Air Cargo Is Suddenly Affordable Relative To Ocean Shipping (freightwaves.com) 119
AskWaves explains how the gap between air and ocean freight transport has narrowed during the pandemic. From the report: The air rate from China to the U.S. West Coast during the first week of November was about $14 per kilogram, double what it was a year ago, according to the Freightos Air Index. Shipping by air to the East Coast cost about $13, also twice as much as in 2020. [...] Air is usually the mode of last resort, limited to perishables and high-value goods with margins that can cover the extra expense. Incredibly, airfreight has become a bargain relative to ocean shipping for many companies, especially when measured against the cost of stockouts and lost sales. That's what happens when supply chains are turned upside down by constant chaos.
Ocean shipping demand to North America is up more than 20% compared to 2019. Carriers and ports have been overwhelmed, resulting in huge delays and port backlogs demonstrated most clearly by the 80 container vessels waiting last week for a berth at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Glitches in the system -- from COVID outbreaks to accidents -- created more havoc because the system is so stretched. Spot tariffs -- for immediate transactions not subject to more favorable long-term contracts -- can cost upwards of $20,000 for a forty-foot equivalent unit from China to the West Coast when a host of premiums and surcharges are included. That's 10 times greater than pre-pandemic rates and doesn't even include domestic transportation to move a shipment across the country.
Many companies, especially retailers worried about product shortages for big holiday shopping events, are trying to make up for lost time by shifting goods that normally move by ocean to air. The decision to convert ocean freight to air is easier for shippers because air transport is much more cost-competitive than it has ever been. Pre-pandemic, the average price to move air cargo was about 13 to 15 times higher than ocean, but now it is only three to five times more expensive, according to the International Air Transport Association and industry experts.
Ocean shipping demand to North America is up more than 20% compared to 2019. Carriers and ports have been overwhelmed, resulting in huge delays and port backlogs demonstrated most clearly by the 80 container vessels waiting last week for a berth at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Glitches in the system -- from COVID outbreaks to accidents -- created more havoc because the system is so stretched. Spot tariffs -- for immediate transactions not subject to more favorable long-term contracts -- can cost upwards of $20,000 for a forty-foot equivalent unit from China to the West Coast when a host of premiums and surcharges are included. That's 10 times greater than pre-pandemic rates and doesn't even include domestic transportation to move a shipment across the country.
Many companies, especially retailers worried about product shortages for big holiday shopping events, are trying to make up for lost time by shifting goods that normally move by ocean to air. The decision to convert ocean freight to air is easier for shippers because air transport is much more cost-competitive than it has ever been. Pre-pandemic, the average price to move air cargo was about 13 to 15 times higher than ocean, but now it is only three to five times more expensive, according to the International Air Transport Association and industry experts.
not all cargo can go by air (Score:2)
not all cargo can go by air
Re: (Score:3)
I suppose a whole lot more could if they were ok with shipping it in pieces and doing final assembly upon arrival?
Re: (Score:2)
shipping it in pieces and doing final assembly upon arrival
Lego should have patented that, they'd be (more?) rich.
Re: (Score:2)
not all cargo can go by air
How much of global trade (percentage-wise) cannot be transported by aircraft?
Almost everything being shipped is shipped because of low cost, not because they can't fit in an aircraft.
Re:not all cargo can go by air (Score:4, Insightful)
Most stuff shipped by sea are bulkier goods - vehicles, white box appliances, etc. Few people are willing to pay for their stove to be shipped by air (at least in the past), so cost is a huge issue. Plus, an aircraft can hold only a few stoves versus a cargo ship.
But there are plenty of goods that cannot be shipped by air - dangerous goods and chemicals. The problem is, those dangerous goods are required by many industries - including chip making facilities. Another one is batteries - lithium batteries cannot be shipped in bulk by air.
The shipping problem is also a huge supply chain problem. COVID caused a LOT more stuff to be bought - and ports, already facing a labor shortage (they are about 50% staffed due to distancing and other requirements) now have to deal with an onslaught of more shipping containers This has resulted in a container shortage in China because all the containers are sitting in the US. Even more fun, no one wants to pay to ship empty containers back to China - typically China buys a bunch of goods which fills those containers and they make their way back. But those lockdowns there have kept the Chinese from buying many American goods.
Effectively, pre-pandemic, worldwide shipping was a finely tuned and adjusted machine that ran at peak efficiency with minimal wastage of resources. Post pandemic, everything is completely unbalanced because a surge in US demand plus a reduction in capacity screwed up the balance .
And yes, it's a general problem that happens more often than you imagine. TCP/IP can suffer form "silly window syndrome" where thanks to a lot of poor feedback mechanisms, you end up with poor throughput. What's happening with supply chains, shipping, etc., is really just things like this. Given the relatively sluggishness of the feedback loop, this can take a little while to fix.
Re: (Score:3)
"Effectively, pre-pandemic, worldwide shipping was a finely tuned and adjusted machine that ran at peak efficiency with minimal wastage of resources."
Not to mention a 3-5% increase year over year.
The increase was lately 15-20% year over year, which basically buried the ports in containers.
Re: (Score:2)
with minimal wastage of resources
Translation from MBA speak: "No room for hiccups." That's the bitch with having something so "finely tuned", you better not trip up.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume the blockage of the Suez Channel also contributed to that problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Source for the corruption claim: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/26/muddy-the-waters-egyptian-authorities-struggle-with-suez-canal-blockage
Re: (Score:2)
The losses they claimed to have made no sense anyway.
On both ends ships piled up to travel through, as soon as the obstacle was removed.
So: they only had a delay n cash flow, certainly not a real loss. ... brave new world.
But alas: you can sue one who is hapless and let him pay up
Re: (Score:2)
not all cargo can go by air
You would be surprised. I have seen Mercedeses being stacked into a Lufthansa 747 passenger/freight Combi. And this was years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
And everything is still pretty much working right in any other port, outside of California and New York.
Seattle and Portland are working better than any of the California ports, but they don't have excess capacity and the rail access is not as good.
If the PNW ports had the capacity and rail connections, they would be preferred because they are closer to Asia, cutting several days off transit times.
Re:Everything was fine before [Trump] came along. (Score:2)
Why are you propagating the troll Subject? I would have thought you knew better.
(But I don't even agree with the corrected version, though it's MUCH closer to reality. The former guy was too incompetent to break EVERYTHING he touched.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because pretty much every other port is either
A) Easily thousands miles of extra travel to get to or
B) Can't handle that capacity, in some shape or form (either not big enough docks, not enough processing equipment, not enough rail to haul things away, etc).
Houston is probably a great port... but from China, you have to sail through the Canal and back up. Waiting off shore for 3-4 weeks is still cheaper, especially once you factor in the cost of rejiggering things (assuming this is possible) so that the shi
Good book (Score:4, Informative)
If you have an interest in this sort of thing, the book, "The Box" by Marc Levinson tells the story of the development of container shipping and how so many disparate intertwined factors influenced (or were influenced by) the global adoption.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the reference, and if I spot the book I'm likely to read it... (However I have read quite a bit on the topic, mostly in relation to scheduling and knapsack problems.)
Re: (Score:2)
If you have an interest in this sort of thing, the book, "The Box" by Marc Levinson tells the story of the development of container shipping and how so many disparate intertwined factors influenced (or were influenced by) the global adoption.
The pandemic is a good example of JIT manufacturing. MBA graduates in logistics proposed JIT deliveries and manufacturing. With Just-In-Time manufacturing, one dispenses with owning warehouses. And when demand grows beyond the ability of the manufacturer, who in turn, has no warehouse stock, his suppliers cannot deliver, and consequently everyone waits, and prices increase as those who can pay, get priority delivery treatment. Warehousing has to return or inflation will more than triple the cost of today
That is because ... (Score:2)
Planes can sit in the air for weeks waiting for their turn to dock/land.
Re: (Score:2)
can -> can't
Re: (Score:2)
Due to significantly reduced passenger travel, there is also a large surplus of aircraft, pilots and airport capacity.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually travel volume has mostly returned [tsa.gov].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not internationally [iata.org] which is what the cargo would be.
This is true, because of whipsawing Covid testing requirements which are almost impossible for Americans to comply with (In most parts of the country you can't get test results within the admission window of your destination country). I visited Eastern Europe last month and was almost the only American there. The tourists in Hungary are mostly Russian and in Czech republic are mostly German.
While nobody was looking, Germans have taken back the Sudetenland.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pilots need to be type certified for the aircraft they are flying, but most cargo planes are based on the same design as passenger planes with the cabin fitted out to carry freight instead of passengers. A pilot certified to fly a passenger 747 can fly a freight 747.
Flying freight is easier, it doesn't get airsick, doesn't need cabin crew, doesn't complain about turbulence, doesn't hold up your departure by getting into fights at the departure gate, doesn't cause an incident onboard and force you to turn ba
Re: (Score:2)
Pilots need to be type certified for the aircraft they are flying, but most cargo planes are based on the same design as passenger planes with the cabin fitted out to carry freight instead of passengers.
Look at it from the airline perspective. Their pilots can only fly planes for which they are certified. For example, the vast majority of Southwest airlines pilots can only fly the 737. Sure some may have flown 747s in the past, but did they keep up the certification for a plane is rarely used in passenger travel these days and never used by Southwest? No. Your pool of pilots is far smaller than you think. Most Southwest airline pilots could only fly cargo 737s, and Boeing has never made a cargo 737 outrigh
Re: (Score:2)
Getting another certification, aka a rating, is not rocket science.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, more than an hour.
And?
Then after that the pilot must maintain the certification yearly and any fees associated with that certification especially if their airline will not reimburse them for a certification that the airline cannot use.
Why would an airline not be able to use a certification/rating it paid for? Especially as it paid for it so the pilot can fly another plane?
You make no sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
do you expect American to reimburse you to get a 747 rating?
Yes, if they want mte to fly for them that type, obviously.
they have no 320s so they will not reimburse you to maintain that rating.
They do not need, too. You can have 2 ratings. And if both airlines agree, you can work for both.
No idea what your silly point is.
Obviously if *one airline* only flies *one type*, they wont pay for you to get a second rating. What would be the point?
Re: (Score:2)
Because of this covid restrictions the airlines can either remove the seats and fill their planes with cargo or mothball the aircraft. The aircraft loses money every day anyway (lease, maintenance, staff wages) but if it is flying cargo, at least there is some ROI.
Re: (Score:2)
Filling a passenger plane with cargo has made excellent economic sense for many airlines during the pandemic. They
Re: (Score:2)
What I mean specifically is that pilot rated to fly an Airbus 320, 330, 340, or 350 for any of the US passenger carriers cannot fly for FedEx because FedEx has 0 of those plane models. Conversely, FedEx still flies the 747 freighter whereas US carriers stopped flying the 747 as long as a decade ago. Any of their pilot that had 747 rating probably let that certifications lapse if they were working for US passenger carriers.
Question for economists (Score:3)
There's about 160 container ships waiting in line off the coast of California.
I was under the impression that this is because there are not enough longshoremen to offload the container ships, and the reason for this is because of Covid restrictions.
Basically, if Covid rules were relaxed for this situation, we could offload the ships much faster and reduce the wait time. The crisis is artificial, caused by Covid restrictions, and it's messing up the supply chain for everyone.
Is this assessment correct? Is there a different explanation that makes better sense?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Your assessment that this is "artificial" is wrong. These ships do not get unloaded because ignoring Covid would make them get unloaded even slower, possibly after a few weeks delay. Pandemic restrictions are basically never overdone. There is absolutely no profit for anybody in doing so. (Unless you believe the deranged "microchip" or "5G" crap.) They are universally somewhere between a bit too permissive and massively too permissive.
Can you elaborate? (Score:2)
Your assessment that this is "artificial" is wrong. These ships do not get unloaded because ignoring Covid would make them get unloaded even slower,
I'm not disagreeing, but I'm also not seeing how your point makes sense. I would have thought that relaxing the restrictions would make more longshoremen available for offloading.
Can you elaborate a little, maybe explain how ignoring the restrictions would make the unloading slower?
Re:Can you elaborate? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Because if you relax the restrictions, then there's the real threat that they or their families get Covid, and then instead of moving slower, you lose them entirely. Better to have 100% of the workforce at 80% effort, which can slowly come back up, then 80% of the workforce and dropping, working at 100%, with no way to easily replace them.
You seem to know a lot about port operations. How is COVID-19 spreading from unloading container vessels (and bunkering oil)? I am kind of puzzled by this since it seems to me that (done right) this kind of work is perfectly safe from a COVID-19 transmission perspective. But I may be wrong?
Re: (Score:2)
Because if you relax the restrictions, then there's the real threat that they or their families get Covid, and then instead of moving slower, you lose them entirely. Better to have 100% of the workforce at 80% effort, which can slowly come back up, then 80% of the workforce and dropping, working at 100%, with no way to easily replace them.
You seem to know a lot about port operations. How is COVID-19 spreading from unloading container vessels (and bunkering oil)? I am kind of puzzled by this since it seems to me that (done right) this kind of work is perfectly safe from a COVID-19 transmission perspective. But I may be wrong?
You seem to be stupid. Or maybe just arguing in bad faith, i.e. malicious. The answer to your "question" is dead obvious. I am not going to give it, because you will just use that to push more lies.
Re: (Score:2)
Because if you relax the restrictions, then there's the real threat that they or their families get Covid, and then instead of moving slower, you lose them entirely. Better to have 100% of the workforce at 80% effort, which can slowly come back up, then 80% of the workforce and dropping, working at 100%, with no way to easily replace them.
You seem to know a lot about port operations. How is COVID-19 spreading from unloading container vessels (and bunkering oil)? I am kind of puzzled by this since it seems to me that (done right) this kind of work is perfectly safe from a COVID-19 transmission perspective. But I may be wrong?
You seem to be stupid. Or maybe just arguing in bad faith, i.e. malicious. The answer to your "question" is dead obvious. I am not going to give it, because you will just use that to push more lies.
I have asked a poster to provide additional arguments to underpin his position because it seems unfounded to me. How is that lying?
You must be incredibly stupid to think so. Or a bastard. Or both.
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to think this is about transmission between the crew and the longshoremen. It's not. It's about transmission among the longshoremen.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Also, there is the secondary problems: Too many tuckers quit the profession because of abysmally bad working conditions which became even more obvious with COVID. Also some are in quarantine, sick or dead. Unloading the ships does not help much if you cannot get the goods moved after that. But I guess that idea is too complicated for some people.
Re: Can you elaborate? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to think this is about transmission between the crew and the longshoremen. It's not. It's about transmission among the longshoremen.
No, I don't think that. Now, I am not from the US but I assume that your container ports are modern. And in a modern port the vast majority of the work do not require personal contact. If you are cutting/removing lashes you will not be in contact with anyone. If you are sitting in a crane for the entire shift you will not be in physical contact with you colleagues. It seems to me that loading and unloading container vessels is extremely socially distanced assuming that there are restrictions on lunches and
Re: (Score:2)
It's a good thing people teleport to the part of the port where they're working. Otherwise you might have missed where the issue is regarding COVID.
Also, the backup isn't due to COVID. There's not enough truck drivers, there's not enough rail capacity, there's a shortage of empty containers in the right places, a shortage of trailers to haul containers.
The volume of cargo massively increased in the last two years, and we're working through the process of getting that cargo moved.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. You relax restrictions. A few weeks later, more people get sick. More people get quarantined. You have even less workers as a result.
Re:Question for economists (Score:4, Insightful)
Why not ensure the workers are all vaccinated? Then they can get back to work with fewer or no restrictions. Offer them financial incentives if they're reluctant.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not ensure the workers are all vaccinated? Then they can get back to work with fewer or no restrictions. Offer them financial incentives if they're reluctant.
Well, that would be the sane option. But it is politically not opportune to "force" people to get vaccinated. Hence the rather larger damage that is being done currently, which is harder to attribute.
But sure. By now every worker there could have base-vaccination plus booster and their families too.
Union. (Score:5, Interesting)
Keeping people miserable (Score:5, Insightful)
It is also affected by union strikes and policies. Longshoremen have an incredibly strong union that has led them to get paid six figures for their work. They limit how many people can join the union so they can artificially reduce supply and keep costs high. It's not an easy field to get into. The union resists some advances in automation, too. There are other factors besides the union, but labor is a big one.
In previous years, strikes that affected the infrastructure could be overridden by the president. Specifically, Reagan ordered air traffic controllers back to work, and then fired 12K of them when they didn't. Other examples come to mind.
So with that in mind, couldn't the president simply put more longshoremen to work by executive order, citing national security and other reasonable reasons? It would only be for a limited time (until the backlog clears), they could probably import longshoremen from other ports, and there's good justification for doing it.
I still don't see how this situation doesn't have a quick fix.
It seems like we're artificially creating a problem just to keep people miserable.
Re:Keeping people miserable (Score:5, Informative)
Biden effectively has already done that, by ordering them to 24/7 operations. The issue is that it doesn't matter how many hours they work, if they got nowhere to put the stuff. It is a cascade of failures. They have all the empty containers, but no where to put them (they need to off load all the stuff coming on shore first, that's parked out there). This leads to congestion to off loading the ships. Then you need trucks to put them on, there's a physical shortage of the actual chassis, then there's the limits on how many drivers, plus drivers retiring/bailing due to the borderline indentured servitude that trucking can be. Then you need the rail capacity, which the surge of goods has also overloaded.
The one saving grace in this entire shitshow is at least it is in California, which means weather won't wreak havoc, imagine a hurricane, or other nasty weather event hitting the port right now. That would just make this entire situation explode.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Then you need trucks to put them on, there's a physical shortage of the actual chassis, then there's the limits on how many drivers, plus drivers retiring/bailing due to the borderline indentured servitude that trucking can be.
My understanding is that this can be tied back to an environmental law passed by California requiring all trucks used in the ports be X years or younger, which pushed out all but the biggest trucking companies, as trucks take along time to pay off, and no one wants to invest in a truck that will only be able to be used for a short number of years. This caused a reduction in the number of trucks available, and drivers available as it took out all the owner operators and all the small companies.
https://www.p [portoflosangeles.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's not a matter of labor, for the most part. Even if you could magically create more cranes and operators, you would also need the dock to park the ship, the railroads to ferry the containers away, the yards to park the containers, the warehouses to unload/sort/store/inspect shipments and arrange for forwarding/pick up, etc. Think about all the coordination that has to be done just to unload the container ship. The crane operator is given a sequence to unload that both respects the weight and balance of t
Re: (Score:2)
"strikes that affected the infrastructure could be overridden by the president."
That's irrelevant since there aren't any longshoremen on strike in the US. I haven't found any strikes in the US in the last two years.
Re: (Score:2)
In previous years, strikes that affected the infrastructure could be overridden by the president. Specifically, Reagan ordered air traffic controllers back to work, and then fired 12K of them when they didn't. Other examples come to mind.
This is nonsense. Air traffic controllers were federal employees at that time. The president has no power to break any strikes in the private workplace, not that there's even one here in the first place.
So with that in mind, couldn't the president simply put more longshoremen to work by executive order, citing national security and other reasonable reasons?
Executive orders direct a federal agency to take some action. What federal agency is it that you think he should issue orders to?
You're just making things up because you have no idea how any of this works.
I still don't see how this situation doesn't have a quick fix.
That's because you don't understand it at all.
Re: (Score:2)
They limit how many people can join the union so they can artificially reduce supply and keep costs high.
How could that be legally possible?
Re: (Score:2)
Probably the same way that some buildings in America are "union buildings".
Typically agreements have been made in the past that boil down to "Place/Business A can only hire from Union B", that means that they cannot get any non-union workers or ALL their union workers strike.
Then the unions have apprenticeship schemes with limited numbers so they only get a few new members a year, unsurprisingly the new member numbers are similar to the returing members numbers
Re: (Score:2)
That would be (actually is) illegal in Europe.
I can hire who ever I want. And a person can work were ever s/he wants. It is even in the constitution of my country.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The main reason is that California has a semi truck ban, only allowing 2011 or newer semis to the docks. California also has a law, called AB-5 which prevents owner-operators from helping with unloading cargo... which is a great boon for the big trucking companies, but hoses the individual who is trying to make a living, in typical California lawmaking fashion.
Re: (Score:3)
The crisis is artificial, caused by Covid restrictions, and it's messing up the supply chain for everyone.
It's mostly caused by distortions in container usage and storage. This is an interesting Twitter post on part of it: https://twitter.com/typesfast/... [twitter.com]
According to this guy who visited one of the large ports, the problem boils down to the ports being so full of containers (both empty and full) that they're not longer letting trucks come in with an empty and leave it like they normally would. Since there's really nowhere else to drop and store empty containers, there just aren't trucks available to go in wi
Re:Question for economists (Score:4, Insightful)
The crisis is artificial, caused by Covid restrictions, and it's messing up the supply chain for everyone.
It's mostly caused by distortions in container usage and storage. This is an interesting Twitter post on part of it: https://twitter.com/typesfast/... [twitter.com]
According to this guy who visited one of the large ports, the problem boils down to the ports being so full of containers (both empty and full) that they're not longer letting trucks come in with an empty and leave it like they normally would. Since there's really nowhere else to drop and store empty containers, there just aren't trucks available to go in without a container to go get the full ones out.
Meanwhile in Asia, they just don't have enough containers to ship goods.
It's kind of like defragging a full partition on old filesystems. When it's 70% full, it goes quickly, when it's 95% full, it's a bitch to do. The port is closer to 95% full of containers (again, both empty and full).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Was that just a computer analogy to describe an issue related to automobiles? Careful with that, we only use car analogies to describe computer problems here.
Close, but the containers aren't inherently automobile oriented. Some are meant for rail.
I figured this was probably the only place I frequent these days that I could ever make that analogy and expect the majority of users to actual comprehend it.
Re: (Score:2)
It is much more complicated than that. There aren’t enough truckers to move the laden containers to their destination, so they sit in port, clogging things up there and requiring multiple moves of containers to get things out of the port. You also have a shortage of available container chassis, becuase an empty container that the port doesn’t want might be sitting on the chassis, or they are simply in the wrong place.
A single ship might have 10-20,000 containers, which might leave the port on
Re:Question for economists (Score:5, Interesting)
There are multiple problems that are now basically feeding off of one another. Yes it did *start* with Covid restrictions on longshoremen being able to do their jobs, but now it's hardly an issue. Instead there is:
- a shortage of actual containers that were not built in 2020 (mostly in China)
- a shortage of truck drivers in North America and the UK, also the EU to a lesser extent
- a shortage of storage capacity for empties in ports
- zoning laws preventing companies from storing empties on their land (eg no more than 2 high in certain areas)
- thus companies using parked truck trailers to "store" empties (to skirt around some of the above zoning laws)
- thus a shortage of truck trailers capable of hauling containers
- various reductions of capacity on rail roads (I'm looking at you, "precision scheduled railroading", which is forcing more and more rail customers to switch to trucking at the worst possible time)
And so on in the whole supply chain. I'm not in this industry, I'm just a casual observer. In my view, we're at a point where it's actually really hard to pinpoint a *single* root cause of all the current mess. There's no easy fix. And it's going to require cooperation from all the vested interest, whether public or private
Re: (Score:3)
Ports are exempt from Covid restrictions as they're considered "essential".
There's a White House report [whitehouse.gov] on the situation with a lot more details.
The Port of Long Beach also has a Covid FAQ page [polb.com], which states:
HOW HAS THE PORT BEEN AFFECTED BY THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC?
The Port’s terminals have remained open throughout the pandemic. An unprecedented surge in import cargo in recent months has seen record-setting cargo volume, and waterfront workers and terminals are working to overcome a backlog in shipments.
Even Before The Pandemic (Score:4, Interesting)
Even before the pandemic 35% of all international trade by value went by air -- of course the stuff with the highest value to weight ratio. I wonder what it is up to now?
Air vs Ships to move your home internationally (Score:2)
While I've seen massive construction equipment and twin Lamborghinis shipped by air, usually it's just standard-sized pallets comprised of multiple boxes of stuff like flowers or Intel CPUs and wrapped and sealed using large rolls of plastic Saran wrap. For the most
Re: (Score:2)
the best option is to simply fit everything into multiple suitcases to take with your on your flight, paid for as extra travel check-in baggage.
Man, why didn't I think of that. I should have just cut my couch into small pieces and thrown it on a carryon.
But really the premise of your post is a bit strange. Shipping large amounts of personal stuff actually doesn't cost much at all when you consider the included services you typically get for moving. I.e. I've yet to see someone rent half a shipping container and be forced to get a truck and pickup said shipping container from the airport themselves and unload it and take it back again. The overwhelm
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes but some of us have nice furniture and don't buy the lowest cost stuff from IKEA. Then combine it with the fact that if you move internationally rarely you normally actually have stuff, at that point moving the IKEA couch becomes free if you already are paying a moving company to move the other things you own.
If you move a lot constantly you typically don't mass a collection of things you own. A colleague of mine moved from America to Europe 2 weeks after I moved from Australia to Europe, and the stark
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be tempted to ship it just to avoid having to assemble a new one.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, depends if you have to cross an ocean. Within the EU I guess you can hire a truck with a driver and do it in one go.
Now, why would I do this in the first place? Believe it or not, there is at least one EU state (mine) in which all "A-label" goods are as expensive as in the company shop in the center of Amsterdam, while being second rate quality. This is not a joke, misinformation or some crazy conspiracy theory. Few years ago a scandal broke within the EU regarding this fact, only they focused on food
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, that is nonsense.
Most stuff is made in the east or south anyway.
And is cheaper in those areas too.
Seems you never have been in Spain or Greece in a shop.
Regarding quality, that goes same direction as pirated labels: most labels order at cheap small shops. If a shop can not deliver in time, that order gets discarded, same if the quality is not on top. However: the made products are then usually sold as pirated products: after all the original label gave them the "labels" (hence the name) to put on the
Re: (Score:2)
Hang on ... (Score:2)
Air Cargo Is Suddenly Affordable Relative To Ocean Shipping
Why don't they just transport all those ocean cargo/container ships by air? Problem solved. :-)
NAFTA to the rescue (Score:2)
"big holiday shopping events" (Score:5, Insightful)
And there, in a nutshell, we have the reason for so many of the problems the world faces:
"big holiday shopping events".
Why?
Why do we need "big holiday shopping events"?
Why is something like Black Friday needed? - which, these days, has extended to weeks.
Why do we need to buy so much over Christmas?
In the UK, the gutter press have been running stories, such as "Christmas could be ruined due to Turkey shortage."
"Christmas under threat due to shortage of toys", with the idea people should buy NOW.
Can anyone explain to me, why Christmas would be ruined if there's no turkey and little Johnny doesn't get his electronic game?
Ah yes, because it's not a religions celebration, whether that be Christianity or Pagan, it's a Celebration of commerce!
Because, you know, buying loads of stuff makes you happy, right? - doesn't it? - isn't that why we do it?
Seems to me, one of the quickest and easiest ways we can help this planet, both from climate change and the decimation of the natural environment, is to just not take part in this madness.
Just get small gifts. Celebrate being with family, not buying shit.
Sounds like I'm just some crazy, right? - well, do the math - have a good look at the sheer volume of produce that is consumed in the western world over the now, very lengthy, season of commerciality. It is staggering - and what's even worse, is the waste after is staggering too.
Mountains of rubbish, mountains of wasted food - crappy plastic "funny" gifts, used for 10 minutes, thrown out the next day - soon to be washing up on a beach near you!
Screw this, screw "big holiday shopping events" - I'm not taking part in that shit.
Re: (Score:2)
It's even happening in China [cnbc.com] now.
Re: (Score:2)
Businesses need big holiday shopping events because many of them are marginal and those events are a great way to fix many of their problems.
They can offload old stock in preparation for the new mode. They can do fake discounts (Amazon is terrible for it) to fool people into buying at a higher price and without doing any real diligence like checking other vendors. People buy stuff they don't really need or want just because it looks like a bargain.
Do "we" as a society need those big events? Not really, but
Re: (Score:2)
This one is easy. People are shit at planning ahead.
Why would Christmas be ruined by not having turkey? Dunno. We always have ham. But it's because people are silly creatures of habit. They get in their rut and roll on towards death, getting super cranky whenever something comes along to temporarly displace them from their nice straight trajectory.
Might be time for some more cof
Re: (Score:2)
>Just get small gifts. Celebrate being with family, not buying shit.
Request that you be given donations to some charity as your gift, if the feel the need to give one.
CO2e. (Score:2)
Perfect opportunity to fight evil capitalism /s (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's all Brexit's fault :-) (Score:2)
Thousands of full and empty containers are sitting around British ports because there are not enough truck-drivers to transport them.
I find this hard to believe... (Score:2)
Look at a lot of cheap stuff from China - it's not being sold for anywhere near $14/kg (about $1 per 2.5 ounces in Eagleland units).
Perhaps this is talking about smaller orders?
Still sounds expensive (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Entirely self-inflicted (Score:4, Informative)
Also, for all the excuses about covid, do you see any other countries (say, Europe) having same problem even though covid is everywhere?
I take it that as a typical American you don't actually watch any news with an international coverage. Lets just say there are indeed problems at ports in other countries.
Re: (Score:2)
I take it that as a typical American you don't actually watch any news with an international coverage. Lets just say there are indeed problems at ports in other countries.
Yes there were. No they weren't nearly as severe. No the shortages weren't nearly as bad. No they didn't run nearly as ineffeciently.
While the USA amputates it's foot it's not a great defense to point out that yeah the UK did too, and oh hey the rest of the world also stubbed it's toe so they are in pain too, we're all in this together *brohug*.
That kind of excuse is the reason shit situations remain shit.
Re: (Score:3)
I was not aware that Rotterdam for example was in the United Kingdom which was the port I was most aware of having issues outside the U.K. and USA. Likewise Antwerp, Hamburg, Singaore, Shanghai, Al Jubail, and Guahgzhou to name just a few other ports with delays that are not in the U.K.
Admittedly Los Angeles has the biggest delays, but New York has less delays than Antwerp or Rotterdam so to claim it is a uniquely USA problem is clearly a load of rubbish.
Like I said as a typical American the OP and your out
Re: (Score:2)
The US is special in other regards - namely, that only two ports serve a country of 330 million people. Because most of the traffic comes from China, the east coast ports may as well be nonexistent.
Re: (Score:2)
What we are doing is insane and that Glasgow conference that just ended doesn't exactly have my hopes up that everybody has gotten the memo.
What I thought was hilarious was seeing COP26 picketed by "activists" who are against applying any kind of technology fix for the greenhouse gas problem, be it geoengineering or nuclear or even a carbon trading system. The only solution they will accept is putting an end to civilization and going back to caves and mud huts.
Perhaps China has the right idea: if you want to implement any kind of large infrastructure, start by just shoving aside any protesters.
Re: (Score:3)
Activists are, pretty much by definition, extremists. Their strategy is to take an extreme position, hoping to pull opinion in that general direction. We don't call people who take reasonable, well-supported positions extremists.
Most activists don't *know* that's their strategy so they end up bitter and disillusioned when the rest of society eventually arrives at some reasonable course of action.
Re: (Score:2)
The only solution they will accept is putting an end to civilization and going back to caves and mud huts.
You seem to be an idiot.
What has switching to renewables to do with living in a hut?