BNSF pioneers drinking water by rail

[CMStPnP]

Didn't folks state previously in this forum earlier that fresh water by rail to help alleviate drought would never be cost feasible?

https://www.bnsf.com/news-media/railtalk/service/jacobs-well.html

 

[BaltACD]

Niche location with relatively limited water requirements.  Not stated is what that costs and 'selling price' are.  It will not be cheap.

[Overmod]

BNSF only moves the cars.  All the costs are paid by donations.

Target market is 250 families each of which uses an average 8 gallons per day.  His longer term goal is "a million gallons per month" -- he now has 28 suitable tank cars so you can estimate trips from that.

[tree68]

I would think they could find water closer than Mississippi.  

A closer source would allow a quicker turnaround.  They might need more storage if they don't have the ability to store five cars worth at a time.

ATSF and SP both hauled water to out-of-the-way stations that had no local water source.

[Overmod]

Not just in Mississippi but in the far southeast corner, almost on the Gulf.  Then the water is routed through Amory (where the big Frisco locomotive is displayed) and presumably via Memphis...

Supposedly he has arranged 'multiple' pickup sites for cheap municipal water.

[York1]

CMStPnP

Didn't folks state previously in this forum earlier that fresh water by rail to help alleviate drought would never be cost feasible?

 

We don't really know the costs.  This entire operation is being funded by donations.

[Gramp]

Glad the problem is being addressed. Having to rely on donations to make it work is tough. 

[Euclid]

Will regulations allow this plan to go forward?

[Bruce Kelly]

This plan already has gone forward, per the linked story.

There's at least one significant source for water in New Mexico with the necessary trackwork already in place to begin loading tank cars. They're in contact with BNSF and the Navajo Nation as we speak.

[Euclid]

Bruce Kelly

This plan already has gone forward, per the linked story.

There's at least one significant source for water in New Mexico with the necessary trackwork already in place to begin loading tank cars. They're in contact with BNSF and the Navajo Nation as we speak.

 

By “go forward,” I mean going into operation and being allowed to continue operation without being stopped by regulations or legal action.  How often has this type of water selling been done in the past century?

[tree68]

Hauling water by truck has been going on around here for years.  I know of no regulations - I know we never had to have any sort of permit when hauling for the fire department.  Filled a lot of cisterns.

[Euclid]

When I talk about transporting and selling water, I am not referring to any incidental quantity of water that happens to move in a vehicle.  I am referring to large scale operations such as the one that is the subject of this thread.  I can imagine there would be opposition to such a plan for various reasons, so I wonder if such opposition would arise over the plan detailed in this thread.  One key indicator would be the incidence of such interstate water selling that has occurred, or is occurring now. 

 

The article characterizes this water shipping plan as a done deal, so when will this water start to move?

[tree68]

Euclid

The article characterizes this water shipping plan as a done deal, so when will this water start to move?

According to the article, it already is.

Generally speaking, water is not a regulated substance.  If entity A is willing to sell water to entity B, there's nothing to stop them.  I'm not sure I know why anyone would object.  If anything, I would expect competition to supply the water.  Given the circumstances, there would be public relations value in doing so.  

We have water haulers in this area who regularly buy water from municipalities.  Most of the time, it's to fill pools.  Some may go for consumption as is the case with the subject of the story.

[MidlandMike]

Surface water rights regulations seem to be more of a dry west thing, and even then ground water isn't regulated.  Back in the wet east water is usually managed locally by water districts.  The Great Lake states water compact seems like one of the few prohibitions against water diversion out of that basin. But I think you are right that regulation is in the future.

[blue streak 1]

If the city of Atlanta cannot stop its water lines breaking since Friday it may need water trains.  Crescent has probably not been able to get potable water with all the boil advisories including the station area.

[Euclid]

I seem to recall that we discussed this on the forum a couple years ago.  It did not sound so easy at that time. 

 

I don’t see why anybody would oppose receiving imported water.  But I don’t see why any water user would favor exporting it unless the export sales generated revenue to reduce the exporter’s own cost of their water supply.  I would not support our water supplier selling our supply to other states just to raise more revenue to expand our water authority empire. 

 

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/11/05/shipping-minnesota-water-to-sate-a-thirsty-world-could-it-happen

[MidlandMike]

Euclid

I seem to recall that we discussed this on the forum a couple years ago.  It did not sound so easy at that time. 

 

I don’t see why anybody would oppose receiving imported water.  But I don’t see why any water user would favor exporting it unless the export sales generated revenue to reduce the exporter’s own cost of their water supply.  I would not support our water supplier selling our supply to other states just to raise more revenue to expand our water authority empire. 

 

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/11/05/shipping-minnesota-water-to-sate-a-thirsty-world-could-it-happen

 

The above link concerns private wells.  Water authorities are often public agencies.  Public agencies generally try to keep the water rates low, as citizens generally howel when they propose raising rates.  A water authority selling to export at higher rates may be just trying to put off raising their own ratepayers water bills.

[Euclid]

The following from the link I posted above and other embedded link(s) make all of the points I have suggested about possible opposition to this new plan for New Mexico imported water.  So I don’t understand your point about this only being about private wells and not pertinent to the plan for New Mexico. 

 

From the link:

 

“Last week came the surprising news that a company in Lakeville, Minn., wants to pump water from below the ground in Dakota County and transport it by rail to the western United States, where water is scarce."

 

Environmental groups quickly opposed the idea. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources said the plan likely won't meet state law.”

 

With this Minnesota proposal, it sounds identical to what is being proposed for NM, and also demonstrates plenty of public opposition, and regulations. 

 

If the water authority here were to sell to other states, and bring in revenue to lower our rates, fine.  But it would also give them a motive to raise our rates on a premise that water is in short supply, and so we all need to chip in and pay a little more.

 

If such a proposal came up here, I would immediately oppose it.  The water rates here are rising all the time, along with sewer, electricity, and gas.

[Overmod]

Ye gods, does no one here understand practical economics?

His 'million gallons a month' is 50 tank-car moves.  I doubt that will affect aquifer levels or incur strict regulation of the most precious fluid.

[Overmod]

Ye gods, does no one here understand practical economics?

His 'million gallons a month' is 50 tank-car moves.  I doubt that will affect aquifer levels or incur strict regulation of the most precious fluid.

[BaltACD]

Overmod gets a double post over 12 hours apart!  Bravo!

[Erik_Mag]

MidlandMike

Surface water rights regulations seem to be more of a dry west thing, and even then ground water isn't regulated.

A 1941 Trains article on the D&RGW's Chili Line mentioned that the farmers in the Rio Grande Valley near Santa Fe had water rights that were granted by the King of Spain to their ancestors.

[Euclid]

Overmod

Ye gods, does no one here understand practical economics?

His 'million gallons a month' is 50 tank-car moves.  I doubt that will affect aquifer levels or incur strict regulation of the most precious fluid.

 

I won’t speak for others here, however the economics of basic private business supply and demand is one thing; but public sector economics, blended with politics and regulation applied to creating fair and equal distribution of state water supplies, is a hornets nest of controversy. 

 

I have no stake in this, other than my positions as a water consumer as it relates to the water bill.  I would oppose any plan by the water authority here to sell water to another state.  Theoretically, such a move could lower my rates, but there is no doubt that it could also raise rates in several different ways.     

 

Minnesota tried the same thing in 2018, also using water by rail, and it was killed on the basis of laws and regulations, some of which were created just to shoot down this project.  So apparently it is not as simple as a buyer merely finding a seller. 

[Overmod]

BaltACD

Overmod gets a double post over 12 hours apart!  Bravo!

Even better -- I was nowhere near the computer when Kalmbach finally got around to double-posting that second one.  That has to be something forensically significant regarding what they're doing with the forums now...

Incidentaqlly for the economically challenged: that million gallons a month equals about 133,690 cubic feet.  I am trying to obtain the water rate per 1000cf from Helena, Mississippi (via the Mississippi Water and Wastewater Rates Dashboard at University of North Carolina) but have other things to do right now.  It is NOT a significant amount of water threatening to raise water rates there.

[Overmod]

Comps for South Mississippi for volume over 10,000 gallons are $3.25 per 1000 gallons (this is the charge for water only, not sewer and line, etc.

I scarcely think the million gallons -- measured by 20,000-gallon loads spread over the course of a month -- represents anything showstopping, but then there may be people who confusedly think it would be.

[Euclid]

Overmod

Comps for South Mississippi for volume over 10,000 gallons are $3.25 per 1000 gallons (this is the charge for water only, not sewer and line, etc.

I scarcely think the million gallons -- measured by 20,000-gallon loads spread over the course of a month -- represents anything showstopping, but then there may be people who confusedly think it would be.

 

I am not predicting whether the Mississippi plan will get shot down, or not.  But the Minnesota plan instantly triggered fierce opposition and was dead on arrival.  In terms of the plan details (including water quantity), both plans were nearly identical, so I conclude that the amount of water being sold is not much related to the success or failure in approval of the plan.

 

I believe the main determining factor of acceptance or rejection of such a water selling plan is which state is chosen as the seller.  I would have bet that Minnesota would have rejected such a plan.  Mississippi may very well be the exact opposite. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds. 

[tree68]

Overmod

I scarcely think the million gallons -- measured by 20,000-gallon loads spread over the course of a month -- represents anything showstopping, but then there may be people who confusedly think it would be.

One local city has been losing mid six figures daily to a leak they can't seem to find.

Twenty thousand gallons is chump change compared to that.

[York1]

How about this comparison?  At New Orleans, the Mississippi River runs around 4.4 million gallons per second.

I know, I know ... 

 

[Euclid]

In further research, I conclude that the trend will not be in more effacement ways to transport water.  Instead it will be in ways to lower water consumption.  In the course of the latter, there will be growing regulations at all levels of government to restrict water usage.  In the new marketing strategy, growing water scarcity will be the focus.  It will not focus on water leaks during transportation, but rather, on falling water supplies in the aquafers. 

 

WATER SCARCITY MARKETING will raise the price of water because water is a fundamental human right.  So for everyone to have water, we must all have less of it. 

 

Previously, I mentioned that Mississippi may very well be the exact opposite of Minnesota, in that Mississippi may gladly sell water to other states.  But now I find that Mississippi is on the critical the danger list of states with dwindling water supplies. 

 

Mississippi one of states facing serious groundwater crises

https://www.wjtv.com/news/state/6-states-facing-the-most-serious-groundwater-crises/

[tree68]

Euclid

Instead it will be in ways to lower water consumption. 

In terms of the original post - most of us would probably have a problem living with the very real restrictions they live with daily.  

Niagara Falls, which handles the outflow from all the Great Lakes above it, moves a lot of water:

During the summer and fall, Niagara Falls can flow at more than 700,000 gallons per second. During peak daytime tourist hours, the Horseshoe Falls can flow at 6 million cubic feet per second, which is about a million bathtubs full of water every minute.

The flow over the falls varies by season and time of day, as governed by a treaty.  This is largely due to tourism.  Seasonal flows notwithstanding, water not going over the falls is generating electricity.

Currently, the Niagara River is flowing at around 240,000 cubic feet per second, or nearly 2 million gallons per second.

The average daily water usage ranges from 50 to 200 gallons per person on a national basis.