Posted Mon, Aug 15, 2:31 p.m.

The three to five mile and a half long 125-140 car trains with four locomotives now running through Bellingham take 3 minutes 30 seconds to 4 minutes to pass a crossing, not 10 to 12 as frequently mentioned. I know, I have personally timed over 30 trains myself. At maximum ...

Posted Thu, Aug 11, 2:59 p.m.

It is true that diesel exhaust is considered harmful to health. It is also true that fuels for diesel engines are getting much better all the time such that emissions from truck engines built today are about one hundredth what they were fifteen years ago. More importantly, all diesel engines, ...

Posted Wed, Aug 10, 3:16 p.m.

It is a bit frightening that this group of doctors would publish statements that are so clearly at odds with the facts or so clearly outside the context of reality. The critical issue about additional trains and air quality can only be determined by the overall composition of all pollutants ...

Posted Wed, Aug 3, 10:29 a.m.

The railroad is really good at squeezing extra capacity out of the system they have. Five years ago Seattle and Tacoma were concerned because it seemed that the rail system east would be maxed out with container trains, there were howls to raise the Stampede Pass tunnel (remember those?), there ...

Posted Wed, Jul 20, 3:42 p.m.

The coal unit trains now running north to Canada through Washington are 120-140 cars with two engines at each end, about a mile and a half long, and when running through Bellingham they take 3 minutes 30 seconds to 4 minutes end to end before a crossing is cleared. This ...

Posted Tue, Jul 19, 12:12 p.m.

Here's the source for relative contributions to air quality - http://www.psrc.org/assets/3318/emissionsinventory.pdf

Posted Tue, Jul 19, 11:51 a.m.

Nine trains a day may sound like a lot but how many trains a day run through Seattle today? Isn't it between 70 and 100? What is critical is the additional net impact of this traffic and that has not yet been properly studied. Chances are that the historical train ...

Posted Wed, Jul 13, 8:02 p.m.

At last. Someone speaking truth, sense, and reality. Thank you BillfromShoreline.

Posted Wed, Jul 13, 1:48 p.m.

Not really - without the port infrastructure in place there wouldn't be lots of the businesses that are here, and it's those businesses, which provide jobs to people and pay property tax and leasehold tax etc, that generate the tax revenues - plus those 200,000 people whose jobs depend on ...

Posted Wed, Jul 13, 12:28 p.m.

Oops I mean to say "Any economic analysis done which looks at port tax revenue collection as compared to the tax funds port activities generate...." Apologies.

Posted Wed, Jul 13, 10:44 a.m.

The reason rail isn't used for short haul trips of 10-40 miles to the local distribution centers is cost. It's a lot more efficient to load a container on a truck chassis at the terminal and then drive it directly to the distribution center than it is to place it ...

Posted Tue, Jul 12, 4:20 p.m.

There are rail spurs out onto the terminals, they are called intermodal yards, and yard tractors take containers from the ship to the trains on the terminal. These are for containers being shipped to inland markets in the midwest. But the local and regional economy also needs cargoes to and ...

Posted Tue, Jul 12, 11:48 a.m.

Great work on all fronts and thank you. Nothing these days is easy or simple, and simple solutions just don't exist. The Port has made terrific progress. More important, thanks to Mr. Albro for working with data and facts about these important issues.

Posted Mon, Jul 4, 8:18 a.m.

Someone once said, "Democracy is the most inefficient form of government there is - except for all the others."

Posted Thu, Jun 30, 8:13 a.m.

@bob ferris: fair point, but even at 1.1 percent sulphur Chinese coal has more than twice the sulphur output than PRB coal. A critical issue is whether or not the plants have scrubbers, which remove the sulphur. It's also more complicated than these back of the envelope estimates, because if ...

Posted Wed, Jun 29, 8:18 p.m.

There are a host of legitimate concerns about any big project and this is no exception. That is the purpose of conducting a detailed, independent, fact-based environmental review (paid for by the applicant) which should answer the many questions raised. Hopefully everyone will work through this process and hold their ...

Posted Wed, Jun 29, 4:27 p.m.

Not sure the ships, trains and fuels are otherwise unnecessary; ships if not delivering from the west coast will be in the trade elsewhere - Indonesia, Australia, etc - so it isn't a zero-sum situation; for trains the equipment will still be built and used, if not to the US ...

Posted Wed, Jun 29, 2:07 p.m.

Er, not really. Regarding sulphur, Chinese coal is soft and contains 2-4 percent sulphur. So burning 200,000 tons of Chinese coal (the estimated capacity of a cargo ship exporting coal from Washington to China) will produce 4,000 to 8,000 tons of sulphur if a volume equal to that 200,000 ton ...