More extensive study needed It is extremely disappointing that the Army Corps of Engineers is intending to do only a limited study of the impacts of coal terminals in Oregon and Washington [“Group asks for big picture in Northwest coal-ports decision,” News, May 25]. Thousands of people gave their input on this very subject last November…More
Topic: coal industry
You are viewing the most recent posts on this topic.
Keep the coal in the ground Roger McClellan expresses discomfort with the way activists are using anecdotal evidence of health impacts of coal dust to justify the coal-train protests. [“Let science, not conjecture, guide discussion of coal-train dangers,” Opinion, May 10.] As a climate scientist, I feel a similar sense of discomfort when I hear political activists…More
Governors show commendable leadership Reading the newspaper does not usually inspire spontaneous cheering, but reading “2 governors wade into coal-export controversy” [NWTuesday, March 26] did just that. As one of countless citizens concerned about climate change, I agree that greenhouse-gas pollution connected with coal export needs a comprehensive evaluation. Other kinds of pollution, from burning coal…More
Corporations benefit from developing countries The ironies concerning the coal-terminal proposal range from coal replacing ancestral Lummi burial grounds to it blowing back across the Pacific as instant karma [“ ‘Green’ strategists now back coal trains,” page one, Feb. 26]. This issue is parallel with the tobacco industry. American smoking continues to decline while corporate profits…More