I have here Don Brunell’s column (“Keeping our rails on track,” Renton Reporter, Sept. 20) on railroads and how they have improved in safety. I’m glad that such an efficient mode of transportation is coming back into its own, but there are problems Brunell hasn’t mentioned. These concern fossil fuel (use of which concerned people want to reduce, as eliminating it might never be possible).

First off, coal trains will make our already wretched traffic situation even worse, in any town they pass through – and any town that people might drive through to avoid them. If one of those mile-long trains blocks access to much of the Sodo district, for instance, anyone who has a medical emergency there might die.

The air will be full of coal dust and so will the rivers and saltwater, because those cars can’t be covered due to the danger of spontaneous combustion. The finer it is, the farther it can drift – into the air of more towns and deeper into our lungs. My lungs, and the gills of the fish that help feed us all, and the trees that make this region so beautiful don’t need that stuff.

Any jobs this project would bring are likely to be short-lived and the permanent ones only available to a few. If terminals aren’t built here, the trains won’t necessarily go to Canada – I gather the rail system is overloaded up there, too, and you might ask Portland or Los Angeles how their terminals have worked out for them.

There was an article a while back in the Seattle Weekly about this mess and it mentioned studies that gave contradictory results in the matter of health risks – but the sources were not cited. I’ll cite mine: powerpastcoal.org. In the case of an uncertainty like this, I would choose the conservative option, the one with less risk. There’s too much at stake. China can’t pay us enough to replace our lives.

I’m not jazzing you when I say this: Coltrane yes, coal trains no.

Kerrick Mainrender,
Renton