English 
Ελληνικα 
Български 
Albanian 
Taiwan-based Evergreen Marine in June launched the largest container ship ever built, the aptly named Ever Alot.
The massive ship has a capacity of 24,004 twenty-foot equivalent units, just a little more than its slightly older sibling, the Ever Ace, launched in July 2021 and the former world record holder at 23,992 TEUs.
The Ever Alot is more than 1,300 feet long and 203 feet wide. If you were to stack the Ever Alot vertically, it would be taller than the Empire State Building in New York City.
The Ever Alot made its maiden voyage leaving Shanghai, where it was constructed, to the Port of Rotterdam in August, becoming the first vessel to break the 24,000-TEU barrier.
The Ever Ace and the Ever Alot are part of a class of ships known as very large container ships (VLCs) or ultra large container vessels (ULCVs), ships so large they can barely pass through the locks of the Panama Canal.
The Ever Ace was built by South Korea-based Samsung Heavy Industries for about $150 million, according to Taiwan News. China-based Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding manufactured the Ever Alot for a reported $145 million when it was ordered in 2019.
Both the Ever Alot and Ever Ace service routes between Europe and the Far East. The larger ships are aimed at gaining benefits of scale and lowering container slot costs, which could enable carriers to offer more competitive rates to shippers.
Since 2012, the average capacity of a container ship has grown from less than 3,000 TEUs to around 4,500 TEUs. In the last decade, more than 50 ships with a capacity of 21,000 TEUs or more have been built, according to a report from the BBC.
Some maritime experts have questioned the viability and financial sustainability of such large ships.
Matt Stoller, director of research at the American Economic Liberties Project, told FreightWaves these very large container ships need larger facilities and more equipment to handle them, requiring ports to pay for increased dredging, new warehouses, more cranes and personnel, as well as more road infrastructure.
Another reason most ultra large container ships service mainly Europe and Asia is because most U.S. ports are too small to accommodate them.
“We have a lot of ports in [the U.S.] but we don’t have enough ocean carrier firms,” Stoller said. “The ocean carrier firms’ boats are too big for most ports.”
But some large container ships have called on U.S. ports in recent years.
In 2015, the 18,000-TEU CMA CGM Benjamin Franklin called on the Port of Los Angeles, becoming the largest container ship to visit a North American port. That record was eclipsed in 2020, when the MSC Anna, a 19,200-TEU ship, called at the Port of Oakland in California.
The largest container ship to sail to the U.S. East Coast is the CMA CGM Marco Polo, a 16,022-TEU vessel that called on the ports of New York and New Jersey, Savannah and Charleston in 2021.
While the Ever Alot was the largest container ship in service when it launched in August, it may have already been eclipsed by larger vessels.
On Oct. 29, the Yangzijiang Shipbuilding Group in China floated two new ships, the MSC Loreto and MSC Irina, for the Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), the world’s largest shipping line.
Although MSC has not put these ships into service yet, Yangzijiang said each vessel will have a container capacity of 24,636 TEU, making them the largest container ships in the world.
MSC unseated Maersk as the world’s largest ocean carrier in January. Although ocean container traffic has slowed in general over the last year, MSC continues to aggressively expand its fleet.
MSC has a newbuild order book of 1,482,178 TEUs, according to Alphaliner (including chartered ships ordered by intermediaries) data reviewed by FreightWaves. MSC’s orderbook capacity is now 33.4% of its on-the-water fleet.
Source: FreightWaves
Author:Noi Mahoney
Shipping containers of various sizes contribute more than 90% to the transportation of cargo globally. Multimodal container shipping help move cargo between locations using more than one method of transport without having to offload and load between different containers at various locations and the different modes of transport. Last year, an estimated 20 – 23 million TEUs (Twenty Equivalent Units) were used to move cargo globally.
Types of Containers
Shipping containers are generally categorised as dry or refrigerated containers. Dry containers are sometimes referred to as general purpose (GP) containers or dry vans (DV), while refrigerated ones are called reefers. Dry containers store and transport general dry cargo, while refrigerated containers are used for temperature-sensitive materials.
Refrigerated shipping containers have generators fixed to them for running the refrigeration unit that keeps the goods inside at the desired temperatures. These units run on electricity as well as fuel. Temperature-sensitive materials, such as perishable food items, pharmaceutical drugs, etc., are transported using such reefers.
So, what is a non-operating reefer or NOR shipping container?
In some instances, refrigerated shipping containers are used to transport general cargo items but with refrigeration units turned off. Such a container is called a non-operating reefer or a NOR shipping container. A refrigerated container may sail as a reefer to one location, and the same may serve as a NOR shipping container to another location.
What purpose does transporting dry items in a switched-off refrigerated container serve? Why are these dry items not transported by dry containers?
Most leading shipping container carriers offer NOR services. As with all commodities, the principle of supply and demand applies to shipping containers as well. Increased demand for containers to a particular destination may fuel the price, but what if there is not enough demand to get these containers back? In this case, the container rate naturally falls. An imbalance in container availability at locations can hamper the movement of goods.
Repositioning of Containers
To counter this situation, container carriers often offer their customers who might want to transport dry cargo, empty refrigerated containers with their refrigeration units turned off. The repositioning of reefer containers, thus, as NOR, at locations where they are needed most mainly helps the carriers to maintain some balance in container availability. It does away with the need to transfer empty refrigerated containers to locations, thereby losing revenue.
Non-operating reefer services are usually available to customers at a reduced rate. Besides being cost-effective to the customer, this method of repositioning containers generates revenue for the shipping carrier.
However, reefer containers cannot carry the same volume of cargo as their dry counterpart. They have much less cargo space as some space inside is taken up by the refrigeration equipment and insulation. The thicker wall of reefer containers consisting of insulation materials or padding reduces storage space considerably. Besides, the dimensions of the door of a reefer container are much less when compared to a dry one.
Not all types of dry cargo are allowed in NOR containers. Only cargoes that do not damage the equipment and insulation material are allowed by carriers in their NOR containers.
Normally, cargo packed neatly in cardboard or similar cartons without sharp edges is allowed. The cartons should be such that they can be stacked and lashed safely, so they do not move around inside the non-operating reefer. Loose loading is not done in such containers.
Similarly, there are weight restrictions too. The normal maximum allowable weight is 3000 KG/M. Hazardous chemicals, heavy machinery with sharp parts, abnormally sized cargo, fertilisers, batteries, items with strong odours, etc., are not allowed in non-operating reefers.
NORs are generally used to transport food and beverages, textiles, toys, and other such items.
Converting a Refrigerated Container to a NOR Shipping Container
A refrigerated container has to go through a certain process before it can be used as a NOR.
After unloading a reefer of its refrigerated contents, the refrigeration unit is switched off and disabled. It is then taken to its respective container depot, and the inside is cleaned and dried thoroughly. Once these steps are completed, the container is ready for taking in the designated dry cargo.
Why NOR Shipping Containers?
As we have seen earlier in this article, NOR shipping containers benefit both the carrier and the customer.
To the carrier, it helps to a great extent in offsetting container shortages at locations – both dry and refrigerated. Shipping dry goods by NOR is economical to businesses as costs are much less than a dry container of the same size, albeit with some space restrictions.
NOR containers get priority onboard carrier vessels as it is mainly used to meet container shortages at a destination. This also means a shorter lead time for the customer.
Limitations of NOR Shipping Containers
Some limitations of NOR containers are given below:
- Non-operating refrigerated shipping containers cannot be used in the transportation of all types of cargo.
- Since they are technically classified as reefers, they do not get the extended detention and demurrage-free days that dry containers enjoy.
- A NOR container can only accommodate a lesser volume of cargo when compared with a dry container of the same size, for example, a 20’ refrigerated container used as NOR V 20’ dry container (General Purpose or Dry Van). This is because of the space occupied by the refrigeration unit inside the container and its thicker insulated container walls.
- It can accommodate only a lesser weight than a dry van of the same size. This is usually fixed at 3000 KG/M.
- It is estimated that a NOR container holds 10 – 15% less cargo than a dry container of the same dimensions.
- Dry containers usually have more lashing points to secure the cargo, another reason why not all types of dry cargo can be transported using a NOR container.
- For transporting dry cargo, the inside of such a container has to be dry – especially if it has been washed before loading.
- Sharp edges of boxes or machinery may cause damage to the insulation material, and hence special care has to be taken while loading and unloading cargo.
- The dimensions of the door of some reefer containers may be less than that of a dry container. The feasibility of loading cargo through the narrow opening must be considered before booking such a container.
Article by
Top-25 container liner
operators
The 1 April snapshot of the Top 25 Container Liner Operators (by parent or main
company, including subsidiaries and affiliates) consolidates the lead taken by
MSC in the ranking early this year. Since then, it has increased the gap with
Maersk to around 60,000 TEU. The twenty-five biggest carriers control 93% of
the existing world container capable fleet deployed in liner services. The share of
the orderbook amounts to 25% of the existing fleet, compared to 23% three
months earlier. Other changes over the first quarter have seen Sea Lead Shipping
replace SM Line in the Top-25. There were also several shifts in position of which
ZIM overtaking Wan Hai was the most remarkable one.
republication Dynamar 14/22
Top-25 Container Liner Operators
The 1 October 2020 Top 25 Container Liner Operators (by parent or main company, including subsidiaries and affiliates) control 92% of the existing world container capable fleet deployed in liner services. This is a rise of 3% compared to the previous quarter, due to putting idle ships back into service and the delivery of a number of 24,000 TEU giants to HMM. The share of the global orderbook continues to go down, and is now a historical low 8%. With regard to carriers, Arkas fell out of the Top-25, being replaced by RCL, and is now number twenty-six. Number ten is now ZIM, which overtook PIL by a minimal margin.
Top-25 October 2020 compared
Comparing the present Top 25 with one year ago shows that HMM and Unifeeder have nearly doubled their fleets. Whilst HMM grew organically, through the construction of twelve ships of 24,000 TEU, Unifeeder obtained the extra capacity through the purchase of Feedertech and Transworld Feeders. Other fast risers were Global Feeder Shipping (+43%), Matson (51%) and Sinokor (+35%), the latter after buying Heung-A.
Reposting from Dynamars, 07-10-2020
China’s 1Q20 Port throughput down by 8.5%
In the difficult first three months of this year, ports in China handled 55.2 million TEU, a decline of 8.5% year-on-year. Some 49.3 million TEU (-8%) was routed via sea ports, whilst 5.8 million TEU (-11%) was handled by river ports. It should be noted that sea ports also handle (substantial amounts) of river cargo and some river ports also handle seagoing containers. The below table comprises the country’s twenty-five largest seaports. Many of them saw volumes go down by double-digit percentages, with stiff declines for the major ports of Dalian (-27%), Shenzhen (-12%), Yingkou (-16%), Guangzhou (-10%) and Shanghai (-10%) in particular. With declines of less than 10%, or even an occasional rise, Ningbo (-8%), Xiamen (-6%) and Qingdao (+2%) fared better.
Although most river ports are restricted to handling inland barges, a few also cater for (international) seaborne trade. The largest such port is Suzhou, which comprises Taicang and Zhanjiangang. It handled 1.27 million TEU (-19%). Other major river ports also involved in sea trade are Jianying, Nanjing and Nantong, but their seagoing volumes are substantially smaller. The latter outlet actually saw its volume go up by almost 30%.
Reposted from DynaLiners, 24-04-2020
Carrier 2018 Financial Performance Overview
In the current situation, the overview of the carrier’s results reads as a history book. In general, with the usual exception of HMM and Yang Ming, the outcomes of the main carriers are quite good. For some, the results are very much affected by bookkeeping gains (Cosco Shipping) or losses (Maersk). As usual, SITC and Wan Hai managed to perform very well, as did, after several rounds of consolidation, Hapag-Lloyd. However, with the corona crisis in full swing, for 2020, the situation will be entirely different. Obviously, past performance is no guarantee for future results.
Ten carriers provided enough information to calculate revenues and operating profit per TEU carried. An overview shows that in 2019 most carriers posted
revenues per TEU in line with or slightly higher than those of the year earlier. HMM and Yang Ming were the only ones who did not earn enough to even cover
their operating expenses.
Reposting from DynaLiners, 03-04-2020
Top-25 container liner operators
The 1 January 2020, Top 25 Container Liner Operators (by parent or main
company, including subsidiaries and affiliates) control 91% of the existing world
container capable fleet deployed in liner services. The share of the orderbook
amounts to just 10% of the existing fleet, its lowest level in years. Compared to
one year ago, following its takeover of Feedertech, Unifeeder entered the
ranking, at the expense of Salam Pasific. The Top-12 is the same as last year with
only some (smaller) changes in the lower regions.
Reposting from Dynaliners, 03-02-2020
