Listen to this post
RBC I Since April 2007, Colorado’s water planners have ignored Central Colorado Project’s (CCP) innovative high altitude water and energy storage solution for state and regional needs. This oversight is a serious violation of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rules.
Unfortunately, because of endless interbasin infighting, Colorado has never had a professional state water plan to guide its critical water development decisions. Colorado is the only western state relying primarily on water supplies that were planned and developed by the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) prior to the 1970s. Colorado’s water costs and farm dry-up rates are now among the highest. Our state’s natural headwater advantages are being wasted.
Since the 1970s, Colorado’s various attempts with decentrailized water planning have been counterproductive failures. Federal reports indicate Colorado is still losing more than 40 percent of its valuable and vulnerable 1922 Colorado River Compact entitlements to thirsty down river states. Colorado has no definitive near or long-term plans to resolve this travesty.
Colorado should immediately unite behind an objective modeling evaluation of CCP’s breakthrough state and regional water and energy solution. CCP’s U. S. Patented high altitude pumped-storage concept can integrate and selectively multiply the reliability and productivity of limited water and energy resources throughout five major Southwestern river systems and the western power grid. All urban and rural stakeholders would benefit.
USBR’s engineers could complete CCP’s vital modeling task within 12 months, if given high level green lights from Colorado and the Department of Interior. CCP’s expected benefit-cost ratio may be higher than 10 to 1. Conventional alternatives, such as Two Forks, Southern Delivery System, and Flaming Gorge Pipeline have less than 2 to 1 benefit-cost expectations.
In addition to lower utility costs for state and regional consumers, Central Colorado Project’s extraordinary economic and environmental advantages could be used to substantially enhance cities, farms, schools, roads, environments, etc. throughout the 21st Century and beyond.
Why is Colorado relying on a costly and futile water planning process within each competing river basin, using non-professional volunteers that may have personal conflicts of interest with Colorado’s vital statewide water and energy development solutions?
All Coloradans should enthusiastically support expedited development of Central Colorado Project’s unprecedented capabilities to substantially benefit our state and region’s current and future generations. Colorado has wasted more than 40 years with a failed water planning process. It’s time for an innovative change of direction.