{"id":1722,"date":"2011-03-16T14:40:00","date_gmt":"2011-03-16T14:40:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/portstrategy.nfdtesting.uk\/greenport-congress\/2011\/03\/16\/widespread-damage-curtails-japans-ports\/"},"modified":"2011-03-16T14:40:00","modified_gmt":"2011-03-16T14:40:00","slug":"widespread-damage-curtails-japans-ports","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/news\/asia\/widespread-damage-curtails-japans-ports\/","title":{"rendered":"Widespread damage curtails Japans ports"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>As at the end of March, Maersk Line confirmed that it had suspended services for both exports and imports at Sendai, Onahama, and Hachinohe until further notice.<\/p>\n<p>However, other reports are conflicting. Although one source says that fire and liquefaction has impacted some of the port areas within Chiba and Tokyo, Maersk had desrcibed Tokyo as &#8220;safe\u201d. Maersk added that Yokohama, Nagoya, Kobe, Osaka and Hakata ports are likewise secure with no damage to the company\u2019s handling equipment.<\/p>\n<p>Despite the differing information, it seems that Tokyo and all ports south of Japan&#8217;s capital were able to re-start operations a short while after the disaster, but the rest of the country&#8217;s ports remained closed awaiting damage assessment.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, a shortage of fuel was slowing down business and impacting shore facilities and handling equipment in the Kanto area, including Shimizu, Yokohama, Kawasaki, Tokyo, Chiba and Kisarazu (Kimitsu).<\/p>\n<p>Continued planned electricity outages in Tokyo and Yokohama further impacted port operations in these areas.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Japans recent devastating earthquake has caused serious damage to the ports of Hachinohe, Hitachi, Hitachinaka, Ishinomaki, Kamaishi, Kashima, Ofunato, Onahama, Sendai-Shiogama and Soma, according to reports.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":1723,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[32],"tags":[],"sponsor":[],"class_list":["post-1722","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-asia"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1722","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1722"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1722\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1723"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1722"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1722"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1722"},{"taxonomy":"sponsor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.portstrategy.com\/greenport-congress\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/sponsor?post=1722"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}