DENVER - Raw sewage rarely draws a crowd, but former Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter joined city leaders from across the state in Denver on Thursday to learn more about turning human waste into natural gas.

David Cox, director of operations for the Renewable Natural Gas Coalition, said turning waste into fuel actually can lower greenhouse-gas emissions that otherwise would be released on farms, landfills and water-treatment facilities.

"Renewable natural gas provides an opportunity to convert everyday waste into transportation fuel or renewable electricity," he said. "This can be part of Colorado's solution to smog and air pollution, to combat climate change, to stabilize fuel prices."

Cox said the same energy extracted by drilling deep into the earth can be harvested from landfills and sewage because, regardless of where organic matter decomposes, methane - the primary component of natural gas - is released. Since methane is more than 80 times more powerful at trapping heat than is carbon dioxide, he said, redirecting emissions into a pipeline could help reduce climate pollution.

Cox pointed to the city of Grand Junction as one example of how renewable natural gas can provide cleaner energy for transportation. He said the city's Persigo Wastewater Treatment Plant already transforms more than 8 million gallons of sewage into fuel for some 40 vehicles.

"They're capturing their waste gas at their wastewater treatment plant," he said. "They're fueling their city's vehicles - refuse trucks, street sweepers, dump trucks and sedans."

Because the conversion process ends up paying for itself, Cox said, Colorado has an opportunity to replicate Grand Junction's efforts across the state. With shale production declining, he said, tapping Colorado's energy infrastructure for renewables could be something that anti-fracking activists and the gas industry can agree on. The conference was co-sponsored by Energy Vision and the Denver Metro Clean Cities Coalition.


get more stories like this via email

Gov. Tom Wolf announced Pennsylvania is moving forward with plans for industrial-sector decarbonization, with a proposal to the federal government for the state to host a hydrogen and carbon capture hub.

The hub would include the creation of hydrogen from natural gas, along with a large pipeline network which would carry captured carbon emissions from factories to areas where the carbon would be injected underground for permanent storage.

The White House Council on Environmental Quality estimates the hubs would cost between $170 billion and $230 billion to construct.

Sean O'Leary, senior researcher at the Ohio River Valley Institute, said the cost of such a project outweighs the benefits.

"Developing the hydrogen hub and using the carbon capture equipment in factories, in power plants, wouldn't actually do anything to increase their output or the value that they're delivering to the economy," O'Leary argued. "It would simply increase their cost of doing so."

He added it is a cost we would see in our taxes and electric bills. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act included $8 billion to create four hydrogen hubs nationwide. Critics of carbon-capture technology contended it is untested at a large-scale level, is expensive, and does not reduce carbon in the atmosphere.

Joanne Kilgour, executive director of the Ohio River Valley Institute, said the governor and some state lawmakers are proposing a number of subsidies and regulations related to the hub. She added as the project moves forward, state officials must be transparent with the public.

"This is fundamentally about spending public money on decarbonization solutions that are supposed to be helping to improve public health and address the climate crisis," Kilgour stated. "And yet the public has largely not had a way to get involved."

Wolf emphasized pursuing the hub will promote the creation of clean jobs in Pennsylvania while supporting the Biden Administration's commitment to significantly reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050.

Pennsylvania is the second-largest producer of natural gas in the country.

New York elected officials are calling on the General Assembly to pass legislation to transition new buildings off fossil fuels, saying it would make the state cleaner and healthier.

The All-Electric Building Act would require new buildings to have all-electric appliances for space and water heating and cooking by 2023. It also would mandate state agencies to identify policies to make electricity more affordable and accessible for low-income residents.

Dominic Frongillo, co-Founder of Elected Officials to Protect America, said it is about saving lives and money.

"Right here in New York, air pollution from burning gas and buildings leads to about 1,000 deaths a year and most of those are in communities of color," Frongillo reported. "It's a real, real harm to our public health."

New York burns more fossil fuels in its buildings than any state in the country. Research shows an all-electric home in New York City would save households $6,800 over the course of 15 years.

The bill received a hearing last week and must be passed by the end of the legislative session June 2.

William Reinhardt, an Albany County legislator, and a former professional energy analyst with the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, said in the long run, it makes the most sense economically to introduce new technologies through new construction.

"If you compare an all-electric building, new construction now, to a fossil-fuel building with central air conditioning, again new construction, so we are comparing apples to apples, the all-electric building is actually cheaper," Reinhardt pointed out.

Under the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act of 2019, New York is mandating 70% of all electricity generated in New York be from renewable sources by 2030. Officials say getting all newly-constructed buildings to be fossil fuel-free is key to achieving the goal.

CORRECTION: Enbridge is proposing a rerouting of its existing Line 5. An earlier version incorrectly stated the project involved an expansion. (2:40 p.m. MST, May 17, 2022)

It's been a year since Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's order to close the Line 5 pipelines was supposed to take effect - but the pipeline system is still operating, and its company Enbridge Energy is proposing a reroute.

The reroute would take Line 5 through hundreds of waterways in Michigan and Wisconsin, and the company also plans to build a tunnel around the existing pipeline under the Straits of Mackinac.

Jannan Cornstalk is director of the Water is Life festival and a citizen of the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians. She is among those who signed a letter to the Army Corps of Engineers, asking them to reject permits for expanding Line 5.

"Our community is a tribal fishing community," said Cornstalk. "If and when the pipeline breaks anywhere along the line, it will affect so many tributaries, inland streams, lakes, not just the Straits."

According to the National Wildlife Federation, Line 5 leaked 29 times from 1968 to 2017.

A company spokesperson said an estimated $46 million dollars will be spent with Native-owned businesses and communities for the rerouting, and the project is undergoing reviews by state and federal regulators.

The integrity of those reviews has been questioned by tribal leaders and environmental groups.

Bill Latka is one of the co-founders of the coalition Oil and Water Don't Mix. He pointed to research that shows anchor strikes are the most likely way that the pipelines could rupture.

"It's located in the middle of a business shipping channel," said Latka. "And when you put those two things - pipelines and anchors - next to each other, it's bound to happen. There's bound to be a rupture."

Cornstalk added that it's important for the Army Corps of Engineers and other agencies responsible for issuing permits to consult with Tribal Nations that have been stewards of the land for centuries.

"As tribal people, it's like we need to be included in the conversation, immediately have consultation from the beginning," said Cornstalk, "because we are supposed to have a government-to-government relationship, and many times that doesn't happen."