Source: The Journal of Commerce Breakbulk Handbook, David Biederman
Fall 2008
Shippers and carriers of breakbulk and
heavy-lift cargo routinely solve the world’s most daunting
logistics challenges. The question now is how they will respond
to what could be their biggest challenge yet: a crumbling infrastructure
and the huge cost of fixing it.
A litany of problems is straining the breakbulk and heavy-lift
shipping industry, including fuel costs, capacity constraints
and a critical shortage of vessels, equipment and skilled labor.
In part, the industry is a victim of its own success, riding a
worldwide boom in energy, mining and infrastructure projects.
But the infrastructure crisis may pose more formidable challenges.
In addition to physical constraints that are driving up the cost
of moving goods, there is widespread concern that shippers and
carriers will end up paying more than their fair share of the
massive bill for maintaining and improving the nation’s
road, rail and waterways infrastructure. Add to that an economy
in turmoil and the uncertainties of a political transition in
Washington, and you have a jittery industry facing an uncertain
future.
Even as the infrastructure bill comes due, the industry’s
current problems show no signs of abating. Capacity will be strained
as the economy improves and demand increases, said Frank Fogarty,
senior vice president of sales and marketing, general stevedoring,
for Ports America. And the labor shortage will likely worsen as
new projects begin.
"It’s the biggest issue in our business right
now," said Peter Huels, chief executive of BDP Project Logistics.
With a new highway reauthorization bill due in 2009 and a new
administration set to take charge, numerous business organizations
and transportation stakeholders are offering proposals for prioritizing
and funding infrastructure projects. The proposals vary, but there
is a consensus that a new approach is needed and that the situation
has reached crisis proportions.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. On an average day, some 43
million tons of goods valued at $29 billion move on the nation’s
network of ports, roads, rails and inland waterways. Poorly maintained
roads contribute to a third of all highway fatalities more than
14,000 deaths per year and congestion costs drivers $78 billion
annually in time and fuel costs, according to the U.S. Chamber
of Commerce.
In 2005, Congress established the National Surface Transportation
Policy and Revenue Study Commission to provide recommendations
for maintaining and upgrading the nation’s roadways.
The commission found that at least $225 billion in annual spending
will be needed over the next 50 years to maintain and upgrade
the existing U.S. surface transportation system, but that less
than 40 percent of that amount is currently being spent.
The U.S. lags far behind its global competitors in infrastructure
spending as a percentage of gross domestic product. China spends
9 percent of its GDP on infrastructure and India, 5 percent. Since
1980, the U.S. has spent less than 2 percent on average as a percentage
of GDP on infrastructure, according to the U.S. Chamber.
The facts are grim across all modes. The American Society of Civil
Engineers concluded in a 2005 report that 27 percent of the nation’s
approximately 600,000 bridges are structurally deficient or functionally
obsolete. The report estimated that it would cost $9 billion annually
for 20 years to fix the bridges alone.
"From a trucking perspective, the U.S. roadways infrastructure
is terrible at best," said David Lowry, president of Bennett
Motor Express, a heavy-haul specialist.
On the rail side, the U.S. Department of Transportation forecasts
that by 2035, demand for freight rail transportation will have
increased by 85 percent from 2002 levels. The National Rail Freight
Infrastructure Capacity and Investment Study, commissioned by
the Association of American Railroads to identify what improvements
are needed to meet the DOT projections, estimates the industry
will have to invest $148 billion over the next 28 years.
The seven U.S. Class 1 railroads estimate that they will be able
to generate $96 billion of their $135 billion share of funding
through revenue growth, leaving a shortfall of $39 billion. In
total, U.S. freight railroads spent $420 billion for maintaining
and expanding track and equipment between 1980 and 2007. The nation’s
inland and coastal waterways have great potential a single barge
can move the equivalent of 58 trailers of cargo at one-tenth the
cost but crumbling locks and dams and chronic underfunding for
channel maintenance dredging have limited their use. Of the 257
locks on the commercial inland waterway system, nearly 50 percent
are functionally obsolete. The locks were designed to last 50
years, but 30 were built in the 19th century.
The cost of deferred maintenance continues to climb. The Army
Corps of Engineers estimates that nearly 30 percent of the 95,550
vessel calls at U.S. ports are constrained because of inadequate
channel depths. Vessels lose between 50 and 270 tons of cargo
for each inch that draft is reduced. Nationwide, queuing delays
at locks total some 550,000 hours annually, representing an estimated
$385 million in increased operating costs borne by shippers, carriers
and consumers.
When the infrastructure crisis is finally addressed, it will almost
certainly be under a new funding regime. The new approach is likely
to be multimodal, with greater emphasis on national rather than
local priorities. All funding options are on the table, from expanding
the fuel tax and adding new taxes to user fees and public-private
partnerships.
"The new user-financed federal surface transportation program
the commission proposes will be performance-driven, outcome-based,
generally mode-neutral, and refocused to pursue activities of
genuine national interest," the National Surface Transportation
Policy and Revenue Study Commission’s report said.
The transportation community recognizes the value of a multimodal
approach. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials has called for public investment in rail transportation
to encourage more freight to move by rail. A $30 billion investment
in rail infrastructure would save $839 billion in highway costs
by reducing the number of long-haul truck routes, according to
the group.
The report’s recommendations include shortening the process
by which transportation projects are approved and built; consolidating
investment mechanisms into a set of performance-based programs
for achieving broad national goals, and creating an independent
National Surface Transportation Commission to oversee development
of a national strategic plan for transportation investment.
Shippers have accepted that user fees are inevitable, but they
are jockeying to influence how fees are applied and how much they
will be. The American Trucking Associations has offered four broad
criteria for surface transportation funding: ease of collection,
low evasion rates, funding that is tied directly to highway use
and no impedance to interstate commerce. The ATA supports ongoing
use of the fuel tax and believes that a reasonable increase could
meet most surface transportation funding needs.
Fogarty said fees need to be supplemented with incentive-based
programs and partnerships between industry, government and port
authorities. "If it’s all going to be user fees, we
will be priced out of business," he said.
The trendsetting state of California where the ports of Los Angeles
and Long Beach sometime next year want to begin assessing a $15-per-container
fee to fund harbor infrastructure improvements and a $35-per-TEU
clean-trucks fee to encourage compliance with stringent emission
standards might be a signpost to the future.
In some cases, the money is there; it just isn’t allocated.
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund monies, collected specifically for
channel maintenance dredging, must be appropriated annually by
Congress. More than $1.4 billion was collected and put into the
fund in fiscal 2007, yet only $751 million was allocated to the
Corps of Engineers for maintenance dredging.
Infrastructure may not have been a hot-button issue in the current
presidential election campaign, but the transportation community
paid close attention.
Sen. John McCain has disappointed many in the transportation community
with his votes against transportation funding but has garnered
support for his pro-business positions. He is a vocal critic of
earmarks, many of them transportation-related. Now that he is
going back to the Senate, that opposition is expected to continue
But support for more infrastructure spending is expected to be
strong in the White House after numerous plugs by President-elect
Barack Obama.
In February, the then-Democratic presidential candidate Barack
Obama called for the establishment of a National Infrastructure
Reinvestment Bank that would invest $60 billion over a 10-year
period for highways, technology and other projects. The independent
bank would oversee national infrastructure projects costing $75
million or more using private-sector money, raised by issuing
tax-credit bonds.
"We’re spending less on our infrastructure than at
any time in the modern era," Obama said at June’s annual
meeting of the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Miami. "When
it comes to rebuilding America’s essential but crumbling
infrastructure, we need to do more, not less."
With Obama "there are definitely going to be some changes
in the financial conditions of this country, and those changes
could be very good for the highway system and the railroads as
well," said Wayne Johnson, director of logistics for American
Gypsum, a Dallas-based wallboard manufacturer with $922 million
in revenue last year.
Some transportation leaders are wary of Obama’s close ties
to organized labor and his support for legislation that would
make it easier for workers at nonunion companies to organize.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Senate Committee
on Environment and Public Works, and Rep. John L. Mica, R-Fla.,
the ranking member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, are both planning proposals for next year’s highway
reauthorization bill that promise to address freight transportation
and infrastructure needs.
Given the decaying infrastructure, economic carnage and the cyclical
nature of the business, what’s in store for the breakbulk
and heavy-lift industry going forward? Paul Wilson, vice president
of Houston-based heavy-lift carrier Intermarine and a 30-year
industry veteran, wouldn’t be surprised if the bloom comes
off the rose. Even though a backlog of projects worldwide should
carry the industry for at least a few more years, some forwarders
already are reporting a drop-off in requests for proposals.
"All good things come to an end," Wilson said. "Who
knew that we would be sending $700 billion to Wall Street?"



