Comment EI-19902
Received or sent (printed as 1/11/2013)
Dear Mr. Blodgett, I am writing to you regarding my concerns about the proposed Tongue River Valley rail line for coal transport. I am concerned about the effects these trains will have on air and water quality. According to BNSF's own website they estimate that each box car loses approximately 500 lbs of coal per trip. Considering that each train is estimated to contain 120-150 cars, that is an incredible amount of toxic material being lost along the route. For these reasons I request that you include in your EIS, the effects coal dust has on air and water quality. As I am sure you are aware coal dust is toxic because it contains elements such as mercury, lead, arsenic, lead, cadmium, selenium, nickel, vanadium and copper. These materials are referred to as toxic metals, or toxic heavy metals because of their negative physiological effects, both chronic and acute on plants,animals and aquatic life and, for the latter, their physical density and atomic weight." "Radioactive elements such as uranium, thorium and radium [the latter of which decays to radon gas] are also accumulated and concentrated in coal strata, therefore present in coal dust. These are toxic in their own right and toxic via the radioactivity they produce," Coal dust also contains significant amounts of sulphur and sulfides who bio-toxicity increases when exposed to air or water. The fine particulate nature of coal dust, and the toxic constituents therein are readily inhaled and lodge in the lungs as well as being ingested. Mr. Blodgett, On a personal note, I know we have competing interests in our country. I just wonder how it serves us as a Nation to be exporting all of our natural resources? Sending this coal to Asia to be used to manufacture goods that then are sold back to us. Is that what's best for us? I don't believe it is. If we sell off all of our resources what do we have to defend? It's a complicated time,that's for sure. I wish you the best. Stacy Neal Everson WA 360.966.0204"
Submitted by: Stacy Neal
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-19902 · back to the docket sheet