I’ve read a lot and written some over the last couple of years about the likely impacts on commerce of the Panama Canal expansion and the vast infrastructure spending in the U.S. to expand ports. And I’m pretty cynical about…
From the Jacksonville Business Insider’s Panama Canal expansion might not impact East Coast immediately: Mark Szakonyi, an associate editor with the Journal of Commerce and former Business Journal logistics reporter, […] spoke Monday to Jacksonville’s Council of Supply Chain Management…
I haven’t been posting much to the statewide political blog Peach Pundit over the last few weeks. But I have a new post up right now: Despite significant infrastructure spending in Obamaâ€™s proposed budget, only a pittance for Savannah port…
1. Despite various economic projections, no one can be certain what the trade impacts of the Panama Canal expansion will be.
2. The massive expenditures of tax dollars in the U.S. are happening without any clear national plan to maximize spending. States with major ports see themselves in competition with other states, not as working cooperatively for the betterment of the country.
By going directly to key members of Congress, the Corps has potentially opened a can of worms. Not only will groups like the Southern Environmental Law Center know whom to lobby, but members of Congress would seem likely to engage directly — and behind the scenes — with the South Carolina delegation before pushing for strong action.
With so many East Coast ports rushing headlong to expand capacity and with such uncertainties in global trade, I’m left wondering if the complex economic analysis of the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project by the Corps of Engineers adequately took into account various scenarios that might have seemed unlikely a few years ago.
Christopher Lytle, executive director of the Port of Long Beach: â€œThereâ€™s just not going to be a huge movement of cargo from the West Coast to the East Coast.”
Which ports on the East Coast or in the Gulf would it be most cost-effective to deepen in anticipation of larger ships coming through the Panama Canal in 2014? What’s the best way to fund those dredging projects?
Transshipment — moving goods from bigger vessels to smaller ones on the Atlantic side of the Panama Canal — might mean that much of the planned East Coast harbor dredging is unnecessary.
I will be posting about twice a week on one of Georgia’s most influential political blogs, but will obviously continuing doing what I’m doing here.
If you’re interested in the ongoing debates, controversies, costs, and risks regarding dredging the Savannah River from 42′ to 47′, check out this interesting piece today by Curtis Tate of McClatchy Newspapers: As states seek funds for deeper ports, will ships come in?