Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers (2015) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 74-111
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 74... ...
74 Background For the LA/LB case study, the research team used the proposed method and cost model to determine whether advanced container transport technologies have a place in long-term solutions to the challenges facing Southern California ports and communities. In so doing, the research team effectively re-examined the issues addressed in the previous studies.
|
From page 75... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 75 to reduce both current and future impacts. Given this increasingly adversarial context, ports everywhere will need to make good-faith efforts to locate and implement the most communityfriendly transport technologies.
|
From page 76... ...
76 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Connectors At present, container movements to and from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are spread over highways and conventional rail lines. The major highways connecting port terminals with local, regional, and national origins and destinations are Interstates 110 and 710, with I-710 taking the greater truck traffic burden, as shown in Figure 6-5.
|
From page 77... ...
Figure 6-4. Inland Empire -- representative terminal site.
|
From page 78... ...
78 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Efforts to increase the capacity of I-710 have been going on for more than a decade, with the current EIR/EIS preparation now in its 7th year (as of early 2014)
|
From page 79... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 79 container movements by rail between the ports and the near-dock or off-dock rail intermodal terminals. Container Flows Several Southern California container flows might be served by a new inland transport system (Figure 6-7)
|
From page 80... ...
80 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Local Transloads The transloaders near the port terminals concentrate substantial volumes in each location. Southern California transloading is dominated by imports, with empties returned to port terminals.
|
From page 81... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 81 • The 2011 Roadmap for Moving Forward with Zero-Emissions Technologies at the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles (2011 Roadmap) The purpose of the 2008 ACTTEC project was "to conduct a systems analysis of advanced transportation technologies for moving containers from the ports to the Intermodal Container Transfer Facility (ICTF)
|
From page 82... ...
82 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers The ports cannot fund or implement an inland container transport system on their own. Although they have accepted some responsibility for transport activity beyond their terminals, they lack authority over inland infrastructure and operations or the financial capability to build an inland system.
|
From page 83... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 83 development is unlikely to be fruitful or accurate. A more useful approach would be to define the circumstances under which such technologies would become cost-effective options.
|
From page 84... ...
84 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers right-of-way outside sensitive communities (especially residential areas, schools, and so forth)
|
From page 85... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 85 emissions and congestion, and the ports would be seen as unresponsive and unconcerned if they did not follow up on these technology proposals. The 2009 request for solutions can be seen as a direct expression of this concern by the Ports.
|
From page 86... ...
86 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers limited bonding capacity. They would prefer to devote the available capital and borrowing capability to marine terminal infrastructure.
|
From page 87... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 87 to date have identified conceptual rights-of-way, but have not undertaken the detailed analysis that would be required. Evaluation Criteria At their highest level, the selection criteria for a new container transport system reflect the port and regional goals: • Reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions compared to the baseline option.
|
From page 88... ...
88 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Congestion Relief The ability of an alternative container transport option to reduce port drayage truck traffic on public streets and highways is a direct function of the system's ability to divert those movements to a new right-of-way. There may be a large difference in the net VMT diversion depending on network configuration.
|
From page 89... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 89 for fixed-guideway systems. System configuration changes are inherently difficult and costly for fixed-guideway systems of all types.
|
From page 90... ...
90 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers business from the baseline clean truck drayage option. There are multiple levels of customer choice involved, with implications for port and regional system evaluation criteria.
|
From page 91... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 91 On the other hand, if major improvements in infrastructure were made that enabled significant reductions in container flow times, the analysis showed that there would be no drop in total import volumes if fees of up to $200 per FEU were applied subsequent to the availability of the new infrastructure, although the mix of importers using the ports would evolve considerably. (SCAG Elasticity Report, Phase II.)
|
From page 92... ...
92 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers systems began. The net effect has been to reduce the potential benefit of alternative systems over a dramatically improved baseline and outlook.
|
From page 93... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 93 These rate estimates establish rough competitive boundaries for the rates that alternative transport systems could charge. Terminals There is an important distinction to be made regarding the 2035 status quo at the marine terminals.
|
From page 94... ...
94 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers • Electrically powered truck tractor drayage using wayside power and battery power in combination, with expanded I-710 capacity. • Conventional rail intermodal service using Tier IV diesel locomotives or LPG locomotives.
|
From page 95... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 95 capacity is delivered in the form of truck-only lanes or routes with tolls, some or all of the incremental infrastructure cost may be passed on and reflected in prices paid by customers. Electric Railroad Scenarios There are two scenarios for use of electric propulsion on existing railroad rights-of-way: • Conventional electric shuttle trains would use existing facilities equipped with overhead electric power (catenary)
|
From page 96... ...
96 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers vulnerable to disruption from relatively small debris (e.g., a baseball-sized rock)
|
From page 97... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 97 fixed-guideway scenarios; three from the I-710 EIR/EIS alternatives evaluation and four constructed for this study. The table also shows estimates for the size of the corresponding 2035 container volume and the required hourly throughput capacity.
|
From page 98... ...
98 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers had zero tailpipe emissions, reduced GHG, and added net capacity to (potentially) reduce congestion.
|
From page 99... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 99 with additional on-dock capacity would both reduce the volume and the distance the system would cover. Shorter distances favor systems with fewer transfers.
|
From page 100... ...
100 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers On the port end, 9 rail intermodal terminals serve 13 active marine container terminals (Figure 6-11)
|
From page 101... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 101 an advanced-technology fixed-guideway system could be constructed on those routes is far beyond the study scope and would almost certainly reveal serious technical, political, and environmental challenges. The hypothetical network shown in Figure 6-11 was developed solely for this case study.
|
From page 102... ...
102 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers The Inland Empire terminal shown in Figure 6-13 adds 39 route miles to the 35-mile port-area system shown in Figure 6-11. The 2008 SCAG study estimated 3,500 daily container trips between the port terminals and the two-county Inland Empire market shown in Figure 6-12.
|
From page 103... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 103 • Systems operating at full capacity have no room for error or variation and are thus highly susceptible to disruption. • Indefinite operation at full capacity requires perfection of the human element, which cannot be assumed.
|
From page 104... ...
104 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers The near-dock cost model (Table 6-5) represents a 20-mile network linking the port marine terminals with the existing ICTF and the SCIG site, served for this purpose by a single ECCO terminal.
|
From page 105... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 105 The third estimate (Table 6-7) connects both the near-dock and off-dock rail facilities to the marine terminals at an estimated capital cost of $9.9 billion.
|
From page 106... ...
106 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Capital Costs - ECCO Single Vehicle System, 60 vehicles/hr Category Metric Unit Cost Units Cost Trackage Elevated Double-track miles 33,000,000$ 35 1,155,000,000$ Incremental Bridge Double-track miles 60,047,382$ 0.2 12,009,476$ Incremental Tracks (Pair) Double-track miles 10,000,000$ 210 2,100,000,000$ ROW Acquision % of non-ROW costs 14.80% 483,517,402$ Trackage Subtotal 3,750,526,879$ Power Substaons Line Miles 479,911$ 1 479,911$ Distribution System Line Miles 849,552$ 35 29,734,329$ Power Subtotal 30,214,240$ Control, Signalling, & Communicaons System 2,144,200$ 1 2,144,200$ Control Facility Number 10,000,000$ 1 10,000,000$ Maintenance Facility Number 50,000,000$ 1 50,000,000$ Land Acquision % of non-land costs 14.80% 7,400,000$ Maintenance Facility Subtotal 57,400,000$ Terminals Port Terminals Number 250,000,000$ 9 2,250,000,000$ Inland Terminals Number 250,000,000$ 2 500,000,000$ Land Acquision % of non-land costs 14.80% 333,000,000$ Terminals Subtotal 3,083,000,000$ Infrastructure Total 6,933,285,319$ Environmental Migaon % of non-land costs 7.50% 458,202,594$ Vehicles Number 720,000$ 166 119,747,368$ Subtotal Capital Cost Esmate 7,511,235,281$ Design Unit 10% 751,123,528$ Contingencies Percent 20% 1,652,471,762$ Total Esmated Capital Cost 9,914,830,571$ Table 6-7.
|
From page 107... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 107 Category Low Volume & Cost High Volume & Cost Annual O&M Cost 262,500,000$ 367,500,000$ Annual Max Volume @ 80% Share 1,840,000 2,480,000 Operating cost per container move 143$ 148$ Annual Debt Service at 3% 246,600,000$ 339,600,000$ Annual Debt Service per container move 134$ 137$ Total Annual Cost 509,100,000$ 707,100,000$ Total Annual Cost per Container 277$ 285$ Table 6-10. Fixed-guideway unit cost estimates.
|
From page 108... ...
108 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Table 6-12 presents a separate capital cost estimate for a four-lane electric truck system. The estimate is $5.4 billion, almost precisely the estimate developed in the I-710 Alternatives Analysis.
|
From page 109... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 109 to the average operations and maintenance costs per trip shown in Table 6-11 to estimate the full per-trip cost. Labor at $15 per hour and overhead at $25 per trip would add about $46 per trip to the figures shown, yielding total per-trip operating and maintenance costs of $60–70.
|
From page 110... ...
110 Evaluating Alternatives for Landside Transport of Ocean Containers Noise. With electric power for propulsion, much of the noise will come from wheel-to-rail contact on the fixed-guideway and tire-to-pavement contact for electric trucks.
|
From page 111... ...
Los Angeles/Long Beach Case Study 111 Findings Based on the available information supplemented by the research team's analysis estimation and conceptual design efforts, advanced-technology fixed-guideway systems (e.g., Maglev, LIM, and LSM) will not have an effective role in solving the ports' inland container transport problems for the foreseeable future.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.