by F3A
roberttosh wrote:Quite frankly, if there wasn't so much negativity on this site I would share a lot more information.'Ol Bobby's in the know.
Railroad Forums
Moderator: MEC407
roberttosh wrote:Quite frankly, if there wasn't so much negativity on this site I would share a lot more information.'Ol Bobby's in the know.
4266 wrote:Something I pointed out in another thread... NPR ran a story today about the Panama Canal expansion and the lack of suitable deep water port facilities in the northeast to handle the expected post Panamax container traffic. So far the only ports that come close to being able to handle these kind of loads are Boston and Halifax. Anybody have any idea of how this might affect New England railroads? Would a Boston container facility help or hurt PAR/PAS? Would PAR, SLR or MMA stand to gain from a post Panamax facility in Halifax?Boston is a second-tier port; the increasing popularity of post-Panamax vessels ain't gonna help its case. Boston lacks: 1. significant capacity, 2. draft, and 3. direct (or even indirect) rail access. Halifax can handle larger vessels but has lost market share to Montreal and NY/NJ. (Interestingly, there's a new terminal planned on Cape Breton Island). If the trend to fewer, larger container ports continues (no reason it won't), you'll see NY/NJ (particularly once they get their draft issues worked out), Norfolk and Savannah as the the three key East Coast ports. Halifax will play a minor role, but ocean carriers are trying to maximize their haul, so will be more inclined to sail to NY/NJ than hand off to rails in Canada. (After all,why give the railroads the money?)
4266 wrote:I'm assuming you're aware that the NY/NJ "Draft Issues" involve moving, demolishing or raising the Sorbonne Bridge. When was the last time the Port Authority simply "took care of" anything?I'm not familiar with the "Sorbonne" Bridge. I assume you meant "Bayonne?" Yes, I'm aware of it. Several points: 1) the air draft issue does limit container vessel size, but smaller post-Panamax vessels can clear the bridge. 2) The Port Authority is evaluating options to locate a container terminal on the Atlantic side of the bridge. 3) While it will become a more pressing issue in the future, vessel size is not a crushing issue now. 4)NY/NJ has one thing that Halifax, Searsport, etc don't have: population (and the resulting local market). That is a factor that cannot be underestimated.
Mcoov wrote:This sounds like PAR will transform into a Deleware & Hudson, acting as a bridge line between the Canadian ports, and the Northeast rail container terminals. (It's kinda weird now that I think about it, seeing as how Guilford bought the D&H in 1984.)I don't see that happening at all. Most of their traffic is online generated or destination, including intermodal.
Cowford wrote:OK you definitely got me On that one... I really have to figure out how to turn off my autocorrect!4266 wrote:I'm assuming you're aware that the NY/NJ "Draft Issues" involve moving, demolishing or raising the Sorbonne Bridge. When was the last time the Port Authority simply "took care of" anything?I'm not familiar with the "Sorbonne" Bridge. I assume you meant "Bayonne?" Yes, I'm aware of it. Several points: 1) the air draft issue does limit container vessel size, but smaller post-Panamax vessels can clear the bridge. 2) The Port Authority is evaluating options to locate a container terminal on the Atlantic side of the bridge. 3) While it will become a more pressing issue in the future, vessel size is not a crushing issue now. 4)NY/NJ has one thing that Halifax, Searsport, etc don't have: population (and the resulting local market). That is a factor that cannot be underestimated.
4266 wrote:Is there ANY scenario in which one may envision a shift in shipping patterns that could significantly affect PAR/PAS traffic volume?Even with improvements in service, clearing the entire PAR/PAS route for double-stack, fuel price changes (higher or lower)... I can't think of any. Maybe if (1) manufacturing moved west from China to India and Suez routings were much more prevalent, and (2) East Coast US ports suffered congestion that led to Canadian ports capturing a share of Northeast/Mid-Atlantic market share??? Tosh?