tool name

close
tool goes here

Let families know the health risks posed by coal trains

Nobody likes going to the doctor. It’s nothing personal against me, a family physician. I understand patients worry about what I might find, but we can all agree that no matter how bad a problem might be, the sooner we know what it is, the better we can treat it.

Published: Jan. 25, 2013 at 12:05 a.m. PST
0 comments

Nobody likes going to the doctor. It’s nothing personal against me, a family physician. I understand patients worry about what I might find, but we can all agree that no matter how bad a problem might be, the sooner we know what it is, the better we can treat it.

In November and December, Washington was rocked by massive public comment hearings around the coal terminal proposal at Cherry Point north of Bellingham. Thousands converged on hearings around the state to publicly voice concerns about the plan to ship nearly 50 million tons of coal to Asia. This joint project between Peabody Energy and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (Warren Buffet’s company, on whose board Bill Gates sits) would add between nine and 18 coal trains, up to 11/2 miles long, to the current train schedules running daily through Western Washington.

Tuesday marked the close of the 121-day public comment period for the Cherry Point terminal proposal. Local, state and federal agencies will have much to consider in determining the scope of their Environmental Impact Statement. But their study should not stop there.

The Washington Academy of Family Physicians (WAFP), which represents more than 3,000 physicians across the state, is requesting a comprehensive health impact assessment prior to approval of the Cherry Point terminal.

The WAFP is asking for a better understanding of the effects this would have on public health. We are requesting data on potential health impacts from increases in pollution from diesel particulates and coal dust, delays to emergency vehicles at railroad crossings, and increases in noise pollution in our communities.

BNSF has estimated that one loaded coal car loses as much as 500 pounds of dust in transit from mine to terminal. Coal dust is known to cause increases in chronic bronchitis, emphysema, pulmonary fibrosis and ischemic stroke. Additionally, coal contains toxic heavy metals such as arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium and uranium, which have the potential to leach into the soil and groundwater across the state.

Areas that are subject to high levels of coal dust also see increased levels of infant mortality and decreased life expectancies. One coal train – with 125 individual cars – could expel more than 60,000 pounds of coal dust in a single trip.

The diesel engines pulling the trains will also release dangerous particulates into the air. These particulates have been linked to impaired pulmonary development in adolescents, increased cardiopulmonary mortality, a rise in severity and frequency of asthma attacks and an increased risk of cancer among nonsmokers.

Yes, a few temporary jobs will be created by the coal export project, but what are the risks? The proposed coal transport corridor would affect more than five million Washingtonians, the vast majority of the state’s total population. With so many unknown risks that could impact so many people, it is incumbent upon our government to provide answers to these critical and consequential questions.

I write not just as a physician, but also as someone who understands the deadly impacts of coal first-hand. My grandfather died of pneumoconiosis – black lung disease – after working a lifetime in the coal mines. He was never told of the potential health risks, and he was never able to make an informed choice for himself.

As family physicians, the WAFP believes that prior to the project moving forward, our patients deserve a comprehensive assessment of the potential health risks from exporting coal through our state. They deserve the right to understand fully what that would mean for their health. Then, as a community, we can make an informed decision.

Melissa Weakland, a member of the Washington Academy of Family Physicians, practices in Seattle.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.

CONTESTS

Similar stories

  • State and federal agencies want sweeping review of proposed Cherry Point coal port

    State and federal agencies have joined project opponents in calling for a wide-ranging review of potential impacts from the Gateway Pacific Terminal project that SSA Marine hopes to build at Whatcom County's Cherry Point.

    SSA Marine and its allies have made it clear they would prefer an environmental impact statement that focuses on the immediate environs of the coal pier site itself, on industrial waterfront south of the BP Cherry Point Refinery.

    Environmental groups fighting the coal terminal, as well as people concerned about health and traffic impacts from coal trains, have demanded a broader review. They want an analysis that includes air pollution and climate change impact from coal burning, as well as assessment of rail traffic impacts from Wyoming and Montana mines to Cherry Point.

  • Coal train issue draws scrutiny in Puyallup, Sumner

    Puyallup and Sumner leaders are voicing concerns about traffic congestion and other problems that proposed increases in coal trains through East Pierce County could cause.

  • Sierra Club challenges coal spills from trains

    The Sierra Club and allied environmental organizations announced they may go to court to use the federal Clean Water Act to curb alleged spillage of dust and fragments from coal trains passing through the Columbia Gorge and other places in Washington, including Bellingham.

    At a Tuesday, April 2, news conference, Cesia Kearns, a Sierra Club spokeswoman, said BNSF Railway Co. and the coal producers who use its rails have been given formal notice of intent to sue.

    Under the terms of the Clean Water Act, the notice gives the companies 60 days to stop the Clean Water Act violations that environmentalists allege are ongoing. At that point, the groups could go to federal court to seek a binding order directing BNSF and the coal companies to curb violations, if the evidence justifies that.

  • Oregon studies coal-train data

    PORTLAND — Industry data is too scant to gauge the health effects of coal dust blowing off of trains headed from the Great Plains to export terminals along the West Coast, according to a review by the Multnomah County Health Department.

  • Wyoming coal company strikes export deal to use Cherry Point terminal

    A Wyoming mining company has signed an option agreement allowing it to ship up to 16 million tons of coal a year through Gateway Pacific Terminal at Cherry Point — if that project can get the regulatory approvals it needs.

    Cloud Peak Energy said Wednesday's deal involving Gateway Pacific Terminal, proposed by SSA Marine of Seattle, will allow it to expand overseas sales amid weak domestic demand.

    The company has mines in Wyoming and Montana. It shipped 4.4 million tons of coal to Asian customers in 2012.