Comment EI-19526
Received or sent (printed as 1/7/2013)
The environmental impact statement for the proposed Tongue River Railroad should include an analysis of the effects on global warming, and the direct pollution on the west coast, from burning the coal that would be extracted from the Montana mines. The winds will carry the sulfur dioxide, mercury and other pollutants directly to the west coast. The effects of the pollution from coal dust from the trains, will affect the health of people in communities like mine, in Washington State. This must also be considered in the environmental impact statement. The proposed railroad does not benefit the public at all. It is for the exclusive benefit of a giant coal company, Arch Coal. There is no public necessity whatsoever - this project has no benefit to the public at large and in fact is a challenge to everyone's health and well being. A few people will profit mightily and they will try to make the case that this is 'better for all' - a very tired argument. This project will have a devastating effect on the pristine Tongue River Valley and the wildlife that find refuge there. We do not need yet another industrial wasteland dumped into the last of our pristine areas by a coal giant that will only hasten the demise of our biodiversity through rampant global warming resulting from burning the coal - not to mention the enormous costs in fuel just to get the coal to China. The railroad will split ranches and farmland, and will do everything we don't want to see in a rural, pristine area. And THEN it will serve to increase global warming, increase ocean acidification, increase coastal flooding. We have the justifications to stop this. Mr. Blodgett, you must step up - this is it.
Submitted by: Ilene Silver · Olympia, Washington
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/FD-30186/comment/EI-19526 · back to the docket sheet