An embattled coal terminal could be a lifeline for US coal

What the report says

Al Jazeera reports that residents and environmental advocates in West Oakland, California, are renewing efforts to stop a long-disputed coal export terminal at the city’s port, arguing it could worsen air pollution in a community already burdened by freight traffic. The article centers on Margaret Gordon, a longtime local activist who began opposing the project after learning in 2013 that coal from Utah and other western states could be shipped by train through Oakland for export to Asia.

The renewed fight follows a June 4 announcement by US President Donald Trump’s administration invoking the Defense Production Act to support coal projects. According to Al Jazeera, the package totals $700m, includes backing for 14 coal plants, and sets aside $75m for the Oakland terminal. Trump said the measures would lower energy costs and create 14,000 jobs, while supporters see coal exports as potential relief for regions hurt by declining production and tax revenue.

Opponents in Oakland, including the No Coal in Oakland coalition, warn that coal trains could release dust and pollutants near homes, schools and other urban areas. They have supported state legislation by California Assembly Member Mia Bonta seeking additional environmental review of coal projects, while US Representative Lateefah Simon has introduced legislation aimed at blocking water and power funds for coal projects including the Oakland terminal.

The project has been delayed for more than a decade by ordinances and lawsuits. Al Jazeera reports that the California Supreme Court cleared a path for it last September, though related litigation continues in a Kentucky district court. Developer Phil Tagami has said the terminal could begin shipping coal in early 2028, but environmental lawyers cited by Al Jazeera say the federal grant would cover only part of the estimated $237m cost.