什么是公路运输 公路运输是构成陆上运输的两种基本运输方式之一。所谓公路运输，是指以公路为运输线，利用汽车等陆路运输工具，做跨地区或跨国的移动，以完成货物位移的运输方式。它是对外贸易运输和国内货物流程的主要方式之一，既是独立的运输体系，也是车站、港口和机场物资集散的重要手段。 公路运输的特点 1、机动灵活，适应性强 由于公路运输网一般比铁路、水路网的密度要大十几倍，分布面也广，因此公路运输车辆可以“无处不到、无时不有”。公路运输在时间方面的机动性也比较大，车辆可随时调度、装运，各环节之间的衔接时间较短。尤其是公路运输对客、货运量的多少具有很强的适应性，汽车的载重吨位有小 (0.25t～1t左右)有大(200t～300t左右)，既可以单个车辆独立运输，也可以由若干车辆组成车队同时运输，这一点对抢险、救灾工作和军事运输具有非凡重要的意义。 2、可实现“门到门”直达运输 由于汽车体积较小，中途一般也不需要换装，除了可沿分布较广的路网运行外，还可离开路网深入到工厂企业、农村田间、城市居民住宅等地，即可以把旅客和货物从始发地门口直接运送到目的地门口，实现“门到门”直达运输。这是其它运输方式无法与公路运输比拟的特点之一。 3、在中、短途运输中，运送速度较快 在中、短途运输中，由于公路运输可以实现“门到门”直达运输，中途不需要倒运、转乘就可以直接将客货运达目的地，因此，与其它运输方式相比，其客、货在途时间较短，运送速度较快。 4、原始投资少，资金周转快 公路运输与铁、水、航运输方式相比，所需固定设施简单，车辆购置费用一般也比较低，因此，投资兴办轻易，投资回收期短。据有关资料表明，在正常经营情况下，公路运输的投资每年可周转1～3次，而铁路运输则需要3～4年才能周转一次。 5、把握车辆驾驶技术较易 与火车司机或飞机驾驶员的培训要求来说，汽车驾驶技术比较轻易把握，对驾驶员的各方面素质要求相对也比较低。 6、运量较小，运输成本较高 目前，世界上最大的汽车是美国通用汽车公司生产的矿用自卸车，长20多米，自重610t，载重350t左右，但仍比火车、轮船少得多；由于汽车载重量小，行驶阻力比铁路大9～14倍，所消耗的燃料又是价格较高的液体汽油或柴油，因此，除了航空运输，就是汽车运输成本最高了。 7、运行持续性较差 据有关统计资料表明，在各种现代运输方式中，公路的平均运距是最短的，运行持续性较差。如我国1998年公路平均运距客运为55km，货运为57km，铁路客运为395km，货运为764km。 8、安全性较低，污染环境较大 据历史记载，自汽车诞生以来，已经吞吃掉3000多万人的生命，非凡是20世纪90年代开始，死于汽车交通事故的人数急剧增加，平均每年达50多万。这个数字超过了艾滋病、战争和结核病人每年的死亡人数。汽车所排出的尾气和引起的噪声也严重地威胁着人类的健康，是大城市环境污染的最大污染源之一。 公路运输的经营方式 1、公共运输业：专业经营汽车货物运输业务并以整个社会为服务对象。 1）定期定线：不论货载多少，在固定路线上按时间表行使。 2）定线不定期：在固定路线上视货源情况，派车行使。 3）定区不定期：在固定的区域内根据货载需要，派车行使。 2、契约运输业：按照承托双方签订的运输契约运送货物。契约期一般较长，托运人保证提供一定的货运量，承运人保证提供所需的运力。 3、自用运输业：企业自置汽车，专为运送自己的物资和产品，一般不对外营业。 4、汽车货运代理：以中间人身份向货主揽货，并向运输公司托运，收取手续费和佣金。 有点汽车货运代理专门从事向货主揽取零星货载，集中成为整车货物，自己以托运人名义向运输公司托运，赚取零担和整车货物运费之间的差额。
什么是保利点 保利点是指在单价和成本水平既定的情况下，为确保事先确定的目标利润（PT）能够实现而应当达到的业务量的统称[1]。 保利点的表现形式[1] 单一品种条件下，保本点表现形式有两种： 1、保利点销售量(简称保利量，记作x2)。 2、保利点销售额(简称保本额，记作y2额)。 保利点的计算公式[1] 在单一品种条件下，保利点的计算公式： 保利量（x2）=（固定成本+目标利润）/（单价+单位变动成本）=（a+TP）/(p-b) =（固定成本+目标利润）/单位贡献边际=（a+TP）/cm =保本量+目标利润/单位贡献边际= 保利额（y2）=单价×保利量= =（固定成本+目标利润）/（1-变动成本率）=（a+TP）/(1-bR) =（固定成本+目标利润）/贡献边际率=（a+TP）/cmR 参考文献 ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 东北财经大学网络课程.《管理会计》[M]
什么是废弃物物流 废弃物流是指将经济活动中失去原有使用价值的物品,根据实际需要进行收集、分类、加工、包装、搬运、储存等,并分别送到专门处理场所时所形成的物品实体流动。它仅从环境保护的角度出发,不管对象物有没有价值或利用价值,而将其妥善处理,以免造成环境污染。 废弃物流的产生 随着科学技术的发展和人民生活水平的提高，人们对物资的消费要求越来越高：既要质量好又要款式新。于是被人们淘汰、丢弃的物资日益增多。这些产生于生产和消费的过程中的物质，由于变质、损坏，或使用寿命终结而失去了使用价值。它们有生产过程的边角余料、废渣废水以及未能形成合格产品而不具有使用价值的物质；有流通过程产生的废弃包装材料；也有在消费后产生的排泄物：如家庭垃圾、办公室垃圾等。这些排泄物一部分可回收并再生利用，称为再生资源，形成回收物流。另一部分在循环利用过程中，基本或完全丧失了使用价值，形成无法再利用的最终排泄物利用，即废物。废弃物经过处理后，返回自然界，形成废弃物流。 回收物流与废弃物流不能直接给企业带来效益，但非常有发展潜力。 我国废弃物物流的现状分析 我国加入WTO以后,一些限制措施的逐渐取消,国外物流服务企业已经进入国内市场,并不断的提高其市场占有率。中国已被公认为21世纪世界的“加工工厂”。许多国外生产企业早在20世纪80年代就开始进驻中国市场,开辟了自己的生产领地。物流产业已作为国民经济的一个新兴的产业部门,成为我国本世纪重要产业和国民经济新的经济增长点。然而对于废弃物物流的研究却很少,这使人很轻易联想到中国早期的工业发展所走的“先污染,后治理”的道路,面对日益增多的废弃物,我们可否使其成为一种非凡的商品?使废弃物物流走产业化的路子?这是我国应该研究和面对的一个课题。 一、重视废弃物物流意义重大 1、废弃物及废弃物物流的涵义 废弃物是指在生产建设、日常生活和其他社会活动中产生的,在一定时间和空间范围内基本或者完全失去使用价值,无法回收和利用的排放物。根据GB的规定,废弃物物流(Waste material logistics)是指将经济活动中失去原有使用价值的商品,根据实际需要进行收集、分类、加工、包装、搬运、储存等,并分送到专门场所时所形成的物品实体流动。在实际生产活动中,人们关注的是使用价值依然存在的这部分商品,即回收物流。然而,在许多的排放物中,一部分可以回收被循环使用称为再生性资源;一部分是已丧失再利用价值的排放物,只能进行焚烧和掩埋被称为废弃物。再生性资源由于社会进步及其人们环保意识的增强,已逐渐的被回收,通过分拣、加工、分解,重新进入生产和消费领域。而对于生产和生活中产生的废弃物,目前国内的处理手段和重视程度还远远不够,因其使用价值的丧失使现代物流企业很少问津,当然,也与我国目前的环保体制不无关系。 2、提高熟悉,改变观念,推动废弃物物流的发展 首先,从社会资源有限性分析:因人类社会所需要的各种物资均来自于自然界。随着人类社会的进步,人们生活水平的提高和消费需求的多样性,使人类对自然资源的采掘量增大,一些自然界不可再生的资源在逐渐的减少,因此就资源稀缺性的角度考虑,人类必须考虑资源保护和对再生性废弃物的回收再利用,由此而形成的废弃物物流的研究与实践,对整个社会文明的发展有积极的推动作用。 其次,从环境保护的角度分析:因废弃物中除了一部分可回收利用外,其余部分已丧失了使用价值,而且很多生产垃圾中含有对人体有害的物质,假如不及时有效的处理,必将影响人们的整个生活环境。尤其是在365JT城市这种人口密度大、企业数量多、废弃物排放量高的地方。不经过处理直接排放到自然界中的废弃物,会严重的影响到农业土壤,植被和饮用水源。所以必须对其处理,使废弃物资源化,成为有利可图的产业,并逐渐的市场化;不但实现废物再生产,同时增加就业人口,这些已经在一些发达国家开始实施,因此很有研究价值。 再次,从可持续发展的观点来分析:从宏观层次上看,可持续发展思想的实质是追求人与自然的和谐。1987年世界环境与发展委员会在《我们共同的未来》的报告中对“可持续发展”给出的定义是:可持续发展就是在满足当代人的各种需要的同时,不会使后代人满足他们自身需要的能力受到损害。20世纪90年代可持续发展成为全球的共识。正因为人们已经熟悉到社会资源的有限性,所以也就有了“循环经济”的提法,即“资源——产品——再生资源”。江泽民曾指出:“决不能浪费资源,走先污染后治理的路子,更不能吃子孙饭,造子孙孽。”所以从国家长远发展的观点出发,废弃物的有效处理必须加强。 2、国内废弃物物流的现状 1)我国对废弃物处理的法规及其相关规定 按产生的来源,我国对废弃物有三类划分:一是生产废弃物,二是流通废弃物,三是生活废弃物。与之相对应的法律法规有:《中华人民共和国固体废物污染防治法》,《中华人民共和国清洁生产促进法》,《城市生活垃圾治理规定》等。因为废弃物物流不仅涉及到物流企业和废弃物产生者的关系,而且直接涉及到经济效益和社会效益的关系。我国对废弃物处理的原则是:“谁污染,谁治理”。对于工业废弃物,按照法律规定由产业部门自行处理,处理费用计入生产成本;而对于生活废弃物目前主要由市政环卫部门处理,处理费用由政府财政支付。 2)国内废弃物物流的现状 有关资料表明,我国600多个城市有三分之二被垃圾所包围,1982--1989年期间我国城市人均产垃圾量为0.4--0.6kg,1990年为0.76kg,1999年超过0.8kg。从年产量来看,1990年全国城市生活垃圾产量为6.766×107t,并且每年以7%--9%的速度递增,1996年已达1.0825×108t,但无害化处理不到2%,到2000年无害率不到5%。尽管我国出台了相关的法律法规,但人们的观念,垃圾制造者的责任感及目前国内落后的废弃物处理设施和尚不健全的法律法规体系,形成了层层障碍,由于长期的分散治理,各自为政,部门和地区分割,导致了目前的许多废弃物无人管、无人治理的尴尬局面。 我国对废弃物的处理水平相对于美、日、德等发达国家相当落后,如对生产垃圾和生活垃圾源头上的分类,可回收再利用的废弃物和不可回收利用的废弃物的分类处理都没有深入的宣传和严格的标准。就现状而言,城市里许多可回收利用的物资主要通过城市里废品收购站回收及小商贩从市内垃圾箱拣选和从住户处回收。回收部门多为私人经营,规模小且设施简陋,对回收物资主要是露天堆放,通过人工拣选再向上一级的物资回收部门出售。作为政府主管部门的环卫机构,对城市里各种无使用价值的生产、生活垃圾进行收集,主要运往垃圾倾倒场地,绝大多数没有进行进一步的处理,致使城市四周的垃圾处理场面积扩大。而把废弃物物流作为盈利性服务的物流公司几乎没有。废弃物不仅威胁着城市,也在向农村蔓延。以甘肃省民勤县为例,一个原本生态环境就很薄弱的地方,近几年因为耕地大量使用地膜覆盖,形成的废旧塑料垃圾已开始严重影响农作物的产量,田间地头这种不可降解的塑料随处可见,这种白色污染,后果又由谁来承担?这与我们倡导的“环保模范城市”、“生态城市”、“可持续发展观”是否背道而驰? 3、国外废弃物物流现状 近年来,废弃物的收集、运输、循环利用、最终处置在国外已成为一个重要的产业,1998年8月号“moneyworld”杂志提出“垃圾变黄金”的专题讨论,文中提到当今世界最值钱的产业将是处理垃圾的公司或生产垃圾处理系统的科技公司,因为他们认为以现在的垃圾处理费用120美元每吨来计算,这个市场的潜在价值高达6 000亿美元以上。仅就以上资料我们可以看出发达国家对于废弃物处理的重视。 1)法律法规的颁布情况 由于废弃物物流主体的非凡性,各国、各地区都对废弃物的流通、处理制定了严格的法律法规。比如德国,是世界上第一个重视包装废弃物回收与利用的国家。1975年,德国政府与工业界就节约资源,增加包装废弃物的回收再生达成协议;1986年,德国政府颁布《废弃物处理及处理办法》;1991年,又正式颁布包装废弃物法令,以立法的方式明令产品生产及销售者负责回收包装废弃物,即《包装废弃物处理法》。另外,1996年,德国又颁布了《循环经济和废物治理法》,以法律形式保证“绿色包装”的实施。再比如日本,2001年4月开始实施《推进建立循环型社会基本法》,《有效利用资源促进法》,《家用电器再利用法》争取控制垃圾数量,实现资源再利用;欧、美、日等发达国家均颁布法令,要求产品制造商,进口商,必须负责包装回收再利用与再制造的责任。 2)废弃物处理手段及废弃物物流的产业化情况 ①废弃物处理手段 就固体废弃物而言,目前的处理方法主要有压实、破碎、分拣、脱水与干燥、固化、热转化、生物处置等7种。随着科技发展,垃圾处理设备不断改进,废弃物处理的现代化、科学化、系统化水平也逐渐提高。如现代机械用于垃圾分拣;生物工程用于填埋场建设;热物理传热365JT技术改进垃圾焚烧发电系统提高产电能力;生物技术用于垃圾制肥提高制肥效率和质量;现代化信息技术用于垃圾综合治理系统等等。废弃物焚烧在国外获得广泛应用,在日本,荷兰,瑞士,丹麦,瑞典等国家已成为废弃物处理的主要手段。瑞士废弃物80%为焚烧;日本,丹麦垃圾70%以上为焚烧。 ②固体废弃物处理的国际潮流 当前废弃物处理的国际潮流“综合性废物治理”,就是动员全体民众参与3R行动,把垃圾的产量减下来,三个R的行动口号是:①减少浪费(Reduce);②物尽其用(Reuse);③回收利用(Recycle)。因为经济全球化及社会资源趋于全球流动,需要全社会这样做,减少废弃物总量和城市处理垃圾的负担。 ③废弃物物流产业化发展状况 以美国废物处理公司为例,该公司创立于1894年,是目前世界上最大的废物处理公司,也是唯一一家提供全套环保服务的公司。服务范围包括环境咨询,建筑365JT设计与工程治理处理,业务扩展到世界各地。今天的废物处理公司控制着:国际废物处理公司,化学废物处理公司,带式喷丸清理机技术公司和拉斯特国际公司,成为世界上最大的环境服务公司。再比如丹麦,一个国家只建设一个垃圾综合处理场,垃圾消纳量占全国的一半左右。 4、对我国废弃物物流产业化运作的一些思考 以上分析表明,废弃物在国外得到了广泛的关注并已经开始了产业化运营。废弃物是一种资源,但它又不同于其他类的资源:一方面它的量在不断的增长,其次治理方式也不同。我国对废弃物的处理及利用程度还相当落后,高科技真正的进入废弃物处理还有一段历程。如何使我国的废弃物物流逐渐的进行市场化运作,产业化经营,笔者认为除了制订相关的法律法规,政府是否可以做一些尝试,例如对一些小的城市做试点运营,政府进行适当的投资以及政策性支持,让我国的物流企业涉足这一产业。作为环卫部门应加大宣传力度以及更为严厉的惩罚措施,北京大学叶文虎教授提到了“三生共赢”,即生产增长,生活提高,生态改善。同时在发展经济和改善环境上达到共赢。对于废弃物的收集首先是一个点到面的汇集过程,成本的负担问题,由谁消化?废弃物制造方和废弃物处理方怎样调整他们的利益格局,使各方积极参与,这些仅靠强制性的政策是不能解决的,需要软科学回答这一系列的问题。为了从源头上减少我国的废弃物排放量,应逐渐对生产垃圾和生活垃圾实行计量收费制度,另一方面也让国内的物流企业看到这一产业的有利可图。笔者认为我国应该借鉴发达国家在处理废弃物方面的一些经验,因为废弃物的处理也是一个相当复杂的过程,需要从面到点的收集、储存、运输以及最终的焚烧、掩埋作业环节,需要专用设备,初期投资大,回收期长,所以需要多方面的支持。 5、结束语 尽管我国是一个资源大国,然而由于生态保护意识的薄弱,致使近年来国内许多地方的生态平衡被严重破坏,而生产和生活废弃物对我们生存的环境影响日益严重,尤其是大城市废弃物的收集处理已成为人们关注的焦点。当我们今天热衷于商品物流运作的时候,是否也要面对人类自己制造的废弃物物流,使那些物流企业介入这个产业,让废弃物得到妥善处置,以可持续发展的生态学观点,改善我们的生活环境。尽早结束我国依然持续着的“先污染,后治理”的局面,真正的做到废弃物物流的产业化,减量化,无害化和资源化!
什么是存货计划法[1] 所谓存货计划法，是利用共同的信息基础，在多个地点或在增值链的各阶段中协调存货需求。在工厂仓库层次会发生计划活动，以协调存货配置和向多个中心递送产品。为协调诸如制造商和零售商之类多个渠道伙伴之间的存货需求，也会发生计划活动。 什么是存货计划法的类型[1] 存货计划方法有两种，它们分别是：公平份额分配和配送需求计划。 一、公平份额分配 公平份额分配（fair share allocation）是一种简化的存货管理计划方法，用以向每一个配送设施提供公平的或“公平份额”的可得存货，这些可得存货来自诸如工厂仓库之类的共同货源。 式中，Aj--分配给配送中心j的数量； DS--每一个配送中心应达到的供给天数； Ij--用单位数表示的配送中心j的存货； Dj--配送中心j的日需求量。 虽然公平份额分配可以在多个地点协调存货，但它并没有考虑各地点的特殊因素，诸如完成周期、经济订货批量或安全储备需要等方面的差异。因此，公平份额分配方法在管理多阶段存货的能力方面受到了限制。 二、配送需求计划 配送需求计划（distribution requirements planning，DRP）是一种更加复杂的计划方法，它要考虑多个配送阶段以及各阶段的特点。DRP在逻辑上是制造需求计划（Manufacturing Requirements Planning，MRP）的扩展，尽管这两种技术之间存在着根本性的差异。制造资源计划是由企业制定和控制的生产计划所确定的，而DRP则是在一种独立的环境下运作，由不确定的顾客需求来确定存货需求。制造需求计划是由制定和控制的生产计划所确定的，而DRP则是由顾客需求引导的，企业无法加以控制。所以，制造需求计划通常是在一种相关需求的情况下运作的，而DRP则是在一种独立的环境下运作，由不确定的顾客需求来确定存货需求。制造需求计划的构成需要协调从材料到制成品之间的计划和综合。因此，制造需求计划在制造或装配完成之前就一直控制着存货。一旦在工厂仓库中接收了制成品后，DRP马上就承担了协调的责任。 参考文献 ↑ 1.0 1.1 唐纳德 J.鲍尔索克斯.物流管理[M],林国龙等译
什么是运输费率 运输费率是指在两地间运输某种具体产品时的每单位运输里程或每单位运输重量的运价。运输费率一般由承运人制定并罗列于费率本（tariffs）中。 具体运输方式的运输费率取决于商品种类、重量、运输距离、服务水平和其他选择性要求。如较坚固的商品费率比易碎商品的费率低，低密度商品单位质量费率比高密度商品高。远距离运输的费率比近距离的低。货主对服务水平的要求增加了额外费用，例如，3天送达比5天送达费率高。选择性要求包括对某次运输的货物集货和配货、部分配送、多据点集货等。不同行业、同一行业不同公司可能使用不同类型的费率形式，这取决于提供的服务类型、费用的分配、为达到特定的目标而采取的定价策略类型（如为了占领市场份额而不是大规模地获利）。 运输费率的基本形式 1、基于重量的费率。这种费率随着运输货物的重量变化，而不是随距离变化。例如邮政费率、快信费率等。这种费率简单、易用。采取这种费率的服务费用主要和搬运费用有关，费率在特定的重量点处变化。这种情况下一般有一个最小费用。如果根据货物重量算出的费用小于最低费用，按最低费用收费。 2、基于距离的费率。这种费率随距离和重量变化而变化，对一给定的重量以线性或非线性形式变化，如整车运输费率。因为这种运输的主要费用与燃料和人力有关，而燃料费随距离的增加而增加，人员费用随时间的增加而增加，所以大多数长途运输费率直接随距离变化。 3、和需求相关的费率。这种费率既不取决于重量，也不取决于距离，只是和外部市场需求有关。 4、契约费率。这种费率是在货主和承运商之间进行协商的费率。它们一般根据允许的容积、运货时间、服务可靠性、对承运商的印象、商品类型、运输线路等进行协商。 5、等级费率。等级费率是根据运输距离、商品类型而定。根据商品价值危险程度、不利因素、搬运要求将运输货物分级。不同的运输方式都有不同的运输费率表。等级费率不包括提供选择性服务如要求集货、存贮等的费率。对物流从业人员，应更可能获得企业所装运的全部货物的费率等级。尽管铁路货物分级表和公路货物分级表中存在差别，但各系统的分级标准都是由类似的规则指导的。不过，铁路的规则比汽车货运的规则更全面、也更详细。对于运输部门的成员来说，彻底了解这些分级系统也是有益的。 6、其他特殊费率。特殊费率是指一定的时期、对某些特殊地区或商品实行的费率，它可能比正常费率高或低。特定起点到某终点的费率或某些特殊商品费率都是特殊费率的例子。大宗货运费率一般比非整车装载的费率低。较轻但体积庞大的货物运输费率比正常的或密度小的货物运输费率高。服务水平低的货物运输费率比服务水平高的货物运输费用低。额外服务也将使正常运输费率提高，如半途中要改变目的地、到达目的地后改变收货人、变更卸货地、变更收货人、运输中途存贮及在中间站点部分货物进行装卸等，都会使运输费率提高。
日本扇港集团简介 扇港集团（SENKO GROUP）1946年在日本千叶_名古屋四日市成立SENKO Denki,下属各部门一直努力不懈,与时间竞赛,应付在供给链和生产上的种种竞争和挑战,成功屹立于世界科技领先位置。 扇港是一个多文化,多语种的团队,目标是为汽车关连品/工业,通信/光通信,电子/电工提供优质的产品和服务。生产据点随着全球市场需求改变而迁移.我们的分部战略性的分布于南北美洲,欧洲,亚洲和亚太地区,体现工业"从不休眠"的道理。 业务趋向多样化的同时,我们共同坚持同一信念:科技是推动全球前进的车轮,而扇港就是支持全球前进的枢纽。而扇港团队建立的口号也建立于这个理念:面向未来,与世界同进。 SENKO GROUP业务集中在电子/电工器件业务，服务于建筑，IT,电力供给等相关行业的厂房和办公自动化。扇港电机在全日本早已为行业所熟悉，分部战略性设立在日本各地，以服务东京和大阪及周边地区。 SENKO全球的办事处涵盖了电子/电工产品，包括电缆，照明灯具，开关，电脑主板元件，PLC,继电器，电源线及管材，胶带及粘合剂等，更延伸至一系列高质量的汽车电子元件。配合全球汽车线束装置和电子元件的需求日益增长，1983年建立的SENKO Sangyo扇港产业负责开发电子/电工，汽车关连品/工业，电信/光纤器件的国际贸易，在日本，北美，欧洲，亚太地区设立了多个办事处。 SENKO Group早在1976年便开始从事汽车配套线束和电器元件的销售。线束端子，连接器和粘结带等一直是我们的主要产品。然而，经过多年的发展，我们的产品线已经涵盖所有产品，从汽车内饰，传感器，配套线束，管材到塑料成型产品，润滑剂,EMI产品等。 SENKO扇港汽车关连品与工业产品的专业技术人员与SENKO扇港物流治理服务紧密结合，形成了跨国供给链治理，为一级，二级，三级制造商提供了及时交货JIT以及看板kanban服务，各分部已经通过ISO9001认证，配备检测，包装，仓储能力，战略性地分布于北美，欧洲及亚太地区，支持汽车相关产业的所有活动！ 在汽车工业领域，SENKO扇港的客户遍及全球，在整车制造有ISUZU五十铃，大发Daihatsu (丰田旗下公司)，Mitsubishi Motor三菱汽车，Nissan尼桑日产汽车，零部件制造商有Aishin AW (Toyota),Denso (Toyota),Toyota Koki (Toyota),Kanto Auto Works Ltd. (Toyota),Tokai Rika东海理化等。汽车线束制造商有,矢崎Yazaki,住友电装Sumitomo Wiring Systems,古河Furukawa,藤仓Fujikura,Kyoritsu High parts日本共立,Asahi Denso,Hokuto Sogyo,GSW等。 SENKO扇港还提供咨询/商务发展服务。扇港商业发展团队成员积极寻找机会，为跨国公司搜寻OEM产品！这方面的客户主要有通用汽车，三菱发动机，施乐，安捷伦，日本富士电子，西门子，日立等。 信赖和选择SENKO扇港 1、可以大大减少供给商数量，降低供给商治理成本。 2、通过SENKO扇港可以轻松控制全球运输及交货。 3、减少全球物流成本。 SENKO含义 SENKO不只是一个名字，它是公司的使命。 SEN在日本语里面的意思是"扇子",风扇传统上代表繁荣的前景,因为它的外形预示着好运都结合在一起。 KO在日语里意思是"港口",日本的全球经贸都是通过港口作为门户来进行的。
加拿大国家铁路公司简介 加拿大国家铁路（Canadian National Railway，CN Rail）——加拿大最大、北美第五大的铁路公司。 加拿大国家铁路集团(简称CN)是一个集合了许多已营运多年的中小型铁路公司的现代联合企业,经营着加拿大第一条连接大西洋和太平洋海岸的铁路线。 公司在北美的经营范围包括遍及北美大陆及各大港口的铁路服务，公司的铁路干线横跨北美，东起大西洋海岸，西至太平洋海岸，南达墨西哥湾，覆盖面在北美独一无二 。这一四通八达的铁路网令人称羡 ，运营效率堪称一流。我们被誉为北美的定时运输铁路 以精确、负责、可靠及运力强大著称。 （The Canadian National Railway (CN; AAR reporting marks CN, CNA, CNIS), known as Canadian National Railways (CNR) between 1918 and 1960, and Canadian National/Canadien National (CN) from 1960 to present, is a Canadian Class I railway operated by Canadian National Railway Company headquartered in Montreal, Quebec. It is the largest railway in Canada, in terms of both revenue and the physical size of its rail network. CN is currently Canada‘s only transcontinental railway company, spanning Canada from Nova Scotia to British Columbia. It also has extensive trackage in the central United States along the Mississippi River valley from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico. The Canadian National Railway was created between 1918 and 1923, comprising several railways that had become bankrupt and fallen into federal government hands, along with some railways already owned by the government. In 1995, the federal government privatized CN. Over the next decade, the company expanded significantly in the United States, purchasing Illinois Central Railroad and Wisconsin Central Railway, among others. Now primarily a freight railway, CN also operated passenger services until 1978, when they were assumed by VIA Rail.） Canadian National system map Creation of Canadian National Railways, 1918–1923 In response to public concerns fearing loss of key transportation links, the Government of Canada assumed majority ownership of the bankrupt Canadian Northern Railway (CNoR) on September 6, 1918, and appointed a "Board of Management" to oversee the company. At the same time, CNoR was also directed to assume management of Canadian Government Railways (CGR), a system comprised of the Intercolonial Railway of Canada (IRC), National Transcontinental Railway (NTR), and the Prince Edward Island Railway (PEIR), among others. On December 20, 1918, the federal government created the Canadian National Railways (CNR) through a Privy Council order as a means to simplify the funding and operation of the various railway companies. The absorption of the Intercolonial Railway would see CNR adopt that system‘s slogan The People‘s Railway. Another Canadian railway, the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway (GTPR), encountered financial difficulty on March 7, 1919, when its parent company Grand Trunk Railway (GTR) defaulted on repayment of construction loans to the federal government. The federal government‘s Department of Railways and Canals took over operation of the GTPR until July 12, 1920, when it too was placed under the CNR. Finally, the bankrupt GTR itself was placed under the care of a federal government "Board of Management" on May 21, 1920, while GTR management and shareholders opposed to nationalization took legal action. After several years of arbitration, the GTR was absorbed into CNR on January 30, 1923. In subsequent years, several smaller independent railways would be added to the CNR as they went bankrupt, or it became politically expedient to do so, however the system was more or less finalized following the addition of the GTR. Canadian National Railways was born out of both wartime and domestic urgency. Railways, until the rise of the personal automobile and creation of taxpayer-funded all-weather highways, were the only viable long-distance land transportation available in Canada for many years. As such, their operation consumed a great deal of public and political attention. Many countries regard railway networks as critical infrastructure (even to this day) and at the time of the creation of CNR during the continuing threat of the First World War, Canada was not the only country to engage in railway nationalization. In the early 20th century, many governments were taking a more interventionist role in the economy, foreshadowing the influence of economists like John Maynard Keynes. This political trend, combined with broader geo-political events, made nationalization an appealing choice for Canada. The Winnipeg General Strike of 1919 and allied involvement in the Russian Revolution seemed to validate the continuing process. The need for a viable rail system was paramount in a time of civil unrest and foreign military intervention. Criticism of CNR The Canadian National Railways logo or herald (Which would later be replaced by the controversial CN "worm" in the early 1960s) Regardless of the political and economic importance of railway transportation in Canada; there were many critics of the Canadian government‘s policies in maintaining CNR as a Crown corporation from its inception in 1918 until its privatization in 1995. Some of the most scathing criticism came from the railway industry itself, namely the commercially successful Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) which argued that its taxes should not be used to fund a competitor. Some argue that the CPR could afford to make this criticism, having been itself the child of government and recipient of untold wealth by virtue of land and resource grants, as well as its position as a monopoly from its completion in 1885 until the CNoR started operations on the Prairies at the turn of the century. As a result of history and geography, CPR served larger population centres in the southern prairies, while the CNR‘s merged system served as a de-facto government colonization railway to serve remote and undeveloped regions of Western Canada, northern ontario and Quebec, and the economically-depressed Maritimes. Also, CN was disadvantaged by being constituted from a hodge-podge of bankrupt rail systems that were not intrinsically viable, as they seldom had the shortest route between any major cities or industrial centres; to this day, CN has many division points far from significant industries or traffic sources. The only notable exception to this sorry state of affairs is the former Grand Trunk mainline between Montreal and Chicago. The company also became a convenient instrument of federal government policy from the operation of ferries in Atlantic Canada, to assuming the operation of the narrow-gauge Newfoundland Railway following that province‘s entry into Confederation, and the partnership with CPR in purchasing and operating the Northern Alberta Railways. A company-driven decision to create a radio network across Canada for its passenger train customers led to the federal government assuming total control in 1932, naming the radio network the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission, which was then renamed and organized into a separate Crown corporation in 1936 as the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). Politics and government priorities It is generally accepted that government policy dictated CNR commercial decisions, whether such decisions were in the nation‘s interest, or in the political interest of the party in power. As such, CNR lost money for many years, except during the Second World War when its extensive network reaching into the resource hinterland proved beneficial, and during the late 1980s and early 1990s following deregulation of the Canadian railway industry. Where CNR failed to address costs was largely due to government interference, such as the requirement to purchase locomotives from all Canadian locomotive manufacturers, resulting in operational inefficiencies. CNR was considered to be competitive with CPR in several areas, notably in Central Canada, prior to the age of the automobile and the dense highway network that grew in ontario and Quebec. The former GTR‘s superior track network in the Montreal–Chicago corridor has always been a more direct route with higher capacity than CPR‘s. CNR was also considered a railway industry leader throughout its time as a Crown corporation in terms of research and development into railway safety systems, logistics management, and in terms of its relationship with labour unions. 3 CN Dash 9-44CWs arrive in Selkirk, New York Deregulation and recapitalization Another problem that hobbled CNR was in the sheer number of low-volume branch railway lines which did not produce sufficient traffic to pay for their operation. Without deregulation in the railway industry permitting abandonment or sale of a railway line, or even the ability to set prices to match those of trucks, both CNR and CPR paid dearly for owning these inefficient lines. One tactic that CNR perfected was to demarket a line by providing sufficiently poor service to its few customers, that those customers would turn to trucks for improved service and lower costs. once customers ceased to exist on a small branch line, the federal government would permit the line‘s abandonment. Had deregulation been in place several decades earlier, it is conceivable that many Canadian branch lines would have been viable in the hands of short line operators, saving millions of dollars for taxpayers funding highways, since the railway lines had already been publicly funded in their construction. From the creation of CNR in 1918 until its recapitalization in 1978, whenever the company posted a deficit, the federal government would assume those costs in the government budget. The result of various governments using CNR as a vehicle for various social and economic policies was a subsidization running into billions of dollars over successive decades. Following its 1978 recapitalization and changes in management, CN (name changed to Canadian National Railway, using the shortened acronym CN in 1960) started to operate much more efficiently, by assuming its own debt, improving accounting practices to allow depreciation of assets and to access financial markets for further capital. Now operating as a for-profit Crown corporation, CN reported a profit in 11 of the 15 years from 1978 to 1992, paying $371 million in cash dividends (profit) to the federal government during this time. Cutbacks and refocusing CN‘s rise to profitability was assisted when the company started to remove itself from non-core freight rail transportation starting in 1977 when subsidiary Air Canada (created in 1937 as Trans-Canada Air Lines) became a separate federal Crown corporation. That same year saw CN move its ferry operations into a separate Crown corporation named CN Marine, followed similarly by the grouping of passenger rail services (for marketing purposes) under the name VIA. The following year (1978), the federal government decided to create VIA Rail as a separate Crown corporation to take over passenger services previously offered by both CN and CPR, including CN‘s flagship transcontinental train the Super Continental and its eastern counterpart the Ocean. CN Marine was renamed Marine Atlantic in 1986 to remove any references to its former parent organization. CN also grouped its money-losing Newfoundland operations into a separate subsidiary called Terra Transport so that federal subsidies for this service would be more visible in company statements. CN also divested itself during the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s of several non-rail transportation activities such as trucking subsidiaries, a hotel chain (sold to CPR), real estate, and telecommunications companies. The biggest telecommunications property was a company which was co-owned by CN and CP (CNCP Telecommunications) which, upon its sale in the 1980s, was successively renamed Unitel (United Telecommunications), AT%26amp;T Canada, and Allstream as it went through various owners and branding agreements. Another more-famous telecommunications property wholly-owned and built by CN was the CN Tower in Toronto which still keeps its original name but was divested by the railway company in the early 1990s. All the proceeds from such sales were used to pay down CN‘s accumulated debt. At the time of their divestitures, all of these subsidiaries required considerable subsidies which partly explained CN‘s financial problems prior to recapitalization. CN also was given free rein by the federal government following deregulation of the railway industry in the 1970s, as well as in 1987, when railway companies began to make tough business decisions by removing themselves from operating money-losing branch lines. In CN‘s case, some of these branch lines were those which it had been forced to absorb through federal government policies and outright patronage, while others were from the heady expansion era of rural branchlines in the 1920s and early 1930s and were considered obsolete following the development of local road networks. CN train at the busy East Junction, Edmonton, 2006 During the period starting in the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s and early 1990s, thousands of kilometres of railway lines were abandoned, including the complete track networks in Newfoundland (CN subsidiary Terra Transport, the former Newfoundland Railway ended freight operations in 1988 and passenger travel in 1969.) and Prince Edward Island (the former PEIR), as well as numerous branch lines in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Southern Ontario, throughout the Prairie provinces, in the British Columbia interior, and on Vancouver Island. Virtually every rural area served by CN in some form was affected, creating resentment for the company and the federal government. Many of these now-abandoned right-of-ways were divested by CN and the federal government and have since been converted into recreational trails by local municipalities and provincial governments. CN‘s U.S. subsidiaries prior to privatization CN‘s railway network in the late 1980s consisted of the company‘s Canadian trackage, along with the following U.S. subsidiary lines: Grand Trunk Western Railroad (GTW) operating in Michigan, Indiana, and Illinois; Detroit, Toledo and Ironton Railroad (DTI) operating in Michigan and Ohio; Duluth, Winnipeg and Pacific Railway (DWP) operating in Minnesota; Central Vermont Railway (CV) operating down the Connecticut River valley from Quebec to Long Island Sound; and a former GT line to Portland, Maine, known informally as the Grand Trunk Eastern, sold to a short line operator in 1989. The US subsidiaries kept their identities due to their ownership. Technically, foreign governments were not allowed to own railroads in the US. However, a railroad owned by another railroad was allowed to operate, regardless as to if that "other railroad" was owned by a foreign government. Privatization In 1992 a new management team led by ex-federal government bureaucrats, Paul Tellier and Michael Sabia, started preparing CN for privatization by emphasizing increased productivity. This was achieved largely through aggressive cuts to the company‘s bloated and inefficient management structure, widescale layoffs in its workforce and continued abandonment or sale of its branch lines. In 1993 and 1994 the company experimented with a rebranding that saw the names CN, Grand Trunk Western, and Duluth, Winnipeg, and Pacific replaced under a collective CN North America moniker. During this time, CPR and CN entered into negotiations regarding a possible merger of the two companies. This was later rejected by the federal government, whereby CPR offered to purchase outright all of CN‘s lines from ontario to Nova Scotia, while an unidentified U.S. railroad (rumoured to have been Burlington Northern Railroad) would purchase CN‘s lines in western Canada. This too was rejected. In 1995, the entire company including its U.S. subsidiaries reverted to using CN exclusively. The CN Commercialization Act was enacted into law on July 13, 1995 and by November 28, 1995, the federal government had completed an initial public offering (IPO) and transferred all of its shares to private investors. Two key prohibitions in this legislation include, 1) that no individual or corporate shareholder may own more than 15% of CN, and 2) that the company‘s headquarters must remain in Montreal, thus maintaining CN as a Canadian corporation. Purchasing Illinois Central Following the successful IPO, CN has recorded impressive gains in its stock price. In 1998, during an era of mergers in the U.S. railway industry, CN purchased the Illinois Central Railroad (IC), which connected the already existing lines from Vancouver, British Columbia to Halifax, Nova Scotia with a line running from Chicago, Illinois to New Orleans, Louisiana. This single purchase of IC transformed CN‘s entire corporate focus from being an east-west uniting presence within Canada (sometimes to the detriment of logical business models) into a north-south NAFTA railroad. CN is now feeding Canadian raw material exports into the U.S. heartland and beyond to Mexico through a strategic alliance with Kansas City Southern Railway (KCS). Failed BNSF merger In 1999, CN and Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), the second largest rail system in the U.S., announced their intent to merge, forming a new corporate entity North American Railways to be headquartered in Montreal to conform with the CN Commercialization Act of 1995. The merger announcement by CN‘s Paul Tellier and BNSF‘s Robert Krebs was greeted with skepticism by the U.S. government‘s Surface Transportation Board (STB), and protested by other major North American rail companies, namely Canadian Pacific Railroad (CP) and Union Pacific Railroad (UP). Rail customers also denounced the proposed merger, following the confusion and poor service sustained in southeastern Texas in 1998 following UP‘s purchase of Southern Pacific Railroad (SP). In response to the rail industry, shippers, and political pressure, the STB placed an 15-month moratorium on all rail industry mergers, effectively scuttling CN-BNSF plans. Both companies dropped their merger applications and have never refiled. Purchasing Wisconsin Central After the STB moratorium expired, CN purchased Wisconsin Central (WC) in 2001, which allowed the company‘s rail network to encircle Lake Michigan and Lake Superior, permitting more efficient connections from Chicago to Western Canada. The deal also included Canadian WC subsidiary Algoma Central Railway (ACR), giving access to Sault Ste. Marie and Michigan‘s Upper Peninsula. The purchase of Wisconsin Central also made CN the owner of EWS, the principal freight train operator in the United Kingdom. Purchasing BC Rail On May 13, 2003 the provincial government of British Columbia announced that the provincial Crown corporation, BC Rail (BCR), would be sold with the winning bidder receiving BCR‘s surface operating assets (locomotives, cars, and service facilities). The provincial government is retaining ownership of the tracks and right-of-way. On November 25, 2003 it was announced that CN‘s bid of $1 billion CAD would be accepted over those of CP and several U.S. companies. The transaction was closed effective July 15, 2004. Many opponents – including CP Rail – accused the government and CN of rigging the bidding process, though this has been denied by the government. documents relating to the case are under court seal, as they are connected to a parallel marijuana grow-op investigation connected with two senior government aides also involved in the sale of BC Rail. Also contested was the economic stimulus package that the government gave the cities along the BC Rail route – some saw it as a buyoff done in order to get the municipalities to cooperate with the lease, though the government has asserted that the package was intended to promote economic development along the corridor. Passenger service along the route had been ended by BC Rail a few years earlier due to ongoing losses resulting from deteriorating service. The cancelled passenger service has recently been replaced by a blue-plate tourist service, the Rocky Mountaineer, with fares well over double what the BCR coach fares had been. Purchasing Great Lakes Transportation CN also announced in October 2003 an agreement to purchase Great Lakes Transportation (GLT), a holding company owned by Blackstone Group for $380 million USD. GLT was the owner of Bessemer %26amp; Lake Erie Railroad, Duluth, Missabe and Iron Range Railway, and the Pittsburgh %26amp; Conneaut Dock Company. The key instigator for the deal was the fact that since the Wisconsin Central purchase, CN was required to use Duluth, Missabe and Iron Range Railway trackage rights for a short 17 km (11 mi) "gap" that existed near Duluth, Minnesota on the route between Chicago and Winnipeg. In order to purchase this short section, CN was told by GLT that it would have to purchase the entire company. Also included in GLT‘s portfolio were 8 Great Lakes vessels for transporting bulk commodities such as coal and iron ore as well as various port facilities. Following Surface Transportation Board approval for the transaction, CN completed the purchase of GLT on May 10, 2004. CN today Since the company operates in two different countries, CN maintains some corporate distinction by having its U.S. lines incorporated under the Grand Trunk Corporation for legal purposes, however the entire company in both Canada and the U.S. operates under CN, as can be seen in its locomotive and rail car repainting programs. Since the IC purchase in 1998 CN has been increasingly focused on running a "scheduled freight railroad/railway", meeting on-time performance with rail industry-leading consistency. This has resulted in improved shipper relations, as well as reduced the need for maintaining pools of surplus locomotives and freight cars. CN has also undertaken a rationalization of its existing track network by removing double track sections in some areas and extending passing sidings in other areas. CN is also a rail industry leader in the employment of radio-control (R/C) for switching locomotives in yards, to the detriment of employees since this results in reductions to the number of yard workers required. CN has frequently been touted in recent years within North American rail industry circles as being the most-improved railroad in terms of productivity and the lowering of its operating ratio, acknowledging the fact that the company is becoming increasingly profitable. Recent controversies In December 1999 the Ultratrain, a petroleum products unit train linking the Saint-Romuald (Quebec) Ultramar oil refinery with a petroleum depot in Montreal, exploded when it collided with a derailed freight train between Sainte-Madeleine and Saint-Hilaire-Est, south of Montreal, killing its train crew. The train derailed on a switch frog that broke under the stress; according to many train crews, this spot was known to be defective, but even after repeated reports, management refused to effect any repairs. In memory of the dead crewmen, two new stations on the line have been named after them (Davis and Thériault). On May 14. 2003, a trestle collapsed under the weight of a freight train near McBride, B.C., killing both crew members. Both men had been disciplined earlier for refusing to take another train on the same bridge, claiming it was unsafe. Subsequent inquiry revealed that as far back as 1999, several bridge components had been reported as rotten, yet no repairs had been ordered by management. Eventually, the disciplinary records of both crewmen were amended posthumously. Controversy arose again in Canadian political circles in 2003 following the company‘s decision to refer solely to its acronym "CN" and not "Canadian National," a move some interpret as being an attempt to distance the company from references to "Canada," particularly in the United States, where Canada‘s decision to not participate in the 2003 invasion of Iraq was unpopular. Canada‘s Minister of Transport at the time called this policy move "obscene" [2] after nationalists noted it could be argued the company is no longer Canadian, being primarily owned by American stockholders. The controversy is somewhat tempered by the fact that a majority of large corporations are being increasingly referred to by acronyms. Despite this, the company is still legally called the Canadian National Railway. In March 2004 a strike by the Canadian Auto Workers union showed deep-rooted divisions between organized labour and the company‘s current management. The residents of Wabamun Lake, in Alberta, staged a blockade of CN tracks in August 2005, when they were unsatisfied with CN‘s response to a fuel oil spill into the lake from the derailment of a freight train. It was resolved five hours later when CN officials met with the residents. On August 5, 2005, a CN train had nine cars derail on a bridge over the Cheakamus River, causing 41,000 litres (9,000 Canadian gal, 11,000 US gal) of caustic soda to spill into the river. The CBC has stated that it could take the river as long as 50 years to recover from the toxic pollution.[1] The Cheakamus River used to have a vibrant fishing tourism industry which now faces an uncertain future. CN is facing accusations from local British Columbians over the rail line‘s supposed lack of response to this issue, touted as the worst chemical spill in British Columbia‘s history. Transport Canada has restricted CN to trains not exceeding 80 car lengths because of the multiple derailments on the former BCR line north from Squamish. CN had been allegedly running trains in excess of 150 cars on this winding and mountainous section of track. A further derailment at Moran, twenty miles north of Lillooet, on June 30, 2006, has raised more questions about CN‘s safety policies. Two more derailments, days apart, near Lytton in August of 2006 have continued criticism. In the first case, 20 coal cars of a CPR train using a CN bridge derailed, dumping 12 cars of coal into the Thompson River. In the second case half a dozen grain cars spilled on a CN train. Corporate governance Current members of the board of directors of the company are: Michael Ralph Armellino, A. Charles Baillie, Hugh J. Bolton, Purdy Crawford, J.V. Raymond Cyr, Gordon D. Giffin, James K. Gray, E. Hunter Harrison, Edith E. Holiday, V. Maureen Kempston Darkes, Robert H. Lee, Denis Losier, Edward C. Lumley, David McLean (chairman), and Robert Pace. Passenger trains When CNR was first created, it inherited a large number of routes from its constituent railways, but eventually pieced its passenger network into one coherent network. For example, on December 3, 1920, CNR inaugurated the Continental Limited, which operated over four of its predecessors, as well as the Temiskaming and Northern ontario Railway. The 1920s saw growth in passenger travel, and CNR inaugurated several new routes and introduced new services, such as radio, on its trains. The growth in passenger travel ended with the Great Depression, which lasted between 1929 and 1939, but picked up somewhat during World War II. By the end of World War II, many of CNR‘s passenger cars were old and worn down. Accidents at Dugald, Manitoba in 1947 and Canoe River, British Columbia in 1950, wherein extra passenger trains comprised of older equipment collided with transcontinental passenger trains comprised of somewhat newer equipment, demonstrated the dangers inherent in the older cars. In 1953, CNR ordered 359 lightweight passenger cars, allowing them to re-equip their major routes. On April 24, 1955, the same day that the CPR introduced its transcontinental train The Canadian, CNR introduced its own new transcontinental passenger train, the Super Continental, which used new streamlined rolling stock. However, the Super Continental was never considered to be as glamourous as the Canadian. For example, it did not include dome cars. Rail passenger traffic in Canada declined significantly between World War II and 1960 due to automobiles and aeroplanes. In the 1960s, CN‘s privately-owned rival CPR reduced its passenger services significantly. However, the government-owned CN continued much of its passenger services and marketed new schemes, such as the "red, white and blue" fare structure, to bring passengers back to rail. In 1968, CN introduced a new high-speed train, the United Aircraft Turbo, which was powered by gas turbines instead of diesel engines. It made the trip between Toronto and Montreal in four hours, but was not entirely successful because it was somewhat uneconomical and not always reliable. The trainsets were retired in 1982 and later scrapped at Naporano Iron and metal in New Jersey. In 1976, CN created an entity called VIA as a separate operating unit for its passenger services. VIA evolved into a coordinated marketing effort with CP Rail for rail passenger services, and later into a separate Crown corporation responsible for inter-city passenger services in Canada. VIA Rail took over CN‘s passenger services on April 1, 1978. CN continued to fund its commuter rail services in Montreal until 1982, when the Montreal Urban Community Transit Commission (MUCTC) assumed financial responsibility for them; operation was contracted out to CN, which eventually spun-off a separate subsidiary, Montrain for this purpose. When the Montreal–Deux-Montagnes line was completely rebuilt in 1994-1995, the new rolling stock was the ownership of the MUCTC, until a separate government agency, the Agence métropolitaine de transport (AMT) was setup to consolidate all suburban transit administration around Montreal. Since then, suburban service has resumed to Saint-Hilaire. Since acquiring the Algoma Central Railway in 2001, CN has operated passenger service between Sault Ste. Marie and Hearst, Ontario. As well, CN operates the Agawa Canyon Tour excursion, an excursion that runs from Sault Ste. Marie, ontario north to the Agawa Canyon. The canyon tour train consists of up to 28 passenger cars and 2 dining cars, the majority of which were built for CN by Canadian Car and Foundry in 1953-54. These cars were transferred to VIA Rail in 1978 and bought by the Algoma Central Railway in the 1990s. A "Snow Train" tour is also offered during the fall and winter season. Since CN acquired BC Rail in 2004, it has operated a railbus service between Seton Portage and Lillooet, British Columbia.
什么是仓储合理化 仓储合理化就是用最经济的办法实现仓储的功能。仓储的功能是对需要的满足，实现被储物的“时间价值”，这就必须有一定储量。 商品储备必须有一定的量，才能在一定时期内满足需要，这是仓储合理化的前提或本质。如果不能保证储存功能的实现，其他问题便无从谈起了。但是，储存的不合理又往往表现在对储存功能实现的过分强调，因而是过分投入储存力量和其他储存劳动所造成的。所以，合理储存的实质是，在保证储存功能实现前提下尽量少的投入，也是一个投入产出的关系问题。 仓储合理化的标志 1、质量标志。保证被仓储物的质量，是完成仓储功能的根本要求。只有这样，商品的使用价值才能通过物流之后得以最终实现。在仓储中增加了多少时间价值或是得到了多少利润，都是以保证质量为前提的。所以，仓储合理化的主要标志中，为首的应是反映使用价值的质量。现代物流系统已经拥有很有效的维护货物质量、保证货物价值的技术手段和管理手段，也正在探索物流系统的全面质量管理问题，即通过物流过程的的控制，通过工作质量来保证仓储物的质量。 2、数量标志。在保证功能实现前提下有一个合理的数量范围。 3、时间标志。在保证功能实现前提下，寻求一个合理的仓储时间，这是和数量有关的问题，仓储量越大而消耗速率越慢。 4、结构标志。是从被储物不同品种、不同规格、不同花色的仓储数量的比例关系对仓储合理性的判断，尤其是相关性很强的各种货物之间的比例关系更能反映仓储合理与否。 5、分布标志。指不同地区仓储的数量比例关系，以此判断当地需求比，以及对需求的保障程度,，也可以此判断对整个物流的影响。 6、费用标志。考虑仓租费、维护费、保管费、损失费、资金占用利息支出等，才能从实际费用上判断仓储的合理与否。 仓储合理化的要求 一般来说，仓储合理化的实施要点可以归纳如下：进行仓储物的ABC分析；在ABC分析基础上实施重点管理；在形成了一定的社会总规模前提下，追求经济规模，适当集中库存。所谓适度集中库存是利用仓储规模优势,以适度集中仓储代替分散的小规模仓储来实现合理化。 1、适度集中库存是“零库存”这种合理化形式的前提。 1）加速物资总的周转，提高单位产出。具体做法诸如采用单元集装存储，建立快速分拣系统都利于实现快进快出，大进大出。 2）采用有效的“先进先出”方式，保证每个被储物的仓储期不至过长。“先进先出”是一种有效的方式，也成了仓储管理的准则之一。 有效的先进先出方式主要有： A、贯通式货架系统。 B、“双仓法”仓储。给每种被储物准备两个仓位或货位，轮换进行存取，再配以必须在一个货位中取光才可补充的规定，则可以遵循信号实现“先进先出”。 C、计算机存取系统。采用计算机管理，在存时向计算机输入时间记录，编入一个简单的按时间顺序输出的程序，取货时计算机就能按时间标志给予指示，以保证“先进先出”。 2、减少仓储设施的投资，提高单位仓储面积的利用率，以降低成本、减少土地占用。 3、采用有效的仓储定位系统。 仓储定位的含义是被储物位置的确定。仓储定位系统可采取先进的计算机管理，也可采取一般人工管理，行之有效的方式主要有：“四号定位”方式；计算机定位系统。 4、采用有效的监测清点方式。 1）“五化”码。是我国手工管理中采用的一种科学方法。储存物堆垛时，以“五”为基本计数单位，堆成总量为“五”的倍数的垛形，如梅花五、重迭五等，堆码后，有经验者可过目成数，大大加快了人工点数的速度，且少差错。 2）光电识别系统。在货位上设置光电识别装置，该装置对被存物扫描，并将准确数目自动显示出来。这种方式不需人工，清点就能准确掌握库存的实有数量。 3）计算机监控系统。用计算机指示存取，可以防止人工出错。 仓储合理化的基本途径 1、实行ABC分类控制法 ABC分类控制法是指将库存货物按重要程度细分为特别重要的库存（A类货物），一般重要的库存（B类货物）和不重要的库存（C类货物）三个等级，针对不同类型级别的货物进行分别管理和控制的方法。 2、适当集中库存 所谓适度集中库存是利用储存规模优势，以适度集中储存代替分散的小规模储存来实现合理化。 3、加速总周转 储存现代化的重要课题是将静态储存变为动态储存，周转速度一快，会带来一系列的合理化好处：资金周转快、资本效益高、货损小、仓库吞吐能力增加、成本下降等。 4、采用有效的“先进先出”方式 保证每个被储物的储存期不致过长，“先进先出”是一种有效的方式也成了仓储管理的准则之一。有效的先进先出方式主要有：贯通式货架系统储存；“双仓法”储存；计算机存取系统储存等。 5、提高仓容利用率 1）采取高垛的方法。 2）缩小库内通道宽度以增加储存有效面积。 3）减少库内通道数量以增加储存有效面积。 6、采用有效的储存定位系统 储存定位的含义是被储物位置的确定。如果定位系统有效，能大大节约寻找、存放、取出的时间，节约不少物化劳动及活劳动，而且能防止差错，便于清点及实行订货点等的管理方式。 7、采用有效的监测清点方式 监测清点的有效方式主要有：“五五化”堆码（以“五”为基本计数单位，对成总量为“五”的倍数的垛形，如梅花五、重叠五）；光电识别系统；计算机监控系统等。
登录
工商服务
危机公关
金融律师
app开发
财税服务
金融牌照
网站建设
知识产权
企业征信
审计评估