zkr123How come no other line has been electrified yet? It's been almost 60 years since Milwaukee road tore down the cross-country wires. It doesn't make sense.
Your question seems to be about both freight and passenger operations but I understand what you are asking.
It is very simple; the cost of building catenary systems is immense, much more so than when PRR/Milwaukee/New Haven ect. did it in the early 20th century. Even adjusted for inflation the actual capital outlay required is much,much higher.
BTW, Milwaukee Road pulled the plug on their electrification in the early 70's so it's been only 40 years....
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Except for PRR, most steam road electrifications were for suburban service or tunnels with some mountain operations. The tunnel operations were generally eliminated with dieselization. GN's and VGN's electrifications were eliminated because they no longer fit with the overall operation of their railroads.
If you finance what it necessary to implement electrical operation on the line of your choice, the catenary, power substations, electic locmotives and changes necessary to the signal system; and I am sure a carrier would undertake electrification. Without your 'grant' the carriers don't see the ROI on their investment in electrification, they see better returns on other uses of their scarce investment dollars.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Several points.
1. Construction Cost of the constant tension CAT is more that variable tension. The Newark airport station rebuilding did not get constant tension over the old or new tracks probably because of the higher cost ? The CT CAT advantage ? much less maintenance costs once in place. Have often wondered that the thru service from WAS to BOS on old PRR CAT causes excess wear on the PANs causing more wire pull downs & other failures on new CAT. Europe does not have as high percentage of CT CAT failures as it is almost all CT. Electrical power resources are another cost as well signal systems may need revising..
2. VGN shutting down may have come from the N&W purchase and no electrification on N&W for the directional running implemented.
3. MKE shut down has been speculated as expecting a positive cash flow from salvage but that did not happen.
4. Thru operation of diesel power terminated and would handicap time sensitive cargo by the necessary delays changing loco power including brake tests.
5. Electrification might have very positive returns to the bottom line at certain helper districts. down hill regeneration could provide some power to uphill trains. Horse shoe, Donner, and 17 mile a couple examples
5. The GN termination of cascade tunnel might be an example of tunnel re-electrification now needed to increase line capacity by not having to ventilate tunnels for another train.
Current MBA teachings are that businesses work to earn as much of their capital back as soon as possible and return the value to the investor/stockholder immediately and let the next generation investor/stockholder group worry what to do with the property. Thus since things like the installation of an electric propulsion system and the locomotives would be a long term operation rather than short term return on investment, diesels will be the American norm of railroading. Commuter lines are of course often government owned and operated and therefore can commit to long term investment and return and thus can install and expand electric operations. This quick return, no long term commitment, pertains not only to railroads but virtually to all industry today..
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.
henry6 Thus since things like the installation of an electric propulsion system and the locomotives would be a long term operation rather than short term return on investment, diesels will be the American norm of railroading. This quick return, no long term commitment, pertains not only to railroads but virtually to all industry today..
Thus since things like the installation of an electric propulsion system and the locomotives would be a long term operation rather than short term return on investment, diesels will be the American norm of railroading. This quick return, no long term commitment, pertains not only to railroads but virtually to all industry today..
Why do you think electrification does make sense, and what lines would you electrify? What is the ROI on your project? What is the ROI on alternative projects? Where is the investment capital to come from?
Railroads are not in the social engineering business they are in the haul stuff/people business. Low costs are better than high costs. High returns on investment are better than low returns. Why should your 401K managers invest in electrification?
Mac
HIgh costs of building is saved over long term of operation both in fuel consumption and power attained. Speed and efficiency of operation and other factors make it good. But as long as the business plan is for short term rewards, it can't happen and won't happen here.
You probably can make a case for electrification, but, lets's say you're Norfolk Southern. You already have an annual capital spending plan about as high as is practical. The discretionary part is to build out the Crescent corridor so you can capture new business. Suppose you divert that spending toward electrification. The best line for it would be Harrisburg to Pittsburgh. It might take you a few years to electrify that whole route. Are you getting much return until its totally built out? Not much. For example, you certainly aren't going to to engine changes at Lewistown for a year, then Altoona the year following, then Johnstown the year after. You have to get all the way to Conway for it to work.
Then, what of Mon Valley coal that uses the route. Do you string wire to West Brownsville? All the way to the various mines? Electrification only pays if you use it. Gotta get all the traffic on the route sucking juice.
What you wind up with a lot of money flowing out for years before any money starts flowing back into your pocket. Crecent Corridor generates cash flow right now.
Electrification may come, but there are bigger fish to fry at the moment. And, who knows? Maybe LNG/hybrid locomotives will show up first and be and even better investment. It's what happened last time out. Diesels "pulled the plug" on electrification that was building out in the first part of the 20th Century.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
But look at the corporate histories of American railroads and other businesses. There are "saviours" who come on the scene rebuilding and expanding and making money and putting money back into the business until an investor group or stockholders say, "Hey! Where's mine? " and at the next annual meeting management is overthrown and the progress and success goes away while the profits are turned into dividends and investor payoffs and maintenance is deferred, service and quality suffers so it comes time for another saviour to come and start the cycle over again. Our steel industry suffered this fate while foreign products became so cheap because the industry was paying dividends instead of retooling to be competitive with the likes of Japan, Korea,and Venezuela. We are at a time in this country's business cycle where investment is going into the plant instead of Caymen Island banks.. Look at CSX and their sidestepping of that British group which wanted to raid the kitty rather than fix up the railroad.
henry6 HIgh costs of building is saved over long term of operation both in fuel consumption and power attained. Speed and efficiency of operation and other factors make it good. But as long as the business plan is for short term rewards, it can't happen and won't happen here.
Henry,
You are claiming that for a large investment there will be ongoing cost savings. OK, lets test that hypothesis. That is what capital budgeting is all about. How much investment for how much savings year by year for the life of the project, say 30 years? Future year expenditures and costs evaluated on a Present Value basis using the hurdle rate set by management. Vague claims that "it will save money in the long run" are meaningless in the real economy.
If someone has a billion dollar investment that saves $10,000,000 per year they would be laughed out of the room if they were dumb enough to suggest it. $100,000,000 savings is 10%. Last I knew most rail managements would not consider projects with less than 15% pre tax-ROI, so you need to save at least $150,000,000 per year after paying the interest costs of say $60,000,000 per year. Interest is a real cash cost.
In addition, electrification is a fixed cost project. Fixed costs are OK if the volume is there to support it, but are hell in a down volume situation since the cost goes on regardless of volume. That is what fixed cost means.
The other issue is the sheer size. Ten $100,000,000 projects are better than one big billion dollar one holding projected ROI constant since they will be diversified, hence less risky. Electrification is a big egg that has to be watched very closely. It is more risky than a portfolio of smaller projects due to the diversification issue.
You are arguing my hypothesis with your hypothesis. So all you are doing is comparing them and not a real thing. If you could show me a real situation to blow me out of the water, find. In the meantime it is nothing more than my hypothesis can beat your hypothesis any time no you can't.
Bluestreak1: "2. VGN shutting down may have come from the N&W purchase and no electrification on N&W for the directional running implemented."
Yes, this what was reported at the time that the N&W bought the VGN. I do not think that putting catenary up on the corresponding section of the N&W was considered--construction costs and the cost of new electric locomotives would not have provided a good ROI.
Johnny
I am not testing your hypothesis. I am telling you how capital budgeting works in very broad strokes. I have no interest in proving the original posters hypothesis, which you seem to have adopted as your own.
The proponents need to make the case and it has to be better than the other alternatives available at the time a decision is made. The fact that no one is stringing wire is evidence that the expected return on investment is less than on other projects.
My point is that financial investors want and are programmed to get as quick a return on investment as possible...often within a year or less....and all management programs from the MBA is to achieve that. So since business won't invest in electrification because of this lack of quick returns then governments will have to. Commuter rail is government investment for the long haul (pun?) while UP, NS, CSX, BNSF are looking for the dividend payouts.
henry6 So since business won't invest in electrification because of this lack of quick returns then governments will have to.
So since business won't invest in electrification because of this lack of quick returns then governments will have to.
Why does government "have to" make a stupid investment? Are you saying we need more Solindras? IIRC that was $500 million in borrowed capital destroyed.
A back issue of TRAINS covered this subject beautifully. Both pro and con electrification arguments were presented in two articles in the same issue. The fact is that all four USA majors have invested in electrification studies, so did Conrail, so did SP. All have preliminary plans that can be implemented if the economics justify it. USA and Canadian Railroads are in business to earn money for their stockholders. This was not true of the state railroads of European countries after WWII, and it is not true of China today. The only serious electrification schemes that were implemented and that are in progress today are those financed by governments, not by private enterprise.
Question is: why don't we have electric or high speed railroads. Answer. Because our business structure of capitalism wants a return on investment as quickly as possible. Question: what is the alternative. Answer: governments build, maintain and operate. Question: is it a stupid investment? Answer: That's your opinion. If people want it, if it is the answer to pollution, environmental issues, fuel usages and costs, highway congestion and urban gridlock, land usage, solutions to whatever other transportation and living problems that pop up, then it is not stupid. If you are in it for the financial investment and quick return, it is a stupid idea; but if you are a social engineer or urban planner, it's not so stupid.
Bingo. It is the social engineers, who by definition are smarter than everybody else just ask them, who truly scare me.
For the most recent example look at Obamacare. The social engineers have required the insurance companies to cancel over 5,000,000 policies that people bought in a relatively free market so that 2,000,000 people can be subsidized to buy "better" policys that cost more and have a higher deductible. That is the small first wave. Next year they will do the same social engineering to employer provided health plans.
The government has no business in the social engineering business. It exists to protect our rights, and to protect our nation. Period.
"The government has no business in the social engineering business. It exists to protect our rights, and to protect our nation. Period."
Totally disagree. Business will not do it, not cost effective, no return. They would probably plan only for themselves and let all else happen by accident. Chaos would probably be in effect. Would a factory in New Jersey build a road to their resources in Pennsylvania and another one to their market in Indiana? Of course not. Would the Association of Capitalist Industries build it? Not worth the investment. But the US Constitution does say the US Government is in charge of regulating interstate commerce. Would a trucking company have built the NJ turnpike or Route 80 or the PA Turnpike? Who would have built the GW Bridge or dug the Holland and LIncoln tunnels? Libertarianism has some merit, yes, but ignores the realities of everyday living.
You clearly have no clue about how a capitalist economy works and how it maximizes human freedom.
Now that we have run off into the weeds perhaps the OP will share with us what his real hypothesis is.
All the RRs in the north American market are having to put every available dollar into capacity improvements. They really do not have any excess capital to put into long range improvements such as electrification when the short term is now very important. It may be more oil trains, Faster passenger and more faster intermodal trains eat up fluidity and capacity when going around slower manifests and other trains. ,
This poster suspects that even BNSF does not have unlimited resources. BNSF may even have to postpone some projects on the southern Transcon and other locations to concentrate during this coming summer for the Baken oil traffic. That will be a big gamble due to the uncertainty of future oil by train.
Forecasts for future rail traffic increases by the FEDS may take all available retained capital to keep up with needed improvements ? That may be for at least another 15 years ?
It may be that the RRs will not have enough capital to just meet these short term needs. There may be a need for Federal help to meet these needs and maybe some long range electrification projects. This poster really suspects that will happen but who knows.? Is it OK to build the short term freight improvements but not electrification.
Another item -- if there is a turn down in traffic the short termers will demand more dividends & less capital improvements instead of getting ahead of future demand. The BNSF Transcon improvements is a perfect example.
DELETED
Thank you Mac, you impresario of omnipotence, etc. Since you do know it all, please explain, without political overtones, what Capitalism is and how it operates. Then explain to us its position today based on both politics and your interpretation. And, while you're at it, explain why many are calling for us to get out of capitalism or find ways to adjust capitalism so that it works for the US. I evidently don't understand it by what I've read on line, in the newspapers, talking to bankers and businessmen, and following the Nightly Business Report, for instance. So I will ignore all of them and just use your answer to guide me forever.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is overhead catenary precludes operation of double stacks and other high-clearance cars.
Modeling the Pennsylvania Railroad in N Scale.
www.prr-nscale.blogspot.com
NO NO The catenary is just higher. In fact, some western railroads in improving clearances and raissing tunnel roofs have even planned for it! Just in case!
Case in point: Double stacks pass under METRA's IC suburban cat at Kensington regularly, or did.
Henry, government people are just as likely to make mistakes as business people. And can be just as self-serving and selfish and cruel. Sometimes they are cruel when putting on an act of being just.
Remember that the Nazi party was for National SOCIALISM.
Did any of the freight railroads make the terrible mistake that NJT made for Sandy?
Sure some Government controls make sense. But not total management of industries (including, to me, health care). I happen to favor government expenditures for education, health, national defense, and even long-distance trains and national parks. But I would let free enterprise largely determine where freight transportation investments should be made. You have a right to disagree, of course
daveklepper NO NO The catenary is just higher. In fact, some western railroads in improving clearances and raissing tunnel roofs have even planned for it! Just in case! Case in point: Double stacks pass under METRA's IC suburban cat at Kensington regularly, or did.
I stand corrected.
I totally agree with capitalism. But I am one who believes that right now that capitalism is cannibalistic in that it is totally immersed in quick returns on investments, no long range planning, that taking care of people (health and wealth) helps them make more money in the long run (but they don't believe in "long run"), and have an attitude that the next set of investors will have to handle whatever is handed them. The so called Robber Barons of yesteryear built companies, built factories, invented and produced for the people, were in business to do business and not just save money so that their personal coffers could be filled. Oh, I know there were scoundrels, there was profit taking, there was stockholders getting theirs while the property went to hell and times the stockholders were ignored while track and equipment and people were renewed. or taken care of. But today's investors have been more insistent for a longer time about getting their ROI and I for one think it has to stop so that the US industries (including rail), the US economy, and the American people have a society and country of the calibre and quality we can live comfortably and prosper as we have in the past. In the US capitalists and the government have worked together to make it happen....public projects that provide transportation, water, electricity, and services which allow businesses to perform and prosper and people to have jobs and quality of life. It has swung on and off center over the years and is due to come back toward center again. NY is saying right now "come start your business here and don't pay taxes" while local communities have to provide electricity, water, roads, electricity, and no property taxes in order to lure business. Is that capitalism or socialism? Does it work? For who? Don't give me lectures about capitalism from political points of view. But do tell me how it works. I ask does it work?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.