Converting coal hoppers to grain hoppers was economically viable here in QLD AU by using eco-fab roofs which lock on. When we had our last drought most were converted back to coal use with lids sitting in stacks in yards.
James, Brisbane Australia
Modelling AT&SF in the 90s
They recently spent $1,000,000,000. That's one Billion dollars to upgrade the scrubbers at the King power plant in Bayport Minnesota. Its one of the several plants that power Minneapolis/St.Paul metro area.
Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.
The US Energy Information Administration report for 2012 thru 2035 shows that while electric energy generation will increase slightly thru that period, the percentage from coal will decrease only slightly, so the effect is that coal generated kilowatts should remain fairly steady.
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/executive_summary.cfm
Just because coal is abundant and cheap, does not mean it will continue in use for a long time. The whole premise of coal going away has nothing to do with its lack of availability. People say we will never meet the energy demand without coal. But the point of the anti-coal advocacy is that we use too much energy. They have no intention of simply replacing coal with windmills and letting us continue using the same amount of energy. So, while coal may be cheap and plentiful, the anti-coal advocacy has the power to raise the price. That will force us to use less.
WOW, this is news!
Having been in the oil business for 40 years, I pay close attention to the "energy" topic and developments and IMHO have some educated experience in the field.
I can't and won't argue the point that burning fossil fuels is detrimental or not. But I can say that the use of coal is definitely not going away in the forseeable future. The coal fields of the US and elsewhere will be busy pulling those black diamonds out of the ground to fee the insatiable energy use of our world. Period.
Remember, a very large percentage of our electricity comes from coal. And, our resources of coal are huge. The logistics and infrastructure is there, and it ain't going away anytime soon.
Those that "go green" with electric cars "and stuff" sometimes seem to forget that they are powered by an energy source that was sourced by primarily the burning of coal or natural gas or the splitting of the atom. Yes, some electricity is sourced by wind power, but that percentage is minimal.
As far as converting coal hoppers to grain usage............. previous posters have covered that pretty well, and I agree that it is just not economically viable.
Hey folks, the above is not an arguement against clean energy or conservation - as I am all for it. But it is also a realistic look at our world as it is - and will be for the next umpteen years.
ENJOY !
Mobilman44
Living in southeast Texas, formerly modeling the "postwar" Santa Fe and Illinois Central
rrnut282 Anyone what to place bets that in five to ten years there is a round of buyer's remorse at all the power plants converted from coal to natural gas? Don't scrap those hoppers just yet.
Anyone what to place bets that in five to ten years there is a round of buyer's remorse at all the power plants converted from coal to natural gas? Don't scrap those hoppers just yet.
Good point! Fuel diversity is a key to dependable and economic electric energy. If a utility company locks itself into one source, it is likely to become a prisoner of that source in time. And once it is a prisoner, the jailer will dictate the price of the fuel.
chicagorails With most of the coal hoppers used today, they may be converted into grain hoppers by weilding tops onto them. Cause most wont be needed when all the coal power plants will be shut down by 2018.
With most of the coal hoppers used today, they may be converted into grain hoppers by weilding tops onto them. Cause most wont be needed when all the coal power plants will be shut down by 2018.
How would you explain then why Wyoming is on track (mind you that it is May 1) to set a record in coal production this year? Even with some coal plants closing down, providing that the planned coal port gets approved and built, there will ALWAYS be a market for coal especially from the PRB.
zugmann PA is doing a lot of the natural gas/shale thing. Problem is that nat. gas prices are too low, so they aren't drilling very much right now. But believe me, this state has bent over backwards (thanks to our paid for Governor) to "assist" the gas companies. No matter what the laws and regulations are, they do very little to trump global energy costs/and/or supply and demand.
PA is doing a lot of the natural gas/shale thing. Problem is that nat. gas prices are too low, so they aren't drilling very much right now. But believe me, this state has bent over backwards (thanks to our paid for Governor) to "assist" the gas companies.
No matter what the laws and regulations are, they do very little to trump global energy costs/and/or supply and demand.
Actually with gas prices near $2, I would be willing to bet that you will see a lot of coal fired power plants with close access to a pipeline begin converting. Rumor has it that prices near the end of summer may go near $0.00. This is due to an over saturated market, brought on by multiple booms across the country. PA has a boom, but NOTHING like we saw here. The reason they keep drilling even at a loss is because if they do not drill the well after a specified time, usually 3-5 years, they lose the lease and will have to re-purchase it if another company or an environmental group doesn't buy it first. Every producer does it. Most still make a small profit, but one that is the major cause of the over saturation is Chesapeake Energy who has operated at a loss of $3.2 Billion, yes BILLION, last year. The only thing keeping them afloat is the little bit of oil holdings that they have.
So in the end. Coal will still live on but it will move towards export instead of domestic use.
RJ
"Something hidden, Go and find it. Go and look behind the ranges, Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go." The Explorers - Rudyard Kipling
http://sweetwater-photography.com/
Stourbridge Lion Let's try to keep the topic related to the OP's post and not stray into areas outside of Railroading. Thanks...
Let's try to keep the topic related to the OP's post and not stray into areas outside of Railroading.
Thanks...
The nation's electric utilities are the largest single consumer of coal in the United States. As they switch from coal fired to natural gas fired steam electric stations, their doing so, as I pointed out in my post, will have a major impact on the fortunes of the nation's coal hauling railroads. Without an understanding of how the electric power industry uses coal, the story would be incomplete.
The latest issue of Business Week has an article entitled Coal's Future is Rocky at Best. It reinforces many of the points made in my post. It also contains an encouraging observation by Jack Koraleski, CEO, Union Pacific, who foresees a strong summer for coal shipments. He is referencing shipments overseas of U.S. coal, most of which will be transported to the ocean shipping points by rail.
Restricting posts to only what happens on the train, as opposed to the upstream and downstream activities leading to or from the railroad as a transport solution, is unnecessarily restrictive
Darren (BLHS & CRRM Lifetime Member)
Delaware and Hudson Virtual Museum (DHVM), Railroad Adventures (RRAdventures)
My Blog
MidlandMike edbenton: If I was anyone at the EPA right now I would lay LOW for a LONG time after one of the Region heads said he liked to Crucify Companies to get them into Compliance a couple years ago and it came out this year that this is teh EPA's Enforcement Doctorine. Think about it we have a Goverment Agency that has No Congressional Power by Law yet they can by making a Threat shut down a Industry. Something wrong there. Read the Clean Air Act the EPA Never was given Enforcement Power or Regulatory Power they made that up ThEMSELVES. I am not a lawyer, but I know enough about environmental regulation to know that at the start of enforcement procedures, the agency must cite the laws that were apparently violated. In addition they must have jurisdiction. The link below cites the sections of the Clean Air Act that enable them to do this. Companies may certainly disagree with the EPA over interpretation of the laws, but that is why there are courts. Courts would probably find a agency in contempt for "making things up themselves." http://www.epa.gov/compliance/civil/caa/gdcenfprocess.html
edbenton: If I was anyone at the EPA right now I would lay LOW for a LONG time after one of the Region heads said he liked to Crucify Companies to get them into Compliance a couple years ago and it came out this year that this is teh EPA's Enforcement Doctorine. Think about it we have a Goverment Agency that has No Congressional Power by Law yet they can by making a Threat shut down a Industry. Something wrong there. Read the Clean Air Act the EPA Never was given Enforcement Power or Regulatory Power they made that up ThEMSELVES.
If I was anyone at the EPA right now I would lay LOW for a LONG time after one of the Region heads said he liked to Crucify Companies to get them into Compliance a couple years ago and it came out this year that this is teh EPA's Enforcement Doctorine. Think about it we have a Goverment Agency that has No Congressional Power by Law yet they can by making a Threat shut down a Industry. Something wrong there. Read the Clean Air Act the EPA Never was given Enforcement Power or Regulatory Power they made that up ThEMSELVES.
I am not a lawyer, but I know enough about environmental regulation to know that at the start of enforcement procedures, the agency must cite the laws that were apparently violated. In addition they must have jurisdiction. The link below cites the sections of the Clean Air Act that enable them to do this. Companies may certainly disagree with the EPA over interpretation of the laws, but that is why there are courts. Courts would probably find a agency in contempt for "making things up themselves."
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/civil/caa/gdcenfprocess.html
You are absolutely right, in this case the Clean Air Act gives the EPA authority. Here is a quote from it:
“The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe (and from time to time revise) in accordance with the provisions of this section, standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”
And in the case of Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (1997) the US Supreme Court ruled on behalf of several states and against the Bush II EPA that the clean air act REQUIRES the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
edbenton If I was anyone at the EPA right now I would lay LOW for a LONG time after one of the Region heads said he liked to Crucify Companies to get them into Compliance a couple years ago and it came out this year that this is teh EPA's Enforcement Doctorine. Think about it we have a Goverment Agency that has No Congressional Power by Law yet they can by making a Threat shut down a Industry. Something wrong there. Read the Clean Air Act the EPA Never was given Enforcement Power or Regulatory Power they made that up ThEMSELVES.
A search on Google for power plants shutting down in 2018 produced three or four articles regarding the closure or mothballing of select coal power plants by 2018 or before. The first article related to the shutdown for two coal fired power plants in the Chicago area. The other articles mentioned power plants in Washington, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Texas.
Several factors are driving the shutdowns. In Chicago politics appears to have played a major role. Some of the other plants are near the end of their optimum life spans, and they will be shutdown irrespective of planned EPA regulations. Others will be mothballed because of economics.
The decision whether to install scrubbers, as well as gear the plants for clean coal technology, is a function of economics. Because of the dramatic drop in the cost of natural gas, the optimum business decision is to switch to natural gas fired generation as opposed to upgrading (scrubbers) the coal plants. In other words, given the steep decline in natural gas prices, many utilities will switch to natural gas irrespective of the EPA.
Coal fired electric generation is likely to be an important element in the nation's electric generation mix for the foreseeable future. In 2009, for example, according to the Energy Information Administration, 45% of the electricity in the United States came from coal fired steam electric stations. This was down from 52% in 2000. During the same period electricity generated by gas fired stations increased from 13% to 24% of the load. Moreover, nearly all of the new generation completed in the United States during the last decade is fired by natural gas.
Texas is amongst the many states that rely heavily on coal fired power plants. In 2010 coal accounted for 40% of the electricity generated in the Lone Star state compared to 38% for natural gas, 13% for nuclear, 8% for wind, and 1% for other. However, installed generation is another matter, which is important to recognize, because people frequently confuse the two. Again, in Texas, which is somewhat representative of the country as a whole, coal fired plants make up installed capacity of 23% compared to 57% for natural gas, 6% for nuclear, 12% for wind, and 2% for other.
Fuel diversity is a key to affordable and dependable electric energy. In this case, wind, solar, and hydro are considered to be fuels, although most people, I suspect, don't think of them that way. The ability to switch from one source of fuel to another as cost parameters change is critical to being able to supply the nation with dependable and affordable electric energy.
Those who argue for clean energy now as an alternative to fossil fuel and nuclear generation, primarily wind and solar, overlook the fact that wind and solar are not ready for prime time. They will not be ready until the ability to store power when the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shinning is ready for prime time. Battery technology, which is only one of several storage methods, is not ready to handle the huge demands placed on the grid. Thus, for every megawatt of wind and solar generated power, one needs a megawatt of coal, natural gas, or nuclear power back-up, unless one is willing to live with interrupted power. Most Americans have shown that they will not accept interrupted power.
The reason wind represents 12% of the installed capacity in Texas, but only generated 8% of the load in 2010 is due to the fact that the wind does not blow steadily each day, or sometimes it does not blow at all. Also, the reason Texas generates 38% of its power from natural gas, although it represents 57% of installed capacity, is because of the load imposed by air conditioning in the summer. So, at the end of the day, the dynamics associated with the generation of electric energy is more complex than most people realize.
According to the American Association of Railroads, coal is the most important single commodity carried by the nation's railroads. In 2009 it accounted for 47% per cent of the tonnage and 25% of the revenues for the Class I carriers. Coal is also an important commodity for the non-Class I railroads. Seventy per cent of the coal produced in the United States is shipped by rail. The number of tons shipped in 2009 and 2010 declined from previous years, primarily because of a decline in electric energy demand and a corresponding switch to natural gas fired power stations.
Clearly, if the United States were to move away abruptly from coal fired electric generation, which is not probable, it would have a dramatic impact on the fortunes of the nation's railroads. But it would not kill them. It could be a cloud with a silver lining, depending on the alternative outcomes. In 2008 (last good numbers) the average revenue per ton mile for coal was 2.43 cents, which was the lowest revenue per ton mile for any commodity hauled by the railroads. The average revenue per ton mile for all commodities was 5.38%. Assuming coal car loadings continue to decline as a per cent of traffic hauled, if they can be replaced by items commanding higher revenue, the railroads could come out a winner. Also, the average load per coal car in 2009 was 115 tons. This is 230,000 pounds plus the tar weight of the car. Assuming that the coal load could be replaced by less dense, higher value freight, reduced coal traffic might mean less wear and tear on the system. Hopefully, one of our engineer participants could address this issue.
If the nation suddenly bans the use of coal in electric generation or greatly restricts its use, as it did with natural gas in the 70s before it became clear that a huge mistake had been made, it would have a dramatic impact on the availability and affordability of electric energy, without which we would not be able to share views on these forums.
GP40-2 chicagorails: With most of the coal hoppers used today, they may be converted into grain hoppers by weilding tops onto them. Cause most wont be needed when all the coal power plants will be shut down by 2018. I'd wait until after the 2012 elections before making any proclamations about the future of coal. If the Republicians take control of the White House & Senate you will see a total revamp of the EPA's current enforcement policies. The first thing gone will be the EPA's ability to regulate CO2 without a strict congressional mandate, with other issues being put off until way into the future. The bottom line, with the current technology, the only way to provide this country with enough electricity is either by coal or a massive investment in new nuclear technology. "Green" energy might be able to supply the final 5%, but that's it. I'd add, you will see more electricity from natural gas fired turbine plants. However, the current administration is trying very hard to make it impossible to get cheap gas from the Marcellus Shale formation. They aren't endearing themselves to the voters of the energy producing states to say the least.
chicagorails: With most of the coal hoppers used today, they may be converted into grain hoppers by weilding tops onto them. Cause most wont be needed when all the coal power plants will be shut down by 2018.
I'd wait until after the 2012 elections before making any proclamations about the future of coal. If the Republicians take control of the White House & Senate you will see a total revamp of the EPA's current enforcement policies. The first thing gone will be the EPA's ability to regulate CO2 without a strict congressional mandate, with other issues being put off until way into the future.
The bottom line, with the current technology, the only way to provide this country with enough electricity is either by coal or a massive investment in new nuclear technology. "Green" energy might be able to supply the final 5%, but that's it.
I'd add, you will see more electricity from natural gas fired turbine plants. However, the current administration is trying very hard to make it impossible to get cheap gas from the Marcellus Shale formation. They aren't endearing themselves to the voters of the energy producing states to say the least.
They are endearing themselves to the voters who drink tap water, however.
There is no doubt that electricity generation through the burning of coal will need to be dramatically reduced, to around 50% of the current usage, and renewable such as wind and solar increased (Germany, with a cloudy climate like Illinois or Wisconsin not ideal for solar is getting close to 20% already). And yes it will cost more, because taking out your garbage (in this case, rather than dumping CO2 for free into the atmosphere) costs money. But back to the original argument, coal gondolas will not be sitting idle, they will exceed their FRA lifetime restrictions before that.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
Oh, Yes. That is the one.
Since coal is such a big need in the production of electricity some one or some company will come up with the pollution controls needed.
There is just to much money being made off of coal for North American and world wide use.
The rules also change depending what party is in power at the time.
Ken G Price My N-Scale Layout
Digitrax Super Empire Builder Radio System. South Valley Texas Railroad. SVTRR
N-Scale out west. 1996-1998 or so! UP, SP, Missouri Pacific, C&NW.
Paul_D_North_Jr Violates one of old Isaac Newton's Laws of Conservation of something or another . . .
Violates one of old Isaac Newton's Laws of Conservation of something or another . . .
Is that the one that goes: "a conductor at rest tends to stay at rest until poked with something sharp by his hogger?"
BaltACD NS & CSX have been shipping West Virginia all over the country and overseas for over 100 years - and it is still there.
NS & CSX have been shipping West Virginia all over the country and overseas for over 100 years - and it is still there.
Only the railroad could figure out how to ship something, yet leave it where it was.
bubbajustin OHH GOD WHAT WILL THE RAILROADS DO?
OHH GOD WHAT WILL THE RAILROADS DO?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding bubbajustin: THEY ARE SHUTTING DOWN ALL COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS? Yep! April 1st. The electrical output lost by shutting down the coal fired plants will be replced by the energy produced by pigs that fly.
bubbajustin: THEY ARE SHUTTING DOWN ALL COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS?
THEY ARE SHUTTING DOWN ALL COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS?
There's probably a Government program looking into that (pig idea) right now. Part of the "green" energy "revolution."
The other day I did see a spokesperson for some coal group on a right leaning network who said that we have probably seen our last new coal burning plant built. While there might be some truth to that, I think it was more hyperbole for the viewers. Most of whom probably don't have an aversion to the burning of coal to begin with. I feel that eventually for a few reasons, the price of natural gas will go up enough to make coal viable again. At least to everyone except for those who have bought into or have a vested interest in extreme environmentalism.
Jeff
The road to to success is always under construction. _____________________________________________________________________________ When the going gets tough, the tough use duct tape.
The Northwest's two remaining coal-fired powerplants (located at Centralia, WA, and southwest of Boardman, OR) were targeted by environmental pressure and have both agreed to end their use of coal by 2020-2025. Having smelled success, environmental groups are now going after export coal that rolls through the same territory on its way to Asia via Canadian ports, and they're vigorously fighting any effort to build new coal ports on U.S. shores. As for those "50,000 coal cars", if that figure includes rotary -dump gons, I think it's gonna take more than just a roof with loading hatches to convert those to grain service.
Do a Google search using the following line:
shut down coal power plants 2018
And enjoy an evening of reading about SOME power plants closing.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
I'm just curious. Where did you get the information that all the coal power plants will be shut down in six years? Do you know something we don't know? If so, how do you know it? What B your source?
Andrew Falconer Perhaps in 100 to 150 years they might have to get out of the coal business, when the coal supply RUNS OUT. Andrew
Perhaps in 100 to 150 years they might have to get out of the coal business, when the coal supply RUNS OUT.
Andrew
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.