Baltimore, MD

Baltimore, Maryland has the second largest national coal exports, with over 7 million tons exported annually. This is only second to Norfolk, Virginia which exports over 9 million tons annually. The terminal is owned by the rail-based transportation company CSX Corporation, and is also known as the Curtis Bay Coal Piers and Bayside Coal Terminal.

CSX Transportation at Curtis Bay Piers. Maryland Department of the Environment. Accessed 2025.

2021 Explosion

Video: Explosion at CSX facility in Curtis Bay shakes residents, workers nearby

On December 30, 2021, an explosion at the CSX coal terminal heightened existing concerns about coal exports in Baltimore, especially for Curtis Bay residents. A “propane tank explosion at the CSX Coal Pier in Curtis Bay” frightened residents with a loud “boom”, accompanied by many shattered windows. Though no injuries were reported, several residents and community organizations took this opportunity to call for the removal of the CSX coal facility, citing long-held concerns about air quality, respiratory health, and the overwhelming number of similar pollutant industries located in Baltimore.

Despite receiving more than $60 million for upgrades between 2017 and 2022, the CSX Curtis Bay facility admitted “inadequate ventilation” and a lack of methane monitoring led to the explosion. As CSX sought ways to improve on their safety measures and mend community relations, the only tangible changes that occurred was a one month shutdown of the facility and a $120,000 OSHA fine.

Maryland state officials have failed to address the concerns of the Baltimore community. After the explosion, when asked if dangerous fumes or particulates were emitted, the Maryland Dept. of the Environment announced that they would allow the railroad companies to track and monitor emissions. Residents appear to be struggling for autonomy when it comes to the economic pursuits of their community, as the neighborhood is also home to a medical waste incinerator, a rendering plant, various chemical factories, and a sewage treatment plant, and the Quarantine Road Landfill.

The Investigation

In July 2022, the results following the investigation into the CSX facility explosion, Curtis Bay Piers Coal Facility Explosion Investigation: Cause & Origin Evaluation, were published. GHD, an environmental and business consulting company, surveyed the Curtis Bay neighborhood and found residual coal dust deposits up to 12 blocks west of the facility. These findings coincide with likely location of coal traveling through the facilities escape tunnel and open feeder holes, especially when aided by the wind. GHD also conducted coal dust samples from the facilities conveyor belts to understand where combustion may have begun. They found that entrained methane from the coal was the source of the initial combustion in a localized flammable atmosphere, and subsequent combustions were fueled by an increased density of airborne coal dust located within the facility's North Reclaim Tunnel. This localized flammable atmosphere, in which the explosion began, was aided by significantly low rates of ventilation. Adequate ventilation allows for the coal to efficiently dissipate and disperse from the internal tunnel, and with a reduced rate of dispersal, methane can build to dangerous levels. Reflective of the investigation, CSX applied GHD's investigative finding into their redesign of the North Reclaim Tunnel, which included "monitoring devices, higher air flow, additional water sprays, skirting of conveyors, grounding of equipment and installation of electrical fixtures to meet appropriate electrical codes."

Community Activism

Invested environmental activists and long-time Curtis Bay residents have long opposed the establishment of CSX. Principally, activists are angry with CSX at failing to keep coal dust from becoming airborne as it travels from the Virginia Appalachian region by train. The only existing measure of containing the coal consist of spraying coal dust mountains with water to keep them in place. The short-term vision of the Curtis Bay community is demanding CSX pay for the environmental damages it has inflicted, including providing medical relief funds to ease the unyielding burden of the less than 3,000 residents. As for their long-term goals, community activists want CSX to discontinue exporting coal altogether and shift to cleaner energy sources.

In 2022, citizens of Curtis Bay filed a $5 million class-action lawsuit against CSX following the explosion. Greg Sawtell, one co-president of the Community of Curtis Bay Association, expressed his support for the lawsuit saying, “It’s a breaking point. If you don’t step up and respond when a facility of that size literally blows up in your backyard and threatens your life, I don’t think we can say we have a community, and the concern is we won’t have a community if we don’t take a stand right now.” Notable community action groups include the Community of Curtis Bay Association, the Southern Baltimore Community Land Trust, and Free Your Voice.

Among the many cries of outrage, residents have produced many suggestions to the city for improving the issue of pollution. For instance, directly after the explosion, the Sierra Club and the Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) called upon the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to require CSX to monitor coal-related pollutants and make this information accessible to the public. They also called upon MDE to set “appropriate pollution limits” to protect the health and safety of Curtis Bay residents. According to Diana Dascalu-Joffe, who is the Senior General Counsel at CCAN, the necessary pollution limits would need to "set the strictest standards possible" in order to seriously address the "industrial pollution burden" forced upon Curtis Bay residents for over a century. Some of the strictest national standards possible include: "Enforceable limits on emissions, full enclosure of the terminal to reduce dust from entering the community, and per ton mitigation fees to be paid to neighboring communities to address the negative impacts of having 14 million tons of coal per year transferred through South Baltimore communities."

Community Testimonies

Many of the Baltimore residents that face a higher risk of coal exposure are the people who live and work near the location of the terminals and railroads. Several oral histories and interviews have documented Baltimore resident’s personal experiences with the terminals and the CSX railroad specifically. One resident who lives less than a block from the CSX coal facility recounts seeing coal dust “[fly] off the tops of their cars” when leaving the port. She testifies that coal dust and soot has coated her home interior completely, from her furniture to her window seals, even turning her white rug completely black in just under four years. Another Baltimore who lives and directs a community garden just blocks from the CSX coal export recalls watching large swaths of dust blow off uncovered coal dust piles that are the size of a football field. Both testimonies allude to these coal terminals being the main contributor to the unusually large concentration of respiratory illness within communities closest to the terminal.

Solutions: 2025 Windscreen Requirement

In July 2025, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) announced a new requirement for coal exporters in Curtis Bay to erect a giant screen to keep dust from polluting the air of nearby neighborhoods.

This change in policy comes a few days after a John Hopkins study linked high instances of dust pollution to times when the wind is blowing across the terminal, or when bulldozers are active on the site. CSX already has a shorter windscreen set up at the property’s southern edge, which was measured in the Johns Hopkins report. The research team found that black carbon and particulate matter levels were significantly higher when the wind was blowing from the terminal, compared to when the wind was blowing from other directions. Similarly, particulate matter and black carbon levels were significantly higher, on average, when bulldozers were visibly active on the coal piles. One coauthor of the paper noted that the research makes it clear that the use of wind screens and water sprayers at the coal terminal isn’t enough, criticizing the MDE permit for not setting specific limits on the amount of dust that can enter the community.

Documents

• Deanes, L. et al. Relation of wind direction and coal terminal activity patterns with air pollution burden in a community bordering a coal export terminal, Curtis Bay, Maryland, USA. Air Quality Atmosphere & Health. July 21, 2025.
• Curtis Bay Piers Coal Facility Explosion Investigation: Cause & Origin Evaluation. CSX Transportation. July 29, 2022.