default_image
© Khunaspix Dreamstime.

Large ocean carrier alliances are contributing to port congestion, according to Federal Maritime Commissioner (FMC) William Doyle, speaking at the European Maritime Law Organisation’s (EMLO) Spring Seminar in Athens last Friday.

Commissioner Doyle said: “In my view, we could be experiencing some growing pains, not so ...

To read this article you need to subscribe.

Help us to continue to invest in award-winning independent journalism. For an introductory offer of just £70 a year, or £10 per month, get access to all our daily news stories and opinion. If you are already a registered user, please login below with your current account's email and password to subscribe. If you are not registered and want to subscribe, please register below to subscribe.
Current subscriber
New subscriber

Comment on this article


You must be logged in to post a comment.
  • BN

    April 21, 2015 at 9:05 pm

    ‘There is no doubt that an 8,000 – 10,000 teu ship co-loading for six carriers in Asia from four or five ports for discharge, at seven terminals on the US west coast, is an extremely challenging operation requiring a complex stowage plan’

    This does not happen in real life, also at G6 1 vessel does not call 6/7 LA/LB ports in 1 voyage

  • Andy Lane

    April 21, 2015 at 11:04 pm

    Fully agree with BN, what FMC describe here does not happen. Large ships or alliances do not cause congestion, that is driven by gross demand exceeding operational capacity.

    Operational capacity (read efficiency) in SPB is less than 50% of what it is internationally (based on footprint and equipment assets). This is merely due to People & Process. It is good that FMC has relaxed any restrictions on operational best practice sharing which were previously in place or perceived to be in place – the inability to talk, learn and improve will cause more trouble than large ships and alliances.

    The SPB terminals are the only terminals in the world where the origin load ports are expected to segregate cargo for “easy discharge” – where after the cargo will head in 2 to 8 hinterlands. Compare this with Singapore where the on-carriage connection puzzle from 1 vessel will exceed 100 and they are able to manage efficiently with a “random” stow as the process input.

    Only when we stop finding “handy-hooks” and accept and acknowledge poor performance can or will any improvements be made to the process. Let’s hope we pass that first hurdle soon.

  • Mike Wackett

    April 22, 2015 at 7:22 am

    Thanks for your input BN and Andy.
    As Andy notes the FMC has relaxed its restrictions on operational best practice sharing and the demurrage & detention report is a “discussion document”.
    So, maybe some practical solutions will evolve?