
A Tale of Two Ports: Automation at Oakland vs. Rotterdam - Bootvis
https://medium.com/@typesfast/a-tale-of-two-ports-automation-at-oakland-vs-rotterdam-e93628be1e13
======
Animats
TraPac and Middle Harbor in the Port of Los Angeles are automating. Oakland
isn't considered big enough to need it.[1] for an overview of automation in
Los Angeles ports, see [2]. The Port of Los Angeles isn't a port operator;
it's a landlord. Thirteen private companies have their own terminals, docks
and equipment, and two of them are automating now. To automate a terminal, you
have to take it out of service and build a new one.

The above references may be too specialized for general readers. Here's a "gee
whiz" video of Rotterdam port operations.[3] And a tutorial with animations,
from the port of Busan, S. Korea.[4]

Note that the article is partly an ad for FlexPort. Automated ports have less
need for FlexPort's service. Most automated ports have buffers, big stacks of
containers. Containers come off ships and are transferred to container stacks
nearby. On the other side of the stacks, trucks approach and have containers
loaded onto them. The terminal handles container sorting.

Oakland loads many containers directly from ships to trucks towing container
trailers, without buffering. Matching up trucks and containers is a problem.
FlexPort's concept is "Uber for containers" (I know, but here it's real.) Any
truck, any container, any destination within some distance limit.

If Oakland had automated container stack buffers, FlexPort wouldn't be needed.

[1] [[http://www.joc.com/port-news/port-productivity/us-ports-
weig...](http://www.joc.com/port-news/port-productivity/us-ports-weigh-value-
terminal-automation-investment_20141002.html)] [2]
[https://www.portoflosangeles.org/Board/2014/April/042014_ite...](https://www.portoflosangeles.org/Board/2014/April/042014_item5_Transmittal_3.pdf)
[3]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxXZQ7emHC0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxXZQ7emHC0)
[4]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t2cqiQl0BE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t2cqiQl0BE)

~~~
fraserharris
FlexPort's customer is the business paying for the shipping (freight forwarder
& customs broker), not the port. Their interest in port automation* is that it
makes for interesting content marketing and it may benefit their end-customer
someday.

* from what I can tell

------
joecomotion
IIRC, Rotterdam had a massive govt. subsidy for going fully-automated, which
kind of helps.

I spent 10 years between 1997 and 2009 (took a break for grad school) working
on semi-automated tracking systems for ports up and down the West Coast (and
other places), including one in Oakland. The recent surge in interest in
intermodal container ports sure brings back memories!

My company developed niche systems for tracking container location within the
terminal by instrumenting and tracking any crane/truck/etc. that could move a
container. Even though longshoremen were still operating the equipment, it
helped to have a real-time (and historical) picture of what happened, because
planning systems were now less subject to clerical mistakes.

Here's their (sort of terrible) website:
[http://www.nowsol.com/](http://www.nowsol.com/)

These guys pretty much own the market for the terminal-planning systems we
fed: [http://navis.com/](http://navis.com/)

------
Maarten88
Rotterdam also has unions to deal with. A colleague of mine, who worked on the
software for the final stage (some 15 years back) moving containers onto
trucks, told a story where, after union negotiations, they implemented a
system where forklift truck drivers could choose between three different
containers to pick next instead of giving them just one instruction, for the
single, most optimal, one.

~~~
cosmolev
What is the logic behind it? Having an opportunity to select is more
entertaining to the driver?

~~~
chime
I am in the middle of writing directed pick/put module for a warehouse. I just
had a meeting last week on the exact same topic. My software gives the user
the most optimal pick list and the warehouse manager wanted me to change it so
his team could pick from alternate bins. His justifications:

1\. My software doesn't know that there is a cart/ladder/forklift blocking the
most optimal bin while the bin next to it is easily accessible.

2\. My software cannot tell if QC is in middle of sampling or if Inventory
team is in middle of cycle counting that exact bin.

3\. My software doesn't factor in changes in real-world that have not yet been
inputted into the computer system. So if there is spillage, quantity, or
quarantine issues that haven't been scanned into the system yet, my software
calculates the optimal bin incorrectly.

It's not that code cannot calculate what optimal means given a set of
requirements. It's just that the end-user might be in a better position to
decide if it really is optimal or not.

------
SixSigma
The real automation in the Rotterdam port is the Automatic Guided Vehicle
system that moves containers between the loading cranes and a container re-
arranging system that optimizes the placement of containers dock side.

The loading cranes themselves are only remote control on the deep water side,
and this is for health and safety reasons. The cranes for the trains and
barges for the hinterland are sit-in cabs.

SOURCE: I did a tour of the terminal a few weeks ago as part of the 6th
International Conference on Computational Logistics [1]

A similar AVG system is in place at Hamburg as seen in this video [2]

[1] [http://realtimelogistics.info/iccl/](http://realtimelogistics.info/iccl/)

[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B3PzgYUK_0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B3PzgYUK_0)

~~~
DenisM
This video suggests the cranes are automated as well:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxXZQ7emHC0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxXZQ7emHC0)

------
remarkEon
From the Wikipedia page, it looks like Rotterdam had 36,315 vessel arrivals in
2008 while Oakland had only 1,928. Is this comparison really apples to apples?
They point out the difference in tonnage, but I'm just wondering if there
isn't a better comparison to be made.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Rotterdam](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Rotterdam)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Oakland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Oakland)

~~~
jpatokal
As noted in the article, Oakland is containers only while Rotterdam handles
other types of cargo as well, and their comparison is based purely on
containers. However, all things being equal, it should be _more_ efficient to
unload a few ships with lots of cargo compared to lots of ships with little
cargo.

That said, Oakland is somewhat weird choice, it's the world's 62nd busiest (by
TEU) when Rotterdam is 11th. LA is the busiest in the US at 18th, with Long
Beach (also greater LA) not far behind.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world%27s_busiest_cont...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world%27s_busiest_container_ports)

------
JabavuAdams
TIL the average salary for port workers is $147k.

~~~
Frondo
That's the kind of quality of life a strong union will get you as a worker. No
wonder the biggest business interests have undergone a decades-long propaganda
campaign against them.

~~~
enraged_camel
>>That's the kind of quality of life a strong union will get you as a worker.

The flip side of the coin is that the quality of air you will breathe every
single day is guaranteed to be abysmal, and air quality has a _very_ strong
inverse correlation with life span.

~~~
JabavuAdams
Why's the air so bad? Because of the bunker oil used on ships, or some other
reason?

------
kalkin
This article tells you basically nothing if you're not already convinced that
more automation is always better, or that while "technological disruption...
almost inevitably leads to displacement of some segments of the workforce. In
the long run, however, technology ends up creating better jobs and expanded
opportunities across broad spectrums of the economy."

The calculation that "proves" Rotterdam is more efficient is based on the
unargued and generally false assumption that both ports are operating at full
capacity - the author just divides TEUs by number of cranes. TEUs handled per
year in Oakland only just matched their 2006 peak after falling drastically
during the Great Recession:
[http://www.portofoakland.com/maritime/containerstats.aspx](http://www.portofoakland.com/maritime/containerstats.aspx)

And Oakland's main capacity limitation actually seems to be congestion getting
containers out of the Port: [http://www.wsj.com/articles/oakland-port-
proposes-trucking-f...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/oakland-port-proposes-
trucking-fees-to-fight-congestion-1440103747)

~~~
tajen
I was also expecting hard figures about how many containers and shifts have
been lost in accidents compared to an automated port.

------
vool
''But in many ways, the Port of Oakland, and most American ports in general,
are some of the most technologically antiquated in the world.''

This BLDGBLOG post from earlier in the year details to automation on the on
the East coast.

[http://bldgblog.blogspot.ie/2015/04/infrastructure-as-
proces...](http://bldgblog.blogspot.ie/2015/04/infrastructure-as-processional-
space.html)

------
troisx
I can't wait for more automation to hit US ports. I'm all for decent wages,
but dockworkers get paid so much they end up behaving a lot like oilfield
workers. Dockworkers are a prime example of what gives unions a bad name.

~~~
kalkin
Do you think nobody should be making six-figure salaries? Or just that
unionized workers shouldn't?

~~~
compostor42
The idea of blue-collar workers getting well-paid is very upsetting to some
white-collar workers. They feel their social status threatened by people they
deem beneath them.

~~~
lambdapie
I don't think that's the primary issue people have with high wage union labor,
and your comment shows an unwillingness to engage constructively with
political opponents.

Unions are a monopoly, and when prices (in this case, of labor) are high due
to a monopoly, we must ask whether the government should allow, forbid, or
encourage this monopoly. When wages are very low, I think most people are not
opposed to unions forcing wages above market rates (I am, but that's another
issue). But when wages are high, or driven far above what people think market
wages would be, people question the moral basis for protecting workers from
competition.

So the issue isn't that blue collar workers are "beneath" white collar
workers, but that (at least to an industry outsider) it's not clear what
special skills these workers have that would command high market wages.

~~~
Frondo
Let me just ask you: why, in a market system, shouldn't people get as wages
_whatever they can demand_ , using personal negotiating skills, collective
negotiating skills, law, whatever?

Management won't leave money on the table, why should the workers?

~~~
lambdapie
You had me up to "law". From the econ perspective, the "free market" does not
include lobbying for particular laws. To define it as such is mockery of the
term.

Assuming completely free property rights and contracts, unions would probably
have almost no power. The power of unions stems from the fact that they are
protected (e.g. you can't fire someone for joining a union) and the fact that
the state ignores violent crime when unions commit it (but as far as I know
that's not the issue here, I'm just mentioning for completeness).

I think that a legal system that is skewed towards labor is ok, for various
reasons. But when you see wages pushed far beyond market wages, it's fair to
ask if the system is too skewed.

So to answer your question, a person _should not_ get whatever they can
command by influencing the political system. Yes, both sides will try to do
it, but in both cases the response should be to argue against them, and
instead argue for impartial laws.

EDIT: the delay before the "reply" link becomes active is there for a reason.
I'll respond to any reply that I consider to be based on a thorough reading of
my post, and not a knee jerk reaction (for reference, the reply I'm referring
to was written 4 minutes after my post).

~~~
Frondo
Of course the free market includes the rules that govern it. If you don't have
rules, you don't have a market, just a rule of anarchic might-makes-right
force.

If you're going to say "well, only property laws then," that's still laws!
That's still a set of "this is how it should be" encoded into rules that we
all have to agree to to take part in it!

It's just been, for so long, assumed that "screw the workers and don't let
them fight back" is somehow "more free" that we treat that like a built-in
thing, when really, that's just one way of doing it.

As for state-sanctioned, union-committed violent crime, oh please.

EDIT: Since you edited your remarks to include the last paragraph, I'll
address that, too.

Why shouldn't people work to influence the political system in their favor? We
all live here, we all have a role to play in the design and operation of the
laws of our city/state/country. If enough people _like_ strong worker
protection laws, well, that's democracy, why shouldn't that stuff get encoded
into law?

SECOND EDIT: Yeah, it only takes a minute or two to read what you're saying
and respond to it. I saw a "reply" link right away, so if there's some extra
delay built in, it didn't apply to me.

~~~
lambdapie
First, I was out of line in my edit. It's not for me to say how you should
post on HN, so I apologize. I'll stick to the addressing the content of what
you wrote.

The difference in our viewpoints seems to be that you have an "adversarial"
understanding of the political system, where different interest groups try to
get the best for themselves. On the other hand, I think that politics is
mostly driven by ideology, not self-interest. If I can state an ideal set of
laws, that should be sufficient and I don't need to concern myself with how
special interest groups might _try_ to manipulate the set of laws.

I also think you conflate self-interest with what is right/wrong when you say
" If enough people like strong worker protection laws, well, that's democracy,
why shouldn't that stuff get encoded into law?". Do they like it because they
think it's right, or because it's good for them? That's an important
difference.

On the specifics, I mostly believe in the free market. I don't consider the
free market to be anti-worker (redistribution through taxation/welfare handles
that aspect) or arbitrary. Classical economics shows that the free market
should be considered the default position. I also support limited rights for
unions, e.g. I don't think an employer should be able to fire you for joining
a union, because the employers control of how people communicate in the
workplace could be considered an unfair advantage.

Re violence, do you disagree that union members do sometimes commit violence
against so-called scabs, when they attempt to enter a worksite? And do you
think that in general these acts are punished in the same way that other
violent acts would be?

------
Someone
Earlier discussion (different article, but same subject):
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10306204](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10306204)

(Other article at [http://priceonomics.com/why-arent-americas-shipping-ports-
au...](http://priceonomics.com/why-arent-americas-shipping-ports-automated/))

------
twic
How is there an article about the costs of using containers without automated
infrastructure on Hacker News and nobody's made a Docker/Kubernetes joke yet?

~~~
lgas
Why didn't you do it?

------
exar0815
This basically only shows again what the tiny Netherlands can achieve. I dont
think there is a single country that threatened by a force of Nature. But
instead of giving up, you basically become the best Worldwide in construction
in, on and around the water. Basically, if you have any problems with water at
any Kind of level, just ASK the dutch.

