Any chance we could get some of these imperial Walker like container cranes on the riverfront? Always loved them growing up in Seattle.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 805
Any chance we could get some of these imperial Walker like container cranes on the riverfront? Always loved them growing up in Seattle.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I brought up the KC project just because I think it is something STL should be looking into. The St. Louis region will need a dedicated port facility if they are to be a hub for this new system. To your point 7, I agree it’s too early to build a big new port. Let’s do what KC is doing, build an intermodal terminal first with space left for the port itself.gone corporate wrote:So, I was offline for a couple days after that big damn post I did earlier on this whole thing, and I see a bunch of good comments and questions. As best I can, here’s a couple quick thoughts…
1. Estimates for Container-on-Vessel (CoV) total cost savings are 30-40%+. This will definitely drive new demand as logistics are fundamentally cost-driven. For my understanding, this is the most significant lure to this business model. BellaVilla is right to note the importance of Economies of Scale.
2. The KC harbor plan ldai_phs wrote about looks great. We mustn’t look at this as direct competition, however, or that they’re going to take an opportunity from STL. Very much, I hope this KC project comes to fruition. This is especially if KC elects to include a container port, as this would only further the market viability for CoV. Plus, what they ship out of KC has to stop in STL before it gets sent to NOLA anyways.
3. Geography plays an incredible amount into this opportunity. STL is effectively the geographic center of the country. Our catchment area is very strong as we will attract manufacturers who could potentially ship via this route from Chicago, Indianapolis, etc. We also have well established shipping networks here, as demonstrated by STL being the second-largest inland port system in the country (Cincinnati is first, but their defined “port” is about 200 miles long while STL’s is about 70) – and gaining ground.
4. Further, our intermodal logistics assets are sound and getting stronger. I note our existing infrastructure beyond the rivers to include 6 major rail yards, 2 international airports, and 4 interstate highways, all situated at the geographic center of the country. We also have strong, and growing, warehousing networks that are increasing in volume. Should CoV come to be, this industry’s development should seriously accelerate physical infrastructure and the strength of our business community.
5. Regarding competing with Memphis… I seriously hope they can keep up with us. This whole thing must not be seen as a “winner take all” scenario. For this new venture to succeed, it will need multiple markets to thrive. The biggest winners will be STL, MEM, and NOLA as these are the hubs. There will be many spokes as well. The STL spokes will include those markets up the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, including KC, Omaha, the Great Plains, and maybe all the way up to Minneapolis. These will all consolidate at STL. Should we include the Illinois River, we could extend this all the way up to (Peoria and) Chicago via Joliet (although Chicago may not be too fond to such competition to their freight routes and rail networks). Meanwhile, the MEM hub will include those river cities up the Ohio River, including Louisville, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh, all of which will consolidate at the MEM yards. They have a lot more market to cover. Of these metro areas, STL is the largest hub; while we are smaller than Minneapolis and Chicago, they will hub here if they participate in this. We are larger than all the spoke metro areas on the MEM/Ohio River group. And, Memphis will likely focus on their two biggest logistics-centric businesses feeding their CoV line: Walmart (Bentonville, AR) and FedEx (through which Memphis is a true “aerotropolis” according to the academic understanding of the term). Meanwhile, STL has a much greater economic presence, not only in total goods shipped but in total major corporations that can utilize this system. Our business community is far, far beyond what MEM has, and we have more than a million more people than they do. Add-in the catchment area we have, and I have no fear of MEM eating our lunch.
6. Addendum: Competition for STL’s potential CoV business is NOT Memphis; it’s the trains that go from Long Beach to Chicago.
7. Dredger is spot-on right when he says we must all be patient until we hear APH has signed a shipyard contract and the keel is laid. Promises don’t matter until the check clears. I hope we hear of such news this Quarter.
8. There’s no need to build a new rail line from NOLA to STL. The Mississippi River is our direct intermodal line between our cities. Much of this entire initiative is based on capitalizing on our rivers as a transportation network, something that this new technology in shipping can fundamentally further. Good times.
^ St. Louis already has significant intermodal capacity along the River. It’s one of the largest inland ports in the country, after all.
According to the Freightway the existing MRT has close to 400 acres, a 2,000’ dock, 4,300’ of river frontage, covered storage, multimodal facilities, highway connections and a TRRA connection to six Class I railroads on the west bank just north of downtown St. Louis in the City. The Illinois ports are even larger, like ACP which has its own 24hr Class III short line railroad that has connections to 6 Class I railroads and TRRA. ACP already has container on barge capability, dry dock, liquid dock, fleeting, roll-on, roll-off, etc.
ACP is in Granite City. That’s 20min from downtown St. Louis.
KRPD 1 and 2 also have existing loop railroads that can handle trains with over 120 cars, a couple of large cranes, dry docks, bulk docks and other intermodal facilities. KRPD is also developing an additional port that will be closer to SAFB and Belleville. KRPD services the Mississippi and Kaskaskia rivers.
There are four large, existing intermodal waterfront ports in the St. Louis region already. All of them routinely expanding and making updates.
Edit: For reference, here is a (very) rough outline of the Granite City port. Huge warehouses, intermodal facilities, direct rail access to both the docks and the large warehouses too. It's right next to the Merchants and McKinley bridges into the heavy St. Louis industrial areas with easy access to Route 3. It's also right on the Chain of Rocks Canal...which is right where it should be. The southern end of the Chain of Rocks is 4 miles from the Arch and 2.5 miles from the MRT. Its northern end is 1.3 miles from the mouth of the Missouri. And more than enough room for expansion of any kind...from warehousing to container storage.
Remember, regional port planning in St. Louis is carried out by Bi-State Development, an interstate compact with large holdings in two states. Not everything has to be in the city or on the Missouri side.
![]()
According to the Freightway the existing MRT has close to 400 acres, a 2,000’ dock, 4,300’ of river frontage, covered storage, multimodal facilities, highway connections and a TRRA connection to six Class I railroads on the west bank just north of downtown St. Louis in the City. The Illinois ports are even larger, like ACP which has its own 24hr Class III short line railroad that has connections to 6 Class I railroads and TRRA. ACP already has container on barge capability, dry dock, liquid dock, fleeting, roll-on, roll-off, etc.
ACP is in Granite City. That’s 20min from downtown St. Louis.
KRPD 1 and 2 also have existing loop railroads that can handle trains with over 120 cars, a couple of large cranes, dry docks, bulk docks and other intermodal facilities. KRPD is also developing an additional port that will be closer to SAFB and Belleville. KRPD services the Mississippi and Kaskaskia rivers.
There are four large, existing intermodal waterfront ports in the St. Louis region already. All of them routinely expanding and making updates.
Edit: For reference, here is a (very) rough outline of the Granite City port. Huge warehouses, intermodal facilities, direct rail access to both the docks and the large warehouses too. It's right next to the Merchants and McKinley bridges into the heavy St. Louis industrial areas with easy access to Route 3. It's also right on the Chain of Rocks Canal...which is right where it should be. The southern end of the Chain of Rocks is 4 miles from the Arch and 2.5 miles from the MRT. Its northern end is 1.3 miles from the mouth of the Missouri. And more than enough room for expansion of any kind...from warehousing to container storage.
Remember, regional port planning in St. Louis is carried out by Bi-State Development, an interstate compact with large holdings in two states. Not everything has to be in the city or on the Missouri side.
- 443
This would seem incredibly foolish if APH's vision comes to fruition. This type of thinking is literally the reason St. Louis was surpassed by Chicago.gone corporate wrote: ↑Feb 16, 20215. Regarding competing with Memphis… I seriously hope they can keep up with us. This whole thing must not be seen as a “winner take all” scenario. For this new venture to succeed, it will need multiple markets to thrive. The biggest winners will be STL, MEM, and NOLA as these are the hubs. There will be many spokes as well. The STL spokes will include those markets up the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, including KC, Omaha, the Great Plains, and maybe all the way up to Minneapolis. These will all consolidate at STL. Should we include the Illinois River, we could extend this all the way up to (Peoria and) Chicago via Joliet (although Chicago may not be too fond to such competition to their freight routes and rail networks). Meanwhile, the MEM hub will include those river cities up the Ohio River, including Louisville, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh, all of which will consolidate at the MEM yards. They have a lot more market to cover. Of these metro areas, STL is the largest hub; while we are smaller than Minneapolis and Chicago, they will hub here if they participate in this. We are larger than all the spoke metro areas on the MEM/Ohio River group. And, Memphis will likely focus on their two biggest logistics-centric businesses feeding their CoV line: Walmart (Bentonville, AR) and FedEx (through which Memphis is a true “aerotropolis” according to the academic understanding of the term). Meanwhile, STL has a much greater economic presence, not only in total goods shipped but in total major corporations that can utilize this system. Our business community is far, far beyond what MEM has, and we have more than a million more people than they do. Add-in the catchment area we have, and I have no fear of MEM eating our lunch.
And as far competition w KC goes, I'm not particularly concerned. APH's vision is driven by containerized corn and bean exports. Of the big 4 commodities players, only Cargill and ADM have substantial grain moving ops in KC, and of those two, only ADM has a river loading facility and its quite upriver from KC. So, KC doesn't just need a port. It needs Louis Dreyfus and Bunge to come to town and for Cargill and ADM to substantially invest in current ops.
First round of transportation grant applications due starting with Dot opening up INFRA. With a definite shift in admin it will interesting to see what the region can put together and snag. You can certainly make the case that the longer a container stays on the water to get to its final destination the smaller carbon footprint is incurred on a per box basis
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/ ... ons--62732
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) yesterday announced it is seeking applicants for the fiscal-year 2021 round of the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) discretionary grant program. Funding available for the FY2021 grants is $889 million.
INFRA grants will fund transportation projects of national and regional significance that are in line with the Biden administration's priorities, including creating good-paying jobs, improving safety, applying transformative technology and explicitly addressing climate change and racial equity, USDOT officials said in a press release.
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/ ... ons--62732
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) yesterday announced it is seeking applicants for the fiscal-year 2021 round of the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) discretionary grant program. Funding available for the FY2021 grants is $889 million.
INFRA grants will fund transportation projects of national and regional significance that are in line with the Biden administration's priorities, including creating good-paying jobs, improving safety, applying transformative technology and explicitly addressing climate change and racial equity, USDOT officials said in a press release.
- 805
Also shipping on the Mississippi provides a lot of jobs in a corridor with a large Black population.dredger wrote:First round of transportation grant applications due starting with Dot opening up INFRA. With a definite shift in admin it will interesting to see what the region can put together and snag. You can certainly make the cast that the longer a container stays on the water to get to its final destination the smaller carbon footprint is incurred on a per box basis
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/ ... ons--62732
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) yesterday announced it is seeking applicants for the fiscal-year 2021 round of the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) discretionary grant program. Funding available for the FY2021 grants is $889 million.
INFRA grants will fund transportation projects of national and regional significance that are in line with the Biden administration's priorities, including creating good-paying jobs, improving safety, applying transformative technology and explicitly addressing climate change and racial equity, USDOT officials said in a press release.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 48
Unfortunately, these megaships are some of the highest polluting vehicles on earth and by a large margin. So I wouldn't necessarily pump the "green" aspect of this mode of transit. Certainly more-so than the intermodal train transport.dredger wrote: ↑Feb 18, 2021First round of transportation grant applications due starting with Dot opening up INFRA. With a definite shift in admin it will interesting to see what the region can put together and snag. You can certainly make the case that the longer a container stays on the water to get to its final destination the smaller carbon footprint is incurred on a per box basis
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/ ... ons--62732
The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) yesterday announced it is seeking applicants for the fiscal-year 2021 round of the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) discretionary grant program. Funding available for the FY2021 grants is $889 million.
INFRA grants will fund transportation projects of national and regional significance that are in line with the Biden administration's priorities, including creating good-paying jobs, improving safety, applying transformative technology and explicitly addressing climate change and racial equity, USDOT officials said in a press release.
- 6,118
^Where did you get that information? A general rule of shipbuilding is that the bigger the ship the less fuel you need to transport any given thing. The square cube law works in your favor. The engine size you need to go a given speed is basically governed by the friction of the hull. The more hull friction, the more engine. As the hull size goes up the friction goes up more or less in direct proportion to the hull's surface area. It's a length times width kind of function: square feet. But the volume of cargo carried is a cube: length times width times depth. That second act of multiplication makes the bigger ship a very big winner in the efficiency wars. That's why big animals can have a lower body temperature. It's why they can eat less relative to their mass. The cost goes up by the square, but the earnings by the cube. I love trains, but container ships are way the heck more efficient than container trains. Also a lot slower.
Now, cruise ships are arguably kind of nasty and dirty, but that's largely because they have lots of people inside that volume. So the volume of food, poop, electricity use, water consumption, and so forth goes up with the volume. If this was about transporting people those big ships would still win . . . as long as you don't mind taking a few days out of your busy schedule to get to Europe. (Or a week if you want to go on a container ship. A couple on a tanker. Going fast is inefficient, so merchant ships by and large go as slow as humanly practical. It beats walking, but maybe not by much.)
Now, cruise ships are arguably kind of nasty and dirty, but that's largely because they have lots of people inside that volume. So the volume of food, poop, electricity use, water consumption, and so forth goes up with the volume. If this was about transporting people those big ships would still win . . . as long as you don't mind taking a few days out of your busy schedule to get to Europe. (Or a week if you want to go on a container ship. A couple on a tanker. Going fast is inefficient, so merchant ships by and large go as slow as humanly practical. It beats walking, but maybe not by much.)
Pappy might be referring to the fact that ocean going vessels, especially bulk vessels to oil tankers to container ships used to burn some of the nastiest, lowest grade, cheapest fuel that the shipping industry can gets their hands on. Essentially what was left over in the refinery process was sold as dirt cheap bunker oil/fuel and add then add the fact that internationally their was very little emissions controls on those massive engines. This stuff was nasty, did not burn very well (typically had to be pre heated) and ships spewed tons of it out of their smokestacks on voyages. One of our dredges is certified for international voyage and was specifically design & built to run on bunker oil. Initially we did use bunker oil in the gulf and switched over to cleaner burning fuels for East and West Coast due to local requirements.
However, things have dramatically changed domestically over the last few decades and Internationally over the last few years. Domestically flagged vessels are essentially prohibited from burning bunker oil outright in inland & coastal waters and most regions now have various requirements, whether it is requirement to submit emission reports limiting hours available, to switching over to cleaner fuel coming into port, to shutting off and requiring dockside electric when at port, to a fair share of Tier III and Tier IV requirements on new builds and smaller vessels. I would not be surprised if all the newer River tugs or ones being built are at least Tier IIi compliant
In addition, international conventions are also phasing out bunker fuel out right... Essentially what happen with safety and international conventions for Safety of Life at Sea, SOLAS, is now being embraced for pollution.
However, things have dramatically changed domestically over the last few decades and Internationally over the last few years. Domestically flagged vessels are essentially prohibited from burning bunker oil outright in inland & coastal waters and most regions now have various requirements, whether it is requirement to submit emission reports limiting hours available, to switching over to cleaner fuel coming into port, to shutting off and requiring dockside electric when at port, to a fair share of Tier III and Tier IV requirements on new builds and smaller vessels. I would not be surprised if all the newer River tugs or ones being built are at least Tier IIi compliant
In addition, international conventions are also phasing out bunker fuel out right... Essentially what happen with safety and international conventions for Safety of Life at Sea, SOLAS, is now being embraced for pollution.
- 6,118
^I won't deny that there's a difference in emissions between low sulfur diesel and bunker C. But in the end, is it better to burn ten tons of "clean" low sulfur diesel or one ton of unrefined tar to ship the same amount of goods? Pappysoulard's claim that "megaships are some of the highest polluting vehicles on earth and by a large margin" doesn't ring true to me, so I'm curious where they got that information. It seems somewhat incredible.
It's also worth keeping in mind that refining those nicer, friendlier fuels has its own energy cost, which needs to figure into the equation, even if the pollution is "displaced" from the point of use. (Rather like electric cars.) If we're going to do a fair comparison, all of this stuff needs to be factored in.
I suppose the term "megaships" set me a bit on edge, as I don't recall seeing it in any of the maritime literature I've read, but I have seen it on places like the Discovery Channel and YouTube. (No disrespect to the fun stuff. I enjoy it. I just wouldn't want to use it as the basis of an argument.) So it makes me suspicious. Maybe there's something there. But if so, what? I didn't get the impression this was about anything as technical as the amount of large particulates in the exhaust. And even if it was . . . is that really enough to overturn the savings Mr. Square Cube Law affords you?
It's also worth keeping in mind that refining those nicer, friendlier fuels has its own energy cost, which needs to figure into the equation, even if the pollution is "displaced" from the point of use. (Rather like electric cars.) If we're going to do a fair comparison, all of this stuff needs to be factored in.
I suppose the term "megaships" set me a bit on edge, as I don't recall seeing it in any of the maritime literature I've read, but I have seen it on places like the Discovery Channel and YouTube. (No disrespect to the fun stuff. I enjoy it. I just wouldn't want to use it as the basis of an argument.) So it makes me suspicious. Maybe there's something there. But if so, what? I didn't get the impression this was about anything as technical as the amount of large particulates in the exhaust. And even if it was . . . is that really enough to overturn the savings Mr. Square Cube Law affords you?
- 443
I spoke with someone who works in logistics in Central Illinois last night and she shed some light on the issues at the port of Long Beach. Essentially, its not uncommon for a container sit on the docks in Long Beach for a month and that creates an incredible headache for shippers (Oakland and Seattle are no better apparently). They need an alternative.
When I moved out West I believe the Long shoremen at Oakland, and for the most part pacific coast, would only work one day shift, Monday to Friday. I think they finally agreed to extended shift as well as Saturday shift a few years ago. It seems as inefficient as you get with resources and assets as you have between these ships, docks, cranes themselves and so on. Even more so as these port are increasingly adding automation. Even then, it still seems very inefficient from my industry where we operate and man a lot of dredges and equipment for 24/7 operations.BellaVilla wrote: ↑Feb 21, 2021I spoke with someone who works in logistics in Central Illinois last night and she shed some light on the issues at the port of Long Beach. Essentially, its not uncommon for a container sit on the docks in Long Beach for a month and that creates an incredible headache for shippers (Oakland and Seattle are no better apparently). They need an alternative.
I'm pretty sure the inland barge fleet would have no competitiveness if everyone tied up their tugs and tows everyday at 5 pm and for the weekend. Pretty much the same if railroads did the same if they tied their capacity to utilizing the tracks only 8 hours a day. So you have to wonder if the scale really mattered enough or some of the West Coast port simply had the monopoly on boxes because they simply had the better and biggest facilities for years. Which is all going by the wayside.
So one conclusion you can make is that APH vessels when built and the associated facilities/port of call that get in first will enjoy being the first for while.
- 1,290
Just need to build more of these modern-day sailboats, I spose:symphonicpoet wrote: ↑Feb 21, 2021^I won't deny that there's a difference in emissions between low sulfur diesel and bunker C. But in the end, is it better to burn ten tons of "clean" low sulfur diesel or one ton of unrefined tar to ship the same amount of goods? Pappysoulard's claim that "megaships are some of the highest polluting vehicles on earth and by a large margin" doesn't ring true to me, so I'm curious where they got that information. It seems somewhat incredible.
It's also worth keeping in mind that refining those nicer, friendlier fuels has its own energy cost, which needs to figure into the equation, even if the pollution is "displaced" from the point of use. (Rather like electric cars.) If we're going to do a fair comparison, all of this stuff needs to be factored in.
I suppose the term "megaships" set me a bit on edge, as I don't recall seeing it in any of the maritime literature I've read, but I have seen it on places like the Discovery Channel and YouTube. (No disrespect to the fun stuff. I enjoy it. I just wouldn't want to use it as the basis of an argument.) So it makes me suspicious. Maybe there's something there. But if so, what? I didn't get the impression this was about anything as technical as the amount of large particulates in the exhaust. And even if it was . . . is that really enough to overturn the savings Mr. Square Cube Law affords you?
- 2,928
FWIW APH's planning for their CoV ships to use LNG for fuel.
- 443
FedEx is expanding and will be the sole tenant in a new, nearly 770,000+ sq. ft. warehouse in the lakeview commerce center.
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... -east.html
https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/new ... -east.html
Will this relieve Memphis at all? I had a package stuck there for two weeks because of the winter storm that they couldn't handle.
I don't think so. This looks to be the size of a standard city/regional facility.
- 443
I am way too ignorant to comment on something like thatquincunx wrote: ↑Mar 25, 2021Will this relieve Memphis at all? I had a package stuck there for two weeks because of the winter storm that they couldn't handle.
- 2,928
An excerpt from the Corporate Mergers thread that absolutely applies here:
wabash wrote:The recently announced purchase of Kansas City Southern by Canadian Pacific will make it so that just three cities on the continent are served by all six remaining "Class I" railroads: Chicago, St. Louis and New Orleans.
Could someone explain exactly what this means and how it may effect the STL area? I mean, they're not gonna start ripping out the other guy's infrastructure, are they?
TBH I don’t think it means much for STL. The line to STL is a stub of a stub almost. Eastbound traffic from Mexico can interchange with east coast railroads at KC (NS at least) and Louisiana and MS.framer wrote:Could someone explain exactly what this means and how it may effect the STL area? I mean, they're not gonna start ripping out the other guy's infrastructure, are they?
Could be a good opportunity for KC though.
ldai_phs wrote:TBH I don’t think it means much for STL. The line to STL is a stub of a stub almost. Eastbound traffic from Mexico can interchange with east coast railroads at KC (NS at least) and Louisiana and MS.framer wrote:Could someone explain exactly what this means and how it may effect the STL area? I mean, they're not gonna start ripping out the other guy's infrastructure, are they?
Fantastic opportunity for KC though.
GoneCorporate do you agree?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
KCS has a long-standing partnership with NS on what they call the Merdian Speedway. The purpose is to provide a weather-free high speed and throughput between Mexico/Texas and the NE. The NS side of the connection hits Atlanta too which is a plus.
https://www.kcsouthern.com/en-us/why-choose-kcs/our-network/meridian-speedway
![]()
Map of KCS in the STL area. IIRC, they can only really interchange with NS at Springfield. NS has a yard right across the river from the KCS & Canadian Pacific joint yard in downtown KC where exchanges can occur today.
https://www.kcsouthern.com/en-us/why-choose-kcs/our-network/meridian-speedway
Map of KCS in the STL area. IIRC, they can only really interchange with NS at Springfield. NS has a yard right across the river from the KCS & Canadian Pacific joint yard in downtown KC where exchanges can occur today.
Neither system overlaps with the other. So no, there won’t be any removal.framer wrote: ↑Mar 26, 2021Could someone explain exactly what this means and how it may effect the STL area? I mean, they're not gonna start ripping out the other guy's infrastructure, are they?
The combined entity will still be the nation’s smallest Class I railroad. From what I’ve read in the Star the main concerns over there are keeping local jobs since KC is losing another HQ. Global HQ will now be Calgary.