Logistics is a profession, in the Netherlands we are doing it for ages, just an example, we knew long before the public that Desert Storm was on its way, just because of the logistics. They were moving a lot of the equipment through the harbors of Rotterdam, Antwerp and Hamburg. Most people hadn’t any clue about it.
I'd love to work on one of those cargo ships if I wasn't so scared of going outside my hometown. That certain isolation... umph... it would be nice. Well sometimes at very least.
Interesting that when the Panama Canal opened the larger locks, the canal started having problems with sufficient water to carry it's new capacity and had to start reducing the number of vessels passing through.
The problem was a lack of rain last year due to well-known climate patterns. This year the rain is more than usual and traffic in the Panama Canal is back to previous peak levels. The new locks are more efficient in use of water than the old ones on a metric ton basis because the water is reused, unlike the older locks, and bigger ships carry more containers at lower cost and more speed than was possible previously. Climate, not the size of ships or of locks, was the issue.
Second driest year in 110 years has to do with that. Then mismanagement. Weather changing. On top of them just needing more water for their growth. Mainly drought though from all sources I have talked with. Zero mention on the increase locks being the culprit. Although obviously they are using more.
WATOP getting incredibly lazy with thumbnails. This thumbnail is nearly identical to the "why is the US putting oil underground" and another recent one with nearly the same picture. And the Canada video having the same thumbnail as another recent one. Honestly, I mostly stopped clicking cause I think "didn't I already watch this video?"
Nobody but nobody is running container ships through the Red Sea. The cargo is too valuable to risk a Houthi attack. They are going around Africa for the time being.
Yeah... About the F.S.Key Bridge... I live near it and the traffic around it in Baltimore City and parts of Baltimore County has gotten so, so much worse since the bridge's fall, and the area hasn't fully recovered from the financial impact. That's another major impact the larger ships pose. If another bridge collapse like that happens in a busier port it'd be catastrophic to that area too. R.I.P the lost six workers.
I agree with all of that, except for you using the word collapse. That bridge didn't collapse. Yes it did fall, but that was from being impacted by one of those cargo ships. That bridge fell from a collision.
Not advancing our world because in the past a tragic error caused a disaster is a really poor way to live life. If we all walked our path with that attitude none of us would ever leave town or take a vacation again. You can't bubble wrap life, if you do you end up missing out on living.
If you triple the volume of a given design, you only need to double the power to get the same speed. All other things being equal, bigger ships literally move more stuff for less power and in theory there is no upper limit (there is only a practical limit to the designs and materials and whatnot).
I wonder if the ports in the US couldn't build a floating platform in deeper water to unload the giant ships, and then the cargo it transferred to smaller ships to take to the land based part of the port. Yea, its expensive but likely cheaper than having to replace a bridge and dredge rivers and bays.
This isn't anything that anyone has been wondering about. US ports charge higher docking/port fees for larger ships than for midsized container ships. If you didn't know that you don't pay attention to shipping and never bothered to ask the question this video is addressing. I get the trend for what you have decided is the topic of the week, but this one is kinda just a ... "why did you bother" video.
I’ve solved the size sue. A Mobile Crane System. Think of a oil platform except the ship pulls between the legs, and under the Covered Platform where cranes unload the ship from the top. Then, smaller Transport Barges move the containers from the Covered Platform (where, if needed, Container Barges pull up under the Covered Platform, but on the Outside of the legs, where the Barges can be loaded as the Covered Platform unloads the container ship directly). Yes, I have dibs on the Mobile Crane System patent as well as all applicable copyrights on plans.
The safest route for Post Panamax ships is obviously the northern sea route and contracting a Russia ice-breaker to accompany the Post Panamax especially during harsh winter months. To me it's a no brainer!
Longer ships create a longer displacement wave. The longer wave can move faster and the ship can move along with it. If the ship tries to go faster it will be riding up the wave (or plowing the bow) and would waste to much fuel. These large container ships go about twice the speed as a holiday cruise ship.
Maersk just installed some new cranes at the Port of Los Angeles. They are CONSTANTLY upgrading equipment & increasing automation at the port, which, as the busiest port in the entire Western hemisphere, processes roughly 40% of all imported goods entering the US, down from the pre-pandemic 60%. The “supply chain issues” around that time stemmed from the fact that POLA makes everything difficult & costly for truck drivers, so they don’t like to work the port, not inadequate infrastructure. ✌🏼
@@RussellParkerArt I get what you're saying and in a lake something like that probably could be feasible but in the open ocean, weather. they would break apart
@@hellsent4204 The question is not how many Billions, perhaps up to a Trillion, but would it be worth it to have ports in the West that can handle the largest ships?
@@eugenecrawford14 Then you lose the potential fuel savings and increased capacity advantages of bigger ships. A state of the art offshore port could enlist automation to further reduce costs, adding to the worthiness of such a venture.
BS. Don't be jealous because a strong union is getting a living wage with benefits for hard working men and women. Corporate greed is where you should be focusing your anger.
You know, if they used floating structures like oils grigs but called them a floating dock, and lashed them together, and have smaller vessels, or bridge they could dock big ships there, and the locals would take the cargo cans into the port, ... Don't really care, I don't have any money, it's someone else's problem...
@@kieronparr3403 I believe that rommelfcc was just using oil rigs as an example of substantial existing oceanic structure. Their key suggestion is to build and use "floating docks" that are easily accessible to larger container ships (i.e. to avoid all the port issues addressed in the video) and to have bridge structures between those floating docks and the mainland.
Perhaps the US must start building harbors outside of their cities, like Rotterdam. Perfect connection to the rest of Europe and no bridges around. If we smell a change, we react to it by building and modifying the harbor.
Why can't we unload the ships onto an old Air Force Landing Craft Air Cushion, or an old oil rig, or maybe create a new thing that's out on the ocean instead of on land? Then it won't matter if it takes several days to unload it onto smaller ships that can be re-routed when Los Angeles is backed up. They could also prioritize food containers, so that spoilage/waste isn't the issue that it is today.
The reality is a larger ship takes less fuel per container. The real limit is the Singapore straights. It depends on who you talk to, the limit is 30k to 36k. This is to get through the Singapore straights without dredging. Why would they get smaller? If a ship is 3x bigger, it takes 2x as much cost to move. I heard with the Emma Maersk how it was too big and no one else would build that big. Now, it is considered a small ship. There is always a "hand me down" effect on building new ships. The new, more efficient and larger ships will serve from Korea to North Germany porting in Japan, China, Hong Kong, Singapore (or Klang), perhaps Colombo (Indian traffic), Suez, Spain, UK, Rotterdam By then other ports can get not the prior generation (they'll still be doing the longest routes), but two generations or older. It only takes 3 or 4 ports on each side. For US, perhaps transfer containers in Kingston Jamaca to handle undersized US ports. Charlston, Jacksonville, Prince Rupert (in Canada), and others will be able to handle the ULCVs. They'll get the prior generation; it is a question of when, not if. Then other ports will have to upgrade.
Just to point out, that strait is called the Strait of Malacca or Malacca Strait, and is Pirate Central, Earth for a reason. Most of the ship traffic with Singapore is with tankers, not container ships. All of the oil/gas pipelines in that part of the world, go right to Singapore. The average depth of the Strait of Malacca is 90', with a channel running through the middle of it.
Antwerp is mainly a bulk cargo, tanker and general cargo port, whereas Rotterdam is mainly containers, roll-on,roll-off (including ferries) and river craft.
About 40 years ago, I went into Spencer's with my girlfriend. We were holding hands, as people do. I picked up a jiggly, squishy eyeball and said, "Somewhere in Asia, there's a factory that makes these." China hadn't risen yet, but I KNEW. She picked up a whoopie cushion and asked, "Do you think that they make these, too?" "Absolutely not," I replied. "Those take completely different tooling. Those come from a different factory." Fast forward. She's now my ex wife, and ADHD and fidgets are major parts of our culture. And because of fidgets, we need ships that can carry 25,000 containers. I don't really know how to feel about any of this. There's that story of highly collectible plastic ducks that washed up all over the world when a container ship ...encountered problems in the Pacific and the ducks all became part of the connected circulating gyres. They actually taught us things about the gyres that we didn't know, which... yay, science. But... goddamn, we buy a lot of crap. And that's not even Temu crap; that gets flown to us, thanks to China's "developing nation" status in the WTO. I have this weird idea that countries that have an active space program aren't actually developing nations, but I'm weird. And I'm not bashing China, it has plenty of problems without me adding my two cents, but... DAMN, we buy a lot of crap.
Dont look at time in port, look at time per container in port. The larger ships are actually much faster, reducing congestion for a given number of containers per quarter.
"It also takes less(sic).... crew to manage one ship carrying 10,000 containers than two ships With 5,000 containers each." This is also way over large container ships are getting stuck in canals and running into bridges, causing billions of dollars in damages that marinetime law says the shipping companies do not have to pay for.
Hi Steve! How are you today Ready for Christmas? They just keep making them bigger and bigger than catch up with everything else! Catch up with you next time!
you missed completely the main hub that handles by far the most of the containers in europe and is the most efficient (industrie award and they win it since it exists and that matters a lot obviously) and has already builded their port extensions into the north sea the Maasvlakte 2. Most of these biggest ships are just pendeling the 6 biggest ports in the world, the 5 Chines and Rotterdam. Rotterdam handles the whole of Europe and UK is just UK
And then, it got warm enough, the ice melted, and the Northwest Passage and was open year round. Canada became valueable and global warfare broke out fighting for it. Panama collapses exposing all the oligarchs organized crime.
China has built or is building a port in Peru that can take the largest ships. Then distribute the cargo to smaller ones the canal and US ports can take.
Obviously when you give the # of containers a ship can carry you are using 20 foot not 40 foot containers. Even though 95% of the containers carried are of the 40 foot variety... Interesting concept ...
make a ship train, make it electric, cover all the cars with solar panels and/or wind powered generators. the "cars" only need maneuvering thrusters, the locomotive has the main engines. then each "car" can individually dock and load/unload, then link back up with the train. no need to keep making them bigger.
A Guy from north Carolina invented the standard shipping container the gov talked him in to giving it up for the sake of the World !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i think its exaggerated... i mean, nobody lives long enough to see one of those ship getting fully paid... sure on paper its obvious: more cargo more money... but think of all the extra cost, the infrastructure, maintenance... yes someone profit from those big ship. but it may not be what we think in term of performance
Could you have an offshore loading crane that moves things to barges or faster inlet ships? I mean it would be cheaper than rebuilding or constant dredging.
There is all sorts of tech and automation that would make things better... we actually rank extremely low on the quality of our ports on the world stage... because the unions protecting dock workers refuse to allow any automation.
I believe that Long Beach is dredging so bigger ships can come in. Not sure about the cranes. As for the "Ecology" of said harbor. Yeah, right, its a mess.
Merry Christmas! 🎄 ..your jokes..magnificent. My father was a petro-chemical tanker captain...Huge. Dwarfed by these! Early in career, on a container ship..a container broke open...water pistol machine guns. The whole crew waged water war the entire time at sea.. Sounded like so much fun. Edit..your haircut joke...brilliant.
just remember this. You and I are paying for these bigger ports. The only money the government has. Is the money they get from us. SO we build the port. They do charge the ships to use the ports. And that charge is passed onto us. the consumer. Mclane had a great idea. but some how it got out of hand. The price always goes up. No matter how many containers the ship carry
I do have a question. What is the reason why these really big cargo ships don't use a mini nuclear reactor? These nuclear reactors been use in the US Navy to power there air craft carriers, submarines, and other ships. I can't imagine a nuclear reactor would be more expensive than spending a shit tone of money on fuel cost. An also another reason why USA ports can't compete against Europe and China ports is due to American ports rejecting automation. The US port unions keeping automation from being implemented. An being reliant of man power to unload them rather than automation, the cost to unload a cargo ship in the US is greater compared to a country that has automation in its ports.
Another reason to promote development of small modular reactors. Can someone tell me what I’m missing because I have watched cranes unloading containers from ships and dropping them onto trucks or trains and it looks pretty automated to me.
The idea that one of the largest ships in the world visited the u s recently o Only to take empty cargo containers back across the ocean doesn't make sense. Shipping makes money when there's stuff inside the containers.. So what Was in the containers that Wasn't on an official list
Empty containers are charged for, unless they belong to the ship owner. The rates are based either on volume or simply per container, the same as for full containers. When full there is also a container hire charge. The charges on the value of the cargo are charged by banks to finance the shipment: the shipper is paid by the bank when the goods are loaded but the purchaser only pays when the goods are ready for delivery at the destination. Empty containers are returned so that they can be used again.
I hate reverse colored maps. If you use blue, make sure it's for the water and not the land. Its like staring at negative film, its just throws your mind off.
Also, there aren't enough people in the western hemisphere to make it worthwhile sending huge ships. We have barely a billion people whereas the routes the biggest ships can take have a range of 7 billion customers. Also, we're being left in the dust by Asia vis a vis development. We aren't the latest and greatest anymore.
You know how they solved the container stack up on the West coast? They moved the ships to the East coast, then told you the problem was solved by Pete BootEdgeEdge’s department, and showed you pictures of open ocean off the West coast!
Logistics is a profession, in the Netherlands we are doing it for ages, just an example, we knew long before the public that Desert Storm was on its way, just because of the logistics. They were moving a lot of the equipment through the harbors of Rotterdam, Antwerp and Hamburg. Most people hadn’t any clue about it.
I am a officer on one of these ships and I think you did this video very well
his videos are allways "on the top"
I'd love to work on one of those cargo ships if I wasn't so scared of going outside my hometown. That certain isolation... umph... it would be nice. Well sometimes at very least.
I am one of those ships, and I agree.
im a captain on one of these ships
Interesting that when the Panama Canal opened the larger locks, the canal started having problems with sufficient water to carry it's new capacity and had to start reducing the number of vessels passing through.
The problem was a lack of rain last year due to well-known climate patterns. This year the rain is more than usual and traffic in the Panama Canal is back to previous peak levels. The new locks are more efficient in use of water than the old ones on a metric ton basis because the water is reused, unlike the older locks, and bigger ships carry more containers at lower cost and more speed than was possible previously. Climate, not the size of ships or of locks, was the issue.
Wouldn't more ships raise the water level? Helping the low water issue?
Second driest year in 110 years has to do with that. Then mismanagement. Weather changing. On top of them just needing more water for their growth.
Mainly drought though from all sources I have talked with. Zero mention on the increase locks being the culprit. Although obviously they are using more.
WATOP getting incredibly lazy with thumbnails. This thumbnail is nearly identical to the "why is the US putting oil underground" and another recent one with nearly the same picture. And the Canada video having the same thumbnail as another recent one. Honestly, I mostly stopped clicking cause I think "didn't I already watch this video?"
😂i don’t even understand the thumbnails. This one looks like a piano pedal coming out of a warehouse with people around it.
What's it even meant to be?
Really have to stop using these ugly, useless thumbnails. They are pure sh*t.
If the thumbnail brought you here, welcome. Nice to see new people
I wound up watching the video because of that massive marshmallow looking organ pedal. Or it could be the accelerator.....
Nobody but nobody is running container ships through the Red Sea. The cargo is too valuable to risk a Houthi attack. They are going around Africa for the time being.
Believe me: I used to work as IT, but managng all of these shipping rutes, and whole other tasks connected with this issue it’s huge challenge!
Yeah... About the F.S.Key Bridge... I live near it and the traffic around it in Baltimore City and parts of Baltimore County has gotten so, so much worse since the bridge's fall, and the area hasn't fully recovered from the financial impact. That's another major impact the larger ships pose. If another bridge collapse like that happens in a busier port it'd be catastrophic to that area too. R.I.P the lost six workers.
I agree with all of that, except for you using the word collapse. That bridge didn't collapse. Yes it did fall, but that was from being impacted by one of those cargo ships. That bridge fell from a collision.
Not advancing our world because in the past a tragic error caused a disaster is a really poor way to live life. If we all walked our path with that attitude none of us would ever leave town or take a vacation again. You can't bubble wrap life, if you do you end up missing out on living.
If you triple the volume of a given design, you only need to double the power to get the same speed.
All other things being equal, bigger ships literally move more stuff for less power and in theory there is no upper limit (there is only a practical limit to the designs and materials and whatnot).
whew, glad u didnt overlook the "whatnot"
@@ImFieldy Never overlook the whatnot and always question the whosit.
The anonymity gimmick is creepy
In Saigon, when the river level drops, the ships stick in the mud until the water rises again.
That'd suck
The US simply needs to manufacture more things themselves
I wonder if the ports in the US couldn't build a floating platform in deeper water to unload the giant ships, and then the cargo it transferred to smaller ships to take to the land based part of the port. Yea, its expensive but likely cheaper than having to replace a bridge and dredge rivers and bays.
The environmentists would have a field day and squash it, same with unions
This isn't anything that anyone has been wondering about.
US ports charge higher docking/port fees for larger ships than for midsized container ships. If you didn't know that you don't pay attention to shipping and never bothered to ask the question this video is addressing.
I get the trend for what you have decided is the topic of the week, but this one is kinda just a ... "why did you bother" video.
I’ve solved the size sue. A Mobile Crane System. Think of a oil platform except the ship pulls between the legs, and under the Covered Platform where cranes unload the ship from the top. Then, smaller Transport Barges move the containers from the Covered Platform (where, if needed, Container Barges pull up under the Covered Platform, but on the Outside of the legs, where the Barges can be loaded as the Covered Platform unloads the container ship directly). Yes, I have dibs on the Mobile Crane System patent as well as all applicable copyrights on plans.
The safest route for Post Panamax ships is obviously the northern sea route and contracting a Russia ice-breaker to accompany the Post Panamax
especially during harsh winter months. To me it's a no brainer!
I'm embarrassed to acknowledge this but this video is the first time I even considered the idea that containers would be below the deck level too
I work at the port of LA/LB. There are projects underway for ocean dredging. But it did slow a bit
Longer ships create a longer displacement wave. The longer wave can move faster and the ship can move along with it. If the ship tries to go faster it will be riding up the wave (or plowing the bow) and would waste to much fuel. These large container ships go about twice the speed as a holiday cruise ship.
Maersk just installed some new cranes at the Port of Los Angeles. They are CONSTANTLY upgrading equipment & increasing automation at the port, which, as the busiest port in the entire Western hemisphere, processes roughly 40% of all imported goods entering the US, down from the pre-pandemic 60%. The “supply chain issues” around that time stemmed from the fact that POLA makes everything difficult & costly for truck drivers, so they don’t like to work the port, not inadequate infrastructure. ✌🏼
Nice production values!
I'm somewhat surprised there isn't boats joining together alike pontoon boat to increase load & separate near ports or divide off like a train.
@@RussellParkerArt I get what you're saying and in a lake something like that probably could be feasible but in the open ocean, weather. they would break apart
Why not build an offshore port with a bridge to land directly to a freeway?
Do you know how many billions of dollars a project like that would cost
@@hellsent4204 The question is not how many Billions, perhaps up to a Trillion, but would it be worth it to have ports in the West that can handle the largest ships?
Yea slip knot,, let's get right on that
Seems like ships that fit in ports
Might be a smarter solution
@@eugenecrawford14 Then you lose the potential fuel savings and increased capacity advantages of bigger ships. A state of the art offshore port could enlist automation to further reduce costs, adding to the worthiness of such a venture.
@@SlipKnotRicky let us know when you getter done
Happy Christmas 🎄 to all
One barrier to upgrading US ports is the longshoremen union. They reject any attempt to automate or modernize.
BS. Don't be jealous because a strong union is getting a living wage with benefits for hard working men and women. Corporate greed is where you should be focusing your anger.
@@OleensEmbroidery Two sides of the same, corrupt coin.
Unions rarely serve an actual purpose and generally hinder progress. States already have labor laws.
@@JonathonG-pk7er OK, keep on waiting for corporations to share the wealth.
@@OleensEmbroidery I don't sense any jealousy from Lyle.
So what say you about the greed of Harold Daggett?
You know, if they used floating structures like oils grigs but called them a floating dock, and lashed them together, and have smaller vessels, or bridge they could dock big ships there, and the locals would take the cargo cans into the port, ...
Don't really care, I don't have any money, it's someone else's problem...
It's a good idea, though. I was thinking the same thing.
OK wtf does any of that mean? Oil grig, locals and cargo cans?
@@kieronparr3403 I believe that rommelfcc was just using oil rigs as an example of substantial existing oceanic structure. Their key suggestion is to build and use "floating docks" that are easily accessible to larger container ships (i.e. to avoid all the port issues addressed in the video) and to have bridge structures between those floating docks and the mainland.
So much stuff moving around that could be made locally. But excess profit is essential.
Coffee is black and bitter, what you show being made is a hot non-alcoholic cocktail;)
Perhaps the US must start building harbors outside of their cities, like Rotterdam. Perfect connection to the rest of Europe and no bridges around. If we smell a change, we react to it by building and modifying the harbor.
Why can't we unload the ships onto an old Air Force Landing Craft Air Cushion, or an old oil rig, or maybe create a new thing that's out on the ocean instead of on land? Then it won't matter if it takes several days to unload it onto smaller ships that can be re-routed when Los Angeles is backed up. They could also prioritize food containers, so that spoilage/waste isn't the issue that it is today.
HO-LEE- 💩💯! 25,OOO CONTAINERS ON A SINGLE SHIP?!?!😂🎉❤😮WOW!
The reality is a larger ship takes less fuel per container. The real limit is the Singapore straights. It depends on who you talk to, the limit is 30k to 36k. This is to get through the Singapore straights without dredging.
Why would they get smaller? If a ship is 3x bigger, it takes 2x as much cost to move. I heard with the Emma Maersk how it was too big and no one else would build that big. Now, it is considered a small ship.
There is always a "hand me down" effect on building new ships. The new, more efficient and larger ships will serve from Korea to North Germany porting in Japan, China, Hong Kong, Singapore (or Klang), perhaps Colombo (Indian traffic), Suez, Spain, UK, Rotterdam
By then other ports can get not the prior generation (they'll still be doing the longest routes), but two generations or older. It only takes 3 or 4 ports on each side.
For US, perhaps transfer containers in Kingston Jamaca to handle undersized US ports. Charlston, Jacksonville, Prince Rupert (in Canada), and others will be able to handle the ULCVs. They'll get the prior generation; it is a question of when, not if. Then other ports will have to upgrade.
Just to point out, that strait is called the Strait of Malacca or Malacca Strait, and is Pirate Central, Earth for a reason. Most of the ship traffic with Singapore is with tankers, not container ships. All of the oil/gas pipelines in that part of the world, go right to Singapore. The average depth of the Strait of Malacca is 90', with a channel running through the middle of it.
Very interesting but I miss mentioning the largest European ports of Rotterdam and Antwerp.
Antwerp is just more than half of Rotterdam.
Btw, the largest western ports.
Antwerp is mainly a bulk cargo, tanker and general cargo port, whereas Rotterdam is mainly containers, roll-on,roll-off (including ferries) and river craft.
About 40 years ago, I went into Spencer's with my girlfriend. We were holding hands, as people do. I picked up a jiggly, squishy eyeball and said, "Somewhere in Asia, there's a factory that makes these." China hadn't risen yet, but I KNEW. She picked up a whoopie cushion and asked, "Do you think that they make these, too?" "Absolutely not," I replied. "Those take completely different tooling. Those come from a different factory." Fast forward. She's now my ex wife, and ADHD and fidgets are major parts of our culture. And because of fidgets, we need ships that can carry 25,000 containers. I don't really know how to feel about any of this.
There's that story of highly collectible plastic ducks that washed up all over the world when a container ship ...encountered problems in the Pacific and the ducks all became part of the connected circulating gyres. They actually taught us things about the gyres that we didn't know, which... yay, science. But... goddamn, we buy a lot of crap. And that's not even Temu crap; that gets flown to us, thanks to China's "developing nation" status in the WTO. I have this weird idea that countries that have an active space program aren't actually developing nations, but I'm weird. And I'm not bashing China, it has plenty of problems without me adding my two cents, but... DAMN, we buy a lot of crap.
Dont look at time in port, look at time per container in port. The larger ships are actually much faster, reducing congestion for a given number of containers per quarter.
Build a new updated port, when the old operated, and when the new is ready, close the old or rent it, and start to use the new one XD!
i suspect some oversimplification / misunderstanding is why 45 was threatening panama with annexation
45 has a very public habit of acting based on oversimplification / misunderstanding
Well explained
The UK, post Brexit, is no longer a part of Europe apparently. But who knew they had such deep ports?
"It also takes less(sic).... crew to manage one ship carrying 10,000 containers than two ships With 5,000 containers each."
This is also way over large container ships are getting stuck in canals and running into bridges, causing billions of dollars in damages that marinetime law says the shipping companies do not have to pay for.
Bigger is usually not better.
I’m old enough to remember when masked men were the bad guys. But then again, one only has to be like 6 years old to know this.
Worst thumbnails ever.
Screw the thumbnails. Read the caption
They have become lazy.
"Ever Given" nah EVERGROUDING.
Expansion every ship in their fleet should be renamed EVERGROUDING, ie EverGrouding I,II,IV, X etc Roman numerals.
@@Michael_Brock * grouNding
Hi Steve! How are you today Ready for Christmas? They just keep making them bigger and bigger than catch up with everything else! Catch up with you next time!
And now get those containers from the UK to the rest of Europe….
you missed completely the main hub that handles by far the most of the containers in europe and is the most efficient (industrie award and they win it since it exists and that matters a lot obviously) and has already builded their port extensions into the north sea the Maasvlakte 2.
Most of these biggest ships are just pendeling the 6 biggest ports in the world, the 5 Chines and Rotterdam.
Rotterdam handles the whole of Europe and UK is just UK
If you want deep sea ports you have to dig some sand or silt in the route. Infra is the US is old and underfunded.
And then, it got warm enough, the ice melted, and the Northwest Passage and was open year round. Canada became valueable and global warfare broke out fighting for it. Panama collapses exposing all the oligarchs organized crime.
I love these videos! lol I don't know how many times I watch these videos it causes me to make a cup of coffee!!!
Hate the coffee slurp
China has built or is building a port in Peru that can take the largest ships. Then distribute the cargo to smaller ones the canal and US ports can take.
Umm, okay. I like your fingers and your eyes. And I like your support team, the problem presented is spelled "o-p-p-o-r-t-u-i-t-y". 😉
Obviously when you give the # of containers a ship can carry you are using 20 foot not 40 foot containers. Even though 95% of the containers carried are of the 40 foot variety... Interesting concept ...
love your work keep it up
make a ship train, make it electric, cover all the cars with solar panels and/or wind powered generators. the "cars" only need maneuvering thrusters, the locomotive has the main engines. then each "car" can individually dock and load/unload, then link back up with the train. no need to keep making them bigger.
keep in mind money is a measure of human energy less money means it takes less human energy used.
Don't put all your eggs in one basket
they are but shipping past few years to the us more of non flexibility in some shipping regs.
A Guy from north Carolina invented the standard shipping container the gov talked him in to giving it up for the sake of the World !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Except he didn’t. McClain’s containers were 38’ long not the standard multiple of 10’ (20’ being most common).
i think its exaggerated... i mean, nobody lives long enough to see one of those ship getting fully paid... sure on paper its obvious: more cargo more money... but think of all the extra cost, the infrastructure, maintenance... yes someone profit from those big ship. but it may not be what we think in term of performance
Could you have an offshore loading crane that moves things to barges or faster inlet ships? I mean it would be cheaper than rebuilding or constant dredging.
There is all sorts of tech and automation that would make things better... we actually rank extremely low on the quality of our ports on the world stage... because the unions protecting dock workers refuse to allow any automation.
@@Metalgarn Oh I know the mods and rebuilds are held back by bureaucrats and union workers.
Jersey, always Jersey
in logistics green means 💸💸💸
Did you know you can walk horizontally along the side of the largest laden ships because they have the gravitational pull of a small planet?
Definitely... if you put the whole fully-laden ship in orbit.
If they really wanted to cut emissions why not make them all nuclear powered?
And you didn't mention the biggest port in the world?
Have a platform befors port..
Take top containers off
Load on smaller vessal
Do it for no extra money and no extra time - then it will become a business model.
Why don't they make a ship train that is not as big but much longer? One's you can take apart and reassemble.
Donald Trump just announced that he’s also going to take Greenland
He thinks he can just reach out and grab it. Maniac. 2025 will be a terrifying year...
Africa too😂😂
I believe that Long Beach is dredging so bigger ships can come in. Not sure about the cranes. As for the "Ecology" of said harbor. Yeah, right, its a mess.
Merry Christmas! 🎄 ..your jokes..magnificent. My father was a petro-chemical tanker captain...Huge. Dwarfed by these! Early in career, on a container ship..a container broke open...water pistol machine guns. The whole crew waged water war the entire time at sea.. Sounded like so much fun. Edit..your haircut joke...brilliant.
This was an interesting episode thankyou. What's the problem though?? Consumerism
Wouldn't it make sense to put huge sails on these ships to take advantage of the wind?
No
excellent channel thank you very :
america so great so big, yet cant get big ships, ironic
Why not, 100,000.......
Solid!
Top KEK!
Peace be with you.
Support automatic ports they cut costs dramatically
just remember this. You and I are paying for these bigger ports. The only money the government has. Is the money they get from us. SO we build the port. They do charge the ships to use the ports. And that charge is passed onto us. the consumer. Mclane had a great idea. but some how it got out of hand. The price always goes up. No matter how many containers the ship carry
Let's bring back shipping
Yep..........see you later, maybe.
When talking about the breaking news, I though the host was bald.
What’s the brand and specs of the coffee maker you use? I’d like to get the same one.
I do have a question. What is the reason why these really big cargo ships don't use a mini nuclear reactor? These nuclear reactors been use in the US Navy to power there air craft carriers, submarines, and other ships. I can't imagine a nuclear reactor would be more expensive than spending a shit tone of money on fuel cost.
An also another reason why USA ports can't compete against Europe and China ports is due to American ports rejecting automation. The US port unions keeping automation from being implemented. An being reliant of man power to unload them rather than automation, the cost to unload a cargo ship in the US is greater compared to a country that has automation in its ports.
Another reason to promote development of small modular reactors. Can someone tell me what I’m missing because I have watched cranes unloading containers from ships and dropping them onto trucks or trains and it looks pretty automated to me.
I was interested until I saw that the video was 22 minutes long.
Pass.
The idea that one of the largest ships in the world visited the u s recently o
Only to take empty cargo containers back across the ocean doesn't make sense. Shipping makes money when there's stuff inside the containers..
So what Was in the containers that Wasn't on an official list
Empty containers are charged for, unless they belong to the ship owner. The rates are based either on volume or simply per container, the same as for full containers. When full there is also a container hire charge. The charges on the value of the cargo are charged by banks to finance the shipment: the shipper is paid by the bank when the goods are loaded but the purchaser only pays when the goods are ready for delivery at the destination. Empty containers are returned so that they can be used again.
Get rid of the coffee clip and the disgusting slurp noise.
I hate reverse colored maps.
If you use blue, make sure it's for the water and not the land.
Its like staring at negative film, its just throws your mind off.
I LOVE the breaking news lol
The problem is that humans are stupid!! And I always give you a like. 😎
Why do I feel like it's dubbed?
Well dam
What's the name of the background music. I like how spooky it sounds.
Short answer us infrastructure sucks
Also, there aren't enough people in the western hemisphere to make it worthwhile sending huge ships. We have barely a billion people whereas the routes the biggest ships can take have a range of 7 billion customers. Also, we're being left in the dust by Asia vis a vis development. We aren't the latest and greatest anymore.
Thanks to the horrific antics of the GOP...
You know how they solved the container stack up on the West coast? They moved the ships to the East coast, then told you the problem was solved by Pete BootEdgeEdge’s department, and showed you pictures of open ocean off the West coast!
Pirates.
Dozens of repeat thumbnails!!! Cut it out!
🙏🙏🌷🌷👏👏
I will never forget !!! lol
Teatherd balloons kites and airfoils