Rebecca Johnston - Cornell Hero

[Jim Hyla]

Man, this is why I like being a Cornellian.

[Trotsky]

You have to put these things in historical context. Vancouver was hardly a world-class city in the 1800s. It was incorporated only in 1886 and had a population of around 20,000 by 1900.

Vancouver might still be a backwater if Charles Melville Hays, General Manager of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, hadn't gone down with the Titanic along with his plans to make Prince Rupert--Grand Trunk's western terminus--the primary Canadian port for shipping to and from the far east.

IINM, Prince Rupert and Portland, OR are actually better choices than Vancouver and Seattle, respectively, as they are deep water ports.  But the railroad barons had other plans.

[Al DeFlorio]

You have to put these things in historical context. Vancouver was hardly a world-class city in the 1800s. It was incorporated only in 1886 and had a population of around 20,000 by 1900.

Vancouver might still be a backwater if Charles Melville Hays, General Manager of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, hadn't gone down with the Titanic along with his plans to make Prince Rupert--Grand Trunk's western terminus--the primary Canadian port for shipping to and from the far east.

IINM, Prince Rupert and Portland, OR are actually better choices than Vancouver and Seattle, respectively, as they are deep water ports.  But the railroad barons had other plans.

From Wikipedia:  "Prince Rupert's sheltered harbour is the deepest ice-free natural harbour in North America."  It's also spectacularly beautiful.

[billhoward]

Good points. We did have no qualms about taking on Alaska when Russia listed it on eBay.

[Tom Lento]

Man, this is why I like being a Cornellian.

Seriously, that was an amazing exchange even for this forum.

[mnagowski]

You have to put these things in historical context. Vancouver was hardly a world-class city in the 1800s. It was incorporated only in 1886 and had a population of around 20,000 by 1900.

Vancouver might still be a backwater if Charles Melville Hays, General Manager of the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, hadn't gone down with the Titanic along with his plans to make Prince Rupert--Grand Trunk's western terminus--the primary Canadian port for shipping to and from the far east.

IINM, Prince Rupert and Portland, OR are actually better choices than Vancouver and Seattle, respectively, as they are deep water ports.  But the railroad barons had other plans.

From Wikipedia:  "Prince Rupert's sheltered harbour is the deepest ice-free natural harbour in North America."  It's also spectacularly beautiful.

Wait, so the Columbia/Willamette basin is deeper than the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Puget Sound? I had thought that navigating into the Columbia was very tricky.

[Trotsky]

Wait, so the Columbia/Willamette basin is deeper than the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Puget Sound? I had thought that navigating into the Columbia was very tricky.

Maybe because of soil erosion.  When I was living there they were just starting the equivalent of a "Big Dig" to undo about 40 years of silting of the harbor.

But what I always heard is that Portland harbor is the point at which the Columbia become difficult, so ocean shipping stops there and unloads onto trains for the trip into the interior.  There are certainly heavy freight lines running night and day on both banks of the Columbia for as far east as I've been.

[Weder]

Wait, so the Columbia/Willamette basin is deeper than the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the Puget Sound? I had thought that navigating into the Columbia was very tricky.

Maybe because of soil erosion.  When I was living there they were just starting the equivalent of a "Big Dig" to undo about 40 years of silting of the harbor.

But what I always heard is that Portland harbor is the point at which the Columbia become difficult, so ocean shipping stops there and unloads onto trains for the trip into the interior.  There are certainly heavy freight lines running night and day on both banks of the Columbia for as far east as I've been.

The trickiest part about the Columbia is getting past the bar in Astoria. You're required to have a pilot to do so.
http://www.columbiariverbarpilots.com/index.html

[billhoward]

The trickiest part about the Columbia is getting past the bar in Astoria. You're required to have a pilot to do so.
http://www.columbiariverbarpilots.com/index.html

And no reciprocity for California lawyers relocating.

[Rosey]

The trickiest part about the Columbia is getting past the bar in Astoria. You're required to have a pilot to do so.
http://www.columbiariverbarpilots.com/index.html

Lovely: government granted monopoly?  Check.  Incumbent union (i.e. cartel) with artificially limited membership?  Check?  Rates set by the cartel under the cover of "safety"?  Check.

I'll give them one thing: the website does a very good job at making it seem like they're performing a public service by withholding the lube.

[profudge]

If  you are ever in Astoria Oregon - visit the museum and light ship on the river front there -  very worth about 3-5 hours as the history and exhibits are extensive and interesting.

The pilots earn there pay much of the year!

[mnagowski]

The trickiest part about the Columbia is getting past the bar in Astoria. You're required to have a pilot to do so.
http://www.columbiariverbarpilots.com/index.html

Lovely: government granted monopoly?  Check.  Incumbent union (i.e. cartel) with artificially limited membership?  Check?  Rates set by the cartel under the cover of "safety"?  Check.

I'll give them one thing: the website does a very good job at making it seem like they're performing a public service by withholding the lube.

You're right, Kyle. I have a much better idea: The shipping companies can navigate their own ships through the treacherous waters however they damn well please, but presumably cheaply to placate their shareholders.

Then when one of their oil tankers crashes and causes an oil spill to spread over 150 miles of pristine Pacific coastline, causing all sorts of environmental and health repercussions for millions of people, the management can declare corporate bankruptcy and absolve themselves and their employees of any further liability. They will, of course, leave the U.S. taxpayers to pay for the costly clean-up and decades of lingering health bills.

[Rosey]

Then when one of their oil tankers crashes and causes an oil spill to spread over 150 miles of pristine Pacific coastline, causing all sorts of environmental and health repercussions for millions of people, the management can declare corporate bankruptcy and absolve themselves and their employees of any further liability. They will, of course, leave the U.S. taxpayers to pay for the costly clean-up and decades of lingering health bills.

It seems like requiring shippers to carry a certain amount of insurance coverage would be sufficient, and certainly a solution that is far less amenable to government-union collusion.

[mnagowski]

Then when one of their oil tankers crashes and causes an oil spill to spread over 150 miles of pristine Pacific coastline, causing all sorts of environmental and health repercussions for millions of people, the management can declare corporate bankruptcy and absolve themselves and their employees of any further liability. They will, of course, leave the U.S. taxpayers to pay for the costly clean-up and decades of lingering health bills.

It seems like requiring shippers to carry a certain amount of insurance coverage would be sufficient, and certainly a solution that is far less amenable to government-union collusion.

Not really. All the insurance contract does is (attempt to) price out the expected cost of the risk -- not to curb the risky activity itself. And tail risk is notoriously difficult to price. Given this risk, what you really want to be able to do is take all reasonable efforts to ensure that the ships make it through the most deadly sandbar in the world in one piece. The insurance contract will not be able to do that, unless the company has a keen sense of the skill of every ship's captain and can effectively force a company to go out of business (through high premiums).

So it is easier (and more effective and cheaper) just to helicopter in fifteen highly trained professionals to do the job.

[Rosey]

Not really. All the insurance contract does is (attempt to) price out the expected cost of the risk -- not to curb the risky activity itself. And tail risk is notoriously difficult to price. Given this risk, what you really want to be able to do is take all reasonable efforts to ensure that the ships make it through the most deadly sandbar in the world in one piece. The insurance contract will not be able to do that, unless the company has a keen sense of the skill of every ship's captain and can effectively force a company to go out of business (through high premiums).

So it is easier (and more effective and cheaper) just to helicopter in fifteen highly trained professionals to do the job.

Yeah, probably.  See, I'm not completely recalcitrant. :-)  I just reflexively bristle at such obvious collusion between a cartel and the government.  But given the unique nature of this particular danger, producers do have other choices, like shipping the goods elsewhere.  I presume the service is priced sufficiently low that producers and shippers can still make a profit, or this waterway would go unused; and presumably the local residents are happy enough with this arrangement that they are willing to trade paying higher prices for goods for a much lower probability of an environmental disaster.