RAY SMUTS WHETHER Transnet gets the nod to proceed with the long-anticipated extension of the Cape Town container terminal – biggest single contributor to port revenue – is in the lap of the gods, but an air of despondency appears to permeate the air. “Every time we think we have reached the peak of the mountain we discover another mountain. We are having doubts as to whether the terminal extension (300 metres out to sea) will be viable,” says NPA port manager, Sanjay Govan. “Our concern is that if we delay the extension project any longer we will be unable to meet customer demands.” What is a dead certainty, however, is that extension or no extension, the NPA will proceed with its plan to deepen terminal draught and possibly add a fifth berth to accommodate the larger generation of container ships. As things now stand, the largest regular callers, such as the Safmarine Nokwanda and Lars Maersk – each around 3 700TEU capacity – are unable to enter the port of Cape Town fully laden. Govan says: “We need to dredge, from a minimum of 11 metres to 15.5 metres for all four existing berths, and may create a fifth berth at the so-called 700 Quays which will enable us to handle 6 000TEU ships.” Last year, environmental affairs minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk was sharply critical of a Transnet report on the extension – environmental concerns at the heart of the matter – sending the parastatal back to the drawing board. He appointed his own consultants to investigate the feasibility of an inland container facility and address environmental matters, such as beach erosion. Transnet, in turn, appointed its own consultants to come up with reports on the two issues. The one dealing with the inland facility is complete but will not be handed to the minister without the other. This explains why it is taking Van Schalkwyk, who has a further 60 days to mull over the issue after receiving both studies, so long to issue a Record of Decision. The NPA is clearly giving serious consideration to an alternative to the extension in the event of a thumbs-down by Van Schalkwyk. Amounting to reconfiguration rather than reclamation, this will involve flattening structures and resurfacing a large expanse of NPA land at an estimated R1 billion less than the anticipated R5 billion cost of extending the terminal. Given soaring building costs in the run-up to the 2010 World Soccer Cup spectacle, the final spend could well exceed R5 billion, as Govan readily admits. “Our gut feeling is that the cost of the extension will take us between 20% and 35% over the R5 billion mark.” What is more, the alternative plan will accommodate roughly the same amount of containers as envisaged for the extended terminal – 1.6 million TEUs annually, which will suffice for the next ten to 15 years. The number of boxes currently handled annually is around 730 000 TEUs .
