I think this is the beginnings of an economy based on perpetual growth and fossil fuel energy running headlong into geological energy constraints. Basically I see an undulatory downward path for the rest of my life. From here out, I think any rallies in our economic condition are going to be met with spiking commodity prices that knock us right back down.
While that would be nice, it's not possible as you very well know!
Well, why post it then. Such posts only detract from anything you might be able to shed light on.
Because he hasn't a clue to the laws of thermodynamics. He believes in a free lunch.
You’re completely off your trolley and haven't a clue what you're talking about. You keep saying 'It doesn't solve the big problem', but never suggest anything to solve it. I actually think you enjoy talking nonsense just to depress people. If I said the grass was green, you would say it was blue. What do you want a suicide pact and goat sacrifice? Come out with something useful or keep your trap shut. I do not believe in a free lunch, if you have the inability to make no sense of what I'm writing or like Ludi want answers to life, the universe and everything then that's your lookout.
Joined: Apr 06, 2005 Posts: 1018 Location: 38 km west of Warsaw, Poland
Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2005 12:56 pm Post subject:
Wildwell wrote:
MonteQuest wrote:
fastbike wrote:
Wildwell wrote:
While that would be nice, it's not possible as you very well know!
Well, why post it then. Such posts only detract from anything you might be able to shed light on.
Because he hasn't a clue to the laws of thermodynamics. He believes in a free lunch.
You’re completely off your trolley and haven't a clue what you're talking about. You keep saying 'It doesn't solve the big problem', but never suggest anything to solve it. I actually think you enjoy talking nonsense just to depress people. If I said the grass was green, you would say it was blue. What do you want a suicide pact and goat sacrifice? Come out with something useful or keep your trap shut. I do not believe in a free lunch, if you have the inability to make no sense of what I'm writing or like Ludi want answers to life, the universe and everything then that's your lookout.
Wildwell,
Having read a few of these disputes between you an MQ, I think the main point of contention boils down to your believe that there is a solution to the 'big problem'. While most of us would agree that there are 'solutions' to the problem at hand, after reviewing the historical record of mankind in general and looking at the current lack of foresight and the greed and ineptitude of the worlds leaders, the vast majority of the folks here have concluded that it is time to act either on their own or in accord with others who have come to the conclusion that there is no 'Plan B'.
Hmn, no I don’t want to paint an overly rosy picture, because this stuff is a problem. There will be an oil related crash of some kind because that’s the way things are set up, but there are always crashes. Economics tends to be boom/bust. I don’t think MQ and I are that far apart, it’s just some of the fundamental reasoning we disagree on, I just don’t buy die off (although if you like it’s happening in other parts of the world) and don’t buy you cannot grow with less energy – not to say growth will go on forever, because that depends on as yet unknown technology.
Joined: Feb 26, 2005 Posts: 107 Location: By the river
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2005 4:54 am Post subject:
SidneyTawl wrote:
Or perhaps look for places that have a good chance of "river traffic"
ol, man river, he don't know nuttin, he just keep rollllinnnn onnnnn,
Then I am set. I have railroad track on one property line, and old train station 4 miles up the flat part of my road, and I live near a river that still has the shipping canal (now a state park) where boats were originally pulled by mule. The river gets too low for boats to make it "upstream" in summer.
Joined: Aug 14, 2004 Posts: 2068 Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2005 5:41 am Post subject:
Quote:
I had an idea where you could fit motors that would run in reverse (in effect generators) in addition to traction motors as you went along and feed the power back into the system as you went along, like a hyrid car. They already do this with braking now.
Trains already use dynamic braking, but the power is dumped and not re-used (battery banks too expensive???):
Quote:
While in dynamic braking mode, the traction motors function as generators driven by the motion of the train, with the output power of the generators dumped across resistor grids, converted to heat, and dissipated with fans.
Dynamic Braking is where the motors perform most of the braking, taking over from the disc brakes. As the name suggests, Dynamic Brakes only work whilst the train is moving. There are 2 types of Dynamic Braking:
Regenerative Braking: in which the energy produced by the motors is returned to the 3rd rail, where it is either used by another train in the same electrical section, or else returned to the National Grid. This sounds like a wonderfully 'Green' use of energy, but sadly the technical and financial issues could never be resolved between British Rail and the Electrical Supply authorities, so this system has never been used.
Rheostatic Braking: in which the energy produced by the motors is dissipated as heat in on-board resistors (rheostats). This is the system which is currently used. What happens is this....If the driver applies, say a step 2 brake application at 60 mph, the disc brakes initially apply at the full 2 bar pressure. After a second or two, the dynamic braking begins and the disc braking reduces - on the Driver's Duplex Air Gauge the Brake Cylinder pressure can be seen to drop to approximately 0.5 bar.
_________________ "Peak oil isn't more than an interesting industry factoid and doesn't have anything to do with the hysterics speculated on ad nauseum around here!" ReserveGrowthRulz
Joined: Apr 03, 2004 Posts: 6976 Location: My Grandkids' Farm
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2005 7:51 am Post subject:
Can anyone put numbers to the efficiency of local rail vs truck transport? Not big shipments like 200 SUVs across the country, but smaller local to local type deliveries across several counties or a couple of states.
It seems to me, rail is very efficient now because it does heavy / long haul and containerized very well. But without the trucks for the pickup and drop-off you are back to start / stop every 20-30 miles; many, many small warehouses instead of the huge ones today and still you need a way to get the small shipment the first and last 15 miles.
Of course that’s how it once was - but that was before big trucks, big regional warehouses and containerized shipping. I suppose by the time rail replaces ‘over the road’ there would be a lot fewer ‘things’ being shipped – shoot, Wal-Mart would need a line all it’s own today!
As far as where the money would come from, the popular opinion around here that sometime in the future there will be a mysterious disappearance of the profit motive and the need to earn a living (you know, the downfall of that nasty Capitalism) is a little overblown. As long as there are people, there will be trade, and as long as there is anything to trade, there will be people willing to make the investment to move those things from here to there.
The government didn’t build the current shipping system; that other evil - the Marketplace, caused it to evolve into its current form because there was a market. Amtrak is still losing huge sums because the market isn’t there, if a time comes that it starts to make huge sums you can bet rails will be going down right and left. _________________ Make a plan and work it:
Trains already use dynamic braking, but the power is dumped and not re-used (battery banks too expensive???):
I don't know about other types of trains, but urban rail systems do have regenerative braking (are we talking the same thing here?) - the extra power is channelled back to the grid. At any one time along the entire line, different trains can be accelerating or slowing down. The net effect isn't exactly zero though, so they have some fancy circuitry to manage that. _________________ Live quotes - crude oil, gold and currencies
http://www.post1.net/lowem/page/livequotes
Joined: Sep 29, 2004 Posts: 2330 Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2005 8:26 am Post subject:
Steel wheels on steel rails were first used to save on horse power. Putting an Omnibus on rails allowed the operator to keep using the same horse for a much longer period of time. That allowed him to keep fewer horses and gave him more time on the job making money. When the steam engine came along, it was natural to use its limited power in the most efficient way possible for the time - rails.
Today, railroads have something like 1/10 the initial and operating cost of a typical two lane highway. When you are hauling heavy stuff long distances it is the way to go. Add to that the fact that railroad rights of way still exist all over the country (USA.)
I think that if we have a soft landing the obvious thing to do is build trolley and rail transit. Electric trolley lines can be laid right on top of highways and are a far more efficient mode of transit than automobiles. The road bed is already there so the cost shouldn't be too bad. Years ago, there was a trolley line running down a street one block from where I live now. There is no reason why we can't rebuild this efficient mode of transit.
In my city they have put back in the trolley system in a limited capacity. Its more of a tourist thing really. It took forever was costly and it doesn't really carry that many people. They use original trolleys that have been rebuilt.
What made it so costly was they had to "accomodate" car traffic along the trolley rail lines. Cars and trolleys on the same streets, oh by the way trolleys always have the right of way. They function under the same laws as trains.
When they only reallze that you can have one system or the other will it happen and will be cost effective. I don't see that happening. The US is almost at gridlock as it is with car traffic. Changing back to rail will happen only when those in charge have given up on the current model.
I had an idea where you could fit motors that would run in reverse (in effect generators) in addition to traction motors as you went along and feed the power back into the system as you went along, like a hyrid car. They already do this with braking now.
Trains already use dynamic braking, but the power is dumped and not re-used (battery banks too expensive???):
Quote:
While in dynamic braking mode, the traction motors function as generators driven by the motion of the train, with the output power of the generators dumped across resistor grids, converted to heat, and dissipated with fans.
Dynamic Braking is where the motors perform most of the braking, taking over from the disc brakes. As the name suggests, Dynamic Brakes only work whilst the train is moving. There are 2 types of Dynamic Braking:
Regenerative Braking: in which the energy produced by the motors is returned to the 3rd rail, where it is either used by another train in the same electrical section, or else returned to the National Grid. This sounds like a wonderfully 'Green' use of energy, but sadly the technical and financial issues could never be resolved between British Rail and the Electrical Supply authorities, so this system has never been used.
Rheostatic Braking: in which the energy produced by the motors is dissipated as heat in on-board resistors (rheostats). This is the system which is currently used. What happens is this....If the driver applies, say a step 2 brake application at 60 mph, the disc brakes initially apply at the full 2 bar pressure. After a second or two, the dynamic braking begins and the disc braking reduces - on the Driver's Duplex Air Gauge the Brake Cylinder pressure can be seen to drop to approximately 0.5 bar.
Depends the system. Most rail systems if the traction is electric it goes back into the feed system. I know on the west coast main line in Britain the trains do have regen braking, but the system is not set up for it yet, but it will be. With the light rail systems it's set up for as far as I understand, and the Southern region will be. Some of the Diesel trains use resister grids and just dissipate the energy. The newer trains reuse it from batteries. But it’s the norm in Japan things like Regen. The whole system could be made even more efficient using fly wheels and so on.
Last edited by Wildwell on Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:15 pm; edited 2 times in total
In my city they have put back in the trolley system in a limited capacity. Its more of a tourist thing really. It took forever was costly and it doesn't really carry that many people. They use original trolleys that have been rebuilt.
What made it so costly was they had to "accomodate" car traffic along the trolley rail lines. Cars and trolleys on the same streets, oh by the way trolleys always have the right of way. They function under the same laws as trains.
When they only reallze that you can have one system or the other will it happen and will be cost effective. I don't see that happening. The US is almost at gridlock as it is with car traffic. Changing back to rail will happen only when those in charge have given up on the current model.
Well this is the problem - retro fitting, always costs far more money.
'Trams are powered by electricity from overhead wires and are therefore a sustainable method of travel which does not cause local pollution. Our trams use far less fuel per passenger than cars or buses and when they brake we put electricity back into the system which further improves energy efficiency.'
Joined: Feb 03, 2005 Posts: 111 Location: Nowhere Fast
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:07 pm Post subject:
Railroads are going to make a big time comeback in the US. It was really oil that killed them in the first place. Oil brought about cars and trucks. Oil also replaced alot of the coal the railroads were hauling.
It seems to me, rail is very efficient now because it does heavy / long haul and containerized very well. But without the trucks for the pickup and drop-off you are back to start / stop every 20-30 miles; many, many small warehouses instead of the huge ones today and still you need a way to get the small shipment the first and last 15 miles.
Rail is very efficeint on long haul routes and will continue to operate that same way in a post peak economy. It is not efficeint for a train to stop every 15 miles and they know it, so they have other ways to deal with the short hauls.
But I think what you will see is a large decline in the use of large trucks doing longhaul service, this will be replaced by the railroads. Trucks will still be used for local delivery and pickup, especially the smaller straight trucks.
Longhaul trains will not have to stop evry 20-30 miles, they didn't in the past, they don't now and they won't in the future.
Before the advent of the modern highway/ trucking system, as well as how the railroads will again operate post peak, trains were catagorized to their function.
For freight there are Fast freight, Local and switchers.
A fast freight could be loaded to go from NYC to Chicago but would include freight for points inbetween and beyond, however it may only stop at Rochester, NY, Cleveland, Oh, and Chicago before loading up again for the return trip back to New York.
When the train arrives in Rochester some cars may be removed from the the train and others attached to it that need to go west. The train would only be stopping in Rochester for 2 reasons:
1, It needs service, fuel, crew change, water, etc.
2, Rochester may be their major hub in that area.
Or even a combination of both reasons.
Next the train may stop in Cleveland again for the same reasons as listed above, where it would again drop off cars and pick up more before continuing on the its final destination of Chicago.
Once in Chicago, the engine would disconnected from the train and serviced for its return trip to NYC.
Some of the freight may be bound for Denver and San Francisco, that freight would be left in a yard in Chicago to be picked up by another train going to San Francisco.
To use Cleveland as an example.
The freight cars that were dropped off in Cleveland would be held in a place like Collinwood Yard, it is, or was, a classification yard where trains are broken apart for local delivery and engines and damaged cars are serviced.
Again there are 3 or more things that can happen to the freight in those cars.
1, They can be taken by a switch engine to a warehouse or dock for unloading there at the yard. Their cargo would be put into a warehouse until it is picked up by other means, mainly a local delivery service (small or large truck) who would then drive it to the customer, usually within just several miles.
Other cars may be taken by the switch engine and made up into longer trains that may go to Columbus, Atlanta, St. Louis & etc.
2, A car or several cars could be made up into a short train for delivery to a warehouse or factory that has a rail siding near the yard. This use to be common and still is in some industries such as plastics and food processors. The railroad delivers a car or several to a siding next to the factory and leaves them there, the factory then unloads the contents as they need it. When the cars are empty, the railroad brings the next delivery and takes away the empty cars.
3, Is a combination of the above two, they are the locals and will go east or west.
The local would take on cars in Cleveland and in this case I will say that it will serve the eastside.
The local would pick up cars both for delivery to Factories as in example #2 and for delivery as in example #1. They would then go to their first stop that may be 5-20 miles away and drop off some cars at a factory or two, or they may take freight cars to a small station where they would spot the cars for unloading on a siding by the station. They may also pick up a car or two either now to take to a station up the line or on their way back to be added into another train that again may be going to San Francisco or New York or anywhere else.
They would then continue on to their next small station up the line to do it all over again until they were out of freight to deliver.
Next they would turn around and stop at some or all of the small stations to pick up both empty and full cars to be returned to Collinwood Yard.
Generally, and this depends on the amount of freight and where the cities are located, Locals don't travel more than half way to the next major freight yard. Many may not go any further that 10-50 miles one way.
Once the freight is at the local station it could either be picked up by a truck for local delivery or by an individual, you may have to go to the depot to get your new Gateway computer yourself.
Many times I have gone down to the local trucking company's terminal or to the railroad station to pick up an item either to save some freight costs or because I needed it right away.
Trucks will still be needed to haul large amounts of goods to large stores or businesses but I don't think you will see them on the highway as much as today other than for short runs.
It will all come down to whether or not it is cheaper to run a big truck for longer distance deliveries or if it is cheaper bring the freight into the many nearest stations to be unloaded there into many smaller trucks for shorter distance deliveries. This will be worked out by the market and the individual business's traffic managers.
Cross country long haul will be limited to shipments that are time critical such as fresh foods or goods and equipment that must be somewhere at a specific time and the buyer is willing to pay more for the freight to get it there.
Pops wrote:
Quote:
As far as where the money would come from, the popular opinion around here that sometime in the future there will be a mysterious disappearance of the profit motive and the need to earn a living (you know, the downfall of that nasty Capitalism) is a little overblown. As long as there are people, there will be trade, and as long as there is anything to trade, there will be people willing to make the investment to move those things from here to there.
The government didn’t build the current shipping system; that other evil - the Marketplace, caused it to evolve into its current form because there was a market. Amtrak is still losing huge sums because the market isn’t there, if a time comes that it starts to make huge sums you can bet rails will be going down right and left.
I completely agree Pops. People do fall into the trap that there will be no more growth or innovation once oil gets TOO expensive or TOO limited.
Actually I see that there will be great opportunities to make money for those who can see outside the box and innovate new ways to do things.
Change presents opportunity, business as usual leads to stagnation.
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
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
