Bert Vernimmer, whose patient guidance and valuable suggestions are indispensable for the completion of this thesis. Last but not least, I would like to thank my family for their support from the beginning to the end. Hub and feeder ports are becoming increasingly important in today's booming shipping market.
The Port of Shanghai surpassed the Port of Hong Kong to become the second busiest port in the world. Recently, the role of the power port has become more important as the power port network is becoming denser. Although Pyeongtaek Port has invested in facilities and expanded its hinterland, its influence in Korea is still small.
In addition, the competitiveness of Pyeongtaek port is compared with the other small ports such as Incheon port. The findings of this paper is that Pyeongtaek port cannot compete with Inchoen port, but it still has its potential to be a feeder port.
Introduction
Finally, this paper will show the strength, weakness, opportunities and threat of Pyeongtaek port and how small ports should be prepared to survive in the market and how they can make a supply network.
Prospect of Pyeongtaek port and Incheon port
Present conditions
The detail figures are displayed in Table 2, such as, number of berths, berth length, handling capacity and type of cargo handled, and so on. Pyeongtaek Port is divided into two parts -- Posung and Dangjin areas with a total berth of 13. In particular, the handling volumes of car and general cargo are higher than other cargo, because car and general cargo are usually sent to other countries traded via Pyeongtaek Port.
According to the development plan of Pyeongtaek port, additional 22 berths will be built by 2010, 6 berths for container, 3 berths for car, 2 berths for wood and 2 berths for cement are planned in Posung area and 9 berths for scrap metal, steel and coal in Dangjin area. 7 terminals are operated by private companies (TOC), while the only exception is a publicly owned one - terminal No.1, where the main cargo handled is steel, general cargo, timber, container and grain. Southern part consists of 5 berths for cargo containers and one for general cargo; the northern part consists of 7 berths serving mainly oil.
In addition, the Port of Incheon has built an extra 8 container bays outside the port, facing south; 15 berths are under construction (Outer harbor - North) for general cargo, timber and steel and another 34 berths (Outer harbor - South) for container and general cargo to the north.
Vessels calling at ports
Incheon Port's main cargoes are refined petroleum products, bulk cargo, general cargo and full containers. Especially, passenger ships are increasing in quantity due to the development of tourism in South Korea. Generally, these ports serve general cargo, refined petroleum products, bulk cargo ships because they have cheap land cost for hinterland with many factories and manufacturing industries.
Large ships do not normally call at Pyeongtaek Port due to its lack of facilities, superstructure and infrastructure compared to Incheon Port (Table 2). Some reasons are that Incheon port has advantages of facility and it usually provides volume incentive programs for customers.
Case studies in Europe
Northern Spain and Norway's trade rates are higher than in other countries, except for England and the Iceland area. In general, the Port of Rotterdam's feeder network serves equally dedicated feeder and Common feeder services. For example, dedicated feeder is developed in the center of Russia, Finland and Scandinavia Pen & Baltic Sea, while common feeder is developed in the center of East England &.
Although the England and Iceland market has more advantages in distance, its scope of handling is smaller than that of Scandinavia Pen. Antwerp Port's special feeder service mainly serves the Baltic Sea area, which includes Russia, Estonia and so on. The usual service area of the feeders is Scandinavia Pen, including Norway, Finland and North West England and Iceland.
The feeder service is more active in Finland, Russia and Estonia in Scandinavia Pen & Baltic Sea. On the other hand, feeder service is being developed in the center of the West of England and Iceland. The market share is the highest (91.5%) because it is close to the Scandinavia Pen & the Baltic Sea, and the trade rate is also balanced as Rotterdam port.
The market share is the highest (86.1%) because it is also the same as the situation in the port of Hamburg and the trading terms are in balance.
Cost analysis of main and feeder routes
- Service route planning
- Competitiveness of main route
- Navigation cost per day
- Capital costs
- Operation costs
- Sailing costs (fuel costs)
- Other costs
- Total navigation cost per day
- THC (Terminal Handling cost) of each port
- Total navigation cost of each scenario
- Economic efficiency of shipping company point of view
- Road cost and feeder cost for Pyeongtaek port and Incheon port
3 scenarios are created for each port, a basic assumption is that the shipping company should call at Pyeongtaek, Incheon and Busan port. First, if the shipping company has shuttle service, the route is from Hong Kong to Long Beach (scenario. Second, if the shipping company has Westbound service, the route is from Hong Kong to Pyeongtaek, Incheon and Busan (scenario.
Finally, if the shipping line has East-bound service, the route from Long Beach to each port is (scenario. Capital cost - Application to 10-year redemption yield of cost of shipbuilding Repair Cost of shipbuilding × 0.75%. Lubricating oil Source: Internal Shipping company of South Korea Ship Inspection Cost of Shipbuilding × 0.50%.
Crew Source: South Korea Inland Shipping Cost Bunker Oil Source: South Korea Inland Shipping Port Using Cost Voyage Source: South Korea Inland Shipping etc. Ship deliveries Source: Inland shipping of South Korea Source: Inland shipping of South Korea. It applies to the redemption yield for 10 years in the construction of the ship, paid by the shipowner to the shipyard. Fuel costs vary from country to country, so this document uses average fuel costs on the main route.
Each country has different fuel costs, so this section applies the average fuel costs of six countries. The total fuel cost per day is calculated by multiplying the amount of fuel consumed per day by the fuel cost per tonne. Fuel cost per day = Amount of fuel used per day × Average fuel cost per tonne.
This section will present the terminal handling charges (THC) at the port of Pyeongtaek, Incheon, Busan, Hong Kong and Long Beach. The total navigation cost of scenario 2-1 (Hong Kong ↔ Incheon ↔ Busan ↔ Long Beach) is the highest, and scenario 3-2 (Hong Kong ↔ Busan) is the lowest. The total cost of navigation in Busan port is the lowest among all scenarios, the total cost of navigation in Pyeongtaek port and Incheon port is similar.
In this section, scenarios 1-1 and 3-1 will be compared to determine which is more profitable for the shipping company.
Conclusion
Wide hinterland (Seoul, KyoungKi-Do and ChoongChung-Do) - It has a plan to build around Posung Industrial Zone - Unloading and navigation costs are cheaper than Incheon port. Container cargo market share is less/handling volume is low - Number of container ships is 1/6 of Incheon port. It is possible to transfer cargo from Incheon Port to Pyeongtaek Port after receiving the investment from the shipping company.
Newly built industrial zone as a reliable inland - Inland transportation cost is cheaper than Busan port. The possibility for existing shipping line to move out from Busan Port to Pyeongtaek Port is great. The inland is similar to Incheon port, Pyeongtaek is more competitive - The road transportation cost to some inland is cheaper than Incheon port Threat - Incheon port offers the volume incentive program to the shipping company.
The main purpose of Pyeongtaek port is to attract investment from shipping companies because it is very possible for shipping companies to move from Busan to Pyeongtaek. If the investment arrives at Pyeongtaek port, shipping companies will tend to dock their own ships in Pyeongtaek to ensure profit returns. When the shipping company chooses Pyeongtaek as a port of call, its M&A (Mergers and Acquisitions) will be followed.
The Port of Pyeongtaek needs to expand berths and facilities to attract large ships and feeder ships. So, Pyeongtaek Port offers the best service to global carriers and the volume incentive programs for cargo handling. If feeder shipping companies choose Pyeongtaek as their port of call and partner, Pyeongtaek Port will provide the incentive conditions to the feeder shipping companies.
In addition, Pyeongtaek Port should use an IT system to provide reliable real-time service. Kim Tae-il, Park Moon-Jin (2007), Hong Kong Port Crisis and Competitiveness Consolidation Strategy, Korea Maritime Institute. Study of Shanghai Port and North China Port Development Impact on South Korea and Countermeasure (2004), Korea Container Terminal Authority 7.
