The impacts of building several coal terminals are much different than the impacts of each individual terminal. An area-wide EIS is a legal option under the National Environmental Policy Act that would provide this cumulative impact review.

Tell the Army Corps: Please study the cumulative impacts of building multiple coal terminals, throughout the region and the world.

 

Click here to read RE Sources' scoping comments.

       

YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE -- VOLUNTEER TODAY

Learn more on our Take Action page and get involved in the effort to protect quality of life in Whatcom, Skagit and San Juan Counties.

Coal companies, recognizing that there is little future growth to be had domestically, have a new plan: export the strip-mined coal that we’re not using to feed Asia's rapidly growing appetite for energy. And what is the cheapest way to get it there? New coal terminals somewhere on the West Coast. Farthest along is the 48 million ton Gateway Pacific coal terminal proposal by SSA Marine (49% owned by Goldman Sachs, and partnering with Peabody Energy), planned to be built at Cherry Point just north of Bellingham, WA. More details on the project proposal can be found at Coal Train Facts.

The impacts of this proposed coal terminal would drastically impact the health and welfare of people and the environment in Whatcom County (where the coal terminal would be located) and all along the rail route from the strip mines in Montana and Wyoming to the Cherry Point Aquatic Reserve, the planned dock location.

Since its creation in 1999, RE Sources North Sound Baykeeper has been protecting the critical ecosystem of the Cherry Point Reach- this is the next step in that battle.

Read Scoping Comments from RE Sources

• RE Sources Scoping Comments (Submitted Jan. 22, 2013)
• Marine Resources Committee Scoping Comments (Submitted Jan. 22, 2013)

We can do better, keeping our local economies strong and the places we love intact for our families. We won’t sell the soul of our communities for coal. The costs to our health, quality of life, and our home towns are too high.

To power past coal, RE Sources started fighting this proposal in fall of 2010. With the aid of community members concerned about the potential impacts of the Gateway Pacific Terminal proposal, we resisted SSA's efforts to generate statements of support from local city and county councils. 

When the full scale of the new proposal was revealed to be an increase from a 1992 proposal for 8 million tons of wheat and potash to the 2011 proposal for 48 million tons of coal and 6 million tons of "other," we helped found the Power Past Coal coalition with  Climate Solutions, Columbia Riverkeeper, Earth Justice, Sierra Club, Washington Environmental Council, and Western Organization for Resource Council.

In response to illegal wetland fill by SSA Marine at their proposed site, RE Sources North Sound Baykeeper has filed suit under the Federal Clean Water Act.

Join RE Sources and Power Past Coal in this critical fight against a bad idea, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.

For more updates about upcoming events sign up to receive our email newsletter.

---