Classic Columns Cover Stock U.S. Container Ports and Air Pollution: A Perfect Storm An Energy Futures, Inc. Study By James S. Cannon a U.S. Container Ports and Air Pollution: A Perfect Storm An Energy Futures, Inc. Study By James S. Cannon © 2008: Energy Futures, Inc. i Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Chapter 1: Introduction 6 Chapter 2: Fndings and Recommendations 11 Chapter 3: Emissions from Port Operations 25 Chapter 4: Profiles of the 10 Largest U.S. Container Ports 36 Profile: Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach 37 Profile: Port of New York and New Jersey 46 Profile: Port of Oakland 50 Profile: Port of Savannah 55 Profile: Port of Tacoma 58 Profile: Port of Hampton Roads 61 Profile: Port of Seattle 64 Profile: Port of Charleston 70 Profile: Port of Houston 73 Acknowledgements 77 About the Author 77 References 79 iii iv Executive Summary Oceangoing container ships make more than 10,000 visits to ports in the United States (U.S.) from around the world each year. Delivery of goods to ports and from there to U.S. consumers is powered by diesel fuel each step of the way. Diesel fuel quality ranges from notoriously filthy bunker fuel that powers ships, to lower quality grades for offroad vehicles, to lower sulfur grades recently required for onroad trucks. Burning diesel fuel releases health threatening toxic air contaminants, smog forming air pollut- ants, and climate changing greenhouse gases. Air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping are bad and getting worse. The combination of growing port activity, the densely populated regions where most ports are lo- cated, and the prevailing onshore wind patterns that accumulate, rather than disperse, port air pollution creates a “perfect storm” of threats to public health. Most U.S. ports are now among the largest sources of air pollution in their cities and progress toward reducing that pollution has been slow. Public concern is rising, however, and efforts to grapple with the complex challenge of reducing air pollution from ports are finally gathering momentum. Climate and human health impacts from port air pollution do not have to occur. A wide range of pollution control strategies are now available. Many squelch the thirst for imported oil in the process. These strategies include switching to cleaner alternative fuels and changing operating procedures to improve efficiency. Ports around the country, particularly at the adjacent ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, California, are beginning to grapple with air pollution problems and working to develop clean air programs that include use of alternative fuels. This study by Energy Futures, Inc., examines the actions underway to reduce air pollution at the 10 largest container ports in the U.S. The goal is to identify the specific environmental problems at each port, the development status of pollution control strategies, and the opportunities for alternative fuels and advanced technologies to play a critical role in reducing air pollution. 1 Overview of Ports Nearly 45 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) of containers were unloaded or loaded at U.S. marine ports in 2005. A standard shipping container holds two TEUs and measures 40 feet long and 8 feet by 8 feet wide and high. This is the perfect size to fit on the carriage of a standard heavy duty semi- truck. Alternatively, they can be stacked two high to fit on a standard railroad car chassis. The 10 largest container ports in the U.S. account for roughly 80 percent of imports. The top ten container ports and their cargo loads for 2006 are listed below: Container Port TEUs (mil) Los Angeles 8.4 Long Beach 7.3 New York City and neighboring New Jersey 5.1 Oakland, California 2.4 Savannah, Georgia 2.2 Tacoma, Washington 2.1 Hampton Roads, Virginia 2.0 Seattle, Washington 2.0 Charleston, South Carolina 2.0 Houston, Texas 1.6 Container ports are one of the fastest growing business sectors in many areas of the U.S. Container shipments more than quintupled in the U.S. from 1980 to 2006, as shown in the figure below. Over the last decade alone, container shipments rose 80.8 percent. U.S. CONTAINER SHIPMENTS: 1980-2006 (million TEUs per year) 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2 Findings The process of grappling with the environmental challenges posed by large and growing port operations begins with the formation of a division within the port authority to direct pollution control programs. Nine of the 10 top ports have environmental departments within their management structures. The most basic role of environment departments is to assess compliance with government regulations. The Envi- ronmental Management System (EMS) established early this decade by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PATH) does this, and other ports have followed with similar programs of their own. The problem with most EMS programs, however, is that they focus primarily on environmental compliance, not on innovation in cleaning the air from goods movement operations. The backbone of air pollution control efforts at U.S. container ports today is efforts to reduce emissions from diesel-powered equipment through the following steps: the use of newer diesel engines that pollute less; the installation of pollution control equipment; and switching to grades of diesel fuel containing lower sulfur content. All 10 container ports in this study have diesel emission reduction pro- grams in place, collectively spending millions of dollars in public and private funds. Introducing cleaner diesel equipment in new equipment purchases will soon be required by public law, however, as it already is for vehicles in other economic sectors. Moreover, continuing to run diesel equipment does nothing to diversify fuel supply away from oil. The best way to lower air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and diversify fuel supply at U.S. container ports is to use alternative fuels or advanced technologies. Fortunately, important steps are being taken that are leading global efforts to replace diesel with alternative fuels and advanced technolo- gies. Natural gas is currently the leading alternative fuel being deployed in port vehicles. There is also interest in biodiesel, particularly at the two ports in the Northwest. Hybrid electric vehicle technology is beginning to enter the port market, too. Six programs are currently underway at the California ports to deploy fleets of natural gas powered cargo handling vehicles. Programs to replace diesel fuel with liquefied natural gas (LNG) are underway at the three largest container ports in California—Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland. The Clean Air Action Plan now in place for the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach sets out an aggressive program to replace approximately 5,300 onroad diesel trucks at the two ports with LNG trucks by 2011. The port of Oakland is also deploying LNG in the fleet of trucks serving the port. The two ports of Seattle and Tacoma on Puget Sound in the state of Washington are spearhead- ing the use of renewable biodiesel blends in their vehicle fleets. Both ports are located in areas that currently meet the national ambient air quality standards for ozone, which affects the choice of biodiesel. Emissions of nitrogen oxide increase with the use of biodiesel, but biodiesel has been shown to reduce emissions of particulate matter, the pollutant of greater concern in the Puget Sound area. Converting to cargo handling equipment with hybrid electric drivetrains offers another option to reduce air pollution at ports. Although hybrid electric drivetrains raise vehicle costs substantially, they reduce fuel use, emissions and operating costs. Use of hybrid electric technology at ports is only beginning. A project to develop hybrid-powered cargo handling equipment has been underway at Long Beach since September 2006. In September 2007, the EPA announced a project to develop and test a new EPA-patented hybrid technology on a yard tractor at a PATH container facility in New Jersey. The electricity used to power a ship’s onboard lights and other non-propulsion equipment while at berth is normally generated by the auxiliary engines onboard the ships burning whatever quality diesel is allowed in ships entering the port. This ranges from 1,000 to 27,000 ppm sulfur. Even the cleanest ship fuel is still much dirtier than the 15 ppm sulfur fuel now required for U.S. onroad diesel truck engines. Shore power, often called cold ironing or alternative marine power, is an alternative to generating power onboard ship. Shore power systems use electric power substations to connect berths to the main power grid or portable dockside generators that use natural gas as the fuel and are independent of the grid. Projects to 3 extend grid power to the ports are underway in Los Angeles and Long Beach. Oakland is the first port in the U.S. to introduce cold ironing technology at a container terminal that produces electricity on the dock using a portable natural gas-fired generator. The unit was publicly demonstrated in port operations in July 2007. The problem of air pollution from oceangoing ships while in ports is severe, but it is only one part of the global shipping industry that is in dire need of reducing its use of bunker fuel. Bunker fuel is the dirtiest grade of diesel allowed under international law. The most polluting fuel contains 45,000 ppm of sulfur. Ships using bunker fuel emit more sulfur dioxide than the entirety of the world’s cars, trucks and buses combined and up to 21 percent of the greenhouse gases from all transportation sources.