Ryerson

[BigRiver]

Sykes is at the port terminal for belt repairs

[garbear]

Just heard from a guy that works at Fraser, the Ryerson has been moved to facilitate parts removal. In other words, they appear to be taking parts off the Ryerson for the Sykes and Block. Anyone else hear anything like this? This is bad news if true, got to mean she'll never sail again.

I hear the Sykes is coming in on the 7th. Parts swap?

How many parts from the Ryerson would fit the other two boats.

[BigRiver]

No. Sykes is coming to unload limestone and load ore

[Guest]

Just heard from a guy that works at Fraser, the Ryerson has been moved to facilitate parts removal. In other words, they appear to be taking parts off the Ryerson for the Sykes and Block. Anyone else hear anything like this? This is bad news if true, got to mean she'll never sail again.

I hear the Sykes is coming in on the 7th. Parts swap?

[Chris M]

No, she was moved from the the slip she was in for dredging, nothing else. Once they're done with the dredging she'll be moved back.

[Ed]

Just heard from a guy that works at Fraser, the Ryerson has been moved to facilitate parts removal. In other words, they appear to be taking parts off the Ryerson for the Sykes and Block. Anyone else hear anything like this? This is bad news if true, got to mean she'll never sail again.

[guest]

I did hear a rumor that she was going to get a 5 year inspection and sail again, but according to a Fraser worker they are not even going to pump the drydock. It is only there for a standby berth till the dredging is done.

[hausen]

algoma central vessels are a lot more economical to operate than the ryerson. it could never compete cost wise

During recent years Algoma has consistently deployed three of its oldest and presumably less efficient gearless bulk carriers, Algoma Discovery, Algoma Guardian, and Algoma Spirit to move iron ore pellets from western Lake Superior to Hamilton and Quebec City. One of those three ships is retired now, and the other two are likely not that far behind. As of now it seems like Algoma is only adding one new gearless bulker to its fleet during the same general period that the three older ships are or will be retired.

At Seaway draft, the iron ore pellet carrying capacity of the Ryerson is almost exactly the same as any one of those three older Algoma bulkers. If the Ryerson's hull and holds are in good shape, a repowering would likely make her just as efficient or perhaps more efficient on the Seaway ore trade than some of the vessels currently making those runs.

[guest]

algoma central vessels are a lot more economical to operate than the ryerson. it could never compete cost wise

[Guest]

She will only make sense if she goes through the canal to Hamilton or out the Seaway!

[ChannelFever]

Beautiful boat but 25,000 ton iron ore capacity would be tough to work on a long haul vs a footer. Burns way more fuel per ton carried, takes twice as long to unload (and that's usually at OT rates), and probably needs 3 A/E and 3 QMED's. Add in the breakout costs which would be multi millions.

With more coal plants closing in the next few years, she would face some really aggressive competition.

[tugboathunter]

This is just a thought, but even though Cleveland has no equipment to unload a straight decker, CSL straight deckers regularly unload titanium slag in Ashtabula using shoreside cranes. Ashtabula is used as a transshipment point for iron ore en route to Cleveland, so maybe a straight decker unloading ore there isn’t out of the question in the future.

[ChannelFever]

I thought the exemption ran to 2025, then I tried to find the ruling and couldn't.

If the hull is in good shape, sooner or later that will be of value. Especially with the price of steel today. The steam plant though will be very expensive to bring back to life and then operate.

[Guest]

She is, but isn't there a sunset date on the exemption? Also, with the cost of new builds in the US, wouldn't it still be cost effective to do the conversion by someone who has the order book to support it and ships hitting the 70 yrs old that have been run every single year?

[ChannelFever]

Isn't the Ryerson part of the group of US Flag steamers exempted from the emission stds?

[Bob]

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.

[Guest]

the csl niagara and the algoma niagara both have exhaust scrubbers. does the s.s. ryerson have?

I don't think the exhaust scrubber technology is compatible with HFO.

It very much is. All of the Interlake boats with scrubbers run HFO.

[hospitaller]

the csl niagara and the algoma niagara both have exhaust scrubbers. does the s.s. ryerson have?

I don't think the exhaust scrubber technology is compatible with HFO.

[guest]

the csl niagara and the algoma niagara both have exhaust scrubbers. does the s.s. ryerson have?

[Geest]

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.