After an unprecedented punch to the gut, intermodal roars back
In the spring, rail intermodal players struggled with a historic, pandemic-induced crash in demand. Yet by late summer, the market rebounded, a capacity crunch hit, and rates were on the rise. What’s next?
Gary Frantz is a contributing editor for DC Velocity and its sister publication, Supply Chain Xchange. He is a veteran communications executive with more than 30 years of experience in the transportation and logistics industries. He's served as communications director and strategic media relations counselor for companies including XPO Logistics, Con-way, Menlo Logistics, GT Nexus, Circle International Group, and Consolidated Freightways. Gary is currently principal of GNF Communications LLC, a consultancy providing freelance writing, editorial and media strategy services. He's a proud graduate of the Journalism program at California State University–Chico.
Intermodal freight operators entered the year expecting modest gains over a somewhat lackluster 2019 in which the industry handled some 13.7 million rail container units. Then the Covid-19 pandemic hit. Businesses shut their doors and sent employees to work from home. Consumers sheltered in place, unemployment skyrocketed, and the economy contracted to levels not seen since the Great Depression.
The impact on intermodal traffic was immediate. April and May saw volumes crater as weekly intermodal shipments dropped at an unprecedented pace. Ocean lines canceled hundreds of ship calls, reducing the flow of import containers into the U.S. to a trickle. Transportation companies furloughed employees. Railroads parked locomotives and sidelined railcars. Containers and chassis stacked up at ports and intermodal yards across the nation.
Then June arrived, and the market came roaring back. Consumers, stuck at home, embraced online ordering of everything from foodstuffs to exercise equipment to home improvement products. Retailers’ inventories were rapidly depleted. Essential goods demanding timely delivery began to soak up available truck and rail capacity. Service providers pivoted to redeploy equipment, bring back workers, and ramp up services.
By August and September, the industry was in a completely different place, facing capacity shortages and struggling with demand and volume challenges that just 60 days prior could not have been imagined.
“I have never seen a market like this,” observed Phillip D. Yeager, president and chief operating officer of Oak Brook, Illinois-based Hub Group, the nation’s second-largest intermodal services provider with $3.7 billion in revenue, a fleet of 42,000 containers and 5,000 trucks, and 5,000 employees. “It’s just been an amazing increase in volume and demand” as appetite for consumer products surged and retailers struggled to restock. “Consumers … are putting their government subsidies into home improvement and other discretionary items, whereas before they’d be spending on going out to restaurants and travel,” he notes.
In response, Hub Group upped its investment in capacity, buying and deploying 3,500 new containers in June, and, anticipating the surge in business, taking on some additional costs to reposition equipment and adjust its network to support customers, Yeager adds.
DEMAND SPIKES BRING PRICE HIKES
Going into the fall, the capacity crunch shows few signs of letting up—which means many shippers will soon be paying more for service. Rail lines already have implemented multiple rounds of surcharges, particularly on containers coming off the West Coast. At the same time, the surge in volume, coupled with tight capacity, is driving up spot rates for both over-the-road (OTR) truckload and intermodal. Higher contract rates are likely to follow.
Yeager believes that if the current demand trends continue, “it sets us up for a really interesting 2021 bid season coming out of 2020.” Shippers who “support their partners” and have locked in capacity will do well, he says, noting that peak season “is happening right now. I think it’s going to be a spiky but prolonged peak,” with tight capacity extending through the end of the year.
Brandon Leonard, president of intermodal for Salt Lake City, Utah-based refrigerated carrier C.R. England, is seeing some service providers, already capacity constrained, turning down tenders and giving back recently awarded freight. “I think some are experiencing buyer’s remorse” on bids they won in April and May, Leonard says. He reports that he’s getting more “mini-bids” from large shippers who are looking for alternatives to cover freight that their existing providers can’t handle or are servicing poorly.
England’s focus is entirely on refrigerated, deploying a fleet of 1,600 intermodal “reefer” containers. Compared with dry-goods containers, turning around a “reefer” takes more time because of the maintenance (such as fueling) and cleaning that’s required between shipments. With reefer containers typically handling perishable goods, Leonard notes the company is less transaction-oriented and more focused on strategic, long-term customer relationships based on consistent year-round freight. Yet as capacity has tightened, shippers are knocking on the door. “We have all these new friends [coming to us] who have great long-term opportunities for us—starting tomorrow,” he says.
From a service perspective, Leonard generally gives good marks to rail operators but notes that the rapid spike in volumes has presented challenges, particularly for intermodal terminal operations. “Time from train arrival to the unit’s being grounded on a chassis is much longer than it was six to eight weeks ago,” he notes. Yet the pressure of responding to fast-rising volumes is rippling across all segments of the supply chain. “Whether from a truck driver perspective, warehouse or DC, freight terminal, rail crew, or drayage, there is a shortage of people able to go back to work,” he notes.
Matt Parry, senior vice president of logistics for Werner Logistics, agrees. “Demand … is significantly outpacing supply capabilities in all modes,” he notes. “The challenge … will center around the fluidity of the entire transportation network. Customers are struggling to support enormous inventory replenishment efforts. It’s a fragile network with interdependencies throughout.”
That network fragility is also creating headaches for the intermodal services companies—known as intermodal marketing companies, or IMCs—that purchase rail capacity for their customers and coordinate the intermodal moves. Most intermodal companies also have their own (or have access to) over-the-road truckload resources so they can balance the best capacity choice for the shipper’s service and cost needs. As capacity constraints shrink the spread between intermodal and OTR rates, making that modal call becomes that much more involved.
Decision factors can include raw transportation cost, service consistency, sustainability, and diversity, notes Parry. “The cost of moving OTR versus rail can often be a lot more complex than [just] rate per mile,” he explains. “Transit time, securement cost, and inventory-carrying cost all need to be considered.” Poor service and/or low reliability also can add cost to the supply chain. Mitigating risk and building in flexibility are key. “Many times, we recommend to source 70% of a lane intermodal and 30% OTR to create the most effective balance between capacity, consistency, and cost,” he adds.
BUILDING MORE RESILIENT SUPPLY CHAINS
The fallout from the pandemic is leading some supply chain leaders to reconsider the lean, just-in-time (JIT) supply chain models they’ve had in place for years. Covid-19 has exposed the inflexibility and brittleness of JIT supply chains, causing managers to examine how they can improve resilience and their supply chains’ ability to withstand shock—whether it’s a hurricane, fire, flood, or health pandemic.
“I think we’ll see companies rethinking DC (distribution center) sizes, to allow for more inventory to be forward-stocked,” says Glen Wegel, vice president of operations and IT for Raleigh, North Carolina-based Kitchen Cabinet Distributors.
At KCD, one of the nation’s larger providers of pre-made kitchen cabinetry, Wegel directs a logistics operation that brings in over 500 containers a year from Asia, into four primary U.S. ports. He uses a combination of OTR truckload, intermodal, and less-than-truckload services to move product from two U.S. warehouses, distributing to building suppliers, cabinetry dealers, and local contractors supporting the repair and remodel industry.
With growth in excess of 35% projected for this year, Wegel is planning for a third warehouse.
“I think 2020 remains volatile” with respect to the freight markets, he says, noting that we may not yet have seen the “bullwhip” effect of an economy recovering from the pandemic. Among his current strategies: avoiding Los Angeles and Long Beach and booking inbound ocean containers into ports that are less capacity-constrained, planning for longer shipment transit times, and shifting freight from rail to OTR. As for the latter, Wegel says he’s still using intermodal where service is consistent and reliable, but has shifted “quite a bit of freight” to OTR at his customers’ request. “Considering OTR fulfillment can shave seven to 10 days off a delivery window, many of our customers are requesting OTR and are willing to pay the cost difference,” he reports, adding that KCD has had “great luck” with service from truckload carriers Schneider and Knight-Swift.
ROLLER COASTER FOR THE RAILS
As one might expect, the pandemic roller coaster has also been a stressful ride for the nation’s rail lines. At Union Pacific (UP), weekly intermodal volumes in April bottomed out at 25% below levels for the same period in 2019, noted Kenny Rocker, UP’s executive vice president, marketing and sales, in the company’s second-quarter earnings call. “Our weekly run rates have been improving since that time,” he said.
As the economy recovers and freight volumes rebound, some shippers are citing equipment shortages as the cause of recent service problems. Lance Fritz, UP’s chairman, president, and CEO, rejects that notion. “We do not have an equipment shortage,” he emphasized during the earnings call. Capacity has been staged and available all along, just waiting to be redeployed as volumes returned, he said.
“I went for a train ride, and we had cars parked in places that I never thought I would ever see cars park,” he recalled. At one point during the pandemic, the UP had more locomotives stored than it had operating, Fritz acknowledged. Yet they were “ready to go … we had them close at hand.” When the time came, train crews and staff came off furlough and returned to work, “with more than 90% “accepting [offers] to come back to work, which is fantastic. We’re not having to worry about having to retrain people,” he added. According to one industry report, in the four weeks from mid-July to mid-August, the UP’s intermodal volume was back, averaging 5.5% higher than the year-ago period.
It was a similar situation at the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF). “Peak-like volumes” have returned, says Tom Williams, the BNSF’s group vice president, consumer products. “Customers’ inventories were low as we went into the pandemic,” he noted. Since then, a combination of surging online sales, demand for personal protective equipment, and rebounding brick-and-mortar store sales has driven up traffic.
“Our network is in good condition,” Williams adds. “We have invested heavily in our network and continue to expand our capacity.” The railroad’s Southern California-to-Chicago line is nearly “100% double tracked … a super-highway for high-velocity trains.” He notes that the BNSF’s expedited service in this lane is 2.5 days.
Even as intermodal volumes return and railroads and IMCs ramp up—despite a pandemic that continues to ravage the country—shippers still seek one measurable attribute that remains most compelling of all. “What do shippers want?” asks the UP’s chief operating officer, Jim Vena. “They want reliability. They want consistency and to save on their assets … We’re going to be there to give them service.”
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."