Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

The Return of Rail

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Check it. . .

As Public Highways Choke, Railroads Enjoy a Renaissance | Autopia from Wired.com

I had no idea this was happening. I thought something like it ought to happen, I wanted to see it happen, but I always sort of cynically assumed that businesses were too short-sighted and set in their ways to ever put their goods on trains.

Moving freight on the rails saves fuel, saves congestion and wear-and-tear on the highways, and eventually the railways also can be electrified. It's expensive -- electrifying a railway costs about as much as laying the tracks in the first place -- but it's already been widely done in Europe, so we know it can work.
 
Great article Tony. I think this is where we should be going. All those semi's that congest our highways will be headed toward the nearest off ramp. At this point any reduction is a good one. Semi's also account for a large proportion of emissions on highways. Just look at the black smoke pour out from those things. We should be investing in rail but not just any rail network. Linear AC induction motors can propel magnetic levitation trains through the countrysides. They are extremely costly at this point. But I personally think this is one technology that will allow trains to truly shine. The crafts ability to hover inches from an induction rail will increase reliability tenfold. Once perfected, the benefits will be obvious and difficult to ignore. Mag Lev trains commonly travel in excess of 300 mph. I read an article awhile back stating the velocity is expected to continue climbing and some scientists claim they will eventually achieve 900 mph or more due to the flexibility that inherently comes from the ability to hover.
 
A typical train can haul something like 1 ton of cargo 400 miles on a single gallon of diesel. They sacrifice a lot of versatility, but the efficiency of rail is phenomenal.

As fuel costs become an increasingly large component of transport expense, trains are going to continue to see growth in popularity.
 
A typical train can haul something like 1 ton of cargo 400 miles on a single gallon of diesel. They sacrifice a lot of versatility, but the efficiency of rail is phenomenal.

As fuel costs become an increasingly large component of transport expense, trains are going to continue to see growth in popularity.



Hey Kardax, just curious where you got your numbers from?
 
Hey Kardax, just curious where you got your numbers from?
I can't remember, but I think they were put out by a railroad company.

Keep in mind that a train is hauling thousands of tons. It's going to be burning fuel at an astonishing rate; but it's getting a lot done while doing it :)

It's a very obvious case where economies of scale plus the inherent efficiency of a smooth track with no stopping and a sustained speed pay off in a dramatic way.

-Ryan / Kardax
 
There's a commercial running right now that shows a beautiful countryside then follows a silver car up a ramp and onto a train. They end with a line something like- 1 ton of cargo moved for XXX miles on X gallons.
 
It's hard to get excited about the beauty of electric rail when one thinks about all the old Electric trolley systems that used to exist but were forced out or destroyed by corrupt politicians in conjunction with evil business practices by GM (under the name "National City Lines"

The electric systems had 16 billion passengers by the mid 20's. The NCL would systematically buy up rail lines let them fall into decay and then convert them to unprofitable bus lines then finally make the bus lines disappear altogether leaving only highly profitable gas-guzzling automobiles.

It's all in Edwin Black's "Internal Combustion" chapter 10
 
One Ton, 480 MIles, One Gallon of Fuel

I've seen that commercial from the railrroads. While the railroads are very efficient, and much better than trucks, I think they are using some clever sleight-of-hand calculations to make them seem even more so.

The railroads don't explain how they come up with those numbers, but I think they do it by taking an existing train, carrying thousands of tons of cargo, that is already going 480 miles, and add one ton to it.

If you drive your car 480 miles, and measure how much fuel it uses, then repeat the trip but add one extra pound to you car, you'll find that your car can carry one pound of cargo 480 miles on about a teaspoon of fuel. Cars are great! Or so you could make it seem.

Despite the distorted ads, I'm very much pro-rail.They are much more efficient than trucks. In Europe, they have a many long haul trains that run on overhead electric power. This process is incredibly efficient, since the engines don't have to carry heavy diesel generators of fuel tanks. I'm not sure why it's not as popular in the US.

In Vancouver, they have a bus-trolley system. They have buses that are powered by an overhead electric system, like trolleys. The big advantage is that they don't need tracks like a traditional trolley. Otherwise, they work pretty much the same way. I don't see why more cities can't go with a similar system. I probably takes some work to set up the overhead wires, but can't be that bad.
 
It seems that San Francisco has that as well.
My own experience says that trams or light rail is usually better than trolley-busses for one thing, comfort. Even though from an enviromental viewpoint not having to lay tracks or use heavy trams does save energy. But then again trams has a very smooth ride and usually is very quiet. Of course I take a tram line to work that runs about 18 times an hour so I'm a bit spoiled :)

Cobos
 
Despite the distorted ads, I'm very much pro-rail.They are much more efficient than trucks. In Europe, they have a many long haul trains that run on overhead electric power. This process is incredibly efficient, since the engines don't have to carry heavy diesel generators of fuel tanks. I'm not sure why it's not as popular in the US.

Cost. It's costs about as much, per mile, to electrify a track as it did to lay the track in the first place. And the USA has a lot of miles of track.

As oil prices keep climbing, at some point it will presumably make sense to spend the money and electrify the rail systems even in the USA.
 
Tony: Yes as oil and diesel prices rises it should make more and more sense. And even though it sounds very counterintuitive electrifying track isn't an all or nothing proposition. In Norway for instance all the track is electrified except the northernmost route. I'm pretty sure that was done simply for cost reasons, but it seems to work out pretty well. For slower moving passenger trains and freight trains diesel-electric works pretty well.

Cobos
 
Guys, It's always made sense. It made sense when they built the first EV trollys in the 1880's and they made sense all the way to the time they started ripping them out in the 30's and 40's.

They still make sense.

Whoever has the (liquid) gold makes the rules.
 
Doug:
What's that vote in 2008 they are talking about ? The presidential election?
Cobos


With every election, we also have state and local issues to vote on. The Quest video mentions a bond measure to fund the project. In California, bonds (large long term loans to the government) have to be approved by the voters. At the time the video was made that bond measure was scheduled to appear on the ballot in 2008. That means, that along with voting for president, at the same time we (in CA) would vote on this High Speed Rail bond measure, as well as a bunch of other stuff (local government positions, judges, etc...probably a state constitutional amendment).

At this point it's unclear to me whether this particular measure will be on the ballot this time around. California High-Speed Rail - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hope that answers your question and I didn't sound too pedantic. I'm assuming you don't know how our voting system works.
 
Thank you, my knowledge on details in your voting system is sketchy at best :)

Regardles this sounds like an excellent time to start working on this project for California...but I want Norway with it's 4 million people to get a extensive high speed rail network and the state has financed several reports. The most expensive is in the $100 billion range but we'll see what we end up with.

Cobos
 
Here's a thought; The California High Speed Rail will run along existing thoroughfares and require 25,000 volts for the entire distance. What if charging stations for EVs and PHEVs were put along the highways every 100 miles or so? Property at the charging stations could be leased to restaurants, convenience stores, and (yes) gas stations. Proceeds from leases and EV / PHEV charging could help subsidize the rail system while encouraging alternative transportation.
 
Democratic Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has suggested $150 billion over 10 years for our entire "green overhaul".

Obama Green Talk Is Gold to Silicon Valley - Bits - Technology - New York Times Blog

Now it seems kinda small.

Keep in mind that the most expensive project isn't very likely to be funded, and Norwegians are actually experts at building tunnels. Considering how many we got we bloody well should be :)

Just to get it in scale, $100 billion is about half our states annual budgeted expenses. So this will increase our yearly expenditures significantly. At the same time this is about the 1/4 or 1/5 of the cash we got in our collective matrass (more as an investment fund, but you get the point).

Cobos