The increase in port productivity does not match the increase in ship sizes, and time in port increases as a result, according to Drewry’s Container Insight.
Drewry believes that one of the key reasons for this is that the length of vessels has not increased linearly with their teu intake , as they have got wider, deeper and stacked higher instead.
For example, the length of the 19,200 teu MSC Oscar is less than twice that of a first generation 1,400 teu ship, yet its teu capacity is nearly 14 times greater. Similarly a 18,300 teu Maersk Triple E vessel is only 25% longer than the 7,400 teu Regina Maersk class, yet carries 150% more teu.
“The largest vessels have, for the time being at least, reached a plateau of around 400 metres in length. This means that the number of gantry cranes deployed cannot be increased in direct proportion to increased ship sizes. It is also the case that the cost and availability of labour in some locations restricts the number of additional cranes than can be deployed on each ship, ” Drewry said.
Handling ever larger ships involves using gantry cranes which are higher and have longer outreaches, meaning that the trolley has to physically travel further per cycle between the quay and the ship’s hold, making it harder to maintain the number of crane moves per hour.
In order to meet the industry target of 6,000 moves in 24 hours, a 19,000 teu vessel would need to have 8 cranes deployed, each working at 35 moves per hour instead of 25, generating a berth productivity of 280 moves per hour (not just once, or now and again, but all the time, each time, every time).
Another problem is that traditional gantry cranes cannot work too closely together. In addition, increasing the moves per hour per crane always creates challenges in terms of congestion and bottlenecks on the landside, in terms of feeding the cranes with boxes sufficiently quickly.
All of this suggests that a revolution in container handling is required, a game-changer, the port industry equivalent of the “double-decker jetway”.
Ideas already exist for this, notably APM Terminals’ FastNet concept announced as long ago as 2010. This envisages a huge fixed gantry-like frame running the length of a berth, on which gantry crane booms are attached. Hence it is similar to the upper works of existing cranes, but without the large portal frames below. This would enable crane booms to work adjacent bays, allowing increased crane intensity per ship. On the quayside a large crane rail gauge (12 vehicle lanes wide) would allow much faster feeding of the cranes. The company’s simulations suggest that 270 berth moves per hour would be consistently possible, perhaps much higher.
It is notable that to date, none of APMT’s existing or new terminals under development are deploying the FastNet concept.
“The question arises: What incentive does a terminal operator have to spend substantial time and money on designing, building and operating such a new system? Can the cost and risk be justified relative to the market and customers? Are carriers likely to be prepared to pay for this premium service?,” Drewry concludes.