Colorado can lead the way in addressing the climate and public health impacts of landfills
Harvesting wheat crops near Denver with a landfill site between them. (John Finney Photography via Getty Images)
When it comes to slowing the impact of climate change, reducing as much methane as we can, as fast as we can, is the most impactful and cost-effective action we can take. After working to reduce this highly polluting greenhouse gas from Colorado's coal, mining, oil, and gas sectors, the administration of Gov. Jared Polis just took a major step toward reducing the mountains of methane emanating from an overlooked source: landfills.
Every year, Colorado's landfills emit an estimated 4.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent of methane — the same climate impact as adding a staggering 1 million gas-powered cars to the road. In addition to methane, landfills leak leachate and a cocktail of pollutants into nearby communities, often disproportionately affecting people of color and low-income residents who already shoulder the heaviest burdens of climate change.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
For example, 45% of Colorado's landfills are located near communities where a higher-than-average number of households have low household incomes. The toxic pollution from landfills puts these residents at increased risk of respiratory and cardiovascular conditions and often is on top of other cumulative impacts. More than half of Colorado's landfills are located in areas where asthma, cancer and melanoma rates are higher than the state average.
The impacts of these landfills are more than just statistics: Across the country, residents who live near landfills routinely report chronic respiratory conditions, migraines and more. Fortunately, earlier this month, the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment released a new draft of emissions standards for landfills that raise the bar for landfill management and will result in cleaner air for millions of Coloradans. The state's Air Quality Control Commission voted to advance these draft regulations and is on track to finalize updated standards this August.
CDPHE's draft rule gets a lot right. For starters, it includes smart provisions like more effective gas collection systems, a significantly reduced threshold for what constitutes a methane exceedance, and landfill cover practices designed to keep methane in the ground. It also closes loopholes that allow pollutants to escape. For example, EPA research reveals that half of the carbon in food waste degrades into methane within 3.6 years. Yet, current state standards allow five years to pass before expanding gas collection systems. This timeline mismatch enables huge amounts of methane to escape into the atmosphere, and CDPHE's standards propose making a simple but necessary fix. Finally, in a nationwide first, the draft rule includes language requiring landfill operators to mitigate large methane leaks identified via satellite or aerial surveys.
However, while CDPHE's rule takes meaningful steps to modernize how landfills find and control methane, there's still further to go. Because methane is invisible, it's often hiding in plain sight. Huge advancements in methane monitoring technology make finding and fixing emissions easier than ever. Yet, despite the availability and cost-effectiveness of advanced detection tools like drones and sensors, CDPHE's proposed rule makes using such technology optional rather than a required best practice. I hope to see the final rule rise to the occasion by embracing cutting-edge technology and leading the industry — and the country — into the future.
Colorado is no stranger to bold climate action. During my tenure as governor, I signed over 50 bills that transformed our state's energy sector to be sustainable and secure, including legislation that expanded our renewable energy portfolio and helped transition the state away from coal. Now, as we face the challenge of landfill methane emissions, the state is poised to lead the nation once more and provide a blueprint for other states to follow. We have the tools and the technology to mitigate methane pollution, and the time to act is now. I urge the Air Quality Control Commission to pass and implement an ambitious, science-backed landfill emissions rule and provide cleaner air for millions of residents across the Centennial State.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Colorado Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen resigns to take national position
DNEVER (KDVR) — Colorado Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen has resigned from the Colorado Senate, the senator's office announced Monday morning. His resignation was effective Monday, June 9, as he heads to the American Excellence Foundation, a national investment nonprofit focused on supporting conservative causes where he will be the next president and CEO. The organization's board unanimously approved of Lundeen in the position. 11 Colorado companies named among top workplaces in nation: US News The Republican leader has been in Colorado's Senate for seven sessions and served as minority leader since 2022. He also served in the Colorado House of Representatives four sessions and four years on the Colorado State Board of Education. 'Serving Colorado has been an honor and blessing,' Lundeen said in a press release. 'I am grateful to the people of Senate District 9 for the opportunity to fight for policies that empower individuals, protect our communities, and promote prosperity. As I transition to a national platform, I am eager to continue advocating for personal freedom, economic opportunity, and common-sense conservative values.' According to a press release, Lundeen's achievements in Colorado's General Assembly include co-leading an effort to rewrite Colorado's public education funding formula, playing a key role in successfully cutting the state income tax rate, and sponsoring bills that have since become law to combat human trafficking. Colorado Senate Republicans in a statement congratulated Lundeen for his next steps. 'We are grateful for his many years of dedicated public service and thank him for his leadership over the years fighting for students, economic freedom, and safety for all Coloradans,' the statement read. 'We wish him well and are excited to see him succeed in his next endeavor.' The Senate Republican Caucus will hold a meeting on Thursday to elect its new minority leader. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump to California: Surrender
President Donald Trump walks on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, DC, on Monday, June 9, 2025. Credit - Yuri Gripas—Abaca/Bloomberg via Getty Images This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME's politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox. President Donald Trump seems on the cusp of getting everything he appears to love out of the crisis in Los Angeles. An opportunity to stoke political divisions and suppress dissent. A showdown with a deep-blue state's Governor with White House ambitions. A chance to nurse grievances dear to his base and largely ungrounded in reality. And an opposition party left unsure of how to navigate a minefield of Trump's making. Taken together, the blend of circumstances seems trending in Trump's gleeful direction. The President on Monday told reporters on the White House' South Lawn that he would be fine arresting California Gov. Gavin Newsom, called protesters against his mass immigration raids 'insurrectionists,' and blamed the unrest on professional agitators. He said the United States cannot accept any disrespect for law enforcement. And he seemed on the edge of invoking a 19th Century law that could be used to quash civic protest and sidestep basic constitutional rights. 'Order will be restored, illegals will be expelled, and Los Angeles will be set free,' Trump posted on social media. Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta responded with a suit against Trump for overstepping his power in sending 2,000 troops into Los Angeles to quell protests against federal immigration raids. The escalating situation seems destined to set up a clash that has no apparent off-ramp, winners, or remedies. It's quite the split screen for a President who, just four years ago, unleashed a violent mob on the U.S. Capitol after he lost his re-election bid in 2020. Whereas Trump gave a blanket pardon for those accused of the Jan. 6 insurrection against Congress that left 138 police injured, he is now professing fealty to the uniform. While insisting he is steadying security for borders, Trump is at the same time launching the West Coast's population center into a freefall of uncertainty. And even as he casts the liberal elite as out-of-touch with so-called American values, he is threatening a core of U.S. character: immigration. 'They spit, we hit,' Trump said, suggesting protests against his raids were insulting police and necessitating a violent response. It has more than a few echoes to his impertinent reaction to the Black Lives Matter activism that marked the final year of his first term. These days, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have been wading more aggressively into workplaces and courthouses as part of Trump's promised crackdown on those in the country without proper papers. Officers are operating in overdrive as they try to hit White House-prescribed quotas for deportations. In response, protests have broken out as activists see the efforts as capricious and mean-spirited. L.A. police have said the protests there were mostly peaceful, although things in the nation's second-largest city did escalate over the weekend, with some of that spurred by the guardsmens' arrival. While arrests reached double digits, the situation was nowhere near the crisis White House aides tried to suggest. Rather than letting this play out, the White House has exacerbated tensions and the city has responded by declaring downtown an illegal demonstration. While making clear he's prepared to fight back, Newsom has tried to de-escalate the situation: 'Don't take the bait,' he told Californians. 'Never use violence or harm law enforcement.' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass likened it to 'intentional chaos.' Democratic lawmakers in Congress are similarly casting this as a mess of Trump's making, not one rooted in reality. But here's the thing: once the kindling is lit, it may be impossible to stop it—especially if the country's top leader is keen to watch it spread. 'We're going to have troops everywhere,' Trump said Sunday. And Trump's top White House aides suggested the snowballing situation was exactly what they had in mind. 'This is a fight to save civilization,' posted White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, an architect of Trump's hardline anti-immigrant policies. This is a moment of political testing unseen since 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson deployed the National Guard without a Governor's request to protect civil rights demonstrators. No White House since then has dared to go around a state chief to activate domestic troops, and the seeming trigger for a careening upswing is an 1807 law that allows the military to be used to quash a domestic uprising. At the same time, the Pentagon has put Marines stationed at Camp Pendleton on high alert and ready to mobilize if things escalate. The fast-moving clash between a Republican President and the nation's largest Democratic-led state has left insiders on both sides of the aisle craning for answers. Los Angeles, a city rooted as much in Hollywood as its rich immigrant communities, is not one to be idle as Washington takes a heavy hand. And Washington, a company town driven by ego more than anything, is flexing its muscle over its West Coast power rival. The fight seems to be on the upswing, not a descent. Trump is spoiling for the battle and Newsom is laying the groundwork for a 2028 presidential bid. Put all of this together and it's a big ol' mess primed to spiral in ways that are hard to predict, but destined to define this part of Trump's legacy. Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter. Write to Philip Elliott at
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The History of White Refugee Narratives
White South Africans who support U.S. President Donald Trump in front of the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria, South Africa on February 15, 2025. Credit - Marco Longari—AFP/Getty Images In May, a charter flight from Johannesburg landed at Dulles International Airport. About 50 white South Africans, known as Afrikaners, were on board, claiming that their livelihoods were jeopardized by a climate of "anti-white racism." This depiction of South Africa has resonated among American right-wing commentators since at least the first Trump Administration. In the view of folks such as Tucker Carlson, Charlie Kirk, and Stephen Miller, efforts to redress inequalities and injustices borne of the Apartheid era constitute, in Miller's words, 'race-based persecution.' The Afrikaners' whiteness, they claim, opens them up to discrimination, threatens the seizure of their farms, and makes them targets of violence. In response, the Trump Administration has granted some Afrikaners refugee status, a glaring exception to the general halt it has put on the entry of people fleeing persecution from around the world. President Donald Trump has rationalized this exceptional treatment by gesturing to unsubstantiated and debunked reports of racialized attacks. 'It's a genocide that's taking place,' he told reporters. Trump recently used the same terms in an attempt to browbeat South African president Cyril Ramaphosa in the oval office. Now, the Afrikaners are on a fast-track to citizenship. The characterization of 'Black' government as existentially threatening has a long history in the United States. Slaveholders first developed the trope in the 1790s in their representations of the emergent nation of Haiti, framing it as a dangerous site of social experimentation and savagery where Black freedom would inexorably lead to white death. This depiction was reductive, and purposeful. Haiti's 'horrors' served as a rallying cry and a cautionary tale; they justified a certain understanding of the nature (and future) of racial pluralism in the United States. Today, spurious depictions of South Africa as an anti-white hellscape swim in the same waters. The treatment of refugees, then and now, brings this similarity into high relief. The Long History of the U.S. Backing White South Africans Haitian independence was declared on January 1, 1804. Before that, Haiti was known world-wide as Saint Domingue, a French colony on the western third of Hispaniola that generated tremendous wealth on the backs of enslaved Africans. The series of events that history deems 'the Haitian Revolution' spanned the prior 14 years and encompassed a staggering array of changes. Americans were intimately aware of those events. Over the period, 'St. Domingo' was depicted as a beleaguered colony, a site of fights over racial equality, a plantation economy unraveled by slave rebellion, a place where slavery was legally abolished, a diplomatic partner, and a player in European geopolitics. After 1804, the country became the second independent nation in the Western hemisphere, one expressly defined around the absence of slavery and colonial control. All Haitians, regardless of their ethnicity, were constitutionally defined as 'Black'; land was to be shared; runaway slaves were declared free the moment they touched its shores. In an age of revolutionary change, there was perhaps no more radical shift than this. For most white Americans, and especially enslavers, the white colonists of Saint Domingue experiencing these changes were a focus of racial empathy. 'When we recollect how nearly similar the situation of the Southern States and St. Domingo are in the profusion of Slaves,' South Carolina's governor wrote to the colony's General Assembly in September 1791, 'we cannot but sensibly fear for your situation.' The thousands of white French colonists who fled Haiti and arrived in American communities after a particular moment of disruption in June 1793 were met with open arms, receiving support from private groups, state governments, and the U.S. Congress alike. Dominguans of color, meanwhile, were painted as figures of terror. 'French negroes' prowled Southern nightmares. Southern states and municipalities quickly passed laws that prevented Black refugees from entering their borders (and requiring those present to depart). Rumors of connections between Saint Domingue and slave resistance abounded in Virginia after 1793 and shaped how whites understood Gabriel's revolt in Richmond in 1800. Denmark Vesey's rumored insurrectionary plot in Charleston, South Carolina in 1822 centered around the notion that he had been in contact with Haitian leaders. While posed as being about a threat from without, this U.S. hysteria had everything to do with domestic realities. White American anxiety over 'the horrors of St. Domingo' reified a nation that was white. The phrase cropped up repeatedly as a way to describe the dangers of antislavery activism and 'fanatical' notions of human equality within the United States that weakened the master class's authority and opened the floodgates for Black violence. This narrative proved to be powerful and long-lasting. In 1859, 68 years after the initial insurrections, a proslavery writer would describe John Brown's raid as 'nothing more nor nothing less than an attempt to do on a vast scale what was done in St. Domingo in 1791.' A pro-Confederate cartoon in 1863 showed Abraham Lincoln penning the Emancipation Proclamation with his foot on the Constitution, the devil on his desk, and a blood-drenched picture of Haiti over his shoulder. By this treatment, Haiti was an upside-down world: Black people were free and white people were dead, a depiction that normalized and celebrated the United States as a white slaveholding republic. The Vilification of Springfield's Haitians Taps Into a Long and Troubling History There were other American understandings of the burgeoning Haitian Revolution alongside this one. Some Americans looked to Saint Domingue and saw a just struggle for human dignity and racial equality. Alongside the Revolution in France, Saint Domingue sparked conversations about an oncoming global democratic wave rooted in universal human rights, one that would sweep away tyranny of all sorts. The fact that Americans, white and Black, made these cosmopolitan connections reminds us that, although the American war for independence was in the (recent) past, the American Revolution—the meaning, and quality of the new polity—was very much in flux. White Americans' reactions to events in Saint Domingue allowed for discussions about an American future in which slavery would not exist. The white Dominguans refugees arriving in Philadelphia in 1793 entered a state in which slavery was being gradually ended and in which white and Black activists were attempting to spread that ethos nationwide. As elsewhere, Philadelphia's philanthropic community rose up to provide them food, shelter, and succor, but the white Dominguans were not permitted to maintain their slaves (despite their best efforts to do so). In the 19th century, Americans of color would take Haiti as an emblem of possibility, one that helped bolster pride and engender action. Like the proslavery usage, these efforts were an attempt to make Haiti into an argument about citizenship, race, and rights in the United States. The Trump Administration's decision to grant Afrikaners refugee status flies in the face of U.S. procedures and practice in place since the 1980 Refugee Act, which, in accordance with the international definition, defines a refugee as a person with a 'well-founded fear of persecution.' This initiative bears many of the hallmarks of a Trump policy—it originates from a selective understanding of the realities on the ground; it has been conveyed, explained, and rationalized via a blend of bullying and bluster; above all, it is driven by a venal self-interest. At its heart, the policy seems to bolster Trump's picture of the dangers of initiatives that place value on striving for racial equality. In this view, the Afrikaners are quite literally pale-faced messengers: their plight fits snugly alongside Trump's attacks on institutions of higher education and the U.S. civil service as bastions of antisemitism and DEI initiatives. As such, the administration is overtly taking a side in a longstanding, and ongoing, battle over the meaning of the American nation. James Alexander Dun is a historian at Princeton University and the author of Dangerous Neighbors: Making the Haitian Revolution in Early America. Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors. Write to Made by History at madebyhistory@
