Ports increase productivity but Asia may have plateaued (JOC)


Productivity at many ports and terminals increased in 2013, says the Journal of Commerce (JOC) in its yearly report. Asian facilities continue to dominate world rankings but their productivity may have reached a plateau.
Eight of the ten most efficient ports can be found in Asia. Tianjin (China) jumped from fifth place in 2012 to become the most productive port in the world with 130 moves per ship per hour on average in 2013. It is followed by Qingdao and Ningbo (China), Jebel Ali and Khor al Fakkan (United Arab Emirates), Yokohama (Japan), Yantian and Xiamen (China), Busan (South Korea) and Nansha (China).
The proportion is the same for the top ten terminals. APM Terminals Yokohama (Japan) retains its number one position, but is now sharing it with Tianjin Xingang Sinor Terminal, which came second in 2012. Both facilities registered a berth productivity of 163 moves per ship per hour in 2013. They are followed by seven Chinese terminals and two UAE terminals.
The Asian superiority can be attributed to ports and gates being open 24 hours a day, a high level of automation, as well as large transshipment volumes in the region.
Strong performing terminals in 2012 got even better in 2013. Whereas the top ten terminals registered between 97 and 150 moves per ship per hour in 2012, they reached a 119-163 bracket in 2013. “Terminal operators around the world are taking quite seriously the challenge they face to service vessels in port as quickly and efficiently as possible in this era of mega-ships,” says the JOC report.
Productivity improvements are not linked to ground-breaking advances in crane technology or terminal operating systems (TOS), but rather to terminal operators employing more cranes over more shifts – and paying greater attention to operational details.
APM Terminals told JOC that its Yokohama terminal has developed a synchronisation between the vessel and the container yard to avoid wasting time between the quay crane operations and yard equipment operations. The terminal operator has also asked shipping lines to send a detailed cargo-stowage plan before their vessels arrive. APMT says that it uses that information to pre-plan how it will work the vessel so that, by the time the ship docks, the equipment and manpower are in place.
The JOC whitepaper warns that “a steady dose of mega-ships limits the potential for berth productivity gains” in Asia. More than half of the vessel capacity on order is for 10,000 TEU ships or larger. “A looming challenge is how to avoid lost time at berths as ships take up more space and remain in port longer.” The report notes that many berths which used to accommodate three containerships can now receive only two of the new, longer types of vessel.
Whereas there is room for improvement in berth productivity in the United States and Europe, Asia appears to be at its limit, says the report, before quoting Subhangshu Dutt, executive director of Krishnapatnam port in India: “It appears that productivity levels have plateaued, and unless there is a totally new innovative concept with regard to yard design, management and flows, there may not be any significant improvement.” 

Port productivity
2012
2013
1
Qingdao, China
1
Tianjin, China
2
Ningbo, China
2
Qingdao, China
3
Dalian, China
3
Ningbo, China
4
Shanghai, China
4
Jebel Ali, UAE
5
Tianjin, China
5
Khor al Fakkan, UAE
6
Yokohama, Japan
6
Yokohama, Japan
7
Jebel Ali, UAE
7
Yantian, China
8
Busan, South Korea
8
Xiamen, China
9
Nhava Sheva, India
9
Busan, South Korea
10
Yantian, China
10
Nansha, China

Terminal productivity
2012
2013
Terminal
mph

Terminal
mph
1
APM Terminals Yokohama, Japan
150
1
APM Terminals Yokohama, Japan
163
1
Tianjin Xingang Sinor Terminal, China
163
2
Tianjin Five Continents International Container Terminal, China
119
2
Ningbo Beilun Second Container Terminal, China
141
3
Qingdao Qianwan Container Terminal, China
107
3
Tianjin Port Euroasia International Container Terminal, China
139
4
Xiamen Songyu Container Terminal, China
106
4
Qingdao Qianwan Container Terminal, China
132
5
OOCL Kaohsiung Container Terminal, Taiwan
105
4
Xiamen Songyu Container Terminal, China
132
6
APM Terminals Mumbai, India
101
5
Tianjin Five Continents International Container Terminal, China
130
7
Korea Express Kwangyang Container Terminal, South Korea
101
6
Ningbo Gangji (Yining) Terminal, China
127
8
Xiamen Hairun Container Terminal, China
100
7
Tianjin Port Alliance International Container Terminal, China
126
9
Tianjin Port Container Terminal, China
99
8
DP World Jebel Ali Terminal, UAE
119
10
Ningbo Gangji (Yining) Terminal, China
97
8
Khorfakkan Container Terminal, UAE
119

Source and method:JOC collected and computed seven elements provided by ocean carriers representing more than 75% of global capacity. Those data points are: vessel name, terminal name, port city, port country, berth arrival, berth departure and number of moves (including lift-ons, lift-offs and re-stows).
The 2013 study covers 483 ports and 771 terminals.
Productivity is defined as the average of the gross moves per hour for each call recorded last year. Gross moves per hour for a single vessel call is defined as the total container moves (onload, offload and repositioning) divided by the number of hours for which the vessel is at berth.

Comments