APPENDIX (G) THE JOURNAL OF COMMERCE, Wednesday, September 26, 1979 Japan Yard Journal of Commerce Staf A contract for the conver sjon of four supertankers be longing to Mobil Shipping and Transportation Co. to diesel propulsion has been awarded to Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co., the Tok'yo-based shipbuilding company has announced. ? The contract was signed earlier this month by Paul G. Dahan, Mobil Shipping's vice president for technical affairs, and Taiji Ubukata, president of IHI. The project involves four 280,000 deadweight ton verylarge crude carriers presently powered by steam turbines. The turbines will be replaced by two medium speed Pielstick diesels for each vessel. This is the second order obtained by IHI from Mobil Shipping. It follows the conversion of the 285,000 ton Mobil Hawk from turbine to diesel, a job completed last December. Powered by two 18,000 horsepower disels, the Mobil Hawk has operated since her conversion with a fuel consumption of 110 tons per day as compared to 170 tons with its original 36,000 horsepower steam turbine, according to IHI. The Japanese shipyard adds that the Pielstick diesels, be sides offering high horsepower output and low fuel and lube oil consumption, have configurations which permit conversion with a minimum of changes in a vessel's engine rooms. Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, Mr. Gold. The question of diesel propulsion, whether it be slow- or mediumspeed diesels, for us has gotten great visibility, not specifically because of this legislation. I think our problems involve turbine ships built when fuel was $2 a barrel-and now we are up to over $20 a barrel-and that has drastically changed the numbers game on the operating efficiency of oceanships, whether they fly an American flag or not. Of course, it is here, and we are aware of the diesel history in other countries, whereas we went steam turbine, probably for very sound and solid reasons. One thing the committee wants to establish is, is there an American industry capable of supplying America's shipbuilding industry with diesel engine capability that is competitive with its counterparts on a worldwide basis? Mr. GOLD. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think that is the point that was probably first addressed by Mr. Nemirow where Maritime Administration has evaluated this, and the 50-percent componentry requirement would enable that to be accomplished, and still maintain the American base. The bill as proposed, of course, gives no incentive to anyone to build deisel engines in this country. Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Gold, we are going to have to recess. There is an activity on the floor right now that I have to participate in, so let's come back at 1:30 this afternoon. We get over on the floor and you don't know what is going to happen. It is a money bill, so let's come back at 1:30 this afternoon. The subcommittee will stand recessed until that time. [Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m. the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 1:30 p.m.] AFTERNOON SESSION Mr. MURPHY. The subcommittee will please be in order. H.R. 4769, as it amends section 505, the 1936 act allows all propelling machinery to be up to 50 percent parts or materials of foreign origin. That is the provision you want amended; 50 percent? Mr. GOLD. That, as well as also the Jones Act. Mr. MURPHY. How do you do 50 percent of an engine? Mr. GOLD. This is the heart of the matter and gets into the waiver section under the present act, where you can immediately build everything except about three major components, the turbocharger, the crankshaft and the main frame in this country at this time, on a diesel engine and, of course, this is true whether it's a slow or medium speed diesel. Mr. MURPHY. What is it that we can't build in this country? Mr. GOLD. At the present time there is not machining capability for the main frame and/or crankcase, whichever way you want to identify it. The crankshaft and turbochargers of this size are not built in this country at this time. Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, I am talking about the really large engines now, because we can build completely United States up to about 18,000 shaft horsepower in this country at this time. Mr. MURPHY. And what do we need? Mr. GOLD. Well, the largest order so far was the American President Lines order, and that was one engine of 43,000 horsepower, and that is the one that is going to be built about 30 to 40 percent American content under this arrangement that Sulzer has with Allis-Chalmers. Mr. MURPHY. Well, what happened to all of that R. & D. money we have been giving out year in and year out, to the tune of $18 to $20 million, that we don't have this capability? Mr. GOLD. Up until 1973 and 1974 the price of oil went up so high the U.S. marine industry was well served with the turbine propulsion, and I think in about 1955 there was a program where gas turbines and diesels, and I think five ships provided for a research program, and that sort of died along the way. Mr. MURPHY. But R. & D., $20 million in R. & D. is a lot of money and the very nature of research and development, not just to be looking at the status quo and what is satisfactory today but what contingencies we have to be prepared for tomorrow. Has MarAd done anything in this area to your knowledge? Mr. GOLD. Well, Mr. Chairman, I would really rather not speak from hearsay; but I do know that the company I work for did approach MarAd some time ago and nothing was worked out for reasons I can't identify at this time. I don't know the facts first hand. Mr. MURPHY. Is that the same for the other members, the people you are speaking for? Mr. GOLD. I am speaking for Colt when I say that. Mr. COUGHLIN. My name is Gene Coughlin of Lake Shore. We have never received any money from MarAd for development of any machinery, or such things as that. Mr. MURPHY. Did you ever ask for any or make any proposals? Mr. COUGHLIN. We haven't needed to in our particular area of the market, I don't think. Our area has been deck machinery, cranes, and we have gained some technology by licensing arrangements with foreign companies. However, we can build 100 percent American in this country at this time, so we don't have the same problem that the diesel people have. Mr. MURPHY. Can you build a 43,000 shaft horsepower diesel engine? Mr. COUGHLIN. I am talking more about the auxiliary deck machinery market. Mr. MURPHY. We are worried about this main propulsion. Perhaps Mr. Decker has a comment. Mr. DECKER. When you mention about the maritime R. & D., just speaking from back knowledge, I am not so sure that MarAd wouldn't have gone forward, except any of the technology, I think, that was available in Europe, it might have been that they figured if companies were interested in the licensing at that time they could have arranged licenses with the manufacturers in Europe, and that is where this docket A-118 came into being, to encourage the development of diesel in these United States and that was based on a license agreement and that is what they put in the APL ship. |