Intermodal Transportation and ContainerizationAuthors: Dr. Jean-Paul Rodrigue and Dr. Brian Slack 1. The Nature of Intermodalism
History as well as competition between modes has tended
to produce a transport system that was segmented and
un-integrated. Each mode, particularly the carriers
that operated them, has sought to exploit its own advantages
in terms of cost, service, reliability and safety. Carriers
try to retain business and increase revenue by maximizing
the line-haul under their control. All the modes saw the
other modes as competitors, and were viewed with a level
of suspicion and mistrust. The lack of integration between
the modes was also accentuated by public policy that
has frequently barred companies from owning firms in other
modes (as in the United States before deregulation), or
has placed a mode under direct state monopoly control (as
in Europe). Modalism was also favored because of
the difficulties of transferring goods from one mode to
another, thereby incurring additional terminal costs and
delays, mainly because the load unit needs to be
changed, which is common for bulk transportation.
Since the 1960s major efforts have been made to
integrate separate transport
systems through intermodalism, which took place in
several stages,
first with the setting of maritime networks which then
better connected with inland networks.
From a functional and operational perspective,
two components
are involved in intermodalism:
Intermodal transportation. The movements of passengers
or freight from one mode of transport to another, commonly
taking place at a terminal specifically designed for such
a purpose. In North America, the term intermodal is also
used to refer to containerized rail transportation.
Transmodal transportation. The movements of passengers
or freight within the same mode of transport. Although "pure"
transmodal transportation rarely exists and an intermodal
operation is often required (e.g. ship to dockside to ship),
the purpose is to insure continuity within the same modal
network.
What initially began as improving the productivity of shipping
evolved into an integrated supply chain management system
across modes and the development of intermodal
transportation networks.
Intermodal transportation network. A logistically
linked system using two or more transport modes with a single
rate. Modes are having common handling characteristics,
permitting freight (or people) to be transferred between
modes during a movement between an origin and a destination.
For freight, it also implies that the cargo does not need
to be handled, just the load unit such as a pallet or a
container.
This involves the use of at least two different
modes in a trip from an origin to a destination through
an intermodal transport
chain, which permit the
integration of
several transportation networks. Intermodality enhances the economic performance
of a transport chain by using modes in the most productive
manner. Thus, the line-haul economies of rail may be exploited
for long distances, with the efficiencies of trucks providing
flexible local pick up and deliveries. The key is that the
entire trip is seen as a whole, rather than as a series
of legs, each marked by an individual operation with separate
sets of documentation and rates. This is organized
around the followings concepts:
The nature and quantity of
the transported cargo. Intermodal transportation
is usually suitable for intermediate and finished
goods in load units of less than 25 tons.
The modes of transportation
being used. Intermodal transportation is organized
as a sequence of modes, often known as an
intermodal transport
chain. The dominant modes supporting intermodalism
are trucking, rail, barges and maritime. Air transportation
usually only require intermodalism (trucking) for
its "first and last miles" and not used in combination
with other modes. Additionally, load units used
by air transportation are not readily
convertible with other modes.
The origins and destinations.
Distances play an important role as the longer the
distance, the more likely an intermodal transport
chain will be used. Distances above 500 km (longer
than one day of trucking) usually require intermodal
transportation.
Transportation time and costs.
Intermodalism tries to use each mode according to
their respective time and cost advantages so that
total transport costs are minimized.
The value of the cargo.
Suitable for intermediate cargo values. Low
and high value shipments are usually less
suitable for intermodal transportation. High
value shipments will tend to use the most direct
options (such as air cargo) while low value
shipments are usually point to point and relying
on one mode such as rail or maritime.
The frequency of shipments. Intermodalism functions well
when cargo flows need to be continuous and in
similar quantities.
2. Forms of Intermodalism
The emergence of intermodalism has been brought about
in part by technology and requires management units
for freight such as containers, swap bodies, pallets
or semi-trailers. In the past,
pallets were a
common management unit, but their relatively small size
and lack of protective frame made their intermodal handling
labor intensive and prone to damage or theft. Better
techniques and management units for transferring freight
from one mode to another have facilitated intermodal
transfers. Early examples include
piggyback (TOFC: Trailers
On Flat Cars), where truck trailers are placed on rail
cars, and LASH (lighter aboard ship), where river barges
are placed directly on board sea-going ships.
A unique form of intermodal unit has been developed
in the rail industry, particularly in the US where there
is sufficient volume.
Roadrailer
is essentially a road trailer that can also roll on
rail tracks. It is unlike the TOFC (piggyback)
system that requires the trailer be lifted on to
rail flat car. Here the rail bogies may be part of
the trailer unit, or be attached in the railway
yard. The road unit becomes a rail car, and
vice-versa.
While handling technology has influenced the development
of intermodalism, another important factor has been
changes in public policy. Deregulation in the United
States in the early 1980s liberated firms from government
control. Companies were no longer prohibited from owning
across modes, which developed a strong impetus towards
intermodal cooperation. Shipping lines in particular
began to offer integrated rail and road services to
customers. The advantages of each mode could be exploited
in a seamless system, which created multiplying effects.
Customers could purchase the service to ship their products
from door to door, without having to concern themselves
of modal barriers. With one bill of lading clients
can obtain one through rate, despite the transfer of
goods from one mode to another.
The most important feature of intermodalism is the provision
of a service with one ticket (for passengers) or one
bill of lading (for freight). This has necessitated
a revolution in organization and information control.
At the heart of modern intermodalism are data handling,
processing and distribution systems that are essential
to ensure the safe, reliable and cost effective control
of freight and passenger movements being transported
by several modes. Electronic Data Interchange
(EDI) is an evolving technology that is helping companies
and government agencies (customs documentation) cope
with an increasingly complex global transport system.
Intermodal transport is transforming a growing share
of the medium and long-haul freight flows across the
globe where large integrated transport carriers
provide door to door services, such as the high
degree of integration between maritime and rail
transport in North America. In Europe rail
intermodal services are becoming well-established between
the major ports, such as Rotterdam, and southern Germany,
and between Hamburg and Eastern Europe. Rail shuttles
are also making their appearance in China, although
their market share remains modest. While rail intermodal
transport has been relatively slow to develop in Europe,
there are extensive interconnections between barge services
and ocean shipping, particularly on the Rhine. Barge
shipping offers a low cost solution to inland distribution
where navigable waterways penetrate to interior markets.
This solution is being tested in North America, although
with limited success so far. The limits of intermodality
are imposed by factors of space, time, form,
pattern of the network,
the number of nodes and linkages, and the type and characteristic
of the vehicles and terminals.
3. Containerization
The driver of intermodal transportation has undoubtedly
been the container, which permits easy handling
between modal systems. While intermodalism could take
lace without the container, it would be very inefficient
and costly:
Container. A large standard size metal box into
which cargo is packed for shipment aboard specially
configured transport modes. It is designed to be moved
with common handling equipment enabling high-speed intermodal
transfers in economically large units between
ships,
railcars,
truck chassis,
and barges using a minimum of labor. The container,
therefore, serves as the load unit rather than the cargo
contained therein, making it the foremost expression
of intermodal transportation. The usage of containers
shows the complementarity between freight transportation
modes by offering a higher fluidity to movements and
a standardization of loads. Thus, the relevance of containers
is not what they are - simple boxes - but what they
enables; intermodalism. The reference size is the 20
foot box, 20 feet long, 8'6" feet high and
8 feet wide, or 1 Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit
(TEU). Since the great majority of containers are now
forty foot long, the term Forty-foot Equivalent Unit
(FEU) is also used, but less commonly.
Globalization could not have taken its current form
without containerization.
Intermodalism originated in
maritime transportation,
with the development of the container in the late 1960's
and has since spread to integrate other modes. It is
not surprising that the maritime sector should have
been the first mode to pursue containerization. It was
the mode most constrained by the time taken to load
and unload the vessels. A conventional breakbulk cargo
ship could spend as much time in a port as it did at
sea. Containerization permits the mechanized handling
of cargoes of diverse types and dimensions that are
placed into boxes of standard sizes. In this way goods
that might have taken days to be loaded or unloaded
from a ship can now be handled in a matter of minutes.
Containers are either made of steel (the most
common for maritime containers) or aluminum (particularly
for domestic) and their structure confers flexibility
and hardiness. The development of intermodal transportation
and containerization are mutually inclusive, self strengthening
and rely of a set of
driving forces
linked with technology, infrastructures and management.
One of the initial issue concerned the different sizes
and dimensions of containers used by shipping lines,
which were a source of much confusion in compiling container
shipping statistics. A lift could involve different
volumes since different box sizes were involved. As
a result, the term TEU (Twenty foot Equivalent Unit) was
first used by Richard F. Gibney in 1969, who worked
for the Shipbuilding & Shipping Record, as a measure
of comparison. Since then, the TEU remains the standard
measure for containerized traffic.
Another factor behind the
diffusion of the container is that an agreement
about its base dimensions and latching system was reached
through the International Standards Organization (ISO)
within 10 years of its introduction. From this standard,
a wide variety of container
sizes and
specifications
have been put in use. The most
prevalent container size
is however the 40 foot box, which in its 2,400 cubic
feet which carry on average
22 tons of cargo.
International containers are either owned by shipping
lines that tend to use them has a tool to help fill
up their ships or by leasing companies using containerized
assets for revenue generation. In the United States,
a large amount of
domestic containers
of 53 foot are also used.
Doublestacking of containers
on railways (COFC: Containers On Flat Cars) has
doubled the capacity of trains to haul freight with
minimal cost increases, thereby improving the competitive
position of the railways with regards to trucking for
long-haul shipments.
While it is true that the maritime container has become
the work horse of international trade, other types of
containers are found in certain modes, most notably
in the airline industry. High labor costs and the slowness
of loading planes, that require a very rapid turnaround,
made the industry very receptive to the concept of a
loading unit of standard dimensions designed to fit
the specific shape of the bellyhold. The maritime container
was too heavy and did not fit the rounded configuration
of a plane’s fuselage, and thus a box specific to the
needs of the airlines was required. The major breakthrough
came with the introduction of wide-bodied aircraft in
the late 1970s. Light weight aluminum boxes, called
unit load devices,
could be filled with passenger’s baggage or parcels
and freight, and loaded into the holds of the planes
using tracking that requires little human assistance.
Containerized traffic has
surged since
the 1990s, underlining its adoption as a privileged
mean to ship products on international and national
markets, particularly for non bulk commodities where
the container accounts for about 90% of all movements.
Containerization leans on
growth factors
mainly related to globalization, substitution from break
bulk and more recently the setting of intermediate transshipment
hubs. The diffusion and adaptation of transport modes
to containerization is an ongoing process which will
eventually reach a level of saturation. Containers have
thus become the most
important component for rail and maritime intermodal
transportation. The challenge remains about the choice
of modes in an intermodal transport chain as well as
minimizing the costs and delays related to moving containers
between modes.
4. Advantages and Challenges of Containerization
Among the numerous
advantages
related to the success of containers in international
and hinterland transport, it is possible to note the
following:
Standard transport product. A container can
be manipulated anywhere in the world as its dimensions
are an ISO standard. Indeed, transfer infrastructures
allow all elements (vehicles) of a transport chain to
handle it with relative ease. Standardization is a prevalent
benefit of containerization as it conveys a ubiquity
to access the distribution system and reduces the risks
of capital investment in modes and terminals. The rapid
diffusion of containerization was facilitated by the
fact that its initiator, Malcolm McLean, purposely did
not patent his invention. Consequently all segments
of the industry, competitors alike, had access to the
standard. It necessitated the construction of specialized
ships and of lifting equipment, but in several instances
existing transport modes can be
converted to container
transportation.
Flexibility of usage. It can transport a
wide variety of goods ranging from raw materials (coal,
wheat), manufactured goods, and cars to frozen products.
There are specialized containers for
transporting liquids
(oil and chemical products) and perishable food items
in refrigerated containers
(called "reefers" which now account for 50%
of all refrigerated cargo being transported). About
1.6 million TEUs of reefers were being used by 2009.
In many developing countries,
discarded containers
are often used as storage,
housing,
office and retail structures.
Management. The container, as an indivisible
unit, carries a
unique
identification number and a size type code enabling
transport management not in terms of loads, but in terms
of unit. This identification number is also used to
insure that it is carried by an authorized agent of
the cargo owner and is
verified
at terminal gates. Computerized management enables
to reduce waiting times considerably and to know the
location of containers (or batches of containers) at
any time. It enables to assign containers according
to the priority, the destination and the available transport
capacities. Transport companies book slots in maritime
or railway convoys that they use to distribute containers
under their responsibility. As such, the container has
become a production,
transport and distribution unit.
Economies of scale. Relatively
to bulk, container transportation reduces transport
costs considerably, about 20 times less. While before
containerization maritime transport costs could account
between 5 and 10% of the retail price, this share has
been reduced
to about 1.5%, depending on the goods being transported.
The main factors behind costs reductions reside in the
speed and flexibility incurred by containerization.
Similar to other transportation modes, container shipping
is benefiting from economies of scale with the usage
of larger containerships
(The 6,000 TEUs
landmark was surpassed in 1996 with the
Regina Maersk and in
2006 the Emma Maersk
surpassed the 14,000 TEU landmark). A 5,000 TEU containership
has operating costs per container 50% lower than a 2,500
TEU vessel. Moving from 4,000 TEU to 12,000 TEU reduces
operating costs per container by a factor of 20%, which
is very significant considering the additional volume
involved. System-wide the outcome has been costs reductions
of about 35% by the use of containerization.
Speed. Transshipment operations are minimal
and rapid, which increase the utilization level of the
modal assets and port productivity. A modern container ship has a monthly
capacity of 3 to 6 times more than a conventional cargo
ship. This is notably attributable to gains in transshipment
time as a crane can handle roughly 30 movements (loading
or unloading) per hour. Port turnaround times have thus
been reduced from 3 weeks in the 1960s to less than 24 hours since
it is uncommon for a ship to be fully loaded or unloaded
along pendulum routes. It takes on average between 10
and 20 hours to unload 1,000 TEUs compared to between
70 and 100 hours for a similar quantity of bulk freight.
With larger containerships, more cranes can be allocated
to transshipment. 5 to 6 cranes can service a 5,000
TEU containership implying that larger ship sizes do
not have much differences in loading or unloading time.
A regular freighter can spend between half and two-third
of its useful life in ports. With less time in ports,
containerships can spend more time at sea, thus be more
profitable to operators. Further, containerships are
on average 35% faster than regular freighter ships (19
knots versus 14 knots). Put all together, it is estimated
that containerization has reduced travel time for freight
by a factor of 80%.
Warehousing. The container limits damage
risks for the goods it carries because it is resistant
to shocks and weather conditions. The packaging of goods
it contains is therefore simpler, less expensive and
can occupy less volume. This reduces insurance costs
since cargo is less prone to be damaged during
transport. Besides, containers fit together
permitting stacking on ships, trains (doublestacking)
and on the ground.
It is possible to superimpose three loaded and six empty
containers on the ground. The container is consequently
its own warehouse.
Security. The contents of the container are
anonymous to outsiders as it can only be opened at the
origin, at customs and at the destination. Thefts, especially
those of valuable commodities, are therefore considerably
reduced, which results in lower insurance premiums.
Theft was a serious issue at ports before containerization
as longshoremen had ready access to cargo.
In spite of numerous advantages in the usage of containers,
some challenges
are also evident:
Site constraints. Containerization implies
a large consumption of terminal space. A containership
of 5,000 TEU requires a minimum of 12 hectares of unloading
space, while unloading entirely its containers would
require the equivalent of about 7 double-stack trains
of 400 containers each. Conventional port areas are
often not adequate for the location of container transshipment
infrastructures, particularly because of draft issues
as well as required space for terminal operations. Many
container vessels require a draft of at least 14 meters
(45 feet). A similar challenge applies to container
rail terminals, many being relocated at the periphery
of metropolitan areas. Consequently, major container
handling facilities have modified the local geography
of container by forcing relocation to new sites at the
periphery.
Infrastructure costs. Container handling
infrastructures, such as gantry cranes, yard equipment,
road and rail access, represent important investments
for port authorities and load centers. For instance,
the costs of a modern container crane (portainer)
are in the range of 4 to 10 million $US depending on
the size. Several developing countries cannot afford
these infrastructures with local capital and so have
difficulties to participate effectively in international
trade as efficient load centers unless concession agreements
are reached with terminal operators.
Stacking. The arrangement of containers,
both at terminals
and on modes (containerships
and double-stack trains)
is a complex problem. At the time of loading, it becomes
imperative to make sure that containers that must be
taken out first are not below the pile. Further, containerships
must be loaded in a way to avoid any restacking along
its numerous port calls where containers are loaded
and unloaded.
Thefts and losses. While many theft
issues have been addressed because of the freight anonymity
a container confers, it remains an issue for movements
outside terminals where the contents of the container
can be assessed based upon its final destination. It
is estimated that about 10,000 containers per year (27
per day) are lost at sea when they fall overboard containerships.
Rough weather is the major cause, but improper container
stacking also plays a role (distribution of heavy containers).
Yet, the loss rate remains very low since 5 to 6 million
containers are being transported at any given time.
Empty travel. Maritime shippers need containers
to maintain their operations along the port networks
they service. The same number of containers brought
into a market must thus eventually be relocated, regardless
if they are full or empty. On average containers will
spend about 56% of their 10 to 15 years
lifespan idle or
being repositioned empty, which is not generating any
income but convey a cost that must be assumed in one
way or the other. Either full or empty, a container
takes the same amount of space on the ship or in a storage
yard and takes the same amount of time to be transshipped.
Due to a divergence between production and consumption,
it is uncommon to see an equilibrium in the distribution
of containers. About 2.5 million TEUs of empty containers
are stored in yards and depots around the world, underlining
the issue of the movement and accumulation of empty
containers. They represent about 20% of the global container
port throughput and of the volume carried by maritime
shipping lines. Most
container trade is
imbalanced, and thus containers "accumulate"
in some places and must be shipped back to locations
where there have deficits (mostly locations having a
strong export function). This is particularly the case
for American container shipping.
As a result, shipping lines waste substantial amounts
of time and money in
repositioning empty containers.
Illicit trade. By its confidential character,
the container is a common instrument used in the illicit
trade of drug and weapons, as well as for illegal immigrants.
Concerns have also been raised about containers being
used for terrorism. These fears have given rise to an
increasing number of regulations aimed at counteracting
illegal use of containers. In 2003, following US inspection
requirements the International Maritime Organization
(IMO) introduced regulations regarding the security
of port sites and the vetting of workers in the shipping
industry. The US, itself established a 24 hour rule,
requiring all shipments destined for the US to receive
clearance from US authorities 24 hours prior to the
departure of the vessel. In 2008, the US Congress has
passed a regulation requiring all US-bound containers
to be electronically scanned at the foreign port of
loading, prior to departure. Needless to say, these
measures incur additional costs and delays that many
in the industry oppose.
Yet, the advantages of containerization have far outweighed
its drawbacks, transforming the global freight transport
system and along with it the global economy.
5. Intermodal Transport Costs
There is a relationship between
transport costs, distance and modal choice that
has for long been observed. It enables to understand
why road transport is usually used for short distances
(from 500 to 750 km), railway transport for average
distances and maritime transport for long distances
(about 750 km). Variations of modal choice according
to the geographical setting are observed but these figures
tend to show a growth of
the range of trucking. However, intermodalism offers
the opportunity to combine modes and find a less costly
alternative than an unimodal solution. It is also linked
with a higher average
value of the cargo being carried since intermodal
transportation is linked with more complex and sophisticated
commodity chains. As a result, the efficiency of contemporary
transport systems rests as much on their capacity
to route freight than on their capacity to transship
it, but each of these functions have a cost that
must be reduced.
The intermodal transportation
cost implies the consideration of several types
of transportation costs for the routing of freight from
its origin to its destination, which involves a
variety of shipment,
transshipment and warehousing activities. It considers
a logistic according to which are organized transport
chains where production and consumption systems are
linked to transport systems. Numerous technical improvements,
such as river / sea shipping
and better rail/road integration, have been established
to reduce interchange costs, but containerization remains
the most significant achievement so far. The concept
of economies of scale
applies particularly well to container shipping. However,
container shipping is
also affected by diseconomies involving maritime
and inland transport systems as well as transshipment.
While maritime container shipping companies have been
pressing for larger ships, transshipment and inland
distribution systems have tried to cope with increased
quantities of containers. Thus, in spite of a significant
reduction in maritime transport costs, land transport
costs remain significant. Between half and two-third
of total transport costs for a TEU is accounted by land
transport.
Public policy is also playing a role through concerns
over the dominant position of road transport in modal
competition and the resultant concerns over congestion,
safety and environmental degradation. In Europe, policies
have been introduced to induce a shift of freight and
passengers from the roads to modes that are environmentally
more efficient. Intermodal transport is seen as a solution
that could work in certain situations. In Switzerland,
for example, laws stipulate that all freight crossing
through the country must be placed on the railways in
order to try to reduce air pollution in alpine valleys.
The European Union is trying to promote intermodal alternatives
by subsidizing rail, and shipping infrastructure and
increasing road user costs. Since intermodal transportation
is mostly the outcome of private initiatives seeking
to capture market opportunities it remains to be seen
to what extent public strategies can be reconciled with
a global intermodal transport system which is flexible
and footloose.
While economies of scale enabled to reduce the unit
costs of maritime, inland
intermodal transportation costs account to about
50% of the total costs if terminal costs are included.
With the deregulation and privatization trends that
began in the 1980's, containerization, which was
already well established in the maritime sector, could
spread inland. The shipping lines were among
the first to exploit the intermodal opportunities that
deregulation permitted. They could offer door-to-door
rates to customers by integrating rail services and
local truck pick up and delivery in a seamless network.
To achieve this they leased trains, managed rail terminals,
and in some cases purchased trucking firms. In this
way they could serve customers across the country by
offering door-to-door service from suppliers located
around the world. The move inland also led to some significant
developments, most notably the double-stacking of containers
on rail cars. This produced important competitive
advantages for intermodal rail transport and favored
the development of
inland terminals.
It also required various forms of
transloading between maritime and domestic container
units.
Media
First Containership, Ideal-X, 1956
Integrated Transport Systems: From Fragmentation
to Coordination
Evolution of Intermodal Integration
Intermodalism and Transmodalism
Intermodal Transport Chain
Integrated Freight Transport Systems: Intermodal
and Transmodal Operations
Intermodal Transportation as an Integrative
Force
Pallets waiting to be loaded in a container,
Shenzhen, China
Piggyback (TOFC) and Doublestack (COFC) Train
Cars
Multimodal Transport Network
Intermodal Terminal Equipment
Panamax Containership at the Port of Le Havre
20-Foot and 40-Foot Containers
40-Foot Containers Doublestacked on a Rail Car
Hybrid Container Chassis
Air Unit Load Device
Driving Forces of Containerization and Intermodalism
Diffusion Cycle of Containerization
Main Physical Characteristics of Containers
Carrying Capacity of Containers
Number of Units and Weight of Standard Consumption
Goods that Can be Carried by a 20 Foot Container
World Container Traffic and Throughput
Containerization Growth Factors
American Intermodal Rail Traffic, 1990-2009
The Benefits of Containerization
Advantages and Challenges of Containerization
Containers being Unloaded to a barge
20-Foot Tank Containers
Reefer Containership entering the Zeebrugge
Harbor
Container Recycled as a Bus Shelter, South Africa
Containerized Housing Units, Le Havre, France
Container Identification System
Remote Verification of Container Identification
at a Port Terminal Gate
The Container as a Transport, Production, Distribution
Unit
Typical Ocean Freight Costs for some Products
(Asia – United States or Asia – Europe)
Container Shipping Costs and Cargo Value
Six Generations of Containerships
The Largest Available Containership
Characteristics of Some Historical Containerships
The Regina Maersk
The Evelyn Maersk
Stacked 40-Foot Containers
Stacked Containership
Domestic 53 Foot Containers Doublestacked
Portainer, APM Terminal, Port Newark (New York)
Container Usage during its Life-Span
Containerized Cargo Flows along Major Trade
Routes, 2007
Containerized Cargo Flows along Major Trade
Routes
US Containerized Trade with Asia
Composition of the Global Fleet of Containers,
2008
World Container Production, 2007
World Container Fleet Ownership
Distance, Modal Choice and Transport Costs
Value Per Ton of U.S. Freight Shipments by Transportation
Mode, 2002
Average Length of Haul, Domestic Freight in
the United States
Intermodal Cost Function
Container Transport Costs
Time and Cost of Transport Activities Involving
Moving a 40 Foot Container between the American
East Coast and Western Europe
Cumulative Cost and Time of Moving a 40 Foot
Container between the American East Coast and
Western Europe
Impacts of River / Sea Shipping on a Transport
Chain
Average Cost per TEU by Containership Capacity
and By Route, 1997
Economies and Diseconomies of Scale in Container
Shipping
Container Transloading
Triple Crown Intermodal Network