Editor:
Re: Interest by investors demonstrates need for T2, letter to the editor, June 19
Firstly, Cliff Stewart mentioned the cost would be about $2 billion. Now at the recent Port Metro Vancouver AGM, $3 billion was said, so in view that investors "demonstrate" the need for T2, I think those figures should be clarified plus on all similar projects $3 billion may itself be an underestimation?
Another aspect worth considering is Port Metro Vancouver's mandated importance in facilitating trade, quite correct, but does the general public know that American importers are moving more containers through PMV (JOC - Port News from the Port of Long Beach - June 18)? This may be good for volume figures but does nothing for Canada trade.
Lastly, from the recent Port Metro Vancouver AGM, container growth forecast was projected to be 4.5 per cent for the next 10 to 15 years. This figure was determined from a very respectable (which they are) London, UK-based consulting company Overseas Shipping.
Having contacted this company, it states that projections over five to 10 years are "speculative," plus the 4.5 per cent increase was based on a weighted average of all North American West Coast ports.
Overseas Shipping consultants' forecast figures for the West Coast are now a little dated with a new updated publication coming out soon.
Giving credit where it's due, Port Metro Vancouver had a very successful 2014 mainly through large bulk shipments, agricultural products in particular. For the past two to three years, container traffic is relatively flat.
Let's relax, enjoy our wonderful summer and see what transpires from environmental assessment review.
Rodney Asher
