Dynamar has taken up the challenge in its latest report, Container Throughput & Terminal Capacity in the Mediterranean<\/i>.<\/p>\n
Focusing on container trade in all countries bordering the Mediterranean and the actual and planned container terminal capacity in each of these countries, the report provides historic container throughput \u2013 2002-2011 – in all Mediterranean ports across six main regions that are the subject of calls by container services with the Far East and North America, as well as a 10-year (2012-2021) forecast, all per port and per region.<\/p>\n
This is compared with the current terminal capacity in the same ports and regions, and all planned and intended expansions and projects in those ports and some potential alternative or complementary outlets.<\/p>\n
On the topic of transhipment the report identifies 13 major transhipment ports, each having a throughput where transhipment accounts for over 50% of the annual volume. Aside from 2009, the report identifies substantial ongoing year-on-year growth in the transhipment and feedering sector at these ports; 12% in 2007 over 2006, 7% in 2010 over 2009 and 9% in 2011 over 2010.<\/p>\n
Total transhipment and feedering volume for 2011 is put at 26.1m teu with transhipment estimated to account for 79% of this.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
New look<\/b> <\/p>\n
In the All New Mediterranean Terminal Projects section, individual terminals are identified on a regional basis where capacity expansion is scheduled to take place and details provided of the proposed scale of development and the target date for year of completion. Here, the Black Sea, Adriatic and Levant regions are identified as the regions where the most development activity is likely to take place.<\/p>\n
New transhipment port projects are listed separately and these include the usual amount of \u2018wish list\u2019 projects such as the idea of the Vlore Container Terminal at the entrance of the Adriatic and the Porto Torres Container Terminal on the North West coast of Sardinia.<\/p>\n
The level of activity on the part of international and global terminal operators in the region is considered to be an endorsement of its attractiveness to them. The report identifies 18 such companies active in 38 different ports where they are involved in 55 different terminals with equity stakes ranging from 18% to 100%.<\/p>\n
A section on Carryings is also an interesting one with these analysed in conjunction with major trade lanes and on a regional basis. Each region contains a breakdown by country as to the carryings 2008-2011 in major trade lanes such as the Mediterranean Far East.<\/p>\n
Year-on-year growth is also identified \u2013 so too is total trade lane growth. In the case of Mediterranean-Far East container traffic this is put at a figure of 7.2m teu for 2011 representing a 6% increase over 2010 traffic. In terms of market share the West (Europe) Med accounted for 38%, Adriatic 7%, Black Sea 11%, Greece and Turkey 17%, Levant 12% and North Africa 6%.<\/p>\n
In overall terms, this report is an authoritative tome featuring recently researched data supported by diverse tables, figures and pictures.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Determining prospects for Mediterranean container demand and capacity can be a sticky business. Covering cultures as diverse as the Black Sea and North Africa, and Greece and Turkey, it can be a challenge to join the container capacity dots.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":3661,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"sponsor":[],"class_list":["post-3660","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-post-script"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3660","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3660"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3660\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3662,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3660\/revisions\/3662"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3661"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3660"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3660"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3660"},{"taxonomy":"sponsor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/coastlink\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/sponsor?post=3660"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}