United States of America – 2034

A Look Back at the 25th Anniversary Year -- A vision by Alan S. Drake

After an extended period of bewildering, painful and rewarding transition, the people of the USA finally feel that they have found their feet underneath them, with a clear and hopeful path to the future.  Oil consumption is down to 6.6 million barrels/day, 30% of our 2007 peak oil use, and CO2 emissions are 26% of their 2011 peak, a matter of pride for most Americans. 

Rapid reductions in world carbon emissions (almost as great as US reductions), plus some negative feedback loops, have kept Global Warming effects manageable.  Persistent and prolonged droughts in the American Southwest have been the largest effect so far in the USA.

At long last the goal of “Not One Drop” of oil is being burned to transport people and freight over the nations railroads.  All of the main and secondary lines are electrified with battery locomotives for some short spurs.

 

READ MORE HERE: United States of America-- 2034

 

Best Hopes,
Alan Drake

 

A 10% Reduction in America's Oil Use in Ten to Twelve Years

By Alan Drake

A 10% reduction in America's oil consumption is not out of reach. There is an overlooked, practical, and affordable approach using technology available today that would allow the U.S. to achieve this goal in 2017. Here is a five step program outlining this approach.

 

Step One – Electrify US Freight Rail Lines and Shift Freight to Rail

Japanese and most European railroads are electrified. The Russians recently finished electrifying the Trans-Siberian Railroad, from Moscow to the Pacific, and to the Arctic port of Murmansk. So there are no technical limitations. Electrifying railroads and transferring half the truck ton-miles to rail should save 6.3% of US oil consumption.

Electrified railroads also expand rail capacity since they accelerate and brake faster.

Today’s diesel railroads are roughly eight times more energy-efficient than heavy diesel trucks. Railroads carried 27.8% of the ton-miles with 220,000 barrels/day while trucks carried 32.1% of the ton-miles with 2,070,000 b/day (2002 data).

When we convert trains to electricity, the rule of thumb is that 1 Btu of electricity will do the work of 2.5 Btus of diesel on rural plains, and 1 to 3 in mountainous and urban areas. Generating electricity back into the grid when braking is the difference.

READ MORE HERE:  Association for the Study of Peak Oil & Gas - USA - A 10% Reduction in America's Oil Use in Ten to Twelve Years

Best Hopes,
Alan Drake

 

20 to 1 Efficiency Gains from Electric Rail

By Alan Drake

As indicated in A 10% Reduction in America's Oil Use in Ten to Twelve Years, the 20 to 1 ratio is the multiple of two factors. About 8 to 1 efficiency gain by transferring from diesel trucks to modern diesel-electric locomotives pulling trains.

And a 2.5 to 3 Btus of diesel to one Btu of electricity trade by going from diesel-electric locomotives to all electric locomotives.

Gil Carmichael, the head of the Federal Railroad Administration under the first President Bush stated in Forbes, “A double-stack freight train can replace as many as 300 trucks and achieve nine times the fuel efficiency of highway movement of the same tonnage volume.”

Link:
http://www.forbes.com/2006/05/04/railroads-intermodal-shipping-cx_rm_0505rail.html

Note that this is double stack containers. Single stack containers are not quite as efficient and “piggy back” trailers are significantly less efficient (perhaps 4 to 1). Piggy back traffic is stable to shrinking slightly as intermodal container traffic is expanding rapidly.

The overall 2002 statistics quoted in the article (below) give an 8.15 to 1 diesel fuel advantage to rail vs. truck per ton-mile. Of course, the freight mix (40% of rail ton-miles are coal) is quite different.

Railroads carried 27.8% of the ton-miles with 220,000 barrels/day while trucks carried 32.1% of the ton-miles with 2,070,000 b/day (2002 data)

In addition, there are issues of circuitry (does rail travel more miles to get from A to B than truck ?) and the relative percentages of empty backhaul. There is concern that 2007 pollution controls will hurt heavy truck mileage. If so, this will increase the ratio.

I believe that nine to one is “best case’, eight to one is a defensible ratio for efficiency gains for truck to rail freight transfers, but seven to one is equally defensible. Six to one is approaching the “worst case” IMO.

US locomotives, except for a few switchyard locos, are diesel-electrics. A diesel engine drives an electrical generator, which transmits power a few feet to an electrical motor.

An electric locomotive draws 25 kV or 50 kV AC power from the grid (specially built for the railroad), transforms it to a lower voltage and drives an electrical motor.

The grid should lose 3% or 4% or so getting to the locomotive and another 1% transforming on the locomotive.

By contrast, a standard diesel engine has a theoretical maximum efficiency of 56% (link below) and is doing quite well to get 40% real world efficiency (Btus diesel in, Btus shaft power out). Add to this the efficiency of generators in the 2 MW class (94% might be typical) and grid power can deliver electricity with s 4% or 5% loss, versus a 62.4% or so loss in diesel Btus to electricity to the motor Btus.

The ratio of 0.95 to 0.376 is 2.52 to 1. This equates well with the “rule of thumb” of 2.5 Btus of diesel to 1 Btu electricity on rural plains quoted in the article.

Link:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/diesel.html

In mountainous areas and built-up areas, the ratio is higher (3 to 1) due to regenerative braking. As the locomotive slows, the motors turn into generators and feed power back into the grid. Obviously, the more a locomotive brakes, the more power that is “recycled” on an electric loco but wasted as heat in a diesel-electric loco. More recycled power creates a higher ratio. The increase from 2.5 to 1 to 3 to 1 seems reasonable, if 20% of the energy is recycled when braking.

So 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 to 1 multiplied by 2.5 or 3 to 1 gives “about 20”. Detailed studies may show that actual efficiency ratios might be 17.8 to 1 or 21 to 1. In either case, well worth doing !

Best Hopes,
Alan Drake

 

Electrification 101

Ready-to-Go Urban Rail Projects as a Medium-Term Response to America's Oil Problems

The United States of America is addicted to oil.

And oil prices keep climbing, plus future availability is a very serious concern. What if Iran is bombed, Saudi Arabia has a revolution? What about Chavez in Venezuela, Nigerian and Iraqi civil wars, more hurricanes, or any other major oil supply interruption?

And what if world oil production peaks and starts declining? World oil exports will shrink even faster than world oil production. Half the world's oil production is used in the nation of production; the balance is exported. In a shrinking – or even flat – oil production world, domestic demand will still grow in many oil exporting nations, shrinking the volume of available exports. A serious and prolonged crunch is in store for the United States if world oil production just fails to increase steadily.

What can be done, and preferably done quickly, to save significant amounts of gasoline and provide a non-oil alternative for many millions of American commuters? A non-oil transportation alternative would be especially useful during a prolonged oil supply interruption or shortfall, when the Strategic Petroleum Reserve will simply not be enough.

One very viable alternative is to build much more urban rail – in particular, electrified urban rail – and build it quickly. Such an approach also can preserve the quality of urban functioning while ensuring adequate mobility.

In the USA, efforts to develop an adequate safety net of urban rail has been starved for funding at the federal level for decades – and even more so in recent years. One way the Federal Transit Administration rations out the relatively few dollars available is by slowing down all projects as much as possible. Thus it takes decades to build out new urban rail systems, one slow project after another.

 

READ MORE HERE:  Transportation Electrification - Ready-to-Go Urban Rail Projects - Light Rail Now

 

Best Hopes,
Alan Drake