 |
The politics and realities of being green
Author: SP5103
Date: 12-21-2012 - 09:28
I do agree that we all need to do our best to take care of our planet because I doubt we will have another one to move to anytime soon. What amazes me is how there seems to be this sustained movement that railroads are "dirty" and should be regulated either into compliance or out of existence. Railroads are something around three to five times more fuel efficient than any truck, so the railroads will always be cleaner than any truck assuming the diesel engines average about the same emissions per gallon of fuel burned. Anytime it is publically announced that there will be an increase in rail traffic, there is a chorus of complaints about how long vehicles will be delayed at crossings. ALmost any major metroploitan area has traffic jams resulting from congestion, which has less to do with not building enough 10 lane freeways but our lifestyle of living in the suburbs in a 4000 square foot house.
The last I heard, a new MP36 from MPI was around $3.5 million dollars. Remember that this is tax money buying these, and taxes are paid by people. Much of the commuter rail is supported by federal grants, so you paid for them also. Commuter locomotive designs no longer have a standard design where the buyer just checks of the standard available options. Each buyer now seems to insist on changes, because their contract consultant told them they absolutely had to have it. I am betting that over one million dollars of the cost is because of the bureaucratic nonsense and liability to the builder or parts suppliers.
Now Metrolink comes along. Instead of buying an existing proven design that meets Tier 3 requirements, they are insisting to be the first "green" kid on the block - at around $6 million per loco. And the proven 710 or GEVO, that will have to be mass produced in a Tier 4 version anyway won't due - they have to have a dual engine Cummins or CAT that requires a completely new design - not to mention the requirement that it can go 125 mph so they can call it "high speed rail". I don't believe Metrolink operates anything above 90 mph, and there seems to be a struggle just to get any of that to 110 mph, much less 125. And what good does 125 mph do for a commuter train anyway? A horrendous amount of extra horsepwer is needed to accelerate and maintain those higher speeds, and that requires burning more fuel which raises costs and creates more emissions. And just as you get up to speed it's time to hit the brakes and get stopped at the next station. Why they should have demanded that the loco use the dynamics to charge a set of batteries so it would be a hybrid design. (Actually, the original spec called for the ability to add this feature in the future. Due to the bloated weight, they were talking about using a "battery tender". More weight, more horsepower needed, more fuel ... a vicious circle.)
Now things will be getting intersting in the commuter locomotive market. MBTA has ordered a GEVO powered design that is actually being built by MPI as an HSP46, but GE is rumored to have been less than cooperative. This is a Tier 3 design using an upgraded GEVO-12 engine and AC traction. Looks like the price was "only" about $5 million a copy. Now EMD will be building the F125 or whatever it is called for Metrolink. And GO Transit wants a dual engine design also. Strangely all these buyers got along just fine with customising the MPI MP36/MP40 on previous orders.
I had thought that maybe one of these locos would become the new standard design for passenger operations, but I realize now that each buyer will insist on soomething of their own concoction. Remember one of the reasons that steam beat out diesel was because diesels could be built to a standard design on an assembly line?
There is another cost to consider. All this constant changing of technology in engine designs and reliance on microprocessor hardwar and software will basically render anything built today obsolete within 10 years. Any of the small block - high speed diesels will simply be scrapped because it will not be cost effective or compliant to rebuild them. I think we should demand that all trains be electric and cars be battery powered - because that would mean they would be zero emissions!
Enough ranting for now. I am not looking forward to the changes in the railroad industry and our country within the coming years. Maybe our new currency will be known as the "IOU"?
The last I heard, a new MP36 from MPI was around $3.5 million dollars. Remember that this is tax money buying these, and taxes are paid by people. Much of the commuter rail is supported by federal grants, so you paid for them also. Commuter locomotive designs no longer have a standard design where the buyer just checks of the standard available options. Each buyer now seems to insist on changes, because their contract consultant told them they absolutely had to have it. I am betting that over one million dollars of the cost is because of the bureaucratic nonsense and liability to the builder or parts suppliers.
Now Metrolink comes along. Instead of buying an existing proven design that meets Tier 3 requirements, they are insisting to be the first "green" kid on the block - at around $6 million per loco. And the proven 710 or GEVO, that will have to be mass produced in a Tier 4 version anyway won't due - they have to have a dual engine Cummins or CAT that requires a completely new design - not to mention the requirement that it can go 125 mph so they can call it "high speed rail". I don't believe Metrolink operates anything above 90 mph, and there seems to be a struggle just to get any of that to 110 mph, much less 125. And what good does 125 mph do for a commuter train anyway? A horrendous amount of extra horsepwer is needed to accelerate and maintain those higher speeds, and that requires burning more fuel which raises costs and creates more emissions. And just as you get up to speed it's time to hit the brakes and get stopped at the next station. Why they should have demanded that the loco use the dynamics to charge a set of batteries so it would be a hybrid design. (Actually, the original spec called for the ability to add this feature in the future. Due to the bloated weight, they were talking about using a "battery tender". More weight, more horsepower needed, more fuel ... a vicious circle.)
Now things will be getting intersting in the commuter locomotive market. MBTA has ordered a GEVO powered design that is actually being built by MPI as an HSP46, but GE is rumored to have been less than cooperative. This is a Tier 3 design using an upgraded GEVO-12 engine and AC traction. Looks like the price was "only" about $5 million a copy. Now EMD will be building the F125 or whatever it is called for Metrolink. And GO Transit wants a dual engine design also. Strangely all these buyers got along just fine with customising the MPI MP36/MP40 on previous orders.
I had thought that maybe one of these locos would become the new standard design for passenger operations, but I realize now that each buyer will insist on soomething of their own concoction. Remember one of the reasons that steam beat out diesel was because diesels could be built to a standard design on an assembly line?
There is another cost to consider. All this constant changing of technology in engine designs and reliance on microprocessor hardwar and software will basically render anything built today obsolete within 10 years. Any of the small block - high speed diesels will simply be scrapped because it will not be cost effective or compliant to rebuild them. I think we should demand that all trains be electric and cars be battery powered - because that would mean they would be zero emissions!
Enough ranting for now. I am not looking forward to the changes in the railroad industry and our country within the coming years. Maybe our new currency will be known as the "IOU"?
