Alternative Cargoes.

Post a reply


BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are OFF

Topic review
   

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Maximum filesize per attachment: 3 MiB.

Expand view Topic review: Alternative Cargoes.

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by Guest » April 28, 2015, 4:52 pm

Their is no out side the box for great lakes shipping. Most shipping with the exception of container ships are bulk carriers, tankers, bulkers and barges. Like most have noted, coal shipments are in steep decline and most likely never to recover. Road construction aggregates should remain steady, but a small portion of the business.
What remains is the steel industry, with out market protection they are in serious trouble. On one front, foreign producer's are destroying the domestic market. But even traditional customers like the auto industry are using less and less steel. Who would have thought a ford f 150, made with so much aluminium. And if it works their it will shift to other vehicles and manufacturing.
Their was no outside the box for the stage coach either.

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by garbear » April 28, 2015, 4:06 pm

I hope everyone who is reading these Alternative Cargoes posts keep an eye on my Iron Range post. A lot of people up here are afraid of what the future holds. Let's hope we do see an upturn in the steel industry, but what if it doesn't happen? There will be a lot of changes in the Great Lakes region economy and it will cost thousands of workers their jobs. We already saw it happen once with the downsizing of the steel industry. Another downsizing could be a real disaster. When you see one iron ore mine in Australia produce more ore than all the mines in the Great Lakes region combined, I definitely see where the future is cloudy at best.

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by Guest » April 28, 2015, 12:59 pm

Guest wrote:You're going to see fewer and fewer ships run as the years go by. Anyone who thinks a boat like the Ryerson will ever run again is only kidding themselves.

I've heard that one several times since the early 1980s...although one of these times it bound to be true :(

Seriously, however, a sudden increase in the demand for ore for either domestic or offshore use could drastically change this situation as we saw several years ago. As the available fleet shrinks in size, any remaining idled ships could return to service to meet an unanticipated demand in the movement of bulk materials.

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by edm » April 28, 2015, 12:14 pm

we all seem to agree that there is a major problem facing our shipping industry but, does anyone know how to fix this problem ?
the lads graduating our fine schools need jobs ! what else can we transport besides coal, stone and iron ore and how do we get this done ? do we need to make our boats more adaptable in order to haul autos ? bulk cargoes have been the mainstay for our industry for way too long. i hate this phrase but, 'we have to think outside the box' here !

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by Guest » April 28, 2015, 10:05 am

You're going to see fewer and fewer ships run as the years go by. Anyone who thinks a boat like the Ryerson will ever run again is only kidding themselves.

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by Guest » April 28, 2015, 9:41 am

Unfortunately I have to agree with the decline of the Great Lakes shipping industry since the early 1980s. I had planned on pursuing a career on the ships but as my graduation approached in 1986, times were so bad that I felt that I had to go in a different direction. In retrospect, times did get better for a while for the US flagged fleet between the early 90s to 2000s, but it once again appears to be in decline. The effect of the reduction in the use of coal is most likely to have an impact similar to that experienced by the recession in the steel industry during the 1980s. I don't believe the full dimensions of this paradigm shift will become clear to those outside of the industry for several years. I would believe that this will greatly effect the US flagged fleet and its impact could be severe. This factor may have weighed heavily in ASC's decision to sell the American Fortitude for scrap last year.

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by edm » April 28, 2015, 9:34 am

because fewer boats sail every year, the cost to taxpayers is increasing every year. one can only imagine the cost this past spring for CG assistance for breaking ice. John McCain wants to eliminate the Jones act to further destroy our shipbuilding industry. in the 50's we had one ship past every 8 minutes in the Detroit river system. today we are lucky to see 5 ships per day use these same rivers. i'm not sure what the solution to this problem is but, unless we find one fast - this industry and the many lads hoping to make a living sailing our waters will become obsolete.

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by jacques » April 28, 2015, 7:18 am

it is a declining industry and the problem is competition from rail and road that can perform just in time, door to door logistics whereas shipping is dependent on docks,pricey pier-side double-handling and on-carriage by those very same modes.The reluctance of commerce and industry to carry inventory when they can squeeze suppliers to arrange JIT is part and parcel of this scenario. Our acceptance of oversize landfreight clogging highways during our daily commute is also to blame. In addition we have very few modern general cargo freighters in the US and Canadian inventory that could even offer an alternative to competing modes. Put this all in perspective and it doesn't paint a rosy picture for the future.

Re: Alternative Cargoes.

by Guest » April 28, 2015, 6:39 am

I think its very clear to most that lake shipping has been in decline since the 80's. Its biggest competitors are the railroads who are near capacity now. The lake boats are competitive on those large bulk cargos that would take thousand's of rail cars and ten of thousands trucks to replace them.
With that said its a far different world today than in the past. Lake shipping simply isn't competitive with cargos like automobiles or packet type freights due to the unloading process and further trans shipping. Shippers demand quick door to door, or door to dock flexibility that lake boats can't deliver.
Will lake shipping survive? Hard to say in a global economy,2where their are always winner and losers. Let's hope so their are many jobs depending on it.

Alternative Cargoes.

by PDBLK25 » April 27, 2015, 8:08 pm

There is a major weakness in Great Lake's shipping that everyone seems to recognize, but no one wants to talk about, Sort of like the elephant in the kitchen. The cargoes that have kept the large lakers going are disappearing. Coal is dropping - more & more power plants going to Natural Gas. Ore is dropping. A weak steel industry & cheap foreign ore are assuring that. The Stone trade is dropping. Construction is not booming & there is that weak Steel Industry. It looks as though soon only the "Footers" will be profitably sailing.
Only Groupe Desgagnes & Pere Marquette Shipping are enjoying some success hauling other than "The Big Three" commodities. What's the problem? Ships once carried autos, pulpwood, scrap steel, package freight & newsprint. Not any more - gave up carrying those without a fight, Big ships carrying coal, ore & stone was where the money WAS. PM41, Catherine, Amelia, and Melissa Desgagnes are small vessels, carrying varied cargoes, and making money doing it. If the big outfits don't look into alternatives, will there be any Lakes Shipping in 20 years?
Attachments
Loading Cars on to McCarthy Steamship Company's Str. 'T..J. McCarthy'..jpg
Pere Marquette Shipping's ATB 'Pere Marquette 41 (Ex-Carferry 'City of Midland 41') Loading Stone at  the K&K Dock in Marinette -A Bow (Barge) View        Thursday, April 20, 2011..jpg
Group  Desgagnes MV. 'Catherine Desgagnes' Below Lock 2 in  the Welland Canal - A Bow View        Saturday, May 14, 2011..jpg
Bethlehem Transpt's Crane Str.'Cambria'(3). Built by Detroit S.B. in 1910 at 524'x54'x30'. Given 2 Diesel Cranes & 3 large hatches over a 386' hold in 1955. In 1973 barged & sold off-Lakes..jpg
Q&O Trans. Co. Str.'Manitoulin'(4). Built Swan, Hunter...Ltd. (England) in 1929. Measured 259'x43.25'x20., Scrapped in 1961..jpg
CANADA STEAMSHIP LINES'  MV. 'Fort William',   Modern PACKAGE FREIGHTER. Built in 1965, is 489' x 56' x 35.5'. Converted to CEMENT-CARRIER 'Stephen B. Roman' in  '83 (A Stern View From MARCH of 1976)..jpg
Nicholson Trans. Str.'Mataafa' loading autos. Blt Cleveland S.B. Co. in 1899 -- 450.25'x50'x25. Wreck. on Duluth shore Nov-'05. Conv. to auto carrier '47. Given 'flight-deck'-'50. Scrapped in '65..jpg

Top