The Jaxson

Community => News => Topic started by: Metro Jacksonville on November 16, 2007, 04:30:00 AM

Title: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Metro Jacksonville on November 16, 2007, 04:30:00 AM
JAXPORT: How do we Rank?

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/port_photo.jpg)

The Port of Jacksonville has recently announced two major shipping deals that will allow containers to arrive directly from Asia. Will Jacksonville overtake other ports for a top spot, or will other cities expand just as aggressively?

Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/606
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Joe on November 16, 2007, 09:04:39 AM
edit: replied in the wrong thread - sorry.

That being said, it will be exciting to see if Jaxport can expand as heavily into other products as they have been with imported automobiles.

It will also be interesting to see if they can further diversify their trading partners with more deals like this one. Right now, they gets tons of their business from Puerto Rico.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Ocklawaha on November 16, 2007, 10:22:42 AM
Quote
The math on this dilemma is rather simple. China is building close to 100 new container-loading berths over the next few years, each capable of shipping about 250,000 containers a year, most of them to the United States. Meanwhile, five berths are planned for the West Coast of the United States to receive them. Something's got to give.

Savannah, has real problems all along the Port. 21 miles of twisting river and swift current is not something that they are going to fix in a deal with South Carolina. There are plans for a new joint GA and SC terminal on the SC side of the river. The problem they face along the channel is sharp turns that are impassible at low tide, and difficult to traverse at ebb tide. There is a bridge that restricts entry for large ships unless the tide is lower, added up, this means ships will only enter or exit the terminal on a rising tide. A tiny window, between when the tide is too low to pass, and too high to slide under the bridge.

We too have a bridge that restricts our port, but apparently not nearly the problem that faces Savannah. While our channel is not quite as deep, we don't deal with currents that can and sometimes do slam these giant ships into the banks. The St. Johns River, is not only a shipping river, it also has the slowest current of any similar river in America. Our rail connections to the West are better with direct mainlines all the way to California. Savannah has come on strong and gotten much closer to Charleston in volume, but it is feeling the pinch as the two states work to try and find some solution. Frankly, for Georgia, a deal with Nassau County, Florida and Fernport at Fernandina Beach, might be a better investment. The Nassau River is deep, Nuke Submarine deep, could JPA expand to include a terminal there as well? Why not?

Charleston, has ran into a brick wall that is fighting all port expansion. The powerful lobby and citizens efforts called "CONTAIN THE PORT" are backed by local universities and developments. Worse then our own Courthouse, they planned to expand on a spoil island. Later they moved the whole project to the newly closed Charleston Naval Base. Citizens attacked that plan too as it would plop a huge port facility right in the middle of a struggling minority community. They calculated a semi-truck every 6 seconds and the Port's dream facility went up in smoke. Back to the Spoil island, they have come under attack by upper income land owners and developers that have land along the bay and do not want their view ruined by a port. Now some 15 years into planning, they are finally moving ahead on what might be Charlestons last Port expansion. The old saying that "Cargo doesn't vote" is coming around to bite SC where it hurts the most.

Jacksonville has serious problems too, but none of our troubles seem on the same scale. We clearly have the space, the will and the railroad and highway network. We have a Hurricane advantage that has NOT been unnoticed either, due to our Westerly position on the Atlantic. Funny that I'm writing about a Port here, but again our single biggest stumbling block is JTA and the stupid bridge that was built too low! On the positive side the bridge, in spite of being somewhat new, scores low on safety. Perhaps that is the key to getting a fix sometime in the future, but I doubt I'll see it! We once had TWO RAILROADS to Mayport and a wide open river, "had," being the key word. Have we approached Nassau County with a joint plan or project? Combined with a critical lack of vision, we alone are to blame if we don't take this prize. But perhaps our transportation planners explain why some animals eat their young!


Ocklawaha
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: zoo on November 16, 2007, 11:51:19 AM
Don't forget the global warming/weather component. Notice how many of the ports above Jacksonville were located on the Gulf Coast in Louisiana & Tx! How many of those ships/containers were affected by the recent hurricane seasons?!?!?
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: thelakelander on November 16, 2007, 12:49:55 PM
You know me, just playing Devil's Adovcate.

Quote
Our rail connections to the West are better with direct mainlines all the way to California.

Why would a shipper from China, bypass the West Coast ports to go around to the East Coast to ship goods back to the West Coast?  In the event that a reason was found, why go all the way to the Atlantic Coast, as opposed to Houston?  It seems that their targeted expansion to the East Coast is to better serve this half of the US, not the West.

Quote
Savannah has come on strong and gotten much closer to Charleston in volume, but it is feeling the pinch as the two states work to try and find some solution. Frankly, for Georgia, a deal with Nassau County, Florida and Fernport at Fernandina Beach, might be a better investment. The Nassau River is deep, Nuke Submarine deep, could JPA expand to include a terminal there as well? Why not?

Savannah's port is operated by the Georgia Port Authority.  If no more growth is possible for port expansion in the area, then what about Brunswick or another spot along the Georgia Coast?  Also, it appears that Savannah has more land potentially available for future port expansion, just east of the US 17 bridge, then Jax Port does altogether (once the two new terminals are fully developed).

Quote
Jacksonville has serious problems too, but none of our troubles seem on the same scale. We clearly have the space, the will and the railroad and highway network.

Speaking of containers, we're already more than a million below Savannah, Norfolk and Charleston right now.  The two recent deals, if fully built out will only bring us up to a level playing field, assuming that these places are not successful in any of their efforts to expand, which is unlikely.  Once we get to that point, then land really does become an issue, since most of the available riverfront land will have then be developed.

Quote
Don't forget the global warming/weather component. Notice how many of the ports above Jacksonville were located on the Gulf Coast in Louisiana & Tx! How many of those ships/containers were affected by the recent hurricane seasons?!?!?

Most of those ports ship oil.  That's a product that will always keep them high, in terms of tonnage, as long as there are reserves.  It also helps that products like steel, grain, corn, etc. that are produced in the Midwest are shipped down the Mississippi.  Our main competitors in the container business will be the East Coast ports.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Ocklawaha on November 16, 2007, 04:04:27 PM
Quote
Why would a shipper from China, bypass the West Coast ports to go around to the East Coast to ship goods back to the West Coast?  In the event that a reason was found, why go all the way to the Atlantic Coast, as opposed to Houston?  It seems that their targeted expansion to the East Coast is to better serve this half of the US, not the West.

With the West Coast hitting gridlock and no more available land or massive projects are in the pipeline, it MIGHT really be cheaper to land the product here and back ship. On the other hand, depending on where the product originates, cheaper to come through the Indian Ocean and Med, before crossing the pond. Even with the new canal, Panama is looking at huge backups in traffic. Ships have to wait far too long to get through. The Gulf Coast Ports are also on alluvial rivers, like Savannah and Charleston. These rivers are much harder to deal with in keeping the channels open, or in navigation of currents. Seasonal flooding in the Midwest and Southwest will continue to cause "a New Orleans" effect of filling in the channels. That leaves Gulfport is small and exposed, Mobile, Pensacola and Panama City are shallow water bays, also exposed to storms. Tampa? Shallow water and narrow channel. Manatee, Miami, Everglades, Canaveral? Not much room, those with room don't have decent rail service. Next in line? Jacksonville.

Quote
Savannah's port is operated by the Georgia Port Authority.  If no more growth is possible for port expansion in the area, then what about Brunswick or another spot along the Georgia Coast?  Also, it appears that Savannah has more land potentially available for future port expansion, just east of the US 17 bridge, then Jax Port does altogether (once the two new terminals are fully developed).

The problems with expansion are myriad in Savannah. While they are going to do some expansion, they are talking about more then 1,000 acres to gain a half million containers. WHY? Wetlands, channel, location and other factors that are causing them to gobble up land to preserve more nature, then to move containers. If your ship came through Panama, you add 125 miles to the trip and take away railroad mainlines. NS is trying to add some capacity on the Charlotte-Savannah route, but this is hardly the FEC we are talking about, it's barely equal to our line to Fernandina Beach. I agree that Brunswick has possibilities but it is not unlike some of Savannah in that it's rail access is even worse. Brunswick or some of the other GPA Ports along the coast are out on Coastal Islands. These are not on rail mainlines. These are not on branches off of mainlines. These ARE many miles down long, slow and sometimes light track. Several of the Ports are not even on a major railroad.

Quote
Speaking of containers, we're already more than a million below Savannah, Norfolk and Charleston right now.  The two recent deals, if fully built out will only bring us up to a level playing field, assuming that these places are not successful in any of their efforts to expand, which is unlikely.  Once we get to that point, then land really does become an issue, since most of the available riverfront land will have then be developed.
I think it's amazing how much land we "have" for our Port future. That Intercoastal Waterway and those "other" streams like the Broward, Dunns Creek, Clapboard Creek, Trout, Nassau Rivers may all come into play when the big bucks start flowing. We CAN move some of those smaller bridges for a net gain, much faster then Savannah can pump up land on a spoil or Charleston can get approved to bulldoze more history. This is Jacksonville, what do we care about our history? We might not like it, but this is the way the game is usually played. I don't think we'll see the container cranes in the preserve, but right up to it? YOU BET! To those who built those expensive homes along the lower river? GONE!

Quote
Most of those (GULF COAST) ports ship oil.  That's a product that will always keep them high, in terms of tonnage, as long as there are reserves.  It also helps that products like steel, grain, corn, etc. that are produced in the Midwest are shipped down the Mississippi.  Our main competitors in the container business will be the East Coast ports.

Add to that chemicals, sugars and wheat grain. Once we completely surrender all of our industrial might to the Orient, we will have to continue to be the "breadbasket". The South will continue to supply the raw materials that have always been our mainstay. As our money is devalued by this shift, we will no longer have the funds to make these investments in facilities. I tend to agree then that Containers will be the "pot o' gold" for the West and the East. The Gulf Coast may be out of this game.

But what the heck? That's just my opinion, but then that's why they pay me to play!


Ocklawaha
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: vicupstate on November 16, 2007, 04:21:03 PM
There are plans for a new joint GA and SC terminal on the SC side of the river. The problem they face along the channel is sharp turns that are impassible at low tide, and difficult to traverse at ebb tide. There is a bridge that restricts entry for large ships unless the tide is lower, added up, this means ships will only enter or exit the terminal on a rising tide. A tiny window, between when the tide is too low to pass, and too high to slide under the bridge.


Are you sure about this?  The only bridge I know of is the Hwy 17 bridge in Savannah proper.  The joint terminal would be many miles seaward of that.  I can't fathom that an entirely new port would be built inland of a bridge.     
Title: Port Georgialina
Post by: Ocklawaha on November 16, 2007, 05:39:54 PM
Here are (PART) of two of the reports I looked at. It appears that some of these problems are pretty big. Also, the Joint port is NOT a done deal... Both sides, ie: Savannah, Charleston, Brunswick, GA and SC, keep coming back to the table with "Don't take my containers..." or "Okay, don't touch my sugar" etc... so it may be that the whole thing falls apart. Further, they expect an storm from the tree hugger community. There is also recent input from, ARE YOU SITTING DOWN? Jacksonville and Port Canaveral and Tallahassee! Seems they have us in their sights and Tallahassee and Georgia are in a spitting contest over the Chattahoochee River water, which GOD knows, must flow to SAVANNAH??? Go figure! In short, it will still be 10 years before the first box moves from Georgialina. The land indeed is said to be East of the bridge, I agree, they're crazy if they build upstream, if they build at all. It's very much a ugly compact between two rivals. 

Quote
The Georgia Ports Authority Ocean Terminal is located on the right descending bank of the Savannah River. Berths 1 and 2 are about 200 ft below the Eugene Talmadge Memorial Bridge, while berths 10-20 are located above the bridge. The height of the bridge could be an important variable for a Navy vessel needing to sortie before a tropical cyclone strikes. The bridge stands 136 ft above the river during mean high water and 144 ft during mean low water, and an advancing storm might induce surge that could reduce this clearance. A sortie at ebb tide would be extremely difficult because the strong outbound current makes maintaining steerageway difficult around the turns. There are variations in construction methods, alongside depths and deck heights among the available berths at Ocean Terminal. Berths 1 and 2, which have been used by the N.S. SAVANNAH and passenger cruise vessels, have a solid-filled concrete bulkhead with a timber relieving platform supported by timber piling. The alongside depth is 30 ft and the deck height is 14 ft, both MLW. The wharf has a 22-ft apron and the bulkhead is fronted by timber fenders. By contrast, berths 12 to 20 have concrete-decked wharves and prestressed concrete piling. Alongside depths for berths 10 to 20 range from 30 to 34 ft MLW and deck heights are generally 15 ft MLW. Aprons are as much as 57 ft in width. Berths 10A and 10B have concrete-decked wharves on concrete and timber piles. The alongside depth is 30 ft MLW and the deck is 13 ft MLW. Maximum apron width is 23 ft. Note that the numbering system for the wharves at Ocean Terminal is not entirely consecutive. The numbers 3 to 9, inclusive, and 11 are not used.

The Garden City Terminal of the Georgia Ports Authority extends along the right side of the Savannah River from 2.4 to 3.7 miles above the Talmadge Bridge. Berths 51-60 are constructed of concrete, and berths 51-57 have a steel sheet pile bulkhead with solid fill. Alongside depths range from 37 to 40 ft and deck height is 15 ft relative to MLW. Berths 50A and 50B are timber pile, timber-decked offshore wharves with an alongside depth of 34 ft and deck height of 12.5 ft MLW. Berth 61 also has an offshore wharf, a 38-ft depth alongside, and a 15-ft MLW deck height. This berth is constructed of prestressed concrete with concrete-capped breasting dolphins.


Quote
Savannah would face a more immediate threat from a new port in Jasper County than Charleston, Mason said.

“This deal takes the uncertain equation of another port further down river and closer to the ocean than Savannah off the table for its competitive impact on Charleston and Savannah,” Mason said. “It prevents the cannibalization of the two ports until the governors are ready to go ahead.”

Mason said neither governor would agree to a container port in Jasper County that could economically harm his state’s existing investment in port facilities.

Ocklawaha
Just another "RIVER" needing help and prayers!
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: I-10east on November 29, 2007, 05:29:32 AM
Here's some great news from FCN concerning Jaxport. :)

www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/news-article.aspx?storyid=96709
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Charles Hunter on November 29, 2007, 05:51:09 AM
When they wrapped the report last night, they said that on tonight's report (at 11?), they would look at some of the 'down sides' of the new activity.  Sounds promising - balanced reporting!
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: I-10east on November 29, 2007, 05:59:02 AM
^^You're right Charles, the follow-up FCN report will be tonight at 11.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Lunican on November 29, 2007, 07:10:08 AM
I happen to see that last night and it was probably the best piece I've seen come from the local tv news here. Hopefully they will post the video, it was very well done.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: reednavy on November 29, 2007, 09:51:51 AM
FCN now has the video up on their website. Honestly, it's the best news report I've seen in this city since I've been here since June of 2006. Very great news and this city really is on the verge. The economy and probably with it, the housing market, will improve significantly. This will definetly add to the already strong population growth. Kudos to Donna Deegan as well, very well done.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Jason on November 29, 2007, 10:33:52 AM
Here is a link to the article.


http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/topstories/news-article.aspx?storyid=96709
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Charles Hunter on November 30, 2007, 06:28:37 AM
A pretty good look at the hurdles to be faced in cashing in on this economic boon.
Now's the time to get your CDL!!!
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: 02roadking on December 05, 2007, 08:34:16 AM
From the   http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/index.php

  The Port Authority, it’s recent agreements with major Asian shipping lines seem to have helped its financial health, as evidenced by Fitch Ratings and Moody’s Investors Services awarding the Port Authority A and A2 designations, which are among the financial industry’s highest seaport ratings. Moody’s and Fitch examined extensive financial records, including the Port Authority’s revenues, expenses, debt service coverage and other business data. The agencies based the designations on JaxPort’s position as a container port, especially with the addition of the new TraPac terminal at the end of next year and the recent contract talks with Korea’s Hanjin Shipping. Moody’s and Fitch are leading global providers of credit ratings, research and analysis for debt instruments and other securities.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: pwhitford on November 02, 2009, 02:15:28 PM
Here is a dose of reality from Lloyd's List, the authority in the shipping industry.  We need to get way out in front of this, now.  Jaxport is currently our only viable, long term engine of economic development and we can either bite the bullet and upgrade the port and the rails (and to a lesser extent, the roads) that serve it now or we can weep later as Savannah and other ports attract record Panama Canal traffic away from us

US ports will not be ready for Panama expansion

US east coast and Gulf of Mexico hubs told to step up preparations for 12,600 teu vessels that will call from 2014

Roger Hailey - Monday 2 November 2009

US EAST coast and Gulf ports need to step up their preparations if they are to handle larger container vessels transiting an expanded Panama Canal from 2014 onwards.

Panama Canal Authority vice-president Rodolfo Sabonge told a US maritime audience: “One of the things that has to be taken very seriously by ports on the [US] east coast and in the Gulf has to do with making sure that they are able to receive the larger vessels, which require at least 45 ft of draught, meaning they will need at least 47 ft to 50 ft of depth in the navigable channel.”

Although the 4,400 teu capacity container vessels today transiting the 50 mile lock controlled waterway can call at most east coast ports, the situation will change dramatically when vessels of 12,600 teu start entering the Atlantic in five years time. Currently, only Norfolk and Charleston are able to host such larger vessels.

Mr Sabonge said that although the larger vessel sizes will also affect dry bulk and tanker operations, the primary changes will be on the container trades, not just for main call vessels but also for the feeder networks on the US east coast and Gulf.

He added: “When you have a larger vessel, you are reducing the ports of call at the origin to maybe two or three, and at the destination to maybe two.”

Mr Sabonge said that such vessel calls would be broken down to a principal US port, where 12,000-plus teu ships can call fully laden, followed by a secondary port, where they can call with less of a draught requirement, because they are not fully laden.

“We have gathered from the shipping lines that the principal port of call will be in the northeast, either New York/New Jersey or Norfolk. But New York/New Jersey has to deal with the Bayonne Bridge problem. The second port will be somewhere in the southeast, at either Charleston, Savannah or Jackson.”

Lloyd’s List reported in September that the New York/New Jersey Port authority is looking at ways of dealing with the problem presented by the 78-year-old Bayonne Bridge, whose current air draught limits ships calling at terminals to 7,000 teu.

Jacking up the bridge, building a new one or digging a tunnel will cost at least $4bn, according to recent studies.

According to Mr Sabonge, the principal port of call in the US Gulf will be in the Houston area, due to factors such as population density and because a large number of logistical distribution centres are located in the region. “The secondary could be on the west coast of Florida,” he added.

The webinar was sponsored by the US Federal Highway Administration‘s National Highways Institute. During the webinar, it was emphasised that port connectivity, primarily US doublestack road rail connections, would also be a critical aspect of ensuring that containers do not build up at the ports, but keep flowing inland.

One of the main US railroad companies, Norfolk Southern, has undertaken a massive investment programme for building or upgrading freight train links to the US port network, although rivals CSC and Canadian National have also been active.

Commenting on transhipment opportunities, Mr Sabonge said: “In addition to direct ships calls, origin to destination, there will be a lot of changes happening especially with regard to transhipment. This is because these larger vessels are also not going to be able to call all the transhipment ports that you have right now.”

Drawing on research from London-based Drewry Shipping Consultants, Mr Sabonge said that the future container network will see “five or at most six transhipment hubs in the world”.

Although no port was named, a transhipment hub in the Caribbean will be critical for those ports to the east of the US Gulf that cannot handle post-panamax vessels.

Bruce Lambert, executive director with the Institute for Trade and Transportation Studies, agreed that the Panama Canal serves as “a very critical shortcut in the global logistics chain”, both for containers and bulks.

But he added: “The canal is really a critical bottleneck, an obstacle that is obsolete. There were a lot of studies on expanding the canal but it took a little time before the government moved on it.”

Mr Lambert continued: “Sometimes we forget the scale of cargo and just how big these ships really are. We tend to think of them as a unit and not as a sum total of a lot of activity.”

Among the factors which could detract from the efforts to widen and deepen the Panama Canal, Mr Lambert mentioned rail freight intermodalism from the US west coast ports, although this had to be set against shipper concerns over the dock strike record at the west coast ports.

Returning to the earlier theme of US port preparedness for the larger boxships, Mr Lambert said: “One of the challenges is that the ports in the east must be ready to receive these cargos, and there is also the question of parochial fighting.

“Can the ports in the region agree that they need to work together to attract these cargos? Let the cargo come to the region and then the market will determine which ports will win.”

“The issue really boils down to who will win between the railroads and the canal? Intermodal is a large part of the western railroads revenue streams, and it will still need investment in those trades to be able to provide those services going forward.”
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: reednavy on November 02, 2009, 02:21:31 PM
Dredge baby, dredge!
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: heights unknown on November 02, 2009, 02:43:31 PM
Dredge baby dredge (Jax Port Inferno).

Heights Unknown
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: JaxBorn1962 on November 02, 2009, 04:36:40 PM
Dredge baby dredge (Jax Port Inferno).

Heights Unknown
Hey If we Don't get a Nuclear Carrier we can turn Mayport into another Jaxport it would be closer to the Ocean and these large ships and Cruise Ships could get in and out of Mayport on a dime.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: mtraininjax on November 02, 2009, 04:38:31 PM
Quote
Cruise Ships could get in and out of Mayport on a dime.

I would dump the Cruise industry if we were the Pan-Am choice for the Southeast. Cruise ships really don't bring in the jobs you would think, but when you have 5,000 containers a DAY to move, you get more jobs here, for sure.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: JaxBorn1962 on November 02, 2009, 04:48:18 PM
Quote
Cruise Ships could get in and out of Mayport on a dime.

I would dump the Cruise industry if we were the Pan-Am choice for the Southeast. Cruise ships really don't bring in the jobs you would think, but when you have 5,000 containers a DAY to move, you get more jobs here, for sure.
True but Damn did Jaxport really make such a smart move with having its new terminal under the Dames Point Bridge? If we knew now that one day we would be getting more SUPER CARGO SHIPS we could have built the dames point bridge a lot higher oh well its only Money!
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: mtraininjax on November 02, 2009, 04:59:13 PM
The Napolean Bonaparte Broward bridge (Dames Point) came A LONG TIME BEFORE CRUISE SHIPS docked here. Started in 85, finished in 89. Here we are 20 years later looking at ships needing more than 160 feet of space.

Super Cargo ships will be placed at Mayport, I don't have a good feeling about the "sleepy fishing village", when the number of jobs this will create will be staggering.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: JaxBorn1962 on November 02, 2009, 05:17:41 PM
The Napolean Bonaparte Broward bridge (Dames Point) came A LONG TIME BEFORE CRUISE SHIPS docked here. Started in 85, finished in 89. Here we are 20 years later looking at ships needing more than 160 feet of space.

Super Cargo ships will be placed at Mayport, I don't have a good feeling about the "sleepy fishing village", when the number of jobs this will create will be staggering.
Funny ::) I didn't say anything about the Cruise Ships and the Dames Point? I had the Cruise Ships up at Mayport check my postings. Look at Blount Island we don't do a lot of New Cars like we once did. Blount island could be turned into a better Cargo area then it is sure we will have to Dredge anyway for the Super Cargo Ships. But Blount is better then the Dames Point Area unless Mayport can't be done.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: Ocklawaha on November 02, 2009, 05:48:35 PM
Super cargo ships? I think you guys are referring to the Panamax ships, and Panamax II, which will be even bigger. I would suspect that the North side of the Ferrylanding would be just about right but turning would require some sort of basin, perhaps at the San Pablo. It would be a LONG skinny port facility. A good deal of these baby's will need a 40 foot channel. 42 feet is a limiting factor due to a lake they will pass through in the Canal zone.  I also predict since it looks as if we are THE choice for the Atlantic Panamax crowd, we could dredge and build right up to North Jax Baptist Church at Main and the Trout River.
 
The Navy needs 252' clearance to come up river with the big stuff.

(http://www.panama-guide.com/images/articles/20060806204931284_4.jpg)

Bridge of the America's is the limiting factor for the future, built around 1959, this Hart Bridge, "look alike" has a 201 foot high center span from High Tide, over the Panama Canal.

The maximum dimensions allowed for a PANAMAX ship transiting the canal are:

Length: 965 ft (294.13 m)
Beam (width): 106 ft (32.31 m)
Draft: 39.5 ft (12.04 m) in tropical fresh water (the salinity and temperature of water affect its density, and hence how deep a ship will float in the water)
Air draft: 190 ft (57.91 m) measured from the waterline to the vessel's highest point  JTA strikes Again!  
A Panamax cargo ship would typically have a DWT of 65,000-80,000 tonnes and a maximum cargo intake of 52,500 tonnes.

BIG... Huge! Me thinkith Captain Broward, hath a problem, just as the Maritime Interests said he would back in the 1980.  


OCKLAWAHA
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: reednavy on November 02, 2009, 07:26:17 PM
I wish they could utilize Mill Cove as a turning basin.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: mtraininjax on November 02, 2009, 08:04:39 PM
Blount island is coveted by the Marines. Obama is dumb enough to give the whole thing to them, by serious imminent domain.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: JaxBorn1962 on November 02, 2009, 09:02:36 PM
Blount island is coveted by the Marines. Obama is dumb enough to give the whole thing to them, by serious imminent domain.
Was your Boy george w bush any smarter?
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: mtraininjax on November 02, 2009, 09:24:25 PM
Quote
Was your Boy george w bush any smarter?

You could at least trust him to grow the economy. So far, we have 787 billion in spending and nothing to show for it, but we do have 11% unemployment in FLORIDA and GROWING.

Sort of like the old Clinton adage, you can trust him with your job, just not your daughter.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: thelakelander on November 02, 2009, 09:31:13 PM
I thought a carrier coming to Mayport had already been decided on?  Screw cruise ships.  Mayport is here to stay and provides for more economic benefit than using that property as a port or cruise terminal ever would.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: JaxBorn1962 on November 02, 2009, 09:55:36 PM
Quote
Was your Boy george w bush any smarter?

You could at least trust him to grow the economy. So far, we have 787 billion in spending and nothing to show for it, but we do have 11% unemployment in FLORIDA and GROWING.

Sort of like the old Clinton adage, you can trust him with your job, just not your daughter.
Ok lets see the Banks were failing while george and DICK were in office so the First bail out came from these dudes RIGHT? And growing the economy as you put it By making the Rich, Richer so some Penny's could be picked up by us pee-ons? Hey did your 401k tank mine did thanks to the george and DICK show! Did all of that 787 billion go to Florida? Rome wasn't built in a day we gave your boy time give my Man the same and lets see after his first term.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: mtraininjax on November 03, 2009, 08:02:08 AM
Quote
Ok lets see the Banks were failing while george and DICK were in office so the First bail out came from these dudes RIGHT? And growing the economy as you put it By making the Rich, Richer so some Penny's could be picked up by us pee-ons? Hey did your 401k tank mine did thanks to the george and DICK show! Did all of that 787 billion go to Florida? Rome wasn't built in a day we gave your boy time give my Man the same and lets see after his first term.

You can blame everyone or no one, but in reality, does it really matter to the 1.1 million floridians without a job right now? Do you think they care what GW or DICK or Dick with ears did or is doing right now? They could care less.

Sounds to me like Oblah and Joe are using the Trickle-down version of job growth. So far, only 21,000 new jobs created with the new stimulus plan, you want to tell the 1.1 million in Florida that "Rome was not built in a day", you might be able to as they hold you up at gunpoint as they try and feed their families.

Quote
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- So just how many stimulus jobs have been created or saved so far?

The figure remains elusive, but Congress provided one of the first peeks this week by reporting that stimulus has funded 21,000 highway and transit jobs as of May 31.

The number, one of the first counts of actual stimulus-based employment, is based on state reports to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Thousands of indirect jobs -- such as the deli employee who prepares lunch for the construction crew or the workers who produce the steel needed for projects -- were also created or sustained.

The White House says the figure is in line with its projection that the $787 billion recovery act has created or saved 150,000 jobs in the administration's first 100 days. The 150,000 number, which includes direct and indirect positions, is an estimate based on the amount of stimulus funds spent. Each $92,000 of stimulus funds spent translates into one job, according to the White House formula.

Congressional Republicans, who have blasted the recovery act as wasteful spending that won't create nearly the number of jobs promised, took issue with the figure.

Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., criticized the Obama administration for not reporting a specific number of jobs created or saved by stimulus-based infrastructure spending.

Mica, the ranking Republican on the transportation committee, pointed out that only 21,000 positions have been produced, though the committee's Democrats have said that the $64.1 billion in infrastructure spending would create or sustain more than 1.8 million jobs.

"This is pitiful that we can't get people working, we can't get the stimulus money out," Mica said. "People want jobs and they want them now."

In his weekly address, House Republican Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, also slammed the administration for failing to stem the rising unemployment tide. The unemployment rate rose to 9.4%, its highest level in 26 years. It's expected to climb to 9.6% when the June numbers are released next Thursday.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: riverkeepered on November 06, 2009, 12:26:50 AM
It is amazing how dollar $ign$ can cloud our judgement.   It is obvious that the Port expansion can potentially have a major impact on our economy.  However, we must also be willing to evaluate ALL of the tradeoffs and to analyze future economic trends and the net benefits to our community. 

For one, the massive dredging of the river could potentially cause significant harm to the health of the river.  We must wait until the Army Corps Environmental Impact Statement is complete to better evaluate this legitimate concern.  Don't underestimate the significant economic benefits of a clean and healthy river.  Also, don't forget that the lastest "rough estimate" of the dredging is $600 million and not much has even been mentioned about the ongoing maintenance expenses that would be required to maintain the necessary depth. Remember, that we don't have a naturally deep port, but are trying to create one.  There are major potential consequences that must be carefully considered.

Cargo ships burn a very dirty fuel that creates a lot of pollution.  The Guardian recently reported on a study that suggests that "just 15 of the world's biggest ships may now emit as much pollution as all the world's 760 million cars" and particulate matter from ship engines causes the premature death of about 60,000 people a year and $330 billion in related healthcare costs. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/apr/09/shipping-pollution  Add in the diesel exhaust from the thousands of trucks that will be coming and going each day, and it adds up to a significant increase in air pollution. 

Fuel prices are also almost certain to increase in time as we reach peak oil, and foreign labor wages in some Asian countries like China are significantly increasing.  As a result, the advantage of producing products cheaply overseas may be eroding, making domestic production more attractive over time.  For example, IKEA recently decided to build a production facility in VA to supply the American market because of rising shipping costs.  The Asian pipeline of cheap products may be drying up and domestic manufacturing could experience a resurgence in the coming years.   

Finally, many of the economic assumptions and projections that were made when the Mitsui and Hanjin deals were signed are no longer valid.  As a result, the economic benefits to our local economy that are often cited may not be realistic. 

Before we go ahead and accept the Port expansion as our economic salvation, we must honestly evaluate all of the tradeoffs and assess the pros and cons to our community,environment, and economy. 
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: JeffreyS on November 06, 2009, 08:43:43 AM
^I am a very big believer in port expansion but you certainly make some excellent points. We really have to reevaluate any economic studies made prior to this recession. Hopefully we can get this done responsibly and profitably.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: mtraininjax on November 06, 2009, 08:52:29 AM
River - Orlando and the HAVES in South Florida will soon be sucking the southend of the river dry. Where is the uproar over that venture? Where is the uproar over the fact that the St. Johns over time will become a saltwater river due to the constant drainage by the folks in Central and Southern Florida?

Ifs and Buts are hard sells to folks in Jax who have no job right now. I'd be careful waving the environmental flag to people who are losing their house, their life, their families, all to save the possibility, the possibility of potential problems. When was the last catastrophic oil spill in the St. Johns by a vessel? Convert the diesel trucks to CNG, the daily cost of labor in 3rd world countries, where manufacturing will move if Chinese labor costs increase, will remain low. 5% of the US clothing is made in the US, that will not change soon.


Jobs are more important right now, good argument, but with the river going dry, and people in more need of a job, I am in favor of continuing the growth of the port and other businesses that will benefit from the support. Don't forget the velocity of money from the port activities and all those businesses that thrive, all the way down to the small businesses.
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: buckethead on November 07, 2009, 05:30:33 PM
HARD TO PORT!
Title: Re: JAXPORT: How do we Rank?
Post by: diverdan363 on March 08, 2013, 06:03:13 PM
I have to agree with the river keeper on this one especially after the port doctored reports Martin associates is not a true account of project projections.