Maritime and intermodal's first and last mile is in bad shape and suffers from benign neglect. Can technology and a more enlightened stakeholder attitude reverse the decline?
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.
Golfers live and die by their putters. A bad green game will waste all the good that came before it. So it goes with drayage, the job of hauling ocean containers between seaports, intermodal yards, and shippers' facilities. If the dray isn't properly executed, nothing else matters. Imports won't leave the terminals when they're supposed to. Exports won't get loaded aboard vessels in a timely manner. And mile-wide seams start to appear in an otherwise perfectly synchronized supply chain.
Unfortunately, the drayage business is in a world of hurt. Base rates for drayage services have been stagnant for about a decade, according to drayage executives. In an extreme example of rate hemorrhaging, Greg Gorno, owner of All Points Transport, a Dearborn, Mich.-based drayage agency of the Evans Network of Companies, said his agency receives less money today to haul two empty 20-foot containers round-trip between Detroit and Toledo, about 120 miles in all, than it did in 1980. The only break for All Points is that it generates more revenue today from fuel surcharges than it did back then, Gorno said.
Noncompensatory rates have a negative cascading effect through the pipeline. Drivers, mostly owner-operators responsible for their own expenses, are generally not well paid. To make matters worse, increasing congestion at the nation's ports forces drivers to wait for hours to either pick up or drop off their loads, cutting into their productivity and earning power. Drivers that are paid by the load can stew for two, four, and sometimes six hours at a marine terminal to offload a box, take on another one, and leave the facility. A study of 1,600 trucks serving the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, the nation's busiest port complex, from October 2012 to May 2013 found that 20 percent of all truck moves took more than two hours; as a general rule, waits of more than one hour are considered unacceptable both from economic and environmental standpoints. "The system suffers from a lack of fluidity," said Ken Kellaway, president and CEO of RoadOne IntermodaLogistics, a Randolph, Mass.-based intermodal company whose services include port and rail drayage.
The proliferation of megacontainer ships capable of handling up to 18,000 twenty-foot equivalent unit (TEU) containers is likely to exacerbate terminal congestion because of longer loading and offloading times. In addition, tougher federal rules governing drivers' hours of service have made driver queuing an even costlier proposition as there are now fewer productive hours in a day than before.
As if low compensation and lengthy terminal delays weren't enough, drayage companies and drivers have been forced to adjust to a new world of chassis availability. For decades, steamship lines made chassis—the frames on which containers rest during their movement—readily available to motor carriers. In the past few years, however, liners have been exiting the chassis provisioning business, leaving the job to a handful of leasing companies that pool the assets.
The chassis transition has been painful for everyone. Assets that were once fixed have become variable. Equipment imbalances have become the norm, with no units available in one location and an overabundance in another. No one has suffered more than draymen, who often must make an extra trip to procure a chassis before they can get in line for a load. "It's like going to the grocery store and being told that you first have to go to Home Depot to get a cart," said Kellaway.
In a February presentation, RoadOne said it is virtually impossible for intermodal trucking, a fragmented $15 billion-a-year business that sits near the bottom of the international trade pecking order, to meet the growing demands of railroads and steamship lines under dray's current rate structure. Kellaway, who has been involved in drayage for more than 30 years, called the current situation "as bad as I've seen it" in his career. He added that terminal operators who deal directly with draymen "are not being held accountable" for the myriad of problems the dray component faces.
BYE BYE, BABY
Whoever is to blame, the reality is that drivers are leaving the business, and fewer are coming in behind them. By some estimates, up to 15 percent of draymen have exited the field during the past five years. "If we don't take care of the draymen, we're going to lose them," Ward Chaplin, senior director, supply chain management of Southern Wine & Spirits of America, a Miami-based beverage distributor, warned in September at the Intermodal Association of North America's (IANA) Intermodal Expo in Long Beach, Calif.
Chaplin called on port executives to get more involved in providing a decent operating environment so draymen have a fair shot at being productive. For their part, port executives at the expo agreed that drayage has become a crisis that demands immediate attention.
"Motor carriers need to see [an] improvement in their turns," said Jon Slangerup, CEO of the Port of Long Beach. Gene Seroka, executive director at the adjacent Port of Los Angeles, the nation's busiest seaport, admitted that "there is a paucity of truckers in the Southern California market." J. Christopher Lytle, executive director of the Port of Oakland, said that ports need to more proactive in assuring that dray is a business that folks can make money in. "The days of ports just being rent collectors are long over," he said.
Port executives are not standing still. Executives in the Southern California basin said the "PierPass" initiative, formed in 2005 by marine terminal operators at the two ports to ease congestion and improve security and air quality, has boosted productivity by giving terminal operations more flexibility. Under the program, all international container terminals at the ports established five additional weekly "off-peak" shifts. As an incentive to use the off-peak times, a Traffic Mitigation Fee (TMF) was assessed on most cargo moving during the peak hours of 3 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. Executives representing West Coast ports said they would like to see more evening hours. However, they dismissed calls for a 24/7-type operation for truck traffic, arguing that wringing more productivity out of each current shift is a higher priority at this time.
HIGH-TECH TO THE RESCUE?
The good news for dray is that technology is being brought to bear on a segment that badly needs it. In mid-September, International Asset Systems (IAS), an Oakland, Calif.-based information technology company, added a module to its "ChassisManager" provisioning platform allowing truckers and ocean carriers to better manage so-called street-turns, where containers and chassis can be swapped between carriers or re-used for a new load, in each case eliminating the need to return empty equipment to the ports. According to Blair Peterson, senior vice president, commercial for IAS, the module provides real-time visibility into when the equipment changes hands so each party knows when the costs and liability change. Peterson said the module removes a major impediment to the expansion of "street-turns," which if done properly reduce empty miles, lessen port congestion and dray wait times, and cut fuel costs and emissions.
Back in March, a public-private sector partnership launched a pilot program in Los Angeles designed to cut the amount of time trucks spend waiting to get into terminal yards by allowing the drayage company and terminal operator to exchange information in advance about a container's availability and a truck's arrival.
The program, "Freight Advanced Traveler Information System," or "FRATIS," is funded by the Department of Transportation and involves Port Logistics Group (PLG), a Los Angeles drayage company, and Yusen Terminals, a unit of Japanese liner company NYK Line. Under the program, a container pickup order generated by PLG is fed into the FRATIS software, which sends a message to Yusen that identifies the truck that will pick up the container when it becomes available. Yusen then relays real-time information to PLG on the container's status.
Once a container is tagged, the software assigns the pickup to a driver in the best geographical position to retrieve the container. After the driver accepts the order, FRATIS determines the optimal route for the truck, suggesting alternatives if necessary to help the driver avoid any delay-causing incidents. Meanwhile, the system notifies the terminal of the truck's estimated time of arrival. Because Yusen sees all of the information in advance, it can assign PLG's trucks a special gate that functions as an "express lane" of sorts, according to Michael Johnson, PLG's trucking operations manager. "Generally, the marine terminal has no clue why a truck is there until it reaches the gate and provides the information," Johnson said in a recent white paper on the project.
The pilot's first phase will run until February. The next phase, which is expected to start almost immediately thereafter, will involve more terminals and more truckers, according to the white paper. Similar programs are either under way or are being considered in Dallas and in south Florida.
In a phone interview, Johnson cautioned that the project today only involves one trucker and one terminal operator. Yet the overarching message, he said, is that the technology is available and, if the results to date are any indication, workable.
"The key is that we are working to use technology to improve the situation. Without technology, we will get nowhere," Johnson said.
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."