Port Hinterland Divergence along the North American Eastern Seaboard

1
Port Hinterland Divergence along the North
American Eastern Seaboard

• Jean-Paul RODRIGUE
• Department of Economics Geography
• Hofstra University, Hempstead, New York 11549,
  USA
• Changqian GUAN
• Intermodal Transportation Logistics Program,
  Department of Marine Transportation, U.S.
  Merchant Marine Academy, Kings Point, New York,
  USA

2
Ports in Proximity along the Eastern Seaboard

• Globalization, Trade and Port Divergence in North
  America
• Cargo Volume Growth and Shipping Services
• Port Regionalization and Potential Port
  Hinterland Divergence
• Conclusion From Divergence to Convergence?

3
A. Globalization, Trade and Port Divergence in
North America

• Factors of Port Divergence
• What are the main processes behind divergence?
• Containerized Traffic Trends
• How containerization has evolved along the East
  Coast in recent years?
• Traffic Concentration
• What is the extent of the divergence taking place?

4
1. Factors of Port Divergence
5
2. Container Volume Handled by Main Maritime Range
46
95
88
6
2. A Schematic Representation of the Eastern
Seaboard
St. Lawrence The Funnel Direct to the
bottleneck Montreal
Upper Range The Empty Sink Weak handles
Halifax and Boston
Mid Range The Full Sink Strong handles New
York and Hampton Roads
Lower Range The Filling Sink Strong
center Charleston / Savannah
Upper Range
Lower Range
Mid Range
St. Lawrence
7
2. Container Traffic at Eastern Seaboard Ports,
2006
4th Tier (Niche ports)
3rd Tier (Regional Gateways)
Divergence Threshold
2nd Tier (Gateways)
Articulation Gateway
8
3. Concentration of Containerized Traffic,
1985-2006
Diffusion of Containerization
Hinterland Effect
9
3. Concentration of Containerized Traffic,
1985-2006 (Lorenz Curve)
Divergence
Convergence
10
B. Cargo Volume Growth and Shipping Services

• Traffic trend among major East Coast Ports
• From convergence to divergence?
• The resurgence of All Water Services
• What are the underlying factors?
• Service routes and transit times
• How Landbridge and All Water Services compare?

11
1. Change in Container Traffic at Eastern
Seaboard Ports
0.77 M TEU
8.36 M TEU
7.19 M TEU
1.31 M TEU
0.04 M TEU
2.01 M TEU
3.02 M TEU
0.28 M TEU
12
1. Strong Divergence Montreal and Halifax
13
1. Strong Divergence Montreal and Halifax
Convergence
Divergence
Zero-sum game?
14
1. From Convergence to Divergence the American
East Coast
15
1. From Convergence to Divergence the American
East Coast (Annual Growth Rates)
Divergence
Convergence
Divergence
16
2. The Resurgence of All Water Services to the
East Coast
Singapore
Colombo
?
Hong Kong
China Effect
Shanghai
Jeddah
Pusan
Kobe
Eastbound Route
Gioia Tauro
Algeciras
Seattle / Vancouver
Westbound Route
?
LA/LB
West Coast Congestion Landbridge Congestion
Growth in the Southeast New Distribution Gateways
Landbridge
?
PanamaRoute
17
3. Service Routes and Transit Times Far East to
New York
-1
4
7
7
12
7
18
3. Service Routes and Transit Times Far East to
Norfolk, Virginia
-1
4
7
8
12
9
19
3. Service Routes and Transit Times Far East to
Savannah, Georgia
-3
3
3
4
8
11
20
3. The Resurgence of All Water Services to the
East Coast
Zone of Contestability
NY
Savannah
Equilibrium (indifference) Point
Eastbound Route
New Direct Links 17 (2002) 26 (2007)
New York (1) 75 (2005) 60 (2020)
Westbound Route
3
New York (23) 25 (2005) 40 (2020)
1
Landbridge
2
PanamaRoute
21
3. Service Time Reliability to the EC All Water
Services vs. Transpacific / Landbridge
Port congestion Offshore transshipment Transloadin
g Unit train assembly Rail congestion Transmodal
operations Road congestion
Transpacific / Landbridge
18 days
Port congestion Offshore transshipment Panama /
Suez Delays
All Water Services
NY 22 days Savannah 21 days
22
3. Monthly Inbound Traffic, Port of Los Angeles
(TEUs)
23
3. Summary

• Supply chain management
• Landbridge is critical for high value cargo from
  East Asia due to its short total transit time.
• The 7 day difference is quite critical.
• Inland areas cargo (e.g. Chicago)
• Landbridge still has an overall advantage.
• Hong Kong and Singapore
• Points of equilibrium between landbridge and all
  water service has a slight advantage in terms of
  transit time.
• South Atlantic ports
• All water service is very competitive.
• South Atlantic ports are in a good position to
  compete with North-Mid Atlantic ports for
  hinterland markets.

24
C. Port Regionalization and Potential Port
Hinterland Divergence

• Port Infrastructure Development and Intermodal
  Services
• What are the major infrastructure projects?
• The reemergence of the hinterland factor
• How the maritime / land interface is being
  modified?
• Port regionalization strategies
• How specific gateway ports are improving their
  regional hinterland access?

25
1. Port Infrastructure Development and Intermodal
Services
New York Dredging (50) On-dock rail PIDN
Hampton Roads APM Terminal Craney Island Terminal
(2017) Heartland Project
Charleston New Terminal (2013) Terminal
upgrade Dredging (47)
Savannah New berth Improved rail yards
26
1. Intermodal Facilities and Navigation Channels
of the Port of New York, 2006
Albers Equal-Area Conic Projection
East River
40
45
Hudson River
1- Port Newark 2- Port Elizabeth 3- Global Marine
43
Newark Bay Channel
40
Red Hook
40
1
3
Upper Bay Channel
South Brooklyn
2
45
Brooklyn
45
37
Kill Van Kull Channel
New Jersey
Howland Hook
45
37
Arthur Kill Channel
The Narrows
Staten Island
Navigation Channel
Ambrose Channel
45
45
30
Control Depth (feet)
Main Ship Channel
N
Intermodal Terminal
37
Arthur Kill Channel
37
Container Port (proposed)
Raritan Bay Channel
Major Highway
Proposed rail tunnel
27
1. Expressrail Lifts, 1991-2006 and Projections
to 2030
28
2. The Reemergence of the Hinterland Factor
Rail Gateways and Metropolitan Freight Centers

• New York
• 85 are local cargo
• 14 is distributed by rail
• Less than 1 is distributed by water

• Hampton Roads
• Over 47 of cargo originates or is destined for
  locations within Virginia
• 53 of cargo are hinterland bound

29
2. The Reemergence of the Hinterland Factor
Inland Corridors
30
2. Heartland Corridor Project, Virginia / Chicago
Current Double Stack Route (1,264 miles to
Chicago)
Virginia Inland Port
Heartland Corridor (1,031 miles to Chicago)
28 Tunnels Modified to a 20 3 Clearance
31
3. Port Inland Distribution Network and Freight
Clusters
32
D. Conclusion Challenges and Opportunities of
the New Panama Canal (New Panamax 12,000 TEU)
Singapore
Colombo
Hong Kong
Shanghai
Jeddah
Pusan
Kobe
Suez
Gioia Tauro
Algeciras
Eastbound Route
Westbound Route
LA/LB
Kingston
Panama
33
D. Conclusion Challenges and Opportunity for
Arctic Routes
34
D. Conclusion From Divergence to Convergence?

• There is a divergence favoring a specific number
  of ports
• Site Limited number able to accommodate larger
  ships.
• Ocean carriers Emergence of all water services
  as a new dimension of standard port calls.
• Port operators Allocation of capital investment.
• Policy Ongoing privatization, albeit at a slower
  pace.
• Hinterland Development of rail corridors,
  particularly towards the Chicago hub.
• Supply chain management A stronger factor than
  accounted.