<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">At 2019’s outset, adequate global growth and demand bode well for project logistics, but potential pitfalls also exist.</div>

At 2019’s outset, adequate global growth and demand bode well for project logistics, but potential pitfalls also exist.

3592776_FI.jpg

<div>Rising oil prices and a robust liquefied natural gas (LNG) and petrochemical construction market will continue to be good news for the project logistics transportation industry through 2019. The multipurpose/heavy-lift (MPV/HL) fleet, in no hurry to add new capacity, finally is seeing freight rates inch higher. But oil price volatility, the US-China trade dispute, and the looming disruption of <a>the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO's) 2020 low-sulfur fuel mandate</a> could slam on the brakes.First, the good news: the energy and chemicals sector is in growth mode — including for refining, petrochemicals, gas, and LNG — and should last into the early...

Rising oil prices and a robust liquefied natural gas (LNG) and petrochemical construction market will continue to be good news for the project logistics transportation industry through 2019. The multipurpose/heavy-lift (MPV/HL) fleet, in no hurry to add new capacity, finally is seeing freight rates inch higher. But oil price volatility, the US-China trade dispute, and the looming disruption of the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO's) 2020 low-sulfur fuel mandate could slam on the brakes. First, the good news: the energy and chemicals sector is in growth mode — including for refining, petrochemicals, gas, and LNG — and should last into the early 2020s. David Seaton, CEO of global engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) company Fluor, made remarks to this effect during a 2018 earnings call, and Bechtel, Linde, Sinopec, TechnipFMC, Daewoo, and similar global EPCs are also optimistic. Reinforcing that sentiment, the American Chemistry Council reports that between 2010 and September 2018, 333 shale-fed petrochemical projects were announced in the United States, valued at $202 billion. Of these, 22 percent are under construction, 41 percent planned, 6 percent delayed or unknown, and the remainder completed. Since September, another US Gulf Coast petrochemical project worth $1.7 billion has been added to the roster, according to Chemical Week, a sister publication of JOC.com. On the oil and gas side, analysts expect the top seven international oil companies to spend $136 billion in capital projects by 2020, according to The Wall Street Journal. Underpinning this healthy market is faith in an oil price strong enough to justify capital investment. IHS Markit expects oil prices to increase through 2019 and then decline to roughly $70 per barrel (in 2017 dollars) through the early 2020s. However, the price of dated Brent, a North Sea crude oil blend used as a global benchmark, surprised markets by bouncing between $85 and $61 per barrel through October and November, likely because of exemptions to Iran export sanctions, oversupply within OPEC, and slowing demand. Brent traded at about $63 per barrel Monday. Potential pitfalls No one likes to be reminded of late 2015 and early 2016, when oil prices plunged as low as $28 per barrel, freezing the EPC sector in its tracks and dealing a crippling blow to project cargo transportation, at that point just recovering from the global recession. IHS Markit doesn’t expect oil prices to bottom out in the same way now: $70 per barrel is considered sustainable, allowing EPCs to continue to invest in capital projects that drive transportation. The 2015 to 2016 price plunge forced oil majors and project developers to manage project costs, including transportation, and they’re not letting these lessons fade, regardless of price recovery. Owners have become “much savvier,” according to a report from industry consultant PwC. More shippers now prefer to manage their own vessel chartering or work with project forwarders directly, rather than through EPCs, for example. As transportation is unbundled, however, project owners also bear more logistics risk. For all shippers, educating non-logistics colleagues about moving project cargo can be a challenge. They often “don’t understand the difference between ordering from Amazon and shipping a reactor from China,” one seasoned project shipper said. The Section 232 ( steel ) and 301 ( China ) tariffs also are complicating the importation of breakbulk and project cargo. Every transaction “requires so much more diligence,” an EPC’s compliance expert said. “It’s become very difficult to conduct business.” Although tariffs and quotas have always been part of global business, the new regime is unusually challenging. EPCs have made substantial investments in Chinese fabrication yards — with the goal of containing costs and increasing efficiency — import modules, pieces, and materials to build mega-projects such as the petrochemical plants and LNG facilities going up in the US. Many US-based industrial manufacturers also rely on Chinese components. These project shippers are facing difficult choices. The advantages China provides will keep some manufacturing and sourcing there despite rising costs, but a few shippers told JOC.com that they are considering moving their manufacturing facilities and/or sourcing to Southeast Asia or Mexico . Once supply chains are remade, they are unlikely to revert, even if the current tariffs are modified. China is also the primary target customer for the resins and LNG to be produced by the massive projects under way on the US Gulf Coast. The American Chemistry Council warns that China’s retaliatory tariffs may put these projects at risk, depending on China’s ability to find substitute suppliers. IHS Markit analysts expect US steel prices to remain soft, although higher than they were before the new tariffs were imposed last summer, well into 2019. Imports are still cheaper than domestically produced steel. According to The Wall Street Journal, US steel imports are down 13 percent, while imports into Europe were up 10 percent, hammering domestic production there. Turkish steel, cheap due to the foundering lira, is undercutting European competition. Multipurpose/heavy-lift fleet As the market brightens, consolidation is likely to continue at the premium end of the MPV/HL fleet, the ships likely to be in demand for the most complex mega-projects. The sector makes up a small slice of the commercial fleet, about 3,200 ships. Of that, about 900 have lift capacities of 100 tons or more, according to Susan Oatway, senior analyst with London-based shipping consultant Drewry Maritime Research. Approximately 340 are considered premium, with lift capacities exceeding 250 tons, while 25 can lift more than 1,000 tons. Only two new vessels appear to have been ordered during 2018, according to Drewry, a sign of chronic overcapacity, long-term weakness in the market, and ongoing competition for breakbulk and project cargo from the roll-on, roll-off and container sectors. This competition could strengthen if liner services prove more adept at handling bunker cost increases due to IMO 2020, the new regulation that kicks in on Jan. 1, 2020, requiring all vessels to switch from high- to low-sulfur fuel oil. The deadweight tonnage of the MPV/HL fleet has remained fairly stable over the past few years, with older, smaller vessels being demolished and replaced by fewer new vessels of higher tonnage and lift capacity. Drewry expects this pattern to continue in the near term, especially as IMO 2020 approaches. Owners of smaller, older, less-efficient vessels won’t have many options after the new regulations are in place. The MPV/HL fleet provides tramp services globally, and the new low-sulfur fuel regulations will present unique challenges for the sector. Netherlands-based carrier partners Spliethoff and Big Lift are installing scrubbers, a choice that makes sense for owner-operators but not for vessel owners that charter out their ships, according to Nicolas Breiding, head of research at Hamburg-based brokerage Toepfer Transport. For them, “it’s hard to make a case for installing a $2 million-plus scrubber, because it’s the operator who saves money on bunkers, not the vessel owner who is paying for the scrubber,” he said. Some operators could choose to rely on marine gasoil (MGO), at least temporarily. Although potentially costlier than low-sulfur fuel, this choice would greatly reduce the risk of bad bunkers, already a multimillion-dollar problem for many, including Leer, Germany-based MPV/HL carrier BBC Chartering. MGO is readily available, it burns efficiently, and carriers already are required to use it in emission control areas (ECAs). The risk reduction could justify the higher cost. Contact Janet Nodar at janet.nodar@ihsmarkit.com and follow her on Twitter: @janet_nodar .

Breakbulk News

Logistics Technology News

Project logistics rides high on oil, construction

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Record container volumes resulted in greater port activity amid an increase in calls by vessels, trucks and trains, as well as increased use of cargo-handling equipment.</div>

Record container volumes resulted in greater port activity amid an increase in calls by vessels, trucks and trains, as well as increased use of cargo-handling equipment.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">Emissions from vessel and surface operations at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach were up by only small to moderate amounts in 2024 despite the Southern California gateway handling record container volumes that jumped about 20% from the year prior. The new data was included in the annual emissions inventories published separately last week by each port. “Cargo volume shot up from 2023 to 2024, and we did see increases in emissions in that time period,” said Noel Hacegaba, COO at the Port of Long Beach. “However, the reduction figures from the baseline year of 2005 to 2024 show we still have dramatically reduced air pollution in the long run.” Record container volumes resulted in greater port activity amid an increase in calls by vessels, trucks and trains, as well as increased use of cargo-handling equipment, said Jacqueline Moore, vice president of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA), which represents marine terminal operators and shipping lines in legislative matters. Los Angeles in 2024 handled 10.3 million laden and empty TEUs, up 19% from 2023. Long Beach handled 9.6 million TEUs, up 20% from 2023, according to statistics in their emissions reports. Despite the growth in activity, “the increases in emissions were small to moderate,” Moore told the Journal of Commerce Tuesday. Los Angeles and Long Beach each year release details of more than a half-dozen health risk categories of emissions at the ports, including diesel particulate matter (DPM), nitrogen oxide (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and carbon dioxide (CO2). In most categories, the increase in emissions for 2024 was in the mid- to upper-single-digit range, Moore said. <h3>Ports account for ‘miniscule” percentage of regional pollution </h3>Port-generated emissions are a “miniscule” percentage of total pollutants in Southern California, Moore said. That includes mobile sources such as automobiles and regional trucking, and stationary sources such as manufacturing and residences. For example, the ports account for 0.5% of all NOx emissions in the South Coast region, 1.3% of DPMs and 5.6% of NOx, she said. The ports’ emission inventories have been measuring gains in emission reductions since 2005. According to an Oct. 16 PMSA release, the port complex has reduced DPMs by 90%, NOx by 70%, SOx by 98%, and greenhouse gas emissions by 10% since that baseline year. The ports will continue to cite these figures before regional, state and federal regulatory agencies to show that they and their stakeholders are doing their part to reduce pollution, Moore said. Last month, the ports reached a “cooperative” agreement with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) to seek further emissions reductions. The PMSA said at the time gains should now be realized without resorting to burdensome measures proposed by the AQMD in its <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/proposed-emissions-rule-would-cap-la-lb-port-volumes-5679341">original Indirect Source Rule.</a>The AQMD agreement recognizes the ports’ achievements to date. The easier gains have been made, and squeezing further reductions from vessels, trucks, trains and cargo-handling equipment <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/la-lb-likely-to-work-with-regulator-on-emissions-cutting-plan-for-ports-6084550">will be much more costly to achieve</a>, PMSA President Mike Jacob told the regulatory agency last month. The ports will also work in a similar capacity with the California Air Resources Board and the federal Environmental Protection Agency to further reduce emissions in areas where those agencies’ jurisdictions intersect with port operations, Moore said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Emissions from vessel and surface operations at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach were up by only small to moderate amounts in 2024 despite the Southern California gateway handling record container volumes that jumped about 20% from the year prior. The new data was included in the annual emissions inventories published separately last week by each port. “Cargo volume shot up from 2023 to 2024, and we did see increases in emissions in that time period,” said Noel Hacegaba, COO at the Port of Long Beach. “However, the reduction figures from the baseline year of 2005 to 2024 show we still have dramatically reduced air pollution in the long run.” Record container volumes resulted in greater port activity amid an increase in calls by vessels, trucks and trains, as well as increased use of cargo-handling equipment, said Jacqueline Moore, vice president of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA), which represents marine terminal operators and shipping lines in legislative matters. Los Angeles in 2024 handled 10.3 million laden and empty TEUs, up 19% from 2023. Long Beach handled 9.6 million TEUs, up 20% from 2023, according to statistics in their emissions reports. Despite the growth in activity, “the increases in emissions were small to moderate,” Moore told the Journal of Commerce Tuesday. Los Angeles and Long Beach each year release details of more than a half-dozen health risk categories of emissions at the ports, including diesel particulate matter (DPM), nitrogen oxide (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and carbon dioxide (CO2). In most categories, the increase in emissions for 2024 was in the mid- to upper-single-digit range, Moore said. Ports account for ‘miniscule” percentage of regional pollution Port-generated emissions are a “miniscule” percentage of total pollutants in Southern California, Moore said. That includes mobile sources such as automobiles and regional trucking, and stationary sources such as manufacturing and residences. For example, the ports account for 0.5% of all NOx emissions in the South Coast region, 1.3% of DPMs and 5.6% of NOx, she said. The ports’ emission inventories have been measuring gains in emission reductions since 2005. According to an Oct. 16 PMSA release, the port complex has reduced DPMs by 90%, NOx by 70%, SOx by 98%, and greenhouse gas emissions by 10% since that baseline year. The ports will continue to cite these figures before regional, state and federal regulatory agencies to show that they and their stakeholders are doing their part to reduce pollution, Moore said. Last month, the ports reached a “cooperative” agreement with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) to seek further emissions reductions. The PMSA said at the time gains should now be realized without resorting to burdensome measures proposed by the AQMD in its original Indirect Source Rule. The AQMD agreement recognizes the ports’ achievements to date. The easier gains have been made, and squeezing further reductions from vessels, trucks, trains and cargo-handling equipment will be much more costly to achieve , PMSA President Mike Jacob told the regulatory agency last month. The ports will also work in a similar capacity with the California Air Resources Board and the federal Environmental Protection Agency to further reduce emissions in areas where those agencies’ jurisdictions intersect with port operations, Moore said. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

Port News

North American ports

Marine terminals

Container Shipping News

Maritime

LA-LB saw ‘small to moderate’ rise in emissions despite record volumes in 2024

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Owner-Operator Independent Driver’s Association is urging Congress to codify new regulations aimed at tightening oversight of commercial driver licensing and to support more training for new drivers. </div>

The Owner-Operator Independent Driver’s Association is urging Congress to codify new regulations aimed at tightening oversight of commercial driver licensing and to support more training for new drivers.

<div class="phx-topic">A crackdown on unqualified and illegal truck drivers in the US is already said to be tightening capacity in certain markets, but some want the crackdown to go further. The Owner-Operator Independent Driver’s Association (OOIDA) is urging the House of Representatives and Senate to write <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/usdot-cracks-down-on-non-domiciled-cdls-targets-california-6087419">new truck driver licensing rules</a> into law. OOIDA is also calling for enhanced new driver training and more stringent audits of new carriers. The group also opposes efforts to lower the legal age required to drive a commercial truck in interstate commerce from 21 to 18. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2022 established a three-year pilot program for 18- to 20-year-old truck drivers. “Simply put, far too many individuals are entering the trucking industry without the basic skills necessary to safely operate a commercial vehicle,” Todd Spencer, OOIDA’s president, said in a letter to the House and Senate transportation committees. “Additionally, inconsistent and improper licensing processes among states have permitted hundreds of thousands of unqualified drivers to work on our nation’s roads, which has needlessly resulted in numerous fatal crashes,” Spencer wrote. Since June, truck drivers have been the focus of English-language proficiency (ELP) and commercial driver’s license (CDL) enforcement initiatives by the US Department of Transportation (DOT) and its Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). The DOT initiatives have focused on enforcing <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-dot-presses-states-to-enforce-english-language-trucking-rules-6069884">English-language proficiency</a> requirements and tightening standards for non-domiciled CDLs issued by states. The US also stopped issuing certain work visas for foreign truck drivers. In its letter, the OOIDA urged Congress to take up the Non-Domiciled CDL Integrity Act <a href="https://rouzer.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=2587">introduced in the House</a> on Oct. 8 by Rep. David Rouzer (R-North Carolina). The bill would codify the interim final rule on non-domiciled CDLs published by the FMCSA on Sept. 29. The interim final rule and the House bill attempt to prevent those in the US illegally from receiving non-domiciled licenses that some states issue to drivers living outside their jurisdiction. The rules also tighten state enforcement of licensing requirements. <h3>‘A little tightness’ </h3>The DOT crackdown on ELP requirements and licensing is already having an impact on some truck lanes and on spot market truckload rates, according to motor carriers. The extent of the impact, however, is hard to measure. “We believe recent developments in regulations and enforcement when taken together could have a noticeable impact on available industry capacity,” Nicholas Hobbs, COO at J.B. Hunt Transport Services, said during a third-quarter earnings call Oct. 15. “We’ve seen a little tightness in probably eight to 10 markets,” said Hobbs. He attributed that not just to DOT roadside inspections, but also immigration enforcement. “You can follow the news and see where [US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)] is active,” he said. The average US national truckload spot rate was $1.70 per mile in the week ending Oct. 18, according to DAT Freight &amp; Analytics, flat with the week prior. The load board operator is seeing evidence that DOT and ICE enforcement are affecting capacity. “We’re seeing drivers who are US citizens saying, ‘We’re going to sit this one out,’” said Dean Croke, principal analyst at DAT. “They’ll go do something else, [such as] maybe run locally.” Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

A crackdown on unqualified and illegal truck drivers in the US is already said to be tightening capacity in certain markets, but some want the crackdown to go further. The Owner-Operator Independent Driver’s Association (OOIDA) is urging the House of Representatives and Senate to write new truck driver licensing rules into law. OOIDA is also calling for enhanced new driver training and more stringent audits of new carriers. The group also opposes efforts to lower the legal age required to drive a commercial truck in interstate commerce from 21 to 18. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2022 established a three-year pilot program for 18- to 20-year-old truck drivers. “Simply put, far too many individuals are entering the trucking industry without the basic skills necessary to safely operate a commercial vehicle,” Todd Spencer, OOIDA’s president, said in a letter to the House and Senate transportation committees. “Additionally, inconsistent and improper licensing processes among states have permitted hundreds of thousands of unqualified drivers to work on our nation’s roads, which has needlessly resulted in numerous fatal crashes,” Spencer wrote. Since June, truck drivers have been the focus of English-language proficiency (ELP) and commercial driver’s license (CDL) enforcement initiatives by the US Department of Transportation (DOT) and its Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). The DOT initiatives have focused on enforcing English-language proficiency requirements and tightening standards for non-domiciled CDLs issued by states. The US also stopped issuing certain work visas for foreign truck drivers. In its letter, the OOIDA urged Congress to take up the Non-Domiciled CDL Integrity Act introduced in the House on Oct. 8 by Rep. David Rouzer (R-North Carolina). The bill would codify the interim final rule on non-domiciled CDLs published by the FMCSA on Sept. 29. The interim final rule and the House bill attempt to prevent those in the US illegally from receiving non-domiciled licenses that some states issue to drivers living outside their jurisdiction. The rules also tighten state enforcement of licensing requirements. ‘A little tightness’ The DOT crackdown on ELP requirements and licensing is already having an impact on some truck lanes and on spot market truckload rates, according to motor carriers. The extent of the impact, however, is hard to measure. “We believe recent developments in regulations and enforcement when taken together could have a noticeable impact on available industry capacity,” Nicholas Hobbs, COO at J.B. Hunt Transport Services, said during a third-quarter earnings call Oct. 15. “We’ve seen a little tightness in probably eight to 10 markets,” said Hobbs. He attributed that not just to DOT roadside inspections, but also immigration enforcement. “You can follow the news and see where [US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)] is active,” he said. The average US national truckload spot rate was $1.70 per mile in the week ending Oct. 18, according to DAT Freight & Analytics, flat with the week prior. The load board operator is seeing evidence that DOT and ICE enforcement are affecting capacity. “We’re seeing drivers who are US citizens saying, ‘We’re going to sit this one out,’” said Dean Croke, principal analyst at DAT. “They’ll go do something else, [such as] maybe run locally.” Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Trucking News

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Surface

Industry group calls for tougher licensing, better training amid trucker crackdown

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The absence of a framework on how global shipping can pass on the higher operating costs of using low- or zero-emission fuels to cargo owners will likely stall investment in the sector. </div>

The absence of a framework on how global shipping can pass on the higher operating costs of using low- or zero-emission fuels to cargo owners will likely stall investment in the sector.

<div class="phx-topic">The most optimistic view of global maritime regulators punting on a new net-zero emissions framework is that efforts to derail it completely were avoided. For most in the shipping industry, however, the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO’s) one-year delay is viewed as a major missed opportunity to give the investment community the certainty it needs to fund the transition to net-zero fuels. The Friday motion to delay adoption of the IMO’s net-zero framework was made at a tense and combative session of its Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in London. The vote to delay was 57 in favor and 49 against, with 21 abstentions. In the interim, member states will continue to work toward consensus on the decarbonization plans, but achieving the emissions-cutting targets agreed under the revised IMO greenhouse gas (GHG) strategy in 2023 will now be under pressure. The IMO’s targets include at least a 20% — striving for 30% — reduction in emissions by 2030 and at least a 70%, striving for 80%, reduction by 2040 compared with 2008 levels. The ultimate goal is to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. But critics argue that the absence of a framework on how global shipping can pass on to cargo owners the higher operating costs of using low- or zero-emission fuels will likely stall investment in shipbuilding and in scaling up production of alternative fuels to replace conventional, heavy-emission bunkers. They fear that with no global pricing mechanism, there is likely to emerge a host of local carbon pricing initiatives that will be difficult for carriers to navigate. The United States’ willingness to threaten IMO member states voting against White House efforts to water down the regulations brings a challenge that wasn’t present in July 2023 when the IMO’s revised GHG strategy was agreed. The US believes putting a price on carbon emissions from ships will be passed on to its consumers, increasing costs by 10%. It was what triggered the extraordinary threats by the White House that included sanctions, port fees and visa refusals against member states voting to adopt the IMO net-zero framework. President Donald Trump even weighed in on his Truth Social media platform with a post last week saying, “the US will not stand for this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping. Stand with the US and vote NO in London...!” <h3>States swayed by US threats </h3>The US was supported in its opposition to the measures by petrostates Saudi Arabia, Russia and Venezuela, with Singapore raising the idea that the regulation be delayed and Saudi Arabia calling for the vote. Pressure from the US saw Liberia, the world’s largest ship registry with 16% of global tonnage, and Bahamas, home to almost 4% of global tonnage, reversing their support for the framework. Not everyone was cowed by the US threats, particularly the tiny Pacific Island states that are most vulnerable to the climate change dismissed as a hoax by Trump. “Don’t pretend that the Pacific was voiceless. We were ignored, bullied, threatened, cornered, sidelined and harassed. But we stood tall,” Marshall Islands Ambassador Albon Ishoda <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/albon-ishoda-384472333/recent-activity/all/">wrote in a LinkedIn post</a>. “When you mention those large countries that fought for or against the framework, don’t forget that it was the Pacific Island countries and Seychelles that gave the hardest miles and took the hardest hit,” Ishoda wrote. “A year delay is a year of more devastation and displacement for our communities that have nothing to do with this catastrophe. We don’t have the luxury of time.” There are concerns that the US considers the delay in adopting IMO decarbonization plans as a win and will use the time between now and next October to build further opposition against the net-zero framework, potentially killing the regulation. There are also concerns that the delay is a win for liquefied natural gas (LNG) that will continue to be the fuel of choice across shipping sectors. Reaction to the IMO vote to adjourn the attempted adoption of the net-zero framework for a year has been loud and predominantly negative, particularly concerning the enormous investment required to decarbonize the maritime industry. The Global Maritime Forum has estimated that achieving a 50% reduction in shipping's GHG emissions by 2050 will require investment of $1 trillion to $1.4 trillion between 2030 and 2050. If full decarbonization is the goal, the total could be as high as $1.9 trillion. “From an economic standpoint, introducing carbon pricing is essential to level the playing field with sustainable fuels, which are currently not economically viable,” said Rico Luman, senior economist for transport and logistics at global bank ING. “Regardless of the timing, a pricing mechanism will eventually be necessary to drive progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, also as it helps funding green investments,” Luman noted. <h3>Delay puts targets under pressure </h3>It was a sentiment repeated time and again as the reaction rolled in following the Friday afternoon vote. “The industry needs clarity to be able to make the investments needed to decarbonize the maritime sector, in line with the goals set out in the IMO greenhouse gas strategy,” said Thomas Kazakos, secretary-general of the International Chamber of Shipping. Kazakos said the framework would have created the first global carbon pricing mechanism for any industrial sector, with the aim of delivering a clear path for shipping’s transition to net zero. The delay means meeting the IMO’s decarbonization targets has been made more difficult, Luman told the Journal of Commerce. “The current timeline needs to be reassessed, as the projected CO₂ reductions by 2030 already fall short of earlier ambitions,” he said. “As a result, achieving the 2040 and 2050 targets set out in the IMO’s net-zero strategy is becoming increasingly challenging — particularly given the long investment horizons typical in the shipping industry.” Jesse Fahnestock, director of decarbonization at the Global Maritime Forum, agreed, calling Friday’s adjournment “a disappointing setback for shipping” that will make delivery of maritime decarbonization targets even more challenging. Lars Jensen, CEO of Vespucci Maritime and a Journal of Commerce contributor, said the main container carriers were unlikely to stray from their current newbuilding path, at least for now. “But it will make it more difficult to convince ... investors to come in hard on green fuel production with the new uncertainty,” <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/larsjensenvespuccimaritime/recent-activity/all/">Jensen wrote in a LinkedIn post</a> Monday. “In such an environment, LNG just got another improvement in its relative competitiveness versus the fully green fuels.” Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The most optimistic view of global maritime regulators punting on a new net-zero emissions framework is that efforts to derail it completely were avoided. For most in the shipping industry, however, the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO’s) one-year delay is viewed as a major missed opportunity to give the investment community the certainty it needs to fund the transition to net-zero fuels. The Friday motion to delay adoption of the IMO’s net-zero framework was made at a tense and combative session of its Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in London. The vote to delay was 57 in favor and 49 against, with 21 abstentions. In the interim, member states will continue to work toward consensus on the decarbonization plans, but achieving the emissions-cutting targets agreed under the revised IMO greenhouse gas (GHG) strategy in 2023 will now be under pressure. The IMO’s targets include at least a 20% — striving for 30% — reduction in emissions by 2030 and at least a 70%, striving for 80%, reduction by 2040 compared with 2008 levels. The ultimate goal is to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. But critics argue that the absence of a framework on how global shipping can pass on to cargo owners the higher operating costs of using low- or zero-emission fuels will likely stall investment in shipbuilding and in scaling up production of alternative fuels to replace conventional, heavy-emission bunkers. They fear that with no global pricing mechanism, there is likely to emerge a host of local carbon pricing initiatives that will be difficult for carriers to navigate. The United States’ willingness to threaten IMO member states voting against White House efforts to water down the regulations brings a challenge that wasn’t present in July 2023 when the IMO’s revised GHG strategy was agreed. The US believes putting a price on carbon emissions from ships will be passed on to its consumers, increasing costs by 10%. It was what triggered the extraordinary threats by the White House that included sanctions, port fees and visa refusals against member states voting to adopt the IMO net-zero framework. President Donald Trump even weighed in on his Truth Social media platform with a post last week saying, “the US will not stand for this Global Green New Scam Tax on Shipping. Stand with the US and vote NO in London...!” States swayed by US threats The US was supported in its opposition to the measures by petrostates Saudi Arabia, Russia and Venezuela, with Singapore raising the idea that the regulation be delayed and Saudi Arabia calling for the vote. Pressure from the US saw Liberia, the world’s largest ship registry with 16% of global tonnage, and Bahamas, home to almost 4% of global tonnage, reversing their support for the framework. Not everyone was cowed by the US threats, particularly the tiny Pacific Island states that are most vulnerable to the climate change dismissed as a hoax by Trump. “Don’t pretend that the Pacific was voiceless. We were ignored, bullied, threatened, cornered, sidelined and harassed. But we stood tall,” Marshall Islands Ambassador Albon Ishoda wrote in a LinkedIn post . “When you mention those large countries that fought for or against the framework, don’t forget that it was the Pacific Island countries and Seychelles that gave the hardest miles and took the hardest hit,” Ishoda wrote. “A year delay is a year of more devastation and displacement for our communities that have nothing to do with this catastrophe. We don’t have the luxury of time.” There are concerns that the US considers the delay in adopting IMO decarbonization plans as a win and will use the time between now and next October to build further opposition against the net-zero framework, potentially killing the regulation. There are also concerns that the delay is a win for liquefied natural gas (LNG) that will continue to be the fuel of choice across shipping sectors. Reaction to the IMO vote to adjourn the attempted adoption of the net-zero framework for a year has been loud and predominantly negative, particularly concerning the enormous investment required to decarbonize the maritime industry. The Global Maritime Forum has estimated that achieving a 50% reduction in shipping's GHG emissions by 2050 will require investment of $1 trillion to $1.4 trillion between 2030 and 2050. If full decarbonization is the goal, the total could be as high as $1.9 trillion. “From an economic standpoint, introducing carbon pricing is essential to level the playing field with sustainable fuels, which are currently not economically viable,” said Rico Luman, senior economist for transport and logistics at global bank ING. “Regardless of the timing, a pricing mechanism will eventually be necessary to drive progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, also as it helps funding green investments,” Luman noted. Delay puts targets under pressure It was a sentiment repeated time and again as the reaction rolled in following the Friday afternoon vote. “The industry needs clarity to be able to make the investments needed to decarbonize the maritime sector, in line with the goals set out in the IMO greenhouse gas strategy,” said Thomas Kazakos, secretary-general of the International Chamber of Shipping. Kazakos said the framework would have created the first global carbon pricing mechanism for any industrial sector, with the aim of delivering a clear path for shipping’s transition to net zero. The delay means meeting the IMO’s decarbonization targets has been made more difficult, Luman told the Journal of Commerce. “The current timeline needs to be reassessed, as the projected CO₂ reductions by 2030 already fall short of earlier ambitions,” he said. “As a result, achieving the 2040 and 2050 targets set out in the IMO’s net-zero strategy is becoming increasingly challenging — particularly given the long investment horizons typical in the shipping industry.” Jesse Fahnestock, director of decarbonization at the Global Maritime Forum, agreed, calling Friday’s adjournment “a disappointing setback for shipping” that will make delivery of maritime decarbonization targets even more challenging. Lars Jensen, CEO of Vespucci Maritime and a Journal of Commerce contributor, said the main container carriers were unlikely to stray from their current newbuilding path, at least for now. “But it will make it more difficult to convince ... investors to come in hard on green fuel production with the new uncertainty,” Jensen wrote in a LinkedIn post Monday. “In such an environment, LNG just got another improvement in its relative competitiveness versus the fully green fuels.” Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Delay in IMO decarbonization plans robs green fuel investors of certainty

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The partnership is part of a broader effort to advance the development of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor via the Adriatic’s main port. </div>

The partnership is part of a broader effort to advance the development of the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor via the Adriatic’s main port.

<div class="phx-topic">CMA CGM and the Slovenian Port of Koper have established an automotive logistic services joint venture, expanding the carrier’s reach into Central Europe and upgrading an existing long-standing partnership. Rodolphe Saadé, CMA CGM’s chairman and CEO, signed the deal Monday during a visit to the port, alongside Slovenian Prime Minister Robert Golob and French President Emmanuel Macron. “In the context of the emerging India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, CMA CGM and the Port of Koper share the ambition to strengthen Slovenia’s role as a sustainable logistics hub at the heart of Europe,” CMA CGM said in a statement. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. Koper is the Adriatic’s main port and a strategic gateway for the transport of vehicles to and from Asia by sea and rail, and the logistics JV will build on CMA CGM’s established intermodal network in the region. The JV company will equip, maintain and operate the site for automotive logistic services. CMA CGM and Koper are considering other joint projects to improve the competitive position of the port and further develop regional trade flows, according to the statement. CMA CGM’s services from Koper are operated by LNG or methanol-powered vessels with a capacity of 15,000 TEUs, with rail connections to major Central European markets. The carrier has two weekly maritime services calling Koper: the Phoenician Express connecting Asia to the Mediterranean and the Bora Med service within the Mediterranean basin. Contact Greg Knowler at <a href="mailto:greg.knowler@spglobal.com">greg.knowler@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

CMA CGM and the Slovenian Port of Koper have established an automotive logistic services joint venture, expanding the carrier’s reach into Central Europe and upgrading an existing long-standing partnership. Rodolphe Saadé, CMA CGM’s chairman and CEO, signed the deal Monday during a visit to the port, alongside Slovenian Prime Minister Robert Golob and French President Emmanuel Macron. “In the context of the emerging India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, CMA CGM and the Port of Koper share the ambition to strengthen Slovenia’s role as a sustainable logistics hub at the heart of Europe,” CMA CGM said in a statement. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. Koper is the Adriatic’s main port and a strategic gateway for the transport of vehicles to and from Asia by sea and rail, and the logistics JV will build on CMA CGM’s established intermodal network in the region. The JV company will equip, maintain and operate the site for automotive logistic services. CMA CGM and Koper are considering other joint projects to improve the competitive position of the port and further develop regional trade flows, according to the statement. CMA CGM’s services from Koper are operated by LNG or methanol-powered vessels with a capacity of 15,000 TEUs, with rail connections to major Central European markets. The carrier has two weekly maritime services calling Koper: the Phoenician Express connecting Asia to the Mediterranean and the Bora Med service within the Mediterranean basin. Contact Greg Knowler at greg.knowler@spglobal.com .

Container lines

Asia-Europe

International ports

CMA CGM inks auto logistics joint venture with Slovenian Port of Koper

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The ocean carrier and logistics provider already has big investments in Panama but may lack dedicated berth space for ships if MSC swoops in on two big container terminals there.</div>

The ocean carrier and logistics provider already has big investments in Panama but may lack dedicated berth space for ships if MSC swoops in on two big container terminals there.

<div class="phx-topic">Maersk signaled its interest in helping develop the Panama Canal’s yet-to-be-built container terminals, as the carrier faces the prospect of its former alliance partner Mediterranean Shipping Co. taking control of Panama’s current terminal assets. Speaking at an event Oct. 9 sponsored by Denmark’s embassy in Colombia, Maersk Chief Executive Vincent Clerc said his company may invest in the new terminals the Panama Canal Authority (ACP) hopes to build on both sides of the canal. This summer, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/panama-canal-mulls-developing-corozal-to-allay-neutrality-fears-over-hutchison-deal-6023330">the ACP said it was looking to develop container terminals</a> on the Pacific side at Corozal and on the Atlantic side near Colon. According to local press reports about the event, the ACP is starting its outreach to ocean carriers and terminal operators about the new terminal concessions, with a formal tender expected in the second half of 2026. The new terminals are part of Panama’s response to US government concerns about Chinese conglomerate CK Hutchison owning terminals on both sides of the canal. President Donald Trump has repeatedly pressured Panama’s government about selling the terminals to a non-Chinese firm, despite <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/panama-canal-transit-data-belies-trumps-claims-of-chinas-control-project44-5948559">no evidence of US-bound ships receiving less preferential treatment for canal transits</a>. ACP President Ricuarte Vasquez Morales has said the canal needs more common carrier terminal capacity. MSC’s Terminal Investment Limited subsidiary and BlackRock’s Global Infrastructure Partners have emerged as the leading bidders for the terminals in Colon and Balboa. The sale, though, faces a lengthy regulatory review, plus the potential inclusion of Cosco Shipping as another partner as <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/beijing-issues-warning-over-hutchisons-proposed-sale-of-panama-ports-company-5962910">a sop to China for approving Hutchison’s sale of the terminals</a>. Hutchison has confirmed that a “major strategic investor from China” was looking to be part of a Hutchison acquisition. An MSC takeover of the two terminals could shut out Maersk from an important transshipment point for its north-south services. Over the past 12 months, Maersk-operated container ships have made 1,345 calls to Panama’s ports, according to data from Sea-web, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. MSC, as well, is a heavy user of Panama’s terminals, with 1,563 calls over the same time. In April, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/apm-acquires-first-railroad-asset-with-deal-for-panama-canals-short-line-5975493">Maersk bought the Panama Canal Railway</a>, the short-line railroad that links the ports of Balboa and Colon. Maersk, which is the railway’s largest customer, also operates a logistics park in the country. Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Maersk signaled its interest in helping develop the Panama Canal’s yet-to-be-built container terminals, as the carrier faces the prospect of its former alliance partner Mediterranean Shipping Co. taking control of Panama’s current terminal assets. Speaking at an event Oct. 9 sponsored by Denmark’s embassy in Colombia, Maersk Chief Executive Vincent Clerc said his company may invest in the new terminals the Panama Canal Authority (ACP) hopes to build on both sides of the canal. This summer, the ACP said it was looking to develop container terminals on the Pacific side at Corozal and on the Atlantic side near Colon. According to local press reports about the event, the ACP is starting its outreach to ocean carriers and terminal operators about the new terminal concessions, with a formal tender expected in the second half of 2026. The new terminals are part of Panama’s response to US government concerns about Chinese conglomerate CK Hutchison owning terminals on both sides of the canal. President Donald Trump has repeatedly pressured Panama’s government about selling the terminals to a non-Chinese firm, despite no evidence of US-bound ships receiving less preferential treatment for canal transits . ACP President Ricuarte Vasquez Morales has said the canal needs more common carrier terminal capacity. MSC’s Terminal Investment Limited subsidiary and BlackRock’s Global Infrastructure Partners have emerged as the leading bidders for the terminals in Colon and Balboa. The sale, though, faces a lengthy regulatory review, plus the potential inclusion of Cosco Shipping as another partner as a sop to China for approving Hutchison’s sale of the terminals . Hutchison has confirmed that a “major strategic investor from China” was looking to be part of a Hutchison acquisition. An MSC takeover of the two terminals could shut out Maersk from an important transshipment point for its north-south services. Over the past 12 months, Maersk-operated container ships have made 1,345 calls to Panama’s ports, according to data from Sea-web, a sister product of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. MSC, as well, is a heavy user of Panama’s terminals, with 1,563 calls over the same time. In April, Maersk bought the Panama Canal Railway , the short-line railroad that links the ports of Balboa and Colon. Maersk, which is the railway’s largest customer, also operates a logistics park in the country. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Maersk considering investment in Panama’s new terminals

Use code GTW595 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 FSW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

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

FALL SALE

Use code FSW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid for first year of subscription.

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 FSW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

The world of LTL is slow to embrace change. Business anachronisms permeate current supply chain processes. These vestiges of the way things used to work define the LTL freight transportation procurement process of many modern shippers.David Knuth, logistics specialist at IEWC, a global supplier of cable and wire based in Wisconsin, is happy to have modernized the RFP process, automating the entire LTL bidding procedure with Bid$ense, SMC³’s automated truckload and LTL freight transportation sourcing solution. But when prompted, he can still recall what once was.In his previous job, a large part of his duties were consumed by creating an intermodal bid package for carriers. In a spreadsheet, Knuth detailed the company’s volumes lane by lane, taking care to delete any errant keystrokes or misleading data. He would then email out the information to each carrier, taking time to respond to detailed technical questions about the spreadsheet data. Finally, he had to compile all the results, create an algorithm that would compare the carriers on each lane, and award the business.“It was a huge undertaking. It took about four months to do,” Knuth said of the old process. “It was almost a full-time job for that part of the year, every year.”In his new job at IEWC, he sat down with Bid$ense on day one and was amazed at the capabilities. Knuth had never before used a bid tool. SMC³’s latest versions of Bid$ense automate the process even further, taking truckload and LTL RFPs entirely online. The tool draws on RFP best-practices protocols to streamline the bidding communication process, enabling bidding carriers to respond accurately and promptly to shipper requests. The solution also does all the distribution work automatically, electronically submitting shipper bid data to carriers based on their actual service capabilities and performance records. Carriers are alerted with timely prompts for RFP deliverables, so shippers aren’t waiting by the phone for responses.Another benefit of automating the process is the data-cleansing assistance. When Knuth sent spreadsheets to carriers, data errors might cloud the bidding process; he might have to resend data or simply accept a price that did not truly reflect the costs of doing business. Data cleansing is incredibly beneficial, he said.The spreadsheet technique also made bidding analysis an onerous task. Since Bid$ense automates and streamlines the entire RFP process, intensive examination is now simple. SMC³ knows that each bid has more than one best outcome. With uniform responses from each carrier, shippers can quickly rank results and create an unlimited quantity of what-if scenarios to make the optimal procurement decision.Jesse Burnett of Central Garden &amp; Pet experiences many of the same benefits. Founded in 1980, Central Garden &amp; Pet has spent the last three decades growing from a small garden supply company to a provider of a range of products from dog chews and bird seed to soil supplements and natural insecticides. For much of its life, the company shipped these disparate goods via LTL and truckload carriers to retailers throughout the country, relying on each business unit to negotiate directly with their freight transportation providers. This arrangement worked fairly well for a small company, but as Central Garden &amp; Pet expanded, leadership decided to consolidate decision making.Burnett helped centralize the transportation decision making in 2015 with SMC³’s Bid$ense. Before Bid$ense, every business unit operated independently as far as negotiating with carriers.“There were a lot of different things just floating around,” he said. “We didn’t have master agreements in place; no national pricing at all. The pricing from carriers was just all over the place, depending on where you were.”The transformations he saw with Bid$ense were immediate. Burnett has been using the tool about every other year since its implementation at the company. Central Garden and Pet’s $19.6 million 2019 LTL bid saved the company just more than 9 percent when compared to its historical average. For Burnett, though, bid automation extends far beyond savings.“We knew that we weren’t getting the best pricing offer from our carriers just because nothing was centralized,” he continued. “We knew that if we combined everything from all these business units and paired it with one corporate offering, then it would drive some cost benefit with it.”When the company initially decided to centralize bid procurement, executives researched a number of different methodologies and technologies. In the end, though, Burnett found that Bid$ense was both widespread and well known, and that his carrier partners already knew how to use the application. Burnett also highlighted the data-cleansing process as a major benefit, saying the rigorous process ensures that carriers always return the best price.“It definitely has helped drive savings,” he said. “Any time you go out there and you drive that competitiveness with the carriers and they know they’re in a bid environment, it seems to sharpen their pencils.”Transportation procurement is an integral part of the modern supply chain. With Bid$ense, shippers can develop a strategic implementation plan that saves them time and money, but also helps them create strong relationships with their carrier partners. These carriers appreciate the solution’s data-cleansing process; when carriers receive a complete shipment history and future volume forecast, they don’t have to guess on pricing. Carriers that receive more data from shippers get a complete picture of that shipper’s freight, allowing them to accurately plan instead of simply preparing for the worst-case scenario. Clean data presented through an automated system can lead to both bigger shipment savings and a lasting partnership between carrier and customer.Whether customers are looking to streamline over-the-road transportation bidding by automating the RFP process or create an entirely new, centralized sourcing process, Bid$ense has the analytical horsepower to get the job done.SMC³ 2020 Customer Case Study

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

If there’s one immutable truth in the world of logistics, it’s this: LTL is an inherently complex form of transportation. Tariffs, rates, DIM weights, transit times — it’s enough to confuse even seasoned logistics professionals. The solution to this knowledge gap has historically been on-the-job training or university supply chain education, but for a variety of reasons there is now a pressing need for third-party, remote LTL training that prepares logistics workers for transportation success. Global Scope Can Overlook Local Intricacies In the past, professionals looking to move into a supply chain career learned about the basics of supply chain from universities. However, many of these college supply chain programs are now global in scope, focusing on worldwide supply chain management instead of the intricacies of specialized domestic transportation. And even these programs, which used to be widespread, are becoming less common. LTL is not an industry of broad-brush strokes; supply chain professionals really need a pointillistic understanding of the logistics of LTL in order to excel in the industry. Accelerating Need for Dedicated LTL Education This lack of specified training put the onus on employers to prepare new hires with the LTL knowledge needed to do their jobs. Dedicated LTL study is a necessity, not a luxury. At the same time, changes in LTL and the broader supply chain world are accelerating. The reliance on e-commerce has ballooned since the start of the pandemic, and last-mile LTL shipments and related e-commerce strains on the supply chain won’t diminish once social distancing abates. That genie isn’t going back into the bottle. So supply chain employers need logistics workers that are fully versed in all aspects of the industry, ready to solve unique shipping and delivery problems based on their extensive supply chain knowledge But why care about LTL? It’s been reported that some shippers in today’s world are no longer concerned with what mode is used to ship their goods. A Multimodal Approach Ensures On-Time Delivery This mode agnosticism means supply chain stakeholders have to be well versed in all modes of transportation. As unforeseen weather events and other disruptions, such as protests, become more common, savvy logistics employees will need to be armed with familiarity of all modes, not just the most popular, to ensure that freight is delivered on time, without damage, and in the most financially expedient way possible. Offerings like SMC³’s LTL online education courses cover a wide range of topics from LTL basics and operations to more advanced concepts like pricing analytics and transportation law. The company also has plans to continually refresh content, adding new expert presenters and taking the feedback of students to make the courses even better as time goes on. Learn more about&nbsp;<a href="https://logisticstrainingcenter.com/smc3-courses/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">SMC³’s LTL Online Education program</a>&nbsp;and view the 2021 hybrid schedule, featuring live industry experts,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.smc3.com/onlinelearning2021/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">here.</a>

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

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

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

FALL SALE: Use code FSW30 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 GTW595 at checkout and save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

FALL SALE: Use code FSW595 and upgrade to Gold for just $595! Valid on first year of subscription.

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

FALL SALE: Use codeFSW995 at checkout to save $500 on a Gold subscription!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

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 premier conference for the global container shipping and supply chain community

TPM Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend TPM26

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

Breakbulk Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Breakbulk26

Explore today’s cutting-edge global logistics technology news and analysis by the Journal of Commerce. Coverage includes logistics technology startups, logistics technology solutions, venture capital, management and impact, freight forwarder technology and the latest supply chain and logistics technology.

Our logistics technology news include logistics technology startups, solutions, and the impact of technology on logistics and supply chain management.

Logistics Technology News | Journal of Commerce

The Journal of Commerce’s supply chain news and analysis impacting the management of end-to-end supply chains reports on supply chain strategies, cargo visibility, inventory trends, sourcing, customs certification and contract logistics. Supply chain news coverage also delves into refrigerated shipping advancements and management of inventory status, regulatory updates and government funding projects.

Stay informed with the latest regulation news and trade updates. Explore comprehensive transportation news and trade regulations today.

Transport, Trade and Regulation News | Journal of Commerce

A thorough cool cargoes news by Journal of Commerce. Learn about the latest trends in refrigerated cargo transportation, weight capacity, technology, and more.

Cool Cargo News | Journal of Commerce

Cool Cargo News

Journal of Commerce keeps you informed on the latest last mile news with comprehensive coverage of carriers, logistics, and last mile transportation solutions.

Last Mile News | Journal of Commerce

Last Mile News

Discover the latest industrial real estate news and trends. Covering projects, real estate supply chain, logistics, pricing, cross dock facilities, and more.

Industrial Real Estate News | Journal of Commerce

Industrial Real Estate News

Stay updated on supply chain strategies, cargo visibility, inventory trends and more with our comprehensive supply chain news and analysis.

Latest News

More News & Analysis

LA-LB saw ‘small to moderate’ rise in emissions despite record volumes in 2024

Industry group calls for tougher licensing, better training amid trucker crackdown

Delay in IMO decarbonization plans robs green fuel investors of certainty