The Port of Vancouver, Washington is no stranger to controversy over its proposed oil terminal. But the intensity of opposition has increased sharply since a recent repeal of the federal ban on crude exports. Activists suggest that the terminal’s rail shipments are too risky, and that the repeal will mean even more of them. The terminal’s backers say that export has never been their intention.
With the federal permission for crude exports signed into law, opponents say that the Vancouver terminal – with five times the daily capacity Tesoro plans to reserve for itself – could ramp up into high gear for export volumes.
Whether for export or for coastwise shipments, the plan has several hurdles yet to go. Its opponents, including environmental watchdog Columbia Riverkeeper and local business association Vancouver 101, have asked the state’s governor to deny permission to build and the Port of Vancouver to cancel Tesoro’s lease agreement. They cite the risk of derailment, fires and spills, invoking the image of the Lac Megantic rail accident in Quebec, which killed nearly fifty and destroyed half the town’s center.
Larger opponents have also weighed in. The City of Portland has passed a resolution opposing the project. The International Longshore Worker’s Union (ILWU) Local 4 recently backed the election of a new port commissioner, Eric LaBrant, who ran in large part to fight the terminal.
