<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Within hours of this issue's deadline last week, Customs issued its final regulation requiring vesse</div>

Within hours of this issue's deadline last week, Customs issued its final regulation requiring vesse

<div>Within hours of this issue's deadline last week, Customs issued its final regulation requiring vessel manifests to be submitted 24 hours before an inbound container ship is loaded at a foreign port. The timing of the announcement was not a surprise; It had become clear in recent weeks that Customs Commissioner Robert Bonner was moving ahead with this landmark regulation, despite importers' objections that their supply chains could not endure the additional transit time that in many cases will be required for carriers to comply with the rule.Bonner had insisted that the Automated Manifest System for electronic filing of vessel...

Within hours of this issue's deadline last week, Customs issued its final regulation requiring vessel manifests to be submitted 24 hours before an inbound container ship is loaded at a foreign port. The timing of the announcement was not a surprise; It had become clear in recent weeks that Customs Commissioner Robert Bonner was moving ahead with this landmark regulation, despite importers' objections that their supply chains could not endure the additional transit time that in many cases will be required for carriers to comply with the rule. Bonner had insisted that the Automated Manifest System for electronic filing of vessel manifests represents the quickest way for Customs to screen containers at the foreign port, and that the agency has no time to lose in putting such a system in place. If terrorists were to strike again and the government could not convincingly demonstrate that it has a cargo security system in place, even one that's imperfect, the public would be within its rights to demand the entire system be shut down until one is in place. As Customs stated in the publication of the final rule last week, "Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations pose an immediate and substantial threat. And the threat is not just to harm and kill American citizens, it is a threat to damage and destroy the U.S. and the world economy." The final rule, which runs over 70 pages, includes several direct responses to concerns raised in the 78 comments Customs received in response to its Aug. 8 proposed rule. Acknowledging the complexity of implementing the rule, Customs gives the trade a total of 90 days to comply. Customs also defends the rule as achieving the dual goals of protecting the nation while allowing for a continued smooth flow of international trade. For example, Customs said, "once a cargo container is pre-screened in a foreign port, in the absence of additional information affecting Customs risk analysis, Customs will rarely need to again screen the container or inspect its contents for security purposes upon arrival in the United States." Reading through the rule, it was clear that there could be important competitive ramifications. For example, Customs noted that "it is the information about the contents of a shipping container, not the container itself, that must be presented to Customs 24 hours prior to lading at a foreign seaport. Under this rule, so long as the required information is provided to Customs 24 hours in advance of lading, the container itself may be brought to the seaport at a later time." It further noted that at many foreign ports, cargo already is stored at terminals for several hours or days before loading. But ocean carriers have pointed out, correctly, that manifests are compiled using bill of lading information, and the carrier doesn't have that data until the container is in its possession. This could give ocean carriers an advantage over intermediaries by encouraging shippers to use container lines for end-to-end intermodal moves, rather than using an intermediary to deliver the container to the marine terminal at the foreign port. If the cargo is delivered to the carrier by a third party, it will need to arrive at the terminal perhaps 48 hours or more before the start of loading. This will add to transit time and, ac-cording to trade groups critical of the 24-hour rule, increase the risk of pilferage. But if the shipper contracts with the carrier to pick up the cargo at its point of origin, it won't be necessary to accelerate the delivery. That's because the cargo, and the information needed for the manifest, will already be in the carrier's possession. Customs says the practice of al-lowing last-minute containers to be loaded could be continued as long as the information was manifested 24 hours in advance of loading. One issue that Customs did not appear to touch on in the final rule: What happens when Customs wants to inspect cargo that is originating at a port not participating in the Container Security Initiative and therefore likely to lack the inspection devices and personnel necessary to screen containers that Customs deems risky? The world's top 20 ports, 14 of which have signed on to the CSI program, account for only about 70 percent of the 6 million containers that entered the U.S. last year. Bonner says he wants to perform non-invasive screening procedures on 5 to 10 percent of all incoming containers. Somehow Customs will have to get in place screening procedures at the non-CSI ports. The issuance of this rule is a landmark development, the first government action that will significantly affect how international trade is handled following the Sept. 11 attacks. Peter Tirschwell is editor of JoC Week. He can be reached at (973) 848-7158, or via e-mail at ptirschwell@joc.com .

24-hour rule will affect competition

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">CPKC’s opposition comes just two years after its acquisition of Kansas City Southern Railway was approved by US regulators.</div>

CPKC’s opposition comes just two years after its acquisition of Kansas City Southern Railway was approved by US regulators.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) on Tuesday urged federal regulators to reject Union Pacific Railroad’s proposed acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway, arguing the deal would create the US’ first coast-to-coast railroad would not serve the public interest and that shippers can achieve similar benefits through stronger rail partnerships. The opposition comes two years after US regulators approved Canadian Pacific’s takeover of Kansas City Southern, the last major rail merger that created CPKC. "We believe that a transcontinental merger would trigger permanent restructuring of the industry and result in a disproportionately large railway whose size and scope would require others to take action," Keith Creel, CPKC’s president and CEO, said in a statement. "This will likely result in an unnecessary wave of railway mergers that today is not the best way to support American businesses nor the public interest, and has the potential to create more issues than it solves." Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern expect to file their application with the US Surface Transportation Board by mid-January. A final decision on the proposed deal is unlikely until at least the spring of 2027 at the earliest The two railroads argue the combination would create the nation’s first true <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-looks-to-create-first-coast-to-coast-railroad-with-85-billion-ns-deal-6052288">transcontinental US carrier</a>, but CPKC believes further rail consolidation is unnecessary. “The existing six major railways in the United States are capable of offering their customers high-quality and near-seamless transportation services across the continent,” CPKC said. “As evidenced by previous rail network alliances by CPKC and CSX in the Southeast US, as well as the recent alliance announced by BNSF and CSX, there remain opportunities for further cooperation between ‘willing’ railways to improve service while preserving optionality for shippers.” Warren Buffett, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, which owns BNSF Railway, echoed that view in a <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/25/warren-buffett-is-not-in-market-to-buy-another-railroad-but-he-met-with-csx-ceo-about-greater-cooperation.html">CNBC interview</a> Monday. He said he was not interested in acquiring another railroad and told CSX CEO Joe Hinrichs in an Aug. 3 meeting that partnerships can deliver the same benefits. BNSF and CSX last week <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/bnsf-csx-unveil-new-joint-intermodal-lanes-in-aftermath-of-up-ns-merger-6067789">announced</a> a joint service linking Southern California with Charlotte and Jacksonville and Phoenix with Atlanta. The trains will operate in a nearly single-line fashion via BNSF to Atlanta, where the railroads co-manage a terminal in Fairburn, Ga., before CSX moves loads onward to Charlotte and Jacksonville. Neither BNSF nor CSX has taken a public position on the UP–NS transaction. Canadian National Railway has also remained silent, a stance that may reflect its close partnerships with Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. CN and UP are the two railroads involved in the Falcon Premium service, an intermodal offering connecting Canada and Mexico. CN also runs dozens of cross-border US lanes with UP and NS using a shared pool of rail-owned containers, known as “EMP” boxes, many of which interchange with NS in the eastern US. <h3>Others support UP-NS deal </h3>Other companies, however, have endorsed the proposed deal. C.R. England, a leading temperature-controlled carrier and UP partner, and Mode Global, a non-asset-based intermodal marketing company, said the UP-NS merger would improve service and lower costs for shippers. C.R. England, well-known as a refrigerated truckload carrier, partners with UP on more than 95% of its temperature-controlled intermodal business in the western US. Mode is among the largest users of the rail-owned container pool. “The improved transit times and single-carrier service will mean faster, more reliable deliveries for our customers and lower shipping costs for beneficial cargo owners,” MODE CEO Lance Malesh said in a statement. “Ultimately, those savings will benefit the entire American economy – when shippers save, consumers do too.” C.R. England said the deal is something it has “dreamed about for years.” “It means faster transit, greater capacity, and lower costs,” Zach England, chief operating officer of C.R. England, said in a statement. “For our customers, that translates to improved supply chain efficiency and savings we can pass on to consumers.” Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a></div>

Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) on Tuesday urged federal regulators to reject Union Pacific Railroad’s proposed acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway, arguing the deal would create the US’ first coast-to-coast railroad would not serve the public interest and that shippers can achieve similar benefits through stronger rail partnerships. The opposition comes two years after US regulators approved Canadian Pacific’s takeover of Kansas City Southern, the last major rail merger that created CPKC. "We believe that a transcontinental merger would trigger permanent restructuring of the industry and result in a disproportionately large railway whose size and scope would require others to take action," Keith Creel, CPKC’s president and CEO, said in a statement. "This will likely result in an unnecessary wave of railway mergers that today is not the best way to support American businesses nor the public interest, and has the potential to create more issues than it solves." Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern expect to file their application with the US Surface Transportation Board by mid-January. A final decision on the proposed deal is unlikely until at least the spring of 2027 at the earliest The two railroads argue the combination would create the nation’s first true transcontinental US carrier , but CPKC believes further rail consolidation is unnecessary. “The existing six major railways in the United States are capable of offering their customers high-quality and near-seamless transportation services across the continent,” CPKC said. “As evidenced by previous rail network alliances by CPKC and CSX in the Southeast US, as well as the recent alliance announced by BNSF and CSX, there remain opportunities for further cooperation between ‘willing’ railways to improve service while preserving optionality for shippers.” Warren Buffett, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, which owns BNSF Railway, echoed that view in a CNBC interview Monday. He said he was not interested in acquiring another railroad and told CSX CEO Joe Hinrichs in an Aug. 3 meeting that partnerships can deliver the same benefits. BNSF and CSX last week announced a joint service linking Southern California with Charlotte and Jacksonville and Phoenix with Atlanta. The trains will operate in a nearly single-line fashion via BNSF to Atlanta, where the railroads co-manage a terminal in Fairburn, Ga., before CSX moves loads onward to Charlotte and Jacksonville. Neither BNSF nor CSX has taken a public position on the UP–NS transaction. Canadian National Railway has also remained silent, a stance that may reflect its close partnerships with Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. CN and UP are the two railroads involved in the Falcon Premium service, an intermodal offering connecting Canada and Mexico. CN also runs dozens of cross-border US lanes with UP and NS using a shared pool of rail-owned containers, known as “EMP” boxes, many of which interchange with NS in the eastern US. Others support UP-NS deal Other companies, however, have endorsed the proposed deal. C.R. England, a leading temperature-controlled carrier and UP partner, and Mode Global, a non-asset-based intermodal marketing company, said the UP-NS merger would improve service and lower costs for shippers. C.R. England, well-known as a refrigerated truckload carrier, partners with UP on more than 95% of its temperature-controlled intermodal business in the western US. Mode is among the largest users of the rail-owned container pool. “The improved transit times and single-carrier service will mean faster, more reliable deliveries for our customers and lower shipping costs for beneficial cargo owners,” MODE CEO Lance Malesh said in a statement. “Ultimately, those savings will benefit the entire American economy – when shippers save, consumers do too.” C.R. England said the deal is something it has “dreamed about for years.” “It means faster transit, greater capacity, and lower costs,” Zach England, chief operating officer of C.R. England, said in a statement. “For our customers, that translates to improved supply chain efficiency and savings we can pass on to consumers.” Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com

North-American rail

Rail News

UP-NS deal would trigger ‘unnecessary wave’ of rail mergers: CPKC

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The scale and scope of the number of products now subject to US steel and aluminum tariffs is likely to affect providers across multiple modes, writes Jason Miller.</div>

The scale and scope of the number of products now subject to US steel and aluminum tariffs is likely to affect providers across multiple modes, writes Jason Miller.

<div class="phx-topic">The White House on Aug. 15 announced a substantial increase in the number of products subject to the <a href="https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2025-15819.pdf">steel and aluminum tariffs</a> that went into effect on Aug. 18. The scope of this expansion was massive, covering 407 new HTS (harmonized tariff schedule) codes that swept up over $160 billion in additional goods in the steel and aluminum tariff net; previously, these tariffs captured roughly $190 billion in goods. While the steel and aluminum tariffs apply only to the steel or aluminum content for the <a href="https://www.flexport.com/blog/what-president-trumps-2024-u-s-election-win-means-for-global-trade-and/">derivative product</a>s, the scale and scope of these tariffs is likely to affect transportation providers across multiple modes. <h3>More pressure on container volumes </h3><div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6069773_0.1.jpg"></img></div>The derivative expansion swept up a wide range of furniture products in addition to the ones already covered. Combined with higher country-specific IEEPA rates (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) coming into effect, this is expected to place further pressure on furniture import volumes, which declined 16% in the second quarter of 2025 from the first quarter of 2025 based on seasonally adjusted imports from the Bureau of Economic Analysis’ (BEA) associated end-use category once adjusted for inflation. Compounding matters, continued sluggishness in the housing market and pressures many consumers are experiencing in paying <a href="https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2025/may/broad-continuing-rise-delinquent-us-credit-card-debt-revisited">credit card debt</a> are likely to further pressure import volumes of goods such as furniture. <h3>Roll-on/roll-off effects for construction, ag equipment </h3>One of the most profound changes with the steel and aluminum tariffs is the last expansion captured many finished capital goods such as bulldozers, backhoes, agricultural tractors and similar associated goods. To understand what this means, consider agricultural equipment imported from Germany. Previously, such goods would be charged a 15% tariff based on the most recent “agreement” between the US and European Union. Now, the steel and aluminum content of agricultural equipment will be charged a 50% tariff, and the remaining value will be charged the 15% tariff. As such, if one-third of the value of a piece of construction equipment is in steel, the effective tariff rate will now be 26.55%. Tariff rates at such levels are likely to place further headwinds on construction and agricultural equipment import demand, which had steadily been falling prior to these tariffs. <h3>Trucking companies and railroads </h3>The steel and aluminum derivative tariffs captured various HTS codes associated with capital goods for railroads and motor carriers. For example, Flexport’s <a href="https://tariffs.flexport.com/?entryDate=2025-08-20&amp;country=CN&amp;value=10000&amp;advanced=true&amp;code=8607191200+Railway+Wheels%2C+Whether+Or+Not+Fitted+With+Axles+%28kg%29&amp;FIELD_CHOSEN_SPIS=%7B%7D&amp;FIELD_CHOSEN_HTS_CODES=%7B%2299030121%22%3Afalse%2C%2299030130%22%3Afalse%7D&amp;FIELD_STEEL_PERCENTAGE=80&amp;FIELD_STEEL_COUNTRY_OF_POUR=%22CN%22&amp;FIELD_EXISTING_HTS_CODES=%5B%5D">Tariff Simulator</a> estimates that HTS 8607.19.1200 (Railway Wheels, Whether Or Not Fitted With Axles) imported from China (the second-largest source from 2024) with 80% steel content poured in China will see an increase in the tariff rate to 87% from 55%. Perhaps more significantly is the impact on imports from Canada (the largest source from 2024 for this HTS). Data for June indicated the ratio of dutiable value over customs import value for consumption was just 2.4%, with an effective tariff rate at just 0.6%. This will change dramatically with this HTS falling under the steel and aluminum tariffs, where we would now expect effective tariff rates of 20% or more, assuming the steel was poured in Canada. For trucking companies, the most significant shock from the newest derivative products comes in the form of tariffs on truck trailers, with HTS 8716.39.0040 (dry van trailers) and HTS 8716.39.0090 (other trailers for transporting goods) being the two categories to watch for. For example, other trailers for transporting goods, imports from the two top sources (Canada and Mexico) had a ratio of dutiable value of customs import value of &lt; 0.1% in June 2025 due to compliance with the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Similar figures applied for dry van trailers. These figures will increase substantially given the high value of steel and aluminum content in these products. <h3>Headwinds and rising costs </h3>The massive expansion of steel and aluminum products subject to tariffs is unwelcome news for transportation providers. These tariffs will create further headwinds for ocean volumes while raising the cost of capital goods for railroads and trucking companies. Given the trucking sector is entering the third year of a prolonged market downturn, higher prices for equipment is unwelcome news. Jason Miller is an associate professor of logistics at Michigan State University. Contact him at <a href="mailto:mill2831@broad.msu.edu">mill2831@broad.msu.edu.</a></div>

The White House on Aug. 15 announced a substantial increase in the number of products subject to the steel and aluminum tariffs that went into effect on Aug. 18. The scope of this expansion was massive, covering 407 new HTS (harmonized tariff schedule) codes that swept up over $160 billion in additional goods in the steel and aluminum tariff net; previously, these tariffs captured roughly $190 billion in goods. While the steel and aluminum tariffs apply only to the steel or aluminum content for the derivative product s, the scale and scope of these tariffs is likely to affect transportation providers across multiple modes. More pressure on container volumes The derivative expansion swept up a wide range of furniture products in addition to the ones already covered. Combined with higher country-specific IEEPA rates (International Emergency Economic Powers Act) coming into effect, this is expected to place further pressure on furniture import volumes, which declined 16% in the second quarter of 2025 from the first quarter of 2025 based on seasonally adjusted imports from the Bureau of Economic Analysis’ (BEA) associated end-use category once adjusted for inflation. Compounding matters, continued sluggishness in the housing market and pressures many consumers are experiencing in paying credit card debt are likely to further pressure import volumes of goods such as furniture. Roll-on/roll-off effects for construction, ag equipment One of the most profound changes with the steel and aluminum tariffs is the last expansion captured many finished capital goods such as bulldozers, backhoes, agricultural tractors and similar associated goods. To understand what this means, consider agricultural equipment imported from Germany. Previously, such goods would be charged a 15% tariff based on the most recent “agreement” between the US and European Union. Now, the steel and aluminum content of agricultural equipment will be charged a 50% tariff, and the remaining value will be charged the 15% tariff. As such, if one-third of the value of a piece of construction equipment is in steel, the effective tariff rate will now be 26.55%. Tariff rates at such levels are likely to place further headwinds on construction and agricultural equipment import demand, which had steadily been falling prior to these tariffs. Trucking companies and railroads The steel and aluminum derivative tariffs captured various HTS codes associated with capital goods for railroads and motor carriers. For example, Flexport’s Tariff Simulator estimates that HTS 8607.19.1200 (Railway Wheels, Whether Or Not Fitted With Axles) imported from China (the second-largest source from 2024) with 80% steel content poured in China will see an increase in the tariff rate to 87% from 55%. Perhaps more significantly is the impact on imports from Canada (the largest source from 2024 for this HTS). Data for June indicated the ratio of dutiable value over customs import value for consumption was just 2.4%, with an effective tariff rate at just 0.6%. This will change dramatically with this HTS falling under the steel and aluminum tariffs, where we would now expect effective tariff rates of 20% or more, assuming the steel was poured in Canada. For trucking companies, the most significant shock from the newest derivative products comes in the form of tariffs on truck trailers, with HTS 8716.39.0040 (dry van trailers) and HTS 8716.39.0090 (other trailers for transporting goods) being the two categories to watch for. For example, other trailers for transporting goods, imports from the two top sources (Canada and Mexico) had a ratio of dutiable value of customs import value of < 0.1% in June 2025 due to compliance with the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Similar figures applied for dry van trailers. These figures will increase substantially given the high value of steel and aluminum content in these products. Headwinds and rising costs The massive expansion of steel and aluminum products subject to tariffs is unwelcome news for transportation providers. These tariffs will create further headwinds for ocean volumes while raising the cost of capital goods for railroads and trucking companies. Given the trucking sector is entering the third year of a prolonged market downturn, higher prices for equipment is unwelcome news. Jason Miller is an associate professor of logistics at Michigan State University. Contact him at mill2831@broad.msu.edu.

Supply chain

Steel, aluminum tariff expansion ‘unwelcome news’ for transport providers

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The unit cost of moving a container has been pushed higher compared with the prevailing pre-pandemic price structure, according to carrier executives, prompting cost-control measures.</div>

The unit cost of moving a container has been pushed higher compared with the prevailing pre-pandemic price structure, according to carrier executives, prompting cost-control measures.

<div class="phx-topic">Container lines, facing rate pressure on all major trades, are doubling down on cutting costs that have materially increased above pre-pandemic levels. Executives from Hapag-Lloyd, Maersk and Zim Integrated Shipping Services told investors during second-quarter earnings calls that they are facing higher prices from shipbuilding to port labor. And that has prompted cost-cutting measures ranging from improving fuel efficiency through better scheduling, cutting port time, returning chartered ships at the end of contracts and slow steaming. “Pre-COVID we were bunkering the ships on HFO [heavy fuel oil], and since then we have transitioned to VLSFO [very low-sulfur fuel oil]. This is a cost increase,” Zim CFO Xavier Destriau told analysts. “If we look at the newbuilding price, that went up. The chartering rate went up. So the cost of securing tonnage has also gone up compared to the prior period.” Destriau also pointed to increases in cargo handling charges, higher wages for dockworkers that are passed on to carriers, and a lack of terminal investment that has made port congestion an ongoing challenge requiring more ships per string. “To give you an example, our main Asia to the US East Coast service used to operate on a weekly basis with 10 ships pre-COVID, but now we need 12 in order to maintain the weekly schedule,” he said. “All these elements of additional cost have found their way into our cost structure, and that contributes to increasing the overall cost that we carry,” Destriau added. While carriers believe higher rates at the end of the second quarter and strong bookings through July will ensure third-quarter earnings are close to those recorded in the second quarter, the shipping companies are expecting a fourth-quarter decline and thus are intensifying cost-reduction efforts across their networks to mitigate any supply-demand shortfall. <h3>Steady rise in capacity </h3>Global demand has been resilient year to date, but J.P. Morgan in a market update Tuesday pointed to softening trends in the second half. The bank highlighted overall first-half ocean volume growth of 4.5% year over year, while real global GDP grew 3% in the same period. “We expect market growth to slow in the second half and forecast 1.8% in Q3 and flat in Q4 [-0.3%],” the bank noted. “For 2026 onwards, we estimate volume growth of 2% per annum, broadly in line with J.P. Morgan economists’ real GDP growth forecasts, as we expect the trade multiplier to hold at 1x.” J.P. Morgan is expecting the rate erosion to accelerate over the next two years as demand slows and capacity grows, pushing the industry into deep losses. “We expect a widening demand-supply imbalance into H2 25, driven by slower demand growth into the end of the year and estimated effective supply growth of 6.5% year over year,” the bank noted. A return of sailings to the Red Sea in 2026 will drive supply growth up 9%, but even if the route remains closed, effective supply will still grow 3% to 5%, the market update predicted. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="e9676ea4-c6b9-4589-9a4b-822a9c82e2f8"></dynamic-object></div>Spot rates are certainly feeling the effects of weakening demand and excess capacity. Asia-US West Coast spot rates at $1,640 per FEU are one-third of the price at the beginning of January, according to Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. On Asia-North Europe routes, rates are half of what they were on Jan. 1, while on the trans-Atlantic westbound trade, spot prices <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trans-atlantic-carriers-limit-capacity-cuts-despite-ongoing-rate-weakness-6066878">have been at loss-making levels for weeks</a>. At the same time, capacity is steadily increasing. The global order book is now 9.3 million TEUs, or 29% of the in-service fleet, according to Alphaliner. About 1.8 million TEUs of capacity are set to be delivered this year, with another 1.6 million TEUs coming online in 2026, according to Drewry. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="77c97ac7-f6be-4816-9394-8c10326f863f"></dynamic-object></div>Still, Hapag-Lloyd CEO Rolf Habben Jansen told analysts on the carrier’s recent second-quarter earnings call that while rates were falling on the major trade lanes, he could not imagine any scenario where they would remain 10% to 20% below unit cost levels for a sustained period due to underlying supportive fundamentals. “Anyone who believes that freight rates would go back to that level, it’s just not going to happen because we see EU ETS [Emissions Trading System], we see low-sulfur fuel, we see the prices of shipyards having gone up significantly on investments that need to be done for newer ships,” he said, adding that port congestion means boxes and ships take longer to turn. In an aggressive move to bring down expenses in a rapidly eroding rate environment, Hapag-Lloyd recently launched a comprehensive cost-cutting program that targets more than $1 billion in savings by the end of 2026, with the program extending across the carrier’s network and including synergies and efficiency gains from its Gemini Corporation alliance with Maersk. “We set ourselves a target to bring unit costs down in a double-digit percentage versus what we saw in 2022 ... I think that is achievable,” Habben Jansen said. “I also believe the $1 billion plus [cost-cutting target] is realistic to get that out until the end of next year.” <h3>No return to 2019 rate levels </h3>Habben Jansen said even with the extensive cuts in expenses, it would not bring the carrier costs back to 2019 levels “for the very simple reason that some of our factor costs are very different.” “We did not have the EU ETS before COVID, and we did not have low-sulfur fuel. Those alone will drive up costs quite significantly,” he said. “Then there has been inflation that impacts our cost as well, and you certainly cannot negotiate that away.” Unit costs at Hapag-Lloyd rose 4% in the first half year over year to $1,320 per TEU, up more than $300 per TEU compared with pre-pandemic times. However, a significant portion of the increased expenses were generated by the startup investments required in the transition of Hapag-Lloyd’s services to the new Gemini Cooperation network. While Gemini’s startup expenses were adding to the costs of its members, Maersk CEO Vincent Clerc outlined the cost savings that will be generated by the new network with “two principal buckets” set to drive down unit costs. “One is the reliability of schedules that means lower fuel consumption,” Clerc said during the carrier’s recent second-quarter earnings call with analysts. “The second one is less sail distances also means higher asset intensity where we can basically move more cargo on the same amount of tonnage, which lowers the unit cost as well.” Clerc said cost increases in the charter markets and at marine terminals battling congestion were being exacerbated by ongoing diversions around southern Africa to avoid attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea. “We saw further inflation in the cost base because of the longer sailing distances that we have, which means that our breakeven point is higher now than it was in 2019,” he said, although he did not disclose Maersk’s rate breakeven point. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Container lines, facing rate pressure on all major trades, are doubling down on cutting costs that have materially increased above pre-pandemic levels. Executives from Hapag-Lloyd, Maersk and Zim Integrated Shipping Services told investors during second-quarter earnings calls that they are facing higher prices from shipbuilding to port labor. And that has prompted cost-cutting measures ranging from improving fuel efficiency through better scheduling, cutting port time, returning chartered ships at the end of contracts and slow steaming. “Pre-COVID we were bunkering the ships on HFO [heavy fuel oil], and since then we have transitioned to VLSFO [very low-sulfur fuel oil]. This is a cost increase,” Zim CFO Xavier Destriau told analysts. “If we look at the newbuilding price, that went up. The chartering rate went up. So the cost of securing tonnage has also gone up compared to the prior period.” Destriau also pointed to increases in cargo handling charges, higher wages for dockworkers that are passed on to carriers, and a lack of terminal investment that has made port congestion an ongoing challenge requiring more ships per string. “To give you an example, our main Asia to the US East Coast service used to operate on a weekly basis with 10 ships pre-COVID, but now we need 12 in order to maintain the weekly schedule,” he said. “All these elements of additional cost have found their way into our cost structure, and that contributes to increasing the overall cost that we carry,” Destriau added. While carriers believe higher rates at the end of the second quarter and strong bookings through July will ensure third-quarter earnings are close to those recorded in the second quarter, the shipping companies are expecting a fourth-quarter decline and thus are intensifying cost-reduction efforts across their networks to mitigate any supply-demand shortfall. Steady rise in capacity Global demand has been resilient year to date, but J.P. Morgan in a market update Tuesday pointed to softening trends in the second half. The bank highlighted overall first-half ocean volume growth of 4.5% year over year, while real global GDP grew 3% in the same period. “We expect market growth to slow in the second half and forecast 1.8% in Q3 and flat in Q4 [-0.3%],” the bank noted. “For 2026 onwards, we estimate volume growth of 2% per annum, broadly in line with J.P. Morgan economists’ real GDP growth forecasts, as we expect the trade multiplier to hold at 1x.” J.P. Morgan is expecting the rate erosion to accelerate over the next two years as demand slows and capacity grows, pushing the industry into deep losses. “We expect a widening demand-supply imbalance into H2 25, driven by slower demand growth into the end of the year and estimated effective supply growth of 6.5% year over year,” the bank noted. A return of sailings to the Red Sea in 2026 will drive supply growth up 9%, but even if the route remains closed, effective supply will still grow 3% to 5%, the market update predicted. Spot rates are certainly feeling the effects of weakening demand and excess capacity. Asia-US West Coast spot rates at $1,640 per FEU are one-third of the price at the beginning of January, according to Platts, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. On Asia-North Europe routes, rates are half of what they were on Jan. 1, while on the trans-Atlantic westbound trade, spot prices have been at loss-making levels for weeks . At the same time, capacity is steadily increasing. The global order book is now 9.3 million TEUs, or 29% of the in-service fleet, according to Alphaliner. About 1.8 million TEUs of capacity are set to be delivered this year, with another 1.6 million TEUs coming online in 2026, according to Drewry. Still, Hapag-Lloyd CEO Rolf Habben Jansen told analysts on the carrier’s recent second-quarter earnings call that while rates were falling on the major trade lanes, he could not imagine any scenario where they would remain 10% to 20% below unit cost levels for a sustained period due to underlying supportive fundamentals. “Anyone who believes that freight rates would go back to that level, it’s just not going to happen because we see EU ETS [Emissions Trading System], we see low-sulfur fuel, we see the prices of shipyards having gone up significantly on investments that need to be done for newer ships,” he said, adding that port congestion means boxes and ships take longer to turn. In an aggressive move to bring down expenses in a rapidly eroding rate environment, Hapag-Lloyd recently launched a comprehensive cost-cutting program that targets more than $1 billion in savings by the end of 2026, with the program extending across the carrier’s network and including synergies and efficiency gains from its Gemini Corporation alliance with Maersk. “We set ourselves a target to bring unit costs down in a double-digit percentage versus what we saw in 2022 ... I think that is achievable,” Habben Jansen said. “I also believe the $1 billion plus [cost-cutting target] is realistic to get that out until the end of next year.” No return to 2019 rate levels Habben Jansen said even with the extensive cuts in expenses, it would not bring the carrier costs back to 2019 levels “for the very simple reason that some of our factor costs are very different.” “We did not have the EU ETS before COVID, and we did not have low-sulfur fuel. Those alone will drive up costs quite significantly,” he said. “Then there has been inflation that impacts our cost as well, and you certainly cannot negotiate that away.” Unit costs at Hapag-Lloyd rose 4% in the first half year over year to $1,320 per TEU, up more than $300 per TEU compared with pre-pandemic times. However, a significant portion of the increased expenses were generated by the startup investments required in the transition of Hapag-Lloyd’s services to the new Gemini Cooperation network. While Gemini’s startup expenses were adding to the costs of its members, Maersk CEO Vincent Clerc outlined the cost savings that will be generated by the new network with “two principal buckets” set to drive down unit costs. “One is the reliability of schedules that means lower fuel consumption,” Clerc said during the carrier’s recent second-quarter earnings call with analysts. “The second one is less sail distances also means higher asset intensity where we can basically move more cargo on the same amount of tonnage, which lowers the unit cost as well.” Clerc said cost increases in the charter markets and at marine terminals battling congestion were being exacerbated by ongoing diversions around southern Africa to avoid attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea. “We saw further inflation in the cost base because of the longer sailing distances that we have, which means that our breakeven point is higher now than it was in 2019,” he said, although he did not disclose Maersk’s rate breakeven point. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Container Shipping News

Container lines

Trans-Atlantic

Asia-Europe

Trans-Pacific

Maritime

Ocean carriers intensify cost-cutting efforts as rates slide on major trades

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Drayage operators say they want EV trucks because they’re cheaper to operate than conventional trucks but driving ranges limit usage. </div>

Drayage operators say they want EV trucks because they’re cheaper to operate than conventional trucks but driving ranges limit usage.

<div class="phx-topic">Advances in electric truck technology are making zero-emission vehicles more viable for container drayage, but operators say demand in the sector will only take off if the driving range of electric vehicle (EV) trucks is extended beyond the current limit of about 200 miles. The 200-mile mark is significant because most drayage operators need to run trucks at least 500 miles per day to make sufficient turns to cover their operating costs. While EVs are cheaper to operate than conventional diesel-burning trucks, they cost nearly twice as much to purchase at approximately $300,000 per rig. “At the end of the day, that’s what’s going to drive EV truck sales. Diesel fuel is not getting any cheaper,” said Matt Schrap, the newly appointed chief commercial officer at Forum Mobility, which builds electric charging infrastructure, and former CEO of the Harbor Trucking Association (HTA), which represents drayage carriers on the US West Coast. Many drayage operators who shuttle containers back and forth between ports and distribution warehouses cannot achieve the two turns they need per day before recharging, current HTA CEO Robert Loya told the Journal of Commerce. He added, however, that Tesla is developing an electric heavy-duty truck with a range of up to 500 miles, which would make the vehicle commercially viable for most drayage operators. “We as an industry support the move towards EVs,” Loya said. “But the 150- to 200-mile range; is that realistic?” Other improvements are also needed, such as the ability to handle larger, heavier payloads such as agricultural products and to climb up steep grades like the six-mile incline on the Grapevine highway north of Los Angeles, Loya said. <h3>Capital costs and range challenges </h3>Ken Kellaway, CEO of RoadOne IntermodaLogistics, which has drayage operations across the country, noted that the price of a new electric truck can be more than twice that of a diesel-powered vehicle. “Most owner-operators, which make up 80-plus percent of the drayage market, depend on buying used [diesel] trucks to get into business,” he added. Drayage operators in California have been whipsawed by regulations requiring them to purchase zero-emission trucks. <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/california-regulator-gives-temporary-reprieve-on-zero-emission-drayage-enforcement-5215238">California’s Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) rule</a>, enacted in 2023, required fleets to transition to EVs over time and would have prohibited the sale of new diesel trucks starting in 2036. However, state regulators in late 2023 agreed to suspend the rule, and the state of California in January stopped seeking exemptions for the rule from the US Environmental Protection Agency. In the meantime, drayage operators in Southern California still have access to state and port subsidies to help narrow the pricing gap between diesel and electric trucks. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach since 2022 have <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/second-california-drayage-operator-shuts-business-cites-electric-truck-costs-6056822">collected about $250 million</a> in revenue from the joint Clean Truck Fund (CTF) Rate. Those funds are used to help drayage operators purchase new EV trucks and also to assist in the development of charging stations and infrastructure. Many drayage operators in other port regions don’t have access to large subsidies to help them purchase electric trucks, but they also don’t have to comply with state regulations that mandate the purchase of zero-emission vehicles. Still, Kellaway said they would be motivated to invest in EV trucks that can operate about 500 miles before needing to be recharged. “Range has been a challenge, but things will get better with time when it comes to technology,” he said. He also noted that charging stations for electric trucks are being developed on the East Coast, especially near the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Drayage operators need convenient access to charging stations in heavy-traffic corridors to invest in electric trucks, Kellaway said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Advances in electric truck technology are making zero-emission vehicles more viable for container drayage, but operators say demand in the sector will only take off if the driving range of electric vehicle (EV) trucks is extended beyond the current limit of about 200 miles. The 200-mile mark is significant because most drayage operators need to run trucks at least 500 miles per day to make sufficient turns to cover their operating costs. While EVs are cheaper to operate than conventional diesel-burning trucks, they cost nearly twice as much to purchase at approximately $300,000 per rig. “At the end of the day, that’s what’s going to drive EV truck sales. Diesel fuel is not getting any cheaper,” said Matt Schrap, the newly appointed chief commercial officer at Forum Mobility, which builds electric charging infrastructure, and former CEO of the Harbor Trucking Association (HTA), which represents drayage carriers on the US West Coast. Many drayage operators who shuttle containers back and forth between ports and distribution warehouses cannot achieve the two turns they need per day before recharging, current HTA CEO Robert Loya told the Journal of Commerce. He added, however, that Tesla is developing an electric heavy-duty truck with a range of up to 500 miles, which would make the vehicle commercially viable for most drayage operators. “We as an industry support the move towards EVs,” Loya said. “But the 150- to 200-mile range; is that realistic?” Other improvements are also needed, such as the ability to handle larger, heavier payloads such as agricultural products and to climb up steep grades like the six-mile incline on the Grapevine highway north of Los Angeles, Loya said. Capital costs and range challenges Ken Kellaway, CEO of RoadOne IntermodaLogistics, which has drayage operations across the country, noted that the price of a new electric truck can be more than twice that of a diesel-powered vehicle. “Most owner-operators, which make up 80-plus percent of the drayage market, depend on buying used [diesel] trucks to get into business,” he added. Drayage operators in California have been whipsawed by regulations requiring them to purchase zero-emission trucks. California’s Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) rule , enacted in 2023, required fleets to transition to EVs over time and would have prohibited the sale of new diesel trucks starting in 2036. However, state regulators in late 2023 agreed to suspend the rule, and the state of California in January stopped seeking exemptions for the rule from the US Environmental Protection Agency. In the meantime, drayage operators in Southern California still have access to state and port subsidies to help narrow the pricing gap between diesel and electric trucks. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach since 2022 have collected about $250 million in revenue from the joint Clean Truck Fund (CTF) Rate. Those funds are used to help drayage operators purchase new EV trucks and also to assist in the development of charging stations and infrastructure. Many drayage operators in other port regions don’t have access to large subsidies to help them purchase electric trucks, but they also don’t have to comply with state regulations that mandate the purchase of zero-emission vehicles. Still, Kellaway said they would be motivated to invest in EV trucks that can operate about 500 miles before needing to be recharged. “Range has been a challenge, but things will get better with time when it comes to technology,” he said. He also noted that charging stations for electric trucks are being developed on the East Coast, especially near the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Drayage operators need convenient access to charging stations in heavy-traffic corridors to invest in electric trucks, Kellaway said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Port News

Drayage

Limited mileage range of EVs slowing US drayage adoption

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Premier Alliance is revamping a trans-Pacific service that would otherwise incur hundreds of millions of dollars in US port fees on Chinese-built vessels.</div>

The Premier Alliance is revamping a trans-Pacific service that would otherwise incur hundreds of millions of dollars in US port fees on Chinese-built vessels.

<div class="phx-topic">Container lines are taking preemptive steps to reduce their exposure to hefty tariffs on Chinese-built and -operated vessels calling US ports that take effect in mid-October. The Premier Alliance of Ocean Network Express (ONE), HMM and Yang Ming Marine Transport is revamping a trans-Pacific service to avoid the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/revised-china-tonnage-tax-less-disruptive-still-costly-6005402">US Trade Representative’s fees</a>, and other major carriers are expected to follow suit. Carriers say the deployment of non-China-built ships won’t be the most efficient for their networks but balk at fees that will initially equate to $1 million per voyage. The savings that come from removing China-built vessels from US services could increase to ultimately more than $500 million per year by April 2028, as the severity of the tariffs ratchets up over the next three years. Ocean Network Express and HMM have confirmed that the Asia-Mediterranean segment of the current Mediterranean Pacific South 2 (MS2) service will operate as a standalone service, renamed Mediterranean 2 (MD2), starting early next month. The trans-Pacific leg of the MS2 will be incorporated into the alliance’s existing Asia Gulf Express 2 service, which will be rebranded as the Gulf Pacific South 2 (GS2) as of next week, limiting the deployment of 10 Chinese-built ONE container ships currently operating the MS2 service to the shortened MD2 route. According to ONE service schedules, these vessels include seven 15,300-TEU ships built by Yangzijiang Shipbuilding Group, China’s largest privately owned shipyard, and three built by state-controlled China State Shipbuilding Corp. Yang Ming Marine Transport has yet to announce the changes, which stand to save ONE an estimated $185 million in tariffs in the first year after the levy is implemented on Oct. 14. Under the USTR fee proposal, ships operated by China-based carriers or built by Chinese shipyards will be subject to fees of $50 per net ton of capacity per voyage calling at US ports in the first year of enforcement, rising to $140 per net ton in April 2028. The fees will be capped at five voyages, and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cosco-slams-us-port-fees-as-other-carriers-reckon-with-potential-costs-5989606">China-based carriers, the USTR’s primary target</a>, will face higher levies. With each of the MS2 deployed vessels assessed at about 74,000 net tons, ONE would face a bill of $3.7 million per ship per voyage, maxing out at $18.5 million for each of the 10 ships — a total of $185 million — after five voyages. In announcing the MS2 service adjustment, ONE and HMM said the changes would improve connectivity and transit times to certain markets. HMM said the new Mediterranean Service 2 (MD2) would provide an express service from western Mediterranean to Busan and central China. Similarly, GS2 — which HMM calls the Korea Middle East–Pacific South (KMP) loop — will provide direct services from Dubai to the US West Coast and the US West Coast to Dalian and Xingang, HMM said. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>. </div>

Container lines are taking preemptive steps to reduce their exposure to hefty tariffs on Chinese-built and -operated vessels calling US ports that take effect in mid-October. The Premier Alliance of Ocean Network Express (ONE), HMM and Yang Ming Marine Transport is revamping a trans-Pacific service to avoid the US Trade Representative’s fees , and other major carriers are expected to follow suit. Carriers say the deployment of non-China-built ships won’t be the most efficient for their networks but balk at fees that will initially equate to $1 million per voyage. The savings that come from removing China-built vessels from US services could increase to ultimately more than $500 million per year by April 2028, as the severity of the tariffs ratchets up over the next three years. Ocean Network Express and HMM have confirmed that the Asia-Mediterranean segment of the current Mediterranean Pacific South 2 (MS2) service will operate as a standalone service, renamed Mediterranean 2 (MD2), starting early next month. The trans-Pacific leg of the MS2 will be incorporated into the alliance’s existing Asia Gulf Express 2 service, which will be rebranded as the Gulf Pacific South 2 (GS2) as of next week, limiting the deployment of 10 Chinese-built ONE container ships currently operating the MS2 service to the shortened MD2 route. According to ONE service schedules, these vessels include seven 15,300-TEU ships built by Yangzijiang Shipbuilding Group, China’s largest privately owned shipyard, and three built by state-controlled China State Shipbuilding Corp. Yang Ming Marine Transport has yet to announce the changes, which stand to save ONE an estimated $185 million in tariffs in the first year after the levy is implemented on Oct. 14. Under the USTR fee proposal, ships operated by China-based carriers or built by Chinese shipyards will be subject to fees of $50 per net ton of capacity per voyage calling at US ports in the first year of enforcement, rising to $140 per net ton in April 2028. The fees will be capped at five voyages, and China-based carriers, the USTR’s primary target , will face higher levies. With each of the MS2 deployed vessels assessed at about 74,000 net tons, ONE would face a bill of $3.7 million per ship per voyage, maxing out at $18.5 million for each of the 10 ships — a total of $185 million — after five voyages. In announcing the MS2 service adjustment, ONE and HMM said the changes would improve connectivity and transit times to certain markets. HMM said the new Mediterranean Service 2 (MD2) would provide an express service from western Mediterranean to Busan and central China. Similarly, GS2 — which HMM calls the Korea Middle East–Pacific South (KMP) loop — will provide direct services from Dubai to the US West Coast and the US West Coast to Dalian and Xingang, HMM said. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

North American ports

Container lines begin shifting China-built ships out of US loops

Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 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 ESSW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

END OF SUMMER SALE

Use code ESSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code ESSGW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

At SSA Marine Mexico, we firmly believe that business development must go hand in hand with social and environmental well-being. Our vision is not solely focused on operating efficiently, but also on creating a meaningful and positive impact in the communities where we are present. Since 1995, we have reaffirmed this commitment through tangible actions that reflect our core values of responsibility, solidarity, and sustainability. <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-3_2 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-medium" data-figure-size="medium" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="3:2"><img src="/content-assets/1752584535914_Photo%201.jpg" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit"> A Year of Major Achievements Over the past year, we allocated more than $107,000 USD to the implementation of 60 social and environmental projects, positively impacting over 7,800 people across various regions of Mexico. Each initiative was designed with a holistic approach, addressing key areas that contribute to long-term community development. Education: Laying the Foundation for the Future Education is one of the most powerful tools to promote social mobility and equitable development. At SSA Marine Mexico, we support academic initiatives that inspire and empower the next generation of leaders. One of our most impactful partnerships was with the University of Colima, where we sponsored the “Reto Camp” program. This initiative encourages university students to develop innovative solutions in the fields of sustainability, logistics, and port operations, offering them mentorship, tools, and real-world challenges to solve. In addition, we donated microscopes, school supplies, and educational materials to institutions in underserved communities, helping to improve the learning environment and provide students with the resources they need to succeed. Health and Sports: Promoting Wellness We believe that healthy communities are strong communities. We have supported several local sporting events and provided direct assistance to talented athletes, enabling them to pursue their passions and represent their regions with pride. Beyond sports, we also strengthened our collaboration with critical emergency response organizations such as the Mexican Red Cross and Civil Protection. Our contributions helped enhance their readiness and capabilities in times of crisis, ensuring better outcomes for those affected by emergencies. Supporting Vulnerable Groups: Reaching Those Who Need It Most A core part of our social responsibility efforts is directed toward supporting vulnerable populations. We have contributed to a range of initiatives focused on children, migrants, and at-risk families. These efforts included donations to orphanages and shelters, as well as support for the National Institute of Migration and grassroots organizations dedicated to protecting and empowering people facing adversity. By standing with those in need, we reinforce our commitment to inclusion and social justice, values that are central to our identity as a responsible company. <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-3_2 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-medium" data-figure-size="medium" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="3:2"><img src="/content-assets/1752584944645_Photo%202.png" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit">Culture: Strengthening Community Identity Cultural identity is a key element in building resilient and united communities. At SSA Marine Mexico, we actively participate in the organization and sponsorship of cultural events that celebrate local traditions and foster civic pride. Working alongside port authorities and municipal governments, we helped bring music, art, and heritage to the forefront, creating spaces for community engagement and intercultural dialogue. Environment: Investing in the Planet Our commitment to sustainability goes beyond operations—it’s a philosophy that drives every decision we make. We have partnered with environmental institutions to carry out reforestation campaigns, beach cleanups, and conservation efforts. In collaboration with the Institute for the Environment, we supported initiatives aimed at decarbonization, biodiversity protection, and environmental education. By involving our employees and local volunteers in these actions, we also foster a culture of environmental stewardship throughout our organization and our surrounding communities. Innovation for a Sustainable Future Sustainability is not just about doing good—it’s also about doing things better. In 2024, we invested $22 million USD in the acquisition of 11 state-of-the-art E-RTG cranes. These electric rubber-tired gantry cranes represent a significant technological advancement in port equipment. Seven of them are already operating on clean electric energy, resulting in a reduction of nearly 4,000 tons of CO₂ emissions and improving operational efficiency by 7%. The remaining four cranes are fully compatible with future electrification, underscoring our long-term strategy to modernize our operations in an environmentally responsible way. This investment is part of a broader innovation roadmap that includes digitalization, automation, and cleaner energy sources—all designed to ensure that our ports continue to grow without compromising the health of our planet. Building a Better Tomorrow, Together At SSA Marine Mexico, we understand that sustainability is a shared and ongoing responsibility. True impact requires collaboration across sectors, long-term vision, and unwavering commitment. That is why we continue to work hand-in-hand with local authorities, non-profit organizations, universities, and our own employees to create solutions that are both scalable and sustainable. Our journey is far from over. In the years ahead, we will continue to deepen our community engagement, explore cleaner technologies, and strengthen the social fabric of the regions where we operate. Each initiative, no matter the size, is a step toward building a future where business success goes hand-in-hand with human and environmental prosperity. We are proud of what we have achieved in 2024, but we are even more excited about what lies ahead. SSA Marine Mexico — Moving the World, Caring for People and Planet. LINK: https://www.ssamarine.mx/

Photo 2.png

SSA Marine Mexico: True Commitment to Sustainability

START A FREE TRIAL: Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

END OF SUMMER SALE: Use code ESSW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous 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

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

END OF SUMMER SALE: Use code ESSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on TPM26! 

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

END OF SUMMER SALE: Use code ESSW995 to save $500 on an annual Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

A must-attend conference for shippers & logistics providers moving goods inland

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

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

Latest News

More News & Analysis

UP-NS deal would trigger ‘unnecessary wave’ of rail mergers: CPKC

Steel, aluminum tariff expansion ‘unwelcome news’ for transport providers

Ocean carriers intensify cost-cutting efforts as rates slide on major trades