Category Archives: Ports

Synchronisation across maritime value chains can ease inflation

This interesting article suggests that slot management across supply chain entities could help ease the current supply chain congestion woes. It’s an attempt to define this concept that could induce more cooperation between firms and supply chain entities such as ports, terminals, and hauliers.

There’s no question that today’s world of maritime logistics and supply chains is dominated by decision-making for the benefit of each individual participant. The flow of goods overall could be improved by introducing a discipline that would make decisions for the common good look better.

The article leaves open the question of how to induce the players to participate.

We already see signs that some large shippers have already decided not to play on the same terms. Firms like Home Depot, Walmart, Amazon, and IKEA are trying out chartering their own ships and selecting their own ports, terminals, and inland transport to make their specific supply chains work better. This individual management could bring gains especially for them, and there’s a chance that if enough of it happens, some of the major bottleneck ports such as Shanghai, LA/Long Beach, and Rotterdam could see a reduction of traffic enough to lower backlogs and congestion. And the smaller ports these individual shippers might use, such as Seattle/Tacoma, Norfolk, and Savannah, will see increasing traffic and congestion. If they have the capacity that’s ok, but if not the woes will continue.

These are just examples of how not to participate.

I agree with the authors that just allowing market principles to work won’t create the gains in throughput we need to see. The markets don’t work fast enough to prevent hardship and business and personal failure.

A suggestion made earlier was for a system to ‘label’ each container (in the paperwork, and perhaps physically on it, like the priority mail labels in the US mail) with a service level standard required for this container. Those handling the container would know its priority and could adjust their individual workflows to meet the standard delivery time. Even if there were bottlenecks, the standard would help those in a position to relieve one to see which containers needed to be handled or placed first, second, and so on.

I submit that introduction of a world-wide slot system for maritime container transport needs to be accompanied by a system to reallocate the benefits and costs of the system. There need to be charges or inducements at ports and terminals to get players to fit their needs and actions in with the slot optimization system.

In fact, any system that would operate throughout whole maritime value chains needs to have the incentives designed along with the tracking or resource allocation system.

A worthwhile start would be a model of a realistic slot allocation system and its effects on, say the current congestion worldwide at ports and in hinterland supply chains. Not an easy study to conduct, but it would show where inducements need to be given, and where penalties need to be put, to prevent or reduce gaming the supply chain. Experiments with inducements could be made to gauge their effect and help choose the right ones.

By Mikael Lind et al 01/02/2022

Synchronisation across maritime value chains can ease inflation – The Loadstar

Los Angeles imports slump further as congestion throttles volume

American Shipper has done a very nice article showing that LA/Long Beach is actually slowing down in throughput in the last two months or so. The graphs from their SONAR statistics show clearly that container processing is bottlenecked at those two ports.

It’s also true that both the port management at Los Angeles and Long Beach has emphasized the overall gains in 2021. But most of that was accomplished before the end of the year,and there has been a dramatic slowdown recently.

One issue that has only recently been mentioned is the large excess of empty containers at these two ports, waiting to be exported back to the Far East. These empties get in the way of unloading and loading real cargo.

Ocean carriers are recalcitrant about taking on the empties, as they don’t pay any fare. And it’s almost cheaper to build new containers in China for Chinese exported goods, than it would be to carry them back. So there is little economic incentive for those containers to be returned. And ocean carriers can’t be ordered to take them by any government.

One option for the ports of LA and Long Beach is to actually enforce fines per day on empty containers not taken by ocean carriers. These have been discussed previously and keep being passed on by the Port Boards.

Another option is for the Ports to declare that any empty container left in the port for more than some number of days will be scrapped for the steel, and the container owner charged for the cost of scrapping. The value of the sold metal could accrue to the port, or could be paid back to the original owner, according to the politics. I’d favor the port keeping the scrap money.

China has been accused of dumping steel in the US before. Now China is dumping fabricated steel in the form of containers. It’s not sustainable to have these boxes build up beyond a point where they interfere with import and export of real goods.

Greg Miller, Senior Editor Thursday, January 27, 2022

Los Angeles imports slump further as congestion throttles volume

New York approaches biggest US container port title as west coast imports flatline

Why are people choosing New York/New Jersey to import containers?

One concern is the congestion and delay, averaging 18 days according to the article, at the West Coast ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Apparently throughput has reached a max there, and is unlikely to improve much.

Actually, ‘approaches’ is a good word. New York’s throughput is still below Los Angeles, by 411,000 to 417,000. But the trend in LA is down, markedly, and the trend in NY is up, so maybe a switch will happen soon. LA doesn’t have many short-term options for improving throughput.

Another concern of shippers is the possibility of labor actions on the West Coast. Historically, longshoreman unions and port terminal representatives have been confrontational on the West Coast. Since the ports are biggest, strikes there or slowdowns would have a serious effect on commerce. and that’s the point of strikes and slowdowns– to bring maximum pressure on the port and terminal representatives to make concessions. It is likely that there will be some kerfuffle. But it’s not clear that anyone wants a total stoppage or serious constriction of traffic. And it’s a major political nightmare too. Presidents in the past have declared states of emergency to keep people at work and the cargo moving. So I think something will be worked out.

When will New York/New Jersey reach its congestion threshhold, and ships start backing up?

It could be good news that the flush of demand for imports may be abating a bit as shippers think through how to realign their supply needs to reduce the pressure on their supply chains. More regular and predictable supply may be the outcome.

By Mike Wackett 24/01/2022

New York nudges biggest US container port title as west coast imports flatline – The Loadstar