Ambre Energy, one of the two coal export companies vying for a home on the Columbia River, faces an unusual lawsuit. In the midst of anti-coal protests led by environmentalists, it’s another coal industry heavyweight that’s launched a lawsuit against the coal exporter. The issue? Ambre allegedly didn’t get the okay from Montana coal miners Cloud Peak Energy before finalizing plans that were supposed to be agreed upon together. The conflict is just another bump in the rocky road towards coal’s pending future along the Columbia.
Coal in Oregon has recently come under a barrage of criticism. A handful of Oregon organizations are teaming up to protest the potential creation of coal export stations along the Columbia River, arguing the operations will do damage to a wide range of environmental, economic and health issues. For Portlanders, the biggest beef is the means of transporting the coal from the mines to the ports.
Environmentalists say an extra 12 coal cars will wind up chugging through Portland every day if these export facilitates set up shop. On dry days, coal dust (which contains a bunch of toxins) could billow off the uncovered cars into places like St. Johns and Sauvie Island. Smaller towns along the Columbia face even worse potential pollution. But thanks to the recent coal vs. coal lawsuit and efforts by Oregon politicians and activists, the export project is slowing down, for now.
In April, Governor John Kitzhaber called for an extensive federal examination of the health and environmental impacts the coal transit and ports could cause. And just last week, mayoral candidate Jefferson Smith encouraged city council to adopt a resolution forbidding the transport of coal trains through Portland (Seattle passed a similar resolution in May). On the community level, local activists are preparing for a large August anti-coal demonstration in St. Johns after smaller rallies earlier in the year.
Ironically, the Montana coal company may have handed Oregon’s anti-coal contingent a helpful delay to push back against coal operations in the state.
An extra 12? Isn’t it more like 120? Typo?
More likely that 12 is a bit high.
Where are the billows of coal dust from the coal trains that are already passing through the Portland area? Coal trains have been going through this area for years. The coal is plasticized in the cars to prevent coal dust from escaping, and I think some coal cars have covers over them.
I guess the anti-coalers are talking about coal dust because average joe (NOT Average Joe(R)) is more likely to act when he feels personally endangered but Christ people!
The real reason to disallow coal exports is because our children (or your precious Pug’s great-great-grandchildren you soul-less and childless heathen hipsters) will never get to see sea turtles or polar bears if we keep digging the shit out of the ground and sending it to China to be burned.
I assume the author means 12 coal TRAINS per day, not coal cars. Each coal train will have about 125-150 coal cars.
According to Burlington Northern Railroad, each coal car can lose 500 pounds of coal dust en route from mine to destination. That’s 31 tons of coal dust lost in transit per train.
And ‘Benjo’ is incorrect, there are actually no coal trains coming through Portland at this time. This would be new air pollution. Check out these recent photos of coal dust coming off of some trains in the Columbia River Gorge (on the Washington side) – http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150925792827539&set=a.10150925792507539.405737.134256937538&type=1&theater . Guess the there are billows of coal dust Benjo…
The NO COAL event is Saturday Aug 18th from noon to 3PM. VOLUNTEER or MORE INFO
http://www.facebook.com/NorthPortlandCoalCommittee