SkyscraperCity Forum banner

Liverpool 2 | Port of Liverpool | In-River Deep-Water Post-Panamax Container Terminal

Tags
merseyside
529K views 2K replies 125 participants last post by  Portobello Red 
#1 ·
This discussion has been split off from the main Port of Liverpool thread. Please see that thread for discussion of Liverpool 2 that predates this thread.

Liverpool 2

Some facts -

* Named to follow on from Grosvenor's Liverpool ONE, in terms of having a similar impact on the local economy
* £300m investment
* New 850m river wall to be built
* 17 hectare / 42 acre area to be in-filled behind the new river wall to store shipping containers
* Capable of handling two Post-Panamax vessels simultaneously
* Annual capacity of 500,000 shipping containers over and above the port's existing capacity (around 600,000 containers)
* Target opening of 2015
 
#1,425 ·
Liverpool takes delivery of container handling fleet
@PeelPorts

Thirty-three new tractor units and trailers have arrived at the Port of Liverpool to serve its existing Royal Seaforth Container Terminal and the new Liverpool2 development.

The fleet of YT222 tractors and Seacom 70 tonne trailers represents an investment of more than £2.6 million in container handling equipment and will complement the new semi-automated CRMG cranes for L2 that are currently being commissioned.

Supplied by Terberg and its partner Briggs Equipment, the vehicles will initially focus on integrated operations between the two Liverpool terminals throughout the phased opening of L2.

 
#1,429 ·
I've currently got 8 containers coming from Shanghai to Felixstowe. This was due to be diverted to London Gateway due to 'vessel congestion' but is now skipping the call and going straight to Rotterdam. The containers will then be shipped to Felixstowe 3 days later than scheduled - nightmare!

If only they were coming direct to Liverpool...
 
#1,431 ·
This is a common problem in Felixstowe often caused by delays incurred in the Far East as the schedules have little recovery time in them. This is compounded as the shipping lines remove complete services from their schedules and then have to add additional port calls to the remaining services to cover the missing sailings. For example CMA-CGM have just made changes to their FAL1 service as this this announcement confirms.

https://www.cma-cgm.com/news/1272/cma-cgm-to-upgrade-its-fal-1-service

With all the shipping lines racking up huge losses because of depressed rate levels and unable to act collectively due to anti competition regulations the only alternative is for them to withdraw a service, usually eight or nine vessels at time. The CMA-CGM announcement demonstrates the problem of trying to get a fleet of vessels round a large number of ports within a given time frame to maintain a fixed day of the week schedule. Get one delay and the whole schedule suffers and/or costs the ship owner a fortune is additional fuel to speed us the ship.

Readers may remember the Maersk product "Daily Maersk" launched a few years ago that offered a guaranteed transit time between certain Far East Ports and North European Ports. Shippers paid a premium rate to ensure shipment on a specified vessel and if it arrived late they could claim compensation. The product was a marketing ploy in part to raise rates/revenue but in essence Maersk concluded deals with each of the port authorities involved to turn their ship around within a defined time scale. In turn Maersk vessels would turn up at the port on schedule which was achieved by Maersk limiting the number of the containers it accepted for a specific port so even shippers who weren't paying the premium rates often found that they had to pay more to guarantee shipment. After about 12 months the product was withdrawn due to a lack of demand in the market place.

UASC and Maersk have been the main culprits for diverting from Felixstowe to London Gateway, whilst delayed Cosco and Evergreen operated ships tend to skip Felixstowe altogether and discharge in Rotterdam before feeding them back on another vessel a policy which then affects cargo carried bills of lading issued by Hanjin, Yang Ming , K Line, UASC, CMA/CGM and ANL. If they manage to get your containers back to the UK in three days I will be amazed, usually it takes about a week!


Thanks for your fulsome reply. I seem to remember Zhen Hua 23 spent a fair bit of time in the Canary Islands prior to resuming her journey to Liverpool. I assumed she'd called in for bunkers,perhaps she was waiting for favourable weather conditions in Northern Europe to deliver the 5 ship to shore gantry cranes. MSC Alyssa is an old friend,Ive shipped many containers on her !
I believe Zhen Hua 23 was waiting for both the terminal to be ready and there was a issue with the weather if I remember correctly.
 
#1,435 ·
We should keep our expectations tempered by global context

Chinese ports feel the pinch
17 Aug 2016
The news that Maersk Line is to end services to and from ten Chinese ports from September in a cost cutting exercise could be construed as an unhappy symptom of China's growth slow down.
In its latest trading update, the shipping giant reported an 89% slide in quarterly profit and a 16% decline in revenue, despite still making a profit. Its 2% annualised return on invested capital during the last quarter was just one-fifth of its target.
“We frequently review the ports/terminals that we service in China, including the inland ports where we provide transport solutions through the Connecting Carrier Agreement. We focus on the ports where we can offer the most benefits that create growth, better service and opportunities for our customers,” it said in a statement.
The trouble is that the shipping sector is beset by overcapacity and deflating costs, which means severe belt tightening across the industry.
- See more at: http://www.portstrategy.com/news101...V01VUTYxajYxbkVhUT0ifQ==#sthash.qUt2AWb4.dpuf

Terminal operators look to consolidate ownership
11 Aug 2016
Global shipping consultancy, Drewry, says as the sector is being faced with the dual challenges of weaker demand growth and rising costs due to larger vessels and alliances, terminal operators are looking to consolidate terminal ownership.
The Global Container Terminal Operators Annual Report 2016 details that softening demand growth coupled with larger liner shipping alliances and bigger ships is moving the container ports industry towards a value sector from a growth sector.
- See more at: http://www.portstrategy.com/news101...V01VUTYxajYxbkVhUT0ifQ==#sthash.BRjYd2On.dpuf
 
#1,436 ·
Chinese ports feel the pinch
17 Aug 2016
The news that Maersk Line is to end services to and from ten Chinese ports from September in a cost cutting exercise could be construed as an unhappy symptom of China's growth slow down.
In its latest trading update, the shipping giant reported an 89% slide in quarterly profit and a 16% decline in revenue, despite still making a profit. Its 2% annualised return on invested capital during the last quarter was just one-fifth of its target.
“We frequently review the ports/terminals that we service in China, including the inland ports where we provide transport solutions through the Connecting Carrier Agreement. We focus on the ports where we can offer the most benefits that create growth, better service and opportunities for our customers,” it said in a statement.
The trouble is that the shipping sector is beset by overcapacity and deflating costs, which means severe belt tightening across the industry.
- See more at: http://www.portstrategy.com/news101...V01VUTYxajYxbkVhUT0ifQ==#sthash.qUt2AWb4.dpuf

Terminal operators look to consolidate ownership
11 Aug 2016
Global shipping consultancy, Drewry, says as the sector is being faced with the dual challenges of weaker demand growth and rising costs due to larger vessels and alliances, terminal operators are looking to consolidate terminal ownership.
The Global Container Terminal Operators Annual Report 2016 details that softening demand growth coupled with larger liner shipping alliances and bigger ships is moving the container ports industry towards a value sector from a growth sector.
- See more at: http://www.portstrategy.com/news101...V01VUTYxajYxbkVhUT0ifQ==#sthash.BRjYd2On.dpuf
I think we should take these press releases in context to wider global trade
trends. The announcement by Maersk that it is chopping serving 10 Chinese ports is probably significant to these ports and their surrounding regions but is unlikely to make a huge difference to global trade. These ports are served by connecting carriers agreements, ie local Chinese feeder or barge operators who shuttle between these ports and the main ports in the region. All foreign owned operators are precluded from operating these services due to Chinese cabotage regulations which are designed to protect local operators, in the same way that India and the USA for example also protect their industry. So all what Maersk is doing here is looking at it's customer base using these ports and saying what most of the shipping lines did in the 1970's and 1980's to Liverpool and saying we are happy to still serve you but instead of us absorbing part of the cost for the precarriage you will now pay the full cost of the movement. I would expect that none of the ports affected are capable of being developed into major hubs so in reality this a cost cutting exercise by Maersk and probably reflects the growing trend in the market place. It should be remembered that Maersk took a similar decision in the in the USA market a few years back when it axed many US inland destinations as bill of lading destinations, effectively forcing the trader to pay a greater contribution of the US inland freight to and from the port of entry or loading.

Liverpool2 is a completely different scenario because it's natural hinterland contains large metropolitan areas which creates a demand for imports and perhaps more importantly generates export traffic. With the ability to combine this traffic from Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland a critical mass can be achieved that will encourage ship operators to call at the terminal. It is important here to consider that the majority of export containers from the North of England and Midlands moving through southern UK ports enjoy some form of haulage subsidy up to about GBP300.00 per container. Removing this subsidy by adding a direct call at Liverpool2 could prove attractive to a shipowner desperate to try and get their bottom line back into the black.
 
#1,440 ·
MSC has released on their website an update on Liverpool2 which suggests further vessels will be calling at the new terminal in the coming weeks as follows.

MSC is pleased to be working with Peel Ports, as commissioning work for Liverpool2 gets into full swing.

MSC has proudly supported the Port of Liverpool for over 15 years and is pleased to be making vessels available for the final commissioning stages of Liverpool2.

The Port of Liverpool is integral to MSC being able to offer customers the widest port network of any line in the UK.

Throughout the coming weeks, MSC will continue to support Peel Ports with its Liverpool2 trials, in preparation for the first landside phase to be fully operational.

Berthing and marine trials took place earlier this summer.

The announcement includes the Peel video of the MSC Nederland berthing trial but branded for MSC and can be seen on this link.

https://www.msc.com/gbr/news/2016-august/video-msc-partners-with-peel-ports-for-liverpool2
 
#1,441 ·
Suggest you keep an eye on Zhen Hua 8 and possibly Zhen Hua 9 as the former is heading for Suez but giving a transit time which is way above what it should be, but perfect for Liverpool. It should be remembered that when these vessels load the RMG's they can use the Suez Canal as there is sufficient clearance under the bridge so there is no need for a call at the Canary Islands. Zhen Hua 9 has just arrived in Nantong so it will be several days before her new destination is known.[/QUOTE]


We can now discount Zhen Hua 9, she is bound for Long Beach.
 
#1,444 ·
The rail line from the Port of Liverpool runs from the dock at Alexandra Dock under Rimrose Road just to the north of Strand Road where it also crosses under the Liverpool to Southport Line on what is now know as the Bootle Branch the route of which is shown below.

http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/c/canada_dock/bootle_branch_map_aey.gif

As the line passes under Edge Lane it reaches a junction which allows trains to arrive or depart via Olive Mount Cutting to and from the east towards the WCML. The other branch of the junction takes the line into the sidings on the north side of Edge Hill Station. This route is presently used by the Biomass trains which are top and tailed (locomotive either end) from the docks to Edge Hill. The front locomotive is detached and the rear locomotive takes the train back down Olive Mount Cutting and onwards to Drax Power Station. The Edge Hill sidings are also used for trains running to and from the WCML via Wavertree Junction to Liverpool South Parkway and beyond. However, this manoeuvre involves the freight trains crossing both the Chat Moss and WCML on the level which can cause delays to passengers services in and out of Lime Street station.

Perhaps surprisingly there has never been a direct connection between the Bootle Branch and the WCML which allowed trains to avoid the reversal at Edge Hill. However, until the early 1970 there was a route called the Edge Hill Circular that allowed the trains to reverse at Edge Hill and then follow a route on the north side of the Chat Moss Line before crossing under the Edge Hill Gridiron and over Chat Moss Lines roughly in the position of the present footbridge at Wavertree Station. The line then circled what was Edge Hill shed before turning sharply ninety degrees and passing over the WCML as it emerged up the bank at the back of Tiverton Street. The route was abandoned in the mid 1970's and most of it disappeared when Wavertree Technology Park was built in the early 1980. The general layout of the rail network in the Edge Hill area is shown in the first link, and the demolished bridge in the second line below.

http://edgehillstation.co.uk/uploads/WAPPINGTUNNEL.jpg

https://flic.kr/p/fE4tUv
 
#1,448 ·
Amassing Biomass?

As they say “What happens to your customer happens to you”.

http://www.bioenergy-news.com/displ...f_uk_government_drops_somerset_nuclear_plans/

August 30th 2016
UK bioenergy giant Drax has announced that it will step in to fill a potential energy gap if the UK government drops plans for a €20 billion nuclear station in Somerset.
Andy Koss, CEO of Drax Group, told Bloomberg that biomass is the UK’s most cost-effective form of energy on a whole-systems cost basis. The company, which converted three of its six units to biomass from coal, “stands ready” to convert the remaining three, he said.
Biomass would be “the cheapest” source of energy if all costs of running a plant were considered he said, including the need to balance the variability of other renewables as well as providing back-up capacity.
“Biomass can do baseload, it can do reliable and it can do flexible dispatch,” Koss said in an interview to Bloomberg.
A brand new incineration plant would generate power at a mid-price levelized cost of $145 per megawatt hour, and a coal-to-biomass conversion would be “significantly cheaper,” according to Jonas Rooze, an analyst with Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
What we need now is a similar statement from the DfT and Peel that they are willing to upgrade both the existing port and rail facilities to support Drax's support of HMG, etc,etc.
 
#1,449 ·
As they say “What happens to your customer happens to you”.

http://www.bioenergy-news.com/displ...f_uk_government_drops_somerset_nuclear_plans/


What we need now is a similar statement from the DfT and Peel that they are willing to upgrade both the existing port and rail facilities to support Drax's support of HMG, etc,etc.
I'm fairly certain that Peel already have plans for upgrading the rail network within the dock estate. In conjunction with Network rail there are works scheduled to take place in the next 24 months to double a short section of the line where the Bootle Branch enters the Dock Estate by Rimrose Road at Alexandra Dock. This will increase the capacity of the network within the dock estate and eventually allow the rail network to be extended south to Huskisson and Canada Docks. In the opposite direction, the railhead at Seaforth should under go an upgrade but this may not happen until parts of the Seaforth terminal have been remodelled once Liverpool2 opens and demand has been defined.
 
#1,450 ·
Slightly off top but one shipping line that looks very unlikely to be calling at Liverpool2 will the Hanjin which has filed for receivership. This is the 6th largest global container carrier operating about 96 ships and 7000000 containers. I'm receiving reports that Port of Felixstowe and London Gateway have seized all the containers on their terminals so with Cosco, Evergreen, UASC and CMA-CGM already announcing they are not accepting Hanjin bookings on their sailing, it looks like exporters will have to have their comtainers returned and reloaded into other shipping line containers. In Felixstowe, importers are having to pay about GBP450.00 to cover the stevedoring and terminal handling charges plus a GBP2000.00 deposit on the container, then pay the additional full round trip UK haulage.

This article in the loadstar provides further background information.

http://theloadstar.co.uk/forwarders...e-for-unpaid-debts-and-fresh-capacity-begins/
 
#1,454 ·
I was in the process of obtaining quotes to ship 2x40's with them. I'm relieved the booking wasn't made. I can't remember the last time a line went bust. Under the circumstances,I wonder whether 'General Average' will be declared. The insurance ramifications of this happening will be huge. I read that freight rates from China to the West Coast of the States were immediately increased by 50%
 
#1,453 ·
In a river like the Mersey with a very strong tidal flow you may notice that vessels tie up bow and stern to that flow, which lowers the strain on lines holding the vessel. Water not only finds it's own level it also takes the path of least resistance and flows around the vessel.
 
#1,459 ·
Thank you for your detailed reply Wavertreelad. Your final point about the Geneva based shipping company immediately came to mind when I heard the news on Thursday night. I know in recent years they've moved away from buying the World's older tonnage,but I'm sure there'll be some bargains to be had from Hanjin's fleet allowing them to scrap some of their older vessels.
 
#1,460 ·
Indeed. The other take on the demise of Hanjin is that Korean Government was reluctant to support both HMM and Hyundai and was unable force the two into a merger. It was left with no alternative but to let the weakest fail allowing the strongest to pick up the profitable operations. Earlier in the year when all the new alliance proposals were announced both HMM & Hanjin were omitted from the three new groups as none of them wanted to be saddled with a partner in severe financial difficulties. The only alliance that remained the same was the 2M alliance comprising Maersk and MSC and it seemed for a while that this would not change because any addition might cause difficulties with the regulations particularly in China and Europe about market share. The Chinese already rejected 2M plus CMA-CGM.

Rumours then started to emerge that Maersk was interested in buying HMM as it wanted to grow it's share of the trans-Pacific market but these were denied. In the meantime, HMM set about restructuring it's business which is managed to achieve and then surprised the market by announcing it was joining the 2M alliance when it leaves the G6 alliance next year. For Maersk and MSC it gives them a huge boost in the Korean market which traditionally has been dominated by Hanjin and HMM which the other two alliances are going to find difficult grow. I doubt the Chinese or European regulators will object as HMM share in these markets will still be no more than the combined HMM and Hanjin shares now. The only weak spot for 2M will then be Japan but that is an entirely different story and one for the future.
 
#1,468 ·
Institute for Public Policy Research North

If anybody is interested there is a free seminar/conference at Portcullis House in Westminster that has relevance to this thread.
Ports and the Powerhouse: Gateways to a Global North

WHEN: Tue 13 Sep 2016, 18:00 - 19:15
ADDRESS: Wilson Room, Portcullis House, London SW1A 2LW
SPEAKERS: Ed Cox Director, IPPR North and John Prescott

Join IPPR North and representatives from the ports for the Westminster launch of Gateways to the northern powerhouse: A northern ports strategy, and for a panel discussion on ports’ part in the Powerhouse.
The details are available on the following links:
http://www.ippr.org/events/ports-and-the-powerhouse-gateways-to-a-global-north
http://www.ippr.org/publications/gateways-to-the-northern-powerhouse
 
#1,475 ·
Could Liverpool2 be about to receive an added bonus?

MSC issued the following statement to customers today,

"Port of Felixstowe Congestion"

Dear Customer

Due to continued congestion at the Port of Felixstowe is taking action to ensure minimal disruption to our customers.

We are working closely with our market leading network of UK ports to evaluate alternative routings as required.

Specific services changes, if implemented, will be provided to you by our dedicated trade teams and msc.com.

Our extensive landside resource will be optimised to support your requirements.

MSC is committed to providing the highest level of service to our customers and is therefore taking this action only as a temporary measure until normal sailing schedules are resumed.

Of course, it our intention to keep you fully informed as the unforeseen situation develops.

If you have any questions regarding your shipments, please contact your local MSC team.

Kind regards

Your MSC Team"


Like many Felixstowe users MSC has diverted some sailings to London Gateway on an adhoc basis, for example UASC's Al Zubara tonight, this is not without it's problems because of the limited landside distribution capacity available. This because most of the road transport capacity is provided by Tilbury and Felixstowe based hauliers who are struggling to cope with demand and with limited rail capacity it means that containers moving a up north have to be moved by road placing further pressure on the dwindling local resource. The problem is unlikely to be helped by the demise of Hanjin which has lead to a build up of containers in Felixstowe so much that they are now being stacked on the old Landguard Terminalas this video shows.

https://youtu.be/PBKCab91uBc


One interesting consideration is that many of MSC's global services are operated with 2M partner Maersk so presumably any diversion of these services would presumably have to be approved by both parties whereas services like the Antwerp feeder service are operated solely by MSC. One other option would be cease some current direct Felixstowe calls and ramp up feeder services to cope with the additional volumes but this could cause considerable pressure on exiting terminals in Antwerp and Rotterdam as well as delays to the cargo making it very unpopular with customers and potentially leading to a loss of market share. Such an operation and could be fairly expensive in comparison to diverting some vessels to another port were suitable capacity may exist.
 
#1,477 ·
Indeed this has not helped, anybody who was unfortunate to have containers booked or shipped with Hanjin will certainly have had a busy and expensive time over the last few weeks and it is likely to continue for some weeks and perhaps months yet. Import customers of Hanjin are having to pay GBP450.00 per container non returnable deposit to either the Port of Felixstowe or London Gateway before they release containers, plus a GBP2000.00 deposit for the container and as an update to my earlier post, reports reached me today that there are 56000 empty containers on the various berths in Felixstowe. Cosco and China Shipping are now unable to accept empty containers back on the quay and other lines have taken steps to divert empties to other nearby depots and when space runs out empties are having to be returned to London Gateway and possibly even Southampton putting further strain on transport in the area. It's therefore perhaps that not surprising that MSC issued the notice to customers which has now been placed on their website.

https://www.msc.com/gbr/notices/2016-september/congestion-at-port-of-felixstowe
 
#1,478 ·
Northern Ports Agree New Partnership to Help Create a “Gateway to a Global North”

The Northern Ports Association which will include Liverpool, Hull & Humber, Tees Valley and Tyne will aim to create jobs, make importing and exporting easier and create prosperity across the North of England.

By bringing the four ports, ran by Peel Ports, ABP, PD Ports and Port of Tyne, together, the North can act as a gateway to the world, connecting Atlantic shipping in Liverpool in the west to the east’s links with the continent, according to PD Ports

Ed Cox, director of IPPR North, said: “Post-Brexit, the Northern Powerhouse agenda is more important than ever.

“Far from the powerhouse being a Whitehall-led scheme, northern businesses are taking control and creating much-needed jobs and prosperity.

“For just £100m, the government could open-up east-west port connections and create a genuine gateway to a global North. This is exactly the kind of ‘shovel-ready’ project HM Treasury looks to be eyeing up ahead of the Autumn Statement.”

Think tank IPPR recently highlighted the dominance of southern ports and the problems this creates in transporting imports and exports across the UK.

At present, 60 per cent of freight destined for the North is delivered to southern ports, it said. This creates unnecessary motorway traffic, delays, pollution and inefficiency.
Source: http://www.cityam.com/249312/uk-port...-global-north-

The Northern Powerhouse agenda marches forward, a new Northern Ports Association will unite northern ports and make importing and exporting much easier than today. Liverpool is already undergoing major redevelopment to the waterfront and will be ready to supplement the amount of traffic from the rest of world.

Part of the northern powerhouse agenda is North Point Global. With the predicted increase of jobs and prosperity within Liverpool NPG have the development schemes that will be ready to supply the demand for housing. For more information on the different developments occurring around Liverpool please visit our projects page. Alternatively if you would like more information on any of the sites then please contact NPG today.
 
#1,479 ·
Link?
 
#1,489 ·
Peel Ports plans lavish official opening party for Liverpool2

​​This is headline tucked away in an article in Lloyds List on the 22nd Sep 2016, and it also confirms that the Zhen Hua 8 is carrying the 6 RMG's cranes. Perhaps the most surprising announcement is that the terminal will open on the 4th November 2016. Just in case the article is removed it states.

"THE heavylift vessel carrying the final cranes for Peel Port's Liverpool2 deepwater container terminal has exited the Suez Canal and is heading north toward the United Kingdom.

The 44,926 dwt, 1980-built Zhen Hua 8 is carrying six cantilever rail-mounted gantry cranes. It is currenlty travelling across the Mediterranean at a speed of 8.8 knots on its way to Merseyside.

Once at Liverpool ZPMC contractors will erect the cranes.

Liverpool2 will allow Port of Liverpool to handle two 13,500 teu post-panamax vessels simultaneously. At present the port can handle vessels up to 4,500 teu.

The Liverpool2 deepwater terminal phase 1 was due to open at the end of 2015. That deadline slipped back to January 2016.

The official launch date is now November 4, and Last Word hears that a number of local celebrities are due to attend a lavish party put on by Peel Ports."

https://www.lloydsli...ticle537569.ece


I'm off to check my diary and brush up the suit, just in case!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top