Oakland, CA – In the discussion surrounding the Insight Terminal Solutions Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal, the facility that has been a dream of Oakland’s economic development community since 1991, and we’re talking about the OBOT, has been constantly referred to as a “coal terminal” by The Sierra Club. (Zennie62Media and Zennie Abraham are proud to have Insight Terminal Solutions LLC as a client – as if we haven’t said that many times before in Oakland News Now and at Zennie62 on YouTube.)
The Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal has also been referred to as a “coal terminal” by writers using The Sierra Club‘s talking points to bash a project they know nothing of any real substance about.
So, what’s the difference between a “coal terminal” and a “bulk terminal” and why is the OBOT a bulk terminal?
A coal terminal is specifically designed to store and prepare for transport coal, and no other commodity. A coal terminal has large land area available to have open air storage facilities and commonly uses open-air hopper cars to bring in coal.
A bulk terminal is vastly different. A bulk terminal handle different types commodities and is not specialized for the handling of just one of them. This more generic operation allows for a more flexible facility that can meet the needs of the market.
As stated before at Oakland News Now, “Zennie62Media was commissioned to tell the developer’s story about the OBOT and address online misconceptions about the project. As the video below will show, the ITS OBOT was never intended to be a coal terminal. It was designed to be a “just-in-time” bulk commodities terminal, flexible enough to handle sulphur, iron ore, coal, and other materials. Moreover, the ITS OBOT was designed to keep all materials in storage for a very short period of time before shipping. The rail shipment would arrive, and then be moved to the bulk cargo vessel just as soon as the train arrives at the OBOT transfer terminal.”
Remember, the Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal is not a coal terminal. Any claim to the contrary is a deliberate attempt to tell fake news.
Is Tom Steyer Gaming The American Coal Market?
It’s reported that U.S. Presidential Candidate Tom Steyer has made much of his $1.6 billion head fund fortune on investments in the coal industry. Now, he’s poured an estimated $100 million in pushing climate change legislation via backing non-profit activist organizations.
Given that Mr. Steyer made his money in coal, and is now speaking against coal, it’s fair to ask this question: Having caused coal’s prices to increase as an investor, is Tom Steyer now trying to devalue American coal mines so he can later buy them up at fire sale prices?
Look, the dynamics at play here are clear: American coal mines are not empty, China’s the largest nation in the World, and the one with the biggest demand for coal, India is close behind, and together, they provide a giant market for anyone who would purchase an American coal mine. Add the latest in mining automation, and voila, a viable coal mining business grows.
All Tom Steyer has to do is play the indirect route in this game, investing in companies that have their collective eye on repurchasing old coal mines, but via another company he may own, and not using his direct name. Steyer’s work to produce a giant public relations machine that has elected officials like Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf and Washington Governor Jay Inslee playing along in causing coal mine values to fall has to be consider a work of genius – a new “big short.” Trouble is, do climate change activists realize they’re being played? Right now, no.