Thought I would keep the link within the Frieght Ways family of publications (brownie points for me). So I am wondering why if the Class I railroads are so opposed to electrification, why does the FRA persist in the ongoing promotion? Will it become mandatory at some point in the future?
FRA study sees new locomotive tech as gateway to electric freight trains - FreightWaves.
I don’t think that railroads are opposed to electrification per se. It’s just that it doesn’t yet make economic sense. If the economics would work in their favor, they would jump on it just as they did with the steam /diesel changeover.
Mark Vinski
It’s not just the economics that don’t “Pencil Out” yet, we simply Don’t have the generating capacity, or grid to handle that demand currently.
As it is, CA and other places can’t even supply their current customers without brownouts and rolling blackouts, and they were (really still are) wanting to go to a zero emissions highway vehicle standard, that is currently, and in the foreseeable future impossible. Add the demands of an electric railway system to that? Shirley you Jest, BTW, who is Shirley?
Doug
Would RRs be expected to supply their own electricity with small generating plants along the routes?
If so, what kind of generating plants would those be?
Coal, and even Natural Gas, are definitely out, as are hydroelectric and nuclear.
Wind and Solar are entirely too unreliable for Baseload supply, maybe as supplemental at best, so what is going to be the Consistent, Reliable power source?
Fairy Dust and Unicorn Farts ain’t going to do it, what will?
Doug
Nope, not against modernization at all, but please do tell us what power sources will the greenies find acceptable, that will actually provide the power needed to electrify rail transportation, or any other form of transportation.
We certainly don’t have the surplus now, that would be needed, so what is the answer?
Doug
15 years ago everyone was against nuclear power and demanding wind and solar to power everything. Now their spending billions to restart dormant nuclear plants. Why they literally were the best plants to provide the base load for the grid.
An argument could be made that electric power generated by combined cycle gas turbines would be cleaner than diesel locomotives. Substituting nuclear for NG CCGT’s would be even cleaner.
Nuclear power definitely is impressive in what it can do. It has one heck of a PR issue on its hands, which seems to be a large part of why it’s not favored.
I suppose time will tell if we have nuclear plants energizing an electrified rail network in the future.
It is my understanding that currently, it isn’t very popular or trendy to make meaningful investments into things like infrastructure and long term benefits. They can make money hauling trains with diesel, why would they want to electrify? How long would it take them to see any financial benefits from rebuilding their entire system with electric infrastructure?
Not to mention, maintaining railroad infrastructure in the US was definitely once a pretty major thing- however! I get the impression that in the present day, railroads are trying to find ways to keep costs down. And one of the ways they can do that, is by reducing infrastructure, to lower maintenance costs. Getting rid of double track and such. Less infrastructure to maintain, less money needed for maintenance, more profit??
I think about how in recent history, Boston got rid of its trackless trolleys… because they were getting battery powered electric busses in a few years. They did not have them yet, and yet they wanted to be rid of their existing electric vehicles. I talked to a guy who does some contract work for the MBTA, and his theory was that they didn’t like maintaining the catenary, and that it would get regularly knocked down by over-height trucks.
I don’t think today’s railroads want to invest in infrastructure unless it is directly tied to making them more money. A for-profit company in today’s market isn’t going to string up wire unless their hand is forced.
-El
The RR are even opposed to electrification for passenger trains. The worse is CSX who even vetoed as future provision to allow for future poles on the new Long Bridge. That really surprised me. The VA rail persons even when buying a portion of the RF&P had to agree to CSX having the final say on any electrification. Then there is the CSX still owned POU - Albany having veto over any electrification.
Overhead wire decrease vertical clearance. CSX has and is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to increase the vertical clearance on their routes for the current highest shipments, double stacked containers and 20 foot 2 inch auto racks. While those are TOCAY’s limits, who knows what the future will hold.
When I first came to Baltimore to work, clearances in the Howard Street Tunnel had only recently been improved to allow the movement of tri-level open auto racks 17 feet 5 inches at 10 MPH through the tunnel, 17 foot 3 inch open auto racks could run track speed of 25 MPH. When I returned to the territory in 1997, clearances had been improved to handle 19 foot 2 inch auto racks to the Twin Oaks, PA transloading facility. The tunnel was taken out of service on February 1, 2025 to permit the construction necessary to permit the movement of 20 foot 2 inch double stacks and auro racks. With the effort CSX has put into increasing clearance heights - rebuilding the Virginia Avenue Tunnel and now the Howard Street Tunnel as well as myriad smaller issues on these routes, it is no wonder the CSX does not think highly about stringing wire over the tops of their tracks.
I spent 27 years with the largest investor-owned electric utility in Texas. We had 23 steam electric power plants with a total of 77 generators, i.e. a nuclear plant, five lignite coal fired plants, and 17 gas fired plants.
Since I retired, the company has invested heavily in wind and solar power. Last year, approximately 28 percent of the electric energy generated by the company was from wind and solar; the percentage has been growing each year.
Nuclear has been the most reliable plant in the fleet. The next most reliable were the lignite coal plants, but all but one of them has been shut down. Next up have been the gas plants. Wind and solar are covering a growing percentage of the load requirements, but their contribution is spotty, i.e., when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine, the slack has to be taken up by nuclear and/or gas. The system has some battery storage capabilities, but they are limited.
New technologies are pointing to a resurgence of nuclear. I am a strong supported of it; I hope nuclear makes a come back. When many of the other plants went down during Storm Uri, the nuclear plant did not miss a beat.
Over my career we constantly heard naysayers claim that the electric utility industry in Texas would not be able to meet the burgeoning demands for electric energy. They were wrong. And they are equally wrong to claim that the industry cannot or will not raise to whatever challenges come its way, i.e., electrification of railroads, EVs, etc.
Back when I was a Moderator on Military dot com. There was this railroad MOS guy from the Army Reserve that was leaving his deployment. Apparently, he got a job right away as a Nuclear Power Plant operator, which kind of shocked me as I thought you needed some past training for that. Not sure how the two fields of railroad and power plant operator mesh together either. I didn’t ask if they were going to train him or not. It was the Southeast, SC I think but could have been NC.
Most of the nuclear reactor operators at our nuclear plant, which ran 24/7, had served as reactor operators in the Navy before signing on with us. Irrespective of the amount of Navy experience they had, they had to complete our training program.
Electric Utilities are still capturing investment in their plants and distribution systems - as long as the get the investment they will continue to do what is required distribute the supply to those making the demands.
BALT: How do you justify CSX’s opposition of electrification of the passenger only tracks from Va Ave all along the route to Richmond? Was even written into the VA purchase contract of the part of the RF&P for exclusive passenger electric service. Also not even allowing for the new Long Bridge to be engineered for the design for a maybe future electrification poles.
Any thing OVERHEAD restricts height clearance.
CSX is a very oppositional company if they refuse to allow electrification on a passenger-only track. In the future, something needs to be done.
CSX and its predecessors have had much experience with wires and high volume freight traffic mixing like gasoline and a match.
Gee, more modern railroads worldwide seem capable of running fast freight under wires. Not the backwards CSX?