According to my reading, much of the figures being quoted as “investments” in several areas are really “expenditure” with little in the way of projected return. Take for example the St Elmo Bridge. On the other hand, the US, despite the downturn, is investing substantially in its port capacity to beef up economic activity.

For example, the US Department of Transportation (DoT) recently announced $62 million in port-related grants as part of the third round of funding in its TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) programme.

Four of the 46 awards go directly to US port-related infrastructure, comprising around 12 per cent of the total $511 million available for capital grants. 

TIGER grants are awarded to transport projects that contribute to the long-term economic competitiveness of the US, improve existing transport facilities and systems, increase energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve safety.  

In the first round of TIGER grant awards, port-related infrastructure projects received eight per cent of the original $1.5 billion. In the second round of grants, port-related infrastructure received 17 per cent.

The Port of South Jersey received $18.5 million to repair the DelAir Bridge, which links the rail networks of Pennsylvania and New Jersey and enhances freight movement throughout the northeast. The Long Beach Port got $17 million to improve tracks to two rail yards and relieve a rail chokepoint, improving efficiency, reducing the environmental impact of freight movements and enabling the port to move 35 per cent of goods by on-dock rail by 2035. Jacksonville Port received $10 million for the Dames Point Intermodal Container Facility that will be used by CSX railroad. The New Orleans port received US$16 million.

A number of these projects also address key congestion points along main rail lines, inland port facilities and highway trade corridors, making a positive impact on freight mobility and the movement of goods to and from US seaports.

I admit that in this day and age passenger terminals seem to be the in thing; after all they come in very handy for ribbon cutting and plague unveiling, but restrictive port access or limitations, as the St Elmo Bridge has done in eliminating one harbour mouth, surely is not conducive to increased business by far sighted planners who are keen to be around after the next election.

G. Bonett