Cina a rischio tracollo.

[tabarè (POL)]

A parte il giusto discorso sul mercato interno, l'export cinese è indirizzato verso assemblati, prodotti a più alto valore aggiunto su cui le spese di trasporto non hanno una incidenza tale da costituire un problema.

[Breiner252]

Nei trasporti le economie di scala sono fondamentali. Basterà aumentare le dimensioni dei bestioni del mare a fronte di una loro diminuzione numerica per ridurre i costi unitari delle merci trasportate.

Davvero pensate che questo possa mettere la Cina in ginocchio?

Che ingenuità...!!

Ma lo sapete che il dieci percento della crescita cinese è dovuto ad aumento della domanda interna(e non dell'export con in suoi sempre più costosi trasporti interoceanici)?

Dai, chiudete il thread ché si fa più bella figura...

1) Certo...ingrandiamo le navi...a dismisura...tanto si puo' fare tutto no?

2) Il 10% e' dovuto alla crescita interna...e il restante 90%?

Sta Cina e' proprio una meraviglia insomma, va che e' un piacere, non ha problemi, e' destinata alla crescita eterna ed e' popolata da persone splendide. E noi siamo dei balordi.

Tutto torna insomma...

[Boba Fett]

Che spasso vederli starnazzare.
Realizzare che il "boom cinese" è stato reso possibile soprattutto grazie all'ampia disponibilità di materie prime a basso costo e non ai piani quinquennali e alle pugnette ideologiche varie dev'essere stato un brutto colpo.

E le fastose olimpiadi di agosto saranno con tutta probabilità, citando Blondet, "il canto del cigno del boom cinese" (un'espressione che mi piace un sacco!)...

[Breiner252]

Che spasso vederli starnazzare.
Realizzare che il "boom cinese" è stato reso possibile soprattutto grazie all'ampia disponibilità di materie prime a basso costo e non ai piani quinquennali e alle pugnette ideologiche varie dev'essere stato un brutto colpo.

E le fastose olimpiadi di agosto saranno con tutta probabilità, citando Blondet, "il canto del cigno del boom cinese" (un'espressione che mi piace un sacco!)...

Mi hai rubato "starnazzare"...

[Boba Fett]

Mi hai rubato "starnazzare"...

Hai ragione, è un'altra espressione che mi piace un casino; d'ora in poi ci metterò la citazione.

[Amati75]

1) Certo...ingrandiamo le navi...a dismisura...tanto si puo' fare tutto no?

2) Il 10% e' dovuto alla crescita interna...e il restante 90%?

Sta Cina e' proprio una meraviglia insomma, va che e' un piacere, non ha problemi, e' destinata alla crescita eterna ed e' popolata da persone splendide. E noi siamo dei balordi.

Tutto torna insomma...

1-Beh le navi le hanno gia' ingrandite, non so quanto ancora lo faranno ma per ora a me i costi del nolo sono scesi.

[Breiner252]

Tra parentesi:

Suez-Max Ultra Large Container Ships (ULCS)

The Suez Canal canal is about 163 km long and 80-135 m wide, and has no lock chambers. Most of the canal has only a single traffic lane with several passing bays. It is intended to increase the depth of the canal before 2010 in order to capture the largest container ships to be built.
Suez-max investigations showed that in future, perhaps by 2010, Ultra Large Container Ships (ULCS) carrying some 12,000 teu containers can be expected. This ship size, with a breadth of 50 m / 57 m, and corresponding max. draught of 16.4 m / 14.4 m, may just meet the present Suezmax size.
For these very large vessels of the future, the propulsion power requirement may be up to about 100 MW/136,000 bhp. Investigations conducted by a propeller maker show that propellers can be built to absorb such high powers. Single-screw vessels are therefore still being considered, along with twin-skeg vessels (with two main engines and two propellers).
The ultra-large container ship (ULCS) study was initiated by Lloyd's Register, in association with Ocean Shipping Consultants Ltd, in 1999. The study commissioned by Lloyd's Register concluded that ultra-large container ships of up to 12,500 teu are entirely feasible and that the first of these vessels may be in service by 2010. The larger ships offer reduced cost, even taking into account the additional time spent in port. The calculations have been carried out on the assumption that a trading speed of 25 knots will be required [] across this entire range of ship sizes. This necessitates a twin-engine installation for ships of 10,000 teu and above. For the 18,000 teu container ship one might assume that an overall length of 470 m will be possible, assuming that the problem with the hull strength will be solved. This will reduce the ship draught and enable more harbors to handle such a large container ship.
Beyond 12,500 teu it is expected that container ship and container terminal design will have to undergo significant change. For container ships, this might include the addition of a second screw, with the added capital investment that this entails. The industry will probably see the first 12,500 teu ship ordered before 2010.
In September 2005 an innovative design study for a 13,000 TEU container ship was presented by Germanischer Lloyd and the Korean yard Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI). The new ship design with two main engines and two propellers. All the relevant calculations have been carried out and the design completely approved by Germanischer Lloyd; the Korean yard is now accepting orders. The ship is 382 metres long and 54.2 metres wide, and has a draft of 13.5 m. The 6,230 containers below deck are stacked in 10 tiers and 19 rows, while the 7,210 deck containers are stowed in 21 rows. Powered by two 45,000 kW engines, the vessel's speed is 25.5 knots. The design study is characterized by two technical innovations: the cooperation partners decided on a twin drive configuration and the separation of deckhouse and engine room.
The question as to what propulsion powers and arrangements are needed to achieve the desired speed of 26 knots may be answered by diverse technical approaches: in the early phase of detailed calculations, not only the twin drive, but also the possibilities offered by one main engine, as well as one main engine with an additional pod drive, were considered. The cost estimate for the various drive configurations, never before done by a shipyard, indicated that a twin propulsion system was only negligibly more cost-intensive than the variant with only one main engine.
From the technical standpoint, the aspect of absolute safety is a major argument for the twin drive. In the event of an engine failure, the ship would remain manoeuvrable and could reach a safe harbour under its own steam. The main-engine and shaft sizes correspond to those of a 4,000 TEU carrier. More than 15 years of experience and smooth operation speak in favour of this size of propulsion unit. Engines and propellers of this size are in widespread use, making the maintenance and procurement of spare parts both easy and cost-effective.
On the other hand, the single-engine variant leads to several difficulties that have not been solved as yet. The output of a 14-cylinder engine is not enough to achieve the required speed, whereas a 16-cylinder engine would be too large. As regards propeller size, HHI believes that the maximum has been reached with a diameter of 9.5 m and a weight of 110 t. What is more, the single-screw design involves a great risk of cavitation; the extremely high shaft power also represents a hazard.
With a view to meeting the SOLAS requirements for bridge visibility on such a large ship, the design envisages the separation of deckhouse and engine room. The innovative arrangement of the deckhouse in the forward part of the ship permits an increase in container capacity and a reduction in ballast water. The international regulations on the protection of fuel tanks are also satisfied with this design, because they are located in the protected area below the deckhouse. Another welcome result of this innovation is reduced bending and increased stiffness of the hull.
Over a period of one and a half years, the cooperation partners Germanischer Lloyd and Hyundai Heavy Industries performed calculations for all components of the ship. The study investigated the layout of the ship, the number of containers and their stowage, the design of the fuel tanks, and also provided for strength analyses. Further aspects included slamming calculations, propulsion plants, engine room design and vibration analyses. In addition to towing experiments, tank model tests were also carried out at Hyundai in respect of parametric rolling, with the support of Germanischer Lloyd. At the same time, programs developed by Germanischer Lloyd were used to examine the behaviour of the ship in a seaway, especially parametric rolling. Moreover, exhaust emission tests were conducted to determine the optimum position for the funnels.
The production period for such a ship lies at 9 to 10 months. Owing to the great workload of the yard, delivery before 2009 will not be possible.
Many ports in America simply couldn't accommodate such vessels, except at great expense. And ports are differently endowed through the vagaries of geography or geology. Gulfport, Mississippi, for example, has about 36 feet of draft. New Orleans has about 40 feet, with all that sediment coming down the Mississippi. The Seattle approach channel, on the other hand, was glacier-carved; it averages 175 feet. Halifax, Nova Scotia, averages about 60 feet, Baltimore and Hampton Roads average about 50 feet, while New York/New Jersey presently averages 40 to 45 feet.
Thus, some U.S. ports will have an easier time of it when accommodating megaships, with the consequent potential for some reshuffling of rank among various North American ports. This would be very similar to another change that happened 40 years ago during the advent of containerization. Some people could make it--some people couldn't make it. San Francisco decided it didn't have the room to pursue containerization. It became a tourist waterfront and gave all of its cargo up to Oakland. Manhattan decided that it couldn't do it and gave it all to New Jersey.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...iner-types.htm

Insomma, nessuna sorpresa. Per chi e' assetato di energia, queste bestie saranno un problema non irrilevante.

[Breiner252]

Noi sfigati che viaggiamo a 10 nodi, raramente 12, siamo proprio dei pivelli

[tucidide]

Ma vuoi che i cinesi non trovino subito subito il modo di far andare le macchine industriali e le portacontainers con il vento?

A parte le battute... che ne dite dell'ipotesi di globalizzazione interrotta? di 'rilocalizzazione'? di produzioni locali?

Sarà certamente così ma gli economisti per non sputtanarsi alterneranno gli aggettivi:globale-continentale-regionale- a sud di--- a nord di---- etc.

[Dragonball (POL)]

Non esagererei,ma è vero che causa l'alto costo del trasporto,i prodotti a basso valore aggiunto non sono + così convenienti da importare dalla Cina.
Ricordate che bisogna aggiungerci pure il dazio e i costi di controllo della merce a monte,dal fornitore cinese.