Port of Vancouver Discussion

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Reading about these developments and thinking about the port a bit made me wonder about something... Roberts Bank seems a bit exposed to the weather conditions in the Strait compared to Burrard Inlet. Are there any issues with that? When we have the kind of rough seas that cause the ferries to be cancelled, what happens with the ships at dock at Roberts Bank?

Rough for ferries is nothing for freighters. The ferries are never meant to leave the protected coastal waters but freighters are meant to cross the open ocean. It's no Puget Sound, but the Strait of Georgia is a pretty well protected body of water. I doubt they notice the worst weather the Strait can put forward.

[officedweller]

Apparently Westridge can only handle Aframax tankers:

Maximum Capacity: 80,000 to 120,000 tonnes (about 550,000 to 800,000 barrels)

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Apparently Westridge can only handle Aframax tankers:

Maximum Capacity: 80,000 to 120,000 tonnes (about 550,000 to 800,000 barrels)

And only about 80% loaded until the dredging in Burrard Inlet starting in the fall allows them to get through fully loaded.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Reading about these developments and thinking about the port a bit made me wonder about something... Roberts Bank seems a bit exposed to the weather conditions in the Strait compared to Burrard Inlet. Are there any issues with that? When we have the kind of rough seas that cause the ferries to be cancelled, what happens with the ships at dock at Roberts Bank?

From the RBT2 EA:

The Proponent indicated that during operations, vessels at berth could be damaged if wind and wave limits were exceeded.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by chowhou

Rough for ferries is nothing for freighters. The ferries are never meant to leave the protected coastal waters but freighters are meant to cross the open ocean. It's no Puget Sound, but the Strait of Georgia is a pretty well protected body of water. I doubt they notice the worst weather the Strait can put forward.

I'm thinking less about seaworthiness on the open waters and more about the ships getting bashed up by waves slamming them into the docks (not to mention the docks themselves). I guess they try to haul them in pretty tightly, but it seemed like it might be a concern in the more open waters of the strait.

Container ship loading has pretty fine tolerances, I wonder if they suspend stevedoring operations in heavy weather?

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm thinking less about seaworthiness on the open waters and more about the ships getting bashed up by waves slamming them into the docks (not to mention the docks themselves). I guess they try to haul them in pretty tightly, but it seemed like it might be a concern in the more open waters of the strait.

Container ship loading has pretty fine tolerances, I wonder if they suspend stevedoring operations in heavy weather?

They don't allow extra large cruises ships to dock in Victoria at 25 knots or more windspeeds

https://www.ppa.gc.ca/standard/pilotage/...or%20conventional%20propulsion%20vessels.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm thinking less about seaworthiness on the open waters and more about the ships getting bashed up by waves slamming them into the docks (not to mention the docks themselves). I guess they try to haul them in pretty tightly, but it seemed like it might be a concern in the more open waters of the strait.

Container ship loading has pretty fine tolerances, I wonder if they suspend stevedoring operations in heavy weather?

The biggest swell anticipated at Roberts Bank is two meters. The worst case scenario is a 4 metre wave caused by a tsunami. Some Norwegian oil platforms load tankers directly from a floating terminal, and north sea waves are typically 2-3 metres in summer, and up to 10 metres in winter. That suggests there's existing experience with loading tankers in worse conditions than are expected to be experienced here.

The VLCC tankers expected to use the new terminal will be at least three times bigger in volume than the Aframax tankers in Burrard Inlet, and there are expected to be a tanker leaving only every two to three days if the new pipeline reaches maximum capacity of a million barrels a day. If there's disruptive weather, it's possible to suspend loading, just as BC Ferries try to avoid sailing in storms.

One interesting scenario suggests that some of the diluted bitumen coming from Alberta could go directly to the four operating refineries in Washington State, which currently receive Canadian stock from tankers that load in Burrard Inlet. It would only need a short spur pipeline, and that would reduce the tanker exports from Roberts Bank to the far east. There are some big questions yet to be answered about the potential customers for additional Alberta diluted bitumen. While both South Korea and Japan are slow to adopt EVs, and rely on imported oil, they currently get it from the middle east, and their refineries are designed to accommodate crude oil, not diluted bitumen. China is rapidly electrifying its transportation and how long they'll need to import oil in any significant volume is very unclear.

[Migrant_Coconut]

If truly in doubt, floating breakwaters are a thing.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by Changing City

One interesting scenario suggests that some of the diluted bitumen coming from Alberta could go directly to the four operating refineries in Washington State, which currently receive Canadian stock from tankers that load in Burrard Inlet. It would only need a short spur pipeline, and that would reduce the tanker exports from Roberts Bank to the far east. There are some big questions yet to be answered about the potential customers for additional Alberta diluted bitumen. While both South Korea and Japan are slow to adopt EVs, and rely on imported oil, they currently get it from the middle east, and their refineries are designed to accommodate crude oil, not diluted bitumen. China is rapidly electrifying its transportation and how long they'll need to import oil in any significant volume is very unclear.

Doesn't Washington State receive Canadian crude all through the existing spur pipeline?

I guess Washington State has the same problem with not wanting to invest billions into refinery retrofits for a dying market.

And you can't discount that most of the Asian markets use oil refineries as export models with jet fuel and other products (plastics) being resold around the world.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Doesn't Washington State receive Canadian crude all through the existing spur pipeline?

Apparently not. Once TMX 2 was operating "Western Washington refineries brought in more oil by tanker from Canada after an expanded export terminal opened in May near Vancouver".

[casper]

For those keeping track, this looks to be moving forward ....

Preferred construction partner selected for Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project

The TerraMarine team has extensive experience in collaboratively delivering major marine infrastructure projects and demonstrated expertise in health and safety, regulatory compliance, project management, environmental protection, and community engagement. It is comprised of:

FlatironDragados Canada, Inc.

Van Oord Canada Ltd.

Aecon Constructors, a division of Aecon Construction Group Inc.

Carlson Construction Group Inc.

Supported by design firm Arcadis Professional Services Canada Inc. and sub-consultants Stantec Consulting Ltd., TYPSA Inc., and Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

https://www.portvancouver.com/article/pr...selected-roberts-bank-terminal-2-project

[chowhou]

It's technically outside the Cowichan claim but I wonder if that impacts interest at all. Anyway, if this helps us ship our potash west rather than south I'd be pretty happy.

Port looks for operator for South Richmond terminal with sea, rail access

The 40-acre site was previously used for importing cars, but has operated as a marine terminal since the 1970s.

A 40-acre site in south Richmond could become another export terminal for products that Canada “makes, mines and grows.”

The Vancouver Fraser Port Authority is looking for an operator for its Richmond terminal located at the south end of No. 6 Road, Fraser Wharves, which is connected both by rail and sea.

The port authority took over the site in 2013, and it was used as a car terminal until early 2025, at which time its operations were consolidated with the Annacis Auto Terminal.

Since then, it has sat empty.

But Jennifer Natland, vice-president of properties and development with the Fraser Vancouver Port Authority, said offering the site for bulk export has been “several years in the making.”

The first step was to consolidate the car terminal on Annacis Island, and now they are open to proposals from possible operators.

The site currently includes deep-sea vessel access and a marine berth, a fenced railyard with nine rail spurs that the port authority says can be expanded, as well as access to Highway 99 1.5 kilometres away.

The port authority is asking for proposals to be submitted by the end of September.

Natland said the site would work for a variety of exports including dry bulk such as grain, coal or potash, or liquid bulk such as canola oil or chemicals.

“We really do think it’s ideally suited for a bulk export terminal,” she added.

In the past, the port authority has looked at the viability of the site being a cruise terminal, but that doesn’t appear to be a suitable use nor would a container terminal, Natland said, but “industry might think differently.”

Natland noted not many sites in the Lower Mainland have both rail and sea access like the Fraser Wharves site.

The federal government announced on Friday that the Fraser Wharves site “may” be supported by the Major Projects Office as Canada looks to double its non-U.S. exports by 2035.

This would depend on whether the proposed use fits the five criteria of being in the “national interest” as defined by the federal government, Natland said.

These five criteria are strengthening Canada’s autonomy, resilience and security, providing either economic or other benefits, having a “high likelihood” of success, advancing interests of First Nations and contributing to clean growth.

The port authority has 29 current terminal sites ranging in size from 10 acres to 180 acres.

Fraser Wharves is a mid-size facility that could handle eight million metric tonnes of dry bulk such as grain per year.

The port moved 131 million metric tonnes (MMT) of bulk goods in 2025 out of a total of 170 MMT.

The lot has been used as a marine terminal since the 1970s before being acquired by the port authority in 2013.

The site is considered a "brownsite," that is, a previously used site ready for new development, and Natland said it will most likely need improvements; for example, the marine berth would need to be upgraded, and the land might need improvements to handle heavier loads.

The port authority is asking qualified interested parties to submit an expression of interest by Sept. 11.

https://www.richmond-news.com/local-news...d-terminal-with-sea-rail-access-12572279