Huge Ships Have Always Held Risk
After the huge ship got stuck and unstuck in the Suez the world of trade, its buyers, sellers, banks, insurance companies and steamship companies are scrambling to pay the losses and prepare for the next disaster. As moving goods around the world became cheaper and cheaper it is now obvious the risks became higher and higher.
I'm old enough to remember well the Exxon Valdez oil spill. That tanker was among the largest in use at that time. Insurance companies and others paying the damage began to wonder if the larger risk of larger tankers offset their economies. Now fright ships face the same dilemma.
These freighters are not equipped with the sensors used by driverless cars of auto pilots in airplanes. Many think more electronic equipment could have made adjustments before the accident. The early conclusions are that wind required an adjustment by the captain. But the captain over adjusted. Possibly some ships will not use the canal in high winds.
The macro effect, however, is the one to speculate about. No one disputes the biggest innovation in shipping of all kinds is the lowly shipping container. It eliminated most damage, theft and labor in shipping. First it increased general trade volume. Then it moved manufacturing to a system where different parts are made in different countries and shipped just-in-time to assembly plants. Some parts are moved more than once. The accident exposed the problems with that system.
I'm reminded of an example used in my economics classrooms years ago. Decades ago in the old Soviet Union planners decided too much money was being used in transportation--that the Union would prosper if each region produced everything it needed without so much moving materials from region to region. If was not unlike the isolationist politics in the U.S. today. Soviet planners placed a large tax on transportation of goods. They were surprised that the tax did almost nothing to reduce the amount of goods moving around the Union. The benefits of specialization and exchange overwhelmed the tax.
For sure, the ocean container and large fright ships and the volume of international helped raise the standards of living in countries including China, Mexico and our own U.S. The question now is whether the volume can continue to increase. Perhaps our standard of living will slide, at least a bit, because of the accident.
"These freighters are not equipped with the sensors used by driverless cars of auto pilots in airplanes."
ReplyDeleteSomewhat true. Going back a few years ago, the navigation system for two navy ships "glitched" crashing them into freighters in the Pacific. These incidents were a month apart of one another. Nothing like this much before, and nothing after. Really strange.
The Ever Given had the steady hand of an experienced Egyptian pilot. The Ever Given even has bow thrusters to bring the orientation of the bow about. This incident really shouldn't have happened even with the "given" wind. Again, really strange.
Too bad that crusty old cantankerous sea salt who was a regular poster here could not be around to make comment. He reportedly got wronged (imagine that in a sinful world) early in his religious experience, and he allowed those external actions from others to cause loss of his own faith. So much for independent free thinking. I see that a lot around these parts.
I was quite surprised they extracted the ship out of the bank so quickly. When I saw the bow embedded into the sticky clay bank and then looked up the 47' draft of the fully loaded ship, I couldn't imagine 47' depth of steel being extracted from sticky clay without taking months. The keel would have had a few hundred feet of length in full contact with the clay. Once steel gets embedded in clay, there are high adhesion forces that are difficult to overcome, especially if it sits for any period of time. Tides, removed ballast, backhoes, dredgers, and many tugs pulling accomplished what I didn't think so quickly could happen.
Henry--Good post. I don't want anyone to think I know anything about freighter navigation equipment, I was quoting what I had read. Airplanes have redundancy in their instrument system and I wonder how much of that freighters have. I read also that it takes, as I recall, about 5-10 minutes after a correction for that ship to respond.
DeleteI was surprised, too, they were able to get the ship out of the mud. The discussion of unloading it from shore seemed almost impossible. I know from other stories they are carefully loaded to spread the weight evenly across the ship so unloading would have to be done the same way.
"Airplanes have redundancy in their instrument system and I wonder how much of that freighters have."
DeleteA little. In the end, a sextant, a chart, and a chronometer will do. Along with a watch.
And if the fancy steering gear gets toasted, they can always manually turn the wheels in the steering room. That is not at all responsive. Some of these men turned the steering gear to their death defending our country:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_E._Evans#Medal_of_Honor_citation
That is one case where bravery and tactics overcame superior firepower. A thin-walled tin can destroyer mopped up on cruisers and battleships. Too thin for many of the enemy shell detonators to activate.
Not sure what happens in an airplane when the fly-by-wire toasts out. I believe I read modern pilots are over-reliant on modern navigation systems. Not many of new guys have the Sully skills.
I am kind of curious where the liability lies in the Ever Given. Evergreen or Egypt who hired out an Egyptian pilot or the ship owner or the ship manufacturer or the Japanese contract dredger (we apologize.....) or the nearby village who dumped junk in canal.
Henry--"..where the liability lies in the Ever Given."
DeleteI know only this little about maritime law. Years ago I had hobby business importing containers of bicycles from Japan. Once something shifted on the ocean and something on the boat was damaged. Maritime Law is that the shippers, not the ship, are responsible. I had to pay. It is counter intuitive but that the way it worked back then.
I need that kind of job. Don't buckle the chains and load binders down. When the wind picks up and load shifts, blame someone else and get paid damages.
DeleteHenry--I just scanned "maritime law" in Wikipedia. As it applies to the U.S., the shipowner is liable for damage to cargo unless "one of 17 exemptions" applies. How all this applies to the Suez I don't know.
Delete