Chinese Economics Thread

abenomics12345

Junior Member
Registered Member
I guess what they have done is that they have moved most passenger traffic to high speed railway. The excess capacity of the slow railway network can now be dedicated to freight transport.
Maybe but it's not going to be without reinvestment costs. Passenger traffic / Freight traffic are not the same in terms of originations/destinations.

First time I hear someone asking does China have an equivalent to India's XXX. Why does China need a dedicated freight corridor? A normal railway network run by competent people should be able to handle both freight and passenger traffic just fine.

Because the cost of trucking a similar amount of product over road is 1/4 as efficient as using train for similar distance. The math reaches equivalence at around 400-500km. Unless you believe China should continue to experience an inefficient transportation/logistics system - freight train networks need to be developed.

Pay a bit of attention and study the North American freight logistics system (especially intermodal freight) and you will realize that there are a lot of things for China to learn from the US.

 
Last edited:

abenomics12345

Junior Member
Registered Member
Wait, lol are you seriously using that guy as a source?

Ok, it's definitely wrong to say that everything he says needs to be thrown in the garbage, but one definitely has to take some salt and be a bit careful with him as a source though.

I happen to have studied the North American railway system before - so do let me know what part of video you think is wrong. Specifically, the part discussing transportation logistics.

What you are saying applies for everything - nobody's sources should be treated with some holy zeal - but unless you can point out exactly where he is wrong about the North American logistics system - your argument is unpersuasive.
 

Godzilla

Junior Member
Registered Member
I happen to have studied the North American railway system before - so do let me know what part of video you think is wrong. Specifically, the part discussing transportation logistics.

What you are saying applies for everything - nobody's sources should be treated with some holy zeal - but unless you can point out exactly where he is wrong about the North American logistics system - your argument is unpersuasive.
His not wrong though, and while there are definitely aspects of North American rail network to learn, you can't take your cake and eat it. Aside from being an end user in the "white goods/container cargo" category, I am far from a SME in that category of transport so I won't comment much. That being said, package delivery in China is far faster and cheaper than in the US lol :p If I am going to assume, with China being a manufacturing power house vs US being a consuming power house, its different game sending trucks from factory floors to a rail interchange then to a port for export or other domestic destinations for consumption vs taking goods from a port, directly onto rail and then onto distribution centers for trucks to destinations for consumption. The Chinese model, the producers are already scattered all around with the consumers, most likely in shorter than 500km circles so the trucks are going to have way more advantage than trains where as in the US model, the goods are gonna be concentrated in places like LA then shipped across the country. This is shooting off the hips using my logic so I may be wrong.

In the bulks, that is something I dabble with in both countries so I will comment. The situation is far more complex than the guy makes it out to be and its not really the fault of the Chinese rail system. Things like coal, in the US or Australia, goes straight from the mine via rail to either the port for export or powerplants that have long term contracts. You don't have that in China. Most of the power plants and steel mill contracts are bid on the market, so you never know who your end user will be. It works for places like Inner Mongolia or Xinjiang to train the coal out, but places like Shanxi and Shaanxi where most of the mines are little ones it don't make much sense. Of course its nice to run the train through and car dumper and be done with it lol. If you want to go intermodal, how are you going to switch between the rail carts and trucks and vice versa without the infrastructure built? Who is going to pay the difference for the losses in transport, and change in quality? (keep in mind the sampling is done at the end point). Going from port to end user via train is great though, since the stockpile is there and we blend it there too, but its going to be low ton-km since its usually not that far from the end user.

Its also all very good making lots of profits, but that is easy if you don't sink in the funds to upgrade or adequately maintain the lines. Especially when you spend it on stock buy back instead lol. I've seen plenty of work for roads and highway upgrades, but not very many railway maintenance work. For context, I think the US rail maintenance market is around $7 or 8 billion a year. China spends 700 billion RMB a year, though that includes capital expenditures for new lines, of which there are few in the US. Kind of says the state of affairs of where the priority is lying lol, and why so many derailments across the country is expected. I am old school and I believe these infrastructures are the lifeblood of a country and should not be measured in profit like other industries.

End of the day, my view is, the hard rail infrastructure in China is way ahead of the US, let alone third world places like India. Electrifying most of the grid will minimize the dependence of imported diesel, and if EV trucks are a thing in the future, they would continue to compete with each other making a positive impact to the economy. There is plenty to improve upon especially in the service and marketing side based on the learnings from the US system, but those learnings also have to be adapted to the completely different economies that it is servicing.
 

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member
Registered Member
I happen to have studied the North American railway system before - so do let me know what part of video you think is wrong. Specifically, the part discussing transportation logistics.

What you are saying applies for everything - nobody's sources should be treated with some holy zeal - but unless you can point out exactly where he is wrong about the North American logistics system - your argument is unpersuasive.
Look at the answer @Godzilla gave you in post #26655.

Even in my original I did say: "Ok, it's definitely wrong to say that everything he says needs to be thrown in the garbage, but one definitely has to take some salt and be a bit careful with him as a source though."

Which in reality can just be boild down to "take some salt and be a bit careful with him as a source".


As for China needing to learn from NA railway system, well there definitely are stuff it can learn from it, but it also includes learning what not to do such as not doing enough maintainance.

And besides that, like @Godzilla said, circumstances might be quite different in China (goods being closer to end destination, so trucks more preferred etc.).
 

hkbc

Junior Member
In the bulks, that is something I dabble with in both countries so I will comment. The situation is far more complex than the guy makes it out to be and its not really the fault of the Chinese rail system. Things like coal, in the US or Australia, goes straight from the mine via rail to either the port for export or powerplants that have long term contracts. You don't have that in China. Most of the power plants and steel mill contracts are bid on the market, so you never know who your end user will be. It works for places like Inner Mongolia or Xinjiang to train the coal out, but places like Shanxi and Shaanxi where most of the mines are little ones it don't make much sense. Of course its nice to run the train through and car dumper and be done with it lol. If you want to go intermodal, how are you going to switch between the rail carts and trucks and vice versa without the infrastructure built? Who is going to pay the difference for the losses in transport, and change in quality? (keep in mind the sampling is done at the end point). Going from port to end user via train is great though, since the stockpile is there and we blend it there too, but its going to be low ton-km since its usually not that far from the end user.

China has a number of dedicated/freight and coal rail lines the Daqin line goes east west through Shanxi and Shaanxi to the Bohai Sea and there's the new Haoji line that goes North South from Inner Mongolia to Jiangxi passing through Shanxi and Shaanxi.

The Haoji line is built to bypass existing coal transport routes that go via coastal cities by ship and reduces the transit time from 20 days by sea to 3 days!

So I don't think the sweeping statement "You don't have that in China" is factual!
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
This is something to watch as I've discussed

The main article is on BASF European layoffs. Remember, they build new plant in China last year.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
With high energy and refining cost in Europe now and for likely future compared to China and America, companies like BASF have no choice but to reduce their operations there.

Dow Inc announced last month that it was doing major layoffs in Europe. I presume its US operation will continue to operate
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The most hurt EU industries are basic metals, air transport & chemicals. and EU energy cost has only dropped because less demand from these industries.

If we look at 2021 numbers, Sinopec was #2 on this list and PetroChina was #7. BASF was pretty far ahead in #1 and was said to be reliant on Russian natural gas. It would reason lack of cheap Russian natural gas for input is a huge disaster for them.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If we look at this list, China already exports quite a bit of fertilizers and also produces almost everything it needs. With increasingly low hydrocarbon input and more petrochemical refineries coming online, this is likely an area they continue to grow in the export market.

Again, more of these petrochemical cracker complex are coming online
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

hkbc

Junior Member
Maybe but it's not going to be without reinvestment costs. Passenger traffic / Freight traffic are not the same in terms of originations/destinations.



Because the cost of trucking a similar amount of product over road is 1/4 as efficient as using train for similar distance. The math reaches equivalence at around 400-500km. Unless you believe China should continue to experience an inefficient transportation/logistics system - freight train networks need to be developed.

Pay a bit of attention and study the North American freight logistics system (especially intermodal freight) and you will realize that there are a lot of things for China to learn from the US.


I remember reading an article in the Economist about 15 years ago that said e-commerce would never take off in China because the logistics is so crap. Now you get Watermelons from Hainan in Xinjiang during the off season! Villages in Yunnan and other remote provinces selling their local produce via live streaming delivered across the country, wouldn't be much of a market for goods that spoil or never arrives or bankrupts the seller in costs!

The thing is there's money to be had scribbling 'China' articles and however, scholarly are just a point in time snapshot of a situation.

Modern China transforms at a pace that sometimes defies belief whereas the Western world barely moves so whilst those snapshots are meaningful when applied to Western Societies they date really badly when used for China.
 
Top