<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=192888919167017&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">
Thursday,  April 25 , 2024

Linkedin Pinterest
News / Business

Oil terminal foes set public forum for April 1

Session will focus on potential threats to safety, possible ways to defeat project

By Aaron Corvin, Columbian Port & Economy Reporter
Published: March 26, 2015, 12:00am
2 Photos
An oil train passes the Vancouver Land Bridge.
An oil train passes the Vancouver Land Bridge. The high-profile nature of oil and coal trains is drawing opposition from a broader coalition of activists than earlier environmental movements. Photo Gallery

Opponents of a plan to build the nation’s largest rail-to-marine oil transfer terminal at the Port of Vancouver are inviting the public to a forum aimed at detailing what they see as the project’s threats to public safety and spelling out how people can help defeat it.

The event, “Southwest Washington — the Oil Industry’s Sacrifice Zone,” kicks off at 6 p.m. Wednesday, April 1, at Kiggins Theatre, 1011 Main St. in Vancouver. Admission is free.

Vancouver City Councilor Bart Hansen will make introductory remarks. Eric de Place, policy director for Sightline Institute — a Seattle nonprofit that focuses on sustainability issues — will give an overview of the oil industry’s plans in Southwest Washington.

Then de Place will moderate a panel discussion. The panelists include Lauren Goldberg, attorney for Columbia Riverkeeper; Vancouver City Councilor Anne McEnerny-Ogle; Barry Cain, president of Gramor Development, a member of Columbia Waterfront LLC, the developer of Vancouver’s waterfront; Cager Clabaugh, president of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 4 in Vancouver; Eric LaBrant, president of the Fruit Valley Neighborhood Association; and a representative of Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility.

De Place said his 20 to 25 minute presentation will put the oil terminal proposal in Vancouver in a larger context. That context includes industry plans to move fossil fuels from the interior of North America to energy-hungry Asian markets.

Nearly all of those lines of transport are between Coos Bay, Ore., and Prince Rupert in British Columbia, Canada, de Place said. And those regions are either going to become a major transfer hub for fossil fuels, he said, or they’re going to “act as a thin green line, and basically send shockwaves to those industries.”

The forum is the second of its kind since March 2014, when opponents of the oil terminal held a similar event at the Kiggins Theatre. That event attracted an estimated 250 people.

It also marks the latest push by opponents to spotlight their concerns about the oil terminal proposed by Tesoro Corp., a petroleum refiner, and Savage Companies, a transportation company, at the Port of Vancouver. The companies, in partnership as Vancouver Energy, want to build and operate a facility capable of handling an average 360,000 barrels of crude per day. The oil would be loaded onto ships bound primarily for West Coast refineries. The companies tout jobs and energy independence among the project’s benefits. They say they’ll operate the terminal in an environmentally sound and safe manner.

Port commissioners unanimously approved a lease with Tesoro and Savage in 2013. The proposed oil terminal is undergoeing an environmental impact examination by the Washington state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council. The evaluation council is expected to issue a draft impact analysis in May. The public would then have an opportunity to comment on it.

Eventually, the council will make a recommendation to Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who may approve or deny the project, or send it back to the council for more work. Opponents may appeal the outcome to the state Supreme Court.

Loading...
Columbian Port & Economy Reporter