by Guest » March 1, 2019, 6:15 am
MilwBob wrote:Guest wrote:Joe Delaronde wrote:The replacement cost is a Whole different story, though.
Good Point! Luckily this fire didn't spread to the other two ships moored nearby.
Does the U.S. have any type of waiver system to allow a foreign flagged (Canadian) vessel to carry cargoes between two domestic ports if there are no available U.S. flagged carriers? I read somewhere that some of this was permitted during World War II, but I have never heard of it in peace time.
Why would they need to do this? The loss, wether temporary or permanent, of the St Clair in no way, shape, or form constitutes an emergency situation. There is no need to have a Canadian vessel cover her loads.
I probably should have started that part of my post in a new thread as I didn't mean to ask about the existence of waivers in connection with the St. Clair fire but rather a comparison to what seems to happen quite a bit in the Canadian tanker trades.
In reference to the St. Clair, however, by looking at the ASC website, that vessel represents nearly 7% of the fleet's single trip carrying capacity. I have no idea what type of cargo tonnages commitments the company has for the coming season but coming from working background of over 25 years in logistics and production scheduling I can say that losing that much capacity is definitely going to have an impact on operations. This 7% figure is just a crude estimation as the true seasonal carrying capacity of the fleet would also have to take into account several other factors such as average vessel operational speeds, unloading rates, trading routes, etc. From what I have heard, ASC planned to outfit all of their ships in 2019 before this accident happened so they must be planning for at least a busy spring. Having the remaining fleet units make a few extra trips may help alleviate the shortfall but the benefits of this is also reliant upon the company's tonnage commitments. In the short term, the loss of the St. Clair's capacity (for at least this season at a minimum) may result in some cargoes being outsourced to other fleets that have some reserve capacity while in the long term further cuts in the coal trade over the next 10 years or so will likely offset the shortfall.
[quote="MilwBob"][quote="Guest"][quote="Joe Delaronde"]The replacement cost is a Whole different story, though.[/quote]
Good Point! Luckily this fire didn't spread to the other two ships moored nearby.
Does the U.S. have any type of waiver system to allow a foreign flagged (Canadian) vessel to carry cargoes between two domestic ports if there are no available U.S. flagged carriers? I read somewhere that some of this was permitted during World War II, but I have never heard of it in peace time.[/quote]
Why would they need to do this? The loss, wether temporary or permanent, of the St Clair in no way, shape, or form constitutes an emergency situation. There is no need to have a Canadian vessel cover her loads.[/quote]
I probably should have started that part of my post in a new thread as I didn't mean to ask about the existence of waivers in connection with the St. Clair fire but rather a comparison to what seems to happen quite a bit in the Canadian tanker trades.
In reference to the St. Clair, however, by looking at the ASC website, that vessel represents nearly 7% of the fleet's single trip carrying capacity. I have no idea what type of cargo tonnages commitments the company has for the coming season but coming from working background of over 25 years in logistics and production scheduling I can say that losing that much capacity is definitely going to have an impact on operations. This 7% figure is just a crude estimation as the true seasonal carrying capacity of the fleet would also have to take into account several other factors such as average vessel operational speeds, unloading rates, trading routes, etc. From what I have heard, ASC planned to outfit all of their ships in 2019 before this accident happened so they must be planning for at least a busy spring. Having the remaining fleet units make a few extra trips may help alleviate the shortfall but the benefits of this is also reliant upon the company's tonnage commitments. In the short term, the loss of the St. Clair's capacity (for at least this season at a minimum) may result in some cargoes being outsourced to other fleets that have some reserve capacity while in the long term further cuts in the coal trade over the next 10 years or so will likely offset the shortfall.