3 ms·
The cost of shipping overseas at scale (thanks to containerization, automated ports and gigantic ships) is lower than doing so locally with less efficient means
by ihaveajob 3y ago
The cost of shipping overseas at scale (thanks to containerization, automated ports and gigantic ships) is lower than doing so locally with less efficient means (i.e. your chicken farmer's diesel van). Given that, even if the price of oil goes up, the math doesn't change because costs rise uniformly.
- weberer 3y agoI don't get it. Instead of a truck driving 100 miles from the factory to the store, you now have ships driving thousands of miles halfway across the world to a port, where a truck then picks up the product and drives 100 miles to the store.
- bberenberg 3y agoYes but you’re ignoring how much each carries. If you look at amount carried per amount of fuel consumed per journey, container ships are much more efficient than trucks regardless that one journey is 100 miles and the other is 3000.
- pier25 3y agoBut you still need to carry the contents in a truck from and to the port.
- weberer 3y agoNo, my point is that the trucks are still there. The ships are just adding an extra step that wasn't there before.
- bberenberg 3y agoAh gotcha I misunderstood. Are you then suggesting that everything everyone needs to consume and dependent supply chains be provided within close proximity of every individual consumer then?
- somenameforme 3y agoA further irony on this is that the main reason those goods are so cheap is because they tend to be produced in areas that not only have cheaper labor, but also far fewer environmental and other regulations. So we're intentionally outsourcing in pursuit of less environmentally friendly production (because it's cheaper), and then shipping it half way around the world on top. Globalism is most certainly not environmentally friendly in any way, shape, or fashion.
- chiefalchemist 3y agoThank you. I should have mentioned that as well. People think it's all about cost of labor in China and SE Asia. But it's also a lack of regulation that protects the ecology. The USA loves to brag about how bad it was in the 70s - remember the TV adverts with the Native American and a tear in his eye? - and how well we cleaned up our act. Lol. Ohhellno. When we offshored the manufacturing, the associated pollution when with it. We didn't clean up as much as we outsourced our pollution. Point being, when we see the photos of Beijing and the smog, that's not China's smog, we, and the rest of The West "owns" a good chunk of that smog. But the politicians and the corporate leaders aren't going to be transparent about it.
- kwere 3y agothe arbitrage is cost of production there + shipping vs local production cost
- RetroTechie 3y agoAt a time when there was a dip in container shipping, I read a quote stating ~$1500 to ship a container from China to US (west coast, probably). With such a container holding ~6000 pair of shoes. Do the math... Of course shipping costs may have changed, but parents' point stands: The energy consumption (and labour costs) embodied in many products' fabrication, is much higher than energy consumed to ship 'em around the world. And thus those products will be fabricated where it's cheapest and/or most efficient.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- chiefalchemist 3y agoI should clarify a bit...it's not so much about international ship vs local truck. It's that the foundation of the global economic system is "tuned" to being pro climate change, if you will. When so much is riding (literally) on the status quo, getting a ship that large (metaphorically) to adjust direction is difficult.