More Port Updates
I posted the other day on harbor area activities, but we have a new slew of stories that should get some attention...In a bit of good news, BNSF hosted "BNSF Goes Green," at its Commerce Mechanical Facility. While not in the harbor area, the SCIG is expected to eliminate millions of miles of truck traffic off nearby freeways, such as the 710. This will create shorter truck trips for movement of containers from ships to rail, which is expected to ease traffic conditions on local freeways and reduce air quality impacts.
In addition, the SCIG Project will provide direct access to the Alameda Corridor and will enable the Alameda Corridor to reach its potential in terms of train capacity, thereby further realizing the significant benefits that already result from using it, such as reduction of traffic congestion and improvement in air quality.
This is all good news for the new Harbor Commission President David Freeman. According to the LA Times, more than 250 people attended the meeting, the largest crowd at a board meeting in recent memory.
Donna Littlejohn with the Daily Breeze has the best write-up I've seen of the meeting. Some key points...
"Wilmington has long been the stepchild of the Port of Los Angeles, bearing the brunt of pollution and traffic as port officials have showered neighboring San Pedro with millions of dollars in beautification and development projects. But the first gathering of the newly appointed Board of Harbor Commissioners suggests that could be changing."The commission quickly scored points with many members of the public by pressing port staff about the timeline for the Wilmington waterfront development project.
It is scheduled to be completed in 2011, a timeline that S. David Freeman called "unbelievable."
[cut]
Commissioners also asked staff members to draw up a new policy governing commissioners' personal contacts.After Jerilyn Lopez Mendoza was named to the commission by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa in July, she said she was inundated with requests for meetings.
"There is this issue of transparency," she said, but added, "I also was struck by the potential of a conflict of interest."
[cut]
Hoping to make board meetings more accessible to the public, commissioners also agreed to hold one of their two meetings each month during evening hours.The next meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m. Sept. 28 at the Port of Los Angeles headquarters in San Pedro.
In the last bit of news, the Daily Breeze also reports that:
The Port of Los Angeles will receive an additional $11.4 million in federal funding to upgrade security under a new grant formula designed to funnel money to ports thought to be at the greatest risk of a terrorist attack.The neighboring Port of Long Beach will get $12.8 million under the program, making the combined funding one of the largest awards for the port complex since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks prompted federal officials to beef up transportation security."
Posted by Anonymous @ 9/15/2005 06:55:00 AM
11 Comments:
As to "BNSF Goes Green", the response to PR events of this sort always should be "What are the numbers?"
In this case, how many tons of pollutants do your operations produce in the South Coast Air Basin, how much will these changes reduce them, and how much will they increase with projected growth.
As compared to the new federal regulations for trucks, to come into effect in 2007, railroad locomotives are extremely dirty. There are no state or federal regulations in effect which will clean them up.
The Port of Los Angeles Emissions Inventory, and the report of the "No Net Increase" Task Force estimate the growth of emissions out to 2025.
Because of the upcoming truck regulations, and no upcoming railroad regulations, these documents estimate that, by 2025, the diesel particulate emissions from port related railroad operations will be SIX TIMES those of all of the trucks related to the port. This may seem counter intuitive, but it is a fact.
The South Coast Air Quality Managment District, which is desperately trying to gain some sort of control of railroad emissions, says that the emissions of locomotives in the air basin exceeds the emissions of all of the power plants, oil refineries, cement plants, and other industrial facilities in the basin combined. This is because "stationary sources" are strictly controlled, and railroads and ships get a free ride. Think about that next time you have to get your car smog checked.
One of the control measures proposed by the "no Net Increase" plan is to use cleaner diesel fuel in line haul (by far the majority) locomotives in the Air Basin. The railroads have absolutely refused.
The problem with these air pollution issues, as with so many others in our society, is that token efforts, press releases and spin take the place of effective action.
I guess we should be pleased that we have at least raised the level to where they think that they have to have media events, but these will never solve the problem. The railroads in the air basin are far, far, far from "green". They are an extremely serious problem, with no solution in sight.
You tell 'em Noel!
Given the amount of community interest and concern about the operations of the Harbor, all of Harbor Comission meetings should be in evening hours.
One little reported fact involving BN, is that they are quietly ramping up the train volumes on their line that loops through Torrance and the South Bay, in violation of their promise to "retire" the line after receiving a billion dollar subsidy (aka Alameda Corridor). Their proposed new Wilmington rail yard will increasingly rely on using this South Bay Line. By using this South Bay Line, then traffic congestion (from blocked intersections) and air pollution (from idling engines) are spread beyond Wilmington to Torrance, Gardena, Lawndale, etc.
San Pedro gets 400+ acres of parks, museums, cafes, marinas & promenades....
Wilmington gets another Rail Yard....
These are useful initiatives which would slow the rate of increase in emissions, especially in the front line communities of Wilmington and west Long Beach.
However, as you correctly note, this is about the proposed new facility in east Wilmington, which does not exist now. This says nothing about cleaning up the existing, and ever growing, pollution from the existing intermodal yards in west Long Beach, Commerce and East LA.
Furthermore, the vast majority of the railroad related emissions in the air basin come from the so-called "line haul" locomotives, which pull the full trains on the mainline tracks.
The problem with all of this is the same as the overall problem with the ports. These efforts to install cleaner equipment are great, but the ensuing growth wipes out all of the gains. If this yard is built, and this cleaner equipment installed, it will facilitate many more container movements. This will result in more truck trips to and from the docks to this yard, and many more visits of extremely dirty "line haul" locomotives to the air basin. At the end of the day, pollution will go up, not down.
The "No Net Increase" report recommends that Tier 2 locomotives be cleaned up, first by requiring cleaner fuels in the Air Basin, and later by advanced pollution controls. The railroads have refused, in an arrogant manner that had to be experienced to be believed.
They are putting on a PR push to try to sell this new yard because they know that a giant push back is coming from the front line communities who know what is about to happen to them.
The concern is that these press releases give the public the impression that the problem is being fixed. The problem is not being fixed. It is getting bigger every day.
Yes, this equipment could be used moving containers from ships to trains - and trucks. There is some movement in the harbor already toward cleaner fuels and engines for such equipment. The electric crane idea is excellent, and is used in many ports around the world - Hong Kong, Singapore and Rotterdam, to name a few. It has huge potential for increased efficiency and lower emissions, but that is probably a subject for another post.
There are other great concerns about these railroad press releases.
They continually say that this rail yard, and other rail facilities, will take trucks off the 710 freeway. To put it as charitably as possible, this is a great misnomer.
The growth forecasts of the two ports are that they will grow from a total throughput of 13 million twenty foot container equivalents (TEUs) today to 47 million in 2025.
They generate about 40,000 to 45,000 truck trips per day in 2005. Their joint traffic study shows that this will increase to 121,000 in 2025. This forecast takes into account all of their predicted growth in rail movements of containers. This will caused the 710, and other freeways, to gridlock once and for all. That is, unless they can persuade the public to come up with $5 billion to widen the 710, the environmental impacts of which do not bear thinking about.
Thus, do not hold your breath (no pun intended) waiting for truck trips to go down. They are going up.
What these rail facilities will actually do is facilitate much of the above growth, after all of the freeway capacity is used up. This will only add to the resulting massive emissions from ships (by far the biggest source), terminal equipment and harbor craft (also a surprisingly large source).
They constantly tell us that, since 4 or 6 locomotives pull a train with 250 containers, there are less emission per container than there would be if they went on trucks, even if the locomotives are primitively dirty.
Alas, the studies of the "No Net Increase" task force call that claim into very serious question.
The ports' growth projections estimate that 32% of containers will move by rail in 2025. The most optimistic emissions scenario shows that, in 2025, port related trucks will emit 30 tons of toxic, carcinogenic, diesel particulates per year, and that port related railroad locomotives will emit 81 tons. Other scenarios show that the locomotives will actually emit as much as 180 tons.
If the railroads emit 73% of the pollution to carry 32% of the containers, it is difficult to see how the emissions per continer are lower. This is a result of the strict pollution controls coming into effect for trucks in 2007, as opposed to the almost non-existent Tier 2 controls on locomotives.
In fact, according to the Port of Los Angeles Emissions Inventory, total railroad emissions will pass total truck emissions this year (2005).
These claims of less pollution per container by rail, and "taking trucks off the 710" have just become propaganda slogans. When studied in the light of the available numbers, they are, again to be charitable, extremely misleading.
A wise man once said that the key to solving this problem is public awareness - that, once the public understands what is going on, and the threat to their health, they will not stand for it. This is why there is such concern when the issues are obfuscated. If the public is lulled into a false sense of security by artful public relations, the air pollution will just continue to increase.
That being the case, all credit to Mayor Frank, and the Mayor Sam blog, for taking up these issues.
The only real pollution that is going on in San Pedro is Noel Park's mouth and ass, which are interchangeable because he loves to talk out of both.
If this problem is not dealt with promptly and effectively, a lot of people are going to die, and many thousands are going to be made sick.
^ If that is the case Noel. Why don't you shut up and die already.
(Chuckles)
There you have it, the message of the Port and its tenants and hangers-on to the public.
Shut up and die so that we can make our money.
Noel, it's actually Shut your trap. Because your lies is the pollution that is poisioning residents.
So if you (noel park) dies, the port and harbor areas would be cleaner for that.
Speaking of making money and polluting, How's your auto body shop doing?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home