QUOTE: Originally posted by csxengineer98 thats an easy one..becouse their will be some killer kickbacks from the oil companys to the legisators.... csx engineer
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton Did you forget where the VP (the brain behind the P) came from? Jay
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by csxengineer98 thats an easy one..becouse their will be some killer kickbacks from the oil companys to the legisators.... csx engineer Hmmm, kickbacks eh? Someone should suggest that to these railroad CEO's. Seriously, what is interesting about this Alaskan pipeline deal is the following: 1. The oil/gas companies are cooperating to get this thing through 2. The pipeline right of way will be publicly owned 3. The feds are throwing in some financing and tax incentives to sweeten the deal Sounds like open access to me. Does any of this get accross the the railroad honcho's? Do they even read the news?
QUOTE: Originally posted by CANADIANPACIFIC2816 The Alaska Railroad ships thousands of tank car loads of aviation fuel to the Anchorage regional airport every year. I know this because I was there in September of 2003. I wi***o quote slotracer, "Gasoline also ships by pipeline, just too much quantity to move economically and effectively by rail." Well, Slotracer doesn't know what he is talking about!
Originally posted by csxengineer98 [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:05 AM M'mm lets check with the NY Times or the Washington Post & see if the guys in the RR ivory towers have subscriptions to those publications. Maybe we should conduct a poll as they leave the office to see if they know even how to access those web sites. [:o)][:I] Originally posted by futuremodal Originally posted by csxengineer98 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 1:52 PM UP829 and others hit the nail on the head about petroleum transportation. Pipeline by far is the best means for moving large quantities of both liquid and gaseous products. If we tried to move all of the crude oil in this country by rail you would need a dedicated double track line between the field and the refinery. $$$ Remember that the oil (and gas) fields are spread out over wide areas and rail lines to all of them would be cost prohibitive. More $$$ To haul natural gas by rail you would either need to have high pressure vessels (oxygen bottles) which would be very costly. The other alternative is liquification of natural gas. Much more $$$$ Turning the gas into a liquid gives a huge volume advantage-600 standard cubic feet of natural gas equals one cubic foot of liquified natural gas. The boogie man is that this is done at approximately 260ºF below zero. This takes a large and expensive cryogenic plant then the tank cars must be a large thermos bottle. I think they will cost a little more than a conventional tank car. This is done today in ships that transport natural gas from the middle east to Europe, Japan, or the good old USA. Upon arrival the gas must be regassified to enter the domestic market. More $$$. A rule of thumb is that you need atleast 3 trillion cubic feet of available gas to justify a liquified natural gas setup. And thisa is considering putting it in a ship which has refigeration to keep the gas in the liquid state. How will you do this on the rail? All of the liqified natural gas receiving terminals in the US are removed from major metropolitan areas. With rail lines going through metro areas I can just hear the Washington DC city council screaming about this. A tank car of propane or hydrocloric acid is nothing compared to the LNG tank car blowing up. You might ask: Why worry about the temperature rising? Just keep the cork in the bottle and it will stay as a liquid. The second boogie man comes to town. As the temperature rises to 117ºF below zero you reach the critical temperature of methane. At the critical temperature the gas will turn to a liquid even if you put a millions pounds of pressure on it. It CANNOT be kept as a liquid unless someone rewrites the laws of thermodynamics and physics. At its peak Prudhoe Bay produced in excess of 1 million barrels of crude per day which is 42 million gallons. If we assume that the average oil tank truck holds 21,000 gallons it would take one thousand trucks per day just to haul the oil. Assuming a 5 day round trip to get the oil to Valdez would require 5,000 tank trucks. Add in a few more for repairs and bad weather. Does anyone know the NYSE ticker symbol for the company makes tank trucks? I want to tell my broker to start buying. Dck Watkins Rail fan and professional whose real job is an oil and gas consulting professional engineer. Reply Edit tatans Member sinceMay 2004 4,115 posts Posted by tatans on Monday, March 28, 2005 5:02 PM Good luck on a pipeline that passes through Canada (if it's allowed) we are having problems here with domestic pipelines now on crossing lands on Native reserves, and the government is increasing ancient land grants to thousands of square miles to be under control of reserve leaders and Dept. of Indian Affairs. I guess Canada should be building a pipeline across the U.S. to Mexico, see how far this scheme would get ! ! Also try building a railway across 1800 miles of muskeg, not an easy task, I watched whole sections of railway track used as pilings in muskeg disappear along with a couple of bulldozers, this would be an interesting project indeed. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:26 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal This is not open access. It is a three party private line. Mac As a matter of practicallity, it is akin to open access. The project promoters have agreed to give access to the smaller players in the area. Any small producer who comes into existence in the future will be allowed access to the pipeline to ship their portion. As a rule, most pipelines in the U.S. will allow smaller producers to use their pipelines, and indeed most pipeline companies today are divested of the ownership of natural gas, oil, or gasoline. Pipeline companies in effect are nothing but infrastructure providers, and are very successful doing so. One of the most prosperous companies in the U.S. today is Kinder-Morgan, a pipeline company, whose president Richard Kinder would be my choice to lead a rail infrastructure company. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:37 PM Miles of natural gas pipelines in USA: Transmission lines: 301,840 miles Distribution: 1,097,980 miles Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:49 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal One of the most prosperous companies in the U.S. today is Kinder-Morgan, a pipeline company, whose president Richard Kinder would be my choice to lead a rail infrastructure company. And what a choice it would be, The only question is "Can you afford him? Reply Edit CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:41 AM Pipelines aren't quite open access, the pipeline is a common carrier who charges a rate to move product, be it gasoline, crude oil or anything in between. The rates are posted with the appropriate regulatory bodies, same as rail rates. Don't be confused by the fact that pipelines have no rolling stock, they have pumping stations, tank farms, and other related equipment instead. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Originally posted by futuremodal Originally posted by csxengineer98 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 1:52 PM UP829 and others hit the nail on the head about petroleum transportation. Pipeline by far is the best means for moving large quantities of both liquid and gaseous products. If we tried to move all of the crude oil in this country by rail you would need a dedicated double track line between the field and the refinery. $$$ Remember that the oil (and gas) fields are spread out over wide areas and rail lines to all of them would be cost prohibitive. More $$$ To haul natural gas by rail you would either need to have high pressure vessels (oxygen bottles) which would be very costly. The other alternative is liquification of natural gas. Much more $$$$ Turning the gas into a liquid gives a huge volume advantage-600 standard cubic feet of natural gas equals one cubic foot of liquified natural gas. The boogie man is that this is done at approximately 260ºF below zero. This takes a large and expensive cryogenic plant then the tank cars must be a large thermos bottle. I think they will cost a little more than a conventional tank car. This is done today in ships that transport natural gas from the middle east to Europe, Japan, or the good old USA. Upon arrival the gas must be regassified to enter the domestic market. More $$$. A rule of thumb is that you need atleast 3 trillion cubic feet of available gas to justify a liquified natural gas setup. And thisa is considering putting it in a ship which has refigeration to keep the gas in the liquid state. How will you do this on the rail? All of the liqified natural gas receiving terminals in the US are removed from major metropolitan areas. With rail lines going through metro areas I can just hear the Washington DC city council screaming about this. A tank car of propane or hydrocloric acid is nothing compared to the LNG tank car blowing up. You might ask: Why worry about the temperature rising? Just keep the cork in the bottle and it will stay as a liquid. The second boogie man comes to town. As the temperature rises to 117ºF below zero you reach the critical temperature of methane. At the critical temperature the gas will turn to a liquid even if you put a millions pounds of pressure on it. It CANNOT be kept as a liquid unless someone rewrites the laws of thermodynamics and physics. At its peak Prudhoe Bay produced in excess of 1 million barrels of crude per day which is 42 million gallons. If we assume that the average oil tank truck holds 21,000 gallons it would take one thousand trucks per day just to haul the oil. Assuming a 5 day round trip to get the oil to Valdez would require 5,000 tank trucks. Add in a few more for repairs and bad weather. Does anyone know the NYSE ticker symbol for the company makes tank trucks? I want to tell my broker to start buying. Dck Watkins Rail fan and professional whose real job is an oil and gas consulting professional engineer. Reply Edit tatans Member sinceMay 2004 4,115 posts Posted by tatans on Monday, March 28, 2005 5:02 PM Good luck on a pipeline that passes through Canada (if it's allowed) we are having problems here with domestic pipelines now on crossing lands on Native reserves, and the government is increasing ancient land grants to thousands of square miles to be under control of reserve leaders and Dept. of Indian Affairs. I guess Canada should be building a pipeline across the U.S. to Mexico, see how far this scheme would get ! ! Also try building a railway across 1800 miles of muskeg, not an easy task, I watched whole sections of railway track used as pilings in muskeg disappear along with a couple of bulldozers, this would be an interesting project indeed. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:26 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal This is not open access. It is a three party private line. Mac As a matter of practicallity, it is akin to open access. The project promoters have agreed to give access to the smaller players in the area. Any small producer who comes into existence in the future will be allowed access to the pipeline to ship their portion. As a rule, most pipelines in the U.S. will allow smaller producers to use their pipelines, and indeed most pipeline companies today are divested of the ownership of natural gas, oil, or gasoline. Pipeline companies in effect are nothing but infrastructure providers, and are very successful doing so. One of the most prosperous companies in the U.S. today is Kinder-Morgan, a pipeline company, whose president Richard Kinder would be my choice to lead a rail infrastructure company. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:37 PM Miles of natural gas pipelines in USA: Transmission lines: 301,840 miles Distribution: 1,097,980 miles Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:49 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal One of the most prosperous companies in the U.S. today is Kinder-Morgan, a pipeline company, whose president Richard Kinder would be my choice to lead a rail infrastructure company. And what a choice it would be, The only question is "Can you afford him? Reply Edit CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:41 AM Pipelines aren't quite open access, the pipeline is a common carrier who charges a rate to move product, be it gasoline, crude oil or anything in between. The rates are posted with the appropriate regulatory bodies, same as rail rates. Don't be confused by the fact that pipelines have no rolling stock, they have pumping stations, tank farms, and other related equipment instead. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by csxengineer98 Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 1:52 PM UP829 and others hit the nail on the head about petroleum transportation. Pipeline by far is the best means for moving large quantities of both liquid and gaseous products. If we tried to move all of the crude oil in this country by rail you would need a dedicated double track line between the field and the refinery. $$$ Remember that the oil (and gas) fields are spread out over wide areas and rail lines to all of them would be cost prohibitive. More $$$ To haul natural gas by rail you would either need to have high pressure vessels (oxygen bottles) which would be very costly. The other alternative is liquification of natural gas. Much more $$$$ Turning the gas into a liquid gives a huge volume advantage-600 standard cubic feet of natural gas equals one cubic foot of liquified natural gas. The boogie man is that this is done at approximately 260ºF below zero. This takes a large and expensive cryogenic plant then the tank cars must be a large thermos bottle. I think they will cost a little more than a conventional tank car. This is done today in ships that transport natural gas from the middle east to Europe, Japan, or the good old USA. Upon arrival the gas must be regassified to enter the domestic market. More $$$. A rule of thumb is that you need atleast 3 trillion cubic feet of available gas to justify a liquified natural gas setup. And thisa is considering putting it in a ship which has refigeration to keep the gas in the liquid state. How will you do this on the rail? All of the liqified natural gas receiving terminals in the US are removed from major metropolitan areas. With rail lines going through metro areas I can just hear the Washington DC city council screaming about this. A tank car of propane or hydrocloric acid is nothing compared to the LNG tank car blowing up. You might ask: Why worry about the temperature rising? Just keep the cork in the bottle and it will stay as a liquid. The second boogie man comes to town. As the temperature rises to 117ºF below zero you reach the critical temperature of methane. At the critical temperature the gas will turn to a liquid even if you put a millions pounds of pressure on it. It CANNOT be kept as a liquid unless someone rewrites the laws of thermodynamics and physics. At its peak Prudhoe Bay produced in excess of 1 million barrels of crude per day which is 42 million gallons. If we assume that the average oil tank truck holds 21,000 gallons it would take one thousand trucks per day just to haul the oil. Assuming a 5 day round trip to get the oil to Valdez would require 5,000 tank trucks. Add in a few more for repairs and bad weather. Does anyone know the NYSE ticker symbol for the company makes tank trucks? I want to tell my broker to start buying. Dck Watkins Rail fan and professional whose real job is an oil and gas consulting professional engineer. Reply Edit tatans Member sinceMay 2004 4,115 posts Posted by tatans on Monday, March 28, 2005 5:02 PM Good luck on a pipeline that passes through Canada (if it's allowed) we are having problems here with domestic pipelines now on crossing lands on Native reserves, and the government is increasing ancient land grants to thousands of square miles to be under control of reserve leaders and Dept. of Indian Affairs. I guess Canada should be building a pipeline across the U.S. to Mexico, see how far this scheme would get ! ! Also try building a railway across 1800 miles of muskeg, not an easy task, I watched whole sections of railway track used as pilings in muskeg disappear along with a couple of bulldozers, this would be an interesting project indeed. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 8:26 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal This is not open access. It is a three party private line. Mac As a matter of practicallity, it is akin to open access. The project promoters have agreed to give access to the smaller players in the area. Any small producer who comes into existence in the future will be allowed access to the pipeline to ship their portion. As a rule, most pipelines in the U.S. will allow smaller producers to use their pipelines, and indeed most pipeline companies today are divested of the ownership of natural gas, oil, or gasoline. Pipeline companies in effect are nothing but infrastructure providers, and are very successful doing so. One of the most prosperous companies in the U.S. today is Kinder-Morgan, a pipeline company, whose president Richard Kinder would be my choice to lead a rail infrastructure company. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:37 PM Miles of natural gas pipelines in USA: Transmission lines: 301,840 miles Distribution: 1,097,980 miles Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Monday, March 28, 2005 9:49 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal One of the most prosperous companies in the U.S. today is Kinder-Morgan, a pipeline company, whose president Richard Kinder would be my choice to lead a rail infrastructure company. And what a choice it would be, The only question is "Can you afford him? Reply Edit CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:41 AM Pipelines aren't quite open access, the pipeline is a common carrier who charges a rate to move product, be it gasoline, crude oil or anything in between. The rates are posted with the appropriate regulatory bodies, same as rail rates. Don't be confused by the fact that pipelines have no rolling stock, they have pumping stations, tank farms, and other related equipment instead. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
QUOTE: Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal This is not open access. It is a three party private line. Mac
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal One of the most prosperous companies in the U.S. today is Kinder-Morgan, a pipeline company, whose president Richard Kinder would be my choice to lead a rail infrastructure company. And what a choice it would be, The only question is "Can you afford him? Reply Edit CSSHEGEWISCH Member sinceMarch 2016 From: Burbank IL (near Clearing) 13,540 posts Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:41 AM Pipelines aren't quite open access, the pipeline is a common carrier who charges a rate to move product, be it gasoline, crude oil or anything in between. The rates are posted with the appropriate regulatory bodies, same as rail rates. Don't be confused by the fact that pipelines have no rolling stock, they have pumping stations, tank farms, and other related equipment instead. The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by PNWRMNM Futuremodal One of the most prosperous companies in the U.S. today is Kinder-Morgan, a pipeline company, whose president Richard Kinder would be my choice to lead a rail infrastructure company.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.