4 ms·

The same rebalancing happened in Europe, and Europe doesn't have close to the issues the US has regarding supply chain. Europe's major ports are automated and o

The same rebalancing happened in Europe, and Europe doesn't have close to the issues the US has regarding supply chain. Europe's major ports are automated and operate 24/7, port to hinterland relies much more on rail than trucking. Overall, the US supply chain was already very fragile and outdated.

Gravityloss 5y ago
Hmm, I thought US rail freight system is massive, excellent and envied by the whole world. When in the US, I saw these double decker container trains with the bogies at the ends (so the lower container could be below the axle).
roenxi 5y ago
Did it? And doesn't it? How can you tell? Both Europe and the US are large and complicated. Last I heard Europe was in the middle of an energy crisis which could easily turn out to be linked to supply chain disruptions. It has been long enough for the slow-rolling-wave nature of economic disasters to start surfacing, but it is too early to raise a head up and talk about cause and effect without some citations.
bwilli123 5y ago
https://medium.com/@ryan79z28/im-a-twenty-year-truck-driver-i-will-tell-you-why-america-s-shipping-crisis-will-not-end-bbe0ebac6a91 https://medium.com/@ryan79z28/im-a-twenty-year-truck-driver-...
fennecfoxen 5y ago
That sounds nice. By contrast, the US makes moving goods between two US ports illegal. Okay, it doesn't technically do that, the Jones Act just requires you to use a US-owned US-built US-crewed US-operated ship. These ships, in general, don't exist. Oh, sure, there are a few that go back and forth to Puerto Rico, and there are a few wastewater ships running up and down the East River in New York, but no one would dream of using ships like these for general cargo. They are not up to modern container-shipping standards. Puerto Rico pays a premium for a few of these freighters and tankers but generally does more to import goods from the Caribbean and Central America than from the US; when there are hurricanes, the President has to issue a waiver so they can move disaster recovery supplies in from the mainland. Fish shipped from Alaska are unloaded on the east coast in Canada, where they put on trucks, and the trucks are put on a carrier train which makes a round trip back and forth for the length of the cargo terminal to qualify as being "shipped by Canadian rail" for US legal purposes, and then the trucks drive into the US with the fish. A related law afflicts cruise ships, which always stop somewhere in Canada, Alaska, or the Caribbean, on their way between US ports. One of the premises of the Jones Act was that it will preserve American shipbuilding for national security™ purposes. This has more or less utterly failed. However, Joe Biden's campaign promises specfically called out fortifying the Jones Act so that it would be even stronger, so, don't hold your breath on change.
- htrp 5y ago
  >Fish shipped from Alaska are unloaded on the east coast in Canada, where they put on trucks, and the trucks are put on a carrier train which makes a round trip back and forth for the length of the cargo terminal to qualify as being "shipped by Canadian rail" for US legal purposes, and then the trucks drive into the US with the fish. A related law afflicts cruise ships, which always stop somewhere in Canada, Alaska, or the Caribbean, on their way between US ports. Can you find a citation for this, I would love to add the example to an upcoming book.
  - fennecfoxen 5y ago
    Wikipedia covers the railway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayside_Canadian_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayside_Canadian_Railway You can also follow a recent mini-saga in The Wall Street Journal: - "Mr. Biden’s Fish Story", Sept. 9, 2021 - "How 26 Million Pounds of American Fish Got Stuck in Canada", Sept. 16, 2021 - "A Victory Over the Jones Act", Oct. 11, 2021 You can also read about it from the people who want to hold these fish shipments hostage to their vessels: https://www.americanmaritimepartnership.com/articles/alaskan-seafood-should-ship-on-jones-act-vessels/ https://www.americanmaritimepartnership.com/articles/alaskan... You can also read about Filet-o-Fish switching from Alaskan to Russian fish (and obviously NOT to American vessels) as a consequence of this saga: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/cbp-bayside-canadian-rail-facility-switched-to-russian-seafood https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/cbp-bayside-canad...
superice 5y ago
Actually, I think barge transport is a much larger contributor than rail in the modal split of hinterland operations in Europe. Both Rotterdam and Antwerp have huge barge modal splits and large hinterland terminals, often trimodal.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  And the US has pretty damn good freight rail. You just don't notice it because all those containers get transferred to trucks or unloaded at distributions facilities outside the beltways in which most of HN tends to live and does the last ~20-100mi on truck.
  - Kye 5y ago
    More of HN needs the experience of waiting for a freight train to finish crossing the road. Count containers with a stopwatch and you can get an idea of how many trucks worth of containers a freight train can move vs the adjacent highway. It's still much more time and fuel efficient even slowed down for the crossing.
    - superice 5y ago
      That’s lovely. But it’s not going to be the 400 TEU that Rhine barges do. Trains in Europe are about 90 TEU, with them being capped by terminal handling capacity and legal maximums. Rail length at terminals in LA seem to be similar to Rotterdam and Antwerp: 600-900m. Let’s assume US freight trains can double their capacity by double stacking their trains. 180 TEU per train is still well under an average barge size. I couldn’t find modal split numbers for LA, but I’m willing to bet their trucking share is above the ~55% Rotterdam achieves (some 10-15% is rail, remaining share is inland barges) Trains are ofcourse still way more efficient than trucks.
      - Kye 5y ago
        That's a different level of the discussion tree. I was talking about rail appreciation in reply to someone talking about rail appreciation. HN's structure lets people talk about different aspects of the same main topic. It's neat.

Gravityloss 5y ago

Hmm, I thought US rail freight system is massive, excellent and envied by the whole world. When in the US, I saw these double decker container trains with the bogies at the ends (so the lower container could be below the axle).

roenxi 5y ago

Did it? And doesn't it? How can you tell? Both Europe and the US are large and complicated. Last I heard Europe was in the middle of an energy crisis which could easily turn out to be linked to supply chain disruptions. It has been long enough for the slow-rolling-wave nature of economic disasters to start surfacing, but it is too early to raise a head up and talk about cause and effect without some citations.

bwilli123 5y ago

https://medium.com/@ryan79z28/im-a-twenty-year-truck-driver-i-will-tell-you-why-america-s-shipping-crisis-will-not-end-bbe0ebac6a91 https://medium.com/@ryan79z28/im-a-twenty-year-truck-driver-...

fennecfoxen 5y ago

That sounds nice. By contrast, the US makes moving goods between two US ports illegal. Okay, it doesn't technically do that, the Jones Act just requires you to use a US-owned US-built US-crewed US-operated ship. These ships, in general, don't exist. Oh, sure, there are a few that go back and forth to Puerto Rico, and there are a few wastewater ships running up and down the East River in New York, but no one would dream of using ships like these for general cargo. They are not up to modern container-shipping standards. Puerto Rico pays a premium for a few of these freighters and tankers but generally does more to import goods from the Caribbean and Central America than from the US; when there are hurricanes, the President has to issue a waiver so they can move disaster recovery supplies in from the mainland. Fish shipped from Alaska are unloaded on the east coast in Canada, where they put on trucks, and the trucks are put on a carrier train which makes a round trip back and forth for the length of the cargo terminal to qualify as being "shipped by Canadian rail" for US legal purposes, and then the trucks drive into the US with the fish. A related law afflicts cruise ships, which always stop somewhere in Canada, Alaska, or the Caribbean, on their way between US ports. One of the premises of the Jones Act was that it will preserve American shipbuilding for national security™ purposes. This has more or less utterly failed. However, Joe Biden's campaign promises specfically called out fortifying the Jones Act so that it would be even stronger, so, don't hold your breath on change.

htrp 5y ago
>Fish shipped from Alaska are unloaded on the east coast in Canada, where they put on trucks, and the trucks are put on a carrier train which makes a round trip back and forth for the length of the cargo terminal to qualify as being "shipped by Canadian rail" for US legal purposes, and then the trucks drive into the US with the fish. A related law afflicts cruise ships, which always stop somewhere in Canada, Alaska, or the Caribbean, on their way between US ports. Can you find a citation for this, I would love to add the example to an upcoming book.
- fennecfoxen 5y ago
  Wikipedia covers the railway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayside_Canadian_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayside_Canadian_Railway You can also follow a recent mini-saga in The Wall Street Journal: - "Mr. Biden’s Fish Story", Sept. 9, 2021 - "How 26 Million Pounds of American Fish Got Stuck in Canada", Sept. 16, 2021 - "A Victory Over the Jones Act", Oct. 11, 2021 You can also read about it from the people who want to hold these fish shipments hostage to their vessels: https://www.americanmaritimepartnership.com/articles/alaskan-seafood-should-ship-on-jones-act-vessels/ https://www.americanmaritimepartnership.com/articles/alaskan... You can also read about Filet-o-Fish switching from Alaskan to Russian fish (and obviously NOT to American vessels) as a consequence of this saga: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/cbp-bayside-canadian-rail-facility-switched-to-russian-seafood https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/cbp-bayside-canad...

superice 5y ago

Actually, I think barge transport is a much larger contributor than rail in the modal split of hinterland operations in Europe. Both Rotterdam and Antwerp have huge barge modal splits and large hinterland terminals, often trimodal.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
And the US has pretty damn good freight rail. You just don't notice it because all those containers get transferred to trucks or unloaded at distributions facilities outside the beltways in which most of HN tends to live and does the last ~20-100mi on truck.
- Kye 5y ago
  More of HN needs the experience of waiting for a freight train to finish crossing the road. Count containers with a stopwatch and you can get an idea of how many trucks worth of containers a freight train can move vs the adjacent highway. It's still much more time and fuel efficient even slowed down for the crossing.
  - superice 5y ago
    That’s lovely. But it’s not going to be the 400 TEU that Rhine barges do. Trains in Europe are about 90 TEU, with them being capped by terminal handling capacity and legal maximums. Rail length at terminals in LA seem to be similar to Rotterdam and Antwerp: 600-900m. Let’s assume US freight trains can double their capacity by double stacking their trains. 180 TEU per train is still well under an average barge size. I couldn’t find modal split numbers for LA, but I’m willing to bet their trucking share is above the ~55% Rotterdam achieves (some 10-15% is rail, remaining share is inland barges) Trains are ofcourse still way more efficient than trucks.
    - Kye 5y ago
      That's a different level of the discussion tree. I was talking about rail appreciation in reply to someone talking about rail appreciation. HN's structure lets people talk about different aspects of the same main topic. It's neat.