Building Maritime Strength: A Conversation with Shipyard Expert Caitlin Hardy of Ness Sea Consulting
September 26, 2025 • 46 mins
🎧 Short Summary
Shipyards sit at the very heart of America’s maritime future, operating as both industrial engines and strategic assets essential to national security. In this conversation with Caitlin Hardy, Founder of Ness Sea Consulting, we explore the challenges and opportunities in rebuilding U.S. shipbuilding capacity, the lessons commercial yards can teach defense programs, and the innovations shaping maritime construction. Plus, I share reflections from the Women in AgriBusiness Summit, where bulk carriers and the looming Section 301 USTR port fees emerged as critical concerns for U.S. grain exports.
🎧 Expanded Description
Shipyards don’t just build vessels—they shape America’s maritime strength. In this episode, I’m joined by Caitlin Hardy of Ness Sea Consulting to break down why shipyards are both economic engines and national security assets, and how America can rethink its approach to shipbuilding.
Hardy brings a wealth of experience from her naval architecture background and work with industry leaders like Kongsberg, Crowley, Holland America, and Foss Maritime. Responding to our recurring car manufacturing analogy, she argues that the U.S. must first master building reliable “F-150s” before focusing too heavily on ambitious “Cybertrucks” in ship design. She also shares examples of commercial innovation—from AI-enhanced radar systems to hull-cleaning robots—that make shipping safer and more efficient without requiring revolutionary vessels.
We also contrast commercial and defense practices, asking what the Navy could learn from cruise lines that refurbish massive vessels in just two weeks with thousands of contractors onboard. Hardy’s perspective highlights where efficiency and innovation can intersect.
Alongside shipyards, we spotlight another pressing issue: bulk carriers and U.S. grain exports. At the Women in AgriBusiness Summit in Orlando, concerns centered on the new Section 301 USTR port fees set to begin October 14. With slim margins in ag exports and many bulk carriers Chinese-built or owned, a $1M+ fee could either deter vessels from calling U.S. ports—or erase the competitiveness of U.S. commodities if passed down the chain - both concerns I will continue to look into.
For anyone involved in ocean shipping, maritime technology, or national security planning, this episode offers crucial insights into how shipyards and trade policy together shape America’s maritime future—and what steps we must take now to strengthen both.
⚓ A special thanks to our partner Ness Sea Consulting for supporting today’s episode.
🎧 Shipyards, Security, and Strategy with Caitlin Hardy
👉 Listen now: www.TheMaritimeProfessor.com/podcast
🎙️ Thanks for tuning in to By Land and By Sea powered by The Maritime Professor®! If you enjoyed today’s episode, be sure to subscribe ⭐ and leave a review 📝 - it really helps others find the show.
📚 Want to go deeper? Check out our live webinars, on-demand e-courses, and our Just-in-Time Learning™ sessions -- short, plain-language lessons (30 minutes or less) built for supply chain pros who need quick clarity.
🚢 Looking for something tailored? We also provide custom corporate trainings designed to meet your team’s needs.
⚓ Learn more and explore past episodes at: www.TheMaritimeProfessor.com/podcast
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_01 (00:01):
Ready to go.
SPEAKER_02 (00:10):
You're listening to By Land and By Sea, powered by
the Maritime Professor.
When we talk about U.S.
maritime strength, shipyards areright at the center of that
conversation.
They're not just places wherevessels get built or repaired,
they're strategic assets.
And today I'm joined by someonewho knows shipyards and
(00:31):
shipbuilding inside and out.
Caitlin Hardy of NestisiConsulting.
Hi, welcome back to By Landed bySea, an attorney breaking down
the weekend supply chain,presented by Maritime Professor.
It's me.
I'm Lauren Beegan, former FMCInternational Affairs Attorney
and founder of the MaritimeProfessor and School Strategies.
By Landed by Sea is your go-toresource for navigating the
(00:53):
regulatory side of global oceanshipping.
And me, I'm your favoritemaritime attorney.
Excuse me.
I'm here to walk you throughboth ocean transport and surface
transport topics in the wildworld of supply chain.
As always, the guidance servicegeneral for educational purposes
only.
It should not be considered tobe legal advice, and there is no
attorney client privilegecreated by this video or this
(01:13):
podcast.
If you need an attorney, contactan attorney.
This is plain language maritimecreated so that anyone, not just
lawyers or industry insiders,can understand what's happening
in the world of shipping.
So let's dive into this week'sepisode because as you know,
ocean shipping moves the world.
Before we get jump into theepisode, though, I want to say
don't miss my next just in timelearning webinar on the brand
(01:36):
new section 301 port fees thatare about to go into effect
later.
What's that, mid-October,October 14th?
This is on the section 301 USTRport fees for the China-built or
China operated vessels.
It's happening, the just in timelearning class is happening
October 2nd at noon.
It's just 30 minutes, plainlanguage, practical takeaways
(01:57):
for importers, exporters,carriers, shippers, you name it.
If you have anything to do withthe maritime industry, this is
going to affect you.
You can register now at theBarentideprofessor.com.
And if you missed the liveversion of my last just in time
learning class, it was on FMCvs.
Marad, compare and contrast, whodoes what.
That class is now available ondemand in our just in time
(02:18):
learning series.
It's the perfect quick primer onhow the regulator and the
promoter fit into America'sMaritime System.
It was a really, really greatsession.
We've gotten a lot of reallyfantastic feedback on that.
So this week also brought medown to Orlando for the Women in
Agribusiness Summit.
It was an incredible chance toconnect with so many new facets
(02:40):
of the supply chain world.
Look, I'm very hooked into themaritime world, but I'm often
finding myself even in newconversations within this
already very niche niche area.
Commercial maritime and defenseor military maritime are often
two different networks ofmaritime conversations that I
regularly find very differentnetworks in.
(03:01):
But what I learned at the summitis that I've actually
unintentionally been leaving outbulk carriers in my
conversations.
Bolt grain exports out of the USare an incredible category, one
of the US, one that the USdominates in many ways, is what
I learned this week.
But the margins are slim,pricing is tight, and that means
that extra fees cansignificantly hinder the
(03:23):
competitiveness of the market.
Now we ended up havingconversations here about bulk
carriers in the Section 301 USTRport fees.
Admittedly, like I said, Ihadn't focused much on the bulk
side of things before.
But what I learned, and what I'mgoing to continue to research on
this, is that many of these boltcarriers are Chinese-owned or
Chinese built.
And unlike container vessels,bulk carriers don't have that
(03:46):
liner service, right?
So that's that regular dedicatedtrade route.
So if a vessel is going to gethit with a million dollar plus
fee, that might be enough of adeterrent to stop them from
calling US ports altogether.
So the current concern that wasexpressed to me was that this
could potentially eliminate theability of US commodities to get
to market, right?
(04:06):
If we don't have the bulkvessels coming and calling at
the US to pick up the grainexports, they could potentially
go away.
And that was the extremeconcern.
But I what I want to look intois was it extreme, or is this
maybe what they're going tostart anticipating seeing come
mid to end October, maybe earlyNovember?
Once these fees have come intoeffect, are we going to see bulk
(04:30):
carriers try to avoid these feesand potentially avoid the US
calls?
Look, even if the bulk carriersstill make these calls, which I
think that they might, and I'mreally interested to see are
some of these bulk carriersgoing to potentially either
reflag or come under ownershipof a US company, those would all
be ways of kind of helping toalleviate.
(04:52):
But even if they still call andthey're Chinese operated or
Chinese owned or built, thosefees get passed along, right?
Because it's not necessarily theproblem or the the it wasn't the
vessel's fault, I should say,right?
These vessels were built a longtime ago.
But those fees could potentiallyeat away at the competitiveness
(05:13):
of the commodity itself, right?
These US exports of grain, lowmargins here is what I'm
understanding.
And so any fees built on top ofthat could have a deletive
effect on the competitiveness ofthe market.
Like I said, I'm going to keeplooking into this because this
story I heard here was prettyjarring on all accounts as that
was explained to me.
(05:33):
I think it deserves moreattention as these US airport
fees take effect in just a fewweeks.
I've been encouraged to see thatthe international ocean carrier,
uh, you know, liner serviceocean vessels are for the most
part not going to be instillingsome sort of a surcharge,
general surcharge.
We're just going to see how itgoes.
(05:53):
But in the meantime, it's thebulk carriers that I'm, I hadn't
honestly I hadn't paid muchattention to.
And I'm going to start lookingfurther into that.
Remember, vessels arriving emptyor imbalanced, and US-owned
company vessels are exempt.
And so that's where I thinkmaybe there's something here
that I want to look into.
Maybe some of these bulk vesselsare being considered for
(06:15):
purchase by US companies to helpcarve out these exemptions.
If they arrive empty or inbalanced, that's another way of
having an exemption for the bulkcarriers.
I just don't know enough aboutthe fleet.
I need to look into it.
So as I learn more, I'll passthat along to you guys.
But hopefully we can we can findif there's going to be
exemptions.
Really, we got to keep thesecommodities going, right?
(06:36):
I'm going to keep digging intothis.
But even though my backgroundhere might be a little
incomplete, I wanted to raisethe issue because it's
important.
And I'd love to hear yourfeedback.
How is this going to impact you?
Because this ag world at thisconference is very concerned.
At the the women's women andagribusiness conference summit,
this was a fantastic summit thisweek in Orlando.
(06:57):
But the resounding concern wasthere that potentially these
bulk carriers are going to behit or inadvertently going to be
really having some troubles forthe bulk exports of the U.S.
commodities.
We also had some news out of theFMC this week.
There was a court case that cameout talking about the
(07:18):
detention-demurge ruling.
As I understand it, andadmittedly, I've been in this
summit, so I haven't taken aclose look, but I'll be doing
that for next week.
As I understand it, it's justthe motor carrier conversation
that has been put into thatcase.
The rest of the rule stillremains in place.
So detention and demurrage, the20 invoice requirements, the
30-30-30, right?
(07:39):
30 days to issue the invoice, 30days to dispute it and try to
button it all up 30 days after adispute is filed.
That all still, as I understandit, like I said, I have to take
a closer look.
And this is not legal advice,but as I understand it, the
majority of the rule stays inplace.
It's just the motor carrierconversation, whether or not
they should be assessed orinvoiced on that bill.
(08:01):
Because currently what the rulesays, it's only the billing
party or the build party or theconsignee, but nobody else,
which kind of means that thatmotor carrier, that's the part
that's still that I want to lookat that.
That's what this case decided.
So let's jump back into theinterview today, though.
I'm speaking to Caitlin Hardy,founder of Nestie Consulting.
(08:22):
And what we talk about is whatshipyards mean for U.S.
maritime strategy, from thelocal builds that spark debate
to the role of repair yards tothe bigger picture of national
security and innovation.
This was a really thoughtfulinterview.
I thought that this was a reallywide-ranging discussion.
You're not going to want to missit.
So let's roll that conversation.
Here's my interview with CaitlinHardy.
(08:42):
Today on By Land and By Sea, I'mjoined by someone who has truly
built a career at the crossroadsof tradition and innovation in
the maritime space.
Caitlin Hardy is the founder andmanaging director of Nestie, a
strategic consulting firmworking at the intersection of
just that maritime, high-tech,and also defense.
Before launching Nestie, Caitlinserved as president of Congress
(09:06):
Underwater Technology here inthe U.S., where she led efforts
around sub-sea systems, advancedsensors, robotics, winning major
government contracts, andexpanding their U.S.
presence.
Her career spans navalarchitecture, shipbuilding, and
maritime operations from time totime, from time at Crowley Foss,
and the Holland American Lionsto maritime tech startups like
(09:26):
IO Current and Polyverse.
She's a U.S.
Naval Academy graduate in navalarchitecture, holds an MBA from
the University of Washington,and today also serves on the
boards of Washington MaritimeBlue, Women Offshore, and the
Lloyd's List editorial board.
Caitlin is truly passionateabout bringing new technology
into shipbuilding.
So, Caitlin, welcome to theshow.
(09:46):
Thank you for being here today.
SPEAKER_00 (09:48):
Hi, Lauren.
Thank you so much for having meon by land and by sea.
It's exciting to get to chatwith you today.
SPEAKER_02 (09:53):
Yeah, it's so great to have you here, and I'm so
happy that you were able tojoin.
This is going to be such a greatconversation.
You've built such a fascinatingcareer.
So before we dive too far intoNessy, the company that you
started, can you walk us throughyour background a little bit?
How did your education and earlyexperience shape the way you
approach shipbuilding today?
SPEAKER_01 (10:12):
Sure.
I think, you know, sort of theearliest years is I grew up on a
small island and I've said a lotof times sort of, you know,
publicly that I always wanted toescape that island, and so I
learned to sail.
And that passion for sailing andbeing on the water ultimately
led me to the Naval Academy.
When I went through school, andI think now there are the same
number of naval architectureprograms in America, which is
(10:32):
six, and that is not nearlyenough.
It wasn't enough then, and itwasn't enough now.
Um, but that you know,foundation and understanding
what it takes for a vessel fromthe earliest times that you're
thinking about it on the back ofa napkin, going through the
design spiral and all thosedesign considerations is what
ultimately led me here.
So I started out as a navalarchitect under Crowley when I
first got out of the Navy, did alot of new vessel construction,
(10:55):
salvage, sea lift, sort ofanything and everything in
between.
And I've worked across a lot ofdifferent verticals in my
career.
So I talk about, you know,coming up through the Hawes
pipe, not as a mariner, but asan engineering perspective,
understanding what it takes tobring one design together for
one vessel, what theimplications are for everything
from stability to you know whatthe loading goes into, the
structural piece of it, thedifferent, you know, major
(11:18):
components that you'repopulating from different OEMs
and how you make those choicesto looking across a class of
vessels, how does that fit inwithin your larger fleet?
And then your fleet overalloperating globally, what are the
considerations for ensuring thatyou're able to support
maintenance, you're able tosupport your crews, and you're
able to support the mission ofdelivering whatever the goods,
the people, et cetera, are.
SPEAKER_02 (11:39):
That's great.
And having that navalarchitecture experience is so
fascinating because that wellsituates you for having these
conversations.
You understand the baseline ofhow ships work, really how they
how they're built, and you canbuild on top of that into this
new tech world that you kind offind yourself moving closer to.
Now, before we go too far, Ialways like to kind of make sure
(12:01):
that my audience understandssome of the lingos you're
talking about.
So you said Hospiper.
Can you explain that a littlebit on in in kind of the like
pair and contrast to thelicensed world?
SPEAKER_01 (12:10):
Yeah, oh gosh, it it's a position on board a
vessel and working your way up.
So really it's that learnedexperience, that hands-on
experience as you move throughthe ranks, uh, the Hawes pipe,
you know, coming up the chainfrom the anchor, you know,
(12:30):
leading all the way up.
And so it's this way that wetalk about experience, not just
a practical from an academicperspective of, you know, going
to university, but really thisearned experience.
And I think the legitimacy thatgoes behind those who have
served and worked in thesereally hard-demanding physical
roles of what they bring to ourindustry.
SPEAKER_02 (12:49):
And that's it too.
So uh one thing that that wewould often talk about kind of
in the the DC world is thatHospiper, even getting to kind
of be certified and or or it'sit's unlicensed from the
merchant marine credential, butthere are some programs that
allow you to go into a Hospiperworld.
They can be tough to follow.
(13:09):
I I feel like there's someadministrative perhaps cleanup
that could happen there to makeit a little bit easier because
it's it's a just a differentpath, but it should have a clear
path.
And right now it feels a littlebit like whack-a-mole.
SPEAKER_01 (13:22):
I I agree with you completely on that.
You know, I think we bothprobably have some friends who
are doing things on the crewingside of where it can help reduce
some of these burdens.
In a lot of ways, I would see itas being similar to, you know,
you could say a military pilotwho has a very clear path of
what it takes to go and work forthe airlines.
But the flip side is, you know,you could have someone who
starts out in small planes andthey're building hours and
(13:44):
building hours, and then theyget that, you know, certified
flight instructor.
In a lot of ways, I thinkthere's comparison where that is
maybe a much smoother path thanwhat it is for those folks in
maritime who are, you know, justgoing out and finding a role,
finding themselves on board andworking their way up.
SPEAKER_02 (13:59):
And it's it's so fantastic to actually, you know,
pull somebody in who kind ofshowed that passion early and
and wanted to work through,right?
I mean, that's that's a such afantastic approach to getting
into the industry.
So, okay, so let's talk aboutyour company a little bit.
So, what inspired you to launchNess C?
What gaps did you see in theshipbuilding industry that
(14:20):
weren't really being filled?
And and what were some of thethings that you wanted to tackle
with this new venue?
SPEAKER_01 (14:26):
For sure.
No, it's definitely scary tothink about, you know, leaving a
corporate role and going outonto your own, starting
something new, is that holethere?
I launched Nest C before theadministration had changed, but
even then there were a lot ofsigns that, regardless of which
way the presidency went, thatthere were going to be
significant changes in theUnited States around
shipbuilding.
I think for me, a lot of whatI've been seeing, you know, over
(14:47):
my career, but certainly overthe last couple of years, was
reflected finally in there beingmore of a willingness towards
new technology and maritime.
I would say pre-COVID, I'm fromthe Northwest, from the Seattle
area.
There's a huge amount of techhere.
And most people have no idea theamount of maritime that's here,
the wide variety of vessels.
I've had the opportunity to lookto work for a lot of really
(15:08):
great Jones Eck companies andinternational companies.
And I was always a bit surprisedat the reluctance to try not
just sort of the new crazytechnologies that we maybe work
with at Messi today, but thingsthat were available off the
shelf that could make peoplesafer at sea, reducing OpEx,
reducing that initial capex forthe investment you're making
into a vessel for whatever itsmission might be.
And in my time at Kongsburg, Imean, Kongsburg leads as a tech
(15:30):
leader, largest maritime OEM inthe world, we would have a lot
of really amazing founders orpeople who were looking at going
off onto their own, come up withideas.
And I was in a role where, youknow, you just don't have time
to, you know, have all thoseconversations for the amount of
people that are reaching out toyou and started to see that it
was really exciting the numberof people who weren't
traditionally from our industry.
(15:51):
And that what there was becomingmore of a willingness from our
industry to be open tonewcomers, but that when those
newcomers got here, they'd neverheard of class societies before.
They'd never heard ofregulatory, you know, flag
state.
They had all these great ideas,but thought they were going to
bypass, you know, the gates thatare in place to ensure that
things are done in what we wouldsay is the proper way, or at
least the legal regime that wedo have to operate in maritime
(16:14):
with or without this greattechnology.
And so that was really part ofthe genesis of Nessie on the
maritime technology piece, or Iwould say at this point, we're,
you know, ocean technology, atleast adjacent.
The other piece for me was I wasdoing a huge amount of work in
defense, and I felt a hugeamount of urgency.
Kongsberg has been around forover 200 years.
(16:34):
They're driving hard to ensurethat there is, you know, a lot
of leading tech anddifferentiators there.
But as I saw these new companiescoming, I felt like there was an
opportunity that what they hadwas so novel, but not
necessarily understanding thepath of how to get there.
And I thought if they hadsomeone who'd maybe been through
that before, it would give thema greater chance of success that
(16:54):
you know is great for the US andtheir allies.
SPEAKER_02 (16:57):
Yeah, and that's so true.
Just because you have a greatidea doesn't mean that you have
this entire background of howthe shipbuilding works.
And so it's such a fantasticopportunity for you to help say,
look, I know how this all works.
And also I'm forward-leaning inmy thinking of I can piece that
round peg in this square holebecause it's actually not that
(17:18):
dissimilar.
It can, it can fit, right?
And that's kind of where youcome in is like, that's a great
idea.
You're missing this one littleelement, and then it'll work.
SPEAKER_01 (17:26):
Exactly.
It's that one little elementwhere it could also be like, oh
my gosh, what you've come upwith is brilliant.
But if you're willing, have youconsidered this segment or this
idea?
Like, do you realize thisapplication could also do, you
know, feature X, which has ahuge you know, impact to this
community?
SPEAKER_02 (17:42):
Yeah, and actually that's one thing, that's one of
the themes that we've kind ofbeen talking about on this
podcast is the blending of thetraditional idea with the
future, but also military andcommercial.
One thing that came up with myinterview with acting
administrator Sang Yi was thatthere is this kind of two
different conversations where wehave military use and military
(18:06):
shipbuilding, but commercial useand commercial shipbuilding is
equally important, but sometimesfeels like it gets a little bit
left behind.
And it's it's a very importantside of it.
And actually, arguably, we needthe military readiness, but we
also need the in the commercialsustainability of the industry
moving forward.
So speak to to the kind ofdefense versus commercial side.
SPEAKER_01 (18:28):
Right.
Oh, there's so much there.
And I I think that's it rightthere, right?
Defense versus commercial.
Even in you know, actingadministrator Yi's comments, it
was, you know, they are veryseparate at times.
And having worked in both, Ithink that was the other area
where I saw Nessie could be atranslator, where I felt like
I've always been a translator inmy roles, is how do you take the
best of what already exists toaccelerate the curve of where
(18:50):
you're trying to go, right?
Responding to that sense ofurgency.
That could be something like youhave a cruise ship that needs to
leave in three weeks becauseyou've passengers booked, right?
That is very different thanpreparing for war or more
potential conflict.
But what is shared across thoseare a lot of processes that, you
know, it's no sense in havingone for crews and one for
military when there's a lot oflessons learned.
(19:12):
You know, what I see it's alwaysstill entertaining to me, and
this isn't meant to, you know,sort of make fun or be light,
but to hear about vesselconstruction management.
I came out of the military, wentstraight into an operating
company that had acquired anaval architecture firm that had
been around for over 50 years.
That was always the model.
Like my brain really just can'tthink about not having vessel
(19:33):
construction management be partof your program.
And so I was really excited forNSMV when you know Merrad hired
Tote and brought on like peoplewho have done this before.
But that should be the standard.
That shouldn't be something thatis considered earth-shattering
in the US.
And I feel like we should bebeyond the point where we're
still talking about that isexcitement because our allies
and those who aren't our allieshave been doing that model for
(19:55):
so long.
So I think there's a lot ofpractices from the commercial
world, right?
One that's as simple as whyaren't we finalizing our designs
earlier and governmentshipbuilding and moving on?
All of these design changes andconsiderations are killing us in
time.
It's killing us in qualitybecause we're constantly
adjusting to where we think weneed to be.
And then with what we end up isjust sort of this haphazard
(20:15):
thing that maybe doesn't meetthe mission of what we initially
intended.
And so I think there's a lot ofthis like, all right, we are
committing to this and we needto trust that we're making the
right decision with the abilityto pivot maybe in future designs
later.
On the commercial side, youknow, it's things.
One of the gentlemen that Iworked for talked a lot about
how cruise ships have a higherop tempo than military vessels.
(20:36):
One of the teams that I had, wewould fly in 1,200 contractors
for almost every cruise ship drydock, tear everything apart in a
two to three week period, andsail on time.
And in the military, that isjust almost comical to even
consider that that could bepossible.
I was really excited to seerecently, I think it had been
MIB, the maritime industrialbase under the Navy, which is
(20:58):
primarily focused on governmentbuilds, but looking at how we
leverage commercial builds, hadtaken a group of program
officers to a cruise ship drydock just to see like how is
this done and something that'sadjacent to where we are.
SPEAKER_02 (21:11):
And that's exactly it.
I want to break that down.
I really kind of highlight thatpoint.
1,200 people came in while thevessel was in dry dock for
fixes, right?
For fixes, for updates, formaybe refreshes of cabins.
But 1,200 people all came in sothat they could work at the same
time instead of a dry dock thatkind of drags on, right?
It's how many maybe 50 peopleare working on a dry dock
(21:33):
otherwise, maybe 100, but 1,200people to fly in because exactly
as you're saying, they got toget that cruise ship back out
there making money.
And that's one of the thingsthat that kind of I keep
highlighting is we need to haveeconomic engines associated with
these vessels, right?
And that's where the cargo comesin.
A lot of my listeners areshippers, and so they understand
the economic drivers help movethings along faster out of
(21:56):
necessity.
They have to, because if it sitsthere, it's losing money.
Exactly.
SPEAKER_01 (22:00):
No, and I think for your shippers, you know, it's
it's so easy to look at avessel.
I mean, there are thesemagnificent, you turn a vessel
on its side and it's you knowlarger than most skyscrapers in
America.
But when you consider what goesinside of a vessel, right?
We can do shipbuilding in theUS.
We can figure out how to scaleshipbuilding.
But I see a lot of this beingchallenges around supply chains,
which is something that yourshippers are expert in because
(22:23):
they're managing manufacturingjust for probably different
types of components or differentthings, you know, whether it's
clothing or consume, moreconsumer-based items.
That's really one of the largestchallenges that I see that we
have to US shipbuilding is thesupply chain piece.
And so then this also becomesthe balance of getting items to
a vessel build quickly enough,but deciding as a country.
(22:44):
And this is where, you know,America first says we need 100%
American components.
Well, what does that mean?
What does it mean from thetimelines and now balancing the
sense of urgency?
If we didn't feel like we had apotential conflict with Taiwan
or even customers who arewaiting to get a vessel out of
the dock, what does that meanand how it shifts our decision
making for the vessels that weare trying to deliver?
SPEAKER_02 (23:05):
That's right, because it's pushing everything
forward.
We have to deliver this, whichthere's always that urgency, but
if you know that it's going tostart losing money, right, at a
certain point, like if there areeconomic drivers part of it.
That's it's so true.
And it's such a powerful driverthat the the inertia of kind of
commerce, right?
And moving along.
(23:27):
So you're at the heart of thisinnovation in shipbuilding.
So what tech advances are youmost excited about right now?
What how are they changing theindustry?
What's some kind of cool thingsthat you're watching that that
our listeners might find justfascinating?
SPEAKER_01 (23:41):
Oh gosh, there's so many.
I I have had such a blast thislast year.
And you know, I I would say theroles I've sort of self-selected
into, you know, during my careerhave really been on the leading
edge of innovation and maritime.
It totem Foss had an opportunityto work on the first LNG barge
in the US, one of the first inthe world.
You know, Holland America saw alot of new things that were
(24:01):
coming on, say it's bridgeequipment.
And so the areas that I work intoday were quite broad in the
types of technologies that wesupport.
One I'm really excited about,they're starting to make waves
in the commercial world, iscalled Takaro Blue.
They are a company that takesexisting COTS radar and does an
AI ML layer.
So if you think about Orca AI, Ithink everyone has seen that
(24:21):
video of the collision off ofthe UK that was caught on video
through their system.
I see Takaro Blue as the missinglayer of if you were able to
take your existing radar andimmediately have contacts that
are showing through the radar isbeing auto-tuned.
You don't even have to have amariner that is tuning the
radar.
What does that do for yoursituational awareness?
(24:42):
And, you know, getting to apoint where you're able to track
radar targets way faster thanwhat ARPA does today for those
who aren't necessarily familiarwith being on the bridge.
It feels like this veryantiquated system of looking at
like 70s or you know, 60s, 50sspace consoles.
It moves beyond that, but it's avery simple add-on.
And I think those are thetechnologies that I gravitate to
(25:03):
are what are the things we cando quickly that again make
people safer at sea, make usable to ship or have in a you
know more responsible way or bebetter aware of what's taking
place near us.
And so I think what thistechnology does, we're doing a
lot in the defense world rightnow with uncrewed surface
vessels, but there's a lot oftranslations, especially in busy
shipping channels.
If you could see every target onyour radar and a system is
(25:26):
automatically tracking those,telling you the speed, telling
you where they're anticipatingthat they will go, that's quite
powerful.
Another technology that's been alot of fun to see has been with
the fleet robotics team.
So there's a lot of differentwhole cleaning robots.
I would say, you know, shippersshould be like, why do I care
about a whole cleaning robot?
Well, you care because who'sultimately paying for the cost
(25:47):
of fuel, right?
Is that on the charter?
And if it is, then that'ssomething that is absolutely
being passed on to you.
So if you can reduce fuel costsbecause the hole passing through
the water, you know, fluiddynamics is that much more
efficient, that's a really goodstory.
But I also see a lot ofapplications with the hole
cleaning robots, especially asthey get to a point where they
(26:08):
are able to operate whileunderway, which is quite novel
to think about this littlerobot, you know, roombaying its
way along the hole as a vesselsails or steams along, that it
could be providing informationabout the gauging of the paint
coating thickness, the steelthickness.
Is there something on the bottomof the hole that shouldn't be
there from a defenseapplication?
(26:29):
So those are two that I thinkare really neat.
Another one that I am workingwith that has been interesting
to see the conversation in theUS, a little bit less related to
commercial.
Again, we're spending a lot oftime on defense, but is with
Eureka Navalcraft.
And they are taking existingdesigns from oil and gas.
These are surface effect shipsthat are already classed, have
(26:50):
been proven to oil and gasstandards, which are a very,
very hard, you know, customer tomeet, and are optionally manned
or uncrewed surface vessels.
And so what these are able to dois, you know, if you think about
the you know, Pacific Ocean andpotential conflicts of the
future, how do we get people toshore?
How do we get people in and out?
How do we send in payloads, youknow, potentially weapons where
(27:13):
we don't want people to be?
And so where I see thedifference in a lot of these
technologies, Eureka is a greatexample, is this balance of not
having to do something that's soearth-shattering that it's going
to take us 15 to 30 years to getto.
But what's something that wecould begin building today that
will be ready to go and be ableto make an impact?
And when I look back, you know,sort of my training, especially
(27:35):
in something like stability, Isee so many of the renderings of
vessels today that I'm like, oh,like that's a really pretty
picture.
And I can tell just looking atsomething that, like, is that
even going to stay upright?
And that's one of the challengesthat we have is we don't have
enough people in America whohave formal training in things
like naval architecture to beable to suss out what is real
(27:56):
and what's not.
And so it's been fascinating,you know, working with a lot of
different companies, going down,you know, the line of venture
capital or private equity asthey work to grow, you know, the
ability to fund their companiesand prove out these technologies
that there is really a gap in alot of these firms of how do
they invest?
(28:16):
If we're talking aboutshipbuilding, you know, what
does that mean for laying a keeland the ceremony that we have
around it?
There's a lot of announcementsrecently where, you know,
everyone is laying a keel, butlike, is there actually a keel
there?
Like, what is that that you're,you know, maybe there's a coin
underneath.
I hope, you know, stick to atradition.
And so those are some of thethings that I'm seeing right now
that I think are interesting.
(28:38):
I think there's also a lot oftechnology that is new to the
US, but that's not necessarilynew in shipbuilding.
And for us, I feel like that'smaybe one of the most key
things.
You know, the smallinfrastructure grants that came
out of MARAD for ports andshipyards are fantastic, but
they're still such small amountsof money.
$8 million barely moves theneedle in the conversation.
(28:59):
And so, how do we leverageexisting technology that's
coming out of South Korea,coming out of Finland, Norway,
Japan to ensure that we're ableto get to a point where we can
keep pace with being best inclass for shipbuilding?
SPEAKER_02 (29:13):
Well, and that leads me to all really fascinating
stuff that you're bringing uphere and great applications and
kind of out-of-the-box thinking.
But that leads me to somethingthat I often bring up in this
show.
Kind of there, I see kind of twodifferent worlds of your, like
if we break it down into likethe most basic version.
We have the F-150, right?
We have the like, and I guesswhen I'm always thinking of
(29:34):
commercial cargo vessels when Iwhen I think of this example,
but we have the F-150, right?
I mean, it's a floatingpaperweight, it does the job.
It really hasn't been updated inmany years.
It's gotten bigger, but it'skind of from my basic
understanding, the the samething, but larger.
And then I just think that wehave an opportunity for a cyber
trust model, like just to breakthe mold, something funky.
(29:57):
You look at it and you're like,wow, how to That works.
Do you think that, and you kindof mentioned we have these
drawings that are like, oh, thatlooks nice, but like, is that
going to actually work?
Do you think that there's anopportunity for a break the mold
cyber truck model, or do youthink that fundamentally vessels
have to look and be a certainway?
I mean, we've seen somedifferent hull, you know,
(30:20):
material being used on on justkind of pleasure craft, but to
get to that scale of a largecargo vessel is a different
world.
SPEAKER_01 (30:27):
Yeah, definitely.
I I mean it's the material sideis really fascinating right now.
We're seeing, you know, naturalcomposites, things made out of
like flaxseed.
I'm, you know, talking with ateam that's looking at that,
that doesn't really scale from astrength perspective.
We call that longitudinalstrength, right?
The worst thing that you couldhave happened other than a fire
is that your ship cracks inhalf.
But I I think the F-150Cybertrack is a great analogy
(30:50):
and way of thinking through.
I'm probably the Debbie Downerin this because I would say, as
much as I love the approach thatSpaceX has taken, I don't think
that's where Americanshipbuilding is today.
I don't think that we are those,you know, certainly for things
like aircraft carriers fornuclear submarines.
But when we're looking at justmoving goods, right, going back
(31:10):
to 90% of everything moves bythe ocean, I'm concerned that
we've forgotten how to makeF-150s.
Our tier two, tier three yardsare fantastic.
But as we really look at likehow do we improve blue water
shipbuilding in the US, thatwould be my first focus.
And I would say, let's teach ourworkforce how to build F-150s.
Because I think about howcomplex it would be, you know,
(31:31):
navigating a vessel, but eventhinking about like flying an
airplane.
Like, let's learn how to fly atwo or four seater Cessna before
we jump in a lair jet.
And I feel like we're jumpinginto that jet right now with all
these conversations aroundbuilding LNG carriers in the US.
I understand, you know, the USTRside moving 1%, you know, from
the US, but an LNG carrier isarguably one of the most complex
(31:53):
types of vessels you couldbuild.
And we're not even talking aboutnew designs here.
We're talking about existingdesigns.
If we're looking at things likemembrane tanks, you know, for
those who are less familiar withshipping, it's these highly
precise, you know, welds thattake place.
It's a different type of weldingto a large degree, the systems
(32:13):
integration that takes place.
So all of the differentsensoring systems, all the
different layers that you'rebringing into a vessel, on the
flip side, a piece that's notreally related to your shippers
today, but will be at some pointis icebreakers, right?
When we look at the Arcticopening up, expecting that, you
know, in the next decade, lessthan a decade and a half, that
the Arctic will be navigableyear-round, what does that mean
(32:36):
for shipping routes?
But are icebreakers really wherewe should be starting?
And so, you know, as a navalarchitect, I never expected that
I would hear about shipbuilding,you know, from the president
speaking to Congress.
That's an exciting moment.
But the hard part is how do weget our workforce to the point
where they're beyond buildingF-150s?
And so, you know, if I was sortof queen for a day, I'd be like,
(32:58):
let's build as many tankers aswe can, something that is
repeatable and straightforwardand gets people to a really high
quality point and understandingof what we're doing, and then go
after those hard things.
SPEAKER_02 (33:11):
That's so important.
I love that you said that too,because I think you're probably
right.
We perhaps we haven't totallyforgotten how to build an F-150,
but we could certainly use a lotmore practice, right?
We could certainly use gettingfaster at it, uh, getting better
at it, kind of all of thosethings, right?
So I think those economies ofscale, right?
(33:32):
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, exactly.
Well, and so so you are fromWashington State, you're local
to Washington State, and there'sbeen some exciting news about
ferry build.
So certainly, right?
Building in the US, but they'rehappening in Florida.
It's Eastern shipbuilding inFlorida, which has stirred up
some strong feelings around theWashington State world.
Talk to me a little bit aboutthat and and how we can kind of
(33:52):
all work together, but how it'simportant to kind of have some
competition still in there.
SPEAKER_01 (33:56):
It is.
So Washington State Ferries,largest ferry system in the US.
A lot of the vessels that wehave, we have a little over 20
vessels right now.
COVID was an incrediblychallenging period, both from
the age of the vessels, butreally from workforce.
And, you know, I we've beentalking about this for years and
you know, circles you and I areboth in of like this silver
tsunami, right?
(34:17):
Of people retiring.
And you can only sort of keeppaying people a little bit extra
to keep them on until wherethey're finally going to be
like, I actually need to retire.
And I would argue that's youknow, a bit of what's happened
at Washington State Ferries.
I grew up in a place where werely on Washington State Ferries
to get home.
My family members, if they can'tget off island, can't go to the
doctor, we can't go and do, youknow, big grocery shops, things
(34:39):
of that nature.
So it's not just this like niceto have, but it is like a
critical way of something that'sinfluencing your life.
And so for the recentannouncement that Washington
State Ferries had decided for,you know, not just the first
round of bids that went out thatcame back in from the state, uh,
from yards within Washingtonstate, but allowing going to the
state legislature in Washingtonto say, you know, we are beyond
(35:02):
this percentage of extra costbecause we're building in
Washington, we'd like to lookoutside the state.
I would say it's a point of hugecontention right now.
We have a new governor.
It's someone who rides theferries a lot.
I am happy to see that we'rejust getting boats built.
And for a lot of those whoaren't from shipbuilding and
those who are, there's a lot offrustration of why wasn't a
(35:24):
Washington state yard chosen.
I think when I look at theconversation, I'm looking at the
commercial aspect of what needsto happen in America from you
know the discussions in the EO,from the Ships for America's
Act, but also the defense sidefocusing on, you know, what's
happening with China andpotentially Taiwan.
And my hope is that while thecontract for ferries is going to
(35:44):
Eastern, that the West Coastyards are likely about to become
so busy if I had to look at mycrystal ball because of the
current geopolitical situation.
And so I think it's interestingfrom you know this very
hyper-localized focus of didWashington give away the
potential to develop our, youknow, workforce here?
I think a lot of people wouldsay yes.
I'm still hoping the answer isno, because I think we're about
(36:07):
to see that renaissance on theWest Coast where a lot of
expertise flows into the WestCoast because it has to, by
nature, being able to not dealwith the Panama Canal and get
through to the Pacific much morequickly.
SPEAKER_02 (36:20):
Well, and I think that's true countrywide, is that
we have some fantasticshipbuilding operations already.
And so while we do havecompetition among the shipyards,
we need to also make sure thatwe're not losing what we have.
We're we're talking aboutbuilding new places, which is
exciting, but we have to makesure that we're not losing what
we have.
And they're at least in the NewEngland area, we've lost at
(36:40):
least one that I know aboutsince even the executive order
came out.
And it wasn't just, you know, ityou can't just flip a switch
right with one executive order.
But certainly we want to makesure that that slide doesn't
continue and that we actuallykeep and capture what we have
and continue to build becausewith those facilities is also
(37:01):
people know how to do this,right?
And and we don't want to losethat workforce.
We it's nothing else, we want togrow it, right?
So yeah, that's such a greatpoint.
And I think that you're you'reright on with kind of that
geopolitics mind of you know,it's a vessel, it's it's sailed
by land, by water, right?
So, you know, if it's if it'sbuilt on the west coast and will
be used in the in the Pacific,then it's already there instead
(37:22):
of having to maneuver it downand around the Panama Canal or
wherever it would need to get toto get over to that side.
You know, you all you we talkedabout the executive order a
little bit just now, but uhyou've worked for both Jones Act
companies and internationalcompanies.
And what was it like to see theexecutive order and the Ships
for America Act, the Ships Actlanguage come out?
What were some things that thatyou really kind of attached to?
(37:44):
You thought were good ideas?
Are there any areas that youthink might need a little bit
more kind of massaging or or oruh a little bit more refinement?
SPEAKER_01 (37:52):
I'm gonna be hiding out, I think, for the next
couple of weeks.
No, I mean both are fantastic,right?
What it says is that peoplerecognize that we have a
challenge of not having enoughvessels and skill sets to build
vessels in America today.
And so I think that theconversation is moving in the
right direction.
Know a lot of the teams I'vebeen involved in both.
You know, I think I certainlyhave a concern over, you know,
(38:15):
our shipbuilders, those of uswho have worked in yards both in
the US and abroad.
And I think the abroad piece isreally, really key because it
goes back to like, what is someof the best in class technology
for welding, for instance,right?
For things around piping,instead of, you know, kind of
eyeballing each piece, like whattools are out there that can
expedite the speed that we dothese things at, but also
(38:37):
increase the quality.
And so with both the EO andShift for America's Act, you
know, my first question is like,300 vessels of what type?
Again, what is it that we'retrying to build?
What is it that we really needthat is going to help solve
things for your shippers today,that is going to increase
resilience for Americans, right,in our own supply chains and how
we get things to our citizensfrom abroad.
(38:58):
I'm really excited about themaritime prosperity zones and
looking forward to seeing thefurther language that comes out
on those.
You mentioned, you know, a yardin New England that has closed
or, you know, lost some of theirworkforce.
In the Northwest, I've seensimilar things over the last few
years.
And, you know, it's I keep usingaviation examples close to that
world as well, but I kind ofequate it to people who move in
(39:19):
next to an airport and thenstart to complain about the
noise.
I'm the weirdo who's like, ohyes, like great, what just took
off?
And I would feel that way abouta shipyard, but a lot of people
aren't going to.
And so I think what's uniqueabout the maritime prosperity
zones that I'm looking forwardto seeing where they currently,
or at least I think differ fromopportunity zones, is
opportunity zones have beenplaced in underrepresented areas
(39:42):
that have economic challenges,right?
There's incentives to go in anddevelop.
But if you think about some ofthe prime examples of where we
could be building orreinvigorating shipbuilding in
America, those are maybe some ofthe most, you know, prized
places where people want to be,where people want to live, where
people want to have mixed-usedevelopments.
And so it'll be curious to seewhat is that balance that
(40:04):
happens overall.
SPEAKER_02 (40:06):
That's right.
And I think that that's the themarathon prosperity zones is
such an interesting idea becauseI've also heard it talked about
in that perhaps we find ways ofhaving maritime prosperity zones
internal to the country.
I mean, what we're talking Iowa,right?
We're talking Kansas.
Are there opportunities to haveshipbuilding be part of those
areas of the country to helpsupport this larger mission?
(40:30):
Because military, nationalsecurity is maritime security
and they're interlinked, right?
And that's something that I'vebeen so excited to see this
administration really lean in onsaying maritime security is
national security.
And so that intention drives usforward to continue to build
that out.
I also like that you kind ofpointed out, right?
There's there's some critiqueshere and there, but let's not
(40:50):
let perfect be the enemy ofgood, right?
We want to make sure that we'restill moving forward.
We want to make sure that westill have forward movement in
this area.
And so there are some thingsthat we could fix, precision
being one, right?
300 of what vessel?
But but it really is, it's agood idea, and and we're we're
kind of, you know, theindustry's on board.
Let's keep moving it.
So I have one more question foryou.
(41:11):
I think we're this has been areally interesting conversation.
I really love getting your takeon everything.
But as we wrap up, I kind ofwant to get your big picture
takeaway.
So, where do you see the USmaritime industry in one year,
perhaps five years, and perhaps10 years, right?
Because each of thoseincremental periods of time is
going to show a very differentworld of maritime readiness.
(41:33):
And to say one year we're gonnabe fully ready, not reality.
But what do you see as possiblein those increments, one, five,
and ten?
SPEAKER_01 (41:43):
I would like to think that in one year we will
have had great advancement onthe EO, especially when we go
back to, you know, looking atthose prosperity zones, what are
the public-private partnershipsthat take place?
A big piece of this, you know,not on the defense side, we're
starting to see the money comethrough on the defense side, but
what does that look like forcommercial incentives?
Because as we look to, you know,the best builders abroad, they
(42:04):
are using those types ofincentives to be able to sustain
their shipbuilding industries.
So I think at one year, it'sreally understanding, you know,
a further lay of the land,whether that's from the maritime
industrial base, some of thework that Blue Forge has been
doing.
I would hope that there's abigger conversation on supply
chain and understanding that itwill take us time to, you know,
just as it takes time to buildan actual vessel hole, it will
(42:27):
take time to get the learningshere in the US to be able to do
things like valves and, youknow, it's a really easy example
is where do propellers comefrom?
Where are the foundries in theUS?
We could talk about that forhours.
I could.
Most people probably would notwant to.
So that would be my one year.
My five year would be that we,you know, are coming out of
(42:48):
seeing some of the first classesof vessels that are, you know,
the recipients of these moniesand these incentives, and that
shippers are helping drive thechange and asking questions and
helping being part of, you know,I'd say a little bit of the
pressure to allow for some ofthese supply chain areas that
are going to allow vessels todeliver more quickly.
But then also on the maintenanceand repair side, how do we
(43:10):
better leverage what we have,what we have in the way of dry
docks today, what we have in allthese locations around the US,
having yards that have maybebeen, you know, less busy or
inactive being brought back tolife.
And then in 10 years, you know,if I could believe that it's,
you know, we're becoming apowerhouse in the world again
for shipbuilding on thecommercial side.
And what does that look like?
(43:31):
It's repeatability, it's costefficiencies, it's building
beyond onesie twosies so thatwe're truly getting the gains
that you learn as you build, youknow, a class of vessels, a
fleet of vessels.
SPEAKER_02 (43:43):
That's right.
Well, that's so that'sencouraging.
Uh, hopefully, I think you'reright.
I think that we do need to breakit down incrementally.
And I think that those are goodtargets to have and would be
successful wins if we were toget there.
So thank you so much for theconversation today.
This has been such a richdiscussion, such a great
conversation.
I I loved hearing more aboutyour journey.
I mean, we we we're friends, soI'm I'm happy to learn more
(44:06):
about you know your yourupbringing, but then also your
insights on where we're going.
This is some really interestingstuff that you're a part of.
And and so if if our listenerswant to learn more about Nest C,
how do they follow your work?
How do they get in touch withyou?
SPEAKER_01 (44:18):
Yeah, absolutely.
We're on LinkedIn, NESS, funfact, made a name.
So Ness dash C for you militarytypes, Ness Taxi, and that's our
website as well, NESS-sa.com.
Happy to connect with people,always happy to talk about
shipbuilding and what we can doto further our abilities in the
United States.
So thank you so much, Lauren.
SPEAKER_02 (44:36):
That's wonderful.
Well, thank you so much forjoining us today.
We'll be watching Nessi closelyas you continue to help shape
the future of shipbuilding.
So thank you so much, Caitlin.
SPEAKER_01 (44:44):
Thank you so much, Eileen.
SPEAKER_02 (44:51):
Shipyards may not always make the headlines, but
they're foundational to botheconomic competitiveness and
national defense.
And conversations like this showwhy the US needs a long-term
strategy for capacity andinnovation in the shipyard and
in shipbuilding generally.
Stay tuned here for moreinsights like this.
(45:11):
Sometimes it's industry leaders,sometimes it's just me and a
microphone breaking it all down,but always in plain language and
always with an eye on whatreally matters in the world of
ocean shipping.
If you like this episode, besure to follow, subscribe, and
leave a review.
Want to go deeper on thesetopics or bring this kind of
insight to your team, visitthemaritimeprofessor.com to
explore corporate trainings,tailored briefings, and
(45:33):
on-demand webinars, all designedto make complex maritime
regulations practical and easyto understand.
And if your organization needshelp navigating the legal or
strategic side of ocean shippingregulations, head over to Squall
Strategies.
That's where I provideconsulting services on
regulatory guidance and policysupport and anything you might
need across the global supplychain.
(45:54):
As always, this podcast is foreducational purposes only and is
not considered legal advice.
If you need an attorney, contactan attorney.
Until next time, I'm LaurenBeegan, the Maritime Professor,
and you've just listened toByland Advice E.
See you next time.
Ready to go.
SPEAKER_02 (00:10):
You're listening to By Land and By Sea, powered by
the Maritime Professor.
When we talk about U.S.
maritime strength, shipyards areright at the center of that
conversation.
They're not just places wherevessels get built or repaired,
they're strategic assets.
And today I'm joined by someonewho knows shipyards and
(00:31):
shipbuilding inside and out.
Caitlin Hardy of NestisiConsulting.
Hi, welcome back to By Landed bySea, an attorney breaking down
the weekend supply chain,presented by Maritime Professor.
It's me.
I'm Lauren Beegan, former FMCInternational Affairs Attorney
and founder of the MaritimeProfessor and School Strategies.
By Landed by Sea is your go-toresource for navigating the
(00:53):
regulatory side of global oceanshipping.
And me, I'm your favoritemaritime attorney.
Excuse me.
I'm here to walk you throughboth ocean transport and surface
transport topics in the wildworld of supply chain.
As always, the guidance servicegeneral for educational purposes
only.
It should not be considered tobe legal advice, and there is no
attorney client privilegecreated by this video or this
(01:13):
podcast.
If you need an attorney, contactan attorney.
This is plain language maritimecreated so that anyone, not just
lawyers or industry insiders,can understand what's happening
in the world of shipping.
So let's dive into this week'sepisode because as you know,
ocean shipping moves the world.
Before we get jump into theepisode, though, I want to say
don't miss my next just in timelearning webinar on the brand
(01:36):
new section 301 port fees thatare about to go into effect
later.
What's that, mid-October,October 14th?
This is on the section 301 USTRport fees for the China-built or
China operated vessels.
It's happening, the just in timelearning class is happening
October 2nd at noon.
It's just 30 minutes, plainlanguage, practical takeaways
(01:57):
for importers, exporters,carriers, shippers, you name it.
If you have anything to do withthe maritime industry, this is
going to affect you.
You can register now at theBarentideprofessor.com.
And if you missed the liveversion of my last just in time
learning class, it was on FMCvs.
Marad, compare and contrast, whodoes what.
That class is now available ondemand in our just in time
(02:18):
learning series.
It's the perfect quick primer onhow the regulator and the
promoter fit into America'sMaritime System.
It was a really, really greatsession.
We've gotten a lot of reallyfantastic feedback on that.
So this week also brought medown to Orlando for the Women in
Agribusiness Summit.
It was an incredible chance toconnect with so many new facets
(02:40):
of the supply chain world.
Look, I'm very hooked into themaritime world, but I'm often
finding myself even in newconversations within this
already very niche niche area.
Commercial maritime and defenseor military maritime are often
two different networks ofmaritime conversations that I
regularly find very differentnetworks in.
(03:01):
But what I learned at the summitis that I've actually
unintentionally been leaving outbulk carriers in my
conversations.
Bolt grain exports out of the USare an incredible category, one
of the US, one that the USdominates in many ways, is what
I learned this week.
But the margins are slim,pricing is tight, and that means
that extra fees cansignificantly hinder the
(03:23):
competitiveness of the market.
Now we ended up havingconversations here about bulk
carriers in the Section 301 USTRport fees.
Admittedly, like I said, Ihadn't focused much on the bulk
side of things before.
But what I learned, and what I'mgoing to continue to research on
this, is that many of these boltcarriers are Chinese-owned or
Chinese built.
And unlike container vessels,bulk carriers don't have that
(03:46):
liner service, right?
So that's that regular dedicatedtrade route.
So if a vessel is going to gethit with a million dollar plus
fee, that might be enough of adeterrent to stop them from
calling US ports altogether.
So the current concern that wasexpressed to me was that this
could potentially eliminate theability of US commodities to get
to market, right?
(04:06):
If we don't have the bulkvessels coming and calling at
the US to pick up the grainexports, they could potentially
go away.
And that was the extremeconcern.
But I what I want to look intois was it extreme, or is this
maybe what they're going tostart anticipating seeing come
mid to end October, maybe earlyNovember?
Once these fees have come intoeffect, are we going to see bulk
(04:30):
carriers try to avoid these feesand potentially avoid the US
calls?
Look, even if the bulk carriersstill make these calls, which I
think that they might, and I'mreally interested to see are
some of these bulk carriersgoing to potentially either
reflag or come under ownershipof a US company, those would all
be ways of kind of helping toalleviate.
(04:52):
But even if they still call andthey're Chinese operated or
Chinese owned or built, thosefees get passed along, right?
Because it's not necessarily theproblem or the the it wasn't the
vessel's fault, I should say,right?
These vessels were built a longtime ago.
But those fees could potentiallyeat away at the competitiveness
(05:13):
of the commodity itself, right?
These US exports of grain, lowmargins here is what I'm
understanding.
And so any fees built on top ofthat could have a deletive
effect on the competitiveness ofthe market.
Like I said, I'm going to keeplooking into this because this
story I heard here was prettyjarring on all accounts as that
was explained to me.
(05:33):
I think it deserves moreattention as these US airport
fees take effect in just a fewweeks.
I've been encouraged to see thatthe international ocean carrier,
uh, you know, liner serviceocean vessels are for the most
part not going to be instillingsome sort of a surcharge,
general surcharge.
We're just going to see how itgoes.
(05:53):
But in the meantime, it's thebulk carriers that I'm, I hadn't
honestly I hadn't paid muchattention to.
And I'm going to start lookingfurther into that.
Remember, vessels arriving emptyor imbalanced, and US-owned
company vessels are exempt.
And so that's where I thinkmaybe there's something here
that I want to look into.
Maybe some of these bulk vesselsare being considered for
(06:15):
purchase by US companies to helpcarve out these exemptions.
If they arrive empty or inbalanced, that's another way of
having an exemption for the bulkcarriers.
I just don't know enough aboutthe fleet.
I need to look into it.
So as I learn more, I'll passthat along to you guys.
But hopefully we can we can findif there's going to be
exemptions.
Really, we got to keep thesecommodities going, right?
(06:36):
I'm going to keep digging intothis.
But even though my backgroundhere might be a little
incomplete, I wanted to raisethe issue because it's
important.
And I'd love to hear yourfeedback.
How is this going to impact you?
Because this ag world at thisconference is very concerned.
At the the women's women andagribusiness conference summit,
this was a fantastic summit thisweek in Orlando.
(06:57):
But the resounding concern wasthere that potentially these
bulk carriers are going to behit or inadvertently going to be
really having some troubles forthe bulk exports of the U.S.
commodities.
We also had some news out of theFMC this week.
There was a court case that cameout talking about the
(07:18):
detention-demurge ruling.
As I understand it, andadmittedly, I've been in this
summit, so I haven't taken aclose look, but I'll be doing
that for next week.
As I understand it, it's justthe motor carrier conversation
that has been put into thatcase.
The rest of the rule stillremains in place.
So detention and demurrage, the20 invoice requirements, the
30-30-30, right?
(07:39):
30 days to issue the invoice, 30days to dispute it and try to
button it all up 30 days after adispute is filed.
That all still, as I understandit, like I said, I have to take
a closer look.
And this is not legal advice,but as I understand it, the
majority of the rule stays inplace.
It's just the motor carrierconversation, whether or not
they should be assessed orinvoiced on that bill.
(08:01):
Because currently what the rulesays, it's only the billing
party or the build party or theconsignee, but nobody else,
which kind of means that thatmotor carrier, that's the part
that's still that I want to lookat that.
That's what this case decided.
So let's jump back into theinterview today, though.
I'm speaking to Caitlin Hardy,founder of Nestie Consulting.
(08:22):
And what we talk about is whatshipyards mean for U.S.
maritime strategy, from thelocal builds that spark debate
to the role of repair yards tothe bigger picture of national
security and innovation.
This was a really thoughtfulinterview.
I thought that this was a reallywide-ranging discussion.
You're not going to want to missit.
So let's roll that conversation.
Here's my interview with CaitlinHardy.
(08:42):
Today on By Land and By Sea, I'mjoined by someone who has truly
built a career at the crossroadsof tradition and innovation in
the maritime space.
Caitlin Hardy is the founder andmanaging director of Nestie, a
strategic consulting firmworking at the intersection of
just that maritime, high-tech,and also defense.
Before launching Nestie, Caitlinserved as president of Congress
(09:06):
Underwater Technology here inthe U.S., where she led efforts
around sub-sea systems, advancedsensors, robotics, winning major
government contracts, andexpanding their U.S.
presence.
Her career spans navalarchitecture, shipbuilding, and
maritime operations from time totime, from time at Crowley Foss,
and the Holland American Lionsto maritime tech startups like
(09:26):
IO Current and Polyverse.
She's a U.S.
Naval Academy graduate in navalarchitecture, holds an MBA from
the University of Washington,and today also serves on the
boards of Washington MaritimeBlue, Women Offshore, and the
Lloyd's List editorial board.
Caitlin is truly passionateabout bringing new technology
into shipbuilding.
So, Caitlin, welcome to theshow.
(09:46):
Thank you for being here today.
SPEAKER_00 (09:48):
Hi, Lauren.
Thank you so much for having meon by land and by sea.
It's exciting to get to chatwith you today.
SPEAKER_02 (09:53):
Yeah, it's so great to have you here, and I'm so
happy that you were able tojoin.
This is going to be such a greatconversation.
You've built such a fascinatingcareer.
So before we dive too far intoNessy, the company that you
started, can you walk us throughyour background a little bit?
How did your education and earlyexperience shape the way you
approach shipbuilding today?
SPEAKER_01 (10:12):
Sure.
I think, you know, sort of theearliest years is I grew up on a
small island and I've said a lotof times sort of, you know,
publicly that I always wanted toescape that island, and so I
learned to sail.
And that passion for sailing andbeing on the water ultimately
led me to the Naval Academy.
When I went through school, andI think now there are the same
number of naval architectureprograms in America, which is
(10:32):
six, and that is not nearlyenough.
It wasn't enough then, and itwasn't enough now.
Um, but that you know,foundation and understanding
what it takes for a vessel fromthe earliest times that you're
thinking about it on the back ofa napkin, going through the
design spiral and all thosedesign considerations is what
ultimately led me here.
So I started out as a navalarchitect under Crowley when I
first got out of the Navy, did alot of new vessel construction,
(10:55):
salvage, sea lift, sort ofanything and everything in
between.
And I've worked across a lot ofdifferent verticals in my
career.
So I talk about, you know,coming up through the Hawes
pipe, not as a mariner, but asan engineering perspective,
understanding what it takes tobring one design together for
one vessel, what theimplications are for everything
from stability to you know whatthe loading goes into, the
structural piece of it, thedifferent, you know, major
(11:18):
components that you'repopulating from different OEMs
and how you make those choicesto looking across a class of
vessels, how does that fit inwithin your larger fleet?
And then your fleet overalloperating globally, what are the
considerations for ensuring thatyou're able to support
maintenance, you're able tosupport your crews, and you're
able to support the mission ofdelivering whatever the goods,
the people, et cetera, are.
SPEAKER_02 (11:39):
That's great.
And having that navalarchitecture experience is so
fascinating because that wellsituates you for having these
conversations.
You understand the baseline ofhow ships work, really how they
how they're built, and you canbuild on top of that into this
new tech world that you kind offind yourself moving closer to.
Now, before we go too far, Ialways like to kind of make sure
(12:01):
that my audience understandssome of the lingos you're
talking about.
So you said Hospiper.
Can you explain that a littlebit on in in kind of the like
pair and contrast to thelicensed world?
SPEAKER_01 (12:10):
Yeah, oh gosh, it it's a position on board a
vessel and working your way up.
So really it's that learnedexperience, that hands-on
experience as you move throughthe ranks, uh, the Hawes pipe,
you know, coming up the chainfrom the anchor, you know,
(12:30):
leading all the way up.
And so it's this way that wetalk about experience, not just
a practical from an academicperspective of, you know, going
to university, but really thisearned experience.
And I think the legitimacy thatgoes behind those who have
served and worked in thesereally hard-demanding physical
roles of what they bring to ourindustry.
SPEAKER_02 (12:49):
And that's it too.
So uh one thing that that wewould often talk about kind of
in the the DC world is thatHospiper, even getting to kind
of be certified and or or it'sit's unlicensed from the
merchant marine credential, butthere are some programs that
allow you to go into a Hospiperworld.
They can be tough to follow.
(13:09):
I I feel like there's someadministrative perhaps cleanup
that could happen there to makeit a little bit easier because
it's it's a just a differentpath, but it should have a clear
path.
And right now it feels a littlebit like whack-a-mole.
SPEAKER_01 (13:22):
I I agree with you completely on that.
You know, I think we bothprobably have some friends who
are doing things on the crewingside of where it can help reduce
some of these burdens.
In a lot of ways, I would see itas being similar to, you know,
you could say a military pilotwho has a very clear path of
what it takes to go and work forthe airlines.
But the flip side is, you know,you could have someone who
starts out in small planes andthey're building hours and
(13:44):
building hours, and then theyget that, you know, certified
flight instructor.
In a lot of ways, I thinkthere's comparison where that is
maybe a much smoother path thanwhat it is for those folks in
maritime who are, you know, justgoing out and finding a role,
finding themselves on board andworking their way up.
SPEAKER_02 (13:59):
And it's it's so fantastic to actually, you know,
pull somebody in who kind ofshowed that passion early and
and wanted to work through,right?
I mean, that's that's a such afantastic approach to getting
into the industry.
So, okay, so let's talk aboutyour company a little bit.
So, what inspired you to launchNess C?
What gaps did you see in theshipbuilding industry that
(14:20):
weren't really being filled?
And and what were some of thethings that you wanted to tackle
with this new venue?
SPEAKER_01 (14:26):
For sure.
No, it's definitely scary tothink about, you know, leaving a
corporate role and going outonto your own, starting
something new, is that holethere?
I launched Nest C before theadministration had changed, but
even then there were a lot ofsigns that, regardless of which
way the presidency went, thatthere were going to be
significant changes in theUnited States around
shipbuilding.
I think for me, a lot of whatI've been seeing, you know, over
(14:47):
my career, but certainly overthe last couple of years, was
reflected finally in there beingmore of a willingness towards
new technology and maritime.
I would say pre-COVID, I'm fromthe Northwest, from the Seattle
area.
There's a huge amount of techhere.
And most people have no idea theamount of maritime that's here,
the wide variety of vessels.
I've had the opportunity to lookto work for a lot of really
(15:08):
great Jones Eck companies andinternational companies.
And I was always a bit surprisedat the reluctance to try not
just sort of the new crazytechnologies that we maybe work
with at Messi today, but thingsthat were available off the
shelf that could make peoplesafer at sea, reducing OpEx,
reducing that initial capex forthe investment you're making
into a vessel for whatever itsmission might be.
And in my time at Kongsburg, Imean, Kongsburg leads as a tech
(15:30):
leader, largest maritime OEM inthe world, we would have a lot
of really amazing founders orpeople who were looking at going
off onto their own, come up withideas.
And I was in a role where, youknow, you just don't have time
to, you know, have all thoseconversations for the amount of
people that are reaching out toyou and started to see that it
was really exciting the numberof people who weren't
traditionally from our industry.
(15:51):
And that what there was becomingmore of a willingness from our
industry to be open tonewcomers, but that when those
newcomers got here, they'd neverheard of class societies before.
They'd never heard ofregulatory, you know, flag
state.
They had all these great ideas,but thought they were going to
bypass, you know, the gates thatare in place to ensure that
things are done in what we wouldsay is the proper way, or at
least the legal regime that wedo have to operate in maritime
(16:14):
with or without this greattechnology.
And so that was really part ofthe genesis of Nessie on the
maritime technology piece, or Iwould say at this point, we're,
you know, ocean technology, atleast adjacent.
The other piece for me was I wasdoing a huge amount of work in
defense, and I felt a hugeamount of urgency.
Kongsberg has been around forover 200 years.
(16:34):
They're driving hard to ensurethat there is, you know, a lot
of leading tech anddifferentiators there.
But as I saw these new companiescoming, I felt like there was an
opportunity that what they hadwas so novel, but not
necessarily understanding thepath of how to get there.
And I thought if they hadsomeone who'd maybe been through
that before, it would give thema greater chance of success that
(16:54):
you know is great for the US andtheir allies.
SPEAKER_02 (16:57):
Yeah, and that's so true.
Just because you have a greatidea doesn't mean that you have
this entire background of howthe shipbuilding works.
And so it's such a fantasticopportunity for you to help say,
look, I know how this all works.
And also I'm forward-leaning inmy thinking of I can piece that
round peg in this square holebecause it's actually not that
(17:18):
dissimilar.
It can, it can fit, right?
And that's kind of where youcome in is like, that's a great
idea.
You're missing this one littleelement, and then it'll work.
SPEAKER_01 (17:26):
Exactly.
It's that one little elementwhere it could also be like, oh
my gosh, what you've come upwith is brilliant.
But if you're willing, have youconsidered this segment or this
idea?
Like, do you realize thisapplication could also do, you
know, feature X, which has ahuge you know, impact to this
community?
SPEAKER_02 (17:42):
Yeah, and actually that's one thing, that's one of
the themes that we've kind ofbeen talking about on this
podcast is the blending of thetraditional idea with the
future, but also military andcommercial.
One thing that came up with myinterview with acting
administrator Sang Yi was thatthere is this kind of two
different conversations where wehave military use and military
(18:06):
shipbuilding, but commercial useand commercial shipbuilding is
equally important, but sometimesfeels like it gets a little bit
left behind.
And it's it's a very importantside of it.
And actually, arguably, we needthe military readiness, but we
also need the in the commercialsustainability of the industry
moving forward.
So speak to to the kind ofdefense versus commercial side.
SPEAKER_01 (18:28):
Right.
Oh, there's so much there.
And I I think that's it rightthere, right?
Defense versus commercial.
Even in you know, actingadministrator Yi's comments, it
was, you know, they are veryseparate at times.
And having worked in both, Ithink that was the other area
where I saw Nessie could be atranslator, where I felt like
I've always been a translator inmy roles, is how do you take the
best of what already exists toaccelerate the curve of where
(18:50):
you're trying to go, right?
Responding to that sense ofurgency.
That could be something like youhave a cruise ship that needs to
leave in three weeks becauseyou've passengers booked, right?
That is very different thanpreparing for war or more
potential conflict.
But what is shared across thoseare a lot of processes that, you
know, it's no sense in havingone for crews and one for
military when there's a lot oflessons learned.
(19:12):
You know, what I see it's alwaysstill entertaining to me, and
this isn't meant to, you know,sort of make fun or be light,
but to hear about vesselconstruction management.
I came out of the military, wentstraight into an operating
company that had acquired anaval architecture firm that had
been around for over 50 years.
That was always the model.
Like my brain really just can'tthink about not having vessel
(19:33):
construction management be partof your program.
And so I was really excited forNSMV when you know Merrad hired
Tote and brought on like peoplewho have done this before.
But that should be the standard.
That shouldn't be something thatis considered earth-shattering
in the US.
And I feel like we should bebeyond the point where we're
still talking about that isexcitement because our allies
and those who aren't our allieshave been doing that model for
(19:55):
so long.
So I think there's a lot ofpractices from the commercial
world, right?
One that's as simple as whyaren't we finalizing our designs
earlier and governmentshipbuilding and moving on?
All of these design changes andconsiderations are killing us in
time.
It's killing us in qualitybecause we're constantly
adjusting to where we think weneed to be.
And then with what we end up isjust sort of this haphazard
(20:15):
thing that maybe doesn't meetthe mission of what we initially
intended.
And so I think there's a lot ofthis like, all right, we are
committing to this and we needto trust that we're making the
right decision with the abilityto pivot maybe in future designs
later.
On the commercial side, youknow, it's things.
One of the gentlemen that Iworked for talked a lot about
how cruise ships have a higherop tempo than military vessels.
(20:36):
One of the teams that I had, wewould fly in 1,200 contractors
for almost every cruise ship drydock, tear everything apart in a
two to three week period, andsail on time.
And in the military, that isjust almost comical to even
consider that that could bepossible.
I was really excited to seerecently, I think it had been
MIB, the maritime industrialbase under the Navy, which is
(20:58):
primarily focused on governmentbuilds, but looking at how we
leverage commercial builds, hadtaken a group of program
officers to a cruise ship drydock just to see like how is
this done and something that'sadjacent to where we are.
SPEAKER_02 (21:11):
And that's exactly it.
I want to break that down.
I really kind of highlight thatpoint.
1,200 people came in while thevessel was in dry dock for
fixes, right?
For fixes, for updates, formaybe refreshes of cabins.
But 1,200 people all came in sothat they could work at the same
time instead of a dry dock thatkind of drags on, right?
It's how many maybe 50 peopleare working on a dry dock
(21:33):
otherwise, maybe 100, but 1,200people to fly in because exactly
as you're saying, they got toget that cruise ship back out
there making money.
And that's one of the thingsthat that kind of I keep
highlighting is we need to haveeconomic engines associated with
these vessels, right?
And that's where the cargo comesin.
A lot of my listeners areshippers, and so they understand
the economic drivers help movethings along faster out of
(21:56):
necessity.
They have to, because if it sitsthere, it's losing money.
Exactly.
SPEAKER_01 (22:00):
No, and I think for your shippers, you know, it's
it's so easy to look at avessel.
I mean, there are thesemagnificent, you turn a vessel
on its side and it's you knowlarger than most skyscrapers in
America.
But when you consider what goesinside of a vessel, right?
We can do shipbuilding in theUS.
We can figure out how to scaleshipbuilding.
But I see a lot of this beingchallenges around supply chains,
which is something that yourshippers are expert in because
(22:23):
they're managing manufacturingjust for probably different
types of components or differentthings, you know, whether it's
clothing or consume, moreconsumer-based items.
That's really one of the largestchallenges that I see that we
have to US shipbuilding is thesupply chain piece.
And so then this also becomesthe balance of getting items to
a vessel build quickly enough,but deciding as a country.
(22:44):
And this is where, you know,America first says we need 100%
American components.
Well, what does that mean?
What does it mean from thetimelines and now balancing the
sense of urgency?
If we didn't feel like we had apotential conflict with Taiwan
or even customers who arewaiting to get a vessel out of
the dock, what does that meanand how it shifts our decision
making for the vessels that weare trying to deliver?
SPEAKER_02 (23:05):
That's right, because it's pushing everything
forward.
We have to deliver this, whichthere's always that urgency, but
if you know that it's going tostart losing money, right, at a
certain point, like if there areeconomic drivers part of it.
That's it's so true.
And it's such a powerful driverthat the the inertia of kind of
commerce, right?
And moving along.
(23:27):
So you're at the heart of thisinnovation in shipbuilding.
So what tech advances are youmost excited about right now?
What how are they changing theindustry?
What's some kind of cool thingsthat you're watching that that
our listeners might find justfascinating?
SPEAKER_01 (23:41):
Oh gosh, there's so many.
I I have had such a blast thislast year.
And you know, I I would say theroles I've sort of self-selected
into, you know, during my careerhave really been on the leading
edge of innovation and maritime.
It totem Foss had an opportunityto work on the first LNG barge
in the US, one of the first inthe world.
You know, Holland America saw alot of new things that were
(24:01):
coming on, say it's bridgeequipment.
And so the areas that I work intoday were quite broad in the
types of technologies that wesupport.
One I'm really excited about,they're starting to make waves
in the commercial world, iscalled Takaro Blue.
They are a company that takesexisting COTS radar and does an
AI ML layer.
So if you think about Orca AI, Ithink everyone has seen that
(24:21):
video of the collision off ofthe UK that was caught on video
through their system.
I see Takaro Blue as the missinglayer of if you were able to
take your existing radar andimmediately have contacts that
are showing through the radar isbeing auto-tuned.
You don't even have to have amariner that is tuning the
radar.
What does that do for yoursituational awareness?
(24:42):
And, you know, getting to apoint where you're able to track
radar targets way faster thanwhat ARPA does today for those
who aren't necessarily familiarwith being on the bridge.
It feels like this veryantiquated system of looking at
like 70s or you know, 60s, 50sspace consoles.
It moves beyond that, but it's avery simple add-on.
And I think those are thetechnologies that I gravitate to
(25:03):
are what are the things we cando quickly that again make
people safer at sea, make usable to ship or have in a you
know more responsible way or bebetter aware of what's taking
place near us.
And so I think what thistechnology does, we're doing a
lot in the defense world rightnow with uncrewed surface
vessels, but there's a lot oftranslations, especially in busy
shipping channels.
If you could see every target onyour radar and a system is
(25:26):
automatically tracking those,telling you the speed, telling
you where they're anticipatingthat they will go, that's quite
powerful.
Another technology that's been alot of fun to see has been with
the fleet robotics team.
So there's a lot of differentwhole cleaning robots.
I would say, you know, shippersshould be like, why do I care
about a whole cleaning robot?
Well, you care because who'sultimately paying for the cost
(25:47):
of fuel, right?
Is that on the charter?
And if it is, then that'ssomething that is absolutely
being passed on to you.
So if you can reduce fuel costsbecause the hole passing through
the water, you know, fluiddynamics is that much more
efficient, that's a really goodstory.
But I also see a lot ofapplications with the hole
cleaning robots, especially asthey get to a point where they
(26:08):
are able to operate whileunderway, which is quite novel
to think about this littlerobot, you know, roombaying its
way along the hole as a vesselsails or steams along, that it
could be providing informationabout the gauging of the paint
coating thickness, the steelthickness.
Is there something on the bottomof the hole that shouldn't be
there from a defenseapplication?
(26:29):
So those are two that I thinkare really neat.
Another one that I am workingwith that has been interesting
to see the conversation in theUS, a little bit less related to
commercial.
Again, we're spending a lot oftime on defense, but is with
Eureka Navalcraft.
And they are taking existingdesigns from oil and gas.
These are surface effect shipsthat are already classed, have
(26:50):
been proven to oil and gasstandards, which are a very,
very hard, you know, customer tomeet, and are optionally manned
or uncrewed surface vessels.
And so what these are able to dois, you know, if you think about
the you know, Pacific Ocean andpotential conflicts of the
future, how do we get people toshore?
How do we get people in and out?
How do we send in payloads, youknow, potentially weapons where
(27:13):
we don't want people to be?
And so where I see thedifference in a lot of these
technologies, Eureka is a greatexample, is this balance of not
having to do something that's soearth-shattering that it's going
to take us 15 to 30 years to getto.
But what's something that wecould begin building today that
will be ready to go and be ableto make an impact?
And when I look back, you know,sort of my training, especially
(27:35):
in something like stability, Isee so many of the renderings of
vessels today that I'm like, oh,like that's a really pretty
picture.
And I can tell just looking atsomething that, like, is that
even going to stay upright?
And that's one of the challengesthat we have is we don't have
enough people in America whohave formal training in things
like naval architecture to beable to suss out what is real
(27:56):
and what's not.
And so it's been fascinating,you know, working with a lot of
different companies, going down,you know, the line of venture
capital or private equity asthey work to grow, you know, the
ability to fund their companiesand prove out these technologies
that there is really a gap in alot of these firms of how do
they invest?
(28:16):
If we're talking aboutshipbuilding, you know, what
does that mean for laying a keeland the ceremony that we have
around it?
There's a lot of announcementsrecently where, you know,
everyone is laying a keel, butlike, is there actually a keel
there?
Like, what is that that you're,you know, maybe there's a coin
underneath.
I hope, you know, stick to atradition.
And so those are some of thethings that I'm seeing right now
that I think are interesting.
(28:38):
I think there's also a lot oftechnology that is new to the
US, but that's not necessarilynew in shipbuilding.
And for us, I feel like that'smaybe one of the most key
things.
You know, the smallinfrastructure grants that came
out of MARAD for ports andshipyards are fantastic, but
they're still such small amountsof money.
$8 million barely moves theneedle in the conversation.
(28:59):
And so, how do we leverageexisting technology that's
coming out of South Korea,coming out of Finland, Norway,
Japan to ensure that we're ableto get to a point where we can
keep pace with being best inclass for shipbuilding?
SPEAKER_02 (29:13):
Well, and that leads me to all really fascinating
stuff that you're bringing uphere and great applications and
kind of out-of-the-box thinking.
But that leads me to somethingthat I often bring up in this
show.
Kind of there, I see kind of twodifferent worlds of your, like
if we break it down into likethe most basic version.
We have the F-150, right?
We have the like, and I guesswhen I'm always thinking of
(29:34):
commercial cargo vessels when Iwhen I think of this example,
but we have the F-150, right?
I mean, it's a floatingpaperweight, it does the job.
It really hasn't been updated inmany years.
It's gotten bigger, but it'skind of from my basic
understanding, the the samething, but larger.
And then I just think that wehave an opportunity for a cyber
trust model, like just to breakthe mold, something funky.
(29:57):
You look at it and you're like,wow, how to That works.
Do you think that, and you kindof mentioned we have these
drawings that are like, oh, thatlooks nice, but like, is that
going to actually work?
Do you think that there's anopportunity for a break the mold
cyber truck model, or do youthink that fundamentally vessels
have to look and be a certainway?
I mean, we've seen somedifferent hull, you know,
(30:20):
material being used on on justkind of pleasure craft, but to
get to that scale of a largecargo vessel is a different
world.
SPEAKER_01 (30:27):
Yeah, definitely.
I I mean it's the material sideis really fascinating right now.
We're seeing, you know, naturalcomposites, things made out of
like flaxseed.
I'm, you know, talking with ateam that's looking at that,
that doesn't really scale from astrength perspective.
We call that longitudinalstrength, right?
The worst thing that you couldhave happened other than a fire
is that your ship cracks inhalf.
But I I think the F-150Cybertrack is a great analogy
(30:50):
and way of thinking through.
I'm probably the Debbie Downerin this because I would say, as
much as I love the approach thatSpaceX has taken, I don't think
that's where Americanshipbuilding is today.
I don't think that we are those,you know, certainly for things
like aircraft carriers fornuclear submarines.
But when we're looking at justmoving goods, right, going back
(31:10):
to 90% of everything moves bythe ocean, I'm concerned that
we've forgotten how to makeF-150s.
Our tier two, tier three yardsare fantastic.
But as we really look at likehow do we improve blue water
shipbuilding in the US, thatwould be my first focus.
And I would say, let's teach ourworkforce how to build F-150s.
Because I think about howcomplex it would be, you know,
(31:31):
navigating a vessel, but eventhinking about like flying an
airplane.
Like, let's learn how to fly atwo or four seater Cessna before
we jump in a lair jet.
And I feel like we're jumpinginto that jet right now with all
these conversations aroundbuilding LNG carriers in the US.
I understand, you know, the USTRside moving 1%, you know, from
the US, but an LNG carrier isarguably one of the most complex
(31:53):
types of vessels you couldbuild.
And we're not even talking aboutnew designs here.
We're talking about existingdesigns.
If we're looking at things likemembrane tanks, you know, for
those who are less familiar withshipping, it's these highly
precise, you know, welds thattake place.
It's a different type of weldingto a large degree, the systems
(32:13):
integration that takes place.
So all of the differentsensoring systems, all the
different layers that you'rebringing into a vessel, on the
flip side, a piece that's notreally related to your shippers
today, but will be at some pointis icebreakers, right?
When we look at the Arcticopening up, expecting that, you
know, in the next decade, lessthan a decade and a half, that
the Arctic will be navigableyear-round, what does that mean
(32:36):
for shipping routes?
But are icebreakers really wherewe should be starting?
And so, you know, as a navalarchitect, I never expected that
I would hear about shipbuilding,you know, from the president
speaking to Congress.
That's an exciting moment.
But the hard part is how do weget our workforce to the point
where they're beyond buildingF-150s?
And so, you know, if I was sortof queen for a day, I'd be like,
(32:58):
let's build as many tankers aswe can, something that is
repeatable and straightforwardand gets people to a really high
quality point and understandingof what we're doing, and then go
after those hard things.
SPEAKER_02 (33:11):
That's so important.
I love that you said that too,because I think you're probably
right.
We perhaps we haven't totallyforgotten how to build an F-150,
but we could certainly use a lotmore practice, right?
We could certainly use gettingfaster at it, uh, getting better
at it, kind of all of thosethings, right?
So I think those economies ofscale, right?
(33:32):
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah, exactly.
Well, and so so you are fromWashington State, you're local
to Washington State, and there'sbeen some exciting news about
ferry build.
So certainly, right?
Building in the US, but they'rehappening in Florida.
It's Eastern shipbuilding inFlorida, which has stirred up
some strong feelings around theWashington State world.
Talk to me a little bit aboutthat and and how we can kind of
(33:52):
all work together, but how it'simportant to kind of have some
competition still in there.
SPEAKER_01 (33:56):
It is.
So Washington State Ferries,largest ferry system in the US.
A lot of the vessels that wehave, we have a little over 20
vessels right now.
COVID was an incrediblychallenging period, both from
the age of the vessels, butreally from workforce.
And, you know, I we've beentalking about this for years and
you know, circles you and I areboth in of like this silver
tsunami, right?
(34:17):
Of people retiring.
And you can only sort of keeppaying people a little bit extra
to keep them on until wherethey're finally going to be
like, I actually need to retire.
And I would argue that's youknow, a bit of what's happened
at Washington State Ferries.
I grew up in a place where werely on Washington State Ferries
to get home.
My family members, if they can'tget off island, can't go to the
doctor, we can't go and do, youknow, big grocery shops, things
(34:39):
of that nature.
So it's not just this like niceto have, but it is like a
critical way of something that'sinfluencing your life.
And so for the recentannouncement that Washington
State Ferries had decided for,you know, not just the first
round of bids that went out thatcame back in from the state, uh,
from yards within Washingtonstate, but allowing going to the
state legislature in Washingtonto say, you know, we are beyond
(35:02):
this percentage of extra costbecause we're building in
Washington, we'd like to lookoutside the state.
I would say it's a point of hugecontention right now.
We have a new governor.
It's someone who rides theferries a lot.
I am happy to see that we'rejust getting boats built.
And for a lot of those whoaren't from shipbuilding and
those who are, there's a lot offrustration of why wasn't a
(35:24):
Washington state yard chosen.
I think when I look at theconversation, I'm looking at the
commercial aspect of what needsto happen in America from you
know the discussions in the EO,from the Ships for America's
Act, but also the defense sidefocusing on, you know, what's
happening with China andpotentially Taiwan.
And my hope is that while thecontract for ferries is going to
(35:44):
Eastern, that the West Coastyards are likely about to become
so busy if I had to look at mycrystal ball because of the
current geopolitical situation.
And so I think it's interestingfrom you know this very
hyper-localized focus of didWashington give away the
potential to develop our, youknow, workforce here?
I think a lot of people wouldsay yes.
I'm still hoping the answer isno, because I think we're about
(36:07):
to see that renaissance on theWest Coast where a lot of
expertise flows into the WestCoast because it has to, by
nature, being able to not dealwith the Panama Canal and get
through to the Pacific much morequickly.
SPEAKER_02 (36:20):
Well, and I think that's true countrywide, is that
we have some fantasticshipbuilding operations already.
And so while we do havecompetition among the shipyards,
we need to also make sure thatwe're not losing what we have.
We're we're talking aboutbuilding new places, which is
exciting, but we have to makesure that we're not losing what
we have.
And they're at least in the NewEngland area, we've lost at
(36:40):
least one that I know aboutsince even the executive order
came out.
And it wasn't just, you know, ityou can't just flip a switch
right with one executive order.
But certainly we want to makesure that that slide doesn't
continue and that we actuallykeep and capture what we have
and continue to build becausewith those facilities is also
(37:01):
people know how to do this,right?
And and we don't want to losethat workforce.
We it's nothing else, we want togrow it, right?
So yeah, that's such a greatpoint.
And I think that you're you'reright on with kind of that
geopolitics mind of you know,it's a vessel, it's it's sailed
by land, by water, right?
So, you know, if it's if it'sbuilt on the west coast and will
be used in the in the Pacific,then it's already there instead
(37:22):
of having to maneuver it downand around the Panama Canal or
wherever it would need to get toto get over to that side.
You know, you all you we talkedabout the executive order a
little bit just now, but uhyou've worked for both Jones Act
companies and internationalcompanies.
And what was it like to see theexecutive order and the Ships
for America Act, the Ships Actlanguage come out?
What were some things that thatyou really kind of attached to?
(37:44):
You thought were good ideas?
Are there any areas that youthink might need a little bit
more kind of massaging or or oruh a little bit more refinement?
SPEAKER_01 (37:52):
I'm gonna be hiding out, I think, for the next
couple of weeks.
No, I mean both are fantastic,right?
What it says is that peoplerecognize that we have a
challenge of not having enoughvessels and skill sets to build
vessels in America today.
And so I think that theconversation is moving in the
right direction.
Know a lot of the teams I'vebeen involved in both.
You know, I think I certainlyhave a concern over, you know,
(38:15):
our shipbuilders, those of uswho have worked in yards both in
the US and abroad.
And I think the abroad piece isreally, really key because it
goes back to like, what is someof the best in class technology
for welding, for instance,right?
For things around piping,instead of, you know, kind of
eyeballing each piece, like whattools are out there that can
expedite the speed that we dothese things at, but also
(38:37):
increase the quality.
And so with both the EO andShift for America's Act, you
know, my first question is like,300 vessels of what type?
Again, what is it that we'retrying to build?
What is it that we really needthat is going to help solve
things for your shippers today,that is going to increase
resilience for Americans, right,in our own supply chains and how
we get things to our citizensfrom abroad.
(38:58):
I'm really excited about themaritime prosperity zones and
looking forward to seeing thefurther language that comes out
on those.
You mentioned, you know, a yardin New England that has closed
or, you know, lost some of theirworkforce.
In the Northwest, I've seensimilar things over the last few
years.
And, you know, it's I keep usingaviation examples close to that
world as well, but I kind ofequate it to people who move in
(39:19):
next to an airport and thenstart to complain about the
noise.
I'm the weirdo who's like, ohyes, like great, what just took
off?
And I would feel that way abouta shipyard, but a lot of people
aren't going to.
And so I think what's uniqueabout the maritime prosperity
zones that I'm looking forwardto seeing where they currently,
or at least I think differ fromopportunity zones, is
opportunity zones have beenplaced in underrepresented areas
(39:42):
that have economic challenges,right?
There's incentives to go in anddevelop.
But if you think about some ofthe prime examples of where we
could be building orreinvigorating shipbuilding in
America, those are maybe some ofthe most, you know, prized
places where people want to be,where people want to live, where
people want to have mixed-usedevelopments.
And so it'll be curious to seewhat is that balance that
(40:04):
happens overall.
SPEAKER_02 (40:06):
That's right.
And I think that that's the themarathon prosperity zones is
such an interesting idea becauseI've also heard it talked about
in that perhaps we find ways ofhaving maritime prosperity zones
internal to the country.
I mean, what we're talking Iowa,right?
We're talking Kansas.
Are there opportunities to haveshipbuilding be part of those
areas of the country to helpsupport this larger mission?
(40:30):
Because military, nationalsecurity is maritime security
and they're interlinked, right?
And that's something that I'vebeen so excited to see this
administration really lean in onsaying maritime security is
national security.
And so that intention drives usforward to continue to build
that out.
I also like that you kind ofpointed out, right?
There's there's some critiqueshere and there, but let's not
(40:50):
let perfect be the enemy ofgood, right?
We want to make sure that we'restill moving forward.
We want to make sure that westill have forward movement in
this area.
And so there are some thingsthat we could fix, precision
being one, right?
300 of what vessel?
But but it really is, it's agood idea, and and we're we're
kind of, you know, theindustry's on board.
Let's keep moving it.
So I have one more question foryou.
(41:11):
I think we're this has been areally interesting conversation.
I really love getting your takeon everything.
But as we wrap up, I kind ofwant to get your big picture
takeaway.
So, where do you see the USmaritime industry in one year,
perhaps five years, and perhaps10 years, right?
Because each of thoseincremental periods of time is
going to show a very differentworld of maritime readiness.
(41:33):
And to say one year we're gonnabe fully ready, not reality.
But what do you see as possiblein those increments, one, five,
and ten?
SPEAKER_01 (41:43):
I would like to think that in one year we will
have had great advancement onthe EO, especially when we go
back to, you know, looking atthose prosperity zones, what are
the public-private partnershipsthat take place?
A big piece of this, you know,not on the defense side, we're
starting to see the money comethrough on the defense side, but
what does that look like forcommercial incentives?
Because as we look to, you know,the best builders abroad, they
(42:04):
are using those types ofincentives to be able to sustain
their shipbuilding industries.
So I think at one year, it'sreally understanding, you know,
a further lay of the land,whether that's from the maritime
industrial base, some of thework that Blue Forge has been
doing.
I would hope that there's abigger conversation on supply
chain and understanding that itwill take us time to, you know,
just as it takes time to buildan actual vessel hole, it will
(42:27):
take time to get the learningshere in the US to be able to do
things like valves and, youknow, it's a really easy example
is where do propellers comefrom?
Where are the foundries in theUS?
We could talk about that forhours.
I could.
Most people probably would notwant to.
So that would be my one year.
My five year would be that we,you know, are coming out of
(42:48):
seeing some of the first classesof vessels that are, you know,
the recipients of these moniesand these incentives, and that
shippers are helping drive thechange and asking questions and
helping being part of, you know,I'd say a little bit of the
pressure to allow for some ofthese supply chain areas that
are going to allow vessels todeliver more quickly.
But then also on the maintenanceand repair side, how do we
(43:10):
better leverage what we have,what we have in the way of dry
docks today, what we have in allthese locations around the US,
having yards that have maybebeen, you know, less busy or
inactive being brought back tolife.
And then in 10 years, you know,if I could believe that it's,
you know, we're becoming apowerhouse in the world again
for shipbuilding on thecommercial side.
And what does that look like?
(43:31):
It's repeatability, it's costefficiencies, it's building
beyond onesie twosies so thatwe're truly getting the gains
that you learn as you build, youknow, a class of vessels, a
fleet of vessels.
SPEAKER_02 (43:43):
That's right.
Well, that's so that'sencouraging.
Uh, hopefully, I think you'reright.
I think that we do need to breakit down incrementally.
And I think that those are goodtargets to have and would be
successful wins if we were toget there.
So thank you so much for theconversation today.
This has been such a richdiscussion, such a great
conversation.
I I loved hearing more aboutyour journey.
I mean, we we we're friends, soI'm I'm happy to learn more
(44:06):
about you know your yourupbringing, but then also your
insights on where we're going.
This is some really interestingstuff that you're a part of.
And and so if if our listenerswant to learn more about Nest C,
how do they follow your work?
How do they get in touch withyou?
SPEAKER_01 (44:18):
Yeah, absolutely.
We're on LinkedIn, NESS, funfact, made a name.
So Ness dash C for you militarytypes, Ness Taxi, and that's our
website as well, NESS-sa.com.
Happy to connect with people,always happy to talk about
shipbuilding and what we can doto further our abilities in the
United States.
So thank you so much, Lauren.
SPEAKER_02 (44:36):
That's wonderful.
Well, thank you so much forjoining us today.
We'll be watching Nessi closelyas you continue to help shape
the future of shipbuilding.
So thank you so much, Caitlin.
SPEAKER_01 (44:44):
Thank you so much, Eileen.
SPEAKER_02 (44:51):
Shipyards may not always make the headlines, but
they're foundational to botheconomic competitiveness and
national defense.
And conversations like this showwhy the US needs a long-term
strategy for capacity andinnovation in the shipyard and
in shipbuilding generally.
Stay tuned here for moreinsights like this.
(45:11):
Sometimes it's industry leaders,sometimes it's just me and a
microphone breaking it all down,but always in plain language and
always with an eye on whatreally matters in the world of
ocean shipping.
If you like this episode, besure to follow, subscribe, and
leave a review.
Want to go deeper on thesetopics or bring this kind of
insight to your team, visitthemaritimeprofessor.com to
explore corporate trainings,tailored briefings, and
(45:33):
on-demand webinars, all designedto make complex maritime
regulations practical and easyto understand.
And if your organization needshelp navigating the legal or
strategic side of ocean shippingregulations, head over to Squall
Strategies.
That's where I provideconsulting services on
regulatory guidance and policysupport and anything you might
need across the global supplychain.
(45:54):
As always, this podcast is foreducational purposes only and is
not considered legal advice.
If you need an attorney, contactan attorney.
Until next time, I'm LaurenBeegan, the Maritime Professor,
and you've just listened toByland Advice E.
See you next time.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.