Tonight there is an article on the FoxNews.com website about a resurgence in rail traffic and using formerly abandoned or mothballed rail lines. It seems that shippers are discovering the fact that rail is far less costly, in terms of fuel use, than road truck shipping. Guess those CSX commercials about a gallon of diesel fuel moving a ton of goods almost 500 miles have finally been paid attention to. Railroads don’t need to share the road, they can easily offload to local street transfer and- imagine this- they are far more “greener” than the alternative! (but us model railroaders already knew what a good thing rail transport is!) Another reason to keep on modeling! Cedarwoodron
Good news, for a change. I always hate to see rail lines being torn up, whether thinking “green” or railfanning. Rails to trails make nice places for folks to get exercise, but they aren’t making the best use of all resources. Trucks are great for the short haul, but…
Thanks for the info.
Richard
I read the article too. It also mentioned 100’s of jobs will be created by opening up these old short lines and the trackside industies that supported them. It could be a boom like the railroads experienced in the 30’s,40’s and 50’s that sparked the booming model railroad industry…maybe history does repeat itself. We can only hope.
The railroads can be part of a growth economy provided such an economy is still possible in future. Railroads have always made good sense. Trucks are needed just to locally distribute goods. They don’t need to choke up the highways. Sure, for overnight or two day emergency delivery out to 1000 miles of several tons, 18 wheelers can still do that, but building up the railroads to a level where the large trucks are pretty much a thing of the past just makes good sense.
I am no greenie or tree hugger but a scientist/engineer, practicality and reasoned logic are easy to come by in this case. The greeness of more trains and less trucks is merely a side goody to make all the high strung, emotional folks happy.
I predict a great future for the railroads if we can hold the country together in an organized fashion long enough to make a slow, steady comeback. Certainly, cross country rail moving huge tonnages is already booming.
Interurbans, I predict, will also make a comeback freeing up the need for personal cars on daily trips to and from distant work places much as some metros have done or are trying to do.
Richard
I find it intersting that enviromentalists want to stop the green shipping of goods that rail provides.
UPS and FedEx discovered this years ago with rail intermodal service for ground shipments beyond a certain distance over their trucks. When I order something from a company in the West, tracking shows it picked up, delivered to a distribution center, and “IN Transit” from there. I know the pacakge is on a trailer which is on a train. 4 or 5 days later, tracking shows it arriving at distribution center in MA, then on a truck to Maine that night, and “Out For Delivery” to my house the next morning. I see rail shipment of my packages from anywhere from the Mountain Time Zone west
That’s old news since railroads been saying rail shipments has seen growth over the past few years…IIRC Trains Magazine mention that last year.
Even single boxcar shipments has seen a small growth.
I also find that strange. The Sierra club has opposed BNSF’s double tracking of Abo Canyon and DM&E’s line through Rochester. People who don’t want a rail line reactivated throught their area also cite they’re afraid that dangerous chemcals would be hauled on it. My question to them would be “Would you rather have those chemicals shipped on trucks and sharing the road with the family vehicle, where it’s more likely to have an accident?”
Just more of the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) mentality. But, they don’t mind reaping the benefits.
A few years ago when the reactivated a short section of the old Wilmington & Northern, the people all complained. Well, you bought a house with a railroad track in the back yard. Me personally, I would love to live there. They basically got told to stuff it, because the railroad tracks had been there before the houses.
Then they have the huge sensationalized news stories liek the denatured alcohol tank cars that went up in a gret big fireball the other day. And all the comments about how dangerous trains are. So you would rather have the 10 or more tank trucks per railroad tank car to carry the same load, on the roads, with your family car, and maybe the schoolbus carrying your children to and from school? Yeah, can;t teach common sense, or logical thinking, let alone science that explains why it is so much more efficient to ship by rail.
–Randy
OP: and I guess that is the flip side of the story, that the greenies will do their best to thwart the resurrection of these lines (and our economy, in part) by bringing up all sorts of what abouts and what ifs; not to mention that the NIMBYies will try to accomplish the same goal as the greenies, albeit with different arguments. The Luddites wanted no powered mills back in the 19th century and tried to turn back the clock- the greenies and NIMBYies have similar goals. Cedarwoodron
I remember this…my grandparents live along the old right-of-way…a house next to them was bought about 2 years before the tracks were rebuilt and the guy said “Ididn`t know that trains were going to run here again…if I would have known I never would have bought the place”…they have only been talking about reopening the quarry sine 1990.
That is the mindset of many people for some reason. For the oddest reasons, in my town, people think that railroads are the most dangerous form of transportation. Why? Trains crash. Well, they don’t believe me when I say that the railroads have the same record of safety as the airlines. They still don’t believe me that even though that the pieces of equipment are several hundred tons in weight, they are so fuel efficient, it’s crazy. Even a smart car can’t compete with it.