Yucca Growth Infrastructure, LLC-YGI Microgrid Air Quality Construction Permit Application

Comment From: anonymous anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:10 PM

the proposed idea will cause health issues for thousands and speed up climate change, leading to the deaths and destruction of thousands more. we can survive in a world without ai, we can survive without data centres. we cannot survive on a planet th...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Pavlína Juklová

7/05/26 @ 7:10 PM

Please stop project Jupiter it's not helping our planet and population at all. We are killing our planet. Data centers are absolutely useless and damage the environment. And what happens when the environment is damaged? It affects us and animals. Aft...↓

No attachments

Comment From: anonymous anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:10 PM

Hello, I'd like to oppose the idea of 'project Jupiter', as i believe that this will most likely ruin the planet and our ecosystem even more than it is already. My first point is that the power plant will release up to 10 million tons of warming gree...↓

No attachments

Comment From: anonymous anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:10 PM

i am asking that you deny yucca growth infrastructure air permit as the many people who live here would be in danger and in harm. Not to mention, the carbon dioxide and toxic chemicals will only pollute our world more and more and will SEVERELY impac...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:10 PM

We do not need this. The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably. The air quality permit application should be denied given Bloom Energy's history of ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Carolina Andrade

7/05/26 @ 7:09 PM

No to Project Jupiter!
The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given Bloom Energy's ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jazalle Gonzalez

7/05/26 @ 7:09 PM

Let's stop damaging the planet

The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given Bloom ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:09 PM

This project is dangerous for the environment, the air, the pollution in general, what you're doing is unnecessary and completely awful. People live on those lands, animal too. The mass is of water is going to ruin our water stock cause first it's no...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Emma Padova

7/05/26 @ 7:09 PM

STOP AI DATA CENTRES!!!!!

No attachments

Comment From: Farin Bustos

7/05/26 @ 7:09 PM

I do not want any form of any data center in New Mexico! Do not build project Jupiter! There are endangered species of plants and animals that live in that area, project Jupiter will ruin their habits and is illegal! Data centers hurt New Mexican! St...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Martyna Czerw

7/05/26 @ 7:09 PM

The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and there are NO proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. ...↓How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution? A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC. A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance. We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the statistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence. Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Mark anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:08 PM

This is an extremely bad idea and completely useless use of our water this will increase droughts electricity usage and poison our air humans CAN survive without AI we did for years we still can

No attachments

Comment From: Emily Lopez

7/05/26 @ 7:08 PM

"The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given Bloom Energy's history of illegal dum...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Alessia Prenda

7/05/26 @ 7:08 PM

We can live just find without this environmental destruction. WE DO NOT WANT THIS! We cannot live without clean air and water. Stop this madness. Nobody has asked for this, we're working so hard to protect our planet but this data center, on such a m...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:08 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Ava Engles

7/05/26 @ 7:08 PM

Changing the technology does not mean changing the outcome, I do not want Ai to use all of New Mexico clean water, the Rio Grand is already dried up and I do not Ai to use more clean water, project Jupiter is made for millionaires and not everyday pe...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Peggy Schott

7/05/26 @ 7:08 PM

We need to either stop with all these data centers or put rules in place that protect our water, air and soil and wildlife. We have one going up here, the city of Cedar Rapids had a group working with them, then they jumped ship looking for a new sit...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ekaterina n/a

7/05/26 @ 7:07 PM

Dear NMED staff, My name is Ekaterina. I am not a New Mexico resident, but I am writing because I am concerned about the risks and harms Project Jupiter poses to New Mexicans. I am submitting this comment to urge the New Mexico Environment Department...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Mateusz Morgut

7/05/26 @ 7:07 PM

As a citizen of Earth I don't consent on building another massive, unnecessary data center. We don't need social media and AI as much as a healthy planet. I don't want to live in a future when water and food will be a premium good.

No attachments

Comment From: Betty Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:07 PM

The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and there are NO proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. ...↓How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution?

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC.

A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the st atistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.

Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Sam Laredo

7/05/26 @ 7:06 PM

The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably. The air quality permit application should be denied given Bloom Energy's history of illegal dumping hazar...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Clodagh O'Farrell

7/05/26 @ 7:06 PM

I am from Ireland and you may think this isn't going to affect me but no it will it's not going to just affect nearby residents but the whole world we have 3 years left to reverse Climate Change or else we are pretty much doomed and you are trying pr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ava White

7/05/26 @ 7:06 PM

No attachments

Comment From: nour Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:06 PM

I mean what is there more to say than we need the world than ai like ai is not what gives life only the world and people can why trade that for something you don't really need Save the earth

No attachments

Comment From: Emily Freeman

7/05/26 @ 7:05 PM

Dear NMED staff, My name is Emily Freeman. I am a New Mexico resident, living in Albuquerque, and I am writing because I am concerned about the risks and harms Project Jupiter poses to New Mexicans. I am submitting this comment to urge the New Mexico...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Cassie Walker

7/05/26 @ 7:05 PM

STOP PROJECT JUPITER

No attachments

Comment From: Chantrea Roth

7/05/26 @ 7:05 PM

This would be so damaging to the citizens of this state. This is not at all in our best interest.

No attachments

Comment From: Amelija Petro

7/05/26 @ 7:05 PM

Don't build data centres in places where water is limited! Its harmful and horrible and completely optional! There is no need for AI data centres. The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so com...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Nas Agerman

7/05/26 @ 7:04 PM

We don't need data centres, we need trees and rivers.

The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denie...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Raul Hernandez

7/05/26 @ 7:04 PM

STOP PROJECT JUPITER!!!! NO ONE WANTS THIS! THIS WILL ONLY WORSEN OUR LIMITED WATER SUPPLY AND AFFECT CLIMATE CHANGE!!!!

No attachments

Comment From: Rita kelly

7/05/26 @ 7:04 PM

I don't want to have to read a book if I want to see animals. I don't want the world to flood and everyone to die, but I think that they probably will and I've thought that since I was a kid. I want to have desire to see the future.

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:04 PM

Please do not continue with this project. It is very bad for the climate that you "want to save" but releasing carbon dioxide will just make the air quality for the people and CHILDREN living in New Mexico and atmosphere even worse. This planet can't...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kathryn Laintz

7/05/26 @ 7:04 PM

Any New Mexican is familiar with the names Las Conchas and Calf Canyon/Hermit's peak in relation to forest fires. These fires collectively, have irreversibly decimated half a million acres in our state. Burns like these are scientifically classified ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: jack pridmore

7/05/26 @ 7:03 PM

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Bella Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:03 PM

I am a resident of NM and I am asking that you deny Yucca Growth Infrastructure's air quality permit. I live here with many generations of my family and this is our home. I want to continue raising my children here knowing they have a safe and secure...↓

No attachments

Comment From: anonymous anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:03 PM

I am asking that you deny Yucca Growth Infrastructure's air quality permit. I live here with many generations of my family and this is our home. I want to continue raising my children here knowing they have a safe and secure future. That future is un...↓der threat with this proposed air quality permit. A change to fuel cells has minimal impacts on the suffering we will endure as a result of the gas plant's air pollution. To add 10 million tons of carbon dioxide pollution and a vague estimate of toxic emissions to our active and long-time nonattainment zone would be nothing short of blatant environmental racism. Our metro area is currently 16th worst in the nation for ozone pollution and we have received a failing grade on this air quality standard every single year since 2000. We are already breathing some of the most compromised air in the country. It is unacceptable to invite a new source of hyperscale air pollution into our communities. The carbon dioxide pollution alone will heat our atmosphere at a much faster pace and promote the formation of even more ground-level ozone. Last summer, my 7 year old suffered a grand mal seizure while on the playground at school because the extreme heat led to electrolyte imbalances. My brother works outside everyday without shade or rest breaks and has nowhere to keep his insulin cool. I can barely pay my electricity bills in the summer as it is. We cannot afford more intense heat. The other toxic air pollutants are extremely dangerous–many of them at very low levels. How am I supposed to send my kids to school knowing what they are breathing in? Knowing it can cause permanent brain damage or breathing complications before they have had a chance to grow up. Fuel cells also create hazardous waste and the fuel cell provider for this project has a history of illegally dumping this waste and hiding it for several years. This company will likely repeat its bad habits, illegally dumping dangerous and undisclosed chemicals into our public landfills, and we will just have to wait until somebody notices? Our county has and continues to face an illegal dumping epidemic so how can I be sure that these systemic oversight failures we have locally won't continue and expand to include this dangerous and experimental fuel cell operation. A fine for illegal dumping does not undo damage or its spread once our aquifer and soils are contaminated. It also will not re-capture the volatile chemicals that are released into the air when hazardous waste is improperly stored and disposed of.

My family's health and safety should be worth more than the profits of out-of-state corporations. The only defensible options moving forward are to deny this air permit or you must hold a public hearing in-person in Santa Teresa with a component for virtual participation. Materials and the hearing itself must be translated into Spanish and meet any other accessibility needs requested by community members.

No attachments

Comment From: Harini Kumar

7/05/26 @ 7:03 PM

The future is under threat with this proposed air quality permit. 10 million tons of carbon dioxide pollution into the environment is going to dry up the water that sustains our communities and at the end of the day, that is environmental racism. The...↓

No attachments

Comment From: John Arancherry

7/05/26 @ 7:03 PM

This is no way beneficial for us or for the environment around. Harming our already damaged environment will only bring hotter heat waves and kill millions of species.

No attachments

Comment From: Julia Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:03 PM

We built civilizations, discovered medicine, explored space, created art, and connected with each other long before AI existed. It's a tool, not a necessity. Society was fully capable of surviving and thriving before AI, and we still are.
The propose...↓d design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and there are NO proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution?

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC.

A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the st atistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.

Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Sam mappy

7/05/26 @ 7:02 PM

I am a resident of Philly and I am asking that you deny Yucca Growth Infrastructure's air quality permit. I live here with many generations of my family and this is our home. I want to continue raising my children here knowing they have a safe and se...↓cure future. That future is under threat with this proposed air quality permit. A change to fuel cells has minimal impacts on the suffering we will endure as a result of the gas plant's air pollution. To add 10 million tons of carbon dioxide pollution and a vague estimate of toxic emissions to our active and long-time nonattainment zone would be nothing short of blatant environmental racism. Our metro area is currently 16th worst in the nation for ozone pollution and we have received a failing grade on this air quality standard every single year since 2000. We are already breathing some of the most compromised air in the country. It is unacceptable to invite a new source of hyperscale air pollution into our communities. The carbon dioxide pollution alone will heat our atmosphere at a much faster pace and promote the formation of even more ground-level ozone. Last summer, my 7 year old suffered a grand mal seizure while on the playground at school because the extreme heat led to electrolyte imbalances. My brother works outside everyday without shade or rest breaks and has nowhere to keep his insulin cool. I can barely pay my electricity bills in the summer as it is. We cannot afford more intense heat. The other toxic air pollutants are extremely dangerous–many of them at very low levels. How am I supposed to send my kids to school knowing what they are breathing in? Knowing it can cause permanent brain damage or breathing complications before they have had a chance to grow up. Fuel cells also create hazardous waste and the fuel cell provider for this project has a history of illegally dumping this waste and hiding it for several years. This company will likely repeat its bad habits, illegally dumping dangerous and undisclosed chemicals into our public landfills, and we will just have to wait until somebody notices? Our county has and continues to face an illegal dumping epidemic so how can I be sure that these systemic oversight failures we have locally won't continue and expand to include this dangerous and experimental fuel cell operation. A fine for illegal dumping does not undo damage or its spread once our aquifer and soils are contaminated. It also will not re-capture the volatile chemicals that are released into the air when hazardous waste is improperly stored and disposed of.

My family's health and safety should be worth more than the profits of out-of-state corporations. The only defensible options moving forward are to deny this air permit or you must hold a public hearing in-person in Santa Teresa with a component for virtual participation. Materials and the hearing itself must be translated into Spanish and meet any other accessibility needs requested by community members.

No attachments

Comment From: Sabrina Chavez

7/05/26 @ 7:02 PM

The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given Bloom Energy's history of illegal dump...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Shea Adams

7/05/26 @ 7:02 PM

This project is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of and it's completely useless. We all need to stop the use of ai entirely. We are capable enough to use our brains yet we're not. Protect our planet, brains, and our future.

No attachments

Comment From: Andrea Cooper

7/05/26 @ 7:02 PM

There is no reason for these data centers when the detrimental impact they are having on the environment is already being seen. They are not benefitting us they are just bringing us closer to not having an earth to inhabit.

The public should be give...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:01 PM

I live in Southern Doña Ana County and under no circumstances do I want experimental technology deployed at an unprecedented scale in my backyard. Yucca Growth Infrastructure's gas-powered fuel cell plant is 1,000 times larger than Bloom Energy's big...↓gest existing fuel cell plant. In fact, worldwide, Bloom Energy has developed 1.4 GW of fuel cell technology across more than a thousand locations, yet Yucca Growth Infrastructure is asking for nearly double that (2.46 GW of fuel cells) at a singular location. The largest fuel cell plant in the entire world is more than 30 times smaller than the fuel cell plant under consideration in Santa Teresa. There is absolutely no way to know, with certainty, what the actual pollution levels will be given the tremendous size differential, and thus gap in data, between operational fuel cell plants and this theoretical plant proposed by Yucca Growth Infrastructure. Betting the livability of our county on this unpredictable and unproven plan would be a total capitulation and betrayal of your so-called values: "protects the public health of New Mexicans...by preventing the deterioration of air quality;" "protect and restore the environment...foster a healthy NM for present and future generations" Though approximations of annual air pollution were provided, the testing used an extremely weak methodology leaving us, ultimately, with pseudoscientific guesses that have large margins of error. Estimated pollution levels for this gas-powered fuel cell plant are based on only three 4-hour pollution tests from a very small unit (only 65 kW). This is a far cry from thousands of sweltering fuel cells operating 24/7 at maximum output in close proximity, all in the scorching heat of our open desert. The lack of rigorous testing at even this small of a scale is lazy and very concerning, especially given that the gas power plant Yucca Growth Infrastructure wants to build is 37,000 times bigger than this unit. A 15% "safety margin" was added to the numbers provided by the applicant. Safety margins are not usually added if a company is confident in the accuracy of their pollution estimates. Even small variations from this superficial test will result in massively different levels of pollution and given that the plant will be 37,000 bigger than the testing unit, a 15% safety margin is completely insufficient–it could work as a margin for a single unit, but not the entire plant. If a unit has a 0.01% chance of failing (sounds promising right?), the odds of 37,000 of those units working perfectly at the same time is 2.47% (pathetically low feasibility). That means there is a 97.53% chance that the plant will experience at least one failure. What will the exact level of redundancy be? Will more fuel cells be rubberstamped or pollution levels overlooked in five years or less due to age-related inefficiencies?

What about cases of catastrophic failure? Are we approving those deadly incidents of pollution in advance without any real data informing us of the risks at this scale? Highly flammable hydrogen under high pressure only needs a microscopic crack to leak out, ignite, explode, and level entire neighborhoods and schools while sending shockwaves into nearby counties. Assuming this risk, an act of gross negligence, at a scale that has never even remotely been demonstrated in practice would be unbelievably careless. These permits must be denied outright. If further deliberation is desired, a public hearing in Santa Teresa is non-negotiable.

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:01 PM

Hello, I am writing this as a person who is struggling with the effects of the climate change and wants to actually do something to change this because I still believe humanity can make a change this situation. The Government should deny this air per...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:01 PM

This data centre has a strong potential to do more damage to Doña Ana County, whose air quality already does not meet federal standards and a refusal to consult with them is evidence of government sponsored racism. The public should be given an addit...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:00 PM

We do not need a data center for an artificial intelligence that will only contribute to the corrosion of not only our young minds but our environment. #saynotojupiter #noai #stopprojectJupiter NO PROJECT JUPITER

No attachments

Comment From: Beau Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 7:00 PM

I prefer water, animals, the trees, birds and bees.
The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and there are NO...↓ proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution?

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC.

A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the st atistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.

Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Ayoosh Unknown

7/05/26 @ 7:00 PM

Protect my planet, I'm not even a legal adult yet. What you are doing is worrying me and no teenager should have to worry about stuff like this, stop what you are doing please I want to live.

No attachments

Comment From: Carlos Sullivan

7/05/26 @ 6:59 PM

The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and there are NO proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. ...↓How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution?

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC.

A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the statistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.

Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Krista Sherman

7/05/26 @ 6:59 PM

Project Jupiter's power plant will release up to 10 million tons of climate-warming greenhouse gasses every year. This would make a mockery of NM's climate goals, and erase most of the climate progress we have made in the last two decades.

The publi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: mia storm

7/05/26 @ 6:59 PM

i want this to stop now!!

No attachments

Comment From: Daebee Fufa

7/05/26 @ 6:59 PM

My name is Daebee Fufa. I am a California resident, living in Cerritos, and I am writing because I am concerned about the risks and harms Project Jupiter poses to us. I am submitting this comment to urge the New Mexico Environment Department to rejec...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Aj Martinez

7/05/26 @ 6:59 PM

I don't like this project for my state I do not approve for this to continue.

The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit app...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Angelina Ortiz

7/05/26 @ 6:58 PM

July 2nd 2026 As were approaching summer the rio grande has been dry for almost 4+ weeks now. There's a lot of people that depend on this water to be running. There is also people that use the rio grande river for numerous things. Like fishing, swimm...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Niklass Markuss Tautkevičs

7/05/26 @ 6:58 PM

The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and there are NO proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. ...↓How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution?

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC.

A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the st atistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.

Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Emily Tula

7/05/26 @ 6:58 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Fathima Noufal

7/05/26 @ 6:58 PM

Dear NMED staff, My name is Fathima. I am a Saudi Arabian resident, living in Jeddah, and I am writing because I am concerned about the risks and harms Project Jupiter poses to New Mexicans. I am submitting this comment to urge the New Mexico Environ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Isabella Mintz

7/05/26 @ 6:57 PM

I write to you and your concern as many thousands are also doing because we are pleading for you to not approve this data center. The change of technology doesn't change the negative outcome on the environment and overall living conditions of the hum...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:57 PM

Humans have lived without AI for thousands of years, and we don't need to use it for even the simplest tasks. Our nature is far more valuable than an AI data center that will shorten our lifespan and that of the planet.

No attachments

Comment From: Rachel, Mapes

7/05/26 @ 6:57 PM

I am a native to NM and I am very concerned about Project Jupiter. Any amount of vague "economic benefit" should never outweigh the cost of dumping chemicals, poisoning our air, and stealing our precious water. I am very concerned for the future of o...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kateryna Podzyrei

7/05/26 @ 6:56 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Tori Lieberman

7/05/26 @ 6:56 PM

Protect our environment!
The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given Bloom Energy'...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Cecilia Wolf

7/05/26 @ 6:55 PM

I am completely against the Jupiter Project not only because of its impact on nature and the world around us, but also because of the big impact and difficulties it will bring to families and fellow artists.

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:55 PM

Yo don't do that.
The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given Bloom Energy's histo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Emmanuel Ortiz

7/05/26 @ 6:55 PM

I am a resident of El Paso, and am reaching out to implore you to give the public more time to contribute their thoughts and opinions on the air quality permit needed for project jupiter's development. I'm sure you're aware there's a strong oppositio...↓

No attachments

Comment From: anonymous anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:54 PM

No attachments

Comment From: anonymous anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:54 PM

I urge the NMED to outright reject YUCCA Yucca Growth Infrastructure, LLC's air permit application for the YGI Microgrid.

No attachments

Comment From: Marina Riesgo

7/05/26 @ 6:54 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Todor Dimitrov

7/05/26 @ 6:54 PM

STOP BUILDING THESE DATA CENTERS!!!!
The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given B...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:54 PM

Project Jupiter is horrible. Our only world is dying day by day and if project jupiter gets finalized, the end is here. Nobody can save us but us.
The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so com...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Maria Arkoudi

7/05/26 @ 6:54 PM

Although I'm Greek, I'm still against Project Jupiter. (I will just be copy pasting talking points, I'm so sorry I have no time.) Santa Teresa Elementary and High School are located within five miles of this project site. 96% of students at the high ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Samantha Boyne

7/05/26 @ 6:53 PM

Building this data center is irresponsible. There was no thought to the people, the land, or the environment about how this would affect everything. It is clear the people do not want this data center in their home yet you still don't listen to the p...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Rory lamb

7/05/26 @ 6:53 PM

No one truly needs AI, all the animals need clean water and quality air including the local people

No attachments

Comment From: Joslyn Farnham

7/05/26 @ 6:53 PM

We have lived without these things for thousands of years we can live without them for a thousand more.

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:53 PM

This is extremely harmful to our air quality and environment. Our future is important and saving it one step at a time is important. Each step taken can save our planet from permanent harm and save our future generations from living on an unsustainab...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Nikki Thurston

7/05/26 @ 6:53 PM

earthjustice.org
The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given Bloom Energy's histor...↓

No attachments

Comment From: anonymous anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:52 PM

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need t...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Flo hillage

7/05/26 @ 6:52 PM

Stop project Jupiter, there isnt and never will be a planet b. The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and th...↓ere are NO proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution?

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC.

A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the st atistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.

Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:52 PM

The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and there are NO proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. ...↓How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution? A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC. A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the statistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.
Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Maria Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:52 PM

Please I urge NMED to to deny the development of the AI data center, it does more damage than it helps us. Our climate is already in such a fragile state that we should care and protect it, not harm it. We cannot breathe nor drink data, and there's t...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Nadaviah Shiloh

7/05/26 @ 6:52 PM

We don't need data centers. The public should be given an additional 60 days to review and comment on the air quality permit so community members can participate equitably.
The air quality permit application should be denied outright given Bloom Ener...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:51 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:51 PM

As someone who is trying to advocate for climate change and depleting CO2 levels. I don't support project Jupiter

No attachments

Comment From: Luca Anonimo

7/05/26 @ 6:51 PM

Dear NMED staff, My name is Luca. I am a New Mexico resident, and I am writing because I am concerned about the risks and harms Project Jupiter poses to New Mexicans. I am submitting this comment to urge the New Mexico Environment Department to rejec...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Avellana Jackson

7/05/26 @ 6:50 PM

I am a concerned citizen asking that you please deny Yucca Growth Infrastructure's air quality. Ai data centers are nothing short of entirely destructive to humans, animals and our ecosystem. The benefits of AI data centers are far outweighed by the ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Aaaa aaaaa aaaaa

7/05/26 @ 6:50 PM

Stop the project pls the world is dying. The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack and there are NO proposed po...↓llution controls on any of these stacks. How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution?

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC.

A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the st atistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.

Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Sydney Forman

7/05/26 @ 6:50 PM

No one wants this data center. Start letting citizens vote on whether or not they want data centers in their communities & start putting them in places where they're okay with it. The people do not want AI. The only people that care about it are the ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anel, Bairova

7/05/26 @ 6:50 PM

This project is horrible, we need to fight for better ecology

No attachments

Comment From: Gagandeep sihota

7/05/26 @ 6:50 PM

The people do not wish data centers, but clean water and fresh air for the children and the creatures of the earth. We Refuse the Production of The Data Center

No attachments

Comment From: Allison Vingatamallé

7/05/26 @ 6:50 PM

I don't want animals to suffer because of us and the billionaires. The proposed design has an individual exhaust stack on each fuel cell, of which there will be 2,275. It would be inefficient to place monitors and controls on each individual stack an...↓d there are NO proposed pollution controls on any of these stacks. How, then, will this project show evidence of their compliance with emissions limit requirements under Title V? Has there been or will there ever be upstream fuel testing of methane gas to anticipate the composition of these fuel cells' emissions? How exactly will NMED enforce emissions standards without direct, long-term, continuous monitoring? Or isolate their deleterious impact on air quality without an accurate assessment of localized pollution?

A fuel cell can continue to generate electricity or maintain operating temperatures while experiencing catalyst degradation which causes a massive spike in the release of carbon monoxide or Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). This project would need to centralize the 2,275 individual stack emissions into an exponentially smaller number of exhaust systems so that Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS) installed on these central exhaust systems can provide real-time, accurate data about operational compliance. As it is, this design plan completely fails to provide monitoring conditions that are "practically enforceable" under 20.2.70.302.B NMAC.

A proposal, such as this one, that relies on computer simulation modeling instead of actual, measured air pollution at scale is invalid, untrustworthy, and far from what residents of Doña Ana County and New Mexico deserve. What data was used to train these models? When and where was this data collected? What proportion of those involved in the development of this model have, at any time, received money from the corporations involved? How much? If NMED allows group testing for this project, 99% of the exhaust stacks at this facility will never be physically tested during the entire life of the Title V permit. This creates an unmonitored loophole that violates the Clean Air Act's mandate for continuous compliance.

We know the pollution approximations provided are based on an extremely lazy testing methodology and while we were not told whether these 4 tests were even done on-site or during peak temperatures, we can safely assume the applicants cut corners here as well in an attempt to fast track this approval. As I write this, Project Jupiter is draining an undisclosed amount of water from our shared aquifer on a daily basis. Given the st atistical invalidity of their pollution estimates, approving this air permit under any circumstance would be to allow this project to introduce unmitigated and undisclosed hazards into our air without consequence.

Children attending Santa Teresa Elementary School will sit innocently, every day, LESS THAN ONE MILE from this pollution. Three other schools, an elder care center, and three public parks sit within around 4 miles of this project. Deny this air permit. Gambling with the fragile health of our children and elders would be a complete defilement of the authority vested in you.

No attachments

Comment From: Kyla Barrett

7/05/26 @ 6:49 PM

This is ridiculous, no one even cares about AI anymore. This bubble will burst and I hope all of you do with it. I hope all of your assets get flushed down the drain because you can't even think of the world that you stand on.

No attachments

Comment From: Muazzer Murat

7/05/26 @ 6:49 PM

To give ourselves and the future generations a better future.

No attachments

Comment From: Jay Tran

7/05/26 @ 6:49 PM

I urge the NMED to outright reject YUCCA Yucca Growth Infrastructure, LLC's air permit application for the YGI Microgrid.

This will not help the community if people are not aware.

No attachments

Comment From: Jon Chevere

7/05/26 @ 6:49 PM

Though approximations of annual air pollution were provided, the testing used an extremely weak methodology leaving us, ultimately, with pseudoscientific guesses that have large margins of error. Estimated pollution levels for this gas-powered fuel c...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Charlotte Cioffi

7/05/26 @ 6:49 PM

I am a resident of York and I am asking that you deny Yucca Growth Infrastructure's air quality permit. I live here with many generations of my family and this is our home. I want to continue raising my children here knowing they have a safe and secu...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Yucca Panghulan

7/05/26 @ 6:48 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Caitlin Rogers

7/05/26 @ 6:48 PM

Throughout my high school years I spent my time in FFA giving speeches about how New Mexico's water supply has fallen short again and again and how it has affected our farm use, easing animals, and our water use at home. Now about 3 years out of high...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

7/05/26 @ 6:48 PM

It will harm the people and their homes around it, the animals and the nature that we are supposed to protect!

No attachments

Comment From: Jeremiah Baca

7/05/26 @ 6:48 PM

No attachments

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]