TVA considers using trains for coal delivery to Memphis plant
Quote from Tom White of AAR:
“while barge rates remain lower than rail charges, it’s largely because of federal subsidies in the form of dredging on navigation channels. “Their right-of-way is built and maintained by the federal government,” White said. “Nonetheless, railroads have become very efficient, and can move an awful lot of coal at very low rates.””
Two points:
Why does the AAR continue to push the “everyone else is subsidized but us” line of BS when most railroads were built with land grants, maintained with antitrust exemptions et al, and are now lining up for federal aid to the public trough? Memo to Mr. White - barge rates are generally lower because they have lower operating costs. Water is a very forgiving conveyance, unlike steel and concrete.
Every transportation mode is subsidized to some degree. Acknowledge it and move on already.
Wasn’t the Mississippi built by God, and not by the federal government? Ergo, barges’ ROW was built by God but is maintained by the federales. Yes, one can argue that slack water is man-made, but there was riverboat activity long before the first dams were built on the Mississippi. The federal role in subsidizing river transportation is simply one of maintaining prior usage, not of establishing new usage where none existed before.
Oh, and about that claim that the rail move can be had at “very low rates” - keep an eye on what’s happening to other utilities who also had very low rates at one time but are now seeing their rates doubling while service suffers. Current deliveries, while at record paces for the railroads, are runni
I am not sure that you realize how one-sided you come across on the issue of subsidies. You keep bringing up the point that the railroads received massive land grants (although railroads were by no means the only recipients of land grants).
But more to the point, the issue is not so much about the initial building of the infrastructure, but about today’s upkeep of the infrastructure. Without dredging, barge traffic on the Mississippi would be limited. Without dams, barge traffic would be even more limited. In the old days, barge operators had to contend with low water levels, floods, constantly changing channels, etc. These factors have been mitigated by public works projects.
Do railroads receive subsidies? Sure they do. But what happened 150 years ago, or even 30 years ago, is of little relevance to the issue of infrastructure maintenance that the railroads must deal with today.
I do appreciate the message that you are trying to convey; I’m only asking that you keep the comparisons relevant. Thank you.
Below St. Louis, the Mississippi River is a wonderful avenue of commerce.
Above St. Louis, it’s a pork barrel taxpayer subsidized looser.
As for the “Land Grants”. Very little railroad mileage was laid using them. Every mile of barge trainsportation on the inland waterways is continually subsidized for no damn good reason.
The initial building of the Union Pacific was done for political reasons. And it really didn’t cost the Federal Government a dime. Northern Pacific, same thing.
Nobody would build a railroad across an empty continent for commercial purposes. The UP and NP were both financial disasters. It’s incredulous that anyone invested in the NP after the UP failed. But, they did.
It was politically important to link California and Puget Sound with the rest of US. That’s why that hapened.
Likening a paddle wheel steamboat to a 10-12 barge tow is about as meaningless as likening the Pony Express to today’s air mail. Barge commerce on our inland waterways would be nil, nada if not for the massive lock and dam infrastructure, cutoffs and channel dredging projects of the Corps of Engineers. All built and maintained with our federal tax dollars.
As far as land grants are concerned, IIRC, their purpose was to promote the westard expansion and population of the netherlands. And it worked. Yes the railroads benefited 140 years ago but I fail to see any relevance to today’s situation.
You are entitled to your opinion of the AAR but your attempt to discredit their position about subsidization of competing modes of transportation is specious.
The fact remains, that overall, with the taxes they pay, and whatever subsidies they receive, the freight railroading is self supporting and is the ONLY form of transportation in the USA that is self-supporting. Don;t bring up the private automobile because DOT figures don’t include land use, police, and other stuff.
The TVA, which now receives coal by barge, might switch to somewhat more expensive all-rail delivery? Gee, transportation price isn’t everything?
And, since the TVA would likely be “captive” to one RR, the railroad would then be able to gouge them on the rate after the “low, low introductory” rate? Uh, wouldn’t they just convert back to barge delivery if this happened? Oh, wait! Now I remember. There’s no such thing as competition between rail and other modes. Only rail - rail comptetion counts. Right?
In line with this, there was an article in the Memphis Commercial Appeal on Monday the 15th, referencing the problems with coal delivery at the Thos. Allen Coal generation plant at Memphis.
The coal delivery has always been accomplished by barged delivery through an access off the Mississippi River, via the McKellar lake channel, which has become more problematic due to the recent periods of low flow on the river. TVA is now considering direct derlivery by rail, as an option to the plant, now the coal is transloaded at a Cora, Il. facility, an approximate 385 mile barge ride from there to Memphis. Apparently, the plant uses about 18 million tons of coal per year, representing several thousand rail car load of coal, and many more trains, representing traffic delays in the area as those trains negotiate a circuitous route through town to get to the Steam Plant.
Should be interesting to see who gets the mine to plant delivery, as both BNSF and UP are carriers serving Memphis.
FM seems to have ignored the fact that the AAR, among other functions, serves as a lobbying group for its member roads. He has also long ignored the fact that modal competition really does exist. Missouri Pacific had barge competition for years.
The low-water issue brings up another point. When water levels are low, barge operators customarily raise their rates since barges are restricted to lighter loads at those times.
FM also missed the boat (Pun sort of intended) on God creating the Mississippi River. The Army Corps of Engineers created the pools on the Mississippi. Without the lock system there would be no pools and without the pools we wouldn’t have towboating as we know it today. These are not the boats of the Mark Twain era. They require a much deeper draft than sternwheelers of the olden days.
FM also missed the boat (Pun sort of intended) on God creating the Mississippi River. The Army Corps of Engineers created the pools on the Mississippi. Without the lock system there would be no pools and without the pools we wouldn’t have towboating as we know it today. These
FM also missed the boat (Pun sort of intended) on God creating the Mississippi River. The Army Corps of Engineers created the pools on the Mississippi. Without the lock system there would be no pools and without the pools we wouldn’t have towboating as we know it today. These
I WAS QUOTING FROM MEMORY. Which in my case, was the wrong thing to do, as I had the facts somewhat scrambled; I was able to go into the Memphis Commercial Appeal’s web site and find a copy of the article in question:
"Shift in shipping
Photos by Alan Spearman/The Commercial Appeal
Deckhands James Barker, David Declue and Brandon Appling do some heavy lifting on McKellar Lake, Memphis’ main harbor along the river.
Pilot David Reeves guides a barge shipment on the river. Coal for TVA’s Allen Fossil Plant is delivered to Memphis on barges from Illinois. Story Tools
TVA considers trains instead of bargesfor coal delivery; local rail traffic may rise
In a move that could sharply increase rail traffic into Memphis, TVA soon may begin using trains instead of Mississippi River barges to ship coal to its Allen Fossil Plant.
Tennessee Valley Authority officials are reviewing submittals from firms that responded to a request for proposals to build a major rail-unloading facility at the power-generating plant, which is located along McKellar Lake.
The agency, which provides wholesale electricity to a seven-state region that includes Memphis, should decide within six months whether to pursue the rail option, TVA spokesman John Moulton said.
The problem is the allegation made by Mr. White that, without subsidies, barging would be more expensive than railroading. If you take away all forms of subsidies from both modes, the fact remains that barging is a lower operating cost method of transit, and that usually results in lower costs to the end users.
The other thing I was pointing out was that railroads offer these introductory rates, much as the credit card companies do, then after you’re in deep they’ll jack the rates on you even as service levels drop. It has happened time and again to other utilities, so why would one infer that it won’t it happen to the TVA?
Of course, this is a bi-modal move currently being used by TVA - rail and barge. It’d be interesting to see if the TVA could opt back to that move if the all-rail move doesn’t work out.
I would presume that barges have to pays fees for each lock that they traverse, which (helps) pay for the upkeep of the lock. To what extent do they contribute to dredging operations?
I will have to admit that I have no clue as to what a barge’s main operating costs stem from. They pay for diesel, labor, upkeep of the barge, lock fees. What else? And of those costs, which tend to predominate?
Lacking any good information, I would agree with you that barges have a lower operating cost than railroads, subsidies notwithstanding.
Barge companies pay into a Waterway Trust Fund, from which the federal government gets another deficit buffer. Currently, barge companies pay more into the fund than what they are getting out if it.
One problem you have in allocating “true” costs of barging is how to allocate the cost of maintaining water levels. Higher water levels favor barging, but also favor electricity generation. And since electricity generation is a profit source, can we allocate those profits to the general operation of dams and the reservoirs?
Also keep in mind that waterways are open access, not only supporting competing barge companies but also private and recreational users. Do you charge the same fee to the two fishermen in the Duckworth inboard jet boat as you do the commercial barge operator? Both take the same amount of water to raise and lower the locks. And that slack water that supports modern day barging also supports major recreational activities.
Photos by Alan Spearman/The Commercial Appeal