Risks assessed for oil-by-rail terminal project
SEATTLE — A major oil-by-rail terminal proposed for a location on the Columbia River in Washington state poses a potential risk of oil spills, train accidents and longer emergency response times because of road traffic, an environmental study has found.
Many of the risks could be decreased with mitigation measures, but the study released Tuesday outlined four areas where it said the impacts are significant and cannot be avoided.
The study said what while “the likelihood of occurrence of the potential for oil spills may be low, the consequences of the events could be severe.” The state’s Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council has been evaluating the project since 2013 and released its environmental review a week before it is scheduled to vote whether to support or oppose the project in a recommendation that will go to Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat, who will decide whether to approve the facility or reject it.
The proposed $210 million terminal to be located in the city of Vancouver would receive about 360,000 barrels of crude oil by trains a day. Oil would be temporarily stored at the site by Vancouver Energy, a joint venture of Tesoro Corp. and Savage Cos., and then loaded on tankers and ships bound for West Coast refineries.
The study identified four risks that could not be avoided: train accidents, emergency response delays, negative impacts on low-income communities and the possibility an earthquake could damage the facility’s dock and cause an oil spill.
The study said that that measures could be taken to reduce other potential risks: oil spills because of other causes, fires and harm to juvenile salmon.
Critics say the project is a risk to the environment and area residents. Developers are promoting the terminal as an opportunity to ship crude oil from North Dakota and elsewhere to a Western port, bringing jobs and money to the region.
“Our initial assessment provides confidence that EFSEC’s thorough evaluation of the facts will demonstrate our ability to build and operate the project safely and in an environmentally responsible way,” Vancouver Energy spokesman Jeff Hymas said in an emailed statement late Tuesday.
He stated that most of the possible risks cited in the report are “related to low-probability events not directly associated with our facility that have the potential to occur today, such as a major earthquake or impacts related to the transportation of products that move across the country on a daily basis.”
Opponents said the report provided justification for the council to issue a recommendation against the project.
The review “clearly shows that the TesoroSavage oil train terminal is bad for Washington,” said Rebecca Ponzio, director for the Stand Up to Oil Campaign.
The facility would produce more than 300,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions annually, with half of that from trains moving along the entire route in Washington state.