Replies

1993 - hazardous waste shipments - 91% truck 9% rail

Probably a lot of short-haul truck moves. This is why statistics are typcially made using ton-miles, not just tons. In any case, Hazardous waste is a small and insignifcant part of the US freight market. Why bring it up? Why would rail haul much, say, hospital waste, or animal renderings?

share of US freight market -

Your statistics appear to be by revenue, not by freight actually hauled. Since rail is cheaper, it will certainly have lower revenue both absolutely and per ton and per ton-mile.

Again, what do you think you are prooving?

Also, aren't you familiar with any sources on the industry giving information that is not 10 years out of date? There are industry trade magazines online like Railway Age.

PS - also, Available road miles of rail have dropped by 50% since 1960.

Again, so? Most of that is consolidation of main lines and abandonment of branch lines. More tonnage is hauled today on fewer lines. Private Enterprise is busy at work making its physical plant more competitive and efficient. Comparing the system from 1960 to today and thinking something is proven by showing less mileage is like saying that since the Interstate System has less milage than the US Highway system it supplanted, therefore, roads must be in decline.

What is your point?

114 - "What is your point?"

Sorry, If you don't see it - more and more transport is shifting away from diminishing rail lines to trucking. Not the opposite, as a percentage of total shipments. Total freight shipments are increasing, for both truck and rail and getting more and more specialized. Sorry, you can't increase your service by decreasing the number of rail milage or road milage either. No new rail lines are being built.

As a traffic manager, I spent years matching the load to the mode to give the best freight management by all modes, air, ship, barge, rail, truck, delivery service, messenger, to give the best service at the cheapest cost.

Mass transit in Houston is abominable, and will not work until Houston starts building up, instead of out. Houston is unique compared to other cities - it is new - it is designed for cars - it has no natural boundaries (Gulf of Mexico (75 miles south), Mississippi River 400 miles east, Rocky Mountains 1000 miles west, and North, well ...).

Houston is made up of numerous mini-city 'centers'. It is really spread out, and full of houses, suburban houses, with lawns and driveways and cars. It is not full of giant apartment buildings. There are very few. And what apartments there are, are generally limited to 2 stories.

New York has little tiny stores and apartments jumbled together, piled on top of one another. Everything can be had within 'walking' distance. In houston, the population lives in houses 3 to 5 times the size of a typical NY apartment, and everything is 'driving' distance.

NYC was built in the 1700-1800's - no one had cars. Houston was built in the 1900's when everyone had cars. Wham-Bam-Trams are not the solution to the mass transit problem in Houston.

Houston needs a paradigm shift in mass transit thinking, not a return to thinking a century or two old.