- Council Asks that Libraries Remain Open
- Good news! City Council stands up to the mayor, says "the public have questions!"
- Be There For Health Care Today at City Hall at noon
- City Paper on the effects of the YPP poll and other online organizing on budget cuts
- Another local library group organizes
- Kids organizing in Mantua to keep their library to open
- Talk solutions with Maria Quinones-Sanchez @ PFC Meetup tonight
- Talking Out of Both Sides on Libraries
- Vince Fumo, the Charmer
- SCI Camp Hill Update—Call for Action, Increased Monitoring, Constant Vigilance
Dredging plan approved by Port Authority
Submitted by raideradam on Thu, 05/17/2007 - 1:35pm.
This is big news and great for Philly.
Also, PATCO will be extended to Gloucester and the Stadiums it seems.
This makes the Naval Yard area even more important, I assume, because we can start going after larger cargo ship contracts.
Plans to deepen the Delaware River shipping channel -- from 40 feet to 45 feet -- and to study the possibility of extending Patco service to Gloucester County and South Philadelphia have been approved by the Delaware River Port Authority.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
And makes the Foxwoods site
And makes the Foxwoods site even worse for our growing port.
Hmmm. Do you think this will
Hmmm.
Do you think this will give more teeth to the anti-Foxwoods location?
Either way, I am completely excited about this news. I have been preaching about this for a long time. With Philly's rail structure, we can become a major port for shipping goods into the Midwest.
This is one of those events that can create real economic opportunity and growth for all sectors, from workers to business, from manufacturing to travel.
Good news
This seems like it's good news. Why is New Jersey so against dredging, all their reasons seem superficial at best. Oh well, any estimates on how long the whole process will take?
I am sure there are also
I am sure there are also political reasons. NJ would lose revenue from the northern NJ and NY ports since we would be able to intercept business.
Since it is the Delaware
Since it is the Delaware River Port Authority that is in charge of the port, I believe that New Jersey still would experience the economic benefits. It wouldn't matter if ships went to this port or the Hudson port, New Jersey is part of both.
I believe this has more to do with environmental concerns from New Jersey, as well as the possibility of damaging their water source.
But jobs and then feeder
But jobs and then feeder industries would be primarily philly based.
I do agree that there are legitimate concerns as well. I am just adding there there is likely political and economic concerns as well.
2 concerns
1. There is the possibility of digging up some pretty gross/ toxic stuff at the bottom of the river which could have a negative environmental impact. It also could expedite the introduction of salt water into the estuary, and really damage the aquifer that much of South Jersey gets drinking water from. I agreed with (the traditionally more environmentally minded) New Jersey that we should heavily scrutinize the possibility of jobs when they come at the cost of our environment.
2. Also, from what I understand, the amount of dredging that will take place won't significantly increase the number of ships that can enter the Delaware River port. Today's cargo ships are becoming increasingly bigger and it shouldn't be long before contemporary ships are too large for the river again. I hope for the sake of our budget that this proves to be false, but this will be an awfully expensive project, and the promise of revenue from it should be built on solid ground (hahaha, i love puns).
Legitimate concerns
Which is why an environmental and economic impact study should be done before it goes forward. Isn't that part of the agreement?
I think the agreement is
I think the agreement is that PA will pay for it. I believe it is otherwise required.
EIRs
Did they say what would happen if the EIR came back with a lot of negatives? Would they not proceed?
From what I understand, EIRs generally focus on how to minimize the harm to the environment while undertaking the project, not necessarily if the project as a whole should go forward.
Well, any project that deals
Well, any project that deals with economic growth has some sort of environmental impact. The job is to see if you can minimize it to an acceptable level.
There will always be a balancing act.
other ideas
Oh yea, I totally agree. And believe me, I'm no expert on this stuff, I'm really just reading what a lot of environmental groups are saying. It's hard for me to say what the impacts will be, maybe that EIR will actually give us a good idea.
I'm truthfully not very concerned with the temporary impacts on the environment this will have (like pulling up all the pollution that has settled to the bottom of the river over the past 100 years; it will settle back down there in a few years), but more with the possibility of permanently changing the salt level of the bay.
However, I would like to point out some other economic growth that would have an different environmental impact.
- Today NYC, along with 13 other cities around the world, 4 international banks, and good ol' Bill Clinton announced that they would begin retrofitting the old buildings in these cities with energy saving technology using low-interest loans that would be paid back over time using money saved on the efficiencies. This economic growth would create tons of jobs, pump money into their local economies, and reduce greenhouse gases from one of the leading causes of global warming today (buildings).
-The proposal to extend the subway-surface trolley lines east under Market St from Center City where they would once again break north and south along the water front would not only create jobs for unions building the infrastructure, but help develop entire areas of the city that are doing nothing for our economy by sitting unused and vacant. It would also reduce the need for people to drive to Target, Home Depot, and points north and south which reduces global warming gases.
-The city could beat national companies by applying to the federal government to build and operate a tidal-powered generator at the mouth of the Delaware. NYC had missed the opportunity to have their public utility own and operate one of these, and now a private energy corporation has built this environmentally-clean power plant using a renewable resource (the tides) and will begin selling electricity back to New York...for a profit.
-California has required a significant percentage of new homes to be built with solar panels. Because of this, the state has become a leader in developing better photo-voltaic technology which is attracting a smart workforce of engineers, administrators, and developers. (Similar to New Jersey pumping a ton of money into embryonic stem-cell research, which in return made New Jersey a national leader in this profitable industry.) Obviously (unfortunately) solar technology wouldn't be our strength, but there are plenty of other burgeoning industries (green roofs?) that we could try and become a leader in.
My point being that we shouldn't always assume that economic growth requires environmental sacrifice. Obviously sometimes it will, but sometimes it won't. We've been strengthening environmental protections for the past 100 years, and our economy has continued to grow. I wouldn't say the two are mutually exclusive.
As far as the river drudging goes, I'm willing to give the idea a chance that it could be good for this city. I think we already have most of the infrastructure in place so it seems like a possibly good idea. I just hope in the future, when we're looking for ways to spur our economy, we can think a little outside the box for things that don't have a negative environmental impact.
Seems somewhat disconnected from OP
But yes, I'm inclined to agree that there is a tremendous amount of room to grow in terms of green economic development. Now that we'll likely have a mayor who gets it when it comes to sustainable development, I'm sure we'll start to see some similar proposals come forward. It's hard not to be excited about the future direction of this city.
I agree that managing the
I agree that managing the wildlife distrubance from this change in the salinzation of the Philly section of the is the most important issue to address- I wonder what the solutions are? If there are any.
I also wonder if there is any way to get various industry involved in covering some costs for minimizing the environmental hazzard- this should be from industry that dumped the stuff there in the first place (I specifically learnd that PECO- or an earlier incarnation- used to just dump PCB's in the river by the barrell)and the new port industries.
Also- I think that Nutter will be the Guy who gets that green economy matters- I heard him speak at the Urban Sustainability forum and RecycleNow South Street Fest- and he gets the whole improved environment= new jobs= better quality of life thing. I'm super excited for the Office of Sustainability to open.
Dredging Up Jobs
John Dougherty and Bill Keller stood shoulder to shoulder with Governor Rendell this morning - at the Governor's request - to announce the successful negotiations that will bring dredging to the Delaware, move the Food Distribution Center out of the way, and create thousands of jobs and billions in revenue for the region. Rendell, Dougherty and Keller kept it alive and made it happen. Doc and Keller got praise from Rendell and a standing ovation from the grateful residents of South Philly. Family sustaining Jobs and prosperity for the region are around the (river) bend.
Transparency at the ports?
Mr. Keel,
Could you tell us how much we'll be subsidizing these jobs (i.e. with tax breaks or loans or bonds)? In addition, are there any covenants that will get tax payers their money back if the "thousands" of jobs fail to materialize?
I'm a supporter of the port but would like our economic development initiatives to be more transparent so that we can ensure we are making worthwhile investments. Any information you can provide would be appreciated.