Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
Current rail mileage Missoula to Pasco (the first available transload location) is 431 miles = 2 crew districts. Estimated rail mileage Missoula to Lewiston 220(?) via new line = one crew district Cycle times for grain shuttles from Midwest to Portland = x number of days Cycle times from Midwest to Pasco = x -2 days Cycle times Midwest to Lewiston via new line = x - 4 days Assuming standard cycle time is 2 weeks now, availability of hopper cars via new line increases to 96 days per year = 10 extra trips per year = better capital utilization. Fuel economy of grain shuttle trains = 600 ton/miles at best Fuel economy of grain barges on Columbia Snake Waterway = 1500 ton/miles at best Capacity issues: The cost of any expansion of rail capacity in the Gorge and/or via Marias Pass would have to be shouldered by BNSF. There is no precident for the Corps to fund capacity improvements for a proprietary railroad. There is precident for the Corps to fund transportation capacity improvements that do not favor one single entity. The open access L-M rail link would fit this criteria, the BNSF line needs would not. As we know, both the UP and BNSF lines through the Gorge are nearing maximum capacity, the waterway through the Gorge has plenty of excess capacity, so from a national transportation policy analysis, it makes sense to transfer commodities from the rails to the barge lines where appropriate. And yes, it does make sense for a railroad to shift heavy haul traffic off its prime intermodal line to a secondary line, we've discussed this in other threads. This is especially true if another entity is shouldering the cost of new construction for this secondary route, saving BNSF from having to spend it's own money. As for the 1.5% eastbound ruling grade on the new line, this is the lowest cost option. It is possible to engineer a 1% eastbound ruling grade, it would just be more expensive. And the Corps of Engineers are well known to spare no expense. There are currently no grain trains going to Lewiston from Montana because the rail link does not exist at this time, that's why we're discussing it now. At one time MRL made an offer for the BN's Palouse lines, and according to sources at the former Camas Prairie RailNet, MRL officials were interested in utilizing the barge ports for MRL grain trains out of Montana. That was before corrupt BN officials severed the northern rail link from Spokane to Lewiston prior to selling the lines to Watco. Your statement about grain barging not being cost effective is pure nonsense. It's at least twice as efficient as hauling by unit train, and much more environmentally friendly.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag