100 people show up for an anti-coal protest. That is 4/1000 of 1% of the population of the Lower Mainland. But I'm sure that the self-appointed head of this protest group probably phoned the radio station half a dozen times trying to get a reporter to show up. Of course the media loves any hint of a protest, even one as trivial as this and so the intrepid reporter did show up.

And to hear what message? That we should shut the world down because a few people believe every Chicken Little story that comes along. When can we expect a little balanced reporting?

It's okay guys...we're going to slowly grind down the hippies on Vancouver and the Northern Gulf Islands and convince them that mining coal here (creating hundreds of jobs for their kids and grand kids), and shipping it out through Port Alberni (creating jobs for the kids and grand kids of layed off pulp and paper workers there), will be the better option.

No need to thank us.

I've read a lot of rhetoric from both sides of the great coal debate over the last couple of weeks. Seems everyone might be so focused on their cause that they forgot to ask the most obvious math question...

The current price of thermal coal is $100 per metric ton. Therefore, the proposed 4M ton expansion of the Fraser Surrey docs will transfer $400 million dollars of raw product. I have no idea what the shipping tax rate is on coal, but let's assume 10 percent. If that's true, the federal government would make $40 million per year. (Local governments don't receive shipping tax revenue.)

So the question is: Does $40 million dollars to the feds justify the risk to local health, slope stability, traffic congestion, safety, beach access, noise, orcas, etc., etc.? In the case of exporting US coal, the added local jobs are only a few low skilled, union workers at the port. (The people driving BNSF trains are exclusively American.)

When you do the math, the real question isn't: "should the Fraser Surrey docs be expanded?", it's: "Why is any US coal being shipped out of Port Metro Vancouver at all?" Canadian tax payers foot the bill for road infrastructure. The lost transportation efficiency alone, does not cost justify a business case for exporting US coal from Vancouver ports.

Why are Canadian tax payers waiting at level crossings, and paying to build railway underpasses, for something that adds negligible federal revenue, and no local revenue? It would be great if Russ Hiebert or the port could clarify the above tax assumptions. Once we can see the math, it will be easy for us all to decide what makes sense. ...but, so far, it doesn't look good.

What's most concerning, is how we ever got here. Do our elected officials not ask a few basic questions when granting permits for the use of our national ports? Maybe, and hopefully, I'm missing something. But, unless my napkin calculation is off by at least one or two orders of magnitude, people's anger shouldn't be aimed at BNSF or Port Metro Vancouver.  Outrage should be focused at the federal transportation authority that grants permits; and at Russ Hiebert, for not managing federal decisions in his riding that make any sense. – To tree-huggers, residents, or tax paying motorists.

Putting this into perspective, Surrey just voted down a casino, which would have injected 6 million per year into their budget. A single slot machine in a back corner would create more tax benefit to Surrey, than the entire coal shipping business.