Way to go STUPID UP!
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=46&u_sid=2136526
Who owns the rail spur that needs the upgrade?
and who is going to pay for the upgrade?
Not being able to access the entire story, I can’t say too much for certain. Since this is an outbound shipper, UP MAY be willing to upgrade the spur if the shipper is amenable to a surcharge on its rates to cover the costs of any upgrade. If, as was suggested above, UP does not own the spur, expecting UP to upgrade it out of its own pocket is hardly reasonable.
(1) I see this all the time. UP is well within it’s bounds.
(2) Shame on ethanol plant boosters for being so stupid. (Agri-dummies!)…probably never even thought there would be contractual responsibities and terms in the contract that would curl their toenails.
(3) Jamie hit the nail/spike on the head. Wouldn’t be surprised at all that the industry just expected the railroad to show up with cars, was not going to be responsible (ever) for track maintenance and would howl every time a wheel hit the ground.
(4) And then there are the issues with the under track pits, clearances and rube-goldberg wacky assumptions in these plants that the agri-dummies come up with that stop railroads from serving the plants for fear of killing a switchman.[:(!][:(!][:(!]
I am so proud of the UP for doing that, although their reasons might be suspect!
Ethanol is crap, and I will never run it in my vehicles. THe MPG takes a huge dump with that swill in the tanks. And the thought that is saves oil is smoke and mirrors at best. There have been more than a few studies showing ethanol to be a net energy loser.
SPIKE
Jake, a little history for you. Ethanol was used as a gasoline additive long before lead was added to boost the octane. A lot safer too. The biggest problem with changing to it in an engine that was run on regular gasoline is that the ethanol acts as a cleaner and removes the gunk from the fuel system. This is the crud that caused the problem back in the 70’s with gasohol (sp?).
And another big difference, the source is domestic, not in the Middle East making terrorists rich.
Since your link doesn’t get one to the full text, perhaps you should read it BEFORE forming an opinion…
Railroad Dispute Halts Ethanol Plant
SIOUX CITY, Iowa (AP) - Plans to build a $140 million ethanol plant are
on hold after Union Pacific Railroad said it would not upgrade a rail
spur needed to haul large amounts of corn to the plant.
Officials from the city and Baard Renewables, based in Washington
State, learned in a meeting last week with Union Pacific representatives
that the rail spur needed improvements to handle increased traffic.
“Union Pacific said they were not going to spend the $2 million to $3
million necessary to upgrade,” said Don Willoughby, Sioux City’s
business development coordinator.
Baard officials then told the city they no longer wanted the site if
grain can’t be delivered to the plant by rail. The company also planned
to move grain by barge on the Missouri River.
Willoughby said Baard had been talking to Omaha-based Union Pacific
throughout the planning stages for the ethanol plant, but those
discussions took place with the railroad’s rate division and not its industrial
development division.
“Everybody’s disappointed on this,” said Craig Conner, Baard’s vice
president of finance. “Information like this coming up this far into the
process usually doesn’t happen. That’s where our due diligence fell
down.”
Baard switched developers midway through the project, he said, which
resulted in the rail spur issue not being thoroughly checked.
“That probably was a piece of information that didn’t get handled real
well,” Conner said.
Baard is still interested in building an ethanol
So, a US railroad company craps out on capacity enhancement for a US production facility? Is anyone really suprised? In the meantime, UP is spending how much to further upgrade it’s import intermodal corridor?
I suspect that if it had been an Asian company that had proposed this plant (all other items being equal), UP would be falling all over itself to provide the necessary track improvements.
And yes, ethanol is a complete waste of resources. Yet the same would probably be happening if the proposal had been for a new coal fired power plant.
I’m amused that 2-3 mil for the siding would derail a $140 mil project. That adds what, 2% to the overall cost of the project? Was their guesstimated profit margin that thin to start with?
Everybody always seems to think the RR has an obligation to connect them to rail. Ethanol requires rail as it cannot move by pipeline. Sounds like these guys just figured they could lever UP into spending the cash on upgrading their spur. I’m amazed that these folks didn’t factor the cost of the spur into their calculations. I’m actually sure that they did. They were merely hoping that they could get either the UP or localities to pay for it. Look at how Toyota got the State of Texas to pay for a long spur to bring rail to their new truck plant near Austin.
They’ll just have to find a better location and try bringing the RR into it this time. I wonder if there is a switching contractor or small short line opportunity in all this…
Too far away for me to chase it, but perhaps there are those in the midwest with the time and inclination…
LC
Darnit and I was hoping the city would pay to concrete the driveway from the street to my house, because they should be glad I built my house in their town. [banghead]
Then why is the Government trying so hard to push harder to add more ethonol plants.
Limitedclear,I was not Forming an opion on stUPid.
I detect more than a little bit of xenophobia on the part of FM. Let’s see, the diesel engine was designed by a German, Hermann Lemp was Swiss, etc., etc., etc.
They got the Ciity to agree to give them the land. They probably also were promised a property tax enhancement package to help lure them to Sioux City. It’s not unthinkable for them to expect the railroad to give them a rail siding, when you look at how these type projects are financed. They asked UP for a freebie, UP said no. It’s time to scrape up more money, or move on. Who do you suppose they were going to hit up for a barge unloading facility? My guess would be Uncle Sam?
I don’t see why some of you are against ethanol. Because that oil deep down in the earth WILL run out someday. There’s no question there. Now we’ve found a new way to make fuel and you’re all complaining. I know, not all vehicles run on e-hol. There was a study and only 20% of cars in IA can run on the new 85% e-hol (or whatever it is). But I think e-hol is a pretty good invention. They just need to try to make a better blend so cars run better on it. For example- I can’t run e-hol in a lawn mower. It doesn’t run well. But these lawn mowers are 20+ years old & that’s why. If i put e-hol in a new mower; it might run fine.
Ethanol:low octane+lousy milage.No thank you.[:(!]
I was wondering the same thing. Thats like saying you can’t afford to build your new $300,000 home because the $3,000 cost of the driveway. Lame. I think they are just playing games hopeing to have someone else pay the tab.
Ethanol or more specificly E-85 at the pump is 105 octane. The reason why you get 20-25% less mileage is because ethanol burns at a lower BTU than regular gasoline, it takes more to get the same heat. Personally I don’t see a *** thing wrong with the 25% mileage drop. Ethanol is a renewable fuel, gas/oil is not. I still don’t see why you people have a problem with it. You **** and moan and fly off the handle about terrorists learning how to shut down a locomotive, yet you still pull up to the pump and burn regular gas. WTF? If you have a flex-fuel vehicle, I’d suggest you use more E-85 and keep your money domestic.
But is the ethanol planned to be used as a gasoline additive, as it was in the 70’s, or a gasoline substitute?