From sea to shore

Just this year, the Port of Barcelona’s El Prat development proved this point rather too well when on January 1 a 600-metre section of a recently-built 1,500 metre quay wall collapsed, as 16 supporting caissons became seriously displaced. The development was part of the reclamation of 930,000 sq m of land to the port’s southern boundary.

Given such a major set back, both national and local media quoted a series of experts, all of whom had their own ideas as to where the ultimate blame lay. The port authority, accused by some of having ultimate responsibility, sensibly commissioned a report.

Following six months of intense study, it was concluded that the fill material used had become subject to liquefaction. The timetable for handing over El Prat to operator Tercat has understandably slipped. Half of the promised total area, including 850 metres of quay, is now slated to become operational in April 2008, while a further 186,000 sq m and 150 metres of quay should then follow in December. However, it will not now be until the second half of 2010 that the facility will be wholly opened.

The port, effectively surrounded by either residential or industrial areas had little choice other than to consider land reclamation when it became clear that it had to add more surface area. Soberly, putting in place the necessary outer harbour protection alone cost €1.1m ($1.5m) for every one hectare of operational area gained from the sea. There have also been lengthy time constraints: construction of the outer protection dykes began in 2001 and will not now be completed until 2008.

The length of time prior to implementation of such schemes is clearly a major industry bugbear. Alan Alcorn, Moffatt & Nichol vice president, notes that in North America, before any construction can take place, environmental (air/water quality, habitat disruption, traffic, etc.) and technical/engineering considerations, and political components all have to be addressed and generally must survive court challenges to their validity. In addition, it must be convincingly demonstrated that existing capacity has been exhausted.

“The biggest thing impacting on a reclamation project is undoubtedly environmental assessment. Air quality can limit the size of the proposed project; nearby resources, including fish habitats, can also affect the shape of the site and/or construction; while you also have to take into account water quality. The environmental impact assessment itself can also provide the means by which opponents can slow or stop projects through protracted legal battles,” warns Mr Alcorn.

The Deltaport Expansion project currently under way near Vancouver, British Columbia, he explains, had to undergo extensive review over several years. This was despite the fact that the need for additional terminal area was universally acknowledged. Adrian Hoyle, market director (maritime) of Royal Haskoning, agrees that the findings of environmental impact assessments often have the biggest overall influence on reclamation projects.

“As engineers, whether we want to or not, we must toe the environmental line, if for no other reason than banks investing in the project will insist on it,” he says.

“Royal Haskoning is just starting construction of a new large port and ship repair yard in Oman, involving 30m cubic metres of dredging and reclamation. If turtle nesting sites had been found on any of the surrounding beaches, the project would have been dead in the water.”

Given the difficulties involved, Moffatt & Nichol’s Mr Alcorn points out that calculating a return on investment (ROI) on such projects can vary by owner and purpose. “In the US, federal government participation is generally required to provide a positive  benefit-cost ratio based on savings in transportation over a 50-year period,” he says.

For Royal Haskoning’s Mr Hoyle, ROI on reclamation schemes has to focus on the project as a whole. Hence the area of reclamation needed to provide the calculated storage and operational requirements would be costed, making due allowance for alternative sources for the fill.

“The return period on the investment will be dependent on the type of operator; however it is rare that return periods less than 25 years are achievable, even with government assistance,” he says.

While, superficially, landward expansion may look cheaper, Mr Acorn stresses that this depends massively on what the land in question was previously used for.

By the same token, if a proposed reclamation site is subject to extreme wave conditions, difficult channel access, extremely deep bathymetry or very poor foundations, then it too may prove expensive to reclaim. While river and delta port reclamation schemes are mercifully free from these impediments, the modest distances involved in most land reclamation schemes also mean that off-shore climatic conditions are not usually limiting factors.

However, Mr Hoyle disagrees, believing that terminals sited on reclaimed land do invariably suffer from worse sea conditions during periods of high wind, even with outer breakwaters in place. Despite this, Royal Haskoning is increasingly seeing clients who want to develop in difficult circumstances; often very difficult.

“We are currently looking at a number of schemes where the brief requires construction of a complete new island many kilometres off the coast connected to the mainland via a heavy duty access trestle. This may be very costly; however the size of many projects around the world is increasing due to economies of scale, particularly in oil and gas and bulk materials, like iron ore and bauxite,” he says.

He adds that while Royal Haskoning would invariably recommend redevelopment of brown field terminals on land where practical, it is very rare that sufficient existing land is available for expansion. He cites Hidd Port, in Bahrain, which had to be built entirely on reclaimed land. For this project, the construction of breakwaters, dredging, reclamation and quay walls was arranged to maximise port operational area and use, while at the same time minimising cost.

Indeed, Royal Haskoning advises new ports to reclaim as much land as possible in the initial construction stages. This is a particularly apposite approach where dredging can generate material suitable for the reclamation.

“It is often a question of balancing the position of the quays so that the volume of material to be dredged matches the volume of fill required for the reclamation,” Mr Hoyle says. For existing ports, this may not be so easy, even if suitable fill is available at the right price, because extensions to the breakwaters and/or slope protection would often be required, too.

Nevertheless, even though land reclamation is often the only option available to many ports, it should not be seen as a panacea, warns Mr Hoyle. The problem with terminal expansion by reclamation is that invariably all the best sites have already been developed, and the remaining areas which are available are often beset by problems: weak ground, strong currents, and even posh neighbours.