A Long Way from Zero

EPA releases $3 billion to attain zero emissions at nation's ports

0
510
Port of Los Angeles Executive Director Gene Seroka delivering his remarks following the announcement of $3 billion in federal funding on March 14. Photo by Arturo Garcia-Ayala
Port of Los Angeles Executive Director Gene Seroka delivering his remarks following the announcement of $3 billion in federal funding on March 14. Photo by Arturo Garcia-Ayala

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, fresh from her trip to Paris, France to check out the preparations for the 2024 Olympics, came to Wilmington to introduce the EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan and the Biden Administration’s Clean Ports Program that, “Will invest three billion dollars to implement zero-emission port equipment and infrastructure, as well as funding to support climate and air quality planning at ports across our nation,” she exclaimed. As was explained later in the program the goal is to have zero emissions on the port terminals by 2030 and off terminals meaning trucks and trains by 2035. When asked how much of this $3 billion can go to the Port of LA the answer was $500 million max. And what will it cost to reach the zero emissions goal? Seroka’s answer was “$58 billion”! Wow!

So, it’s a grand gesture from the federal government to seed the start of something but “It’s a Long Way to Tipperary” as the First World War British marching song goes. And the first deadline is just six years away. It seems highly unlikely that they will meet that goal, but this “seed money” is a step in the right direction.

It’s been 23 years since the historic China Shipping lawsuit was filed by the NRDC on behalf of the San Pedro Homeowners Association against the POLA. It changed the direction of diesel air pollution in the ports of LA with a $65 million judgment that is still funding mitigation measures but is now back in the courts after POLA filed a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. Curiously the port only issued that SEIR after this reporter asked the question, “Has anyone ever audited the China Shipping settlement funds?” Chris Cannon, the now mysteriously absent director of environmental affairs, answered, “We have. We audit everything.” And then some seven months later they had to release a SEIR. That’s what got them sued again by the original plaintiffs.

Now Seroka claims that our ports are leading the way in green technology. And by the estimate he offered at this press conference, they’re $57.5 billion short, but there’s more to come if only Joe Biden gets reelected that is. The former ex-president of the USA basically gutted the EPA, fired hundreds of scientists, and rolled back regulations. Right now, everyone is charging ahead with spending the Biden infrastructure plans before the next election.

For those wondering how we got here, a curious narrative written by Kat Janowicz entitled: Chasing Zero, attempts to explain the “story of how the busiest US ports cut pollution.” As far as she goes this book does document most of what has happened since 2001 and the China Shipping lawsuit but not much of what came before, which predicated and influenced that legal battle. In fact, decades of community activism preceded this lawsuit which was born out of frustration and what the former president of the Board of Harbor Commissioners, John Wentworth, once called “the hundred years war.”

If it wasn’t for Wentworth leaking to this reporter back before all this happened that the POLA was secretly moving forward with the acquisition and demolition of Knoll Hill, the community might never have been able to alter the plans. Nor would people like Janet Gunther, Noel Park, Andy Mardesich, and Jesse Marquez ever have started to organize their respective communities. They and many others who followed, like Richard Havernick, June Smith, and Frank Anderson, became highly aware and involved in the port pollution issues that are now finally being addressed but nowhere near ZERO. Many of the community environmental justice heroes have been recognized by articles in this newspaper with stories by Paul Rosenberg, Terelle Jerricks, and most recently Emma Rault and it is to the credit of these EJ heroes that the true credit for the march to zero-emission should go. It was never certain in the beginning that anything would change the industrial pollution of the largest port complex in the nation.

They can take the credit for ultimately making the policy changes over the last 20 years, after several mayors and port administrations, but it came at the point of lawsuits public outrage, and a great deal of newspaper ink to get that change. Many believe the port is still dragging its feet and yes they have retaliated against this newspaper in both obvious and subtle ways to undermine our reporting. They have even used neighborhood council surrogates to attack me personally or question my “ethics” in both sitting on a neighborhood council and publishing this newspaper– like after four decades of publishing I don’t know a thing or two about ethics. What I find unethical are the attempts to quash free speech, the buying of loyalty with grants to favored community groups, and the manipulation of small-town politics and small-town civic leaders’ desire to curry favor with the port and its power structure. Readers will note the lack of advertising from the Port of LA while we regularly have support from a much friendlier Port of Long Beach. It’s actually a bias in contracting that the Board of Harbor Commissioners needs to investigate.

Yet here we are, more than four decades after the disastrous GATX explosion at 22nd Street and Harbor Blvd. The land still hasn’t been fully remediated and remains unusable and fenced. There are many more toxic soil sights on port property and we are just beginning to get a handle on PM 2.5’s, the fine diesel particulate matter that you find on your window sills or wash off your cars weekly. It’s one of the main causes of many of the health issues like asthma, lung, and heart disease in the harbor area, particularly affecting the young and old.

It is a good start that the EPA is giving out $3 billion in grants, but the deadline of 2030 will arrive sooner rather than later. Zero emissions would go a long way in protecting the health and the quality of life for everyone in the San Pedro Bay region of Los Angeles.

Tell us what you think about this story.