Shipping containers have revolutionized the way cargo is transported on ships across oceans. Containerization has not only helped in ensuring the safety of the cargo but has also improved the overall cargo carrying capacity. As a result, shipping containers of different types are being built and used for transporting a variety of cargo around the world. (Note: Directly Skip to the Amazing Video Below to Find Out How Shipping Containers are made!) 

Some of the most commonly used types of shipping containers are 20ft, 30ft, 40ft, refrigerated etc. A list of different types of shipping containers used in the market can be found here.  Mostly, all shipping containers are made from steel and have closed-top with hinged doors. They have corrugated walls on the top and bottom sides and are welded to the rails and end frames.

Shipping containers are constructed and used in large number on container ships. There has been a sudden rise in the demand and usage of shipping containers in the past few years. The production of these steel boxes has thus increased around the world.

How are shipping containers made?

Shipping containers are made from materials such as steel, aluminum, fibre-reinforced polymer etc or a combination of all. Construction of an ideal shipping container can be explained in an amazing video made by the Big Steel Box.

According to Big Steel Box, a new 20? shipping container would usually cost around $ 4000-4500. However, the cost would definitely differ depending on the location.

Today, shipping containers are not only used for cargo operations but also have a variety of other applications. Click here to find out different ways in which shipping containers are used today.

Do you know any other ways in which shipping containers are or were made? Let us know in the comments below.

Source

              

A report published today, 21 May 2013, by the International Seafarers’ Welfare and Assistance Network (ISWAN) details best practice in establishing and operating port levies around the world. The report, Port levies and sustainable welfare for seafarers, documents how levies make a real difference to welfare organisations and the services that they are able to provide for seafarers, at a time when funding for seafarers’ welfare is under pressure.

Port levies and sustainable welfare for seafarers shows that 35% of the 132 participating ports already operate port welfare levies. Voluntary levy payment rates were 75-99% for 10 of these ports, and the average levy rate emerged as $58 (approximately £38). While there are often no restrictions on levy expenditure, revenue is almost always used for maintenance of seafarers’ centres, operating seafarer transport, and covering staffing costs.

This report is being launched in the run up to the ILO’s Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006) coming into force on 20 August 2013. The MLC states that “Every seafarer has the right to health protection, medical care, welfare measures and other forms of social protection.” (Article IV). And MLC guidelines on financing of welfare facilities include: “levies or other special dues from shipping sources”. (Guideline B4.4.4).

Roger Harris, Executive Director of ISWAN said: “There is much to be learned from ports with existing levies, including from the challenges faced in setting up and implementing levies. Collaboration and determination play a crucial role in making port levies work. This report can be used as a tool to support more levies being put in place, and improving practice for existing levies. While not a panacea, levies provide a sustainable and predictable way to help shore-based welfare provisions in the MLC be implemented globally.”

Port levies and sustainable welfare for seafarers will be launched at an ISWAN seminar: How can port levies help deliver welfare provisions in the MLC, 2006? being held on 21 May 2013 at the Baltic Exchange, London.

The report can be downloaded by clicking on the link below.

Port levies & sustainable welfare report

Reference & Image Credits: seafarerswelfare

Source

              

Gas carriers cornered the largest chunk of global shipping investment last year since 2005, just as the profits to be made from shipping liquefied natural gas are falling to their lowest in almost two years.

Source

              

Issue #1594      May 22, 2013

Defence White Paper

Part 2

Anna Pha

Indo-Pacific arc

The White Paper states,“China’s continued rise as a global power, the increasing economic and strategic weight of East Asia and the emergence over time of India as a global power are key trends influencing the Indian Ocean’s development as an area of increasing strategic significance. In aggregate, these trends are shaping the emergence of the Indo-Pacific as a single strategic arc.”

(Photo: Avante Media Australia)

Hence the adjustment of “Australia’s priority strategic focus to the arc extending from India though Southeast Asia to Northeast Asia, including the sea lines of communication on which the region depend.” This adjustment in priorities is to bring Australia into line with the US’s pivot.

The Paper notes that the sea-lanes are vital trade routes for China and India as well as for Japan, Singapore, India, South Korea and Australia.

The inclusion of India reflects growing concerns that India “is expected to become the world’s third largest economy by 2025, by when it will also become the most populous state.”

India is modernising its military. The US, with the assistance of Australia, is doing all it can to draw India into the US camp as an ally and pit it against China and Russia. Australia’s sale of uranium should be seen in this light. There is also the risk of war between India and Pakistan which could serve US interests by weakening or even seeing India broken up.

Yet India is rapidly becoming more important to Australia as a trading partner and there has been a recent surge in migration from India.

The US’s longer term plans for India are similar to those for China – to break the country up so that it cannot pose a threat to US economic domination. In the case of China, there is the question of counter-revolution and turning China into a “democracy”.

The military agenda is only one facet of the US’s attempts to contain China’s economic development and prevent it overtaking the US. It is waging political and ideological battles within China, promoting disruptive forces and ethnic and religious divisions.

The Paper emphasises that the strategic environment will be shaped largely by the relationship between the United States and China while noting the importance that India will play in the longer term.

The government also expresses concern over the growing influence in the region of Russia and the BRICS group (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). It makes particular reference to “Russia’s economic potential, as a supplier of oil and gas, nuclear technology and conventional arms.”

At the same time it promotes the formation of multi-lateral and bilateral alliances in the region and escalation of military exercises with the US’s (and so Australia’s) military partners.

Economic domination

“Because the adverse impact of the Global Financial Crisis has been comparatively heavier on Western economies, it is accelerating the shift in economic and strategic weight to our region.”

This is true. It is also accelerating the relative and absolute economic decline of the US, which the White Paper does not say explicitly. What the US cannot achieve by economic or political means, it pursues using military might and other forms of sabotage.

The US, NATO and other Western governments preach the rule of law, but shamelessly arm terrorist groups, do business with drug traffickers carry out assassinations, orchestrate coups, as well as bombing infrastructure to gain access to natural resources and pursue their economic interests.

Libya, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia, to name a few of their victims, have all been subjected to such exercises.

“Australia has direct interests in stable trade routes through the Indian Ocean. Some of Australia’s major trading partners – China, Japan, Singapore, India and the Republic of Korea – are heavily reliant on these routes for energy and raw material resources,” the Paper says.

It is clear that the US is seeking to control these routes with the assistance of allies like Australia. The aim is to contain China economically and militarily and the Indian Ocean is a critical component. The White Paper makes the point that “Over 80 percent of China’s oil imports transit the area.” Is the US planning to blockade China’s sea lanes?

Brian Toohey writing for the The Australian Financial Review raises concerns that Australia is being diverted from its core objectives if planners allow operational doctrine to be dominated by the US’s important new Air-Sea Battle Plan (“Spend less more wisely”, 4-5 May 2013).

“The plan assumes the ADF will always be available to help impose a proposed naval blockade on exports of raw materials from reaching China, Australia’s biggest market,” Toohey says.

“It will need an extraordinarily compelling case before Australia participates in a blockade that will collapse the global economy. Nevertheless, the US military is pushing Australia to give higher priority to preparing for such a blockade as part of a high intensity war with China.”

War preparations

The 2013 Paper is the culmination of a series of reviews including the Australian Defence Force Posture Review (03-05-2012); Australia in the Asian Century (28-10-2012); and the National Security Strategy (23-01-2013). Each of these papers spelt out aspects of the Australian government’s and the US’s “rebalancing” of economic, military and political focus towards Asia and the Indian Ocean.

Looking beyond the spin in the 2013 Paper, it is clear that the US and Australian governments are escalating their war preparations and China is still the principal target.

The paper is essentially a political statement for public consumption that attempts to sell a massive build-up in Australia’s war preparations. It outlines the expansion of “joint” US bases in Australia, purchase of materiel, development of electronic, cyber and space warfare capacity and the expansion of maritime capability in particular.

As previously announced, Australia will continue with its plans to host permanently 2,500 (on rotational basis) US marines in Darwin and expand its bases for the use of the US at Tindal and Darwin.

It will go ahead with 12 new submarines (to be assembled in South Australia), new amphibious ships, ten C-27J Battlefield Airlift aircraft, Air Warfare Destroyers and other purchases that will extend its marine capability and striking power. Twelve EA-18G Growler aircraft will add to their Hornet range to “provide the ability to dominate the battle space electronically” – i.e. shut down electronic equipment.

Australia will play a major role in the US’s space war and missile “defence” plans with the deployment of the C-band ground-based radar at the Harold E Holt Naval Communications Station at North West Cape in WA and the Space Surveillance Telescope elsewhere in Australia.

This will strengthen the US’s capacity to attack satellites and space-based systems and monitor launches by other countries.

Australia is also planning to use unmanned surveillance systems including unmanned aircraft (drones). It is silent as to whether the drones would be used for military attacks.

Australia’s build-up in offensive military capacity only serves to fuel the arms race in the Asia Pacific region. The White Paper appears to support the growing militarisation of the region and the expansion of the military industry in Australia. It is sold as job creating, whereas the same money put into such projects as public transport and alternative energy would create many more jobs, serve other social needs, do less damage to the environment and reduce the risk of war.

Instead of advocating nuclear disarmament, it talks in terms of “the deterrent value of the strategic nuclear forces of major nuclear powers.”

Regardless of all the rhetoric, the main thrust of the White Paper – the strengthening of the US alliance, “rebalancing” of Australia’s military, expansion of US bases and training on Australian soil and blind subservience to the US – means the agenda of the 2009 White Paper has not changed. The main target remains China.

Budget

There has been considerable criticism from the war hawks in the media that the government is not making enough cuts to other budget items to fund the massive shopping list of aircraft, submarines, warships and weaponry.

They seem to have overlooked that it is a pre-election budget and that the government plans to increase Defence spending from 1.5 to about two percent of GDP. The 2013-14 Budget Papers provide for ongoing increases from $29 billion in 2013-14 to a whopping $36 billion in 2016-17.

This is consistent with the Rudd government’s policy of a real increase in military spending of three percent per annum which was put on hold by Gillard as the government attempted to restore the budget to a surplus.

The so-called cuts to military spending have largely come from delays in purchases and internal restructurings and efficiencies – the defence forces did not get all they wanted immediately, but they have not been hit hard like the unemployed, single parents or others on the receiving end of real cuts.

Regardless of whether Liberal or Labor wins office, with the elections over, military spending will once again be a sacred cow, shielded from axe-wielding treasurers. Australia is still preparing for war.

Alternative path

China’s White Paper, The Diversified Employment of China’s Armed Forces, published by the State Council in April, 2013, states: “It is China’s unshakable national commitment and strategic choice to take the road of peaceful development. China unswervingly pursues an independent foreign policy of peace and a national defence policy that is defensive in nature.

“China opposes any form of hegemonism or power politics, and does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. China will never seek hegemony or behave in a hegemonic manner, nor will it engage in military expansion. China advocates a new security concept featuring mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality and coordination, and pursues comprehensive security, common security and cooperative security.

“It is a strategic task of China’s modernisation drive as well as a strong guarantee for China’s peaceful development to build a strong national defence and powerful armed forces which are commensurate with China’s international standing and meet the needs of its security and development interests.”

The US-Australia Alliance might be “indispensable” to the warmongering imperialists in Washington but for the people of Australia its cancellation is a necessity. Ending the Alliance, removal of US bases and other military facilities would be a huge political and military step towards peace and security.

As stated in “Australia in Asia” (Guardian 14-11-2012, #1573) “Australia does have another option: to develop genuine, friendly relations with China and other Asian neighbours based on respect, equality and recognising sovereignty and independence. This would necessitate the adoption of an independent foreign policy, removal of all US bases and other military installations and personnel and an end to the US alliance.

“This would not only bring peace and stability to the region, it would serve the interests of the people of Australia. The additional bonus is that billions of dollars would be saved that could be directed towards job creation and pressing social needs.” It is scandalous that Australia spends over $70 million a day on war preparations and cannot find the money to increase unemployment benefits by $50 a week.

See last week’s Guardian for Part 1 of this article.   

Next article – FMLN continues on the path of progress in El Salvador

Back to index page

Source

              

“The DPRK side released the fishing boat and all the fishermen were safe and healthy,” foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei told a regular press briefing, using the North’s official name.

The vessel’s owner had not paid a ransom, he added, calling on Pyongyang to launch “a full investigation into the incident and make an explanation to us and take effective measures to prevent the reoccurrence of such incidents”.

The seizure is the latest strain in the relationship.

Owner Yu Xuejun told AFP that armed North Koreans whom he said were probably from Pyongyang’s military detained the boat in waters between the two countries on May 6 and demanded 600,000 yuan ($98,000) for the men’s release.

Beijing is Pyongyang’s sole major ally and its key provider of aid and trade, but China said it “firmly opposed” the North’s atomic test in February.

North Korea has for years done most of its banking through China, but with the imposition of stronger UN sanctions after the nuclear test, Beijing has come under greater pressure to tighten its control on Pyongyang’s financial flows.

The state-owned Bank of China in early May shut the account of a North Korean bank accused by the United States of supporting the atomic programme.

Reports said the boat’s captors had asked Yu to pay the ransom into a bank account in the northeastern Chinese city of Dandong, a major hub for trade between China and the North.

The detention caused outrage online in China, with Internet users calling on Beijing to take a tough stance against Pyongyang, and accusing authorities of not trying hard enough to secure the men’s release.

In an editorial Tuesday before the release was announced, the state-run Global Times, which often reflects nationalist opinion, said Beijing should “should let the North Korean side know we are angry”.

“If North Korea continues to go rogue, China should take actions to push it toward a more measured response,” it said, adding: “If we don’t set rules for North Korea, our whole government’s image may be seen as being too weak.”

The incident came a year after the return of 29 Chinese fishermen also kidnapped by unidentified North Koreans who had demanded a 1.2 million yuan ransom.

Those sailors were returned without ransom after the foreign ministry said it had contacted North Korea to try to resolve the case, Xinhua reported at the time.

“There is no clear demarcation of the sea border between China and North Korea,” the Global Times quoted Lu Chao, a Chinese maritime researcher, as saying.

“Whenever North Korean coastal troops lack money, they cross the line and detain Chinese vessels to extort money. And most ship owners choose to pay the ransom if the amount is not too high,” he said.

Source

              

CAVITE, Philippines –  The Philippines has protested the presence of a Chinese warship and other vessels off a Filipino military-occupied shoal in the disputed Spratly Islands.

A Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman said Tuesday the Philippines denounced the “provocative and illegal presence” of Beijing’s ships off Ayungin Shoal in the South China Sea.

Spokesman Raul Hernandez said the complaint was filed two weeks ago at the Chinese Embassy in Manila. It called the shoal “an integral part of our national territory.”

Dozens of Chinese fishing boats were also sighted nearby.

Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin says another protest might be lodged if authorities can confirm that two ships which chased a Philippine official’s ferry boat last week near Ayungin were Chinese government vessels.

It’s the latest territorial rift between the Asian neighbors.

•   Print
•   Email
•   Share
•   Comments
• Recommend
• Tweet

Share This Article

Source

              

]]> http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/south-china-sea-2/philippines-protests-presence-of-chinese-warship-fishing-boats-in-disputed-fox-news/feed/ 0 http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/sea-lines-of-communication/offshore-patrol-vessel-opvicgs-vaibhavcommissioned-press-information-bureau-press-release/ http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/sea-lines-of-communication/offshore-patrol-vessel-opvicgs-vaibhavcommissioned-press-information-bureau-press-release/#comments Tue, 21 May 2013 11:40:12 +0000 MaritimeSecurity.Asia http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/sea-lines-of-communication/offshore-patrol-vessel-opvicgs-vaibhavcommissioned-press-information-bureau-press-release/ Indian Coast Guard Ship Vaibhav, the 3rd in the series of 90 meters class Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) was commissioned today at Tuticorin byVice Admiral Anurag G Thapliyal, Director General Indian Coast Guard.

This 90 metres OPV has been designed and built indigenously by M/s GSL and is fitted with the state-of-the-art navigation and communication equipment, sensors and machineries. Her features include an Integrated Bridge System(IBS), Integrated Machinery Control System (IMCS), Power Management System (PMS), High Power External Fire Fighting System (ABS Fi-Fi Class-1) and one indigenous Close Range Naval Gun (CRN-91) along with an optical fire control system. The ship is designed to carry one Helicopter and five high speed boats for Search and Rescue, law enforcement and maritime patrol. The ship is also capable of carrying pollution response equipment to combat oil spill at sea. The ship is fitted with advanced Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS) making it an apt platform to carryout search and rescue operations in Indian Search and Rescue Region (ISRR).

The ship draws 1940 tons and is propelled by two diesel engines to attain a maximum speed of 26 Knots. At economical speed, it has an endurance of 4500 nautical miles and can stay at sea for 15 days without any replenishment. The sustenance and reach coupled with the latest and modern equipment and systems, provide her with the capability to perform the role of a command platform and accomplish all Coast Guard charter of duties.

The ship on joining Coast Guard Fleet will be deployed extensively for the EEZ surveillance and such other duties as enlisted in Coast Guard Charter. The vessel will be exploited extensively in the Eastern region, more so, in the sensitive Gulf of Mannar and up to the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) with Sri Lanka, to safeguard the maritime interests of India.

ICGS Vaibhav, will be manned by 10 Officers and 84 men under the command of Deputy Inspector General Sanjiv Trikha and will be based at Tuticorin under the administrative and operational control of the Commander Coast Guard Region (East).

DM/HH
(Release ID :96118)

Source

              

]]> http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/sea-lines-of-communication/offshore-patrol-vessel-opvicgs-vaibhavcommissioned-press-information-bureau-press-release/feed/ 0 http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/procurement-2/naval-academy-plebes-climb-herndon-monument/ http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/procurement-2/naval-academy-plebes-climb-herndon-monument/#comments Tue, 21 May 2013 10:21:59 +0000 MaritimeSecurity.Asia http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/procurement-2/naval-academy-plebes-climb-herndon-monument/

First-year Naval Academy students conquered the Herndon Monument Monday, an annual tradition. One midshipman made it to the top in less than an hour and 43 minutes.

Naval Academy Plebes Climb…

Copy

Close

Link to this video

</p> <p>http://www.nbcwashington.com/video/#!/news/local/Naval-Academy-Plebes-Climb-Herndon-Monument/208215721</p> <p>

Copy

Close

Embed this video

Replay

advertisement

The freshman class at the Naval Academy conquered an Annapolis tradition Monday. The Class of 2016 climbed the Herndon Monument.

A midshipman made it to the top in just less than an hour and 43 minutes.

The plebes form a human pyramid to reach the top of the greased-up, 21-foot monument. Per tradition, the sailor who reached the top replaced the plebe “dixie cup hat” atop the obelisk with an upperclassman’s hat.

According to tradition, the first one up the monument will be the first admiral from that class.

The longest attempt took more than four hours. According to the Naval Academy, the fastest time on record is one minute and 30 seconds, completed in 1969.

Get the latest headlines sent to your inbox!

Source

              

]]> http://maritimesecurity.asia/free-2/procurement-2/naval-academy-plebes-climb-herndon-monument/feed/ 0