China rail freight volume grows 3.6% in JanâApr 2025
China's national railways transported approximately 1.3 billion tonnes of cargo in the January–April 2025 period, marking a 3.6 per cent year-on-year increase, according to China State Railway Group Co, Ltd.
China's national railways moved 1.3 billion tonnes of cargo in Janâ€'Apr 2025, up 3.6 per cent YoY, with daily loading averaging 180,000 carriages. Rail-water container volumes rose 19.1 per cent to 5.38 million TEUs. Cross-border freight surged: China-Central Asia trips up 21 per cent, China-Laos volumes rose 7.6 per cent, and China-Europe service remained stable.
The average daily loading volume rose by 4.7 per cent to 180,000 carriages.
Efforts to improve logistics efficiency included the launch of 119 new multimodal services and a 19.1 per cent increase in rail-water container volumes, which reached 5.38 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs), as per Chinese media reports.
Cross-border rail freight remained strong. China-Central Asia train trips rose 21 per cent to 4,725, while the China-Laos Railway handled nearly 2 million tonnes of goods, up 7.6 per cent. China-Europe Railway Express operations remained stable.
Fibre2Fashion News Desk (HU)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
28 minutes ago
- Mint
Barry Eichengreen: Is the US Federal Reserve's independence at threat?
The independence of the US Federal Reserve is back in the spotlight. Late last month, Fed Chair Jerome Powell met at the White House with President Donald Trump 'to discuss economic developments," as the Fed antiseptically put it in a post-meeting statement. Market participants will wonder what went on. Held at the president's request, the meeting was exceptional but not unprecedented. Fed chairs have met with presidents on occasion, although those occasions generally were less than propitious. In 1965, William McChesney Martin met with Lyndon B. Johnson at LBJ's Texas ranch. Johnson worried that a Fed interest-rate hike had created headwinds for growth, and anticipated a challenging midterm election. Also Read: Powell versus Trump: Why Fed independence matters in times of turmoil Johnson confronted the Fed chair physically as well as verbally, using his considerable girth to pin Martin to a wall. The impact on Fed policy is disputed to this day. President Richard Nixon met with his Fed Chair Arthur Burns on scores of occasions, regularly pressing him to pursue expansionary monetary policies, which Burns obligingly did. In 1984, with another election looming, Ronald Reagan summoned Paul Volcker to the White House, where James Baker, the president's chief of staff, instructed Volcker not to raise rates. Ben Bernanke met repeatedly with George W. Bush during the Global Financial Crisis, when cooperation to prevent collapse of the financial system was imperative. Powell himself dined with Trump at the White House in 2019. Periodic meetings pose no threat to central bank independence. Independence requires accountability. And in describing the Fed's priorities and general outlook to the president, the Fed chair is demonstrating accountability to the public. But as in the case of Nixon and Burns, a president who regularly harangues the Fed chair, specifically over interest-rate policy, threatens that independence. Also Read: The US-China trade truce doesn't solve the Fed's headache Trump has, of course, repeatedly criticized the Fed's interest-rate decisions. The post-meeting statement issued by the Fed was careful to say that 'expectations for monetary policy" were not discussed. So far so good, assuming the statement can be taken at face value. The second event raising questions about Fed independence was the Supreme Court's 22 May decision in Trump vs Wilcox in which the court granted an administration request to allow the president to fire members of independent government agencies such as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which oversees union elections and labour laws. Technically, the court paused a lower court ruling that would have stayed the president's power of dismissal, suggesting that presidential discretion is justified because NLRB members 'exercise considerable executive power." In other words, they are de facto members of the executive branch, subordinate to the president. This logic would appear to put the Federal Reserve squarely in Trump's crosshairs. Also Read: Barry Eichengreen: Trump is taking aim at the IMF, World Bank and US Fed But in a 6-3 ruling, the six-member majority on the court explicitly exempted the Fed. 'The Federal Reserve," the justices reasoned, 'is a uniquely structured, quasi-private entity that follows in the distinct historical tradition of the First and Second Banks of the United States." This argument might be seen as providing strong support for Fed independence, except that it is illiterate, illogical and ahistorical. The First and Second Banks of the US, which executed limited functions on behalf of the government between 1791 and 1836, were private banks, full stop. Along with providing depository services to the government, they competed with other banks, extending commercial loans. There was nothing quasi about their private status. In contrast, the Federal Reserve Board—if we assume that's what the justices mean when they write 'Federal Reserve"—is made up of seven presidentially-appointed public servants. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), responsible for interest-rate policy, includes those seven board members and five regional Reserve Bank presidents, who are appointed by Reserve Bank directors, subject to the approval of the Federal Reserve Board. The regional Reserve Banks come closest to being 'quasi-private,' because private citizens serve on their boards. But to argue that the same is true of the FOMC or the Federal Reserve System as a whole is a non sequitur. Also Read: The Fed's 'Mission Impossible' is now 'Mission Accomplished' Beyond the Fed's governance is the scope of its authority. The First and Second Banks of the US lacked statutory authority to regulate banks, a key public-policy mandate of the Federal Reserve. In justifying its decision, the majority cited an earlier ruling, Seila Law LLC vs Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, in which the court affirmed the president's power to remove the heads of agencies led by a single director and not a board. That decision included a footnote that the Second Bank and the Fed 'can claim a special historical status." But it provided no legal basis for that statement, and no judgment of validity of the claim. The note reads like a ChatGPT hallucination. Removing checks on presidential powers while arbitrarily exempting the Fed opens the door to arbitrarily not exempting the US central bank. Advocates of Fed independence should be worried. Maybe that's what Trump and Powell talked about. ©2025/Project Syndicate The author is professor of economics and political science at the University of California, Berkeley, and the author, most recently, of 'In Defense of Public Debt'
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
View: Chips won the Cold War. Rare earths may win the next
By David Fickling In retrospect, the symbolism of the moment was foreboding. On May 15, 2019, President Donald Trump signed an executive order banning US firms from doing business with Chinese telecommunications companies, including Huawei Technologies Co. Five days after that first broadside in a brewing trade-and-technology war, President Xi Jinping was photographed touring a factory producing rare-earth magnets. Such devices, his visit seemed to imply, could be a geopolitical weapon for China quite as potent as advanced semiconductors are for the US. Six years later, those battle lines are hardening. In the first major US-China trade dispute of Trump's second term, Beijing was able to use its control of rare earths to force Washington to a deal last week. The magnets produced from them are essential for the lightweight, powerful motors driving everything from automated car seats to guided missiles. After the US imposed its first round of tariffs in April, China started limiting export permits, causing US manufacturers to warn of imminent shutdowns. 'FULL MAGNETS, AND ANY NECESSARY RARE EARTHS, WILL BE SUPPLIED, UP FRONT, BY CHINA,' Trump said in a social media post Wednesday, announcing the trade deal had been finalized. Beneath the all-caps boastfulness there's a worrying note of desperation. America has been caught napping. Beijing's response to being frozen out of the microprocessor ecosystem was an all-out drive to bridge the technological gap. State-owned chip foundry Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. has deployed $33.5 billion on capital expenditures, and $4 billion on research and development, since the middle of 2019. Huawei spends 180 billion yuan ($25 billion) on R&D every year, founder Ren Zhengfei said in a recent interview. Just 12 months ago, the government created a separate $47.5 billion semiconductor investment fund. The US chip fortress still looks pretty impregnable, barring an unexpected DeepSeek moment. Although Huawei is reported to be developing a 3-nanometer chip to match the most advanced non-Chinese processors as soon as next year, Ren said its best designs still 'lag behind the US by a generation.' A lesson of asymmetric warfare, though, is to exploit your enemy's weaknesses, rather than attempt to match their strengths. That's where rare earths come in. A technological conflict is simply a disguised version of a real flesh-and-blood battle. As Chris Miller's 2022 book Chip War explains, the US advantage in semiconductors was a crucial factor in winning the Cold War. By making processing power incredibly lightweight and error-free, it enabled America to build a far more fearsome military machine. Cruise missiles guided by tiny onboard computers could destroy targets with pinpoint accuracy, rendering them more deadly than Soviet missiles that perennially veered off course. Rare-earth magnets promise to replicate that processing-power revolution in mechanical power — making motors smaller, stronger, cheaper, and more efficient. It's an innovative leap perceptible to anyone who's used a $25 drone: The tiny devices only exist today because of the way this new technology (along with the parallel revolution of lithium-ion batteries ) allows us to move objects in undreamt-of ways. As with cruise missiles in the 1970s, this innovation promises to change the way future wars will be fought. Consider Ukraine's bold drone strike on Russia's long-range bomber fleet earlier this month. Blinded by culture wars over the energy transition, America is doing far too little to close this technological gap. Its military needs for rare-earth magnets, as we've written, have been pretty much met at minimal cost. Compared to the hundreds of billions that China is pouring into chips , the Pentagon has built a rare-earth supply chain since the start of 2020 with $439 million in grants and loans. Worse is the way lithium-ion batteries are falling victim to politics. The looming repeal of Biden era clean-energy subsidies and the resultant collapse of the electric-vehicle supply chain may reduce the output capacity of US battery manufacturers in 2030 by about 75%. That would halt almost every plant not already under construction, and ensure the country can only produce enough cells to power about a fifth of annual car sales. America will be left more dependent on China, both for auto batteries and the host of more crucial niche applications for lithium-ion technology. In the golden age of semiconductors, the US instinctively knew that its strength as a great power lay in its determination to remain at the bleeding edge of innovation. When the might of the state forces technology to submit to ideology, though, the consequences can be disastrous. That's the road the US is heading down, however, in letting China take the lead in rare earths, solar panels, lithium-ion batteries and the other clean electrical technologies of the future. Should American troops find themselves on some future battlefield without the critical minerals and batteries to match the swarms of drones deployed against them, they'll rue the day Washington turned its back on the future.
Business Standard
31 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Kikkoman launches 'The Kikkoman Manga' to accelerate the switch to its soy sauce by more restaurants in India
PRNewswire Mumbai (Maharashtra) [India], June 16: Kikkoman is leveraging one of Japan's most beloved cultural exports - Manga - to convey the unique features of Kikkoman Soy Sauce to the owners of India's more than 1.5 million restaurants. Apart from owners, chefs, line/junior chefs, cooks, and culinary school students will be encouraged, in classic manga-style, to switch to Kikkoman to give their dishes more robust flavour, marking a creative and engaging approach to marketing in India by this global Japanese company. Here's the story of the first episode: Pramod, a chef with exceptional skills, learns he is getting fired from his job after unilaterally changing the restaurant's menu. Amid all the tension, he coincidentally meets Varun, a restaurant owner-chef who has inherited his father's restaurant. The two connect through their shared passion for cooking and work together to rebuild the restaurant, transforming it into a popular eatery through the use of the condiment they both swear by - Kikkoman Soy Sauce. Chef Manjit Gill, President of the Indian Federation of Culinary Associations and Kikkoman India Industry Advisor, enjoyed the story thoroughly and felt a touch of nostalgia. "I strongly believe that Kikkoman's message will resonate with many chefs in India. There are said to be more than 200,000 chefs in the organized sector alone," he said. "I was fondly reminded of my own younger days - when the hero was trying hard, making all possible efforts to make dishes more delicious - using the best ingredients. I look forward to this story reaching out to a wide audience, making real impact in India. In fact, I'm waiting impatiently for the next episode of this interesting Kikkoman Manga." Currently, Kikkoman India is directly engaging with top chain restaurants and large format restaurants, gradually increasing its brand recognition and adoption. However, awareness of Kikkoman among owners and chefs of smaller restaurants, as well as line/junior chefs, and cooks in restaurants, remains relatively low. The Kikkoman Manga project's primary aim is to introduce the Kikkoman brand to chefs who are unfamiliar with it, to encourage chefs to consider trying Kikkoman, and to convey that Kikkoman Soy Sauce can also be used in Chinese cuisine. Kikkoman hopes the use of this compelling form of storytelling will accelerate the move to Kikkoman Soy Sauce becoming a vital ingredient in enhancing taste. Language will not be a barrier. The Kikkoman Manga will be available in English, Hindi, Telugu, Tamil, Bengali, and Marathi. About Kikkoman and Kikkoman India With a history spanning over 350 years, the current Kikkoman corporate entity was established through the merger of eight families in 1917. The company's internationalization strategy began some 60 years ago, with its entry into the United States market. Kikkoman has become a global business, expanding to over 100 countries, with 11 soy sauce production sites worldwide that distribute its products all over the world to millions of consumers. Kikkoman India is solely responsible for importing all Kikkoman products, and is responsible for managing all production, marketing, sales, and distribution in India.
