Terrible new ozone bill, SB24-165, just now out. A good idea, SB24-092 fixes for energy codes, up for committee soon. And, because it's Friday, the myth of Oregon Trail sourdough starter.
A really concerning new bill about ozone just now dropped. It is yet more rulemaking by the AQCC.
The thing is, this time it won't be onerous and expensive regulations on large buildings. This time it'll be schools. It'll be warehouses. It'll be hospitals. It'll be construction sites.
I just got wind of a bill sponsored by Priola, Cutter, Rutinel, and Garcia that makes some rather radical changes to a whole lot of life here in Colorado. Changes that will be made by the unelected AQCC.
That bill is linked first below.
This new bill takes the usual and, sadly, expected jabs at oil and gas in this state. It calls for, among other burdensome regulations, a pause on oil and gas operations during the "ozone season". This being defined as May 1 to Sept 30, a full third of the year.
What oil and gas workers (and the companies that pay big into the tax base of this state) are to do during that time or who will make up their income is, of course, not noted in the bill.
Disappointing and shortsighted as these efforts are, it's tempting to think that this bill simply affects those industries. But wait, there's more!
Anyone (Ag is excluded thankfully) that uses off-road diesel vehicles with greater than 25 Hp, will now face a bunch of new regulations. Check out screenshot 1 for examples.
Additionally, anyone who runs an organization or business shown on the list in screenshot 2 will face a host of new regulations since they are (using the bill's language) an "indirect source" of ozone.
And who decides the regulations on these "indirect" sources? Why the unelected AQCC of course.
I mean they did such a thoughtful job on regulating large buildings (see the second link below), I guess the bill sponsors thought they should be messing up these folks too.
Own a warehouse that has vehicle traffic to and from it inside the ozone nonattainment area? Guess what? You'll have new costly regulations if this passes.
Work on a construction site? You'll have to deal with them too.
And on top of that, all these regulated buildings and industries will get to pay for the pleasure of ensuring these regulations are enforced.
This bill is beyond bad policy. It's a job killer. It's a tax revenue killer. It's yet more economic activity sacrificed on the altar of the environment and done in a way that, yet again, is there to ensure that elected (and thus accountable) officials are left out of the process.
I've added it to my watchlist and hope to have the chance to say those very things in a committee hearing. If you'd like to follow suit, copy the link and bookmark it.
https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb24-165
https://coloradosun.com/2023/08/08/colorado-greenhouse-gas-building-emissions-cuts/
Bringing some sense to local energy codes.
I have posted in the past about how the state created yet another group of political (and unelected) appointees to draft a new statewide model energy code which local governments have to adopt as soon as their current one runs out.
I won't go back over the details here (see the "related" content below if you want an update as to where the state is on this process), but I wanted to put up a bill that I intend to advocate on when it's in committee next Thursday. See the link below.
This is a bill that would, frankly, bring back some sense to this process by requiring a tighter look at potential energy code adoption.
As it is right now, one of the main arguments on behalf of the adoption of energy codes is the money you'll save in the long run exceeding the increased upfront costs.
I think there are aspects of energy codes that do this. I think there are also ways (such someone making it cheaper by doing the grunt work themselves) that can make this a reality.
But I also think there is a lot of "wishful calculating" out there that says that every single provision of the strictest energy codes saves money and/or would pay for itself.
A closer look is in order. A more realistic appraisal, taking into account how often people move and their "money horizon" is in order. This bill provides that.
I sent the open email below this morning and have signed up to testify remotely in favor of this bill. I would urge you to look over the bill and give serious thought to doing the same.
The email I wrote in case I can't make the committee meeting is below in case you find it helpful.
https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb24-092
An open email to the sponsors of SB24-092 (Cost Effective Energy Codes) and the Senate Local Government and Housing Committee.
Hello to all,
My name is Cory Gaines. I hope to be able to testify remotely in support of this bill, but I wanted to write you (along with putting this in the written record on the bill) in case my teaching schedule does not allow it. If anyone who gets this email would like, please feel free to read any or all of it into the record.
I am in support of this bill because I think it makes good on the promise we citizens of Colorado hear often from our policymakers: that of helping to keep houses affordable.
When I put nice rhetoric like this next to the fact that past choices, such as bills requiring the adoption of restrictive statewide energy codes, made by a group of unelected political appointees and with little to no local input or flexibility, I can't help but question just how sincere the desire to keep houses affordable is.
The counter to statements like mine is, of course, that future savings on energy will more than make up for the increased upfront costs brought about by stricter codes. If one sits down and actually takes the time to read through the estimates that undergird such claims, however, one finds that they depend on a series of claims which may or may not reflect reality and may or may not be the actual future that we see.
All of this is on top of the fact that the assumptions behind such statewide codes and claims of cost savings do not take into account the wide variety of ways that people actually live in homes and the variation inherent in our state. They simply cannot; reality is hugely complicated.
A more realistic, tailored, and local approach is what is needed to energy codes. An approach that better respects local control, local desires is needed.
This bill helps provide that. This bill would help meet the supposed "laser focus" on affordability by helping ensure that our desire to be energy efficient doesn't start pricing us out of the ability to actually own a home.
Your yes vote on this bill would show Coloradans that your words match your actions.
Cory
Related:
The state's webpage outlining the new energy code and resources for its (eventual) local adoption.
https://energyoffice.colorado.gov/buildings/building-energy-codes
The myth of Oregon Trail sourdough starter.
That time of the week again. This will be the last post til Sunday and that means something for fun, a curiosity.
If you have designs on getting a sourdough starter from somewhere to bring home the flavor of that place (say you want a starter from San Fran or, as in the case of starry-eyed internet people, a starter that supposedly came along the Oregon Trail mentioned in the 9News article linked below), I have bad news for you.
Your starter may initially be populated by that specific group of bugs, but it probably won't be that way for long; the local fauna, and likely the bugs that are living on the flour you use, will eventually outbreed your purchased starter and your starter will take on the characteristics of the locals.
In that sense, the Oregon Trail starter is miles away from the one that Mr. Griffith took with him. Any vestiges of that original starter are this point mostly sentimental.
As a sometimes-sourdough baker myself** I applaud the interest. I'm glad to see people wanting to bake sourdoughs. Just got to know what you're getting.
You know what is (at least to me--it's what I've done with my various types of starters) more interesting? Making your own sourdough starter, all the way from scratch. It's not that hard and you can say it's your own local blend. Just have patience and you'll get it. Well that and organic bread/dark rye flour plus distilled water. Huge help, and yes, organic matters here because you'll likely get stronger yeast and a head start because there are more of them.
Or, buy one of the ones that has some meaning to you (San Fran, say) and just enjoy it for a bit knowing it will morph.
That's it for today! Happy baking if you decide to try it and see you on Sunday!
**One of my favorites is my 10% dark rye pain au levain. Makes great toast (French and otherwise). See the picture above. Another favorite (though this one uses a mix of commercial yeast and starter) is my honey whole wheat sourdough with amaranth/quinoa. Lovely for sandwiches. Ask me and I might share the recipe for the latter.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/local/next/next-with-kyle-clark/colorado-sourdough-group-overwhelmed-tiktok-starter-samples-greeley/73-eb18ac46-bb93-42b4-9f4c-d2f8aca4bbeb?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot