Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
QUOTE: Originally posted by joegreen So if they do get the coal line then will they send that coal to Chicago? I'm wondering because I do a lot of railfanning on the IC&E and I'd like to know if they will go to Chicago that way.
QUOTE: I bet DM&E will have to buy a lot of coal hoppers if they get the line.
"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
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
QUOTE: Originally posted by smalling_60626 Does this mean the DM&E won't have to connect with the UP/BNSF line into PRB -- the one that had the washouts? Is the proposed route the original route by Rapid City and Belle Fourche?
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Off topic: I know the writer of the article, Peter Harriman. He was one of my old running chums back in Moscow ID. On topic: Of course DME will need public funds. All rail projects today use public funds. And given the liabilities private debt holders would face if the current pro-coal Congress and Admininstration were replaced by an anti-coal party, it's not suprising private cash was scarce for this project.
QUOTE: Originally posted by smalling_60626 as proposed the line would have swung south from Kadoka/Wall area (I think I remember) to hook up with the PRB triple. Which turned out not to be the best idea, maybe, because of the devastation??
Brian (IA) http://blhanel.rrpicturearchives.net.
QUOTE: Originally posted by blhanel QUOTE: Originally posted by smalling_60626 as proposed the line would have swung south from Kadoka/Wall area (I think I remember) to hook up with the PRB triple. Which turned out not to be the best idea, maybe, because of the devastation?? No kidding! How would they avoid the badlands?
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe The lack of private investment says it all. Railroads are already undercutting one another for better rates in the Powder River Basin, this will just make things worse. I think this is going to go down in history as a collasal blunder with lobyists and power companies to blame. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe The lack of private investment says it all. Railroads are already undercutting one another for better rates in the Powder River Basin, this will just make things worse. I think this is going to go down in history as a collasal blunder with lobyists and power companies to blame. Gabe Skeptic me wonders if it will ever get done? As a side note: On a recent thread about bio-diesel in ND, I asked why none of the ethanol plants were coal-fired. This seemed like a perfect compliment for rail operations to me. The newspaper mentions just that thought, without elaboration. Do you think someone is reading this message board, and **stealing** my thoughts?[:-,][}:)]
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe The lack of private investment says it all. Railroads are already undercutting one another for better rates in the Powder River Basin, this will just make things worse. I think this is going to go down in history as a collasal blunder with lobyists and power companies to blame. Gabe Rates out of the PRB are going up, because demand is exceeding the railroads' ability to deliver. The reason for the lack of private investment is due to the political nature of coal. This project has to have long term ROI's just by it's nature, 20 or 30 years. Who knows, in ten years we might be back to politicians seeing coal as an anachronism. Perhaps coal gasification technologies will become much more commerially viable than is predicted, and since gasification precludes the need for low sulfer coals, demand for PRB coal might diminish, making the DME project superfluous. And the idea of new rail construction "making things worse" is straight from the AAR subtext. It does make things worse if you are a monopolist, it makes things better if the railroad industry wants to actually increase business coverage.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Swafford You just may be right but don’t forget the UP and BNSF. They may want to keep their monopoly on the Powder River Basin! Best regards, Swafford
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal If indeed BNSF and UP are competitors for PRB coal haulage, then they are a duopoly. If there is collusion between BNSF and UP to manipulate rates higher, the effect is monopolistic.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.