1 / 35

Alter nat ive Development Plan for Chile’s Region V Ports

“Soñar Valparaíso”. Alter nat ive Development Plan for Chile’s Region V Ports. Asaf Ashar National Ports & Waterways Int., USA www.asafashar.com. April 2012. Presentation Agenda. Traffic Forecast Fleet Forecast EPSA/EPV Plan Alternative Plan Capacity of Plans Capability of Plans

vesna
Download Presentation

Alter nat ive Development Plan for Chile’s Region V Ports

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “Soñar Valparaíso” Alternative Development Plan for Chile’s Region V Ports Asaf Ashar National Ports & Waterways Int., USA www.asafashar.com April 2012

  2. Presentation Agenda • Traffic Forecast • Fleet Forecast • EPSA/EPV Plan • Alternative Plan • Capacity of Plans • Capability of Plans • Cost of Plans • Summary & Conclusions Demand Scenarios Supply Options Comparison

  3. Past Traffic Developments Containerization (Reefer, Copper, Forest Products) Containerization Growing Import & Asia 14.5% 9.5%

  4. Forecast Scenarios Only to 2017 when Outer Harbor needed 4.0 mil. 177% 2.2 mil.

  5. World’sEconomic Forecast Slowing Recovery Increasing Volatility IHS Global Insight; Wilbur Smith; Ashar

  6. Larger Newer Ships more Fuel Efficient Present and Future Ships

  7. Fleet Composition by Line 38% Growing Consolidation (Super Alliances), Larger Ships, Larger Terminals Alphaliner 2012; Ashar

  8. Presentation Agenda • Traffic Forecast • Fleet Forecast • EPSA/EPV Plan • Alternative Plan • Capacity of Plans • Capability of Plans • Cost of Plans • Summary & Conclusions Demand Scenarios Supply Options Comparison

  9. Comparison of Development Plans • Capacity– Forecast Scenarios (TEUs) • Capability – Future Ships (Depth, Turning Basin, Berth Length, Yard Area) • Efficiency – Scale Economies; Automation; Land Access; Logistic • Competition • (Environmental Concerns)

  10. Alternative Plans • EPSA/EPV Plan – • Short Term: MinorExtension of Present Terminals • Mid Term: New Terminals in San Antonio (Puerto Central) and Valparaiso (Terminal 2) • Alternative Plan (AA & PW) – • Short Term: MeaningfulExpansionof Present Terminals • Long Term: Outer Terminal • Cost Comparison– Only Basic Infrastructure • Per Capacity Unit ($/ TEU) • Only Containers

  11. Competition • Valparaiso and San Antonio serve the same Hinterland • No Captive Cargo • Similar Services & Prices • Line Switching for $10/Box • Both STI & TPS Low Price $120/Box • Tight Price Control by EPSA/EPV • Small Risk of Collusion • 3 Terminals = Sufficient Number of Competitors

  12. Automated Modern Terminal 600 x 600 m = 32 ha; 16 ha / 300-m Berth 8 STS (65 MT, no tandem); 32 ASC (8 wide, 1-over-5); 20 Shuttle Strads TTI; Ashar2012

  13. Middle Harbor Terminal Long Beach (1) 2 Terminals; 80 ha; 1.3 M TEUs; 16,250 TEUs/ha 1 Terminals; 120 ha; 3.3 M TEUs; 27,500 TEUs/ha (+70%); $1.2 billion; 40-year Lease POLB; Ashar2012

  14. Berth’s Scale Economies 3 X (0.68 – 0.58) = 0.3; 3rd Berth = 1.3 More Combinations of Ship Length 1,200 = 240 x 5; 900 = 240 x 3 Fixed Facilities: Gate, Administration, Maintenance n = 3 0.1

  15. San Antonio Harbor Lagoon Puerto Central Bulk

  16. Original EPSA Plan Deep Shallow Lagoon

  17. 2011 EPSA Plan -- STI Ampliación a incorporar por canje a STI Área Total: 31 ha (40 ha) Frente lineal: 746 m (900 m) Calado: 15 m N N Área de respaldo a canjear a STI Área Inundada a canjear a STI 16 Ha Puerto Central 7,2 Ha 8,8 Ha 900 m 131 m Ampliación Frente

  18. 2011 EPSA Plan – Puerto Central N Área Total: 35.7ha Frente lineal: 945 m (700 + 245) + 250 = 1,195m Profudidal : 15 m Ship-side Yard: 12 ha; 4 ha / Berth Odd-ShapeArea; Traffic? STI Sea Protection: 2% to 5% Downtime 14 ha 14 ha 900 m 14 ha 120 m 620 m 740 m 945 m 250 m

  19. Original EPV Plan -- TPS Área Total: 13 ha Frente lineal: 740 m Profudidal: 14.5 m 740 m << 900, 945 m of SA Terminals 120 m 6.5 ha/Berth 620 m 740 m

  20. Original EPV Plan (1) Terminal 1 TPS (628 m, 16 ha) Downtown Terminal 2

  21. Original EPV Plan (2) 30 - 40 m Depth in Front! Limited Protection: 5 - 15% Downtown 6 – 7 ha / Berth; Remote Gate? Logistics? Constrained Land Access; Rail?

  22. EPV 2012 Bidding Only 1 ContainerBerth? Only 2 Berths Sea Protection; Land Access ?

  23. Expanded STI, San Antonio 2007: 1.55 million TEUs +9 ha; 43 ha 2012: 2.2 million TEUs l 769m (-15 m) +430m; 1,200m; 49 ha Ashar 2009

  24. Expanded TPS, Valparaiso 2007: 1.45 million TEUs 2012: 1.87 million TEUs 2012: 6 ha / Berth +516m; 1,130m +7 ha; 23 ha 610 m; 16 ha Ashar 2009

  25. Port Moin, APMT Phase I: 600 m / 40 ha / -16 m / 1.3 M TEUs; Final: 1,500 m / 80 ha / -18 m/ 6 M TEUs Bid 8/2010; Award 3/2011; Phase I: 8/2016; 33 Years; 80% of Trade; Exclusivity; Price Control APMT 2011; Google; Ashar 2012

  26. Colombo South Harbor 3 x 1,200 m (3 x 400m) ; 18m (23m); 600 ha; 7.2 M TEUS (0.8 M TEUs/Berth) 6.8 km Breakwater; $1.6 billion; 75% Transshipment; Indian Direct? Present Port Future Port Ashar; Sri Lanka Port Authority

  27. Rotterdam’s Maasvlakte 2 Present Port Future Port Open-Sea Reclamation; 240 M cu m; 11 km Seawall; 1,000 ha 3 Terminals: Euromax, APMT and ECT/HPH, each 1,200 m; 1.2 mil TEU/Berth

  28. Outer Harbor 400 x 500 m Modules 600 m Diameter

  29. Outer Harbor Development Options General & Bulk Logistic Park Ashar/Woodbury 2009 http://www.lyd.com/lyd/controls/neochannels/neo_ch4358/deploy/presentacion2.pdf

  30. Presentation Agenda • Traffic Forecast • Fleet Forecast • EPSA/EPV Plan • Alternative Plan • Capacity of Plans • Capability of Plans • Cost of Plans • Summary & Conclusions Demand Scenarios Supply Options Comparison

  31. Capacity vs. Forecast Ashar 2009

  32. Infrastructure Unit Costs Woodbury 2009

  33. Cost Comparison Ashar 2009

  34. Summary & Conclusion • EPSA/EPV Plans – Small Terminals, Odd Shape, No Rail, Difficult Land Access, No Support Facilities, Problems in Navigations, Difficulties in Serving Future Post-Panamax • Alternative Plan – New Spacious Harbor, Large Terminals, Accommodates Traffic to 2035 and beyond • Expansion of Present Terminals – Relatively Easy and Cost Effective, Retains Competition (Tariff Control) • Savings -- Alternative Saves $86 million, or 27% of Infrastructural Cost • Other Cargoes -- Outer Harbor has sufficient space for Non-Container Cargoes

  35. “Soñar Valparaíso” Gracias Asaf Ashar National Ports & Waterways Int., USA www.asafashar.com April 2012

More Related