Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
Author: Bruce Kelly
Date: 12-14-2007 - 13:08
It might take a significant difference in fuel consumption, speed, and cost between container and bulk shipping on the Snake to prompt any change in current operations there. On many trips, they already hook container barges together with one or two bulk barges for movement up or down the river as a single unit.
Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Ross Hall |
12-13-2007 - 17:48 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Dave Smith |
12-13-2007 - 19:35 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Ross Hall |
12-14-2007 - 17:35 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
George Andrews |
12-13-2007 - 19:39 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
S.L. Murray |
12-14-2007 - 09:50 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Bruce Kelly |
12-14-2007 - 10:26 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread. |
Bruce Kelly |
12-14-2007 - 13:08 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Ross Hall |
12-14-2007 - 17:43 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread. There are also other issues.
|
Ross Hall |
12-14-2007 - 17:51 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Dave Smith |
12-14-2007 - 17:46 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Marc |
12-14-2007 - 20:50 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Dave Smith |
12-15-2007 - 11:45 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
George Andrews |
12-15-2007 - 17:36 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Marc |
12-15-2007 - 22:13 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
Dave Smith |
12-15-2007 - 23:50 |
Re: Rail most efficient, not no 2 continuing earlier thread.
|
hummm... |
12-16-2007 - 14:45 |