Intermodal struggles continue as congestion, capacity, supply chain disruptions persist
Rail intermodal operators, already challenged on numerous fronts, have little ability to flex up as peak season rolls on. Shippers are wise to make contingency plans to avoid further supply chain pain.
Gary Frantz is a contributing editor for DC Velocity and its sister publication CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly, and 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.
The far-flung intermodal operations of the nation’s Class 1 railroads continue to deal with a host of challenges as shippers look to get peak season cargoes moved without delay and available in stores for the annual holiday sales push.
Those challenges reflect persistent issues that rail service providers, drayage firms, shippers both import and export, and warehouse operators have been dealing with since the onset of Covid. Containers are piling up at seaports and inland port intermodal (IPI) facilities (off port or inland rail depots where containers are staged and loaded on stack trains). Intermodal rail capacity remains stubbornly problematic. Train departures are delayed or canceled as the rail lines continue to recover from staffing shortages, a residual effect of Covid-driven furloughs and layoffs. On-time arrival of dispatched trains is mired in the mid-70% range.
Then there is the impact of warehouses already filled to the rafters with aging inventory that still needs to be moved to stores. That landside capacity crunch means fresh inbound goods have no place to go. As a result, incoming containers are left on rail ramps for extended periods of time, exacerbating congestion issues at the ramps. Those that do move off ramps often are being parked at warehouses, unable to immediately be unloaded. That creates yet another capacity issue, as chassis are then delayed being returned to ports and inland rail ramps.
All this foreshadows a challenging run to the end of the year for intermodal rail providers, drayage truckers, and shippers.
TURNING THE FAUCET OFF, THEN ON
Larry Gross, who has followed the industry for several decades and publishes the monthly "Intermodal in Depth" report, points to a couple of factors that have influenced—and continue to influence—intermodal service and capacity. “Ocean carriers late last year and early this year basically turned off the IPI faucet, because they wanted to corral their [containers] close to the port and shoot them back to Asia as fast as possible,” he said. “They were short of equipment in Asia, and rates were insane coming east. They didn’t want containers spending a lot of time running around the U.S. when [containers] could be back in Shanghai getting another high-profit load,” he noted.
Then they opened the spigots, sending a surge of freight into inland intermodal systems, “which just cannot deal with the speed and magnitude of the changes,” he explained. “Volume went up like an escalator. There are chassis shortages in many lanes, the surge has eaten up all the chassis [capacity], and warehouses are [already] full with the wrong inventory.” All of which led to what seem to be intractable bottlenecks.
While capacity remains tight, Gross believes demand is beginning to slacken, which may provide some relief through the end of the year.
At the same time, the rails are making progress reducing congestion, adding crews, and improving on-time dispatches. But Gross isn’t convinced the pain is behind us. “My expectation for peak season is very muted,” he notes. “We’re already running as fast as we can.” The ability of rails to “flex up” is very limited, particularly as many shippers have advanced or “up-streamed” orders early in an effort to get goods into stores in time for seasonal sales. As a result, for intermodal networks, “when everyone is doing the same thing, it creates a big problem.”
DISJOINTED SUPPLY CHAINS DISRUPTING—AGAIN
“Everyone is acutely aware of supply chain challenges; our service has been impacted as well,” notes Pat Linden, assistant vice president, intermodal marketing for the Union Pacific railroad. “We have taken some actions in terms of metering [restricting] inbound freight as a few inbound ramps are congested with stacked containers.” He emphasizes that “fluidity” and throughput at intermodal ramps depends as well on how promptly shippers pick up their containers. He points out that shippers control “the first or last mile, so we need improvement from our customers to process those loads and get them off the inbound ramps.”
Nevertheless, Linden says that “we at the UP are accountable to our customers for our service, [which] certainly has not been where we want it to be. We need to increase velocity and deliver better performance, and that’s on us.”
Balance is critical to an intermodal network, which Linden says the railroad works constantly to manage, taking steps operationally and commercially to adjust and improve. Crew availability has been an issue—“and we have been very public about the challenges we have faced with crews,” Linden says—but he emphasizes that progress is being made. “Crew availability [in September] is the best it has been since the end of the first quarter.” The UP has graduated nearly 600 train, engine, and yard service employees through July and has another 100-plus member class soon to graduate. “We are on pace to meet our hiring target of 1,400 crew members by the end of the year.”
Linden says the UP has the resources necessary to support the demand it has currently. He notes as well that the railroad is spending some $600 million over the next several years on capacity and commercial facilities, including expansions at existing facilities to increase parking and lift capacity, fund technology initiatives, and “deliver a best-in-class driver experience.” The market is at about the halfway point through the traditional peak season, Linden said in early September. How big of a peak the industry will see remains up for debate, as a cooling economy and rising interest rates and inflation begin to put a damper on consumer spending and industrial output.
Regardless of the market, the UP is plowing ahead with initiatives to improve network fluidity, reduce congestion, and improve overall service performance. “We know that intermodal is a service-sensitive product,” Linden says. “When we don’t perform, that impedes our opportunity to fully capture what is available to us. Our bias is for growth, and we are going to make sure we have the resources and train plans in place to be competitive in the market.”
LOOKING FOR CAPACITY WHEREVER IT EXISTS
Tom Williams, group vice president for consumer products at the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, says the BNSF has been experiencing capacity issues at both East and West Coast gateways and all inland terminals, driven by “crowded warehouses and labor shortages across the supply chain.” The West Coast, which provides the most direct route into the U.S. from Asia, is processing a record number of containers. With congestion apparent across all gateways, “BCOs [beneficial cargo owners] are looking for capacity wherever it exists,” he says.
The BNSF in September instituted metering for international intermodal traffic at its Logistics Park Alliance and Logistics Park Chicago depots to help reduce the high number of ground-stacked containers. Williams says that street turn times for chassis are again spiking, which is “depleting the assets that are needed to unload trains at our facilities.” Those longer chassis turn times are a big factor behind the metering of containers at ports awaiting a train.
Williams stresses that the railroad has been actively managing its network to increase fluidity and reduce congestion. “Managing the active car inventory is an impactful action in the short term to improve fluidity and restore service consistency,” he notes. Those actions include “selective metering of inbound volumes to address high container dwell and chassis unavailability.”
In one effort to alleviate the situation, the BNSF has been working with ship lines and customers to shuttle containers away from ports and IPI yards, stacking them at offsite container yards, which, Williams says, “allows us to move longer-dwelling units away from the production area and off much-needed chassis, ultimately increasing unloading potential and container availability for customers.”
The BNSF also has established a weekend dray-off program (to move containers from rail ramps to offsite yards) using new stacked container yards at its Logistics Park Chicago facility; added new stacking cranes at its Logistics Park Alliance site, which enables faster movement of stacked containers at the 3,000-unit capacity site; and implemented a long-dwelling unit dray-off program in Kansas City.
All the initiatives are part of what Williams calls the BNSF’s “aggressive service recovery plan.” He says the plan has since early July reduced by 50% the number of trains being held or delayed at origin, decreased traffic backlogs, and improved overall network fluidity and velocity.
Williams also cited several BNSF initiatives to unlock more capacity. One is the development of a new rail hub at Washington’s Port of Tacoma in collaboration with the Northwest Seaport Alliance. The new Tacoma South facility will accommodate more than 50,000 annual container lifts. That complements the BNSF’s current facility at Tukwila serving the Seattle harbor. Another is an initiative with freight transportation giant J.B. Hunt, which earlier this year announced plans to grow its intermodal fleet by as many as 150,000 containers. In support of that, the BNSF is investing to increase capability at major intermodal hubs in Southern California, Chicago, Tacoma, and other key terminals to increase efficiency.
The railroad also has been making progress overcoming hiring and retention challenges. To date through early September, the BNSF had achieved 60% of its hiring plan for 2022, which calls for hiring 1,800 train, yard, and engine personnel as well as some 1,200 workers in its engineering, mechanical, and dispatch groups.
At the end of the day, all these activities still come back to one overriding issue, Williams notes. “First and foremost, we need to restore our service to a level our customers expect from us,” he says. “We are confident in our recovery plan, and as service returns, so will volume.”
Most of the apparel sold in North America is manufactured in Asia, meaning the finished goods travel long distances to reach end markets, with all the associated greenhouse gas emissions. On top of that, apparel manufacturing itself requires a significant amount of energy, water, and raw materials like cotton. Overall, the production of apparel is responsible for about 2% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, according to a report titled
Taking Stock of Progress Against the Roadmap to Net Zeroby the Apparel Impact Institute. Founded in 2017, the Apparel Impact Institute is an organization dedicated to identifying, funding, and then scaling solutions aimed at reducing the carbon emissions and other environmental impacts of the apparel and textile industries.
The author of this annual study is researcher and consultant Michael Sadowski. He wrote the first report in 2021 as well as the latest edition, which was released earlier this year. Sadowski, who is also executive director of the environmental nonprofit
The Circulate Initiative, recently joined DC Velocity Group Editorial Director David Maloney on an episode of the “Logistics Matters” podcast to discuss the key findings of the research, what companies are doing to reduce emissions, and the progress they’ve made since the first report was issued.
A: While companies in the apparel industry can set their own sustainability targets, we realized there was a need to give them a blueprint for actually reducing emissions. And so, we produced the first report back in 2021, where we laid out the emissions from the sector, based on the best estimates [we could make using] data from various sources. It gives companies and the sector a blueprint for what we collectively need to do to drive toward the ambitious reduction [target] of staying within a 1.5 degrees Celsius pathway. That was the first report, and then we committed to refresh the analysis on an annual basis. The second report was published last year, and the third report came out in May of this year.
Q: What were some of the key findings of your research?
A: We found that about half of the emissions in the sector come from Tier Two, which is essentially textile production. That includes the knitting, weaving, dyeing, and finishing of fabric, which together account for over half of the total emissions. That was a really important finding, and it allows us to focus our attention on the interventions that can drive those emissions down.
Raw material production accounts for another quarter of emissions. That includes cotton farming, extracting gas and oil from the ground to make synthetics, and things like that. So we now have a really keen understanding of the source of our industry’s emissions.
Q: Your report mentions that the apparel industry is responsible for about 2% of global emissions. Is that an accurate statistic?
A: That’s our best estimate of the total emissions [generated by] the apparel sector. Some other reports on the industry have apparel at up to 8% of global emissions. And there is a commonly misquoted number in the media that it’s 10%. From my perspective, I think the best estimate is somewhere under 2%.
We know that globally, humankind needs to reduce emissions by roughly half by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050 to hit international goals. [Reaching that target will require the involvement of] every facet of the global economy and every aspect of the apparel sector—transportation, material production, manufacturing, cotton farming. Through our work and that of others, I think the apparel sector understands what has to happen. We have highlighted examples of how companies are taking action to reduce emissions in the roadmap reports.
Q: What are some of those actions the industry can take to reduce emissions?
A: I think one of the positive developments since we wrote the first report is that we’re seeing companies really focus on the most impactful areas. We see companies diving deep on thermal energy, for example. With respect to Tier Two, we [focus] a lot of attention on things like ocean freight versus air. There’s a rule of thumb I’ve heard that indicates air freight is about 10 times the cost [of ocean] and also produces 10 times more greenhouse gas emissions.
There is money available to invest in sustainability efforts. It’s really exciting to see the funding that’s coming through for AI [artificial intelligence] and to see that individual companies, such as H&M and Lululemon, are investing in real solutions in their supply chains. I think a lot of concrete actions are being taken.
And yet we know that reducing emissions by half on an absolute basis by 2030 is a monumental undertaking. So I don’t want to be overly optimistic, because I think we have a lot of work to do. But I do think we’ve got some amazing progress happening.
Q: You mentioned several companies that are starting to address their emissions. Is that a result of their being more aware of the emissions they generate? Have you seen progress made since the first report came out in 2021?
A: Yes. When we published the first roadmap back in 2021, our statistics showed that only about 12 companies had met the criteria [for setting] science-based targets. In 2024, the number of apparel, textile, and footwear companies that have set targets or have commitments to set targets is close to 500. It’s an enormous increase. I think they see the urgency more than other sectors do.
We have companies that have been working at sustainability for quite a long time. I think the apparel sector has developed a keen understanding of the impacts of climate change. You can see the impacts of flooding, drought, heat, and other things happening in places like Bangladesh and Pakistan and India. If you’re a brand or a manufacturer and you have operations and supply chains in these places, I think you understand what the future will look like if we don’t significantly reduce emissions.
Q: There are different categories of emission levels, depending on the role within the supply chain. Scope 1 are “direct” emissions under the reporting company’s control. For apparel, this might be the production of raw materials or the manufacturing of the finished product. Scope 2 covers “indirect” emissions from purchased energy, such as electricity used in these processes. Scope 3 emissions are harder to track, as they include emissions from supply chain partners both upstream and downstream.
Now companies are finding there are legislative efforts around the world that could soon require them to track and report on all these emissions, including emissions produced by their partners’ supply chains. Does this mean that companies now need to be more aware of not only what greenhouse gas emissions they produce, but also what their partners produce?
A: That’s right. Just to put this into context, if you’re a brand like an Adidas or a Gap, you still have to consider the Scope 3 emissions. In particular, there are the so-called “purchased goods and services,” which refers to all of the embedded emissions in your products, from farming cotton to knitting yarn to making fabric. Those “purchased goods and services” generally account for well above 80% of the total emissions associated with a product. It’s by far the most significant portion of your emissions.
Leading companies have begun measuring and taking action on Scope 3 emissions because of regulatory developments in Europe and, to some extent now, in California. I do think this is just a further tailwind for the work that the industry is doing.
I also think it will definitely ratchet up the quality requirements of Scope 3 data, which is not yet where we’d all like it to be. Companies are working to improve that data, but I think the regulatory push will make the quality side increasingly important.
Q: Overall, do you think the work being done by the Apparel Impact Institute will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions within the industry?
A: When we started this back in 2020, we were at a place where companies were setting targets and knew their intended destination, but what they needed was a blueprint for how to get there. And so, the roadmap [provided] this blueprint and identified six key things that the sector needed to do—from using more sustainable materials to deploying renewable electricity in the supply chain.
Decarbonizing any sector, whether it’s transportation, chemicals, or automotive, requires investment. The Apparel Impact Institute is bringing collective investment, which is so critical. I’m really optimistic about what they’re doing. They have taken a data-driven, evidence-based approach, so they know where the emissions are and they know what the needed interventions are. And they’ve got the industry behind them in doing that.
The global air cargo market’s hot summer of double-digit demand growth continued in August with average spot rates showing their largest year-on-year jump with a 24% increase, according to the latest weekly analysis by Xeneta.
Xeneta cited two reasons to explain the increase. First, Global average air cargo spot rates reached $2.68 per kg in August due to continuing supply and demand imbalance. That came as August's global cargo supply grew at its slowest ratio in 2024 to-date at 2% year-on-year, while global cargo demand continued its double-digit growth, rising +11%.
The second reason for higher rates was an ocean-to-air shift in freight volumes due to Red Sea disruptions and e-commerce demand.
Those factors could soon be amplified as e-commerce shows continued strong growth approaching the hotly anticipated winter peak season. E-commerce and low-value goods exports from China in the first seven months of 2024 increased 30% year-on-year, including shipments to Europe and the US rising 38% and 30% growth respectively, Xeneta said.
“Typically, air cargo market performance in August tends to follow the July trend. But another month of double-digit demand growth and the strongest rate growths of the year means there was definitely no summer slack season in 2024,” Niall van de Wouw, Xeneta’s chief airfreight officer, said in a release.
“Rates we saw bottoming out in late July started picking up again in mid-August. This is too short a period to call a season. This has been a busy summer, and now we’re at the threshold of Q4, it will be interesting to see what will happen and if all the anticipation of a red-hot peak season materializes,” van de Wouw said.
The report cites data showing that there are approximately 1.7 million workers missing from the post-pandemic workforce and that 38% of small firms are unable to fill open positions. At the same time, the “skills gap” in the workforce is accelerating as automation and AI create significant shifts in how work is performed.
That information comes from the “2024 Labor Day Report” released by Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute (WPI), the firm’s government relations and public policy arm.
“We continue to see a labor shortage and an urgent need to upskill the current workforce to adapt to the new world of work,” said Michael Lotito, Littler shareholder and co-chair of WPI. “As corporate executives and business leaders look to the future, they are focused on realizing the many benefits of AI to streamline operations and guide strategic decision-making, while cultivating a talent pipeline that can support this growth.”
But while the need is clear, solutions may be complicated by public policy changes such as the upcoming U.S. general election and the proliferation of employment-related legislation at the state and local levels amid Congressional gridlock.
“We are heading into a contentious election that has already proven to be unpredictable and is poised to create even more uncertainty for employers, no matter the outcome,” Shannon Meade, WPI’s executive director, said in a release. “At the same time, the growing patchwork of state and local requirements across the U.S. is exacerbating compliance challenges for companies. That, coupled with looming changes following several Supreme Court decisions that have the potential to upend rulemaking, gives C-suite executives much to contend with in planning their workforce-related strategies.”
Stax Engineering, the venture-backed startup that provides smokestack emissions reduction services for maritime ships, will service all vessels from Toyota Motor North America Inc. visiting the Toyota Berth at the Port of Long Beach, according to a new five-year deal announced today.
Beginning in 2025 to coincide with new California Air Resources Board (CARB) standards, STAX will become the first and only emissions control provider to service roll-on/roll-off (ro-ros) vessels in the state of California, the company said.
Stax has rapidly grown since its launch in the first quarter of this year, supported in part by a $40 million funding round from investors, announced in July. It now holds exclusive service agreements at California ports including Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, Benicia, Richmond, and Oakland. The firm has also partnered with individual companies like NYK Line, Hyundai GLOVIS, Equilon Enterprises LLC d/b/a Shell Oil Products US (Shell), and now Toyota.
Stax says it offers an alternative to shore power with land- and barge-based, mobile emissions capture and control technology for shipping terminal and fleet operators without the need for retrofits.
In the case of this latest deal, the Toyota Long Beach Vehicle Distribution Center imports about 200,000 vehicles each year on ro-ro vessels. Stax will keep those ships green with its flexible exhaust capture system, which attaches to all vessel classes without modification to remove 99% of emitted particulate matter (PM) and 95% of emitted oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Over the lifetime of this new agreement with Toyota, Stax estimated the service will account for approximately 3,700 hours and more than 47 tons of emissions controlled.
“We set out to provide an emissions capture and control solution that was reliable, easily accessible, and cost-effective. As we begin to service Toyota, we’re confident that we can meet the needs of the full breadth of the maritime industry, furthering our impact on the local air quality, public health, and environment,” Mike Walker, CEO of Stax, said in a release. “Continuing to establish strong partnerships will help build momentum for and trust in our technology as we expand beyond the state of California.”
That result showed that driver wages across the industry continue to increase post-pandemic, despite a challenging freight market for motor carriers. The data comes from ATA’s “Driver Compensation Study,” which asked 120 fleets, more than 150,000 employee drivers, and 14,000 independent contractors about their wage and benefit information.
Drilling into specific categories, linehaul less-than-truckload (LTL) drivers earned a median annual amount of $94,525 in 2023, while local LTL drivers earned a median of $80,680. The median annual compensation for drivers at private carriers has risen 12% since 2021, reaching $95,114 in 2023. And leased-on independent contractors for truckload carriers were paid an annual median amount of $186,016 in 2023.
The results also showed how the demographics of the industry are changing, as carriers offered smaller referral and fewer sign-on bonuses for new drivers in 2023 compared to 2021 but more frequently offered tenure bonuses to their current drivers and with a greater median value.
"While our last study, conducted in 2021, illustrated how drivers benefitted from the strongest freight environment in a generation, this latest report shows professional drivers' earnings are still rising—even in a weaker freight economy," ATA Chief Economist Bob Costello said in a release. "By offering greater tenure bonuses to their current driver force, many fleets appear to be shifting their workforce priorities from recruitment to retention."