Port Commissioners Rail Against, Then Allow Shell Oil Vessels at Elliott Bay Terminal

Comments

1
Good. The Port Commissioners have a fiduciary responsibility to try to make money off the facilities and reduce the Port's take of our property taxes. They're not letting them drill in Eliot bay, just use the currently empty (and non-revenue-generating) terminal for staging/storage.

Or is the Stranger about to start demanding we stop using traffic camera companies based in "show me your papers" Arizona ? http://seattletimes.com/html/politicsnor…
2
The fact is, someone is going to berth at terminal 5, this has been a fact ever since Matson moved over to terminal 18.

It is also a fact that Shell is needs a dock somewhere.

And while it didn't have to be this way is is also a fact that our society cannot function without fossil fuels at this time.

We should have nationalized the energy companies back in 1905 at the latest, but we didn't.

We should have began ending our use of fossil fuels no later than the nineteen fifties, but we didn't.

So today we have to live in the world that is, not what we wish it was, and in today's world this deal isn't all that bad.
3
I worked as a commercial fisherman the year of the Valdez spill. We boated up the coast for hours, days, passing blackened shores. It's only a matter of time before it happens to Puget Sound http://www.adn.com/slideshow/photos-exxo…
4
We had to burn the village docks to save the boats
5
Note who Commissioner Gregoire is.

Remember who ignored 70% of Seattle citizens who didn't want the Deep Bertha Tunnel of Doom flustercluck - that's her mom.

Not a coincidence.
6
It's storage. Who cares. They aren't unloading or transporting. Can we please get armchair outraged about more meaningful issues? It takes me a lot of effort to write emails to former governors.
7
uh @1 THe port doesn't abstain from pulling taxes if they make more money. They take it regardless. If anything the public welfare they receive allows them to make stupider market risks ( like backing the tunnel with cash ) and makes them less receptive to the realities of the market.
8
@7, incorrect. The port has more levy authority than they're currently using. To keep the tunnel scheme palatable to the public, they agreed to sneak a "tunnel tax increase" through to the public under their levy authority. I don't like it, but you know how well a voted tunnel tax would go over.
2
This is a BIG DEAL.

Shell's plans for arctic drilling are planet-killing activities - immoral in the extreme. We cannot participate in that just because the port needs the easy money to pay their share of the costs of the tunnel, or needs to find a new tenant. Our participation isn't excused because they are just storing stuff here. We are helping to twist the knife in the heart of the planet as surely as if we did the drilling ourselves.