Guess I'm just a choo-choo supporter.
Note, I was not calling out the substance of the claims of the volume of freight required to be handled, but the veracity of the claim that an East-West Humboldt Line would require the Eureka to handle more freight tonnage than Long Beach, etc.
Being a product of North Coast schools, including CR and Humboldt State, I guess I'm just too stupid to realize that 18.5 million metric tons is actually greater than 175 million metric tons. I always was confused by this metric stuff.
I remain confused. And whining! As I watch the South Fork of the Eel River go dry...
"For the east-west rail to be economically feasible, Humboldt Bay would need to ship 11.5 million to 18.5 million metric tons per year — more than Seattle, Tacoma, Vancouver, Stockton, Long Beach or Los Angeles."
Long Beach October 2012 to February 2013: 65.4 metric tons (in 5 months)
Seattle 16.1 metric tons Containerized in 2012. 20 metric tons Bulk in 2012
Port of Los Angeles 18.9 Short tons in 1923 (90 years ago): 175.3 million metric revenue tons in 2012.
Without reviewing the actual report it's not clear if the tonnage indicated for Humboldt Bay is outbound only. The reports cited above are for total tonnage handled (inbound as well as outbound).
It appears that the quoted text from your article is not true, particularly the reference that Humboldt Bay would have to handle more cargo than the ports you cited. Was the reference to other ports in the report?
In fact, 20 million metric tons in Humboldt Bay would be about 5% of the totals from these three ports. Consider the volumes handled by the other ports you cited, and some other big ports like Oakland, and it's more likely Humboldt Bay would need to handle well under 1% of the total tonnage of the West Coast to be economically feasible.
Economic development in Humboldt County of anything other than the illegal cultivation and marketing of marijuana (and its associated environmental damage) is a major threat to the status quo and power structure of the "progressive" North Coast.
In Print This Week:
Dec 5, 2013
vol XXIV issue 49
The North Coast Journal Weekly
Website powered by Foundation