I would quote which part of that post i strongly object to, but then i’d need to flag my own post as objectionable.
In the original formula, they multiplied by 5 ships and by 365 days.
To reiterate, 1 item at a time:
(1 ship) x (1 ton/day) x ($552/ton) x (2days)
THAT is the special scenario YOU described, plugged directly into the original equation.
Now, clearly, the additional flaw in your ‘logic’ is that you seem to think shipping 1 ton, all by itself, to a special location and then deadheading back is as efficient and cost effecting as shipping via mega-container cargo vessel…
You’re a truck driver? You know deadheading doesn’t pay. I was a dispatcher for Great Western Trucking, here in Texas. My WORST delivery was supposed to be a deadhead back and I got the other truckers to wait a few extra days working local freight, so that my driver could haul the only load scheduled out, since his wife was due to have their baby in under a week. Special case, but he couldn’t get stuck in local freight, in that circumstance and it took me finding local freight for those other drivers, but I did it.
If I was in my fishing boat, say a 45 ft skinny trawler with an 8hsp diesel in the Dominican Republic and my contact (SSB radio) called in an “order” I would no doubt accept it and spend the day buying and loading it all into the boat. No tropical storms? Leave that day with 2 buddies, 60-70 hours later unload, pick up the $1100 bucks, catch all the “home guard” fish from the seastead and be happy as a clam trolling back home…$900 profit + the fish.
What equation? Me? 5 ships 217 tons 552 a ton??? you must be refering to my friend “the boss” hauling scrap iron in India or something…
Which is immediately after:
Which is where you made the mistake.
Oh, so this thread only. Yes I said those things. It seemed there where at least 3 of us who had no idea where you came up with that “original formula”. I checked http://unctad.org/en/PublicationChapters/rmt2015ch3_en.pdf . They were talking about shipping cost versus the value of the goods. In three different graphs they showed shipping costs to be 4 to 7 cents/ton/nautical mile - or $10-25 /ton/day, same thing.
So I did not come up with $552/ton as a shipping rate in some other post on some other site? If it’s your figure (It certainly was not UNCTAD), I don’t see what we are discussing then because that figure is off by a FACTOR of at least 27 and possibly 75,000 or so, compared to 4-7 cents per ton as stated by your own source?
It’s not IN that, it’s in (gasp) the OTHER article I posted…
If you really need to discuss this further, (me I’d just as well prefer to remain in the dark and calculate my shipping costs), please enlighten me as to what the original formula is used for…
If Its not even a freight estimate but an operational expense I had a hard time believing that even the US NAVY could run up a $43 million dollar a year bill on a dinky patrol boat.
EDITED: ok, I waste 30 min figuring how the “other arcticle” justies a 3000% increase in shipping costs…I’m going to eat breakfast first though
EDITED #2 well that quack needs some better eyewear.
“If a cargo shipper pays less than its share of fuel costs, it can only mean that other shippers must pay more, and/or the carrier fails to recover its operating costs. This is not a sustainable business scenario.” - No! If a shipper pays what it pays it can mean just about anything, and a marine engineer posting dribble on the Internet has what to do with following the money?
Yes, I made the mistake of “chiming in out of place” It is a fuel bill that you posted, not a freight quote.
Heck, you can’t even keep 2 articles separated and now you’re adding in $43 Million/year US Navy Patrol Boat operations that have nothing to do with shipping?
Why did you post what is written inside the article and then post the article? To the casual reader it would seem that seem that those were your words. I looked at it in a glance, discarded it as dribble, and never clicked the link unitil just then- Edit #2 above… Still dribble. The first sentence isn’t even English.
To the casual reader, it would be an excerpt of the contents, applicable to the conversation. To you, Mr. Mensa, it is incomprehensible Mathematics.
In context with the preceding post, yep, you got that right. And my instincts are still Intact, It was “dribble” she confirmed it inside the post.
So, what do think of the floating yacht club? 1400 feet is too big, huh? maybe just 280 feet is fine? 2-3 thousand dollars overall with marketing potential?
Well,… how many tires is that?
Well,… why settle for less??
This is the top view. 820 x 220 (pixels). The black “tire tubes” lines are 5 pixels. This makes the drawing scaled to 369ft long 99ft wide. about 30,000ft2. 800ft of “dock” alongside and some temporary tie ups in the stern area. It might as well just be a non-motorized “raft”, although it has much lower wetted surface area and is shaped to give low wave making resistance also. Red is rope, green is polyester strap, black is used tires filled a couple inches above the waterline with “positive flotation”, blue is an epoxy/plwood 90 degree elbow “ram” lol (gotta steal something). at 370 ft it has 1700 ft of “tire tube” - 2550 used tires. less than the120ft offshore fishing catamaran.
It has dock space for 50-60 small boats and nearly unlimited space for canoes, kayaks, row boats, paddle boards, motorcycles, scooters and bikes. the disgn is not complete but everything else can be done on board including lengthening the “raft”, just untie the ropes and “string” more tires on, all at he same time even if the water is so shallow. The same design could be used offshore just triple the tire tubes- or better 7 strands of tire tubes lashed together effectively eliminating 99% of wiggling. The used tires are filled something like this: the greenish dot is polyester strap (more than 1) “the string” tensioned on the inside radius of the tire tubes), the orange dots are "representation of polystyrene bbs the yellow ar plastic bottles and the grey is aircrete(maybe mixed with some sawdust so it doesn’t shrink too badly. could care less if it rots. All in all pretty large and extremely cheap “footprint”. Labor is not too bad - three or for years light part time work to extend to a mile or so…150 acres-35,000 free tires. @Spark - Could suspend another 4million tires off it in the Pacific plus the 245,000 (35,000 x 7) for the same 150 acres, not unfeasible considering the $4.25 million used tire subsidy.
In case there are actually any “investors” out there, I have gotten dependable quotes from two different people on the price of 70-80 foot long 6"+ diameter at the base bamboo canes from Mindanao, $1each…so double it since it was cash price as is where is (no export bribes included). I would be excited about strapping bundles of 100,000 or more canes together and importing them directly, should there be any engineering concerns about a used tire seastead… Bamboo is the strongest, least expensive, truly structural material in existence and can be pressure treated with “wood oil” to last centuries at sea. Sorry no sources, firm belief.
All of that sounds good especially the $4.24M.
this “marina design”, is just that. “moves with the waves boat” has large slightly sprung, suspended living areas and deforms slightly with 3-6 inch waves in 18" of water. It does not smell like old tires and it is now rock-proof as there are no sealed airspaces, except the plastic bottles sealed in concrete encased inside a 1/2 inch of used tire. boats docked along side can rub or bump the tires all they need. In fact each dock “tenant” has two or three free used tire “bumpers” to keep rubbing to a minimum.
any type of lightweight construction can be built on top of the suspended ground. If for example this: about $15-25 /ft 2. I was thinking even cheaper- 4’ x 4’ pallets (3-5$ if bought, usually free) covered with chicken wire and mortared in/out using pumice sand. Just looking at Ellmer’s floating rock, wild guess- nativeshrubcrete shell, coated with asphalt emulsion stabilized cow dung. Available in Texas also…
I’m working on the craigslist “ads” (bilingual) right now, Any “wise” suggestions?
Ah, first mention of suspended cabins with rigid floors! I see the steel truss frame ouside the glass doors there. Why aren’t the trusses embedded inside the walls?
I wouldn’t use so much biodegradeables, or other materials which leach stuff. But you have hit all the buzzwords to be adored and worshipped by most of the humans here. Truely good effort!
Flexible floor :
That is Wilfried Ellmer’s picture…it is a single floating unit on rigid floor. If someone wanted to try and purchase one of those for $98,000 (Columbian price I believe- may be more or less in Bronsville Texas), they could “rent” a single lot space outside the inner rings (picture - 6 posts scroll up) inside the breakwall for $150/month full membership dues(based on two people), or dock it outside or just “tag along” with Jr membership privileges (no living and especially no constructing on board the yacht club/with jr only membership) of $50 monthly dues. If it becomes to much of a hassle with maintaining order on the “docks” or “slum” conditions develop among the “live aboards” then it is time to “stretch” the marina with a few more tires…
Yeah, thats cool. A good description of a “really rough” day inside the bay. Imagine that same “floor” stretched tight 18" above the water’s surface between two anchored 200 ft tugboats and now you got the picture of “floating suspended floor”. It is not like I don’t have a pretty good vocabulary of nautical terms or construction or real estate…just whenever I describe something that I don’t know actually exists or might be described otherwise in legal regulations, I will generally “quotemark” it.