Should We Electrify Freight RR?

But then being "green", as curently defined, is a crock.:eek:
The point is should freight lines be electrified when oil becomes scarce 100 years from now. By then it is very likely fuel cell technology will be widely used, even by railroads so "electrification" would be not needed.
Consider how technology has evolved in the last 100 years, then consider how it will likely in the next 100 years.
 
SuperFudd said:
But then being "green", as curently defined, is a crock.:eek:
The point is should freight lines be electrified when oil becomes scarce 100 years from now. By then it is very likely fuel cell technology will be widely used, even by railroads so "electrification" would be not needed.
Consider how technology has evolved in the last 100 years, then consider how it will likely in the next 100 years.
Click to expand...

If you go back in time and look at predictions for the future many have been wrong. I think in the UK the politicians were saying within 20 years there would be no need for roads as every one would travel by helicopter. It didn't happen.

I think if there is going to be a reasonable future for people then global warming really needs to be tackled.

I'm more than a little concerned about methane hydrate deposits beneath the permafrost becoming exposed as the permafrost melts.

UN warning
http://news.mongabay.com/2008/0221-methane.html

Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate note the bit about climate change.

If we look at what probably will happen if Climate change starts to have a major impact on people living in hotter areas, reduced food etc then I think we can expect more unrest.

Think what a hand full of Somali pirates can do with a few guns, now think in terms of a few tourists buying guns at a gun show.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show#The_.22Gun_Show_Loophole.22

A .50 caliber rifle is accurate at a mile, and its quite sufficient to stop a train. Already one group of terrorists has been arrested in the US, they were planning to open fire in a Shopping Mall. Improvised explosive devices are cheap and are causing problems in Afghanistan, think what they could do in the States.

Basically its self interest to keep temperatures down and look out for the rest of the world.

Cheerio John
 
Hi All: You know I often have thought about Global Warming, and through out history the Equater has changed positions serveral times..And every Scientists or person in the know(supposedly) have made it feel like it is Mans Fault for Global Warming..Well what ever happens we will all be the same boat..so anyhow what will be will be..I think we should however, do what we can to help the enviroment and the green method its only one we have at this point. I can't really understand why if we know this already, what are we waiting for??The grass is not going to get any greener lets do it..And that brings to RR ELECTRYFICATION ..We are tripping over pennies and watching the nickols roll by...



Bob Cass :) :)
 
SuperFudd said:
But then being "green", as curently defined, is a crock.:eek:
The point is should freight lines be electrified when oil becomes scarce 100 years from now. By then it is very likely fuel cell technology will be widely used, even by railroads so "electrification" would be not needed.
Consider how technology has evolved in the last 100 years, then consider how it will likely in the next 100 years.
Click to expand...

Actually, I suspect that Pommie's calculations have already been worked through by the auto industry, who now seem to be overwhelmingly be looking at battery power rather than fuel cells, especially as battery technology is still improving, and hydrogen will still only be hydrogen. I suspect that on the railroads, at least, overhead AC electric will become the main means of traction, with a combination of battery power and 'second generation' bio-diesel making up the rest.

Paul
 
Don't know if it was mentioned (I'm too busy to check) but do a web search on, "Wood Electric Plant," and similar for information. Just from seeing a lot of posts regarding coal and plants, wood is also possible, renewable though I have yet to find info on emissions.

While rail can take a beating, the history of rail usefulness in war/defense has changed. During WWII and earlier, road and air travel was nowhere near what it is today. Plus there are places rail doesn't go. A better comparison would be looking at something more recent, that largely involves Middle Eastern conflicts even going back to the longtime situation with Israel, not opening politics, just looking at how the engagements with Syria and Egypt unfolded and what equipment was involved. Then there's Africa, not much rail network there. I know Eastern Asia (Korea) has rail but not sure how much.
Of the various transportation forms, rail ranks near the bottom. Road convoys have better chances of avoiding possible attack (trains cannot jump track for safety/protection then get back on), air has some of rail's vulnerabilities but still more maneuverable, navies are going to stay for some time.
Finally there's the fact that electrifying rail increases the priority of electric plants for attack by, well, anyone. Adding power needs of electric rail to any plant makes the takedown of such plants much more damaging to society unless such plants were on a seperate network.

On topic, had an interesting idea for a hypothetical situation.
Suppose you receive some (not all) funding for electrifying railroads (how much is irrelevant, presume enough for the question). What would be your top 5 sections/areas for electrification, how and why?
Curious as most historical electrification took place:
- on heavy grades (Milwaukee and Virginian).
- in major cities.
- on shortlines.
 
Hi StorkNest: Good Question..But I think I wood start Electrifycation by looking at Powder River Basin area and Coal areas in general..Also in Virginia, Kentucky,Illinios, and Ohio..The reason is we are going to need alot of electricity to help carry the load. The second area would be the 3 track main UP has in the middle of Nebraska..It carries alot of freight in general at the same time it carries alot of Coal. I think in all sencerity people would be surprised at the adhesion qualitys, fastness and ease of handeling of freight..Lets don't forget the Chicago area because of the way RR's are set up in general(Hub Big Tme).

I think the biggest hurdle would be getting the right people envolved, and of coarse Money..

Also I think the bigger cities would be a priority..

Bob Cass :) :)
 
I don't know if we'll ever see complete electrification on freight roads. The cost of the equipment required (and the construction of green power plants) would be far too great, and no road would invest in it without an incentive of some type. Railroads are already in the process of testing alternate fuels, such as hydrogen.
 
Unless some totally reveloutionary, and as yet unheard of, power source becomes available in the very near future, I think it's inevitable that railways will eventually convert to "mains" electric power. Oil may last another 20, 50 or 100 years, but long before it runs out, it will become scarce and very expensive, and I don't beleive $40 a gallon is too fanciful.

The problems with alternative power sources, are that they are only supplementary, usually expensive, and still come with their own environmental impacts. In the case of hydrogen fuel cells, 95% of hydrogen is currently produced from natural gas, itself a diminishing resource, and requires vast amounts of energy. The energy losses involved in the process are also significant. Studies are being carried out of the feasibility (cost) of producing hydrogen by electrolisis from water, but at the moment, this process uses even more energy (electricity) and a by product of the process is CO2 in large quantities.

The future energy sources for railways and roads will, I think, diverge. While railways will probably change to electrification, road transport, cars in particular, will use varying methods depending on the use for which a vehicle is purchased. We're likely to see all sorts of niche markets, but the overall winner will be battery power. Having said that, battery technolgy has evolved very little over the last 100 years, and much improvement is required. This is where governments need to spend large amounts of R&D dollars. Electricity is relatively easy to generate using green methods, but that falls down when there is no cheap, reliable way to store it.

I suppose the ideal solution to our future power needs is for us to find a genie in a bottle and......aaah wait a minute. ;)

Cheers
 
Alex99al said:
Agreed. A GG1 is a beautiful locomotive that should be built again.
Click to expand...

I know, impossible idea. I do wish loco manufacturers would take a hint from the auto makers and style some modern efficient locos after some of the classics. Gen-set styled like an RS3? But style serves no purpose on a train so I don't know why they would ever bother.
 
Hi MotorBreath: You are absolutely right and I agree about the GG1..Todays RR's do not have "Umf" when it comes to design or any thing like that. Look at the pride the RR's use to have..Now all of the Passenger Trains they don't want.
What has happened to this great pride?? Oh they look at aerodynamics, you are right No style..Most of todays Diesel engines look a lot alike..



Bob Cass:) :)
 
SuperFudd said:
...The point is should freight lines be electrified when oil becomes scarce 100 years from now...
Click to expand...
Much of modern politics is based on punting oncoming problems until the next election cycle, resulting in the current economic joys. Waiting until after the disaster strikes before preparing for it is not a viable solution. Preparing early so the disaster becomes an inconvenience is much better.

motorbreath said:
I think they should only do it if they build new GG1's. It should be a law. Modern electrics bore me.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm missing something, but I don't believe the purpose of electrification would be your personal entertainment.

The situation is as follows; We are using petroleum faster than we are making it, since we're not making any. No matter how much there is, we will eventually run out.
Meanwhile, we are due for an ice age. Our orbital and solar conditions are appropriate for an ice age. Instead we are in the middle of the fastest temperature rise in world history. Temperature increases that previously took centuries are happening within decades. Coincidentally, this started the same time we started mass producing CO2 as an industrial by product.
So what do you propose we do about it? Plan ahed and solve oncoming problems before they become disasters or wait until the collapse and blame the neighbors for not doing something?

:cool:Claude
 
...the obvious vs. the irony...

:cool: Exactly my approach. Use the oil reserves until every last drop is gone, then if we are too dumb to have not foreseen that or planned alternatives(or done away with using petroleum), then that's tough.

Why leave dirty energy sources just lying around for our children to use?

Did you forget the fact that CO2 is essential for the life of vegetation?

Studies have revealed that in the last eighty years bristle-cone pine growth has been stimulated by an increase of CO2...the more the plants get, the more oxygen produced.
 
Tokkyu40 said:
Correct me if I'm missing something, but I don't believe the purpose of electrification would be your personal entertainment.
Click to expand...

The GG-1 was a solid, robust loco that was light-years ahead of its time compared to what's out there now. Compare with modern locos like the E-60 which was a P-O-S from the day it first rode rails or others that crap out for no good reason.

You're overall point is well-taken but you have to understand that things aren't as well made today as they were then. And we're not just talking Walmart and Target either. Building a good product once rather than having two or three generations of inferior replacements does a lot to solve the fossil fuel problems.
 
RRSignal said:
The GG-1 was a solid, robust loco that was light-years ahead of its time compared to what's out there now. Compare with modern locos like the E-60 which was a P-O-S from the day it first rode rails or others that crap out for no good reason.

You're overall point is well-taken but you have to understand that things aren't as well made today as they were then. And we're not just talking Walmart and Target either. Building a good product once rather than having two or three generations of inferior replacements does a lot to solve the fossil fuel problems.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that we should be still using loco's based on the "rocket", build it once and never improve the design :eek:

Railroads do not scrap loco's and pay out around us$2mil for a new one just for the fun of it, they do it because the new breed of loco's are vastly improved on the model that is being scrapped, and the GG's were scrapped a long time ago.
I will agree they are a nice looking loco, but its technology is ancient.

Cheers David
 
I don't know if we'll ever see complete electrification on freight roads. The cost of the equipment required (and the construction of green power plants) would be far too great, and no road would invest in it without an incentive of some type. Railroads are already in the process of testing alternate fuels, such as hydrogen.
Click to expand...

TrainMan12 pretty much nailed it. Railroads will do what it takes to stay profitable, at least in the USA. Then consider China Inc. They will do what ever it takes to keep their railroads functional. Watch what they do when oil threatens to run out. They will do what it takes when it needs to be done. Until then, don't sweat it.

It was sugested that our governments should spend our money to delope some new energy technology before it is too late. I don't see why all our governments should spend money taken from all of us to do this. I nominate Uganda.
 
pommie said:
So what you are saying is that we should be still using loco's based on the "rocket", build it once and never improve the design :eek:

Railroads do not scrap loco's and pay out around us$2mil for a new one just for the fun of it, they do it because the new breed of loco's are vastly improved on the model that is being scrapped, and the GG's were scrapped a long time ago.
Click to expand...

But they worked. And, unlike today, railroads weren't guaranteed a taxpayer bailout. Error was not tolerated to the degree it is today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
One project leading to another... The Hoosac Tunnel and Wilmington RR
Replies
1
Views
2K
Railwoodman
R
Back
Top