Three of Four Colorado Communities Vote to Ban or Suspend Fracking

Voters in three Colorado communities have decided to suspend or ban an oil and gas production process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, according to unofficial election returns on Wednesday.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Keith Coffman

DENVER (Reuters) - Voters in three Colorado communities have decided to suspend or ban an oil and gas production process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, according to unofficial election returns on Wednesday.

Boulder, Lafayette and Fort Collins passed measures with solid margins, but a fourth community, Broomfield, about 12 miles east of Boulder, narrowly rejected a fracking moratorium.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Seventy-eight percent of Boulder residents voted to suspend fracking within city limits for five years, while a similar measure won 56 percent support in Fort Collins.

In Lafayette, a city ordinance that permanently bans fracking within the city passed with 59 percent of the vote.

Broomfield defeated the measure by just 13 votes out of more than 20,500 cast, according to unofficial returns posted on the city's website.

Fracking involves pumping millions of gallons of pressurized water, sand and chemicals underground to fracture shale rock and release oil or gas.

Much of that water returns to the surface and is stored in lined pits or closed tanks for recycling or injection in underground storage caverns offsite.

Environmental groups say fracking can contaminate water supplies, but the industry has argued that it does not hurt the environment.

Fracking activity has increased in Colorado over the past decade, as it has in much of the United States. A drilling boom is under way and in June this year, oil production rose nearly 30 percent compared with the same period in 2012, to 161,000 barrels of oil each day.

(Editing by Karen Brooks and Maureen Bavdek)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe