Miiu'fs EXHIBIT 8
M
Peri Commission SKQOJ
r"W
Peter Goldman

Director, Washington Forest Law Center

615 Second Ave. Suite 360

Seattle, WA 98104

pgoldmaanflcorg; 206-223-4088 x.3; 206-399-0092

Testimony of Peter Goldman Regarding Proposed Lease of Terminal 5

Before Port of Seattle Commissioners

January 13, 2015 1:00 pm

Good afternoon, Commissioners and Mr. Fick. My
name is Peter Goldman. l have lived in West
Seattle for 27 years and I am an environmental lawyer, concerned citizen, and board-member
of Washington Conservation Voters. i am speaking on behalf of myself but
my views are shared
by many who will be testifying today

Over the past two years, I have worked closely with Port staff and Commissioners
on freight
mobility issues in Seattle's Sodo district that could impede Port operations, such
as the
proposed sports arena. l have learned a lot about the seaport and Seattle's maritime and
industrial economy and the threats to it, and I deeply respect the Port's important role in
our
regional and State economy.

The Port's visionary tag line is, "Where
a Sustainable World is Headed." I am here today to
make the case to you that the Port enabling Shell Oil Co. to stage its Arctic
drilling operation at
Terminal 5 is NOT "where a sustainable world is headed."

There are two basic environmental facts at play. First, it is generally agreed that, to avoid
world-wide devastation and major climactic disruption, the
average global temperature rise
caused by green-house gas emissions must not exceed 2 degrees C above the
average global
temperature of pre-industrial times. To have at least a 50% chance of achieving this limit
over
the next 35 years, however, we must limit
our future C02 emissions to 1100 gigatons. But it is
estimated that the green-house gas emissions contained in present estimates of
global fossil
fuel are around three times higher than this. In a study recently published in the journal
Nature, scientists estimated that about 1/3 of oil reserves, half of
gas reserves, and 80% of
remaining world coal reserves must remain unused to possibly meet this 2 degree target.
Considering our need to reduce fossil fuel consumption in general, aggressive development of
impossibleto-safely-extract Arctic oil makes no economic or environmental
sense.

The second environmental fact is that blowout
or spill-free drilling in the harsh Arctic
environment is dangerous, virtually impossible, and no technology exists to stop
or contain a
blow-out in this harsh environment. One needs to look
no further than the NY Times magazine
article two weeks ago about Shell's Kullug rig disaster in 2012. We made 10
copies for the
Commissioners and staff.

I am mindful and respect that there is an important slippery slope policy issue here. Your
duty,
of course, is to run a seaport and not
serve as a cop policingthe environmental impact of what
the Port's tenants do or what goes into or comes out of the millions
sea containers that cross
your land. But the proposed lease of Terminal 5 to Foss is not simply meddling in
your tenants'
business or interfering with interstate commerce; it is your business decision whether the
proposed change in use is consistent with the long-term interest of the Port and "where
a
sustainable world is headed." Enabling Arctic drilling is neither.

The Port's staff did its job, and a thorough job, vetting potential interim
uses of T5. But this
leasing decision transcends ordinary staff business decisions. Port staff needs and deserves
policy guidance governing how the Port should lease its facilities to the resource extraction
industry.

Another consideration is the Port's social license to operate in Seattle. If the Port facilitates
Arctic drilling in this highly visible manner, it will make it much more difficult for
environmentalists like me to make the case to the public and the City of Seattle that the Port is
an environmentallyresponsible neighbor and economic resource. Losing this argument will
weaken the Port's ability to operate and build its infrastructure in Seattle, which is proudly one
of the most environmentally-progressive cities in the US.

l also urge the Port, if it decides to proceed with the Foss lease, to
process this proposed lease
under SEPA. SEPA generally exempts leasing decisions but does not
exempt leasing decisions
that propose changes in use. Here, there is a clear change in use that could produce negative
environmental consequences. In this SEPA review, the Port must analyze whether and to what
extent its leasing decision will have a direct, indirect, or cumulative impact
on climate change
and the Arctic sea.

Thank you for considering my views.