Tag Archives: chat
From Factory Floor To The Decks Of Megayachts
http://www.heraldtri…xW=445&border=0 Jon Barker guides a 40-foot teak deck panel as it comes out of a sander at Teakdecking Systems Inc. in Sarasota. STAFF PHOTO / MIKE LANG By Michael Pollick Published: Sunday, August 25, 2013 SOUTH MANATEE COUNTY – Teakdecking Systems Inc. never knows what kinds of orders will come in to its 100,000-square-foot factory, so it keeps about three years worth of inventory around at all times. That’s no easy — or inexpensive — task, though. At wholesale prices of between $25 and $30 per foot, teak is one of the world’s more expensive woods. But for the 30-year-old company, the cost is worth it to have an ample supply of the wood that is prized by boat builders and buyers alike for its moisture-resistant properties and its aesthetic qualities. Having the supply of wood on hand is a departure from standard industry practice — even though it can take six months or more to have teak shipped from forests in Myanmar — but Teakdecking is accustomed to bucking the trends. Several years ago, the company pioneered the concept of building teak yacht decks in a factory. When finished, the deck is shipped to a yacht, uncrated and fastened in place with epoxy, rather than screws. The system had its skeptics, at first, but has gradually become the preferred method for shipyards and boat builders worldwide — from Sarasota’s Chris-Craft to mega-yacht builders such as England’s Pendennis Shipyard. “We kind of revolutionized the industry,” said Alan Brosilow, Teakdecking’s manager of yacht services and one of the company’s earliest U.S. employees. “This invention was not heard of, where you could make a set of patterns and make a teak deck from it and then deliver it,” he said. “People would just not believe you could do this.” The old way Before Teakdecking introduced its new method, if you wanted a teak deck for a yacht, the job required a specialized carpenter who could allow for hatches, hardware, a cabin and a cockpit. Boards would be molded to fit the curves of the deck, then screwed down to the hull. It could take two to three months to deck a large yacht, keeping it in port. But as fiberglass and epoxy started coming into widespread use in the 1970s, a group in Sweden pioneered building teak decks — curves and all — in a factory, and then shipping them to where the boat was being made or refitted, to be installed. The advantages were many: There were no wooden plugs hiding screw heads to fall out, no screws to come loose or metal that could create leaks in the cabin. Instead, buyers got perfectly grained teak decks custom-designed to fit snugly. Today, working from exact digital blueprints made on site, Teakdecking builds decks upside down on its factory floor, using a proprietary raised floor system made up of slots and wedges that helps shape the wood. When finished, the upside-down deck is frozen into its correct position by using a sheet of fiberglass and specially concocted epoxy, or glue. Once cured, the deck panels are sanded, trimmed and fitted together like a jigsaw puzzle. Then they are separated again and packed into custom wooden crates up to 40 feet long for shipping. ‘Sourcing’ the raw material Paul Crist is a big guy who favors blue company T-shirts. He spends his days cutting thick slabs of teak into smaller pieces. But his real job, he says, is “wood sourcing.” He and another worker, Dan Paver, work as a team. Sourcing involves traveling to Myanmar, which has abundant teak forests, to visit mills to scope out which wood to buy and which to reject. “Our standards are real, real high,” Crist said. “Stuff I reject, other boat builders would gladly accept.” Teak tree harvesting kicked into high gear during the British colonial period, which in Burma — now known as Myanmar — lasted from 1824 to 1948. The wood’s resistance to moisture and bugs made it a perfect material for ship-building. Teak can be left unvarnished and exposed to sun and salt water without degrading into splints. It also weathers to a silver-gray color and provides a natural non-slip surface. British demand for ships made of the durable wood consumed most of the teak in India, Thailand and Cambodia. The forests in which teak grows in Myanmar are gradually disappearing, as well. “Natural teak has now almost become an endangered species,” according to a 2012 report by the Ministry of Forestry of Myanmar, which has the last large stands of teak forest in the world. The ministry contends it is keeping the supply sustainable through its current system of forest management. Rules and regulations determine how many trees can be felled, and where. “These are managed forests, very managed forests,” Brosilow said. Brosilow predicted the company will still be buying and using teak 15 to 20 years from now. The Sarasota connection Teakdecking owes its methods to formulations from Sweden, but the company’s process has been used in the U.S. since 1983, ever since Lars Lewander established a factory in Sarasota. The company chose Southwest Florida because it provided access to production boat builders like Wellcraft, which has since moved away, as well as big yacht builders in Tampa and along the east coast. Gulfstar Yachts was an early customer, recalls Joe Zammataro, who was vice president of sales there and is now a yacht broker at Denison Yacht Sales in St. Petersburg. “To use their teak decks was like a fraction of the expense of making our own, and I think the overall dependability was better,” Zammataro said. Smaller pleasure craft rarely come with teak these days, he said. “But when you get into boats in the 60-, 70-, 80-foot range and larger, the teak decks are always a more elegant solution.” Lewander eventually bought out his original partners and became Teakdecking’s owner as well as its president. The company now does $15 million to $20 million a year in sales and has 129 employees. Four years ago, Lewander started an employee stock ownership plan. So now the employees are becoming its owners, with the proceeds from a profit-sharing plan being poured into an employee stock ownership trust. That’s on top of a 401(k) retirement savings plan. “You can come in here and build a career,” said Michael Havey, the company’s director of quality assurance and employee development. Half custom jobs now Teakdecking now derives half of its business from custom jobs and half from production work, with Chris-Craft being a notable and nearby customer. The Sarasota-based builder of luxury run-abouts and yachts has been buying pre-fabricated teak from Teakdecking since 2001. “It has been a marriage that we have had with Teakdecking under the current ownership, a little over 12 years,” said Steve Callahan, vice president of materials at Chris-Craft. “Yes, every single one has teak on it,” he said. Brosilow spends his time coordinating teak projects with a who’s who of shipyards and mega-yacht builders: Lürssen Werft of Germany; Trinity Yachts of Gulfport, Miss.; Christensen Shipyards of Washington; and many others. Teakdecking doesn’t shy away from large jobs, either. It’s built the decks for some of the largest yachts ever constructed, including “Rising Sun,” a 454-foot motor yacht built in 2004 for Oracle founder Larry Ellison and now owned by media mogul David Geffen. The $200 million yacht, with passenger accommodations on five stories, has 8,000 square feet of living space. The planning that goes into big deck projects is just as intricate as the construction method itself. Teakdecking digital designer Mike Baker displayed that complexity recently when he worked on a deck that requires 2,226 square feet of teak for a 120-foot aluminum sailing yacht. The boat was made by Pendennis 15 years ago and is now being refitted at the same British shipyard. Baker and Brosilow have been going back and forth with those overseeing the work in England, and now, Brosilow thinks Teakdecking has finally figured out the exact width of the planks that will be needed — averting skinny pieces of wood around hatches or the need for other significant hardware. That one deck will bring in $350,000, but require the company to go through a lot of its inventory in the process — meaning Crist and Paver will likely be on airplanes soon, heading to Myanmar for continued “sourcing.” Continue reading
Comment: Look To The Trees For Truly Green Technology
Cris Brack Green alternatives such as wind and solar may be touted as the solution to our environmental problems such as climate change, but how green are they really? Wind and solar rely on technologically-sophisticated industries and infrastructure including rare earth batteries, highly-processed composite building materials, computer controlled switching and balancing programs and continuous maintenance. There are natural alternatives to such technologies that are arguably “greener”. So, why aren’t we looking to make our technologies truly green? Wind, solar … wood Fire is probably the greatest discovery of humankind, if not the discovery that set us on the path to becoming civilised and social. Wood still fuels the energy needs of millions in Africa, China and India. Perhaps surprisingly, it also fuels the energy needs of many thousands in Europe, Canada, the US and even Australia . Why do we in the developed word seem to have forgotten its power? Wood fuel has numerous advantages over wind or solar. Wood can be grown right where it is needed – even along the boundaries of residential properties, around commercial enterprises or even in urban and peri-urban parks. While it is growing, trees look good and provide a temporary home for birds and other wildlife – certainly not something that can be said for every wind farm. A continuous supply of winter home heating can be produced by selecting relevant tree species (or group of species) and progressively planting them around a “quarter acre” residential block. Each year, one seventh of the boundary could be planted and after seven years the owner could begin harvesting, drying, burning and replanting the oldest trees. A suburban house with over one dozen trees, planted at different times around its boundary, which could grow over half a tonne of firewood every year. Google Earth Changing the trees species and the harvesting rotation lengths could allow co-production of products such as honey or flowers without ultimately endangering fuel reserves. Such a system would however require some management. Neighbourhood groups could coordinate their individual plantings and use of the trees to encourage community projects, including planting in parks, that benefit from trees at different stages of their life or allow longer life spans for selected trees. Such a system could continue pretty much indefinitely and may rightly be classified as sustainable yield: renewable energy with very little need for unnatural elements or practises. But somehow the use of wood as a fuel source is specifically included from a range of renewable energy and environmental improvement schemes, despite its advantages. Timber! The timber industry could benefit from similar rethinking. Plantations are gaining a reputation as the “green” option for the production of solid timber for use in construction or high-value products. The management required in plantations includes ploughing, ripping, spraying and fertilising for preparation, followed by more spraying and fertilising over time. Exotic species are used to avoid losses from local pests and diseases. This intensive management is designed to ensure that final harvest revenues don’t happen so far into the future that the “time cost of money” erodes the net profit. While not as intensive or invasive as agriculture, and orders of magnitude less intensive than the industries associated with plastic, steel or concrete products, plantations are never-the-less more intense and less natural than native forest management. In native forests, local or endemic species are kept even though growth is slower. Fertiliser is not applied, partially because its cost cannot be justified but also because the local species are commonly adapted to local soil fertility. Similarly, weedicide application is rare. Producing wood products in such a forest is slower, and to produce the same amount requires a larger area. One hectare of intensively managed plantation can produce the same amount of solid wood product as 30-to-50 hectares of native eucalypt forest. But the managed native forest will have a greater diversity of tree sizes and stages, and only relatively small areas of disturbance. The vast majority of the forest simply grows and changes in a natural way , which is orders of magnitude better for birds and animals. There is a strong branch of forest management in Europe called “ nature-based forestry ” or “ near natural silviculture ” that attempts to make human induced disturbances during harvesting or regeneration as close to natural-like conditions as possible. Visitors need special training to detect the difference between the human induced changes and the natural ones. But, like high-technology systems, plantations are seen as the “green” alternative to low-technology native forest management. Green values The “green” alternatives market has been captured by systems that require high levels of technology, energy inputs and processing. Is the ultimate green goal is to leave nature altogether, replacing nature-based solution with technological ones – perhaps ultimately living in space stations powered by solar cells measured in kilometres? Machines could make our air, water and nutrients out of raw mineral stocks mined from asteroid belts without impinging on natural earth at all. A “green” but precarious future totally reliant on sophisticated technology. To be green and natural, we must re-engage with nature. Recall battles over battery chickens. The battle against that industry could not have commenced until the connection between the product (the egg) and the system (chickens in backyards or battery farms created by us) was re-established. Many urban children have never seen a farm or even touched a chicken. Similarly a battle for green and natural alternatives can only be commenced once the connection between natural systems that produce goods and services are appreciated and compared with unnatural and energy demanding systems that they have been replaced by. Cris Brack does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations. Continue reading
Biomass Sector Faces Sustainability Criteria
Biomass electricity will produce over 70% greenhouse gas savings compared to fossil fuel alternatives, under changes made by the government to ensure the sustainability of wood-fuel used to create energy. From April 2015, the biomass industry – which is worth over £1bn in new investment and supports over 3,000 jobs – will be required to demonstrate their fuel is sustainable or lose financial support. Greg Barker, minister of state for energy and climate change, said: “The coalition is committed to delivering clean, affordable and secure energy for consumers. This includes an important role for biomass power as part of the UK’s energy mix. “The new criteria will provide the necessary investor certainty and, crucially, ensure that the biomass is delivered in a transparent and sustainable way.” The new criteria for sustainable forest management are based on a range of issues such as: sustainable harvesting rates; biodiversity protection and land use rights for indigenous populations. The REA has welcomed the government’s new sustainability criteria for biomass power and CHP. The criteria will ensure that only projects with strong ecological protections and high carbon savings can be supported under the Renewables Obligation (RO) and count towards renewable energy targets. However, the REA is urging government not to withdraw support for the construction of new biomass power plants under the forthcoming Contracts for Difference (CfD) regime. REA chief executive Dr Nina Skorupska said: “These sustainability criteria ensure that the UK can reap the benefits of biomass, safe in the knowledge that it is making a real dent in our carbon emissions and that ecologically sensitive land is being protected. Biomass is a great way to bridge the looming capacity gap because it has all the same benefits as fossil fuels – such as reliability and flexibility of supply – but without the carbon impacts.” The REA is pleased that government is taking steps to ensure environmental best practice in the use of biomass for heat and power. However, this is incongruous with the government’s moves to restrict the construction of biomass power plants in the RO, and not support them at all under the forthcoming CfD regime. New biomass plants will only be supported under these schemes if they produce heat as well as power (combined heat and power, CHP). Dr Nina Skorupska said: “Biomass power can help bridge the energy gap because it is affordable, helps to meet base load power needs and is relatively quick to build. It can also help economic recovery by creating jobs in construction and the ongoing operation of the plants. “CHP is an excellent use of the resource but it is not feasible in sites where there is no user for the heat load. The government will have serious regrets down the line if it excludes the construction of dedicated biomass power plants from the new regime.” The REA rejects the arguments used by green campaigners who claim that biomass power is ‘dirtier than coal’ . Their research is based on worst case scenarios involving the burning of whole trees and unsustainable forest management. In reality, the biomass industry uses primarily thinnings and residues, as it cannot afford to compete with other industries for high quality virgin wood. Sustainable forest management, including high levels of replanting, is in fact key to the foresters’ bottom line as it safeguards their ability to do business in the future. Dr Nina Skorupska said: “It is absolutely right that biomass should only be supported if it can be proven to be good for the environment. These criteria enable industry to do exactly that. They are challenging, but not unattainable. Generators are actually incentivised to over-achieve on greenhouse gas savings in order to minimise the risk of non-compliance. “I invite the NGOs who have concerns about biomass to work with us to iron out the details of implementing these standards. If we get it right, which I’m sure we will, the UK will be reinforcing the highest standards of sustainable forestry for trade partners around the world. That is a worthy goal to aim for.” Industry already reports on greenhouse gas (GHG) savings and land use under the RO, and the minimum standards will become mandatory in April 2015. These minimum standards will tighten significantly over the period up to 2030, while the methodology used to calculate GHG savings will be unchanged for plants which accredit in the near term. This design does well to join together goals of ensuring that the industry is continuously improving, while also providing forward visibility to industry to enable investment. Continue reading
