You are probably right, nothing will change in the near future, but you can always hope.
The problem may not be the Unions alone. They can be turned to useful tools for change, as shown in UK and other parts of the world.
Could the actual problem be “money politics”?? If that isn’t changed not much can be done.
Unless the political climate change, that is.
Maybe the “social media revolution” will happen and traditional political parties will go the way of the dinosaurs.
More meaningful than to have identified you as a s%$# stirrer? No nothing more. And at last you admit it though quite circuitously. That’s ok, you are now on the road to recovery.
Maybe just consider that the next time you feel compelled to post. Just leave off the judgemental part about the US you seem so preoccupied with. Thank you.
According to their job ads, the average Walmart driver makes $82,000 his first year.
Transportation costs have many components. Labor is just one of them.
Shipboard labor costs per container are next to nothing. Maybe $50 per container from Asia to the US.
But you would agree if truck drivers made $140,000 or more then the economics of moving a container by sea over the short distances along the NE corridor would shift in favor of putting 20 containers on a barge and towing them Elizabeth to Portland say?
he hourly wage of an experienced longshoreman under the most recent union contract, affecting U.S. East Coast ports, is $35 per hour; with wages for newcomers starting at $20. A longshoreman’s total compensation, though, includes benefits that amount to 24 percent of the hourly wage and a bonus for each container of cargo they work with. The bonuses and benefits drive the potential hourly compensation up to $44.20 per hour, or $91,998 per year for a longshoreman who works 40 hours each week.
I admit that I did the stirring, but you supplied the sh*t…
The attitude that because it isn’t possible today, it can’t EVER become so is self-defeating.
Nobody can convince me that this way of transporting containers and rolling stock:
Is safer and more efficient than to do so with this one:
Or that to deliver containers , to say St.Louis by tug and barge:
Is better, safer and faster then to do so with one of these:
It is obviously not a new idea, based on this article from 2013:
https://www.joc.com/maritime-news/short-sea-shipping/defense-short-sea-shipping_20131120.html
Yes manning rules and the Longshoremen’s grip on the Ports must be change, but to give up without a fight is un-American.
That’s it…that’s it… let it all out now. You’ll feel better in the morning. Let’s continue…
The above is a figment of your imagination and seems to be offered up only to drive a wedge and further antagonize. I can’t remember anyone representing their attitude about short sea shipping in the US as you have stated it above. What I have seen here is people desirous of such a trade developing but only pointing out the reasons why it hasn’t happened yet and possible stumbling blocks whereas you seem to think it is only a matter of magical thinking.
Your analysis seems to be China has a coast, China has some river box ships, US has a coast ipso facto US should have river box ships. Other people have explained it is more complicated than that but you don’t want to comprehend that. Somehow you turn “it’s more complicated than that” into “giving up” or “believing it can’t ever be so”. Okay we get it. There is a difference between saying “it will never happen unless…” and “it will never happen”. Capiche?
Why not? In the words of a great American:
“I say boy, I say, what’s it all about boy, elucidate!”
Foghorn Leghorn
Do you have any studies of the unsafe aspects of tug and barge operation in the US? Do you think drivers operating yard mules in near continuous drive off of the ro-ro barge is less efficient than a vessel with a single ramp? How so? How about the container/chassis or trailer being immediately picked up by a tractor for road transport vs transferring the cargo from those low-boys I see in the hull? Especially when only loaded over a short coastwise. Evem more cargo handling. Is the crew size and cost of that ro-ro less than a tug? Let me just say I don’t know either but these are the sorts of things most readers want to know and formulate plans with. Again these may seem like negative comments to you but they are issues that need to be resolved before an owner is going to build something. Hey it would be “nicer” for people like me but being “nicer” doesn’t enter into the calculus of the owner/carrier/market?
But more than the above details, here we get to the root of your problem. You read a PR release, an industry puff piece or some other “news” article and then you have an emotional response and you link it and splatter your opinion (usually labeled as fact and sprinkled with a few sea stories) in a derisive manner which seems to be calculated to elicit controversy. Then you interpret any response other than praise and honor for your position as total opposition. If that’s how you want to spend your time go for it.
I have an interest in short sea shipping but I am disappointed by how you frame many of your posts as anti-American then deny it or disclaim it by saying “well not all Americans”. Why do you think there is such a backlash good natured or otherwise with the Norwegian thing?
Who’s said anything about giving up? That’s all you again. If you have read even a part of what myself and others have written (not just on this thread) you know many Americans are critical of MARAD’s performance in recent years and yet we are also aware that a detailed review of their remit and funding never happens. The total disdain certain citizens seem to have for the federal government (richly deserved in some cases) together with the corrupting influence of money and special interest groups does not bode well for additional funding to MARAD for an active R&D program, subsidies, or other enticements any time soon. But you go ahead keep telling us like it is.
And thanks for letting us know what is un-American.
With regard to:
I would suggest you consider the words of another great American:
“it is a principle that shines on the just and unjust that once you have a point of view all history will back you up”
Van Wyck Brooks
I feel like our time is up for this session. Please take all the tissues you want. But I feel you may have issues deeper than my lowly skills are capable of. Please make an appointment with @Capt_Anonymous at your earliest convenience.
Funnily enough, Crowley is ahead of you on that one.
http://gcaptain.com/crowley-launches-first-lng-powered-conro-el-coqui/
Yes that is a beginning, but two such vessels from Crawley and two more from TOTE will only be that, a beginning. I know that new ships for the Hawaii and Alaska trades are on order and construction as well, but the large potential market is in the Coastal and River trade.
As has been pointed out in abundance; the obstacle is in the resistance for change in the industry, the lack of changes in the way ports are operating, Longshoremen’s Union power, administrative and political will (or ability) to do anything.
Meanwhile the rest of the world is forging ahead with modernization of both their sea, road and rail transport, leaving the Americans to shout about unfair competition and America First.
If my saying so is seen as an insult, so be it. I’m actually only pointing out the obvious, which anybody can check and see for themselves. (If they are willing to open their mind and not just look at everything I say as anti-American)
Tugs and barges have had a huge cost advantage over ships due to drastically reduced manning with fewer certificates, no USCG inspection, no requirement to be classed, much cheaper maintenance costs, etc.
Subchapter M, if it’s actually enforced, will reduce that cost advantage somewhat.
Crowley took the size too far with its largest class of ATBs, and the cost advantage disappeared. So they started building real tankers. I suspect that the large Ro-Ro barges to Puerto Rico May be at the upper end of what is practical for size, hence the new Co-Ro ships.
The Ro-Ro never made sense to me for a run that long. For long runs, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Alaska, ships make more sense than slow barges for time sensitive cargos.
There is still a big barge trade to Hawaii and Alaska for cargos that are not time sensitive because barges freight rates are much cheaper and many places have no facilities for ships.
I think tugs and barges will continue to have a large cost advantage over ships for short runs. In small “ports” where barges can bypass the union longshoremen they have a huge cost advantage.
Small Euro style ships would not compete with tug and barge unless the manning was reduced to tug boat level — 5 man crew.
Longshoreman wages and unions are always brought up when discussing short sea shipping or international trade.For some reason paying wages that allow a person to support their family seems to be the great impediment to every business plan in the USA. The unionized NY City police force pays +$85000/yr after 5 years and they get a very nice pension after 20 years. Why shouldn’t a longshoreman make as much? Being a cop is safer than farming, logging, fishing and they make chump change.
Short sea shipping will happen in the USA only when the rail and trucking industry allow it. Railroads are a monopoly now and there is no way they and their congressmen will allow short sea shipping to take a piece of their profit.
It is indeed a pitty that monopolies and backward thinking shall hold up the development of effective SSS in USA.
I can see it is attractive to use a tug and barge configuration when manning is that low and the size and type of barge is not regulated. The safety of towing/pushing large barges loaded with oil and chemicals vs. tanker transport should also be an issue in an environmentally conscious Maritime Administration.
What is not mentioned is the insurance costs, which is normally substantially higher for anything loaded on towed barges than on a ship. That is what “killed” Crowley’s dry tow of rigs on barges when semisubmersible HLV came on the market. (My earliest involvement with dry tows were by Crowley/Red Stack tugs and barges)
In Europe the manning requirements are not fixed by any specific size, type or trade, but based on requirements of safe navigation. Min. safe manning is proposed by the Owner/Manager and verified, or amended by the relevant Maritime Authorities.
Here is the regulation for the German register:
http://www.deutsche-flagge.de/en/crew/ships-manning
This 3500 DWT open hatch Sea/River bulk/general cargo ship has facilities for a crew of 8 (I don’t know if that is the actual crew on board) :
Wilson Alicante.pdf (136.2 KB)
And a Sea/River Container Feed of 8500 DWT:
Wilson container.pdf (148.4 KB)
Ships like these could load way up rivers and transport the cargo to any other coastal or river port in USA, or Canada, the Caribbean islands, Central and South American north coast at least.
No double handling, safe, economical and fast. But, as you all have said, it cannot be done as long as greed is stronger than sense of duty to the society.
No, no it isn’t.
(I’m referring to the looking that actually pays big money.)
Man you’re full of shit. No one has ever said anything remotely close to that.
Highest fatality injury rates per occupation according to US Bureau of Labor Statistics:
Loggers- 132 per 100,000
Fishermen- 55 per 100,000
Aircraft pilots- 40 per 100,000
Roofers- 40 per 100,000
Refuse and recyclable material workers- 39 per 100,000
Structural iron and steel workers- 30 per 100,000
Truck drivers- 24 per 100,000
Farmers, ranchers- 22 per 100,000
Electrical power-line workers- 21 per 100,000
Landscapers- 18 per 100,000.
Cops- 12.6 per 100,000
Good info. Can you link to that? Not disputing, just would like to become more aware of the issue in general.
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?
" 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 .
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:
Comparing European and American Transport – The Antiplanner
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):
https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/united-states-problem-aging-infrastructure-inland-waterways
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??
