I see on the local news last night, that DM&E has dropped it’s condemnation lawsuits, in reference to obtaining land for the proposed Powder River Basin extention. In essence,they have decided to quit fighting for the extention, and put it on hold, due to the economy. I don’t see it ever coming back to life.
Reports I read say CN is trying to alter their procedures in Wyoming rather than dropping the plan entirely. Time is no longer of the essence so they are changing stratagies, not abandoning the project. They are continuing proceedings in other states along the proposed route.
I think you meant CP. I heard this on the radio just now - same statement.
The idea of it being dead was my own opinion, not one from media sources. They say delaying due to the economy. I day delaying indefinately, until some stars align just perfectly.
henry6: Can you explain what you mean, in the above post? Seems to me, they can continue proceedings in other states, but eventually they would have to deal with Wyoming landowners. Landowners in southwestern S.D. are also fighting it as well.
I am just reporting what was said. They feel they have time to make changes in their tactics and since the laws of each state are different they feel they can do something different in Wyoming than in the other states. For further details and explanation you would need quiz CP (yes, I was wrong, it is CP not CN) PR department about thier stance.
Just another theory on CP’s actions. They realized that land prices have started to fall out there as the economy slows. In addition, with the rapid expansion of solar and wind energy, the demand for coal will level off soon and the additional investment will not pay off. All of the environmental controls on coal will put it well behind other energy sources. I suspect that the Wyoming land owners screwed themselves pretty badly by holding out. They could have gotten some nice cash for desert land. They might have thought they were pretty cleaver holding out for megabucks, but the winds have changed (that is a nice metaphor) and we cannot afford to pump coal pollution into the atmosphere much longer. Sorry Cowboys!
These were my thoughts exactly when I read this story in the TRAINS NewsWire. 2008 sailed without them.
In terms of the existing DM&E and plans for the new line, I’ve always felt with the CPR’s one and a quarter century of experience moving grain and coal, that if there is money to be made in the PRB they are the right company for the job.
AgentKid
At the very least, they have to wait to see if the Cap and Trade scam gets rammed through. If THAT goes through, the line will never be built. In my opinion.
I agree some of the owners are wishing (or will wish soon) that they had sold when the offer was there.
However I disagree about the production and shipping of coal decreasing. Power plants in West Virginia ship in Powder River Basin coal in to use because it is so clean burning compared to eastern coal that they don’t need to spend as much to meet pollution control regulations that it more than offsets the shipping expense compared to local coal. Also, since it’s likely the price of oil is going to drop significantly in the future, and wind and solar are unlikely to provide a big source of power in the near future (too bad Ronald Reagan removed the tax credit for solar panels on private houses that had caused a boom in panels in the late seventies), the need for PWB coal will continue and probably increase for many more years.
I’m not sure I agree with that. I’m from western S.D. , and lived a couple years in eastern Wyoming. Yes- I’m sure there are people holding out for the big bucks, but there are bigger issues than money involved. You’re calling it desert, it’s probably best described as semi-arid. Most all of that area is used for grazing cattle. The ranchers for the most part have lived on the land for generations. They don’t want to sell their land to the highest bidder. They simply don’t want to sell the land-period.
The landowners holding out for more money is one thing. The landowners who say “no way” area different matter.
Let’s not forget that personalities play a part of what happens. Wasn’t the Powder River Extenstion the brain child/pet project of the DM&E’s president? Now that he has “explored his options elsewhere”, CP is taking time to make sure the project makes sense. Throw in the uncertainty of cap-and-trade legislation, and if I were CP, I’d take two steps back and look at the big picture, again, before proceeding.
I am not sure what other states are mandating, but Minnesota will definitely be using a lot less coal in the near future unless the wheels come off this happy bandwagon when consumers see what it does to their electric bills. http://www.newrules.org/energy/rules/renewable-portfolio-standards/renewable-energy-standard-minnesota From the link:
“Update 2007:
[quote user=“Bucyrus”]
I am not sure what other states are mandating, but Minnesota will definitely be using a lot less coal in the near future unless the wheels come off this happy bandwagon when consumers see what it does to their electric bills. http://www.newrules.org/energy/rules/renewable-portfolio-standards/renewable-energy-standard-minnesota From the link:
“Update 2007: The 2007 Minnesota legislature adopted a stronger renewable energy standard that applies to all the state’s utilities - 25% by 2025 (30% by 2020 for Xcel Ener
[quote user=“WIAR”]
[quote user=“Bucyrus”]
I am not sure what other states are mandating, but Minnesota will definitely be using a lot less coal in the near future unless the wheels come off this happy bandwagon when consumers see what it does to their electric bills. http://www.newrules.org/energy/rules/renewable-portfolio-standards/renewable-energy-standard-minnesota From the link:
“Update 2007: The 2007 Minnesota legislature adopted a stronger renewable energy standard that applies to all the state’s utilities - 25% by 2025 (
And if you believe that one, I’m got some beachfront property in Deming, New Mexico I’d like to sell you!!!
Two observations:
(1) As far as the “lefties” (or whoever) opposed to coal consumption are concerned, they are likely to be disappointed. Even if CP’s announcement means that CP is no longer actively pursuing the coal project, the lack of a CP line isn’t going to decrease demand for PRB coal. It just means that the incumbents will handle it and that, to the extent more capacity is requred to meet the demand, it will be added to the existing rail routes rather than met by a new CP line.
(2) It’s no surprise that CP would look at the PRB project more critically that prior DM&E management. Imagine yourself in the position of prior management. You are running a railroad whose future prospects are not promising unless there is a major, positive change in its business. The PRB project, while extremely risky, represents potential salvation. In this situation, it’s perfectly rational to “bet the company” on a project like this. What, after all, do they have to lose if their view is that the company is otherwise destined to fail over time? CP, on the other hand, doesn’t face the same situation. They don’t need to take “bet the company” risks to survive, and they can afford to take a more conservative view of the PRB project.
I don’t think that the current anti-coal faction was hoping that less coal would be consumed because CP would decline the PRB project started by DM&E. The anti-coal faction is in the diver’s seat, so they will simply force us to use less coal. Undoubtedly this reality has played a role in making the PRB investment less attractive than it was a few years ago. This change is just the tip of the iceberg. The anti-coal faction wants to leave all coal in the ground.
Coal (though abundant) is a poor solution to our energy needs. My point is that the coal binge may be over. At least the management of CP is bright enough to recognize that they cannot hang their future on coal. I wonder if UP and BNSF are seeing the light ?
What should they do if they do see the light?
And what light would that be?