5 ms·

A great Twitter thread with many articles/resources if you want a critical lens at the global logistics supply chain. https://twitter.com/CharmaineSChua/status

by pradn 6y ago

A great Twitter thread with many articles/resources if you want a critical lens at the global logistics supply chain. https://twitter.com/CharmaineSChua/status/1375868552129863681?s=20 https://twitter.com/CharmaineSChua/status/137586855212986368... I found this article on the impact on super-sized ships on logistical infrastructure useful and fascinating. It describes how the creation of ships too big to fit in the Panama canal (post-PANAMAX ships) was received by 1) Panamanians 2) East Coast / Gulf Coast ports 3) West Coast ports. The Panamanians spent billions expanding their channel to bring port fees and promote attendant value-add services. Ports across the East and Gulf coasts overinvested in trying to make their port the preferred one for these new ships. Clearly, not every port can recoup investments in higher cranes and deeper harbors. There was an irrational optimism on the East Coast, as they sought to take business away from West Coast transhippers (dock in Southern California and ship to the east by train.) In response, the West Coast logistics industry sought and received a series of infrastructure improvements to make transshipment from their ports viable. So, just a few shipping companies are able to increase the size of their ships (for economies of scale) and end up having a major impact on billions of investment dollars in more than a dozen cities. Policy makers in the US aren't able to pick just a few cities to focus investment in. How can you tell a city that they aren't going to get those jobs? Perhaps the US should set a maximum ship size to prevent this wastage of resources; but one could argue the efficiencies for consumers could be worth it. https://www.ijurr.org/article/fungible-space-competition-and-volatility-in-the-global-logistics-network/ https://www.ijurr.org/article/fungible-space-competition-and... The size of these ships keeps increasing at an astonishing rate. See the chart in this excellent talk: https://youtu.be/gdkvAXcZD7U?t=892 https://youtu.be/gdkvAXcZD7U?t=892 Moreover, the hydrodynamic effects of these large ships in relatively shallow and narrow canals is underappreciated. We're liable to see more such incidents as ships get bigger and bigger. https://www.ft.com/content/171c92ec-0a44-4dc5-acab-81ee2620d3c1 https://www.ft.com/content/171c92ec-0a44-4dc5-acab-81ee2620d...

beastialityking 6y ago
You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.
HeyLaughingBoy 6y ago
>the hydrodynamic effects of these large ships in relatively shallow and narrow canals is underappreciated I'm really surprised I haven't seen this mentioned. A long time ago, I was trained as a merchant ship's navigation officer. One of the things we were taught (but unfortunately had few opportunities to practice), was using "bank cushion" or "bank suction" to use the hydraulic interaction between the hull and a narrow body of water like a river to navigate tight curves. These days, there are simulations that I'm sure capture these effects to it's easier to get some experience with them. Of course, in the case of the Ever Given it seems that the grounding was mainly due to not compensating for the strong cross winds.
- EricE 6y ago
  That and going ridiculously fast during a sandstorm. Juan Brown/Blancolirio channel has a good overview and he touches on hydronic interactions you reference too: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5iyn2q6s1Sk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5iyn2q6s1Sk
- SPACE_LAWYER 6y ago
  I learned about the bank effect from this article https://www.ft.com/content/171c92ec-0a44-4dc5-acab-81ee2620d3c1 https://www.ft.com/content/171c92ec-0a44-4dc5-acab-81ee2620d...
- rswail 6y ago
  > ... not compensating for the strong cross winds. Not compensating or not being able to compensate? One implies negligence, the other unavoidable.
  - willyt 6y ago
    > Unavoidable Not really, weather forecasts are readily available and windage calculations are a thing.
    - ArnoVW 6y ago
      I believe the ft article says that they had 30 kts wind, and steered 'into the wind' to compensate. And since they were in a narrow canal, a sudden lull in the wind was enough. That doesn't contradict the 'going too fast' though. Just like we don't drive 55 mph in a residential neighborhood, thinking 'if a kid runs into the street that is not my fault, it was unforeseeable'.
Synaesthesia 6y ago
The Suez canal has also increased in size over time, it's cross sectional area has steadily increased.
behnamoh 6y ago
Maybe it's easier to read that Twitter thread here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1375868552129863681.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1375868552129863681.html
Arn_Thor 6y ago
Fantastic thread! Thank you for sharing. This has dramatically expanded my "to read" list
xyzzyz 6y ago
> Policy makers in the US aren't able to pick just a few cities to focus investment in. Policy makers in the US aren't even able to repeal Jones Act, with its disastrous consequences for US shipping industry. You can't expect much from them.
- rattray 6y ago
  What is the Jones Act and what are its consequences, disastrous and otherwise?
  - tjalfi 6y ago
    The Jones Act[0] requires that goods transported by water between US ports to fly under the US flag, use ships constructed in the US, owned by US companies, and be crewed by US citizens. This results in a substantial cost increase for water traffic. It's otherwise quite cheap to transport goods by water but because of the act highways and trucks are used instead. An OEDC study[1] found that repealing the act would benefit the economy from $19-64 billion. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 [1] https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/local-content-requirements-and-their-economic-effect-on-shipbuilding_90316781-en https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/local-c...
  - xyzzyz 6y ago
    You got a good response from someone else below, but here is an example of insanities Jones Act leads to. There have been companies running LNG vessels, sailing from Russia to Northeastern US, selling Russian natural gas there, and then sailing south to buy American natural gas in southern states for much lower price, and than sailing back east to sell it in Europe or further east. Northeastern states buy expensive Russian gas instead of cheap American gas, because there is no vessel that could ship gas from south to north: because of Jones Act, it would have to be American built American operated vessel, and such vessel quite simply does not exist.

by pradn 6y ago

beastialityking 6y ago

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

HeyLaughingBoy 6y ago

>the hydrodynamic effects of these large ships in relatively shallow and narrow canals is underappreciated I'm really surprised I haven't seen this mentioned. A long time ago, I was trained as a merchant ship's navigation officer. One of the things we were taught (but unfortunately had few opportunities to practice), was using "bank cushion" or "bank suction" to use the hydraulic interaction between the hull and a narrow body of water like a river to navigate tight curves. These days, there are simulations that I'm sure capture these effects to it's easier to get some experience with them. Of course, in the case of the Ever Given it seems that the grounding was mainly due to not compensating for the strong cross winds.

EricE 6y ago
That and going ridiculously fast during a sandstorm. Juan Brown/Blancolirio channel has a good overview and he touches on hydronic interactions you reference too: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5iyn2q6s1Sk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5iyn2q6s1Sk
SPACE_LAWYER 6y ago
I learned about the bank effect from this article https://www.ft.com/content/171c92ec-0a44-4dc5-acab-81ee2620d3c1 https://www.ft.com/content/171c92ec-0a44-4dc5-acab-81ee2620d...
rswail 6y ago
> ... not compensating for the strong cross winds. Not compensating or not being able to compensate? One implies negligence, the other unavoidable.
- willyt 6y ago
  > Unavoidable Not really, weather forecasts are readily available and windage calculations are a thing.
  - ArnoVW 6y ago
    I believe the ft article says that they had 30 kts wind, and steered 'into the wind' to compensate. And since they were in a narrow canal, a sudden lull in the wind was enough. That doesn't contradict the 'going too fast' though. Just like we don't drive 55 mph in a residential neighborhood, thinking 'if a kid runs into the street that is not my fault, it was unforeseeable'.

Synaesthesia 6y ago

The Suez canal has also increased in size over time, it's cross sectional area has steadily increased.

behnamoh 6y ago

Maybe it's easier to read that Twitter thread here: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1375868552129863681.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1375868552129863681.html

Arn_Thor 6y ago

Fantastic thread! Thank you for sharing. This has dramatically expanded my "to read" list

xyzzyz 6y ago

> Policy makers in the US aren't able to pick just a few cities to focus investment in. Policy makers in the US aren't even able to repeal Jones Act, with its disastrous consequences for US shipping industry. You can't expect much from them.

rattray 6y ago
What is the Jones Act and what are its consequences, disastrous and otherwise?
- tjalfi 6y ago
  The Jones Act[0] requires that goods transported by water between US ports to fly under the US flag, use ships constructed in the US, owned by US companies, and be crewed by US citizens. This results in a substantial cost increase for water traffic. It's otherwise quite cheap to transport goods by water but because of the act highways and trucks are used instead. An OEDC study[1] found that repealing the act would benefit the economy from $19-64 billion. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Marine_Act_of_1920 [1] https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/local-content-requirements-and-their-economic-effect-on-shipbuilding_90316781-en https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/local-c...
- xyzzyz 6y ago
  You got a good response from someone else below, but here is an example of insanities Jones Act leads to. There have been companies running LNG vessels, sailing from Russia to Northeastern US, selling Russian natural gas there, and then sailing south to buy American natural gas in southern states for much lower price, and than sailing back east to sell it in Europe or further east. Northeastern states buy expensive Russian gas instead of cheap American gas, because there is no vessel that could ship gas from south to north: because of Jones Act, it would have to be American built American operated vessel, and such vessel quite simply does not exist.