We welcome article submissions from experts in the areas of coal, mining,
shipping, etc.
To Submit your article please click here.
|
|
|
Wednesday, 18 March 15
CHINA-OWNED SHIPS: A RAPID RISE TO BECOME ONE OF THE WORLD'S LARGEST FLEETS - RICHARD SCOTT
 Ships operated by owners based in China have become increasingly prominent on the world’s sea routes. China-owned container ships, bulk carriers, tankers and other vessels are seen more frequently in ports around the world. These ships now constitute the third largest fleet as identified by ownership and control nationality, following Greece in the number one position and Japan at number two. And the China-owned fleet is set to become much larger, one indication of which is a huge volume of new vessels on order at shipbuilding yards. This article looks at how and why rapid fleet expansion has evolved, and who are the major players.
Fleet growth has evolved alongside the spectacular advance of China’s seaborne trade since the early 2000s. Many second-hand ships have been bought by Chinese owners from foreign companies, while newbuilding vessels have been acquired on a vast scale. But the China-owned fleet’s enlargement has generally lagged behind the growth of the country’s import and export cargo movements. This widening gap may be reduced over the years ahead.
The fleet’s tidal surge
During the past ten years, the China-owned fleet has more than tripled in size. From 37.7 million gross tons (GT) at the end of 2004, total capacity rose by 216 percent to reach 119.2m GT at end-2014, according to figures compiled by Clarkson Research and shown in the graph, including all ships of 100 GT and above. This pace of growth was faster than seen in the entire world fleet; consequently China’s share of the global total increased from 6 percent to just over 10 percent.
Expansion has been seen in all the vessel-type categories. The bulk carrier fleet saw the most rapid advance, especially since 2008. Between 2004 and 2014 this fleet almost quadrupled to 69.2m GT, forming the largest portion of China-owned tonnage. The tanker and container ship fleets tripled in size over the past decade to 21.2m GT and 13.7m GT respectively at end-2014. All other ship types together grew less rapidly by seventy-six percent, to reach 15.1m GT. Included in this ‘other ships’ category are gas carriers, multi-purpose and general cargo ships, roll on-roll off vessels and vehicle carriers, cruise and passenger ships and offshore vessels. A large part of these fleets is involved in international trade, but many ships are employed wholly within the huge Chinese coastal cargo movements.
Two aspects of the figures need clarification. Firstly, the choice of gross tonnes to provide an indication of cargo-carrying capacity. For bulk vessels (tankers and bulk carriers) the usual measurement is deadweight tonnes, and for container ships the TEU (twenty-foot equivalent unit) is normally used. Gas carriers are generally described in cubic metres capacity, and other ship types by a variety of tonnages. Gross tonnes provides a convenient common measurement.
Secondly, how can the country of ownership of a vessel be defined? As is well known, a vessel’s flag (the flag of the state in which it is registered) typically provides no indication of ownership nationality. The ownership country is where full control (the parent owning company) is located. However, identifying this location relies heavily on interpretation and subjective judgements. In some cases the real ownership location may be obvious, but in many other cases it is less or much less apparent. At the end of 2014 there were over 89,000 ships included in the world’s merchant (commercial) ship fleet. In a typical year, a huge number of changes take place. Identifying ownership, and tracking changes for the entire fleet is a highly challenging task, and it seems quite likely that numerous mistakes occur, probably unavoidably, despite thorough checking. Perhaps these figures should be viewed as a broad, rather than precise, indication of ownership nationality.
As an example of how statistical data differs, slightly changing perceptions, the foregoing figures can be compared with the widely-used United Nations Conference on Trade and Development statistics. These UNCTAD figures are compiled in deadweight tonnes, and include only vessels over 1000 GT, which are contributory reasons for differences. In this analysis the China-owned fleet’s proportion rises from 6.8 percent of the world total at the end of 2004, to 11.9 percent at end-2013 (the latest available data). The starting position in that decade therefore is almost one percentage point higher than in the data set already discussed, while the ending position is almost two percentage points higher. Moreover, when UNCTAD changed data providers in 2012, the identified China-owned fleet’s deadweight capacity jumped by 53 percent in just one year. Also, the proportion of the world total abruptly increased over twelve months by three percentage points, to 11.8 percent. This narrative seems to illustrate how identification of true ownership is not an exact science and varies among statisticians.
Chinese characteristics
Fleet tonnage expansion involved a huge rise in the number of individual China-owned vessels trading, from 3.821 at the end of 2004, to 6,532 at end-2014, based on Clarkson data. The percentage rise, 71 percent over the decade was well below that of gross tonnage, owing to a rising average vessel size. At the beginning, the average vessel size employed was 9,859 GT, rising to 18,242 GT at the end, an 85 percent increase.
One significant characteristic of the current fleet is the predominance of relatively young ships. At the end of 2014, based on the number of vessels, 80 percent of tankers were less than ten years old (built 2005-2014). The comparable figure for bulk carriers was 68 percent, and for container ships 51 percent. Modern ships usually have superior operating advantages, being more efficient and more economical.
A large part of the China-owned fleet is operated under open registries. At the end of 2013, based on UNCTAD figures, 63 percent was registered by foreign flags, similar to the 65 percent proportion one year earlier, up from 49 percent ten years earlier. The role of the Hong Kong flag has grown strongly. The advantage of this arrangement, for many China-owned ships involved in international trade, is greater operational, financial and regulatory flexibility under open registries, compared with national flag registration. Ships participating in coastal trade are required to fly the Chinese national flag.
While much of the fleet growth reflected new ships purchased, China’s shipowners’ vessel purchases on the international second-hand market also comprised a major part. In 2014, for example, a 5.7m GT total was bought, according to Clarkson, although 56 percent of the number of vessels resulted from transactions with domestic owners. Second-hand purchases often have substantial advantages for buyers, including immediate availability for trading and, often, involve lower capital expenditure than a comparable newbuilding vessel.
Although growth in the China-owned fleet has been impressive over the past decade as a whole, annual growth varied greatly, within a 2 percent to 25 percent range. The fastest annual advances were seen in 2009 and 2010, when there were two consecutive 25 percent surges. Since then, a marked deceleration has occurred, down to only a modest 2 percent in 2014, when the bulk carrier fleet’s capacity actually diminished marginally, and tanker fleet capacity was flat.
Policy and economics drivers
Accompanying this fleet evolution, several recent signs of broad action by China’s government on aspects of shipping policy have been seen. At the beginning of this year, the Ministry of Transport published details of aims for upgrading the country’s shipping industry and improving services and competitiveness in the global marketplace. Previously, two months earlier, intentions to support and modernise China’s shipping were reported. Specific items listed were encouragement of mergers and acquisitions and private investment involvement, together with development of cruise shipping. More support from domestic financial institutions was encouraged. These policy objectives followed publication of guidelines for developing and supporting shipping, including tax changes and regulatory reform, while applying pressure on companies to improve and modernise their fleets. The stated aim was to build an efficient, safe and environmentally friendly Chinese shipping system by 2020.
Previously, towards the end of 2013, a new scrapping subsidy plan was introduced by the Chinese government to benefit both shipping and shipbuilding industries in China over the period up to 2015. The subsidy is restricted to China-flagged ships. Shipowners participating are required to place newbuilding orders with Chinese shipbuilders at least equivalent to the vessel tonnage being scrapped in domestic recycling yards. This policy has assisted a number of Chinese shipowners with their fleet renewal programmes. The plan was seen as being especially valuable for the coastal trading fleet operating under the China flag.
For some time, it has been clear that the Chinese government’s intention is to achieve a larger proportion of the country’s seaborne trade transported by ships owned by companies based within China. This aim has been most visible in the VLCC (very large crude carrier) segment of the oil imports trade.
Reports have suggested that the government’s target is to see as much as 85 percent of foreign crude oil purchases carried by Chinese controlled ships. A huge newbuilding order by Chinese shipowners for up to eighty VLCCs has been anticipated, as a result. But, although a number of new tankers of this type have been ordered, and some have already joined the fleet, there are no signs of the target being achieved. According to a recent report by E A Gibson Shipbrokers, only 8 VLCCs were delivered to Chinese controlled companies in 2014, preceded by just 5 in the previous twelve months. However, orders for new VLCCs stood at around 30, for delivery at a rate of about 10 ships annually from this year up to 2017, implying a possible acceleration in the pace of transport capacity expansion.
A trend of expanding global seaborne trade volumes, a major contributor to which comprises rising imports into, and exports from, China provides growing opportunities for participation by Chinese shipowners. Cost-competitiveness enhances potential for involvement. These features, becoming well established over the past decade or longer, are the fundamental economic drivers of growth in the China-owned fleet of ships. But there is some evidence that subdued freight rates on the international market, and therefore low profitability for shipowners, during many of the past few years, has deterred investment by Chinese companies. In these circumstances, China-owned ships, employed in both China import or export trade and in international cross-trades, experience poor or mediocre investment returns.
Prominent players
Within the entire China-owned fleet of ships of all types, about two-fifths measured in gross tonnes is contributed by three state-owned enterprises. These are: China Ocean Shipping Company (Group), usually known as COSCO; China Shipping Group (CSG); and Sinotrans & CSC. Another prominent company, also state-owned, is China Merchants Group. The largest shipowner in the private sector is HOSCO.
A number of separate individual company fleets of specific vessel types are large parts. At the end of 2014 there were nine, each of at least 2 million GT, which dominated the industry. The biggest, according to Clarkson data, were COSCO Group’s bulk carrier fleet amounting to 160 ships of 8.7m GT, China Shipping’s container ship fleet totalling 76 ships of 5.8m GT, and the COSCO container ship fleet consisting of 79 ships totalling 4.5m GT. The next largest component was the 4.4m GT tanker fleet in the new China VLCC pool.
In August last year, a joint venture to operate VLCCs was announced by China Merchants Energy Shipping (with a 51 percent shareholding) and Sinotrans & CSC (49 percent shareholding). China Merchant’s existing nine tankers of this type were the initial component, together with ten newbuildings on order. A few months later the new enterprise, named China VLCC Company, acquired eight VLCCs from the bankrupt Nanjing Tankers, originally a subsidiary of Sinotrans & CSC. Another nine VLCCs operated by Nanjing, plus a recently-delivered newbuilding, were taken over by year-end, raising the China VLCC total to 28 tankers. This company seems destined to be one of the tanker market’s largest players.
Navigating further growth ahead
What is the outlook for future fleet development? One clear indication is new ships currently on order for China-based shipowners. At the end of 2014, Clarkson statistics show that the total of these was 625 ships of 32.1m GT, equivalent to 27 percent of the capacity of the existing 119.2m GT operational fleet. This huge order volume was the largest by owner nationality, exceeding that of Greece (30.4m GT), Japan (15.4m GT) and Germany (11.0m GT). Just over half of the China total volume, 16.4m GT is scheduled to be completed by shipyards and delivered to owners within the current year, 2015. A further 12.2m GT is due for delivery in 2016.
Although this new capacity being added implies fleet expansion, projections for China (and other countries) are often surrounded by great uncertainty. Aspects which are usually difficult to forecast reliably are numerous. Major uncertainties include the timing of newbuilding deliveries (compared with the recorded order book schedule), and how much additional ordering will occur. Also, scrapping of existing old or obsolete tonnage is hard to predict. The disposal of existing ships in the fleet to, and acquisitions from, owners located elsewhere (second-hand sale and purchase activity) is not accurately predictable either.
Nevertheless, signs point firmly towards continued enlargement of cargo-carrying capacity in the China-owned fleet of ships during this year, the Year of the Goat and further ahead. The large-scale order book is a convincing indicator, and anecdotal evidence also demonstrates intentions to add tonnage. Backed by a government strategy for shipping industry development, and accompanied by President Xi Jinping’s vision of a 21st century Maritime Silk Road, the China-owned fleet seems set to achieve greater prominence.
Source: Article by Richard Scott, Visiting Lecturer, China Maritime Centre, University of Greenwich & MD, Bulk Shipping Analysis | Hellenic Shipping News
If you believe an article violates your rights or the rights of others, please contact us.
|
|
Tuesday, 17 February 15
Q2' FOB RICHARDS BAY COAL SWAP CLOSED AT $63.45; $ 1.85 HIGHER COMPARED TO Q4 CLOSING
COALspot.com: API 4 FOB Richards Bay Coal swap for delivery Q2' 2015 surge month over month, week on week and day on day.
The Q2 swap has ...
Monday, 16 February 15
COAL MINING SLUMP A BLESSING IN DISGUISE - THE JAKARTA POST
The growth of the coal-mining industry, which has diminished in the last two years, is expected to slump even further this year following weakening ...
Monday, 16 February 15
FOB NEWCASTLE COAL SWAPS SURGE WEEK ON WEEK
COALspot.com: API 5 FOB Newcastle Coal swap for Q2’ 2015 delivery rose US$ 1.31 per MT (+2.59%) week over week and US$ 4.35 (+9.13%) month on ...
Monday, 16 February 15
Q2' 15 - CFR SOUTH CHINA COAL SWAP ROSE 5.22% M-O-M
COALspot.com: API 8 CFR South China Coal swap for Q2’ 2015 delivery rose US$ 2.88 (+5.22%) per MT month over month and US$ 1.08 (+1.90% ...
Sunday, 15 February 15
BALTIC DRY INDEX CONTINUALLY DIPPED IN RED
COALspot.com: The Baltic Dry Index continues its decline and fell 5.18 pct to 530 points week on week due to falling commodity prices and declining ...
|
|
|
Showing 3191 to 3195 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Economic Council, Georgia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Planning Commission, India
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- The University of Queensland
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- MS Steel International - UAE
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- PTC India Limited - India
- Australian Coal Association
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- White Energy Company Limited
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
|
| |
| |
|
