The Whatcom County Council approved a measure to take back 8,700 acres of land in order to protect a vital water source for Bellingham-area communities. Still, opposition is just around the corner.
The corporations involved with a proposed Bellingham-area coal export facility could get a nearly free ride on rail upgrades. Or the coal traffic might just kill hopes for a greener form of travel.
With a new contender, on the Columbia River near Boardman, joining the parade, those concerned about widespread impacts are pushing for a comprehensive EIS process that will sweep lots of towns and politicians into an epic debate.
Gateway Pacific Terminals, the entity behind Bellingham's proposed Cherry Point coal port, is moving ahead with permitting but dodging opponents pushing for an environmental review covering a wider geography. Another battle heats up over economic impacts and displaced jobs.
As an environmental review approaches, opponents and supporters of exporting coal to China are angling to shape the perception of how a proposed facility will affect Bellingham and even cities like Seattle and Edmonds.
There's all that oil from Alberta's tar sands, and coal in Wyoming and Montana. All of it is yearning to burn free, but not for free, in Asia, or wherever else top dollar will be paid.
With Norm Dicks leaving office, the Sound needs more protection than ever from potential oil spill pollution. And shouldn't the Obama administration look for another supplier of oil for military needs?
As Northwest concerns build about global and local environmental issues in the Northwest, a small Oregon port gives its approval to exporting coal to burn in Chinese power plants.
Proponents of a coal port say fuel from here would be cleaner than what China would burn from domestic supplies. Opponents worry about the effects of any coal on the climate. But maybe our decision isn't that big a deal either way. Further: the economics of high-cost U.S. coal may be the real limiting factor.