<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Coast Guard investigators were trying to ascertain if the skipper and mate of a Moran Towing &amp; Trans</div>

Coast Guard investigators were trying to ascertain if the skipper and mate of a Moran Towing & Trans

<div>Coast Guard investigators were trying to ascertain if the skipper and mate of a Moran Towing &amp; Transportation Co. tug that grounded while pushing a fuel barge into Boston harbor Sunday were properly licensed.Initial indications were that the tug Maureen Moran, pushing the 22,000- ton Bouchard Transportation Co. barge B-15, grounded on Nix's Mate at the harbor mouth as the vessels veered out of the main ship channel, Coast Guard officials said. Moran refused comment on the incident.The 100-foot tug and barge, carrying 22,900 barrels of jet fuel to Mobil Oil tanks in Chelsea Creek, were firmly grounded at a...

Coast Guard investigators were trying to ascertain if the skipper and mate of a Moran Towing & Transportation Co. tug that grounded while pushing a fuel barge into Boston harbor Sunday were properly licensed. Initial indications were that the tug Maureen Moran, pushing the 22,000- ton Bouchard Transportation Co. barge B-15, grounded on Nix's Mate at the harbor mouth as the vessels veered out of the main ship channel, Coast Guard officials said. Moran refused comment on the incident.The 100-foot tug and barge, carrying 22,900 barrels of jet fuel to Mobil Oil tanks in Chelsea Creek, were firmly grounded at a 20-degree list for eight hours, the tug's propeller and drive shaft uncovered at low tide. A full moon tide of more than 11 feet eased a Boston Fuel Transportation Co. tug's efforts to free the grounded vessels, Coast Guard officials said. There was no petroleum spillage reported. Several questions remained about the tug's crew, including: which of two licensed personnel was the master; whether the man in charge during the grounding had an endorsement for coastal waters; and how the vessel ended up out of the main ship channel. Coast Guard officials refused to identify Maureen Moran crewmen, but Lt. Cmdr. Philip Chase of the First District Marine Safety Office said charges would likely be pressed. Meanwhile, it was learned that Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan, D-N.Y., wrote July 19 to Transportation Secretary James Burnley to complain about the Coast Guard's handling of incidents allegedly related to the six-month New York tug strike. Sen. Moynihan asked Mr. Burnley to assign more Coast Guard manpower to marine safety functions in New York after the senator's staff was told Coast Guard officials were not aware of any increase in incidents due to the strike. New York Assemblyman Maurice Hinchey sought Sen. Moynihan's intervention, complaining of minor oil spills and other Hudson River incidents stemming from the strike. Albert Cornette, president of International Longshoremen's Association Local 333 in New York, said the striking union has tallied 140 incidents in New York and other ports allegedly attributable to unlicensed or improperly licensed tugboat personnel employed since the strike began last February. The Coast Guard looks the other way, and that's the gripe, he said. Coast Guard marine safety officials were reluctant to discuss details of the Maureen Moran grounding, saying the episode was still under investigation after early efforts centered on getting the vessels refloated. Capt. R.L. Anderson, captain of the port, did not know if the crewman at the tug's helm had proper license endorsements in coastal waters, but said the man was properly licensed to operate within the harbor, where inland rules apply. Capt. Anderson also could not say which of two licensed personnel was the designated Maureen Moran skipper or if the second man had a proper license to operate in coastal waters. The tug and barge grounded about 6:30 p.m. Sunday in 1- to 2-foot seas and visibility of three miles. Nix's Mate, marked with a day beacon built on a concrete footing, was once an island on which pirate's bodies were hung for display. Sediment has slowly been rebuilding for years.

Maritime

COAST GUARD PROBES BOSTON TUG MISHAP

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Executives say the jump in trucking rates is being driven less by increased volumes and more by higher operating costs and tightening capacity, creating a more fragile recovery. </div>

Executives say the jump in trucking rates is being driven less by increased volumes and more by higher operating costs and tightening capacity, creating a more fragile recovery.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">If wood shipping pallets are a reliable leading indicator of freight demand, the recent surge in US trucking rates may be signaling something other than a true market rebound. Industry executives say the rise in rates is being driven less by increased freight volumes and more by higher operating costs — particularly diesel — combined with tightening capacity. That dynamic is creating a more fragile recovery, even as companies express cautious optimism about the second half of 2026. “There’s a lot of uncertainty right now,” said Brent McClendon, president and CEO of Woodpack Global, an international trade association representing pallet manufacturers in 43 countries. “Demand remains inconsistent. When you’re connected to 90% of the goods that move, some sectors are strong while others are not.” That uneven demand profile has become a defining feature of the current freight cycle. Segments tied to government and defense spending are performing well, while other areas — particularly discretionary consumer goods — remain soft. The result is a fragmented market that lacks the broad-based strength typically seen in the early stages of a freight recovery. “Members supplying military-related firms are doing very well,” McClendon said. “Other parts of the economy are much more sluggish. January and February looked stronger, but March and April were weaker. It’s that ‘fits and starts’ pattern — that uncertainty — that has everyone uncomfortable.” At the same time, cost pressures are reshaping behavior across the supply chain. <h3>Reuse, then restock </h3>At Pennsylvania-based pallet manufacturer TMF Corp., production has declined as customers extend the life of existing pallets to conserve cash and manage higher transportation and materials costs. “Companies are doing what I would do — use every pallet until it’s no longer usable,” said TMF founder and President Tom Fitzgerald. “Pallets are getting beat up more quickly, in part because some manufacturers are using thinner wood to control costs.” TMF produced about 20,000 pallets a week at its peak. That figure has fallen to roughly 15,000, Fitzgerald said — a drop of about 25% that reflects both weaker demand and changing customer behavior. The reuse trend, while practical in the short term, has contributed to a tightening of available pallet supply, setting the stage for potential restocking later this year if freight volumes stabilize or increase. Some early signs of that shift are emerging. Packaging Corp. of America President Thomas Hassfurther told analysts on a recent earnings call that volumes are beginning to recover after a weak first quarter, which is typically the slowest period of the year. “The first quarter is by far the weakest in terms of volume, and then it accelerates through the year,” Hassfurther said. “The good news is it has returned in the second quarter as forecast, giving us flexibility to improve operational efficiency.” <h3>Spot rates still rising </h3>Still, freight market data suggests that the current rate environment is being driven primarily by supply-side constraints rather than a demand surge. DAT Freight &amp; Analytics reported that trucking rates continued to climb through April as capacity tightened and fuel prices rose. In some parts of the country, diesel is more than $2 per gallon higher than a year ago, significantly increasing carriers’ cost base. Excluding fuel surcharges, national dry-van spot rates are 25% higher year over year at a base rate of $2.00 per mile, and 23% above the five-year average. Refrigerated, or reefer, rates sans surcharges have climbed 22% to $2.36 per mile. In produce-growing regions, rates are up 10% year over year to $3.84 per mile before surcharges due to tighter truck availability tied to seasonal demand and limited capacity. Flatbed rates have also surged, reaching $2.69 per mile before surcharges, just 5 cents below the all-time high, after seven consecutive weeks of increases. Rates in that segment are 27% higher than a year ago, reflecting strong demand tied to construction, energy, and industrial activity.<div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="7c4fec07-a5cb-4a65-a29e-d9274d1b9816"></dynamic-object></div>The combination of rising fuel costs and constrained capacity is forcing pricing adjustments across the packaging and materials sector. Crackdowns on <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/impact-of-non-domiciled-cdl-enforcement-splits-us-trucking-sector-6135184">non-domiciled commercial drivers</a> and stricter English-language enforcement are constraining truckload capacity after a four-year freight recession. Packaging Corp. of America plans to implement price increases in 2026 in response to higher raw material and transportation costs. “We have room for further improvement and will continue these efforts through the second and third quarters,” Hassfurther said. “Containerboard prices are up a net $50 per ton since the beginning of the year, and we are working with customers to implement increases.” <h3>Transitional phase </h3>Executives say key end markets remain relatively stable, providing a foundation for cautious optimism. Consumer products, food and beverage shipments have held steady, and there are early signs of strengthening demand tied to residential construction and home improvement — sectors that are particularly sensitive to interest rates and broader economic confidence. “The consumer has been very resilient,” said Packaging Corp. of America CEO Mark Kowlzan. “Our customer base feels good about their business going forward, and tax refunds will provide an additional boost in the second half of the year.” Macroeconomic data also points to modest improvement. US gross domestic product grew at a 2% rate in the second quarter, up from 0.5% growth at the end of 2025. While not indicative of a strong expansion, the increase suggests the economy is stabilizing after a period of slower growth. For the pallet and container sector, that stabilization could translate into increased demand for packaging materials, particularly if retailers and manufacturers begin rebuilding inventories that were drawn down during the recent period of cost control and demand uncertainty. Still, industry leaders caution that significant risks remain. Trade policy, interest rates, war-driven fuel costs and broader business confidence all continue to influence freight demand and pricing dynamics. Any disruption in those areas could quickly alter the trajectory of the recovery. “The industry is cautiously optimistic,” McClendon said. “There are a lot of moving parts — tariffs, policy, diesel prices — but overall, the fundamentals look solid.” For now, the pallet and container sector appears to be navigating a transitional phase, one in which rising costs are driving rates higher even as underlying demand remains uneven. Whether that environment evolves into a sustained freight recovery in the second half of 2026 will depend largely on whether demand begins to catch up with the cost-driven pricing pressures already moving through the supply chain. Contact Dan Ronan at <a href="mailto:contactdanronan@gmail.com">contactdanronan@gmail.com</a>. </div>

If wood shipping pallets are a reliable leading indicator of freight demand, the recent surge in US trucking rates may be signaling something other than a true market rebound. Industry executives say the rise in rates is being driven less by increased freight volumes and more by higher operating costs — particularly diesel — combined with tightening capacity. That dynamic is creating a more fragile recovery, even as companies express cautious optimism about the second half of 2026. “There’s a lot of uncertainty right now,” said Brent McClendon, president and CEO of Woodpack Global, an international trade association representing pallet manufacturers in 43 countries. “Demand remains inconsistent. When you’re connected to 90% of the goods that move, some sectors are strong while others are not.” That uneven demand profile has become a defining feature of the current freight cycle. Segments tied to government and defense spending are performing well, while other areas — particularly discretionary consumer goods — remain soft. The result is a fragmented market that lacks the broad-based strength typically seen in the early stages of a freight recovery. “Members supplying military-related firms are doing very well,” McClendon said. “Other parts of the economy are much more sluggish. January and February looked stronger, but March and April were weaker. It’s that ‘fits and starts’ pattern — that uncertainty — that has everyone uncomfortable.” At the same time, cost pressures are reshaping behavior across the supply chain. Reuse, then restock At Pennsylvania-based pallet manufacturer TMF Corp., production has declined as customers extend the life of existing pallets to conserve cash and manage higher transportation and materials costs. “Companies are doing what I would do — use every pallet until it’s no longer usable,” said TMF founder and President Tom Fitzgerald. “Pallets are getting beat up more quickly, in part because some manufacturers are using thinner wood to control costs.” TMF produced about 20,000 pallets a week at its peak. That figure has fallen to roughly 15,000, Fitzgerald said — a drop of about 25% that reflects both weaker demand and changing customer behavior. The reuse trend, while practical in the short term, has contributed to a tightening of available pallet supply, setting the stage for potential restocking later this year if freight volumes stabilize or increase. Some early signs of that shift are emerging. Packaging Corp. of America President Thomas Hassfurther told analysts on a recent earnings call that volumes are beginning to recover after a weak first quarter, which is typically the slowest period of the year. “The first quarter is by far the weakest in terms of volume, and then it accelerates through the year,” Hassfurther said. “The good news is it has returned in the second quarter as forecast, giving us flexibility to improve operational efficiency.” Spot rates still rising Still, freight market data suggests that the current rate environment is being driven primarily by supply-side constraints rather than a demand surge. DAT Freight & Analytics reported that trucking rates continued to climb through April as capacity tightened and fuel prices rose. In some parts of the country, diesel is more than $2 per gallon higher than a year ago, significantly increasing carriers’ cost base. Excluding fuel surcharges, national dry-van spot rates are 25% higher year over year at a base rate of $2.00 per mile, and 23% above the five-year average. Refrigerated, or reefer, rates sans surcharges have climbed 22% to $2.36 per mile. In produce-growing regions, rates are up 10% year over year to $3.84 per mile before surcharges due to tighter truck availability tied to seasonal demand and limited capacity. Flatbed rates have also surged, reaching $2.69 per mile before surcharges, just 5 cents below the all-time high, after seven consecutive weeks of increases. Rates in that segment are 27% higher than a year ago, reflecting strong demand tied to construction, energy, and industrial activity. The combination of rising fuel costs and constrained capacity is forcing pricing adjustments across the packaging and materials sector. Crackdowns on non-domiciled commercial drivers and stricter English-language enforcement are constraining truckload capacity after a four-year freight recession. Packaging Corp. of America plans to implement price increases in 2026 in response to higher raw material and transportation costs. “We have room for further improvement and will continue these efforts through the second and third quarters,” Hassfurther said. “Containerboard prices are up a net $50 per ton since the beginning of the year, and we are working with customers to implement increases.” Transitional phase Executives say key end markets remain relatively stable, providing a foundation for cautious optimism. Consumer products, food and beverage shipments have held steady, and there are early signs of strengthening demand tied to residential construction and home improvement — sectors that are particularly sensitive to interest rates and broader economic confidence. “The consumer has been very resilient,” said Packaging Corp. of America CEO Mark Kowlzan. “Our customer base feels good about their business going forward, and tax refunds will provide an additional boost in the second half of the year.” Macroeconomic data also points to modest improvement. US gross domestic product grew at a 2% rate in the second quarter, up from 0.5% growth at the end of 2025. While not indicative of a strong expansion, the increase suggests the economy is stabilizing after a period of slower growth. For the pallet and container sector, that stabilization could translate into increased demand for packaging materials, particularly if retailers and manufacturers begin rebuilding inventories that were drawn down during the recent period of cost control and demand uncertainty. Still, industry leaders caution that significant risks remain. Trade policy, interest rates, war-driven fuel costs and broader business confidence all continue to influence freight demand and pricing dynamics. Any disruption in those areas could quickly alter the trajectory of the recovery. “The industry is cautiously optimistic,” McClendon said. “There are a lot of moving parts — tariffs, policy, diesel prices — but overall, the fundamentals look solid.” For now, the pallet and container sector appears to be navigating a transitional phase, one in which rising costs are driving rates higher even as underlying demand remains uneven. Whether that environment evolves into a sustained freight recovery in the second half of 2026 will depend largely on whether demand begins to catch up with the cost-driven pricing pressures already moving through the supply chain. Contact Dan Ronan at contactdanronan@gmail.com .

Trucking News

Truckload

Flatbed

Surface

Shipping pallet, packaging sectors wade through ‘uncertainty’ in US freight demand

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The closure of the Strait of Hormuz only serves to highlight that companies proactively investing in adopting alternative shipping fuels now will be far better off when the next disruption hits, writes Michael Lerner. </div>

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz only serves to highlight that companies proactively investing in adopting alternative shipping fuels now will be far better off when the next disruption hits, writes Michael Lerner.

<div class="phx-topic">Bunker fuel prices have surged 70% since the start of the war in Iran and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. At present, the global average price for very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) is over <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/shipandbunker.com/prices/av/global/av-glb-global-average-bunker-price__;!!DEyr4sPAfcQg!Sie7eoWVctWwupvhkkxfvMLeGOmG0tR2h3MD4BfybxOOb7_m5TV4zfs8wzGrUp_KahTIOUSYa_Agyepill1I$">$930/mt</a>, up from $540/mt in early February. Meanwhile, the regulation of maritime greenhouse gas emissions is evolving. Both trends favor low-carbon alternative shipping fuels, prompting shipping companies to re-evaluate investment decisions.  The International Maritime Organization (IMO)’s Marine Environment Protection Committee <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/fmcs-dibella-brings-anti-net-zero-message-to-imo-london-meeting-6210952">just wrapped up a round of meetings</a> on its proposed Net-Zero Framework (NZF), which would be a major, globally applicable step forward for decarbonizing shipping. But it’s unclear if the NZF will be watered down, or adopted in any form. Escalating penalties for noncompliance might get removed, leaving only voluntary measures. The vote to authorize NZF might get delayed again, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/imo-punts-on-pivotal-net-zero-shipping-regulation-6099141">as it was last October amid pressure from the US and Saudi Arabia</a>. <div class="wrapper-narrow float-right-element"><img src="/images/phoenix/6213889_0.1.jpg"></img></div> But whatever happens with the NZF, the impetus for decarbonizing shipping is strong, and getting stronger. About a fifth of global oil and gas supply ordinally passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Closing it spiked prices of conventional fuels that 99% of ships use – mainly fossil oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) – and demonstrated their vulnerability to supply disruptions. The risk of price volatility and further shocks is ongoing.  This is a wakeup call for shipping companies, changing their calculus for adopting  low-carbon alternative fuels. Those fuels cost more than conventional ones, but are becoming more attractive all the time.  For one thing, many alternative fuels can be made locally from organic wastes, so they don’t have to pass through Hormuz. For another, European Union maritime emissions regulations (FuelEU Maritime and the EU Emissions Trading System) are helping shrink the price premium for them, since each year penalties on fossil fuels tighten while alternative fuel production rises. Already, certain alternative fuels on certain routes, for example bioLNG on intra-EU voyages, are at parity or even cheaper than conventional fuels.  This affects shipping companies worldwide, including in the US. EU regulations apply to 100% of maritime emissions within EU territorial waters, and 50% of emissions for vessels transiting between an EU port and a non-EU port (for example Marseilles-New York). That means shipping companies servicing EU-US routes will need clean fuel sources in the US, which are growing, though not nearly as fast as in Europe. <h3> Can US legislation drive change? </h3>Current US policy is not conducive for producing or using alternative fuels. But <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ricketts.senate.gov/news/press-releases/ricketts-klobuchar-introduce-renewable-fuel-for-ocean-going-vessels-act/__;!!DEyr4sPAfcQg!Sie7eoWVctWwupvhkkxfvMLeGOmG0tR2h3MD4BfybxOOb7_m5TV4zfs8wzGrUp_KahTIOUSYa_AgyWi7Tba1$">bipartisan bills</a> introduced in both houses of Congress aim to change that by making biofuels eligible for the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) when used in oceangoing vessels (they’re already eligible when used as road or aviation fuels). This would accelerate US production and use of bioLNG (which requires new dual-fuel engines) as well as renewable diesel and biodiesel (“drop-in” fuels that work in conventional engines).  Whether or not those bills become law, US clean maritime fuel producers are also aiming to sell to the European market and working to get their fuels qualified under EU regulations. So are international shipping associations. If they succeed, it would boost US clean fuel production – and energy security – for the European market.  The potential for slashing maritime emissions is gigantic. A <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/energy-vision.org/pdf/TheFutureOfShipping-EnergyVision.pdf__;!!DEyr4sPAfcQg!Sie7eoWVctWwupvhkkxfvMLeGOmG0tR2h3MD4BfybxOOb7_m5TV4zfs8wzGrUp_KahTIOUSYa_AgybNYDbPM$">new report</a> by the nonprofit Energy Vision finds that alternative low-carbon fuels derived from food waste or manure – including bioLNG, biomethanol, or green ammonia – have carbon-negative lifecycle emissions — i.e., less than net-zero, since more greenhouse gas is captured during production than is released when the fuel is burned. When these fuels are derived from landfill gas or wastewater, they do emit some GHG over their lifecycle, but only a third to half the emissions of heavy fuel oil or fossil LNG.  The added cost of using alternative low-carbon fuel is a surprisingly small percentage of the cost of products shipped. Energy Vision calculated that using alternative fuel to ship a container across the Pacific would cost an extra 12 cents per pair of sneakers or less than a cent per smartphone or toothpaste tube – and that’s for a “next-gen” e-fuel (made with renewable electricity and captured CO2) using a high-end cost estimate. The extra cost of existing alternative fuels like bioLNG is even lower.  However regulatory regimes evolve in the near future, the writing is on the wall. As vessels age out, shipping companies must decide what to replace them with. Each alternative maritime fuel comes with its own advantages and disadvantages, but the basic choice comes down to this: continue to bear growing regulatory costs and price volatility of fossil fuels, or invest now in vessels that will have far lower GHG emissions and commodity price risk over their 30-year lifespans. Companies that proactively invest in adopting alternative shipping fuels now will be far better off when the next shock hits. Michael Lerner is Director of Research and Publications at  the non-profit organization <a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/energy-vision.org/__;!!DEyr4sPAfcQg!Sie7eoWVctWwupvhkkxfvMLeGOmG0tR2h3MD4BfybxOOb7_m5TV4zfs8wzGrUp_KahTIOUSYa_AgyZz5b4dX$">Energy Vision</a>.  Contact him at <a href="mailto:lerner@energy-vision.org">lerner@energy-vision.org</a>. </div>

Bunker fuel prices have surged 70% since the start of the war in Iran and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. At present, the global average price for very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO) is over $930/mt , up from $540/mt in early February. Meanwhile, the regulation of maritime greenhouse gas emissions is evolving. Both trends favor low-carbon alternative shipping fuels, prompting shipping companies to re-evaluate investment decisions.  The International Maritime Organization (IMO)’s Marine Environment Protection Committee just wrapped up a round of meetings on its proposed Net-Zero Framework (NZF), which would be a major, globally applicable step forward for decarbonizing shipping. But it’s unclear if the NZF will be watered down, or adopted in any form. Escalating penalties for noncompliance might get removed, leaving only voluntary measures. The vote to authorize NZF might get delayed again, as it was last October amid pressure from the US and Saudi Arabia .  But whatever happens with the NZF, the impetus for decarbonizing shipping is strong, and getting stronger. About a fifth of global oil and gas supply ordinally passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Closing it spiked prices of conventional fuels that 99% of ships use – mainly fossil oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) – and demonstrated their vulnerability to supply disruptions. The risk of price volatility and further shocks is ongoing.  This is a wakeup call for shipping companies, changing their calculus for adopting  low-carbon alternative fuels. Those fuels cost more than conventional ones, but are becoming more attractive all the time.  For one thing, many alternative fuels can be made locally from organic wastes, so they don’t have to pass through Hormuz. For another, European Union maritime emissions regulations (FuelEU Maritime and the EU Emissions Trading System) are helping shrink the price premium for them, since each year penalties on fossil fuels tighten while alternative fuel production rises. Already, certain alternative fuels on certain routes, for example bioLNG on intra-EU voyages, are at parity or even cheaper than conventional fuels.  This affects shipping companies worldwide, including in the US. EU regulations apply to 100% of maritime emissions within EU territorial waters, and 50% of emissions for vessels transiting between an EU port and a non-EU port (for example Marseilles-New York). That means shipping companies servicing EU-US routes will need clean fuel sources in the US, which are growing, though not nearly as fast as in Europe.  Can US legislation drive change? Current US policy is not conducive for producing or using alternative fuels. But bipartisan bills introduced in both houses of Congress aim to change that by making biofuels eligible for the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) when used in oceangoing vessels (they’re already eligible when used as road or aviation fuels). This would accelerate US production and use of bioLNG (which requires new dual-fuel engines) as well as renewable diesel and biodiesel (“drop-in” fuels that work in conventional engines).  Whether or not those bills become law, US clean maritime fuel producers are also aiming to sell to the European market and working to get their fuels qualified under EU regulations. So are international shipping associations. If they succeed, it would boost US clean fuel production – and energy security – for the European market.  The potential for slashing maritime emissions is gigantic. A new report by the nonprofit Energy Vision finds that alternative low-carbon fuels derived from food waste or manure – including bioLNG, biomethanol, or green ammonia – have carbon-negative lifecycle emissions — i.e., less than net-zero, since more greenhouse gas is captured during production than is released when the fuel is burned. When these fuels are derived from landfill gas or wastewater, they do emit some GHG over their lifecycle, but only a third to half the emissions of heavy fuel oil or fossil LNG.  The added cost of using alternative low-carbon fuel is a surprisingly small percentage of the cost of products shipped. Energy Vision calculated that using alternative fuel to ship a container across the Pacific would cost an extra 12 cents per pair of sneakers or less than a cent per smartphone or toothpaste tube – and that’s for a “next-gen” e-fuel (made with renewable electricity and captured CO2) using a high-end cost estimate. The extra cost of existing alternative fuels like bioLNG is even lower.  However regulatory regimes evolve in the near future, the writing is on the wall. As vessels age out, shipping companies must decide what to replace them with. Each alternative maritime fuel comes with its own advantages and disadvantages, but the basic choice comes down to this: continue to bear growing regulatory costs and price volatility of fossil fuels, or invest now in vessels that will have far lower GHG emissions and commodity price risk over their 30-year lifespans. Companies that proactively invest in adopting alternative shipping fuels now will be far better off when the next shock hits. Michael Lerner is Director of Research and Publications at  the non-profit organization  Energy Vision .  Contact him at  lerner@energy-vision.org .

Supply chain

War-driven energy shock makes case for more alternative fuels

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Bunker fuel surcharges and surging diesel prices linked to the war in Iran come on top of higher tariff costs that have hurt the competitiveness of US agricultural products abroad. </div>

Bunker fuel surcharges and surging diesel prices linked to the war in Iran come on top of higher tariff costs that have hurt the competitiveness of US agricultural products abroad.

<div class="phx-topic">(The following story appears in the Top 100 Importers and Exporters issue of the Journal of Commerce magazine published on May 4, 2026.) The war in the Middle East will further increase the cost of US agricultural exports — and further diminish global demand — after a 2025 in which growth slowed despite the efforts by shippers to replace a rapidly vanishing Chinese market. War-linked <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cost-hit-ocean-carriers-roll-out-series-of-rate-increases-fuel-surcharges-6202474">bunker fuel surcharges</a>, as well as <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/surging-fuel-prices-drive-protesting-european-truckers-into-the-streets-6205378">soaring diesel prices for inland truck and rail movements</a>, could “add tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars to our costs,” Mike Symonanis, director of strategic network at Louis Dreyfus Company and chairman of the American Cotton Shippers Association, told the Journal of Commerce. Symonanis said agricultural exporters are closely scrutinizing the surcharges, which will be most significant for small and midsize shippers, to determine whether they accurately reflect higher fuel costs borne by container lines. “If the carrier says it costs them ‘X,’ how do we get to the point of substantiation? This will be an ongoing conversation between shippers and carriers,” he said. For their part, carriers are attempting to mitigate the impact of rising bunker fuel costs through more direct sailings and slower steaming of vessels. At the Port of Oakland, which handles agricultural exports from California’s Central Valley, “carriers are asking the terminals to work 24/7, so they spend less time in port,” said Bryan Brandes, the port’s maritime director. Peter Friedmann, executive director of the Agriculture Transportation Coalition (AgTC), noted that the impact of those fees will intensify the longer the war drags on. “Generally, costs are going up and will continue to go up until there is an end to the war,” Friedmann said. “The fuel surcharges will have a cascading effect on ag shippers’ costs as they are phased in.” And although the US itself is a large producer of fertilizers, growers could also face higher costs for fertilizers if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed for too long, with crops that consume large quantities of ammonia and phosphates particularly vulnerable. <h3>Piling on the pressure </h3>The additional costs for shippers — and resulting drag on demand abroad — come at a time when export growth was already slowing, primarily due to Chinese import tariffs in response to duties imposed by the Trump administration. Containerized US agricultural exports grew 2.9% last year, but that was down from 7.1% growth in 2024, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. Perhaps more alarming, outbound agricultural product shipments have declined at a compound annual rate of 1.7% since 2020. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d434c4d6-4334-4f49-b217-80b812dafbaf"></dynamic-object></div>“When the impact of tariffs is a higher price that other countries don’t have to deal with, that certainly diminishes our market access and encourages competitors to develop longer-term strategies to expand their market access,” said Buddy Allen, president and CEO of the American Cotton Shippers Association. Both Allen and Mike Steenhoek, executive director of the Soy Transportation Coalition, said products from Brazil have largely taken the place of US cotton and soybeans in the Chinese market, creating what Steenhoek described as “considerable headwinds” for exports. Mainland China’s share of US agriculture exports fell to 6.2% from 15.7% in 2024 and as high as 23.7% in 2022, according to PIERS. In dollar terms, Chinese buyers purchased just $3.1 billion worth of soybeans in 2025, down from $17.9 billion the year before, Steenhoek said. The rapid shift of agricultural exports to other markets is also being felt at the port level. “Six years ago, about 70% of our cargo was tied to China. Today, it’s closer to 60%, with countries in Southeast Asia growing in importance,” said Noel Hacegaba, CEO of the Port of Long Beach. Cotton exports through Long Beach plummeted 90% last year, while soybean exports fell 95%, he said. The good news for growers is that there is growing global demand for soybeans, which move primarily in bulk ships, as well as higher-value processed soybean products like meal and oils, which tend to move in containers. Steenhoek said promising markets include the Philippines, Colombia, Mexico, Canada, Guatemala, and Vietnam. “Potentially, 2026 could be a good marketing year in terms of demand, but there are so many uncertainties ahead in terms of tariffs,” he said. “This is an industry where you are making your commitments today for deliveries months away.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto: bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

(The following story appears in the Top 100 Importers and Exporters issue of the Journal of Commerce magazine published on May 4, 2026.) The war in the Middle East will further increase the cost of US agricultural exports — and further diminish global demand — after a 2025 in which growth slowed despite the efforts by shippers to replace a rapidly vanishing Chinese market. War-linked bunker fuel surcharges , as well as soaring diesel prices for inland truck and rail movements , could “add tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars to our costs,” Mike Symonanis, director of strategic network at Louis Dreyfus Company and chairman of the American Cotton Shippers Association, told the Journal of Commerce. Symonanis said agricultural exporters are closely scrutinizing the surcharges, which will be most significant for small and midsize shippers, to determine whether they accurately reflect higher fuel costs borne by container lines. “If the carrier says it costs them ‘X,’ how do we get to the point of substantiation? This will be an ongoing conversation between shippers and carriers,” he said. For their part, carriers are attempting to mitigate the impact of rising bunker fuel costs through more direct sailings and slower steaming of vessels. At the Port of Oakland, which handles agricultural exports from California’s Central Valley, “carriers are asking the terminals to work 24/7, so they spend less time in port,” said Bryan Brandes, the port’s maritime director. Peter Friedmann, executive director of the Agriculture Transportation Coalition (AgTC), noted that the impact of those fees will intensify the longer the war drags on. “Generally, costs are going up and will continue to go up until there is an end to the war,” Friedmann said. “The fuel surcharges will have a cascading effect on ag shippers’ costs as they are phased in.” And although the US itself is a large producer of fertilizers, growers could also face higher costs for fertilizers if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed for too long, with crops that consume large quantities of ammonia and phosphates particularly vulnerable. Piling on the pressure The additional costs for shippers — and resulting drag on demand abroad — come at a time when export growth was already slowing, primarily due to Chinese import tariffs in response to duties imposed by the Trump administration. Containerized US agricultural exports grew 2.9% last year, but that was down from 7.1% growth in 2024, according to PIERS, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. Perhaps more alarming, outbound agricultural product shipments have declined at a compound annual rate of 1.7% since 2020. “When the impact of tariffs is a higher price that other countries don’t have to deal with, that certainly diminishes our market access and encourages competitors to develop longer-term strategies to expand their market access,” said Buddy Allen, president and CEO of the American Cotton Shippers Association. Both Allen and Mike Steenhoek, executive director of the Soy Transportation Coalition, said products from Brazil have largely taken the place of US cotton and soybeans in the Chinese market, creating what Steenhoek described as “considerable headwinds” for exports. Mainland China’s share of US agriculture exports fell to 6.2% from 15.7% in 2024 and as high as 23.7% in 2022, according to PIERS. In dollar terms, Chinese buyers purchased just $3.1 billion worth of soybeans in 2025, down from $17.9 billion the year before, Steenhoek said. The rapid shift of agricultural exports to other markets is also being felt at the port level. “Six years ago, about 70% of our cargo was tied to China. Today, it’s closer to 60%, with countries in Southeast Asia growing in importance,” said Noel Hacegaba, CEO of the Port of Long Beach. Cotton exports through Long Beach plummeted 90% last year, while soybean exports fell 95%, he said. The good news for growers is that there is growing global demand for soybeans, which move primarily in bulk ships, as well as higher-value processed soybean products like meal and oils, which tend to move in containers. Steenhoek said promising markets include the Philippines, Colombia, Mexico, Canada, Guatemala, and Vietnam. “Potentially, 2026 could be a good marketing year in terms of demand, but there are so many uncertainties ahead in terms of tariffs,” he said. “This is an industry where you are making your commitments today for deliveries months away.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Port News

Rail News

Container lines

North American ports

Marine terminals

Container Shipping News

Middle East fuel shock exacerbates rising US ag export costs

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Baltimore’s Sparrows Point Container Terminal is scheduled to debut its first berth in 2028, some 14 years after the site began its transformation from an old steel mill into a comprehensive logistics center. </div>

Baltimore’s Sparrows Point Container Terminal is scheduled to debut its first berth in 2028, some 14 years after the site began its transformation from an old steel mill into a comprehensive logistics center.

<div class="phx-topic">Mediterranean Shipping Co.’s terminal arm and real estate developer Tradepoint Atlantic broke ground Friday at the Port of Baltimore on what would be the first privately built container terminal in the US in 40 years, part of the ocean carrier’s massive push to build out North American capacity. Executives at Terminal Investment Limited (TiL) and Tradepoint took part in the ceremonial event at the future site of the Sparrows Point Container Terminal (SPCT). They were joined by Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, US Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland), and other state and local officials, The groundbreaking comes <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/msc-unit-teaming-up-to-develop-new-baltimore-container-terminal-5242503">just over three years after TiL and Tradepoint announced their joint investment</a> in Sparrows Point, a 3,300-acre industrial development that was the former site of a Bethlehem Steel plant. SPCT will occupy 168 acres of the site. The terminal will have two berths, each capable of handling 18,000-TEU ships; 3,000 feet of on-dock rail track, and be capable of handling 2 million TEUs by its full buildout with a second berth. The terminal is expected to employ 1,100 longshore workers. The $1.2 billion project would be the first privately funded and operated container terminal in the US since Penn Terminals opened in Philadelphia in 1986. TiL Chief Executive Ammar Kanaan said it was a “unique project” because of the private funding, adding that Sparrows Point is a response to the port capacity constraints that came to light in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic. “It’s adding capacity, much needed capacity,” Kanaan said. “With just a little bit of disruption, our ports clogged. For those in the industry that say there’s enough capacity, they are wrong.” Container demand in the mid-Atlantic appears strong. Last year, Baltimore’s Seagirt Marine Terminal handled 1.12 million total TEUs, the second highest since 2023, according to the Maryland Port Administration. Imports through the port have grown at an average annual rate of 4.5% since 2010.“This is like a renaissance for the Port of Baltimore,” said Scott Cowan, president of Local 333 International Longshoremen’s Association. “I can see us being in the top three on the East Coast in no time.”Even with the private investment, Sparrows Point will receive some government support. This week, the US Maritime Administration awarded the project $40 million under its port grants program to be used for purchasing container handling equipment. Locally, Maryland state legislators are considering $50 million in funding for the project, while the Baltimore County Council in December approved a 50-year tax abatement for the project. The government support comes as Sparrows Point’s expected costs have increased “significantly” since its 2022 announcement, Aaron Tomarchio, executive vice president of Tradepoint Atlantic, told the Journal of Commerce. The cost increases stem from overall inflation but also US tariffs on steel and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/looming-us-tariffs-put-economic-viability-of-sts-cranes-in-doubt-6055678">ship-to-shore cranes</a>. Tradepoint owner Redwood Holdings, which bought the site in 2014, is funding half of Sparrows Point. Tradepoint currently has about 15 million square feet of warehousing and distribution centers at the site, 90% of which is leased, Tomarchio said, with room for 6 million square feet of additional space. Among its biggest tenants are spice maker McCormick, Floor &amp; Decor, Under Armor, Amazon, and Home Depot. Many of the tenants will be deconsolidating ocean freight right at the site, Tomarchio said. Tradepoint will be able to handle many of their logistics needs through its short-line railroad, as well as the stevedoring service it will provide at Sparrows Point. “This site has transformed dramatically over that 12-year period,” Tomarchio said. “There’s massive capital that’s been deployed into building these facilities and outfitting them, so they are committed to it.” <h3>Boost rail use </h3>The other big play at Sparrows Point will be the fast rail connection to Chicago, Tom Van Eynde, director for TiL’s North American assets, told the Journal of Commerce. The <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/csx-restarts-baltimore-tunnel-service-for-double-stack-in-2026-6087384">Howard Street Tunnel project</a> will allow CSX Transportation to double stack its intermodal cars out of Baltimore. Only about 2% of Baltimore’s international cargo is going out on rail currently due to the tunnel height clearance limits, Van Eynde said. But given MSC’s interest in serving inland US markets, he said Sparrows Point could see 25% of its cargo heading out on rail. “Rail has not been significant out of Baltimore before Howard Street,” Van Eynde said. “When you start looking at the map, it’s the closest of any port to Chicago.” The biggest lesson that TiL took from the last five years is to build in redundant capacity for cargo surges, Van Eynde said. Sparrows Point will be a rubber-tire gantry facility that can stack containers six high at full capacity, he said, although it will initially also deploy top handlers as it begins operations. The Sparrows Point groundbreaking comes amid a slew of other terminal investments TiL is making in the US. TiL is also funding half of <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ny-njs-port-newark-terminal-takes-first-steps-in-next-big-expansion-6211543">Port Newark Container Terminal’s $1 billion plan</a> to increase capacity by 50% over the next three years, alongside its partner Ports America. The two are also developing <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ports-america-msc-to-invest-800-million-in-proposed-new-orleans-terminal-5234722">the $1.8 billion Louisiana International Terminal</a>, along with the state. Along with <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/new-ship-to-shore-cranes-with-us-parts-coming-to-long-beach-6085180">new ship-to-shore cranes at its Total Terminals International facility</a> in Long Beach, TiL is slated to invest some $25 billion in US terminal assets over the next decade, Van Eynde said. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Mediterranean Shipping Co.’s terminal arm and real estate developer Tradepoint Atlantic broke ground Friday at the Port of Baltimore on what would be the first privately built container terminal in the US in 40 years, part of the ocean carrier’s massive push to build out North American capacity. Executives at Terminal Investment Limited (TiL) and Tradepoint took part in the ceremonial event at the future site of the Sparrows Point Container Terminal (SPCT). They were joined by Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, US Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland), and other state and local officials, The groundbreaking comes just over three years after TiL and Tradepoint announced their joint investment in Sparrows Point, a 3,300-acre industrial development that was the former site of a Bethlehem Steel plant. SPCT will occupy 168 acres of the site. The terminal will have two berths, each capable of handling 18,000-TEU ships; 3,000 feet of on-dock rail track, and be capable of handling 2 million TEUs by its full buildout with a second berth. The terminal is expected to employ 1,100 longshore workers. The $1.2 billion project would be the first privately funded and operated container terminal in the US since Penn Terminals opened in Philadelphia in 1986. TiL Chief Executive Ammar Kanaan said it was a “unique project” because of the private funding, adding that Sparrows Point is a response to the port capacity constraints that came to light in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic. “It’s adding capacity, much needed capacity,” Kanaan said. “With just a little bit of disruption, our ports clogged. For those in the industry that say there’s enough capacity, they are wrong.” Container demand in the mid-Atlantic appears strong. Last year, Baltimore’s Seagirt Marine Terminal handled 1.12 million total TEUs, the second highest since 2023, according to the Maryland Port Administration. Imports through the port have grown at an average annual rate of 4.5% since 2010. “This is like a renaissance for the Port of Baltimore,” said Scott Cowan, president of Local 333 International Longshoremen’s Association. “I can see us being in the top three on the East Coast in no time.” Even with the private investment, Sparrows Point will receive some government support. This week, the US Maritime Administration awarded the project $40 million under its port grants program to be used for purchasing container handling equipment. Locally, Maryland state legislators are considering $50 million in funding for the project, while the Baltimore County Council in December approved a 50-year tax abatement for the project. The government support comes as Sparrows Point’s expected costs have increased “significantly” since its 2022 announcement, Aaron Tomarchio, executive vice president of Tradepoint Atlantic, told the Journal of Commerce. The cost increases stem from overall inflation but also US tariffs on steel and ship-to-shore cranes . Tradepoint owner Redwood Holdings, which bought the site in 2014, is funding half of Sparrows Point. Tradepoint currently has about 15 million square feet of warehousing and distribution centers at the site, 90% of which is leased, Tomarchio said, with room for 6 million square feet of additional space. Among its biggest tenants are spice maker McCormick, Floor & Decor, Under Armor, Amazon, and Home Depot. Many of the tenants will be deconsolidating ocean freight right at the site, Tomarchio said. Tradepoint will be able to handle many of their logistics needs through its short-line railroad, as well as the stevedoring service it will provide at Sparrows Point. “This site has transformed dramatically over that 12-year period,” Tomarchio said. “There’s massive capital that’s been deployed into building these facilities and outfitting them, so they are committed to it.” Boost rail use The other big play at Sparrows Point will be the fast rail connection to Chicago, Tom Van Eynde, director for TiL’s North American assets, told the Journal of Commerce. The Howard Street Tunnel project will allow CSX Transportation to double stack its intermodal cars out of Baltimore. Only about 2% of Baltimore’s international cargo is going out on rail currently due to the tunnel height clearance limits, Van Eynde said. But given MSC’s interest in serving inland US markets, he said Sparrows Point could see 25% of its cargo heading out on rail. “Rail has not been significant out of Baltimore before Howard Street,” Van Eynde said. “When you start looking at the map, it’s the closest of any port to Chicago.” The biggest lesson that TiL took from the last five years is to build in redundant capacity for cargo surges, Van Eynde said. Sparrows Point will be a rubber-tire gantry facility that can stack containers six high at full capacity, he said, although it will initially also deploy top handlers as it begins operations. The Sparrows Point groundbreaking comes amid a slew of other terminal investments TiL is making in the US. TiL is also funding half of Port Newark Container Terminal’s $1 billion plan to increase capacity by 50% over the next three years, alongside its partner Ports America. The two are also developing the $1.8 billion Louisiana International Terminal , along with the state. Along with new ship-to-shore cranes at its Total Terminals International facility in Long Beach, TiL is slated to invest some $25 billion in US terminal assets over the next decade, Van Eynde said. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Port infrastructure

MSC, Tradepoint begin work on first private US terminal in decades

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">TRAC Intermodal’s exit from the massive chassis cooperative on June 1, just one year after Flexi-Van’s departure, reflects the shift from a primarily pool-owned and operated chassis market to one that is trucker-owned or leased. </div>

TRAC Intermodal’s exit from the massive chassis cooperative on June 1, just one year after Flexi-Van’s departure, reflects the shift from a primarily pool-owned and operated chassis market to one that is trucker-owned or leased. 

<div class="phx-topic">TRAC Intermodal will leave the Southern California-based “Pool of Pools” on June 1, effectively ending the massive chassis cooperative that has served truckers and their customers at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach since 2015. However, executives at the region’s three intermodal equipment providers (IEPs) — TRAC, DCLI and Flexi-Van — are assuring users they will continue to have access to a sufficient number of chassis for the 2026 peak season and beyond. . “An emphatic ‘yes,’” said Than Seeds, president of Flexi-Van, which exited the Pool of Pools (PoP) in May 2025. “I am confident that right now there is so much surplus chassis capacity in the market that we can handle a couple of peak seasons right on top of each other.”  The PoP began operations in 2015 with about 80,000 chassis; it is now down to about 25,000, according to the Pool of Pools website. With Flexi-Van’s departure from the pool a year ago and TRAC’s announcement this week, it leaves only DCLI as a member of the Pool of Pools, effectively bringing an end to the cooperative that began business just over 11 years ago. Jake Gilene, TRAC’s executive vice president and chief commercial officer, said the decision to leave PoP reflects the changing environment at the Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex from a primarily pool-owned and -operated chassis market to a trucker-owned or -leased market. In 2015, almost 80% of the chassis in Southern California were controlled by PoP members. That number has flipped to 75%-80% trucker-owned or -leased because of changing operating conditions that call for trucker and customer control of the chassis, Gilene said. He also said the move to leave PoP was based in large part on feedback from customers who were interested in more of a hybrid operating model that offered both a pool-type product and a daily product for customers who can use the chassis however they wish and be billed a daily rate. “Depending on what the customer is looking for, depending on what the motor carrier is looking for, we’re going to offer both options in the market,” Gilene said. <h3>Formed to ease logistical headaches </h3><a href="https://www.joc.com/article/la-long-beach-chassis-lessors-form-neutral-chassis-pool-5247434">The Pool of Pools was formed in Los Angeles-Long Beach in 2015</a>, when container lines serving the US market ceased their decades-long practice of providing chassis to beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) for a nominal fee with each booking. At the same time, a group of trans-Pacific container lines formed the G6 alliance, with the six member carriers serving all 12 container terminals in the port complex. This created logistical problems for carriers in repositioning the chassis where they were needed. A decision was made by the ports and their stakeholders to develop a neutral, or “grey,” chassis pool to eliminate the frustrating and costly requirements that truckers faced — delivering a container to one terminal but the chassis to another because of different ownership of the assets. The IEPs said that while each company has its own business model, they feel the transition out of the Pool of Pools will be seamless to truckers and their customers.  “DCLI remains committed to a comprehensive chassis pool solution to the LA-LB market,” said Mike O’Malley, DCLI’s chief administrative officer. “We intend to maintain our terminal footprints, allowing motor carriers to pick up and drop off chassis at marine terminal and rail locations across the region.”  <h3>Trucker concerns for new environment </h3>While the Pool of Pools was the right solution for the post-2015 environment, motor carriers this past year have dealt with several problem areas in the port-related supply chain regarding inland point intermodal (IPI) and container handling chassis moves, said Robert Loya, CEO of the Harbor Trucking Association. “We have seen incidents of inadequate support when PoP chassis were short, or simply not having the right number of chassis at the right location,” Loya said. “We continue to struggle with the increasing number of ocean carrier specialized pools. These pools result in the ‘deoptimization’ of our fleets due to the inherent inefficiencies they create: increased triangulation, a higher frequency of split returns, lost driver time and increased costs.”  As the IEPs enter the post-Pool of Pools era, Loya sees several red flags the IEPs must address, including whether the port’s rail ramps will still be considered start/stop locations for the chassis providers; how demurrage will be handled if there are insufficient chassis for inland point intermodal moves and appointments are missed; and how potential billing complications will be handled for equipment picked up under the PoP rules but returned after June 1. Loya is also concerned about dual transactions, or the ability of a trucker to drop off a container and pick up another on the same trip.“Dual transactions are critical for efficiency,” he said. “There must be a mechanism to handle the interchange of these chassis without incurring extra fees.” Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>.  </div>

TRAC Intermodal will leave the Southern California-based “Pool of Pools” on June 1, effectively ending the massive chassis cooperative that has served truckers and their customers at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach since 2015. However, executives at the region’s three intermodal equipment providers (IEPs) — TRAC, DCLI and Flexi-Van — are assuring users they will continue to have access to a sufficient number of chassis for the 2026 peak season and beyond. .  “An emphatic ‘yes,’” said Than Seeds, president of Flexi-Van, which exited the Pool of Pools (PoP) in May 2025. “I am confident that right now there is so much surplus chassis capacity in the market that we can handle a couple of peak seasons right on top of each other.”  The PoP began operations in 2015 with about 80,000 chassis; it is now down to about 25,000, according to the Pool of Pools website. With Flexi-Van’s departure from the pool a year ago and TRAC’s announcement this week, it leaves only DCLI as a member of the Pool of Pools, effectively bringing an end to the cooperative that began business just over 11 years ago. Jake Gilene, TRAC’s executive vice president and chief commercial officer, said the decision to leave PoP reflects the changing environment at the Los Angeles-Long Beach port complex from a primarily pool-owned and -operated chassis market to a trucker-owned or -leased market. In 2015, almost 80% of the chassis in Southern California were controlled by PoP members. That number has flipped to 75%-80% trucker-owned or -leased because of changing operating conditions that call for trucker and customer control of the chassis, Gilene said. He also said the move to leave PoP was based in large part on feedback from customers who were interested in more of a hybrid operating model that offered both a pool-type product and a daily product for customers who can use the chassis however they wish and be billed a daily rate. “Depending on what the customer is looking for, depending on what the motor carrier is looking for, we’re going to offer both options in the market,” Gilene said. Formed to ease logistical headaches  The Pool of Pools was formed in Los Angeles-Long Beach in 2015 , when container lines serving the US market ceased their decades-long practice of providing chassis to beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) for a nominal fee with each booking. At the same time, a group of trans-Pacific container lines formed the G6 alliance, with the six member carriers serving all 12 container terminals in the port complex. This created logistical problems for carriers in repositioning the chassis where they were needed.  A decision was made by the ports and their stakeholders to develop a neutral, or “grey,” chassis pool to eliminate the frustrating and costly requirements that truckers faced — delivering a container to one terminal but the chassis to another because of different ownership of the assets. The IEPs said that while each company has its own business model, they feel the transition out of the Pool of Pools will be seamless to truckers and their customers.  “DCLI remains committed to a comprehensive chassis pool solution to the LA-LB market,” said Mike O’Malley, DCLI’s chief administrative officer. “We intend to maintain our terminal footprints, allowing motor carriers to pick up and drop off chassis at marine terminal and rail locations across the region.”  Trucker concerns for new environment  While the Pool of Pools was the right solution for the post-2015 environment, motor carriers this past year have dealt with several problem areas in the port-related supply chain regarding inland point intermodal (IPI) and container handling chassis moves, said Robert Loya, CEO of the Harbor Trucking Association. “We have seen incidents of inadequate support when PoP chassis were short, or simply not having the right number of chassis at the right location,” Loya said. “We continue to struggle with the increasing number of ocean carrier specialized pools. These pools result in the ‘deoptimization’ of our fleets due to the inherent inefficiencies they create: increased triangulation, a higher frequency of split returns, lost driver time and increased costs.”  As the IEPs enter the post-Pool of Pools era, Loya sees several red flags the IEPs must address, including whether the port’s rail ramps will still be considered start/stop locations for the chassis providers; how demurrage will be handled if there are insufficient chassis for inland point intermodal moves and appointments are missed; and how potential billing complications will be handled for equipment picked up under the PoP rules but returned after June 1. Loya is also concerned about dual transactions, or the ability of a trucker to drop off a container and pick up another on the same trip. “Dual transactions are critical for efficiency,” he said. “There must be a mechanism to handle the interchange of these chassis without incurring extra fees.”  Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at  bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .  

Demise of ‘Pool of Pools’ marks new chassis era in Southern California

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 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

Breakbulk News

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

Container Shipping News | 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

Shipping pallet, packaging sectors wade through ‘uncertainty’ in US freight demand

War-driven energy shock makes case for more alternative fuels

Middle East fuel shock exacerbates rising US ag export costs