CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 24, 2009 01:54 AM UTC

Mercury in Grand Junction

  • 22 Comments
  • by: Jim Carpenter

(In response to this story–Josh Penry? Your district? Hello? – promoted by Colorado Pols)

FRIDAY POLS UPDATE #2: Liberal activist group Progress Now opens fire, just got a release from them hammering both Scott McInnis and Josh Penry equally for their “failure to act.” Full text after the jump–says the ubiquitous Michael Huttner, “It is unconscionable that days after the Department of Energy presented plans to store toxic mercury at a Mesa County landfill, in violation of previous agreements, they have remained silent.”

POLS FRIDAY AM UPDATE: The Grand Junction Sentinel reports:

Gov. Bill Ritter will oppose any federal effort to store mercury in Mesa County, drawing a harder line than state health officials had in telling their federal counterparts earlier this week they had a “high burden” of showing that the project could move forward.

“Colorado’s Western Slope is no place for the federal government to deposit thousands of tons of mercury,” Ritter said in a statement issued Thursday. “The risks to ground and surface water are too great. The risks to our air quality are too great. The risks of transporting elemental mercury over long distances and on routes that run adjacent to or cross major water sources, such as the Colorado River, are too great.”

Ritter’s announcement was a disappointment, said Ray Plieness, director of the Office of Site Operations within the Energy Department’s Office of Legacy Management.

“This could certainly put into question whether that could even happen,” Plieness said, stressing the federal agency has a long history of “extremely good relations” working with the state in Mesa County and at 10 other sites in Colorado.

This story has now been at full steam since Tuesday, and it’s increasingly peculiar that Colorado’s GOP gubernatorial candidates, Josh Penry and Scott McInnis, both of whom ostensibly live in Mesa County, have been ‘unavailable for comment’ the whole time. Getting kind of late in the news cycle, wouldn’t you say? What’s the problem here? Original post follows.

Gov. Ritter opposes the shipment of thousands of tons of mercury to the Grand Junction Disposal Site in Grand Junction. The Colo. Dept of Public Heath and Environment earlier this week laid out in great detail its concerns to the US Dept of Energy.

Gov. Ritter said: “The risks to ground and surface water are too great. The risks to our air quality are too great. The risks of transporting elemental mercury over long distances and on routes that run adjacent to or cross major water sources, such as the Colorado River, are too great.”

Another issue is that when the DOE sited the facility in western Mesa County for long-term disposal of uranium mill tailings, it publicly assured everyone that the site would never be used to store other hazardous wastes.

This is one of 7 sites DOE says it is considering. Colorado’s Health Department would have to issue permits for this to happen. DOE has an especially high burden here, particularly since they promised not to store other waste here.

ProgressNow Colorado Demands McInnis, Penry Stand Up for Public Health in Mesa County

Why Are Scott McInnis, Josh Penry Silent on Mercury Dump?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Friday, July 24, 2009

CONTACT: Michael Huttner at 303-931-4547

DENVER–As elected officials around Colorado grew increasingly wary of Department of Energy proposals to store large quantities of toxic mercury near the city of Grand Junction, ProgressNow Colorado, the state’s largest online progressive advocacy organization released the following statement:

“We demand that Scott ‘McLobbyist’ McInnis and Josh Penry stand up to protect the public health now,” said ProgressNow Colorado founder Michael Huttner.  “It is unconscionable that days after the Department of Energy presented plans to store toxic mercury at a Mesa County landfill, in violation of previous agreements, they have remained silent.

“Yesterday, Rep. Steve King, Republican from Grand Junction, told reporters that he would oppose any attempt by the Department of Energy to transport mercury to Mesa County.[1] Governor Bill Ritter also announced his opposition to this proposal.[2] Both of them are to be commended for taking swift action to protect the public health,” Huttner said.

The area’s other representative in the General Assembly, Sen. Josh Penry, ‘could not be reached for comment’ according to the Grand Junction Sentinel.[3] Scott McInnis, who represented the area in Congress from 1993-2005, has also been completely silent.

“It’s totally unacceptable,” concluded Huttner, “and the people of Mesa County should demand accountability for their failure to act.”

###

[1] Grand Junction Sentinel. Rep. King: Feds should look elsewhere to store mercury. 7/23/2009.

[2] Grand Junction Sentinel. Ritter says he’ll oppose mercury on West Slope. 7/24/2009.

[3] Grand Junction Sentinel. Local officials lukewarm on idea of storing mercury within Mesa County. 7/22/2009.

Comments

22 thoughts on “Mercury in Grand Junction

  1. 1. We should not risk our water supply and environment with this mercury waste.

    2. DOE promised not to use this site for other hazardous waste.

    When the Gov. makes a blunder we have called him on it. If he takes a positive stand for Colorado on an issue he deserves our support on that issue. Thanks Gov.

  2. I appreciate this insight. Would rather hear it directly from the Governor but something is better than nothing.

    However, I note it was posted on government time.

    Jim, help the Governor fix the problems and stop worrying about the blogs. By posting on blogs you only give fuel to the fire that Elliman has undercut you.

    Help solve the problem-don’t create one.

  3. Governor Ritter has taken exactly the right position on this issue. As you pointed out, the site was and has always been designated to store uranium mill tailings which in the past has been a significant problem on the West Slope, and therefore it makes sense for that kind of facility to be located in that area.

    This is another example of Governor Ritter’s commitment to enhancing and preserving our Colorado way of life for us and our children.

  4. …this sounded like an astrology reading.  “Venus is in the second house, Jupiter is in opposition, Mercury is in Grand Junction.”  I’m almost relieved that it’s talking about the toxic metal instead.

    One thing that is not clear to me – why/how is the US accumulating large quantities of mercury?  Side effect of mining/refining other metals?  Recycled leftovers from millions of rectal thermometers?  The article did not explain, and I have not found a good explanation via googling.

    1. …bans the export of mercury.

      Since mercury is used in compact fluorescent bulbs, and since most of those are made in China, we have become a net importer of mercury.  We want to recycle the mercury because we don’t want it in our landfills, but since we can no longer ship it to the countries where compact fluorescents are made, and we keep importing more lightbulbs every year, it’s going to build up.

      The rationale behind the ban was apparently that companies who wanted to circumvent U.S. law would simply export the mercury to third-world contries, where it would be disposed of illegally and find its way into the ocean. There, it accumulates in fish and poisons those of us who eat them.  I don’t think the law will stop illegal dumping of mercury, but I guess it will stop the dumping of OUR mercury.

      Thermometers are not the only source of metallic mercury.  It’s also used in switches and relays.  Take the cover off of an older, non-computerized thermostat, for example, and you’ll find a mercury switch.  It’s also used in the chlor-alkalai process to produce chlorine and sodium hydroxide.

      A large quantity of mercury that is currently stockpiled in the DOE system was used in the production of the isotope Lithium-6, which is used in thermonuclear weapons.

      I wrote about the background of the project here.  The politics of how the repository came to be proposed in locations other than Oak Ridge, where the DOE’s mercury is currently stored, was something the DOE left out of its presentation at the Grand Junction meeting.

  5. He’s not taking Penry to task on this right now. The fact that neither of them have responded is very telling as to how they would act as Governor.

    Meanwhile the guy who’s supposed to be a weak leader comes out and takes a clear stand on it right away.

    Side note: why are we always trying to poison the Western Slope? I mean, I know that a candidate doesn’t need them to carry the state, but this is getting ridiculous. 🙂

    1. are well understood, regardless of geography. Neonatal poisoning is a devastating thing. It’s a major reason pregnant and nursing mothers are cautioned against eating fish anymore. Sad.  

        1. They have projects, but in my opinion (and I worked at that facility for 18 years) the office is at or below the “critical mass” of staff at which the DOE can comfortably justify having a facility here.  Most of the work they do is environmental monitoring of sites elsewhere in the US that DOE has either actively or passively remediated.

          There used to be a world-class analytical chemistry laboratory at the site, but that has been torn down.

          To be quite honest, most of the work that Grand Junction does can be done from almost anywhere.  A plane ticket is a plane ticket.  I think the DOE and Contractor staff recognize that as a significant vulnerability.  The alternative to Grand Junction would be to transfer the work to Morgantown.  I think that as far as keeping an office here compared to moving the work elsewhere, it’s a wash.  If the office gets smaller, it will no longer be a wash.

          They have the Moab project, but that project isn’t going to last forever.

          They’re looking for things close to home to justify their existence as a field office.  Kind of like putting their thumbs on the scale.  

      1. But their obsession traps them in the untenable situation of either tacitly supporting a really stupid thing or agreeing with Bill.

        This is fun!

      2. but no problem coming off as uncaring for the health of residents (constituents)in his own district?

        I choose to focus on Sen. Penry because this is the district he’s serving. He’s still serving, right? He hasn’t pulled up stakes and moved the family to Denver yet?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

60 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!