Auckland disputes need for dredging

Ports of Auckland says statements that $200 million would need to be spent to be able to cater for new-generation larger ships are untrue.

Chief executive Jens Madsen said yesterday that Morningstar research unit AspectHuntley's assertion in a report that Port of Tauranga was able to handle larger ships without spending as much as Auckland was also incorrect.

AspectHuntley's claim that Ports of Auckland needed to spend $200m on dredging to accommodate the new generation of larger container ships was untrue, said Mr Madsen.

He sent the port's customers and stakeholders a letter yesterday reassuring them the Rangitoto channel was already capable of handling larger 6000 TEU (a 20-foot equivalent unit) to 7000 TEU container ships. The port now handles 4000 TEU ships. "We only need to deepen a berth pocket and undertake minor wharf strengthening work at the Fergusson terminal, at a cost of less than $50m," Mr Madsen said. He has asked AspectHuntley to withdraw the report, but the company has refused.

AspectHuntley report author Nachiket Moghe said he understood that in order for Ports of Auckland to cater for larger ships at high tide and low tide, it needed to dredge the channel another two metres to 14.5m at a cost of $200m.

That was backed up by former Ports of Auckland chief executive Geoff Vazey, who said in 2007 that the port had to spend more than $200m to cater for the next generation of ships at all tides.

In comparison, Port of Tauranga was seeking resource consent to dredge to 14.5m that would cater for larger ships at all tides, which Mr Moghe expected to cost between $40m and $50m.

Mr Madsen wasn't comparing "apples with apples" when he claimed the port needed to spend only $50m to cater for larger ships, Mr Moghe said.

Ports of Auckland spokeswoman Catherine Etheridge said since Mr Vazey had left the port, further detailed analysis of the channel using a navy stimulator had been done.

It showed the port could accommodate 5000 to 6000 TEU ships up to 13.9m draft at high tide with no further dredging.

Ships in Auckland generally required less than their maximum draft because of the high proportion of lightweight import cargo being discharged, she said.

Also, Auckland was frequently the first port of call in New Zealand so ships left the port bound for other New Zealand ports without a full load of heavy exports.

"It is not necessary nor a sensible use of shareholders' funds to dredge to accommodate larger ships at all tides," Ms Etheridge said.