Container-on-Barge Pre-Feasibility Study Final Report - Towmasters ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

General Conclusions 1. The greatest opportunities for new cargo development were identified as the development of barge load and less than barge load (LBL) trade with Mexico and developing container-on-barge operations (COB). The COB operations could be used to develop import and export trade with Mexico; import and export trade through the Gulf Ports of New Orleans and Houston; the repositioning of empty containers; and, in some cases, the domestic movement of containers. Osprey Line has already begun successfully moving COB shipments between Houston and New Orleans and is in discussion with routes from Houston to Brownsville and Baton Rouge and Memphis. Intermodal Logistics Group (ILG), ACBL and MEMCO barge lines are also very interested in potential service. 2. The impediments to further developing these trades are formidable. For this trade to be successful, it needs to be efficient, reliable and cost-effective. Pittsburgh’s location as the northeastern most point on the inland waterways has the highest risk of inefficiencies due to the number of locks and dams barges need to maneuver in and out of the area. This could be detrimental to reliable service and transit times. Most terminals on the inland waterway lack the knowledge of handling containers and the infrastructure for storing loaded and empty containers at their facility and need guidance. The facilities themselves were not deemed to be a significant impediment, nor were any of the obstacles considered insurmountable. 3. The service lends itself to a single intermodal operator to seamlessly handle a prospective shipper’s freight from point of origin to point of destination. The strategies needed to overcome these impediments need to be comprehensive, including technology, marketing, infrastructure, current business practices and industry organization. Many of these issues are being addressed by the PPC and by other groups operating throughout the IWTS in a consistent, but uncoordinated manner. This entire project calls for synchronized planning, involving not only the ports, shippers and carriers, but also the state departments of transportation and economic development, the regional and metropolitan planning organizations, and the federal offices of MARAD, the Coast Guard and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Coordination efforts to date, however, are insufficient to successfully execute a sustained, multi-port COB service on the inland system. Models, such as MARAD’s Ship Operations Cooperative or Cargo Handling Cooperative Program, should be considered to better coordinate these efforts, hopefully with matching funds. Some aspects of the inland market are so distinct that it will likely require a subset cooperative, or sister cooperative, if one is formed, related to COB service from international ports in the Gulf.
Marketing efforts to date are likewise insufficient to sustain a multi-port COB service on the inland system. This report, however, provides a marketing methodology that would allow any port on the inland system to identify initial demand for COB services at their port. While additional marketing research will be ongoing, the next steps also include a trial or demonstration project to move containers by barge on that part of the river system that is maintained by locks and dams. This is likely the only way that the chicken and egg problem described in this report can be resolved. Finally, the need for federal assistance must be addressed. The ports of Houston and New York have successfully accessed CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality) funds that are part of the TEA-21 (Transportation Efficiency Act of the 21 st Century) legislation. That legislation is currently before the Congress for renewal in the form of the SAFTEA (Safe, Accessible and Flexible Transportation Act) bill that is generally much more favorable to freight issues than was TEA-21. SAFTEA maintains the CMAQ provisions and includes funding for intermodal connectors and freight gateways. Uses of the SAFTEA money for COB will likely be justified to the extent that they alleviate congestion or air quality issues. If properly structured, COB services would compliment service by truck or train. A March 2003 study by the Foundation for Intermodal Research and Education (FIRE) showed that converting a Port of New York to Pittsburgh move from truck to train would result in a net public benefit of about $53 per truck for a 363 mile trip, or 15 cents per mile. While no similar studies have been done for the inland waterway system, at least this much public saving would be expected if movement were converted from truck to barge, thus indicating that the use of CMAQ money would be justified for this purpose.
Page 1 and 2: CONTAINER-ON-BARGE PRE-FEASIBILITY
Page 3 and 4: Final Report Container</str
Page 5: Summary This report responds to the
Page 9 and 10: To date, council members have ident
Page 11 and 12: Initial Assumptions: 1. Freight tra
Page 13 and 14: Issues Explored: 1. Projected conge
Page 15 and 16: Task 2A: Market Analysis: The PPC w
Page 17 and 18: Characteristics of Successful COB S
Page 19 and 20: Obstacles to Starting a COB Service
Page 21 and 22: Osprey Line uses deck barges and wi
Page 23 and 24: Alternatives to Double Handling Fee
Page 25 and 26: Promoting the Cheapest Way Barging
Page 27 and 28: Inventory Cost If barging adds to t
Page 29 and 30: In addition to the region specific
Page 31 and 32: Task 3: Establish a Mexican Barge S
Page 33: Future Actions Demonstration Projec

Container-on-Barge Pre-Feasibility Study Final Report - Towmasters ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?