Wants report to reject terminal plan


I was shocked and appalled by a recent letter writer's over-zealously singing the praises of the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal. I believe this project, adamantly pushed by SSA Marine, Peabody Coal, and Goldman Sachs, should be fully rejected upon the upcoming release of the environmental impact report for the following reasons:

This coal terminal, said to be the largest in North America if built, would export as much as 48 million tons of coal through the Salish Sea and through the San Juan Island Archipelago, declared protected by President Obama as a National Monument;

I believe it irretrievably threatens our marine life, including herring, salmon, and orca populations, listed as endangered and federally protected;

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee has officially made an executive order on addressing the grim reality of climate change, and has set forth a legislative task force addressing and implementing the use of green energy over costly, unhealthy, and outdated fossil fuels such as coal;

The proposed exponential increase in coal and oil trains I believe would jeopardize efficiency of emergency response and medical teams left waiting at blocked railroad tracks, putting lives at risk; and

Derailments, heaven forbid, would be severely damaging and costly, and the bill would most likely go to the taxpayers.

The final report should be a resounding no to Gateway Pacific Terminal.

Wendy Bartlett


Bellingham Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service