Reduction in The Movement Of Empty Container Will Cut Down Co2 Emissions: Research Says
A research conducted by the Spain based Intermodal firm, Connectainer Intermodal Solutions, reveals that adoption of efficient means to put the empty shipping containers into effective use and thereby limiting their movement around the globe could significantly lower CO2 and other green-house gas emissions. Reports shows that about 21 percent of all containers moved per year are empty, and that the percentage stays fairly constant, so that as the total number of containers shipped each year increases, so does the number of empties.
Experts argue that if we calculate the CO2 emissions of a 40-foot empty unit repositioned from Algeciras, Spain to Shanghai, China, the result is around 328 kg per container in only one leg. In addition, normal movement within a port generates about 6 kg of CO2 per TEU (20-foot equivalent unit). And then here are these millions of units of containers that are moving across the globe generating huge quantities of CO2 on an annual basis. Thus there is an urgent need to find a solution to reduce the volume of empty containers that are being moved around the world.
Shipping companies are not unaware that moving empty containers represents a significant cost, and terminals can also be affected. In 2014, for example, both Manila’s main container terminals suffered serious overcrowding of empty containers as the traffic congestion caused by the City of Manila’s short-lived ‘truck ban’ made shippers unwilling to use the limited time they could access the port to move empty containers.
Shipping companies, who have experienced this situation for many years, have adopted appropriate measures to minimize the impact this situation causes them by optimizing the way of repositioning empty equipment to areas where more containers are needed at the least possible cost. But shipping is not ruled by a mathematical algorithm. Sometimes the planned operation has to be adjusted due to external factors, or sometimes even due to an unexpected market change, thereby bidding farewell to cost optimization.Experts suggests that simply working to reduce movements rather than optimizing costs would lead to more flexible repositioning management, as well as making a serious impact on reducing greenhouse gases. Even a small reduction in container movements would make a difference, given the huge number of containers being moved each year—in 2014, more than 560 million.
With better optimization of empty repositioning, which can be managed through improved real-time tracking systems being developed, both costs and emissions could be significantly lowered. If main shipping actors could reduce empty movements by 30 percent, there would be a saving of 145.8 million kg of CO2 per year.
A much talked about topic these days is the exit of Britain from the European Union (EU). The European Union is made up of 28 member states and on June 23rd 2016, the people of Britain voted for the exit of Britain (also referred as “BREXIT”) from the European Union, after being with EU for almost 43 years.Since the finality of the process of exiting the EU, will take about 2 year; this is the perfect time for individuals and companies engaged in the shipping industry to have a better understanding of the “Impact of BREXIT”.
Arbitration is emerging as a viable and preferred recourse to dispute resolution even in maritime matters owing to the international and cross border nature of the subject matter.. The traditional and usual methods of approaching national courts of the parties, independent of each other, choosing one of the courts of the parties or choosing a neutral national court or resorting to mediation or conciliation, so on and so forth, have their own setbacks. For instance, the National courts of independent parties may be perceived to be partial, corrupt or incompetent by the other, while a neutral national court of a third country and its procedures, though assuring, might seem foreign and alien to both the parties. Mediation and conciliation on the other hand may have no final result as they are just forms of further agreement. In relation to all of the above, Arbitration tends to sort out the ambiguities and drawbacks of the conventional solutions pragmatically.
This year, celebrates the 60th anniversary of the Container Shipping on 26th April, 2016.
The two most important and most commonly used container sizes today, are the 20 foot and 40 foot lengths. The container sizes need to be standardised so that the containers can be most efficiently stacked, one on top of the other and that the ships, trains, cranes at the port can be specifically fitted or built to a single size specification. As above said, ISO works to set the standard sizes for all the containers, globally. Shipping containers are also available in variety of types in addition to the standard dry cargo containers often referred to as the special equipment. These special containers include open end, reefer, flat rack and many more.
The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (hereby referred as SOLAS Convention) shall make a mandatory container weight verification requirement in its Chapter VI, Part A, Regulation 2 which shall come into force on 1st July, 2016. As per this Regulation 2, the person who is transporting the shipment / Shipper or a third party arranged by the Shipper is responsible to provide the weight of their packed container in any of the following methods:
In today’s day and age there are many advanced tracking methods introduced to monitor the movement of vessels in the territorial waters; However, despite the same, there have been occasions when arrested vessels manage to flee from their specific jurisdiction, thereby tricking the automated tracking systems. The most recent incident being, MV Madra which escaped the Maltese waters.
However, in this case no such deposit was made by the vessel that jumped arrest. Further the proceedings under Article 865 would be based on the presumption that the vessel is no more within the territorial waters of Malta, which by itself would defy the requisites for jurisdiction in rem. Therefore, the court held that the claim for penalties under Article 865 could not be initiated against a vessel in rem.
Shipwrecks are a growing concern with typically a 1,000 casualties attributed to shipping globally each year. MSC Napoli, The Container Ship Rena and The Costa Concordia are a few examples of the most notable wrecks. The total cost of the top 20 most expensive wreck removals from the past decade currently stands at $2.1B and is set to increase over time.
The usual coastal state law that normally applied required any harbour authority issuing a removal order to first prove that a wreck would in fact be a genuine navigational hazard if it was not removed and this was often used as an escape hatch to legitimately ignore such an order. However, this hatch will be closed as the Convention provides an alternative entitlement to demand removal if the wreck creates the “potential” for substantial damage to the environment.
Opposed to traditional methods of managing loads/containers at the yards, today with the assistance of latest technology, there is not only effective time management but a lot of double guessing can also be eliminated. For instance the elaborate procedure of filling and filing in paper work has been drastically reduced by adopting online procedures. This not only avoids time lags but also speeds up the process, as all essential information with regard to the load are available in the system and hence when the trailer arrives, the details not only pop up, but from the gate in time itself, the warehouse is alerted that the load has arrived. Still further with the use of modern technology it is easier to track the location of the container, the kind of container, ie refer or normal etc, its contents and to also monitor the priority for loading etc.
Another plus point with the use of drones is that long standing containers can be identified and dealt with in a timely manner. This also simplifies the task of updating demurrage and detention charges which is critical for efficient management and operation of any yard.
Facts of the Case
A Shipper in a standard bills of lading is responsible for the “Load, Stow and Count” of his cargo/consignment and hence if the Shipper intends on using a Flexitank to transport his consignment he should discuss with a flexitank operator the most suitable type of flexitank that will be compatible with the product to be shipped. Here the Shipper must also provide vital information detailing of the nature of the product and whether it could ‘solidify’, ‘taint’ or ‘damage’ the container in the event of a leakage, etc.
As far as possible it is also better to open the container only at the time of the joint survey, in the presence of all concerned parties. Ensure that all the details pertaining to the damage are inspected and recorded before the container is returned.