\’Unprecedented\’ operation to refloat stricken Costa Concordia to cost £200 millionMay 19, 2012 Tim WorstallEnvironmentalism10 CommentsWhy? Why bother? That\’s at least 10 times the scrap value. Set a few charges and leave the remains to rust on the reef. previousSurprise!nextMore unlearning economics 10 thoughts on “\’Unprecedented\’ operation to refloat stricken Costa Concordia to cost £200 million” Grumpy Old Man May 19, 2012 at 8:23 am OH Tim! Think of the damage to the environment! Surreptitious Evil May 19, 2012 at 9:07 am It’s a wee bit close to that harbour just to leave it. I wonder what buying the island up entirely would have cost? 24 sq km off Tuscany? Using a tiny and probably unrepresentative bit of googling, a 420 acre winery in Certaldo has an asking price of just under €10m. That’s 1.7 sq km. So, that’s €134m (at an excessive valuation for the island – it’s not all as nice as that winery) +, what, €5m for Tim’s nice controlled explosion. I’ve just saved the insurers around $120m and made everyone on Giglio rich. I’ll take 10%, thanks! Surreptitious Evil May 19, 2012 at 9:09 am Oh, if you got a spare £8m, here’s the winery. With C15 villa, olive groves etc. Nice. Matthew L May 19, 2012 at 9:42 am If you did leave it there, there’s probably significant public support for having the captain hung in chains off the side. Timdifano May 19, 2012 at 9:50 am I think the real problem is the environmental impact should it sink, although the fuel has been removed there are many other pollutants on board. I do suspect however that even if a cost / benefit analysis resulted in the “just sink it there” solution it would be politically unacceptable locally, nationally and even to cruise operator. Would be interesting to know what the insurers think. Matt Wardman May 19, 2012 at 11:14 am >has an asking price of just under €10m. >That’s 1.7 sq km. So, that’s €134m (at an excessive valuation for the island – it’s not all as nice as that winery) Wishing you luck trying to buy houses on Giglio at 24k Euro per acre… Luke May 19, 2012 at 12:22 pm Ther could be an environmental argument for Tim’s proposal. Wrecks tend to be havens for fish – if you go on a fishing trip, the skipper often takes you to an old wreck. Might not apply so much in non-tidal waters, but I guess it still does a bit. blokeinfrance May 19, 2012 at 12:43 pm All salvage operations are “unprecedented”, but only in the sense that each is unique. This one has none of the major usual problems: remoteness, depth, storms, tides, condition of the wreck. To my mind it’s quite a simple operation that should make an extraordinary profit. Geoff Taylor May 19, 2012 at 2:39 pm The company is down by one ship, which means a lot of revenue being foregone over the next 20 years or so (or whatever the operating life of a liner is). The solution is simple; get another big boat quickly. If the choice is then between salvaging this one and commissioning a whole new one then I would guess that salvage is both quicker and cheaper. Surreptitious Evil May 20, 2012 at 9:40 pm If the choice is then between salvaging this one and commissioning a whole new one then I would guess that salvage is both quicker and cheaper. It’s not going to be re-useable. Even if it was mechanically sound (unlikely) it’s not going to get passengers at the sort of £/$/€ rates that will make it profitable. Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.