The first article says nothing about using specifically renewable energy. The line will get its power from the grid. It does say:
"The project will reduce carbon dioxide emission by three million tons, divert over a third of the air trips travel and about 6% of auto-travellers. Once built, the system would not require operating subsidies and will generate over $1bn in annual profits."
If thats even half true then Its probably a good idea. Regardless, most of the money spent should stay in the US.
Renewable energy is mentioned in a second article and they are only in the exploratory stage. But that should really be a matter of what the grid can handle or boosting their local grids. The good news is, there are enough already grid tied roof tops to collect significant power which is mostly used in the daytime. California has lots of sun and is already leading in their RE portfolios and efforts.
-E-C-Mills " Once built, the system would not require operating subsidies and will generate over $1bn in annual profits."
" Once built, the system would not require operating subsidies and will generate over $1bn in annual profits."
Really cool, except that no passenger rail system has generated a profit long term. One of the most interesting editorials in Railway Age was a discourse on why passenger systems would not generate profits.
It was written in 1905.
The equipment will be made by US subsidiaries of foreign companies (the Acela is basically a TGV). The cars, locomotives, catenary and probably a large part of the rail will be made overseas. At best it will be assembled over here.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
What percentage do you estimate wold be required for initial locos and rolling stock vs the cost of building the line itself? I would imagine the cost to build the line without locos and cars would be major initially.
Edit: It shold be a requirement that the infrastructure is built here since its government money. I cant imagine why they would not manufacture the rail and such here.
EMD.Don..but is this the same highspeed rail that is supposed to cost...$35 million per mile...
That's a bargain. It cost a BILLION dollars to add a new runway to our airport here in St. Louis. That's about $500 million per mile. And the worst part is that while it was being built, TWA was gobbled up by American and St. Louis stopped being a major hub. The new runway goes largely unused.
Steve S
High speed rail in california, it'd be interesting to see acela like locos and cars wearing an Amtrak Cal., Metro, etc schemes. but maybe we could drive ticket prices down by having the big 4 compete in the passenger business again so that way the Amtrak bill won't be so much, and there may be a return of streamliners. BNSF's North coast Zephyr, Empire builder zephyr, san diegan zephyr.
SP&S modeler, 1960's give or take a decade or two for some equipment.
http://www.youtube.com/user/SGTDUPREY?feature=guide
Gary DuPrey
N scale model railroader
tatans Sort of reminds us that sailing ships many years ago reached speeds twice as fast as todays modern transport ships, nothing new again.
Sort of reminds us that sailing ships many years ago reached speeds twice as fast as todays modern transport ships, nothing new again.
I presume you consider WWII Liberty and Victory ships 'modern.'
Present-day containerships 'slow cruise' at 20 knots to save fuel and reduce complaints about their CO2 footprints, but they are capable of 24-26 knots - regardless of which way or how hard the wind is blowing. Not to mention that the larger ones carry as much as the dry cargo vessels of an entire WWII convoy. The best one-time runs of some clipper ships were fast - but they couldn't guarantee an arrival time based on those record runs. More typically, they crossed the ocean at somewhere between 7 and 15 knots average speed depending on season and route.
As for 'green' energy powering anything serious, NVEnergy (the latest name for the Nevada Power Corporation) has announced plans to replace coal burning power stations with 'green' energy - and said right up front that rates will have to go up. Wind and sunshine may be free, but the equipment to convert them to usable electric power isn't.
And finally, for California to make their high speed rail system competitive, they need to run 200 mph auto-trains. That way the preferred wheels will be available from origin to destination.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
BroadwayLion LOOK about this "free energy" bovine by-product...
LOOK about this "free energy" bovine by-product...
That's about my take on it as well.
HSR needs a reliable and consistent source of electric power, which is emphatically not wind or solar. Even hydro has problems with droughts (think Pacific Electric ca 1921), though geothermal and biomass would fit the bill, with my favorite being methane from landfills and sewage treatment plants used in combined cycle power plants.
Using wind and solar for HSR would require some very hefty energy storage systems, but then again, using wind and solar for providing a large portion of grid power also presupposes some very hefty energy storage systems.
- Erik
-E-C-Mills The first article says nothing about using specifically renewable energy. The line will get its power from the grid. It does say: "The project will reduce carbon dioxide emission by three million tons, divert over a third of the air trips travel and about 6% of auto-travellers. Once built, the system would not require operating subsidies and will generate over $1bn in annual profits." If thats even half true then Its probably a good idea. Regardless, most of the money spent should stay in the US.
I would be really surprised if that was even a quarter true, especially the part of about generating profits and not needing any subsidies. As for using rail to reduce the environmental impacts of moving people around in California, the money would be better spent on the LOSSAN corridor. Reducing travel time from LA to San Diego to say 1.5 hours would draw a lot more riders that 2.5 hours from LA to SF. This would be especially true if the line improvements also proportionally sped up Metrolink and Coaster service along with a 100 MPH line up the I-15/I-215 corridors (split at Temecula).
The San Joaquin valley could be well served by a line that would make good use of the Accela's capabilities.
Take a look at the Cal-ISO website sometime in the summer - peak demand is typically about 5-6PM, peak solar generation is 12 noon.
erikem -E-C-Mills The first article says nothing about using specifically renewable energy. The line will get its power from the grid. It does say: "The project will reduce carbon dioxide emission by three million tons, divert over a third of the air trips travel and about 6% of auto-travellers. Once built, the system would not require operating subsidies and will generate over $1bn in annual profits." If thats even half true then Its probably a good idea. Regardless, most of the money spent should stay in the US. I would be really surprised if that was even a quarter true, especially the part of about generating profits and not needing any subsidies. As for using rail to reduce the environmental impacts of moving people around in California, the money would be better spent on the LOSSAN corridor. Reducing travel time from LA to San Diego to say 1.5 hours would draw a lot more riders that 2.5 hours from LA to SF. This would be especially true if the line improvements also proportionally sped up Metrolink and Coaster service along with a 100 MPH line up the I-15/I-215 corridors (split at Temecula). The San Joaquin valley could be well served by a line that would make good use of the Accela's capabilities. Renewable energy is mentioned in a second article and they are only in the exploratory stage. But that should really be a matter of what the grid can handle or boosting their local grids. The good news is, there are enough already grid tied roof tops to collect significant power which is mostly used in the daytime. California has lots of sun and is already leading in their RE portfolios and efforts. Take a look at the Cal-ISO website sometime in the summer - peak demand is typically about 5-6PM, peak solar generation is 12 noon. - Erik
Oh, you just a spoilsport! Letting all this practical, fact based stuff get in the way of "super fast trains with free energy!"
I love renewable energy sources. I'm just not so sure I want to pay for them!
Unless the whole HSR project INCLUDES the construction of renewable energy sources to feed the grid in the rough aggregate amount the trains will consume, you can't say anything about how "green" the trains are with a straight face (although that does not seem to be slowing anybody down). Hard to use coal or nuclear plants to do peaking...and fill in the valleys when the wind dies or the bovines get an accidental does of Beano....
Fast trains consume more energy than slow ones - by a lot.... Slow ones are more "green" therefore....
I'm with you on "what else could we have done/do with the money".
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
tstage I'll gladly take your rhubarb, Lion. One of my favorite pies is rhubarb pie. No strawberries added; just rhubarb. And just enough sugar to make it mildly sweet but still tart. Mmmmmmm. Tom
I'll gladly take your rhubarb, Lion. One of my favorite pies is rhubarb pie. No strawberries added; just rhubarb. And just enough sugar to make it mildly sweet but still tart. Mmmmmmm.
Tom
I was introduced to rhubarb pie my first year in college, where we had it for dessert occasionally. For some strange reason, many of the students did not eat it, so I was able to go around after most had left the dining hall and eat my fill of the untouched pie. The last time it was served (in my second year), I had to leave early, and was unable eat the untouched servings. Apparently, the dietician came up with the strange idea that it was not popular, and never served it again.
As to the renewable power, it seems that the proponents are unaware of There Ain't No Such Thing As a Free Lunch. Also, the writer of the article is a victim of modern education, and does not know the distinction between "fewer" and "less" (among other things), and has difficulty in writing clear statements.
Johnny
“Our goal is to be the national leader in renewable energy and energy efficiently,” said Governor Chet Culver. It’s why Governor Chet Culver says the federal government awarded Iowa $230million in funding to put a new passenger rail route from Iowa City to Chicago. “This focus in our application really helped us secure this award,” said Culver. Green technology Iowa Interstate Railroad Vice President Mick Burkart says they’re already using. “The Iowa Interstate worked with UNI quite a few years ago and developed a soy based lubricant for track switches,” said Iowa Interstate Railroad Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Mick Burkart. The only problem… “It’s quite a bit expensive than the petroleum base,” said Burkart.
http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/Iowa-City-Chicago-Passenger-Rail-to-Incorporate-Green-Technology-105819443.html
How green be thy rocket? They be wearin' the green to sell their dream.
One point of advocacy mentioned in a news article regarding the Cornbelt Rocket was sustainable, locally grown belgian endive being served in the dinning car. Politicians will claim their plan will fight crime, cure cancer, deliver us from CO2, etc.
Passengers don't pay. Taxpayers will. Passenger rail will be a political decision. Is the return worth the price?
Chet Culver is no longer governor of Iowa. A major issue in Culver's departure was Iowa goverment's balance sheet drifting toward becoming as Illinois. That extended to many issues besides the Cornbelt Rocket running to Iowa City.
Residents of Illinois and California may consider the service worth the price. As the balance of political power currently stands in Iowa, the field for the Cornbelt Rocket ends in Moline, no matter how green it may be.
Did this thread just drop out of another forum and land here this morning?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding Did this thread just drop out of another forum and land here this morning?
Yes. It had been under the "Ketchup Advisory Board" heading earlier...
I read the original article and a couple of things jumped out at me.
First, Los Angeles to San Francisco, 450 miles, is to be covered by express trains in 2.5 hours, an average speed of 180 MPH on a line good for 200 MPH. That seems reasonable if no intermediate stops and 200 MPH capability over every foot of the way, but it seems other articles have talked about using existing lines or rights of way in both LA and SF. If the latter is true, max speed will be less, perhaps much less, than 200 MPH.
More interesting was the claim would run 20 trains per hour in each direction. That is three minute headway and about 10 mile separation. That should work, barely, as long as NOTHING bad ever happens.
The article says there will be 20 stations. If average delay per station is 3:20, the intermediate station stops will add an hour to running time. That delay seems too short by half to me, so we are talking two hour delay for the intermediate stops. I am not talking dwell time but the sum of deceleration delay, dwell time, and acceleration time.
If plan is to run no stop express trains and all stops locals, then it looks like every station will require both a station track and a through track in each direction so the express can pass the local without delay. Those station tracks will be several miles long and include high speed switches at both ends so most of the deceleration and acceleration takes place on the station tracks to avoid delaying the following express trains.
$35 million a mile is beginning to look cheap if the performance claims are to be believed.
Mac
I'll stand in line for some of that rhubarb, Lion. My parents always had it in their garden and I miss it. Last spring I tried planting some. We had a very hot summer and it died. I envy you your rhubarb.
Rhubarb is an ancient plant. It may have been present in the Garden of Eden. Whether or not that it true it is one of the Lord's gifts to us.
Sign me up for some of that rhubarb, it is very hard to find in East Texas.
Not to cause a rhubarb, but wouldn't it cost MUCH less to build and maintain between LA and SF two paved, grade-separated highway lanes...with Jersey barriers between the two and on both sides...where rubber-tired vehicles built to travel 150mph+ (with comfortable accommodations) could transport people back and forth. Whether they would be powered by oil, gas, electric wire in the concrete, or something else would be for the most part a separate, flexible decision based on current market costs. California car culture might swallow that more easily?
Be bop arebop Rhubarb pie.
I distrust the claims of profitability, but the HSR is going to rebuild the San Jose to SF line to HSR standards and so if nothing else that will significantly improve performance CalTrain. Further, the San Joaquins will spend significant time now on new rails (incremental to make use of the initial build out while the rest is being constructed)
None of these things will pay for themselves, but the provide initial value back from the investment.
Further Californians have proven that they are more than willing to take trains. Or are the Coaster, Metrolink, Surfliner, Capital Corridor, CalTrain, Altamont and San Joaquins all figments of my fevered imagination.
Finally, I reject the notion that HSR rail requires that you be deposited right at your final destination. I would like to know just how many airlines/Airports provide such service? Long Distance Bus lines? etc etc etc. That is a false issue.
YoHo1975Be bop arebop Rhubarb pie.
As soon as I get some rhubarb from Lion I'll take the train to Lake Woebegone to Ralph's Pretty Good Grocery to get some Norwegian Bachelor Farmers flour.
Rhubarb Lovers of the World, unite! But, let us not engage in a vendetta against those who do not understand rhubarb, lest we start a rhubarb.
True, the article does not specifically mention how the electricity necessary will be generated, but it does mention regenerative braking--which cannot return as much power as has been used.
PNWRMNM I read the original article and a couple of things jumped out at me. First, Los Angeles to San Francisco, 450 miles, is to be covered by express trains in 2.5 hours, an average speed of 180 MPH on a line good for 200 MPH. That seems reasonable if no intermediate stops and 200 MPH capability over every foot of the way, but it seems other articles have talked about using existing lines or rights of way in both LA and SF. If the latter is true, max speed will be less, perhaps much less, than 200 MPH. More interesting was the claim would run 20 trains per hour in each direction. That is three minute headway and about 10 mile separation. That should work, barely, as long as NOTHING bad ever happens. The article says there will be 20 stations. If average delay per station is 3:20, the intermediate station stops will add an hour to running time. That delay seems too short by half to me, so we are talking two hour delay for the intermediate stops. I am not talking dwell time but the sum of deceleration delay, dwell time, and acceleration time. If plan is to run no stop express trains and all stops locals, then it looks like every station will require both a station track and a through track in each direction so the express can pass the local without delay. Those station tracks will be several miles long and include high speed switches at both ends so most of the deceleration and acceleration takes place on the station tracks to avoid delaying the following express trains. $35 million a mile is beginning to look cheap if the performance claims are to be believed. Mac
Double rainbow all the way!
Many curious items, indeed! I think many of the strange assumptions got written into law when they passed the ballot initiative. They've since walked away from some of them into the valley of "common sense" (which is not where the double rainbow lands).
I guess I should wait for the explanation how the electrons that are sloshing back and forth in their pipe that's connected to the train are being pushed and pulled from a windmill rather than a coal plant.
Isn't' it obvious that the electrical generation split between renewable/non-renewable is almost completely divorced from consumption?
I think I'm going to ask my bank to only use Philadelphia minted quarters when they wire the money from my checking account to my gas company.
Don,
I stayed away from the electrical fantasies because I know less about them than railroad fantasies and because the electrical article was separate from the railroad article.
PNWRMNM Don, I stayed away from the electrical fantasies because I know less about them than railroad fantasies and because the electrical article was separate from the railroad article. Mac
Down the rabbit hole we go!
California can (I'm not saying will) make HSR work for them by justifying the cost by what they don't have to spend on highway lanes and runways. If their population projections are anywhere close to correct, HSR will end up being a bargain. To make it palitable to a larger chunk of the population, they need to carry passenger's cars, too, so they can have them for the first/last mile of their trip. (Amtrak would set a few more ridership records, if every train were an auto-train, IMHO)
Why is rail the only mode of transportation that has to show a profit? How many car drivers paid for the road they are using? (answer: none, gas taxes and the highway trust don't cover all the cost, so every car trip is subsidized) How many airlines paid for a runway or air traffic control? (again the answer is none as the aviation trust and ticket taxes don't cover the true costs, either)
joe323 Government builds roads that privately owned cars use Same for Airports. So in theory Goverment could build tracks that private trains would run on.
Government builds roads that privately owned cars use Same for Airports. So in theory Goverment could build tracks that private trains would run on.
I actually think that is a good idea, but that would require government dispatch, similar to air traffic control.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
"People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it."
- George Bernard Shaw
I wonder how much HSR could be advanced with the $436 million dollars being spent on the tanks that the Army doesn't even want?
joe323So in theory Goverment could build tracks that private trains would run on.
I agree. But it ain't gonna happen.
Phoebe Vet I wonder how much HSR could be advanced with the $436 million dollars being spent on the tanks that the Army doesn't even want?
Considering that NCTD is looking at something like $100 million to double track the less than two miles that separate the Solana Beach siding and Del Mar siding, the $436 million probably won't go very far.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.