Impact of Larger Vessel Size on Port Infrastructure Costs

Transcription

1 Balancing and Calculating ROI and Risk against Cost of Technical Developments Diego Quiroga, Associate Ports & Marine, AECOM Port Finance International - Casablanca September 2015

2 Outline Introduction Ultra Large Containerships Technical Challenges Case Studies Conclusions Page 2

3 About AECOM A Fortune 500 company, AECOM had revenue of US$19.5 billion during the 12 months ending 30 September AECOM has a team of about 90 port engineers in the UK as well as approximately another 350 in overseas offices. Major recent projects undertaken by the UK team include: London Gateway Container Terminal, UK New Doha (Hamad) Port, Qatar Jebel Ali Container Terminal 2, Dubai Khalifa Port Industrial Zone, Abu Dhabi Boubyan Port Owners Engineer, Kuwait Pengerang Oil Terminal, Malaysia Colombo Port Efficiency & Expansion Project, Sri Lanka Tangguh LNG Terminal Expansion, Indonesia PSA Panama IT, Panama Page 3

4 AECOM Ports & Marine Transaction Advisory Services AECOM Ports & Marine team is appointed Lenders Technical Advisor on a number of on-going mandates For port transactions AECOM can advise on either sellside and buyside We provide the full range of technical, commercial and ESDD / EHS due diligence services Recent / On-going Lenders Technical Advisor assignments Location Trade Type NW Europe Container ReFi & Expansion Turkey Container Greenfield Djibouti Container Greenfield Senegal Container Post-Privatisation Upgrade & Expansion Dominican Republic Container Greenfield Recent Transaction Advisory assignments Location Target Client UK Associated British Ports CPPIB / Hermes UK Wightlink (domestic ferry operator) BBIP Italy Container terminal and transport services Confidential Global LBC Tank Terminal Group Challenger Infrastructure Fund Page 4

5 Ultra Large Containerships What is a Mega-ship? Rise of the Ultra-large container ship (ULCS) Share of 12,000teu increased from 1% to 12% ( ) and growing Driven by economies of scale Oversupply to trade route, therefore cascade Page 5

6 Ultra Large Containerships $100, US$/day $80, Consequences Page 6 $40, $20, $ Capacity - TEUs Capital Costs Total Operational Costs $/TEU Rate Potential savings decline as vessel sizes increase Imperative that bigger ships are highly utilised to gain economies of scale Reduced number of ports capable of handling larger sized ports upgrading need Pressure on quay, yard and hinterland infrastructure Pressure on operational requirements for the port higher peak factors Pressure on commercial aspects for port authorities and terminal operators: revenue stream may remain the same despite higher capital and operating costs $60, Capacity - TEU From Port Strategy data

7 Ultra Large Containerships Greenfield Projects Brownfield Projects Technical Issues Technical issues Length of quay Maximum depth alongside now vs future Increased bearing, berthing, mooring Number and Size of cranes Yard Key Investment Considerations: Technical constrains due to infrastructure Ability to implement solutions in the operating envinronment Key Investment Considerations: Short term patch or long term solution Assess the cost of proposed upgrade vs expected lifespan of investment Don t underestimate increased risk associated with maintaining operations during project delivery Balance current vs future requirements over proposed life of the investment Consider designs which will enable future upgrades to reduce initial capex Page 7

8 Ultra Large Containerships Who bears the cost? Repercussions for whole transport chain Port Authorities/ Terminal Operators Dilemma: Invest or lose the business? Can major investment in upgrading capability be justified if throughput is not going to increase? Page 8

9 Technical Challenges Marine Access Terminal Facilities Page 9 Inland Transportation

10 Marine Access Capital Works Considerations Dredging approach channels Larger turning circles Widening approach channels Larger docks New breakwaters New operational port areas Operational Considerations Navigational rules for deep draft vessels Impact of other port users due to navigational restrictions for ULCS Requirement for additional pilots/ tugs Page 10

11 Marine Access Commercial Considerations Same cargo volumes may be handled on smaller number of larger vessels In reality, not as black/white situation Page 11

12 Terminal Facilities Quay Greater loadings, mooring, berthing, cranes STS Reqs ULCS Requirement Cranes: Outreach 23 rows or more Height 10 x high cube or 11 x standard height containers on deck Lift Capacity Twin lift capability to ensure high productivity Outreach, height, lift Performance Crane moves per hour Sufficient cranes deployment Cost New cranes Crane heightening Cranetoday magazine Page 12

13 Terminal Facilities Yard Mega-ships typically result in higher peaking factors Intensification of yard storage areas Reduction in dwell times Challenges in current market conditions of cancellation / short-notice schedule changes due to over-capacity on major trade lanes Increased peaking factor also impacts on labour requirements Increased flexibility across the supply chain dock workers, Customs, truckers Page 13

14 Terminal Facilities Design for Performance Port Planning and Civil Engineering considerations Future plant deployment consideration 50 years quay life / 25 years crane life will future plant be more demanding (load, data) Future deepening Ability to dredge deeper Terminal circulation pattern Number of traffic lanes beneath crane will limit Number of cranes deployed per vessel Intermodal Capacity Barge and rail facilities Space for expansion to support growth Page 14

15 Inland Transportation Gate hours Increased gate hours Use of VBS to manage truck arrivals Rail capacity Overall rail capacity / capability linking the port Requirement to ensure adequate land in vicinity of port for marshalling High volumes can reduce the distance over which rail is cost competitive with road Page 15

16 Inland Transportation Road capacity Overall road capacity / capability linking the port Intra-port movements add to traffic demand Funding and timing remain key issues, generally outside of terminal operator / port authority control but failure to deliver can increase operational costs Page 16

17 Case Studies

18 Case Study: Colombo South Harbour Port access channels seen to be a constraint to growth Major public and private sector investments Marine Access Major Infrastructure Enabling Works consisting of: 6 km main breakwater providing shelter from the SW Monsoon waves Two-way access navigation channel dredged to -20 m 15Mm 3 Improvements to entrance to existing harbour Port Control Tower and navigation aids Diversion of 36 sub-sea oil pipeline others Public sector funding for common / shared port infrastructure still common due to long operational life of assets Huge infrastructure enabling works to cater for large containerships Page 18

19 Case Study: London Gateway Port Marine Access channel (100Km) Crane outreach 25-box (Triple E 23-box) Mooring and berthing capacity Services Capacity Take-away Points Futureproofing design in greenfield ports Page 19

20 Case Study: PSA International Terminal Phase 2 PSA Development currently under construction Dredge depth in relation with Panama Canal expansion Container Quay and Yard Optioneering, Sequencing for continued operation and speedy start of new operations Yard plant allowance, RMGs, RTGs/ ertgs implications for infrastructure Balancing development flexibility with capital costs, a difficult task Need to consider ongoing operations and surroundings constraints Page 20

21 Case Study: Bayonne Bridge Current Air draft 46m restricts vessel access to main PANYNJ container terminals Port Newark, Elizabeth, Howland Hook The Raise the Roadway project, announced Dec-2010, will provide 65.5m air draft Programme Cost: $1 Billion. Other Gerald Desmond Bridge Port of Long Beach $1.26 Billion Vessel upsizing is a big challenge for ports in urban areas Ship size challenges are not limited to port and terminal operators Planning for larger vessels can take a long time New York Times March 21,2014 Page 21

22 Conclusion

23 Summary Vessel upsizing is a challenge for all ports, not just the major hubs The Business Case for capability upgrades can be more difficult to achieve vs. capacity increases which are generally funded by increased throughput Increased collaboration by stakeholders in the overall supply chain is becoming common: port authority working more closely with terminal operators and intermodal operators The change in peaking factors caused by ULCS needs to be accommodated into terminal design and operating practices, and the significant increases in productivity will only be met if the inland supply chain also upgrades to meet the challenge Future proofing in design can be cost effective and should always be considered carefully Page 23

24 Thank You Diego Quiroga