NPR's story on the US shipbuilding boom this morning

[QUOTE=c.captain;133217]BS ON THIS SIR! They are more costly yes but if they can be operated profitably then they are affordable. Yes, consumers who buy petroleum transported by US tankship or barge pay an extra amount because that oil must go on a US vessel by law but no one has ever clearly calculated the exact extra amount per gallon one has to pay. Is it 3 to 5 cents more?..does anyone really know? It obviously it not so high that consumers will not buy the gasoline? The same goes with cargo sent to Alaska, Hawaii or Puerto Rico. Residents and businesses in those places pay a premium but the economies do manage to function and no one can say that the need to use JA qualified ships truly harms them there?

If the cost were so high that the economy was clearly harmed by the added costs of using Jones Act ships then you would have an argument here! Otherwise we both know that protectionism exists throughout ours as well as other world economies. Each and every one of us pays extra because businesses must hire US citizens or resident aliens to work on US soil…nobody knows how much more we pay but we all do pay for laws which ultimately protect out economy by protecting workers. Case closed![/QUOTE]

Look around you, the proof is in the pudding. Why is it that we have one of the most impotent deep sea merchant fleets in the entire world? The answer is without question the fact that it doesn’t make business sense for any company, except those explicitly bound by law, to ship under the stars and stripes. Anyone can stomp their feet all day long about how a company can still make a profit, even with U.S. ships and mariners, but that doesn’t change the fact that the guy down the road can make even more money with someone else’s ships and mariners. Shipping companies are beholden to nothing but their shareholders and the only thing their shareholders want is more money, not a strong U.S. merchant fleet.

I unequivocally agree that repealing the Jones Act would not actually benefit the individual consumer. If some middle-eastern dictator farts the wrong way, the very next day gas prices go through the roof, but if tomorrow every country in the middle east melted down their weapons, disbanded their armies, and held hands in the world’s largest prayer circle, it would still take months, years perhaps, before the individual consumer saw any relief at the local gas pump. This same logic can be applied to Jones Act shipping. The absence of the Jones Act would save heaps of money for someone, but it wouldn’t be the consumer, it would be the shipping companies and their charterers. As I said before, companies are beholden only to the goal of maximizing their profits for the sake of their shareholders. A company is beholden to consumers only insofar as to convince them to buy their goods and services, but if those goods and services are absolutely essential (food, fuel, clothes, etc…) then any company can persevere. We in the shipping industry rarely deal in luxuries. Most of the goods we carry are those that average people could not go on living without. For that reason consumers will continue to pay a premium no matter whose ships the goods are carried on, because companies know an easy and healthy profit when they see one.

If my first two conclusions seem more than a bit contradictory, fear not, you’re right! First I said that the Jones Act is bad for business, and secondly I said that getting rid of it wouldn’t actually help the American people. I have found that both of these beliefs can commingle in my third conclusion. The process that has been going on since the end of World War II will continue to its inevitable outcome: the complete elimination, by free market forces, of an American flagged merchant fleet. If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. If the fleet has been shrinking at an unstoppable pace for the last 60-odd years, then what’s to stop it from shrinking to zero? Eventually there will be so few Jones Act vessels of any kind that something like what we saw this winter in New Jersey will happen again, except finally the battle cries will be nation-wide and and the anti-Jones Act revolt will conclude in nothing else but the complete repeal of the act.

I must seem like quite a traitor to my profession with these arguments but I can’t state enough that I appreciate as much as anybody else that my job is not but for the grace of Senator Wesley Jones. The only difference is that I’ve read the writing on the walls. The end of the Jones Act is coming, it’s only a question of when. The market always wins. It beats time, it beats politicians, it beats governments, it beats religions, it beats armies, it beats navies, it beats air forces, the market trumps all else. Cash is King. Nothing short of World War III can save the American merchant fleet now. The only thing any of us can do is to start saving up so that we have a little nest-egg to fall back on when we all have to take salary cuts working for foreign companies, and that’s if they’ll hire us. Good luck everybody!

[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;133214]I support the Jones Act as much as you do, I wouldn’t have a job without it, but don’t kid yourself about its merits. It’s a crappy system, even if I benefit from it. Our ships are not affordable because without the law protecting the shipyards, no company in their right mind would be caught dead with an American ship. No one, not even you, C.Captain, can justify paying so many more times than what a product (a ship, in this case) is actually worth. Maybe we make some nice boats here but they are not worth what our companies pay for them. American shipbuilding is an artificial economy, no better than Chinese currency manipulation. The national security reasons alone are enough to keep the Jones Act alive and well, but don’t for one nanosecond imagine that you can argue that the Jones Act makes business sense, because it doesn’t and it never will. You’re peeing on my leg and telling me it’s raining.[/QUOTE]

You’re right it doesnt make business since, but neither does our govt not subsidizing our shipbuilding industry to the same level the Chinese ( and possibly Korea) do in order to compete globally. Were wasting how much money on another carrier, destroyer, strike fighter, etc, that we don’t need that we can’t sell to anybody??? We have already missed the boat on drillship and semi sub construction.

meanwhile we could be building ships for planet earth in capable yards from coast to coast and the great lakes if the govt would only pull their head out of their ass and see how much some of this money can be better spent on big shipbuilding subsidies than farms, foreign aid, national endowment for the arts, EBT, SNAP, c captains beloved NOAA pensions, and TWIC.

By the time the powers that be realize we have to beat them at their own subsidizing game, it will be way too late. It took the US and EU years of pressure to to convince China open the yuan to market fluctuation. It was pegged at some ridiculously undervalued yuan per dollar value for years. All while we bought their cheap crap (and American companies sent their ships there for scheduled shipyards) and they stockipiled benjamins. They have controlled the yuan’s minimal descent since day 1 of “market fluctuation.”

I dare say if we did anything to compete with their yards, they’d start calling in the loans.
so we probably find ourselves right where we are now… Jones Act construction and the occasional 1 or 2 ship surprise.

We did it to ourselves…

[QUOTE=Johnny Canal;133258]You’re right it doesnt make business since(sic)

We did it to ourselves…[/QUOTE]

first, the US will never ever go back to direct shipbuilding subsidies so put that idea out of your head…that was a remnant of the cold war and is now “Dead Jim”

second, Jones Act qualified shipbuilding is probably less than 1% of total world shipbuilding so it poses a threat to no nation

third, Jones Act shipowners are the biggest supporters of the law because it restricts outside foreign competition and allows them a more level playing field where they know they will not have to face every other nation sending their ships to our shores to take their work. This is even happening at an accelerating pace in the GoM where the US OMSA companies are building more and more subsea vessels to get the interlopers off their turf. I do not know why there isn’t loud screaming taking place to put US crews on all the shuttle tankers? Let AET and Skauglund use the foreign built ships because they are offloading foreign VLCCs but they should have American mariners on them!

NOW TELL ME HOW NONE OF THIS MAKES ANY SENSE?

[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;133257]I must seem like quite a traitor to my profession with these arguments but I can’t state enough that I appreciate as much as anybody else that my job is not but for the grace of Senator Wesley Jones. The only difference is that I’ve read the writing on the walls. The end of the Jones Act is coming, it’s only a question of when. The market always wins. It beats time, it beats politicians, it beats governments, it beats religions, it beats armies, it beats navies, it beats air forces, the market trumps all else. Cash is King. Nothing short of World War III can save the American merchant fleet now. The only thing any of us can do is to start saving up so that we have a little nest-egg to fall back on when we all have to take salary cuts working for foreign companies, and that’s if they’ll hire us. Good luck everybody![/QUOTE]

even though I may be the eternal pessimist, I do not agree with this at all. The Jones Act is not going away and the US Merchant Marine is not in its death throes. If anything, it has improved steadily over the past thirty years that I have been working in it. I am just saddened that I will be retired soon enough and not be able to enjoy this shipping resurgence. I started in this miserable business right when Ronnie Raygun gutted CDS and ODS and the precipice our fleet went over in the 10 years following was straight down. We literally lost all the major US flag foreign trading liner companies except for a pitiful few who were bought by foreign owners or they too would have blown away in the whirlwind. Except for Gulf War I in 1989-91 were there any jobs but once that ended is was going back to sailing on crap old tubs for miserably low pay. The 90’s sucked unbelievably!

.

CC,

yes, i agree with you CDS is not coming back. Because Uncle Sam is too dumb to see the value in it, and partly because there was a lot of graft and corruption between multiple parties.

And no, I was never implying on any level that Jones Act construction was/is a threat to any other nation’s yards. I was saying, quite directly, that if we could ever lure construction our way that SE Asia is handling on multiple levels right now (drilling, construction, containers, etc) that then we would be seen as a threat.

as far as I can tell, the single biggest driving force for American operators to build new ships over last 25 years was OPA 90. How many non-tankers (commercial owned and operated, unlimited tonnage/hp rated vessels with traditional manning) have been built in the US since 1990? Right now I can only think of 5. If I throw in the R.J. Pfeifer, that makes 6.

That law certainly didn’t makes business since for the operators, but it certainly did for the yards. If not for double hull requirements on petroleum based products American yards would have seriously languished and steam tankers from the 60s and early 70s would still be running coast to coast, just like they were when I graduated.

the American operators/owners have a love/hate relatioship with the Jones Act.

Matson loves it as they watch Horizon slowly, but surely fall apart. And they hate it when they are told it will cost nearly $200m to build a container RO/RO to cover what 3 ancient steamers are handling now.

And you can be assured that the tanker companies were pithcing a fit about the Jones Act when OPA 90 was being drafted.

All those operators want the trade route protection, but they loathe all the nasty attachments that go along with it… US construction, US Flag, and most certainly me and you.

As far as oil field related vessel construction goes, that’s like comparing apples and oranges. Being able to sign a pre-construction contract for say nearly $25k a day for a plain jane 250ft OSV when a charter rate equivalent for a 750ft plus containership probably isnt much more is mind boggling.

[QUOTE=Johnny Canal;133310]as far as I can tell, the single biggest driving force for American operators to build new ships over last 25 years was OPA 90. How many non-tankers (commercial owned and operated, unlimited tonnage/hp rated vessels with traditional manning) have been built in the US since 1990? Right now I can only think of 5. If I throw in the R.J. Pfeifer, that makes 6[/QUOTE]

I make it 8

  1. RJ PFEIFER
  2. JEAN ANN
  3. MIDNIGHT SUN
  4. NORTH STAR
  5. MAUNAWILI
  6. MAUNULANI
  7. MAUNUKAI
  8. MAUNALEI

that stoopid Boeing rocket carrier DELTA MARINER would make it 9

.

I’m bypassing your pointy stick to harpoon you instead.

Where did you learn to count 1,2,4?

Dont know if Delta Mariner was unlimited tonnage. Anything going up to Huntsville, AL cant be drawing much water.

By my stoopid style of counting (which includes the underrated #3) I’m off by 2 ships.
Not too shabby.

I’m not sure on the background but I think he might have been talking about Sea Launch

Sea launch is 2 vessels for private rocket launches.

Delta Mariner as best I recall was US flag for carry and retrieval for jettisoned empty shuttle rocket boosters. Dont know what it is doing now.

      • Updated - - -

Sea launch is 2 vessels for private rocket launches.

Delta Mariner as best I recall was US flag for carry and retrieval for jettisoned empty shuttle rocket boosters. Dont know what it is doing now.

Yeah but he mentioned Boeing, I always thought they owned Sea Launch.

They may. I honestly dont know, but were those 2 built here? Can’t see why there would be legal cause for such.

[QUOTE=Johnny Canal;133315]I’m bypassing your pointy stick to harpoon you instead.

Where did you learn to count 1,2,4?[/QUOTE]

EW! I made a typo…WELL EXXCCUUUSSSE ME!

also SeaLaunch as not US built or flagged although I do believe Boeing at one time had an interest until they exploded in a gigantic fireball!

//youtu.be/a3BB8SsIEtA

also, also DELTA MARINER was built to carry Delta IV rocket bodies from Decatur, AL to either Port Canaveral or Port Hueneme. I honestly have no idea how many it has actually carried?

You get 1/2 point for Delta Mariner.

8700 GT but only 16 crew. 312ft and ugly as balls. Recently hit bridge in Aurora, KY on TN River.

Operating draft is whopping 8ft.
Moss Point, MS 98.

It’s all for nought anyway! We’re rats riding a sinking ship, and brothers, I’m taking this puppy straight to the bottom. All ahead full!

I saw a scale model of the Sea Launch platform in Vyborg Shipyard yesterday. I didn’t know that the conversion was carried out there.

http://vyborgshipyard.ru/en/?p=special

Construction of the floating rocket launching platform (Sea Launch Project) is one of the most challenging international projects of the latest time. The project was realized by international consortium «Sea Launch» composed of The Boeing Company (USA), RSC Energia (Russia), Kvaerner Maritime (Norway), NPO Yuzhnoye and PO Yuzhmash (Ukraine).

The basic part of the whole complex is a launching platform. For installation of launching complex the semi-submersible drilling platform Odyssey was selected. Built in Japan, the Odyssey platform was repaired and modernized in 1992 at Vyborg Shipyard, in 1995-1997 the platform was further outfitted in Norway, and in 1995-1998 Vyborg Shipyard performed installation works and testing of a launching complex for intake, storing, servicing and launching of the 3-stage rocket carrier Zenit — 3 SL.

Upon completion Sea Launch Platform had the following particulars:

Length overall — 155,5 m.
Length by pontoons — 137 m.
Width — 70,7 m.
Height overall — 70,5 m.
Full displacement — 46000 т.
Speed — 12,5 knots.

In a launching position the platform is kept by dynamic positioning system.
For the first time during construction of the «Sea Launch» platform Vyborg Shipyard implemented new project control software Primavera Project Planner.
The platform was built by Vyborg Shipyard in cooperation with the Norwegian Shipyard Kvaerner Rozenberg in Stavanger.
Vyborg Shipyard’s labor input in the «Sea Launch» platform was 57,6 % of the total labor content of the project, not accounting previously completed works at the stages of repair and modernization of the semi-submersible drilling platform «Odyssey» to a multipurpose platform.

[QUOTE=Tups;133336]I saw a scale model of the Sea Launch platform in Vyborg Shipyard yesterday. I didn’t know that the conversion was carried out there.

http://vyborgshipyard.ru/en/?p=special[/QUOTE]

I always thought the Sea Launch Commander was a pretty awesome looking boat, even if only because it’s so unique looking. That’s what I was referring to when I thought that “Sea Launch” might have been an American endeavor, but it occurs to me now that the “Commander” was built in Scotland in '97. Oops…

[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;133328]It’s all for nought anyway! We’re rats riding a sinking ship, and brothers, I’m taking this puppy straight to the bottom. All ahead full![/QUOTE]

NYAH! NUTS To YOU TOO!

I see a bright future for the Jones Act and bigger and better new US built vessels for the coastwise trade.

[QUOTE=tugsailor;133416]I see a bright future for the Jones Act and bigger and better new US built vessels for the coastwise trade.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, U.S. ships being built in U.S. yards for the U.S. coastwiise trade. What’s the beef here?

I think it’s great and I hope it keeps going for a long time to come, I just don’t think it will. The last 50 years have seen the long, painful dance of the laws of economics doing a jig on the slowly expiring corpse of the Jones Act. I wish it could survive forever, I really do, but economics will win in the end.

[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;133423]I think it’s great and I hope it keeps going for a long time to come, I just don’t think it will. The last 50 years have seen the long, painful dance of the laws of economics doing a jig on the slowly expiring corpse of the Jones Act. I wish it could survive forever, I really do, but economics will win in the end.[/QUOTE]

It’s not just economics, it’s politics too. When these ship’s are running the shipyard, the owners and mariners working them are not going to want to be undercut.