Port of Vancouver Discussion

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

You’ve got over a billion cubic metres of seawater rushing through two narrow chokepoints (hence the name) twice a day - not Ripple Rock, but not particularly gentle either.

The NV Sulphur port facility and Pembina Canada are near the First Narrows, so it might be viable for modern ships.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Both of those have berths dug into the shore, negating the tide; a terminal at Ambleside would be jutting out.

[SFUVancouver]

I seem to recall a future cruise ship terminal associated with Sea Island (YVR's island) being discussed at some point, at least as a blue-sky idea. It would have some obvious synergies with the airport for passenger arrivals and departures, but obviously flight paths would dictate where a terminal and ship berthing could be located, and the dredging that would be required to maintain a navigable channel is probably a non-starter. At least in principle, it holds merit for the long-term, especially if, somehow, it could tie in with an extension of the Canada Line to service the terminal (I'm not holding my breath).

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Both of those have berths dug into the shore, negating the tide; a terminal at Ambleside would be jutting out.

???

What are you talking about?

Are you talking about that small jetty to the West of the Port?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Ah, those. The jetty you mentioned acts as a breakwater, making the tide flow past the ships instead; doing the same at Ambleside with worse currents and for much heavier cruise ships? Probably a non-starter.

I get that you really want a Norgate SkyTrain, but it and this ain't gonna work.

[fromthelake]

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...g-alternative-to-roberts-bank-terminal-2

Looks like GCT terminals is still pursuing their own expansion at Deltaport. Could someone explain to me the dynamics of the Port of Vancouver? Is GCT a competitor or operator of the Port of Vancouver? Is it likely that GCT’s expansion goes ahead if the Port of Vancouver goes ahead with the RBT2?

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by fromthelake

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...g-alternative-to-roberts-bank-terminal-2

Looks like GCT terminals is still pursuing their own expansion at Deltaport. Could someone explain to me the dynamics of the Port of Vancouver? Is GCT a competitor or operator of the Port of Vancouver? Is it likely that GCT’s expansion goes ahead if the Port of Vancouver goes ahead with the RBT2?

IIRC all port activities are under the umbrella of the Port of Vancouver, the Port is just the overarching authority for port activities in the Lower Mainland. GCT is a company that (owns? leases?) port land to operate their container terminals GCT Deltaport and GCT Vanterm. The Port of Vancouver doesn't like that GCT runs most of of the container traffic in the Lower Mainland, so they're building RBT2 and looking for another operator.

It's totally possible that DP4 is built alongside RBT2. If GCT builds DP4, I believe they'll own that land so it's basically a guarantee that they'll be the operator.

[casper]

Originally Posted by fromthelake

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...g-alternative-to-roberts-bank-terminal-2

Looks like GCT terminals is still pursuing their own expansion at Deltaport. Could someone explain to me the dynamics of the Port of Vancouver? Is GCT a competitor or operator of the Port of Vancouver? Is it likely that GCT’s expansion goes ahead if the Port of Vancouver goes ahead with the RBT2?

Port of Vancouver is the landlord and a government agency.

GCT is a private company that "leases" and operates the terminal facility.

It would be in the best interest of GCT to expand its facilities instead of seeing a new entrant (competitor) come into the market with significantly more capacity.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by casper

Port of Vancouver is the landlord and a government agency.

GCT is a private company that "leases" and operates the terminal facility.

It would be in the best interest of GCT to expand its facilities instead of seeing a new entrant (competitor) come into the market with significantly more capacity.

The problem with DP4, from what I understand, is that going further back into the bank causes more ecological damage than what Terminal 2 is doing.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by fredinno

The problem with DP4, from what I understand, is that going further back into the bank causes more ecological damage than what Terminal 2 is doing.

More is subjective, DP4 replaces more sea grass, but RBT2 has more environmental effects in other ways.

The TWN commissioned a study on it, take a look here.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by fromthelake

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news...g-alternative-to-roberts-bank-terminal-2

Looks like GCT terminals is still pursuing their own expansion at Deltaport. Could someone explain to me the dynamics of the Port of Vancouver? Is GCT a competitor or operator of the Port of Vancouver? Is it likely that GCT’s expansion goes ahead if the Port of Vancouver goes ahead with the RBT2?

As the others have said GCT is a terminal operator and tenant of PoV on the federally owned land under the jurisdiction of PoV.

The Port wants a new container terminal with a 3rd operator; GCT operates the existing Roberts Bank container terminal and Vanterm, DP World operates Centerm (and the terminals in Prince Rupert and Nanaimo).

It's the Port's job to enable trade through the port and large projects are generally Port led, such as the recent Centerm expansion. So far GCP has submitted an environmental assessment for the project; they have not submitted the project to the Port yet as would be typical for smaller privately led projects.

GCT touts how their project "will be privately funded" (not specifying fully or partially) and gives no risk to taxpayers. This is at best vague and at worst very misleading.
PoV is not taxpayer funded and self-funds projects from their income from leases and port fees along with private investment, the RBT2 project is no different.
Now IF GCT wants to 100% privately fund the expansion of their terminal PoV could approve the project (and should have no reason not to IF the environmental assessment returns no impacts), it's very clear that PoV won't be funding it. Reading their promotional material I see no indication GCT wants to fully fund a fourth berth themselfs.

[Migrant_Coconut]

So it's basically a South Fraser Community Port? Knew it sounded too good to be true...

[scottN]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Ah, those. The jetty you mentioned acts as a breakwater, making the tide flow past the ships instead; doing the same at Ambleside with worse currents and for much heavier cruise ships? Probably a non-starter.

I get that you really want a Norgate SkyTrain, but it and this ain't gonna work.

Docking with the bow straight into the current wouldn't be so bad, since you maintain steerage and the current doesn't spin the ship.

Docking perpendicular to the current would be like doing a canoe/kayak eddy turn, but with a giant cruise ship that doesn't fit under the bridge just downstream.

I don't think there's room to build a dock big enough parallel to the shore without ruining the capilano river estuary.

[fromthelake]

https://biv.com/article/2023/05/cruise-ship-terminal-still-possibility-delta

Looks like the PoV is formally looking into the feasibility of a Delta Cruise Ship Terminal!

[Migrant_Coconut]

Vancouver expecting a record 331 cruise ship visits in 2023

Vancouver is expected to receive a record number of cruise passengers this year - between 1.2 million and 1.3 million, depending on how full the ships are, according to the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority (VFPA).

The previous record for cruise passengers in a year was 1.1 million, set in 2019, according to VFPA data...

Hold up - we're getting more cruise ship traffic than ever before, but we're also worried about losing passengers to Seattle? Those two would seem to contradict each other.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Vancouver expecting a record 331 cruise ship visits in 2023



Hold up - we're getting more cruise ship traffic than ever before, but we're also worried about losing passengers to Seattle? Those two would seem to contradict each other.

Does the cruise ship terminal in Seattle have a limit on the size of vessel docking there? If not, that might be why the Port of Vancouver anticipate the potential to lose passengers (over time) if bigger vessels continue to be commissioned by the cruise companies, and used on the Alaska market.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Does the cruise ship terminal in Seattle have a limit on the size of vessel docking there? If not, that might be why the Port of Vancouver anticipate the potential to lose passengers (over time) if bigger vessels continue to be commissioned by the cruise companies, and used on the Alaska market.

Seattle doesn't have constraints on the size of ship.

The major benefit of Vancouver is it allows one way passage to and from Alaska ports near Anchorage, being an international voyage it can be done with non-US registered vessels. All Alaska cruises from Seattle (and other US west coast) are round trip, foreign registered vessels are allowed because cargo/passengers are not being transported. A standard Alaska itinerary is done in 7 days one way while generally taking 10 days round trip, in a 4 month season 5 more cruises can be done.
I believe building a new terminal is less to do with the Port concerned about losing business and more that the cruise lines, through their trade association Cruise Lines International Association, want and need it. At the end of the day the cruise lines will be footing the bill for the new terminal through direct investment or port fees.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Yeah, I doubt Vancouver's at any risk of losing cruise traffic - some tourists will always prefer a direct downtown stop over being on a larger ship.

[Marshal]

When Seattle entered the scene Vancouver's numbers eventually dipped before what is often characterized as a slow recovery. Seattle changed the whole situation of the Alaska cruise industry. And Seattle's numbers represent two things: the growth of the over all industry, and a siphoning off of Vancouver's business. Without Seattle, Vancouver would have grown its previous numbers far beyond whatever we have seen since that change. It is good news for Vancouver to finally get up over the million mark. But let's not forget that without Seattle, we might have already seen numbers between 1.5 and 2.0 million plus.

[madog222]

Getting to 1.5-2 million is definitely going to need a second terminal. Looking at this years schedule there's only around 30% spare capacity (berth days) during the busy months.
https://www.portvancouver.com/wp-content...-Cruise-Ship-Schedule-as-of-April-25.pdf