2. 2
The six workshops will cover
o Demand forecasting techniques.
o Operations analysis and capacity assessment.
o Formulation and assessment of development
scenarios.
o Financial and economic analysis
o (especially pricing)
o Environmental assessment and impact
analysis.
o Social cost benefit and value for money
analysis.
3. 3
Agenda day 1
13 May 2014 Formulating and Assessment of Development Scenarios
09:00 – 09:15 Introduction by Pak Adolf
09:15 – 09:30 Introduction by Professor Sudjanadi
09:30 – 10:30 Segment 1: Port Master Planning Overview
10:30 – 11:00 Break
11:00 – 12:00 Segment 2: Development Scenario Considerations (Part I)
12:00 – 13:00 Lunch
13:00 – 13:30 Segment 3: Development Scenarios Considerations (Part II)
13:30 – 14:30 Segment 4: Assessing Development Scenarios through
International Case Studies
14:30 – 15:00 Break
15:00 – 16:00 Segment 5: Application to the Makassar Pilot Port Project
16:00 – 17:00 Discussion
17:00 Finish
4. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 1: Port Master Planning Overview
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
5. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 1: Port Master Planning
Master Planning Approach
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
6. 6
What is a Port Master Plan?
• Port Master Planning – usually 20-30yr horizon but
often revisited and should:
• Look into the future
• Discuss how a port should develop to meet demand
• Show integration with transport networks
• Address environmental constraints
• Ensure compatibility with adjacent land use
• Present a proposed Development Scenario
• The Development Scenario should:
• Be flexible to incorporate change
• Make best use of existing port assets
• Allow for effective phased development to match demand
• Include port zoning to cover both land and water areas, often by trade type
• Allow for future proofing of critical parameters:
• Berth depths
• Land areas
• Land connections
• Port zoning
8. 8
Port Master Planning – General Principles
1. Look to optimise existing terminal
2. Identify bottlenecks
• Operating procedures
• Equipment
• Physical constraints (berth and yard)
• Trade consolidation
3. Confirm the need for new container terminal
9. 9
The role of trade/demand forecasting
• One of the most important inputs to a port plan
• Prefaced by a market study
• Estimate the type and amount of cargo that will need to
be handled
• Objectives of a demand forecast:
• Provide a basis for physical port plans
• Support economic and financial assessments
• Coupled with a vessel fleet analysis to establish design
vessel fleet spectra to determine:
• Water depths
• Navigation and turning areas
• Berth type and length
• Reliability of estimates decreases as forecast horizon
increases
10. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 1: Port Master Planning Overview
The Challenges facing existing ports
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
11. 11
Challenges facing existing ports
• Increases in cargo volumes
• Changes in cargo types
• Changes in vessel fleet
• Inland connections constrained
• Changing physical conditions
12. 12
Challenges facing existing ports:
Increases in cargo volumes
World Merchandise trade volume by major product group
(indexed with 1950 = 100)
(Source: World Trade Organisation)
13. 13
Challenges facing existing ports:
Changes in cargo type
(Source: World Trade Organisation)
• Significant historic increase in container tonnage
14. 14
Challenges facing existing ports:
Changes in cargo type
(Source: World Trade Organisation)
• Cargo volumes have increased – beyond port capacity
• Significant historic increase in container tonnage
• Increased container penetration
• Trade and container type imbalance increasing need to
move containers
• Increase in transhipment operations
15. 15
Challenges facing existing ports:
Changes in vessel fleet
• Last 10 years: 68% growth in vessel numbers, 165%
growth in total TEU capacity
• End of June 2013: 5023 ships, total 16.6m TEU
• <25% account for >50% of capacity
• Average vessel size 3,300TEU
Vessels scrapped as a proportion of total yearly fleet
(source: Lloyds List Intelligence)
TEU proportion of total fleet
(source: Lloyds List Intelligence)
16. 16
Challenges facing existing ports:
Changes in vessel fleet
Container ships are getting bigger
Clifford Maersk (8,000 TEU) docked at Tanjung Pelepas (Photo: AECOM)
17. 17
Challenges facing existing ports:
Changes in vessel fleet
Container ships are getting beamier
Image: Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller (18,270TEU, 399m LOA) Courtesy Howard Wren Consulting
19. 19
Challenges facing existing ports:
Changes in vessel fleet
• Approaches:
• Determine margins in channel geometry and turning areas
through simulation
• Consider need for tidally restricted access or other navigation
constraints
• Aged Berth structures
• Deepen berth box – if structure permits
• Offset berthing line
• Crane Loads and gauge
• Review capacity and gauge of existing rail
• Consider new crane rails
• Crane height
• Apron and yard
• Apron not wide enough to accommodate unloading rates
needed from larger vessels
• Yard not able to grow at the same rate as throughput
20. 20
Challenges facing existing ports:
Changes in vessel fleet
Image: Low height ship to shore cranes arriving at Port Botany (image: Hutchison Port Holdings)
21. 21
Challenges facing existing ports:
Inland Connections
• Land side infrastructure often constrained – backs onto
cities
• Existing transport connections may need significant
expense to increase capacity – often not the
responsibility of the port owner/operator.
• Rail effective for containers, but typically dedicated
consists. Gradient dependant.
22. 22
Challenges facing existing ports:
Inland Connections
$7.2bn Khalifa Port – UAE: Containers relocated to enable growth
23. 23
Challenges facing existing ports:
Environmental Conditions
Assessment of sea level rise, storminess, subsidence,
population growth and urbanisation
1 Nicholls, R. J. 2008, Ranking Port Cities wit high Exposure and Vulnerability to Climate Change Extremes: Exposure Estimates. OECD Environment Working Papers, No.1
2005:
Population exposure (2.2M)
2070:
Asset value exposure (US$321bn)
24. 24
Challenges facing existing ports:
Ocean water levels are rising
• Risen 120m in the last 21,000 years
• Global rise of 0.17m during the 20th century
• Water body continues to expand
• Water exchange between oceans, glaciers etc
continues
• Tectonic movements, ground water extraction
Sea Level Trends 1993-2003 (Cazenave and Narem 2004)
25. 25
Challenges facing existing ports:
Are storms getting more severe?
• Considerable debate over whether storms are changing
• Lack of real data and only recent models
• Large historic variations
• No significant change in tropical storm numbers 1970-2004, except Atlantic1
• Observed changes in storms could be attributable to natural variation
• Observations suggest changes in Hs over time that are latitude dependent2
• Storm surge has been shown to be effected, but driven by local conditions
Reproduced from : Nobuhito Mori, T, Y. (2010), Projection of Extreme Wave climate
Change under Global Warming, Hydrological Research letters, 4, 15-19
1 Knutson, T , (2010), Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change, Nature Geoscience
2 Nobuhito Mori, T, Y. (2010), Projection of Extreme Wave climate Change under Global
Warming, Hydrological Research letters, 4, 15-19
26. 26
Challenges facing existing ports:
What could the impacts be?
• Increased downtime due to flooding and inundation of
terminal areas, buildings and infrastructure
• Increased wave and storm surge activity
• Surface water drainage capacity
• Structural damage and durability (when combined
temperature changes)
Waves batter a merchant vessel stranded along the coast during a heavy storm in Valparaiso
City, Chile, 121 km (75 miles) northwest of Santiago on July 6, 2010. (REUTERS/Eliseo
Fernandez)
27. 27
Challenges facing existing ports:
And when combined with other changes?
Reproduced from Kong, D, Setunge, S, Molyneaux, T, Zhang, G & Law D, 2013, Structural Resilience of core port infrastructure in a changing climate. Work Package
3 of Enhancing the resilience to seaports to a changing climate report series, National Climate Change Adaptation Facility, Gold Coast, Australia
• Combined changes in temperature & salinity may reduce
service life
• Higher levels of maintenance intervention required
28. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 2: Development Scenario Considerations
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
29. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 2: Development Scenario Considerations
Functional Requirements of a new port
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
30. 30
Development Scenarios – Finding a new site
• Deep sheltered water
• Good conditions for vessel manoeuvring
• Environmental conditions that maximise berth
availability and minimise downtime (wind, wave)
• Availability (or ability to form) yard area
• Good transport links
• Good ground conditions
• Suitable existing land use and zoning
• Available labour force
• Must allow the port to evolve
31. 31
Development Scenario Considerations:
Accomodating trade type (1)
Trade Requirements
Containers • Continuous linear quay
• Range of vessels sizes from feeders (50TEU) to ULCS
(>12,500TEU)
• Manoeuvrable – usually have bow thrusters
• Quick turnaround times needed <24hrs
• Usually use ship-to-shore cranes
• Quayside needs to efficiently move and stack/retrieve large
numbers of containers
General
Cargo
• Always handled at the quayside
• Vessels typically 700dwt to 15,000dwt
• Variety of off loading equipment needed depending on
cargo. Usually quayside crane and forklift. Can be ships gear.
Solid bulks • Handled at jetty or quayside, but loading/unloading system
that can reach each hold
• Range in size from Handy Max to Very Large Bulk Carriers
(over 180,000dwt). Largest (500,000dwt) draw 25m
• Loaded through loaders, unloaded through grabs or vacuum
• Stored/retrieved from stockpiles with conveyor
32. 32
Development Scenario Considerations:
Accomodating trade type (2)
Trade Requirements
Oils • Handled at jetties
• Cargos piped to onshore storage facilities – can be remote
• Commodity grades and viscosities variable – dedicated
pipelines or cleansing system. Can require heated pipes
Gas • Handled at jetties – similar to oils
• LNG and LPG handled as liquids through pressurisation or
cooling
• Hazardous materials requiring careful design and handling
Chemicals • Usually handled at jetties
• Typically limited draft
• Required large array of pipelines to handle multiple products
• Vessel usually loaded via flexible hose rather than loading
arm
Passengers • Quayside with good landside connections to move
passengers through quickly
Ferries and
Ro-Ro
• Vessels vary significantly
• Requires rapid unloading and storage (on/off terminal) of
vehicles
33. 33
Development Scenario Considerations:
Other considerations
Tugs, pilots and line boats
• Most major ports have compulsory pilotage
• Pilot boarding outside of port entrance or approach
channel
• Tugs usually come along side and make fast outside of
any breakwaters
• Line boats may be needed, more likely on jetties
• Safe mooring needs to be provided for tugs, line boats
and pilots.
34. 34
Development Scenario Considerations:
Design Vessel
• Vessel forecast identified design vessel for each trade
type
• Design vessel usually the largest likely, but not
necessarily. Could be the least manoeuvrable
• Informs the design of dredged depths and berth length
• Design to give safe navigation and berthing for all likely
vessels
• Unlikely that each container berth will need to
accommodate the design vessel simultaneously –
design vessel often a rare visitor
• Design for a realistic vessel spectra
35. 35
Development Scenario Considerations:
Design Vessel
Makassar Worked Example: Design Vessel
Trade: Container
Historic arrivals: typically 7,000 – 8,000 dwt (700-1000 TEU)
The aging fleet means that these are likely to be replaced with steadily increasingly
sized vessels.
Likely that at the end of the design life, Panamax sized vessels could be calling at
Makassar. Example design vessel CMA-CGM Georgia:
LOA: 294m
Beam: 32.2m
Draft: 13.5m
Capacity 5,085 TEU
Likely to be calling toward the end of the design life.
Berth structures to be designed to accommodate.
Dredging could be phased over time.
36. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 2: Development Scenario Considerations
Establishing Baseline Conditions
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
38. 38
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing physical baseline conditions
• Topographic and Bathymetric
• Determine dredge and reclamation volumes
• Inputs to hydrodynamic models
• Can use charts if current- fairsheets if possible
• Sidescan
• Should overlap
39. 39
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing physical baseline conditions
• Important to understand relationship between sea and
land datums at the site:
• Land Datum: Constant level plane
• Sea Datum (CD): Not constant
dependant on tidal range
• Difference between datums site specific
• Should be confirmed for each site
Land Datum
40. 40
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing physical baseline conditions
• Metocean
• Wind and waves – crane downtime, vessel
downtime, berth alignment, cope levels, structural
design, mooring loads, breakwaters
• Tides and Water levels – surges, dredging and
reclamation levels
• Currents – berthing and mooring, tug requirements,
sedimentation
• All need long sample times to cover cycles
• Wind for wave hindcasting needs high resolution
sampling at regular intervals over a long period
• Good to collect all data at the same time
41. 41
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing physical baseline conditions
• Geotechnical Investigation
• Confirm dredging viability and cost
• Establish suitable reclamation material
• Input to structural design
• Combination of geophysics supplemented with
ground truthing tests
• Boreholes
• CPTs
42. 42
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing physical baseline conditions
• Coastal
• Understand Littoral transport
• Assess accretion/erosion
• Assess Sedimentation
• Evaluate impacts to Water quality
45. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 2: Development Scenario Considerations
Basic Layouts
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
46. 46
Port Master Planning – Basic Layouts
• What’s the difference between a port and a harbour?
47. 47
Development Scenario Considerations:
Basic Coastal Harbour Layouts
• Objective:
• Simple is best
• Keep options open – consider a wide range
• Provide sheltered water with substantial land areas
• Consider size of back-up area needed – 500m/m for
modern container port
48. 48
• Develop a natural harbour
• Create a new harbour
Development Scenario Considerations:
Basic Coastal Harbour Layouts
58. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 3: Development Scenarios – Port Approaches and Sizing
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
60. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 3: Development Scenarios – Port Approaches and Sizing
Approaches, channels and basins
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
61. 61
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing Navigational Areas - Channels
Definitions:
• Approach channel – links the berths of a port to the
open sea
• ‘outer’ channel – exposed
• ‘inner’ channel – sheltered
• Channel and fairway – a feature of a waterway that has
enough width and depth to allow vessels to transit.
Buoyed
PIANC 121::2014
62. 62
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing Navigational Areas - Channels
• Objectives
• Minimise transit time to the port
• Minimise access restrictions
• Channel dimensions a function of:
• Size of vessel
• Manoeuvrability of vessels
• Winds
• Currents
• Choice of one-way or two-way is a economic one:
• Dredging costs (both capital and maintenance)
• Volume of traffic and likely demurrage costs
• The transit time and VTMS system
• Pilotage and tug availability
64. 64
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing Navigational Areas - Channels
• Manoeuvring lane typically: 1.3 to 2.0 x Beam
• Sensitive to lateral wind areas: tankers in ballast, cruise
and container
• Cross currents can cause yaw: 0.5 x Beam
• Caution with proximity to banks and other vessels – can
cause suction
• 2-way channel clearance >30m or largest B
• Widen channel at bends >10o to at least 4 x Beam, can
be more. Depth dependant
• Minimum curve radius >10 x greatest LOA
• Should not be designed for ‘hard over’ rudder
• Should avoid vessel heading for quay during approach
65. 65
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing Navigational Areas - Depths
• Depth sufficient for safe manoeuvring at lowest water level
allow for:
• Maximum loaded draft of the design vessel
• Water Level:
• Tide
• Surge – note can be positive or negative
• Climate change – more later
• Atmospheric pressure
• Vessel motion (roll, pitch, yaw and heave)
• Vessel trim during loading
• Squat
• Seabed characteristics
• Salinity
• Siltation
• Measurement errors
• Need not be the same as the berth box
66. 66
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing Navigational Areas - Depths
Minimum gross UKC Rules of Thumb:
Open Sea, High Speed ships, exposed to strong
swells:
30% of max draft.
Exposed channels, exposed to swell: 25% of max draft.
Exposed manoeuvring and berthing area: 20% of max draft.
Protected manoeuvring and berthing area: 10-15% of max draft.
69. 69
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing Navigational Areas – Swinging
• Usually in the basin, adjacent or as part of the channel
• Usual to make the turn during entry (i.e. under ballast)
• Typically on berth bow to sea
• Diameter will depend on:
• Vessel manoeuvrability
• Tug assistance
• Local conditions
• Rules of Thumb: Minimum for design 2 x LOA
Vessel with Bow
Thrusters
With tug assistance Diameter as x of
LOA
4 – 5
2.5
1.5
70. 70
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing Navigational Areas – Channel
Makassar Worked Example: Approach Channel Development
Design Vessel:
LOA: 294m
Beam: 32.2m
Draft: 13.5m
Design Depth:
Assume 85% load factor, so design draft = 0.85 x 13.5 = 11.5m
Outside the reef assume 20% UKC = 11.5 x 1.2 = 13.8m
Inside the manoeuvring area 10% UKC = 11.5 x 1.1 = 12.6m
Adopt = 12.5m
Design Width:
Check narrowest point: 150m, depth 15m
150m = 4.7 x beam = OK
Turning Area:
2.5 x LOA = 735m
No constraints.
71. 71
Development Scenario Considerations:
Confirming Navigation Design
• Can be useful to confirming navigation through
simulation as design progresses.
• Fast-time simulation cost effective
• Real-time simulation
• Part Mission – good for option development
• Full Mission – should be use to confirm final design
and train pilots
74. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 3: Development Scenarios – Port Approaches and Sizing
Basin and Berth box
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
75. 75
Development Scenario Considerations:
Basin and Berth Box
• The area adjacent to the berth
• Vessel will complete final berthing manoeuvres and sit
along side throughout tidal cycle:
• Needs to accommodate vessel manoeuvring:
• Minimum width ≥ 1.25 x Vessel Beam
• Minimum length≥ 1.25 x Vessel Length
• Depth need to accommodate vessel draft at all tides
and loading states
76. 76
Development Scenario Considerations:
Selection of berth length
• Governed by ability to berth and un-berth design vessel
• Clearance typically multiple of largest vessel length:
0.1L for sheltered, 0.2L if exposed.
• Rough guide 30m for daylight berthing, 50m for night
berthing
• Base total length on vessel size distribution
• Note – does not apply to jetty berths which are vessel
length specific
77. 77
Development Scenario Considerations:
Selection of berth length
• Time vessels spent queuing will be determined by berth
availability
• Typically aim for waiting to service time ratios of:
Bulk: <0.3
General Cargo: <0.2
Containers: <0.1
• For containers:
• Assume continuous wharf length
• Initial estimate: Rule of Thumb: 1,000-1,400 TEU/m
of quay
• Confirm acceptable waiting to service time ratio
78. 78
Development Scenario Considerations:
Determining Berth length
Makassar Worked Example: Total Berth Length
Trade forecast: 3M TEU per annum in 2036.
Rough Estimate:
Assume 1,200 TEU/m of quay = 2,500m of quay length required.
79. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 3: Development Scenarios – Port Approaches and Sizing
Terminal and Yard Sizing
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
83. 83
Development Scenario Considerations:
Establishing Yard Dimensions - Yard
• Demand based calculation based on (see earlier
workshop):
• No of containers
• Dwell time
• Storage density
• Import, export, transhipment,
• Development Scenario based on benchmark: 40-50,000
TEU/ha/yr
84. 84
Development Scenario Considerations:
Determining Terminal Dimension
Makassar Worked Example: Total Terminal Area
Trade forecast: 3M TEU per annum.
Rough Estimate:
Assume 40,000 TEU/ha/yr = 75 ha of yard area required.
Given quay length of 2,500m (see above) = 300 net yard depth
500m total terminal depth – 50m apron – 130m for back of port = 320m. OK
50m130m320m
500m
85. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 4: Development Scenarios – Berth Availability and Engineering
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
86. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 4: Development Scenarios – Berth Availability and Engineering
Calmness and efficiency at berth
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
87. 87
Development Scenario Considerations:
Berth Availability and Calmness
• Vessel movement at berth can affect efficiency
• 3 translational movement: surge, sway, heave
• 3 rotational: roll, pitch, yaw
88. 88
Development Scenario Considerations:
Berth Availability and Calmness
• How far can a vessel move before loading/unloading is
affected?
• Which direction of motion is likely to be worst for
container loading/unloading?
• How many days per year should the berth be available?
89. 89
Development Scenario Considerations:
Berth Availability and Calmness
• Caused by:
• Passing vessels
• Tides
• Wind
• Waves
• Local waves – fetch, duration limited. 5-10s.
• Swell waves – propagated from distant storms. 8-
20s.
• Long Waves – low frequency/surfbeat/infragravity.
Solitary or with wave group. 30s - >minutes
91. 91
Development Scenario Considerations:
Berth Availability and Calmness – horizontal motions
• Surge, sway, yaw
• 40-80s natural oscillation
• long periods waves
• Most critical whilst at berth
95. 95
Development Scenario Considerations:
Berth Availability and Calmness
Assess by:
• Numerical modelling of wave agitation at the berth
• Mooring analysis
• Physical modelling
Design out if necessary by:
• Selection of berth orientation – usually within 30o of
prevailing wind direction
• Consider sheltering the berths – either with reclamation
or breakwaters – most effective for local and swell
waves
• Consider risk of long wave activity
96. 96
Development Scenario Considerations:
Berth Availability and Calmness
Case Example: Port Kembla
Port Kembla has a history of wave agitation in the outer
harbour
Photo taken during a storm in 1950 (modified from Figure 3 of Fitzpatrick and Sinclair, 1954)
97. 97
Development Scenario Considerations:
Berth Availability and Calmness
– Numerical seiching
modelling of masterplan
– Clear long wave seiching
axis
– Revised master plan
eliminated seiching
– Modifications made to tug
harbour
99. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 4: Development Scenarios – Berth Availability and Engineering
Dredging, reclamation and berth structures
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
100. 100
Development Scenario Considerations:
Dredging and reclamation
• Objective to minimise both or achieve balance
• Minimise dredging in hard materials
• Maximise opportunity to re-use
• Looking for good engineering fill
• Soft ground can usually be improved
111. 111
Development Scenario Considerations:
Selection of Berth Structure – Gravity Walls
• Blockwork
• Caisson
• Cellular sheet piled
Advantages: Issues
Robust and durable Tie rear crane beam
Minimal maintenance High mass, high seismic loads
Block work can be built
underwater
Require good founding strata
Good where the final depth and
dredged depth are the same
Sensitive to differential settlement
Block work needs large casting
yard
Caissons need depth to float in
Can hinder vessel through
increased reflection
113. 113
Development Scenario Considerations:
Selection of Berth Structure – Sheet Walls
• Tied Sheet pile wall
• Combi-wall
Advantages: Issues
Reduced weight of wall Lower tie can be difficult to install
Flexible, can accommodate
changes in earth pressures
Front crane loads carried on piles –
deep penetration needed in soft
ground
Tubular piles in combi walls make it
less vulnerable to variable ground
conditions
Corrosion of steel piles
Can hinder vessels through
increased reflection
115. 115
Development Scenario Considerations:
Selection of Berth Structure – Open Piled
• Open piled
Advantages: Issues
Tubular piles in combi walls make it
less vulnerable to variable ground
conditions
Slender structure, sensitive to
overloading
Fixed rail gauge
Widely used
Reduces wave reflection
118. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 4: Development Scenarios – Berth Availability and Engineering
Utilities and shore connections
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
119. 119
Development Scenario Considerations:
Utilities
• Power:
• During construction and operation
• Usually from local grid
• Emergency power supply – port responsibility
• Power demand can be large – container cranes and
reefers
• Substations likely
• Water:
• During construction and operation
• Usually from public network
• If remote may need de-salination plant
120. 120
Development Scenario Considerations:
Utilities
• Fire Fighting
• During construction and operation
• Depends on trade types and port size
• May need own supply
• Bulk liquids and LNG need special consideration
• Liquid and solid waste
• During construction and operation
• Usually public network
• If not, space will need to be allocated
• Communications
• Phones lines, IT etc usual
121. 121
Development Scenario Considerations:
Transport connections
• Road traffic to/from the port
• Lanes provision and capacity
• Distance to road network
• Parking space for short, intermediate and long stay
• Availability and quality of truck services
• Customs and security regulation
• Rail traffic to/from the port
• The number, length and capacity of rail
• Railway gauge compatibility
• Technical standards (electrification, signalling system,
radio systems)
• Distance to rail network
• Marshalling yards
• Customs and security regulation (potential jams,
container checks)
122. 122
Development Scenario Considerations:
Transport connections
• Inland waterways traffic to/from the port
• Vessel sizes
• Tidal influence and lock operations
• Availability of services (bunkering, linesmen, pilot
services)
• Availability and quality of handling services
• Pipelines and conveyors
• Distance between port and source or storage
• Intermediate storage capacities on both sides
• Terrain structure
• Safety and security regulation
• Noise and emissions
123. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 5: Development Scenario and Assessment – Case Studies
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
124. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 5: Development Scenario and Assessment – Case Studies
Part 1: International Example
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
125. Port Development Scenarios
Segment 5: Development Scenario and Assessment
Part 2: The Port of Makassar
13 May 2014
Formulation and Development of Port Development Scenarios
126. 126
Segment 5:
Application to Makassar Port
• In this segment we will apply some of
these considerations to the development
of the options considered for the pilot
port project at Makassar
127. 127
Development Scenarios: Makassar Port
Development Objectives:
• 1.2M TEU for Phase 1 with scope to grow
• Panamax design vessel
Baseline data:
• Bathymetric
• Geotechnical
• Wind
130. 130
Development Scenarios: Makassar Port
Scope to develop existing terminals
Hatta:
• Caisson not readily deepened
• Inefficient container storage
• Yard area constrains planning
• Yard depth primary constraint
• Ultimate capacity could be 800,000TEU
• Efficient capacity limit about 550,000TEU – today’s
throughput
• Road network congested
Soekarno:
• Not deep enough for containers
• Suited to handling bulks
Need for new container terminal confirmed
139. 139
Development Scenarios: Makassar Port
Baseline data
• Traffic review issues:
• Local road network narrow and congested
• Parking/waiting area for trucks
• Narrow bridge crossing Tallo river
• Toll plaza entry points
• Improvements to the road network are planned which
should open up this area to development
140. 140
Development Scenarios: Makassar Port
Development Scenario – key objectives
• Suitable for private sector participation
• Able to cater for long term growth
• Minimising environmental impacts.
• Minimising risks associated with re-zoning and approvals
• Safe marine access
• Maximising terminal efficiency
• Efficient land access and transport
• Economical staging of major civil works such as dredging,
reclamation and breakwaters.
• Cost
