An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles • Hacker News Board

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#71

Post by revel » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:31 PM UTC

This article is ridiculous. "It's so easy but nobody expected it to happen!"

Most of freight is run off spreadsheets and over the phone or by email. Flexport is built around digitization and optimization. Half of the appeal of their product is that it gives customers improved visibility!

It's therefore not surprising that a local city mayor didn't realize he had the power to unclog the US traffic jam. Referring to him diminutively as a bureaucrat is unfair. This guy almost certainly didn't even realize he could do anything to fix the problem and the fact that he resolved it in 8 hours (!) is something to be celebrated, not chided.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#72

Post by oasisbob » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:31 PM UTC

datameta wrote: post #50

slobiwan wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the popular consensus here in LA, it's cheaper to discard the containers than to ship them back empty (and nobody at the receiving end wants enough of what we have to make it worth sending them back full). However I drive through the port area frequently and always see containers stacked well above the 2-high limit. I suppose that means they are not empty containers? There definitely has to be some alternate u…

We can get pretty far with passive solutions like internal and external insulation and painting the outside white. Burying them halfway into the ground would also give great benefits (albeit the trickier of the options) Perhaps we can even cover the roof with sod where available. May only need a minimal power active A/C.

The price of high quality paint, insulation, structural reinforcements, and exterior drainage sounds expensive.

I've never messed with containers because digging yourself out of the thermal hole of starting with a metal box still doesn't sound worth it.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#73

Post by justinator » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:32 PM UTC

otterley wrote: post #53

justinator wrote: post #39

OK so this is essentially a self-written news story that was manipulated to make it feel-good. That's bad . Also, now that I know I'm manipulated, I'm skeptical that the changes will have the outcome that they want. It could but it's not good that you've told me you've manipulated me. That's also bad .

If the solution proves effective, will you change your mind, or will you simply remain forever outraged that you didn't like how the story was told?

Well, we can talk about dropping atomic bombs on Japan during WWII if you want. The discussion isn't going to be a very simple one.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#74

Post by CalChris » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:32 PM UTC

> A bureaucrat insisting that stacked containers are an eyesore

No, that wasn't the case. It was a Fire Department ordinance for the city and not the port. It didn't apply to the Port of Long Beach itself. This is a photo from October 19th, before the emergency order on October 22.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/10/26/los-an...

Containers are stacked five high.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#75

Post by ajmurmann » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:32 PM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #65

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the 'stacking rule' meant that people with more empties than they could stack 2 high on their property were "storing" empties on trailer chassis that carry one container. As I understood it, by letting them stack empties higher, it freed up trailers to be used by trucks to go get containers out of the port. When that happens the port then wants empties to…

From Ryan Peterson's description, it was more that there was no space left to unload full containers from ships or empties from trucks to then pick up a full one from the ship. In essence container grid lock.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#76

Post by nostrademons » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:32 PM UTC

sleibrock wrote: post #7

In Factorio design this is simply increasing the buffer size. If the truck-loadings-per-hour don't increase then it's not going to matter how large you make the buffer. Adding a secondary site for putting containers also seems like it's going to be a new challenge for the logistics company scheduling the rides (I have a friend who deals with train cargo scheduling). Truckers who are used to showing up at the port are…

You could also look at it as putting down a storage chest so that you can run down a belt and pick up all the items that shouldn't be there, or sticking a chest next to your un-barreling factory while you work out how to get a return train back to the barreling factory, or putting down some fuel tanks to hold light/heavy oil while you research advanced oil processing (before the basic oil change).

I'm skeptical that this will fix the problem by itself, but it buys time to observe the system in action and adjust capacity on other bottlenecks to bring it back into balance.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#77

Post by datameta » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:32 PM UTC

aninteger wrote: post #26

Wow. There's just no straight talk anymore... Why does everyone have to dance around the issue. Just say the facts and this article could have been quite a bit shorter.

Humans are not perfect, some of us get angry at the perception of being superceded by those less experienced. Some will dig in their heels and not fix the issue if it means admitting they were unable to see the problem and suggest a solution.

So that's the beauty of how it was communicated. No blame was placed on anyone, plausible deniability was given out to everyone, and he pre-empted being derided as a layman who doesn't know shit by pretending to accidentally discover the issue. In one fell swoop so many egos were placated and a plan was laid out on top of all that. No back and forth, just all boxes checked and all given license to proceed forward with enthusiasm and intent.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#78

Post by briffle » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

MauranKilom wrote: post #27

sleibrock wrote: post #7

In Factorio design this is simply increasing the buffer size. If the truck-loadings-per-hour don't increase then it's not going to matter how large you make the buffer. Adding a secondary site for putting containers also seems like it's going to be a new challenge for the logistics company scheduling the rides (I have a friend who deals with train cargo scheduling). Truckers who are used to showing up at the port are…

Truck-loadings-per-hour will increase, but that does not help shrink the buffer if every truck picking up a container also brings back an empty one. Increasing the buffer size is a temporary relief, but clearly the underlying problem is an ever-increasing number of containers (empty or full), or we wouldn't have gotten into this situation. If we could dispose of the empty containers somewhere then this bottleneck wou…

Considering the price and availability of steel, i'm kind of suprised nobody is trying to scrap and recycle them.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#79

Post by ncmncm » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

ksdale wrote: post #63

ncmncm wrote: post #30

Two points: First, negative feedback is good . The problem here was a case of positive feedback, which are always bad . This Ryan person might be helping in the one crisis, but he has just installed a thousand new timebombs. Second, the reason NYT has nothing about this is that NYT editors tell its reporters to find stories that seem to illustrate what the editors want said. NYT is not really interested in what is ac…

What new timebombs do you think he has installed, for example?

Did you read the tweets? He implies that it is a given that negative feedback is a problem, not a solution to problems.

Re: An unexpected victory: container stacking at the port of Los Angeles

#80

Post by ajmurmann » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 4:34 PM UTC

parsimo2010 wrote: post #12

sleibrock wrote: post #7

In Factorio design this is simply increasing the buffer size. If the truck-loadings-per-hour don't increase then it's not going to matter how large you make the buffer. Adding a secondary site for putting containers also seems like it's going to be a new challenge for the logistics company scheduling the rides (I have a friend who deals with train cargo scheduling). Truckers who are used to showing up at the port are…

There were supposedly trucks that couldn’t be loaded because they had no place to get rid of the empty container they currently had. So truck loading rate was low, not because of the speed of the workers and cranes, but because of the availability of the trucks. So this is supposed to allow the truck loading rate to go up by making it easier for trucks to become available. I don’t know if that will happen, but this i…

This is what I understood as well. However, I still don't understand how we got there in the first place. Last time I asked this I just got down voted.