Mexico considers port growth, rail link to U.S.

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

MEXICO CITY — Mexico and major shipping interests are bolstering Pacific ports south of the border, hoping to catch future runoff as an increasing tide of Asian cargo sails toward already clogged ports in California.
Mexican officials in coming weeks plan to study the feasibility of turning Punta Colonet a sparsely populated, wind-blown bay on the Baja Peninsula 150 miles south of the U.S. border into a super-port on par with twin facilities at Los Angeles and Long Beach, the largest western port complex in North America.

Farther south, Hutchison Port Holdings, the world’s largest independent port operator, plans to pump about $200 million into expanding container ship capacity at Lazaro Cardenas, Mexico’s deepest port.

“We are ready. The port is ready. The infrastructure is ready for anything shipping companies need,” said Hector Carranza, business director for the port at Lazaro Cardenas.

Private companies have approached ports in this country looking for backup routes in case of work stoppages in California. “The world’s biggest retailers want to have more options open,” said David Eaten, a spokesman for Kansas City Southern de Mexico, the U.S. railroad that serves Lazaro Cardenas.

Los Angeles-Long Beach handles 40 percent of all the cargo shipped into the United States and 80 percent of U.S. imports from Asia.

Last July, officials began unloading cargo 24 hours a day while giving shippers financial incentive to move cargo during evening and weekend hours so trucks
hauling it could avoid the long lines of peak hours.

But, officials concede, problems remain.

“As far as congestion goes, that definitely is an issue here,” said John Pope, a spokesman for the Long Beach port.

Leaders from both countries are still negotiating the details of the plan, which seeks to allow trucks carrying U.S. goods bound for the Mexican market to be inspected and sealed in Kansas City, then head into Mexico without de

2

I worked in the steamship industry my entire life. I doubt that this will ever come to fruitation due to the additional costs to the steamship lines such as additional docking costs, pilot fees so & on & so forth. Since many, many containers are NOT going to the midwest or E/coast but are terminated & unloaded in S. California that means a call at a Mexican
port represents a hugh increase in costs. Now if they are saying that just the midwest & E/coast containers will be unloaded in Mexico I doubt that as well cause when I was doing it in conjuction with the UPRR we moved the containers from unloading LAX to NYC in just 5 days which would never ever be matched by via Mexico & since the owners of the goods in the containers demand quickest possible transit time normally F/east/NYC I really doubt anything will ever come of it. [:)]

[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

MEXICO CITY — Mexico and major shipping interests are bolstering Pacific ports south of the border, hoping to catch future runoff as an increasing tide of Asian cargo sails toward already clogged ports in California.
Mexican officials in coming weeks plan to study the feasibility of turning Punta Colonet a sparsely populated, wind-blown bay on the Baja Peninsula 150 miles south of the U.S. border into a super-port on par with twin facilities at Los Angeles and Long Beach, the largest western port complex in North America.

Farther south, Hutchison Port Holdings, the world’s largest independent port operator, plans to pump about $200 million into expanding container ship capacity at Lazaro Cardenas, Mexico’s deepest port.

“We are ready. The port is ready. The infrastructure is ready for anything shipping companies need,” said Hector Carranza, business director for the port at Lazaro Cardenas.

Private companies have approached ports in this country looking for backup routes in case of work stoppages in California. "The world’s biggest retailers want to have more o

3

Could be, but here’s a copy of something that was posted on the “KCS Notes” group:

From: “David Hawkins”
Date: Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:24 am
Subject: KCS Completes Competitive Test Run from Mexico to TX

KCS Completes Competitive Test Run from Mexico to TX
Author: TO News from KCS
First publish date: 01-23-2006

Last week, Kansas City Southern and subsidiary KCS-Mexico completed a
successful intermodal test run from the Port of Lazaro Cardenas in Mexico to San Antonio, Texas.

It was the first international, in-bond, double-stack container test
shipment between KCSR and KCSM. The container shipment of barbecue pits from China moved via rail from the Port of Lazaro Cardenas on KCSM to Laredo, TX. From Laredo, KCSR arranged for it to be trucked to San Antonio, TX. The shipper, who is considering the route as an alternative, said that the route was two days faster than its best times through the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach, California.

KCSR director sales and marketing Ron Bird joined the shipper’s executives in Lazaro Cardenas for departure of the test shipment, and will continue discussions in the coming weeks. A number of shippers like this one are considering the route. As interest grows in service through the Port of Lazaro Cardenas, KCSRKCSM is developing premium intermodal service with dedicated trains from the Port of Lazaro Cardenas to destinations throughout the KCSR/KCSM network. Transit times and reliability are expected to improve as capital investments in the corridor are made, and as volumes grow along the corridor.

And today, Lowell McManus posted

4

Sonuds to me that something is not quite right since if the SS line is using the UPRR to San Antonio it should not be more then 3 days from the time the vessel docks since the UPRR Sunset route is direct. Now if they are using the BNSF then yes I could see it since you have to go thru the Cajon pass, Barstow, Needles then Northern Arizona & then Northern NM to Belam before turning southward to get to Texas. Still any which way for the owner of the vessel adding more ports is a staggering increase to him as well as inbalancing the vessel schedule due to the increased time on the W/coast side[:)]

[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by egmurphy

Could be, but here’s a copy of something that was posted on the “KCS Notes” group:

From: “David Hawkins”
Date: Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:24 am
Subject: KCS Completes Competitive Test Run from Mexico to TX

KCS Completes Competitive Test Run from Mexico to TX
Author: TO News from KCS
First publish date: 01-23-2006

Last week, Kansas City Southern and subsidiary KCS-Mexico completed a
successful intermodal test run from the Port of Lazaro Cardenas in Mexico to San Antonio, Texas.

It was the first international, in-bond, double-stack container test
shipment between KCSR and KCSM. The container shipment of barbecue pits from China moved via rail from the Port of Lazaro Cardenas on KCSM to Laredo, TX. From Laredo, KCSR arranged for it to be trucked to San Antonio, TX. The shipper, who is considering the route as an alternative, said that the route was two days faster than its best times through the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach, Califor

5

Also containers destined for the gulf is a very, very small part of the steamship lines cargo. When I typed my other response it was for E/coast & Midwest containers which make up the largest bulk of the containers discharged in LAX for transconing on the RR [:)]

[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by egmurphy

Could be, but here’s a copy of something that was posted on the “KCS Notes” group:

From: “David Hawkins”
Date: Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:24 am
Subject: KCS Completes Competitive Test Run from Mexico to TX

KCS Completes Competitive Test Run from Mexico to TX
Author: TO News from KCS
First publish date: 01-23-2006

Last week, Kansas City Southern and subsidiary KCS-Mexico completed a
successful intermodal test run from the Port of Lazaro Cardenas in Mexico to San Antonio, Texas.

It was the first international, in-bond, double-stack container test
shipment between KCSR and KCSM. The container shipment of barbecue pits from China moved via rail from the Port of Lazaro Cardenas on KCSM to Laredo, TX. From Laredo, KCSR arranged for it to be trucked to San Antonio, TX. The shipper, who is considering the route as an alternative, said that the route was two days faster than its best times through the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach, California.

KCSR director sales and marketing Ron Bird joined the shipper’s executives in Lazaro Cardenas for departure of the test shipment, and will continue discussions in the coming weeks. A number of shippers like this one are considering the route. As interest grows in service through the Port of Lazaro Cardenas, KCSRKC

6

It’s hard for me to envision large container trains, much less double-stacks, being dragged across that operating nightmare formerly known as the FC Chihuahua al Pacifico. The scenery is great, but the grades are stiff. Mexican ports are also out of the way of most steamship routes.

7

I’ll assume you’re not considering the possibility of direct shipping to the Mexican ports, as opposed to being just another port of call?

Who’s talking about containers bound for the Gulf coast? KCS’s idea is to get containers to the midwest and east coast, just moving them through a different route.

Wrong port, wrong route. Lazaro Cardenas is farther south than Topolobampo (the port for the Copper Canyon route), and does not use the Copper Canyon route. That belongs to Ferromex. Here’s a link to the KCSdeM routemap:
http://www.tfm.com.mx/ruta_en.htm

The route to Lazaro Cardenas was built in the 70’s when they developed the port and built the new steel mill complex there.

No doubt about it. Not saying they’re going to be the biggest thing. But if Hutchinson Port Holdings (the world’s largest independent port operator) is expanding it’s infrastructure in LC, then they certainly expect enough business growth to make it worthwhile.

Regards

Ed

8

I’m surprised that none of these shipping companies has considered a rail based land bridge between the west coast of Mexico and the east coast, to shorten the land distance of most Asia and Europe bound shipping containers that are not bound for any part of the US

9

A transcontinental route across Mexico does indeed have a shorter land component, but the railroads would need a major upgrading and Tampico and other Mexican ports on the Gulf are a lot further from Europe than Halifax, Newark and other US East Coast ports.

10

The land bridge concept has been around for a while. One of the possible locations is down in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec area where Mexico is only about 150 miles wide, and where there are no significant mountain ranges to cross. The rail line actually exists, see this link to show a system map of the FCCM (Ferrocarril Chiapas Mayab, owned by Genessee & Wyoming). The dotted portion is not owned by them, but they do have trackage rights.
http://www.gwrr.com/default.cfm?action=rail§ion=3B7c

Here’s another link to the FerroSur route map, which shows that they also have trackage rights over this section.
http://www.ferrosur.com.mx/gxpsites/hgxpp001.aspx?1,1,5,O,S,0,MNU;E;2;2;MNU;,

Back in the early 80’s, they were proposing this route for the transport of containers bound for Europe that were on ships too large to pass the Panama Canal. The project never materialized.

Today, the line would require significant upgrading, and both the ports of Salina Cruz and Coatzacoalcos would require major infrastructure upgrading. But again, it’s not impossible. Just as a matter of interest, there is already a railcar ferry service operating between Coatzacoalcos and New Orleans (used to be Mobile, AL), operated by CG Railway. See:
http://www.cgrailway.com/home.htm

Regards

Ed

11

Just a polite question,Where are the whales going to go?I know they go back to Alaska,
but don’t they migrate off the Baja coast in that area? Davebr

12

My guess is that they’ll continue to migrate to the same bays that they migrate to now. The ports we have been discussing, Lazaro Cardenas and Salina Cruz, are far south of the Sea of Cortez. However, even if we include Topolobampo, which is the port at the end of the Copper Canyon line, and within the Sea of Cortez, I still don’t think we have a whale problem.

We’re not talking about new ports, these are existing ports. I also believe that most, if not all, of the calving bays are on the Baja California peninsula side (west side) of the Sea of Cortez, while Topolobampo is on the mainland (east shore).

I’m not a whale expert but what I’ve read on the subject leads me to believe that commercial fishing (or overfishing) is the main threat to the fish food chain (and thereby, to the whales) in the Sea of Cortez.

Regards

Ed