Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 3:14 pm Post subject: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
Quote:
For the first time in nearly a century, railroads are making large investments in their networks by adding tracks, straightening curves and expanding tunnels.
Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
The government's uneconomic, tax-funded interstate highway system certainly reduced the ability for railroads to compete. With the peak oil writing on the wall, private investors see a future need and are allocating resources in anticipation of providing for it in the most practical means possible. Government meanwhile is encouraging us to burn our food.
Joined: Dec 11, 2005 Posts: 430 Location: albuquerque
Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:22 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
Quote:
Delivery roadblocks
A more immediate challenge is transportation, from missing links in the rail routes to silted-up Great Lakes shipping channels, which raise concern that coal might not be so simple to get at after all.
"Can coal deliver?" asked Gary Hunt, president of Global Energy Advisors, a Sacramento, Calif .-based unit of Global Energy Decisions. "The answer is no," he said - not without "billions and billions" spent on improvements for mining capacity, railroads and shipping About 40 percent of the coal that America bums for power comes from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and Montana. Sought after for its low sulfur content, the product is sent on trains more than 100 cars long. But only two rail companies serve the basin, and for 100 miles they share one set of tracks.
That caused trouble in spring 2005, when coal dust built up between the ties, snow and rain fell on the tracks, and the resulting slush caused two derailments. The ensuing bottleneck kept coal and power plants apart for months. Utilities started hoarding the coal they had on hand and ran their more expensive natural-gas plants more often. They filed for rate hikes, and at least two sued their rail carriers.
Railroads are investing about $200 million to improve and expand the tracks leading out of the Powder River Basin, and they point to record cargoes this year. But the National Mining Association still has concerns about the future, spokesman Luke Popovich said. "Capacity is adequate now, but it's close to being inadequate," he said.
In the coal fields of southern Illinois and Indiana, a mining renaissance is hoped for - but no north-south rail line connects them with Chicago and the Great Lakes. Purdue University recommends building a 300-mile "Indiana coal corridor" - at a cost of about $1 million a mile.
Overall, the Association of American Railroads estimates that $148 billion needs to be invested in freight infrastructure over the next 28 years. The industry says it needs federal assistance to help it cover about $39 billion of that cost. ...
Joined: Sep 25, 2004 Posts: 4534 Location: Boston, MA
Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:04 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
So that's about 5 billion a year?
That's less than what we spend on cell phone ring tones per year!
With ever increasing demand for rail transport, the railroad companies should have no problems raising this capital. _________________ "www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Joined: Mar 26, 2005 Posts: 3758 Location: over here
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 7:48 am Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
Tyler_JC wrote:
So that's about 5 billion a year?
That's less than what we spend on cell phone ring tones per year!
With ever increasing demand for rail transport, the railroad companies should have no problems raising this capital.
well, it's a start. But indeed it isn't much more than what holland alone spent a year on upgrading railsystems, linking Amsterdam to Paris with a highspeed line, and Rottardam with Germany with a dedicated goods transport line in the past ten years and the coming ten years.
Railroads aren't as cheap and easy to build as they used to; private property laws are much stronger than they were a hundred years ago and it can take years to overcome local opposition to a planned line. Also high speed trains are a high tech business these days.
I wonder if nationalisation of the railsystem, or at least the infrastructure of the railways in america could put railtravel on a highspeed track to success in America.... _________________ "The best thing about the future is that it comes only one day at a time."
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 8:52 am Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
Quote:
Railroads aren't as cheap and easy to build as they used to; private property laws are much stronger than they were a hundred years ago and it can take years to overcome local opposition to a planned line. Also high speed trains are a high tech business these days.
I wonder if nationalisation of the railsystem, or at least the infrastructure of the railways in america could put railtravel on a highspeed track to success in America....
I would argue the opposite: it used to be, if I wanted to build a railroad all I needed to do was buy or lease the right of way from the owners. Now, the owners do not have the right to grant me such right of way without government approval and many years of public debate.
I suggest it is this loss of the right of land owners to use their property as they wish that would be a greater hinderance to the construction of new lines.
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:09 am Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
LoneSnark wrote:
I would argue the opposite: it used to be, if I wanted to build a railroad all I needed to do was buy or lease the right of way from the ownersbe granted the rights-of-way by the government.
FTFY.
Railroads weren't built by assembling land from thousands of property owners; they provided access to land that had *no* owner, at least in the eyes of the mid-19c United States government.
Building railroads on land with multiple owners today is more analogous to the interstate highway system, as it was built using the powers of condemnation and eminent domain. Had it not been, it would have been logistically (and financially) impossible to build a continuous system.
One word: holdouts. _________________ "It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:12 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
Tyler_JC wrote:
So that's about 5 billion a year?
That's less than what we spend on cell phone ring tones per year!
.....
link please or perhaps you were being sarcastic?
However if you're simply just trying to say that $5 B is a drop in the bucket these days then yes I agree. Even 1 oil refinery these days costs more then that. A nuke plant used to cost $1 B per GW and now the price is double thanks to inflation.
Joined: Sep 25, 2004 Posts: 4534 Location: Boston, MA
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 1:49 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
cube wrote:
Tyler_JC wrote:
So that's about 5 billion a year?
That's less than what we spend on cell phone ring tones per year!
.....
link please or perhaps you were being sarcastic?
However if you're simply just trying to say that $5 B is a drop in the bucket these days then yes I agree. Even 1 oil refinery these days costs more then that. A nuke plant used to cost $1 B per GW and now the price is double thanks to inflation.
$5 billion is still a drop in the bucket of a multi-trillion dollar economy.
Especially when investors see that the $5 billion allocated to rail roads will yield a larger return on investment than that same money put into a toy company or a clothing company.
I see a massive reallocation of capital underway. Capital goods and infrastructure are soaking up more money and consumer goods are being allocated less money. I don't see this as a personal problem because I don't buy a lot of "stuff".
Some people might "suffer" as the result of a decline in the number and variety of plastic pumpkins available on the Wal*Mart shelves for toddlers to cart around on Halloween and then throw away but I'm not one of them. _________________ "www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Smack my Ass and call me Sally
Damn I always hear kids are $$$ to raise these days, I didn't know it was that bad. When I was younger I had a "walkman" with no rewind button. I had to eject the tape, flip it around, stick it back in, and push the fast forward button to rewind.
Tyler_JC wrote:
I see a massive reallocation of capital underway. Capital goods and infrastructure are soaking up more money and consumer goods are being allocated less money. I don't see this as a personal problem because I don't buy a lot of "stuff".
Some people might "suffer" as the result of a decline in the number and variety of plastic pumpkins available on the Wal*Mart shelves for toddlers to cart around on Halloween and then throw away but I'm not one of them.
Unfortunately there are more people employed in selling plastic pumpkins rather then building railroads. Even if capital spending increases I think there will be a net job loss because the "consuming" part makes up 75% of the economy. But hey that's fine with me too. I'm not going to shed a tear if a bunch of SUV soccer moms have to downsize to a regular compact car.
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:30 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
Quote:
Railroads weren't built by assembling land from thousands of property owners; they provided access to land that had *no* owner, at least in the eyes of the mid-19c United States government.
Building railroads on land with multiple owners today is more analogous to the interstate highway system, as it was built using the powers of condemnation and eminent domain. Had it not been, it would have been logistically (and financially) impossible to build a continuous system.
One word: holdouts.
You are right and wrong. Back then, yes, the land was government owned and so government approval is usually all you needed. Even if the land was private, again, all you needed was government approval to take it. But, if you were building a railroad on the east coast, for example, where everything was already owned, then you could still proceed even if the government was in the pocket of your rivals (which was common) because the government had no authority to stop you from buying right of way and building your rail.
That is no longer the case. If the government is lobbied sucessfully by your rivals then you are dead in the water; there is no more Supreme Court to call such governmental interference a violation of your right to contract and make a living.
Holdouts can be a problem, but men skilled in this business have mechanisms for minimizing holdout problems. I suggest a book called "the Machinery of Freedom" where examples of such mechanisms are described in detail.
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
I figured that my example of the railroads wouldn't hold for back east, but was land parcelization even in the ballpark of the levels that exist today? It seems like the problem of multiple owners has been compounded with the advent of suburbia and high rates of homeownership, where attempting to build anything infrastructural-scale (on the private end) almost assuredly results in an insolvency in short fashion.
Thanks for the info about that book - I'll look into that. _________________ "It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:07 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
You are right that parcelization would make the problem worse. But it is not clear that parcelization for railroads is worse today than 100 years ago. Railroads today, so far, do not enter urban (and thus suburban) centers because they are only interested in hauling freight. And as the average rural farm size has dramatically grown in size, I would suspect parcelization has actually decreased in rural areas, which constitutes most of America.
That said, the principle is still the same. A railroad builder back in teh day, even with a hostile political environment, will always have the upper hand when negotiating with holdouts because it has private information: only it knows which parcels are needed (only possible route for track) and which can be done without (sidings, rail yard, etc). So, thanks to its right to both lie and sign conditional contracts, circles can be run around land owners.
Now, I did not mention this, but current laws make this impossible even if the government tacitly supports the endeavor because they would still need to publish environmental studies, neighborhood impact reports, transportation impact reports, apply for zoning permits, etc. Such activity completely obliterates any would-be railroads hopes of having private information during the negotiation process, as anyone interested can just check them out from the county and know what the railroad is planning, which means everyone that could be a holdout will be, making eminent domain absolutely necessary to proceed in all cases.
edit: Of course, as I think more about it, even this has a work around if you buy the right-of-way long before beginning the political process. This will dramatically lengthen the time required, since even in the old days it would take longer to buy the land than build the railroad, but it can still be done as long as the politicians are on your side.
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:17 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
As you concur, it is definitely apparent that government intervention has made the expansion of private [infrastructural] entities at the very least cumbersome, and at worst, prohibitive.
One wonders how much of the boilerplate will continue to exist and, indeed, be enforced during the next economic depression. The post-peak future only looks bright for railroads, IMHO. _________________ "It's called the American Dream because you'd have to be asleep to believe it."
Joined: Sep 29, 2004 Posts: 2330 Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2008 10:52 pm Post subject: Re: WSJ: America's Back Working On The Railroads
Hell, in this country we can't even seem to rebuild abandoned railways even when the right of way still exists! Where I live in Allentown, PA, there used to be a line that came up from Philadelphia called the "Bethlehem Branch" because it terminated in Bethlehem PA which is right next door. SEPTA acquired the right of way from the defunct Reading Lines and closed it a couple of years later in 1984. Since then, it's just sat, in disrepair, but hell, the right of way is still there and so are most of the tracks. Local governments have done study after study as to whether they should revive it. One estimate is to electrify the entire line with a total cost of about $150M. That's chump change; maybe a couple hours worth of our Iraq costs.
There is another line which NJT is looking into restoring going from NYC to Philipsburg, NJ. This is part of the old "Black Diamond" line, which ran from NYC to Buffalo, NY. PA isn't interested in that either.
All over my home state there are abandoned rail lines which can be restored at minimal cost - no problem obtaining the right of way because it's already there. Electric trolley lines, rail lines, you name it; you used to be able to get anywhere in this state by rail. Rail transit is very cheap from an energy standpoint. It's very frustrating to see because if they can't even rebuild old rail lines, then I doubt there would be any interest in building new ones. _________________ "That's the problem with mercy, kid... It just ain't professional" - Fast Eddie, The Color of Money
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum