DENVER (CBS4) – One of the most divisive measures on the ballot this November is Proposition 112, which would change the future of fracking in our state.

It would require a 2,500 foot buffer between new oil and gas drilling and any occupied structure or “vulnerable” area, as defined by state or local government.

A recent poll from the University of Colorado shows voters are evenly split on Prop 112.

Proponents say the goal is to improve health and safety. The industry insists it’s to ban fracking and it’s spending tens of millions of dollars on ads.

Political Specialist Shaun Boyd gives an ad featuring prominent Democrat and Republican a Reality Check.

Click here to see all of CBS4 Political Specialist Shaun Boyd’s Reality Check reports.

Boyd’s sources for this Reality Check are as follows:

Comments (6)
  1. Bob Arrington says:

    While compiling sources for the story, she missed what Channel 9 found:

  2. Ron Booth says:

    Contrary to channel 4’s reporting and looking at just one of the major myths in this debate “Prop 112 would effectively be a ban putting 85% of Colorado’s non-federal lands off limits”.

    In fact in the most oil and gas rich areas of Weld county, those where fracking is currently taking place within 500′ of homes, over 40% of the potential oil and gas would still be available to be fracked. Elsewhere in the the “Denver Basin which is large sections of the most oil and gas rich areas of Northeastern Colorado over 60% of the lands are still available under Prop 112.

    One of the other misleading things about “85% off limits” is that statewide there is a good deal of non-federal lands that don’t even have enough potential to make fracking them profitable.

    Last but not least with the capability to drill horizontally well over a mile keeping drilling operations 2,500′ away shouldn’t even be an issue, it does make the operations a little more expensive than operating where there is a danger to residents but one thing is for sure 500′ from homes and 1,000′ from schools and businesses it totally unnecessary and its far better t be overly protective of people’s health and safety.

    1. If it were just homes and business it would be tolerable but it includes “vulnerable areas” which includes dry creek beds and intermittent streams and lakes. The 85% estimate is based on a study by the Oil and Gas Commission which would be responsible for overseeing and implementing Prop 112 by managing the minerals.
      There are also only 30/31 rigs currently operating in Colorado and most are in very rural areas of Weld County. How many of these 30/31 rigs are near homes. Are we going to destroy a multi billion dollar Colorado industry because people in Boulder and Denver (where there are zero rigs operating) think they are unsafe? Should we close Rocky Mountain National Park because there were more people injured there than there were people harmed by oil and gas development in Colorado. IF YOU LOVE COLORADO VOTE NO.

  3. Mitchell Bly says:

    Voted early and gave 112 a big thumbs down.

  4. R Couch says:

    and the mexifornialoons are doing their worst to make Colorado as bad as the fruit/nut state

Leave a Reply