Our economy and way of life – especially in sprawling, car-crazy North Texas – depends on a steady and affordable supply of oil. It can't last, because oil is not an infinite resource. We might not be at the end of the cheap oil era yet, but when that day comes, its dawn will look something like what we're living through today.
We must start transitioning to a far less oil-intensive way of life. It can't be done overnight. Complacency is our enemy. Politicians, business leaders and every single one of us should read the signs of the times, and get on with it.
Most leaders have stipulated a list of transit's benefits, such as unsnarled traffic and cleaner air.
Another benefit now takes front and center.
When legislators blocked North Texas' rail plan in 2005, the price of gas had just broken $2 a gallon. It's now approaching twice that in many places. We hope that will sober lawmakers to the shortsightedness of kicking this issue down the road.
Rod Dreher, one of a tiny number of Peak Oil aware journalists willing to write about it, wrote the editorial. An excerpt from JHK's Memorial Day Essay is shown below:
Of course, one of the reasons that Americans are so anxious to get away on a holiday weekend from the places where they live is because we did such a perfect job the past fifty years turning our home-places into utterly unrewarding, graceless nowheres, where the private realm of the beige houses is saturated in monotony, and the public realm has been reduced to the berm between the WalMart and the strip mall. Now, we barely have the gasoline to run all this stuff, let alone escape from it for a weekend.
In most places where people live, a small fraction of the energy they spend on getting out of where they are could be spent on making their places pretty again. Parts of Texas were absolutely gorgeous -- and could be again. If everyone just stayed home and tended their gardens ....
Wishful, maybe Pollyanna thinking for an early morning on Memorial Day, but I don't see a declining energy regime as all bad -- there is a potential seriously positive upside.
While the change may be painful, a quieter, more inward-looking existence certainly has its rewards. The consumerist treadmill--a huge public relations success brought about by over a hundred years of incessant propaganda--may not be all it's cracked up to be.
That said, it nevertheless may be human nature that makes consumerism and our Baroque modern culture, a culture in which every waking moment is filled to excess with a whirlwind of activity or entertainment, so appealing. As Eric Hoffer observed:
"The individual's most vital need is to prove his worth, and this usually means an insatiable hunger for action. For it is only the few who can acquire a sense of worth by developing and employing their capacities and talents. The majority prove their worth by keeping busy."
Grand theories about "human nature" need careful examination.
It seems to me from what I can read about "traditional" societies (which I guess means "pre-industrial") people don't seem to have to prove their worth. In fact, that is largely a Calvinist idea, designed to discover who was "saved", but easily distorted into creating a consumer society to demonstrate "worth" and by extension, "salvation" through consumption.
Eric Hoffer is probably right about Western Europe and North America since the 18th century. I'm not sure if it generalizes.
Lots of people really like to stay home and fix up their places -- even now.
What you have read about traditional societies seems to be at variance with that which I have read.
Their need to prove their worth is articulated in their initiation rites, for a start.
Those who did not cut the mustard had a short life expectancy probably and a miserable life certainly.
[Industrialists] feared that the frugal habits maintained by most American families would be difficult to break. Perhaps even more threatening was the fact that the industrial capacity for turning out goods seemed to be increasing at a pace greater than people’s sense that they needed them…
By the late 1920s, America’s business and political elite had found a way to defuse the dual threat of stagnating economic growth and a radicalized working class in what one industrial consultant called “the gospel of consumption”—the notion that people could be convinced that however much they have, it isn’t enough. President Herbert Hoover’s 1929 Committee on Recent Economic Changes observed in glowing terms the results: “By advertising and other promotional devices . . . a measurable pull on production has been created which releases capital otherwise tied up.” They celebrated the conceptual breakthrough: “Economically we have a boundless field before us; that there are new wants which will make way endlessly for newer wants, as fast as they are satisfied.”
See also Paul Graham's most excellent essay on Stuff.
("...What I didn't understand was that the value of some new acquisition wasn't the difference between its retail price and what I paid for it. It was the value I derived from it. Stuff is an extremely illiquid asset....")
"This is certainly the golden heart of the great wish out there, as the empire of Happy Motoring begins to run down on $4 gasoline. It seems inconceivable that a society so bold as to put men on the moon (fer crissake) can't overcome such a prosaic problem as finding something other than oil byproducts to run our cars on."
This is the heart of the issue for a lot of people. I gave a Peak Oil Presentation last week and a gentleman who said he'd heard of it smiled knowingly and told me that I forgot about hydrogen fuel cells.
"They'll get that going when they need to..."
How do you explain to people who have never known hunger (arriving home famished because you ran in a Labor Day 5K doesn't count)or need the concept of peak oil and that that means the end of the world as they know it.
Leave it to "JHK" to get the cynicism just right. And you know, he is right... rather than public parks dictated by wise zoning rules, we have (in my area) car dealerships, car repair facilities, and restaurants jammed up against each as tight as could be arranged and to maximize the dollar return on the land. How could a society be healthy when that is the environment into which it places its children, and forces its adults to live?
I recently rented the Film Mosquito Coast with Harrison Ford and River Phoenix. At the beginning of the film Ford's Charachter Allie Fox explains to his 12 year old son via a rant the truth about America. For a 26 year old story by Paul Theroux I think that The unfortunate Mr Fox may have been prophetic after all. Worth a look if just to see Harrison Ford:
"Look around you Charlie, How did America get this way?"
One thing I rarely see JHK talk about (though I don't read him every week) is population. "World Made by Hand" sounds like a good idea and all, but the planet isn't going to support 6.5e9 people that way. As we have discussed here, the biggest edible bang for the buck (or barrel) is still industrial agriculture. If we can't feed the residents of those suburbs, the last thing anyone will care about is poor taste in architecture. And all the rapid transit, high-rise condos, low-rise condos, or 19th century-esque farmhouses etc that you care to build, will not really help that much.
One thing I rarely see JHK talk about (though I don't read him every week) is population.
The Peak Oil gurus and talking heads have taken a page from the Environmentalist and Global Warming talking heads and gurus - they avoid the population growth issue like it was the Black Plague.
And yet...
"talking about energy solutions without talking about the population problems is just like mopping the floor with the faucets running on. So that is #1 problem."
Tad Patzek
I thought this statement from the first editorial was a bit strange: We might not be at the end of the cheap oil era yet, but when that day comes, its dawn will look something like what we're living through today.
So far, I haven't seen anyone change their ways -- we're still buying big, driving long, accelerating hard -- and living large. If changes are being made, they're not being made where they are apparent. And implying that this may not be the real dawn just hurts the efforts of those who need funding to work on fixes -- investors won't invest if they think PO is a sham, or a future event (isn't 30 years from now being bandied about?).
I think the editorial above is saying in a diplomatic way "we can't absolutely prove it yet, but we're probably at the end of cheap oil. It certainly looks like the end of cheap oil. Maybe we should do something, huh?"
The big debate about whether now is the end of cheap oil can be divided into below ground and above ground. The below ground debate is all over Hubbert's theory vs new technology and new models. The above ground debate is all over the oil price signals - the big speculation debate essentially.
I think the anti-peakers have already lost the debate in the below ground arena. You have the non-peakoil world now saying that we probably won't have everincreasing supplies of cheap oil for decades. But we still hear a loud chorus of speculation claims. The above ground debate forces the anti-peakers to prove the massive oil price signal over the last 5 years to be pure speculation - a tough row to hoe. It's much easier for them to try to show just a recent, short term, crazy climb in oil prices to be just a "paper oil" anomaly. But even here, they are forced to explain things like this:
This chart shows the yearly patterns of oil price increase compared to the yearly pattern of a slow oil inventory build over the last 5 years. Both patterns show a parallel build in oil price and inventory as would be expected from the historical norm of climbing price, supply concern, and stockpiling. But in October, 2007 this pattern was abruptly changed. Short term inventory figures are not a good way to guage the oil supply/demand condition because of strong seasonal changes, transient refinery issues, etc. But there does seem to be a big pattern change that occured last October that would suggest the crazy run-up of the last few months to be perhaps more physical barrel related than paper barrel related.
And so what if it is? Are we going back to $40 per barrel? Nope. $60 per barrel? I highly doubt it.
If there is a bubble, I would expect us to fall no more than half of the current price, so I'd bet on $65 as the absolute floor, with prices in the $80-$100 range more likely. The only thing that can drive prices lower than that in the short term (in my opinion) is an economic collapse so huge that it makes the Great Depression look like a picnic. Note that Soros points to something like that as well, claiming this recession will be larger than any since the Great Depression. He doesn't come out and say that it will be worse than the Great Depression but Soros has been betting against the dollar and assuming negatives for a few years now. He was just a little early on his assumptions.
What will high-priced fossil fuel do to the cost of launching and maintaining communication satellites, cellphone towers, undersea cables, fiberoptic cables on land? What will Google's server farms cost with $300/bbl oil?
Do the great minds of TOD believe that this communication network, let alone the transportation network, can be sustained?
Do the great minds of TOD believe that this communication network, let alone the transportation network, can be sustained?
The transport network as we know it in the USA today? No. Goods will, however, be transported.
If the end comes to the consumption culture then many of the ad supported "free" things will come to an end. Wankers like the guy who set up whyblockfirefox.com will be a gone like his website about firefox.
The communication network, in some form, will continue up until man no longer makes crystal silicon. (because if humanity looses what ICs can do, tubes will look like a goal to reach from the backslide) Rolling blackouts or spotty maintence will just mean a return to UUCP and wireless gear will be the 'routing around' of broken telephone lines/way to expensive telephone lines.
Rural areas will continue to be able to grasp the brown stinky end of the stick.
Having toured a tube factory many decades ago (it was in Owensboro, KY) I can say with confidence that natural gas is a good thing to have when you're manufacturing tubes. Because mostly they are a lot of fancy glassblowing. And it'll be hard to maintain much of a network based on tubes.
If we lose the ability to process crystal silicon, we may just be looking at a return to the telegraph. Steampunk-looking brass key clickety clacking away ... :)
I don't think rockets use diesel. I believe the SRBs, such as the ones on the Shuttle, use aluminum powder and ammonium percolate powder mixed in a Polybutadiene Acrylonitrile copolymer gue.
Google invests substantial cheddar in renewables and seems intent to make bigger investments.
I can guarantee you the last barrel of oil will go into and F-22 or the tractor that tows the shuttle to the launch pad.
I ride DART rail daily, and it has been standing room only for some time. They are working on modifications to the stations that will allow the use of lower floor cars that increase capacity from 75 to 100 ppl/car. I haven't seen the new cars yet, but I'm skeptical that the increase will be that great, because people are already standing on the steps since they're always so full.
When I look at the DART website, the emphasis is clearly on adding miles, but other than the new cars, there's nothing about increasing the capacity of the existing lines. The only fix that I can see would be to modify the schedule to have them run every few minutes during peak hours. The way their budget process appears to work, I guess that will take several years.
Strategic Railcar Reserve i.e. More rolling stock "for emergencies" (along with beefed up transformers to power them) is Step #5 in my plan to reduce US Oil Use by 10% in 10 to 12 years. Useful for major, and minor, oil problems. And they last 40 years instead of one year.
BTW: On May 15th, UTA (Salt Lake City) just placed a massive order (with even larger options) for LRVs (Light Rail Vehicles). Larger than federal funding would normally allow for their system (the feds "save' money by strictly limiting the number of cars ordered (or built in New Orleans case) so there is no slack for better than expected ridership. This "over order" has created a bit of a stir in transit circles (almost all agencies want more rolling stock). But since Utah is deep red, perhaps ...
Semi-funny story. Minneapolis ridership on the Hiawatha line is much higher than expected. But even so, it drops in the winter, especially during cold snaps.
This was puzzling until someone realized that the average diameter of the average rider increases as temperatures drop, limiting the # that can be squeezed aboard. (See Tokyo for solution).
These are not new cars. DART is going to take the existing cars and splice in a low floor section (easier boarding for wheelchairs, baby carriages, etc.) in the middle. I saw prototype in 2005.
Expect slower acceleration when full, the motors are not being upgraded I understand.
BTW, a better article on the UTA order (it mentions the option orders). Smart move ! If demand increases, UTA gets extra cars with short lead time, if not they resell cars to other agencies or do not exercise orders. This commonality with other cities also allows for future trades, common rebuild work, etc.
Those station platforms are COLD. There is no place to hide to get out of the wind. They must have been designed to keep the homeless out by freezing them to death.
Good News! The governor and legislature came to an agreement and saved the funding for the next light rail line. It will connect the two cities (twin cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul) running down one of the oldest (and rather run down) commercial districts. They expect a huge boom in TOD development. Should be done in 2014.
Maybe more important than entire railcars are just the undercarriage. I am assuming that any municipality could build a body shell and seating as needed, the undercarriage is the heavy metal that takes heavy industry, and could take a while to be made and delivered. The top part could be built out in a matter of days. It might not match the rest of the rolling stock, but there might be more important concerns.
Yes and no. New Orleans was the first transit agency in roughly 60 years (worldwide) to a build a series (7 then 24) of streetcars in-house and I was privileged to watch it from the inside. The trucks (the term you are looking for) came from Brookville Equipment and are an improved PCC design.
IMO, with someone else's designs, Lufkin Industry (source of 90% of the pumpjacks such as the one to grace the masthead of TOD) could build many thousands of rail trucks/year. Might cut into the pumpjack business though.
It is not that difficult to set up a shop to assembly rolling stock, but it requires people that know what the hell they are doing ! An almost unique virtue for New Orleans streetcars (see 60 year gap). Those people are few and far between IMHO.
BTW, the side body panels of the new New Orleans streetcars are 3/8" Corten plate up to the waist. Solid aluminum forgings (about 3" by 5" cross section) support the panels on the ends (slightly thinner curved panels there), etc. Very good safety rating.
This took 20 years of planning to get done and after opening to little fanfare 2 months ago it is already too little too late. The suburban and exurban areas to the east beyond the reach of Sprinter are still inaccessible without auto transport. It is a pity that our transportation system not to mention our urban planners have been so short sighted for so long.
As JHK stated:
Suburban drive-in America is the greatest misalocation of wealth in the history of the world.
Two Memorial Day Dallas Morning News Editorials:
Editorial: The end of cheap oil?
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/storie...
Editorial: Push rail transit now
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/storie...
Has the posse been assembled for the writer of the first piece yet?
Rod Dreher, one of a tiny number of Peak Oil aware journalists willing to write about it, wrote the editorial. An excerpt from JHK's Memorial Day Essay is shown below:
www.kunstler.com
In most places where people live, a small fraction of the energy they spend on getting out of where they are could be spent on making their places pretty again. Parts of Texas were absolutely gorgeous -- and could be again. If everyone just stayed home and tended their gardens ....
Wishful, maybe Pollyanna thinking for an early morning on Memorial Day, but I don't see a declining energy regime as all bad -- there is a potential seriously positive upside.
I agree, NeverLNG.
While the change may be painful, a quieter, more inward-looking existence certainly has its rewards. The consumerist treadmill--a huge public relations success brought about by over a hundred years of incessant propaganda--may not be all it's cracked up to be.
That said, it nevertheless may be human nature that makes consumerism and our Baroque modern culture, a culture in which every waking moment is filled to excess with a whirlwind of activity or entertainment, so appealing. As Eric Hoffer observed:
"The individual's most vital need is to prove his worth, and this usually means an insatiable hunger for action. For it is only the few who can acquire a sense of worth by developing and employing their capacities and talents. The majority prove their worth by keeping busy."
Grand theories about "human nature" need careful examination.
It seems to me from what I can read about "traditional" societies (which I guess means "pre-industrial") people don't seem to have to prove their worth. In fact, that is largely a Calvinist idea, designed to discover who was "saved", but easily distorted into creating a consumer society to demonstrate "worth" and by extension, "salvation" through consumption.
Eric Hoffer is probably right about Western Europe and North America since the 18th century. I'm not sure if it generalizes.
Lots of people really like to stay home and fix up their places -- even now.
What you have read about traditional societies seems to be at variance with that which I have read.
Their need to prove their worth is articulated in their initiation rites, for a start.
Those who did not cut the mustard had a short life expectancy probably and a miserable life certainly.
Well, true enough for the children. Once they have been admitted to adult society, I suspect the rules change, except for the leadership.
However-- this discussion is probably not appropriate for the oil drum.
it nevertheless may be human nature that makes consumerism
A lot of energy was expended to train Americans to be voracious consumers. See this article from Orion:
The Gospel of Consumption:
Thank you, lilith--A great article that not only gives a thoughtful critique of American baroque culture but also explains how we got here.
I'll file it away in my favorites and use it for future reference.
See also Paul Graham's most excellent essay on Stuff.
("...What I didn't understand was that the value of some new acquisition wasn't the difference between its retail price and what I paid for it. It was the value I derived from it. Stuff is an extremely illiquid asset....")
RE JHK Memmorial Weekend Post
"This is certainly the golden heart of the great wish out there, as the empire of Happy Motoring begins to run down on $4 gasoline. It seems inconceivable that a society so bold as to put men on the moon (fer crissake) can't overcome such a prosaic problem as finding something other than oil byproducts to run our cars on."
This is the heart of the issue for a lot of people. I gave a Peak Oil Presentation last week and a gentleman who said he'd heard of it smiled knowingly and told me that I forgot about hydrogen fuel cells.
"They'll get that going when they need to..."
How do you explain to people who have never known hunger (arriving home famished because you ran in a Labor Day 5K doesn't count)or need the concept of peak oil and that that means the end of the world as they know it.
BTW, the Phoenix mars lander has touched down successfully and is sending back pictures: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2008-82
Leave it to "JHK" to get the cynicism just right. And you know, he is right... rather than public parks dictated by wise zoning rules, we have (in my area) car dealerships, car repair facilities, and restaurants jammed up against each as tight as could be arranged and to maximize the dollar return on the land. How could a society be healthy when that is the environment into which it places its children, and forces its adults to live?
I recently rented the Film Mosquito Coast with Harrison Ford and River Phoenix. At the beginning of the film Ford's Charachter Allie Fox explains to his 12 year old son via a rant the truth about America. For a 26 year old story by Paul Theroux I think that The unfortunate Mr Fox may have been prophetic after all. Worth a look if just to see Harrison Ford:
Re: JHK's Memorial Day Essay
One thing I rarely see JHK talk about (though I don't read him every week) is population. "World Made by Hand" sounds like a good idea and all, but the planet isn't going to support 6.5e9 people that way. As we have discussed here, the biggest edible bang for the buck (or barrel) is still industrial agriculture. If we can't feed the residents of those suburbs, the last thing anyone will care about is poor taste in architecture. And all the rapid transit, high-rise condos, low-rise condos, or 19th century-esque farmhouses etc that you care to build, will not really help that much.
JHK is the ultimate cynic. In World Made By Hand the world has far less people due to starvation and pandemics. Also human life has little value.
Sounds like a probable future then. Maybe I'll get his book, there might be just time enough to read it before TSHTF.
One thing I rarely see JHK talk about (though I don't read him every week) is population.
The Peak Oil gurus and talking heads have taken a page from the Environmentalist and Global Warming talking heads and gurus - they avoid the population growth issue like it was the Black Plague.
And yet...
"talking about energy solutions without talking about the population problems is just like mopping the floor with the faucets running on. So that is #1 problem."
Tad Patzek
I thought this statement from the first editorial was a bit strange: We might not be at the end of the cheap oil era yet, but when that day comes, its dawn will look something like what we're living through today.
So far, I haven't seen anyone change their ways -- we're still buying big, driving long, accelerating hard -- and living large. If changes are being made, they're not being made where they are apparent. And implying that this may not be the real dawn just hurts the efforts of those who need funding to work on fixes -- investors won't invest if they think PO is a sham, or a future event (isn't 30 years from now being bandied about?).
I think the editorial above is saying in a diplomatic way "we can't absolutely prove it yet, but we're probably at the end of cheap oil. It certainly looks like the end of cheap oil. Maybe we should do something, huh?"
The big debate about whether now is the end of cheap oil can be divided into below ground and above ground. The below ground debate is all over Hubbert's theory vs new technology and new models. The above ground debate is all over the oil price signals - the big speculation debate essentially.
I think the anti-peakers have already lost the debate in the below ground arena. You have the non-peakoil world now saying that we probably won't have everincreasing supplies of cheap oil for decades. But we still hear a loud chorus of speculation claims. The above ground debate forces the anti-peakers to prove the massive oil price signal over the last 5 years to be pure speculation - a tough row to hoe. It's much easier for them to try to show just a recent, short term, crazy climb in oil prices to be just a "paper oil" anomaly. But even here, they are forced to explain things like this:
This chart shows the yearly patterns of oil price increase compared to the yearly pattern of a slow oil inventory build over the last 5 years. Both patterns show a parallel build in oil price and inventory as would be expected from the historical norm of climbing price, supply concern, and stockpiling. But in October, 2007 this pattern was abruptly changed. Short term inventory figures are not a good way to guage the oil supply/demand condition because of strong seasonal changes, transient refinery issues, etc. But there does seem to be a big pattern change that occured last October that would suggest the crazy run-up of the last few months to be perhaps more physical barrel related than paper barrel related.
I notice today Soros says oil prices are a bubble...
Yeah--all that oil that's been sold at such high prices is going to come back on the market because of margin calls and interest rate resets.
When it does, will the price at the pump go down?
And so what if it is? Are we going back to $40 per barrel? Nope. $60 per barrel? I highly doubt it.
If there is a bubble, I would expect us to fall no more than half of the current price, so I'd bet on $65 as the absolute floor, with prices in the $80-$100 range more likely. The only thing that can drive prices lower than that in the short term (in my opinion) is an economic collapse so huge that it makes the Great Depression look like a picnic. Note that Soros points to something like that as well, claiming this recession will be larger than any since the Great Depression. He doesn't come out and say that it will be worse than the Great Depression but Soros has been betting against the dollar and assuming negatives for a few years now. He was just a little early on his assumptions.
If he is betting on a dollar collapse I can't see how that will help oil prices fall.
Should there also be a Soros, like there is a Yergin!
What will high-priced fossil fuel do to the cost of launching and maintaining communication satellites, cellphone towers, undersea cables, fiberoptic cables on land? What will Google's server farms cost with $300/bbl oil?
Do the great minds of TOD believe that this communication network, let alone the transportation network, can be sustained?
Do the great minds of TOD believe that this communication network, let alone the transportation network, can be sustained?
The transport network as we know it in the USA today? No. Goods will, however, be transported.
If the end comes to the consumption culture then many of the ad supported "free" things will come to an end. Wankers like the guy who set up whyblockfirefox.com will be a gone like his website about firefox.
The communication network, in some form, will continue up until man no longer makes crystal silicon. (because if humanity looses what ICs can do, tubes will look like a goal to reach from the backslide) Rolling blackouts or spotty maintence will just mean a return to UUCP and wireless gear will be the 'routing around' of broken telephone lines/way to expensive telephone lines.
Rural areas will continue to be able to grasp the brown stinky end of the stick.
Having toured a tube factory many decades ago (it was in Owensboro, KY) I can say with confidence that natural gas is a good thing to have when you're manufacturing tubes. Because mostly they are a lot of fancy glassblowing. And it'll be hard to maintain much of a network based on tubes.
If we lose the ability to process crystal silicon, we may just be looking at a return to the telegraph. Steampunk-looking brass key clickety clacking away ... :)
I don't think rockets use diesel. I believe the SRBs, such as the ones on the Shuttle, use aluminum powder and ammonium percolate powder mixed in a Polybutadiene Acrylonitrile copolymer gue.
Google invests substantial cheddar in renewables and seems intent to make bigger investments.
I can guarantee you the last barrel of oil will go into and F-22 or the tractor that tows the shuttle to the launch pad.
I ride DART rail daily, and it has been standing room only for some time. They are working on modifications to the stations that will allow the use of lower floor cars that increase capacity from 75 to 100 ppl/car. I haven't seen the new cars yet, but I'm skeptical that the increase will be that great, because people are already standing on the steps since they're always so full.
When I look at the DART website, the emphasis is clearly on adding miles, but other than the new cars, there's nothing about increasing the capacity of the existing lines. The only fix that I can see would be to modify the schedule to have them run every few minutes during peak hours. The way their budget process appears to work, I guess that will take several years.
Strategic Railcar Reserve i.e. More rolling stock "for emergencies" (along with beefed up transformers to power them) is Step #5 in my plan to reduce US Oil Use by 10% in 10 to 12 years. Useful for major, and minor, oil problems. And they last 40 years instead of one year.
http://www.aspo-usa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&It...
I have since gotten more aggressive.
Best Hopes,
Alan
BTW: On May 15th, UTA (Salt Lake City) just placed a massive order (with even larger options) for LRVs (Light Rail Vehicles). Larger than federal funding would normally allow for their system (the feds "save' money by strictly limiting the number of cars ordered (or built in New Orleans case) so there is no slack for better than expected ridership. This "over order" has created a bit of a stir in transit circles (almost all agencies want more rolling stock). But since Utah is deep red, perhaps ...
http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/ap/2008/05/15/utah-a...
Semi-funny story. Minneapolis ridership on the Hiawatha line is much higher than expected. But even so, it drops in the winter, especially during cold snaps.
This was puzzling until someone realized that the average diameter of the average rider increases as temperatures drop, limiting the # that can be squeezed aboard. (See Tokyo for solution).
DART is apparently getting involved in the manufacturing of these cars. It's not clear why they don't just order them as well.
http://www.dart.org/news/news.asp?ID=789
Just thought you'd find it interesting.
Thanks !
These are not new cars. DART is going to take the existing cars and splice in a low floor section (easier boarding for wheelchairs, baby carriages, etc.) in the middle. I saw prototype in 2005.
Expect slower acceleration when full, the motors are not being upgraded I understand.
BTW, a better article on the UTA order (it mentions the option orders). Smart move ! If demand increases, UTA gets extra cars with short lead time, if not they resell cars to other agencies or do not exercise orders. This commonality with other cities also allows for future trades, common rebuild work, etc.
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_view/article/2008/05/8445/siemens_ann...
Those station platforms are COLD. There is no place to hide to get out of the wind. They must have been designed to keep the homeless out by freezing them to death.
Good News! The governor and legislature came to an agreement and saved the funding for the next light rail line. It will connect the two cities (twin cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul) running down one of the oldest (and rather run down) commercial districts. They expect a huge boom in TOD development. Should be done in 2014.
And the price of gasoline on Opening Day, May 15th, 2014 will be $xx.xx/9 per gallon ?
It is VERY good to have these plans underway, because they are the first ones that can be built when the TSHTF !
Best Hopes for 7 Light Rail & Streetcar Lines operating in the Twin Cities on 5/15/14 !
Alan
Alan:
Maybe more important than entire railcars are just the undercarriage. I am assuming that any municipality could build a body shell and seating as needed, the undercarriage is the heavy metal that takes heavy industry, and could take a while to be made and delivered. The top part could be built out in a matter of days. It might not match the rest of the rolling stock, but there might be more important concerns.
Yes and no. New Orleans was the first transit agency in roughly 60 years (worldwide) to a build a series (7 then 24) of streetcars in-house and I was privileged to watch it from the inside. The trucks (the term you are looking for) came from Brookville Equipment and are an improved PCC design.
IMO, with someone else's designs, Lufkin Industry (source of 90% of the pumpjacks such as the one to grace the masthead of TOD) could build many thousands of rail trucks/year. Might cut into the pumpjack business though.
It is not that difficult to set up a shop to assembly rolling stock, but it requires people that know what the hell they are doing ! An almost unique virtue for New Orleans streetcars (see 60 year gap). Those people are few and far between IMHO.
BTW, the side body panels of the new New Orleans streetcars are 3/8" Corten plate up to the waist. Solid aluminum forgings (about 3" by 5" cross section) support the panels on the ends (slightly thinner curved panels there), etc. Very good safety rating.
Design life is 500 years.
Best Hopes for Metal Bending,
Alan
I live next to the train station in Oceanside/San Diego:
http://www.gonctd.com/sprinter_intro.htm
This took 20 years of planning to get done and after opening to little fanfare 2 months ago it is already too little too late. The suburban and exurban areas to the east beyond the reach of Sprinter are still inaccessible without auto transport. It is a pity that our transportation system not to mention our urban planners have been so short sighted for so long.
As JHK stated: