The Presidential Candidates and Their Views on the Jones Act

Professional Mariner Forum
81

Interesting to see that this subject brought a lot of interest and some very informative comments.

Just one thing,if you are to develop Short Sea Shipping, don’t look at modifying existing ships, or using tugs and barges, especially as Container feeders. Start building up a fleet of highly efficient and economical vessels that can actually do the job safely and efficiently.

Modern Short Sea Vessels come in many forms and sizes, as can be seen in Europe and Japan, among other places.
There is no need to re-invent what has already been developed, tested and proven elsewhere. I’m sure that naval architects would be happy to introduce their models on the US market.

Damen, Rolls-Royce Marine (UT design)and others have long experience in supplying design and equipment packets to shipyards world wide. There is no reason why that couldn’t be the case for US yards to build vessels to the Jones Act for a future US Short Sea market. (Except national pride maybe?)

You should also remember that “Short seas” doesn’t only mean domestic USA. Add on Canada, the Caribbean and the northern parts of South America to the equation.
Ships like Damen’s Combi Coasters could pick up cargo at Inland Ports along the major rivers and bring it to anywhere within the CONUS or beyond. (Incl. Inland Ports in other river systems)

Fully developed there should be a small number of Hub Container Ports in or near CONUS, able to handle the largest ships of the future, with feeder service to/from smaller ports along the coasts and inland waterways + “Dry Ports” at Railway junctions in states without access to navigable rivers, or the sea.

Some of the feeder vessels must be able to handle both sea and river transport to avoid transshipping more than one time.
Some must have cranes to load/discharge unaided in ports without suitable facilities.
The major secondary ports may be served by larger gearless feeders, while still be classed as “short sea” for regulatory purposes.

Would this be possible? Yes,it is already reality in other parts of the world.

Will it become reality in the US in our lifetime? Maybe, but only if attitudes, rules and working habits are changed with it. You cannot have a traditional “gang” of Longshoremen watch each fully automated crane and autonomous transporters do their work. Even lashing/unlashing will soon be done with minimal human involvement.

Somebody has to stuff/unstuff the containers though, but that will not likely be done in the Ports, or by Longshoremen at their present wages.

82

Any person that has any intention of voting for the lying piece of shit Hillary Clinton should renounce any gender specific organs immediately because you will have demonstrated that you are not worthy of owning them. X or Y

83

[QUOTE=capitan1962;183821]Any person that has any intention of voting for the lying piece of shit Hillary Clinton should renounce any gender specific organs immediately because you will have demonstrated that you are not worthy of owning them. X or Y[/QUOTe]

can I just say…FUCK YOU SENOR ASSWIPE!

84

On the internet you can say anything you want because that is the only place you have any resemblance of testicles.

85

[QUOTE=capitan1962;183825]On the internet you can say anything you want because that is the only place you have any resemblance of testicles.[/QUOTE]

86

Trucking keeps halving their costs in OZ
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/martin_phippard_trailers_03.html
There are B triples on some roads now.

87

[QUOTE=powerabout;183867]Trucking keeps halving their costs in OZ
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/martin_phippard_trailers_03.html
There are B triples on some roads now.[/QUOTE]

I don’t see many doubles on the road in the US and the ones I see appear to be shorter trailers than a single. Maybe between them they hold 3 TEU? As I understand it in this country is mostly for the convenience of being able to drop off one trailer someplace and keep moving the other one elsewhere without having to wait for a partial discharge

88

I have seen trucks with 3 hangers in Darwin NT. They travel all the way to Adelaide, South Australia, on a near straight road.
I believe there are even longer Road Trains on that run though.
The longest Road Trains are a LOT longer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iFkKRh5kcM

89

Sure road trains are massive but cant drive anywhere near a city
B triples can and it 5 or 6 teu

90

[QUOTE=Chief Seadog;183817]Really, since when? Do you have facts to back up that statement?[/QUOTE]

A 15000 TEU does not arrive from China and drop off all containers in one US port. They can go to Savannnah on to Baltimore, NY etc.

91

[QUOTE=tengineer1;183873]A 15000 TEU does not arrive from China and drop off all containers in one US port. They can go to Savannnah on to Baltimore, NY etc.[/QUOTE]

Yes that is true. But the containers they drop off are foreign, not US Port to US Port. Any they pick up are bound for a foreign destination.

[QUOTE=tengineer1;183812]Saltchuck and their less than state of the art vessels [El Faro], Matson which has some decent vessels make a profit along with others. We all know foreign vessels deliver from US port to US port when coming from overseas. How are things different in Europe where coast-wise trading is feasible from a business standpoint?[/QUOTE]

In the above post I commented on, you inferred that foreign vessels were in involved in US domestic trade delivering from US port to US port, such trade is against the Jones Act. Hence my asking for facts to back up your statement. That may not have been your intent, but it certainly seemed that way since you start your post referring to 2 Jones Act players and end it with cost-wise trading being the topic.

Foreign ships deliver to US ports, and pick up from US ports. But they do not deliver from US ports to US ports.

92

[QUOTE=Chief Seadog;183879]In the above post I commented on, you inferred that foreign vessels were in involved in US domestic trade delivering from US port to US port,[/QUOTE]

You inferred, but he did not imply.

It was clear to me that he said foreign flag ships arriving from foreign ports made deliveries to multiple US ports. Nothing was said about uploading cargo in one US port and offloading at another.

93

Perhaps the idea in question is that a large container ship is able to discharge nearly all of their boxes in one European port as coastwise short sea shipping is economical and they have feeders do the rest rather than make port calls with the same ship in NY, Boston, Norfolk and Savannah?

94

[QUOTE=z-drive;183881]Perhaps the idea in question is that a large container ship is able to discharge nearly all of their boxes in one European port as coastwise short sea shipping is economical and they have feeders do the rest rather than make port calls with the same ship in NY, Boston, Norfolk and Savannah?[/QUOTE]

But those American ports make more money for their foreign owned operators by working large foreign ships than they would from little American feeders. The American taxpayer funds megaports so foreign carriers can load and unload at their foreign owned port operation but heaven forbid an American coastal trader asks for support.

Thank you MARAD.

95

[QUOTE=tengineer1;183812]…How are things different in Europe where coast-wise trading is feasible from a business standpoint?[/QUOTE]

The European Union is not comparable to the United States of America. It is rather a Union of Independent States, where the single states delegated only some sovereign powers upwards to the Union. There are even some European states willingly not being member of the Union, e.g. the geographically central Switzerland or the seafarer nation Norway.

The maritime cabotage inside the EU, but between single member states, is international traffic (e.g. France <> Germany). The cabotage inside a member state is regulated by the individual state. There are not many states with a meaningful internal traffic. Italy is one, with its very long coast and its two major islands Sicily and Sardinia.

Only ships with the main Italian flag (RINA) are allowed to transport freight or passengers between Italian ports. Even ships with the International Italian flag are not allowed to do this. I do not know how many Italian ships are ‘international’, at least all cruise ships of the Carnival subsidiaries Costa and Aida fly ‘Italy-International’.

96

[QUOTE=Steamer;183882]But those American ports make more money for their foreign owned operators by working large foreign ships than they would from little American feeders. The American taxpayer funds megaports so foreign carriers can load and unload at their foreign owned port operation but heaven forbid an American coastal trader asks for support.

Thank you MARAD.[/QUOTE]

You complain that US Container Ports are run by FOREIGN companies and that it is FOREIGN Carriers who use those ports to load and unload cargo.
If a FOREIGN Company can run a US Port more effectively and cheaper than any US Company can, why is that a bad thing?
Besides, there is no American major Container carriers to use these ports.

There is little complains when the same Government DEMAND freedom for US Companies to operate freely in other countries.
Shouldn’t there be equality of rights?,

I agree that the US Government(MARAD?)does not lend enough support to American coastal traders, but that can hardly be blamed on the FOREIGNERS who take advantage of the opportunity to make money.
NOT to do so would have been against the grain of Capitalism. (Or downright anti-American?)

97

[QUOTE=Chief Seadog;183879]In the above post I commented on, you inferred that foreign vessels were in involved in US domestic trade delivering from US port to US port, such trade is against the Jones Act. Hence my asking for facts to back up your statement.[/QUOTE]

He made no such claim. The talk is about tariffs and harbor maintenance fees making feeder ships unprofitable, he’s asking how foreign container ships can carry cargo from port to port (being taxed on it at each one) and still make money.

98

We also have a pretty great freight rail and pipeline system here in the US. As for trucks I’ve seen plenty of doubles on US highways. Haven’t seen many in NY but I’ve seen them on the interstates in Indiana and Ohio. I-95 goes through a lot of cities so they don’t work too well there. What you need is long flat rural expanses for them to be any good. Going across the country we have rails that are far more efficient though. North-South in the middle of the states we have the Mississippi.

99

[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;183885]He made no such claim. The talk is about tariffs and harbor maintenance fees making feeder ships unprofitable, he’s asking how foreign container ships can carry cargo from port to port (being taxed on it at each one) and still make money.[/QUOTE]

IF that is what he was asking, the answer is that the HMF is only levied on the cargo shipped through the respective port, not the total amount of cargo the ship has onboard.

As far as how Matson and Tote make money, when I worked those trades they primarily carried cargo from a continental port to either Hawaii, Alaska, or Puerto Rico. There wasn’t much carried between continental U.S. ports, between Alaskan ports, or between ports in Hawaii. Not that it wasn’t done, but comparably it wasn’t much.

If foreign ships were allowed to work in the Jones Act trades, the HMF would be applied the same as it is to Matson, Tote or any other domestic operator.

100

Capital vs variable costs and subsidized infrastructure has made trucks so dominant over the last 30 years. There used to be a ton more rails across the USA before the interstate highway system got so developed.

Many truck fleets are leased. Variable cost. Truck drivers are relatively cheap. Trucks are simpler to drive today (autoshift, auto brake if too close to car, etc). Trucks just pay a fuel tax for the roads, but other than that they don’t really pay much for infrastructure. A truck doesn’t need expensive equipment to unload it, just a dock/pallet jack for the most part.

Fuel is cheap. “TRUCKERS KEEP AMERICA ROLLING!@#!!” Easy for illegals to drive trucks and work for less than real wages. There’s plenty more reasons trucks handle so much cargo, even though using floating vessels makes more sense.