(erielack) Intermodal Then and Now

["Paul Brezicki" <doctorpb_@_bellsouth.net>]

Some of you have probably read the two-part series on international container traffic in the current issue of Trains; it presents some astonishing data. I'll get to the EL content in a moment, but first some stats. 

We've heard a lot about the explosive growth of intermodal, and indeed traffic grew from about 2.2 million trailers and containers in 1975 (EL's last full year) to 13.6 million in 2005. However it appears that all the recent growth is in one segment: 58% were international containers, 23% domestic containers, and 19% trailers. Moreover, it appears that most of those domestic containers are actually carrying foreign goods which have arrived at the west coast in international boxes; these are trucked to giant inland transloading centers where their contents are unloaded and reshuffled. This accounts for an estimated 25% of international traffic, so that 58% figure is only three fourths of the total. This means that only 23% of today's intermodal traffic is domestic, and if present trends continue it will soon be less than 20%. That's because domestic traffic has been flat for two years while the international segment has been growing 10% annually. Since the economy has been growing at a good clip it also means that for purely domestic freight, intermodal is losing market share. I'm guessing international traffic was no more than 10% of the total during EL's final years. It now so dominates intermodal that TTX is back to where it was 20 years ago: ordering 5-platform 40' wells, since the current production 53' wells with their 13' of wasted space constrain capacity at congested west coast ports.

The most striking trend during the history of intermodal is the increasing length of haul. This is because as trucking has become more competitive, the distance at which it supercedes rail's long-distance advantage keeps increasing. In the 1930's, Chicago Great Western ushered in the era of "modern intermodal" with a 170 mile route between Chicago and Dubuque IA. New Haven followed with it's 225 mile NY-Boston service. When PRR began TrucTrain service in 1955, the 900 mile NY-Chicago route became the leading piggyback market for the next 20 years, with multiple schedules over as many as five RR's; EL, of course played a prominant role. After 1975, the major growth shifted to the west. Several factors were at work, including the financial collapse of northeastern lines and the declining industrial base of that region, as well as the ascendancy of AT&SF as the nation's premier intermodal carrier, but the steady advance of the trucking industry was the major reason. Even in 1975, the average intermodal haul was about 1,000 miles, and about half of EL's Chicago volume was "rubber interchanged". By 1982, it was 1150 miles, and today it's about 2200 miles, or roughly the rail distance from Chicago to LA. So intermodal has evolved from short and medium haul to long-haul mode, and is now a transcontinental and even international mode, as most traffic is really the tail end of a trans-ocean haul of 8,000 miles or more. 

The current Trains issue also has a nice map of today's intermodal terminals, and nicely illustrates the dominance of the western lines. The busiest facilities (over 500,000 lifts per year) are found there: Chicago, Alliance TX, Tacoma and LA area; none are in the northeast. In the second category (250,000-500,000) only two are in the northeast: S Kearny (ex PRR) and Croxton (ex-EL). These were also the busiest north Jersey terminals in EL/PC days. Croxton was doing 600 lifts daily at it's peak in 1973-74, or about 160,000 per year. EL's total annual intermodal volume of about 200,000 in those years put it in the same ballpark as the largest Class 1's (except PC), inlcuding N&W, UP, SP and ATSF, since EL's intermodal revenue contribution was much higher (17% vs perhaps 5%). 

For more insight, have a look at AASHTO's 2000 report on rail freight http://freight.transportation.org/doc/FreightRailReport.pdf  The intermodal map illustrates that the main routes of CSX and NS are feeders for the Chicago-west coast arteries of BNSF and UP. The latter plus Alliancs-S California are where today's intermodal action takes place. It almost appears that if not for the west coast, rail intermodal wouldn't exist today. Look also at the thick lines in the east on the trucking map. For moves within the densely populated part of the country east of the Mississippi, the diversion of merchandise traffic from rail to highway is almost total.

Paul B

	The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
	Sponsored by the ELH&TS
	http://www.elhts.org

------------------------------