Mark Solomon joined DC VELOCITY as senior editor in August 2008, and was promoted to his current position on January 1, 2015. He has spent more than 30 years in the transportation, logistics and supply chain management fields as a journalist and public relations professional. From 1989 to 1994, he worked in Washington as a reporter for the Journal of Commerce, covering the aviation and trucking industries, the Department of Transportation, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. Prior to that, he worked for Traffic World for seven years in a similar role. From 1994 to 2008, Mr. Solomon ran Media-Based Solutions, a public relations firm based in Atlanta. He graduated in 1978 with a B.A. in journalism from The American University in Washington, D.C.
Those seeking to divine the future of American trucking may want to examine the third-quarter results of J.B. Hunt Transport Services Inc.
Like everyone else in an industry suffering through the worst freight recession in decades, the Lowell, Ark.-based freight giant posted double-digit declines in its over-the-road revenue and income. But its intermodal traffic—by far the largest segment of Hunt's business—grew at a record pace, with revenue and operating income up 24 percent and 21 percent, respectively.
Hunt is reaping the fruits of a multiyear strategy to convert some of its customer loads from the highways to more fuel-efficient intermodal service. Higher fuel costs, environmental concerns, and worsening road conditions are pushing shippers to consider intermodal options, decisions helped along by recent improvements in infrastructure and service consistency.
Hunt's own equipment mix reflects this trend: At quarter's end, it had 37,000 intermodal containers in its fleet, an increase of 4,000 from the 2007 period. By contrast, Hunt ended the quarter with 3,309 tractors, a reduction of 1,419 rigs from the third quarter of 2007.
"In increasing numbers, traditional over-the-road shippers are turning to intermodal for the first time" as they seek to drive down costs and reduce carbon emissions, Kirk Thompson, Hunt's president and CEO, said in a statement accompanying the company's third-quarter results.
Hunt is not alone. Steve Van Kirk, vice president of commercial development for Schneider Intermodal, a unit of privately held truckload carrier Schneider National, says his division is growing at a pace that is "faster than the industry average."
Even truckers who've never before played on the intermodal field are seeing unexpected gains. USA Truck Inc., a large truckload carrier based in Van Buren, Ark., posted $2.1 million in intermodal revenue in its third quarter. The revenue is a tiny fraction of USA Truck's third-quarter revenue of $103 million (excluding fuel surcharges). However, the company had projected only $2 million in intermodal revenue for all of 2008.
"Our intermodal volume is small, and we are still on the steep slope of the learning curve, but we are pleased with our progress," said Cliff Beckham, USA Truck's president and CEO, in a statement.
Going short
Further evidence of truckers' growing use of intermodal can be found in the third-quarter numbers posted by the Intermodal Association of North America. Domestic intermodal operations showed their best quarterly results in more than four years, according to IANA, up by 6.7 percent over the third quarter last year. The surge was led by a 10.5-percent jump in domestic container loadings and buttressed by small gains in trailer loadings. Through September, domestic intermodal volume for both trailers and containers rose 4.7 percent from 2007 levels, according to the group.
Although in the past, intermodal movements tended to be long hauls, that's quickly changing. Through the first nine months of this year, intermodal loads transiting less than 1,000 miles grew by 7 percent, twice the growth rate reported for 1,000-mile plus lanes, IANA says. The "sweet spots," according to IANA, were in corridors between 700 and 1,000 miles; there, freight shipped in domestic equipment—predominantly 53-foot containers—grew by 9 percent through September. The IANA data underscore that the real action in intermodal is now on the short to intermediate corridors, where in the past goods have generally moved over the road via truckload carrier.
Hunt's numbers bear that out. For example, while the carrier's total intermodal load count in 2008's third quarter rose 13 percent over the same quarter in 2007, volumes on its Eastern regional network increased by more than 50 percent. Hunt's typical intermodal movement remains a fairly lengthy haul—the trucker says an average intermodal movement in the quarter traveled 1,817 miles. However, that's down 5 percent from 1,913 miles in the same period a year ago.
The company doesn't see that trend reversing itself anytime soon. Intermodal's length of haul "is going to continue to come down" as it has for over-the-road trucking, says Hunt CFO Jerry Walton. Positioning both intermodal and over-the-road services for shorter lengths of haul is "certainly where the trucker is headed," he said in an interview.
It's a similar story over at Schneider Intermodal. Van Kirk notes that his unit's growth is skewed toward intermediate hauls averaging 1,000 miles. Most of Schneider Intermodal's shorter-haul growth has come from business converted from over-the-road trucking, he says. By contrast, longer-haul volume gains are largely driven by new business.
An economic advantage
Carriers may be bullish on intermodal's future, but analysts are divided on whether intermodal can sustain the momentum. Satish Jindel, president of Pittsburgh-based SJ Consulting Group Inc., says intermodal gains last year were sparked in part by soaring oil prices, and oil's dramatic reversal in recent months will lessen intermodal's appeal. However, intermodal growth is likely to be supported over the long term by concerns over a worsening domestic road infrastructure that may force freight off the highways, Jindel adds.
Eric Starks, president of FTR Associates, a Houston-based consultancy, says the sharp decline in diesel prices will "remove a major tailwind behind the recent intermodal conversion. We expect that any additional conversion [to intermodal] will significantly slow down and likely pause completely for the near term." He notes, however, that intermodal will retain its current share of the market, including recently added short-haul traffic.
Other experts say intermodal is poised for a period of growth regardless of how oil prices behave.
"The wake-up call was when diesel prices hit $5 a gallon," says Charles Clowdis, managing director-North American markets, trade & transportation advisory services for IHS Global Insight Inc., a Lexington, Mass., consulting firm. "But even if prices never reach those levels again, it won't change the dynamic. In intermodal, the industry has found a system that works."
Jindel notes that railroads are poised to deliver "better transit times and on-time performance" in large part through significant infrastructure improvements. As an example, SJ Consulting cites a Norfolk Southern Corp. initiative to enable double-stack service between the port of Portsmouth, Va., and Chicago by raising clearances at 28 tunnels and seven bridges. The $155 million project will shave one day of transit time from intermodal service between the East Coast and the Midwest when it's completed in 2010, according to the firm.
NS's East Coast rival, CSX Corp., has launched its own intermodal expansion by creating double-stack clearances linking Washington, D.C., and Northwest Ohio via Pittsburgh; between North Carolina and Baltimore via Washington; and between Wilmington and Charlotte, N.C. The $700 million project is slated for completion in 2015.
Dray area
Yet the potential of those future projects does not hide the reality that many short and intermediate traffic lanes are still not ready for intermodal operations. The existing rail infrastructure would not be able to support increases in intermodal demand on many of those corridors, according to industry observers.
"There are a zillion markets that will never be intermodally competitive unless the railroads or the government spends money on infrastructure," says John G. Larkin, managing director, transportation logistics group for the investment firm Stifel, Nicolaus & Co.
Tom White, spokesman for the Association of American Railroads, says future intermodal growth "will depend on whether there are capacity constraints in individual corridors. Railroads are investing heavily in expansion aimed at intermodal, but it does take some time for those projects to come on line."
Truckers also will be under pressure to better manage their drayage fleets to ensure that loads can be promptly fed to and from intermodal ramps while minimizing the dray that adds time and expense to an intermodal move. "As the length of haul declines, so too does the 'economic radius' around the rail ramp," Starks of FTR says. "Loads must originate and/or terminate near the ramp in order to minimize high-cost dray miles as a percentage of the total door-to-door move." As a result, Starks predicts intermodal will be hard-pressed to compete for shorter-haul loads outside high-density traffic lanes usually located near rail ramps.
Van Kirk of Schneider Intermodal says the efficiency of drayage operations will often determine whether the shipments should go on a train or a truck. In what may be an attempt to better control that segment of the business, Hunt expanded its in-house drayage fleet by 20 percent in the third quarter of 2008 to reduce its reliance on independent contractors.
Offsetting the increasing costs of dray service as loads are staged farther from main intermodal ramps may prove difficult, according to Larkin. "The longer the dray, the quicker the economies [of intermodal] break down," he says.
Challenges aside, there is little doubt that for a trucking industry confronting weak domestic and international economies, a deteriorating infrastructure, oil price volatility, environmental imperatives, and a demanding clientele, intermodal will take on increased importance.
In the process, companies that made their living off the highways may need to rethink their business models. Those companies that have successfully made the transition have needed to adjust their culture. That goes for firms whose names are virtually synonymous with trucking.
"J.B. Hunt himself might be rolling over in his grave if he knew that intermodal had become the growth and profitability driver for his company," says Clowdis.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."