Small Ports Don’t Need Rotterdam’s Budget To Automate – Here’s What They’re Doing Instead Smaller ports do not need to automate everything at once. Many are starting with one gate, one system and solving one problem at a time. When we talk about port automation, we usually think of big ports like Rotterdam, Singapore, Busan and Shanghai. These ports use automated cranes, autonomous trucks and digital systems across their terminals. But automation can be very expensive. Long Beach Container Terminal spent about $1.4 billion to automate a terminal with a capacity of 3.3 million TEU. The Port of Santos put the cost of its automated equipment at about $534 million over 35 years. Complete automation usually makes financial sense for ports handling at least 1 million TEU a year. Even then, U.S. operators told the Government Accountability Office that it can take 10 to 20 years to recover the cost of automated cargo-handling equipment. McKinsey says a fully automated new terminal needs to cut operating costs by 25% or increase productivity by 30% to make the investment worthwhile. For smaller terminals handling only a few hundred thousand TEU a year, these costs can make automation seem out of reach. But smaller ports do not need to automate everything. The Industry Has A Scaling Problem UNCTAD says ports are at very different stages of digitalisation. At many smaller ports, important information is still handled manually or outside digital systems. It also says that many small and medium-sized ports do not have the skills or staff needed to manage large digital projects on their own. Instead, UNCTAD suggests using simpler technologies that solve specific problems. It also suggests that ports can share the cost of developing these systems. So, smaller ports do not need to ask, “How can we automate the whole