« So, We Got Another Conspiracy Theory | Matthew Saroff's Blog | D'Oh!!!! I Goofed on Gitmo Detainees Returning to "The Fight" »
Upgrading Freight Rail as Stimulus
Phillip Longman makes the very good point that while people are talking up bullet trains, they are ignoring freight rail infrastructure.
I used to work as an engineer at GE Transportation Systems* on their locomotives, I was Lead Engineer on the Blower Cab Structure on the AC6000 Locomotive, and as a result, I consider myself to have some background in this industry.
Simply put, it is easier, cheaper, and faster to upgrade or repair existing for rail, and medium speed (say less than 150 km/h) rail than it is to construct new rail for what Atrios calls "Supertrains".
Cargo transport is energy inefficient in the US, and the upgraded infrastructure would increase speeds, even for short haul passenger rail, and reduce accidents.
Best of all, this is all shovel ready, you don't need an environmental impact statement, or to go before a planning board, or to seize land by eminent domain to repair and upgrade rail lines.
*Yes, I have worked everywhere. Maybe I can't hold down a job, but more likely this has been my role as "technical hit man", where you are parachuted in to take care of a specific need.
Cross posted from 40 Years in the Desert.
I used to work as an engineer at GE Transportation Systems* on their locomotives, I was Lead Engineer on the Blower Cab Structure on the AC6000 Locomotive, and as a result, I consider myself to have some background in this industry.
Simply put, it is easier, cheaper, and faster to upgrade or repair existing for rail, and medium speed (say less than 150 km/h) rail than it is to construct new rail for what Atrios calls "Supertrains".
Cargo transport is energy inefficient in the US, and the upgraded infrastructure would increase speeds, even for short haul passenger rail, and reduce accidents.
Best of all, this is all shovel ready, you don't need an environmental impact statement, or to go before a planning board, or to seize land by eminent domain to repair and upgrade rail lines.
*Yes, I have worked everywhere. Maybe I can't hold down a job, but more likely this has been my role as "technical hit man", where you are parachuted in to take care of a specific need.
Cross posted from 40 Years in the Desert.
Advertisement
Why yes, I did actually, under the supervision of an appropriately licensed operator, operate a locomotive on the GE test track once....
But even better, I was there for hard coupling (bump) tests of the AC-6000.
We smacked together two FULL SIZED locomotives at about 5mph.
Uncle Fester, eat your heart out.
January 15, 2009 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope - that was Gomez!
Seriously, all rail needs to be looked at with an eye to the future. Things and people still need to move from place to place, and it's better to move large numbers of them this way than by cars or trucks whenever and wherever possible.
January 15, 2009 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
D'oh!!!!!!
You are correct, sir.
January 15, 2009 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
It wouldn't take a lot in terms of right of way to double track. I'm clueless about expense. But wouldn't that speed things up a lot, not having to pull over to a siding to pass?
January 16, 2009 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Longman's thesis, I think, makes lots of sense. Kevin Drum, linked to the article yesterday at his Mother Jones blog.
A minor quibble with your comments. Environmental reviews and permitting will certainly be necessary for many projects; and for some projects aimed at relieving "choke points" additional land will be required.
This is an example how the so called "invisible hand" very often does not result in the best choices for society. A bit more "command", perhaps, would have resulted in the prohibition of the removal of rails, protection of abandoned rights-of-way, and more coordination between the various carriers, so that it wouldn't today take two days for freight to travel five miles through Chicago.
And a bit of command would have long ago removed lots of trucks from the roadways, resulting in less congestion, less pollution, lower highway maintenance costs, and fewer truck accident related deaths.
Thanks for calling attention to the article.
January 15, 2009 5:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rec'd... because I hate semis! They're road hogs and they're dangerous (nothing against any semi drivers out there- they're just too big to be on the road next to my Hyundai Accent). You make a good argument in freight vs. passenger. Personally, I'd hate to make the decision between the two, as I believe both are needed in this country.
January 15, 2009 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good post. Mass transit could solve a lot of problems. Just remember that we have a VP coming in who spent most days for 35 years on the passenger train.
We know where his heart lies.
And Barack lived in the home of the els.
January 15, 2009 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Biden is such an idiot he'd lose his way trying to make a trip that distance in a motorcar. Given he was driving alone, you know. That's the only reason that goofy b*stard rides the train. That and it gives him the opportunity to read speeches of other politicians picking out things to plagiarize.
January 16, 2009 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
The most wonderful trip I ever took across this country was on the California Zephyr. I started in San Francisco (which really begins in Emeryville--just north of Oakland), went through Denver and across the great plains of Nebraska and Iowa to Chicago. I wasn't finished as I took the train from Chicago through Northern Ohio, to Pittsburgh, through the Cumberland Gap and on to Washington D.C.. Harpers Ferry was a treat. The last leg of the trip ended in New York City. I returned to San Francisco on the same route.
I have the greatest appreciation for train travel and saw first hand the drawbacks to this mode of transportation and travel in the United States. I have also driven across the country on U.S. route 70 west through St. Louis to U.S. 40 where it touches Southern California. I much prefer train travel and I hope that this country moves toward high-speed rail. I also hope the country embraces inner-city and inter-city rail because it one of many ways to kick our oil habit.
January 16, 2009 12:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup! Trains can have a tremendous impact on keeping us provided when resources get low, expecially since the rails do not care whether it is fossil fuel or electric.
January 16, 2009 3:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fossil fuel vs. electric is a false dichotomy until we start getting most of our electricity from sources other than coal and oil. Anyway...
Very good point. Passenger rail makes very little sense because people often want to go to different places, and rail only goes one place (it's on rails). Freight is just a better rail business because you generally have a larger quantity to deliver to any one place.
Plus the QWERTY effect: existing rail infrastructure tends to run to industrial areas.
January 16, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
First post I've read on this TPM thing where the writer knew at least something about the subject.
January 16, 2009 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink