We appreciate the chance to respond to the union members' op-ed on coal exports (Coal is critical to B.C. economy, Opinion, The Record, Jan. 10) as it provides an opportunity to clear up misunderstandings circulated by the coal lobby.
As the members pointed out, they are responsible for mining and transporting B.C.'s metallurgical coal to markets overseas. The key word here is "metallurgical." We are opposed to Fraser Surrey Docks' proposal to export U.S. thermal coal. This may result in up to 25 jobs, but it threatens to bring serious risks to communities from White Rock all the way to Texada Island. The environmental impact assessment recently released by the Port Authority was in response to this U.S. thermal coal export proposal and not the B.C. metallurgical coal industry.
Curiously, the assessment states that "the project is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental, socio-economic, or health effects." It is hard to understand how that conclusion could be drawn when the assessment leaves out the impacts associated with transporting coal by rail through White Rock, Surrey and Delta, transfer from barges and onto ships at Texada Island, and shipment in ocean-going vessels through the Georgia and Juan de Fuca straits. In fact, numerous comments submitted by doctors and air quality experts to the port (and posted on RealPortHearings.org) were highly critical of the assessment, condemning it for significant deficiencies, incorrect assumptions and superficial analysis.
We are glad to hear that coal dust safety is a primary consideration for the unions, but they have missed our larger point. Coal dust is not the only issue of concern with the Fraser Surrey Docks' proposal. What about diesel particulate matter from train exhaust, which causes respiratory illness and cancer?
There are 37 schools along the coal train route. What about health issues associated with noise? How about the concerns of those living in Crescent Beach whose emergency-vehicle access will be cut off when these 120-plus car trains pass by?
To say that the project is not likely to cause significant adverse effects is misleading at best. That is why the cities of White Rock, Surrey, Langley, New Westminster, Vancouver and Powell River, as well as Metro Vancouver, the Islands Trust and our health authorities have all stood up to either oppose the project outright or ask that it undergo an independent and comprehensive health impact assessment prior to approval. Anything less would be irresponsible.
There is another important concern that the members overlooked in their piece.
The International Energy Agency, an organization that works to ensure reliable global energy supplies, has estimated that 80 percent of world thermal coal reserves must stay in the ground if we are to have a good chance of avoiding runaway climate change. The UN climate chief recently made the same point.
We are certain that the remaining 20 per cent of the world's thermal coal can be burned without having to build a new coal port on the Fraser River in Surrey.
The need to reduce coal use isn't going to go away because it is inconvenient and the coal lobby wants to ignore it.
Furthermore, when they argue that Metro Vancouver somehow deprives developing nations of their right to self-determination by rejecting the export of U.S. coal, the coal lobby confuses its own self-interest with the common good.
Eventually, if we don't take steps to reduce thermal coal use, climate change will impact the people employed in mining and transporting B.C.'s coal as surely as it will the 120,000 people employed in the Broadway corridor in Vancouver.
Eventually, if we don't take action, disasters like the one just endured by the residents of Tacloban in the Philippines will be commonplace.
We need to stop talking past each other. We invite the unions to sit down with us for a frank discussion about what the future looks like for B.C. in a world where we take the threat of climate change seriously.
This discussion is long overdue, and we need to start it soon if we are going to work together to smoothly transition to a low-carbon future.
Today, we call on the unions to join us in rejecting the proposal to build a port at Fraser Surrey Docks for the export of U.S. thermal coal.
This plan may benefit a U.S. railway, U.S. coal companies and the port, but it doesn't benefit British Columbians. It puts our communities and our future at risk.
Paula Williams is the founder of Communities and Coal and a Surrey mother of two children. Kevin Washbrook is a director of Voters Taking Action on Climate Change and a Vancouver father of two.
