Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
double-stack vs piggyback
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<P>There's also the matter of Identity Protected Grain shipments, as well as the too small for unit train output of some specialized rotation crops. The IPG shipments <STRONG>must</STRONG> move in ISO containers from point of origin to final destination overseas, in either 20' or 40' containers. For any IPG shipments from Montana to Asia, the only viable choice right now is to truck either to Spokane or Lewiston. For the Spokane move, BNSF's quotes rates of about $640 per 20' and $670 per 40' to Puget Sound. For the Lewiston move, the barge companies charge a per container rate of about $120 per 20' and $160 per 40' to Portland, e.g. <STRONG>about a fourth of what BNSF charges for relatively the same distance!</STRONG></P> <P>Since it's roughly the same distance from central Montana to either Spokane or Lewiston, the truck rates will be the same to either destination. Assuming the same cost of drayage, it's clear that IPG shippers will use the truck/barge combo rather than the truck/rail combo, since they'll save $500 a pop. The only factor that could make them choose the truck/rail via Spokane is the relative lack of ocean carriers that call on Portland, but the likelyhood is that those Portland carriers will serve the same Asian markets as the Puget Sound carriers.</P> <P>Of course, BNSF could reopen it's Shelby intermodal terminal, or open a new one in Great Falls, both of which are closer to the grain growers than either Spokane or Lewiston. Then it'd be a snap that most such shipments would move by rail, even with monopolistic rates. FYI - BNSF currently is not posting any intermodal rates out of Billings; Is a Billings terminal shutdown next on the screw Montana agenda?</P> <P>It's somewhat ironic that the railroads have been moving more and more to bulk shipping over-efficiency-itus, while at the same time grain growers are likely to move toward the more lucrative specialized crop markets. BNSF is cutting back on carload and intermodal services in Big Sky country in deference to consolidated unit train terminals, while the growers are starting to demand more individualized transportation options to conform to their new crop specialization.</P> <P>Gee, if BNSF had actually treated it's bulk grain customers in such a way as to allow them to be more competitive on the world markets, maybe those growers wouldn't have so much incentive to move to the high risk/high reward specialized crop markets.</P>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy