Sunday July 24, 8:36 AM
L.A. Ports Extend Hours to Reduce Smog

AP - The twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach began operating on weekends and evenings Saturday in a new initiative designed to ease Southern California's worst-in-the-nation traffic congestion and smog.

By expanding beyond regular Monday-through-Friday business hours, officials hope to reduce the ports' tangle of shipping trucks, which would also cut exhaust emissions released when the vehicles sit in gridlocked traffic.

"The economic benefits (of the port) are not without a cost to our quality of life," Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said Saturday as he described the program while trucks revved in the distance. He said the new plan would make the port a "greener and a more conscientious neighbor."

The combined ports are the fifth-largest in the world, with more than 35 percent of all waterborne container cargo passing through them, according to port officials.

The amount of cargo at the ports soared by almost 40 percent between 2000 and 2004, largely because of increased shipments from China. The increase has added to traffic congestion and smog in the Los Angeles area, where both are the worst in the country.

The program, administered by the nonprofit group PierPASS Inc., will charge shippers extra fees if they deliver or retrieve cargo containers during the peak hours of 3 a.m. to 6 p.m. Shippers can avoid the fee by shifting their cargo movements to evening or weekend hours.

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters held a rally Friday criticizing aspects of the plan.

Miguel Lopez, international port representative for the Teamsters, said the longer hours could tempt drivers to break federal rules prohibiting them from driving more than 10 hours straight, which could lead to exhaustion and more accidents.

Ryan Rauzon, a spokesman for PierPASS, said the new hours would allow truckers to make more money if they chose and complete more deliveries in off-hours than they could at peak times.

"You're stuck in the middle of the day," he said. "You're not going anywhere."

Rauzon also said the longer hours had created up to 550 new jobs for longshoremen who unload shipments.

Truck driver Fidel Ocegueda, completing his second delivery to the port late Saturday morning, said he would rather spend weekends with his family than work. But he appreciated the less congested roads.

"It's going pretty good," he said. "There's not too many trucks. Less traffic."

Calif. officials vote to regulate ship pollution at state ports
By TERENCE CHEA
Associated Press Writer
8 December 2005

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - State air regulators on Thursday approved new regulations to curb pollution from cargo ships, cruise liners and other large vessels that enter state ports, making California one of the first states to regulate emissions from oceangoing ships.

The California Air Resources Board also passed new rules to reduce emissions from the cranes, fork lifts, tractors and trucks that move cargo at state ports. Both sets of regulations are scheduled to take effect in 2007.

Environmental groups praised the board's actions, but ship operators questioned whether California had the right to regulate ships beyond state waters.

The new regulations, unanimously approved by the six-member board in Sacramento, are aimed at cutting emissions at ports in Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland and Stockton where increasing air pollution poses a health risk to workers and nearby residents.

"Clearly, the goal is to protect public health," agency spokesman Jerry Martin said. "We want to stem the public health threat as quickly and efficiently as we can."

One set of regulations will restrict emissions of particulates and gases such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides from the 1,900 oceangoing vessels that make 10,000 stops at California ports each year.

Ships will be required to switch from large diesel engines to smaller auxiliary engines that run on cleaner-burning fuel once they come within 24 miles from the California coast. The regulations were projected to reduce particulates by 75 percent and sulfur dioxides by more than 80 percent in 2007.

The regulations will apply to all ships calling at state ports, where an estimated 90 percent of the docking vessels are foreign.

The other set of regulations will require emissions reductions from cargo handling equipment and vehicles through cleaner fuels and other pollution control measures.

Environmental groups applauded the board's decision to regulate ship engine emissions at a time when state officials anticipate a dramatic increase in port traffic from ships carrying imports from China and other Asian nations.

"It's very good news for the air quality of California," said Teri Shore, clean vessels campaign director for the Bluewater Network. "These SUVs of the seas will now burn cleaner fuels in California waters, and fewer people will get sick or die prematurely so Americans can buy inexpensive shoes, clothes and computers."

The Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, which represents 90 percent of the West Coast's cargo shipping business, supported the cargo handling regulations, but opposed the ship pollution regulations. PMSA officials said its members were already taking measures to reduce engine emissions, and the U.S. government -- not individual states -- should set regulations for oceangoing vessels.

"We have a fundamental problem with the fact that the state of California is trying to regulate extraterritorially," said Mike Jacob, a PMSA vice president. "They're trying to tell us how to operate beyond California."

The shipping association planned to voice its opposition during the 15-day public comment period.

The Air Resources Board earlier this month released a report that found that California's cargo industry produces enough pollution to cause 750 premature deaths each year and result in thousands of asthma attacks, lost work days and school absences.

Toward cleaner ports
18 December 2005
Los Angeles Times

LIKE THE HARBORS THEMSELVES, which are side by side, pollution and jobs have long been inextricably linked at the twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. More jobs would lead to more pollution, the thinking went, while reducing pollution would mean a loss of jobs. Thankfully, recent developments are clarifying the inaccuracy of this assumption -- as well as the air around the ports.

The ports are the region's biggest source of air pollution. The diesel fumes emitted by the container ships, trucks and trains serving the ports have been linked to lung cancer, asthma and other ailments; a recent study by the state Air Resources Board said air pollutants generated by the state's cargo industry will kill 750 people prematurely and lead to $6.3 billion in healthcare costs this year. Harbor-area residents have long complained about all this, since they bear the brunt of the negative health effects.

Last week, two events occurred that should put a dent in the problem. First, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa appointed Geraldine Knatz as head of the Port of L.A. Knatz, managing director of development at the Long Beach port, has been faulted by activists for not going far enough on environmental issues, and by industry executives for going too far. That's a good indicator that the architect of Long Beach's "Green Port" policy has a good grasp of the need to balance growth with environmentalism. Villaraigosa's appointees to the Harbor Commission have also signaled that they'll make reducing emissions a priority.

Second, the state Air Resources Board passed new rules curbing emissions from cargo-handling equipment and requiring ships within 24 miles of the coast to switch to cleaner fuel when using auxiliary engines. The rule on ships is especially welcome because they are the biggest single source of pollution at the ports. Although there are questions about the board's authority on such matters, its vote shows that the state is taking strong measures to make up for the Bush administration's inaction.

It was especially encouraging that the air board made its ruling on ship emissions after finding that it wouldn't cost shippers a significant amount. About 250,000 jobs are directly connected to the transport industry in Southern California, and another 300,000 are indirectly reliant on it. When it comes to new developments, many decisions at the ports in the near future will come down to a simple balancing act: cleaner air versus growing businesses. But these two goals aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, there is a technical solution for nearly every pollution problem at the harbor, and a growing port can also be clean.

Broadly speaking, there's a simple formula that harbor officials should use when considering future improvements. Those that result in cleaner air and the more efficient movement of goods should be supported. Those that achieve one of these goals to the detriment of the other should not -- or at least they should be regarded with skepticism.

On this score, a new 153-acre rail yard proposed by BNSF Railway looks promising. The yard would take containers trucked from the ports and send them along the underused Alameda Corridor, a $2.5-billion railway completed in 2002 to speed cargo movement. Because the new yard would be much closer to the ports than BNSF's existing facility near downtown, it would reduce truck traffic on the 710 Freeway.

A million trucks a year, however, would pass through the yard, many of them idling while waiting to unload, and the added emissions might more than make up for any pollution reduction. An environmental study will provide an answer in 18 months. But the Harbor Commission and BNSF deserve credit for moving in the right direction.

Businesses in the transport industry aren't eager to clean up their own messes. New regulations in California are typically met with vows to move cargo through other ports, such as Seattle or New Orleans. It's largely an empty threat; California's market is so huge that its ports will always be vital to importers. Shippers and their customers need to realize that they're going to have to pay a share of the costs of both cutting emissions and boosting the local infrastructure. Fortunately, the right people are in place to send them that message, and the actions of companies such as BNSF show they're starting to get it.

Sweeping air pollution plan proposed for LA/Long Beach ports
29 June 2006

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Truck, ship and cargo-handling equipment pollutants would be reduced 50 percent in five years under a clear air proposal for the Long Beach and Los Angeles harbors.

Cleaner vehicles and shore-side electrical outlets so vessels can shut down diesel engines while dockside are key elements of the plan unveiled Wednesday.

"This is an action plan, this is not a study. The days of yakkin' are coming to a screeching halt," harbor commission president S. David Freeman said.

Proposals also include retrofitting and replacing cargo-handling equipment and locomotives. The plan, which now enters a 30-day public review period before approval by the Long Beach and Los Angeles harbor commissions, calls for a mixture of incentives and requirements.

The Port of Los Angeles committed $177 million and Long Beach $181 million to put the anti-pollution measures into place. The regional South Coast Air Quality Management District pledged $36 million for the conversion of older diesel trucks.

But $1.6 billion is still needed. Officials hope to collect money from federal and state sources, including funds in the state infrastructure bond measure on the November ballot.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board participated in drafting the twin ports clean air plan, so port officials are optimistic state and federal money will come.

John McLaurin, president of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, said the organization needs to study the plan but "generally supports the broad goals" of the proposal.

Freeman cited the recent decision by shipping company Maersk to cut pollution by switching to lower sulfur diesel fuel as a precedent that other companies should follow.

Do you have Aerial views of LA ports? I believe its very big.

http://ladpw.org/wmd/watershed/dc/photos/images/aerial_port.jpg

Wow. it looks huge, but not very busy. So that's a new quay extension?

Long Beach harbor panel OKs fees in clean air plan
18 December 2007

LOS ANGELES (AP) - The Long Beach Harbor Commission voted Monday in favor of imposing fees on cargo containers moving through the port as part of a plan aimed at curbing air pollution from trucks.

The panel voted to charge a fee between $35 and $70 on every loaded container beginning in June.

Harbor commissioners at the twin Port of Los Angeles are expected to vote later this week on whether to apply the same measure to containers hauled through those docks.

Cargo container fees from the neighboring ports are expected to generate around $1.6 billion to help pay for trucks that produce fewer harmful emissions.

That picture doesn't show the completed expansion to the port.

This news doesn't make any sense. It's not like less ships are coming in :sleepy:

Los Angeles, Long Beach ports OK air pollution fee

SAN FRANCISCO, Dec 20 (Reuters) - Millions of shipping containers passing through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach next year will be assessed a new fee designed to improve air quality and remove a political obstacle that has stymied expansion of the country's largest port complex.

Both seaports, which adjoin each other but operate independently, approved a $35 cargo fee this week for 20-foot container units that enter or exit the ports on trucks that do not meet 2007 emissions standards.

Officials expect the fee to generate $1.6 billion over the next five years and say they will use the proceeds to replace a fleet of 16,800 dirty trucks that carry containers between ships, local distribution centers and rail lines.

"The tennis shoes will be a nickel more, but the people will breathe healthier here," said David Freeman, president of the Los Angeles Port Commission.

These aging, short-haul trucks handle about three-quarters of the ports' freight and are part of the machinery -- including ships, harbor craft, and locomotives -- that has long been criticized for its air pollution of the local environment.

About 25 percent of the diesel emissions in the Los Angeles basin originate from the ports and, when combined with other port gases, are responsible for about 67 premature deaths each year, according to the California Air Resources Board.

Forty percent of the country's imports pass through the complex, leaving nearby residents to suffer unusually high rates of asthma and lung disease. Public concern has made port expansion politically unfeasible even as port traffic has boomed in recent years, Freeman said.

"We've taken two significant steps now: We have a timetable for cleaning up, and we have a way to help people do it," Freeman said.

The fee will begin in June, and the ports expect to begin phasing out diesel trucks, some that date to 1989, in October.

However, not all are in favor of the new program: Most of the ports' short-haul trucks are operated by independent contractors, often low-income, Spanish-speaking drivers who make about $12 an hour.

The drivers say they cannot afford to maintain new computer-controlled engines on greener trucks even if the port provides the rigs. In recent weeks, they have stood at port gates to protest with whistles and signs asking trucking companies to buy the rigs and formally hire them to drive.

The ports will consider their request and other questions about how to distribute the funds next month.

But in the end, the program will certainly amount to an overhaul of how trucking works in the country's largest port complex, Freeman said.

"I think the vast majority of people understand that we have an obligation to grow and green the port," Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa told Reuters in a telephone interview on Thursday. "And you're not going to grow it if you don't green it."