Originally published in The Washington Times.
Guest post by Steve Goreham
Exports from the Pacific Northwest are an ongoing battleground in the environmental war on coal. Last week, the Sierra Club and three other groups announced that they would file suit against Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway and six coal companies over shipments of coal in open-topped train cars. The announcement is an escalation in the three-year battle to stop new export terminals proposed for ports in Washington and Oregon. Underlying all the rhetoric is a concern that mankind is causing dangerous global warming.
In 2010, Peabody Energy, Cloud Peak Energy, and Australia-based Ambre Energy announced competing plans to build export terminals in the Pacific Northwest to ship coal to Asia, with Arch Coal joining the fray in 2011. Five new export terminals have been proposed. Coal would be shipped by rail from the Powder River Basin coal mines in Montana and Wyoming, loaded on ships at the proposed terminals, and transported across the Pacific Ocean to meet the growing demand for coal in China and Asia. Potential coal exports to Asia are estimated at between 50 and 100 million tons annually. Environmental groups and students have mounted a growing campaign to oppose construction of the terminals and the planned coal exports.
The Sierra Club and other opponents claim that rail transport of coal is responsible for “emitting coal into waterways in many locations across Washington” in the form of coal dust and that this violates the Clean Water Act. They fear that, if the export terminals are built, additional coal trains will add to the problem. “Coal is a toxic pollutant and this action today seeks to stop illegal pollution and keep our river free of dirty coal,” said Brett VandenHeuvel, Executive Director of Columbia Riverkeeper.
Shipping coal by rail and exporting coal is nothing new. In 2011, the US exported 89 million metric tons of coal, up 143 percent from 2002. Most of those exports went through the East Coast ports of Norfolk, New Orleans, and Baltimore to Europe, which is using more coal―not less. Most of this coal was delivered to ports by rail and water pollution has not been a major issue.
Neither is coal dust new. In 1900, coal provided 70 percent of US energy consumption. Factories, railroads, electrical utilities, and home furnaces were powered by coal. During the 1940s and 1950s, fallen snow in Chicago was blackened with coal dust after only a few days. Homeowners washed their walls once a year to remove accumulated coal dust. But thanks to cleaner-burning coal-fired plants and our nation’s shift to natural gas and petroleum, US emissions of coal dust today are at a 50-year low.
While environmentalists complain about coal dust, the real reason they hate coal is their acceptance of the ideology Climatism, the belief that man-made greenhouse gases are destroying Earth’s climate. In 2009 Dr. James Hansen stated, “The trains carrying coal to power plants are death trains. Coal-fired power plants are factories of death.” Environmental groups believe burning coal will cause catastrophic climate change, so “coal dust” is used as an excuse to try to halt coal exports.
But there is no empirical evidence that human greenhouse gas emissions are causing dangerous global warming. Carbon dioxide is a trace gas. Only four of every 10,000 air molecules are carbon dioxide. Ninety-nine percent of Earth’s greenhouse effect is natural, caused by water vapor and natural greenhouse gas emissions from oceans and the biosphere. Global temperatures have not increased for more than ten years, despite a continued rise in atmospheric CO2, confounding the climate models. And despite the furor over Hurricane Sandy, history shows that storms, floods, and droughts today are neither more frequent nor more severe than in past centuries.
Yet, protests against coal in the Pacific Northwest continue to escalate. It seems that “yes we can” works except in the case of export terminals and pipelines.
==============================================================
Steve Goreham is Executive Director of the Climate Science Coalition of America and author of the new book The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I am not sure I understand this, if they dont like mountaintop mining we should discuss that, but to end all coal is just wrong. Obama himself was for a huge coal plant in his home state of Illinois before he was President.
Coal is the best option for electricity, and save the natural gas for other uses, but dont export it please!
Well, I’m all for stopping the coal export terminals and trains.
It’s crazy to send that energy to China, to be used against us and our economy, when we can keep it here and use it ourselves. So yeah, go ahead, lie about the dust, make “stuff” up, scream, holler, sacrifice your reputation for the cause, whatever. Just keep that American Coal here in America for Americans…
Only 1/2 /sarc;… Rather like a stopped clock, they are doing the right thing, but for the wrong reasons… It happens every so often, I guess….
Part of your problem is that in the US you think your coal exports are significant. Australia exports about 5 times as much, and Indonesia almost the same. And it’s good quality stuff.
One port alone, Newcastle, loads about 240 million tonnes a year, so your 100 million tonnes total is pretty minor stuff by comparison.
Tell ’em that.
If Sierra Club are so concerned about the open-top coal cars, why don’t they contribute covers for them? They have lotsa money.
Nah – they don’t want solutions – they just want to throw a wrench into the works. Luddites.
@ur momisugly thingodonta says:
April 10, 2013 at 9:25 pm
A very neat way of making a useful distinction. How to evaluate that, and what to do with those that have infected the host known as humanity, is the real challenge ahead.
Modern Environmentalists = Climate Morons.
Just for the record. If you want to know the truth. There is no coal dust falling out of the open car tops to any detectable level. Just go to the cities of Alliance and North Platte Nebraska for the proof. These places see staggering numbers of coal trains pass right through their cities. My wife counted 7 fully loaded trains through Alliance in the span of an hour. I first observed the frequency 6 years ago and I have no reason to believe this doesn’t go on 24/7 year on year. If there was coal dust falling out of the cars it would be piled in huge windrows. It is not. There is none. Nothing. It doesn’t exist, is unworthy of discussion, and should be dismissed as nothing but childish blabber.
jc says:
“How to evaluate that, and what to do with those that have infected the host known as humanity, is the real challenge ahead.”
In my opinion the real power for change lies within academia. Knowledge is power. Youth is attracted to knowledge and to causes. In my opinion academia has been grossly irresponsible in the whole environment matter /and climate change in the last 20-30 years, but I don’t think its intractable.
Part of the way to address the issue is to e.g. enforce proper standards and ensure procedures are followed, and tighten up journals and general academic culture. It’s been done before, the early 20th century was awash with social Darwinism and Marxism within academia, these were defeated ultimately by basic, hard won values, and proper procedures, amongst other ways.
I’m sure that there is some way to cover over coal trains. The Russians have had to mine coal in some places that combusts spontaneously if exposed to air during transport. Surely they developed some way to cover over coal cars so that air dosen’t get in and dust dosen’t escape. Especially since BN is going to have to build thousands more coal cars to transport all that increased coal anyway.Apparently this is the major issue:
(from a Spokane Examiner article 12/06/12)
Pat Russell reported seeing coal chunks fall from coal cares waiting for trains to pass. BNSF engineer Steve Hart confirmed that polymer sprays keep the down dust. However, when the coal shifts in transit the seal is breaks causing coal chunks and dust to be released.”
So the issue is that the precautions that Burlington Northern takes to prevent coal dust from being released in transit can be inadequate if the load shifts. And this, plus the traffic tie-ups at grade crossings from 28 coal trains per day plus general freight trains are a real problem for Spokane, with no attempt to mitigate the problem and few new jobs for Spokane (maybe a few more locomotive engineers based in Spokane). So Spokane (and probably the Tri cities may have some legitimate beefs going against BNSF.
However, there’s a guy named Mark Pettibone founder of a company called Clearrails LLC that apparently has a mechanical cover for coal cars that will eliminate this problem. It’s just a matter (which will be much to environmentalist’s chagrin) of getting railroads on board to install these covers.
In Middlesbrough, the local housewives were jubilant when they heard that the local steam engines were to be phased out to be replaced by nice clean diesels. Not so pleased when they found that the nice clean soot from steam engines on their washing, which would fall off when beaten, was replaced by nasty sticky oily soot from the diesels, which would not come off easily.
Coal dust falls quickly to the ground, in the trains it settles to the bottom of the cars. The only area where it was a problem was in the Powder River Basin lines themselves, where coal dust which had not got inside the cars fell on the tracks, and after a few years blocked the drainage, resulting in a very expensive clean up – see “Trains” magazine’s articles re this. After a few miles there was no dust left to fall on the tracks, so no further need to fix. And the lines west are a lot further along. No problem!
Coal is a toxic pollutant
In the same way that limestone, granite and quartz etc are also toxic pollutants. Ban ’em, I say. Ban ’em all!
/sarc
A point of information.
Several commentators have suggested covers (e.g. of canvas) to prevent dust leaving the coal trucks. This would replace a non-problem with a real problem.
The uncovered coal trucks don’t lose dust but would be converted to potential fire risk if fitted with the suggested covers.
Loss of coal dust is loss of coal. Sellers of coal don’t want to lose any dust because it reduces their profits. Hence, coal stocks in stock piles or in transport trucks are sprayed with water (i.e. are “watered”) to avoid this problem.
Coal stocks would be watered whether or not watering prevented loss of coal dust because the stocks may spontaneously combust (i.e. catch fire) unless kept wet.
Richard
What an interesting coincidence. Just yesterday Haunting The Library wrote about the increased use of coal in the EU. And it’s not just the EU but China and the rest of the world.
You know if these loons get their ultimate way then people will start chopping down trees. We have seen this with biofuels and massive deforestation in Indonesia to make way for ozone emitting palm oil trees. People in Germany are stealing wood from forests due to high energy prices. Keep it up greens, that’s the ticket. They think all their proposed solutions are simple. If they were we wouldn’t need them to tell us.
If coal is a “toxic pollutant” then burning it actually cleans up the environment.
UK Sceptic says:
April 10, 2013 at 11:58 pm
“Coal is a toxic pollutant
In the same way that limestone, granite and quartz etc are also toxic pollutants. Ban ‘em, I say. Ban ‘em all!”
Very true. Especially granite; it’s not only toxic but also radioactive.
Gnome says:
April 10, 2013 at 10:45 pm
Part of your problem is that in the US you think your coal exports are significant. Australia exports about 5 times as much, and Indonesia almost the same. And it’s good quality stuff.
One port alone, Newcastle, loads about 240 million tonnes a year, so your 100 million tonnes total is pretty minor stuff by comparison.
Tell ‘em that.
***************************************************************************************************8
And next week they are having a Senate Inquiry into coal dust here in Newcastle next week.
It’s too bad that the large majority of people, who are hurt by these few anti-human saboteurs aren’t out there with a counter protest. Why do the hateful people have a monopoly on this activity? Why do we bend so easily? I think activism is going to have to be promoted to the larger society who suffer the fall out from all this abuse. Please don’t tell me this is democracy in action.
The Left Coast is Waaay Wackoville. Folks, your obsolete. China and India are the big dogs now.
And they are going to get a lot bigger!! With or without you.
James at 48 says:
April 10, 2013 at 6:40 pm
The actual issue is aerosols and the Asian Brown Cloud, which of course impact both insolation and precip here in the West Coast. The more coal we ship the colder and wetter are our conditions.
———————————–
“The more coal we ship the colder and wetter are our conditions.”
Ha ha, now that’s funny. We are talking Northwestern US, yes?
Show the evidence for this assertion, please.
Finally we can stop worrying about CAGW.
It’s CAGCooling, now.
Does global cooling still cause the Arctic to melt and drown all the poley bears or has that problem disappeared without mention?
Is there anything else they need to fix or change now that we finally have the science settled (
again, still,some more?)Wetter, colder, more floods, more snow, more tornadoes, more hurricanes, dryer, hotter, more fires, more droughts, no snow and dead baby animals everywhere all over the earth.
Oh, and least we forget all the millions of missing climate refugees.
Are there enough bases covered? Is there nothing that nasty little molecule cannot do?
This all sounds a bit weird. How ’bout we knock off the silliness.
Not having energy is not an option.
cn
What a stupid bunch of hypocritical ignorant eco-terrorists these people are. I bet they keep warm in winter using fossil fuels, swim in their own private heated pools in the summer.
I like my coal trains to be powered by coal too.
The enviromentalist (sic) groups should have their charitable status removed. They perform no charity.
steve,
keep us posted on your UofW FOIA. very interesting. there’s not much dust left to blow off after the first 1,000 miles.
The environmental movement’s war against humanity continues.
Environmentalist extremists are at least as heartless as the Inquisition, the IRA or Al Qaeda. Like environmentalists, those groups also hated and acted out against those who dared to disagree with them.