CMStPnP rrnut282 Million-gallon water towers are huge, muli-legged affairs The ones we have in North Texas (Plano, TX example) no longer have legs they have a pedestal of concrete and hold 1.5 million gallons each. Plano has these all over the place at least 10 if not more of them. https://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-waymarking-images/6473d95a-372b-44c0-b083-ac1b43d23707.JPG
rrnut282 Million-gallon water towers are huge, muli-legged affairs
The ones we have in North Texas (Plano, TX example) no longer have legs they have a pedestal of concrete and hold 1.5 million gallons each. Plano has these all over the place at least 10 if not more of them.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/gs-waymarking-images/6473d95a-372b-44c0-b083-ac1b43d23707.JPG
How much revenue are they getting for the cel phone attennas attached to the towers?
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
rrnut282Million-gallon water towers are huge, muli-legged affairs
rrnut282 tree68 A thirty car train of 30,000 gallon cars would carry about a million gallons (all numbers approximate) - enough to fill an average municipal standpipe/water tower..... Million-gallon water towers are huge, muli-legged affairs. In my neck of the woods, only locales with 100k plus residents even consider using one that big. For smaller cities/towns you see a lot of 100,000 to 400,000 gallon tanks. You'll see many in this size range in larger cities, too. Smaller ones are cheaper and by having muliple, you don't risk losing all your storage capacity if there is a problem. Often, you'll see the million-gallon tanks used to replace several older watertowers that are no longer economical to refurbish.
tree68 A thirty car train of 30,000 gallon cars would carry about a million gallons (all numbers approximate) - enough to fill an average municipal standpipe/water tower.....
A thirty car train of 30,000 gallon cars would carry about a million gallons (all numbers approximate) - enough to fill an average municipal standpipe/water tower.....
Million-gallon water towers are huge, muli-legged affairs. In my neck of the woods, only locales with 100k plus residents even consider using one that big. For smaller cities/towns you see a lot of 100,000 to 400,000 gallon tanks. You'll see many in this size range in larger cities, too. Smaller ones are cheaper and by having muliple, you don't risk losing all your storage capacity if there is a problem. Often, you'll see the million-gallon tanks used to replace several older watertowers that are no longer economical to refurbish.
And the water in significant rivers flows at 1M gallons a second.
A thirty car train of 30,000 gallon cars would carry about a million gallons (all numbers approximate) - enough to fill an average municipal standpipe/water tower.
Usage is another question, though. How much water does the end user actually use? The city plant here processes around six million gallons a day for a population of about 45,000.
And there is storage - is the water to be off-loaded in total (requiring enough storage to hold the entire train as well as "working" stock), or does the train serve as storage in place?
I can see this as a short term solution, or as the solution when other options (ie, a pipeline or more wells) are not available.
Long term, the railroads did it for years, bringing in a tank or two to support staff and steam operations at remote locations.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
The liner design has been 'in the can' for many years now, including load partitioning and effective anti slosh at permitted load. The car can also be loaded with 'original' cargo with the liner installed in many prospective cases.
The issue comes down to long-term profitability and hard contracts for the delivered water, and while the Ramages have reasonable surplus capacity at their site the 'remote' logistics may not be as rosy, even if they can arrange captive unit consists in dedicated lanes. They will certainly need more volumetric capacity than their current nominal pump capacity indicates -- I suspect they may be better with air-assisted gravity feed tanks than straight or positive-displacement pumping.
Good to see you commenting directly in a forum thread!
A topic that refuses to go away. When it might be adopted in a larger, modern scope here in the U.S. remains to be seen. Comes largely down to money, and yes, a fair measure of politics.
The second link presented below offers some insight into the history, logistics, and politics behind water by rail.
In an update to the third link, Ironhorse Permian Basin is now looking into more localized WBR deliveries (NM to CA seems just beyond the economic reach of most buyers right now), as well as a creative method for shipping water in what could best be described as an "alternative form."
https://www.railwayage.com/news/if-crude-by-rail-why-not-water/
https://www.railwayage.com/freight/class-i/drought-relief-by-rail/
https://www.railwayage.com/freight/class-i/water-by-rail-ready-to-roll/
Can become a hot political issue in a hurry, too.
We've had threads on this before. The general consensus is the same as for transporting snow and ice from 'blizzards' to other areas: the economics does not work.
The Australian case is anomalous in that there is a business case for the water, including the linings and special handling for potable water. In part it is the maintenance of tank cars or other potable-water vessels that fit in boxes, gondolas or containers that poses the principal difficulty. I have yet to see an analysis that says there is advantage in transporting grey water or any kind of floodwater in trains, full or partial trainload or dedicated liners notwithstanding.
So I think I read this in Trains that a railroad in Austrailia was now hauling fresh water in rail tank cars so that mining of minerals could continue during a severe lack of water or drought area (not sure which). In the press release they stated they thought it was the first example where a railroad was hauling fresh water in order to redistribute it to areas of greater need.
I wonder if there is a market for such a service in the United States or if it is considered too expensive. For example perhaps haul water from water drenched or flooded areas of the United States to areas of drought where reserviors are well below their minimum level. Would this be cheaper than a desalination plant? Could this work economically or not? Just curious.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.