.jpg){kind=spacer}
Tammy and CCH tankers at Olympia hearing and rally.
More than 750 people turn out for meeting on oil-train study
Hundreds of people concerned about the increasing number of oil trains traversing the state came to a Thursday evening meeting in Olympia to comment on the preliminary findings of a state study on oil-train safety and spill response.
By Hal Bernton Seattle Times staff reporter 10/30/14
State officials are proposing more funding and more regulatory
authority to step up oversight of the surging numbers of oil trains
carrying crude through Washington, and to better prepare for any
possible spills.
The proposals are included in the preliminary findings of a state Department of Ecology study, which was reviewed at a Thursday evening meeting that drew more than 750 people, the vast majority of whom are opposed to increased oil train traffic in the state..... more here
Citizens
say no oil by rail during Olympia public hearing - See more at:
http://thedailyworld.com/news/local/citizens-say-no-oil-rail-during-olympia-public-hearing#sthash.688itN6b.dpuf
.jpg){kind=spacer}
at the rally
and from the (semi) Daily World:
More than 600 people gathered in Olympia on Thursday night to show state regulators they’re against rail shipments of crude oil and coal throughout the state..... [includes great comments from Ocean Shores' Larry Thevik!].... read moreZoltan Grossman's pics here
Judy Christensen Carter's video here
.jpg){kind=spacer}
.jpg){kind=spacer}
.jpg){kind=spacer}
The boom in domestic oil production through fracking is posing new risks
to Washington’s rails and waterways. The state is taking comments on
the initial
Citizens
say no oil by rail during Olympia public hearing - See more at:
http://thedailyworld.com/news/local/citizens-say-no-oil-rail-during-olympia-public-hearing#sthash.688itN6b.dpuf
Washington State Dept. of Ecology et al, can do rail studies, and marine studies until the cows come home, in an attempt to make it look like Washington State Citizens will be safe, or better off--bottom line is it is undeniably impossible to do so. Ethically, and morally and environmentally--this "study group" posed as protectors (DOE) of Washington, should use the 700 pages of their study to explain to our Governor, (our clean energy--all green governor) why this is NOT SAFE. The study advisors consist mainly of BNSF (railway consultants), MainLine Management, Inc. and petroleum industry consultants retained for $250,000 to complete this ruse of making crude by rail safe or beneficial to the citizens of this state. At what cost? After receiving testimony, largely ignored, from many: such as WCFF( Washington Council of Fire Fighters), engineers & railway labor themselves, Physicians for Social Responsibility, the agricultural & farming communities and businesses, resolutions from 12 cities at risk on the crude oil route,
ReplyDeleteThe Washington State Dungeness Crab Fishers Assoc., etc. etc.--all calling for "no more crude oil by rail, and a moratorium on more than 11 new proposals (totaling billions of gallons) for crude oil storage and transit by barge and tankers through our Washington waters--they continue this folly to approve disaster on out doorstep. Why? It is not for the benefit of people of Washington, our waters, our environment. Our communities and our ports in Washington stand to become nothing more than a conduit for the crude oil industry to enlarge their profits, which already lead the world in corporate profits. When is enough enough? When do we stand up and say we refuse to be a sacrificial zone for crude oil profiteering. This dangerous endeavor promises to be the largest life changing, climate changing contribution event in the history of our state. It is wrong for the people and nothing construed by The Dept. of Ecology can make it right. Period. I don't need to wait until March for the final report. We, the citizenry, have enough done enough research, compiled enough information and statistics to have already drawn this conclusion. All of us except the Dept. of Ecology and Governor Inslee. Why is that?