3 ms·
That's 40% of "ton-miles" - trains disproportionately move heavy, cheap goods (i.e. aggregate, coal), which makes that number potentially misleading. The perce
by ederamen 3y ago
That's 40% of "ton-miles" - trains disproportionately move heavy, cheap goods (i.e. aggregate, coal), which makes that number potentially misleading. The percentage of freight moved by rail by "value" is closer to 15% (trucking is ~65%).
https://www.bts.gov/newsroom/2017-north-american-freight-numbers https://www.bts.gov/newsroom/2017-north-american-freight-num...
https://www.aar.org/facts-figures#:~:text=Freight%20rail%20accounts%20for%20around,any%20other%20mode%20of%20transportation https://www.aar.org/facts-figures#:~:text=Freight%20rail%20a....
- obmelvin 3y agoI agree it's good to consider the whole picture, but ton-miles are probably the most important to consider given the increased diesel required to truck heavy loads, correct?
- eru 3y agoPlus congestion and labour etc.
- irrational 3y agoWhy would one want to emphasize value over weight? If I load up a train with extremely expensive metals, jewels, artwork, etc. couldn’t I raise a countries rail by value measurement overnight?
- pitaj 3y agoAnd how does that compare to Europe?
- sarchertech 3y agoThe number isn’t misleading if we’re talking about efficient movement of goods. I’m unclear why you’d care about value at all in the context of this discussion. In context weight and volume are the most relevant metrics.