Why U.S. Freight Trains Are So Much Better Than Passenger Rail
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 май 2024
- The United States lags behind the rest of the world when it comes to passenger trains but when it comes to the freight railroad the U.S. is dominating. The U.S. freight rail network operates over 140,000 miles of privately-owned track in every state except Hawaii, according to the Association of American Railroads. It moves one-third of all U.S. exports and roughly 40% of long distance freight volume.
It competes directly with the trucking industry to move goods around the country. Shipping everything from coal to cars to chemicals. And with the rise of e-commerce companies like Amazon, trains are increasingly moving consumer goods as well.
There are seven major freight railroads that connect North America. Union Pacific and BNSF dominate the west. CSX and Norfolk Southern are the primary east coast operators, while Kansas City Southern, along with Canadian Pacific and Canadian National run routes north and south. Amtrak, which is the United State’s passenger service, owns only 3% of the country’s rail.
In 2019, the five top railroads in the U.S. had a total operating revenue of more than $71 billion dollars.
But the freight rail industry’s success has not come without its challenges. The industry has dealt with bankruptcies, the lack of demand for coal and the more recent supply chain bottlenecks and rise in thefts. The seven top railroads, which own the majority of the tracks in North America, have also been criticized for power over the rail industry.
CNBC explores how freight railroads became so profitable and how the industry plans to evolve to stay on top.
Correction (February 3, 2022): At 1:41, Craig Fuller incorrectly states Amtrak is for-profit but Amtrak is not a for-profit corporation.
» Subscribe to CNBC: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBC
» Subscribe to CNBC TV: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCtelevision
» Subscribe to CNBC Classic: cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCclassic
About CNBC: From 'Wall Street' to 'Main Street' to award winning original documentaries and Reality TV series, CNBC has you covered. Experience special sneak peeks of your favorite shows, exclusive video and more.
Connect with CNBC News Online
Get the latest news: www.cnbc.com/
Follow CNBC on LinkedIn: cnb.cx/LinkedInCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Facebook: cnb.cx/LikeCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Twitter: cnb.cx/FollowCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Instagram: cnb.cx/InstagramCNBC
#CNBC
Why U.S. Freight Trains Are So Much Better Than Passenger Rail
Honestly, the low employment figures of rail relative to its' gross and net revenues is strongly indicative of just how efficient and profitable the industry is.
Why do you think Warren Buffet bought a railway? It helps that almost all the lines are owned by freight focused rail companies. So passenger rail is given second fiddle when it wants to share some of the rail capacity. It at least helps take traffic off the highways. Freight rail also relies on cheap diesel
@@stephendoherty8291 yes and also newer locomotives are a lot more efficient in their use of diesel.
@@JamesTyreeII There is likely potential for the rail companies to install wind turbines adjacent to depots or the rail track in order to feed the electrified lines with renewable power or perhaps batteries in order to "refuel" some hybrid locomotives that would use battery power for the take-off and any container power requirements (cooling etc). Cars that use this as called mild hybrids and use a second battery for this purpose but trains would need a bigger battery and a fast recharge rate to avoid any "refueling" downtime. They might also allow less powerful (and less emitting) locomotives to assist with an electric boost up strong inclines. It is neither likely nor practicle to electrify most of the freight rail network due to its rural distances and low frequency use unless its sharing it with "frequent" passenger rail. Solar and wind generation may also offer hydrogen production that could be a future alternative fuel to diesel. GE showed a "green" locomotive but the type of battery needed for trains is not available or economic to use as a diesel alternative for long haul train journeys. Modern freight locomotives might be cleaner but ever longer trucks to compensate for less bulk hauling traffic will mean higher fuel use. Cutting fuel use to "zero" carbon fuel might also allow freight to move further into cities or just remain there as urban-suburban air quality restrictions impact all fossil fuel (and the dirtiest ones) transport no matter its type
Trucks use just one driver normally but they carry one container. With even just two train drivers you can carry hundreds of intermodal or bulk goods so hence the low employment required. Plus trucks have to accomidate a crumbling road infrastructure and occassionally other driver accidents whereas trains are on a private track meeting no other traffic (and the whole network is monitored centrally) with very reliable hardware running at moderate speeds. Even cargo aircraft meet more inclement weather and other planes
@@stephendoherty8291 With freight traffic increasing 50 percent over the next two decades, the railroads desire to maintain, sustain, and expand their railroads lines. They can't do that if they give Amtrak or local commuter rail route availability every half hour or every fifteen minutes. Especially after spending multiple billions maintaining and sustaining their tracks over the past two decades. Amtrak should build its own new high speed infrastructure on its own right of way not adjacent to railroad right of ways. If the railroads don't move the future freight, then trucks will do so on our crumbling interstate highways which isn't a GREEN solution...
I have always desired to see more passenger rail in the US, but I think we need more mass transit in general, especially in urban areas--trolleys, streetcars, and lightrail.
Agreed, but there are too many opponents to fight before we even draw out plans.
Use to have a great trolley system throughout nyc, till the late 1950s when GM and other bus manufacturers paid off politicians for pollution driven busses, and let me to you, those old original buses spuded out big clouds of carbon monoxide!!!
@@robertdipaola3447 I know--I just watched "Trolley," an IMAX documentary about the rise and fall of rail-based urban transportation. The film is available to watch for free online, because the creators want more people to know about this issue.
maybe you some people do, but most Americans don't, that's why they don't exist.
between cars and planes, most Americans don't need / want public transportation or hsr.
Yup, we had it once.
When one of these giant freight trains drive through parts of Illinois and Indiana the track is often on street level in the middle of busy areas of small towns. They can routinely take between 3 to 6 minutes to fully pass by. It's one of the longest Loading Screens you experience in real life
I live in Bloomington where Indiana University is, and there's a railroad that cuts STRAIGHT through the middle of the campus and its amazing to see it so close up for minutes on end.
I think school is longer.
Just like when your mom walks by.
Anybody else bothered that the title of the video is inaccurate? The video told virtually nothing about freight trains vs passenger trains, but was basically all about the freight rail industry vs the freight truck industry. It was definitely an interesting video, but terribly named.
Basically, it just means that freight railroads are not subsidized by taxpayers and are hugely successful private companies that are very profitable, while all passenger trains are subsidized by taxpayers and are not profitable at all. That's the TLDR. 🙂
@@waycoolscootaloo cause freight rail moves slow and can carry large loads, passenger trains have to move fast.
@@twocansams6335 It's not a speed issue. Its reliability. And cars and buses are always just faster because they don't have to stop a ton like passenger trains do. Plus your personal car can leave at any moment. You don't need to get to a train station at a specific time and you don't need to sit there and wait for one to show up.
Also when it comes to infrastructure freight trains are far more demanding on track and cause far more wear and tear than passenger trains do. Freight train companies have to spend a lot more money on their track compared to lightweight passenger trains. Yet they are still far more profitable. They can haul just so much weight that they become very profitable.
The railroads a long time ago learned that with cars around, there was no real way to make a profitable passenger rail service. And if private industry couldn't make it work, no government funded rail system will ever find a way.
And it's not just cars these days trains have to compete with. It's the airline industry too.
Commuter trains in and out of very busy metropolitan areas make sense. Hence why cities like Chicago have the "Chicago L" and the Metra system. And they work very well. But cars are still by far the dominant way to get around even in these areas.
But Metra and the L do help to relieve traffic congestion. And the trains are always full. But again still not profitable even though they are full of people.
@@waycoolscootaloo Freight railway companies are subsidized by taxpayers. What are you talking about?
@@uzziya6392 They are not subsidized. Only passenger rail is. Freight railroads make billions of dollars in net profits while passenger trains loose money.
The most profitable railroads in the world are American / Canadian Railroads.
Rail subsidies are largest in China ($130 billion) and Europe (€73 billion), while the United States has relatively small subsidies for just passenger rail with freight not subsidized at all.
Railroads also "Borrow" each others power (Locomotives) on an as-needed basis. They reconcile the accounting for this at the end of the year. This is why you may see a BNSF engine 1000 miles off their territory on the east coast. Also I have noticed combined trains in the last several years due to PSR. Also no coal trains anymore here in NY, I used to see them almost daily.
@
why no more coal trains? did the stop mining it in Pennsylvania?
Meanwhile in Europe especially Poland You don’t see foreign power on their railways there
@@zombieat democrats took over.
Some railways also have agreements to keep the power on their trains from origin to destination, so there is no power swap at the interchange. An example is CP and UP, which is why you see a lot of CP locomotives in Idaho, and UP locomotives in Alberta, Canada.
It used to take two guys to run the train.
Now the train will be able to drive itself,
but it needs ten guards to keep people from stealing the cargo.
De los mejor son unos NUDE-DATTING.ONLINE
Sun: "Hotter"
Sugar: "Sweeter"
Joonie: "Cooler"
Yoongi: "Butter"
Son unos de los mejores conciertos, no puede ir pero de tan solo verlos desde pantalla, se que estuvo sorprendente.
Ojalá la cultura europea se representara más a menudo tan bellamente. No puedo dejar de decir "oh, esto es hermoso" a lo largo del video..
Uyunan çıgıp, tigi jer-jerdi izdedi. Al kiçinekey koyondu wins taba algan. Al bir az oylonboy koyondu karmadı. '' Bul koyon menin kursagımdı toyguza albayt '' dep oylodu arstan.
Arstan koyondu öltüröyün dep jatkanda, bir kiyik tigi tarapka çurkadı. Arstan aç köz bolup kaldı. Kiçine koyondu emes, çoŋ kiyikti jegen jakşı dep oylodu. # 垃圾
They are one of the best concerts, you can not go but just seeing them from the screen, I know it was surprising
💗❤️💌💘
Or an actual lock on the containers themselves. From what I have heard a large number of the containers are kept closed by a plastic rod.
@@AmpereBEEP You have no clue to what extent thieves are willing to go do you?
How hard do you think it is to carry a bolt cutters for thieves? Absolutely nothing.. The story that popped up in LA couple of weeks ago confirms this..
When they can steal wheels and catalytic converters from cars, locks are nothing..
Here's where the real remake of Robocop emerges! ;)
@@revaddict Use better locks, then the thieves will need to use saws and cutting torches on the containers. Not stop them but slow them down.
If only the government saw trains as an option. It would be perfect for medium distance travel. Traveling from Chicago to Detroit, Nashville, Cincinnati and city in between. Same for LA, SF,, and Vegas. Would totally drive commerce up in many smaller cities which have struggled.
Detroit to chi Amtrak been a thing, go back to sleep
@@alexanderbankowski5617 not well supported or modern. If it wasn’t from the 50s people would probably use it
Ozzy Osbourne: All aboard! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Aye aye aye aye aye aye!
*guitar solo
Could never compete with air, autos, or buses. It would require building and maintaining separate tracks from freight trains at a cost of billions. Passenger demand could never justify construction or the huge continuing and endless subsidies.
@@stuarthirsch would require less money than auto and airlines which take much more in subsidies. The goal wouldnt be to compete with airlines it would be to take on cars. Trains will never be suited for national travel like airlines are but they would be perfect for regional travel. Reduce spending on interstates and other auto focused infrastructure and put that into building up regional railways which would reduce emissions, reduce traffic, increase commerce. Yes there would be flaws like there would be a higher short term cost and public transportation within American cities sucks so what do you do once you get there but the positives outweigh the negatives in my opinion.
Because the freight companies own the tracks and the passenger company (Amtrak/government) doesn't. So Amtrak gets pushed aside whenever a freight train comes along. That's why it takes them forever to get anywhere. The only place they own any of the tracks they use is in the Northeast where they have the high-speed Acela line from Boston to D.C.
Amtrak takes priority over freight trains. Can't tell you how many hours I've spent In a siding to get out of the way of Amtrak trains.
@@simguy912 Having ridden Amtrak many times, I can tell you that almost every time we've been late and it's usually involved pulling over and waiting for freight trains to pass at least two or three times. The freight companies do own the tracks, so they always have the right-of-way. I don't know of any time Amtrak has priority, except maybe in the Northeast where they do own some of the tracks.
@@mattbosley3531 thats just the dispatchers and freight workers flexing muscle. It's a law that amtrak has preference over freight trains. But if I'm working an industry and leave my train on the main line. Well Amtrak just has to wait. I'll be told to hurry so Amtrak can come thru but prolly still gonna take my time. When Amtrak gets put in a siding it's more than likely they are held up well before the trains passing them. And those particular trains have some sort of proceed to an area before where the actual hold up is.
That doesn't cause them to be late and they can't increase speeds on the tracks to go any faster.
@@igneousmoth4329 what part of freight companies owning the tracks so they can do whatever they want are you not getting exactly?
Why is the unprofitability of amtrack always a talking point, but not the unprofitability of roads? Maybe there are other reasons for public utilities than profit and this is a silly double standard that benefits the oil industry?
Because Amtrak is managed as a for-profit corporation. If we want a dedicated, public rail travel service that operates as a public utility, we probably need to create a new institution or reconstitute Amtrak
@@TankDerek The best way to get better rail service in the USA is to break up and sell off Amtrak.
@@starventure Then we'd get no rail service because no private company would invest in something as risky as passenger rail. The government just needs to fund it more.
Because roads get 1000x the ridership of Amtrak.
@@starventure Amtrak exists because passengers are unprofitable so they offloaded it.
TLDR Trains carry a lot of stuff long distances for a solid cost/Ton moved, private companies own the rails passenger trains uses, so freight are higher priority on their own rails.
also: lobbyists.
Amtrak has priority over freight. Passenger in general I’m pretty sure is federally required to have more priority on main track than freight period. I could be wrong
@@NoVaRedacted I also could be wrong, but when I tried to take amtrak there were a lot of delays and us pulling over to stop for freight.
Amtrak has priority over the freight trains and charges the freight companys 1000$ a minute ,usually if Amtrak is delayed it's not intentional and something has gone wrong or poor planning on the freight side.
@@recedingant4868 not quite. Freight rail can theoretically be fined for holding up Amtrak trains but the DOJ never has actually gone after a freight rail company for doing this. Amtrak publishes a report card every year of which freight rail hosts lead to the most delays.
One factor that will impede the trucking industry is the increasing congestion on the interstate highway system - by trucks. Sometimes all you see are 18-wheelers jostling with each other on the road, and the occasional car stuck in the mayhem. Our interstates cannot handle a large increase in truck traffic, and we will have to rely more on the rail networks.
Interstates with only two lanes in each direction are incapable with dealing with semi traffic. Instead of widening them ad Infinitum, put some train tracks in it
@@Shinyarc Dedicated truck routes might help. Highways that are only for trucks.
Might cost a few hundred billion dollars to do, though.
@@dannypipewrench533 why would we want more highways only for truck? at that point just add more rail, not only will it be cheaper, and it is better for the environment.
@@LWoodGaming Right, but then the trucks will continue clogging the existing roads. And unless all of the trucking companies collectively decide to commit corporate suicide, I do not see the trucks going away until the companies are all bankrupt. And those trucks are really necessary due to the fact that we buy so much stuff. Trains can only do so much, and are great for long haul, but the trucks are what we need once the stuff is in the vicinity of the destination.
Essentially, unless we ban trucks, which seems un-American, the only solution I see is to make it easier for them to do their jobs and simultaneously clear our roads of them.
And besides, it is really annoying when all of the trucks decide to play a game of "road block." Now, they can play it by themselves on their truck-only (Maybe buses as well, there, we have some public transit opportunities.) highways. Heck, we could run transmission cables over the road and offer a tax break for using the cables to encourage electric trucks.
@@dannypipewrench533 If they build a road only for truck they will have to destroy house and building that is in the way, also they will still have to go back to the normal road to reach the walmart and other building in the big city or small tower. why build more road if we can build/make better transports for peolpe like bike, bus, and trains so people can stop driving so many cars which mean less traffic for truck.
I've worked as a intermodal contractor (13 years and counting) for just about every Railroad in America, besides CP. Out of all of them BNSF is by far the best to work at. Railroads that have adopted PSR seem to be the worst to work at. PSR's profit over safety is one of the major reasons why derailments are way up amongst other things. Cost cutting just to make profits seem bigger will without a doubt cost more in the long run.
NOT ANYMORE
😂 BNSF adopted PSR and are putting in place one of the worst attendance policies out there making workers commit 90-95% of their life to working. Maybe years ago it was a good place to work but Warren Buffett does not care and is all about profit. He is trying to fire/force resignations to push 1 man or computerized trains, so NO BNSF is most definitely not a good railroad to work for.
In Poland PSR would be laughed off the rails
What does PSR stand for?
It stands for Precision Schedule Railroading. On paper, it’s an “innovation” that increases profits while also decreasing traffic. In reality, this means trains that are in excess of 15,000 feet, all operated by 2 men at minimum. This means the workload for the remaining employees is much larger than it was before, resulting in extremely long hours and miserable working conditions. It has led to mass uproar amongst the unions because of the safety risk that PSR brings. But the executives and shareholders don’t see any of that, all they see are dollar signs.
The upper level management types use the term "efficiency" loosely, they are mostly referring to return on investment and not shipping costs to end users of the freight systems.
10:00 Why do you never mention that they recently laid off a lot of the track security personel that usually were able prevent it?
Probably cheaper to just insure the containers than to hire security. Objects are easier to replace than to have to pay out workers comp/disability/death benefits.
Railroad owners point to Amtrak and say "look how unprofitable and space waste this is on our rails".
In reality Amtrak's low profits are the result in putting freight trains always higher priority than passenger trains which adds to passenger delays, and drop in ridership for more reliable / faster transportation like cars or flying.
It's the same thinking as politicians screaming how bad the postal service is when in reality we have lowered funding year over year for it. It's bad because we prioritize it to be bad.
In Germany, passenger trains always have higher priority.
This results in much less transportation of freight on the rail. All freight goes with the truck then.
The passenger trains and the railroadoperator (which is a government owned monopoly) are still unprofitable and have to be subsidised with billions wich is always a mayor issue in german politics.
In the US, the market share of railway transport compared with trucking is double then that in Germany.
I think freight is a better use of railroads than passengers.
But of course I think there should be passenger trains too.
@@obstimhaus5086 I get what you're saying for sure. I feel the US needs a balance just as much as Germany does
CNBC is owned by a mega corporation, they love to make contradictory claims because they know their audience hardly does research for themselves so it's easy for them to get away with dishonesty, they probably support NOT improving passenger rail service because they're being paid at the long term
@@CannabisTechLife Amtrak needs to build or buy their own tracks. There's tons of abandoned right of ways that would be perfect for this.
Amtrak loses money because it doesn't respond to passenger demand, it answers to Politicians who order Amtrak to provide the lines that the Politicians want. Railroads have time based contracts, they have to give priority to those contracts, Amtrak doesn't compensate them for violating the contracts.
I thought 18 wheelers had largely replaced freight trains in the US. This story helps bring clarity to the situation.
Perhaps you haven't noticed the 150 car double stack container trains everywhere? Haven't noticed how often train horns are heard?
18 wheelers and trains work together for intermodel shipping (steel containers shipping).
@@robertsteinbach7325 Not at the Ports of LA and Long Beach CA. Ships Truks and RR are not able to work together as in the past. Thus Hundreds of ships parked offshore and thousands of Trucks not able to get into container yards and trains getting ripped off. We all pay for it we all suffer from it and I cannot see how any industry wins in this case.
They certainly have.
A train might carry 200 boxes, but if you stand next to a freeway and count semis all day, it'll be a few thousand or more just one one road.
@@jimbronson687 I work pacific tradelane to ELP Texas. Death of rail bookings to Santa Teresa ramp has put our cost through the roof to trans load and return container to steamship, move line haul to ELP…
Hopefully, passenger railroads in the United States will improve one day.
Not going to happen if people don’t use them.
The would have to be separate from the freight rail, it would be the only way it would be good. Other nations do this as well
@@starventure People don't use them because there's nothing good to use, not because there is no inherent demand. The US doesn't know how to properly build social infrastructure, just industrial. Best they can do is sprawling suburbs and unwalkable cities with no metro Systems. So why would they bother with passenger rail now. Damage is done... the only reason a lot of people in NJ *can't* use public transportation is because their lines/routes are sooo useless. Instead of being interconnected, all lines are centered towards Manhattan. Plain and simply useless.
@KFC Man only place they do well is in the NEC where big cities are close together and have okayish public transport. Everywhere else in the US isn't formatted, so to speak, for intercity passenger rail.
@@starventure I would use them. I don't like to drive and I now hate flying.
Instead of more regulation, maybe we should just stop subsidizing the trucking industry. Tax them properly for their disproportional impact on road maintenance costs. Also implement a carbon tax. Once the negative externalities have been taken into account, rail will always come out ahead for good reason. It's just better for society.
That will make goods more expensive due to higher transport costs. Also You cant have a freight train everywhere.
Trucks also do local and interstate freight. Freight rail cant do that with cost effectiveness.
Also our road (state and federal highway and roads) are paid through fuel taxes .
Also a carbon tax will simply be passed on to the consumer
@@johnsamuel1999 You can absolutely have local freight trains. This video is particularly enlightening on the subject: ruclips.net/video/_909DbOblvU/видео.html
Gas tax does not come close to paying for the road infrastructure maintenance costs, not to mention the negative externalities associated with emissions. Carbon tax will merely account for this. Very questionable if that will actually result in noticeably higher prices to the consumer. It will instead just incentivize companies to make investments they will need to make in the future earlier. Those investments are beneficial for society in the form of lower emissions, better air quality, etc.
@@airops423 trust me those costs willget passed on to the consumer. Transportation and logistics are a high capital low margin business that rely on volumes.
Why do you think truckers always complain about costs ,there isnt much profit to absorb any increase in cost.
So the carbon tax will simply be passed on to the consumer
@@johnsamuel1999 It will incentive local rail, which is very much underutilized in the US today, instead of trucks. Even if it is slightly more expensive for people to buy random stuff on Amazon, so what? Why should taxpayers be subsidizing shipping companies that ruin our roads? Large 18 wheeler trucks contribute to 99% of road degradation, while paying for just 1/3 of that in fees and taxes.
Better yet, we should nationalize rail like basically every other country.
@@airops423 We also pay Heavy truck taxes, see IRS Form 2290 on top of the huge fuel taxes we pay to both state and federal governments.
There is no labor shortage in trucking. There's a pay shortage.
yes
Truckers get paid well. I know I’m a trucker. They’re just chronic complainers.
economics 101...
@@keithmorgan4883 Yea it's not a pay issue it's the fact lots of people can't handle the job, most people don't like being away from their house working for weeks to months. If you want a social life trucking is not for you
I think a factor is that you're on call 24/7 and you have to spend extended periods of time away from home. So working conditions.
“Unions have not particularly liked it but the shareholders have loved it and it has led to record profits…” that tells me everything I need to know about the management-employee relationship at railroads.
Unions are in the carriers pockets. They negotiate with these “dream contracts” and the carrier doesn’t want to negotiate and this ping-pong effect happens. They can keep us in mediation indefinitely if they want to.
The entire piece is corporate propaganda.
American railroads are expansive, mostly due to how massive the United States is and when the railroads came about, but despite what Oilver Wyman says they're not particularly efficient, most are barely profitable at all and they're not the largest in the world.
The most profitable national railway in the world, freight or otherwise, is India's. No other country even comes close. The largest freight railway network in the world is either China, Russia or India depending on how you quantify that (if you count duel track as double track length or single track length, for example). Efficiency is difficult to calculate but if you're talking about freight tons per km then China has the most efficient by a wide margin but if you're talking about efficiency as measured by total tonne-kilometres then it's either Canada or Russia who have the most efficient network.
What is wrong with making money?
Three words i never expected to see in one sentence: America, rail, good.
America's freight rail is fantastic. The transit rail is fantastically bad.
That's because it's somewhat a myth
Freight is Great, Passenger service is garbage
@@delicious619 well as long is fantastic in both the ends lol. #murica 😂
@@sciencecw please elaborate that is an interesting way to look at things.
Actually this piece by a media company was well done as it got the right sources of people to comment on the facts of freight railroads and transportation in general. Having railroad and transportation experts commenting as well as graphics showing statistics is the way to go. Congrats to CNBC for excellent reporting.
I had family that worked for L&N railroad. Working for the railroads gives you the best retirement benefits, replacing social security.
They generally do pretty good, despite their last 3 letters
They didn’t interview any of the workers or union representatives. So, you only a tiny fraction of the picture. They didn’t even talk about the problems going on right now and glossed over the “labor shortage”. The companies did that to themselves right before the pandemic. It’s interesting how this article was presented. Of course there will be massive profits when they lay off whole sections of employees and make the remaining employees work without consistent days off under threat of being fired. The video editing and framing of the story was very good, even if what the speakers said were incorrect.
@@robertsteinbach7325 Railroad work is the secret hack to win at life.
this has been a paid presentation of the Norfolk Southern Corporation
thank you for watching
Having ridden trains in Korea, England, Germany and Franch, their rails have dedicated tracks and are not delayed by commercial rail like in the US. You can generally set your clock to their schedule. Delays are fairly common for Amtrack as they have to "pull-over" and allow commercial trains to pass (New Orleans to Chicago).
Having been to Switzerland and ridden their rail they have plenty of freight on their National rail system. They make an effort to move freighter to the last mile.
just like the car companies like it
doesn't help that when Amtrack builds track or buys track, it gets used as commercial track as well. there needs to be new, separate, passenger track built.
Don't forget Japan where you can LITERALLY set your clock to your schedule.
The trains in Germany are unfortunately not punctual.
As far as I’m concerned, the trucking companies can go pound sand; road wear correlates roughly with the 4th power of vehicle weight, so an 80,000 pound truck does roughly 160,000 times as much damage to the road as an average car (assuming an average car weighs around 4,000 pounds). Trucks cause something like 95% of damage to roads but only pay maybe like 30% of the costs of road upkeep, not to mention the roads in question effectively have to be designed for them rather than cars for the aforementioned reason of road wear. Aside from last-mile deliveries, the way rail operates means trucks and anything else that proposes moving goods via single-unit load (ie one trailer or container per engine and human) will never beat it in terms of energy usage and labor cost; even for last mile deliveries, there was a time when that was also the domain of railroads and frankly that should be brought back.
I'm a life long road worker, close to retirement. Trucks cause almost all road wear.
Cars, very little.
Weather has a bigger impact than car traffic.
states collect billions from trucking companies for using interstates and us highways. not every truck is 80k lbs on road.
Before bs do your research, you are driving on the roads paid by truckers.
So I am shipper who needs to move expedited, door-to-door TL freight across the country in two-to-three days. Convince me to put it on the rails and not over-the-road.
Yeah maybe in LaLa Land that would work
@@sunglasserz yes and if trucking companies were taxed according to the amount of damage their business does to roads (which I assure you they are not), they’d be bankrupted almost immediately because they account for something like 90-95% of road wear, which, again, scales with the fourth power of weight, so the truck doesn’t even have to be full; an unladen truck weighing 35,000 pounds will still do around 5860 times as much damage as an average car.
I REALLY hope with this infrastructure bill expand passenger rail and new bullet passenger trains like they have in Japan, China and Europe. After having lived in Europe it is embarrassing how far behind we are. I'm also tired of the monopoly the Airlines have. I think it's time we travel via train which is way cheaper to travel vs flying but to do that they need to add new lines and new bullet trains.
Monorail, monorail, monorail!
We have jetliners. We don't need bullet trains.
I would start by co-locating high-speed passenger rail tracks with the Interstate highways. They should have plenty of straight stretches necessary for high-speed rail to work, not to mention the rights-of-way.
@@technocrat40 that's what big aero companies and oil companies want you think
Traveling by train is actually WAY more expensive due to the enormous cost of infrastructure building and maintaining, all payed by taxpayers here in europe, not counting the enormous amount of state aid train companies receive compared to airlines.
Trains are a useful tool for decarbonisation (not considering all the CO2 produced to build and maintain the infrastructure and generate electricity) but definitely not the smartest way to move around
This makes sense. I have been looking up a lot of passenger rail videos. And was wondering what happened to all the old railroads we built, and they still exists, just used for moving cargo.
They moved more. Double track became single track
PSR does not make the railroads more efficient, just better for shareholders because it guts the long term health of the RRs in favor of shorter term gains.
Also Autonomus anything is inherently anti-labor.
There is generally 3 key metrics that help promote autonomy when compared to labor:
1) Can run continuously (8 hours, 12 hours, 24 hours, etc)
2) Mistakes, defects, etc are drastically reduced
3) The upfront cost of the machines is retained as an asset they are kept and utilized, the cost is not "thrown out the window" as it would be with labor costs for humans
Of course, if anything goes wrong, humans must intervene.
However, unfortunately, humans can not compare to the productivity and investment of machinery.
Making autonomous locomotives seems like something that should have happened a long time ago.
I mean, computers already fly every commercial plane and navigate every commercial ship. Somehow autonomy hasn't caught on in rail.
@@aerodynamicist4 Yes but those ships and Planes still run with crews. They are not unmanned and that is wear the cost is.
The reason for planes and ships being partly flown by computers is not about saving money its about risk mitigation. Most accidents are human error.
For the Record Railroads are also heavily controlled that is what all the noise was teen years ago about "positive train control"
As for driverless cars the government should ban them on public roads. Period.
@@aerodynamicist4 locomotives are partially autonomous with the Trip Optimizer software we run. You have no idea how railroading works. In many territories like my own, you cannot count on an autonomous locomotive to be controlled safely by a computer. There are to many variables that require the human hand and feeling of how the train is acting.
Well I guess we need to have people process nuclear materials by hand, because apparently autonomous systems are "antilabor" and saving your own health by remotely operating something dangerous is being a scab
"precision railroading, which makes the railroads far more efficient" I'm laughing. They just lengthened the trains, which means they have to go slower (causes theft problem), don't fit in yards (again, theft), and are less safe, since they take longer to stop and put more forces on couplings and tracks. Two man crew rule is a massive safety feature, less likely to forget something if two people check it.
If they really want to keep railroads competitive they need to do two things: electrify and stop subsidizing trucks with the "free" roads they destroy.
How would electrification keep railroads competitive?
@@sharkheadism Save time on refueling, lower costs over time. pull in the 'green' crowd.
@@EmperorNefarious1 Refueling time is just not a concern. Lower costs over time? Dubious, when you consider the cost of installing and maintaining overhead wire as well as purchasing thousands of new locomotives to use it.
@EmperorNefarious1 The Glorious
Trucks don't destroy roads, least wise it's not their fault.
Designers, engineers, contractors not to mention bureaucrats, for various reasons, don't build or maintain roads to standards that will stand up to the 80,000 pound LEGAL load limits
trucks are restricted to. Please put the blame where it's deserved. Not on trucks.
@@geezer652 I'm not blaming truckers and truck companies for following the incentives and money that exist in trucking. But they still benefit from the roads everyone pays for. Trucks to almost all the damage to roads, that's just how it is and if you think taxpayers should pay to make bridges so strong that no wear and tear happens from the big trucks... well at that point the roads would have to be steel anyway, might as well build a rail line.
Perhaps lowering max weight on trucks would help but good luck getting that passed.
It will be great when rails can go from the lower 48 states to Alaska and to more northern areas of Canada.
US, Canadian and Mexican tracks already are fully connected with trains going across the borders between the countries. The CP and Kansas City Southern merger would simply just allow one single Railroad to travel between all three countries without having to have another railroad take ownership of the train as it crosses borders.
The main North American railroad system already extends as far north as Hay River in Canada's Northwest Territories. Attempts to connect Alaska's railroad system to the main North American system have failed so far because of the need to build through rugged, sparcely populated regions.
Proposals have been put forward to connect Alaska to the Canadian rail network. Unfortunately, Trudeau, the Canadian prime minister, has said he would block any attempt to provide railway service to Northern Canada.
@@waycoolscootaloo it would eliminate run through power for CPKCS
@@haroldb1856 once people stop voting the cuckold we could probably get something done, our most northern line is probably the line up to churchill
Passenger RR are great for relatively short distances with high passenger traffic such as the Northeast corridor and between LA - Los Vegas and LA-SF and LA-San Diego. They should have high speed dedicated passenger tracks. Problems with US passenger rail today is most use the same tracks as freight trains and long distance passenger trains aren't competitive with air for speed, buses for cost, and automobiles for comfort, travel flexibility, and convenience. Passenger rail service in the US is often a political decision not driven by demand or economics.
This is false, High speed dedicated passenger rail is competitive with air under 200 miles. It is competitive if there was political will, like most public transit once you have it in place demand picks up, it isnt intially driven by demands or economics but it does become one and there are plenty of examples across the United States of this. Americans across urbran sprawn are dealing with traffic jams, and want to get to places in a decent amount of time.
Or the idea that certain politicians are denying the ability to make high speed trains.
Even in areas where train companies are given what they wanted.
They still resist to make such trains. -_-
@@thewingedhussar4188 High speed rail is incredibly expensive to build as we're seeing in California. Americans need to experience successful regional rail first. From there, there can be more interest, will an demand from the people to have it. Forcing tax payer HSR on people is pointless and unnecessary.
@@pudanielson1 Agreed. High Speed works well in Europe, China and Japan where you can get somewhere in like an hour that would usually take you 8 hours by driving. High Speed trains also voids traffics
@@jirky015 maybe because it's so hard and expensive to build there because all the mobs want a cut
Rail is the cheapest land transport per ton/mile. You can’t cram enough tonnage onto a passenger train. The passenger rail which comes closest to profitability is short, high ridership commuter service. The USA is much less densely populated than other countries. Even so, passenger service is highly subsidized in most countries.
How much money do all the roads, bridges, and overpasses required for car-based infrastructure make?
HSR should be use to connect other major cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, Las Vegas, and San Diego together. It is highly unlikely to see a HSR crossing multiple large states.
The Interstate Highway system is also subsidised. There are corridors where the highway system is saturated. There are consistent obstacles erected obstructing convenient passenger service, which could help ease the highway load. The commuter rail corridors that are profitable are parallel to heavily traveled highways and are conveniently operated.
Not anymore Tesla semi truck in a convoy senario beats out rail these desil trains are dinosaurs 🦖🦕
@@toyotanerd2269 Yeah right, do you know how many tons of chemicals, grain, lumber, vehicles and other raw materials trains haul across North America per day? And now you think a Tesla truck convoy, that will clog up the highways, can replace trains?? You’re living in the clouds!
Ooooh yeah! I'd love to see a freight railroad going from California to Hawai'i
*underground Tesla boring company tunnel* coming soon.... lol..
I'm sure the voters in California would approve the taxes needed to build it.
Not even Switzerland would build such an insanity :D
De los mejor son unos NUDE-DATTING.ONLINE
Sun: "Hotter"
Sugar: "Sweeter"
Joonie: "Cooler"
Yoongi: "Butter"
Son unos de los mejores conciertos, no puede ir pero de tan solo verlos desde pantalla, se que estuvo sorprendente.
Ojalá la cultura europea se representara más a menudo tan bellamente. No puedo dejar de decir "oh, esto es hermoso" a lo largo del video..
Uyunan çıgıp, tigi jer-jerdi izdedi. Al kiçinekey koyondu wins taba algan. Al bir az oylonboy koyondu karmadı. '' Bul koyon menin kursagımdı toyguza albayt '' dep oylodu arstan.
Arstan koyondu öltüröyün dep jatkanda, bir kiyik tigi tarapka çurkadı. Arstan aç köz bolup kaldı. Kiçine koyondu emes, çoŋ kiyikti jegen jakşı dep oylodu. # 垃圾
They are one of the best concerts, you can not go but just seeing them from the screen, I know it was surprising
💗❤️💌💘
@bear
I'd like to see a freight railroad go from California to Russia.
I can not describe how valuable this mini documentaries are
Infinite thanks to CNBC for doing this amazing REPORTING WORK and providing actual useful information, thank you very much
(sorry for my english)
Thank you so much for uploading this video. It is helping me get through the pandemic!
NOBODY GIVES A DAMN!!!
A good portion of the reason Amtrak can make a profit is the routes it has to take. I was going to try to take a train from Houston to Amarillo many years ago. I had a choice of going to California or somewhere in the east coast area (same distance basically) then back to Amarillo. That meant to go 600 miles, I had to travel close to 2000. Obviously it was more expensive than flying.
Grandma lived in Denver and we were in north eastern Montana. There is a Amtrak terminal in both. Grandma had to go either LA then on to Portland then across or St Louis then Chicago and across. It was a 700 mile drive straight otherwise. She did it once in 96 or 97’
if the government is giving away mansions, why would I live in a house? It's the same situation with passenger rail for passenger rail or any other mode of transportation to be successful, driving subsidies need to go. It's insane to subsidize private vehicle ownsership. We need subsidies for efficient transport, not the most inefficient way of moving people.
You can't just simply start penalizing people for living in the country as it is today though. Right now in alot of the US alot of people need or want a car and a train station isn't going to pop up and be useable to them anytime soon, even if there is a consensus nationally on wanting more trains today.
@@chickenfishhybrid44 nobody is penalizing anyone. If you chose to live in country, you have to accept that infrastructure in less dense areas is serving less people so taxes need to be increased to offset the cost. It's paying your fair share. And why do people pretend anytime there's an alternative transport mentioned, "but how will people in rural areas get by" as if people are proposing taking people's cars away. You can still have your cars, just pay for them? alright?
@@tyren818 Comments like yours are evidence why the United States should be broken up between country and city.
@@tyren818 but alot of these things are often paid for via high taxes on gas. Everyone can't just afford to pick up and move because someone suddenly is wagging their finger at them telling them they have to move to a city. A person who needs their car to get to work to support their family will be paying more for things like registration and gas. Sounds like you could call that a sort if penalty to me?
Even if someone wanted to move to a more dense area it doesn't mean they can afford it or find work in that area they can do.
There's already taxes on gas and registration fees. Just because it's not flush on a big scale economically doesn't mean no one is paying anything for using their cars.
@@chickenfishhybrid44 US subsidizes the hell out of driving, gas is super cheap, and you bring up the argument of gas tax? Compare gas prices to anywhere in the world, canada and europe and see how cheap just it is. And the argument that you are paying for gas to drive far, how does that finance any infrastructure?
Americans love driving because they have never truely known the cost of owning a vehicle. And nobody is asking for drastic changes overnight. We can start by densifying the areas that already exist instead of constant sprawl.
We need more trains.
More reliable passenger rail services can be welcoming
Japan, China, and Germany had maglev trains that are really fast. France had a TGV train that had a world record of being the fastest. What else? UK, Belgium, South Korea, Spain, Netherlands, Taiwan, and Italy? No kidding!🚝🚄🚅🚆
Canada has Canadian Pacific, Canadian National, and Via Rail. Mexico has Ferrosur and Ferromex. United States has Union Pacific, CSX, Norfolk Southern, BNSF, and Amtrak.
Here in Brazil, the government recently passed a law to increase and facilitate investments in freight railroads, since our country is so dependent on road transport. But there has been no movement to expand passenger trains.
That is okay, freight rail and personal road travel is the fuel for the best society.
But Europe will say otherwise.
@@dannypipewrench533 What do you mean? Europe still have freight rail and automobiles. Even Volkswagen uses Deutsche Bahn Schenker Rail (DB Cargo) to transport their cars. Europe just have more variety of transport options instead of relying on just one method: cars.
@@dbclass4075 This was supposed to be a joke, exaggerating that fact. Of course Europe has all sorts of transportation modes. It just sometimes feels like Europe dislikes cars, at least from my standpoint.
@@dannypipewrench533 Well, they do not have as much free space to cater everyone driving, and in the first place: their cities and towns predates automobiles. Though, I admit, their proposals can be extreme, such as total car ban in city centers. That's not necessary, as drivers do not want to drive there anyway.
@@dbclass4075 Right, Europe is definitely more densely built. But I agree those proposals are a bit weird, and I figure that is a good place to base my semi-joke.
I fail to see the significant difference between "Nationalized rail network" and "privatized rail cartel", besides a lack of accountability. Both systems are ran by a few people and are basically all in control of the same thing. And frankly, if Union Pacific can't coordinate with Amtrak, who runs sometimes only one train a day on each line, when those trains have been running for nearly 50 years now, I don't know why we should trust them with that infrastructure.
It's their tracks. It's up's infrastructure what gives you the right to steal all of that?
The difference is that a nationalized rail network is just that - a rail network. The state owns the infrastructure and private companies pay to use it. In Germany there are roughly 450 railoperators. This setup incentivises a network for both passenger and freight service. A freight only railroad has no problem with a single tracked, low speed network. It's cheaper to operate anyway. But for Passengerservice it just sucks.
That's why private industry will NEVER be better that the government. They can't be trusted. The question you have to ask is who will be more corrupt? Yet, people always push for deregulation, self regulation, privatization. "The FREE MARKET will fix everything DUR-HURR!" - The free market is the same market that brought you children in coal mines instead of schools (which cost money at the time).
@@rpgreseller everything you consume comes from private industry. all of the innovations in technology and engineering that you take for granted comes from private industry. the government is run by inept and incompetent morons who don't even know what they are doing half the time. hell they can't eve maintain our current infrastructure.
@@rpgreseller if i had a dollar for everytime a tankie lectures me about how great communism is and about how bad capitalism is cause muh child labor. i'd be a ..... actually i'd starve under your ideals and have nothing to eat then likely die in those same quarries you tell me about under forced labor by the same government you worship.
It's much more profitable for many companies if American people relying on car than public transportations.
Bingo ✅
De los mejor son unos NUDE-DATTING.ONLINE
Sun: "Hotter"
Sugar: "Sweeter"
Joonie: "Cooler"
Yoongi: "Butter"
Son unos de los mejores conciertos, no puede ir pero de tan solo verlos desde pantalla, se que estuvo sorprendente.
Ojalá la cultura europea se representara más a menudo tan bellamente. No puedo dejar de decir "oh, esto es hermoso" a lo largo del video..
Uyunan çıgıp, tigi jer-jerdi izdedi. Al kiçinekey koyondu wins taba algan. Al bir az oylonboy koyondu karmadı. '' Bul koyon menin kursagımdı toyguza albayt '' dep oylodu arstan.
Arstan koyondu öltüröyün dep jatkanda, bir kiyik tigi tarapka çurkadı. Arstan aç köz bolup kaldı. Kiçine koyondu emes, çoŋ kiyikti jegen jakşı dep oylodu. # 垃圾
They are one of the best concerts, you can not go but just seeing them from the screen, I know it was surprising
💗❤️💌💘
Driving is more private, comfortable, and convenient. Trax doesn’t pull over at Starbucks or Wendy’s because I’m hungry and want to grab coffee or a 🍔.
Driving is more private, comfortable, and convenient. Trax doesn’t pull over at Starbucks or Wendy’s because I’m hungry and want to grab coffee or a burger.
@@donnerwetter1905 lol walk 10 miles minimum...dream on...the US is spread out...
The title of this video wasn't wrong; but I was expecting to see more about the hurdles faced by passenger rail, while the video concentrated on the efficiencies of freight rail.
There's an earlier vid by CNBC as well on how difficult it is to run high speed rail in the US. Here's the link for you.
ruclips.net/video/Qaf6baEu0_w/видео.html
That is the core issue- the Freight Railroads spend Billions in development and efficiency. Amtrak has to make due with 40 year old equipment and the occasional government handout while using rails owned by other railroads.
Personally i think they should get rid of Amtrak and simply mandate the Railroads to provide Passenger service along their networks.
People don't realize this but the Railroads were REQUIRED to provide passenger service before the founding of Amtrak. Amtrak was a way for the Freight railroads to avoid the money loss of passenger rail at a time when they were loosing vast amounts of money.
the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s were a REALLY dark period for private rail in America so Amtrak was a way for them to reduce their spending by shedding Passenger Rail.
With their new found profits the Freight Railroads could be required to provide passenger rail service to communities along routes with the goal to expand.
Main problems with Amtrak would be solved:
Conflict of interest with track usage
Lack of capitalization for new equipment, technology, services and infrastructure (read track age)
I honestly think if the Class I and Class II railroads had no choice but to provide Passenger Service they would invest a lot of money to try and make it turn a profit. They would also
Would be nice to ride one. I live along Lake Erie. Thousands of commuters drive on highways along the railroad tracks from home to their workplaces everyday. My dad builds locomotives for GE, I process fruit at a well known supplier. Most everyone I know works within 0.5 miles of the rail line and live less than 0.5 miles of the line. I would straight up sell my car if I could ride a public rail service. Hundreds and thousands would too. I think this whole "ITS NOT PROFITABLE" line is a load of bullsh17. My car is very used and is expensive to keep. I dread having to become enslaved to a new one; which I will likely need in a few years. But parts manufacturers, auto manufacturers, dealers, maintenance shops, government revenue from licenses, registrations, taxes.....OH TAXES, SOUL SUCKING CREDITORS, insane insurance companies...They all love me having to drive 9 miles to work 300 times a year...But I've taken my bicycle to commute to and from work, I would absolutely use a train if any existed for transportation in the US.
It will never be profitable unless we all go back to 1927. The issue is you can't fund something that is a money pit day after day without it being able to sustain itself, with that being said it can be argued that's what we do with our military every day but still. They might be potentially profitable but I highly doubt it unless a trend of more younger generations like I would assume yours and mine decide to rapidly move to cities and not buy cars.
I never understand this enslaved to a car attitude. Seems people generally can’t be bothered to maintain their vehicle.
Then again I’ve never been dumb enough to buy new.
Also why do we always say it has to be profitable? Passenger rail is usually never profitable in most other countries but it's still a lot better than cars. Our government pays a ton of money for highways and up keeping them, why can't they do the same for rail? I doubt trucking companies would make any money if they had to build their own roads and upkeep them.
@@liamm8447 Because operating a railroad requires way more upkeep than a highway. If a trucking company built everything they drove on and maintained it would be the same as a freight railroad considering they actually did that and made tons of money. Just use buses they do not require extensive redesigning and can be put into the existing roads.
I build and sell high-speed electric bicycles. I can build you a bike that will run at 45 mph and have a 45 mile range, costs you a dime a day for electricity and charges off 110-v house outlet. All you need is an extension cord. Or you can take the battery out and recharge it in your bedroom. It will cost you $6,000 but if you finance it the cost is $15 a week. Toss on a pair of saddlebags and you can do all your grocery shopping. Attach a trailer and haul your building supplies from Lowe's. And you don't need a license plate, a driver's permit, or liability insurance - it's a bicycle! It even has pedals (to confuse the police, make them think you pedal it to go). But all you need to do is flick the power throttle.
I love how they mention and fight to say PSR works and is turning the railroads around, it only is working to give more profits yet is taking away jobs and safety which is rising derailments and issues. I see PSR working in the flat lands deserts and Midwest with not mountains where they can run faster trains, but ou here in Norcal with our grades on these mountains, PSR trains stalls constantly with lack of power and too heavy of trains that more and more have had helper set that are 3 to 4 units long. Right back to how the Old SP ran the trains over these hills
Same out here on the East coast!!! I know this is an older video but the railroads are now going away from PSR. Oh, and burn in hell Hunter Harrison!!!!
This short is incredibly well produced. This team at CNBC is amazing! And we get to watch this for free!! Thank you!
Why is it when Amtrak is brought up immediately we talk about profits? Why does passanger rail need to make profits? Do roads make profits? Is I-95 on east coast making profits?
We need to treat rail same as we treat roads. It is paid by taxes to help us get from point a to b.
Well roads and freight lines for that matter are inexorably tied to alot of the economy.. Amtrak and passenger trains not so much at this point. Have to consider that another justification for roads and railways in the US was national security and being able to move military equipment effectively around the country.
For some states, I-95 and other roads are cash cows. Why? Because they toll them. Think of the NJ turnpike and Triboro T&B Authority.
Many parts of the I95 have tolled express lanes. Roads are not as subsidized as many public transport systems - and bus need them too.
@@sciencecw Not many, only few parts have tolls. And yes roads are very subsidized. I dont know the numbers though to compare so rail might be more expensive, but my point is that we should treat it same as roads.
Amtrak was created to become profitable, until Lobbyist came along
As a truck driver who’s working at the ports people are leaving the trucking industry because of the pay and the Lack of respect
Most profitable, yet offer a skimpy 10% raise for people who made them “record profits” during a pandemic. The class 1 railroads are simply the most disgusting examples of greed gone unchecked. They are the biggest contributor to the situation known as shipping crisis today, yet get no spotlight in the media of the damage they have caused.
You are out of your mind if you think a 10% raise is "skimpy." I've never gotten more than 4%.
@@lwnf360 do you have any idea how long our contracts are for? It’s not per year.
Yup! 0/40 throttle restrictions on almost all trains if TO doesn’t work! Furloughing thousands of TY&E workers and then expecting them to all come back after being gone for 2 years!
@@andrewr3884 agree!
Well, German Train Drivers went on Strike last Year to fight for a 1.5% Raise, which isn't even enough to adjust for Inflation. Meanwhile, the Managers at Deutsche Bahn gave themselves Raises between 10-20%, so none of them make under a Million €/Month now. All of this happened during Record Losses because of the Pandemic (the Deutsche Bahn is almost exclusively Passengers; Rail makes up less than 5% of Freight Transportation in Germany), and the Deutsche Bahn even refused a Government Bailout because that would have preconditioned no Management Raises. Mind you, most Managers at Deutsche Bahn used to work in the Automotive Industry before, so they expect ridiuclous Salaries.
Another Example for Management Greed in the Deutsche Bahn is how they improved "Punctuality". Until 2019, a Passenger Train was considered on Time if it was less than 6 Minutes late, but the Deutsche Bahn kept failing massively on their Goal of having 75% of Trains on Time. So they just increased "on Time" to less than 15 Minutes late and then paid themselves Millions in Bonus for having reached the Punctuality Goals.
Passenger train in India also same issue , but with cargo , king of profit.
The Indian passenger train network is actually well developed and profitable.
@@aadavanelangovan1630 How? The passenger division runs on losses. But it's a Public entity and the Government pays with the tax payers money to cover the losses and keep the system running.
@@aadavanelangovan1630 it never will be or has been. Passengers are _net negative_ services. Always lose money no matter what. That's why the US railroads jumped that ship long ago.
honestly automated trains are far more suitable given they don't have as many random cars in the way and warnings can be given much sooner if a car is stuck on a crossing than let's say a car breaking down in front of an autonomous truck
De los mejor son unos NUDE-DATTING.ONLINE
Sun: "Hotter"
Sugar: "Sweeter"
Joonie: "Cooler"
Yoongi: "Butter"
Son unos de los mejores conciertos, no puede ir pero de tan solo verlos desde pantalla, se que estuvo sorprendente.
Ojalá la cultura europea se representara más a menudo tan bellamente. No puedo dejar de decir "oh, esto es hermoso" a lo largo del video..
Uyunan çıgıp, tigi jer-jerdi izdedi. Al kiçinekey koyondu wins taba algan. Al bir az oylonboy koyondu karmadı. '' Bul koyon menin kursagımdı toyguza albayt '' dep oylodu arstan.
Arstan koyondu öltüröyün dep jatkanda, bir kiyik tigi tarapka çurkadı. Arstan aç köz bolup kaldı. Kiçine koyondu emes, çoŋ kiyikti jegen jakşı dep oylodu. # 垃圾
They are one of the best concerts, you can not go but just seeing them from the screen, I know it was surprising
💗❤️💌💘
Automated trains as now are illusion - while they could drive themselves, they still would need personel on them for the case of technical dificuties or other problems. So you will not actually save much money, unless you declare, that the mechanic on it is in "on-call duty" and not actually working. But try to find people who would agree to spend days on train without equal pay.
A japanese railroad is actively trying to autonomise the shinkansen, because they foresee a driver shortage in the future and considering that driverless metros already exist and work very well I can definitely see that happening in the future, but maybe electrification may be necesarry, because it becomes far easier to accelerate with them and so easier to control
@@tim333y7 You need to differ here - Metros are closed circuit. When anything goes wrong, technician can go to it in matter of minutes and fix it. They dont have to drive 100s of kilometers miles to reach it first. So one technician can replace several drivers there without problem. And Japan is whole othere thing. Especially when you consider that they dont even think about reducing jobs when they talk about automatisation. They system works so great, that its really about optimisation of seconds there. And people still will drive in them even, if they dont have to do much anymore(they already got lot of such jobs there, but because of population shrinking, they will to rethink it in futere too, but by that point they will have archived automatisations long time ago already). Both cases are very limited to either closed system in small room or a country with different working ethics and expectation of train system. That simply doesnt work nowhere else. Technical problems in trains are sadly an norm, not an exception.
interesting vid, I like the explore theme that goes into more depth than typical short attention span catering business content
@4:07 is the corwith intermodal yard I used to work at! You would be amazed how much consumer goods go through the railroad.
It's kind of hard to see how autonomous vehicles could be such a threat to rail freight. Like they said in the part about fuel efficiency, one train can carry 200 containers, which is equivalent to 200 trucks. By that logic, it's also equivalent to the amount of freight that can be pulled by 200 truck drivers.
One train includes multiple locomotives with increased fuel consumption, flatbeds ,installed and maintained rail system . This advantage will be severely lost with the deployment of autonomous trucks . That is why a serious pushback is expected from the rail operators.
It can also easily electrified which would have massive environmental impact even without renewable energy
@@nivlac_dj6327 they could electrify the trains too
Two-man crews for trucking and for railroads are a good idea. It’s a lot easier for Truck to have a one-man crew than it is to have a locomotive with dozens and dozens of cars and maybe multiple locomotives being run by one person.
Hi how are you doing 😊
@@mariarusso1325 me?
@@JamesTyreeII Hi James yes you😊
Excellent piece. Great journalism!
Autonomous trucks and cars have a long way to go. What happens during a breakdown or tire blow out? What about construction or accident detours? Border crossings? WHEN they're involved in an accident, who's responsible? Then there's the lousy GPS trip directions.
lol not gonna happen anytime soon too many sensor and computers which are bound to fail everything is made cheap for the sake of profit
American rail traffic is dominated by freight trains. Passenger trains have absolutely no chance to run reasonably fast, because they are stuck between all the freight trains. If you want to change that you need to build new tracks exclusively for passenger trains. And while you are at it build bridges and viaducts to avoid all those far to many dangerous railroad crossings.
How about we have seperate tracks just for passenger rail.
like if we genuinely want to be greener and more train-centered, whats stopping us from just splurging on a seperate track?
There was a time when delivery was made to sidings by short haul networks.
very informative, thanks!
0:37 _”Coals, to Cars, to Chemicals”_
Bars!
Amtrak is a public service. We don't say the interstate highways or military "lose money".
It’s a for-profit railway company. Which is why it’s relevant to mention that it loses money.
@@IpSyCo that doesn’t make it right
@@IpSyCo It doesn't justify it, CNBC is clearly against passenger rail
@@Racko. They did a whole segment on passenger rail. I’m not going to bail you out if you’re too lazy to do the research yourself. Go waste someone else’s time.
@@IpSyCo They're owned by a huge corporation who values things like lobbying against rail, so ofc they're going to take them to "glorify" how passenger rail is unprofitable, plus them doing a whole segment on why its not making any money should be enough for you to understand they dont actually give a rat's ass about it, too bad many, including you can't see right through these tactics
I started driving a truck back in 1998. If I had to do it over again, I would have tried to get on with the railroad after a few years of trucking.
And you would have great seniority right now if you had!!!! And you would have been 4 years from 30 years for your full retirement!!!!
Best channel for this type of news
That was a very nice summary.
Trucks are heavily subsidized directly and indirectly. All things-included rail will always be a better and more efficient choice.
@@Juan-hv9bi true
Warren Buffet bought BNSF, not for the railroad, but for the access to run fiber optic lines along the tracks in early 2000's. Then railroads became profitable, the fiber optics paid for the railroad, anything he makes now is pure profit.
The US is also blessed with an unparalleled waterways. These must be considered as alternatives to rails, especially extremely heavy ores/machinery.
Great great work
Pretty frustrating how hard it really is to move around the USA without dragging a 3,000lb chunk of steel with you everywhere you go.
I learned something in my high school while educating for a train engineer here in Croatia.
Freight trains bring money and passenger trains, no matter are they filled to the last seat with people, they will always bring negative income.
Yet still, Europe moves only 8% of freight by rail.
I suspect it has something to do with coastline and rivers. But yes, we underestimate how much freight facilities industry
@@sciencecw Exactly, mainland Europe has good river connections like the Danube. The US really doesn't outside the Great Lakes and Mississippi
@@AdamSmith-gs2dv well Mississippi and great lakes cover a lot of grounds. The determining factor is probably distance from the nearest sea port. Everywhere is coast in Europe.
@@sciencecw 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Have you ever looked at a map of Europe?
@@sciencecw also the US is a Huge country, from San Francisco to NYC is the same distance from London the Moscow, you can fit the whole of Europe without Russia inside the USA and still have tons of space left , Canada is even Bigger, and Mexico being the smallest of all three and yet still a huge country, from Tijuana to Cancun the distance is 3000 miles. the entire west corridor of the 🇺🇸 is less densely populated and vast, all in just one country. So it makes sense to use a double decker freight train running in isolated rural areas or Forrest than moving all that cargo by truck or river.
Just for clarity, Amtrack is serving people cocktails while travelling behind all-electric locos going a hundred miles an hour, on the most crowded corridor in America. For the win.
Simple answer, inanimate objects don’t complain about how they’re moved.
Some of the major developments in rail transport, notably doublestack containers and trailer on flatcar transport, first became common in the USA. Indeed, freight transport by containers are becoming common in Europe, too.
One form of train, the RoadRailer, may make a comeback as stronger, lighter weight materials make it possible for such trains to be viable again. I wouldn't be surprised that UPS and FedEx Ground look at this idea again now.
I miss RoadRailers. They got replaced by generic domestic container / van trains.
the light weight of the trailers was the issue in the first place, there's no way to make a semi trailer heavy enough not to derail but still be light enough to be able to compete with other non-Roadrailer semi trailers. I've heard stories and seen it on video that the Roadrailers were derailing left and right because they were too light... its partially why we haven't seen much innovation on railcar design weight wise, make them too light and they will derail. Only place you see weight savings on a train car (or set) will be in passenger service as the safety and comfort of modern railcars adds alot of weight.
@@trainfansgamingchannel2778 no way in heck those have the structural integrity to handle 2+ mile long PSR trains.
@@ecoRfan I think the older ones could handle a mile and a half, maybe 2 miles but they were reinforced, they were 1000 pounds heavier than their road only counterparts (I know that doesn't sound like alot but when your limited to exactly 80K pounds total on all axles, it's a PITA)
One thing that was not mentioned here which I have read is that tracks which work well for heavy tonnage are not ideal for fast passenger trains. I suppose this has to do with super elevation of tracks around curves. Banked curves would be a disaster for a heavy freight pulling up a grade and around a curve at the same time. As things are now, passenger trains have to keep their speed down considerably to keep from flying off the track when negotiating curves. They have a way of getting in the news when they do not. Also not mentioned was that Amtrak was the governments way for railroads to get out of passenger service which they were obligated to provide as per regulation. Railroads were given a lot of land back in the day and had a mandate to serve the greater common good. Providing a means for people to get around was part of that mandate.
Railroads used to superelevate curves but as maintenance forces were cut back over the years, that stopped happening as it doesn't take long for an elevated curve to 'go flat.'
Then again, when I have only one week to vacation, I don't want to spend half to or more of that time getting to my destination and back. I can fly across the country in 6 or 7 hours. Even high speed trains would take 2 days. Amtrak is fine for those that have the time and enjoy the trip. One service that Amtrak offers that is useful is taking your car on the train. They run that service down the east coast to Florida.
According to a 1937 committee on the rail industry, that debt has long been paid. RRs moved enough US mail and troops.
I saw automotive cars in a mixed train the other day. Some grain cars, lumber wagons, chemical tankers and even a caboose mixed in. Most of what I’ve seen in last few years have been grain and crude oil cars.
this is the way it's always been for shipping. For bulk non time sensitive loads carried across the country rail is the greatest bargain and value for land based shipping. For local deliveries and distribution. Trucks are king. the intermodal system we use here in north america takes the best of both worlds.
Logistics is amazing!!! 🚂🤯
I'm not a fan of automated anything, that has to do with a safety function of any vehicle. There are too many variables and sensors go down all the time. I drive a modern truck and there are always an issue with one or another sensor. Then there's the weather factor, like ice buid up. Ice covers a sensor ab6d it's over. It happens all the time. My radar antenna is always going down during bad weather due to debris, snow, ice. It's used in the adaptive cruise control. Between that and the cameras used for lane control getting covered up is a recipe for disaster. Then there's the decision to shut it down. You can't train a computer to back a truck. There is more than one bridge setting on the trailer. Those tandems move, as well as the fifth wheel. There are different setups for different needs. Their answer is to put a driver in the cab to monitor the operation. Know how boring that can be? Know how many drivers will fall asleep at the wheel (literally)? Will the truck know what to do in the case of an emergency? What happens if the system blows a fuse? Nothing like people losing their lives over a 25 cent fuse.
No more I could see the Ac freight train maintain on diesel carrying fresh vegetables from Seattle, Washington state right into an ac platform in New York 4000 km away. Outstanding engineering.
I just love your documentaries
As a foreigner, I do wonder why the US don't electrify their railroads. It'd probably cut emissions even more.
And lower maintenance costs. As a combustion engine has hundreds of parts while an electric engine mainly has one moving part plus some fans for cooling.
The US is Different. Have you seen how many Miles of Rail we Have? And the size of the Yards? Plus US Railroads Travel into Mexico and Canada. So Electrifying is Not Possible nor would it cut Emissions. Electricity has to be Generated from somewhere. Electrified lines only serve good on Passenger rail such as Amtraks Northeast Corridor
@@Bill-fv3lm Seeing as Russia electrified its rail line between Moscow and Vladivostok long ago and China has electrified tens of thousands of kms of rail lines in just the past two decades, distance isn't the issue. It's a question of priorities, and the US's are frankly backwards.
You can’t get the power from electricity that a diesel electric prime mover produces. Do other countries pull 10,000 foot trains over 2.2 percent grades moving 10-15,000 tons of freight? Good luck doing that with an electric motor
@@antonberglund117 Huge added burden to an already strained power grid.
Let's shoot for a goal of shipping as close to 100% as possible by train. Clear up the roads from all those OTR trucks
Write a letter to the Government
What you said is incredibly unrealistic. Even europe and asia have a lot of trucks
@@johnsamuel1999 "as close to 100% as possible." Doesn't mean remove all trucks. We could do better and striving to do better by getting as close to that end goal as possible is something that is realistic
The free market is streamlining the transportation industry already. Government could f up a wet dream.
Federal government: ok so monopolies are federally illegal, unless we are doing it. Lol
Good luck getting people to agree that self driving is a good idea. A lot of people will need a lot of convincing!!
It should never be allowed to happen. A lot of innocent people will die in the name of the all mighty dollar. It’s disgusting.
@@andrewr3884 It is greed
"These pretzels are making me thirsty!"
De los mejor son unos NUDE-DATTING.ONLINE
Sun: "Hotter"
Sugar: "Sweeter"
Joonie: "Cooler"
Yoongi: "Butter"
Son unos de los mejores conciertos, no puede ir pero de tan solo verlos desde pantalla, se que estuvo sorprendente.
Ojalá la cultura europea se representara más a menudo tan bellamente. No puedo dejar de decir "oh, esto es hermoso" a lo largo del video..
Uyunan çıgıp, tigi jer-jerdi izdedi. Al kiçinekey koyondu wins taba algan. Al bir az oylonboy koyondu karmadı. '' Bul koyon menin kursagımdı toyguza albayt '' dep oylodu arstan.
Arstan koyondu öltüröyün dep jatkanda, bir kiyik tigi tarapka çurkadı. Arstan aç köz bolup kaldı. Kiçine koyondu emes, çoŋ kiyikti jegen jakşı dep oylodu. # 垃圾
They are one of the best concerts, you can not go but just seeing them from the screen, I know it was surprising
💗❤️💌💘
To examine the thought of automation further considering trains and trucks:
1. Trains have a great inherent automation, it is called rails.
2. Trucks have great advantage in their lack of rails, they can go anywhere a road leads them individually, which is important, and roads go everywhere.
3. Following on from #2, something that can be improved with the train system is better electronically controlled track switchers.
4. Following on from #3, train freight cars could have electric motor / generators, batteries, computer control systems, and a new electronically controlled automatic coupler that includes power and communication interconnects. The main idea being train cars can move themselves around and attach to and detach from trains even while the train is moving at full speed and with modernized track switchers go on their individualized ways at switch points. No more need to connect air hoses manually as breaking could be electronic and no need for humans to pull levers to decouple cars as that is also electronic. Locomotives would still be around for long haul where the freight cars can autonomously do shorter distance movements on battery electric power (the last mile and just switching between trains). The computer smarts for a train car to do this is pretty low as the rails are automatic automation determining exactly where the train car is going to go and the train cars go down centrally controlled dedicated tracks. However, a truck needs advanced AI computer systems to stand a chance of doing the job in a reasonably safe fashion while dealing with various roads in various conditions and all kinds of random crazy people also on those shared roads. I mean you are talking about the difference between say a need for a 16-bit computer from the 1980's to handle the train car and associated 'simple' procedural programming, granted a low end 64-bit computer would do it now as we just don't really make 16-bit computers anymore verses the most advanced and rather costly computer systems we are working with today to get the job done to a comparable safety level with a truck. At this there is no question that a simple computer system can safely do the defined tasks for a train car where we are not even sure even the most advanced computer systems of today can reach a comparable safety level for a a truck as the truck problem is a much harder nut to crack. In addition to the cheap computer system for train cars, a small penance for what the whole of an otherwise dumb train car costs (I am talking like
Those ideas are nice and all, but devoid of reality of rail operation. One would only need to spend a week on a switchman job to know what issues would arise from trying that level of automation. Likewise, making a few trips in the cab would reveal why it would not work safely. And believe it, the railroad companies would love to have these trains running themselves.
Great arguments made here, but a couple of points to consider:
1.) Brakes on a train are pneumatic. The air power comes from the locomotive. Disconnect the cars and braking power is far more limited. This is not an insurmountable obstacle to overcome, but it’s a key consideration since every single bit of rolling stock would need to be outfitted with a different braking system and they would all need to be maintained to stay in working conditions.
2.) Rather than batteries, since we know where the trains will be since they already follow tracks, why not hang wires over where they go and run electricity over them and put thingies on the locomotives that connect them to the wires to make them go?
@@LeeHawkinsPhoto
1. If each car has a power system, it can generate the braking force it needs. In addition each car can do regenerative braking, allowing the brakes to last much longer as then you only need mechanical in emergency situations and parking, which is zero wear. You could make things backwards compatible for a graceful upgrade. Transition cars could either generate their own air or use from locomotive. They could use regenerative braking to get all of their power at first until the neighboring cars have the extra connectors in a standardized spot to allow automatic hookup. They could communicate through the rails until they have another connection to use.
2. Overhead lines are great, just costs money. The thought is a focus on battery at this point is cheaper than stringing up a bunch of wires, but would still be useful for opportunistic charging and power. For example drive by a city or power junction in the middle of nowhere, have overhead power. Be in the middle of nowhere and no power around to hook into and run on battery. You will only go so far in the latter case before you hit the former case, so likely between the two the trains can run perpetually as in they never need to make a refueling / recharging stop. However it will still take some time to build out, so instead of this long explanation, just start with batteries are enough and allow whatever eventuality to take hold happen later.
@@ChaJ67 the current locomotives in use here in the United States, are deisel/electric hybrids. A Diesel engine is attached to an alternator which powers the electric drive motors at each set of axles, and an air compressor. To give an idea of the amount of power generated, there have been instances where in emergency situations, locomotives have been used as generators to power a city. The pneumatic braking systems are important as well, just look into derailments like Lac-Megantic when that system was taken away.
There are already many points of possible failure, which would only increase exponentially with the suggestions that have been made. Sure in a perfect world (fantasy) a system like that would work. But in reality, something a simple as a picked switch, or a vehicle on the tracks could prove catastrophic.
@@B1Springfield this argument doesn't make sense. Sure a diesel generator in a locomotive generates X amount of power, often somewhere around 4,400 HP, which is ~3MW of electrical power. This power is usually used across many train cars as in pulling many freight cars. At this you don't use that 4,400 HP to run mechanical brakes. If you have ever ridden on light rail, the cars are often self propelled including operating their own brakes. The notion here is you could have a "mini locomotive" in each rail car cost and weight optimized to fill in gaps where the traditional train model has shortcomings while still having a more traditional thing going on where it makes sense. At this the new system would bolster the old system the whole way, making the complete system much better, more efficient, and more cost effective to operate. Kind of like how automatic couplers made trains a lot more efficient and requiring far fewer personnel to operate the train system.
Maybe another way to put this is your Tesla electric car can easily put out 0.3MW of power. A single train car can carry many Tesla cars. If a single locomotive pulls 20 train cars, that is 3MW / 20 = 0.15MW per train car pulled. So yeah, a fraction of a single Tesla car is what I am talking about augmenting each rail car with.
05:38 Beautiful shot and lots of Coal!
It is stupid to have a story about American railroading and then see foreign railroad video cut in just to stretch the video presentation. It is a good story overall.
NJ could do a lot to upgrade it's NJ Transit fleet. I know it's commuter rail but seriously 🙁
US government: *incentivizes single tracking of railroads*
Also US government: Why is there no room to run passenger trains on these lines?
if I recall correctly private rail ripped up a lot of their extra rail lines as a cost saving method.
@@MelGibsonFan Exactly, they are heavily taxed by miles of rail and in some cases how many switches. While the highway system is heavily supported by tax dollars, the railroad companies (except Amtrak who has never shown a profit) must foot the bill for maintaining/improving their system
@@kenmelrac Edit: Haha sorry my comment came off mad hostile, didn't mean for it to. I'm gonna clean it up a bit.
“Heavily taxed”, is somewhat subjective considering the massive profits these companies bring in. Rail in just about every other country with better transit pays more in taxes.
Also gotta push back with this “Amtrak doesn’t post profits” point. Most rail doesn’t post profit, I don't think that’s the point of rail, it’s to render a service. Anyway Amtrak is only unprofitable tmk because of A. cross country rail lines and B. Freight creates massive delays, disincentivizing people from riding.
Luckily for places like Japan, South Korea, France etc. they don’t have nearly as many proponents of Reaganomics.
If there is anything that can-and certainly, way back in years past of my life (and in certain somewhat occasional instances, today), has-make/made me immensely proud to be alive in this timeline that we’re living in, right now, and have been living in, over the past 40 years, it’s this. All of it.
Make no mistake: as a nearly life-long absolute train lover/rail fan, I am at the very least grateful that this is the where the state of modern American railroading has ended up in, compared to what could’ve happened, otherwise, on the more negative side.
Yooo people have brought back railroad robberies. I'm sick.
It always been happening it never stopped it's only being reported now because people got video of it majority of the news channels didn't care cuz majority of people was not interested in it until video showed up
Passenger trains are extremely profitable in India. We are also building Dedicated Freight Corridor that too fully electric. More than 75% of the entire rail network is electric and about to achieve fully electric network within next 2 years.
Passenger trains lose money in india
Indian railways burn money on the passenger segment
The freight segment earns money and covers the losses incurred by the passenger segment
Hope you remember it next time
You should be clear with facts before making such outlandish claim. Passenger operations of Indian Railways only recover 40% of cost of a journey. The rest of the cost is cross-subsidized by freight operations. Freight contributes 70% of revenue to Indian Railways.
Passenger rail in india is provided as a service to the people, it has and always will run on loss. Please remove the expectation of profit when it comes to passenger rail. Rather look at the total socio-economic benefit it provides.
Passenger trains are running at losses, only freight trains are making profit.
Passenger rail DOES LOSE MONEY in India, their costs are covered from the freight movement. India has the benifit of having freight and passenger rail under the same organisation and rail operations can be optimized keeping both in view. This is a luxury that US cannot afford as Amtrack and freight companies are separate entity, and many times passenger trains are stopped for the movement of freight trains.
A great video on about USA railroading its inportant that rail roads must keep going to keep this country aflot at all wave lengths
The theft from the intermodal units coming out of Port LA is HUGE. It seems the railroads and law enforcement are looking the other way. If the railroads are so profitable, they could have CCTV surveillance of their trains in high-risk areas. Then again, the thefts are so obvious it begs the question 'What is law enforcement waiting for?'
what good is CCTV or arresting someone when the LA DA Gascon has ordered not to prosecute for thefts under $950. You get a crystal clear image of the thief, the police arrest them and later that day they are back out stealing.
@@TheRealCartman1 Could you give me the REFERENCE for that statement, Please ? I saw an interview with the local Sherrif (Chief Sherrif? I am not sure what you would call a high ranking Sherrif) a short while back and he made it sounds like he had not even heard of these thefts.
People need things. So, it is okay, for them to steal. why should cops risk their lives, to only have thieves released!
@@tompain2751 It is never OK to steal things. Other people have paid for those stolen things.. and they need those things too.. This is not about people needing things... this is about organised crime and should be dealt with. If you can jail someone for 5 years for smoking a joint, you can also jail them a long time for theft.
@@RichardRenes I agree. Stealing undermines our economy, and causes stores to move from bad neighborhoods. However, there are insane 'prosecutors, with childish ideas.
I heard from a friend that the reason why theft have increase is because California change the law. When petty theft is involved (stealing items valued at $950 or less), the punishment is a misdemeanor with a six-month jail sentence and the thief may be out in 2-3 months for "good" behavior. This law will just encourage more theft.
I want Amtrak and Amtrak trains in the US and USA all year and every year.
Is that all you had to say?
I have worked on both railroad and trucks
The reason is simple. Freight makes money, passenger service looses it. Even in Europe.
and there's nothing wrong about it; Passenger rail gets people to work, make money through the companies they work for = good for the economy; Thus passenger rail itself doesn't need to be profitable; Booking 5 days in advance I can get a 1st class high speed rail ticket from my village in southern Germany to our federal capital for only $44
I forget if its Switzerland or Sweden, or the Netherlands. But one of those European nations passed a law that requires all new warehouse style retail stores and malls to have a rail spur for direct port to dock rail shipping. We should do something like that in the US. And give big tax breaks to existing facilities that can make the upgrade.
I think it's Switzerland. Switzerland also disproves the notions that moving cargo by rail only works for long distances or that excellent passenger rail can't co-exist with freight.