Letters + Opinion » Mailbox

Port of No Entry

comment

Editor:

An interesting article, however salient points were omitted ("Port of Entry," July 27). The Biden administration's optimistic timeline cannot be met. There are no steel manufacturers in the U.S. that can make the steel necessary for the towers. Same with ship builders, suppliers of raw materials, etc. The U.S. must compete in the international market, which goes against the "made in America" mantra. It will take years to build the U.S. supply chain to furnish U.S. made component parts.

CEQA and NEPA regulations (plus 50 organizations staking a claim) will delay or derail the project. The local workforce is non-existent in skill sets. Local schools are not equipped to prepare students for jobs. Housing already in short supply will skyrocket in rental and purchase price due to demand. A government already unable to meet today's needs will collapse under the weight of the essential new infrastructure and services.

The port facilities will be landlocked with no room for expansion.

Competition from the Port of Long Beach (which has 400 acres dedicated to this type of project, with existing on-site material and maintenance suppliers) will impact development in Humboldt. There is little difference in towing from Long Beach to Morro Bay, Humboldt or even to Oregon.

Any government sponsored project, especially one requiring billions of dollars of public and private investment for the numerous offshore wind projects in the U.S., will force companies to look at the bottom line. ROI will dictate where their dollars are spent. Even Crowley, with 100 years of experience (and presence in Long Beach), will look at the bottom line. The goal for 2030 power considered, Humboldt will be far down on the list for investing. Facilities for 2040 and beyond are a more realistic goal.

Myron Kelso, Eureka

Add a comment