#but its not actually like. logistically necessary imo

[sanstropfremir]

randomish and this might be an unpopular opinion or just something cassies think and never say out loud but i’ve been kinda sensing a disbandment might be coming within the next year or so, their career in korea as a group has been in limbo for a while and the events of last year made it even worse idk i just don’t really see a path for them in korea anymore i feel like they’re gonna do their jpn tour next year finish that maybe release a “special”mini album for the 20th anniversary with a fan meeting and then announce a hiatus which will never end

i mean, there's no real reason for them to actually disband. they can just keep doing solo schedules and performing at smtown, plus whatever toho activities and tours they want, and that's reasonable for a group of their age. since their popularity is waning in kr i think it's very understandable for them to slow down, and now they literally have to bc changmin has a baby and yunho has long covid. but that doesn't mean they have to formally disband or even go on hiatus imo. it's fine to let them live life a bit.

[spilledreality]

1. Mimosa pudica, or an economy of signal

I remember reading an interview with a pretty successful/respected Army rangers battalion leader. Said one of the biggest advantages he got was, in the Iraq and/or Afghanistan campaigns, all the officers were constantly trying to suck the teat of big government, get as many resources as they could, even stuff they didn’t need. So, regular requests for supplies, little luxuries, time off, etc. “Why not? The Army’s got the money” was the logic—which, fair enough from an ethical perspective, but think selfishly now: This is actually self-defeating behavior.

Because officers who did this burnt out their credibility, burnt out the goodwill of supply teams and logistics officers. “Ah yeah he’s always asking for shit.” Eventually the system gets “numbed” because it can’t distinguish signal—it doesn’t know what’s actually important/needed vs unimportant/unnecessary.

Whereas—this ranger battalion head said—he never requested anything they didn’t absolutely need, had in fact turned down offers. “Hey, need any XYZ?” “Nope, we’re good.” “Are you sure? What about ABC?” “Nope, we’re good.” So that on the rare occasions he did send a message up command, making requests, they were granted immediately, without questions, without delays, and in full. Because it was assumed that if he was requesting something, it was absolutely necessary.

One way to think about this is as an economy of credibility—how much building a certain (typically respected/“good”) reputation gives you immense, outsized “manipulative” leverage when you need it. Manipulative in the sense of "getting things done by communicating."

There’s something wild about the way that, because I don't boss my partner around, I could, if needed to (e.g. we were in a dangerous situation), use a very serious voice and tell her to do something and she’d immediately do it without questioning, because if I’m “playing that card”—a card that is quasi economically scarce due to the numbing effect (i.e. its frequency-dependence)—she'll assume there’s a very good reason.

And you can get information out of situations by what cards skilled strategic players play—e.g. in the Milwaukee game the other day, Curry flipped out about a no-call on a three-point attempt to refs. On replay it really doesn’t look that egregious, but… it was early in a regular season game, the shot went in, it wasn’t like some tight final-possessions thing—it’s like, why would he choose now to play this card? If, that is, you think “refs taking seriously player complaints” has an “economy” to it. It’s almost—and this is amazing IMO—a more reliable signal of an egregious foul happening that he chose to play the card than any single replay angle on its own.

Abstractly: Player moves emit information about their experience of the environment, and when those players are more sensorily proximate to aspects of that environment, or more skilled at parsing and structuring that sensory input in a culturally schematized way (e.g. what contact is or isn't a foul), your observation of their observations (second-order) can be more reliable than your first-order observations.

What I’m trying to say is, once you assume players are strategically competent, you can do “algebra” on the world, using their choices of action to model events you might not have fully witnessed, the same way you can use responses + environment to model player agenda, or agenda + environment to forecast behavior. Which is maybe just what “theory of mind” entails, under it all. Triangulations of their knowledge state, the world state, their desires, and their actions. Like it sorta seems like this is how we navigate the social world already?

You know that shy plant? Mimosa pudica, sometimes called the shameplant, that curls to the touch? If you give it opioids, it stops responding. It is "numbed."

The other way you get it numb, get it to stop curling? Touch/stimulate it the same way, over and over, until it’s habituated (with all the undertones of pragmatist habit, or Bourdieusean habitus). It’ll respond to novel types of stimulations, just not the one it’s used to (i.e. has seen over and over, i.e. has learned). It’s all frequency dependence.

Regardless of what light group the plants were in, one drop was not enough for the plants to learn to ignore the stimulation. For the groups that were dropped repetitively, the plants stopped folding their leaves and were even fully open after a drop before the end of the trainings. The low light plants learned faster to ignore the dropping stimulation than the high light plants. When the plants were shaken, they responded immediately by folding their leaves, which suggests that the plants were not ignoring the dropping stimulation due to exhaustion.[45] This research suggests that the Mimosa has the capability for habitual learning and memory storage and that Mimosa plants grown in low light conditions have faster learning mechanisms so they can reduce the amount of time their leaves are unnecessarily closed to optimize energy production.

There’s some universal law here. I find sort of incredible—that a plant, despite not having a nervous system, behaves the exact same way as animals do in response to the same chemical. And that this mimics habituation, the sleepwalking that is a world perfectly expected, i.e. ready-to-hand. That difference jolts the system into awareness, and that there’s an economy of difference, and that we're constantly playing the numbers, stockpiling jolt-power.

Part 2

[marithlizard]

Thoughts on RWBY v7 finale, “The Enemy of Trust”

Okay, finale, it's you and me.   I've heard some eyebrow-raising things.    Let's see what you've got.  

Neo vs JNRO!   My money's on umbrella girl, even at four to one.

Oscar's really getting along with this team.   I won't be surprised if sometime next volume they officially invite him to be the P(ine) in the reborn JNPR.

Yep, short and sweet.  She had a bit of fun there, and she was never in any danger.

I'm really appreciating the option to watch the fights at half-speed on the RT site and actually catch some of the clever moves.

Cinder's fighting style is quite different here than it was in all previous volumes. Remember the bow, the telekinetically controlled black glass shards,  the Maiden fire and the giant sword?   Right now she's leaping about acrobatically in melee with two short swords. If the face was different everyone would take this as an entirely new character.   I get that it's cool to try new things, writers, but I miss the consistency.

So she specifically despises the privileged elite of Atlas. Can't blame her for that.

Okay, consistency or not I have to admit the aerial combat is visually fantastic. Winter's gryphon and Penny charging Cinder from opposite sides, followed by  fire and ice colliding, wow.

Background music also doing its usual stellar job.

Penny says "I...disagree"  in exactly the same tone of voice Adam used, and for exactly the opposite reason.  That's a cool parallel and I'm sure it was intentional.

Oscar lagging behind out of breath. He's smaller and younger and is years behind everyone except Jaune on training, it makes sense.  Also probably not using Aura to recharge stamina like the others. 

Oooh, I knew it wasn't Nora instantly by the body language. Neo moves very distinctively, it's great.  

And she's had lots of practice in imitating the person you love at the right instant to make you hesitate. Poor Ren.

You don't normally yell "Drop your weapons!" and simultaneously open fire unless you are intending to kill rather than capture. I guess the soldiers are assuming that Huntsmen will survive any kind of damage a normal person can dish out.  Which is...not a safe assumption for Oscar I don't think.  Ugh Ironwood your stormtroopers are dumb.

Ren is crying oh no

Annnnd Neo just toddles off with the lamp. I love that short officer with short ponytail look on her.

FRIA WAKES

and she is  AWESOME

(Her eyes are the same blue as Ironwood's,  it does make you wonder. We never learned her last name. )

Ren with an understandable lack of perspective. He's thought of Huntsmen as the pinnacle of combat badassery all his life, when really it's just a benchmark  of competence along the path.   I suspect there aren't many people alive who could defeat Neo, outnumbered or not, and most of the people who can are god-tier.

Maria's kept a low profile all volume because she has no patience for the high-level strategy and arguments and politics,  she sure as hell isn't going to run grunt missions, and she'd last ten minutes in a room with the General before smacking him in the knees or possibly the nuts.  But she was ready to charge in with the logistical support the instant that arrest order went out on the net.   I just...love her.  She is the best.  

"I was supposed to protect the power of the Maiden until I was ready.  I worry I may have lost track of time...but you can tell James that I'm ready, now."    People were worried that Ironwood was holding Fria prisoner, forcing her into a sacrificial death. But the way she says that makes it very clear that she wasn't pressured.  He specifically told her when you're ready.   And he waited as long as he could.  

Ironwood apologizing to Winter with so much regret in his voice.   Look, you may hate him,  but the writers don't, that's abundantly clear.  And I don't either.  This is a classical Greek-style tragedy unfolding before us, a good person being destroyed as their inherent fatal flaw meets the worst possible circumstances for it.  

Oscar descending in the elevator, standing just like Ozpin.  That is an eerie sight.   He's going to imitate Oz as much as he can because Ironwood has been asking for Oz all along.   ...and it's going to backfire as a strategy, isn't it.

"And....whom do I have the pleasure of speaking with?"  "Still just me."  But you're leaning on your cane as you walk just like Ozpin did.

Someone suggested applying Blake's "embodiment of a word"  idea to all the characters, and the word I thought of at first for Oscar was innocence....but it's not, is it.  Oscar is the embodiment of sincerity.  He means every word of his offer to reconcile.  How could anyone resist?

...Apparently Ironwood can.   And I see it, I do.   If this is a chess game, then protecting the king - the relics - is ultimately the only thing that matters.  All the other pieces are expendable. Oz and Oscar and Ruby represent the opposite approach:  every piece matters, and what's most important is not to win the game but to preserve the board, to keep it all going.    

(If they'd told Ironwood all the way back in ch2 that as far as they know Salem can't be killed, would he have adjusted his perspective?   I believe he would have,  but not all the way.  There's a fundamental difference in mindset.   Lois Bujold talked in one of her books (Brothers in Arms I think) about how people are drawn to the romance of the hard choices. If you've believed all your life that hardship and painful sacrifice are necessary and inevitable, you get proudly attached to them in a way, and you tend to be skeptical, at best, of anyone who claims they can be avoided.  I've been thinking about that a lot this volume.)

Uh.

WHAT.

You were having an argument,  a heated but peaceful one.  Why would you suddenly draw your weapon and shoot a teenager off the edge of a cliff?   One who was offering no physical threat to you at all and who you could certainly have overpowered and arrested?   You arrested Watts, who was trying to kill you, nearly destroyed your kingdom, and made you nearly tear your own arm off.   Why would you murder Oscar?

You wouldn't.  This makes no sense, just like Clover and Qrow fighting each other instead of teaming up against Tyrian makes no sense.  I was hoping there'd be context in this case but there just isn't. The RWBY writers wanted dramatic scenes here and they didn't think the fans would care about anything else as long as it looked cool.

And this is new in v7, IMO.  While I've certainly had some quibbles with the writing in past volumes, I don't remember anything remotely like this.  Nothing so huge that I can't handwave or rationalize or say that it's a minor story element.   I'm a Watsonian, not a Doylist; I hate having to say that something is just plain bad writing.  

Ugh. Okay. Moving on.

That's a fast-regrowing Grimm arm.

I was expecting Penny to say "No, it's not me, it's supposed to be Winter," but she's really hesitating.  After the conversations they've had she's not sure the power should go to Winter.    There's nothing personal about it, no ambition.  Penny has been acting exactly as a Maiden should from the moment Fria first saw her, her every instinct to protect and help.

Uh, y'know, Winter, you could SHOOT CINDER during the many seconds she's writhing in helpless agony there.   You don't have to stand there and wait till she's ready to fight again.  Sigh.

That said, the sequence of Oscar falling,  power building in him and Penny,  the silver eyes etc is stunning.

(that little twirl Oscar does, like a shoujo magical girl.  cute)

holy carp there are still ten minutes left.

I don't think you're correct about fear being the common denominator, Oz, but I'll shut up and enjoy your very fine speech.

Winter makes her choice...and she's not surprised that Penny chooses differently.    Opposed to the heroes or not, I do think it's a good thing for her to stay at Ironwood's side.  Somebody sane needs to be ready to take over there sooner or later.  

Penny getting support from Ruby and Weiss,  yay.

This can't be easy for Pietro.  He's loyally helped Ironwood for decades, and he's not exactly in good shape to live the outlaw life.

Cinder, continuing to piss off her only ally.  Despite being the antagonist in a boss fight she felt...weirdly irrelevant at the end of it.  So much so that she just quietly left when no one was looking. 

"It's gone."  Well, now that's an interestingly vague way to put things, Winter.  Are you protecting Penny?   Withholding information from your boss is, as we've seen, not something he reacts well to.

Watts has an implausibly nice cell with a beautiful view.  

I think that's a quarry Oscar has fallen into, or perhaps the outskirts of a mine.  He and Oz have a LOT to talk about and I would really love to actually see the conversation next volume, writers.  For a change. 

ooooookay yep that's a flying murder behemoth whale.   I was expecting to be reminded of FFX's Sin, but it's got a vibe more like the whale from Pinocchio.  My vote for a name is therefore Monstro.   

Someone's dressed to impress her ex.

....Hmmmmm.  You know, I didn't see an actual army of flying monkeys.  Is there one? Is it inside the whale, or in that black cloud?  Or does Salem have something else in mind?  

"Fear" does seem like a song from Oz's point of view, but I don't feel it expresses his - or their - personality.  It's not the image song I'm still waiting for.  But then, quite a  few characters still haven't gotten theirs.  

Well. I'm on board for volume 8,  hopeful the writers will make better choices, and curious to see how we're going to START a volume with an ultimate boss encounter.  That's not a thing I've seen a story do before.

[raina16]

Thoughts on Steve Rogers and branching timelines

This isn’t about the ending itself because while it’s not my favorite possible ending, I have ZERO issues with Steve’s choice and think storywise, it has a lot of amazing potential for great plotlines and Steve Rogers’ characterization because its a very open ending, but it’s simply about the logistics of Steve Rogers in the new branch getting back to the prime branch in 2023 and other random thoughts.

I don’t think there is really any difficulty here.  Up until the point where the timelines diverge they are a SINGLE timeline. 

As such, I would speculate, all Steve needs to do to get to the prime MCU timeline is go back to a point just prior to it branching off when he stayed in 1945 and then go forward on the prime timeline instead of the new timeline.  All the coordinates would be in the technology he has with him and I’m sure by this time, given there was still Howard Stark and most likely Hank Pym and other great scientists in his new timeline, such technology could be perfected even further.(Esp if he’s actually from the future of his timeline as some of us have proposed because the serum slows aging down a great deal, he could be from the 22nd or even 23rd century of the new timeline) where that wouldn’t even be necessary and maybe they can simply “bridge” the timelines.  

But I would say even with the technology he HAS from MCU Prime 2023, he would be able to get to the prime timeline simply by going back to just before the new branch and then jumping forward on the original branch

In a way haven’t they already done that?  When Loki steals the tesseract in 2012, that causes a new branch of the timeline(in fact all their actions do, but depending on when Steve returns the mind stone, it may or may not affect 2012 Cap).  Yet Steve and Tony are able to go back to 1970, which both branches share, to get the tesseract and then go forward into the prime timeline, not the “Loki stole the tesseract and escaped timeline”.  Steve is returning the tesseract to 1970, not 2012.  

I would also say that the branches and the Infinity Stones are not necessarily connected.  That is to say, the Infinity Stones may need to be in certain places at certain times, no matter what the timeline but that you don’t need an infinity stone to cause a new branch.  Sort of like a fixed point and maybe there are massive blah blah comic book science/technology consequences if that is not the case.  Maybe the Infinity Stones have to be in the same places at the same times in all the timelines.

However putting the Infinity Stone back where it belongs doesn’t necessarily cut off the branch(and I don’t think the Ancient One was necessarily saying that, because she was talking about an infinity stone needing to be where she needed it when she needed it, in other words minimal consequences). It can I suppose, if there were literally no other changes and it wasn’t missed, completely cut off the branch, but I would think any change that caused someone in that time period to change something they did would be a new timeline, even if in every other way it was the same as the Prime timeline. 

EX: In this timeline, Person A chose green shoes because Time Traveller walked past wearing a similar shade of green and they liked it, and in Prime timeline Person A chose red shoes because Time Traveller did not walk past them wearing green.  Even if that is the ONLY single change and it affects nothing else, because in both cases Person A got the shoes home decided they didn’t like how they fit and tossed them in a closet to never be worn by themselves or anyone else again, there is a still a difference between between Prime Timeline and new timeline and that difference is Person A bought green shoes in one and red shoes in the other.

When Steve returns the time stone, it will be as though the Ancient One never missed it, though she will know it had been taken and why, which given she’s the Ancient One and time stone sorcery yada yada maybe she always did,, however that doesn’t change the fact that in 2012 Steve has Jasper Sitwell convinced he’s Hydra, which didn’t happen in the Prime timeline, even if he just dropped the infinity stone suitcase right outside the elevator and never spoke to his 2012 self and even if Steve managed to track down Loki and somehow return him and the infinity stone with little effect on the timeline, which seems unlikely.

IMO there is always going to be a new branch of the timeline where Sitwell thinks Steve’s in on the Hydra thing in 2012 and where Loki escaped, however briefly.(I also think Steve knows this and so given it’s a new timeline anyway, probably would tell his 2012 self in this new timeline when he’s returning the stone, in a quick run down just as he’s regaining consciousness that what he said about Bucky was true, that Hydra has infiltrated SHIELD with dozens of not hundreds of people and that Sitwill is in on it and he needs to very carefully investigate, and of course that he can trust Natasha and Nick but be careful. :)  I’d love to see this movie, where Steve plays a part of bringing Hydra down from the get go and he has to convince Nat and Nick it’s true, etc)

[roxannepolice]

Punishments, redemptions and force deprivations - or the b*tching that was promised

Arite, so I guess we all here agree that Luke’s naughty nephew can’t end this trilogy with so much as a tap on his wrist. Some reckoning is due for jedi killing, dad piercing, mind probing, force choking and village burning. But I guess we also all agree that it can’t be another redemption=death feast, we had it with his grandpa. 

So, all sorts of different theories as to how Kylo Ben will pay for his crimes have emerged, the most popular of those being maiming (particularly arm losing), exile (more or less self imposed), imprisonment (for term unknown) and force deprivation. Being frustrated with the apparent seductiveness of all of these tropes being flung here and there, I decided to explain why none of this makes much sense for a deeper narrative meaning. Disclaimer, though: I can’t say that the writers definitely won’t go there, I can only explain why they don’t make as much sense as they would seem at a first glance. I’ll also spend more time on the subject of force  deprivation, because it’s, frankly, probably the most tempting and the most shiver inducing.

First of all, all of the above options could be very strong narrative points – if they’re temporary. Yes, that would even include death, considering Rey’s heroine journey is likely to incorporate some rebirth imagery. Loss of arm is still an option to honour a family tradition, especially if Kylo Ben loses his crossguard lightsaber and has to use Luke’s green one - the weapon that made a would - for a while. But when any of those things is done permanently.... well, that’s where my bitching comes in.

Let us dissect what are narrative purposes of punishment, beginning with enumerating what they shouldn’t, though very often seem to, be:

giving audience a sense of justice – this is probably the most valid point among these. We certainly need some karma feast before we’ll forgive Kylo Ben. But that being said, the attitude of well, we don’t won’t him to die, so let him be permanently deprived in some other way has too much of hand washing vibe, IMO. That especially applies to force deprivation. We’re civilised people, popculture progressed so much since Vader... No, let him live, but let’s make sure he can no longer cause evil he’s caused by taking away from him a universal power dormantly binding all beings that he had too much of and clearly abused. *Sigh* This may be a heavy cannon, but this, y’all is

Goodness is something to be chosen. When a man cannot choose he ceases to be a man, if you get the drift. And no, this doesn’t mean I apply exactly the same morality to real life, this is fiction, here to provide me with a catharsis that may become reflection over real world, not give me straightforward answers about it, I can’t believe I had to consider this disclaimer

paying for the crimes – let’s get something straight. If you kill a murderer, you don’t bring back the people they’ve killed, you only get another dead person. I think we all agree here that Kylo Ben’s redemption will be through life, not death but also not any other punishment. Because him suffering won’t erase the suffering he’s caused

a lesson for the audience through a character, aka. cautionary – yes, I get it, Don Giovanni was a bad person to seduce thousands and commit murder, he refused to repent, Commandor’s ghost was right to drag him to hell, and good guys are even more right to sing Questo e fin di chi fa mal. I suppose I won’t be seducing people and killing their fathers now that I’ve seen a man dragged to theatrical hell. Congratulations, Wolfie, you’ve done a great job if you think’s that’s serious just listen to the opera and hear the mockery in the music

So, now that we’re clear on what aren’t the narrative purposes of punishment, let’s dig deeper beyond the surface level and see what hides beneath the above simulacrae.

evoking pity for the character – well, art isn’t a purely intellectual experience, we need some appeal to the emotions, too. What seems to us like justice getting it’s due is in fact evoking in us – and other characters – pity towards a reforming character. It’s rediscovering humanity where we denied its existence. Maiming, imprisonment, exile, torture and force deprivation would all have that effect on the audience, however they can easily turn to joy when the reformed villain has their status restored when they prove worthy

a declaration – when a villainous character willingly subjugates themselves to good guys’ justice, it serves to show that they aren’t just tossing words at wind. They want to change, in fact they want nothing more in their lives, so they would accept whatever price they have to pay for the world to allow them that change – even if it’s their life, to show that they accept the right of those they formerly fought. Again, all options match, though permanence is almost counterproductive

a lesson for the audience and a character – if nothing else works to for the villain to change their ways, they need a lesson, which will also serve as a food for thought for the audience. This is where the trope of paying with what they value most about themselves comes in, especially if pride was one of their sins. Ramsay Bolton trigger warning.

A warrior loses a hand, a seducer gets neutred, a prophet (seer) goes blind, a liar loses a tongue, Thor loses Mjolnir – an extremely powerful force user loses his force sensitivity. They need to understand what it’s like to be one of those they despised and abused – but, on a more positive note when a character is to become a hero, also learn that their value didn’t end at what they considered their only greatest asset.

This is Star Wars, it’s now adoptive sibling of MCU, not HBO, and that’s why I can see temporary, Thor-like, loss of force sensitivity in store for Kylo Ben – maybe that would be the revival in Rey’s story, should Disney-LF feel that actual BatB scene could be a tad too cheesy. So now I’ll delve into narrative options for force deprivation and explain why they all make more sense when temporary and not permanent:

he cuts himself away from it as a form of self-flagellation – done. And really, Luke’s whole arc in TLJ was about refusing to act being just as harmful as acting wrongly, so I can only see that scenario if it ends with Rey kicking another Skywalker’s ass out of useless pit of despair

he’s deprived of it by the bad guys – first of all, let’s discuss the logistics here. It’s not as if any technology or chemistry could actually bend the universal will to their own desire. The most it can do is mess with an individual’s nervous system enough for them to not be able to use it. I can see that happening to Kylo Ben, courtesy of Hux, once again, excellent occasion for Rey’s revival powers to shine. That being said – this here, is Faustus. Devil can have all the chirographs he likes, the doctor can willingly forfeit his soul – God and Margaret have different plans

he’s deprived of it by the good guys – so I suppose they could even try to be more delicate about than Hugsy. But it’s necessary. It’s just. It’s what the force wants, they know it, it’s they that keep telling each other may the force be with you. This here, on the other hand, is Tannhauser. The pope knows when a sinner is beyond redemption and has God’s word on his side to deny the absolution – and ends up with his staff springing leaves to show him he himself became blinded by pride

he just loses it. Force is done. he doesn’t deserve it – BITCH, NOW?!!!!!! YOU DID NOTHING TO PALPATINE, TO SNOKE, TO MAUL, EVEN TO VADER BUT NOW YOU INTERVENE? I KNOW ANAKIN HARDLY GOT HIS CHARACTER FROM SHMI, BUT REALLY????? There’s no narratively satisfying moment for that to happen (again, permanently) – if it happens after he turns, what the hell, now that he’s trying to actually make up for the evil, now he gets punished? This is no case of showing good will, what’s the point? If before – well, exactly, bitch, now? Not when Snoke started to get inside his head, not when he destroyed the jedi temple, not when he killed his father, not the moment he seized power, only some two years into his rule? Honestly, there’s only one way that would make sense – if he’s actually really effing evil as the renperor and... frankly, I root for his redemption because I believe he’s actually capable of being a good person before it’s his only option.

There are some other reasons why force deprivation would feel right to us. Some may want to see it as passing the torch entirely out of Skywalker bloodline and onto Rey (cue in some mystical feminism) – but, frankly speaking, you can’t have a trilogy packed to the brim with yin-yang imagery and then end it with yeah, they’re equal and mutually dependent parts but some parts are just equaller. In a way, Kylo Ben’s role isn’t to redeem himself only to redeem all of the darkness of the prime jedi.

There’s also the laying down the gun trope – the sheriff saves the city and then drops his star to go farming.  This feels right to us, even those who wish Reylo all the best. But that’s the problem with both accepted/self imposed force deprivation, exile and to some extent imprisonment – they all give a sense of peace.

And Kylo Ben deserves many things – corporeal punishment, learning what it’s like to not be force sensitive, sex with Rey, being a subject to mind probe (though I would say he had it the hard way with Snoke for years), losing his arm, fighting side by side with Rey, utter hellfire which will explode in his chest when he sees Chewie, showing off what the piece of junk can actually do, kissing every freckle on Rey’s skin, guiding a new generation of force users, especially those temped by extreme darkness, family with Rey. Punishment. Redemption. Life. Love. Happiness. 

But not peace. Not yet.

[laundryandtaxes]

Julia, if banning guns isn't a smart solution what is?? Should there just be stricter access?? Do you have any recommendations for articles to read with alternative solutions?

Short answer is that I have ideological disagreements with disarming regular people snd leaving rhe police and military fully armed, and I consider an armed populace a necessary defense against the rise of fascism, etc. That doesn't mean I oppose every regulation measure, but those let the federal government keep a list of every gun in the country, or severely limit firepower available to civilians beyond their current limitations are things I don't support on principle. When the police state sets down its guns, and when white nationalists who are increasingly vocal and visible in the streets set theirs down, I will set mine down too and we can talk our issues out. But while my enemies are armed I will be too. The problem then of what to do is that I genuinely don't think there is very much, even outside of things I listed above that I am NOT okay with. So, let's say I'm okay with any form of gun control at all, no limits. Banning so-called assault weapons sounds nice and makes people feel good. But there are tens of millions in the country. What are you going to do about those? How are you going to stop them from being sold in private sales? Leave "assault weapons" available but limit magazine capacity? I would bet money every well armed white nationalist has at least 15, more like 30, loaded at all times. Create a registry of them? Sounds cute, but I guarantee you the most dangerous armed people (including those legally armed, like 3%ers) are never going to register anything, not a pump shotgun or their ARs. The thriving illegal market for guns is just too large already for most changes to do anything other than affect people who are actually concerned with following firearms law, who are not the threat to begin with. There's more than one gun in the country for every person- I would bet those estimates are conservative and there are probably 2 or more, so 600 million guns in the country. Frankly, I think it is mostly too late to be talking about limiting supply of something when you have at LEAST 300 million in the country. It's silly. I know people who know people who've bought guns illegally just because it was easy, not even because they were legally barred from ownership- people who could buy one perfectly legally but either didn't know how to or knew it was just easier to buy one from a buddy. So I don't think most laws would be effective in a country this populated by guns. You wanna restrict access going forward, sure, but that does nothing to address the minimum 300 million here. And any mentions of confiscation are just war talk- I assure you the far right is ready and willing to go to civil war over confiscation implementation. No other country being held up as a model for gun control had this many to deal with (Australia buying up and destroying 600,000 is such a wild comparison to make to the logistics of rounding up not .6 million but 300 million guns) and none of them have the right to gun ownership either in their constitution or just culturally engrained as an important right. So the kinds of things put in place in other countries wouldn't work here. There are measures I support, but as stated they only affect people actually trying to follow the law. I support making the NICS background check system (which everyone needs to pass in order to buy a gun at a gun shop) available to civilians so people can easily run a check on someone trying to buy a firearm from them, and not unwittingly sell to criminals. I support safe storage laws for houses with children or people who should not have firearms access in them (if you have children and guns you should have a safe to which they don't have access). In theory I support mandating that private sales be conducted with a NICS background check but I see 0 ways to enforce that. Nobody approached on a street corner about a gun is going to whip out their phone for a quick background check. The whole issue is also not discussed well because people have this image in their heads of American gun violence that's inaccurate. Off the bat, 60% are suicides- and the US has a suicide rate of about 10.3 per 100,000 people, far below Japan (the model gun control countrt for many) at 19.0 per 100,000. So when we talk about interpersonal gun violence (which is what everyone thinks the whole number is) we are talking about 30% of total firearms deaths, after subtracting a few thousand accidents. Then you look at how many people are murdered by what, and a whopping 3% of firearms deaths in this country are with any kind of rifle. Not just ARs or AKs or other scary rifles, but aaaaany rifle at all. Your odds of being bludgeoned to death are greater than your odds of dying at the middle end of a rifle. So when we talk about "assault weapons" bans that leaves 97% of gun violence completely intact, assuming nobody ever kills anyone with an AR ever again after a ban. Which is not a reasonable assumption imo. Americans generally think "mass shootings" comprise a bigger portion if the gun violence pie than they do. They don't. Thwy just capture attention easily. And even when you read about "mass shootings" in papers, they generally count any 4 people shot at once, not just the politically motivated mass violence that makes headlines. In Chicago and lots of other cities that's almost 100% gang violence. The face of mass shootings in the US is not the lone wolf shooter, though white dudes with histories of violence against women and racist ideologies are most likely to commit the KINDS of violence that makes headlines. It's poor kids trapped in bad neighborhoods with no way of getting a job or making money except dealing and no way to deal except through small gangs lacking even the control they had in the 90s. And we have programs that have worked at the local level to deal with that particular kind of violence. But nobody wants to deal with uplifting those groups so let's ban "assault rifles" and hope gun violence goes away? It's just nonsense.So even if I was okay with every kind of legislation possible, I just don't think most of it would work in a culture with massive general problems with violence and a country so invested in warfare. If the police state almost completely disarmed (not politically possible in the US) and we tried Japanese style gun control in the US for, say, 5 yeara and it WORKED that would be one thing. I just doubt the efficacy of most reforms put forward and think they're more about making people feel good than saving lives.

[lilanbex]

Evolution of Disney Channel: Andi Mack Part 1

Why exactly is Andi Mack something completely new for this channel?

I’ve been thinking about writing this for awhile and held off on it because I wanted the first season to finish first, but I’m going to separate it into parts and start off with production and get deeper into storyline/plot elements in a later post when I get the chance to look back at the season as a whole.

I’m planning to take a look back at older Disney Channel shows, but realistically if I make any comparisons I’m going to look mainly at shows coming after 2010 and probably Lizzie McGuire. 

It’s a long post so get ready but TL;DR this show uses the best of Disney’s production techniques and then keeps pushing the boundaries by taking risks that are paying off. 

Single-Camera

Disney Channel’s first original series Flash Forward (1995-1997) was interestingly geared towards preteens/teens and was produced as a single-camera show in Canada. It really wasn’t until the early 2000s that the multi-cam sitcom with a laugh track most of us are used to became popular on DC starting with That’s So Raven (2003-2007). But after that, there was a huge shift into the multi-cam format with Suite Life/Hannah Montana/WOWP taking over, getting a ton of recognition, and with people referring back to that era as “Old Disney”/”When Disney was good” now. With multi-cams on the rise, single-cam shows became much less popular– until JONAS/JONAS LA (2009-2010), the last single-cam was Phil of the Future (2004-2006). After JONAS, there was nearly a seven year gap until Stuck in the Middle (2016-) and right now SITM is the only other single-cam airing alongside Andi Mack. Why is this a trend on the channel? Multi-cam shows are easier to produce, less expensive to make, and you can make more episodes faster, but it usually also means filming in front of an audience/including a laugh track. Since the multi-cam shows of the mid 2000s did so amazingly well and cable programming was at its peak, it’s not a surprise that DC continued to use it, but I’d argue that there was a significant decrease in quality in DC multi-cams 2010 onwards especially after Good Luck Charlie (2010-2014) finished. DC has avoided going into single-cam these past few years so the only similar kids shows with the same emotional intelligence I can compare this format to are from Amazon like Gortimer Gibbon’s Life on Normal Street (2014-2016). I’m not going to get into the logistics but here’s more information about the single-cam vs. multi-cam debate. 

For Andi Mack, I think the single-cam format has helped to make it more realistic and elevates the overall quality for cinematography. In terms of the storyline, I really think format particularly works well because the show isn’t just a comedy but really finds a good balance with the drama, which works much better with single-cam. I mean, I don’t think Bex’s reveal in the pilot could’ve worked any other way. 

This single-cam format extends to where the show shoots, which brings me to:

Filming On-Location

The first season of Andi Mack was shot in Salt Lake City and this article sums up a bit about how that affects the look of the series. Correct me if I’m wrong, but other than international series/DCOMs/special episodes, this is really the first modern Disney Channel original series shot entirely outside of studios in California. Even the other single-cams JONAS and SITM, are filmed in studios around Hollywood. The shots we get of the characters walking down the hallway feel real because they were shot at a real middle school. The extras in the background? Real middle school kids from the town. The salon for the Fringe that Bex works at is a real salon that they used. With filming on location, we get a much richer look into Andi’s world that isn’t limited to a traditional set that a Disney Channel living room usually looks like. Using actual places helps capture movement and we get to see Andi live her life rather than be told she does certain activities because we see her and Jonah at Ultimate practice, Buffy running a race, Bex at work, and conversations between the Good Hair Crew in a booth at the Spoon.

Another plus? Andi Mack filmed outside of LA makes this show feel more special because the cast and crew can actually go and focus on making the show for a few months. I’m really glad they were able to just go do their thing and spend time with each other working on this project. (But I can’t attest to this so maybe ask @persongoingfast). With a multi-cam that shoots in front of a live audience, spoilers are bound to come out months ahead of time and for Andi Mack, the plot twists are integral to the show. The fandom cultivated out of interactions at live tapings can also get downright vicious, which is why filming in SLC has probably helped Andi Mack remain relatively peaceful and friendly. Just refer back to Girl Meets World (2014-2017)’s twitter fandom even a year ago. IMO, it’s healthier for a young cast to focus on filming rather than how each interaction with a fan at a live taping can be misconstrued and then made viral over Twitter and Instagram. Even if it means that Andi Mack is less known and has a quieter fandom, it feel much more like the show can stand as its own piece of work rather than become about the actors as celebrity figures, but we’ll see how this looks like in the coming seasons.

Women Leading this Show!

Terri Minsky and Michelle Manning are the EPs at the helm of the show and aside from SITM, modern Disney Channel shows just don’t have women occupying these positions and that’s really unfortunate when it comes to creating programming geared towards girls that are focused on coming-of-age stories. Frankly, I think this is something where GMW struggled with at times to capture a girl’s perspective that wasn’t too heavy handed with morality. 

Seven of the nine Andi Mack episodes that have aired have been written by women. Do they need more women of color on staff? Yes. Do they need more women (of color) directors? Yes. Andi Mack is still very early on in its series trajectory so hopefully the show can also push for more diverse creators in seasons to come. Feel free to disagree with me on this but I think a creative’s identity plays a huge role into how they go forward with all aspects of a project so women being at the forefront of a show about mother/daughter relationships is really important. 

Serialization 

Last, I want to talk about the structure of “last time/next time on Andi Mack” and how serialization makes this show a first for DC. Disney Channel sitcoms usually air out of order. Even Lizzie McGuire (2001-2004) did and it tried to follow Lizzie growing up. It didn’t matter as much for nonserialized shows for the most part because each episode can usually stand on its own with individual slice of life stories. Other than the awkwardness of an actor being taller/voice dropping in an earlier episode than the next, it doesn’t drastically change the story. Most coming-of-age/family oriented shows on the channel follow a general school year structure, but otherwise you didn’t need to know what happened in the previous episode to make sense of a different one. Sure, this makes it easier for DC to put episodes on repeat throughout the day, but doesn’t have the same payoff of following through with something serialized, which is now more popular with Netlfix and binge watching. 

Andi Mack requires the audience then to follow along with the series to get the satisfaction of knowing where the story’s going because you’re not going to get it at the end of every episode. With only 13 half hour episodes in the season, serialization is necessary for this show to even create a viable storyline in the first place. Particularly for a series aimed at kids/teens, I think it’s smart to show that issues aren’t always solved at the end of 22 minutes and that’s okay. Also in heightening the stakes at the end of each episode, it shows that younger kids don’t necessarily have to resort to watching more adult shows outside of their demo to get more exciting drama in their programming, but that DC can be a bit edgier and still be age-appropriate.  

That’s it for part 1 but I’m quickly realizing I have so much more I want to look into the show beyond the story itself like costume choices, Mack Chat, and the parallels to the Lizzie/Miranda/Gordo dynamic in comparison to other DC friendships over the years but that’ll have to wait! 

[topfenstrudel]

reference review - story genius

How to Use Brain Science to Go Beyond Outlining And Write A Riveting Novel* [*Before You Waste Three Years Writing 327 Pages That Go Nowhere] – Lisa Cron

Something a little different for this almost-month; I happened to go to the library a little while ago. As you do I pottered around the reference section aimlessly poking around for things to take home and not read, and decided to impulse borrow this book. Then for once I actually read it. We’re all capable of the impossible

Rating: Helpful but Egregiously Patronising/10

You may have heard of the exTRORdinarily popular (I think) Snowflake Method, which boils down to, “get the basic plot of your novel and extrapolate all the bits in the middle of those bits (and then develop those bits into smaller bits)”. It’s essentially an exercise in “working backwards” from what you know to fill in the gaps in your planning. However, if you’ve tried to use it you may have found out that actually doing this is not as simple as it sounds. Either you end up with no ideas at all, or have too many, and not much reason for you to pick one idea over the other. The reason you need a planning method is that you don’t know what to do next, but Snowflake doesn’t give you very much guidance given on how you should fill in the gaps; you’re just told to do it in a certain order. So, unless you already have a lot of well-developed ideas it can be frustratingly difficult to use. It doesn’t really do anything to solve the underlying problem – why should I put anything here? What am I doing???? Help?????????

You’d have to work it out on your own and we all (read: I) just can’t be bothered honestly. I don’t want to think critically about how I should put the meat in my novel sandwich, I am a big baby and want somebody to do it for me.

If you sympathise with this, you may find this book helpful.

Cron’s approach in this book is that everything in a novel is centred around its “third rail” - the protagonist’s emotional journey. If it’s not related to their struggle (“what they learn”, ”the theme”, etc.), chuck it! Basically:

The internal struggle (emotional journey) is what they have to deal with internally in order to solve the external plot problem

The protagonist has a desire & misbelief; these conflict; it's very important to know WHY the protagonist has developed these

The plot events are created to force the internal change, not the other way around - what do the events MEAN to the protagonist?

Cause & effect - the plot should be (in some sense) karma, not “what goes around comes around” but “if you lie about graduating college, when you’re about to get your dream job, that lie is bound to surface”. (Dramatic, much? Very Hollywood when at its most extreme like this, but imo the point should stand at some level.)

The cause and effect should reveal the logic behind everything, both internally (what would my protagonist’s beliefs/ past experience cause them to do in this situation) and externally (how will the other characters and world react to what my protagonist will do).

Each scene has an external & internal change within it, which leads directly to what should be the next scene (“if this, therefore that” not “and then”). Each scene must have a single big purpose e.g. "this is the scene where she kidnaps the dog".

As for scene content, you can ask yourself a series of questions such as “is this necessary for the plot?” “Is this logical externally (logistically)?” “Is this logical internally (for the protagonist’s/character’s current states of mind)?”

Ask “Why” of everything, and don’t stop asking until you’ve reached the most story-specific, concrete, “close your eyes and you can see it unfold” origin and there are no “whys” left to ask.

Ask “And so?” of everything. “And so, why does my reader need to know this?” “And so, how does this move the story forward?” “And so, what will happen as a result?” I.e. WHAT IS THE POINT!

That’s about it. I saved you approximately ten hours. Despite its Hollywood-ness, I really like her approach. I think this is a really logical way to plan a novel!

Her process – which you carry out through the exercises, and if you don’t want to do that then don’t bother reading the book – is to develop a base of information for the cause-and-effect trajectory.  She leads you through developing the protagonist from the ground up (read: past-up, including their misbelief & desire), writing some beginning/starting scenes and the "ending" (the protagonist’s final big moment of realisation), then a sample of the rest of your planning experience, which will basically be simultaneously developing & writing the novel in chronological order. It’s expected that as you do stuff you’ll naturally think up more questions you’ll need to answer and have to go through and carry through changes (in writing & plan).

As for how to fill in the blanks in your novel, Cron’s idea is that the answer is in the content that you already have. Go through the story and search for the event, given who the characters are, that would logically happen next, or trigger the next thing you know will happen (or that needs to happen to get whatever you know happens at the end of the blank). Then think about what will happen next, etc., etc.! She emphasises that the solution to all types of missing content (character details, empty middle bits) is to ask “why” of your novel, or “and so?” - what logically should happen next. A lot more detailed than Mr Snowflake.

Compared to Mr Snowflake’s start-(middle stuff you’re supposed to just know I guess)-end to start- mid-steps – (middle stuff) – more mid-steps –end, Cron’s method makes a lot more sense to me. If you find that you haven’t figured out the middle you don’t have to just stop stuck, you just have to ask more questions. It really helps that (after you work out the “ending”) it’s chronologically ordered (start-end to start-logical post-start - end) as well. This planning method that she provides (also including a folder structure!) via her exercises I found incredibly helpful. Her writing style, however, not so much.

Cron’s language is liberally peppered with buzzwords, repeated information, and unnecessary references to other books. Points are repeated multiple times or rehashed into new metaphors so often that by the time you get to the end of the book you’ll have forgotten what the original words were supposed to mean. Instead of simply “the why of the story as per Chapter Four” it’s a constant barrage of “the why of your story, which you HAVE to touch on, ASK yourself about each time, YOU HAVENT FORGOTTEN YET ALREADY HAVE YOU I THINK YOU HAVE SURELY?”. It feels like I’m assumed to have the attention span of a child, and combined with the friendly tone, am being talked down to as if I’m one.

Having to constantly struggle to understand buzzwords of Cron’s own definition, or tell whether something is actually new information, makes the book confusing and frustrating to read. It felt sometimes like I was relying on the examples (also horridly written, but they do their job well) to be able to understand what I was supposed to do. These are not things that should be able to be said about an educational novel (surprise!).

Overall the tone doesn’t really serve the intended purpose, so to me it feels more like Cron is trying to self-aggrandisingly sell you on the methods of a book that you’ve already bought and half-consumed, than reassuring you that you’re doing well.

Buzzwords (which is, by the way, how you tell/rate a bad self-help book; thankfully she didn’t use any acronyms)

Minor Nit-Picks

If you want to write A Theme Book for Grown-Ups not a “Hollywood Movie”-esque story, or anything in a non-Western story structure, this probably isn’t for you. I don’t really like that she frames this as the only proper way to write a good story. You could probably replace the “everything has to link back to the third rail” with “the theme” or “the question” for a similar effect.

This book is (by its own admission) about how to write an entertaining novel, not a well-written or thematically complex one. Think an Agatha Christie or 50 Shades.

I feel like missing from the book is a "these methods may not work for you", and even if sensible adults should be able to understand this on their own, to me it feels a bit dishonest to leave it out, especially given the tone.

Brain science not from a brain scientist

In possibly one of the most annoying failures at gender equality Cron refers to “your protagonist” alternatively with “she” and “he” pronouns for the whole book instead of using singular “they” thus slapping you in the mental face each time she switches and sounding like a pedantic uneducated twat

I don’t really agree with the ideas of where, or with what, a novel should start; you might need more set-up for the world than starting at the “point of no return” for the protagonist;

Could’ve used chapter summaries considering the roundabout writing style

This isn’t a nitpick but the "what if" (primary-school writing prompts) segment is really insightful? Also her recommendation of writing the ending scene really helped to discover/iron out the kinks in my stuff and is super good to help you keep in mind where you’re going and please do it? I REFUSE to ruin my formatting just for the sake of a good thing she did

Overall I can only come down in favour of this book. If you’ve struggled with planning a novel or even wrapping your head around writing one but you want to, I won’t say it’s THE book for you, but it’s a book, and if you can get over Cron’s horrid writing then I really recommend it to you.

Personally I recommend that if you feel like there are ANY scenes in your novel that you can write, right now, that you try finishing one or two BEFORE going into this book. Mainly for your own motivation, but, it might also help you figure out whether or not Cron’s techniques are for you.

Finally, a quote:

"There is no firmly established next [...] writers very often stop writing after the first twenty pages because THEY have no idea what comes next either. The problem is that BECAUSE there are so many options, it's the same as having none."

Regardless of any of its other qualities or flaws, Story Genius solves that problem. It really helped me to plan MYYYY novel and they don’t teach you how to do that in school.

[myallywynn]

Don’t be caught out with an unseaworthy container – follow this checklist and avoid cargo damage

There are several reasons why the cargo inside a container could get damaged.

It could be due to improper packing of cargo inside a container, incorrect container used for the cargo carried, but one of the main reasons for cargo damage inside a container is the condition of the container itself.

Wet damage due water ingress (rain, seawater etc) into the container ;

Wet damage due to condensation inside the container when an incorrect type of container is used like using a normal container instead of a ventilated container ;

Contamination due to adjacency risk or odor transfer ;

Infestation damage

are some of the common types of damages reported on cargoes that are packed in containers.

As a general rule, shipping lines reject these claims confirming that the gate out documents of the containers were clean at the time of release to the shipper.

Insurance companies use Unseaworthiness and Unfitness Exclusion Clause stated in ICC (A) not to cover similar claims either, unless the insured can prove that he was not aware of the condition of the container at the time of loading.

Obviously, this situation causes a lot of frustration, feelings of injustice, and could result in absorbed losses among shippers globally.

  So should the shipper simply accept this rejection of claims and move on?

No, the shipper can take a few precautions to avoid these or some steps to mitigate their losses as listed below if there are cargo damages that may have occurred due to pre-existing condition of an unseaworthy container.

Pre-existing conditions means when the container released has bent door hinges, rust, dents, old cracks in the door of the container, apparent improper previous repairs etc.

Shipping Lines must exercise due diligence to make the container equipment is seaworthy by regularly servicing its containers.

As the shipping line is obligated to properly and carefully load, keep, care for and carry the cargo under their care and custody and deliver it in the same good order and condition in which it was in upon loading, they would also try their best to take care that they release good condition containers and avoid unseaworthy containers.

As cargo damages affect both parties, it is a responsibility shared by both the shipping lines and shippers to check that the container issued is not an unseaworthy container.

A shipper and/or his agent or logistics services provider (like a freight forwarder) needs to ensure that they have received a seaworthy, good, clean and sound condition container from the shipping line and the container does not have any of the above mentioned pre-existing conditions.

On the outside of the container:

No holes or cracks in the walls or the roof of the container because this is one of the easiest ways for water or air to get into the container ;

Doors operate properly because this is also an easy way for water or air to get into the container ;

Closing devices operate properly. This is to avoid easy access for theft or possible damage to the goods inside the container ;

No adhesive labels from the previous cargo, e.g. IMO placards. This is a common issue that could affect the carriage of the goods for the current shipper because they could be penalised by the port or the ship for the carriage of undeclared hazardous goods whereas the goods inside the container are not actually hazardous. There are several very strict ports around the world where misdeclared hazardous cargo will not be allowed to move through the port and the only way to prove this could be for the container to be unpacked in that port ;

For flatracks: stanchions (if ordered) are complete and correctly fitted. For 40′ flatracks: all lashing belts are present ;

For open-top containers: roof bows are complete and correctly fitted ;

For open-top containers: tarpaulins are undamaged and fit properly; ends of tarpaulin ropes are undamaged; all tarpaulin eyelets are present ;

For hard-top containers: the roof is undamaged, the roof locking mechanism fits and operates properly ;

Take pictures of the container from all sides outside, showing the container number as well, as proof of its condition at the time of packing

  Inside the container

Check for cracks, holes, door gaskets etc ;

Check there is no light or air coming into the container when the container is fully locked ;

Make sure the interior is absolutely dry and not damp or moist ;

The container is clean, free of cargo residues and neutral in odor ;

If you are loading any sensitive or clean cargo ensure there are no oil stains on the floorboard as those could seep through to the cargo ;

No nails or other protrusions which could damage the cargo.

Take pictures of the inside of the container, showing the container number as well, as proof of its condition at the time of packing.

  Post Arrival

If there are signs of cargo damage when cargo reaches its destination, the receiver should take necessary steps to ensure they have all the details to place a claim with either the carrier or the shipper especially if the container is found to be unseaworthy.

Pictures of showing the damage to the cargo clearly ;

Pictures of the container while unpacking, with a specific focus on holes, cracks in the side panel or roof, door gaskets, floor, dents and anything else that could signal that the condition of the container was preexisting and result of the bad maintenance of the container ;

Ensure that the pictures are taken before the return of the empty container to the yard ;

Arrange a joint survey with the shipping line and the surveyor of the shipper where all the details of the damage to the cargo and condition of the container should be included in the survey report

  Conclusion

Containerisation started 64 years ago and the containers have evolved very much since then but I am sure you are aware that there are containers in the fleet of shipping lines that are 20+ years old. On some of the trade routes, majority of the containers could be of this age and not in the best shape.

It is in the shipper’s interest to protect themselves by checking the condition of container(s) before loading cargo and collecting clear evidence of any pre-existing condition of the container in order to make sure they get fairly compensated for the damaged cargo.

Do you have any other points to share on how to avoid cargo damage due to an unseaworthy container?

About the Author

Lina Jasutiene is an entrepreneur, international shipping lawyer, an expert in marine insurance, and cargo claims with strong business acumen.

Prior to founding Recoupex to fix the cargo claims refund experience in global trade, Lina worked with one of the biggest shipping lines, where she witnessed first hand the implications of unrecovered claims for cargo owners and insurers.

Lina is passionate about merging technology and industry expertise to create a radically better customer experience and to substantially reduce losses and increase cost savings for marine insurers and cargo owners.

Recoupex is a technology company helping customers globally to obtain the compensation they are entitled to when cargo is lost or damaged in transit.

The post Don’t be caught out with an unseaworthy container – follow this checklist and avoid cargo damage appeared first on Shipping and Freight Resource.

from Moving https://shippingandfreightresource.com/cargo-damage-due-to-unseaworthy-container/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

[hudsonespie]

Interview: Russia's Phased Approach to Northern Sea Route Development

The Russian Government recently approved a Northern Sea Route Infrastructure Development Plan for the period up to 2035. 

Maxim Kulinko, Deputy Head of the Northern Sea Route (NSR) Directorate and Head of Rosatom’s Department for Development of NSR and Coastal Territories, discusses its implications for shipping.

What is the purpose of the Plan?

It is a comprehensive document, and for the first time, a phase-by-phase approach has been applied to the NSR development till 2035. Actually, no previous documents said when year-round navigation should be ensured on the Northern Sea Route or what should be done for that. Now, as the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan is approved, we are guided by a task to start year-round operation on the Northern Sea Route from 2025.

The Plan also covers emergency response issues. We are grateful to Yury Trutnev, Deputy Prime Minister - Presidential Plenipotentiary Envoy to the Far Eastern Federal District, who suggested that we should consider the Plan from the perspective of airport and railway infrastructure which can be potentially linked with the Northern Sea Route and supply it with cargo as well as from the perspective of medicine and personnel.

On the other hand, we acknowledge the changeability of life and do not view this Plan to be dogmatic. It should be improved and adjusted. I am sure that the federal authorities, the entities of the Federation and large investors can expand it with their projects.

We have decided, and it is foreseen by the document, that separate plans are to be adopted for specific investment projects approved by the Government of Russia. They will clearly describe the projects’ parameters, assign those responsible for implementation, set forth the terms. This scheme will respond to possible issues on the development of certain projects in the Arctic and responsibility for them.

Are there enough icebreakers to achieve the task of 80-million cargo traffic on the Northern Sea Route by 2024?

With the extended service life of the available icebreakers and the plan to build five new nuclear-powered ships of LK-60 design and one Leader class icebreaker (the contract is to be signed in 2020), that is sufficient for the current projects.

In view of the federal law on privileges in the Arctic developed by the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic, implementation of new projects, including ambitious ones is possible, primarily oil and coal projects. In this case, icebreaking assistance will have to be adjusted, perhaps.

I also remind that Novatek plans to build four icebreakers running on LNG. The work on the final decision regarding the start of construction is underway. If our colleagues have those ships built, we think the fleet of icebreakers will be sufficient for operations on the NSR. Moreover, that will let us redirect our nuclear-powered icebreakers eastwards from 2025 to ensure year-round navigation.

What are the real prospects for additional coal and oil shipment projects?

As for oil, it is the Payakhskoye field being developed by AO Neftegazholding. Besides, our Rosneft colleagues are actively working on the Vankor field. As for coal, the most interesting projects are those of VostokCoal and Severnaya Zvezda.

It should be noted that neither the Payakhskoye field nor the Severnaya Zvezda project have been taken into account for the cargo flow of 80 million tonnes. Nevertheless, we expect them to contribute to it and even let us exceed it.

We are somewhat concerned about the coal port “Chaika” of VostokCoal. It should be said that according to an official statement we have received from VostokCoal, the beginning of the project implementation has been postponed from 2019 to the first half of 2020.

According to the plan, the VostokCoal's project is to ensure annual shipment of 19 million tonnes of coal by 2024. Our forecast based on postponement of the project implementation by one year says that it will only be able to handle 12 million tonnes of coal by that time.

We are currently thinking over some compensatory measures to cover both coal and oil projects. In particular, Gazprom Neft is likely to launch three projects. They have entered the active phase of development while waiting for adoption of the above-mentioned law on privileges in the Arctic.

How much of NSR shipping is anticipated to be transits?

There are various estimates. When working on the Plan for the Development of the Northern Sea Route Infrastructure together with the Russian Government’s Analytical Center, we analyzed the possible cargo flow till 2035. Of course, official estimates based on the demands of companies, including foreign ones, are very modest so far. Our maximum by 2035 is three million tonnes per year. I would like to remind that transit was slightly below 700,000 tonnes in 2019.

If hubs and transport-logistic centers are built in Murmansk and Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and if we manage to proceed with the construction of ice class container carriers (ships of 5,000-10,000 TEUs) or enter into a consortium with foreign shipping companies, an increase of transit cargo flow is quite possible.

Of course, implementation of those plans will be easier with year-round navigation. Apart from icebreaking, transit cargo shipping on the NSR should be provided with services ensuring safety, navigational guidance and emergency response. In the framework of the NSR Public Council, we are currently working with our foreign partners including major players. They often raise questions related to availability of spare parts for transit ships, crew rotation, migration cards and procedures for crossing the border of the Russian Federation. 

These issues are definitely feasible [to resolve]. This should be done to reverse the negative attitude of foreign partners to the NSR. Of course, we do not compare the NSR with the Suez Canal – they are absolutely different – but it can be a perfectly good supplement.

Are there any developments regarding construction of container ships?

There is no full understanding in this respect yet. Rosatom is working on this, and the feasibility study is to be conducted in 2020. It is necessary to determine the architecture, tonnage and operational economics of a container ship. It is evident today that ships with ice class of up to Arc7 are inefficient when operated beyond Arctic waters. Therefore, the project should be coordinated with a financial and economic model of the NSR.

Moreover, the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic is currently looking into the introduction of a new concept – the Northern Sea Transport Corridor. In some sense, it is a revival of the Soviet Union practices with Glavsevmorput responsible for the route between Murmansk and Kamchatka. (The NSR is currently between the Kara Strait in the west and the Bering Strait in the east). It is not a substitution for the NSR, but it is a more correct model for economic development of our northern waters. So the container line development project can be a part of the economic model for the development of the Northern Sea Transport Corridor.

A group of countries under the IMO are currently lobbying for a ban on the use of heavy fuel oil in the Arctic. If they succeed, how crucial it is for the NSR and Arctic development?

The topic of using this or that fuel is very interesting, as there are polar opinions on it.

For our part, we are ready to offer nuclear-power technologies, as we consider them to be safe, reliable and quite effective. We have conducted a study to compare the economics of LNG and nuclear-powered icebreakers. Actually, within a period of 35-40 years, nuclear-powered icebreakers demonstrate a higher economic efficiency compared to icebreakers running on LNG even without taking into account the ships’ cruising range and endurance.

It is good for Novatek, with LNG close at hand, to use gas-powered icebreakers, but if we speak about year-round navigation with limited opportunities for LNG bunkering, the efficiency of gas-powered icebreakers will be even less.

Do you plan to arrange points for fueling ships with gas in the Arctic?

This is covered by the NSR Development Plan, and our position (approved by the Ministry of Energy) is to analyze thoroughly which areas of the NSR really need the LNG infrastructure. It is not only about bunkering of ships but also about converting the heating system in our Arctic regions from heavy fuel oil to liquefied gas. Therefore, a separate comprehensive program will cover the use of LNG in the Arctic. It is to be developed and submitted to the Government in 2020.

Does the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan foresee the use of methanol?

Numerous experts believe that methanol is an even more promising marine fuel than LNG. Of course, there remain a number of issues including engines, storage and practicality of conversion to methanol. However, supposing that hydrogen will be increasingly widespread in the future with its higher efficiency coefficient than LNG, methanol can carve out a niche as well.

We have recently discussed it with a well-known European shipping company focused a lot on methanol. LNG is good for icebreakers while placing LNG tanks on container carriers is not always reasonable. Methanol as a marine fuel can be more interesting in this case.

Extensive dredging is required to implement all the port projects announced in the Arctic. How are things going under the projects on the Utrenny terminal and on expansion of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob? 

Indeed, there are ambitious tasks involving dredging, first of all that for the Utrenny terminal. All of them are to be completed by 2022.

The scope of dredging performed under this project in 2019 totaled 5.3 million cbm with RUB 3.5 billion of expenses. It is Mordraga that should be thanked, the company that conducted dredging in 2019. They performed really good work within an extremely limited period of time. The ice-free navigation period at the site is only 60-70 calendar days per year.

We have even more challenging tasks for 2020. Apart from the Utrenny terminal, we are to commence the reconstruction of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob. The estimates on the works to be done are different. The study being conducted by Krylov State Research Center nears completion with the reconstruction of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob alone having a preliminary estimate of RUB 40 billion. There is a variety of technological solutions. This work is to be used as a basis for design and estimate documentation, and we plan to launch this project in 2020.

We should not forget maintenance dredging, the scope of which will be essential due to specific features of the Gulf of Ob with its storms and high sediment accumulation.

Moreover, dredging will be required under other projects on the NSR including coal and oil ones.

What do you think about the prospects of the national offshore dredging company that can be established under the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan?

To meet all the above-mentioned challenges, the capacity of Russia’s dredging fleet should be expanded considerably. Therefore, we have to deploy foreign equipment.

Among the challenges of dredging works on the NSR is a short navigation period for fleet mobilization, execution of works and removal of equipment before harsh ice conditions are in place. 

We have a number of tasks set by RF Government’s Executive Office to explore the rationale for establishment of a special dredging company able to perform such works. No solution in pursuance of these instructions is ready, but we are looking into creating a group of domestic dredging ships. It is not an easy task, as the dredging ships would be deployed during hard ice conditions in the Arctic, and this is not our core business.

When it comes to the railway component of the Arctic logistics, which projects do you consider to be the most promising ones?

In our opinion, the most realistic projects are the Northern Latitudinal Railway 2 (NLR-2) and the railway line to the Indiga port. I would like to emphasize that Indiga is not within the NSR zone and is beyond our area of responsibility.

Implementation of the NLR-2 project depends a lot on the position of Gazprom. It is studying different variants choosing between a railway line to Sabetta and a link to Kharasaway.

In view of the development plans till 2030, it would be more reasonable to build a line to Sabetta, since this is the time when the development of the Tambey field with enormous gas reserves is to commence. The Tambey field is impossible without the railway infrastructure. Having created a railway foundation for Sabetta, we will consequently have a multiplicative effect.

Within the five-year run, a branch to Sabetta can look less attractive compared with a link to Kharasaway where a gas condensate field will be developed. However, production of gas condensate in Kharasaway is not to be that great (preliminary estimated are eight million tonnes). So, a railway to Sabetta will undoubtedly ensure a far greater effect in the long run.

What are the prospects of fish transportation along the NSR considering the experience of using the Sevmorput container carrier?

Throughout her single voyage, the Sevmorput made four port calls with Atomflot obtaining invaluable experience and fishing companies being quite positive about it: the cargo was delivered in time and no containers defrosted.

We are currently working to set this line rolling. For that purpose, we are looking into chartering other container ships. Preliminary calculations say it is viable to use two ships with capacity of 400 forty-foot refrigerated containers each.

Unfortunately, transportation from Kamchatka to Saint-Petersburg makes the route longer, hence our intention to arrange transshipment of reefer cargo in Murmansk. We are also considering the construction of a dedicated terminal there. We are currently looking for a site and power supply opportunities.

Loading for the reverse direction is of high significance for this line. For example, Arkhangelsk offers plywood and prefabricated houses bound for China. This cargo can be containerized. It could also be fish for a return voyage: salmon can be transported from the Far East to the west, and seasonal white fish extensively consumed in Asia can be carried from Murmansk. Besides, the ships can be loaded with food products and other cargo under the Northern Delivery project, since the prices are different in the European part of Russia and in the Far East.

We have compared transportation of Far East fish to the European part of Russia by sea and by railway. Shipping by sea can be more efficient if return voyage loading is ensured.

We have obtained an approval from the State Commission on the Arctic Development regarding extension of the seasonal container service on the NSR as well as the instructions to cooperate with the Governors of the Murmansk and Arkhangelsk Region, Kamchatka and Saint-Petersburg to ensure loading for eastward voyages.

Source: IAA Port News

from Storage Containers https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/interview-russia-s-phased-approach-to-northern-sea-route-development via http://www.rssmix.com/

[hudsonespie]

Interview: Russia's Phased Approach to Northern Sea Route Development

The Russian Government recently approved a Northern Sea Route Infrastructure Development Plan for the period up to 2035. 

Maxim Kulinko, Deputy Head of the Northern Sea Route (NSR) Directorate and Head of Rosatom’s Department for Development of NSR and Coastal Territories, discusses its implications for shipping.

What is the purpose of the Plan?

It is a comprehensive document, and for the first time, a phase-by-phase approach has been applied to the NSR development till 2035. Actually, no previous documents said when year-round navigation should be ensured on the Northern Sea Route or what should be done for that. Now, as the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan is approved, we are guided by a task to start year-round operation on the Northern Sea Route from 2025.

The Plan also covers emergency response issues. We are grateful to Yury Trutnev, Deputy Prime Minister - Presidential Plenipotentiary Envoy to the Far Eastern Federal District, who suggested that we should consider the Plan from the perspective of airport and railway infrastructure which can be potentially linked with the Northern Sea Route and supply it with cargo as well as from the perspective of medicine and personnel.

On the other hand, we acknowledge the changeability of life and do not view this Plan to be dogmatic. It should be improved and adjusted. I am sure that the federal authorities, the entities of the Federation and large investors can expand it with their projects.

We have decided, and it is foreseen by the document, that separate plans are to be adopted for specific investment projects approved by the Government of Russia. They will clearly describe the projects’ parameters, assign those responsible for implementation, set forth the terms. This scheme will respond to possible issues on the development of certain projects in the Arctic and responsibility for them.

Are there enough icebreakers to achieve the task of 80-million cargo traffic on the Northern Sea Route by 2024?

With the extended service life of the available icebreakers and the plan to build five new nuclear-powered ships of LK-60 design and one Leader class icebreaker (the contract is to be signed in 2020), that is sufficient for the current projects.

In view of the federal law on privileges in the Arctic developed by the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic, implementation of new projects, including ambitious ones is possible, primarily oil and coal projects. In this case, icebreaking assistance will have to be adjusted, perhaps.

I also remind that Novatek plans to build four icebreakers running on LNG. The work on the final decision regarding the start of construction is underway. If our colleagues have those ships built, we think the fleet of icebreakers will be sufficient for operations on the NSR. Moreover, that will let us redirect our nuclear-powered icebreakers eastwards from 2025 to ensure year-round navigation.

What are the real prospects for additional coal and oil shipment projects?

As for oil, it is the Payakhskoye field being developed by AO Neftegazholding. Besides, our Rosneft colleagues are actively working on the Vankor field. As for coal, the most interesting projects are those of VostokCoal and Severnaya Zvezda.

It should be noted that neither the Payakhskoye field nor the Severnaya Zvezda project have been taken into account for the cargo flow of 80 million tonnes. Nevertheless, we expect them to contribute to it and even let us exceed it.

We are somewhat concerned about the coal port “Chaika” of VostokCoal. It should be said that according to an official statement we have received from VostokCoal, the beginning of the project implementation has been postponed from 2019 to the first half of 2020.

According to the plan, the VostokCoal's project is to ensure annual shipment of 19 million tonnes of coal by 2024. Our forecast based on postponement of the project implementation by one year says that it will only be able to handle 12 million tonnes of coal by that time.

We are currently thinking over some compensatory measures to cover both coal and oil projects. In particular, Gazprom Neft is likely to launch three projects. They have entered the active phase of development while waiting for adoption of the above-mentioned law on privileges in the Arctic.

How much of NSR shipping is anticipated to be transits?

There are various estimates. When working on the Plan for the Development of the Northern Sea Route Infrastructure together with the Russian Government’s Analytical Center, we analyzed the possible cargo flow till 2035. Of course, official estimates based on the demands of companies, including foreign ones, are very modest so far. Our maximum by 2035 is three million tonnes per year. I would like to remind that transit was slightly below 700,000 tonnes in 2019.

If hubs and transport-logistic centers are built in Murmansk and Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and if we manage to proceed with the construction of ice class container carriers (ships of 5,000-10,000 TEUs) or enter into a consortium with foreign shipping companies, an increase of transit cargo flow is quite possible.

Of course, implementation of those plans will be easier with year-round navigation. Apart from icebreaking, transit cargo shipping on the NSR should be provided with services ensuring safety, navigational guidance and emergency response. In the framework of the NSR Public Council, we are currently working with our foreign partners including major players. They often raise questions related to availability of spare parts for transit ships, crew rotation, migration cards and procedures for crossing the border of the Russian Federation. 

These issues are definitely feasible [to resolve]. This should be done to reverse the negative attitude of foreign partners to the NSR. Of course, we do not compare the NSR with the Suez Canal – they are absolutely different – but it can be a perfectly good supplement.

Are there any developments regarding construction of container ships?

There is no full understanding in this respect yet. Rosatom is working on this, and the feasibility study is to be conducted in 2020. It is necessary to determine the architecture, tonnage and operational economics of a container ship. It is evident today that ships with ice class of up to Arc7 are inefficient when operated beyond Arctic waters. Therefore, the project should be coordinated with a financial and economic model of the NSR.

Moreover, the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic is currently looking into the introduction of a new concept – the Northern Sea Transport Corridor. In some sense, it is a revival of the Soviet Union practices with Glavsevmorput responsible for the route between Murmansk and Kamchatka. (The NSR is currently between the Kara Strait in the west and the Bering Strait in the east). It is not a substitution for the NSR, but it is a more correct model for economic development of our northern waters. So the container line development project can be a part of the economic model for the development of the Northern Sea Transport Corridor.

A group of countries under the IMO are currently lobbying for a ban on the use of heavy fuel oil in the Arctic. If they succeed, how crucial it is for the NSR and Arctic development?

The topic of using this or that fuel is very interesting, as there are polar opinions on it.

For our part, we are ready to offer nuclear-power technologies, as we consider them to be safe, reliable and quite effective. We have conducted a study to compare the economics of LNG and nuclear-powered icebreakers. Actually, within a period of 35-40 years, nuclear-powered icebreakers demonstrate a higher economic efficiency compared to icebreakers running on LNG even without taking into account the ships’ cruising range and endurance.

It is good for Novatek, with LNG close at hand, to use gas-powered icebreakers, but if we speak about year-round navigation with limited opportunities for LNG bunkering, the efficiency of gas-powered icebreakers will be even less.

Do you plan to arrange points for fueling ships with gas in the Arctic?

This is covered by the NSR Development Plan, and our position (approved by the Ministry of Energy) is to analyze thoroughly which areas of the NSR really need the LNG infrastructure. It is not only about bunkering of ships but also about converting the heating system in our Arctic regions from heavy fuel oil to liquefied gas. Therefore, a separate comprehensive program will cover the use of LNG in the Arctic. It is to be developed and submitted to the Government in 2020.

Does the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan foresee the use of methanol?

Numerous experts believe that methanol is an even more promising marine fuel than LNG. Of course, there remain a number of issues including engines, storage and practicality of conversion to methanol. However, supposing that hydrogen will be increasingly widespread in the future with its higher efficiency coefficient than LNG, methanol can carve out a niche as well.

We have recently discussed it with a well-known European shipping company focused a lot on methanol. LNG is good for icebreakers while placing LNG tanks on container carriers is not always reasonable. Methanol as a marine fuel can be more interesting in this case.

Extensive dredging is required to implement all the port projects announced in the Arctic. How are things going under the projects on the Utrenny terminal and on expansion of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob? 

Indeed, there are ambitious tasks involving dredging, first of all that for the Utrenny terminal. All of them are to be completed by 2022.

The scope of dredging performed under this project in 2019 totaled 5.3 million cbm with RUB 3.5 billion of expenses. It is Mordraga that should be thanked, the company that conducted dredging in 2019. They performed really good work within an extremely limited period of time. The ice-free navigation period at the site is only 60-70 calendar days per year.

We have even more challenging tasks for 2020. Apart from the Utrenny terminal, we are to commence the reconstruction of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob. The estimates on the works to be done are different. The study being conducted by Krylov State Research Center nears completion with the reconstruction of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob alone having a preliminary estimate of RUB 40 billion. There is a variety of technological solutions. This work is to be used as a basis for design and estimate documentation, and we plan to launch this project in 2020.

We should not forget maintenance dredging, the scope of which will be essential due to specific features of the Gulf of Ob with its storms and high sediment accumulation.

Moreover, dredging will be required under other projects on the NSR including coal and oil ones.

What do you think about the prospects of the national offshore dredging company that can be established under the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan?

To meet all the above-mentioned challenges, the capacity of Russia’s dredging fleet should be expanded considerably. Therefore, we have to deploy foreign equipment.

Among the challenges of dredging works on the NSR is a short navigation period for fleet mobilization, execution of works and removal of equipment before harsh ice conditions are in place. 

We have a number of tasks set by RF Government’s Executive Office to explore the rationale for establishment of a special dredging company able to perform such works. No solution in pursuance of these instructions is ready, but we are looking into creating a group of domestic dredging ships. It is not an easy task, as the dredging ships would be deployed during hard ice conditions in the Arctic, and this is not our core business.

When it comes to the railway component of the Arctic logistics, which projects do you consider to be the most promising ones?

In our opinion, the most realistic projects are the Northern Latitudinal Railway 2 (NLR-2) and the railway line to the Indiga port. I would like to emphasize that Indiga is not within the NSR zone and is beyond our area of responsibility.

Implementation of the NLR-2 project depends a lot on the position of Gazprom. It is studying different variants choosing between a railway line to Sabetta and a link to Kharasaway.

In view of the development plans till 2030, it would be more reasonable to build a line to Sabetta, since this is the time when the development of the Tambey field with enormous gas reserves is to commence. The Tambey field is impossible without the railway infrastructure. Having created a railway foundation for Sabetta, we will consequently have a multiplicative effect.

Within the five-year run, a branch to Sabetta can look less attractive compared with a link to Kharasaway where a gas condensate field will be developed. However, production of gas condensate in Kharasaway is not to be that great (preliminary estimated are eight million tonnes). So, a railway to Sabetta will undoubtedly ensure a far greater effect in the long run.

What are the prospects of fish transportation along the NSR considering the experience of using the Sevmorput container carrier?

Throughout her single voyage, the Sevmorput made four port calls with Atomflot obtaining invaluable experience and fishing companies being quite positive about it: the cargo was delivered in time and no containers defrosted.

We are currently working to set this line rolling. For that purpose, we are looking into chartering other container ships. Preliminary calculations say it is viable to use two ships with capacity of 400 forty-foot refrigerated containers each.

Unfortunately, transportation from Kamchatka to Saint-Petersburg makes the route longer, hence our intention to arrange transshipment of reefer cargo in Murmansk. We are also considering the construction of a dedicated terminal there. We are currently looking for a site and power supply opportunities.

Loading for the reverse direction is of high significance for this line. For example, Arkhangelsk offers plywood and prefabricated houses bound for China. This cargo can be containerized. It could also be fish for a return voyage: salmon can be transported from the Far East to the west, and seasonal white fish extensively consumed in Asia can be carried from Murmansk. Besides, the ships can be loaded with food products and other cargo under the Northern Delivery project, since the prices are different in the European part of Russia and in the Far East.

We have compared transportation of Far East fish to the European part of Russia by sea and by railway. Shipping by sea can be more efficient if return voyage loading is ensured.

We have obtained an approval from the State Commission on the Arctic Development regarding extension of the seasonal container service on the NSR as well as the instructions to cooperate with the Governors of the Murmansk and Arkhangelsk Region, Kamchatka and Saint-Petersburg to ensure loading for eastward voyages.

Source: IAA Port News

from Storage Containers https://maritime-executive.com/article/interview-russia-s-phased-approach-to-northern-sea-route-development via http://www.rssmix.com/

[hudsonespie]

Interview: Russia's Phased Approach to Northern Sea Route Development

The Russian Government recently approved a Northern Sea Route Infrastructure Development Plan for the period up to 2035. 

Maxim Kulinko, Deputy Head of the Northern Sea Route (NSR) Directorate and Head of Rosatom’s Department for Development of NSR and Coastal Territories, discusses its implications for shipping.

What is the purpose of the Plan?

It is a comprehensive document, and for the first time, a phase-by-phase approach has been applied to the NSR development till 2035. Actually, no previous documents said when year-round navigation should be ensured on the Northern Sea Route or what should be done for that. Now, as the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan is approved, we are guided by a task to start year-round operation on the Northern Sea Route from 2025.

The Plan also covers emergency response issues. We are grateful to Yury Trutnev, Deputy Prime Minister - Presidential Plenipotentiary Envoy to the Far Eastern Federal District, who suggested that we should consider the Plan from the perspective of airport and railway infrastructure which can be potentially linked with the Northern Sea Route and supply it with cargo as well as from the perspective of medicine and personnel.

On the other hand, we acknowledge the changeability of life and do not view this Plan to be dogmatic. It should be improved and adjusted. I am sure that the federal authorities, the entities of the Federation and large investors can expand it with their projects.

We have decided, and it is foreseen by the document, that separate plans are to be adopted for specific investment projects approved by the Government of Russia. They will clearly describe the projects’ parameters, assign those responsible for implementation, set forth the terms. This scheme will respond to possible issues on the development of certain projects in the Arctic and responsibility for them.

Are there enough icebreakers to achieve the task of 80-million cargo traffic on the Northern Sea Route by 2024?

With the extended service life of the available icebreakers and the plan to build five new nuclear-powered ships of LK-60 design and one Leader class icebreaker (the contract is to be signed in 2020), that is sufficient for the current projects.

In view of the federal law on privileges in the Arctic developed by the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic, implementation of new projects, including ambitious ones is possible, primarily oil and coal projects. In this case, icebreaking assistance will have to be adjusted, perhaps.

I also remind that Novatek plans to build four icebreakers running on LNG. The work on the final decision regarding the start of construction is underway. If our colleagues have those ships built, we think the fleet of icebreakers will be sufficient for operations on the NSR. Moreover, that will let us redirect our nuclear-powered icebreakers eastwards from 2025 to ensure year-round navigation.

What are the real prospects for additional coal and oil shipment projects?

As for oil, it is the Payakhskoye field being developed by AO Neftegazholding. Besides, our Rosneft colleagues are actively working on the Vankor field. As for coal, the most interesting projects are those of VostokCoal and Severnaya Zvezda.

It should be noted that neither the Payakhskoye field nor the Severnaya Zvezda project have been taken into account for the cargo flow of 80 million tonnes. Nevertheless, we expect them to contribute to it and even let us exceed it.

We are somewhat concerned about the coal port “Chaika” of VostokCoal. It should be said that according to an official statement we have received from VostokCoal, the beginning of the project implementation has been postponed from 2019 to the first half of 2020.

According to the plan, the VostokCoal's project is to ensure annual shipment of 19 million tonnes of coal by 2024. Our forecast based on postponement of the project implementation by one year says that it will only be able to handle 12 million tonnes of coal by that time.

We are currently thinking over some compensatory measures to cover both coal and oil projects. In particular, Gazprom Neft is likely to launch three projects. They have entered the active phase of development while waiting for adoption of the above-mentioned law on privileges in the Arctic.

How much of NSR shipping is anticipated to be transits?

There are various estimates. When working on the Plan for the Development of the Northern Sea Route Infrastructure together with the Russian Government’s Analytical Center, we analyzed the possible cargo flow till 2035. Of course, official estimates based on the demands of companies, including foreign ones, are very modest so far. Our maximum by 2035 is three million tonnes per year. I would like to remind that transit was slightly below 700,000 tonnes in 2019.

If hubs and transport-logistic centers are built in Murmansk and Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and if we manage to proceed with the construction of ice class container carriers (ships of 5,000-10,000 TEUs) or enter into a consortium with foreign shipping companies, an increase of transit cargo flow is quite possible.

Of course, implementation of those plans will be easier with year-round navigation. Apart from icebreaking, transit cargo shipping on the NSR should be provided with services ensuring safety, navigational guidance and emergency response. In the framework of the NSR Public Council, we are currently working with our foreign partners including major players. They often raise questions related to availability of spare parts for transit ships, crew rotation, migration cards and procedures for crossing the border of the Russian Federation. 

These issues are definitely feasible [to resolve]. This should be done to reverse the negative attitude of foreign partners to the NSR. Of course, we do not compare the NSR with the Suez Canal – they are absolutely different – but it can be a perfectly good supplement.

Are there any developments regarding construction of container ships?

There is no full understanding in this respect yet. Rosatom is working on this, and the feasibility study is to be conducted in 2020. It is necessary to determine the architecture, tonnage and operational economics of a container ship. It is evident today that ships with ice class of up to Arc7 are inefficient when operated beyond Arctic waters. Therefore, the project should be coordinated with a financial and economic model of the NSR.

Moreover, the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic is currently looking into the introduction of a new concept – the Northern Sea Transport Corridor. In some sense, it is a revival of the Soviet Union practices with Glavsevmorput responsible for the route between Murmansk and Kamchatka. (The NSR is currently between the Kara Strait in the west and the Bering Strait in the east). It is not a substitution for the NSR, but it is a more correct model for economic development of our northern waters. So the container line development project can be a part of the economic model for the development of the Northern Sea Transport Corridor.

A group of countries under the IMO are currently lobbying for a ban on the use of heavy fuel oil in the Arctic. If they succeed, how crucial it is for the NSR and Arctic development?

The topic of using this or that fuel is very interesting, as there are polar opinions on it.

For our part, we are ready to offer nuclear-power technologies, as we consider them to be safe, reliable and quite effective. We have conducted a study to compare the economics of LNG and nuclear-powered icebreakers. Actually, within a period of 35-40 years, nuclear-powered icebreakers demonstrate a higher economic efficiency compared to icebreakers running on LNG even without taking into account the ships’ cruising range and endurance.

It is good for Novatek, with LNG close at hand, to use gas-powered icebreakers, but if we speak about year-round navigation with limited opportunities for LNG bunkering, the efficiency of gas-powered icebreakers will be even less.

Do you plan to arrange points for fueling ships with gas in the Arctic?

This is covered by the NSR Development Plan, and our position (approved by the Ministry of Energy) is to analyze thoroughly which areas of the NSR really need the LNG infrastructure. It is not only about bunkering of ships but also about converting the heating system in our Arctic regions from heavy fuel oil to liquefied gas. Therefore, a separate comprehensive program will cover the use of LNG in the Arctic. It is to be developed and submitted to the Government in 2020.

Does the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan foresee the use of methanol?

Numerous experts believe that methanol is an even more promising marine fuel than LNG. Of course, there remain a number of issues including engines, storage and practicality of conversion to methanol. However, supposing that hydrogen will be increasingly widespread in the future with its higher efficiency coefficient than LNG, methanol can carve out a niche as well.

We have recently discussed it with a well-known European shipping company focused a lot on methanol. LNG is good for icebreakers while placing LNG tanks on container carriers is not always reasonable. Methanol as a marine fuel can be more interesting in this case.

Extensive dredging is required to implement all the port projects announced in the Arctic. How are things going under the projects on the Utrenny terminal and on expansion of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob? 

Indeed, there are ambitious tasks involving dredging, first of all that for the Utrenny terminal. All of them are to be completed by 2022.

The scope of dredging performed under this project in 2019 totaled 5.3 million cbm with RUB 3.5 billion of expenses. It is Mordraga that should be thanked, the company that conducted dredging in 2019. They performed really good work within an extremely limited period of time. The ice-free navigation period at the site is only 60-70 calendar days per year.

We have even more challenging tasks for 2020. Apart from the Utrenny terminal, we are to commence the reconstruction of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob. The estimates on the works to be done are different. The study being conducted by Krylov State Research Center nears completion with the reconstruction of the seaway canal in the Gulf of Ob alone having a preliminary estimate of RUB 40 billion. There is a variety of technological solutions. This work is to be used as a basis for design and estimate documentation, and we plan to launch this project in 2020.

We should not forget maintenance dredging, the scope of which will be essential due to specific features of the Gulf of Ob with its storms and high sediment accumulation.

Moreover, dredging will be required under other projects on the NSR including coal and oil ones.

What do you think about the prospects of the national offshore dredging company that can be established under the NSR Infrastructure Development Plan?

To meet all the above-mentioned challenges, the capacity of Russia’s dredging fleet should be expanded considerably. Therefore, we have to deploy foreign equipment.

Among the challenges of dredging works on the NSR is a short navigation period for fleet mobilization, execution of works and removal of equipment before harsh ice conditions are in place. 

We have a number of tasks set by RF Government’s Executive Office to explore the rationale for establishment of a special dredging company able to perform such works. No solution in pursuance of these instructions is ready, but we are looking into creating a group of domestic dredging ships. It is not an easy task, as the dredging ships would be deployed during hard ice conditions in the Arctic, and this is not our core business.

When it comes to the railway component of the Arctic logistics, which projects do you consider to be the most promising ones?

In our opinion, the most realistic projects are the Northern Latitudinal Railway 2 (NLR-2) and the railway line to the Indiga port. I would like to emphasize that Indiga is not within the NSR zone and is beyond our area of responsibility.

Implementation of the NLR-2 project depends a lot on the position of Gazprom. It is studying different variants choosing between a railway line to Sabetta and a link to Kharasaway.

In view of the development plans till 2030, it would be more reasonable to build a line to Sabetta, since this is the time when the development of the Tambey field with enormous gas reserves is to commence. The Tambey field is impossible without the railway infrastructure. Having created a railway foundation for Sabetta, we will consequently have a multiplicative effect.

Within the five-year run, a branch to Sabetta can look less attractive compared with a link to Kharasaway where a gas condensate field will be developed. However, production of gas condensate in Kharasaway is not to be that great (preliminary estimated are eight million tonnes). So, a railway to Sabetta will undoubtedly ensure a far greater effect in the long run.

What are the prospects of fish transportation along the NSR considering the experience of using the Sevmorput container carrier?

Throughout her single voyage, the Sevmorput made four port calls with Atomflot obtaining invaluable experience and fishing companies being quite positive about it: the cargo was delivered in time and no containers defrosted.

We are currently working to set this line rolling. For that purpose, we are looking into chartering other container ships. Preliminary calculations say it is viable to use two ships with capacity of 400 forty-foot refrigerated containers each.

Unfortunately, transportation from Kamchatka to Saint-Petersburg makes the route longer, hence our intention to arrange transshipment of reefer cargo in Murmansk. We are also considering the construction of a dedicated terminal there. We are currently looking for a site and power supply opportunities.

Loading for the reverse direction is of high significance for this line. For example, Arkhangelsk offers plywood and prefabricated houses bound for China. This cargo can be containerized. It could also be fish for a return voyage: salmon can be transported from the Far East to the west, and seasonal white fish extensively consumed in Asia can be carried from Murmansk. Besides, the ships can be loaded with food products and other cargo under the Northern Delivery project, since the prices are different in the European part of Russia and in the Far East.

We have compared transportation of Far East fish to the European part of Russia by sea and by railway. Shipping by sea can be more efficient if return voyage loading is ensured.

We have obtained an approval from the State Commission on the Arctic Development regarding extension of the seasonal container service on the NSR as well as the instructions to cooperate with the Governors of the Murmansk and Arkhangelsk Region, Kamchatka and Saint-Petersburg to ensure loading for eastward voyages.

Source: IAA Port News

from Storage Containers https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/interview-russia-s-phased-approach-to-northern-sea-route-development via http://www.rssmix.com/

[hudsonespie]

Nor-Shipping Calls for Industry Action

Per Martin Tanggaard, director of the biennial Norwegian maritime conference Nor-Shipping, has issued a call for the maritime and ocean industries to rise to the challenges on the horizon and demonstrate the tangible action they’re taking at, and before, the next Nor-Shipping in 2021. Tanggaard believes that, with pressing environmental and business challenges and opportunities at hand, the industry has a need to convey to all stakeholders, including society at large, that it is moving beyond words and ideas to ambitious, impactful ocean action. 

Adding real value

“This is not a criticism, this is not a complaint, this is a requirement for us, all of us, as an industry,” Tanggaard explains. “Awareness of environmental issues, particularly those related to our ‘home’ the ocean, is growing exponentially. Society sees us using this invaluable resource but they don’t always see us taking the necessary action to protect it.

“At the same time the untapped business potential here is huge, with new possibilities for satisfying a growing global population’s energy, nutritional and logistics/trade demands. Business stakeholders want companies to deliver added value and, with the unique competency of our maritime professionals, knowledge and assets, we have the means to do so. But we must do so responsibly."

“I believe platforms like Nor-Shipping are tailormade for us to demonstrate our worth to the world – for companies, organisations and individuals to say; ‘this is what we’re doing, this is the value we deliver, this is how we’re making a positive difference. This is the future, now.’ Nor-Shipping exists to support the sustainable development of our industry. I believe this message is key to that aim.”

Positioning for success

Tanggaard’s comments come after Nor-Shipping’s most successful ever year. 2019 saw the event week reposition as "Your Arena for Ocean Solutions," embracing a broader industry perspective to help enable new business opportunities.

It was a move that seemingly paid significant dividends, with around 50,000 people from over 85 nations participating in the Lillestrøm-based exhibition and accompanying activities in nearby Oslo. This represented a 34 percent increase over Nor-Shipping 2017, while the entire hall space was completely filled – for the first time ever – with exhibitors from some 47 countries.

Nor-Shipping is now looking to consolidate that success in 2021 (with a program running from June 1 through June 4) and build on its ocean business mission. Tanggaard believes the action theme sends a clear message to the market and wider world.

Platform for progress

“There was a palpable sense of optimism at Nor-Shipping 2019,” he says, “with a great deal of talk about new innovations, collaborations, business models and services – all focused on unlocking the opportunity in our oceans. For the next Nor-Shipping we’d love to be able to show the world how those intentions and plans are starting to come to fruition… how progress is actually being made.

“We need real action to enable a sustainable future for the industry, and society, with the IMO and new requirements at the forefront, demands it!” he concludes. “Nor-Shipping will do all it can to facilitate, support and celebrate key achievements – for the next two years and far beyond.”

from Storage Containers https://maritime-executive.com/article/nor-shipping-calls-for-industry-action via http://www.rssmix.com/

[hudsonespie]

Nor-Shipping Calls for Industry Action

Per Martin Tanggaard, director of the biennial Norwegian maritime conference Nor-Shipping, has issued a call for the maritime and ocean industries to rise to the challenges on the horizon and demonstrate the tangible action they’re taking at, and before, the next Nor-Shipping in 2021. Tanggaard believes that, with pressing environmental and business challenges and opportunities at hand, the industry has a need to convey to all stakeholders, including society at large, that it is moving beyond words and ideas to ambitious, impactful ocean action. 

Adding real value

“This is not a criticism, this is not a complaint, this is a requirement for us, all of us, as an industry,” Tanggaard explains. “Awareness of environmental issues, particularly those related to our ‘home’ the ocean, is growing exponentially. Society sees us using this invaluable resource but they don’t always see us taking the necessary action to protect it.

“At the same time the untapped business potential here is huge, with new possibilities for satisfying a growing global population’s energy, nutritional and logistics/trade demands. Business stakeholders want companies to deliver added value and, with the unique competency of our maritime professionals, knowledge and assets, we have the means to do so. But we must do so responsibly."

“I believe platforms like Nor-Shipping are tailormade for us to demonstrate our worth to the world – for companies, organisations and individuals to say; ‘this is what we’re doing, this is the value we deliver, this is how we’re making a positive difference. This is the future, now.’ Nor-Shipping exists to support the sustainable development of our industry. I believe this message is key to that aim.”

Positioning for success

Tanggaard’s comments come after Nor-Shipping’s most successful ever year. 2019 saw the event week reposition as "Your Arena for Ocean Solutions," embracing a broader industry perspective to help enable new business opportunities.

It was a move that seemingly paid significant dividends, with around 50,000 people from over 85 nations participating in the Lillestrøm-based exhibition and accompanying activities in nearby Oslo. This represented a 34 percent increase over Nor-Shipping 2017, while the entire hall space was completely filled – for the first time ever – with exhibitors from some 47 countries.

Nor-Shipping is now looking to consolidate that success in 2021 (with a program running from June 1 through June 4) and build on its ocean business mission. Tanggaard believes the action theme sends a clear message to the market and wider world.

Platform for progress

“There was a palpable sense of optimism at Nor-Shipping 2019,” he says, “with a great deal of talk about new innovations, collaborations, business models and services – all focused on unlocking the opportunity in our oceans. For the next Nor-Shipping we’d love to be able to show the world how those intentions and plans are starting to come to fruition… how progress is actually being made.

“We need real action to enable a sustainable future for the industry, and society, with the IMO and new requirements at the forefront, demands it!” he concludes. “Nor-Shipping will do all it can to facilitate, support and celebrate key achievements – for the next two years and far beyond.”

from Storage Containers https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/nor-shipping-calls-for-industry-action via http://www.rssmix.com/