Solarize La Plata is Beaming

Solarize La Plata, coordinated by (4CORE), has confirmed 99 clients committed to installing solar photovoltaic systems through the program. Participants have confirmed their commitment to install solar by signing contracts with local contractors. 

A total of 387 people signed up for Solarize La Plata, and five solar contractors have distributed 219 solar system proposals. Fifty-one systems have been installed, with the goal of having all systems installed by the end of summer.

“We thought we were shooting for the moon when we set our goal of 100 systems,” said Robert Lea, Solarize La Plata Chairman. “SLP proved effective in removing substantial barriers to going solar for much of our community. Our committee is ecstatic about these program results.”

The group also set a goal of 325 kilowatts (kW) of newly installed system capacity, which has already been met and exceeded. The 99 systems represent a total of 538 kW that will now be provided by solar, a clean, renewable source of energy. This translates to 584 metric tons of carbon pollution prevented each year, or the equivalent of 123 cars removed from the road for one year. In addition, 8 jobs have already been created by the demand for these 99 new solar PV systems, which is generating over $2,000,000 for our local economy in only six months.

“The Solarize La Plata Campaign represents a paradigm shift that is underway in Southwest Colorado,” said Gregg Dubit, 4CORE Executive Director. “We speculate that our community is positively responding to the rising cost of power, 290 days of free sunshine per year, and increased effects of climate change, resulting in the accelerated adoption of distributed solar in La Plata County.” 

Solarize La Plata is supported by grants from the Optony’s American Solar Transformation Initiative (ASTI) through the Department of Energy’s Rooftop Solar Challenge, Ballantine Family Fund, and the City of Durango. The Solarize La Plata Steering Committee will be hosting a party at the end of July to celebrate the hard work and commitment of volunteers, partners, supporters, and clients. Everyone is welcome.

Find more information on the 4CORE web site at www.fourcore.org, or by calling 970-259-1916.   

How Much Fresh Air is Enough and Who Decides?

My assessment of adequate indoor air quality is when you can move from indoors to outdoors, or outdoors to indoors, and air inside feels as fresh as it does outside. My recommendation for assessing your home’s indoor air quality is to NOT do the math and rate to standards, but to take a deep breath inside your home. Before you forget how it feels, walk outdoors and take another deep breath of fresh outdoor air. Does it feel different? Does the outdoor air make you feel better? The air you prefer to breathe is the air you should be breathing.

Why Does Indoor Air Quality Matter?
Familiarize yourself with problems caused by poor indoor air quality. There is a good article by James Hamblin that appeared in “The Atlantic” in March of 2014 titled “The Toxins That Threaten Our Brains.” We also have a lot of great resources at our website.

If there is one idea I would like to be able convey to readers it is that like temperature, fresh air introduction and indoor air quality exists as a range. That range can be from bad to good, and it can be changed to suit the occupants’ preference, comfort, and health needs.

Below are two standards for indoor air quality.One standard strives toward “A High Level of Comfort,” the other to not dissatisfy the majority of occupants. One strives to not cause or aggravate illness, the other recommends reducing the likelihood of health risk.

Standard 1
“Acceptable indoor air quality: air toward which a substantial majority of occupants express no dissatisfaction with respect to odor and sensory irritation and in which there are not likely to be contaminants at concentrations that are known to pose a health risk.”

Standard 1 is part of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) standard “62.2-2013 Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Air Quality in Low-Rise Residential Buildings”. This is the guiding standard for home indoor air quality in the US and is likely the standard that was used for your home if it was built in the last few years. It states, “While acceptable IAQ is the goal of this standard, it will not necessarily be achieved even if all requirements are met.” This doesn't exude confidence in a standard that is not very demanding to begin with.

ASHRAE has calculations and tables for calculating the ventilation rate for a given residential configuration, but they are not available to the general public (at least not for free). Remember that installed equipment and systems often do not deliver at their intended capacity. For example, it is not unusual for a fan rated to move 100 cubic feet per minute of air to only deliver a small percentage of this volume.

If it were easier to assess health risks from long term exposure to indoor pollution I believe that ASHRAE would have a whole different set of recommendations. Energy savings are pretty easy to assess, while the correlation of health problems to long term exposure to indoor pollutants has so far been impossible to prove.

Standard 2
Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) can be defined as: the physical, chemical and biological properties that indoor air must have, in order:

• not to cause or aggravate illnesses in the building occupants, and
• to secure a high level of comfort to the building occupants in the performance of the designated activities for which the building has been intended and designed.

Standard 2 is from the International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate (ISIAQ). It is from the ISIAQ’s, “Performance Criteria of Buildings for Health and Comfort.” I like this standard better because it strives for a healthier environment.

While my recommendation will not likely end up being the new standard for building code, I do have my own ideas on the topic. I like the 0.5 air exchanges per hour that is the standard in a number of European countries. I like this number because I believe it is a good starting place for fresh air introduction. From the 0.5 air exchanges per hour, the homeowner can regulate fresh air introduction to a level that makes sense both in comfort and in utility cost (there is a cost to heating and cooling fresh air).

When I first started working in my present office, the indoor air quality was lousy. My office is now ventilated at the 0.5 air exchanges per hour rate. When I walk out of the building at the end of the day the difference in breathing outdoors is negligible. In case you missed it, my assessment of adequate indoor air quality is when you can move from indoors to outdoors, or outdoors to indoors, and the difference in air quality is negligible.

In my home the difference is negligible during temperate and warmer months, but more noticeable in the middle of the winter. We sacrifice some indoor air quality for lower heating bills during the winter, and boost our fresh air intake as much as possible when it is more affordable.

My recommendation for assessing your home’s indoor air quality is to NOT do the math, and to remember that even if you knew how much fresh air was being introduced into your home, the design amount was to meet building code, which is the minimum. Instead, take a deep breath inside your home. Before you forget how it feels, walk outdoors and take another deep breath of fresh outdoor air. Does it feel different? Does the outdoor air make you feel better? The air you prefer to breathe is the air you should be breathing.

About the author
David Davis is a Certified Energy Manager, and product designer for the Fresh Air Manufacturing Company. Among experience leading to this role was five years as a utility efficiency expert, five years as an HVAC instructor for Boise State University, and a number of earlier years as an Engineering Specialist for Siemens and Honeywell. Learn more about fresh air here.

Solar Experience in Montezuma County

This posting describes my success with simple passive solar principles. Some of these had been learned at an earth shelter house seminar at the University of Minnesota. I made a cardboard model of the house I wanted to build and handed it to a Montezuma County contractor. He built it. That was in 1980.

Standard materials and construction techniques were used. The house was economical to build. PV panels added in 2013 raise its efficiency. Empire Electric buys the surplus power. Here are the details:

• The rectangular 44’ x 24’ house faces directly south
• 4’ X 6’ windows and 6’ double pane patio doors admit the sunshine.
• The doors and windows have clear glass. If building code demands Low-E glass, try to get a variance.
• The objective is to admit all the sunshine that we can.
• Drapes close off and insulate the glass on winter nights and summer days.
• Concrete walls and floor for the lower portion are insulated with 2” rigid foam on the exterior and under the floor to serve as thermal mass. This mass absorbs the heat which has penetrated through the windows.
• It is critical to balance the mass with the amount of glazing. Imbalance will cause either overheating or a cold house.
• The upper floor is insulated with 1” rigid foam outside the studs and 3 1/2” fiberglass between them.
• The 2’ overhang is a permanent awning which restricts sun entry in summer when the solar angle increases.
• A small stove on the lower floor supplements heating. No butane or propane is used.
• A 20 gallon, 120 volt water heater is good for a family size of 3, even 7 when visitors come.
• Countertop oven, microwave, electric stove are used to prepare food in that order.
• A photo voltaic array was put on the south side of the barn in 2013. The installed cost was $15,500 for 14 panels. Rated capacity is 3220 watts.

The best performance centers on the several weeks of mid-winter. The sun angle is then low in our Colorado, and the cold, clear nights change to bright sunny days. The house then takes in enough warmth that temperature in the living space is above 70 degrees until bed-time at 10:00 pm. Although it can’t exactly be felt, heat goes into the concrete walls. But in the floor its warmth can be felt when in stocking feet even near the patio doors.

As I got older (I am now 88) I found myself wanting a wood fire at night even when the house temperature was 70⁰. But now, I can rationalize that it is OK to use a portable electric heater because of the photo-voltaic panels. On a cloudy winter day there will be enough warming radiance coming through the glass to keep me warm when I am engaged in regular household activity. The house is freeze proof. It can be left with the drapes half-closed and the temperature will not fall below 55 degrees. With the drapes are operated every day and night, the air temperature will not fall below 64 degrees.

For summer, there is a 500 BTU wall air conditioner. It gets limited use. The construction keeps the house cool. All appliances and water heating are electric. Monthly usage centers around 250 Kilowatt hours with one person living in the home. Electricity usage may reach 500 kWh if five persons occupy it. A clothes line is used for drying clothes.

Critical to lower hot water use is that the water heater, showers and all sinks are grouped on one wall so that pipe runs were kept to a minimum. A low flow atomizing shower head (Delta 52650-PK) works quite well with a full curtain that confines the water spray and maximize its heating effect.

There is an advantage of wood for the stove being available from the piñon juniper forest.   A hundred years of mismanagement caused the stand to be far too dense and most of the pines were killed in the beetle epidemic of 2003. Before the photo-voltaic panels made electric heat a responsible choice; about one cord was burned in the stove each year.

Ceramic tile was used for the lower floor. It goes without saying that there should be no insulation, no carpeting of this thermal mass.

About the Author

The electric meter spinning backwards
from William's solar

William Hendrickson lived through the depression and served as an engineering officer on merchant ad navy ships during WWII and Korea. He had a career with the National Park Service as manager and ecologist. He married into Montezuma County after meeting a waitress when they both had summer jobs at Mesa Verde. He is working to reduce the immense quantities of energy we all use.

It's Springtime - Get Gardening!

As I ride my bike to work, I can't help but notice the trees lining downtown neighborhoods bursting with pink and white flowers - petals scattering with the wind. Spring is most definitely here! To me Spring means tulips popping up in the front yard, hauling the grill out of the shed for dinners on the deck and prepping the garden beds for another bountiful growing season. Sometimes it's difficult to imagine gardening in the dead of winter, but now that the soils have warmed it's time to start adding compost, turning the soil, watering and getting some seeds in the ground.

Darrin Parmenter with CSU Extension has a weekly article in the Herald on backyard gardening and local food. This week's article titled "Eager to get gardening? Here's what to plant now" has some great suggestions on cool weather crops like peas and lettuces to get your garden started.

If you don't have the space to garden at home, or would like to garden with a community of gardeners of all skill levels and backgrounds, consider applying for one of the few remaining plots at the Ohana Kuleana Community Garden at 564 E. 30th St. below Riverview Elementary, Durango's first "public" use community garden started in 2013. For only $60 per year, you receive 150 sq ft of growing space, irrigation water, free gardening workshops throughout the season and the opportunity to grow your own food alongside other members of the community (discounted rates are available in exchange for extra volunteer hours). The Ohana Kuleana garden, which means "community responsibility" in native Hawaiian, is managed by the local nonprofit, The Garden Project of Southwest Colorado. The Garden Project's mission is to help grow a healthier community through the support and development of school and community garden programs that promote health and wellness, environmental stewardship and a sustainable local food system.

In addition to coordinating the Healthy Homes program at 4CORE, I am honored to have served as the Executive Director of The Garden Project for the past year. (I must say it sure is convenient to have two nonprofit jobs in Durango that are located right across a downtown alley from each other!) Helping create a healthier community through healthy homes education and gardening skills empowerment is an additional benefit, of course!

There are lots of ways to get involved with growing healthy food for our community. Every Wednesday  The Garden Project hosts a volunteer garden day at the Manna Soup Kitchen garden from 10 to noon  led by expert gardeners. Manna is one of the first soup kitchens in the nation to have their own garden that produced vegetables directly for the kitchen and clients. During the summer months our volunteers harvest around 50 lbs of fresh produce from the garden every week!

If you get fired up about kids growing and eating their own healthy food, consider getting involved with the Needham Elementary School garden. In 2013 the Needham garden was expanded from 8 raised beds to 24 - one for each classroom. This Spring students will be planting their beds with local farmers - rather than a field trip to the farm, the farmers are coming to the school to work alongside the students in the garden! Volunteers are needed to help care for beds over the summer months. You can sign up to volunteer for any of our gardens here.

One last thing, before you run outdoors and start turning your garden soil...

Mother's Day is right around the corner, and if you don't have a gift lined up yet, perhaps this is the year to give a gift that's a bit more meaningful. The Garden Project is hosting a Mother's Day Grow A Garden Fundraiser. Here's how it works: Choose gardening items and plants to donate on our website and we'll send your mom a handwritten note letting her know that a donation has been made on her behalf to support school and community gardens in Southwest Colorado. There are lots of options, from kids gardening gloves to bee and butterfly plants to fruit trees. Make this Mother's Day something special, and help Grow a Garden.

About the Author

Sandhya Tillotson is Executive Director of The Garden Project of Southwest Colorado, as well as the Healthy Homes Program Specialist at 4CORE. Originally from California, Sandhya earned her Bachelor's degree in Environmental Science from The Colorado College in Colorado Springs. After moving to Durango in 2010, Sandhya is thrilled to be working for a local environmental non-profit and spending her free time volunteering, running, biking, climbing and exploring the vast wilderness that makes up Durango's backyard.

What and Why ICF?

ICF is the abbreviation for Insulated Concrete Form. You have probably seen walls of expanded polystyrene (similar stuff to the insulated white coffee cups you have used) being erected here and there; these are ICF structures. Reinforcing steel is placed as specified during the stacking process, openings are formed in a variety of ways, concrete is then placed in the wall forms and vibrated for proper consolidation. The EPS foam that creates the form stays in place, providing superior insulation. Result, a great wall!

There are over sixteen manufacturers of ICFs, so you have plenty of options. Generally all ICFs provide similar results to the owner: the structures built with this technology are very strong, very quiet, very energy efficient. Looking from the street there is no difference between an ICF house and a conventionally constructed house. Only when one steps inside and feels the quiet, sees the deep windowsills (the walls are typically 12” thick), senses good shelter, is the difference evident. These buildings typically reduce heating and cooling costs by 35 to 45%.

Concrete structures are extremely long lasting and provide secure shelter to the occupants. The primary ingredients of concrete - stone, sand and water- account for 90% of the mixture and are plentiful in most locations. The concrete and foam forms are 100% recycle-able. There are trained and experienced installers and contractors working with ICFs in Pagosa Springs, Durango, Cortez, and all of Colorado. Framers, carpenters, masons, concrete subs, homeowners and builders have all installed ICFs with great success; this is an additional skill-set, not a replacement skill.

Why ICF? 

Study the following chart.

	ICF	Wood-frame
R-value	22 +	R-11 to R-19
Effective R-value	up to R-50	R-9 to R-16
Heating & cooling/YR	$480-600	$1600-2200
Air leakage	.07 ACH	.4 ACH
Drafts	No	Yes
Even temperatures	Yes	No
Noise reduction	STC 50	almost none
Pollen infiltration	No	Yes
Wind resistance	200 MPH+	80-100 MPH
Fire rating	4 hours+	None
Bulletproof	Yes	No
Rodent proof	Yes	No
Nail pops	No	Yes
Wood rot	No	Yes
Wood splits & warps	No	Yes
Promotes mold growth	No	Yes
Qualifies for higher loan	Yes	No
Appraisal advantage	Yes	No

So, why WOOD you?

More about ICFs

The first ICF patent in the USA was issued in 1968. Our construction industry is not known for its rapid adoption of new technologies, so though the original Foam Forms® were used into the 1980s, when more recent designs began to shoulder Foam Form® aside, their use was rare and largely unnoticed. In 1985 Lance Berrenberg began manufacturing Southwest Foam Forms in Albuquerque; that company became American Polysteel and is still in business, though under a new name since the company has been acquired. Other early forms such as Greenblock and Lite-Form are also still being manufactured.

The bulk of ICFs are manufactured 4’ long by 16” tall in varying core thicknesses. A latecomer to the industry is NUDURA, a form that is 8’ long and 18” tall. Most ICFs are installed horizontally but a few systems, such as TF System believe their vertical forms are preferable. There are other stay-in-place forms, not wholly made of polystyrene, such as Rastra and Durisol and each makes its claim as a better product.

In 2006 ICFs were being installed at a rate of about 120 million square feet per year; this number has been expanding at about 20% per year.

Concrete may be recycled (look at ex-Stapleton airport landing strips & runways, all recycled), and is extremely long lasting.

About the Author:

Felix Marti began his construction career in 1964 and has specialized in energy efficient, low maintenance structures; he is now retired from construction. Mr. Marti states that he believes ICF construction will become the technology of choice within the next ten to fifteen years, whether the structure to be built is a hospital, a home, a school, or a theater; virtually any space to be heated or cooled.may be reached at 970-626-4169 or fmproventech@me.com.

Leaps of Faith in the Future: From Efficiency to PV to EV

After I did everything I could to make my home more energy efficient, I faced my first decision 12 years ago about whether to install solar panels as well. I remember friends asking me if they would pay back their extra cost in a reasonable period of time through electricity savings.  “Not yet,” I acknowledged, “you basically have to vote with your wallet on where you want your electricity to come from.  If I buy them and other people buy them, eventually they will be cost effective for everybody.”

Fast forward 7 years, and I made a decision to buy more solar panels.  This time, they were cost effective, mostly because the price of the panels and inverter had fallen just about as fast as electricity prices from the utility had risen.  They’re an even better deal today, and are an accepted way of cutting our energy bills in a sunny place like Durango.

In 2013, my wife and I faced that same kind of decision again with our car.  Our first instinct was to get a plug-in hybrid like the Chevy Volt or the Ford C-Max Energi.  They seemed like the perfect solution -- an electric car around town for all our short trips, and an efficient gasoline powered car for our longer road trips, all in one vehicle!

When we looked at the numbers, it was evident that they weren't strictly cost effective compared to just going out and buying a regular hybrid.  We could live with that, but the utter simplicity of an all-electric vehicle (EV) started to look even more compelling.  In the end, we decided to make a clean break from gasoline, and the complexity of a car with all the mechanical parts of a gasoline engine wedged into a small space under the hood next to all the electronic parts of an EV.

Even with the federal and Colorado tax credits adding up to $13,500, we knew an EV wasn’t the most cost effective choice.  There are much cheaper ways of driving around.  But buying an electric vehicle seemed to me the purest way to vote for the change we wanted to see in transportation, in the hopes that someday everyone will be able to buy an affordable electric car.

At the end of 2012, we ordered a Tesla Model S with the smaller of two available battery sizes (60 kWh) and none of the options to make it faster or more powerful.  It seemed powerful enough already to accelerate better than other cars we had owned and had a maximum range of 208 miles per charge.

Tesla delivered the car to us in May, and I immediately took it on a road trip to Crested Butte, Pueblo, Denver, Mt. Evans, Aspen, and back to Durango.  It worked great and was really fun to drive, but the charging infrastructure still wasn’t quite there to make the trip convenient.  I had to break up my trip into segments of 200 miles or less per day, with recharging overnight, or allocate a couple hours in the middle of each day to recharge at campgrounds and sparsely available charging stations to enable longer drives.

Since that time, Tesla has built out a Supercharger network along the west and east coasts and across the middle of the country that passes near Durango.  There are now Superchargers in Gallup, Farmington, Blanding, Moab, and Grand Junction that are all reachable on one charge from Durango. They make longer trips possible by providing free, fast (20-40 minutes) recharging roughly every 150 miles.  So I decided to try something much more ambitious:  a 3,000 mile winter road trip from Durango to northern and southern California, and then back home across the Arizona desert.  And my goal was to do the entire thing on free electricity, with minimal inconvenience.

So how did it work out?  The full details are on my blog at Ecova, but here’s the high level summary. The total trip distance was 3115 miles and total electricity use was about 1099 kWh, counting the losses in the charging process. This works out to an efficiency of 353 watt-hours/mile. That about $136 worth of electricity at today’s national average electricity rates, or 4.4 cents/mile.  

My actual out-of-pocket cost was only about 0.2 cents/mile or $7 total, because the electricity at Tesla’s Superchargers was free. I was able to charge at friends’ houses and hotels for free too, so I only paid for electricity at two campgrounds near Yosemite. I almost hit my goal of free fuel costs! I saved about $480 on the gasoline that a typical gas-powered car of similar size and features would have used.

Of course, I was still using fossil fuels from power plants.  It’s clear from the research done by the Union of Concerned Scientists and others that we still have a long way to go improving the generating stations that charge our electric vehicles.  In Colorado, the electricity comes primarily from coal, so a typical electric vehicle is no better than a 34 mpg gasoline car from a greenhouse gas emissions perspective, unless you have solar panels on your roof.

But other states are much further along.  In California, the electric grid is much more heavily powered by solar, wind, and hydro sources, making an electric vehicle there the equivalent of a 78 mpg gasoline car.  Arizona and New Mexico are in-between, with an average of about 49 mpg.  Given the regional mix of charging I did on my trip, a reasonable average might be 55 to 60 mpg-equivalent – not too bad!

Over the next 18 months, the Supercharger network will grow to span the entire country, largely eliminating the inconvenience considerations that have hampered electric vehicles so far.  I can’t wait!

'The Chicken & The Egg' of Compressed Natural Gas for Transportation

With the consistently rising price of gasoline and diesel and threats of climate change, vehicle fleets and independent drivers are looking to alternative transportation fuels for their transportation needs. One of the leading alternative transportation fuels in the United States is natural gas. When used as a transportation fuel natural gas is stored in storage tanks on the vehicles, in either a compressed natural gas (CNG) form at pressures between 3,000 and 3,600 pounds per square inch, or in a liquefied natural gas (LNG) form at a temperature of -260°F.  Compared to the traditional transportation fuels (gasoline and diesel) natural gas has fewer fuel life-cycle emissions (6%-11% fewer greenhouse gas emissions) and is less expensive, in terms of gasoline gallon equivalents (GGEs).

According to the latest alternative fuels price report from Clean Cities the average cost for CNG in the Rocky Mountain Region is $1.82 per GGE and the average cost for gasoline is $3.42 per gallon. Today in the United States there are approximately 112,000 CNG vehicles in operation and 672 CNG fueling stations where these vehicles can be refueled. However, in the four corners region there is only one CNG fueling station, located in Moab, Utah. With the cost to operate CNG vehicles being almost half the cost to operate traditionally fueled vehicles, why is there almost no CNG presence in the region?

Which came first the chicken, or the egg? 

Fleet managers in the four corners are discussing which should come first, CNG fueling stations or CNG fueled vehicles. CNG fueling stations generally cost between $1 and $2.5 million and, investors are skeptical to put forth such large amounts of money when there is no demand for the transportation fuel. Likewise, fleet managers are resistant to purchase CNG vehicles when there is no place to fuel them, especially since these vehicles cost $7,000 to $10,000 more than traditionally fueled vehicles. Unlike the issue of the chicken and the egg, eventually the four corners region will find a solution to the CNG vehicle and infrastructure dilemma.

One solution to the dilemma currently being considered is subsidization of the first CNG fueling station in Southwest Colorado. In December 2013, Governor Hickenlooper announced a $30 million award from the Federal Highway Administration’s Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program for the development of CNG fueling stations statewide, and CNG vehicle purchases in non-attainment air quality areas in Colorado. The grant application process for these funds is expected to begin in the spring of 2014. With this funding opportunity the first CNG station developer in Southwest Colorado could be eligible for up to $500,000 in CMAQ funds to purchase the equipment for the station. Capital investment in station equipment is the largest cost associated with the development of a CNG fueling station therefore, the CMAQ funds could make a CNG fueling station project more enticing to investors.

4CORE is working to diversify fuel sources and create demand for alternative fuel vehicles. 4CORE is a sub-grantee of the Refuel Colorado grant, which was awarded to the Colorado Energy Office in order to accelerate the adoption of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs). The work being done under this grant includes:

• free energy coaching services for fleet managers, 
• discussions with auto dealerships about offering AFVs, and 
• monthly and quarterly working group meetings with different local fleet managers, car dealerships, and economic and community leaders. 

These working group meetings are an arena for knowledge sharing, networking, and AFV demonstrations with question and answer sessions. The energy coaching service offered to fleet managers involves in-depth quantitative and qualitative analysis of the fleet to determine which vehicles are most suitable for replacement with AFVs. At present, there are multiple fleet managers in the region interested in these vehicles and they are in the midst of analyzing the economic benefits and returns on investment for purchasing CNG and other alternative fuel vehicles.

4CORE is also working to create a business plan for the first CNG fueling station in Southwest Colorado. The idea is to develop a fueling station coinciding with CNG vehicle procurement by a number of fleets. The fueling station business plan will be shared with investors once it’s completed. It may not be long before we see CNG vehicles on the road, and a fueling station with pump prices reading $1.85/GGE. The chicken and the egg issue of natural gas as a transportation fuel in the four corners will be solved.

---

About the Author
Sarah is a Colorado native who fell in love with the Durango area while earning her Bachelor’s in Anthropology at Fort Lewis College. After graduation in 2010 she earned a Master’s in Anthropology and Certificate in Sustainable Urban Infrastructure from the University of Colorado Denver. Sarah moved back to Durango in 2012 in hopes of starting a career in the field of sustainable development. After a grueling 11 month AmeriCorps service term installing weatherization upgrades to low income housing in Southwest Colorado, Sarah is excited to be working with 4CORE on improving the sustainability and resilience of our local communities.