Journal of Commerce flags port investments North Charleston

South Carolina Ports’ latest move at North Charleston is a dredging study, not a finished construction project. On Aug. 28, SC Ports and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Charleston District signed a feasibility study agreement to examine adding depth to the Cooper River approach serving North Charleston Terminal, which is now maintained at 48 feet. Charleston Harbor was deepened to 52 feet in 2022 up to Wando and Leatherman terminals, leaving the North Charleston stretch as the remaining segment outside that full depth. The Journal of Commerce highlighted that project in late-August coverage as part of a wider run of port reporting that also touched peak-season parcel planning, U.S.-Canada trade friction, oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz and new investment themes in North Carolina. Its recent port coverage described terminals and inland facilities as infrastructure assets tied to cargo resilience, industrial development and regional jobs. (scspa.com) ### Why is North Charleston still being dredged if Charleston Harbor was already deepened? Charleston Harbor reached 52 feet in 2022, but SC Ports said the channel segment between Leatherman Terminal and North Charleston Terminal remains at 48 feet. The new study is aimed at bringing that final stretch to the harbor’s federally authorized 52-foot depth. (joc.com) Micah Mallace, SC Ports’ president and chief executive, said in the port authority’s Aug. 28 statement that “deepening this final stretch” would support the port’s plan to modernize and enhance North Charleston Terminal. The port authority said completing that work would allow all of its container terminals to handle the biggest ships at any tide. (scspa.com) ### What did the Journal of Commerce focus on in that coverage? The Journal of Commerce article published Aug. 28 said SC Ports wants to dredge the Cooper River from its current 48-foot depth so North Charleston Terminal can handle larger ships. The publication framed the project as part of continuing port-infrastructure work on the U.S. East Coast. (scspa.com) Its broader port file around Sept. 1 ranged beyond Charleston. Journal of Commerce port pages described coverage spanning North Carolina, Florida, Shanghai and Singapore, with recurring attention to terminal construction, dredging, hinterland connectivity, disruption and cargo flow. ### How does North Carolina fit into the same story? North Carolina Ports’ strategy has centered in part on breakbulk and project cargo rather than trying to match the container scale of larger East Coast gateways. (joc.com) A Journal of Commerce report published Aug. 20 said a recent economic report found breakbulk and project cargo could create opportunities in the state without having to “chase the container scale” of Norfolk, Charleston or Savannah. (joc.com) That matters because the reporting tied port investment to regional economic planning, not only to box-ship competition. The example from North Carolina complements the Charleston dredging story: one port system is pursuing deeper water for larger vessels, while another is emphasizing inland breakbulk facilities and project cargo. (joc.com) ### Why were Hormuz and trade tensions mentioned alongside U.S. port projects? The Strait of Hormuz appeared in recent Journal of Commerce coverage because geopolitical disruption has affected carrier routing, risk calculations and port volumes. In an Aug. 21 report, the publication said months of attacks, ceasefires and interrupted transits left liners reluctant to return ships, crews and cargo to the Persian Gulf too quickly; DP World-operated Jebel Ali reported a 90% drop in volume in the second quarter. (joc.com) That reporting sat alongside North American port stories because shipping operators are managing local infrastructure decisions and global disruption at the same time. The Journal of Commerce’s maritime coverage explicitly tracks container flows, ports, terminals and end-to-end logistics across those linked markets. ### What happens next at North Charleston? Congress authorized the Charleston upper-harbor study in the Water Resources Development Act of 2024, and federal funding was included in fiscal 2026 appropriations, SC Ports said. (joc.com) The agreement signed Aug. 28 starts the Army Corps’ engineering, environmental and economic analysis of the proposed deepening between Leatherman and North Charleston terminals. (prod.int.joc.com) Lt. Col. Todd Mainwaring, commander of the Army Corps’ Charleston District, said the district would evaluate options for improving navigation in the next phase. Any actual dredging decision would follow that federal study process, rather than the Aug. 28 agreement itself. (scspa.com)