Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 134 posts

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#71

Post by ju-st »

Shivetya wrote: post #60
paradite wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone looking for a quick answer, this is from the 4th paragraph in the article: While the train can carry about 200 containers, versus 20,000 on a large cargo vessel, the trip takes about half as long as a 30-day sailing between East Asia and northern Europe. That will make rail a competitive option when maritime shipments are held up or miss the booked departure, especially compared with airfreight, which cost…

I will be very curious if the savings hold up. Then throw in the risk of cargo theft which will be higher by this method of transport and this method is also more subject to mechanical issues with both vehicle and the rails it rides on.

If shipping by air only cost 2x more than by train, then using air cargo is a no brainer.

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#72

Post by fennecfoxen »

brunnsbe wrote: post #49

China, Poland, Germany, Belgium and France uses the standard gauge of 1,435mm but Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan has 1520mm. I guess they are shifting wagons at the borders of China and Kazakhstan and Belarus and Poland. Or are the wagons mixed-gauge?

Loading gauges might be a problem as well. Parts of the UK rail network are still on W6a, which means the clearance from tunnels and bridges and turns is too small to take standard containers on standard wagons: you need special low-deck wagons where the container sits down between the wheels (so there's extra space between the containers, where the rail bogies are). This isn't the most efficient way imaginable to move goods over long distances. The W10 standard (which allows the taller Hi-Cube containers for refrigerated goods and the like) is available only on a few corridors.

(Mind you, in the US, they use low-deck cars like this for about 70% of containers... the difference being that the US railways can double-stack the containers. It's a wonderful rail system.)

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#73

Post by jakozaur »

jakozaur wrote: post #26

Some more detail articles about current China Europe regular train connection (actually it goes weekly to Poland): http://postandparcel.info/56547/news/innovation/dhl-launches... http://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/06/28/what-the-... It make sense for goods that sending them by air is too expensive, but they are too time sensitive to send them by ship. It takes a day by plane, 14 days by train, 45 days by th…

Some price estimates: (very crude, but shows magnitude of price)

Rail is 4 times more expensive than by sea. Air is at least 6 times more expensive than rail, but can be even 18 times more expensive if payload is heavy.

Cost of shipping 40′ HC container:

- by sea: $1,600

- by train: $6,800

- by air, light, so you pay for volume: 4.6 USD / kg, 40 ft got volume 67.7 m3 * 143 kg / m3 ~= 9 tons, $41,400

- by air, heavy, so you pay for real weight: 4.6 USD / kg, 40tf can be 27tons, $124,200

Shanghai Gdynia, Poland: http://www.transportchiny.pl/ceny_transportu_z_chin.php

Shanghai Małaszewicze, Poland http://gocargo.pl/czy-transport-koleja-z-chin-jest-oplacalny...

By Air: http://www.chinaimportal.com/blog/air-freight-import-china-g...

Container: https://www.searates.com/reference/equipment/3/

Excuse me for non-English links, but that was the easiest what I can find.

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#74

Post by wastedhours »

arctangent wrote: post #62
bkor wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is forgetting another option. Say your factory is relying on parts delivered to you by containers. One week there's heavy storms somewhere in Asia and your containers from China aren't loaded. Currently the only option is to either always keep a buffer of parts or to gamble and use airfreight in case needed. With such a rail option you'll have an alternative: by default use container vessel then in case of a…

It's a hedge bet.

I don't claim to understand logistics - but will we see companies pay for slots on the trains as insurance, but not use them if everything's fine? Train company gets a deposit, shipper gets an insurance policy for semi-important payloads?

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#75

Post by SixSigma »

jakozaur wrote: post #73
jakozaur wrote: post #26

Some more detail articles about current China Europe regular train connection (actually it goes weekly to Poland): http://postandparcel.info/56547/news/innovation/dhl-launches... http://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/06/28/what-the-... It make sense for goods that sending them by air is too expensive, but they are too time sensitive to send them by ship. It takes a day by plane, 14 days by train, 45 days by th…

Some price estimates: (very crude, but shows magnitude of price) Rail is 4 times more expensive than by sea. Air is at least 6 times more expensive than rail, but can be even 18 times more expensive if payload is heavy. Cost of shipping 40′ HC container: - by sea: $1,600 - by train: $6,800 - by air, light, so you pay for volume: 4.6 USD / kg, 40 ft got volume 67.7 m3 * 143 kg / m3 ~= 9 tons, $41,400 - by air, heavy,…

Pollution

- Air cargo - 0.8063 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile

- Truck - 0.1693 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile

- Train - 0.1048 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile

- Sea freight - 0.0403 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile

So I see this competing with air freight, not sea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_transp...

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#76

Post by Faaak »

jdietrich wrote: post #65
claudius wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that this is for diesel trains. While likely most of the length of the track won’t be electrified soon, essentially all tracks in western Europe (France, Germany, possibly Poland) are already electrified. This means that using nuclear or renewable energy generation, the trains can run emission-free there, in particular avoiding the strongly localised particle emissions by ships in and around harbours.

German electricity is fairly dirty and Polish electricity is absolutely filthy - they're both heavily reliant on coal. Germany is committed to phasing out all of their existing nuclear plants by 2022; Poland has no nuclear capacity and is unlikely to have any before 2030. Renewables are clearly going to be a growing part of the energy mix, but the issue of base load is still an unanswered question. https://electricit…

The electricity may be dirty, the electric train is not. Even with a dirty electricity, an electric train is more efficient than a diesel one (EDIT: braking regeneration).

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#77

Post by neals »

ju-st wrote: post #71
Shivetya wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will be very curious if the savings hold up. Then throw in the risk of cargo theft which will be higher by this method of transport and this method is also more subject to mechanical issues with both vehicle and the rails it rides on.

If shipping by air only cost 2x more than by train, then using air cargo is a no brainer.

No, it is never just that simple. And I don't believe anybody would say such a thing.

I can imagine being in a position where shipments can be ordered 15 days in advance, but where 45 days would be unacceptable. (train vs ship)

If that's the case, you set up your logistics to come by rail, rolling in every 15 days, instead of air and you save a bunch on your shipping.

There's so many variables and volume here, it probably makes perfect sense for a whole lot of businesses.

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#78

Post by _coldfire »

jdietrich wrote: post #67
guard-of-terra wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the length is electrified already. Yekaterinburg-Madrid definitely, Kazakhstan-Yekaterinburg likely, China-Kazakhstan connection and Chinese side probably remains an issue.

I would wager that Chinese and Russian electricity is no cleaner than diesel. They have an awful lot of old coal power stations burning lignite and sub-bituminous coal.

The Chinese source 25% of their electricity from renewables.

US is at 15%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electrici...

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#79

Post by cbr »

SixSigma wrote: post #75
jakozaur wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some price estimates: (very crude, but shows magnitude of price) Rail is 4 times more expensive than by sea. Air is at least 6 times more expensive than rail, but can be even 18 times more expensive if payload is heavy. Cost of shipping 40′ HC container: - by sea: $1,600 - by train: $6,800 - by air, light, so you pay for volume: 4.6 USD / kg, 40 ft got volume 67.7 m3 * 143 kg / m3 ~= 9 tons, $41,400 - by air, heavy,…

Pollution - Air cargo - 0.8063 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile - Truck - 0.1693 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile - Train - 0.1048 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile - Sea freight - 0.0403 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile So I see this competing with air freight, not sea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_transp...

Most of the people making these decisions are primarily concerned with cost and time and not pollution, so what determines whether this will be successful is primarily cost vs time.

Re: First China-U.K. Freight Train Departs as Xi Seeks to Lift Trade

#80

Post by willyt »

SixSigma wrote: post #75
jakozaur wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some price estimates: (very crude, but shows magnitude of price) Rail is 4 times more expensive than by sea. Air is at least 6 times more expensive than rail, but can be even 18 times more expensive if payload is heavy. Cost of shipping 40′ HC container: - by sea: $1,600 - by train: $6,800 - by air, light, so you pay for volume: 4.6 USD / kg, 40 ft got volume 67.7 m3 * 143 kg / m3 ~= 9 tons, $41,400 - by air, heavy,…

Pollution - Air cargo - 0.8063 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile - Truck - 0.1693 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile - Train - 0.1048 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile - Sea freight - 0.0403 kg of CO2 per Ton-Mile So I see this competing with air freight, not sea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_transp...

But the ship route China London is a lot more miles than the train.
Post reply on HN