You are here

La Jicarita

Subscribe to La Jicarita feed La Jicarita
An Online Magazine of Environmental Politics in New Mexico
Updated: 8 hours 28 min ago

Stop WIPP Forever: Support NMED’s Demand for LANL Cean-up

Fri, 06/05/2026 - 13:56
Spring 2026 Newsletter TAKE QUICK ACTION for a REAL IMPACT

 

Dear Friends, Thanks to ongoing community efforts, New Mexico officials are taking action to require DOE, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) to prioritize sending LANL’s “Legacy” nuclear waste to WIPP for disposal. “Legacy Waste” is Cold War nuclear waste, created during decades of nuclear weapons research, design and fabrication. DOE promised New Mexicans that if we allowed WIPP to be built in our state, Cold War and other radioactive waste, then stored at LANL, would have priority to be disposed in WIPP. DOE has continually broken this promise over the years. New Mexico is usually far behind other states in disposing LANL’s Legacy Waste in WIPP. This has led to, among other problems, about 2500 drums of plutonium-contaminated Legacy Waste languishing for decades in tents in “Area G” in a wildfire zone. The red area shows the combined burn area of 8 wildfires between 1977 and 2022 three of which burned over LANL property. For more information about these fires, including an interactive map, go to FireOnTheMountain.xyz   On April 23, our New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) issued an important permit modification to WIPP’s 2023 Renewal Permit, holding LANL and DOE accountable for not prioritizing this Legacy Waste disposal as required in the 2023 WIPP Permit Renewal.   Important Points in the Proposed Permit Modification •  All Legacy Waste currently stored above-ground at LANL’s Area G shall be disposed in WIPP by July 1, 2028. (This would include the plutonium-contaminated Legacy Waste stored in the tents. •  From January 1, 2027 through December 31, 2031at least 55% of the total volume of all waste disposed in WIPP from all national sites must be LANL Legacy Waste. •  Beginning January 1, 2032, and until all LANL legacy waste has been disposed in WIPP, LANL legacy waste must be at least 75% of the total volume of waste disposed in WIPP from all national sites. •  If at any point any of those conditions are not met, all shipments, other than those from LANL, must cease until all deficiencies are cured.   NMED needs to hear that we are in support of this permit modification.   Our full support is especially necessary because DOE is strongly opposing the modification.       To view the full Permit Modification, Public Notice, and a detailed Fact Sheet, go to:
www.env.nm.gov/hazardous-waste/wipp/
And scroll down to WIPP News 2026 For more information and sample comments go to:
www.StopForeverWIPP.org ————————————————————– Members of the Stop Forever WIPP Coalition and Fire on the Mountain as well as other community groups support this action and urge people to submit written comments in support of NMED’s action by Monday, June 22 at 5 PM.   How to submit comments     •  NMED has asked that we submit comments directly through their portal here. •  But if you find that a little intimidating you can email your comments to:      HWB-WIPP-Comment@env.nm.gov •  Or even snail mail them to NMED at:            
    Megan McLean, WIPP Program Manager
Hazardous Waste Bureau
New Mexico Environment Department
2905 Rodeo Park Drive East, Building 1 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505-6303
  For more information visit    Stop Forever WIPP https://stopforeverwipp.org
https://www.facebook.com/StopfvrWIPP/ Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety (CCNS) http://nuclearactive.org Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC)
http://www.sric.org/ Nuclear Watch New Mexico

https://nukewatch.org

Fire on the Mountain www.fireonthemountain.xyz
Categories: G2. Local Greens

Some Concerns About KCEC’s Hydrogen Project Water Study in Questa

Mon, 06/01/2026 - 11:09

By KAY MATTHEWS

Kit Carson Electric Cooperative CEO Luis Reyes just announced that the company has hired GZA GeoEnvironmental/Glorieta Geoscience (GZAGeoEnvironmental recently acquired Geoscience, which is based in Santa Fe) to conduct a water study of the proposed hydrogen facility in Questa. Kit Carson has only contracted for Phase 1 of that study, that states it will “assess the influence of pumping the Chevron production well (RG-14117-POD-18) on the groundwater flow conditions in the Questa, NM area.” However, the Phase I study will only develop a “three-dimensional visualization model,” which doesn’t involve well testing, drilling flow logs, measuring the rates of aquifer replenishment, and other critical water studies. If requested, Phase 2 would create “a groundwater flow model, calibrate the model, and prepare a report that summarizes the groundwater modeling work.” 

The Questa Watershed Coalition has received a detailed letter from a local hydrologist that lays down the details and requirements that a competent water study must include. The letter begins with this statement: “This will be a critically important study, and it is paramount that it be technically sound, comprehensive, and independently and impartially reviewed and validated.” The hydrologist emphasized that both Phases, 1 and 2, are necessary to “adequately predict hydrologic impacts. The visualization model should be accompanied by a conceptual model (which is basically a qualitative description of the flow system) and a quantitative water budget for all relevant hydrologic components (recharge, flux, discharge to rivers and wells, etc.) along with a clear statement of the objectives of the modeling exercise. He also stated that the 100 afy extraction rate is probably inadequate and 250 afy, the well’s adjudicated capacity, will be more likely needed. The Coalition will use the input in the letter to help assess the GeoScience study.

Questa Watershed Protectors have been asking Reyes for a comprehensive water study for months, as concerns over drought and the climate crisis are exacerbated by this year’s extreme situation. Snowpack measurements for the Sangre de Cristos are the lowest ever recorded, and both of the Questa acequias, Cabresto Lake Irrigation Community Ditch Association and Llano Community Ditch, have seen a significant loss of irrigation water. The well that will provide water for the hydrogen project is a Chevron exploratory well that they call the tailings facility water well. It’s 500 feet deep and will supposedly supply clean water for the project (the OSE will have to provide an assessment). A mile-wide study was done that said four other wells could be affected by the Chevron well, but Questa’s wells are not within that one-mile radius. A two-mile radius could affect 58 wells, including the many private wells in the community.

While GeoScience promotes its hydrogeology analyses and has worked all over the state, the president and senior hydrogeologist, Jay Lazarus, has an extensive history in the Taos area that may not bode well for an unbiased, comprehensive study of water quantity and quality in the Questa area that could be affected by the hydrogen facility. He’s been a longtime consultant for the Abeyta Water Rights Adjudication (Taos Pueblo) that resulted in a settlement in 2013. As such, he was a vocal opponent of the Public Welfare Statement that was drafted by a group of citizens as part of the Taos Regional Water Plan, back in 2006. The statement laid out the criteria for determining whether proposed water appropriations or transfers from the Taos Region to other regions and within the Taos Region from one sub-watershed to another are consistent with the public welfare.

Public welfare is one of the criteria the Office of the State Engineer is supposed to use to determine whether to approve a water transfer, but has rarely done so. That’s why the citizen committee urged that the Public Welfare Statement be incorporated into the Taos Regional Water Plan. But the parties to the Abeyta settlement raised objections to the proposed PWS, claiming it would prevent the implementation of the settlement and that it was contrary to state law. They, represented by Lazarus, wanted nothing to interfere with whatever transfers might be necessary for implementation of the controversial Abeyta Settlement.

In 2013, when Blackstone Ranch, which had acquired the historic McCarthy Ranch, “Taos’s last great grasslands” on Upper Ranchitos Road, applied to transfer just under 12-acre feet per year of surface water rights from the Alamitos Acequia to a groundwater well to irrigate landscaping around the “main-house,” a small orchard, gardens, greenhouse, and “fire-prevention pond”—which translates to 6 afy of groundwater. Their hydrogeologist, Jay Lazarus, was quite frank about the reason for the transfer: it would ensure the ranch irrigation water when there isn’t enough water in the acequia. This, of course, sets a bad precedent: As surface water continues to dry up more and more irrigators will want to pump groundwater instead. It’s already happening in southern New Mexico—and on a much larger scale than 12 afy of water—as farmers dependent on Elephant Butte Irrigation District for irrigation come up short and pump groundwater to save their crops. Texas sued, and a settlement agreement will require the retirement of thousands of acres of farmland to provide Texas with its allotted water rights under the Rio Grande Compact.

Finally, in 2025, at a public meeting about Sipapu Ski Area and Resort expansion plans, Lazarus was confronted in two claims he made as the ski area’s consultant on water quality monitoring. When asked about the ingredient surfactant, or Drift, used in snowmaking, Lazarus said that a New Mexico Environment Department study had found no impact on downstream users. The representative from the NMED corrected him that the agency was unable to test for snowmaking because surfactant is already present in the agency’s lab.

Lazarus was also challenged by Robert Templeton, a parciante from Dixon, when he made the often-touted claim that ski areas act as water reservoirs and help downstream users when the snow is released into the watershed in the spring. Templeton argued that stored water is only available during the spring runoff when the river flow is at or approaching flood conditions and is of no use to irrigators. The time that the “potentially stored” water is used for snowmaking is the exact moment when the water is needed in the river for recharge of wells and the sub-surface lands along the river’s course after the irrigation season.

.In a Taos News article Reyes was asked about allocating such a large amount of water during a time of extreme drought. His response was, “I’ve never seen it, living here [that] in a year we’ll get so much snow that it undoes, you know, 10 or 15 or 20 years of drought, but we’re not using [the water] for a while,” Reyes said. “I have faith that, like any cycle, we’ll start to get rains and moisture back, hopefully, like we did in the old days.”

The people of Questa would rather rely on a scientific assessment of what the water situation is right now before a water-guzzling project moves forward. Hopefully, that’s what they get.

Categories: G2. Local Greens

Guest Essay on Proposed Hydrogen Facility in Questa

Tue, 05/19/2026 - 12:13

Opinion By Om Jaya

Mice and Men

The best laid plans of mice and men is an expression to signify, despite careful planning, that projects can still fail and cause grief. Big promises often lead to big problems. Moss Landing in California, the Moly Corp/Chevron mine in Questa, Oak Flat in Arizona, the national list is growing. These massive developments are always at the risk of environmental impact and the health and safety of communities. Corporations use clever advertising to sway public opinion, and publish articles on why it’s good for you to support them. Their tone is of concern for public interest but when asked for environmental, health, and safety assessments, they often reply unrealistically.

Guilty companies back out of harmful projects after they’ve taken enough resources and their stock holders are satisfied. These capital groups make promises to restore and balance the land they’ve destroyed and always fall short of their commitments. While capital groups make millions, a few locals earn well, but the environmental destruction is done and serious health issues emerge. The shadow of dishonest corporations and soft handed representatives linger forever.

And now we are faced again with a potential Mice and Men story: the proposed installation of a hydrogen plant and hundreds of acres of solar panels in Questa, along with the proposed hydrogen plants in Taos and Picuris. These possible productions (pilot, in other words, experimental) have rightfully been upsetting local and national citizens who have taken the time to research and uncover the potential environmental impacts and the risks of health and safety to our community.

Kit Carson Electric Coop has been crafting one sided adds disguised as articles that cleverly sway public opinion, falsely stating that all is green, proper environmental assessments have been done, and that they have had no push back. Truth be told, as our community wakes up to this undeveloped proposal, push back is rapidly increasing and the community’s questions of concern are not being fully answered.

Luis Reyes of KCEC tells us everything’s in order, shows no legal proof, and the mayor of Questa, John Ortega, remains silent. Questa Village Councilor Daryl Ortega (no relation to the mayor) has asked Luis Reyes for a copy of the original USDA grant application and other documents related to the $231 million award that funds the project; months later, Luis continues to avoid the request. The latest statement from KCEC is the most alarming: they have done an impact study in case the hydrogen plant explodes. An explosion impact report looks good on paper, but how can we predict the unpredictable power of nature? Why is KCEC so desperate to begin this project?

We are the ones we have been waiting for, so let’s step up and protect our right to have influence on the land we live and love on. Worldwide, alternative clean methods of creating and storing energy are rapidly being developed while hydrogen continues to propose challenges. KCEC needs to imagine a back to the land picture of Taos and not support one of corporate industrial take over. Getting back to the land is not a fantasy, it’s a necessity. We don’t need an eye sore dinosaur (hydrogen plant) that will become obsolete while it is breaking down. A construction mistake like this will not weaken but will challenge the spirit of our people and discolor our already tarnished past.

And there is hope. A new wave of a conscious and vibrant attitude is rising in Taos County, one of regeneration and revival. A vision of returning to community, local culture, food, and arts, one of giving rights back to the land and taking responsibility for its uses. Let’s nourish the nature we are famous for, not stress it with thousands of solar panels and hydrogen plants.

What if our children and their children and the elk and eagle could speak. Will they have to fight for the health and safety of their lives and the protection of the environment, and will their cries fall on deaf ears?

No, we as concerned citizens won’t let that happen.

 

 

 

Categories: G2. Local Greens

One more reading about Ike, this time in Santa Fe

Sun, 05/17/2026 - 13:17
Remindeer:

I’ll be reading from my book Antonio “Ike” DeVargas—Norteño Warrior: The Politics of Land, Power, and Justice in Northern New Mexico on Wednesday, May 20, 6 pm, at Collected Works Bookstore in Santa Fe. Ty Bannerman will also be reading from his book Nuclear Family: a memoir of the atomic west.

A blurb from Lucy Lippard, author of  Undermining: A Wild Ride Through Land Use, Politics, and Art in the Changing West.

Unlike journalists from elsewhere “covering” the chaotic politics of northern New Mexico, the writer Kay Matthews has lived it. This book on her friend and fellow warrior, the grassroots leader Ike DeVargas, is a lively and detailed account of decades of struggle. The varied participants include several tiny rural communities, the US Forest Service, the Spotted Owl, State and County local officials, La Raza, environmentalists, and local Chicano land grant activists. The subtitle says it all: “The Politics of Land, Power, and Justice in Northern New Mexico.”

New Mexico has a notoriously complex history, often playing out invisibly in its many poor rural communities still dealing with the traumas of colonialism, land grants, and corrupt officials. Those of us from away, no matter how long we have lived here, cannot fully understand the issues in Rio Arriba County, the devotion to homeplace, longtime dominance of Emilio Naranjo, and the economic importance of grazing, firewood, and logging permits to the surrounding communities. The battles that began in the 1960s are ongoing. Though DeVargas and his cohort often lost, they are famously resilient and their occasional hard-won victories have changed the political landusescape. Matthews and her family have long been active and trusted allies in these struggles, and her paper, La Jicarita, is a vital information source for those still fighting the good fights and for those of us who are supportive but not in the thick of it.

Few of these stories are known to a broader audience and hopefully Matthews’s book will not only keep the memory of Ike DeVargas alive but inspire other contributions from the inside of those adobe houses with no running water, no electricity, like the one Ike lived in. So if you’re a lefty and ready to participate, but not quite sure what that means in northern New Mexico, read about the Ike DeVargas model… and step up.

 

Categories: G2. Local Greens

The People Say NO to Plutonium Pits

Fri, 05/15/2026 - 14:28

By KAY MATTHEWS

Jay Coghlan of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, the second speaker at the public hearing on the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Plutonium Pit Production, pretty much summed up the opposition to the Draft in his three minutes: “Pit production is not necessary and downright wrong.”

  • The proposed pits are for the production of new weapons that could lead to testing, which violates the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
  • It’s been proved that existing pits have a ± 100-year life span.
  • The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has failed for years to formulate a clean-up plan for all of LANL’s contaminated waste. Pit production will continue to block and exacerbate clean-up.
  • The New Mexico Environment Department is forcing the Department of Energy to prioritize the shipment of legacy waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.
  • The missing alternative in this EIS is legacy waste clean-up instead of pit production.

The preferred alternative in this EIS is the Multi-Site Alternative, referring to both LANL and the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. The proposal is for LANL to produce 10/30/80 pits per year and SRS to produce 50/80/125 pits per year. The promulgation of the EIS is a result of the lawsuit that Nuclear Watch New Mexico and other watch dog groups filed against the NNSA that temporarily halted plutonium pit production at Savannah River, leaving LANL as NNSA’s sole pit-production site. The settlement required the development of a new programmatic environmental impact statement involving public hearings around the country by July 2027.

However, as Dylan Spaulding, scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, pointed out in his comments, the Trump administration has issued a new directive to accelerate nuclear weapons production at LANL. On February 11, 2026 Dave Beck, Deputy National Nuclear Security Administration Administrator for Defense Programs, issued a “framework” memorandum mandating NNSA to urgently accelerate the modernization of the nuclear weapons stockpile and the revitalization of its associated facilities and infrastructure to enable production of 100 plutonium pits and achieve a production rate of at least 60 pits per year.

As I listened to the dozens (over 100) who spoke against this draft proposal, I couldn’t help but compare their diversity with the NNSA and LANL administrators, all white men with crew cuts, sitting in the front row.

Skit outside the hearing yelling “fire on the mountain!”

John Wilkes of the Plutonium Trail Caravan, which follows the transportation and disposition of waste from LANL, castigated LANL for failure to clear up Area C or the buried containers in Area G.

Sean Arent, a member of the Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, reminded everyone of the first nuclear arms race at the decommissioned and radioactive Hanford Plant where workers struggle to clean-up the toxic mess. “Proposing new nuclear sites like this to future generations is a curse.”

A member of the Party for Socialist Liberation told the group “This is a farce. If they [the nuclear industry] were actually listening to us they wouldn’t be making bombs.” Madison Figueroa spoke for the UNM Students for Nuclear Disarmament.

Several speakers decried the amount of water LANL will acquire to meet its objectives while the rest of the state is experiencing desertification. Others raised the seismic issue of the Rio Grande Rift that runs right through the Parajito plateau.

Joni Arends of CCNS that works with Pueblo people to stop the migration of the hexavalent chromium plume contaminating groundwater and wells.

One of the biggest reactions from the crowd came when Pat Leahan, of the Las Vegas Peace and Justice Center, speaking remotely, pointed out the sentence on NNSA’s presentation screen that stated: “Peace through atomic strength.” She suggested a more accurate catch phrase would be “stress through nuclear development” as we descend into violence to deter violence.

Public comments are due by July 16 of 2026. All the comments made at the public hearings will be added to the official site along with those submitted by email and snail mail. The email address is PITPEIS@NNSA.GOV. Opposition to this EIS and all previous EISs, from 1999 to 2026, has been overwhelming, but the pits keep marching on. However, there’s hope. By the time the SRS facilities are anywhere near ready for production, and when LANL proves incapable of producing more than a few pits, there will be a new congressional mandate that halts the billions—trillions—of dollars that no longer exist in a failed economy.

Categories: G2. Local Greens

WQCC Votes to Move Oil & Gas Industry Petition Forward

Wed, 05/13/2026 - 12:16

Editor’s Note: Covering the on-going arguments regarding the reuse of oil and gas wastewater hasn’t been in La Jicarita’s purview, but the latest decision by the Water Quality Control Commission is so egregious that I’m posting the New Energy Economy’s press release. The WQCC, lobbied heavily by the Water Access, Treatment and Reuse Alliance — or WATR Alliance — a trade group with members from the oil and gas industry, voted for the second time to advance a petition to expand and regulate the reuse of oil and gas wastewater. The Lujan Grisham administration also lobbied WQCC to overturn a year-old decision prohibiting the reuse of the wastewater, making sure that her appointed WQCC commissioners were making the right decision. WQCC will hold a public hearing to advance the rule making, a hearing that will be protested by the many environmental and public advocacy groups that oppose this decision.

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Mariel Nanasi, Executive Director, New Energy Economy
(505) 469-4060 | mnanasi@newenergyeconomy.org

May 12, 2026

Despite The Fact that Science is Missing to Prove Oil and Gas Industry Waste Water Is Safe for Reuse or Discharge WQCC Votes to Move Oil & Gas Industry Petition Forward

Santa Fe, NM — Environmental and public interest organizations lost today; oil and gas industry’s latest attempt to weaken New Mexico’s produced water protections was greenlighted today despite the fact that the science remains fundamentally incomplete, uncertain, and incapable of demonstrating safety for human health or the environment.

While the Petition cites scientific studies, the studies themselves do not establish the central claim the industry needs to prove: that produced water can actually be treated and reused safely in the real world. Critically, the industry repeatedly claims that produced water can be treated and reused “to a non-toxic level in a real-world setting,” yet that statement does not appear in the cited studies or in the scientific literature itself.

The scientific record instead demonstrates the opposite: the science surrounding produced water reuse remains in an early and highly uncertain stage. Major unresolved problems remain, including incomplete characterization of contaminants, the presence of unknown and unmeasured compounds, lack of comprehensive toxicological datasets, and the complete absence of established regulatory frameworks capable of ensuring safe discharge or reuse.

The Water Quality Control Commission’s Vice Chair said “the Petition is not ready for us to hear it.” The Chair of the Commission said the Petition has “serious legal flaws” and has pages, 20 page or more of blank empty spaces” and stated that he could “not support it in its current form.” He specifically pointed out that produced water contains complex mixtures that the industry has not “fessed up” to. Produced water is full of known and unknown contaminants, that treatment technologies remain experimental, and that the state lacks sufficient standards and data to regulate reuse safely.

“The oil and gas industry is asking regulators to leap far ahead of the science,” said Mariel Nanasi, Executive Director, New Energy Economy. “While there is new science – that science does not state what it must: that produced water can be treated and discharged and is safe. New Mexicans should not become guinea pigs for an experiment involving toxic radioactive wastewater that has not been proven safe.”

Under New Mexico law, the Commission’s role is to prevent and abate water pollution — not to create new industrial water supplies for oil and gas operators or speculative development projects. Many Commissioners raised questions about bias, concerned with who is paying for the NM Produced Water Consortium and the studies that result therefrom; they were also concerned with the accuracy of statements in the Petition.

At its core, the situation is simple: the science is not settled. It is evolving, incomplete, and deeply uncertain. That is exactly why the Commission previously prohibited discharge and reuse of produced water outside tightly controlled pilot projects in 2025. Until comprehensive science, toxicology, and enforceable regulatory safeguards exist, allowing widespread reuse or discharge would place New Mexico’s groundwater, rivers, communities, and future generations at unacceptable risk.

Categories: G2. Local Greens

Chevron Shenanigans

Tue, 05/12/2026 - 11:59

Opinion By JUAN MONTES

Since February Chevron has stopped environmental cleanup at the Questa mine that was judicially mandated in a Superfund consent decree. In a Cease and Desist Order, Chevron fired the Superfund contractor Granite with over 150 employees and forced it to remove all of its equipment from the mine site along the Red River. The RV parks in Questa are nearly vacant and the Chevron cheerleaders are left unemployed and in limbo, pushing an irrelevant produced water petition (toxic water which they won’t drink). In a hypocritical stance, produced brine water promoters want taxpayers to clean up oil and gas corporations’ environmental mess 400 miles away while turning a blind eye to the Chevron’s pollution in their own backyard.

Instead of demanding that Chevron clean up its environmental damage at the mine and tailings site, the mayor of Questa, in tandem with Kit Carson Electric Coop (who the mayor works for), want to break ground in May for a water-intensive, flammable, and combustible Green Hydrogen Plant next to our elementary school. This ill-conceived plan is at taxpayer’s expense (from a USDA grant), not the near-trillion-dollar Chevron corporation. Chevron made the decision to change the placement of this green hydrogen plant, originally planned for the Red River mine site, using treated mine water, to a populated section of Questa, ten miles away, using groundwater from a minimally used well, siphoning off precious, clean, groundwater.

Kit Carson Electric Coop’s engineering firm EnTrust calculates that the plant will use 31,000,000 gallons (95 acre feet) of water a year from a well formerly designated solely for dust suppression just north of the tailings pond. In the midst of a prolonged drought, this massive groundwater depletion will result in many domestic wells going dry as well as desertification of the entire area. The siphoning effect will also deplete acequias running north of Questa, and in Llano/Cerro, leaving farms and ranches dry. It should be noted that Chevron owns the land the plant will be on, as well as the water rights, neither of which have been transferred to Kit Carson. In a faulty decision, the Office of the State Engineer erroneously revived heretofore expired water rights Chevron claimed throughout the area.

The process is bankrupt and has been marred by a complete lack of transparency, blatant conflicts of interest, and an arrogant disregard for public involvement or safety. Hiding behind Trump’s effort to gut NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act), Kit Carson Electric hired EnTrust to conduct a superficial environmental assessment that totally excluded people and communities affected by the hydrogen project. Kit Carson Electric organized several informal community meetings in Questa, which resulted in 90 percent of attendees, at all meetings, opposed to this ill-planned project. Then the mayor, who works for Kit Carson Electric, started to convene secret meetings, by invitation only, to solicit support, but none has been forthcoming from any sector because of the water-intensive nature of the project in the middle of a serious drought.

The lack of water for a water-intensive project is enough for it to fall on its face, but there is more. The flammability and combustibility of green hydrogen are well documented, yet greed and illusions of power are blindly driving this project. Placing this hydrogen gas plant next to our elementary school is criminal, and elected officials promoting this ill-fated plan should be recalled immediately. The production and storage of hydrogen gas is highly dangerous and Kit Caron Electric and the Village of Questa have no experience in this process, yet greedy power brokers and pusillanimous petty politicians are willing to put people’s lives at risk.

Juan Montes is a  longtime environmental justice advocate and a Concerned Citizen de Questa

 

 

 

Categories: G2. Local Greens

The Fine Print I:

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.

Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.

The Fine Print II:

Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.

It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.