An oil rig towers over homes in Erie on Jan. 15. The Denver Postap “Managing the Boom” series looked at the relationship between Colorado’s booming oil and gas industry and affected communities and agricultural areas. (RJ Sangosti, The Denver Post)
Re: “Managing the Boom,” Feb. 15-17 series.
Almost 40 years ago, my family decided to allow Amoco Production Company to drill underneath our farms in exchange for royalty payments. I thought this was a prudent financial choice, but have discovered after recent well drilling that it had been an error in judgment.
My family and I started to notice strange smells coming from the tank battery owned by Encana, the operating company for the new wells. I inquired to the state and a representative came out to the area and confirmed that the battery was not built correctly.
Why was this not built correctly in the first place? If an industrial operation is constructed very close to families’ homes, shouldn’t the energy companies take careful precautions to ensure that all the equipment is properly constructed? I am not opposed to oil and gas drilling; but families should not have to be negatively affected in order to get protections from drilling in their area.
I urge the governor’s oil and gas task force to recommend strong community protections.
Jim Hergenreder,Longmont
This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.It would seem that so many people move to rural Colorado and expect to have an idyllic situation. Once they move, these people are often surprised to find oil and gas workers drilling, miners mining, hunters hunting, cows mooing, and elk stomping their grass and flowers. On top of that, we have thousands living in areas that are at high risk of forest fires and are shocked that the rest of the citizens of the state don’t want to pay exorbitant taxes so they can have their view.
Look, people, life is filled with tradeoffs and it was your choice to live where you do — just like those of us who live in urban areas deal with traffic, crime, crowding and noise. I am for people making their own choices in this life; just don’t make the rest of us have to pay so you can strictly control the environment in which you live.
Joseph Galmish,Wheat Ridge
This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.As with the construction of airports well “out of town” and then followed by construction of residential developments closer and closer, resulting in those new residents complaining about the noise, now we see the same thing happening with the construction of drilling sites. If the development was already established, residents might have a case, but if they purchased a home near the existing site, my feeling is: If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
Barbara Vetter,Broomfield
This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.In order for the public to make informed decisions about fracking, the pros and cons must be objectively presented. Your series neglected to mention several research-based consequences that people need to understand in order to protect themselves and their loved ones.
Your articles did not mention evidence of health hazards associated with fracking, particularly for the very young, as well as the health effects of the myriad chemicals used. There was no mention of earthquakes that are linked to wastewater injection. Drinking water and aquifers are put at risk by fracking. Methane leaks are significantly higher than frackers have previously stated. Methane is associated with global weather chaos and is 20-plus times more potent than CO2.
Your articles mentioned consequences that can be tolerated considering the economic benefits, but neglected to inform the public of consequences to life and limb.
Richard Bluhm,Westminster
This letter was published in the Feb. 22 edition.
Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
