VANCOUVER – The Wilderness Committee is cautiously optimistic after receiving the news yesterday that Port Metro Vancouver is requiring Fraser Surrey Docks to prepare a revised project scope and Environmental Impact Assessment for its proposed Coal Transfer Facility.

“Yesterday’s announcement by the Port acknowledges the very real and pressing environmental and health concerns expressed by local residents who don’t want to see this region become the largest exporter of coal in North America,” said Eoin Madden, the Wilderness Committee’s Climate Campaigner.

Fraser Surrey Docks had previously submitted environmental management plans to Port Metro Vancouver (PMV) regarding their proposal to ship U.S. thermal coal to Asia through a new facility in Surrey [see here]. PMV is now asking the proponent to resubmit an environmental study, and to respond within the next few weeks with an extended document that includes an analysis of human health and ecological impacts.

In Washington State, the issues to be covered (or “scoped”) by an environmental assessment for a large coal terminal were opened up to the public over a 121-day period. 124,000 public comments were received, asking that issues such as climate change and the health impacts of burning coal in China be examined. As a result, the climate impact of the project will now be assessed.

In the case of Fraser Surrey Docks, the environmental impact assessment will not be organized by PMV, but by the proponent itself. Public hearings will not be required as part of the process.

“This is a baby step in the right direction, but we’re still left with the fox in charge of the henhouse. Fraser Surrey Docks should not be calling the shots on this assessment. We say there needs to be public input on the scope of the process, so we can ensure that important concerns around issues like climate change will be addressed,” said Madden.

“We are now asking the Port to provide the same democratic process provided to our southern neighbours, and to ask the general public whether the impact of all that coal on our climate should be part of this decision,” he said.

“At the end of the day, the environmental, health and climate impacts of this project are not worth the risk.”