5 ms·

That's neat, but isn't this whole thing about stacking restrictions on empty containers? My understanding of what the Flexport CEO said in their twitter thread

by wcarss 5y ago

That's neat, but isn't this whole thing about stacking restrictions on empty containers? My understanding of what the Flexport CEO said in their twitter thread was that the best example of the problem is the haulage company that's keeping its driver count * 3 empty containers around on-chassis (which I think means on wheels), just sitting in their parking lot, because they have nowhere to put their empties, because they empty-storage is maxed out at the 2-height capacity. All/most of the haulage company's chassis are now tied up with empty containers, which prevents them from being able to go pick up filled containers to ship, which stops the full containers from getting picked, etc.

jeffrallen 5y ago
If they are getting paid per delivery, it seems they could find a quarry or an unused airstrip to dump empties on for a small price. When Tesla needs space urgently, they put up a tent. When the military needs to start a war they manage somehow to unload their tanks. Come on, USA, we still know how to do stuff...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  All places I have done real estate development require permits for putting containers on your land, and it is not a quick process to get one. At the least, you usually have to justify why you need the container space and for how long. And I cannot imagine a local zoning board wanting to go out on a limb to do something novel like approving containers just because a port is backed up.
  - lostapathy 5y ago
    As this is a short term problem and part of a national crisis ... just stack them up, and get them removed in the near future. Any place big enough to stack up enough containers to matter (stadium parking lot, dead airport, etc) isn't going to have neighbors that raise a huge stink immediately, and the wheels of zoning disputes take times. Heck, budget the possible fines into your business plan for holding the containers. Delivery firms already budget for tickets from parking illegally to make deliveries. This isn't so far removed from that.
    - jeffrallen 5y ago
      Exactly. Fix the problem, then ask for permission to do so afterwards. If you can honestly say, "we fixed the problem and didn't hurt anything with our temporary fix" then the permission people who come along afterwards to fine you are going to have to think seriously about suspending the fine that your solution drew. Don't do anything criminal, but accrue a bit of civil liability: it will either be a cost of business, or will be forgiven. As for contracts: If I am obligated to return the containers, but I dump them for a few weeks on a disused airstrip, I'm still going to, eventually, fulfill my contract, when the port allows me to. No excuses. Fix problems, don't brainstorm reasons not to fix then.
  - blip54321 5y ago
    > And I cannot imagine a local zoning board wanting to go out on a limb to do something novel like approving containers just because a port is backed up. I can, if they get paid for it. Rent should be reasonable for short-term storage and unreasonable for long-term.
- jpindar 5y ago
  They don't own the empties, and it's in their contracts to return them.
- jtbayly 5y ago
  Without a permit? In California? lol
- jeffrallen 5y ago
  From a quick Google map look, I'd ask the National Guard to take over runway 8R of LGB. That would still leave plenty of runways there, including 8L, usable under the same wind conditions. There is also a huge amount of land at Palmdale airport, 1h30 north of Long Beach. A glut of empty containers is a stupid problem, but the solution can be stupid easy, if we choose to make it so.
toast0 5y ago
> That's neat, but isn't this whole thing about stacking restrictions on empty containers? It's stacking restrictions for empty containers in lots that are not at the port, I believe. > on-chassis (which I think means on wheels) In container shipping, a chassis is basically a trailer that accepts a container and can be pulled by a semi-truck or one of the utility vehicles they've got at the port to move things around. If a chassis comes back with an empty container on it, and the port isn't accepting empties, you've got to leave it somewhere before you can grab one of the many containers sitting at the dock that have goods waiting to be delivered. If the dock yard is full of containers, they can't unload the boats. If the can't unload the boats, they can't load outgoing cargo including outgoing empties. Stacking empties higher, especially away from the dock may free up chassis that frees up dock space, etc, that gets things moving and then the empties can come back. But, that only works if the storage yards have the equipment to stack higher; which probably they don't all have. The thread mentions a limit on stacking empty containers, but the zoning limitation is for stacking any containers, it's just that outside of the yards at the port, you tend not to store full containers. Once you get those on a chassis, you want to get them delivered either to the final destination or a storage yard at another port or a train depot, etc. Empties are a bit different; you'd prefer to load filled containers most of the time, so it makes sense to stack some empties from time to time; also a trucking company may want to have some empties to take to an exporter, etc. Honestly, I had thought that both chassis and empties were fungible, kind of like with rail wagons. You count what goes where and if things are uneven over time, make some transfers to bring it back, but otherwise no big deal. But the thread says otherwise.
- Animats 5y ago
  For US railroads, railroad cars may seem to be fungible, but someone owns each one and there's a settlements system running behind the scenes. The Association of American Railroads, via their Railinc subsidiary, is behind that, and all railroads that interchange traffic are members. There are standard rates. How does that work for containers?
  - toast0 5y ago
    > How does that work for containers? Apparently, it doesn't. I would have thought at least some shipping lines would have gotten together to allow for offsets and settlements and all that to ease logistics. Maybe the lines don't want to coordinate or enjoy the semi-lockin that returning a container to the line's yard means it's most convenient to pick up an outgoing container from that yard, or don't trust their inventory with each other.

by wcarss 5y ago

jeffrallen 5y ago

If they are getting paid per delivery, it seems they could find a quarry or an unused airstrip to dump empties on for a small price. When Tesla needs space urgently, they put up a tent. When the military needs to start a war they manage somehow to unload their tanks. Come on, USA, we still know how to do stuff...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
lotsofpulp 5y ago
All places I have done real estate development require permits for putting containers on your land, and it is not a quick process to get one. At the least, you usually have to justify why you need the container space and for how long. And I cannot imagine a local zoning board wanting to go out on a limb to do something novel like approving containers just because a port is backed up.
- lostapathy 5y ago
  As this is a short term problem and part of a national crisis ... just stack them up, and get them removed in the near future. Any place big enough to stack up enough containers to matter (stadium parking lot, dead airport, etc) isn't going to have neighbors that raise a huge stink immediately, and the wheels of zoning disputes take times. Heck, budget the possible fines into your business plan for holding the containers. Delivery firms already budget for tickets from parking illegally to make deliveries. This isn't so far removed from that.
  - jeffrallen 5y ago
    Exactly. Fix the problem, then ask for permission to do so afterwards. If you can honestly say, "we fixed the problem and didn't hurt anything with our temporary fix" then the permission people who come along afterwards to fine you are going to have to think seriously about suspending the fine that your solution drew. Don't do anything criminal, but accrue a bit of civil liability: it will either be a cost of business, or will be forgiven. As for contracts: If I am obligated to return the containers, but I dump them for a few weeks on a disused airstrip, I'm still going to, eventually, fulfill my contract, when the port allows me to. No excuses. Fix problems, don't brainstorm reasons not to fix then.
- blip54321 5y ago
  > And I cannot imagine a local zoning board wanting to go out on a limb to do something novel like approving containers just because a port is backed up. I can, if they get paid for it. Rent should be reasonable for short-term storage and unreasonable for long-term.
jpindar 5y ago
They don't own the empties, and it's in their contracts to return them.
jtbayly 5y ago
Without a permit? In California? lol
jeffrallen 5y ago
From a quick Google map look, I'd ask the National Guard to take over runway 8R of LGB. That would still leave plenty of runways there, including 8L, usable under the same wind conditions. There is also a huge amount of land at Palmdale airport, 1h30 north of Long Beach. A glut of empty containers is a stupid problem, but the solution can be stupid easy, if we choose to make it so.

toast0 5y ago

> That's neat, but isn't this whole thing about stacking restrictions on empty containers? It's stacking restrictions for empty containers in lots that are not at the port, I believe. > on-chassis (which I think means on wheels) In container shipping, a chassis is basically a trailer that accepts a container and can be pulled by a semi-truck or one of the utility vehicles they've got at the port to move things around. If a chassis comes back with an empty container on it, and the port isn't accepting empties, you've got to leave it somewhere before you can grab one of the many containers sitting at the dock that have goods waiting to be delivered. If the dock yard is full of containers, they can't unload the boats. If the can't unload the boats, they can't load outgoing cargo including outgoing empties. Stacking empties higher, especially away from the dock may free up chassis that frees up dock space, etc, that gets things moving and then the empties can come back. But, that only works if the storage yards have the equipment to stack higher; which probably they don't all have. The thread mentions a limit on stacking empty containers, but the zoning limitation is for stacking any containers, it's just that outside of the yards at the port, you tend not to store full containers. Once you get those on a chassis, you want to get them delivered either to the final destination or a storage yard at another port or a train depot, etc. Empties are a bit different; you'd prefer to load filled containers most of the time, so it makes sense to stack some empties from time to time; also a trucking company may want to have some empties to take to an exporter, etc. Honestly, I had thought that both chassis and empties were fungible, kind of like with rail wagons. You count what goes where and if things are uneven over time, make some transfers to bring it back, but otherwise no big deal. But the thread says otherwise.

Animats 5y ago
For US railroads, railroad cars may seem to be fungible, but someone owns each one and there's a settlements system running behind the scenes. The Association of American Railroads, via their Railinc subsidiary, is behind that, and all railroads that interchange traffic are members. There are standard rates. How does that work for containers?
- toast0 5y ago
  > How does that work for containers? Apparently, it doesn't. I would have thought at least some shipping lines would have gotten together to allow for offsets and settlements and all that to ease logistics. Maybe the lines don't want to coordinate or enjoy the semi-lockin that returning a container to the line's yard means it's most convenient to pick up an outgoing container from that yard, or don't trust their inventory with each other.