The crew change crisis continues. Some very strong remarks by Hugo De Stoop, CEO of Belgian tanker giant Euronav, at the International Chamber of Shipping webinar indicated that ship owners’ desire to hide out from problems like crew welfare means they have no power to force governments to let their nationals back in. Their flag states have little influence on the world stage.
It’s the worst crisis in 200 years. And it’s a humanitarian crisis, as so many of the COVID-19-induced crises are. Who will step up and take action?
There are suddenly more exports of soybeans to China in containers. It’s earlier than usual, and more of them. Over several years now, containerized exports of soybeans are rising, but suddenly it’s faster. A Taiwanese source said that “it’s more competitive than bulk” right now. Taiwan seems to be the main purchaser.
There are a few reasons why containers might be better for soybeans. First, you can trace the source much more closely than bulk. For customers who care, this may be a big deal. Second, the quality may be controlled better. In bulk vessels the beans are mixed with other lots, and even when an attempt is made (usually with a tarp or other barrier) to keep beans from two sources separate, some may escape the barrier. A third reason is ease of off-ship handling in areas where there aren’t good bulk unloading and storage facilities. Many remote regions can handle containers, load right on a truck, and transport inland to a distant point, when it might be difficult with bulk beans. And of course, it is a product that can be loaded for reverse travel for containers, to get them where they will be needed next.
I think in general we would expect bulk beans to be cheaper, because according to the article, the containers hold 20-22 metric tons of beans whereas bulk lots tend to run to 60,000 metric tons. However, it is nice to see that the niche is growing.
Chris Clott and I wrote a paper on this some years ago: Clott, Christopher B., Bruce Hartman, Elizabeth Ogard, and Althea Gatto. (2014). “Container Repositioning and Agricultural Commodities: Shipping Soybeans by Container from US Hinterland to Overseas Markets”. Research in Transportation and Business Management. DOI: 10.1016/j.rtbm.2014.10.006.
Once again intermodal container chassis become a bone of contention.Ocean carriers brought this on themselves by trying to escape liability for accidents caused by defective chassis. They created a system in which they could retain shadow control over chassis availability while not appearing as the responsible party.
The problem today, with declining intermodal shipping, is with the chassis pools created to give cargo owners a place to obtain a chassis when a shipment needs one. The pools were supposed to provide maintenance services on the units to assure they would be in good repair when they were picked up, reducing the chance of accident. However, there have been many trucker problems with the nature of the chassis use agreements; where they must be dropped off, and when. The words in the story are “denying truckers choice of equipment providers at ports and inland locations”.
I don’t think they will win on that claim. But it’s quite possible that there have been undercharges to ocean carriers and overcharges to truyckers. And since OCEMA, the chassis pool operator, was founded by ocean carriers, it’s probable the charges were arranged in carriers’ favor whenever possible.
There’s no question the truckers, who are on the low end of the totem pole, bear the brunt of the problems. And they have very few ways to try to right things. This is one attempt. There will be more until treatment of truckers is economically fair to them. It may never happen.
Supply Chain and Logistics 