Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Port of Los Angeles receives unprecedented $400-million grant to electrify operations

News Feed
Tuesday, October 29, 2024

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has awarded the Port of Los Angeles more than $400 million to support its transition to electric cargo-moving equipment — a major boost to efforts aimed at curbing pollution at America’s busiest container port.The so-called Clean Ports grant, announced Tuesday, is part of a larger $3-billion initiative to deploy zero-emission equipment at the nation’s ports, which are significant sources of lung-searing smog and greenhouse gas emissions. The Port of Los Angeles received the largest single award, securing $411 million in federal funding. The port and its private partners have committed an additional $236 million in matching funds for zero-emission initiatives.“This transformative investment will be a tremendous boost to our efforts to meet our ambitious zero-emission goals, improve regional air quality and combat climate change while accelerating the port industry’s transition to zero emissions across the country,” said Gene Seroka, executive director at the Port of Los Angeles.The landmark grant, funded through the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act, will significantly accelerate the port’s efforts to replace diesel-powered equipment with all-electric alternatives.The funding is expected to finance the purchase of more than 400 pieces of cargo-moving equipment, such as yard tractors and forklifts. The grant also aims to increase the number of battery-electric trucks and expand the port’s charging infrastructure.These investments will help the port avoid burning 3.5 million gallons of diesel fuel each year, according to port officials. It will reduce smog-forming emissions by 55 tons and planet-warming carbon emissions by 41,500 tons per year.“Our ports are the backbone of our economy — critical hubs that support our supply chain, drive commerce, create jobs and connect us all,” said EPA Administrator Michael Regan, who visited the port in March. “But we cannot overlook the challenges faced by the communities that live and work near these ports. Too often these communities face serious air quality challenges due to diesel pollution from trucks, ships and other port machinery.”Six other California ports were also awarded federal funding: Oakland, Oxnard, San Diego, San Francisco, Stockton and Redwood City. The Port of Long Beach however, which operates adjacent to the Port of Los Angeles and is the second-busiest port in the nation, was notably absent from the list of announced grant recipients. The Port of Los Angeles — nicknamed America’s Port — serves as a vital gateway between Asia and the United States. From furniture to electronics, roughly $300 billion worth of goods pass through the sprawling seaport every year. These operations provide tens of thousands of jobs to dockworkers, truck drivers and other laborers who help move this cargo. But the port’s activity is also one of the region’s largest fixed sources of smog-forming emissions. Although the port has drastically slashed diesel exhaust and nitrogen oxides through cleaner fuels and engines in the past two decades, it is now faced with its stiffest challenge to date: adopting zero-emission technology. The new funding will help push it toward its ambitious goal of having all terminal equipment be zero-emission by 2030. The port has more than 2,100 pieces of cargo-moving equipment — about 72% of which are diesel-powered while 9% are electric.The Clean Ports funding could phase out more than a quarter of the diesel equipment. It will assist the port tenants in purchasing 337 yard tractors that ferry containers across the harbor; 56 top handlers that load and stack cargo; and 24 forklifts.The trucks, cargo ships and trains that transport these goods continue to generate pollution and planet warming emissions, however. More than 22,000 trucks are registered to serve the Port of Los Angeles. Ninety percent are diesel-powered. Fewer than 2% are zero-emission, and they include 332 electric trucks and 51 hydrogen fuel cell trucks. The EPA grant will fund the financial incentives for trucking companies and operators to purchase another 250 electric cargo trucks. It is also expected to cover the installation of 300 electric chargers, two solar arrays and 10 battery storage systems. “The San Pedro Bay communities have struggled with the impacts of cargo-goods-related emissions for far too long, so we congratulate the Port of Los Angeles on its substantive EPA Clean Ports Grant award to make meaningful progress towards the stated zero-emissions goal,” said Ed Avol, who sits on the board of the Harbor Community Benefit Foundation, an organization working to mitigate pollution at the ports. “The Harbor Community Benefit Foundation looks forward to working with the Port to achieve that goal without delay.”In July, the EPA announced another historic $500-million federal grant to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which plans to encourage the adoption of zero-emission cargo trucks, delivery vehicles and some locomotives. The Port of Los Angeles partnered with Yusen Terminals LLC, Everport Terminal Services, TraPac, Fenix Marine Services, APM Terminals and the Harbor Community Benefit Foundation for the grant application. The port’s bid was supported by elected officials, public agencies, business groups, environmental justice advocates, community groups and labor organizations. Beyond the environmental benefits, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union emphasized that the grant funding will be spent on human-operated equipment that won’t automate operations and eliminate jobs. This includes $50 million toward community benefits, including training for residents who are interested in learning how to operate and repair this new equipment. “The men and women of the ILWU are thrilled to learn of this over $400 million investment, by the U.S. EPA, in the environmental and economic well-being of our members and local community,” said Gary Herrera, president of ILWU Local 13. “Human-operated, zero-emission cargo handling equipment is the gold standard for maritime port operations not only because it protects good jobs while cleaning the air, but is also the most efficient and cost-effective in terms of port operations, while additionally providing the necessary safeguards against cyber threats to our national security.” Newsletter Toward a more sustainable California Get Boiling Point, our newsletter exploring climate change, energy and the environment, and become part of the conversation — and the solution. You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

The grant is part of a larger $3-billion initiative to deploy zero-emission equipment at the nation's ports, which are significant sources of pollution.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has awarded the Port of Los Angeles more than $400 million to support its transition to electric cargo-moving equipment — a major boost to efforts aimed at curbing pollution at America’s busiest container port.

The so-called Clean Ports grant, announced Tuesday, is part of a larger $3-billion initiative to deploy zero-emission equipment at the nation’s ports, which are significant sources of lung-searing smog and greenhouse gas emissions.

The Port of Los Angeles received the largest single award, securing $411 million in federal funding. The port and its private partners have committed an additional $236 million in matching funds for zero-emission initiatives.

“This transformative investment will be a tremendous boost to our efforts to meet our ambitious zero-emission goals, improve regional air quality and combat climate change while accelerating the port industry’s transition to zero emissions across the country,” said Gene Seroka, executive director at the Port of Los Angeles.

The landmark grant, funded through the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act, will significantly accelerate the port’s efforts to replace diesel-powered equipment with all-electric alternatives.

The funding is expected to finance the purchase of more than 400 pieces of cargo-moving equipment, such as yard tractors and forklifts. The grant also aims to increase the number of battery-electric trucks and expand the port’s charging infrastructure.

These investments will help the port avoid burning 3.5 million gallons of diesel fuel each year, according to port officials. It will reduce smog-forming emissions by 55 tons and planet-warming carbon emissions by 41,500 tons per year.

“Our ports are the backbone of our economy — critical hubs that support our supply chain, drive commerce, create jobs and connect us all,” said EPA Administrator Michael Regan, who visited the port in March. “But we cannot overlook the challenges faced by the communities that live and work near these ports. Too often these communities face serious air quality challenges due to diesel pollution from trucks, ships and other port machinery.”

Six other California ports were also awarded federal funding: Oakland, Oxnard, San Diego, San Francisco, Stockton and Redwood City. The Port of Long Beach however, which operates adjacent to the Port of Los Angeles and is the second-busiest port in the nation, was notably absent from the list of announced grant recipients.

The Port of Los Angeles — nicknamed America’s Port — serves as a vital gateway between Asia and the United States. From furniture to electronics, roughly $300 billion worth of goods pass through the sprawling seaport every year. These operations provide tens of thousands of jobs to dockworkers, truck drivers and other laborers who help move this cargo.

But the port’s activity is also one of the region’s largest fixed sources of smog-forming emissions. Although the port has drastically slashed diesel exhaust and nitrogen oxides through cleaner fuels and engines in the past two decades, it is now faced with its stiffest challenge to date: adopting zero-emission technology.

The new funding will help push it toward its ambitious goal of having all terminal equipment be zero-emission by 2030. The port has more than 2,100 pieces of cargo-moving equipment — about 72% of which are diesel-powered while 9% are electric.

The Clean Ports funding could phase out more than a quarter of the diesel equipment. It will assist the port tenants in purchasing 337 yard tractors that ferry containers across the harbor; 56 top handlers that load and stack cargo; and 24 forklifts.

The trucks, cargo ships and trains that transport these goods continue to generate pollution and planet warming emissions, however.

More than 22,000 trucks are registered to serve the Port of Los Angeles. Ninety percent are diesel-powered. Fewer than 2% are zero-emission, and they include 332 electric trucks and 51 hydrogen fuel cell trucks.

The EPA grant will fund the financial incentives for trucking companies and operators to purchase another 250 electric cargo trucks. It is also expected to cover the installation of 300 electric chargers, two solar arrays and 10 battery storage systems.

“The San Pedro Bay communities have struggled with the impacts of cargo-goods-related emissions for far too long, so we congratulate the Port of Los Angeles on its substantive EPA Clean Ports Grant award to make meaningful progress towards the stated zero-emissions goal,” said Ed Avol, who sits on the board of the Harbor Community Benefit Foundation, an organization working to mitigate pollution at the ports. “The Harbor Community Benefit Foundation looks forward to working with the Port to achieve that goal without delay.”

In July, the EPA announced another historic $500-million federal grant to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, which plans to encourage the adoption of zero-emission cargo trucks, delivery vehicles and some locomotives.

The Port of Los Angeles partnered with Yusen Terminals LLC, Everport Terminal Services, TraPac, Fenix Marine Services, APM Terminals and the Harbor Community Benefit Foundation for the grant application.

The port’s bid was supported by elected officials, public agencies, business groups, environmental justice advocates, community groups and labor organizations.

Beyond the environmental benefits, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union emphasized that the grant funding will be spent on human-operated equipment that won’t automate operations and eliminate jobs. This includes $50 million toward community benefits, including training for residents who are interested in learning how to operate and repair this new equipment.

“The men and women of the ILWU are thrilled to learn of this over $400 million investment, by the U.S. EPA, in the environmental and economic well-being of our members and local community,” said Gary Herrera, president of ILWU Local 13. “Human-operated, zero-emission cargo handling equipment is the gold standard for maritime port operations not only because it protects good jobs while cleaning the air, but is also the most efficient and cost-effective in terms of port operations, while additionally providing the necessary safeguards against cyber threats to our national security.”

Newsletter

Toward a more sustainable California

Get Boiling Point, our newsletter exploring climate change, energy and the environment, and become part of the conversation — and the solution.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

EPA urged to classify abortion drugs as pollutants

It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the drug.

(NewsNation) — Anti-abortion group Students for Life of America is urging the Environmental Protection Agency to add abortion drug mifepristone to its list of water contaminants. It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the abortion drug. “The EPA has the regulatory authority and humane responsibility to determine the extent of abortion water pollution, caused by the reckless and negligent policies pushed by past administrations through the [Food and Drug Administration],” Kristan Hawkins, president of SFLA, said in a release. “Take the word ‘abortion’ out of it and ask, should chemically tainted blood and placenta tissue, along with human remains, be flushed by the tons into America’s waterways? And since the federal government set that up, shouldn’t we know what’s in our water?” she added. In 2025, lawmakers from seven states introduced bills, none of which passed, to either order environmental studies on the effects of mifepristone in water or to enact environmental regulations for the drug. EPA’s Office of Water leaders met with Politico in November, with its press secretary Brigit Hirsch telling the outlet it “takes the issue of pharmaceuticals in our water systems seriously and employs a rigorous, science-based approach to protect human health and the environment.” “As always, EPA encourages all stakeholders invested in clean and safe drinking water to review the proposals and submit comments,” Hirsch added. Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump’s EPA' in 2025: A Fossil Fuel-Friendly Approach to Deregulation

The Trump administration has reshaped the Environmental Protection Agency, reversing pollution limits and promoting fossil fuels

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration has transformed the Environmental Protection Agency in its first year, cutting federal limits on air and water pollution and promoting fossil fuels, a metamorphosis that clashes with the agency’s historic mission to protect human health and the environment.The administration says its actions will “unleash” the American economy, but environmentalists say the agency’s abrupt change in focus threatens to unravel years of progress on climate-friendly initiatives that could be hard or impossible to reverse.“It just constantly wants to pat the fossil fuel business on the back and turn back the clock to a pre-Richard Nixon era” when the agency didn’t exist, said historian Douglas Brinkley.Zeldin has argued the EPA can protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. He announced “five pillars” to guide EPA’s work; four were economic goals, including energy dominance — Trump’s shorthand for more fossil fuels — and boosting the auto industry.Zeldin, a former New York congressman who had a record as a moderate Republican on some environmental issues, said his views on climate change have evolved. Many federal and state climate goals are unattainable in the near future — and come at huge cost, he said.“We should not be causing … extreme economic pain for an individual or a family” because of policies aimed at “saving the planet,” he told reporters at EPA headquarters in early December.But scientists and experts say the EPA's new direction comes at a cost to public health, and would lead to far more pollutants in the environment, including mercury, lead and especially tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs. They also note higher emissions of greenhouse gases will worsen atmospheric warming that is driving more frequent, costly and deadly extreme weather.Christine Todd Whitman, a Republican who led the EPA for several years under President George W. Bush, said watching Zeldin attack laws protecting air and water has been “just depressing.” “It’s tragic for our country. I worry about my grandchildren, of which I have seven. I worry about what their future is going to be if they don’t have clean air, if they don’t have clean water to drink,” she said.The EPA was launched under Nixon in 1970 with pollution disrupting American life, some cities suffocating in smog and some rivers turned into wastelands by industrial chemicals. Congress passed laws then that remain foundational for protecting water, air and endangered species.The agency's aggressiveness has always seesawed depending on who occupies the White House. Former President Joe Biden's administration boosted renewable energy and electric vehicles, tightened motor-vehicle emissions and proposed greenhouse gas limits on coal-fired power plants and oil and gas wells. Industry groups called rules overly burdensome and said the power plant rule would force many aging plants to shut down. In response, many businesses shifted resources to meet the more stringent rules that are now being undone.“While the Biden EPA repeatedly attempted to usurp the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law to impose its ‘Green New Scam,’ the Trump EPA is laser-focused on achieving results for the American people while operating within the limits of the laws passed by Congress,” EPA spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch said. Zeldin's list of targets is long Much of EPA’s new direction aligns with Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation road map that argued the agency should gut staffing, cut regulations and end what it called a war on coal on other fossil fuels.“A lot of the regulations that were put on during the Biden administration were more harmful and restrictive than in any other period. So that’s why deregulating them looks like EPA is making major changes,” said Diana Furchtgott-Roth, director of Heritage's Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment.But Chris Frey, an EPA official under Biden, said the regulations Zeldin has targeted “offered benefits of avoided premature deaths, of avoided chronic illness … bad things that would not happen because of these rules.”Matthew Tejada, a former EPA official under both Trump and Biden who now works at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the revamped EPA: “I think it would be hard for them to make it any clearer to polluters in this country that they can go on about their business and not worry about EPA getting in their way.”Zeldin also has shrunk EPA staffing by about 20% to levels last seen in the mid-1980s. Justin Chen, president of the EPA’s largest union, called staff cuts “devastating.” He cited the dismantling of research and development offices at labs across the country and the firing of employees who signed a letter of dissent opposing EPA cuts. Relaxed enforcement and cutting staff Many of Zeldin's changes aren't in effect yet. It takes time to propose new rules, get public input and finalize rollbacks. It's much faster to cut grants and ease up on enforcement, and Trump's EPA is doing both. The number of new civil environmental actions is roughly one-fifth what it was in the first eight months of the Biden administration, according to the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project. “You can effectively do a lot of deregulation if you just don’t do enforcement,” said Leif Fredrickson, visiting assistant professor of history at the University of Montana.Hirsch said the number of legal filings isn't the best way to judge enforcement because they require work outside of the EPA and can bog staff down with burdensome legal agreements. She said the EPA is “focused on efficiently resolving violations and achieving compliance as quickly as possible” and not making demands beyond what the law requires.EPA's cuts have been especially hard on climate change programs and environmental justice, the effort to address chronic pollution that typically is worse in minority and poor communities. Both were Biden priorities. Zeldin dismissed staff and canceled billions in grants for projects that fell under the “diversity, equity and inclusion” umbrella, a Trump administration target.He also spiked a $20 billion “green bank” set up under Biden’s landmark climate law to fund qualifying clean energy projects. Zeldin argued the fund was a scheme to funnel money to Democrat-aligned organizations with little oversight — allegations a federal judge rejected. Pat Parenteau, an environmental law expert and former director of the Environmental Law School at Vermont Law & Graduate School, said the EPA's shift under Trump left him with little optimism for what he called “the two most awful crises in the 21st century” — biodiversity loss and climate disruption.“I don’t see any hope for either one,” he said. “I really don’t. And I’ll be long gone, but I think the world is in just for absolute catastrophe.”The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environmentCopyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.