EDITORIAL COMMENT Big is beautiful!


Maersk’s great leap of faith as it is poised to make up to a total of US$17.1 billion for 30 Triple-E ships.


I


n developing the 18,000TEU Triple-E container vessel Maersk and Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering


(DSME) have taken the industry to the edge of what today’s technology can do. If it is success- ful the ships will offer significant savings in fuel costs and in the environmental impact, reducing CO2


emissions by 50% and NOx and


particulate substantially too. Two issues become immediately obvious


aſter one has taken in the enormity of this announcement for the container industry. Te initial impact is the realisation that these ships will have great economies of scale and Maersk and DSME believe they can save 26% on slot costs compared to a standard 13,100TEU ship. Secondly, on closer inspec- tion you find there is little by way of savings in SOx emissions. In fact on further questioning, Maersk


has decided to leave a space where scrubber technology should be installed. It seems that these ultra-large container carriers will have to operate on more expensive distillate fuel in order to reduce SOx emissions. Like Cinder- ella the scrubber manufacturers were not invited to the Maersk ball. Unfortunately this leads us to the question


that must be coming to everyone’s mind as they read this piece; ‘Why were the scrubbers not invited to the party?’ And for this I ask forgiveness. However, it seems that Maersk is not convinced that current scrubber technology is up to the task according to the company’s head of sustainability, Søren Stig Nielsen. Te space in the design where the scrubber will go appears to indicate that Maersk has


The Naval Architect April 2011


confidence that the technology will work, eventually, but that it will not buy it until it is proven. Given that the scrubber companies have invested some considerable capital into the design, manufacture and promotion of these pieces of equipment that they say will mean ship operators will be able to continue using the significantly cheaper heavy fuel oil this is a surprising move. Conspicuous by their absence the scrubber


companies must now, one assumes, be engaged in a race to prove to Maersk that their technology really does work. Te winner of course will have much to crow about, not only providing the kit, but also being a part of what promises to be the highest profile launch, well, since Maersk built the Emma Class vessels. Already the mainstream media has been


alerted to the Triple-E and the US$5.7 billion initial investment for the first 10 ships will mean that Maersk will want to fill these ships. Promotion of them then will be important and though many shippers are apparently looking at the green credentials of their service providers, one suspects that the most eloquent persuasion will come in the cost savings that will be passed on to them as a result of the economies of scale and the fuel saving technology employed in the ships. Triple-E ships have the potential, then, to


act like cargo black holes, sucking in cargo from miles around as shippers want to be able to say that they have imported goods on the most environmentally friendly ships in the world and they can save a buck or two as well. Handling 18,000TEU ships will be a complex process, however, and the thought


of so many containers being handled on one ship would have the potential to cause a log jam in cargo processing at any one port. If this is the case then Maersk will need to step up its hub and spoke operations and develop the feeder operations that will be necessary for the efficient distribution of cargo. In all probability that will mean feeding


cargo to places like Hamburg and the UK from Rotterdam and perhaps the Western Mediter- ranean, the Eastern Mediterranean, to the Middle East and Subcontinent from Salalah in Omanand so on. In short shippers, who are generally averse to feeder shipping, will change the way they view the hub and spoke system. Tere are risks in this strategy for Maersk,


however. In the first place the company is very firmly banking on the price of fuel rising sharply and staying high. Next, it must see a growth in demand for trans-continental container shipping, a demand that has been in part fuelled by the gradual migration of cargoes from bulk to containerised transporta- tion over the years. Tis process is due to come to an end with some experts saying that all the cargoes that can be containerised have been. Tis means that economic growth is essential and the trickle of factories that have returned to Europe from China must not become a flood. A return to the 15% growth rates in the Asia/Europe trades of the noughties is unlikely, but growth will be resumed, the question is at what level? At this moment the Triple-E is looking like a


great investment from a company that has the courage of its convictions. Whether these ships will become a great white elephant remains to be seen. NA


7


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80