19
Churchill and Prince Rupert: A Tale of Two Grain Ports Barry Prentice, PhD Professor, I.H. Asper School of Business Dept. Supply Chain Management, Transport Institute University of Manitoba December 12, 2011

Barry Prentice

  • Upload
    doandat

  • View
    226

  • Download
    2

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Barry Prentice

Churchill and Prince Rupert: A Tale of Two Grain Ports

Barry Prentice, PhD Professor, I.H. Asper School of Business

Dept. Supply Chain Management, Transport Institute University of Manitoba

December 12, 2011

Page 2: Barry Prentice

How do we effectively use the ports of Churchill and Prince Rupert?

•  What are the incentives for the private sector to utilize these ports?

•  What is the likely impact on these ports of CWB change?

•  How much will grain sales through these ports change?

•  Are there profitable strategies for using these ports?

•  Are there policy initiatives that would be desirable for the grain marketing, handling and transportation system?

Page 3: Barry Prentice

Port Nelson or Port Churchill? Bay route began the fall 1910 completed September 1929. By 1920, $13.9 million spent on the rail line and $6.3 million on Port Nelson. Churchill was selected as the port in 1927.

Page 4: Barry Prentice

Hudson Bay Railway

Length: 627 miles

Fleet: 25 locomotives 80 railcars

Traffic: 19,500 carloads

Perishables Automobiles Construction material Heavy and dimensional equipment Scrap Hazardous materials Kraft paper Concentrates Containers Fertilizer Wheat/grain

VIA Rail

Page 5: Barry Prentice

Port of Churchill Bulk Shipping program 2011

Traffic: four berths 90-95 percent of all traffic is grain 50 million litre petroleum terminal 82,000 sq. ft. warehouse

Page 6: Barry Prentice

140,000-tonne elevator Unload rate 100+ railcars per day Load out rate 1,200 tonnes per hour Panamax vessels

Page 7: Barry Prentice

Viability of Churchill Grain Terminal?

•  Small catchment area (need for cross-hauling)

•  Dependence on Board grains for majority of traffic

•  Non-grain company ownership terminal •  Competition with Thunder Bay-Montreal route •  Dependence on high-cost short-line railway

Page 8: Barry Prentice

Source: Jean-Marc Ruest, Richardson International, 16th Fields on Wheels, Winnipeg, 2011

Page 9: Barry Prentice
Page 10: Barry Prentice
Page 11: Barry Prentice

Prince Rupert Strategic Advantages

•  Closest North American Port to Asia

•  Deepest natural harbor in North America

•  Safe, sheltered & efficient access from international shipping lanes

•  Exceptional community & labor support for expansion

•  Best crossing of Rocky Mountains from west coast (rail grade under 1%)

•  Trains run longer, faster (less urban congestion)

•  Reliable - Fewer weather-related interruptions

•  No congestion on main line (<25% utilization)

•  CN invested in capacity expansion and upgrades

Marine Rail

Source: Andrew Hamilton, Prince Rupert Port Authority “Welcome to North America’s Leading Edge” 15th Fields on Wheels, Winnipeg, 2010

Page 12: Barry Prentice

Source: Andrew Hamilton, Prince Rupert Port Authority “Welcome to North America’s Leading Edge” 15th Fields on Wheels, Winnipeg, 2010

Page 13: Barry Prentice

Viability of Prince Rupert Grain Terminal?

•  Board grains account for 85- 90 percent of the traffic in most years

•  Ownership, financing, and legal structure of elevator is complicated

•  Financed by Alberta Government, losses added to outstanding principal – due 2035

•  Grain companies have incentive to use PRG as a surge terminal

•  Revenues to CN Rail ~ $100 million annually Source: Brian Hayward, Aldare Resources “Back To The Drawing Board” 16th Fields on Wheels, Winnipeg, 2011

Page 14: Barry Prentice

Prince Rupert 1 Facility

209,000 MT Storage 4.6 MMT Avg. Annual Movement

Inventory Turns ~ 22

Churchill 1 Facility

140,000 MT Storage 0.5 MMT Avg. Annual Movement

Inventory Turns ~ 3.6

Vancouver 6 Facilities

954,290 MT Storage 14.6 MMT Avg. Annual Movement

Inventory Turns ~ 15.3

Thunder Bay 8 Facilities

1.25 MMT Storage 5.9 MMT Avg. Annual Movement

Inventory Turns ~ 4.7

Grain Terminals and Inventory Turnover

Source: Derived from - Mark Hemmes, Quorum Corporation, “Where Are We Going? - A Supply Chain Perspective” 16th Fields on Wheels, Winnipeg, 2011

Page 15: Barry Prentice

Port of Prince Rupert versus Port of Churchill

•  Year round operations

•  Asian market focus •  Bulk and

containerized freight •  CN mainline •  Mix of grain, coal,

forest products, containers, potash

•  July to October season

•  European-African market focus

•  Bulk freight only •  HBR short-line •  Grain dependent

Page 16: Barry Prentice

Churchill Strategic Advantages

•  The Arctic has the largest undeveloped reserves of minerals in the world. •  Churchill is the only deepwater Arctic Port in Canada and the shortest route. •  The Northwest Passage could be a significantly shorter global trade route

Tourism, Mining and Defense are

growth industries

Page 17: Barry Prentice

New airships under construction

Page 18: Barry Prentice

How do we effectively use the ports of Churchill and Prince Rupert?

•  What are the incentives for the private sector to utilize these ports?

•  What is the likely impact on these ports of CWB change?

•  How much will grain sales through these ports change?

•  Are there profitable strategies for using these ports?

•  Are there policy initiatives that would be desirable for the grain marketing, handling and transportation system?

Page 19: Barry Prentice

Conclusions

Port of Churchill: - The port will never close because of its strategic military value - Climate change presents positive and negative potentials - Tourism should continue to grow - Grain traffic will require enough volume to pay variable costs - Resource development and transshipment could replace grain

Port of Prince Rupert: - Positive future in general - Grain terminal needs ownership change - Containerized wheat shipments could become new traffic