Energy, Powder River Basin, and the DM&E

[Murphy Siding]

Keep in mind, that $4 billion figure was just for an example.  I'm not sure what the total estimated cost for rehabbing the entire DM&E line from Colony to Winona was/is, but the $4 billion figure may be a bit high.

For what it's worth, here's a list of all the industries served by DM&E:

http://www.dmerail.com/PDF/DME%20INDUSTRY%20DIRECTORY.pdf

Also, it was CNW's "Cowboy Line" that was used as the access into the PRB.  What is the status of that line now?

What is your source for the claim that most new ethanol plants in SD are being located on BNSF?  Certainly, BNSF being the main Class I line out of the state is going to get most of the rate split.

And for what it's worth, Colony is technically located in the PRB coal fields, just not the easy to get prefered coal.  There's gotta be a reason DM&E has gone to all the trouble of not only obtaining and keeping that line, but also getting an FRA loan to upgrade it.  It was surmised that Colony would be the starting point into the PRB to get at all that Montana coal just sittin' there.  Still could be if Montana's Guv threw DM&E a bone or two.........

   Well, here goes.  I've read that the PRB extention from Wall, S.D. was to cost somewhere around $2Billion.  Six minus two equals four.  That's where I'm getting that number from.  I could be all wrong.  Looking at a map, S.D. has 8 ethanol plants operating, and two in development.  The score would be 7:1, or 8:2 BNSF:DM&E, depending on how you score it.  I don't think Colony is in the Powder River coal area.  It's in the Belle Fourche River area of bentonite clay.   If the coal's there, it's so far down, that it will never see daylight.

[Anonymous]

Keep in mind, that $4 billion figure was just for an example.  I'm not sure what the total estimated cost for rehabbing the entire DM&E line from Colony to Winona was/is, but the $4 billion figure may be a bit high.

For what it's worth, here's a list of all the industries served by DM&E:

http://www.dmerail.com/PDF/DME%20INDUSTRY%20DIRECTORY.pdf

Also, it was CNW's "Cowboy Line" that was used as the access into the PRB.  What is the status of that line now?

What is your source for the claim that most new ethanol plants in SD are being located on BNSF?  Certainly, BNSF being the main Class I line out of the state is going to get most of the rate split.

And for what it's worth, Colony is technically located in the PRB coal fields, just not the easy to get prefered coal.  There's gotta be a reason DM&E has gone to all the trouble of not only obtaining and keeping that line, but also getting an FRA loan to upgrade it.  It was surmised that Colony would be the starting point into the PRB to get at all that Montana coal just sittin' there.  Still could be if Montana's Guv threw DM&E a bone or two.........

   Well, here goes.  I've read that the PRB extention from Wall, S.D. was to cost somewhere around $2Billion.  Six minus two equals four.  That's where I'm getting that number from.  I could be all wrong.  Looking at a map, S.D. has 8 ethanol plants operating, and two in development.  The score would be 7:1, or 8:2 BNSF:DM&E, depending on how you score it.  I don't think Colony is in the Powder River coal area.  It's in the Belle Fourche River area of bentonite clay.   If the coal's there, it's so far down, that it will never see daylight.

Actually, I count about 14 ethanol plants either up and running or in planning/development...

http://www.sdcorn.org/ethanol/sdplants.cfm

Some of those are on various shortlines.  Whether those shortlines are captive to BNSF or some other Class I such as UP or CP is hard to say.  But I'll grant you that if we were keeping score, BNSF would win......(yaaawwwnnnn).....

When I speak of Colony as being a more apt starting point for a PRB extension, I mean it is half as close to the Gillette area as that southern option.  And the Belle Fourche river flows northeast from the Gillette coalfields to Colony, so there's your water level grade.  But perhaps more important, the untouched Montana PRB fields are a hop skip and jump away from Colony, so there's the possibility of using Colony as a jumping point for two coal road extensions.

[nanaimo73]

 When I speak of Colony as being a more apt starting point for a PRB extension, I mean it is half as close to the Gillette area as that southern option.  And the Belle Fourche river flows northeast from the Gillette coalfields to Colony, so there's your water level grade.  But perhaps more important, the untouched Montana PRB fields are a hop skip and jump away from Colony, so there's the possibility of using Colony as a jumping point for two coal road extensions.

Somehow I don't believe Rapid City is going to allow unit trains through their city, just like Rochester.

DME is loosing a one-front war, and you want to open a second front ?

[Murphy Siding]

Actually, I count about 14 ethanol plants either up and running or in planning/development...

http://www.sdcorn.org/ethanol/sdplants.cfm

Some of those are on various shortlines.  Whether those shortlines are captive to BNSF or some other Class I such as UP or CP is hard to say.  But I'll grant you that if we were keeping score, BNSF would win......(yaaawwwnnnn).....

You are correct-14.  The bad part is, I was looking at the same map..  Aurora ia on the DM&E. Redfield might go either way, as both DM&E and BNSF go through there. Rosholt, I believe, is on a short line connected to CP.  Huron will definately be on DM&E!  Corrected score would be something like 12-2, or 11-2-1.  My point is, I don't see DM&E burning up the ethanol tonnage anywhere but in press releases.

[Anonymous]

 When I speak of Colony as being a more apt starting point for a PRB extension, I mean it is half as close to the Gillette area as that southern option.  And the Belle Fourche river flows northeast from the Gillette coalfields to Colony, so there's your water level grade.  But perhaps more important, the untouched Montana PRB fields are a hop skip and jump away from Colony, so there's the possibility of using Colony as a jumping point for two coal road extensions.

Somehow I don't believe Rapid City is going to allow unit trains through their city, just like Rochester.

How dare you compare the good citizens of Rapid City with those Roachies!

Seriously, why do you think the level of opposition would be comparable?  There is no Mayo monster dominating Rapid City, indeed Rapid City's economy is very much dependent on natural resources.

I feel that there wouldn't be any more opposition to coal trains through Rapid City than there is with coal trains through Gillette.  And if a new PRB extension through the Montana coalfields results in a through rail connection to Billings, that opens the door for that new Amtrak train everyone's been speculatin' about!

DME is loosing a one-front war, and you want to open a second front ?

DM&E temporarily lost the battle of sanity over idiocy.  Lightning ain't gonna strike twice.

[nanaimo73]

Isn't Rapid City now focused on tourism, and away from natural resources ?

[Murphy Siding]

 When I speak of Colony as being a more apt starting point for a PRB extension, I mean it is half as close to the Gillette area as that southern option.  And the Belle Fourche river flows northeast from the Gillette coalfields to Colony, so there's your water level grade.  But perhaps more important, the untouched Montana PRB fields are a hop skip and jump away from Colony, so there's the possibility of using Colony as a jumping point for two coal road extensions.

Somehow I don't believe Rapid City is going to allow unit trains through their city, just like Rochester.

How dare you compare the good citizens of Rapid City with those Roachies!

Seriously, why do you think the level of opposition would be comparable?  There is no Mayo monster dominating Rapid City, indeed Rapid City's economy is very much dependent on natural resources.

I feel that there wouldn't be any more opposition to coal trains through Rapid City than there is with coal trains through Gillette. 

Ok seriously- I grew up in Rapid City.  There is no dependence on natural resources.  There are basically two industies: tourism, and Ellsworth Air Force Base, and not much else.  Take a look on Google Earth at Rapid City.  The topography and the rail lines would be every bit as tricky as in Rochester.  I wouldn't be surprised that a coal train might need a helper just to get out of town going east.  Westbound is probably not much better.  The citizens would be every bit as against it as Rochester is.

     Actually, the bigger concern would be from Sturgis.  24(?) coal trains a day + 500,000 bikers for the Sturgis Ralleye for the first 2 weeks of August each year=disaster.

[Anonymous]

 When I speak of Colony as being a more apt starting point for a PRB extension, I mean it is half as close to the Gillette area as that southern option.  And the Belle Fourche river flows northeast from the Gillette coalfields to Colony, so there's your water level grade.  But perhaps more important, the untouched Montana PRB fields are a hop skip and jump away from Colony, so there's the possibility of using Colony as a jumping point for two coal road extensions.

Somehow I don't believe Rapid City is going to allow unit trains through their city, just like Rochester.

How dare you compare the good citizens of Rapid City with those Roachies!

Seriously, why do you think the level of opposition would be comparable?  There is no Mayo monster dominating Rapid City, indeed Rapid City's economy is very much dependent on natural resources.

I feel that there wouldn't be any more opposition to coal trains through Rapid City than there is with coal trains through Gillette. 

Ok seriously- I grew up in Rapid City.  There is no dependence on natural resources.  There are basically two industies: tourism, and Ellsworth Air Force Base, and not much else.  Take a look on Google Earth at Rapid City.  The topography and the rail lines would be every bit as tricky as in Rochester.  I wouldn't be surprised that a coal train might need a helper just to get out of town going east.  Westbound is probably not much better.  The citizens would be every bit as against it as Rochester is.

Okay, seriously now.......

1. I know that many burgs across the country count tourism as an "industry", but seriously it's not.  Waiting tables and selling trinkets is simply the lowest form of economic prostitution, barely able to eke out an income level slightly above the official poverty line.
2. That being said, the tourism is taking place in the Black Hills, not necessarily in Rapid City.

To equate the mentality of Rapid City with that of Rochester is simply absurd.  The Mayo Clinic is Rochester, it pays medical industry wages, it carries great political mojo.  Frankly, the denizens of Rochester could care less about what goes on around them, aka the normally aspirated ag base of southern Minnesota.  So when DM&E comes along and tries to sell the job creation prospects, Rochester says no thank you we already got a high paying wage base here.

Rapid City is still the center of the timber, ranching, and ag industries of Western SD, SE Montana, and NE Wyoming, and they all would intuitively support an improved rail service spectrum.  Those who try to eke by on tourism dollars are not going to turn down higher paying industrial jobs if given the chance.  The average household income around Rapid City is under $40,000.  Sounds to me they could use a few more union scale jobs out there.  DM&E did open a small factory directly related to the PRB expansion project, and I didn't see any news items about how Rapid City folks were protesting that investment.  Even the presence of the Air Base would seem to favor improved rail transportation - Fairchild AFB west of Spokane has taken an active part in improving rail service.

Since I mention Spokane, I will say that the attitudes toward heavy haul railroads would be indentical for Spokane and Rapid City - not 100% adoration necessarily, but neither full fledged opposition.  Certainly nothing like Rochester.

That being said, I too have some questions about the profile of the rail lines in and out of Rapid City toward Wall and Colony.  Is it a question of 2.2% grades needing helpers, or is it simply a case of an up and down profile that just needs one to pay attention while driving a train?  Is it comparable to Crawford Notch through which BNSF coal trains run day and night?  Do you have a profile map or chart that you could share?

Actually, the bigger concern would be from Sturgis.  24(?) coal trains a day + 500,000 bikers for the Sturgis Ralleye for the first 2 weeks of August each year=disaster.

So DM&E takes that two weeks for annual maintenance.  Big deal!

I didn't know straw men rode Harley's!

[Murphy Siding]

 When I speak of Colony as being a more apt starting point for a PRB extension, I mean it is half as close to the Gillette area as that southern option.  And the Belle Fourche river flows northeast from the Gillette coalfields to Colony, so there's your water level grade.  But perhaps more important, the untouched Montana PRB fields are a hop skip and jump away from Colony, so there's the possibility of using Colony as a jumping point for two coal road extensions.

Somehow I don't believe Rapid City is going to allow unit trains through their city, just like Rochester.

How dare you compare the good citizens of Rapid City with those Roachies!

Seriously, why do you think the level of opposition would be comparable?  There is no Mayo monster dominating Rapid City, indeed Rapid City's economy is very much dependent on natural resources.

I feel that there wouldn't be any more opposition to coal trains through Rapid City than there is with coal trains through Gillette. 

Ok seriously- I grew up in Rapid City.  There is no dependence on natural resources.  There are basically two industies: tourism, and Ellsworth Air Force Base, and not much else.  Take a look on Google Earth at Rapid City.  The topography and the rail lines would be every bit as tricky as in Rochester.  I wouldn't be surprised that a coal train might need a helper just to get out of town going east.  Westbound is probably not much better.  The citizens would be every bit as against it as Rochester is.

Okay, seriously now.......

1. I know that many burgs across the country count tourism as an "industry", but seriously it's not.  Waiting tables and selling trinkets is simply the lowest form of economic prostitution, barely able to eke out an income level slightly above the official poverty line.
2. That being said, the tourism is taking place in the Black Hills, not necessarily in Rapid City.

Rapid City is still the center of the timber, ranching, and ag industries of Western SD, SE Montana, and NE Wyoming,

Interesting perspective from someone who's never lived there.  Have you ever been there?  There's a reason I don't live there anymore.  Why did CNW not cash in on all that business?

[Anonymous]

Been through there a few times, though always via US 16 through the Black Hills, never via I-90 and Sturgis.  What I do remember is that the ex-Milwaukee grade east out of town seemed to follow a gulch, while the ex-CNW went east via a more northerly route.  Didn't really get a chance to eyeball grades and curves. 

It should be worth noting that the ex-Milwaukee grade is railbanked by the State, according to their DOT website.  If indeed the current DM&E grade east out of town is unsatisfactory, perhaps they can get the State in on transfering rails to the better grade at least as far as the Cheyenne River valley where the new PRB grade is supposed to run from Wasta south.

I did a little research and came up with some statements regarding DM&E's original set of route alternatives into the PRB.  There was the North Alternative, the Middle Alternative, and the South Alternative.  I have no idea how a Middle Alternative was supposed to work (any abandoned grades straight west of Rapid City?), but the North Alternative did as I expected - Start at Colony and head SW via the Bella Fourche River valley down to Gillette, then south parallel to the Orin Line to the premo mines.  As stated in this news item from the era.....

http://www.visi.com/~mfrahm/dme/news/southern.html

....the Northern route did have the advantage of less new construction, but also would have been somewhat handicapped by a longer overall routing for the coal trains east.  No mention of the grade profile to suggest adverse operating conditions on the Northern route, but that doesn't mean such conditions didn't/don't exist.  The Southern route, the one ultimately chosen by DM&E, involved twice as much new trackage but would incorporate a shorter overall route east and does follow a watercourse out of the PRB past RC until Wasta grade.

My oh my!  I wonder if, given that the Northern route involved less new construction, that perhaps DM&E made a mistake in opting for the Southern over the Northern PRB route?  If indeed the Northern route ended up costing less, say a billion or two less than the Southern route, would DM&E have managed to request a smaller FRA loan, perhaps one that would have been accepted?

[Murphy Siding]

It should be worth noting that the ex-Milwaukee grade is railbanked by the State, according to their DOT website. 

The tracks are even still there past Murphy Siding.  However, there have been buildings and hiways built on top of the ROW east of Rapid City.

[Anonymous]

It should be worth noting that the ex-Milwaukee grade is railbanked by the State, according to their DOT website. 

The tracks are even still there past Murphy Siding.  However, there have been buildings and hiways built on top of the ROW east of Rapid City.

Hmmmmm......Perhaps some eco-schmoe is contemplatin' a new biofuels facility there at Murphy Siding?

I did as you suggested and copied some topo maps of the Rapid City to Colony territory.  It looks as if there might be a short but significant grade east out of Rapid City, one that seems to cross a lot of side streets, but it's one that could be avoided with a northern bypass around Rapid City via Box Elder Creek.  Other than that there doesn't look to be any areas of concern should rail traffic increase on that line.  The line skirts Sturgis to the west, and there may be a short up and down segment between Sturgis and Whitewood.

So if the Northern Option involved only 100 or so miles of new trackage compared to the Southern option's 200 or so, even a Rapid City bypass only adds about 10 more miles of new track construction.  Kevin and the gang would still have been able to cut a cool billion or so from the loan request, and probably would have the money in hand even as we speak.

The Southern route, although water level grade and giving the closest connection to the eastern power plants, may end up having been The Big Mistake.