Wind-Generated Electricity to Power Calgary's C-Train
By Ron CollinsCalgary TransitCalgary, AL
C-Train light rail customers in Calgary will being "Riding the Wind!" in September, when Calgary Transit becomes the first public transit system in North America to power its light rail transit system with wind-generated electricity. This program, being developed in partnership with Vision Quest Windelectric and Enmax, will provide 100 percent pollution-free operation on the system.
Under the new, innovative program, Vision Quest has installed 12 additional turbines at its wind farm in southern Alberta and is selling wind-generated power to Enmax, Calgary Transit's supplier of electricity. The entire 100 car C-Train fleet will be driven by wind power, resulting in no pollutants being released into the environment.
The elimination of emissions from the C-Train system is expected to contribute significantly to the city of Calgary's goal to reduce its corporate carbon dioxide emissions.
"We are a leader in this area, and proud of the fact that our customers can ride the C-Train knowing we have taken this significant step towards reducing the environmental impact of urban transportation," said Calgary Transit General Manager John Hubbell.
In May, Calgary Transit's "Ride the Wind" project received a Federation of Canadian Municipalities CH2M HILL Sustainable Community Award for leadership in renewable energy.
The use of wind-generated electricity to power the C-Train system will avoid the annual generation of 26,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide that would have been produced by the burning of coal or natural gas for the generation of electricity for the system. This is equivalent to eliminating 7.5 million vehicle trips in Calgary annually. Levels of other pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide, will also be reduced.
The program also is expected to provide greater budget stability for Calgary Transit by establishing a 10-year price structure for C-Train traction power. This structure will significantly reduce uncertainty that has resulted from the recent volatility in the Power Power Pool price of electricity.
Operational costs of using wind-powered generation may increase at a nominal premium of one-half of 1 percent per passenger. However, when compared to the environmental benefits, Calgary Transit believes this is a small price to pay.
Travel via C-Train provides an environmentally friendly alternative to private vehicles, with a three-car C-Train carrying the passenger equivalent of 545 private vehicles.
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
tatans wrote:All this is wonderful, now comes the reality, Just what is the cost from day one to the present, including massive expansion, new equipment, total maintenance etc etc etc etc etc and ALL costs associated including the cost of purchasing electricity from windfarms. This figure(if ever published) will be so astronomical as not to be believed. There has to be a limit to any system and you can believe the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the C-train will result in many other facilities suffering, regardless of the vast wealth created by the oil patch.
Stop and add up the money spent on buying R/W, grading, paving, restriping, repaving, plowing snow, providing police and EMTs that are spent on supplying streets for people to drive on. The cost of the C-line will pale in comparision.
....Wind powered generators are springing up in many locations. I've witnessed a group of them near my home area of Somerset, Pa.
They are operational now for several years and seem to be successful as more are in the planning stage and to be built in the general area.
They seem to run rather consistently....I've been right to the sight and witnessed their operation and they do so without much noise at all. Info on a display at the sight indicates they will operate in winds of 8 to 55 mph. And controlled {directionally, etc. by computers}, for any direction of winds.
Hopefully that system and many others springing up around the country are powering all kinds of operations that would be burning foriegn oil imports if they were not up and running.
Quentin
Technically the Monorail in Seattle is powered entirely by hydro-electric power made in the dams on Washington state rivers. (I am pretty sure that Seattle gets all of its electricity from hydro-electric dams.)
Having wind powered trains is a great idea. Windmills if they are put up in the right areas should be ablt to produce plenty of electricity to run a train.
I hope this idea catches on!
cnr wrote:Great,Wind power may not realy be that expensive if you have a windy place. At least you don't constatly have to buy fuels at fluctuating prices.440cuin
What happens if there is no wind?
solzrules wrote:What happens if there is no wind?
The train runs real slow
Everyone has to get out and push
They have exercise bicycles hooked up to generators for each passenger
solzrules wrote: What happens if there is no wind?
I'd be willing to bet that the power generated by the turbines when in normal operation will exceed the needs of the transit line, resulting in a credit they will draw from when there is no wind and they have to take power from the grid.
Capital and maintenance costs nowithstanding, you can't get get any freer power.
One planned wind farm in my area is getting substantial opposition. They cite visual pollution, a danger to birds and the endangered brown bat. I think the turbines I've seen around here (and we have a major installation just to the south) are quite graceful. When you factor in that they are generating pollution-free power, a little visual pollution is nothing. Better the turbines than a big coal-fired power plant. NIMBY, BANANA...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
.....I really can't fully understand why so many are against producing power from wind powered generators....
They seem harmless enough to me and I've been right to their base and witnessed their operation several times.
They make min. noise and what danger they create is lost on the way I see them.
The sites are chosen carefully so there is a wind strong enough to move the massive blades {some 95' in length}, to turn the generator. a high % of the time. As I mentioned before the ones I witnessed will run in a wind 8 to 55 mph to do the work they are designed to do.
They stand there gracefully and their blades rotate and not much else happens as they do their work of producing power to feed into a grid system. Pollution free.
If the customer is using more than they produce the power will be taken from the grid as stated above, etc.....Probably most are connected to the grid in the first place and simply add to the supply on the grid available for general use.
Modelcar wrote: .....I really can't fully understand why so many are against producing power from wind powered generators....They seem harmless enough to me and I've been right to their base and witnessed their operation several times.They make min. noise and what danger they create is lost on the way I see them.The sites are chosen carefully so there is a wind strong enough to move the massive blades {some 95' in length}, to turn the generator. a high % of the time. As I mentioned before the ones I witnessed will run in a wind 8 to 55 mph to do the work they are designed to do.They stand there gracefully and their blades rotate and not much else happens as they do their work of producing power to feed into a grid system. Pollution free.If the customer is using more than they produce the power will be taken from the grid as stated above, etc.....Probably most are connected to the grid in the first place and simply add to the supply on the grid available for general use.
I have noticed those things as well. They are quiet and graceful. They are generating power pollution-free. However, enviromentalists have problems with these as well because they are a 'visual pollutant'. (I had to read that several time because I thought they were kidding at first). Enviros also claim that wind turbines kill all kinds of birds. I have even heard some emotionally charged individuals sobbing (yes sobbing) that wind turbines would kill millions of birds annually. They were wondering-as the tears were streaming down their faces-how we could be so hateful and hurtful that we would willingly kill all these birds just to produce electricity.
This occured during WE Energies' recent proposal to build additional wind farms around Allenton, WI. At this point I decided that enviromentalists are lunatics. There is no keeping anyone happy.
....That really is silly of being afraid of massive bird kills as the blades rotate. So silly. Those blades rotate at a leisurely speed that I'm sure birds are able to determine to stay clear of them.
Birds having the ability to fly {and stay alive through it all}, I'm sure they would be able to "see" those rotating blades as to not try to land on them...So silly.
As for being a visual pollutant...{The wind mill towers and blades, etc...}, I for sure can't see it. They just stand gracefully out in a field or hill top and do the job of producing power almost silent. The power lines are even buried in the group that I am familiar with back in my home area in Somerset Co., Pa.
I realize one can't please everyone with the same ideas and process but this is just my opinion on these machines that produce pollution free electricity.
Datafever wrote:One merely needs to visit the site of a radio transmission tower (which utilizes guy lines to keep it upright) to realize that birds are already being killed by the millions.
spokyone wrote: Datafever wrote:One merely needs to visit the site of a radio transmission tower (which utilizes guy lines to keep it upright) to realize that birds are already being killed by the millions.DF Not the same thing. The blades are visible, just like a hawk. Wires are hard to see. I have visited the wind farms in NW Iowa, walking around below them. I saw birds in the air and not a dead one anywhere. If they miss my truck, they can miss a prop. Maybe it is the motion that the birds detect.
Thanks, spokyone. Poor job of expressing myself again. My intent was that the bird-loving environmentalists are attacking the wrong target.
Datafever wrote: spokyone wrote: Datafever wrote:One merely needs to visit the site of a radio transmission tower (which utilizes guy lines to keep it upright) to realize that birds are already being killed by the millions.DF Not the same thing. The blades are visible, just like a hawk. Wires are hard to see. I have visited the wind farms in NW Iowa, walking around below them. I saw birds in the air and not a dead one anywhere. If they miss my truck, they can miss a prop. Maybe it is the motion that the birds detect.Thanks, spokyone. Poor job of expressing myself again. My intent was that the bird-loving environmentalists are attacking the wrong target.
Most of the opposition to wind farms seems to be coming from people who are ignorant of the environmental impact studies that have been done on wind farms. I am a " bird-loving environmentalist" and a supporter of the use of wind turbines to create electricity. It has been proven that the turbines do not pose a large danger to birds because the wind turbulence around the blades actually pushes the birds around the blades not into them. As far as "visual pollution" I actually find the appearance of the turbines I have seen in California to be attractive and that is not even comparing them to the ugly concrete nuclear power plants, dirty smog creating coal fired power plants and the dams that have destroyed many wild rivers and pristine wildernesses in the West. --Imagine fields of gleaming wind turbines gracing the hills and plains creating clean quite electricity.--
jclass wrote:Do these people think a dead tree is visual pollution?
I don't think so, but I can say that I probably can't speak for nay environmentalist who doesn't support wind generated electricity.
A dead tree is "natural" and provides habitat - as long as it doesn't interfere with my view.
A significant number of these folks go beyond "NIMBY" (not in my back yard) to "BANANA" (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything).
Anyone else remember the article years ago in Model Railroad Craftsman about the rail line in Holland that carried passengers out over the dikes on a two axle flatcar with a SAIL on it? Now that is wind powered transit ....
Dave Nelson
Yes, Dave. I think I remember that article. For some reason I was thinking it was located in Germany, but maybe that was a different article (in TRAINS?).
I've wondered if in some situations a system could be engineered where a train with a track with an upgrade at each end would be useful that would use only gravity for "propulsion".
jclass wrote: I've wondered if in some situations a system could be engineered where a train with a track with an upgrade at each end would be useful that would use only gravity for "propulsion".
In a perfect world, yes. However, friction losses would require some outside form of propulsion or the train would never make it back up the 'other' hill.
On the other hand - there are dozens, if not hundreds of rail systems that operate using gravity as a primary source of propulsion - roller coasters. Not necessarily a good commuter option, but...
...Uh....Larry.....The roller coaster....Don't you think you better count the power source that elevates the coaster cars to the top of the incline as the "primary source of energy" to do the work of the coaster......
Modelcar wrote: ...Uh....Larry.....The roller coaster....Don't you think you better count the power source that elevates the coaster cars to the top of the incline as the "primary source of energy" to do the work of the coaster......
I'll grant that - to a point (and did consider it in crafting my previous post). However, once the coaster is at the top, gravity generally does the rest of the work. It's a rare coaster that has more than one chain. And the chain does not, in itself, impart the speed - that's all gravity. If friction were not a factor, you could board a coaster at its highest point - which it would reach again after running around the rest of the course.
In the context suggested, a chain would be required at each end to gain enough elevation to make the train reach the other end.
Gravity can assist. How about a horse as a power source? In Denver, there was a well known horse car, Cherrelyn, that was propelled uphill by a horse and on the way downhill, the horse rode on the rear platform...In Ontario, California, the horse rode on a special trailer.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.