Railroads' role in helping U.S. achieve energy independence

[Anonymous]

A Win Win proposal might be in order given present technology and reserch available. Nuclear, Solvent Refined Coal (SRC) heat recapture, regeneration and the like. Who would like to look into this idea. Solar, wind and even biomass are still in their infancy and need reserch and reliability studies. What says the forum

[Junctionfan]

Toronto is using some wind turbines to reduce the demand on our existing grid. It has been very sucessful and in fact Ontario plans on substantially increase the amount of wind turbines. This of course isn't our only method to increase the strain but it is a relatively cheap method of increasing our power. We also have plans to build another hydro dam in Niagara Falls-the Adam Beck 3 I believe it's called.

I have know idea about what Ontario Power Generations plans on solar and the other alternatives. I do know that coal powered plants are to be phased out so I am keeping my ears peeled to see how sucessful it is.

[Junctionfan]

As far as electrification goes, third rail would be a more reasonable way of doing it. High winds make cantenary too inconvient and is really ugly looking. Third rail allows for double stacks and does not make issues with bridges and tunnels that can not accomidate for the overhead wires.

Of course it makes the system look like a giant O scale layout.[:D]

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

As far as electrification goes, third rail would be a more reasonable way of doing it. High winds make cantenary too inconvient and is really ugly looking. Third rail allows for double stacks and does not make issues with bridges and tunnels that can not accomidate for the overhead wires.

Of course it makes the system look like a giant O scale layout.[:D]

Now, hold on there!

High winds make catenary "inconvenient"? What do you mean? It's too hard to install and repair when it's windy? I have no idea if this is true, but, that would be a minor inconvenience. Do you mean you can't run trains on windy days? That would be just plain wrong. The NH-DC catenary's been around a while, and that's a pretty reliable stretch of RR, all things considered..

What about the danger of electricution from 3rd rail? Most 3rd rail installations are fully fenced in.

I won't even get into the voltage/voltage drop arguement....

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan


I have know idea about what Ontario Power Generations plans on solar and the other alternatives. I do know that coal powered plants are to be phased out so I am keeping my ears peeled to see how sucessful it is.

A good idea for the future, but a bit short sighted for your utilities in view of available resourses and technology that cleans traditional fuels to compliant standards. The loss of coal shipments to utilities would not bring much good to the rail companies their investors, employees or customers. Please remember that we are seeking for a win-win proposition. Intermodal by itself is only a partial answer for a commercial transportation company entering the 21st century.

[TH&B]

3rd rail is a good way to electricute switchmen and brakeman on the ground.

It is done on LIRR, but it's bad news, well cars and engine pilots can strike the 3rd rail and much of this equipement wich is standard everywhere else is restricted on Long Island.

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

As far as electrification goes, third rail would be a more reasonable way of doing it. High winds make cantenary too inconvient and is really ugly looking. Third rail allows for double stacks and does not make issues with bridges and tunnels that can not accomidate for the overhead wires.

Of course it makes the system look like a giant O scale layout.[:D]

Now, hold on there!

High winds make catenary "inconvenient"? What do you mean? It's too hard to install and repair when it's windy? I have no idea if this is true, but, that would be a minor inconvenience. Do you mean you can't run trains on windy days? That would be just plain wrong. The NH-DC catenary's been around a while, and that's a pretty reliable stretch of RR, all things considered..

What about the danger of electricution from 3rd rail? Most 3rd rail installations are fully fenced in.

I won't even get into the voltage/voltage drop arguement....

Haven't you seen those storms that knock down telephone and electric wires? Some states are prone to all kinds of annoying winds like Florida with hurricanes and Texas with Tornadoes. Than, ice and snow can weight down the lines and cause them to tumble from the weight. Just look what happened to the wires in Ontario and Quebec during that famous icestorm we had. There are a few states that can just as easilly get nailed by an Alberta Clipper.

As far as crews being electricuted, what about giving crews those boots and gloves that the electric companies wear when they work on the wires and about transformer stations?

[martin.knoepfel]

Except for subways, I know only one place where third rail electrification is used for main lines. southern england, and it is hopelessly outmoded.

it is still in use because British governments - both conservative and labour - have negelcted the railroads for decades.

when the British Railways electrified from London to the Midlands and to Scotland, they chose 25 kv 50 Hz AC with catenary. this sais enough as for prospects of third rail.

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 440cuin

3rd rail is a good way to electricute switchmen and brakeman on the ground.

It is done on LIRR, but it's bad news, well cars and engine pilots can strike the 3rd rail and much of this equipement wich is standard everywhere else is restricted on Long Island.

Sounds like some insulation innovation is required than if this is to be something thought of for the future.

[TH&B]

MK- Don't you consider the LIRR as maimline with 3rd rai? I do. So is the main line between Harmon and Grand Central Station.

J- Another big problem with 3rd rail is snow on the ground, this of course is not as big a problem for subway trains because they are mostly under ground.

[Overmod]

HVDC is not a practical technology for sliding power distribution -- or for applications where very thick and heavy insulating construction cannot be provided. There are relatively hard limits on third-rail voltage imposed by its proximity to ties, ground, etc., particularly in rain or bad weather that induces a better path from rail to ground. The substantially higher return current in the track requires better bonding (and in my opinion leads to higher galvanic issues as well).

A possible place for third-rail service is on helper or pusher districts, to supply additional power via relatively cheap means. This would not 'replace' diesel operation over this trackage, simply provide a means of 'boosting' performance without commensurate fuel burn. I have looked into this opportunity, and some of the enabling technology should be quite inexpensive. I don't think that third rail is a particularly good general railroad solution for long-distance full freight electrification, however; I also note that all current FRA development of electrification systems is predicated on relatively high-speed passenger operation, and 110mph operation on third rail is NOT a particularly attractive technical requirement...

The Harmon to GCT electrification was state-of-the-art... for the turn of the century. It is quite capable for passenger work, but even in its best days the speed achieved was not particularly high. I can't imagine it extended to serve the needs of particularly heavy freight... or fast service either; it's not at all easy to build a high-current high-speed pickup for conventional third-rail (either overrunning or underrunning) that fits in the required locations and won't set the train on fire (as so many of the '50s attempts seemed to do!). You will also have some substantial engineering, implementation, and maintenance problems trying to do distributed peak-power generation with locomotives feeding third rail.

Conversely, modern AC catenary (the dynamically-suspended kind) solves these issues rather well. The ice problem is relatively easily addressed by running periodic trains that break the ice off the trolley, messenger, and hangers with vibration; it isn't difficult to use resistant heating elements in the catenary and pulloffs when necessary. We've done some studies on adapting trolleybus multiconductor overhead to railroad traction applications; I don't yet see insurmountable problems with the technology.

Note that I am NOT necessarily advocating the use of the overhead-wire infrastructure to carry grid AC power directly (although this was the gist of the Meadowlands cat-bridge project I mentioned earlier). To a certain extent, the area directly over railroad lines could be used for AC longlines (particularly the 'lollipop' multiphase line designs) -- the towers would have to be constructed to allow necessary overhead clearance, but it might actually be easier to arrange the pulloffs, hangers etc. for the high clearances required for stack trains in this sort of design, as opposed to portal-frame style catenary bridges or other ground-planted support with high legs (and hence high bending moment) relative to their cross-span. One note is that sagging of the actual main powerline conductors under overload conditions can be substantial, and this may have serious implications regarding the necessary height of the power towers over the railroad ROW.

I suspect that buried HVDC lines adjacent to the ROW (they can coexist quite nicely with fiber-optic cabling, btw) represents a more workable sort of solution. The railroad catenary infrastructure here might be considered a 'quid pro quo' for the colocation rights for HVDC lines, with the additional benefit of distributed peak-power connection... at least that's the way I've been developing some of the economic models.

What's the general consensus of the experienced heads on this list about the 'best' technologies for nuclear development?

With respect to SRC -- are there accessible studies on its storage stability and other characteristics?

[dldance]

If one were to start with a clean sheet of paper on railroad electrification, there are very interesting technologies which can improve the reliability and safety - whether cat or 3rd rail.

One is the application of computer controlled power dispatching. Under this system, most of the electrical system would be at very low voltage most of the time. In reponse to the train signaling system, with further control from dispatching, voltage would jump to railroad power levels a few seconds before the engines arrive in that block and then drop back to low control voltage after the engines had passed. This is very similar to the way that model railroads operate. Properly designed, most of the train would be over(under) dead power leads for safety.

The second idea requires much more research, but GM developed an inductive method for connecting the 220v charging power to battery powered cars. With this method, a person could be in contact with both the power source and the car at the same time - without causing a short or conducting power through the body. The only thing that would allow power transfer is a matching inductor in each locomotive.

Just a few things to think about.

dd

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dldance

If one were to start with a clean sheet of paper on railroad electrification, there are very interesting technologies which can improve the reliability and safety - whether cat or 3rd rail.

One is the application of computer controlled power dispatching. Under this system, most of the electrical system would be at very low voltage most of the time. In reponse to the train signaling system, with further control from dispatching, voltage would jump to railroad power levels a few seconds before the engines arrive in that block and then drop back to low control voltage after the engines had passed. This is very similar to the way that model railroads operate. Properly designed, most of the train would be over(under) dead power leads for safety.

Interesting. On the one hand, this method could reduce attenuation losses in the overhead wires. On the other hand, wouldn't this type of system hamper the ability of downhill trains to return power to the system via regenerative braking systems?

[Overmod]

Computer power dispatching doesn't impair regenerative connectivity. Note that the dispatching system works in 'blocks' that are activated by train occupancy. A train doing regenerative braking is still occupying a block, and the same connections that provide high traction power to trains in a block can very simply be arranged to handle or sink the current from trains producing current instead...

[Anonymous]

Well the discussion is at least far reaching

[jeaton]

jchnhtfd

[Anonymous]

Yeah Jamie, but remember getting to yes often means that there is more than one answer, logic or no logic to what an engineer knows is the best answer there's always a bunch that make up a majority that will shout him down. By the way, I'm an old Civil Inspector with Nuc/Fossill/Hydro (NFH) construction Certs (what used to be called Level II). I know your point and mostly agree with it. Unfortunatly more dissagree with us than agree. SRC as a by product may be a place to find some alliances toward getting the U.S. back in the Nuc business while we still have enough crafts persons that know how to do the work. That combines, Utilities, Coal miners, Railroads, Steel folks, buildiong and trades folks and not a few investors that know a good thing when they see it. I do have to give you this, I think your right - Roy

[daveklepper]

Third rail should be the solution for tunnels where raising clearances for caternary would be expensive. The third rail would be between the rails, Lionel like, and energized only when a train was in the tunnel. Voltage would be about 750V and this may require mutliple droppable "skates" to pick up the required current throught the tunnel. Just because the long distance transmission for the power companies would be DC, there is no reason why the say 20,000V catenary outside the tunnels need be DC if AC is the engineering solution for cost effectiveness.

I see too many objections on this thread that indicate the objectors have not really thought through all the possible answers to their objections.

Some of the electrifications may be planned for high speed rail, such as any further upgrade of the NE Corridor or its extension to Portland ME and Richmond, VA, although even there freight must be accommocated. But most new electrification would be planned primarily for more economy and greater capacity in freight movement, with residual benefit to commuter and Amtrak operations that may use part of this trackage

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

As far as electrification goes, third rail would be a more reasonable way of doing it. High winds make cantenary too inconvient and is really ugly looking. Third rail allows for double stacks and does not make issues with bridges and tunnels that can not accomidate for the overhead wires.

Of course it makes the system look like a giant O scale layout.[:D]

Now, hold on there!

High winds make catenary "inconvenient"? What do you mean? It's too hard to install and repair when it's windy? I have no idea if this is true, but, that would be a minor inconvenience. Do you mean you can't run trains on windy days? That would be just plain wrong. The NH-DC catenary's been around a while, and that's a pretty reliable stretch of RR, all things considered..

What about the danger of electricution from 3rd rail? Most 3rd rail installations are fully fenced in.

I won't even get into the voltage/voltage drop arguement....

Haven't you seen those storms that knock down telephone and electric wires? Some states are prone to all kinds of annoying winds like Florida with hurricanes and Texas with Tornadoes. Than, ice and snow can weight down the lines and cause them to tumble from the weight. Just look what happened to the wires in Ontario and Quebec during that famous icestorm we had. There are a few states that can just as easilly get nailed by an Alberta Clipper.

As far as crews being electricuted, what about giving crews those boots and gloves that the electric companies wear when they work on the wires and about transformer stations?

This just isn't a problem on the NEC. When freezing rain occurs, sometimes they'll run with both pans up, but I've never seen trains have significant difficultly because of icing on the catenary.

I have seen freezing rain and snow cause problems with overrunning 3rd rail, though. Chicago has even gone as far at to apply electric heat tracing along the 3rd rail to keep it from icing. This is a big bucks solution!

Wind only causes problems with wires when it blows trees into them. I have never known of such a problem on the NEC - Amtrak keeps the trees trimmed back. The usual catenary problems are trains knocking down the wires, I suspect because the wires are near their fatigue life. I have even had my SEPTA commute be delayed because of squirrels in the substation (they were squirrel vapor at that point) , but never because of wind in the wires.

[Junctionfan]

Yes but we are talking about (at least I think we are talking about) wiring up the entire U.S railways. NEC is fortunate but what about the other lines?

[TH&B]

J- Dealing with ice, if the whole continent can be filled with overhead transmision lines all over the place, why wouldn't the railroads be able to have catenary?

DaveK- Why would you put the 3rd rail between the rails Lionel like, instead of outside the rails like on subway lines?

[Junctionfan]

Cantenary is possible but would be kind of difficult for double stacks and excess height railcars like the high cube box cars and the automaxes. Now if you raise the wires to accomidate them, you need to raise the clearance of the bridges and tunnels too. Gets kind of expensive and tasking to alter everything for the wires.

I don't know if it is possible but I wonder if it is possible to do a combination. Wires for lines and third rail for tunnels and underpasses?

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

Yes but we are talking about (at least I think we are talking about) wiring up the entire U.S railways. NEC is fortunate but what about the other lines?

Brush cutters will work in the south and west, too.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

Cantenary is possible but would be kind of difficult for double stacks and excess height railcars like the high cube box cars and the automaxes. Now if you raise the wires to accomidate them, you need to raise the clearance of the bridges and tunnels too. Gets kind of expensive and tasking to alter everything for the wires.

I don't know if it is possible but I wonder if it is possible to do a combination. Wires for lines and third rail for tunnels and underpasses?

Most of the clearance work for DS was done by undercutting. Not too difficult to go another foot down, if you need to. Tunnels can sometimes be undercut, too, depending on their construction. And, I think some of the heavy duty DS tunnel work allowed some extra clearance for future "growth". Stringing the wire is the big expense.

[mloik]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

Apparently, Plutonium for example which is 94 on the periodic table, can be rendered an inert gas if an element with a higher number was introduced to it like Lawrencium which is 103. Does anybody know of this?

Junctionfan,

Like most of the actinide elements, Lawrencium (Lr, element 103, atomic weight 262), has only been observed under extremely specific conditions (i.e. inside particle-accelerating cyclotrons), and only a VERY limited number of times. You can't just go to your friendly, neighborhood Lawrencium supplier and buy a tank of it to spray onto a pile of Plutonium. Lr was first detected in 1961 after bombarding a mixture of isotopes of Californium with heavy Boron. Moreover, it has a half-life of 8 seconds (although a lighter isotope had a half-life of 35 s)...not much time to make it useful, even if you had a lot of it. It has been observed so few times that is it considered probably a solid at 273 K (0 degrees Celsius), and probably would have a metallic look if you had enough of it to view it. We don't even know how it would react with air or water.

As for bombarding P with Lr: I'd stand waaaay back. There would be very little that was inert about the particles that would be emitted.

Michael

[mudchicken]

(1) The cost of the changeover is prohibitive (pointed out justifiably multiple times)

(2) Why do people think that ALL the power put out at the generating site automatically gets to the end user(s)????

(3) Why do people think that electricity is automatically cleaner than portable diesel electric generators on wheels (aka diesel locomotives)????All you are doing is moving the emissions point source to some other guy's backyard and evil is conserved.

[(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D]

[Paul Milenkovic]

oltmannd:

I was able to ride one of your SEPTA trains a couple weekends ago. I was in Philly for a scientific conference, and I took the train from Pennsylvania Convention Center out to the airport. I talked to a British colleague who said he rode the train in from the airport and liked it a whole lot -- SEPTA gets high marks from the international train-riding community.

Hey everybody, did you know you could fly into Phily, a $5.50 train ride leaves just outside baggage claim every half hour and can take you to Amtrak station where you can hop on the NEC? Trying doing anything that cool anywhere else. I hope the service holds together after the big cost crunch situation by the end of the year.

By the way, I remember riding a Silverliner MU car from Metro Park, NJ to Trenton about 20 years ago (a commuter train on the NEC), and I remember the acceleration and traction motor gearing to be streetcar/electric trolley bus kind of fast -- the SEPTA MUs run smooth but I didn't notice the same rush of adrenelin. Does SEPTA run the same kind of MU over its entire network or is it a mix of Diesel and electric like NJT? Who makes your MU cars these days now that Budd is out of the business?

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken

(1) The cost of the changeover is prohibitive (pointed out justifiably multiple times)

(2) Why do people think that ALL the power put out at the generating site automatically gets to the end user(s)????

(3) Why do people think that electricity is automatically cleaner than portable diesel electric generators on wheels (aka diesel locomotives)????All you are doing is moving the emissions point source to some other guy's backyard and evil is conserved.

[(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D]

Mudchicken you have a nice way of putting forth the $ 64,000 question. Said like a true student of human nature and professor of life as it really is, Good post!!!-----[^]

[Junctionfan]

QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken

(1) The cost of the changeover is prohibitive (pointed out justifiably multiple times)

(2) Why do people think that ALL the power put out at the generating site automatically gets to the end user(s)????

(3) Why do people think that electricity is automatically cleaner than portable diesel electric generators on wheels (aka diesel locomotives)????All you are doing is moving the emissions point source to some other guy's backyard and evil is conserved.

[(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D]

If the power plants don't output toxic fumes like coal powered plants, than all is o.k.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Junctionfan

QUOTE: Originally posted by mudchicken

(1) The cost of the changeover is prohibitive (pointed out justifiably multiple times)

(2) Why do people think that ALL the power put out at the generating site automatically gets to the end user(s)????

(3) Why do people think that electricity is automatically cleaner than portable diesel electric generators on wheels (aka diesel locomotives)????All you are doing is moving the emissions point source to some other guy's backyard and evil is conserved.

[(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D][(-D]

If the power plants don't output toxic fumes like coal powered plants, than all is o.k.

Junctionfan: I really did not want to say this, but it really would help if you knew something about the modern compliant coal fired generating plants which are the only kind you can build in the U.S. Please do also remember that those coal plants are a primary sorse of healthy income to your favorite industry in the U.S. (railroads). We do not have the resorses your great country has when it comes to Hydo electric sites in the U.S. and are even beginning to retire and destroy them due to their adverse impact on the environment. Be careful friend don't cut yourself off from reality when it comes to commercial enterprises