By John Stark
The Friday, Dec. 7 accident at the Westshore Terminal coal pier in British Columbia got just a short mention in Saturday’s newspaper and the Friday online edition. I’m sure many of you wanted more.
Here’s an update from The Maritime Executive, noting that one of the berths at the terminal, just north of the U.S. border, remains out of commission as of Monday, Dec. 10. The report says there is still no explanation for the accident, in which a coal ship apparently crashed through the conveyer belt that carries coal to the loading equipment and spilled about 30 tons of coal into the sea.
Here’s a report and aerial photo from Metro Vancouver. This report indicates that the collision and spill have stirred up some serious misgivings about plans to expand the terminal.
Here’s a lengthy report about opposition to coal exports in British Columbia. It appeared in the Maple Ridge News before last week’s mishap.
Expansion of the Canadian coal terminal could be significant to Bellingham and Whatcom County, since U.S. coal exported through Westshore would likely use BNSF Railway Co. tracks through western Washington and Bellingham to get there — as some coal trains are already doing. This report also details plans to expand coal export capacity in Canada, and it appears as though those plans were not slated for extensive regulatory review at the time this report was written.
Some proponents of the Gateway Pacific Terminal project proposed for Whatcom County’s Cherry Point have argued that if a local terminal is not built, the coal will still be shipped through Bellingham en route to potentially-expandable Canadian terminals and Chinese steam plants.
But opponents contend that the potential increase in coal train traffic through Bellingham to Canada is nowhere near the 18 trains per day (loaded and empty) that would be generated by Gateway Pacific at full capacity.
Here’s a link to the Communitywise Bellingham report on that issue.
In any event, Westshore also handles Canadian coal that gets to the terminal via Canadian rail lines. Here’s one example–the coal sources in this deal appear to be Canadian. (report from NASDAQ)
Thanks John for trying to keep us updated in your research on this important debate as best you can. I know you take a lot of flack from both sides of the issue. I think, in trying to read objectively, you’ve been doing a good job of trying to report as objectively as you possibly can in limited time. You can not control the way people may interpret what you write about or the words you may choose when they’re reading from their bias subjective stand point.
Keep up the good work.
I thought that this line from one of the articles was interesting.
“The accident was not like an oil spill since the coal is inert and will dissipate quickly, he said.”
What? Does he think that coal is a gas? Coal is inert and dissipates quickly? How does a lump of coal dissipate?
Does that mean an increased local demand for coal ports?
Most of what Westshore ships is not sub-bituminous coal and the demand for sub-bituminous coal is way down. PRB coal is selling for $10.35/ton right now, so I doubt that there is much pressure to ship it.
Has anybody tried to contact the company to determine when they think the terminal will be reopened and what the environmental impact is?
The Westshore Terminal accident helps to illustrate how coal from the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal will inevitably find its way into Cherry Point waters: human error. Or perhaps it was equipment malfunction, which is another way. On that score, we’ll have to await the report of the Canadian maritime industry panel that is presumably investigating this event. If it ever comes to light, that is. This is where good reporting can make a difference.
The initial report from Westshore Terminals was that a “tiny amount” of coal escaped into the water, which grew to a “small amount” of 1/3 railcar, according to the Westshore spokesman. That’s over 30 tons, or about a millionth of what Westshore will ship in 2012. Do the math!
But coal was still escaping into nearby waters whenever aerial photos were taken late on the morning of December 7. And what about additional losses as they vacuum off the stranded coal all along the conveyor belt? Figure a FULL railcar, or over 100 tons. In fact, I’ve seen other credible reports quoting the latter figure. Maybe it’s still a small loss to Westshore executives, but did any reporters think to ask the fish and crabs below?