From Stark
A new group called Protect Whatcom has fired up a website as part of a countywide effort to encourage people to get involved in the environmental review and permitting process for the Gateway Pacific Terminal project that SSA Marine has proposed for its property at Cherry Point, just south of the BP refinery.
Organizer Terry Wechsler, who describes herself as a retired public interest attorney, said she did not wish to be critical of the “Coal-Free Bellingham” initiative campaign to get a ballot measure that supposedly would outlaw the passage of coal trains through the city. But she also said that the leaders of that effort are mistaken “legally inaccurate” in saying that the local, state and federal regulatory process can’t be counted upon to block the coal terminal proposal.
As Wechsler sees it, the State Environmental Policy Act sets stringent standards for environmental review that could, in fact, block SSA Marine’s plans if studies show the coal terminal could not be built without harm to the environment.
She noted that the environmental impact statement for the project will consider “no action” as one of the alternatives for the Cherry Point site.
“We want to teach people how to be a part of the process,” Wechsler said. “The process is going to work more effectively with more participation … Everyone should consider the impacts on them of a project of this magnitude. When enough public voices speak out about a project, it can stop a project.”
Former Bellingham mayor Dan Pike, who is not directly involved with either Coal-Free Bellingham or Protect Whatcom, said he agreed with Wechsler that the environmental review process could succeed in stopping the coal port.
“I fully agree with that,” Pike said. “In fact, I’m very confident of that … I share faith in the process if people are engaged.”
Pike too said he had no wish to criticize the Coal-Free Bellingham initiative effort.
“I think it serves a positive purpose overall,” Pike said. “It keeps people focused on the importance of the issue.”
Pike also doubts that such an initiative will survive a court review, since the Constitution gives the federal government, not local communities, the authority to regulate interstate commerce.
“I don’t see them (courts) saying you can just overturn the Constitution without having amendment and conventions to change it,” Pike said.
Stoney Bird is a former corporate attorney active in the anti-coal train initiative effort. He argued that the continuing deterioration of the global environment is evidence that the existing system of environmental regulation doesn’t do enough. As he sees it, the permit process facing Gateway Pacific is geared to the enventual granting of permits.
“Although a few projects may have been stopped, overall, projects get approved,” Bird said. “The system is slanted. The system is biased.”
But he doesn’t reject Protect Whatcom’s approach, either.
“I would never say that people shouldn’t pursue the conventional regulatory route, because it might succeed,” Bird said.
I’ll have a full report online and in the print edition soon.
While it is good to work on the scoping process I believe that it is of vast importance to support the No Coal Imitative. The right to choose is what freedom is about. The Bellingham Community Bill of rights is about the freedom to choose also. We have the right to choose a coal free Bellingham. I support the No Coal Initiative. The burning of coal is harmful to all living things, adults, children and unborn children. Key in Coal-Free Bellingham.
This may be a new group but many groups and thousands of people have been diligently working to stop the Gateway Pacific Terminal and the transport of coal.
I believe in the old adage “Do not put all your eggs in one basket.”
With that in mind you are invited:
On February 9th, from 7-9 p.m., the Western Washington University based club Students for Energy Efficiency will host a panel of specialists who will speak about the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point. The varied backgrounds of the speakers, Ross Macfarlane (Sr. Advisor at Climate Solutions) Jean Melious (land use and environmental lawyer/professor at WWU), Bob Ferris (executive director of Re Sources), and Dr. Frank James (of the Whatcom Docs association), endows each with a unique perspective on the ramifications of the project. The event will be held on Western Washington University’s campus, in Fraser Hall room #4
I agree with Pear Follett that the WWU panel on Thursday February 9 at 7 PM will be an excellent opportunity to learn more about the problems of exporting coal to China through a new port to be built at Cherry Point. The citizens of Whatcom County will be wise to take advantage of opportunities to increase their understanding of the issues, comment on the scoping process and express their views to their elected officials during the future hearings.
The problem is that ALL these groups focus their efforts on Bellingham, ignoring the area closest to the terminal, which will bear most of the environmental damage.
For instance, the plan to block three county roads for more than two hours a day, seems to be ok with all the Bellingham opponents of the project because I haven’t heard one single word of complaint about the plan.
Those two hours of blockage are just for the coal, what is going to happen when they add grain? Are they going to force the county to vacate the roads completely?
No one wants to talk about that. Why not?
I can provide links to anyone who doesn’t believe it.
John,
ProtectWhatcom.org is focused on the county and small cities. Our priorities are to get forums and signs in the county. This is where the real discussion needs to happen.
I do believe you about the blockage. How should I go about getting access to your links?
I’ll do a cut and paste from the Gateway/ county documents. I am sure that the links to the originals will have expired.
The reason that I say that is because this isn’t even the same as the first time that I read it. It’s a moving target, keeps changing. Note #4.
Document dated February 28, 2011. Whatcom County is provided these comments for the ORA MAP team to provide project specific guidance for the applicant. Whatcom County reserves the right to provide additional comments in the future.
ROADWAY and RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION
Additional/revised information needed:
1. Train crossing impact to intersection of Main St. and Portal Way (Custer, WA).
2. Traffic impact analysis for the intersections of Grandview Rd./Vista Dr. and Birch Bay Lynden/Kickerville Rd.
3. Intersection #7 on fig. 5-13 is now a completed and functioning roundabout.
4. Provide a drawing with the existing and proposed railroad crossing control systems at all county public roads within the Whatcom County road system.
5. It appears that the project site overlay portions of Lonseth Rd. and Powder Plant Rd. Are there plans to pursue vacation of these roads from the County?
Impact mitigation discussion:
1. No new trains during the AM or PM peak hour of adjacent public roads.
2. Add railroad signal/crossing gates to county road crossings that are
missing these systems.
3. Creation of Quiet Zone at specific railroad crossings with public county
roads.
4. County roads may be blocked by train crossings 2 or more hours on a
daily basis. Explore the use of intelligent advance warning systems to
inform the traveling public of delays at railroad crossings. 5. Improve the crossing surface between the rail tracks with concrete
aprons.
The following section and page number refer to the document’s numbering system.
Section 4.3.5 Rail Access First bullet: Where would the new receive/departure tracks be located in order to accommodate a train that is 8500 ft. long and not block an existing county road/RR crossing?
Section 5.6.1.2, page 5-104 Fourth paragraph: “Table 5-20” should be “Table 5-21”. Last paragraph: “Table 5-21” should be “Table 5-22”.
Section 5.6.2.2, page 5-113 Second to last paragraph: “Table 5-20” should be “Table 5-21”. Last paragraph: Intersection 7 in now a roundabout and reference to it should be removed from this sentence.
Section 5.6.2.2, page 5-129 First paragraph: “Table 5-21” should be “Table 5-22”.
Bob, if you notice Terri Weschler is connected to the usual Bellingham NGOs, who are trying to control the conversation and debate over the coal terminal
It appears to me that these groups have essentially caved on preventing the coal from coming to Whatcom county and are now concentrating on controlling all the $$$ from mitigation for the project through the fee in lieu of mitigation plans. The precedent for this plan was provided by the “Ad Hoc Stakeholder committee” and the Planning commission.
Never heard of the “Ad Hoc Stake Holders Committee”? Don’t be surprised, some of the county council members had never heard of it before January, either.
I am for the Gateway Pacific terminal but even though methinks Terry Wechsler’s group is correct in separating her group from the Bellingham petition group.
That petition as written is terribly flawed, the devil is in their details and IMHO that petition once exposed has a slim and none chance of passage even in a city like Bellingham whose politics sometimes crosses the border of the farthest reaches of a leftwing fantasy land.
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
JG’s references are from PDS comments to the JARPA and Project Information Document found at http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/pds/plan/current/gpt-ssa/pdf/2011-project-info-doc-pds-comments.pdf. I believe PDS only referred to blocking of intersections at Custer Spur on the mistaken belief at that time only impacts at and immediately adjacent to the terminal would be scoped. The Corps has already stated, in a June 2011 memorandum, that they will scope impacts on rail communities throughout western Washington (specifically citing concerns expressed by Safeguard the South Fork about the inland, or farm land, route). Dan Pike, on KUOW yesterday, did the math and talked about how long intersections will be blocked. The podcast of that interview is at http://www.kuow.org/mp3high/mp3/WeekdayA/WeekdayA20120207.mp3. This applies to all communities along rail routes and on the ProtectWhatcom.org website, we reiterate over and over that the EIS must scope impacts on all rail communities from GPT to the Powder River Basin.
AFY – Are you one of the Coal terminal supporters who thinks it’s ok to block county roads for more than two hours at a time, on a daily basis, but not Bellingham roads?
I am one of the Gateway supporters who also supports building the infrastructure (like overpasses etc) as needed/required to support a new terminal.
I just love new jobs, highways, overpasses, bridges, terminals; well progress in general I’s reckon!
Even pipelines, don’t ya know!!!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Heck once we get the Gateway built I’s for an LNG terninal and a few more new large manufacturing plants next!
Progress don’t ya love it!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
I am a voting citizen who was never much of a joiner (not a “greenie” as some folks like to call it) until I heard about the Gateway Pacific Terminal. Researching the project and its proponents (big multinational corporations and those paid to do their bidding) I began to see that it has nothing at all to recommend it. I have joined numerous groups working to stop it. I also will be working on getting the Coal Free Bellingham Ordinance on the ballot for many reasons; but, here I quote part of the section (c, page 5 of the Ordinance) that is uniquely important for our collective decision making as we move further into the 21st century:
“Rights of Natural Communities. Natural communities and ecosystems, including, but not limited to flora, fauna, the atmosphere, soils, wetlands, bays, streams, rivers, aquifers, and other water systems, possess inalienable and fundamental rights to exist and flourish within the City of Bellingham.”
I think this Ordinance deserves to be on the ballot and to come up for citizen scrutiny. No matter which way the vote goes it will stimulate discussion and debate, and American freedom I highly value.
If you want to find out more about the Ordinance look online for coal free Bellingham.
If you want to learn more about keeping Whatcom County coal free attend the panel discussion at Western Washington University tomorrow night at 7 p.m. in Fraser Hall, Room number 4.
I believe that development needs to be done responsibly and correctly, but it seems many of the anti-crowd are anti- any development at all. I wonder where they think the money for the programs and pet projects they love will come from with no good jobs? There’s only so many ice cream trucks to drive and there’s even fewer kids with money for ice cream now that we have “protected” them from picking berries and other such horrible work….
Please qualify the statement that coal dump-opponents are ‘anti-development at all’.
It sounds thoughtless when you say it,
but you can make it less so by backing up your words with specific examples.
And if coal-dump opponents work to construct the environment you enjoy
even without you knowing it,
is it still obstruction?
Or are they really doing you a favor.
TT, please read http://protectwhatcom.org/coal-costs-us-jobs/ and then pass judgment.
Let’s cut the stereotypes, OK? I’m a business owner, I live in Custer and I work with ProtectWhatcom. Why? Not because I don’t want development. Not because I think we don’t need Good Jobs. Because the Coal Terminal is a bad idea for all of us here. All of us. I don’t need to enumerate the negatives, they are countless at this point. The only positives I see are for New York investors who will reap profits from our wallets and leave us with long term costs, and degradation of our communities. That’s why I want to work with a county wide grass roots group that carries water for no one, but is honestly concerned with the profound, long term negative effects of this proposal on every average Joe and average Jill living here.
“legally inaccurate”
That McCleary Case is obvious too and the school funding crisis too…
“Impressions of this kind will naturally indicate a policy of fostering divisions among us, and of depriving us, as far as possible, of an ACTIVE COMMERCE in our own bottoms…”
Federalist #11,
Been left behind for long?
AFY – One of the roads that will be blocked is Main Street in Custer. What kind of overpass would you suggest that would fix that and just who do you think is going to pay for all these over passes? The federal government is beyond broke and the state is only slightly better off.
Warren Buffett sure isn’t going to pay for them.
It’s mind boggling how self-centered the Bellingham residents on both sides of the political aisle can be.
I’d like to know exactly what the proponents of this project see in it for Whatcom County and don’t say jobs, because we ALL know that there are very few jobs for Whatcom County in this project.
Hey AFY, You said: “I am one of the Gateway supporters who also supports building the infrastructure (like overpasses etc) as needed/required to support a new terminal.”
Are you for higher taxes to pay for this stuff? A few million per overpass? And countless more $$$ for other infrastructure? I think all the “economic benefit” from this is going to bankrupt a lot of us because GPT sure isn’t going to pay for it. We pay, they/you profit.
Main Street in Custer Gault, it’s a dead end on the other side of the tracks if you’ve ever been there.
Buffett will pay his share of any overpass project, 15% as required by Commerce, you know Commerce, where even Obama had to dump Gary Locke.
The tracks are on the west side of old 99. Custer is on the east side, and everyone knows Sitting Bull too.
When I was a boy, the Sioux owned the world. The sun rose and set on their land; they sent ten thousand men to battle. Where are the warriors today? Who slew them? Where are our lands? Who owns them?
Sitting Bull
If your so broke, why this then?
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/mow/news/Washington-port-lands-federal-grant-for-BNSF-overpass-UP-advances-trackwork-between-two-states–27678
Going Green?
http://www.bnsf.com/media/news-releases/2012/february/2012-02-01a.html?mobile=0
Thrill – The anti-crowd who is opposed to any development are all in Bellingham. They aren’t truly concerned with local impact of the coal terminal, only with the coal and trains passing through Bellingham.
The Bellingham anti-development people are anti-rural population, as well. They supported the terminal before the coal trains came into the mix, but at that time, the plan was to connect the trains through the north part of the county. That might still be the long term plan, they’ve been laying track all year out in Van Zandt.
On top of the two hour closures for the coal, there will be additional closures when the grain is added. Then there is the potash that will come from Canada through Blaine, that will just about cut the NW portion of Whatcom County off from the rest of the county. …and guess who owns that Canadian Potash, George Soros.
So, we have Goldman Sachs, Warren Buffet, George Soros and the ILWU, all cronies of Barack Obama. ( I mention this only for all those Republicans who still think that this coal terminal is a good thing)
Liberty Bell, who are you to say whether a town is dead?
Buffet is supposed to pay for all the infra-structure, it’s part of the regulations in Whatcom County. All the necessary infrastructure improvements must be paid for by the developer. There are no shares.
Why should we, the tax payers have to pay anything for a private project that will hurt us? No federal, no state subsidies for trains that will kill our communities.
Terry – The impact of the trains nearest the terminal is not comparable to what you will see in the South Fork, not even close and it is illegal to block to an intersection for that amount of time. They state right in the documents that it will be for more than 2 hours at a time on a daily basis. They did the math for you. The trains will be 8500 feet long and traveling very slowly at that point.
….and that is just for the coal. If you notice in the documents, they are calling this an IMPORT-EXPORT Cargo terminal. There have been rumors that the property that has recently been by Chinese developers is for ware houses. It’s just rumors, but it’s a very real possibility.
I also hear that they have been laying a whole lot of track in out in Van Zandt, for the past year.
Because of the Gateway Terminal and the lack of insight of some of our locals; I’s decided to dedicate a chapter in my new upcoming potentially NYT’s best seller; “The Dreams of a Heelot” to the history of opposition to progress.
I’s thought I would start by going back a few years to when fire was first discovered and how there was those I’s bet who argued against the progress fire represented because they could only see the negative side in their considerations, how fire could most likely destroy everything they held dear (i.e. teepee’s, etc), destroy all of the natural wildlife and plants and even burn the skin right off of them! These stoneage NIMBY’s was so blinded by their narrow minded self centered concerns that they could not give a fair hearing to the potential good that the progress that something like fire might bring to their community even if it was handled correctly!
Methinks it was a good thing that even with cavemen, there were those who had the understanding (good sense!); if something is done right it (even if it has a negative potential if not) could be good and back then they didn’t have the benefit (extra protection) of some massive permit process to achieve it likes we do, don’t ya know!
But I”s wonder would we have fire if the caveman had an EPA, that sounds like another chapter methinks!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
John Galt said, “Thrill – The anti-crowd who is opposed to any development are all in Bellingham. They aren’t truly concerned with local impact of the coal terminal, only with the coal and trains passing through Bellingham.”
This is not true. The NO COAL group has stated publicly that they will also be working to introduce a county-wide initiative. They are 100% opposed to the proposed coal terminal project due to its impacts on the entire county, the Northwest region of the US and the entire planet. Stopping the coal trains from destroying Bellingham’s waterfront development and given that Bellingham stands to have the greatest negative impacts from the additional 18 trains a day – and given that it takes a lot less signatures to get a citizen’s initiative on the ballot in Bellingham than in Whatcom County – these are the reasons they have first focused on Bellingham first.
Your devisive comments are doing nothing to move the conversation forward. Please stick to the facts.
LucyDoggie
The new petition that says:
“Rights of Natural Communities. Natural communities and ecosystems, including, but not limited to flora, fauna, the atmosphere, soils, wetlands, bays, streams, rivers, aquifers, and other water systems, possess inalienable and fundamental rights to exist and flourish within the City of Bellingham.”
Could that allow for someone cutting their grass in Bham to get sued?
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Ms. Weschler said, “…the State Environmental Policy Act sets stringent standards for environmental review that could, in fact, block SSA Marine’s plans if studies show the coal terminal could not be built without harm to the environment.”
It “could”, but, as an attorney, she knows that the phrase “harm to the environment” is subjective. SSA’s legal team (with Goldman Sachs’ financial backing) will most likely legally intimidate our County officials into permitting this project with a few mitigations here and there. The environmental review process is designed to approve projects as long as their projected harms can be mitigated. With billions of dollars behind the proposed coal export terminal as well as political pressure coming down from DC (including our own US Senator Murray)…..the chance of stopping this project is small. But, yes, there is a chance.
The No Coal group has decided the stakes are too high to rely on chance; we can’t rely on regulations which are designed to approve projects with mitigations – our approach is to go head to head with the laws that have evolved to the point where citizens have little say in what happens in our communities.
We need both! We need to ALL be involved in the environmental review process, attending meetings, standing up and having our voices heard. And, we need a citizens’ initiative. They are not in opposition to each other.
Even though No Coal, as a group has stated that the environmental regulations are set up to favor the interests of corporations over citizens, most of us in the group WILL be actively participating in the process.
However, I don’t share Ms. Weschler’s optimism about the chances of the review process to stop the proposed terminal project. I have already witnessed (at the December County Planning Commission meeting) the county planning department burying language (in proposed changes to the Birch Bay Watershed plan) clearly designed to give SSA carte blanche to eliminate/mitigate the protected buffer zone around streams and wetlands in the Cherry Point industrial area. It was only because of vigilant citizen oversight that this was challenged before it was put to a vote. How can we rely upon the environmental review process when the money and political influence behind this project are already manipulating our county staff to change the laws – with NO public notification?!
We need to be vigilant; we need to send emails, show up at meetings and have our voices heard! Because, there is a chance it will work, and we must do all we can.
We also need to support the Coal Free Bellingham citizen’s initiative to declare that we, the people, refuse to allow the negative economic, community health and environmental impacts that will occur from this proposed project.
Cindy Franklin
No Coal!
http://www.coal-free-bellingham.org
Hey Cindy maybe you or your stoney lawyer could anwser my previous question:
The new petition that says:
“Rights of Natural Communities. Natural communities and ecosystems, including, but not limited to flora, fauna, the atmosphere, soils, wetlands, bays, streams, rivers, aquifers, and other water systems, possess inalienable and fundamental rights to exist and flourish within the City of Bellingham.”
Could that allow for someone cutting their grass in Bham to get sued?
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
“Flora is the plant life occurring in a particular region or time, generally the naturally occurring or indigenous—native plant life.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flora
Now if you have indigenous plant life in your yard and you cut it now couldn’t that be considered denying your flora it’s inalienable and fundamental rights, and under your petition if someone does that than anyone and everyone else in our community has the right to sue them?
One thing for sure your petition sure could help the lawyering business for sure, don’t ya know!
Let’s say I’s got a bakery business and when I bake bread and the smell of me bread baking goes out into the community now that smell is invading the atmosphere; couldn’t someone conclude that the inalienable and fundamental rights of the atmosphere have been impacted negatively and again sue?
You know folks I could go on and on with this, if the name of the lawyer who dreamed this up, is Stoney Bird; let me be the first to say he sure has picked the right name, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Why is it that in the hundred or so comments about the coal trains here and on the news page there is no mention of global warming? The opportunity to to do something efficacious about global warming is the first reason to oppose the coal trains.
Today, Bill McKibben has an opinion article at the top of the Science section in the Guardian, explaining why the fossil fuel companies are so heavily invested in global warming denial. He writes that our world can take maybe a 2-degree increase in temperature and that if we add 565 gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere, the increase will reach 2 degrees. Now, the wealth of Exxon and the other companies consists of their carbon reserves, about 2,792 gigatons of carbon, which won’t get burned if we switch to solar and other alternatives. In 2011, Exxon made greater profits than any company in history. That is the incentive for the managers who work for Exxon to continue to fund global warming denial, and the reason why we must counter their apocalyptic business model using the resources at our disposal to oppose their control of our corporations, our media and our government.
Bill McKibben’s brief article focuses on Exxon. However, the railroads that deliver coal to utilities take most of the revenue from coal sales, and with the utilities are as heavily invested in global warming denial — so long after Aarhenius described how greenhouse gasses work to drive global warming.
“Global warming alarmists won’t give up their campaign to spread fear and backward thinking until an ice bridge stretches from New York to Paris. Science, though, says they should….
…a Met Office research paper notes that “there is a 92% chance that both Cycle 25 and those taking place in the following decades will be as weak as, or weaker than, the ‘Dalton minimum’ of 1790 to 1830.”
…”that the new solar energy slump could be as deep as the ‘Maunder minimum,’” which occurred “between 1645 and 1715 in the coldest part of the ‘Little Ice Age’ when, as well as the Thames frost fairs, the canals of Holland froze solid.”
But predictions that a man-made global warming catastrophe is imminent look foolish in light of the data and the solar cycle forecasts….
http://news.investors.com/Article/599442/201201301844/climate-change-warming-over-little-ice-age.htm
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
If SSA wants to run a bakery at Cherry Point,
and invade the atmosphere with the smell that results
I say we all pitch in to make it happen.
But
Why make fun of a man’s name?
Cause you’ve got nothing else.
Nothing.
AFY,
Seriously, “Investors.com” ? That’s the point Bill McKibben makes: we investors own 2,792 gigatons of carbon in the ground and we are making enormous profits. That’s why our employees keep buying influence in media and politics to promote global-warming denial.
Your johnny-come-lately authorities have done nothing to disprove Aarhenius.
Not making fun, kinda like it really!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Boudon the research paper came from:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/
Me don’t think they be Johnny-come lately methinks they be on the cutting edge of Climate Change, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Seriously, “metoffice.gov.uk”? That’s the point Bill McKibben makes: we investors own 2,792 gigatons of carbon in the ground, and we are making enormous profits. That’s why our employees keep buying influence in media, politics, and the government bureaucracy, to promote global-warming denial.
If you doubt that our energy market is centrally controlled by integrated bureaucracies in Exxon, Southern Company (see the approval of their new nuclear power plants), Congress, the courts, and federal agencies has not been paying attention to the revolving doors, lobbying, PACs, court decisions, and the Murdoch media.
I’s just reckon unless studies comes only from informational sources that spew the party line and are either financed or subsidized from entities that also spew the party line those studies can not be even considered, kinda like a religion, unless it is promoted by one of my priest or it is in my bible, I’s ain’t listening, don’t ya know!
Faith… Must be enforced by reason…When faith becomes blind it dies.”
Mahatma Gandhi
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
I suppose it depends on how you define progress. Some think of progress as an economic model that requires ever increasing growth and consumption. Others might define progress as increasingly better quality of life for a broader spectrum of people into the foreseeable future.
It looks to me that the former is in mutual opposition to the latter. We live on a planet with limited material resources and limits to how much pollution we can withstand. Burning coal for power is a poignant example of the denial people are willing to “live with” for short term and even fantasy “prosperity”. Of course, no one wants it in their back yard—not the air pollution, not the dust, not the traffic, but burning it in someone else’s back yard—even if that is on the other side of the world— well, let them worry about that. We have one atmosphere on this planet. And besides, I don’t think it is any less reprehensible to make Chinese people sick than American people.
You don’t have to be a scientist to see the pollution. Ever been in an airplane and looked at cities? And the really harmful stuff is the tiny invisible particles.
People are very uncomfortable with thoughts of change, but anyone who has a smattering of common sense and moral courage can see that our mass devotion to consumption, to profit for profit sake is not only bad for the body, but downright inhuman. (That’s why these intentions have to takke place within humanity-denying bodies of fake personhood called corporations.) I don’t believe that wealth at the expense of our grandchildren is progress. Can’t we stop believing in the myth that the extremely wealthy deserve to direct our lives, our values, our actions–just because they have the audacity to want to? Why allow our economic/political system to be based on crimes against nature and even one’s own species? Habit? Mystique of power? Belief that some have the right to sacrifice others because they have superior stashes of cash? (I think I’ve just described the Republican primaries.)
But back to coal. I applaud anyone who is doing what they can to stop the trains. Stop the coal from coming out of the earth, crossing the country, and being burned in Asia. Not only is this another citizen subsidized give-away to the extremely wealthy, it is unconscionable suicide.
It may be that, for now, our most immediate fight is to stop the permitting. That would certainlybe a victory, but not the end of the fight. It won’t address the larger issue. We need radical change. We need to take back our lives and have fait that we can know how to live and do a much better job of it than by giving our power away to unscrupulous rich guys and men behind the curtain and shared delusional dependencies. There could be plenty of jobs in designing our communities around energy efficiency and less consumptive ways of life. We could be doing lot’s of things we have yet to imagine. We always have. When did we get so dependent on the market? Why?
So that ordinance doesn’t say it quite right? I wouldn’t think so. It takes a stab at the insidious relationship between power and potential and law and control that has gotten way out of wack. I think the effort deserves a lot of attention by a lot of people all across the country until we get it right. It would be very healthy if we all spent some time thinking about how we would govern ourselves if it were our choice.
So what do ya know?
FP, it is good to live in a place where people have different opinions and the right to express those opinions, we all should respect each other whether we agree or not because diversity in opinion is as good/important as it is with everything else.
IMHO badly written laws are bad laws open to abuse, either do it right (or at least the best you can) or not at all because things can be made worst when done badly.
Also IMHO there is truth to the saying that opportunity only knocks once so IMHO; when opportunity does knock it should be given a fair hearing,
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Frieda – “how would we govern ourselves if we had a choice” ?? Looking around this crazy town, the heck if I want tin pots “granting rights” to weeds. If something like this gets traction, beware. You really want some local commitee deciding what your rights are? Who could protect you from excess if this kind of thing happens? There are no checks and balances.
Go, read about vigilantism – that’s what this comes down to.
Divide and conquer seems to have been the strategy for SSA to get this terminal through.
Reading the posts on this article, I can’t help but think that it has worked. No one seems to be considering the overall impact of this terminal on Whatcom County and no one seems to care about how it will impact anyone but themselves.
The obvious problem with this project is that the size of the proposal is way too large for the piece of property. Not only is there not enough room for the rails, there’s not enough room for a closed coal system like the one that at BP, the system that SSA continues to hold up as an example of a clean coal operation.
SSA needs to down size their proposal until if fits the property and can be done to the highest environmental standards. Anything less is unacceptable. There is simply not enough room for all that coal, all those rail tracks and the grain, too.
Cut the coal by half or more, build closed coal barns and forget the grain. The dock may be able to accommodate all those ships, but it’s the amount of land that is inadequate.