tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377497904882186501.post6491903390570780993..comments2024-03-22T11:58:02.835-07:00Comments on Garden Earth - Beyond sustainability: Peak GlobalizationGunnar Rundgrenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11869055229248959119noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377497904882186501.post-17713696810329842482016-11-05T11:20:22.750-07:002016-11-05T11:20:22.750-07:00Karl, thanks for those insights from the realm of ...Karl, thanks for those insights from the realm of ports and containers. Very valuable input which adds to the view that we might have reached a peak in trade. Gunnar Rundgrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11869055229248959119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7377497904882186501.post-70121064213684055682016-11-04T17:12:55.202-07:002016-11-04T17:12:55.202-07:00There is an on-going discussion within those cover...There is an on-going discussion within those covering the shipping industry regarding the need to decrease the record-carrying ship sizes and superfluous port expansions, which likely will make a dent on globalization (as shipping goods from one end of the planet to the other is held with greatest esteem). For example articles by Olaf Merk:<br /><br />http://shippingtoday.eu/speed-limit-ships/<br /><br />http://shippingtoday.eu/iron-grip-container-lines-ports/<br /><br />http://shippingtoday.eu/container-shipping/<br /><br />Something rarely mentioned is the fact that the mega port expansions in Northern Europe – just to pick one area – took place after the 2008 financial and economic crisis: Rotterdam’s Maasvlakte 2, JadeWeser Port, London Gateway, amongst others. In Sweden there are ports that have expaned in last years (or are going to) such as Malmo (Norra Hamnen), Stockholm-Nynashamn-Norvik, Trelleborg, Ystad among others.<br /><br /><br />This has been seen and presented to legislators and public as some sort of an Keynesian effort to counter-invest in infrastructure in recession (who would be against a bigger, better port?), but one wonders if these investments really create anything new or sustainable at all. They seem to ignore that competiting ports and shipping are investing in these great-size solutions too, creating over-capacity and price wars which will sink profits. The new megaharbour where 18 000 containers are unloaded from each ship doesn't need much of a work force if loading and unloading must go on 24/h and demands automation, or you get a temporarily large-workforce who never become specialists as they can't be hired for a longer time in port and most likely be part of the precariat, not someone you'd offer decent wages and benefits to as an employer. This would be the case outside of the super stars of ports (Antwerp, perhaps? Or Rotterdam? Shenzhen in China?)<br /><br /><br />The result is capital destruction. Ships are not used, ports are not used, so goodbye to healthy return on investment. The opportunity costs related to the port bubble are possibly bigger than for ships, as they do not only relate to port infrastructure assets, but also to space, one of the scarcest goods in cities – still the places where most ports are located (though I wonder about Stockholm-Norvik, located as it is 50 kms south of Stockholm on a peninsula that lacks rail and road access to mainland Sweden to the west. The current rail is a commuter rail line with frequent stops which is bound to cause conflicts with train operators for time slots unless there are expansions and though the road 73 is motorway nowadays the road passes through some built-up areas in Stockholm that will most certainly lead to conflicts in future when authorities have to weigh in trucks carrying goods to the shops with disturbed neighbours and missing opportunities for city planners to build new houses). Ships are layed up – so put aside for the time being – or scrapped. The port equivalent to laying up is empty terminals; and its version of scrapping is waterfront development. Whatever the form, whatever the specifics, we get what was sowed: death from overcapacity.<br /><br /><br />I think we're near peak container harbour (not at least because tax payers pay for hinterland connections (road, rail, water pipes, electrical connections) to the ports as well as the port works (dredging, quay stabilization). This isn't result of some free enterprise at all. Shipping companies get off for nil, but they in turn are burdened by cost-cutting pressures and wouldn't stand to pay any reasonable share of these projects, as much as they survive on state subsidies and externalizations of their pollution). Karl Mnoreply@blogger.com