Traditionally ports have been less concerned about what they were moving than getting it to where it’s supposed to go. That’s changing. In at least two cases in the Pacific Northwest, ports have either halted oil transport or are urging such actions because of public concerns about safety and environmental health.
The Port of Portland in Oregon passed on $6 million in new annual revenue when it decided against an oil-train export terminal because of rail safety. The Port of Olympia in Washington adopted a resolution that asked the Port of Grays Harbor to rethink opening three proposed oil-by-rail transfer terminals. In doing so the Port of Olympia cited the July 6, 2013, oil-train accident in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, that killed 47 people. In that accident the highly flammable Bakken crude oil exploded.
The Washington Public Ports Association has acknowledged concern about the dangers of oil transport and will issue a position paper on it. The paper is expected to call on the federal government to increase the safety of tank cars and upgrade oil-spill prevention and response measures, according to The Columbian in Vancouver, Wash.
In a controversial move, Port of Olympia commissioners voted 2-1 for the resolution of “deep concern” about the threat to “life, safety, the environment and economic development” of transporting crude through the county, according to The Columbian. The resolution called on the Port of Grays Harbor to halt its terminals and asked the city of Hoquiam to reject construction permits for the projects.
The commissioners who voted in favor of the resolution said they have a responsibility to protect the citizens and natural resources.
One of the reasons for heightened concern is the amount of crude oil being produced in North America’s Bakken region because that oil may be more flammable than other crude and more dangerous to ship.
