My Feverish Argument For JAXPORT Harbor Deepening
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/775808837_FSrp2-M.jpg)
Metro Jacksonville's Robert Mann expresses his opinion of why dredging the St. Johns River is critical to the future survival of JAXPORT.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-nov-my-feverish-argument-for-jaxport-harbor-deepening
interesting. It will never make it to the Jacksonville Waterways Commission.
I agree dredging is needed...and deepening too...just don't believe 47-50 feet is necessary.
To your point about a rail connection between Dame Point / Blount Island and the rail yards in the NW - the TPO is conducting a study now to find the best connection route. I believe the power line is one of the options. A major drawback to this line is that it runs through, or behind, several residential neighborhoods. Adding the noise and dirt of frequent freight trains will generate a lot of opposition.
I like the point in #5 and #6. Too often 'old ' infrastructure is discarded, or forgotten about, and could certainly be re-used, at a minimal cost. The Dames point should have been built taller to begin with, and if it can be raised, and paid for, it should be done.
Here's how I view Bob's points:
#1. A deeper harbor, this is a no brainer for the reasons explained in the 'Alphaliner.'
I'm not sold that dredging the St. Johns River to 48' is worth the extra cost to taxpayers. Neither do the Corps, which is why we have to pay the difference between their recommendation and what JAXPORT wants. That extra cost would come at the expense of other needs in the community and obviously the health of the river. As a resident who would be taxed for it, I need more verification on the ROI.
Furthermore, there are a number of other things worth investing in that will generate extra growth, revenue and job creation. You've touched on a few of them in points 2-6.
#2. An on dock rail. The proposed intermodal yard needs tracks that are easily accessible from the dockside in the terminals, to allow for ship to rail car loading.
I agree that on-dock rail would be ideal.
#3. We need to explore running that Blount Island branchline straight west (under port or joint railroad control) to Dinsmore (the electric transmission line right-of-way would be a ripe cherry) then south to Westlake.
I agree that NS and FEC need access to all port terminals instead of just CSX. Shippers need options and the ports that offer access to mulitple railroads will continue to have a leg up on those who don't.......regardless of channel depth. With that said, I don't see that JEA ROW happening. Too many residential neighborhoods would be negatively impacted.
#4. Get active and recruit every logistical "value added: business in the country.
I agree. It's definitely worked for Savannah.
#5. The Dames Point Bridge can be raised. Raising a cable stayed bridge is pretty elementary.
Cost wise, dredging and raising the Dames Point Bridge would be a major drag to local taxpayers that would certainly come at the expense of funding quality-of-life enhancements in our community. It's kind of like trying to force a square peg into a round hole.
Before hitting taxpayers up for a billion we already don't have, play a game of Sim City and invest in port needs while ignoring everything else and see what your Sims begin to think about your city management skills and leadership ability. That will cost real taxpayers a lot less money to find out we'll be screwing our community.
If we're hell bent on dredging, perhaps the focus should be on better utilizing Blount Island because we're only talking about containers. There's still a number of shipping activities that don't require anything the size of post panamax vessels. I'd also probably start looking at forming partnerships as well. Maybe some of this stuff works better in Fernandina Beach or St. Marys as opposed to the St. Johns River.
#6. A joint JAXPORT-CLAY COUNTY Port could be a reality and cause our interstate barge traffic to swell.
I don't see why it couldn't be considered for additional use along with places like the old Durango site in St. Marys or Fernandina Beach. However, the First Coast Beltway will screw the airside portion of it up.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on November 15, 2013, 07:06:55 AM
To your point about a rail connection between Dame Point / Blount Island and the rail yards in the NW - the TPO is conducting a study now to find the best connection route. I believe the power line is one of the options. A major drawback to this line is that it runs through, or behind, several residential neighborhoods. Adding the noise and dirt of frequent freight trains will generate a lot of opposition.
I am aware of the neighborhoods however there is quite a decent buffer if the tracks were centered on that right-of-way. Secondly sound barriers and/or a tree line could absorb or deflect much of the sound. Third, we are not talking about a 90 mph railroad here, and new construction means we could overpass the tracks in the residential areas both of which mitigate noise.
The only sticky point along the power lines is by the Wal-Mart on Lem Turner at I-295, it looks like the track would have to hug the highway pretty tight then go up and over it.
Based on the COJ property maps, it looks like the JEA corridor is about 150 feet wide. Does seem like enough room to use sound buffers - whether natural or walls. (If it were a highway, walls probably would be required - do the same rules apply to new RRs?) There is still the problem (challenge!) of moving the JEA towers out of the way - and getting JEA to agree to it.
Back to the maps - looks like 10 highway crossings. It looks like 8 of those roads could be rebuilt to go over the new RR line. The two Interstates - I-295 and I-95 are more problematic, as the powerline crosses very near interchanges - Lem Turner/I-295 as you pointed out; and I-95/I-295 on the east end - which would make it very difficult and expensive to raise the Interstates over the rail line.
Sounds pretty expensive to me. When do we expect JAXPORT to generate enough rail traffic to warrant this?
Quote from: tufsu1 on November 15, 2013, 06:45:48 AM
I agree dredging is needed...and deepening too...just don't believe 47-50 feet is necessary.
The Emma Maersk, a new 14,770 TEU behemoth draws 52.6' feet of water. Post Panamax ships will draw 43 feet, but the newer crop known as Post Panamax Plus draws 46, and the New Panamax is at 50 feet.
It is true that we could play along for another 10-20 years in the Post Panamax arena, but as the industry has shown zero intention of stopping there, those ships too will soon get the torch.
Many of our readers may not know this (don't ask me how I know - I just do LOL!) but there are two more projects that will impact us right on the tail of getting to 47/50 feet:
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/JAXPORT%20Maritime/ScreenShot2013-11-17at23038PM_zps9b9bee99.png)
China is into this 'alternative' canal for $40 Bn USD.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/JAXPORT%20Maritime/ScreenShot2013-11-17at24444PM_zpsbb77ed9d.png)
Meanwhile China and Colombia are pouring $7.6 Bn USD into a dry canal alternative to the Panama Canal.
Both of these projects spell larger ships, both are routes of rail or future wet canals, and both dodge the mountain ranges found in Panama's shortcut, in fact the Colombian route is all sea level. Here's what the BBC had to say about the metamorphosis we are witnessing:
QuoteWhat is blue, a quarter of a mile long, and taller than London's Olympic stadium?
The answer - this year's new class of container ship, the Triple E. When it goes into service this June, it will be the largest vessel ploughing the sea.
Each will contain as much steel as eight Eiffel Towers and have a capacity equivalent to 18,000 20-foot containers (TEU).
If those containers were placed in Times Square in New York, they would rise above billboards, streetlights and some buildings.
Or, to put it another way, they would fill more than 30 trains, each a mile long and stacked two containers high. Inside those containers, you could fit 36,000 cars or 863 million tins of baked beans.
A visual representation of 18,000 containers
This image from Maersk shows what 18,000 shipping containers look like in the wrong place
The Triple E will not be the largest ship ever built. That accolade goes to an "ultra-large crude carrier" (ULCC) built in the 1970s, but all supertankers more than 400m (440 yards) long were scrapped years ago, some after less than a decade of service. Only a couple of shorter ULCCs are still in use. But giant container ships are still being built in large numbers - and they are still growing.
It's 25 years since the biggest became too wide for the Panama Canal. These first "post-Panamax" ships, carrying 4,300 TEU, had roughly quarter of the capacity of the current record holder - the 16,020 TEU Marco Polo, launched in November by CMA CGM.
In the shipping industry there is already talk of a class of ship that would run aground in the Suez canal, but would just pass through another bottleneck of international trade - the Strait of Malacca, between Malaysia and Indonesia. The "Malaccamax" would carry 30,000 containers.
The current crop of ultra-large container vessels can navigate the Suez - just - but they are only able to dock at a handful of the world's ports. No American harbour is equipped to handle them.
The sole purpose of the soon-to-be-launched Triple E ships will be to run what's called a pendulum service for Maersk - the largest shipping company in the world - between Asia and Europe. SOURCE:BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21432226
Actually Los Angeles/Long Beach COULD probably handle them today and Miami might be able to with some tweaking. We and any other riverine port is simply out of that ball game. Thus the triple E class may be about as big as the common ships get, ports that don't keep up with at least this minimum might as well start cashing in their chips.
This is why it is imperative that we get into the game within the next 10-20 years. I fear we are backing right into another infamous Jacksonville 4th and LONG situation... time for a Hail Mary.
What's the downfall in forming a partnership with GA Port Authority and doing something in St. Marys? How long do we expect those paper mills to operate in Fernandina? Given the natural depth of that waterway, either would be more ideal than dredging the St. Johns to 50'. Is this more about having everything in Jacksonville moreso than the region?
Quote from: Ocklawaha on November 17, 2013, 03:09:17 PM
Many of our readers may not know this (don't ask me how I know - I just do LOL!) but there are two more projects that will impact us right on the tail of getting to 47/50 feet:
The Nicaruaguan Canal Proposal is still just that,,,,,a proposal. Alot of people are following the Chinese money. I posted on MJ about it earlier this year.
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21587218-yet-again-nicaraguans-are-letting-their-longing-trans-oceanic-canal-get-better (http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21587218-yet-again-nicaraguans-are-letting-their-longing-trans-oceanic-canal-get-better)
There are several remediation strategies being looked at for deep draft dredging. The use of abatement pools, pressure relief channels, etc. It raises the costs of the overall effort, but deals with much of the environmental impacts.
Quote from: spuwho on November 17, 2013, 04:06:35 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on November 17, 2013, 03:09:17 PM
Many of our readers may not know this (don't ask me how I know - I just do LOL!) but there are two more projects that will impact us right on the tail of getting to 47/50 feet:
The Nicaruaguan Canal Proposal is still just that,,,,,a proposal. Alot of people are following the Chinese money. I posted on MJ about it earlier this year.
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21587218-yet-again-nicaraguans-are-letting-their-longing-trans-oceanic-canal-get-better (http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21587218-yet-again-nicaraguans-are-letting-their-longing-trans-oceanic-canal-get-better)
There are several remediation strategies being looked at for deep draft dredging. The use of abatement pools, pressure relief channels, etc. It raises the costs of the overall effort, but deals with much of the environmental impacts.
That Nicaruaguan canal if they continue with the project will be deeper and wider as well as several hundred miles closer to the USA. My problem with the project is personal really, as I have held in my hands the actual blue print books for the Colombian Canal; a water-level route across the NW frontier of Choco and Antioquia, just south of Panama.
My other problem with it is the Communist backed government of Nicaragua has recently extended it's off-shore limits 200 miles into the Caribbean. Thus Nicaragua has encircled San Andres and Providencia Islands, the English Speaking islands populated by Captain Morgan, protected by Colombia and now departments (states) within Colombia.
With the anniversary of the Nicaraguan navy's founding, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega was aboard a Russian warship flotilla off their coast. Ortega, chose the occasion to announce that he would be making a territorial claim against Costa Rica to the coastal province of Guanacaste. This will probably blow over but it probably makes Ortega seem like a big man with his 3 fast speed boats and 7 old rusting frigates which make up their 800 man 'Navy.'
Colombia on the other hand has filled Nicaraguan waters with it's compact Navy which actually has/does 'blue water' missions (meaning a naval force able to project itself internationally). With at least 4 Frigates and 10-11 submarines, mostly German built me thinks it won't come to fire works.
Larger ships will still be pretty limited as to world ports because the length + air draft + draft = a combination of factors only fixable in the largest port basins, riverine ports need not apply. But if these giants like the Malacca Max types take over the primary sea lanes, then the 'new' Triple-E and Post Panamax Plus ships WILL BE the smaller craft.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 17, 2013, 03:05:27 PM
Sounds pretty expensive to me. When do we expect JAXPORT to generate enough rail traffic to warrant this?
That's probably somewhere in the 200-300 rail cars daily if we hit the million container mark with the rail side improvements. It wouldn't take much more to warrant the rail extension, not to mention the potential of a direct tie-in to JIA, the free trade zone and the potential of reaching more then just CSX. However I'd be happily surprised to learn that they plan to continue on to Westlake, Norfolk Southern/FEC RY's and/or Cecil. The real industrial development potential of such a belt line is mammoth.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 17, 2013, 03:14:19 PM
What's the downfall in forming a partnership with GA Port Authority and doing something in St. Marys? How long do we expect those paper mills to operate in Fernandina? Given the natural depth of that waterway, either would be more ideal than dredging the St. Johns to 50'. Is this more about having everything in Jacksonville moreso than the region?
You know I have no problem with this myself, this is why Green Cove Springs is mentioned in the article. While Green Cove Springs certainly is NOT the location for the larger ships it is a ripe fruit for EVERYTHING else.
As we are studying rail expansion, I'd like to see a study of taking a line east of Blount Island hugging Hecksher Drive to a container terminal closer/on Fort George Island or one of the other north bank islands.
St. Marys would probably have the same constrictions and it would need a much more extensive dredging project once the channel left the ICW/St. Marys River junction.
The mills in Fernandina appear pretty stable, should they leave then absolutely this (and east Hecksher) is the spot for a large, natural deep water container port.
Meanwhile if the cargo airships go commercial and we have a foot in the door, Imeson looks pretty sweet.
About that Jacksonville Belt Line Railroad idea? Here is an update on the Port of Miami.
Quote(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/RAILROAD%20Images/ScreenShot2013-11-21at75026PM_zps1de53739.png)
Rail service to resume from PortMiami cargo
A Florida East Coast Railway train arrives at PortMiami on Tuesday afternoon in a demonstration run from the Hialeah rail yard. Rail service is being restored to the port for the first time since Hurricane Wilma damaged the rail bridge. Cargo service is schedule to resume next month (Within a week, MJ). From Miami Herald.
- See more at: http://www.internationalforeigntrade.com/page.php?nid=6396#sthash.C11QsFUt.dpuf
My worry is that the costs are being substantially understated while the benefits are substantially overstated and we, the taxpayers, will pay for those differences for many years. Unfortunately, our port facilities are all at least 9 miles upriver, beyond electric transmission lines that are too low (175 ft) and a bridge too low (175 ft), and insufficient turning basins, with no rail link until 15 miles upriver. Got to keep the ROI in mind and it looks shaky to me. And that'w without any consideration given to the damage that will occur to the environment.
WJCT had a great discussion and debate about this topic on 'First Coast Forum' (aired 11/13/14). They are supposed to show a re-airing on Channel 4 sometime soon.
http://www.wjct.org/events/first-coast-forum-deepening-the-st-johns-river/
Nobody is building 8,000 TEU container ships anymore, shifting to 18,000 based on the economies of scale. That container business goes a long way toward supporting our local industry. This is a hit the city would never recover from.
^ supporting data for that claim please
It's a worthwhile watch.
http://www.wjct.org/first-coast-forum-deepening-the-st-johns-river/
With a new LNG terminal, one of the major fuel ports in Florida, a hub for Keystone Coal and a major exporter for agg material, with competition from Brunswick and Savannah, and to the point made that the port is 9 miles upriver, the port would be foolish to think that it is the best option for money to deepen, dredge and possibly destroy the freshwater river. Who pays for the spikes in salinity and destroyed ecosystems to allow for the deeper ships?
I find that most projects like this in Jacksonville have little to do with the real ROI and lots to do with making money today, screw the future. In the last two decades, what major projects went well for this city and which ones did not? How did the millions of federal funds that came into this city help the people of this city? As long as the same people are in charge of things like this (and they are) then how can there be any hope for the future they are trying to sell us? We will end up with a destroyed river and empty ports. There are far less expensive ways to make money from our river without hurting it.
Quote from: strider on November 21, 2014, 07:43:04 AM
I find that most projects like this in Jacksonville have little to do with the real ROI and lots to do with making money today, screw the future. In the last two decades, what major projects went well for this city and which ones did not? How did the millions of federal funds that came into this city help the people of this city? As long as the same people are in charge of things like this (and they are) then how can there be any hope for the future they are trying to sell us? We will end up with a destroyed river and empty ports. There are far less expensive ways to make money from our river without hurting it.
+1,000,000