[Saint John] Port Development

[MonctonianSentinel01]

Originally Posted by J81

Hes not right and neither are you. When a ship unloads containers it doesnt empty the whole ship. Quite the opposite actually. Which is why i used 150 as an example. If the entire ship were to be offloaded your assumption that sending the ship further inland is the most feasible might hold some truth but its not the case.

I am actually, shipping by boat is the cheapest, cheaper than rail, truck and plane. I know that all containers don't come off at Halifax. Containers only go to Halifax because Montreal can't take them all, it's too far off the beaten path or the American East Coast ports are too full, or there is too much waiting involved, or they take off a few containers in Halifax because there isn't enough to justify going to Montreal to unload a few containers that are going to central Canada or Chicago and Detroit. There are plenty of more reasons as well, but if time is money as much as your making it out to be, because rail is faster, then Halifax would be the size of Singapore by now. Better yet Sydney would be the biggest on the North American East Coast ports period. Cost is the biggest factor in shipping goods, that doesn't mean that they can take their sweet old time, of course they want everything yesterday, but cost is still number one. It's doesn't make sense to unload from the cheapest mode of transportation to one that is more expensive when cost is the number one concern and they could have taken it further by boat. Just because the port of Halifax exists is not a reason enough to argue that switching to rail ASAP at a higher cost is what should be done.

Fuel is the number one cost to all shipping companies, rail and boat alike. That however, is their problem to overcome, with what they charge in their shipping price and indeed boat is cheaper.

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

The feds and the provinces of NS and NB are haggling out who's responsible for the fix. The cost to place a new flood control structure (berm or dyke) in front of the CNR mainline across the Tantramar Marsh is in the multiples of hundreds of millions of dollars.

In other words, the political class is fiddling while Rome burns. We already had a flooding event during a major storm a few years back where the mainline was within inches of being overtopped. This will only worsen with sea level rise. Even now, a "thousand year storm" could probably take out both the CNR mailine and the TCH. This would nearly completely cut off NS (and NL) from the rest of the country.


This image clearly shows how immediate the problem is when a storm surge happens along the isthmus. Scary stuff. The VIA Ocean Limited is almost in the damned ocean!

As I understand it the Feds are offering a 50/50 cost share like most big highway projects. NB and NS are arguing that this is constitutionally a federal responsibility as it involves keeping the federation physically connected (Much like ferry service to Nfld. or the bridge to PEI.)

I suppose from an NB POV the argument why should we spend millions to keep Nova Scotia connected to Canada has some merit. Although much of the infrastructure would need to be in NB it's really a Nova Scotia/Ottawa problem. How much serious harm would NB suffer if the TCH and the CN mainline stopped in Sackville?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by sailor734

How much serious harm would NB suffer if the TCH and the CN mainline stopped in Sackville?

Well, the town of Sackville itself would likely be largely submerged too.......

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by sailor734

As I understand it the Feds are offering a 50/50 cost share like most big highway projects. NB and NS are arguing that this is constitutionally a federal responsibility as it involves keeping the federation physically connected (Much like ferry service to Nfld. or the bridge to PEI.)

I suppose from an NB POV the argument why should we spend millions to keep Nova Scotia connected to Canada has some merit. Although much of the infrastructure would need to be in NB it's really a Nova Scotia/Ottawa problem. How much serious harm would NB suffer if the TCH and the CN mainline stopped in Sackville?

Never considered this point. Not much incentive for NB for sure unless there is some legal obligation from a 200 year old document

[PSJ harbour]

Originally Posted by sailor734

As I understand it the Feds are offering a 50/50 cost share like most big highway projects. NB and NS are arguing that this is constitutionally a federal responsibility as it involves keeping the federation physically connected (Much like ferry service to Nfld. or the bridge to PEI.)

I suppose from an NB POV the argument why should we spend millions to keep Nova Scotia connected to Canada has some merit. Although much of the infrastructure would need to be in NB it's really a Nova Scotia/Ottawa problem. How much serious harm would NB suffer if the TCH and the CN mainline stopped in Sackville?

CP likely sitting back with popcorn watching this unfold. Wonder if they would contribute to the costs?!

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Well, the town of Sackville itself would likely be largely submerged too.......

Nope Sackville is on a hill above the marsh.....Aulac might be an island though!

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by sailor734

Nope Sackville is on a hill above the marsh.....Aulac might be an island though!

Partially on a hill. The MTA campus would be OK, but portions of the downtown would be flooded.

[cdnguys]

Cost is $700m ! Bill before Senate to make it 100% federal responsibility. I’d imagine businesses that rely on that $35 billion trade corridor have storm anxiety.

[cdnguys]

Originally Posted by PSJ harbour

CP likely sitting back with popcorn watching this unfold. Wonder if they would contribute to the costs?!

I believe CN said they would not contribute. I guess when you think about it, it’s not their fault the land bridge between the provinces is disappearing. Now I’m wondering if there are any risks are along the NBSR/CPKC lines ….

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by cdnguys

I believe CN said they would not contribute. I guess when you think about it, it’s not their fault the land bridge between the provinces is disappearing. Now I’m wondering if there are any risks are along the NBSR/CPKC lines ….

I'm sure there are but i suspect they'd be more along the lines of localized washouts rather than rising sea level. (Climate warming causing more high energy storms dumping tropical levels or rainfall type of thing.)

[sailor734]

Originally Posted by cdnguys

Cost is $700m ! Bill before Senate to make it 100% federal responsibility. I’d imagine businesses that rely on that $35 billion trade corridor have storm anxiety.

If they are talking 700m now you can be sure it will be well over a billion by the time anything gets built.

[Ottawa]

Originally Posted by PSJ harbour

The face has to be the length of the ship for the gantry cranes to get at all the bays. Yes, bollards and/or a dolphin could be placed at the northern end to get a better lead on the bow lines.
Regarding HP on the tugs, safety has become a major concern over the last few years, and the pilots are bringing in ships sober now! So the 1250HP tugs don’t cut it! The river does assist the ship when departing, turning to starboard, however a couple NYK’s have gone broad side and the entire ship began falling down the river. Three 4000’s all
Pushing full finally made her turn.

Thanks for your input on this. What you've described gives a reasonable explanation for a lot of the things I have noticed but unable to answer. People go down rabbit holes with a lot of pet theories when they don't comprehend the real issues.

Can you answer a question I have had for awhile? I always wondered why the original berth was not capable of handling the larger ships. It is listed on sjport.com as 435m. I understand it is not dredged as deep, but otherwise, why is it not capable of handling larger than 294m?

[PSJ harbour]

Originally Posted by Ottawa

Thanks for your input on this. What you've described gives a reasonable explanation for a lot of the things I have noticed but unable to answer. People go down rabbit holes with a lot of pet theories when they don't comprehend the real issues.

Can you answer a question I have had for awhile? I always wondered why the original berth was not capable of handling the larger ships. It is listed on sjport.com as 435m. I understand it is not dredged as deep, but otherwise, why is it not capable of handling larger than 294m?

I’m sure the berth can handle a larger ship, it could likely handle the 400m ships actually. However I have never seen a 360m container ship on east coast that wasn’t draughting less than 13m. If the ship was in ballast, empty, certainly it could come alongside. However, there are currently 4 360m ONE line ships en route to Halifax now, three of them westbound all with a draft of roughly 15m, and the one Eastbound leg is a little over 13m. The two cranes at the southern dock, 435m, could not work the 360m ships, few cells short to reach hard off. The answer for me is the draught restriction of 12.2m.

[Ottawa]

Since it may be awhile before we get real data on the 2023 intermodal throughput, I have some numbers that may or may not be relevant.

2022
Ships 147
Average size 2577 TEU
Throughput 151,000

2023
Ships 201 (37% larger)
Average size 2830 (10% larger)
Throughput > 151K

[Ottawa]

Originally Posted by PSJ harbour

I’m sure the berth can handle a larger ship, it could likely handle the 400m ships actually. However I have never seen a 360m container ship on east coast that wasn’t draughting less than 13m. If the ship was in ballast, empty, certainly it could come alongside. However, there are currently 4 360m ONE line ships en route to Halifax now, three of them westbound all with a draft of roughly 15m, and the one Eastbound leg is a little over 13m. The two cranes at the southern dock, 435m, could not work the 360m ships, few cells short to reach hard off. The answer for me is the draught restriction of 12.2m.

Thanks much. Might the quickest solution to the problem be to dredge the berth to 17m or thereabouts, move the north cranes to the south (that sounds like not a 5 minute job), or move the south cranes to the north and get cranes brought in from Prince Rupert (I have heard they might get cranes from there) for the next step.

Also, get whatever tugboats you need to handle the loads. I have no idea how much 8KHP tugboats go for these days but it sounds like $$$$. I imagine if JDI was going to do it, they will apply for some government funding. I think that's reasonable, but it takes time.

[PSJ harbour]

Originally Posted by Ottawa

Thanks much. Might the quickest solution to the problem be to dredge the berth to 17m or thereabouts, move the north cranes to the south (that sounds like not a 5 minute job), or move the south cranes to the north and get cranes brought in from Prince Rupert (I have heard they might get cranes from there) for the next step.

Also, get whatever tugboats you need to handle the loads. I have no idea how much 8KHP tugboats go for these days but it sounds like $$$$. I imagine if JDI was going to do it, they will apply for some government funding. I think that's reasonable, but it takes time.

The South berth is pile driven and dredging would require blasting rock and chances of undermining piles, and is already 50ish years old years old. The pile wharf cannot withstand nearly what the new caisson wharf can. Yes, I’ve heard two more cranes from PR when they get new ones.

I believe ATL will get two big tugs for Halifax, 7-8k HP. So this may allow the three 6k HP LNG tugs to remain in Saint John, and they may do the trick for the bigger ships if they do come.

[Ottawa]

Originally Posted by PSJ harbour

The South berth is pile driven and dredging would require blasting rock and chances of undermining piles, and is already 50ish years old years old. The pile wharf cannot withstand nearly what the new caisson wharf can. Yes, I’ve heard two more cranes from PR when they get new ones.

I believe ATL will get two big tugs for Halifax, 7-8k HP. So this may allow the three 6k HP LNG tugs to remain in Saint John, and they may do the trick for the bigger ships if they do come.

Appreciate that. I wasn't aware we had the 6K. That's good.

So is the AIM berth better for dredging and reusing? Or are we looking at a much bigger job?

[PSJ harbour]

Originally Posted by Ottawa

Appreciate that. I wasn't aware we had the 6K. That's good.

So is the AIM berth better for dredging and reusing? Or are we looking at a much bigger job?

The AIM berth, aka Pier 10, is even older than Rodney face south, however it is more of a caisson style, with big caverns underneath you can see at low water. Looks similar to the styles at pier 1, 2 and 3 before they got filled in.

[adamuptownsj]

PSJ Harbour, great posts. Quick question.

What's the real state of the old sugar refinery site and the pier south of Lower Cove? I fish off it sometimes and it's pretty freaky. My dad says it's basically teak posts and fill to the west. How serious would remediation efforts be?

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2640...!1e3?entry=ttu

[sailor734]

Another question.....aside from the undermining old piling issues, how deep is the overburden in the harbour? How much dredging could you do before hitting rock?