承认安全有问题
2012.02.16
一:本期头条 贸易凤周刊 2月01日有篇报导题目是 “我们需要承认海上安全有问题”之文章
如要重振船务的名誉必需辙底调查安全失败的原因 近日来世界媒体针对 “Costa Concordia” 游轮沉设的大篇特别报导和解释并无减轻世人对船只不安全的看法.虽然 IMO和船级社对海上安全规则己作出极大修改但仍然无法避免客和货船舶撞上海岛,40万吨 VLOC船身发现烈缝, 油轮洗舱时爆炸和货物液化等各种海难的发生.鉴于上述海难之发生IMO已非常合适的命名2012年为 “铁坦尼克年”, 但我们对这些海难的发生所需的答案是 IMO的公约有所缺乏抑或船上执行不当?
We need to admit there is a problem
The true nature of safety failings must be thoroughly investigated if shipping is to salvage its reputation.
The intense, worldwide media focus on every facet of the Costa Concordia accident has done nothing to erase the public perception that shipping is inherently unsafe.
The Costa Concordia is just one of a run of recent casualties that is making a mockery of decades of regulatory work intended to make the industry safer and more professional.
The International Safety Management (ISM) code, the Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) code and its recent revision, as well as an improved understanding of the human element and the need for crew competency still could not prevent a cruiseship with 3,200 passengers from navigating onto rocks followed by a bungled evacuation process.
Nor could it stop the 75,000-dwt bulker Oliva (built 2009) from ploughing into Nightingale Island in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean in March last year, causing widespread pollution. Uncovering the reasons for that calamity still rests with the ship’s flag state, Malta, which, a year later, has yet to shed any light on the event. And then there is the issue of the liquefaction of cargoes such as iron-ore fines and nickel ore.
Cargo liquefaction is not new. The latest run of casualties actually started in India in 2009 and there have been two more recently.
But despite scores of dead seafarers, the recently revised International Maritime Solid Bulk Cargo (IMSBC) code still falls short of mandating a requirement for independent inspection and there are still issues with the categorisation of certain problem cargoes. Insurers have not yet come far enough in persuading shippers to be more co-operative about cargo testing, while owners move hazardous cargoes without taking proper safety measures.
Chemical tankers are another case in point. A series of explosions six years ago led to safety measures for new ships above 8,000 dwt. This year has seen two massive and fatal explosions on existing chemical tankers below that size.
In a warning of what might be in store if the trend continues, the 400,000-dwt Vale Beijing (built 2011), one of a series of 35 of the largest bulkers ever built, cracked during its first loading. Luckily this did not turn into a major disaster.
The natural fear is that, however owners and classification societies dress it up, safety margins will shrink as owners attempt to squeeze more dollars per tonne of steel. There are consequences not only because of the potential scale of disasters, as evidenced by the Costa Concordia, but also whether these vessels can be salvaged.
The question that needs to be answered this year, appropriately named “Year of the Titanic” by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), is whether the safety failings are a matter of ineffective regulation or a failure of compliance.
A good starting point would be to accept that the shipping industry has a problem in the first place.
Published: 19:46 GMT, 01 Feb 12 | updated: 19:46 GMT, 01 Feb 12
****************
中国造船集团总裁严重警告到2014年国内一半的造船厂将会被迫停业, 唯一生存方法是投资于 “研究和开发”.
Strong warning for the Chinese
Half of China’s shipyards will go bust by 2014, China State Shipbuilding Corp (CSSC) has warned.
President of the state-owned group Tan Zuojun says the country’s yards are competing well currently but in two or three years’ time many will be falling behind due to a lack of high-value technology.
He told CNTV that about 50% of yards would be weeded out and 2012 would see the most closures. Tan added that 2013 and 2014 would see more mergers and takeovers than this year.
Investment in research and development (R&D) is key for survival, he notes.
Published: 19:44 GMT, 01 Feb 12 | updated: 19:44 GMT, 01 Feb 12
*****************
中国对 40万吨 VLOC的禁命迫使淡水河谷转载货物以应要求- 据分析这道禁令将令淡水河谷遭受巨大损失和麻烦.此篇报导并指出淡水河谷可能会以受到”某国家的干与” 无法完成航程的原因宣布不可抗拒, 很看取消跟买家所签定之”航次连接”之租船合约.
China VLOC ban pushes Vale to tranship cargoes to feed demand
Vale is playing down the impact of a ban by China on its 400,000-dwt iron ore carriers (VLOCs) but industry insiders say it could still prove very expensive for the Brazilian mining giant. It will now be forced to rely heavily on transhipping ore onto its owned and chartered VLOCs into smaller bulkers to continue feeding China’s steel mills.
Vale names five alternative discharge ports for the 400,000 tonners, including Subic Bay in the Philippines, where a 280,000-dwt floating terminal station (FTS) for transhipment cargoes docked on Monday.
It is expected to be operational by mid-February but broking sources tell TradeWinds that the cost of transhipping into China will wipe away any cost advantage the VLOCs have over typical capesize bulkers of up to 250,000 dwt.
The plan is to use capesizes for China transhipments but it is estimated that a shuttle operation would cost $7 or $8 per tonne just for bunkers, lifting the freight cost to over $21 per tonne. The cost of transferring cargoes at Subic Bay is estimated by sources at upwards of $3 per tonne.
If Vale has to use panamax or even handysize tonnage for onward shipment, it would turn into a “nightmare”, comments one observer.
China’s Ministry of Transport announced unexpectedly this week that it was restricting ports’ rights to accept many large bulkers and tankers. Previously, they decided on a case-by-case basis.
The Chinese are citing port safety concerns, which, although viewed by many as simply an excuse to stop Vale controlling the iron-ore logisitics chain, may actually have substance.
Other owners are said to have already limited the size of ships they deploy into China and other discharge points, including Rotterdam, because they feel ports have already reached their safety limits.
Rotterdam, Malaysia and the Port of Sohar are also mentioned by Vale as transhipment hubs for its VLOCs. But it has only recently started construction of its Malaysia facility to serve China and, while Sohar is open to receive the miner’s 400,000-dwt bulkers, the pellet-conversion plant there is thought to be out of action until later this year.
There is also increasing talk in the market of the problems Vale faces in loading its VLOCs in Brazil, including the fact it only has one pier, at Ponta da Madeira (PDM), capable of loading the ships to full capacity.
It is understood that the 402,000-dwt Vale Rio de Janeiro is having to load a part-cargo of around 300,000 tonnes in Tubarao and then make the long journey to PDM to top-off. Dredging problems have also raised questions over PDM’s ability to serve the VLOCs.
Meanwhile, Chinese steel mills themselves must be concerned about the Ministry of Transport’s possible clamp on bulkers above 300,000 dwt because they have commitments on 360,000-tonners.
It also remains unclear where it leaves shipowners with consecutive voyage charters if Vale seeks to declare force majeure because an “act of state” has rendered the contracts no longer valid.
Published: 20:14 GMT, 01 Feb 12 | updated: 20:14 GMT, 01 Feb 12
劳氏船务 2月01-16日
1. -中海运把油轮和干散货轮业务分开管理以便提高效率.
2. -今年各货箱公司所订之新船将达 180万箱位.
3. -虽被禁止进入中国港口淡水河谷仍然依照原计划准备接收 29艘40万吨之 VLOC.
4. -印尼油轮公司 Berlian Laju因扩充太快而被资产评级公司降级.
贸易凤周刊 2月01-16日
1. -Maersk公司任命46岁之 Hanne Sorenson女士为油轮部主管负责300条油轮年营业额12亿之业务.
2. -淡水河谷公司从本星期开始将把40万吨 VLOC之货在菲律宾之Subic Bay转载到较小之海岬型船只前往中国这个过程之费用约每吨31块美元.
二:造船 (Shipbuilding)
1. -台湾裕民公司趁造价低迷时向外高桥订造10艘 18.63万吨海岬型新船, 造价每艘 4983万美元, 2014年交船.
三:买卖/租贷 (S/P & Chartering)
1. S & P
-“Magic Fortis” (1985) 42512-dwt, Bulker usd 4.00M, Chinese
-“Poseidon” (2012) 34000-dwt, Bulker usd 22.00M, unknown
2. DEMO -“Ocean Queen” (1987) 187864-dwt usd 430/ldt, India
-“Hebei Forest” (1989) 149211-dwt usd 505/ldt, Bangladesh
-“Pearl C.” (1987) 65552-dwt usd 520/ldt, Pakistan
-“Cebu Star” (1982) 45546-dwt usd 491/ldt, Bangladesh
-“Daio Andes” (1989) 44315-dwt usd 430/ldt, China
-“Finich Arrow” (1984) 39273-dwt usd 430/ldt, China
-“Gannet Arrow” (1985) 39260-dwt usd 430/ldt, China
-“Maria K.” (1983) 35340-dwt usd 545/ldt, India
-“Andrea” (1980) 25637-dwt usd 505/ldt, India
3. Daily Summary of Baltic Exchange Dry Indices 2012.02.16
Baltic Exchange Dry Index BDI 723 (- 8)
Baltic Exchange Capesize Index BCI 1464 (- 2)
Baltic Exchange Panamax Index BPI 974 (- 31)
Baltic Exchange Supramax Index BSI 641 (- 5)
Baltic Exchange Handysize Index BHSI 378 (+ 2)
4. TIMECHARTER
-“King Harold” (2011) 82500 dwt dely Gibraltar 07 Feb trip via EC S,Am redel S’pre-Jpn range $16500 daily – Cargill
-“Cinzia D’Amato” (2008) 75213 dwt dely Seattle 10/20 Feb trip redel S’pre-Jpn range $7000 daily +$317000bb– Louis Dreyfus
-“Yong Li” (2001) 74382 dwt dely Taichung Spot trip via EC Australia redel China $6750 daily – BHP Billiton
-“Mingzhou 78” (2011) 57000 dwt dely Guangzhou 4/6 Feb trip via Indonesia redel N,China $4500 daily – cnr
-“K.Jasper” (2012) 56000 dwt dely Kaohsiung 7/9 Feb trip via Indonesia redel India $7000 daily – cnr
-“Nova Mesto” (2005) 53626 dwt dely S’pore Spot trip via Australia redel SE Asia $9600 daily – S’pore a/c
-“Jin Fu” (2001) 50777 dwt dely S.china Spot trip via SE Asia redel China, int Nicekl ore, $8500 daily – cnr
-“Bao Sheng” (1997) 47260 dwt dely Hongkong Spot trip via Indonesia redel China, int Bauxite, $4500 daily – cnr
5. PERIOD
-“Kiran Turkiye” (2011) 176000-dwt 10 months usd 13600/daily Oldendorff
-“Pelia” (2005) 82163-dwt 4-7 months usd 9700/daily Bunge
-“Thetis” (2004) 73000-dwt 18-28 months usd 10500/daily EDP
-“Friendly Sea” (2008) 58000-dwt 24 months usd 10700/daily Paragon
-“Amoy Dream” (2010) 57000-dwt 3-5 months usd 9000/daily Bunge
-“Santana” (2001) 50271-dwt 3-5 months usd 8000/daily Oldendoff
6. ORE
-“Mosel N.” (1995) 100000/10%, Port Hedland/青島 10/15 Feb usd 11.25 fio, sc/30000sc -- Atlas
-“Great Qin” (2010) 160000/10%, Dampier/ China 19/24 Feb usd 7.40 fio, sc/30000sc -- Rio Tinto
-“Navios Melodia” 160000/10%, Pointe Noire/ 青島, 20/29 Feb usd 29.80 fio, 45000/30000 shinc bend – Pacific Bulk
四:2012/02/16 船用燃油价格(每吨/usd)
来源: Bunkerworld
IFO 380 __IFO 180 MDO MGO
新加坡 727 740 975 985
鹿特丹 690 711 ----- 1000
休士顿 713 746 ----- 1032
*****************************************************************************************************
备注: tbn = to be named ldt = light d/weight ton
usd = u.s.dollar mtpa = million ton per annum
cbm =cubic meter tpa =million metric ton per annu