|
|
Post by thebessemerkid on Feb 22, 2015 9:00:06 GMT -8
The Tangent X58 thread got me thinking about the future of intermodal traffic, especially after the Panama Canal is widened. The West Coast longshoreman unions have a history of work issues and poor productivity. Markets are doing what they do, and adapting. When likely non-union ports open in Tampa, Mobile or wherever, one might expect a boom in intermodal traffic in the Southeast. CSX and NS are the obvious winners. Will they be scooped up by BNSF and UP, as has been long rumored?   The NS map has the Crescent Corridor highlighted. Here's an overall RR traffic map:  And here's an intermodal traffic map  |
|
|
|
Post by lajrmdlr on Feb 22, 2015 10:48:07 GMT -8
Seems like BNSF & UP will do something to combat the widen Panama Canal. There's too much money to be made to just roll over & give up.
|
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Feb 22, 2015 11:14:44 GMT -8
The Panama Canal widening will be finished in the relative near term, barring more financial issues. But it won't be the only game in town very long. The Chinese are building another canal in Nicaragua, north of Panama on the isthmus.
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Feb 22, 2015 11:23:50 GMT -8
Regarding the canals, I doubt there will be a dramatic change in US intermodal routing. Containers already go through the existing canal. There will just be bigger (more efficient) ships, now. Which means transit costs through the canal route will lower. Some. The added time of using either canal won't change. Intermodal shipping is a balance of cost and time. If cost gets cut in half, but time is tripled, will your customers go for it. Maybe. Maybe not. Some certainly will. Some surely will not.
There will be lots of calculating. Decisions will be made. But there won't be dramatic changes.
And small ports who want to become big ports should consider this before spending someone else's money. And running up debt.
And, I suppose, so should railroads.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Feb 22, 2015 11:28:11 GMT -8
But it won't be the only game in town very long. The Chinese are building another canal in Nicaragua, north of Panama on the isthmus. I don't think they've actually started, yet. I'm not finding any pictures of dirt being dug--just people in front of map boards. Ed |
|
|
|
Post by thebessemerkid on Feb 22, 2015 11:58:15 GMT -8
Regarding the canals, I doubt there will be a dramatic change in US intermodal routing. Containers already go through the existing canal. There will just be bigger (more efficient) ships, now. Which means transit costs through the canal route will lower. Some. The added time of using either canal won't change. Intermodal shipping is a balance of cost and time. If cost gets cut in half, but time is tripled, will your customers go for it. Maybe. Maybe not. Some certainly will. Some surely will not. There will be lots of calculating. Decisions will be made. But there won't be dramatic changes. And small ports who want to become big ports should consider this before spending someone else's money. And running up debt. And, I suppose, so should railroads. Ed I think the latest tantrum by the longshoreman unions will have a big effect. Just-in-time lives and dies by the supply chain. Plants were idled (Honda, others). I've watched industries shuttered after one too many strikes. I think time sensitive stuff will still go by the left coast, but anything that can be diverted, will. Canada may be abandoned altogether, as intermodal traffic and interest in hockey wanes.  |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Feb 22, 2015 12:19:44 GMT -8
I am sure both the ILWU and the PMA are aware that their customers are in a foul mood because of them. I do wonder why the shoving match, though.
I think that shipping choices will continue to be made mostly based on money. If the shutdown won't happen again for at least the duration of the contract, then shippers can plan for that.
And time sensitive stuff going east will still land on the west coast. A person could ask: How much of intermodal traffic is NOT time sensitive?
As I said, it's a balance of cost and time. If I were shipping a box to a customer in New Orleans, I would consider adding the extra time for the canal, subtract the time for transloading to and from rail, throw in the price difference, and consult my customer. After all, the box can just come off the ship, go on a chassis, and go out for delivery--quick, quick. The farther inland the boxes go, less money/time is saved by using a Gulf or even Atlantic port.
Also, consider the bigger ships soon to be using the canal. They need to go to ports with a fair amount of traffic. Not the smaller ports. That's because, to unload their full load, they'd have to make more stops. And customer's boxes would arrive later. The smaller ships that currently use the Canal already have productive routes, and little need/desire to change.
Ed
|
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Feb 22, 2015 13:24:41 GMT -8
But it won't be the only game in town very long. The Chinese are building another canal in Nicaragua, north of Panama on the isthmus. I don't think they've actually started, yet. I'm not finding any pictures of dirt being dug--just people in front of map boards. Ed Ed, They had a groundbreaking in December: www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/nicaragua-begins-construction-new-transoceanic-canal/Obviously, given the history of both canals and Nicaragua, it's far from a done deal. All indications are dirt will be turning soon. The Chinese have deeper pockets than the French ever did. Guess we'll see how serious it is over the next few months or if it goes on the backburner for another century. I mentioned it because I can see your points about how just the Panama Canal improvements may not make a big difference to the RRs. However, two canals in a price war could reshuffle the deck pretty substantially. Boxes handled by the RRs might not change much in numbers, but it might tend to cut miles hauled substantially if a lot of boxes hauled across the continent now ended up traveling a far shorter distance from port. There are a few family connections here. We lived in the CZ when I was a kid for a 2-year tour of duty. Don't remember much but they had plenty of jungle and RRs in addition to that canal. I used to have nightmares about getting stuck at the very end of the road bridge over the canal when it swung open. And my wife's grandfather worked for the CZ commission as a dredge captain. |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Feb 22, 2015 14:15:57 GMT -8
There are a few family connections here. We lived in the CZ when I was a kid for a 2-year tour of duty. Don't remember much but they had plenty of jungle and RRs in addition to that canal. I used to have nightmares about getting stuck at the very end of the road bridge over the canal when it swung open. And my wife's grandfather worked for the CZ commission as a dredge captain. Mike, Was the nightmare bridge the one at Miraflores? THAT one is certainly way-cool! I went through the canal a few months ago. It was pretty fantastic. We had some great lectures by one of the guys who worked there. It was weird seeing KCS locomotives pulling trains next to the canal. Ed |
|
|
|
Post by Great-Northern-Willmar Div on Feb 22, 2015 15:02:26 GMT -8
Before the Gulf and eastern ports pop the cork on the champagne bottle. The train can still bolt across the United States faster than the boat can navigate down to and through the Panama Canal and back up to the United States.
|
|
wsor
Full Member
The Route of the Ruptured Duck
Posts: 138
|
Post by wsor on Feb 22, 2015 15:25:18 GMT -8
With an increase in the size of the Panama Canal comes an increase is the fees for the bigger ships to use said canal. KCS with the PCRC is doing quite well unloading the ships, running trains across Panama, and reloading other ships. Apparently with all that handling, it is still cheaper and/or quicker than running ships through the canal. The newly widened canal may or may not be a player in the future. I wonder if Prince Rupert is party to the squabble or is CN able to exploit their port and get more business.
|
|
|
|
Post by TBird1958 on Feb 22, 2015 15:33:33 GMT -8
Doubtful you would ever have ships re routed to Canada or Mexico to unload U.S. cargo as import taxes on goods from China are vastly different.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Feb 22, 2015 16:04:23 GMT -8
For some reason I can't see dock workers unloading containers for minimum rage or a tad above with zero benefits. Its a high skilled job that demands high pay.
I agree there may be little change since a Intermodal train is still faster then a ship.
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Feb 22, 2015 17:23:49 GMT -8
Regarding the canals, I doubt there will be a dramatic change in US intermodal routing. Containers already go through the existing canal. There will just be bigger (more efficient) ships, now. Which means transit costs through the canal route will lower. Some. The added time of using either canal won't change. Intermodal shipping is a balance of cost and time. If cost gets cut in half, but time is tripled, will your customers go for it. Maybe. Maybe not. Some certainly will. Some surely will not. There will be lots of calculating. Decisions will be made. But there won't be dramatic changes. And small ports who want to become big ports should consider this before spending someone else's money. And running up debt. And, I suppose, so should railroads. Ed You obviously are not in the industry. Do you honestly think all of these $billions are being spent in Panama and the East Coast ports because there won't be any changes ?! CSX and NS are also spending $$$$$ to allow double stacks |
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Feb 22, 2015 17:28:31 GMT -8
For some reason I can't see dock workers unloading containers for minimum rage or a tad above with zero benefits. Its a high skilled job that demands high pay. I agree there may be little change since a Intermodal train is still faster then a ship. You don't understand the industry. It isn't all about time. If it was air cargo would be booming. It is about who gets the money and leveraging your haul. A ship through the new canal can keep the haul to itself to the east coast. And leverage the massive size to haul more containers for not much additional cost for the ship. It is amazing to me reading here people just dismissing a huge revolution in shipping and moving containers to the USA as "little change". Amazing. This will impact every route, every railroad, and every port in the USA as much as did stuck trains in the late 80s, despite the expert opinions here saying otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by Great-Northern-Willmar Div on Feb 22, 2015 18:00:41 GMT -8
You obviously are not in the industry. Are you in the logistics industry? Or are you in the industry of bloviation. |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Feb 22, 2015 21:31:19 GMT -8
You obviously are not in the industry. I have been both a contractor for and an employee of the Port of Oakland. What are your credentials? Ed |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2015 22:39:54 GMT -8
For some reason I can't see dock workers unloading containers for minimum rage or a tad above with zero benefits. Its a high skilled job that demands high pay. I agree there may be little change since a Intermodal train is still faster then a ship. You don't understand the industry. It isn't all about time. If it was air cargo would be booming. It is about who gets the money and leveraging your haul. A ship through the new canal can keep the haul to itself to the east coast. And leverage the massive size to haul more containers for not much additional cost for the ship. It is amazing to me reading here people just dismissing a huge revolution in shipping and moving containers to the USA as "little change". Amazing. This will impact every route, every railroad, and every port in the USA as much as did stuck trains in the late 80s, despite the expert opinions here saying otherwise. No, it won't. I was in the business as a RR marketing officer. Worked with NS & CSX, this was a topic of interest. The canal won't change the status quo much. Not to worry. |
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Feb 23, 2015 4:38:58 GMT -8
You don't understand the industry. It isn't all about time. If it was air cargo would be booming. It is about who gets the money and leveraging your haul. A ship through the new canal can keep the haul to itself to the east coast. And leverage the massive size to haul more containers for not much additional cost for the ship. It is amazing to me reading here people just dismissing a huge revolution in shipping and moving containers to the USA as "little change". Amazing. This will impact every route, every railroad, and every port in the USA as much as did stuck trains in the late 80s, despite the expert opinions here saying otherwise. No, it won't. I was in the business as a RR marketing officer. Worked with NS & CSX, this was a topic of interest. The canal won't change the status quo much. Not to worry. You can believe whatever you want to. It won't change reality. |
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Feb 23, 2015 4:59:14 GMT -8
You obviously are not in the industry. I have been both a contractor for and an employee of the Port of Oakland. What are your credentials? Ed Oakland is one of the ports to loose more business. |
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Feb 23, 2015 6:34:09 GMT -8
Atsfan,I truly doubt if the railroads will be effected like you claim..East,West or South those containers will still need to be moved---by rail.
Your doom and gloom thinking doesn't make sense in the grand scheme of transporting containers once they are unloaded.
|
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Feb 23, 2015 7:13:55 GMT -8
Marine container movements are down quite a bit right now where I am, but our domestic container movements are still high. The added transit time of moving through the widened canal will cause some shippers to shy away from using it and they will continue to use the Pacific ports. But other shippers for whom that isn't an issue may very well opt for the canal to Atlantic or Gulf port routes. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing more traffic in the Houston-Chicago lane.
UP and BNSF are the railroads that stand to lose out on this volume. I'd look for both to take measures to secure that business where they can. If that means strategic partnerships or outright acquisitions, neither would surprise me.
|
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Feb 23, 2015 8:07:52 GMT -8
SNIP Mike, Was the nightmare bridge the one at Miraflores? THAT one is certainly way-cool! SNIP Ed, Yes, that's the one. We actually were caught out there at least once near to or at the front of the traffic waiting, as my mom remembers it. Doubt if it was dangerous, just quite unexpected and awesome when you're 4 years old. I just remember bits and pieces of Panama, but it was pretty cool circa 1960ish. |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Feb 23, 2015 8:38:50 GMT -8
I have been both a contractor for and an employee of the Port of Oakland. What are your credentials? Ed Oakland is one of the ports to loose more business. Oh, no. Oakland is expecting business to rise 853% in 4.6 years. We've got a deal with Amazon to deliver containers with drones. That will TOTALLY bypass the railroads. And thus bring costs down 572%. Now, containers being heavier than your typical Amazon shipment, we've decided to augment the craft with the use of AGWARLD. That stands for: Anti-Gravity Warm Air Rising Lift Devices. To the layperson, that would mean hot-air gas bags. We have been searching for a ready source to fill the Devices, and I think you have just given me an idea to bring to The Big Guys. I'm pretty sure we'll be contacting you later to ask for your assistance. Thanks, Ed |
|
|
|
Post by Great-Northern-Willmar Div on Feb 23, 2015 8:47:17 GMT -8
Oakland is one of the ports to loose more business. Oh, no. Oakland is expecting business to rise 853% in 4.6 years. We've got a deal with Amazon to deliver containers with drones. That will TOTALLY bypass the railroads. And thus bring costs down 572%. Now, containers being heavier than your typical Amazon shipment, we've decided to augment the craft with the use of AGWARLD. That stands for: Anti-Gravity Warm Air Rising Lift Devices. To the layperson, that would mean hot-air gas bags. We have been searching for a ready source to fill the Devices, and I think you have just given me an idea to bring to The Big Guys. I'm pretty sure we'll be contacting you later to ask for your assistance. Thanks, Ed Thank you Ed you've made my day!  |
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Feb 23, 2015 15:01:30 GMT -8
Oakland is one of the ports to loose more business. Oh, no. Oakland is expecting business to rise 853% in 4.6 years. We've got a deal with Amazon to deliver containers with drones. That will TOTALLY bypass the railroads. And thus bring costs down 572%. Now, containers being heavier than your typical Amazon shipment, we've decided to augment the craft with the use of AGWARLD. That stands for: Anti-Gravity Warm Air Rising Lift Devices. To the layperson, that would mean hot-air gas bags. We have been searching for a ready source to fill the Devices, and I think you have just given me an idea to bring to The Big Guys. I'm pretty sure we'll be contacting you later to ask for your assistance. Thanks, Ed You sound like this guy dissing, the canal and saying Oakland won't be impacted. Good luck with that plan. |
|
|
|
Post by Great-Northern-Willmar Div on Feb 23, 2015 15:26:53 GMT -8
You sound like this guy dissing, the canal and saying Oakland won't be impacted. Good luck with that plan. You come off like you know everything about everything and for all we know you are a janitor at McDonalds. What sources are you relying on to make these bold statements? Are they in print? Where can the rest of the us in the unwashed public see these facts or is this just a you trying to start a donnybrook? That is one thing we've come to know about you. You are very adept at starting a ruckus and then slipping out the back door. Inquiring minds would like to know. |
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Feb 23, 2015 15:58:24 GMT -8
Oh, no. Oakland is expecting business to rise 853% in 4.6 years. We've got a deal with Amazon to deliver containers with drones. That will TOTALLY bypass the railroads. And thus bring costs down 572%. Now, containers being heavier than your typical Amazon shipment, we've decided to augment the craft with the use of AGWARLD. That stands for: Anti-Gravity Warm Air Rising Lift Devices. To the layperson, that would mean hot-air gas bags. We have been searching for a ready source to fill the Devices, and I think you have just given me an idea to bring to The Big Guys. I'm pretty sure we'll be contacting you later to ask for your assistance. Thanks, Ed Good luck with that plan. Luck??? Amazon has already been testing it. I saw it on the TV. It's gonna happen! And then see what good those canals are. I suppose the locks could be permanently closed and used for swimming pools. And those bridges that intimidate little kids can be permanently closed. Well, actually they'd be open. For traffic. So maybe "closed" is the wrong choice of words. Or maybe not. Hmmmmm..... It's also looking possible to go with some pretty enormous AGWARLD's--then we'll be running double-stacks!!!! The sky is literally the limit. And it all started at the Port of Oakland. Which is not really too far from Moffett Field:  They're actually thinking of using the old blimp building for storage of their excess AGWARLD's. Those are something you're not going to want to run short of. Not with just-in-time manufacturing. Ed |
|
|
|
Post by santafe49 on Feb 23, 2015 19:47:52 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by edwardsutorik on Feb 23, 2015 21:41:08 GMT -8
It might make more sense for the ports on the west coast of Mexico to maximize their service to Mexico. I mean, it's just right there outside the gates.
The route from China to the midwest is a lot farther through Mexico than through, uh, Oakland. Say. More time, more money. Oakland is more anxious about the short travel times through Seattle-Tacoma.
Ed
|
|
