Roberts Bank Terminal 2 | Proposed

[vanman]

Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project

PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project is a proposed new multi-berth container terminal at Roberts Bank in Delta, B.C. that would provide 2.4 million TEUs (twenty-foot equivalent unit containers) of container capacity. The project is part of Port Metro Vancouver’s Container Capacity Improvement Program, a longterm strategy to deliver projects to meet anticipated growth in demand for container capacity to 2030.

Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project would drive economic growth and increase employment, benefiting the Metro Vancouver region, British Columbia and Canada. The economic benefits from the proposed project would include gains in economic output and gross domestic product (GDP) during construction and operations. During the construction period, anticipated to be approximately six years, the project would generate thefollowing benefits:
• Direct Construction Employment: Estimated
2,500 jobs for six years, worth approximately $690
million in wages

• Indirect and Induced Employment1: Estimated
2,000 jobs for six years, worth approximately $450
million in wages

• Total Direct, Indirect and Induced
Employment: Estimated 4,500 jobs for six years,
worth approximately $1.14 billion in wages

• Gross Domestic Product: Approximately $1.63
billion to the Canadian economy

• Total Economic Output: Approximately $4.1 billion

Once operating at capacity, the project would provide
the following benefits:
• Direct Employment: Estimated 9,200
jobs, worth approximately $440 million in
wages annually

• Indirect and Induced Employment: Estimated
9,000 jobs, worth approximately $180 million in
wages annually

• Total Direct, Indirect and Induced
Employment: 18,200 jobs, worth approximately
$620 million in wages annually

• Gross Domestic Product: Approximately
$1.66 billion to the Canadian economy annually

• Total Economic Output: Approximately
$3.1 billion annually
Economic information will be updated as the project proceeds through design and development.

View the project pdf here:
http://www.robertsbankterminal2.com/...tober-2012.pdf

Project Website:
http://www.robertsbankterminal2.com/...nal-2-project/

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by vanman

View the project pdf here:
http://www.robertsbankterminal2.com/...tober-2012.pdf

Project Website:
http://www.robertsbankterminal2.com/...nal-2-project/

That's a heck of a large terminal update. When I worked as a line painter I did a little work around there and man is it huge as is.

I wonder if the volume increases would make electrifying the rail line worth while. It would sure help with the environmental concerns of the increased rail traffic, even though they're tiny compared to the amount of pollution container ships throw off.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I wonder if the volume increases would make electrifying the rail line worth while.

I can't see that happening. The three railways that use the port would have to switch engines on inbound and outbound trains, causing delays and blocking of level crossings - all for just a few miles of track. And it's made even more complex because I believe CN uses double-ended trains (locomotives at the front and back) to make turnarounds easier.

[BIMBAM]

My only wonder is, where are they going to develop the needed off site industrial land to provide services for this expanded capacity? As far as I know, a scarcity of industrial land in the lower mainland is the major bottle neck for the port right now.

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

That's a heck of a large terminal update. When I worked as a line painter I did a little work around there and man is it huge as is.

It is big but it's interesting that even with this new terminal, the port barely keeps ahead of projected demand for the next 15-20 years (barring a major slowdown in growth, which at least based on the last decade or so doesn't seem likely). That includes the capacity and expansion plans in Prince Rupert.

Also, while this is a major development, to put it in perspective, Shanghai is building out an offshore container that will eventually handle 18 million TEUs annually (versus 2.4 million for Roberts Bank terminal 2). Singapore is planning to consolidate its terminals away from the CBD into a terminal that will handle 30 million TEUs per year.

[dleung]

^^The shanghai port is a monster... you can see it from space, including the 33km bridge to it from the mainland, (which disappointingly, is only for trucks - no rail). The port is half done, and when complete, will be 16km long


googleearth

[logan5]

Originally Posted by Hourglass

It is big but it's interesting that even with this new terminal, the port barely keeps ahead of projected demand for the next 15-20 years (barring a major slowdown in growth, which at least based on the last decade or so doesn't seem likely). That includes the capacity and expansion plans in Prince Rupert.

Also, while this is a major development, to put it in perspective, Shanghai is building out an offshore container that will eventually handle 18 million TEUs annually (versus 2.4 million for Roberts Bank terminal 2). Singapore is planning to consolidate its terminals away from the CBD into a terminal that will handle 30 million TEUs per year.

Makes me wonder what the land value of Centerm and Vanterm would be, seeing as they're located in the DT area of a densely populated city. It's got to be close to 6 billion dollars when rezoned. Build a new terminal for 2 billion, then use the 4 billion in profit to build 30 km or so of rapid transit line in Metro Van (with the co-operation of the federal government).

[giallo]

Originally Posted by dleung

^^The shanghai port is a monster... you can see it from space, including the 33km bridge to it from the mainland, (which disappointingly, is only for trucks - no rail). The port is half done, and when complete, will be 16km long


googleearth

Whoa!

I need to photograph that place. I wonder if I've got any guangxi with someone who is involved in the project.

[Pinion]

Kind of a weird way to expand, no? doesn't seem like the most practical shape.

Even Seattle's port area is enormous compared to Vancouver's, not including Tacoma. They have their own port island too.

[GMasterAres]

Shape has to do with the depth of water around that area. They want to reduce how much dredging is required most likely. As for industrial land, there is still space to expand in Tilbury and Port Kells. Also probably see continued expansion out in Abbotsford.

Remember that a lot of the container trains leave BC anyway.

[gary92]

wow shanghais port is insane


on page 2 of the PDF file posted it shows in 2028 that there will be another expansion called inner harbour. anyone know what that's about?

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by dleung

I can't help it, but I find this picture repulsive. The amount of natural resources wasted in today's container traffic is just ridiculous and makes absolute no sense. Globalization is a cancer that will consume every resource on this planet for Made in China crap that none of us really needs.

[Hourglass]

Originally Posted by gary92

wow shanghais port is insane


on page 2 of the PDF file posted it shows in 2028 that there will be another expansion called inner harbour. anyone know what that's about?

I recall reading about discussions to convert Lynnterm into another container terminal (although with a rebound in lumber shipments, that may be off the table). The inner harbour expansion likely refers to that or a redevelopment of Vanterm/Centerm

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by Klazu

I can't help it, but I find this picture repulsive. The amount of natural resources wasted in today's container traffic is just ridiculous and makes absolute no sense. Globalization is a cancer that will consume every resource on this planet for Made in China crap that none of us really needs.

That port is amazing facility. Its the world largest port.
Would you prefer seeing bicylces hauling back and forth our commodities?

[moosejaw]

Originally Posted by Pinion

Kind of a weird way to expand, no? doesn't seem like the most practical shape.

Even Seattle's port area is enormous compared to Vancouver's, not including Tacoma. They have their own port island too.

The Port of Seattle and Port of Tacoma are two separate entities. Note that the Port of Seattle also includes Sea Tac Airport which i think has nothing do with these figures.

By comparison sake
In 2011:

• Port Metro Vancouver has moved about 2.2 Million TEUs (Twenty-Foot Equivalent Containers) and $75 billion of goods.
• Port of Seattle has moved slightly north of 2 Million TEUs and $43 billion of goods.
• Port of Tacoma has moved 1.4 Million TEUs and $34.5 billion of goods.

Now Vancouver moves 898,000 cruise ship passengers.
Seattle moves 864,000 cruise ship passengers.

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by moosejaw

That port is amazing facility. Its the world largest port. Would you prefer seeing bicylces hauling back and forth our commodities?

Engineering wise it's amazing facility, I agree, but I would prefer seeing our commodities being built and produced locally here in Canada instead of being shipped around the world.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Engineering wise it's amazing facility, I agree, but I would prefer seeing our commodities being built and produced locally here in Canada instead of being shipped around the world.

Why? If we can build something cheaper elsewhere it means we should. Economic protectionism doesn't work out in the long run. If a business only has to spend 60% for the same good by going abroad it has 40% extra to spend that it normally wouldn't that it can use to increase wages, hire more people, modernize equipment, pass on the savings to its consumers, or pay higher dividends to its shareholders. If you only have to spend 60% to buy a good made abroad as opposed to a locally produced one you have 40% left over which you otherwise wouldn't to improve your quality of life.

[Klazu]

Sure, globalization makes sense economically, but that's the only sense it makes. Natural resource wise globalization makes absolutely no sense and today's absurd system won't last long. I just wonder what these megaports will be used for after we run out of oil and Chinese labor outprices itself. Already now the first factories are moving out of China to more cheaper countries in Asia (and later in the future in Africa).

And for the well-being of shareholders I have no care what so ever.

[Hourglass]

Seriously, a Malthusian on the board

Solar, wind, hydrogen -- who knows what will take the place of oil.

As to the big megaports, they'd probably be re-purposed for other uses. Coal Harbour used to be rail yards and port land. Liverpool is redeveloping their old unused port lands.

Don't care about shareholder well being? Sorry, that's just a cop-out -- right now a large part of Vancouver's well being depends not only on trade, but people working for those horrible corporations. So until there's anew economic system in place, you should care. Shareholders keep (in theory, anyway) these companies accountable.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by Klazu

Sure, globalization makes sense economically, but that's the only sense it makes. Natural resource wise globalization makes absolutely no sense and today's absurd system won't last long. I just wonder what these megaports will be used for after we run out of oil and Chinese labor outprices itself. Already now the first factories are moving out of China to more cheaper countries in Asia (and later in the future in Africa).

And for the well-being of shareholders I have no care what so ever.

I guess that's why animals migrate over thousands of km's, some birds across half the planet every year. Not natural...Fire up your brain for a bit and think a bit rationally, use some logic, just think, imagine the big picture, not your narrow biased view of the world.

Also while your at think how much of a cost it is to ship something from the other side of the planet when you can sell it for pennies and make a huge profit? Cost is directly related to the waste!