# Presentation: 326909

- Seaport Air Quality Program

- Sarah Flagg
- Environmental Management Specialist II

## Port of Seattle Overview

- Independent municipal corporation created in 1911
- 5 Commissioners elected at large by voters of King County
- Diverse operations
- Seaport (cargo, cruise, marinas)
- Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
- Commercial Real Estate
- Broad Economic Impact (2005 study)
- Supported nearly 200,000 jobs in the Puget Sound region
- Over $12 billion in business revenue
- $625 million in state and local taxes

**Notes:**
The Port is a special purpose local government.
We are one of the few ports in the US that operate both an airport and a seaport.
Our primary function is economic development; in this trade-dependent region & state, transportation facilities are critical to that development.

## Slide 3

**Notes:**
Our operating container terminals are shown here in yellow. We are also converting Terminal 30, shown in read, back to a container terminal from its current use as a cruise terminal (moving the cruise ships to the north end of the harbor.
Two items worth of note on the map:
We are very close to downtown
We are very close to intermodal yards for both UPRR & BNSF – drays are very short for the 70% of our import cargo that is intermodal.

## Striking the BalanceEnvironment and Port Competitiveness

- CEO Tay Yoshitani’s goal to be the “cleanest, greenest and most energy efficient port in the U.S.”
- Legacy of industrial use
- Growth in goods movement
- Impacts on public health and the environment
- Seeking to create a level playing field
- Environmental stewardship as the Port’s competitive edge

**Notes:**
We must reduce environmental impact & remain competitive locally & throughout the west coast.
Our CEO’s goal sets a high bar – 0ur challenge is to do this cost-effectively while maintaining/enhancing competitiveness.
We are not operating on greenfield sites; most of our terminals are EPA or State superfund sites that were cleaned & capped, before people were talking about brownfields.
We have seen extensive growoth in volume in the recent past; that has slowed as it has for all West coast ports but we expect growth to return & approach environmental issues in a way to accommodate & encourage that growth.
Unlike the California Ports, we are in an area that MEETS all air quality standards. This gives us flexibility in our approach, yet we are still seeking to reduce diesel emissions as they are the overwhelming percentage of local air toxics.
In working with the other PNW ports, we want to move but not tilt the playing field to increase environmental protection & remain competitive. Not identical programs but similar results & industry impacts. By doing this with our tenants & business partners in a collaborative way that encourages innovation & cost-effectiveness, we gain a competitive edge.

## Why is Air Quality Important to the Port of Seattle?

**Growth in Goods Movement**
**Impacts on public health and the environment**
**Shared Georgia Basin/Puget Sound Airshed**
**Port Competitiveness**

## Seaport Air Quality Program

- Collaborative, voluntary approach
- Fact-based
- Puget Sound Maritime Air Emissions Inventory
- Looking for both emission reductions and goods movement efficiencies
- Contrast to Southern California Ports

**Notes:**
NWPCAS = Seattle, Tacoma, Vancouver Fraser
Unprecedented – international, collaborative - w/o regulatory hammers driving it but w/regulatory agency involvement incl technology & funding, geographic scale
Based on facts – began our work by doing an EI that I’ll discuss in a moment
Explicitly seeking emissions reductions & efficiencies. Anything we do that increases the flow rate of cargo through and outside our terminals reduces emissions. Our regulators recognize this & support business growth.
Southern California ports – plan born of litigation and regulation, extensive top down mandates, very limited industry involvement in developing the plan, has ended up in court multiple times & parts of it will remain there for years. We have a plan that is real, supported by those who need to execute it, and will result in real environmental benefits rather than looking bright & shiny in the courtroom

## Puget Sound Maritime Air Emissions Inventory

- 2005 activity-based inventory
- Spans ~140 miles south-to-north; 160 miles west-to-east
- Close coordination with Canada
- First to include greenhouse gases

**Notes:**
This is the largest effort of its kind ever done.
$1 million plus project.
All parts of the supply chain – ships, CHE, trucks & trains associated w/that cargo.
Industry, port, regulator, & public interest group involvement in designing & managing the study.

## Diesel Particulate Matter From Non-Maritime and Maritime SourcesPuget Sound Clean Air Agency Region, %

**Notes:**
DOM is the air toxic that we are focused on.
What we found – 29% of the DPM in the 4 county region comes from maritime sources.
Of that, nearly half comes from harbor vessels (primarily the State ferries) and there are efforts underway to reduce those emissions.
All things are not equal – as they are air toxic concerns, how close these emissions are to people is very important.

## Emission Reduction Projects

- Cargo Projects
- Biodiesel blends and retrofits for cargo-handling equipment
- Terminal efficiencies and gate improvements
- Electric cranes and reefers
- Cruise Projects
- Shore power at Terminal 30
-    Cruise Facility
- Lower sulfur fuels while at
-    berth
- Seawater Scrubber Pilot
-    with Holland America Line

**Notes:**
Things we’ve already done – lots of improvements already
 - much work cleaning up the CHE
Much work on improving flow through our terminals
Extensive use of electric power
Beginning use of low sulfur fuels at dock – first w/our cruise lines, but now extending to cargo lines as well

##   Create a voluntary, joint strategy to reduce port-related air emissions that affect air quality and climate change in the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Airshed 

**	**
**  ****Create a voluntary, joint strategy to reduce port-related air emissions that affect air quality and climate change in the Puget Sound/Georgia Basin Airshed**

**Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy****Objective**

**Notes:**
Our objective is simple; reaching it is very complex & involves many partners.
It is voluntary, it is joint between the ports.
We share an airshed & seek to reduce impacts to it.
Climate change – we seek GHG emissions reductions as a co-benefit. Particularly in the area of efficiency, anything we do to speed flow & reduce idling reduces GHG emissions.

## Partners

**Partners**

**Notes:**
All of these groups were involved in developing the emissions inventory, through a group started by POS called the Puget Sound Maritime Air Forum. These groups are also involved in implementing the NWPCAS.

## Strategy Approach

**Clear, measurable performance measures**
**Ocean-going vessels (OGV)**
**Cargo handling equipment (CHE)**
**Trucks**
**Rail**
**Harbor vessels**
**Encourage ongoing innovation instead of mandated solutions**
**Short Term (2010) and Long Term (2015) targets**

**Notes:**
Clear performance standards, flexibility in how they are met. Plan includes a menu of approaches, but collaborative decisions as to how to implement.
Source categories:
Harbor craft
Rail
Trucks
Ocean-going vessels
Cargo-handling equipment
Short term & long term targets
Developing implementation details in 2008, including funding, verification.

## Performance Measures

|  | 2010 | 2015 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Ships | Use distillate fuels at berth | Meet IMO standards |
| Cargo-handling equipment | 2000 model year engine or better | Best available emission control devices |
| Rail | Expedite EPA SmartWay standards | Comply with EPA’s 2007 locomotive rules |
| Trucks | 1994 or better emission standards | 80% to meet 2007 emission standards |
| Harbor Craft | Low-sulfur fuels, new technologies | Advanced technology pilot projects |

**Notes:**
So what are the measures?
Ships – at berth fuels, IMO requirements. Expect west coast NA to be emissions control area under new IMO which sets further clean fuel or equivalent requirement.
CHE – move towards on road engine equivalents, upgrades over time.
Trucks – major challenge. Accelerate fleet turnover & retrofit devices. Recognize need to do it in way that works for trucking industry. Establishing a parking area to reduce neighborhood impacts. Getting FMC approval to develop program together w/POT.

## Stakeholder Consultation and Outreach

- Strategy developed in conjunction with industry and community stakeholders
- Collaborative, bottom up approach that takes into account industry needs
- Stakeholder work groups
- Public meetings

**Notes:**
Extensive business & Public Input as we developed the plan last year

Two large Public meetings were held
Two Public comment periods

Stakeholder work groups – work continues – implementation details
  Trucking
  Rail
  Ocean-going vessels
  Harbor craft
  Terminals
  Labor
  Environmental and Community groups

## Working with the Industry

- Collaborative, bottom up approach that takes into account industry needs
- Other ports have used top down, mandated approaches
- Looking for both emission reductions
- 	and goods movement efficiencies

**Notes:**
Collaborative, bottom up is really the key – it reflects our & the regulator’s pro-business approach by allowing flexibility & encouraging cost-effectiveness in design of programs. The contrast w/Southern CA is stark.

Again, emissions reductions AND efficient goods movement. Our regulators recognise that you need to have both, support our growth, and support projects to increase freight mobility.

## Working with the Industry

- In lockstep with Port of Tacoma and Port Metro Vancouver
- Avoids business competition based on the environment
- Provides a regional
- 	level playing field
- Building on what works
- 	at the Port of Seattle

**Notes:**
Doing this together, we can all benefit while adjusting to our individual business partner needs.
Separate programs w/similar environmental results & cost impacts is our goal.
Build on positive experiences – for us, CHE results to date (fuels, retrofits) & willingness to do shore power when the market is ready for it. Already familiar w/shore power from cruise industry.

## Strategy Implementation

- Developing implementation plans in 2008
- Continue to work with stakeholders
- Balance environmental and business needs
- Secure funding
- Business considerations:
- What are the impacts to efficient goods movement?
- How will businesses be impacted?
- Environmental/Community considerations:
- Does this support our goal to protect public health?
- Is the Puget Sound region still attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards?

**Notes:**
We thought we were busy last year developing the NWPCAS – the real work is this year – implementation
	how do we get this done
	where does the money come from
	how do we verify & report on our accomplishments, adjust the plan going forward as needed
	how do we involve everyone in developing these details
Business considerations at the forefront – improving goods movement efficiency
Environmental – looking at real reductions, NAAQS (has now become an issue for POT)

- Sarah Flagg
- 206-728-3249
- flagg.s@portseattle.org