I agree. Far better to bail out the leeches and parasites of Wall Street.
Should We Electrify Freight RR?
- Thread starter BobCass
- Start date
By the time the last drop comes out of the ground, none of us will be able to afford it - it's not going to stay at current prices and then just run out. Plus the shock to the economy if we had to stop using oil overnight would be many times worse than anything even the deepest greens are proposing today.
You are joking right? I had hoped (poor deluded me) that the next generation might just take a bit better care of the planet...
So you've seen those 'CO2 - we call it life ads' too? I was staggered that anyone would fall for them. It's true that CO2 promotes plant growth, and I've seen studies that suggest that the worlds remaining forests are seeing increased growth rates in places. Unfortunately, the worlds forests are a fraction of what they were the last time the climate shifted in a big way, so they don't have the ability to act as much of a brake on growing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. Don't forget that oxygen had to be taken from the atmosphere to burn all that carbon in the first place, so your last point is completely hollow...
China's electrification: 27,500km (34.8%) in 2008 and growing. They've also doubled their wind energy capacity every year since 2005, and now rank 4th in the world (interestingly enough the USA leads in this field).
On the subject of loco design - I think what is needed is something that looks modern and up to date, in order to create the impression of a modern efficient logistics operation. Rail-freight customers aren't really into nostalgia...
Paul
NPR...
Thanks Paul,
I was listening to National Public Radio yesterday when I heard a piece on increased pine growth. I usually never involve myself in these conversations, however I do pay attention...
Also, if there is no more filthy potential energy lying around, our kids can't pollute....
Thanks Paul,I was listening to National Public Radio yesterday when I heard a piece on increased pine growth. I usually never involve myself in these conversations, however I do pay attention...
Also, if there is no more filthy potential energy lying around, our kids can't pollute....
From what I have seen of some of them...
The GG1 is outdated. Its look gives some of its lasting appeal but the performance will not cut it in modern times.
Couple of more questions.
1 - How well did some of the last American electric locomotives perform compared to other countries? If you need info: http://www.american-rails.com/electric-locomotives.html there's a plce to start for American electrics, I'm not up on non-USA.
2 - What do you think a modern American design may involve? Perofrmance and, yeah, look.
Hi All: I loved the GG1, there is nothing today that it compares to it..What we are really talking about here is, Design..The olden days are gone, but you see what really enters the picture is lets take some of the values of yesterday and put them to work with the current values..But you know, yesteryear is forgotten why?.Well the new technolgy today out shines it..Is that still a good reason to forget, NO..
They seem to forget who brought them to this point in history..WE had good things..So it seems to me then, why not incorporate our work. I think that Design is important for a locomotive, you know yourself that something good looking is photographed more then something that is not. I think it also would leave a better taste even in the railfans mouth. We are still alive and can give alot of people some advice if they would listen..Lets don't forget each other thats life..
Bob Cass
They seem to forget who brought them to this point in history..WE had good things..So it seems to me then, why not incorporate our work. I think that Design is important for a locomotive, you know yourself that something good looking is photographed more then something that is not. I think it also would leave a better taste even in the railfans mouth. We are still alive and can give alot of people some advice if they would listen..Lets don't forget each other thats life..
Bob Cass
WileeCoyote
Eatibus Almost Anythingus
Quite a lot of it comes from coal-fired power plants. At least according to the Energy Information Administration, 70% of China's electrical power comes from coal, followed by oil at 20% and a mixture of natural gas, nuclear et al behind the two. It sort of makes sense in that China has the world's largest known coal reserves, none of which are exported overseas. Given that they have so much coal, they're probably going to use it. In my opinion, this is yet another reason why China kept mainline steam locomotives in regular service until a few years ago.
WileeCoyote
WileeCoyote
illinoiscentral
SARM Volunteer
Really?
5521,
Did you pull that answer out of your hat?
Of course they got it from a powerplant, some of us consider a wind farm a power plant...
Or is it a nursing home after dinner time?:hehe:
Please 5521, if you don't have something truly constructive to say, please don't post.
It makes it so much more enjoyable for the rest of us.
Don't take me the wrong way (moderators too) but you should think about that.
Simple one sentence "That's a good idea" or "Outstanding!" are simply just 1+ post count, posts.
Think of an opinion before you post, we all like to be included, but we hate being embarrassed...
Your Forum Buddy,
Woody
5521,
Did you pull that answer out of your hat?
Of course they got it from a powerplant, some of us consider a wind farm a power plant...
Or is it a nursing home after dinner time?:hehe:
Please 5521, if you don't have something truly constructive to say, please don't post.
It makes it so much more enjoyable for the rest of us.
Don't take me the wrong way (moderators too) but you should think about that.
Simple one sentence "That's a good idea" or "Outstanding!
" are simply just 1+ post count, posts.Think of an opinion before you post, we all like to be included, but we hate being embarrassed...
Your Forum Buddy,
Woody
5521,
Did you pull that answer out of your hat?
Of course they got it from a powerplant, some of us consider a wind farm a power plant...
Or is it a nursing home after dinner time?:hehe:
Please 5521, if you don't have something truly constructive to say, please don't post.
It makes it so much more enjoyable for the rest of us.
Don't take me the wrong way (moderators too) but you should think about that.
Simple one sentence "That's a good idea" or "Outstanding!
Think of an opinion before you post, we all like to be included, but we hate being embarrassed...
Your Forum Buddy,
Woody
alright,I understand!
Hi SuperFudd: China has 15,000 miles of electrifycation 2nd in the world, Russia tops with 25,300 miles..China has a Nationalized Rail system so the government is pretty much the supporter..I do not know for sure, but I would say that it would be Coal that produces the electricity for the most part..
Bob Cass
Bob Cass
illinoiscentral
SARM Volunteer
Its not that big of a deal, man.
I'm just pointing something out, thats all!
I didn't mean to offend you, accept my apologies, but I remain firm on the guidence I suggested.
Your Friend,
Woody:wave:
PS Noticed your edit, I wasn't saying you were embarrasing the community, only yourself.
Like I said, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.
My apologies.
I'm just pointing something out, thats all!
I didn't mean to offend you, accept my apologies, but I remain firm on the guidence I suggested.
Your Friend,
Woody:wave:
PS Noticed your edit, I wasn't saying you were embarrasing the community, only yourself.
Like I said, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.
My apologies.
Last edited:
illinoiscentral
SARM Volunteer
Thats Alright.
motorbreath
Earth Rocker
I would like to think it would be all for me...
Seriously, of course I don't think that. I also don't think electrifying all of our freight trains is at all possible, or that it would fix anything. The electricity has to come from somewhere, and in most cases it would probably be coal. It would seem hydrogen would be more practical and safe used on trains than in passenger vehicles, but I don't know. From a rail fan perspective, yes, I really wish it was all for me. All of the old flags would be resurrected, and new versions of all the smokey polluting Alcos and other vintage diesels would be running revenue freight. Steam would run, the flat-head Ford would rule, and music wouldn't suck, beards would be cool, I would have all of my grandaddy's tattoos, and I wouldn't need a computer to run trains because I would be an engineer.
In general, electric traction, even if generated from coal, uses less energy in total, emits less CO2, and is cheaper to run than diesel. Coal reserves will almost certainly outlast oil by a generation, and it looks like CO2 capture may be viable (the coal and energy companies' futures may depend on it). The large upfront cost is the only reason it hasn't been done already.
Hydrogen is really not much of a solution, as it can either be produced from fossil fuels in the 'Steam Reforming' process (which uses loads of energy and emits CO2), or by electrolysis (which requires electricity - which isn't carbon neutral in most of the world). Therefore, hydrogen is at best a carrier of power, much like batteries or overhead wires, and the most important considerations when proposing to use it are efficiency (which is fairly low), and convenience (where it has its points in some applications).
I guess that's why we have trainz...
(apart from the beards & tats bit )Paul
motorbreath
Earth Rocker
I would think that the biggest problem is our personal vehicles. While I do love old gas guzzling muscle cars, I think if our own transportation could be made cleaner, than really the emissions of locomotives would be tolerable. I doubt... hell, I'm sure we will never have an emission free world until we are extinct for thousands of years and the only pollutants will come from within the Earth, and whats left of our landfills and such.
mlplap7902
New member
I really don't want to get in to the political or envrionmental asepect of this conversation, I just want to comment on the original question at hand and that is "should electric freight railroads elctrify". I think that in several well used routes electrification will pay for itself. One route that pops in my head is Philly to Chicago. If Conrail hadn't abandoned the former PRR electrification and tried to extend the current electrification even if it was only to Pittsburg, a big savings in fuel could have been made. And that would have also justified keeping the eastern lines electrified since it was having to change power in Harrisburg that was a big detractor to keeping it. Simply put the longer the run under catenary power the more savings. But it's really a matter of initial cost that most rail roads cannot cover. PRR borrowed extensively from the govt to erect thier electrfication project, the upside to that was as soon as they were running the electric trains the costs went down per mile even though they had such a large amount of debt to pay back. And the lower cost per mile was passed on to the customers almost immediately which acctually had the effect of attracting more customers increasing the railroads revenue and allowing them to pay back thier loans. So I do feel that there should be electrified freight railroads in this country. They would benefit from the higher adheasion, higher starting tractive effort and the ability to use regerative braking among other benefits, and if the catenary is high enough double stack container trains, which take priority over some pasenger trains in parts of the country would be able to make it from coast to coast even faster allowing the land bridges to be even less costly and more efficient than sending every container ship to the Panama canal or around south america that has cargo going between Europe and Asia. That is one of the most lucrative commodities the rail roads haul even though those containers are not destined for locations in the US. And the shipping companies don't want their cargo to be late that's for sure. And for coal electric traction would be perfect because of the the higher tractive effort since coal is heavy and usually takes thre to four diesel electrics to move a train through relatively low grade area and that number can double in mountainous areas. It would take usually only 2 electrics to handle most coal trains and possibly only 1 or 2 helpers on heavy grades. But not all the freight railroads need to be electrified. Branch lines for instance that have little daily traffic would not justify the cost. Not to mention if the traffic that does exist ceases to use the rails for transportation before the cost is met the money to electrify the branch would have been wasted. And even though the govt has been trying to pass legislation to regulate how many diesels are switching traffic in rail yards the amount of pollution from even the largest rail yard pales in comparison to all the trucks and cars that are constaly being used all arount thoses yards. A handfull of diesel yard switchers is more economical than electrifing the entire yard leaving the arrival and departure tracks electrified for road locos and thier maintenance facilities. Again I'm not looking at this from an envrionmental point of view or a political one simply from the point of view of the rail roads who are trying to survive by making money just like every other business.