coal passing by Lasqueti through Sabine Channel to Texada and then China and ports west

Merrick and I were discussing the proposed US coal that the Port of Metro Vancouver is planning to send to Texada Isl. for storage and then export to ports west (China, etc.). He says he's heard very little objection to this proposal from Lasquetians. He speaks for us at the Powell River Regional District, and they are the district that are seemingly complicit with this passage of US climate changing product through Canadian waters - off our beautiful little island - for money making and climate changing impacts. Maybe we don't see the coal stored there now (from Campbell River) and maybe a few more jobs will be created by this 20 times increase of the transportation and storage of climate changing black energy and dust in our waters - which in the long term, threatens the very lives of our children. Please email or call Merrick - and check out these efforts to stop this.

It seems the Vancouver Port Authority (a non-elected, appointed board) has complete control over this decision. Please voice your concerns - to Merrick and to the Port.

Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 5:27:06 PM
 Subject: Port Authority: have your say at the AGM + Board run update

    
 Hello all,
 
 I want to let you know about an opportunity to voice your concerns directly to the Port Authority's Board of Directors at their annual general meeting next Tuesday.  I also want to provide you with a long overdue update on that video we created awhile back.
 
 Port Authority Annual General Meeting -- have your say, speak directly to the Board of Directors!
This is a rare opportunity to speak directly to Port Authority decision makers in a public setting.  Tuesday June 4th, 3 pm, at the Vancouver Convention Centre -- West,  Room 223, 1055 Canada Place.
 
 From the Port Authority invitation: "We welcome ... all interested in learning more about the Port, our mandate, and how we are creating a sustainable future through dialogue and collaboration." (emphasis added) An assertion worthy of debate!
 
 There will be a Question and Answer session at the meeting, and a chance to speak one on one with Directors.  Since we began challenging them last fall, the Port Authority has repeatedly declined to participate in public events, and the Board has failed to respond to community concerns.  The AGM will be a perfect venue in which to engage the Port in a dialogue on transparency, accountability and responsibility.
 
 Can't make it to the meeting?
 
 The Port Authority invites you to provide comments on topics you think should be discussed at the AGM.  Follow this link to a survey tool to leave your comments <http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/KDVFPH8> .  More details on the meeting here <http://www.portmetrovancouver.com/en/about/news/13-05-01/Notice_of_Annual_General_Meeting.aspx> .
 
 In other matters...

 A lot has been happening over the past 2 months... including municipal and regional votes opposing coal export expansion, cancellation of plans for coal ports on the US west coast due largely to coal dust impacts, and confirmation that we have surpassed 400 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere.   We're keeping up the running battle on this large local issue just as the need for global action becomes clearer.
 
 There is no point in sending letters to the federal Minister in charge, Denis Lebel.  In a letter  sent recently <http://www.vtacc.org/content/pdf/Denis%20Lebel%20Letter001.pdf> , the Minister has indicated that he sees the Port Authority as completely autonomous and he is not willing to intervene in its decision making.  Although the minister has the power to appoint directors of his own choosing, it is clear that a direct appeal would go nowhere.  No point in wasting time there, so we just move on to more productive efforts.
 
 In any case, it's good to have received clarification from Minister Lebel, because it means that the buck stops with the Port Authority.  Ottawa has indicated that the Port is fully in charge of decisions that will have a huge impact on our future.  They need to respond to public concerns.  So far they haven't.   
 
 Despite seven months of intense community pressure, the Port of Metro Vancouver have still not participated in a single public  forum on coal exports <http://www.vancourier.com/Climate+kids+upset+over+cancelled+coal+forum/8445358/story.html> , not even one they originally proposed with highschool kids.  Nor has the board responded to letters or requests to meet with neighbours and concerned citizens.
 
 This wrong, and we need to keep pointing it out until they understand.  The AGM next week will be a good opportunity to reinforce that message.  We hope to see you there.
 
 Cheers
 the folks of VTACC

Hi all of you on Texada, Lasqueti, and Powell River,

Right now everything looks like the Port of Metro Vancouver is aiming to approve the Texada-Surrey Fraser Docks proposal very soon.  This is no surprise, as they were planning to do it back in January, but have been trying to change the appearance of the decision so that it does not look like a hasty decision rammed down the throats of local governments.  They are still scrambling to legitimize their actions and we are by no means done.  

Now, at the last minute, and instead of the Port Authority holding real public consultations, they have instructed the company that wants to build to coal port to hold two "open-houses."   Obviously, they are trying to distance themselves from this decision, just as the federal government is trying to distance themselves from the decision by handing authority to the Port of Metro Vancouver.  Political pass-the-buck-and-shrug at its most obvious!

Local governments are wise to this shell game, and are not buying it.

For  immediate release
 
 April  24 2013

 
 Voters  Taking Action on Climate Change also supports Mr Julian's call for full public hearings.  Coal export plans currently under consideration by the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority will make Metro Vancouver the largest exporter of coal in North America.   These plans, if approved, would increase the risk of runaway climate change and would expose regional residents to coal dust, diesel exhaust and increased train traffic.  It is only reasonable that regional residents have a say in decisions with such significant regional and global implications.

Letter to Doctors and residents:

Why this issue matters
Approval of coal export proposals would result in at least three more coal trains per day through Metro Vancouver communities, in addition to the six or more which already cross through our region.  Several barges every day will go down the Fraser River and up the Strait to Texada Island.
 
 As the open letter describes, Port Metro Vancouver can approve developments on lands under their control which then generate impacts -- such as increased coal train traffic -- in areas far beyond their jurisdiction. However, there is no external public agency with the power to properly consider and regulate those impacts.  In other words, increased coal exports will mean increased coal train traffic, and no agency has responsibility to manage the cumulative health risks generated by that traffic.  This is wrong.
 
 Some quick research yesterday showed that there are more than 30 elementary and secondary schools within 1 km of the BNSF rail corridor, which would see two additional coal trains per day if one of the export proposals was approved.  I've yet to examine the rail corridor leading to the second proposal, but I would expect similar results.
 
 Given that peer  reviewed research <http://www.coaltrainfacts.org/whatcom-docs-position-statement-and-appendices>  shows an association between coal dust and diesel exhaust from trains and a range of health concerns, it seems only reasonable that the region be allowed to evaluate these potential risks before the export plans are approved.
 
 These coal export proposals are only the first of many, and it is important that we get the review process right at the start.
 
 Full background on the coal export proposals, including an archive of recent media coverage, can be found here. <http://vtacc.org/vtacc_template.php?content=export_campaign>   See also the open  letter <http://vtacc.org/vtacc_template.php?content=open_letter#Open_Letter>  to the Port Authority from nearly 200 people, including James Hansen, Bill McKibben, Naomi Klein, David Suzuki and a number of ENGO's, faith leaders, academics and concerned citizens, which calls for a delay in decision making until the the potential harm to the climate from these proposals has been given due consideration through a full public review process.   Finally, see also the letter  from the Mayor of Vancouver <http://vtacc.org/vtacc_template.php?content=Media_Release_Dec_5_2012>  calling on the Port Authority to delay a decision until the public has been properly consulted.  
 
 With a strong list of signatories to the health leader's open letter, I think we can persuade the Port Authority to give these proposals a more thorough evaluation.
 
 If you know of any colleagues who may also be interested in signing on, please feel free to have them contact me at this address with their proper title.
 
 Thank you for giving this your consideration.  I hope you can join us in this initiative.

 
 --30--
 For  more information:
 Kevin  Washbrook
 Director,  Voters Taking Action on Climate Change
 
 Letter  from Peter Julian to Minister Lebel on Fraser Surrey Docks coal export proposal <http://www.vtacc.org/content/pdf/Letter%20to%20Minister%20Lebel%20re.%20Port%20Metro%20Vancouver-Fraser%20Surrey%20Docks.April-19-2013.pdf>
 Letter  from Peter Julian to the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority on Fraser Surrey Docks <http://www.vtacc.org/content/pdf/Letter%20to%20Port%20Metro%20Vancouver%20re.%20Fraser%20Surrey%20Docks.April-19-2013.pdf>
 
 Letter  from Peter Julian to Minister Lebel on Neptune Terminals coal export proposal <http://www.vtacc.org/content/pdf/Letter%20to%20Minister%20Lebel%20re.%20Port%20Metro%20Vancouver-Neptune%20coal%20terminal.April-17-2013.pdf>
 Letter  from Peter Julian to Vancouver Fraser Port Authority on Neptune Terminals <http://www.vtacc.org/content/pdf/Letter%20to%20Port%20Metro%20Vancouver%20re.%20Neptune%20coal%20terminal.April-17-2013.pdf>
 
 Letter  from Fin Donnelly to Quayside Community Board in support of No Coal Export Rally <http://www.vtacc.org/content/pdf/QUAYSIDE%20COMMUNITY%20BOARD_Say%20No%20Coal%20Rally%20Greetings.pdf> 

Climate change not our problem: Port Authority approves Neptune coal export expansion
-- shrugs off calls for broader consultation on climate, health impacts from climate scientists, mayors, Lung Association and others
 
 For immediate release
 
 January 24 2013
 
 Vancouver --
 
 The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority announced yesterday that it has approved plans for coal export expansion at Neptune Terminals in North Vancouver.   In doing so it ignored appeals from the public, climate scientists, regional mayors, the BC Lung Association and leading NGO's(1) to delay a decision until the broad public had been thoroughly consulted on the climate and potential health impacts of this proposal.
 
 Approval means that coal exports from this facility will expand by as much as 13 million tonnes per year over 2011 levels.(2) At full output, Neptune Terminals could see 4 to 5 loaded coal trains arriving each day (up to 10 train trips per day total), based on current coal train capacities.(3)
 
 The Port Authority has rejected arguments about climate change, potential health impacts, and broad public consultation in making its decision.  We address each of these points in turn below.
 
 Climate Change
Climate change is a real and urgent threat to our children's future.  The greenhouse gas emissions that will result from the burning of BC's coal exports will hurt all global citizens, including British Columbians.  The International Energy Agency reported  last year <http://www.iea.org/publications/scenariosandprojections/>  that  if we continue to blindly service increasing demand for fossil fuels, by 2050 the world will be locked into a devastating 6 degree increase in temperature.  
 
 Taking steps to avoid this outcome cannot be reconciled with increasing exports of coal, the dirtiest of all fossil fuels.  "Business as usual" is no longer an option.  We must all take responsibility to reduce emissions.  The Port Authority does not get a free pass on this issue by choosing to narrowly interpret its federal mandate as the demand-driven facilitation of trade.
 
 Coal exports from Metro Vancouver have increased considerably in recent years, and if the Neptune Terminals and Fraser Surrey Docks coal export proposals are both approved Metro Vancouver will be the biggest coal exporter in North America.  Total emissions from this exported coal would be greater than those from the Northern Gateway pipeline.  The public should not think that these will be the last proposals to increase coal exports out of our region.(4)
 
 The Port Authority and its tenant, Neptune Terminals, have not explicitly acknowledged that metallurgical coal exported from Neptune Terminals, when used in steel making, produces as much global warming pollution as thermal coal used in power production.  By ignoring the harm that these exports will do to our fragile climate, Neptune Terminals and the Port Authority do a disservice to the public.
 
 Regional impacts from increased coal train traffic
The Port Authority has not acknowledged that developments on its own lands have impacts in communities far outside its jurisdiction.  It has not addressed the fact that the Neptune Terminals expansion will result in increased train traffic through North Vancouver, Burnaby, New Westminster, Surrey, Langley and other municipalities further afield, resulting in increased exposure to diesel emissions and unknown amounts of coal dust.  
 
 The Port Authority indicates that Transport Canada has the power to regulate rail traffic, but it does not clarify that there are no regulations governing the release of coal dust from trains in Canada, and that any measures to control coal dust escapes are entirely voluntary on the part of railways.  The Port Authority has  ignored a call <http://vtacc.org/vtacc_template.php?content=Media_release_Dec_17_2012>  from  the BC Lung Association, the Public Health Association of BC, Canadian Physicians for the  Environment and individual health leaders to delay these decisions until unanswered questions about potential health impacts have been properly assessed.  If the Port Authority truly aspires to be a good neighbour to Metro Vancouver communities, it would work to close these gaps in public oversight prior to approval of coal export expansion.
 
 Port Authority decision making and consultation processes
We remind the Port Authority that their federal  mandate <http://www.appointments.gc.ca/prflOrg.asp?OrgID=VFPA&amp;lang=eng>  includes  a requirement that they act with broad public support in the best interests of Canadians.   The Port Authority has ignored calls  from the Mayors of Vancouver and New Westminster <http://vtacc.org/vtacc_template.php?content=Media_Release_Dec_5_2012>  for broader public consultation on these decisions.  They have ignored similar calls from leading public organizations and high profile individuals.  Again, these actions call into question the Port Authority's aspirations to be a good neighbour to Metro Vancouver communities.
 
 In keeping with the Port Authority's stated commitment to transparency, we call on the Port Authority to make public all comments received during their consultation over the Neptune Terminals decision, as was done during the scoping phase of the review of the proposed Cherry Point coal terminal in Washington State.   
 
 More broadly, the conduct of the Port Authority during this review process calls into question how well it reflects the interests of the region within which it operates.  Seven of eleven seats on the Port’s Board of Directors are nominated  by port users <http://www.appointments.gc.ca/prflOrg.asp?OrgID=VFPA&amp;lang=eng> .  Only one seat is nominated by regional communities.  There are no board members representing health concerns.  There are no board members representing environmental concerns. Voters Taking Action on Climate Change (VTACC) calls on the federal government to change the make up of the Port Authority board to better reflect the priorities of our region in Port decision making.
 
 "The Port doesn't lack the authority to consider climate change or broad health concerns in its decisions, it lacks the courage to do so," said Kevin Washbrook, Director with VTACC.  "We think the Port Authority shrugs off any responsibility for these issues because its board doesn't reflect who we are as a region, our shared concern for a healthy future and our sense of a moral obligation to take action on climate change," Washbrook said.   
 
 VTACC calls on the Port Authority to reconsider this decision, to open it to full public review, and to more broadly interpret their mandate to incorporate shared responsibility for our future.  This is the transparent, fair and morally responsible thing to do.  
 
 "It is hypocritical to celebrate Vancouver as a Green City and British Columbia as a climate leader, while we continue to prosper from the export of coal and oil," said VTACC Director, Kathryn Harrison “With each approval of new infrastructure for coal exports, the Port Authority further locks us into an economic path dependent on  fossil fuels. They are sacrificing our children's future for short-term gain.”
 
 
 --30--
 
 (1) Read the open letter from climate leaders here <http://vtacc.org/vtacc_template.php?content=open_letter> . Signatories included Bill McKibben, James Hansen, David Suzuki, Andrew Weaver, Mark Jaccard, Naomi Klein, Tzeporah Berman, William Rees, Greenpeace Canada, the Council of Canadians, the Islands Trust Council and a host of other individuals and organizations.
 
 (2) Starting with the Port  Authority's overall figures <http://www.portmetrovancouver.com/Libraries/ABOUT_Facts_Stats/PMV_2011_Stats_Overview.sflb.ashx>  for coal exports in 2011 (32.7 million tonnes in 2011) and subtracting Westshore's self published figures <http://www.westshore.com/>  (27.3  million tonnes) leaves approximately 5.2 million tonnes for Neptune in 2011. (Minor amounts of coal may have been shipped from other locations.)  The proposals just approved will increase Neptune Terminals capacity to 18.5 million tonnes/yr.  
 
 (3) A rough estimate of the relationship between daily train traffic and annual export volumes can be derived from the Fraser Surrey Docks proposal. This indicates that 4 million tonnes/yr export results in 1 coal train per day <http://www.fsd.bc.ca/company/community.htm#details>  (scroll  down to point 8).  Other sources confirm these numbers, assuming standard rail car volumes and 126 car trains.   Applied to Neptune, this means that in 2011, with exports of approximately 5.2 million tonnes, there was likely 1 coal train per day to the terminal, and perhaps 2 on some days -- or 2 to 4 one way trips in loaded and out empty.
 
 Using the same calculations, exports of 18.5 million tonnes per year would mean 4 to 5 coal deliveries per day, and 8 to 10 total train trips (in loaded, out empty).  Neptune indicates that it may begin using trains that are 152 cars in length.  If that is the case it would decrease the total number of daily trips, assuming the rail cars were the same volume.  
 
 It's worth noting that longer trains will also increase delays at rail crossings; a 152 car train is approximately 2.6 km in length
 
 
 (4) Fraser Surrey Docks has  indicated <http://www.ajot.com/article_SpecialFeatures.asp?ArticleId=15798>  that  it is seeking out other coal export customers in addition to BNSF.  If theproposed  Gateway Pacific Terminal <http://www.kuow.org/post/strong-opposition-seattle-gateway-pacific-terminal>  near Bellingham Washington (projected to generate 18 return coal train trips per day) is not approved, there will be increased pressure to export US coal through BC.  Westshore Terminals general manager Denis Horgan has stated that currently proposed capacity increases will not be enough to meet expected demand:
 
 “Between us, Neptune and Ridley right now, let’s say we’re close to 50 million tons capacity. All of us combined. With all of these projects going on in a couple years time we’ll be at 70 million. But even then it still isn’t enough,” said Denis Horgan, vice president and general manager, Westshore Terminal."
 
 Source: http://www.coalage.com/index.php/features/1808-while-canadian-terminals-expand-export-capacities-many-us-producers-are-still-going-to-be-short-of-space.html