Study Details Port Pollution Threat

By Deborah Schoch

March 22, 2004 12 AM PT

Times Staff Writer

Booming global trade is taking a toll on the nation’s major seaports as container ships, trucks and port equipment produce massive amounts of air and water pollutants that threaten residents’ health, a study concludes.

A prime example is the Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex, now the single largest fixed source of air pollution in Southern California, emitting as much diesel exhaust as 16,000 tractor-trailers idling their engines 24 hours a day, according to the study, being released today by the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Coalition for Clean Air.

The report rates the environmental records of the 10 largest U.S. seaports, giving the highest marks to the Port of Oakland and the lowest to the Port of Houston.

Southern California’s two major ports finished in the low-to-middle range, with the Port of Long Beach edging out its chief competitor, the neighboring Port of Los Angeles, with higher marks for environmental compliance. Long Beach received a C grade and Los Angeles trailed with a C-minus.

The report calls for stricter regulation of port pollution, raising questions about how much ports, shipping companies, retailers and consumers may have to pay to reduce air and water pollution.

Port-related pollution across the country has been largely ignored and unregulated, it says.

“So few people are talking about this gigantic elephant in our living room,” said Thomas Plenys, one of the study’s principal authors and a transportation policy analyst at the Coalition for Clean Air, a not-for-profit California group. Port activity, he said, is “arguably the most poorly regulated source of pollution in the United States.”

At some ports and shipping companies, officials countered that they already were taking significant steps and making major investments to reduce air emissions and curb water pollution.

“I know there are a lot of people out there trying,” said Geraldine Knatz, managing director of development at the Port of Long Beach, which got high marks in the report for its efforts to stem storm-water runoff.

Evergreen America Corp., a major shipping line, already is replacing old equipment with modern models using low-emission technology, said Executive Vice President Wesley Brunson, adding, “We want to go as ‘green’ as possible.”

Shipping company APL, which operates through Eagle Marine Service at Los Angeles, Oakland and other ports, is considering whether to switch to cleaner, low-sulfur diesel fuel, which is 6 to 10 cents more expensive than lower-grade diesel fuel, spokesman Scott Dailey said.

“Diesel emissions are a significant issue, and we want to be good citizens and good neighbors,” Dailey said.

Air emissions are of particular concern at Los Angeles and Long Beach, since the region’s air problems are among the worst in the nation.

A 1999 study by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, for instance, found that diesel exhaust was to blame for 71% of the cancer risk from air pollution in the region, concentrated in areas around the two ports and freeway corridors.

Ports also produce large amounts of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter, both linked to human respiratory illnesses.

The latest study’s authors, using a variety of reports, calculated that the Port of Los Angeles produces 31.4 tons per day of nitrous oxide, largely from ships, trucks and port equipment. By contrast, an average U.S. refinery produces 0.8 ton daily; an average power plant, 4.6 tons; and half a million cars, 23.9 tons.

The Los Angeles port produces 1.8 tons of particulate matter daily, in contrast to 0.4 ton from a refinery, 0.6 ton from a power plant and 0.5 ton from half a million cars, the report determined.

Together, the two ports form the third-largest complex in the world, behind Hong Kong and Singapore, serving as the point of entry for 33% of the nation’s seaborne cargo.

As Asian ocean trade has swelled, rapid port expansion in both Los Angeles and Long Beach has antagonized residents of San Pedro, Wilmington and Long Beach, where some neighborhoods flank terminals and truck arteries. Their concerns have increased in the face of predictions that cargo container volume could quadruple in the two ports in the next 15 to 20 years.

Such fears fostered a 2001 lawsuit against the port and city of Los Angeles brought by local groups, the NRDC and the Coalition for Clean Air. In a $60-million settlement, the port agreed to improvements including installing equipment so that ships docking at the new China Shipping terminal could plug into onshore electric power and turn off their diesel engines. That and other changes haven’t yet been implemented.

The study praises the Los Angeles port for ordering 585 “diesel oxidation catalysts” that can be installed on tractors and other yard equipment, making them operate more cleanly. But it chides the port for not installing the catalysts more quickly. A port spokeswoman, Theresa Adams-Lopez, said Friday that only half the catalysts had been installed.

Los Angeles lags behind Long Beach in efforts to reduce storm-water runoff of contaminants from vast expanses of terminals and container storage areas. Such runoff -- including oils, metals and pesticides -- ends up in the ocean and can taint beaches and other coastal areas, analyst Plenys said.

The report urges Los Angeles to follow Long Beach’s example and coordinate port-wide anti-runoff efforts, rather than leaving that responsibility to individual tenants as it does today.

Both ports are roundly criticized for poor community relations, and the report suggests that Long Beach create a community port committee such as the one operating in Los Angeles.

At the competing Port of Oakland, officials said Friday that they were pleased to hear that the port received the highest marks in the study.

“We’ve improved air quality, reduced congestion and are completing a beautiful waterfront park for public enjoyment,” John Protopappas, president of the Board of Port Commissioners, said in a statement.

“The NRDC ranking encourages us to continue to look for sustainability opportunities as we develop for the future.”

The report’s most severe criticisms are directed at the Port of Houston, because of what it called “deplorable treatment of local residents and its few noteworthy programs” to reduce air and water pollution.

The port’s communications manager, Felicia Griffin, expressed concern with the finding, saying that the port had taken extra steps to lessen the effect of its proposed Bayport expansion.

“We’re setting new standards for environmental stewardship and environmental sensitivity,” said Griffin, who later declined to comment further.

The Bayport project is currently stalled in the face of legal opposition from four cities and a number of environmental groups, which allege that the plans violate federal law.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Port grades

How the nation’s 10 largest seaports rank in improving air and water quality, reducing port sprawl and working with the community:

1. Los Angeles C-

2. Long Beach C

3. New York/New Jersey C+

4. Charleston, S.C. D+

5. Oakland B-

6. Hampton Roads, Va. C+

7. Seattle C+

8. Savannah, Ga. D+

9. Houston F