Suez Canal blockage, and should a new diversionary canal be built?

[E100]

I'm not sure of the exact answer to you question but I think part of that answer will be "nowhere near enough". Ever Given by herself can shift 20,000 twenty foot containers and there's dozens of such ships either currently stuck, on their way to the Suez Canal or going around the Cape of Good Hope. I feel like we would need dozens of double stack intermodal trains every day to replicate that capacity.

It's a good point. Based on an optimistic double stack of 50 wagons so 100 containers. That's 200 trains a day still (bare in mind that's only one direction and for one ship). Seems somewhat unreasonable on the basis there's going to be a few of these leaving China / SE Asia every day.

I would though like to see the number of trains increased as I think there is a likely market for faster that ship cargo / but slower than air freight for a premium. We are all rail enthusiasts here so who wouldn't want some additional interest!

 

[Ianno87]

I understand it is very expensive to take a ship through the canal so maybe there is a use for rail from port to port, the ports may be able to act as hubs to bring cargo for a single destinatio on to one ship.

Although the economics of handling containers twice at either end compared to just starying k the ship, would be poor. The whole length of the Suez canal is less than 200km.

 

[Annetts key]

Just build a mini bypass round the stuck ship. Afterall, can’t ships do handbrake turns?

 

[ainsworth74]

I would though like to see the number of trains increased as I think there is a likely market for faster that ship cargo / but slower than air freight for a premium. We are all rail enthusiasts here so who wouldn't want some additional interest!

Oh yeah absolutely! I just don't think that it's ever likely to be viable as a wholesale replacement (absent some massive economic realignment which sees less trade being done between Europe and Asia) for container ships.

 

[Ediswan]

I understand it is very expensive to take a ship through the canal ...

Average around 250,000 USD by the latest figures I can find (2019).

 

[Vespa]

Average around 250,000 USD by the latest figures I can find (2019).

Nice little earner for the Eygptian government after they "Nationalised" it without compensation causing the Suez crisis, the Americans put pressure on us to withdraw through threats to curtail the financial assistance for rebuilding post war Britain, we got them back in the end by refusing to get involved in the Vietnam war when they asked us to send troops, Harold Wilson got some plus point from me on that.

There were some bypass canals built as can be seen from Google earth, however it doesn't go all the way along, looks like they will be doing that now

 

[6Gman]

I understand it is very expensive to take a ship through the canal so maybe there is a use for rail from port to port, the ports may be able to act as hubs to bring cargo for a single destinatio on to one ship.

A project for that lot who want to reopen the Woodhead Tunnel as a rolling highway!

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

What, unload 20 000 containers, put them on 200 trains, then back on another ship? Madness! My suggestion would be one-way traffic through the canal, then even bigger bigger ships could be used. Perhaps all the half-empty ships going back to the far east could go via the Cape of Good Hope. Capacity doubled, simples %)

 

[Master Cutler]

Perhaps the answe is something like the Haifa -Jordan freight line.

JERUSALEM, April 5 (Reuters) - Israel’s transport minister proposed on Wednesday linking its freight railway network with Jordan and Saudi Arabia and said he presented the idea to U.S. President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy last month.

Under the proposal, goods could travel by rail from Israel’s Mediterranean port of Haifa through Jordan to Saudi Arabia’s Gulf port of Dammam via Jordan.


The minister, Yisrael Katz, declined as a news conference to say whether Arab states had agreed to join his initiative.

After Syria’s civil war began in 2011, Israel opened its Haifa port as a conduit for goods coming from Turkey and Europe to be trucked to Arab countries further east, but traffic has been limited due to small capacity and political opposition.

A railway connection would formalise links across tense borders. Israel, which has fought three wars with its Arab neighbours, has peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, but not with Saudi Arabia.

Katz, a member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party, told reporters that Trump envoy Jason Greenblatt expressed enthusiasm about the plan when it was presented to him during his regional visit.

“I have already started working ... I am in touch with very senior elements in the U.S. administration,” said Katz, who has said he intends to eventually succeed Netanyahu as Likud leader.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

A project for that lot who want to reopen the Woodhead Tunnel as a rolling highway!

A Panamax size canal including cross-pennine tunnel, from Humber to Mersey. Now there's a project for Northern Powerhouse to get to grips with!
Crayons Out, begin sketching.

 

[swt_passenger]

Nice little earner for the Eygptian government after they "Nationalised" it without compensation causing the Suez crisis, the Americans put pressure on us to withdraw through threats to curtail the financial assistance for rebuilding post war Britain, we got them back in the end by refusing to get involved in the Vietnam war when they asked us to send troops, Harold Wilson got some plus point from me on that.

There were some bypass canals built as can be seen from Google earth, however it doesn't go all the way along, looks like they will be doing that now

I think a second canal is relatively easy to dig, (given the terrain#), but I expect new bridges and other crossings will be the biggest expense. With 2 channels throughout you end up with an island down the middle that’s a bit cut off otherwise...

# Just to be specific in light of recent ideas, that’s still the desert rather than the Pennines...

 

[Baxenden Bank]

I think a second canal is relatively easy to dig, (given the terrain#), but I expect new bridges and other crossings will be the biggest expense. With 2 channels throughout you end up with an island down the middle that’s a bit cut off otherwise...

# Just to be specific in light of recent ideas, that’s still the desert rather than the Pennines...

Having looked on Google at the Suez Canal, there seem to be some interesting floating swing bridges. Basically the road appraoch, then a pier, then a floating bit which is hinged at the pier and swings through 90 degrees.

There are also high level fixed bridges and a swing rail bridge with halves on each bank (rather than a central island and a large balanced structure).

Fascinating stuff, thank heavens for the internet and Google Aerial and Streetview (others are available).

 

[TheEdge]

I feel like people suggesting a railway as an alternate to container ships passing through the Suez Canal really don't appreciate how many containers are loaded onto those ships.

 

[swt_passenger]

I feel like people suggesting a railway as an alternate to container ships passing through the Suez Canal really don't appreciate how many containers are loaded onto those ships.

Yes, optimistic or what!
Approx 200 normal GB sized container trains per ship.
75 miles long laid end to end with no gaps per ship.
Then, about how many container ships are there each direction per day?

 

[TheEdge]

Yes, optimistic or what!
Approx 200 normal GB sized container trains per ship.
75 miles long laid end to end with no gaps per ship.
Then, about how many container ships are there each direction per day?

And that's only the containers...

You've also got the (depending on size) 300,000 to 3m barrels of oil products on each tanker and (up to) 400,000 tonnes bulk carriers.

It'll be less a railway and more a conveyor belt...

 

[BayPaul]

As a shipping man, I do love the rail based solutions being suggested by everyone on here. As others have pointed out, this one ship is carrying enough containers to fill a train more than half the length of the canal! You may as well use 442s to carry them all.

There are some flows where the Panama would be an alternative (Japan to Northern Europe is a similar distance) , depending on the ship it is normally slightly cheaper as well, but there were big queues (around a week) for unbooked passage through the new locks when I checked a few weeks ago. Most ship owners must be working out the gamble of waiting for the canal to clear vs going round the Cape. With the backlog, I would imagine the Cape is looking very attractive right now.

Incidentally, I would estimate that her canal fees would be around $550k.

 

[TheEdge]

Most ship owners must be working out the gamble of waiting for the canal to clear vs going round the Cape. With the backlog, I would imagine the Cape is looking very attractive right now.

Would they decide that on leaving their last Asian port or halfway across the Indian Ocean and head north or south?

I know it's been mentioned already but if the canal stays shut and everything is going via the Cape would there be any incentive to go via Panama? Or is the distance just too far for that ever to be a practical option?

 

[Vespa]

Trouble is the Suez and Panama Canal, holds the monopoly on trade crossings and can charge what they like

There are alternatives, its a question of time v money cost effectiveness.

Northwestern Passage might be an option to go over the top of Canada if it's clear of ice enough times of the year.

Honduras is propsing a canal to rival Panama.

Not many options really.

 

[BayPaul]

Would they decide that on leaving their last Asian port or halfway across the Indian Ocean and head north or south?

I know it's been mentioned already but if the canal stays shut and everything is going via the Cape would there be any incentive to go via Panama? Or is the distance just too far for that ever to be a practical option?

It would need to be decided before coming through Singapore, but I'm certain that the discussion is being had in shipping companies worldwide. Even if the ship is freed this evening, the backlog will still take a long time to clear, so diverting ships that haven't yet left Asia may make sense, though as I mentioned, the backlog in Panama could be an issue too.

 

[Annetts key]

Although I think a railway as an alternative is a non-starter. If you did decide to do this, and were expecting to have to handle extremely large numbers of containers, why would you go for standard gauge?

Would a custom wide gauge make more sense, with the containers carried at 90 degrees compared to normal standard gauge trains? And being as all this would be new construction, the height of any bridges or structures could be a lot higher, then the containers could be stacked, say five or six high.

 

[BayPaul]

Although I think a railway as an alternative is a non-starter. If you did decide to do this, and were expecting to have to handle extremely large numbers of containers, why would you go for standard gauge?

Would a custom wide gauge make more sense, with the containers carried at 90 degrees compared to normal standard gauge trains? And being as all this would be new construction, the height of any bridges or structures could be a lot higher, then the containers could be stacked, say five or six high.

A forty foot wide train would certainly be impressive... Realistically I can't imagine it would be practical building a rail line to that gauge from Asia to Europe. And the delays of transhipping would mean there would be no point in building a short line across suez, given the canal already exists.

 

[edwin_m]

Although I think a railway as an alternative is a non-starter. If you did decide to do this, and were expecting to have to handle extremely large numbers of containers, why would you go for standard gauge?

Would a custom wide gauge make more sense, with the containers carried at 90 degrees compared to normal standard gauge trains? And being as all this would be new construction, the height of any bridges or structures could be a lot higher, then the containers could be stacked, say five or six high.

There are all sorts of ways that railway technology would change and potentially stop working with a wider gauge. For a start the axle load would be much more, so you'd need multiple wheels or fatter wheels running on wider rails. The tightest practicable curve is also a certain number multiplied by the track gauge, so wide-gauge railways would be much less flexible in terms of alignment. It's been said that Hitler's broad gauge railways were totally impracticable, and the engineer tasked with designing them knew that, but given the alternatives I assume they preferred to carry on working on it.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

@BayPaul could Cape Horn be an option, saving $500k in fees?

Perhaps we crayonistas should be spending more time with our globes and atlases. I have quite a good world map in my head.

 

[BayPaul]

@BayPaul could Cape Horn be an option, saving $500k in fees?

Perhaps we crayonistas should be spending more time with our globes and atlases. I have quite a good world map in my head.

Good Hope is an awful lot shorter for Asia to Europe than Cape Horn. The fees for both canals are carefully set to be slightly cheaper than the alternative - the fuel cost for the extra distance, plus the extra time (so more ships needed for the same frequency) means that the the canal is generally the more economic route, but there's not a massive amount in it.

To give an idea (and my apologies if my maths is out, as I'm used to rather different engines) the ever given has a single 59000kW slow speed Man diesel engine. The fuel consumption at 22.8 knot service speed would be around 150 g/kwh, so about 8.8 tonnes per hour. The distance from Singapore to Ushant via Cape Horn is about 11,700 NM, compared to 8200 NM via Suez, so 3500 NM further, or 150 hours extra steaming time. That equals 1300 tonnes of fuel, if she is burning gas oil, the current price is over $600 per tonne, so the extra fuel is over $800k. Running a ship is expensive!

 

[Bald Rick]

It's been said that Hitler's broad gauge railways were totally impracticable, and the engineer tasked with designing them knew that, but given the alternatives I assume they preferred to carry on working on it.

This thread is full of entries for awards - this one gets ‘understatement of the year’ award!

 

[AndrewE]

A Panamax size canal including cross-pennine tunnel, from Humber to Mersey. Now there's a project for Northern Powerhouse to get to grips with!
Crayons Out, begin sketching.

It wouldn't be the first...
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/norway-ship-tunnel/index.html isn't quite as big as Panamax, or as long as would be needed across NPR!

Norway has got the go-ahead to construct what's being billed as the world's first ship tunnel, designed to help vessels navigate the treacherous Stadhavet Sea.
First announced a few years ago by the Norwegian Coastal Administration, this mile-long, 118-feet-wide tunnel will burrow through the mountainous Stadhavet peninsula in northwestern Norway.
Building this engineering marvel will cost somewhere in the region of 2.8 billion Norwegian kroner ($330 million) and take between three to four years, with construction due to commence in 2022.

 

[philosopher]

My totally impracticable and unworkable solution to the blockage would to gather all the world’s helicopters, attach them to the ship with chains and airlift the ship back into the correct postion!

 

[AndrewE]

My totally impracticable and unworkable solution to the blockage would to gather all the world’s helicopters, attach them to the ship with chains and airlift the ship back into the correct postion!

I have a better idea: find a couple of barges the right length and depth and sink them across the canal either end of the ship. Pump water in to re-float the ship, straighten it up, let the water out and raise the barges. Job done.

 

[edwin_m]

I have a better idea: find a couple of barges the right length and depth and sink them across the canal either end of the ship. Pump water in to re-float the ship, straighten it up, let the water out and raise the barges. Job done.

Isn't the problem that the ends of the ship are buried in the sand so you can't put anything underneath? I think you'd be better attaching a big tank below the waterline and pumping the water out, as was done with the Costa Concordia.

Alternatively, can't someone ask the Isrealites to get the canal drained, as they did with the nearby Red Sea?

 

[AndrewE]

Isn't the problem that the ends of the ship are buried in the sand so you can't put anything underneath? I think you'd be better attaching a big tank below the waterline and pumping the water out, as was done with the Costa Concordia.

Alternatively, can't someone ask the Isrealites to get the canal drained, as they did with the nearby Red Sea?

You could put caissons (or whatever the proper name is - mules?) both sides and pump them out, but you have to get sufficient cable or chain passed under the ship to lift its weight: quite a tall order. I think the problem is that the ship has ridden up the bank at both ends, so it seemed to me that it would be easier to support the ship's length on water (what it is designed to do) and reduce the risk of it breaking its back.