Victrola1 Concerning compatibility, when will one state build high speed rail to their border and encounter non high speed rail to continue farther? It brings to mind the 1920's and paving roads. Illinois took the lead and Iowa lingered. Towns along the Mississippi river became known as places where the pavement ends and the mud begins.
Concerning compatibility, when will one state build high speed rail to their border and encounter non high speed rail to continue farther?
It brings to mind the 1920's and paving roads. Illinois took the lead and Iowa lingered. Towns along the Mississippi river became known as places where the pavement ends and the mud begins.
This is exactly the problem of railroading in Europe. Interoperability between various countries is a big issue. One of the biggest hurdles is the train control systems. Each country has different laws and mandates that manifest themselves differently. If you want to run a train from Germany to Italy, you have to have three sets of train control equipment on board. That adds over $1M to the cost of a locomotive.
It's good to avoid such things, but I don't think it's worth stalling project work several years until you work out a good set of specs. Sometimes, it's just best to "blunder ahead" and let things sort themselves out on the fly.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I don't think that would happen Victorla1. But reminds me of private railroads stopping trains at state borders because the state with train demanded it run. Then they could prove to the ICC that the train was no longer viable and could be taken off. But the revrese, building or running to a boarder to force the other state to build won't happen.
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.
sam1: My point was to show that planning based on erroneous assumptions and projections for the future can be worse than no planning at all. That appears to be the case for both TX and CA HSR, examples from both the private and public sectors. Hopefully, in both cases, revisions can be made without too much wasted efforts and dollars, whether consumers' or taxpayers'.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm The thread relates to the topic of planning and you referred to planning in the utility industry in TX. Perhaps you do not agree with Lasher. However, he is not some outsider and is more of an insider than you were or are in terms of capacity planning. Moreover, trying to silence others from commenting because they are not experts or insiders won't wash. it should also be noted that a major reason why TX faces a power shortage was its decision to stay out of the national grid to avoid federal regulation. That was a legitimate choice, but now the price may need to be paid. The bigger message is that choices have consequences, often unintended and negative. The same could be said for our past choices regarding passenger rail service. 40 years of basically status quo; catching up to have an appropriate modern network of routes under 500 miles with frequent, fast reliable service is hard and expensive to do now.
The thread relates to the topic of planning and you referred to planning in the utility industry in TX. Perhaps you do not agree with Lasher. However, he is not some outsider and is more of an insider than you were or are in terms of capacity planning. Moreover, trying to silence others from commenting because they are not experts or insiders won't wash. it should also be noted that a major reason why TX faces a power shortage was its decision to stay out of the national grid to avoid federal regulation. That was a legitimate choice, but now the price may need to be paid.
The bigger message is that choices have consequences, often unintended and negative. The same could be said for our past choices regarding passenger rail service. 40 years of basically status quo; catching up to have an appropriate modern network of routes under 500 miles with frequent, fast reliable service is hard and expensive to do now.
The thread relates to the California Bullet Train as being Off Target. My comment regarding long range planning in the electric utility industry was designed to create a platform to state that long range planning is a dicy challenge. That's all! It was not intended, as I have stated, to promote a discussion of electric energy in Texas.
How could you possibly know what I know about planning in the electric utility industry? How could you possibly know what role I played in planning for my company? How could you possibly know the impact of my company on ERCOT. How could you possibly know who from our company sits on the ERCOT council and what relationship I had with that person? What do you know about Lasher? What do you know about the the inner workings of ERCOT or the give and take between ERCOT and Texas' power generators?
Texas's future power shortages are a function of a complex mix of interlocking technical, regulatory, and market variables, all acerbated by a burgeoning population that can be labelled at Texas success story. Understanding them would be extremely difficult for someone who is not involved with the industry. It is even more so for some who lives outside of Texas.
Now, back to the key point related to the California Bullet Train. The California High Speed Rail Authority laid down a long range plan for the California high speed rail system. Supporters of the plan claimed that it was an excellent roadmap. It has fallen apart before the first shovel of dirt has been turned, which has tended to be the case for most long range plans, for a variety of reasons. One of them is that long range plans don't work.
The United States needs a transport framework. It must be flexible if it is to work. If it is overly detailed, as is seemingly favored by some of the folks who post to these forums, it will not work anymore than overly detailed long range planning has worked for most capital intensive industries.
Within a transport framework, the market place should determine what form future transport should take. There is a role for passenger rail, but it is likely to be a minor role far into the future. The people should decided with their dollars what form of transport suits them. Not a bunch of Washington or Austin planners who are likely to get it wrong! Now there is a novel idea! People in a democracy being given a choice.
dakotafred schlimm: "Lasher said Texas will have to rely on conservation to keep the lights on because it takes at least two years to build a power plant, often longer. ERCOT recently expanded some programs that pay large customers to stand ready to shut down when supply runs low." Sure sounds like poor planning, even admitted by the director of planning at ERCOT. Failures to plan for the future without using appropriate assumptions can lead to a real mess. I can't help but wonder how many power-plant projects in Texas have been stopped in their tracks by the combination of green protests and the great uncertainty about what is coming down from the EPA. (I expect Sam1 would know.) In the Dakotas, there have been at least two in the last couple of years (Big Stone II and South Heart).
schlimm: "Lasher said Texas will have to rely on conservation to keep the lights on because it takes at least two years to build a power plant, often longer. ERCOT recently expanded some programs that pay large customers to stand ready to shut down when supply runs low." Sure sounds like poor planning, even admitted by the director of planning at ERCOT. Failures to plan for the future without using appropriate assumptions can lead to a real mess.
"Lasher said Texas will have to rely on conservation to keep the lights on because it takes at least two years to build a power plant, often longer. ERCOT recently expanded some programs that pay large customers to stand ready to shut down when supply runs low."
Sure sounds like poor planning, even admitted by the director of planning at ERCOT. Failures to plan for the future without using appropriate assumptions can lead to a real mess.
I can't help but wonder how many power-plant projects in Texas have been stopped in their tracks by the combination of green protests and the great uncertainty about what is coming down from the EPA. (I expect Sam1 would know.) In the Dakotas, there have been at least two in the last couple of years (Big Stone II and South Heart).
Conservation has been part of the electric power supply metric in Texas for decades. So too is co-generation, which is a subject unto itself.
The amount of time to bring a new power plant on line or convert an existing power plant ranges widely. A gas turbine can be installed, tested, and coupled to the grid in less than a year. My company, which is one of numerous generators in Texas, has several mothballed plants that could be brought out of retirement and made ready to generate in an equally short period of time. The issue, as is often the case, is whether we can recapture the high costs of operating an old plant.
The issue regarding the use of older plants, as well as building new ones, is related to vol. It has to do with pricing, which is unique to the Texas system compared to most areas of the United States, but not other areas of the world. It would require a detailed discussion to explain it. Like many things, however, unless one trades in the market, he or she will never understand it.
Lasher's statement regarding poor planning is disputed by many people, including my former colleagues who are involved in the planning, development and operation of power plants in Texas. I am in regular contact with them, as in we have lunch once a week. Moreover, the company provides its retirees with regular briefings on the status of the company and the industry in Texas.
Most people, especially those who live outside of Texas, with no hands on experience in the electric power industry, relying on a high level newspaper article that only scratches the surface of the issue, don't know what they are talking about. To quote a newspaper article or even a single report as if it is gospel shows a clear lack of understanding of the power industry in Texas.
As I pointed out, which was apparently missed, a discussion of the Texas electric power industry is outside of the scope of a trains forum.
schlimm "Lasher said Texas will have to rely on conservation to keep the lights on because it takes at least two years to build a power plant, often longer. ERCOT recently expanded some programs that pay large customers to stand ready to shut down when supply runs low." Sure sounds like poor planning, even admitted by the director of planning at ERCOT. Failures to plan for the future without using appropriate assumptions can lead to a real mess.
"The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) released a report Tuesday showing the state will not have enough electricity in 2022 unless power companies build more plants or people conserve. By 2014, the amount of excess reserves drops below ERCOT’s 13.75 percent target for reliability. There’s hardly enough time to build more power plants before things get tight.
“This … report looks a bit more pessimistic than we have seen in previous versions,” said Warren Lasher, ERCOT’s director of system planning. “The options in 2014 are fairly limited.”
Lasher said Texas will have to rely on conservation to keep the lights on because it takes at least two years to build a power plant, often longer. ERCOT recently expanded some programs that pay large customers to stand ready to shut down when supply runs low."
Sam1 "All of the electric utilities in the Texas Interconnection are electrically tied together during normal system conditions and operate at a synchronized frequency of an average of 60Hz. The Texas Interconnection covers most of the state of Texas." In an emergency Texas connects with the U.S. and Mexico grids through tie lines, two of which are maintained by my former employer. I am retired.
"All of the electric utilities in the Texas Interconnection are electrically tied together during normal system conditions and operate at a synchronized frequency of an average of 60Hz. The Texas Interconnection covers most of the state of Texas." In an emergency Texas connects with the U.S. and Mexico grids through tie lines, two of which are maintained by my former employer. I am retired.
How many of these links are DC interties? (DC interties make it possible to transfer power without a synchronous connection.) And how many links between the eastern-central US grid and the Western Systems Coordinating Council (covers the US from the Rockies and west, along with British Columbia and Baja California)? I know there are several DC interties between the WSCC and the eastern 2/3rds of the US, not sure about ERCOT.
Along these lines, GE has developed and shipped a phase adjustable transformer that allows reactive as well as real power flow between two asynchronous systems.
- Erik
schlimm Sounds pretty serious, according to ERCOT. http://www.dallasnews.com/business/energy/20120522-texas-electrical-grid-operator-warns-of-shortages-in-coming-decade.ece "ERCOT was formed in 1970, in the wake of a major blackout in the Northeast in November 1965, and it was tasked with managing grid reliability in accordance with national standards. The agency assumed additional responsibilities following electric deregulation in Texas a decade ago. The ERCOT grid remains beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which succeeded the Federal Power Commission and regulates interstate electric transmission. Historically, the Texas grid's independence has been violated a few times. Once was during World War II, when special provisions were made to link Texas to other grids. Another episode occurred in 1976 after a Texas utility, for reasons relating to its own regulatory needs, deliberately flipped a switch and sent power to Oklahoma for a few hours. This event, known as the "Midnight Connection," set off a major legal battle that could have brought Texas under the jurisdiction of federal regulators, but it was ultimately resolved in favor of continued Texan independence."
Sounds pretty serious, according to ERCOT.
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/energy/20120522-texas-electrical-grid-operator-warns-of-shortages-in-coming-decade.ece
"ERCOT was formed in 1970, in the wake of a major blackout in the Northeast in November 1965, and it was tasked with managing grid reliability in accordance with national standards. The agency assumed additional responsibilities following electric deregulation in Texas a decade ago. The ERCOT grid remains beyond the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which succeeded the Federal Power Commission and regulates interstate electric transmission.
Historically, the Texas grid's independence has been violated a few times. Once was during World War II, when special provisions were made to link Texas to other grids. Another episode occurred in 1976 after a Texas utility, for reasons relating to its own regulatory needs, deliberately flipped a switch and sent power to Oklahoma for a few hours. This event, known as the "Midnight Connection," set off a major legal battle that could have brought Texas under the jurisdiction of federal regulators, but it was ultimately resolved in favor of continued Texan independence."
The point of my post was to point out the difficulties of long term planning, as per my experience in the electric utility industry, which is as capital intensive as the railroads, as it relates to long term planning for passenger rail services. It was not intended as a discussion of electric power in Texas.
The article, which only scratches the surface, mentions a potential power shortage in 2022, with some constraints showing up in 2014. There are numerous solutions being discussed, all of which are potentially workable. The ERCOT history lesson is superficial and irrelevant for an understanding of Texas's energy challenges.
A discussion of the Texas electric utility business, especially as it relates to my company, which neither you or blue streak know anything about, is beyond the scope of these forums.
The United States' electric grid consists of a number of electric reliability councils. Because of its size, as well as a streak of independence, Texas set-up its own grid, with the concurrence of the federal government. People who live outside of Texas do not appear to understand much about Texas, anymore than I understand much about Wisconsin or Illinois or New York. I don't comment on the values of places where I don't live. Having said that, I am savvy enough to know that there are significant differences between the major areas of the United States, i.e. Southeast, Northwest, etc., and between the U.S. and other countries.
Texas has adequate spinning reserve, although like any growing state, it needs to add capacity. Texas' population grew by 21.6 per cent between 2000 and 2010 compared to 9.7% for the U.S. Comparatively Louisiana grew by 1.4%, Arkansas by 9.7%, Oklahoma by 8.7%, and New Mexico by 13.2%. Georgia grew by 18.3% and New York grew by 2.1%. Clearly, given the growth of Texas over the last decade, it needs to increase its power generation capability. How it gets there is being debated.
My former colleague and now neighbor is the President of ERCOT. I have engaged him on several occasions over the past two years to speak to our continuing education group at the University of Texas. Without getting into all of the power generation issues in the Lone Star state, I suggest that press reports regarding the status of the Texas electric grid be treated with skepticism.
Texas is its own country.
Sam1 As someone who spent the better part of his working career in the electric utility industry, where the ability to project power requirements five to ten years in the future was necessary, because that is the lead time require to build a large steam electric power plant, we got it wrong nearly as often as we got it right. And we were one of the best run electric utilities in the country
As someone who spent the better part of his working career in the electric utility industry, where the ability to project power requirements five to ten years in the future was necessary, because that is the lead time require to build a large steam electric power plant, we got it wrong nearly as often as we got it right. And we were one of the best run electric utilities in the country
Maybe Texas state utilities were once one of the best run but now ---- ? Why do I now read that there may be a power shortage in the near future? However this is caused by this state and its utilities not biting the bullet years ago and getting their 60 Hz power in sync with the rest of the country. ( I don't know exactly what angle difference it is but the difference would be no more than 60 degrees ). That means Texas cannot join the national power grid at present. don't know what would happen if they slowed down or speeded their generators long enough to get in sync. ( maybe 1/100 degree angle per minute ?? )
That does not tell me that this was one of the best run utilities to neglect this problem.
henry6 Compare LA-SF with other city pairs and corridors: St.L-Chi. Chi-Det; Boston-NY; NY- DC, etc. Then get a market study and look out 25, 50 and 100 years and what do you see? Then look at your short and long term options and decide on plans.
Compare LA-SF with other city pairs and corridors: St.L-Chi. Chi-Det; Boston-NY; NY- DC, etc. Then get a market study and look out 25, 50 and 100 years and what do you see? Then look at your short and long term options and decide on plans.
The availability of transportation changes the market - in the long term.
Would Philadelphia look like it does now if the PRR hadn't electrified and upgraded the corridor in the 1930s?
What would DC look like without the Metro?
Connecting SF and LA by rail is probably a good idea, particularly if you can make the case for avoiding airport and highway expansion, coupled by the prospect of new and continued economic growth along the route.
But, the saga of CAHSR is one, long comic opera or perhaps, Keystone Kops. I'm not sure which yet, but it's very entertaining to watch!
Oh, I understand llong range planning well enough, as we discussed earlier, that 1) people don't know what they really want and results from survey's cannot be accepted at 100% accurate. But, 2) if you don't have plans in the works, there is chaos at best, complete disasters at worst. So you have to have a plan based on the direction you think is needed based on what you know about the problem and the people.
John Maynard Keynes stressed the point that humans are not very good at long range projections. If you think long range plans work, take a look at the five year plans that were implemented by the Soviet Union, China, and Cuba. They came to realize the long range planning did not work so well. These countries broke out of their economic doldrums when they largely gave up on long range central planning and allowed market forces to work it out.
As someone who spent the better part of his working career in the electric utility industry, where the ability to project power requirements five to ten years in the future was necessary, because that is the lead time require to build a large steam electric power plant, we got it wrong nearly as often as we got it right. And we were one of the best run electric utilities in the country. If I had a thousand dollars for every power plant, transmission line, sub-station, etc. that was on the drawing boards and was cancelled because the models got it wrong, I would be well off.
It seems to me that California is overreaching, as usual, and as a result will probably end up with nothing LA-SF.
Look at how well conventional passenger rail does between Seattle and Portland. Are we sure that TRUE 79-mph service, including non-stop schedules, wouldn't work between LA and SF? You could afford to pay a lot to the freight railroads for capacity and not make a pimple on the cost of this new-built 220-mph fantasy.
Never say never.
A. McIntosh I wonder if there has been any thought to acquiring the coast line route from UP between LA and SF to make that a higher speed line? From everything that I have seen, people want passenger rail service that is clean, reliable, and on time. Deliver this service consistently could mean success. Focus on the fun- damentals instead of what is trendy.
I wonder if there has been any thought to acquiring the coast line route from UP between LA and SF to
make that a higher speed line? From everything that I have seen, people want passenger rail service
that is clean, reliable, and on time. Deliver this service consistently could mean success. Focus on the fun-
damentals instead of what is trendy.
When it comes to High Speed Rail - don't even think about converting existing rail lines that were surveyed and designed in the 19th Century with the main idea being to minimize grades to enhance the movement of tonnage over the line - to minimize grades a lot of curvature and water level meandering were designed into these lines so as to not overtax the abilities of the Irish, German and Chinese human earth-movers of that era. A high degree of curvature is not compatible with High Speed Rail.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Three major successes in the East which opinion polls said were not going to be patronized to any extent are Amtrak's Downeaster service Boston to Portland, ME which has not only added trains but will be adding additional mileage by Fall. Second is the NJT River Line light rail between Camden and Trenton which became such a success that additional service had to be added nights and weekends almost immediate to its opening. Also at NJT was MidTown Direct service putting former DL&W line trains into Penn Station NY. Passenger counts surpassed predictions within weeks. SO, yeah, use polls as an idea of what might happen....but if you have better intuition, gut feelings, real understanding of people, then do the job anyway. Listen to the great Cole Porter song, They All Laughed.
schlimm oltmannd: Also, what people SAY they will do and what they ACTUALLY will do is often very different. Polling data that concerns a prediction of doing something (using a fast, frequent and convenient passenger rail service* as millions in Europe use every day) that very few Americans have ever previously experienced or had available is likely to have a high error margin. "If you build it, they will come." * = credits to henry6.
oltmannd: Also, what people SAY they will do and what they ACTUALLY will do is often very different.
Also, what people SAY they will do and what they ACTUALLY will do is often very different.
Polling data that concerns a prediction of doing something (using a fast, frequent and convenient passenger rail service* as millions in Europe use every day) that very few Americans have ever previously experienced or had available is likely to have a high error margin. "If you build it, they will come."
* = credits to henry6.
Like asking people in 1980 if they could use a computer in their home.
oltmannd Also, what people SAY they will do and what they ACTUALLY will do is often very different.
Even in Europe, only about 1 in 10 travelers use intercity rail - most drive there, too - so having 7 of 10 say they wouldn't ride is a red herring.
However, the HSR project in California is just ugly a whole bunch of different ways. I also find it interesting the Jerry Green...err...Brown is trying to stifle any future environmental lawsuits that might come up as the project...um...evolves.
The US population and politicians are in love with the term "high speed" without understanding its meaning or impact. To some it is a Bullet Train, to others it is anything that goes faster than their family car. It is intercity, it is commuter, it is what they dreamed they were doing with the Lionel around the Christmas tree with Buck Rogers at the throttle. How a segment like LA to SF fits into the passenger rail system or transportation overall, why it might be important, how it fits into the economy for the area and the country, are parts of the concept that are not thought of by most. To accept it out of hand is just as bad as dismissing it out of hand.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.