Laserfiche WebLink
MAGAZINE .... <br /> <br />! <br /> tVaterwa ys : 'Most economical' <br />! route for large bulb shipments <br />I (kmtimn'd from I~. 3 <br /> <br /> ! <br />'1 <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> 1 <br /> <br />Duluth. These figures indicate whal ap- <br />pear to be significant movements. Ilow- <br />ever, the limitations on Great Lakes <br />cargo have a negative impact, too. <br /> Those limitations include lock size, <br />season length and channel dimensions, <br />changes which would require significant <br />capital commitment. <br /> The lock size at the Welland Canal be- <br />tween Lakes Ontario and Erie prohibits <br />entry into the Great Lakes system of <br />new large-sized cargo vessels. The main <br />problem is that lock width limits vessels <br />to 76-foot beam dimension, restricting <br />total vessel length to 750 feet. <br /> Only a new lock system would solve <br />this problem. Tolls pay for all mainte- <br />nance costs for the seaway system, hut <br />building a new lock system would re- <br />quire significant outlays from both the <br />United States and Canada. The interna- <br />tional' implications make the problem <br />even more difficult. <br />Season length is another challenge. <br />"Operating in the ice increases cost of <br />shipping in winter by at least 10 per- <br />cent," said Bill Newstrand, director ol <br />ports and waterways for the Minnesota <br />Department of Transportation. Nega- <br />tive environmental impacts ol winter <br />transportation on the Great Lakes are <br />feared, but not proven. <br /> Channel depth is another problem <br />that increases Great Lakes shipping <br />costs. Common channel depth is 27 feet, <br />restricting draft (th~ portion of the ves- <br />sel under the water line) to 251/~ feet. <br />Most oceari-going,,vessels traveling <br />through the system, however, draft <br />about 35 feet with capacity cargo. Be- <br />cause of the shallower.channel depths, <br />such vessels are forced to load at as <br />much as 35 percent below capacity. <br /> This proble'm is compounded in <br />Duluth/Superior because the upper <br />harbor is dredged to only 23 feet, re- <br />stricting development and reducing the <br />use of some terminals. <br /> The Army Corps of Engineers has <br />recommended deepening the channel, <br />but the change will require congressio- <br />nal action. <br /> Cortes said that the Seaway Port Au- <br />thority of Duluth "strongly favors deep- <br />ening of the channel as a matter of po/- <br /> <br />GRAIN SHIPMENT ON BARGES LOOKS GOOD THIS YEAR <br />Mississippi River business fluctuates with economy <br /> <br />icy." But the recession in the late '70s <br />and early '80s, coupled with the impor- <br />tation of foreign steel, greatly reduced <br />the demand for Minnesota iron ore. <br />"With no demand, channel depth isn't <br />the most pressing concern:' <br /> David VanBrunt, general manager of <br />operations with U.S.S. Great Lakes <br />Fleet, Inc., is greatly concerned about <br />the impacts on the demand lor domestic <br />steel. VanBrunt ekes studies that show <br />the large surplus of low-priced, and in <br />many eases foreign government subsi- <br />dized, iron ore available, even to the <br /> <br />steel mills located in America's heart- <br />land. "Our vessel officers see foreign ore <br />coming up the Mississippi River and <br />discharging right alongside our ships at <br />many of the ports on the Great Lakes," <br />he said. <br /> MnDOT's Newstrand summed up <br />the situation with the state's ports and <br />wate~,ays: "Indeed, the most economi- <br />cal way to handle large quantities of <br />bulk goods is over the water. If we con- <br />tinue to work to address the challenges, <br />we'.Il get back to getting the full eco- <br />nomic advantages of our water system." <br /> <br /> <br />