Good info JT ,now this brings to mind something else about pollution .Near where I reside is a resort town ,they used to heat the whole town and once upon a time even generated their own electricity with a coal fired boiler,finally they stopped producing their own power and went on the grid ,but keep in mind the little town was dirty and grungy (not the best look for a 5 star resort hotel community so they went to No.2 oil fired boiler system,very big improvement ,then somehow budget wise they switched to No.5 bunker grade ,which saved money and the smokestack was so tall you didnt smell it anyway,but one time (sometimes they used an asphalt companys tanker truck to haul the No,5 ,worked fairly well had internal heaters and so on to keep the goo flowing ,then one time the tanker wasnt quite purged of the asphalt heavy oil good enough,the resulting molasses like fuel gave them a heck of a time ) So lessons learned and the economics worked out ,they switched to gas and never looked back (I think propane because it comes on a tanker ,I dont think CNG ) as far as I know the system has been flawless and seems to generate very little pollution ,they go through a tanker load in about 3 days during normal conditions.The old timey smokestack(riveted construction) now is full of holes dont know how they will repair it
These things emit as much pollution as several thousand new autos and trucks.While hauling more freight than several thousand new autos and trucks ever could.
Doesnt matter ,smoke ,still make you choke . How many van containers can you get on one ,I know they are big,but some OTR rigs can do triples ,so maybe its not as expotential as you are lead to believe .
The thing about ships is the bigger they are, the more energy efficient they become. It’s basic scaling effect. Double the size and you quadruple the surface area but the volume increases by eight fold.
Today’s largest container ships can haul a ton of cargo about 70 km per kilowatt-hour of energy consumed.
That’s more than three times more efficient than railroads and close to 14 times more efficient than big trucks.
Agree with @BLE Shipping costs for many items are miniscule compared with the selling price. Some British environmentalists tried to blacklist New Zealand lamb on the basis that it generated too many greenhouse gasses from transportation halfway around the world.
The New Zealand department of agriculture put them straight by stating that New Zealand lamb is grass fed all year around, requiring NO fertilizer on the grass, no supplemental feeds, no heated barns, and the transport by refrigerated container ship required so little energy that British lamb was far more energy intensive and greenhouse gas intensive than New Zealand lamb.
Many here on this forum argued that when oil and other energy prices went through the roof that many manufactured items now made in China would return to the USA as a base of manufacturing. Donald Trump would certainly like that to happen, but it’s a pipe dream. Only heavy, bulky items with low value might return to the US.
We have a dining room suite made in China made from wood imported from the Malaysian rain forest, then shipped to Los Angeles for North American distribution.
My office desk is made in Malaysia, only my book cases are Sauer, made in the US from particle board with a wood veneer.
When shopping at Costco I noticed that apples from Chile are about the same price as those from New Zealand or from Washington state.
When manufacturers decide as to where to build a car they look at volume first, then local special needs, then labor cost, then local incentives and finally transportation cost. Greenhouse gas emissions don’t even enter the picture.
Donald Trump would certainly like that to happen, but it's a pipe dream.
No he wouldn’t…Never have. He’s supported overseas low wage manufacturing for decades. What he has said…is Americans make too much money…and in order to compete with foreign manufacturing the average worker’s wages are way too high.
Sounds to me like he was simply stating a fact, which does not necessarily = supporting the situation.
@MikeInNH The message I seem to get from his speeches is that he wants to close the borders to imports and “restore US jobs” lost mostly to China and Mexico. Ironically at this time jobless claims are the lowest since 1974, and the actual unemployment rate is low as well compared to many developed countries. However, political rhetoric bears no resemblance to what is actually doable or what these guys practice in their own lives.
I’m sure most Trump buildings are full of Chinese plumbing and electrical parts, and imported electronics. And I can almost guarantee that Trump does not wear a US watch.
I once listed to a passionate speech by an economic consultant about “backing out imports”, only afterwards to see his chauffer start up a big Mercedes in the parking garage. He snuck into the backseat and the car left quickly.
lets see the " Emma Maersk " carries 11,000 -20 ft containers around 14 tons each =I54,000 tons a lot of freight indeed these ships can go 28 feet on a gallon of residual oil (equivalent to 1.2 gallons of gasoline)its a good thing there is something that will burn that bottom of the stack stuff ,I have bought No.2 diesel that smelled like asphalt.The container ships are 3 times more energy efficient then the the avg freight train ,but now CSX is claiming to be able to move a ton of freight,450 miles on a gallon of fuel. During my trip through cyberspace something surprising jumped out a me ,it seems air freight is about as efficient(cost wise as trucking ) because airplanes are loaded to the max ,while the truck capacity is often under utilized ,I suppose the time factor is figured in also .
Under utilization is a problem for all freight and passenger transportation systems. How many times have I seen a train of mostly empty flatcars go by at a railroad crossing. Those container ships that arrive loaded with containers often return nearly empty.
I remember one South West Airlines trip from Austin TX to Jacksonville Florida. A stopover at New Orleans before a stopover in Tampa. At the Tampa stopover, nearly everybody but a dozen or so passengers got out but hardly anyone boarded the plane so a dozen or so passengers had the plane to themselves and since the hop from Tampa to Jacksonville was a short 20 minute hop, they probably didn’t take on any fuel either.
I’ll vouch for the fact that an empty 737 is a rocket ship. We must have been airborne after only a quarter mile of runway. I’ve never been pushed back that hard into the seat during acceleration and climbout. That same airplane fully loaded with passengers and enough fuel to cross the country would have needed the whole runway to get airborne.
Sounds to me like he was simply stating a fact, which does not necessarily = supporting the situation.
I suggest you listen to his speech then…
In many areas wages are too high to compete…but that doesn’t mean the solution is to lower wages. If I earned what my counter parts in India earned…I’d be living below poverty levels here in the US. You have to look at cost of living as part of the equation. You can live like a king with servants and drivers and Nanny’s on $35k/year in India or China. Sure lower wages…but you have to lower cost of living also…and that’s NOT going to happen. Cost of goods keep going up…Housing keeps going up…utilities keep going up…CEO wages/compensation keeps going up. All those would have to take a drastic cut in order for our wages to compete in the global market.
What Donald says and what Donald does are completely different animals. He’s hired Illegal immigrants (and was caught and fined for it).
He’s been on public record in the past to NOT punish companies who hire illegal immigrants.
You want to stop illegal immigrants…then stop the companies that hire them. That’s the only way it’s really going to work. Not this stupid $100 billion WALL he wants to build that won’t work.
“Mr Trump, tear down this wall!” :naughty:
I read the speech and it still sounds like he’s explaining the situation as it is rather than telling us what we want to hear.
Everybody wants their jobs protected from foreign competition, but nobody wants to pay $200 for a pair of Levi’s. Ultimately, our standard of living is determined by our productivity, not by how many pictures of dead presidents we get and give while bartering for those goods.
Visit Zimbabwe if you want to see “millionaires” living in grinding poverty and squalor.
A Zimbabwean holding a loaf of bread and the cash needed to buy it.
Docnick ,sometimes you have to take the jobless claims with a grain of salt ,sometimes they report just new jobless claims and some people have just plain exhausted their UC benefits ,while some people are for the most part chronically unemployable (Felons for instance doesnt really matter what the conviction was,you have the " Scarlet letter " ,I dont know what the current claimed employment stats are,but I heard POTUS bragging the other day about the economic recovery that happened during His tenure (not in evidence around here)
I suppose the 84 month low interest (almost lifetime ) auto payments help make the economy look a little better .
I hear too many younger people lamenting the fact that both parties have to work to make ends meet . and I think the continual meddling and control by the govt has something to do with it ,cars are just dang expensive due in part to all the mandated features,little has been done to make the creature behind the wheel a better driver.
@kmccune Yes, there has been a trade-off between high paying unskilled jobs such as in the auto sector with low paying unskilled jobs (McJobs), and as a result it takes two wage earners to provide a decent lifestyle.
This transition had little to do with whoever was in power in Washington; it’s an evolutionary change brought about by automation, the electronic revolution, and globalization.
I remember living near an auto frame plant owned by Budd Automotive. Those frames were hand welded with several guys (well paid) doing the welding on the "assembly’ line. That plant is closed now; not much demand for frames, and in those plants that still make them, robots do the work.
The idea that any politician can change this is ludicrous. Only serious investment in education and training and emphasis on high tech manufacturing can improve the situation.
True what Donald says and does may be two different things but you know for certain that what the Hill says will be different that what the Hill does. And of course the Bern is just an old communist in socialist britches. Lets not forget also it was another Clinton where these trade issues began that pretty much forced corporations to go global. Remember that giant sucking sound that Perot warned us about? So don’t kid yourself, it doesn’t look good for the ole US from any of the front runners but might be time to shake up the old establishment a little. What can it hurt?
On the other hand, the labor shortage around here is becoming critical. Plenty of whack jobs that can’t get up on time or stay sober, but a real lack of trained or trainable people to work factory and skilled jobs at wages approaching the $20’s to start. They are offering all kinds of benefits in the rural areas including board.
The only thing I can think of when I see Bernie Sanders on TV is “Grumpy Old Men”
If they ever relaunch the franchise, he should be the main character. Jack Lemmon, Ossie Davis, Burgess Meredith and Walter Matthau are no longer around, so who would be the new co-stars?
I think if Bernie grew a goatee and wore some horn rimmed glasses, he could sell fried chicken.
@B.L.E.
"I think if Bernie grew a goatee and wore some horn rimmed glasses, he could sell fried chicken."
You’re being a bit ridiculous. He wouldn’t sell it. He’d raise taxes on people like us that don’t pay their fair share and don’t need the chicken or the money, declare fried chicken a human right (backed up by the U.N and WHO), and distribute if free for disadvantaged citizens, for the common good. 
CSA
Lets not forget also it was another Clinton where these trade issues began that pretty much forced corporations to go global. Remember that giant sucking sound that Perot warned us about?
WOW…
I hate to tell you this but NAFTA was started by Reagan…NOT Clinton. It was started by Reagan…First agreement signed by Bush…then Clinton signed it into law.
The jobs outsourcing has been a Large Corporation agenda for decades. It’s been the Mantra of Jack Welch and GE since the 70’s…and other corporations have been trying to follow it for years. Keep the headquarters here in the US and move Manufacturing and Engineering to cheaper labor markets.