Opinion: Keeping Cargo on Tracks
For decades, great things were predicted for rail intermodal. Now, as that line of business begins to fulfill its promise, questions are arising as to whether railroads will make the investments needed to handle this freight traffic efficiently.
To be sure, each railroad’s spokesman assures one and all that his company is on top of the situation. Indeed, it seems unthinkable that they would not be.
Nevertheless, leaders in the third-party business are starting to worry. Is another Union Pacific scenario beginning to unfold?
ill the railroads, having resolutely opposed any increases in truck capacity — and having fostered the organizations that fanned the fires of fear about heavy trucks — now crouch over their customer base like a greedy child over a bag of candy, face and hands smeared with chocolate and too full to eat any more but unwilling to give up one bit of it?
Have the railroads, as they appear to be readying themselves to head off a truck size and weight threat that has not really even manifested itself, made the decision that pre-emptively denying trucks more capacity is better than trying to become more productive themselves?
Kind of looks that way — doesn’t it?
In its own way, however, this position is rational. A public policy campaign can be expensive, compared to normal legislative or public affairs activities. But the expense, measured in tens of millions at the most, is a drop in the bucket compared with the cost of upgrading intermodal facilities.
And, if you can spend a few million to hamstring the competition, isn’t that better than spending much more to outcompete them on that proverbial level playing field?
For the full story, see the Feb. 8 print edition of Transport Topics. Subscribe today.
