While recently researching Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle power generation at American Electric Power Company’s web site, I came across this little tidbit stating that AEP was now the 4th largest inland barge company in America, and that they do contract transportation for outside entities…
http://www.aep.com/about/powerplants/default.htm
wouldn’t it be funny if AEP absorbed UP next?
Buying barges is cheaper than buying a whole rail system. The waterway system is open to new entrants, so all one has to do is buy the barges and tugs and you got yourself a barging company. The rail system is closed to new entrants, so if you want to run your own trains you also have to buy the whole railroad lock stock and barrel. Now, if the rail system was open to new entrants, would it still be cheaper to buy barges, tugs, and hire a crew, or would it now become cost effective to buy rail cars and locos, and hire your own crews?
I thought of you as I was posting this for pretty much the same reason. Rivers being largely open access.
As far as my initial comment goes, it was made pretty much tongue in cheek.
With so many folks wondering who the next rail merger will be between, wouldn’t it be funny if it came from outside the industry?
Suppose the chinese shipping concerns bought a controlling interest in BNSF, for instance, and rolled it into a landbased extension of their container fleets?
When you think of it, AEP’s reasons for having a barge line is probably the same as any company having its own trucking operation or private aircraft fleet. All use publicly owned and maintained ways. If private works better than for hire service, go for it. Interesting thing is that a “private” transportation operation may not be any less costly than paying for “for hire” service, but the “load and go” self dispatching feature of the private operation may produce many economic benefits for a company that are not directly tied to the transport service itself.
Because of the physical structure of a railroad, a load and go self dispatch feature is not possible, thus a key benefit of “private” transport is lost. It is one of the key reasons that I do not think that a scenerio of public ownership of railroad infrastructure would produce any significant amount of shipper owned and operated trains.
i think we (ARTCO[ADM]) are number one in inland barge company. i know the largest grossing.
it would be cheaper buying a barge company over rail, and deffinatly in the long run. by barge to railcar comparison, one barge is much more expensive, BUT size and product carrying potential, one, 15 barge tow(most barges allowed in a tow almost all inland rivers besides the Lower Miss. and a few other select areas) of coal is equal to one 120 - 130+/- car coal train.
in rail cars, we have the pleasure of seeing a VAST range of different cars for different products, but one covered hopper barge, you can put coal, rock, sand, cement, scrap, steel coils, salt, DGE (cattle feed) corn, beans, bark mulch, ive seen large steel holding tanks moved in them, this year i saw a hull of a very large luxury pleasure boat that when finished would easily cost multi-millions $$, a few companies are start to experiment with container by barge operations to see if its going to be cost effective, and MANY MANY more things. and thats just the potenial of one barge.
Tug and barge is the most cost effective way to move very large quatities,as long as they are not time sensitive. Tug and barge movement is slow(3-10 mph), subject to weather condition(wind, ice) low water and currents.
Who says they haven’t already?[}:)]