Interesting article, if somewhat truncated from what one would suppose would be included in this particular subject matter…(insert fake coughing sound “DME!”):
Missing Quote of Note: “DM&E’s PRB line cannot be built too soon…”
[banghead]
Oh well, can’t complain about the author or the paper too much, given that the paper put some neat photos of PRB trains in action!
But really, how seriously can we take the claims by UP and BNSF that “we’re putting in track about as fast as we can build it”? They are projected to spend only $100 million for Orin line improvements, while the DM&E line into the PRB itself has to be a couple of billion itself out of the whole $6 billion project total. Shouldn’t UP and BNSF also be projecting billions for new PRB trackage if they really want to keep up with demand?
You can take the claims of U.P. seriously. You say that U.P. will spend “only 100 million dollars” on the Orin line. Keep in mind that the Orin line is only a small fraction of the total trackage for the railroad. There is an entire railroad to work on and there will be system gangs all over the railroad. We do have some 35,000 miles or so of mainline to maintain. DME doesn’t have much of an infrastructure to maintain.
I see someone’s grasp on reality (what little there was, shut-ins tend to be just a little myoptic as well) has been reduced. If you are around the M/W forces up in NE Wyoming for any period of time, you’d see how tightly the manpower rubber-band is stretched. You would also see that construction activity is constant (even at this time of year, which is almost counterproductive in moist or frozen conditions)and everywhere you go… Try to bring in additional manpower there and then the question becomes where do you put them, how do you avoid burning them out and how do you keep the operating side fluid?
You also have to look at the fact that UP and BNSF already have the land, or most of it. Adding another track to an existing right of way, is far cheaper then building an entirely new line.
DME will have to aquire the land. In addition to the construction costs, there are the costly environmental impact studies and any remediation those studies will require. And don’t forget the NIMBY factor.
Another factor that wasn’t mentioned is that many utilities have gone to “just-in-time” logistics and have eliminated the 45-day surge inventory of coal that was often seen at many power plants, which leaves little to no margin for error in delivery.
Despite what FM may think, $100 million is still a lot of money, and both BNSF and UP still have to maintain and upgrade the rest of their system, so the allocation of M/W and upgrading dollars is often a matter of setting priorities on a systemwide basis.
Dave knows all of this…he just baited his hook and cast out, and now he is getting a few nibbles.
Give it a few more replies, and he will set the hook, then proceed to bombast us with the evils of the railroad monopolies, the benefits of open access as he sees it, and take the chance to insult as many of you as he can, to feed his petty ego.
Face it guys, you are showing pictures and talking to a deaf mute that lives at the back of a narrow ally behind a dumpster, crouching there all the while grumbling about how the rest of the world doesn’t recognize or appreciate his genius.
"Industry analyst Donald Broughton of A.G. Edwards & Sons said railroads shouldn’t take all the blame for the coal capacity problems because the facilities at the mines and utilities are part of the issue.
Everyone would benefit from higher capacity, he said. It’s just a matter of determining who will pay for all the improvements.
“The finger-pointing and crying about who needs to do more is just good old-fashioned negotiating, in my mind,” Broughton said."
Of course, some may decide Broughton is just a lackey for the railroads and the AAR.
Google indicates that this article was picked up by many newspapers. Some had “Struggle” in the headline while others said “Railroads move coal in record amounts”. I guess “struggle” can be interpreted different ways, but the suggestion that the railroads “Can’t” get the job done seems to be pushing the spin envelope just a bit.
Gawd, it must really suck to be you, Mudchuck. Every single reply you post is full of unnecessary venom. Oh well, it takes all kinds…
The question put forth was the $100 million by the mega-corps UP and BNSF vs the $2 billion or more of tiny DM&E. The answer is also the beggar’s followup - UP/BNSF are only “laying tracks as fast as they can” in the sense of mostly maintaining what they’ve got, with a few siding extensions thrown in for good measure.
Oh, and thank you Mudchuck for that expose on the maintenance window. Like we’ve not heard about that before…
Because therein lies the problem - One cannot be “laying tracks as fast as yadda yadda…” if they are really only maintaining what they’ve got, token siding expansions not
What I was pointing out was the lack of any mention of the DM&E project, and the subsequent comparison of DM&E PRB spending vs the stated PRB spending goals of UP/BNSF. Just thought it was a strange omission, since it would make those stated numbers look puny by comparison.
But since you brought it up…
Doesn’t it seem strange to you that Broughton plays the “adding capacity” card as some sort of liability to the railroads, rather than treating new capacity as a revenue producing asset? It’s funny, but usually businesses will gladly finance new capacity when demand is outstripping current supply, but the railroads…??? Heck, they even have a new conduit to the federal treasury for loan guarantees for new construction!
Probably not paying that much attention, but isn’t the DME going to have to use the Orin Line to reach most of the mines?
It would be interesting to see how the single line DM&E, with only 20 to 25% of the capacity would handle the tonnage when a derailment wipes out the Orin Line for THREE WEEKS? (Maybe they use Oxen to clear train wrecks in FM land.)
Didn’t it take three weeks to clear that last derailment on the Orin, you know, the one that caused coal stockpiles to run out nationwide? Don’t know if it was because BNSF hired some oxen outfit to clear the coal dust from the ballast or not…
Sure, DM&E will have it’s share of derailments, no one is perfect. The point is, a DM&E PRB derailment will not cause the shutdown of all coal deliveries from the PRB for weeks on end, since it will be new trackage over a new corridor. (It’s my understanding that the DM&E will build a line parallel to the Orin line going north and south once it’s line from the east reaches that point.)
In fact, the DM&E line represents a safety net for continued coal deliveries that is not currently present with the UP/BNSF setup. Like the old saying - “Don’t put all your eggs in one basket”.
And I will reiterate that Matt Rose and BNSF are fools for publicly criticising the DM&E project (possibly abetting a possible rejection of the DM&E application), when it is becoming clear to anyone with reasonable judgement that BNSF should instead be rushing to help finance the DM&E PRB extension in exchange for trackage rights at least as far as Edgemont, something that would bail out BNSF when the current Orin line gets shut down for some reason.
Looks like you called that one, Ed. Funny, I wonder how many times Bergie had to warn Dave? Especially since he seems to know so much about how many times anyone else has (or maybe that’s just something else that only exists in his mind).
So I have a question for you, Mr. Futuremodal - why is it that on the threads that I engage into discussion with you, your participation dies out? Am I a boring conversationalist? Do I have bad breath?
What does it take to keep you engaged in a meaningful discussion?
What I’d like to know is why is any of this going on. We have recognized experts in the practical parts of railroading, and even should we disagree with them, we need to respect them. Among other things, that means being polite. Then the only time that we would hear from Bergie would be with very good news for all.
If flameing, or setting someone(s) up for the same, is all that you have to do, then you need to get a new life - a real life.
I may be sorry for jumping in on one of these. But here’s UP’s latest:
Additional rail line improvements are expected to boost the railroad’s coal capacity in 2007. The completion of a third main line south of Reno Junction, Wyo., and five new train landing tracks just completed at the mines will help boost capacity on the Joint Line owned by UP and BNSF to more than 375 million tons. During 2006 the Joint Line is expected to support more than 350 million tons of coal.
Future improvements, including construction of a third main line north of Reno Junction and a fourth main line south of Nacco Junction, Wyo., are expected to boost Joint Line capacity to more than 400 million tons per year. Grading is already under way on both of these projects and completion is expected in late 2007.
Keep in mind that UP’s investment in trackwork usually involves its own trackage only. I believe (may not be accurate) that the responsibility of joint-line maintenance is BNSF’s.
No. Mat Rose is not anybody’s fool (as FM foolishly claimed). And building a rail line as “standby” capcity is a waste of money.
Potential brief service interuptions can be more efficiently handled by stockpilling coal. Safety stock coal will offer more protection than a second rail line. For example, it will also protect against a mine shut down, something that also happens. A “standby” rail line will be useless in such a situation.