• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

EDITORIAL: Scuttled Oil Tanker Bill Failed to Address Risks

Posted on: Tuesday, 7 March 2006, 12:01 CST

By The Bellingham Herald, Bellingham, Wash.

Mar. 7--We applaud the announcement by U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, that he will no longer pursue plans to change legislation that limits oil tanker traffic in Puget Sound.

The limits have been in place under the Magnuson Amendment since 1977. That law limits the expansion of oil refineries and the number of oil tankers entering the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound unless the expansion is "for consumption in the state of Washington."

Stevens has pursued an end to the law for years, seeking more refining capacity for Alaska's crude oil. Some oil companies have also supported the change, including BP, which owns a refinery at Cherry Point that refines Alaskan oil.

We have never argued that an expansion is completely unnecessary. It may be beneficial in some ways to have more refining capacity in Washington. And we know the people at the BP Cherry Point refinery are conscientious with the potentially dangerous fuels. Though not spotless, the company's record with moving oil to the refinery has been quite good over the years.

But what has been missing throughout this discussion is data and information about environmental hazards. What additional dangers did more tanker traffic mean for the waters off our shores and throughout the San Juans?

It appears that Stevens couldn't have cared less. All of the talk surrounding the change in the law was about economic development, about helping decrease dependence on foreign oil and about creating additional supply in a time when the price of crude, and the gasoline products created from it, have skyrocketed.

Who wouldn't want an expansion if it means a real decrease in gas prices?

But that's very short-term thinking. We reject it, and we believe most Washington residents do as well.

Without a clear picture of the dangers of oil spills and of the increase in tanker traffic, it is wrong to consider changing the law.

It appeared that well thought out planning and study was going to lose out to temporary worries about gas prices, fueled by damage created by natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina.

Thankfully, that thinking appears to have lost. We suggest if Stevens and oil companies want to suggest changes to limits on tanker traffic and refining capacity in northwest Washington again, they provide the public with a clear risk assessment. The legislation in place is aimed at protecting our important environmental resources. It should not change unless those offering the changes can prove those resources are not put in increased danger.

-----

Copyright (c) 2006, The Bellingham Herald, Bellingham, Wash.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.

Source: The Bellingham Herald, Wash.

More News in this Category