Some Greek philosopher must have said that, “for every blessing, there is a price to pay.” Certainly, with sunshine, come droughts … with rains come floods. And probably such a philosopher would have added, that “the greater the blessing, the greater the price to be paid.” Nowhere could it more apply than to the case of the burgeoning cruise ship business on San Francisco Bay. Much-need tourism and maritime dollars bring in their wake serious environmental concerns. Go to Article
Published: May, 2004
Some Greek philosopher must have said that, “for every blessing, there is a price to pay.” Certainly, with sunshine, come droughts … with rains come floods. And probably such a philosopher would have added, that “the greater the blessing, the greater the price to be paid.”
We talked with John Marks, the President of the San Francisco Convention and Visitors Bureau, who stressed that, “The cruise ship industry is vitally important to San Francisco. The average number of cruise ship calls between 1998 and 2002 was 41, but in 2004, it is estimated to be close to 90 calls from 25 ships. They are expected to deliver 220,000 passengers to the city, bringing upwards of $50 million to the local economy.” So, Marks concluded, “The cruise ship business has been positive for San Francisco, and it appears that it will increase.”
Why the increase in San Francisco’s cruise ship business? Perhaps, it is the draw of the cruise ships themselves that serve as a “safe harbor in difficult travel times.” Perhaps, it is faster ships that make San Francisco only a day or so away from Alaska and the Mexican Riviera. Or, perhaps it is the magical draw of San Francisco itself. In any case, the increasing number of cruise ships calling at San Francisco is expected to continue, especially with the opening of the new cruise terminal in another four years. .
As for the port, cruise ship revenue is increasing, but it still “just about breaks even” according to Peter Dailey, Maritime director for the Port of San Francisco. However, there is the added income from San Francisco Drydock, a shipyard that leases facilities from the Port and operates the only floating drydock on the Pacific Coast large enough to service today’s cruise ships. At the present level of cruise business, the yard is expected to generate more than $5 million in annual cruise-ship revenue and provide employment for almost 400 experienced union members.
Environmental Impacts
Teri Shore of the environmental advocacy organization, Bluewater Network, emphasizes that, “The problems with cruise ships is that they are floating cities that dump sewage and dirty water overboard and pollute the air with tons of diesel exhaust. The environmental and public-health costs of cruise ship calls are completely ignored in the economic calculations.
“Regarding the Port of San Francisco, the results of our efforts have been mixed, but we think they are improving. Currently, the port has instituted a no-discharge policy in the bay for cruise ships. However, there are no air quality measures in place; so, that is the most challenging area, because ships have unregulated diesel engines that are more polluting than cars or buses. Actually, we find the cruise ship industry on one side, the environmental community on the other, and the port in the middle. But, we think that they are making progress.”
The Port Responds
Peter Dailey noted, “We need to remember that, even with the increased number of cruise ships calling at San Francisco, the number of cruise ship calls represents only 1.4% of the vessel traffic in San Francisco Bay.” Nevertheless, thanks to the unrelenting efforts of Bluewater Network and other environmental organization, the port has heard the message and is trying to do something about the pollution problems.
So, we talked with the port’s maritime marketing manager, Mike Nerney, who noted that, “The Port of San Francisco has updated its berthing agreements with the cruise liners, with added clauses that prohibit the discharge of sewage, gray water, or ballast into San Francisco Bay. With repeated violations, the cruise ship may be prohibited from coming to the port. We have also developed a cruise ship discharge report that has to be filed within 24 hours of any incident. The State Lands Commission is charged with enforcing rules pertaining to ballast discharges, and the US Coast Guard is involved in policing oil or oily water discharges.”
All of which seems to be positive, but what does a ship do if it needs to discharge wastewater while in port? The answer is, “it can’t,” since the port does not have on-shore facilities for treating wastewater nor adequate sewer connections at the present cruise terminal, Pier 35; so, ships must retain their liquid wastes in onboard holding tanks until they are back at sea. It should be noted that a growing number of cruise ships do have wastewater treatment facilities on board; however, the port does not even permit the discharge of treated wastewater into the bay. Regarding other wastes, under the supervision of the US Dept. of Agriculture, ships can off-load dry and wet galley garbage in approved containers, and oily water or sewage sludge can be discharged into tanker trucks.
The Future: Justin Herman International Cruise Terminal
The only thing that can be said about the facilities at the Pier 35 Cruise Ship Terminal at the base of Telegraph Hill is that they are “inadequate” for the present volume of business. Cruise ships have been calling at the pier just about as long as anyone can remember. The pier has been upgraded several times, but it still resembles a relic from the pre-World War II years when there were ships that actually took passengers to far-away places or made leisurely voyages to Hawaii or down the coast to Los Angeles. Now, as cruise ships grow larger and their numbers increase, old Pier 35 is literally bursting at the seams as it tries to cope with the onslaught of ships and passengers.
So, it has been obvious for some time that the city needs a better gateway for cruise ships and their passengers. For a number of years, the Port of San Francisco has been looking at its large Pier 30/32 in a less congested area between Brannan and Bryant streets, south of the Bay Bridge, as the site for a new cruise ship terminal. But, funding remained an issue, and several years ago, the port issued a request for bids from potential developers. As a result, in January 2001, a development agreement was signed with San Francisco Cruise Terminal, LLC, which is an international group controlled by Lend Lease USA, an Australian-based land developer, and includes the developer and operator of Singapore’s Cruise Center.
To be known as the James R. Herman International Cruise Terminal, the $400-million development will feature two berths capable of handling two of the world’s largest cruise ships simultaneously. According to Gerry Roybal, Cruise Marketing Manager for the Port of San Francisco, “The terminal is designed to handle a passenger discharge of 4,500 passengers, either from one or two vessels. It will have all requisite features for efficiently performing two ship turn-around operations simultaneously.” And, the mixed-use facility will also include office and retail space, as well as parking facilities and a waterfront park and promenade, together with a condominium complex on the opposite side of the Embarcadero.
Three years were required for planning and environmental reviews for the project, during which Bluewater Network and other environmental groups called for prohibiting cruise ships using the terminal from discharging any kind of water into San Francisco Bay, as well as adopting an air emissions reduction program. As a part of the negotiations, a Cruise Terminal Environmental Advisory Committee (CTEAC) was established to guide the design of the terminal. Members include environmental groups as well as regulatory agencies, unions, and cruise lines.
In addition to environmental provisions in place at Pier 35 that have been included in the port’s new cruise-ship berthing agreements, CTEAC is examining the possibility of having an adequate shore-side sewer connection to help ships keep their commitment not to discharge treated or untreated wastewater either into the bay and as far as 12 miles at sea.
Guidelines are also being considered for the new terminal to provide ships with shore-side power, thus eliminating the need to keep ship generators operating, thereby reducing ship emissions. However, with the precarious power situation in the city created by an inability to build new power stations, and with the inadequate power transmission lines leading to the city from the peninsula, that provision may be difficult to achieve.
Efforts are also being made to provide cruise ships with supplies of low-sulfur bunker oil, which is not readily available in the Bay Area. But, since cruise ships represent only a small number of ships entering the bay, that commitment may be difficult to achieve unless the environmental movement can convince the operators of container ships and other ships to also use lower polluting fuels.
Phase One Construction Starts
Finally, this March, escrow was closed and construction started on the first phase of the mixed-use cruise ship terminal, which consists of a 136-unit condominium tower located on a three-acre plot of land opposite Pier 30/32 that the city transferred to the developer. Proceeds from the sale of condominiums and the land will be applied by the developer to the cost of building the cruise ship terminal.
When completed in 2008, the James R. Herman International Cruise Terminal will be the largest development on the San Francisco waterfront since the “SBC” or “PacBell” (whatever it is) Park. According to John Marks of the Convention & Visitors Bureau, “The new cruise ship terminal will be a welcome and important addition to the San Francisco waterfront, serving to strengthen San Francisco’s base as America’s Favorite City!”
