MarEx Mailbag: Reader Response to MarEx Editorials
MarEx readers weigh in on last week’s piece, entitled “Shades of 1973: Gaslines, Energy and the Economy,” as well as other past articles.
In last week’s edition of the MarEx e-newsletter, our lead editorial centered on the energy, the current economy, and made some comparisons to years gone by. In these trying times, we tried to do that with a bit of humor, especially as that relates to the mini-gas shortage going on in the mid-Atlantic states (and seemingly nowhere else). I also expressed an opinion that the way out of the current financial mess is rooted in our ability to wean ourselves from foreign energy and develop our own sources (and the infrastructure to process and deliver those products) here at home. You can read last week’s editorial by clicking HERE. You can also see what our readers thought about the article below:
Greetings,
I am old enough to remember the gas lines of 1973. One of the outcomes was a national 55 mph speed limit to conserve fuel since vehicles get significantly better gas mileage at that speed. You could buy a car that got 25 mpg.
Today I drove the sixty miles from Olympia to Seattle and back. I have found that I get about 40 mpg in my 2004 Honda Civic at the speed limit of the Interstate for that trip of 60 mph. If I go 65 mph, it drops to the low thirties. So I go the speed limit. We have all been told that going a bit slower can increase gas mileage, yet going the speed limit I had most cars passing me by.
In 1973, I could buy a car that got 25mpg. Today's cars have better brakes, better crash survival, are all around safer and last a lot longer, but get about 25mpg. Is this the best we can do?
And refineries? Sure, with the environmental regulations they will cost more, but it certainly seems the companies would recoup their investment (Oh, sorry, I forgot that the market dictates these things and the "market", as we have recently seen, is always right). Do you want a refinery of the present types next to your house? What happened to the American ideal of inventiveness? If we developed the technologies to make cleaner, safer refineries, isn't there a profit to be made from selling these around the world? I guess we should wait for the Chinese to develop these and buy from them. And drilling? Drill away so that we can increase supply to feed the increasing oil hunger of the Chinese and Indians. The price of oil is set internationally. Additional domestic supplies will still be sold at those rates, or do you figure we will get a price break since we are a high volume consumer.
Have we turned into arrogant children who want everything that they want now, just the way we want it, with no thought of the costs or consequences or any thoughts of the future?
With Best Regards,
Rick Pietrusiak
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: There is, of course, a lot to digest in this particular letter, but one point that I would make in response is that I’m under no illusion that energy is going to continue to be expensive. I just think that if we’re going to have to pay for it, let’s keep some of those dollars here at home. Employment goes up, taxes to the U.S. treasury increase, the trade deficit goes down, and on and on. Yes, conservation has to be part of the solution. And, the reader is right: I drove out to the Blue Ridge Mountains last weekend (finally confident enough that I could get enough gasoline to get there and back). Driving at the speed limit, cars were passing me like I was standing still. And, there’s still a lot of gas guzzlers out there tooling around. I did notice, however, that Hummers are being marketed here at $15,000 off the sticker price. Maybe that’s a harbinger of things to come. Read on for another opinion:
Joe,
I was on vacation out West when I heard about the Gas shortages in the Southeast. I was a bit worried about getting to work after I got back to Southeast Florida. Upon arriving home I learned that Tankers where being held out of Port Everglades because there was no room for product ashore. Storage tanks were all full. No gas lines or shortages here. Maybe it's the difference between relying on Pipelines for supply versus mostly Jones Act tankers. Just a thought.
Captain Andy Edelstein
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: Captain Edelstein and I sailed together briefly back in the 1980’s. He probably doesn’t remember me, but I am constantly amazed at who pops up on my Radar from time to time. With regard to his letter, I couldn’t agree more. And while the pipeline takes the place of as many as 150 Jones Act, coastwise tankers, it is also a fairly rigid mode of transport. You can’t change your mind once the product is in the pipeline – its going where you sent it. And in this case, the pipeline got hamstrung by a lack of refining capacity for a few days. Thanks for weighing in, Andy. Here’s another letter:
Subject: 1973
Funny about that "sudden interruption of petroleum supplies". I remember sitting at anchor off Philadelphia with several other ships for a week with 135,000 bbls of gasoline waiting for a place to discharge. I was told that every bit of storage in the port was full, but when my Company, Mathiasen's Tanker Industries, sent tickets to a Flyers game to the C/E and me, we couldn't get a cab to the Spectrum. No gas.
On a subsequent voyage, with a full load of heating oil, gasoline and diesel for Boston, our sailing was delayed for almost a day because we couldn't get a bunker allocation from the new Department of Energy. They were moving into bigger office that day to better serve us.
I see nothing has changed. Oh, unless it's "chalk" now instead of "chock".
Name Withheld by Request
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: I made the change to the spelling when I got this letter. I said I was a little “punchy” while I waited in that gasline. It’s as good an excuse as any. The reader and I exchanged a couple of E-mails after his initial letter (above). With regard to the gasoline shortages, he was referring to 1973 and not 2008 (his experiences on board the ship). His letter does make an arguably valid point and tries to connect two scenarios. Well done. And, for those of you wondering, there are at least a dozen gas station owners in the greater Charlotte area under investigation for price gouging.
In this case, unfortunately, we have two metrics in play: We're not close enough to Charleston, Savannah or Wilmington (I used to deliver gasoline on MY tanker to the two latter ports) to get much relief there and the pipeline was shut down because of supply interruptions. I'm as suspicious as the next guy. But, when you put 25% of the nation's refining capacity in one place, at or below sea level, in harm’s way for three months annually, well, you get what you get. Beyond this, if everyone in the greater Charlotte metro area had just gotten a grip on themselves and let their tank dip to one-half before topping off, this would’ve been over in a heartbeat. As it stands today, the problem is easing, but I can tell you that there are still any number of stations out of product at one time or another. Thanks for writing. Read on for one more on this subject:
Dear Joe,
Agree 110% with regard to energy independence. Two lessons from history:
• Toward the close of WWII, one huge advantage held by the Allies was that they had ample fuel, and Hitler did not. His war machine was literally choking for lack of access to petroleum. Fast-forward to today: the US military will be dependent on oil for decades to come, no matter the advances made in hybrids, etc. in the consumer space. I'm concerned that we will exploit our oil reserves for relatively trivial reasons (making that trip to Wal-Mart on gas that's a few cents cheaper) instead of looking to the future. Maybe we should drill all right - but look into "banking up" significant ready reserves to ensure that we will never be handcuffed by our enemies for lack of fuel for our military and critical oil-dependent infrastructure. Undue influence over our actions and our economy are a turn of the (foreign controlled) oil valve away at this point.
• Our appetite for foreign oil (and general lack of discipline financially over the last 30 years or so) has brought us to an unhealthy state of indebtedness to some folks who could be described as at least our competitors now, and who may someday become our enemies again: China and Russia. Again, look to WWII, when the shoe was on the other foot: then the US was the world's creditor, and that leverage led us to an unprecedented degree of influence and control over those debtor nations. "Deficits don't matter" over the short term maybe - but they will become a rope around our neck over time, unless dealt with. Energy independence would help immeasurably there, and could also spawn technologies worth billions as exports.
Thanks,
Reid Sprague
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: I think these comments speak for themselves. Thanks for weighing in. Here’s another letter, but on a different subject: Online learning. Specifically, the reader is responding to the article in our August print edition of THE MARITIME EXECUTIVE, entitled, “CMES: Online, Long Distance – and Leading the Way.” In that article (I’m going to have to insist you go and buy a subscription to the magazine to read it – I’ll personally send you the back issue if you do), we talk about the first and only online, USCG approved STCW course curriculum available to mariners today. It is offered by the Calhoun M.E.B.A. Engineering School. Read on to see what our fan has to say:
Dear Joseph:
I really enjoyed your editorial and article on maritime training found in the August 2008 issue of ME. The magazine is actually new to me and I will be sure to follow it from now on.
I happened to pick it up during a recent visit I made to reconnect with alum in the south Florida area.
Regarding your focus on education, I believe you’re right on. I’m a big fan of the internet and the continued potential it holds as an extremely efficient tool that will continue to transform the way we communicate.
I can just picture this in the not-too distant future: A/E’s will be able to immediately access operation, maintenance, troubleshooting and repair content on blogs, videos and wikis through robust iPods. Marine engineering know-how, expertise and best-practices will be unleashed through technology and tomorrow’s engineers will be better prepared to face the many challenges faced in the field.
I travel to South Florida several times a year and I hope we can meet at some point.
Sincerely,
Luis F. Corzo
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: A nice letter which, I think, reinforces what is to come in the future – something pioneered by our friends at MEBA. Well done. The next letter refers to our September 25th e-newsletter editorial entitled, “ Wakeup Call: The Road to STCW Compliance Starts to Get Bumpy…” The piece talked about the new Coast Guard NAVIC (04-08) and the new NMS TWIC Advisory. Both documents were eye-openers and we said so. The implications for mariners and their employers are many, but most of those – like most regulatory mandates – will not be easy hurdles to clear. Read the September 25th editorial by clicking HERE. Also, check out what another MarEx reader thinks about the matter:
Joe,
Great article!
I think that one of the worst things about the 32 pages of NAVIC 04-08 is the possible effects that it will have on American seamen and the growing imbalance between the treatment of American seaman vs.. foreign seamen. While both ply the waters of the US, the foreign seamen sailing on foreign ships are not subject to this regulation.
The worst thing, however, is that the rule makes a "chilling effect" (a legalese term for a rule that just by being there scares people into doing something that they should not or not doing something that they should for their own benefits).
This rule will result in people not seeking help for medical problems. Because they do not want those problems to come up on the record, a record that will be scrutinized by the Coast Guard, and which may result in the loss of their livelihood, they may not go to a medical professional when they have a problem. They may delay treatments, they may even deny to themselves that there may be a problem. If certain medications are on the list, even though it may be the best medicine to control a problem they may opt for a medication not on the list, or take no medication at all. When getting a physical, they may not be forthcoming to the doctor about symptoms, a symptom that may have resulted in the doctor finding out about a problem that is on the list. Even if the symptom is not related to a listed medical ailment, the seaman may be afraid to tell the doctor because it could somehow be related to some disease that is on the list.
All this will result in American seamen who are less apt to go to a doctor when they normally would, and be a "chilling effect" on their seeking medical care, and result in a less healthy group of seamen, possessing undetected unreported and untreated medical problems. It will not result in a healthier body of seamen.
The impetus for the NAVIC was from the allision of the New York ferry with the dock, resulting in injury and death. The root cause of the problem was found to be that the wheelhouse was not manned by two licensed officers, as required. There may be many circumstances that result in one officer blanking out, many that are not even on the list. You can never cover all medical circumstances, but having the duplication of a second person to take over if the conning officer loses the ability to do his job is the proper response, not the implementation of this draconian "medical reform". Requiring the officers of the Staten Island Ferry, or any other vessel to be medically vetted like a front line Marine makes no sense at all.
As we grow older, our medical records get bigger, along with our experience and knowledge of the job. Replacing the professionals with kids who are physically fit, or are too young to have discovered underlying medical problems, is not the solution to the original problem. This is very much akin to setting up a bridge of a ship with humongously costly steering gear that is "fail proof" or setting the bridge up with two redundant systems. The Coast Guard already weighed in on that with the result that two systems makes more sense, is cheaper, easier to maintain and is actually more "fail proof".
Respectfully,
Captain Jerry Hasselbach (USMS-Ret)
MarEx Editor’s Remarks: This letter reinforces some of my original points and makes just a few more. We appreciate the effort it took to write in. Thanks, Captain Hasselbach. Finally, my favorite letter of the week: Okay, it’s not really a letter, but it is one of the many (500 – to – 700) “out-of-office” replies that I get on a weekly basis. I’ve printed it without attribution to protect the innocent. I laughed until I cried. Suffice it to say that I like this guy’s style:
My wife has forced me to accompany her on a Caribbean Cruise so I will be off line for about a week.