There are two types of commercial freighters that use the Great Lakes for moving bulk goods like iron ore, crushed limestone, and grain.  Salties, or the ships that come down the Saint Lawrence Seaway from the Atlantic Ocean; and Lakers, which are properly called boats and spend their working lives entirely in the Great Lakes.  (You can learn more about them at BoatNerd.com.)

In a post in 2009 titled, Just How Dirty Are Great Lakes Freighters? , I talked about the air pollution problems of Great Lakes Freighters.  Emissions of sulphur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) were addressed by US and Canadian governments for the Salties recently, but many of the Lakers were given a pass.  Ironically, the Salties already had cleaner burning power plants, and are by and large a newer fleet for a couple of reasons.

1. The more straightforward reason is simply that fresh water isn’t as corrosive as salt water, so metal lasts longer on Lakers.
2. The less intuitive reason is that it costs a fortune to make changes to a Laker due to cabotage laws.  On the Great Lakes in US waters this is governed by Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920, known as the Jones Act.

The Great Lakes Maritime Task Force, (GLMTF) encourages  “Strict adherence to all existing cabotage laws.” in a position paper found here>  In that same paper they describe how the Jones act works.

BACKGROUND: Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1920 and other laws mandate that all cargo moving between U.S. ports be carried in vessels that are U.S.-owned, -built, and -crewed. Section 27 is generally referred to as the Jones Act. The Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) sets the same requirements for the transport of passengers between U.S. ports. Other statutes apply the same ground rules to towing, dredging and salvage in U.S. waters.

They go on to point out that 54 other countries, including Canada, have cabotage laws.

This was an issue addressed by Congress in the late 1700′s, so it’s been on the books in one way or another for a long time.  But why do we need a protectionist law of this sweeping scope?  Again I’ll let the GLMTF explain that.

BENEFITS TO THE NATION: Total Jones Act commerce routinely tops 1 billion tons and 130 million passengers each year, yet the freight charges total less than 1 percent of the nation’s transportation bill. Nationwide, the Jones Act fleet has more than tripled in size since 1965 to 39,000-plus vessels and has quadrupled its productivity. The cabotage laws further ensure the United States has the ships, skilled mariners, and shipyards needed to supply American troops during a national emergency.

BENEFITS TO GREAT LAKES REGION: The cabotage laws are, first and foremost, guarantees that domestic waterborne commerce is carried in vessels built to the world’s highest safety and environmental protection standards and manned with crews whose skills and expertise are certified by the U.S. Coast Guard. Further, by guaranteeing a level playing field among the various transportation modes, Great Lakes Jones Act operators have been able to assemble the world’s largest and most diverse fleet of self-unloading vessels without one penny of Federal subsidies, either direct or indirect. For example, one iron ore cargo delivered in a 1,000-foot-long Jones Act “Laker” keeps a major steel mill in operation for 4-plus days. A single coal cargo in a 1,000-footer produces enough electricity to power a metropolitan area the size of Greater Detroit for a day.

But I take exception with their assertion that “The cabotage laws are, first and foremost, guarantees that domestic waterborne commerce is carried in vessels built to the world’s highest … environmental protection standards….”  No they’re not!  They are air pollution nightmares!

The EPA proposed designating the entire Great Lakes region as an Emmisions Control Area (ECA) because our air quality sucks in several areas and these areas aren’t separated by much distance.  According to the GLMTF

By declaring the Lakes an ECA, the EPA was banning the use of residual fuel on vessels by 2012. (Other users such as greenhouses could continue to use high-sulfur fuel.) This meant that 13 U.S.-Flag Lakers that carried 19 million tons of cargo in 2008 (nearly 20 percent of the U.S.-Flag total for the year) faced extinction. The EPA so misunderstood the realities of the marine industry that it did not know that what it proposed – burning distillate fuel on a steamship – could lead to an explosion and loss of life. The only option available to vessel operators would be converting the steamers to diesels, but that was an expensive proposition – the cost ranges from $15 million to $22 million per vessel – and physically unattainable by the 2012 deadline. The engines on large commercial vessels are all built to order, and the whole re-powering process can take nearly 30 months even if financing can be arranged.

These steamships are among the oldest ships in commercial use today anywhere.  The St. Mary’s Challenger is 115 years old!   So, because the EPA didn’t understand “the realities of the marine industry” these ships were given exemptions in a deal brokered By Congressmen Oberstar and Obey.

I take a different view (surprise!).  I’m disappointed that the owners and operators of the 110 or so Lakers in the Great Lakes Maritime fleet don’t understand the public health and environmental realities of releasing millions of tons of pollutants, including CO2, SO2 and NOx, into the air and waters of the Great Lakes region.  The cost in environmental impacts, human suffering and health care cost will run many millions of dollars beyond the cost of new engines.  But the Lakers’ owners don’t have to pay that bill.

Advocates of the Jones Act say that it is a national security necessity.  But for the shipping industry on the Great Lakes its in the same class of national security imperative as the giant anti-terrorist fences around every rural airport in the country.

The Act stipulates that cabotage be restricted to American Flag vessels, built in America, owned by Americans, and crewed by Americans.  It further requires work on these vessels be done in an American Shipyard.  But hey!  54 other countries (including our neighbor to the north, Canada) have all the same requirements, so we are just following internationally accepted standards.  And Canada is about to launch some new Lakers.

• Canadian Mariner – built by Chengxi Shipyard of Jiangyin, China and schedule for delivery after April 2011 for Seaway Marine Transport.
• Equinox Class – a new class of lake freighter (5 ordered from Mingde Shipyard of Nantong, China) and expected to enter service in 2013-2014 for Seaway Marine Transport.   -from Wikipedia

Oops!  Canadian shippers must not realize that when they buy Chinese boats, the Terrorists win.

Still, I understand that given the Jones Act’s requirement for work to be done in an American Shipyard, and the cost that comes with using an American shipyard, it may not be financially realistic to retrofit these old steamers.  But rather than give them pollution exemptions, why not give the ship owners Jones Act waivers and let them buy engines someplace else?  Or, they can cut the steamers up and make tug/barge combinations out of them, as has been done with other obsolete boats.  Or if supporting the national economy, security, and shipyards are more important, buy shiny new boats built in American shipyards to meet 21st century safety and environmental standards, and then cut the old boats up.  Make it a floating “cash for clunkers” initiative.  There isn’t a boatyard in any community in the country that wouldn’t jump for joy at getting that work today.

And while they are at it, build them to treat their ballast water so that they will cease to move alien invasive species (AIS) around within the Great Lakes system.  Because, even though these nasties come in with the salties, and the GLMTF supports requiring foreign salties to treat their ballast water, they oppose requiring Lakers to do the same because, well, the AIS are already in the lakes, and they are going to infest the entire system eventually anyhow, so why should they spend money to forestall the inevitable?

Well, because the lakes are enormous, and it isn’t a foregone conclusion that once an AIS shows up in Cleveland it is going to spread to Chicago and Duluth on its own.  Lakers provide a direct path for AIS from port to port.  They need to stop it and join the fight against the invasives that are choking the life out of the lakes, displacing native species, and costing industry, government, utilities, and private citizens billions of dollars annually.

The Jones Act certainly has some good points, but we can’t let an entire industry hide behind it in order to avoid meeting “…the world’s highest safety and environmental protection standards….”  That was not the reason the Act was adopted.

Clean, abundant freshwater is going to become increasingly valuable as it becomes more rare globally.  Soon having the largest pool of freshwater on the planet will be much more important to our national health and security than protecting a handful of old boats, no matter how cool they are.  But we must protect that water now, while we still can.  We can only do that by protecting or restoring the Great Lakes ecosystem, and that requires we eliminate threats to that ecosystem first.  It shouldn’t matter if those threats are land or water based, they all need to be addressed sooner rather than later.

That is a matter of national security of the most basic kind.