The following is part of a dialogue between The Power of Place and Dr. James Wang regarding the new Shanghai port development project.

The Power of Place
We have attached a part of a Space Imaging/Ikonos Satellite browse image at the confluence of the Huang Pu and the Chang Jiang. Our question concerns the area circled in red on the Chang Jiang. Is this the main port for Pudong, or part of the main port? Or is the main port servicing Pudong in particular still farther south and east? How much of Pudong's main port is actually on the Huang Pu? The Pudong planner in our program makes the point of saying they have their own port, not in old Shanghai, but presumably not in Nanhui either.

Dr. James Wang
The area you circled is Wai(4)-gao(1)-qiao(2), the new terminal areas along Changjiang in Pudong District, and at the same time, part of Shanghai Port and being operated by Shanghai Port Group (i.e. Shanghai Port Authority). But administratively speaking, Waigaoqiao is considered as an autonomy - Shanghai Waigaoqiao Free Trade Zone, the largest FTZ in China, set up in 1990, directly under the municipal government of Shanghai. There are currently 6 berths in operation, a total capacity of 2.4 million TEU. 3 more berths to be built will add up 2 million TEU of container handling capacity. But due to conservative and dated design standards, the actual handling capacity is larger. The WGQ terminal has deeper water (-11m~-12m) than Jungonglu, the SICT terminal, but not as deep as Yangshan harbor.

Below are two paragraphs from a Web site regarding the port operation in Waigaoqiao:
"Waigaoqiao Port lies about 7 km east to Wu Song Port and 85km west to the estuary of Yangtze River. It has 6 container berths now. The coastline of the quay is 1800 meters long. The container laydown area is 560,000 sqm, with annual handling capacity of 2.4 million TEU. The port is equipped with advanced facilities special for containers and with operational management system. Waigaoqiao Port has opened more than 20 regular international container-ship lines. From January to September 2001, the port can handle 2.03 million TEU, which accounting for one fourth of the handling capacity of Shanghai Port. At the end of tenth five-year plan, the handling capacity of Waigaoqiao Port will reach 6 million TEU, accounting for 60% of that in Shanghai.

"In order to meet the fast development of Waigaoqiao Free Trade Zone container transportation and the requirement to be the logistics center, Phase II of Waigaoqiao Port, which is increased by 2 million TEU has been completed and in operation. 2 container berths of Phase III and 4 container berths of Phase IV will be completed in the following years. The construction of Wuhaogao expanding project has already begun. Wuhaogao is a deepwater port, which is 3km away from Xin Development Company. The designing annual handling capacity is above 60 million MT (including 5 million standard containers). The port will be able to berth container ships of third and fourth generation and become the new hub of international shipping in Shanghai. "

The Power of Place
We are still confused about some things. Are the Jungonglu port (SICT terminal) and the Wu Song Port close to one another? Are they both on the Chang Jiang to the west of the confluence with the Huang Pu? In our original production, PROFESSOR CHENG LU said, "We developed the Pudong Area so that it had its own port, its own air terminal, its own railway facilities. In that way you would not need to have tunnels or bridges linking it to the city proper." But it sounds like there was some kind of port already in Pudong, where the new Waigaoqiao port is now. Is this correct? How much of Shanghai's shipping went through this Pudong area prior to 1990 (in very rough terms)? In other words, was this a significant port already, and the fact that it is now in Pudong just makes it easier to get shipping to and from Pudong?

Dr. James Wang
(1) Yes, Jun-gong-lu or Jun Gong Road is a locality name, referring to part of terminals near Wu Song Ku (Ku means Mouth). (2) Before 1990, NO container was handled at Waigaoqiao. In fact, before 1995, very limited boxes were handled by Shanghai port as a whole, even in Wu Song Ku area. Waigaoqiao, when I visited 4 years ago, had very limited business too, as no major international shipping line was using it. The major change happened two years ago, when the Shanghai Port Authority did two things: (a) allocating more vessels to WGQ than to SICT, and (b) WGQ charged less (50% or less) than SICT. The reasons behind are (1) SICT is a 50-50 JV between Shanghai Port Authority and Hutchison Whampao, and Shanghai Port Authority has the vessel allocation right; (2) while WGQ is 100% owned by Shanghai Port Authority; (3) SICT should pay land premium, while WGQ does not. As a result, in 2001-2002, WGQ saw a 50%+ growth, while SICT at Jun-gong-lu encountered the first negative growth in the last 8 years. (3) for more port evolution process in Shanghai up to 2000, see attached jpg files. You may find all the names mentioned above on these maps.

Click on images to expand.

The Power of Place
Thanks to your excellent descriptions and maps, we are beginning to understand. Most of Shanghai's tonnage was not loaded and unloaded on the Chang Jiang west of the mouth of the Huang Pu. Until recently, the busiest terminals were actually ON the Huang Pu, farther to the south before 1991 and more in the north, nearer the Chang Jiang after 1991. The recent dredging of the harbor to bring in these larger ships actually occurred well downstream, in the very mouth of the Chang Jiang near the sea. Many ships came up through this deeper channel and into the Huang Pu, where the water also must have been deep enough for some containerized ships in the case of the SICT. But more cargo now is loaded/unloaded on the Chang Jiang at Waigaoqiao. The Huang Pu is restricted in the size of the very largest ships it can accommodate. So now more ships go to Waigaoqiao, but even more will eventually go-Shanghai hopes-to the very deep-water port in the Yang Shan Islands. Do I have this basically correct?

Dr. James Wang:
Yes, your understanding is correct.