Technical Feasibility and Economic Analysis of
     Proposed Sethusamudram Channel

               (Executive Summary)



...
July 2004




  5.1-1
Technical Feasibility and Economic Analysis of
     Proposed Sethusamudram Channel




                        Sponsor :

...
July 2004

                                          Contents

 Index No.                        Title                Page...
Figure 2.1-2.2                                                     2.13-
2.14
       Tables 2.1-2.4                       ...
Index No.                      Title                          Page
No.

 4.0    Channel Alignment and Characteristics     ...
6.0   Cost Benefits                                    6.1-
6.3
      6.1   General                                      6...
Index No.                     Title                            Page
No.

        7.3   Cost Estimates                     ...
List of Figures

 Figure No.                Title                                         Page
No.

    1.1       Index Pl...
List of Tables

 Table No.                 Title                                             Page
No.

   1.1       Saving...
5.1   Capital Cost for 10 m Depth and 300 m Width Channel
                                                            5.
 ...
List of Annexures

 Annexure No.                 Title                                           Page
No.

   3.1         ...
1. Introduction
1.1      General
         India does not have a continuous and a navigable route around the peninsula
runn...
Tuticorin          Visakhapatnam                   1028            662          366
 Tuticorin          Kolkata           ...
The proposed ship channel in Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay area will save
about 20-25 hours of time which is around 20% of t...
decision to incorporate environmental considerations in the design phase of the project,
retained National Environmental E...
-12 mCD in the Palk Strait and adjoining parts of Palk Bay and terminate in the Bay of
Bengal.

          The basic differ...
5.1-17
                                                                           Savings by the
                         ...
5.4 km
                                                               E4
                                      14.4 km    ...
2. Earlier Proposals
2.1        General
           All the earlier project proposals were for creation of canal popularly ...
A brief review of these proposals extracted from Shri C.V. Venkateshwaran’s
report.




2.2.1     History of Earlier Propo...
The Scheme involved the excavation of a deep cutting nearly three miles in
length through the dry land and deepening to fi...
and small islands on the Southern side from the South-West monsoon; its Northern
approach was, however, exposed to the Nor...
Governments was carried on for some years. The Madras Government in their
proceeding, dated the 14th October 1890, however...
″No other alignment can be made for a canal which would offer the same
advantages having reference to the eligibility of t...
on all parts of the ship, and the anxiety and risk which are thus eliminated in the case of
all vessels render the constru...
-       Construction of breakwaters

      -       Procurement of a dredger and

      -       Land acquisition and procur...
undertaking, to reappraise and revalidate the 1983 report. Fresh particulars of
         cost and traffic were collected a...
The canal proposed earlier (Fig. 2.1) had two legs, one near the Point Calimere
which is called the Bay of Bengal Channel ...
Second                  180           210             210
          Third                   180           210             ...
Presently, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board which moves coal from mines in
North India by road and brings it to the port f...
5.1-31
         Fig. 2.1 : Alignment of Sethusamudram Ship Canal (Earlier Proposal)
4
                                                                                     1               3
                 ...
Table 2.1

            Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project – Traffic Projections

 Draft                  1983 Committee     ...
Table 2.3

                         Estimated Quantities of Dredging and Costs for ′K′
                       (Kodandarama...
Table 2.4

        Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project Components and Cost Estimates

Sr.   Description                      ...
Table 2.4 Contd…

Sr.   Description                                    30′ draft                          31′ draft       ...
3. Traffic Analysis
3.1      Design Draft for Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project
          Number of studies have been car...
3.2         Past Traffic Surveys
            The various groups that considered the development of Sethusamudram Ship
Cana...
In a meeting chaired by the Hon’ble Minister of State for Shipping, it was
presented by the National Environmental Researc...
A report prepared by Shipping Corporation of India on Traffic Potential for 11
and 12 m draughts is appended as Annexure 3...
Table 3.3

        Expected Number of Transits through Sethusamudram Channel

                                            ...
•     NRT                         153 lakh tonnes




3.5      Conclusion
         In view of large variations in the past...
Annexure 3.1


                        Sethusamudram Ship Channel
                                 Supplementary Report – ...
Thus, these ships would have to use different routes for loaded passage vis-a-vis ballast
passage, even when shuttling bet...
The next size i.e. Suezmax tankers have a loaded draught of about 15 metres
and a ballast draught of around 9 metres. Cons...
Coast to West Coast of India and vice-versa. The number of transits by LR-f tankers and
the resultant savings therefrom wo...
Speclised Cargoes
Phosphoric Acid
         As stated in the earlier reports, there are about 10-12 acid carriers deployed ...
the number of transits expected when the canal were to offer 7 metres navigable draught,
when these vessels were expected ...
General Cargo
Containers
         Most of the mainline container vessels calling at Indian ports have less than 12
metres ...
Beak-Bulk
         An increase in the navigable draught at the proposed canal upto 11 metres
would enable almost all break...
about US$ 0.06 million. Thus, total savings from the canal to the India-Black Sea
breakbulk liner trade would be about US$...
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004

3,942

Published on

Published in: Technology, Economy & Finance
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,942
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
324
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Techno-economic feasibility report (SSCP) Aug. 2004

  1. 1. Technical Feasibility and Economic Analysis of Proposed Sethusamudram Channel (Executive Summary) Sponsor : Tuticorin Port Trust, Tuticorin National Environmental Engineering Research Institute Nehru Marg, Nagpur- 440 020
  2. 2. July 2004 5.1-1
  3. 3. Technical Feasibility and Economic Analysis of Proposed Sethusamudram Channel Sponsor : Tuticorin Port Trust, Tuticorin National Environmental Engineering Research Institute Nehru Marg, Nagpur- 440 020 5.1-2
  4. 4. July 2004 Contents Index No. Title Page No. List of Figures (iv) List of Tables (v) List of Annexures (vi) Executive Summary i- xxi 1.0 Introduction 1.1- 1.5 1.1 General 1.1 1.2 Economy of Sea Transport 1.2 1.3 Pre-Independence Proposals 1.3 1.4 Post Independence Proposal 1.3 1.5 Present Proposal 1.3 2.0 Earlier Proposals 2.1- 2.18 2.1 General 2.1 2.2 Pre Independence Proposals 2.1 2.2.1 History of Earlier Proposals 2.2 2.2.2.1 Proposal-1 2.2 2.2.2.2 Proposal-2 2.3 2.2.2.3 Proposal-3 2.3 2.2.2.4 Proposal-4 2.3 2.2.2.5 Proposal-5 2.3 2.2.2.6 Proposal-6 2.3 2.2.2.7 Proposal-7 2.4 2.2.2.8 Proposal-8 2.4 2.2.2.9 Proposal-9 2.4 2.3 Post Independence Proposals 2.7 2.4 Traffic Projections 2.9 2.5 Canal Alignment 2.9 2.6 Economic Evaluation 2.11 2.7 Cost Benefit 2.11 2.8 Indirect Benefits 2.11 5.1-3
  5. 5. Figure 2.1-2.2 2.13- 2.14 Tables 2.1-2.4 2.15- 2.18 3.0 Traffic Analysis 3.1- 3.16 3.1 Design Draft for Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project 3.1 3.2 Past Traffic Surveys 3.2 3.3 Traffic Projections by Shipping Corporation of India (SCI) 3.2 3.4 Traffic Projections for the Present Study 3.4 3.5 Conclusion 3.5 Annexure 3.1 3.6 5.1-4
  6. 6. Index No. Title Page No. 4.0 Channel Alignment and Characteristics 4.1- 4.9 4.1 General 4.1 4.2 Channel Alignment 4.1 4.2.1 Alignment in the Adam's Bridge Area 4.2 4.2.2 Alignment in Palk Bay and Palk Strait 4.2 4.3 Design Vessel Dimensions for the Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project 4.3 4.4 Channel Width 4.4 4.5 Channel Depth 4.6 4.6 Conclusions 4.7 Figures 4.1-4.2 4.8- 4.9 Charts 4.1-4.12 Vol. II 5.0 Cost Estimates 5.1- 5.31 5.1 General 5.1 5.1.1 Dredging 5.1 5.1.1.1 Methodology of Dredging 5.1 5.1.2 Rate Analysis for Dredging 5.4 5.1.3 Navigational Aids 5.9 5.1.4 Other Items 5.11 5.2 Capital Cost 5.12 5.3 Phasing of Capital Expenditure 5.12 5.4 Source of Funds 5.12 5.5 Operation and Maintenance Cost 5.12 Table 5.1-5.2 5.14- 5.17 Annexure 5.1 5.18- 5.31 Charts 5.1-5.2 Vol. II 5.1-5
  7. 7. 6.0 Cost Benefits 6.1- 6.3 6.1 General 6.1 6.2 Benefits from Sethusamudram Ship Channel 6.1 6.2.1 Direct Benefits 6.2 6.2.2 Indirect Benefits 6.2 7.0 Economic Viability 7.1- 7.8 7.1 Economic Evaluation 7.1 7.2 Methods of Evaluation 7.1 7.2.1 Net Present Value (NPV) 7.1 7.2.2 Internal Rate of Return (IRR) 7.2 7.2.3 Benefit / Cost Ratio (B/C Ratio) 7.2 7.2.4 Average Rate of Return 7.2 7.2.5 Pay Back Period 7.2 7.2.6 Selection of the Method 7.2 5.1-6
  8. 8. Index No. Title Page No. 7.3 Cost Estimates 7.2 7.3.1 Capital Costs 7.2 7.3.2 Operation and Maintenance Costs 7.3 7.4 Cost Benefits 7.3 7.4.1 Traffic Projections 7.3 7.4.2 Fixation of Channel Dues 7.3 7.5 Results of Economic Analysis 7.4 Annexures 7.1-7.4 7.5- 7.8 8.0 Conclusion 8.1- 8.2 Report on Sea State for Sethusamudram Ship Annexure I Channel Project I.1- I.83 Annexure II Report on Tidal Information II.1- II.65 Annexure III Literature Review III.1- III.18 5.1-7
  9. 9. List of Figures Figure No. Title Page No. 1.1 Index Plan of Proposed Sethusamudram Ship Channel 1.5 1.2 Bathymetry along the Proposed Channel 1.6 2.1 Alignment of Sethusamudram Ship Canal (Earlier Proposal) 2.13 2.2 Various Alignments of Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project Including the Proposed Alignment 2.14 4.1 The Alignment of the Proposed Channel 4.8 4.2 Cross Section of Proposed Channel 4.9 5.1-8
  10. 10. List of Tables Table No. Title Page No. 1.1 Savings in Mileage by the Sethusamudram Channel Project Route 1. 1 1.2 Typical Comparison of Modal Costs 1. 2 2.1 Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project – Traffic Projections 2. 15 2.2 Lengths of Various Segments of the Sethusamudram Ship Canal 2. 15 Estimated Quantities of Dredging and Costs for ′K′ 2.3 (Kodandaramaswamy Koil) Alignment for Various Drafts 2. 16 2.4 Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project Components and Cost Estimates 2. 17 3.1 Draughts Considered under Various Proposals 3. 1 3.2 Past traffic Projections 3. 2 3.3 Expected Number of Transits through Sethusamudram Channel 3. 4 4.1 Design Vessel Dimensions 4. 4 5.1-9
  11. 11. 5.1 Capital Cost for 10 m Depth and 300 m Width Channel 5. 14 5.2 Capital Cost for 12 m Depth and 300 m Width Channel 5. 16 7.1 Phasing of Expenditure 7. 3 5.1-10
  12. 12. List of Annexures Annexure No. Title Page No. 3.1 Estimation of Traffic Potential at the Channel at a Proposed Draught of 11 and 12 m 3.6 5.1 Drilling Operations for Sub-Surface Data at Sethusamudram Navigation Channel 5.18 7.1 IPR and NPV Appraisal with Revenue and Expenditure Constant 7.5 7.2 IPR and NPV Appraisal with Revenue and Expenditure Increase by 5% 7.6 7.3 IPR and NPV Appraisal with Revenue and Expenditure Increase by 10% and 5% respectively 7.7 7.4 Cash Flow Statement 7.8 I Report on Sea State for Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project I.1- I.83 II Report on Tidal Information II.1- II.65 III Literature Review III.1- III.18 5.1-11
  13. 13. 1. Introduction 1.1 General India does not have a continuous and a navigable route around the peninsula running within her own territorial waters, due to presence of a shallow reef called “Adam’s Bridge” at Pamban, where the navigable depth is about 3.0 m. Hence, all ships from the west to east and from Tuticorin Port to the east have to go round Sri Lanka. Proposals for dredging this ship canal through Pamban Island have been under consideration of the Government for over a century. This canal, popularly known as the “Sethsamudram Ship Canal Project (SSP)” envisaged dredging a ship canal through Pamban island and increasing a channel depth in the Palk Strait to provide a short cut route for ships going from the west coast of India to the east coast and visa versa. Now the proposal for canal in Pamban Island is replaced by creation of a channel in Adam’s Bridge area. Thus the project now be known as Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project. The name ‘Sethu’ is derived from the name of the Indo-Ceylon causeway said to have been built by Lord Rama. The savings in the distance could be between 300 to 400 nautical miles as shown in Table 1.1. Table 1.1 Savings in Mileage by the Sethusamudram Channel Project Route (in nautical miles) Mileages by Mileages by Savings by From To Present Route the SSP route the SSP route Cape Comorin Chennai 755 407 348 Cape Comorin Visakhapatnam 1014 724 290 Cape Comorin Kolkata 1357 1103 254 Tuticorin Chennai 769 345 424 5.1-12
  14. 14. Tuticorin Visakhapatnam 1028 662 366 Tuticorin Kolkata 1371 1041 330 1.2 Economy of Sea Transport World over ports handle 82% of the worlds trade and hence its capacity and efficiency will determine the growth and economic potential of the region or the country. In India seaborne trade plays a vital role, as about 95% of the international trade takes place through seaports. The approximate breakdown of cost in a typical transport chain is as under • Transportation to Port - 26% • Port Handling (Loading) - 7% • Sea Freight - 37% • Port handling (Unloading) - 9% • Transportation from Port - 21% From the above, it may be seen that the sea freight constitutes an important item in the cost of transport chain. The cost per tonne of moving one tonne of coal by rail in India is about 54 ps. as against 13 ps. by sea. (1996). Thus the movement by sea route costs only 25% of the rail movement costs. Large quantities of coal move from Haldia / Paradeep to Tuticorin for power generation. Sethusamudram Ship channel will give a big boost for this traffic. Some of the international modal costs of various modes of transport for typical commodities are presented in Table 1.2. Table 1.2 Typical Comparison of Modal Costs Mode Commodity & Route US Cents per Tonne/Mile Sea Iron Ore in Cape size vessels from Australia to Rotterdam 0.067 Air Australia to Europe 12.0 Rail Coal by rail in the USA 2.17 Source : Intercargo Annual Review 1996/97. The above Table clearly illustrates the economy of sea transport compared to other modes. 5.1-13
  15. 15. The proposed ship channel in Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay area will save about 20-25 hours of time which is around 20% of the average time for a ship movement between Tuticorin and Haldia and will improve number of transits for transport of coal to Tuticorin from Haldia Port. Thus already economic mode of transport can be further economized due to this ship channel project. The Sethusamudram ship channel will reduce the haulage distance by 424 nm miles between Tuticorin and Chennai and about 366 nm between Tuticorin and Visakhapatnam. This channel system • will also establish National waterway within territorial waters • Reduce shipping distances • Reduce voyage time • Reduce operating costs and pave way for regional economic developments. 1.3 Pre-Independence Proposals Between 1890 and 1922 as many as nine proposals were formulated for dredging a canal across the narrow strip of land mostly through the Rameshwaram Island and the Gulf of Mannar with Palk Bay. However, the concerned authorities did not evince much interest for the development of this project. 1.4 Post Independence Proposal Between 1956 and 1996, five proposals were drawn up for the development of the Sethusamudram Canal Project. The various proposals were • Sethusamudram Project Committee (1956) • Government of Madras (1960) which was revised in 1963 • Dr. Nagendra Singh Committee (1967) • Shri H.R. Laxminarayan Committee (1983) (Fig. 1.1) • M/s. Pallavan Transport Consultancy Services Ltd. (1996) • NEERI report shifting canal alignment to Adams Bridge (1998) 1.5 Present Proposal The Ministry of Shipping has identified Tuticorin Port Trust as the nodal agency for the implementation of the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project. In pursuance of its 5.1-14
  16. 16. decision to incorporate environmental considerations in the design phase of the project, retained National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur to conduct the Environmental Impact Assessment study for the project. This report incorporates technical feasibility and economic analysis of proposed Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project. The present proposal envisages creation of a ship navigation channel to suit different draughts viz. 9.15m, 10.7m and 12.8 m requiring dredging depths of 10 m, 12 m and 14 m respectively. The width of the channel for 9.15 m and 10.7 m draught will be 300 m whereas for 12.8 m draught width will be 500 m. Based on the bathymetry survey done by National Hydrographic Office (Fig. 1.2), it is observed that navigation depths in Palk Bay area between Adams Bridge and Palk Strait are restricted to about 12 m only. The total length from Adams Bridge to Palk Strait is about 145 km. In the event of proposal for 12.8 m draught requiring 14 m depth, dredging will require to be carried out in entire Palk Bay incurring heavy expenditure and additional dredge spoil generation of about 170-180 million m3. Dredging in Palk Bay all along the channel length will be detrimental to ecological sensitivity of Palk Bay. It would also entail incurrance of huge additional expenditure for dredging & disposal of dredge spoil. Thus keeping in view Environmental sensitivity and economic viability the proposal for 14 m depth (12.8 m draught) is not evaluated. The proposals are therefore evaluated only for 9.15 m and 10.7 m draught requiring 10 and 12 m depth respectively. Thus the proposed Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project is considered with two dredged depth viz. of -10 mCD, -12 mCD to cater to vessels drawing a draught of 9.15 and 10.7 m respectively. The channel will have a bed width of 300 m providing a two way channel for vessels drawing a draught of 9.15 and 10.7 m. The dredging of the channel will be in • Adam’s Bridge • Parts of Palk Bay and • Palk Strait The navigation route will originate from Tuticorin Port in the Gulf of Mannar utilizing the available depths which are about -20 mCD upto south east of Pambam island, pass through a channel to be dredged to a depth of 10.0 m or -12 mCD in the Adam’s Bridge within the international boundary and proceed parallel to the International Medial Line in the Palk Bay, pass through a channel to be dredged to - 10 mCD or 5.1-15
  17. 17. -12 mCD in the Palk Strait and adjoining parts of Palk Bay and terminate in the Bay of Bengal. The basic difference between Sri. H.R. Laxminarayan Committee’s Report (1983) and the present Report is that the creation of canal as a land locked body with a Canal Lock which was proposed in the 1983 Report has been dispensed and creation of channel in Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay is proposed in the present report after a detailed review. 5.1-16
  18. 18. 5.1-17 Savings by the Mileages by Mileages by the From To Present Route SSP route SSP route Cape Comorin Chennai 755 407 348 Cape Comorin Visakhapatnam 1014 724 290 Cape Comorin Kolkata 1357 1103 254 Tuticorin Chennai 769 345 424 Tuticorin Visakhapatnam 1028 662 366 Tuticorin Kolkata 1371 1041 330 Fig. 1.1 : Index Plan of Proposed Sethusamudram Ship Channel
  19. 19. 5.4 km E4 14.4 km 10.5 m E3 8.1 m 19.8 km E2 9.6 m 14.6 km E1 E 11.6m D C Km : Distance between points m : average depth within a section B Fig. 1.2 : Bathymetry along the Proposed Channel 5.1-18
  20. 20. 2. Earlier Proposals 2.1 General All the earlier project proposals were for creation of canal popularly known as Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project and had been under the demand by the public, statesmen, administrators and navigators for over a century. The phenomenal increase in the traffic on land, steep hikes in the prices of the petroleum products had enhanced the advantages and the economics of waterborne traffic. 2.2 Pre Independence Proposals Between 1860 and 1922 as many as nine proposals were formulated for cutting a canal across the narrow strip of land mostly through the Rameshwaram Island to connect the Gulf of Mannar with Palk Bay with the object of providing a short cut for oean going ships plying between the west and east coasts of India. The various proposals were : i. 1860 - Commander Taylor’s Proposal ii. 1861 - Mr. Town Shed’s Proposal iii. 1862 - Parliamentary Committee’s Proposal iv. 1863 - His Excellency Sir William Dennison’s (Governor of Madras) Proposal v. 1871 - Mr. Stoddart’s Proposal vi. 1872 - Mr. Robertson’s (Harbour Engineer to the Govt. of India) Proposal vii. 1884 - Sir John Code’s Proposal viii. 1903 - S.I Railway Engineers Proposal ix. 1922 - Sir Robert Bristo’s (Harbour Engineer to the Govt. of India) Proposal 5.1-19
  21. 21. A brief review of these proposals extracted from Shri C.V. Venkateshwaran’s report. 2.2.1 History of Earlier Proposals Between 1860 and 1922, as many as nine proposals were made for cutting a Ship Channel across the narrow strip of land to connect the Gulf of Mannar and the Palk Bay with the object of providing a short-cut for ocean-going ships plying between the West Coast of India and the East Coast. These were : 1. 1860 Commander Taylor’s Proposal 2. 1861 Mr. Townshend’s Proposal 3. 1862 Parliamentary Committee’s Proposal 4. 1863 His Excellency Sir William dennison’s R.E. (Governor of Madras) Proposal 5. 1871 Mr. Stoddart’s Proposal 6. 1872 Mr. Robertson’s (Harbour Engineer for India) Proposal 7. 1884 Sir John Code’s Proposal for South India Ship Canal, Port & Coaling Station, Limited 8. 1903 S.I. Railway Engineer’s Proposal based on their Survey 9. 1922 Sir Robert Bristow’s (Harbour Engineer to the Government of Madras) Proposal These proposals are shown in Drawing No. 3 A brief survey of these various proposals extracted from Sir Bristow’s Report is given hereunder : 2.2.1.1 Proposal-1 The earliest proposal for cutting a link canal was made in 1860 by Commander Taylor of the Indian Marine. In his paper, he advocated cutting a canal across the Tonitorai Peninsula at a place about 12 miles west of the Pamban Pass. He stated “The southern end would start from ‘Port Lorne’, a natural harbour, a few miles down the coast from Mandapam, about seven miles in length and four-and-a-half miles in breadth, the grater part of which had a depth of 24 feet, and for some considerable extent up to 30 feet, the deepest parts being 36 feet. It was well sheltered by the Musal and Muli Islands and reefs. Its entrance had only a depth of less than 15 feet, but if this were depend, it would make the harbour a safe one for the anchorage of all vessels during the South- West Monsoon”. 5.1-20
  22. 22. The Scheme involved the excavation of a deep cutting nearly three miles in length through the dry land and deepening to five fathoms for at least three miles on each side to connect it with the harbour on the south, and the deep water on the north. It would also involve cutting a channel across the reef barrier at the southern entrance to the harbour. It was at first stated to cost only about £ 90,000, but further inquiries brought the estimate up to £ 1,500,000. The Northern approach would be exposed to the North-East monsoon and would require special protective works. Owing to the great expense involved and the extra work to be done in comparison with a canal across the Island of Rameswaram (please see proposals 3 to 9), the Scheme was not seriously considered. 2.2.1.2 Proposal-2 The next proposal was by Mr. Townshend. He proposed siting the canal through the Pamban Pass. His proposal was to deepen the existing tortuous Pamban Channel to enable the passage of large vessels. However, the objections to its adoption, with a curved channel, and subject to the strong currents through the Pamban Pass were so obvious that it put the Scheme outside the pale of practical consideration. 2.2.1.3 Proposal-3 In 1862, a Parliamentary Committee of Her Majesty’s Government was appointed to report on the site for a canal across the Island of Rameswaram, and they recommended an alignment situated about two miles East of Pamban, crossing the Island in a straight Northerly direction. 2.2.1.4 Proposal-4 In 1863, His Excellency Sir William Dennison, R.E., Acting Governor of Madras, visited Pamban and selected a site which he considered the most advantageous. This was about a mile further East from that recommended by the Parliamentary Committee. Probably he visited the Island during the North-East monsoon, as he chose the best position for a sheltered Northern approach at a time when the Northern seas were rough and the Southern seas were calm. In the South-West monsoon, the Southern side will be rough and the Northern side calm. This alignment was unsuitable, as its Southern entrance would be very much exposed during the South-West monsoon. 2.2.1.5 Proposal-5 Subsequently in 1871, Mr. Stoddart recommended a site about one mile West of Dennison’s alignment and parallel to it. This was practically the same as the one suggested by the Parliamentary Committee. This alignment was protected by the reefs 5.1-21
  23. 23. and small islands on the Southern side from the South-West monsoon; its Northern approach was, however, exposed to the North-East monsoon. 2.2.1.6 Proposal-6 In March, 1872, Sir Elphinstone, M.P., wrote to the Under Secretary of State for India, requesting that “Mr. Robertson, Harbour Engineer for India, should be directed to proceed to Pamban and examine the locality closely and minutely and give his opinion as to the best mode of proceeding in the matter, which is every month becoming of greater importance to the commerce and trade of the East”. Mr. Robertson accordingly visited Pamban and selected a new site about a mile from Pamban with its Southern entrance well within the protection of Kurisadi and Shingle Islands leaving the Northern entrance quite unprotected from the North-East Monsoon as he was of the opinion “that the point of paramount importance was the protection of the Southern entrance from the swell of the South-West monsoon”. He did not evidently make a close examination of the channel leading to the Southern entrance which would be narrow and would require an enormous amount of dredging to fit it for the passage of vessels. 2.2.1.7 Proposal-7 After a lapse of 12 years in the year 1884, “The South India Ship Canal Port and Coaling Station, Limited,” U.K., considered the project for the construction of a canal across the Rameswaram Island and instructed Sir John Code, Consulting Engineer, to prepare a report and estimate. His report discussed the previous schemes and decided on the best alignment for the canal. The southern entrance was just near that recommended by Mr. Stoddart in 1871, but the placed his line of canal obliquely on land so that the northern entrance would “derive considerable shelter from the northerly stretch of the coast immediately to the eastward”. He states “there will be a further advantage than the improved sheltering of the entrances, viz., the bringing of the course of vessels passing through it more directly in the line of the winds both in the North-East and South- West Monsoons. This I regard as a material consideration seeing that vessels of the largest class which have their sides so high above the water will be much less liable to be deflected from their true course while passing through the canal, owing to the wind being almost invariably either ahead or astern, whichever monsoon might be blowing”. The Secretary of State for India granted the South India Ship Canal Port and Coaling Station, Limited, a perpetual concession, reserving the right to purchase the canal under certain conditions. Correspondence between the Home and the Indian 5.1-22
  24. 24. Governments was carried on for some years. The Madras Government in their proceeding, dated the 14th October 1890, however, advised the Government of India to reject the scheme on the ground that the shoals at the Palk Straits between Pt. Calimere and Pt. Pedro would prevent the projected canal being made use of by vessels of a deep- sea draft. Apparently, the Madras Government Adviser had not studied the Ceylon Government chart of the channel north of Ceylon, which showed ample waterway. The present Drawing No. 2, in which soundings taken from the Admiralty Chart Nos. 68-A and 2197 are plotted would also show that there is a minimum depth of 33 to 34 feet by the route via the Pedro Channel. In this drawing, this channel route is also marked for easy reference. Another point worth mentioning here is that in those days dredging and deepening a channel in the open sea conditions in the Palk Straits where they may get fiver or six feet waves in fair weather, could not be thought of, as dredgers could work only in two or three feet waves. Now Dredger design has advanced considerably and swell-compensating arrangements are provided in Trailer Suction Dredgers, so that it is possible to dredge in 7 ft. or 8 ft. waves without any difficulty. In this connection, mention may be made of the new estuarian dredger “Mohana” acquired for Calcutta Port to dredge in the estuary in the exposed open sea conditions. 2.2.1.8 Proposal-8 In 1902, the South Indian Railway Company carried out a fresh survey by their Engineers and decided upon an alignment in Rameswaram about which they stated as follows : ″The final alignment of the canal has been determined after a careful survey was made of the seas on each side, and due consideration was given to its protection at both ends during the monsoons. A glance at the maps which accompany the project report will show that the minimum amount of dredging at the approaches will be required to enable a depth of 30 ft. to be dredged. The southern entrance is well under the protection of the Kallaru reef with the Shingle Islets and also of the Kurisadi, Pulli-Vausel and Pulli Islands and their surrounding reefs which form a natural breakwater during the South-West monsoon″. ″The line of canal is oblique (and in the direction of the prevailing winds) and has the same advantage as advocated by Sir John Code in his alignment, which has already been referred to″. 5.1-23
  25. 25. ″No other alignment can be made for a canal which would offer the same advantages having reference to the eligibility of the approaches and shelter which the present one affords″. 2.2.1.9 Proposal-9 After another two decades, Sir Robert Bristow, Harbour Engineer to the Government of Madras, made a thorough study of all the previous proposals and carried out detailed investigations and put up his proposal for an alignment somewhat similar to the previous one adopted by the S.I. Railway across the Rameswaram Island, as being the best line for the canal crossing. He, however, shifted the southern extremity of the land canal by about 500 yards west in order to get still better protection for the southern approach. Sir Robert Bristow in his report has stated that the reason for reopening the matter at this date (1922) was that ″One of the reasons which was acting adversely to the development of the ports of the South-East India was the fact that there was no deep-sea passage northward of Cape Comorin and that nearly all traffic had to pass round the Island of Ceylon. The question was, therefore, raised as to the advisability of cutting a canal through the Island of Rameswaram, in order to remove this disability. A good deal of discussion was aroused by this proposal, especially among the people of Tuticorin, who, whilst in entire agreement with the idea of making a canal ‘qual canal’, were apprehensive that, as it would cross the main line of railway from Dhanushkodi to Madras, a port might grow up there, which would attract the trade from Tuticorin to Rameswaram. Again to quote from the Report of the Tuticorin Ad hoc Committee which considered the Canal Scheme drawn up by Sir Robert Bristow : ″There has been very little of divergence of opinion during the discussions as to the advantage of the canal in the abstract. Indeed, its obvious usefulness and the desirability in the constructing it, if only on the broad ground of reducing ocean distances, has made anything like serious discussion impossible. For example, it reduces the distance from off Cape Comorin (a common point for all traffic from the West) to Madras, Calcutta and Rangoon by 333, 240 and 109 miles, respectively and from Trincomalee to Cape Comorin by 125 miles″. ″Further the actual saving in mileage and money is enhanced by the less tangible, but, perhaps, more important savings consequent upon avoiding the stormy journey round the Island of Ceylon particularly in monsoon weather. The increased wear 5.1-24
  26. 26. on all parts of the ship, and the anxiety and risk which are thus eliminated in the case of all vessels render the construction of the canal a very desirable object on the general grounds″. This proposal, however, was not pursued then, apparently because of dearth of finance. 2.3 Post Independence Proposals The proposals considered after independence are as under :- i) Sethusamudram Project Committee (1956) The committee was headed by Sir A. Ramaswamy Mudaliyar and the committee contemplated a 26 feet draft land canal crossing the main land at Mandapam estimated to cost Rs.1.8 crores. Capt. H.R. Davis carried out further survey in the year 1959 and suggested certain modifications, regarding alternative alignment across the main land maintaining the same draft. ii) The Government of Madras under the guidance of State Port Officer explored the possibility of increasing the draft from 26 feet to 36 feet in the year 1963 at an estimated cost of Rs.21 crores. iii) Government of India constituted a committee under the Chairmanship of Dr. Nagendra Singh, Secretary Ministry of Shipping and Transport in the year 1964. Shri C.V. Venkateshwaran, Retd. Development Advisor, (Ports) was appointed as the Chief Engineer to take up the investigation work. Shri R. Natarajan was appointed as the Project Officer to collect the statistics of shipping and to determine the economic viability of the project. The committee completed its report in 1967 and the draft contemplated was 30 feet at an estimated cost of Rs.37.46 crores. The committee examined both the alignments suggested earlier and due to the presence of layers of sand stone in the Madapam alignment, suggested an alternative alignment in the Rameshwaram Island Crossing called the DE alignment near Thankachimadam. The main components of the project involved were - Excavation and dredging of the canal - Construction of a lock - Construction of a bridge 5.1-25
  27. 27. - Construction of breakwaters - Procurement of a dredger and - Land acquisition and procurement of harbour crafts, construction of buildings, model studies etc. iv) The committee under the Chairmanship of Shri H.R. Lakshminarayan Development Advisor (Ports) was constituted in the year 1981. The committee collected the opinions and representations of the leading public, industrialists and Government officials of the State. All of them unanimously urged the Government to take up the scheme immediately. The prominent citizens of the Rameshwaram island represented that the canal would serve better if located to the east of Rameshwaram town as far as possible, as it would otherwise affect the movement of the pilgrims of the temple town. After detailed investigations a new alignment was proposed across Dhanushkodi, 1km. west of Kodandaramasamy Temple across the narrow land strip known as the ‘K’ alignment. The committee also appointed a Navigational Expert Group to finalize the bottom width of the channel and the under keel clearance. The committee recommended construction of two channels called the south and north channels and also construction of a lock in the land portion connecting both the channels. The salient features of the scheme were as under :- Length Dredging depth Bottom width Section of the Channel in nautical in meters chart in meters miles datum Bay of Bengal channel 33.5 305 12.2 North approach 8.05 244 11.6 Lock in land canal 300m. 45 12.2 South approach 2.4 244 11.6 A side slope of 1:6 was considered. The estimated cost of the project was Rs. 282 crores with a foreign exchange component of Rs. 3 crores. v) During 1994, the State Government of Tamil Nadu felt that Sri. H.R. Laxminarayan Committee Report of 1983 has to be up dated and directed M/s. Pallavan Transport Consultancy Services Ltd.(PTCS), a Govt. Tamil Nadu 5.1-26
  28. 28. undertaking, to reappraise and revalidate the 1983 report. Fresh particulars of cost and traffic were collected and incorporated in the report. PTCS Report Considered Following Project Components : Apart from the construction of the proposed canal, which constitutes the major component of the project, a number of infrastructural facilities as listed below are envisaged to be created under the project : • Construction of a ″lock″ • Construction of rubble mound type breakwaters on either side of the land canal • Navigational aids Lighted beacons/buoys - Racons - Satellite based differential global system - Improvements to Pamban light house - • Flotilla Harbour tugs - Pilot, mooring, survey-cum-lighting launches - Despatch vessels - • Shore facilities Two service jetties - Slipways - Buoy yard - Repair workshop - • Staff and administration buildings 2.4 Traffic Projections The Lakshminarayan Committee in 1983 had made traffic projections for 30′ draft in the first stage by which time the harbours at Mangalore, Tuticorin, Vizag and Paradeep had come into existence. Following a detailed analysis of traffic through other Indian ports, projections have been made for the year 2000 AD (Table 2.1) while updating the report by the PTCS Ltd. The minimum depth available in Chennai, Vishakhapatnam and Paradeep in inner harbour is 18.6, 10.7 and 12.8 m respectively whereas depth available in outer harbour is 19.2 and 17.5 m at Chennai and Vishakhapatnam respectively. 2.5 Canal Alignment 5.1-27
  29. 29. The canal proposed earlier (Fig. 2.1) had two legs, one near the Point Calimere which is called the Bay of Bengal Channel and another across the narrow Danushkody Peninsula near Kodandaramasamy Temple. The lengths of various segments of the canal for the different drafts are shown in Table 2.2. The Bay of Bengal Channel traverses the Palk Bay wherein the sea-bed is mostly soft to hard clayey-sand in nature. Bore holes drilled into the sea-bed upto 15 m depth met with only clay and not corals or rock. The canal is 19.3 km away from Point Calimere and Kanakesan Thurai where the coast consists of only clayey-sand. The second leg of the canal 802 m long crosses the narrow Danushkody Peninsula through the land portion. The entire coast of Danushkody Peninsula on the North and the South is all sandy. Drillings done at 16 places here have shown only sandy strata upto 12 depth. In the North Approach Channel, soft sand-stone was met with below 12 m depth and cutting this sand-stone is not necessary even in the ultimate stage of the canal. The canal will, however, cut the road connecting Rameswaram and Danushkody. This road is being used by the Rameswaram fisherman to go to Danushkody for daily fishing as there is no habitation at Danushkody. The project envisages a high-level or a swinging bridge at the crossing point to enable the traffic to go through. Tracer studies at two places along the 'K' alignment conducted jointly by the Atomic Energy Establishment and the Central Water and Power Research Station in two monsoon seasons established that the pattern of movement of sea-bed silt would almost be in the same direction as that of the proposed channel, and that the chances of siltation would be very minimal. Cost Estimates The cost estimates for the canal project were worked out by PTCS Ltd. based on the same quantities of dredging as in the 1983 report but with updated rates for the year 1994. The costs of dredging for the various segments of the channel of the project for the three different drafts viz. 30, 31 and 35 feet are presented in Table 2.3. The abstract of cost estimates for all the components of the project including those of navigational aids and floating crafts is presented in Table 2.4. The construction period for 31 feet draft is estimated at four years and the phasing of the capital expenditure will be as under : Year Amoutn (Rs. in Crores) 30 ft. draft 31 ft. draft 35 ft. draft First 120 120 160 5.1-28
  30. 30. Second 180 210 210 Third 180 210 210 Fourth 205 220 210 Fifth NIL NIL 210 Sixth NIL NIL 200 Total 685 760 1200 The operation and maintenance cost has been estimated by PTCS Ltd. at Rs. 4.52 crores per year. It is expected that this cost will increase by about 5 % every year. In case of 35 feet draft, the project period will stand extended by two more years. 2.6 Economic Evaluation An economic appraisal of the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project, taking into account the cost estimates and the cost benefits of the proposal, has been made by PTCS Ltd. Based on the Net Present Value (NPV) method of appraisal, an Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of 10 to 17 % on the project investment has been arrived at. Considering an interest rate of 9 % per annum on the capital employed on the basis of the rate of Government lending to ports prevailing now, the project will start generating surplus from the 16 to 17th year of its operation as per the cash flow statement The project will have a cumulative surplus of over 1600 crores in 25th the year and over 3000 crores in the 30th year. In the 25th year the CB ratio will be 1 and will increase by over 10% every year reaching 1.75 in the 30th year. 2.7 Cost Benefit As per the economic analysis by PTCS Ltd. the project will be able to pay back the principal and interest in the 17th year and thereafter the benefits to the canal company would be 47 crores in the first year, and this would go on creasing by 100 to 120 crores every year. In the 30th year of operation, the annual surplus to the company would be over Rs. 550 crores. The project will reduce the oil import bill by over Rs. 40 crores in the initial years, and this would increase every year by atleast 4 %. The canal will boost the coastal and foreign ship-traffic and establish Chennai and Tuticorin as international nodal ports. The social benefits to the backward region of old Ramanathapuram district wilt be immense. 2.8 Indirect Benefits 5.1-29
  31. 31. Presently, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board which moves coal from mines in North India by road and brings it to the port for onward shipment to Tuticorin, spends 54 paise per tonne kilometre on road and 13 paise per tonne kilometre by sea. For want of a sea canal, many commodities like salt, fish, and caustic soda are now transported by rail causing congestion and incurring high cost. Once the canal comes into being, aIl this and more can take the sea-route. Further, the canal system will establish a national waterway within the territorial waters of India, reduce distances, and voyage time. Likewise, all coastal ships plying between the East and the West coasts can make considerable profits on extra turn-arounds. The canal will be a great asset from national defence and security points of view and also the coast guards who now have to go around Sri Lanka. Benefit of shorter distance will encourage small entrepreneurs to launch new ventures of coastal sea-traffic between ports on trade and commerce. There are rich resources of fish and shrimps in the area and this can be exported to Japan and U.S.A. through Rameswaram Port which will get strengthened once the canal comes into being. This will relieve the distress of Ramanathapuram district which is one of the worst drought-prone areas in the country, and save the Governments from taking annual special alleviation measures. On the whole, the canal will come as a boon to the industrial development of the Ramanathapuram, Sivagangai, Tuticorin and Virudhunagar districts of Tamil Nadu, and the nation in general. Thus the revised cost as worked out by M/s Pallavan Transport for 35′ draught was Rs. 1200 Crores. Various alignments of Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project proposed earlier till NEERI's report of 1998 as also now proposed alignment is shown in Fig. 2.2. 5.1-30
  32. 32. 5.1-31 Fig. 2.1 : Alignment of Sethusamudram Ship Canal (Earlier Proposal)
  33. 33. 4 1 3 2 6 1 Proposed in 1961 2 Proposed in 1968 3 Proposed in 1996 Report 4 Suggested by Steering Committee 5 Considered by NEERI (1998) 6 Present Proposal of NEERI 5 5.1-32 LEGEND Fathoms Line 3.5 Fathoms Line 5.0 Reefs Fig. 2.2 : Various Alignments of Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project Including the Proposed Alignment
  34. 34. Table 2.1 Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project – Traffic Projections Draft 1983 Committee 1996 Report for 2000 AD Transits NRT Transits NRT Nos. % Lakh % Nos. % Lakh % tones tones upto 30' 2100 89.4 160 79.6 3791 90.0 319.6 82.2 31-32' 2200 93.6 170 84.0 3875 92.0 328.0 84.4 above 34' 2300 100.0 201.0 100.0 4211 100.0 388.5 100.0 Table 2.2 Lengths of Various Segments of the Sethusamudram Ship Canal Item Length 30′draft 31′draft 35′draft Nautical Nautical Nautical Meter Meter Meter Miles Miles Miles Bay of Bengal Channel 33.5 61,700 39.2 72,300 56.0 1,00,800 Sea Lane (no dredging) 34.0 62,968 28.5 52,782 Nil Nil North Approach Channel 7.39 13,600 10.89 20,065 19.8 36,564 Land canal upto lock 0.44 802 0.44 802 0.40 802 Lock 0.16 300 0.16 300 0.16 300 Land canal blow lock 0.60 1,117 0.60 1,117 0.60 1,117 South Approach Channel 2.06 3,800 2.31 4,250 4.00 7,200 5.1-33
  35. 35. Table 2.3 Estimated Quantities of Dredging and Costs for ′K′ (Kodandaramaswamy Koil) Alighment for Various Drafts Sr. Description 30′ draft 31′ draft 35′ draft No. Length Width Quantity of Dredging Length Width Quantity of Dredging Length Width Quantity of Dredging (m) (m) Dredging Cost (Rs. (m) (m) Dredging Cost (Rs. (m) (m) Dredging Cost (Rs. Material in lakhs) Material in lakhs) Material in lakhs) (lakh m3) (lakh m3) (lakh m3) 1. Bay of Bengal 61,700 305 375.60 30048.00 72.300 305 446.00 35680.00 1,00,800 305 832.20 66570.00 Channel 2. North Approach 13.600 245 147.33 8827.00 20,065 245 165.41 9924.60 36,564 245 313.00 18780.00 Channel 3. South Approach 3,800 245 29.33 1759.80 4.250 245 33.18 1990.80 7,200 245 55.10 3306.00 Channel 4. Land Canal a) upto lock 802 245 69.86 6986.00 802 245 71.72 7172.00 802 245 76.65 7665.00 b) below lock 1,117 1.117 1,117 Mobilisation - - - 150.00 - - - 150.00 - - - 150.00 Total 81,019 622.12 47770.80 98,534 716.31 54917 .40 1,46,483 1276.95 96477 .00 5.1-34
  36. 36. Table 2.4 Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project Components and Cost Estimates Sr. Description 30′ draft 31′ draft 35′ draft No. Quantity Rate Amount Quantity Rate (Rs.) Amount Quantity Rate Amount (Rs.) (Rs. in (Rs. in (Rs.) (Rs. in lakhs) lakhs) lakhs) 1. Preliminary expenses such as - - 500.00 L.S. - 500.00 L.S. - 500.00 model studies, hydrographic and land surveys, soundings, boring, consultancy fees etc. at 20% 2. Land Acquisition charges L.S. - 50.00 40 125000/ 50.00 40 L.S. 50.00 including payment for hectares hectares hectares compensation of structures for 40 hectares 3. Dredging and excavation : Dredging the loose or compact sand, silt or any other soft materials from the existing sea bed to the required levels by suitable dredgers in the proposed canal, conveying the dredged spoils and dumping the same at dumping site including removal of abstructions if any : i) Mobilisation and LS - 150.00 LS - 150.00 LS - 150.00 demobilization charges ii) South approach channel 29.33 60/m3 1759.80 33.18 60/m3 1990.00 50.10 60/m3 3306.00 (average lead 6 km) lakhs m3 lakhs m3 lakhs m2 iii) North approach channel 147.33 60/m3 8827.80 165.41 60/m3 9924.60 313.00 60/m3 18780.00 (average lead 6 km) lakhs m3 lakhs m3 lakhs m3 iv) Bay of Bengal channel 375.60 80/m3 30048.00 446.00 80/m3 35680.00 832.2 80/m3 66576.00 (average lead 15 km) m3 lakhs m3 lakhs m3 v) Land canal 69.86 m3 100/m3 6986.00 71.72 100/m3 7172.00 76.65 100/m3 7665.00 lakhs m3 lakhs m3 4. 4000.00 LS 4000.00 LS 4000.00 Construction of a ″lock″ of size 300x45 m as per details shown in the drawinings 5. Construction of Rubble Mound 1,60,000 274/t 438.00 1,60,000 274/t 438.40 1,60,000 274/t 438.00 Type Breakwaters of length tons tons tons 350 m each from shore to –3 m depth on either side of the land canal total 1400 km 5.1-35
  37. 37. Table 2.4 Contd… Sr. Description 30′ draft 31′ draft 35′ draft No. Quantity Rate Amount Quantity Rate (Rs.) Amount Quantity Rate Amount (Rs.) (Rs. in (Rs. in (Rs.) (Rs. in lakhs) lakhs) lakhs) 6. Navigational Aids i) Lighted beacons/buoys 35 Nos. 30 lakhs/ 1050.00 35 Nos. 30.00/ 1050.00 70 Nos. 30.00/ 2100.00 Nos. Nos. Nos. ii) Racons 10 Nos. 12 lakhs/ 120.00 10 Nos. 12.00/ 120.00 15 Nos. 12.00/ 180.00 Nos. Nos. Nos. iii) Satellite Based Differential 100.00 100.00 100.00 Global System iv) Improvements to Pamban 100.00 100.00 100.00 light house 7. Flotilla i) Harbour Tugs 30 TBP 4 Nos. 1540 6160.20 4 Nos. 1540 6160.20 4 Nos. 1540 6160.00 2700 HP (30 m x 10 m x lakhs/ lakhs/ lakhs/ 3.5 m draught) Nos. Nos. Nos. ii) Pilot launches 700 HP (22 3 Nos. 75 225.00 3 Nos. 75 225.00 3 Nos. 75 225.00 m x 5 m x 1.5 m to 2.0 m lakhs/ lakhs/ lakhs/ draught) Nos. Nos. Nos. iii) Mooring launches -10 HP 3 Nos. 30 90.00 3 Nos. 30 90.00 3 Nos. 30 90.00 (10 m x 3.5 m x 1 m lakhs/ lakhs/ lakhs/ draught) Nos. Nos. Nos. iv) Survey cum lighting 1 No. 100 100.00 1 No. 100 100.00 1 No. 100 100.00 launches 700 HP lakhs/ lakhs/ lakhs/ (25m x 7m x 2 m draught) Nos. Nos. Nos. v) Despatch vessels – 2000 1 No. 100 100.00 1 No. 100 100.00 1 No. 100 100.00 HP (40 m x 12 m x 4 m lakhs/ lakhs/ lakhs/ draught) with buoy Nos. Nos. Nos. servicing facilities 8. a) Provision of 2 service 300 km 4 1200.00 300 km 4 1200.00 3 km 4 1200.00 jetties 150 m long lakhs/km lakhs/km lakhs/km b) Provision for slipway LS LS 100.00 LS LS 100.00 LS LS 100.00 c) Provision for buoy yard 1000 m2 1000/m2 45.00 1000 m2 1000/m2 45.00 1000 m2 1000/m2 45.00 d) Provision for repair 2000 m2 6000/m2 120.00 2000 m2 6000/m2 120.00 2000 m3 6000/m2 120.00 workshop 9. Staff & Administration Building LS LS 1000.00 LS LS 1000.00 LS LS 1000.00 10. Electricity at 7 1/12% on works 84.00 LS 84.00 LS 84.00 other than dredgers and jetties 11. Water supply at 7 ½ % on 84.00 LS 84.00 LS 84.00 works other than dredging and jetties 12. Maintenance during 1808.00 LS 1808.00 LS 1808.00 construction 13. Petty supervision and 3253.40 LS 3608.20 4939.00 contingencies at 5% Total 68500.00 76000.00 120000.00 5.1-36
  38. 38. 3. Traffic Analysis 3.1 Design Draft for Sethusamudram Ship Channel Project Number of studies have been carried out earlier for the development of Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project and the draughts considered under various proposals are shown in Table 3.1. Table 3.1 Draughts Considered under Various Proposals Draft Sr. No. Proposal in feet (meters) 1 Sethusamudram Project Committee (1956) 26(7.93) 2 Government of Madras (1960) 26(7.93) 3. Government of Madras Revised (1962) 30 (9.15) 4. Dr. Nagendra Singh (1964-67) 30(9.15) 5. Mr. H.R. Laxminarayanan (1983) 30(9.15) 6. Pallavan Transport Consultancy Services Ltd., 30(9.15) Chennai (1996) /35(10.7) However, there has been a consistent trend in the increase in the size of vessels and also for proposals for deepening of Haldia and Tuticorin. The Ports of Visakhapatnam and Paradip have also been developed. Existing depths of inner harbour at Chennai, Visakhapatnam and Paradeep are 18.6 m, 10.7m and 12.8 m respectively whereas outer harbour depths at Chennai and Visakhapatnam are 19.2 m and 17.5 m respectively. Taking into consideration the above as well as environmental sensitivity, it is now proposed to assess traffic potential of Sethusamudram Ship Channels upto a depth of 12 m (draught 10.7 m). 5.1-37
  39. 39. 3.2 Past Traffic Surveys The various groups that considered the development of Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project have projected different traffic at different points of time by adopting different growth rates. The traffic projection in terms of transit and NRT by the various committees is tabulated in Table 3.2. Table 3.2 Past Traffic Projections No. of Net Registered Tonnage Sr. No. Proposal Transits (NRT) (in lakh tonnes ) 1. Sethusamudram Project 1613 64 Committee (1956) Projection for 1961 2. Government of Madras (1960) 2212 93 3. Mr. K.N.Srinivasan (1963) - Projection for 1968 1933 79 4. Mr.C.Venkateshwaran Sethusamudram Project (1971) 102 5. Mr. R. Natarajan (1963) 2371 105 Projection for 1974 3300 150 6. Mr. H.R. Laxminarayan (1983) Projection for 1980 2100 160 Projection for 1989-90 3000 230 7. Pallavan Transport Consultancy Services Ltd., Chennai (1996) Projection for 2000 (for 35 feet draft) 4211 388.5 3.3 Traffic Projections by Shipping Corporation of India (SCI) SCI was advised by the Ministry of Shipping to examine the traffic potential that is likely to transit through the Sethsamudram Channel for a draught of 7m. and the resultant saving that would accrue to the shippers / consignees thereupon. It was estimated that for an available draft of 7m. there would be about 1,708 transits through the channel in a year and the industry would save about Rs. 68 crores by way of savings in ship time and bunker consumption due to reduction in the navigable distance when crossing from the East Coast to the West Coast of India and vice-versa. 5.1-38
  40. 40. In a meeting chaired by the Hon’ble Minister of State for Shipping, it was presented by the National Environmental Research Institute (NEERI) that Indian Navy are keen in using the facilities of the proposed channel. However, it was indicated that the minimum draught required by them was 9 m. Accordingly, M/s. SCI were advised to estimate the likely increase in the number of transits through the proposed channel if the draught is increased from 7 to 9 m. The study revealed that the number of transits expected for the 9 m draught channel would be 1,792 and the estimated savings would be Rs. 80.71 crores. The above transits and the savings accrued was only for merchant ships. If naval ships are also taken into account, additional savings would be accrued due to the construction of the channel. It was noticed that both for 7 and 9 m draft, a large number of ships estimated to transit the channel would be during the ballast voyage only. Further, the whole of liquid and dray bulk cargo vessels projected to transit the channel with 7 and 9 m draught would not be able to transit the channel during their loaded voyages due to the limitations in the draught offered by the channel. Many of these vessels had a loaded draught of about 11 m. However, since these vessels have a draught of about 6 to 9 m in ballast, these vessels may navigate through the channel during the ballast voyages. Thus, these ships would have to use different routes for loaded passage vis-à-vis ballast passage, even when shuttling between the ports of India. Further, there have been apprehensions in some circles that, ship operators may not be comfortable with the idea of plying on two different routes between the same ports depending upon the loaded / ballast condition of the vessel. It is also likely that the operators may refrain from using the channel from ballast voyages only. Accordingly, M/s. SCI was advised to estimate the likely increase in the number of transits through the proposed channel if the draught offered at the channel would be increased from 9 to 11/12 m. Hence, in addition to estimation of traffic at the channel at 11 m, the committee also analyzed the likely increase in traffic if the channel were to offer 12 m draught. The estimation was based on the same assumptions as made in the earlier reports. Based on the present day scenario, the expected number of crossings through the proposed Sethusamudram channel at various drafts and the resultant benefits accruing to the trade there from are summarized in Table 3.3. The proposed development of the Sethusamudram channel is for a draught of 10.7 m. In the absence of specific data for vessels drawing a draught of 10.7 m , the data in respect of 11 m draught vessels are adopted for evaluation. 5.1-39
  41. 41. A report prepared by Shipping Corporation of India on Traffic Potential for 11 and 12 m draughts is appended as Annexure 3.1. 5.1-40
  42. 42. Table 3.3 Expected Number of Transits through Sethusamudram Channel Rs. in Crores 7m Draught 9m Draught 11 m Draught Cargo Transits Savings Transits Savings Transits Savings (Per year) (Rs.) (Per year) (Rs.) (Per year) (Rs.) POL & Specialized Cargo 282 39.39 366 51.97 522 75.75 Dry Bulk Cargo 120 11.92 120 11.92 120 11.92 General Cargo 1,306 16.82 1,306 16.82 1,362 19.81 1,708 68.13 1,792 80.71 2,004 107.48 Total 3.4 Traffic Projections for the Present Study The traffic projections made by various committees is presented in Table 3.2. A perusal of the figures indicate that there is a wide variations in the Projections. Further, on the advise of Ministry of Shipping, M/s. Shipping Corporation of India was requested to carry out a traffic projection for various drafts. The results are presented in Table 3.3. This study is based on the present trade scenario. The data presented by SCI relates to the ground reality today. The proposed development of the Sethusamudram Ship Channel is for a maximum draught of 10.7 m. In the absence of specific data for vessels drawing a draught of 10.7 m , the data in respect of 11 m draught vessels viz. - 2004 Ship transits can be considered as a realistic estimate. However, the SCI study does not provide the data relating to NRT of ships. The 1983 report contains the actual data relating to ship transits and NRT for 1980 viz. • No. of ship transits 2100 • NRT 160 lakh tonnes Since all the data available in earlier report is for NRT, from the above co- relation the proportionate NRT for 2004 transits works out to 153 lakh tonnes. Hence, the following traffic data is considered for evaluation. • Number of ship transits 2004 5.1-41
  43. 43. • NRT 153 lakh tonnes 3.5 Conclusion In view of large variations in the past traffic projections and the study now carried out by SCI, it is proposed to consider the number of transits as per the SCI Study which is based on the present trade scenario for the purpose of evaluation. However, the SCI Study do not contain the NRT data. Hence, the co-relation between transits and NRT as per the 1983 report has been considered. Thus, the number of transits and the NRT considered for evaluation are • Number of ship transits - 2004 • NRT - 153 lakh tons 5.1-42
  44. 44. Annexure 3.1 Sethusamudram Ship Channel Supplementary Report – II Estimation of Traffic Potential at the Channel at a Proposed Draught of 11 and 12 m (Report Prepared by Shipping Corporation of India, January 2003) In respect of the proposed Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project, the SCI has done an estimation on the traffic that is likely to transit through the proposed canal at a draught of 7 metres as also 9 metres, and the resultant savings that would accrue to the shippers/consignees thereupon due to reduction in the navigable distance when crossing from the East Coast to the West Coast of India and vice-versa. It has been estimated that, at a navigable draught of 7 metres at the canal, there would be about 1,708 transits through the canal per annum and the industry would save about Rs. 68 crores by way of savings in shiptime and bunker consumption. Similarly, if the canal were to offer 9 metres navigable draught, the total number of transits would be about 1,792 and the savings would be about Rs.80 crores. The savings estimated are exclusive of any user charges, which the vessels would have to pay for using the facilities that would be provided by the canal. The number of transits shown above and the savings accruing due to reduction in the navigable distance for ships-crossing from the East Coast to the West Coast of India and vice-versa, are for merchant ships only. There can be additional transits by Naval ships, which would mean additional savings from the canal. It has been noticed that, at 7 as also at 9 meters navigable draught, a large number of ships' estimated to transit the canal would be during their ballast voyage only. Almost the whole of liquid and dry bulk cargo vessels projected to transit the canal with 7- 9 metres draught, would not be able to transit the canal during their loaded voyages due to limitations in draught offered by the canal. Many of these vessels have a draught of about 11 metres in loaded condition, and would continue to ply along the existing route thereby encircling around Sri Lanka, during loaded voyages from the East coast to West Coast of India and vice-versa. However, since these vessels have a draught of about 6-9 metres in ballast these vessels may navigate through the canal during ballast voyages. 5.1-43
  45. 45. Thus, these ships would have to use different routes for loaded passage vis-a-vis ballast passage, even when shuttling between the same ports in India. There has been apprehension in some circles that, ship operators may not be comfortable with the idea of plying on two different routes between the same ports, depending upon the loaded/ballast condition of the vessel. The operators may refrain from using the canal for ballast voyage only and may continue to use only one trade route for their ships i.e. encircling around Srilanka, irrespective of the loaded/ballast condition of the vessel. Thus, if the canal has to attract these vessels to use its facilities, it should offer navigating facilities to these vessels in loaded condition also. By this, the operators may find the idea of using the canal attractive and the canal may thus witness transit by these vessels in both the legs i.e. loaded as also ballast passage. The SCI has, therefore, been advised to estimate the likely increase in the number of transits through the proposed canal, if the draught offered at the canal would be increased from 9 metres to 11 metres. This aspect has been studied by the committee of SCI officials that has studied the Project, and its observations are presented in the subsequent paragraphs. The Committee is of the opinion that, since the majority of the oil tankers and dry bulk carriers that are expected to transit the canal in ballast, have a loaded draught of about 11 metres, in order to attract these vessels to use the canal, the authorities have to consider offering a navigable draught of 12 metres. Hence, in addition to estimation of traffic at the canal at 11 metres, the Committee has also analysed the likely increase in traffic if the canal were to offer 12 metres draught. The estimation has been based on the same assumptions as made in the earlier reports. These observations are the views of the committee of SCI officials that has studied the proposal and should not be perceived as the commitments of either. The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd., or The Indian National Shipowners' Association, or. The Indian Coastal Conference, as in the previous reports on the subject. Petroleum Oil and Lube Crude Oil As stated in the earlier reports, while larger sized vessels like VLCCs and LR-II tanker (Aframax/Suezmax) transport crude oil imports to India, the coastal movement of crude oil is mostly on LR-I and MR sized tankers. Out of the various sizes of tankers deployed, the largest ones i.e. VLCCs have a ballast draught in excess of 12 metres, hence an increase in draught at the canal even upto 12 metres would not be of any benefit to these tankers. 5.1-44
  46. 46. The next size i.e. Suezmax tankers have a loaded draught of about 15 metres and a ballast draught of around 9 metres. Considering the size and safety of these vessels, it was earlier presumed that these vessels may not transit the canal, if the canal were to provide a navigable draught 9 metres. However. If the canal would offer a navigable draught of 11/12 metres, these vessels may transit the canal when crossing from the East Coast of India to the Western water front in ballast. As stated in the Supplementary Report I, on an average, atleast one Suezmax tanker sails in ballast to Persian Gulf after discharging crude oil at Sandheads and another from Visakhapatnam, every month. These vessels can navigate through the canal when moving in ballast from the East Coast of India to the Persian Gulf, if the canal offers a draught of 11 metres. Thus as per the present trade pattern, about 24 transits in a year by Suezmax tankers can be considered at the proposed canal. This would lead to savings of about 36 days of shiptime and about 1,800 tons of bunkers (at a consumption rate of 50 tonnes per day). At an average charter hire rate of US$ 18000 per day for Suezmax tankers, savings in shiptime would be to the tune of US$ 0.65 million. Similarly, at a bunker cost of US$ 165 per tonne, annual savings of bunkers would be about US$ 0.3 million. Thus, there would be an annual saving of about US$ 0.95 million or Rs.4.65 crores (US$ 1 = Rs.49) for Suezmax tankers from the canal. Next, the LR-II size tankers (CSL built tankers, SCI's World Bank tankers), have a loaded draught of about 14 metres and these would not be able to transit the canal in loaded condition even if the navigable draught at the canal were increased upto 12 metres. Transits by these tankers in ballast have already been considered during the traffic estimation at 9 metres draught at the canal. Hence, an increase in draught to 11/12 metres at the canal would not be of any further benefit to this category of tankers. The LR-I size tankers transporting coastal crude oil, cross from West Coast to East Coast of India when transporting Mumbai High crude. These vessels have already been considered to transit through the proposed canal during their ballast passage from East Coast to the West Coast of India. For loaded voyage, the loading port for these vessels i.e. Mumbai provides a draught of about 37 feet and these tankers load the maximum upto this limit i.e. about 11.1 metres draught. Thus, with a draught limitation of 11 metres at the canal, these tankers may not be able to transit the canal in majority of the cases. However, if the proposed canal is dredged to offer a navigable draught of 12 metres, these vessels would be able to transit the canal in loaded condition. Thus, an increase in draught at the canal from 9 metres to 12 metres will enable LR-I tankers to transit the canal both in ballast as also loaded voyages, i.e. while crossing from East 5.1-45
  47. 47. Coast to West Coast of India and vice-versa. The number of transits by LR-f tankers and the resultant savings therefrom would, therefore, double from that expected at 9 metres draught, when transits by these vessels was considered in ballast condition only. Thus, about 36 additional transits by these tankers can be expected every year, which would result in a saving of about Rs.5.19 crores. The next size range of crude oil tankers Le. MR tankers generally undertake short haul voyages only and as per past experience, generally these vessels do not cross over from one coast in India to the other. This has already been stated in the earlier reports and no transits by tankers of these size can be expected at the canal. Thus, an increase in draught at the canal from 9 metres to 11 metres may lead to about 24 additional transits by crude oil tankers per annum, which may lead to a saving of about Rs. 4.65 crores. Additionally, an increase in draught from 11 metres to 12 metres may witness about 36 additional transits, which may lead to a saving of about Rs.5.19 crores per annum to the ship operators. Oil Products In the earlier report, about 150 transits. of Product tankers have been anticipated at a navigable draught of 7 metres at the proposed Sethusamudram canal. All these transits would be during the ballast leg of the voyage, with vessels moving to loadports on the West Coast after discharge on the East Coast of India. Majority of the tankers currently deployed in this trade have loaded draughts ranging from about 10.5 metres to 12 metres. In normal practise, these vessels load upto 90-95 percent capacity depending upon the cargo loaded, and tile draught ranges from about 10 to 11.5 metres in majority of the cases. An assumption on the number of times the tankers would move with less than 11 metres draught would be difficult to estimate. Thus, for the purpose of this study we have presumed that these tankers would be able to transit the canal when the navigable draught available at the canal is 12 metres. Thus, it is presumed that, while there would be no additional transits at the canal if its draught were to be increased from 7 metres to 11 metres, the number of transits would double if the draught at the canal is increased to 12 metres. There can thus be about 150 additional transits in a year, which would result to a saving of Rs.20.26 crores at 12 metres draught at the canal. 5.1-46
  48. 48. Speclised Cargoes Phosphoric Acid As stated in the earlier reports, there are about 10-12 acid carriers deployed for transporting Phosphoric acid from Morocco to India. These vessels usually discharge at 2/3 ports amongst Sikka, Kandla, Nhava Sheva, Marmugao, New Mangalore and Cochin on the West Coast and Tuticorin, Kakinada, Paradip and Haldia on the East Coast. Since the sequence of discharge ports is not fixed, based on the past experience, we had presumed that each vessel deployed in this trade would cross from the West Coast to the East Coast of India atleast 5 times in a year. These vessels have a draught of about 9-10 metres in loaded condition and in ballast their draught is less than 7 metres. For the purpose of estimation of traffic at 7 metres navigable draught at the canal, we had considered 60 transits per annum by these vessels, when these would move in ballast to Morocco after discharge on the East Coast of India. If the draught at the canal would be increased to 11 metres, these vessels can transit through the canal when crossing from the West Coast of India to the East in loaded condition as well. Thus, at 11 metres draught at the canal, the number of transits and the benefits accruing to this trade would double from the estimates at 7 metres draught. The incremental transits for this trade would thus be about 60 transits per annum, which would lead to a saving of about RS.7.55 crores. Liquified Petroleum Gas For the purpose of estimation of traffic at the proposed canal at 7 metres draught, based on the current LPG transportation scenario in India, it was anticipated that each of the 6 Indian flag LPG carriers may cross over from the East Coast to the West Coast of India in ballast, atleast once every month. Thus, a total of 72 transits per annum has been anticipated through the canal at 7 metres draught, which would result in savings of about RS.11.58 crores. As already stated in the earlier reports, while these vessels have a draught of less than 7 metres in ballast, in loaded condition their draught is in the range of about 8- 11 metres. While the largest vessel operating in this trade may have a draught 'marginally exceeding 11 metres in full load condition, it is understood that in normal practise the vessel moves with a draught of less than 11 metres in majority of the cases. Thus, if the proposed canal would offer a navigable draught of 11 metres, all the Indian flag LPG carriers operating in the Indian trade can be expected to transit through the canal during loaded voyages also. The number of transits would, therefore, be twice 5.1-47
  49. 49. the number of transits expected when the canal were to offer 7 metres navigable draught, when these vessels were expected to transit the canal only in ballast. Thus, the incremental traffic at the canal would be about 72 transits per annum, which would lead to a saving of about RS.11.58 crores. Dry Bulk Cargo As has already been stated in the earlier reports, one major beneficiary from the canal would be the thermal coal movement from Haldia, Paradip and Visakapatnam to Tuticorin on behalf of Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. This cargo moves in handysize and handymax size bulk carriers, which have a loaded draught of around 10-12 metres and a ballast draught of less than 7 metres. Since these vessels move to the load port in ballast after discharge at Tuticorin, it was earlier estimated that these vessels may transit through the canal during the ballast passage, when the navigable draught offered by the canal would be 7 metres. As the loaded draught of these vessels varies from 10 metres to 12 metres depending upon the vessel's dimensions, the exact number of times when the draught would be less than 11 metres, would be difficult to quantify. Thus, a fair estimation of number of transits through the canal at 11 metre draught would not be realistic. However, if the navigable draught at the canal were 12 metres, all the vessels operating in this trade would be able to transit the canal even in loaded condition. The number of transits through the canal would, therefore, double if the draught at the canal is increased from 7 metres to 12 metres. Thus, about 120 additional transits per annum are anticipated at the canal by these vessels, which may lead to a saving of about RS.11.92 crores. As regards other dry bulk cargo, as already stated in the earlier reports, although there is ' substantial seaborne transportation of Iron are, Coking Coal and Fertiliser in India, there is no fixed deployment pattern of bulk carriers operating in this trade which would indicate these vessels may transit the canal. These vessels operate in the tramp market and an estimation on the fixed pattern of movement of those through the proposed canal would not be possible. Thus, there cannot be a fair estimation of the benefits this trade would derive from increasing the draught at the canal to 11/12 metres. Hence, for the purpose of this study, no additional benefits are presumed to accrue to this trade by increasing the draught at the proposed canal. 5.1-48
  50. 50. General Cargo Containers Most of the mainline container vessels calling at Indian ports have less than 12 metres draughts and if the proposed canal were to offer 12 metres navigable draught, these vessels can transit the canal whenever required. However, as per the present trade pattern, there are hardly any mainline, vessels which call on both the East Coast and West Coast ports of India. A container service with ports of call on both the coasts would not be economical, and operators prefer to call on one of the coasts only and feeder the cargo originating/destined from/to the port on the other coast. Thus, if container shipping in India were to continue following the same pattern as of now, there may not be any additional transits at the canal by these vessels. However, container shipping in India is set to witness drastic changes in future as the Government is developing one hub port each on the East Coast and the West Coast of India i.e. at Chennai and Vallarpadam respectively. Development of these ports may change the face of container shipping in India as studies have projected that operation by these ports may lead to majority of feedering of Indian cargo at these ports, and not at Singapore, Colombo or Dubai as is done at present. This would thus lead to some of the mainline vessels to call at these ports. Thus, a scenario can be that the mainline vessel includes both Vallarpadam and Chennai in its itinerary. In such a case, the vessel can transit the proposed canal whenever moving from one port to the other, thereby avoiding the need to encircle around Sri Lanka and thus save on valuable shiptime and bunker consumption. However, such scenarios may arise only after the Indian ports are developed as major hubs and are able to attract mainline vessels to call at these ports instead of Colombo. This would require the Indian ports to offer international level port operation services and other ancillary services which are offered at other major hubs. Thus, as of now, any estimation on the transits by tnese vessels through the proposed canal would be difficult to assess. Although the increase in draught at the proposed canal would be beneficial to container shipping in India, estimation of such benefit at this moment would not be realistic. Hence, for the purpose of this study, no additional benefit to the container trade be considered due to increase in draught at the proposed canal. 5.1-49
  51. 51. Beak-Bulk An increase in the navigable draught at the proposed canal upto 11 metres would enable almost all break-bulk vessels operating in the Indian trade to transit through the canal when crossing from the East Coat of India to the West, and vice-versa. Almost all the break-bulk vessels in the Indian trade have less than 11 metres loaded draught, hence these vessels can safely navigate through the canal whenever required. Benefits accruing to the major sectors would be the following: India - UK Continent Service : Currently, SCI in a consortium with Rickmers Line provides the sole fixed breakbulk service between India and the UK Continent. There is one sailing every month from India with both partners offering their vessels every alternate month. The vessels deployed are in the range of 10-15,000 DWT, which have a loaded draught of about 10 metres. Amongst the Indian ports, the vessels normally call at Mumbai and Cochin on the West Coast, and Chennai, Visakhapatnam and Kolkata on the East Coast. Since 'these vessels have to cross from the West Coast of India to the East during the inward leg and East Coast to the West in the outward leg, these vessels can transit through the proposed canal providing a navigable draught of 11 metres. Thus, about 12 transits during the inward leg, and 12 during the outward leg are estimated by the vessels plying in the India-UK Continent breakbulk liner service. This would lead to annual saving of about 36 days seatime and about 720 tonnes of bunker (at a consumption rate of 20 tonnes per day). At prevailing charter hire rate of US$ 4,000 per day, total savings from sea time would be about US$ 0.14 million. Similarly, savings from bunker consumption would be about US$ 0.12 million. Thus, total savings from the canal to the India-UK breakbulk liner trade would be about US$ 0.26 million or RS.1.27 crores. Black Sea - India Service : SCI used to provide regular liner service between India and Black Sea ports in the past. However, currently there is no fixed service and whenever there is sufficient cargo available, SCI books space on breakbulk ships plying on this region. Major cargo transported on this sector is Machinery goods to India and the vessels plying in this trade are normally in the range of about 10-15,000 DWT, which have loaded draughts of around 10 metres. Thus, these vessels can safely transit through the proposed canal providing a navigable draught of 11 metres. Based on the present pattern of trade, about transits from the West Coast to KoIkata and 6 on the return leg, can be expected by these vessels in a year. This would lead to annual saving of about 18 days seatime and about 360 tonnes of bunker (at a consumption rate of 20 tonnes per day). At prevailing charter hire rate of US$ 4,000 per day, total savings from sea time would be about US$ 0.07 million. Similarly, savings from bunker consumption would be 5.1-50
  52. 52. about US$ 0.06 million. Thus, total savings from the canal to the India-Black Sea breakbulk liner trade would be about US$ 0.13 million or RS.0.64 crores. Granite Trade : India exports substantial quantity of Granite to the European and the Far-East Asian countries. The major load ports for Granite are Visakhapatnam, Chennai and Tuticorin and in addition to transportation on regular liner vessels, often vessels are chartered in for this trade. The vessels are primarily in the range of about 10- 15,000 DWT, which have around 10 metres loaded draught. The presence of the Sethusamudram canal with a navigable draught of 11 metres would enable ships loading Europe bound cargo from the East Coast of India, to transit through the canal. Based on the present trade pattern, atleast one vessel loads Europe bound cargo from the East Coast ports every month. These vessels are chartered for specific voyages and it would not be realistic to assume as to from which part of the world would these vessels be positioned on the Indian port. Thus, while the vessel may transit the canal when moving from the West to the East Coast India, she need not transit the canal if she has to repositiofa from East Asia. Thus to have a realistic study, only outbound voyages from East Coast of India to Europe have been considered. The proposed canal would, therefore, have about 12 transits per annum by vessels transporting Granite. This would lead to annual saving of about 18 days seatime and about 360 tonnes of bunker (at a consumption rate of 20, tonnes per day). At charter hire rate of US$ 4,000 per (by, 101:11 savings from seatime would be about US$ 0.07 million. Similarly, saving from bunker consumption would be about US$ 0.06 million. Thus, total savings to this trade from the canal would be about US$ 0.13 million or RS.0.64 crores. Steel Trade : Steel Plants located in Eastern region of India export steel (mainly Hot Rolled Coils) to various destinations in the western world, primarily the USA and UK. On an average, each of SAIL and TISCO transport about one shipment in every 2/3 months. These parcels are transported on about 10-15,000 DWT size vessels which have loaded draughts of about 10 metres. These vessels can, therefore, transit through the proposed canal whenever required. Thus, based on the present trade pattern, about 8 transits per annum can be expected at the canal by vessels transporting steel. This would lead to a saving of about 12 days of shiptime and about 240 lons of hunker (at a consumption rate of 20 tons per day). At charter hire rate of US$ 4,000 per day, total savings from seatime would be about US$ 0.05 million. Similarly, savings from bunker consumption would be about US$ 0.04 million. Thus, 1010/ savings to this trade from the canal would be about US$ 0.09 mil/ion or RS.0.44 crores. 5.1-51
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×