<Peak Oil and Economic Growth: Where Do We Go From Here?The Oil DrumAndris Piebalgs : getting a sense of proportion>
<DrumBeat: March 28, 2008DrumBeatDrumBeat: March 30, 2008>

197 comments on DrumBeat: March 29, 2008

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Nate Hagens on March 29, 2008 - 11:30am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

That quote by Greer is excellent and spot on. Thats the problem with EROI analysis - it doesnt go far enough. Not only to we need high energy gain to continue our current trajectory, but we need this energy gain TO COME IN THE SAME FORM THAT IT HAS BEEN, namely liquid fuels. If global EROI of oil is around 19:1 (so says Charlie Hall), and declining quickly, I would argue we need a 30:1 gain with equivalent scale in order to transition the infrastructure into something that can use renewables. So we need both high EROI technologies AND enough additional energy surplus (over and above what we need to grow) to make the transition. Greer said it better than I, but basically replacing 20:1 oil with 20:1 wind is only sufficient, once the wind/electric infrastructure is in place. I had to buy a new tire for my truck today - on the way to store I saw people with flame machines and petrochemicals repairing the cracks in the county road - a crew of 10 people and 4 trucks - all this stuff has to stay reasonably constant while we transition to new modes of energy. To do that we need more than we initially had.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on March 29, 2008 - 2:00pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I would argue we need a 30:1 gain with equivalent scale in order to transition the infrastructure into something that can use renewables

Ed Tennyson estimated that it would take $250 billion (current $) to electrify and improve speed & reliability of the US rail system enough to displace 67% of current and future US truck traffic.

I estimated $400 billion to displace 85%.

Better (but not TGV) passenger rail would come as a byproduct.

I figured 8,000 miles of "CSX"# type rail (grade separated, 2 tracks regular freight at 60 to 70 mph, one track pax & express freight at 100 to 110 mph). About 24,000 miles of double tracking, better signals, etc. About 65,000 miles electrified of 177,000 miles (80/20 rule).

# CSX has "on the table" a plan to do this from Washington DC to Miami.

Add $20 to $60 billion/year for Urban Rail.

Building new renewables (or nuke) to run this would be trivial.

Best Hopes,

Alan

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
R W Reactionary on March 29, 2008 - 8:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Hi Alan.

When you target 85% are you referring to inter city trucking? [Makes a lot of sense -- most long haul trucking does not involve truly time critical cargoes and it is difficult to believe that long haul trucking is less labor intensive -- other than the initial investment which is born by the railroad, most long haul trucking seems to make very little sense on any basis -- if the cargoes can be delivered to the customer's location!] Short haul -- probably not ever customer is going to relocate so as to have their own siding.

Also, is there work underway on getting a better inter modal hand off between rail and truck for the final delivery? I have not studied this question to any degree, but I have in recent years watched a massive switching yards more or less stripped of track. If we are going to transfer cargo the old way, it seems to me that the switching yards are going to be very busy places.

Thoughts?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on March 29, 2008 - 9:31pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

The goal is to make express rail time and reliability competitive with trucks for those shippers that require that. Canadian National type operations are assumed (scheduled trains several times/day).

An 8,000 mile network (mainly Texas, Kansas City, Minneapolis and to the East plus San Francisco to Tuscon) of 100 to 110 mph express freight trains will add speed and reliability. Even if only a portion of s trip can be scheduled on a semi-High Speed rail line, delivery times improve considerably. 60 to 79 mph service could become "normal" on regular mainlines.

Highway congestion in major cities and 62 mph governors lowers the bar a tad in competing with trucks on speed and reliability.

Until (and it will happen !) customers relocate to a rail spur (or build new ones), intermodal will be required. The number of intermodal locations will increase, and many will be quite small operations. (Does Tuscaloosa Alabama get it's own, or does it uses the intermodal center in Birmingham ?).

In the first years, with diesel only $9/gallon, it will be Birmingham. Later, having it's own intermodal center will make sense.

Ed is working on a model for EMUs# carrying passengers and less than truckload freight (like old days of Railroad Express). Charge sky high freight rates (in comparison to unit cars of coal), but "affordable" to get appliances, small packages, fruit, etc. delivered at the railroad depot of smaller town. Say $21 to deliver refrigerator from big city 200 miles away to RR depot. Merchant or individual takes it from there.

Combine one or two EMUs with less than truckload freight with basic passenger service (decent seats & bathroom, but no dining car, sleepers or lounge) in one or two EMUs and one can make money today in his opinion, if done right. Service 2 to 6 times/day "depending on demand".

# EMU = Electric Multiple Units, self propelled electric rail cars that can operate singly or in trains of any length. Passenger seating could be 66 to 88/EMU.

Basic passenger service, several times a day, going to "big cities" on either end (including airports) as well as small twons along the way could be quite attractive for trips of 80 to 300 miles for a good % of the population (perhaps not a majority).

Best Hopes for Non-Oil Transportation,

Alan

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
WNC Observer on March 30, 2008 - 9:44am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Alan:

Now here's a thought - I wonder if intermodal shipping containers could be retrofitted to carry passengers? This could be a way to ramp up passenger capacity quickly, and to integrate freight and passenger traffic.

Not ideal, by any means. But it reminds me a little bit of the Cuban contraptions pulled by a semi - whatever works.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on March 30, 2008 - 11:28am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

FRA would have a seizure ! *SO* far from current regs, etc.

A few years after TSHTF, who knows ?

Alan

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jewishfarmer on March 30, 2008 - 9:15am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Nate, I think you and Gail and Greer et al have it spot on. Now let us estimate the likelihood of a *short term* turnaround in which such energy supplies become rapidly available. All done estimating ;-)?

Longer term, we can probably gradually ramp things up to an extent, depending on economic factors and what else we decide to do - but the question becomes, if we aren't going to make a rapid transition, what do we do in the meantime - do we put everything we've got to trying to build the new infrastructure and in the meantime screw the majority who aren't going to get personal solar or wind, and are going to be left with cars that don't work, and houses that don't heat, and no health care or educational system that can work without fuels, or do we accept an even longer lead time on any transition, and do what we can with what we have to soften the blow for most people, by keeping up lifespan, quality of life and allowing people to live decently - but at the price of a longer time before we can ever run as a high energy society?

I think those genuinely are the choices, and I know which side I personally stand on. But it is a tough decision - and tough stakes, and the price is high either way.

Sharon

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
WNC Observer on March 30, 2008 - 10:11am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Sharon:

Unfortunately, given our political system here in the US, it is unlikely that any such choice will ever be made. I doubt that we're even capable of making effective major public policy choices any more. Whatever happens will happen by default. Which means that there will be no big, coordinated, well-though-out programs, crash or otherwise. "Business as usual" will continue long past the time when things are no longer "usual". Whatever big government initiatives are eventually undertaken will almost inevitably be wrong. (Corn Ethanol is exhibit A.) Infrastructure and artifacts will deteriorate and eventually be abandonded on a piecemeal basis. Decline will be gradual and inexorable - we will continue to hear "there's light at the end of the tunnel" and "prosperity is just around the corner" until we can't stand it any more, but things will just continue to get worse.

Energy conservation and alternative energy investments will also happen piecemeal, a little bit here, a little bit there. It will never be enough "to allow us to run as a high energy society", but gradually individuals -- and thus society as a whole -- will adapt and adjust to the future reality. That future reality is a society that is much poorer and necessarilly more frugal. As I figure it, if we end up as well off as Costa Rica, we'll have done well - and I see that as probably an overly optimistic hope.

And yes, the majority of people are going to get screwed, big time, along the way. It is not going to be a pleasant or happy time.

The bottom line advice for most people in the US (and this pretty much holds for other parts of the world as well): Get your debts paid off sooner rather than later (while you still can), and own some property free and clear; make investments to the extent that you are able in household energy efficiency and alternative energy; produce as much of your own food as you feasibly can; and in general downsize your lifestyle and live frugally. Don't worry about the fact that the people around you aren't doing the same, yet. They'll be following along soon enough.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.