Port of Stenungsund - occupancy study

1. Port of Stenungsund- occupancy study Chalmers University of Technology Göteborg, 060925 Viktor Allgurén allgvikt@student.chalmers.se 0704-45 00 83 Andreas Svensson svenande@student.chalmers.se 0702-773 858

2. Vattenfall’s jetty

3. Introduction Major thesis conclusions • Five companies operating in the 11th largest port • 7 expansions 2007-2010  doubled turnover 2010 -Worst case  89% • 1/5 of all laytime is documentation time (not value adding) • Stay under occupancy interval 60-75 % • Need for effectiveness (a new pier)

4. Introduction Agenda • Introduction • Occupancy study • Joint organization for the port • Solutions • Summary/Conclusions

5. Introduction Methodology

6. Introduction Jetty locations- Port of Stenungsund At weight limitation – not possible for more equipment

7. Introduction Largest ports in Sweden 2005 Source: SIKA, 2006:16 Port of Stenungsund: • Roughly 6.2 million tons 2010 -Vattenfall’s pier 2,5 million tons • 600 ships in 2005 • 1,200 ships in 2010

8. Introduction Complexity in Stenungsund Source: Borealis, 2000

9. Introduction Companies using the pier EFAB • First come first serve • Lack of cooperation in port • Port is equally important 1

10. Occupancy study Expansions 2007-2010 EFAB • Perstorp Oxo expansion ~ 5 times higher utilization 2010 than 2005 • EFAB (ethylene) ~ 2 times higher utilization 2010 than 2005 2

11. Occupancy study Occupancy per company

12. Occupancy study Future jetty occupancy • Worst case: 89 % • Pumping like 2005: 81 % • Average 2001-2005: 81 % • Estimated: 78 % • Best case: 74 %

13. Occupancy study Validation • Ship size • Documentation time • Pumping rate - + • 13 700 h laytime 2010 • 2 900 h doc time  21% of laytime 3

14. Occupancy study Maximum occupancy interval 60%-75% • 65 % has been confirmed (five references) • Varies within different ports • Increases with increasing flexibility • More companies, harder to be efficient • If occupancy above the interval for long time  risk for stop in production 4

15. Occupancy study Overcapacity Efficiency (lean) vs. Effectiveness (overcapacity) • Variations in shipping -arrivals (weather, pilots) -documentation -pumping • Planning is hard • Many parties interacting • Need overcapacity to handle variations and uncertainties (five companies) • Overcapacity = new pier

16. Joint organization Earn when fast, pay when slow ”A ship at berth shall be active!” - Mats Eggers, Harbour Manager, Preem Brofjorden • Pay for time at berth –contracts with Vattenfall • Pay per ton handled –contracts with Hamntjänst • Incentive to be faster - Save money (loading master, lab costs, Hamntjänst etc.) • Increase efficiency

17. Joint organization Rules for sequencing • Documents setting the rules for when to prioritize - Common sequencing cases in one document - One standard document to fill in • Recommended sequencing rules - Use shortest processing time (SPT) - Emergency sequencing (to avoid stop in production) -Companies must agree upon these rules

18. Joint organization Joint documentation • Find out “best practice” • Will save laytime • Will save personnel for the companies • The ship does not have to wait for personnel • When queue: - Ship occupying the pier - You are occupying the pier • Do documentation in the anchoring area

19. Joint organization Web-based planning system • Plan ships short- and longterm • Keep statistics • Give idea of laytime • Include: -AIS -Booked pilots -Ship info • Password protected • Available for: -The five companies - Pilots - Agents - Tugboats - Shipowners

20. Solutions Aims – our solutions/improvements Increase maximum occupancy interval Decrease laytime Decrease waiting time Some solutions are of dynamic character

21. Solutions Realisticsolutions(some of these solutions must be implemented) Medium • Move marginal flows to Havden/Hydro (raps/RME) (700 h) • Pre-work for buoy unloading • Better pump capacity -Booster pump (700 h) -Thicker pipelines -Improved pumps (500 h) Short • Web-based planning system • Joint documentation (1,000 h) • Statistics • Rules for sequencing • Pay per hour, not per ton (500 h) • Regular meetings • “Sveriges hamnar” organization • Environmental certificate for a new pier • Larger ships when possible Strategic • New pier (5,000 h) 5

22. Solutions Brainstorming(Everything is allowed) • Optimal sequencing • Increase flexibility • -use both sides (dredge, loading arms, pipelines) • -use Havden and Saltkajen for more products • Buoy unloading (ethane) • Three locations on the pier, like Skarvikshamnen • Move the pipelines to the middle of the pier, everybody • can use both sides, minimum use of hoses • Extend Vattenfall’s pier

23. Solutions New pier locations • One new pier adds 8,760 h new laytime. 2010 = 13,700h laytime  occupancy ~50 % 2010 (all piers) • Long time for environmental application

24. Solutions Price for a new quay (Close to Hydro’s pier) • Price estimated by Flygfältsbyrån to: ~ 20 million SEK Incl. unforeseen costs 15% Other costs: • Loading arm ~5 million SEK • Pipelines, valves, pipe bridge • Safety equipment • Etc.

25. Summary/conclusion Summary/Conclusion 1 • Five companies operating in the port without cooperation • 11th largest port in Sweden • 7 expansions 2007-2010  doubled turnover 2010 in the Port of Stenungsund • Worst case scenario  89 % occupancy 2010 • Stay under interval 60-75 % • Need for effectiveness and efficiency • Joint organization - No easy quick solution, all have to make an effort, otherwise  sub optimization • Create incentive for shorter laytime • 1/5 of all laytime is documentation time (not value adding) • Statistics and web-based planning system • If a new pier  estimated occupancy ~50 % 2010 • No financial payback for previous investments and efforts, however, economical incitements do NOW exist • Environmental application for new pier A.S.A.P! 2 3 4 5

26. Thank you for your attention!

27. Focus on documentation