Peak oil solution – electrify the rails
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; mso-ascii- mso-ascii-theme- mso-fareast- mso-fareast-theme- mso-hansi- mso-hansi-theme- mso-bidi- mso-bidi-theme-}
High speed rail ”“ it”™s all the rage. We”™re going to run it from New York City to Albany, to Buffalo and Montreal. It will solve the economic woes of upstate New York, the oil problem, the freight problem and probably countless others.
To be sure, it does sound too good to be true ”“ and it probably is. However, there is one very large step that must be taken before passenger rail can become more than just an also-ran in the freight world.
For one thing we must address the matter of peak oil. An article in the Wall Street Journal one year ago should have lit a fire under the most recalcitrant politician/policymaker. Jeff Rubin of CIBC World Markets in Canada had predicted $200/barrel oil in 2012. He recently adjusted his date to 2010. Of course, he was writing that before the current recession took hold and the price of oil fell back and peak oil appeared to disappear. But the gravity of the problem hardly went away. Rubin points out there is a 4 billion barrel a day decline in the output of the Saudi fields now. That in combination with oil-producing nations”™ increase in use of their own oil assures an unhealthy shortfall in the oil available for the world”™s use.
By the time the impact of peak oil kicks in it will be too late to simply switch to another energy source, as if there is one up to the task. Whether it will occur around 2012 or 10 years from now ”“ it doesn”™t matter ”“ we need to prepare now. In case you are counting on Alberta tar sands or Montana shale, think again. These energy sources may require as much energy to create usable oil as the resource supplies and they are stunningly destructive environmentally.
The answer to a whole range of critical issues facing the nation, if a barrel of oil even remotely rises to the level mentioned by many energy analysts, would be the electrification of the entire U.S. rail network. This is hardly a radical suggestion. Our trading partners around the world are way ahead of us in this strategy. Such a national policy has a range of positive impacts ”“ reduction in use of imported oil and thus greenhouse gases, modernization of the chaotic national grid, reduction in costs of road repair caused by truck traffic, employment opportunities and endless other positives. Not to embark on a comprehensive program for electrifying the U.S. rail network is to assure the nation”™s decline as the primo economy in the world. If you cannot move your goods around the country affordably you have no economy.
Having just seen the History Channel”™s presentation of the “Crumbling of America,” a survey of how truly terrible the infrastructure here really is, there is no time to lose. The tenuous character of the national grid, as illustrated by the blackout of August 2003, should have been a wake-up call but apparently not since only a small part of the stimulus money has been set aside for infrastructure improvements.
For the most part, U.S. rail lines are privately owned, which can be a positive in getting this initiative off the ground. First step is to double-track those lines that still rely on sidings to get Amtrak out of the way of freight trains. When a rail line is double-tracked it can carry three to four times the freight of a single track. Replacing tracks that were torn up in the 1960”™s would not double the cost. Already installed signals can serve two tracks as easily as one track.
The electrification of rail lines opens up the possibility of using the rail right-of-ways to locate electricity generation, meaning wind turbines, eliminating the need to deal with the thousands of municipalities along the way while generating the energy needed for the rail as well those same communities.
In the age of tight money we have to spend smarter, particularly in the light of reduced energy availability. Adding a lane to an existing freeway (as New Jersey is contemplating on the turnpike) will cost as much as the original roadway. The more money invested in rubber tire solutions the more the average cost rises. And that doesn”™t take into consideration the increased wear and tear on the highways. Adding road capacity in every measure is a non-solution.
Surviving the Future explores a wide range of subjects to assist businesses in adapting to a new energy age. Maureen Morgan, a transit advocate, is on the board of Federated Conservationists of Westchester. Reach her at mmmorgan10@optonline.net.