Western Railroad Discussion > BIG Peabody PNW Coal News! Link

Link

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/peabody-energy-and-ssa-marine-enter-into-long-term-agreement-for-powder-river-basin-coal-exports-117106678.html

Thanks for posting the news -- I'll happily shoot another 8-10 trains/day on the Bellingham Sub once Cherry Point is operating at capacity. The fun question is, Where will BNSF put all this traffic? Before the economy tanked, the Scenic and Fallbridge Subs were running at capacity, and one can imagine that by the time this terminal is constructed and ready to accept shipments, intermodal traffic may have grown back to where it was a few years ago. In 2010 BNSF demonstrated that they could successfully run loaded grain trains over Stevens Pass with DPU helpers at mid-train and the rear, so maybe they'd do that for coal, too? Their late '90s investment in Stampede Pass may finally pay off, allowing them to squeeze all the empties out east that way. Combined with Saturday's WSDOT-BNSF-FRA-Amtrak agreement, the railroading scene out here could become VERY interesting.

-Dave
Issaquah, WA

Oh this is going to really pisses off those environmentalist that were worried about Longview!! All speculations were correct about this being for Peabody.. Time to start double tracking some railroad..

Double-track? I'm sure it won't be on the south side of the River......

In my opinion, the Cherry Point terminal has less chance of being permitted than the one at Longview, and look just how mired the Longview terminal is now in enviromental politics. Industry just can't build anything in the state of Washington anymore because of too broad enviromental laws and NIMBYism. The question of weather or not US coal should be burned in China should be answered in congress, not the permitting process!!! This is so screwed up, it's hard to see how it will ever be set straight!
BNSF better just go ahead and double track the Bellingham Sub, because all the coal is going to be exported through Canadian ports for the time being. Robert's Bank II anyone?

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR

Ted with the state in negotiations with Millennium and SSA been permitting for the Cherry Point terminal now for a few months I'm pretty sure both of these will get permitted and ok'ed. The thing that the environmentalist can hold on to is an environmental statement for another country. I doubt the state will pisses away this kind of revenue and jobs. Of course just my opinion, I do find it interesting that it starts out at 24mil, the Bellingham, Seattle, Fallbridge, Lakeside and Funnel subdivisions are going to need some upgrades..

Well looking at the troubles that the LNG terminal had, it'll be a long time before we see a coal terminal. The LNG terminal started the permitting process in 2005, and it's still mired in the process.

Ted Curphey
Ontario, OR



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/11 09:43 by funnelfan.

Teddy 2 Mr. Washy O

Industry just can't build anything in the state of Washington anymore because of too broad enviromental laws and NIMBYism.

Agree. They call Washington, Oregon and California the "left coast" for a reason.

funnelfan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well looking at the troubles that the LNG terminal
> had, it'll be a long time before we see a coal
> terminal. The LNG terminal started the permitting
> process in 2005, and it's still mired in the
> process.


Want LNG terminal are you talking?? The one out at Aberdeen that's been finished for 5 months and shipping for 4?? That one? Look, like I said the only straw the environmental idiots have to hang on to is if the state really makes them do an environmental impact statement in Asia. And that isn't going to happen..

Washy,

I think the one Ted is referring to is the one that was supposed to be at Tongue Point on the Columbia east of Astoria on the P&W Astoria line.


SP8100

washybryan Wrote:
>
> Want LNG terminal are you talking?? The one out at
> Aberdeen that's been finished for 5 months and
> shipping for 4?? That one? Look, like I said the
> only straw the environmental idiots have to hang
> on to is if the state really makes them do an
> environmental impact statement in Asia. And that
> isn't going to happen..

Proofreading is a good thing ;-)

Hard to say whether it will happen or not. "SEPA requires the consideration of direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of a project. This is true even if the impacts themselves occur outside of local jurisdictional boundaries. (see WAC 197-11-060(4)) Greenhouse gas emissions directly, indirectly, and cumulatively lead to changes in our global climate."

For more information, see: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/docs/sepa/faq.pdf

I don't work for Ecology, and don't work in climate change. I don't know the requirements of Washington's SEPA in terms of mitigation. California's version (CEQA) has some teeth when it comes to requiring mitigation of adverse effects, the federal statute (NEPA) is less strict. Depending on the requirements for mitigation, the issue of greenhouse gas emissions doesn't mean the project couldn't happen. But certainly, ignoring the requirements doesn't make them go away.

Referring to someone as an idiot simply because they hold a different view than you doesn't help your position. If you can't make your argument without resorting to name calling, it leads to the conclusion that your position has no rational basis.

Elizabeth

SP8100 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Washy,
>
> I think the one Ted is referring to is the one
> that was supposed to be at Tongue Point on the
> Columbia east of Astoria on the P&W Astoria line.
>
>
> SP8100


Oh, that's in Oregon, that's twice as bad as Washington..

Betsy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> washybryan Wrote:
> >
> > Want LNG terminal are you talking?? The one out
> at
> > Aberdeen that's been finished for 5 months and
> > shipping for 4?? That one? Look, like I said
> the
> > only straw the environmental idiots have to
> hang
> > on to is if the state really makes them do an
> > environmental impact statement in Asia. And
> that
> > isn't going to happen..
>
> Proofreading is a good thing ;-)
>
> Hard to say whether it will happen or not. "SEPA
> requires the consideration of direct, indirect and
> cumulative impacts of a project. This is true even
> if the impacts themselves occur outside of local
> jurisdictional boundaries. (see WAC 197-11-060(4))
> Greenhouse gas emissions directly, indirectly, and
> cumulatively lead to changes in our global
> climate."
>
> For more information, see:
> http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/docs/sepa/faq.
> pdf
>
> I don't work for Ecology, and don't work in
> climate change. I don't know the requirements of
> Washington's SEPA in terms of mitigation.
> California's version (CEQA) has some teeth when it
> comes to requiring mitigation of adverse effects,
> the federal statute (NEPA) is less strict.
> Depending on the requirements for mitigation, the
> issue of greenhouse gas emissions doesn't mean the
> project couldn't happen. But certainly, ignoring
> the requirements doesn't make them go away.
>
> Referring to someone as an idiot simply because
> they hold a different view than you doesn't help
> your position. If you can't make your argument
> without resorting to name calling, it leads to the
> conclusion that your position has no rational
> basis.
>
> Elizabeth


Elizabeth, this is going to be a shock to some, I do apologize for using the word idiot, it doesn't change the way I feel or look at the extreme environmental groups. Any group of people that think they're way is the only way and the hell with anyone else's livelihood or property I do find issues with.

washybryan Wrote:
> I do apologize for using the word idiot. ...

Why apologize for the truth? You can't reason with those people -- they're True Believers Of The Green Gospel.

I'll wager the coal terminal goes through. Money talks, modern liberalism squawks.

Idiot 6 Mr. Washy O

signalmaintainer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> washybryan Wrote:
> > I do apologize for using the word idiot. ...
>
> Why apologize for the truth? You can't reason with
> those people -- they're True Believers Of The
> Green Gospel.
>
> I'll wager the coal terminal goes through. Money
> talks, modern liberalism squawks.


Thanks Paul... Mike, your being a little one sided!!!

signalmaintainer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> washybryan Wrote:
> > I do apologize for using the word idiot. ...
>
> Why apologize for the truth? You can't reason with
> those people -- they're True Believers Of The
> Green Gospel.
>
> I'll wager the coal terminal goes through. Money
> talks, modern liberalism squawks.


I'll bet the "Green Gospelers" drive cars and have electricity in their homes possibly generated by coal-fired power plants.

SantaFeRuss

SantaFeRuss Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> signalmaintainer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > washybryan Wrote:
> > > I do apologize for using the word idiot. ...
> >
> > Why apologize for the truth? You can't reason
> with
> > those people -- they're True Believers Of The
> > Green Gospel.
> >
> > I'll wager the coal terminal goes through.
> Money
> > talks, modern liberalism squawks.
>
>
> I'll bet the "Green Gospelers" drive cars and have
> electricity in their homes possibly generated by
> coal-fired power plants.
>
> SantaFeRuss


Russ I'm betting your right, and I bet they live in a wood house and use toiletpaper!!