Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="SRen"][quote user="Paul Milenkovic"] Starting with <a href="http://cta.ornl.gov/data/tedb26/Spreadsheets/Table9_10.xls">http://cta.ornl.gov/data/tedb26/Spreadsheets/Table9_10.xls</a>, Amtrak's most recently-reported energy use is 2700 BTU/passenger mile, down from a high of 3200 in 2000 and up from a low of 2400 in 1991.  Using a figure of 125,000 BTU in a gallon of gasoline (the high heating value) and 140,000 BTU in a gallon of #2 Diesel, this works out to 46 passenger-miles/gallon gasoline (MPG will be gasoline unless indicated).  Their averages work out to 20 persons per train car.  A train car averages 2.6 Diesel MPG, contrasted with a figure of 6 Diesel MPG stated for intercity buses.[/quote]Dear Paul, I am getting the impression that you are comparing apples to oranges here.  How exactly did you arive at the 6 MPG figure for intercity busses?  Since you cite no details on this figure the rest of the information in your post is useless.  A better way to compare the fuel efficieny of busses to trains would be to compare the MPG per passenger seat rather than the average number of passengers carried.  By this method you can compare the potential energy savings of one mode over the other on equal footing.However I must also note that there is more to energy efficiency than just MPG.  To be fair you must also compare the energy consumption of the infrastructure that supports the two modes of transport.  Wich consumes more energy to build and maintain, a mile of interstate freeway or a mile of 79 MPH mainline track?  You simply leave this part out of your equations.When you come up with appropriate facts and figures Paul you will see that trains are the most energy efficient means of land transportation.Scott[/quote]The amount of energy used in building a highway or railway line, when depreciation or the life of the project is considered, is probably marginal compared to the energy used in operations.Highways and railway lines, together with their support facilities, are capital projects.  The cost of building them, at least in the case of a private railway line or one owned by a quasi governmental agency (Amtrak) is capitalized and depreciated over the estimated life of the asset.  The depreciation period runs for decades.  The major costs associated with a capital project are labor, equipment, materials and overheads.  Most of these projects are built by contractors.  If the contract is a time and materials arrangement, the contractor bills out the equipment at so many dollars an hour.  Included in his equipment billing rate is the cost of the fuel.  If it is a lump sum contract, the contractor builds the cost of fuel into his estimate of the total cost of the contract.  The cost of the fuel is capitalized along with the other costs associated with the project and is an element in the annual depreciation schedule.  I have never worked for a government agency.  I am not sure whether the cost of highways is capitalized or expensed.  If it is not capitalized, then the cost of the fuel used to construct the highway would be a one off, which means it would have a big impact during the construction period, but it would have no impact over the remaining life of the project.  At the end of the project's life the outcome would be the same.Although the cost of the energy used in construction may be capitalized, it is fair to say that the pollution is not embedded in the project.  So one might argue that it is a one off, which means there is a big blip in air pollution while the project is being constructed, offset by no construction pollution once the project is completed.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag