It has been well documented that most maritime accidents (~80%) are caused by human error. Still, most of the focus on learning is rooted in technical causes and adding procedures and checklists.

Despite this bias, many accident investigation reports pinpoint that the leadership or safety culture was the root cause of more recent accidents such as the Bulk Jupiter, El Faro, Helge Ingstad and Costa Concordia, as well as older accidents such as the Exxon Valdez, Bow Mariner, Herald of Free Enterprise and Amoco Cadiz.

Industry blind spot

The critical failures leading to the accident were in most cases known before the accident took place. This demonstrates that failures which are not handled properly may develop into critical situations and accidents. This is a blind spot because the biased focus on technicalities and “impeccable” safety inspections makes people reluctant to be open about their failures, concerns and mistakes.

We at SAYFR think shipping companies, and the whole industry, needs to change its focus. Thousands of auditors and inspectors across the world are engaged by classification societies, flag and port state authorities, vetting and insurance companies and HSEQ departments. They verify that ships do the right thing and comply with technical and procedural requirements. However, ticking boxes never made anyone safer.

Cover-up culture

Also, and worryingly, there is a cover-up culture causing errors and unsafe practices. There are now so many procedures and checklists that, in some cases, it is impossible to comply with all of them. The fear of failure is driving accident statistics, and surveys reveal that 45% of seafarers admit that they regularly do not comply with procedures.

I firmly believe that human factors are key to prevent threats and failures from escalating. Yet improving safety or performance is about improving not only individuals but also the collaboration between sea and shore staff, between officers and crew and between different nationalities and cultures on board ships.

Huge potential to reduce accidents

Although this is recognized, it is not always addressed, so I believe a new approach is necessary to improve collaboration and reduce risks. Indeed, collaboration is strongly correlated with the risk of accidents and business interruption. Our experience of working on multiple projects over the years shows that it is possible to reduce the risk of major accidents by up to 75%.

However, there is no quick fix to improve collaboration and implement behavioral changes through, for example, training courses. Changing the culture is key and that process takes time. To help operators improve their approach to safety, proven methodologies must be used.

Safety leadership behaviors

Put simply, it involves observing and identifying working methods on board and then working with all the officers and crew in teams and as individuals to deliver the eight-point safety leadership behaviors, namely:

• Giving feedback
• Speaking up
• Building trust
• Creating openness
• Showing care
• Facilitate learning
• Promoting teamwork
• Managing dilemmas

Experience shows that the focus on the eight behaviors work because they address the blind spot. By encouraging the participants to openly share errors, failures and concerns, they are able to break the chain of events that can lead up to a major accident. Also, this approach helps to move beyond the culture of punishment to the positive safety-enhancing culture where crew members help each other.

Culture assessments key to improving safety

In order to understand how the organization culture influences safety, there is a need to use methodologies specialized for this purpose. One thing that many people are ignorant of is that a key professional competence of organizational psychology is advanced mathematics and data analysis. The evaluation of organizational culture relies on interviews, observations and questionnaires applying psychometric instruments that are tailor-made to ensure valid and reliable results. The professionals drive the process while the data provides the results. As a consequence, the more and better the data on these topics, the more valid, reliable and to-the-point are the results.

However not all the instruments used in the industry are valid and reliable. In a recent review of safety culture maturity instruments, only 3 of 43 instruments were valid. Indeed, there is not one single test alone that can demonstrate the validity of a survey instrument. Therefore, SAYFR has developed tailor-made psychometric instruments to assess these topics and has a database of responses from about 300 000 seafarers.

When it comes to the qualitative and quantitative tests that can be made to verify validity, the basic one is content validity. This dictates how well a safety instrument addresses a safety issue. It specifies that the survey instrument adequately covers the topic being studied as well as having sound scientific grounds and references.

This is important because so many historical examples show risks that were identified well ahead of time but were not addressed. These include the Deepwater Horizon blowout, which claimed 11 lives and caused huge environmental damage, rig personnel had knowingly by-passed safety barriers. In this case, failures were identified but the root cause of the problem – i.e. human neglect, whether cultural or circumstantial – was not factored in.

Reliability of survey instruments through data

Reliability of the survey instrument is also key and that is ensured statistically by use of data. Factor-analysis is a statistical method used to describe variability among correlated items in terms of a potentially lower number of unobserved variables, called factors. For our instrument, the eight factors are equal to the eight SAYFR leadership behaviours (8SLBs) mentioned above.

Moreover, predictive validity is the instrument’s ability to predict something in the future such as an event, or correlations with instrument measurements made by other instruments. If an organization scores low in terms of the 8SLBs, it is a good indicator of future problems. This has been shown on a number of occasions when departments, units or suborganizations have received low 8SLB scores only to have accidents occur in the intervening time, before action was taken.

Predictive validity can also be applied to solutions. When action was taken based upon a low 8SLBs score, a shipping company experienced a 60% reduction in the frequency of serious accidents, to a level which was maintained five years subsequent to the investigation.
Concurrent validity and construct validity are also important elements. Concurrent validity measures the correlation between two independent measurements performed at the same time. An increase in the ability to manage failures, for example, will necessarily correlate with the number of incidents that occur.

Construct validity is when a theoretical model of cause and effect – for example, do the improvements prescribed following appraisal of the 8SLBs – accurately replicate the real-world scenarios they are intended to represent? Construct validity is the ultimate validity measurement, and necessarily incorporates all other validity factors.

Reduction in the frequency of serious accidents

Also, it’s not only the psychometric instruments that rely on data. The use of digitalization, the internet of things (IoT), sensor data, machine learning, and big data has picked up in recent years. The idea is that those with the most data can create the best analytics and forecasts. With the use of more quality data, risk assessments and worst-case scenario simulations provide reliable predictions and identify effective interventions to prevent accidents.

In short, what we at SAYFR see is that the best shipowners and operators have a proactive organizational culture that goes beyond ticking the ‘compliance boxes’ and instead applies a collaborative, trusting approach from top to bottom in the company’s organization. This also includes assessing culture using valid and reliable survey instruments. This is what really helps to improve safety.

Source: www.maritimeprofessional.com

Author: Dr. Torkel Soma, Chief Scientific Officer, SAYFR

Image: www.pixibay.com

The post A New Approach to Maritime Safety is Needed appeared first on Cargo News Today.

As logistics professionals come out from underwater, they’re dealing with the fact that they cannot resume business as usual. Fortunately, these challenges present a new reality and opportunities in remote collaboration. This includes using technology to achieve greater visibility into their organizations, and developing end-to-end, collaborative business processes that involve all the players in the supply chain.

Remote Collaboration in Logistics

Remote collaboration is the use of technology to bring together people from different locations for a common purpose. It’s driven by advancements in cloud computing, real-time videoconferencing, and other forms of telecommunications that have made it easier to collaborate with people across distances. Leaders in logistics can benefit from remote collaboration because it allows them to tap into a wider range of industry experts and connect more easily to their end customers.

One of the biggest challenges in logistics is gaining a true sense of a facility or area that an employee can’t physically visit. This helps with planning and operations, but it’s also important from a security perspective because it allows leaders to understand what areas present risks for their workers and what areas might be hiding dangers. Advances in 360° technology, such as real-time 360° collaboration, allow leaders, customers, and experts to see any area from a remote location.

For example, during the heat of the pandemic, DB Schenker, a global logistics leader, leveraged 360° technology to conduct virtual warehouse tours. During these tours, DB Schenker brings potential customers on site to view their facility and explore their offerings without the time, cost, and environmental impact of physical travel, which in turn helps drive sustainability goals. They estimate saving millions in travel costs.

Below are 5 key benefits of remote collaboration for logistics leaders.

#1 Massive Cost-Saving Potential

Swapping site visits with virtual inspections/tours saves on average $2k per person, per visit. This money can be reinvested into other scalable projects. Remote collaboration is meant to augment an existing collaboration protocol. With the right tools at their disposal, logistics leaders can select which visits they can conduct remotely and how they can reallocate funds to other areas of business growth.

#2 Sustainable Solution

Business travel is a leading culprit in carbon emissions. For example, a relatively short return trip from London to Rome carries a carbon footprint of 234kg of CO2 per passenger.

Reducing reliance on travel allows businesses to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over time, thereby helping organizations meet carbon reduction targets without major disruptions to their business.

#3 Minimize In-Person Disruptions

With 360° remote collaboration, leaders and onsite personnel can get their time back. Instead of spending travel time and several hours on site, leaders can see what’s happening and discuss all the details in a single meeting.

Typical on-site visits disrupt routine workflows. For example, visits such as facility tours or audits may involve schedule changes for on-site personnel. This might only take a few hours out of the day but could significantly disrupt workflow. Leaders that use remote collaboration can reduce or eliminate these disruptions, allowing them to get work done.

For attendees, the average business trip involves 6.9 hours lost that could otherwise be spent productively and often involves a physical and mental drain on the travelers.

#4 Conduct More Frequent Visits

By avoiding logistical challenges with travel, leaders in the logistics space can reimagine how often they want their team or customers to be on site.

With remote tools at their disposal, they can increase the frequency of routine audits or bring customers/stakeholders on site more often for updates and decisions. Having more site visits virtually will only help on the efficiency side and improve quality control.

#5 Maintain Safety of Sites and Personnel

Remote collaboration also provides logistics leaders with another security benefit – personal safety – by allowing them to conduct more business from their homes or offices, away from any danger that might be present at a particular location. Having a remote protocol in effect helps leaders overcome travel challenges or COVID related shutdowns.

At the end of the day, logistics leaders should consider how remote collaboration tools can add value across the entire organization. Creating measurable goals, reallocating funds based on current needs, conducting more frequent visits for customers or employees, reducing in-person disruptions, and increasing access to decision makers are just some of the benefits that come from selecting remote collaboration tools built for site visits.

Technology is not a replacement for all physical interactions. In certain cases, logistics leaders might want their team or customers/stakeholders to visit their locations as opposed to meeting online. Having the option to have meetings with multiple people from different time zones in one space is already our future.

Source: www.inboundlogistics.com

Author: Devon Copley, Founder and CEO, Avatour

Image: www.pexels.com

The post 5 Benefits of Remote Collaboration for Logistics Leaders appeared first on Cargo News Today.

The zero-emissions vessels, which will be constructed for New York-based Zeeboat and available for charter from 2025, will run entirely on battery power, without the use of diesel engines—a first for towboats in North America. Vancouver, B.C.-based Shift Clean Energy will deliver the battery energy storage systems.

ISS, which was selected in 2021 to provide general contract, project management and vessel support services for the manufacture and delivery of the first-of-their-kind vessels, said its request for proposal (RFP) will be open form May 15 through June 30, 2022 and is for construction of the first hull, with options for up to three additional hulls.

The fully-electric vessel is based on The Shearer Group, Inc.’s (TSGI). proven 95- by 34-foot  towboat hull design, which is said to increase water flow to the propeller and improve overall efficiency of the barge/towboat combination by more than 10% compared to traditional towboat designs. When coupled with an azimuth thruster pod drive system, the hull design will improve overall efficiency by more than 30% when compared to conventional towboats, the Houston-based naval architecture and marine engineering firm said.

The project partners said their first goal is to enable greener transit with zero-emissions towboats, but they will later work toward a joint development of electrification technologies to further reduce the carbon footprint of ports and harbors.

“Moving carbon-intensive processes, like shipping and port management, to electric power sources is a critical step to meeting net-zero emissions targets,” said Wade Stockstill, ISS CEO. “Our electrification technologies and track record dovetail neatly with innovations from partners like Shift Clean Energy, enabling ISS to deliver turnkey solutions to some of today’s biggest green energy challenges.”

ISS said interested shipbuilders should contact its director of business development, Jessica Lewis, at Jessica.Lewis@iss-na.com for RFP submission information and detailed project specifications.

Source: www.marinelink.com

Image: www.pexels.com

The post ISS Issues RFP to Construct North America’s First Zero-emissions Towboats appeared first on Cargo News Today.

On episode 120 of the Inbound Logistics podcast (bit.ly/ILMagPodcastPage) Marty Wadle, chief commercial officer and Paul Jensen, senior vp of supply chain solutions for Ruan, an Iowa-based logistics provider, spoke about the importance of transparency and trust in the industry. Here are the highlights of their interview.

Wadle: A single integrated solution removes waste and duplication and creates a stronger relationship with the customer. It creates inventory visibility throughout the supply chain—whether it’s raw materials inbound, work in process, or finished goods.

If you work with one logistics provider, you see the freight all the way through the process. Visibility across the entire supply chain when you’re working with one provider is a huge benefit.

A single, integrated solution also enables rapid response to supply challenges. If we see what’s going on in the entire supply chain, we’re able to effectively maneuver around a clog, wherever it might be. If we see where we have challenges—at the ports or with containers coming in from overseas—then we can do other things to expedite freight once it hits our borders to get that product to customers more efficiently.

We also look at ways to work with our carrier partners to put them on continuous moves. Shippers today are looking to be a shipper of choice. As we act as an extension of our customer, we do our best to create that shipper of choice view from our carrier perspective: How quickly can we get carriers in and out of the docks? Can we put two or three different lanes together to create a continuous move, keep that carrier moving, and eliminate their empty miles? That just creates a better solution.

We also look for backhauls for our dedicated resources that may be delivering finished goods for one of our value-added warehouse customers. The trucks can pick up inbound raw materials or other third-party freight so we can keep dedicated assets loaded at all times. That drives continuous improvement and takes waste out of the system for customers.

Jensen: A common theme across the different services that we provide is transparency. On the dedicated fleet side, we’re 100% transparent. On the managed transportation side, we’re 100% transparent with our customer—from a service, cost, and carrier payment standpoint—and that develops a sense of trust with customers.

We operate best when we’re part of our customer’s enterprise. We bring the most value when we’re included in strategic discussions about the direction of their organization, when our goals and objectives are fundamentally aligned. And that starts from the first day we engage with a customer.

We are all about being as transparent as possible, so that the decision-making on both sides—from our customer’s perspective and our perspective—drives toward a common goal.

IL: What are some innovations that Ruan has implemented where you really see that value-add in play?

Jensen: Every implementation of a solution begins with the needs of the customer. Whether that’s a sophisticated racking system or a complex pick-to-light, multifaceted kitting operation that directly feeds manufacturing lines, we build solutions that meet a specific customer objective.

That includes both finished goods on the outbound side as well as inbound raw materials through a consolidation center. We bring product from across the country into a single consolidation point for splitting, cross docking, reconfiguring, staging, and shipping to various manufacturing sites.

It starts with what our customer’s needs are. As we get into a customer’s business, and we start to learn what their supply chain chokepoints are, we can help them design a better solution that feeds through that distribution process. We understand what it takes to run assets, what it takes to manage carrier relationships, and what it takes to run distribution and finished goods shipping.

IL: When shippers look for a warehouse partner, a lot of thought has to go into that decision. What are some of the things shippers might overlook when they evaluate a new partner?

Jensen: As proposal systems and technology have gotten better, the nuts and bolts of how to share requirements has gotten easier over the past five or 10 years. What hasn’t gotten easier is understanding who your partner is going to be—getting to know them. And not just the services that they provide, but the type of organization they want to be. The way they behave, the way they interact with their customers, and cultural alignment is often overlooked. You need the ability to meet each other’s needs in a transparent way and develop a sense of trust.

When you go out and try to find the right partner, understanding who they are and what they want to be is just as important as pricing and capabilities because your needs will evolve.

I saw this on the shipper side when I worked for a seed manufacturer. In the five years I was there, our business in that industry changed dramatically with complexities that were injected into the manufacturing process, which resulted in much different distribution. Having a partner who could work through that with us would have been a lot easier than trying to figure it out on our own. That’s the kind of partner we want to be.

I’d also caution folks as they look to build a distribution network, build out a regional distribution concept, or just take distribution out of manufacturing to allow more space to create material. Don’t shortchange your long-term plan. Often, in the interest of saving a few dollars on the front end, companies want to buy into a smaller facility that meets today’s needs, but it won’t meet their needs in three to five years. Take a hard look at what your long-term plan is and build for who you want to be—not for who you are.

Although it’s more expensive in the near term, it’s a lot less expensive in the long term to be in the right facility, as opposed to having to make changes along the way as you implement your growth strategy.

Wadle: We perform site analysis for potential customers. One thing that you look at is identifying the right location for your inbound raw materials and for your outbound finished goods locations, to reduce that transportation spend.

Once you’ve picked that location, you also want to look at where you will draw employees from to fill that warehouse. If you’re in a spot where you don’t have access to enough team members, you will be challenged.

We work with our customer to make sure that not only do we find the right location from a transportation standpoint, but also decide if it is the right location for staffing inside the facility. Then we work closely on the configuration.

If we know that a customer’s growth projects that they will need 450,000 square feet in four years, we don’t want to get them into a building that’s 250,000 now and then we’ve got a year to figure out how to add to it or move into another location down the road. We work with the customer to configure the portion of that building they need with the ability to grow into the balance of it.

In the meantime, we’ll work with other partners, other shippers, to bring in third-party freight to defray the cost of that facility so customers can take the full building and be able to grow into it eventually.

Source: www.inboundlogistics.com

Image: www.pixybay.com

The post How transparency enhances and strengthens supply chain partnerships appeared first on Cargo News Today.

Fortunately, the use of expedited shipping services can help mitigate these risks. Experienced freight companies can identify the quickest and most cost-effective transportation methods while also helping to prevent financial loss caused by absent or late shipments.

Once you’ve established a working relationship with a reputable freight service, your account information, needs, and any special requests will be saved in their customer database. That means that the next time you contact them, you’ll spend less time explaining your situation, getting your inventory en route even faster.

WHY EXPEDITED SHIPPING SERVICES?

While expedited shipping options are typically more expensive than standard freight services, they offer numerous benefits.

Streamline the transportation process by sending freight directly to the consignee as soon as it’s picked up. That means your inventory won’t waste unscheduled time sitting in a storage facility or warehouse, reducing the risk of lost profits. Depending on the industry, just one hour of downtime (caused by lack of equipment or tools) can cost anywhere from $85,000 to $1 million.

Don’t pay for storage. More organizations utilize just-in-time inventory based on their production cycles. This means that supplies arrive only when needed, lowering overall costs. Maintaining the warehouses that store these items can be expensive since the facilities have to carry insurance, hire staff workers, and implement temperature control—leading to higher costs.

Utilizing expedited shipping services to order supplies when necessary eliminates the need for storage space, saving time and money without interrupting production.

Know your inventory is secure. Because your inventory remains on the same vehicle during the duration of its journey, there’s minimal handling, resulting in a much lower chance of damage or losses. Businesses also have the ability to track inventory in real time 24/7/365.

The ability to plan ahead. Planning months or years in advance can help businesses prepare for future demand, maintenance, upcoming supply chain shortages, and more.

Many organizations only utilize a single pallet per shipment when sending or receiving goods. However, they’ll save money in the long run if they order enough supplies to fill all the available space since they’re entitled to exclusive use of that vehicle.

By taking time to evaluate the total cost per shipment and establish a working relationship with a trusted expedited shipping provider, businesses can determine exactly what they’ll need over the next year, combining multiple orders into fewer shipments and reducing overall spending.

Save money over time. Expedited shipping offers security, helps you meet tight deadlines, reduces storage costs, and allows your business to plan ahead. Real-time tracking updates and less handling also ensure a damage- and loss-free delivery with no downtime.

While supply chain disruptions may continue for a while, expedited shipping services can reduce their impact.

Author: Dan Boaz, President and CEO, AirFreight.com

Source: www.inboundlogistics.com

Image: www.pexels.com

The post Expedited Shipping Can Save Money appeared first on Cargo News Today.

Traveling in rigid hull inflatable boats (RHIB), kayaks and as swimmers, protesters from Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Netherlands and Germany on Sunday went in front of supertankers Waikiki and SFC Baltica in the Baltic Sea, displaying banners with “Oil Fuels War” as Greenpeace calls on Europe to reject and ban Russian fossil fuel imports to weaken the attack on Ukraine.

Mads Flarup Christensen, executive director of Greenpeace Nordic, said, “While people suffer in Ukraine and people in Russia take to the streets pleading for peace, Putin’s oil and gas is still arriving at European ports, contributing to his war chest. Supertankers crossing our seas with Russian oil and gas are still delivering fossils to Europe. If we want to stand for peace, we must stop this and urgently get off oil and gas.”

Waikiki, owned by Greek shipping company Cardiff Marine, is reportedly carrying 100,000 tonnes of crude oil from Russia to Rotterdam, and SFC Baltica, owned by Russia’s Sovcomflot, is transporting 85,000 tonnes of fuel oil from Russia to Antwerp.

© Will Rose / Greenpeace

A new tracking service launched by Greenpeace UK has identified at least 189 supertankers carrying oil and gas from Russia since the start of its invasion of Ukraine on February 24, with 88 of them headed to Europe. Despite some countries declaring a ban on the arrival of Russian vessels, Russian cargo is still arriving via ships registered to other countries.

Russia is the largest source of the European Union’s fossil fuel imports. Europe spends up to $285 million per day on Russian oil, which funds Putin’s war effort, according to the Transport & Environment (T&E) thinktank.

Last week in France, Greenpeace activists confronted Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) carrier Boris Vilkitsky at sea, and earlier this month 20 activists from Greenpeace Germany painted ‘No Coal’ and ‘No War’ on the side of the bulk carrier Grant T loaded with 100,000 tons of Russian coal as it approached the port of Hamburg.

Dockers in France, the U.K. and the Netherlands have already refused to unload fossil tankers coming from Russia. And the Swedish Dockworkers Union decided on Thursday to block ships from Russia.

© Jean Nicholas Guillo / Greenpeace

Source: www.marinelinks.com

Image: www.pexels.com

The post Greenpeace Protests Against Ships Carrying Russian Fossil Fuels appeared first on Cargo News Today.

I think the fancier approaches fight the “build a little, test a little, learn a lot” engineering maxim in new technology development, and maybe doing more simple stuff may be a better way to achieve lasting results quicker.

A recent conversation with a sustainable propulsion advocate compelled me to run a few numbers.

I found a bulker with a GA for a 2010 era 25,000 deadweight tonner that may work with appropriately positioned cranes and it even has a CPP. I drew in some sails that are set along a stay that is being held up by the cranes.

To make a prettier sail plan, get better balance, and to add some additional sail area, I also mounted a tripod mast on the No. 1 crane top to allow a proper headsail to be rigged.

This resulted in sail plan with about 13,600 square feet of fore and aft sail as shown.

Image courtesy Rik van Hemmen

Not exactly 12M sailboat pretty but not terribly bad looking either, but now we need to figure out if this is a realistic approach.
Let’s first consider operational realities.

These are sails with about 115 feet on the luff. Not a crazy size sail considering that there are many sloops sailing today that have headsails that size and much larger.

To set sail, the crew will deploy the crane, lock it in place at maximum boom elevation, and hoist a spectra stay that has a headblock for the halyard and the sail hanked on to the stay. The stay is tensioned by the crane hoist wire.

A halyard winch raises the sails and the sail is sheeted with a separate sheeting winch (actually probably two sheeting winches, one fitted port and one starboard to allow better leads). Each sail would have a halyard winch and two sheet winches.

When making port, the sail is lowered and stuffed into a stowage area at the foot of the cargo crane, the stay is dropped in the same location, and the crane is ready for cargo work. There is no rigging that interferes with cargo operations. All the rigging is spectra and can be handled by humans without danger of injury or rigging failure from kinking, etc.

I estimate that three good big boat sailors can rig, set, and douse the sails. Once the sails are set, they will stand sail watch (trimming and route optimization) while the vessel is underway. In other words, if this were a prototype vessel, I would provide three additional specialist crew members to the crew and not overburden the standard crew with this technology.

This vessel is fitted with 35-ton cranes. At 25 mph wind speed, each sail will generate about 2.5 tons wind pressure.

Let’s, for the time being, assume that sail area will be reduced when wind speeds exceed 25 mph, but I think the system can probably sustain higher wind speeds, especially from abaft.

Headstay tensions are much higher than wind pressure, but, depending on the headstay sag, they are unlikely to exceed 35 tons. There is a side load component on the crane boom and cranes booms do not like to be side loaded, but side loads are an order of magnitude less than the crane capacity. I expect that some calculations and possible modifications (locking features) need to be made on the cranes for this unorthodox use, but I don’t think these modifications will be a deal breaker.

In good conditions these sails will generate about 10 tons of thrust. That is nice, but far from the 70 tons or so thrust that is generated by the 6,700 hp main engine to drive the vessel at 13 knots.

I estimate that, overall, this arrangement will save about 10 to 15% in fuel consumed at 13 knots (if the wind is blowing). That is fuel not burned and therefore a good deal from an environmental point of view, but is it worth it?

Keep in mind that in a 25-mph wind from a useful direction this vessel can probably do about 7 knots under sail alone (1/2 the speed requires 1/8 the thrust). If the wind is truly from an attractive direction (reach to tight reach), things become even more interesting because motor sailing can add significant speed at very low additional fuel costs, since it increases apparent wind speed with various interesting beneficial effects. While at this stage I have no way to quantify it, I also know that sails can reduce drag from waves due to their steadying effect and that may provide additional performance gains. (As a side note, I also looked at energy production by covering the hatch covers with thin film solar, but that only results in an additional 64 kW round the clock on average and is not going to make a significant difference.)

Regardless, if we go with the vessel’s rated consumption at 13 knots of 21 tons per day, this arrangement can save 2 tons per day. At a fuel cost of $600 per ton that would save $1,200 per day.

All of this would heavily depend on advanced weather routing and deployment on attractive routes.

I estimate that the four sails (at about $10 per square foot resulting in $140,000), rigging, the 12 winches, and the various crane and stowage modifications will cost $1M to $2M to procure and install (which would be a payback period of 5 years or so at zero interest, and the life of these components probably equates to about 5 years). Then there is also the cost of the additional crew.

Let’s discuss the cost of the additional crew. Three additional crew members, especially if they are skilled big boat sailors, would probably be more expensive than $400 per crew member per day, but it is in the ballpark. Nevertheless, together with the equipment investment, commercially, it becomes a losing proposition.

However, I still think it may be worth it to modify a bulker to carry a sail arrangement like this.

The operation of sail assist on a commercial motor vessel is a complex game, and, unintentionally, the crew is often the cause of the failure of sail propulsion in commercial maritime. Operating a commercial motor vessel is hard work. To find the internal motivation to go out on deck to set sail is hard on recreational sailing vessels and certainly no easier on commercial vessels. In my experience, the failure too often rests with a lack of energy by the vessel crew in focusing on sailing the vessel rather than defaulting to motoring the vessel……..unless there is a commercial incentive.

What if the sailing crew is paid according to fuel saved? In other words, their pay depends on how much less the vessel burned if it had operated on the engine alone. If we were to use this example, that would be on the order of $300 per day per crew member (no savings while in port, or in low or adverse wind). While it would not be terribly attractive by itself, together with base pay it could be the basis for a trial arrangement.
And I think it would be a very worthwhile trial for the following reasons:

1. Build a little, test a little, learn a lot.
2. Often (but not always) when a concept is workable, it can become viable with improvements based on operational experience.
3. In the context of sustainability, this project is a modest investment at about $3M (equipment modifications and non-recovered crew cost).
4. We can start with one sail on one crane to get a feel from an operational point of view.
5. Actual testing of the rig would require a committed crew with the three sailors who can operate the crane and rig the sail.
6. Once they have their head around an appropriate arrangement and process after a few months (and pick up a little performance data from the single sail, although that is not that easy to do), four Mod 2 sails can be installed and a year long program can be started.
7. Here the sail crew can work the system to see what kind of money they can make.
8. If the system works as expected, a few dynamics will come into play. First, there will most likely be many improvements that come to mind. Second, the vessel’s regular crew will think “Hey, these guys get bonus money; maybe there is a way for us to get it.”
9. In other words, the sail crew actually is a training crew and will hand the operation to the regular crew once they get their head around the way to earn some extra money.
10. If the concept works, but is not necessarily cost effective in the first instance, the lessons learned can be applied to a more optimized design and that is where the real value comes in and could well reach commercial break even. This project is just a modified existing design, but a purpose-built design with taller purpose-built cranes, optimized control surfaces, maybe some anti heel arrangement, maybe some automation, a shaft generator and a somewhat smaller main engine can make a significant difference on the bottom line. Even that may not be commercially viable, but doing is learning and I am convinced that the solutions will only be found by doing.
11. For one thing, I have only spent a few minutes thinking about the deployment of the sail. Maybe a type of roller furling or sock dousing can be installed, simplifying operation, and that is only one example.
12. Once systems improve, the burden on the crew will go down, but fuel saved will go up. Once crew burden goes down, reasonable fuel saved bonuses can also go down, increasing overall cost effectiveness.
13. To provide an experimental training ground to make commercial sail work is a much better approach than theorizing about the most elegant solution.

To quote a famous philosopher (Master Yoda), Do or do not; there is no try.

Source: www.marinelinks.com

Image: www.pexels.com

The post Eye on Maritime Design: Can Wind Propulsion Work by Keeping it Simple? appeared first on Cargo News Today.

Whopping fuel prices

The war has affected the logistics and freight industry both directly and indirectly. One of them is the rise in fuel prices, which has been felt by every driver in recent weeks. Fuel prices have now reached unprecedented heights. In America, for example, this increase was last seen more than a decade ago. This inevitably affects the costs for carriers, which in turn raises the price of the service. For example, according to Freightos, global air freight rates from Asia and Europe have risen by about 80% since the end of February, reaching $ 11.86 per kilogram. Higher shipping costs are likely to affect not only carriers but also consumers. Market comparisons are already showing significant price increases for commodities such as aluminium, wheat and exotic fruits.

Longer routes

More than 2,500 flights from the United States used Russian airspace in January, according to aviation data company Cirium. However, at present, due to security, sanctions and political stance, many carriers no longer deliver goods to Russia and avoid including its territory in their route plans. Due to military threats, Ukraine and Moldova have also become countries with a curve in both land and air transport. This means that companies in the sector need to think about alternatives to travel around certain countries, thus extending flight times and inevitably increasing fuel consumption. Due to the difficulties caused, several airlines have cancelled flights to some Asian countries. Such a step has been taken, for example, by an industry giant such as Finnair, which has decided to cancel passenger and cargo flights to Seoul, Shanghai and Guangzhou, as well as Hong Kong indefinitely.

Lack of capacity and congestion

The state of war in Ukraine has also affected freight transport capacity, which had already fallen sharply during the pandemic due to growing demand for goods, and is now being further eroded. Why? One of the reasons is the aforementioned sanctions against Russia. As a result, Russian cargo planes have been suspended. One of the most significant losses is the banning of Russia’s largest cargo air operator, the Volga-Dnepr, in the West. The Volga-Dnepr operates a fleet of particularly large cargo ships with ramps that can accommodate unusual types of cargo, such as metro wagons, as well as large general cargo shipments. Its subsidiary AirBridgeCargo has 17 Boeing 747 jumbo jets and 777 other cargo aircraft that have been banned from operating in almost 30 countries since the sanctions were imposed. Such bans have had a significant impact on the capacity of cargo aircraft, which is also contributing to the rise in air freight rates.

Congestion at borders and ports

Sanctions against Russia are also not helping the already growing congestion at the border and in major ports. As a result, all shipments of goods entering and leaving the country are subject to special scrutiny at the border to ensure that all sanctions imposed on the country are complied with. This, in turn, indirectly affects an already disrupted supply chain, creating congestion and making it even slower than before.

The air and land transport sectors are not the only ones indirectly affected by the military conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is also damaging world shipping, which accounts for 80% of world trade. Many Russian ships are currently stranded in the world’s oceans and seas, unable to deliver and receive cargo because they are barred from calling at ports in the Americas, England, Canada and many European countries. In addition, the crew on board has to deal with the reluctance of foreign seafarers to help in the event of a shortage of petrol. In recent weeks, the media has repeatedly published videos showing footage of the Russian ship’s crew crying for help, which has been unsuccessful.

Security risk

The war in Ukraine has also increased the security risks for logistics and freight workers. Although most logistics companies have stopped delivering goods to Russia and Ukraine, including Maersk, CMA CGM and Hapag-Lloyd, some 140 merchant ships from other countries are currently trapped in Ukrainian ports, risking being left without food or drinking water. There have been several reports in the media about the shooting of ships and the death of crew members. For example, on March 3, an Estonian-owned cargo ship with a crew of six, including two representatives of Russia and four representatives of Ukraine, sank off the port of Odessa. Three other merchant ships were sunk in the Black Sea; one of these attacks killed a Bangladeshi crew member. Undoubtedly, the security risk in the shipping industry is now higher than ever, and events are pushing up insurance prices, urging carriers to impose a ‘war risk surcharge’ and puts people in the shipping industry in fear for their lives.

All the above factors lead to the same conclusion: no matter how much we want to send Russian freight and logistics companies to hell because of their political position, we must understand that their absence from the market makes it difficult for the entire industry to function effectively. So let us hope for an early end to the war and a faster recovery of the industry, which will benefit everyone.

Author: Roland Peterson, logistics expert

Image: www.pexels.com

The post Security risks and rising costs: the consequences of the Russia-Ukraine war on freight transport appeared first on Cargo News Today.

Russia’s military took control of waterways when it invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, in what Moscow calls a “special operation”.

Ukrainian maritime officials have told Reuters fighting has left around 100 foreign-flagged vessels and hundreds of mariners stranded in Ukrainian ports.

Last week a seafarer was killed at the Ukrainian port of Olvia after a missile struck his Bangladesh-flagged cargo ship. Projectiles have hit four other vessels in recent days with one sunk.

The UN’s International Maritime Organization (IMO) convened a virtual meeting on Thursday and Friday to discuss the escalating situation.

A statement afterwards said the IMO’s Secretary-General Kitack Lim “indicated his commitment to take immediate action to realise the blue safe maritime corridor with the cooperation and collaboration of the relevant parties including littoral states”.

It said a maritime corridor would “allow the safe evacuation of seafarers and ships from the high-risk and affected areas in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov to a safe place”.

Ukraine has accused the Russian military of targeting Olvia port facilities in a missile strike, while Russia’s embassy in Dhaka said last week the circumstances of the incident involving the Bangladesh ship were “being established”. Russia denies deliberately targeting civilians.

The IMO meeting was held with its Council, which consists of 40 member countries who are elected for two years. Non-Council member states such as Ukraine were able to make statements.

The IMO statement said separately that the Council “deplored the attacks of the Russian Federation aimed at commercial vessels, their seizures, including search-and-sescue vessels”.

The Council separately demanded that Russia “cease its unlawful activities to ensure the safety and welfare of seafarers and the security of international shipping and the marine environment in all affected areas”.

Russia’s IMO representatives could not be immediately reached for comment on Friday.

Source: www.marinelinks.com

Image: www.pixibay.com

The post IMO to Work on Safe Corridor for Ships Stranded by Ukraine Conflict appeared first on Cargo News Today.

Classification societies provide services such as checking that ships are seaworthy, and this certification cover is essential for securing insurance and entry into ports.

In recent days, Britain’s LR and Denmark’s DNV, have both announced they were stopping or winding down their business ties with Russia.

The International Association of Classification Societies (IACS), which had 12 members previously including LR and DNV and forms the top tier of ship certifiers globally, said late on Friday it was withdrawing RS’ membership with immediate effect, which it said was “no longer tenable”, citing UK sanctions on Russia where IACS is domiciled.

“IACS deeply regrets the circumstances that have resulted in this decision,” it said.

RS did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday.

An IACS spokesperson said on Monday that the impact on RS of no longer being an IACS member would “depend on its various, private bilateral arrangements with entities such as shipowners and flag states”.

The spokesperson said IACS was a technical association that “develops and agrees minimum technical standards”.

“IACS will need to make various consequential changes regarding the composition of various working groups,” the spokesperson said.

“IACS is not involved in the operational and commercial activities of its members. As such, the decision whether to continue to engage bilaterally with RS will need to be taken by each IACS member individually.”

RS said in June last year it had formed a strategic partnership with leading Russian shipping company Sovcomflot (SCF), which included cooperating on the development of new marine fuels to reduce emissions and technical supervision of ice-class ships operating in the Arctic.

SCF was among the Russian entities the U.S. Treasury restricted last month from raising capital in U.S. markets, which shipping sources say will complicate transactions for the Moscow-listed company.

It was not yet clear what impact the growing restrictions would have on the safety of SCF’s fleet and their ability to sail.

Source: www.marinelinks.com

Image: www.pexels.com

The post Russia Dropped from Ship Certification Body as Sanctions Bite appeared first on Cargo News Today.