Ryerson

Discussion board focusing on Great Lakes Shipping Question & Answer. From beginner to expert all posts are welcome.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

This is likely just as speculative as the other rumors but down here in the Chicago area heard some rumors she may make shuttle runs from Quebec with transloaded cement from overseas into Chicago and reload scrap from the new shredding facility located where the old LTV mill was out the seaway to Quebec to transload for overseas. Deal is running her till no longer feasible and then she would be towed over with the last load out for scrap. I'm sure there's about as much to it as the other rumors but that is what we have heard down here.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

I personally witnessed HBI being shipped by rail n truck to steel dynamics Indiana facilities when was still hauling steel until retiring this past oct.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Mr Link wrote: January 24, 2023, 11:23 am To my knowledge I don't think the Toledo HBI plant was designed to ship product out by water. It was designed to load trucks and rail cars. So I think that for the shipments that they have sent via the Great Lakes, they have had to truck the product from the plant to a nearby dock. Does anyone know differently?
I believe you are correct - no loadout facilities there.

Goncalves said in the last quarterly earnings report that Cliffs intended to sell HBI to third parties, but so far have been using it all internally at their blast furnaces. Output has exceeded the nameplate 1.9 million tons annually. The briquettes weigh 1.2 pounds each. Is all that being shipped to their furnaces by rail?
Jon Paul
Posts: 888
Joined: December 14, 2017, 8:37 pm

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Jon Paul »

guest wrote: January 24, 2023, 3:55 am is the hbi plant in toledo up and running? if not when will it be operatioal? about 10 years ago in the welland canal the purvis tug reliance and barge pml 9000 was upbound for the sault with a load of "ore briquettes" which i assume was loaded in sept iles. probably a one shot deal. at the steel mill it would have to be unloaded by a shoreside crane, possibly one of the bridge cranes. is this similar to the hbi mills product?
The Cliffs Ironville HBI plant has been running for 2 yrs and was averaging 2-3 deliveries of pellets a week by VTB from Superior and earlier in the season from Silver Bay.
Cliffs controls the vast majority of pellets produced on the Great Lakes and is in a position to effect pricing and delivery of pellets as they see fit and the market dictates.
I think maybe the simple reality is that if the ELR passes muster and they can deliver pellets at a competitive price then she will sail.
Mr Link
Posts: 1198
Joined: December 6, 2014, 3:43 pm

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Mr Link »

guest wrote: January 24, 2023, 3:55 am is the hbi plant in toledo up and running?
I believe it began commercial production around January 2021.

To my knowledge I don't think the Toledo HBI plant was designed to ship product out by water. It was designed to load trucks and rail cars. So I think that for the shipments that they have sent via the Great Lakes, they have had to truck the product from the plant to a nearby dock. Does anyone know differently?
Old Sailor

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Old Sailor »

There is some wild speculation that Elon Musk is interested in hauling new Tesla's to major Great Lakes cities. Great marketing strategy.
guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by guest »

is the hbi plant in toledo up and running? if not when will it be operatioal? about 10 years ago in the welland canal the purvis tug reliance and barge pml 9000 was upbound for the sault with a load of "ore briquettes" which i assume was loaded in sept iles. probably a one shot deal. at the steel mill it would have to be unloaded by a shoreside crane, possibly one of the bridge cranes. is this similar to the hbi mills product?
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

This is what I and many posters have said. WE DONT know what the plan is. Maybe activated as is. Maybe huge costly modifications. Maybe run this year… maybe not🤷🏼‍♂️. I believe when guys say it was properly prepped for long term storage but only dry docking will tell hull condition. Wasn’t steam supposed to have been up in the donkey boiler by now as reported? I hope it does indeed sail for many years.. obviously something is in motion but WHAT is the question. No doubt though that the HBI plant in Toledo is probably in play for it’s possible sailing.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

What does Algoma Central have to do with the Edward L. Ryerson?! It's about Algoma Steel, CML and the Edward L. Ryerson and nothing to do with Algoma Central. People are getting confused and and running off on different tangents, such as ELR being chartered by Algoma Central, or running into Hamilton. Remember, when the ELR ran into Hamilton until 2009, Arcelor-Mittal still owned the steel mills in Indiana Harbor, Burns Harbor and in Hamilton. All that has changed - with the Indiana Harbor and Burns Harbor Mills under Cliffs ownership, but Dofasco in Hamilton remaining under Arcelor-Mittal ownership.

A possible reason why the ELR is being reactivated (if that is indeed happening), maybe because Cliffs may have provided a good rate on the movement of the HBI (and pricing on that product) to the Algoma Steel plant and that they have a ready supply of HBI for the EAFs, when they are in operation. Since such agreements are confidential, we can only guess as to what the agreement includes, but usually it's a long-term contract (a complete package for Algoma Steel, i.e. HBI and transportation of same to the Soo) which may justify the expense of refitting the ELR back into service and the potential for upgrades. But that is pure speculation on my part.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Perhaps Jerry can and is willing to clear up the confusion?
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Gortado wrote: January 23, 2023, 6:17 pm Are there any updates on the reactivation process? Is the Mariner still in dry dock?
Yes, Mariner is still in dry dock. Lots of repairs. IMO, Ryerson to follow mid March.
Gortado

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Gortado »

Are there any updates on the reactivation process? Is the Mariner still in dry dock?
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote: January 7, 2023, 1:23 pm
guest wrote: January 6, 2023, 7:10 pm why would algoma charter a aged steamer when the got rid of the ones they owned outright? and as far as the skipper is concerned the man you mentioned is now a marine pilot. i rather doubt he would give up his pilotage job to go back skipper only to be layed off some time in the future. im sure shes on the hit list for mrc in port colborne
Algoma might be trying to free a bottom currently hauling pellets to Hamilton for the more lucrative seaway runs. I would guess a Superior to Hamilton run for fast Eddie!
I am of the opinion it is for Algoma Central.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote: January 21, 2023, 9:34 pm
Jon Paul wrote: January 21, 2023, 11:59 am
Guest wrote: January 20, 2023, 8:59 pm If they load Ore in Superior/Two Harbors, deliver to Hamilton, head to Toledo to load HBI, take that to the Soo once it is converted to EAF, unload, then head back to Superior/Two Harbors to restart the loop. In a situation like this it would only be empty the westbound trip on Lake Erie and the Westbound trip on Lake Superior. That is a fairly efficient round trip.

However, I still don’t understand the economic feasibility of this. Any ship in the world (that fits through the locks) could carry cargo on this loop being both of these legs would be international shipments. I am not privy to the financials behind this so I am purely speculating, however, I don’t understand how they are planning to compete with the lower operating costs of newer foreign built vessels.
If any foreign ship that can pass through the locks is capable and more efficient than Lakers on these "International shipments" why arent they being used on the trans shipments from Superior to Quebec City? Or for that matter why aren't they hauling from the lakehead to Hamilton?
I have never understood why an international shipping company hasn’t gotten into this on the dry bulk cargo side for the international moves. However, it is already happening on the liquid bulk cargo side with the Iver Bright.
The use of internationally owned vessels operating in the liquid trades has been going on for several years. Although there may be earlier examples, one of the earliest I can recall is the tanker Kiisla that operated out of Sarnia year-round for several seasons during the late 1980s. I believe that it carried asphalt if I'm not mistaken.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

From reading some of the comments here it seems that there is some confusion about the asserted "Algoma" link to the possible return of the Ryerson with some interpreting this as CML contracting to carry cargo for either Algoma Steel or Algoma Central. I believe the comment is meant to imply Algoma Steel and not Algoma the fleet, but maybe someone could clarify. Regardless, I don't know why the conversation has to digress into how Algoma Central could put CML "under."
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote: January 22, 2023, 10:48 am Fun to read the exchanges here about ELR. Cliff's owns the Ryerson, Sykes and Block correct? Is it not less expensive to run your own equipment vs chartering and paying someone else to make that run for raw materials? Seeing the Sykes and Block at Marquette and trips to Lake Erie are something new and look to continue going forward. There were even a few trips for the Sykes and maybe the Block moving fines from Lake Erie mills to Lake Michigan mills owned by Cliffs. This is vertical integration of having control of raw materials, transportation, and positioning both at the variety of mills Cliff's operates. Going back several owner changes, does the Cort also fall under the Cliff's umbrella? SJC was originally a Bethlehem vessel, then ISG, then Arcelor Mittal. Currently operated by Interlake for those previous foreign owners. Now that Cliffs is in charge, I feel they brought SJC back out to haul for themselves at a reduce rate vs the other fleets rates. The bigger picture is Cliff's is counting their operating costs and looking to stay current going forward with their mills. Handling your own transportation is efficient and better suits your needs operationally. Maybe they will look at restoring Tac Harbor. That port saves several hours each trip compared to going all the way to Duluth/Superior/2Hbrs. Over the course of a season, hours saved could add additional trips. Thanks, I love this forum!
The Cort is owned by an investment/insurance company out on the East Coast, operated by Interlake under charter to Cliffs. Cliffs does not have ownership of her
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote: January 22, 2023, 10:48 am Cliff's owns the Ryerson, Sykes and Block correct?
Cliffs does not ‘own these vessels. They are ‘owned’ by Indiana Steamship Company, under long term charter to Cleveland Cliffs.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Fun to read the exchanges here about ELR. Cliff's owns the Ryerson, Sykes and Block correct? Is it not less expensive to run your own equipment vs chartering and paying someone else to make that run for raw materials? Seeing the Sykes and Block at Marquette and trips to Lake Erie are something new and look to continue going forward. There were even a few trips for the Sykes and maybe the Block moving fines from Lake Erie mills to Lake Michigan mills owned by Cliffs. This is vertical integration of having control of raw materials, transportation, and positioning both at the variety of mills Cliff's operates. Going back several owner changes, does the Cort also fall under the Cliff's umbrella? SJC was originally a Bethlehem vessel, then ISG, then Arcelor Mittal. Currently operated by Interlake for those previous foreign owners. Now that Cliffs is in charge, I feel they brought SJC back out to haul for themselves at a reduce rate vs the other fleets rates. The bigger picture is Cliff's is counting their operating costs and looking to stay current going forward with their mills. Handling your own transportation is efficient and better suits your needs operationally. Maybe they will look at restoring Tac Harbor. That port saves several hours each trip compared to going all the way to Duluth/Superior/2Hbrs. Over the course of a season, hours saved could add additional trips. Thanks, I love this forum!
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote: January 21, 2023, 9:34 pm
Jon Paul wrote: January 21, 2023, 11:59 am
Guest wrote: January 20, 2023, 8:59 pm If they load Ore in Superior/Two Harbors, deliver to Hamilton, head to Toledo to load HBI, take that to the Soo once it is converted to EAF, unload, then head back to Superior/Two Harbors to restart the loop. In a situation like this it would only be empty the westbound trip on Lake Erie and the Westbound trip on Lake Superior. That is a fairly efficient round trip.

However, I still don’t understand the economic feasibility of this. Any ship in the world (that fits through the locks) could carry cargo on this loop being both of these legs would be international shipments. I am not privy to the financials behind this so I am purely speculating, however, I don’t understand how they are planning to compete with the lower operating costs of newer foreign built vessels.
If any foreign ship that can pass through the locks is capable and more efficient than Lakers on these "International shipments" why arent they being used on the trans shipments from Superior to Quebec City? Or for that matter why aren't they hauling from the lakehead to Hamilton?
I have never understood why an international shipping company hasn’t gotten into this on the dry bulk cargo side for the international moves. However, it is already happening on the liquid bulk cargo side with the Iver Bright.
The US and Canadian deck officers have Great Lakes Pilotage. Anyone else who have to carry a pilot around and that would get pretty expensive. The value of a liquid cargo is so much more than iron ore that it's probably economic to do that.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

guest wrote: January 21, 2023, 1:34 am algoma could put cliffs under, 3 ships? versus many ships. do the math. the elr will be srapped soner than latter
It’s not always size that matters.
Post Reply