Dirty and Deadly Oil Train Projects Meet Defeat in California and Washington
'The American people have spoken: They do not want dirty and dangerous fossil fuel projects that will threaten their communities, their clean air and water, and the climate'
In what environmentalists described as a "historic victory," two separate proposed oil train facilities in Washington and California were roundly defeated this week.
"A few years ago, oil trains were the industry's back-door approach to getting crude oil to the market. Today, communities and decision makers along the West Coast are slamming that door shut."
--Matt Krogh, StandThe San Luis Obispo County Planning Commission on Wednesday voted 3-2 to reject a Phillips 66 oil train project, an outcome that was met by a standing ovation.
"Here's one for the people," said Martin Akel, a member of Mesa Refinery Watch, a group that opposes the rail-spur project, according to local newspaper The Tribune. "The commissioners got it finally. We finally beat back a major business institution that only had its self-interests in mind, not the people."
The Tribune describes the extent of Phillips 66's proposal:
Phillips 66 had sought approval to build a 1.3-mile rail spur from its Nipomo Mesa refinery to the main rail line so it could receive crude oil by train. The refinery now gets its crude by pipeline. The proposal called for deliveries from three 80-car trains per week, with each train hauling about 2.2 million gallons of crude oil.
The decision surprised observers, as a measure to defeat the project had failed on a 3-2 vote in May. The swing vote, Commissioner Jim Irving, said he changed his vote because "I don't think the case has been made that we can override the recommendations of our staff and the county, so I will [be] voting against it."
Indeed, many locals and officials from the county as well as neighboring regions had come out against the proposal, fearing that a derailment could spill oil and contaminate land throughout the railway's proposed route.
County Commissioner Eric Meyer read an impassioned statement before the vote asking his fellow commissioners to help defeat the facility, saying, "How can you ignore the actual pleas of our neighboring representatives who represent more than 10 million citizens [in California]. You are willing to accept the possibility of a death, or 20, or 100 [...] so this oil company can achieve a higher margin."
Meanwhile, Shell finally admitted defeat Thursday on an oil train facility in the small coastal town of Anacortes, Washington, by withdrawing its application for the project.
The plan would have brought fracked oil from Bakken fields of North Dakota to Anacortes by train, according to the Seattle Times.
More than 35,000 people had submitted public comments calling for the project to be rejected, notes the Sierra Club.
"This is a historic victory for the people of Skagit [County] and across Washington," said Stephanie Hillman, Northwest campaign representative for the Sierra Club. "The people of Washington continue to lead the charge to keep dirty fuels in the ground, with tens of thousands of people blocking this dirty and dangerous project."
"Today's announcement by Shell confirms a sea change in sentiment over the acceptability of allowing explosive oil trains through our communities," said Matt Krogh of Stand. "A few years ago, oil trains were the industry's back-door approach to getting crude oil to the market. Today, communities and decision makers along the West Coast are slamming that door shut."
"The American people have spoken: They do not want dirty and dangerous fossil fuel projects that will threaten their communities, their clean air and water, and the climate," added Lena Moffitt, director of Sierra Club's Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign. "The only solution is to keep dirty fuels in the ground, and hasten our transition onto 100 percent clean, renewable energy."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just hours left in our Spring Campaign, we're still falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
In what environmentalists described as a "historic victory," two separate proposed oil train facilities in Washington and California were roundly defeated this week.
"A few years ago, oil trains were the industry's back-door approach to getting crude oil to the market. Today, communities and decision makers along the West Coast are slamming that door shut."
--Matt Krogh, StandThe San Luis Obispo County Planning Commission on Wednesday voted 3-2 to reject a Phillips 66 oil train project, an outcome that was met by a standing ovation.
"Here's one for the people," said Martin Akel, a member of Mesa Refinery Watch, a group that opposes the rail-spur project, according to local newspaper The Tribune. "The commissioners got it finally. We finally beat back a major business institution that only had its self-interests in mind, not the people."
The Tribune describes the extent of Phillips 66's proposal:
Phillips 66 had sought approval to build a 1.3-mile rail spur from its Nipomo Mesa refinery to the main rail line so it could receive crude oil by train. The refinery now gets its crude by pipeline. The proposal called for deliveries from three 80-car trains per week, with each train hauling about 2.2 million gallons of crude oil.
The decision surprised observers, as a measure to defeat the project had failed on a 3-2 vote in May. The swing vote, Commissioner Jim Irving, said he changed his vote because "I don't think the case has been made that we can override the recommendations of our staff and the county, so I will [be] voting against it."
Indeed, many locals and officials from the county as well as neighboring regions had come out against the proposal, fearing that a derailment could spill oil and contaminate land throughout the railway's proposed route.
County Commissioner Eric Meyer read an impassioned statement before the vote asking his fellow commissioners to help defeat the facility, saying, "How can you ignore the actual pleas of our neighboring representatives who represent more than 10 million citizens [in California]. You are willing to accept the possibility of a death, or 20, or 100 [...] so this oil company can achieve a higher margin."
Meanwhile, Shell finally admitted defeat Thursday on an oil train facility in the small coastal town of Anacortes, Washington, by withdrawing its application for the project.
The plan would have brought fracked oil from Bakken fields of North Dakota to Anacortes by train, according to the Seattle Times.
More than 35,000 people had submitted public comments calling for the project to be rejected, notes the Sierra Club.
"This is a historic victory for the people of Skagit [County] and across Washington," said Stephanie Hillman, Northwest campaign representative for the Sierra Club. "The people of Washington continue to lead the charge to keep dirty fuels in the ground, with tens of thousands of people blocking this dirty and dangerous project."
"Today's announcement by Shell confirms a sea change in sentiment over the acceptability of allowing explosive oil trains through our communities," said Matt Krogh of Stand. "A few years ago, oil trains were the industry's back-door approach to getting crude oil to the market. Today, communities and decision makers along the West Coast are slamming that door shut."
"The American people have spoken: They do not want dirty and dangerous fossil fuel projects that will threaten their communities, their clean air and water, and the climate," added Lena Moffitt, director of Sierra Club's Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign. "The only solution is to keep dirty fuels in the ground, and hasten our transition onto 100 percent clean, renewable energy."
In what environmentalists described as a "historic victory," two separate proposed oil train facilities in Washington and California were roundly defeated this week.
"A few years ago, oil trains were the industry's back-door approach to getting crude oil to the market. Today, communities and decision makers along the West Coast are slamming that door shut."
--Matt Krogh, StandThe San Luis Obispo County Planning Commission on Wednesday voted 3-2 to reject a Phillips 66 oil train project, an outcome that was met by a standing ovation.
"Here's one for the people," said Martin Akel, a member of Mesa Refinery Watch, a group that opposes the rail-spur project, according to local newspaper The Tribune. "The commissioners got it finally. We finally beat back a major business institution that only had its self-interests in mind, not the people."
The Tribune describes the extent of Phillips 66's proposal:
Phillips 66 had sought approval to build a 1.3-mile rail spur from its Nipomo Mesa refinery to the main rail line so it could receive crude oil by train. The refinery now gets its crude by pipeline. The proposal called for deliveries from three 80-car trains per week, with each train hauling about 2.2 million gallons of crude oil.
The decision surprised observers, as a measure to defeat the project had failed on a 3-2 vote in May. The swing vote, Commissioner Jim Irving, said he changed his vote because "I don't think the case has been made that we can override the recommendations of our staff and the county, so I will [be] voting against it."
Indeed, many locals and officials from the county as well as neighboring regions had come out against the proposal, fearing that a derailment could spill oil and contaminate land throughout the railway's proposed route.
County Commissioner Eric Meyer read an impassioned statement before the vote asking his fellow commissioners to help defeat the facility, saying, "How can you ignore the actual pleas of our neighboring representatives who represent more than 10 million citizens [in California]. You are willing to accept the possibility of a death, or 20, or 100 [...] so this oil company can achieve a higher margin."
Meanwhile, Shell finally admitted defeat Thursday on an oil train facility in the small coastal town of Anacortes, Washington, by withdrawing its application for the project.
The plan would have brought fracked oil from Bakken fields of North Dakota to Anacortes by train, according to the Seattle Times.
More than 35,000 people had submitted public comments calling for the project to be rejected, notes the Sierra Club.
"This is a historic victory for the people of Skagit [County] and across Washington," said Stephanie Hillman, Northwest campaign representative for the Sierra Club. "The people of Washington continue to lead the charge to keep dirty fuels in the ground, with tens of thousands of people blocking this dirty and dangerous project."
"Today's announcement by Shell confirms a sea change in sentiment over the acceptability of allowing explosive oil trains through our communities," said Matt Krogh of Stand. "A few years ago, oil trains were the industry's back-door approach to getting crude oil to the market. Today, communities and decision makers along the West Coast are slamming that door shut."
"The American people have spoken: They do not want dirty and dangerous fossil fuel projects that will threaten their communities, their clean air and water, and the climate," added Lena Moffitt, director of Sierra Club's Beyond Dirty Fuels campaign. "The only solution is to keep dirty fuels in the ground, and hasten our transition onto 100 percent clean, renewable energy."