Often, the most significant events are those that don’t happen — which means this might be a landmark year for Washington. A year in which the state’s economy is transformed. A year in which Washingtonians firmly assert their values in the continual tug-of-war between energy interests and environmental concerns.
Last week, a proposal for a coal-export terminal at Cherry Point — in Whatcom County at the northwest corner of the state — met its apparent demise. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in charge of federal permitting oversight, determined that the proposal was incompatible with a treaty the United States signed with the Lummi Nation in 1855.
The proposed terminal would have been the nation’s largest coal-export facility, bringing in coal from Wyoming and Montana by train and transferring it to marine vessels for transport to Asia. Lummi Nation officials argued that the proposal would have harmed the tribe’s traditional fishing waters, which are protected by the long-ago treaty, and decision-makers from the Army Corps of Engineers agreed. It should be noted that the companies seeking the terminal could try to strike a deal with the Lummi, and that a revived proposal then would face additional hurdles in the state permitting process. But for now the plan is dead.
This follows the cancellation of a project that would have built the world’s largest methanol plant at the Port of Tacoma. In that case, the China-backed company behind the proposal backed out while citing the length of the state’s environmental review process and political uncertainty surrounding the project.
If this sounds familiar, it might be because there are parallels between those projects and a proposed oil terminal at the Port of Vancouver. That plan, which would build the largest oil-to-marine terminal in the United States, would bring crude-bearing trains from North Dakota down the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area and through populated areas on their way to the port. The proposal calls for 15 million gallons of oil per day to be carried through the region, and it is still undergoing review by the state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council.
Meanwhile, there also is a proposal for a coal terminal in Longview. Millennium Bulk Terminals-Longview is proposing to build a 44 million-ton export facility that also would bring coal from Wyoming and Montana for shipment to Asia.
Each of these proposed projects has generated intense public interest and intense public debate about the economic and environmental future of the region. Proponents say the terminals would provide much-needed jobs and much-needed tax revenue. They also say that oil and coal are essential to the economy here and elsewhere, and that if Asia is going to use coal it might as well come from the United States. That final argument is easily quashed — if somebody is going to use drugs, does that mean you should be the one to sell them? Of course not.
Yet the argument of economy vs. environment is one that speaks to the very ethos of Washington and to the kind of state we wish to create for coming generations. While jobs and tax revenue are essential, so is clean air and clean water. A strong economy and a clean environment are not diametrically opposed notions, and Washington should move toward the economy of the future while working to turn coal dust and oil spills into relics of the past.
With so many large energy proposals under consideration, this could be a significant year for Washington’s future. Residents will be better off if those projects don’t happen.
