Colorado River negotiators express urgency, uncertainty as deadline nears
Lead negotiators from the Colorado River's Upper Basin states expressed a dual sense of uncertainty and urgency on Tuesday, as a deadline to determine the fate of the entire system looms near.
'If you are in the Upper Basin states or probably anywhere across the West, you know it's not looking so good right now,' said Becky Mitchell, director of the Colorado Water Conservation Board.
Mitchell was addressing a meeting of the Upper Colorado River Commission, which also included federal Bureau of Reclamation representatives and the lead negotiators for the other Upper Basin states: Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico.
The commissioners convened to discuss basin-wide hydrology and share updates on longer-term Colorado River negotiations, which have been occurring for more than a year with Lower Basin counterparts: Arizona, Nevada and California.
The talks concern a long-anticipated update of the Colorado River's operational guidelines, which are set to expire at the end of 2026. These 2007 interim rules govern conservation policies for the 1,450-mile river, which provides water to about 40 million people in the U.S. and Mexico.
With the Upper and Lower basins still far from reaching any collaborative arrangement, the Biden administration in late November tried to propel the process forward — releasing a bullet-point list of five potential alternatives for the watershed's long-term management.
Just days before President Trump's inauguration, former President Biden's team released a detailed version of the alternatives, placing the Bureau of Reclamation on a path to issue a draft environmental impact statement — a key step in the federal environmental process — by this summer.
Chuck Cullom, executive director of the Upper Colorado River Commission, confirmed at the Tuesday meeting that this initial framework would need to be in place 'by early summer of 2025' in order to trigger the development of state-level implementation plans.
'Those are the types of agreements between states, and the basin states as a whole, that would be part of the foundation for whatever those post-2026 operations might be,' Cullom said, noting that some of those plans might require the passage of legislation.
The Bureau of Reclamation had initially given the states an early March 2024 deadline to submit a consensus-backed alternative for updated guidelines for the river's management. But two days after that deadline, the basins ended up publishing competing proposals.
The Lower Basin states presented a proposal that incorporated reductions for themselves but also called for cuts across the entire watershed — calculating storage capacity not just on the massive Lake Powell and Lake Mead, but also on five smaller reservoirs, including three in the Upper Basin.
The Upper Basin states, meanwhile, issued plans that they said would consider real-time hydrological conditions in an area dependent on mountain snowpack for its water supply.
Having received no unified vision among all seven states, Biden's Bureau of Reclamation proposed a range of management solutions, none of which precisely match either basin's proposal.
Most of the federal alternatives presented, however, require some level of consensus agreement, Cullom noted at the Tuesday meeting.
'A consensus is the best option out there for everyone, and I'm hopeful that we'll get there,' Mitchell said. 'That is the highest level of certainty that we will have as seven basin states.'
Mitchell stressed the importance of the states determining their own future, adding that all parties must 'acknowledge that cuts are probable, possible and likely.'
'We need to do that for certainty, and everyone needs to do that,' she said. 'We are committed to work with the Lower Basin states toward that seven-state consensus.'
Her Upper Basin colleagues offered similar perspectives, with Estevan Lopez of New Mexico and Brandon Gebhart of Wyoming both expressing their commitment to such collaboration.
'We are meeting with all of the states,' added Gene Shawcroft, Utah's commissioner. 'Discussions have been frank and fruitful.'
Shawcroft expressed optimism 'that there is a box that we can work within that will allow us to come to a seven-state consensus,
'But certainly, there's a lot of work yet to do,' he added.
As for the Colorado River's hydrological conditions, Alex Pivarnik of the Bureau of Reclamation told the commissioners that Lake Powell — the main reservoir for the Upper Basin — is only 35 percent full, while Upper Colorado River system storage is sitting at 43 percent capacity and total system storage in both basins is at 42 percent.
'January was a really bad month for us in the basin,' Pivarnik said, noting that conditions were 'pretty much dry' across all the states.
Pivarnik described the initial weeks of February as 'kind of a make or break for us,' recognizing that precipitation has since increased substantially.
Mitchell echoed these sentiments, acknowledging that water officials have 'been slightly optimistic because of the snow.'
'But it still does not look as good as we'd like,' she said.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
House GOP approves ‘technical changes' to Trump agenda bill
House Republicans on Wednesday greenlit a series of 'technical changes' to the party's tax cut and spending package, removing language that would have thrown their effort off course in the Senate. The chamber approved the tweaks — which were tucked inside a procedural rule for a separate measure — in a 213-207 vote, weeks after Republicans passed the sprawling package full of President Trump's legislative priorities. The adopted rule also tees up a final vote on the White House's bill to claw back $9.4 billion in federal spending. House GOP leaders moved to make the changes after the Senate parliamentarian scrubbed through the legislation — a procedure known as the 'Byrd bath' — and identified provisions and language that do not comply with the strict rules for the budget reconciliation process, which the GOP trifecta is using to circumvent a Democratic filibuster in the Senate and approve the bill by a simple majority. Leaving the legislation as it was risked the parliamentarian ruling that it was not compliant, which would have resulted in the threshold for passage in the Senate increasing from a simple majority to 60 votes — allowing Democratic opposition to block it. The changes to the Trump agenda bill — officially titled the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act — pertain to defense funding, energy policy and changes to Medicaid. For defense, Republicans nixed $2 billion for the enhancement of military intelligence programs; $500 million for the development, procurement and integration of maritime mines; and $62 million to convert Ohio-class submarine tubes to accept additional missiles. On the energy front, meanwhile, the changes removed a provision that would have reinstated leases for a proposed copper and nickel mine that had been renewed under the first Trump administration but revoked under Biden. The mine would have been located near an area known as the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, a nature preserve that contains canoe routes and species including black bears, moose and foxes. While leaders moved to strike some portions of the bill, they still plan to fight for those provisions when the package hits the Senate floor. 'We disagree; ultimately we're going to try it again on the Senate floor,' House Majority Leadere Steve Scalise (R-La.) said Tuesday. ' We disagree with the parliamentarian. … But you can't take the risk on any of them. You cannot take the risk because if any one of them is ruled on the Senate floor to be fatal, it's a 60-vote bill. The whole bill is a 60-vote bill — you can't take that risk.' With the changes made, the House is now expected to formally send the package to the Senate, where Republicans are mapping out their own changes to the behemoth bill. Some GOP senators want to decrease the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap, others are pushing to increase the spending cuts in the bill, and a subset are pressing for a smaller rollback of the green energy tax credits that Democrats approved in 2022. Any changes to the House bill in the Senate, however, risks party leadership losing support in the lower chamber, which will have to approve the Senate's tweaks before the bill can head to Trump's desk for signature. Party leaders are still hoping to enact the package by July 4, but that timeline is coming into serious question as Republicans remain at odds over a series of high-stakes issues. Rachel Frazin contributed.
Wall Street Journal
29 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
EPA to Repeal Air-Pollution Standards on Power Plants
WASHINGTON—The Environmental Protection Agency proposed Wednesday weakening air-pollution standards for mercury and eliminating carbon dioxide rules on power plants, reversing Biden-era policies as part of an overall effort to curtail the agency's role in regulating climate change. The easing of the environmental regulations is in line with executive orders issued by President Trump in April to expand coal mining, leasing and exports, and push for greater use of coal-fired power generation.
Newsweek
32 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump's EPA Scraps Air Protections in Effort to Revive Coal Power
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced Wednesday that it will seek to scrap two rules on power plant pollution as part of the Trump administration's effort to encourage more use of fossil fuels such as coal, a major source of greenhouse gases and toxic emissions that contribute to disease and premature deaths. "Since President Trump was sworn in, we have been working to end this agency's war on so much of our U.S. domestic energy supply," EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said at a ceremony at EPA headquarters. The EPA is proposing to repeal two Biden-era rules that would make new and existing power plants cut pollution. The 2024 Carbon Pollution Standards would limit greenhouse gases from power plants, and the 2024 changes to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards would have reduced emissions of harmful metals in emissions, primarily from coal. The power plant rules are among more than 30 regulations that Zeldin pledged to undo in March in what he called the biggest deregulation action in U.S. history. President Donald Trump speaks alongside coal and energy workers during an April executive order signing ceremony in the White House. The Trump administration has elected to roll back Biden-era environmental policies with the intention to... President Donald Trump speaks alongside coal and energy workers during an April executive order signing ceremony in the White House. The Trump administration has elected to roll back Biden-era environmental policies with the intention to help revive coal-fired plants. MoreThe changes will not immediately take effect, Zeldin said—the announcement Wednesday will trigger a public comment and rule-making period. Zeldin claimed the final repeal of the rules would save ratepayers more than $1 billion a year. "These rules have saddled our power sector with expensive, unnecessary and burdensome regulations," Zeldin said. In its proposal, the EPA argued that U.S. power plants do not contribute a significant amount to global greenhouse gas emissions. However, the U.S. power sector is responsible for about one-quarter of the country's total emissions, second only to the transportation sector. Zeldin's claims of cost savings are also undermined by the health costs associated with the rollbacks. "No power plant will be allowed to emit more than they do today," Zeldin said. However, repealing the rules means Americans would continue to be exposed to the current levels of harmful pollutants. Data from Zeldin's own agency shows that the 2024 carbon pollution standards would save lives by also reducing the other pollutants such as soot that lead to heart and lung disease. EPA estimates that the standards would prevent about 1,200 premature deaths in 2035. Environmental and public health groups pledged to fight the proposed rollback. "It's an extraordinary and reckless action by the head of the Environmental Protection Agency," Vickie Patton, general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, told Newsweek. "The fleet of power plant smokestacks in our country are the single largest industrial source of carbon pollution in the nation, it's just a staggering amount of pollution." Republican members of Congress from coal and gas-producing states joined Zeldin at the announcement in support. They said the changes would allow their states to keep in place fossil-fueled plants that might otherwise be shuttered. Ohio Representative Troy Balderson said the Biden-era rules "would have forced our most reliable sources into early retirement," threatening the reliability of the electric grid. West Virginia Representative Carol Miller, a co-chair of the Congressional Coal Caucus, said the country needs the dependable baseload power that coal provides. "We must unleash American coal, not bury it under red tape," Miller said. Miller lamented the decline of the coal industry in her state. Twenty years ago, coal was the nation's top fuel source and provided a little more than half of the country's electricity. By 2023, it had fallen to the fourth-highest energy source, providing only about 16 percent of U.S. electricity generation, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). A chart from the Energy Information Administration showing changes in the makeup of U.S. electricity generation over time. The brown section at the bottom shows the decline of coal as a fuel over the past... A chart from the Energy Information Administration showing changes in the makeup of U.S. electricity generation over time. The brown section at the bottom shows the decline of coal as a fuel over the past 20 years. More Energy Information Administration Coal mining employment has also sharply declined over the decades. Department of Labor statistics show about 45,000 people were employed in coal mining in 2023, roughly 60 percent of the number employed a decade earlier. In West Virginia, the state with the highest number of coal miners, coal employment dropped from about 21,000 in 2010 to 14,000 in 2023. Trump's high-profile effort to bring back coal in his first term in office did little to slow the decline. West Virginia and the nation had fewer miners when he left office in 2021 than when he entered it. The coal industry and its allies in Congress frequently blame the industry's woes on environmental regulations, a so-called "war on coal." But energy market analysis shows that the main reason behind coal's demise is simply that other cheaper and cleaner energy sources have become more available. The boom in natural gas supplies led many power companies to switch fuels, and gas is now the country's top source of electricity generation. Natural gas demand is projected to rise, but analysts also point to cost concerns with gas as both domestic use and exports of liquified natural gas climb. More recently, renewable energy has become the go-to source for new power. Last year, the EIA reported wind, solar and battery storage together accounted for more than 90 percent of new electricity capacity added to the U.S. grid. Electricity demand is projected to surge in the coming years, and many power companies find that renewable energy and battery storage is the fastest, cheapest way to add power supply. Globally, investments in clean and low-carbon energy are expected to be twice those in fossil fuel, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). The IEA's recent report on energy investment found about $2.2 trillion dollars flowing to solar, wind, nuclear power, battery storage, energy efficiency measures and low-emissions fuels. Coal, meanwhile, has become pricier. A 2023 analysis by the non-partisan think tank Energy Innovation found that 99 percent of U.S. coal plants were more expensive to run compared to replacement by renewable energy and battery storage. Even before the clean energy incentives offered by the Biden administration, about 77 percent of coal plants were more expensive than solar and wind. The extra cost to operate coal plants often gets passed along to ratepayers, as happened when the Trump administration used its emergency powers to order local utility regulators in Michigan to prolong the use of an old coal-fired power plant slated for closure. Michigan's Public Service Commission estimated that the order could cost ratepayers millions of dollars. The cost of air pollution is also a burden on the public in the form of additional premature deaths, illnesses, hospitalizations and lost work days due to asthma and other lung diseases linked to dirty air. One of Zeldin's predecessors at the EPA, Gina McCarthy, said the health effects of eliminating the rules would fall disproportionately on the most vulnerable people. "By giving a green light to more pollution, his legacy will forever be someone who does the bidding of the fossil fuel industry at the expense of our health," McCarthy, who served as the 13th EPA administrator under President Barack Obama, said in a statement. "It's a purely political play that goes against decades of science and policy review."
