The rule crack down has a couple sides, some we see from the agreement side, and some we dont. I agree, running the railroad has taken a back seat to testing and playing clerk. I can see both sides tho.
(This isnt anything i was told, just my thoughts) A new crew consist agreement might get played a bit sooner then most guys think, stock market was on the slide big time today (CNBC) i didnt hear any hear any optimism, anyways who knows what they can get if they start screaming emergency about fuel prices and the economy. Hold a symbol till they get enough cars to make a monster DP train to save on man power? Might see some things like that, probibly alot worse then that before you'll see them get off diesel.
nanaimo73 wrote:Ive read on another forum that some of the politicians in southern California are now pushing for a levy on imported boxes. This may push some inbound containers further north as well.
Dale, an update for you:
Ocean cargo: More fees to be imposed on California shippers
Patrick Burnson, Executive Editor -- Logistics Management, 7/16/2008
SAN FRANCISCO-West Coast shippers were given some more bad news late yesterday as the California state assembly passed Senate Bill 974, authorizing new fees for containers moving through the state's major seaports. Authored by State Senator Alan Lowenthal, the legislation is now headed for the State Senate.
Shippers expect the bill to be quickly passed in its amended version and signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in the coming weeks.
"We are very disappointed that shippers are being burdened with additional fees when other alternatives had been presented," said Ezra Finkin, a spokesman for the Waterfront Coalition in Washington, DC. "Despite our best efforts with the governor's staff, it appears that our suggestions were not considered."
Once the bill is passed, containers moving through the Port of Los Angeles, the Port of Long Beach and the Port of Oakland would be assessed a $60-per-FEU (forty equivalent units). The bill was amended before passage to define which infrastructure projects would be eligible to be funded from the fee. It also changes the authority administering the funds in the Southland.
The Waterfront Coalition and other shipper associations had hoped that the state would scrap the legislation in favor of a highway toll which would collect the fees directly from trucks transporting cargo. The lobbying group, which has also been championing a "national freight policy," pointed out that two local other container fees pending at the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles total $100 per FEU. Shippers using the Port of Oakland face a $25 per FEU boost.
With the new amendments, SB974 will fund rail and traffic projects primarily in Southern California. Once signed, the new fees will go into effect in 2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Saxon wrote: As of today, there are no commercial CTL production facilities in the US, nor are there any under construction, nor are there any on the drawing board. This in spite of the fact that the break even point for CTL over petroleum (roughly $35 a barrel) was passed five years ago and may never be seen again.The reason? Simply put, it's the threat of CO2 regulation.
As of today, there are no commercial CTL production facilities in the US, nor are there any under construction, nor are there any on the drawing board. This in spite of the fact that the break even point for CTL over petroleum (roughly $35 a barrel) was passed five years ago and may never be seen again.
The reason? Simply put, it's the threat of CO2 regulation.
I am impressed by a man who is confident in stating his observations, but I'm interested in the facts are you drawing on to make your observations.
http://www.deq.state.id.us/air/permits_forms/permitting/pcaec/index.cfm
RWM
Railway Man wrote: Dale, an update for you:Ocean cargo: More fees to be imposed on California shippers
Thanks,
If it sends any additional boxes through Vancouver or Prince Rupert, I'm for it. BTW, Centerm in Vancouver has been running smoothly since the evil Dubai Ports World took over.
nanaimo73 wrote: Railway Man wrote: Dale, an update for you:Ocean cargo: More fees to be imposed on California shippersThanks,If it sends any additional boxes through Vancouver or Prince Rupert, I'm for it. BTW, Centerm in Vancouver has been running smoothly since the evil Dubai Ports World took over.
Seriously, I don't think it will have much impact on market share.
Railway Man wrote: The fees at POLB and POLA are de facto infrastructure fees, imposed to internalize the costs of operating the ports onto the users of the ports, who are in many cases not local users, rather than externalizing the costs onto local taxpayers who may not derive benefits from the ports. The success at POLB and POLA of instituting these taxes will not so much drive business away from these ports as provide an umbrella for other ports to institute their own fee hikes to pay for their infrastructure needs, too. Every West Coast port in order to grow significantly needs to raise billions of dollars; the fee is simply a method of charging the user rather than expecting the benefits of the port to trickle to the state or national taxpayer, and taxing them to pay for the infrastructure. I think rather than expecting the fees to drive business away, the fees will be absorbed, and other ports will do the same shortly.
The fees at POLB and POLA are de facto infrastructure fees, imposed to internalize the costs of operating the ports onto the users of the ports, who are in many cases not local users, rather than externalizing the costs onto local taxpayers who may not derive benefits from the ports. The success at POLB and POLA of instituting these taxes will not so much drive business away from these ports as provide an umbrella for other ports to institute their own fee hikes to pay for their infrastructure needs, too. Every West Coast port in order to grow significantly needs to raise billions of dollars; the fee is simply a method of charging the user rather than expecting the benefits of the port to trickle to the state or national taxpayer, and taxing them to pay for the infrastructure. I think rather than expecting the fees to drive business away, the fees will be absorbed, and other ports will do the same shortly.
Now I'm thinking that de facto infrastructure fees will be passed on to the consumer that buys the imported product, most of whom live far from the ports. The benefits of the ports are the high paying jobs the ports create, which would be local. Thus, the local taxpayer gains from the improvements which other people pay for. Sounds like a good deal for them.
Railway Man wrote: Norman Saxon wrote: As of today, there are no commercial CTL production facilities in the US, nor are there any under construction, nor are there any on the drawing board. This in spite of the fact that the break even point for CTL over petroleum (roughly $35 a barrel) was passed five years ago and may never be seen again.The reason? Simply put, it's the threat of CO2 regulation.I am impressed by a man who is confident in stating his observations, but I'm interested in the facts are you drawing on to make your observations. http://www.deq.state.id.us/air/permits_forms/permitting/pcaec/index.cfmRWM
I guess I should have qualified my statement thus: "......that I am aware of."
However, your link is for a fertilizer plant, not a CTL fuel plant per the subject of alternative railroad fuels:
"Proposed products: ammonia, urea, urea ammonium nitrate (UAN), sulfuric acid, and slag/frit for sale for road mix or other uses. Deleted production of Fischer-Tropsch diesel fuels and naphtha for this project phase."
So as it stands when I made the statement, there were no CTL plant plans as I knew of. However, there now are plans that have been made public for a $4 billion CTL plant in Kentucky (dated July 15, 2008):
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/07/kentucky-county.html
And I will stand by my skepticism that such CTL (fuel) plants will never see the light of day until the nutjobs are removed from Congressional power, and I am not confident that will ever happen in my lifetime.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.