Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
US Class I Railroads: Why Are Coal Volumes a Concern?
US Class I Railroads: Why Are Coal Volumes a Concern?
By Samuel Prince
11 hours ago
How Did Major US Railroads Perform in 1Q16?
(Continued from Prior Part)
1Q16 coal revenues
Previously, we discussed the 1Q16 revenues for all of the US Class I railroads. Now, we’ll look at coal. Since 2015, coal has turned into a black hole in the universe of commodities hauled by these carriers. Let’s look at the coal revenues lost by these railroads in 1Q16—compared to 1Q15.
As you can see in the above graph, Union Pacific (UNP) saw its coal revenues fall by 43% in 1Q16 on a year-over-year basis. The immediate followers were Canadian National Railway (CNI) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe—owned by Berkshire Hathaway (BRK-B). They had a loss of 42% and 38.6% in coal revenues, respectively. However, investors should note that coal’s exposure in total revenues is merely 5% for Canadian National Railway—Canada’s largest railway. Coal’s exposure in total revenues is 16.3% for Burlington Northern Santa Fe—the United States’ biggest Class I railroad.
For the major eastern US Class I rail carrier, CSX (CSX), you should know that the coal revenue loss was 37% compared to 23.3% for Norfolk Southern (NSC) in 1Q16. What’s worrisome is the fact that coal’s share of CSX’s total revenues is 1% higher than rival Norfolk Southern’s 14.4% in 1Q16. In this scenario, Canadian Pacific appears to be relatively better off in the peer group. We would like to remind investors’ that this railroad’s coal traffic in Canada starts primarily from Teck Resources’ (TCK) mines in southeastern British Columbia. The good news is that Tech Resources intends to produce slightly more coal in the current year—compared to 2015.
By Samuel Prince
11 hours ago
How Did Major US Railroads Perform in 1Q16?
(Continued from Prior Part)
1Q16 coal revenues
Previously, we discussed the 1Q16 revenues for all of the US Class I railroads. Now, we’ll look at coal. Since 2015, coal has turned into a black hole in the universe of commodities hauled by these carriers. Let’s look at the coal revenues lost by these railroads in 1Q16—compared to 1Q15.
As you can see in the above graph, Union Pacific (UNP) saw its coal revenues fall by 43% in 1Q16 on a year-over-year basis. The immediate followers were Canadian National Railway (CNI) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe—owned by Berkshire Hathaway (BRK-B). They had a loss of 42% and 38.6% in coal revenues, respectively. However, investors should note that coal’s exposure in total revenues is merely 5% for Canadian National Railway—Canada’s largest railway. Coal’s exposure in total revenues is 16.3% for Burlington Northern Santa Fe—the United States’ biggest Class I railroad.
For the major eastern US Class I rail carrier, CSX (CSX), you should know that the coal revenue loss was 37% compared to 23.3% for Norfolk Southern (NSC) in 1Q16. What’s worrisome is the fact that coal’s share of CSX’s total revenues is 1% higher than rival Norfolk Southern’s 14.4% in 1Q16. In this scenario, Canadian Pacific appears to be relatively better off in the peer group. We would like to remind investors’ that this railroad’s coal traffic in Canada starts primarily from Teck Resources’ (TCK) mines in southeastern British Columbia. The good news is that Tech Resources intends to produce slightly more coal in the current year—compared to 2015.
