Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Global Warming...Fact or Fiction?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • JRT
    replied
    Click image for larger version

Name:	hhl-valparaiso-is-the-first-68904.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	191.1 KB
ID:	1470160

    Click image for larger version

Name:	photo-hhl-68902.jpg
Views:	3
Size:	209.1 KB
ID:	1470161



    Ship-to-shore Cranes Shipped via The Northern Sea Route

    by Michelle Howard
    January 4, 2017
    MarineLink.com

    HANSA HEAVY LIFT has transported the first-ever ship-to-shore (STS) cranes via the Northern Sea Route (NSR), relocating them from the port of St Petersburg to the port of Vostochny, spanning both the European and Far East regions of Russia.

    HHL Valparaiso is the first vessel to sail open hatch through the Northern Sea Route, which is covered by thick ice for most of the year and has a limited window of about two months open to cargo voyages.

    This allowed the two cranes, each weighing 820 metric tonnes and measuring 61 meters in height and 92 metres in width, to be shipped partially above and below deck.

    “The Northern Sea Route was the only viable option to complete this voyage in the required timeframe,” said Gleb Faldin, Commercial Manager, HANSA HEAVY LIFT.

    “In the Arctic there is no room for mistakes. During the passage, the vessel has limited connection and only a few points of shelter.

    “It is important to understand the legal framework to navigate the NSR, to plan carefully, to be prepared for the unexpected, and most importantly to have the right team on board the vessel and in the office.”

    Faldin added that a two-month delay in the cargo being ready meant that HHL Valparaiso had to be repositioned for the voyage, which was originally planned for HHL Tokyo.

    HHL Valparaiso travelled from Qingdao, China to St Petersburg via the NSR to load the cranes, and then went back through the NSR a second time to complete the mission, which was accomplished in record time.

    Crews had only a few weeks to complete the voyage, as the cargo was loaded in October and had to be delivered to its destination by late November before the route completely froze over.

    Other challenges included limited space aboard the HHL Valparaiso, which holds Ice Class E3 equivalent to Russian Arc.4 (Finnish- Swedish Ice Class 1A).

    Additionally, the cranes were not designed to be lifted, requiring careful planning from all parties involved in the move, as well as strong engineering expertise.

    “The Northern Sea Route is an important alternative that can save weeks from a voyage, but to be successful you need careful planning and engineering, the right equipment, capable vessels, and experienced crews,” said Heinrich Nagrelli, Project & Transport Engineer, HANSA HEAVY LIFT.

    “Due to the STS’s very high center of gravity (CoG) at 30 meters above deck and 70 meters air draft, as well as draft restriction of 7.7 meters, a careful and detailed plan was needed from the start.

    “This included a load spreading design and a structural analysis of the hatch covers and lower hold, a lifting stability assessment, a lifting simulation, fulfilment of Flag State requirements (open hatch, visibility, arctic weather conditions, COLREGs*), and the approval of the Russian Maritime Register of Shipping, as well as the arranging of ice breaker assistance.”

    ZAO ‘SMM’, a leading manufacturer of heavy port handling equipment in Russia, was charterer of the HHL Valparaiso and in charge of overall project management as well as the transportation of the two STS cranes.

    “The high professionalism of ZAO ‘SMM’ and good mutual cooperation with HANSA HEAVY LIFT ensured the successful and timely implementation of this project,” said Mikhail Skripchenko, Project Manager at ZAO ‘SMM’.

    “Our company has proven expertise in the area of logistics for the transport of heavy cranes and other oversized equipment via Russian inland waterways, as well as the Northern Sea Route.


    All HANSA HEAVY LIFT vessels can travel along sea routes with an ice thickness of up to 0.8 meters.


    *International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea


    ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    If nothing else, we can all agree CO2 causes heavy breathing that leads to no breathing. Can we?

    Leave a comment:


  • Wooglin
    replied
    Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
    Polluted cities create global warming? What sort of pollution?
    Judging from that comment along with this one...

    And if carbon dioxide really is not a pollutant then there have been a whole lot of fake suicides ..... and just as many premature burials
    It would seem we have yet another who lacks even the most fundamental understanding of the issue, but no doubt will tell everyone else how wrong they are because all scientists agree.... on something. In this case it's apparently that carbon monoxide pollution causes global warming.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    Originally posted by FORMBY View Post
    Yes, I see what you mean. It's very interesting. With all of this green technology a-foot you have to ask yourself why the oil grab and fracking. Should we assume that the green age will put an end to dirty energy so crooks are at it full tilt to make as much money as possible in oil & coal before it's too late?
    You think old dogs can't learn new tricks? They will all rebrand as pionnleers of green and will continue to grab money. Untill some eco initiative figures out there are greener ways...

    WRT to the figure I've put in the previous comment, CNN estimates 330bn per anum in the coming years that's if USA wants to catch up and lead.

    Leave a comment:


  • Parihaka
    replied
    Originally posted by FORMBY View Post
    I've been to several highly polluted cities. How could I not believe that the human contribution has a negative effect? My answer is 'YES I believe.'
    Polluted cities create global warming? What sort of pollution?

    Leave a comment:


  • FORMBY
    replied
    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
    No, it was a question to see if you follow the money, do you follow all the leads. Oil companies sure have interest, but so does Musk, Al Gore or Bill Gates, for example. At the moment PHEW cars is a sector with highest growth rate, even in China. Solar collectors, wind turbines, technologies that make , you name it, we have it. Billions if not trillions of dollars are in the game. The thing is, when you start asking about how wind turbines effect this, how solar panels are made, how much coal/oil is spent to make/transport this or that "new gig", you start to feel like Giordano Bruno in front of the Inquisition.
    Yes, I see what you mean. It's very interesting. With all of this green technology a-foot you have to ask yourself why the oil grab and fracking. Should we assume that the green age will put an end to dirty energy so crooks are at it full tilt to make as much money as possible in oil & coal before it's too late?

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    Originally posted by FORMBY View Post
    I was under the impression it's you who wanted to know. I was only trying to be congenial, being new here and all that.
    No, it was a question to see if you follow the money, do you follow all the leads. Oil companies sure have interest, but so does Musk, Al Gore or Bill Gates, for example. At the moment PHEW cars is a sector with highest growth rate, even in China. Solar collectors, wind turbines, technologies that make , you name it, we have it. Billions if not trillions of dollars are in the game. The thing is, when you start asking about how wind turbines effect this, how solar panels are made, how much coal/oil is spent to make/transport this or that "new gig", you start to feel like Giordano Bruno in front of the Inquisition.

    Leave a comment:


  • FORMBY
    replied
    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
    Nah, google it.
    I was under the impression it's you who wanted to know. I was only trying to be congenial, being new here and all that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    Originally posted by FORMBY View Post
    Not the slightest clue. You'll be telling me now, I hope.
    Nah, google it.

    Leave a comment:


  • FORMBY
    replied
    Originally posted by Doktor View Post
    Do you have any idea how big the clean-energy sector is?
    Not the slightest clue. You'll be telling me now, I hope.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doktor
    replied
    Originally posted by FORMBY View Post
    The first inspection team of 'experts' to Irak (with which Saddam refused to cooperate) was removed when the UN confirmed that indeed it was saturated by CIA spies, just as Saddam had said. We have also witnessed 'expert' lawyers, doctors, etc. (employed by large corporations) falsify their reports over commodities such as tobacco and sugar.

    So, I am more inclined to believe the side that has no obvious, political gain to make. I am less inclined to believe those whose business investments will be adversely affected by the results of a climate change clean-up. In the case where ignorance deprives me of any insight regarding political connections and business chicanery, I am more likely to disbelieve the side that has lied in the past on other issues.
    Do you have any idea how big the clean-energy sector is?

    Leave a comment:


  • FORMBY
    replied
    Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
    My question was, which meteorologists do you believe. The ones who believe global warming is primarily anthropogenic in origin or those who don't?
    I've been to several highly polluted cities. How could I not believe that the human contribution has a negative effect? My answer is 'YES I believe.'

    Leave a comment:


  • Parihaka
    replied
    Originally posted by FORMBY View Post
    The first inspection team of 'experts' to Irak (with which Saddam refused to cooperate) was removed when the UN confirmed that indeed it was saturated by CIA spies, just as Saddam had said. We have also witnessed 'expert' lawyers, doctors, etc. (employed by large corporations) falsify their reports over commodities such as tobacco and sugar.

    So, I am more inclined to believe the side that has no obvious, political gain to make. I am less inclined to believe those whose business investments will be adversely affected by the results of a climate change clean-up. In the case where ignorance deprives me of any insight regarding political connections and business chicanery, I am more likely to disbelieve the side that has lied in the past on other issues.
    My question was, which meteorologists do you believe. The ones who believe global warming is primarily anthropogenic in origin or those who don't?

    Leave a comment:


  • FORMBY
    replied
    Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
    The first inspection team of 'experts' to Irak (with which Saddam refused to cooperate) was removed when the UN confirmed that indeed it was saturated by CIA spies, just as Saddam had said. We have also witnessed 'expert' lawyers, doctors, etc. (employed by large corporations) falsify their reports over commodities such as tobacco and sugar.

    So, I am more inclined to believe the side that has no obvious, political gain to make. I am less inclined to believe those whose business investments will be adversely affected by the results of a climate change clean-up. In the case where ignorance deprives me of any insight regarding political connections and business chicanery, I am more likely to disbelieve the side that has lied in the past on other issues.

    Leave a comment:


  • Parihaka
    replied
    Originally posted by FORMBY View Post
    With regards Global Warming, ought we believe the intel services with political agendas, or international, meteorological experts? My choice is made.
    Well which ones do you believe?
    http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/...S-D-13-00091.1

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X