<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Eastbound trans-Pacific spot rates are sliding on the wind down of the peak season.</div>

Eastbound trans-Pacific spot rates are sliding on the wind down of the peak season.

<div>Eastbound trans-Pacific spot rates are sliding on the wind down of the peak season, though, rates are up at least roughly half to the East and West Coasts from where they were last year.A swift price increase could be around the corner when steady volume through December quickens later in the month ahead of January closings of Chinese factories for New Year celebrations later that month, said Kevin Krause, vice president of ocean services at supply chain solutions firm SEKO Logistics. The two-week celebrations begin Jan. 28.<div><img>l</div>On a year-over-year basis, the rate to move a 40-foot-equivalent unit from Shanghai to...

Eastbound trans-Pacific spot rates are sliding on the wind down of the peak season, though, rates are up at least roughly half to the East and West Coasts from where they were last year. A swift price increase could be around the corner when steady volume through December quickens later in the month ahead of January closings of Chinese factories for New Year celebrations later that month, said Kevin Krause, vice president of ocean services at supply chain solutions firm SEKO Logistics. The two-week celebrations begin Jan. 28. l On a year-over-year basis, the rate to move a 40-foot-equivalent unit from Shanghai to the US West Coast fell 4.7 percent, to $1,456 per FEU, according to the latest reading from the Shanghai Shipping Exchange, as displayed on JOC.com’s Market Data Hub. Rates from Shanghai to the East Coast dropped 3.9 percent, to $2,414 per FEU, in the same period. Spot rates are so far are holding up compared with last year. The rate to the West Coast is up 63.4 percent and rates to the East Coast are 48.6 percent higher. This week's decline in eastbound spot rates on a year-over-year basis was sharper according to roughly 1,300 data points tapped by Xeneta, a price comparison service for sea freight. Xeneta said the rate to the West Coast declined 8 percent, to $1,685 per 20-foot-equivalent unit. Eastbound capacity is tight, but Krause said “there are no shut-outs, no rolls.” That’s a good sign for retailers aiming to make sure they have enough inventory after what they generally expect will be a brisk holiday season, even if more presents will be rolling off parcel trucks rather than shelves. The National Retail Federation expects holiday season sales to rise 3.6 percent year-over-year to $655.8 billion. In a historically good sign for broader sales, 3 million more shoppers participated in Black Friday this year than last, bringing the total to 154 million shoppers, NRF said. Liners had previously announced a general rate increase for Dec. 1, but with no immediate spike in volumes discernible, most of the lines have postponed the GRI until Jan. 1. Carriers are usually able to maintain some of the announced GRI if volumes are increasing and ships are filling up, so the fate of the Jan. 1 increase will become clearer in late December.

Container lines

Eastbound trans-Pacific spot rate slide belies strength

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">TotalEnergies accepted a $1 billion payment from the Trump administration to walk away from two offshore wind projects and instead reinvest the funds in fossil fuel projects along the Gulf Coast.</div>

TotalEnergies accepted a $1 billion payment from the Trump administration to walk away from two offshore wind projects and instead reinvest the funds in fossil fuel projects along the Gulf Coast.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">The cancellation of a pair of US offshore wind projects in exchange for a $1 billion payment from the Trump administration is the latest development to chip away at renewable project cargo opportunities. But the deal could potentially drive cargo for fossil fuel projects. French energy giant TotalEnergies signed off on a March 23 agreement to accept $1 billion from the US government to give up the leases on its two offshore wind projects — Carolina Long Bay and New York Bight — and instead pivot to the buildout of gas and power production and export facilities in the US. “Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” TotalEnergies chairman and CEO Patrick Pouyanné said in a statement. US offshore wind projects have come under attack by President Donald Trump, who issued an executive order banning new wind power projects upon taking office in January 2025. In December, the administration’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) issued stop-work orders on five East Coast offshore wind projects that are fully permitted and over halfway complete. The TotalEnergies projects were not among the five. The payout to TotalEnergies comes after the administration <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trump-administration-seeks-to-undo-court-rulings-favoring-offshore-wind-projects-6173748">began taking steps to reverse a sweep of recent court victories</a> for the five offshore wind projects as developers rush to complete work on the projects after courts allowed work to resume. Sam Salustro, senior vice president of policy and market affairs for industry group Oceantic Network, told the Journal of Commerce that TotalEnergies’ projects were still in the pre-environmental review phase when project cargo and logistics activity is limited. “These two projects were not well advanced in the development or permitting pipeline, so impacts stemming directly from this would be negligible,” he said. Salustro said that despite the project cancellations, the long-term trajectory of the US offshore wind industry remains secure because states continue to rely on wind as a foundational power source amid rapidly rising energy demands. “This is political theater meant to obscure the fact that offshore wind capacity is being pulled out of the pipeline when energy prices are skyrocketing, even as other offshore wind projects continue delivering reliable and affordable power to the grid,” he said. Under the agreement, TotalEnergies will reinvest the refunded lease fees to finance the construction of NextDecade Corp.’s Rio Grande liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant under way near Brownsville, Texas, and to support the development of other US gas production and export projects. TotalEnergies’ energy pivot comes at a time when LNG export capacity in the US, which is already the world’s largest LNG exporter, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/lng-project-cargo-poised-for-us-boom-amid-war-6185867">is expected to nearly double in the next five years</a>, according to recent analyses by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). <h3>Wind cargo shifting to Canada </h3>For facilities like the Port of Vancouver USA in Washington state, project cargo movement has been reflecting the move away from wind energy in the US. Alex Strogen, the port’s chief commercial officer, told the Journal of Commerce that he’s observed more wind cargo moving to Canada because of the falloff in US wind projects. “This is a shift that we’ve seen gaining momentum for the past three or four years,” he said. From a ports perspective, policies under Trump and former President Joe Biden have made wind farm installations more expensive, Strogen said. He cited Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act incentivizing manufacturers to move production to the US — creating short-term capital expenses while domestic supply chains were gaining their footing — and Trump’s push to dial back permits for wind farms on federal lands. Because Canadian ports don’t have the infrastructure in place to move massive wind turbine components, one silver lining for US facilities like the Port of Vancouver is that they have been able to capture some of Canada’s wind project cargo business. “The Port of Vancouver and the Port of Longview (Washington) have been taking advantage of the falloff of US wind projects and capitalizing on the relatively steady demand for wind farms going up historically in Alberta and Saskatchewan, and now we are seeing a shift into British Columbia as well,” Strogen said. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com.</a></div>

The cancellation of a pair of US offshore wind projects in exchange for a $1 billion payment from the Trump administration is the latest development to chip away at renewable project cargo opportunities. But the deal could potentially drive cargo for fossil fuel projects. French energy giant TotalEnergies signed off on a March 23 agreement to accept $1 billion from the US government to give up the leases on its two offshore wind projects — Carolina Long Bay and New York Bight — and instead pivot to the buildout of gas and power production and export facilities in the US. “Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” TotalEnergies chairman and CEO Patrick Pouyanné said in a statement. US offshore wind projects have come under attack by President Donald Trump, who issued an executive order banning new wind power projects upon taking office in January 2025. In December, the administration’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) issued stop-work orders on five East Coast offshore wind projects that are fully permitted and over halfway complete. The TotalEnergies projects were not among the five. The payout to TotalEnergies comes after the administration began taking steps to reverse a sweep of recent court victories for the five offshore wind projects as developers rush to complete work on the projects after courts allowed work to resume. Sam Salustro, senior vice president of policy and market affairs for industry group Oceantic Network, told the Journal of Commerce that TotalEnergies’ projects were still in the pre-environmental review phase when project cargo and logistics activity is limited. “These two projects were not well advanced in the development or permitting pipeline, so impacts stemming directly from this would be negligible,” he said. Salustro said that despite the project cancellations, the long-term trajectory of the US offshore wind industry remains secure because states continue to rely on wind as a foundational power source amid rapidly rising energy demands. “This is political theater meant to obscure the fact that offshore wind capacity is being pulled out of the pipeline when energy prices are skyrocketing, even as other offshore wind projects continue delivering reliable and affordable power to the grid,” he said. Under the agreement, TotalEnergies will reinvest the refunded lease fees to finance the construction of NextDecade Corp.’s Rio Grande liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant under way near Brownsville, Texas, and to support the development of other US gas production and export projects. TotalEnergies’ energy pivot comes at a time when LNG export capacity in the US, which is already the world’s largest LNG exporter, is expected to nearly double in the next five years , according to recent analyses by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). Wind cargo shifting to Canada For facilities like the Port of Vancouver USA in Washington state, project cargo movement has been reflecting the move away from wind energy in the US. Alex Strogen, the port’s chief commercial officer, told the Journal of Commerce that he’s observed more wind cargo moving to Canada because of the falloff in US wind projects. “This is a shift that we’ve seen gaining momentum for the past three or four years,” he said. From a ports perspective, policies under Trump and former President Joe Biden have made wind farm installations more expensive, Strogen said. He cited Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act incentivizing manufacturers to move production to the US — creating short-term capital expenses while domestic supply chains were gaining their footing — and Trump’s push to dial back permits for wind farms on federal lands. Because Canadian ports don’t have the infrastructure in place to move massive wind turbine components, one silver lining for US facilities like the Port of Vancouver is that they have been able to capture some of Canada’s wind project cargo business. “The Port of Vancouver and the Port of Longview (Washington) have been taking advantage of the falloff of US wind projects and capitalizing on the relatively steady demand for wind farms going up historically in Alberta and Saskatchewan, and now we are seeing a shift into British Columbia as well,” Strogen said. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com.

Energy projects

Project cargo

Breakbulk News

Offshore wind cancellations set up energy project pivot in the US

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Ocean carriers have a stronger financial backstop than past downcycles after having retired significant debt and increased their profitability in the last five years post-pandemic, writes Executive Editor Mark Szakonyi.</div>

Ocean carriers have a stronger financial backstop than past downcycles after having retired significant debt and increased their profitability in the last five years post-pandemic, writes Executive Editor Mark Szakonyi.

<div class="phx-topic">This container shipping downcycle is shaping up to be “shallow,” and there’s an argument to be made that so-called ship overordering may be prudent in the long-term despite overcapacity rising over the next few years. Most immediately, ocean carriers have a stronger financial backstop than past downcycles, having retired significant debt after reaping $600 billion in operating profits from 2021-2024, said Rahul Kapoor, S&amp;P’ Global’s global head of shipping and analytics research. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6192742_0.1.jpg"></img></div>Average leverage for the industry, as measured by total debt to earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT), was a mere 1 to 2% between 2021-2025. Comparatively, the average leverage was in the range of 7 to 8% in 2012-2020. “When we look at the industry and when we look at this downturn which we are talking about, I think the industry is very well-prepared, and we have to look at that when we're talking about the container shipping downcycle which is going to come,” Kapoor said March 2 at the Journal of Commerce’s TPM26 conference in Long Beach. “So in our view, it's a shallow cycle.” Beyond driving record profits for the industry, the disruption during the pandemic set carriers on a more profitable course, recording EBIT margins of 21 to 22% in 2021-2025, compared to EBIT in the range of just 2 to 3% in the nine prior years, he said. The data is based only on carriers that report earnings, and thus excludes Mediterranean Shipping Co. Kapoor said he expected the container shipping industry to report losses over the next two or three years. Profitability is already falling. The average operating profit of major carriers fell to 5.3% for the fourth quarter of 2025 and was the first quarterly operating loss since the first quarter of 2024, according to analyst Alphaliner. But while overcapacity will pull balance sheets into the red in the coming years, container ship orders, representing more than one-third of the existing fleet, are a better bet than they appear, Kapoor said. In a capital-intensive industry, ordering more ships, partly to prepare for tighter decarbonization regulations, makes more sense than returning the profits to shareholders, he said. “Maybe (the industry) went a bit overboard. It always does. But the balance sheets are strong,” Kapoor said. “The cash buffers are extremely strong, and the windfall profits the industry saw were better utilized.” <h3>Why this order cycle is different </h3>Since 2020, there’s been two waves of ship orders, with the first between 2021-2024 being driven by record profits tied to pandemic-era disruption “They were all building and forming a long conga line with a glass of champagne in their hand, and they ordered,” Jan Tiedemann, senior analyst at Alphaliner, said at TPM26. “But now there's a second ordering wave going on. We have to think about why that is happening because this one is clearly deliberate, and it also focuses on more and smaller ships.” Whereas the first wave of orders centered on ships with capacities of up to 24,000 TEUs, the second wave is dominated by orders of small ships with capacities under 6,000 TEUs. Non-operating common carriers are also driving the ordering of small ships. ”Since roughly 2005, if you look at the fleet and the fleet growth over these 20 years, it’s gone up in an almost linear way,” Tiedemann said. “It’s 1 million (TEUs) added year-in, year-out, and it’s almost stable.” Industry consolidation, with the top 10 carriers operating 85% of the total fleet compared to 65% a decade ago, and record profits during the pandemic give the major ocean carriers confidence in the long-game, he said. “They understood that the ship is an asset which probably can break even for 10 years of its lifetime, probably can be slightly loss-making for another 10 years of its lifetime, but then makes all its money back in five years,” said Tiedemann. “So you have that asset, and especially in this time of constant disruption, where we're going into a phase, that disruption is the new normal.” Not all container lines were able to capitalize on the disruption caused by diversions away from the Suez Canal starting in late 2023 because they failed to order enough tonnage, Tiedemann said. Carriers without enough tonnage for the longer sailings around the Cape of Good Hope had to turn to more expensive chartering and buying secondhand ships. Simon Heaney, senior manager of container research at Drewry, doesn’t see the massive order book as benign as others. Betting on a ‘black swan’ event to cause disruption and soak up functional capacity “doesn’t constitute as a plan,” he said. “Also, over-ordering means they are not fully capitalizing on the given situation,” Heaney said. “A smarter bet would have been to limit orders as they would win in any scenario without the expense.” Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mailto:mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com</a></div>

This container shipping downcycle is shaping up to be “shallow,” and there’s an argument to be made that so-called ship overordering may be prudent in the long-term despite overcapacity rising over the next few years. Most immediately, ocean carriers have a stronger financial backstop than past downcycles, having retired significant debt after reaping $600 billion in operating profits from 2021-2024, said Rahul Kapoor, S&P’ Global’s global head of shipping and analytics research. Average leverage for the industry, as measured by total debt to earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT), was a mere 1 to 2% between 2021-2025. Comparatively, the average leverage was in the range of 7 to 8% in 2012-2020. “When we look at the industry and when we look at this downturn which we are talking about, I think the industry is very well-prepared, and we have to look at that when we're talking about the container shipping downcycle which is going to come,” Kapoor said March 2 at the Journal of Commerce’s TPM26 conference in Long Beach. “So in our view, it's a shallow cycle.” Beyond driving record profits for the industry, the disruption during the pandemic set carriers on a more profitable course, recording EBIT margins of 21 to 22% in 2021-2025, compared to EBIT in the range of just 2 to 3% in the nine prior years, he said. The data is based only on carriers that report earnings, and thus excludes Mediterranean Shipping Co. Kapoor said he expected the container shipping industry to report losses over the next two or three years. Profitability is already falling. The average operating profit of major carriers fell to 5.3% for the fourth quarter of 2025 and was the first quarterly operating loss since the first quarter of 2024, according to analyst Alphaliner. But while overcapacity will pull balance sheets into the red in the coming years, container ship orders, representing more than one-third of the existing fleet, are a better bet than they appear, Kapoor said. In a capital-intensive industry, ordering more ships, partly to prepare for tighter decarbonization regulations, makes more sense than returning the profits to shareholders, he said. “Maybe (the industry) went a bit overboard. It always does. But the balance sheets are strong,” Kapoor said. “The cash buffers are extremely strong, and the windfall profits the industry saw were better utilized.” Why this order cycle is different Since 2020, there’s been two waves of ship orders, with the first between 2021-2024 being driven by record profits tied to pandemic-era disruption “They were all building and forming a long conga line with a glass of champagne in their hand, and they ordered,” Jan Tiedemann, senior analyst at Alphaliner, said at TPM26. “But now there's a second ordering wave going on. We have to think about why that is happening because this one is clearly deliberate, and it also focuses on more and smaller ships.” Whereas the first wave of orders centered on ships with capacities of up to 24,000 TEUs, the second wave is dominated by orders of small ships with capacities under 6,000 TEUs. Non-operating common carriers are also driving the ordering of small ships. ”Since roughly 2005, if you look at the fleet and the fleet growth over these 20 years, it’s gone up in an almost linear way,” Tiedemann said. “It’s 1 million (TEUs) added year-in, year-out, and it’s almost stable.” Industry consolidation, with the top 10 carriers operating 85% of the total fleet compared to 65% a decade ago, and record profits during the pandemic give the major ocean carriers confidence in the long-game, he said. “They understood that the ship is an asset which probably can break even for 10 years of its lifetime, probably can be slightly loss-making for another 10 years of its lifetime, but then makes all its money back in five years,” said Tiedemann. “So you have that asset, and especially in this time of constant disruption, where we're going into a phase, that disruption is the new normal.” Not all container lines were able to capitalize on the disruption caused by diversions away from the Suez Canal starting in late 2023 because they failed to order enough tonnage, Tiedemann said. Carriers without enough tonnage for the longer sailings around the Cape of Good Hope had to turn to more expensive chartering and buying secondhand ships. Simon Heaney, senior manager of container research at Drewry, doesn’t see the massive order book as benign as others. Betting on a ‘black swan’ event to cause disruption and soak up functional capacity “doesn’t constitute as a plan,” he said. “Also, over-ordering means they are not fully capitalizing on the given situation,” Heaney said. “A smarter bet would have been to limit orders as they would win in any scenario without the expense.” Contact Mark Szakonyi at  mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com

Maritime

Container shipping faces ‘shallow’ downcycle amid strong carrier finances

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Iran-driven fuel spike has created the widest intermodal cost advantage in years, but capturing it — and keeping it — requires something railroads have rarely practiced: orchestrated intermodal, writes Paul Tonsager.</div>

The Iran-driven fuel spike has created the widest intermodal cost advantage in years, but capturing it — and keeping it — requires something railroads have rarely practiced: orchestrated intermodal, writes Paul Tonsager.

<div class="phx-topic">Gulf Coast diesel hit $5.13 per gallon for the week ending March 23 — up 30 cents in a single week and still the cheapest regional price in the country, according to government data. East Coast truckers are paying $5.48; California operators are staring at $6.87. For long-haul carriers already squeezed by two years of overcapacity and compressed margins, the Middle East conflict’s disruption to Strait of Hormuz crude flows has turned a manageable cost structure into a cash hemorrhage. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6192409_0.1.jpg"></img></div>For railroads and intermodal marketing companies (IMCs), this is the moment they have been waiting for since freight markets went soft in 2023. The fuel efficiency advantage of rail is not new. Most beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) have already run the numbers — and until now, trucking won. What is new is that the price spread has widened to the point where the math is changing answers that shippers thought were settled. That question is the gift. Namely, what railroads do with it — and what their entire partner network does with it — determines whether the next 12 months represent a lasting franchise expansion or another cycle of mode-shift freight that returns to trucks the moment diesel retreats. <h3>Sell the network, not the lane </h3>When a shipper calls because diesel just hit $5 per gallon, the instinct is to quote the lane they asked about and close the booking. That is the wrong move. A shipper under fuel pressure is not just repricing one lane — they are repricing their entire transportation wallet. Railroads and IMCs that arrive with a network proposal — (“here is your freight portfolio across high-density corridors, here is the landed cost comparison across your full book”) — will capture meaningful wallet share, not just the lane that prompted the call. The shipper asking about Chicago-to-Dallas may have 10 corridors where intermodal is now the better economic answer. Sell the lane and you win the booking. Sell the network and you win the account. <h3>Orchestrated intermodal </h3>Here is the part most railroads get wrong even when the commercial conversation goes well: The railroad cannot retain the shipper alone — and when it was talking to the shipper directly, it was a strategy call, not the day-to-day operational relationship that actually creates loyalty. To the BCO, the underlying carriers — the steamship line, the dray operator, the chassis pool — are largely unknown. The IMC is the only throat to choke. When something breaks, that call goes to the IMC. And if the IMC can’t fix it, the freight goes back to trucking. But here is the structural reality: Railroads have largely ceded the BCO relationship to their wholesale partners — the steamship lines and IMCs who hold the direct commercial connection to the cargo owner. That is not a failure; it is the model. The liner and the IMC own the loyalty, the wallet conversation, and the export opportunity as BCOs move polyethylene and other commodities into Atlantic markets. The railroad’s job is not to reclaim that relationship — it is to make its wholesale partners effective enough orchestrators that the freight stays on rail. That means investing in the partners, not competing with them. Shared visibility tools. Service commitments at the account level, not just the corridor level. Chassis and terminal performance the IMC can actually promise a BCO without hedging. Winning this window — and I borrow that term from tech, where timing a market shift is the whole game — requires the railroad to function as the backbone of orchestrated intermodal, enabling the steamship lines and IMCs who own the customer to deliver on the promise. <h3>Is your tech stack ready to orchestrate? </h3>That is the question every railroad and IMC should be asking because orchestrated intermodal is not a commercial concept; it is a technology commitment. Can you see the dray carrier’s ETA in real time, or are you still making phone calls? Is chassis pool visibility live, or a spreadsheet updated twice a day? Is terminal dwell data current enough to intervene before a shipper’s container becomes a problem? Can your systems flag new conversion accounts showing stress signals before the shipper calls their broker? Orchestration requires account-level visibility — knowing that this shipper’s container, on this lane, with this dray partner, is at risk right now. The technology exists: visibility platforms, AI-driven exception management, connected partner APIs. The question is whether a diesel spike is finally the urgency that accelerates the investment. Show up with a rate sheet but not a visibility platform and you win the booking and lose the account. Show up with both and you build something that outlasts the fuel cycle. The diesel spike hands railroads the invitation. Orchestrating the entire service chain — and the technology behind it — to deliver on it is entirely up to them. Paul Tonsager is founder and principal of IMS Advisory and writes the Signals &amp; Switches newsletter on freight strategy at aet1998.substack.com. Contact him at <a href="mailto:paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io">paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io</a>.</div>

Gulf Coast diesel hit $5.13 per gallon for the week ending March 23 — up 30 cents in a single week and still the cheapest regional price in the country, according to government data. East Coast truckers are paying $5.48; California operators are staring at $6.87. For long-haul carriers already squeezed by two years of overcapacity and compressed margins, the Middle East conflict’s disruption to Strait of Hormuz crude flows has turned a manageable cost structure into a cash hemorrhage. For railroads and intermodal marketing companies (IMCs), this is the moment they have been waiting for since freight markets went soft in 2023. The fuel efficiency advantage of rail is not new. Most beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) have already run the numbers — and until now, trucking won. What is new is that the price spread has widened to the point where the math is changing answers that shippers thought were settled. That question is the gift. Namely, what railroads do with it — and what their entire partner network does with it — determines whether the next 12 months represent a lasting franchise expansion or another cycle of mode-shift freight that returns to trucks the moment diesel retreats. Sell the network, not the lane When a shipper calls because diesel just hit $5 per gallon, the instinct is to quote the lane they asked about and close the booking. That is the wrong move. A shipper under fuel pressure is not just repricing one lane — they are repricing their entire transportation wallet. Railroads and IMCs that arrive with a network proposal — (“here is your freight portfolio across high-density corridors, here is the landed cost comparison across your full book”) — will capture meaningful wallet share, not just the lane that prompted the call. The shipper asking about Chicago-to-Dallas may have 10 corridors where intermodal is now the better economic answer. Sell the lane and you win the booking. Sell the network and you win the account. Orchestrated intermodal Here is the part most railroads get wrong even when the commercial conversation goes well: The railroad cannot retain the shipper alone — and when it was talking to the shipper directly, it was a strategy call, not the day-to-day operational relationship that actually creates loyalty. To the BCO, the underlying carriers — the steamship line, the dray operator, the chassis pool — are largely unknown. The IMC is the only throat to choke. When something breaks, that call goes to the IMC. And if the IMC can’t fix it, the freight goes back to trucking. But here is the structural reality: Railroads have largely ceded the BCO relationship to their wholesale partners — the steamship lines and IMCs who hold the direct commercial connection to the cargo owner. That is not a failure; it is the model. The liner and the IMC own the loyalty, the wallet conversation, and the export opportunity as BCOs move polyethylene and other commodities into Atlantic markets. The railroad’s job is not to reclaim that relationship — it is to make its wholesale partners effective enough orchestrators that the freight stays on rail. That means investing in the partners, not competing with them. Shared visibility tools. Service commitments at the account level, not just the corridor level. Chassis and terminal performance the IMC can actually promise a BCO without hedging. Winning this window — and I borrow that term from tech, where timing a market shift is the whole game — requires the railroad to function as the backbone of orchestrated intermodal, enabling the steamship lines and IMCs who own the customer to deliver on the promise. Is your tech stack ready to orchestrate? That is the question every railroad and IMC should be asking because orchestrated intermodal is not a commercial concept; it is a technology commitment. Can you see the dray carrier’s ETA in real time, or are you still making phone calls? Is chassis pool visibility live, or a spreadsheet updated twice a day? Is terminal dwell data current enough to intervene before a shipper’s container becomes a problem? Can your systems flag new conversion accounts showing stress signals before the shipper calls their broker? Orchestration requires account-level visibility — knowing that this shipper’s container, on this lane, with this dray partner, is at risk right now. The technology exists: visibility platforms, AI-driven exception management, connected partner APIs. The question is whether a diesel spike is finally the urgency that accelerates the investment. Show up with a rate sheet but not a visibility platform and you win the booking and lose the account. Show up with both and you build something that outlasts the fuel cycle. The diesel spike hands railroads the invitation. Orchestrating the entire service chain — and the technology behind it — to deliver on it is entirely up to them. Paul Tonsager is founder and principal of IMS Advisory and writes the Signals & Switches newsletter on freight strategy at aet1998.substack.com. Contact him at paul.tonsager@multimodalsolutions.io .

Truckload

North-American rail

International rail

Surface

War hands railroads the ‘gift’ of higher diesel prices

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Union Pacific for the second time in five weeks is resetting freight-all-kinds rates on key lanes for rail-owned boxes used by intermodal marketing companies.</div>

Union Pacific for the second time in five weeks is resetting freight-all-kinds rates on key lanes for rail-owned boxes used by intermodal marketing companies.

<div class="phx-topic">Union Pacific Railroad (UP) on Tuesday adjusted rates for rail-owned boxes used by intermodal marketing companies (IMCs), the second such move in the last five weeks amid a widening gap between the truckload spot market and domestic intermodal rates. The pricing adjustments, which go into effect April 1, cover freight-all-kinds (FAK) rates on nearly 30 lanes on so-called EMP boxes and UMAX boxes which interchange with Norfolk Southern and CSX, respectively. About half of the adjustments seek a rate increase, ranging from 1.6% to 14.8%, while the other half actually lower rates between 1.2% and 29%. The moves come as current truckload spot rates have soared since the start of 2026, up between 15% and 20% year over year, according to DAT Freight &amp; Analytics. UP is eyeing an opportunity to win back cargo that can flex between domestic intermodal and truckload as truckload spot rates rise. Truckload contract rates have risen by the low single digits thus far in 2026, due in part to tightening capacity from US regulatory scrutiny over non-domiciled and non-English language proficient drivers, and the lingering effects of weather disruptions from February. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="9f53592f-fdc6-46d3-b392-18fdccf441fe"></dynamic-object></div>A big jump in diesel prices due to the war in the Middle East has also pushed truckload carriers to raise all-in spot rates as they attempt to recapture an unexpected operational cost, while the increased cost of diesel is captured through fuel surcharges on contract rates. Those dynamics present an opportunity for railroads to recapture volume lost to truckload as the full truckload market navigated three years of low pricing, inducing shippers to move cargo to truckload. Even before the recent jump in diesel prices, the spread between spot truckload and spot intermodal rates was widening, with the gap at 68 cents in February, according to the Journal of Commerce’s Intermodal Savings Index. Contact Eric Johnson at <a href="mailto:eric.johnson@spglobal.com">eric.johnson@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Union Pacific Railroad (UP) on Tuesday adjusted rates for rail-owned boxes used by intermodal marketing companies (IMCs), the second such move in the last five weeks amid a widening gap between the truckload spot market and domestic intermodal rates. The pricing adjustments, which go into effect April 1, cover freight-all-kinds (FAK) rates on nearly 30 lanes on so-called EMP boxes and UMAX boxes which interchange with Norfolk Southern and CSX, respectively. About half of the adjustments seek a rate increase, ranging from 1.6% to 14.8%, while the other half actually lower rates between 1.2% and 29%. The moves come as current truckload spot rates have soared since the start of 2026, up between 15% and 20% year over year, according to DAT Freight & Analytics. UP is eyeing an opportunity to win back cargo that can flex between domestic intermodal and truckload as truckload spot rates rise. Truckload contract rates have risen by the low single digits thus far in 2026, due in part to tightening capacity from US regulatory scrutiny over non-domiciled and non-English language proficient drivers, and the lingering effects of weather disruptions from February. A big jump in diesel prices due to the war in the Middle East has also pushed truckload carriers to raise all-in spot rates as they attempt to recapture an unexpected operational cost, while the increased cost of diesel is captured through fuel surcharges on contract rates. Those dynamics present an opportunity for railroads to recapture volume lost to truckload as the full truckload market navigated three years of low pricing, inducing shippers to move cargo to truckload. Even before the recent jump in diesel prices, the spread between spot truckload and spot intermodal rates was widening, with the gap at 68 cents in February, according to the Journal of Commerce’s Intermodal Savings Index. Contact Eric Johnson at eric.johnson@spglobal.com .

Trucking News

Rail News

UP adjusts intermodal pricing to win back volume as truckload rates climb

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Houston and New Orleans are coming off a year of growth for project cargo volumes, albeit with a drop in steel imports, and both ports anticipate a continuation of those trends.</div>

Houston and New Orleans are coming off a year of growth for project cargo volumes, albeit with a drop in steel imports, and both ports anticipate a continuation of those trends.

<div class="phx-topic">Major industrial and energy projects on the Gulf Coast are dialing up cargo activity at two of the largest US ports for breakbulk and project cargo, even as conflict in the Middle East introduces global shipping disruptions and tariff-induced market volatilities linger. The Port of New Orleans and Port Houston are coming off a year of growth for project cargo volumes, albeit with a drop in steel imports, and both ports anticipate a continuation of those trends. For New Orleans, the latest development expected to drive project cargo activity is the $3.4 billion expansion of Shintech’s chemical manufacturing complex in southeastern Louisiana, a project announced March 4. Construction is set to take place in phases, with the first phase slated for completion in 2030. Shintech is the world’s largest manufacturer of polyvinyl chloride (PVC). “With them announcing a new expansion, there’s a lot of optimism from the petrochemical sector, especially in light of the challenges in the Middle East that affect the products they’re producing on a competitive scale,” Janine Mansour, director of trade development for the Port of New Orleans, told the Journal of Commerce. Project cargo volumes at the Port of New Orleans increased 31% to 64,806 tons in 2025, with shipments originating from multiple global locations including Italy, China, India, Thailand and South Korea, according to data from the port. That growth comes after a 46% increase in project cargo volumes in 2024. Major projects producing project cargo include Venture Global’s massive CP2 LNG export facility in southwest Louisiana, UBE Corporation’s Louisiana electric vehicle battery plant outside of New Orleans that will produce key chemicals used in EV battery manufacturing, and Meta’s 4 million-square-foot data center in northeast Louisiana. Hyundai Steel also plans to build a $5.8 billion low-carbon steel mill in southeast Louisiana. Overall breakbulk volumes at the Port of New Orleans fell 22% to 958,152 tons in 2025, according to port data, because of tariff-related market uncertainty and because some steel and non-ferrous cargoes have shifted to containers, Mansour said. Breakbulk steel volumes declined 29% to 524,749 short tons in 2025, with most cargo coming from Japan, followed by South Korea and China, according to data from the port. “Steel imports have been severely hit by tariff increases to foster domestic production,” Mansour said, adding that the port last year measured an 80% year-over-year increase to 129,705 tons of bulk imports of ferro alloys and silico-alloys, both of which are used in steel manufacturing. With the declines in breakbulk cargoes, the total number of multipurpose/heavy-lift vessel (MPV/HL) calls at New Orleans fell to 163 in 2025 from 189 the previous year. The ongoing conflict in the Middle East could potentially squeeze vessel capacity for breakbulk and project cargoes worldwide, as port closures and route changes have already been tying up vessels on the container side, Mansour said. That could indirectly affect vessel movements at the Port of New Orleans. “For the carriers that are calling New Orleans, if they do have routes in the Middle East, they may have disruptions where it affects their capacity from a global fleet perspective,” she said. “But we’re not anticipating significant impacts on the breakbulk and project cargo side, and we haven’t really seen any direct impacts yet.” Mansour acknowledged that the Middle East is not a major shipping lane for breakbulk and project cargoes for the port. <h3>Cargo mix offsets steel slump for Houston </h3>With tariffs chipping away at steel imports, Port Houston is looking to cargo diversification and Gulf Coast project developments to expand cargo shipments for the nation’s largest breakbulk and project cargo gateway. Volumes of general cargo — which the port defines to include project cargo, breakbulk, and other non-containerized goods — reached 564,346 tons in January, a 27% year-over-year increase, according to Port Houston data. That growth trend is expected to continue, driven in part by a mix of projects under development in the region, port spokesperson Lisa Ashley-Daniels told the Journal of Commerce. “There are several major industrial and energy projects along the Gulf Coast that are expected to move forward between 2026 and 2028, with the potential to generate considerable breakbulk and heavy-lift cargo through Port Houston,” she said. Breakbulk steel imports at Port Houston declined 35% year over year to 213,653 tons in January, according to port data, mirroring larger trends tied to lower drilling activity, Ashley-Daniels said. For all of 2025, breakbulk steel volumes fell 8% to just under 4.2 million tons. “The decline in steel imports that Houston experienced in January is not unique to the port, but reflects broad shifts in energy markets, supply and demand drivers, regulatory environments, and trade policies, among other contributing factors,” she said. Significant activity from cargo types other than steel is driving an overall rise in general cargo volumes at the port, Ashley-Daniels said, citing quadruple-digit growth in machinery, triple-digit increases in grain, and double-digit gains in pet coke volumes and roll-on/roll-off cargo in February. “The growing diversification of breakbulk cargo beyond steel is helping to stabilize overall activity,” Ashley-Daniels said, adding that cargo activity for these commodities is expected to increase further. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at <a href="mailto:autumn@autumngiusti.com">autumn@autumngiusti.com</a>.</div>

Major industrial and energy projects on the Gulf Coast are dialing up cargo activity at two of the largest US ports for breakbulk and project cargo, even as conflict in the Middle East introduces global shipping disruptions and tariff-induced market volatilities linger. The Port of New Orleans and Port Houston are coming off a year of growth for project cargo volumes, albeit with a drop in steel imports, and both ports anticipate a continuation of those trends. For New Orleans, the latest development expected to drive project cargo activity is the $3.4 billion expansion of Shintech’s chemical manufacturing complex in southeastern Louisiana, a project announced March 4. Construction is set to take place in phases, with the first phase slated for completion in 2030. Shintech is the world’s largest manufacturer of polyvinyl chloride (PVC). “With them announcing a new expansion, there’s a lot of optimism from the petrochemical sector, especially in light of the challenges in the Middle East that affect the products they’re producing on a competitive scale,” Janine Mansour, director of trade development for the Port of New Orleans, told the Journal of Commerce. Project cargo volumes at the Port of New Orleans increased 31% to 64,806 tons in 2025, with shipments originating from multiple global locations including Italy, China, India, Thailand and South Korea, according to data from the port. That growth comes after a 46% increase in project cargo volumes in 2024. Major projects producing project cargo include Venture Global’s massive CP2 LNG export facility in southwest Louisiana, UBE Corporation’s Louisiana electric vehicle battery plant outside of New Orleans that will produce key chemicals used in EV battery manufacturing, and Meta’s 4 million-square-foot data center in northeast Louisiana. Hyundai Steel also plans to build a $5.8 billion low-carbon steel mill in southeast Louisiana. Overall breakbulk volumes at the Port of New Orleans fell 22% to 958,152 tons in 2025, according to port data, because of tariff-related market uncertainty and because some steel and non-ferrous cargoes have shifted to containers, Mansour said. Breakbulk steel volumes declined 29% to 524,749 short tons in 2025, with most cargo coming from Japan, followed by South Korea and China, according to data from the port. “Steel imports have been severely hit by tariff increases to foster domestic production,” Mansour said, adding that the port last year measured an 80% year-over-year increase to 129,705 tons of bulk imports of ferro alloys and silico-alloys, both of which are used in steel manufacturing. With the declines in breakbulk cargoes, the total number of multipurpose/heavy-lift vessel (MPV/HL) calls at New Orleans fell to 163 in 2025 from 189 the previous year. The ongoing conflict in the Middle East could potentially squeeze vessel capacity for breakbulk and project cargoes worldwide, as port closures and route changes have already been tying up vessels on the container side, Mansour said. That could indirectly affect vessel movements at the Port of New Orleans. “For the carriers that are calling New Orleans, if they do have routes in the Middle East, they may have disruptions where it affects their capacity from a global fleet perspective,” she said. “But we’re not anticipating significant impacts on the breakbulk and project cargo side, and we haven’t really seen any direct impacts yet.” Mansour acknowledged that the Middle East is not a major shipping lane for breakbulk and project cargoes for the port. Cargo mix offsets steel slump for Houston With tariffs chipping away at steel imports, Port Houston is looking to cargo diversification and Gulf Coast project developments to expand cargo shipments for the nation’s largest breakbulk and project cargo gateway. Volumes of general cargo — which the port defines to include project cargo, breakbulk, and other non-containerized goods — reached 564,346 tons in January, a 27% year-over-year increase, according to Port Houston data. That growth trend is expected to continue, driven in part by a mix of projects under development in the region, port spokesperson Lisa Ashley-Daniels told the Journal of Commerce. “There are several major industrial and energy projects along the Gulf Coast that are expected to move forward between 2026 and 2028, with the potential to generate considerable breakbulk and heavy-lift cargo through Port Houston,” she said. Breakbulk steel imports at Port Houston declined 35% year over year to 213,653 tons in January, according to port data, mirroring larger trends tied to lower drilling activity, Ashley-Daniels said. For all of 2025, breakbulk steel volumes fell 8% to just under 4.2 million tons. “The decline in steel imports that Houston experienced in January is not unique to the port, but reflects broad shifts in energy markets, supply and demand drivers, regulatory environments, and trade policies, among other contributing factors,” she said. Significant activity from cargo types other than steel is driving an overall rise in general cargo volumes at the port, Ashley-Daniels said, citing quadruple-digit growth in machinery, triple-digit increases in grain, and double-digit gains in pet coke volumes and roll-on/roll-off cargo in February. “The growing diversification of breakbulk cargo beyond steel is helping to stabilize overall activity,” Ashley-Daniels said, adding that cargo activity for these commodities is expected to increase further. Contact Autumn Cafiero Giusti at autumn@autumngiusti.com .

Port News

Breakbulk ports

North American ports

US Gulf breakbulk ports lean into project boom

Use code GTT26W at checkout and save $900 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code SSFTW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Wide Box

SPRING SALE!

Use code GW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid for first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION

Use code SSLW30 at checkout and save 30% on an annual Silver or Silver Plus subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code SSGFTW895 at checkout to save $600 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Wide Box

Use code SSLW895 at checkout and save $600 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

SPRING SALE: Use code SSFTW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT to S/SP - Offer Box

Subscribe and Save

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

SPRING SALE: Use code SSLW30 at checkout and save 30% on an annual Silver or Silver Plus subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTT26W at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

SPRING SALE: Use code SSLW895 at checkout and save $600 on an annual Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

SAVE $900 ON A GOLD SUBSCRIPTION: Use code GW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

SPRING SALE: Use code SSGFTW895 and save $600 on the first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT to Gold - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

The only editorially independent conference for the breakbulk & project cargo industry

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

The latest container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology solutions and end-to-end connectivity. Coverage includes the movement of containerized cargo handled by marine terminals and container ports, depots, container lines, drayage, consignees, importers and shippers, forwarders, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) and off-dock warehousing providers. The Journal of Commerce's container shipping news includes news from the trans-Pacific, Asia–Europe, North America–Caribbean, Central and South America trades, and intra-Asia trades.

Trans-Atlantic

Forwarding

Asia-Europe

Trans-Pacific

Container shipping news and analysis of ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, technology and end-to-end connectivity.

Container Shipping News | Journal of Commerce

Container Shipping News

The Journal of Commerce is the industry’s source for maritime news and analysis about ocean container shipping, logistics, supply chains, global shipping ports, shipping technology solutions and end-to-end connectivity. Coverage tracks the movement of containerized cargo — from origin to destination — handled by marine terminals in the US and abroad, depots, container ports, container lines, drayage, consignees and shippers, forwarders, non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOs) and off-dock warehousing providers, as well as pricing, capacity, volume and reliability on the trans-Pacific, Asia–Europe, North America–Caribbean, Central and South American and intra-Asia trades.

Discover comprehensive trucking news and trends with Journal of Commerce - from trucking LTL to regulation and trucking supply and demand.

Breakbulk News shipping | Journal of Commerce

Stay informed on port news worldwide with Journal of Commerce. From decarbonization to labor updates, get insights on global developments.

Port News | Journal of Commerce

News and analysis of ocean containerized cargo movement, logistics, supply chains, technology, and end-to-end connectivity. Maritime news and analysis of containerized ocean cargo movement, breakbulk and roll-on and roll-off shipping from origin to destination.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

Offshore wind cancellations set up energy project pivot in the US

Container shipping faces ‘shallow’ downcycle amid strong carrier finances

War hands railroads the ‘gift’ of higher diesel prices