We believe the decisions to continue and expand coal leasing from federal lands and authorize the export of that coal are likely to lead to long-term investments in coal generation in Asia, with air quality and climate impacts in the United States that dwarf those of almost any other action the federal government could take in the foreseeable future.

For these reasons, we urge the CEQ in the strongest possible terms to undertake and complete a thorough examination of the greenhouse gas and other air quality effects of continued coal leasing and export before the U.S. and its partners make irretrievable long-term investments in expanding this trade.

“We … believe current regulations ensure rigorous environmental review of each individual project.  We will continue our efforts to make the case to Governors Inslee and Kitzhaber, as well as others, that these terminal projects are good for our region and can be done right,” said [Lauri Hennessey, spokeswoman for the Alliance for Northwest Jobs & Exports].

The governors’ letter comes after a March 18 report that the Army Corps of Engineers would not “conduct an intensive, all-encompassing programmatic environmental impact statement for the proposed coal export terminals in the Pacific Northwest.”

Last year, I commented on the efforts of opponents of the project to require what’s called a programmatic environmental impact statement, something that would do what the governors appear to suggest – look at the possible global effects of the proposed actions. It’s a mammoth undertaking, impossible to evaluate with precision and guaranteed to extend the review process through years of litigation.

As the Seattle Times reports, the ports’ opponents applaud the governors’ request.

“We are very encouraged that Governors Inslee and Kitzhaber are raising critical questions on the long-term impacts that coal leasing and exports will have on our communities,” said Beth Doglio, campaign director of the Power Past Coalition, which is trying to block coal exports from the Pacific Northwest.

Expanding environmental reviews to encompass hypothetical global impacts would subject any major project to an endless cycle of litigation, appeal, and costly and speculative analysis. Consider it the chilling effect of climate change politics. While coal is the immediate focus, any major manufacturer or exporter could see similar roadblocks to investment and job creation.

It’s a point Hennessey makes in the Times story.

“This has all kinds of implications. Wheat, lumber and planes. Do we really want to analyze how products are used before we export them?”

Without question, the project merits thorough review and, as mentioned earlier, the processes for such review are already in place and will be followed. In a televised session with Crosscut editors, the governor outlined the steps he will direct be taken. They’re extensive.

Gov. Inslee’s aides told the Times the governor hopes the requested federal review does not create additional delay. It’s hard to think of a time when a federal review didn’t slow things down. The review requested by the governors would not be the exception.