Short sea shipping in the US?


#142

Good info. Can you link to that? Not disputing, just would like to become more aware of the issue in general.


#143

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfo


#144

Moving cargo by truck and rail is something the United States is very good at.

Look at the cost of diesel in the US. Our highways are expansive and less crowded. Cut throat capitalism has kept costs low and owner-operators easy to replace.

Rail is preferred because the distances across the United States are much larger than across Europe. Most of Europe is less than 400 nm from the sea. The United States is far bigger and further from the sea.

Why use slower and less flexible fancy ships when roads, rails or barges can do it cheaper/faster/better?


#145

" But, as you all have said, it cannot be done as long as greed is stronger than sense of duty to the society."
That about sums up the USA .


#146

I believe the movement of cargo by truck and rail is as good and well developed in Northwest Europe as in USA and with better safety records.

Cost of Diesel in Europe is kept high by way of duty for environmental reasons. This to encourage rail and water transport of goods and public transport of people.
The Autobahn in Germany (with free speed) and the Highway systems in the rest of NW Europe doesn’t lag behind the US in efficiency and standard of maintenance, or average speed:


As for the advantage of your cut throat capitalism over Government planning, here is one opinion:
http://ti.org/antiplanner/?p=11847
Of course you wouldn’t agree with that.

Rail transport of container is also preferred in Europe, especially for urgent delivery, but for commodities rivers and canals are the prefered way, just like in the US.

You look at distance from the coast, but is the distance from the nearest river port in US any larger than in Europe?

Besides, the rail network stretches way outside the geographical borders of the European continent. There are now direct rail link to/from China carrying containers in competition with ships and air freight.

Inland water transport is still a large factor in the US transport system, but.mainly for commodities to/from inland river ports and nearest deep sea port at the coast. This has many advantages, but also require extensive maintenance to function properly. (dredging and locks):

I don’t say that the barge train carrying grain for export should be replaced, but a modern fleet of Sea/River ships could bring manufactured goods to markets along the entire coastline and beyond. Likewise, imported goods in Containers from hub ports to smaller coastal and inland ports.

In Europe the benefit to the environment of using coastal and inland transport by water figures high on the agenda, while it appears to be $$$ that is the main concern in US??


#147

" But, as you all have said, it cannot be done as long as greed is stronger than sense of duty to the society."
Jack Ma, one of China’s most successful and richest entrepreneurs, has responded to America’s growing globalisation backlash, arguing that the superpower has benefited immensely from the process – but that it has largely squandered its wealth.

“American international companies made millions and millions of dollars from globalisation,” Ma – the founder of Alibaba, the world’s largest online retailer – told participants on the second day of Davos. “The past 30 years, companies like IBM, Cisco and Microsoft made tons of money.”

The question is: where did that money go? It was wasted, Ma explained.

“In the past 30 years, America has had 13 wars at a cost of $14.2 trillion. That’s where the money went.” He also questioned America’s decision to bankroll Wall Street after the 2008 financial crash, arguing the money would have been better spent in other areas.

“What if they had spent part of that money on building up their infrastructure, helping white-collar and blue-collar workers? You’re supposed to spend money on your own people.”

It’s not globalisation – and everything that comes along with it, like free trade and outsourcing – that’s to blame for America’s woes. It’s the way the country’s elite managed the process.

“It’s not that other countries steal American jobs; it is your strategy – that you did not distribute the money in a proper way.”


#148

+1 for Jack Ma’s summary.

The US will soon be even more isolated as China continues with One Belt One Road, having an archaic Short Sea Shipping policy will hamper it further.

http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/australia-open-to-one-belt-one-road-engagement-as-china-targets-sea-ports/


#149

The new One Belt One Road and/or new Silk Road will happen. China has been contributing money, building airports, loaning money and buying their way into countries all over the world for some time. They own the largest port on the Panama Canal and other key trade locations .They take a long view, to them a 100 years is a minute. They bide their time while others squander their national treasure on greed or wars that have no end. Look at the consolidation of the the container shipping trade that has happened in the last 3-5 years for an example of how things are going to end up.While the EU and USA destroy themselves from within China will maintain their plan. They have been around for 4000 years and have learned a thing or two.


#150

Alright, I’m calling it. I am officially reading Ombugge’s posts in Nick Kroll’s “european” voice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSZoshxXSlg


#151

In America our betters could give a shit about ‘safety records.’ This isn’t your Emerald City. Profit is all that matters.


#152

Until we in the use can get past this problem it’s a not going to happen.


#153

Could short sea and river shipping come faster than you think?:
https://www.workboat.com/news/coastal-inland-waterways/mississippi-river-ports-planning-for-new-container-services/


#154

Odd drawing of that self propelled barge. The containers are stacked higher than the aft pilothouse.


#155

Must have had the bean counters involved in the drawing then. “We can fit more cargo, they don’t have to be able to see! PROFIT, PROFIT, PROFIT!!”


#156

Autonomous maybe?? :rofl::yum:


#157

I would’ve gone with a forward house and some nice bridgewings.


#158

Different view:

A link to the site the above view is from:

Detailed look at fwrd. superstructure and bow configuration:


#159

Are they going to need unlimited tonnage officers with river pilotage for these? They look like a solid unit not tug and barge


#160

13+ knots upriver (diesel electric propulsion) with 500+ reefer sockets with only 11,520 kW of generation? Might be a little light. Hopefully they’re not assuming all four engines running at 100% at all times.

I definitely hope they can make it happen.


#161

The specs the bugge posted says >10,000 GRT. That’s going to require unlimited officers and I would imagine they’d want their officers to have federal pilotage to save on pilotage fees. They’ll hopefully run pilots for a while and train their officers to get pilotage since I expect they’ll have a hard time finding qualified people right out of the gate.

Then again, Master Unlimited Inland is insanely easy to get both sea time wise and exam wise, plus no STCW classes or assessments necessary, and that’s all it will require. Therefore, I don’t expect the pay to be extremely impressive.