소형항만의 미래
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | 이면수 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-02-22T06:24:46Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2017-02-22T06:24:46Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2009 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 56904-11-11 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://kmou.dcollection.net/jsp/common/DcLoOrgPer.jsp?sItemId=000002175304 | ko_KR |
dc.identifier.uri | http://repository.kmou.ac.kr/handle/2014.oak/9494 | - |
dc.description.abstract | The size of newly generated vessels has exceeded the 8,000TEUs. The volume became larger and the speed get faster. The hub and feeder ports are becoming more and more important in the current booming shipping market. Especially, Asian shipping market is changing dramatically. There are changes in the ranking of world's busiest ports. Shanghai port has surpassed Hong Kong port and ranked the second among world's busiest ports. In addition, there is a fierce competition in the shipping market. Therefore, if a hub port fails in preparing and forecasting some critical points of the market, it may lose its market share, and its role. This paper discusses on the basis of a case study of Pyeongtaek port, South Korea. Recently, the role of feeder port has become more important as the feeder port network is getting dense. Many ports in Europe, such as the port of Rotterdam, Antwerp, Hamburg, Le Havre and so on have offered feeder services. Although Pyeongtaek port has invested in facilities and expanded hinterland, its influence is still low in Korea. One of reasons is that it can not compete with the Incheon port, nearby although the both have similar conditions such as hinterland. This paper reviews how small ports can survive in the current shipping market. In addition, the competitiveness of Pyeongtaek port is compared to the other small ports such as, Incheon port. Three scenarios, which are Hong Kong-Pyeongtaek (or Incheon and Busan)-Long Beach, Hong Kong-Pyeongtaek (or Incheon and Busan) and Pyeongtaek -Long Beach (or Incheon and Busan) are considered. The results of this paper is Pyeongtaek port can not compete with Inchoen port, but it still has its potentialities to be a feeder port. | - |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Chapter 1. Introduction = 7 Chapter 2. Prospect of Pyeongtaek port and Incheon port = 9 2.1 Present conditions = 9 2.2 Vessels calling at ports = 13 Chapter 3. Case studies in Europe = 17 3.1. Rotterdam port = 18 3.2. Antwerp port = 19 3.3. Hamburg port = 21 3.4. Bremerhaven port = 22 Chapter 4. Cost analysis of main and feeder routes = 24 4.1 Service route planning = 24 4.2 Competitiveness of main route = 25 4.3 Navigation cost per day = 28 4.3.1 Capital costs = 28 4.3.2 Operation costs = 29 4.3.3 Sailing costs (fuel costs) = 30 4.3.4 Other costs = 32 4.3.5 Total navigation cost per day = 32 4.4 THC (Terminal Handling cost) of each port = 33 4.5 Total navigation cost of each scenario = 33 4.6 Economic efficiency of shipping company point of view = 34 4.7 Road cost and feeder cost for Pyeongtaek port and Incheon port = 35 Chapter 5. Conclusion = 37 References = 40 | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | 한국해양대학교 대학원 | - |
dc.title | 소형항만의 미래 | - |
dc.title.alternative | 선형증가에 대하여 | - |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.awarded | 2009-02 | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Lee | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Myoun Soo | - |
Items in Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.