<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: THE RECOVERY IN RAIL FREIGHT CONTINUES</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pragcap.com/the-recovery-in-rail-freight-continues/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pragcap.com/the-recovery-in-rail-freight-continues</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 09:29:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Uformula</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/the-recovery-in-rail-freight-continues/comment-page-1#comment-10254</link>
		<dc:creator>Uformula</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jan 2010 00:19:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=14837#comment-10254</guid>
		<description>What&#039;s the difference between intermodel traffic and Carload Freight?  They are diverging it seems to me.  Is this correct?  If so, why?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s the difference between intermodel traffic and Carload Freight?  They are diverging it seems to me.  Is this correct?  If so, why?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TomOfTheNorth</title>
		<link>http://pragcap.com/the-recovery-in-rail-freight-continues/comment-page-1#comment-10248</link>
		<dc:creator>TomOfTheNorth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2010 20:30:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pragcap.com/?p=14837#comment-10248</guid>
		<description>Thanks for another interesting post TPC! I&#039;m really struggling to wrap my brain around the stats in this one.

Seemingly bad news:
&quot;For the first 51 weeks of 2009, U.S. railroads reported .....total volume of an estimated 1.47 trillion ton-miles, down 15.4 percent from 2008 and 16.3 percent from 2007.&quot;

But here&#039;s good news on weekly data vs same week last year:
&quot;commodity groups were up compared with the same week last year, with fourteen reporting double digit increases, including motor vehicles (52.1 percent); lumber and wood products (44.8 percent); grain (31.1 percent); metals (31.7 percent) and chemicals (18.7 percent).&quot;

As I queried on your Housing post, how much of current freight volume can be attributed to the expected inventory rebuild irrespective of any recovery? I will add however that I especially noted, in support of your housing recovery thesis, the 45% jump in wood products shipments vs same week a year ago.....

Interesting - I&#039;m still skeptical but interesting.

Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for another interesting post TPC! I&#8217;m really struggling to wrap my brain around the stats in this one.</p>
<p>Seemingly bad news:<br />
&#8220;For the first 51 weeks of 2009, U.S. railroads reported &#8230;..total volume of an estimated 1.47 trillion ton-miles, down 15.4 percent from 2008 and 16.3 percent from 2007.&#8221;</p>
<p>But here&#8217;s good news on weekly data vs same week last year:<br />
&#8220;commodity groups were up compared with the same week last year, with fourteen reporting double digit increases, including motor vehicles (52.1 percent); lumber and wood products (44.8 percent); grain (31.1 percent); metals (31.7 percent) and chemicals (18.7 percent).&#8221;</p>
<p>As I queried on your Housing post, how much of current freight volume can be attributed to the expected inventory rebuild irrespective of any recovery? I will add however that I especially noted, in support of your housing recovery thesis, the 45% jump in wood products shipments vs same week a year ago&#8230;..</p>
<p>Interesting &#8211; I&#8217;m still skeptical but interesting.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

