Copyright Sue Dexter
December 8, 2017
Abstract
Ports and maritime activity have had tremendous influence on every aspect of the human experience since sea trade became commonplace 6000 years ago. Man figured out how to make boats seaworthy for longer and longer voyages to expand the scope of their exploration, domination, and wealth. Trade started small with neighbors bartering with each other. Then small boats navigated the shoreline laden with tradable goods to farther away coastal hamlets until early ancient civilizations built huge ships that could haul cargo across the sea. To the victors belong the spoils, and navigation was a powerful tool. Cities on trade routes became rich and their countries influential, and almost every coastal town had a port.
When containerization became commonplace the maritime industry changed profoundly. Ports grew based on economies of scale and were increasingly tied to urban spaces to draw upon labor and capital. (Hall & Jacobs, 2012) It is no coincidence that some of the most powerful cities in the world grew from their preordained position on the sea including: Piraeus in Greece (#45 largest port), Valencia in Spain (#32), Jebel Ali in Dubai, U.A.E. (#9), and Hong Kong (#5). The largest port in the world according to the World Shipping Council is Shanghai in China with a volume of 36.54 million TEU (twenty-foot equivalent units). (“Top 50 World Container Ports | World Shipping Council,” 2017) These volumes are astounding. But besides the sheer capacity, the ships themselves have become cities; the largest ship launched this year is the OOCL Hong Kong which can carry over 21,000 TEUs at one time. This Ultra Large Container Vessel (ULCV) ship is a marvel at 399.87 meters long (1312 feet, 3.5 football fields) and only the largest ports can accommodate her. (“10 World’s Biggest Container Ships in 2017,” 2017) Globally, “some 6 billion tonnes of freight moves by maritime transport each year and is estimated to comprise 45 per cent liquid bulks, 23 per cent dry bulks and 32 per cent general cargo.” (Gibbs, Rigot-Muller, Mangan, & Lalwani, 2014)
How did this industry which has changed every aspect of our lives come to be? I set out to examine the role and importance of ports throughout global history, and found fascinating stories of trade and war that shaped countries, cultures, and humanity. In this paper I will describe some of these important events and radical ideas that changed forever how we approach trade and maritime activities, including the story of our ports at Los Angeles and Long Beach which have a significant supply chain footprint in Southern California and the entire USA.
Combined, the magnitude of the LA/Long Beach port operations cannot be understated: in September 2017 847,857 TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent units) were handled (Narayan, 2017) and in 2016 16% of all US import dollars flowed through this entry point (“Table 1-51: Top U.S. Foreign Trade Freight Gateways by Value of Shipments (Current $ billions) | Bureau of Transportation Statistics,” 2016). Together they are considered the 10th busiest seaport in the world. (“Port of Long Beach - Facts at a Glance,” n.d.). Thousands of containers arrive at the port daily and are subsequently transported to inland rail terminals or local businesses by diesel trucks or rail spewing toxic air pollutants in their wake. “In addition to cancer risk, port-related air pollution contributes to other acute and chronic health effects. About 15% of children in Long Beach suffer from asthma compared to 9% of children in the United States.” (Clean Air Action Plan 2017 FINAL, 2017) Clearly this is completely unacceptable, and the ports along with the State of California have implemented a series of initiatives aimed at reducing port and truck emissions, with new goals for zero emissions announced just this summer (Barboza, 2017). The final chapter of this paper will examine efforts to alleviate both on and off-site port pollution externalities through the existing and 2017 Clean Air Act Plan (for LA/Long Beach), and address potential solutions not explicitly identified therein.
A Brief History of the Sea: Migration, Trade, and War
One cannot talk about ports without talking about boats, and it is thought that the people of Oceania were the first to take to the open sea in mass. They explored, and settled in, 39 million square kilometers of the Pacific (which is larger than Africa) starting in 1500 BCE. According to Lincoln Paine, the “islands of Oceania form the locus of the oldest, most sustained, and perhaps most enigmatic effort of maritime exploration and migration in the history of the world.” (Paine, 2013) It was originally thought settlements were the results of accidental drifting about, and not intentional navigation. Now the later has been proven based on archaeological evidence: they used celestial navigation and traced the behavior of fish, birds, and whales. Using double canoes that could carry up to 120 people and supplies, strong “trade winds” helped to jettison craft long distances with little human effort. (Paine, 2013) Landing the canoes ashore was relatively easy with no docks or wharfs required.
Like canoes, the large ships of Egypt 5000 years ago were also wind and human powered. As children we saw movies depicting pharaohs on gilded ships, being powered by rows upon rows of men – is this how it really was? Although images are limited, murals and reliefs do attest to this fact.
The Egyptians organized great cities around the Nile which is considered the “cradle of civilization,” and as Paine calls it, the “cradle of navigation.” The Nile was a transportation super-riverway to connect Upper and Lower Egypt politically and transport goods. It is the longest river in Africa and connects the Mediterranean from the Red Sea and Indian Ocean. The simplest river boats were made from the reeds of papyrus, but these had a disadvantage: once they became saturated with water, they simply fell apart or sank. For longer journeys or heavy loads, wood was employed for royal yachts, funerary ships, hunting boats, war ships, and cargo ships. First Dynasty vessels (3100 BCE) have been found in archaeological digs measuring up to 24 meters in length, which is 6 more meters than Columbus’ largest ship, the Santa Maria, built more than 4000 years later. “Massive utilitarian barges” hauled stone for the pyramids. Because of detailed drawings, we know something about the loads of these barges. For example, “the most vivid illustration of moving stone comes from the New Kingdom temple of Queen Hatshepsut (1400 BCE), which shows how two granite obelisks were carried from quarries near Aswan to the temple complex at Thebes…. It was long thought that each of the obelisks was thirty meters long and weighted about 330 tons. A vessel that carried these end-to-end, …, would measure about eight-four by twenty-eight meters.” (Paine, 2013) Even if the obelisks were carried side-by-side, the ship would have been 63 m long (207 feet). Regardless, these are very large ships. Drawings also show the loading of heavy objects. The boats were brought to the river’s edge and loaded there.
Foreign trade existed between Egypt and the Arabian Peninsula, Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Iran, Syro-Canaanite, Crete, and Libya. Trade included animals like leopards, incense, myrrh, oil, spice, grain, beer, wine, meat, fruit, cattle, silver, lazuli, eye-cosmetic, ivory, daggers, necklaces, and throwing sticks (a tool for hunting small water fowl). (Paine, 2013) A series of archaeological digs in the 1970s uncovered evidence of an Egyptian port dated 2055-1650 BCE, the harbor of Mersa/Wadi Gawasis. (Sayed, 1978) Further excavations in 2003-2011 uncovered 8 man-made caves used for storage of goods and supplies, a ceramics factory, living quarters, and administrative offices. In the caves and surrounding area, archaeologists found tablets with hieroglyphics describing the mission of the port and how the ships got there, perfectly coiled ropes, ship timbers, food, and 2-meter-long curved oar blades that were used in large boats hypothesized to be 21 meters (69 feet) in length. Ships were not just built there; they were rebuilt there after being disassembled at the Nile and carried overland. The ultimate destination was to get gold and spices in Punt, a city on the Red Sea in what is now in eastern Sudan/northern Eritrea. “Wood for the large ship timbers was brought in ships from Lebanon down the coast of the eastern Mediterranean to the Nile Delta, then up the Nile to Coptos to the shipbuilding yard. Other woods from the Nile Valley, especially Nile acacia, were also used for ship parts. The ships were then disassembled and carried roughly 150 km through desert wadis across the Eastern Desert—along with the rigging and all needed equipment, supplies, and food—to the harbor on the Red Sea.” (K. A. Bard & Fattovich, 2010) After being built, the ships were eased into the water on one of the five mud-brick ramps.
Although the harbor now is dried up because of sea level changes, all indications are that this was a thriving port. Many people lived and worked there, and trade with Punt provided the royal family and wealthy from Faiyum Oasis, the capital at the time near Cairo, with the luxury goods it craved. The location was fine with a protected harbor and direct maritime travel path to Punt and beyond.
It is interesting that the plan was to build ships at the port. However, since they did not have the supplies readily available (or network to provide supplies), the crew brought their own ships with them. The logistics planning must have been quite sophisticated to make this happen.
In addition, over forty cargo boxes were outside several caves. These boxes had been unpacked and cast aside. “Though the wood of these boxes showed termite damage, many facts are clear: nine boxes had been made in a standardized size of 50–52 × 32–34 × 27–29 cm, while four boxes were slightly smaller at 45–48 × 30–34 × 20 cm.” (K. A. Bard & Fattovich, 2010) Were the Egyptians standardizing containers? More on this topic later.
By the 1st century AD, port cities became the cultural and artistic centers where information and ideas were exchanged. Trade spread not only products among the four corners of the globe, but also new inventions, religious beliefs, art, and customs. Three ancient civilizations were the leaders in international sea trade. They were the Roman Empire, Parthian Empire spanning from Arabia to India, and the Han Empire in China. (“Trade between Arabia and the Empires of Rome and Asia,” 2000) Although all prospered, the Romans certainly thrived because of their sea power in trade and war. Per Seneca the Younger (Roman, approximately 1 AD), “He [god] gave us winds so that we might get to know distant lands. For man would have been an untaught animal and without experience of affairs if he had been circumscribed by the limits of the land where he was born.” (Loeb Classical Library, 2017).
Trade continued to build nations throughout the next two centuries. Geopolitics came to a head in the first part of the 20th century with the first world war, and then almost 21 years later with the second world war. In 1943/44, the Allied Command was planning the invasion of France, known forever as D-day. Ports, or lack or ports, was a serious consideration since everything that was needed to wage war with Germany had to come with them. “Assuming that the cross-Channel invasion could be attempted from the miniature British ports… where would all this mechanized army and its supplies be handled on the Far Shore [beaches of France]?” (Stanford, 1951) Operation Overlord (the code name for the invasion) made the decision that no port would be captured, since it was probable that most would be damaged beyond use. As related by Commander Alfred Stanford, the assault on the open beaches at Gold and Omaha beaches would be followed by “the construction of two completely artificial harbors, one American, one British, off the assault beaches.” (Stanford, 1951) It was the brain child of Sir Winston Churchill and named project Mulberry after the fast growing tree, and was so vital it was described as the “crux” to the entire invasion. The project was prioritized based on Churchill’s personal directive on May 30, 1942 to Admiral Mountbatten, the head of combined operations. It read: “Piers for use on beaches: They must float up and down with the tide. The anchor problem must be mastered. Let me have the best solution worked out. Don’t argue the matter. The difficulties will argue for themselves.” (Churchill, 1942)
The goal of Mulberry was to construct two harbors with: 1) a “gigantic” breakwater, 2) floating docks, and 3) connected roads between the docks and land to offload over 7000 tons of vehicles and supplies per day. (Lewis, n.d.) In this manner supplies (vehicles, food, gasoline, armor, etc.) could be offloaded from large ships onto the docks and brought to shore easily. Everything needed to be fabricated in England and brought over with the caravan of troops. The plan was to construct the artificial docks starting on day D+1 and completed in 8 days; under “assault conditions,” the entire port complex was completed 1 day ahead of schedule. (Stanford, 1951)
Like the Egyptians who brought their ships with them across the desert from the Nile, the Allies brought their port with them. Huge caissons, by a definition a coffin or a sealed underwater structure, provided the main foundations for the breakwater that would protect the ports. To keep this operation secret and avoid detection, construction sites were strewn around England. But it was hard to keep these structures under wraps given they were over five stories tall and a block long, the size of an apartment house. The 212 caissons were alone estimated to require “330,000 cubic yards (252,000 cubic metres) of concrete, 31,000 tons of steel, and 1.5 million yards (1.4 million metres) of steel shuttering.” (Lewis, n.d.) On June 6, 1944 they were drug behind destroyers across the channel and then sunk in place along with old and unusable ships which further fortified the breakwater. These breakwaters protected the construction of the twelve miles of flexible steel roadways that floated on pontoons (six miles for each harbor).
By calculations, over 2.5 million men, half a million vehicles, and four tons of supplies came through the Normandy port complex during the mission. (Lewis, n.d.) The plan and subsequent execution is truly one of man’s greatest technical and logistical feats of all time. We will never know if these “artificial” ports were the linchpin in the Allied forces victory over the Axis powers, but like their more permanent cousins, ports around the world serve as the gateway for importing both basic needs and technology to thrive in war or the modern age.
The San Pedro Bay Ports
Los Angeles and Long Beach share a history of development. As the city of Los Angeles 20 miles to the north of Long Beach grew, citrus growers needed a way to export their crops while new immigrants needed lumber to build homes/other structures and consumer goods to set up their households. Before 1870 Los Angeles was not “connected” by rail, so transport by sea was the only option for the volumes needed to supply a hungry small frontier town.
Nicknamed “Goose Town” because of the abundance of geese who frequented the area, the first recorded trader to call at San Pedro was Captain William Shaler in 1805. Described as being a “shady character” and “scoundrel,” he traded otter pelts and provisions for sugar, textiles, and household goods. Shaler chose the location because it provided calm and shallow waters for loading and offloading his boat moored off shore. (Cunningham & Cunningham, 2015; “The Port of Los Angeles | History,” n.d.) Cargo was landed on the beach since a dock did not exist at the time. This would shortly be rectified by businessman Phineas Banning who envisioned a thriving port operation that would connect Los Angeles to the global economy. He purchased land in the San Pedro Bay’s tidal estuary and in 1855 built a wharf in the location where the current harbor is; he called it New San Pedro. After dredging a channel through the marshes, the dock would allow boats to disembark directly. However, the harbor needed deepening and Banning requested that the government survey the site for further expansion. He got his wish when in 1859 the Coast Guard recommended it.
To bring more business to the port it was vitally important to have a transportation corridor in place between the main town of Los Angeles and the port since roads became unpassable in poor weather hampering any attempts of goods or passenger delivery. Banning self-financed a short rail line between LA and the port and service began in 1869. A sign along this stretch read in Spanish: “Look out for the steam engine on the road of iron.” (Cunningham & Cunningham, 2015) Cost and time for transporting goods were slashed. “Local merchants and farmers--not to mention port operators like Banning--benefited almost immediately. The railroad charged $6 per ton to transport inbound dry goods to the city. Outbound grain cost $2.50 per ton to ship, and passengers could buy a one-way ticket to the port for $1.50. Total commerce at the harbor more than doubled from 26,000 net tons of freight in 1869 to 55,000 in 1871.” (Masters, 2012) LA would finally be connected to the east coast through two direct intercontinental railroads opened by the Southern Pacific and Santa Fe Railroads in 1881 and 1885 respectively.
The 1880s saw a huge boom in Los Angeles. People flocked from all over the country by rail. This put more pressure on the port to import and export even more goods, but additional infrastructure was required to support the largest oceangoing vessels. It was not the only port in town – there were several wharfs in Santa Monica and Redondo Beach with much deeper waters. However, Santa Monica and Redondo locations did not offer a safe harbor since they were in open water. Much of the decision to invest government dollars in the area was, in part, political, but the harbor in Long Beach did have significant natural advantages over the others. In 1891, a three-member board of Army Engineers concluded:
“In view of the fact that San Pedro Bay in its natural condition affords better protection both from prevailing winds and from dangerous storms than Santa Monica Bay; that protection can be secured at less cost for equal development of breakwater at the former then at the latter; that larger area of protected anchorage from the prevailing westerly swells can be secured, the severe storms from the southwest being, infrequent; and that there is already an interior harbor that will be a valuable addition an outer harbor; the Board considers San Pedro Bay as the better location for the deep water harbor provided for by the Act.” (Cunningham & Cunningham, 2015)
The new century brought more growing pains for the port complex. In 1907 shipbuilder John Craig relocated his operation from Toledo, Ohio. He was instrumental in further developing the harbor over the next 20 years. (Cunningham & Cunningham, 2015) The 1910 census found Long Beach the fastest growing city in America which prompted Southern California Electric to build a huge electrical generating plant in the immediate vicinity. This, in turn, attracted even more industry to the area. The “harbor zone” became a very desirable location since industry could be located immediately adjacent to shipping facilities. The harbor had by 1930 oil refineries, an iron works, and a Ford assembly plant among others. (Cunningham & Cunningham, 2015) Henry Ford saw great opportunities for his Model A car since Angelinos were “avid users of the car. Southern Californians geared their culture to it.” (“Decision to Build in Long Beach,” n.d.)
Around 1907 the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach became official separate entities, but they continued to share numerous strategies and operational direction. Expansions kept on coming. The port was again deepened. The navy took up residence. Technology brought new equipment and efficiencies. In 1948 Long Beach Naval Shipyard received a spoil of war from the Germans, a crane called “Herman the German.” Herman was not an ordinary crane, but 370-foot-tall floating crane, one of the largest in the world. It could hoist up to 386 tons and was used to lift “ships, parts of ships, and even other cranes, but one of its most notable lifting jobs was in the early 1980s, when the crane was used to lift the Spruce Goose in preparation for its move to the dome next to the Queen Mary.” (“Port of Long Beach Centennial Forum: Herman the German,” 2011) Herman would dominate the skyline for 48 years.
Other notable advances included the 1934 Long Beach Freeway which directly connected the port to inland areas by a high-speed roadway for passengers and cargo; in 1949 the first radar system for guiding ships into the harbor was installed; and containerization in the late 1960s. Containerization was one of the most revolutionary ideas to come to international shipping. It changed how companies moved cargo from that point forward. Prior to using,
“cargo arrived on the dock in boxes, barrels and bags and was swung aboard ship and stowed in the holds piece by piece. These "breakbulk" cargo ships spent a week or more in every port they served, and port costs accounted for roughly half the total operating cost of a voyage. Cargo was loaded and stowed by gangs of longshoremen, and high rates of breakage and pilferage were commonplace. In the port of New York, through which half the nation's overseas commerce passed, losses during the loading and unloading of valuable cargo such as whiskey and coffee often ran as high as 30 percent.” (Donovan, 2004)
The idea to put cargo in storage boxes was not a new one. The military was already using small steel containers to ship service member’s personal goods. And the Egyptians may have also used much smaller units for shipping in the Red Sea. But it had not caught on until a man named McLean saw an opportunity to make transporting cargo for his truck transport business easier and more efficient. “In short, McLean’s idea was to put cargo in big boxes that would fit onto the chassis is of a truck trailer, use a crane to take off the truck and load it onto a ship, unload it at its destination, stick it on another truck, and drive it to its final destination.” (Cunningham & Cunningham, 2015) The world shipping industry embraced it wholeheartedly. Loading and unloading a vessel took a fraction of the time, and with came massive savings in handling cost and decreased time at port. It is estimated that the cost of shipping goods in containers is about 1-2% of the retail value and 90% less than before. (Donovan, 2004) The idea that ships could use more of their time for the actual transporting of goods instead of waiting for goods to come off the ship made excellent economic sense. Various standard sizes were originally tried, but the ones most commonly used for international shipping are the 20-foot box for heavy cargo and 40-foot container, TEU and FEU, and a 53-foot container for domestic cargo.
Port Pollution and Remedies
The container allowed for volume. With it came more ships, larger ships, and externalities from ships, port equipment, and vehicles. Globally, international shipping contributes approx. 2.4% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. (Winnes, Styhre, & Fridell, 2015) GHGs are made up of CO2, methane, and N2O. “Environmental impact from international shipping has traditionally not focused on climate change.” Winnes et al. attributes this to several factors: shipping is taking place on open water and outside local jurisdictions – only locally can pollutants be closely monitored, tracked, and reported; the Kyoto protocol which currently omits shipping from national inventories; the overall importance of trade to the economy; and the reputation of maritime transport for being the most efficient method of transportation.
Sea ports are often near major population centers and pose environmental challenges to communities, especially lower income ones. Giuliano and O’Brien in their 2007 study on truck emissions concluded that the San Pedro Port complex is the single largest source of diesel pollution in the region. (Giuliano & O’Brien, 2007) Current EnviroScreen3.0 maps of Los Angeles County validate that diesel PM in Long Beach is still at the highest levels, even after aggressive port measures to reduce it. In addition, ports may be close to environmentally
sensitive estuaries which may contain unique plant and animal life. Pollution at ports come from five main sources: ships in the channel, at berth, port equipment, rail, and trucks. To reduce air emissions for ships moving on the open sea or inbound to the port, slower speeds reduce fuel consumption and emissions. Newer fuels like LNG (liquified natural gas) can provide for reduced emissions, but converting engines may have significant cost implications to the shipping companies. Methanol (not methane) is also a lower emission fuel, but is currently in an earlier state of market introduction. Biofuels are recommended, but availability is very limited. Ships last a long time, so overall fleet replacement may take several decades. However, new and smaller vessels can optimize the hull shape and superstructure which can reduce fuel consumption by 15% - 20%. (Winnes et al., 2015) For ships at berth, Gibbs et al. concluded that emissions from shipping at berth are ten times greater than those from ports' own operations. (Gibbs et al., 2014) They recommend that on-shore power supply (OPS) be utilized to reduce NOx, SOx and PM. Berechman and Tseng found in their study of ship emissions that tankers were the worst offenders. Their study looked at different types of ships docked running auxiliary engines. (Berechman & Tseng, 2012) On-shore power capability does have high capital costs for both the port and shippers, however if shippers can save money on fuel costs overall while at berth this might be an easy sell. At 2015 fuel prices, Vaishnav et al. found it was less expensive to buy one kWh of electricity from the grid than to produce it using the vessel’s diesel-fired auxiliary generator. (Vaishnav, Fischbeck, Granger Morgan, & Corbett, 2015) The grid may be more polluting than an on-board motor (example coal power plants), so the decision to implement OLS may be based on population density near the port complex.
Installation of OPS “normally do[es] not impose any major technical implications for new-buildings nor retrofit on existing ships. However, a mismatch in connection standards and different AC frequency, 50 or 60 Hz, may add to the connection system complexity.” Ships that often visit the port are good candidates for this retrofit; if turnaround time in port is short, this is not practical. Also, if many ships require power simultaneously, capacity load can be very high. For LA/Long Beach only 18% of ships call more than 10 times per year as compared with Osaka at 66%. (Styhre, Winnes, Black, Lee, & Le-Griffin, 2017) In my literature search I did not find information on standards for OPS systems. Clearly, this would facilitate the adoption for this technology if all ports had the same type of connections and requirements.
Most port equipment and drayage trucks run on diesel. Exposure to diesel particulates is a known health threat. (Norsworthy & Craft, 2013) Optimizing usage by reducing idling/wait times or changing to zero-emission vehicles are recommended for improving in this area. (Bailey & Solomon, 2004) The Los Angeles/Long Beach ports PierPass program was implemented as result of pressure from government regulators through California Assembly Bill (AB) 2650 to “address multi-terminal issues such as congestion, air quality and security. PierPass launched the OffPeak program in 2005 to reduce severe cargo-related congestion on local streets and highways around the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports.” (“Pierpass,” n.d.) Congestion pricing is aimed at switching users to off-peak shifts between 6pm - 3am Monday through Friday and 8am – 6pm Saturdays, but as of 2008 the program had failed to meet expectations. (Giuliano, Hayden, Dell ’aquila, & O ’Brien, 2008)
On June 12 of this year, the mayors of Los Angeles and Long Beach announced a revision of the Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP) for the ports. The main message of this communication was to reinforce the commitment for “creating a zero-emission goods movement future.” The update aligns with California’s Sustainable Freight Action Plan to develop freight efficiency to reduce emissions systemwide. The targets are for zero-emissions of port equipment by 2030, and zero-emissions for drayage trucks serving the ports by 2035. Expanding the use of on-dock rail is also a priority.
The CAAP was originally implemented in 2006 and refreshed in 2010. The results of emission reductions to date are included in the table below. Significant reductions have been made in all categories except for CO2e (greenhouse gas emissions in carbon dioxide equivalent), even with a 1% increase in TEUs in time frame. (Clean Air Action Plan 2017 FINAL, 2017)
The 2006 Clean Air Act had several strategies which remain in place today. They include:
1) The Clean Truck Program which has banned older, more polluting drayage trucks from the terminals. Zero and near-zero emission pilot programs are on-going. Since 2005, diesel emissions have been reduced 87%. (“Port of Long Beach - Clean Trucks,” n.d.)
2) The Green Flag Program which encourage ships to reduce speeds close to shore.
3) The Green Ship Program which rewards operators for investing in green technology. These are ships with tier II or III main engines with low NOx emissions.
4) Providing OPS for berthing ships. (“Ships - Clean Air Action Plan,” n.d.)
The Clean Truck Program is especially important to the surrounding port area and major transportation corridors due to the health risks from diesel pollution. The Environmental Defense Fund has credited this program as the “most aggressive actions taken to reduce emissions in this sector…. in one the more heavily polluted areas of the country.” (Norsworthy & Craft, 2013) Other volunteer clean truck programs at the ports of Norfolk, Charleston, and Houston have been “dramatically less effective” in lowering pollution (only 1-4% reduction). (Norsworthy & Craft, 2013)
Zero and near-zero emission drayage trucks are thought to be a big piece of the pollution reduction puzzle, but the technology is relatively new and expensive. Options include hybrid diesel, pure electric, and hydrogen. Hydrogen demonstrations are in-progress, but the lack of fueling stations makes this technology unfeasible for the near future. The most promising are hybrids and pure electric class 8 trucks. Several OEM manufacturers have models on the horizon like Tesla who showcased a prototype electric truck last month; Tesla has started accepting orders, but deliveries are not expected until 2019. BYD from China is actively selling electric trucks in California now. Other companies like TransPower retrofit existing combustion engines to an electric powertrain, and they have been involved in trials at the Port of Los Angeles. (Port of Los Angeles, 2016) However, electric trucks have limitations: they need a lot of batteries which are heavy in themselves and may reduce the amount of cargo (in weight) that a shipper can carry due to road weight regulations. Combined with extremely high costs which can be three to four times a diesel equivalent, limited ranges of 100 miles between charges (although Tesla claims their trucks will go 300-500 miles between charges), and the physical down time for charging, it may take a while for the trucking community to embrace them. Incentives will most likely be needed to entice buyers. However, it is expected that costs will decrease as economies of scale come into play with large orders. (Giuliano, White, & Dexter, 2017)
Conclusion
In ancient times, ports appeared in places most favorable to trade and the protection of ships. In more modern times, harbors can be manufactured – waters deepened, channels widened, marshes drained, and bridges built. Spatial elements have changed dramatically to accommodate traffic volume as well as the ultra large ships and large cranes that swoop in and grab containers. (Strupp, 2016) No longer only for shipping, ports are industrial complexes and logistics hubs that process hundreds of thousands, and sometimes millions, of containers a year. The emissions created by the massive volumes of ships, trucks, and other equipment have taken its toll on the communities near ports. Pollution is a real problem. This paper addressed the challenges and some potential solutions that ports can implement to reduce their carbon footprint. Some ports, like in Los Angeles, have developed detailed plans to reduce air particulates with great success. But more is needed to build sustainable operations for long-term growth and the health of communities.
Works Cited
10 World’s Biggest Container Ships in 2017. (2017). Retrieved December 5, 2017, from https://www.marineinsight.com/know-more/10-worlds-biggest-container-ships-2017/
Arromanches-Mulberry Harbour - Submerged. (n.d.). Retrieved December 5, 2017, from https://www.submerged.co.uk/arromanches-mulberry-harbour.php
Bailey, D., & Solomon, G. (2004). Pollution prevention at ports: clearing the air. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24(7–8), 749–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EIAR.2004.06.005
Barboza, T. (2017). Plan calls for L.A., Long Beach ports to go to zero-emissions technology; cost could hit $14 billion - LA Times. Retrieved October 1, 2017, from http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ports-clean-air-20170719-story.html
Bard, K. A., & Fattovich, R. (2010). Spatial Use of the Twelfth Dynasty Harbor at Mersa/Wadi Gawasis for the Seafaring Expeditions to Punt. Journal of Ancient Egyptian Interconnections, 2(3), 13. Retrieved from http://eds.a.ebscohost.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=2a62a7a2-4da0-40b9-b328-e77479dd35c9%40sessionmgr4007
Bard, K., & Fattovich, R. (2008). Mersa/Wadi Gawasis, an Egyptian Harbor on the Red Sea. Retrieved from http://dashfoundation.org/WadiGawasis-AnEgyptianHarbor.pdf
Berechman, J., & Tseng, P.-H. (2012). Estimating the environmental costs of port related emissions: The case of Kaohsiung. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 17(1), 35–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2011.09.009
Churchill, W. (1942). Piers for Use on Beaches. London. Retrieved from http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205195425
Clean Air Action Plan 2017 FINAL. (2017). San Pedro. Retrieved from http://www.cleanairactionplan.org/documents/final-2017-clean-air-action-plan-update.pdf
Cunningham, G., & Cunningham, C. (2015). Port Town: How the People of Long Beach Built, Defended and Profited from their Harbor (1st ed.). Long Beach: Port of Long Beach.
Decision to Build in Long Beach. (n.d.). Retrieved December 6, 2017, from http://www.fordmotorhistory.com/factories/long_beach/decision.php
Donovan, A. (2004). The Impact of Containerization: From Adam Smith to the 21st Century. Review of Business, 25(3), 6. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/220966599?pq-origsite=gscholar
Ferrebee, W. (n.d.). ferrebeekeeper | Reflections Concerning Art, Nature, and the Affairs of Humankind (also some gardening anecdotes). Retrieved December 6, 2017, from https://ferrebeekeeper.wordpress.com/
Gibbs, D., Rigot-Muller, P., Mangan, J., & Lalwani, C. (2014). The role of sea ports in end-to-end maritime transport chain emissions. Energy Policy, 64, 337–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2013.09.024
Giuliano, G., Hayden, S., Dell ’aquila, P., & O ’Brien, T. (2008). Evaluation of the Terminal Gate Appointment System at the Los Angeles/Long Beach Ports Final Report. Los Angeles. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e147/6487a9de25dda11453e0298b512acafa8686.pdf
Giuliano, G., & O’Brien, T. (2007). Reducing port-related truck emissions: The terminal gate appointment system at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 12(7), 460–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2007.06.004
Giuliano, G., White L., & Dexter S. (2017). Developing Markets for ZEVs in Goods Movement. METRANS: Los Angeles.
Hall, P. V., & Jacobs, W. (2012). Why are maritime ports (still) urban, and why should policy-makers care? Maritime Policy & Management, 39(2), 189–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2011.650721
Lewis, A. R. (n.d.). Mulberry | artificial harbours, World War II. Retrieved December 6, 2017, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/Mulberry-artificial-harbours-World-War-II
Loeb Classical Library. (2017). SENECA THE YOUNGER, Natural Questions | Loeb Classical Library. Retrieved December 5, 2017, from https://www.loebclassics.com/view/seneca_younger-natural_questions/1971/pb_LCL457.121.xml
Masters, N. (2012). Photos: L.A.’s First Railroads Connected the Region to the Global Economy | KCET. Retrieved December 6, 2017, from https://www.kcet.org/shows/lost-la/photos-las-first-railroads-connected-the-region-to-the-global-economy
Narayan, S. (2017). Cargo Volumes Rise at Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach | Los Angeles Business Journal. Retrieved October 1, 2017, from http://labusinessjournal.com/news/2017/sep/13/cargo-volumes-rise-ports-los-angeles-and-long-beac/
Norsworthy, M., & Craft, E. (2013). Emissions reduction analysis of voluntary clean truck programs at US ports. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 22, 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2013.02.012
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2017). Map of CalEnviroScreen 3.0 Results. Retrieved December 8, 2017, from https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/maps-data
Paine, L. (2013). The Sea and Civilization: A Maritime History of the World (1st ed.). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Pierpass. (n.d.). Retrieved October 28, 2017, from http://www.pierpass.org/
Port of Long Beach - Clean Trucks. (n.d.). Retrieved December 6, 2017, from http://www.polb.com/environment/cleantrucks/
Port of Long Beach - Facts at a Glance. (n.d.). Retrieved October 1, 2017, from http://www.polb.com/about/facts.asp
Port of Long Beach Centennial Forum: Herman the German. (2011). Retrieved December 6, 2017, from http://portoflongbeach.blogspot.com/2011/04/herman-german.html
Port of Los Angeles. (2016). Interim Electric Drayage Demonstration Report Update – June 2016.
Sayed, A. M. A. H. (1978). The Recently Discovered Port on the Red Sea Shore. The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 64, 4. https://doi.org/10.1177/030751337806400111
Ships - Clean Air Action Plan. (n.d.). Retrieved December 6, 2017, from http://www.cleanairactionplan.org/strategies/ships/
Stanford, A. (1951). Force Mulberry - The Planning and Installation of the Artificial Harbor Off U.S Normandy Beaches in World War II. New York: William Marrow & Co.
Starcrest Consulting Group, L. (2017). Port of Long Beach 2016 Air Emissions Inventory. Long Beach. Retrieved from http://www.polb.com/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=14109
Strupp, C. (2016). Seaports in transition. Global change and the role of seaports since the 1950s. Planning Perspectives, 31(1), 115–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2015.1038578
Styhre, L., Winnes, H., Black, J., Lee, J., & Le-Griffin, H. (2017). Greenhouse gas emissions from ships in ports – Case studies in four continents. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 54, 212–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2017.04.033
Table 1-51: Top U.S. Foreign Trade Freight Gateways by Value of Shipments (Current $ billions) | Bureau of Transportation Statistics. (2016). Retrieved October 1, 2017, from https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_51.html
The Port of Los Angeles | History. (n.d.). Retrieved December 6, 2017, from https://www.portoflosangeles.org/history/timeline.asp
Top 50 World Container Ports | World Shipping Council. (2017). Retrieved December 5, 2017, from http://www.worldshipping.org/about-the-industry/global-trade/top-50-world-container-ports
Trade between Arabia and the Empires of Rome and Asia. (2000). Retrieved December 5, 2017, from https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/ince/hd_ince.htm
Vaishnav, P., Fischbeck, P. S., Granger Morgan, M., & Corbett, J. J. (2015). Shore Power for Vessels Calling at U.S. Ports: Benefits and Costs. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(3), pp 1102–1110. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b04860
Winnes, H., Styhre, L., & Fridell, E. (2015). Reducing GHG emissions from ships in port areas. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 17, 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RTBM.2015.10.008
Comments