Sierra Club cries foul over Port of Long Beach move to extend leases for dirty coal

Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Stephanie Steinbrecher, Sierra Club.

Come make your voice heard 5 p.m. Aug. 19 when the Long Beach City Council meets to discuss the CEQA appeal. Plan to arrive early to get a seat; a large turnout is expected. The meeting takes place at 333 W. Ocean Blvd. in Long Beach. (If you can't find the City Council meeting, ask the guard on the ground floor to point you to council chambers.)

California leads the nation in solar energy generation. But while most of California continues to move the transition to clean energy transition forward, the Port of Long Beach has taken a huge step backward, promoting the interests and protecting the wallets of the toxic fossil fuel industry.

In a controversial agreement that ignited community outcry, the Port of Long Beach recently approved a new lease to raise the amount of guaranteed coal and petroleum coke (or petcoke, a byproduct of oil refining) exports. The plan, which will have devastating consequences for local and overseas communities, secures dirty fossil fuel exports for the next 15 years.

The Port’s agreement violates key provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) which requires proper environmental impact analysis and disclosure for projects. Under this state law, the Port is required to gather public insight and provide vital information to decision-makers before approving projects or agreements with detrimental consequences. Additionally, CEQA mandates that all assessed impacts are met with measures to mitigate harmful impacts. The Port did not conduct any environmental review at all in this case and it claimed that its decision to approve the lease agreements was exempt from CEQA.

This claim is especially problematic because the leases deal with increasing the exports of two of the most polluting fossil fuels--coal and petcoke--both of which have air, water, and climate change impacts.

Open train cars of coal being shipped through the Port of Long Beach.

Sierra Club opposes dirty fuel action

The Port’s failure to meet these statewide environmental safeguards prompted the Sierra Club to take action and join with Communities for a Better Environment, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Earthjustice to file an appeal to contest the Port’s new approvals. The appeal, submitted to the Long Beach City Council on June 23, was filed to enforce state law requiring an adequate environmental analysis under CEQA.

The agreements approved by the Port include a partnership with Oxbow Company, a corporation that falls under the Koch brothers’ big-polluting empire. The plan will bring coal shipments from mines in Utah and Colorado and potentially the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and Montana to the California coast on trains passing through several communities.

The Port’s regressive action quickly garnered backlash from local community members, who voiced concerns about community health and environmental impacts from coal dust blowing from the exposed rail cars at a Port of Long Beach Board of Harbor Commissioners’ meeting in June.

Bigger climate change issue

Californians aren’t just worried about the local impacts of this destructive new agreement from the Port of Long Beach -- they have also raised concerns about the ramifications for global climate disruption. The Port’s agreement to export fossil fuels will serve Long Beach’s temporary economic interests at the extreme expense of overseas communities that are importing the American coal but are without emission controls.

“The Port’s neighbors in Long Beach are moving towards clean energy, and Los Angeles plans to be coal-free by 2025 -- yet the Port still wants to embrace the past and ship carbon-intensive coal and petcoke in the middle of our clean energy transition,” said Sierra Club attorney Jessica Yarnall Loarie. “Long Beach should put the health and safety of its communities first: We don't want to burn coal here, and we don't want to ship our dirty fossil fuels somewhere else."

The Port’s move and long-term agreement contradicts the U.S.  and the state of California’s commitments to move away from dirty fuels such as coal. From mine to rail and port to plant, communities across the West Coast are standing up against fossil fuel exports. It’s time for the Port of Long Beach to listen to the voices of local residents. And with action like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s new Clean Power Plan and the Oakland City Council’s resolution opposing the transportation of dangerous fossil fuels by rail in California, clean energy future is clearly on the national and statewide agenda; the Port of Long Beach is taking a step into the past.

Not only does the Port agreement violate the law, but it also violates our commitment to cleaner air, healthier communities, and a global effort to combat climate disruption.  Help protect the communities impacted by this dangerous agreement by signing this petition here to tell the Port of Long Beach to put families first and reconsider their decision.


-- Stephanie Steinbrecher, Sierra Club. Rudy Karnik, staff member with the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign, contributed to the story.  Photo by Al Sattler, Sierra Club Angeles Chapter Climate Change Committee.  



Thank you for this article and thanks to Sierra Club for joining with Earth Justice and NRDC in an appeal of this action to the Long Beach City Council. The appeal will be heard on Tues. Aug. 19 at 5 p.m. at Long Beach City Hall. Please be there to ask for environmental review of this environmental hazard.

Thank you for this article and for joining NRDC and Earth Justice in an appeal to the Long Beach City Council on this issue. The appeal will be heard on Tues. Aug. 19, 5 p.m. Please come and add your voice to ask for an environmental review of this polluting disaster.

It is past time to look forward and implement clean energy solutions. Turn your backs on old toxic solutions to our energy needs. Californians know better and the Long Beach council should realize that and act accordingly. There should be zero tolerance when it comes to these old methods, oil, coal, etc., of producing energy.

As a former resident of Long Beach, from the 50s-80s, it is depressing to see how little those in charge have learned from environmental damage already done in Long Beach. I remember debris falling out of the sky for days during the Signal Hill oilfield fires and the closing of lagoons and beaches due to contamination from oil & sewage waste.

I'm NOT surprised to read this................as I read through each day's Daily Breeze and Los Angeles Times newspapers, I often read letters-to-the-editor from residents in Long Beach - the writers of those letters revealing staunchly Conservative / Tea Party rabid anti-environmentalism and extreme stinginess in their attitudes.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><span>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.