Category: Reports

PORT OF LOS ANGELES HIT BY 60 MILLION MONTHLY CYBER ATTACKS IN 2023

PORT OF LOS ANGELES HIT BY 60 MILLION MONTHLY CYBER ATTACKS IN 2023

 

Between 2014 and 2023 cyber-attacks against the Port of Los Angeles increased from 7 million attacks per month in 2014 to 60 million monthly attacks in 2023, according to Tony Zhong, Chief Information Security Officer, Port of Los Angeles.

Zhong was speaking to the Propeller Club of Northern California on July 15, 2024 and explained that the Port had established a Cyber Operations Center to protect the Port’s digital infrastructure in 2014.

In 2017, after an attack on a major maritime company, the Port of Los Angeles and maritime stakeholders including terminals, rail, trucking and ocean carriers collaborated to develop what would become the Cyber Resilience Center (CRC) to provide a comprehensive stakeholder-based defense capability.

In 2021, IBM was selected to manage the CRC which began operations in 2022.

The establishment of the Cyber Resilience Center has made the Port of Los Angeles a leader in cyber security defense among US ports. As Zhong explained the CRC operates with an executive committee that oversees its operations and a technical committee that collaborates among the stakeholders (and the Port of LA is among them) focusing on technical issues. And when it comes to cyber security, as Zhong notes this is a case where defense has to be much better than offense as it takes only a single attack to be successful generating damage, whereas the defenders need to be able to successfully defend 100% of the time.

Zhong explained that when an attack occurs, it is reported by the stakeholder but transmitted to the other stakeholders anonymously. If another stakeholder also reports a similar attack, then those attacks will be reported to all of the stakeholders again anonymously so that they can evaluate whether they, too, have been under attack. This system preserves anonymity and proprietary information but also allows for the real time exchange of information in the event of a cyber-attack

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE

Ron Brown Is the New PCNC Vice President

Ron Brown Is the New PCNC Vice President

Ron-Brown-Port-Oakland

Ron Brown was unanimously elected Vice President of the Propeller Club of Northern California at the Club’s  April 2nd meeting at Scott’s Seafood, Oakland, California.

“Ron Brown has been a stalwart member of the Propeller Club of Northern California and one our leading advocates in the maritime community,” Stas Margaronis, Propeller Club of Northern California President told Propeller Club attendees  in proposing Brown for Vice President at the April 2nd meeting.

Brown has been the Maritime Marketing and Commodities Manager for the Port of Oakland since 2008.

Previously, Brown held the following positions:

  • President, International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE) Port of Oakland Chapter: Jan 2005 – Dec 2019 · 15 yrs
  • Sr. Adjunct Professor, DeVry University – Keller Graduate School of Management, 2003 – 2009, San Francisco Bay AreaSenior Program Manager, SAIC, Dec 1999 – Sep 2002, San Francisco Bay Area
  • Co-Founder, President, and Chief Executive Officer, Micro Search Environmental Corporation: Oct 1993 – Dec 1999, Oakland CA
Book Review: Ships from Victory: How the US pioneered the mass production of ships

Book Review: Ships from Victory: How the US pioneered the mass production of ships

Kaiser_Shipyard_in_Richmond_CA_during_WWII

Who builds commercial ships?

Well, in 2022 China built the lion’s share of large oceangoing vessels according to a report by the Barry Rogriano Salis (BRS) Group. China built 121.3 million deadweight tons (DWT) of ships based on its order book at the end of 2022 up from 111 million DWT in 2021. And as a result, China’s share of the global market rose from 47.7% to 50.3%.

South Korea, a distant second in the global shipbuilding sweepstakes, built ships of 69.8 million DWT in 2022, up from 68.3 million DWT in 2021, but its market share inched down from 29.6% to 29.0%, according to a November report by Business Korea. And in the number three slot was Japan. Japan’s order intake shrank from 47.7 million DWT in 2021 to 36.5 million DWT last year, and its market share fell from 17.6% to 15.1%.

So where was the greatest industrial power on the planet, the United States, in the commercial shipbuilding ranks? The US market share was a measly 0.2%.

It is no surprise the U.S. Congressional Research Service (CRS) cited the data and noted that 90% of military equipment needed for overseas wars is transported by cargo ships and expressed a concern about the United States lack of competitiveness and the possible negative impact on America’s national security. But this is nothing new as this situation has existed for decades.

The U.S. Shipbuilding Mobilization of 1939-1945

It wasn’t always so.

Before the United States allowed its shipping industry and shipbuilding to decline, the United States pioneered shipbuilding mass-production during World War II.

During the period of 1939-1945, 5,777 ships including the Liberty ships, Victory ships, tankers, and military ships were constructed at U.S. shipyards.

The shipbuilding program produced a Liberty ship that could transport 10,800 deadweight tons (the weight of cargo a ship can carry). In total, the 2,708 Liberty ships that were built collectively generated the capacity to transport 29,246,400 tons of weapons, food and supplies to European and Asian military theaters that helped win World War II.

The shipbuilding program employed 650,900 American workers. African Americans and women were employed by the shipyards in large numbers and the shipbuilding employment boom helped pull the United States out of the Great Depression financed by federally financed war orders.

It may be time to review that success and why it may be relevant in 2024.

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE

Port of Oakland seeks improved maritime industry collaboration

Port of Oakland seeks improved maritime industry collaboration

Ed-DeEd-DeNike_SSA-Containers-Speaking

In the aftermath of the failed effort by the Oakland A’s to build a ballpark and condominiums on the Port of Oakland property, the Port of Oakland’s Executive Director Danny Wan and Maritime Director Bryan Brandes sought support for major infrastructure upgrades to port operations.

Wan noted that the Port has won $600 million in new investments: “We’ve gotten … over $600 million of investment on grants from both the federal and state levels. Those go into projects like the Seventh Street access improvements, port efficiency, data improvements, and harbor strengthening.”

On November 14th, Wan explained to an assembly of maritime stakeholders that he had requested the Propeller Club of Northern California organize a meeting with Port stakeholders to discuss future projects and improved collaboration. He asked, “We get everybody in a room … to give us some ideas about what you think needs to happen at the Port of Oakland to grow our business …I’m so very heartened by … all of you showing up today.”

SSA Voices Concerns

Ed DeNike, President, of SSA Containers, which operates the biggest terminal at the Port of Oakland (Oakland International Container Terminal or OICT) said that the Port’s support for the failed Oakland A’s ballpark and condominiums at the Port of Oakland’s Howard Terminal created uncertainty. He said it undermined SSA’s ability to attract customers to the Port of Oakland: “We signed a long-term commitment with the Port of Oakland … We bought the biggest cranes in the world sitting at OICT handling any ship that’s going to be built now or for the next 20 years. We bought equipment … This thing that happened at Howard Terminal hurt us. We stopped getting any commitment from any carriers for not more than one year because they didn’t know what the future was in this Port. We need volumes and we need commitments. We can talk and say anything … that we want to (but) when carriers hear that the Port doesn’t care about them, I’m not saying it’s true, but that’s what they think. When the Port says that there’s going to be other uses for a marine terminal then … our customers need to know that the Port of Oakland is supporting the future of this Port then we can get long-term commitments.”

DeNike’s concern was repeated publicly and privately by other stakeholders who say they have confidence in the Port staff but do not have confidence in the City of Oakland. They say the City ignored pleas from truckers, the railroads, terminal operators, longshore labor, freight forwarders, and others that the ballpark and condominium project would be severely disruptive to Port operations.

DeNike was positive about the support SSA has received from International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) Local 10 which represents longshore labor at Oakland: “We’ve worked with Local 10 for a long time. I feel Local 10 now is … the best I’ve ever seen them … I think … they realize that their future also is to get the job done. And I think the employer, not only SSA, but the other employers too, have convinced Local 10 that they have to step up to the plate.”

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE

California Ports hear sea level defense could cost SF Bay $110 bn

California Ports hear sea level defense could cost SF Bay $110 bn

California ports heard a report that the cost of defending the San Francisco Bay from sea level rise could cost $110 billion while the City of San Francisco may need an additional $13 billion to defend itself.

Even more ominously Brian Garcia, Warning Coordination Meteorologist, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) noted that ice sheet losses in Antarctica and Greenland will add 13-14 feet to global sea level rise and is a certainty to occur. The only question is how soon.

The reports were presented at the Storms, Flooding & Sea Level Defense 2023 conference, a co-production of the Propeller Club of Northern California (PCNC) and the Society of American Military Engineers (SAME).

Rachael Hartofelis, Project Manager, Metropolitan Transportation Commission/ABAG and Dana Brechwald, Assistant Planning Director for Climate Adaptation at the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) discussed findings of the report: “Sea Level Rise Adaptation for S.F. Bay Area Could Cost $110 Billion.”

Warner Chabot, Executive Director, San Francisco Estuary Institute, urged developing a strategy to pay for the $110 billion. He also urged more nature-based shore protections, that should include nearshore reefs, beaches, tidal marshes, green stormwater infrastructure and more.

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE

S.F. Bar Pilots Hail New Low Emission Pilot Boat Golden Gate

S.F. Bar Pilots Hail New Low Emission Pilot Boat Golden Gate

The San Francisco Bar Pilots christened their new pilot boat the Golden Gate hailing it as the next generation of low emission vessel technology for the San Francisco Bay.

The Bar Pilots said that the Golden Gate, which replaces a vessel under the same name, “is a state-of-the-art pilot vessel that advances the organization’s sustainability goals and whose funding was made possible through last year’s Assembly Bill 2056 legislation authored by California Assembly Member Timothy Grayson (D-Concord).”

On October 12th, Captain David McCloy, S.F. Bar Pilots, told an audience at the christening ceremony that took place at Pier 9 in San Francisco: “I am pretty sure we’re still the first Tier 4  (low emission) compliant pilot boat in the United States right now …It was quite a big deal … to put a vessel like this in service (during the) pandemic and supply chain issues.”

According to Diesel.net: “On May 11, 2004, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) signed a final rule introducing Tier 4 emission standards, which were phased-in over the period of 2008-2015. The Tier 4 standards require that emissions of PM and NOx be further reduced by about 90%. These emission reductions have been achieved through the use of advanced exhaust gas aftertreatment (sic) technologies, with most Tier 4 engine families using urea-SCR catalysts for NOx control.”

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE

Congress considering national shipbuilding mobilization modeled on the “Chips Act”

Congress considering national shipbuilding mobilization modeled on the “Chips Act”

U.S. House and Senate leaders are discussing a proposed ‘Ships Act’ to dramatically upgrade U.S. naval and commercial shipbuilding along the lines of the $52 billion CHIPS Act supporting U.S. semiconductor manufacturing, according to Luke Lorenz, Director of Legislative Affairs, Navy League of the United States.

Lorenz was the keynote speaker at the Propeller Club of Northern California Maritime Day webinar on May 23rd.

Lorenz outlined the Ships Act concept to the Propeller Club audience: “The potential for something … would be called the Ships Act. Again, I say ‘potential’ because this is still very much … in the brainstorming phase, but this discussion is happening among a number of important offices that we’ve been speaking with in the Senate and the House … that carry a lot of weight … a bill that would somewhat mirror the CHIPS Act, which of course was intended to bring back production of microchip manufacturing to the United States … that had a number of provisions to bolster that industrial base and produce at … various facilities … microchips. There’s an interest in doing something similar for the shipbuilding industrial base with a significant investment in our public shipyards …a number of different incentive programs for private and smaller shipyards (with) emphasis on workforce development.”

Lorenz explained that shipbuilding is now a top national security priority as China ramps up its naval and commercial shipbuilding: “Expanding shipbuilding has impacts far beyond just our shipyards. It also impacts a number of other … tangential industries as well … We don’t necessarily need to be on a one-for-one basis with China. China has expansive shipbuilding capacity, but let’s bear in mind that we still make a more capable, more advanced ship. So, we don’t need to necessarily be on that one-for-one basis with China. However, we do need a certain number of ships in our fleet to be able to counter a larger maritime force coming from the Chinese if such a conflict were to occur. And so, this type of shipbuilding program … is absolutely imperative”

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE