With natural gas prices so low, and cost of coal pollution so high, it seems that burning coal in the U.S. doesn’t make economic sense. In the Gulf region, coal proposals have been pushed through on the public dime.We’ve been watching the progress of our colleagues in the Northwest. Unfortunately, we’ve been able to offer them examples of the serious pollution large piles of coal and petroleum cokefor exportcan bring to their waters and their air. When Oregon wants to argue against coal exports, they use Louisiana as an example of how the coal industry treats its neighbors like second class citizens.But while thecosts of coal terminals are apparent, the benefits are so much paper. At three minues intothis clip, financial forcasters at the Motley Fool laugh that Gulf coast coal terminals, expanded for the Asian market, will make any money(skip to 3 minutes in to see the discussion):In this clip, financial advisors repeatedly assure investors that Kinder-Morgan’s position is strong because coal is only a minor part of their investments. They then laugh at shipping coal to China. Tyler Crowe jokes “It’s not like they are going to ship Wyoming coal all the way…to the Gulf Coast…to get to the Asian Pacific market.” “It wouldn’t make sense to do that, Tyler, would it” smiles Aimee Duffy.But RAM Terminals proposes that its economic plan is just that. Is RAM pulling our leg? Will Louisiana allow the RAM terminal to dump its load down in Myrtle Grove, on top of our communities, while the supposed economic benefits are this risky? This terminal is a bad bet for Louisiana, a gamble we can hardly afford.Once again, Louisiana may well be swindled by financially dogy companies that will dump pollution on us, while failing to deliver promised economic benefits.Our coalition of groups has won a hearing on RAM’s Coastal Use Permit, on a Wednesday evening, 6:30 PM, the 14th of August, in Davant, LA, down on the east bank of Plaquemines. Emaildevin.martin@sierraclub.org if you like more information on how to get there and speak out against this dirty deal.If you can’t make it out, you can still tell DNR, the Army Corps, and DEQ that expanding these coal terminals, especially on top of a much needed restoration project, is not a risk we can take.Scott Eustis is GRN’s Coastal Wetland Specialist.UPDATE:Although they were supposed to finalize the deal early last year, Armstrong Coal, the parent company of RAM Terminals, officially withdrew going public 25 July 2013. The company did not give a reason as to why they were staying private.http://www.renaissancecapital.com/ipohome/news/Coal-producer-Armstrong-E…”Armstrong Energy, a producer and distributor of high sulfur thermal coal stationed in the midwestern US, withdrew its plans for an initial public offering on Thursday; it did not cite the reasons for its withdrawal. The St. Louis, MO-based company was founded in 2006 and initially filed for an IPO on October 12, 2011. Raymond James, FBR Capital Markets and Stifel were set to be the joint bookrunners on the deal.”2nd UPDATE: David Roberts at Grist reports that Goldman Sachs has proclaimed that, as China’s demand drops, coal export is a “bum investment.” Click through for an analysis of why China will stop buying coal.http://grist.org/climate-energy/goldman-sachs-says-coal-export-terminals-are-a-bad-investment/
