A Coal Nightmare Looms in the American Northwest
An Interview with Bellingham WA Locals Anne & Mike Botwin
Have you heard about the plans to ship millions of tons of American coal from Northwest ports to China annually? If Arch Coal, Peabody Energy, and other coal giants get their way, coal will be strip-mined from the Powder River Basin in Montana and Wyoming, transported on trains to ports along the Pacific Northwest, and shipped across the Pacific to be burned in unregulated Chinese power plants.
The United States holds the world's largest coal reserves, and about 40 percent of U.S. coal comes from the Powder River Basin, so we are talking about a lot of coal being shipped to China: some 150 million tons or more per year. That’s enough to fill more than 10,000 trains a year, each roughly 1.5 miles long. That’s 1.5 miles of uncovered, open train cars running through 
sensitive ecological areas (think Columbia River Gorge and Glacier National Park) some 27 times per day!
This plan presents so many potentially devastating impacts to human health, the global climate and ecosystems (from the Powder River Basin all the way to China), that it’s hard to get your head around it. In all, five coal export terminals have been proposed along the Washington and Oregon coastline. The largest, Gateway Pacific Terminal (GPT) at Cherry Point, WA, will be the first to be studied in a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) by the Army Corps of Engineers and the WA State Dept. of Ecology. If the final EIS is approved by these agencies and then by the Whatcom County Council in WA, the huge Gateway Pacific Terminal will be built, and the other four smaller terminals will likely be rubber-stamped.
The Green Graze reader Anne Botwin, and her husband Mike, live in the Puget Sound town of Bellingham, WA, just south of Cherry Point. To say that they are concerned about potential impacts to their town, their health, the Sound and the climate would be an understatement. They are fighting this plan with everything they’ve got: letters to elected officials, several letters to the editor, attendance at “pre-Scoping” meetings, speaking in person at the first public Scoping Meeting in Bellingham and spreading the word any way they can.
Here, they share their concerns and experiences and suggest ways we can all help stop this nightmare from coming true.
Q: You live about 200 yards from the train tracks. How many trains pass on average per day now and how much do you expect the traffic to increase?
Our best guess is we have about 10-11 trains per day now if you include two Amtrak passenger trains. If GPT is built, we are told train traffic would gradually increase to 18 additional trains a day, for a total of about 28-29 trains every 24 hours. We also live beyond an “at-grade” RR crossing, so when a train is passing, there is no access in or out of our neighborhood. All vehicles would be blocked for approximately 2-3 hours each day, 365 days per year. Engineers are required to sound their horns a minimum of four times at crossings, though we have counted up to 14 times. The combined noise from the horns and the wheels of the trains screeching on the rails, conversation outside our home (and sometimes, inside) comes to a stop till they pass.
Q: What is the prevailing mood in town with respect to GPT?
Local people in Bellingham are extremely concerned. Elected officials from Seattle and even Portland are expressing their opposition. Several Indian Tribes have joined in the outcry. The Sierra Club and hundreds of environmental activists from four local organizations in Bellingham (Coal Train Facts, Protect Whatcom, Communitywise Bellingham, and Power Past Coal) are actively involved in fighting the three coal export terminals in WA and two others in OR that are currently being proposed. Because of the much larger-than-expected turnout at other scoping hearings, Seattle recently decided to change its hearing venue to a larger facility.
Most of us want a cumulative impact study of the adverse impacts and risks of shipping coal from all these terminals on our air, water, marine life, the negative economic impacts on the fishing and tourist industry, etc. which would result from all 5 of the terminals currently proposed in the Pacific Northwest.) In fact, many people believe the whole transportation corridor should be included, from Wyoming and Montana, south to OR (including transport in coal barges in the Columbia River) and north in WA from Seattle almost to the Canadian border.
Q: Anything of interest to report from the Scoping Meeting? How many people would you say attended?
The newspaper estimated that about 2,000 people attended the Scoping meeting in Bellingham, which lasted four hours. Only about 200 people in line were allotted two minutes each to speak directly to representatives of the Army Corps and Ecology. Comments came from ordinary citizens, physicians, experts in marine ecology, and a representative from the Lummi Indian Tribe, which had announced their strong opposition about a week before. Only two or three people spoke in favor of “good jobs now.” Footage of several of the comments can be seen at www.coaltrainfacts.org/scoping/videos.
Many speakers were concerned about air and water pollution: Coal dust from uncovered containers, the diesel particulate matter in the air (from both train and cargo ship engines) is a known carcinogen, and the risk of mercury, cadmium, and other heavy metals being blown by Pacific trade winds from China back to the West Coast when this coal is ultimately burned. Others spoke about the effects on their farms and berry crops and losing WA’s well-earned reputation for healthy air and land and water. One woman described seeing a huge black coal cloud while flying above a Canadian coal terminal and watching as it slowly dissipated in theair. Anotheraddressed the issue of an earthquake and tsunami on our coastline (and 
interestingly, the very next day anearthquake hit Canada, resulting in a tsunami warning).
People were also worried about the impact of the terminal and the continual noise of passing ships further depleting our Southern Resident Orca whales (already officially listed as “endangered”). Some people mentioned the increased risk of collisions with Orcas and with other vessels in the narrow straits and warned of an almost inevitable coal and/or oil spill into Puget Sound (coal cargo ships are single-hulled vessels). One person mentioned the 100 mph winds in Salish Sea and the propensity of ships to break from their moorings because Chinese-made anchors were known to be weak.
Many people spoke about climate change when this coal is burned in unregulated Chinese power plants: No matter where this coal is burned, the CO2 and toxic airborne pollutants have the same adverse impacts on our air and water, on human health, and on global warming. One woman was carrying a homemade sign saying: “China gets our coal, and all we get is the shaft!”
Q: What do you say to the people who argue that GPT is needed for the jobs it will create? Won’t it also have an adverse effect on other jobs, such as in the tourism and fishing industries?
Yes. GPT’s incessant mantra is: “Good Jobs NOW—build them here or watch them go elsewhere.” To that we reply: Do about 240 permanent new jobs make up for the harm of potentially thousands of businesses and jobs LOST in the salmon fishing industry, including the native Lummi fishermen, AND in the tourism trade (e.g., whale-watching) and the communities that support and depend on them, such as restaurants, B&B’s, tourist shops, etc.?? We seriously doubt it.
To get these “good jobs,” taxpayers would also have to accept responsibility for 95% of the cost of any new construction to accommodate the trains (such as over-passes or track sidings), residents would have to accept air & water pollution, increased noise and traffic, lower property values near the RR tracks and terminal, and reduced access for emergency responders (paramedics, firefighters, and police) while trains passed, with the potential loss of life and property, and reduced parkland where the railroad will have to be expanded to accommodate the increased train traffic—to name just a few. The wide economic impacts, both positive and negative, should be carefully studied.
Furthermore: a) Chinese demand for coal is known to be highly variable (China has plenty of coal of their own, and some coal ships have waited for weeks in Chinese ports for permission to unload). b) Two West Coast terminals (Portland and Los Angeles) already have a history of failure. Turns out, they were built on expressions of interest, not actual contracts. Both closed after only a few years, leaving taxpayers with the bill for clean-up and renovation of these ports. c) The Chinese have recently begun looking into importing U.S. fracking technology, which could be used to extract natural gas instead of importing cheap U.S. coal. (They would probably like to improve their own air, which is already so polluted by coal, it’s yellow. Can’t really blame them!)
Q: What are some specific ways you expect human health to be impacted if GPT is approved and this plan is fully implemented?
The Powder Basin coal that the proponents of the terminal want to export is illegal in Washington because of the pollution it creates. Even without burning it here, the air pollution from coal dust, diesel particulates, CO2, mercury, selenium, cadmium, etc. will dramatically increase in the Northwest. People will be breathing these tiny particulates deep into their lungs. According to over 200 doctors in our county, all cause respiratory diseases, such as bronchitis and asthma in people, and several are carcinogenic (see WhatcomDocs.com). Airborne particles of coal dust and mercury could contaminate Lake Whatcom -- Bellingham's sole source of fresh drinking water) which would be devastating. The toxic soot would be carried back to the U.S. by Pacific trade-winds and ultimately around the world. This would affect the health of people living on the West Coast first and more severely.
In his comments at the scoping meeting, Mike addressed the risk to human life when trains delay a quick response by paramedics, firefighters, or police in an emergency. Access could be blocked by a mile-and-a-half-long coal train taking 5-6 minutes to pass on the tracks. He described some dangerous real-life situations during the past two summers when our elderly neighbor had a heart attack and needed help from the EMT’s, and 3 other incidents the following summer when "crabbers" collecting their traps came to our door needing help-- exhausted, soaked, and freezing from the 50 degree water in the Sound. We had to call paramedics to come for one of them who couldn’t stop shivering. We suspected, and paramedics confirmed, he was hypothermic, and it took over an hour to warm him up in their specially equipped van. Sometimes trains even come to a complete stop on the tracks, blocking the crossing and access to dozens of homes in our neighborhood for hours. One neighbor told us she'd personally seen two trains that had completely stopped on the tracks. Last May, one of them blocked the crossing for about four hours.
Q: At the Scoping Meeting, you spoke about impacts to eel grass in the Sound, and what it could mean for the entire marine ecosystem there. Can you give us the highlights of what you said?
I spoke about the risks of building a coal terminal on the shoreline plus an 800' long pier near or above the eel grass beds at Cherry Pt. Eel grass needs sunlight to survive and provides a critical nursery for herring and juvenile salmon. If the eel grass were dug up, crushed or buried in silt during construction, it would die. Even if it survived, the shade from the pier and the turbidity of the water (continually stirred up by ships arriving and departing daily) would prevent sunlight from reaching it. And if that didn't kill it, invasive species transported in the ships' ballast water might finish the job.
Eel grass seems like such a small thing, but the adverse impacts are very significant: it is the base of an entire marine ecosystem. Eel grass beds provides protection for Pacific Herring and a critical nursery for juvenile salmon; salmon rely on the herring for food, and Orcas rely on the salmon for food. Without the eel grass, the herring, salmon, and Orcas will be in serious peril. If the salmon are depleted and the Orcas die off or are forced to relocate in order to survive, this will create serious adverse economic impacts on the livelihoods of many people, including the commercial salmon fishing industry, the Lummi Tribe fishermen, and the tourist industry (such as whale-watching boats and many communities with shops, restaurants, B&B’s. etc. which rely on tourism.) The prospect is really ugly.
Q: Is there anything concerned citizens can do right now to fight this plan and stop the approval of GPT?
The best thing you can do right now to fight this is to send your scoping comments or questions directly to the two agencies that are studying the adverse impacts and writing the Draft EIS by going to http://www.eisgatewaypacificwa.gov and clicking the link under “Comments.” Note that the deadline for accepting comments is January 21, 2013.
Alternatively, there are at least two online petitions you can sign. Credo Action has a petition that provides a lot of basic information and allows for people to write their comments to the Army Corps and Ecology. You can also sign the petition at SignOn.org. With both petitions, it is important to use your own words (not copy them) and SPECIFICALLY ASK that the impacts be studied in the EIS if you want your comment to be counted.
