posted
Just out of curiosity I did a google search on diesel locomotive fuel consumption. UP says on their freight locomotives that they average 4 gal per minute at idle and 180-200 per hour at full throttle. The most recent generations of 737 aircraft use around $750-800 gallons of jet fuel per hour. There isn't the same kind of stable commodity market for jet fuel that there is for diesel. It is subject to wider swings.
I know there have been some recent musings on these forums about how amtraks cost per passenger has been going up versus the airlines and other providers. Whether I believe these statistics or not isn't germaine. Purely by the fuel consumption figures one can see that a train system achieving proper passenger volumes would be very economically sound. Notwithstanding that there has been little if any investment or wise application of capital due to bureaucratic meddling. If we saw continued upward pressure on petroleum products and a privatization of rail with investment as well as cooperation from freight railroads there isn't any reason we couldn't have a quality rail system like many european and asian countries. Folks gas if over $6 a gallon in Great Britain for example. Rail is an option with some enlightened thinking. India is a big country..Thailand is a big country...China is a big country. They all have passenger rail that works.
Posts: 15 | From: Tulsa | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you look at Amtrak's monthly reports (the redesigned ones that have been coming out the past few months) you will find a "Gallons Per Train Mile" figure. You will also find the average cost per gallon of diesel for Amtrak.
Posts: 286 | From: Knee deep in the retention tank | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by doveman: If we saw ... a privatization of rail with investment ... there isn't any reason we couldn't have a quality rail system like many european and asian countries. ... India is a big country..Thailand is a big country...China is a big country. They all have passenger rail that works.
It seems you are making a leap here-- are the passenger rail companies in Thiland, China, and India owned by private companies or the government? How heavily are said governments involved in supplementing whatever private rail infrastructure exists in those markets?
Posts: 108 | From: Culver City, CA, US | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
To get back to the original thread topic, there was an article on energy use by intercity passenger trains on this past week's NARP hotline. I think a P42 averages around a gallon per mile at track speed, depending on loading. I know they said fuel savings over the F40s (at least one of which in HEP mode all the time) were around thirty percent.
For the umpteenth time, cost per passenger is worthless; you must consider the cost per passenger mile. You must also consider the amount of prying it's going to take to get Americans out of the private automobile. I find it amusing to sit back and watch sometimes. The only thing keeping back Amtrak is a sensible approach to funding, yes, both operating costs and capital projects. They've got more locomotives than they know what to do with right now (good riddance, mail and express) and around half of them are roadworthy because they've also got half the maintenance personnel they had in 1997. At least heavy overhauls were restarted. All those "privatized" systems took control of existing, serviceable infrastructure, and are subsidized for capital improvements. Amtrak gets about 50% on both of those fronts, and to keep the trains running has historically been forced to curtail maintenance. Also, there's that pile of sixty-seven Superliner cars, fourty-three of which are recoverable, sitting around waiting to be fixed from accidents. (not to mention the single-level stuff sitting around, 8519 anyone?) That's where your maintenance staff comes into play. More available equipment would allow them to put more equipment on trains, sell more seats, and serve more customers. Does anyone remember when the Cardinal was equipped with Superliners? That one died a nearly silent death. Now the train doesn't even have a dining car. Four out of five Lakeshores I saw this week had either three or four coaches. Previous years they would have had five, maybe six in mid-summer. It's a good thing we can build suspension bridges in Alaska to serve 150 people though. They've got cars, which are better, because you don't have to sit next to strangers in your own car.
Posts: 391 | From: Schenectady | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
