Ryerson
Re: Ryerson
She’ll never run again, there’s too much money to be spent on her such as a new power plant and unloading equipment. If they turned her into a self unloaded then that would cut the tonnage she could haul and they would be losing money on each run. This is my opinion and my opinion only but I truly believe that the next time we see her on the lake she’ll be heading for scrap.
Re: Ryerson
It very much is. All of the Interlake boats with scrubbers run HFO.hospitaller wrote:I don't think the exhaust scrubber technology is compatible with HFO.guest wrote:the csl niagara and the algoma niagara both have exhaust scrubbers. does the s.s. ryerson have?
Re: Ryerson
I don't think the exhaust scrubber technology is compatible with HFO.guest wrote:the csl niagara and the algoma niagara both have exhaust scrubbers. does the s.s. ryerson have?
Re: Ryerson
the csl niagara and the algoma niagara both have exhaust scrubbers. does the s.s. ryerson have?
Re: Ryerson
For the Ryerson to run and run profitably she needs:
1. High ore prices, with forecasts to remain high
2. Destinations that can offload her
3. Crew familiar with her plant
4. Low fuel prices, with forecasts to remain low.
Right now that list is missing some key check marks.
Ore prices and international demand may float interest enough to have Cliffs/CML kick the tires, but I don't think there is enough long-term stability to warrant the reactivation cost from a multi-year layup.
Offload facilities are probably the most limiting factor for the Ryerson. Of the US mills that still have operational waterside bridge cranes, most haven't been used to offload a vessel in years if not decades. IIRC Indiana Harbor just demolished their bridge cranes on the West side, so that's one less option and as far as I know neither Burns Harbor, Gary or Cleveland have any offloading equipment in place for bulkers. This limits her to international trade to Hamilton, Quebec or other saltwater Canadian ports in the Seaway, where she will have to compete with Algoma and CSL for profitable business.
Crewing the engineering plant is likely going to be difficult as steam turbine vessels are getting rarer in the ocean commercial trades for the US Flag fleet. The largest remaining source of labor would have to be ex-USN engineers coming off the Burkes, Ticos or big Amphibs.
Fuel costs versus her competitors are another stumbling block. The majority of the Canadian fleet is either newbuilt or newer than the Ryerson. All run on diesel and most have vastly more efficient plants in terms of consumption and exhaust than a steam turbine plant running on heavy fuel oil. I'd imagine any thought of retrofitting the vessel with scrubbers is cost prohibitive when added to the already hefty bill of getting her ready to trade again.
1. High ore prices, with forecasts to remain high
2. Destinations that can offload her
3. Crew familiar with her plant
4. Low fuel prices, with forecasts to remain low.
Right now that list is missing some key check marks.
Ore prices and international demand may float interest enough to have Cliffs/CML kick the tires, but I don't think there is enough long-term stability to warrant the reactivation cost from a multi-year layup.
Offload facilities are probably the most limiting factor for the Ryerson. Of the US mills that still have operational waterside bridge cranes, most haven't been used to offload a vessel in years if not decades. IIRC Indiana Harbor just demolished their bridge cranes on the West side, so that's one less option and as far as I know neither Burns Harbor, Gary or Cleveland have any offloading equipment in place for bulkers. This limits her to international trade to Hamilton, Quebec or other saltwater Canadian ports in the Seaway, where she will have to compete with Algoma and CSL for profitable business.
Crewing the engineering plant is likely going to be difficult as steam turbine vessels are getting rarer in the ocean commercial trades for the US Flag fleet. The largest remaining source of labor would have to be ex-USN engineers coming off the Burkes, Ticos or big Amphibs.
Fuel costs versus her competitors are another stumbling block. The majority of the Canadian fleet is either newbuilt or newer than the Ryerson. All run on diesel and most have vastly more efficient plants in terms of consumption and exhaust than a steam turbine plant running on heavy fuel oil. I'd imagine any thought of retrofitting the vessel with scrubbers is cost prohibitive when added to the already hefty bill of getting her ready to trade again.
Re: Ryerson
The CSL Niagara and Algoma Niagara are both up bound in ballast on Lake Huron headed for Superior. Some may backhaul part way but a lot of the Canadian boats I've watched don't.
As for the Ryerson I personally don't see it happening. Cliffs has shown no sign of letting up on overseas pellet sales and prices are high worldwide. Putting the Ryerson back in service would only happen if the long term looked good enough to justify the investment.
As for the Ryerson I personally don't see it happening. Cliffs has shown no sign of letting up on overseas pellet sales and prices are high worldwide. Putting the Ryerson back in service would only happen if the long term looked good enough to justify the investment.
Re: Ryerson
Jon Paul, she does not come back from Quebec City without a cargo. They sail light from Hamilton to Quebec City where they load Mangenese ore to be taken to Indiana Harbor.
Re: Ryerson
The Canadian selfunloaders occasionally back haul the strait deckers rarely do.guest wrote:its a long steam from quebec city to duluth with no backhaul
Re: Ryerson
The chances of the Ryerson ever sailing 'as-is' again are slim to none. My guess (and it's just that) is that CML keeps it on the books as a sellable asset on their balance sheet. In other words, the ships value (which at this point is largely parts and, most critically, scrap) can be used as collateral on credit devices, should they ever need one.
Re: Ryerson
The corrosion issue at Duluth/Superior is also happening in Thunder Bay, but at a slower rate. The water in Duluth/Superior is generally no different than in other ports in the Great Lakes. Instead, the problem is coming from microbes (Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion) which are feeding off of the tannin in the water from nearby bogs. They attach themselves to uncoated steel and start causing corrosion. During the Winter, ice scrapes the tubercles off exposing the copper-covered iron which causes corrosion of the underlying metal. So the issue for ships like the Sherwin, Irvin and perhaps the Ryerson is the tubercles attaching themselves to the hull, but then being scrapped off by the ice. That's why the Sherwin's corrosion is not the entire hull bottom, but along the hull bottom/bilge where the ice would scrape the hull.
https://www.seagrant.wisc.edu/wp-conten ... e_2015.pdf
The CN ore docks in Duluth are suffering from severe corrosion with large holes in the underwater dock facings.
As for the Ryerson and her lower hull coating, all the CML ships have this coating. Inland Steel started applying the lower hull coating in the mid-1990s when they discovered corrosion issues at Indiana Harbor and there vessels would layup for the winter at the steel mill. I don't know if the issue of corrosion in Indiana Harbor is related to what's going on in Duluth/Superior or if it's some chemistry in the water due to pollution.
- Brian
https://www.seagrant.wisc.edu/wp-conten ... e_2015.pdf
The CN ore docks in Duluth are suffering from severe corrosion with large holes in the underwater dock facings.
As for the Ryerson and her lower hull coating, all the CML ships have this coating. Inland Steel started applying the lower hull coating in the mid-1990s when they discovered corrosion issues at Indiana Harbor and there vessels would layup for the winter at the steel mill. I don't know if the issue of corrosion in Indiana Harbor is related to what's going on in Duluth/Superior or if it's some chemistry in the water due to pollution.
- Brian
-
- Posts: 489
- Joined: April 19, 2011, 4:01 pm
Re: Ryerson
The Ryerson was not fully painted her last time in dry dock (2006), instead they pained the bottom of the hull. Prior to the 2008 season, Fraser rolled new paint on at her lay up dock.Guest wrote:Guest wrote:I imagine their technical superintendents have already reviewed this and made the decision that they feel it is safe for the time being for her to lay by in the Twin PortsGuest wrote:The iron eating bacteria in the water of the Duluth-Superior Harbor will corrode the bottom hull plates of the Ryerson if she stays laid-up in the Twin Ports. ( It probably is already happening) Just like what happened to the John Sherwin and is occurring (severely) to the William A Irvin. If Central Marine really thinks she has a future, they better tow the Ryerson to another port for continued lay-up.
Would the newer grades of bottom coatings better protect against this problem? The Irvin had probably last been painted in the mid-1980s and the Sherwin most likely in the 1970s. Have there been any improvement in the bottom coating since that time? I beiieve that Ryerson's hull was fully repainted the season before or just before its last operational season in the early 2000s. From pictures I have seen of the Ryerson laid up at Superior it looks like it may have a different shade of paint extending up from about 8 to 10 feet above the keel line. Is this a different form of paint not used on the entire hull?
Re: Ryerson
Is there any relation to potential hull damage due to the qualities of the water around the Sherwin and the Ryerson that can be traced back to the discontinuance of lead-based paint on the hulls?
Re: Ryerson
Guest wrote:I imagine their technical superintendents have already reviewed this and made the decision that they feel it is safe for the time being for her to lay by in the Twin PortsGuest wrote:The iron eating bacteria in the water of the Duluth-Superior Harbor will corrode the bottom hull plates of the Ryerson if she stays laid-up in the Twin Ports. ( It probably is already happening) Just like what happened to the John Sherwin and is occurring (severely) to the William A Irvin. If Central Marine really thinks she has a future, they better tow the Ryerson to another port for continued lay-up.
Would the newer grades of bottom coatings better protect against this problem? The Irvin had probably last been painted in the mid-1980s and the Sherwin most likely in the 1970s. Have there been any improvement in the bottom coating since that time? I beiieve that Ryerson's hull was fully repainted the season before or just before its last operational season in the early 2000s. From pictures I have seen of the Ryerson laid up at Superior it looks like it may have a different shade of paint extending up from about 8 to 10 feet above the keel line. Is this a different form of paint not used on the entire hull?
Re: Ryerson
I imagine their technical superintendents have already reviewed this and made the decision that they feel it is safe for the time being for her to lay by in the Twin PortsGuest wrote:The iron eating bacteria in the water of the Duluth-Superior Harbor will corrode the bottom hull plates of the Ryerson if she stays laid-up in the Twin Ports. ( It probably is already happening) Just like what happened to the John Sherwin and is occurring (severely) to the William A Irvin. If Central Marine really thinks she has a future, they better tow the Ryerson to another port for continued lay-up.
Re: Ryerson
The iron eating bacteria in the water of the Duluth-Superior Harbor will corrode the bottom hull plates of the Ryerson if she stays laid-up in the Twin Ports. ( It probably is already happening) Just like what happened to the John Sherwin and is occurring (severely) to the William A Irvin. If Central Marine really thinks she has a future, they better tow the Ryerson to another port for continued lay-up.
Re: Ryerson
Storage is cheap and technical superintendents (who have little if any input or visibility into commercial decision making) hate to throw stuff away.Guest wrote:Cliffs Does have a plan for the Ryerson pending market conditions. Joe Block life boat is at Sturgeon Bay with with a note on it. "Save equipment for Ryerson"
It's not unusual to find parts for long-gone vessels in shipping company's warehouses.
Re: Ryerson
Cliffs Does have a plan for the Ryerson pending market conditions. Joe Block life boat is at Sturgeon Bay with with a note on it. "Save equipment for Ryerson"
Re: Ryerson
The unload time would be baked into the per-day rate, with laytime set accordingly. If there is demurrage, it's on the charterer's account.badger wrote:dock side cranes like in lorain are fine, but with a 36hr unload time who is paying for the demurage?
The Ryerson isn't going to sail commercially again, unless she's re-engined and converted to a self unloader. There's just no market for an aging straightback like that.
Re: Ryerson
Ok, this is a very out there question, but...
With the high cost of a new vessel and the fleet aging, any chance she could have a new mid body built? Maybe go 800 foot ? I know she is steam, but everyone says she is in such good shape.
With the high cost of a new vessel and the fleet aging, any chance she could have a new mid body built? Maybe go 800 foot ? I know she is steam, but everyone says she is in such good shape.
Re: Ryerson
I would imagine there were would have to be a significant increase in the demand for export iron ore shipments to bring the Ryerson back into service. The longer voyages through the Seaway largely offset its lack of self-unloading gear in comparison to the relatively short distances traveled between ports on Lake Superior and the receiving ports on the lower lakes. Over longer distances, the time saved by the ability to self-unload is offset by the additional tonnage carried by a vessel without the added weight and reduced carrying capacity imposed by the unloading gear. As the Canadian fleet is optimized for Seaway service, that is why Algoma and CSL continue to build straight deck bulk carriers. I once created a basic mathematical model demonstrating the advantages of gearless carriers to self-unloaders through the Seaway and it was pretty obvious as to why the Canadian fleet is a mix of straight deckers and self-unloaders and the US fleet is not. As cargoes become tighter on the lakes, it is possible, although probably unlikely, that this could change in the US fleet.