Take a look at this. http://www.bnsf.com/investors/weeklyunits/20080301.pdf
David Lustig wrote in the April 08’ issue that Cajon Pass’ third track “will be able to accomodate the ever-increasing traffic flow between U.S. trading partners on the Pacific Rim and consumers in the middle of the country” How can this be said when BNSF’s container loadings are way down? Nobody is even mentioning this. Why?
Tyler,
The traffic on the BNSF between Mpls/St Paul and Chicago is increasing as well. A friend is an engineer working the Northtown pool and has worked 14 days straight again. He laid off 2 days this week-end so he could do some home remodeling. He said that the traffic has been heavy all winter. I am sure other traffic corridors has seen a drop in traffic, but the Pacific Rim business has been holding up quite well through Port of Seattle/Tacoma.
Jim
Even on a light day in Cajon a 3rd track would come in handy, especially when you consider UP traffic out of West Colton (on the old SP) having to cross over tracks with opposing traffic between CP Silverwood and Lugo to get to the exSP,LA&SL route.
I understand that the amount of traffic over Cajon is crazy, but that isn’t the point. If traffic on BNSF’s northern transcon is increasing than that probably means cont. traffic is down more than 10% over Cajon. Am I missing something? because that is not ever increasing!
Container traffic may be 'way down now, and we may or may not be in a recession, and it may or may not get worse–but I haven’t heard anyone say that the economy will never recover from this. What I have heard is people who have to make projections far down the road, who are saying that the entire railroad infrastructure in the country is underbuilt. I suspect that forward-thinking railroads are welcoming the breather that the economy is currently providing (might I add that we’re not seeing any such breather locally). You don’t see the other expansion projects being curtailed, either.
t.winx
“that probably means” What kind of science is that? Yes you are probably missing something!!
Actually business is up and will continue to grow although slower for a time. The economy in the USA goes through these things every few years. Where ever you are getting info which motivates you to make these projections you should check their background.
It is always a good idea, at this site, to provide some background when forcasting, but only if you wish to be listened to.
Um, ok… Did you see my link? How is that not background?
How can I trust what your saying is accurate when the data I am looking at is directly from the BNSF website? Where is your source?
Here is what I was thinking. jrbernier was saying that traffic on the northern transcon is up, ok? So if BNSF’s cont. traffic is down 10+% for the year where else would the traffic be declining? From Oakland? I don’t know for sure but I doubt that Oakland even handled 10% of BNSF’s cont. traffic a year ago and unless they completely stopped shipping containers then Oakland isn’t the only port losing traffic. Am I right there? So that leaves L.A. and Long Beach to be taking the damage. Either that or else domestic containers are down. Anybody have any facts there?
I have heard on the forums that Maersk is shipping less. Was that traffic not on Cajon?
Total TEUs handled on the West Coast in 2006 was 26 million. The consensus prediction for 2020, as of today, is 69 million. Plus there’s significant growth in grain, soda ash, and potash. Coal is moving sporadically, again, with perhaps potential for more, as well as manganese ore, iron ore, and steel (really!) sitting in the background.
RWM
Yes, I understand this, and it seems to be the only reason why everybody is just ignoring it. I just don’t understand how 10% can be flying under everybody’s radar. 10% DECREASING is not “ever-increasing”. That is all this thread was supposed to point out.
Whose radar is it flying under? Those of us who collect a paycheck from the railroads and are responsible for planning and spending capital are very much aware of it. Markets fluctuate, to quote Conrad Barron, and so do container flows. It appears you have a definition of “ever-increasing” that rules out year-long peaks and valleys. Considering railway investments have 20-year to 100-year lifetimes, should decisions be made on one-year results?
RWM
Railway man you are right. I am so toired of our short time accounting that only looks to the next quarter’s earnings. Only the stock traders can get rich!!!
It is flying under David Lustig’s I guess, and everybody else that is ignoring this. Since no other railroad worker has said anything about it too, than how can I not say it is under their radar as well. “Ever-increasing” shouldn’t have peaks and valleys. Ever means always, consistent, at all times, and any time.
Thanks for replying though. Atleast somebody be
I just can’t get as spun-up about this, but you’re welcome to do so. Just my opinion but some of us in the industry consider David Lustig the best-informed rail reporter there is. I’m comfortable with the phrasing he used. A few months of downturn doesn’t mean much to me.
RWM
Those BNSF figures which t.winx presented tell a bigger story than just overall traffic increase or decrease. Yes, containers are down a bit, more so than trailers. We all know how the Christmas shopping frenzy was not what retailers had hoped, because most (but not all) Americans have less cash to spend and are finally having to bite the bullet and not pile any more debt onto their credit cards. Coupled to the recent concerns about Chinese product safety, it’s no surprise that import containers have dipped. That will certainly impact Cajon and the southern transcon more than BNSF’s northern transcon. But what those BNSF figures also show are huge increases in other traffic, one of which I’m witnessing first-hand here in north Idaho. Grain and other bulk commodities are going gang-busters. And not just on BNSF. UP is bringing a lot of grain down from Canada; some of that grain originates in the American Midwest and travels across southern Canada before re-entering the U.S. at Eastport. And potash from Saskatechewan is getting an early start to its spring-time peak, with those 124-car unit, 17,000-ton Canpotex monsters with mid-train DPUs coming south almost daily. Back to BNSF, they are pumping more grain across the Funnel right now than I’ve seen in quite some time. General traffic conditions on many days over the past couple of weeks have looked more like the fall rush (minus the flood of intermodal), with Hauser’s yard tracks jammed and all run-through refueling tracks occupied. Westbounds have been stacking up as far east as Algoma (near Sandpoint) and as far west as Spokane waiting for an available fuel track at Hauser. The Lakeside Sub between Pasco and Spokane has been a log-jam, too. If our consumer-based economy can somehow bounce back, all that capacity being added at Cajon will eventually justify itself.
I am not getting as “spun up” about this decrease as you might think. I am more spun up about fellow railfans denying the situation (not all of you i know!) and ignoring my legitamate data and blowing it off.
Don’t get me wrong about Lustig too. I respect him and his material, but it is hard for me to agree with him on this point when I’m looking at these numbers. If there is some other factor David, PLEASE let me know!
The numbers in the provided reference apply to one week and the first quarter to date of 2007 and 2008.
Total carloads for week 9 are up 6.65% from 2007. Year-to-date shows a 5.62% increase.
Totalled carloads and intermodal show a whopping 2.75% decrease from 2007 for the week, and just a 1.7% decrease from last year.
A good blizzard in the midwest could have that effect for just one week.
If you want to really impress me, show me a chart with the past 10 years worth of data. Then we’ll see if this massive decrease you cite is a pending disaster or just normal traffic fluctuations. Yes, traffic can decrease on the short term while the overall trend is up.
Otherwise it’s all just meaningless numbers.
Methinks you’re taking the term “ever increasing” a little to literally.
Yes that data is for the week, but did you look a little further and see quarterly and yearly results also? 13.72% for the week and 10.16% for the year. I am not just posting about a weekly decrease in traffic!!! please look at his link: http://www.bnsf.com/investors/archives/weeklyunits_archive.html
Scroll through the weeks from this past year and you will see that. Whether the drop here is from domestic containers I am not totally sure, but this has been going on for nearly a year now. It appears that within the next few weeks container traffic should level out to last years levels. Should be interesting to see what happens.
I know that carload traffic is up, but that isn’t the point here, unless it is going to western ports for Pacific Rim countries.
I realize that business will pick up again, eventually, and that overall, traffic the last decade has skyrocketed. But for the year, BNSF’s traffic is down. Maybe I am taking the term too literally, but I don’t care. I thought 10% was worth mentioning and that others might agree.
Yeah I saw Grain was way up, along with many other carload commodities. Interesting to see. How much of that is being exported, if not all
OK, you’ve introduced a new parameter - one that is not addressed in the numbers you cite. Now we’re talking about “traffic moving east.” That information is not provided in these reports.
As for the BNSF reports, the December 29th report, showing YTD figures for the entire year of 2007, show a mere 3% drop in traffic. Ain’t no thang, there.
While trailer and intermodal traffic was down 6% over the course of the year, carload traffic was up by .65%. If total traffic was down only 3%, and IM was down 6%, that tells me that IM traffic is less of a factor to the railroad than the carload traffic.
As for “ever increasing” - anything I’ve read seems to bear that out. Don’t fixate on the term. The sky is not falling. This is normal ebb and flow. You can’t extrapolate a single week or quarter into anything larger than it is - a single week or quarter.
The empties have to return, do they not?
RWM