Join the discussion on the following article:
STB to railroads: No substitutes for coal
In other words, not only will coal fired power plants become too expensive to operate due to big government regulations based on the pseudo-science of global warming. The railroads will be forced by government to take such heavy losses on each load that they must stop moving coal. At least to American power plants. China doesn’t have any global warming meltdowns in the future. Only Americans. Something tells me the government will allow plenty of profit on China export coal.
The Obama administration is determined to kill the coal industry by any means possible. EPA has been in the forefront of this idiotic attack and now STB is part of the scheme.
Amen to D Ohanley. The thing we can afford is Uncle Sam. When will people understand?
This is all quite simple. The Obama administration is doing everything it can to destroy the coal industry in favor of solar power and wind power. In keeping coal shipment rates artificially high, railroads which carry it [name your favorite here] must maintain tariffs which are borderline non-competitive. While the rail industry must try to compete, the administration continues to quite literally throw millions of our tax dollars at energy industries which are decades away from becoming viable. Thanks, a lot.
It seems logical that a fall in volume would probably make the haulage of a commodity more expensive and should be reflected in a rate. As lines heavily dependent on coal lose traffic their profitability will decline. This is not a good decision as the railroads begin the transition away from coal. Hopefully this decision can be challenged.
It seems logical that a fall in volume would probably make the haulage of a commodity more expensive and should be reflected in a rate. As lines heavily dependent on coal lose traffic their profitability will decline. This is not a good decision as the railroads begin the transition away from coal. Hopefully this decision can be challenged.
I’m a bit confused here, did the railroads want the ability to RAISE rates or to LOWER them? If the latter, why would the shippers be upset?
The article doesn’t make this clear at all.
That is true David, the article lacks an explanation - it is poorly written.
Sounds like some from 60’s and 70’s before de regulation.If I didn’t know better, I would swear the EPA is making the calls ; not the STB.
This sounds like arguments from the 60’s and 70’s before de regulation. Just what does the STB what the railroads to do? I am not sure cheap natural gas is here to stay.It sounds like the EPA is making the calls and not the STB.
This sounds like arguments from the 60’s and 70’s before de regulation. Just what does the STB what the railroads to do? I am not sure cheap natural gas is here to stay.It sounds like the EPA is making the calls and not the STB.
I am confused by the AAR’s request. Since natural gas is a lot cheaper for utilities than coal, then the logical way to reduce the cost of coal to better compete with natural gas is to lower both the cost of the coal and the cost to transport it. However, it would seem that the railroads would want to increase the cost of transporting the coal to offset the diminished volume being shipped. That would drive up the cost to the utilities, and therefore it would be a detriment to the utilities that do not have access to natural gas.
Pure politics. I sense the EPA’s fingerprints are all over this decision. Just one more step in making the United States of America the largest coal EXPORTER on the planet.
ICC vs Penn Central all over again.
“The Concerned Captive Coal Shippers, the Western Coal Traffic League, National Mining Association, the American Public Power Association, and others challenged AAR’s assertions before the STB. They argued that the AAR and U.S. railroads failed to demonstrate how natural gas was “effective” as a competitor with train-delivered coal.”
Well if the APPA doesn’t understand it nobody does. I worked for a utility at two brand new Gas fired plants. All their other large plants are coal-fired. With all the interest on clean firing gas as an alternative to the perception that all coal fired plants are dirty, how can any other position but the industry is going to Gas on all new construction (except nuclear) even be serious. These associations want their cake and want to eat it to.
Boy, is this ever confusing. How in this world can product competition not be considered competition? Can someone explain the STB boards opinion of this?
The STB should get out of the rate-making business.
Natural Gas pipelines are indeed out competing railroad hauled Coal. Its time the regulators got with the times, Shale Gas is here to stay. Railroads know this better than the regulators, its time that railroads be allowed to adapt to this reality.
Natural Gas pipelines are indeed out competing railroad hauled Coal. Its time the regulators got with the times, Shale Gas is here to stay. Railroads know this better than the regulators, its time that railroads be allowed to adapt to this reality.