Now a new factor in the possible RR strike. River so low that traffic slowing and may stop if drought does not end. How much river traffic may try to go rail?
I suspect, but don’t know, that shipper/consignees that are set up for river transportation of their products probably aren’t configured to be able to switch their operations to rail, at least not without the expenditure of investment capital to create the rail infrastructure.
If I recall correctly, this occurred also in the late 1980s, perhaps 1987 and ADM (Archer Daniels Midland) considered buying the IC in order to move grain down south for export.
Correct me if wrong.
Ed
Roughly 65% of US grains get exported via the Port of South Louisiana. There’s 7 elevators from Convent, LA through to Port Allen, LA. All are equipped with rail facilities for unloading/loading. Only 3 Class 1’s serve the port; CN, KCS, and UP.
I am going to guess that each barge has a nominal capacity of between 5000 and 7500 tons per barge - ie upto about 1/2 to 3/4 the tonnage of a 100 car unit grain train of 10K net tons. In normal conditions, I believe tows on the Mississippi are restricted to 15 barges maximum (or at least that is what I have heard). That is a whole lot of unit trains floating down river.
[quote user=“BaltACD”]
SD60MAC9500
BaltACD
blue streak 1
Now a new factor in the possible RR strike. River so low that traffic slowing and may stop if drought does not end. How much river traffic may try to go rail?I suspect, but don’t know, that shipper/consignees that are set up for river transportation of their products probably aren’t configured to be able to switch their operations to rail, at least not without the expenditure of investment capital to create the rail infrastructure.
Roughly 65% of US grains get exported via the Port of South Louisiana. There’s 7 elevators from Convent, LA through to Port Allen, LA. All are equipped with rail facilities for unloading/loading. Only 3 Class 1’s serve the port; CN, KCS, and UP.
I am going to guess that each barge has a nominal capacity of between 5000 and 7500 tons per barge - ie upto about 1/2 to 3/4 the tonnage of a 100 car unit grain train of 10K net tons. In normal conditions, I believe tows on the Mississippi ar
Another article today . Not anything neew except another body found.
Shipping on Mississippi rates increasing. Corp of Engineers having trouble keeping 9 foot chanel. Also keeping sea water out of drinking water.
While it’s unusual, it’s not the first time. After living in New Orleans for years, there were at least several times I remember salt water making its way upriver when the river flow was low.
Agree. In normal conditions (Is anything “Normal” anymore?) the Mississippi River south of St. Louis is a wonderfully efficient transportation artery. The Missouri River flows into the Mississippi right at St. Louis. Just a few miles north of St. Louis the Illinois River also flows into the Mississippi. The added water normally allows much larger barge tows south of St. Louis resulting in lower costs per barge ton mile.
It just gets more efficient south of Cairo where the Ohio River flows into the Mississippi. So, these very large and very efficient barge tows are possible south of St. Louis/Cairo.
In addition, there is no need for an expensive lock and dam system south of St. Louis. South of there the river’s fall to sea level is so gradual that such a system is unneeded. It’s all very efficient. But…
This is a very limited market. The efficient river transportation system does not serve major grain/soybean producing states such as Ohio, Indiana
[quote user=“greyhounds”]
SD60MAC9500
Your run of the mill Mississippi River dry hopper barge has dimensions of 195’x35’x14’ with a 1500 ton capacity. Only when the 9’ channel depth is maintained. Typical tows south of Cairo, IL get up to 48 barges in a 6x8 configuration. Sometimes larger depending on river conditions. I’ve seen tows a big as 6x9. So, at 6x8 config with optimal river conditions you’re looking at a total 72K tons of hauling capacity.
Agree. In normal conditions (Is anything “Normal” anymore?) the Mississippi River south of St. Louis is a wonderfully efficient transportation artery. The Missouri River flows into the Mississippi right at St. Louis. Just a few miles north of St. Louis the Illinois River also flows into the Mississippi. The added water normally allows much larger barge tows south of St. Louis resulting in lower costs per barge ton mile.
It just gets more efficient south of Cairo where the Ohio River flows into the Mississippi. So, these very large and very efficient barge tows are possible south of St. Louis/Cairo.
In addition, there is no need for an expensive lock and dam system south of St. Louis. South of there the river’s fall to sea level is so gradual that such a system is unneeded. It’s all very efficient. But…
Isn’t that what all the hoo-hah was about touting the “public private partnership” with Norfolk Southern’s “Heartland Corridor” project?
Not to mention all the tax payer dollars invested in enabling the freight railroads obsession with making Chicago the hub of their universe.
On a Freightwaves discussion forum The head of the Corps of Engineers Mississippi River operations said tows in the area of Memphis, TN are currently limited to 5x5 configuration due to low water narrowing the channel.
As far as US railroads are concerned Chicago is already the most important hub of their universe. And it’s been that way for a very long time.
I generally do not like “Public Private Partnerships.” To me, they’re just a way for politically connected entities to get their hands in taxpayers’ pockets. Yes, many of the projects do produce benefits. So what? We don’t know if those benefits are worth their costs. It sems doubtful that they are worth their costs because otherwise private funding could be raised without taxpayer involvement. If the government causes the money to be spent on improving railway infrastructure it can’t also be spent on another project which would produce greater benefits for the population. There is no good way for the government to determine the best use for the funds.
I don’t want to be an ideolog about this. Some things go beyond strictly economic considerations. Medical care is an example. If a new hospital or clinic with advanced equipment is needed, it’s fine with me for the funding to come from any source possible. We’re talking peoples’ lives here. I don’t want folks to suffer or die because they don’t have access to proper care or medications.
But transportation, including rail transportation, is an economic activity. Investments and operations should always be self-supporting. That’s one reason I don’t like Amtrak. Amtrak takes money from work
But with a politician you get the opportunity to judge the truthfulness of their words and if they don’t pass the ‘smell test’ you and your compatriots can vote them out of office.
And taxpayers will most likely be burdened with contributing towards maintaining that status for another very long time.
You and I agree here. I was just bringing up the PPP angle because Gramp appeared to be questioning where are the tax dollars earmarked to the benefit to rail? ( the old “airports, and highways, and harbors, OH MY!” lament , wondering where rail’s “fair” share is hidden.)
Unless you’re like the Pennsylvania (?) voters who re-elected someone who was convicted of a serious crime just a short time before the election…
There was a time when voting machines had a “party line” lever, wherein the voter simply pulled one lever to vote for everyone in a given party… Some people still vote that way.
It’s been said that no form of passenger rail makes money. I would opine that no form of passenger carriage makes money - all survive on some sort of subsidy. Even your personal vehicle.
Agree!
You seem to be limiting benefit to dollars. That might be why private funding would finance a project, but government may fund a project for a public interest benefit, such as getting trucks off the public highways, reducing congestion, fatal truck/car accidents, and also saving highway repair dollars.
If transportation is an economic activity, then it should support the economy as a whole, and not necessarily be financially compartmentalized. You mention the NS Hartland Corridor in your post. Maybe the government saw a better return in helping to raise a few tunnel clearances so an existing rail line could double their container capacity, rather then building more lanes of highway all the way to Chicago.
no, I was wondering if the railroads were at the government trough in a big way.
It seems they’ve gotten hit with big mandates because of accidents. Lots of brickbats, not many bouquets.