Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 63

Thread: Two billion tons, deadweight.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    23,918

    Default Two billion tons, deadweight.

    The world merchant fleet just reached two billion tons.

    It was one billion tons in April 2006

    5.6% p.a. compound

    This has got to stop.
    Last edited by Andrew Craig-Bennett; 05-21-2019 at 11:02 PM.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Saint Helena Island, SC
    Posts
    9,743

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Why? Not arguing your point as I don’t know enough about the subject. Just curious why you think so.
    Fight Entropy, build a wooden boat!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Salt Spring Island, BC
    Posts
    6,179

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Unregulated pollution due to use of low grade fuels?

    Gross over consumption of goods by the population in general?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Mukilteo, WA
    Posts
    2,309

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    More than 1 ton of shipping capacity for every 4 people on earth. That seems like more than is needed. I know margins were already slim, it seems a correction would be on its way. I wouldn't put my money on new ships right now....

    Doubling in 4 years is more than 5% p.a. increase, more like 20% or so, without breaking out a calculator.
    Last edited by J.Madison; 05-21-2019 at 12:08 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    16,285

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    The world merchant fleet just reached two billion tons.

    It was one billion tons in April 2016

    5.6% p.a. compound

    This has got to stop.
    Isn't the excess capacity already a problem in terms of ships that are either mothballed or just sitting somewhere at anchor?

    Also, are new ships being built to be somewhat like new aircraft - safer, more efficient, etc. - and making the older tonnage obsolete?
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    The Garden State
    Posts
    4,225

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    Isn't the excess capacity already a problem in terms of ships that are either mothballed or just sitting somewhere at anchor?

    Also, are new ships being built to be somewhat like new aircraft - safer, more efficient, etc. - and making the older tonnage obsolete?
    Both are good questions. I would say that larger and more efficient ships put less pollution into the air than a lot of smaller ships. Still seems like a LOT of goods are being shipped
    "If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito"

    -Dalai Lama

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    16,285

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Art Haberland View Post
    Both are good questions. I would say that larger and more efficient ships put less pollution into the air than a lot of smaller ships. Still seems like a LOT of goods are being shipped
    A little like the trucking business, I think.

    We ship about 2/3 of our systems via freight and are usually the last pick-up of the day because of the way the routes run for most of our vendors. Most of the trucks are 48 or 52 foot trailers and it is very, very rare to see one that even approaches "full". The same seems to be true for delivery trucks. There are lots of occasions when our goods are the only freight going on the truck.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    50,744

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    2006 - 2018?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    5,711

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Is the 2 billion figure just for ships or does it include trucks, railroads, air and any other forms of freight transportation?
    Will

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    16,285

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by willmarsh3 View Post
    Is the 2 billion figure just for ships or does it include trucks, railroads, air and any other forms of freight transportation?
    Andrew said, "Merchant Fleet", so I'd consider it to be just shipping.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    The Garden State
    Posts
    4,225

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    A little like the trucking business, I think.

    We ship about 2/3 of our systems via freight and are usually the last pick-up of the day because of the way the routes run for most of our vendors. Most of the trucks are 48 or 52 foot trailers and it is very, very rare to see one that even approaches "full". The same seems to be true for delivery trucks. There are lots of occasions when our goods are the only freight going on the truck.
    I can give you some insight into that.

    I drove two different trucks. One was a 24 foot GMC with a GVWR of 25,995. The other was a peterbilt 32 foot straight truck. It was GVWR 32,990. Both trucks got between 11 and 15mpg.. with the peterbilt actually getting better MPG, especially on the highway with it's higher gearing. So technically, the bigger truck was more efficient to use all around, even if it did need a full county to turn around
    "If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito"

    -Dalai Lama

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    27,071

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    I have to think the increase in shipping is a direct result of moving manufacturing off shore to places where labor is cheaper. This won't continue indefinitely. Increased manufacturing raises the standard of living in those places and reduces profit. We seem to be sliding down the rail to some of the last places where labor is cheap. Soon, it will be more cost effective to produce at home.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Europe
    Posts
    10,212

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Maybe this is the real cause of rising sea levels.......

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    17,219

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    I think that the era of 'get into shipping, make a fortune' is officially dead...
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Salt Spring Island, BC
    Posts
    6,179

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by skaraborgcraft View Post
    Maybe this is the real cause of rising sea levels.......

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    The Garden State
    Posts
    4,225

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWSmith View Post
    I have to think the increase in shipping is a direct result of moving manufacturing off shore to places where labor is cheaper. This won't continue indefinitely. Increased manufacturing raises the standard of living in those places and reduces profit. We seem to be sliding down the rail to some of the last places where labor is cheap. Soon, it will be more cost effective to produce at home.
    there is a reason China is investing in Africa. Even Ivanka was going to have her shoes made in Ethiopia
    "If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito"

    -Dalai Lama

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    145

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    I would have thought this group (of all groups) might have guessed this one.

    The new locks on the Panama Canal allow for larger ships. The old Panamax class of ship (Tonnage= 52.500 DWT, L=950 ft, B=106 ft, H=190 ft, D=39.5 ft) are now obsolete...the New Panamax class of ships is (Tonnage=120,000 DWT, L=1,201 ft, B=161 ft, H=190 ft, D=50 ft).

    There has been a race to build new ships to take advantage of the larger locks.

    The old ships are still on the books....

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    South Australia and Tasmania
    Posts
    17,951

    Default

    Trump's war on trade should leave a lot of them tied to the dock. And how many are busy carrying oil, coal and gas? Renewables will slow that down.

    Sent from my CPH1851 using Tapatalk

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Co
    Posts
    7,887

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    https://splash247.com/peak-container/

    The 3 comments are also worth a read.


    Shout out to Winnie the pooh
    Disbelief in magic can force a poor soul into believing in government and business.
    TOM ROBBINS, Even Cowgirls Get the Blues



  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Southern Maine
    Posts
    20,590

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    The world merchant fleet just reached two billion tons.

    It was one billion tons in April 2016

    5.6% p.a. compound

    This has got to stop.
    Something misplaced in your arithmetic. Did you mean 25.6% or 2006?

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Beaufort, NC
    Posts
    1,272

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    Isn't the excess capacity already a problem in terms of ships that are either mothballed or just sitting somewhere at anchor?

    Also, are new ships being built to be somewhat like new aircraft - safer, more efficient, etc. - and making the older tonnage obsolete?
    New airplanes safer? Some line of code is off and the ground comes up from below and swats them. But DC 3s keep flying everywhere, even Antartica.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    174

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    And what about the glut of single trip containers choking some countries? they have very little scrap value.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    16,285

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by switters View Post
    https://splash247.com/peak-container/

    The 3 comments are also worth a read.


    Shout out to Winnie the pooh
    Being a Bear of Little Brain, I can appreciate that. It’s why I have a Thotful Spot instead of a Moaning Chair.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  24. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    16,285

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dannybb55 View Post
    New airplanes safer? Some line of code is off and the ground comes up from below and swats them. But DC 3s keep flying everywhere, even Antartica.
    Yes. Safer. With the notable exception of the code in the 737-MAX series, flying is by far safer today than it has been in the past - for many reasons, more modernized aircraft and flight systems and better air traffic control, communication, navigation, and weather services.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    lagunitas, ca, usa
    Posts
    518

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    With the notable exception of the code in the 737-MAX series...
    737 max is fine too if the pilot knows how to fly. You'll notice there has not been one accident in those in a first-world country.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    16,285

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Favorite View Post
    737 max is fine too if the pilot knows how to fly. You'll notice there has not been one accident in those in a first-world country.
    Before you blame the pilots and denigrate them for where they live, I suggest that you go over and read the thread on the subject. I think you’ll find that the pilots are not to blame. Training on the aircraft from the manufacturer did not include information about the MCAS system. Also, Boeing offered safety systems related to the MCAS system (redundant systems that cross-check AOA) as an option not purchased by all airlines when it appears that is should have been standard equipment.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    5,525

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Favorite View Post
    737 max is fine too if the pilot knows how to fly. You'll notice there has not been one accident in those in a first-world country.
    I'm not that confident that it had anything to do with third world pilots.

    I do believe flying is safer than ever.
    Tom

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    5,711

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by rayman View Post
    And what about the glut of single trip containers choking some countries? they have very little scrap value.
    This probably will use only a tiny fraction of the available shipping containers. However this looks quite worthwhile if you want a tiny house that you can ship anywhere in the world.

    Will

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    7,219

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Favorite View Post
    737 max is fine too if the pilot knows how to fly. You'll notice there has not been one accident in those in a first-world country.
    the 737 MAX was fatally flawed.
    __________________________________________________ ________________________

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    lagunitas, ca, usa
    Posts
    518

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    Before you blame the pilots and denigrate them for where they live, I suggest that you go over and read the thread on the subject.
    Why would I give any credence to a stupid thread here when

    1) Neighbor across the dock is an actual airline pilot

    2) I have read other sources that know what they are talking about

    Also, as they say, proof is in the pudding. Show me a crash in a first world country with first world pilots. Asiana taught some of us a lesson.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    23,918

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Apologies for the typo: I meant to write April 2006 .

    Older people in in my industry (who often teach younger people) tend to come out with the line that we are the most fuel efficient means of transport. But when there is twice as much...
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    23,918

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Favorite View Post
    Why would I give any credence to a stupid thread here when

    1) Neighbor across the dock is an actual airline pilot

    2) I have read other sources that know what they are talking about

    Also, as they say, proof is in the pudding. Show me a crash in a first world country with first world pilots. Asiana taught some of us a lesson.
    If you read the thread, you would know that several of the contributions come from actual airline pilots and others are from an actual airline maintenance manager. You want a report of a crash in a first world country with first world pilots ? Here you are:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Air_Flight_3591
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    23,918

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hwyl View Post
    Something misplaced in your arithmetic. Did you mean 25.6% or 2006?
    I meant 2006. Sorry, Gareth.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    7,219

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Favorite View Post
    Why would I give any credence to a stupid thread here when

    1) Neighbor across the dock is an actual airline pilot
    I’m impressed. Tell me more.
    __________________________________________________ ________________________

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    57,968

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    Apologies for the typo: I meant to write April 2006 .

    Older people in in my industry (who often teach younger people) tend to come out with the line that we are the most fuel efficient means of transport. But when there is twice as much...
    There's only fuel consumption when the ships are moving (with some minor exceptions)
    "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome and charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" Mark Twain... so... Carpe the living sh!t out of the Diem

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •