3 ms·

Don't know about air mail, but for maritime and rail transport, there is much more going from China to the EU or US than in the other direction by volume. This

Don't know about air mail, but for maritime and rail transport, there is much more going from China to the EU or US than in the other direction by volume. This means cargo carriers have to send back empty containers to China. As a result, it's cheaper to book a container, from, say, Antwerp to Shanghai than the reverse. The difference can be quite substantial, potentially hundreds of USD per container. For the other parts of the trip I don't have any hard info but I would think rail and truck is cheaper in China per km when converted to USD.

Scoundreller 7y ago
That’s all especially true now that we can’t send our “recyclables” in those empty containers.
DoctorOetker 7y ago
>Don't know about air mail, but for maritime and rail transport, there is much more going from China to the EU or US than in the other direction by volume. Where can I verify this? Thats looking at only the direct transport? Or also indirect transport? Consider a hypothetical container from the US/EU going to Africa (bringing products, second hand goods, "recyclables", ...), then the container could pick up raw minerals and resources going to China, now theres an empty container in China and it has to go back to US/EU?
- seanmcdirmid 7y ago
  It’s pretty much the result of our trade deficit. Not only does China export more than is, they export much lower value products on a volume/weight basis. Heck, a big USA export to China are airplanes that can simply be flown there. China exports plenty to Africa, no need for such circuitous shipping patterns.
  - DoctorOetker 7y ago
    China has a huge population, so material consumption (raw materials or finished products) for internal use in china, can bayesian catapult reasoning on value per volume/weight basis.
    - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
      It could, but China has other more nearby trade partners for raw materials (Russia, Central Asia, Indonesia, Australia).
- nickserv 7y ago
  It's because the shipping containers belong to the shipping company, and are rented out for the trip. So the shipping company will have a bunch of empty containers at the port of landing (destination), and needs to send them back to the port of departure to be filled again. If trade between the two ports is balanced, then the containers will always be full regardless of the port of departure. But since trade is not balanced, they wind up having to send empty containers on the "return" voyage. Which is pure loss for the shipping company, so they are willing to heavily discount routes that have empty containers transiting. Which are these routes does change of course, but they are often those originating in the EU / US and arriving in Asia.
  - londons_explore 7y ago
    If the containers were the only concern, they could be melted down and shipped back to China in a far more compact form. Container manufacturing is very automated, so it can be very cheap to do so.

Scoundreller 7y ago

That’s all especially true now that we can’t send our “recyclables” in those empty containers.

DoctorOetker 7y ago

>Don't know about air mail, but for maritime and rail transport, there is much more going from China to the EU or US than in the other direction by volume. Where can I verify this? Thats looking at only the direct transport? Or also indirect transport? Consider a hypothetical container from the US/EU going to Africa (bringing products, second hand goods, "recyclables", ...), then the container could pick up raw minerals and resources going to China, now theres an empty container in China and it has to go back to US/EU?

seanmcdirmid 7y ago
It’s pretty much the result of our trade deficit. Not only does China export more than is, they export much lower value products on a volume/weight basis. Heck, a big USA export to China are airplanes that can simply be flown there. China exports plenty to Africa, no need for such circuitous shipping patterns.
- DoctorOetker 7y ago
  China has a huge population, so material consumption (raw materials or finished products) for internal use in china, can bayesian catapult reasoning on value per volume/weight basis.
  - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
    It could, but China has other more nearby trade partners for raw materials (Russia, Central Asia, Indonesia, Australia).
nickserv 7y ago
It's because the shipping containers belong to the shipping company, and are rented out for the trip. So the shipping company will have a bunch of empty containers at the port of landing (destination), and needs to send them back to the port of departure to be filled again. If trade between the two ports is balanced, then the containers will always be full regardless of the port of departure. But since trade is not balanced, they wind up having to send empty containers on the "return" voyage. Which is pure loss for the shipping company, so they are willing to heavily discount routes that have empty containers transiting. Which are these routes does change of course, but they are often those originating in the EU / US and arriving in Asia.
- londons_explore 7y ago
  If the containers were the only concern, they could be melted down and shipped back to China in a far more compact form. Container manufacturing is very automated, so it can be very cheap to do so.