vmac letter to moef 29 oct 2013

7/27/2019 VMAC Letter to MOEF 29 Oct 2013

1/34

VIZHINJAM MOTHERPORT ACTION SAMITHI (VMAC)

From,

Elias John, President,

Vizhinjam Mother Port Action Samithi (VMAC),

Trivandrum.

To,

Shri Anil Razdan, IAS (retd.),

Chairman, Environmental Appraisal Committee,

Ministry of Environment and Forests,

C-1/34, Pandara Park,

New Delhi-110 003

Sub: EIA Clearance for Vizhinjam International Sea Port Project Reg:

Respected Sir,

Vizhinjam Mother Port ACtion Samithi (VMAC) is a registered [TVM/TC/1073/2013] Non-Governmental

Organization, based at Trivandrum, Kerala who has been actively supporting the Vizhinjam project and

has played a significant role in educating the people of Kerala for the need of the project for the nation.

VMAC is formed by a group of people of people from Trivandrum who includes the working middle class,

fishermen, students, bureaucrats and a wide diversity of common man representing the larger section of

community in Kerala.

We are writing this letter to MOEF to expose the malicious intent by a vested group of people who are

trying to scuttle the project. It has come to the understanding to VMAC that a representation was put

forward by Mr. Cyriac Kodath and Mr. John Jacob Puthur on behalf of the tourism industry and local

fishing community. Being involved with project over last 10 years on grass root levels, VMAC would liketo bring light to MOEF that the intents of these people are false in nature and has been trying to spread

negative emotions within the local community with vested interests.

Mr. Cyriac Kodath, is a director of Coconut Bay Resorts, a resort which is lying in the project area and

that would be affected due to the project. To note is that this resort, along with 8 other resorts has been

found out to be illegally constructed violating the CRZ norms. The details are attached as an Appendix.

Thus the only intent of the concerned person is to save his resort and is not represented by the hotel or

resort community at large. It is to be noted that no resort outside the immediate project area has filed a

complaint or raised a protest. The project would only increase the income levels of all other resorts in the

vicinity with the virtue of having the cruise terminal and increased tourism potential.

Mr. John Jacob Puthur, claims that the port project would bring significant negative impacts to the localitywith environmental failures due to the action of siltation, wind, corrosion and reclamation. VMAC would

like to bring to the attention of MOEF these false claims as presented in the appendix raised by Mr.

Puthur during a seminar held in Trivandrum on 11th

July, 2013. VMAC had then strongly and publically

exposed the false claims and the protagonist has been only propagating fear and without any scientific

base or sincere concerns. His book Untold Story of the Coast also had been blatantly opposing any port

projects and is trying to spread false impressions of any coastal infrastructure projects. Ports have always

existed as the key node for trade and global economy is highly dependent of efficiently operating ports. It


2/34

can be seen that the intentions of Mr. Puthur is not to improve the environmental sustainability of the

coast or the nation as a whole, rather only to support a vested interested group at large.

VMAC meanwhile had been actively involved in educating the people of the region regarding the

immense benefits of the project. We would like to present below the activities which we had done in the

past to let know the MOEF that these issues were discussed within all folks of community in Kerala and

the project now has immense support from the public.

VMAC in its initial stages worked under the banner of Janapaksham. The organization was formed on

2nd October 2004, with presentations of the project held at City School, PMG Trivandrum. Janapaksham

members realized that this project will be implemented only with a mass movement, for which we planned

Janapaksham Birth Right Declaration programme on October 31st, 2004.

Since then, Janapaksham and VMAC had been very actively conducting seminars and workshops

propagating the good news about the project and have presented ourselves in all forums possible for the

speedy implementation of the project. Listed below are the few activities conducted by VMAC.

Workshops / Seminars in Educational Institutes

o Class for 150 staff members in Cotton Hill Girls Higher Secondary School.o Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram. Nearly 500 students.

o Class for nearly 6000 students in Cotton Hill GHSS, Trivandrum

o Institute of Management in Kerala (IMK),Trivandrum

o College of Engineering, Trivandrum

o University College of Engineering, Kariyavattom

o M.G. College, Trivandrum

o Govt. Arts College, Trivandrum

o Govt. Model Higher Secondary School, Trivandrum

o Govt. Women's College, Vazhuthacad

o St. Xavier's College, Thumba NSS team

o City Higher Secondary School, PMG

o St. Mary's Higher Secondary School, Vizhinjam

o All Saints College, Trivandrum

o Pettah Girls High School, Trivandrum

Project area

o Discussion meeting at Mukkola The people gathered there declared full hearted

support for all activities for the implementation of Vizhinjam Project.

o Adimalathura Beach organized by Fr. Lucian Thomas, Parish Priest, Adimalathura, the

area which had witnessed widespread protest against the port construction due

misapprehensions created by lack of proper communication to the natives about the

project details. Hundreds of fishermen, ladies, youths gathered there were very confused

about the Project. Main area of concern was the evacuation of poor people residing nearProject Area, because Pattayam was not issued to many of the families who have no

political influence. Janapaksham declared that it will always be with the people in Project

area and decided to take up the pattayam issue. Accordingly pattayam applications are

being collected. Most families fear that they will be displaced to Pannimala, a remote

area if the project comes up.

o Parish Council, Vizhinjam Church: The parish priest Fr. Ignesious and council members

have assured support for the project. They have requested Janapaksham to take up the

drinking water issue.


3/34

o Siraj Nagar, Thekkumbhakom Muslim Jam'aat organized by Thekkumbhakom Jamaat.

Hundreds of people gathered in the sandy yard near the wharf. Representatives of

nearly13 organizations connected with Vizhinjam fishing harbor attended the meeting.

o Chappath, Vizhinjam: - the entrance of proposed Vizhinjam Port. Organised by Chappath

Area Convenor.

Others

o Raised 400m long banner equal to the length of Emma Maersk, the then largest

container ship

o Formation of a 2000 number of boat chain in sea

o Road shows of India Max Ship model

o Public meetings involving Chief Minister, Port Minister, Opposition leader and other road

shows involving film stars.

o Organisation of bike rallies for supporting Vizhinjam Project.

o KCYM - Animation centre, TVM for representatives of nearly 100 KCYM units (Kerala

Catholic Youth Movement)

o Teacher's GUILD - Nearly 400 teachers working in attended the meeting.

o Industrial Estate, Monvila Seminar for the ideal industrialists gathered at Monvila.o ARENA Multimedia, Karimpanal Arcade, Statue for Multimedia students.

o Rural Development Society, Thenniyoorkonam

o FRAT, Trivandrum - General body meeting of nearly 400 residential associations.

Letter writing and e-mail campaigns

o VMMCS has also organized a letter writing campaign in the schools and Colleges of

Thiruvananthapuram City. Nearly 25000 post cards were posted to the Honourable

President of India, Prime Minister, Chief Minister of Kerala and Opposition Leader of

Kerala.

Dossier of Activities by VMAC urging the authorities for speedy implementation of Vizhinjam Project isattached as reference. VMAC do hereby request to MOEF that the complaints raised by the resort owners

or the NGOs opposing the projects comes with no basis in truth, knowledge or any sincere concern for

the environment. The Vizhinjam port project has been the dream of an entire State for over five decades

and I certainly hope that you will help it for its speedy implementation whereby thousands of Crores of

rupees could be saved in sake of transhipment happening at foreign ports.

It is our sincere and urgent request that MOEF may grant all required appraisals and clearances for

commencement of the project at the earliest. We are ready and willing to support in any way to make this

project a reality.

Looking forward to your early action,

Sincerely,

Elias John.


4/34

Appendix List

1. Violation of CRZ Norms by Resorts

2. Response to Seminar by John Jacob Puthur

3. Dossier of Activities by VMAC urging the authorities for

speedy implementation of Vizhinjam Project


5/34

Appendix 1 Violation of CRZ Norms by Resorts


6/34

C1111307 Comprehensive EIA for Vizhinjam Deepwater PortRP006 rev. 0 Final CEIA Report

Chapter 4 Description of EnvironmentPage 4-118

Figure 4-75: Kovalam and the Project Site with the Final Project Layout

4.10.10.5 Details of Resorts

There are 31 resorts situated along the coast in the Project stretch, as per information received from

the Kerala Hotel & Restaurant Association (KHRA), Thiruvanathapuram. These resorts offer Ayurvedic

treatments and mainly attract foreign tourists from Austria, Germany, Switzerland and other parts of

globe. The details of the resorts in and around the project stretch are given in Figure 4-76. An attempt

was made to gather site-specific tourism information during the social survey. The proforma was

circulated to all 31 resorts, but details were received only from 9; these are presented in Table 4-77.


7/34

Comprehensive EIA for Vizhinjam Deepwater Port C1111307Final CEIA Report RP006 rev. 0


Figure 4-76: Map Showing the Resorts in and around the Project Site


8/34



Table 4-77: Details of 31 Resorts received from KHRA Association

Details of 12 resorts registered

with Kottukal Gram Panchayat

are presented in Table 4-78.

Except Agastya Beach Resort,

Shin Shiva Ayurveda andSomatheeram Beach Resort, in

the remaining resorts, the number

of officially registered rooms is

lesser than the number of rooms

given by the KHRA.

The number of employees in

these nine resorts/institutes

ranged from 80 280 people and

the area of the resorts/institute

varied from 0.61 3.24 Ha (1.5

8.0 Acres). The October to Aprilmonths represent the tourist

season. Most of the tourists (88 to

99%) are foreigners.

Revenue from Tourist Inflow:

The primary information, which

was provided by the individual

resorts, shows that except

Coconut bay, Somatheeram

Beach Resort and Manaltheeram

Beach Resort, all other resorts

are showing an improvement in

their income over the period from

2009 to 2012. Figure 4-77

provides comparative results of

the annual earnings of the nine

resorts from year 2009 to 2012.

Table 4-78: List of Resorts as received from Pulinkudy Ward of Kottukal Gram Panchayat

S.No.

Name of ResortNumber of approved

buildings/RoomsNumber of Staffs

1. Bethsaida resort 21 Employment tax not being remitted

2. Surya Samudra 29 97

3. Nikkis Nest 24 Employment tax not being remitted

4. Agastya Beach resort 32 20

5. Shin Shiva ayurveda asramam 27 38

6. Dr Franklins Panchakarma institute 16 387. Somatheeram Health Resort 17 77

8. Somatheeram Beach Resort 145 25

9. Manaltheeram Beach Resort 20 21

10. Travancore Heritage 29 92

11. Ideal Resort 10Employment tax not being remitted

12. Gods Own Country Resort 12

Name of HotelNo. ofRooms

No. ofStaff

Date ofCommencement

Nellikunnu Beach

Thapovan Heritage Home 31 75 2000

Medicos Ayur Bay 18 16 2004

Kadaltheeram 6 4 2005

Sea Park 25 18 1998Padme Beach Resort 10 6 2010

Vayalkara Beach Resort 14 16 2008

Merlin Villa 2 2 2009

Lotus Beach 2 3 2008

Park House 20 12 2008

Gods Light 1 1 2011

Mulloor Beach

Nandikulam Beach House 4 4 2010Coconut Bay Beach Resort 27 125 1997

Pulinkudy Beach

Surya Samudra 30 90 1982

Bethsaida 90 165 1994

Karikathi Beach House 4 4 1997Paradise Garden Resort 8 6 2004

Azhimala Beach

Agastya Beach Resort 32 60 2002

Nikkis Nest 47 85 1996

Sea and Sand Beach Resort 9 6 2009Azhimala Beach Resort 20 25 2009

Sun Tara Beach Resort 13 19 2009

Chowara Beach

Shin Shiva Ayurveda Ashramam 23 60 1998

Dr Franklins Panchakarma Institute 42 125

Visaya House 4 7 2009

Somatheeram Health Resort 66 255 1989

Somatheeram Beach Resort 80 400 1985

Manaltheeram Beach Resort 60 300 1985Travancore Heritage 90 235 2001

Ideal Resort 22 35 1996

Gods Own Country Resort 20 20 2007

Sandal Resort 12 10 2010

Total Staff in Beach Resorts 832 2189(Source: KHRA)


9/34

Comprehensive EIA for Vizhinjam Deepwater Port C1111307Final CEIA Report RP006 rev. 0


Tourist Inflow: Arrival of

foreign as well as

domestic tourists to the

resorts is shown in

Figure 4-78. The data

shows that main tourist

season in the resortsstarts from October and

continues till April.

During this period, the

number of tourist stay in

these resorts was

reported high compared

to the non-tourist season

i.e. May to September. In

almost all the resorts, the

number of foreign tourist

stay was high, which

also support the amount

of revenue generated by

them.

Figure 4-78: Resort wise detail of Tourist Arrival from year 2008-2012

Coastal Regulation Zone and Resort/Hotels in the Project Stretch: The coastal region of theIndian sub-continent is governed by the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification January 6, 2011.

These CRZ notifications classify different regions of the coast according to its eco-sensitive nature andlocation with respect High Tide Line (HTL) and Low Tide Line (LTL).

As per Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification 1991, a Kerala Coastal Management Plan (CZMP)

was prepared by the GoK in 1995. In which, the Coastal Regulation Zones were demarcated on

Coastal Zone Management Planning (CZMP) map, in that the proposed project site is located in Map

No. 2 and 3 (Source: CESS, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala). Based on this CZMP and primary field

investigation, a CRZ map and report was prepared by CESS, Thiruvananthapuram for this proposed

Project in 2004. In this report, it is noted that the sea side of the proposed development does not have

Figure 4-77: Year Wise Annual Income of the Resorts


10/34



any eco-sensitive area like corals, mangroves etc., which comes under CRZ I (i) as per CRZ

Notification, 1991.

The resorts in the project stretch were overlaid on the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) map prepared

by Centre for Earth Sciences Studies (CESS) in 2013 with respect to CRZ Notification 1991 (Figure

4-79). It can be inferred from the map, that many resorts namely Gods Light, Park House, Sea Park,

Lotus Beach, Medicus Ayurbay Beach Resort, Thapovan Heritage, Coconut Bay Beach Resort,Karikkathi Beach House, Surya Samudra Resort, Bethsaida and Agastya Beach Resort are located

within 200 m from HTL line, which is a No Development Zone as per the CRZ notification 1991.

The location of Nikkis Nest, Dr. Franklins Institute, Azhimala Beach Resort, Somatheeram Ayurvedic

Hospital, Somatheeram Ayurvedic Beach Resort, Someatheeram Research Institute & Ayurveda

Hospital, Travancore Heritage, Sun Tara Beach Resort, Ideal Resort and Gods Own Country could

not be correlated with HTL, as HTL line was demarcated only up to the Southern Breakwater.

Figure 4-79: Resorts in the CRZ Project Stretch

4.10.11 Other Economic Activities

Local Small Scale Industries: Two local cottage industries were identified in the study area, namely

coconut-based businesses and mollusc shell- based businesses.

Coconut based Industry: The study area has abundant coconut plantations. Coconut based cottage

industries involving coconut oil extraction, rope, and coir pith-making are present in the study area.

The data on the number and production capacity of these units was not available from any official

source.

Molluscs Shell based Industry: Since molluscs shells are available abundantly, shell based cottage

industries are present in the study area. Lime and artefacts are the main products manufactured from

mollusc shells. The lime produced in this way is used as raw material for white-washing of walls by


11/34

Appendix 2 Response to Seminar by John Jacob Puthur


12/34

Response to Seminar on Vizhinjam Prospects and Challenges by Theeradesa Samyuktha

Samithi

12th July 2013

Completeness of the Study

The presenter has raised the allegation that the report prepared for the EIA study is incomplete insuch a manner that erosion studies, area development issues, structural design of the port and

sourcing of construction materials etc has not been addressed properly.

Response

The stage of the project which we are currently in has to be noted particularly by the readers. The

finished process of public hearing on 29thJune, 2013 is for the Environmental Impact Assessment of

the port which is a mandatory clearance process required by MOEF. The document was

supplemented by various studies such as Detailed Project Report, Assessment of Long Term

Shoreline Changes in and around Proposed Port, Mathematical Modeling Report for Waves etc.

These reports clearly states more than required information asked for by the MOEF guidelines.MOEF asks for a 5km impact area study for the port, meanwhile a 10km radius was included for all

the studies.

It has to be noted that the hearing was for EIA and not for Area Development Study. A separate

study is being conducted by CEPT Ahmedabad based on the mitigation measures asked for in the

EIA report and this report shall be concretely stating how the area has to be developed. For this

purpose of EIA study all required information asked for by MOEF has been submitted. A detailed

study of long term shoreline changes has been published separately by VISL and is available in the

website. Regarding concerns on Erosion, it has been proven that Accretion takes place at South of

the Port and due to the presence of Stable Rocky Patches at North portion no significant erosion

would take place. The complainant also has asked to study the impact of this port till Perumathuraand South till Colachel/Kanyakumari. To note is that this stretch asked for is more than 80km stretch

and a port like Vizhinjam in between shall be bringing negligible impact in such a long distances. It

also has to note that the stretch between Vizhinjam till Shangumugham is protected using seawall

and erosion issues are not expected in this region. (Details are provided in the attached Appendix

Shoreline mapping of Trivandrum District)

Again, to note is that structural design of the port has not been completed and is not required at this

stage of the project. The structural design responsibility rests with the EPC (Engineering,

Procurement and Construction) Contractor and he has to detail the master plan suitable enough of

his construction. He can use his methodology for design based on his experience and availability of

materials and his machinery. This includes all rock supply and concrete, piles etc. The rock supplyshall be completely his responsibility and he can source it from any required distance as he may

require. The quarries identified in the report is only indicative such that rock is available nearby and

transport method suggested for such rock supply is using barges and not trucks as against raised in

the seminar.

VISL has also promised during the public hearing that any missing details as raised by any of the

complainants shall be addressed properly before issuing the final document to MOEF.


13/34

Siltation

The seminar had called for a relook into the siltation pattern inside the port. The presenter has

mentioned that there would be a large runoff from the land towards the sea and thus the dredged

channel would be silted in the tune of 3 Million Cubic metres after every monsoon. The presenter also

mentioned that the source of silt being mountains and land area as far as the Western Ghats.

Response

It has to be agreed that in generic the origin of sediments is from land and not from sea. However,

this pattern changes from area to area and cannot be compared with any other region. A large

number of ports in India are riverine ports or located at the mouth of the river, which itself is cause of

siltation. To note is that this chosen location has no rivers nearby, nor does the land behind is sandy

or silty enough to pour in the silt to the basin. As the public in Trivandrum knows clearly, the region of

Kovalam and Vizhinjam is founded with rocky patches and these rocks itself would be a natural

barrier against the silt flow. This is also a reason why Poovar was not chosen against this location at

Vizhinjam. Also as shown by the presenter a figure on silting issues, the shown diagram is to be

mentioned as factually wrong. The presenter had missed out a key component of the port its Quay

Wall or the Berthing Structure where the ships berth against the wharf. This structure itself is a barrier

against the silt to be formed inside the basin. Hence it can be concluded that the issue of siltation

from land side is very minimal. (Explained in diagram below).

Diagram as Shown by the Presenter


14/34

In Reality

Siltation due to littoral drift could be prevented by the 500m long South Side revetments. The

accretion is expected to form in the area less than 50m (26m as modeled) and the remaining area

shall thus prevent any such siltation in the port. The siltation volume at the existing port was recorded

as 3,800 m3 per year. Once the new port is built this volume will be reduced to such low extends as

200 m3 per year. The presenter has mentioned that 3 Million m3 will be silted inside the port. It is

requested that such in-factual and misleading figures may not be thrown out into the public.


15/34

Tranquility Effect due to Wind

The presenter had mentioned that the West Coast and in particular South Kerala region is prone to

very heavy winds and thus the port would be operationally dysfunctional during the monsoon seasons

(May to August). The winds will affect movement of the vessels into the port, container handling

operations and stacking as mentioned by the presenter.

Response

Quoted from EIA Report and Data from LTR:

During summer, the wind was blowing predominantly from the NE direction. It reached a maximumspeed of about 3.6 5.7 m/s. The average wind speed for this season was 0.56 m/s. In summer,almost 61.75% of the wind was calm less than 2 m/s.

The Monsoon season has two predominant wind directions, SW and NEnorth-east, which depicts thetwo different seasons of monsoon (south-west monsoon and north-east monsoon). The average windspeed of this season was recorded at 0.51 m/s and 60.36% of the total wind in that region was calm.Higher wind speeds were recorded in the range of 2.1 3.6 m/s. In the winter season, the wind wasblowing from NE direction predominately. The wind speed was in the range of 3.6 5.7 m/s. Theaverage wind speed was recorded at 0.58 m/s..

The maximum wind speed near the location is in the order of less than 6 m/s (~ 12 knots) and is notfrequent. Even this figure is in a Beaufort scale of 4 and is considered as Moderate Breeze.

For container handling operations to come to a halt a Beaufort Scale of 8 (17 m/s) or more isrequired. The design parameters for buildings in any windy region and container handling equipmentare in the order of 43.5 m/s as per Indian Standard Codes. It is typical to design the quay cranes and

yard cranes to withstand winds more than 35 m/s.

Even for stacking of empty containers the international guideline is to stack lower when the windexceeds 10 m/s. More details provided in the attached technical paper.

Vizhinjam area experiences much less wind conditions than prescribed above and thus the pointraised against wind issues stands invalid. It has to note that these vessels with 18,000 TEU isconstantly travelling against wind and waves in the rough seas before reaching any port. It isdesigned to withstand those heavy metocean conditions. There are ports all over the world includingTaiwan, Hong Kong and California which has heavy Typhoons and Cyclones compared to ZEROcyclone event at Vizhinjam. All those places have ports built 10 times bigger than the proposed portat Vizhinjam. Thus the above argument stands invalid.


16/34

Corrosion

The presenter also states that there will be corrosion issues due to the salinity nature at coastal

region. The containers and equipment will get corroded.

Response

Corrosion for structural elements are discussed in the Engineering domain and numerous solutions

are in place today to rectify those. Few of them being listed as Surface protection using corrosion

protective paintings, biofilm coatings etc. Cathodic Protection using Sacrificial Anodes is also a very

common methodology (These elements sacrifices itself protecting the adjoined steel structure using

chemical reactions), Impressed current protection etc.

All the above mentioned technologies are very common in Maritime Structures domain and helps in

protecting the system against any corrosion. The typical lifetime of these container cranes are 25 to

30 years and the crane manufacturers ensures that proper corrosion protection systems are in place

for such systems.

The example of ships sailing in the sea for more than 99% of its life is the perfect example for

corrosion protection. These vessels are steel bodied and is prevented against corrosion. Containers

are also having its significant part of lifetime spent in open seas and coastal regions. It can be said

that corrosion has been identified by Engineers ages ago and the current systems in place to prevent

those is good enough for ports to sustain.

(Anodes places on Steel Structural Elements to prevent Corrosion)


17/34

Reclamation and its effect on Environment

The Seminar also raised many concerns regarding any adverse effects of reclamation in the sea and

no such project has taken place in Kerala undertaking any reclamation.

Response

Reclamation is a very common process all over the world and in many parts of India. Till date many

ports in India are formed as riverine ports due to the non-requisite needs for deep draft. For reaching

a draft in the order of 14-18m the most suitable method followed all over the world is reclamation.

For Vizhinjam the final stage reclamation asked for is only in the order of 80 Hectares. The

reclamation volumes for Maasvlakte Project in Rotterdam with much adverse conditions than

Vizhinjam is in the order of 2,000 Hectares and 700 Hectares of this was completed in April 2013.

Several such examples are available in the world for reclamation.

Artist Impression and Actual Reclamation at Rotterdam

The process of reclamation will also be contained within the breakwater and using reclamation bunds.

The Breakwater would be constructed prior to any land filling in the sea thus preventing any

suspension of solids. The dredging process involved could also be contained properly using the

modern day technology available using silt curtains which traps any sediments during the dredging

process. The dispersion while any dumping process could also be contained using this process.


18/34

Shore Line Mapping of Trivandrum


19/34


20/34


21/34


22/34

Wind Influence on Container Handling


23/34

CONTAINERHANDLING

Over the course of hundreds of hours per year, ports experience

the influence of wind on nautical and terminal operations. This

influence is increased by the global trend of ever increasing vessel

sizes and the movement of ports to deeper water near or even

beyond the coastline. The influence of wind and possible solutions

to this problem are discussed in this article.

IntroductionWind is an uncontrollable source of disturbances, reducing

efficiency of port operations and sometimes even causing

downtime. Because of the increase in scale, the movement further

towards sea and also stricter regulations, the impact of wind

continues to increase.

Wind influence on container handling,equipment and stackingW. van den Bos, Faculty of Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering, Section Transport Technology and Logistics, Delft University,The Netherlands

Figure 1. The effect of wind increases due to larger wind surfaces of cranes and because of the extra wind speed at higher altitudes.

Scale of Beaufort Mean Wind speed [m/sec] Description

6 10,8 13,8 Strong breeze Large waves begin to form; white foam crests, probably spray.

7 13,9 17,1 Near gale Sea heaps up and white foam blown in streaks along the directionof the wind.

8 17,2 20,7 Gale Moderately high waves, crests begin to break into spindrift.

9 20,8 24,4 Strong gale High waves. Dense foam along the direction of the wind. Crests ofwaves begin to roll over. Spray may affect visibility.

10 24,5 28,4 Storm Very high waves with long overhanging crests. The surface of thesea takes a white appearance. The tumbling of the sea becomesheavy and shock like. Visibility affected.

11 28,5 32,6 Violent storm Exceptionally high waves. The sea is completely covered with longwhite patches of foam lying in the direction of the wind. Visibility

affected.

12 32,7 more Hurricane The air is filled with foam and spray. Sea completely white withdriving spray Visibility very seriously affected

TABLE 1: BEAUFORT SCALE (MEAN WIND SPEED IS 10 MIN AVERAGE AT 10 M)


24/34

ONTAINERANDLING

Wind characteristicsWind can be characterised by speed and direction. Unfortunately

in the working environment of ports there is confusion about

Beaufort scale (Table 1) and wind speed. The wind speed of

the Beaufort scale is the average wind speed taken over the

ten minutes preceding the time of observation at 10 m(J. Weringa en P.J. Rijkoort Windklimaat van Nederland, KNMI)

or mean wind. Sometimes however, a wind regime at Beaufort

6 is wrongly interpreted as gusts of wind with speeds varying

between 10.8 and 13.8 m/s.

By definition of the European standard for Crane design

(European standard EN13001 Cranes general design) the

gust wind is the average three-second wind. Table 2 shows the

relation between the maximum wind speed and the measure

time interval. The table shows that wind speed increases with

decreasing interval time. The maximum gust wind at Beaufort 6

is therefore not 13.8 but 13.8*1.5=20.7 m/s!

Increase of wind velocityTo handle vessels with deep draught the international trend is to

construct new ports closer to the sea, while older docks near city

centres become less important or are even closed. The difference

in wind speed between the coast and the open sea is indicated by

the Royal Meteorological Institute of the Netherlands (KNMI) as:under equal circumstances ... it is concluded that potential wind

on sea is 12% stronger than on open terrain on shore only because

of the difference in roughness. However, most experiments reveal

a difference of 20% or more mainly because the shore terrain is

not open but rugged.

This is also confirmed by our own research where we found

that 30 km off-shore the mean wind speed is up to two m/s

higher than on shore, while for wind gusts, the difference can

be even four m/s. If we assume that moving five km towards sea

(from Maasvlakte I to Maasvlakte II) increases mean wind speed

with one m/s, the amount of hours with troubling winds and loss

of productivity on a container terminal due to wind will double.

Figure 2. Wind map of Europe (EN 13001). Figure 3. Wind pressure based on gust winds (EN 13001).

Gust factor

Period [s] 1 3 5 10 30 60 120 600

(1 min) (2 min) (10 min)

V(t)/Vmean [.] 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1

TABLE 2. RELATION BETWEEN AVERAGE WIND SPEED OVER VARIOUS PERIODS AND MEAN SPEED (SOURCE EN 13001)


25/34

ONTAINERANDLING

Increase of wind pressureThe increase in world sea trade causes an increase in port

equipment and vessel size. For example, the 9500 TEU container

vessel commissioned in 2005 is almost ten times the capacity of

the first generation container vessels of 1962. This also affects

the size of the cranes. The effect of wind increases due to

larger wind surfaces of cranes and vessels, but the effect is also

augmented because of the extra wind speed at higher altitudes.

Besides the affects on vessels and cranes, high investments in

quay strength are also needed, in order to support the high

corner pressures of a 110 m high stowed crane, which is exposed

to storm winds (Figure 1).

Strict regulationsOver the years society has become stricter in terms of

accepted pollution and hazard level. An example of this

increased attention is the stricter interpretation of wind

pressure due to wind gusts in the new European crane design

standard EN13001. Wind pressure on cranes is now explicitly

dependent on wind gusts, while previously in National

Standards (Din 15019 teil 1 Krane, Standsicherheit; NEN

2018 Hijskranen) only the wind categories light, normal,

and heavy were defined. Furthermore, terrain roughness

factors account for higher coastal winds, while wind loads

no longer depend on countries, but rather on a wind map

where Europe is divided into wind regions (A to F) based on

measured data (Figure 2).

Figure 5a. Computer simulation model for machine trolley vs rope trolleyconfiguration.

Figure 5b. Dynamic container displacement due to wind load for both configurations.

Figure 6. Trailer stability depending on gust wind velocity and trailer speed while turning.


26/34

ONTAINERANDLING

Effects of windPort proceduresIn general, international standards and port or terminal authorities

both assume that ports are operational up to 6-8 Beaufort. At

terminals in the port of Rotterdam, operations are suspended at

Beaufort 8 or when gust wind speed exceeds 25 m/s. From figure

3, it can be deduced that a gust wind speed of 25 m/s signifies

a mean wind speed of 25/1.5= 17 m/s, which means that port

operations in practice stop at the end of Beaufort 7.

Vessel mooring

For ship-shore loading and unloading, the movements of thevessel due to wind load need to be limited. We researched the

dynamic response of a moored Ultra Large Container Vessel

(ULCV) which carries 12.500 TEU on a typical wind spectrum

at Beaufort scales 6 and 7. We found out that the maximum

movements of the cell guides are acceptable for positioning

containers in the cell guides, but the maximum calculated force

of 150 kN in the mooring lines requires special lines and wharf

bollards. For wind at Beaufort 8 or higher, storm bollards for these

vessel types are highly recommended.

Crane operationBeside vessel movement, wind also causes problems with

crane operations. Wind causes undesirable movements (mainly

sway and skew) of the container in the crane (Figure 4a andb). The crane driver can correct disturbances in sway, but an

effective way to control skew does not yet exist. Heavy sway is

generated by head on winds, but the crane driver can correct

these movements. Skew is mainly generated by diagonal winds.

If diagonal winds can be avoided, production loss due to

uncontrollable skew can be reduced.

The vulnerability of the container in the crane to both skew

and sway depend on the type of trolley. Because a (semi) rope

trolley has a V-shape cable configuration the stiffness of the

configuration in sway direction is higher than with machine

trolley with vertical inner ropes. A computer simulation of the

movements of the container exposed to wind for both trolley

types show a 40% decrease in sway for the (semi) rope trolley(Figure 5a and b).

Terminal equipment

unlashed container load, the MTS-trailer is used to calculate the

maximum wind for safe (container) transport on the terminal.

Side wind reduces total trailer stability and can cause tilt of the

(empty) container. The container/trailer combination stability

while turning is sufficient during low gust winds, but at high

speed and with gust winds above 22 m/s, an empty container can

tilt from the trailer frame. It is therefore recommended to drive at

lower speeds during high winds (Figure 6).

Another vulnerable container transportation vehicle to wind is

the straddle carrier. Because of the high position of the container

during transport, these vehicles have limited maximum speed. The

stability of a straddle carrier loaded with a 45 ft empty container,as well as a straddle carrier with a maximum loaded (30 tonnes)

45ft container, decreases during higher gust winds. As with MTS-

trailers it is recommended to lower driving speed during high

gust winds (Figure 7).

Empty container stackingFor storage, empty containers at the terminal area are stacked up

to 10 high. The risk of a single container sliding, or the tilting

of a whole row of containers, is calculated with wind pressure

according to the Dutch TGB standard (Nen 6720). Depending on

the stacking height, the risk of the total row tilting increases. In

respect to a container sliding, a friction coefficient of 0.1 is taken

(the lowest steel-steel contact friction). The sliding and tilting risk

is calculated for several different container types, but for safetyreasons, the wind speed at which the first container type starts

to slide or tilt is plotted. The calculations clearly show that tilting

and sliding can occur at low wind speeds near or around 10 m/s

(Figure 8). Lashing down stacked empty containers and reshuffling

empty containers in normal stack to lower positions is therefore

necessary at Beaufort 5 or even at lower wind regimes!

Reduction of wind influence

Reduction of windThe wind regime on a wind sensible terminal location can be

lowered by raising the climatological roughness. The terminal

should be planned in the shadow of other industrial installations

or buildings, and quay and cranes should be properly orientedto reduce the influence of the dominant wind direction. As an

alternative one can also use a lashed empty container stack as a

Figure 8. Risk of empty container sliding or tilting.


27/34

CONTAINERHANDLING

Wouter van den Bos graduated in 1998 from

Delft University in Mechanical Engineering (MSc).

He is employed at the section Transport Technology

and Logistic at the same university. He has carried

out various research programmes with a focus on

transport, cranes and load influences on mechanical

designs.

The field of Transport Engineering and Logistics at

Delft University encompasses the controlled handling

and transportation of unit loads and bulk materials.

The research and teaching involve the use of basic

principles and applied engineering to design industrial

systems and equipment for the handling and transport

of unit loads and bulk materials. In addition to the

equipment itself, aspects such as energy consumption,

the exchange of information and automation are given

due consideration. The functions to be fulfilled by the

equipment are defined on the basis of an inventory of

requirements. The research activities are carried out

in close cooperation with the Netherlands Research

School for Transport, Infrastructure and Logistics,

(TRAIL), and with industrial partners, especially those

located in the Rotterdam area of the Netherlands

Wouter van den Bos

Faculty of Mechanical, Maritime and Materials

Engineering

Section Transport Technology and Logistics

Mekelweg 2

2628 CD Delft

The Netherlands

E-mail: [email protected]

ABOUT THE AUTHOR AND THE COMPANY ENQUIRIES

Figure 9. Carrier Crane concept, TU Delft.

Wind on vesselsTo avoid the breakage of mooring lines or wharf bollards at Beaufort

8 or higher, severe storms bollards must be installed on the wharf.

Container ship-to-shore cranesThe effect of severe wind on ship-to-shore operations can be

limited by using a rope trolley instead of a machine trolley. Another

way of reducing wind influence on the load and unloading process

is to change the crane cycle under stormy conditions. With

rectangular hoisting, combined horizontal and vertical movementsare avoided, which reduce sway and skew significantly, but the

loading and unloading process becomes slower. Another possibility

is a new crane concept, the Carrier Crane, where a container is

hoisted from the ship by a trolley, transported over the main crane

beam with a carrier and again, on land, unloaded with a trolley. This

division of the crane cycle significantly increases crane performance

because the cycle time of each process is a lot shorter than that of

an original total load or unload cycle (Figure 9).

Terminal equipmentIf terminal operations have to continue at Beaufort 8, terminal

movements have to be performed by equipment other than

straddle carriers. In order to use MTS-trailers or similar

transportation equipment at stormy conditions, containers needto be fixed on the frame.

ConclusionWind causes production loss, and heavy winds even cause

downtime at the terminal. Port expansions move in the direction

of the sea, and in this perspective, more wind and additional

wind problems for terminals can be expected. Therefore, wind

influences should receive proper attention as a design aspect for

new terminals and port expansion programmes.

Wind speed can be reduced by using obstacles which increase

the climatological roughness of the area. If no installation or

natural barrier is available, an empty container stack can be used

as an obstacle.

The effects of wind can also be reduced by proper orientation

of the quay to the dominant wind direction, and use of a rope

trolley combined with the rectangular hoisting procedure

for ship-to-shore movements. Use of new crane types, such as

the Carrier Crane, can improve production as well as reduce

vulnerability to wind.

Empty containers are sensitive to wind, and lashing of container

stacks and reshuffling of empty containers in normal stacks is

necessary even at Beaufort 5. During stormy conditions, it is

advised to lock containers to the transporting vehicle frame and

to avoid the use of straddle carriers.


28/34

Appendix 3 Dossier of Activities by VMAC urging the

authorities for speedy implementation of Vizhinjam Project


29/34

July 13, 2013

May 18, 2008


30/34

23 Aug 2013


31/34


32/34


33/34


34/34

vmac letter to moef 29 oct 2013

Documents