QuoteThursday, February 5, 2009, 2:42pm EST | Modified: Thursday, February 5, 2009, 4:26pm
Ferrin touts port’s future despite economy
Jacksonville Business Journal - by Mark Szakonyi
The Jacksonville Port Authority’s executive director said the port is in good shape and has a bright future despite the many challenges facing the maritime industry.
Rick Ferrin told members of the Propeller Club of the United States that traffic handled by the authority’s tenants and customers has been increasing, unlike many other U.S. ports.
“We are ideally situated to become the first post-Panamax port of call on the East Coast,†said Ferrin.
For this to happen, the port needs to deepen the river so that when the Panama Canal is expanded in 2014, larger ships can call on the docks. Ferrin said the authority expects the deepening, improving the port’s surrounding infrastructure and other projects to cost about $1.4 billion.
The Army Corps of Engineers accelerated study on the proposed dredging is expected within eight months. Ferrin expects the deepening to be approved in 2010.
“Then I’ll have the fight of my life in Washington D.C. to get the money,†he said.
The final phase of deepening is expected to begin in 2013, with completion as soon as 2014. He said funding could come from a variety of sources, including bonds, federal funding and the proposed stimulus package.
continued....
Read the rest here: http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2009/02/02/daily38.html
QuoteWhen the Mitsui and TraPac terminals are completed, the port expects about 1.6 million containers to pass through Jacksonville. To prevent roads from becoming jammed by the expected 6,000 to 7,000 trucks coming to the terminals daily, the surrounding roads and rail lines need to be improved, said Ferrin.
I wonder what plans may be in line for these improvements?
Probably not anything that we have not heard already (ex. widening Heckscher Drive, improving the 9A interchange and building the proposed rail intermodal yard near the paper mill).
Does the intermodal yard include the CSX proposed bypass line to the north?
Its a part of CSX's plan. However, all of their port related improvements are tied to the approval of the Orlando commuter rail deal. The money CSX makes of the Orlando deal is supposed to pay for our rail related improvements at JaxPort. So you can include our port expansion as another reason to support rail projects locally and across the State.
YIKES!!
CSX delays Jaxport project
Updated February 18, 2009 9:42:05 AM
The JOURNAL of COMMERCE ONLINE
Construction of an intermodal on-dock rail terminal at the Port of Jacksonville has been delayed by CSX Corp. because of the decline in cargo from Asia.
According to local reports, the plan to build a new container transfer facility has been pushed back at least six months beyond the scheduled 2011 opening. That date was timed to accept containers generated by the newly-opened TraPac Container Terminal and the Hanjin Shipping facility also under development at Dames Point.
The CSX terminal was planned amid booming trans-Pacific traffic handled by Asian carriers MOL at TraPac and Hanjin. The transfer facility was expected to handle two trains per day handling 280 containers each, Adam Bridges, assistant vice president of CSX Intermodal Inc., told local media. At the time, the two terminals were expected to generate volume of up to 2 million TEUs per year.
In addition to the decline in potential volume, CSX had yet to secure a site for the proposed terminal, build the spur or design the facility.
Intermodal transport will still be economically feasible if the transfer facility is built several miles from the terminals, Bridges said.
-- Rick Eyerdam, Florida Shipper
Quick question:
Would it be entirely quixotic to have JaxPort's cranes and trucks running on veggie diesel--fuel from restaurants within Jacksonville and refined in Jacksonville?
No, it isn't quixotic to expect energy savings. JEA runs many of its trucks and diesel equipment on biodiesel sold here on the First Coast.
Cool.
What's JPA's comment on the impact of the clearance of the Dames Point bridge on Panamax ships? If ships need deeper drafts, they would seem to also need higher clearances? Dames Point is I believe 175 feet, not so high in today's world. We already know its restricting the location of the cruise terminal. Port interests warned before the bridge was built it would become a limitation to the port at some point.
Are these forecasts coming to bear? Anyone have the latest?
Lakelander wrote "Probably not anything that we have not heard already (ex. widening Heckscher Drive, improving the 9A interchange and building the proposed rail intermodal yard near the paper mill)."
I've heard a rumor that the current recession could be the last nail in the coffin of the papermill. Maybe the intermodal yard ends up on the papermill site? :-\
Ask and ye shall recieve...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panamax
The maximum dimensions allowed for a ship transiting the canal are:[1]
Length: 294.1 metres (965 ft)
Beam (width): 32.3 metres (106 ft)
Draft: 12.0 metres (39.5 ft) 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: 57.91 metres (190 ft) measured from the waterline to the vessel's highest point
A Panamax cargo ship would typically have a displacement of around 65,000 tons
Thanks for the info, BridgeTroll, as you are so aptly named in this case.
It looks like no matter how deep the channel, there could be Panamax ships that won't be able to navigate the entire port area due to the Dames Point Bridge (another case of Jax losing out over lack of patience, planning, and willingness to pay a little more to do it right). I wonder who's paying attention to this?
If an approximately 40 foot draft Panamax ship actually needs 45 feet of draft, a 190 foot high ship may need 195 to 200 feet or more bridge clearance. I guess tidal changes can effect the numbers as well.
Does the planned dredging stop short of the bridge?
Depending on the draft of the loaded ships that will probably call here before working their way north, they might slip under the bridge because they will displace more water.
Off load and they float higher and won't fit.
Solution?
Flood the bilge and lower the ship until clear of the span, then discharge the water and haul butt.
OCKLAWAHA
Looks like we are talking about 50 feet, not 45, for dredging. How tall will a 50 foot draft ship be? If Panamax is only to 40 feet, why do we need a full 10 feet more for this? Or is it for some other class of traffic? How do all these pieces fit together?
From Dredging News Online:QuoteSt Johns River dredging "could cost US$1 billion"
News - February 26, 2009
Dredging the St Johns River to allow larger cargo ships to use the expanding port facilities in Jacksonville will cost between US$500 million and US$1 billion, according to the head of Mitsui’s Jacksonville terminal.
Dennis Kelly, general manager of the new terminal, told Charlotte Business Journal that Jaxport will be in heavy competition with other East Coast ports to get federal funding for the dredging because the other ports also need deeper channels to handle the larger ships that will be using the Panama Canal, once the enlarging of the canal is complete in 2014.
“It’s going to be interesting to see who gets it [dredging funding], and when,†Kelly told a Tuesday lunch meeting of The Economic Roundtable of Jacksonville at Jacksonville University.
He said the river channel will need to be dredged to a depth of 50ft.
Kelly said the US Navy’s plans to base a nuclear aircraft carrier at Mayport will help Jacksonville compete for the dredging money, because the carrier will also need a deeper channel in the St Johns to access the Mayport base.
Why the hell are they promoting nuclear warfare? I oppose this, hands down. No.
Huh? What do you mean... "nuclear warfare"?
Quote from: stjr on February 27, 2009, 01:25:22 AM
Looks like we are talking about 50 feet, not 45, for dredging. How tall will a 50 foot draft ship be? If Panamax is only to 40 feet, why do we need a full 10 feet more for this? Or is it for some other class of traffic? How do all these pieces fit together?
From Dredging News Online:
QuoteSt Johns River dredging "could cost US$1 billion"
News - February 26, 2009
Dredging the St Johns River to allow larger cargo ships to use the expanding port facilities in Jacksonville will cost between US$500 million and US$1 billion, according to the head of Mitsui’s Jacksonville terminal.
Dennis Kelly, general manager of the new terminal, told Charlotte Business Journal that Jaxport will be in heavy competition with other East Coast ports to get federal funding for the dredging because the other ports also need deeper channels to handle the larger ships that will be using the Panama Canal, once the enlarging of the canal is complete in 2014.
“It’s going to be interesting to see who gets it [dredging funding], and when,†Kelly told a Tuesday lunch meeting of The Economic Roundtable of Jacksonville at Jacksonville University.
He said the river channel will need to be dredged to a depth of 50ft.
Kelly said the US Navy’s plans to base a nuclear aircraft carrier at Mayport will help Jacksonville compete for the dredging money, because the carrier will also need a deeper channel in the St Johns to access the Mayport base.
Nuclear-powered? Or nuclear weaponry-carrying? You know what. I've been awake for about 29 hours. Let this slide.
Quote from: kellypope on February 27, 2009, 07:20:23 AM
Why the hell are they promoting nuclear warfare? I oppose this, hands down. No.
WTF??
The fact that the carrier is nuclear doesn't mean that it has to have a single nuke weapon onboard. The nuke is simply a heat source to create steam to run the ship. This has no more to do with promotion of "nuclear warfare" then the local Army National Guard post.
I would guess the channel depth will change somewhat after they clear the Mayport basin. If not between the new container terminals and the mouth of the river, they'll want to make darn sure they have room to flood those ships if needed to clear that stupid bridge/power line log jam.
I looked to see records of rebuilt suspension bridges in the event we someday MUST go higher. I did find a couple, one in Cincinnati that was quite old. They came in and used the old deck as a work platform and hung a new deck on it and ABOVE the old platform. This was done without having to change the towers. In another case California, new towers were built which more or less cradled the old bridge but went higher, for a new one.
BTW, JAXPORT is number 19 in TEU's in the USA (latest numbers are for 2007). Savannah is number
4 on the chart.
North American RANK: (CONTAINER TRAFFIC)
LA -1.4%
Long Beach +.4%
NY NJ +4.1%
Savannah +20.6
Oakland -.1%
Vancouver +4.5%
Hampton Roads +4.0%
Seattle -.7%
Tacoma -6.9%
Houston +10.6%
Charleston -10.9%
San Juan -2.0%
Manzanillo +12.9%
Montreal +5.7%
Honolulu +1.0%
Port Everglades +9.8%
Miami -9.4%
Veracruz +8.1%
Jacksonville -7.6% (slipped one place from number 18)
The good news is "IF" we see any kind of recovery, the big dogs have officially moved their American East Coast HOME PORT to Jacksonville. The container wars are hot and everyone expects the Southeast to kick some butt. They are all in terror over Jacksonvilles Coup de grace. If the port gets the expected numbers it puts us about 100,000 containers ahead of SAVANNAH! Talk about a leaping port!OCKLAWAHA
I suspect that the channel dredging may be more controversial than not. The T-U has already run articles saying it could have a major environmental impact on the ecology of the river, especially its salinity. This issue is now front and center after the hubbub about Orlando's withdrawal plans. The dredging impact may be even more dramatic according to said articles. JPA could be in for another fight to rival the cruise ship terminal.