Header graphic for print
China Law Blog China Law for Business

For All The Coal In China, Shipped Through Longview, Washington?

By Dan Harris on Posted in China Business, Legal News

China needs more coal. The United States has more coal than it needs. President Obama is vowing to double U.S. exports. Sounds like we have everything in place for increased coal shipments from the United States to China, right?

Maybe.

In an article entitled, “Coal Foes Play China Card: Critics of Export Terminal Warn of Environmental Harm Abroad From U.S. Fuel,” the Wall Street Journal does a truly great job explaining what is going on with attempts by big-Coal and Longview, Washington to start shipping U.S. coal to China from the U.S. West Coast. 

To grossly summarize the article (which I strongly urge you to read), the divide is betweenthose who favor converting the Port of Longview into a port capable of shipping coal to China from Montana and Wyoming. Those who oppose the port being used for this purpose oppose coal going to China at all. Those who favor the coal shipments argue that the mining and shipment of the coal will create American jobs and provide China with less polluting coal than it currently uses. Those who oppose the shipments argue that the mining, shipping and eventual use of the coal will cause environmental and climate change damage.  

Fascinating.

Where do you stand?

  • Bill Rich

    It is a tough call. But some principles must be laid down.
    1. There must be warning labels, or things similar, in the coal sales contract that coal is dangerous, and hazardous to those who uses it, even this is completely obvious. And the purchaser is completely responsible for any and all damages done to their own people, their environment, or the people of the world and the world environment, buy accepting and using the product.
    2. The selling price of coal to anybody, must include the full cost of cleaning up and other remedial costs, such as healthcare for the workers digging and processing coal – whether it is from mining, or processing coal. These remedial costs must be collected by the government, and deposit into a fund for future use in cleaning up the environment and care of workers affected.
    3. A congress committee must be used to oversee the fund being set up, with laws governing what the fund can be used for, the approval processes (must include congress) for fund disposal, and management.
    4. Congress has authority to stop any shipment any where, for whatever reasons deem appropriate by congress. And the sales contract must include this item. (This is to safeguard the supply of coal to local consumers.)
    If China don’t mind paying the cost of (2), no one should mine selling the coal.

  • Michael

    As a native Washingtonian who has spent three years of his life in China and currently work on energy issues professionally, perhaps my biases cancel each other out. That said, I think WA state should be supportive of the idea. China imported about 160 million tons of coal in 2010. the proposed port would only see about 5 million tons be exported (or about 3% of China’s total coal imports). China is going to burn the coal, so the question is: whose coal? Domestic transportation constrains have made coal very expensive in China, so much so that they began importing coal from as far away as our southern neighbors in Colombia. If people have a problem with this environmentally, they should realize that this signifies a DECLINE in US coal consumption! The protesters should attack the shipping industry or raise taxes on bunker fuel, as that would deter long-haul shipments of coal.

  • http://www.twitter.com/darnoc darnoc

    Coal is a cheap BTU, simple as that. Shutting this project would not have a material impact on global emissions from coal, yet it would inflict unnecessary harm on the regional Longview economy.
    Not unrelated….the US is also a major natural gas resource globally….however, the US has not historically been a major exporter of such. Several projects seek to start sharply increasing the amount of LNG export…good primer here in the WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704279704576102350424208900.html Interesting to me to compare the contrast the opposition arguments to the coal and gas projects….carbon/enviro in the former and potential domestic price pressure in the latter.

  • William

    The coal’s going to get burned by somebody; it may as well be the Chinese or whoever is the highest bidder.