In light of the recent
report by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation
(DRPT) regarding the Roanoke Region Intermodal Facility, I would like to
share with you my concerns and the reasons why I do not believe this
facility is appropriate for Salem, or for that matter for any site close
to schools, residential areas, or outdoor athletic
facilities.
The principal issue is that the area surrounding such a
facility (perhaps a 1-2 mile radius) will be subject to significantly
higher levels of diesel soot pollution (PM2 particulates, in technical
jargon) from the locomotives, trucks and other equipment. Diesel
soot is the major component of our visible air pollution, but more
importantly, it is a serious health hazard.
As you probably know, those who are impacted most by bad air
are the elderly, young children whose lungs are still developing, people
who are active outdoors, and those who already suffer from respiratory
diseases. I find myself in the latter two categories, as I take
daily medication to minimize the effects of asthma, and I walk daily in
the neighborhood for exercise. My residence is just over one mile
as the crow flies from the proposed site, and I know from the odor often
emanating from the Yokohama plant that pollution from this facility
would be in the air I breathe.
I believe it is inappropriate to support a plan that will
expose vulnerable citizens to these higher levels of pollution. Of
particular concern are residents in nearby neighborhoods, students at
G.W. Carver Elementary, East Salem Elementary & Andrew Lewis Middle
School, and the athletes at the Moyer Sports Complex, Kiwanis Field,
& the playing fields at the Salem Civic Center.
Here are two direct quotes from the recent DRPT
report:
• "Facilities can also negatively impact local residents
because of increased congestion-induced air pollution . . .
"
• "Air quality preservation is the most significant challenge
for freight movement."
Regrettably, while this report goes into
great depth on possible economic benefits and environmental benefits
that are not specific to the site, it sheds no further light on these
admitted environmental and health problems that are site-specific.
A 15-year study (published in 2006) led by the Harvard School of
Public Health found a 27 to 32 percent increase in death rates for
people with the following conditions when exposed to higher levels of
diesel soot for one year or more:
• heart
failure
• chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
diabetes
• inflammatory diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis
Many other studies support similar conclusions.
In addition to our local Sierra Club group, Greater Roanoke
Valley Asthma and Air Quality Coalition has come out in opposition to
this facility, noting that to avoid their opposition, changes must be
made so that "all vehicles (locomotives, highway trucks, off-road
vehicles) involved with the facility are using ultra low sulfur diesel
and are equipped with EPA-approved filtering devices." This group
is comprised primarily of health care professionals who specialize in
respiratory illness.
I recognize that the estimates of projected economic benefits
are compelling, but I urge you not to sacrifice public health in the
name of economic prosperity. As you strive to guide Salem toward
economic growth, bear in mind that air quality is one issue that is
typically taken into account when companies are looking for relocation
destinations. You should consider the very real possibility that
an intermodal facility could actually be a hindrance to the acquisition
of new businesses in Salem, particularly companies that are looking for
a clean, healthy environment for their employees.
I also note with interest the projected environmental benefits
of this project. The Sierra Club has long been supportive of
schemes that will move more freight from trucks to rail as a means to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The DRPT report sited a potential
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of 700,000 tons over a 15 year
period. This is not a trivial benefit, but to put it in
perspective, a similar benefit could be derived by installing 13 compact
fluorescent light bulb in 50,000 households (a typical house has around
70 light bulbs). We would like to see our region participate in
helping achieve these benefits, but it should done by siting this
facility where the impact on public health is minimized AND by taking
action to clean up the emissions of the equipment used at the facility
through the use of modern emissions control technology.
Finally, it has been duly noted that Norfolk Southern already
owns certain property in Salem that they have the right to develop, and
they may have the right to seek condemnation of other property for
purposes such as this intermodal facility. Nevertheless, it's
fairly clear that DRPT would prefer to approve a site where local
sentiment favors such development, and I hope you will consider taking
action to inform them, as several other localities already have, that
Salem is not such a place.
I urge you to just say "NO" to any new development in Salem
that has the effect of degrading the air quality of our community.
We should be moving in the opposite direction.
Sincerely,
Mark McClain
Group Chair & Salem Area
Coordinator
