| "If you don't know what ports are doing, how can you even have a conversation?" | |
| James Fawcett, University of Southern California Sea Grant Program |
|
The American economy is driven by consumers, and the majority of products that are purchased from abroad – everything from cars to clothes to coffee – arrive in this country through one of our coastal ports. The often unseen price tag, however, is that ports can be the source of significant amounts of pollution, which can impact not only local, but also regional resources.
Just as every state's coastal resource management program is different, so is the role each program plays in addressing the environmental impacts of ports. Coastal programs in states such as California and Massachusetts can be important players in locating and regulating ports, while others play either a minor role or none at all.
Even if coastal programs have no legislatively mandated role in managing ports, many argue they could play a role in facilitating dialogue between port, environmental, and community players, educating ports on best management practices, and helping ports find grant monies to implement those practices.
"I'm increasingly convinced that the way to achieve our objectives is not by passing laws, but in sitting down and talking and really collaborating," says Will Travis, executive director of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
A good example of a port using a collaborative approach to improve its environmental impact, he says, is the Port of Oakland, which recently received the highest score in the Natural Resources Defense Council's (NRDC) environmental report card for the 10 largest U.S. ports
Shopping from A to Z
Many Americans may not be aware of how dependent they are on the activities of the 185 commercial seaports found along the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf, and Great Lakes coasts, as well as in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
According to the American Association of Port Authorities, electronics from Japan, bananas and coffee from Central America, and shoes from Italy all make their way to U.S. consumers on cargo ships that arrive at ports.
Almost 16 million Americans work in port-related jobs, which equal $515 billion in annual income and $210 billion in federal, state, and local taxes.
U.S. ports and waterways handle more than two billion tons of domestic and import/export cargo annually, and the amount of cargo shipped by water is expected to triple by the year 2020.
The Environmental Cost
"Port operations are essential," agrees NRDC scientist Diane Bailey, but she believes more could be done to mitigate the "considerable environmental impacts."
"We talk about harbors in terms of trade, but they are really estuaries," Bailey says. "There is a lot of marine life there. The deeper the ports go into an estuary, the more damage you're going to find."
The environmental impacts of ports include air and water pollution, dredging, aquatic nuisance species, loss of wildlife habitat and public access to coastal resources, and land use issues.
"Communities surrounding these facilities are seeing significant impacts from those operations," Bailey says.
Taking Responsibility
"Ports want to do the environmentally correct thing," says Tom Chase, director of environmental affairs for the American Association of Port Authorities, and many ports are "doing a lot of good things."
"The tension," he says, "is with paying the bills."
One of the reasons the Port of Oakland has been able to successfully implement environmental mitigation initiatives, says Jim McGrath, the port's environmental planning manager, is that "we brought into it the fact that it had to be affordable."
"The port started to realize that it is essential to make sure the costs of those measures are reflected in the decision to pursue mitigation projects or not," he explains. By doing this, the port was able to "minimize cost implications in some cases" by thinking about environmental measures early enough in the planning process.
By pursuing environmental solutions in this manner, "it often was no more expensive and sometimes was even cheaper," McGrath says."
Providing an Example
| Go Here for More Information on Ports |
|---|
|
In its environmental report card for the 10 largest U.S. ports, the NRDC writes that while there is still room for improvement for the Port of Oakland in several areas, "other ports can look to Oakland as an example for positive programs to mitigate environmental impacts."
McGrath says the port made a decision to go beyond legally mandated pollution control requirements and aggressively pursue an Air Quality Mitigation Program after settling a lawsuit filed by area residents concerned about the impacts of the port's planned expansion.
The port's air quality program has included helping six marine terminal operators replace 150 older diesel engines with new, cleaner engines, installing emission controls on 310 pieces of equipment, and switching to cleaner, ultra-low sulfur fuel.
Of particular note is that the port does not own or operate any of this equipment.
In addition, the Port of Oakland has conducted several restoration projects in an attempt to mitigate damage to tidal wetlands in San Francisco Bay. One significant restoration project involved the collaboration of citizens, environmentalists, and government agencies to reuse dredge materials from a channel-deepening project to create a tidal wetland surrounded by a public park.
McGrath notes that the collaboration resulted in the project passing through the regulatory process in record time, and that the cost was "not too much greater than deep-ocean dumping."
In fact, the project was so innovative, says Will Travis, it resulted in his program "refining" its policies.
The port has been a leader in helping prevent invasive aquatic species from entering San Francisco Bay through ships' ballast water, and is working to implement water quality measures.
Coastal Zone Concerns
Many coastal zone management programs "don't require ports to play in the CZM system," says James Fawcett, director of the marine science and policy outreach program at the University of Southern California Sea Grant Program. "If you don't know what ports are doing, how can you even have a conversation?"
Those interviewed for this story suggest that even without a legal mandate, coastal managers could, and probably should, be involved in port issues. Suggested roles include helping to broker agreements between port stakeholders, such as shipping lines, environmental groups, and area residents, assisting ports in determining their environmental impacts, advising ports on mitigation options, and identifying grant or other funding for mitigation projects.
For programs that are involved in regulating ports, those interviewed suggest simplifying the permitting process, providing incentives for ports to incorporate mitigation early in port planning, and determining ways to measure the success of port mitigation programs.
The participation of coastal managers is particularly important when a port is planning to expand, says Jim Kruse, National Ports and Harbors Specialist for the Sea Grant Program.
"Everything takes time and money," Kruse says. "Coastal managers need to work with ports to find the money and determine a reasonable time frame to creatively manage these issues."
For more information on the environmental efforts of the Port of Oakland, contact Jim McGrath at (510) 627-1175, or jmcgrath@portoakland.com. To get the coastal management perspective on the port, contact Will Travis at (415) 352-3653, or travis@bcdc.ca.gov, James Fawcett at (213) 740-4477, or Fawcett@usc.edu, or Jim Kruse at j-kruse@ttimail.tamu.edu. You also may contact Diane Bailey at (415) 777-0220 or Tom Chase at (703) 684-5700.
