Western Railroad Discussion > Richmond, CA: Coal's Final Hurrah?

The Richmond Pacific has not had much in the way of coal traffic in 2026 as far as I can tell. For a stretch beginning in 2025 into 2026 there was a large number of the gold open coal hoppers stored on the waterside drill but the drill has been basically empty for the last few months. Recall that 2026 is the last year that the Levin Terminal will be handling coal. Levin came to an agreement with the City of Richmond to that effect a few years ago. 

Last Friday I came across the outyard job at Stege after putting a cut of coal empties on the waterside drill. Earlier I had seen some loaded cars on the storage tracks adjacent to Wright Way. 

I wonder why there hasn't been much in the way of coal traffic out of Richmond this year and whether we'll see sustained activity through the summer. 

I use the term coal here but could the material be petcoke? 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/08/26 16:12 by phthithu.

---

---

---

phthithu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I wonder why there hasn't been much in the way of
> coal traffic out of Richmond this year and whether
> we'll see sustained activity through the
> summer. 

Only coal exports I know of are via Metro Ports at the Port of Long Beach. Metro Ports (California) has the largest dry bulk import/export terminal on the US west coast.

Wonder if Port of Stockton gave up on coal exports too? Maybe Soda Ash is all they see in their future.

Keith_Kevet

Posted from Android

i did see a eb empty coal train the other day on the truckee cam, and someone a few days earler had said something about the return of coal trains on the feather river and donner but when i asked richmond or storckton i got no answer 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/08/26 17:16 by traindave.

phthithu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I use the term coal here but could the material be
> petcoke? 

This is a guess based on watching the Permanente Local in Cupertino take petroleum coke up to the cement plant... Pet coke is supposed to be much denser and heavier, so I have not seen that filled to or above the brim on these types of hoppers. So my guess is that you saw coal.

Keith_Kevet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> phthithu Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > I wonder why there hasn't been much in the way
> of
> > coal traffic out of Richmond this year and
> whether
> > we'll see sustained activity through the
> > summer. 
>
> Only coal exports I know of are via Metro Ports at
> the Port of Long Beach. Metro Ports (California)
> has the largest dry bulk import/export terminal on
> the US west coast.
>
> Wonder if Port of Stockton gave up on coal exports
> too? Maybe Soda Ash is all they see in their
> future.
>
> Keith_Kevet
>
> Posted from Android

I don't know if we're talking about just coal going to California for export here, but if we're talking about the West Coast, BNSF still runs multiple unit coal trains a day from Montana/Wyoming coal fields to Roberts Bank BC Canada for export.

Why is there a CALIFORNIA car on the head end of that San Joaquin train???  Do the new cab cars from Siemens not work??

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why is there a CALIFORNIA car on the head end of
> that San Joaquin train???  Do the new cab cars
> from Siemens not work??

They have not been cleared to lead by BNSF, a fix is supposed to be in the works so they're using the California Cab Cars as a temp work around.
 

Duncan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Keith_Kevet Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > phthithu Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > I wonder why there hasn't been much in the
> way
> > of
> > > coal traffic out of Richmond this year and
> > whether
> > > we'll see sustained activity through the
> > > summer. 
> >
> > Only coal exports I know of are via Metro Ports
> at
> > the Port of Long Beach. Metro Ports
> (California)
> > has the largest dry bulk import/export terminal
> on
> > the US west coast.
> >
> > Wonder if Port of Stockton gave up on coal
> exports
> > too? Maybe Soda Ash is all they see in their
> > future.
> >
> > Keith_Kevet
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> I don't know if we're talking about just coal
> going to California for export here, but if we're
> talking about the West Coast, BNSF still runs
> multiple unit coal trains a day from
> Montana/Wyoming coal fields to Roberts Bank BC
> Canada for export.

The subject was coal going through the Port of Richmond, CA.

I have read that the push is still on to build a new coal export facility at the Port of Oakland--they have the space, and they've already built the new, large receiving yard.

Here's a good article on the current status of the Oakland coal export facility. While I'm not sure of the mechanics, Trump made a large chunk of funding available for the project in June. Now there's a bill in the State Assembly that would require environmental review for these types of projects. A member of the House is also trying to prevent the funding from being made avaialbnle to the project. 

I wonder if the coal project had its own environmental review at some point or perhaps it somehow falls under the environmental review for the Oakland Army Base redevelopment. 

Good article from last month here with a good picture of the builk loading facility in Richmond that Genset fans will appreciate: https://www.kqed.org/news/12087600/lawmakers-push-back-against-trump-coal-terminal-plans-in-west-oakland

phthithu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here's a good article on the current status of the
> Oakland coal export facility. While I'm not sure
> of the mechanics, Trump made a large chunk of
> funding available for the project in June. Now
> there's a bill in the State Assembly that would
> require environmental review for these types of
> projects. A member of the House is also trying to
> prevent the funding from being made avaialbnle to
> the project. 
>
> I wonder if the coal project had its own
> environmental review at some point or perhaps it
> somehow falls under the environmental review for
> the Oakland Army Base redevelopment. 
>
> Good article from last month here with a good
> picture of the builk loading facility in Richmond
> that Genset fans will
> appreciate: https://www.kqed.org/news/12087600/la
> wmakers-push-back-against-trump-coal-terminal-plan
> s-in-west-oakland

That proposed Port of Oakland bulk materials project has been environmentally reviewed to death. It has all the needed permits now; the Trump administration would not have tossed money that way if all the permits were not in place. Oakland, stupidly, spent 10 years fighting it, lost, and is now on the hook for millions of dollars of legal fees, ect. An internet search will provide plenty of info on the subject.

The Port of Oakland and the city itself can't seem to get out of their own way....................


Keith_Kevet

Posted from Android



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/09/26 09:32 by Keith_Kevet.

Port of Richmond on the local news today related to the Crockett Sugar plant and offloading raw material at the Port of Richmond. Interesting overhead views with various ladings visible.

Be aware of the Strike and Protest content.

C&H offloads sugar at industrial terminal in East Bay due to strike, sparking health concerns

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7aLZc-iHDI



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/09/26 10:19 by TCnR.

I can't blame the voters of Oakland, especially West Oakland near the Port, for being against this. Why wouldn't residents oppose projects that bring little economic value to residents but harm air quality and public health, while primarily enriching a local land developer and mine owners in Utah? (At least Phil Tagami is a long time Oakland resident, though I don't know if he still lives there.) How many permanent jobs would be created for this project? Having biked around much of that area, it is an industrial wasteland that needs redevelopment, but I can empathize with residents being against certain types of redevelopment. 

Keith_Kevet Wrote:
> The Port of Oakland and the city itself can't seem
> to get out of their own way....................
 

broken_link Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can't blame the voters of Oakland, especially
> West Oakland near the Port, for being against
> this. Why wouldn't residents oppose projects that
> bring little economic value to residents but harm
> air quality and public health, while primarily
> enriching a local land developer and mine owners
> in Utah? (At least Phil Tagami is a long time
> Oakland resident, though I don't know if he still
> lives there.) How many permanent jobs would be
> created for this project? Having biked around
> much of that area, it is an industrial wasteland
> that needs redevelopment, but I can empathize with
> residents being against certain types of
> redevelopment. 

The problem is those residents will oppose ANY big project there, which is ridiculous. It's a huge reason the soda ash terminal is being built at the Port of Stockton. It would have been perfect for the Port of Richmond or Oakland. But no.

I have lost empathy for people who reject any kind of job growth in Oakland or at the Port just because the wind blows the wrong way. They are cutting their own throats using excuses like "health concerns". It's just more anti everything. And, no, there IS economic value. If something goes there they have to pay taxes, right?

Keith_Kevet

Posted from Android



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/26 16:50 by Keith_Kevet.

TCnR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Port of Richmond on the local news today related
> to the Crockett Sugar plant and offloading raw
> material at the Port of Richmond. Interesting
> overhead views with various ladings visible.
>
> Be aware of the Strike and Protest content.
>
> C&H offloads sugar at industrial terminal in East
> Bay due to strike, sparking health concerns.

Health concerns?!?!?

Again, there's always an excuse or concern with these east bay residents. This one is particularly laughable.

Keith_Kevet

Posted from Android

Keith_Kevet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TCnR Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Port of Richmond on the local news today
> related
> > to the Crockett Sugar plant and offloading raw
> > material at the Port of Richmond. Interesting
> > overhead views with various ladings visible.
> >
> > Be aware of the Strike and Protest content.
> >
> > C&H offloads sugar at industrial terminal in
> East
> > Bay due to strike, sparking health concerns.
>
> Health concerns?!?!?
>
> Again, there's always an excuse or concern with
> these east bay residents. This one is
> particularly laughable.
>
> Keith_Kevet
>
> Posted from Android

I believe the concern is that bulk sugar is being moved in equipment that is not normally used to handle food grade products.

Keith_Kevet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TCnR Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Port of Richmond on the local news today
> related
> > to the Crockett Sugar plant and offloading raw
> > material at the Port of Richmond. Interesting
> > overhead views with various ladings visible.
> >
> > Be aware of the Strike and Protest content.
> >
> > C&H offloads sugar at industrial terminal in
> East
> > Bay due to strike, sparking health concerns.
>
> Health concerns?!?!?
>
> Again, there's always an excuse or concern with
> these east bay residents. This one is
> particularly laughable.
>
> Keith_Kevet
>
> Posted from Android

The health concerns are legitimate. It should be looked into to verify that cane dumped on the ground and coated with coal dust will not effect the soon to be refined product.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I believe the concern is that bulk sugar is being
> moved in equipment that is not normally used to
> handle food grade products.

First, find out what you are talking about. This is "RAW" sugar from cane and still must go through further processing and refining. At the point that it is at right now, it is not yet food grade. 

It is very common to unload bulk RAW cane sugar from a ship onto the ground and then move it into a processing facility for final refining and packaging.

portlander Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The health concerns are legitimate. It should be
> looked into to verify that cane dumped on the
> ground and coated with coal dust will not effect
> the soon to be refined product.

The health concerns are not legitimate, because the RAW cane sugar must go through further processing and refining before it is considered food grade.

portlander Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Keith_Kevet Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > TCnR Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Port of Richmond on the local news today
> > related
> > > to the Crockett Sugar plant and offloading
> raw
> > > material at the Port of Richmond. Interesting
> > > overhead views with various ladings visible.
> > >
> > > Be aware of the Strike and Protest content.
> > >
> > > C&H offloads sugar at industrial terminal in
> > East
> > > Bay due to strike, sparking health concerns.
> >
> > Health concerns?!?!?
> >
> > Again, there's always an excuse or concern with
> > these east bay residents. This one is
> > particularly laughable.
> >
> > Keith_Kevet
> >
> > Posted from Android
>
> The health concerns are legitimate. It should be
> looked into to verify that cane dumped on the
> ground and coated with coal dust will not effect
> the soon to be refined product.

Oh please. Do you think the Port of Richmond would just "wing it" and not have a proper unloading and handling plan to meet C&H's specifications?? And if they don't then subject themselves to litigation?? Really? You think they're that dumb?

If you have some sort of proof the sugar has been dumped on the ground to mix with coal dust then have you called someone at C&H to report it? Or are you just too busy thinking about "what if's" and have no proof?

Keith_Kevet

We don't need to get too into this coal sugar thing although it's an interesting controversy. There's a drone video at the link above that shows the pile of sugar and the pile of coal. 

I haven't investigated the coal dust health issues.