Coal Train Fact Check
for the
League of Women Voters
by
Bob Vance, P.E.
2/7/2013
1
Disclaimers and Disclosures
• Evaluation based upon Experience and Public Documents
 Not Representing URS Corporation
 Not Representing an Engineering Society
 Not Representing the Sierra Club or Other Environmental Advocacy
Group
 No Personal Contact with Railroads or Port Developer
 Not Necessarily Representing any Opinions of Janet Nail
• Disclosures
 Employment History includes Many Coal Projects
 Likes Train Travel, but Open-Minded about Coal Trains
2/7/2013
2
Fun Fact Check
Convinced Janet and Monte to Travel by Train on
Vacation: 100 % True
2/7/2013
3
Agenda
• Basis of the Export Coal Controversy
• Issues of Concern to Washington Citizens
• Facts in Common with Pro-Coal and Anti-Coal Shipment
Advocates
• Fact Check of Each Issue of Concern
• Conclusions and Recommendations from One Private
Citizen
2/7/2013
4
Export Coal Controversy
• Over 10,000 people have attended public hearings for
permitting of a proposed Export Coal Shipping Terminal
– Opinions pro and con appear to be evenly divided, but maybe more con
– Terminal Owner = Gateway Pacific
– Port Location = Cherry Point, Washington near Bellingham
– Coal Buyer = China to supplement local coal supplies for power generation
– Coal Terminal Capacity = 50 million tons/year (transfers coal from rail to ship)
– Coal Source = Powder River Basin, Wyoming
– Additional Projects totaling 50 to 100 million/yr have been proposed, but not yet
ready for permitting
2/7/2013
5
Issues of Concern
• The following issues are the most controversial:
– Coal is a Hazardous Substance
– Powder River Coal Improves Air Quality
– Trains will Deposit a Layer of Coal across Washington
– Coal Trains Cause Excessive Delays to Highway Traffic and Emergency
Vehicles
– Existing Rail System Can Support Additional Traffic
– Dust Control Measures at the Port Trans-Loading Facility will be
Adequate
2/7/2013
6
Facts not-in-Dispute
• Number of Coal Trains
– Basis = 50 million tons coal/year
– Open hopper cars hold 100 to 125 tons coal; use 115 tons/car
– Coal trains consist of 100 to 125 cars; use 115 cars/train
– Not a math test, but each train contains 115 x 115 = 13,225 tons coal
– Loaded Trains/year = 50,000,000 tons/13,225 tons = 3,781
– Loaded Trains/day = 10 each minimum (reality = 8 to 12)
– Empty trains need to return to Wyoming for another Load, so Total
Trains/day = 16 to 24
2/7/2013
7
Facts not-in-Dispute
• Length of a Coal Train
– Basis = 5 locomotives and 115 hopper cars
– Length of hopper car = 60 ft
– Length of locomotive = 80 ft
– Length of coal train = 5 x 80 + 115 x 60 = 7,300 ft
– 7,300 ft = 1.4 miles
2/7/2013
8
Facts not-in-Dispute
• Coal Train Routing
– Powder River Basin to Spokane via BNSF RR = 900 miles
– BNSF Lines to Bellingham from Spokane
 Hi-Line over Stephens Pass: 380 miles, but 3,000 ft elevation gain and capacity limited
by Cascade Tunnel
 Mid-Columbia Line over Stampede Pass: 510 miles, but 3,000 ft elevation gain
 Water Level Route along Columbia River and Coast: 660 miles, but minimal elevation
gain and heavy duty track
 Preferred Route for Loaded Trains = Water Level Route
 Preferred Route for Empty Trains = Mid-Columbia Route (or
Water Level Route if space is available)
2/7/2013
9
Facts not-in-Dispute
• Uncontrolled Coal Dust Losses from Open Top Hopper Cars are a
Significant Problem
– Losses vary with wind speed, train speed, time of year, and load shape
– Average Loss = 600 lbs/car per Norfolk Southern study (east coast RR)
– OK, just a little more math:
 600 lbs/car x 115 cars/train = 69,000 lbs/train
 69,000 lbs/train x 3,800 trains/yr x 1 ton/2000 lbs = 130,000 tons/yr
– “Dusting” significantly degraded track structure on routes leaving the Powder
River Basin limiting train speed
– BNSF spent more than $100 million dollars cleaning and replacing track ballast in
Wyoming in 2009 and 2010
– Most losses occur in early portion of journey (visual observations and particulate
collectors)
2/7/2013
10
Fact Check # 1
• Issue: Coal is a Hazardous Substance
– Coal is a naturally occurring substance composed primarily of carbon, but also
contains the following:
 Heavy metals in ppm (parts per million) range: Examples = Arsenic and
Beryllium
 Coal contains Mercury in ppb (parts per billion) range
 Coal contains Sulfur: 0.5 to 5% range
 Coal contains ash: 5 to 10% range
– E.U. Classification: Not considered Dangerous
– Raw Coal is also not considered hazardous by the U.S. EPA due to toxicity or
other characteristic
– Principal hazard of Raw Coal is dust in enclosed spaces
2/7/2013
11
Fact Check # 1: Coal is Hazardous?
•
Environmental concerns with coal occur
mostly after combustion
 Sulfur and fly ash emissions are
regulated by the EPA
 Heavy metals, mercury, and
bottom ash emissions are not
currently regulated by the EPA
2/7/2013
•
Current status of coal cleanup from
Mesa, WA train wreck: not hazardous,
but still a little “messy”
•
Bob’s Fact Check Rating: 10% True
(only because coal is a clean-up
nuisance)
12
Fact Check # 2
• Issue: Powder River Coal Improves Air Quality
– Environmental Advantage: Low Sulfur (< 0.5% Sulfur) instead of the 4% Sulfur in
Chinese Coal
– Advantage: Powder River Coal – Reduces Acid Rain
– Heat Content: 8,000 Btu/lb instead of the 12,000 Btu/lb in Chinese coal
– Disadvantage: Powder River Coal – Requires 50% increase in consumption to
produce an equivalent amount of power
– Ash and metals in Powder River and Chinese Coal are probably about the same
– Not a silver bullet
– Bob’s Fact Check Rating: 75% True (reduces sulfur emissions from combustion)
2/7/2013
13
Fact Check # 3
• Issue: Coal Trains will Deposit a Layer of Coal Across Washington
– Since March, 2011, BNSF requires coal shippers to mitigate coal dust
during transportation by
 Using modified loading chutes to shape coal in hopper cars
(rounded contours – no angles)
 Spraying a surfactant or “topper” on coal cars (just like hair spray)
 Above measures reduce coal losses by at least 85% (BNSF) and as
much as 95 to 99% (Norfolk Southern)
2/7/2013
14
Fact Check # 3: Deposit Layer of Coal?
•
Photo of Loaded BNSF Coal Hopper
in Pasco Rail Yard
 Bread Loaf Shape
 At 95% spraying efficiency, coal
dust losses are reduced from
130,000 tons/yr to 6,500 tons/yr
2/7/2013
•
Particulate collectors have
confirmed that dusting decreases as
the coal cars move out of Wyoming
•
Bob’s Fact Check Rating: 10% True
(Coal dust losses have been
mitigated and most dusting occurs
at start of journey, not in Washington
state)
15
Fact Check # 4
• Issue: Coal Trains Will Cause Traffic Delays




Train Length = 1.4 miles
Approximate Train speed through Pasco = 10 mph (City Council)
Approximate Train Speed through Seattle = 30 mph (WDOT)
Use 20 mph as average
 Here’s a little more math to check grade crossing times:
 1.4 miles / 20 mph x 60 min/hr + 1 min (open and close gates)= 5.2 min/train
 5.2 min x 20 trains/day (10 loaded + 10 empty) = 104 min/day (almost 2 hrs)
 Need to have alternative routes for emergency responders
 Bob’s Fact Check Rating = 90%True (public policy should promote grade
crossing elimination)
2/7/2013
16
Fact Check # 5
• Issue: Existing Rail System Can Support Additional
Traffic
– State and Federal governments have invested in passenger rail on the West
Side (more than $500 million)
– Coal Trains should not impact successful Amtrak and Sound Transit train
schedules
– Approximate Current Traffic versus Route Capacity per WDOT
 Hi-Line: 30 trains/day with a capacity of 30 trains/day  No Room
 Mid-Columbia Line: 15 trains/day with a capacity of 30  Room
 Water Level Route: 40 trains/day with a capacity of 60  Room
 West Coast: 50 trains/day with a capacity of 80  Room, but north of
Seattle could be a bottleneck
 Bob’s Fact Check Rating = 90%True (OK to add 20 trains/day, but BNSF
needs to confirm)
2/7/2013
17
Fact Check # 6
• Issue: Dust Control at the Port Trans-Loading Facility
will be Adequate
– Fugitive dust must be controlled every time coal is transferred from one container
to another or when it changes direction
– Standard dust control techniques include the following:
 Wet Dust Suppression (sprays) with water @ 2 gal/ton
 Wet Dust Suppression with surfactant (hair spray) @0.2 gal/ton
 Dry Dust Collectors with fabric filters (baghouse and fans like a vacuum
cleaner)
 Additional dust mitigation measures identified for use at the Port Facility include:
 Covered Conveyors
 Telescoping Chutes (used in ship loading)
 Enclosed Rail Car Dumping Facility
2/7/2013
18
Fact Check # 6: Dust Control at Port is Acceptable?
 Most controversial item at the Port Facility is a proposed 100-acre,
uncovered coal storage pile
 Fugitive dust from open storage can be controlled by
 Wet dust suppression
 Compaction using heavy equipment
 Estimated cost of the Port Facility = $700 million (should include
purchase of adequate dust control equipment, but need to confirm
during permitting)
 Rely on Washington Department of Ecology to enforce state and
federal fugitive dust regulations
 Bob’s Fact Check Rating = 90%True (conventional technology)
2/7/2013
19
Fact Check Summary
• Bob’s Fact Checks are based on shipping 50 million tons
of coal/yr:
– Coal is a hazardous substance – 10% True (messy, but not hazardous)
– Powder River Basin coal improves air quality – 75% True (reduces acid
rain only)
– Coal Trains will leave a layer of dust across our state – 10% True
(mitigating measures significantly reduce coal losses)
2/7/2013
20
Fact Check Summary
• Bob’s Summary for shipping 50 million tons coal/yr
(continued):
– Coal Trains will cause delays at highway crossings – 90% true (local
input from emergency responders needed)
– Existing Rail System can accommodate new coal trains – 90% true
(needs to be confirmed by the BNSF RR)
– Port Trans-Loading Terminal can be operated without adverse affects on
air quality – 90% True (dust suppression and dust collection are
conventional technology)
2/7/2013
21
Conclusion
• A Chinese proverb seems appropriate:
– Sooner is better
– Slower is too late
• It’s nice to see the City of Pasco taking an active interest
in the possibility of increased rail traffic!
2/7/2013
22