Great Western Coffee Shop

Is the current pandemic an opportunity for modal shift for intercontinental freight (Far East to Europe) from Ship and Aircraft to train?

From Air Cargo World (https://aircargoworld.com/news/freight/intermodal/consultant-insight-ocean-demand-succumbs-to-air-but-will-rail-disrupt-both/)

Quite possibly, but I personally think it would be far better if we permanently reduced the volume of 'stuff' that is imported from the Far East / Asia.

I agree for a number of reasons:

1) We need to have a manufacturing capability for some key products here in the UK even if it does not cover all our needs (on the basis that it could be scaled up if needed);
2) Even if we don't make it here we need multiple sources of supply in case there is an emergency affecting one part of the world (we also need multiple sources in case a single factory is affected or has quality issues - that has caused problems with supply of some drugs in recent years with many drugs being produced only in a single factory in somewhere like India);
3) Because we don't make something here we kid ourselves that we have reduced our carbon footprint, when we have merely moved it to another part of the globe and then increased it by the carbon in transport and sometimes by a less efficient manufacturing process.
4) The economic activity of manufacture would benefit our communities. 

And when we offshore manufacturing to "third world" countries we don't have any say as to the carbon footprint underpinning its production, but you can bet that it won't be lower than ours.

As for moving stuff by rail, the numbers needed to move the dial are interesting.  Our ports accept around 8m TEU's a year, so 4m standard 40 footers.  If you want to shift 10% of that by rail, say you can get 50 on a train within 775m length, that would need 22 trains a day through the tunnel.   Not impossible, but then remember they (assuming they've all come from China) have to find suitable paths for the 8,000 plus miles all the way.  So with a 10 day journey, you'd have about 220 trains at any point in time trundling their way across Europe (and back again).

It's hard to see how the economics would work either.  A large container ship can hold 20,000 TEU's, or 10,000 40 ft units. So in broad terms those 220 trains winding their way across Europe would equate to one ship.  If each train needs three drivers to keep on the move, that's 600 well paid drivers, as opposed to maybe 20 low paid crew from a flag of convenience.  I'm not convinced the carbon footprint would be less either, although marine diesel is very poor in terms of particulate emission.

And of course the cooperation required across numerous countries to enable this to all happen would be a challenge in itself, particularly as most countries would not benefit except for some track access charges, and may consider it to be an adverse impact to their own environment.   

So much, much better to reduce the amount we import, starting with a long hard look at what this country needs to survive both in normal times and in a stressed scenario such as we are now in.   

There are regular China-Europe freight trains anyway. Faster than ship, cheaper than plane. Just right for certain goods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yiwu–London_railway_line
18 days, running once a week. Some other routes run more frequently AFAIR.

Yes, but it's unrealistic to think that they can do anything other than scratch the surface in terms of the huge volume of freight carried.

I don't think they're trying to replace anything. It's just another option with other characteristics. There certainly is some, but I don't know how much, air freight for which shipping is too slow but which doesn't actually need to arrive as quickly as by air. If that all transferred to rail it would be a good thing. Hard to see it competing with the huge volumes of sea cargo.

This is fascinating stuff!

The largest ship to come from China to Felixstowe was over 23,000 TEU equivalent. It takes 4 or 5 weeks to make the journey, depending on weather. That load can include over 2,000 refrigerated containers. That will take a lot of railway traffic, and a lot of paperwork. There are passenger services. The Thursday train from Paris connects with the Saturday departure for Beijing, arriving the following Saturday. Probably beyond my endurance.

Most (all?) large ships these days pay for weather routing from one of the many weather services.
The service will have the size of ship, type of cargo, etc and will work out a route for the ship to follow to avoid large swell/winds.
This will continually be updated on the voyage to ensure a smoother run.
Most cruise ships on longer runs will utilise this service.
In years gone by it was always A to B and take pot luck.  Nowadays it's the appliance of science!

Just the 4 weeks then. That is a lot longer than going by air, and a fair bit longer than by rail, but volume make up for it.

Marine diesel oil is pretty much the filthiest motive fuel in common use. It is basically what is left after the crude has been distilled and all the nice bit removed for use by other vehicles. I know that cruise liners are looking to convert to LPG or LNG and wonder if that will apply to cargo vessels. Cruise ships have the advantage of frequent stops where they can be refuelled. I remember sails being tested a few decades ago, controlled by computer to get the optimum power out of the wind, but I can recall much coming of the research.

Tankers themselves are converting to LNG! This is apparently due to the scrubber controversy. Do scrubbers fitted to bring sulphur emissions within EU limits pay for themselves? The answer apparently is that the scrubbers are fragile and LNG is the way to go. I'd expect this is only at the techno forefront now but will presumably become more mainstream in time as more parts of the world start to look at pollution from shipping.