The following is presented as part of The Columbian’s Opinion content, which offers a point of view in order to provoke thought and debate of civic issues. Opinions represent the viewpoint of the author. Unsigned editorials represent the consensus opinion of The Columbian’s editorial board, which operates independently of the news department.
Donnelly: Port’s energy policy may turn off tenants
By Ann Donnelly
Published: May 5, 2019, 6:01am
Share:
‘Generating jobs and investment in the community is the primary function of the Port …” states the Port of Vancouver’s 2018 Strategic Plan. Yet its newly proposed energy policy may discourage current and future tenants, on whom port growth hinges. At the very least, the proposal creates business uncertainty.
How many objectives can the port pursue? Which take precedence? A year ago, the port undertook extensive strategic planning, featuring goal-setting and public stakeholder input. One outgrowth was a recently-unveiled Renewable/Clean Energy Policy Statement, the subject of an April 23 public workshop. It aims to support a “global shift toward renewable energy sources … demonstrating leadership in wind energy … and support(ing) tenants with their transition to renewable energy sources.”
The policy bans “new bulk crude or coal terminals.” It requires that existing tenants planning to expand or diversify “must go through current port and regulatory processes,” considering social, economic and environmental factors. Such studies could presumably result in denial of business expansion if they rely too heavily on fossil fuels. Realistically, some tenants may not be able to transition to renewable energy sources for decades, if ever, depending upon their business objectives.
There is another logical disconnect within the two-page draft policy. It acknowledges that the port is “an integral part of Southwest Washington’s local and regional economies, moving cargo, supplying land and facilities for industry, and acting as a transportation hub for products moving via river, road and rail.”
Yet river, road and rail transport all depend upon reliable and affordable supplies of diesel or gasoline, as well as multi-sourced electricity. Therefore, by its own description, the Port of Vancouver is a hub of fossil-fuel consumption, specifically of those transportation uses that cannot now be replaced with wind and solar energy. Wheat exports — a major function at the port — require fossil-fuel based energy all along their supply chain.
At the April 23 port meeting, the policy statement was not tough enough on fossil fuels to gain the support of Commissioner Don Orange. He wanted a statement that went further than the current language banning crude oil and coal projects, to exclude fossil fuels in general. The current policy draft is now being revised for its next iteration of public comment. Commission Chair Gerald Oliver has stated he is “skeptical” of the plan.
Port runs on fossil fuels
The Port’s tenants may be watching nervously. Virtually all of them share some measure of need for fossil fuels. Andeavor handles petroleum, including jet fuel; American Steamboat couldn’t run its river cruises without fossil fuels; Great Western Malting is a major natural gas consumer; NGL Supply Co. distributes propane and butane (produced as a byproduct of natural gas or oil); Subaru distributes gasoline-consuming vehicles; Kinder Morgan, a bulk cargo exporter, operates natural gas pipelines throughout North America; Nustar Energy is “engaged in the transportation of petroleum products and anhydrous ammonia, the terminalling and storage of petroleum products, and the marketing of petroleum products,” according to its website.
Such products — gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, propane — are among the most essential to the functioning of our society. Any shortage (such as in a major earthquake) could create serious disruption. Jet fuel, for example, cannot be replaced currently (if ever) for flights out of PDX, Pearson or the region’s other airports.
Construction of The Waterfront Vancouver, on which the city’s strategic planning is based, requires fossil fuels to move machinery, supplies and workers to and from the site.
Our port commission must decide whether to focus on running a thriving, competitive port with policies designed to benefit its tenants’ businesses, or to engage in an environmental mission. Port tenants and taxpayers deserve to know.
Morning Briefing Newsletter
Get a rundown of the latest local and regional news every Mon-Fri morning.
