The last decade’s affairs of Russian Baltic ports were dramatic, interesting and complex. However,
the ports can also prove their track records by success stories. The Big Port of Saint Petersburg
is currently the largest container port in the Baltic Sea, the First Container Terminal
– a leader in container handlings in the region. The Port of Primorsk is a major oil port and
Rosterminalugol has grown into the biggest coal terminal.
Development of port terminal infrastructure in Leningrad region, RussiaАлександр Головизнин
Development of port terminal infrastructure in Leningrad region, Russia
Ports and terminals, industrial design, engineering
Logistic centers’ master-plans, business-plans, design
Transport market research (shipping, ports, rail)
Cargo flows analysis and outlook,
Logistic optimization for industries and export
The seminar was managed by ESTIEM (European Students of Industrial Engineering and Management) - a local group in Saint Petersburg. The theme of the cycle of lectures 2012-2013 is "Green Supply Chain". The seminar performed in Saint Petersburg was named "Window to Europe: Maritime Logistics".
The Morstroytechnology's expert gave a lecture "Development of the Russian Seaport Infrastructure". Attention was mainly focused on long-term changes in the logistics and transport industry.
The speaker provided figures that show that starting from 1995 the volume of cargo flows to seaports and transshipment of export-import was twice as much compared to the Soviet period. What's more, the structure of the country's whole transport system changed.
The lecture includes a detailed overview of the ports in the Baltic, Arctic, Black Sea, and Far East basins with analysis of completed and future projects.
The lecture was given in English. Students expressed their thanks for the deep analysis and original data.
The presentation of the lecture is placed in section "Publications".
Where are new terminals needed?
The growing export of Russian coal is impeded by the deficit of port cargo handling capacities on the most demanded directions. At the same time, the intensity of investments in terminal infrastructure depends on a variety of factors, some of which are extremely important, while not obvious without a deep, professional analysis.
Development of port terminal infrastructure in Leningrad region, RussiaАлександр Головизнин
Development of port terminal infrastructure in Leningrad region, Russia
Ports and terminals, industrial design, engineering
Logistic centers’ master-plans, business-plans, design
Transport market research (shipping, ports, rail)
Cargo flows analysis and outlook,
Logistic optimization for industries and export
The seminar was managed by ESTIEM (European Students of Industrial Engineering and Management) - a local group in Saint Petersburg. The theme of the cycle of lectures 2012-2013 is "Green Supply Chain". The seminar performed in Saint Petersburg was named "Window to Europe: Maritime Logistics".
The Morstroytechnology's expert gave a lecture "Development of the Russian Seaport Infrastructure". Attention was mainly focused on long-term changes in the logistics and transport industry.
The speaker provided figures that show that starting from 1995 the volume of cargo flows to seaports and transshipment of export-import was twice as much compared to the Soviet period. What's more, the structure of the country's whole transport system changed.
The lecture includes a detailed overview of the ports in the Baltic, Arctic, Black Sea, and Far East basins with analysis of completed and future projects.
The lecture was given in English. Students expressed their thanks for the deep analysis and original data.
The presentation of the lecture is placed in section "Publications".
Where are new terminals needed?
The growing export of Russian coal is impeded by the deficit of port cargo handling capacities on the most demanded directions. At the same time, the intensity of investments in terminal infrastructure depends on a variety of factors, some of which are extremely important, while not obvious without a deep, professional analysis.
Russia’s window onto Europe by Olga Gopkalo and Alexander Goloviznin, Mostroy...Olga Gopkalo
The last decade’s affairs of Russian Baltic ports were dramatic, interesting and complex. However, the ports can also prove their track records by success stories. The Big Port of Saint Petersburg is currently the largest container port in the Baltic Sea, the First Container Terminal – a leader in container handlings in the region. The Port of Primorsk is a major oil port and Rosterminalugol has grown into the biggest coal terminal.
April 26th, 1956, marks the offi cial birthday of container transport, that day Malcolm McLean shipped the
fi rst batch of aluminium containers loaded on the Ideal-X. Over the period of 1986-2013, the global container
turnover increased nearly 10 times and exceeded 600 mln TEU. In 2013, the volume of cargo carried
worldwide was close to 181.8 mln TEU1 (each container being handled two or more times in a port).
Currently, the major Russian container terminals are planning to
continue their dynamic growth. According to Saint Petersburg’s First
Container Terminal’s development programme, the facility’s throughput
is expected to rise from 1,350 up to 1,600 thou. TEU in the nearest
future. In the case of Petrolesport, a growth from 1,200 up to 1,500
April 26th, 1956, marks the offi cial birthday of container transport, that day Malcolm McLean shipped the
fi rst batch of aluminium containers loaded on the Ideal-X. Over the period of 1986-2013, the global container
turnover increased nearly 10 times and exceeded 600 mln TEU. In 2013, the volume of cargo carried
worldwide was close to 181.8 mln TEU1 (each container being handled two or more times in a port).
Trends and problems in container transport infrastructure development in Russia
Train(ing) up
by Olga Olegovna Gopkalo, Ph.D., Lead Specialist at Morstoytechnology Ltd.
thou. TEU is forecasted. Saint Petersburg Container Terminal plans to
expand its capacity from 500 to 1,500 thou. TEU, Moby Dick – from
250 to 370 thou. TEU. Th e Port of Bronka, currently under construction,
is planning to achieve a target of 1,400 thou. TEU capacity. It is
also possible that the Ust-Luga Container Terminal will increase its
aptitude from 440 tо 2,600 thou. TEU. Moving slightly south, Kaliningrad’s
Baltic Stevedoring Company announced a plan to increase
its capacity from 200 tо 468 thou. TEU. Moreover, a new container
terminal to be constructed for Avtotor, an automotive factory in Kaliningrad,
is expected to handle up to 800 thou. TEU per year.
The growing export of Russian coal is impeded by the deficit of port cargo handling capacities on the most demanded directions. At the same time, the intensity of investments in terminal infrastructure depends on a variety
of factors, some of which are extremely important, while not obvious without a deep, professional analysis.
A closer look. Tendencies on the fertilizer transshipment market in Eastern B...Olga Gopkalo
Fertilizers are one of the most important cargo groups
for Baltic Sea ports. Their share in the total cargo handled
in Eastern Baltic ports is close to 7%, with Port of
Klaipėda leading this market. Its three major terminals,
serving the Lithuanian chemical industry’s export, attract
Belarusian and Russian transit as well.
An overview of the Stena-sphere: Stena AB, Stena Sessan AB, and Stena Metall AB. Presentation created for International Business course in my MBA program.
Ports of Genoa: the Southern Gateway to EuropePorts of Genoa
I porti di Genova, Savona e Vado - riuniti nel nome Ports of Genoa - compongono il più importante polo portuale italiano in termini di volumi movimentati, diversificazione produttiva e valore economico, capolinea nel Mediterraneo del corridoio-Rhine Alpine: la porta di accesso da Sud all’Europa.
IV Международный Форум дноуглубительных компаний
презентация к докладу
«Рынок дноуглубительных работ в морских портах РФ.
Проекты, включающие дноуглубление.
Строительство угольного порта в бухте Мучке»
Russia’s window onto Europe by Olga Gopkalo and Alexander Goloviznin, Mostroy...Olga Gopkalo
The last decade’s affairs of Russian Baltic ports were dramatic, interesting and complex. However, the ports can also prove their track records by success stories. The Big Port of Saint Petersburg is currently the largest container port in the Baltic Sea, the First Container Terminal – a leader in container handlings in the region. The Port of Primorsk is a major oil port and Rosterminalugol has grown into the biggest coal terminal.
April 26th, 1956, marks the offi cial birthday of container transport, that day Malcolm McLean shipped the
fi rst batch of aluminium containers loaded on the Ideal-X. Over the period of 1986-2013, the global container
turnover increased nearly 10 times and exceeded 600 mln TEU. In 2013, the volume of cargo carried
worldwide was close to 181.8 mln TEU1 (each container being handled two or more times in a port).
Currently, the major Russian container terminals are planning to
continue their dynamic growth. According to Saint Petersburg’s First
Container Terminal’s development programme, the facility’s throughput
is expected to rise from 1,350 up to 1,600 thou. TEU in the nearest
future. In the case of Petrolesport, a growth from 1,200 up to 1,500
April 26th, 1956, marks the offi cial birthday of container transport, that day Malcolm McLean shipped the
fi rst batch of aluminium containers loaded on the Ideal-X. Over the period of 1986-2013, the global container
turnover increased nearly 10 times and exceeded 600 mln TEU. In 2013, the volume of cargo carried
worldwide was close to 181.8 mln TEU1 (each container being handled two or more times in a port).
Trends and problems in container transport infrastructure development in Russia
Train(ing) up
by Olga Olegovna Gopkalo, Ph.D., Lead Specialist at Morstoytechnology Ltd.
thou. TEU is forecasted. Saint Petersburg Container Terminal plans to
expand its capacity from 500 to 1,500 thou. TEU, Moby Dick – from
250 to 370 thou. TEU. Th e Port of Bronka, currently under construction,
is planning to achieve a target of 1,400 thou. TEU capacity. It is
also possible that the Ust-Luga Container Terminal will increase its
aptitude from 440 tо 2,600 thou. TEU. Moving slightly south, Kaliningrad’s
Baltic Stevedoring Company announced a plan to increase
its capacity from 200 tо 468 thou. TEU. Moreover, a new container
terminal to be constructed for Avtotor, an automotive factory in Kaliningrad,
is expected to handle up to 800 thou. TEU per year.
The growing export of Russian coal is impeded by the deficit of port cargo handling capacities on the most demanded directions. At the same time, the intensity of investments in terminal infrastructure depends on a variety
of factors, some of which are extremely important, while not obvious without a deep, professional analysis.
A closer look. Tendencies on the fertilizer transshipment market in Eastern B...Olga Gopkalo
Fertilizers are one of the most important cargo groups
for Baltic Sea ports. Their share in the total cargo handled
in Eastern Baltic ports is close to 7%, with Port of
Klaipėda leading this market. Its three major terminals,
serving the Lithuanian chemical industry’s export, attract
Belarusian and Russian transit as well.
An overview of the Stena-sphere: Stena AB, Stena Sessan AB, and Stena Metall AB. Presentation created for International Business course in my MBA program.
Ports of Genoa: the Southern Gateway to EuropePorts of Genoa
I porti di Genova, Savona e Vado - riuniti nel nome Ports of Genoa - compongono il più importante polo portuale italiano in termini di volumi movimentati, diversificazione produttiva e valore economico, capolinea nel Mediterraneo del corridoio-Rhine Alpine: la porta di accesso da Sud all’Europa.
IV Международный Форум дноуглубительных компаний
презентация к докладу
«Рынок дноуглубительных работ в морских портах РФ.
Проекты, включающие дноуглубление.
Строительство угольного порта в бухте Мучке»
Возможности использования контейнеров для перевалки навалочных грузовАлександр Головизнин
В Росси с 90-х использовали в портах контейнеры для погрузки навала.
Но всегда груз высыпался через дверь, наклоном контейнера.
Дверь открывалась в основном в ручную. Чаще ксего путем дергания веревки.
В Усть-Луге работает ссмрт-балк терминал. Там Ультрамар (Экспедитор Фосагро) внедрил схему, когда спредер снабжен специальным механизмомо наклона и рукой для открытия контейнера.
Дальше. Для перевозки навала в контейнерах по сети РЖД обязательно использовать вкладыш в контейнер и ставить дополнительный щит или металические упоры в двери.
Т.е. привезти по жд и высыпать в трюм не представлялось возможным.
Правда Ультрамар сертифицироваал свой контейнер для перевозки по жд без вкладыша и щита и теперь (уже третий месяц) возят по 12 маршрутов в месяц.
В мире пошли по другому пути.
Там разработана технология проворачивания контейнера на 360 вокруг длинной оси. при этом спредер еще и снимает верхнюю крышку сам.
Но здесь проблема в том, что контейнер брутто весит 45 тонн.
Т.е на контейнерную платформу (РЖДшную) его не поставить.
Да еще и крышка там такая, что получить разрешение для работы на сети просто не реально.
Стандартный же ИСОшный контейнер для такой работы не подходит.
он не расчитан на такую работу. Ни по раме, ни по бортовой обшивке.
т.е. борт контейнера не выдержит массу груза при повороте, и раму перекосит.
Наша питерская небольшая компания разработала конструкцию контейнера который не только может использоваться с РАМспредером, но и построен по требования РЖД. Т.е. в нем можно перевозить навал по сети РЖД.
Сейчас контейнер изготовлен в железе. Прошел испытания регистра.
На этой неделе первй экземпляр привезли в Питер.
Сайт разработчика http://kotta-container.com/
Что еще можно добавить. Контейнерн расчитан для грузов с высокой удельной погрузочной массой. От тонны и выше.
встает на стандартную контейнерную платформу, цепляется тандартным контейнерным оборудованием.
Но по росту он существенно ниже.
т.е в жд габарит проходит платформа с двумя ящиками поставленными друг на друга.
Опыт планирования логистического обеспечения проектов в труднодоступных регионахАлександр Головизнин
В России много неосвоенных территорий, имеющих большой экономический потенциал. В силу этой специфики, российские экспедиторские компании имеют опыт работы в труднодоступных регионах, где может полностью отсутствовать транспортная инфраструктура. Этот опыт часто уникален, так же как уникальны сами грузы и условия их доставки.
Для тех, кто занимается проектированием и консалтингом в этой области, стоит несколько другая задача – комплексное планирование логистики, как входящей, так и исходящей. Вопрос заключается в том, как доставить на месторождение (или иной удаленный объект) все, что необходимо для его освоения, и как вывезти то, что там будет добываться.
Транспортное обеспечение является ключевым фактором успеха при освоении и последующей эксплуатации месторождений в труднодоступных районах севера – на Ямале, Гыданском полуострове.
Между тем, решение логистических задач в суровых условиях Крайнего Севера – это высший пилотаж логистики. Сложностей много: суровый климат, отсутствие транспортной инфраструктуры, ограниченный период навигации и работы зимников и пр. В ситуации высокого риска цена ошибки очень велика, а соответственно и велика роль стратегического планирования.
Оптимизация логистики в труднодоступных регионах имеет те же цели и методы, что и оптимизационные проекты в других сегментах транспортно-логистической системы (см. раздел оптимизации логистики). Однако есть и ряд особенностей, связанных со спецификой проектов освоения арктических месторождений:
Пиковый характер поставок в период освоения – 3-6 лет;
Недостаточность или полное отсутствие транспортной инфраструктуры;
Ограничения по использованию «чужой» инфраструктуры;
Экологические ограничения;
Отсутствие координации между проектами, риски исчерпания пропускной способности;
Сезонность работы транспорта в условиях Крайнего Севера;
Вариативность и непредсказуемость географию будущих поставок;
Высокая стоимость строительства.
Морстройтехнология на форуме Oil Terminal 2016
Руководитель проектов ООО «Морстройтехнология» Софья Каткова приняла участие в международном форуме Oil Terminal 2016, прошедшем 24-25 ноября в Санкт-Петербурге. Специалисты компании принимают участие в работе форума уже 10 раз.
В этот раз доклад Морстройтехнологии был посвящен оценке рынка железнодорожных технологий и автоматизированных систем управления на полигонах железных дорог и отдельных грузовых узлах, а также адаптации этих проектов к текущим проблемам крупных грузоотправителей на железнодорожном транспорте.
Термин "адаптивное планирование" прошел красной нитью через всю сессию, посвященную железнодорожному транспорту и работе припортовых узлов. Эксперты обсудили внедрение аналогичных проектов на мировом рынке перевозок, новые технологии работы с РЖД в России и перспективы этого сегмента.
Российские агрохимические компании активно используют
портовые мощности для экспорта удобрений как в России, так и
в сопредельных государствах. Профицит мощностей позволяет
им наращивать экспорт за счет запуска новых производств и
внедрения прогрессивных технологий перевалки.
Виктор Цукер, по материалам доклада Александра Головизнина, директора
по направлению логистика и аналитика ООО «Морстройтехнология»
Конкуренция С.-Петербурга и Новороссийска в борьбе за экспортные Ро-Ро грузоп...Александр Головизнин
5 октября Морстройтехнология провела секционное заседание «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» в рамках программы Пятой международной конференции по развитию портов и судоходства «ТРАНСТЕК-2016».
Мы предлагаем вашему вниманию презентацию и видеозапись выступления Дмитрия Самарского, TMBC Logistics Ltd "Конкуренция С.-Петербурга и Новороссийска в борьбе за экспортные Ро-Ро грузопотоки".
Доклад на третьей международной научной конференции «Полярная механика 2016», прошедшей в период с 27 по 30 сентября 2016 г. в Дальневосточном федеральном университете (г. Владивосток).
Авторы: сотрудники ООО «Морстройтехнология» Горгуца Роман Юльевич, Ксенофонтова Дарья Андреевна, Соколов Артемий Валерьевич.
Аналитические зависимости в действующих отечественных нормативных документах не в полной мере учитывают особенности связанные с изменением распределения солености в толще льда, которая в свою очередь влияет на его прочность.
В статье уделено внимание строению льда и его солености. Приведены и систематизированы основные зависимости для определения солености льда и количества жидкой фазы в нем на основе отечественной нормативной базы и зарубежных источников. Выполнен сравнительный анализ влияния вышеупомянутых параметров, рассчитанных по различным методикам, на итоговую прочность льда. Предложены способы корректировки прочности льда в некоторых слоях, в случае, если соленость в них, полученная аналитическим путем, по отношению к замеренной при натурных испытаниях оказалась завышенной или, наоборот, заниженной. Уточненное распределение солености по толщине льда может снизить расчетные нагрузки на ГТС.
Информация, приведенная в настоящей статье, дает необходимые пояснения к расчетным методикам нормативных документов и позволяет определить итоговую прочность льда более корректно, при отсутствии данных натурных испытаний.
Доклад на третьей международной научной конференции «Полярная механика 2016», прошедшей в период с 27 по 30 сентября 2016 г. в Дальневосточном федеральном университете (г. Владивосток).
Авторы: Горгуца Роман Юльевич (ООО «Морстройтехнология»), Миронов Михаил Евгеньевич (АО «ВНИИГ им. Б.Е. Веденеева»), Соколов Артемий Валерьевич (ООО «Морстройтехнология»).
К настоящему времени, благодаря многолетним усилиям российских и зарубежных ученых, разработаны достаточно достоверные методики расчета ледовых нагрузок и воздействий на сплошные и отдельно стоящие преграды. Для определения толщин льда целесообразно использовать данные Федеральной службы по гидрометеорологии и мониторингу окружающей среды России (Росгидромет), которая ведет многолетние гидрометеорологические наблюдения на водных объектах.
В статье предлагается инженерная методика расчета толщины льда с учетом данных Росгидромета. Приведены рекомендации и дан алгоритм расчета. Указано на необходимость корреляции толщин льда, полученных расчетным путем, с данными натурных измерений. Рекомендации, изложенные в статье, могут быть использованы инженерами в практических целях при определении ледовых воздействий на сооружения.
Выступление Ольги ГОПКАЛО, ООО «Морстройтехнология» на секционном заседании «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» проведенном ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016 в рамках конференции ТРАНСТЭК 2016
Инфраструктура Арктических регионов для добычи и вывоза жидких углеводородовАлександр Головизнин
5 октября Морстройтехнология провела секционное заседание «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» в рамках программы Пятой международной конференции по развитию портов и судоходства «ТРАНСТЕК-2016».
Мы предлагаем вашему вниманию презентацию и видеозапись выступления Софьи КАТКОВОЙ, ООО «Морстройтехнология» "Инфраструктура Арктических регионов для добычи и вывоза жидких углеводородов".
Координация развития морских портов и железных дорог: инновации и технологииАлександр Головизнин
Выступление Софьи КАТКОВОЙ, ООО «Морстройтехнология» на секционном заседании «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» проведенном ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016 в рамках конференции ТРАНСТЭК 2016
Опыт эффективного взаимодействия на стыке порт-железная дорога на примере пор...Александр Головизнин
Выступление Игоря ЕВСТАФЬЕВА, Генерального директора, АО «ПУЛ транс» на секционном заседании «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» проведенном ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016 в рамках конференции ТРАНСТЭК 2016
Выступление Дениса НЕГОДАЕВА, Директора представительства «Трансфеника» на секционном заседании «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» проведенном ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016 в рамках конференции ТРАНСТЭК 2016
Синхронизация развития железной инфраструктуры и портов: современное состояниеАлександр Головизнин
Выступление Павла ТЕРЕШКО, Руководителя отдела комплексных исследований Департамента исследований железнодорожного транспорта АНО «Институт Проблем естественных монополий» на секционном заседание «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» проведенном ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016 в рамках конференции ТРАНСТЭК 2016
Выступление КОЛЯГИНА Сергея, Заместителя генерального директора АО «Беломортранс» на Секционном заседании «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016. В рамка ансх конференции Транстэк 2016
Организация взаимодействия порта и железной дороги на примере порта ГамбургАлександр Головизнин
Выступление Натальи Капкаевой на Секционном заседании «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016. В рамках конференции Транстэк 2016
Проблемы информационного взаимодействия всех участников цепи поставок груза ч...Александр Головизнин
Выступление Павле Картопольцева, Директора «SoftMasters Ltd», «Проблемы информационного взаимодействия всех участников цепи поставок груза через морские торговые порты и пути их решения»
на Секционном заседание «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016. В рамках конференции Транстэк 2016
Комплексный логистический сервис в условиях Крайнего Севера: реализация масшт...Александр Головизнин
СИЧИНАВА Дмитрий, Руководитель департамента агентских перевозок ООО "Логистика Северо-Европейских Газопроводов" (ООО "ЛСЕГ") «Комплексный логистический сервис в условиях Крайнего Севера: реализация масштабных инфраструктурных проектов России»
Секционное заседание «Оптимизация логистики как путь к повышению эффективности» ООО "Морстройтехнология" 5.10. 2016 в равках конференции Транстэк 2016
Доклад Ольги Гопкало на конференции "Железнодорожные перевозки горно-металлургических грузов РФ", посвященный тенденциям мирового рынка угля. Рассматриваются перспективы российского экспорта угля и проекты развития терминалов.
Generative AI Deep Dive: Advancing from Proof of Concept to ProductionAggregage
Join Maher Hanafi, VP of Engineering at Betterworks, in this new session where he'll share a practical framework to transform Gen AI prototypes into impactful products! He'll delve into the complexities of data collection and management, model selection and optimization, and ensuring security, scalability, and responsible use.
DevOps and Testing slides at DASA ConnectKari Kakkonen
My and Rik Marselis slides at 30.5.2024 DASA Connect conference. We discuss about what is testing, then what is agile testing and finally what is Testing in DevOps. Finally we had lovely workshop with the participants trying to find out different ways to think about quality and testing in different parts of the DevOps infinity loop.
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
Climate Impact of Software Testing at Nordic Testing DaysKari Kakkonen
My slides at Nordic Testing Days 6.6.2024
Climate impact / sustainability of software testing discussed on the talk. ICT and testing must carry their part of global responsibility to help with the climat warming. We can minimize the carbon footprint but we can also have a carbon handprint, a positive impact on the climate. Quality characteristics can be added with sustainability, and then measured continuously. Test environments can be used less, and in smaller scale and on demand. Test techniques can be used in optimizing or minimizing number of tests. Test automation can be used to speed up testing.
PHP Frameworks: I want to break free (IPC Berlin 2024)Ralf Eggert
In this presentation, we examine the challenges and limitations of relying too heavily on PHP frameworks in web development. We discuss the history of PHP and its frameworks to understand how this dependence has evolved. The focus will be on providing concrete tips and strategies to reduce reliance on these frameworks, based on real-world examples and practical considerations. The goal is to equip developers with the skills and knowledge to create more flexible and future-proof web applications. We'll explore the importance of maintaining autonomy in a rapidly changing tech landscape and how to make informed decisions in PHP development.
This talk is aimed at encouraging a more independent approach to using PHP frameworks, moving towards a more flexible and future-proof approach to PHP development.
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object CalisthenicsDorra BARTAGUIZ
After immersing yourself in the blue book and its red counterpart, attending DDD-focused conferences, and applying tactical patterns, you're left with a crucial question: How do I ensure my design is effective? Tactical patterns within Domain-Driven Design (DDD) serve as guiding principles for creating clear and manageable domain models. However, achieving success with these patterns requires additional guidance. Interestingly, we've observed that a set of constraints initially designed for training purposes remarkably aligns with effective pattern implementation, offering a more ‘mechanical’ approach. Let's explore together how Object Calisthenics can elevate the design of your tactical DDD patterns, offering concrete help for those venturing into DDD for the first time!
Transcript: Selling digital books in 2024: Insights from industry leaders - T...BookNet Canada
The publishing industry has been selling digital audiobooks and ebooks for over a decade and has found its groove. What’s changed? What has stayed the same? Where do we go from here? Join a group of leading sales peers from across the industry for a conversation about the lessons learned since the popularization of digital books, best practices, digital book supply chain management, and more.
Link to video recording: https://bnctechforum.ca/sessions/selling-digital-books-in-2024-insights-from-industry-leaders/
Presented by BookNet Canada on May 28, 2024, with support from the Department of Canadian Heritage.
Unlocking Productivity: Leveraging the Potential of Copilot in Microsoft 365, a presentation by Christoforos Vlachos, Senior Solutions Manager – Modern Workplace, Uni Systems
Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey 2024 by 91mobiles.pdf91mobiles
91mobiles recently conducted a Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey in which we asked over 3,000 respondents about the TV they own, aspects they look at on a new TV, and their TV buying preferences.
GraphRAG is All You need? LLM & Knowledge GraphGuy Korland
Guy Korland, CEO and Co-founder of FalkorDB, will review two articles on the integration of language models with knowledge graphs.
1. Unifying Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs: A Roadmap.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.08302
2. Microsoft Research's GraphRAG paper and a review paper on various uses of knowledge graphs:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/graphrag-unlocking-llm-discovery-on-narrative-private-data/
Alt. GDG Cloud Southlake #33: Boule & Rebala: Effective AppSec in SDLC using ...James Anderson
Effective Application Security in Software Delivery lifecycle using Deployment Firewall and DBOM
The modern software delivery process (or the CI/CD process) includes many tools, distributed teams, open-source code, and cloud platforms. Constant focus on speed to release software to market, along with the traditional slow and manual security checks has caused gaps in continuous security as an important piece in the software supply chain. Today organizations feel more susceptible to external and internal cyber threats due to the vast attack surface in their applications supply chain and the lack of end-to-end governance and risk management.
The software team must secure its software delivery process to avoid vulnerability and security breaches. This needs to be achieved with existing tool chains and without extensive rework of the delivery processes. This talk will present strategies and techniques for providing visibility into the true risk of the existing vulnerabilities, preventing the introduction of security issues in the software, resolving vulnerabilities in production environments quickly, and capturing the deployment bill of materials (DBOM).
Speakers:
Bob Boule
Robert Boule is a technology enthusiast with PASSION for technology and making things work along with a knack for helping others understand how things work. He comes with around 20 years of solution engineering experience in application security, software continuous delivery, and SaaS platforms. He is known for his dynamic presentations in CI/CD and application security integrated in software delivery lifecycle.
Gopinath Rebala
Gopinath Rebala is the CTO of OpsMx, where he has overall responsibility for the machine learning and data processing architectures for Secure Software Delivery. Gopi also has a strong connection with our customers, leading design and architecture for strategic implementations. Gopi is a frequent speaker and well-known leader in continuous delivery and integrating security into software delivery.
Communications Mining Series - Zero to Hero - Session 1DianaGray10
This session provides introduction to UiPath Communication Mining, importance and platform overview. You will acquire a good understand of the phases in Communication Mining as we go over the platform with you. Topics covered:
• Communication Mining Overview
• Why is it important?
• How can it help today’s business and the benefits
• Phases in Communication Mining
• Demo on Platform overview
• Q/A
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 5DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 5. In this session, we will cover CI/CD with devops.
Topics covered:
CI/CD with in UiPath
End-to-end overview of CI/CD pipeline with Azure devops
Speaker:
Lyndsey Byblow, Test Suite Sales Engineer @ UiPath, Inc.
GridMate - End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid...ThomasParaiso2
End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid regressions. In this session, we share our journey building an E2E testing pipeline for GridMate components (LWC and Aura) using Cypress, JSForce, FakerJS…
GridMate - End to end testing is a critical piece to ensure quality and avoid...
Russia’s window onto Europe. Russian ports along the Baltic coast after transition.
1. Russian ports along the Baltic coast after transition
Russia’s window onto Europe
Photo: JSC Seaport St. Petersburg
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
It was not until the 18th century that Russia gained access to the
Baltic Sea and although the number of seaports in the Russian
Federation has increased since that time, the Baltic ‘window’ still
plays a leading role within the country in terms of cargo turnover.
The seaports of the region can be divided into two groups: multi-purpose
facilities and highly specialized ones. The Big Port Saint Peters-burg,
Vyborg and Kaliningrad are multipurpose ports, handling a wide
range of freight categories. Primorsk specializes in oil and oil products,
Vysotsk has two dedicated terminals: an oil-loading and a coal termi-nal,
whereas Ust-Luga is launching a number of specialized facilities. In
2013, the Baltic ports’ share within the total Russian ports’ freight turno-ver
was close to 37%; this figure can be further broken down to a 38%
oil share in this score, 49% in oil products, 60% in containers, 24% in
coal, 61% in refrigerated cargo and 38% in ro-ro and ferry-borne cargo.
The total cargo volume handled by Russian ports along the Baltic coast
reached 216.01 mln tn, out of which 78.8 mln tn constituted oil, 54.57
mln tn – oil products, 24.89 mln tn (or 2.89 mln TEU) – containerized
cargo and 23.87 mln tn was the amount of total coal handlings.
Fig. 1. Cargo turnover dynamics in the Russian Baltic ports 2004-2013 [mln tn]
90 | Baltic Transport Journal | 4/2014
by Olga Gopkalo and Alexander Goloviznin, Mostroytechnology
The last decade’s affairs of Russian Baltic ports were dramatic, interesting and complex. How-ever,
the ports can also prove their track records by success stories. The Big Port of Saint Pe-tersburg
is currently the largest container port in the Baltic Sea, the First Container Terminal
– a leader in container handlings in the region. The Port of Primorsk is a major oil port and
Rosterminalugol has grown into the biggest coal terminal.
Foreign trade freight prevails in the Baltic seaports of Rus-sia,
with 52.04 mln tn of dry cargo (delivered mainly by rail) and
132.7 mln of liquid cargo (in majority delivered by pipelines)
exported this way. Imports included dry cargo turnover (25.33
mln tn), transported from ports mainly by road, in containers
and a small volume of liquid cargo (wine in bulk imported via
Vyborg). The short-sea shipping freight volume amounted to
3.08 mln tn, i.e. some 1.5% of the total cargo turnover.
Development after transition
Over the time-frame of 2004-2013, the freight turnover
nearly doubled in the Baltic ports of Russia, constituting an
85% growth. It is impossible to understand what stimulated this
rapid growth without analysing the general context of the RF’s
seaport development in the post-Soviet era.
After the dissolution of the USSR, a substantial part of
port capacities previously used for handling exports were lo-cated
within the territories of former Soviet republics – now
independent states: Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Ukraine.
RF’s losses were most significant in the Baltic Sea region. Such
traditional channels of Soviet/Russian exports as Ventspils,
Klaipėda, Riga and Tallinn remained abroad. Therefore, a ma-jor
part of Russian freights was shipped via ports of adjacent
states. Over the post-Soviet period (1990-2014), the Russian
economy’s growth was fuelled by raw materials (mainly – oil,
oil products, coal and fertilizers) exported mainly via seaports.
Imports saw an increase in containerized transport to the RF.
The freight flow slowdown in the years 1991-1994 caused by
the system crash, was followed by a rapid growth (hindered
then by the 1998 crisis).
2. 4/2014 | Baltic Transport Journal | 91
Fig. 2. Cargo turnover dynamics in the Russian Baltic ports 2004-2013 –
cargo categories [mln tn]
left with limited container handling capacities, thereby being forced to
use transit ports of the Baltic States and Finland. In 2000, the container
traffic in Russian ports constituted some 439 thou. TEU. Considering
the circumstances, new container handling capacities were required.
Developments were mainly owing to the Russian transport companies’
effort (National Container Company, Severstaltrans/N-Trans – ac-quired
by Global Ports, Delo Group). Since 2005, a snowballing increase
in the car sales volume has been observed in the country: 20-30% annu-ally.
This rising demand has been met mainly by imports, the volume of
which grew nearly 10 times over the analysed period, reaching its peak
level in 2008, with nearly 1.9 mln cars imported to Russia.
All this resulted in a deficit of transport infrastructure for im-port
traffic. The first batches of imported new cars arrived in Rus-sian
Baltic ports in December 2006, initially to modernized berths
and yards. Many car terminals emerged at the peak of demand
(imports) and they were not constructed as dedicated, specialist
facilities, but were arranged based on what was available.
The Big Port Saint Petersburg
In the period between 2004 and 2013 containerized cargo turn-over
multiplied nearly four times in Russian ports – from 1.3 tо 4.8
mln TEU. Baltic ports of the country are playing a leading role in
this process – this is where more than half of the cargo volume is
handled, mainly – in the Big Port of Saint Petersburg.
Fig. 3. Containerized cargo turnover dynamics at the Big Port Saint
Petersburg 2004-2013 [thou. TEU]
Regardless of the high saturation of the Baltic container market
and the growth of competition, investors’ interest in the port is
not fading, as using Saint Petersburg is an optimum solution for
many Russian exporters and importers. Therefore, cargo owners
and transport companies in the RF have been and are still mostly
interested in this port. Yet, its development is hindered by territo-rial
limitations and the vicinity of urban areas.
As of November 25, 2005, the Big Port Saint Petersburg’s contain-er
turnover hit and later exceeded the level of 1 mln TEU. In 2008, the
turnover of the port’s largest container terminal – the First Container
Terminal (FCT) – surpassed one million TEU as well. Currently, all
major container terminals in Saint Petersburg are planning to increase
their throughput capacities. Development plans for the nearest future
provide for capacity expansion from 1,350 up to 1,600 thou. TEU at
FCT, from 1,200 to 1,500 thou. TEU at Petrolesport, from 500 to 1,500
thou. TEU at Container Terminal Saint Petersburg and from 250 to
370 thou. TEU at Moby Dick. Besides investment plans for these ter-minals,
one should also mention Bronka – a project currently devised
to build a multi-purpose cargo handling facility, with a target through-put
capacity of 260 thou. ro-ro units and up to 1,900 thou. TEU.
In recent years, the Big Port Saint Petersburg has not only be-come
the centre of container business, but also the main entrance
point for car imports. The history of its car terminals development
began in 2006, when the Multi-purpose Cargo Handling Com-plex
“Onega” received its first vehicles shipment. The system was
Over the years 1994-2003, the Russian ports’ throughput in-creased
from 111.0 tо 288.3 mln tn (i.e. 2.6 times), to grow from 364.0
to 589.2 mln tn (by 62%) in the period 2004-2013. The change was
mainly due to developing international carriage, primarily exports.
The rapid growth in international trade required adaptation of the
seaports’ infrastructure so as to respond to the market needs. This was
achieved in a number of ways. Firstly, by utilizing the existing, chiefly
multi-purpose port capacities to the maximum, as well as upgrading or
converting the facilities. Often, imperfect technologies were used, when
considering the limited land area and depth in the existing ports, it was
impossible to construct terminals meeting the current needs. This was a
relatively low-cost solution, since the assets involved had already partly
(or completely) depreciated. Besides, as a result of internal privatization
during the years 1992-1994, many port assets were acquired at a low
price and the management of privatized enterprises was taken over by
people with no experience in port operations. Secondly, by re-profiling
non-stevedoring assets (shipbuilding and ship repair yards, fishing
ports). This was also a relatively low-cost solution, although an ineffi-cient
one in terms of technologies applied. And thirdly, by constructing
new ports and terminals, mainly for the purpose of exporting raw ma-terials
and importing containerized consumer goods and ro-ro freight.
With limited public funding, the ‘rebirth’ of the port construc-tion
industry was primarily financed by private investors or by state-owned
corporations (JSC Transneft). The progress in development
of sea ports is reflected in the “Maritime Transport” subprogramme
implemented under the Federal Target Programme “Modernization
of the Russian Transport System (2002-2010)” report. The propor-tion
between the budget-financed and private investments was 1:7.
Exports of energy resources has become the most important driving
force of the port industry’s development. The Port of Primorsk, the
coal terminals in Ust-Luga as well as Vysotsk and Kaliningrad – all
these facilities were constructed to handle export of fossil fuels.
Nevertheless, since 2008 bulk cargo flows (oil, coal) have tended
to transfer eastwards. In 2008-2012, the volume of oil deliveries to
eastern regions grew by 23.4 mln tn, while freights going west, south-west
and south shrank by 10.2 mln tn, 19.2 mln tn and 4.4 mln tn,
respectively. Along with these changes in the geographic pattern of
traffic, pipeline construction projects were launched: the first stage
of the Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean oil pipeline in 2009 (including
the oil port Kozmino) and the second stage in 2012 (incl. the port’s
expansion). A similar situation was observed in the case of coal – all
of the freight volume growth occurred in ports of the Far East.
The growth of income earned by Russia from exports over the last
decade resulted in an increasing demand for imported goods transport-ed
mainly in containers. After the dissolution of the USSR, Russia was
3. complicated: cars were transferred from a pier to “Onega-Terminal”
yard with customs assistance. In autumn 2007, Russian Transport
Lines (a customs broker and a car dealer) began unloading cars at
the Sea Fishing Port’s wharfs. Petrolesport commenced receiving
cars concurrently with the first deliveries to Yug-2 Terminal in Ust-
Luga, in 2008. Moreover, this very year a car terminal opened within
the premises of Third Stevedoring Company (which was incorporat-ed
into the Sea Port Saint Petersburg). The terminal is managed by
The BPSP container affairs
The way the currently largest container operator on the Rus-sian
market was established is a complex, but interesting one.
At the beginning of the 1990s Russia’s ports went public and
enterprises were privatized. Based on the Port of Leningrad’s
assets, the JSC Sea Port of Saint-Petersburg was estab-lished
(replaced by the OJSC Sea Port of Saint Petersburg).
By means of buying up shares from the company’s workers, a
group of entrepreneurs took over control of the port, some of
them known for their relations with criminal circles.
Vitaly Yuzhilin and his business partner, Andrey Kobzar (repre-sented
by the British company FQ – First Quantum) were among
those to acquire the port shares last. At the beginning of the 2000s,
the Liechtenstein off-shore company Nasdor Anstalt took over
control of the port. The company was considered associated with
Vitaly Yuzhilin and his partners. In response to requirements of the
time – growing exports of bulk cargoes – specialized terminals
were constructed and expanded in the port. As a result of the staged
modernization, the oil terminal (currently – Petersburg Oil Termi-nal,
a closed joint stock company) increased its 1995 throughput
capacity from 1 mln tn up to 12.5 mln tn in 2013.
In 1998 modernization of a container terminal in the 3rd cargo
district of the Port of Saint Petersburg began, with the First
Container Company being set up for this purpose. In 2002, the
process of redesigning the facilities at Petrolesport was initiated
towards handling containers. Moreover, that year also OJSC Baltic
Bulk Terminal, specializing in handling mineral fertilizers, was
put into operation (its current annual throughput capacity: 5-7
mln tn). The project was initiated by OJSC Uralkali, a company
producing and exporting potash fertilizers, and by structural units
of the OJSC Sea Port of Saint-Petersburg, on a parity basis.
At the same time, a formation of the container market’s key play-ers
began. This complex process involved development of the major
Russian transport groups concentrating on container transportation
and on the management of container terminals, with such ele-ments
as the formation of alliances, division of throughput capaci-ties
and subsequent consolidation. The other side of this process
included distribution of the market of all port assets, where assets
remaining outside the container market profile were transferred to
other stakeholders – exporters and cargo owners.
In 2002 Severstaltrans (a transport group at that time
affiliated with OJSC Severstal, a steel plant) established
National Container Company (NCC), a limited liabil-ity
company), on a parity basis with FQ, controlled most
probably by Vitaly Yuzhilin. NCC was established with the
purpose of managing all assets of the founders associated
with container transport, with the CJSC First Container
Terminal (FCT) as the principal element. Furthermore,
NCC acquired 74% of the container complex in the Port of
Ust-Luga from OJSC Ust-Luga. However, this relationship
did not last long. Four years later, in 2006, Severstaltrans
left National Container Company. The company sold its
shares in NCC and in a number of other assets owned joint-ly
by Yuzhilin in the North-West and South of Russia, keep-ing
only the Far-East container business for themselves.
92 | Baltic Transport Journal | 4/2014
BLG, owner and operator of BLG AutoTerminal Bremerhaven. At
the beginning of 2009, the first stage of a ro-ro terminal construction
was completed in the area of wharf nos. 36-37 (the premises of CJSC
Perstiko, incorporated in the Sea Port Saint Petersburg). All kinds of
rolling cargo can be handled at the terminal and sometimes cars are
received here (SEAT, Fiat LCV and other brands).
The new terminals were very much used during the period of
rapid growth of imports. As the rate of imports slows down and
In 2004, Vitaly Yuzhilin focussed on his container business and
withdrew from a number of port assets, keeping a 50% interest
in FCT. Nasdor Anstalt sold its 50% in the stevedoring company
Neva-Metal to its partner in NCC, Severstaltrans. As a consequence,
Neva-Metal was included in the Russian Steel division of Severstal.
Neva-Metal has been handling metal products ever since, including
containerized freights. For this purpose, the new owner fitted the
terminal with adequate equipment. Nasdor Anstalt‘s 50% interest
in the Baltic Bulk Terminal was sold to Uralkali – the cargo owner
and second partner in the project. The arrangement was announced in
2007 by Uralkali, which acquired a complete block of terminal shares.
In 2004 Nasdor Anstalt sold its controlling interest in the Sea
Port of Saint Petersburg to the Danish company Jysk Stålindus-tri,
representing Novolipetsk Steel Company (NLMK Group).
Within the process of restructuring NLMK’s assets, shares in the
Sea Port of Saint Petersburg, together with the interest in three
stevedoring companies: First Stevedoring Company, Second
Stevedoring Company and Third Stevedoring Company were
acquired by an international transport group, Universal Cargo
Logistics Holding B.V. (UCLH). The latter is an international trans-port
group, which incorporates a number of stevedoring, shipping,
shipbuilding and logistic assets and is controlled by Vladimir Lisin.
Novolipetsk Steel Company is Lisin’s major asset.
Following Severstaltrans’ exit from NCC, Sergey Gener-alov’s
Industrial Investors Group owning the Far Eastern
Shipping Company (FESCO) became First Quantum’s new
partner. FESCO’s interest in port assets complied with the
company’s strategy of developing a comprehensive offer of
logistic services. For this purpose, the existing railway and
shipping assets had to be supplemented with terminals. Nev-ertheless,
this partnership did not last long either.
Besides the differing approaches to business, the Ust-Luga
Container Terminal project became the main apple of discord
between the partners. The supporters of Yuzhilin intended to invest
in the terminal construction actively, while FESCO considered the
project to be premature and inadequate to the situation on the mar-ket
at the time of recession. In the summer of 2009, FQ extended a
public proposal to FESCO to leave the construction project of the
Ust-Luga Container Terminal in Leningrad oblast in response
to FESCO’s refusal to finance the project. In 2010, FESCO sold its
shares in NCC Group’s joint ventures to a company owned by
Andrey Kobzar. First Quantum’s structural units became the First
Container Terminal’s principal shareholders. Concurrently, one
other major player was emerging on the Russian container market.
Following disposal of its interest in the Petersburg Container
Terminal, Severstaltrans acquired a controlling block of Pe-trolesport
shares in 2007. At the time of this transaction, the
share of containerized cargo in Petrolesport’s total turnover
accounted for 50%. The new owners set a goal to turn Petrole-sport
into a standard, specialized container terminal. In 2013,
containers accounted for 78% of the terminal’s throughput.
More or less at the same time Severstaltrans acquired interest
in the container terminal Moby Dick. The facility, a ferry and cargo
terminal located on Kronstadt Island – a territory adjacent to the dam
which is part of the Saint Petersburg Flood Prevention Facility Com-plex
– started operations in 2002. The terminal was developed and
initially owned by Containerships Oy, a Finnish operator. In 2006,
during construction of the Saint Petersburg Flood Prevention Com-plex,
there was a conflict between the stevedoring company and the
dam developer who insisted that the land leased by Moby Dick for
terminal construction should be made available as a yard for storing
dam construction materials. This conflict intensified in 2007, when the
Flood Prevention Facility Complex’s management blocked the termi-nal
access road. The land site was at risk of seizure. The management
of the terminal resolved the situation by attempts of a corporate raid.
At the end of 2007, structural units of Severstaltrans acquired
a 50% interest in Moby Dick, thereby becoming Container-ships’
partners. In next to no time the new shareholders man-aged
to obtain from the Ministry of Transport a long-awaited
permission to arrange a border crossing at the second stage of the
terminal, at the same time solving the conflict around the land
sites. Currently, Global Ports holds 75% of the terminal shares.
In 2008, structural units of Severstaltrans began operating
under the N-Trans brand. Port assets were consolidated into
Global Ports Investments. Currently, Global Ports incorpo-rates
several Russian and Finnish port and land-based con-tainer
terminals, as well as operating an oil terminal in Estonia.
It is a leading operator of port-based container terminals on
the Russian market. At the end of November 2012, 37.5% of
Global Ports was acquired by APM Terminals B.V., the port
branch of A.P. Møller-Maersk A/S. In December 2013, Global
Ports/APMT absorbed National Container Company.
At the moment, Global Ports/APMT group controls all
major container terminals at the Big Port Saint Petersburg:
CJSC Container Terminal, OJSC Petrolesport, Moby Dick
Ltd. (75% jointly with Containerships Oy). The figures from
2013 show that these terminals handled 80% of contain-ers
at the Big Port Saint Petersburg. Furthermore, Global
Ports/APMT owns 80% of Ust-Luga Container Terminal
and a number of assets in the Black Sea and Far East ports.
The Container Terminal Saint Petersburg is the only one
among the major container terminals of the Saint Petersburg port
not owned by Global Ports/APMT. The facility was built in 2008-
2011 and replaced general cargo and coal handling facilities within
the 4th cargo district of the port and is a joint venture of the Sea
Port Saint Petersburg (a part of UCLH) and a branch of Medi-terranean
Shipping Company (MSC) – Terminal Investment
Limited S.A. (TIL). The venture invests in container terminals and
develops them. In fact, the terminal is controlled by MSC.
The Sea Fishing Port of Saint Petersburg is an independ-ent
player operating on the container market. Historically, the
company focused on handling perishable cargo, mostly fish.
In 2007, the terminal began handling new vehicle imports.
The next stage resulted from a decision to expand container
operations. Container yard equipment has already been in-stalled
and the terminal has been included in time tables of
container lines. The freight turnover volume has not yet been
significant, but it is expected to reach 128 thou. TEU. ‚
4. 4/2014 | Baltic Transport Journal | 93
state-of-the-art terminals are launched – such as the one in Ust-Lu-ga
– the role of Saint Petersburg’s terminals may decrease.
Tab. 1. Major stevedoring companies at the BPSP
Company name Wharf numbers Cargo categories Freight turnover
Ad v e r t i s e m e n t
in 2013
CJSC First Container Terminal 82-87 containers, refrigerated
containers
11.96 mln tn
1,083.9 thou. TEU
CJSC Petersburg Oil Terminal 112А, B, W, ПНТ-1-4,
anchoring piles
diesel oil, mazut 9.10 mln tn
OJSC Petrolesport 42-48 containers, ro-ro 7.82 mln tn
711.4 thou. TEU
OJSC Sea Port Saint
Petersburg
1-7, 15-26, 29-32,
35-41, 67, 68, 102,
103
colour metals, refrigerated
cargo, general cargo, ro-ro,
bulk cargo, cars, coal
7.73 mln tn
OJSC Baltic Bulk Terminal 106, 107 mineral fertilizers 4.72 mln tn
CJSC Container Terminal
101А, B, W containers 3.73 mln tn
Saint Petersburg
396.4 thou. TEU
CJSC Neva-Metal 71-74 iron, containers 2.93 mln tn
CJSC In-Transit anchorage 5А,
external roadstead
oil products 1.58 mln tn
Moby Dick Ltd Litke base, L-1, 2 containerized cargo 1.34 mln tn
219.3 thou. TEU
CJSC Infotech Baltika anchorage 5А, oil products 1.11 mln tn
St. Peter’s Terminal Ltd. 15k, 16k, 17k general cargo, refrigerated
cargo
1.10 mln tn
Delta Service Ltd. 94 oil products 1.02 mln tn
Sea Fishing Port Ltd. Р3-6 general cargo, containers 0.98 mln tn
Photo: JSC Seaport St. Petersburg
5. Providing global solutions
for tomorrow’s needs
94 | Baltic Transport Journal | 4/2014
DEME has decades of experience in its core dredging and
land reclamation activities and hydraulic engineering. In
support of its dredging activities, the Group offers an
impressive range of services in the environmental field
such as brownfield remediation, complex marine
construction such as foundation and installation of
offshore wind farms and sea aggregate winning. Thanks
to its multidisciplinary capabilities and its integrated
corporate structure, DEME has become a global solutions
provider developing a whole range of new activities in
the field of energy, oil & gas and renewable energy.
DEME N.V.
Haven 1025, Scheldedijk 30
B-2070 Zwijndrecht, Belgium
T +32 3 250 52 11
F +32 3 250 56 50
info.deme@deme-group.com
www.deme-group.com
Creating land for the future
AMORAS project: construction and exploitation
of a mechanical dewatering plant for dredged
material in the Port of Antwerp.
Construction of the C-Power offshore
wind park off the Belgian Coast.
Dredging of a turning basin and an access channel for a new coal export terminal in Santa Marta, Colombia.
In May 2012, a distant terminal located at Cape Putevoy was
included in the Port of Vysotsk. The terminal is part of the Vyborg-skaya
Cellulose industrial plant and is intended to handle general
cargo (including pellets). Its annual capacity is up to 3 mln tn.
Vysotsk’s twin brother – the Port of Vyborg – was also owned by
ROSA Holding at the beginning of the 2000s. The distance between the
ports of Vyborg and Vysotsk is not greater than 30 km and for some
time they even used to have a common port authority. Nevertheless,
their history followed two different paths. Initially, ROSA Holding’s
coal was handled at the Port of Vyborg, but as the port is located within
the city centre, a decision was made to cease this type of operation. In
2007, ROSA Holding decided to focus on developing the Port of Vy-sotsk
and sold its assets in the Port of Vyborg to Oslo Marine Group
(OMG), owned by Vitaly Arkhangelsky – a multi-profile structure de-veloping
business in a relatively wide range of directions, including: in-surance,
leasing, real estate, port, transport and freight services.
As far as the port business was concerned, the founder of Oslo
Marine Group had ambitions to develop the Port of Vyborg into a
multi-purpose cargo handling complex with an annual throughput
capacity of 3 mln tn (at the moment of sale, the annual turnover was
close to 1.1 mln tn). To achieve this goal and to finance development
of a shipping company and other projects, huge loans were contracted
from a number of Russian banks. It became obvious after a couple of
years that reality did not comply with the plans at all. Not only did
the shallow Port of Vyborg turn out to be insufficiently competitive to
perform such tasks, but additionally a conflict with the Federal State
Unitary Enterprise Rosmorport arose over the legal validity of berth
lease contracts; this led to withdrawal of some of the berths from opera-tion.
In the meantime, loan debts grew. In 2009, Oslo Marine Group’s
manager and owner, Vitaly Arkhangelsky, went on vacation and never
Vysotsk
The Port of Vysotsk is one example of a successful specialization
strategy. Historically, the port had only dry cargo handling facilities
at its disposal. Having experienced the wave of ownership transfor-mation,
the dry cargo terminal has been managed by Port Vysotsky
Company since 2004. The terminal is owned by ROSA Holding,
through off-shore companies. Initially, the company was established
on the basis of Erunakovo Coal Company and port assets were needed
for the purpose of exports. ROSA Holding exited the coal business in
2007, selling its coal assets to Sibuglemet, but kept control of the port.
The dry cargo section of the Port of Vysotsk continues coal han-dling
operations. Under the federal target program, wharf nos. 1-4
were modernized and dredging works were carried out at the port
basin and waterway. While in 2004 the port was capable of receiving
ships up to 25 thou. dwt, today vessels up to 87 thou. dwt enter the ter-minal,
with roadstead loading. The terminal’s coal turnover increased
from 3.1 to 4.9 mln tn. Further expanding the coal throughput capac-ity
up to 7 mln tn and more is impeded by the insufficient railway ac-cess
infrastructure. Cargo is delivered to the port via the Vyborg rail-way
line. After the high-speed train service Allegro has been launched,
the freight traffic has to be transferred to an alternative route – namely
to the still non-existent Losevo-Kamenogorsk line. Yet, the by-pass
completion has already been postponed more than once.
In June 2004, the Port of Vysotsk gained an oil terminal. The first start-up
facilities of the RPK Vysotsk–Lukoil-II oil terminal were commis-sioned
to handle light and dark oil products, with an annual throughput
capacity of 2.5 mln tn. The second stage of the complex commissioned in
2005 increased the terminal’s capacity to 10.7 mln tn and in 2008 – to 12.0
mln tn. Today, the annual throughput capacity of the terminal amounts
to 13.5 mln tn. The terminal handles Lukoil’s export freight flows.
6. 4/2014 | Baltic Transport Journal | 95
returned to Russia. Since that time, creditors have not ceased efforts
to recover the outstanding debts from OMG’s structural units and to
take over control of the remaining assets, including the OJSC Port of
Vyborg. Lawsuits with banks and the unsolved conflict over the lease
of berths are not conducive to port development, but still the flow of
freight has somewhat increased, to reach a volume of 1.5 mln tn in
2013. The growth was owing to the transshipment of coal.
Primorsk
A major oil port on the Baltic Sea and the second among all of the
Russian ports in terms of cargo turnover – Primorsk – is an indispensa-ble
point of the Baltic pipeline system and the Kstovo-Yaroslavl-Kirishi-
Primorsk pipeline for the transportation of low-sulphur diesel oil. The
port started operations in 2001, when the first stage of the Specmorneft-port
Primorsk was launched (12 mln tn of annual capacity). In 2004,
the second stage opened (50 mln tn) and in 2006 – the third one (74
mln tn capacity). In the early 2000s – a period of insufficient state sup-port,
port development was financed by Transneft, a company dealing
with pipeline transportation of oil. In 2007, the latter firm merged with
Transnefteproduct (engaged in pipeline transportation of oil products),
triggering a process of assets integration in the Port of Primorsk and
today both terminals are controlled by one operator.
The first phase of commissioning Primorsk terminal for light oil
products handling took place in 2008. With an initial annual capacity
of 8.4 mln tn, the terminal recorded a 1.5 mln tn turnover in the first
year of operation and 9.3 mln tn in 2013. Owing to more efficient op-eration
and integration of two terminals operated initially by different
companies, it was possible to go over the designed throughput capac-ity
limit in the category of oil and oil products.
With its convenient location and good depths, the Port of Pri-morsk
attracts investors. The NCSP Group (Novorossiysk Commer-cial
Sea Port) is most active in this respect, planning construction of an
oil terminal with a railway transshipment facility here. However, with
a single-track railway line leading to the port, transportation of any
significant volume of cargo will not be possible, unless a major mod-ernization
of the Vyborg-Primorsk-Ermilovo line occurs. Yet, Rus-sian
Railways is still delaying the solution to the problem and seems to
be more interested in developing access to the Port of Ust-Luga.
Ust-Luga
This seaport has been the most intense growth point in the Baltic
Sea area in recent times. Although its construction was initiated in
1993, new terminals have begun emerging one by one since 2011. The
port’s turnover increased from 0.8 mln tn in 2004 to 62.9 mln tn in
2013. According to 2013 figures, Ust-Luga became the third-largest
port in Russia and the second-largest in the Baltic Sea (after Primorsk).
Fig. 4. Cargo turnover at the Port of Ust-Luga 2004-2013 [mln tn]
OJSC Ust-Luga Company, established for the purpose of construct-ing
the port as well as land development activities, was created in 1992.
The Ust-Luga project, a private-public partnership venture, is a unique
one even on a Russian scale. Almost all of the port’s facilities, except for
Photo: Ust-Luga Company
the water area and navigation systems, are privately held. The project
has attracted strategic investors – national level cargo owners and com-panies
representing the transport and logistics sector.
Tab. 2. Ust-Luga’s calendar of events
2003 The first terminal – Rosterminalugol, accommodating freight flows coming
from the Kuzbassrazrezugol Coal Mining Company – was commissioned.
2004 A project to construct a car and railway ferry terminal was approved as part of
the combined multi-purpose Ust-Luga-Baltiysk-German ports ferry complex.
Two years later, the project was adjusted to allow for large tonnage vessels and
consequently the designed annual throughput capacity of the ferry terminal
was increased to 5.5 mln tn. The first stage of the assignment was completed
that year. 2007 was the year of trial operations and in 2008 a regular Ust-Luga-
Baltiysk (the sea Port of Kaliningrad) connection opened.
2006 Construction of the multi-purpose cargo terminal Yug-2 commenced. The
facility was commissioned two years later. Yug-2, a modern car terminal,
currently the heart of the port, is the only terminal operated by OJSC Ust-
Luga Company. Unlike its competitors in the Big Port Saint Petersburg, the
terminal was designed and constructed from scratch, with the specific purpose
of handling car imports and it offers European service standards.
2008 The JSC Multipurpose Reloading Complex was launched (UCLH has been
the holder of a 100% interest in the terminal since 2008), capable of handling
a wide range of cargo categories, with coal being the core of the freight flows.
December
2011
The first stage of Ust-Luga Container Terminal was commissioned (a part of
the National Container Company, which was incorporated into Global Ports
in 2013). The project is expected to expand the Ust-Luga Container Terminal’s
throughput capacity from 440 tо 2,600 thou. TEU.
2009 A decision to construct the second Baltic Pipeline System (BPS II) was adopted,
giving a strong push stimulating the port’s growth. Construction of an oil terminal
and its accompanying infrastructure began in the seaport. The port water area and
Northern Channel were dredged to allow 160 thou. dwt oil carriers.
May 2012 The new Ust-Luga Bunker Complex was commissioned. The facility is an
indispensable element of BPS II, operated by Neva Pipeline Company. Oil
handling operations began in 2012. The annual throughput capacity of the first
stage of BPS II amounts to 30 mln tn. During the next stage of the project, the
capacity is expected to reach 50 mln tn of oil.
2011-
2012
Liquid cargo handling wharfs operated by Ust-Luga Oil (formerly –
Rosneftbunker) were commissioned one by one. Oil products’ handling began
already in 2011, to reach a volume of 14.9 mln tn in 2013.
2012 The first stage of the Novaya Gavan terminal opened to handle ro-ro freight
including new passenger vehicles.
June
2013
OJSC Novatek (a vertically-structured integrated company, an independent
Russian producer of natural gas) launched its Gas Condensate Fractionation
and Transshipment Complex. The first stage of the facility includes two stable
gas condensate fractionation trains with a capacity of 3 mln tn per annum each
and a terminal capable of loading tankers up to 120 thou. dwt. The Ust-Luga
Complex processes stable gas condensate into petroleum products like light
and heavy naphtha, jet fuel, heating oil and gasoil, and enables the shipping of
petroleum products to international markets. In 2013, the company processed
1,873 thou. tn of stable gas condensate into 1,831 thou. tn of end products.
June
2013
Construction of the Sibur-Portenergo’s light oil products handling terminal,
with a capacity of 1.5 mln tn of LPG and up to 2.5 mln tn of light oil products,
commenced. The bulk of the cargo from a Russian gas processing and
petrochemical group, Sibur, is exported through this terminal.
As for today, the handling facilities operating within the Port
of Ust-Luga are located in the southern part of the port area. As far
as the northern area is concerned, plans include construction of
7. the Baltic Metallurgical Terminal (by United Metallurgical Com-pany)
and a terminal for handling mineral fertilizers (by Euro-
Chem). Furthermore, a grain terminal could possibly be built, as
there is still enough land available. Further capacity expansion is
also possible in the river area of the port.
As has already been mentioned, a comprehensive approach to land
development is a characteristic feature of the Port of Ust-Luga project.
The nearest land development plans provide for creating an industrial
zone. Hence, the ICT Group is planning to build a carbamide factory
in the Ust-Luga industrial zone. The plant’s capacity should be close
to 350 thou. tn of ammonia and 1.2 mln tn of carbamide. The project
also includes construction of a carbamide and possibly an ammonia
handling terminal (OJSC Baltic Fertilizer Terminal). Moreover, con-struction
of a city-cluster with residential developments for the port
workers and other enterprises is underway. Further plans provide for
the development of an agri-industrial cluster and a recreation zone.
Kaliningrad
The Kaliningrad Oblast is an enclave of the Russian Federation and
this fact determines the development of the Port of Kaliningrad very
much. Therefore, the port focuses on regional sources of freight, thereby
limiting its development opportunities.
In 2001, Lukoil commissioned its oil terminal at the Port of Kalinin-grad.
Lukoil carries out oil and gas exploration and production work in
the Kaliningrad region and on the Baltic Sea Shelf; therefore, the termi-nal
handles the mother company’s freight flows. In April 2007, the first
handlings were received by the sea terminal operated by Sodrugestvo-
Soy. Currently, a project is underway to expand the terminal’s annual
throughput capacity, up to 5.5 mln tn. The terminal is part of the Sod-rugestvo
industrial group – it was built together with two oil extraction
96 | Baltic Transport Journal | 4/2014
plants, with a third plant construction underway. Even now, Sodrug-estvo
is one of Europe’s leading manufacturers of soya products.
In August 2002, construction of a car and railway ferry com-plex
began in Baltiysk. The first stage (the car section) was launched
in December 2002, the second one (railway) – in September 2006.
The facility is part of the Ust-Luga-Baltiysk-German ports line and
connects the Russian exclave to the mainland.
There is one more factor stimulating Kaliningrad’s growth, name-ly
the development of an automotive cluster in the region, leading to
an increase in demand for container transportation and construction
of container terminals. The dynamics of container freight flows re-flect
the growth of the automotive market and follows its decline. In
2006, in response to growing demand, Baltic Stevedoring Company, a
ferry terminal operator, began developing a cargo handling section of
the car terminal. In 2013, 166.7 thou. TEU was handled at the termi-nal.
Plans provide for capacity expansion from 200 tо 468 thou. TEU.
Moreover, CJSC Avtotor (an automotive factory in Kaliningrad) is
planning to build an 880 thou. TEU terminal in the port, in order to
secure the needs of the automotive cluster, which is being developed
in the special economic zone of the Kaliningrad Oblast.
Not long ago, the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation
was associating the plans for development of the Port of Kaliningrad
with construction of a deep water hub, but in 2014, when the Sabetta
project – a key component in the huge Yamal LNG project – turned out
to be over-budget, the decision was made to withdraw financing from
a number of other port projects and to re-allocate the funds to Sabetta.
The Kaliningrad hub was among the projects affected by this process.
Summing up the Russian port tales, it’s needless to emphasize how
rich the last decade has been in various sectorial affairs. And, it looks like
the future of Russian ports will be no less interesting. ‚
For the tenth year, we are proud to present a variety of highly
interesting lecturers. In addition to the popular programme focusing
on transport and logistics, Baltic Shipping Days is a much appreciated
networking opportunity for professional purchasers and suppliers.
www.balticshippingdays.se