Appendix 5a - Value of U.S.-NAFTA Trade Moved by All Modes by State: 2004 and 2005,,,,,Appendix 5b - Value of U.S.-NAFTA Trade Moved by Land Modes by State: 2004 and 2005,,,,,
Ranked by 2005 U.S.– NAFTA All Mode Trade  (Millions of current U.S. dollars),,,,,Ranked by 2005 U.S. - NAFTA Land Mode Trade  (Millions of current U.S. dollars),,,,,
,U.S.– NAFTA Trade by All Modes,,,,,U.S. –NAFTA Trade by Land Modes,,,,
U.S. State,2004,2005,"Percent
change",,U.S. State,2004,2005,"Percent
change",,
All U.S. states,"711,647","789,537",10.9,,All U.S. states,"633,563","697,987",10.2,,
Texas,"114,313","126,590",10.7,,Texas,"91,554","98,062",7.1,,
Michigan,"96,208","97,771",1.6,,Michigan,"94,079","95,565",1.6,,
California,"74,940","80,335",7.2,,California,"66,104","70,309",6.4,,
Illinois,"35,504","42,735",20.4,,Illinois,"33,226","40,079",20.6,,
New York,"35,632","39,389",10.5,,New York,"32,309","36,026",11.5,,
Ohio,"34,872","37,100",6.4,,Ohio,"33,209","35,516",6.9,,
Pennsylvania,"20,064","23,108",15.2,,Pennsylvania,"18,460","21,268",15.2,,
Indiana,"19,290","21,073",9.2,,Indiana,"18,688","20,351",8.9,,
Washington,"16,501","20,067",21.6,,Tennessee,"15,632","19,063",22.0,,
Tennessee,"16,260","19,768",21.6,,Washington,"15,205","18,480",21.5,,
Minnesota,"13,085","15,485",18.3,,Minnesota,"11,941","14,747",23.5,,
New Jersey,"13,307","14,856",11.6,,Georgia,"11,944","13,343",11.7,
Georgia,"13,111","14,561",11.1,,Wisconsin,"11,461","12,757",11.3,
North Carolina,"12,709","13,744",8.1,,North Carolina,"11,718","12,523",6.9,
Wisconsin,"12,093","13,266",9.7,,Kentucky,"10,697","12,215",14.2,
Kentucky,"11,130","12,681",13.9,,New Jersey,"10,140","11,155",10.0,
Arizona,"10,548","12,302",16.6,,Arizona,"9,362","10,943",16.9,
Massachusetts,"10,694","11,524",7.8,,Missouri,"9,400","9,995",6.3,
Florida,"9,927","10,949",10.3,,Massachusetts,"8,740","9,424",7.8,
Missouri,"9,662","10,407",7.7,,Florida,"7,108","8,078",13.6,
Louisiana,"6,616","8,934",35.0,,Iowa,"6,488","7,573",16.7,
Iowa,"6,613","7,697",16.4,,South Carolina,"6,236","7,065",13.3,
Oregon,"6,194","7,537",21.7,,Oregon,"5,616","6,899",22.8,
South Carolina,"6,586","7,362",11.8,,Vermont,"4,935","6,197",25.6,
Virginia,"6,659","6,635",-0.4,,Virginia,"5,815","5,737",-1.4,
Connecticut,"5,394","6,544",21.3,,Connecticut,"4,590","5,712",24.4,
Vermont,"5,031","6,280",24.8,,Colorado,"4,022","5,495",36.6,
Colorado,"4,444","5,972",34.4,,Alabama,"4,285","4,794",11.9,
New Hampshire,"2,288","5,970",160.9,,Kansas,"3,829","4,417",15.3,
Alabama,"4,977","5,572",12.0,,Maryland,"3,890","4,130",6.2,
Mississippi,"4,753","5,477",15.2,,Oklahoma,"2,872","3,921",36.5,
Kansas,"4,271","5,058",18.4,,Montana,"3,193","3,675",15.1,
Maryland,"4,324","4,801",11.0,,Louisiana,"2,587","3,010",16.4,
Oklahoma,"3,038","4,220",38.9,,Maine,"2,815","2,989",6.2,
Maine,"5,466","3,793",-30.6,,Utah,"2,240","2,659",18.7,
Montana,"3,206","3,692",15.1,,Arkansas,"2,422","2,524",4.2,
Utah,"2,661","2,813",5.7,,Wyoming,"2,056","2,425",17.9,
Arkansas,"2,541","2,602",2.4,,West Virginia,"2,322","2,345",1.0,
West Virginia,"2,618","2,600",-0.7,,Mississippi,"2,039","2,332",14.4,
Wyoming,"2,151","2,476",15.1,,Nebraska,"1,793","2,319",29.3,
Nebraska,"1,859","2,393",28.7,,New Hampshire,"1,905","2,317",21.6,
North Dakota,"1,889","2,056",8.9,,North Dakota,"1,877","2,043",8.8,
Rhode Island,"1,522","1,946",27.8,,Nevada,"1,241","1,490",20.1,
Nevada,"1,619","1,877",15.9,,Delaware,"1,458","1,265",-13.2,
Delaware,"1,837","1,667",-9.2,,Rhode Island,"1,071","1,136",6.1,
Idaho,"1,117","1,307",17.1,,Idaho,975,"1,113",14.2,
South Dakota,932,"1,106",18.7,,South Dakota,848,"1,048",23.6,
New Mexico,805,943,17.2,,New Mexico,746,864,15.9,
Alaska,690,770,11.6,,Alaska,343,337,-1.8,
Hawaii,146,153,4.2,,District of Columbia,94,113,20.2,
District of Columbia,111,126,14.0,,Hawaii,91,90,-0.5,
U.S. State Unknown,"29,440","31,447",6.8,,U.S. State Unknown,"27,891","30,056",7.8,
,,,,,,,,,
"NOTE: Total for all U.S. states includes data for shipments where the U.S. state of origin or destination was unknown.  For imports, the U.S. state of destination reflects the state of the importer of record, this state may not always represent the ultimate physical destination of shipments.  For exports, the U.S. state of origin typically reflects the state of origin where the goods were grown, manufactured or otherwise produced, in some instances, however, it may not always reflect the actual state of physical origin.  Shipments for Hawaii are intermodal, and are included in this dataset because a portion of the shipment moves by  a land mode either from its origin or to its final destination.",,,,,,,,,
"SOURCE: U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Transborder Freight Data as of April 2006.",,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,



,
,
,
,
,
,