Baltimore's alternate shipping channels not deep enough, Maersk says
Source: msn/Reuters
4h
OSLO (Reuters) - The Baltimore port's alternate shipping channels are not deep enough to accommodate the oceangoing container vessels that Maersk and other carriers use, the Danish shipping group said in a statement on Wednesday.
A container vessel chartered by Maersk collided with a major bridge in the U.S. port of Baltimore's harbour last month, causing the structure to collapse. Six people died in the incident.
Maersk in its statement said there had been some media reports of another alternate channel slated to open later in April that would be able to accommodate larger vessels.
"Details on this third channel have yet to be confirmed by the Baltimore Captain of the Port via Unified Command, the group tasked with coordinating the incident response," Maersk said in its note directed at clients.
Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/baltimore-s-alternate-shipping-channels-not-deep-enough-maersk-says/ar-BB1lMQZL
pwb
(11,287 posts)We require all shipping vessels to be smaller and lighter? No problem, the channels are fine.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)The weird thing here is, at 10,000 TEU the Dali is not really that big of a container ship.
pwb
(11,287 posts)threatening local infrastructure. Push backs against corporations are overdue. IMO.
MyOwnPeace
(16,937 posts)They are telling you that they cannot safely enter the 'provided "safe" channels' that you are offering (you want their business, or what?) - and you're telling them that " 'dem's da' rules?"
You're going to have a whole lot of 'NO BUSINESS' there for all of those looking for income based on port usage.
Srkdqltr
(6,313 posts)Yea like that will happen.
FakeNoose
(32,706 posts)ClaudetteCC
(22 posts)and the AI generated response said they are more fuel efficient (e.g. fuel per ton/miles of cargo) on the seas but did go further to tell me that 'larger ships are less efficient on freeways and surface streets than container trucks.' - the more you know...
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)ClaudetteCC
(22 posts)they should be OK
BumRushDaShow
(129,328 posts)keopeli
(3,524 posts)Temporary situations due to catastrophes are never ideal. Has Maersk proposed an alternate solution or are they just complaining?