POLB’s Mario Cordero on Leadership, Legacy, and the Future of Maritime Trade

As he steps down after eight years as CEO, Mario Cordero reflects on transforming the Port of Long Beach into a global model for sustainable growth and environmental stewardship. In conversation with VX News, Cordero recounts launching the Green Port Policy, co-developing the Clean Air Action Plan with the Port of LA, and championing Green Shipping Corridors with Shanghai and Singapore—initiatives that redefined the port’s mission beyond cargo throughput.

Weighing in on energy security, hydrogen’s potential, and the importance of continued federal investment in ports, Cordero calls on collaboration as “essential for U.S. competitiveness.” His advice to his successor: lead by example, lead without fear, and lead with integrity.

“[Regionally] the Port contributes over 543,000 jobs in Los Angeles and Orange counties. We are an economic engine.” — Mario Cordero

Mario, after eight years at the helm of the Port of Long Beach, you recently announced your retirement from your role as CEO. Reflecting on your tenure, which includes some of the most challenging and rewarding periods in the Port’s history, share with our readers what you regard as signature achievements.

Well, first of all, David, thank you for the kind invitation. In pondering that question, there are two things I’d highlight under the caption of a “landlord port.” I’ve always hoped that our legacy would be to make a difference, other than simply collecting a check from our tenants. Let me explain that a little bit by going back to when I was first appointed as a Harbor Commissioner. Then, I thought one of the things we needed to do–in 2003–was to address the air quality issue and the industry mindset that environmental initiatives were not popular. People thought it wasn’t our responsibility, they assumed it would be too costly, and believed it would negatively affect commercial growth.

One of our key legacies as a landlord port is that we made a difference. Not just by talking about cargo volume, but by asking: What are we doing as a port authority to address the needs of the community and the surrounding neighborhoods?

That’s where the concept of the Green Port Policy was born. I actually just returned from Shanghai two days ago, and it was comforting to hear the level of buy-in there around the “green corridor” conversation, and the recognition that the Port of Long Beach has been a leader in green port initiatives. That’s something I’m very proud of.

The second legacy I’d mention is what we can do as a port authority to give back to the community and nonprofits. I’ll always remember my first (media) interview after (then-Mayor) Beverly O’Neill appointed me to the Harbor Commission in July 2003. It was with the publisher of the Press-Telegram, which, at that time, had a fairly conservative mindset. The first question he asked me was, “Have you ever practiced maritime law?” My response was, “Name me the last commissioner who did.” Of course, he didn’t have an answer.

The second question was, “What do you hope to accomplish?” I told him, “Rather than the community coming to the port, the port needs to go out to the community.” That statement reflected the reality at the time—there were only a few environmentalists coming to the Port of Long Beach (more so in Los Angeles because of the China Shipping lawsuit) to complain about air quality issues. 

So, in summation, I’d hope that the big change we made here at the Port of Long Beach is that we’re about more than just cargo growth or TEU volume. We’re about sustainable development, and that touches on how we approach infrastructure projects, air quality, and water quality. 

That’s the legacy I hope people appreciate: that the Port of Long Beach was the first in the nation—and remains among the most committed—to embedding sustainability into its very structure.

Surely, former Congressman and California State Legislator Alan Lowenthal appreciates your answer…

Alan was actually the one who took me out to lunch in the spring of 2003 and asked if I was interested in being appointed to the Harbor Commission. So, the success I’ve had in that area, I attribute to Alan Lowenthal.

Moving on, the Port of Long Beach has often been described as an economic engine, both for California and nationally, especially in combination with the Port of Los Angeles. For our readers, contextualize the POLB’s growth under your leadership.

To begin, and this ties back to the first question, commercially we’ve had great success at the Port of Long Beach, and across the San Pedro Bay complex as a whole. Even in today’s world of geopolitical uncertainty, tariffs, and shifting trade dynamics, we’ve seen 6% growth this year. Who would have thought that, given the volatility in tariff policy and the uncertainty that surrounded our industry?

Now, I’m not overly optimistic that those numbers will hold through the fourth quarter—but still, when you consider the scale, it’s remarkable. The Port of Long Beach supports 1.1 million jobs in California alone, directly and indirectly. Nationally, it supports 2.7 million jobs throughout the supply chain. We saw this vividly during the COVID-19 supply-chain crisis. When the White House wanted to address those issues, where did they go? 

They came here, to this complex, to have daily, substantive conversations about reducing the impact of supply-chain disruptions. Regionally, the port contributes over 543,000 jobs in Los Angeles and Orange counties. We are an economic engine—and that’s precisely why we’re able to give back through community contributions and the various initiatives our commission has prioritized over the years.

Could you address the impacts of the shifting federal and global trade landscape, and specifically, the vulnerability of the supply chain you’ve built?

To the word “uncertainty,” I’ve said: we’ve gone through radical uncertainty. Just to give you an example, in my whole career, whether as a practicing attorney, as Chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission, or of course in this position, staff will tell you I always have classical music playing in the background in my office. I grew up playing classical piano, so music has always been around me. You know what I have on in my office now, for the most part? CNBC. 

I have the TV on, because I don’t know what the next news…the next breaking news—is going to be. That gives you a sense of the radical uncertainty we’re experiencing right now. I will say, we’ve seen worse scenarios. Back in April and May, we were talking about a 20% loss in volume because of the dynamics with China. That hasn’t happened. But we’re still not out of this, and there’s no final resolution to the trade discussions between China and the United States.

I’m trying to be optimistic that there will be—and to bring some pragmatism to that conversation. But in the meantime, we’re seeing a lot of uncertainty. Perhaps even some change in globalized trade routes. Certainly, I think the American consumer is going to experience higher prices, and they’re starting to see that already. Just look at what you’ll pay for coffee at Starbucks in the coming months. So, it’s a rather interesting period in terms of these geopolitical discussions and their impact on trade.

As a prominent North American port leader, what was the significance of the Shanghai event you attended for the POLB as well as other U.S. ports?

The significance was the progress that’s been achieved in the Green Corridor conversation, or better said, the partnership between the Port of Long Beach, the Port of Los Angeles, and the Port of Shanghai. It’s amazing, and you being such a leader on this subject through VerdeXchange, could you imagine a decade ago that China would be talking about green methanol, about zero-emission fuels? That China would be a leader in wind energy, by far? That China would be a leader in renewable energy?

Now, a third of the cars on the road in Shanghai are zero-emission, lithium-battery cars. And I think that’s important, because despite the geopolitical debates and divisions we have in the United States today about green technology, which are very real and challenging, the fact of the matter is this: it’s been embraced by Asia, by the EU, and we even had representatives from Africa. The train has left the station in terms of what we need to do as an industry to better this world in regard to harmful emissions.

The takeaway there is that the green corridor we’ve been talking about is now a reality. Now, I will say it’s going to take some time before we see a significant number of transoceanic, net-zero-emission vessels, but at Long Beach, just last week, the first COSCO Shipping vessel running on green methanol arrived here at the Port of Long Beach. Another one is coming in a couple of weeks, and that’s just the beginning. I’m very optimistic that in the next five years, and certainly in the next decade, this industry is really going to make a difference with regard to energy transition.

Certainly, advancing the energy transition is both Long Beach’s legacy and your legacy. How, then, are federal energy and environmental policies impacting the aforementioned? 

Well, number one, the question for the United States really should be about energy security. Set aside the debate on climate change or decarbonization. When you look at the dynamics of China as a country, here in the United States, the big conversation right now is data centers, AI, and the tripling, in the near future, of energy demand…perhaps even thirtyfold in the next decade.

What are those energy resources going to be? It has to be a wide portfolio. Whether it’s renewable, modular nuclear technology, fossil fuel, or natural gas. That’s the reality we have to accept in this country. The reason we’re exploring renewable energy and wind energy is because, if you look at China, think about this: Governor Newsom has a vision of 25 gigawatts of offshore wind energy by 2045, and that’s a great vision. At the Port of Long Beach, we’ve stepped up to the plate to be part of that. 

But when you think about energy security, China today has more than 30 gigawatts of offshore wind energy. And multiply that by three or four times when you look at their overall wind portfolio. Now true, on one hand, that’s an emissions-reduction project. But on the other hand, it’s energy security. I think that’s what we have to talk about: resilience and security to get buy-in from those who question the climate change agenda.

Because, if nothing else, we have to understand what the energy demand in this country requires. And for anyone who doesn’t quite grasp that, just pick up any publication on any given day, read about the data center challenge. Let me mention here that Mr. Musk is investing in a megacenter data facility in Tennessee, and on the chips required for that data center, he’s spending $18 billion. Just on chips. 

Imagine if we could have just $1 billion to help us with our cargo-handling equipment issues, to meet our goals here….But that’s what’s coming.

Following up on your answer and because of your international prominence, what’s your view on China’s aggressiveness in taking ownership control of major ports globally? 

Well, number one, you have to understand the history of China. There’s a great book written by Amy Chua—she’s a lawyer who, at least at one point, taught at Yale Law School. Her first book was entitled World on Fire. I think it came out in the mid-2000s—I can’t remember exactly—but I read it, and to understand this dynamic I speak to, you must understand the dominance that China had centuries ago in trade. Now China wants to get back to that status. The last century could be characterized by foreign dominance, and China wants to ensure that never happens again. So, absolutely, whether it’s through One Belt, One Road or China 2025, they want to secure dominance in the international maritime industry. And to do that, of course, ownership in major ports is a goal.

On the other hand, if you’re the US, it seems to me that not only are we cognizant of that, but it’s something we need to really step up to the plate on. I’ve been an advocate that the federal and state governments should be widely invested in port authorities. Not just the Port of Long Beach, but across the board, and I think we have a great association which we’ve been able to build over the last several years—I’m talking about the American Association of Port Authorities—under the leadership of the current CEO.

Despite criticism of the lack of proper investment in the maritime industry by this country, I will say that, in the last couple of years, the federal government has become more cognizant of what we need to do and invest in our ports. That’s the way to meet the challenge that we have in the global arena on this question.

In terms of energy security, you omitted hydrogen—and that raises a question about the recent federal decision to defund ARCHES. Speak to how this challenges ARCHES' ambitions for Southern California.

Well, number one, ARCHES had great potential as $1.2 billion in funding through the ARCHES coalition, obtained from the Biden administration. The Port of Long Beach was the first port to come in with a partnership. When it was brought to me, I didn’t hesitate for one minute to join the ARCHES coalition.

Number two: hydrogen has so much potential in this country, and I think it’s a mistake to backtrack from investment in hydrogen. Particularly given that every major fossil-fuel or oil company has hydrogen in its portfolio.

Now, the debate is: is it gray hydrogen, blue hydrogen, or green hydrogen? But we’re never going to get to green hydrogen unless we start with hydrogen. Let me say, first of all, I commend my environmental advocate friends for being advocates for people like the David Abels of the world, and the environmentalists who have been pushing this transition to sustainable development for many years. But we also have to have what my wife and I used to tell our kids, who are now adults, delayed gratification. This stuff doesn’t happen overnight.

That’s why I’m concerned about stepping back from the inertia—the momentum—we’ve built for hydrogen investment at this point. I think that’s a mistake. Because if there’s ever a source of energy the United States has been blessed to have, it’s natural gas, and we need to take advantage of that. One of my priorities when I came to the Port of Long Beach in 2017 as CEO was to move forward with an LNG bunkering fuel station. I had the support from the commission and from Washington, because what was coming down the road were LNG vessels. But unfortunately, this became a political debate. The political will wasn’t there to support it, because it was a fossil-fuel derivative. And I understand that.

I think we made a mistake—do you want a bunker of low-sulfur diesel arriving here, or would you rather have a 90 to 95 percent reduction in emissions with an LNG vessel, as a transitory era step toward green methanol and other clean fuels?

Throughout your tenure, the Port of Long Beach has been a national proving ground for collaboration through programs such as the Clean Trucks Program and Pier B, among others. How important has institutional and community collaboration been to the many successful initiatives you advanced?

First of all, you’ve got to continue with that collaboration culture because whether it’s the Green Port Policy, the Clean Air Action Plan -- the milestone policy we adopted with the Port of Los Angeles in 2006—this transition and transformation of those dirty, polluting trucks on the 710 would not have happened but for the buy-in from the trucking firms and the industry. We came together and set some reasonable goals. That collaboration has to continue, and even more so given the political environment we’re in.

As a state, California should be proud to say we’re the fourth largest economy in the world—in the world, so for those who question the politics or the economic priorities of California, all I have to say is: where are you on that economic ladder? We’re number four. But I also remind state leaders, it’s not all because of Silicon Valley. International trade is a big part of that. We just talked about the job numbers here. The economic engine of the ports is vital.

Last, I’ll say this: my strongest recommendation is that we maximize collaboration between the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. In many areas, we’ve had great collaboration over the years; the Clean Air Action Plan is a perfect example. But, we also have to recognize the competitive environment we’re in…The Walmarts, Targets, and Home Depots of the world have choices now. They don’t have to come here to San Pedro Bay. They could go to Savannah, Charleston, or Houston. My colleagues at those ports have done great work and made major investments.

So it’s a very competitive arena. And for the San Pedro Bay ports, rather than trying to be even friendly competitors, we should maximize our collaboration. In coming together to address issues of mutual concern as a gateway. I’m not talking about a merger, but about working together. Because one thing I learned in Washington during those six years, David: people from the outside don’t see the Port of Long Beach or the Port of LA—they see the Southern California Gateway. It makes no difference to them.

To reaffirm what I just said, look at the report (Los Angeles) Mayor Garcetti commissioned when he was in office, issued in October 2018. It was an administrative survey prepared by a consultant. There’s a whole chapter of recommendations regarding higher-level collaboration between the two ports. That, to me, should be prioritized as we move forward.

Southern California is just three years away from hosting the 2028 Olympics, with Long Beach positioning itself as a major venue. What kind of return on public investment can the region realistically expect from LA28—in terms of tourism, infrastructure, and the international trade that flows through the Port?

Well, first of all, the assertiveness we’ve had on that issue, I have to give credit to our mayor, Rex Richardson, and the City Council. We were a player back in the ’80s for the Olympics, and we’re certainly going to be a player this time around. Our position now, as the Port of Long Beach, is to be supportive of the events that are going to occur here.

I had the pleasure and honor of traveling with Mayor Richardson to the Olympics in Paris, just to observe the practices and operations there. We met with the Port of Paris, which is now part of a greater merger of French ports. They’re much smaller than we are, but they were a sponsor of the Olympics in their own right, so I think it’s a great opportunity for the Port of Long Beach to work closely with the City, because the City of Long Beach is so blessed to have a port. When you think about the economic engines, this is a city of about 494,000 people that has one of the most significant ports in the world.

Yes, over the years, there’s been criticism of the port complex on environmental fronts—and rightfully so—but we need to embrace this port, because it’s a significant player in putting Long Beach on the map. When you have an international event like the Olympics, we are an international port. The collaboration with our Mayor and the City Council is going to be of utmost importance. It’ll put Long Beach not only on the international map, but it will again place the Port of Long Beach as a major global player, known for its economic strength and its role in advancing international trade.

Coming to a close, what message might you share with your successor regarding the Port’s priorities at the intersection of climate policy, trade, politics, and community activism?

Well, the message for my successor—I just spoke at the AAPA Conference in Quebec, Canada, a few weeks ago. They asked me to get on stage and say a few words about retirement, and I said to my colleagues, there are three things that I think are very important.

One: Lead by example.

Two: Lead without fear. In this position, a lot of times, people aren’t going to be happy with your decisions. You can’t lead with fear. If I had led with fear, the Green Port Policy would never have evolved—because it would have been easier to sit comfortably and not touch that subject back in 2003 or 2004.

And three—and this is more important than ever today—lead with integrity. At the end of the day, I sleep better at night because of the ethics I’ve displayed and mandated. People can debate your decisions or where you are on the political spectrum, but we have to learn to respect other people’s positions. 

You sleep better at night if you always act with integrity. People can dispute your policies, but if they respect your integrity, that goes a long way toward making this a better world. Now, more than ever, it’s important.

Mario, only because of time and space—let’s close with: what’s next for you?

Well, let me just say this. There was a time when I was asking myself the same question…what did I really want to do with my career? And then, out of the clear blue, I got a call from the Obama White House: “Would you be interested in being considered for appointment to the Federal Maritime Commission?”

Now, David, you remember the synergy back then under the Obama administration. How would I say no to that? Of course, I said yes, I’d be interested. And after all the hoops you have to jump through, I did become the candidate for that appointment.

The reason I share that story is because my wife and I have been very blessed—blessed with good health at our age, and blessed by the opportunities that have come our way over the years. So, to the question of what’s next? 

God has been very good to me, and who knows what door will open next. I’m looking forward to doing a little traveling, taking some time for myself. Maybe going out to the desert, being still, and seeing what happens….My wife says to me sometimes, “You leave things a lot to chance. You just go where the wind blows.” And there’s some truth to that. Sometimes you can’t do that, but there’s also comfort in it. 

Because, at the end of the day, it’s about faith—and if you have faith, things tend to work out.

Mario, thank you for this interview.