Tag Archives: coast

Canadian Review Panel Approves Plans for an Oil Pipeline

If built, the pipeline and port project will move oil from Alberta’s oil sands to tankers on Canada’s Pacific Coast. Link:   Canadian Review Panel Approves Plans for an Oil Pipeline ; ;Related ArticlesApplying Creativity to a Byproduct of Oil DrillingApplying Creativity to a Byproduct of Oil Drilling in North DakotaSurge Seen in U.S. Oil Output, Lowering Gasoline Prices ;

Continue reading:

Canadian Review Panel Approves Plans for an Oil Pipeline

Posted in alo, Anker, Annies, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, Monterey, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Canadian Review Panel Approves Plans for an Oil Pipeline

The southern half of Keystone XL is now filling up with oil

The southern half of Keystone XL is now filling up with oil

Elizabeth Brossa

TransCanada had a nice little party last weekend.

The company has been battling for years to win the State Department’s blessing to build the Keystone XL pipeline over the Canadian border to help export tar-sands oil to American refineries. Meanwhile, it has been building the southern leg of that same pipeline from Oklahoma to Texas.

On Saturday, the company started filling that southern leg with the sticky, polluting, climate-changing fuel that it will carry cross-country to the Texan refineries — crude oil.

The achievement, which followed a problemplagued and deeply unpopular construction effort, was so momentous for the company that it noted the very minute of the event in its press materials: 10:04 a.m. Central Time.

From Fuel Fix:

The pipeline owner will need to fill the newly constructed line before it can begin delivering oil to refineries along the Gulf Coast, including those in Houston. TransCanada plans to fill the new pipeline system with about 3 million barrels of oil in the coming weeks, the company said. …

Although TransCanada is still waiting for approval to construct the northern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would connect with oil sands fields in Canada, the company has completed the $2.3 billion southern leg.

The line will be capable of bringing up to 700,000 barrels per day of oil to the Gulf Coast, providing more supplies of crude to refineries.

Still, it’ll be a few weeks before that oil actually gets to refineries. From Bloomberg:

The Calgary-based pipeline company estimates it will begin taking receipts and delivering oil in mid- to late January, a bulletin to shippers shows. …

“There are many moving parts to this process — completion of construction, testing, regulatory approvals, line fill and then the transition to operations,” [said a TransCanada spokesperson].

Let’s hope none of those moving parts include bits of the pipeline bursting out after a rupture. TransCanada already dug up and replaced many faulty sections of the pipeline, and anti-Keystone activists charge that the pipeline still contains numerous holes and flaws.


Source
Oil begins flowing through Keystone XL’s southern leg, Fuel Fix
TransCanada Keystone South Won’t Deliver Oil Before Mid-January, Bloomberg

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Visit site: 

The southern half of Keystone XL is now filling up with oil

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The southern half of Keystone XL is now filling up with oil

Frackers might soon be allowed to float their wastewater down rivers

Frackers might soon be allowed to float their wastewater down rivers

Shutterstock

We told you the other day that frackers are drawing millions of gallons of water from rivers and streams to pump into their wells. Now the U.S. Coast Guard wants that water returned to the rivers — floating on barges and laced with radioactive contamination.

Wastewater is a huge problem for the fracking industry. It’s produced when the water that frackers pump into the ground returns to the surface — contaminated with fracking chemicals and also with toxic substances that naturally linger deep beneath the soil. Some of the wastewater is pumped back into the ground, but that can trigger earthquakes. Some of the wastewater is treated like sewage and then poured back into rivers and streams, but that pollutes waterways with the hitherto-subterranean radiation.

The industry wants to be allowed to ship its wastewater away from frack sites to be dumped, stored, or recycled in far-off locations, even in other states. And the Coast Guard is giving the public a month to comment on its proposal to allow this precarious practice to begin. From PublicSource, a news outlet in the heavily fracked state of Pennsylvania:

The Coast Guard began studying the issue nearly two years ago at the request of its Pittsburgh office, which had inquiries from companies transporting Marcellus Shale wastewater.

If the policy is approved, companies can ship the wastewater in bulk on barges on the nation’s 12,000 miles of waterways, a much cheaper mode than trucks or rail. …

Under the policy, companies would first have to test the wastewater at a state-certified laboratory and provide the data to the Coast Guard for review. The tests would determine levels of radioactivity, pH, bromides and other hazardous materials. …

However, “the identity of proprietary chemicals may be withheld from public release,” the policy states.

The proposed regulations [PDF], which were published last week, would cap each load’s level of radioactivity:

The Coast Guard is concerned that, over time, sediment and deposits with radioisotopes may accumulate on the inside of the barge tank surface and may pose a health risk to personnel entering the tank. The Coast Guard’s concern with respect to radioisotopes is to ensure that radiation exposure duration and levels are both kept as low as reasonably achievable, within the meaning of Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations.

Environmentalists and scientists worry about the potential impacts if a barge sinks, runs aground, or tips over while laden with a stew of pollution. “If and when there’s a spill, that can’t be cleaned up,” said Benjamin Stout, a biology professor at Wheeling Jesuit University. “That means it’s going to be in the drinking-water supply of millions of people.”


Source
Proposed policy letter: Carriage of conditionally permitted shale gas extraction waste water in bulk, U.S. Coast Guard
U.S. Coast Guard publishes proposed policy on moving frack wastewater by barge, PublicSource

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Continued here: 

Frackers might soon be allowed to float their wastewater down rivers

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, organic, Stout, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Frackers might soon be allowed to float their wastewater down rivers

West Coast leaders team up on a new climate plan

West Coast leaders team up on a new climate plan

Shutterstock

The left coast just got more lefty. Leaders from California, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia gathered in San Francisco on Monday to sign a climate action plan [PDF].

But this is no Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative; that’s the legally binding carbon-trading program among nine Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states. Rather, the West Coast leaders agreed that their states and province would work together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but only in non-binding and somewhat vague terms that commit no actual funds. So specific outcomes from the agreement are about as clear as a summer morning in California’s polluted Central Valley

The deal grew out of the Pacific Coast Collaborative, a group formed in 2008 that counts the three states and one province as well as Alaska as its members. The collaborative describes the agreement in a press release [PDF]:

Through the Action Plan, the leaders agreed that all four jurisdictions will account for the costs of carbon pollution and that, where appropriate and feasible, link programs to create consistency and predictability across the region of 53 million people. The leaders also committed to adopting and maintaining low carbon fuel standards in each jurisdiction. …

California and British Columbia will maintain their existing carbon pricing programs along with their respective clean fuel standards, while Oregon and Washington have committed to moving forward on a suite of similar policies.

That last item will be an uphill climb, as the legislatures of Oregon and Washington have in the past rejected cap-and-trade plans, but the states’ current governors say they’re optimistic about prospects going forward.

Here’s more about the deal from the San Jose Mercury News:

Each state and the Canadian province promised to take roughly a dozen actions, including streamlining permits for solar and wind projects, better integrating the electric power grid, supporting more research on ocean acidification and expanding government purchases of electric vehicles. …

In a wider sense …, the agreement was a strong political statement. The three Western states and British Columbia have 53 million people and an annual GDP of $2.8 trillion — representing the fifth largest economy in the world.

Green groups praised the pact. “This agreement will show the world that the Pacific Coast states aren’t waiting for Congress or governments worldwide to tackle climate change,” said Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council.


Source
Climate change pact signed by California, Oregon, Washington and British Columbia, San Jose Mercury News
British Columbia, California, Oregon & Washington join forces to combat climate change, Pacific Coast Collaborative
West Coast states and BC to link climate policies, Associated Press

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Original article:

West Coast leaders team up on a new climate plan

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, Northeastern, ONA, PUR, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on West Coast leaders team up on a new climate plan

Yarr! Russia says Greenpeace protesters are pirates

Yarr! Russia says Greenpeace protesters are pirates

Denis Sinyakov / Greenpeace

Russian Coast Guard officers responded to Greenpeace with water cannons, guns and a mass arrest.

Greenpeace activists last week scaled the Prirazlomnaya platform, the first of many offshore Arctic oil platform planned in Russian waters. The protesters, perched high above the frigid waters, were forced down with water cannons. Armed officers boarded Greenpeace’s icebreaker, and arrested all 30 activists.

The demonstration was designed to bring international attention to Russia’s burgeoning plans to allow Big Oil to drill in its offshore waters (onshore drilling is already widespread). ExxonMobil and Statoil are among the companies planning to take part in the precarious deepwater plunder.

Obviously, the 30 activists are not pirates. Pirates are seafaring robbers. Yet that’s what some Russian law enforcement authorities are claiming, and that’s how the Greenpeace arrestees may be charged.

“Yarr, maties, we’ve come to loot your oil drill! Wait, whar’s the treasure?”

The environmentalists could be sentenced to as much as 15 years in prison and fined $15,000 apiece if found guilty of trumped-up piracy charges. From Reuters:

Environmental activists who protested at an offshore oil platform in the Russian Arctic last week will be prosecuted, possibly for piracy which is punishable by up to 15 years’ jail, Russian investigators said on Tuesday.

They said the “attack,” in which Greenpeace activists tried scaling the Gazprom-owned Prirazlomnaya platform, Russia’s first offshore Arctic oil platform, had violated Russian sovereignty.

“When a foreign ship full of electronic equipment intended for unknown purposes and a group of people, declaring themselves to be environmental activists, try to storm a drilling platform there are legitimate doubts about their intentions,” the investigators said in a statement.

Even President Vladimir Putin spoke out against the ludicrous notion that these people are pirates. ”It is absolutely evident that they are, of course, not pirates, but formally they were trying to seize this platform,” Putin said at an Arctic forum, according to a separate Reuters report. “It is evident that those people violated international law.”

And while we’re discussing harebrained Russian claims, one official said Greenpeace had endangered the area’s wildlife and its ecology, which “is being protected zealously” by Russia. Right.

Greenpeace, meanwhile, decried the authorities’ treatment of the protesters. From the BBC:

The environmental organisation said its protest against “dangerous Arctic oil drilling” was peaceful and in line with its “strong principles.”

“Our activists did nothing to warrant the reaction we’ve seen from the Russian authorities,” it said.

The multinational makeup of the protesters is helping deliver a storm of worldwide press coverage. The protesters are from 18 countries, including the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia, and Russia. Consular officials have interviewed some of those who were arrested.

Putin’s Russia is not the best place to be jailed for protest. While the Greenpeace drama unfolded, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova, one of the Pussy Riot members who was sentenced to two years in Russian jail for singing a song that asked the Virgin Mary to throw Putin out of power, has been moved to solitary confinement as punishment for a hunger strike. Tolokonnikova was protesting “slave labor” and the treatment of “women like cattle” in jail.

We’ll see whether pseudo-piracy provokes similarly disproportionate treatment.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Continue reading:

Yarr! Russia says Greenpeace protesters are pirates

Posted in alo, ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yarr! Russia says Greenpeace protesters are pirates

Deepwater Horizon blamed for still more oil spills

Deepwater Horizon blamed for still more oil spills

David Valentine, UC Santa BarbaraAnalysis of oil-sheen samples revealed that the Deepwater Horizon rig was the source.

More than three years after the Deepwater Horizon exploded, triggering the worst oil spill in American history, the sunken wreckage of the rig may still be leaking oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

Beginning in the fall of last year and continuing through the winter, mysterious oil sheens were spotted in the vicinity of the rig wreckage.

A team of researchers set about trying to figure out exactly where the oil was coming from by studying its chemical composition. They matched the slicks to samples taken from Deepwater Horizon debris. They also tracked the trajectories of the oil sheens as they spread across the Gulf, tracing them back to the wreckage.

Now they have concluded that pockets of oil trapped in the wreckage bubbled to the surface, triggering the oil sheens that were spotted in recent months.

The fact that the sunken rig has been leaking is bad news, but the scientists ruled out BP’s capped Macondo well as the source of the leaks, which is good news. “[T]he likely source is oil in tanks and pits on the [Deepwater Horizon] wreckage, representing a finite oil volume for leakage,” they reported in a new paper published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. From a press release by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution:

The oil sheens were first reported to the United States Coast Guard by BP in mid-September 2012, raising public concern that the Macondo well, which was capped in July 2010, might be leaking.

“It was important to determine where the oil was coming from because of the environmental and legal concerns around these sheens. First, the public needed to be certain the leak was not coming from the Macondo well, but beyond that we needed to know the source of these sheens and how much oil is supplying them so we could define the magnitude of the problem,” said WHOI chemist Chris Reddy.

Is the rig’s ghoulish carcass still leaking oil to this day? That’s hard to say. “There are a few small lines [of oil] in the vicinity,” said Bonny Schumaker of On Wings of Care, a nonprofit that monitors Gulf oil spills from light aircraft. “They look just like other natural seeps in the Gulf.”

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

From:

Deepwater Horizon blamed for still more oil spills

Posted in Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Deepwater Horizon blamed for still more oil spills

Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

Shutterstock

Going up, up, up …

If the Keystone XL pipeline is built, Americans could pay as much as 40 cents more per gallon for gasoline in some parts of the country, according to a new report by the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog [PDF].

That’s because oil extracted in Canada would start to bypass traditional American markets, traveling through the pipeline to the Gulf Coast and onto tanker ships bound for international markets where oil fetches higher prices.

“The pipeline is being built through America, but not for Americans,” Consumer Watchdog researcher Judy Dugan said in a statement. “Keystone XL is not an economic benefit to Americans who will see higher gas prices and bear all the risks of the pipeline.” From the report:

The aim of tar sands producers with refining interests on the Gulf Coast — primarily multinational oil companies — is to get the oil to their Gulf refineries, which would process additional oil largely for fuel exports to hungry foreign markets. Other oil sands investors, including two major Chinese petrochemical companies and major European oil companies, have an interest in exporting crude oil and/or refined products to their markets. Such exports would drain off what the tar sands producers consider a current oversupply, and help push global oil prices higher. …

U.S. drivers would be forced to pay higher prices for tar sands oil, particularly in the Midwest. There, gasoline costs could rise by 20 cents to 40 cents per gallon or more, based on the $20 to $30 per barrel discount on Canadian crude oil that Keystone XL developers seek to erase. Such an increase, just in the Midwest, could cost the U.S. economy $3 billion to $4 billion a year in consumer income that would not be spent more productively elsewhere. The West Coast imports much smaller amounts of Canadian oil in a larger and more complicated market. Even so, a sharp price hike for Canadian oil could bump Pacific Coast gasoline prices by a few cents a gallon.

The report also connects a few corporate dots, showing who’s really intended to benefit from Keystone XL:

Consumer Watchdog

Click to embiggen.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Visit source – 

Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

Posted in alo, Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Sprout, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Keystone XL could hike gas prices as much as 40 cents a gallon

Here’s an easy way to protect coastal communities from rising seas and storms

Here’s an easy way to protect coastal communities from rising seas and storms

Shutterstock

Natural protection against rising seas, or development site in waiting?

Protecting nature is the best way of protecting ourselves from rising tides and storm surges, according to new research.

Sand dunes, wetlands, coral reefs, mangroves, oyster beds, and other shoreline habitats that ring America help to protect two-thirds of the coastlines of the continental U.S. from hurricanes and other such hazards.

Developers see these coastal areas and think — *ding* *ding* *ding* *ding* — opportunity. They want to replace shoreline habitats with waterfront homes, shipping channels, highways, and other delights of urbanism and commerce, along with hulking concrete structures designed to keep the rising seas at bay.

Or, another idea would be to leave nature intact and let it continue to shelter us.

The latter approach would, according to a study published in Nature Climate Change, be the superior option for protecting lives and property in most of the nation’s coastal areas.

Led by Stanford University’s Natural Capital Project, researchers mapped the intensity of hazards posed to communities living along America’s coastlines from rising seas and ferocious storms now and in the decades to come. They examined the hazards those communities would face in the year 2100 with and without the coastal habitats left intact. Here is what they found:

Habitat loss would double the extent of coastline highly exposed to storms and sea-level rise, making an additional 1.4 million people now living within 1 km of the coast vulnerable. The number of poor families, elderly people and total property value highly exposed to hazards would also double if protective habitats were lost.

The research team’s map shows areas where natural systems would be most effective for sheltering lives and properties. From ClimateWire:

The East Coast and Gulf Coast would feel the largest impacts from depleted ecosystems, because they have denser populations and are more vulnerable to sea-level rise and storm surge.

Florida would see the largest increase of people exposed to hazards by 2100 under one sea-level rise scenario highlighted by the researchers. If coastal habitats were preserved, about 500,000 Floridians would face intermediate and high risk from disasters, compared with almost 900,000 people if the habitats disappeared.

New York sees one of the biggest jumps as a percentage of people facing risk under the same scenario. With habitat, a little more than 200,000 people would face high risk, compared with roughly 550,000 people without habitat.

But what’s wrong with building seawalls, levees, and such? Couldn’t such infrastructure allow builders to develop the shorelines safely, keeping rising waters at bay? The paper explains some of the problems with that approach:

In the United States — where 23 of the nation’s 25 most densely populated counties are coastal — the combination of storms and rising seas is already putting valuable property and large numbers of people in harm’s way. The traditional approach to protecting towns and cities has been to ‘harden’ shorelines. Although engineered solutions are necessary and desirable in some contexts, they can be expensive to build and maintain, and construction may impair recreation, enhance erosion, degrade water quality and reduce the production of fisheries.

So let’s maybe thank nature for protecting us by leaving it intact, yeah?

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Cities

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Source: 

Here’s an easy way to protect coastal communities from rising seas and storms

Posted in alo, Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Here’s an easy way to protect coastal communities from rising seas and storms

Oil spill stretches 10 miles down a river in Mississippi

Oil spill stretches 10 miles down a river in Mississippi

The Wayne County News on

Youtube

See those dark globs? They’re oil floating down the Chickasawhay River.

A 10-mile stretch of Mississippi’s Chickasawhay River was fouled by more than 200 barrels of oil after equipment at a drilling well malfunctioned.

The Wayne County News reported in an online video that cleanup efforts were complicated by the oil spill’s remote location. The U.S. EPA, Coast Guard, and state and local authorities have responded to the spill, the newspaper reported.

The spill was reported by Logan Oil on Thursday, and the emergency clean-up operations are expected to continue at least until the end of this week. From WHLT:

Joseph Dunlap of the Wayne County Emergency Management Agency says oil flowed roughly four miles down the Chickasawhay River, which is located about one mile from the oil field.

Mississippi Oil and Gas Board (MSOGB) field director Allen Floyd says the spill had been contained, and its environmental effects were expected to be “minimal.”

Floyd says the spill happened because of an equipment malfunction. It’s still under investigation.

“The spill has been contained. There have been small amounts of oil as far down as ten miles from where the oil entered the river,” says Floyd.

Though the Oil and Gas Board is trying to dismiss the spill as “minimal,” Angela Atchison, head of the Wayne County Emergency Management Agency, deemed it “significant.”

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: UncategorizedAlso in Grist
Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Follow this link:

Oil spill stretches 10 miles down a river in Mississippi

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oil spill stretches 10 miles down a river in Mississippi

Oil trains and terminals could be coming to the Northwest

Oil trains and terminals could be coming to the Northwest

Loco Steve

The Port of Vancouver, Wash., might get more oily.

Pacific Northwesterners worried by three planned new coal export hubs along their shorelines have something new to fear.

Oil refiner Tesoro and terminal operator Savage are trying to secure permits to build the region’s biggest crude oil shipping terminal at the Port of Vancouver, along the Washington state side of the Columbia River.

KPLU reports that the proposed terminal would receive crude by rail from oil fields in North Dakota and transfer it onto oceangoing tankers for delivery to refineries along the West Coast. And that’s just one of many plans to boost shipments of oil through the region to coastal ports. Environmentalists are not pleased, fearing oil spills among other problems.

From The Columbian:

The Port of Vancouver got an earful Thursday from backers and opponents of a proposed crude-oil transfer terminal who packed the Board of Commissioners’ hearing room to trumpet their arguments.

Executives with Tesoro Corp. and Savage Companies, who want to build the terminal to handle as much as 380,000 barrels of oil per day, told commissioners the project capitalizes on rising U.S. oil production, boosts the local economy and will operate in ways that minimize harm to the environment.

“A lot of family-wage jobs will be created,” said Kent Avery, a senior vice president for Savage.

Critics told commissioners the project, which would haul oil by rail and move it over water, conflicts with the port’s own sustainability goals, increases the risk of oil spills in the Columbia River and further fuels global warming.

“This is a really big gamble,” said Jim Eversaul, a Vancouver resident and retired U.S. Coast Guard chief engineer.

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) will have the final decision on the proposal. From the Columbian again:

Port managers are negotiating the terms of a lease agreement with Tesoro and Savage. Commissioners may decide a proposed lease arrangement on July 23.

Such a decision won’t end the matter, though. The state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council will scrutinize the proposed crude oil facility and make a recommendation to Gov. Jay Inslee, who has the final say.

The council’s review could take up to a year or more. The companies hope to launch an oil terminal at the port in 2014.

The Seattle-based nonprofit Sightline reports that 11 port terminals and refineries in Washington and Oregon “are planning, building, or already operating oil-by-rail shipments” and “if all of the projects were built and operated at full capacity, they would put an estimated 20 mile-long trains per day on the Northwest’s railway system.”

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Continued here:

Oil trains and terminals could be coming to the Northwest

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oil trains and terminals could be coming to the Northwest