Kalama Manufacturing and Marine Export Facility Second Supplemental EIS

Submitted By

4777 Results

Search Type

Sort:

Sort Results By

Comment From: State Representative from Dist... (Alex Ybarra)

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

>> My name is Alex Ybarra. I'm a state representative from District 13, which is North Central Washington. Most importantly, I'm an advisor for the energy strategy Advisory Committee, which is tasked with meeting all of the 100% clean bills mea...↓

At the end of the day, the goals will be met. If this plant goes up, the goals will be met no matter if the plant is up or not, but we will achieve those climate goals that have been set in legislature. Another thing that I'd like to also talk about is forest fires. I live in eastern Washington and every fire that comes across, most of them in the Cascades come directly to my hometown of Quincy, Washington.

We had smoke for a week and a half before there was any smoke in the Seattle area at all because the fires come to us. If you talk to the folks that live in Kittitas County, Yakima county in the fire areas, it's not due to climate change, it's due to forest management. We had $65 million set aside to do more forest management which was not passed by a portion of the legislature so there was no forest management to happen. It's forest management that needs to happen to stop the forest fires, not climate change. We're doing something about climate change with the 100% clean bills.

No attachments

Comment From: Daphne White-Hall

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

My name is Daphne White-Hall, and I'm a native Washingtonian. I currently live in Lewis County. I'm a young professional and a student. I am very concerned about our economy and our environment, which is why I'm in total support of the Kalama project...↓

However, that is not the case with the Kalama project. Building the project will help a post-COVID-19 economy recover by providing over 1,000 jobs and 30 to $40 million in new taxes. That is outstanding. In addition, it will reduce global greenhouse gases by six million tons. As global demand for methanol increases, we need to have the project here in Washington State with the environmental regulations that we have using natural gas rather than Iran or Russia using coal without the same standards of environmental regulations.

We need to put this good science to work while benefiting our communities. Our families need real jobs and our region and State need real investment. Our economic problems were tough before and are getting worse with the COVID-19 crisis. We need to take action right now. I encourage the Department of Ecology to permit this project without delay. Thank you very much.

No attachments

Comment From: Jean Avery

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

>> Good evening, this is Jean Avery, I'm a resident of Vancouver. It is important to remember the history of this place we call home. The area we're talking about is the ancestral homeland of Native Americans. Indigenous peoples continue to hon...↓

Several of these natural areas are designated as IBAs, Important Bird and Biodiversity Areas. IBAs are internationally recognized as globally important for the conservation of bird populations. The Washington State Birding Trail includes these IBAs close to Kalama. JB Hansen National Wildlife Refuge, 6,000 acres of Columbia River islands and slews, Chinook County Park and the 1,900 acre Cape Disappointment State Park, Richfield National Wildlife Refuge, 5,000 acres of wetlands, grasslands, and woodlands. Also Vancouver Lake Park and Columbia River lowlands.

The NWIW plant would degrade the area's air and water threatening natural areas and wildlife. Yet none of these significant impacts are included in the SSEIS. I would like to end with this Native American proverb. Listen to the wind, it talks. Listen to the silence, it speaks. Listen to your heart, it knows. Thank you, and good evening.

No attachments

Comment From: Marcella Chandler

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

My name is Marcella Chandler, and I'm a retired nurse and mother of two sons. I live in downtown Vancouver, Washington just blocks from the Columbia River. The Pacific Northwest and the river have been an important part of my life since I can remembe...↓

We have talked about safety. The refinery would be storing explosive methanol on dredged up sand that has a moderate to high risk of liquifying in an earthquake or exploding in a wildfire, leak, or other accident with the knowledge that there are three schools within the blast zone. We have talked about the impact on our water.

This refinery will use five million gallons of water from the Columbia and Kalama aquifers daily with potentially six tankers per month transporting methanol to China. Spills that will happen deplete water off oxygen potentially creating dead zones beneath them. The refinery will not just affect Kalama, but most of the Columbia River, all the towns, cities, farms, wetlands, forests, and wildlife.

It will also have an effect on the waters and marine life off the Washington and Oregon coast. I can tell you this, if this refinery is built, I will be extremely concerned for the health and safety of my children, our grandchildren, friends, community, and our beautiful region. Northwest Innovation Works has not been honest with us. I ask the Department of Ecology to reject the methanol refinery and deny any shoreline permits for this project. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Amanda Swenson

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

My name is Amanda Swinson and I'm an Operating Engineer, Local 701 member. I am the mother of two beautiful little girls and the wife of another operating engineer that works on the Columbia River, maintaining safe travels. I started in the ope...↓

I am in support of the Kalama project, and I appreciate the review done by the Department of Ecology. I am apprehensive about those who are out there that want to ignore the science and I believe more than enough study has been done to continue. I ask and believe that this is the time for the department to permit the project and proceed and move forward with all the benefits it will provide. Thank you, Department of Ecology. Good work, and please move forward swiftly.

No attachments

Comment From: Amy Tejcka

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

My name is Amy Tesca. I live in Woodland, Washington about 12 miles downwind of the proposed methanol refinery in Kalama. I am begging you, please do not allow Northwest Innovation Works to build a methanol refinery in our backyard. We have wildfires...↓

What happens to us if the East wind decides to blow fire into Kalama? Why would anyone consider building such a monstrosity in such a densely populated area? Why would we risk our beloved Columbia River so key to the entire Pacific Northwest economy and way of life? What about the real possibility of a Cascadia mega earthquake? What about five million gallons of water the plant will be drawing daily from our local aquifer? What about our sadly dwindling salmon and steelhead runs?

Property values are likely to tank locally, including my own here in Washington if this plant is approved. Folks are going to love the unsightly Clunes of hazardous vapor clouds billowing up higher than those blown from Mount st. Helens eruption in 1980. Who wants to live near that? This proposal is absolutely ludicrous. It's so dangerous.

What are we building it for, more plastic? We don't need more plastic in the world. We need less, and we don't need a methanol refinery in Southwest Washington. My grandchildren are five and seven years old. Please protect their health and safety. It's their air and water we're talking about here. You are the Washington State Department of Ecology. It's your job to protect us. Please do not grant this permit. Thank you for listening.

No attachments

Comment From: Ann Waendelin

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

I'm Anna Vendilin. I live in Camas, Washington, and I'm speaking in opposition of permitting the Kalama methanol refinery. I wholeheartedly support the reasoning of the prior speakers in opposition of this project.

I simply want to add, we in the West...↓

No attachments

Comment From: April Matzenbachar

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

Hi. I'm a registered nurse. I've lived all over the nation. We fought fracking in Colorado as well because what I learned about fracking is even though this company is saying that they're going to have zero water pollution, from the studies I'v...↓

Of course, with this being a high earthquake zone, there's no guarantee that all that pollutant won't come out into the local waterways and air and just really toxify people. Of course, they would lose their houses, not to mention their health. I wanted to say to the people that are in the oil and gas industry, that I do appreciate that you do need a good-paying job, but now's the time when our country we have to evolve, we have to change and support more green industries that get our energy from other sources, perhaps carbon sequestration, alternative plastics.

In closing, I would like to finish this with a Native American comment. We know that the white man does not understand our ways. One portion of the land is the same to him as the next, for he is a stranger who comes in the night and takes the land, whatever he needs. The earth is not his brother, but his enemy, and when he has conquered it he moves on. He leaves his father's graves and his children birthright is forgotten. Thank you. Bye.

No attachments

Comment From: Brandon Bowersox-Johnson

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

My name is Brandon Bauersox Johnson. I have been a Washingtonian for four years and before that was an Elected City Council member for eight years in Urbana, Illinois, where I grew up. I'm not just a policymaker, also a father, and I don't want my so...↓

That's simply absurd on its face. The idea that we should build a new fracked gas methanol refinery and lock-in pollution for 40 more years because somehow if we don't someone else will, that's absurd. That's a race to the bottom and it is planning to fail as the earlier speaker said. That displacement is a dangerous myth. It's obvious to anybody, we can't solve climate change by expanding fossil fuel infrastructure and investments. Furthermore, we can't predict as the market analysis does that in the next 40 years, there won't be cleaner technologies that might make plastics or fuel.

By investing now in fossil fuels, we're actually slowing those investments that need to go into cleaner sources for plastics or fuels, those investments in cleaner energy or green jobs to help the workers and communities switch to a cleaner greener economy. Please remove this displacement theory, put that myth to rest. Instead, please give a full accounting of this plant without the displacement and a path for Washington to meet its carbon budget. Please stand with the science, the native tribes, and the youth, the 15-year-olds on this call. Throw out that displacement theory and deny this. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Brandon Campbell

9/22/20 @ 11:00 AM

my name is Brandon Campbell. I'm a war veteran out of the United States Air Force. I'm a small business owner. My company is in Vancouver. I live about six months out of the year on the Kalama River and I'm a lifelong Pacific Northwest center absent ...↓

There's nothing backing up this company and the assumptions that are inherent to it as to the reductions in greenhouse fuels that will necessarily increase these pollutants in Southwest Washington in our backyard. China seems to have a problem with their air quality and we should be supporting China in bettering their local air quality and not to the detriment of our own. These Chinese methanol demands and requests for providing materials necessary to produce plastics can be built in China. They have the technology to build these plants in China. We don't need to be supporting fracking in Clark County and in Cowlitz County in Southwest Washington.

We don't need to be subsidizing our air quality or the Chinese air quality with our own. The Southwest Washington is built on fishing and hunting and also production. I support logging. I support manufacturers but I don't support Chinese air quality being benefited by a detriment to our own. Let's keep tight lines, go out there and fish and that's all I got to say.

No attachments

Comment From: Jef Gunn

9/22/20 @ 10:57 AM

I am from the region. My father and his family grew up on Mount Saint Helens near Spirit Lake, and later in Kelso and Longview. I was born in Seattle, and now live in Portland. I travel through Kalama frequently. We are blue collar working stock. My ...↓

However, there's more going on here in this project than jobs. There is also the need to protect home, to take care of home for our communities all across the geography of this proposed project. The conditions we enjoy on this planet–temperate atmosphere, oxygen, water, vegetation, animals–are not common. This planet is unique and rare! This Great Northwest region is uniquely special. Not just because it's home, but because it's beautiful and abundant. I am a carpenter, not a scientist, so I'm not going to pretend fluency with the technical data. I see as well as you do the staggering projected atmospheric and aquatic pollution that is bound to happen as a result of a project of this scale dealing with fracked gas and methanol. I say it's bound to happen because I'm a carpenter. Whatever is built will eventually fail. Period. These projects fail all the time. Catastrophically. And the SSEIS has already called out multiple issues that have not been adequately addressed.

It will not fail only in Kalama, but along the fracked gas pipeline, all the way back its source in Canada. I have a stake in this there, too as my mother's family are in BC and Alberta. And it will fail all along the shipping route to China and into cars there or plastics there. Even without failure, massive pollution will follow the trail. Enough is enough.

I know, and you know too, that fossil fuels have, in just two centuries, created wealth for some, ease of life for many through many important inventions, and at the same time destroyed life on this planet. Death and deadly weather are part of the legacy of fossil fuels. They simply go hand in hand. That's not going away unless we change course now. NOW.

The world has been hearing the warnings since the early 50s, for my whole lifespan. We have to learn. There are new technologies already in existence to lead us into a clean sustainable future. These new technologies also will create jobs. Let's put our efforts and money into these new sustainable technologies that will usher in a new era of clean prosperity for all. Lots of work making the way for a dependable future.

Jef Gunn

No attachments

Comment From: David Berger

9/22/20 @ 10:29 AM

Thanks for you opportunity to comment. Please deny the shorelines permit for the Kalama manufacturing and export facility. The environmental consequences of increased green house gases, potential fracking impacts, possible increased plastic productio...↓

I live in the gorge, and recently saw a train cause a fire on the Oregon train tracks. These likely fires coupled with highly volatile trains containing fracked gas are terrifying.

In addition, I have seen large amounts of micro-plastics on what used to be pristine ocean beaches. The potential for this facility to cause an increase of toxic plastic in the food chain is another reason to deny this permit.

Thanks again for the chance to comment.

David Berger

No attachments

Comment From: Kristyn MacPhail

9/22/20 @ 10:24 AM

Thank you for your work to protect Washingtons environment and acknowledgement that previous environmental analysis of Northwest Innovation Works (NWIW) Methanol refinery proposal in Kalama, Washington have been inaccurate and inadequate.

This new Dra...↓

Despite these marginal improvements, the evaluation of potential mitigation and displacement contained in this analysis is misleading and concerning in its reliance on speculative and unenforceable assumptions. One can simply look to the impacts of this pandemic to see evidence of incredible uncertainty and volatility in energy market dynamics. It is dangerous to presume this analysis can accurately predict global fuel markets, technology developments, consumer behavior, or regulations for the coming four decades. Furthermore, the SEIS provides too little detail on the actual mitigation that would be accomplished within the voluntary mitigation framework, nor does this mitigation address the full impacts of NWIWs emissions that will occur overseas. The mitigation framework is too vague for Ecology to conclude that this projects impacts will be mitigated, and the urgency of climate change demands that mitigation should be the last option (after all other impacts are reduced) in order to address unavoidable impacts, not simply to maintain the status quo as we continue to build out the fossil fuel industry.

Even with all of its flaws, this analysis confirms that NWIWs proposed facility would become one of the greatest sources of climate pollution in Washington. It is simply unacceptable for Washington to build an unequivocally and enormously polluting facility based on speculative analysis and a faint hope of theoretical emission reductions. Ecology should dismiss the speculative basis that this project could displace even more polluting facilities, and instead should base its permitting decision on what is reasonably foreseeable and indeed, assured, about this project--that it would cause millions of tons of greenhouse gas pollution each year, for 40 years, and is profoundly inconsistent with achieving Washingtons climate goals.

The evidence in this draft SEIS demonstrates that Washington should deny NWIWs proposal to build and operate this dangerous methanol refinery in Kalama. We cannot keep building fossil fuel export infrastructure and expect to address the dangers of climate change.

Please keep our communities safe and keep Washington on track to meet our goals for reducing climate pollution.

No attachments

Comment From: Catherine Spofford

9/22/20 @ 9:56 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Alice Shapiro

9/22/20 @ 9:52 AM

There are many reasons to oppose the Kalama methanol plant. You know that methanol is a potent greenhouse gas. We are in the midst of a climate crisis and extreme drought in Washington as well as Oregon, where I live, as do my two young granddaught...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: anna waendelin

9/22/20 @ 9:52 AM

I submit my opposition to the Kalama Methanol Refinery. We in the West are keenly aware of the effects of global warming and we do not need another 12 million tons of carbon pollution, as this refinery is projected to emit. What is needed is to pr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Patricia Auer

9/22/20 @ 9:25 AM

This new Dra...↓

Please keep our communities safe and keep Washington on track to meet our goals for reducing climate pollution.

No attachments

Comment From: Meccah Boynton-Brown

9/22/20 @ 9:20 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Timothy Baer

9/22/20 @ 8:50 AM

Hello,

I appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts and position on this issue, even while I despair of the efficacy of the action.

Please deny this application for construction. I love my life in rural King County, WA. I bel...↓

When we base our decisions on what the other guy (China) might do, we're on shaky ground. Clean up your own backyard, and then ask the neighbors if they will join you. Do not pretend that you are waiting for the other guy to act first, or that it's hopeless because he never will.

While humans may have an inherent bias toward negative stories, we can choose to tell each other positive stories, and work toward the reality we long for. After all, we are the ones creating all of this, together. Which side will you support? One argument seems to favor the status quo, the other is more visionary. One is powerless; the other works toward a better future.

I've heard that there are three types of falsehood: fibs, lies and (the most egregious) statistics. By your own admission the current studies are (at best) very speculative. You can just as easily create a study opposing as supporting this plant. Add upstream and downstream emissions, for example. There are many other factors to consider.

Fundamentally, the current conclusions are clearly based on untrue assumptions. e.g.: "We cannot quickly change the way we've always done things in the past." Really? Is that your experience of the worldwide response to the current pandemic? We actually CAN make wide, sweeping changes. Worldwide. We CAN stop using so much plastics and methanol, for example.

What's missing is willpower. And leadership. WA Department of Ecology can do better; can live up to its mandate. Please show the type of leadership that the overwhelming majority of humans around the world are pleading for their leaders to take. Do it for humanity (if the non-human world doesn't figure into the equation.)

It troubles me to see the disenfranchised being used as pawns in a media war waged on all of us (By the fossil-fuel industry!) to support this abomination of a plan. The plight of families who have lost their livelihood is not lost on me. Change is inevitable, though, and narrow self-interest will not serve the self in the long run.

Deny the permit!

Thank you,

--Tim Baer

No attachments

Comment From: Brenda Michaels

9/22/20 @ 7:59 AM

This new Dra...↓

Please keep our communities safe and keep Washington on track to meet our goals for reducing climate pollution.

No attachments

Comment From: Nichole Snyder

9/22/20 @ 7:42 AM

The Kalama Manufacturing plant would be a climate disaster. After our state just spent a week and a half being covered in wildfire smoke that left our air unhealthy to breathe are we really considering opening a plant that is meant to convert natural...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Mariana Sanchez

9/22/20 @ 7:36 AM

This new Dra...↓

Please keep our communities safe and keep Washington on track to meet our goals for reducing climate pollution.

No attachments

Comment From: Jimmy Peterson

9/22/20 @ 7:20 AM

I would like to see this project begin construction. It would allow for a new source safe reusable and sustainable energy source to be used to further our society. This project would open a large number of jobs in the construction of the project.

Than...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Dennis C

9/22/20 @ 7:08 AM

The absurd notion that this refinery would actually reduce global GHG emissions hinges on the highly speculative prediction that it would displace less clean burning methanol production facilities and assumes that the methanol market will continue to...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Dave Hale

9/22/20 @ 7:05 AM

My comment on the KMMEF DSSEIS:

Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important decision making process.

My name is Dave Hale. I live in Silver Creek, WA and I'm a retired biologist. In my ...↓

I would like to address the issue of our GHGs in the state of Washington and the contribution that the Kalama methanol refinery would have on those emissions.

Having reviewed the DSSEIS it is clear that Ecology has done a fairly good job of analyzing the life cycle of contributions of the project and also of the current alternative processes. I realize the difficulty of attempting to determine by projection, from sources of information with varying and sometimes conflicting data, the contributions of GHGs resulting from the development, extraction and transport of natural gas. This is also very difficult when analyzing the downstream use contributions, especially in a foreign county where we have sometimes questionable information and no control over how the product of this project will be used.

It is clear that the argument, used by NWIW, of displacement of more carbon intense processes over in China is highly speculative and dependent on a number of factors that rely on social, economic and developmental uncertainties. Looking at the results of the DSSEIS in this area, it's clear to me that the displacement theory would be OK if it actually resulted in offsetting dirtier forms of plastic and/or fuel production and use. Sadly, the analysis seems to rely on increasing use of fossil fuels and lacks the comparison of alternative methods of energy production (renewables). I believe that Ecology has, as part of the analysis, the need to compare and contrast the results when a greater proportion of the transport and electric energy may come from solar, wind and other low carbon power generation. China is rapidly developing electric car technology and has been using a greater portion of their solar panel production in country. I realize that renewable power production increases are also in the realm of speculation as well. Therefore, I will consider that KMMEF methanol could, under higher oil prices and greater restrictions on coal processes in Asia, displace some dirtier methanol processes like naphtha and coal. That's speculative; China is investing in new coal power plants and not just within China.

That leaves us with the Kalama NWIW site which will potentially produce, on average, approximately 1M T CO2e GHGs per year for 40 years, locally, and 5M T CO2e GHGs, for 40 years, globally. That represents a net increase in carbon produced in state (and globally) as a result of a proposed business. This doesn't fit with our current goals to reduce our carbon footprint or to protect our air and water. Further, mitigation is questionable with no definite plans to localize carbon sequestering or prevent additive effects of air pollution of the lower Columbia River airshed. With consideration of the additional risks to our important Columbia River ecosystem, human health impacts that can't be mitigated, and use of resources (natural gas, water, and electricity from a grid that relies on fossil fuels for make-up power when hydro is insufficient), Washington State can expect to bear the brunt of the negatives of this project with little benefits.

My work in natural resource conservation was aimed at repair, enhancement and protection; not posing new risks.

Please deny the Shorelines Permit for KMMEF.

Thank you,

Dave Hale, Silver Creek, WA98585

No attachments

Comment From: Jean Avery

9/22/20 @ 6:43 AM

The Kalama refinery would have a huge environmental "footprint"-- if that term can be used to refer to pipelines and ocean routes.

-- The map on page 41 shows pipeline routes that would supply fracked gas to Kalama: 600 miles from British Columbia, pl...↓

-- On page 48 is a color map of the world, with a red line showing the marine route from Kalama to China. As proposed, large tankers would transit 5,000 nautical miles from Kalama to China. Product would be unloaded, and the tankers would return empty to Kalama. This 10,000-mile round trip would be completed approximately once a week. (The SSEIS estimates 36 to 72 shipments per year; see page C-4).

Although the SSEIS includes plans to mitigate emissions within Washington, it is less clear

(a) if there will be any mitigation outside of the state and

(b) if there will be mitigation for non-emissions, such as marine fuel.

In conclusion:

1, The enormous reach of this project -- across the continent and across the globe -- would be hugely impactful, even beyond the stated GHG emissions.

2. The SSEIS fails to provide a complete, multi-dimensional plan for mitigation.

3. The scope of this project seems far beyond the regulatory purview of one state's Dept. of Ecology.

The Climate Clock is ticking. Please deny this project.

(Presented as oral testimony on Tuesday morning, 9/22/2020, with this revision: Neil's slide confirms zero mitigation out of state.)

No attachments

Comment From: Greg Hoffman

9/22/20 @ 6:34 AM

"We are facing a man made disaster of global scale, our greatest threat in thousands of year: climate change," said David Attenborough at the UN Climate Change Summit. "If we don't take action, the collapse of our civilizations and the extinction of ...↓

WHAT OTHER APOCALYPTIC WARNING DO WE NEED TO HEAR? COULD THERE BE A MORE PERILOUS MESSAGE?

The proposed methanol refinery in Kalama would pollute as much as 1.2 million cars and use millions of gallons of water from the Columbia River each day, polluting the air with cancer causing toxins.

Department of Ecology and other local decision-makes, YOU MUST BE LEADERS IN OUR FIGHT AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE. Like it or not, the continuation of civilizations and the natural world upon which we depend is partially in your hands.

This is not a dress rehearsal. Wield your influence and be the North West climate change champions we need you to be and put an end to the methanol refinery NOW!

No attachments

Comment From: Deborah Kramer

9/22/20 @ 6:29 AM

I am against the Kalama Methanol Plant. Keep dirty emissions and fuel out of our beautiful state. Global warming is a serious threat. Protect Washington state and future generations from this dirty project. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Jim Byrne

9/22/20 @ 6:26 AM

I do not want a methanol plant anywhere in the Pacific Northwest. Last week SW Washington suffered the worst air quality in the world and tropical storms ravaged the south east. Some claim climate change is a hoax, but I believe it is real; and the...↓

I have been a WDFW fish biologist for 28 years and have monitored climate change locally. It is accelerating annually, with this summer being a clear (or smokey) indicator that the time for action has ended. It is time for action. Methane gas is 20 times more dangerous for the climate than CO2. This project is fraught with methane gas leak potential, from the initial fracking process in Canada, through the transit process to Kalama. It is not even a WA or US company that benefits, but a Chinees company whose previous positions are contradictory.

This is not good for the Pacific northwest. Do not permit this plant. Thank you.

Jim Byrne

No attachments

Comment From: Sharon Kalister

9/22/20 @ 6:25 AM

Re: Kalama Manufacturing and Marine Export Facility Second Supplemental EIS.

Climate change is real and it's here now ... showing the impacts in the PNW with unprecedented 60 mph winds this month that spread wildfires across areas that have not histor...↓

No attachments

Comment From: George Vaughan

9/22/20 @ 6:16 AM

Having kept myself informed by reading updates and the latest Dept. of Ecology report, my opinion continues to oppose the building of the Kalama Methanol Plant. My main objections are: 1. it is counter-productive to our efforts at reducing Greenhous...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Corey Gedrose

9/22/20 @ 6:15 AM

I hope we can all agree we desire to live and raise our families in a safe, healthy environment. Our family home in Prescott is one of the closest to the proposed refinery, just 1/2 mile directly across the river. We will no longer feel safe in our h...↓

As if earthquake, fire and mass shooting lock down drills aren't enough to frighten our children, we will now have to introduce chemical plant explosion drills into our homes and schools. Can you imagine the ear-piercing tsunami-like blaring warning sirens and having to quickly shelter in place after donning air masks and sealing all the doors and windows after an accident releases toxic, flammable chemicals into the air? According to an independent analysis conducted by the Northwest Citizen Science Initiative, the entire downtown and all 3 Kalama schools are within the glass-shattering "blast zone". I don't know if our home would still be standing after such an explosion.

It is unbelievable to me that people in positions of local leadership and authority think this methanol plant is a good thing. We all should have the right to breathe clean, healthy air and feel safe in our community. We cannot let the quality of our life and environment be determined by those who care more about profits than the people in their very own neighborhood. Please protect our health and safety and say no to the world's largest methanol refinery in our backyard.

No attachments

Comment From: Karlyn Gedrose

9/22/20 @ 6:05 AM

Five years ago, my husband, Greg and I purchased what we considered to be our "dream property" in Prescott, Oregon along the Columbia river. We were married on the beach in front of our home last summer.�You can see Steelscape and the proposed...↓

Greg and I found out about the refinery plan a few years ago. We would NEVER have purchased here had we known. NOT ONCE have Prescott residents ever been directly contacted to let us know what's going on. Living just 1/2 mile, we are probably more vulnerable to health and safety risks than anyone in Kalama! There have never been any direct mailers or signs to let us know we are living in the blast zone. THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MANDATORY INFORMATION COMMUNICATED AT THE VERY BEGINNING STAGES. Consequently, we were denied the opportunity to engage in the initial public hearings and comment periods.

NW Innovation Works did not effectively communicate to residents when a similar plan was in place for the Port of Tacoma. When they learned about it, residents there pleaded their case and won - no methanol plant is being built there and it should not be built in Kalama either!

This is untested, "new" technology proposed by a company that has no experience building methanol plants! It would be bad enough to allow a knowledgeable company with many years of experience - at least they might have learned a few safety tips over the years...but to allow a brand new FOREIGN-BASED company to come in using us as guinea pigs? Really? How can you possibly even consider building this hazardous facility when so many lives are at risk? ��

Methanol is HIGHLY TOXIC TO HUMANS AND ANIMALS. It is most dangerous when ingested but inhalation of high concentrations of vapor and absorption through the skin are just as bad for producing toxic effects. The risk for cancer and other illnesses to those of us living in Prescott will surely increase.

We understand the desire for more jobs brought into the local Kalama area, but for Prescott residents, we gain NOTHING. A recent study found property values decreased up to 11% after an industrial plant opened.�Another study indicates that air pollution has a significant negative loss on home prices within a 2 mile radius of a refinery. By law we now have to disclose our knowledge if we want to sell. Would you buy a home in the blast zone directly facing a dangerous, noisy, toxic, eyesore like this?

Prescott is home to young children and the elderly, the most vulnerable to health risks resulting from air pollution. Prescott Beach is a popular county park providing exceptional fishing, windsurfing and recreational opportunities. The methanol refinery with it's 245' flare stack, vapor plumes reaching 2 1/2 miles high, new dock for tankers and 72 million gallons of on-site methanol storage would degrade the quality of Prescott Beach. Prescott citizens do not support sacrificing the health, livability, and economic future of our community to a dangerous fossil fuel export project. We ask you to advocate for our community and do everything in your power to deny the permit.

Department of Ecology, how are you going to live with yourself if you approve this, knowing the potential risks, and then there is an earthquake or some other catastrophic accident? NW Innovation Works can implement all the safety precautions they want in constructing and running this monster, but they CANNOT PREVENT HUMAN ERROR, the cause of many refinery "accidents."

Gerard Hawkins, CEO of GBK Enterprises summarizes in his presentation entitled "Methanol Plant Experiences In The Last Twenty Years" states: "If it can go wrong, it will... Apparent safe systems can fail."

Please reject the permit for building the world's largest methanol plant in our front yard.

Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Ruth Pettis

9/22/20 @ 5:50 AM

This new Dra...↓

Please keep our communities safe and keep Washington on track to meet our goals for reducing climate pollution.

No attachments

Comment From: Debra Lee Keim

9/22/20 @ 5:30 AM

I do not support extending a permit for the Kalama Manufacturing and Marine Export Facility. With all the extreme climate events we are experiencing now and predicted for our future, I find it devastatingly short sighted to proceed with this facility...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Lori Sarancik

9/22/20 @ 5:25 AM

I am a resident of Longview, WA, and I appreciate the opportunity to leave my comments on this project. First of all, I live inside the city limits of Longview, and, as such, would not be able to visually see the new facility. It would not impact my ...↓everyday travels whatsoever because I live and work in Longview. I suppose any particulate that is air-born would have the possibility of impacting me without me being aware of it. Because I am not a scientist, nor have I seen a study of this phenomenon, I cannot comment on the health impacts of the air after this facility is in operation. I would be interested to see how the Longview/Kelso area would be impacted by this. Also, my home and property would likely not change in value were the facility built and operating. Having said these things, I cannot speak from the point of view of having this facility built in my very own field of vision. So, I think those opinions of folks living near the location of the facility should be considered and studied with great detail. My interest in building the facility is economic. I have a teenage son who is working toward entering a workforce, and I interact with a lot of his friends who are in this stage of life as well. I believe that the number of jobs to build the facility and the number of jobs that will be available once it is operational are a very important point. These positions would provide opportunities for our youth that is maturing, so they would not have to leave town to find jobs with a good wage. Also, I have heard that the facility is sponsoring Workforce training. This is so important in our area where so many of the kids live at the poverty level and may not have an opportunity to study in college post high school. The facility could be a game-changer for our youth living below the poverty level. I believe we have a high percentage of youth in both the Longview and Kelso School Districts who participate in the free lunch program. These statistics are available from DSHS. Along with the number of new job positions available to our youth, this workforce training program is a huge need that the facility would help fill in our community. Finally, I believe the tax revenues from the business operation could be a big benefit to building and repairing our county infrastructure, recreational facilities, and community programs. We should look carefully at these things. So, to conclude, I am, as a resident of Longview, looking at a lot of economic and workforce benefits from this facility and it is attractive. If we carefully study and consider the health and financial impacts of the residents of Kalama and those living near to the facility, and we find they will have every opportunity to be free from physical and financial harm, then I believe it is a good project. Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment.

No attachments

Comment From: Joel Caldwell

9/22/20 @ 4:54 AM

My name is Joel Caldwell of Toledo washington. I am writing to ask Ecology to please deny the project. 6 months ago my wife and I had our first child. Now the entire west coast seems to be burning in relations to the amount of carbon we have put in t...↓

For future generations we must scale back emissions and halt climate change. please deny NWIW's refinery in Kalama!

Thank you,

Joel Caldwell

No attachments

Comment From: Rebekah Gaxiola

9/22/20 @ 4:54 AM

Director Watson and Department of Ecology,

Please reject the proposal to build and operate the gas-to-methanol refinery in Kalama. The negative ecological impacts of this refinery are far-reaching and it's irresponsible to move forward with this proje...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Cynthia Jones

9/22/20 @ 4:48 AM

Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to comment. I am calling on the Department of Ecology to reject the methanol refinery.

My name is Cynthia Jones. While I grew up in Colorado, I have lived in Edmonds, Washington for the last 30 years. I ...↓

One of the main causes of climate change is the burning of fossil fuels. If we wish to address climate change, we cannot continue to burn fossil fuels, including methanol.

The proposed methanol refinery would create millions of tons of greenhouse gas pollution each year, and would lock us in to doing so for the next 40 years.

We cannot be distracted thinking mitigation will solve the problem. Nor can we believe that the only way to proceed is to continue to pollution-emitting plants. While we need to think globally, we need to act locally. I am not comfortable with increasing pollution in my state with the hope of decreasing pollution across the globe.

I treasure clean air and the opportunity to spend time in the great outdoors. I urge you to join me in working to protect our climate by facilitating the move away from fossil fuels. The Kalama Methanol plant will increase the burning of fossil fuels, increase the level of pollution in our state, and make it close to impossible to achieve Washington state climate goals. I urge the Department of Ecology to reject the methanol refinery.

Thank you.

Cynthia Jones

No attachments

Comment From: Sydney Brahmavar

9/22/20 @ 4:42 AM

The idea that a methanol plant is being considered in the "progressive" state of Washington is abhorrent. At a time when we need to be forward thinking and stop destroying our planet with disastrous greenhouses gases, the environmental impacts of thi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: RICHARD STERN

9/22/20 @ 4:21 AM

This new Dra...↓

Please keep our communities safe and keep Washington on track to meet our goals for reducing climate pollution.

No attachments

Comment From: carolyn atkinson

9/22/20 @ 4:18 AM

My name is Carolyn Atkinson and I work at an elementary school in Seattle. I am a young person who struggles with climate-related terror.

My students understand that they are growing up in a world in crisis. I prepared these comments under the smoke o...↓

My students are anxious. Can you imagine the despair and powerlessness of being 10 years old and knowing that we have only 10 years left to course correct? The most terrifying impacts of climate change are projected to hit us well within my lifetime. Before the end of the century, CO2 levels are likely to rise to the point of impairing human cognition. This concern is absent from the EIS.

The Kalama plant is justifying itself with the ridiculous logic that somehow, over the next 40 years, this plant will emit less than hypothetical other plants. This is an absurdity. 2020 shows that significant but long foreseeable economic, ecological, and human system collapses are here. The next 40 years will be so unpredictable that most of my generation has agreed that we won't bother to plan for retirement because of the scale of chaos on our horizon. The EIS is ridiculously optimistic. Assuming "Business as usual" indefinitely is absurdity.

The ecological and political instability that breaks the 40 year speculation of this environmental statement is caused by the climate crisis.

The instability is caused by fossil fuel expansion.

The instability is caused by projects EXACTLY like this one

It is exacerbated by the commitment to dishonesty of all fossil companies INCLUDING Northwest Innovations, which has wasted DOE time with "data" so optimistic and inaccurate that this whole environmental impact process had to be repeated. We don't want to work with careless firms when the stakes are this high. The EIS should accurately account for historical failures of this industry to clean up after itself and prevent leaks.

It is time for those with the responsibility to do the right thing to quit saying "well, just a little bit more". The planet doesn't have a little bit more to give!

Protect, preserve and enhance the environment for current and future generations. I am one of the children of the generation that you were supposed to fix this mess for. We are grown now, and we are angry that the mess is still here for us to clean up. Don't make it bigger. Reject the statement based on incomplete and dishonest data. It is not worth it for temporary construction jobs when there's so much other construction to FIX this mess that needs to be done.

No attachments

Comment From: Mark Wells

9/22/20 @ 4:16 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Megan Cover

9/22/20 @ 4:12 AM

Burning methanol as fuel would generate millions of tons of pollution each year. In 2018 and 2019, NWIW informed potential investors that methanol from the planned refinery could be burned as fuel overseas, in sharp contrast to claims NWIW mad...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Claire Butler

9/22/20 @ 4:10 AM

After enduring days of the worst air quality measurements in the world due to west coast wildfires, I cannot imagine a more ill-timed proposal for further deterioration of our shared air quality. Dept of Ecology needs to examine its priorities, at a...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kelly Lindmark

9/22/20 @ 4:04 AM

This new Dra...↓

Please keep our communities safe and keep Washington on track to meet our goals for reducing climate pollution.

No attachments

Comment From: Gunnar Leidel

9/22/20 @ 3:50 AM

I would just like to say that I lived in Centralia for four years and the lack of work that's there in the the amount of work that will come for passing of this facility being built will change lives and make things better there thank you

No attachments

Comment From: Clint Bryson

9/22/20 @ 3:41 AM

I am writing to comment in favor of approving the needed permits for the proposed Northwest Innovation Works Kalama Methanol facility. This project provides an opportunity for tremendous investment in the area while being a part of addressing greenho...↓

Respectfully, Clint Bryson

No attachments

Comment From: jeff wilson

9/22/20 @ 3:36 AM

This is not a perfect project. There is no perfect project. The process to provide employment opportunities has been overshadowed by poor handling of the review process by Ecology. This process has contaminated future project inquiries due to the ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Olivia Hill

9/22/20 @ 3:28 AM

This new Dra...↓

Please keep our communities safe and keep Washington on track to meet our goals for reducing climate pollution.

No attachments

Comment From: Emily Moon

9/22/20 @ 3:26 AM

I strongly oppose Northwest Innovation Works' proposed Kalama methanol facility. As the draft SSEIS shows, the plant would be one of the most significant pollution generators in Washington. The Second EIS's additional analysis lends proof that the mo...↓

I urge the Department of Ecology to deny all permits for this project and to work tirelessly to safeguard our critically sensitive environment.

Thank you,

Emily Moon

No attachments

Comment From: ahnetta fields

9/22/20 @ 3:22 AM

I bought this house in February and I paid a lot of money for it because i wanted a view of the river. If this passes I want the names of the people that passed it and the names of the owners because I will sue for the devaluation of my property bec...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Megan Richie

9/22/20 @ 3:17 AM

I oppose this facility and ask that their permits be denied. This is a risk our community cannot afford. The cost is too high. They would be using an obscene amount of natural gas to produce the plastics our world does not need at a cost our communit...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ethan Pfahl

9/22/20 @ 3:14 AM

I would like to see this project progress and begin construction. It would allow for a safe reusable and sustainable energy source to be used to further our society. This project would also provide many new jobs, for the maintenance and the construct...↓

Thank you for your time

No attachments

Comment From: David DiGiandomenico

9/22/20 @ 3:14 AM

Thank y...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Denise Banker

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Denise Banker and I live in Port Townsend, Washington. Thank you for this opportunity to testify against the Kalama Manufacturing and Marine Export Public Hearing. I call on Ecology to do the right thing for the people and the planet in vo...↓

Why is this specific issue important to me? Overall, this is a spherical planet, we breathe the same air, we all depend on the earth stability and its ability to support life. I am particularly tired of witnessing billion-dollar companies obfuscate data and future speculation and mitigation schemes to hoodwink busy and underpaid regulators. It's unfortunate that Ecology's current study relies on speculative mitigation and an unenforceable market analysis to paper over the impacts of this nerdy climate wrecking proposal.

Here, it's why Ecology needs to reject Northwest Innovation Works dubious proposal. The people don't want the proposal approved. We know the hazards associated with fracking gas, we know carbon emissions drive global climate change. We know methane leaks are underestimated in this proposal. We know that cost benefit analysis do not take into consideration all the healthcare, loss of livelihood, infrastructure and insurance costs associated with noxious air, rising sea levels, intensified storms and fire seasons. This project is not in keeping with Washington State's clean air goals.

This company has consistently made false, misleading, and dubious claims. I call on Ecology to reject Northwest Innovations Works proposal to build the largest fracked-gas-to-methanol refinery in the world. We don't need any more greenhouse gas producing energy systems. We don't need expansion of fossil fuel development and production, we need to focus solely on expansion of sustainable, renewable, clean energy systems that don't use fossil fuels.

No attachments

Comment From: Cynthia Svensson

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Good morning. I'm Cynthia Swenson, a homeowner in Kalama, Washington. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to comment. The SSEIS repeatedly assumes an expanding market for methanol. If this is true, then the Kalama facility is adding to emissions,...↓

The study states that " Within China, there is likely a preference for expanding domestic production where feasible and so expanded low-cost, coal-based methanol is expected to make up the largest share of increased methanol supplies in the coming year." We see that this is actually, most likely that any replacement would be in the important methanol sector, which is far more expensive than the Chinese coal sector, and only slightly more expensive and produces only slightly more GHGs than the Kalama facility. It's evident that the Kalama facility is most likely to add a huge amount of GHG to the atmosphere with only a remote chance that it will decrease GHG at all, so please deny this permit on the basis of your own research study. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Association of Firefighters, l... (Daniel Ulrich)

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hello. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Dan Alrich, I'm the president of the International Association of Firefighters, local 4447. We are the full-time members of the Cowlitz County Fire District number 5, here in Kalama, Was...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Sharon Miller

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Good morning, everyone. I'm Sharon Miller, a lifetime resident of the state of Washington, currently living in Vancouver. I am strongly committed to preserving our environment for my family, including six grandchildren who are learning of the devasta...↓

As a young child I lived in Longview, Washington, and I knew of Kalama as the small Riverside community, which featured Keith Liliska, who carved totem poles and clear view from the freeway. His totems are now displayed very near the side of the proposed Northwest innovation works methanol refinery. The tallest totem is 140 feet tall and is reportedly the tallest single strand carved from one single tree totem in the world. Not only is this totem a reminder of the native people who live and have rights to this land, but also to the trees that were thriving there when he was carving.

We are now aware of a proposed foreign company locating in this community that will produce upstream pollution exceeding 1 million tons of greenhouse gas pollution each year, and 5 million tons of additional greenhouse gas pollution in Kalama. Why would we allow this? This is totally counter to our State's efforts to move towards a clean energy economy.

I am calling on the department of ecology to reject the methanol refinery and deny the shorelines permit for this project. Right now is the time to protect our communities for our children. Thank you for this hearing today that empowers all of us to have input into your decision and thank you for doing the right thing.

No attachments

Comment From: Carolyn Atkinson

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi, my name is Carolyn Atkinson and I work at an elementary school in Seattle. I'm a young person who struggles with the climate related mental health effects described earlier. My students understand that they are growing up in a world in crisis. I ...↓

The most terrifying impacts of climate change are projected to hit us well within my lifetime. Before the end of the century, CO2 levels are likely to rise to the point of impairing human cognition. This concern is absent from the EIS.

The climate plan is justifying itself with the ridiculous logic that somehow over the next 40 years, this plant will emit less than hypothetical other plants. This is an absurdity. 2020 shows that the significant long foreseeable economic ecological and human system collapses are here. The next 40 years will be so unpredictable that most of my generation has agreed that we won't bother to plan for retirement because of the scale of chaos on our horizon. The EIS is ridiculously optimistic and assuming business as usual indefinitely is an absurdity.

These ecological and political instabilities that break the 40 year speculation of the environmental statement is caused by the climate crisis and this instability is caused by fossil fuel expansion. The instability is caused by projects exactly like this one, and it is exacerbated by the commitment to dishonesty of so many fossil companies, not necessarily excluding Northwest Innovations, which has wasted DOE time with data so optimistic and inaccurate that the whole environmental impact process had to be repeated.

We don't want to work with careless firms when the stakes are this high. VIS should accurately account for historical failures of this industry to clean up after themselves and prevent leaks and close Wells. It is time for those with the responsibility to do the right thing, to quit saying, "Well, just a little bit more." The planet doesn't have a little bit more to give. Protect, preserve, and enhance the environment for my generation and future generations. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Don Watt

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi, my name is Don watt. I live in Chehalis, Washington. I'm a retiree from the department of Ecology, where I worked for 25 years in the air quality program, as an air quality monitor and also worked in the environmental assessment program, doing st...↓

No, if approve,d in each of these cases, the Kalama Methanol Plant would prove to be just the first in a long list of proposals for projects that would further degrade our river, our region, and the climate of our planet. If we are serious about protecting the environment in this region and serious about limiting greenhouse gas emissions, then we must deny approval of this Kalama Methanol Plant proposal. The industrial site at Kalama's prime location, but it does not have to be used as a welcome mat, opening the region to the destructive fossil fuel and petrochemical industries.

No attachments

Comment From: Kristine Edmark

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hello, my name is Kristine Edmar and I live in Battleground Washington. Thank you very much for the chance to comment and thank you for requiring that the supplemental EIS be redone. I'm very much against the building of the Kalama Methanol Ref...↓

I sent a few specific changes draft in, but the fact is that the present draft reveals that there's still an enormous amount of greenhouse gas emissions that would be produced by the refinery. It's also a fact that the refinery would create a demand, which encourages drilling, fracking at a time when it's imperative that we decrease and stop extraction. That increase in fossil fuel extraction would continue 40 years, which is far beyond the time that we have available to prevent climate disaster, which is already happening.

The world is already feeling the consequences of the warming climate. My daughter-in-law's family lost a beloved home this month in a fire in Oregon, but this is really nothing compared to all the devastation that is happening right now to so many people and species, and our atmosphere all around the world. Please deny the shoreline permit on the basis that it's unacceptable unmitigatable greenhouse gas emissions. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Jean Avery

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Thank you so much, Fran. I want to thank Neal for showing the slide that clarifies there'll be 0% mitigation outside of Washington. My name is Jean Avery, I live in Vancouver. The Kalama Refinery would have a huge environmental footprint, if that ter...↓

On page 48 is a color map of the world with a red line showing the marine route from Kalama to China. As proposed, large tankers would transit 5,000 nautical miles from Kalama to China. This 10,000-mile round trip would be completed approximately once a week. Although the SSEIS includes plans to mitigate for emissions within Washington, we have heard that there will be no mitigation for any damage outside the state and will there be any mitigation for non-emission such as marine fuel?

In conclusion, one, the enormous reach of this project across the continent and across the globe would be hugely impactful even beyond the stated GHG emission. Two, the SSEIS fails to provide a complete multi-dimensional plan for mitigation. Three, the scope of this project seems far beyond the regulatory purview of one state's Department of Ecology. The climate clock is ticking, please deny this project. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Sierra Club (Stephanie Hillman)

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Stephanie Hellman. I'm a campaign representative with Sierra Club. I want to thank you for the opportunity to comment today. I really appreciate all the powerful comments that have been given today in opposition to this project. As others ...↓

This analysis offers a false choice here and I really hope that that is recognized. It's disappointing also that a state that is considered to be [inaudible] leader with strong climate goals that recognize our need to drastically cut emissions, that we're considering approving a hugely polluting project because we think it might be better than a slightly more polluting one. We need the Department of Ecology to be a leader here and just say no to this permit. This is not okay. Again, I thank you very much for this opportunity.

No attachments

Comment From: Brian Bonlender

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

>> Hi, my name is Brian Von Lander. Can you hear me okay?

>> We can, thank you.

>> I just want to point out a couple of things. The displacement analysis in this greenhouse gas lifecycle analysis is consistent with how greenhouse...↓

In the case of this project, it very clearly shows that this project is going to reduce a lot of greenhouse gas emissions equal to about them out of the TransAlta Coal plant. I think it's worth pointing out that the market in China is not a mysterious market with regard to their coal to methanol projects that they--coal to methanol to olefins or plastics, which they launched in 2011 and are growing every year. They have about 50 projects from which they make olefins from coal-based methanol. Those are very defined identifiable projects. They have several others on the drawing board. This project will disrupt either those that are on the drawing board or make uneconomical existing coal to methanol to plastics. Right now we have no alternatives to form these materials, to decarbonize these materials. This is going to be a great opportunity to have lower carbon materials and add renewable materials to that mix.

No attachments

Comment From: Timothy O'Donnell

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Timothy O'Donnell. I'm from Tacoma, Washington. I've spent many years working in and around the Longview Kalama area. I'm an outdoorsman avidly, a hunter and a fisherman. I'm also a construction electrician. I believe in this project, and ...↓

We're trying to build things and to keep our pensions alive. All of these green jobs in the green economy everybody refers to does not exist. These jobs aren't there, this job is there. We need to build it. We need to keep our pensions strong. We need job replacement. This is a very good job to replace the jobs that we've been losing, especially in the timber area, especially in the Longview Kelso area. I'm wholeheartedly behind this. I thank the state for their commitment in this study. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: DeAnn Fields

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Thank you, Fran. My name is Diane Fields, and I'm a market rep with the Laborer's Union in North America. I've lived in Southwest Washington my whole life. Right now we live in Battleground. I'm here listening to testimony and it sounds like a lot of...↓

We live in a beautiful place and we appreciate that. That's been left behind by the economic opportunity that the rest of the state has experienced. Our communities were founded on innovating, and cutting edge industrial development. This project provides the opportunity for Southwest Washington to return our proud legacy by creating family-wage jobs and making a meaningful contribution to tackling climate change.

If we are to confront climate change, we must invest in new clean ways to manufacture the things we use every day. We can't solve climate change through inaction. We must be led by science, not personal bias. This study from Ecology has answered the question it was asked and should be the final answer. It's time to make progress for both people and the planet.

Also, by listening to people, I've come to the realization that this project is the next step in moving forward in a safe way. Everything moves forward with the production and emissions that are going to be reduced. It's going to reduce emissions. It's incredibly naive for people to believe that we can immediately stop using fossil fuels and methanol. We use these products every day produced by methanol. In closing, I'd like to say that I really urge you to approve this project. Thank you very much for your time.

No attachments

Comment From: Mark Uhart

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Mark Euhart and my wife and I live near Kalama and I don't think I'm naive. I have a degree in wildlife biology, a minor in biochemistry, backgrounds in nuclear engineering, computer science and operational research and analysis, I am not ...↓

I certainly hope Ecology will read all the written comments and scrutinize the information in this SSEIS. I read the SSEIS and there are so many bad assumptions, poor application of technical information, and a covert attempt to under-report the upstream operational and downstream emissions. I documented my review and I am submitting multiple comments, referencing all my sources.

This project under cuts GHG because it doesn't mitigate upstream and downstream GHGs outside of the state of Washington. It continues to refer to information in the FSEIS,, such as the 100-year global warming potential instead of the 20-year GWP for fugitive methane. It cherry picks information from fugitive methane research papers, such as [inaudible] and Alvarez paper and others.

It presumes the use of ultra-low emissions, ULE technology that has not been approved by the EPAs for the application of prevention of a significant determination PSD permit for GHG admissions. It purports that ULE will admit 38% less GHGs in CR technology and I found several articles that indicate that the savings is only around 31%. ULE was first used in a power plant in Australia in 1994-

No attachments

Comment From: Boilermakers Local 242 (Brent Stephens)

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Good morning. My name is Brett Stevens, I'm the president and assistant business manager for the Boilermakers local 242. I support this project on many fronts. First, jobs. A thousand construction jobs are expected, 200 permanent and another 500 indi...↓

Secondly, the technology to produce methanol from natural gas is far better than from coal, which is what the Chinese are doing without the regulations that we require. Methanol is not going away, we want them these products, but we want these facilities in someone else's backyard. It's always easier to say no, rather than to work together. To say all we care about is jobs is false, all of our members care about the environment just as much as everyone else. We hunt fish and enjoy the Pacific Northwest, just as much as everyone else who chooses to live here. If we truly care about climate change on a global level, then we must build this facility here simply because we have the strictest regulations and oversight. If not, it will be built somewhere else and the climate on a global level will suffer.

No attachments

Comment From: Bryant Mullin

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Thank you for allowing this. My name is Brian Mullen and I am an inside IVW Construction wireman. I'm going on record in support of this project. I'd like to point out that everybody on this call today has enjoyed things made from the refining of met...↓

I would also like to point out that there is currently a wind project that is being built in Lewis County. I was at a hearing, and there was opposition to this green project, a wind project that had opposition. How can we be against a wind project and against a responsible project. I'd just like to close by thanking everybody for their comments. I am once again in support of this project. Thank you for the time.

No attachments

Comment From: Cathy Spofford

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Okay. Thank you. My name is Cathy Spoford. I live in Portland, Oregon. I have two young granddaughters whose future I'm concerned about. The proposed methanol refinery would be the largest fracked gas to methanol refinery in the world and would impac...↓

The proposed refinery would become a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions each year, further contributing to the climate crisis and undermining Washington's greenhouse gas reduction roles. The refinery would consume more gas than any sector of Washington's economy, necessitating a new fracked gas pipeline that may go down the entire length of the state. As we know, gas pipelines leak methanol, which is 80 times more polluting than CO2 and have a history of dangerous explosions. The project will only exacerbate the climate crisis. I urge the Washington Department of Ecology to protect our environment and the future of our children and grandchildren and reject this project. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Columbia Riverkeeper (Daniel Serres)

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi, my name is Daniel Steris and I'm the Conservation Director with Columbia Riverkeeper. Ecology should set its sights on protecting the future we can live in rather than contributing millions of tons of carbon pollution each year [inaudible] the bi...↓

On this basis, recognizing that the project will produce 4.6 million tons of pollution each year or more, Ecology should deny the project. A central premise of the new EIS is that all of the factors- economic growth, technology, climate policy, trade regulations, et cetera- affecting the production and consumption of methanol will remain fundamentally unchanged for the next 40 years. This prediction about the next four decades is unfounded and almost certainly wrong. None of these factors have remained static over the last 40 years. Pretending that time will stand still for Northwest Innovation Works is illogical, and the displacement theory, which relies on that illogic, is not reliable.

In every case Ecology presents, methanol production dramatically increases from fossil fuels and pollution increases. Ecology's analysis bleakly predicts that coal-based methanol will increase regardless, and the displacement analysis that comes to paper over the pollution from the fracked gas-based methanol coming from Northwest Innovation Works by comparing it only with other fossil-based forms of methanol. The analysis fails to make comparisons for competing cleaner alternatives, such as electric vehicles, which may be displaced by fossil-based methanol being used for fuel. The SSEIS also fails to consider cleaner ways of producing methanol that may develop over the next 40 years. Cleaner forms of methanol production are technologically feasible now and may become commercially feasible during the next 40 years.

Washington must plan for something better. The analysis should involve a case that actually aims for reducing carbon emissions in absolute terms, and works toward limiting global warming in line with Washington's goals towards limiting global warming below two degrees.

No attachments

Comment From: Bill Josh

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Thank you so much for allowing me to speak today. I do support this project. There's a lot of people within our community here in Cowlitz, and within Southwest Washington that do support this project here in Kalama. We've been having this discussion ...↓

The project has taken far too long to get approved. The goalposts have continued to move, not just for this project, but other projects within Southwest Washington. It would be a great economic boon for our community, for our county. It would provide needed tax dollars for us to help provide for crucial services within our community and within the county. It would be a great opportunity for local unions and workers within Cowlitz County, and would provide opportunities for families that will help our economy and help improve the quality of life here in Cowlitz County and Southwest Washington.

Far too often, we are faced with a government and a state bureaucracy that just continues to say no to everything. We have the highest standards of any state, and potentially in the world, to develop and build the project like the Northwest Innovation Works project. If Washington State says no to this, you are essentially going to shut down any and every opportunity for Southwest Washington to create and provide jobs in an industrial manner in the future. If you say no and if they say no, then what else can we do? What else can we build? What project will be good enough? Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Elijah Cetes

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Greetings. My name is Elijah [inaudible]. I live in Portland, Oregon. As a young person, a conservationist, and a fisherman, I strongly oppose this project. Although the risks and impacts to endangered salmon and steelhead runs on the Columbia River ...↓

One likely and dismal future you might have explored is one where global plastic production increases. China continues to produce methanol from coal, while new pipelines are still built to supply Kalama. [sound cut] New plastic facilities open. The plastic industry, which is notoriously a haven for fossil fuel companies clinging to profits, continues to undercut sustainable alternatives to plastic and our oceans continue to be choked with debris. Meanwhile, we in the Pacific Northwest will still see the price of gas in our homes increase, driven up by this project's monopolistic control of our gas supply lines.

Then again, another scenario could be the opposite occurs. At much cost to local East Coast systems and clean water, the facility is [sound cut] built and operates for five years. Then before the coal plants can go down in China, a climate disaster, a pandemic, a wildfire, or a plastic alternative emerges driving down demand for fracked gas while the supply lines become glutted. Eventually, the project closes after a short lifespan. Meanwhile, we are left to clean up the mess and for what?

This is, of course, exactly what we are witnessing with the oil industry during the COVID-19 pandemic. Flotillas of oil storage vessels are currently waiting off our coasts, while-

No attachments

Comment From: Nate Stokes

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Well, thank you. My name is Nate Stokes and I live in Clark County. I'm a Field Rep Supervisor for the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 701, and a father of five and a grandfather of one. People have been talking about this global env...↓

I want to make a couple of points since the opposition is stating stats. This project sets a new, high, unprecedented, inspirational standard for development in Washington State. This project has been under review for almost seven years now. This is the third time the government-led process has been undertaken. In the meantime, while we've continued to study this, climate change keeps happening and science shows that every year we delay this project, another year will allow more carbon to be added to our planet.

In addition to global GHG reduction, Northwest Innovation will mitigate for 100% of its in-state emissions, even those not directly tied to its facility. This will create investments renewable natural gas development, saving and improving forest lands and practice driving other innovative GHG-reducing technologies and opportunities locally, regionally, and globally. Washington State can and should be the highest standards-lead other states, our nation, other nations. Please approve this project as a great example to drive those high standards.

We must act now to address the climate change and this project is an important step to do that. I do support this project and thank you Department of Ecology for the good work, and please move swiftly.

No attachments

Comment From: Darlene Johnson

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Okay, Darlene Johnson, and I live in Woodland, Washington, which is about eight miles south of Kalama. I'm a grandmother. I have eight grandkids and another seven, if you count the grandkids of our exchange students. I entirely support this project. ...↓

Also, I hear a lot of people talk about that climate change has caused forest fires. Well, I live in an area where we've had a lot of logging and what really causes forest fires is unmanaged timber, and we need to get back to managing the timber. So, I don't think they can use that as a reason for not allowing this development.

Inaction is really an action. The longer we keep having inaction on supporting this, the longer we go with increasing pollution. I just wholly hope that you approve this project, and especially approve it for my grandkids, all of whom live in Washington. Not too many in Woodland, Washington or Kalama because there aren't as many job opportunities here. They live in Seattle or Gig Harbor. So, I'm just hopeful that this gets approved. I'm also on the board of directors-

No attachments

Comment From: Gary Lindstrom

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Yes, thank you very much. I am Gary Lindstrom, retired Director of Marketing for the Port of Longview and a property owner in Kalama. The proposed methanol refinery is of grave concern because life on this planet is being impacted by global warming. ...↓

I'm disappointed that the Port of Kalama is fostering greenhouse gas emissions by allowing the world's largest frack gas-to-methanol refinery to be built on the shores of the Columbia River for the benefit of China. When Trump withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement to counter global warming, Governor Inslee, along with other Governors, committed to a US Climate Alliance to reduce greenhouse gases. I am committed to this endeavor and fully support whatever we, the State of Washington, can do to keep the planet from warming two degrees Fahrenheit.

The devastation from [sound cut] [inaudible] wildfires is further evidence of climate warming; the challenge for all of us. Ecology's analysis shows that the refinery would produce 184 million metric tons of carbon pollution during the lifetime of the refinery. It is a fact that our lives are insulated from the perils of the sun by a very thin layer of atmosphere. I ask Ecology to find that the refinery's output of greenhouse gases is beyond the threshold and our state's passionate commitment to preserve that thin layer; and that Ecology deny the Shoreline Permit. Thank you very much.

No attachments

Comment From: Scott Strickland

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Scott Strickland, and I'm a Special Project Counsel for the International Union of Operating Engineers. I have many friends and family members who live and work in Washington. I feel that climate change is the number one threat to our econ...↓

I see this project as an example of that. A shift in international finance and productivity to be able to provide family wage jobs for folks, to provide hundreds of millions of dollars of economic benefit and increase taxes, to provide for more regulation, for more technological advances to further drive us towards a better economy for everyone; including all of the ecosystem entirely. I urge the committee to approve this, and would like to see all of the folks that are speaking out against this and every other project; if there is a better alternative point to it.

I've heard about electric cars, I've heard about electricity and other things, but I haven't heard any of the criticisms that are typically lobbied against those because of the cobalt mines and other issues in South Africa and everywhere else. There is an environmental cost to everything we do. It is our responsibility to find a way forward to lessen that to better it for everyone. I thank you and yield the rest of my time.

No attachments

Comment From: Jane Nicolai

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Thank you Department of Ecology for taking my comments. I'm Jane Nikolai, a lifelong resident of Washington State. The dangers, threats, and outcomes of this proposed project are known. The current EIS does not take into honest account of each step i...↓

You are in a position of power that most of us do not have. The decision hanging in the balance is between destruction and well-being, between greed and generosity, between courage and a soul forever disquieted by the knowledge of what you have done. As you are in possession of such power, celebrate life; full, generous, well-fed, wholesome life. You have the ability to make the world a better place; use it. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Janeen Provazek

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi. My name is Janeen Provazek. I've been a resident of Washington State all my life. I live in Tacoma, and volunteer for 350 Tacoma; a non-profit climate organization. I am here because of my grave concern regarding the proposal for this methanol re...↓

This proposed methanol plant would cause millions of tons of greenhouse gas pollution, use millions of gallons of water daily from an aquifer connected to the Columbia River, pollute the air with cancer-causing emissions, and pose a serious safety hazard during an earthquake. This is about urgency, scientific evidence, common sense, and not giving in to the immediate gratification of economics.

We are putting ourselves and future generations at serious risk by refusing to change. We need to not ignore the scientists and continue to pollute our air and land and water. We need to focus now on smarter and cleaner and sustainable ways to generate power, fuel, and products. My plea is to the Department of Ecology; please have the courage and awareness and integrity to reject the methanol refinery. Be the hero for us.

No attachments

Comment From: John Flynn

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is John Flynn, and I live in Kalama. In 2008, the Washington State Legislature established limits for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Washington. Those requirements can be found in the Revised Code of Washington, RCW 70.235.020. In its 2...↓

The Department of Ecology issued its Washington State Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report to the legislature in December, 2018. The key findings of this report were; Washington's 2015 total greenhouse gas emissions were 97.4 million metric tons. Washington's 2015 total greenhouse emissions were 7.4 million metric tons higher than the 1990 baseline.

Today, Department of Ecology is considering whether to de-grant or deny a permit for the construction and operation of a fracked gas-to-methanol refinery in Kalama that would add 4.6 million metric tons of greenhouse gases per year. We know that in 2015, we were 7.4 million tons over the 1990 baseline. By adding an additional 4.6 million tons, that would equate to 12.0 million more than 1990.

No attachments

Comment From: Carolyn Anonymous

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Carolyn [inaudible] here.

>> Our grandchildren's lives matter. Governor Inslee's 100% Clean Energy for America Plan is the first major policy announcement in his Climate Mission Agenda; a bold 10-year mobilization to defeat climate change. To al...↓

We don't have decades. Fossil fuels produce large quantities of carbon dioxide when burned, carbon emissions trap heat in the atmosphere which leads to global warming. Extreme weather events like wildfires and hurricanes will only become stronger and more frequent in a warmer world. With heat comes drought and more air pollution; both particularly harmful to children. Governor Inslee strongly agrees with the IPCC; to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, the global community must cut climate pollution in half by 2030. Washington's legislature has set a target to reduce emissions at least 25% below 1990 levels by 2035, and the Department of Ecology has recommended a more ambitious target of 40% below those levels.

Ecology's own website states, "We're proud to protect, preserve, and enhance Washington's environment for current and future generations." Ecology, your decision impacts so much more than Kalama. You have a responsibility to aid in the phasing out of fossil fuel reliance in favor of clean energy-

No attachments

Comment From: Kelly O'Hanley

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi, my name is Kelly O'Hanley. I thank you for this opportunity. Actually, I have someone right here with me who is anxious to talk. [mimics] Please do. Allow me to introduce myself. I'm [inaudible] fugitive methane emission. Usually, I'm floating ar...↓

For example, they're saying that methane emissions- meaning me- are being underestimated; that we need top-down not just bottom-up measurements. I love those terms. I would think they'd have come from Scientific American or Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. But seriously, enough is enough. I say let's stick with the EIS's very optimistic methane calculations. After all, doesn't the world need a little bit of optimism right now? Well, of course, it does. Oh, dear. I'm turning back into gas. I'm glad we chatted. Stay in touch. Stay optimistic.

Well, this is Kelly O'Hanley, again. I guess I don't have much to add to that. Thank you very much.

No attachments

Comment From: Linda Leonard

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

This is very good. Linda Leonard, I am a resident of Kalama. Northwest Innovation Works states it will voluntary mitigate 100% of all in-state direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions in Washington State. As for being voluntary, offset carbon emi...↓

Footnote 40 on D2 reads; NWIW is undertaking research, how to configure and account for the voluntary mitigation program, including consideration of forming an independent non-profit arm to administer the funds. Additional conditions and required fulfillment documentation will be developed in coordination with Cowlitz County and the Department of Ecology following the completion of the environmental review of the facility.

The citizens of this state are being excluded from knowing anything more about the voluntary mitigation program framework. How can the public make their analysis in regard to this project? Northwest Innovation Works identifies no specific projects or measures that will address the enormous greenhouse gas pollution's impact. Please deny this permit. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Mike Reuter

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

All right. Thank you for letting me speak here today. I am speaking here as an individual and not as a Mayor of Kalama. I want to just address the jobs aspect of this refinery. No matter what gets built at the site, it will provide jobs. Whether it i...↓

The short term construction jobs will be mostly for putting the infrastructure in and erecting the refinery when it arrives from China. That is why the project uses a short less than two year construction window to be constructed. If this company really cared about construction jobs, they would build a refinery here and not in another place. That way you employ hundreds more local union workers and for a longer term employment.

How can we make sure that this plant is built and inspected and licensed by quality workers using quality components. For long-term employment metrics. we need to look no farther than Woodland, the nearest port to Kalama. This port has a five person per acre minimum standard for industrial development. The Kalama refinery even with the over-exaggerated full buildout of 200 employees will provide only approximately one job per acre which includes the footprint from the refinery and the 90 acres needed for mitigation.

We should look for multiple value added light industrial manufacturing companies for this site and not keep forcing another speculative fossil fuel product that would lock us into long-term emission production. The jobs created for these multiple manufacturing companies would also diversify the property tax and jobs provided and not on one highly volatile commodity market. The site is one of the last Greenfield deep water port properties in the Columbia. That's it. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Richard Voget

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Can you hear me? My name is Richard Vogget and I am a life long resident of Washington State. I feel that it's immoral to enable preventable time of death. The IPPC says that to limit warming to to 1.5 degrees centigrade, climate emissions must fall ...↓

You are the Department of Ecology, your own goal is achieving Washington's climate goals, not undermining them by allowing more climate pollution. The voluntary mitigation framework is too vague for Ecology to conclude that 100% of the project's in state emission in the [inaudible] will be mitigated. You just admitted in this morning's presentation with half of the projects emissions that are from British Columbia and China will not be mitigated.

Severe conditions will warm the atmosphere, dry out the forests, lead to bigger wildfires and fill Western Washington with smoke from unhealthy air quality as well as create hotter and longer heat waves. Mitigation can [inaudible] over a long period of time. 4.6 million tons of pollution today can be mitigated on paper by planting enough trees, but it will take 40 years for the trees to be able to [inaudible] emissions will increase in the short term and if climate change isn't addressed in the short-term, one of those is going to become irreversible.

If emissions don't fall by 45% by 2030. Don't allow more climate pollution which will cause hotter and longer heat waves. Do enable the [inaudible] to die in heat waves. People's--

No attachments

Comment From: Dr. Ann Turner

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi, my name is Dr. Ann Turner. Please deny Kalama's Shoreline permit to prevent environmental injustice to Kalama and Cowlitz County residents from climate change. I come to this work for my work as a physician caring for migrant and seasonal farm wo...↓

The SSCIS states that the Kalama project would result in the emission of 4.6 tons of greenhouse gases every year for 40 years. This displacement theory is pure speculation. We know that climate change has a disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations. Kalama and Cowlitz County residents are the most vulnerable. Using Washington tracking networks, vulnerability to climate change index Kalama has an index of seven and nearby Longview 10 with 10 being the highest.

Cowlitz County experiences significant socio-economic and health disparities including lower median income and higher percentage of persons living in poverty than Washington State as a whole. The County's health disparities include a higher age-adjusted mortality in higher mortality from cancer, heart lung disease and diabetes. The negative impacts of climate change will have an outsized effect on the residence of Kalama and Cowlitz County. We must not authorize any new fossil fuel projects.

Methane, fracked gas, methanol is not bridge fuel, it's not even a bridge to nowhere. It's a bridge to climate and human disaster and results in environmental great environmental injustice. Please deny this permit and this project. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Marrene Jenkins

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hello, I’m Marine Jenkins and I appreciate all that has been said. Many of the negative commentators, thank you very much and strictly to the direct subject greenhouse gases, but there's no greenhouse pollution. If we have ground zero here in Kalama ...↓

The commissioners are often re-designating over the 12 years that I've lived here as suits their economic need but if they build this concentrated plant, I as a former nurse formerly living in the Midwest and seeing grey skies know the clouds of pollution and its effects on the respiratory system. You can't adjust for listening to the whistling sound of the lungs and seeing the faces of anxiety when an asthma person comes in distress.

You can't deny that the rustling sounds of the lungs when a person has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Many of the doctors who have commented before know what these are, nurses know what they are. It doesn't exist here because it's a clean state. Don't change, keep this plant on.

No attachments

Comment From: Adam Davis

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

As stated, my name is Adam Davis and I live in Castle Rock, Washington with my wife and three children. While a lot of you have heard from me in the past, as recent as last week, I thought it was important for me to take time to give additional...↓

Several opponents to this project have asked, what if the analysis uses a higher methane leakage rate? Ecology use a 3% leakage rate as required by the environmentalists, and lo and behold, the plant will still result in a global reduction of 5.48 million tonnes of GHGs annually. Another popular question. What if the methanol is used as fuel instead of olefin production?

While this is not the project's intent, Ecology's study found that if 100% of the methanol produced of the proposed facility was used as fuel, we would still see a reduction in global GHGs annually to the tune of 6.7 million tons per year.

Lastly, the opposition has attacked supporters of the project claiming we are only interested in the jobs and we are ignoring the bigger picture. To that I say, we now have two studies before us that prove just how beneficial this project is for Washington and the globe. With this project, we can have a greener future, increase local tax revenue, and 1,000 plus jobs that will help people like me from the trades, reduce our own carbon footprint by cutting down on our everyday commutes to other communities or even out of state. Let's take this win together. Thank you for your time, and I urge you to please approve this final permit.

No attachments

Comment From: Jeff Berskin

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi, my name is Jeff Berskin. I have been a resident of Cowlitz County for 44 years with my wife and two daughters. I have worked in the piping industry for 25 of those years, and on many projects across the United States. Our local jobs that pay a li...↓

If we do not have a place like this world-class facility that is regulated by the best in the industry for safety and near-zero emissions, we are not leaving much for our future generation to contribute to our society in terms of tax revenue, for all the things that the general public benefits from. I would also like to state as an avid outdoorsman and a steward of our land, there's no proven science, just speculation from unfounded sources that it's going to harm the environment.

The world cannot achieve its goal of keeping global warming well below two degrees Celsius by taking a not in my backyard approach to carbon reductions. Opponents want their kayaks, their tents, their fleece jackets, their automobiles, computers, and airplanes made up synthetic material, and they want other countries to produce that material in the dirtiest possible ways. That is the recipe for failure to achieve climate change goals.

In closing, I would like to see this project approved to move forward because it is the beginning of an end of growth for our future generations if it's denied. Thank you for your time.

No attachments

Comment From: Cameron Wilkinson

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hello, my name is Cameron Wilkinson. I was raised in Kelso and live in Kelso. I'm a third-generation steamfitter with United Association Local 26. My wife and I have two sons, 11 and 14. My grandfather moved his family here in 1976 from Southern Cali...↓

The Cowlitz County area was a flourishing community for a blue-collar worker to raise their family with a great wage and benefits. It's unfortunate to see a small community and the impacts we've seen from the closing of production facilities like RNW paper and Reynolds Metal Company. We continue to see a decline in our family-wage jobs in this community with the Uberization of their industries.

It is unfortunate to see a project that is leading their industry globally with an environmental conscious approach being demonized with miss. The next leaders in Olefin production is 38% more polluting in Northwest Innovations proposed facility. We could turn our back on in NWIW, and have this other leader polluting our oceans from another country or we can embrace their continued work on improving this facility.

It's sad not to get the same shake in life as the past generation when they try to create an infinite loop on a stopwatch on permitting a project, but don't bat an eye at an 80-year-old dilapidated facility the next generation is constantly putting band-aids on daily in my industry. Thank you for letting me take the time to comment on this. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Kate Martin

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi, I'm Kate Martin. I live in Kalama. I've been lucky enough to live here just for a short while. We moved here because it's a very small rural area and it's one of the things we were looking for when we came here. What I hear regularly from o...↓

One of the things Kalama looks to be doing is heightening its tourism attraction. Somehow I'm thinking a huge plant right on the river sucking up millions of gallons of water a day is not a tourist attraction. I for one would never come to see a huge plant on the river. We do fish quite often and enjoy having our boat out on the river. [sound cut]

No attachments

Comment From: Jack Miller

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Jack Miller. I'm from Oregon City and I support this project wholeheartedly. Union jobs are key to building equity in our community for our children's future and with COVID, we need jobs more than we've ever needed them before. Thank...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Joan Roberts

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Joan Roberts and I am here as a pediatrician, a parent, and a cancer survivor to stand in staunch opposition to the proposed Kalama Methanol Plant. The public health risks proposed by this plant are numerous, terrifying and preventable.

I w...↓

There are no steps in this pathway that do not result in damage to the local, regional, and eventually global environment. The human and environmental costs associated with the release of carbon, chemicals and heavy metals into our water and air and the increased presence of plastic in our ocean for centuries to come all represent immediate reasons to prevent this project from going forward.

Yet here we are with the Department of Ecology apparently contemplating that these costs might be worth incurring. What is in the balance? Do we think that the jobs for this plant will outweigh the job losses from tourism, fisheries, and shellfish that will be injured in the coming years? I implore you to consider our welfare as humans, we're all subject to the same frailties and needs.

Our bodies are affected by plastics which are proven to change the hormonal balance and promote cancers driven by those hormones. Please, for the health of our people, for our beautiful Columbia River and the Salish Sea, do not allow this plant to move forward.

No attachments

Comment From: Samantha Grieger

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Thank you. Hi, I'm a 25-year old Southwest resident and biogeochemist in environmental science, and I'm just really concerned about the proposed refinery. After reviewing the data and most recent environmental assessment report, I wanted just to stat...↓

These wildfires in the research I have done have been proven to be worsening with climate change and increased greenhouse gas emissions. Most recent EIS draft reported that this refinery would increase Washington's annual carbon CO2 equivalent emissions by over a million of cubic tons a year.

This on top of the huge water use coming from the Columbia river, the inevitable gas leaks, the impacts on local indigenous communities up and downstream from the plant, the potential and inevitable groundwater and water quality degradation within the Columbia river itself, this plant cannot be built in good conscious and benefits to people who call this place home.

This is also being proposed to be built on sacred land without the consent of the indigenous tribes who reside there, and we really need to try to do better in that because we messed up a lot in the past. We are at the moment in time here where we need to be moving away from fossil fuels and finding new alternatives regardless of what direction the global market is moving in, and it's changing really fast.

Who's to say it's slow and steady for the next 40 years. Look at how much it's changed in the past 40 years. We need to create jobs by becoming less dependent on fossil fuels. Washington should be leaders in this transition to renewable energy. Please look beyond the immediate monetary benefit of this plant, and think of the impact it will have on the next six generations. We are in a crisis. We must actively combat it, not just promote it. Thank you so much.

No attachments

Comment From: Neal Anderson

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

After the smoke last week, all of us in the West Coast are well aware that we set a new record this year of the number of [inaudible] burned. People in the Midwest know about the record flooding there, and the millions of acres of crops it destroyed,...↓

No matter where you live, you're seeing the effects of climate destruction because for 40 years we've ignored the warnings of scientists, [inaudible] building more refineries and adding more carbon pollution to the atmosphere year after year. It's becoming increasingly clear to everyone that we can't continue with business as usual. Yet, business as usual is exactly what this document assumes.

It accepts as a given that the world will continue burning fossil fuels [inaudible] increasing. It assumes that humanity will just accept worsening disasters and ever increasing casualties as one of the costs of doing business. It argues that this is a slightly cleaner than other forms of methanol production which to me seems like a doctor diagnosing a patient with lung disease [inaudible] because quitting seems like too much to ask.

The baseline scenario shouldn't be business as usual, it should be rapid decarbonization, and fossil fueled derived methanol has no place in that future. Assuming business as usual can no longer be the framework we use to evaluate [inaudible] would add 40 million tons of carbon pollution over its lifetime, and when we're already in a climate emergency that's all the reason you need to deny this project.

Also, I want to address those making the argument that this needs to be built for economic reasons. The current forecast is that by 2050, cumulative [inaudible] from climate change will reach $8 trillion. In addition, increased hurricanes, floods and fires, this is the financial cost that we're asking the next generation to pay. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Terry Casey

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Terry Casey [inaudible] local 701 [inaudible] in Washington. I support the project wholeheartedly. Union jobs are key to building equity in our community for the children's futures. Speaking on children's futures, the unions and trade unio...↓

Those kids that have come into the trades, have gotten their education and their wealth of knowledge by learning from others that have done that. If we don't have these projects to build, these people have the jobs that have gotten them to the point where they are today. Thank you very much.

No attachments

Comment From: Camp Kalama RV Park and Campgr... (Charlene DesRosier)

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Perfect. My name is Charlene de Rocher. I live in Kalama. My family home is the closest year-round residents to this proposed plant. Our family business is the closest non-industrial business we own and operate Camp Kalama RV park and Campgroun...↓

Our family business is fueled by these outdoor activities, attracting visitors, and return customers. This plant would negatively impact our business. It will pump dangerous pollutants into our air and put our rivers at risk. Waiting for sunsets that will only be obscured by the 10,000-foot plume emitted from this plant. Sitting around the fire waiting for darkness and the stars to come out is going to be difficult because the light from this plant will always be on.

These same lights will impact the natural movement of fish. Currently, things are happening on the Kalama River and hopes to increase fish numbers and improve and provide more habitat. Any spill or leak could destroy this environment. How will they mitigate that? How would they mitigate my home life because this proposed plant is literally in my backyard? If permitted, we will look at towering pillars spewing steam and pollutants 10,000 feet into the sky every day we walk out our front door and every night when we return.

Mount St. Helens is over 8000 feet Mount Hood over 11,000 this plume will compare and height only with these mountains, but will have a devastating impact on us in our family. We will not pick fruit from our orchard or eat food from our gardens. Will our well last and will our water remain safe? Kalama should not be forced to live in the shadow of this monstrosity to risk all the dangers.

Kalama should not be defined by the world's largest methanol plant. It has no place in this community. Please, as your mission states, protect, preserve, and enhance Washington's environment. There is nothing about this plant that will enhance our environment. We need you to help us protect what we as a community have built and help us preserve and create a better cleaner Washington. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: RoseMary Siipola

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

My name is Rosemary Siipola, and I live in Kalama, Washington. For the past six years. I've been supportive of the Northwest Innovation project, and I have submitted comments to the Department of Ecology. I have a few today. For every year the plant ...↓

Number one; the State of Washington's robust environmental permitting regulations support this project, upholding its high standards and opening the way for additional modern, environmentally-sound projects to be permitted and built in Washington; revitalizing and transitioning our economy, while promoting our state standards for environmentally safe and sound industry. Taking all of this into account, it's time to put people to work in Cowlitz County in the new modern green economy.

As a proud Cowlitz County citizen over the past 37 years, and a member of the Lower Columbia College Foundation Board of Directors, where we assist students who are changing their lives and want to live and work in their communities, I can honestly say that Cowlitz County is ready, willing, and able to meet the opportunities and challenges this new economy will bring to our region. I really ask that the Department of Ecology approve the permit for this project. Thank you very much.

No attachments

Comment From: Sam Kern

9/22/20 @ 3:00 AM

Hi, my name is Sam [inaudible]. I find this SEIS insufficiently convincing. As the presentation speaker noted, global demand over 40 years is very hard to predict, and I'm skeptical that we can rely on current market conditions to hold stable. Within...↓

Similarly, BlackRock Investments is encouraging investors to move away from emissive industries. Years ago, these announcements coming from some of the largest and most risk-averse players in the global economy would have been completely unthinkable. The climate, [chuckles] I guess- excuse the pun- is changing really fast.

Due to activist pressure changing market conditions and changing global priorities, these announcements are coming faster and faster. With Google announcing only last week that their operations would be fully carbon-free by 2030; something that only the year prior they refused to commit to. So, I'm really skeptical that we can rely on the projections in the SEIS of demand to hold stable over a 40-year period, when we can't even predict what the largest global players will do within a one-year time frame.

Another commenter pointed out that this would set a dangerous precedent in the region. I completely agree. This facility would establish a foothold in the region for further natural gas infrastructure. I think this is the wrong precedent to set. This facility wouldn't spin up tomorrow. This is an investment and it represents an investment in the wrong path for both our state and for the planet.

I also want to weigh-in on the topic of mitigation. I did read Appendix D of the SEIS that purports to detail the mitigation plan, and I see no plan other than purchasing carbon offsets. This does nothing to mitigate the effects of this project on the Washington local environment. You cannot mitigate the effects of cancer-causing chemicals emitted locally, and you can't mitigate the enormous water dependency of such a facility. So forgive me for being uninspired by this non-existent mitigation plan. Thank you.

No attachments

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]