70 comments on Electrified Rail: An Overlooked Mitigation Strategy for Peak Oil?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
70 comments on Electrified Rail: An Overlooked Mitigation Strategy for Peak Oil?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Local
- Home Buyers Demand Short Commutes, Efficient Homes (with Backyards, Parking, lots of Square Feet)
- Streets: Utilitarian Corridors or Livable Public Space
- Summer Streets a Success!
TOD:Europe
- IEA WEO 2008 - Fossil Fuel Ultimates and CO2 Emissions Scenarios
- The IEA WEO 2008: Will coal usage be phased out?
- Oilwatch Monthly - November 2008
TOD:Canada
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
- Oil Megaproject Update (July 2008)
TOD:ANZ
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- Calculated Risk
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
“If kindness and comfort are, as I suspect, the results of an energy surplus, then, as the supply contracts, we could be expected to start fighting once again like cats in a sack.”
—George Monbiot
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Prof. Goose, Heading Out, Stuart Staniford, Nate Hagens
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Gail the Actuary, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Khebab, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Local: Glenn
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.





GAIA Host Collective
And to repeat another comment I made yesterday, here's my thinking on electricity:
* You can make it from pretty much anything, including renewables
* For the fossil fuels, it's much more feasible to sequester the carbon (and other nasties) from fixed sources like power plants, than from millions of tailpipes.
* It doesn't require many exotic new technologies. Better batteries seem to be the major technology need.
* It works well for mass transit (subways, streetcars, buses, etc), long haul freight and short haul automobiles.
* An electric driven transportation system re-centers life around towns, cities and transportation hubs.
It certainly won't be cheap to build out the infrastructure required, but over the long term, I think it might be our best shot. At least that's what all the evidence I see now tells me.
As for NYC, the major issue is time I feel. We are eventually going to complete the projects you list, but it's all being done piecemeal in segments and it will take decades to make a big impact. Replacing many bus routes with electrified vehicles that have dedicated right of way building off many of the proposed Bus Rapid Transit Routes would be a quick additional increase to capacity.
I also recently wrote about extending regional passenger rail service back to Scranton, PA and then up to Binghamton, NY as a way to re-center those exurban areas. Much of the ROW still is in place.
Thanks for all the great work on this Alan.
A multi-pronged approach would be best. I'd shy away from putting all of our collective eggs in light rail or even rail in general. In many cases it does make sense. But other decisions transportation and land use-related must be made:
LAND USE
1) Are we going to try and preserve everything in existence or will we selectively abandon (and salvage for scrap) certain types of settlement or whole regions?
-why try and extend service if the area has no longterm prospects.
2)The opposite now, are there areas near existing infrastructure that ought to be more intensively developed to better utilze those resources?
3)Are there new forms of settlement going to form that concentrate residents in a single place, putting them close to agricultural resources, education, simple goods manufacture and basic service providers. Think to various relocalization projects underway or discussed?
4) What are we going to do about the "marginal places" where the addition of missing land uses (eg adding commercial and agricultural activities) make the place viable
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
- sidewalks. duh
- bike paths/lanes and improved parking. Most close tasks can be reasonablly be accomplished via biking. Definately short distance commuting.
- bikes and bike technology - Improve the bike offerings to encorage: all-weather comfort, electric assist, expanded cargo capacity, safe children transportation, better delivery applications. Many of these already exist (I use some already) but would benefit from lower costs and higher awareness.
4)Ridesharing/hitching network. How many times have you gone somewhere only to find out someone else was going that way too? A system that matches drivers to passengers would definately encourage more car pooling5)Rail electrification. start with the mainlines and go from there. Encourage freight to be shipped this way. container use helps this. Double tracking and selective re-alignments in many areas will make freight travel faster and allow for the re-introduction of passenger rail. Reactivate older branches and ROWs.
- Urban rail extensions. Use the appropriate rail tech. Large cities should stick to heavy rail. Can you believe one of the 2nd Avenue subway alternatives was light rail? thats not appropriate. Intermediate sized cities will benefit from light rail, the more grade seperated the better. If some small towns have legacy streetcar infrastructure in place and can put it to use, more power to them.
- Personal Rapid Transit- In certain circumstances, PRT would be ideal, mostly in large mixed use campus settings with no large peaks in travel demands.
- Internet and telecommunications: Even better, if you can accomplish something online or virtually, then you DONT have to travel somewhere. How many trips has the internet already saved us?
- Hybrid or battery trolley busses- Some places and locations it isnt practical to install rail. In those cases run busses that can: (a) draw electricity from a wire in denser urban settings (b) run off battery power for longer stretches like up to 5-10 miles between wires and/or (c) run an internal combustion engine at an efficient setting to power a generator to keep charging the batteries. This technology exists. Plus if any transportation mode will benefit from fuel cells, the bus will be it. A trolleybus-fuelcell combo may be the long term goal. If we can only have to manufacture H2 from water via renewables, applying the fuel to municipal fleet vehicles could be probably quite manageable. Again, use the overhead wires for urban areas, fuel cells for those areas in between
- Electric Cars. Screw the ICE engine. Scratch the fuel cell. Plug in hybrids (near term) and straight-up electric cars need to be the way of the future. If we cant do that, at least mode choices 1-9 are still available. I'd advocate a stronger future for electric cars IF we had...
- Dual-Mode. - Even better. Imagine a network of elevated monorail-styled track network that you'd drive your electic vehicle onto and proceeding automatically, drawing current directly from the rail. Dual mode combines the practicality of the electric car (short distance travel) and gives it long distance potential. Now you could drive only up to 5-10 miles, enter the rail system, being guided automatically and then exiting and driving the remaining 5 or so miles to your destination. Public transit applications would include creating bus runs that took advantage of rail locations to create numerous flexible running lines, dial a ride and so on. A simple offline station (like for PRT) would allow totally automated PRT style use within the rail network.
- Sail assisted shipping. Maybe not going back to preindustrial transoceanic vessels but more modern sail arrays to reduce fuel usage.
- Dirigibles. If for some reason we can no longer fuel our airplanes, we could still take to the sky in airships. Just need some hydrogen and fair weather to make this work. Any takers? Granted these things didnt have the best track record in the thirties but is there any reason why they wouldnt work with some more modern design elements.
If all else fails, walking works for most of us.Bottom line is, if the settlement is light and the travel demands (peak usage) is light, personal vehicles and bicycles are appropriate. As distances decrease and densities increase bus service and biking are best. Higher densities and demand loads require rail of some flavor, reserving the heavy rail subways for those crush load demands of Tokyo or the like. Long distance trips by large numbers of people are best mad via train.
We need to make our transportation choices based on our land use patterns and if we cant make a particular mode of transit work, then perhaps we should adjust our land uses
I'm always really nervous about this tactic. But I feel I have to pursue it. I learned it from Jerome a Paris. (Lie) I knew it way before that.
Follow my lead.
Don't ever reply to your own post. Some of the best writers in the blogosphere fall prey to this. Westexas among them. Never ever do this. I'm hoping to eradicate this process. Oily.