[sustran] Re: rail vs road freight distribution

[Daryl Oster]

> Original Message From: Todd Alexander Litman
> 
> Rail is often the most cost effective way of shipping farm products. Here
> in North America many farm groups have fought hard to maintain rail
> service in their areas. For that reason some rural communities have
> purchased rail lines that were scheduled for abandonment in order to
> maintain service.

Todd,
If you look at my posts, you will see that I always qualify the difference
in passenger and freight rail.  Most cargo rail in the US is not subsidized,
and is profitable and efficient.  I have no complaint or issue with private
rail investment.  

On the average rail is 1/3 the cost of truck, and takes three times longer.
There are many incidences where railroad freight rates are so high that is
lower cost for a farmer to buy a truck for only 3 or 4 weeks use per year,
along with the labor cost, and higher operating cost than to contract with a
rail shipper.  There have been several coops formed by farmers to harness
the efficiency of rail, while some are successful in achieving better value
for farmers, many instead grow top-heavy with general and administrative
costs (and perhaps even some corruption).  

 
> Researchers Kenneth Casavant and Jerry Lenzi ("Rail Line Abandonment and
> Public Acquisition Impacts on Economic Development," Transportation
> Research Record 1274, 1989, pp. 241-251) found that it is often cost
> effective for transportation agencies to subsidize rail lines than to have
> rural freight (such as farm products) travel by heavy trucks, which cause
> significant damage to roadways. An efficient transportation system would
> charge trucks the full costs of the road damage they impose, which would
> give shippers a rational reason to use rail when it is most cost effective
> overall, but currently most jurisdictions undercharge heavy trucks (i.e.,
> they impose significant economic externalities) making trucking appear
> cheaper than it really is to society.
> 
> Of course, this is not to suggest that all freight should travel by rail,
> but with improved logistics (i.e., more containerization and more
> efficient terminal operations) and as fuel costs increase and communities
> become more concerned about external impacts such as road damage,
> congestion, accident risk and pollution, the role of rail increases.
> 
> Best wishes,
> -Todd Litman

I fully agree that trucks must be charged for the road damage they cause,
and I agree that rail is often the best present method to move freight with.
For new transportation infrastructure, please consider that ETT offers: low
cost cargo ability, low cost infrastructure, distributed access, AND very
high speed.

Daryl Oster
(c) 2006  all rights reserved.  ETT, et3, MoPod, "space travel on earth"
e-tube, e-tubes,  and the logos thereof are trademarks and or service marks
of et3.com Inc.  For licensing information contact: POB 1423, Crystal River
FL 34423-1423  (352)257-1310, et3 at et3.com , www.et3.com>