Portland Commissioner Preparing Anti-Coal Resolution

Later this month, Portland, Oregon could become the latest city in the Pacific Northwest to officially oppose the possibility of new coal exports through the region.

Portland Commissioner Amanda Fritz says she’s preparing a resolution to oppose the prospect of more coal trains traveling through the city.

Fritz, who made the revelation during an anti-coal rally in front of the Portland office of the Army Corps of Engineers, said she expects to present the resolution during the Sept. 19 Portland City Council meeting.

“We’re looking at the strongest resolution we can get passed,” she said at the Aug. 28 rally, which attracted about 150 people.

About 20 other Pacific Northwest cities and counties have already passed resolutions either opposing coal exports outright or raising concerns about it, including Seattle, where the City Council unanimously passed an anti-coal resolution May 29.

Other municipalities that have also passed anti-coal measures include Hood River, Oregon and three Washington cities, Camas, Marysville and Washougal.

The backlash is in response to the proposed development of about half a dozen coal export terminals through the Pacific Northwest, where coal would be brought in from other parts of the county by rail, then shipped to Asia. Among the largest proposals is one at the Port of Longview, where Millennium Bulk Terminals has applied for permits to build a $600 million terminal in a bid to become one of the biggest coal exporters in North America.

Several of the other larger coal export related port expansions are also now undergoing the formal permitting process, including Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point in Washington state; Kinder Morgan Terminals at St. Helen’s, Oregon; and Coyote Island Terminal at the Port of Morrow.

Opponents of the proposed terminals have raised concerns about potential rail congestion and environmental damage, specifically the possibility of coal dust escaping from inbound trains and harming the local air quality.

Proponents however, have said that measures would be taken to ensure that dust would not escape, but that the terminals could bring hundreds of temporary and permanent jobs to the region.

Seattle City Council Opposes Coal Export Projects

On a unanimous vote, the Seattle City Council May 29 decided to oppose the development of coal export terminals within the Pacific Northwest, saying that at least half-dozen proposals in development would cause too much environmental damage.

“This goes against what we stand for from a climate change standpoint,” councilman Mike O’Brien said regarding the proposed terminals, which would see coal brought in to coastal terminals in Washington state and Oregon via train from Wyoming and Montana, then shipped to China and other Asian countries.

Coal companies have submitted permits to build export terminals near the ports of Westward, Morrow, Bellingham and Longview, where Millennium Bulk Terminals has applied for permits to build a $600 million facility in a bid to become one of the largest coal exporters in North America.

Terminal proposals, but no formal permit requests as of yet, have also surfaced in Coos Bay and Hoquiam.

One estimate says that if all the facilities are built, they’d move at least 100 million tons of coal annually throughout the Pacific Northwest.

With the proposals, however, has come vocal opposition from environmentalists, who say coal imports would bring more air and noise pollution to the Pacific Northwest.

In response to the controversy, numerous state and regional officials and entities, including Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber, Washington state Ecology Director Ted Sturdevant and the US Environmental Protection Agency have all called for a comprehensive study to determine the full potential cumulative environmental effects of the coal export proposals.

But despite the vocal opposition, proponents of the various projects say they’re in support partially because of the positive economic impact they could have on the surrounding communities.

Numerous terminal proponents spoke on their behalf prior to the Seattle council’s vote on the anti-coal resolution, including SSA Marine senior project manager Joe Ritzman. SSA is proposing the Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point.

Ritzman said that the projects could bring hundreds of jobs to the area as well as much needed tax revenue to local governments. Mike Elliott, chair of the Washington state legislative board of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen was another voice speaking against the anti-coal resolution.

“We view this as an attack on our jobs,” Elliott told the council prior to the vote.

The Council was not swayed however, and Seattle became the largest city so far to formally oppose building more coal import terminals. Other municipalities that have also passed measures so far include Hood River, Oregon and three Washington cities, Camas, Marysville and Washougal.

Kennedy Rails Against Pacific Northwest Coal Projects

Environmental activist and attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says that coal export terminals planned for about half a dozen locations throughout Oregon and Washington would lead to environmental damage and political malfeasance, while creating a minimal number of jobs.

“It’s going to end up leaving Portland with a legacy of pollution, poison and corruption,” Kennedy said of coal exports during a May 7 anti-coal rally at Portland’s Pioneer Square. The event was organized by environmental groups the Sierra Club and Columbia Riverkeeper, which have been involved in concerted efforts to prevent Pacific Northwest ports from developing terminals that would export coal to Asian countries.

The environmentalists argue that the resulting dust from the trains hauling the coal to coastal ports from the Midwest and elsewhere would pollute the countryside along the proposed routes.

During the anti-coal rally, Kennedy claimed coal export companies would inevitably pay off legislators to see pro-coal legislation passed, using the prospect of job creation as a selling point.

“It poisons democracy, it poisons communities, it poisons values,” Kennedy warned. “Coal is crime. Do not let it come through this community.”

Despite the vocal opposition however, about half a dozen Oregon and Washington ports are currently considering coal export terminal proposals, partially because of the jobs they would bring and the positive economic impact they could have on the surrounding communities.

Among them is the Port of Longview, where Millennium Bulk Terminals has applied for permits to build a $600 million terminal in a bid to become one of the largest coal exporters in North America.

Coal companies have also submitted permits to build export terminals at or near Port Westward near Clatskanie; Port Morrow and Port of Bellingham. Two other proposals have surfaced in Coos Bay and Hoquiam, but no formal permit requests have been filed as of yet.

In response to the controversy, numerous state and regional officials and entities, including Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber, Washington state Ecology Director Ted Sturdevant and the US Environmental Protection Agency have weighed in, with each saying that a comprehensive study is needed to study the full potential cumulative environmental effects of the coal export proposals.

Permits Filed for Longview Coal Export Facility

Millennium Bulk Terminals, which is now engaged in the cleanup and redevelopment of a former Alcoa aluminum smelter site in Cowlitz County, Washington, has submitted paperwork to start the process of building a coal export facility on the site.

The 416-acre location near the Port of Longview hasn’t been in use since it was decommissioned more than a decade ago. Millennium leased the land from Northwest Alloys in January 2011.

“Millennium has been working closely with local and state agencies as we move through the first step to permit a world-class import-export facility,” Ken Miller, Millennium’s President and CEO, said. “We are committed to developing and operating the safest and cleanest port facility possible.”

Millennium has filed for an aquatic resources permit with the US Army Corps of Engineers, a water quality certification from the Washington State Department of Ecology and shoreline development and conditional use permits with Cowlitz County.

If the project ultimately receives approval, building of the coal export terminal would occur in two stages, according to Millennium. Upon completion of the first stage, the facility’s capacity would be 25 million metric tons of coal per year.

Stage two would raise the capacity to 44 million metric tons, with most if not all of it going from the Western United States to Pacific Rim energy markets.

Millennium says it expects to invest $400 million during the development of the first stage of the coal export terminal and a total of $600 million at full build out.

According to an economic analysis by Seattle-based research firm Berk Consulting, revitalization of the site would result in 2,650 direct and indirect jobs during construction and 300 direct and indirect permanent jobs once the facility reaches full capacity.

Berk estimates that over a 30-year period, Millennium would generate $235 million in local and state revenues from the terminal.