4 ms·

So one ship will have to unload on one side and then another ship will have to pick up the cargo on the other end? So the shipping company has to have two ship

So one ship will have to unload on one side and then another ship will have to pick up the cargo on the other end? So the shipping company has to have two ships, one on each side, and wait for the loading and unloading? I'm sure smarter people than me have worked this out but it seems like this would take a lot longer than the canal (which only takes 8-10 hours vs 7 hours for this train plus load and unload). Granted ships without reservations have to wait 2-20 days to transit the canal right now, but I suspect wait times for cranes at each end of this rail would be about the same as canal wait times if not longer. Maybe a shipping expert can chime in here?

nickpinkston 3y ago
Another possible way this project could be beneficial is if the Panama Canal can't widen its locks, and hence this project could enable ships larger than that (which are more fuel efficient / cheaper) to have a far faster and possibly cheaper (depends on their costs, etc.) route.
- myself248 3y ago
  Ooooh that's an aspect I hadn't considered. Post-Panamax ships tend to be 2x-3x more TEUs and they continue to grow. Eeeenteresting. Plus if they're already offloading to land in the Americas, don't just put 'em onto another ship and sail up to LAX, a rail route up through Mexico itself could mean the containers arrive directly into the US without going through LAX, which has interesting implications for labor.
dave333 3y ago
Given multiple source ports and destination ports having the ability to sort containers is useful. Similar to Fedex/Airline hub and spoke models. Also why there is a huge railyard in North Platte. https://youtu.be/zgpMRY1gAzw?si=-zNXLdLor5bt_0vQ https://youtu.be/zgpMRY1gAzw?si=-zNXLdLor5bt_0vQ
- jedberg 3y ago
  This is a good point. They could have multiple rail yards that all feed into the one main transcontinental railroad.
vidarh 3y ago
See e.g. [1]. As long as the Panama Canal is at capacity, they don't need to compete with the Panama Canal. They need to compete with long detours: > The Panama Canal has become so backlogged that the world’s largest operator of chemical tankers has decided to reroute its fleet to the Suez Canal. > London-based Stolt-Nielsen, which has a tanker division with 166 ships, is charging customers additional costs for the longer route, it said in an email. A bottleneck at the Panama Canal due to low water levels has prompted shippers to divert to Suez, the Cape of Good Hope, or even through the Strait of Magellan off the tip of South America. And so, presumably, they're assuming that irrespective of resolution of these immediate issues, the Panama Canal won't be able to keep up with demand. [1] https://fortune.com/2023/11/27/panama-canal-backed-up-water-shortage-ships-reroute/ https://fortune.com/2023/11/27/panama-canal-backed-up-water-...
Brian_K_White 3y ago
Two ships running two smaller loops is no problem at all vs two ships running two longer loops.
- jedberg 3y ago
  Sure, as long as you have an even number of ships in your fleet and they can be paired off to carry the same number of containers. It's certainly solvable but adds a whole new level of logistical planning to make sure there is a suitable ship available and empty to receive the containers at the other end.
s1artibartfast 3y ago
>I suspect wait times for cranes at each end of this rail would be about the same as canal wait times if not longer. This is the wrong way to think about it. Wait times would naturally start at zero days, and then increase from there until there is no more demand or the comparative advantage runs out.
Zacru 3y ago
If you're shipping from northern hemisphere to northern hemisphere, then you also save to time/fuel to go down to Panama. No idea if that's significant or not.
bluGill 3y ago
Generally you wouldn't have two ships, you would have dozens. This only makes sense if you sort. There are many ports across the Pacific, and many other ports on the east coast (include South American and the Caribbean!). Dozens of ships from different ports cross the Pacific and unload. Then the containers get mixed and matched with dozens of other ships on the other side going to dozens of different ports. And the reverse for the return trips. Note that the ships do not all need to be owned by the same company, the important part is the containers get where they need to be. Sometimes they are, but container logistics is often separate and even when not the shipping companies will use each other when needed to get their containers where the customer needs them.

nickpinkston 3y ago

Another possible way this project could be beneficial is if the Panama Canal can't widen its locks, and hence this project could enable ships larger than that (which are more fuel efficient / cheaper) to have a far faster and possibly cheaper (depends on their costs, etc.) route.

myself248 3y ago
Ooooh that's an aspect I hadn't considered. Post-Panamax ships tend to be 2x-3x more TEUs and they continue to grow. Eeeenteresting. Plus if they're already offloading to land in the Americas, don't just put 'em onto another ship and sail up to LAX, a rail route up through Mexico itself could mean the containers arrive directly into the US without going through LAX, which has interesting implications for labor.

dave333 3y ago

Given multiple source ports and destination ports having the ability to sort containers is useful. Similar to Fedex/Airline hub and spoke models. Also why there is a huge railyard in North Platte. https://youtu.be/zgpMRY1gAzw?si=-zNXLdLor5bt_0vQ https://youtu.be/zgpMRY1gAzw?si=-zNXLdLor5bt_0vQ

jedberg 3y ago
This is a good point. They could have multiple rail yards that all feed into the one main transcontinental railroad.

vidarh 3y ago

See e.g. [1]. As long as the Panama Canal is at capacity, they don't need to compete with the Panama Canal. They need to compete with long detours: > The Panama Canal has become so backlogged that the world’s largest operator of chemical tankers has decided to reroute its fleet to the Suez Canal. > London-based Stolt-Nielsen, which has a tanker division with 166 ships, is charging customers additional costs for the longer route, it said in an email. A bottleneck at the Panama Canal due to low water levels has prompted shippers to divert to Suez, the Cape of Good Hope, or even through the Strait of Magellan off the tip of South America. And so, presumably, they're assuming that irrespective of resolution of these immediate issues, the Panama Canal won't be able to keep up with demand. [1] https://fortune.com/2023/11/27/panama-canal-backed-up-water-shortage-ships-reroute/ https://fortune.com/2023/11/27/panama-canal-backed-up-water-...

Brian_K_White 3y ago

Two ships running two smaller loops is no problem at all vs two ships running two longer loops.

jedberg 3y ago
Sure, as long as you have an even number of ships in your fleet and they can be paired off to carry the same number of containers. It's certainly solvable but adds a whole new level of logistical planning to make sure there is a suitable ship available and empty to receive the containers at the other end.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

>I suspect wait times for cranes at each end of this rail would be about the same as canal wait times if not longer. This is the wrong way to think about it. Wait times would naturally start at zero days, and then increase from there until there is no more demand or the comparative advantage runs out.

Zacru 3y ago

If you're shipping from northern hemisphere to northern hemisphere, then you also save to time/fuel to go down to Panama. No idea if that's significant or not.

bluGill 3y ago

Generally you wouldn't have two ships, you would have dozens. This only makes sense if you sort. There are many ports across the Pacific, and many other ports on the east coast (include South American and the Caribbean!). Dozens of ships from different ports cross the Pacific and unload. Then the containers get mixed and matched with dozens of other ships on the other side going to dozens of different ports. And the reverse for the return trips. Note that the ships do not all need to be owned by the same company, the important part is the containers get where they need to be. Sometimes they are, but container logistics is often separate and even when not the shipping companies will use each other when needed to get their containers where the customer needs them.