I believe no one doubts the level of our ports, especially the Port of La Luz and Las Palmas, which is evidently in one of the highest positions within the port system.
After almost two years at the head of the Port Authority of Las Palmas, Beatriz Calzada takes stock of her management and the main challenges facing the port. The lack of personnel, the need for more resources, and the transformation of the port into a strategic hub for intercontinental trade are some of the topics she analyzes in this interview. She also addresses key projects such as FP Dual, infrastructure expansion, and the future of offshore wind energy.
After almost two years in office, what has surprised you most about the Port of Las Palmas?
I was prepared for something very complex with a lot of activity, but what has pleasantly surprised me is the sheer amount and variety of activity in the port. The professionalism and international recognition of many of the companies operating here are impressive. I have also been struck by the lack of personnel, both in the private sector and in the Port Authority. That’s why we have launched the FP Dual project, to meet the demand for highly specialized professions with a promising future for our people.
On the Port Authority side, there is also a shortage of staff and structure. This port needs a much larger structure, which is why we are requesting to move to Group 1, so that we can have a structure that truly responds to the needs of a port of this level.
Speaking of this, one of your objectives is for the Port of Las Palmas to be included in Group 1 of State Ports. How is this process progressing?
We are preparing the reports requested to justify this request. The goal is to provide the port with a larger structure that allows us to manage the number of services we offer. Being a multi-purpose port, the largest in Spain, we need more human resources and tools to improve digitalization and bureaucratic efficiency. The final decision lies with the Treasury and the Council of Ministers, but we trust that State Ports will see our proposal as viable.
When you have such a variety of services, you need people focused on each one to provide the right response and be much more efficient.
I believe no one doubts the level of our ports, especially the Port of La Luz and Las Palmas, which is evidently in one of the highest positions within the port system.
In recent years, several projects have been up in the air, such as the octopus farm, the Totisa power plant, the cruise terminal, or the offshore wind energy space. Where do they stand?
Each has its own pace. The octopus farm is still in the hands of the Canary Islands Government and the Ministry, awaiting the Environmental Impact Declaration. The company has told us they haven’t discarded the project but are reconsidering some aspects while still betting on it.
The Santa Catalina cruise terminal will be completed by the end of the year and will be the largest in Europe, an international benchmark. Additionally, it will be a sustainable and energy-efficient terminal. It has been designed with many considerations, especially our trade winds, to minimize the need for air conditioning, which is very positive given the latest advances.
In addition, the Fuerteventura terminal and the two Lanzarote terminals have already been completed.
Will this increase the volume of cruises, or are we already at full capacity?
In Las Palmas, we are talking about being able to operate four cruise ships simultaneously. Right now, we sometimes have four, but some are smaller or require fewer services. With this, we will be able to accommodate four with absolute ease.
And what about the Totisa project?
Regarding Totisa, I always say the same thing. Some people deemed it viable for the port in 2019, and the process for granting the concession continues. To this day, I haven’t even assessed the project myself because it was already evaluated at the time. What the port absolutely needs is to ensure we have enough energy for cold ironing—the electrification of our docks—to advance in decarbonization. As of today, no one guarantees us that, so we need someone to assure us that we will have sufficient energy without affecting the rest of the island’s system.
That’s the first issue. Additionally, tied to this, we must be able to supply alternative fuels until we reach 100% green fuel. There is a big debate about which fuel this will be.
This port has one of the highest capacities for supplying biofuels. We have companies here that are leaders in this field, but the globally accepted alternative fuel is liquefied natural gas, and we must at least be able to supply it.
We continue working as if the Totisa project were not happening. If we cannot generate it, we must be able to store it for supply. Those are our challenges. As we resolve these two issues, we will be in a much better position. We must be able to address these two elements because we cannot afford to lose routes.
Why is there so much opposition to the project?
There has been significant mobilization against it. Additionally, the Cabildo and the Las Palmas de Gran Canaria City Council have publicly opposed it, which hasn’t happened with the Totisa project in Tenerife, even though it is practically the same.
In the case of offshore wind energy, it seems there have been advances in the land allocated for it. Is that correct?
Regarding offshore wind energy, we have already recovered land to develop an auxiliary industry that supports the sector’s growth in the Canary Islands.
There were two plots of land—one already had a granted concession, while the other was put up for tender but initially received no bids. For the latter, a company, Boluda & Suárez, submitted a proposal for direct allocation, which is now being processed.
These are two separate plots, but it makes sense for them to eventually merge, which was already anticipated when the tender was issued and included in the terms. Ultimately, the port must make as much land as possible available for offshore wind energy development. This way, the port will be able to provide around 170,000 square meters.
Additionally, the area must have deep waters and an adequate zone—not just a wide entry channel—to accommodate the large vessels that frequently arrive here. These ships, which we regularly see, are of considerable size and require ample space for loading and unloading.
Can you confirm that State Ports has decided that the strategic ports for offshore wind development are A Coruña, Castellón, and Las Palmas?
That’s what we’ve been told. There is no official communication, but in various forums, those three ports have been mentioned as key. We are prepared to lead this development and attract international investors.
Regardless of that, we understood that since the first planned offshore wind project in Spain is in the southeast of Gran Canaria, the best-positioned port is the Port of Las Palmas for many reasons—mainly because there is already a project beginning to develop under direct allocation with experienced operators. This, in turn, is attracting other international operators with even more expertise.
It’s a very serious project because we are not only talking about supporting what is being developed in the southeast of Gran Canaria. We are talking about supporting any potential developments, particularly in our geographical surroundings, especially along the African coast.
And what about the construction projects?
In this regard, the expansion of the Commercial Breakwater at the Port of Puerto del Rosario has been resolved. This was a stalled project, but we are now in the awarding process, and we hope the work can begin as soon as possible.
We are also finalizing the expansion of the fourth phase of the Esfinge Breakwater at Nelson Mandela, which we expect to be operational by summer. Additionally, we have already launched the expansion of the Reina Sofía Breakwater. This will also generate a new platform and additional berthing lines, another long-pending project that is now moving forward.
Moving on to another topic. The Port of Las Palmas aims to become an intercontinental commercial hub. How is this progressing?
Our challenge is to establish ourselves as a key port for connections between Europe, Africa, and the Americas—especially South America—for those looking to transport goods to Africa through a secure port. We already have established routes to Africa, which make us highly attractive, and we also benefit from a privileged geographical position, legal security, and tax advantages.
We have initiated contacts with South American companies interested in operating from here, and we hope to finalize more agreements in the coming months.
How does the new tariff policy promoted by the Trump administration affect this situation?
We need to stay alert and see what ultimately happens. These tariffs will force exporters to redirect their shipments to other regions, which presents both a challenge and an opportunity for us.
One of the industry’s concerns is the possible loss of connectivity due to the ETS system. How is the negotiation progressing for a specific application in the Canary Islands?
It’s a complex issue. We have been working alongside the Government of the Canary Islands and the Port Authority of Santa Cruz de Tenerife to demonstrate the real risk that the current ETS system poses to the Canary Islands. Brussels has given us until 2025 to provide more data. What we cannot afford is to lose connectivity, so we are focused on proving this with figures and studies. Our goal is for Canary Islands ports to be exempt from the emissions tax or at least have an application adapted to our reality.
This is what is making us move faster. There is a real risk of losing certain routes, and we need to be able to replace them with others. That’s why we are also working on increasing berthing capacity.
There has been talk about the possibility of Canarian business owners acquiring a stake in Naviera Armas. What do you know about this?
This is not the first time it has been proposed, but it seems that this time more progress has been made. Having a shipping company with Canarian roots would help ensure maritime connectivity and maintain essential routes, even if they are not profitable in the short term. It is an issue we will continue to monitor closely. It would be good news for the Canary Islands.
If we have—or at least we like to think we have—local people involved, people who care about the Canary Islands and understand its reality, they will recognize that some routes must be maintained even if they are not economically profitable. So, if this eventually becomes a reality, it will always be good news.
Speaking of connectivity, what is happening with the route to Tarfaya?
The Moroccan government remains interested, and Spain has allocated two million euros in the 2025 Business Plan to study its feasibility. We are now analyzing the necessary infrastructure and security measures required to make this connection a reality.
Is this related to the Tarfaya route?
The Tarfaya route is not simple. There is still interest from the State. In fact, I see much more interest from the State, and this has been reflected in the 2025 business plan, where we have had to allocate around two million euros to begin work on assessing its potential viability. The Moroccan government also appears to be very interested in this route.
In the Canary Islands, opinions are divided depending on the perspective—some see it as an opportunity, while others view it as a challenge.
As a port, our role is to make entry through Fuerteventura viable. This involves not only the Port Authority but also all the relevant administrations responsible for setting up a Border Inspection Post (PIF), along with all the necessary security and control measures, including Customs and Health inspections. All of this requires significant investment, so we have started with the port-related aspects.
Then, there is the business sector, which has shown interest in developing this project.
To conclude, would you like to continue leading the Port Authority after this term?
The port sector is fascinating—it’s a world I have always been passionate about. I believe I convey this enthusiasm whenever I speak about it.
I find the port industry highly attractive, and this role has been a unique opportunity to manage a Port Authority with immense economic significance for our region and the Spanish port system as a whole. This has been one of the biggest challenges of my political career.
However, political appointments depend on many factors. If, in the future, I am considered the right person to continue, I will evaluate it at that time. Meanwhile, my focus remains on fostering the port’s growth and strengthening its strategic role.
What is the status of the port museum project and FP Dual?
We are making progress on both fronts. The port museum is an exciting project with great potential value. Regarding FP Dual, we are securing commitments from companies to ensure its success. Our aim is for this training to meet industry needs and qualify more people for high-demand professions.
We are advancing in two areas. First, in regulated education through FP Dual, always with strong business support—because without company involvement, FP Dual would not succeed. That’s what we are working on.
Second, we are also working on professional certification programs. This is a more complex area, but we have proposed initiatives and discussed them with training providers. Our goal is for the Port Authority to support all non-formal training efforts that contribute to workforce qualification. Many companies here are doing outstanding work in this regard.
Finally, how would you describe the relationship with the Port Authority of Santa Cruz de Tenerife?
The relationship is not only good—it is excellent. And this applies at different levels: at the presidential level, among executives, and among mid-level technicians. I believe we have very strong relations, despite the competition between ports. In fact, the structure of the Spanish port system encourages this competition.
Although there is competition among ports, what matters most is that the Canary Islands have a strong and complementary port system. There is no reason for a ship to go to Huelva if it can receive services in Las Palmas or Santa Cruz. We must work together to retain all possible traffic.
Would a single Port Authority for the Canary Islands be viable?
I prefer not to comment on that. However, I do believe that we must work toward having the strongest possible system and complement each other effectively.
The key is for each port to reinforce its role within the Spanish port system and to collaborate when necessary to strengthen the Canary Islands as a logistics and commercial hub.
