The Overseas Chinook is the only shuttle tanker operating in the Gulf of Mexico right now (as a shuttle tanker) with the BW Pioneer. The Cascade is subbed out right now. There will be another one next year when the Shell project gets going.
There aren’t any. Only one and it’s American top to bottom.
Something else that should be on US bottoms, for example, lightering in the Gulf: http://shipmanagementinternational.com/aet-chalks-up-10000th-us-gulf-lightering/
Done off NY too. You asked for ideas, and these are places Jones act tonnage should be used for seeing as their main job is to bring products in and out of the US without going beyond coastal waters.
[QUOTE=z-drive;128390]Yes, we do export product on both US bottoms (Houston-Israel for example, but its probably a donation), and on foreign bottoms to Europe mostly. As far as canadian crude exports go, I mis-spoke thinking some of that bakken oil coming through Albany for Irving was canadian, thus the exception to the rule. I just don’t see why a US flag ATB couldn’t do that run when all the tanker companies cry about how much “cheaper” they are to operate than a ship. Does a large ATB cost more than a FOC product tanker to operate? I would think the savings would be there, especially factoring in less in the way of pilotage, assist tugs and a shorter run.
The thing I can’t stand is that while some of that oil goes right down the river to Bayway, a good amount is going to Irving…albeit often coming back as product to New England, why the hell export it when bayway still has to import oil in the shadow of exporting some. Talking crude here, not product.[/QUOTE]
This is why more American ATB’s can’t just as easily do that Albany to Canada run (I say more because I believe KOM’s “Coho” is already doing this)
BY ROB ALMEIDA ON JANUARY 16, 2014
The departure of the Winna Wilson, a Signal International-built ATB for Kirby, image: Signal
Kirby Corporation (NYSE:KEX) announced plans to build a 185,000 barrel/10,000 hp Articulated Tug and Barge (ATB) unit for a total cost of between $75 and $80 million. Upon delivery in mid-to-late 2015, the vessel will be placed on 4-year charter that includes a 1 year extension.
Joe Pyne, Kirby’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, commented, “With the coastal fleet utilization around 90%, increasing demand for the coastwise movements of crude and natural gas condensate, and continued progress in expanding our coastal business to inland customers, new capacity is needed to meet demand. The 185,000 barrel ATB unit has the flexibility to access ports that restrict larger vessels, while still delivering large volumes of product for our customer.”
$75-80 MILLION!?!? Are you kidding me!? There are VLCC’s that go for half that! This is why I say we are doomed to failure because it makes NO BUSINESS SENSE to do these things. There’s no good use in paying for something many times more than what it’s worth. Kirby would be better off just lighting that $75 million on fire.
Kirby doesn’t make any sense to me with the majority of stuff they do. They make money so they know what they’re doing but what the hell…build in series or buy a shipyard. Coho was hauling asphalt last I saw them. The aframax ships for sea river are $200 a piece…80 for an ATB is nonsense but why the hell is Bouchard and Kirby building stuff, and reinauer building stuff as fast as they can? Obviously the market supports the economics and they’re profitable at these prices.
anyway…I will throw the shipyards under a bus by advocating that any shuttle tankers offloading a foreign ship taking the crude into a US refinery not be Jones Act qualified but SHOULD be US flag and manned. This would mean all the existing shuttle tankers out there could continue in service but just require new crews and a different flag on the stern.
But we all know that 2cents more a barrel on bringing the crude into the US to be more than the market will support!
BULLSHIT!
While this thread is fun and entertaining to read, anyone who is actually at the Symposium will attest to the fact that it is a complete waste of time. It is nothing more than a meeting to placate industry and give MARAD work. Little to nothing will come of the symposium.
I think you need to get your definition of a shuttle tanker right. You’re talking about lightering tankers. There are only 2 shuttle tankers in the GoM and both are owned by OSG.
Although it is an article from 4/2000, it shows that there is a precedent and one from the Clinton administration. http://www.cnie.org/NLE/CRSreports/natural/nrgen-25.cfm And Johnny Canal, that was the case about the Kuwait tankers, but again a precedent was set. I assume (yes, I know) that in law that is all important.
What exactly is the relevant precedent? Were those Kuwaiti tankers actually exporting US crude? I thought they were running around Persian gulf and possibly to Europe. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Lolz right on…no precedent there! Not exactly a relevant argument in the context of the Kuwaiti tankers. Totally different situation.
Isn’t USA a part of the glorious “Free marked”? Or is it only as long as it benefits USA?
[QUOTE=Kraken;128439]Isn’t USA a part of the glorious “Free marked”? Or is it only as long as it benefits USA?[/QUOTE]
I can only assume that you are talking about the “free market” and not the “free marked”. Are you just saying that because you’re from Norway and you don’t like the Jones Act? Norway has protectionist instruments of its own as well. Are you not part of the free market?
Love the free market.
Norway do not have any rules that prohibits foreign people working in Norwegian waters.
[QUOTE=Kraken;128447]Norway do not have any rules that prohibits foreign people working in Norwegian waters.[/QUOTE]
BULLSHIT! There are virtually ZERO non Scandinavians working in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea!
[QUOTE=c.captain;128452]BULLSHIT! There are virtually ZERO non Scandinavians working in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea![/QUOTE]
The Scandinavians run their shipping businesses like an international drug cartel, they just go around bullying everyone else out of existence…
Strange than that I was looking at Filipino AB’s true my binoculars last time I was in Florø. And that the crew on the Nor-Line boats serving the harbours at the coast is Easter European.
It’s your own fault that you can’t work on a Norwegian ship. Get international recognised certificates and come playing. I’d loved having American shipmates 
it would have been nice knowing if you all act like the people in Discovery channel shows 
[QUOTE=Kraken;128457]Strange than that I was looking at Filipino AB’s true my binoculars last time I was in Florø. And that the crew on the Nor-Line boats serving the harbours at the coast is Easter European.
It’s your own fault that you can’t work on a Norwegian ship. Get international recognised certificates and come playing. I’d loved having American shipmates it would have been nice knowing if you all act like the people in Discovery channel shows :D[/QUOTE]
-
Your english is hilarious. It almost makes your argument worthwhile to read.
-
Maybe you do have Filipino AB’s, but you sure as hell don’t have any non-Scandinavian officers in the North Sea.
-
If we’re covered in STCW certifications why are our licenses not internationally recognized? You’re not going to win the argument that some pacific-island 3rd mate has a license that means more than an American 3rd mate’s license. It simply isn’t so. If our licenses aren’t recognized it’s because people like the Norwegians have stacked the deck against Americans because they don’t want us around for various different reasons.
I had a Danish license for a while. Took less than 2 days to get it, 1 sheet of paper, and a physical.
[QUOTE=Kraken;128457]It’s your own fault that you can’t work on a Norwegian ship. Get international recognised certificates and come playing. I’d loved having American shipmates it would have been nice knowing if you all act like the people in Discovery channel shows :D[/QUOTE]
How dare you come here and tell me it is MY fault I can’t get a berth on a vessel in the North Sea when there are hundreds of Norwegian mariners working in MY GoM which the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act made American territory just like Norway made their sector of the North Sea reserved for Norwegian nationals?
you may EAT ME very much…SIR