Letters to the Editor

LNG plant: Sticking with bunker fuel is far worse

Driving down Ruston Way this morning, we saw two barges of fuel for the four to six ships in the harbor. They either had diesel or bunker C fuel. We have not had a massive spill in Commencement Bay in a long time, if ever.

Each of these fuels had to be carried by pipeline or train to be put on the barges. In theory the diesel will evaporate. Not so the bunker fuel. It is so thick it needs to be heated so it will flow, and only then burn in an engine. This is not nice stuff, and it is used every day in our harbor.

The LNG plant is a move forward, not backward. It is a carbon-based petroleum product, but much cleaner and safer than how we are fueling ships now. There is no alternative fuel for the ships that call in Tacoma. (or anywhere else for that matter).

The jobs in the port are well-paying jobs and the ships in the harbor are necessary. If you have not received adequate or accurate information, you have not been studying the available information, or you no longer believe anything that the Port, PSE or the TNT say.

  Comments