[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
I& *w-v- SEP op s W4 On--- p "lle a ORM j PW "gi . . . . . . . . . . . . YA "W" -1, A-h-4al"i 1W P P Aw t e rc i*a r'N av t o V E BASIN F Ty, 32., 0 . S . DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CENTER 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE CHARLESTON SC 29405-2413 Great Lakes Basin Framework Study APPENDIX C9 COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION 'ASAL 7 ONE MORROW CERIAR @0 cm C" Property of CSC Library GREAT LAKES BASIN COMMISSION Prepared by the Commercial Navigation Task Group of the Navigation Work Group Sponsored by the U.S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Published by the Public Information Office, Great Lakes Basin Commission, 3475 Plymouth Road, P.O. Box 999, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106. Printed in 1975. Cover photo by Kristine Moore Meves. This appendix to the Report of the Great Lakes Basin Framework Study was prepared at field level under the auspices of the Great Lakes Basin Commission to provide data for use in the conduct of the Study and preparation of the Report. The conclusions and recommendations herein are those of the group preparing the appendix and not necessarily those of the Basin Commission. The recommendations of the Great Lakes Basin Commission are included in the Report. The copyright material reproduced in this volume of the Great Lakes Basin Framework Study was printed with the kind consent of the copyright holders. Section 8, title 17, United States Code, provides: The publicatioR ,pryepublication by the Government,, either separately or in a public document, of any N , , e , material in whichWpy-right is-subsistirig shallW6i'be' tAen to cause any abridgement or annulment of the copyright or to authorize any use or appropriation of such copyright material without the consent of the copyright proprietor. The Great Lakes Basin Commission requests that no copyrighted material in this volume be republished or reprinted without the permission of the author. OUTLINE Report Appendix 1: Alternative Frameworks Appendix 2: Surface Water Hydrology Appendix 3: Geology and Ground Water Appendix 4: Limnology of Lakes and Embayments Appendix 5: Mineral Resources Appendix 6: Water Supply-Munic 1pal, Industrial, and Rural Appendix 7: Water Qua lity Appendix 8: Fish Appendix C9: Commercial Navigation Appendix R9: Recreational Boating Appendix 10: Power Appendix 11: Levels and Flows Appendix 12: Shore Use and Erosion Appendix 13: Land Use and Management Appendix 14: Flood Plains Appendix 15: Irrigation Appendix 16: Drainage Appendix 17: Wildlife Appendix 18: Erosion and Sedimentation Appendix 19: Economic and Demographic Studies Appendix F20: Federal Laws, Policies, and Institutional Arrangements Appendix S20: State Laws, Policies, and Institutional Arrangements Appendix 21: Outdoor Recreation Appendix 22: Aesthetic and Cultural Resources Appendix 23: Health Aspects Environmental Impact Statement SYNOPSIS The Great Lakes, connecting channels, and mates represent ultimate extremes which, al- St. Lawrence River form a 2,342 mile wa- though possible, are unlikely to occur. The terway from the heart of the North American medium projection is used in this study. Ac- continent to the Atlantic Ocean. The availabil- tual 1970 traffic and the medium projections ity of low-cost, waterborne transportation in for 1980, 2000, and 2020 are presented in tabu- conjunction with the rich natural resources of lar form in millions of short tons. the area was a primary factor in the initial growth of the Great Lakes Basin and con- 1970 1980 2000 2020 tinued to provide a transportation base which is vital for its continued economic health. The Iron Ore 94.2 124 164 221 Great Lakes service area contains 36 percent Coal 49.0 62 74 74 of the nation's population and accounts for 44 Limestone 36.1 46 70 104 percent of the value added by manufacturing, Grain 21.7 26 32 39 50 percent of all farm products sold, and 41 Subtotal 201.0 258 340 438 percent of employment. Since the first re- Overseas General 8.2 10 13 16 corded navigation on the Great Lakes (a load Other 28.0 36 47 61 of grain) in 1678, the system has grown to ac- Total 237.2 304 401 515 commodate 237 million tons of traffic in 1970. The abundance of iron ore and limestone near the upper Great Lakes and coal within Total annual U.S. and Canadian traffic on the 200 miles of the southern Lake ports consti- Great Lakes is estimated to increase from 237 tutes an incomparable resource combination million tons in 1970 to 304,401, and 515 million that, alongwiththe growing consuming areas, tons in 1980, 2000, and 2020. This commerce is has dictated the location of 40 percent of the estimated to generate 5.4, 7.2, and 9.2 billion nation's steelmaking capacity along the south- dollars per year in direct and secondary in- ern Lake Michigan and the western and south- come. The portion attributed to general cargo ern Lake Erie shores. An additional 33 percent traffic is $500 million, $600 million, and $740 of steelmaking capacity which is not in the Ba- million annually in 1980,2000, and 2020. These sin (''-littsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Youngs- estimates assume that growth is not limited town and Cincinnati, Ohio) is served by Lake by channel and/or lock capacities. However, Erie ports. The concentration of manufaetur- specific ongoing studies of St. Lawrence Sea- ing in the Great Lakes Basin is indicated by way traffic and the Lake Erie-Lake Ontario the value added by manufacturing of $1,261 Waterway study show that economic capacity per capita in the seven major port areas. This of present lock facilities in the Welland Canal is 60 percent more than the average for the and in the Seaway will very likely be exceeded entire country ($792). by 1990. Low, medium, and high estimates of pro- The cost of transporting bulk commodities spective Great Lakes traffic (domestic and on the Great Lakes in 1970, using 1971 vessel foreign) were developed for this study. The low operating cost for both U.S. and Canadian ves- projection of traffic might occur if the limited sels, is estimated at $386 million as follows: objective were pursued throughout the Basin. iron ore, $213 million; coal, $53 million; lime- The medium projection could be the normal or stone, $40 million; and grain, $80 million. national income, and the high projection the Future waterfront planning should be com- accelerated or regional development. Mixing prehensive in nature. Commercial, industrial, these objectives may be more desirable than social, recreational and aesthetic needs and selecting one for the entire Basin. The inter- values must be considered. Beautiful scenery, dependence and regional nature of bulk traffic fishing, swimming, power boating, sailing and must be recognized. The low and high esti- agriculture, mining, manufacturing, power v vi Appendix C9 supply and transportation all contribute to consideration must be given to the effects of the quality of life, and all are dependent on the any proposed action on the environment and water resources of the Basin. Some uses are to restoring, preserving, and improving the complementary, others are competitive. Prime Great Lakes for the benefit of all users. FOREWORD This appendix was prepared by the Com- Robert J. Lewis, St. Lawrence Seaway De- mercial Navigation Work Group. Technical velopment Corporation reports, statistics, and views of private inter- George S. Lykowski, Chairman, North Cen- ests and State and Federal agencies were the tral Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers sources of information. Principal contributors Robert M. McIntyre, North Central Divi- were the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the sion, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Maritime Administration, the St. Lawrence Robert D. Murphy, Department of Trans- Seaway Development Corporation, the De- portation partment of Transportation, the Lake Car- John D. Officer, St. Lawrence Seaway De- riers' Association, the University of Toledo, velopment Corporation and other navigation interests. Howard E. Olson, Institute for Water Re- Task group members are listed below: sources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers James H. Aase, Bureau of Mines, Depart- John Pisani, Maritime Administration, De- ment of the Interior partment of Commerce Lt. Comdr. Peter M. Bernstein, Ninth Coast Edward E. Rosendahl, Division of Engineer- District ing, Ohio Department of Health Capt. Oliver T. Burnham, Lake Carriers' Joe Sizer, Minnesota Water Resources Association Coordinating Committee A. J. Chomistek, Dow Chemical Company George Skene, St. Paul District, U.S. Army Joseph V. Cook, Bureau of Transportation, Corps of Engineers Michigan Department of Commerce Vice Adm. Paul Trimble, U.S. Coast Guard, Summer A. Dole, Jr., Ohio Bureau of Sport retired, Lake Carriers' Association Fisheries and Wildlife Lester P. Voigt, Wisconsin Department of Redmond Goodno, Buffalo District, U.S. Natural Resources Army Corps of Engineers Richard L. Wawrzyniak, Indiana Depart- Floyd Hoch, Ohio Northern University ment of Natural Resources Dr. Guy J. Kelnhofer, Jr., Minnesota Water Ernest W. Weaver, College of Engineering, Resources Coordinating Committee University of Toledo Charles W. Larsen, Acting Chairman, North Preparation of the appendix was coordi- Central Division, U.S. Army Corps of En- nated by Charles Larsen of the U.S. Army gineers Corps of Engineers. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page OUTLINE .................................................................... iii SYNOPSIS ................................................................... v FOREWORD ................................................................. vii LIST OF TABLES ............................................................. xiv LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................... xix INTRODUCTION ............................................................. xxi Purpose and Scope ......................................................... xxi Study Procedure ........................................................... xxi Organization .............................................................. xxi Historical Development .................................................... xxiii Navigation Regulations and Policies ....................................... xxv 1 RELATIONSHIPS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPOR- TATION NEEDS .......................................................... 1 1.1 General ................. 1 1.2 Economic Development an Area Resources .......................... 2 1.2.1 Location Astride Transportation Crossroads .................. 2 1.2.2 Great Lakes Tributary Areas ................................. 2 1.3 Major Port Areas ..................................................... 3 1.3.1 Duluth-Superior (Planning Subarea 1.1) ...................... 3 1.3.2 Port of Chicago (Planning Subarea 2.2) ....................... 3 1.3.3 Port of Detroit (Planning Subarea 4.1) ........................ 4 1.3.4 Toledo (Planning Subarea 4.2) ................................ 5 1.3.5 Cleveland (Planning Subarea 4.3) ............................. 7 1.3.6 Buffalo (Planning Subarea 4.4) ............................... 7 1.3.7 Rochester (Planning Subarea 5.1) ............................. 7 1.3.8 Foreign Trade Zones .......................................... 7 1.4 Mining ............................................................... 7 1.5 Manufacturing ....................................................... 8 1.6 Agriculture ............................... .............. 8 1.7 Income and Employment Generated by the St. Lawrence @e'a* w**a*y-.'.'.*.* 10 1.8 Complementary Role of Alternative Transport Modes ................ 11 1.8.1 Railroads ..................................................... 11 1.8.2 Motor Carriers ............................................... 11 1.8.3 Inland Waterways ............................................ 11 1.8.4 Pipelines ..................................................... 11 1.9 Competition in the Great Lakes Basin ................................ 12 1.9.1 Regional Competition ......................................... 12 1.9.2 General Cargo ................................................ 12 1.9.3 Bulk Cargo ................................................... 12 1.10 Transportation Technology, Problems, and Solutions ................. 13 1.10.1 General ....................................................... 13 ix x Appendix C9 Page 1.10.2 Railroads ..................................................... 13 1.10.2.1 Technology .......................................... 13 1.10.2.2 Problems ............................................ 13 1.10.2.3 Solutions ............................................ 14 1.10.3 Inland Waterways ............................................ 14 1.10.3.1 Technology .......................................... 14 1.10.3.2 Problems ............................................ 14 1.10.3.3 Solutions ............................................ 14 1.10.4 Airlines ....................................................... 15 1.10.4.1 Technology .......................................... 15 1.10.4.2 Problems ............................................ 15 1.10.4.3 Solutions ............................................ 15 1.10.5 Motor Carriers ............................................... 15 1.10.5.1 Technology .......................................... 15 1.10.5.2 Problems ............................................ 15 1.10.5.3 Solutions ............................................ 16 1.10.6 Pipelines ..................................................... 16 1.10.6.1 Technology .......................................... 16 1.10.6.2 Problems ............................................ 16 1.10.6.3 Solutions ............................................ 16 1.11 Comparison of Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Navigation System with U.S. Coastal Ports ............................................... 16 1.11.1 Coastal Ports ................................................. 16 1.11.2 Panama Canal ................................................ 18 2 GREAT LAKES-ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY SYSTEM ................ 19 2.1 General ............................................................... 19 2.2 Gulf of St. Lawrence and Lower St. Lawrence River .................. 19 2.3 The Upper St. Lawrence River ....................................... 20 2.4 Lake Ontario and the Welland Canal ................................. 22 2.5 Lakes Erie, Huron, Michigan, and Superior ........................... 23 2.6 Other Connecting Waterways ......................................... 23 2.7 Physical Constraints Affecting Navigation ........................... 24 2.7.1 General ....................................................... 24 2.7.2 Water Levels and Flows ...................................... 24 2.7.3 Depths ...... 24 2.7.4 Weather and Ice onditions .................................. 25 2.7.5 Currents ................. 25 2.8 Limitations Imposed by Lock Sizes'an*d Channel *6epths .............. 26 2.8.1 General ....................................................... 26 2.8.2 Length ....................................................... 27 2.8.3 Beam ......................................................... 27 2.8.4 Draft ......................................................... 27 2.9 Harbors .............................................................. 28 2.10 Navigation Program .................................................. 28 2.11 Navigation System Costs ............................................. 28 2.11.1 Existing System Costs ........................................ 28 2.11.2 Costs to Increase System Capacity ........................... 37 2.11.3 Vessel Cost ................................................... 38 3 EXISTING AND PROJECTED WATERBORNE COMMERCE ............. 43 3.1 Existing Waterborne Commerce ...................................... 43 3.1.1 General ....................................................... 43 3.1.2 Iron Ore ...................................................... 43 Table of Contents xi Page 3.1.3 Coal .......................................................... 48 3.1.4 Limestone .................................................... 48 3.1.5 Fuel Oil ...................................................... 52 3.1.6 Grain ......................................................... 54 3.1.6.1 General ............................................... 54 3.1.6.2 Wheat ................................................ 54 3.1.6.3 Corn .................................................. 57 3.1.6.4 Soybeans ............................................. 58 3.1.6.5 Barley and Rye ....................................... 58 3.1.6.6 Cargo Handling Systems ............................. 59 3.1.7 General Cargo ................................................ 59 3.1.7.1 Overseas General Cargo Traffic ...................... 59 3.1.7.2 Domestic General Cargo .............................. 61 3.1.7.3 Major General Cargo Ports ........................... 61 3.2 Prospective Waterborne Commerce ................................... 63 3.2.1 Methodology .................................................. 63 3.2.1.1 Iron Ore, Limestone, and Coal ........................ 63 3.2.1.2 Grain ................................................. 63 3.2.1.3 Overseas General Cargo .............................. 64 3.2.1.4 Extension of the Navigation Season .................. 64 3.2.2 Iron Ore ...................................................... 65 3.2.3 Bituminous Coal .............................................. 69 3.2.4 Limestone .................................................... 73 3.2.5 Grain ......................................................... 78 3.2.5.1 General ............................................... 78 3.2.5.2 Future Great Lakes Exports ......................... 78 3.2.5.3 Future Lakewise Grain Shipments ................... 78 3.2.5.4 Imports from Great Lakes Canada ................... 79 3.2.5.5 Canadian Coastwise Shipments ....................... 82 3.2.5.6 Total Great Lakes Shipments ......................... 83 3.2.6 Overseas General Cargo ....................................... 83 3.3 Summary ............................................................. 85 4 EXISTING AND FUTURE VESSEL FLEET AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT ..................................... 93 4.1 Existing Great Lakes Fleet ........................................... 93 4.1.1 General ....................................................... 93 4.1.2 Domestic Laker Fleet ......................................... 94 4.1.2.1 Dry Bulk Carriers .................................... 94 4.1.2.2 Self-Unloaders ........................................ 95 4.1.2.3 Tankers .............................................. 96 4.1.2.4 Crane Vessels ........................................ 96 4.1.2.5 Package Freighters ................................... 97 4.1.3 The Ocean-Going Fleet ....................................... 97 4.1.3.1 Bulk Carriers ......................................... 98 4.1.3.2 General Cargo ......... 98 4.2 Opportunities for Technological Advancement ........................ 98 4.3 Future Great Lakes Fleet ............................................ 98 4.3.1 Domestic Dry Bulk ........................................... 98 4.3.2 Domestic Tanker ............................................. 100 4.3.3 Domestic General Cargo ...................................... 100 4.3.4 Overseas Fleet ............................................... 100 4.4 Legislative Trends Pertinent to Great Lakes Navigation ............. 103 4.4.1 Merchant Marine Program ................................... 103 4.4.2 Environmental Control ....................................... 103 xii Appendix C9 Page 4.4.3 Shore Erosion and Shore Damage ............................ 105 4.4.4 Navigation Safety ............................................ 105 4.4.5 User Charges, Tolls, and Alleged Discriminatory Rail Rates .. 106 4.4.6 Codification and Simplification of the Shipping Laws ......... 106 4.5 Energy Utilized per Ton-Mile ......................................... 106 4.6 Environmental Considerations ....................................... 107 4.7 Vessel Transits ....................................................... 109 4.7.1 General ....................................................... 109 4.7.2 Average Cargo Per Transit ................................... 109 4.7.3 Conclusion .................................................... ill 5 FRAMEWORK PLAN FOR ACTION ....................................... 113 5.1 Framework Objectives ................................................ 113 5.1.1 General ....................................................... 113 5.1.2 National Income Objective ................................... 113 5.1.3 Regional Development Objective ............................. 113 5.1.4 Environmental Objective ..................................... 113 5.1.5 Social Well-Being Consequences .............................. 113 5.2 Framework Plan ...................................................... 113 5.2.1 Environmental Effects ....................................... 115 5.2.2 Structural and Operational Changes in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Navigation System ................................. 115 5.2.3 International Coordination ................................... 115 5.2.4 Harbors ...................................................... 116 5.2.5 Terminal Facilities ........................................... 116 5.2.6 Lack of Port Promotion and Information ..................... 116 5.2.7 Lack of Trained Vessel Personnel ............................. 116 5.2.8 Lack of Repair Facilities for Superships ...................... 116 5.2.9 Lack of Investment Capital for Construction of New Vessels . 116 5.2.10 Competition .............................................. ... 116 5.2.11 Containerization .............................................. 117 5.2.12 Capacity of Existing Lock Systems ........................... 117 5.2.13 Military Cargo ................................................ 117 5.3 Time Factors and Regional Impact ................................... 117 5.4 Planning Subareas ................................................... 118 5.4.1 General ........................ .............................. 118 5.4.2 Planning Subarea 1.1 (Lake Superior West) ................... 119 5.4.3 Planning Subarea 1.2 (Lake Superior East) ................... 121 5.4.4 Planning Subarea 2.1 (Lake Michigan Northwest) ............ 122 5.4.5 Planning Subarea 2.2 (Lake Michigan Southwest) ............ 123 5.4.6 Planning Subarea 2.3 (Lake Michigan Southeast) ............. 125 5.4.7 Planning Subarea 2.4 (Lake Michigan Northeast) ............. 125 5.4.8 Planning Subarea 3.1 (Lake Huron North) .................... 126 5.4.9 Planning Subarea 3.2 (Lake Huron South) .................... 126 5.4.10 Planning Subarea 4.1 (Lake Erie Northwest) ................. 126 5.4.11 Planning Subarea 4.2 (Lake Erie Southwest) ................. 127 5.4.12 Planning Subarea 4.3 (Lake Erie Central) .................... 127 5.4.13 Planning Subarea 4.4 (Lake Erie East) ....................... 128 5.4.14 Planning Subarea 5.1 (Lake Ontario West) .................... 128 5.4.15 Planning Subarea 5.2 (Lake Ontario Central) ................. 128 5.4.16 Planning Subarea 5.3 (Lake Ontario East) .................... 129 SUMMARY ................................................................... 131 GLOSSARY .................................................................. 133 Table of Contents xiii Page LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................. 139 LIST OF REFERENCES ..................................................... 141 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................ 145 ANNEX-COSTS OF ENLARGED SYSTEM BY PLANNING SUBAREA .... 147 LIST OF TABLES Table Page C9_1 Relationship of Domestic Intercity Freight Traffic, GNP, Population, Per Capita Freight Traffic Volume, and Per Capita GNP, 1940 to 1969 1 C9-2 Volume of Domestic Intercity Freight Traffic by T ype of Transport, 1940 to 1969 .......................................................... 2 C9-3 Comparison of Ton Mileage and Revenue by Type of Transport ...... 3 C9-4 Land Area, Population, and Economic Activity in the Great Lakes Area Compared to U.S. Totals ............................................. 4 C9-5 Wage and Salary Disbursements for Transportation in the Great Lakes Area ................................................................. 5 C9-6 States of Great Lakes Region Share of U.S. Population, Area, Highway Mileage, and Railroad Mileage ....................................... 6 C9-7 Rank and Value Added by Manufacture in 1958 and 1967 for Major Industry Groups with More Than One Billion Dollars Reported for Areas Within 100 Miles of Great Lakes Ports ........................ 9 C9-8 Direct Income Generated by 1968 Seaway Traffic .................... 10 C9-9 Estimated Employment Generated by Seaway Traffic, 1968 (Families) 11 C9-10 Channel Depths of Selected Principal U.S. Ocean Ports .............. 17 C9-11 Potential U.S. Ocean Port Capability of Accommodating World Mer- chant Fleet at Selected Drafts ....................................... 18 C9-12 Physical Dimensions of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway ...... 21 C9-13 Total Loss of Potential Carrying Capacity for Existing Ocean-Going Seaway Vessels Due to Draft Limitations ............................ 28 C9-14 Federal Harbors on the Great Lakes ................................. 29 C9-15 Private Harbors on the Great Lakes ................................. 32 C9-16 Prior and Ongoing Navigation Studies ............................... 33 C9-17 Federal Cost for Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System ......... 35 C9-18 The Nation's Freight Bill ............................................ 36 C9-19 Fifteen Federal Great Lakes Harbors in Order of Decreasing Construc- tion, Maintenance, and Total Costs .................................. 37 xiv List of Tables xv Table Page C9-20 Cost of Increased Capacity System .................................. 38 C9-21 Estimated Construction Costs to Extend Season of Existing Navigation System .............................................................. 39 C9-22 Estimated Construction Costs of Extended Season with Increased Ca- pacity ................................................................ 39 C9-23 Cost of Adding Locks to Increase Capacity of Existing System ....... 39 C9-24 Estimate of Dredging Required to Increase the System Capacity .... 40 C9-25 Effects of Dredging on Port Structures .............................. 41 C9-26 Cost of Transporting Commerce on the Great Lakes ................. 41 C9-27 Tonnage Handled in Bulk Freight Vessels on the Great Lakes, 1929 to 1970 ................................................................. 44 C9-28 Total Traffic Carried on the Great Lakes and Connecting Channels by Area, 1959 to 1970 ................................................... 45 C9-29 Great Lakes Area Iron Ore Shipments ............................... 45 C9-30 World Production of Iron Ore in 1970 ................................ 48 C9-31 Shipments of Iron Ore Pellets ....................................... 49 C9-32 Major Iron Ore Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 ................... 50 C9-33 Major Coal Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 ........................ 51 C9-34 Major Limestone Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 ................. 53 C9-35 Major Petroleum Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 .................. 55 C9-36 Grains: Inspections for Export by Coastal Areas, 1958,1968, and 1971 56 C9-37 Canadian Wheat Exports Through the St. Lawrence Seaway, 1966 .. 57 C9-38 U.S. Wheat Exports Through the St. Lawrence Seaway, 1966 ........ 57 C9-39 Route Distribution of Wheat, Corn, Soybeans, and Barley and Rye Shipped between May 1, 1966, and November 30,1966 ............... 58 C9-40 Major Grain Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 ...................... 60 C9-41 Major General Cargo Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 ............. 62 C9-42 Apparent U.S. Minable Reserves of Iron Ore ........................ 65 C9-43 Great Lakes Iron Ore Production .................................... 66 C9-44 Iron Ore Production in Base Year (1960) in States Bordering the Great Lakes ................................................................ 66 xvi Appendix C9 Table Page C9-45 Projected Great Lakes Iron Ore Production and Shipments .......... 67 C9-46 Projected Iron Ore Traffic Distribution Pattern in 1995 (Percent of Respective Traffic Type) ............................................. 68 C9-47 Mileages of Projected Iron Ore Shipments in United States Fleet in 1995 ................................................................. 68 C9-48 Round Trip Hours of Projected Iron Ore Shipments in Canadian Fleet in 1995 ............................................................... 68 C9-49 Round Trip Time Factor of Loaded-Trip Time for Iron Ore in 1995 ... 69 C9-50 Estimated Bituminous Coal Reserves in Principal States Contributing to Coal Commerce of the Great Lakes ................................ 70 C9-51 Bituminous Coal Production and Great Lakes Shipments, 1960 ...... 71 C9-52 Projected Great Lakes Coal Production .............................. 72 C9-53 Projected Bituminous Coal Traffic Distribution Pattern in 1995 (Per- cent of Respective Traffic Types) .................................... 73 C9-54 Mileages of Projected Bituminous Coal Shipments in United States Fleet in 1995 ......................................................... 73 C9-55 Round Trip Hours of Projected Coal Shipments in Canadian Fleet in 1995 ................................................................. 73 C9-56 Round Trip Time Factor of Loaded-Trip Time for Bituminous Coal in 1995 ................................................................. 73 C9-57 Projected Michigan Limestone Production ........................... 76 C9-58 Projected Limestone Traffic Distribution Pattern in 1995 (Percent of Respective Traffic Types) ............................................ 77 C9-59 Mileages of Projected Limestone Shipments in United States Fleet in 1995 ................................................................. 77 C9-60 Round Trip Hours of Projected Limestone Shipments in Canadian Fleet in 1995 ............................................................... 78 C9-61 Round Trip Time Factor of Loaded-Trip Time for Limestone in 1995 78 C9-62 Projected Great Lakes Grain Shipments ............................. 79 C9-63 Projected Grain Traffic Distribution Pattern in 1995 (Percent of Re- spective Traffic Types) ............................................... 80 C9-64 Projected Deep-Draft Lakewise Shipments and Receipts of Grain at U.S. Great Lakes Harbors, 1980 to 2020, Compared with 1959 to 1963 Actual Average ...................................................... 80 C9-65 Mileages of Projected Grain Shipments in United States Fleet in 1995 80 List of Tables xvii Table Page C9-66 Round Trip Hours of Projected Grain Shipments in Canadian Fleet in 1995 ................................................................. 81 C9-67 Round Trip Time Factor of Loaded-Trip Time for Grain in 1995 ...... 81 C9-68 U.S. and Great Lakes Grain Exports by Type of Grain and Great Lakes Ports Percentage of U.S. Total, Average for 1959 to 1963, and Projec- tions for 1980 to 2000 ................................................ 82 C9-69 Overseas General Cargo on the Great Lakes ......................... 84 C9-70 Distribution of Other General Cargo ................................. 84 C9-71 U.S. Great Lakes Overseas Freight Traffic Included and Excluded from the General Cargo Traffic Analysis, 1965 to 1969 ..................... 84 C9-72 Projected Overseas General Cargo on the Great Lakes ............... 85 C9-73 Overseas General Cargo Flow Through Channels .................... 86 C9-74 Past Estimates of the St. Lawrence Seaway Traffic .................. 87 C9-75 Waterborne Commerce Great Lakes-St. Lawrence System ........... 88 C9-76 Estimate of 1995 Traffic Flow Through Channels .................... 89 C9-77 Projected Traffic Through Channels for 1980, 2000, and 2020 ......... 90 C9-78 Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway Waterborne Fleet, 1970 ...... 93 C9-79 Projected Distribution of Shipments by Vessel Class and Commodity Trade for 1995 ....................................................... 99 C9-80 Projected Vessel Data for 1995 ....................................... 99 C9-81 Prospective Great Lakes Dry Bulk Cargo Fleet (Dry Bulk Carriers and Self-Unloaders), Medium Traffic Projection for 1995 ................. 100 C9-82 Ton-Miles Per Gallon of Fuel ........................................ 106 C9-83 Carrying Capacity of the Great Lakes Fleet, 1958 to 1971 ............ 109 C9-84 Tonnage and Transits Through Locks ............................... 110 C9-85 Projected Average Vessel Capacity for Canadian Fleet in 1995 ....... 110 C9-86 Transits Required to Carry Prospective Commerce (Medium Estimate) ill C9-87 Estimated Additional Waterborne Commerce from Extension of Navi- gation Season ........................................................ 115 C9-88 Time Factor Effect on Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System ... 117 C9-89 Commodities Affected by Improvements ............................. 118 xviii Appendix C9 Table Page C9-90 Percent of Shipments and Receipts by Commodity and Planning Sub- area ................................................................. 119 C9-91 Projected 1980 Shipments and Receipts by Commodity and Planning Subarea ............................................................. 120 C9-92 Projected 2000 Shipments and Receipts by Commodity and Planning Subarea ............................................................. 121 C9-93 Projected 2020 Shipments and Receipts by Commodity and Planning Subarea ............................................................. 122 C9-94 Port Income and Employment Generated by Waterborne Commerce for Port Handling Facilities and Related Services ....................... 124 C9-95 Cost of Operation and Maintenance on Mississippi River, 1938 to 1971 147 C9-96 Average Cost of Operation and Maintenance for Great Lakes-St. Law- rence Seaway System 1965 to 1969 ................................... 147 C9-97 Distribution of Extension of Season Costs ........................... 147 C9-98 Cost of Dredging Interlake Connections ............................. 148 C9-99 Feature Costs by Planning Subarea (United States only) 31-Foot Sys- tem .................................................................. 148 C9-100 Commercial Navigation Costs by Planning Subarea .................. 149 C9-101 Cost of 31-Foot System by State ..................................... 153 C9-102 Update Cost of Lake Erie-Lake Ontario Waterway ................... 154 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page C9-1 Great Lakes Region Planning Subareas ............................... xxii C9-2 Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Navigation System ................ 19 C9-3 Profile of Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway .......................... 20 C9-4 The Carol Lake Bulk Carrier .......................................... 22 C9-5 Aerial View of Soo Locks at Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan ............... 23 C9-6 The Robinson Bay SLSDC Tug ....................................... 26 C9-7 Taconite Plant at Silver Bay Harbor, Minnesota ...................... 46 C9-8 Loading Taconite by Typical Gravity Feed Loading System at New Duluth Dock .......................................................... 46 C9-9 Unloading Iron Ore at a Lake Erie Dock .............................. 47 C9-10 Ore Unloading and Coal Loading Docks at Toledo, Ohio ............... 47 C9-11 Limestone Loading Docks at Calcite, Michigan ....................... 52 C9-12 Grain Loading at Duluth Harbor ..................................... 57 C9-13 Projected Iron Ore Traffic Flow, 1995 ................................. 69 C9-14 Iron Ore Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway ............ 69 C9-15 Projected Bituminous Coal Traffic Flow, 1995 ......................... 74 C9-16 Coal Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway ................ 74 C9-17 Projected Limestone Traffic Flow, 1995 ............................... 75 C9-18 Limestone Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway .......... 75 C9-19 Projected Grain Traffic Flow, 1995 .................................... 81 C9-20 Grain Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway ............... 81 C9-21 Projected Overseas General Cargo Traffic Flow, 1995 ................. 83 C9-22 Overseas General Cargo Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Sea- way ................................................................... 83 C9-23 Projected Total Traffic Flow, 1995 .................................... 91 xix xx Appendix C9 Figure Page C9-24 Total Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway ............... 91 C9-25 The John G. Munson Self-Unloader ................................... 94 C9-26 The Edward J. Ryerson Bulk Carrier ................................. 95 C9-27 The Stewart J. Cort Self-Unloader .................................... 97 C9-28 Artist's Sketch of 1,000-Foot Tug Barge ............................... 104 C9-29 Overseas General Cargo Vessels at Duluth, Minnesota, in 1969 ....... 105 C9-30 The Doctor Lykes SEABEE-Type Vessel .............................. 107 C9-31 The World's Largest Shipboard Elevator .............................. 108 INTRODUCTION Purpose and Scope each of the major commodity movements and the relationship of water and land modes of The specific objective of this appendix is to transportation, which establishes the econom- determine the extent, nature and timing of a ics of the deep-draft system development program necessary to meet the (6) assessing the restrictions inherent in requirements of future commercial naviga- the Great Lakes system, including lock sizes, tion. For clarity and ease of presentation, rec- channel depths, length of season, land reational navigation is treated separately in facilities, cargo handling aids, traffic control Appendix R9, Recreational Boating. (7) defining the system's opportunities and This appendix presents information on the needs in river basin groups and local areas for historical development, current status, and planning periods 1970 to 1980, 1980 to 2000, projected needs of the Great Lakes-St. Law- and 2000 to 2020. Included are estimates of rence Seaway commercial navigation system. prospective traffic, alternative solutions, ap- Estimates of Federal, State, and local pro- proximate costs, and development of a gram requirements are given for the planning framework plan for commercial navigation to periods 1980, 2000, and 2020. The scope of this meet national, regional, and environmental appendix includes the entire commercial objectives. navigation system from Lake Superior through the St. Lawrence Seaway to the At- lantic Ocean. While concentrating on the U.S. Organization portion of the Basin, it includes all waterborne commerce with origins or destinations in the The available information concerning Great Lakes Basin (Figure C9-1). Planning transportation systems serving the Great subareas are delineated by county boundaries Lakes Basin is presented in Section 1. Com- that approximate groups of drainage basins plementary and competitive roles of alterna- (river basin groups) draining into the Great tive modes of transportation, problems facing Lakes. the alternative modes and their possible solu- tions, and the relationship of the Great Lakes transportation system to seacoast areas are Study Procedure discussed. The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway is Study procedure involved: described in Section 2. Information is pre- (1) assembling available information on sented on development of the Seaway, which the transportation systems serving the Great has been a coordinated undertaking of the Lakes Region Federal governments of the United States and (2) assembling information on existing Canada. private, local, public, and Federal programs Transportation studies of existing and for navigation and summarizing technology, prospective waterborne commerce are given problems, and possible solutions connected in Section 3. Summary tables of trends in with the various transportation modes commodity movements are developed to de- (3) surveying the present status of har- termine the needs for improvements for the bors, connecting channels, and deepening proj- projection periods. ects up to present day conditions, and describ- The existing vessel fleet and the oppor- ing the status of authorized studies tunities for technological advancements are (4) tabulating existing traffic, projecting analyzed in Section 4. The size and composi- low, medium, and high ranges of prospective tion of the future fleet are discussed in rela- traffic, and providing appropriate summary tion to the size of locks and channels. tables for existing and prospective traffic A discussion of alternatives, costs, and (5) analyzing facilities associated with navigation needs is presented in Section 5. A xxi III LEGEND Great Lakes Region 0 Subregions ---------- Planning Subareas @'SOF A Subregion number MINNESOTA L IOR Planning Subarea AKE SUPER 0 (Cities) Standard 04 " U -.'J to, uth ONTARIO Superii 1.2 St. Mry, R,,,,, MICHIGAN 01 WIS. CIS GEORWAN BAY IF R- LAKE@URON WISCON reen t av L.k S-- )NTARI (ANAoA - - HIGAN STATES r-> City R- Sagin Bi- Buffalo Muskegon Milv,auke. 0 Flint St. Cl.ir L pids Grand Rapids R.Cine rinsing 401 NEW YORK WISCONSIN Kenoshao it L,*, -11.1.71pio-ls Kalamazoo Alnn Aftr 0 C,tro St. CI." NE Jackson Dwmit Ri- Erie Chicago 0 MICHIGAN ICH ------ S Hammond INDIANA OHIO place aon ILLINOI Gary OSmth Band 0 Loraino STATU x CAkron 0 2LO 0 20 a1z Fort Way. 0 1 z z I N D I A N A < Lima 0 0 H 10 Z 0 <2 0 Introduction xxiii framework plan for action in the planning the Canadian side of the St. Marys River at periods of 1980, 2000, and 2020 is developed., Sault Sainte Marie. This lock, having a lift of less than half the total drop (19 feet) in water level, was for canoes and bateaux .27 Historical Development Because highways and railways were not developed, water transport provided the only The five Great Lakes and their connecting means of getting products to the eastern mar- waterways and canals form a water highway kets. The completion of the Erie Canal in 1825 2,342 miles long from the heart of the North provided the initial water route from the Illi- American continent to the sea via the St. Law- nois prairies to the Atlantic coast. The canal's rence River. Of this, 1,270 miles are within the 4-foot depth and 40-foot width accommodated Great Lakes. The remainder is along the St. boats with capacities up to 30 tons. Grain, for Lawrence River. example, was loaded on lake boats at Lake The first recorded commercial navigation on Michigan ports, carried to Buffalo, and then the Great Lakes commenced with the launch- transferred to canal boats on the Erie Canal ing of a 10-ton sailing vessel at Fort Frontenac and delivered directly to New York, a total (the present site of Kingston, Ontario) in distance of 1,400 miles. Chicago was the major November, 1678.26 Sieur de La Salle built this grain shipping port until the 1880s. Grain was ship to transport supplies from Fort brought to Chicago on wagon trains up to 80 Frontenac through the Niagara River to a wagons long, traveling on plank roads built portage that led to an advanced base above out into the prairies. The rapid growth of wa- the Falls. The first cargo was a load of grain terborne commerce between the midwest and obtained in trade from the Seneca Indians at the Atlantic seaboard is presented in tabular their camp near the present site of the City of form.26 Toronto. The trip took nine days. During the winter of 1678-79 La Salle built a 40-ton sail- Year Total Tons ing ship, the Griffon, which was launched in (All freight including grain) May of 1679. In August of that year he sailed 1836 54,000 this ship across Lake Erie, towed it up the 1846 507,000 Detroit and St. Clair Rivers, sailed the full 1856 19210,000 length of Lake Huron to the Mackinac Straits 1867 2,1309000 and down Lake Michigan to Green Bay. Load- ing the ship with a rich cargo of furs obtained One of the many difficulties obstructing in trade, La Salle sent it back to his base on development of Great Lakes navigation into a the Niagara River with orders to return with single system was the 602-foot difference in more supplies for further exploration. The elevation between tidewater and Lake ship was lost in a storm on Lake Huron. Be- Superior. Most of this, 591 feet, occurs in three cause of these early voyages, La Salle has areas. The rise in the St. Lawrence River from been called the father of navigation on the tidewater to Lake Ontario is 246 feet. The sec- Great Lakes. ond is a 326-foot lift over the Niagara escarp- The opening of the Northwest Territory in ment into Lake Erie, and the third is a 19-foot 1787 (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and lift on the St. Marys River at the outlet of Lake Wisconsin) was a great stimulus to develop- Superior. For many years goods were un- ment of the Great Lakes area. As westward loaded from ships at each of these barriers, migration followed the water courses, naviga- transported overland, and reloaded on other tion developed as a natural means of coTn- ships in the Lake beyond. munication. In 1680, Dollier de Casson, Superior of the By the early 1800s some two dozen Sulpician Order in Montreal, originated the lakeshore communities had been established concept of making a canal through the St. along Lakes Ontario and Erie, at Prescott and Lawrence River. In the early 1700s work actu- Ogdensburg on the St. Lawrence River, and at ally began on a canal to provide a 3-foot deep Detroit on the Detroit River. The midwest channel between Lake St. Louis and the St. farmlands were fertile and the climate was Pierre River. Although never completed it was favorable for growing grain, which became followed by other small canals. By 1780 a one of the first sources of income for farmers. series of small locks, 40 feet long, six feet wide, Trade in furs was also an important item of and 21/2 feet deep were in operation between commerce of the area. In 1797 the Northwest Lake St. Louis and Lake St. Francis. The Fur Company built a small lock on what is now Lachine Canal was completed in 1825 and by xxiv Appendix C9 1850 a channel with maximum depth of nine 88,000,000 bushels were shipped from Lake feet was available from the Atlantic Ocean to Superior ports in 1898. Lake Ontario. The first Welland Canal across However shipments of iron ore and coal on the Niagara peninsula was opened in 1829 and the Lakes soon eclipsed the grain movement. the improvements and modifications that The first shipments of ore from the Mesabi formed the second Welland Canal were com- Range began in 1892. By 1910 approximately pleted by 1844 .26 42,000,000 tons were shipped annually. Coal A major change in transportation service on shipments totalled 26,000,000 tons and grain the Great Lakes occurred during the mid-19th shipments equalled 6,000,000 tons (approxi- century when the demand for steel exceeded mately 240,000,000 bushels) in 1910. These the capacity of eastern iron ore reserves. Con- three items accounted for more than 95 per- sequently the mines of Michigan and Min- cent of the total traffic on the Great Lakes at nesota became competitive. The first mine (on that time. the Marquette Range) was opened in 1854. In the late 1800s the government of Canada A canal to by-pass St. Marys Falls at Sault undertook a new canal building program, Sainte Marie and the State of Michigan Lock, which, on its completion in 1905, provided a the first ship lock at Sault Sainte Marie, was minimum draft of 14 feet from the Atlantic completed in 1855, providing a 9-foot naviga- Ocean to Lake Superior. This established ble channel from the Atlantic Ocean to Lake much of the present traffic pattern. The use of Superior. This facilitated economic delivery of lake freighters, which were developed solely ore to Pittsburgh furnaces. Larger vessels, for the movement of bulk cargoes on the Great terminal facilities, and complementary inland Lakes, resulted in savings that made the Lake rail facilities were constructed. The rail cars system again competitive with railroad S.26 and ore vessels, which normally would be This marked the end of rail dominance in empty on the back haul, were used to carry transporting bulk cargoes. coal at out-of-pocket rates (usually half the While the canals of the Great Lakes were cost of ore movements downbound) to being developed, radical changes were also energy-deficient upper lake ports and cities. being made in the vessels. Prior to enlarge- Settlers came with their families to mine the ment of the Welland Canal in 1844, there were ore and to work in the growing centers of some 224 vessels, with an aggregate tonnage commerce and industry (Chicago, Milwaukee, of 23,868 tons, navigating the upper Lakes. Of Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Toronto). this number, 114 ships with a registered ton- While construction of the 9-foot canal sys- nage of 16,200 tons were relegated to the tem stimulated navigation on the Great Lakes above the Welland Canal. The develop- Lakes, the rapid development of the railways ment of propeller-driven ships was a major during the 1840s and 1850s provided stiff com- breakthrough in the expansion of economical petition. A rail connection between Rochester water transportation. Within the 42 years fol- on Lake Ontario and Albany on the Hudson lowing the launching of the first propeller- River was completed in 1841 and a connection driven ships in 1841, the side-wheelers were between Toledo on Lake Erie and the Ohio totally supplanted and sailing ships either River was finished in 1848. Chicago was con- disappeared or became barges towed by the nected to the east by rail in 1852, and in 1854 a new propeller ships. By 1883 more than 1,500 line extended from Chicago to the Mississippi vessels of all descriptions carried commercial River. A railway from Montreal to Toronto cargoes valued between $50 and $60 million on was completed in 1856. the Great Lakes. Of these almost 600 of the The effectiveness of the rail competition is largest ships could not traverse the Welland reflected by the following statistics: between Canal due to the minimum draft available 1868 and 1898 total grain shipments (ship and (nine feet).26 rail) from Chicago increased from 41,000,000 Since 1904 there have been a number of bushels to 254,000,000 bushels, while the rail major changes in the navigation system in the portion of these shipments increased from Great Lakes which have increased the capa- 3,000,000 bushels in 1868 to 102,000,000 bility of the system. Among the most impor- bushels in 1898 .27 tant was the construction of the new Welland The construction of the Canadian Pacific Ship Canal completed in 1932. The seven locks Railroad encouraged the growing of grain and were 860 feet long, 80 feet wide, and 30 feet its shipment from the Canadian ports of Fort deep over the sills. Locks of these dimensions William and Port Arthur (now known as could accommodate the lake freighters of that Thunder Bay) beginning in 1884. More than time. However, it was not until metallurgical Introduction xxv developments made during and after World In 1887 the average size vessel passing War 11 provided steels of a greater strength through the canal at Sault Sainte Marie was and quality that lake ships having the 600 tons, and the total cargo moved was maximum permissible dimensions for use in 5,000,000 tons. By 1924 vessel size had in- the Welland Canal were constructed. It was creased to 3,000 tons and total cargo move- not until after the opening of the St. Lawrence ments were nearly 50,000,000 tonS.26 In 1970 section of the Seaway in 1959 that ships 730 total cargo movements were more than feet long, 75 feet wide, and drawing 25 feet of 200,000,000 tons and average vessel cargo per water began to appear. These ships, capable of passage was 7,400 tons. In the 1972 season a carrying cargoes of 25,000 to 28,000 tons, were 1,000-foot long self-unloading carrier, capable faster and more economical than their earlier of carrying up to 58,000 tons of iron ore and kindred on the Lakes. One of these ships could loading and unloading as much as 20,000 tons carry enough cargo to fill eight or nine of the per hour, began operating on the Lakes. "canallers" which were then in use through the St. Lawrence River canals, or all the grain carried by 600 standard railroad box cars. In a single trip one new ship could carry all of the Navigation Regulations and Policies wheat produced on 30 sections of prairie farm land. However, all of these larger ships were The Constitution of the United States pro- limited to the Great Lakes. They were unable vides Congress with the power to regulate to use any of the smaller canals below Prescott commerce with foreign nations, among the until the St. Lawrence section of the Seaway States, and with Indian tribes. An early Su- was opened in 1959. The locks along the St. preme Court decision held that commerce Lawrence were similar in size to those on the necessarily included power over navigation. Welland and Sault Sainte Marie Canals. In To effectuate this power, Congress delegated 1968, the opening of the new 1,200-foot long power to several Federal agencies. Poe Lock at Sault Sainte Marie, which can A detailed description of laws pertaining to handle ships up to 1,000 feet long, further navigation is contained in Appendix F20, Fed- stimulated the growth in vessel size and eral Laws, Policies, and Institutional Ar- economy. rangements. Section 1 RELATIONSHIPS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION NEEDS 1.1 General periods 1940 to 1950 and 1960 to 1969 are ap- proximately comparable to the annual rate of The historical relationship of freight traffic change in gross national product. In the to the major economic indicators of gross na- period 1950 to 1960 the rate of change of two tional product and population can be seen in percent was slightly more than the annual Table C9-1. Unless otherwise indicated, tons rate of change in population which was 13/4 are short tons (2,000 lbs.) and miles are statute percent. Per capita freight traffic volume has miles (5,280 ft.). The total volume in ton-miles followed the upward and downward inflec- of domestic intercity freight traffic increased tions of per capita GNP and the annual rates of 2.7 times or at an annual rate of 33/4 percent change have been of the same order of mag- per year from 1940 to 1967. The annual rate of nitude. change was 53/s percent from 1940 to 1950, two The shifts in the national distribution of percent from 1950 to 1960, and 41/8 percent freight traffic between transport modes be- from 1960 to 1969. The rates of change for the cause of intermodal competition since 1940 is TABLE C9-1 Relationship of Domestic Intercity Freight Traffic, GNP, Population, Per Capita Freight Traffic Volume, and Per Capita GNP, 1940 to 1969 Domestic Inter- Gross Per Capita city Freight National Freight Per Capita Traffic Volume Product Population Traffic Volume GNP Year (million ton miles) (58$)a (millions) (ton miles) (58$) 1940 651,204 227.2 132.1 4,930 1,720 1950 1,094,160 355.3 152.3 7,184 2,333 1960 1,329,995 487.7 180.7 7,360 2,699 1969 1,898,200 727.1 202.6 9,369 3,589 Indexes of Change 1940-67 270 296 151 180 196 1940-50 168 156 115 146 136 1950-60 122 137 119 102 116 1960-69 143 149 112 127 133 Compound Rates of Change 1940-67 3-3/4% 4-1/8% 1-9/16% 2-3/16% 2-9/16% 1940-50 5-3/8% 4-1/2% 1-7/16% 3-7/8% 3-1/8% 1950-60 2% 3-1/4% 1-3/4% 23/96% 1-1/2% 1960-69 4-1/8% 4-5/8% 1-1/4% 2-3/4% 3-1/4% SOURCE: Table 2 and Economic Report of the President Together With the Annual Report of the Council of Economic Advisors, transmitted to the Congress January 1969, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1969. (Also 1971 edition). aUnits are billions of 1958 dollars. 2 Appendix C9 shown in Table C9-2. In 1940 motor vehicles 1.2 Economic Development and Area and pipelines together transported only 30 Resources percent as many ton-miles as the railroads. In 1969 they accounted for five percent more ton-miles than railroads. The volume of air 1.2.1 Location Astride Transportation freight traffic increased 228 times from 1940 to Crossroads 1969. During the nine years 1960 to 1969 the rate of increase tapered off to 4.1 times. Dur- From the viewpoint of economic develop- ing the period 1940 to 1969 the share of total ment, the dominant characteristics of the traffic volume by railroads decreased from 63 Great Lakes Basin is its location within the percent to 41 percent and the share of inland highly industrialized and well-populated waterways declined from 18 percent to 16 per- north central United States. It stands astride cent. At the same time increases are indicated the transcontinental link between the ag- in the percentage shares of motor vehicles ricultural regions of the north central States from 10 percent to 22 percent, oil pipelines and the high consumption areas to the east. from 9 percent to 22 percent and airways from Included in the area are the major routes .002 percent to .169 percent. Table C9-3 com- through the United States manufacturing pares the distribution of ton-mileage and rev- belt and the direct line between the metropoli- enue for regulated freight carriers. Revenue tan complexes of Chicago and New York. per ton-mile ranged from $0.0015 for wa- The 95,000 square miles of water surface, terways to $0.156 for airways. In other words, which makes the Great Lakes the world's the ratio of revenue per ton-mile, assuming largest body of fresh water, is capable of waterways to be one, would be pipelines 2.5, transporting more than 100 billion ton-miles of railroads 10.4, motor trucks 22.4, and airways waterborne freight per year. 104. In 1970 a study by the AWO (American Waterways Operators) estimated that a ship- per's dollar will move a ton of freight 333 miles 1.2.2 Great Lakes Tributary Areas by barge, 67 by rail, 15 miles by truck and five miles by air. The region considered of interest to Great TABLE C9-2 Volume of Domestic Intercity Freight Traffic by Type of Transport, 1940 to 1969-1 R.ilr..dE@ Motor Vehicles Inland Waterway Oil Pipelines Airwaysd Total Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent Traffic of of of of of Year Volume Volume Total Volume Total Volume Total Volume Total Volume Total 1940 651,204 411,813 63.24 62,043 9.53 118,057 18.13 59,277 9.10 14 0.002 1945 19072,490 736,184 68.64 66,948 6.24 142,737 13.31 126,530 11.80 91 0.008 1950 1,094,160 628,463 57.44 172,860 15.80 163,344 14.93 129,175 11.81 318 0.029 1955 1,298,060 654,573 50.43 223,254 17.20 216,508 16.68 203,244 15.66 481 0.037 1960 1,329,995 594,855 44.73 285,483 21.46 220,253 16.56 228,626 17.19 778 0.058 1965 1,650,997 721,055 43.67 359,218 21.76 262,421 15.89 306,393 18.56 1,910 0.116 1969 1,898,200 780,000 41.09 404,000 21.28 300,000 15.80 411,000 21.65 3,200 0,169 a In millions of ton-miles, except percent. Airways, prior to 1959 and other types of transportation, prior to 1960, exclude Alaska and Hawaii, except as noted. A ton-mile is the movement of one ton (2,000 pounds) of freight for the distance of one mile. Comprises public and private traffic, both revenue and nonrevenue. b See also Historical Statistics, Colonial Times to 1957, series Q 1-11. includes electric railways, express, and mail. c Includes Great Lakes. Includes Alaska for all years and Hawaii beginning 1959. d Domestic revenue service only. Includes express, mail, and excess baggage. Source: Interstate Commerce Commission; Annual Report, Statement No. 6103, Intercity Ton-Miles, 1939-1959, April 1961 and Transport Economics, December 1967. Statistical abstract of U. S. 1971. Economic Development and Transportation Needs 3 TABLE C9-3 Comparison of Ton Mileage and Revenue by Type of Transport 1940 1960 1969 % of % of % of % of Tun Miles Total % Revenue Total % Revenue per Transport Type Ton Miles Revenue Ton Miles Revenue (Billions) Ton Miles (Billions) Revenue Ton Mile Railroad 61.3 75.4 44.1 49.4 780 41.1 $ 12.2 44.0 $0.0156 Water 19.1 1.8 16.8 2.0 300 15.8 0.45 1.6 0.0015 Oil Pipeline 9.6 4.6 17.4 4.5 411 21.6 1.1 4.0 0.0038 Airways 6.4 Passenger (5.7) Freight 0.002 0.46 0.059 1.6 3.2 0.169 (0.5) 1.8 0.156 Motor Vehicles 10.0 17.7 21.7 42.5 404 21.3 13.5 48.6 0.0334 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0.0146 Ton M,,,,a 619 1,314 1,892.2 Revenuea 4.89 16.99 27.75 abillions SOURCE: Transportation of Freight in the Year 2000, by Sir James Easton (Consultant to Detroit Edison Co.) 1971, pp 88-89, Reference No. 8. Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1971, Reference No. 52. NOTE: The breakdown of the approximate 16% of intercity ton miles on inland waterways between the St. Lawrence Seaway/Great Lakes and other inland waterways has averaged about 6.8% for the former and 9.2% for the latter over the last ten years. Railroads loss of their percentage share of ton mileage shows a definite slowing up of the decline. From 1942 to 1960 their share fell by nearly 25-1/2% or an average of 1.4% a year. From 1960 to 1968 the total percentage drop was only 2.80% or only 0.35% per year. Most of the net gain since 1960 has been by pipelines which have increased their share of ton mileage by about 4%. In terms of growth rate, air freight ton mileage has shown the most spectacular increase by approximately doubling its share every four years. As a percentage of the national total for all modes the air freight share is still small. Lakes harbors for various types of overseas 1.3 Major Port Areas cargo includes the eight Great Lakes States and 11 additional contiguous States (See foot- note b, Table C9-4). This 19-State area gener- 1.3.1 Duluth-Superior (Planning Subarea 1.1) ates approximately 25 percent of the nation's general cargo export traffic. Although one- The nearly 43 million tons of freight traffic half of this traffic has a transportation cost in 1970 make this one of the most important advantage via the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence harbors on the Great Lakes and in the nation. Seaway system as compared to alternative The harbor is served by seven railroads. Prin- routes, only four million tons, or a little more cipal commodities are grain and iron ore (pel- than five percent, of the nation's overseas lets). There is potential for shipment of sub- general cargo exports are being transported stantial tonnage of low sulphur western coal. via the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway navigation system. The areas contributing overseas shipments of U.S. grain produce 79 1.3.2 Port of Chicago (Planning Subarea 2.2) percent of U.S. grain and the six midwest States bordering the Great Lakes, Minnesota, The Port of Chicago combines lake, ocean, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and and river shipping and serves as a link be- Ohio, produce 37 percent of U.S. grain. The tween the Mississippi River system and the Great Lakes percentage share of the U.S. grain Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway system. exports, which was 14 percent in 1964 and 17.8 The port handled 48 million tons of cargo in percent in 1971, is projected to increase to 20 1970, including 35 percent of all U.S. overseas percent in 1980. Pertinent statistics on the cargo entering or leaving the Great Lakes. 19-State area and the eight Great Lakes The city originates 30 percent of the nation's States are presented in Tables C9-4, C9-5 and air cargo and is served by 28 scheduled com- C9-6. mercial airlines. O'Hare Field is the world's 4 Appendix C9 largest and busiest airport, with 27.5 million 1.3.3 Port of Detroit (Planning Subarea 4.1) passengers annually. It has handled more than 2,000 aircraft movements per day. One Detroit is served by nine railroads, 200 truck out of every five foreign visitors passes lines, 15 airlines, five freight carriers, and 50 through customs at O'Hare Field. The ship lines. Rail freight tonnage totaled 30.3 Chic ago-Northwe stern Indiana SMSA had a million in 1968. The Port of Detroit cargo ton- 1970 population of 7.6 million. nage was 31 million in 1970, 2.5 million tons of TABLEC9-4 Land Area, Population, and Economic Activity in the Great Lakes Area Compared to U.S. Totals Great Lakes--b Great Lakes--b Hinterland Border States Upper Great Lakesc Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Uniteda or of or of or of Item States Amount U. S. Amount U. S. Amount U. S.- (Number and Percent of the U. S.) Land area. sq.mi., 1970d 2,963,998 1,205,286 40.7 366,569 12.4 115,352 3.9 Population, 1970d 202,112,686 73,144,566 36.2 52,428,512 25.9 2,876,345 1.4 Manufacturing - 1967e ($1,000,000) - Value Added 261,983.8 114,209.5 43.6 93,804.6 35.8 2,262.2 1.0 Capital Expenditures 21,503.0 9,111.6 42.4 7,508.9 34.9 215.1 1.0 (1,000 Employees) _ Employment 19,323.2 7,858.2 40.7 6,473.2 33.5 184.3 1.0 Agriculture - 1969f (Value in $1,000) All farm products sold Not Available 22,766,62-9 - 10,034,927 - 1,102,461 - All crops sold 11 It 7,089,188 - 3,596,953 - 253,136 - Livestock sold 11,725,262 - 3,451,596 - 241,904 - Poultry and poultry products sold 752,392 - 515,030 - 76,005 - Dairy products sold 2,802,193 - 2,222,484 - 489,954 - (Value in $1,000) Retail Sales - 19679 310,214,393 114,629,621 36.9 83,082,764 26.8 4,138,341 1.3 Merchant Wholesalers' Sales - 1967h 459,475,967 167,699,282 36.5 123,731,255 26.9 3,045,205 0.7 Value of Mineral Production - 19691 26,927,827 7,050,045 26.2 3,223,023 12.0 924,385 3.4 a Excludes Alaska and Hawaii. bThe Great Lakes--Hinterland includes the eight Great Lakes border States of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and western portions of Pennsylvania and New York, and also the eleven additional adjacent States of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, Kentucky, and West Virginia. cThe Upper Great Lakes area includes portions of the States of Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. dU.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1970, Number of Inhabitants, Selected State Reports, Final Report PC(l), U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1971. eU.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Manufactures: 1967, General Summary Subject Report and Selected Area Reports MC67, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1970. fU.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Agriculture: 1969, Advance Individual Counties, U.S. Bureau of Census, 1971. 9U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Business: 1967, Retail Trade - Area Statistics, Volume II; U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1970. hU.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Business: 1967, Wholesale Trade - Area Statistics, Volume III; U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1971. iU.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines: 1969, Minerals Yearbook, Volume III, Area Reports: Domestic; U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1971. Economic Development and Transportation Needs 5 which was overseas traffic. In addition more is served by nine railroads with a track than 7,500,000 vehicle crossings are made each mileage in Toledo of 1,200 miles. Strategically year over the border between Detroit, USA, located at Lake Erie's western tip, Toledo's and Windsor, Canada. Detroit Metropolitan port ranks third on the Great Lakes and ninth Airport, with 5.8 million passengers annually, in the United States. It handled 32 million tons ranks 14th in the International Civil Aviation of traffic in 1970, including one million tons of Organization list of the busiest world airport. overseas traffic. To handle cargoes from To- The SMSA 1970 population was 4.2 million. ledo, nine railroads, four major airlines, two extensive petroleum pipeline systems, and approximately 180 common carriers are avail- 1.3.4 Toledo (Planning Subarea 4.2) able. Toledo's port is also the site of a foreign trade zone. The population of the SMSA in Toledo, the nation's third largest rail center, 1970 was 0.7 million. TABLE C9-5 Wage and Salary Disbursements for Transportation in the Great Lakes Area Railroad Highway Freight Other Trans- Total Transportation & Warehousing portation (millions of dollars) Total U. S. 22,956 5,945 8,685 8,326 8-State-G.L.Area 9,145 2,489 3,558 3,098 6-G.L.Border States 5,024 1,622 2,375 1,027 Michigan 730 193 412 125 Ohio 1,187 388 630 169 Indiana 535 205 270 60 Illinois 1,714 555 708 451 Wisconsin 376 104 198 74 Minnesota 481 177 157 147 2-States on both G.L. 4,121 867 1,183 2,071 & North Atlantic New York 2,842 380 632 1,830 Pennsylvania 1,279 487 551 241 (Percent) Total U. S. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 8-State G.L.Area 39.8 41.9 41.0 37.2 6-G.L.Border States 21.9 27.3 27.3 12.3 Michigan 3.2 3.2 4.7 1.5 Ohio 5.2 6.5 7.2 2.0 Indiana 2.3 3.4 3.1 0.7 Illinois 7.5 9.3 8.2 5.4 Wisconsin 1.6 1.7 2.3 0.9 Minnesota 2.1 3.0 1.8 1.8 2-States on both G.L. 18.0 14.6 13.6 24.9 & North Atlantic New York 12.4 6.4 7.3 22.0 Pennsylvania 5.6 8.2 6.3 2.9 Source: U. S. Department of Commerce, Office of Business Economics, "Survey of Current Business," August 1970. 6 Appendix C9 TABLEC9-6 States of Great Lakes Region Share of U.S. Population, Area, Highway Mileage, and Railroad Mileage 1960 1967 Mileage Population a Areab Highwayc Railroadd (1,000) (sq. miles) (miles) (miles) United States Total 179,992 3,615,123 3,704,914 209,292 States of Great Lakes Region Total 67,891 427,260 884,933 59,981 Illinois 10,084 56,400 128,479 10,928 Indiana 4,673 36,291 90,878 6,488 Michigan 7,833 58,216 113,895 6,372 Minnesota 3,422 84,068 126,879 7,-990 New York 16,855 49,576 102,292 5,689- Ohio 9,737 41,222 108,049 8,031 Pennsylvania 11,328 45,333 113,166 8,477 Wisconsin 3,959 56,154 101,295 6,006 Percent United States Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 States of Great Lakes Region Totale 37.7 11.8 23.9 28.7 Illinois 5.6 1.6 3.5 5.2 Indiana 2.6 1.0 2.4 3.1 Michigan 4.4 1.6 3.1 3.0 Minnesota 1.9 2.3 3.4 3.8 New York 9.4 1.4 2.8 2.7 Ohio 5.4 1.1 2.9 3.8 Pennsylvania 6.3 1.2 3.0 4.0 Wisconsin 2.2 1.6 2.7 2.9 SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1969 (90th edition), Washington, D.C., 1969, pages 12, 163, 542, and 561. aEstimates as of July 1. Includes Armed Forces stationed in area. bIncludes land area and water surface area. CIncludes all rural and municipal mileage under State, local, and Federal control. dActual length of line owned by line-haul companies in each State without duplication. eColumns may not add up to total due to rounding. Economic Development and Transportation Needs 7 1.3.5 Cleveland (Planning Subarea 4.3) 1.3.8 Foreign Trade Zones Cleveland is the largest city on Lake Erie There are now three foreign trade zones in and the third largest city on the Great Lakes. the area of the Great Lakes. They are Toledo, Cleveland's port handled 23 million tons of Ohio; Bay City, Michigan, and Sault Ste. freight traffic in 1970. Four major railroads Marie, Michigan. Data on these foreign trade serve the Cleveland area. Cleveland Hopkins zones are presented in tabular form. Airport with 4.4 million passengers annually The major commodities in the Toledo zone ranks 24th in a list of the world's busiest air- included zinc, aluminum, liquor, tools, vehi- ports. The 1970 SMSA population was 2.1 mil- cles, and steel. Located within 500 miles of To- lion. ledo are 50 percent of Canada's population, 67 percent of U.S. population, and 75 percent of the U.S. buying power. In 1968 the Seaway, 1.3.6 Buffalo (Planning Subarea 4.4) through the Port of Toledo, added $124 million to the business life of that area. It also in- This is one of the largest railroad centers in creased the net yield on grain by six cents per the U.S., with 15 freight terminals scheduling bushel to farmers within 150 miles of the port. 25,000 trains annually. It is serviced by seven major railroads representing one-third of the total railroad mileage in the U.S. and Canada. 1.4 Mining Approximately 150 motor carriers serve in- dustries in the Buffalo Metropolitan Area. The abundance of iron ore and limestone The Port of Buffalo handled 13 million tons of near or on the shore lines of the upper Lakes cargo from Great Lakes and ocean-going ship- and the high quality coal within 200 miles of ping in 1970. The Greater Buffalo Interna- the southern Lake ports constitutes an in- tional Airport which is serviced by six airlines, comparable resource combination. The prox- handled 151,950 scheduled and non-scheduled imity of these raw materials to the Lakes flights with a total of two million passengers in and resulting potential for their low cost wa- 1970. The 1970 SMSA population was 1.3 mil- terborne transportation to steel mills is a cir- lion. cumstance of paramount economic impor- tance. The Marquette and Menominee iron ranges 1.3.7 Rochester (Planning Subarea 5.1) in Michigan, the Gogebic Range in Michigan and Wisconsin, the Vermilion Range in Rochester, the third largest city in New Minnesota, and Minnesota's famour Mesabi York State, is a world leader in the manufac- Range have constituted the major source of ture of precision goods. It is served by five iron ore in the United States. In 1953 the iron railroads and three airlines. Rochester- ore production reached a peak of nearly Monroe County Airport serviced 1,353,371 100,000,000 net tons, which was approximately passengers in 1968. The Port of Rochester three-fourths of the total United States pro- handled 0.4 million tons of freight traffic in duction for that year. Shipments from these 1970. The 1970 SMSA population was 0.9 mil- mines to consumers have since declined to ap- lion. proximately 75,000,000 net tons annually. Foreign Movement of Merchandise FY 72 Trade Year Persons Received Forwarded Zone No. Location Opened Employed $101 Tons-103 $106 Tons_103 10 Bay City 1971 n/a 0.05 0.030 0.012 0.006 8 Toledo 1961 44 16.5 37.3 16.1 44.0 13 Sault Ste. Marie 19731 --- --- --- --- --- lApproved SOURCE: 31st Annual Report of Foreign Trade Zones Board to Congress, U.S. Government Printing Office. 8 Appendix C9 While the once abundant high-grade ores of United States, $928 in the 19-State Great the Mesabi Range are dwindling, there re- Lakes tributary area, $1,012 in the eight Great main tremendous reserves of lower grade de- Lakes border States, and $1,261 in the seven posits, called taconite, of which less than one- major port areas. These figures are indicative fourth is iron. A process is now used in the of the concentration of manufacturing in the vicinity of mines on this range that separates Great Lakes area. iron from waste and concentrates it into pel- Steel is necessary in one way or another to lets consisting of nearly two-thirds iron (ap- almost all manufacturing. If nothing else, it is proximately 62 percent). Beneficiation proc- required in the tools and machinery used. In esses are also used at mines in Michigan, at the United States, steel production of the Steep Rock in Ontario, and in Labrador. Ben- Great Lakes Basin is concentrated in the eficiation reduces the amount of iron ore Chicago-Gary area, in the Detroit area, and at shipped and stockpiled at the steel mills, and points along the south shore of Lake Erie. The increases the efficiency of the blast furnaces. Pittsburgh and Youngstown steel centers, The Steep Rock Range, an important Cana- outside but adjacent to the Basin, receive dian source of iron ore, is situated within the most of their ore via Great Lakes transporta- Basin near Atikokan, Ontario. The mines are tion. In Canada the steel industry is situated under the lake bed. A portion of the Lake had in the Hamilton area at the west end of Lake to be drained and other difficulties had to be Ontario, and at Sault Ste. Marie. The Cana- surmounted before mining operations could dian steel output in the Great Lakes Basin is a begin in 1945. The ore is loaded aboard lake major part of Canada's total. In the United freighters at Thunder Bay for shipment to States, mills of the Great Lakes Basin produce Canadian and United States consumers. approximately one-half of the nation's total. If However, the Labrador region produces the the Pittsburgh and Youngstown areas were major portion of Canadian iron. In 1970 iron part of the Great Lakes Basin, the steel output ore accounted for 15,119,000 net tons (98 per- would be approximately three-fourths of the cent from Labrador) or approximately 30 per- nation's total. cent of the cargo tonnage transiting the Sea- way. This is nearly three times the average annual ore tonnage transited during the first five years of the Seaway existence. 1.6 Agriculture Waterborne commerce on the Great Lakes 1.5 Manufacturing serves agricultural areas well beyond the limits of the drainage Basin, particularly the According to the Bureau of the Census grain-producing areas in Canada and the Origin-Destination Study, "about 60 percent United States far to the west of the Great of the 1956 tonnage of exports of the selected Lakes. In 1970 approximately 18,858,000 net commodities originated less than 100 miles tons of east-bound agricultural products, from the port (including origins in the port mainly wheat and other grains, passed area itself). Approximately 75 percent of the through the locks at Sault Ste. Marie. Approx- general imports of the selected commodities imately 2.2 million tons of this were shipped were distributed within the receiving port directly overseas, and 14.9 million tons were area, or to areas within 100 miles from the shipped to Canadian ports along the St. Law- port." (see references 50 and 51). The standard rence River (primarily for transshipment metropolitan statistical areas and the entire overseas). State of Michigan, all within 100 miles of Great The Seaway has provided an excellent low- Lakes ports, had nine major industry groups, cost route for exporting surplus agricultural each accounting for more than one billion dol- products. Most of the Seaway grain has its lars of value added by manufacture in 1958 final destination overseas. It provides either a (Table C9-7) and 12 groups in 1967. These in- back-haul cargo for the lakers bringing iron dustries produced 80 to 90 percent of the value ore from Labrador to Quebec or to steel mills in added by manufacture in these metropolitan the Great Lakes Region, or full or partial car- areas. The value added by manufacture annu- goes for a third or more of the outbound over- ally increased by 63 percent in the nine-year seas ships. period. Various processed agricultural products, On a per capita basis the value added by such as pelletized animal feeds and meal, have manufacture in a recent year was $792 in the entered the world's market largely due to the Economic Development and Transportation Needs 9 TABLEC94 Rank and Value Added by Manufacture in 1958 and 1967 for Major Industry Groups with More Than One Billion Dollars Reported for Areas Within 100 Miles of Great Lakes Ports' sic Value Added Code Industry by Mftg. Percentage Percentage of No. Description ($1,000,000) Distribution U. S. Total 1958 Total All Industry Groups 33,654 100.0 24 Total Selected Industry Groups 26,307 78.2 26 33 Primary metals 4,897 14.4 42 37 Transportation equipment 4,481 13.3 29 35 Machinery, excl. electrical 3,808 11.5 31 20 Food and kindred products 3,026 9.0 17 34 Fabricated metal products 2,789 8.3 30 36 Electrical machinery 2,697 8.0 26 28 Chemicals & related prod. 1,980 5.9 16 27 Printing and publishing 1,587 4.7 20 38 Instruments & related prod. 1,039 3.1 36 Other industry groups 7,346 21.8 18 1967 Total All Industry Groups 612731 100.0 24 Total Selected Industry Groups 541522 88.4 24 35 Machinery, excl. electrical 8,928 14.5 32 33 Primary metal industry 8,603 13.9 43 37 Transportation equipment 8,055 13.0 29 34 Fabricated metal products 6,344 10.3 35 36 Electrical machinery 4,621 7.5 19 20 Food and kindred products 4,555 7.4 17 28 Chemicals & allied prod. 3,473 5.6 15 27 Printing and publishing 2,758 4.5 19 38 Instruments & related prod. 2,562 4.1 40 32 Stone, clay, & glass prod. 1,573 2.5 19 30 Rubber & plastic prod. 1,553 2.5 23 26 Paper and allied products 1,497 2.4 15 Other industry groups 7,209 11.7 10 SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, U.S. Census of Manufacturers: 1958 and 1967. aData reported for areas within 100 miles of Great Lakes ports are for Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas with 40,000 or more manufacturing employees and for the entire State of Michigan. (The significant concen- trations of manufacturing in the State of Michigan are all within 100 miles of a Great Lakes port) 10 Appendix C9 Seaway route. Large quantities of foreign aid It is interesting to compare this with Hoch's commodities-powdered milk, flour, corn 1959 study of the Chicago area'9, which re- meal, and other agricultural commodities- ported that a one-dollar increase in final de- also can be shipped economically from ports mand of any industry generates approximate- near the producing centers largely due to the ly 3.3 dollars in household income. The higher existence of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence multiplier (3.3 compared to 2.64) is attributed transportation system. to Hoch's inclusion of the nonmanufacturing sector. A study by Gadzikowski in 196311 took into 1.7 Income and Employment Generated by the account the nonmanufacturing and agricul- St. Lawrence Seaway tural sectors and showed a multiplier of 2.52. The manufacturing portion of the same data A recent study under the University of Wis- yields a multiplier of 2.02, which approximates consin Sea Grant Program35 concluded that the 1.99 for Michigan shown in Table C9-8. the Seaway provides three types of economic Regional multipliers are used for determin- benefits: it reduces transportation costs for ing the gross effects of changes in exports on mid-American foreign commerce; it generates income and employment within the region. increased economic activity at the lake ports; Regions with large multipliers tend to be less and it extends the range of mid-American stable economically, since small changes in manufacturers' marketing possibilities. exports produce large swings in total re- That study considered the St. Lawrence gional income and employment. More stable Seaway to be one of the most important fac- regions are characterized by smaller multi- tors in an increased mid-American export pliers. trade. Regional income-employment multi- Using $5 per ton 35 as the average direct in- pliers were calculated as an approximation of come produced from servicing bulk cargo and the economic impact of the Seaway on the using $24 per ton for general cargo, a total Great Lakes area. Multipliers for five Great direct income of $283,000,000 is indicated for Lakes States are presented in Table C9-8. 1968 (Table C9-8) for the five States that Economists recognize that an increase in a handle most Seaway trade. Using the multi- region's exports causes an increase in non- pliers, total direct and secondary income gen- localized employment, which in turn increases erated is $643,000,000. This income accrues in a locality's income. When the income increase the form of direct wages and necessary allied is spent, employment grows. For example, in services, such as stevedore contractors, cus- Illinois a change in nonlocalized employment toms house brokers, towing companies, ship of 100 people causes an increase in localized chandlers, ship repair yards, surveyors, and employment of 164. The ratio of change in customs officials. total employment to change in nonlocalized This income can be translated into employ- employment equ als (100 + 164 = 264)/100 = 2.64. ment. Using $7,500 as an approximation of the TABLE C9-8 Direct Income Generated by 1968 Seaway Traffic Cargo (1,000 tons) Direct Income ($1,000) Income Total State Bulka Generalb Bulk General Total Multiplier Income Minnesotac 4,634 148 $ 23,170 $ 3,552 $ 26,722 1.89 $50,505 Wisconsinc 401 445 2,005 10,680 12,685 2.57 32,600 Illinoisd 2,984 2,549 14,920 61,176 76,096 2.64 200,893 Michigan 1,806 2,279 9,030 54t696 63,726 1.99 126,815 Ohiod 13,800 1,459 69,000 35,016 104,016 2.23 231,955 Total 23,625 6,880 $118,125 $165,120 $283,245 $642,768 Source: References 32 and 34. aIncludes wheat, corn, soybeans, barley and rye, and both shipments and receipts of iron ore. bIncludes iron and steel imports. cDuluth-Superior cargo included in Minesota figures. dIndiana's general cargo and much of its bulk cargo moves through Illinois and Ohio ports. Economic Development and Transportation Needs 11 1968 median income, Seaway cargo directly tities of grain, coal, and iron ore at inland loca- provided income for 37,770 families in the tions for movement to lake loading ports. In Great Lakes Region (Table C9-9). Adding the many cases they receive the same type of secondary income produces a total of approx- commodities at discharging ports for trans- imately 85,710 families. portation to inland consuming centers. These income and employment estimates Although most of the coal currently moving are only part of the Seaway's economic impact. through the seaway system begins itsjourney The resulting growth in exports from the by rail, use of all-rail unit trains is more com- Great Lakes States means increased export petitive than complementary. income, which is multiplied into an even greater expansion of the Region's total in- come. This income growth has never been es- 1.8.2 Motor Carriers timated, but it is surely many times greater than the port-related income established in The motor carriers serving the Great Lakes this study. If the nonmanufacturing sector Region complement the Seaway system. (including agriculture) had been included in Trucking lines link important inland areas to the study, the resulting multipliers would the Seaway. For example, the process of have been even greater. gathering grains in suitable quantities for shipment has been accomplished to a great extent by trucks. Motor carriers transport TABLE C9-9 Estimated Employment Gener- corn and soybeans short distances to Chicago ated by Seaway Traffic, 1968 (Families) and Toledo from inland consolidation points, and carry general cargo imports between lake Direct Total unloading ports and inland consuming areas. State Employment Employment The transport of general cargo imports inland Minnesota 3,560 6,730 by truck occurs primarily in the Chicago area, Wisconsin 1,690 4,350 which receives a significant portion of the Illinois 10,150 26,790 Great Lakes general cargo imports. Michigan 8,500 16,910 Ohio 13,870 30,930 Total 37,770 85,710 1.8.3 Inland Waterways Source: Reference 34. Inland waterways, such as the Illinois and Mississippi Rivers, complement the Seaway system by moving coal by barge from southern Illinois mines to power plants in Wisconsin 1.8 Complementary Role of Alternative and Michigan via Lake Michigan ports. They Transport Modes also provide a lake-barge channel for Mesabi range iron ore destined for steel plants in the The railroads, motor carriers, airlines, St. Louis area. The Great Lakes are also con- barge operators, and pipelines serving the nected with the New York State Barge Canal hinterland contributing to the Seaway system at Buffalo and Oswego, New York. The provide complementary service for most of the Mdeau, Trent, and Ottawa canal systems link domestic and overseas traffic moving through this hinterland to the St. Lawrence River. the Seaway. As partners in the total physical These canals are now used primarily for rec- distribution process, they transport freight to reational boating. and from the Great Lakes ports and inland origins or destinations (see references 2 and 5). References 51 and 53 give further information 1.8.4 Pipelines regarding complementary role of alternative transport modes. There are several crude oil pipelines that complement the Seaway system. Pipelines carry crude oil from the southwestern U.S. 1.8.1 Railroads and the western Canadian Provinces to re- fineries located on or near the Seaway. Part of The railroads provide the most significant the oil refined there is delivered by lake tank- complementary service to the Seaway system. ers and tank trucks to industrial users and Rail lines, for example, pick up huge quan- individual consumers. 12 Appendix C9 1.9 Competition in the Great Lakes Basin freight vessel operators appear to be falling behind Canadian railroads in moving export- import containers to and from southern On- 1.9.1 Regional Competition tario markets via Montreal. United States rail and motor carriers also The Seaway is affected by a classic example compete with the Seaway system for over- of the regional competition that has charac- seas general cargo originating and terminat- terized development of this country. The ing in midwestern markets. This competition major U.S. ports on the Atlantic, Pacific, and and that of the more efficient East coast and Gulf coasts have certain operating advan- Gulf ports have caused services to decline sig- tages over Great Lakes ports. Vessels calling nificantly on the Great Lakes. When the Sea- at coastal ports do not encounter the length or way opened, 28 major shipping groups and beam limitations imposed by the Seaway. many smaller ones called at Great Lakes Coastal ports also have a year-round season. ports. The number of major lines is now down Controlling channel depths of 35 feet gener- to 10 and could drop even lower. The number of ally prevail at major ports along the Atlantic general cargo services has dropped from 60 to and Gulf coasts, and they range up to 42 feet at approximately 20 in 1973. Baltimore and Mobile, and 45 feet in portions of New York and Norfolk harbors. On the other hand, Atlantic and Gulf coast ports are farther from midwestern shipping and receiv- 1.9.3 Bulk Cargo ing areas than Great Lakes ports. (See refer- ences 10 and 53.) Because dry bulk commodities are usually of low value, transportation costs comprise a high percentage of their selling price. Major carriers competing for bulk commodities mov- 1.9.2 General Cargo ing through the Great Lakes Region are the lake vessel operators, rail lines, barge car- Competition for the Seaway system's riers, and pipelines. These carriers can trans- import-export overseas general cargo among port sizable volumes of bulk cargo over sub- alternative modes of transportation is and will stantial distances at low costs per ton-mile by continue to be intense, especially in container using equipment capable of handling large traffic. The Canadian National Railroad, in loads. Motor carriers are more commonly used conjunction with containership operators and for short-haul bulk movements because they port interests, is operating a coordinated, in- tend to become less competitive as distance termodal container service connecting the increases. continental interior lake ports of Chicago, De- Approximately 90 percent of the Seaway's troit, and Toronto with Montreal and Halifax. total traffic is bulk cargo, consisting primarily This is accomplished by means of high-speed of iron ore, coal, limestone, grain, and fuel oil. rail and, if volume warrants, unit trains. With With the exception of grain, most of the bulk assistance from its U.S. subsidiary, the Grand traffic is domestic (both originating and ter- Trunk Western Railroad, the Canadian Na- minating within the Great Lakes-Seaway sys- tional can divert a significant volume of con- tem). tainerized general cargo through Chicago, The pipelines and railroads that parallel the Detroit, and southern Ontario, on its way Seaway system and serve the same general overseas. This traffic comes not only from territory are the major competitors for domes- steamship operators serving the Great tic bulk traffic. Although pipeline service in Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway system, but also the Seaway region handles crude petroleum, from U.S. railroads serving the North Atlantic refined oil products, and natural gas, it only ports of New York, Baltimore, and Norfolk. competes directly with the Seaway for refined Similarly, the Canadian Pacific railroad is oil products. Because of its viscosity and con- operating a high-speed container rail service, tamination potential, heavy fuel oil is gener- including unit trains between Saint Johns, ally unsuitable for pipeline transportation. As Quebec, and Montreal, where connecting a result, most of the fuel oil movement in the trains also service the major southern Ontario Great Lakes Region occurs on the Seaway. and U.S. midwest market areas of Chicago and Railroad competition within the domestic Detroit. bulk market manifests itself largely in the use Canadian motor carriers and package of unit trains, especially for moving coal to Economic Development and Transportation Needs 13 electric utilities. Currently, more than 40 per- portation costs, many production and con- cent of the coal used by utilities is carried by sumption points in the Great Lakes Region unit trains. are located at or very near lakeside. As a re- Generally, unit train movement of domestic sult, limestone is transported only by lake ves- iron ore costs more than rail/lake transporta- sels. tion. However, in certain locations where The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway is water transport is unavailable or significantly primarily an internal bulk shipping system. less direct than all-rail movement, or if ore The Seaway does not face exceptionally strong must be transported during the closed naviga- competition from other modes of transport for tion season, rail transportation is often eco- its domestic bulk cargos, except for coal. nomically attractive. On the other hand a re- cent study by John Sward for Pullman Incor- porated38 proposed that moving iron ore by 1.10 Transportation Technology, Problems, unit train from Minnesota is less costly than and Solutions constructing new vessels to replace the aging bulk carrier fleet. Although Quebec-Labrador iron ore can be 1.40.1 General transported via the Atlantic coast ports of Philadelphia or Baltimore to the Pittsburgh In recent years transportation equipment steel comsuming area by rail, its cost is still too has become more and more specialized.8 Con- high to attract tonnages from the traditional tainers, while designed especially for a certain rail/water Seaway system. commodity, are adaptable enough to carry a In 1970 Australian iron ore was delivered to similar commodity on the return trip. Al- the Pittsburgh area steel plants at costs per though the demand for specialized equipment iron unit that were competitive with pellets continues, the accompanying growth in vehi- from Minnesota. Philadelphia and Baltimore cle size hasjust about run its course, except in receive iron ore in 70,000 to 80,000-ton vessels. ocean-going vessels. The growth is being im- There are plans to dredge the channels at Bal- peded by the new concern for preserving the timore so that vessels of 110,000 to 120,000- environment. tons capacity can deliver ore at prices com- Present technological developments and in- petitive with Minnesota iron ores. novations of inland modal carriers appear to The foreign ores are attractive because of be more competitive than complementary in their high grade which is 68 percent iron and 3 relation to the Seaway system. to 4 percent silicone dioxide. In addition, pig iron production costs and "Free on Board" mine prices are lower for natural ores than for 1.10.2 Railroads Minnesota-produced pellets. Because of the availability of bulk cargo ocean vessels, ocean vessel transportation rates were exception- 1.10.2.1 Technology ally low at the time the ore sales contracts were negotiated. However, these rates are The railroads are using larger unit train changeable. The closing of the Suez Canal cars to carry bulk grain and coal at low rates to changed the trade routes for world oil trans- coastal ports, but not to lake ports. They are portation, and the crisis in the Middle East also using container and trailer trains to has reduced the supply of oil. Pollution con- expedite the transport of general cargo mov- trols and increasing demands for coal, oil, gas, ing from the Midwest to eastern ports. and atomic energy have multiplied the de- The railroads have done little to increase mand for bulk ocean transportation. direct use of the Great Lakes Seaway system. As a result, ocean freight rates have in- They have neither extended their service nor creased by 100 percent or more. Shipyards of established through-rate structures, nor have the world, other than the U.S. yards, are fully they offered lake ports the service and time committed to new construction, vessels of privileges provided to coastal ports. 300,000 tons are in operation and 500,000 ton- ners are being built. For the present, the com- petition has eased but ocean shipping rates 1.10.2.2 Problems can reverse at any time. Because domestic limestone is a low-value The major problems hindering development commodity that cannot absorb heavy trans- of the railroads in the United States are: 14 Appendix C9 (1) Capital investment has been insuffi- those carried on theAcadia Forest servingthe cient and improvements to existing facilities Gulf, have a capacity of 370 long tons each and are not taking place fast enough. Railroads a maximum draft of 81/2 feet, which enables must compete with modes of transportation them to be loaded or unloaded at inland river that benefit directly or indirectly from gov- sites selected by the shipper. A LASH ship's ernment research and subsidies. flexibility allows it to carry containers as well (2) Restrictive labor practices still plague as breakbulk cargoes, in addition to dry and the railroad in certain areas. liquid bulk cargoes. The mini-ship is another (3) Railroads contend that they could op- innovation that has been recently introduced erate with greater efficiency if they owned successfully between Mississippi River ports trucks, barges, and ships, but such ownership and Central American ports. is restricted. These innovations give the inland shippers In Canada some of these problems do not of container cargo the choice of either using exist since there are virtually only two big LASH lighters or loading directly onto a small companies, the Canadian Pacific and the vessel capable of navigating both shallow riv- Canadian National. Multi-modal ownership ers and the deep seas. With containerization already exists. However, Canadian railways the shipper has a single bill of lading. He are faced with unprofitable passenger traffic, avoids dealing with a railroad or trucker, and and are having difficulty discontinuing it. paying wharfage or stevedoring changes for transfer of containerized cargo at ocean ports. These innovations in inland barge opera- 1.10.2.3 Solutions tions have yet to penetrate the Great Lakes. Railroad problems are far from being solved. Their complete resolution will be a long-term 1.10.3.2 Problems task. At one time railroad management op- posed any aid except tax reliefs or incentives The inland water carriers are generally free and depreciation allowances. Now the gov- of serious problems. However, possible future ernment is beginning to understand the rail- problems are: roads'problems and the industry is becoming (1) Government imposition of user charges less rigid about the forms of government aid or to offset the cost of navigation improvements cooperation it will accept. Evidence of this is and maintenance works would cause an in- the faster depreciation schedules for railroads crease in freight rates and impair the indus- and the emergence of Amtrak to alleviate de- try's present competitive position. ficits in passenger traffic. (2) Transfer of responsibility for waterway It has been suggested that the best way for improvements and maintenance from the De- the government to aid railroads would be to fense Department to a civil department would own, maintain, and improve the tracks and be regarded by the industry as a possible limi- stations or rights-of-way, and then charge tation on future. growth of the industry. railroads for use. This, it is claimed, would be (3) The industry would regard any gov- consistent with government's treatment of ernment move to permit multi-modal owner- other forms of transportation. ship as a threat to their future prosperity. 1.10.3 Inland Waterways 1.10.3.3 Solutions Future government legislation will deter- 1.10.3.1 Technology mine what the user charge policy for all modes of transportation will be. It will determine Ocean-going barge carriers and mini-ships whether there is a move to multi-modal own- could be used on the Great Lakes-Seaway sys- ership and whether the government's encour- tem. The lighter-aboard-ship or LASH con- agement of mass transit schemes will divert cept, employing lift-on/lift-off containers has funds from the rights-of-way of other systems, been successfully introduced in the Gulf- such as waterways and highways. However, Western European trade. The first of three the waterways already completed or approved Lykes SEABEE barge carriers became opera- should allow a steady expansion of barge and tional for overseas service in the Gulf during lake vessel traffic for at least the next 10 to 15 1971. The versatile LASH barges, such as years. Economic Development and Transpo7tation Needs 15 . 1.10.4 Airlines vehicle would continue in orbit to its destina- tion and then land like a normal airplane. Such space-shuttle craft could travel half way 1.10.4.1 Technology around the earth in less than an hour. Con- tinued development of aircraft and more effi- International air freight traffic has been in- cient systems for handling passengers and creasing at more than 15 percent per year. cargo would alleviate crowding in both the air Airlines now carry 9.3 percent of the value but and on the ground. only 0.2 percent of the tonnage of U.S. exports and imports. Yet, more than 50 percent of cargo capacity is going unused. Only 30 per- 1.10.5 Motor Carriers cent of airline manpower is used and terminal facilities remain idle nearly 20 hours a day. Larger and more economic aircraft such as 1.10.5.1 Technology the 747 assure continued increases in high value traffic, but they are unlikely to affect The motor carrier industry has become this ocean shipping in the foreseeable future. Air nation's top revenue producer in the field of carriers will play an increasing role in direct transportation. This is because it proviaes service across the Lakes, encouraged by the faster, more personalized service than any reciprocal agreement (1965) authorizing di- other form of transportation. However, the rect carrier service between the U.S. and size of motor carrier equipment has not in- Canada. creased substantially. The trend has been to- ward specialized equipment with a number of uses. 1.10.4.2 Problems Ecology improvement programs will im- pinge on the trucking industry because of the Although air traffic will continue to be used resulting legislation, such as laws restricting primarily for passengers there will be more and pollution in exhaust fumes. The Department more all-freight aircraft. Major problems are- of Transportation has stated that express- (1) Construction and financing of efficient ways that would harm the environment will freight terminals capable of handling heavy not be built. unit loads (containers) could be accomplished Trucks have not taken full advantage of at a limited number of key points without ex- what the Seaway could offer their primarily cessive capital expenditure, but a comprehen- short-haul services. They have neither initi- sive network will be very costly. ated nor supported interlake container and (2) Congestion on the ground to and from trailer services, which are standard opera- airports, in the airlanes, and at airports could tions in the coastal and offshore trades. cause the government to discourage or at least not to accelerate construction of major air freight facilities at busy airports. 1.10.5.2 Problems (3) International agreements and regula- tions about scheduled air routes will affect Major problems in the motor carrier indus- economical operation, and perhaps prevent try will have a greater impact in the future two-way loads. than they have had in the past. Problems in- tensify as the industry becomes larger and national population grows. Major problems 1.10.4.3 Solutions are: (1) In this labor intensive industry it is dif- Continued research and development of ficult to increase productivity in the face of vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) and short increasing labor costs. Limitations on the di- takeoff and landing (STOL) aircraft should en- mension and weight of truck rigs will not allow courage air transport of freight and significant increase in load capacity. This passengers. Another innovation is the space- problem could either upset the present net shuttle craft, now under study by NASA. The revenue situation in the industry or lead to present concept comprises an initial booster increases in freight rates, which might be vehicle and a smaller cargo or passenger vehi- enough to make some shippers switch to other cle. The booster would put the smaller vehicle forms of transportation. in orbit and then return to base. The smaller (2) Delays caused by congestion in ur- 16 Appendix C9 banized areas are having an economic effect by piping in products requiring dispersed in- on pickups and delivery. The automobile own- land distribution or overseas movement. A er's resentment at sharing the road with new system has been developed to move iron trucks grows as congestion increases. Sepa- ore from mine to mill by a combination of rate routes would be ideal but very expensive. slurry pipeline and bulk ocean transportation. (3) The industry maybe faced with increas- However, it is unlikely that slurry pipelines ing charges to offset the rising cost of highway will bring iron ore to Great Lakes steel mills. construction and maintenance. Further innovations in transporting dry bulk commodities sealed in containers through pipelines add to this mode's potential influ- 1.10.5.3 Solutions ence in the field of transportation. There are no short-term solutions for the trucking industry's problems, but there are 1.10.6.2 Problems some longer-term measures that can help. The following could contribute to relief of conges- The oil pipeline industry is singularly free of tion and consequent delays: the type of pervasive problems that affect (1) Metropolitan development and plan- some other modes. Technological problems, ning, in the form of efficient mass transit sys- such as leaks and spills, and combating corro- tems in urban areas will keep more private sion, and the special problem of constructing a cars out of these areas. All-commercial truck safe pipeline in the permafrost of Alaska will routes around a city, coupled with collecting probably be overcome by advanced technol- and delivery centers near the city, would re- ogy- duce the number of trucks moving partial Perhaps the biggest problem of the industry loads. The automated highway could greatly is guarding against oil pollution caused by ac- increase highway capacity and ensure a cidents. smoother flow. Building modification and de- sign to permit efficient off-street loading and unloading and increased night time service 1.10.6.3 Solutions could also help alleviate urban traffic conges- tion. Although oil pipeline companies will be sub- (2) Little can be done to alleviate the ject to restrictions in some of their operations, crowding caused by rapidly growing numbers as they were off the California coast after the of private cars and trucks. However, closer Santa Barbara oil leak, and as they were in working relations between railroads and getting permission to construct a pipeline trucking companies to ensure that piggyback- from Prudhoe Bay, there is little doubt that ing provides service efficiency similar to truck technology will overcome these problems. service for distances of 200 miles or more will However, risks of spills can never be entirely help alleviate crowded highways. eliminated. 1.10.6 Pipelines 1.11 Comparison of Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Navigation System with U.S. Coastal Ports 1.10.6.1 Technology Pipelines have been improved in size, auto- 1.11.1 Coastal Ports mation, mixing in transit, and joint company ventures. Currently a 30-inch pipeline can de- Major U.S. ports on the Atlantic, Pacific, liver major quantities of crude oil at lowercost and Gulf Coasts enjoy a distinct operating ad- than any tanker that can be put into Great vantage over Great Lakes ports because they Lakes use with present depth limitations. can accommodate larger vessels on a year- Whenever the commodity is soluble or finely round basis .53 Vessels calling at coastal ports ground and in great volume (industrial chemi- do not encounter any length or beam limita- cals, pulp, sulfur, and coal slurry), the direct- tions except possibly in narrow or winding ap- hauling pipeline is a potential alternative to proach channels or at pier terminal facilities. waterborne movement. In addition all major seaboard ports cur- Pipelines may also contribute to lake cargos rently have greater depths in their harbor Economic Development and Transportation Needs 17 channels and alongside berthing facilities Great Lakes ports can handle only 47 percent than Great Lakes and Seaway ports. As illus- of the world fleet at a 26-foot draft. trated in Table C9-10, controlling channel Because most general cargo vessels and depths of 35 feet generally prevail at major containerships can be loaded in ocean ports at ports in the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Depths of or near their maximum drafts, present sea- 35 to 40 feet are generally available in the board harbor and berthing depths appear ad- principal Pacific coast ports, though Los equate to handle existing and most future Angeles has a 51-foot entrance channel and containerships, whose drafts are just begin- Long Beach has a 52-foot entrance channel for ning to exceed 40 feet. Only crude oil, oil-bulk- accommodating supertankers. Puget Sound ore, and certain dry bulk carriers constructed has depths of 100 feet. in the last decade pose an accommodation Because most U.S. seaboard ports have con- problem for U.S. coastal ports. trolling depths between 35 and 40 feet, they The size of bulk vessels capable of berthing can handle a significantly higher percentage at most U.S. ports fully loaded is limited to the of the total world fleet at full draft than can general range of 50,000 to 80,000 tons. Only the Great Lakes ports. As shown in Table C9-11, ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Seattle Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific coast ports can po- can accommodate tankers up to approxi- tentially accommodate at full drafts ranging mately 110,000 dwt at berth. The upward from 32 to 42 feet, approximately 84 to 97 per- trend in bulk vessel size has produced over 200 cent of the world's 19,570 ocean vessels (1969). tankers and bulk carriers exceeding 100,000 TABLE C9-10 Channel Depths of Selected Principal U.S. Ocean Ports Channel Depths a Controlling Authorizedc Main Entranc_@_MTIE -Harbord Main Entrance Malffi-Harbord Mean Tidal Name of Port Channel (ft.) Fairways(ft.) Channel (ft.) Fairways(ft.) Range (ft.) Boston, Mass. 38 40-35 40 45-35 10 New York, N.Y.1N.J. 45 44-30 45 45-30 5 Philadelphia, Pa. 40 37-22 40 40-37 6 Baltimore, Md.- 42 42-21 42 42-27 1 Norfolk, Va. 45 35-31 45 40-35 3 Charleston, S.C. 35 34-30 35 35-30 5 Mobile, Ala. e 42 38-24 42 40-25 2 New Orleans, La. 40 35-27 40 36-32 0 Houston, Tex. 37 37-34 40 40-36 0 Los Angeles, Calif. 51 51-35 51 51-35 4 Long Beach, Calif. 52 52-35 52 52-35 4 San Francisco, Calif. 50 39-31 55 40-35 4 Portland, Oreg. 35 35 40 40 2 Seattle, Wash. Unlimited 34-28 Unlimited 34-30 8 aBased on 1967-1968 data. Chart datum plane for Atlantic and Gulf coast ports is mean low water, and for Pacific coast ports it is mean lower low water. bControlling depths are often less than original or authorized (project) depths due to silting, shifting sand bars, and similar problems. cAuthorized depths include original or project depths in channels which are part of Federal deepwater channel improvement and maintenance projects developed over the years under Congress- ional authorization in accordance with the needs of navigation as recommended by the Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army. In general, channel depths authorized in United states ports have been based on actual drafts of vessels using the channel, plus sufficient water under the keel to insure safe and efficient operation of these vessels when operating under their own propulsion. dIncludes main navigable channels as well as branch or auxiliary channels used customarily by ocean-going vessels when proceeding from the open sea to their berth or from one berth to another within the harbor area. eDiurnal range of tide during low-river stages averages 0.8 foot. SOURCE: Division of-Ports, Maritime Administration. 18 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-11 Potential U.S. Ocean Port Capability of Accommodating World Merchant Fleet at Selected Drafts 'D 'Draft Dr:f Draft Draft (32 ::fless) _ .05 or less) (37 0 less) (39' or less) - (42' or less) Total Percent Percent Percent Percent Percent World Fleet Number of Total Number of Total Number of Total Number of Total Number of Total Combination Passenger Cargo Vessels 931 925 99.36% 930 99.89% 930 99.89% 930 99.89% 931 100.00% Freighters 11,820 11,677 98.79% 11,810 99.91% 11,815 99.96% 11,818 99.98% 11,819 99.99% Bulk Carriers 2,748 1,636 59.53% 2,095 76.24% 2,296 83.54% 2,469 89.84% 2,612 95.05% Tankers 4,071 2,278 55.95% 2,747 67.47% 3,026 74.33% 3,341 82.06% 3,648 89.60% Total Fleet 19,570 16,516 84.39% 17,582 89.84% 18,067 92.32% 18,558 94.83% 19,010 97.14% Source: Office of Ports and Intermodal Systems, Maritime Administration - Developed from Merchant Fleets of the Worl&-Frequency Distributions, December 31, 1969. dwt. Another 250 were under construction or 1.11.2 Panama Canal on order at the beginning of 1970. By 1980 large crude oil tankers and dry bulk carriers Coastal traffic is constrained by the Panama ranging from 100,000 to 250,000 dwt are ex- Canal, which can only handle ships up to 950 pected to be operating in the U.S. bulk foreign feet long, 106 feet wide, and 40 feet in trades. maximum draft.30 The maximum tonnage per ship the Canal can handle is approximately U.S. ocean ports, the Federal government, 85,000 deadweight tons in ballast or 65,000 and bulk carriers will have to develop ade- tons laden. Approximately 900 commercial quate terminal facilities for these larger, eco- ships in the world fleet can not transit the nomical vessels, which require depths from 50 Canal at all and more are being built every to 75 feet, in order that bulk-using industries day. In addition, approximately 1600 ships can can take advantage of them. not transit the Canal fully loaded at all times because of draft limitations. These large ships These superships may pose a problem to the are primarily bulk carriers of ore and oil. Con- 27-foot Great Lakes system because its tainer ships and general cargo ships larger maximum navigable depth is estimated at than the Panama Canal locks will probably not approximately 35 feet (see Subsection 2.7.3, be built in significant numbers for many Physical Factors Influencing Navigation). years. Section 2 GREAT LAKES-ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY SYSTEM 2.1 General tween Lakes Erie and Huron, Lakes Huron and Superior, and Lakes Huron and Michigan The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway sys- (Figures C9-2 and C9-3 and Table C9-12). The tem provides a continuous waterway extend- St. Lawrence Seaway is considered to extend ing 2,342 miles into the heart of North from Montreal to the upper terminus of the America. For geographical reasons and in Welland Canal in Lake Erie. order to identify national and international responsibilities for the waterway system, it is described in four parts: the Gulf of St. Law- 2.2 Gulf of St. Lawrence and Lower St. rence and the lower St. Lawrence River; the Lawrence River upper St. Lawrence River between Montreal and Lake Ontario; Lake Ontario and the Wel- The Gulf of St. Lawrence extends from the land Canal connecting Lake Ontario and Lake Atlantic upstream 700 miles to Father Point Erie; and the upper Lakes and connecting (Figure C9-2). Two entrances to the St. Law- channels, which include the waterways be- rence are available from the Atlantic, one 4), Sept-Iles '000 Port Cartier -_111E IN .11 IS 0 50 100 200 300 Ban, Comeau 0011 QUEBEC Les Escournains. '40- ONTARIO FATHER POINT Th"a'Lll Ba Quebec QUE13EC T MINNES@T@A Trois-Rivieres Taconite Sorel silver Say 'looxo* Contrecoeur Two Harbor Sault te. Mar, Montreal Dulut e or [email protected] Cornwall Superior Marquet e D m 11 te Little Current rt n,?Io . Ashland Escaona 'I U.Ek_ % Dap.t Pre t Massena Kingston Ogdensburg Alpena 1 0 Picton Green Bay .4 0 MICHIGAN 1.0 Toronto 010930 Oswego -ko WISCONSIN Port Credit L Hamilton aRochester Muskegon Bay City .11.nd Ca.. 8.ti.l. Sarnia M Milwaukee Port Hur n Port Colborne i' K nah. _VW@auke'.. Oet'. Erie u Ashtabula ,,a c... roe C1 land Ch Monroe Calumet H.r or Portofl ana'-11 Lorain I-- I . r a J: ILLIKOIS In .... Har or Sandusky Marbi has IN I A OHIO FIGURE C9-2 Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Navigation System 19 20 Appendix C9 THOUSAND ISLANDS SECTION 27 FT. CHANNEL ST. CLAIR RIVER 68 MILES ST. MARYS RI ER LAKE ST. CLAIR ..SOO" LOCKS DETROIT RIVER INTERNATIONAL RAPIDS SECTION 70 MILES MILES 27 FT. CHANNEL -THREE LOCKS AND DAMS WELLA CANAL 44 MILES @S 2 TOTAL MILEAGE 8 SOULANGES SECTION DULUTH TO ATLANTIC 27 FT. CHANNEL 2400 MILES AND TWO LOCKS 16 MILES LACHINE SECTION 78.5 27 FT. CHANNEL 572' AND TWO LOCKS 31 MILES -------- 4 69' SEA _LEA@EL I - - - - - - 242' ,ELEVATION 20 FT. LAKE ERIE 236 MILES TIDE WATER SECTION LAKE DEEP WATER ONTARIO LAKEIS FROM MONTREAL TO SEA LAKE LAKE LAKE 160 MILES ST. Lou 1000 MILES MICHIGAN HURON SUPERIOR 345 MILE 383 MILES LAKE LAKE ST. FRANCIS SECTION ST. LAWRENCE 27 FT. CHANNEL 44 MILES 30 MILES FIGURE C9-3 Profile of Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway through the Strait of Belle Isle, to the north of The Lachine Rapids are bypassed by a lat- Newfoundland, which provides a 12-mile wide eral canal 18 miles long containing two locks, passage at its narrowest point, and another to the St. Lambert Lock at the lower end opposite the south through the Cabot Strait, which Montreal, and the Cote Ste. Catherine Lock provides a 60-mile wide passage south of New- 81/2 miles upstream. foundland. Lake St. Louis extends upstream another 16 The St. Lawrence River mouth is at Father miles to the point where the Ottawa River Point, Quebec. In the 340 miles to Montreal, joins the St. Lawrence River. Continuing up- the river level ascends only 20 feet from sea stream, a series of rapids known as the Cas- level. The tidal run dissipates approximately cades, Split Rock, Cedar and Coteau Rapids halfway between Montreal and Quebec City at form a total ascent of 82 feet between Lake St. the City of Trois-Rivi6res. The Canadian gov- Louis and Lake St. Francis. The rapids in this ernment maintains a 35-foot channel in the section of the river are bypassed by a lateral thousand miles of open waters between the canal 21/2 miles long containing two locks, the Atlantic Ocean and Montreal. Upper and Lower Beauharnois Locks. Beyond this artificial channel the river continues upstream for a distance of 14 miles via the 2.3 The Upper St. Lawrence River Beauharnois power canal, which terminates in Lake St. Francis. All of this section of the The reach between Montreal and Lake On- river, including Lake St. Francis, is in Canada. tario, a distance of 182 miles that ascends a The international section of the river begins total of 226 feet, is the waterway's greatest at the upstream end of Lake St. Francis. This obstacle to navigation. It also offers the formerly was a swift-flowing section that as- greatest potential for hydroelectric power de- cended 90 feet in the 44 miles to Ogdensburg, velopment. Rapids and lakes alternate N.Y. Once rapids and swift flowing river, this through this section of the river. section is now a reservoir, which forms Lake Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 21 TABLE C9-12 Physical Dimensions of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Lakes and Channels Locks Open Channels Depth Size (Ft.) Waters & Canals (min.) Year Length x Depth over Lift Reach (miles) (miles) (Ft.) Number Completed Width Sill (Ft.) (Ft.) Atlantic Ocean to Father Point, Que. 700 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Father Point to Montreal 300 --- 35 --- --- --- --- --- Montreal to Lake Ontario (includes St. Lawrence Seaway) 189 91 27 5 (Can.) 1958 800 x 80 30 226 2 (U.S.) 1958 800 x 80 30 226 Lake Ontario to Welland Canal 160 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- Welland Canal --- 27 27 8 1932 800 x 80 30 326 Welland Canal to Detroit River 236 --- 27 --- --- --- --- --- Detroit River, Lake St. Clair, and St. Clair River --- 77 27 --- --- --- --- --- Lake Huron, St. Clair River to St. Marys River 223 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- St. Marys River (includes Soo Locks) 70 2 27 2 (U.S.) 1919 1350 x 80 23.1 22 1 (U.S.) 1943 800 x 80 31.0 22 1 (U.S.) 1968 1200 x 110 35.0 22 1 (Can.) 1895 900 x 59 16.8 22 Lake Superior, St. Marys River to Duluth 383 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- St. Lawrence, held back by four power struc- scribed by the Seaway rules and regulations. tures. The difference in elevation is overcome Preclearance forms must be filed with the U.S. by three locks, Bertrand H. Snell, Dwight D. Seaway Development Corporation or the Eisenhower, and Iroquois. Canadian Seaway Authority. This form gives The remaining section of the river extend- pertinent data concerning the dimensions of ing 68 miles into Lake Ontario is known as the the ship, its equipment, and the manner in Thousand Islands section. This section is free which the toll charges are to be guaranteed of rapids, but it contained many rock shoals, and paid. When the form is approved, the ves- which obstructed navigation. These were re- sel is assigned a number which is used in moved and the channels widened and transmitting each of the locks. straightened for navigation. It takes approximately seven minutes to The controlling channel dimensions for the raise or lower the water level at Eisenhower Seaway from Lake Erie to Montreal include a and Snell Locks and approximately 22 million minimum depth of 27 feet, to permit transit of gallons of water are used. Figure C9-4 shows a vessels drawing 25' 9" in fresh water. bulk carrier at Eisenhower Lock. In-the The seven new locks of the St. Lawrence Iroquois Lock, the water is let in and out by River (five in Canada, operated by the St. partially opening the upper or lower lock gate. Lawrence Seaway Authority of Canada, and It takes approximately five minutes to open or two in the United States, operated by the St. close any pair of lock gates and operate the Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation) fender boom. An average lockage on the Sea- are all similar in size. These locks can accom- way requires 33 minutes from the time the modate ships up to 730 feet long and 75 feet bow passes the approach wall until the stern is wide. cleared of the outermost boom. Each vessel must be registered and pre- Hydroelectric power facilities were de- cleared prior to using the Seaway, as pre- veloped and are operated by two agencies at 22 Appendix C9 W, -77 lot* _4@ N @'Q R"3A, FIGUREC9-4 The Carol Lake Bulk Carrier. The Carol Lake, a 715 by 75 foot bulk carrier owned by Carryore Ltd., Montreal, Quebec, is shown in the lock chamber at Eisenhower Lock. State-Provincial level, the Power Authority of Lakes Ontario and Erie. It bypasses Niagara the State of New York and the Hydro Electric Falls and the river gorge with its series of Power Commission of Ontario. The creation of eight locks, which raise or lower vessels 326 the power reservoir in connection with exten- feet. The Welland Canal was designated a part sive channel improvements undertaken and of the Seaway by the Canadian Seaway Act, financed by the power agencies, made the and it is now operated by the St. Lawrence simultaneous development of navigation and Seaway Authority. The Welland Locks and power economically and physically feasible. Canal were completed in 1932 by Canada at a Costs of the St. Lawrence Seaway and cost of approximately $13,000,000. This origi- Power Project total more than one billion dol- nal cost will not be recovered from toll reve- lars. Operating costs for the navigation nues. Only part of the cost of operation and new facilities are recovered through tolls. The improvements at the Welland Canal are re- costs for power facilities will be paid by those covered from lockage fees. using the electricity produced. This project Since the opening of the Seaway many im- was opened to navigation in 1958. provements have been undertaken to reduce transit time through the Welland Canal. One important addition is the traffic control sys- 2.4 Lake Ontario and the Welland Canal tem inaugurated in 1966, which uses closed- circuit television and telemetry to direct ship Lake Ontario is the smallest of the Great movements. A new eight-mile straight chan- Lakes in area. It is approximately 180 miles nel to bypass the part of the route that is in- long and 50 miles wide. The Welland Canal, 28 tersected by a number of highway and rail- miles long, provides a waterway between road bridges was completed in 1972. It pro- Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 23 vides a straighter alignment of the canal and the St. Marys River at Sault Ste. Marie, reduces transit time. Other plans propose a Michigan and one lock at Sault Ste. Marie, new route for the northern third of the canal. Ontario. Here vessels are raised and lowered It would provide four new locks, each having approximately 22 feet. Figure C9-5 shows an nearly double the 46.5-foot lift of the seven aerial view of the Soo Locks at Sault Ste. existing locks (three twin and four single) they Marie. The MacArthur Lock is equal in dimen- would replace. sions to St. Lawrence Seaway locks, but the new Poe Lock (32 feet deep over the sills, 1,200 feet long, and 110 feet wide) can handle ships 2.5 Lakes Erie, Huron, Michigan, and up to 1,000 feet in length and to 105 feet in Superior beam. These lock depths exceed the channel depths leading to the lock. Lakes Erie, Huron, Michigan, and Superior, together with the connecting channels (the Detroit River, Lake St. Clair, the St. Clair 2.6 Other Connecting Waterways River, and the St. Marys River) and the locks at Sault Ste. Marie, form the remainder of the The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence System and Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway navigation the Mississippi River Inland Waterway Sys- system. tem are connected at the Calumet Harbor and A 27-foot project depth has been available in River Project at the south end of Lake Michi- the connecting channels since June 1962. The gan. The 5,000 mile Mississippi River Inland St. Marys River project provides a channel for Waterway System services the central part of the construction and operation of four locks in the United States. 4 e F-4 Z @ 41. P 10, 4 ,r7 FIGURE C9-5 Aerial View of Soo Locks at Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan 24 Appendix C9 2.7 Physical Constraints Affecting Navigation Depths available during the navigation sea- son are generally equal to or greater than project depths, except during extreme low- 2.7.1 General water years, such as those occurring during the mid-1920s, mid-1930s, and early 1960s. For Navigation on the Great Lakes-St. Law- the connecting rivers between Lakes Superior rence System is affected by a number of physi- and Huron, between Lakes Huron and Erie, cal constraints, but most can be modified to and for the upper reaches of the St. Lawrence varying degrees by human endeavor. River, low water datum is the sloping surface The fundamental factors are depth of water of the rivers when the Lakes are at their low and influence of climate. Depth of water in- water datum elevations. cludes both depths below chart datum and Because an inch of draft represents up to fluctuations in water level. Climate has both 110 tons of cargo on the large freighters now in long- and short-term impact. The most notice- use, and 200-plus tons per inch on the new 800 able impact of climate, a long-term one, is the and 1,000 feet ships, any lowering of the water annual formation of ice on Lakes. Another level can cause severe losses in the quantity of long-term impact is the fluctuation in lake cargo moved and in the unit cost of cargo level due to fluctuation in precipitation rates. movements. From a navigation standpoint Storms characteristic of the temperate zone then, it is desirable that water levels be as are short-term climatic impacts. high as possible and at least as high as LWD. Water levels also affect speed limits imposed by the Corps of Engineers in the Detroit-St. 2.7.2 Water Levels and Flows Clair Rivers and by U.S. Coast Guard in the St. Marys River. Speed and, therefore, time of The water levels of the Great Lakes vary transit affect the cost-per-ton-mile. Speed from year to year, and from month to month limits are temporarily reduced during periods during each year. The seasonal high occurs in of high water to reduce shore erosion. the summer months, and the low occurs in the winter during the closed navigation season. The variation between the summer high and 2.7.3 Depths the winter low usually ranges between one and two feet. Depths are a major constraint on naviga- All project depths in the Great Lakes navi- tion. With few exceptions, the Lakes proper gation system are given in feet below low have ample depth for navigation. It is in the water datum (LWD), the plane on each Lake to connecting waters and the harbors where which Federal navigation depths are referred. depths are a problem. Navigation needs now Elevations are in feet above mean water level are well in excess of natural depths in most of at Father Point, Quebec, a point on the St. these areas. These waters have been dredged Lawrence River near the river transition to to their present controlling depths. Further the Gulf of St. Lawrence (1955 International deepening becomes increasingly difficult as Great Lakes Datum). The present low water greater depths are needed. For the Great datum planes for each of the Lakes were es- Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway system, the tablished in 1933 from a consideration of the maximum depth attainable appears to be 35 recorded levels since 1860. Low water datum feet, the depth of the St. Lawrence River levels were selected to represent average low channel downstream of Montreal. For inter- levels. Average lows and highs over the period lake traffic controlling depths would be the of record (1860-1971) are shown in tabular depths that can be obtained in the connecting form. waterways. The most serious problem area is the St. Clair-Detroit River system where deepening of navigation channels can lower Avg. Avg. the level of Lakes Huron and Michigan. The Lake Winter low Summer High deepening effect can be offset to a certain ex- tent by compensating works. However, as Lake Superior ............ -0.1 (March) +0.9 (Sept.) channel depths increase, it becomes more and Lakes Michigan-Huron ... +1.4 (Feb.) +2.4 (July) more difficult to provide necessary compen- Lake St. Clair ............ +0.3 (Feb.) +2.0 (July) Lake Erie ................ +1.2 (Feb.) +2.4 (June) sating works. It might be necessary to install a Lake Ontario ............. +1.3 (Jan.) +2.8 (June) lock system. This could cause congestion be- cause of the density of traffic. Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 25 2.7.4 Weather and Ice Conditions An example of the severe weather that has confronted ships is the famous storm that rip- Ice is an inevitable result of the climate of ped across Lake Huron and Lake Superior in the Great Lakes Region. At this time, there is November 1913. Seventeen ships were either no known method for reducing formation of ice lost or damaged beyond repair and a total of on a lakewide basis. Limited areas can be pro- 285 sailors lost their lives. There have been tected against ice formation, but in general, other bad storms, but this is the worst to date. navigation through ice cover depends upon Another reason for the use of extreme cau- available techniques of ice breaking. tion during late season operations is the pres- During the 31/2 to 4 winter months the Sea- ent insurance rate structure. Rates are differ- way is closed money is lost through the im- ent for each vessel and are a function of the mobilization of a large fleet of expensive ships area of operation, type of cargoes, capability and docks, seasonal employment of crews and for ice operation, damage record, and many longshoremen, stockpiling materials, and re- other variables. Ironically, Canadian experi- routing to other means of transport. ence in the Gulf of St. Lawrence has indicated The official 260-day shipping season 1972 for very little hull damage to vessels hard beset. the St. Lawrence Seaway, Montreal to Lake Many insurance companies will not specify a Ontario, extended from April 1 to December rate structure for operation beyond a four- 15. These are official published dates, not ac- week late season extension, or prior to a tual operating dates. The Seaway Develop- three-week early start of the season. However, ment Corporation established targets for an attitudes toward winter insurance rates ap- official season of 240 days in 1970, 255 days for pear to be easing. Figure C9-6 shows an ice- 1971, 260 days for 1972, 270 days for 1974, and breaking tug. 275 days for 1975. Interlake traffic through Wind and weather problems have to be ac- the Soo locks generally closes on December 15. cepted; there is now no significant method to However, in 1969 this closing date was ex- modify their effects. Vessels must be designed tended to January 11. It was extended to to withstand wind and wave forces. Channels January 29 in 1970 and February in 1971. and harbors must be designed to permit navi- Overseas commercial navigation interest gation under all but extreme conditions and to emphasizes that for maximum benefit exten- provide shelter for vessels from extreme con- sion of the season must be publicized at least ditions of wind and wave. Long-term fluctua- 90 days in advance. This permits advanta- tions of water level can be modified to some geous scheduling of overseas traffic. Interlake extent by control works at the outlets of the traffic, similarly needs firm dates but with Lakes. The effect of short-term fluctuations much less lead time. can be offset by additional deepening of har- Vessels that would benefit from an exten- bors and channels in areas subject to these sion of the navigation season are predomi- fluctuations. The development of radar and of nantly the dry bulk carriers and the ocean- electronic navigation aids have partially re- going general cargo fleet. The latter is a rela- solved the problem of navigating in periods of tively new group of vessels, many of which, by restricted visibility, but passage through con- virtue of their ocean-going trades, are fined waterways is still difficult in these equipped for ice operations. In contrast, more periods. than 50 percent of the total available capacity of the dry bulk fleet is in vessels built prior to 1948 and not necessarily suited for ice opera- 2.7.5 Currents tions. Winds and other weather conditions have Currents cause problems in many places. significant long-term and short-term effects The flow of water from Lake to Lake creates on navigation. Precipitation is the basic currents in connecting waterways. Short- source of water supply for the Lakes. Long- term fluctuations in lake level cause sudden term fluctuations in amounts of precipitation changes in these currents, and they also cause cause corresponding fluctuations in lake sudden currents in harbor areas. Normal cur- levels. Wind action al 'so has a major impact on rents can be alleviated by training works and navigation through wind forces acting di- dredging at the most troublesome locations. rectly on ships through wave action, and Currents due to short-term level fluctuations through short-term water level fluctuations. are greater problems. A navigator may not be Snow and fog can cause serious visibility prob- aware of them until his vessel is caught and lems. carried off course. These currents are difficult 26 Appendix C9 Is NWAMIL-. ___M1 c"'t"'y of Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation FIGURE C9-6 The Robinson Bay SLSDC Tug. The tug is shown leaving Snell Lock at Massena, New York, on March 17, 1971, to begin ice breaking in the Wiley-Dondero Canal. to control. Navigators should be aware that Congressional committees even in the late currents can occur and of the conditions that 1940s predicted that the Seaway could sue- create them. cessfully serve approximately 85 percent of world shipping then afloat. In World War II a 15,000 to 20,000 ton dry bulk or petroleum 2.8 Limitations Imposed by Lock Sizes and cargo ship was reasonably impressive, but Channel Depths now there are ships in the range of 100,000 to 400,000 tons, far beyond Seaway capacity. Vessels wishing to enter or exit the Great 2.8.1 General Lakes segment of the Seaway system are lim- ited by the St. Lawrence River and Welland Since resources were not available to build a Canal locks to a 730-feet length and 75 feet 6 new Welland Canal when the Seaway was de- inches in beam. Poe Lock at Sault Ste. Marie signed following Congressional authorization limits the size of vessels sailing between in 1954, it was argued that there was no point Lakes Superior, Huron, Michigan, and Erie to in building locks at Montreal or in American 1,000 feet long and 105 feet wide. All of these waters to accommodate ships larger than locks have depths over the sills in excess of those which could get through the Welland channel depths leading to the locks, but the Canal .53 Therefore the new Seaway locks were drafts of ocean and laker vessels are limited by built to the same dimensions as the Welland the channel depths. Canal locks. In 1959 the new Seaway, capable The authorized depth of 27 feet in the St. of handling cargoes of approximately 30,000 Lawrence Seaway and Welland Canal re- tons in large bulk carriers, or approximately stricts ocean and lake vessels entering or leav- 20,000 tons in saltwater vessels, was opened. ing the system to a maximum safe draft of 25 When the Seaway was under study, during feet nine inches. In the connecting channels the 1930s and 1940s, such cargo capacity above Lake Erie, a controlling depth of 27 feet seemed impressive. In fact testimony before below low water datum has been available Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 27 since 1962 in order to provide a safe draft of 25 ports. Despite additional port costs, this form feet six inches for lake vessels when the water of operation predominates in the Great Lakes level is at low water datum. overseas grain trades because it is cheaper than direct shipments via smaller ocean bulk carriers, whose capacities are limited by the 2.8.2 Length Seaway's 25 feet 9 inch draft restriction. Un- less there is some modification of the Seaway In 1966 only three vessels in the world mer- system's beam and draft dimensions to allow chant fleet exceeded a length of 1,000 feet. In larger ocean bulk carriers to provide lower 1970, 81 vessels, practically all tankers, had cost direct services overseas, transshipment lengths exceeding 1,000 feet. However, virtu- of large volumes of export grains in the lower ally all combination passenger/cargo vessels St. Lawrence will continue to be the dominant (96.7 percent) and freighters (99.9 percent) in method of operation. the world fleet (1970) have lengths less than The effect of the Seaway's beam limitation only 700 feet. In fact as of December 1969, on accommodation of ocean freighters is mar- there were only 16 freighters, mostly newer ginal. Practically all (98.1 percent) of the con- containerships, in the world fleet with lengths ventional breakbulk ships including many in excess of 700 feet. Of 19,570 ships in the converted full and partial containerships have world fleet, 92.3 percent had overall lengths beams less than 76 feet wide. The remainder of less than 700 feet. the freighter fleet unable to transit the Sea- Because large tankers are not economical way is composed primarily of newer, larger, for Seaway use, the limiting 730 foot Seaway high-speed full containerships, not meant for length is primarily a problem for the larger lake use. Some newer breakbulk general cargo dry bulk carriers whose lengths in recent vessels are wider than 75 feet, and future de- years have increased considerably in the 700 signs are expected to feature up to 90-foot to 1,000 foot range. The majority (85.5 percent) beams. of the world's bulk carriers still have lengths less than 700 feet. While future full container- ships are expected to increase in length up to 2.8.4 Draft 1,000 feet, very few, if any at all, are antici- pated to use the Seaway system instead of The Seaway's 25 foot 9 inch draft is a more other high volume and high revenue severe limitation than either the length or worldwide container trade routes. beam limits. At the end of 1969 less than half (47.5 percent) of the total world fleet could use the Seaway system fully-loaded. Only 27 per- 2.8.3 Beam cent of the dry bulk carrier and 24 percent of the tanker fleet currently have drafts less The Seaway's vessel beam restriction of 75 than 26 feet. Approximately 58 percent of the feet 6 inches is far more critical than its length total world freighter fleet could transit the limitation in terms of potential vessel accom- Seaway system at full draft in 1970. Contain- modation. In recent years increased beams erships generally have fully-loaded drafts have been characteristic of large bulk carriers ranging from 30 to 35 feet. and tankers, as well as many new full contain- Although the Seaway can accommodate erships. Therefore, the Seaway's beam con- more than 16,000 ocean vessels or approxi- straint, more so than its length limitation, mately 85 percent of the total world fleet in considerably reduces the capability of the length and beam, more than half of these ves- world's bulk carriers (66.9 percent) and tank- sels would have to transit the system at less ers (54.9 percent) to transit its existing lock than full load capacity because of the 25 foot 9 system. Since pipelines serve the Seaway re- inch draft constraint. In fact some 62 percent gion's crude oil needs, the inability of the Sea- (182) of the 296 ocean-going vessels currently way to accommodate the broad-beamed crude using the Seaway system forfeit 470,860 oil supertankers is not significant. The inter- deadweight tons of potential carrying capac- nal Lake distribution of refined petroleum ity (Table C9-19) because of the 25 foot 9 inch products is far more suited to small tanker draft limitation. operations. Draft, beam, and length, in that order, are Most ocean bulk carriers unable'to transit the ship characteristics most seriously limited the Seaway are forced to transship their car- by the Seaway's existing lock sizes and chan- goes to lake vessels at lower St. Lawrence nel depths. While ship drafts can be adjusted 28 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-13 Total Loss of Potential Carry- Great Lakes connecting channels, the Wel- ing Capacity for Existing Ocean-Going Seaway land Canal, and the St. Lawrence Seaway. The Vessels Due to Draft Limitations connecting channel improvements authorized Total Draft DWT Loss in 1956 were approximately 90 percent com- Vessel Type Number >25'6" Percent Total Average plete as of 1970. The remaining work primarily concerns channel widening at critical bends. Bulk Carriers 25 24 96 156,445 6,518 The Great Lakes Harbor study (1966) recom- General Cargo 271 158 58 314,415 2,041 mended harbor improvements at 30 harbors. Total Fleet 296 182 62 470,860 2,598 Most of these projects are now complete. - Navigation construction projects are au- SOURCE: Greenwood's Guide to Great Lakes Shipping 1970 thorized by the Congress of the United States Reference 14 based upon reports submitted by the Corps of Engineers. The major reports submitted and studies now under way by the Corps of En- to some degree by varying loading, beam and gineers, Department of Transportation, and length cannot be, and vessels of excess size are the Maritime Administration are given in absolutely excluded. Draft restriction affects Table C9-16. During the period 1961 to 1970 the carrying capacity of all vessels transiting Federal expenditures by the Corps of En- the Seaway. Because larger tankers and full gineers for navigation improvements for the containerships are not expected to use the Great Lakes Region have averaged $40 million Seaway, beam and length constraints pose annually. Construction expenditures, which serious accommodation problems mainly for averaged $30 million annually for the first half larger dry bulk carriers. Length and beam re- of the decade, have declined to approximately strictions are not currently a serious barrier $15 million annually. Operation and mainte- to traditional breakbulk general cargo ves- nance costs have increased from $10 million sels. annually for the period 1961 to 1965 to $20 million annually for the period 1966 to 1970 (Subsection 2.11, Navigation System Costs). 2.9 Harbors When a controlling depth of 27 feet was au- 2.11 Navigation System Costs thorized for Great Lakes connecting channels to complement the controlling depth of 27 feet being provided in the St. Lawrence Seaway 2.11.1 Existing System Costs from Montreal to Lake Erie, the Great Lakes Harbor Study was authorized to determine The Federal costs of providing and main- what improvements would be economically taining harbors on the Great Lakes is shown justified to provide commensurate depths at in Table C9-14. The non-Federal share of proj- harbors on the Great Lakes. That study rec- ect costs had reached approximately $30 mil- ommended improvements at 30 existing har- lion through fiscal year 1966. Non-Federal bors and construction of one new harbor. In costs for general cargo facilities totaled ap- connection with that study comprehensive proximately $80 million and specialized overall Great Lakes traffic analyses were facilities cost $170 million for the 1946 to 1965 made for iron ore, coal, stone, grain, and for period. Costs for locks, channels, and harbors overseas general cargo. Commodity receipts, are shown in Table C9-17. (See references 4, available project depths, and construction 31, 47 and 53.) costs for Federal and private commercial har- A recent survey by the Maritime Adminis- bors on the Great Lakes are shown in Tables tration of port development expenditures in- C9-14 and C9-15. The depths shown are for the dicated- the following expenditures for the harbor areas that control maximum drafts. 1946 to 1970 period: North Atlantic, $454 mil- lion; South Atlantic, $122 million; Gulf Coast, $221 million; Pacific Coast, $150 million; Great 2.10 Navigation Program Lakes, $85 million; Canada, $275 million. A breakdown of the U.S. total transportation bill The Great Lakes navigation program is con- is presented in Table C9-18. cerned with improving connecting channels When the Seaway opened, it was relatively and harbors in order to take advantage of the easy to persuade port cities and port districts authorized 27-foot depths now provided in the (Contivned on page 37) Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 29 TABLE C9-14 Federal Habors on the Great Lakes Existing Major Total Cost ($11000) Annual Maintenance Depth Commodities as of June 30, 1969 Av.Cu.Yd. Av.Maint.Costs PSA Harbor (ft.) (million tons) Constr. Rehab. Maint. Dredged 1965-1969 LAKE SUPERIOR 1.1 Grand Marais, Minn. 16-20 Logs (0.04) $ 451 $ --- $ 256 2,000 $ --- Two Harbors, Minn. 28-30 Iron Ore (5.33) 3,709 --- 370 1,000 5,636 Duluth-Superior, 23-30 Iron Ore 34.4 15,741 --- 7,578 68,000 220,360 Minn.-Wis. Grain 3.6 Coal 2.5 Limestone 1.0 (43.5) Ashland, Wis. 20-25 Coal 0.28 1,696 --- 863 --- (0.35) 1.2 Ontonagon, Mich. 15-17 Coal 0.19 332 --- 2,021 30,000 127,934 (0.23) Presque Isle, Mich. 28-30 Iron Ore (6.6) 1,190 --- 175 1,000 --- Marquette, Mich. 27 Coal 0.64 1,283 --- 585 1,000 --- Iron Ore 1.26 (1.98) Keweenaw Waterway, 25 Coal .07 5,967 --- 4,815 55,000 55,224 Mich. Iron Ore .17 (0.33) LAKE MICHIGAN 2.1 Menominee, Mich. & 15-23 Coal 0.13 534 1,352 1,111 8,000 15,386 Wis. Limestone 0.06 Pulp 0.09 (0.38) Green Bay, Wis. 18-26 Coal 1.82 4,592 --- 2,681 121,000 172,064 Limestone 0.15 Fuel Oil 0.21 Cement 0.25 (2.8) Sturgeon Bay, Wis. 22-23 (0.37) 1,060 885 3,523 50,000 50,726 Kewaunee, Wis. 20 Lumber 0.14 752 617 1,251 33,000 39,342 Paper 0.28 (1.35) Two Rivers, Wis. 10-18 (0.12) 360 58 1,643 52,000 56,636 Manitowoc, Wis. 12-25 Coal 0.13 875 --- lv493 40,000 36,689 Lumber 0.11 Paper 0.43 Cement 0.34 (2.36) Sheboygan, Wis. 15-25 Coal 0.25 1,136 609 1,357 20,000 43,217 (0.39) 2.2 Port Washington, Wis. 18-21 Coal 0.72 999 --- 393 8,000 9,158 (0.87) Milwaukee, Wis. 21-30 Grain 0.62 8,231 1,892 4,936 48,000 90,035 Coal 1.52 Limestone 0.27 Petro.Prod. 0.96 (6.83) Racine, Wis. 19-23 (0.12) 1,205 --- 1,167 21,500 38,978 Kenosha, Wis. 21-27 (0.39) 847 788 1,007 25s8OO 37,899 Waukegan, Ill. 8-22 Coal 0.11 823 --- 1,919 34,000 40,573 Cement 0.31 (0.57) Chicago, Ill. 21-29 (0.75) 4,789 1,327 3,768 7,900 2,026 Calumet Harbor, Ind. 27-29 Grain 3.2 22,072 689 8,080 146,000 377,224 & Ill. & Lake Calumet Iron Ore 9.4 Iron Pl. 2.2 Coal 6.4 Limestone 2.6 (28.6) 30 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-14 (continued) Federal Harbors on the Great Lakes Existing Major Total Cost ($1,000) Annual Maintenance Depth Commodities as of June 30, 1969 Av.Cu.Yd. Av-Maint.Costs PSA Harbor (ft.) (million tons) Constr. Rehab. Maint. Dredged 1965-1969 LAKE MICHIGAN (continued) 2.2 Indiana Harbor, Ind. 22-29 Iron Ore 10.0 $ 4,897 $ $ 3,957 200,000 $ 113,174 Limestone 1.9 Petro.Prod. 5.7 (18.8) Burns Waterway, Ind. 27-30 Iron Ore 0.65 13,600 --- 100 N/A N/A Limestone 0.19 (0.88) Michigan City, Ind. 6-18 --- --- 1,544 900 2,337 46,000 75,488 2.3 St. Joseph, Mich. 18-21 Limestone 0.29 976 365 2,919 87,000 105,114 (0.60) South Haven, Mich. 19-21 --- (0.05) 452 880 1,905 75,000 79,880 Holland, Mich. 21 Coal 0.11 772 502 2,315 100,000 110,721 Limestone 0.11 (0.26) Grand Haven, Mich. 21-23 Coal 0.10 1,283 814 6,462 100,000 189,119 Sand, Gravel 3.1 (3.70) 2.4 Manistique, Mich. 18-19 --- (0.01) 1,299 316 1,358 10,500 83,150 Gladstone, Mich. 24 (0.30) 333 --- 4 --- --- Muskegon, Mich. 27-29 Coal 1.4 2,912 743 1,808 70,000 80,717 Petro.Prod. 0.9 0.40) White Lake, Mich. 16 Sod. Hyd. 0.004 208 1,082 34,000 37,857 Ludington, Mich. 18 Coal 0.18 1,528 358 3,662 50,000 41,276 Limestone 0.72 (3.66) Manistee Harbor, Mich. 23-25 Coal 0.25 2,697 1,374 1,883 48,000 65,567 Sand, Gravel 0.35 (0.70) Frankfort, Mich. 18-24 Lumber 0.15 1,921 275 1,416 35,000 41,296 Pulp 0.11 Paper 0.3 (1.61) Charlevoix, Mich. 18 Coal 0.11 82 789 629 20,000 15,280 (0.19) LAKE HURON 3.1 Alpena, Mich. 15-21 Coal 0.7 337 --- 259 8sOOO 12,933 Cement 2.3 (3.1) Cheboygan, Mich. 21 (0.12) 504 --- 330 25,000 13,448 3.2 Saginaw, Mich 16.5-27 Grain 0.13 13,134 --- 4,378 500,000 248,258 Coal 1.2 Limestone 2.1 (5.1) Harbor Beach, Mich. 21-23 Coal (0.24) 1,201 195 1,824 273,900 51,806 LAKE ERIE 4.1 Port of Detroit 27-29.5 Iron Ore 9.8 76,595 --- 6,366 550,000 571,369 Iron Pl. 1.3 Coal 9.2 Limestone 5.8 Cement 0.9 (30.1) St. Clair River Coal 4.9 --- --- --- --- (6.1) Detroit River a Rouge River a 17-25 675 --- 49792 --- 347,243 Trenton Channe a Monroe, Mich. 21 Coal 0.06 987 --- 2,489 200,000 100,336 (0.07) Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 31 TABLE C9-14 (continued) Federal Harbors on the Great Lakes Existing Major Total Cost ($1,000) Annual Maintenance Depth Commodities as of June 30, 1969 Av.Cu.Yd. Av.Maint.Costs PSA Harbor (ft.) (million tons) Constr. Rehab. Maint. Dredged 1965-1969 LAKE ERIE (continued) 4.2 Toledo, Ohio 18-28 Iron Ore 5.6 $ 17,192 $ --- $ 13,113 100,000 $ 718,115 Grain 2.3 Coal 20.7 (31.1) Sandusky, Ohio 21-26 Coal 6.8 6,727 676 3,953 600,000 285,139 (6.9) Huron, Ohio 25 Iron Ore 2.9 1,304 247 2,100 200,000 81,337 Limestone 0.4 (3.3) 4.3 Lorain, Ohio 17-29 Iron Ore 4.4 13,310 --- 3,907 240,000 181,111 Coal 3.3 Limestone 0.7 (9.1) Cleveland, Ohio 23-29 Iron Ore 17.6 31,400 465 30,466 900,000 1,913,003 Sand, Gravel 1.9 Limestone 2.6 (24.6) Fairport, Ohio 8-25 Limestone 2.1 2,960 --- 4,398 400,000 206,552 (2.6) Ashtabula, Ohio 16-29 Iron Ore 6.2 11,680 --- 3,150 180,000 149,159 Coal 3.4 Limestone 0.8 (10.8) Conneaut, Ohio 8-28 Iron Ore 6.5 8,347 652 2,576 80,000 40,869 Coal 6.4 Limestone 1.0 (13.9) Erie, Pa. 18-29 Limestone 0.37 3,598 1 4,799 295,000 95,713 Sand, Gravel 0.37 (1.1) 4.4 Port of Buffalo, N.Y. 22-30 Grain 1.7 23,115 295 14,367 600,000 710,784 Iron Ore 8.7 Limestone 2.3 Coal 0.6 (16.0) LAKE ONTARIO 5.1 Rochester, N.Y. 21-24 Coal 0.4 2,439 --- 4,168 360,000 128,730 (0.6) 5.2 Great Sodus Bay, N.Y. 20-22 (No commerce) 611 714 1,461 5,000 38,292 Oswego, N.Y. 21-27 Cement 0.2 8,430 308 2,653 80tOOO 56,714 (0.4) 5.3 Ogdensburg, N.Y. 19-21 (0-3) 646 --- 730 5,000 14,447 Totals 305.0 $338,704 $19,086 $195,104 7,250,600 $3,355,560 aIncluded in Port of Detroit. 32 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-15 Private Harbors on the Great Lakes Existing Major Planning Depth Commodities Subarea Harbor (ft.) (million tons) LAKE SUPERIOR 1.1 Taconite, Minn. 27 Iron Ore 11.3 (11.9) Silver Bay, Minn. 27 Iron Ore 11.9 (12.1) LAKE MICHIGAN 2.2 Oak Creek, Wis. 20 Coal (1.4) Buffington, Ind. 26 Limestone 1.72 Cement 0.36 (2.3) Gary, Ind. 27 Iron Ore 9.1 Limestone 1.9 (11.5) 2.4 Port Dolomite, Mich. 29 Limestone (3.6) Port Inland, Mich. -- Limestone (4.2) Escanaba, Mich. 27 Coal 0.3 Iron Ore 7.2 (8.2) Petoskey Penn Dixie -- Coal 0.14 Harbor, Mich. Cement 0.35 (0.5) LAKE HURON 3.1 Calcite, Mich. 25 Limestone (13.3) Stoneport, Mich. 25 Limestone (6.4) Port Gypsum, Mich. -- Gypsum (0.3) Alabaster, Mich. -- Gypsum (0-5) Drummond Island, Mich. 23 Limestone (2.6) LAKE ERIE 4.2 Marblehead, Ohio -- Limestone (2.5) Commodity a Federal Private Total Iron Ore 129.5 39.5 169.0 Coal 74.8 1.8 76.6 Limestone 23.0 36.2 59.2 Grain 11.6 -- 11.6 Total 238.9 77.6 316.5 Other traffic b 66.1 3.9 70.0 Combined Total 305.0 81.5 386.5 aIncludes both receipts and shipments. bComprised approximately 18% of total U.S. receipts and shipments in 1969. Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 33 TABLE C9-16 Prior and Ongoing Navigation Studies Study, Status, and Cost Authorization Purpose Recommendation CORPS OF ENGINEERS Major Completed Studies St. Lawrence Seaway Act of May 13, 1954 To open the Great Lakes to ocean navigation Authorized by 1954 Wiley-Dondero Act (Development of the Great (Public Law 358 83rd and create 2,200,000 bydro-electric horse- (Public Law 358, 83rd Congress, as Lakes-St. Lawrence Basin) Congress) power to be commonly shared between the amended). Status: 27-foot seaway was United States and Canada. open to navigation in 1959. Connecting Channels of Senate Public Works To determine an up-to-date estimate of the That the existing project be modified to the Great Lakes Committee resolution costs for accommodation of present and provide for (1) deepening and improving Status@ 27-foot channel dated 3-25-53 and House prospective commerce, including considera- the channel in St. Marys River, Straits Public Works Committee tion of a 27-foot channel. of Mackinac, St. Clair River, Lake St. available since 1962. dated 6-24-53. Clair and Detroit River; (2) an alter- Widening at bends and compensating works not nate plan authorizing construction of complete. cutoffSchanneltin,Ca.ada at Southeast Bend, t. Clai R ver in lieu of further Cost: $110,327,000 improvement of existing channel in this reach. Great Lakes Harbors Senate Public Works To determine advisability of further Improvements authorized at 30 harbors Status: Almost all harbor Committee Resolution improvement of harbors on the Great Lakes from approximately 40 reports plus 7 improvements have been dated 5-18-56 and House in the interest of present and prospective additional harbors after report Public Works Committee deep-draft commerce to take advantage of submittal. completed. Resolution dated 27-foot depths in Connecting Channels Cost: $ 7,965,200 6-27-56. and Seaway. 4,514,800 $12,480,000 CORPS OF ENGINEERS Studies under way. Water Levels on the House Public Works To study the damage resulting from changes Great Lakes Committee Resolution in levels of the Great Lakes and the Status: Completed in 1965 dated 6-26-52. feasibility of measures to reduce that to present plans and to damage. so mma ri.e other data to facilitate the inter- national study below. Cost: $916,500 Water Levels on the International Joint A coordinated study between Canada and the Great Lakes Commission dated United States for further regulation of Status: International 10-7-64. the water levels of the Great Lakes (under Joint Commission Study auspices of International Joint Committee, under way with scheduled IJC). completion date of 1974. Cost: $1,900,000 (U.S. only) Great Lakes--St. Lawrence Section 304 of the River To determine the engineering and economic The feasibility study recommended the Seaway Navigation Season and Harbor Act (Title III, feasibility of extending the navigation following: (1) A full survey scope, Extension Public Law 89-298) dated season on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence under auspices of the International Status: Full survey scope 10-27-65. System to include part or all of the Joint Commission, to define cost, inter season during which navigation is economic justification, and degree of study is authorized, under Federal interest; (2) Feasible winter way, and scheduled for now precluded by ice. completion by 1975. The navigation features be incorporated demonstration program, also into design of all future modifications under way, is scheduled for of Federal navigation facilities, in- completion in 1974. Interim cluding the Great Lakes Connecting progress reports will be Channels, locks and harbors, and submitted annually. placementsof su itable dredged material into ice- tabilizing islands where Cost: $9,500,000 ($6,500,000 appropriate; (3) An operations center for demonstration program, be established for collecting, process- $3,000,000 for studies and ing, and disseminating information, in- report). cluding weather and ice data vital to the maximum use of the present system. Great Lakes Connecting Senate Public Works To provide for ease of navigation and the Channels and Harbors Committee Resolution safe passage of larger size vessels being Status: The main thrust dated 6-2-69. built to the dimensions of the New Poe Lock. Solutions must consider not only commercial of the study is evalua- benefits but a Iso effects of any improve- tion of environmental, ments on the environment. Consideration engineering feasibility, will be given also to the problem of shore and economic effects of erosion. alternatives. Completion is scheduled for 1974-75. cost: $1,000,000 St. Lawrence Seaway Senate Public Works To consider the need for new larger locks Additional Locks Committee Resolution parallel to the existing locks to accommo- Status: Geophysical, dated 6-15-66. date projected increases in traffic which may exceed the capacity of the existing economic, and capacity locks. studies are under way. Scheduled for completion in 1975. Lake Erie-Lake Ontario Senate Public Works Increasing traffic may reach the practical An international study (Canada-United Waterway (LELO) Committee Resolution capacity of the Welland Canal in the fore- States) should be undertaken immediately dated 5-6-58 and House seeable future. The LELO study con3iders to consider the needs of both Canadian Status: Completed in 1974. Public Works Committee the engineering and economic feasit-ility and United States traffic over the Cost: $2,500,000 Resolution dated of constructing a canal in the United States entire Great Lakes-St. Lawrence System. 7-16-58. to provide facilities necessary for the anticipated increases in U.S. waterborne traffic only. 34 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-16 (continued) Prior and Ongoing Navigation Studies Study, Status, and Cost Authorization Purpose Recommendation Domestic and International Sponsored jointly by To determine the foreign trade commodity Tran52ortati :n o9f U,S. Corps of Engineer. and movements or flows within the United States ,or ig e n Trad 1 70. Department of Trans- during 1970 (flows prior to shipment via the Status Completed. portation under agree- U.S. port of export or after receipt at the ment with Bureau of U.S. port'of entry) which cannot be obtained Census , Department of directly from public records. Such data Commerce. were obtained for 1956 foreign trade flows from an origin-destination study on a sample basis by the Bureau of Census under contract with the Corps of Engineers. This study will develop similar information regarding liner-type general cargo commodities moving in waterborne and airborne U.S. foreign trade (e.g., degree of containerization for the domestic and international segments of the commodity movements; the major mode of domes- tic transport between United States inland points and ports of entry or exit). DEPAMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The Effects of Inland This research study, funded and administered Freight Rates and Services by DOT, is a research program designed as an on the St. Lawrence Seaway, examination of the relevant principles of DOT-OS-10019. competitive rate making in the Interstate Status: Completed April 1972. Commerce Act. The study analyzes these prin- ciples as established by Commission decisions by their specific application to selected rates from the Seaway region'$ inland tariff structure. The study examines the selected rates, giving consideration to current Cm- mission procedures but also to new approaches for testing established principles and pre- cedents of the Interstate Commerce Act. In essence, the study is intended to generate a set of conclusions as to whether the existing inland rate structure is unreasonable, discrim- iatory, or unduly prejudicial to the Seaway. DEPAMENT OF TRANSPORTATION An Economic Feasibility This is a study jointly funded by the Depart- Study of Alternative ment of Transportation and the St. Lawrence Waterborne Cargo Feeder Seaway Development Corporation. Its purpose System for the Great is to determine the feasibility, design, and Lakes-St. Lawrence implementation of a feeder system operating Seaway within the Lakes primarily serving unitized Status: Completed April 1972. cargo (containers and pallets). The study is being conducted in two phases with the second phase being implemented in late May 1971 for a, expected 8-month duration before the final report is submitted. Phase II concentrates on close examination of alternate feeder systems to determine operational cost, competitive position, market potential. and to select and recommend the necessary process for implemen- tation of whichever system is determined most feasible. Design and operation of the feeder system will consider seasonal operation and physical characteristics of the Seaway as they currently exist. MARITIME ADMINISTRATION Offshore Terminals Study The study is designed to help pave the way for Status: Under way. the introduction of "supersized" bulk carriers. The study examines the economics inherent in Cost: $200,000 using these vessels in the U.S. foreign trade. Phase I: Project bulk-cargo shipment require- Ments for U.S. industry over the next 30 years on a geographic basis and assess the capability of present bulk-cargo distribution systems to handle them. Compare alternate methods of using "supersized" ships to carry these cargoes, including using feeder vessels and pipelines; moving user industries to sites where these ships can berth; and formulating concepts in design, construction, and operation of offshore island terminal., including development of economic and technical data. Phase II: Specific privately sponsored development studies, con- ducted jointly with Federal and State agencies, to define contract specifications, necessary legislative proposals, and operating agreements among proposed users. Phase III: The final part will be construction and testing of one prototype offshore terminal. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMISSION (ICC) Rail Freight Rate Study Study and litigation to determine whether rail Status: Decision rate s to and from the Great Lakes have become expected in 1974. distorted in relationship to corresponding rates to and from other ports in the Atlantic and Gulf Coast areas. Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 35 TABLE C9-17 Federal Cost for Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System (Millions of Dollars) Average Annual Cost Operation and Maintenance Construction All Other Costs 1967-1970 Locks and Channels St. Marys River a 150.4 66.0 3.0 St. Clair Rivera 19.2 3.9 0.34 Channels in Lake St. Claira 7.7 2.2 0.14 Detroit Rivera 76.6 7.0 0.65 St. Lawrence Seaway b Welland Canal.(Cgnadian) 280.0 e Canadian Section 349.0 h 59.1 United States Section 125.4 32.6 2.5 Seaway Total 754.4 32.6 61.6 St. Lawrence River (Canadian)b 238.Oe 51.8 Non-toll canals (Canadian)b 39.Oe Superseded canals (Canadian)b 50.Oe Canadian Subtotal 956.0 110.9 United States Subtotal 379.3 111.7 6.6 Harbors Great Lakes f f f United States 290.8 261.9 11.3 Canadianb 142.Oe Great Lakes Total 432.8 261.9 11.3 St. Lawrence River (Canadian)b 322.,e Marine Services Canadian Sectionb d 353.09 United States Section 280.0 Canadian Total 1,783.0 110.9 United States Total 950.1 373.6 17.9 Combined Total 2,733.1 373.6 128.8 aSource: 1970 Annual Report of the Chief of En ineers, Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army. (Cost to June 30, 1970)t6 bSource: The Seaway in Canadian Transportation, D. W. Carr & Associates, for the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority, October 1970. (Costs to 1968 or 1969)4 cSource: St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation. (Annual Reports 1959-1971) 33 d Source: Harbor and Port Development, Corps of Engineers, Washington, D.C., 1968. (Costs to 1966)47 eTotal investment includes all costs (construction, operation and maintenance, rehabil- itation, etc.) fincludes about $21 million, $20 million, and $1 million (construction, all other and average annual maintenance cost respectively) for harbors containing only recreational boats. gComprises cost of aids to navigation, icebreakers, pilotage, etc. hIncludes $8.4 million for major structure repairs. iIncludes Welland Canal. 36 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-18 The Nation's Freight Bill (Millions of Dollars) 1958 1960 1965 Highway Truck - Intercity ICC Regulated 6,081 7,155 10,015 Non-ICC Regulated 10,834 10,744 15,872 Truck - Local 12,643 14,289 21,836 Bus 31 42 71 Total 29,489 32,230 47,794 Rail Railroads 8,748 8,739 9,695 Water International 1,513 1,765 2,509 Coastal, Intercoastal. 724 747 692 and Non-Contiguous Inland Waterways 292 312 374 Great Lakes 174 227 210 Total 2,703 3,051 3,785 Oil Pipe Line ICC Regulated 721 770 904 Non-ICC Regulated 117 125 157 Total 838 895 1,061 Air Domestic 137 175 322 International 91 114 234 All-Cargo & Supplemental 71 71 144 Total 299 360 700 Other Carriers Freight Forwarder 416 438 461 REA Express 352 345 397 Total 768 783 858 Other Shipping Costs Loading and Unloading 1,062 1,097 1,106 Freight Cars Operation of Traffic 223 241 293 Departments Total 1,285 1,338 1,399 Grand Total 44,130 47,396 65,292 Gross National Product 447.3 503.7 681.2 (Billions of Dollars) Grand Total % of GNP 9.87 9.41 9.58 Source: Journal of Commerce 12 Aug 68. Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 37 to lay out millions of dollars for port expansion. Lakes harbors. Although these figures do not Today cities are faced with critical social and include the more than $280 million in non- financial problems, and are struggling with Federal funds for docks and facilities, they do costly programs of urban renewal, redevelop- indicate the varying cost of providing for han- ment, and public relief. In these circum- dling cargo at major ports. For example, stances further expansion of public ports may Cleveland Harbor costs to date are $62.3 mil- have a low priority, while resources flow to lion. Its 1970 commerce was 24.6 million tons. areas of political sensitivity, rather than to- Cleveland is the most expensive lake harbor to ward a proprietary venture. Many cities are maintain ($1.9 million annually). Duluth- approaching the limit of their bonded indebt- Superior Harbor, which handled more cargo edness. If they turn to revenue bonds, high (43.5 million tons) in 1969, had total costs of interest rates will put a heavy burden on capi- only $23.3 million and maintenance costs of tal expansion. $0.22 million annually. These cost figures indi- For these reasons the already low level of cate the value of regional port development in port investment in the Great Lakes has been minimizing costs and maximizing benefits. decreasing in recent years. If the decline in public investment is only temporary, the full potential of the Great Lakes may yet be 2.11.2 Costs to Increase System Capacity realized. Table C9-19 shows the relationships of Fed- The costs of increasing the system capacity eral first cost, maintenance cost, and total cost were estimated in 196849 for three situations: to tonnage handled at 15 major Federal Great (1) increasing the capacity of the system TABLE C9-19 Fifteen Federal Great Lakes Harbors in Order of Decreasing Construction, Main- tenance, and Total Costs (Thousands of Dollars) Construction Maintenance Total Federal Cost 1969 Total Rank Harbor Commercea Costb Rank Harbor Costc Rank Harbor Costd 1 Detroit River e 122.9f 79,400 1 Cleveland 1,913 1 Detroit River e 88,400 2 Cleveland 24.6 31,400 2 Detroit Rivere 918 2 Cleveland 62,300 3 Buffalo 14.1 23,100 3 Toledo 719 3 Buffalo 37,800 4 Calumet 27.5 22,100 4 Buffalo 711 4 Calumet 30,900 5 Toledo 31.1 17,200 5 Calumet 377 5 Toledo 30,300 6 Duluth-Superior 43.5 15,700 6 Sandusky 285 6 Duluth-Superior 23,300 7 Lorain 9.1 13,300 7 Saginaw River 248 7 Saginaw River 17,500 8 Saginaw River 5.1 13,100 8 Duluth-Superior 220 8 Lorain 17,200 9 Ashtabula 10.8 11,700 9 Fairport 206 9 Milwaukee 15,100 10 Oswego 0.4 8,400 10 Grand Haven 189 10 Ashtabula 14,800 11 Conneaut 13.9 8,300 11 Lorain 181 11 Conneaut 11,500 12 Milwaukee 6.8 8o200 12 Green Bay 172 12 Oswego 11,400 13 Sandusky 6.9 6,700 13 Ashtabula 149 13 Sandusky 11,300 14 Indiana 18.8 4,900 14 Indiana 137 14 Indiana 8,900 15 Green Bay 2.8 4,600 15 Rochester 129 15 Grand Haven 8,600 Fairportg 2.6 2,600 Milwaukeeg 90 Fairportg 7,400 Rochesterg 0.6 2,400 Oswegog 57 Green Bayg 7,300 Grand Haveng 3.7 1,000 Conneautg 41 Rochesterg 6,600 aMillions of tons bCumulative construction cost (Federal only) through June 30, 1969. CCumulative Federal maintenance cost through June 30, 1969. dConstruction, maintenance, and rehabilitation through June 30, 1969 (Federal costs only). eIncludes Port of Detroit and Rouge River. fComprises 30.2 million tons traffic at Port of Detroit and 92.7 million tons through traffic. gNot ranked. 38 Appendix C9 with no increase in season length (Table and $2.2 billion. Of that, 91 percent, 92 percent, C9-20) and 95 percent would be for dredging in chan- (2) extending the length of season by two, nels and harbors. four, or six weeks (Table C9-21) A Department of Transportation study con- (3) a combination of increased capacity sidered two-, four-, and six-week season exten- system and extended season (Table C9-22) sions costing $246 million, $299 million, and Costs of locks, dredging, and harbor struc- $358 million. The cost of extending the season tures are presented in Tables C9-23, C9-24, and increasing the system capacity (Table and C9-25. Only nineteen harbors, Thunder C9-22) is less than the cost of accomplishing Bay, Silver Bay, Taconite, Duluth, Marquette, each separately. Escanaba, Milwaukee, Chicago Harbor, Calumet Harbor, Indiana Harbor, Detroit, To- ledo, Sandusky, Lorain, Cleveland, Hamilton, 2.11.3 Vessel Cost Toronto, Buffalo, and Conneaut, were selected for cost analysis. The 31-, 32-, and 34-foot deep The actual cost of operating the vessels re- systems were designed to handle vessels of the quired to transport 1995 commerce has been following length, beam, and draft: 1,000 by 105 estimated for the Great Lakes Water Levels by 29 feet; 1,200 by 115 by 30 feet; 1,400 by 125 Study, sponsored by the International Joint by 32 feet. The first cost of increasing to a Commission. A summary is shown in Table 31-foot deep system is $3.5 billion. It would cost C9-26. Details are presented in Bureau of $4 billion for a 32-foot system and $5.3 billion Mines Circular 84611 and in the Navigation for a 34-foot system. The cost of deepening the Appendix to the Water Levels Study.20 The harbors and channels above the Welland capital cost of a new bulk vessel for Great Canal for each system alone would be $1.2,$1.4 Lakes use (delivered in 1972) is estimated at TABLE C9-20 Cost of Increased Capacity System (1968 Costs in Millions of Dollars) Criteria Ship size, ft. 1000 x 105 x 29 1200 x 115 x 30 1400 x 125 x 32 Lock size, ft. 1200 x 110 x 32 1400 x 125 x 34 1600 x 140 x 36 Channel depth, ft. 31 32 34 Channel width, ft. 600 700 800 Interest Interest Interest First During First During First During Reach Cost Const.a Total Cost Const.a Total Cost Const.a Total Great Lakes above Welland Canal Locks Sault Ste. Marie 40 6 46 42 6 48 44 7 51 St. Clair River Dam & Lock 50 7 57 52 7 59 54 8 62 Dredging in Channels 615 92 707 735 ill 846 1,310 197 1,507 Dredging in Harbors 274 41 315 332 50 382 450 68 518 Harbor Structures Affected 42 7 49 46 7 53 49 7 56 by Dredging Subtotal 1,021 153 1,174 1,207 181 g,388 1,908 287 2,194 1.2 Billionb 1.4 Billion 2.2 Billionb Welland Canal and L. Ontario Welland (All American) Canal 1,224 184 1,408 1,343 201 1,544 1,414 212 1,626 Lake Ontario Port Structures 8 1 9 10 1 11 11 1 12 Lake Ontario Harbor Dredging 5 1 6 6 1 7 10 1 11 Subtotal 1,237 186 1,423 1,359 203 1,562 1,435 214 1,649 1.4 Billionb 1.6 Billionb 1.7 Billionb St. Lawrence Seaway Locks 386 58 444 403 61 464 423 64 487 Channel Dredging 402 60 462 476 71 547 816 1-22 938 Subtotal 788 118 906 879 132 1,011 T,239 1.86 1,425 0.9 Billionb 1.0 Billionb 1.4 Billionb Total System Cost 3,046 457 3,503 3,445 516 3,961 4,581 687 5,268 3.5 Billionb 4.0 Billionb 5.3 Billionb Data Source: DOT - St. Lawrence Seaway Task Force, Report of the Technical Subgroup, prepared by U. S. Coast Guard (November 1968). a6% x 1/2 of 5-year construction period. bTotals are rounded figures. I Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 39 approximately $12 to $15 million for a vessel TABLE C9-21 Estimated Construction Costs 500 to 730 feet long, and $20 to $24 million for ato Extend Season of Existing Navigation Sys- vessel 900 to 1,000 feet long. Hourly operating tem (Millions of Dollars) costs (1971) range from $271 for a class 4 (500 Enlarged System feet to 550 feet long) to $345 for a class 7 (700 Season Present 1000' Ships 1200' Ships 1400' Ships feet to 730 feet long). A class 10 (1,000 feet long) Extension System 31' 32' 34' vessel costs $563 per hour. In 1974 the capital 2 Weeks 246 295 312 327 cost of a 1,000 feet long vessel to be delivered in 4 Weeks 299 358 380 398 1976 and 1977 was estimated at $35 million. 6 Weeks 358 430 455 476 TABLE C9-22 Estimated Construction Costs of Extended Season with Increased Capacity (Mil- lions of Dollars) Season Channel Depth Extension 31' 32' 34' 2 Weeks Lakes, Channels, Locks & Canals 3,129 3,514 4,677 Dec. 15 to 29 Ports & Harbors 380 454 598 Total 3,509 3,968 5,274 4 Weeks Dec. 15 to Lakes, Channels, Locks & Canals 3,161 3,546 4,709 Jan. 12 Ports & Harbors 380 454 598 Total 3,541 4,000 5,307 6 Weeks Lakes, Channels, Locks & Canals 3,418 3,845 5,041 Dec. 15 to Ports & Harbors 380 454 598 Jan. 26 Total 3,798 4,299 5,639 Reference 49, pages 220 and 235. The difference in costs on pages 220 and 235 of reference 49 is added to the cost of increasing system capacity (Table C9-20) to obtain the above costs. TABLEC9-23 Cost of Adding Locks to Increase Capacity of Existing System (Millions of Dollars) Ship Size 1000 x 105 x 29 1200 x 115 x 30 1400 x 125 x 32 Lock Size Lock 1200 x 110 x 33 1400 x 125 x 34 1600 x 140 x 36 St. Lambert 50.0 52.0 54.0 Cote. St. Catherine 61.0 63.0 66.0 Lower Beauharnois 57.0 60.0 64.0 Upper Beauharnois 60.0 62.0 65.0 Snell 64.0 67.0 70.0 Eisenhower 76.0 79.0 82.0 All American Canal (Welland Reach) 416.0 482.0 530.0 Iroquois (includes canals) 66.0 70.0 75.0 Sault Ste. Marie 40.0 42.0 44.0 St. Clair River Lock 18.0 20.0 22.0 St. Clair River Dam 32.0 32.0 32.0 Total 940.0 1,029.0 1,104.0 Interest during construction (except All American Canal)a 76.0 82.0 86.0 Total Costs and Interest 1,016.0 1,111.0 1,190.0 aInterest during construction and all engineering costs are already included in All American Canal. 40 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-24 Estimate of Dredging Required to Increase the System Capacity' System Depth 31' 32' 34' million million' _@I@llion million million million Item cu. yds. dollars cu. yds. dollars cu. yds. dollars St. Lawrence Seaway 130.0 412.0 156.0 494.0 280.0 882.0 Iroquois Canal 8.7 50.0 9.1 53.0 9.8 56.0 Welland Canal (LELO) 220.0 534.0 190.0 579.0 200.0 607.0 Sub-Total 358.7 996.0 355.1 1,126.0 489.8 1,545.0 Interlake Connections 223.0 707.0 267.0 846.0 476.0 1,507.0 Planning Subareas Harbors _1 Silver Bay (rock) 0.01 0.2 0.02 0.4 0.04 0.7 1.1 Taconite Harbor NA 0.6 NA 1.1 NA 2.0 1.1 Duluth 5.0 17.0 6.7 22.0 10.0 33.0 1.2 Marquette 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.3 2.2 Milwaukee 7.6 25.1 9.2 31.0 12.3 41.0 2.2 Calumet NA 53.0 NA 66.0 NA 92.0 2.2 Chicago 0.1 0.6 0.15 0.5 0.2 0.8 2.2 Indiana Harbor NA 11.2 NA 14.0 NA 20.0 2.2 Port of Indiana NA 6.0 NA 7.0 NA 8.0 2.4 Escanaba 0.2 0.6 0.2 0.8 0.4 1.2 4.1 Detroit NA 11.4 NA 14.0 NA 19.0 4.2 Toledo NA 38.0 NA 47.0 NA 66.0 4.2 Sandusky 4.5 15.0 5.7 19.0 7.9 26.1 4.3 Lorain 0.7 5.3 0.9 7.1 1.3 11.0 4.3 Cleveland 1.8 6.0 2.2 7.2 3.1 10.2 4.3 Conneaut 0.1 0 *4 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.7 4.4 Buffalo 0.8 13.0 1.1 15.2 1.8 24.0 Can. Thunder Bay 34.1 112.0 39.2 129.0 49.0 162.0 Can. Hamilton 0.2 0.3 0.01 0.7 Can. Toronto 1.7 5.7 2.2 7.1 3.0 10.0 Total, Harbors 56.71 321.5 67.77 389.4 45.25 528.7 Grand Total 638.41 2,024.5 689.87 2,361.4 1,011.05 3,580.7 aIncludes 6% interest during construction. Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Waterway System 41 TABLE C9-25 Effects of Dredging on Port Structures Planning Channel Depth Subarea Harbo r Work Proposed 31' 32' 34' 1.1 Silver Bay None --- --- --- 1.1 Taconite None --- --- --- 1.1 Duluth None --- --- --- 1.2 Marquette None --- --- --- 2.2 Calumet Additional cost to proposed docks in Lake Calumet $ 2,178,000 $ 2,723,000 $ 3,812,000 2.2 Chicago Rebuild bulkhead, Navy pier 238,000 297,000 416,000 2.2 Milwaukee Increased cost to proposed marginal wharf 528,000 660,000 924,000 Modify existing docks 28,644,000 28,710,000 28,776,000 2.2 Indiana Harbor (Gary) None --- --- --- 2.4 Escanaba None --- --- --- 4.1 Detroit Rebuild private dock frontage 4,019,000 4,307,000 4,594,000 4.2 Toledo Rebuild private dock frontage 4,468,000 6,930,000 7,392,000 4.2 Sandusky None --- --- --- 4.3 Lorain None --- --- --- 4.3 Cleveland None --- --- --- 4.3 Conneaut Rebuild bulkhead 739,000 792,000 845,000 4.4 Buffalo Rebuild bulkhead, Seaway dock 1,525,000 1,634,000 1,742,000 Canada Thunder Bay None --- --- --- Canada Hamilton Rebuild bulkhead 2,772,000 2,970,000 3,168,000 Canada Toronto Rebuild bridge & bulkhead 6,006,000 8,415,000 8,856,000 Total $51,117,000 $57,438,000 $60,525,000 Construction & Engineering 44,533,000 50,040,000 52,730,000 Interest during construction 6,584,ooo 7,398,000 7,795,000 TABLE C9-26 Cost of Transporting Com- merce on the Great Lakes (Millions of DollarS)a Tons Average Fleet _ Transported Cost Commodity U.S. Canadian Combined (millions) Per Ton 1970b Iron Ore 157 36 193 94.2 2.05 Coal 27 15 42 49.3 0.85 Limestone 30 3 33 36.1 0.91 Grain 11 59 70 21.7 0.32 Total 225 113 338 201.3 1.68 1995 Iron Ore 157 56 213 153.7 1.39 Coal 39 14 53 74.0 0.72 Limestone 34 6 40 63.3 0.63 Grain 7 73 80 30.7 0.26 Total 236 150 386 321.7 1.20 aRef. Water Levels of the Great Lakes, International Joint Commission Special Study Effect of Lake Level Regulation, Navigation Appendix (1971 vessel operating costs are used) bBased on existing conditions. Section 3 EXISTING AND PROJECTED WATERBORNE COMMERCE 3.1 Existing Waterborne Commerce Both of these movements converge on Lakes Ontario and Erie and at the south end of Lake Michigan .53 3.1.1 General The greater downbound volume originates on the shores of Lake Superior in the States of Concentrations of industry and population Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan, and at in both the United States and Canada, linked the Canadian port of Thunder Bay. The mines with strategically located natural resources of the Mesabi Range provide most of this ore. In and productive agricultural land, produce the 1970 Duluth- Superior, the twin ports that Great Lakes traffic. Fifty percent of the function as the primary outlet for the Mesabi steel-producing capacity of the United States Range, handled 32.4 million tons of iron ore. is located at Great Lakes ports, and an addi- United States shipments of taconite pellets, tional 15 to 20 percent is served by Great the development of which rejuvenated mines Lakes ports. Canadian steel production capac- on the Mesabi Range, have risen from 17.5 ity is even more concentrated at Great Lakes million tons in 1962 to 45.7 million tons in 1970, ports. Canadian lake ports represent 82 per- or from 26.5 percent of total U.S. Great Lakes cent of the nation's capacity. Five of the ten ore shipments in 1962 to 66.1 percent in 1970 .21 largest United States cities are Great Lakes A taconite plant is shown in Figure C9-7. The ports. Canada's largest city, Montreal, is at growth of Great Lakes shipments of iron ore the entrance to the St. Lawrence Seaway, and and iron ore pellets is shown in Tables C9-29, Canada's second largest city, Toronto, is a C9-30, and C9-31.21 With the exception of one Great Lakes port. port, all upper lake loading ports participated United States Great Lakes traffic is domi- in the pellet trade. nated by bulk commodities. They were re- The majority of the iron ore originating in ported in 1970 in millions of net tons: iron ore, the Lake Superior region passes down 94; coal, 49; limestone, 36; and grain, 22. Table through Lake Huron and the St. Clair River to C9-27 illustrates the growth of major bulk steel production plants on Lake Erie. Most of mineral commodities on the Great Lakes. the remainder is transported down to steel Overseas general cargo, a high-value commod- furnaces at the south end of Lake Michigan. ity, accounted for eight million tons of United Small amounts go to Lake Ontario. States traffic in 1969 and seven million tons in Three ports on the north side of the Gulf of 1970. St. Lawrence, Sept Iles, Pointe Noire, and Port A summary of the total United States traffic Cartier, are the leading ports for iron ore from on the Great Lakes and connecting channels the Quebec-Labrador mines. Tonnages and for the period 1959 to 1970 is given in Table facilities at major U.S. and Canadian iron ore C9-28. ports are shown in Table C9-32. Great Lakes deep-draft commercial harbors The efficient transfer of iron ore from the are indicated on Figure C9-2. References 10 originating mine to the processing mill de- and 56 give further information. pends on a highly coordinated transportation sequence. This system is comprised of ships, railroads, and dock transfer equipment. The 3.1.2 Iron Ore sequence involves moving the iron ore via rail from the mine site to a specialized port facility More iron ore is handled at lake ports and where the ore is transferred to dry bulk car- along the Seaway than other commodities. The riers, which carry it to the receiving port .53 ore moves in both directions on the Seaway There are basically two types of facilities system, downbound from Lake Superior and used in transferring ore from rail to lake ves- upbound from the lower St. Lawrence River. sels. The traditional port facility, as 43 44 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-27 Tonnage Handled in Bulk Freight Vessels on the Great Lakes, 1929 to 1970 (Net Short TonS)a (Cargo only) Bituminous Anthracite Ore Year Coalb Coalb -dross Tons Net Tons Ston-e Grain Total 1970 49,529,708 154,002 87,018,233' 97,550,021 38,477,439 23,820,347 209,531,517 1969 46,718,540 205,907 86,307,605 96,664,509 36,083,477 16,594,713 196,267,146 1968 48,657,184 204,682 83,6319049 93,666,775 33,093,501 16,325,298 191,947,440 1967 52,683,693 206,975 80,605,929 90,278,641 31,716,614 17,616.863 192,502,786 1966 55,375,935 209,529 85,273,676 95,506,517 34,021,957 25,013,943 210,127,881 1965 54,347,810 225,366 78,627,591 88,062,902 30,819,351 21,875,439 195,330,868 1964 51,921,001 221,741 78,115,327 87,489,166 30,771,477 21,637,255 192,040,640 1963 51,426,707 2169089 67,206,146 75,270,884 28,547,128 18,877,164 174,337,972 1962 45,9549329 229,956 63,085,330 70,655,570 24,666,684 15,905,464 157,412,003 1961 43,728,754 240,811 60,997,367 68,317,051 25,418,364 16,607,745 154,312,725 1960 46,408,307 292,928 73,030,945 81,794,658 27,179,458 14,134,959 169,810,310 1959 46,875,327 353,122 51,450,731 57,624,819 26,159,660 13,609,452 144,622,380 1958 44,679,937 270,058 54,798,230 61,374,018 22,496,239 12,625,829 141,446,081 1957 56,324,891 4549881 87,278,815 97,752,273 30,439,375 11,234,810 196,206,230 1956 56,785,903 588,782 80,195,929 89,819,440 30,753,412 14,3309454 192,277,991 1955 52,906,161 472,171 89,169,973 99,870,369 29,722,293 10,787,786 193,758,780 1954 469081,293 285,874 60,791,697 68,088,941 24,975,440 11,866,241 151,297,789 1953 50,753,100 281,613 95,844,449 107,345,783 26,999,207 14,317,229 199,696,932 1952 45,763,756 520,436 74,910,798 83,900,094 23,277,942 15.214,778 168,677,006 1951 50,426,652 519,004 899092,012 99,783,053 25,871,319 13,150,144 189,750,172 1950 56,862,000 778,222 78,205,592 87,587,471 23,395,011 9,327,450 177,950,154 1949 40,149,123 780,442 69,556,269 77,903,021 20,322,136 12,542,565 151,697,287 1948 59,241,228 1,322,302 82,937,192 92,889,655 22,282,425 9,876,880 185,612,490 1947 56,870,546 1,189,338 77,898,087 87,245,857 20,891,130 11,409,228 177,606,099 1946 52,361,722 1,364,809 59,356,716 66,479,522 17,551,555 10,197.850 147,955,458 1945 53,670,837 1,575,360 75,714,750 84,800,520 16,318,193 18,717,773 175,082,683 1944 58,747,203 1,416,127 81,170,538 90,911,003 16,856,279 16,228,880 184,159,492 1943 51,120,475 848,984 84,404,852 94,533,434 17,339,675 11,810,116 175,652,684 1942 51,623,848 909,949 92,076,781 103,125,995 18,570,048 8,501,586 182,731,426 1941 52,566,163 969,202 80,116,360 89,730,323 179633,448 11,387,480 172,286,616 1940 48,517,632 801,972 63,712,982 71,358,540 14,893,316 9,644,950 145,216,410 1939 39,836,786 531,335 45,072,724 50,481,451 12,208,205 11,172,079 114,229,856 1938 34,172,963 450,324 19,263,011 21,574,572 8,240,768 10,679,125 75,117,752 1937 43,644,997 673,768 62,598,836 70,110,696 14,429,379 5,829,399 134,688,239 1936 44,010,585 688,858 44,822,023 50,200,666 12,080,672 7,433,967 114,414,748 1935 34,730,099 559,036 28,362,368 31,765,852 9,082,155 6,750,261 82,887,403 1934 34,869,536 607,039 22,249,600 24,919,552 79392,218 7,951,145 75,739,490 1933 31,351,353 425,301 21,623,898 24,218,766 6,664,629 8,713,127 71,373,176 1932 24,563,391 293,978 3,567,985 3,996,142 3,928,840 8,890,409 41,672,761 1931 30,415,291 761,068 23,467,786 26,283,920 7,208,946 9,479,640 74,148,865 1930 36,839,923 1,232,137 46,582,982 529172,940 12,432,628 9,851,229 112,528,857 1929 37,933,249 1,321,329 65,204,600 33,029,152 16,269,612 10,021,099 138,574,441 aIncludes Canadian and United States traffic. bCoal figures from 1940 corrected to include Lake Michigan and Lake Ontario movement. cGross Tons (2,240 lbs.) SOURCE: The Hanna Mining Company, Agents - February 15, 1971. exemplified by the six ore docks at Duluth- Loading speed is governed primarily by the Superior, generally consists of high-level need to avoid overstressing the vessel hull. piers, which load vessels by gravity feed from Figure C9-8 shows taconite being loaded by on-pier storage bins. The vessel can also be gravity feed system. loaded directly from rail cars moving on and A more recently constructed type of ore off the pier. These high-level finger piers are loading facility generally operates at equipped with specially designed pockets. specialized bulk ports such as Taconite Har- They accept the ore from the rail cars and drop bor and Silver Bay. These ports are the outlets it via chutes into vessels moored alongside. for the high grade iron ore pellets produced by The average loading speed for this type of a complex concentrating process from taco- facility is approximately 3,000 tons per hour. nite or jasper. Both Silver Bay and Taconite Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 45 TABLEC9-28 Total Traffic Carried on the Great Lakes and Connecting Channels by Area, 1959 to 1970 (Millions of Tons) Area 1959 1960 1961- 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1970 Lake Superior 60.3 81.8 68.9 70.0 72.7 77.9 78.7 85.3 75.4 78.8 St. Marys River 65.9 86.6 74.2 74.5 77.4 83.7 81.3 87.3 77.9 81.1 Lake Michigan, including the Port 81.5 92.0 85.4 85.1 107.4 117.7 117.5 125.9 124.6 131.1 of Chicago (Chicago Harbor, North Branch, South Branch, Sanitary Ship Canal, Calumet-Sag Canal, Calumet Harbor and River, and Lake Calumet) Lake Huron 106.4 126.0 113.8 114.9 122.7 136.7 138.9 148.0 136.0 141.3 St. Clair River, including Channels 78.9 97.2 84.6 87.2 93.0 103.5 107.0 113.9 101.0 109.2 in Lake St. Clair Detroit River 92.6 111.2 96.2 100.0 107.2 120.3 124.5 129.2 118.5 125.6 Lake Erie, including Upper Niagara 100.7 114.9 101.0 107.4 120.2 134.5 140.6 147.5 136.6 142.7 River Welland Canal 21.0 21.7 21.5 27.5 31.1 38.9 40.6 43.8 41.7 45.7 Lake Ontario, including Lower 21.4 22.1 21.7 28.0 33.1 38.8 41.0 43.1 41.0 45.1 Niagara River St. Lawrence River, between Inter- 12.5 12.0 12.8 16.3 19.4 25.6 27.7 29.5 27.9 30.9 national Boundary Line and Lake Ontario Net United States Traffic on the 18/4.3 209.5 213.3 217.5 231. 7 217.3 228.2 Great Lakes Harbor use conveyer belt loading systems to TABLE C9-29 Great Lakes Area Iron Ore load iron ore pellets into ships. The conveyers ShipmentSa are impressive in their performance, averag- Shipments Nat. Iron Silica Moisture ing 6,000 tons per hour. The major Canadian Year (tons) M iron ore ports such as Sept Iles, Pointe Noire, Mesabi Range and Port Cartier also use these high-speed, 1924 28,850,000 51.93 6.08 11.35 belt-loading conveyer systems (see references 1933 13,355,000 51.26 8.77 11.55 17 and 53). 1955 66,504,000 50.43 10.21 11.26 Once the ore carrier arrives at ports on the 1960 52,087,000 54.10 9.03 8.31 lower Lakes, the ore is transferred from the 1965 49,172,000 56.66 8.32 6.62 vessel by shore-based cranes, usually of the 1970 54,717,000 58.93 7.36 5.26 specially-de signed Hulett type. Once out of the U. S. Ranges - Great Lakes Region vessel, the ore is either fed through a high- 1924 43,276,000 51.72 8.46 10.75 level hopper into waiting rail cars or into a 1933 21,455,000 51.85 8.96 10.47 system that places the ore in storage. The 1955 85,405,000 50.63 10.11 10.81 1960 67,439,000 53.84 8.90 8.26 traditional method for handling storage ore 1965 64,689,000 56.93 8.14 6.05 has been large bridge cranes, but there is a 1970 69,072,000 59.26 7.38 4.64 trend to use of conveyer systems. Total U. S. Unloaders are usually employed in groups Shipments-- or batteries of three to five machines on one 1970 87,389,000 59.31 7.31 4.10 dock. Individual machine rates are approxi- Canadian Regions mately 600 to 750 tons per hour. Average for a 1960 19,445,000 53.64 7.98 7.10 battery (the total dock rate) is approximately 1965 35,883,000 60.24 5.92 3.67 3,000 tons per hour. Figure C9-9 shows iron 1970 479824,000 61.83 5.59 3.05 ore being unloaded at a Lake Erie dock. aRail and water shipments. 46 Appendix C9 FIGURE C9-7 Taconite Plant at Silver Bay Harbor, Minnesota Courtesy of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers FIGURE C9-8 Loading Taconite by Typical Gravity Feed Loading System at New Duluth Dock Courtesy of Lake Carriers' Association W 7z 0 W*f7ij 1, %: 17 77 19 AWW NOMMOMM Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 47 All o- Y @y V,; hll,, FIGURE C9-9 Unloading Iron Ore at a Lake Erie Dock Courtesy of General Electric FIGURE C9-10 Ore Unloading and Coal Loading Docks at Toledo, Ohio Courtesy of Lake Carriers' Association 5, M 48 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-30 World Production of Iron Ore other five use the car dump unloaders, which in 1970 average 2,280 tons per hour. As is the case with iron ore, specialized coal bulk ports illus- Short Tons trate efficient loading. The ports of Sandusky, Continent (millions) Ashtabula, and Conneaut have changed their methods to modern conveyerized loading sys- tems capable of transferring coal at an aver- North America 156 age rate of 8,000 tons per hour. Here rail cars South America 81 are unloaded promptly onto a conveyer sys- tem. The coal can be loaded directly into a Europe 374 vessel, but normally it is sent to a stockpile. When a vessel arrives, the coal is reclaimed by Asia 100 conveyer and loaded. This system eliminates Africa 68 need for close coordination of rail and vessel movements. Coal can be received all winter Oceanic 51 and stockpiled for shipment in the spring when navigation opens. Mines supplying lake Total 830 coal can thus operate year-round, offering im- - portant economic savings. Railroad car de- murrage also is reduced. Vessel time in port is reduced significantly. The coal is generally 3.1.3 Coal loaded onto self-unloaders, which have their own, usually conveyerized, unloading system. Coal traffic is concentrated on Lake Erie, The ten Port of Detroit unloading docks that with Huron, Michigan, and Ontario having receive the greatest volume of coal are lesser roles. Coal movement on Lake Ontario equipped to receive only self-unloaders and is accomplished with large modern vessels. To- have available storage capacity of approxi- ledo is the most important loading port, al- mately 2.3 million tons. At Duluth-Superior though the net tonnage leaving the terminal five of the six coal docks use shore-based un- has decreased from 35 million tons in 1965 to 15 loading cranes, which operate in the 600 to 900 million tons in 1972. This fact reflects the ac- tons-per-hour range, while one coal dock ac- celerated inroads of unit train competition, cepts self-unloaders. At Hamilton, the largest the shift to eastern Lake Erie ports, and the Canadian recipient of coal, three of the un- effect of environmental controls on use of high loading docks require the use of self- sulphur coal. Destinations for coal are gener- unloaders, while the other two use bucket ally areas where electric utilities and the iron cranes handling coal at the rate of 325 tons and steel industry are predominant. Western per hour. The docks at Hamilton have a com- Lake Erie ports in the U.S. and a stretch along bined storage capacity of 590,000 tonS.53 the Detroit River consume substantial This ve s sel-to- storage movement at the re- amounts of coal. In Canada major receiving ceiving port is usually supplemented only by a ports for coal are Hamilton, with its steel cen- local transfer of the coal from storage to con- ter, and Toronto, with its coal-consuming pub- suming furnace. Tonnages and facilities at lic utilitie S.53 major U.S. and Canadian coal ports are shown The vast majority of coal moving in the in Table C9-33. Great Lakes Region leaves the mine in rail cars. At a central point these coal cars are assembled into trains and line-hauled to a 3.1.4 Limestone Great Lakes port for transshipment. For many years the procedure was to move the Like coal, virtually no limestone is shipped cars into dumping positions on the pier and overseas through the Seaway, but almost all unload. These standard coal loading docks limestone traffic is shipped by Lake. The tower high above the decks of the vessels. major loading ports for limestone are Calcite Their large conveyers and chutes move thou- (Figure 9-11), Stoneport, and Port Inland, sands of tons of coal an hour. Toledo, the Great Michigan. Port Dolomite, Michigan, is a major Lakes largest coal port, has six coal loading port for loading dolomite. Most of the traffic is docks 17 (Figure C9-10). One uses a conveyer unloaded near steel mills at Detroit, Gary, handling system that achieves a maximum Chicago, and Cleveland .53 vessel loading rate of 4,500 tons per hour. The (Continued on page 52) Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 49 TABLE C9-31 Shipments of Iron Ore Pellets Percent of Shipments Nat. Iron Silica Moisture Total Ore Year (tons) M M M Shipments United States Regions 1962 17,503,000 a 61.52 7.97 2.64 26.5 1963 23,224,000 a 61.74 7.97 2.18 32.3 1964 28,852,000 a 61.96 7.67 2.10 35.1 1965 30,786,000 a 62.05 7.55 2.10 37.2 1966 29,361,000 b 61.38 7.94 2.70 42.1 36,301,000 a 61.90 7.27 2.41 41.0 1967 33,913,000 b 61.85 7.29 2.70 53.1 41,347,000 a 62.25 6.79 2.44 50.6 1968 39,639,000 b 62.12 7.04 2.73 61.9 46,885,000 a 62.49 6.68 2.46 57.6 1969 45,402,000 b 62-38 6.86 2.39 63.6 53,475,000 a 62.66 6.59 2.18 59.6 1970 45,658,000 b 62.38 6.87 2.45 66.1 53,740,000 a 62.63 6.61 2.26 61.5 All Canadian Regions c 1962 1,146,000 65.90 1.50 0.03 4.8 1963 3,183,000 65.15 3.82 0.45 11.8 1964 6,359,000 64.44 4.33 1.34 18.5 1965 9,171,000 64.50 4.40 1.25 25.6 1966 11,258,000 64.33 4.37 1.47 30.8 1967 15,677,000 64.18 4.61 1.40 41.2 1968 20,702,000 65.11 4.68 1.48 48.4 1969 18,796,000 64.26 4.74 1.37 52.1 1970 24,186,000 64.12 4.87 1.39 50.6 aTotal U.S. Shipments bGreat Lakes Area Shipments cTotal Canadian Shipments 50 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-32 Major Iron Ore Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 (Thousands of Short Tons) Foreign Domestic Facilities Total Overseas Canadian Coastwise Lakewise Internal- U.S. Receiving Ports Cleveland, Ohio 5 16,649 --- 3,658 --- 12,991 --- Port of Detroit 2 10,560 --- 1,024 --- 9,536 --- Port of Chicago 5 9,612 --- 1,223 --- 8,330 59 Indiana Harbor, Ind. 2 9,297 --- 2,776 6,521 --- Gary, Ind. 1 8,736 --- --- --- 8,736 --- Port of Buffalo 3 8,213 --- 1,269 --- 6,944 --- Conneaut, Ohio 1 6,992 --- 1,897 --- 5,095 --- Toledo, Ohio 6 5,443 --- --- --- 5,443 --- Ashtabula, Ohio 1 5,250 --- 1,070 --- 4,180 --- Lorain, Ohio 1 3,421 --- 214 --- 3,207 --- Huron, Ohio 1 2,427 --- --- --- 2,427 --- Burns Waterway, Ind. 1 1,499 --- --- 1,499 --- Total 88,099 0 13,344 0 74,696 59 Percent of Total 100% --- 15% --- 85% --- U.S. Shipping Ports Duluth-Superior 6 32,352 --- 732 31,620 --- Taconite Harbor, Minn. 1 llt636 --- --- --- 11,636 --- Silver Bay, Minn. 1 10,995 --- --- --- 10,995 --- Escanaba, Mich. 1 9,864 --- --- 9,864 Two Harbors, Minn. 1 5,246 --- --- --- 5,246 --- Presque Isle, Mich. 1 3,816 --- 116 --- 3,700 --- Total 73,909 0 848 0 73,061 0 Percent of Total 100% --- 1% --- 99% --- Foreien Domestic Facilities Total U.S. Overseas Receipts or Shipments" Canadian Receiving Ports Hamilton 2 5,986 1,594 10 4,382 Sault Ste. Marie 1 1,889 381 --- 1,508 7- Total 7,875 1,975 10 5,890 Percent of Total 100% 25% 0.1% 74.9% Canadian Shipping Ports Sept Iles 2 23,007 21,947 --- 1,060 Port Cartier 1 9,964 9,957 --- 7 Thunder Bay 2 5,766 2,739 --- 3,027 Pointe Noire 1 5,765 -2,964 --- 2,801 Total 44,502 37,607 0 6,895 Percent of Total 100% 85% --- 15% SOURCES: Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part 3, Waterways & Harbors, Great Lakes, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part II, International Seaborne Shipping, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part III, Coastwise Shipping, 1970. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 51 TABLE C9-33 Major Coal Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 (Thousands of Short Tons) Foreign Domestic Facilities Total Overseas Canadian Coastwise Lakewise Internal U.S. Receiving Ports Port of Detroit 10 9,014 --- --- --- 9,014 --- Port of Chicago 1 6,330 --- --- --- --- 6,330 St. Clair River, Mich. 1 4,808 --- --- --- --- 4,808 ,Green Bay, Wis. 6 1,890 --- --- --- 1,890 --- Duluth-Superior 6 1,816 --- --- --- 1,816 --- Milwaukee, Wis. 10 1@-662 --- --- --- 1,662 --- Muskegon, Mich. 4 1,642 --- --- --- 1,642 --- Saginaw River, Mich. 1 1,567 --- --- --- 1,567 --- Oak Creek, Wis. 1 1,218 --- --- --- 1,218 --- Port of Buffalo 3 1,039 --- --- --- 1,039 --- Port Washington, Wis. 1 1,023 --- --- --- 1,023 --- Alpena, Mich. 1 791 --- --- --- 791 --- Total 32,800 0 0 0 21,662 11,138 Percent of Total 100% --- --- --- 66% 34% U.S. Shippi g Ports Toledo, Ohio 6 21,639 --- 3,944 --- 17,695 --- Conneaut, Ohio 1 7,545 --- 5,856 --- 1,689 --- Port of Chicago 1 6,342 2 21 --- 6,319 --- Ashtabula, Ohio 1 5,571 --- 4,641 --- 930 --- Sandusky, Ohio 2 4,845 --- 3,525 --- 1,320 --- Lorain, Ohio 1 3,127 --- 52 --- 3,075 --- Total 49,069 2 18,039 0 31,028 0 Percent of Total 100% --- 37% --- 63% --- Foreign Domestic Facilities Total -U.S. Ove rseas Receipts or Shipments Canadian Receiving Ports Hamilton 5 4,484 4,307 --- 177 Port Credit 1 3,801 3,801 --- --- Sarnia 6 3,399 3,377 --- 22 Sault Ste. Marie 4 2,349 - 2,322 --- 27 Toronto 5 1,615 1,615 --- --- Windsor 3 1,042 796 --- 246 Montreal 3 340 337 3 Total 17,030 16,555 0 475 Percent of Total 100% 97% --- 3% Canadian Shipping Ports No major shipping ports SOURCES: Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part 3, Waterways & Harbors, Great Lakes, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part II, International Seaborne Shipping, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part III, Coastwise Shipping, 1970. 52 Appendix C9 Jr M'a 'am 'A -tee, FIGURE C9-11 Limestone Loading Docks at Calcite, Michigan Limestone is a low-value commodity, with unloaded in the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence an inability to support much transportation Seaway are imports destined for Canadian cost. Fortunately limestone is not only pro- consumption .53 duced at lakeside, it is generally consumed at Ontario receives fuel oil from two basic or near lakeside, too, which minimizes the cost sources, western Canada and foreign supplies. of getting it to or from lake vessels. These two Pipelines transport the western crude to Sar- factors have resulted in the development of a nia and Toronto for refining, and the fuel out- sophisticated triangular movement of coal put is then shipped along the Lakes or ex- and limestone, designed to provide viable, ported to the U.S. Imported fuel oil is received low-cost transportation. Coal moves via self- either from cargoes transshipped at Montreal unloaders out of Lake Erie ports or Chicago or directly from foreign sources. Direct import destined for lakeside cities on Lakes Michigan sources include the United States, Europe, or Huron. Once the coal is unloaded, the self- and the Caribbean, while additional imports unloaders move in ballast to a port where they originate from within the Lakes system at load limestone and then sail to its port of des- Lake Erie and Lake Michigan ports. tination. Because this enables the vessel to The movement of fuel oil is another salient sail with as high a load factor as possible, it example of a complementary relationship be- reduces the overall transportation cost. Ton- tween several modes of transportation, nages and facilities at major limestone ports pipeline, lake vessel, and truck. The transpor- on the Great Lakes are shown in Table C9-34 tation sequence begins when the crude oil is (see references 17 and 48). delivered by pipeline to refineries serving the Great Lakes. Among the major crude oil sources are Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana 3.1.5 Fuel Oil in the United States, and Alberta in Canada. The crude oil is piped to major refineries in the The great Canadian demand for fuel oil is Chicago, Central Michigan, Detroit, Toledo, the impetus for most of the fuel oil movement Buffalo, and Duluth-Superior areas in the on the Great Lakes. Almost half the fuel oil U.S., and Sarnia and Toronto in Canada. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 53 TABLE C9-34 Major Limestone Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 (Thousands of Short Tons) Foreign Domestic Facilities Total Overseas Canadian Coastwise Lakewise Internal U.S. Receiving Ports Port of Detroit 10 5,753 --- --- --- 5,753 --- Cleveland, Ohio 11 2,443 --- --- --- 2,443 --- Port of Chicago 8 2,273 --- --- --- 2,273 --- Indiana Harbor, Ind. 3 2,256 --- -- --- 2,256 --- Fairport, Ohio 7 2,151 --- --- --- 2,151 --- Port of Buffalo 7 2,053 --- --- --- 2,053 --- Buffington, Ind. 1 1,905 --- --- --- 1,905 --- Saginaw River, Mich. 5 1,631 --- --- --- 1,631 --- Ludington, Mich. 1 1,552 --- --- --- 1,552 --- Gary, Ind. 2 1,341 --- --- --- 1,341 --- Lorain, Ohio 1 1,255 --- --- --- 1,255 --- St. Clair River, Mich. 1 825 --- --- --- 825 --- Total 25,438 0 0 0 25,438 0 Percent of Total 100% --- --- --- 100% --- U.S. Shipping Ports Calcite, Mich. 3 13,432 --- --- 13,432 --- Stoneport, Mich. 1 7,088 --- --- --- 7,088 --- Port Inland, Mich. 1 4,881 --- --- --- 4,881 --- Port Dolomite, Mich. 1 3,609 --- --- --- 3,609 --- Drummond Island, Mich. 2 2,527 --- 125 --- 2,402 --- Marblehead, Ohio 1 1,659 1,659 --- Kelleys Island, Ohio 1 508 --- --- --- 508 --- Total 33,704 0 125 0 33,579 0 Percent of Total 100% --- 0.4% --- 99.6% Foreign Domestic Facilities Total U.S. Overseas Receipts or Shipments Canadian Receiving Ports Clarkson 1 1,670 --- --- 1,670 Sault Ste. Marie 3 486 486 --- --- Windsor 3 333 323 10 --- Total 2,489 809 10 1,670 Percent of Total 100% 33% 0.5% 66.5% Canadian Shipping Ports Marble Bay 1 727 647 --- 80 Blubber Bay 1 596 548 --- 48 Total 1,323 1,195 0 128 Percent of Total 100% 90% --- 10% SOURCES: Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part 3. Waterways & Harbors, Great Lakes, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part II, International Seaborne Shipping, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part III, Coastwise Shipping, 1970. 54 Appendix C9 In most cases the refineries are located eludes grain production in the Great Lakes either directly on the Great Lakes-Seaway or hinterland only. on tributary bodies of water. Fuel oil and other products are pumped from refinery storage tanks into waiting barges and tankers. These 3.1.6.2 Wheat vessels then proceed to their demand points and unload into storage tanks, from which Thunder Bay and Duluth-Superior are by final delivery is made, normally by tank truck. far the two largest wheat loading ports on the Other refined products move by water either Great Lakes. They are the outlets for the mid- to small markets not reached by product continent of North America, the world's pipelines or as a means of equalizing tempo- largest supplier of wheat. Figure C9-12 shows rary imbalances between local supplies and grain being loaded into a vessel at Duluth demands. Heavy fuel oils are frequently Harbor. transported by water to the Great Lakes area. Most Canadian wheat moved along the They are not well suited to pipeline movement Seaway is loaded on lakers at Thunder Bay. because of high viscosity and pipeline con- Wheat destined for foreign export is shipped to tamination problems. Montreal or other ports on the lower St. Law- The Port of Chicago has two petroleum rence where it is reloaded on larger ocean docks.17 One at Calumet Harbor provides a ships for the final leg of its overseas journey. combination loading and unloading facility. More than 85 percent of the Canadian wheat The second is an unloading facility at the City exports are shipped to Northern and Eastern of Chicago. Their combined storage capacity is Europe, the U.S.S.R., and South Asia '53 as approximately 700,000 barrels. Of the seven shown in Table C9-37. Approximately 50 per- petroleum docks at Indiana Harbor, a major cent of all Canadian wheat exports move U.S. petroleum port, six are equipped for load- through the Seaway system. The practice of ing and one is for both loading and unloading. transshipping at Montreal became popular The combined storage capacity for the docks is when the Quebec-Labrador iron ore mines approximately 15.7 million barrels. began to develop. It soon became apparent Montreal, an important Canadian fuel port, that unit costs of the lake vessels could be has 11 petroleum docks, all but one of which substantially reduced by providing a return are equipped to handle both loading and un- haul of iron ore to ports on Lake Erie. loading of cargo. Their combined storage Approximately 22 percent of the Canadian space is 23.0 million barrels. Tonnage and wheat shipped via the Great Lakes-Seaway facilities at major petroleum ports on the system is consumed domestically.10 This Great Lakes-Seaway System are shown in domestic Canadian wheat moves in patterns Table C9-35. similar to those of foreign wheat, and reaches storage points on the lower St. Lawrence. The United States shipped only 8.4 percent 3.1.6 Grain of its wheat exports in 1971 via the Seaway. The twin ports of Duluth-Superior handle the majority of U.S. wheat traffic. In 1970 this 3.1.6.1 General amounted to 3.0 million tonS.411 More than half of U.S. wheat exports via the Seaway are des- Historically, 50 percent to 70 percent of U.S. tined for Northern Europe and North Africa grain shipments are for export. The Seaway (Table C9-38). Roughly 55 percent of American system is now the least expensive shipping wheat shipped over the Great Lakes is con- channel for most U.S. grain exports. grown sumed domestically.10 The majority of the within North Dakota, parts of Montana, American domestic wheat is unloaded at Buf- Wyoming, South Dakota, Iowa, and parts of falo with its large milling complex, although the Great Lakes grain producing border smaller quantities do go to Detroit, Cleveland, States. Since the opening of the St. Lawrence and Chicago. In 1968 comparable charges for Seaway in 1959, it is apparent that a substan- shipping a bushel of wheat from Duluth to tial shift in the U.S. export grain markets has Buffalo were 11@ by laker, 2W by unit train, occurred, largely at the expense of the North and 460 by single railroad car. Atlantic ports (Table C9-36). It should be Although the Seaway system is the most noted when comparing Table C9-36 with Table competitive route for exported barley, rye, and C9-39, that Table C9-36 includes total U.S. spring and durum wheats from the upper grain production, whereas Table C9-39 in- middlewest hinterland, as shown by its share Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 55 TABLE C9-35 Major Petroleum Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 (Thousands of Short Tons) Foreign Domestic Facilities Total Overseas Canadian Coastwise Lakewise Internal U.S. Receiving Ports Port of Chicago 2 4,280 --- --- 1,079 3,201 Milwaukee, Wis. 7 919 --- --- --- 917 2 Muskegon, Mich. 5 864 --- --- --- 864 --- Port of Buffalo 2 348 42 --- 271 35 Indiana Harbor, Ind. 7 344 --- --- --- 318 26 Total 6,755 0 42 0 3,449 3,264 Percent of Total 100% --- 1% --- 51% 48% U.S. Shipping Ports Indiana Harbor, Ind. 7 5,005 --- --- --- 4,973 32 Port of Chicago 2 1,353 --- 5 --- 696 652 Toledo, Ohio 5 470 --- 38 --- 429 3 Port of Detroit 2 389 --- --- --- 389 --- Port of Buffalo 2 304 --- --- --- 234 70 Total 7,521 0 43 0 6,721 757 Percent of Total 100% --- 0.6% --- 89.4% 10% Foreign Domestic Facilities Total U.S. Overseas Receipts or Shipments Canadian Receiving Ports Quebec 6 2,655 1,307 --- 1,348 Montreal 11 2,359 2,155 --- 204 Toronto 9 933 --- 173 760 Trois Rivieres 1 805 450 --- 355 Hamilton 3 727 9 73 645 Sept Iles 4 722 521 --- 201 Sault Ste. Marie 1 418 16 --- 402 Windsor 3 412 --- --- 412 Sorel 1 289 59 --- 230 Clarkson 1 288 --- 81 207 Sarnia 6 155 --- 26 129 Total 9,763 4,517 353 4,893 Percent of Total 100% 46% 4% 50% Canadian Shipping Ports Montreal 11 5,914 407 --- 59507 Sarnia 6 29281 56 --- 2,225 Thunder Bay 2 400 --- --- 400 Clarkson 1 364 59 --- 305 Quebec 6 269 23 --- 246 Toronto 9 181 --- --- 181 Total 9,409 545 0 8,864@ Percent of Total 100% 6% --- 94% SOURCES: Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part 3, Waterways & Harbors, Great Lakes, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part II, International Seaborne Shipping, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part III, Coastwise Shipping, 1970. 56 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-36 Grains: Inspections for Export by Coastal Areas, 1958, 1968, and 1971 Percent of Total Type Total Great Lakes Atlantic Gulf Pacific of Grain (Millions of Net Tons) Ports Ports Ports Ports Total 1958 - 3.7 22.6 52.4 21.3 1968 45.4 15.3 9.3 62.5 12.9 1971 47.4 17.8 5.5 65.4 11.3 Wheat 1958 - - 24.9 48.5 26.6 1968 16.5 9.4 6.6 50.7 33.3 1971 16.7 8.4 2.4 62.5 26.7 Oats 1958 - - 54.1 37.2 8.7 1968 0.098 92.0 - 8.0 - 1971 0.084 85.9 - 14.1 - Barley 1958 - 0.2 18.6 20.8 60.4 1968 0.4 28.7 12.3 0.9 58.1 1971 1.4 38.4 - 7.6 54.0 Rye 1958 - 3.9 50.8 23.7 21.6 1968 0.05 85.3 - 14.7 - 1971 0.15 92.0 0.7 7.3 - Flaxseed 1958 - 93.1 0.9 6.0 - 1968 0.25 92.2 - 7.8 - 1971 0.008 100.0 - - - Corn 1958 - 9.8 28.6 58.9 2.7 1968 16.2 20.9 14.9 64.2 - 1971 14.0 23.5 13.5 63.0 - Grain 1958 - - - 96.8 3.2 Sorghums 1968 3.7 0.3 96.1 3.6 1971 3.2 - - 95.1 4.9 Soybeans 1958 - 11.3 17.6 71.1 - 1968 8.2 18.5 7.9 73.6 1971 11.9 25.2 2.8 72.0 - Source: USDA Grain Market News, Weekly Summary and Statistics, January 1959, 1969, and 1972. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 57 TABLE C9-37 Canadian Wheat Exports of the total export market during the shipping Through the St. Lawrence Seaway, 1966 season (Table C9-39), Gulf, Atlantic, and Tonnage Seaway Share Pacific coast ports divert considerable ton- short tons Total Canadian nages during the winter months because of Destination Area (thousands) Wheat Traffic(%) the additional storage costs incurred at lake Northern Europe 2,427 64.7 ports. The limited shipping season on the Southern Europe 346 97.7 Lakes prevents the Seaway from shipping Eastern Europe & U.S.S.R. 3,863 77.3 more export grain. North Africa & Near East 296 98.0 Wheat exports via the Seaway32 in 1970, 8.8 South Asia 1,104 85.2 Latin America 191 62.2 percent of the United States total (19,200,000 All other destinations 594 8.1 tons) '48 are shown in tabular form in thou- Total 8,821 47.0 sands of tons. WHEAT SOURCE: Canadian Board of Grain Commissioners. From Canada Foreign Total United States 1,185 508 1,693 Canada 6,414 74 6,488 TABLE C9-38 U.S. Wheat Exports Through 7,599 582 8,181 the St. Lawrence Seaway, 1966 Tonnage Seaway Share Seaway exports have been projected to reach short tons Total U.S. 3,600,000 tons or 11 percent of the nation's Destination Area (thousands) Wheat TrafficM total by 2015.43 Northern Europe 539 20.7 Southern Europe 135 35.5 Eastern Europe 38 8.5 3.1.6.3 Corn North Africa 306 14.5 All other destinations 400 3.4 Total 1,418 7.2 Corn has become one of the nation's fastest growing export commodities. Chicago is the SOURCE: EBS Management Consultants, Inc., An Economic major port for corn traffic, drawing its pro- Analysis of Improvement Alternatives to the St. Lawrence Seaway System, 1969, Appendix A, duce from the western Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, P. IA-5. Iowa, and Nebraska corn belt. In 1970,1-2 mil- 7777@ V@ 2@ 'z 5.1 P 4 W 7- M-e, .. ..... .... . ... FIGURE C9-12 Grain Loading at Duluth Harbor Courtesy of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 58 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-39 Route Distribution of Wheat, Projections show that as much as 7,350,000 Corn, Soybeans, and Barley and Rye Shipped tons or 40 percent of U.S. corn exports will between May 1, 1966, and November 30, 1966 move via the Seaway by 2015 .43 a Distribution in Percent b Barley Route Wheat Corn Soybeans & Rye 3.1.6.4 Soybeans Seaway System 85.5 42.8 18.9 85.0 Soybeans flow in a pattern roughly similar (48.4)c to that of corn. Toledo and Chicago handle 85 Atlantic Coast Ports 3.8 4.6 4.4 1.2 percent of the soybean exports passing (28.2) through the Seaway stream. The amount of Gulf Coast Ports 9.0 52.6 76.7 2.6 (22.7) soybeans exported via the Seaway accounts Pacific Coast Ports 1.7 0.0 0.0 11.2 for only 20 to 24 percent of the U.S. soybean (0.7) export. There is virtually no U.S. domestic Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 soybean cargo. The major recipients of soy- (100.0) beans, as with corn, are countries in northern a and southern Europe and Japan. The surpris- bIncludes grain from Great Lakes hinterland only. ingly large share of soybean exports to Japan Commercial hard, red spring, and durum wheat only. is due to the fact that vessels carrying cDistribution for entire year (%). Japanese steel imports can reload their ships SOURCE: EBS Management Consultants, Inc., An Economic with soybeans. * Analysis of Improvement Alternative to the In the period 1959 to 1963, approximately St. Lawrence Seaway System, 1969, Table IV-10, 913,000 tons of soybeans were exported via the P. IV-20. Reference 10. Seaway.43 This is only 20 percent of the na- tion's exports, although 50 percent of U.S. soybeans are grown in central Illinois, In- diana, and Ohio. Exports of soybeans via and lion tons of corn passed through Chicago for the Seaway32 in 1970 comprise 18.8 percent of export to overseas and Canadian ports. Toledo the U.S. total (12,900,000 ton S)48 and are and Duluth-Superior also handle substantial shown in tabular form in thousands of tons. amounts of corn. Much of the corn is unloaded SOYBEANS at lower St. Lawrence ports for transshipment From Canada Foreign Total onto ocean-going vessels. The domestic flow of corn is similar to the United States 1,662 769 2,431 flow of wheat in that a substantial majority of Canada 51 2 53 the U.S. traffic is unloaded at the milling com- 1,713 771 2,484 plex at Buffalo. Virtually no corn is exported from Canada, but Canada does import some from the U.S. The major recipients of the U.S. The Gulf ports handle the majority of U.S. corn exports are northern and southern corn and soybean exports not only on a year- Europe and Japan.53 round basis as indicated in Table C9-36, but From 1959 to 1963 an average of 2,007,000 even when the Seaway system is open for tons, only 23 percent of the nation's total corn shipping as Table C9-39 points out. A compari- exports, was exported via the Seaway,43 al- son of Tables C9-36 and C9-39 reveals that the though the U.S. cornbelt, producing 80 to 85 Seaway's short shipping season has a signifi- percent of the nation's corn, is located in the cantly greater impact on diversion of corn ex- Great Lakes tributary area. Corn exports via ports to the gulf coast than on soybeans. Dur- the Seaway32 in 1970, 18.5 percent of the na- ing the shipping season U.S. corn exports tend tion's total (15,400,000 tons) '411 are shown in to split almost evenly between the Seaway and tabular form in thousands of tons. Gulf ports, while soybeans move predomi- nantly south. ProjectionS43 show that by 2015 CORN as much as 30 percent (3,200,000 tons) of U.S. From Canada Foreign Total soybean exports may move via the Seaway.43 United States 1,442 1,397 2,839 Canada 45 - 45 3.1.6.5 Barley and Rye 1,487 1,397 2,884 The flow of barley and rye on the Seaway Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 59 approximates that of wheat, but there is a time, are functional, though quite old. Nearly substantial quantity of barley that termi- all the grain facilities have been modernized nates in U.S. ports such as Milwaukee and since the opening of the Seaway. Duluth- Chicago where it is used in the production of Superior, the leading U.S. grain loading port, malt. A very large portion of Canadian barley has 13 grain elevators with a total storage and rye is transshipped in the lower St. Law- capacity of approximately 65 million bushels. rence River. A relatively high portion of The elevators operate with an average loading American barley and rye is taken directly speed of roughly 25,000 bushels per hour. overseas from Lake Superior, with a certain Montreal is the foremost Canadian grain quantity transloaded at lower St. Lawrence unloading port. The average unloading speed ports. Northern and southern Europe are the of its five facilities is 39,000 bushels per hour. major recipients of these commoditie S.53 The combined storage capacity of the Barley and rye exports via the Seaway av- elevators is 22.3 million bushels. Another lead- erage 681,000 tons annually or approximately ing unloading port, Buffalo, has grain 30 percent of total U.S. exports (1959-63) .43 elevators with a combined storage capacity of Projections show that approximately 43 per- 35.5 million bushels. Their average unloading cent (1,475,000 tons) will be exported via the speed is 21,000 bushels per hour. Seaway by 2015 .43 United States shipments of Utilization of port facilities is defined as the barley and rye 32 in 1970 (via the Seaway) are ratio of volume of shipments each year to the shown in tabular form in 1,000 tons. This was volume of storage capacity. A low ratio approximately 86 percent of the nation's 1970 suggests a slow turnover of inventory, and export (1,278 ton S).411 therefore excess storage capacity. The highest 1966 to 1967 ratio was 27 at New Orleans. BARLEY Other ratios were D uluth- Superior, 2.2; Chi- cago, 1.4; Toledo, 3.1; Albany, 1.2; Baltimore From Canada Foreign Total 4.7; and Norfolk, 7.7. The Gulf coast and Atlan- tic ports are open year-round, while Great United States 1,008 94 1,102 Lakes ports are limited to eight to nine Canada 2,650 229 2,879 months of operation. This accounts for some of - - - the discrepancies between lake and coastal 3,658 323 3,981 port utilization factors. In addition, schedul- ing loading at ports is complicated and erratic. Nevertheless, a conservative estimate indi- RYE cates that the existing storage capacity of Great Lakes ports could accommodate at least United States - 1 1 double present grain traffic. Canada 38 14 52 Tonnages and facilities at major farm prod- - - - ucts (grain) ports on the Great Lakes-Seaway 38 15 53 system are shown in Table C9-40. References 6, 10, 17, and 53 give further information re- garding cargo handling systems. 3.1.6.6 Cargo Handling Systems Several intermediate steps are involved in 3.1.7 General Cargo transfering grain from the area of production The term general cargo describes all com- to the area of distribution. After trucks move modities that must be handled by individual the grain to a nearby country elevator, it is unit, box, bale, or barrel and that are subject transported by rail to a major Seaway termi- to individual mark or count. nal market. From there, either an ocean vessel carries the grain directly to its overseas desti- nation or a laker shifts the cargo to the lower St. Lawrence for transshipment via ocean 3.1.7.1 Overseas General Cargo Traffic vessel to its foreign distribution port. Thunder Bay's 24 grain elevators provide The Seaway system's midwest tributary one of the world's largest concentrations of area, although landbound, generates the most grain storage. These 24 grain elevators, which overseas general cargo of any region in the can hold more than 105 million bushels at one U.S. Its export potential has grown rapidly. 60 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-40 Major Grain Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 (Thousands of Short Tons) Foreign Domestic Facilities Total Overseas Canadian Coastwise Lakewise Internal U.S. Receiving Ports Port of Buffalo 9 1,851 --- 28 --- 1,823 Milwaukee, Wis. 2 198 --- 188 --- 10 Total 2,049 0 216 0 1,833 0 Percent of Total 100% --- 11% --- 89% --- U.S. Shipping Ports Duluth-Superior 13 6,046 1,168 2,953 --- 1,935 --- Port of Chicago 7 2,386 993 1,079 2 85 227 Toledo, Ohio 3 1,888 558 1,292 --- 38 --- Milwaukee, Wis. 2 529 221 192 --- 116 --- Total 10,859 2,940 5,516 2 2,174 227 Percent of Total 100% 27% 51% --- 20% 2% Foreign Domestic Facilities Total U.S. Overseas Receipts or Shipments Canadian Receiving Ports Montreal 5 3,942 320 --- 3,622 Port Cartier 1 2,537 806 --- 1,731 Baie Comeau 1 2,368 1,227 --- 1,141 Trois Rivieres 1 1,550 771 --- 779 Quebec 1 1,388 457 931 Sorel 1 1,189 15 --- 1,174 Toronto 3 352 --- --- 352 Total 13,326 3,596 0 9,730 Percent of Total 100% 27% --- 73% Canadian Shipping Ports Thunder Bay 2 12,559 276 520 11,763 Montreal 5 2,712 2,712 --- --- Port Cartier 1 2,656 2,656 --- --- Baie Comeau 1 2,503 2,498 --- 5 Trois Rivieres 1 1,232 1,232 --- --- Sorel 1 1,147 1,147 Quebec 1 926 921 --- 5 Total 23,735 11,442 520 11,773 Percent of Total 100% 48% 2% 50% NOTE: Includes Wheat, Corn, Barley, Rye, oats, and Flaxseed. SOURCE: Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part 3, Waterways & Harbors, Great Lakes, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part II, International Seaborne Shipping, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part III, Coastwise Shipping, 1970. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 61 As shown in tabular form, seven Great ports. Lube oil, greases, and domestic freight Lakes States were ranked among the 11 lead- traffic are important products moving be- ing States in terms of exports of manufactured tween Canadian ports. Newsprint is a major goods (dollar value) in 1969. The seven Lake Canadian export to the U.S. Downbound States comprised 45 percent, or $29,210,000,000, domestic general cargo includes domestic of the national total. package freight, chemicals, and malt, which move between Canadian ports, and clay, ben- State ($ Millions) tonite, peas, and beans, which move from the California 2,721 U.S. to Canada. Michigan 2,613 There are so many variables involved with Illinois 2,343 the transportation of general cargo that it is Ohio 2,338 impossible to reduce them to a definite se- New York 2,296 quence. It is sufficient to say that general Pennsylvania 1,902 cargo is carried to and from the Seaway ports Texas 1,468 Indiana 999 primarily by truck, although railroads are also Washington 955 involved. Massachusetts 818 Wisconsin 785 Total 19,238 3.1.7.3 Major General Cargo Ports National Total 29,210 The Port of Chicago, the largest U.S. general Source: 1971 Statistical Abstract of the U.S.52 cargo port on the Great Lakes, operates eight general cargo terminals at Calumet Harbor Even though the Seaway system is a low with approximately 10,000 feet of wharf. The cost overseas shipping channel, the lake ports Calumet Harbor piers provide heavy lift handle less than 20 percent of the total gen- cranes. There are also three other general eral cargo exports generated within this cargo terminals in downtown Chicago, which highly productive area. Allegedly the lake depend entirely on ship's gear for cargo han- ports face discriminatory rail rates and in- dling. Detroit has four general cargo termi- equitable rail services, the same problem that nals, which provide an open storage area of plagues their export grain traffic. 3,395,120 square feet and a transit shed capac- Other factors holding back shipment of gen- ity of 400,000 square feet. eral cargo from the Great Lakes to overseas At the Port of Milwaukee five of six general destinations are inertia or force of habit, lack cargo terminals have been built since 1961. At of promotion, and seasonality. (See Subsection these five terminals cargo is handled by ship's 1.9 on competition.) gear or shore-based heavy lift crane. The Particularly important general cargo items other general cargo terminal is much older and are iron and steel plates, shapes, and castings. rents its cargo-handling equipment as needed. In 1970 iron and steel imports from Europe Montreal, with 48 general cargo facilities, is and Japan accounted for 68 percent of the gen- the largest general cargo port on the Seaway eral cargo traffic on the St. Lawrence River system. Seven terminals provide on-pier, section in both directions and 74 percent of the heavy lift equipment, and four rely entirely on upbound general cargo traffic. A substantial ship's gear. There is 598,340 square feet of portion of the inbound iron and steel is un- open storage space available and 3,863,100 loaded at Detroit where cold rolled steel is square feet of transit shed and warehouse used for automobiles. Chicago is close behind space for storing cargo. There is also a 100,000 Detroit in total overseas iron and steel im- square foot, open-ended container storage ports. Because steel and iron imports account shed for 750 containers. The containers are for such a large percentage of the general handled by a 56,000 pound container crane. cargo movement, the tonnage totals for the Thunder Bay has three terminals for han- remaining general cargo are relatively small. dling general cargo. At two of these docks the cargo can be handled by ship's gear only. At the third facility, cargo can be handled either 3.1.7.2 Domestic General Cargo by ship's gear or rented cranes. Tonnages and facilities at major general cargo ports on the Domestic general cargo moving up the Sea- Great Lakes-Seaway are shown in Table way system primarily consists of Canadian C9-41. References 17 and 53 give further in- goods destined for United States or Canadian formation on major general cargo ports. 62 Appendix C9 TABLEC9-41 Major General Cargo Shipping or Receiving Ports, 1970 (Thousands of Short Tons) Foreign Domestic Facilities -Total Overseas Canadian Coastwise Lakewise Internal U.S. Receiving Ports Port of Chicago 11 6,390 1,486 514 16 480 3,894 Port of Detroit 4 3,347 1,645 595 73 1,010 24 Milwaukee, Wis. 6 1,909 267 106 --- 1,531 5 Cleveland, Ohio 6 993 521 82 --- 384 6 Toledo, Ohio 4 808 334 152 --- 281 41 Duluth-Superior 3 761 56 34 671 --- Total 14,208 4,309 1,483 89 4,357 3,970 Percent of Total 100% 30% 10% 1% 31% 28% U.S. Shipping Ports Port of Chicago 11 3,219 1,383 168 58 291 1,319 Milwaukee, Wis. 6 1,152 232 --- --- 920 Port of Detroit 4 1,140 741 5 2 344 48 Cleveland, Ohio 6 869 211 59 23 576 --- Duluth-Superior 3 506 426 14 --- 66 --- Toledo, Ohio 4 408 76 64 --- 256 12 Total 7,294 3,069 310 83 2,453 1,379 Percent of Total 100% 42% 4% 1% 34% 19% Foreign Domestic Facilities Total U.S. Overseas Receipts or Shipments Canadian Receiving Ports Montreal 48 3,587 2,622 --- 965 Toronto 8 1,810 425 586 799 Thunder Bay 5 1,102 81 16 1,005 Hamilton 4 886 337 280 269 Total 7,385 3,465 882 3,038 Percent of Total 100% 47% 12% 41% Canadian Shipping Ports Montreal 48 3,522 2,667 --- 855 Thunder Bay 5 927 213 220 494 Hamilton 4 799 37 324 438 Toronto 8 272 6 263 3 Total 5,520 2,923 807 1,790 Percent of Total 100% 53% 15% 32% NOTE: Includes all commodities except Petroleum, Iron Ore, Grain, Coal, and Limestone. SOURCES: Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part 3, Waterways & Harbors, Great Lakes, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part II, International Seaborne Shipping, 1970. Statistics Canada, Shipping Report Part III, Coastwise Shipping, 1970. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 63 3.2 Prospective Waterborne Commerce written to process the data calculated the an- nual percentages of each commodity carried over each route as percentages of each annual 3.2.1 Methodology total commodity movement. The proportional distribution for the base years 1956 to 1964 were projected to year 1995 3.2.1.1 Iron Ore, Limestone, and Coal by regression analysis (best fit-least square line). The proportions projected for 1995 over The latest estimates of potential Great each of the traffic routes were normalized to Lakes traffic in iron ore, bituminous coal, and 100 percent for each category (lakewise, ex- limestone were made for the 50-year period port, and import). 1970 to 2020 for the Great Lakes Water Levels Traffic distribution patterns for Canadian Study. These three commodities comprise ap- coastwise shipments were developed sepa- proximately 80 to 85 percent of the total ton- rately in a special study. Separate forecasts nage handled at U.S. Great Lakes ports. Traf- for each traffic route were made. fic estimates are based on the following as- sumptions: (1) Improvements to channels, locks, and 3.2.1.2 Grain harbors will be made during the project period if and when they are required to accommodate Estimates of prospective grain traffic de- the projected traffic, but such improvements veloped in the Grain Traffic AnalySiS,43 which will not include an increase in the present con- accompanied the Great Lakes Harbors trolling depth of the system, which is 27 feet. Study '42 are used here. Eight kinds of grain (2) There will be no radical changes in the were included in the study: wheat, corn, bar- present general pattern of traffic. ley, rye, oats, grain sorghums, soybeans, and (3) By 1995 all harbors shipping or receiv- flaxseed. ing a significant volume of one or more of the The projections of potential waterborne four bulk commodities analyzed will have grain commerce were developed using the fol- been deepened to 27 feet. lowing assumptions: (4) By 1995, additional 1200 by 110 foot (1) There will be no major wars or national locks will be in operation on the Seaway and economic depressions. Welland Canal. (2) Depths of the connecting channels and In developing the shipment estimates for principal U.S. Great Lakes harbors will permit each of the three mineral commodities, con- drafts commensurate with the controlling sideration was given to: depth of the 27-foot St. Lawrence Seaway. (1) past and anticipated demand require- (3) Canals and waterways between Lakes ments of consuming industries in areas hav- Erie and Ontario and in the St. Lawrence ing access to Great Lakes transportation River will be adequate to handle the estimated (2) the present and future production traffic potentials. capability of suppliers (4) All other factors being equal, grain will (3) resource availability in the Great Lakes move from producing areas to foreign and Region domestic areas of consumption over the most Quantities were estimated by standard economical routes. statistical methods using shipment data col- Sources of data for grain traffic include re- lected by various United States and Canadian ports by the Interstate Commerce Commis- agencies including the U.S. Bureau of Mines,' sion, the Department of Agriculture, the the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers '411 and the Bureau of the Census, and the Corps of En- Canadian Ministry of Transport .7, 32 Projected gineers. traffic distribution patterns for U.S. Great A combination of methods was used to de- Lakes shipments of bituminous coal, iron ore, rive projections of future grain exports from limestone, and grain were developed from the Great Lakes tributary area. A shift analy- waterborne commerce data obtained by the sis based on the present level of U.S. and Great U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Tonnages for Lakes exports and grain sales from farms each type of U.S. Great Lakes traffic combined with other long-range variables was (lakewise, export, and import) over each of 25 used to establish the future potential for grain different origin and destination combinations, exports from Great Lakes ports via the St. were recorded by commodity and by years for Lawrence Seaway. the period 1956 to 1964. A computer program Two variations of the shift analysis were 64 Appendix C9 used in the study. The first, called the propor- the General Cargo Analysis is described be- tional shift was based on the grain exports low. from Great Lakes ports in 1962. For this the A special study of origins and destinations of percentages of the 1962 national export total foreign waterborne commerce in the United for each type of grain according to destination States determined that 25 percent of the U.S. were compiled and applied to national grain waterborne foreign trade was generated in export projections for 1965, 1980, and 2015. the 19-State area served by Great Lakes ports. This analysis assumes that future Great This area encompasses 36 percent of the na- Lakes ports grain exports will increase in di- tion's population, 44 percent of the U.S. value rect proportion to the 1962 national distribu- added by manufacture, and 50 percent of the tion level. The results were used as a bottom value of farm products sold in the U.S. The limit of future Great Lakes grain export po- foreign trade data further revealed which of tential. these Great Lakes areas supplied which over- To estimate the amount of potential export- seas foreign areas. Also, the data were ad- able grain that is most economically shipped justed for institutional and other factors, in- through the Seaway from the Great Lakes cluding the closed Great Lakes navigation tributary area, the present percentages of season during the winter months. The result grain sales from farms within a 15-State Great revealed that approximately 7 percent of the Lakes area were applied to the national grain nation's total general cargo foreign trade is export projections to obtain an estimate of available for shipment via U.S. Great Lakes total exports generated within the area. The harbors. Analysis of the commodities in over- geographical contours of transportation cost seas general cargo foreign trade indicated advantage to European, Mediterranean, and that the foreign overseas trade generated in Latin American countries via the Great Lakes the Great Lakes tributary area would keep and St. Lawrence Seaway were then used to pace with the national production rate for determine the amount of exports generated those commodities. within the 15-State area that are best sent via The estimate of Canadian general cargo the Seaway route. traffic by 1980 presented in the report "St. The proportional shift analysis and the Lawrence Seaway Tolls and Traffic Analysis analysis of exports generated through grain and Recommendations" by J. Kates and As- sales resulted in a low and high level estimate sociates (1965) 22 is used here. Estimates for of future Great Lakes ports grain exports. To planning periods 2000 and 2020 are obtained determine the level of future grain exports by plotting the Kates estimate of total Seaway from Great Lakes ports, it was necessary to traffic for 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2010, and ex- consider several other factors, including the trapolating to 2020. Then the estimate of total long-range trend of grain production and sales traffic in 2000 and 2020 is multiplied by the from farms within the area. A second factor is ratio of Canadian general cargo to total Sea- the location of the Great Lakes ports in rela- way traffic in 1980 to obtain the volume of tion to the major foreign area markets. Other general cargo traffic. considerations examined for each foreign area Several harbors have already handled gen- were variations in population growth rates, eral cargo traffic equal to or greater than the increases in standard of living, and individual estimates found by the above methods. It is country dietary habits. too early to determine whether these are Future traffic estimates contained in the short-term fluctuations or long-term trends. Grain Traffic AnalysiS43 were interpolated to The recent origin-destination study of U.S. find the traffic in 2000 and extended graphi- overseas traffic will allow updating of that cally to determine the 2020 traffic. traffic estimate .50 New information on both U.S. and Canadian traffic will be included in this report as available. 3.2.1.3 Overseas General Cargo The estimates developed in the Great 3.2.1.4 Extension of the Navigation Season Lakes-Overseas General Cargo Traffic Analy- SiS44 to accompany the Great Lakes Harbors Extension of the navigation season on the Study42were interpolated and extrapolated to Great Lakes would allow more bulk materials the planning periods 1980, 2000, and 2020 for and general cargo to be shipped via the Great use in this report. The methodology used in Lakes. Estimates of shipments on the Great Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 65 Lakes would be increased by approximately Quebec and Labrador, approximately 360 the tonnages shown in Table C9-87. An addi- miles north of the Gulf of St. Lawrence. tional 25 million tons would move via the The U.S. Bureau of Mines' has indicated Lakes by 2000, including 7 million tons of iron U.So iron ore reserves are adequate to meet ore, 3 million tons of stone, 2 million tons of the projected demands for at least 100 years if coal, 3 million tons of grain, 2 million tons of the price of ore increases moderately or if general cargo, and 8 million tons of other technology reduces the costs of mining and cargo. beneficiation.1 Total iron ore resources in the United States have been estimated at approx- imately Ill billion tons. Ninety percent of 3.2.2 Iron Ore these resources are located in the Lake Superior region principally in the form of The sources of iron ore for the United States taconite, which requires beneficiation to make steel industry have changed in the past 20 it acceptable for blast furnace use. It is esti- years, beginning with the inability of the mated that by 1980, all iron ore shipped from natural iron ore mines in Michigan, Min- western Lake Superior will be in the form of nesota, and Wisconsin to furnish an adequate pellets (Appendix 5, Mineral Resources). long-term ore supply. This led to the discovery The United States minable iron ore re- and development of new reserves of higher serves, estimated by the Bureau of Mines at grade ore in Canada and the partial replace- varying price levels,' are shown in Table ment of the upper Great Lakes region as the C9-42. The figures, based on 1966 costs and primary ore source. However, with the advent technology, indicate the amount of usable iron of ore pellets, the upper Great Lakes region ore that may be produced at the indicated again became competitive to the extent that price levels. The apparent average mine price the University of Minnesota School of Mines is $12 per long ton, and the lowest price limit at forecasts shipment of as many as 75 million which most domestic mines can operate with- tons of iron ore (65 of pellets and 10 of natural out subsidy is estimated at $9 per long ton.' ore and concentrate) in 1975 from the region. Under 1970 conditions approximately 10 bil- In fact, the most productive iron ore region in lion short tons of domestic ore is considered the world is now the very old (Precambrian) economically minable. Nine billion short tons strata surrounding Lake Superior in both the of this ore is in the Lake Superior region adja- United States and Canada. cent to the Great Lakes waterway. The Bureau of Mines and the University of Iron ore shipments by all modes of transpor- Minnesota studies' on future U.S. iron ore tation were analyzed to determine what per- demand indicate an expected annual growth centage of the total annual production was rate of approximately two percent based on carried on the Great Lakes waterway system. iron units. The Bureau of Mines estimated the During the nine-year period studied (1956 to average grade of iron ore for blast furnace 1964), the percentage of lake shipments to feed will increase from 57 percent in iron con- total production ranged from 87 to 93 percent. tent in 1967 to 60 percent in 1970, 70 percent in The arithmetic average was 91 percent. A re- 1985, and 80 percent in the year 2000. This gression analysis showed that 91 percent of increase in grade is expected to result from gradual conversion to prereduced agglomer- ates and pellets for producing pig iron. Be- cause less ore will be required as grade in- TABLE C9-42 Apparent U.S. Minable Re- creases, transportation costs will be less. Con- serves of Iron-Ore (Millions of Short Tons) sequently the productivity of the furnaces will Iron Ore Prices Per Short Ton increase. After the projected iron-unit re- Region $12 $14 $16- quirements are adjusted to reflect the ex- pected increase in iron content, the ore ton- Northeastern 150 200 300 nage requirements indicate there will be an Southeastern 250 550 7,000 average annual growth rate of 1.5 percent for Lake Superior 9,000 11,000 100,000 the projected period. Canadian ore deposits are located in the Central and Gulf 150 650 700 Canadian shield, particularly in western On- Western 450 1,000 3,000 tario and in the Knob Lake-Schefferville dis- Total 10,000 13,500 111,000 trict in the eastern part of the shield between 66 Appendix C9 production was shipped on the Lakes in the tion, it may be questioned how long the re- base year 1960. It is not expected that patterns serves will last. Economic geologists indicate and methods of lake shipment from U.S. ori- that there is enough iron ore on earth to last at gins will change enough by 1995 to cause any least 200 years at the current rate of consump- long-term change in the percentage of lake tion. Two-thirds of these reserves are in the shipments to total production. western hemisphere, primarily in the United Imports of iron ore handled on the Great States and Brazil although Canada and Cuba Lakes have accounted in recent years for ap- also have notable deposits. Two-thirds of proximately 20 percent of the total Great North American ore comes from the Great Lakes iron ore commerce. Principally from Lakes ranges in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Canadian sources, these imports are expected Minnesota. The 100-mile long Mesabi range is to remain at this same percentage level estimated to contain approximately 70 billion throughout the projection period. Estimates tons of low grade material (taconite), which is made by Canadian authorities also agree with being used in concentration (pelletizing) proc- this percentage. esses by several large companies. Iron ore production from States bordering Table C9-45 shows the projected iron ore the Great Lakes will increase at approxi- shipments. The projected traffic distribution mately the same rate as the expected demand. pattern for 1995 iron ore shipments on the Table C9-44 shows the base used for pro- Lakes is shown on Table C9-46. Tables C9-47, jecting ore production from these States and represents the modified arithmetic average of total annual production from 1955 to 1965. A TABLE C9-44 Iron Ore Production in Base regression analysis of the Minnesota produc- Year (1960) in States Bordering the Great tion data, representing the largest percentage Lakes (Millions of Short Tons) of total production, indicated the computed value for 1960 was three percent less than the Production arithmetic average. The arithmetic average Source 1960 1969 was reduced slightly. Because of the much smaller difference for the other States, no ad- Michigan 12.5 15.0 justment of their production figures was re- quired. Minnesota 57.1 61.9 In Appendix 5, Mineral Resources, the fu- New York 2.8 4.2a ture production of iron ore in the United States portion of the Great Lakes Basin is es- Pennsylvania 1.5 timated as shown in Table C9-43. This is ap- Wisconsin 1.2 proximately 80 percent of the total usable ore - produced in the five border States shown in Total 75.1 81.1 Table C9-44. In view of the tremendous annual produc- aIncludes both New York and Pennsylvania. TABLE C9-43 Great Lakes Iron Ore Production Great Lakes Planning Subareaa Basin Total 1.0 2.0 5.0 Long Short Long Short Long Short Long Short Year Tons Tons Tons Tons Tons Tons Tons Tons 1968 56,636 63,500 52,000 58,250 3,449 3,860 1,187 1,330 1980 65,550 73,500 61,600 69,000 2,500 2,800 1,450 1,620 2000 90,490 101,200 84,700 95,000 3,800 4,250 1,990 2,230 2020 124,740 139,700 116,400 130,400 5,600 6,300 2,740 3,100 1968 to 2020 4,431,200 4,960,000 4,149,600 4,650,000 184,000 206,000 97,600 110,600 aX0 iron ore has been or is expected -to-bie-produced in planning subareas 3.0 and 4.0. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 67 C9-48, and C9-49 show the projected average iron based on the projected shipment quan- distances of the U.S. traffic routes, the round- tities and traffic distribution pattern for 1995. trip hours for the Canadian traffic routes, and Because the present sources and markets for the projected round-trip time factor for the iron ore are not expected to change radically, vessels handling the cargo. These tables were the 1995 general traffic pattern follows closely developed for the Great Lakes Water Levels that of today. As shown on the flow chart and Study. Figure C9-14 shows the low, medium, in Table C9-46, the major movement of iron and high estimates of prospective traffic. ore is from Planning Subareas, 1.1 and 2.4 to Figure C9-13 represents the traffic flow of 2.2, 4.1 and 4.3. TABLEC9-45 Projected Great Lakes Iron Ore Production and Shipments (Millions of Net Tons) Base Year 1960 1970 a 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2020 U.S. Production High b C 75.1 81.9 100.0 110.3 120.6 134.5 147.4 164.6 297.5 Medium 75.1 81.9 93.9 101.2 109.0 117.4 126.5 135.0 182.0 Lowd 75.1 81.9 80.2 81.3 83.7 86.3 88.2 91.4 123.2 Shipments Medium U.S. Lakewise 68.5 72.2 82.1 88.4 95.3 102.7 110.7 119.2 160.6 U.S. Export 5.0 2.5 5.1 5.0 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 U.S. Import 8.1 16.4 24.0 25.3 26.9 28.4 30.1 31.9 44.0 Canadian Coastwise e 3.1 4.0 5.1 6.1 7.1 8.1 8.1 11.6 Total 81.6 94.2 115.2 123.8 133.2 143.0 153.7 164.0 f 221.0 f High f 81.6 106.4 121.0 134.0 146.0 163.0 179.0 200.0 360.0 Low f 81.6 91.0 96.0 98.6 102.0 105.0 107.0 111.0 150.0 a Actual 1970 production. b Judgment projection based on historical requirement for iron content in the period 1960 to 1970 which equaled about a 3% annual increase in iron content requirements. Same projected percent of iron content per ton of production as Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8461.1 c Data to 1995 from Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8461. Data for 2000 and 2020 based on growth rate of about 1.5%. d Judgment projection based on rate of growth slightly higher than OBERS (Bureau of Census, Series C, from publication P 25 no. 381) projected rate of 1.3%. This study indicated a future U.S. iron ore demand to equal an expected annual growth rate of approximately 1.5% based on iron units. Same projected percent of iron content per ton of production as Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8461. e The 1995 estimate provided by the Ministry of Transport (Canada). Other values were interpolated between 1970 and 1995. Estimates for 2000 and 2020 were obtained by subtracting the estimated U.S. shipments from estimated total shipments. f Estimated using 1995 ratio of production to total shipments, medium projection. 68 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-46 Projected Iron Ore Traffic Distribution Pattern in 1995 (Percent of Respective Traffic Type) Destination Lake Ontario Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake and/or Type of Traffic Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie St. Lawrence U.S. Lakewise Superior 33.15 57.36 -- U.S. Export, Canadian Import Superior -- -- 100.00 U.S. Import, Canadian Export Superior -- 10.60 5.70 -- Canadian Coastwise Superior 19.80 -- 4.90 24.70 U.S. Lakewise Michigan -- 4.78 4.69 -- U.S. Import, Canadian Export Huron 1.70 6.60 U.S. Import, Canadian Export Ontario 17.60 57.80 -- Canadian Coastwise and/or -- -- 50.60 St. Lawrence TABLE C9-47 Mileages of Projected Iron Ore Shipments in United States Fleet in 1995 Destination Lake Ontario Type of Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake and/or Shipment Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie St. Lawrence Lakewise Superior 292 797 458 792 --- Export Superior 316 --- --- 935 971 Lakewise Michigan --- 276 --- 507 --- Export Michigan 197 --- --- 651 735 Import Michigan 699 --- 474 --- 1172 Lakewise Erie --- --- --- 430 --- Export Erie 486 --- --- --- 292 Import Erie 703 --- 304 --- 416 TABLE C9-48 Round Trip Hours of Projected Iron Ore Shipments in Canadian Fleet in 1995 Type Destination of Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake Shipment Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie Ontario Coastwise Superior 72 -- 127 220 Exports Superior -- 176 122 -- Imports Superior -- -- 236 Exports Huron 142 64 -- Exports Ontario -- 77 -- Coastwise St. Lawrence -- 173 Exports St. Lawrence 217 161 -- Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 69 d' ST. MARYS FALLS CANAL UP DOWN 1970* - 67 6@ NOTES: 1980 - 88 - 114 1995 FLOW LINES DENOTE 2000 - 122 YEAR 1995 TONNAGE 2020 - 164 *ACTUAL TRAFFIC IN 1970. L ALL FIGURES IN MI LIONS OF TONS (2,000 LBS.) W, 0 N T A R 1 0 QUEBEC AI/CH _J ST. LAWRENCE RIVER U P DOWN C % IV/V1 I t).u 0.3 1980 21.0 2.0 1995 27.0 4.0 2000 29.0 4.0 2020 39.0 6.0 SOUTH END OF WELLAND LAKE MICHIGAN CANAL UPDOWN @Lp DOWN 1970'E2.6 4.0 1970* 30 5.0. 1980 39 - 1980 17.0 %.% i.. ST. CLAIR R. DETROIT R. 199523.0 7:0, 1995 51 - UPDOWN U 5.0 7.0::: 2000 54 - WP DOWN 200025 1970* 4 '0 53.0 4.0 53.0 202033.0 1 2020 73 - 1980 4.0 62.0 4.0 62.0 1995 5.0 80.0 5.0 BO S, C1 R 0 "I qQN� I N 2000 5.0 85.0 5. ILLINOIS 2020 7.0 115.0 7.0 115 0 BI NEW YORK D.-i R. J'I P@@j@SYLVANIA MICHIGAN 0 H 10 SCALE IN MILES 25 0 25 50 75 f FIGURE C9-13 Projected Iron Ore Traffic Flow, 1995 350 TABLE C9-49 Round Trip Time Factor of 325 - Loaded-Trip Time for Iron Ore in 1995 Vessel Overall Length 300 - Class (feet) Iron Ore Shipments 275 - 5 600-649 180% + 16 hrs 6 650-699 200% + 16 hrs 250 - 7 700-730 200% + 16 hrs 8 731-849 200% + 10 hrs 225 - 9 850-949 200% + 12 hrs 10 950-1000 200% + 14 hrs 2.. 175 3.2.3 Bituminous Coal R, J 150 Coal-bearing rocks underlie approximately 14 percent of the continental United States. 125 Coal reserves have been identified in 34 States.' The bituminous coal resources con- 100 Z tributing to the coal commerce of the Great 75 ACTIIIAI TRAFF1 iC Lakes are in the States bordering Lakes On- tario, Erie, and Michigan (Table C9-50). These States are close enough to the Lakes that 50 transportation costs to the lake harbors are reasonable. Approximately 90 percent of the 25 total U.S. bituminous coal production came 0 1 1 T-D from these States from 1957 to 1966. During 1940 1950 19W 1970 ma 1990 @000 2010 2020 this period approximately 10 percent of the YEARS total tonnage produced from these States was FIGURE C9-14 Iron Ore Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway 70 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-50 Estimated Bituminous Coal Reserves in Principal States Contributing to Coal Commerce of the Great Lakes (Millions of Net Tons) Estimated Original Depleted Remaining Recoverable Reservesa State Reserves Reserves a Reservesa Assuming 50% Recovery Illinois 137,329 948 136,381 68,190 Indiana 37,293 2,296 34,997 17,499 Kentucky 72,318 5,292 67,026 33,513 Ohio 46,488 4,104 42,384 21,192 Pennsylvania 75,093 16,566 58,527 29,263 Tennessee 1,912 12 1,900 950 Virginia 11,696 1,544 10,152 5,076 West Virginia -116,618 12,738 103,880 51,940 Total 498,747 43,500 455,247 227,623 aJanuary 1, 1960 date used. transported on the Great Lakes. Coal produc- energy, while providing for some new coal re- tion from these States is expected to follow quirements as technology for coal liquefaction closely the growth in national energy con- and gasification is perfected and used. It also sumption. Bureau of Mines forecasts estimate takes into consideration diminishing gas and an energy consumption growth rate of 3.2 per- oil supplies. Any large increase in nuclear cent annually for the period 1966 to 1980. Con- energy for electric power generation will de- sumption estimates of bituminous coal have pend on the successful development of an effi- been forecast for this period at an average cient breeder reactor. annual growth rate of 3.0 percent. The recov- For a variety of reasons, projected coal out- erable bituminous coal reserves from these put is not expected to increase at a uniform States are apparently adequate to meet the rate throughout all States contributing to nation's projected requirements for at least Great Lakes commerce. In Illinois, where a the next 100 years. Coal accounts for 88 per- high nuclear energy growth rate is projected cent; petroleum, 3 percent; oil shale, 6 percent; by the Federal Power Commission, the growth and natural gas, 3 percent of the'world's rate of coal production has been estimated to reserves of fossil fuels. be less than that for other areas of the Great In this study, a modification of these two Lakes Region. In Pennsylvania data de- nationwide growth rates, 3.2 percent and 3.0 veloped for the Susquehanna River Basin percent, was used in projecting bituminous Mineral Economic Survey in 1964 by the coal production for those areas contributing to Bureau of Mines indicate a negative growth bituminous coal commerce on the Great rate for anthracitic coal and a relatively slow Lakes. An annual growth rate of 3.1 percent growth rate for output of bituminous coal in was set for bituminous coal production until the eastern part of the State. Data from the the year 1980. For the period beyond 1980 the Projective Economic Study of the Ohio River annual growth rate was reduced to 2.5 per- Basin, prepared in 1964 by Arthur D. Little, cent. This reduction compensates for the de- InC.,23 for the Corps of Engineers, indicate a crease in coal output because of nuclear higher growth rate for bituminous coal up to Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 71 the year 2000 in western Pennsylvania, and in effects of nuclear power and new technology Ohio and Indiana. All of these factors were on future coal consumption, the estimated considered in estimating future coal produc- Great Lakes shipments of coal in 1995 are as- tion from areas contributing to commerce on sumed to hold at that level through 2020. the Great Lakes for base year 1960. The projected traffic distribution pattern Bituminous coal shipments from districts for 1995 bituminous coal shipments on the contributing to coal commerce on the Great Lakes is shown in Table C9-53. Tables C9-54 Lakes were analyzed to determine what per- and C9-55 show the projected average dis- centage of the total annual production from tance of U.S. traffic routes for bituminous coal each district was being transported on the shipments and round-trip time in hours for the Great Lakes. In 1960, the base year used for Canadian traffic routes. Round-trip time fac- projecting future shipments, Bureau of Mines tors of loaded-trip times for vessels projected data indicated that 11.91 percent of the total to handle this commerce are shown in Table production from the districts listed in Table C9-56. Figure C9-16 shows the low, medium, C9-51 was shipped on the Great Lakes. A time and high estimates of prospective traffic. Fig- trend analysis, using the percentage of lake ure C9-15 represents the traffic flow of bitu- shipments to total production for selected minous coal based on the projected shipment years from 1957 to 1966, indicated an average quantities and traffic distribution pattern for annual decline of approximately 1.4 percent. 1995. This trend was applied to the 11.91 percent As shown on the flow chart and in Table established for the base year 1960 and was C9-33, the major U.S. shipping harbors are used as the basis for projecting the shipments Port of Chicago (Planning Subarea 2.2), Toledo given in Table C9-52. In view of the uncertain and Sandusky (Planning Subarea 4.2), and TABLE C9-51 Bituminous Coal Production and Great Lakes Shipments, 1960 % Production Great Lakes Shipped on District States in Districts Production a Shipments a Great Lakes 1 Eastern Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia 29,553 1,386 4.69 2 Western Pennsylvania 37,027 2,958 7.99 3 & 6 West Virginia 40,544 3,707 9.14 4 Ohio 33,957 6,643 19.56 7 West Virginia, Virginia 33,661 4,763 14.15 8 West Virginia, Tennessee, Virginia, Kentucky, North Carolina 112,666 19,709 17.49 9 Western Kentucky 30,587 2,726 8.91 10 Illinois 45,977 2,887 6.28 11 Indiana 15,538 407 2.62 Total 379,510 45,186 11.91 aThousand net tons. 72 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-52 Projected Great Lakes Coal Production (Millions of Net Tons) Base Year 1960 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2020 U. S. Production Higha 380 597 745 935 1170 1463 1835 1835 1835 Mediumb 380 516 600 700 792 896 1014 1014 1014 Lowc 380 430 458 487 518 552 587 587 587 Shipments Medium:b U.S.Lakewise 36 42 45 47 49 50 52 52 52 U.S.Export 9 11 13 15 17 19 22 22 22 U.S.Import 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Canadian Coastwise 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 45 53 58 62 66 69 74 74 74 High:d 45 61 72 83 97 113 134 134 134 Low:d 45 44 44 43 43 43 43 43 43 aIndicated projected annual rate of increase of 4.6% from Bureau of Mines 1969 Minerals Yearbook, Volume I-II page 22. bData to 1995 from Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8461.1 In view of the uncertain effects of nuclear power and new technology on future coal consumption, the estimated Great Lakes production and shipments of coal in 1995 are assumed to hold at that level through 2020. CIndicated projected annual rate of increase of 1.25% from Landsberg, Hans H., Fischman, Leonard L., and Fisher, Joseph I., Resources in America's Future, the Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore: 1963. The medium projection of total consumption including exports on page 854 for the years 1960-2000 was used. dEstimated using the same ratio of production to total shipments as Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8461. Shipments after 1995 held at 1995 level. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 73 TABLEC9-53 Projected Bituminous Coal Traffic Distribution Pattern in 1995 (Percent of Respec- tive Traffic Types) Destination Lake Ontario Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake and/or Type of Traffic Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie St. Lawrence U.S. Lakewise Michigan --- 17.82 1.16 --- --- U.S. Lakewise Erie 8.98 5.66 31.67 34.71 --- U.S. Export, Canadian Import Erie 14.00 --- 15.40 19.50 49.80 U.S. Export, Canadian Import Ontario --- --- --- --- 1.30 and/or St. Lawrence TABLE C9-54 Mileages of Projected Bituminous Coal Shipments in United States Fleet in 1995 Destination Type Lake Ontario of Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake and/or Shipment Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie St. Lawrence Lakewise Superior --- --- --- 766 Export Superior 166 --- --- --- Lakewise Michigan 743 126 533 623 --- Export Michigan 645 --- 357 --- Lakewise Erie 717 628 184 74 --- Export Erie 396 --- 239 94 237 Lakewise Ontario --- --- --- --- 41 Export Ontario --- --- --- --- 117 TABLEC9-55 Round Trip Hours of Projected Conneaut (Planning Subarea 4.3). Major U.S. Coal Shipments in Canadian Fleet in 1995 receiving harbors are Duluth-Superior (Plan- Destination ning Subarea 1.1), Green Bay (Planning Sub- Type of Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake area 2.1), Milwaukee, Oak Creek, Port of Chi- Shipment Lake Superior Michigan Huron -Erie Ontario cago, and Indiana Harbor (Planning Subarea Imports Erie 87 --- 63 46 100 2.2), Muskegon (Planning Subarea 2.3), Imports Ontario --- --- --- --- 52 Saginaw River (Planning Subarea 3.2), and Port of Detroit and St. Clair (Planning Sub- area 4.2). TABLE C9-56 Round Trip Time Factor of 3.2.4 Limestone Loaded-Trip-Time for Bituminous Coal in 1995 Vessel Overall Length Bituminous Coal The future demand for limestone from Class (feet) Shipments sources in the Great Lakes area will depend on 4 500-599 125% + 10 hrs economic factors that will similarly affect 5 600-649 180% + 16 hrs much of our national economy.' Limestone de- 6 650-699 200% + 16 hrs mands are tied to the rate of steel output and 7 700-730 200% + 16 hrs are subject to changing technology in the composition of blast furnace feed. In 1955, 74 Appendix C9 ST. MARYS FALLS CANAL O/Vr'4 U P DOWN 1970' 4.1 0.4 NOTES: 1980 6.7 - 1995 8.0 - FLOW LINES DENOTE YEAR 1995 TONNAGE 2000 8.0 - 2020 8.0 - *ACTUAL TRAFFIC IN 1970. ALL FIGURES IN MILLIONS OF TONS (2,000 LBS.) 0 N T A R 1 0 QUEBEC 4fic" ST. LAWRENCE RIVER U P DOWN 19701 0.3 @10 1980 0.3 1995 0.3 2000 0.3 2020 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WELLAND SOUTH END OF CANAL 5KE MICHIGAN @ULP DDOW N OWN 10 UPDOWN 197 1. 11 _= _6 0. 1970 1 .0 980 110 80 - 8.0 9 ST. CLAIR R. DETROIT R. 1995 - 10.0 995 110 ---ffP -DOWN 2000 11.0 WN LLP DOWI` 2000 - 10.0 1970* 17.0 - 30.0 2020 11.0 202 - 10.0 1980 26.0 - 42.0 S'. 0.11 R. 1995 31.0 - 50.0 AA1QQNAI N 200031.0 - 50.0 2020 31.0 - 50.0 ILLINOIS YORK D-.tl R. yCVANIA MICHIGAN _(TH @6 N61A A SCALE IN MILES 25 0 25-50 5 FIGURE C9-15 Projected Bituminous Coal Traffic Flow, 1995 0 140 - 0.389 net ton of limestone and dolomite was 130 - used to produce one net ton of pig iron. This amount had been reduced to 0.279 net ton by 120 - 1965. Present technology indicates that these requirements will be further reduced to ap- 110 - proximately 0.270 net ton per ton of pig iron produced. Limestone requirements for con- struction material will depend on population growth, the growth of the gross material 90 product, road building, and residential, com- mercial, and industrial construction. Other lo factors such as the demand for lime and indus- trial chemicals will have a direct bearing on Z5 70 future limestone requirements from Great o Lakes sources. The State of Michigan historically has been o Z., X- I and is forecast to be the principal source of 40 - - - - - - limestone commerce on the Great Lakes. The limestone industry in Michigan is concen- ACTUAL TRAFFIC trated in a few large companies, which not 30 only operate quarries, but mills, processing plants, ports, and fleets of ships. From 33 to 40 2a percent of the waterborne limestone ship- ments have gone to steel mills for use as a fluxing agent. Another 40 percent goes to the construction industry for manufacturing ce- 1940 1950 Nw 1970 mo 199o 2000 2010 2020 ment and for aggregate used in road and build- ' i FIGURE C9-16 Coal"Traffic on the Great ing construction. Approximately 20 percent is Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 75 ST. MARYS FALLS CANAL UP DOWN O/VT - .4 1970* 1.2 - A@ -- NOTES: I/V 1980 2.8 1995 3.8 FLOW LINES DENOTE 2000 4.2 YEAR 1995 TONNAGE 2020 6.2 -ACTUAL TRAFFIC IN 1970. ALL FIGURES IN MILLIONS OF TONS (2,000 LBS.) 0 N T A R 1 0 QUEBEC Al/C,, ST. LAWRENCE RIVER U P DOWN 1970* - 1980 - - 1995 - - 2000 2020 WELLAND SOUTH END OF CANAL LAKE MICHIGAN UPDOWN !LP 0.1 DOWN 1970* - 1970' 6 - 1980 - 1980 8 - ST. CLAIR R. DETROIT R. 1995 - U. I 0.1 1995 10 - 2000 - 2000 12 UPDOWN UP UVWIN 1970* 0.2 15.2 0.7 14.4 2020 - 0.1 2020 17 - 1980 0.6 13.0 0.7 13.0 t\ S1. cl.w R... 1995 0.9 17.4 1.0 16.4 w.7.; 2000 1.0 19.0 1.0 18.0 0 ILLINOIS 1.5 29.0 1.5 27.0 - 10 NEW YORK D a R'@.. PEN X., _.@VCHIGAN NA ---- 6-H INDI@ SCALE IN MILES 25 0 25 50 75 FIGURE C9-17 Projected Limestone Traffic Flow, 1995 2W - sold to manufacturers of lime and other chem- 180 - icals and for a variety of miscellaneous uses (e.g., various types of filler and poultry grit). Approximately 2 percent is used as fertilizer. 1W - Limestone reserves near the shores of the Great Lakes are expected to continue to be the 140 - principal source of stone commerce on the Great Lakes. The high-bulk, low-unit value of limestone influences the economic utility of a deposit, which must compete with other sources on a delivered-cost basis. The availa- o bility and cost of transportation usually de- 100 termine whether a particular deposit is com- o mercially desirable. Limestone reserves in the 2 Great Lakes area occur near the western end 8o of Lake Erie in Ohio and Michigan, around the northern end of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, and along the south shore (on Lake XI Michigan) of the Upper Peninsula of Michi- gan. Although the limestone reserves in these 40 areas have not been quantitatively estimated, they appear to be extremely large and able to ACTUAL TRAFFIC support the present and projected production 20 and shipping requirements for at least 50 years. Michigan was selected as the source area for 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 20M 2010 2020 future limestone production. Projected pro- 1E11 FIGURE C9-18 Limestone Traffic on the duction was based in part on the linear trend Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway 76 Appendix C9 of Michigan limestone production for the production figures for Michigan are presented period 1924 to 1964. An annual growth rate, in Table C9-57. modified to reflect changing blast furnace Great Lakes shipments from Michigan av- technology, of approximately 2.8 percent was eraged approximately 84 percent of the indicated by this trend. This growth trend was State's limestone production from 1955 to applied to the base year 1960 at a calculated 1965. A regression analysis of the relationship production level of 31.6 million tons, the between the annual percentage of shipments arithmetic average of production for 1955 and production for this period indicates a through 1965. A regression analysis was also downward trend at an average annual rate of made of Michigan's production for this same approximately 0.5 percent. When applied to 11-year period, and little difference was noted the 84-percent shipment-to-production rate between the computed 1960 base year figure calculated for 1960, this trend indicates that and the arithmetic average. The projected by 1995 lake shipments from Michigan should TABLE C9-57 Projected Michigan Limestone Production (Millions of Net Tons) Base Year 1960 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2020 U. S. Production Higha 31.6 47 57 69 84 103- 125 152 332 Mediumb 31.6 42 48 55 63 72 83 95 161 Lowc 31.6 36 38 41 44 47 50 53 67 Shipments Medium: U.S.Lakewise 25.63 31.4 34.7 38.3 42.3 46.7 51.6 57.0 84.6 U.S.Export .84 1.7 2.2 2.8 3.4 3.9 4.4 4.8 7.2 U.S.Import .12 .5 .8 1.1 1.4 1.7 2.0 2.2 2.3 Canadian Coastwise 2.6 3.2 3.6 4.2 4.6 5.0 5.3 6.o 8.7 Total 29.29 36.8 41.3 46.4 51.7 57.3 63.3 70.0 103.8 High:d 29.29 40.9 48.5 57.0 67.0 78.8 91.3 106.8 201.4 Low:d 29.29 32.3 34.2 35.9 37.6 39.4 40.8 42.6 51.1 aIndicated projected annual rate of increase of 4% from OBERS national aggregate projection of gross national product, 1968-2020. As stated in the Stone Traffic Analysis to accompany Great Lakes Harbor Study, April 1958, "Because of the wide variety of uses of stone, it is considered reasonable to assume that the national production of stone will increase b at least as fast as the gross national product." 1 Data to 1995 from Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8461. Approxi- mately the same rate of increase was extrapolated to 2020. CIndicated projected annual rate of increase of 1.3% from OBERS national aggregate projection of population, 1968-2020. This annual rate would incorporate a variety of reasonable low economic growth assumptions. dEstimated using the same ratio of production to total U. S. shipments as Bureau of Mines Information Circular 8461 extrapolated to 2020. Import and Canadian coastwise held at constant (medium) level. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 77 approximate 70 percent of the State's lime- shipments were held constant (medium level) stone production. Table C9-58 presents the for use in the low and high shipment esti- projected Great Lakes limestone shipments mates. Figure C9-18 shows the low, medium, based on the assumption that the State of and high estimates of prospective traffic. Michigan will be the principal production The projected traffic distribution pattern source. Lakewise and export quantities have for 1995 limestone shipments on the Lakes is been projected from 26.5 million net tons in shown in Table C9-58. Figure C9-17 repre- 1960 to 62 million net tons by 2000, and to 92 sents the traffic flow of limestone based on the million net tons by 2020, an annual growth projected shipment quantities and traffic dis- rate of approximately 2.1 percent. Applying 2.1 tribution pattern for 1995. percent growth to the 1995 Canadian coast- The projected average distance of the U.S. wise shipments indicates approximately 9 mil- traffic routes, the round-trip hours for the lion tons by 2020. The import shipments of Canadian traffic routes and the round-trip limestone to U.S. Great Lakes ports are ex- time for vessels projected to handle this com- pected to come solely from Canada. It is ex- merce are shown in Tables C9-59, C9-60, and pected that they will increase from approxi- C9-61. As shown in Figure C9-17, limestone is mately 0.5 million net tons in 1970 to 2.2 mil- shipped from Planning Subareas 2.4, 3.1, and lion net tons by 2000 and 3.3 million net tons by 4.2 to Planning Subareas 2.2 (southern Lake 2020. The import and Canadian coastwise Michigan ports) and 4.1 (Port of Detroit). TABLE C9-58 Projected Limestone Traffic Distribution Pattern in 1995 (Percent of Respective Traffic Types) Destination Lake Ontario Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake and/or Type of Traffic Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie St. Lawrence U.S. Lakewise Superior --- --- .34 6.99 --- U.S. Lakewise Michigan --- 14.48 6.44 8.11 --- U.S. Lakewise Huron 4.47 20.47 8.90 17.88 --- U.S. Export, Canadian Import Huron 30.70 --- 19-30 8.00 --- U.S. Lakewise Erie --- --- .03 11.85 .05 U.S. Export, Canadian Import Erie 3.40 --- 19.30 19.30 --- U.S. Import, Canadian Export Erie --- --- --- 100.00 --- Canadian Coastwise Erie --- 11.40 --- Canadian Coastwise Ontario --- --- --- 88.60 and/or St. Lawrence TABLE C9-59 Mileages of Projected Limestone Shipments in United States Fleet in 1995 Destination Type Lake Ontario of Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake and/or Shipment Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie St. Lawrence Lakewise Superior 315 301 158 452 -- Export Superior 265 213 265 622 Lakewise Michigan 222 268 279 462 Export Michigan 285 773 Lakewise Huron 426 364 132 354 Export Huron 104 238 333 463 Lakewise Erie 129 53 160 Export Erie 481 97 78 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-60 Round Trip Hours of Projected der Bay on Lake Superior. These facilities are Limestone Shipments in Canadian Fleet in 1995 considered adequate to handle at least twice Destination the current volume of traffic based on experi- Type of Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake Lake ence at coastal ports. The sale of grain to Rus- Shipment Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie Ontario sia and other countries will increase exports Imports Huron 52 --- 72 67 --- (especially wheat). The increase in wheat pro- Coastwise Erie --- --- 57 --- duction in North Dakota and Minnesota will Exports Erie --- --- 49 --- continue. Imports Erie 77 --- 47 42 --- Coastwise Ontario --- --- --- 62 3.2.5.2 Future Great Lakes Exports TABLE C9-61 Round Trip Time Factor of Exports of grain from U.S. Great Lakes Loaded-Trip Time for Limestone in 1995 ports, expressed in millions of net tons, in- Vessel Overall Length Limestone creased sharply from 0.9 in 1958 to 3.5 in 1959, Class (feet) Shipments the first year of the Seaway, to 6.9 in 1964, and 4 500-599 125% +10 hrs to 9.1 in 1970. These exports are projected to 5 600-649 180% +16 hrs increase further to 10.0 in 1975, 11.0 by 1980, 6 650-699 200% +16 hrs 14.0 by 2000, and to 17.0 by 2020. Total United 7 700-730 200% +16 hrs States grain exports increased from 22.5 mil- 8 731-849 200% +10 hrs lion tons in 1958 to approximately 49 million 9 850-949 200% +12 hrs tons in 1964. They are projected to increase to 53 million tons by 1980,63 million tons by 2000, and 74 million tons by 2020. As percentages of United States total exports, the Great Lakes 3.2.5 Grain exports amounted to 3.9 in 1958, 12.8 in 1959, 14.1 in 1964, 16.0 in 1970, and are projected to increase to 20.6 by 1980, 22.2 by 2000, and to 3.2.5.1 General 23.0 by 2020. The grain exports will continue to be shipped principally from Lake Superior, The estimate of grain traffic in the Grain Lake Michigan, and Lake Erie .43 Traffic AnalySiS43 for the Great Lakes Har- The individual grains projected to show the bors Stud y42 for 1965 to 2015 were interpolated greatest export growth, both on the national and extrapolated to the planning per 'iods of and Great Lakes ports level, are wheat, corn, 1980, 2000, and 2020. The estimated move- and soybeans. These three commodities are ments of grain are described in the following projected to account for 86 percent of both U.S. paragraphs. and Great Lakes ports total grain exports in The three most significant reasons for the the planning period. changes and the growth prospects of Great Lakes grain traffic are an improved transpor- tation route, an increased overseas market for 3.2.5.3 Future Lakewise Grain Shipments United States grain, and a strong grain- producing area tributary to U.S. Great Lakes Domestic grain shipments via the Seaway to ports. Since 1959 the Seaway depth of 27 feet U.S. East Coast destinations have a higher has accommodated larger ships carrying sev- transportation cost than ex-lake grain, i.e., eral times the cargo carried by the smaller grain shipped by rail out of eastern Great ships of the pre-Seaway fleet. Grain exports Lakes ports to destinations along the East from the Great Lakes area now move via the Coast. Railroads have provided special rates Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway direct to to encourage such movement. Seaway traffic overseas areas or to Canadian ports on the of this kind has not developed. The dominant lower St. Lawrence River for transshipment grain movement of lakewise grain traffic be- overseas. The six Midwest States bordering tween the U.S. Great Lakes ports is expected the Great Lakes produce 37 percent of U.S. to continue to go from the western ports of grain and in combination with nine additional Lake Superior to the eastern ports on Lake States served by Great Lakes ports they pro- Erie. The total lakewise traffic (in millions of duce 79 percent of the United States grain. tons) was 3.0 in 1958, 2.3 in 1959, 2.7 in the 1961 Present shipping facilities are located al- to 1963 period, and 2.2 in 1970. Several vari- most entirely at Duluth-Superior and Thun- ables contribute to the conclusion that Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 79 lakewise grain traffic will assume the national 3.2.5.4 Imports from Great Lakes Canada growth rate of slightly more than one-half of one percent per year. This traffic is projected The decline in grain imports from Canada at to increase to 3.0 million tons by 1980, 3.4 mil- U.S. Great Lakes ports is reflected in the total lion tons by 2000, and 3.7 million tons by 2020. imports of grain from Canada and overseas for The slight decline in lakewise grain traffic in the entire United States. Total U.S. imports of 1959 was due primarily to a decrease in grain wheat, barley, rye, and oats, excluding grain receipts at ports on Lake Erie and Lake On- moving in bond, declined from 1.557 million tario. This was because some grain exports tons between 1948 and 1957 to 0.612 million traveled via the Seaway rather than via east- tons in the 1959 to 1963 period. This represents ern Great Lakes ports and overland to Atlan- a decline of 60.7 percent. Imports in 1970 to- tic Coastal ports for export overseas. taled 0.3 million tons. Lakewise grain traffic is projected to continue In addition to the opening of the St. Law- supplying domestic grain markets in north- rence Seaway in 1959, other strong variables eastern States as it did in pre-Seaway days. have affected both Great Lakes ports and total TABLE C9-62 Projected Great Lakes Grain ShipmentSa (Millions of Net Tons) Base Year Actual Projection 1960 1970 1980 1995 2000 2020 Medium United States Lakewise 2.4 2.5 3.0 3.3 3.4 3.7 Export 4.0 8.5 11.0 13.1 13.8 16.7 Import 0 0 0 0 0 0 Canadian b Coastwise 10.7 11.8 14.3 15.2 18.5 Total 21.7 25.8 30.7 32.4 38.9 Highc 28.5 36.6 d 39.3 52.1 Low C 24.4 26.6 d 27.4 31.8 aAll U.S. traffic projections are based upon projections of Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources, Committee Print No. 12, 86th Congress 2nd Session, with straight-line extrapolation to 2020. Ratios of total pro- duction to export and lakewise traffic are from Grain Traffic Analysis,43 Great Lakes Harbors Study, by the Corps of Engineers. bCanadian coastwise shipments for medium projection for 1995 were estimated by Dominion Bureau of Statistics. Other years were estimated by straight- line growth using 1995 and actual 1967 traffic as controlling points. High and low projections were developed using ratio of U.S. high and low pro- jections to U.S. medium projection. cEstimated using same ratio of shipments to production as medium projection. dInterpolated between 1980 and 2000 projections. 80 Appendix C9 TABLEC9-63 Projected Grain Traffic Distribution Pattern in 1995 (Percent of Respective Traffic Types) Destination Lake Ontario Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake and/or Type of Traffic Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie St. Lawrence U.S. Lakewise Superior --- --- 75.39 4.00 U.S. Export, Canadian Import Superior --- --- --- --- 30.99 U.S. Import, Canadian Export Superior --- 70.00 --- 30.00 --- Canadian Coastwise Superior --- --- 10.18 5.26 84.56 U.S. Lakewise Michigan --- --- --- 14.46 --- U.S. Export, Canadian Import Michigan --- --- .83 --- 42.15 U.S. Import, Canadian Export Michigan --- --- --- Canadian Coastwise Michigan --- --- --- --- --- U.S. Lakewise Erie --- --- --- 4.92 --- U.S. Export, Canadian Import Erie --- --- --- .27 25.76 U.S. Import, Canadian Export Erie --- --- --- --- --- Canadian Coastwise Erie --- --- --- --- --- TABLE C9-64 Projected Deep-Draft Lakewise Shipments and Receipts of Grain at U.S. Great Lakes Harbors, 1980 to 2020, Compared with 1959 to 1963 Actual Average (Thousands of Tons) Lakes Huron, Lake Superior Lake Michigan Erie and Ontario Great Lakes Total Year Shipments Receipts Shipments Receipts Shipments Receipts Shipments Receipts 1959-63 2,033 7 412 27 ill 2,522 2,556 2,556 1980 2,400 10 455 40 145 2,950 3,000 3,000 2000 2,700 10 490 40 170 3,300 3,400 3,400 2020 3,000 10 520 40 200 3,600 3,700 3,700 SOURCE: Corps of Engineers, Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part 3. 48 TABLE C9-65 Mileages of Projected Grain Shipments in United States Fleet in 1995 Destination Type Lake Ontario of Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake and/or Shipment Lake Superior Michigan Huron Erie St. Lawrence Lakewise Superior 808 986 1,025 Export Superior 1,334 Lakewise Michigan -- 893 -- Export Michigan 535 19200 Import Michigan 686 Lakewise Erie 254 Export Erie 143 561 Import Erie 864 Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 81 1P ST. MARYS FALLS CANAL ON], U P DOWN 'AR/O 0. 18.1 197 NOTES: 1980 19.0 1995 22.0 FLOW LINES DENOTE 2000 23.0 YEAR 1995 TONNAGE 2020 28.0 *ACTUALTRAFFtC IN 1970. ALL FIGURES IN MILLIONS OF TONS (2,000 LBS.) 0 N T A R 1 0 QUEBEC 41/CH q/66'GAN ST. LAWRENCE RIVER ... .. . ..... LLP DOWN c 1970* 19.0 1980 0.5 22.0 1995 0.7 26.2 2000 0.7 28.0 2020 0.9 36.0 WELLAND SOUTH END OF CANAL LAKE MICHIGAN 26 @LPOOWN UPDOWN 1970* - 21.0 1970 4.0 1989 - 22@O 0 go 3.5 0 19 0 1995 ST. CLAIR R. DETROIT R. R06 1995 4.2 '0 2001 2 2000 - 4.5 @LP DOWN UP DOWN 2020 - 4.5 1970* - 18.6 -18.6 ZU20 34.0 1980 - 22.0 -22.0 S'. ci.i' R. _4 1995 - 26.6 - 26.6 0 -28:0 2000 28. ILLINOIS 34.0 -34.0 N _W YORK F _jNA NiA __MICHIGA 29 N -1 _6H TN NA @6 SCALE IN MILES 25 0 25 50 75 FIGURE C9-19 Projected Grain Traffic Flow, 1995 55 - 50 - TABLEC9-66 Round Trip Hours of Projected Grain Shipments in Canadian Fleet in 1995 45- Destination Type of Origin Lake Lake Lake Lake St. Shipment Lake Michigan Huron Erie Ontario Lawrence Coastwise Superior --- 220 260 290 328 Export Superior 240 --- 260 --- --- Import Superior --- --- --- 320 324 35 - Import Michigan --- 220 --- 380 285 30 - Import Erie --- --- 120 200 215 o 0 25 z X ACTUAL TRAFFIC @0 @5__ TABLE C9-67 Round Trip Time Factor of 10 Loaded-Trip Time for Grain in 1995 Vessel Overall Length Grain Class (feet) Shipments 5 5 600-649 180% + 16 hrs 6 650-699 200% + 16 hrs 01 7 700-730 200% + 16 hrs 1940 1950 19W 1970 198o 1990 2000 2010 2020 " 's FIGURE C9-20 Grain Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway 82 Appendix C9 U.S. grain import levels. Domestic grain sup- eluded that U.S. Great Lakes grain imports ply and export price fluctuation are closely from Great Lakes Canada will continue to aligned with the unpredictable forces of na- fluctuate because of weather, U.S. domestic ture and the action of national governments supply and demand, and changes in gov- on foreign trade policy. There has been a con- ernmental decisions affecting the price rela- tinued attempt to protect the countries' re- tionships of U.S. and Canadian grain, stand- spective farm industries with legislation de- ards of classification of grain, and import signed to minimize the price differential that quotas. In view of these intangible forces no may exist on agricultural produce. Thus, the long-range projections were estimated. Canadian grain trade and the American grain trade are largely competitive rather than complementary. A major factor in the fluctua- 3.2.5.5 Canadian Coastwise Shipments tion of grain imports is the system of import quotas enforced by the United States. Canadian coastwise shipments of grain The imports of grain from Canada currently were estimated by the Statistics Canada at comprise less than 3 percent of the total grain 14.3 million tons by 1995. Actual shipments in traffic at U.S. Great Lakes ports. It was con- 1970 were approximately 10.7 million tons. TABLE C9-68 U.S. and Great Lakes Grain Exports by Type of Grain, and Great Lakes Ports Percentage of U.S. Total, Average for 1959 to 1963, and Projections for 1980 to 2000 (Thousands of Tons) 1959-63 Commodity Averagea 1980 2000 2020 United States Total 34,741 52,200 62,000 73,000 Wheat 15,926 24,000 29,000 34,100 Corn 8,777 14,000 16,200 18,500 Oats 419 400 400 400 Barley-rye 2,242 2,820 3,000 3,500 Grain sorghums 2,804 3,640 4,400 5,000 Soybeans 4,431 7,200 9,000 11,000 Flaxseed 142 125 126 126 Great Lakes Total 4,900 11,000 13,800 16,700 Wheat 878 2,250 3,000 3,800 Corn 2,007 5,125 6,400 7,600 Oats 307 300 300 300 Barley-rye 681 1,150 1,300 1,500 Grain sorghums 2 - - - Soybeans 913 2,075 2,700 3,400 Flaxseed 112 100 100 100 Ratio: Great Lakes to United States (Percent) Total-All Grains 14.1 21 22 23 Wheat 5.5 9 10 11 Corn 22.9 37 40 41 Oats 73.3 75 75 75 Barley-rye 30.4 41 43 43 Grain sorghums 0.1 - - - Soybeans 20.6 29 30 31 Flaxseed 78.9 79 79 79 aSource: Reference 17. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 83 d. ST. MARYS FALLS CANAL 01VT UP DOWN ARJO 1970* 0.1 0.5 NOTES: 1980 0.1 0.6 1995 0.1 0.7 FLOW LINES DENOTE 2000 0.1 0.7 YEAR 1995 TONNAGE 2020 0.1 0.9 *ACTUAL TRAFFIC IN 1970. ALL FIGURES IN MILLIONS OF TONS (2,000 LBS.) 7 . . . . . . . . 0 N T A R 1 0 QUEBEC 7 Al/CN DC ST. LAWRENCE RIVER UP DOWN 1970' 5.9 3.3 1980 6.3 4.2 1995 7.7 5.2 2000 8.1 5. 2020 9.8 6.7 SOUTH END OF WELLAND cv CANAL LAK E MICHIGAN DOWN UPDOWN 1970-4.7 2.8 52 1970* 1.5 1.5 1980 2.0 2.0 __80 @4 36 6 4 ST. CLAIR R. DETROIT R. 1995 61, @4 1995 2.4 2.0 UPDOWN UP DOWN- 2000 6 2000 2.5 2.5 1970* 2.2 2.6 3,6 3.4 2020 8.4 5.6 2020 3.0 3.0 CO 1980 2.4 3.2 4.1 4.1 1995 3.0 3.9 5.0 5.0 2000 3.1 4.1 5.2 5.2 K@ ILLINOIS 2020 3.8 5.0 6.4 6.4 b.ro -4 0"" R. YORK YbiIkNi@ .0 MICHIGAN 0) INDIANA SCALE IN MILES 25 0 25 50 75 f FIGURE C9-21 Projected Oversees General Cargo Traffic Flow, 1995 @6- This rate of growth indicates coastwise ship- ments of 15.2 million tons in 2000 and 18.5 mil- lion tons in 2020. This is the medium projec- 14 tion. 12 3.2.5.6 Total Great Lakes Shipments Projected grain shipments and the distribu- 1 tion pattern are shown in Tables C9-62, C9-63, ACTUAL TRAFFIC-/// C9-64, and C9-68. Mileages of projected ship- ments for the U.S. fleet, round-trip hours for 8 the Canadian fleet, and round-trip time fac- tors are shown in Tables C9-65, C9-66, -and C9-67. Figure C9-20 shows the low, medium, and high estimates of prospective traffic. Fig- ure C9-19 shows the grain flow pattern based on 1995 quantities and distribution. 3.2.6 Overseas General Cargo The overseas general cargo traffic for all U.S. Great Lakes ports averaged approxi- 1940 195o 19w 1970 19so 199o 2000 2010 2020 YEARS mately 500,000 tons annually during the 1952 FIGURE C9-22 Overseas General Cargo to 1958 period prior to the completion of the St. Traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Sea- Lawrence Seaway.44 In the first year of the way Seaway's operation (1959) this traffic in- 84 Appendix C9 TABLEC9-69 Overseas General Cargo on the creased to 1,800,000 tons and has continued to Great Lakes (Millions of Tons) increase each year, reaching 3,800,000 tons in 1980 1995 2000 2020 1964 and 8,000,000 tons in 1970. Table C9-71 shows the United States Great Lakes overseas Sixteen U. S. Interim freight traffic included and excluded from the Report Harbors 5.2 6.2 6.4 7.6 general cargo traffic analysis from 1965 to Other U. S. Harbors 2.6 4.6 4.9 6.2 1969. U.S. overseas general cargo traffic is Total U. S. 8.8 10.8 11.3 13.8 projected to increase to 8,800,000 tons by 1980; 11,300,000 tons by 2000; and 13,800,000 tons by Canadian 1.7 2.1 2.2 2.7 2020 (Tables C9-69 and C9-72). The total gen- eral cargo traffic at the 16 harbors that were Total 10.5 12.9 13.5 16.5 subjects of interim reports in the Great Lakes Harbors Study averaged 364,000 tons annu- ally for the 1952 to 1958 period prior to the Seaway's completion and 2,242,000 tons annu- ally from 1959 to 1964, after the Seaway was completed. This traffic is to or from the Chicago-Milwaukee area. Ninety-five percent of traffic to harbors other than the 16 com- TABLE C9-70 Distribution of Other General prises traffic at Duluth- Superior, Detroit, and Cargo Toledo. All general cargo traffic attributed to other harbors is distributed to these three Traffic.(millions of tons) harbors as shown in Table C9-70 to allow de- Percent 1995 velopment of a flow chart. Table C9-73 shows Harbor 1967 1968 Average Total Traffic the overseas general cargo flow through con- Duluth-Superior 0.381 0.349 0.365 13 0.6 necting channels of the Seaway. Figure C9-22 Detroit 1.745 2.508 2.126 75 3.5 shows the high, medium, and low estimates of Toledo 0.350 0.332 0.341 12 0.5 prospective overseas general cargo and Fig- Total 2.476 3.189 2.832 100 4.6 ure C9-21 shows the overseas general cargo flow pattern for 1995. TABLE C9-71 U.S. Great Lakes Overseas Freight Traffic Included and Excluded from the Gen- eral Cargo Traffic Analysis, 1965 to 196944 (Short Tons) 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 Imports Included in General Cargo Analysis 3,738,471 3,953,984 4,290,967 6,358,021 4,688,859 Excluded from General Cargo Analysis 162,560 134,567 159,545 92,530 185,987 Total 3,901,031 4,088,551 4,450,512 6,450,551 4,874,846 Exports Included in General Cargo Analysis 2,074,384 2,061,247 2,411,493 2,244,036 4,008,992 Excluded from General Cargo Analysis 4,003,825 4,817,503 3,255,835 3,745,790 2,830,302 Total 6,078,209 6,878,750 5,667,328 5,989,826 6,839,294 Combined Total 9,979,240 10,967,301 10,117,840 12,440,377 11,714,140 Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 85 TABLE C9-72 Projected Overseas General tinue in the future. Nevertheless, existing Cargo on the Great Lakes (Millions of Tons) tonnages indicate that estimates of 1995 gen- eral cargo traffic may be conservative. The 19684 1980 1995 2000 2020 recently completed origin-destination study 50 High Projection:b is the first step in developing new estimates of United States 6.9 9.8 12.0 12.6 15.4 general cargo traffic. Canadae f 1.3 1.9 2.3 2.4 2.9 Total 8.2 11.7 14.3 15.0 18.3 3.3 Summary Medium Projection:c United States 6.9 8.8 10.8 11.3 13.8 Past estimates of St. Lawrence Seaway traf- Canadae f 1.3 1.7 2.1 2.2 2.7 fic are summarized in Table C9-74.18 Esti- Total 8.2 10.5 12.9 13.5 16.5 mates of future traffic on the Great Lakes-St. Low Projection:d Lawrence Seaway are summarized in Table United States 6.9 6.2 7.6 8.0 9.6 C9-75. Estimated traffic through the connect- Canadae f 1.3 1.2 1.5 1.5 1.9 ing channels, the Welland Canal, and the St. Lawrence Seaway, for 1995 (medium estimate) Total 8.2 7.4 9.1 9.5 11.5 is shown in Table C9-76 by individual commod- aon the basis of historical trends the 1969 overseas ity, and extrapolated to planning periods (as- freight imports included in the General Cargo suming flow pattern does not change) in Table Analysis and the 1968 overseas freight exports are C9-77. Figure C9-24 shows the low, medium, viewed as being representative of long term traffic trends. and high estimates of prospective traffic on bThe growth between 1968 and 1980 is estimated at 3% the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence system. The a year. The annual rates of change beyond 1980 are total traffic flow pattern for 1995 is given in the same as in footnote c. Figure C9-23. cThe growth between 1968 and 1980 is estimated at 2% a year. The annual rates of change from 1980 to The estimates of iron ore and limestone traf- 2020 (1.4% for 1980 to 1995; 1% from 1995 to 2020) fic are considered more reliable than the esti- are from U. S. Army Engineer Division North Central mates of coal, grain, and overseas general Great Lakes - Overseas General Cargo Traffic cargo because of uncertainties surrounding dAnalysis, March 1967, p. 126. the latter. Nuclear power, liquefaction, gasifi- The data taken directly from U. S. Army Engineer Division North Central Great Lakes - Overseas cation of coal, and emission standards affect- General Cargo Traffic Analysis, March 1967, p.126. ing use of high sulphur coal will affect coal use eThe Canadian data represents traffic year 1966 and in the future just as competing Canadian and are for commodity groups which are included in the U.S. domestic and foreign policies will affect above cited Great Lakes - Overseas General Cargo Traffic Analysis. Source of this foreign waterborne grain. General cargo will be influenced by the commerce at Canadian Great Lakes Ports via the St. impact of Canadian National rail movement Lawrence River is Dominion Bureau of Statistics, from Chicago-Detroit to Montre al- Halifax. Shipping Report 1966, Part II, International Sea- The recent initiation of rail shipments of low fborne Shipping, Table 4 (less U. S. traffic). sulphur coal from eastern Montana to the The Canadian overseas general cargo traffic has been projected by using the same annual rates of west end of Lake Superior, from where they change as the respective U. S. high, medium and are shipped by lake, and the possibility of low projections. shipments of lignite from North Dakota have not been analyzed in this study.4' The possibil- ity of lignite shipments is a result of the pas- sage of the 1970 Clean Air Act. The sulphur Overseas general cargo includes all but the content of western coal is generally low. The following commodities: sulphur content in midwestern coal is high (1) exports: grains, coal, coke, limestone, and Appalachian coal has a low-to-medium sand, gravel, sulphur, mineral ores, and con- content. If pre-combustion emission stand- centrates ards specified by the Act are enforced, most (2) imports: grains, sugar, bananas, midwestern coal would not be usable, accord- pulpwood, coal, coke, petroleum products, ing to available technology. Western coal (Col- limestone, sand, gravel, mineral ores, and con- orado, Wyoming, and Montana) could be used centrates to satisfy needs in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and A major portion of existing tonnage at Chi- Michigan, while most Appalachian coal would cago and Detroit (between 1 and 11/2 million be shipped to other regions. Steam electric tons each annually) comprises imports of iron power plants in Michigan, Wisconsin, and and steel products that may or may not con- Minnesota consumed 35 million tons of coal in 86 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-73 Overseas General Cargo Flow Through Channels Traf f ic Percent of 1969 (millions of tons) Channel Seaway Traffic 1980 1995 2000 2020 St. Marys River 6 Low 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 Medium 0.6 0.8 0.8 1.0 High 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.1 St. Clair River 53.4 Low 4.0 4.9 5.1 6.1 Medium 5.6 6.9 7.2 8.8 High 6.2 7.6 8.0 9.8 Detroit River 77.3 Low 5.7 7.0 7.3 8.9 Medium 8.1 10.0 10.4 12.8 High 9.0 11.0 11.6 14.1 Welland Canal 85.0 Low 6.3 7.7 8.1 9.8 Medium 8.9 11.0 11.5 14.0 High 10.0 12.1 12.8 15.5 St. Lawrence Seaway 100.0 Low 7.4 9.1 9.5 11.5 Medium 10.5 12.9 13.5 16.5 High 11.7 14.3 15.0 18.3 1970. A major portion of this could be supplied determining future shipments of western low by western coal. Although coal is expected to sulphur coal. Currently there is a moderate hold a competitive edge over residual fuel oil trend toward use of western coal. This trend in the upper Great Lakes region, the further will increase as the price of oil goes up. Im- east the coal travels the closer it is to a break- proved technology for processing medium and even point with the residual fuel oil. The loca- high sulphur coal could reverse this trend at tion of the break-even point is very critical in any time. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 87 TABLE C9-74 Past Estimates of the St. Lawrence Seaway Traffica (Thousands of Short Tons) Year of Authority Study Minimum Average Maximum A. H. Ritter 1925 30,174 Gregg & Cricher 1927 20,832 26,544 Moulton, Morgan & Lee 1929 10,563 Interdepartmental Group 1934 13,483 24,865 Danielian 1941 4,632 10,000 U. S. Department of Commerce 1948 57,787 82,287 Canadian Department of Trade and Commerce 1951 44,505 U. S. Seaway Corporation 1954 36,500(1959) 52,000(1965) Canadian Seaway Authority 1956 30,000(1960-64) U. S. Seaway Corporation 1957 34,200(1960) 54,500(1965) Stanford Research Inst. 1964 43,500(1965) 59,100(1980) 76,700(2000) Kates Associates 1965 43,600(1965) 74,600(1980) 143,900(2010) Litton Systems, Inc. (U.S. Traffic only) 1968 8,960(1980) 64,592(2043) E.B.S. Mgt. Cons. Inc. 1969 49,250(1966) 54,120(1980) aThe estimates are not precisely comparable. Some deal with potential for the year of the study, and some for the future. Many failed to specify the time limits. Sources: A. H. Ritter, Transportation Economics of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Ship Channel, St. Lawrence Tidewater Association, 1925; Harold G. Moulton, Charles S. Morgan, Adah L. Lee, The St. Lawrence Navigation and Power Project, the Brookings Institution, Washington, D. C., 1929; E. S. Gregg and A. Lane Cricher, Great Lakes to Ocean Waterways, etc., U. S. Department of Commerce, 1927; Interdepartmental Board (War, Commerce and Federal Power Commission), Survey of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway and Power Project; Danielian, the St. Lawrence Survey, Part III, U. S. Department of Commerce, 1941; Paul M. Zeis, Potential Traffic on the St. Lawrence Seaway, U. S. Department of Commerce, Transportation Division, 1948; The St. Lawrence Waterway and the Canadian Economy, Canadian Department of Trade and Commerce, Ottawa, 1951. Totals from U. S. St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation and Canadian Seaway Authority are the publicly announced figures drawn from unpublished reports. Economic Analyses of St. Lawrence Seaway, S.R.I., 1964. St. Lawrence Seaway Traffic Forecast, J. Kates Associates, 1965. Oceanborne Shipping, Litton Systems, Inc., 1968, includes only U. S. overseas cargoes. Seaway System Study, E.B.S., Inc., 1969. 88 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-75 Waterborne Commerce Great Lakes-St. Lawrence System (Millions of Net Tons) Actual Projected Projection and Commodity 1960 1970 1980 1995 2000 2020 Low Iron Ore 81.8 94.2 93.5 101.4 105.1 141.7 Coal 46.7 49.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 43.0 Limestone 27.2 36.1 35.9 40.8 42.6 51.1 Grain 14.1 21.7 24.4 26.6 27.4 31.8 Subtotal 169.8 201.0 196.8 211.8 218.1 266.6 Other (18% x Subtotal) 30.6 36.2 35.4 38.1 39.2 48.0 Overseas General Cargo (3.1) (8.2) (7-4) (9.1) (9.5) (11-5) Total 200.4 237.2 232.2 249.9 257.3 314.6 Medium Iron Ore 123.8 153.7 164.0 221.0 Coal 62.0 74.0 74.0 74.0 Limestone 46.4 63.3 70.0* 103.8 Grain 25.8 30.7 32.4 38.9 Subtotal 258.0 321.7 340.4 437.7 Other (18% x Subtotal) 46.4 57.9 61.2 79.0 Overseas General Cargo (10-5) -(12.9) (13-5) (16.5) Total 304.4 379.6 401.6 516.7 High Iron Ore 126.8 169.5 189.3 342.1 Coal 83.0 134.0 134.0 134.0 Limestone 57.0 91.3 106.8 201.4 Grain 28.5 36.6 39.3 52.1 Subtotal 295.3 431.4 469.4 729.6 Other (18% x Subtotal) 53.1 77.7 84.5 131.0 Overseas General Cargo (11.7) (14.3) (15.0) (18.3) Total 348.4 509.1 553.9 860.6 Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 89 TABLE C9-76 Estimate of 1995 Traffic Flow Through Channel s (Millions of Net Tons) Channel Downbound Upbound Total St. Marys Falls Canal a Iron Ore 113.9 --- 113.9 Coal --- 7.8 7.8 Grain 22.0 --- 22.0 Limestone --- 3.8 3.8 Subtotal 135.9 b 11.6 147.5 b Other traffic (% x subtotal) 3.5 (2.6%) 5.0 8.5 (5.8%) Overseas generald (0.7) (0.1) (0.8) Total 1995 Traffic 139.4 16.6 156.0 St. Clair River Iron Ore 79.5 5.3 84.9 Coal --- 30.6 30.6 Grain 26.6 --- 26.6 Limestone 17.4 0.9 18.3 Subtotal 123.6 36.8 160.4 Other traffic (% x subtotal) e 10.5 (8.5%) 7.8 (21.1%) 18.3 (11.5%) Overseas general (3.9) (3.0) (6.9 Total 1995 Traffic 134.1 44.6 178.7 Detroit River f Iron Ore 80.0 5.0 85.0 Coal --- 50.0 50.0 Grain 26.6 --- 26.6 Limestone 17.4 1.0 18.4 Subtotal 124.0 56.0 180.0 other traffic (% x subtotal )e 12.3 (9.9%) 10.9 (19.5%) 23.4 (13.0%) Overseas general (5.0) (5.0) (10.0) Total 1995 Traffic 136.3 66.9 203.4 Welland Canal Iron Ore 6.8 22.7 29.5 Coal 11.0 --- 11.0 Grain 26.6 --- 26.6 Limestone --- --- --- Overseas general 4.4 6.6 11.0 Subtotal 48.8 29.3 78.1 Other traffic (% x subtotal)g 1.7 (3.5%) 2.5 (8.5%) 4.2 (5.3%) Total 1995 Traffic 50.5 31.8 82.3 St. Lawrence Seaway (Montreal-Lake Ontario) Iron Ore 4.o 27.0 31.0 Coal 0.3 --- 0.3 Grain 26.2 0.7 26.9 Limestone --- --- --- Overseas general 5.2 7.7 12.9 Subtotal 35.7 35.4 71.1 Other traffic (% x subtotal)g 1.4 (3.8%) 5.2 (14.7%) 6.6 (9.3%) Total 1995 Traffic 37.1 40.6 77.7 aA small amount (1.6 million tons) will be unloaded at Sault Ste. Marie (Algoma Steel). bBased on 1968 U.S. and Canadian traffic. cDifference between total and downbound tonnage. dOverseas general is included in "other traffic." eBased on 1968 and 1969 U.S. traffic. fSubstantial tonnages are unloaded at the Port of Detroit (principally Detroit Harbor, Rouge River, and Trenton Channel). Estimate made by assuming all traffic through St. Clair also going through at least part of Detroit River and about 20 x 106 tons of coal are estimaged to travel through Detroit River to Port of Detroit destinations (this is added to 30.6 x 10 tons already traveling through to reach St. Clair River). gBased on U.S. and Canadian traffic 1965-1969 (5-year average). 90 Appendix C9 TABLEC9-77 Projected Traffic Through Channels for 1980,2000, and 2020 (Millions of Net Tons) Great Lakes St. Marys St. Clair Detroit Welland St. Lawrence Year Total Falls Canal River River Canal SeawaV 1995 379.6 156.0 178.7 203.4 82.3 77.7 Ratio: Channel Traffic to Total Traffic 1.000 0.411 0.470 0.535 0.217 0.214 Low Projection 1970a 228 81.0 109 126 62.9 51.1 1980 238.3 98 112 128 52 51 2000 269.3 ill 127 145 58 58 2020 334.5 137 157 179 72 72 Medium Projection 1980 298.4 123 141 160 65 64 2000 401.6 165 189 215 87 86 2020 516.7 212 243 277 112 110 High Projection 1980 348.4 143 164 187 75 72 2000 553.9 227 261 297 120 114 2020 860.6 354 405 460 187 184 aActual 1970 traffic. Existing and Projected Waterborne Commerce 91 ST. MARYS FALLS CANAL U P DOWN 0 1970* 8 89 NOTES: 1980 13 109 1995 17 139 FLOW LINES DENOTE 18 147 YEAR 1995 TONNAGE 2000 "S 2020 33 189 -ACTUAL TRAFFIC IN 1970. L ALL FIGURES IN MI LIONS OF TONS (2,000 LBS.) 0 N T A R 1 0 QUEBEC MCI, W/-S&6 _'uA /V /VS/ /V ST. LAWRENCE RIVER @LP DOWN L 1970- 25 26 1980 32 29 1995 41 37 2000 43 39 2020 58 5 1 WELLAND SOUTH END OF CANAL UAKE MICHIGAN 4 6 @LP EIOWN UPDOWN 1970* 21 42 1970* 41.4 17.5 li .: -..m 4 1980 54.0 20.7 1980 25 0 ST. CLAIR R. DETROIT R. 1995 32 1995 70.0 27.0 54 1 2000 750 290 UPDOWN UP DOWN 2000 34 2020 46 74 202 1970' 26 83 42 84 0102. 3 ..0 1980 35 105 52 107 136 1995 45 134 67 WISCO 1 2000 48 142 71 144 2020 65 193 97 196 luf YORK E D.".;, R_ iTS NIA MICHIGAN IN61;kNA --- UH SCALE IN MILES ECEEEII@ 25 025 50 75 FIGURE C9-23 Projected Total Traffic Flow, 1995 1000 900 800 700 500 2 400 300 0 ACTUAL TRAFFIC too FIGURE C9-24 Total Traffic on the Great 19A0 1950 1960 1970 1@80 1990 2@ 20 '020 Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway YEARS Section 4 EXISTING AND FUTURE VESSEL FLEET AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT 4.1 Existing Great Lakes Fleet carry cargoes to or from lake and overseas ports outside the Seaway system. The world fleet has changed remarkably in 4.1.1 General the past 10 years. World ports now deal with special purpose ships carrying chemicals, mol- The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway ten sulphur, liquified natural gas, wine, and fleet comprises two types of ships, domestic orange juice. Dry bulk carriers of 165,000 tons lakers and ocean-going vessels (Table C9-78). and tankers up to 500,000 tons have appeared. The domestic fleet operates exclusively within The shipping revolution in the Great Lakes the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway ex- has been equally evident. The years since tending from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to the World War II have marked the collapse of the head of Lake Superior. Ocean-going vessels historic Great Lakes package fleet trade, the TABLE C9-78 Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway Waterborne Fleet, 1970 Domestic Laker Fleet Ocean-Going Fleet Dry Bulk Carriers Self Unloaders Tankers Crane Vessels Package Freighter Bulk Carriers General Cargo No. of % of No. of % of No. of %of No. of % of No. of % of No. of 2 of No. of % of Ves ael To tal Vessels Total Vessels Total Vessels Total Vessels Total Vessels Total Vessels Total Construction Period 1890 -1909 53 19.9 21 28.7 1 1.6 7 77.8 1 2.3 5 1.5 1910 -1929 69 25.9 25 34.2 12 19.4 1 11.1 3 6.8 7 2.7 1930 -1949 51 19.2 9 12.4 25 40.4 9 20.4 19 7.3 1950 -195 9 50 18.8 7 9.6 8 12.8 17 39.1 5 20 109 40.2 1960 -1965a 1965 -Present 43 16.2 11 15.1 16 25.8 1 11.1 14 31.8 20 80 131 48.3 Vessel Length (ft.) 0 -199 13 4.9 3 4.1 7 11.3 1 11.1 31 70.4 28 10.3 200 -299 14 5.3 5 6.8 19 30.6 2 22.2 4 9.2 7 2.7 300 -399 18 6.8 3 4.1 25 40.3 3 33.4 2 4.5 41 15.1 400 -499 11 4.1 6 8.2 10 16.2 2 22.1 7 15.9 4 16 134 49.4 500 -599 40 15.0 28 38.3 1 1.6 1 11.1 11 44 61 22.5 600 -699 122 45.9 20 27.5 7 28 700 -730 48 18.0 8 11.0 3 12 Over 730 a Dead Weight at 25'6" (Long tons) 0 - 4,999 32 12.0 11 15.1 42 67.7 4 44.4 38 86.3 43 15.9 5,000 - 9,999 26 9.8 17 23.3 17 27.4 4 44.4 6 13.7 1 4 180 66.3 10,000 - 14,999 103 38.7 26 35.6 3 4.9 1 11.2 9 36 42 15.5 15,000 - 19,999 42 15.8 7 9.6 7 28 6 2.3 Over 20,000 63 23.7 12 16.4 8 32 Total Number of Vessels 266 100 73 100 62 100 9 100 44 100 25 100 271 100 Percent of Total 35.5 -- 9.7 -- 8.2 -- 1.2 -- 5.8 -- 3.3 -- 36.1 -- aNo vessels were built in this category. NOTE: The domestic fleet has decreased from about 710 ships in 1950 to the 454 ships shown above and will probably fall to less than 300 by 1995 or 2000. See Table C9-80- 93 94 Appendix C9 demise of Great Lakes passenger ships, and 4.1.2.1 Dry Bulk Carriers the retirement through bloc obsolescence of several hundred small "canallers," which Dry bulk carriers are the most significant in were uneconomical and incapable of survival terms of both tonnage and number. These ves- in an era of mass production and mass move- sels are primarily involved in the iron ore and ment. The Great Lakes fleet is now charac- grain trades. Some also carry coal and stone. terized by fewer but larger vessels, deeper Of the 266 vessels (Table C9-78) actively en- draft requirements in harbors and channels, gaged in domestic dry bulk transportation in and even more emphasis on automated han- 1970, 63.9 percent were 600 feet or more in dling. The Great Lakes Region pioneered in length. In terms of cargo capacity, 78.2 per- vessel automation with the first self- cent of the dry bulk fleet carries 10,000 long unloading ships and the first giant dockside tons or better. Sixty-five percent of the fleet is equipment for continuous automated han- 20 or more years old. Nearly half of the fleet dling of grain, coal, cement, and iron ore. Fig- (45.8 percent) is 40 or more years old. The U.S. ures C9-25 through C9-31 show various types flag portion, with an average vessel age in of vessels that travel the Great Lakes. excess of 45 years, is older than the Canadian. Thirty-six of the 48 vessels in the 700 to 730 foot long category (designed to fit the dimen- 4.1.2 Domestic Laker Fleet sion of the St. Lawrence Seaway and Welland Canal locks) are Canadian. All but one, which As of December 31, 1969, this fleet, which was built in 1954, were constructed between operates exclusively within the Lakes, con- 1959 and 1969. sisted of five vessel types totalling 454 vessels. Vessel age directly affects the cost of bulk There were 266 dry bulk carriers, 73 self- transportation service. Many vessels in the unloaders, 62 tankers, 9 crane vessels, and 44 dry bulk carrier fleet are fully amortized, general cargo carriers.14 which allows their owners to operate them J _J V__ Courtesy of Lake Carriers' Association FIGUREC9-25 The John G. Munson Self-Unloader. This U.S. Steel Corporation vessel, a 666-foot self-unloader built in 1952, is shown entering Duluth-Superior Harbor. Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 95 profitably at an extremely low rate. It has to the ship operator because it has a rapid port been estimated that a 17,000 ton, 600-foot dry turn-around time and is not restricted to serv- bulk carrier that is fully depreciated can cover ing docks that have unloading equipment. It is its annual operating costs with a freight rate attractive to the dock operator because it re- of slightly less than $1.00 per long ton.53 quires a minimum of dock equipment, only an Vessel operators with newer equipment, open area within reach of the vessel's unload- which has not fully depreciated, are subject to ing boom and large enough to hold the amount intense rate competition that prohibits an ad- being unloaded. The fleet numbers 73, 65.8 equate return on the capital invested in their percent of which is between 500 and 699 feet in vessels. The 1970 Merchant Marine Act, how- length. Vessels with less than 15,000 long-tons ever, permits lake vessel operators to deposit capacity comprise 74 percent of the fleet. In earnings in tax-deferred construction reserve terms of carrying capacity and length, the av- accounts for use in building new ships. This erage self-unloader, which carries mainly coal relieves some of the rate competition and also and limestone, is smaller than the average dry supplies some needed incentives to construct bulk vessel so that it can call at shallow draft newer and more efficient lake vessels.22 harbors and at industrial plants with limited dock storage. Nine new vessels have been added to the Canadian fleet since 1965. The 4.1.2.2 Self-Unloaders remainder of the fleet are vessels that have been converted to the self-unloading type. These vessels are essentially adaptations of The increased pelletization of iron ore is the basic dry bulk vessel. The difference is opening a new segment of commerce to self- that the self-unloader is fitted with its own unloaders. Many natural iron ores have phys- unloading system, usually conveyor belts. ical characteristics that prevent them from This self-unloading ability makes the vessel being handled readily by belt conveyor sys- efficient and flexible in its use. It is attractive tems. Since most self-unloaders use belt con- Moff ff N L-A W R A L JR@ @Zj *X Courtesy of Lake Carriers' Association FIGURE C9-26 The Edward J. Ryerson Bulk Carrier. This 730-foot carrier, shown entering Duluth-Superior Harbor, was built for Inland Steel Company in 1960. 96 Appendix C9 veyor systems, they have been excluded from Two Harbors, Minnesota on December 21,1973, the ore movement. Pellets, however, can be carrying 57,000 net tons of taconite pellets handled by belt conveyors. Some pellets now bound for the U.S. Steel works in Gary, In- are transported by self-unloaders, and it is ex- diana. The Presque Isle unloads at the rate of pected that in the future, these vessels will 10,000 net tons per hour. play a major role in transportation of iron ore A contract was signed in the fall of 1973 for pellets. the building of two additional 1,000 foot ships In 1972 two new U.S. ore self-unloaders for at a total cost of $70 million. A key factor in the the U.S. Steel and Bethlehem Steel Corpora- decision to build the ships, scheduled for com- tions were placed in service. These vessels are pletion in 1976 and 1977, was the building of a unique in size and capacity. U.S. Steel's vessel new 5.4 million ton iron ore pellet plant in (the Roger Blough) is 858 feet long and 105feet Minnesota for Bethlehem Steel Corporation. in beam, while Bethlehem's (the Stewart Cort) Each of the vessels will carry 66,000 net tons of is 1,000 feet long and 105 feet in beam. (See iron ore or 58,000 net tons of coal. Unloading references 40 and 58.) This increase in vessel speed will be 10,000 net tons per hour. A size was permitted by the completion of the drydock option is held for two additional Poe Lock at Sault Ste. Marie. The principal 1,000-footers that could follow. characteristics of these vessels are shown in tabular form beloW.14 The Cort is constructed so that its draft can 4.1.2.3 Tankers be increased to 30 feet 6 inches by the addition of a minimum amount of steel strapping to the This fleet of 62 vessels transports refined upper deck. At a draft of 30 feet 6 inches the petroleum products between refining centers vessel can carry approximately 73,000 net tons and consuming centers located on the Great of iron ore. The average operating speed is 16.5 Lakes. Approximately 70.9 percent of the miles per hour. The vessel was designed to Seaway tanker fleet is between 200 feet and de-ballast in less than three hours. It can be 399 feet in length with 67.1 percent of the fleet loaded and unloaded at 10,000 net tons per having less than 5,000 ton capacity. Size of hour. The Cort carried 2,100,000 net tons from these domestic tankers, obviously smaller Taconite Harbor to Burns Harbor in 35 trips than the self-unloader and dry bulk types, is between 4 May and 23 December, 1972. The limited by the smaller shallow draft harbors in largest cargo was 62,500 net tons. The average which they trade. Competing oil pipelines cargo per trip was 60,000 net tons. serve the major port areas. The Roger Blough carried more than 1,100,000 net tons in its first season on the Lakes, although it operated only slightly over 4.1.2.4 Crane Vessels four months. The Blough is designed to unload at a rate of approximately 11,000 net tons per These ships deal mainly in the steel-scrap hour. and sulphur trades. The crane vessels average A third vessel, the Presque Isle, a 1,000-foot- around 300 feet in length with 88.8 percent long tug-barge, so called because the power having a carrying capacity less than 10,000 unit is detachable from the remainder of the long tons. Only one vessel of this small fleet vessel, commenced its maiden voyage from was built originally for that purpose. The Characteristics of the Roger Blough and the Stewart Cort U.S. Steel Bethlehem Steel 858 ft. Self- 1,000 ft. Self- Current Seaway Unloader Vessel Unloader Vessel Vessel Size Roger Blough Stewart Cort Length 730 ft. 858 ft. 1,000 ft. Beam 75 ft. 105 ft. 105 ft. Design Draft 27 ft. 3 in. 28 ft. 27 ft. 10 in. Capacity at Design Draft 31,200 ST 50,600 ST 65,000 ST (2,000 lbs) Capacity at 25'9" Draft 28,000 ST 45,500 ST 56,000 ST Lost Capacity 3,200 ST 5,100 ST 9,000 ST Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 97 t L11 Cour esy of North American Films FIGURE C9-27 The StewartJ. Cort Self-Unloader. A 1,000-foot vessel built t for Bethlehem Steel in 1971, the Stewart J. Cort is shown leaving Erie, Pennsylvania. The vessel contains a belt conveyor unloading system designed for the pellet trade. eight other vessels are reconstructed ships of pelletized freight. With the aid of fork-lifts, 55 years of age or older. these vessels have an extremely high unload- ingrate. Their rapid loading and unloading capability and young age make this fleet the 4.1.2.5 Package Freighters most up-to-date element of the Seaway sys- tem. Of the 44 vessels in the domestic general cargo package fleet, 54.4 percent are less than 100 feet long, and 81.8 percent have a carrying 4.1.3 The Ocean-Going Fleet capacity of less than 2,000 long tons. Most of this fleet operates on a regular schedule. The Ocean-going vessels have limited access to majority are Canadian-owned. The United the Great Lakes-Seaway waterway due to the States fleet is virtually non-existent because dimensions of its locks and channel depths. of competition from the highly developed U.S. The Seaway draft limitation of 25 feet 6 inches highway system. often forces vessels to carry less than their This fleet is relatively new, and 61.8 percent maximum design capacity. As of December 31, of the package freighters were built within the 1969, the ocean-going Seaway fleet numbered past 15 years. Some of the newer vessels are 296 American, Canadian, and foreign vessels. equipped with side ports for rapid handling of The fleet has been broken down into two types, 98 Appendix C9 the newer bulk carriers and conventional 150 standard 20-foot containers. break-bulk general cargo ships. Approximately 58.4 percent of these ships have drafts in excess of 25 feet 6 inches. To- gether they sacrifice 314,415 deadweight tons 4.1.3.1 Bulk Carriers of carrying capacity. The average lost capac- ity for these 158 ocean-going general cargo The ocean-going bulk carrier fleet is com- vessels is 2,040 deadweight tons per vessel. posed of 25 vessels, which average approxi- mately 600 feet in length. The current trend is toward construction of larger ships upwards 4.2 Opportunities for Technological to the 730-foot Seaway maximum. These ves- Advancement sels are comparatively new. All were con- structed within the past 15 years, and are used The future Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Sea- to carry dry bulk cargoes (such as grain), gen- way fleet cannot be fully evaluated without eral cargo (such as steel products), and even knowledge of technological developments and some containers. At a draft of 25 feet 6 inches, innovation in other transport and in industry 60 percent of these ships have capacities of distribution and collection practices. 16,000 tons or greater. Forty-four percent of Great Lakes shipping has received consid- the vessels have the maximum permissible erable stimulation from the passage of the beam of 75 feet. Only one vessel has a summer Merchant Marine Act of 1970 and from the draft that is 25 feet 6 inches or less, leaving 96 newly constructed Poe Lock at Sault Sainte percent of these carriers transporting less Marie, which will accommodate vessels up to than their actual potential carrying capacity. 1,000 feet long and 105 feet wide. At the pres- The total lost capacity of these 24 vessels at a ent time, however, innovative vessel design summer draft of 25 feet 6 inches is 156,445 is not being pursued for the Great Lakes- deadweight tons. This means that the average Seaway system. Substantial investments in Seaway ocean-going bulk carrier is losing research, ships, shore facilities, and changes 6,500 tons of potential capacity because of the in trade practices are now required .24 Seaway draft restriction. Three new Norwe- The effect of transportation technology on gian sister ships, the Rolwi, Nanf?i, andAndwi, the existing and projected commerce for are the largest of these bulk carriers in opera- domestic bulk carriers and the general cargo tion. They have lengths of 709 feet, beams of 75 ocean-going fleet is critical for future Great feet, and design drafts and deadweights of 36 Lakes-St. Lawrence River shipping. feet and 35,700 tons. At a draft of 25 feet 6 inches their capacity is limited to only 22,175 deadweight.tons, thus losing a potential 13,525 tons of cargo each. 4.3 Future Great Lakes Fleet 4.1.3.2 General Cargo 4.3.1 Domestic Dry Bulk The conventional ocean-going general cargo The existing U.S. domestic dry bulk fleet, fleet, numbering approximately 271 vessels, is despite its age, is still an active, economically much larger than the ocean-going bulk fleet. viable transportation system on the Great These vessels average between 400 and 500 Lakes-St. Lawrence systeM.53 Incentives for feet in length with the greatest proportion modernizing the U.S. flag fleet were provided (57.2 percent) built during the 1955 to 1965 era. by the Merchant Marine Act of 1970, which A majority of these freighters have carrying created tax-deferred reserve accounts for ac- capacities of less than 10,000 deadweight tons quisition, construction, and reconstruction of at a 25 feet 6 inch draft. These vessels are vessels. The prospective (1995) bulk fleet has smaller in length and capacity and are slightly been estimated for the Great Lakes Water older than the ocean-going bulk carriers. Op- Levels Study20 based on medium projections erators make maximum use of these vessels by for iron ore, coal, limestone, and grain, (Table carrying bottom loads of grain and edible oils C9-75), distribution of commerce to the vari- with top loads of general cargo, containers, ous classes of vessels (estimated for the Great and heavy lifts. In addition, nine of these ves- Lakes Levels Study and shown in Table C9- sels have been converted into partial cellular 79), and vessel characteristics such as capac- containerships capable of carrying more than ity, draft, speed, and size (Table C9-80). Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 99 Data in Tables C9-79, C9-80, and C9-81 were quired to carry the 1995 medium commerce used to determine the number of vessels in projections. The fleet capacity would be 8.5 each class of the 1995 fleet that would be re- million deadweight tons. Using these same as- sumptions, the percent of the fleet that would be required to carry the high and low projec- TABLE C9-79 Projected Distribution of tions of traffic can be estimated by simple pro- Shipments by Vessel Class and Commodity jection. The low projection yields iron ore, 78 Trade for 1995a percent; coal, 58 percent; limestone, 64 per- Percent of Annual Shipment Tonnage cent; and grain, 87 percent. Thehigh projec- Vessel Iron Bituminous tion yields iron ore, 110 percent; coal, 181 per- Length Class Ore Coal Limestone Grain cent; limestone, 144 percent; and grain, 119 percent. United States Fleet Some generalizations about the future fleet 550'- 599' 4 25 20 can be inferred from trends that are well es- 600'- 649' 5 20 25 20 33 650'- 699' 6 10 25 10 33 tablished at this time. Foremost among these 700'- 730' 7 10 25 10 34 is the preference for larger vessels as re- 731'- 849' 8 20 20 placements for vessels leaving service. Re- 850'- 949' 9 20 20 950'-1,000' 10 20 placements will have two or more times the 100 100 100 100 carrying capacity of vessels replaced. Their propulsion power and resultant speed will be Canadian Fleet greater, their hulls approximately structured l'- 399' 1 .9 3.1 for winter operation, and their loading and 400'- 499' 2 .7 3.3 unloading facilities will be improved. Re- 500'- 599' 4 .6 4.5 1.7 placement vessels will carry more tonnage 600'- 649' 5 1.6 7.6 13.4 6.9 faster, more days of the year, than present 650'- 699' 6 2.0 3.1 5.4 8.3 700'- 730' 7 84.0 87.1 73.4 61.4 vessels do. These factors, viewed in the light of 950'-1,000' 10 12.4 18.6 comparatively modest increases in total tons 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 moved, indicate a numerically smaller fleet. aDue to the recently completed Canadian ship building The fleet may include large deadweight barge program, the characteristics of the U. S. and Canadian carriers, such as the 50,000 ton tug-barge sys- 1995 fleets will differ since the U. S. 1995 fleet tem recently constructed at Litton's shipyard will embody more advanced design concepts. in Erie, Pennsylvania. TABLE C9-80 Projected Vessel Data for 1995 Vessel Ave. Vessel Net Ton Draft at Vessel Capacity Per Foot Total Maximum Cargo Capacity in Net Tons Max. Cargo Speed of Immersion (For 1972 Vessel Iron Bituminous Carrying Statuie Drafts in Excess Operating Class Ore Coal Limestone Grain Capacity m.p.h. of 18 Feet) Cost/Hour United States Fleet 4 16,100 13,300 16,100 16,100 22.5 14 920 297 5 22,800 18,400 22,800 22,800 25.6 14 1170 328 6 24,000 19,500 24,000 24,000 26.3 14 1230 348 7 28,900 21,900 28,900 28,900 27.2 14 1390 366 8 45,000 45,000 29.5 17 2150 481 9 51,000 51,000 31.0 17 2300 513 10 62,000 62,000 32.0 17 2650 594 Canadian Fleet 1 6,407 6,407 6,407 6,407 23.5 17 423 179 2 10,520 10,520 10,520 10,520 21.1 17 774 208 4 17,873 16,900 17,873 16,900 23.8 17 1021 228 5 21,600 19,925 21,600 19,925 24.6 17 1037 228 6 25,984 22,900 25,984 22,900 26.4 18 1309 251 7 30,600 30,600 30,600 30,600 27.2 18 1560 252 10 62,000 62,000 32.0 18 2650 287 100 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-81 Prospective Great Lakes Dry The Canadian share of this trade will con- Bulk Cargo Fleet (Dry Bulk Carriers and tinue to grow at a moderate rate. Pelletization Self-Unloaders), Medium Traffic Projection for will remain its prime cargo-handling proce- 1995 dure. Canadian package freighters will com- Commodity pete .strongly for domestic container cargo moving within the Hamilton-Toronto- Vessel Iron Lime- Montreal corridor. The Canadian National Class Ore stone Coal Grain Total Railroad also handles containers for domestic United States Fleet delivery and transfer. Its integrated railway 1 system, while complementing the ocean-going 2 container shipping lines, will be the primary 3 competitive force for any domestic container 4 8 8 traffic moving on package carriers. 5 27 6 8 2 43 6 14 3 8 2 27 7 12 3 7 2 24 4.3.4 Overseas Fleet 8 12 3 15 9 11 3 14 It is anticipated that by 1980 perhaps as 10 9 9 much as 80 percent of the present Seaway- Total 85 18 31 6 140 overseas fleet will be in need of replacement. This offers an excellent opportunity to con- Canadian Fleet struct new vessels incorporating design fea- 1 1 10 11 tures tailored to the existing characteristics of 2 1 1 2 specific trade routes and existing limitations 3 of the Seaway system. 4 1 1 2 4 The maritime industry is currently in the 5 2 1 2 7 12 midst of unprecedented technological change 6 2 1 1 7 11 in ocean shipping operations, which affects 7 42 4 11 38 95 both equipment and cargo handling methods. 8 Large, fast full-containerships are presently 9 in operation transporting containerized gen- 10 3 6 9 eral cargo on the North Atlantic and Pacific Total 49 8 17 70 144 high-value, high-volume trade routes. Barge- Combined carrying ocean vessels capable of receiving Total 134 26 48 76 284 and dispatching pre-loaded cargo lighters at anchor for towing to and from multiple ocean and river ports will be entering service in greater number in the next few years. Combi- nation ocean barge-tug service is also ex- 4.3.2 Domestic Tanker pected to grow rapidly. Ocean-going barges of up to 50,000 tons are being designed and con- The domestic tanker fleet is expected to re- structed to carry dry, liquid, and refrigerated main constant in number and total tonnage. cargoes, propelled by pusher tugs rated at The present average tanker vessel is smaller more than 10,000 horsepower. This new con- than the physical constraints of the Seaway cept in deep sea transportation could poten- and it is expected that future tankers simi- tially be used instead of conventional cargo larly will not exceed the Seaway's maximum ships. permissible dimensions. Petroleum pipelines Overseas general cargo volume through the are expected to take on some of the routes now Seaway system is expected to continue to grow supplied by tankers as lines are extended to during the next decade despite the competing more consuming centers. container shipping services by U.S. and Cana- dian railways to East Coast ports. Part of this growth will occur in general cargo not suitable 4.3.3 Domestic General Cargo for containerized general cargo and where speed of delivery is less important than cost of There is no U.S. flag fleet because of motor transportation. carrier and air freight transportation of The theme of the design and size of future high-value cargoes. ships to serve Great Lakes-overseas general Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 101 cargo traffic requirements in the next decade demand to provide Great Lakes services to will be adaptability and flexibility. In addition many areas in Africa, South America, India, to accommodating break-bulk and pelletized and the Far East where harbors, industries, cargoes, many of these multi-purpose ships and connecting rail and road systems are still will also be capable of carrying partial cellular relatively undeveloped. loads of standard containers, roll-on/roll-off Although containerized cargo moving cargoes, bulk grains, liquids, and other dry through the Seaway system in the future is and refrigerated commodities. The partial cel- expected to be handled both conventionally on lular containerships recently put into Great break-bulk general cargo ships and cellularly Lakes service by several foreign flag liner op- on multi-purpose partial containerships, erators for direct movement to Western Euro- heavier- and lower-rated general cargoes un- pean ports exemplify one type of multi- amenable to containerization will predomi- purpose vessel expected to serve the future nate in the Lakes-overseas trades. Because general cargo traffic needs of the Great these conventional general cargo vessels and Lakes-Seaway region. multi-purpose carriers will have to maintain a The trend toward such flexible ships will relatively wide operational flexibility in and also be reflected in the direct overseas volume out of many developed and undeveloped world movements of dry bulk cargoes such as wheat, ports, their size is not expected to increase corn, and soybeans.10 Several new, multi- significantly. purpose bulk carriers are already in service in Economies of more mechanized cargo han- the Lakes-overseas grain trades. These mod- dling gear, improved propulsion equipment ern vessels can carry full loads (23,000 tons) of for greater speed, modifications of hull forms dry bulk commodities, including break-bulk and automated systems are expected to play a general cargo such as steel products and a more important role in the future develop- number of deck-loaded containers. ment and operation of Great Lakes general Efforts by the Maritime Administration to cargo and multi-purpose vessels than in- develop preliminary vessel designs to increase creases in size. U.S. participation in foreign trade may also Various factors may limit the Great Lakes- further the trend toward multi-purpose, Seaway system's potential development of ocean-going vessels serving the Great Lakes full-containership services for its overseas general cargo and dry bulk trades. Design general cargo tradeS:53 competition has already resulted in the de- (1) vessel size and draft restrictions im- velopment of a multi-purpose carrier known posed by the present dimensions of Seaway as the Kennebec Class which transports locks and depths of its channels break-bulk and pelletized cargoes, containers, (2) lack of a year-round shipping season grains, and ores. This highly versatile ship, (3) lack of sufficient container cargo with a 570-foot length, 75-foot beam, and a generating capacity 21,000 ton deadweight tonnage ocean service (4) lack of adequate, specialized contain- carrying capacity, possesses the characteris- er-handling lake port facilities tics for successful Great Lakes-Seaway opera- (5) inability to generate sufficient invest- tions. An elongated version of this class could ment capital at lake ports also be constructed and operated as a 20,000 The new generation of large full- deadweight tonnage Seaway service vessel or containerships are not suited to the present a 27,000 deadweight tonnage ocean service Lakes-overseas trades. They are too wide, ship. fast, and expensive to be committed to the slow Concern has been expressed that the rapidly inland journey through the tolled Seaway and growing world fleet of containerships will seal to a limited shipping season. Because much of the fate of the traditional break-bulk general the efficiency of the containership depends on cargo ships now operating on the Seaway sys- rapid turnaround, these expensive vessels tem and that these break-bulk vessels may be cannot afford to stop at the multiple port net- displaced by the competing, intermodal rail- work characteristic of the Lakes-overseas containership services provided at eastern general cargo trades and then top off their Canadian and U.S. ports. However, there is loads at lower St. Lawrence ports to achieve and will continue to be a definitive need on the deeper drafts. Volume cargo aggregation at a Great Lakes for conventional general cargo few major lake ports is necessary for full- vessels to carry commodities that are neither containersbips to continue to service the physically or economically amenable to con- Great Lakes. tainer transport. These vessels will also be in With the possible exception of Chicago, most 102 Appendix C9 general cargo lake ports cannot generate Since competitive and political pressures enough container cargo to support a costly may make regional port planning virtually specialized terminal for full-containership op- impossible, the remaining alternative is inde- erations. The Great Lakes-overseas general pendent port planning for future container cargo traffic consists more of high-weight, terminal needs. In this respect, it appears that high-density, low-value cargoes, such as iron in the near future only the Port of Chicago will and steel products, than the higher-value, have sufficient containerized general cargo packaged merchandise that is more suitable to traffic to support a full-container terminal containerization. Recent studies by Professor berth. Toledo may be the only other lake port Eric Schenker of the University of Wisconsin that has excellent potential for future con- have shown that 72 percent and 81 percent of tainer terminal development. It has available the Lakes-overseas general cargo imports and land, excellent rail and highway services, good exports respectively are physically and eco- hinterland penetration, and a rapidly rising nomically unsuited to container transport. By volume of container traffic. 1985 only approximately 25 percent of the Provision of direct overseas full-container- Lakes general cargo traffic is expected to be ship Great Lakes services appears unlikely suited for containerization (see references 35 unless sufficient container cargo can be ag- and 37). gregated at adequate terminal facilities Other important factors inhibiting the con- developed at a few major lake ports. Expan- tainer generating potential of the Great Lakes sion of the Seaway's vessel size capacity are that the Seaway handles less than 20 per- through larger locks and deeper channels, cent of the general cargo exports generated in equitable inland access, and an extended its hinterland and few lake ports do more than shipping season would also help attract full- 10 percent in export-import business. Reasons containership services at Great Lakes load for this include alleged discriminatory rail center ports. Manchester Lines, Ltd., British rates and inequitable services, shippers' flag service, pioneered the first full-container habits and inexperience with the Seaway, the service during the 1971 season. short shipping season in the Great Lakes, and Ocean-going barges, pushed, towed, carried, insufficient sailings to certain world areas. or self-propelled, appear to hold equal promise Another reason operators of full-container- as full-containerships for Seaway service. ships are not inclined to service the Lakes Barges are more adaptable to the type and is lack of adequate, specialized container volume of cargo and the multiple port network port facilities designed to achieve rapid of the present Great Lakes-overseas trade. turn-around time. The lake ports at present Existing ocean-going barge concepts, such as have no berths to accommodate full- the LASH and SEABEE barge carriers and containerships and appear to have no im- the tug-barge combinations, are not suitable mediate plans to build any such facilities. In for Seaway use because of their size. Further addition few lake ports can generate sufficient studies may show that appropriate adapta- capital to provide the necessary space, equip- tions of these concepts for the Great Lakes-St. ment, and facilities. The cost of a single con- Lawrence system will prove to be econom- tainer berth with marginal wharf, 10 to 20 ically and technically feasible. acres of land, and two large container cranes One of the advantages of the barge carrying requires capital investment of at least five vessel is short turn-around time in port and million dollars. flexibility of cargo types carried in its lighters Since every lake port cannot afford to build and on deck. With the LASH and Lykes SEA- modern container facilities, some sort of coor- BEE systems, barges can be easily loaded and dinated regional planning appears to be one unloaded from the mother vessel at the rate of way the major general cargo lake ports can three or four per hour. The process requires no prevent losing container traffic to coastal more than 24 to 36 hours in port. Many ship- ocean ports while retaining their financial pers state that because at least 50 percent of a stability. It has been suggested that the Great ship's time is spent in port, barge carrying Lakes ports as a unit consider the develop- ocean ships can save an average of 20 days per ment of two modern, fully-integrated con- voyage. The versatility of the barge carrier tainer terminal facilities: one at the southern lies in its ability to carry all types of break- end of Lake Michigan serving Chicago and bulk, unitized, or bulk cargoes in its lighters in Milwaukee, and one on Lake Erie to service any reasonable mixture. The lighters can be eastern lake ports such as Detroit, Toledo, and towed to and from inland river and ocean port Cleveland (see references 35 and 37). terminals for loading and discharging while Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 103 the mother vessel continues to operate at sea. This Act designates the Great Lakes as the The effect of lake wave action on the move- nation's fourth seacoast, and comes to grips ments of these barges, especially LASH light- with problems that have faced the industry for ers, is another important factor that needs many years. careful study. The occasionally strong cur- Most significant in the Lake carriers'view is rents and wave action of the Lakes are far the fact that the act allows creation of tax different than those of an inland river channel deferred construction- reserve accounts for or the oceans. acquisition, construction, and reconstruction Recent unpublished research by Professor of lake vessels. This provision had been sought John Hazard of Michigan State University by the lake carriers for more than 18 years. It has revealed that the ocean-going barge car- provides an incentive for vessel operators to riers are more economical than either break- replace their aging fleets, using funds that bulk general cargo vessels or full-container- would otherwise have been paid in taxes. The ships when serving multiple ports of call. past success of this incentive is well There are several potential methods and lo- documented. Construction reserve accounts cations for operating ocean-going barge carry- have been available to the ocean-going fleets ing ships and their lighters on the Great for many years and have been largely respon- Lakes. Although existing barge carrier pro- sible for the development of the most modern totypes are too large to transit the Seaway, segment of the U.S. Merchant Marine, the the mother ship could carry its lighters as far liner fleet. as Montreal where they could be transshipped A number of new lake vessels are already to a feeder Great Lakes barge carrier or towed being built and older vessels lengthened, e.g., through the Seaway system. Another alterna- the Charles Beeghly was lengthened from 700 tive would be to design a special barge carrier feet to 806 feet with construction reserve ac- suitable for Seaway, ocean, and Great Lakes counts. As of February 1973, American ship- service. The operation and location of the builders were building five Great Lakes bulk mother ship and its lighters within the Sea- carriers in their biggest shipbuilding program way system can vary. Instead of the barge in any peacetime era. There were also con- carrier calling at numerous lake ports, it could tracts for construction of 175 barges and two simply unload barges at various ports en route towboats. to Chicago, where it could load containers or heavy lift cargoes on deck, and then proceed to collect loaded barges on the back-haul. Alter- 4.4.2 Environmental Control natively, the mother ship could anchor at a location on any one of the five Lakes where it The Federal Water Quality Improvement could load and discharge barges en route to Act of 1970, among other things, is designed to and from several ports. protect Federal navigable waters from oil and In addition to serving the Great Lakes sewage pollution from vessels.9 The Act im- through the Seaway, ocean barge carriers poses liability, irrespective of fault, for the might receive lighters loaded at southern cost of cleaning up an oil spill up to $100 per Lake Michigan ports to be towed down the gross ton of the vessel or $14 million, Illinois and Mississippi River to the Gulf whichever is the lesser. The liability applies Coast. Ocean barge carriers could make Chi- unless it can be shown that the spill was cago a true year-round port with lighters mov- caused solely by an act of God, an act of war, ing down the Mississippi during winter and negligence on the part of the United States, or out the Seaway when it is open. See references an act or omission of a third party. 35 and 53 for more overseas fleet information. The Act provides that after giving appropri- ate consideration to the economic costs and technological limitations involved, Federal 4.4 Legislative Trends Pertinent to Great standards for the performance of marine sani- Lakes Navigation tation devices shall be promulgated. These devices are to be designed to prevent the dis- charge of untreated or inadequately treated 4.4.1 Merchant Marine Program sewage into or on the navigable waters of the United States. The Coast Guard, in coordina- The Merchant Marine Act of 1970 rep- tion with the Environmental Protection resents a notable milestone in the moderniza- Agency, must promulgate regulations govern- tion of the United States Great Lakes fleet.9 ing the design, construction, installation, and 104 Appendix C9 A, Courtesy of Litton Industries FIGURE C9-28 Artist's Sketch of 1,000-foot Tug Barge. Built by Litton Industries at Erie, Pennsylvania, this vessel was expected to begin service during the 1974 season. operation of marine sanitation devices on and lakes and coastal waters unless @the State board vessels. They are to be consistent with has, in fact, adopted standards which estab- maritime safety and marine and navigation lish uses for all of those waters which require laws and regulations. such an absolute prohibition. In -effect, the Standards and regulations are to become ef- Committee intends that any State prohibition fective two years after promulgation for new apply only to areas for protection of public vessels, and five years after promulgation for drinking water supplies, shellfish beds, and existing vessels. The Senate Committee on areas designated for body contact recreation." Public Works stated that marine sanitation Especially significant to Lake shipping is devices should be installed at the earliest pos- legislation relating to disposal of dredge spoil. sible time permitted by existing and advanc- Navigation improvements in the connecting ing technology, economics, and other practical rivers and channels must be achieved and considerations. maintained to realize the economies of wa- Congress recognized the necessity to relate terborne transportation and to maximize the sewage treatment control measures to the return from public investment in navigation existing water quality control programs of the facilities. This must be accomplished in coor- various States. It therefore authorized with dination with environmental interests, as dis- the approval of the Secretary of the Interior cussed in Section 5. (whose functions have since been transferred Legislation and local ordinances dealing to the Environmental Protection Agency), the with air and thermal pollution are also of im- States to prohibit the discharge of any sewage mediate concern to vessel operators on the from vessels, treated or not, in certain limited Great Lakes. areas. But, according to the Senate Commit- Because of the interstate and international tee on Public Works, this authority is not to be nature of Great Lakes shipping operations, broadly construed. "A State cannot prohibit the method of imposing environmental con- vessel waste discharge from all of its rivers trols, i.e., by local ordinance, State laws, Fed- Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 105 'Nil A& 41 LINERS 6add:* R c ... tesy of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers FIGURE C9-29 Overseas General Cargo Vessels at Duluth, Minnesota, in 1969 eral laws, or by international agreement or U.S. waters. Great Lakes vessels have been treaty, is extremely important. using this technique voluntarily since 1934. The new requirement will simplify meeting and overtaking situations with saltwater ves- 4A.3 Shore Erosion and Shore Damage sels not familiar with Great Lakes rules of the road. Regulating the speed of vessels in connect- Radio-telephone communication equipment ing rivers has been a problem for navigation requirements for bridges over navigable wa- and shoreside property owners for many ters was authorized by regulations issued by years. The speed required for steering control the Coast Guard during 1970. Exchanges of must be assured for safety of vessels and intentions beyond the ranges of lights and channels. Strict compliance with U.S. Army horns will enhance the safety of both bridges Corps of Engineers permit regulations for and ships. structures on the navigable waters is a possi- An important bill that would affect both ble solution to the problem that will become navigation safety and environmental control increasingly important as winter navigation is under consideration by Congress. It would becomes more routine and ice pressures on authorize marine traffic control where jus- structures become more severe. tified, sea lanes, improved control of poten- tially hazardous ship design and operation, and establishment of standards for shoreside r 4A.4 Navigation Safety facilities to minimize hazards and pollution. A uniform system of rules of the road at sea One of the most important pieces of marine may present some problems for lake shipping safety legislation enacted this century is the even though a signatory nation can make ex- bill signed by the President in August 1970 ceptions for inland waters such as the Great requiring bridge-to-bridge radio-telephone Lakes. Recent statistics released by the Coast communication while vessels are operating in Guard show a 30 percent decrease of collisions 106 Appendix C9 on the Great Lakes during the past two de- the various statutes passed by the Congress cades. This compares with an increase of 360 have been included with the sections of the percent on the oceans where international Revised Statutes in the United States Code. rules apply. There has been no attempt to consolidate or The National Transportation Safety Board rewrite conflicting provisions. has reported on a special study covering the During the 92 years since enactment of the six-ye ar span 1963 to 1968, showing widely dif- Revised Statutes, responsibility for adminis- fering average fatality rates in freight move- tration of the shipping laws has been trans- ment by highway, rail, marine, and pipeline. ferred eight times by implied amendment and The ratio between the most safe and the least reorganization, but the authorizing statute safe method of surface freight transportation has never been expressly amended. Although is approximately 1,000 to 1. need for codification of the shipping laws has The averages were 10.9 deaths for every bil- long been recognized, it has proved virtually lion ton-miles in Federally regulated trucking, impossible because of the number of agencies 2.5 in railroad freight carriage, and estimated involved in administering these laws. Now be- .31 in commercial shipping, and .011 in petro- cause virtually all statutory powers and leum pipeline movements. Statistics for non- duties contained in the shipping laws are vest- regul .ated trucking and natural gas pipelines ed in the Secretary of Transportation and were not available for the study. In contrast to administered through the Coast Guard, effec- the large body of statistical data and analysis tive codification and simplification appears available on passenger safety, freight safety possible. If this can be accomplished, it will not information was not readily available. only simplify the administration of the ship- "One of the first requirements . . . in the ping laws but will reduce the burdensome shaping of national transportation policy is paper work now imposed upon the vessel that the relevant data be available," the owner, particularly in connection with the Board said. It recommended that the Depart- documentation of seamen. ment of Transportation regularly publish "comparable data on the losses and loss rates" in all freight transportation modes, including 4.5 Energy Utilized per Ton-Mile fatalities, injuries, property damage, and ac- cident delays. The energy cost per ton-mile for waterborne commerce is the lowest of the five principal modes of transportation (Table C9-82). In 4.4.5 User Charges, Tolls, and Alleged Dis- addition to saving energy, waterborne car- criminatory Rail Rates riers primarily utilize trackless natural water courses to efficiently move great quantities of Legislative or administrative actions deal- material without generating excessive noise, ing with these important issues directly affect Great Lakes shipping. Each bill is studied by one or more Federal agencies, including De- partment of Transportation, Maritime Ad- TABLE C9-82 Ton-Miles Per Gallon of Fuel ministration, and Interstate Commerce Ton Miles BTU's Commission. The impact of resulting or re- Per Gallon Required lated legislation will have to be analyzed Mode of Fuel Per Ton Mileb carefully by shipping intereStS.13 Air 3.7a 6,300 Truck 58a 2,400 Rail 200a 750 4.4.6 Codification and Simplification of the Water (Inland River System) 250a 500 Shipping Laws Pipeline 300a Not Estimated Typical Lake Vessel 495C Not Estimated When the first Congress of the United Roger Blough States convened on March 4,1789, the work of 858' Self-Unloader 656d Not Estimated regulating shipping and navigation began. In aEstimated by Oak Ridge Laboratory, Tennessee, fact, the need for uniform regulation of ship- published in the Journal of Commerce 21 May 1973. ping and navigation was one of the compelling bUnpublished study by Rand Corporation. reasons for adopting the Constitution. In 1878 CEstimated by Lake Carrier's Association, Cleveland, Ohio. shipping laws then in existence were consoli- dFurnished by U. S. Steel Corporation for 16 trips dated in the Revised Statutes. Since that time, with no cargo carried on backhaul. Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 107 NOVI ow MAN FIGURE C9-30 The Doctor Lykes SEABEE-Type Vessel. Approximately 24,500 long tons in thirty-eight 97-foot barges can be loaded into this vessel in only 13 hours. A conventional freighter would require a week or more to load that much cargo. The 36,000 horsepower engine produces a top speed of 20 knots. The ship will also carry 1,800 containers or roll-on/roll-off cargo. The SEABEE concept makes shallow harbors and inland waterways an integral part of a global transportation system. preempting valuable land areas to the exclu- rence River, provides a back-haul for the ves- sion of other users, or altering great stretches sels bringing Canadian iron ore into Lakes of land. These characteristics are important Erie and Michigan. Overseas general cargo considering environmental objectives, which vessels carry cargo both ways although export include preservation of natural and cultural tonnage is 25 percent greater than import areas, duration or restoration of scenic areas, tonnage. enhancement or protection to achieve or maintain quality of environment, and protec- tion and rehabilitation of related land re- 4.6 Environmental Considerations sources to ensure availability for their best use. The environmental effect of proposed proj- Back-haul cargoes have contributed to the ects concerning commercial navigation must low cost of waterborne transportation on the be evaluated in an environmental impact Great Lakes for the smaller vessels. For statement (EIS) as required by the Environ- example, limestone from northern Lake mental Policy Act of 1969. Michigan and Lake Huron provides a back- Five items must be evaluated: haul for self-unloaders bringing coal from (1) environmental setting without the southern Lake Michigan and Lake Erie ports. project Although larger vessels, especially the newer (2) environmental impacts of the pro- ones, are designed primarily for one way posed action movement of a particular commodity, grain (3) any adverse environmental effects from Lakes Superior and Michigan, bound for that cannot be avoided Buffalo or Canadian ports along the St. Law- (4) a relation between local, short term 108 Appendix C9 J!, 4- FIGURE C9-31 The World's Largest Shipboard Elevator. This view of the Doctor Lykes' stern shows the vessel's 21,000 ton capacity submersible shipboard elevator, the world's largest. This is the largest dry cargo ship afloat. uses, and the maintenance and enhancement Agency (EPA). The local cooperating agency is of long term productivity required to pay 25 percent of the additional (5) irreversible and irretrieveable com- cost to place the material in a diked area if mitments of resources EPA does not approve the local sewage treat- The purpose of an EIS is to insure that envi- ment facilities. The disposal area must be suf- ronmental consequences are known before ficient to hold polluted materials expected to any decision is made. be dredged over a 10-year period. It has been Because dredging is essential to the main- assumed that in 10 years, sewage treatment tenance of the Great Lakes waterway system, facilities will be adequate to prevent con- the location and development of methods to tinued pollution of harbor sediments so that dispose of dredged material should be the re- dredged materials will no longer be polluted sult of efforts by all concerned groups and and require diked disposal. Material not agencies. As municipal and industrial waste classified as polluted may be deposited in ap- treatment systems are fully developed, the proved areas in the Great Lakes. problem of bottom sediment contamination is The cost of diked disposal varies greatly expected to diminish, thereby minimizing the from harbor to harbor, ranging from as low as impact of dredging on water quality. 50 percent to as high as 500 percent or even 900 The Corps of Engineers is presently en- percent more than lake disposal. Cost varies gaged in a program that provides for diked with design, composition, and location of diked disposal of any dredged material classified as areas, techniques of handling material, polluted by the Environmental Protection treatment or other measures required, and re- Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 109 lation of diking to land use planning. Although future monitoring, planning, and correction. these factors vary widely from one location to It is imperative that environmental consid- another, diking is considered to be less costly erations and restraints be used in the basic than other means of handling dredging except design criteria for all systems and components lake disposal. developed: harbors, terminal facilities, shore A pilot study recently completed by the protection, and channel development. Corps of Engineers indicated that construc- tion of diked disposal areas to contain all dredged material from 35 Great Lakes harbors 4.7 Vessel Transits for a period of 10 years would cost approxi- mately $70 million. The annual cost of dredg- ing, including the cost of operation and 4.7.1 General maintenance for the diked disposal areas, would be increased from $5 to $10 million an- As background information, the changing nually. In a 10-year period, costs would be in- carrying capacity of the Great Lakes fleet is creased from approximately $50 million to ap- presented in Table C9-83. The number of ves- proximately $170 million if all 35 harbors were sel transits through the Welland Canal, the St. involved. This means overall costs would be Lawrence Seaway, and the St. Marys River in increased 3 to 31/2 times over current costs of recent years, and future transits based on the lake disposal. traffic projections in this report, are pre- The need for diked disposal will be deter- sented in Tables C9-84 and C9-86. The number mined on a h arbor-by-h arbor basis as need for of future transits is based on the existing dredging arises. channel and lock system. The system is not The problem of inadvertent cargo and waste enlarged. spills into the waterways are of great concern and are in need of further study. Systems should be developed to cope effectively with 4.7.2 Average Cargo Per Transit any occurrence. Studies, conducted to determine baseline The maximum average cargo per transit values for water quality in navigation wa- through the Welland Canal in future years is terways and harbors could be the basis for estimated by first estimating the average ca- TABLE C9-83 Carrying Capacity of the Great Lakes Fleet, 1958 to 1971 (Short Tons) U. S. Registry Canadian Package Oil Total U. S. Canadian Dry Bulks Bargeb Freighters Tankersc Registry - Registry Year No. Capacity No. Capacity No. Capacity No. Capacity No. Capacity No. Capacity 1958 345 3,868,925 6 30,912 - - 55 193,928 406 4,0939765 283 1,573,713 1960 322 4,045,440 6 30,912 - - 55 194,264 383 4,270,616 258 1,661,962 1962 272 3,704,400 5 27,104 - - 48 178,360 325 3,909,864 223 1,870,338 1964 238 3,365,712 5 27,104 - - 49 170,520 292 3,563,336 215 2,118,082 1966 216 3,135,048 5 27,104 - - 42 152,488 263 3,314,640 218 2,508,688 1968 205 3,020,584 5 27,104 - - 40 144,424 250 3,192,112 181 2,487,184 1971 194 2,961,000 5 27,104 - - 39 149,800 238 3,137,904 153 2,324,840 Source: Annual Reports, Lake Carriers Association--Section: "Carrying Capacity of the Lake Fleet". aBulk Freighters in iron ore trade; Bulk Freight, self-unloading vessels; Bulk Freight vessels in mixed trade. bBulk Freight Barges in mixed trades. cIncludes Barges. 110 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-84 Tonnage and Transits Through Locks 1953 1960 1962 1965 1970 1972 St. Marys Falls Canal (Soo Locks) Cargo, million tons 128.5 91.4 79.9 81..0 81.0 NA Transits (+ 12 feet draft) 21,364 13,535 10,774 12,093 9,933 Average cargo per transit (short tons) 6,020 6,750 7,420 6,700 8,160 Transits (12 feet or less) 4,758 8,616 5,982 6,128 2,779 Total transits 26,122 22,151 16,756 18,221 12,712 Welland Canal Cargo, million tons NA 29.2 35.4 53.4 62.9 64.1 Total transits 7,536 7,615 8,384 7,111 6,768 Average cargo per transit (short tons) 3,880 4,650 6,370 8,850 9,470 Ballast transits, % of total transits 30.8 30.0 25.6 28.0 27.9 St. Lawrence Seaway (Montreal to Lake Ontario) Cargo, million tons NA 20.3 25.6 43.4 51.1 53.6 Total transits 6,869 6,351 7,330 6,277 5,936 Average cargo per transit (short tons) 2,950 4,030 5,920 8,150 9,040 Ballast transits, % of total transits 30.6 26.5 22.4 23.7 22.9 SOURCE: References 35 and 51. pacity of the 1995 and 2020 Canadian vessel downbound vessels carried 42,969,000 cargo fleets, which comprise approximately 70 per- tons on the Welland canal in 1972 while up- cent of the vessels transiting the Welland. bound vessels carried only 21,126,000 tons. The average capacity of the 1995 fleet is es- Therefore, vessels using the Welland are timated in Table C9-85. Because the system is travelling at a maximum of 75 percent of ca- assumed to remain the same size, the capacity pacity. of the class 10 vessels is redistributed to the class 4, 5, and 6 vessels. Average maximum (42,969+21,126) 64,095 vessel capacity is 23,500 short tons. - Analysis of statistics indicates that (42,969 x 2) 85,938 TABLE C9-85 Projected Average Vessel Capacity for Canadian Fleet in 1995 Vessel Class 1 2 4 5 6 7 10 Total No. of Vessel Equilavents 9.6 0.7 2.4 9.8 8.7 93.5 8.8 133.5 Average Capacity (1,000 tons) 4.35 9.39 13.6 -19.3 26.0 27.0 62.0 Total Capacity 41.3 6.6 32.6 189 226 2525 546 3566 Redistribute Class 10 Capacity -100 200 246 132.6 389 472 3566 No. of Vessel Equilavents Required 9.8 20.2 18.2 0 3566 Average Capacity Per Vessel 3566 t 152 = 23,500 short tons Existing and Future Vessel Fleet 111 Analysis of ballast lockage statistics indi- cent years are presented in Table C9-84. The cates that downbound vessels could probably average cargo per transit is higher on the Wel- carry at least 10 to 15 percent more cargo. This land Canal than on the Seaway (e.g., 9,470 tons reduces the 75 percent to approximately 65 compared to 9,040 tons in 1972), but because so percent of capacity for the Welland. Therefore, many more large vessels transit the Welland average cargo per transit in 1995 would be 65 Canal than the Seaway, the Welland traffic is percent of 23,500 or 15,300 tons. Average cargo actually less efficient. A higher percentage of per transit on the Seaway (Montreal to Lake vessel capacity is used on the Seaway than on Ontario) has averaged approximately 95 per- the Welland. cent of average cargo per transit on the Wel- land. This would be approximately 14,500 tons in 1995. The 2020 Canadian fleet will be composed 4.7.3 Conclusion almost solely of class 7 vessels. Average carry- ing capacity of a class 7 is 27,000 tons at pres- Estimates in Table C9-86 represent the ent Seaway depth. Because some other highest and lowest number of transits re- smaller ships will still be using the Seaway, an quired to carry the medium projection of average cargo capacity per transit of 25,000 commerce through the locks in the Great tons is used. Sixty-five percent of this is 16,200 Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway. tons. Ninety-five percent of 16,200 is 15,400 Continued observation of shipping trends is tons. necessary to determine the most efficient use The projected average cargo per transit for of the Welland Canal and Seaway and to pro- the St. Marys Falls Canal is determined by vide better estimates of when the system will assuming the 1971 value (8,660 tons per reach capacity. Studies of capacity must ad- transit) increases at the same rate as the av- dress both absolute physical capacity and erage cargo per transit through the Welland practical capacity. Cost of delays and other Canal. benefits must be weighed against the cost of Tonnages and transits through locks in re- constructing needed improvementS.29 TABLE C9-86 Transits Required to Carry Prospective Commerce (Medium Estimate) 1972 Average Cargo per Transit Projected Maximum Cargo per Trans its 1980 1995 2000 2020 --- 1-980 1995 2000 2020 St. Marys Falls Canal (Soo Locks) Cargo, million tons 123 156 165 212 123 156 165 212 Transits (+ 12 feet draft) 14,200 18,000 19,000 24,400 10,800 11,200 11,600 14,300 Average cargo per transit (short tons) 8s700 8,700 8,700 8,700 11,400 14,000 14,200 14,800 Transits (12 feet or less)b 5,000 7,000 7,500 10,000 5,000 7,000 7,500 10,000 Total transits 19,200 25,000 26,500 34,400 15,800 18,200 19,100 24,300 Welland Canal Cargo, million tons 65 82 87 112 65 82 87 112 Total transits 6,900 8,700 9,200 11,800 5,200 5,400 5,600 6,900 Average cargo per transit (short tons) 9,500 9,500 9,500 9,500 12,500 15,300 15,500 16,200 Ballast transits, % of total transits 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 St. Lawrence Seaway (Montreal to Lake Ontario) Cargo, million tons 64 78 86 110 61 78 82 105 Total transits 7,100 8,600 9,500 12,100 5,100 5,400 5,600 6,800 Average cargo per transit (short tons) 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 11,900 14,500 14,700 15,400 Ballast transits, % of total transits 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 a See Subsection 4.7.2 b Estimated Section 5 FRAMEWORK PLAN FOR ACTION 5.1 Framework Objectives utilization of unemployed or underemployed workers, and use of otherwise unemployed re- sources in related economic activities. 5.1.1 General The area served by Great Lakes ports con- 5.1.3 Regional Development Objective tains 35 percent of the nation's population, and provides 44 percent of the gross national This objective embraces increased regional product. The dispersion of mineral resources, income, increased regional employment, a population, and industry, and the Region's broader economic base, improved income dis- lack of large sources of energy contribute to tribution within the Region, and improved the great need for a complete and efficient quality of services within the Region. transportation system. Continued regional growth and development is dependent on such a system. 5.1.4 Environmental Objective The basic objective of a framework plan is to provide a general guide to the best use, or This objective includes the preservation of combination of uses, of water and related land natural and cultural areas, creation or restor- resources to meet foreseeable short- and ation of scenic areas, and enhancement or pro- long-term needs of a region. In studies to tection to achieve or maintain the quality of achieve this basic objective consideration is the environment. Also included are protection given to: and rehabilitation of related land resources to (1) the timely development and manage- insure availability for their best use when ment of these resources as essential aids to the needed. economic development and growth of the na- tion and the region (2) the preservation of resources in appro- 5.1.5 Social Well-Being Consequences priate instances to insure that they will be available for their best use as needed All of the above affect social well-being in (3) the well-being of the people as the many ways such as health, national defense, overriding determinant in such planning personal income distribution, interregional These broad economic and social goals can employment, population distribution, and fi- be divided into national economic develop- nancial and physical security. ment, regional development, and environ- men'tal quality.56 5.2 Framework Plan 5.1.2 National Income Objective The first step in developing a framework plan is to consider the known problems and The national income objective is best met by constraints on development. These should be the most economical project (considering both considered in terms of existing legislation, benefits and costs) for developing a specific technological studies, and programs, and in resource. Indicators as to whether the objec- terms of proposed programs, research, and tive has been met include increased productiv- study needs. Many problems facing commer- ity of land, labor, and capital in the production cial navigation on the Great Lakes are being of goods and services demanded by society, addressed currently in several ongoing direct employment benefits resulting from studies. 113 114 Appendix C9 Following is a list of problems and con- (a) Environmental Policy Act of 1969 straints involving the development of com- (5-point statement) mercial navigation: (b) Water Quality Improvement Act of (1) environmental effects: 1970 (a) water level fluctuations (c) Merchant Marine Acts (b) disruption from navigation im- (d) International Joint Commission provements (e) International Pollution Agreement (c) vessel wastes (f) 1970 Clean Air Act (d) oil spills and clean up (g) Federal Water Pollution Control (e) air pollution Act Amendments of 1972 (2) structural and operational changes in (2) studies and programs under way: the navigation system: (a) Lake Erie-Lake Ontario Waterway (a) additional locks of greater size (b) additional locks on the St. Law- along the Welland Canal and the St. Lawrence rence Seaway Seaway (c) extension of the Season Demon- (b) the channel depth and width stration Program and Survey Report needed to accommodate supercarriers (d) widening and deepening of St. (c) extension of the navigation season Marys River for 1,000-foot vessels (includes and an ice information system the Environmental Test Program) (d) hazards to commercial navigation, (e) connecting channels and harbors including congestion, currents, and recrea- study to accommodate 1,000-foot vessels tional craft (f) Great Lakes Water Levels Study (3) United States and Canadian coordina- (g) Corps of Engineers Survey Report tion: and continuing Authorities Programs (a) water level fluctuations (h) Department of Transportation U.S. (b) additional locks on the Welland Coast Guard Programs and Studies Canal and the St. Lawrence Seaway (i) schools to train vessel personnel (c) tolls sponsored by the Lake Carriers Association (d) pilotage fees and Dominion Marine Association (4) harbors: 0) local port development studies and (a) poorly protected berths programs N entrance conditions (k) Interstate Commerce Commission (c) maneuvering area rate studies and proceedings (d) depth (1) urban renewal and Model Cities (5) terminal facilities: Program (a) space for modern vessels and in- (m) Maritime Administration studies creased cargo and programs (b) slow turnaround (n) diked disposal areas program (c) poor management (o) Department of Transportation rail (d) inadequate facilities freight rate and cargo feeder studies (e) conflicting land use (p) Pennsylvania State Study of Vessel (6) other major problems or constraints: Delay Costs (a) lack of port promotion and informa- (q) Foreign Trade Studies, 1970 tion Bureau of Census N lack of trained vessel personnel (3) technology: (c) lack of repair facilities for super- (a) standardization of bulk vessel de- ships sign (d) lack of capital for investment in (b) continued vessel modernization vessels and replacement of old vessels (e) capacity of existing lock systems (4) proposed programs, research, and (Soo-Well and- Seaway) study: (f) competition (a) regional or national marketing (g) containerization study preparation (h) U.S. flag service on the Great Lakes (b) public relations program with quarterly or semi-annual report Alternatives or solutions to these problems (c) continued field study of thermal and constraints include the following: discharge effects (1) legislation: (d) more efficient seaway transit Framework Plan for Action 115 5.2.1 Environmental Effects tors influencing navigation and as shown in the estimate of waterborne commerce that Tools with which to evaluate the environ- would move during the extended (from 8 to 12 mental effects of any modifications to the months) navigation season (Table C9-87). navigation system are available in the Envi- Extension of season for only Lakes ronmental Policy Act of 1969 as amended and Superior, Michigan, Huron, and Erie could re- in the Water Quality Improvement Act of sult in traffic of 66,000,000 tons moving annu- 1970.41 In addition, the Corps of Engineers diked ally during the extended season by 2025. This disposal area program and the environmental would be primarily a redistribution of traffic investigations for the various studies under that would move during the regular eight way should alleviate the lack of information months season although it would include some available on environmental effects. It is an- new traffic. Additional needs includes better ticipated that environmental problems, such traffic control and reduction of hazards to as disposal of dredged material, vessel wastes, navigation caused by congestion, currents, and water level fluctuations, will be resolved and recreational craft. through these Acts and programs (see refer- ences 15, 16, and 39). The ultimate solution for polluted dredged material is to reduce or eliminate the amount TABLE C9-87 Estimated Additional Wa- of polluting material at its source by providing terborne Commerce from Extension of Naviga- better municipal and industrial treatment. tion Seasona The 10-year time span for the present diked 1975 1985 2005 2025 disposal program of the Corps of Engineers is based on the assumption that adequate Lime Ore 15 24 34 44 treatment would eliminate the major sources Limestone 1 3 5 6 of pollution in that time. Coal 5 6 8 9 Such problems as risks of oil spills and public Grain 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.8 attitudes toward thermal pollution may in the General Cargo 0.05 0.3 0.5 0.6 long run have the greatest effect on the navi- Other 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 gation industry. For example, the availability Total 21 35 51 66 of power in the Great Lakes area may deter- mine the rate of industrial growth, which in a turn generates the ship traffic estimated in Est4mated additional waterborne commerce in millions of tons from extension of the navioa- Section 3. There is a growing number of people tion season on the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence who would contend that expanding technol- Seaway System from 8 to 12 months. Figures ogy and industrial growth and attendant en- are for the four upper Lakes (Superior, vironmental 'problems will ultimately cause Michigan, Huron, and Erie) only. the total downfall of civilization. On the other hand, there are those who contend that technology is the very tool that will solve the environmental problems that may perplex us 5.2.3 International Coordination today. Because four of the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence Seaway are international, coordi- 5.2.2 Structural and Operational Changes in nation between the U.S. and Canadian gov- the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Naviga- ernments is necessary. Such coordination is tion System currently conducted under the auspices of the International Joint Commission. In spite of Most of the problems listed under this head- governmental reorganizations and differing ing, especially extension of the navigation goals and needs, the means for coordination is season, providing additional locks on the Sea- available and utilized. Coordination is also ob- way, and channel depth and width to accom- tained through the several navigation organi- modate super-carriers (vessels 730 feet to zations on the Great Lakes such as the U.S. St. 1,000 feet long), are being addressed in ongo- Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation ing studies. The questions to be answered by and the Canadian St. Lawrence Seaway Au- these studies are extremely important to the thority, the U.S. Lake Carriers Association, future of commercial navigation, as pointed and the Canadian Dominion Carriers Associa- out by the previous discussion of physical fac- tion. 116 Appendix C9 5.2.4 Harbors 5.2.6 Lack of Port Promotion and Information Harbor problems such as inadequate depth, Strong port promotion policies in conjunc- protection from storms, entrance conditions, tion with reviews of rate structures by the and inadequate maneuvering areas are tradi- Interstate Commerce Commission, Depart- tionally resolved through studies and project ment of Transportation, Maritime Adminis- modification by the Corps of Engineers, by tration could generate considerable interest State or local action, or through improve- in Great Lakes-Seaway transportation. Dis- ments by the owners and operators of private seminated information should contain facts harbors. Additional legislation or action is not on shipping services available at ports and required at this time. through the Seaway, their cost, shipping schedules, and total route times. This could be accomplished by information pamphlets and seminars for shippers.17 5.2.5 Terminal Facilities Existing terminal facilities are generally 5.2.7 Lack of Trained Vessel Personnel adequate for at least the near future with the possible exception of a need for a container Although various classes conducted by the port at the south end of Lake Michigan or at Lake Carriers' Association and the North- the west end of Lake Erie. It is recognized that western Michigan College's Great Lakes Offi- many of the Hulett bulk unloading facilities cers School assist in filling the shortage of are old, and replacement or rehabilitation trained personnel, a significant shortage re- may be necessary within a decade or so. The mains. Continuation and expansion of these recent trend toward pelletization and self- programs is essential. Efficient personnel are unloaders, and possible pipeline transporta- essential to the continued growth and effi- tion of coal slurry will also affect the need for ciency of the Great Lakes fleet. such facilities. A 20 million ton coal loading facility is being constructed at Duluth- Superior to handle low sulphur western coal. 5.2.8 Lack of Repair Facilities for Superships Another major consideration is the need for land for industrial expansion. Determination If the superships become as successful as of land requirements, which is beyond the anticipated, there may be a need for additional scope of this appendix, is affected by the fol- construction and/or repair facilities. Cur- lowing factors: rently there are only two facilities on the (1) extension of the season and reduction of Great Lakes capable of dry docking vessels in stockpiling requirements the 730 foot to 1,000 foot length. If, as antici- (2) trend toward superearriers and result- pated, these docks are used for construction, ing delivery of larger cargoes per trip there will be no facilities available for repair of (3) trend toward increased pelletization existing vessels of this size. and higher iron content (4) possibility of transmission of coal and iron ore via pipeline or unit type trains 5.2.9 Lack of Investment Capital for (5) costs of land and construction Construction of New Vessels (6) availability of labor force for plant op- eration The construction reserve clause of the 1970 Although many factors are considered by Merchant Marine Act will generate substan- industry when determining location and tim- tial new investment capital, to revitalize the ing of expansion, a strong promotional effort U.S. fleet and promote improved shipping by Great Lakes ports and shipping interests technology. could promote growth in the area. The relatively minor land requirements for navigation facilities (locks and channels) will 5.2.10 Competition be determined by ongoing studies such as "Additional Locks on the St. Lawrence Sea- There is no easy solution to the multi- way", and "Connecting Channels and Har- faceted competition between various trans- bors" studies. portation modes, but rate studies and litiga- Framework Plan for Action 117 tion now underway may provide partial solu- 5.3 Time Factors and Regional Impact tions in terms of more equitable rail rates. Probably just as important as equitable rail The time when a factor begins to affect the rates is a positive attitude coupled with strong system (based on time required to complete promotional activities by the major ports and the study and any construction involved) is shipping interests. shown in Table C9-88. Items of immediate concern are extension of season, lock size, channel alignment, and depth at Sault Ste. 5.2.11 Containerization Marie, channel alignment and depth through the St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, and Detroit Even though both conventional and smaller River, modernization of the vessel fleet, and feeder container ships and break-bulk general increased efficiency throughout the system. cargo ships have sailed to and from Great The regional impact of alternatives in terms of Lakes ports, there is a lack of adequate the five major commodities is shown in Table specialized container-handling facilities on C9-89 by placing an X under each planning the Great Lakes and a lack of investment capi- subarea to or from which significant com- tal with which to build such facilities. There modities are shipped. No impact is shown for are only one or two areas that can generate Lake Ontario because planning subareas sufficient containerized cargo to support full- cover only the U.S. shore of the Great Lakes containership service. Furthermore, inter- and very little cargo is handled at ports on the port competitive and political pressures may United States shore of Lake Ontario. It is ob- prevent development of modern regional con- vious from examination of Tables C9-88 and tainer ports. C9-89 that extension of the navigation season Further study is necessary to determine has both the most immediate and most exten- whether barge carrying vessels such as the sive impact on the total navigation system. LASH or SEABEE types, or large tug barges, can be adapted to the Great Lakes general cargo trade. See Subsection 4.3.4 for more de- tailed discussion of overseas general cargo. TABLE C9-88 Time Factor Effect on Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System Immediate Long Range 5.2.12 Capacity of Existing Lock Systems Factor 1971-1980a 1991-2020a Seasonb X The capacities of existing lock systems in Lock Size the St. Lawrence Seaway will be evaluated in St. Lawrence Seaway b X the two studies "Additional Locks on the St. Wellandb X Lawrence Seaway" and "Lake Erie-Lake On- Sault Ste. Mariec X tario Waterway." A study of the capacity of Channel Alignment and Depth the locks at Sault Ste. Marie is also needed. It St. Lawrence Seaway X is essential that studies of capacity consider Welland (LELO)d X X Sault Ste. Marie b the cost of delays in addition to pure physical (St. Marys Falls Canal) X capacity.29 Detroit & St. Clair Rivers X Vessel Fleet X Increased Efficiency X Port Promotional Efforts X 5.2.13 Military Cargo More Efficient Operation X Better Ira ffic Control X The substantial portion of U.S. military Extension of Season X cargo generated in the area served by the aSince all factors have either an imme@iate or a long Great Lakes does not move via the Lakes be- range effect, there is no need to show a column for cause of the requirement that it be shipped the period 1981-1990. only in U.S. flagships. These are virtually bStudy under way. nonexistent on the Great Lakes. Two solutions cPoe Lock completed 1968. are immediately obvious: either allow ship- dRealignment of the northern portion was completed in ment in foreign flagships or stimulate de- 1972, but greater depth is not expected until after velopment of a U.S. fleet. 1991. 118 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-89 Commodities Affected by Improvements Planning Subarea 1.1 1.2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 5.1 5.2 5.3 Season Extension Iron Ore X X - X - X - - X X X X - - - Coal X X X X X X - X X X X X - - - Stone X X X X - X X X X X X X - - - Grain X - - X - - - - - X - X - - - Overseas General Cargo X - - X - - - X X X X X - - - Above Welland Canal Iron X X - X - X - - X X X X - - - Coal X X X X - X X X X X X X - - - Stone Grain X - - - - - - - - - - X Overseas General Cargo X - - - - - - - - - - Between Lake Erie and Lake Ontario Iron - X - - - - X X X X Coal X X Stone Grain X - X - X X Overseas General Cargo X - X X - X - X X X X St. Lawrence River Iron X - - X X X X Coal Stone Grain X - X - X X Overseas General Cargo X - X X - X X X X X The function of the navigation system is to timates of costs to improve the system are pre- provide the most efficient transport of those sented in Section 2, Tables C9-20 through commodities shown in Tables C9-90 through C9-25. The income and employment generated C9-93. by waterborne commerce in each planning Because questions of further structural subarea is determined in Table C9-94 by using modification to the system will be answered by estimated values of $5 and $24 per ton for bulk ongoing studies, the remaining question is and general cargo, and applying an appropri- how best to use the existing system. Following ate multiplier to develop total income gener- discussion of the system as a whole, a frame- ated (see references 34 and 36). These values work plan for each planning subarea is pre- ($5 and $24) represent the cost to a port of sented in Subsection 5.4. handling each ton of cargo. The number of families supported is determined by dividing total generated income by an estimated family 5.4 Planning Subareas income of $9,000 (1970). Assuming an average of 3.0 persons per family an estimate of popu- lation supported by bulk and general cargo 5.4.1 General commerce is found. However, it is important to recognize that some of the commerce is Each of the 15 planning subareas will be neither produced, manufactured, nor con- discussed in terms of type and amount of sumed in the planning subareas, but trans- commerce, value of commerce (money and ported through them by rail or truck. Thus, jobs), cost of the navigation system, and prob- the importance of bulk and general commerce lems or priorities. Shipments and receipts of is actually spread over a much larger area. On bulk commodities by planning subarea are the other hand, in the major metropolitan presented in Tables C9-90 through C9-93. Es- areas of Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, Toledo, Framework Plan for Action 119 TABLE C9-90 Percent of Shipments and Receipts by Commodity and Planning Subareaa Overseas Other Planning Iron Ore Coal Limestone Grain Gen. Cargo Traffic Subarea Shi2- Rec. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. 1.1 63 8 3 25 12 1 1.2 5 2.5 6 2.1 5 1 2 2.2 33 13 8 22 15 45 36 35 2.3 2.4 7 5 24 3.1 1.5 46 3.2 3 6 4 2 4.1 10 30 -- 33 18 26 10 4.2 8 56 16 1 7 2 6 4.3 33 30 19 7 15 13 4.4 8 -- 1 7 8 3 1 5.1 5.2 5.3 Subtotal 75 92 99 64 92 92 47 8 93 87 58 Canadian 25b 8c id 36d 8e 8e 53f 749 7i 13i 30 Overseas 18h Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 88i aBased on 1969 and 1970 traffic and predicted traffic patterns from IJC Great Lakes Water Levels Study. b17% through Seaway, 2% from Georgian Bay, 6% from Thunder Bay. cAbout 11-2% to Sault Ste. Marie, 6% to Hamilton (Lake Ontario). dAbout 1% shipped from Thunder Bay. Receipts: Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, 5%; Lower Rivers, 5%; Lake Ontario, 25%; others, 1%. eMostly Canadian shipments on Lake Ontario. fcanadian shipments from Thunder Bay. gSt. Lawrence River Ports, 63%; Georgian Bay, 5%; Toronto, 3%; others, 3%. hEurope, 12%; United Kingdom, 3%; Japan, 1.3%; others, 1.7%. iTo or from Hamilton and Toronto. j12% not accounted for. and Cleveland the importance of waterborne and oils in international trade, plus coal, lime- commerce is understated because several mil- stone, salt, steel products, gypsum, and petro- lion tons of "other" traffic is not included in leum products in domestic movements. The the analysis. A more rigorous analysis would bulk and overseas general commerce is ex- include the higher-valued cargoes such as pected to generate $935 million, $1.22 billion, woodpulp, newsprint, and chemicals. and $1.6 billion in total (direct and secondary) income in 1980, 2000, and 2020, and could sup- port 104,000 families in 1980 and 178,000 5.4.2 Planning Subarea 1.1 (Lake Superior families by 2020 (assuming three persons per West) family and income of $9,000 per family; Table C9-94). Taconite, Silver Bay, Two Harbors, and The volume of commerce, employment gen- Duluth-Superior harbors in Planning Subarea erated, and percent of total population that 1.1 ship 63 percent of the iron ore traffic on the could be supported by the total income indi- Lakes. In addition, Duluth-Superior ships 25 cate that this planning subarea is highly de- percent of the grain, 12 percent of the overseas pendent on the mining, processing, and ship- general cargo, and handles scrap iron, fats, ment of iron ore and pellets, on the transship- 120 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-91 Projected 1980 Shipments and Receipts by Commodity and Planning Subarea (Millions of Tons) Overseas Total Traffic Planning iron Ore Coal Limestone Grain General Cargo other Subarea Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. @_hi_p.Re,. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Traffic Total 1.1 75 5.0 1.4 6.5 1.3 0.1 82.8 6.5 89.3 1.2 5.9 1.5 2.8 -- 8.7 1.5 10.2 2.1 3.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 3.6 3.8 2.2 39 8.1 5.0 10.2 3.9 4.7 3.8 16.7 58.0 5.2 79.9 2.3 0.1 0.5 0.6 4.0 4.6 2.4 8.3 3.1 11.1 19.4 3.1 22.5 3.1 0.9 21.4 21.4 0.9 22.3 3.2 1.8 2.8 0.4 0.2 0.4 4.8 5.2 4.1 12 18.6 15.3 1.9 2.7 1.9 48.6 1.5 52.0 4.2 9.5 34.4 -- 7.4 0.5 1.8 0.2 0.6 43.8 10.6 54.4 4.3 39 18.4 8.8 0.7 1.6 19.1 49.4 1.9 70.4 4.4 9.5 3.2 2.1 0.3 0.1 0.3 14.9 15.2 5.1 0.5 0.5 -- 0.1 0.6 5.2 0.5 0.5 5.3 0.4 0.4 Subtotal 89.2 109.0 61.4 39.1 42.7 43.2 12.2 2.1 9.7 9.1 215.2 202.5 13.6 431.3c Canadian 30 10 0.6 22.4 3.7 3.7 13.6 19.1 0.7 1.4 48.6 56.6 4.5 109.7 Overseas 4.6 10.4 10.5 4.6 4.6 Subtotal 119.2 119.0 62.0 61.5 46.4 46.9 25.8 25.8 10.4 10.5 263.8 263.7 18.1 545.6c Total 1980 Traffic ona Great Lakes 118.7 62.0 46.4 25.8 10.5 278.2b 14.8 a Subtotals and totals do not match because of rounding, small shipments or receipts not accounted for. b Includes "other" traffic. c Totals for subareas include both shipments and receipts (double counting) and therefore comprise more than the total 1980 traffic (278.2 million tons). ment of grain, and on receipts and shipments require strengthening of dock structures, but of other bulk and general cargo. This traffic it will require dredging costs as follows: Silver can only be sustained by a highly efficient and Bay, $200,000; Taconite Harbor, $600,000; and economical transportation system. A portion Duluth- Superior, $17,000,000. of the total income is generated by commerce Priorities for this area are the extension of originating outside of the planning subarea the season and accommodation of the new (e.g., grain), and therefore, the estimated total supercarriers, the Roger Blough and the income is not confined to the planning sub. Stewart Cort, which began service during area. The participation rate (employees/ 1972. Two additional 1,000 foot long ships are population) of 0.33 in 1960 and estimated at ordered for 1976 and 1977 to participate in the 0.37 in 1980 to 2020 is one of the lowest in the pellet trade between Lake Superior and Lake Great Lakes area and emphasizes the need to Michigan. Future waterborne traffic will be continue and improve the iron ore and trans- influenced positively by higher population portation industries. and industrial growth (iron ore and copper in- Federal expenditures through June 30, 1969 dustries), extension of season, use of super- at Two Harbors and Duluth-Superior totaled ships in the Lakes above the Welland Canal, $27 million, including $8 million for mainte- and strong port promotion policies. Low sulfur nance. Maintenance costs are now averaging western coal has begun moving through more than $200,000 annually. First costs and Duluth-Superior harbor bound for the lower maintenance costs for private harbors are not Lakes and may total several million tons an- available * nually by 1980. Provision of a 31-foot depth to accommodate Possible negative influences on waterborne full loading of superearriers is not expected to commerce are lower growth rates for popula- Framework Plan for Action 121 TABLE C9-92 Projected 2000 Shipments and Receipts by Commodity and Planning Subarea (Millions of Tons) Overseas Total Traffic Planning iron Ore Coal Limestone Grain General Cargo Other Subarea Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Fh-ip.Rec. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Traffic Total 1.1 104 5.9 2.1 8.1 1.6 0.1 113.7 8.1 121.8 1.2 8.2 1.8 4.2 -- 12.4 1.8 14.2 2.1 3.7 0.7 0.3 0.3 4.4 4.7 2.2 54 10 5.9 15.4 4.9 6.1 4.9 21.0 80.2 7.2 108.4 2.3 0.1 0.7 0.8 5.0 5.8 2.4 11.5 3.7 16.8 -- 28.3 3.7 32.0 3.1 1.1 32.2 -- 32.2 1.1 33.3 3.2 2.2 4.2 0.5 0.3 0.5 6.7 7.2 4.1 16 22.0 23.0 2.4 3.5 2.4 64.5 2.0 68.9 4.2 13 40.4 -- 11.2 0.7 2.3 0.3 0.8 54.2 14.5 68.7 4.3 54 22 13.3 0.9 2.0 22.9 69.3 2.7 94.9 4.4 13 4.9 2.6 0.4 0.1 0.4 20.6 21.0 5.1 0.6 0.6 -- 0.1 0.7 5.2 0.6 0.6 5.3 0.5 0.5 Subtotal 123.7 150.0 73.0 46.4 64.4 65.0 15.3 2.6 12.5 11.7 288.9 275.7 18.1 582.7c Canadian 41.0 13.1 1.0 26.6 5.6 5.6 17.2 24.0 0.9 1.8 65.7 71.1 6.2 143.0 Overseas 5.8 All All 5.8 5.8 Subtotal 164.7 163.1 74.0 73.0 70.0 70.6 32.5 32.4 13.4 13.5 354.6 352.6 24.3 731.5c Totala 164.0 , 74.0 70.0 32.4 13.5 374.4b 20.5 a Subtotals and totals do not match because of rounding, small shipments or receipts not accounted for. b Includes "other" traffic. c Totals for subareas include both shipments and receipts (double counting) and therefore comprise more than the total 2000 traffic (374.4 million tons) tion and industry, transportation of ore by rail come will be produced by this commerce in or pipeline, competition from foreign ores 1980, 2000, and 2020. This income could sup- through eastern ports, and the Seaway port 11,300, 15,800 and 21,100 families. This (break-even point is now the Cleveland area). indicates that commercial navigation and Satisfying the national and regional eco- other transportation modes are expected to nomic development objectives will require play a more important role in the area's continuation of the iron ore trade from west- economy in future years. The present partici- ern Lake Superior. There is sufficient iron ore pation rate (employee s/po pul ation) of 0.30 in reserve in Minnesota to last at least 100 years 1960 is expected to rise to 0.35 in 1980, 0.37 in (Subsection 3.2.2). 2000, and 0.38 in 2020. This is attributed prin- cipally to increases in employment in the nonmanufacturing sector. Employment in 5.4.3 Planning Subarea 1.2 (Lake Superior manufacturing, mining, and agriculture is ex- East) pected to decline (see Appendix 19, Economic and Demographic Studies). Waterborne commerce in this area com- Total Federal costs through June 30,1969, at prises shipments of iron ore from Marquette Marquette Harbor were $1,868,000. Mainte- and limestone from Drummond Island, and nance costs have been very low-over the past receipt of coal at Marquette and Sault Ste. five years an average of only 1,000 cubic yards Marie. Additional commerce in petroleum annually have been dredged. Drummond Is- products and miscellaneous items is received land harbor is a private facility and costs are at the above ports and at Ontonagon. As not available. shown in Table C9-94, approximately $102 mil- Marquette Harbor would be considered for lion, $142 million, and $190 million of total in- deepening to 31-foot depth at an estimated 122 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-93 Projected 2020 Shipments and Receipts by Commodity and Planning Subarea (Millions of Tons) Overseas Total Traffic Planning Iron Ore Coal Limestone Grain General Cargo Other Subarea Ship. Rec. 9hip. Re,. Thip. Rec, Thip. Rc. Ship. Rec. Ship. Rec. Traffic Total 1.1 139.0 5.9 3.1 9.7 2.0 0.2 150.7 9.2 159.9 1.2 11.0 1.8 6.2 -- 17.2 1.8 19.0 2.1 3.7 1.0 0.3 0.3 4.7 5.0 2.2 73.0 10.0 5.9 22.8 5.8 7.4 6.0 23.2 107.7 9.2 140.1 2.3 0.1 0.8 0.9 6.0 6.9 2.4 16.0 3.7 25.0 -- 41.0 3.7 44.7 3.1 1.1 47.7 -- 47.7 1.1 48.8 3.2 2.2 6.2 0.7 0.3 0.7 8.7 9.4 4.1 22.0 -- 22.0 34.0 3.0 4.3 3.0 82.5 2.6 88.1 4.2 18.0 40.4 -- 16.6 1.0 2.7 0.3 1.0 60.0 20.0 80.0 4.3 72.0 22.0 19.7 1.1 2.5 23.1 94.2 3.4 120.4 4.4 18.0 -- 7.2 3.1 0.5 0.2 0.5 28.5 29.0 5.1 0.6 0.6 -- 0.2 0.8 5.2 0.7 0.7 5.3 0.6 0.6 Subtotal 166.0 204.0 73.0 46.4 95.5 96.0 18.2 3.1 15.3 14.5 368.0 362.2 22.7 752.6c Canadian 55.0 18.0 1.0 26.6 8.3 8.6 20.7 28.8 1.2 2.0 86.2 84.0 7.9 178.1 Overseas 7.0 All All 7.0 7.0 Subtotal 221.0 221.0 74.0 73.0 103.8 104.6 38.9 38.9 16.5 16.5 454.2 453.2 30.6 937.7c Totala 221.0 74.0 103.8 38.9 16.5 481.5b 26.3 a Subtotals and totals do not match because of rounding, small shipments or receipts not accounted for. b Includes "other" traffic. c Totals for subareas include both shipments and receipts (double counting) and therefore comprise more than the total 2020 traffic (481.5 million tons). cost of $200,000. The estimated cost of deepen- ception of approximately 300,000 tons of over- ing the channel through the St. Marys River seas and Canadian imports and exports. to 31 feet is $317 million. The bulk and overseas general cargo gener- Waterborne commerce (iron ore and lime- ates approximately $60 million, $75 million, stone) in this area would be benefited most by and $81 million in total income in the area. extension of season and improvements to the This is sufficient to support approximately 2 St. Marys River to accommodate the new su- percent of the population in the planning sub- perships. A technological break-through to area. The "other" commerce (3.5 million tons allow prereduction of copper ore would greatly in 1969) would very likely provide income to stimulate the area's economy. support approximately an additional 2 per- cent of the population. Federal expenditures at these harbors have 5.4.4 Planning Subarea 2.1 (Lake Michigan totaled $8.2 million, $2.6 million, and $9.7 mil- Northwest) lion, for construction, rehabilitation, and maintenance. Recently maintenance, includ- Major harbors in this area are Green Bay, ing 274,000 cubic yards of dredging, has aver- Manitowoc, and Kewaunee, which, in 1969 re- aged $360,000 annually (see Table C9-14). ceived 2.5 million tons of coal (1.8 million at Harbors in this area are not likely to be Green Bay). Approximately one million tons of deepened to 31 feet to accommodate the super- lumber, newsprint, pulp, and paper were ship- ships (classes 8, 9, and 10). ped. Other commodities including petroleum Primary functions ofcommercial navigation products and building cement totaled approx- in this planning subarea are providing domes- imately 3.8 million tons in 1969. All traffic is tic general cargo transport to all harbors, pro- lakewise receipts or shipments with the ex- viding bulk coal for a fossil fuel power plant Framework Plan for Action 123 and overseas general cargo at Green Bay for a which has heavy lift cranes of 85 and 200 tons substantial industrial and manufacturing capacity, has quadrupled since 1959. General community in that area, and shipping the cargo, export grain, import steel, and heavy products of local lumber and paper industries.- lift machinery have been the major com- The participation rate is expected to rise from modities. Other exports include agricultural 0.36 in 1960 to 0.38 in 1980 and 0.39 in 2020. implements, electrical apparatus, dairy prod- Employment in agriculture will decline ap- ucts, chemicals and oils, paper, and forest proximately 50 percent, and mining will be products. fairly constant, while manufacturing in- The Port of Chicago is the major overseas creases approximately 45 percent. Chemicals general cargo port on the Great Lakes. Major and paper industries will almost double their facilities are located at Navy Pier with spaces employment. for six vessels and 500,000 square feet of stor- Neither the advent of superships nor exten- age area (385,000 under roof); Lake Calumet, sion of the season is expected to have a great with 5,300 feet of wharfage; and on the influence on this area. The most effective Calumet River. Grain elevators on Lake means of continuing the present level of traf- Calumet and Calumet River have a total ca- fic or generating new traffic is stronger port pacity of 54 million bushels. promotion stressing dock capability, effi- The 17-State midwest area served by har- ciency, and inland transportation capability. bors in Planning Subarea 2.2 account for one- half of the nation's marketed agricultural production and 45 percent of U.S. manufactur- 5.4.5 Planning Subarea 2.2 (Lake Michigan ing value. Southwest) Bulk and overseas general cargo are esti- mated to generate $1.39 billion, $1.86 billion, Several major harbors are located in this and $2.36 billion in total income in 1980, 2000, area: Port Washington, Milwaukee, Oak and 2020 (Table C9-94). This is sufficient to Creek, Port of Chicago (includes Chicago Har- support approximately 4.5 percent of the bor, and Calumet Harbor and River), Indiana area's population. Total personal income in Harbor, Buffington Harbor, Gary Harbor, and the area is estimated at $53 billion in 1980, the Port of Indiana (Burns Waterway). Com- $111 billion in 2000, and $231 billion in 2020 bined, these harbors receive 33 percent of the (1958 dollars), or approximately one-third of iron ore, 8 percent of the coal, 22 percent of the the total personal income in the entire Great limestone, and 36 percent of the overseas gen- Lakes Basin. The participation rate of 0.40 in eral. cargo (imports). They ship 13 percent of 1960 (0.42 in 1980, 2000, and 2020) reflects the the coal, 15 percent of the grain, and 45 per- relatively high employment rate in this major cent of the overseas general cargo (exports). industrial-manufacturing area and demon- They ship or receive one-third of the other strates the importance of a varied, com- traffic on the Great Lakes. plementary, and efficient transportation sys- According to 1970 figures, Calumet Harbor tem. received 9.6 million tons of iron ore; Indiana Federal expenditures through June 30, Harbor, 9.9; Gary Harbor, 8.7; and the Port of 1969, have totaled approximately $44 million, Indiana, 1.5. Calumet Harbor and Calumet $47 million, and $25 million for construction, River handled 2.3 million tons of limestone; rehabilitation, and maintenance. Average Buffington, 1.9; Indiana, 2.3; Gary Harbor, 1.3; annual maintenance (492,000 cubic yards of and Port of Indiana, 0.3. Most of the coal, 6.3 dredging) now costs $710,000. This figure does million tons in 1970, was shipped via the not include estimated Federal costs of $13.6 Calumet River. A million tons were received at million for construction and $100,000 for Port Washington, 1.7 were received at Mil- maintenance at the Port of Indiana (Burns waukee, and 1.2 were received at Oak Creek. Waterway), or costs for private harbors at Oak Almost three million tons of grain were ship- Creek, Buffington, and Gary. Estimated costs ped from Calumet Harbor and Calumet River to deepen the major harbors to 31-foot depth in 1.970, while 0.8 million tons were shipped are 95.9 million and 36 million for dredging and from Milwaukee. Most overseas general cargo, strengthening dock structures. As shown in 3.9 million tons, was shipped from or received Tables C9-24 and C9-25, most of the cost is for at Chicago Harbor and the Calumet River. The work at Milwaukee and at Calumet Harbor remaining one million tons was handled at and River. Priority sites for accommodating Milwaukee. superships, considering both traffic require- Seaway trade at the Port of Milwaukee, ments and costs, are the Port of Indiana 124 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-94 Port Income and Employment Generated by Waterborne Commerce for Port Han- dling Facilities and Related Services Commerce Income Employment Percent of Planning Income (million tons) Ilion 1) Generated Population Year Subarea Multipliera Bulk General Dir!:t Total' (families) d Supportede 1980 1.1 1.9 86.9 2.4 492 935 104,000 85 1.2 2.0 10.2 --- 51 102 11,300 20 2.1 2.6 3.6 0.2 23 60 6,670 1.8 2.2 2.6 66.2 8.5 535 19391 1559000 4.6 2.3 2.0 0.6 3 6 670 0.07 2.4 2.0 22.5 --- 113 226 25,100 14 3.1 2.0 22.3 --- 112 224 24,900 46 3.2 2.0 4.6 0.6 37 74 8,220 2.0 4.1 2.0 45.9 4.6 340 680 75,600 3.9 4.2 2.2 53.6 0.8 287 631 70,100 11 4.3 2.2 f 66.2 2.3 386 849 94,300 8.2 4.4 2.2 f 14.8 0.4 84 185 20,600 3.0 5.1 2.2 f 0.5 0.5 3 7 778 0.24 5.2 2.2 --- O-3g 7 15 1,670 0.32 5.3 2.2 f --- 0.29 5 11 1,220 1.6 Total 397.9 20.8 2,478 5,396 600,128 5.4 2000 1.1 1.9 120.1 1.7 641 1,218 135,000 97 1.2 2.0 14.2 --- 71 142 159800 27 2.1 2.6 4.4 0.3 29 75 8,330 1.8 2@2 2.6 90.2 11.0 715 19859 207,000 4.5 2.3 2.0 0.8 --- 4 8 890 0.07 2.4 2.0 32.0 --- 160 320 35,600 16 3.1 2.0 33.3 --- 167 334 37,100 53 3.2 2.0 6.4 0.8 51 102 11,300 2.1 4.1 2.0 61.0 5.9 447 894 99,300 4.0 4.2 2.2 67.6 1.1 364 801 89,000 10.8 4.3 2.2 f 89.3 2.9 516 1,135 126,000 8.6 4.4 2.2 f 20.5 0.5 114 251 27,890 3.3 5.1 2.2 f 0.6 --- 3 7 778 0.19 5.2 2.2 0.4g 10 22 2,444 0.36 5.3 2.2 f - 0.39 7 15 1,667 1.9 Total 540.4 24.9 3,299 7,183 798,099 5.7 2020 1.1 1.9 157.7 2.2 841 1,598 177,556 110 1.2 2.0 19.0 --- 95 190 21,111 33 2.1 2.6 4.7 0.3 31 81 9,000 1.6 2.2 2.6 117.5 13.4 909 2,363 262,556 4.5 2.3 2.0 0.9 --- 5 10 1,100 0.07 2.4 2.0 44.7 --- 224 448 49,778 19 3.1 2.0 48.8 --- 244 488 54,222 61 3.2 2.0 8.4 1.0 66 132 14,667 2.1 4.1 2.0 78.2 7.3 566 1,132 125,778 3.9 4.2 2.2 78.7 1.3 425 935 103,889 10.0 4.3 2.2 f 113.4 3.6 653 1,437 159,667 8.7 4.4 2.2 f 28.3 0.7 158 348 38,667 3.8 5.1 2.2 f 0.6 --- 9 3 7 778 0.15 5.2 2.2 f --- 0.59 12 26 29889 0.34 5.3 2.2 0.4 10 22 2,444 2.4 Total 700.9 30.7 4,242 9,217 1,024,102 5.8 SOURCE: Statistical Abstract of the United States 1971. aSee Subsection 5.4.1 bThe sum of number of tons x $24/ton for general cargo and number of tons x $5/ton for bulk cargo. cDirect income x income multiplier. dAssume medium family income of $9,000. Total income -t $9,000 = number of families supported. eAssuming population per household of 3.0. (Population per household has decreased from 4.9 in 1890 to 3.2 in 1970). fThe multiplier for Ohio is also used for Pennsylvania and New York. gCanadian imports and exports. Framework Plan for Action 125 (Burns Waterway), Gary Harbor, the outer mining, or manufacturing. This percentage is portion of Indiana Harbor, and the outer por- expected to increase to 72 percent by 2020. tion of Calumet Harbor and River (lakeward of the first bridge). The 1,000-foot-long self-unloader Stewart 5.4.7 Planning Subarea 2.4 (Lake Michigan Cort, owned by Bethlehem Steel Company, Northeast) began service in 1972 between Taconite Har- bor and the Bethlehem docks at the Port of The harbors in this planning subarea are Indiana. The 858-foot long Roger Blough also Muskegon, Ludington, Manistee, Portage began service in 1972 carrying pellets from Lake, Frankfort, Charlevoix, Escanaba, Port western Lake Superior to southern Lake Inland, and Port Dolomite. These harbors ship Michigan and Lake Erie ports. As stated in the 7 percent,of the iron ore and 24 percent of the discussion of Planning Subarea 1.1, two more limestone on the Great Lakes and receive ap- 1,000 foot-long ships are on order for 1976 and proximately 5 percent of the coal. In addition, 1977. in 1969 more than 1.5 million tons of lumber, The economy of Planning Subarea 2.2 is de- newsprint, wood and paper products, and ap- pendent upon efficient transportation. Bulk proximatley 1.5 million tons of petroleum commodities that sustain the steel industry, products were received. Bulk commerce is es- export grain, and general cargo must be re- timated to reach 22 million tons in 1980 and 44 ceived and shipped. Waterborne transporta- million tons in 2020. tion not only has the capacity to meet the Total income generated by the bulk cargo transportation needs of the planning subarea, traffic in iron ore, coal, and limestone is ex- but it is the most economical mode in terms of pected to reach $226 million, $320 million, and money and energy. It also pollutes less than $448 million in 1980i 2000, 2020 respectively. the other available forms of transportation. This income could support 25,000 families in Strong port promotion and reduction or 1980 and 50,000 families in 2020. The percent- elimination of alleged discriminatory rail age of the planning subarea population sup- rates could substantially increase the area's ported by this income is expected to increase share of grain exports and general cargo. from 14 percent in 1980 to 19 percent in 2020. Priorities are extension of the shipping sea- The expected growth of the chemical and son, accommodation of 1,000-foot vessels, and paper industries, which will double employ- consideration of a container port. ment between 1980 and 2020, while employ- ment in agriculture and mining declines, is also expected to create increased demands for 5.4.6 Planning Subarea 2.3 (Lake Michigan transportation. The participation rate is ex- Southeast) pected to increase rapidly from 0.33 in 1960 to 0.36 in 1980 and 0.39 in 2020, creating a need Total lakewise traffic at the four harbors for efficient, economical transportation. (Grand Haven, Holland, South Haven, and St. Federal expenditures for harbors in Plan- Joseph) in Planning Subarea 2.3 was 2.7 mil- ning Subarea 2.4 total $11.0 million, $3.9 mil- lion tons in 1969. Approximately 0.4 million lion, and $11.8 million for construction, re- tons were limestone while approximately 1.3 habilitation, and maintenance. Maintenance million tons were lakewise shipments of sand, averaging 267,000 cubic yards of dredging, gravel, and crushed rock. Local traffic in sand, cost $365,000 annually from 1965 to 1969 (Ta- gravel, and crushed rock amounted to 2.0 mil- ble C9-14). lion tons. Almost all sand and gravel traffic Escanaba is the harbor that will most likely passed through Grand Haven. be deepened to 31 feet to accommodate the The bulk commerce in coal and limestone is 1,000-foot ore vessels. Costs are estimated at estimated to generate $6,$8, and $10 million in $600,000 for dredging (Table C9-24). The esti- total income. The large domestic and local mated cost of deepening the Straits of Mack- traffic in sand, gravel, and rock (six million inac to 31 feet is $23 million. Strengthening of tons by 2020) will provide additional income of port structures is not required. Although the $20 to $30 million using $3 to $5 per ton for harbors at Port Dolomite, Port Inland, and income generated. Income from waterborne Muskegon may be deepened in the future, no commerce supports only one percent or less of cost estimates are available. the population in Planning Subarea 2.3. Ap- Priorities for this planning subarea are ex- proximately 56 percent of those employed tension of the season, strong port promotion, in 1960 were in fields other than agriculture, accommodation of the needs of the growing 126 Appendix C9 chemical and paper industries, and provision Costs for private harbors at Calcite, for larger vessels when justified. Continuance Stoneport, Alpena, Port Gypsum, and of the limestone trade on the Great Lakes is Bayshore are not available. dependent on the needs of the steel, construc- Although improvements to accommodate tion, cement, lime, and chemical industries. superearriers are not expected in the near fu- Because limestone is a very low-value com- ture for the limestone and coal trades, they modity, it is dependent on the continuance of may become a reality later, depending upon complementary coal movements, which create market conditions. Only a few cement carriers a high load factor by using the same self- are more than 500 feet long and draw more unloaders that carry the stone. Shipping cost than 22 feet at midsummer draft. comprises a major portion of the cost of lime- The principal objective in this planning stone at receiving docks. Loss of cheap trans- subarea should be extension of the season, in- portation would increase significantly the cost creased efficiency, and close surveillance of to the user. the factors affecting the economics of trans- porting limestone, i.e., the complementary coal movement. 5.4.8 Planning Subarea 3.1 (Lake Huron North) 5.4.9 Planning Subarea 3.2 (Lake Huron The major harbors in this planning subarea South) are Calcite, Stoneport, and Alpena. Approxi- mately 46 percent of the limestone traffic on By far the principal harbor in this planning the Great Lakes is shipped from this area (Ta- subarea is the Saginaw River. Principal re- ble C9-90). Seven hundred thousand tons of ceipts are limestone, coal, and general cargo. coal or 1.5 percent of 1969 traffic were received General cargo is also exported. Total ship- at Alpena, while 2.3 million tons of cement ments and receipts are projected to be 5.2, 7.2, were shipped from there. Other cargoes to- and 9.4 million tons in 1980, 2000, and 2020. taled approximately 500,000 tons in 1969. These figures will generate income to $74, As shown in Table C9-94, the bulk commerce $102, and $132 million which is enough to sup- in coal and in limestone is expected to reach port approximately 2 percent of the area popu- 22.3, 33.3, and 48.8 million tons in 1980, 2000, lation. and 2020. This will generate total income of Expenditures to date at Saginaw River are $224,$334, and $488 million, which will support $13.1 million for construction and $44 million 46, 53, and 61 percent of the planning subarea for maintenance. Maintenance costs, includ- population. Assuming a value of $15 per ton ing 500,000 cubic yards of dredging, are now for cement, this commerce introduces another averaging $250,000 annually. The costs of ae- $70 million in total income into the Alpena eommodations for vessels greater than 730 area in 1970 and probably more than $100 mil- feet are not estimated because these large lion by 2020, employing approximately 10 per- vessels are not expected in this area in the cent of the population. The participation rate foreseeable future. of 0.32 in 1960 is expected to rise to 0.36 by 1980 Data in Appendix 19, Economic and Demo- and 0.38 by 2000 and 2020, indicating a high graphic Studies, shows that more than 99 per- growth rate for the area economy. cent of the work force in this planning subarea Because more than 50 percent of the area is heavily dependent on manufacturing and population is supported by industries produc- other industries for employment. There is ing or using large quantities of bulk com- very little dependence on agriculture and min- modities, the economy of the area is highly ing, although the limestone quarries and ce- dependent upon an efficient, low-cost trans- ment manufacturers are very important em- portation system. This is especially true of the ployers on a local basis. The number one prior- limestone trade, which is dependent.upon ity for this area should be extension of season. complementary coal movements to produce a high load factor. Expenditures have totaled $0.8 and $0.6 mil- lion for construction and maintenance of Fed- 5.4.10 Planning Subarea 4.1 (Lake Erie eral harbors at Cheboygan and Alpena. Northwest) Maintenance averages 33,000 cubic yards an- nually (primarily 25,000 cubic yards at This planning subarea contains one of the Cheboygan), at an annual cost of $26,000. largest port complexes in the Great Lakes sys- Framework Plan for Action 127 tem, the Port of Detroit, which includes Rouge 5.4.11 Planning Subarea 4.2 (Lake Erie River and Trenton Channel. This area re- Southwest) ceives 10 percent of the iron ore, 30 percent of the coal, 33 percent of the limestone, and 26 Toledo, Marblehead, Sandusky, and Huron percent of the overseas general cargo imports. are the major harbors in this planning sub- It ships 18 percent of overseas general cargo area. These harbors ship 56 percent of the coal exports. In addition, 10 percent of the other (approximately 40 percent from Toledo and 16 cargoes on the Great Lakes are shipped or re- percent from Sandusky), 16 percent of the ceived at the Port of Detroit. Total traffic is limestone, and 7 percent of the grain, and re- projected to be 52 million tons by 1980 and 88 ceive 8 percent of the iron ore and 6 percent of million tons by 2020. This includes traffic re- the overseas general cargo on the Great ceived and shipped on the St. Clair River Lakes. Total traffic is estimated to reach 54 (mostly receipts of coal), which comprises ap- million tons by 1980 and 80 million tons by proximately 15 percent of total traffic in the 2020. planning subarea. The Port of Toledo is the third largest rail This traffic is projected to provide $680, center in the United States, the largest bulk $894, and $1,132 million in total income in 1980, cargo port on Lake Erie, and the ninth largest 2000, and 2020, which will support approxi- in the country. A Foreign Trade Zone located mately 4 percent of the area's population. The at Toledo is serviced by a 125-acre port (land participation rate of 0.35 in 1960 is expected to service area). increase to 0.40 in 1980 and remain at that Traffic projected at this port is estimated to level through 2020. generate $631 million, $801 million, and Expenditures at Port of Detroit have totaled $935 million in total income for 1980, 2000, and $76.6 million for construction and $6.4 million 2020. These figures will support 10 to 11 per- for maintenance. Maintenance costs average cent of the area population. Participation rate $571,000 annually. Dredging quantities aver- is expected to increase from 0.36 in 1960 to 0.39 age 550,000 cubic yards annually. in 1980 and 0.40 in 2020. While total manufac- Costs to deepen the Port of Detroit to a 31- turing employment increases 70 percent be- foot depth to accommodate vessels up to 1,000 tween 1960 and 2020, employment in the chem- feet long are estimated at $11.4 million for ical and paper industries will more than triple. dredging and at $4.6 million for rebuilding Employment in agriculture will decline to dock structures. Costs to deepen the Detroit one-half its present value, while other River, St. Clair River, and Channels through employment will almost triple. Population will Lake St. Clair ($367 million) are presented in double. Table C9-20. As shown in Table C9-23, a lock Federal expenditures for the harbors above and dam may be required in the St. Clair River have totaled $25 million, $0.9 million, and $19.2 to control outflows from Lakes Michigan and million for construction, rehabilitation, and Huron if the navigation channel is widened maintenance through June 30, 1969. Mainte- and deepened. This would create an additional nance including 900,000 cubic yards of dredg- delay and cost to navigation. The engineering ing, averages $1.1 million annually. Costs for feasibility and economics of navigating 1,000- Marblehead harbor are not available. foot ships through these channels to and from Costs of providing a 31-foot depth to accom- Lake Erie ports will be investigated in the modate vessels up to 1,000-feet long are esti- Connecting Channels and Harbors Study, mated at $38 million and $15 million for dredg- which is now underway and scheduled for ing at Toledo and Sandusky, respectively. Re- completion in 1975. building dock structures in Toledo will cost an Top priorities in the planning subarea are additional $5.2 million. Costs of deepening at extension of season, strong port promotion Marblehead and at Huron have not been esti- (especially for overseas general cargo), en- mated. couragement of development of LASH- Priorities for this area are extension of sea- SEABEE type vessels for Seaway passage, son, strong port promotion, and accommoda- accommodation of 1,000-foot vessels, and con- tion of superships where necessary. sideration of a container port. Problems facing commercial navigation interests are the pos- sibility of transporting coal via pipeline and 5.4.12 Planning Subarea 4.3 (Lake Erie the success of Canadian National Railroad in Central) capturing a significant portion of the overseas general cargo traffic. Major harbors in this planning subarea re- 128 Appendix C9 ceive 33 percent of the iron ore, 19 percent of Buffalo. Total income generated would reach the limestone, and 15 percent of the overseas $185 million in 1980 and $348 million in 2020, general cargo imports. They ship 30 percent of amounts sufficient to support 3 to 4 percent of the coal and 7 percent of the overseas general the population in the planning subarea. cargo, while handling 13 percent of the other Expenditures for navigation through 1969 traffic. The major harbor is Cleveland, which totaled $26.7 million, $0.3 million, and $19.2 handles both bulk cargoes for heavy industry million for construction, rehabilitation, and and general cargo with the help of its 150-ton maintenance. Dredging quantities averaged capacity crane. The Port of Lorain is an ex- 895,000 cubic yards at a cost of $806,000 annu- panding steel manufacturing center that re- ally from 1965 to 1969. ceives ore, coal, and limestone as well as alloy- Deepening the harbor to accommodate ves- ing materials from overseas sources. Planning sels up to 1,000 feet in length is estimated to Subarea 4.3 primarily receives waterborne cost $13 million (800,000 cubic yards). An addi- commerce with the exception of coal and gen- tional $1.8 million will be needed to rebuild eral cargo. Total tonnage is projected to reach port structures at Buffalo. The estimated cost 70 million tons in 1980 and 120 million tons in of a new waterway between Lakes Erie and 2020. Traffic in 1969 totaled 61 million tons. Ontario is $1.4 billion. Projected traffic is estimated to produce Priorities for this planning subarea are ex- $849 million in 1980 and $1.44 billion in total tension of season, port promotion, and ac- income in 2020. This is sufficient to support commodation of superearriers. approximately 8 or 9 percent of the population. The participation rate of 0.38 in 1960 is pro- jected to be 0.40 in the 1980 to 2020 period. 5.4.14 Planning Subarea 5.1 (Lake Ontario Expenditures in the area have totaled $68 West) million, $1.2 million, and $44.6 million for con- struction, rehabilitation, and maintenance. The only commercial harbor of significance An annual average of 1.8 million cubic yards of in the planning subarea is Rochester, New material has been removed by dredging at a York. Major commodities include lakewise re- cost of $2.5 million annually. ceipts of non-metallic minerals (approxi- Deepening to 31 feet to accommodate 1,000- mately 0.1 million tons annually). The traffic foot vessels is estimated to cost $11.7 million generates approximately $7 million of total in- for dredging at Lorain, Cleveland, and Con- come annually, which supports approximately neaut, and $0.8 million for dock strengthening 0.2 percent of the population. at Conneaut. Expenditures at Rochester have totaled Priorities for this planning subarea are ex- $2.4 million for construction and $4.2 million tension of the season, accommodation of for maintenance. Maintenance, (averaging 1,000-foot vessels, and strong port promotion. 360,000 cubic yards dredged annually), costs Competitive iron ore from the East Coast and $129,000 annually. possible shipment of coal by pipeline could The most significant alternative or priority present serious problems for commercial for this planning subarea is strong port pro- navigation in the future. Extension of the sea- motion policies. son and use of vessels up to 1,000 feet in length would enhance the economics of ore and pel- lets from western Lake Superior at the ex- 5.4.15 Planning Subarea 5.2 (Lake Ontario pense of foreign ores (Canadian, South Ameri- Central) can, and overseas). Great Sodus and Oswego are the commercial harbors in this planning subarea. No com- 5.4.13 Planning Subarea 4.4 (Lake Erie East) merce has been reported at Great Sodus in recent years. Traffic at Oswego includes Buffalo, New York, is the only major harbor Canadian imports and lakewise receipts of in this planning subarea. It receives large cement and Canadian imports of fuel oil from quantities of iron ore, limestone, and grain. the United States. The total income generated Bulk and general cargo traffic, which in 1969 by the above traffic is estimated to be $15 mil- totaled 17.1 million tons, is projected to be 15.2 lion for 0.6 million tons in 1980 and $26 million million tons in 1980, 21.0 million tons in 2000, for 0.8 million tons in 2020. and 29.0 million tons in 2020. Eight percent or Expenditures in the area have totaled $9.0 more of this traffic passes through the Port of million, $1.0 million, and $4.1 million for con- Framework Plan for Action 129 struction, rehabilitation, and maintenance. tons in 1969 was composed of imports of pulp Recently, maintenance has averaged $95,000 and newsprint from Canada and lakewise re- for approximately 85,000 cubic yards of dredg- ceipts of gasoline and fuel oil. Traffic is pro- ing. jected to reach 0.6 million tons by 2020. Total The most significant alternative or priority income generated by waterborne commerce is for this planning subarea is strong port pro- estimated at $11 million in 1980 and $22 mil- motion to enhance the bulk and general cargo lion in 2020. traffic with Canada and overseas. Expenditures for Ogdensburg harbor have totaled $646,000 and $730,000 for construction and maintenance. Maintenance has averaged $3,000 annually in recent years. The estimated 5.4.16 Planning Subarea 5.3 (Lake Ontario cost of deepening the St. Lawrence Seaway to East) 31 feet is $0.9 billion. The most significant alternative or priority Ogdensburg on the St. Lawrence River is for this planning subarea is strong port pro- the only United States harbor of significance motion to enhance the general cargo traffic in this planning subarea. Traffic of 0.3 million with Canada and overseas. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Study of the present and prospective future mated costs (1967) to increase the system of commercial navigation on the Great Lakes depth to 31 feet, 32 feet, or 34 feet are $3.5 leads to three conclusions: billion, $5.0 billion, and $5.3 billion, respec- (1) The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River tively. commercial navigation system is a low-cost Based on the above conclusions, the Naviga- transportation facility essential to the eco- tion Work Group has made the following rec- nomic vitality of the Great takes Region. Wa- ommendations: terborne transportation requires less energy (1) Every effort should be made to improve per ton-mile than any other form of transpor- the efficiency of the present system. There will tation and creates very little noise and air pol- be a continuing need for observation, study, lution. It also provides efficient means of and improvement of system efficiency. The ef- transporting energy sources such as coal. In- ficiency of the existing system can be im- novations on the Lakes may include multiple proved by better traffic management through barge towing to service customers with locks and critical reaches of channels, use of smaller delivered quantities. larger vessels, and extension of season. Effi- (2) The Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River ciency will continue to be constrained by un- commercial navigation system is presently balanced traffic flow, i.e., more cargo moving underused. A significant number of shippers in one direction than another, resulting in do not avail themselves of the cost advantages numerous ballast lockages on the return trip. of water transportation. The 19-State tribu- Although tonnage per transit is rising and tary area generates 20 to 25 percent of the locks can handle more tonnage with the same nation's export/import general cargo traf3ic, number of lockages, there will be a continuing one-half of which has a transportation cost need for observation and study of lock effi- advantage via the Great Lakes. However, only ciency, cost of delays, need for and cost of addi- 7 percent is shipped via the Great Lakes. The tional locks. 19-State area also produces 79 percent of U.S. (2) Every reasonable effort should be made grain, and the six midwest States bordering to extend the length of the navigation season. the Great Lakes produce 37 percent of U.S. Due to adverse weather conditions, past ship- grain. Only 15 percent is shipped via the Great ping practices, and power booms, present Lakes. navigation on the Great Lakes and the St. (3) Additional system capacity is expected Lawrence Seaway has been restricted to a to be needed by about 1990. Recent studies period that begins around the first of April indicate that the capacity of the existing Wel- and ends in mid-December. land Canal and Seaway may be reached by (3) By 1980 as much as 80 percent of the about 1990. Additional capacity should be in present Seaway overseas bulk cargo fleet may place at that time. The 1970 Merchant Marine be in need of replacement. This is primarily Act has stimulated modernization of the U.S. foreign flag service, and the United States has Great Lakes fleet. Vessel modernization and little control over design and development of lengthening and new vessel construction pro- new ships. Nevertheless, this provides an ex- grams have resulted from the 1970 Merchant cellent opportunity to construct new vessels Marine Act which declared the Great Lakes to designed specifically for the Seaway system. be the nation's fourth seacoast and authorized The primary features of these ships should be a tax-free construction reserve to stimulate adaptability and flexibility. In addition to shipbuilding and modernization of the fleet. breakbulk and palletized cargoes, they should Several new large ships are being constructed be capable of carrying standard containers, under this new program. The total first cost roll-on roll-off cargoes, bulk grains and liquids, (U.S. and Canadian) of providing the present and other dry and refrigerated commodities. 27-foot Seaway system from Montreal to (4) Channels and dock facilities should be Duluth was more than 2 billion dollars. Esti- modified if necessary to accommodate vessels 131 132 Appendix C9 of 730 feet to 1,000 feet in length. Two vessels (9) Eliminating alleged discriminatory of this size are now in operation on the Great rates and strengthening port promotion ac- Lakes above the Welland Canal. The St. Marys tivities could enhance use of the Great Lakes River is being widened at bends to accommo- system by marginal traffic and traffic now date 1,000-foot-long vessels in connection with using other modes of transportation because the ongoing Great Lakes Connecting Chan- of habit or current rates. Promotion activities nels and Harbors Study. The 1,000-foot-long could include issuing a newsletter several StewaTt Co?t averaged about 55,000 short tons times a year and holding meetings or confer- per trip in the 1972 season, more than double ences for prospective users. the capacity of the 730-foot-long vessels which (10) The growth and prosperity of the are the maximum size that can fit through the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway system re- St. Lawrence River and the Welland Canal. quires the cooperating efforts of both the (5) The efficiency of handling general Canadian and United States governments to cargo on the Great Lakes must be improved. assure the best use and preservation of this (6) A reorganization of regulations and valuable resource. subsidies governing all modes of transporta- (11) The existing system will require addi- tion could reduce or even eliminate subsidies tional lock and channel capacity by about of each mode to compete with the others. The 1990. reorganization would allow each transporta- (12) An effective framework plan for the tion mode to move the cargo it is best equipped Great Lakes must provide for timely comple- to handle. tion of ongoing studies (priority funding and (7) Use of the same waters by both com- completion efforts), and continual evaluation mercial and recreational traffic should be of technological innovations such as pipeline avoided where possible. shipment of coal or ore. (8) Technological improvements should be developed to provide a greater stimulus to the (13) There is a need for highly efficient, Great Lakes, especially to specific regions. load center, full containership, general cargo These improvements may include prereduc- ports on the Great Lakes. However, it appears tion of copper ore or iron ore, development of a that there are only a few areas that could gen- feeder system for containerized cargo, in- erate sufficient container cargo to support full creased standardization of bulk vessel de- containership operations. signs, more efficient loading and unloading (14) An international regional study of the systems (faster turnaround time), and more entire Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River com- efficient traffic control and lock operation. mercial navigation system is needed. GLOSSARY anchorage area-that portion of a habor (or the boundaries of a country to domestic car- designated area outside a harbor) in which riers. ships are permitted to lie at anchor. car ferry-a vessel provided with tracks upon aid to navigation-a device external to a craft, which railroad cars may be transported over designed to assist in determination of posi- water (may also carry automobiles). tion, a safe course, or to warn of dangers or obstructions: lighthouses, offshore light cargo deadweight-this is the number of tons structures, buoys, day-beacons, long-range of 2,240 pounds that remain after deducting electronic aids (LORAN), short-range radio from the vessel deadweight the weight of beacons, and fog signals. fuel, water, stores and other items neces- sary for use on a voyage. It represents the bale cubic-the number of cubic feet of space total weight of cargo that will bring this par- available on a ship for baled or packaged ticular vessel down to its maximum permis- cargo. The measurement is taken to the in- sible draft. side of the cargo battens, on the frames, and to the underside of the beams. cargo weight-the difference between gross weight and tare weight of the container. ballast-stone, rock, water, or other material placed in an empty or lightly loaded ship for channel-the buoyed, dredged and policed the purpose of steadying it in rough seas. fairway through which ships proceed from Ballast is not considered ship's stores and it the sea to their berth from one berth to is assessed the same charges as cargo. another within a harbor. basin, turning-an enlargement of a channel coastwise receipts and shipments-domestic in which vessels can turn around. traffic carried over the ocean or the Gulf of Mexico, e.g., New Orleans to Baltimore or berth-the water area at the waterfront edge New York to Puerto Rico. Traffic between of a wharf reserved for a vessel. Great Lakes ports and seacoast ports, when carried over the ocean, is also termed breakwater-an engineering structure to af- 64coastwise". ford shelter from wave action; may be called mole, jetty. cofferdam-a temporary structure for the ex- clusion of water from a site during construc- bulkhead-a wall, either watertight or with tion. On a ship, a void space between two passages, separating cargo or living spaces watertight bulkheads. in a ship. commodity stowage factor-the number of bulkhead line-boundary set by governing cubic feet occupied by one weight ton of a body beyond which solid fill may not be ex- particular commodity, including container. tended. An exception is made when fill is placed within the confines of a pier extend- container (cargo)-an enclosed, permanent, ing out from the bulkhead line. reusable, nondisposable, weather-tight shipping conveyance, fitted with at least one buoy-a floating object, other than a lightship, door, and capable of being handled and moored or anchored to the bottom as an aid transported by existing equipment and to navigation. modes of land and sea transport. For marine containers, common lengths are 10, 20, 24, cabotage-restrietion of transport within the 30, 35 and 40 feet. 133 134 Appendix C9 containership-a vessel designed for carrying and other items necessary to bring the ves- containerized cargo. A full containership sel down to its maximum permissible draft. carries only containerized cargo. A partial containership can also carry bulk cargoes. dock, dry-Several types of dry dock are described below: container capacity-the inside cubic volume of the container (I x w x h). (1) Floating dry dock is buoyant structure or hull open at both ends capable of being containerization-practice of storing and ship- flooded and sunk to controlled levels and ping small packages, boxes, bulk materials pumped out and raised, into which ships within a box-like structure. may be shifted in order to lift them out of the water for repairs. crane, cargo-a crane especially adapted to the transferring of cargo between a vessel's (2) Graving dry dock is a dock into which a hold and a wharf or lighter vessel. ship is floated for cleaning and repairs. It is fitted with gates which when closed permit datum-reference point for elevations of the dock to be pumped dry. structures and water level. Elevations on the Great Lakes are in feet above mean (3) Gridiron dock is one where a cluster of water level at Fathers Point, Quebec, on the piles with caps, or stringers on to which a St. Lawrence River. barge may be floated at flood tide and which, with the fall of the tide, holds the barge at a deadweight tonnage-the term "total (vessel) certain level permitting connection with deadweight" is used to express the total land tracks and allowing railroad cars to run weight-carrying capacity of a ship including on to the barge for ferrying. cargo, fuel, oil, fresh water stores, and crew. It is the difference between displacement (4) Hydraulic lift dock consists of a hori- loaded and displacement light. "Cargo zontal platform of pontoons, upon which a deadweight" is used to express the cargo vessel can be floated. carrying capacity of the ship. "Vessel stow- age factor" and "commodity stowage fac- (5) Slip dock is a marine railway which en- tor" are used to express the relationship of ters a chamber with side walls and water ship space to cargo weight. In order to make gate, the floor of which is at low water level this clear, the following example, using the to permit hauling out a vessel at high tide, weights with respect to a typical freighter gates being closed at low tide to lay the ves- together with supplemental definitions, is sel dry. The slip dock can be applied only presented. where there is a considerable range of tide. tons It was evolved to permit a shortening of the displacement, loaded 10,500 underwater portions of the railway and to displacement, light 3,290 avoid excessive length where the shore is deadweight tonnage 7,210 high. fuel, water, stores, etc. 1,210 cargo deadweight 6,000 dock, wet-a basin in which the water is main- tained at a fairly level depth by closing gates when the tide begins to fall. demurrage-the delaying of a ship, freight car, etc., by the failure to load, unload or sail dolphin-an isolated cluster of piles used as a within the time allowed. Also refers to the support for mooring devices or marker compensation paid for this. lights. displacement, light-the weight, in tons of dredge-a machine for excavating material 2,240 pounds, of the vessel excluding cargo, from the bottom of a body of water, classified passengers, fuel, water, stores, dunnage and by type of excavating equipment used such other items necessary for use on a voyage. as bucket, dipper, ladder, hopper, or hydrau- lic dredges. displacement, loaded-the weight, in tons of 2,240 pounds, of a vessel including cargo, dry cargo bulk-commodities customarily passengers, fuel, water, stores, dunnage, loaded and carried without wrappers or con- Glossary 135 tainers, and received and delivered without such as inner bottom tanks, peak and other transportation mark or count whether such tanks for water ballast, open forecastle cargo is handled on berth terms, voyage bridge and poop, shelter deck spaces, excess charter, or any other basis. of hatchways, certain light and air spaces, domes and skylights, wheelhouse, galley, dry cargo general-miscellaneous goods cabins for passengers, and certain other packed in boxes, bags, bales, barrels, crates, spaces, expressed in tons of 100 cubic feet. drums, unboxed or uncrated, accepted and delivered by mark and count. gross weight-the total weight of the con- tainer and the cargo. dunnage-a loose packing of bulky material put around cargo for protection (also per- harbor-an area affording a natural or artifi- sonal baggage or belongings). cial haven for ships. In a proper and more limited sense, an area separated from the elevator, grain storage-structure for receiv- main body of water, by natural or artificial ing, cleaning, conditioning, handling and indentations of shoreline such as the area shipping grain. within two headlands. export or outbound tonnage-cargo, including harbor facilities-those aids, advantages or that destined for transshipment or re- conveniences provided for ships as distin- export, loaded at a United States port for guished from those provided by the port for discharge at a foreign port. cargo or passengers. This term includes channels, anchorages and anchorage ba- free port-an area generally encompassing an sins, mooring posts, dry docks, ship repair entire port and its surrounding locality, into plants, tug boats, car floats, lighters and which foreign goods may be brought without ferries. imposition of customs duties if they are in- tended for reexportation or for local con- harbor limit-boundary line of area set aside sumption. Free ports in less developed parts for harbor development, established by of countries tend to be multi-purpose competent authority, beyond which con- facilities simultaneously accommodating struction (docks, etc.) is prohibited. local and international commercial ac- tivities, industry, and tourism. inbound and outbound-traffic moving from one waterway into another is termed "out- free trade zone-an enclosed, policed area in a bound" in the case of the shipping waterway seaport or at an airport or other inland point and "inbound" with respect to the receiving treated for customs purposes as lying out- waterway. side the customs territory of the country. Foreign goods may be brought in pending integrated transportation-the combination of eventual transshipment, reexportation, or various transport modes through the use of importation into the local market, without standard interchangeable units. This allows payment of customs duties. Domestic goods for door-to-door delivery with a minimum of intended for export or for admixture with cargo handling and maximum speed. foreign goods may also be brought into the free trade zone. internal receipts and shipments-these terms apply to traffic limited to ports or landings grain cubic-the maximum number of cubic on inland waterways. feet of space on a ship available on a ship for grain or other dry bulk cargo. The meas- import or inbound tonnage-cargo, including urement is taken to the inside of the shell that for transshipment or reexport, loaded plating of the ship and to the underside of at a foreign port for discharge at a United deck plating. States port. gross ton-2,240 lbs. (short or net ton = 2,000 jetty-an engineering structure at the mouth lbs.) of a river or harbor, or elsewhere, to control the waterflow and currents, to maintain gross tonnage-the entire internal cubic ca- depth of channel, or to protect harbor or pacity of a ship, except for certain spaces beach. 136 Appendix C9 lakehead-refers to the western end of Lake measurement ton-in the foreign trade of the Superior especially Duluth- Superior. United States the in 'easurement ton is con- sidered to be 40 cubic feet. lakewise receipts and shipments-these terms apply to traffic between United States ports net ton-2,000 lbs. on the Great Lakes system. The Great Lakes system is treated as a separate system payload-the weight on which the tariff is rather than as a part of the inland system. based. leading light(s)-a light or lights arranged to pier-a structure or platform of timber, indicate the path to be f(;Ilowed. masonry, earth or other material, usually built at right angles to the shoreline of the lighter aboard ship-an adaptation of the con- harbor and extending outwards to deep wa- tainership idea in which lighters (small ter, permitting vessels to lie against it to barges) are carried aboard a mother ship discharge or receive cargoes or passengers. and when unloaded can travel to many dif- ferent ports. The Arcadia Forest is an pier head line-line set by the U.S. Army Corps example. It carries 73 lighters, each lighter of Engineers, or other competent authority is 31 feet wide and 615 feet long. beyond which the pier may not extend. (There is also a pier head line coincident with limnology-the scientific study of biological, the actual pier heads, or established by the chemical, geographic, and physical features local port authority.) of fresh waters, especially lakes and ponds. port-a harbor provided with terminal and liquid cargo, bulk-commodities in liquid form transfer facilities that enable it to be used in transported in tankers or in deep tanks of commerce. As distinguished from the term dry cargo ships. harbor, port involves some degree of de- velopment for purposes of commerce. If local traffic-movements of freight within the there are no marked indentations of shore confines of a port whether the port has only lines, ports may exist without harbors. one or several arms or channels. This does not include car-ferry and general ferry traf- port authority-the administrating committee fic. The term also applies to marine prod- or board of directors of a designated port ucts, sand and gravel taken directly from area vested with the control and adminis- the Great Lakes. tration of certain designated waterfront property. lock-the system of valves, wet docks, and wa- tergates permitting ships to pass from a port facilities-waterfront terminals, includ- higher to a lower or a lower to a higher water ing structures, reservations, equipment, level. appliances, and necessary collateral aids or conveniences for embarking and disembark- long ton-2,240 lbs. ing passengers and commodities trans- ported or to be transported by water. This lower lakes-refers to the lower end of Lake includes wharves, piers, sheds, warehouses, Michigan and to Lakes Erie and Ontario. railroads, water or street connections, belt railroads and yards, and handling low water datum-the reference plane estab- appliances. lished for each of the Great Lakes. radio beacon-a radio transmitter which emits marine railway-track, cradle, and winding a distinctive or characteristic signal used mechanism used to draw ships out of the for the determination of bearings, courses, water onto the bank for the purpose of in- or location. One intended primarily to mark spection and repair. a specific location is called a marker radio beacon. mean level (sea and lake)-the average height of the sea or lake, determined by averaging range lights-two or more lights in the same the hourly heights of the water surface for a horizontal direction, particularly those period of time. lights placed as navigational aids to mark Glossary 137 any line of importance to vessels, such as the silting-the filling in of a harbor bottom by axis of a navigable channel. The one nearest material that was suspended in a river flow- the observer is the rear light. ing into or through the harbor. revetments-e n gin ee ring structures to pro- spoil-the term applied to the material re- tect from erosion and to hold in place banks moved from land in making an excavation, of canals, rivers and harbors. or taken from under water by dredging. riparian rights-the rights of a person owning tare weight-light weight of an empty con- land containing or bordering on a wa- tainer. tercourse or other body of water in or to its banks, bed, or waters. terminal-(l) the end of a movement in trans- portation; (2) the buildings, structures and SEABEE-another adaptation of the contain- equipment at the end of a transportation ership idea in which barges are carried movement, for the transfer, handling, deliv- aboard a mother ship. The Doctor Lykes is ery and reception of passengers and freight. an example. service-the means of providing transporta- through traffic-traffic moving through a wa- terway to and from points on other wa- tion over a trade route, including the itiner- terways. ary, sailing frequency, number and type of vessels to be employed. A service may be contained within the limits of a designated tide-the rising and falling of large bodies of trade route, as on Trade Route No. 31 (U. S. water produced by attractions of the sun Gulf/West Coast South America) with its one and moon. service, or as on Trade Route No. 14 (U. S. Atlantic and Gulf/West Coast Africa) with trade route-a specifically designated channel its two services. On the other hand, a service through which the commerce of the United may extend into another trade route as is States flows between a particular United the case on Trade Route No. 2 (U. S. States coastal area or areas and a specific Atlantic/West Coast South America) where foreign coastal area or areas. the service provides not only for calls at ports on that route but also for calls at ports trade route, essential-a route between ports in Haiti and Colombia on Trade Route No. 4. in a United States coastal area or areas to foreign markets which has been determined (1) subsidized service-this term signifies by the Maritime Administration to be essen- that service is being provided under an tial for the promotion, development, expan- operating-differential subsidy contract for sion, and maintenance of the foreign com- United States flag service on an essential merce of the United States. U.S. foreign trade route. (2) liner, berth, or regular service-these transit shed-wharf structure for the short- terms, often used interchangeably, to a ser- time storage of merchandise in transit. vice operating on a definite, advertised schedule, giving relatively frequent sailings upbound and downbound-terms applied to at regular intervals between specific United movements within the confines of a river, States ports or range and designated intracoastal waterway, canal, or a segment foreign ports or range. of one of these channels. (3) non-liner, irregular, or tramp service vessel stowage factor-the number of cubic -these terms have reference to opera- feet for stowing one weight ton (2,240 tions of ships on an unscheduled basis as pounds of cargo on a specified vessel when cargo offers, usually carrying full cargo lots, fully loaded to its maximum permissible generally of a single bulk commodity, with draft. no restricted trading limits. (Bale Cubic)450,000 = 75 cubic feet per ton short ton-2,000 lbs. (Cargo DWT) 6,000 (Cargo Stowage Factor) 138 Appendix C9 warehouses-a structure in which goods may weight ton-a weight ton is usually the long be stored at a minimum risk from fire, theft, ton of 2,240 pounds but may also be the met- fraud, or deterioration until further dis- ric ton of 2,205 pounds or the short ton of tribution. There are warehouses for transit 2,000 pounds depending upon the ships storage, and merchandising warehouses. trade. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS BOM-Bureau of Mines Ls-chemical symbol for limestone CAB-Civil Aeronautics Board LWD-low water datum COE-Corps of Engineers MARAD-Maritime Administration DOT-Department of Transportation NA or N/A-not available or not applicable DMA-Dominion Marine Association OBERS-Office of Business Economics, Eco- nomic Research Service dwt-deadweight tonnage Petro. Prod-petroleum products Fe-chemical symbol for iron PSA-Planning Subarea F.O.B.-Free on board; used in quoting prices of goods at the place of manufacture, not RBG-River Basin Group including transportation charges Sand, gr.-sand, gravel, and crushed rock GLBC-Great Lakes Basin Commission Si02-Silicone dioxide GLBFS-Great Lakes Basin Framework Study SLSA-St. Lawrence Seaway Authority (Ca- nadian) G.L.-Great Lakes GNP-Gross National Product SLSDC-St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (U.S.) ICC-Interstate Commerce Commission SMSA-Standard Metropolitan Statistical iron PI-iron and steel plates, shapes, and Area castings LASH-lighter aboard ship STOL-short take off and landing LCA-Lake Carriers Association U.S.S.R.-Union of Soviet Socialist Republics LELO-Lake Erie-Lake Ontario Waterway VTOL-vertical take off and landing 139 LIST OF REFERENCES 1. Aase, James H., Transportation of Iron 10. EBS Management Consultants, Inc., An Ore, Limestone, and Bituminous Coal on Economic Analysis of Improvement Al- the Great Lakes Waterway System, U.S. ternatives to the St. Lawrence Seaway Department of the Interior, Bureau of System, U.S. Department of Transporta- Mines Information Circular 8461, 1970. tion, January 1969. 2. Blaze, James Robert, "Restructuring 11. Gadzikowski, G. R., Impact on the Freight Transportation in Chicago," Economy of Michigan of Proposed Diver- paper presented before the AMSCE and sion of Lake Michigan Water at Chicago, AMSME, Seattle, July 19,1971. W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Michigan, 1963. 3. Brockel, H. S., "Ships, Ports, and Ship- ping Seasons," remarks before the Sea- 12. Gilman, Roger H., "Views of the Port In- way Season Extension Symposium, dustry," presented at ASCE National Cleveland, Ohio, May 10-11, 1971. Meeting on Transportation Engineering, Washington, D.C., July 1969. 4. Carr, D. Wm. and Associates, Ltd., The Seaway in Canada's Transportation, 13. Great Lakes Waterways Development Volumes la and 2, The St. Lawrence Association, A Detailed Study of Serious Seaway Authority, Ottawa, December Problems Now Confronting All Users of 1970. the International St. Lawrence Seaway and All-Canadian Welland Ship Canal, 5. Chicago Area Transportation Study, Re- Toronto,1969. gional Transportation Interim Plan and Program, March 1971. 14. Greenwood, John 0., Guide to Great Lakes Shipping, 1970, Freshwater Press, 6. Christensen, Lee A., An Overview of Inc., Cleveland, Ohio. Grain Handling and Processing in the Upper Great Lakes Region, U.S. Depart- 15. Gustafson, J. F., "Beneficial Effects of ment of Agriculture, Natural Resource Dredging Turbidity," Impact of Water Economics Division, Economic Research Resources Development, March 1973. Service, East Lansing, Michigan, 1972. 16. Hansen, Colonel Ray S., "Dredging: 7. Dominion Bureau of Statistics (now Problems and Remedies," Limnos, Vol. 4, Statistics Canada), Canal Statistics 1969, No. 1 (Spring 1971). Catalogue No. 54-201, November 1970, published annually. 17. Hanson, Melvin A., Novick, J., Rabiega, W. A., and Yaeger, R. H., Great Lakes 8. Easton, James, Transportation of Port and Shipping Systems, Parts I and Freight in the Year 2000, The Detroit Edi- 2, U.S. Maritime Administration, Office son Company, September 1970. of Ports and Intermodal Systems, Oc- tober 1969. 9. Elder, Scott, "Impact of Legislation on Great Lakes Shipping," presented at the 18. Hazard, John L., The Great Lakes-St. Spring Meeting of the Great Lakes and Lawrence Transportation System- Great Rivers Section, Society of Naval Problems and Potential, Upper Great Architects and Marine Engineers, May Lakes Regional Commission, December 18,1971. 1969. 141 142 Appendix C9 19. Hoch, I., A Comparison of Alternative 31. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell and Company, Inter-Industry Forecasts for the Chicago Inland Waterway Systems Analysis, Task Region, Regional Science Association Group for Inland Waterways Systems Proceedings, 5:217-35, 1969. Analyses, Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, 20. International Great Lakes Levels Board, D.C., May 1971. Report to the International Joint Com- mission, Appendix E, Navigation, Regu- 32. Saint Lawrence Seaway Authority- lation of Great Lakes Water Levels, 1973. Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, Traffic Report of the St. 21. Iron Ore 1970, American Iron Ore As- Lawrence Seaway, 1968, 1970, published sociation, Cleveland, Ohio, pp. 50, 86, 87. annually. 22. Kates, J. and Associates, St. Lawrence 33. Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Seaway Tolls and Traffic Analyses and Corporation, 1969 Annual Report, U.S. Recommendations, The St. Lawrence Department of Transportation, Wash- Seaway Authority, December 1965. ington, D.C. 23. Little, Arthur D., Inc., Ohio River 34. Schenker, Eric, "Effects of Containeriza- Basin-Projective Economic Study, 1964. tion on Great Lakes Ports," Special Re- port No. 2, 1973 edition, Center for Great 24. Lorenzen, Jan A., "A Standardized Ship Lakes Studies, University of Wisconsin, Design for the Great Lakes," presented Milwaukee. to the Great Lakes and Great Rivers Sec- tion, Society of Naval Architects and 35. "Present and Marine Engineers, May 18, 1971. Future Income and Employment Gener- ated by the St. Lawrence Seaway," Sea- 25. Luce, A. M., and Fullerton, H. V., "The way Review, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Autumn 1970), Welland Canal Capacity Problem," Ot- pp. 19-23. tawa Section, Canadian Operations Re- search Society, April 28, 1966, Ottawa, 36. Schenker, Eric, and Bunamo, Michael, Canada, H.M.C.S. Bytown. "The Great Lakes Container Dilemma," Sea Grant Reprint from Transportation 26. MacKay, W. R., "Commercial Navigation Research Forum Papers 1970, of a paper on the Great Lakes," Proceedings of presented at the Transportation Re- Great Lakes Resources Conference, To- search Forum, New Orleans, October 22, ronto, June 1968, pp. 89-114. 1970. 37. Schenker, Eric, Tee Koh, S., Kochan, J., 27. MacNish, C. F., and Lawhead, H. F., and Bunamo, M., "An Estimation of the "History of the Development of Use of Quantitative Impact of the St. Lawrence the Great Lakes and Present Problems," Seaway on the Hinterland's Economy," Proceedings of Great Lakes Water Re- Sea Grant Reprint WIS-SG-71-309, from sources Conference, Toronto, June 1968, the Proceedings of the 13th Conference on pp. 1-48. Great Lakes Research, April 1970, Buf- 28. New York Times Encyclopedic Almanac falo, N.Y. 1970, New York, Quadrangle, p. 685. 38. Sward, John D., "The Economic Feasibil- ity of All-Rail Transportation of Iron 29. Officer, John D., "Increasing Capacity of Ore," presented at Annual Association of Present Seaway System," paper pre- Iron and Steel Engineers, Chicago, Illi- sented at ASCE National Transportation nois, September 27, 1971. Report de- Engineering Meeting, Milwaukee, Wis- veloped for Pullman, Inc. consin, July 17-22, 1972. 39. Trimble, Paul E., "Environmental As- 30. Parker, David S., President, Panama pects of Lakes Shipping," paper pre- Canal Company, "The Panama Canal," sented at ASCE National Transportation Xeroxed, The Panama Canal Company, Engineering Meeting, July 17-22, 19729 1973. Milwaukee, Wisconsin. List of References 143 40. Tripp, C. E., and Plude, G. H., "One Thou- Subgroup, St. Lawrence Seaway Task sand Foot Great Lakes Self-Unloader, Force, November 1968. Erie Marine Hull 101," paper presented to Great Lakes and Great Rivers Section, 50. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau Society of Naval Architects and Marine of the Census, Domestic and Interna- Engineers, January 21, 1971. tional Transportation of U.S. Foreign Trade: 1970, U.S. Government Printing 41. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Buffalo Office, Washington, D.C., 1972. District, Buffalo, New York, Dredging and Water Quality Problems in the Great 51. Domestic Move- Lakes, 1969. ment of Selected Commodities in the United States Waterborne Foreign Trade, 42. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North 1956, Washington, D.C., p. 6. Central Division, Chicago, Illinois, Great 52. , Statistical Ab- Lakes Harbors Study, November 1966. stract of the United States, U.S. Govern- 43. , Chicago, Illi- ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C., nois, Grain Traffic Analysis to accom- published annually. pany Great Lakes Harbors Study, June 53. U.S. Department of Commerce, Maritime 1965. Administration, Great Lakes-St. Law- 44. Chicago, Illi- rence Seaway System Navigation Study nois, Overseas General Cargo Traffic Report. A special report prepared for the Analysis to accompany Great Lakes Har- Commercial Navigation Work Group, bors Study, March 1967. Great Lakes Basin Commission, Sep- tember 1970. 45. Chicago, Illi- 54. Information and nois, Origin-Destination Study of Bulk Preliminary Criteria on Planning Con- Commodity Movement Upper Great tainer Terminals, Washington, D.C., De- Lakes Region, June 1972, pp. iv-23. cember 1967. 46. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Annual 55. Relationship of Reports of the Chief of Engineers, U.S. Land Transportation Economics to Great Army, on Civil Works Activities, U.S. Lakes Traffic Volume, Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office, Washing- Contract No. 1-35492, October 1971. ton, D.C., 1970, 1971. 56. U.S. Water Resources Council, Guide- 47. Harbor and lines for Framework Studies, October Port Development, July 1968. 1967. 48. Waterborne 57. World Almanac, 1970 Edition, New Commerce of the United States, Part 3, York, 1969, pp. 582, 586, 591, 629. Waterways and Harbors, Great Lakes, and Part 5, National Summaries, pub- 58. Yu, Dr. A. T., and Quinn, R. K., "A New lished annually. Dimension in Great Lakes Iron Ore Transportation," Skillings Mining Re- 49. U.S. Coast Guard, Report of Technical view, February 15,1969, Vol. 58, No. 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abstracts, 14th Conference on Great Lakes Re- Light List, Great Lakes, Vol. IV (CG 159). search 1971, International Association for Great Lakes Research, April 1971, Toronto, Litton Systems, Inc., Oceanborne Shipping: Canada. Demand and Technology Forecast, U.S. De- partment of Transportation, June 1968 (PB- American Bureau of Shipping, Annual Re- 179-142; PB-179-143). ports. Planning Research Corporation, Trans- Bathurst, J., "Estimation of the Water Flows oceanic Cargo Study, U.S. Department of Required for N 'avigation in the St. Lawrence Transportation. Seaway and Welland Canal in 1985," Interna- tional Great Lakes Levels Working Committee "Europe Looks at Containerization," Seaway Report, Navigation Sub-Committee, Ottawa, Review, Vol. 1, No. 3 (Autumn 1970) 9-13. Canada, November 1967. Stiff, John, Ontario Mining-The Early Years Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus (1604-1940), Ontario, Department of Mines Laboratories, Industries Suited for the Upper and Northern Affairs. Great Lakes Region, prepared for the Upper Great Lakes Regional Commission, 1970. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit Dis- trict, Final Environmental Statement-Great Beukema, Christian, "The Demonstration: Lakes Connecting Channels -Widening and U.S. Steel Shipping, Winter 1970-71," Seaway Deepening Bends in St. Marys River, Michigan Review, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Summer 1971) 10-15. (Phase I), September 1971. Bragg, Dan M., and Bradley, James R., Work U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Plan for a Study of the Feasibility of an Water Resources, Preliminary Analysis of the Offshore Terminal in the Texas Gulf Coast Re- Ecological Aspects of Deep Port Creation and gion, Texas A&M University, June 1971. Supership Operation, October 1971. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 33 (Parts I U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Busi- and II). ness Economics and U.S. Department of Ag- riculture, Economic Research Service, Eco- Great Lakes Pilot, Published Annually. U.S. nomic Activity in the United States by Water Department of Commerce, National Oceanic Resources Regions and Subareas Historical and Atmospheric Administration, National and Projected 1929-2020, United States Water Ocean Survey, Lake Survey Center, Detroit, Resources council, Vol. 2, Great Lakes Region. Michigan. Woodward, J. B., 111, Benford, H., and Now- Lake Carriers' Association, 1970 Annual Re- acki, H., "Systems Analysis in Marine Trans- port. port," SAME, June 1968 (Transaction). 145 Annex COSTS OF ENLARGED SYSTEM BY PLANNING SUBAREA General TABLE C9-95 Cost of Operation and Mainte- nance on Mississippi River, 1938 to 1971 The estimated costs of enlarging the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence navigation system has District Capital Cost O&M been listed in Table C9-99 by planning sub- St. Paul $90,000,000 $66,000,000 area (PSA). The costs of dredging the interlake Rock island 90,000,000 62,000,000 connections has been apportioned to the vari- St. Louis 29,000,000 29,000,000 ous channels based on a 1951 Corps of En- gineers estimate. Basic cost data are taken from the Report of the Technical Subgroup, St. Lawrence Seaway Task Force, November 1968.49 Costs would be considerably higher TABLE C9-96 Average Cost of Operation and today and will be even greater in future years. Maintenance for Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System 1965 to 1969 Estimate of Cost of Operation and Maintenance 1965-1969 Average for Increased Capacity System In $ Millions Item United States Canada The Federal cost of operation and mainte- Connecting Channels 3.8 nance (O&M) on the Mississippi River in the Welland Canal 10.4 St. Paul, Rock Island, and St. Louis Districts of Seaway the Corps of Engineers is used as a guide to the Canada 6.0 cost of operation and maintenance (Table C9- United States 2.0 95). In a 33-year period the O&M costs have Harbors 3.4 NA totaled from 2/3 to 1.0 of capital costs. There- Total 9.2 16.4 fore, it is assumed that for new work, a 20-year time span will require a minimum expenditure for O&M of (20 years/30 years) times 2/3 = 4/9 or approximately 1/2 of the capital costs. Ten- and five-year periods will require 1/4 to 'Is of capital TABLE C9-97 Distribution of Extension of costs. Actual O&M costs on the Great Lakes Season Costs (6 weeks) (Millions of Dollars) for 1965-1969 are shown in Table C9-96. Present Depth (ft.) Construction costs are assumed to occur at system Percents @l 32 34 the middle year of each planning period, i.e., Lake Superior 75 30 89 100 108 1975 for the 1970-1980 period and 1990 for the St. Marys River 7 3 8 9 11 1980-2000 period. Therefore, operation and Subtotal 82 33 97 109 119 maintenance costs apply only to the second Lake Michigan 37 15 44 49 54 half of each period. Lake Huron 22 9 27 30 32 Detroit & St. Clair Rivers 14 6 17 19 22 Lake Erie 22 9 27 30 32 Welland Canal 7 3 10 11 11 Estimated Cost of Enlarging System to 31, 32, Subtotal 102 42 125 139 151 and 34 Feet Depth Lake Ontario 27 11 33 37 40 St. Lawrence 35 14 40 44 49 The cost of enlarging the system is pre- Subtotal 62 25 73 81 89 sented in Tables C9-98 through C9-100 based on data in Report of the Technical Subgroup, Total 246 100 295 329 359 St. Lawrence Seaway Task Force, November SOURCE: Reference 49, page 112. 1968.49 The cost of extending the season for 31, aPercent of total cost for present system 147 148 Appendix C9 32, and 34 foot deep systems is estimated in increasing the length of season at the same Table C9-97 based on estimated costs for the time as the system capacity is increased, and present 27-foot system. The cost of dredging therefore differ from costs in Table C9-21 interlake connections is apportioned in Table which represent lengthening the season after C9-98 based on a 1951 estimate by the Corps of completion of improvements to increase sys- Engineers. These costs are preliminary. An tem capacity. Costs have been grouped by accurate estimate will not be available until planning periods for each planning subarea in the ongoing Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Sea- Table C9-99 and C9-100 and by State in Table way Navigation Season Extension Study is C9-101. Update costs of Lake Erie-Lake On- completed in 1978. Costs in Table C9-98 are for tario Waterway are shown in Table C9-102. TABLE C9-98 Cost of Dredging Interlake Connections St. Marys River Mackinac Straits St. Clair River Lake St. Clair Detroit River Total a Deepening to 35 Fee t Quantity (Million cu. yds) 115 2.2 41 20 37 Unit Price $ 1.44 $ 5.22 $ 0.96 $ 0.44 $ 3.69 Total (Million $) 165 12 40 9 138 $364 Ratiob 0.450 0.35 0.110 0.025 0.380 1.000 31-Foot System Capital 277 20 68 15 235 615 Interest 40 3 10 2 37 92 Total (Million $) 317 23 78 17 272 707 32-Foot System Capital 331 24 82 18 280 735 Interest 51 4 11 3 42 Ill Total (Million $) 382 28 93 21 322 846 34-Foot System Capital 590 43 145 33 499 1310 Interest 90 6 21 5 75 197 Total (Million $) 680 49 166 38 574 1507 SOURCE: Reference 49, pages 127 and 128 a1951 Corps estimaLe, Reference 49, page 125 bTotal in millions of dollars divided by combined total (i.e., 165 t 364 = 0.450) TABLE C9-99 Feature Costs by Planning Subarea (United States only) 3-1-Foot System (Millions of Dollars) Dredging Interlake Seaway and Harbor Other Extension PSA Harbors Connect-ions LELO Iroquois Canal Subtotal Structures Locks Relocation sa Costsa of Season Total 1.1 17.8 --- --- --- 17.8 --- --- b --- 48.0 65.8 1.2 0.2 317.0 --- --- 317.2 --- 46.0 --- --- 49.0 412.2 2.1 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 7.0 7.0 2.2 95.9 --- --- --- 95.9 36.4 --- --- --- 22.0 154.3 2.3 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 8.0 8.0 2.4 0.6 23.0 --- 23.6 --- --- --- --- 7.6 31.2 3.1 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 27.0 27.0 3.2 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.0 4.1 11.4 367.0 --- --- 378.4 4.6 57. oc --- --- 17.0 457.0 4.2 53.0 --- --- 53.0 5.2 --- --- --- 9.0 67.2 4.3 11.7 --- --- 11.7 0.8 --- --- --- 9.0 21.5 4.4 13.0 --- 534.0 --- 547.0 1.8 416.0a 214.0 152.0 19.0 1349.8 5.1 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 0.0 5.2 --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 33.0 33.0 5.3 --- --- --- 194.0 194.0 --- 161.Od --- --- 40.0 395.0 aLake Erie-Lake Ontario (LELO) bSault Ste. Marie (SOO Locks) CSt. Clair River dSeaway Annex 149 TABLE C9-100 Commercial Navigation Costs by Planning Subareaa (Millions of Dollars) Depth of System Depth of System 31' 32' 341 31' 321 341 1970-1980 Planning Subarea 1.1 Planning Subarea 1.2 Extension of Season Capital 48 54 59 49 55 60 0 & M 6 6 7 6 7 7 Total 54 60 66 55 62 67 1980-2000 Great Lakes above Welland Sault Ste. Marie Locks Capital 46 48 51 0 & M 11 11 11 Dredge Harbors b Capital 17.8 23.5 35.7 0.2 0.2 0.3 0 & M 4 6 9 0.1 0.1 0.1 Dredge Channels Capital -- -- -- 317 382 680 0 & M -- 80 95 170 Total Capital 17.8 23.5 35.7 363 430 731 Total 0 & M 4 6 9 91 106 181 Total 0 & M for 1970-1980 Construction 24 24 28 24 28 28 Total 45.8 33.5 72.7 478.0 -@64 840 2000-2020 Capital -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 & M for 1970-2000 Construction 32 36 46 206 240 390 Total 32 T6 46 2- - 240 390 1970-1980 Planning Subarea 2.1 Planning Subarea 2.2 Extension of Season Capital 7.0 8.3 9.0 22.0 24.0 27.0 0 & M 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Total 8.0 9.3 10.0 25.0 27.0 30.0 1980-2000 Great Lakes above Welland Dredge Harbors Capital 95.9 118.5 161.8 0 & M 23.0 29.0 40.0 Harbor Structures 36.4 37.0 39.0 Total Capital 132.3 155.5 200.8 Total 0 & M -- -- -- 23.0 29.0 40.0 Total 0 & M for 1970-1980 Construction 4 4 4 12 12 12 Total 4 4 4 167.3 196.5 252.8 2000-2020 Capital -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 & M for 1970-2000 Construction 4 4 4 58 70 92 Total 4 4 4 58 70 92 150 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-100 (continued) Commercial Navigation Costs by Planning Subareaa (Millions of Dol- lars) Depth of System Depth of System 31' 32' 341 31' 32' 34' 1970-1980 Planning Subarea 2.3 Planning Subarea 2.4 Extension of Season Capital 8.0 8.4 9.0 7.6 8.3 9.0 0 & M 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total 9.0 _@_.4 1-0.0 -8.6 _@_.3 10.0 1980-2000 Great Lakes above Welland Dredge Harbors Capital 0.6 0.8 1.2 0 & M 6.2 0.2 0.3 Dredge Channels Capital 23.0 28.0 49.0 0 & M 6 7 12 Total Capital 23.6 28.8 50.2 -Total 0 & M 6.2 7.2 12.3 Total 0 & M for 1970-1980 Construction 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total 4 4 4 33.8 40.0 66.5 2000-2020 Capital 0 & M for 1980-2000 Construction 4 4 4 16.4 18.4 28.6 Total 4 4 4 1 _8. 1, 28.6 1970-1980 Planning Subarea 3.1 Planning Subarea 4.1 Extension of Season Capital 27.0 30.0 32.0 17 19 22 0 & M 3 4 4 2 2 3 Total 30 34 36 19 21 25 1980-2000 Great Lakes above Welland Locks (St. Clair River) Capital 57 60 62 0 & M 12 13 13 Dredge Harbors Capital 11.4 14 19 0 & M 3 4 5 Dredge Channels (St. Clair & Capital Detroit Rivers) 367 436 778 0 & M 92 109 194 Harbor Structures 4.6 4.9 5.3 Total Capital 440 515 864 Total 0 & M 107 126 212 Total 0 & M for 1970-1980 Construction 12 16 16 8 8 12 Total 12 16 16 555 649 1,088 2000-2020 Capital 0 & M for 1970-2000 Construction 12 16 16 222 260 436 Total 12 16 16 222 260 436 Annex 151 TABLE C9-100 (continued) Commercial Navigation Costs by Planning Subareaa (Millions of Dol- lars) Depth of System Depth of System 31' 32' 34' 31' 32' 34' 1970-1980 Planning Suba,@@a 4.2 Planning Subarea 4.3 Extension of Season Capital 9 10 11 9 10 10 0 & M 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total 10 IF, -IF2 TO T, 11 1980-2000 Dredge Harbors C C c d d d Capital 53 66 92 11.7 14.8 21.9 0 & M 13 16 23 3 4 5 Harbor Structures 5.2 7.9 8.5 0.8 0.9 1.0 Total Capital 58 74 100 12.5 15.7 22.9 Total 0 & M 13 16 23 3 4 5 Total 0 & M for 1970-1980 Construction 4 4 4 4 4 4 Total 75 94 127 _f9__.5 @_3.7 31.9 2000-2020 Capital 0 & M for 1970-2000 Construction 30 36 50 10 12 14 Total 30 T6 50 TO 12 14 1970-1980 Planving Subarea 4.4 Planning Subarea 5.2 Extension of Season Capital 19 21 22 33 37 40 0 & M 2 3 3 4 4 5 Total 21 24 25 41 45 1980-2000 Locks Capital 416d 482d 530d 0 & M 104d 121d 142d Dredge Harbors Capital 13.0 15.2 24.0 0 & M 3 4 6 Breakwaters Capital 92d 92d 92d 0 & M 23d 23d 23d Dredge Channels Capital 534d 579d 607d 0 & M 134d 145d 152d Relocations 214d 231d 231d Other LELO Costs 152 160 167 Harbor Structures 1.8 1.9 2.0 Total Capital 1,423 1,561 1,663 Total 0 & M 264 293 325 Total 0 & M for 1970-1980 Construction 8 12 12 16 16 20 Total 1,695 1, @6_6 T,_000 T6 T6 20 2000-2020 Capital 0 & M for 1970-2000 Construction 536 598 662 16 16 20 Total 536 598 662 16 16 20 152 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-100 (continued) Commercial Navigation Costs by Planning Subareaa (Millions of Dol- lars) Depth of System 31' 32' 34' Planning Subarea 5.3 1970-1980 Extension of Season Capital 40 44 49 0 & M (1975-1980) 5 5 6 Total 45 49 55 1980-2000 Dredging Costs e Unites States Capitalf 125 150 269 Interest .06 x 2-1/2 0.15 19 22 40 Canada Capital 277 326 547 Interest 41 49 82 Locks9 United States Capital 140 146 152 Interest 21 22 23 Canada Capital 246 257 271 Interest 37 39 41 Total Capital United States 305 340 484 Canada 601 671 941 Total 0 & Mh United States 38 42 60 Canada 75 84 118 Combined Total United States 343 382 544 Canada 676 755 1,059 0 & M for 1970-1980 Construction 20 20 24 Total 1,039 1,157 1,627 2000-2020 Capital 0 & M (United States only) 96 104 144 Total 96 104 144 a Includes interest during construction, 6% for half of 5-year construction period (i.e., capital costs + 15%). b Does not include $112, $129, and $162 million for Thunder Bay in Canada in Planning Subarea 1.1. c Great Lakes above Welland d Lake Erie-Lake Ontario (LELO) e Reference 49, page 127. f Half of costs for 1,000 island section + all of cost for international rapids section. Reference 49, page 127. 9 Reference 49, page 135. h Assuming construction completed in 1995, i.e., 0 & M required for 5 years only (1995-2000). TABLE C9-101 Cost of 31-Foot System by State Cost State Item Location (millions) State Item Location Minnesota Harbor dredging Silver Bay 0.2 New York Harbor dredging Buffalo Taconite 0.6 Rebuild port structures Duluth 17.0 to accommodate dredging Buffalo Subtotal 17.8 Wisconsin Harbor dredging Milwaukee 25.1 All-American Canal Rebuild port structures Sub to accommodate dredging Milwaukee 33.6 Subtotal 58.7 Illinois Harbor dredging Calumet 53.0 Inter- St. Lawrence Seaway Chicago 0.6 national Dredging United State 1/2 of Thou Rebuild port structures Islands to accommodate dredging Calumet 2.5 Entire Inte Chicago 0.3 national S Subtotal 56.4 Indiana Harbor dredging Indiana Harbor 11.2 Canada Port of Indiana 6.0 1/2 of Thou Subtotal 17.2 Islands Michigan Harbor dredging Marquette 0.2 Lake St. Fr Escanaba 0.6 Lachine & Detroit 11.4 Iroquois C Rebuild port structures to accommodate dredging Detroit 4.6 16.8 Total Seaway Dredging connecting Locks United State channels St. Marys River 317.0 Canada Straits of Mackinac 23.0 St. Clair River 78.0 Lake St. Clair 17.0 Total Seaway Detroit River 272.0 and Locks 707.6 New lock Sault Ste. Marie 46.0 Canada Lock and Dam St. Clair River 57.0 (other costs) Harbor dredging Thunder Bay 103.0 Hamilton Subtotal 826.8 Toronto Rebuild port structures Ohio Harbor dredging Toledo 38.0 to accommodate dredging Hamilton Sandusky 15.0 Toronto Lorain 5.3 Sub Cleveland 6.0 Conneaut 0.4 64.7 Rebuild port structures Total United States Costs to accommodate dredging Toledo 5.2 Conneaut 0.8 6.0 Total Canadian Costs Subtotal 70.7 Pennsylvania Not Estimated Grand Total SOURCE: Report of the Technical Subgroup; St. Lawrence Seaway Task Force, Department of Transportation, November 1968. Estimate for Port of Indiana added. 154 Appendix C9 TABLE C9-102 Update Cost of Lake Erie-Lake Ontario Waterwaya (Millions of Dollars) b Update b 1961 to 1968 31' System 32' System 34' System Item Est. (140%) Capital Interest Total Capital Interest Total Capital Interest Total Relocation 112 156 186 28 214 201 30 231 201 30 231 Locks 216 302 362 54 416 419 63 482 461 69 530 Channels 321 450 464 70 534 504 75 579 528 79 607 Breakwater 57 80 80 12 92 80 12 92 80 12 92 Other Costs 84 118 132 20 152 139 21 160 145 22 167 790 1,106 1,224 184 1,408 1,342 201 1,544 1,414 212 1,626 aReference 49, pages 138-146. bEvaluated for a 27' system. or Av@@ A M 0. DATE DUE A f Minne ota ate of New York 17 Education 4i We"Ok Department ousing & ftopment Urban Dove Department of the Interior t Department of J Ice Al Department oi Me Departinent of Transportation Environmenta rotection gency 411,11 Federal Power Commission 7@ Great Lakes 6 3 E 368 4106 284