Trains.com

diesel fumes problem at Rensselaer?

5602 views
33 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 302 posts
Posted by JT22CW on Friday, July 18, 2014 8:38 PM

henry6
But our strength could just choke us all to death! Lots to say against keeping the status quo in energy use and its not just the environment either. We've got to move with solar, wind, and other energies and not be behind the rest of the world choking on our own stupidity and greed

No nation ever choked to death by its strength.  Always by weakness do nations fall.

The USA is anything but "behind the rest of the world" in terms of what energy sources we and they use. Putting faith in "renewables" that are not is what may choke a nation's economy.  Not even Germany, who (depending on the source) often boasts use of solar for over 50 percent of its power needs (a much-debated figure), can do without conventional power sources, whether coal, oil or natural gas.

The entire world is troubled by both stupidity (a term with a very loose definition) and greed.  Those countries whose philosophy is based on anything having to do with Marx or the Fabian Society are more troubled by those problems than those whose philosophy is not.  What is holding the USA back behind anyone else in the world is the failure to develop our resources—and that is the only fact that can be cited here.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 9:35 PM

dakotafred
Schlimm has just demonstrated why not just the energy companies but all U.S. residents should be rooting for development of these reserves. It's called going with our strength, as opposed to being held up by a lot of foreign crazies or waiting for that remote day that new technologies are capable of replacing  -- I said replacing -- fossil fuels.

More and more corporate interests, as well as landowners with holdings on coasts, are realizing we have a lot more to lose by continuing to feed the greed of the oil companies.   And the interim report to the UN emphasizes electric generation, including not only using renewables, but also nuclear and natural gas and coal using carbon capture and sequestration strategies already developed. 

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 9:01 PM
But our strength could just choke us all to death! Lots to say against keeping the status quo in energy use and its not just the environment either. We've got to move with solar, wind, and other energies and not be behind the rest of the world choking on our own stupidity and greed.

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 8:35 PM

schlimm

henry6
However, we have an energy cartel in this country which continues to hold us to coal and oil because 1) their investment nest eggs are there and, 2) they don't want to think nor want us to think, they don't want our politicians to think anything else. Politicians are afraid of change. Energy companies are afraid of losing lots of change if we went with more rail and more electric rail.

How true!!  In the US alone, the proven reserves of oil, coal and natural gas are worth in today's dollars $28.5 trillion.  Canada another $20.2 trillion.  If anyone thinks for one second the companies that control such assets are going to look favorably at conservation and developing sustainable sources, i.e., anything that reduces the value of their assets, "there are several fine old bridges I can offer you quite cheaply."

 
Schlimm has just demonstrated why not just the energy companies but all U.S. residents should be rooting for development of these reserves. It's called going with our strength, as opposed to being held up by a lot of foreign crazies or waiting for that remote day that new technologies are capable of replacing  -- I said replacing -- fossil fuels.
 
That day is surely not yet. Although, Henry notwithstanding, most North Dakota utilities -- can't speak for his -- are getting into wind as backup and (no doubt) a genuflection toward modern public relations. 
 
 
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Somewhere in North Texas
  • 1,080 posts
Posted by desertdog on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 8:10 PM

Something similar is happening in Portland, OR: http://koin.com/2014/06/09/neighborhood-using-drone-to-keep-residents-safe/

John Timm

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 6:51 PM

Lemme see here, there's been a railyard at Renssalear for HOW long?  People in the area certainly knew it was there, and the diesel fumes are only becoming a problem NOW?

Sounds like those whiners who buy a house near a airport because it's cheap and then complain about the noise, or people who buy a place out in the country and then complain about the "Eau de Bovine"  that fills the air.

By God, I wish Commodore Vanderbilt were still alive!  HE'D know what to do!  Probably beat up the complainers, personally.

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 302 posts
Posted by JT22CW on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 1:38 PM

blue streak 1
ndbprr
Every step has inherent losses making electricity the most expensive form of power and may use more fossil fuel then using it directly
Some posters here might challenge that statement.  The new GE gas turbine recuperative standby (or continuous) electric generating system is stated to have a BTU to KW recovery of about 52%. This is a multi-fuel turbine that can use cheap natural gas (gas is the most efficient). Diesel Locos only recover 20-25%?

There is also the matter of operational energy efficiency.  Electric locos are 90+ percent efficient and regenerative braking returns power to the grid versus losing that energy as heat.  Never mind that if electricity per se was "the most expensive form of power", then all diesel-powered locomotives would be diesel-mechanical or diesel-hydraulic.

If grid power was truly inefficient, then every home would have its own permanent electric generator.  The matter of transmitting power at high voltage with minimal losses overcomes just about all notions of doing something like that, though.  Also, Germany has been looking into using active railroad alignments for high-voltage power transmission—which is something that the USA only does with abandoned railroad alignments (one example off the top of my head is that of the former "Newark-Trenton Fast Line" interurban railroad south of New Brunswick in New Jersey).

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 302 posts
Posted by JT22CW on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 1:30 PM

henry6
Trans Siberian RR is not 100% electrified but only in segments. Hudson Line is already third rail so why encumber the line with yet another structure and system? Dual locomotives will do the trick cheaper and with more versatility than a whole new structure...plus I like dualies for when power goes out as it often does, not by railroad but by power suppliers...

The TransSib has been 100 percent electrified end-to-end for 12 years thus far.

There are not enough trains running from New York City to Albany-Rensselaer to justify electrification either way.  And there are the problems with conflicting electrification systems as noted.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:51 AM

ndbprr

. Every step has inherent losses making electricity the most expensive form of power and may use more fossil fuel then using it directly.

 
Some posters here might challenge that statement.  The new GE gas turbine recuperative standby ( or continuous ) electric generating system is stated to have a BTU to KW recovery of about 52%.  This is a mulit fuel turbine that can use cheap natural gas  ( gas is the most efficient ) .  Diesel Locos only recover 20 - 25 % ?
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:23 AM
Trans Siberian RR is not 100% electrified but only in segments. Hudson Line is already third rail so why encumber the line with yet another structure and system? Dual locomotives will do the trick cheaper and with more versatility than a whole new structure...plus I like dualies for when power goes out as it often does, not by railroad but by power suppliers...

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 11:12 AM

NKP guy
   I notice no one commented on my observation that the Trans-Siberian Railroad is electrified.  How cost effective is that for them versus diesels?  Why is it a good idea in one country but anathema (to some) in ours?

The TSR has always been more of a strategic asset than a railroad built for profit. It runs through wilderness for quite a bit of its route. The railroad also has the state treasury behind it, without as much focus on ROI. Once electrification becomes cost effective, I think we will see it.  

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,530 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 10:52 AM

   If indeed this electrification of the old Hudson River Railroad were to be undertaken, would it not be a better idea to use overhead catenary, as on the NE Corridor, from Penn Station to Rensselaer?  At least Amtrak could use the same locomotives in both places.  The third rail could be kept for a while (even forever), but as new equipment is acquired it could use pantographs.  No doubt the sticking point, again, will be the low clearances into GCT.  But we're Americans: We can solve problems if we want to.  

   I notice no one commented on my observation that the Trans-Siberian Railroad is electrified.  How cost effective is that for them versus diesels?  Why is it a good idea in one country but anathema (to some) in ours?

(And thanks to the moderator!)



  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 10:35 AM
UH...ah...Yes! Senior moment...lame excuse but...

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • 964 posts
Posted by gardendance on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 9:41 AM

henry6
True, 24 trains is not a mandate for electrifying but, since the electrification would only have to be installed from Poughkeepsie to Albany, it would in effect be an extension of the present MNRR system and could lead to additional service

Did you mean Croton-Harmon to Albany?

Patrick Boylan

Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message

Moderator
  • Member since
    August 2002
  • From: Waukesha, WI
  • 217 posts
Posted by Angela Pusztai-Pasternak on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 8:46 AM

Please stop being rude to one another. Let's stick to the railroad topics and not venture off into insulting one another. It's not acceptable on this forum.

Thank you.

Angela Pusztai-Pasternak, Production Editor, Trains Magazine

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 7:54 AM
Corrrection: not West Shore Railroad but West Side line. West Shore Railroad was the present CSX River Line from NJ to Selkirk; West Side line is former NYC freight line to St. Johns Park.....concept of electric plug in station at Rennselear is intriguing as I've never heard of the idea before....True, 24 trains is not a mandate for electrifying but, since the electrification would only have to be installed from Poughkeepsie to Albany, it would in effect be an extension of the present MNRR system and could lead to additional service....problems private railroads have with electric are the initial construction costs vs. pay back and having increased property taxes because of property improvement and additional structures (or fear of)....

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • 7,486 posts
Posted by ndbprr on Wednesday, July 16, 2014 6:13 AM
I guess Great Northern, Mulwaukee Road and Conrail never got the memo about the benefits of electrification as well as several that studied it and found it too costly. How dare companies or citizens use the cheapest fuel available for their needs. Oh by the way, electricity doesn't just exist. You burn fuels to make steam which turn turbines which genrate electricity. Every step has inherent losses making electricity the most expensive form of power and may use more fossil fuel then using it directly.
  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:47 PM

Most of the engines in Rensselaer are dual modes.  So if idling engines are a real issue, why not set up a small bit of 3rd rail in the terminal at Rensselaer for HEP and air?  Wouldn't need to electrify the whole line.

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    December 2006
  • 302 posts
Posted by JT22CW on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:41 PM

NKP guy

   In light of today's news item about Amtrak's egregious fouling of the pristine air at Rensselaer, and thinking about rail passenger service generally in New York, is it not maybe time to think about electrifying the rest of the distance from Croton-Harmon upriver to Rensselaer?  Would this massive project pay for itself in, say, thirty years?  Fifty years?  

   Certainly creative financing could turn this into a needed infrastructure project with thousands of well-paying jobs for people in the Hudson Valley.

   By the way, I have over the years spent, as a result of my relentless riding of The Lake Shore Limited, so much time at Rensselaer that I almost qualify to vote there.  I know full well that the sensitivity these days in the Albany-Rensselaer area is more about Bakken crude  CSX trains in Albany, than Empire Service and The Lake Shore Limited.  Still, what about electrifying the old Hudson River Rail Road?

Amtrak has no electrification on the West Side Line from the new tunnel connecting it to New York Penn to the Bronx.  The former NY Central electrification is under-running third rail and Amtrak does not own that railroad so it cannot call the shots there, and it would most likely be very expensive to install dual electrification systems since Amtrak also owns no electric motor that can use the third rail in question.

In addition, the total number of Amtrak trains that operate between NYC and Rensselaer are about twelve daily in each direction, on average.  The economies of scale are not there to justify electrification, any more than they are there to justify rebuilding the old NYC route via Albany Union Station (which may take the trains away from the NIMBYs, interestingly enough, unless of course Prince Andrew Cuomo gets involved).

The current regulatory environment also suppresses any initiative by the private railroads to engage in their own electrification, whether Amtrak would be permitted to use same or not.  Liberal politicians talk a good game, but they won't walk the walk.

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • From: Mason City, Iowa
  • 901 posts
Posted by RRKen on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:35 PM

Murray

zugmann

Convicted One

What are you trying to do, Schimm? Upset the 'experts' and risk  their refusal to continue gracing this board with their upbeat character and sunny demeanor? Laugh

As opposed to your......?


 

Laugh

 

Schlimm and C.O. were born ignorant, and have been losing ground rapidly ever since.

BTW: There is no "PRISTINE" air in the greater Albany area.

It's all that New York State dairy air!

I never drink water. I'm afraid it will become habit-forming.
W. C. Fields
I never met a Moderator I liked
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:31 PM

zugmann

Convicted One

What are you trying to do, Schimm? Upset the 'experts' and risk  their refusal to continue gracing this board with their upbeat character and sunny demeanor? Laugh

As opposed to your......?


 

Laugh

 

Schlimm and C.O. were born ignorant, and have been losing ground rapidly ever since.

BTW: There is no "PRISTINE" air in the greater Albany area.

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:25 PM

Convicted One

What are you trying to do, Schimm? Upset the 'experts' and risk  their refusal to continue gracing this board with their upbeat character and sunny demeanor? Laugh

As opposed to your......?

Laugh

It's been fun.  But it isn't much fun anymore.   Signing off for now. 


  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • From: Mason City, Iowa
  • 901 posts
Posted by RRKen on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:21 PM

Convicted One

schlimm
 Keep in mind it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.  

What are you trying to do, Schimm? Upset the 'experts' and risk  their refusal to continue gracing this board with their upbeat character and sunny demeanor? Laugh

My demeanor has nothing to do with silly notions of illogical thinking.  Your paradigm of what you think railroading should be, and what those who actually RUN the industry know what actually can be done given the economics are two very different things.   I will trust those in charge of those private corporations over someone with zero experience or background.

And if  you think that is a bad attitude, so be it.

I never drink water. I'm afraid it will become habit-forming.
W. C. Fields
I never met a Moderator I liked
  • Member since
    May 2004
  • From: Mason City, Iowa
  • 901 posts
Posted by RRKen on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 8:11 PM

schlimm

RRKen

schlimm

If we had a truly modern rail infrastructure, that would be just one of many electrification of RoW projects.

You are as dumb as a box of rocks if you think any Class One such as UP or BN will electrify thier ROW's because think it is modern.  Who do you think is going to fund all that investment?  I am sure rate payers and shareholders would raise hell if they even thought of such a move.

Get real!

Frankly your typically crude responses to a fairly simple proposal suggest someone who is pretty insecure. You may well think it is best for railroads to continue to use locomotives that other intelligent folks have decided are outdated economically.  Had you read more carefully you would have noted I never said the shareholders should pay.  Keep in mind it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.  

Exactly who should/would pay?  Taxpayers?  You are hardly based in reality if that is the case.  Perhaps in the case of Amtrak or other passenger lines, I can see that happening.  But in the case of private railroads, with private property,  you are suggesting a socialist solution that will not fly in the U.S. Comrade!

I never drink water. I'm afraid it will become habit-forming.
W. C. Fields
I never met a Moderator I liked
  • Member since
    April 2007
  • 4,557 posts
Posted by Convicted One on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 6:59 PM

schlimm
 Keep in mind it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.  

What are you trying to do, Schimm? Upset the 'experts' and risk  their refusal to continue gracing this board with their upbeat character and sunny demeanor? Laugh

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,530 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 6:12 PM

   By specifically discussing electrification north from Croton-Harmon to Rensselaer it is implicit that this would primarily affect passenger trains. So I'm not asking about UP or BNSF.

   But now that you mention it, if the Trans-Siberian Railroad can be electrified its entire distance (and I think it is), why can't US roads do the same?  Wouldn't that, in the long run, be cost effective?  In thirty years?  Fifty years?

   Also, it's disappointing to see anyone here disparage another.  schlimm is absolutely right about disagreeing without being disagreeable.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, July 15, 2014 2:56 PM

RRKen

schlimm

If we had a truly modern rail infrastructure, that would be just one of many electrification of RoW projects.

You are as dumb as a box of rocks if you think any Class One such as UP or BN will electrify thier ROW's because think it is modern.  Who do you think is going to fund all that investment?  I am sure rate payers and shareholders would raise hell if they even thought of such a move.

Get real!

Frankly your typically crude responses to a fairly simple proposal suggest someone who is pretty insecure. You may well think it is best for railroads to continue to use locomotives that other intelligent folks have decided are outdated economically.  Had you read more carefully you would have noted I never said the shareholders should pay.  Keep in mind it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.  

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    May 2004
  • From: Mason City, Iowa
  • 901 posts
Posted by RRKen on Monday, July 14, 2014 9:03 PM

schlimm

If we had a truly modern rail infrastructure, that would be just one of many electrification of RoW projects.

You are as dumb as a box of rocks if you think any Class One such as UP or BN will electrify thier ROW's because think it is modern.  Who do you think is going to fund all that investment?  I am sure rate payers and shareholders would raise hell if they even thought of such a move.

Get real!

I never drink water. I'm afraid it will become habit-forming.
W. C. Fields
I never met a Moderator I liked
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Monday, July 14, 2014 4:59 PM

gardendance

May we please have a link to "today's news item about Amtrak's egregious fouling of the pristine air at Rensselaer". I can't convince my friend googoo to show it to me.

Do you not have access to News Wire, which is under Railroad News at the top of this screen?

Johnny

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

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