 |
Re: Press Democrat article about NCR-A/NWP & business
Author: BOB2
Date: 07-05-2008 - 16:42
WOW, you really don't like the NWP! Just because their projections are shaky? Which ones?
Projections are often wrong and any good projection will have a number of possible outcomes, and some caveats on the factors which favor or disfavor a particular outcome. I was involved with projections of export unit coal trains in the 1980's to assess the feasibility of building the Alameda Corridor. The projections of that coal export traffic proved amazingly wrong, but this was only one factor we considered and thankfully we invested in the Corridor, thus preparing for the future.
I had an opportunity, just this week, to attend a tour the Port of Long Beach, and found myself in sheer awe at the volume of not just container traffic, but, of lumber traffic, auto traffic, dry bulk, scrap, construction equipment, tires, and other commodities. A lower US dollar will probably mitigate only somewhat the growth in in-bound container imports. This same effect will almost certainly significantly increase exports, including both manufactured and dry bulk commodities. And, with good rail access, Port of Eureka could potentially compete in these more specialized markets.
The local optimal current conditions on NWP would probably only justify one hauler and one local. Local traffic bases in Marin, Sonoma, and Mendocino would only require a limited portion of that capacity, allowing it to be shared with commuter rail, without any significant impact, environmental or otherwise, to those communities along the line. The need to haul out thing like trash also portend a significant local market of between 50-100 cars per day. The screwballs would have this trash on our roads, in trucks.
The Port of Eureka has certain drawbacks today, a rough entrance, lack of a significant local market, poor road connections, and the lack of rail are among them. But, trade growth is putting significant pressure to expand other Pacific Coast ports. So while a rebuilt NWP is no slam dunk, doing nothing is absolutely certain to achieve exactly zero possibilities. That includes zero job growth in a struggling area, zero trucks removed from a very dangerous and congested 101, zero cost savings to local industry, and higher costs for everything from milk to trash pick up for local residents. So a modest investment in the NWP, staged at a realistic pace, based upon more likely "near term" business conditions, might prove to be a prudent move. Or, we could spend hundreds of millions more on the 101? The choices aren't perfect, but they are real.
Projections are often wrong and any good projection will have a number of possible outcomes, and some caveats on the factors which favor or disfavor a particular outcome. I was involved with projections of export unit coal trains in the 1980's to assess the feasibility of building the Alameda Corridor. The projections of that coal export traffic proved amazingly wrong, but this was only one factor we considered and thankfully we invested in the Corridor, thus preparing for the future.
I had an opportunity, just this week, to attend a tour the Port of Long Beach, and found myself in sheer awe at the volume of not just container traffic, but, of lumber traffic, auto traffic, dry bulk, scrap, construction equipment, tires, and other commodities. A lower US dollar will probably mitigate only somewhat the growth in in-bound container imports. This same effect will almost certainly significantly increase exports, including both manufactured and dry bulk commodities. And, with good rail access, Port of Eureka could potentially compete in these more specialized markets.
The local optimal current conditions on NWP would probably only justify one hauler and one local. Local traffic bases in Marin, Sonoma, and Mendocino would only require a limited portion of that capacity, allowing it to be shared with commuter rail, without any significant impact, environmental or otherwise, to those communities along the line. The need to haul out thing like trash also portend a significant local market of between 50-100 cars per day. The screwballs would have this trash on our roads, in trucks.
The Port of Eureka has certain drawbacks today, a rough entrance, lack of a significant local market, poor road connections, and the lack of rail are among them. But, trade growth is putting significant pressure to expand other Pacific Coast ports. So while a rebuilt NWP is no slam dunk, doing nothing is absolutely certain to achieve exactly zero possibilities. That includes zero job growth in a struggling area, zero trucks removed from a very dangerous and congested 101, zero cost savings to local industry, and higher costs for everything from milk to trash pick up for local residents. So a modest investment in the NWP, staged at a realistic pace, based upon more likely "near term" business conditions, might prove to be a prudent move. Or, we could spend hundreds of millions more on the 101? The choices aren't perfect, but they are real.
