Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hmaly who wrote (124293)	9/20/2000 12:20:18 PM
From: pgerassi	Respond to of 1580328

Dear Hmaly: You do not know how intermodal works period! Step 1 is the load is loaded into a container. Step 2, a truck (tractor) hooks up to the trailer on which the container sits and takes it to the train station. Step 3, a crane lifts the container from the trailer and places it on a rail car. Step 4, the train take the rail car to the destination. Step 5, a crane takes the container from the rail car and places it on a trailer. Step 6, another tractor drives the trailer to the destination. Step 7, the container is unloaded. When shipped overseas, Step 4a, a crane loads the container onto a ship. Step 4b, the ship travels to the destination port. Step 4c, a crane loads trailer onto a rail car from the ship. Step 4d, the train travels to the destination yard. There are many shortcuts in this procedure if, the destination and / or source has their own port or rail spur. This is how intermodal works. More than 50% of the freight rail traffic passing my house is of this type. The local governments patch the roads, sweep them, install lights, etc. This is not wholly paid for by the federal government or the state (it costs 50K a year to maintain a stop light in power and materials). Furthermore, cars subsidize trucks. If diesel fuel for trains was taxed at same rate as truck diesel fuel and that paid for all track maintenance and upgrades derailments, accidents, etc., trains would be much cheaper to operate. Fuel costs are less than track maintenance and upgrade costs even if, priced the same as truck diesel fuel. There would even be a subsidy to electrify the rails yielding even more cost reductions. The current breakeven for intermodal is around 500 to 800 miles. Given the above, the breakeven would be lowered to 100 to 300 miles. Would you like highway travel if the truck traffic was reduced by 50%? 75%? 90%? It would even be done so that short range electric tractors owned by the railroad or terminal go to the business and pick up or drop off the container trailers. The refueling point for these units would be at the terminal (so even LP, CNG, LiH, or CH (high pressure compressed hydrogen) could be the tractor fuel choice). The storage at the terminal can even be the very rail cars that transport those fuels. So the terminal would be self sufficient. The containers are picked up between 8PM and 10PM. If the destination is short say 200 miles or so, the destination tractor would arrive at say 4AM and 6AM at the destination. This would make the intercity semis run only at off peak hours. Even intracity semis would run at these times thus, further reducing traffic congestion. If longer, add one or at most two days since the trackage is now owned by the government and RRs bacome the suppliers of the train tractors (engines) and their crews. Scheduling could be handled by rail route traffic control similar to air traffic control or better yet, an quasi-public agency specifically tasked for maintaining the highest amount of on-time traffic. This can be done with the appropriate incentives and disincentives. A win win win win win proposition for industry, shippers, RRs, the government, and the traveling public. Would you pay to not see trucks during the day, especially the morning and evening commutes (the typical rush hours)? Pete