Ferry fares
- 13 March 2013 18:15220229i wasn't aware of this, just been on the box.
http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2013-03-13/ferry-fuel-fears/ - 13 March 2013 18:37220234[try again...]
What can be the problem locally? From the clip this may well increase the traffic through Dover and work against long-haul ferry ports, proposed and existing.
As we can see from this thread's title, moaning makes the news.Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 13 March 2013 18:43220236Tom, did you mean to say, it might DECREASE the traffic through Dover?Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 13 March 2013 18:44220237think on it tom, eurotunnel will be rubbing their hands with glee, they are already overtaking us.
- 13 March 2013 18:47220238Surely neither of you imagine that I put myself forward as an authority on these matters?
In the clip they say this change may well reduce long haul ferry travel and 'drive' more business to the short-haul Dover routes.Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 13 March 2013 19:05220242Tom Austin wrote:Surely neither of you imagine that I put myself forward as an authority on these matters?
.
Yes Tom leave this one to Alexander the master of the port
Find me on Facebook Dover History Pages Group or Flickr
http://www.facebook.com/groups/393747750647287/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/doverpast - 13 March 2013 20:14220258Hard to say,Tom.
Freight-lorries using Hampshire, East Anglia and northern ports on the South and East coasts would do a much shorter sea-crossing using Dover, but they'd have to take different road routes to reach Calais, which might mean using more road petrol and paying more road tolls in Europe if these routes prove longer.Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 13 March 2013 20:48220262Possible impact on the Cruise business as well I would have thought?Audere est facere.
- 13 March 2013 21:13220265Cruise vessels and other deep sea vessels (which generally burn IFO 380 CST) have been affected by low sulphur rules for some time now. There has been a Sulphur Emissions Control Area in force from the Western Approaches to the Channel all the way up into the North Sea and Baltic and vessels entering the SECA from deep sea have had to switch from burning normal fuel to burning low sulphur fuel so that they are only burning low sulphur when they enter the zone for a couple of years.
Burning Low Sulphur Fuel Oil (LSFO) has an adverse impact on vessel engines and also leads to higher daily consumption. For example, a container vessel which burns 72tonnes normal IFO 380 CST per day for an average daily speed of 19kts over the ground will burn 75tonnes plus of LSFO for the same speed in the same sea and weather conditions.
Only the very newest (vessels designed and ordered less than 3 years ago) have the latest engine designs for better fuel economy when burning LSFO and even then, it is not quite as economical as when they are burning standard IFO 380 CST.
On top of that, LSFO is about US$25 per tonne more expensive than the ordinary stuff and when you're buying several hundreds of tonnes at a time (Avge stem on a mid size container vessel heading deep sea will be 350 tonnes LSFO and 2700 tonnes normal at RTM or Antwerp (the two cheapest European stemming ports), that all adds up. - 13 March 2013 21:29220266So I think that means no impact on the Cruise business then?Audere est facere.
- 22 March 2013 17:23221701Alexander D wrote:Tom, did you mean to say, it might DECREASE the traffic through Dover?
The Freight Transport Association (FTA) believes demand for the shortest route, Calais to Dover, could rise by 16%
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21901450Find me on Facebook Dover History Pages Group or Flickr
http://www.facebook.com/groups/393747750647287/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/doverpast - 22 March 2013 17:44221705If this does happen, it must be good for the ferry companies and their freight traffic, but maybe less so for tourist traffic, but it would also mean that there's more reason to upgrade the local part of the A2.
Roger - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
22 March 2013 19:23221729but have we enough ferrys in dover to cope with the extra traffic. - 22 March 2013 19:27221731more than enough ferry capacity brian, i don't know how they all get by at present.
- 2 April 2013 03:48223173The Dover ferries operate continuously in the North Sea Emission Control Area and accordingly presently burn low sulphur fuel with a sulphur content of 1%. As from 2015 the proposal is that this will be required to be reduced to 0.1%. This will mean a massive increase in costs and a very bleak future for the Dover ferries.
Any freight diverting to the short sea route from the long haul routes up North will presumably use the tunnel as this will be unaffected by the fuel price increase. The ferries are operating on a shoestring as it is. If they increase fares to cover the extra costs then the freight will go to the tunnel. If they do not increase fares then their operations will plunge deeply into the red. A bit of a dilemma.
P&O's submission to the Transport Committee in the House of Commons is on the link below, I have cherry picked a couple of passages:
"The economic impact will be massive - increasing the cost of bunker fuel by, probably 70%-87% for ships operating in Emission Control Areas (ECAs). The change of fuel from a sulphur content of 2.7% on Dover-Calais in 2004 to the sulphur content of 1% in 2011 has been an iterative process which has cost a premia of approx USD 60 per tonne on heavy fuel oil. However, the proposed change from 1.0% to 0.1% sulphur content in marine fuel in 2015 is a step change requiring a move from residual heavy fuel oil and burn much lighter distillate marine gas oil. This will be a cost premia of +70%, cUSD 420 per tonne. This will mean, from 2015, up to £3.6 billion additional annual cost for shipping within 200 miles of the UK."
"Various cost estimates place the premia for 0.1% sulphur fuel above the current 1.0% sulphur fuel in ECAs of between 70-87% extra cost. Assuming a 70% cost differential, the vessel operating costs in the North Sea sector will increase by approx 27%, and in the Short Sea sector will increase by approx 23% for P&O Ferries. The total increase in vessel operating costs in both of these sectors will, for P&O Ferries in total, be circa £60 million per annum. This will change routes which today are marginal, to be heavily loss making routes. This is completely unsustainable, with job losses inevitable."
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmtran/1561/1561vw10.htm