November 30,
2015
Senator Patty
Murray
Office of
Senator Patty Murray
154 Russell
Senate Office Building
Washington,
D.C. 20510
Senator Ron
Wyden
Office of
Senator Ron Wyden
221 Dirksen
Senate Office Building
Washington,
D.C., 20510
Senator Maria Cantwell
Office of U.S. Senator Maria
Cantwell
511 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Senator Jeff Merkley
Office of Senator Jeff Merkley
313 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Re: Opposition to the Lifting
the EPCA Rule Prohibiting the Export of Domestic Crude Oil
Dear Senators Murray, Cantwell,
Wyden, and Merkley:
We, as organizational leaders and elected officials, are
writing to urge you as members of the United States Senate to stop the House of
Representative efforts to lift the 40-year old rule ‘prohibiting the export of
crude oil and natural gas produced in the United States’ that was promulgated
under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA).
Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA)
The crude oil export prohibition (the Ban) was signed into
law by President Gerald Ford in 1975 in response to the oil embargo by Arab
OPEC nations against the U.S. for its support of Israel in the 1973
Arab-Israeli war. The primary goal of
EPCA is to insulate the U.S. from volatile and unpredictable global crude oil
markets. EPCA also strives to:
·
Increase energy production and supply
·
Reduce energy demand, provide energy efficiency
·
Give the executive branch additional powers to
respond to disruptions in energy supply.
·
Establish and maintain the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve
·
Establish conservation efforts that are still
evolving today – efforts such as the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer
Products and the Corporate Average Fuel Economy regulations.
Lifting the Ban will have dire environmental and economic
consequences for the Pacific Northwest.
The Pacific Northwest has historically benefited
economically from the trade of diverse commodities due to its geographic
proximity to Pacific Rim nations.
However, in just the past few years the Pacific Northwest is fast
becoming the primary export gateway for massive quantities of fossil fuels to
Asian markets, because the energy companies are actively expanding the shipping
of tar sands oil out of Canada, Bakken shale oil out of North Dakota, and coal
of out of Wyoming and Montana to Asia.
Existing Crude Oil Exportation
Our communities are already at risk of excessive fossil fuel
transportation to serve existing facilities – especially in light of the
limited emergency response capabilities. In addition, on December 30, 2014, the
US Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security published a FAQ
identifying seven ways in which the oil industry can currently export crude oil
and natural gas while the Ban is in place. These seven ways include exports: 1)
from Cook Inlet, 2) to Canada for domestic consumption, 3) of minimally
processed crude, 4) of certain heavy oil from California, 5) consistent with
certain international agreements, 6) consistent with Presidential findings, and
7) of foreign crude oil not co-mingled with domestic crude (e.g., oil from
Canada).
This current risk is not theoretical. A recent analysis of the Washington State
Department of Ecology’s data by Friends of the Earth revealed that on 80 occasions
between 2010 and 2014 all five Washington refineries used their existing
terminals to send 9,805,000 bbls of crude oil outbound. While
the destination of this oil may have been to other domestic ports, it
demonstrates the ability of existing refineries, which are already connected to
Alberta and Bakken oil fields by either pipeline or rail, to use their
facilities to export crude oil.
Likely Crude Oil Terminals in the Pacific Northwest
If the Ban is lifted, the following Sightline Institute
table[1]
illustrates
the likely oil export terminals in the Pacific Northwest.
Current Crude Oil-by-Rail Projects |
||
|
Burnaby BC
|
Barrels per Day
|
Trains per Week
|
|
● Chevron
Canada
|
8,000
|
0.8
|
|
Ferndale, WA
|
|
|
|
● BP Refinery
|
70,000
|
7.0
|
|
● Phillips 66
|
35,000
|
3.5
|
|
Anacortes , WA
|
|
|
|
● Tesoro Refinery
|
50,000
|
5.0
|
|
●
Shell
Refinery
|
61,200
|
6.1
|
|
Tacoma, WA
|
|
|
|
● US Oil & Refining
|
40,000
|
4.0
|
|
● Targa Terminals
|
40,004
|
4.0
|
|
Hoquiam, WA
|
|
|
|
●
Westway
Terminals
|
48,918
|
4.9
|
|
●
Grays
Harbor Rail Terminal
|
45,000
|
4.5
|
|
●
Imperium
Terminals
|
73,500
|
7.4
|
|
Longview, WA
|
|
|
|
●
Riverside
Refinery
|
30,000
|
3.0
|
|
Portland, OR
|
|
|
|
● Arc Logistics
|
16,250
|
1.6
|
|
Clatskanie, OR
|
|
|
|
● Global Partners
|
120,000
|
12.0
|
|
Vancouver WA
|
|
|
|
●
NuStar
Energy
|
22,000
|
2.2
|
|
●
Vancouver
Energy
|
360,000
|
36.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
● Already Operating
|
379,254
|
36
|
|
●
Proposed
|
640,618
|
66
|
|
Total
Potential
|
1,019,872
|
102
|
Significant Risk of Crude Oil Disasters in the Pacific Northwest
Lifting the Ban will result in significant increases of
crude oil transport, which will significantly increase the risk of catastrophic
oil spills - not only by rail disasters but also marine disasters. Catastrophic
train derailments, involving tank cars that individually carry 30,000 gallons
each, will devastate not only the Pacific Northwest’s natural environments but
also our economies.
To
reach the oil terminals in the Pacific Coast, the oil trains of 100+
tanks car travel over 1,400 miles from North Dakota through Montana and Idaho
to get to Washington and Oregon. In
Washington State alone, the oil trains threaten 120 rail communities – communities
that bear horrific risks but no economic benefits. The Sightline Institute map[2]
to the right illustrates the oil train routes and the proposed and existing
crude oil terminals.
Coastal communities, such as Anacortes, Grays Harbor, and Longview are
under siege. Three crude oil terminals
are proposed for Grays Harbor and two crude‑by‑rail oil terminals (one existing
and one proposed) for Anacortes. Both
an oil refinery and a propane-by-rail export terminal are proposed in Longview.
These
crude oil terminals threaten not only the Pacific Northwest’s sea shores, bays,
but also northwest tribal treaty rights and major commercial fishing economies.
A July 2014 Seattle Times article[3]
reported, 'A surge in oil trains hauling North Dakota’s energy bonanza is
interfering with grain shipments to Pacific Northwest ports, prompting fears of
a chronic crisis in which railcars carrying fossil fuels crowd out other
products and disrupt exports.’ The same
article stated, ‘In testimony to the Surface Transportation Board, the U.S.
agency that oversees rail freight, Cargill executive Kevin Thompson on behalf
of the National Grain and Feed Association testified that “The sheer gravity,
magnitude and scope of rail-service disruptions now being experienced are
unprecedented, and have rippled through all sectors of grain-based
agriculture.”’
Crude Oil Exports Will Increase the
Risk of Marine Disasters
The unacceptable risks of oil spills from increased marine transportation
of crude oil will compound the already unacceptable risks of oil spills
from trains. In Washington State, the
oil trains follow historic railroad routes along the shores of the Columbia
River, the Chehalis River and the Puget Sound.
The likelihood of more marine vessels carrying these harmful
substances will significantly increase the greater risk of marine catastrophes
like the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster[1] in Prince William
Sound. Of the two groups of killer
whales that swam through the affected parts of the Prince William Sound, one suffered
population losses up to 41 percent in the year after the disaster, according to
a 2008 study[2],
and the other is destined for extinction.
While several thousand sea otters perished because of the spill, sea
otter populations[3]
have only now recovered to pre-spill levels, the U.S. Geological Survey
recently announced. The
herring population[4]
— once a lucrative catch for the fishing industry in the region — crashed and
has never fully recovered.
A major oil spill in the Puget Sound, along one of our magnificent
rivers, or on our Pacific coast will destroy economically vital waterways and
will harm endangered salmon and orcas— environments and animals that federal
and state governments have spent countless millions of dollars to protect and restore
over the past several decades.
On a different level, the cumulative impacts from chronic oil and fuel
spills associated with fueling, increased accident risks involving smaller
marine vessels, will also lead to major disruptions of irreplaceable marine
ecosystems. More crude oil moving both
inbound and outbound through our marine waters will increase the frequency and
cumulative impacts of these events.
Concluding Statements
Lifting the EPCA ban on crude
oil exports further enables an economy built around the production,
transportation, and consumption of fossil fuels—precisely the opposite of the
measures required to avoid the catastrophic effects of climate change. Currently the Pacific Northwest leads the
transition to a clean and renewable energy policy. Lifting the Ban, in contrast, will allow
large energy companies to transform our magnificent Pacific Northwest into a
major industrial hub that supports our nation's unwise dependence on fossil
fuel.
As organizational leaders and elected officials, we ask you as
members of the United States Senate to preserve the EPCA rule ‘prohibiting the
export of crude oil and natural gas produced in the United States’ that
was promulgated under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
of 1975 (EPCA).
In the Pacific Northwest, maintaining the EPCA ban safeguards
our economy, our environment, and our communities.
Note: The Solidarity Roundtable on Oil, a coalition of
leaders and elected officials, in conjunction with the Washington State Council
of Fire Fighters, organized this letter.
Please
respond to this letter via the Washington State Council of Fire Fighters at
1069 Adams Street, SE, Olympia, WA 98501 or wscff@wscff.org.
Sincerely,
|
Kelly L. Fox, President Washington State Council of Fire Fighters |
|||
|
Eric Labrant, Commissioner Elect Port of Vancouver |
E.J. Zita, Ph.D., Commissioner Port of Olympia, District 3 Chair, Thurston County Agriculture Committee |
||
|
Kent Wright, President Northwest Farmers Union |
Dr. Bruce Amundson, President
Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility |
||
|
Fred Felleman, NW Consultant Friends of the Earth, US |
Cager Clabaugh, Representative ILWU Local 4, Vancouver, WA |
||
|
Alan Richrod, Council Member City of Aberdeen |
|||
|
Ahmed Gaya Rising Tide Seattle |
Carlo Voli 350 Seattle |
||
|
Don & Alona Steinke Sierra Club of SW Washington |
Arnie Martin, President Grays Harbor Audubon |
||
|
Arthur “RD” Grunbaum, President Friends of Grays Harbor |
Linda Orgel, Treasurer Friends of Grays Harbor |
||
|
Diane L. Dick, Representative Landowners & Citizens for a Safe Community Longview |
Laura Ackerman, Oil Policy Director The Lands Council, Spokane |
||
|
Zoltan Grossman, Ph.D.
Olympia Confronting the Climate Crisis |
Terry Hill
Spokane Rising Tide
|
||
|
Ann Winkes, Representative Protect Skagit, Skagit County |
Tom Glade, President Evergreen Islands, Anacortes |
||
Notes:
[1]
"Crude oil shipments planned for Puget Sound, Grays Harbor, and the Columbia
River,"
Eric de
Place, “The Northwest’s Pipeline on Rails”, July 2015.
[2] 'The
Northwest’s Pipeline on Rails', Eric de Place, June 24, 2013, Sightline
Institute.
[3]
'Oil trains crowd out grain shipments to NW ports,' Angel Gonzalez, The Seattle
Times, July 26, 2014.
[4]
'Exxon Valdez 25th Anniversary: 5 Facts About the Historic Spill', Megan
Gannon, March 24, 2014
Live Science website.
http://www.livescience.com/44314-exxon-valdez-spill-anniversary-facts.html
[5] C.
O. Matkin, et.al., “Ongoing population-level impacts on killer whales Orcinus
orca following the ‘Exxon Valdez’ oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska”, Marine
Ecology Progress Series, March 18, 2008.
[6] Andrea
Thompson, “Sea Otters Rebound from Exxon Valdez Disaster”, Planet Earth, March
03, 2014.
[7] Sean
Cockerham, ‘25 years later, oil spilled from Exxon Valdez still clings to
lives, Alaska habitat’,
Alaska Dispatch News, March 21, 2014.
h/t Dan Leahy!!
No comments:
Post a Comment