14-page White Paper “THE SALISH SEA IMPERILED: A community response to increased coal transport around the San Juan Islands!” produced by THE SAN JUANS ALLIANCE — An alliance of organizations in the San Juan Islands: Lopez NO COALition, Orcas NO COALition, Friends of the San Juans , San Juan Islanders for Safe Shipping (August 2013).
A summary of impacts and concerns:
The description of impacts below are copied and adapted from coaltrainfacts.org.
OVERVIEW
There are currently plans to develop the largest coal export facility in North America at Cherry Point, in northwest Washington state. The Gateway Pacific Terminal, a project of Pacific International Terminals, would be owned by SSA Marine, which is owned by Carrix, partnered with Goldman Sachs. Coal mined from the Powder River Basin by Peabody Energy would be hauled by trains along BNSF rail lines. The coal train corridor extends from mines in Montana and Wyoming through Sandpoint, Idaho to Spokane, down through the Columbia River Gorge, then up along the Puget Sound coast, passing through Longview, Tacoma, Seattle, Edmonds, Everett, Mt. Vernon, Bellingham, Ferndale and all points in between.
Costs to local economies, public health, and rail corridor communities are concerning to many. There is evidence to support that local jobs and businesses, property values, human health and quality of life would be adversely impacted by the coal trains. Increased marine traffic and the coal terminal would affect fisheries, marine ecosystems, and air quality. Further, substantial taxpayer investment may be required to support infrastructure required by the project and to mitigate some of the potential negative effects. There are questions as to whether damages to local businesses, regional identity, communities and fisheries could ever be adequately mitigated. The global impacts of coal export and coal combustion are significant, particularly when the future is considered.
WEST COAST COAL EXPORT
China is building at least one new coal-fired power plant every week and has a seemingly limitless appetite for coal. The Powder River Basin in southeast Montana and northeast Wyoming has a seemingly limitless supply. There is increasing interest linking this supply with Asian demand through west coast coal terminals. Two potential sites in Washington state—Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point (Carrix/SSA Marine, Peabody Energy) and Millenium Bulk Terminal at Longview (Ambre Energy, Arch Coal)—are currently the most active projects, although other sites both in the States and in Canada are under consideration.
Coal mining and coal transport (by both rail and sea) are problematic when conducted at such scale. Local economies, communities, and human health are foremost amongst concerns. The coal industry itself acknowledges that coal markets are traditionally volatile and that coal terminals are financially risky ventures. Strategic questions regarding the wisdom of selling energy resources cheaply to economic rival have been raised. Additional concerns include those about the coal combustion that occurs once the PRB coal reaches its market.
China consumes coal at an ever-increasing rate due to its burgeoning industrial economy. Though China has vast coal supplies of its own, dangerous mines combined with overrun rail infrastructure make it easier for China to import coal from other countries rather than mine its own. China has committed $80 billion over the next decade to build up its passenger rail in an effort to open up its main rail line capacity to move more coal. Washington State has put policies in place to phase out coal burning facilities because of coal’s negative environmental impact, yet we are exporting it to China. Its unique economic position makes China especially powerful in negotiations of prices of coal worldwide.
The Powder River Basin (PRB) is an area in southeast Montana and northeast Wyoming known for its natural coal deposits. It is the largest source of coal in the United States. The Wyodak coalbed covers 10,000 square miles in the PRB and has seams of coal averaging 70 feet thick. Total production from the PRB was over 455 million short tons of coal in 2009. Powder River Basin coal is low-sulfur, subbituminous coal. While it contains 15 times less sulfur than Eastern (Appalachian) coal, it also has fewer Btu’s of energy or a lower “heat rate,” which means that coal-fired power plants need to burn nearly 50 percent more of it to match the power output from Eastern coal.
Coal is mined by a process called strip mining, a type of surface mining where overlying soil and rock are removed to reach the coal underneath. The mining process damages aquifers in the region, affecting human health and local economies, particularly ranching. Transporting tremendous amounts of coal from Powder River Basin mines requires an unprecedented intensity of railway usage.
This dedication of rail lines to coal transport is associated with a number of concerns, including, but not limited to, interference with passenger rail and other freight rail uses; impacts on other ground traffic, as railroad crossing delays escalate to hours per day; damages to local economies as businesses are isolated on the “wrong side of the tracks;” loss of tax revenues; effects of noise, vibration, coal dust and diesel emissions on human health, property values and quality of life. The coal train corridor extends through several states and communities that differ in size, demographics, and economic base; however, all communities would be subject to impacts from the proposed scale of coal export activities.
Although the Gateway Pacific Terminal and Longview, both in Washington State, are the two terminal sites with current proposals, other ports, including the Port of Grays Harbor in Hoquiam, Oregon International Port of Coos Bay, and Port of St. Helens are also under consideration. British Columbia ships coal from the facility at Westshore, at Roberts Bank; there is talk of expanding Prince Rupert’s Ridley Island terminal; other locations in BC may be developed towards similar ends.
Sightline Institute has done research into the unreliable economics of West Coast coal export. An example of the false economic promise of coal export is the coal terminal in Los Angeles which was closed in 2006 due to market failure.
“Clean Coal” and the Powder River Basin
There is a compelling argument made by James Fallows in The Atlantic Magazine for making clean coal a priority, alongside “all-out effort on all other fronts, from conservation and efficiency to improved battery technology to wind- and solar-power systems to improved nuclear facilities.” Clean coal refers to coal being used in more sustainable ways by sequestering the carbon dioxide emissions of coal. Fallows reports that China is a leader in developing clean coal technologies; these technologies, however, are still theoretical. A fundamental question remains: Is selling coal cheaply to China the best way to provide incentive to further develop “clean coal?” Selling an inexpensive energy resource that can be utilized with existing technologies may simply perpetuate the consumption of coal as we know it.
THE PROPOSED GATEWAY PACIFIC TERMINAL FACILITY
The proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal (GPT) at Cherry Point would have a capacity of approximately 54 million metric tons of goods, of which 48 million tons would be coal , annually. By comparison, Westshore Terminals at Robert’s Bank in the lower mainland of British Columbia, currently the largest coal port in North America, ships around 21 million metric tons of coal per year. The 2,980 foot long wharf would berth 3 ships; cargo would be conveyed along a 1,250 foot trestle linking the ships to shore. There would be an 80 to 105-acre stockyard at Cherry Point for storage of coal and associated machinery. Coal dust is generated from uncovered piles that need to be rotated regularly. The dust is notoriously difficult to control. The coal would be loaded from the storage areas into Panamax and capesize (too large to fit through the Panama Canal and must sail around a cape) ships for transport to destinations in Asia. As both supply and demand for Powder River Basin coal are vast, and as the current application is to develop only 350 acres of a 1,092 acre site, there is no way to accurately predict how large the Gateway Pacific Terminal might eventually become, and how many coal trains and vessels would then be required.
TRAINS
Transporting coal from the Powder River Basin to proposed west coast terminal sites would require unprecedented levels of regional rail usage. There are concerns not only about dramatically increased rail traffic, but also about negative impacts associated with coal trains specifically, due to train length, weight, content, and polluting capacity. The terminal at Cherry Point would see the addition of approximately 30 miles of coal trains daily to the BNSF rail line that runs along the Puget Sound coast. This would likely constrain passenger rail and adversely affect the transport of freight other than coal. The Washington state rail system is already nearing practical capacity; infrastructure would need to be upgraded to accommodate proposed usage.BNSF has been largely silent on the issue of rail improvements ; it remains unclear who would pay, and what kind of physical and economic disruption such upgrades would cause.
RAIL TRAFFIC
“Findings have shown that increases in rail traffic have the potential to result in diseconomies as a result of traffic delays,” according to a paper taken from a University of Texas Transportation Center study. Recent studies conducted by Gibson Traffic Consultants in the western Washington cities of Seattle, Edmonds, Burlington, Marysville, Mt Vernon, and Stanwood (a study in Bellingham is currently underway) suggest potentially severe consequences due to the proposed increase in rail traffic intensity associated with GPT. Adverse effects include increased risk of accidents, impacts to the city’s level of service, decreased ability to provide effective emergency response times, and possible interference with the local freight delivery systems affecting the local economy.
JOBS and LOCAL BUSINESS
There has yet to be a thorough analysis of the economic impacts of the proposed GPT coal terminal, though one could be called for as part of the environmental impact statement. Such an analysis could approximate a net gain or loss of jobs, and a net gain or loss to the economy. It could take into account not only the number of permanent number of jobs created at the terminal site and the tax revenue associated with the terminal, but also job losses, damages to small businesses and fisheries, opportunity costs (such as loss of tourism revenue), and taxpayer expenses for upgraded safety and infrastructure along the rail corridor. It is more difficult to quantify losses to quality of life and regional identity.
Actual Job Numbers:
There is a great deal of rhetorical confusion about precisely how many jobs will be created and sustained by the Gateway Terminal Project. Peabody and SSA have offered divergent claims about job numbers, ranging from less than a hundred to upward of 4,000, but analysis of the Project Information Document by the Bellingham Herald on May 21, 2011 shows that 89 full-time jobs will be created by the end of the first phase of construction. Then, depending on demand, the number could grow to 160 jobs by 2017 and 213 jobs by 2026. The applicant’s traffic impact summary in their land use application to Whatcom County states a maximum of 213 jobs at build-out. Pacific International Terminals/Gateway Pacific Terminal commissioned a study by Martin Associates, and then a review by three local economists. The jobs study and the review were fairly consistent in their findings, projecting the employment of 44 terminal operators at the Cherry Point site. Tug operators, railroad workers, ILWU workers, tug and ship pilots, and maritime services also factored into their 430 “direct jobs” figure.
San Juan County’s economy depends on its natural beauty, which would be jeapordized by a single major oil spill. According to the WA government, “The San Juan’s are regularly reported in lists of America’s most desirable places to live. Today tourism and retirement communities form the economic base of the economy.” The number of jobs on the islands have been growing in the past years to 6,630 in June 2012 (surpassing the 2010 and 2011 tallies by 850 and 980 positions respectively). This trend is linked to gains in the numbers of tourists visiting the county. Due to a large tourism component in the economy, employment levels are highly seasonal, with an average gain of about 2,000 jobs (42 percent) from the January low point of the jobs cycle. The SJ economy may be significantly affected if a major oil spill were to occur. Polluted shorelines, decimation of orca population and other wildlife, contamination of water will likely hurt the economic base of the county. Thousands of jobs and economic viability of many working families and businesses will be at stake.
TAXPAYER INVESTMENT
A recent study conducted by a Billings-based transportation consultant and released by the Western Organization of Resource Councils (WORC) outlines economic costs associated with rail system, road and infrastructure upgrades that would be required by proposed Powder River Basin / West Coast coal export projects. The study indicates that these costs, added to mitigation measures, could total in the billions and would likely be borne by state and local governments. The WORC report complements studies previously released by CommunityWise Bellingham on rail capacity, transportation and economic impact issues. Crosscut offers a concise overview of the situation in an article by Floyd McKay.
PROPERTY VALUES
Property values could suffer near the coal train corridor and along shores if a major oil spill were to occur. Entrepreneur Magazine found that the worth of small homes near freight rail lines decrease 5-7%. Ranching and agricultural properties are often bisected by rail lines and therefore are particularly affected by increased coal train traffic. The productive value of these properties is further diminished by damages to water supply caused by strip mining in the Powder River Basin. A new study examining Los Angeles neighborhoods supports the notion that home values decrease as nearby rail traffic increases.
MARINE VESSEL TRAFFIC
Tens of thousands of marine vessels transit the Strait of Georgia every year, including those destined for the piers of the Alcoa Aluminum smelter, BP and Conoco-Phillips refineries at Cherry Point. Vessel traffic is growing due to a rise in exports and plans for an additional oil pipeline from Canada. The transport of 54 million metric tons per annum (Mtpa) of cargo, 48 Mtpa of which would be coal, from the proposed terminal at Cherry Point, would require the addition of over 900 annual transits (over 450 ships, coming and going) by some of the largest oceangoing vessels. Despite the increase in vessel traffic, Washington’s oil response spill program is facing budget cuts. Given the size of vessel involved, a spill of coal and/or oil would be devastating to marine life, shorelines, and Washington’s economy.
The Passage:
Marine vessels in transit to and from the proposed terminal at Cherry Point travel through the Strait of Georgia. The Discovery Islands at the north and San Juan Islands at the south, along with narrow channels, mark each end of the Strait. It adjoins Puget Sound to the south (through Rosario Strait) and the Strait of Juan de Fuca to the west (through Haro Strait).
Cherry Point’s deep water trench (about 80 feet) makes it a much sought-after deep water industrial port, as it easily can accommodate Panamax and capesize vessels. This same bathymetrical feature also makes it a vital environmental zone, as the phyto- and zooplankton that form the bottom of the food chain thrive in such a place.
Vessel Size/Type, Projected Number of Transits:
The Strait of Georgia is one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world and is getting busier with recent increases in the region’s marine exports. In addition, the number of oil tankers traveling from Canada through the Strait of Georgia has increased dramatically due to an increased volume of oil exports. Moreover, the number of oil tankers and the volume of oil exports in the Strait are expected to grow unprecedentedly high with North America’s Kinder Morgan energy company’s plans to proceed with a major oil pipeline expansion linking Alberta tar sands oil to Vancouver’s Westridge terminal.
Cherry Point’s eight mile shoreline currently receives 850 annual transits from its three existing marine piers. The proposed terminal would add approximately 221-487 (by 2026) vessels for a total of 442-947 transits per year. Vessels will be either Panamax or Capesize. Panamax class are the largest vessels that can cargo through the Panama Canal, they are up to 950 feet long by 106 feet wide, with a deadweight of 50,000 – 80,000 tonnes. Capesize vessels are too wide to fit through the Panama or Suez Canal and therefore must travel around the Cape of Good Hope or Cape Horn. These vessels require deep-water ports and can carry a deadweight of 80,001 to 199,000 tonnes (which would include both bulk commodity i.e. coal and ballast water for stability).
Vessel Collision, Groundings and Delays:
A 2008 BP Refinery Vessel Traffic Risk Assessment study projected dramatic increases for both the risk of marine vessel accidents and oil spills or outflows resulting from collisions between two vessels, groundings (both powered and drift), and allisions (collisions with the dock or other fixed objects) if crude vessel traffic levels increased by 17% at the BP Cherry Point Refinery.
A review of the environmental and safety documents for the initial (1997) proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal, shows that the proposed increase in vessels would result in an increase of approximately 60% in the deep draft ship traffic in the upper Rosario Strait, the route most vessels from the terminal would likely take. The review also found that the increase in proposed deep draft traffic on the risk of collisions and powered vessel groundings in Rosario Strait was not adequately addressed by the 1997 Vessel Traffic Study. Collision frequency is highly dependent upon traffic density and environmental conditions. Vessels most likely to be involved in a collision with a large bulk cargo vessel are: passenger ferries, tank barges, and tank vessels—the impact of which any one would be catastrophic. Powered or drift groundings of large bulk carriers are also a serious risk given that they carry thousands of tons of bunkers in single bottom tanks and they are not escorted by tugs. Marine traffic delays and backups in the Rosario Strait will also likely occur given that it is a one-way zone for deep draft vessels.
Air Pollution from Marine Vessels:
Marine vessels represent one of the most difficult to regulate sources of air pollution in the world. Sometimes called “floating power plants,” marine vessels emit sufficient pollutants to negatively impact the air quality and health of people near ports and inland waterways. Marine vessels used in international shipping are typically powered by diesel engines fueled by either diesel (distillate) or residual fuel. Diesel engines generate significant amounts of fine particle and toxic emissions, which are linked to cancer, cardiovascular problems, aggravated asthma, chronic bronchitis and premature death. Additionally, in response to increasing oil prices and the large quantities of fuel needed to operate vessels, lower quality residual fuel called bunker fuel is commonly used. Bunker fuel has a very high sulfur content which, when burned, emits harmful levels of particulate matter and nitrogen oxide that can travel inland, causing severe respiratory illnesses. Airborne pollution at Cherry Point is primarily from marine vessel traffic and stationary sources. Marine vessels account for the largest single source of sulfur dioxide in the airshed in the larger Georgia Basin (where the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve is located).
MARINE IMPACTS
Sharply increased marine traffic, physical disruption of ecologically sensitive areas, and open coal storage in proximity to the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve give rise to concerns about the proposed coal export facility. The risk of collisions and oil spills rises as coal ships are added to waters already crowded with oil tankers. 80-100 acres of open coal heaps will be in proximity to the aquatic reserve, in an area sometimes subjected to high winds; it is unknown to what extent coal dust in the water might affect the marine plants and animals. The construction of the facility and rail loops on wetlands and uplands, and of the wharf and trestle area over the water, have the potential to disrupt fragile ecosystems. Cherry Point herring are a keystone species, providing food for a number of other species; their status is currently fragile, and would likely be further stressed by activities associated with the coal port. Increased noise pollution, increased risk of collision with marine vessels, threatened food sources (i.e. herring), and a degraded marine environment would pose challenges to killer whales, salmon and a myriad of shore and migratory bird populations. Ballast water carried from Asian ports and released into local waters could introduce invasive species, to possibly devastating consequence.
Oil Spill Risks:
Tens of thousands of marine vessels transit the Strait of Georgia every year, including those destined for Cherry Point. The Strait of Georgia has been designated by Parks Canada as Canada’s “most-at-risk natural environment.” Vessel traffic is growing due to a rise in exports and plans for a major oil pipeline expansion in Canada. Coal transport from the proposed terminal at Cherry Point would require, at build-out, an additional 974 annual transits by some of the largest oceangoing vessels. Despite the increase in vessel traffic and a Vessel Traffic Risk Assessment correlating higher vessel traffic levels with a higher risk of accidents and oil spills, Washington’s oil spill response program is facing budget cuts. Effects from collision or grounding are amplified by the type of vessel and cargo; oil and/or coal would be devastating to marine life, shorelines, and Washington’s economy in the event of a spill.
Of recent concern is how to prepare for and respond to an oil spill from bitumen–the type of oil moving through B.C. Canada’s pipeline. Originating from the Alberta Oil Sands, bitumen is thicker and heavier than crude oil and may sink rather than float on the surface making traditional oil spill response and clean-up methods likely ineffective. Not knowing how much bitumen is currently exported through our region’s waters or how a spill would affect the environment, the Washington Department of Ecology acknowledges its concern, especially in light of the planned pipeline expansion.
The Risks to Herring:
Washington herring are a keystone species, as they provide food for a number of other species. Cherry Point herring, unlike other regional herring populations that spawn at sea in the winter, migrate toward fresh water and estuaries to spawn in the spring. This unique spawning schedule and location makes the Cherry Point herring a vital source of food for endangered Chinook salmon. The Chinook salmon, in turn, provide sustenance for orca/killer whales, porpoises and other marine mammals. Cherry Point herring was once the most abundant herring species in Washington state waters; their population has declined by over 90%. Efforts to have this critical and fragile species declared “endangered” have so far been unsuccessful.
Noise and vessel movement are stressors to Pacific herring. The waters at Cherry Point serve as a “core” region for Pacific herring spawn deposition. Because Cherry Point herring spawn in open, high energy shoreline areas, vessels in transit to and from the proposed Terminal could cross through their prespawning holding areas and disrupt their spawning habits. According to Washington Fish and Wildlife, conservation of herring spawning habitat and minimizing disturbance in the prespawning holding areas are key to preservation of herring stock inside Puget Sound. Additionally, shading from the proposed Terminal’s wharf and trestle could further decrease the herring population by causing a decline in herring spawning habitat and primary productivity due to reduction of macroalgae. Coal dust, which is notoriously difficult to control, blowing or running into the water from the proposed Terminal’s uncovered 80-acre coal storage area could further shade critical macroalgae or seagrass species and deplete critical oxygen in nearshore habitats. Noting the regional importance of the Cherry Point herring stock, the WDNR, in a 1998 letter to Pacific International Terminals, stated that further herring studies and a regional risk analysis were necessary and that it would “allow the construction of the Terminal only if the completed regional ecological risk analysis shows that construction and operation activities will not pose an unacceptable risk to the Cherry Point herring stock.”
Killer Whales (Orca) and other Marine Mammals:
Marine mammals in and around the waters at the proposed Terminal may be injured or killed by collision with vessels. Disturbance by marine traffic from noise and vessel movement, reduction of food (Chinook salmon, herring, cod), and high levels of environmental contaminants are the three main factors causing the decline of threatened Northern Resident and endangered Southern Resident Killer Whales.
Cherry Point Habitats:
The Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve encompasses important habitats, including those of mixed microalgae (critical for salmon and herring), kelp, eelgrass beds, a salt marsh, and two small freshwater streams, which provide lower salinity in the nearshore, which in turn provides habitat for many fish species, including Pacific herring, salmon, surf smelt, and groundfish. Surf smelt spawning very high up in the tideland area rely on the beach’s mix of sand and fine gravel. The Reserve is listed as a significant bird habitat, and its wetland supports many species of marine and migratory birds. Marine mammals that may use the Reserve’s waters include: Dall’s porpoise, Stellar and California sea lions, gray whales, harbor seals, Southern Resident Killer Whales, humpback whales, seals, and Pacific harbor porpoise.
The Importance of Wetlands at Cherry Point:
A wetland impact assessment of the proposed project at Cherry Point has determined direct permanent wetland impacts to approximately 140.6 acres of wetlands, including filling and grading or cutting to raise areas for rail embankments. The project will be located within two coastal watersheds—the Gateway Pacific Terminal Watershed and the Birch Bay Watershed, which contains extensive wetlands associated with Terrell Creek and Lake Terrell, including a 1,500-acre wildlife area managed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) for wintering waterfowl (Canada geese, duck, trumpeter and tundra swans, pheasants). In addition, Lake Terrell wetlands support the second largest heron rookery in Washington. Indirect effects to aquatic systems downstream are expected as well. Potential negative changes to stormwater; soil erosion and sedimentation; and spills and fugitive coal dust all would degrade water quality.
Ballast Water and the Risk of Invasive Species:
In order to maintain stability and structural strength during transit, cargo vessels fill their ballast tanks with water at one port and then discharge it at another when receiving cargo. A single modern cargo vessel can carry anywhere from 100,000 to 10 million gallons or more of ballast water (6 million gallons is approximately 10 Olympic-size swimming pools) — all potentially containing several hundred different invasive aquatic species (plants, insects, animals, microbes). Once established, the invasive species can become a significant threat to biodiversity because there are often no natural predators to control them. The introduction of invasive marine species into new environments by ships’ ballast water has been identified by the United Nations as one of the four greatest threats to the world’s oceans. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) recommends guidelines to minimize the risk of spreading aquatic nuisance species such as mid-ocean water exchange of ballast water. Several countries have adopted the IMO standards. However, in the United States, the US Coast Guard (USCG) has yet to mandate a ballast water discharge standard to help vessel operators comply with its ballast water management practices.
The Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve & Required Environmental Protection:
Because part of the proposed terminal (the wharf and nearly all the trestle) will need to be built on state-owned tidelands, a lease from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) is required. These tidelands have been recognized by the State of Washington as part of the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve. In 2010, the WDNR adopted a Management Plan to assist in its management and protection of the Reserve. The Management Plan identifies environmental protection of the Reserve over and above all other management actions. In addition to following the Management Plan, it is also the responsibility of the WDNR, under state law, to withhold from leasing lands which it finds to have significant natural values.
GPT and the Aquatic Reserve: concerns and incomplete studies:
While there are many effects to consider regarding the proposed terminal and increase in marine traffic, several key areas of concern were identified by environmental groups and state agencies during negotiations to a 1999 Settlement Agreement between Pacific International Terminals, Inc. and five citizen groups, including: “impacts to habitat in the footprint of the pier from shading and ship operations; impacts to herring, particularly during spawning season; ballast water exchange; water quality deterioration from construction and operation of the facility; vessel traffic impacts; public access issues, and questions surrounding how many additional piers will be allowed….” As key conditions of the settlement, Pacific International Terminals, Inc. agreed to conduct and fund mitigation and monitoring programs for macroalgae, herring, ballast water, sediment, as well as a vessel traffic analysis, which will evaluate impacts of increased vessel traffic, oil spill risk, hazards at the facility, and bunkering (fueling) operations. Many of these studies have yet to be completed. Additionally, a Biological Assesment (in preparation) will evaluate impacts on marine habitat, threatened, endangered, and priority species, including salmon and herring.
FISHERIES
Partly due to its deep water feature, Cherry Point has been an especially rich and fertile marine area. The waters around Cherry Point have traditionally been part of abundant salmon and lingcod fisheries. There has also been a vigorous recreational, commercial, and tribal Dungeness crab fishery. Damages to the local herring population would result in damages to the salmon and lingcod fisheries, as herring are a primary source of nutrition for these fish. Heavily increased marine traffic could result in losses both the the fisheries and the fisherman, as crabbing gear can be destroyed or carried away by large marine vessels.
Herring Populations, Eelgrass Beds and Fisheries:
According to the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve Management Plan, there are several factors that could disturb the already fragile herring population. Light, noise, shading, and movement from the terminal and/or from marine vessels could disrupt herring spawning. Many fish, mammals, and aquatic birds are dependent upon herring, including: Pacific Cod, Lingcod, halibut, Chinook salmon, harbor seals, herons, western grebes, common murres, rhinoceros auklets, tufted puffins, orcas, seals, sea lions, Dall’s porpoises and surf scoters.
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has extensively studied the Cherry Point herring population and its decline. Their website contains a study called “Covered Species Paper” that documents the health of the Cherry Point Pacific herring population (see pps. 3-80 through 3-87). Two state agencies, Puget Sound Partnership (PSP) and DNR, have been studying eelgrass in the Puget Sound because it is a preferred habitat for herring spawn deposition. PSP has just adopted “Recovery Targets” for Puget Sound eelgrass. DNR’s Nearshore Habitat Program webpage includes scientific studies on eelgrass, including a paper entitled “Developing Indicators and Targets for Eelgrass in Puget Sound.” PSP has generated numerous scientific documents relating to the health of the Puget Sound generally, including the 2009 State of the Sound Report. It has also published specific recovery targets for protecting and restoring eelgrass habitat: “Eelgrass extent in 2020 is 120 percent of area measured in the 2000-2008 baseline period.”
Much has been written about the decline of anadromous fisheries in the Puget Sound. Anadromous fish are those that are born in fresh water, live their lives in salt water, then return to fresh water to spawn. Salmon and smelt are examples. The importance of estuaries in marine life can not be overstated; a healthy estuarial system is critical to the survival of certain species. DNR has done a study on threatened and covered species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) as a part of its “Aquatic Lands Habitat Conservation Plan.” You can also see the National Marine Fisheries Service website, which administers the ESA and recovery planning for listed species.
The federal government, the Puget Sound Partnership, and the state DNR have invested millions of dollars in working to restore marine ecologies that now may be jeopardized by the substantial increase in ship traffic, pollution and wetland disturbance associated with the proposed coal port site.
QUALITY OF LIFE and REGIONAL IDENTITY
The Northwest is a region noted for spectacular physical beauty, an emphasis on “quality of life,” and a dedication to clean, healthy living and environmental stewardship. It is considered a prime tourist destination spot and a highly desirable place to live; it is both agriculturally rich and a haven for innovative business. The pollution, traffic, noise, and degradation of our waters and fisheries that would come with significant coal train and ship traffic is at odds with our enjoyment and stewardship of this region. Choosing to become an economy in which coal transport is an emphasis seemingly undermines aspirations to build on the Northwest economies of tourism, healthy agriculture, innovative businesses, clean energy and the manufacture of local goods. Even our icons – the salmon and the orca– would be imperiled by the proposed project. The Northwest’s most valuable asset is our quality of life –witness the profusion of Northwest communities on “best places” lists– and this quality is what hangs in the balance.
COAL DUST
Coal dust is notoriously difficult to control. BNSF estimates that each uncovered car loses between 500 pounds and a ton of coal dust en route. It is unknown how much coal dust will be released into the air, onto the land, and into the water from the from the 80-100+ acres of open, continuously turned-over, coal heaps in storage at the terminal site. There are concerns about train derailments, the effects of dust on human health, local clean water supplies, and on the marine environment. The methods of containing coal dust, especially in adverse weather conditions (wind, rain) are unproven, and it is uncertain which party would pay for dust mitigation measures.
Because most coal trains are uncovered, they produce significant amounts of coal dust in the course of transporting the coal from one place to another. According to BNSF research, 500 pounds to a ton of of coal can escape a single loaded car. Coal dust is regarded as a nuisance, as the dust can damage the ballast and, the railway claims, cause derailments. BNSF asks that shippers pay for dust mitigation; shippers typically balk at paying. The Puget Sound coast line is notoriously rainy and windy; it is unclear as to how effective surfactants might be at containing the pulverized coal in adverse weather. There seem to be no guarantees that dust would successfully be controlled en route from the mines to the port.
Dust is also generated at the terminal site, as bulldozers continually shift and rotate the ground-up coal. Constant turnover is required to both keep the coal in one area, and also to prevent spontaneous combustion. Wind and moisture can agitate the combustive properties of coal. The potential adverse effects of coal dust on adjacent sites was a factor in the Port of Vancouver rejecting a proposal to export coal from a new export site there. The dust is notoriously difficult to control, and has proven to be a concern for residents close to Westshore, the coal port in BC. The coal at the proposed GPT terminal will be stored in open heaps on 80-105 acres located in proximity to the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve. Cherry Point can be buffeted by high winds, winter conditions often see wind gusts in the 60-70 knot range. It seems likely that the wind will agitate the heaped, pulverized coal.
The leaching of toxic heavy metals from coal ash into water supplies is a proven problem. Exposure to arsenic, cadmium, barium, chromium, selenium, lead and mercury can cause any number of health problems, including cancers and neurological diseases. It is unknown if and to what extent these heavy metals might leach out from the coal and/or fugitive coal dust, from the train cars and at the terminal storage site, into local water supplies and into the marine environment. There are potential implications for the safety of the water we drink and the seafood we eat.
AIR QUALITY
Pollutants, weather, wind patterns and topography all affect local air quality. Accurately predicting the effects of the Gateway Pacific Terminal on the air we breathe, and thus on public health, will require much good science. Both the means of transporting coal and the coal itself present potential air quality challenges. Diesel particulate matter emitted by the coal trains and ships; fugitive coal dust from the trains and from storage at the port site; and the toxins that blow over the Pacific to the West Coast of the US from coal combustion in Asia, are all cause for concern with regard to regional air quality and the resultant health effect on humans who breathe that air.
The locomotives and ships that would transport coal through our region burn diesel or bunker (low-quality, heavy) oil for fuel; diesel particulate matter causes cancer and other diseases. Up to 18 trains a day, each powered by an average of 4 locomotives, would pass through our rail communities; immense coal ships would make over 950 annual transits right by island and coastal communities. Emissions from locomotives and ships vary depending upon the type of fuel burned, how old the engine is, and how hard the engine is working at a given time. Air quality studies conducted in Spokane and in California have shown that neighborhoods in proximity to heavy rail activity have increased rates of cancer. The EPA considers ocean vessels and large ships to be “significant contributors to air pollution.”
It is worth considering that our air is directly affected by what happens in Asia, the market to which GPT would ship coal. The Jaffe Group has proven that mercury emitted by coal combustion in Asia crosses over the Pacific Ocean and pollutes our Northwest water supplies; mercury is implicated in a number of health problems, especially those involving the brain and nervous system. The New York Times has written that sulphur dioxide, which can cause respiratory disorders, likewise blows back to us from Asia. Noted meteorologist and UW atmospheric scientist Cliff Mass has shown that the haze over much of the Pacific Northwest coastline in early summer 2012 was smoke from massive Asian wildfires. What burns in Asia does not stay in Asia: we all breathe the same air.
NOISE
While there are many sources of noise from trains (high-pitch screeching, idling engines; moving cars, etc.), horn sounding is the most significant. Federal rules governing the blowing of locomotive engine horns require that engineers of all trains sound horns for at least 15-20 seconds at 96-110 decibels (dB) at all public crossings. Decibels in the range of 80-105 are labeled extremely loud, whereas those above 105 are dangerous. Decibels are logarithmic, meaning that 100 decibels is ten times as loud as 90, 110 decibels is ten times as loud as 100, and so on. While impacts to quality of life from repeated loud noise are self-evident, chronic noise exposure has proven adverse health effects, including impaired sleep and cognitive function, and cardiovascular effects.
There is also significant noise pollution from coal vessels which could affect marine animals as well as residents along the shipping routes. The ships calling at the Gateway Pacific Terminal will be using either Haro Strait or Rosario Strait. If Rosario Strait, they may have to park south of the islands, especially Lopez for many hours at a time. These ships will be transiting the home waters of the endangered resident orcas and the waters necessary to transient orca populations as well. Studies have shown that both the engine noise and the propeller noise of even small craft disrupt the communication systems critical to both the feeding and social structure of the orcas. Whale and dolphin communications are increasingly disrupted by the high-intensity low-frequency noise from the carriers. Changes in vessel speed associated with docking activities and tugboat assistance of large tankers also create abrupt frequency changes and study by Schwartz and Greer (1984) have revealed the noise impacts lead to avoidance and alarm behavior (cessation of feeding, tightening of the school and slow movement away from the sound source) among fishes. Their findings also indicated that larger ships could influence behavior of a school at greater distances than smaller vessels.
PUBLIC HEALTH
Frequent long trains at rail crossings will mean delayed emergency medical service response times, as well as increased risk of accidents, traumatic injury and death.
The scale of the proposed terminal would require a dramatic increase in the number of diesel-burning locomotives and marine vessels affecting Puget Sound airsheds. Diesel particulate matter is a particularly noxious form of air pollution, as it is of sufficiently small size (PM 2.5) to embed in the lung tissue.Diesel particulate matter is associated with both pulmonary and cardiovascular issues, including cancers, heart disease, and asthma. Children, teens and the elderly are especially vulnerable. Noise exposure can cause cardiovascular disease; cognitive impairment in children; sleep disturbance and resultant fatigue; hypertension; arrhythmia; and increased rate of accidents and injuries; and exacerbation of mental health disorders such as depression, stress and anxiety, and psychosis. Transporting coal to China in particular has the potential to raise levels of mercury in our waters. Mercury is associated with neurological dysfunction, as in ALS, Parkinson’s, and Alzheimer’s.
Whatcom Docs, a group representing over 180 local physicians, and an increasing number of health care providers from the Pacific Northwest (Skagit, King and Thurston counties; Oregon) are calling for a Health Impact Assessment (HIA). While few specific mandates or resources exist for conducting HIA, its use is increasing and recently has been included in state legislation to fulfill regulatory requirements. For example, Washington state required an HIA be performed to inform mitigation planning for the State Route 520 Bridge in Seattle to analyze effects on air pollution exposure. Realizing the benefits of HIA, many are advocating its analysis be integrated with or part of the Environmental Impact Assessment process.
Many people have expressed anxiety about coal dust. Although coal dust contains toxic heavy metals and has been associated with emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and malignancy in people who work closely with coal in mining, processing and/or transport, it is not yet known what, if any, health effects fugitive coal dust from coal trains or from the uncovered coal heaps in storage, might have on the general population. A more pressing question might involve the effects of coal dust from the trains and/or storage site leaching into local water supplies, about which little is known.
GLOBAL IMPACTS
While the Gateway Pacific Terminal and the associated coal trains would be active in only the transport and export of coal, it is important to recognize that the only function of coal transport is to link coal mining to coal combustion: GPT and related enterprises need to be considered as part of this larger system. Each of the various processes associated with coal have negative effects on local economies, public health, communities and the environment. The coal mines in the Powder River Basin (Montana and Wyoming) continue to degrade local aquifers and water supplies. Coal combustion in China presents a serious health risk to the hundreds of millions of people, especially children, who live in affected airsheds. Coal combustion is also associated with negative impacts that transcend geographic borders. Ocean acidification, acid rain, mercury emissions, and climate change affect global populations, regardless of where the coal is burned. The financial cost accrued from health and environmental damages from coal mining, processing, transport and combustion are currently estimated at a third to over half a trillion dollars annually in the U.S. alone.
China, PRB Coal, and the Global Energy Market:
We are at a critical time and a critical place: a West Coast coal export industry of the scale currently under discussion could influence Chinese energy policy for the next half-century: increasing the supply of cheap coal could reduce the incentive to pursue clean energy. While regulations such as The Clean Air Act have limited the profitability of coal in the U.S. and provided a degree of environmental and health protection, China has no such regulations.
From 2005 to 2030 the global demand for electricity is expected to double, bringing with it an increase in coal consumption. Although the U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts that by 2030 nearly 90% of increased coal consumption will be attributed to China, this prediction is not inevitable. Economic analysis shows that Chinese demand is sensitive to the value of coal in the market place. Recently an empirical study performed in China found that a 10 percent decrease in the cost of coal resulted in a 12 percent increase in Chinese coal consumption.
The proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal is part of a larger trend to create a coal export industry in the United States. SSA Marine at Cherry Point and Millenium Bulk Terminals at Longview are currently seeking permits that would allow them to export close to 110 million tons of coal annually. In addition, Port of Morrow in eastern Oregon has signed a one-year lease to transfer coal, while other ports, including Port of St. Helens, Coos Bay, and Grays Harbor, are also being considered.
In order to profit, Washington ports will have to undercut the prices of Australian and Asian competitors as well as other North American sources. Increased competition results in reduced price. Inserting Powder River Basin (PRB) coal into the global market each year could influence China towards a future of coal and away from exploring renewables.
Quantifying the Effects of Coal Mining, Transport, Processing and Combustion:
While certain parties stand to profit considerably from coal, the general population will suffer economic loss due to its health and environmental impacts. Studies quantifying such comprehensive costs include that of Dr. Paul Epstein of the Harvard Medical School Center for Health and the Global Environment. A 2011 study co-authored with 11 peers traces each stage in the life cycle of coal. As the report states, “Each stage—extraction, transport, processing, and combustion—generates a waste stream and carries multiple hazards for health and the environment.” These effects are defined as “externalities.” Coal companies are not responsible for these costs. Rather, they fall to the public. The Epstein study estimates that each year externalities cost the U.S. public a third to over $500 billion or half a trillion dollars.
Externalities transcend borders. The effects of air pollution, mercury emissions, acid precipitation, ocean acidification and climate change are felt globally regardless of where the coal is burned.
Public Health: At home and in China:
Coal combustion produces sulfur dioxide, which causes the premature deaths of about 400,000 people in China each year. Pollution from coal combustion makes some cities so dark that people drive with their lights on during the day. Some of that sulfur dioxide pollution crosses the Pacific Ocean, and has been detected in California, Oregon and Washington State. India, whose population is expected to exceed China’s by 2030, is accelerating construction of coal-burning plants.
Acid Rain:
Another externality of coal combustion is acid precipitation or acid rain. The primary man-made cause of acid rain is sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), released from burning fossil fuels like coal. Approximately 2/3 of all SO2 and ¼ of all NOx in the U.S. comes from burning fossil fuels for power. Acid rain is not limited to national borders and can travel hundreds of miles before precipitation occurs. Although the U.S. has taken action to regulate coal power plants domestically and thus reduce acid rain, these efforts would be undermined from a global perspective if U.S. coal contributes to Chinese acidification—a form of pollution that already effects not only China, but threatens quality of life across the Pacific Rim, resulting in increased illness and premature death from heart and lung disorders, such as asthma and bronchitis.
Mercury:
While acid rain can travel hundreds of miles, mercury emissions can travel thousands of miles. The EPA estimates that 34% of mercury emissions in the U.S. come from non-U.S. sources. In Oregon, a researcher estimated that 18% of mercury in the Willamete River came from overseas. Increasingly the source of mercury is Asia. From 1990 to 1995, Asia’s contribution to the global inventory rose from 30 to 56%. Like acid rain, coal burning power plants are the primary cause of mercury. After mercury from coal combustion is emitted into the atmosphere, it settles in water, where microorganisms change it to methylmercury, a high toxic chemical that builds up in shellfish and fish. Human consumption of methylmercury infected seafood can harm the brain, heart, kidneys, lungs and immune system. For pregnant woman, methylmercury exposure can damage the nervous system of unborn children resulting in mental retardation. A 2003 study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that one in twelve women (8%) of childbearing age had mercury in their blood above levels deemed safe by the EPA.
Ocean Acidification:
The burning of fossil fuels, including coal, release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. About a quarter of all carbon dioxide emissions are absorbed into the world’s oceans. This carbon dioxide changes the chemistry of the ocean water, making it more acidic. Marine life has been and is being harmed by this rather sudden and dramatic change; the ocean’s pH had remained fairly stable for about 20 million years prior to humans burning coal and oil. At current rates, the waters around Antartica will become corrosive by 2050. High acidity will fundamentally alter the nature of the oceans and any human connection (fishing, tourism, recreation) with them.
A recent study published in the journal Limnology and Oceanography shows that ocean acidification is occurring much sooner than predicted. Since 2005, oyster farms and hatcheries in the Pacific Northwest have been experiencing massive oyster larvae die-offs during periods of ocean upwelling. During these periods, scientists have determined that the level of acidity from the combination of more acidic deep ocean water from the upwell and the rising carbon dioxide levels in surface water from increased CO2 emissions is too high for the oyster larvae to survive.
Climate Change:
Of the greenhouse gases linked to global warming, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) cites carbon dioxide as being the single most important. Coal burning is the primary contributor of CO2 emissions, accounting for 81% of emissions in the U.S. Overall coal combustion contributes at least one-third of heat trapping chemicals. Carbon emissions have already shown an alarming increase, rising 80% from 1970 to 2004.
West coal export would contribute to this trend, allowing for close to 110 million tons of Powder River Basin coal to leave Washington annually. For context, burning this amount of PRB coal is roughly equivalent to the annual carbon emissions of 40 million cars. For every 100 million tons of PRB coal burned, 180 million tons of heat trapping carbon-dioxide are released into the atmosphere. That constitutes twice the greenhouse gas emissions of the entire state of Washington, including every power plant, car, truck factory, and farm combined.
The IPCC report states that in order for the global temperature to stabilize between 2 and 2.4 degrees above the pre-industrial average, emissions would need to peak before 2015. Rather than peaking, coal exporters hope to hit their stride in 2015, abandoning the IPCC warnings in order to take advantage of a market that Peabody Energy estimates will have grown to 220-260 million metric tons a year by that time.
Economics of Climate Change:
To date, the most comprehensive study done to measure the full economic effect of climate change is the Stern Review, a 700 page independent report released for the British government led by Sir Nicholas Stern of The Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
At current rates, the stock of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere would reach 550ppm CO2e by 2050, doubling pre-industrial averages. However increasing transportation and energy demand has resulted in an acceleration of emissions. The level of 550ppm CO2e could be reached as early as 2035. Depending on the climate model used, there is a 77% to 99% chance that at this level global warming will rise 2 degrees Celsius. If emissions go uncurbed, the study estimates a 50% risk of exceeding 5° C global temperature rise in the decades following the turn of the century.
The economic effect of climate change is proportional to the rise in temperature. Today the world has warmed half a degree Celsius, and already seen a measured increase in asthma, heat waves, clusters of illnesses after heavy rain events and intense storms, and the distribution of infectious disease. The costs of weather-related disasters rose 10-fold from the 1980s to the 1990s (from an average of $4 billion/year to $40 billion/year) and jumped again in the past decade, reaching $225 billion in 2005.
Effect of Uncurbed Emissions:
Given that current trends anticipate a 2-3° C warming over the next fifty years or so—a number that will rise several more degrees if emissions continue to grow—theStern Review reveals the following severe impacts:
- “Melting glaciers will initially increase flood risk and then strongly reduce water supplies, eventually threatening one-sixth of the world’s population, predominantly in the Indian sub-continent, parts of China, and the Andes in South America.”
- “Declining crop yields, especially in Africa, could leave hundreds of millions without the ability to produce or purchase sufficient food. At mid to high latitudes, crop yields may increase for moderate temperature rises (2 – 3°C), but then decline with greater amounts of warming. At 4°C and above, global food production is likely to be seriously affected.”
- “In higher latitudes, cold-related deaths will decrease. But climate change will increase worldwide deaths from malnutrition and heat stress. Vector-borne diseases such as malaria and dengue fever could become more widespread if effective control measures are not in place.”
- “Rising sea levels will result in tens to hundreds of millions more people flooded each year with warming of 3 or 4°C. There will be serious risks and increasing pressures for coastal protection in South East Asia (Bangladesh and Vietnam), small islands in the Caribbean and the Pacific, and large coastal cities, such as Tokyo, New York, Cairo and London. According to one estimate, by the middle of the century, 200 million people may become permanently displaced due to rising sea levels, heavier floods, and more intense droughts.”
- “Ecosystems will be particularly vulnerable to climate change, with around 15 – 40% of species potentially facing extinction after only 2°C of warming. And ocean acidification, a direct result of rising carbon dioxide levels, will have major effects on marine ecosystems, with possible adverse consequences on fish stocks.”
- “Warming may induce sudden shifts in regional weather patterns such as the monsoon rains in South Asia or the El Niño phenomenon – changes that would have severe consequences for water availability and flooding in tropical regions and threaten the livelihoods of millions of people.”
- “A number of studies suggest that the Amazon rainforest could be vulnerable to climate change, with models projecting significant drying in this region. One model, for example, finds that the Amazon rainforest could be significantly, and possibly irrevocably, damaged by a warming of 2 – 3°C.”
- “The melting or collapse of ice sheets would eventually threaten land which today is home to 1 in every 20 people.”
Cost of Mitigation:
In addition to the immeasurable human cost, by the end of the century a very real temperature rise of 5-6 C would result in an estimated 5-10% loss of global GDP, with poor countries suffering costs in excess of 10% GDP. In contrast, the review estimates the annual cost of stabilization at 500-550ppm CO2 e to be around 1% of GDP by 2050, with a range of -2% to +5% GDP. If mitigation to reduce emissions fails in the next 10 to 20 years, the costs of deceleration will increase and stabilization even at 550 ppm C02e will be beyond reach. As the Stern Review states, “Mitigation—taking strong action to reduce emissions—must be viewed as an investment, a cost incurred now…to avoid the risks of very severe consequences in the future.”
———————
To learn more about the project and its impacts, visit:
http://www.coaltrainfacts.org/key-facts
101 Reasons to Be Concerned About Coal Exports.pdf (156k)
Lopez No COALition 