Do We Really Need Triple E Class Ships in Elliot Bay?

[mark47n]

What I find most fascinating is that the Harbor Island, a man made island, and the Duwamish Industrial Zone have been here a long time but now many who move into areas adjacent to industrial sites of long standing want to complain about them. Locally, these sites make the rebar and structural components of buildings, cement, wall board, concrete, glass bottles, aggregates, calcium carbonate, ships and airplane parts are among a few of the products produced along the Duwamish (which was straightened to be used for shipping) for both domestic consumption and for export .

If you have a problem with heavy industry then why did you move near it? Admittedly, houses that aren’t next door to a steel mill may be more expensive, but the new Youngstown Apartments are hardly inexpensive and they are just a block away from a steel mill. The mill’s been there 100 years and is still producing but the apartment is brand spanking new.

It’s unfortunate that prior use isn’t considered when we discuss these issues, only what people want now. As we continue to make fewer goods here (which takes space) you’d better make peace with freighters (which are pretty efficient in terms of fuel used per ton of cargo). Speaking of efficient; the new Terminal 5 will have a better ability to provide shore power to ships as well to limit the need of running the diesels.

One other thing; these industrial facilities, even a 100 year old steel mill, have to comply with current environmental regulations and that applies to ships that come here as well.

Share This

[wakeflood]

mark47, et al, I certainly get the apprehension of many on this thread about supporting heavy industry going forward. I’m torn on it as well, though I come down on the side of trying to find balance both economically and environmentally, as I see benefits to having a diverse economic base. (I remember how hammered we were during the dot com bust in the early aughts and it wasn’t pretty.) It would have been even worse, if we didn’t have some of the other industries you mentioned in the region.

Having said that, my gut cringes when I see new examples every day of what we’re doing to our environment – sea star dieoff being a possible canary in the coal mine? – and I want to find ways to leverage our economic diversity into the cleanest/greenest possible directions.

In other words, every functional offset we can make to reduce impacts and encourage green industry growth – even at the expense of currently extant heavy industry – is what I’d like to pursue. Some good steps have been made already but they won’t continue without keeping pressure on the entities who need to do the changing. And that’s just how this stuff has to work, it seems?

Look at energy extraction. That stuff is going to kill every damn thing on the planet if we don’t rein it in and soon. But it’s just too lucrative for them to keep doing it unless we demand different. And yet, green industries are there for the taking, some of them already profitable, many that look like they can get there with support. Would I rather have THOSE products being produced locally and EXPORTED? Yup. Having a viable shipping port nearby would help make costs more competitive. But I digress.

Are communities naturally NIMBY? Yup. Do we ask for irrational things to happen on our behalf? All the time. Does industry adapt? Sometimes. Die? Certainly. What fate does Seattle have as top line cargo shipping port? Can’t tell you and frankly, neither can the port. They hope so but some of this isn’t under their control. What happens if they spend this money – OUR money – and the ships DON’T come? Or in too small numbers to make it pencil? That’s not so farfetched that it shouldn’t be factored into our thinking.

So, that was one rambling, long-winded way to say, just because people grumble and get emotional about this stuff doesn’t mean we can’t find something approaching win/win in this scenario. I’m holding out for it.

Share This

[mark47n]

Don’t misunderstand; I’m pretty left. I have definite ideas about the “energy” industry, and it’s one of the reasons that I mention tons per gallon. And I don’t intend to hijack this thread. But the heart of the disagreement is NIMBY. But, what about prior use? Why should the voice of those who move next to an industrial site be able to make life tough? If the manufacturer is in compliance then, too bad for the newcomer. The port doesn’t just bring cargo in, it also sends cargo out. The products made by those mills are also shipped all over the world.

Regarding the health of the planet. We have severely damaged the only planet we have and we continue to do so. I don’t know what the solution is. Sea star dieoff is bad. Really bad. But what about the 6+ billion people on the planet and more coming every second? I suspect we aren’t good for the planet either. As I said above, I don’t have the solution. As to electric cars we push this as an alternative but it’s questionable as to the energy and material it takes for that car equals the energy/work that car will put out, let alone the fact that, currently, there is no way to recycle lithium ion batteries, the batteries in the Prius, Tesla, Leaf et al, to say nothing of all of the smart phones, Ipads, I pods, etc. But that’s not in our back yard…that’s China, Thailand, Taiwan and other countires that have less regulation than us, the user.

I’m now so far off topic. I just think we look at things from such a short sighted point of view.

Sorry. I’ll put away my soap box.

Share This

[wakeflood]

No need to apologize, you were just making your points.

And yeah, we’ve certainly created all sorts of Hobson’s choices on our little planet, haven’t we? Pretty heartbreaking. And we still have plenty of folks who seem committed to using up what is left as fast as they can – and lots of those folks have both $ and power.

And plenty of us want change but don’t want to pay for it. So, we do what we can and we press on…

Share This

[PLS]

It’s not just NIMBY, though that plays some role I’m sure.

It’s about defining our City. It’s about investing billions of dollars into our future economy, jobs, environment and – yes – attractiveness. Where is the best place to put that money? The port could continue to be good for the city, but I’d like to see that proof vis-a-vis other options. Well, crap, that’d require some leadership now wouldn’t it . . . certainly won’t hear creative thinking from the Port Commission or the Unions. And the City Council and Mayor won’t rock that boat, I don’t imagine.

Just because they have always been here does NOT mean they always have to be. We can choose to pivot to other industries and products that could fit our city better and have similar or better economic impact with less environmental and aesthetic impact.

And I’ll tell you now that if this thing goes forward, you WILL see housing prices/values drop on our fair peninsula. But that’ll be after I’m gone cuz this rat will get off the gigantic sinking container ship early.

Share This

[JoB]

PLS

The port was there when you moved to West Seattle

and i will assume that you moved here in spite of it

i suspect other people will make the same choice

i happen to think the Port is one of the pluses of living in West Seattle.. i get to see it working every time i cross that bridge…

but it still can’t be seen from the heart of West seattle or from the sound sides….

although i will admit it can be heard

i like the sound

but then i also like the sound of public gatherings .. and kids playing and dogs

as long as i hear them from a distance…

Share This

[JayDee]

@wakeflood: this is about the port use, not vehicle fuel consumption. Not about sea star die off. While sea star die off is happening, or if we have extractable energy issues, does it mean they are connected?

–

Maybe we had too many sea stars or that maybe climate warming played a part? Do we have too much fuel use? You betcha. Who plays a part? We do, every bike riding, bus riding, car driving West Seattleite because as pure as you are, your business depends on it. Do we want cheap gas? Yes.

–

Research will find the answer to the sea star die-off. We still need to find a use for Terminal 5, and frankly, using it as a Terminal seems fine to me. That land that is zoned Industrial and unless some genie (other than Robin Williams) comes around, it will remain in industrial use. If it was to be proposed to use T-5 as a gas/oil/coal shipment point I would be opposed for the reasons you state.

–

@PLS What other industries need sea and deep berth access? And access to rail, and highway? Which types of business that are “greener” do you envision? Shipping goods from larger container ships was the original point of this post and it seems viable to me, rather than have the terminal lie empty.

Share This

[wakeflood]

Thanks for the directive, Jay Dee. I’ll assume that my points must have been poorly stated for you to have blown thru so many of them, even the ones we agree on, which is likely a majority. Oh well…I’ll try to be less introspective in the future.

Share This

[mark47n]

@PLS – And where do you suggest all of these products are made? Where do they come from? Pivot to what other indusstries that don’t consume resources? Where exactly do you think steel, cement, wallboard, etc come from? These are fundamental building blocks for construction and have been for a long, long time. If you move these industries, because those products will still have to come from somewhere (currently Certainteed Gypsum is bringing their mothballed production line back on line since 2008, Ashgrove is cranking out quite a bit of cement, Nucor is running full tilt and the various concrete batch plants are mixing and selling concrete as fast as they can). Import them and you need a port, don’t want them made here then the facilities will be replaced costing the region jobs and revenue. I can say this, though; I’d rather have the industries that I listed above than a battery manufacturing facility.

I’ve lived a lot of places and have had the opportunity to work in places that range from offshore oilfields in the Gulf of Mexico as a diver, mines, slaughterhouses, to the most remote research bases studying some topics that I can barely understand (Amunsden-Scott Base, Southpole Antarctica, Antarctic Muon and Neutrino Detection Array to name one such project). I didn’t have the luxury of always working for clients whose political/environmental ethics line up with mine. Also, having spent so much time in heavy manufacturing has left me able to consider where these fundamental materials come from. When I look at a new device or machine I can see the steel in the frame of a car or in the new building, the silicon, lithium and other minerals, the borosilicate in the glass and the miles of copper even inside a modest house. I’d rather see more of those things were made here, in a union shop rather than always shipped over from some hellhole that require 16 hour days and is little more than a work camp.

Share This

[PLS]

All good points on the value and existence of the port.

I should have been more clear in later posts as this topic light most has devolved from the OP’s question. I am okay with the Port as it is (or was even with t5) but I don’t think it’s a good idea for the 3E gigantic container ships to come into Elliot Bay and T5. I don’t think investing hundreds of millions of dollars to handle these rare ships may be the best thing we can do for our economy. Nor do I think these container ships are carrying much concrete. :) I do like all the good examples of businesses and industries that benefit – that’s what we need more of, imho: data. Objective dollars and figures on what we import, produce and export and how it fits into our City’s future. I’m never willing to keep something just because it’s been there. But I’m certainly willing to if it can be clearly shown to be a go-forward positive.

Alternatives? First let’s invest in high speed internet access across the region. Let’s make world class educational facilities. Both of those would create many well paying jobs and have ongoing positive impacts to community and economy.

Share This

[mark47n]

It’s not a devolution so much as it’s another facet of the issue; industrial production vs. other uses. I don’t know if one of these giant ships will ever come in to Elliot Bay. I do know that folks in Seattle, in this case W. Seattle, are ambivalent about the established industrial footprint adjacent to their neighborhoods. My point is simply that this footprint provides valuable commodities to the area, jobs, complies with current environmental regulation on a federal, state and local level (in general, I can’t speak for all facilities or even the one that employs me) and when there is an issue, most will try to mitigate it.

On a national level we talk a good game about how we need to manufacture goods in this country for our consumption and for export. This is an example of that use.

Share This

[Author]

Posts