Ryerson

Discussion board focusing on Great Lakes Shipping Question & Answer. From beginner to expert all posts are welcome.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

I believe the original poster was comparing the CML fleet in size vs Algomas fleet.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Jon Paul wrote: January 21, 2023, 11:59 am
Guest wrote: January 20, 2023, 8:59 pm If they load Ore in Superior/Two Harbors, deliver to Hamilton, head to Toledo to load HBI, take that to the Soo once it is converted to EAF, unload, then head back to Superior/Two Harbors to restart the loop. In a situation like this it would only be empty the westbound trip on Lake Erie and the Westbound trip on Lake Superior. That is a fairly efficient round trip.

However, I still don’t understand the economic feasibility of this. Any ship in the world (that fits through the locks) could carry cargo on this loop being both of these legs would be international shipments. I am not privy to the financials behind this so I am purely speculating, however, I don’t understand how they are planning to compete with the lower operating costs of newer foreign built vessels.
If any foreign ship that can pass through the locks is capable and more efficient than Lakers on these "International shipments" why arent they being used on the trans shipments from Superior to Quebec City? Or for that matter why aren't they hauling from the lakehead to Hamilton?
I have never understood why an international shipping company hasn’t gotten into this on the dry bulk cargo side for the international moves. However, it is already happening on the liquid bulk cargo side with the Iver Bright.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

guest wrote: January 21, 2023, 1:34 am algoma could put cliffs under, 3 ships? versus many ships. do the math. the elr will be srapped soner than latter
You realize how big Cliffs is, right? They're much more than three ships.
Jon Paul
Posts: 888
Joined: December 14, 2017, 8:37 pm

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Jon Paul »

high-carbon@2x.jpg
The HBI briquet is 4" x 2" and can be used in both BOF and EAF steel making. As I mentioned earlier, I think it will be interesting to see how they are loaded and unloaded. Its not like you can drop something of that size and weight off a loading belt and free fall to the bottom of the cargo hold.
The important thing to note is that HBI is versatile and can be used in both steel making processes and that Cliffs will be using its own raw materials to make it and if they have a way to load and unload it on the ELR, it will add a whole new dimension to steel making on the Great Lakes and they will be leading the way
Jon Paul
Posts: 888
Joined: December 14, 2017, 8:37 pm

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Jon Paul »

Guest wrote: January 20, 2023, 8:59 pm If they load Ore in Superior/Two Harbors, deliver to Hamilton, head to Toledo to load HBI, take that to the Soo once it is converted to EAF, unload, then head back to Superior/Two Harbors to restart the loop. In a situation like this it would only be empty the westbound trip on Lake Erie and the Westbound trip on Lake Superior. That is a fairly efficient round trip.

However, I still don’t understand the economic feasibility of this. Any ship in the world (that fits through the locks) could carry cargo on this loop being both of these legs would be international shipments. I am not privy to the financials behind this so I am purely speculating, however, I don’t understand how they are planning to compete with the lower operating costs of newer foreign built vessels.
If any foreign ship that can pass through the locks is capable and more efficient than Lakers on these "International shipments" why arent they being used on the trans shipments from Superior to Quebec City? Or for that matter why aren't they hauling from the lakehead to Hamilton?
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote: January 20, 2023, 8:59 pm If they load Ore in Superior/Two Harbors, deliver to Hamilton, head to Toledo to load HBI, take that to the Soo once it is converted to EAF, unload, then head back to Superior/Two Harbors to restart the loop. In a situation like this it would only be empty the westbound trip on Lake Erie and the Westbound trip on Lake Superior. That is a fairly efficient round trip.

However, I still don’t understand the economic feasibility of this. Any ship in the world (that fits through the locks) could carry cargo on this loop being both of these legs would be international shipments. I am not privy to the financials behind this so I am purely speculating, however, I don’t understand how they are planning to compete with the lower operating costs of newer foreign built vessels.
I'm not too familiar with this HBI cargo for use in electric arc furnaces, but are current self-unloaders able to carry it, or is it more like when natural ores could not be moved in self-unloaders until the advent of taconite?
guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by guest »

algoma could put cliffs under, 3 ships? versus many ships. do the math. the elr will be srapped soner than latter
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

If they load Ore in Superior/Two Harbors, deliver to Hamilton, head to Toledo to load HBI, take that to the Soo once it is converted to EAF, unload, then head back to Superior/Two Harbors to restart the loop. In a situation like this it would only be empty the westbound trip on Lake Erie and the Westbound trip on Lake Superior. That is a fairly efficient round trip.

However, I still don’t understand the economic feasibility of this. Any ship in the world (that fits through the locks) could carry cargo on this loop being both of these legs would be international shipments. I am not privy to the financials behind this so I am purely speculating, however, I don’t understand how they are planning to compete with the lower operating costs of newer foreign built vessels.
Geest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Geest »

Cliffs must have really lowballed the contract price to get the business out from under Algoma, unless Algoma is committing elsewhere or really dropped the ball the last few years. Getting a vessel out of multi-year layup is no cheap endeavor and not one undertaken for spot tonnage or a short term contract. I wonder if there is a backhaul business they landed...thats a long trip back in ballast.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Who knows? But it must be worth it to spend big $ to refit and make talked about modification. First it has to pass inspection. Then whatever “ modifications” means what’s the timetable? This season? Long term shipyard work? 🤷‍♂️.Last it ran it was serving Lorain and Hamilton. Not sure but I think USS Lorain pipe mill is shuttered again. Haven’t kept up on that stuff much since retired from hauling steel. It’s good if it does run but I disagree that it’s “ long term” and won’t be scrapped for years. Too many unknowns at this point. If it does come out enjoy it now as present time is all that counts.
Mn bob

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Mn bob »

Isn’t that the same run she was doing before she went into long term layup? What’s changed since then?
Gortado

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Gortado »

Guest wrote: January 18, 2023, 2:47 pm
Gortado wrote: January 16, 2023, 7:47 pm What routes will the Ryerson serve when she's back out?
I believe the Ryerson will be running from Superior WI (BN5) to Hamilton.
Sounds perfect, I live near Hamilton so I hope to see her soon.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Gortado wrote: January 16, 2023, 7:47 pm What routes will the Ryerson serve when she's back out?
I believe the Ryerson will be running from Superior WI (BN5) to Hamilton.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

I did some research and it appears that 13 steamships were grandfathered exempt from the emission standards by Congress (2008 or 2009?). So I guess the Ryerson can sail as a steamer.
Gortado

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Gortado »

What routes will the Ryerson serve when she's back out?
guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by guest »

Im not sure why so many are surprised by Cliffs making moves on the Ryerson. Cliffs has shown a steady proactive moving forward approach to utilizing CML in new and expanding ways, i.e. JLB running Silver Bay - Ironville , Duluth to CBT and MQT to Toledo/Torco along with the Sykes hauling pellets from IH/BH to Toledo and frequently loading Marquette this fall.
Granted those are all self-unloader hauls but Cliffs seeis a bigger picture and controls most of the board.
My friend on the Sykes who first tipped me off said that if the ELR passes muster there is a plan in place for modifications and long term use.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Perhaps someone can remember- didn't the US government give steamers a limited life extension due to their power plants being unable to meet emission standards? Otherwise all the steamers would have had to been repowered or scrapped.

Or was that extension (actually exemption) forever?
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote: January 13, 2023, 11:12 pmI’m skeptical of the boilers conditions.
She was properly laid up in 2009 for long-term storage, so I doubt that.
Guest

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

BOB,there is an american s.s. boat i the dock with couple holes in it and as soon as it comes out of the dock, the Ryerson will gp otpp the dock. The Chief will be tne same Chief that laid the boat up in 2009. A new oiler has been named to the boat and will report in about two weeks. Inspection has shown that the boat was very well laid and the fit out should present no unusal problems. They plan to have steam up next week with the donkey boiler. All of the nay sayers will have to eat their words of doom and gloom for the boat.+She is not going to scrap and wont be going there for a long number of years
Shipwatcher1
Posts: 489
Joined: April 19, 2011, 4:01 pm

Re: Ryerson

Unread post by Shipwatcher1 »

Guest wrote: January 13, 2023, 11:12 pm And where did this news come from? Reliable source or just rumor mill? Maybe Jerry from Duluth is correct. Maybe it will run, who knows? Maybe inspection for sale? I’m skeptical of the boilers conditions. Will certainly need lots of $ upgrades. Just wait n see as I said. When it’s under power to a loading dock then I’ll believe all the scuttlebutt. Before that? Just speculation
Cliffs did psi tests on the boilers in 2021 with favorable results.
Post Reply