider the path its on with this lease. Ask them to do some work themselves, as it was their process that lead us into this mess. Demand help and action, NOW!