Is Iqaluit the best choice for a deep water port???

[Navy_Blue]

Why are the Tory's suggesting a deep water port in Iqaluit??  $$2 Billion is allot of money to be spent on a dead end Island.  The tides don't allow a large ship to dock anywhere.  The cost of maintenance and support for ships in this mystical port would sky rocket.  Just the cost of keeping skilled labour up there would be ridiculous.  Sure it would be a boom for the town.  It might even lower the cost of living when you account for ships being able to load and unload supplies with out worrying about the weather and tides. But....

Churchill might be a better choice.  I haven't been to churchill but it must have more services and an existing port.  They are begging to stay open longer now so adding a military/bigger CCG presence would only help there argument.  The money could then go to develop an already establish port drawing in more traffic. It is relatively close to the desired Operation area of the "Armed Ice Breakers" as well.

 

[geo]

Iqualuit (aka Frobisher Bay) as a deep water port sounds all nice and pretty but, it's not a port that is accessible 12 months of the year... sounds good during politickin' but nor real practical.
Lived there for a while - sealift only comes in august (aka; can't get a big boat in there before that time of year)

Then again, with Global warming - who says we're going to need an icebreaker?

 

[Armymatters]

Iqualuit (aka Frobisher Bay) as a deep water port sounds all nice and pretty but, it's not a port that is accessible 12 months of the year... sounds good during politickin' but nor real practical.
Lived there for a while - sealift only comes in august (aka; can't get a big boat in there before that time of year)

Then again, with Global warming - who says we're going to need an icebreaker?

Agreed with the last point. In 10 or so years, we can send a CPF up there almost year round. One of my profs went up there with the CF on a winter exercise with the Rangers to photograph what the CF did up there. Saw his presentation, and it looked very interesting. Even heard of a anecdotal story of a Ranger encountering a French nuclear sub that surfaced in some pack ice, and the Ranger took out his Lee-Enfield and popped off some shots at the French submarine, until the French realized they were being shot at.

 

[STONEY]

I wonder why a deep water port is required in the first place?  Maybe there is a justification for one but nobody has said why.
There  used to be a couple of ore mines in the Arctic that shipped cargo in summer but they are all closed now. There used to be quite a bit of oil search activity but that has also ended for the present. The entire Arctic seems to be able to be resupplied for the year during the short summer shipping season except for air resupply the remainder of the time.  If you did build a port what would you send there & for who?  As for Churchill , it is in Manitoba hardly the Arctic although it may feel like it in winter. The reason Churchill isn't kept open longer than it is not financialy viable. Anyone remember Mirabel the airport where the future is past. Another great government idea to expropriate land effecting 3000 people and build a new airport 27 times bigger than Dorval , trouble is today it is a empty shell that no-one uses.

 

[sheikyerbouti]

The whole idea of a "port" is blown out of proportion.

The Economic Development officer for Iqaluit has proposed the idea of developing a Single-berth port with a 10 M draft. The idea put forward is to radically improve ship to shore fuel and cargo transfer, meaning more can be done, faster for hopefully cheaper. A modern facility could open up a lot of economic opportunities.

The Conservatives have seized upon the idea, particularily since it will serve a dual purpose. This port is not planned to provide year round access. Instead, the gist of the proposal is to enhance the economy of Iqaluit by opening up their community to outsiders (be they fishing boats, cruise ships, freighters, or an MCDV). Better port facilities would help the community out greatly in terms of their costs, there is a well written report which deals with the proposal available from the Iqaluit website.

There is not going to be a real significant presence because as Geo said it is relatively inaccessible. What we will potentially see is a  developed port facility that can provide some amenity to the CF when called upon. Incidentally, large ships shouldn't be expected from the CF as the only CF naval ship to visit Iqaluit to date was an MCDV.

In dollar terms, the economic development officer has put forward a costing of around $45 million Canadian for a single berth with modern refuelling capacity and some storage ashore.

Go to: www.city.iqaluit.nu.ca  for more details, just follow the links and enjoy the 90 pages or so...

As for the other 1.95 billion leftover, talk to Mr. Harper

 

[geo]

sheik.
Know what you're saying but..... having been there, I do not see the value of spending much time OR money to develop the harbour facilities in Iqualuit.... certainly should not be DND $ used to develop the facilities.

If the Nunavuit government wants to have Ottawa allocate it's (Nunavuit) allocation share to developing the port facilities - fine... else we should just continue barge / hauling sea containers onto the beach - from which they can be trucked to warehouses.

 

[Navy_Blue]

I was in Iqaluit in 2004.  We could not get our ship closer than 5+ KM.  Tides will not allow it.  So a jetty would require dredging up the area to provide a channel or you need to build  a really long Jetty.  It would be a boom for them.  Besides having the richest Legion in Canada (it was nice) I felt like I was in a world vision commercial walking down the streets.  Saying this I don't think it would be money well spent.  There are many ports in Canada trying to attract more shipping.  $2 Billion would be better spent. 

I suggested Churchill because of location.  When the north opens up and east bound shipping is looking for a place to unload it seems logical they would want to go in there. 

To CCG said in 2004 they didn't think it was safe to transit the bay past December (mini ice bergs).  They also said they didn't have ships to spare.