About 2 or 3 years ago, when gas prices were hovering close to five dollars or so, I didn’t notice
any changes in traffic or in people’s behavior, other than that they complained more. I think they
learned over the last few decades that gas prices will vary, and eventually will come back down,
so you don’t see the panic that you saw in 1973. I guess this is as sam1 said, it’s the perception
of the cost that matters. And as schlimm said, they figure it’s temporary.
Another reason for the lack of change in behavior is that there is really no other short term option
for many people since the population has become very spread out. I live in a relatively small town,
and for miles out in all directions there are big houses out in the country. With gas so readily
available, many people have opted for “a couple of acres out in the country.” This makes it next
to impossible to provide public transportation to them. It would take a drastic and long-term
change in fuel (and land) prices to have any effect on attitudes.
As far as justifying any transportation mode by fuel economy numbers, I’m always skeptical
about such reports. There are many assumptions made, and I figure that in too many cases the
first question asked by those contracted to do a study is, “What do you want it to say?”
Well I’ve rambled on enough for now.
Figuring out a pretty good estimate of what the passenger miles per gallon or seat miles per gallon shouldn’t be all that difficult. At least any RR or consultant worth his salt should be capable. A train performance calculator program will integrate the energy requirements and get the total energy required to move the train with pretty good accuracy. Some even know the power production efficiency of the locomotives and can give fuel consumption directly. Adding in the HEP requirements is a bit trickier - you’d have to make some assumptions about the heating/cooling/lighting demand on the average for the train while moving and while on standby between runs.
I would think that you could do a good approximation of a TPC program piece-wise on a spreadsheet. Chop the route into chunks and calculate the energy for acceleration (F=ma), train resistance (Davis Equation), grade (20#/percent) and curve (0.8#/degree), then add them up. It would take some tedious work with a track chart, but once done, you could play with some of the input variables like train weight, aerodynamics, regenerative braking, etc.
I think we’d find that train weight is a big deal.
If I were Amtrak, I’d have a watt-hour meter on the output of each inverter on the P42s and I’d download or record it along with train position periodically on every trip. I’d use this data to help determine ways to improve energy efficiency. Maybe they do this already, but I doubt it.
Those numbers are well-known to me – they are the numbers which cause me concern about claims from MWHSRA, WisPIRG, and others that “trains are multiples more fuel efficient than autos.” These are the numbers that don’t pass the “sniff test” of the advocacy community – I have been told on this Web site that I am promulgating government lies to advance these numbers as representative of passenger train fuel efficiencies.
Given the capital and subsidy dollar inputs required to expand train service, there is probably a reason why advocacy groups overstate the fuel efficiency of Amtrak – a 30% saving is not good enough. Dollar for gallon, hybrid vehicle subsidies are a far more effective use of public money if the objective is reducing energy consumption, either to the goal of reduced oil imports or reduced CO2 emissions.
The four-persons riding a Chevy Volt was offered as a comparison to all-seats occupied on a Velaro train, which in all likelihood is where Siemens got its numbers. That I ride the TGV and find all the seats taken
From my perspective, one big unknown is the HEP demand – I have no idea what energy is required for air conditioning in summer or more significantly, providing electric heat in winter. The other thing is that you at least have to keep heat on at least on a standby level 24/7 in winter in anything that has “indoor plumbing.” Amtrak states that they have switched to plug power for layovers rather than keeping HEP going, but that plug power ought to be charged against the energy needs of trains. My car lacks an onboard toilet and I don’t keep it heated when it is not operating.
The other big unknown is the pattern of slowing down for speed restrictions and speeding up to track speed to keep schedule.
A third big unknown is I have no idea regarding the aerodynamics of different Amtrak consists, especially the P42-Horizon car-NPCC consists with large step changes in height.
If I could get a handle on these three items, the simulations would be straightforward.
Several units could be equipped with watt meters AND THEN RECORD THE output to both motors and the HEP inverter(s). More important would be to record the loads with various consists (ie 2 car coonsists on NH - Springfield) up to ten car consists ( Also Hiawathas and STL plus every route could then be analyzed. Power for every route segment could be analyzed as well.
An item not considered is to also measure the idle fuel consumption for HEP and idling locos. A recording thermometer would be needed to factor in weather. All the new Electric motors on order should have this capability along with measuring how much regenerative power returns to grid.
Off topic the cold weather fuel consumption of road traffic and the effect of jammed traqffic is not cited in comparing fuel consumption. Wife drove to/from florida last week and got 18 MPG instead of our usual 26 MPG due to very heavy stop and go traffic. Sticker MPG listed as 29MPG but we have a heavy foot.