Jump to content




Photo

Caltrain electrification at risk


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#21 me_little_me

me_little_me

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,155 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 February 2017 - 01:14 PM

The way to go is with Donkeys and Asses IMHO LOL!

It's already done that way in D.C. The congressional gravy train is powered by them (although gravy trains are considered freight).



#22 Metra Electric Rider

Metra Electric Rider

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 15 February 2017 - 11:16 AM

 


 

I wonder what they do with all that used cooking oil now.  I heard that all their waste oil wasn't even enough, and they had to buy some from a supplier.

 

 

I've heard that too - in fact, I thought I'd read somewhere that the demand for biodiesel outstrips the availability of it (kinda like the situation in Sweden where they burn trash for providing district heating - the Swedes recycle so much that there isn't enough trash and they have to import it from Germany).

 

 

LOVE Caltrain bingo!


SJ - Norra Stambanan, Nordvästra stambanan, Södra stambanan, Dalabanan

NSB- Bergensbanen, Kongsvingerbanen, Rørosbanen, Dovrebanen, Flåmsbana, Roa–Hønefossbanen

Amtrak - Floridian, San Francisco Zephyr, Southwest Limited, Illini, State House


#23 BCL

BCL

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,106 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 15 February 2017 - 03:24 PM

I wonder what they do with all that used cooking oil now.  I heard that all their waste oil wasn't even enough, and they had to buy some from a supplier.

 
I've heard that too - in fact, I thought I'd read somewhere that the demand for biodiesel outstrips the availability of it (kinda like the situation in Sweden where they burn trash for providing district heating - the Swedes recycle so much that there isn't enough trash and they have to import it from Germany).

Anything running on biodiesel should be able to run on petroleum diesel without issue. I heard that Disney actually buys taxed road diesel and not #2 fuel oil like most railroads use. Untaxed fuel is supposed to be dyed red.

I'm pretty sure incinerator heating can be done with almost any biomass.

#24 Metra Electric Rider

Metra Electric Rider

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 16 February 2017 - 02:16 PM


I'm pretty sure incinerator heating can be done with almost any biomass.

 

 

True, but their plants were set up for garbage with pollution controls, etc, as I understand it. And their plentiful wood is too valuable to burn (getting way off topic, but their 16th century timber shortage led to early energy efficiency -heating moves).


SJ - Norra Stambanan, Nordvästra stambanan, Södra stambanan, Dalabanan

NSB- Bergensbanen, Kongsvingerbanen, Rørosbanen, Dovrebanen, Flåmsbana, Roa–Hønefossbanen

Amtrak - Floridian, San Francisco Zephyr, Southwest Limited, Illini, State House


#25 BCL

BCL

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,106 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 17 February 2017 - 08:35 PM

The first domino falls.

 

http://www.mercuryne...fication-money/



#26 BCL

BCL

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,106 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco Bay Area

Posted 23 February 2017 - 04:17 PM

There's a White House petition circulating:

 

https://petitions.wh...electrification



#27 jis

jis

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,857 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 25 February 2017 - 05:52 PM

There's a White House petition circulating:
 
https://petitions.wh...electrification

LOL! They'll probably just declare it "fake" and carry on doing whatever they want. :(

#28 Texan Eagle

Texan Eagle

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts

Posted 27 February 2017 - 06:38 PM

Fake or not, if it reaches 100,000 signatures, White House has to provide an official response to it.

 

It is sad that this affects 60,000 daily commuters yet there are a measly 9,000 signatures supporting it. We, as rail lovers and transit advocates, should all do our little part in supporting this at least.



#29 me_little_me

me_little_me

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,155 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 February 2017 - 09:37 PM

 

 

It is sad that this affects 60,000 daily commuters yet there are a measly 9,000 signatures supporting it. We, as rail lovers and transit advocates, should all do our little part in supporting this at least.

If the local who use it don't support it, or even the locals who believe in it but are not in a position or location to use it, why should outside train lovers do so? I'd rather the money be spent in my area.


Edited by me_little_me, 27 February 2017 - 09:37 PM.


#30 Metra Electric Rider

Metra Electric Rider

    OBS Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 392 posts

Posted 01 March 2017 - 02:40 PM

Is it well know locally that electrification is at risk? And the advantages even w/o any other, like, oh, say, high speed rail, changes?


SJ - Norra Stambanan, Nordvästra stambanan, Södra stambanan, Dalabanan

NSB- Bergensbanen, Kongsvingerbanen, Rørosbanen, Dovrebanen, Flåmsbana, Roa–Hønefossbanen

Amtrak - Floridian, San Francisco Zephyr, Southwest Limited, Illini, State House


#31 Texan Eagle

Texan Eagle

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts

Posted 01 March 2017 - 03:55 PM

 

 

 

It is sad that this affects 60,000 daily commuters yet there are a measly 9,000 signatures supporting it. We, as rail lovers and transit advocates, should all do our little part in supporting this at least.

If the local who use it don't support it, or even the locals who believe in it but are not in a position or location to use it, why should outside train lovers do so? I'd rather the money be spent in my area.

 

 

Is there a rail improvement project in your area that was shovel-ready and had federal funding to it taken away at the last minute? If yes, I will happily sign a petition to support that too. It's not you vs me. It is us aka people who like trains and transit vs those who want to deny funding to it.



#32 Texan Eagle

Texan Eagle

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts

Posted 01 March 2017 - 03:57 PM

Is it well know locally that electrification is at risk? And the advantages even w/o any other, like, oh, say, high speed rail, changes?

 

Yes. All the local media has talked about it, and Caltrain itself is furiously vocal on social media- Facebook/Twitter about the project, its advantages, what the funding deferral means and so on. From what I am seeing locally, there is enough support within the Bay Area to have it done, but a lot of resistance and brigading coming from Central Valley Republican residents who don't use Caltrain and consider it "waste of money"



#33 Anderson

Anderson

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,020 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 01 March 2017 - 04:55 PM

I'll be a bit colorful on this...but if funding is pulled then some of that cap-and-trade money CA has should be funneled to this.  I'd also like to see a sign attached to those "Your tax dollars hard at work" signs saying "And with no help from the Federal government" (which, to be fair, also belonged on the Norfolk service...that was a 100% state project).

 

With all of this said, I put no small part of the blame on the former administration for not getting the contracting worked out on the way out the door.  It's not like we haven't seen a version of this show before (WI, OH, and FL, oh my!) and the idea that what's-his-face from Southern California (the Congresscritter spearheading attempts to kill CAHSR) would try to lead a charge like this should not be considered the world's greatest shock.


Capitol Limited (7), CA Zephyr (4) Lake Shore Limited (1), Acela (2), NE Regional (2), Sliver Meteor (4)

Upcoming: Silver Meteor (1), Lake Shore Limited (1), SW Chief (2), MO River Runner (1), Texas Eagle (1)

Possibly Upcoming: Either Texas Eagle (1), Capitol Limited (1), Silver Meteor (2) or Texas Eagle (1), Capitol Limited (1), Silver Meteor (1)

#34 Texan Eagle

Texan Eagle

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts

Posted 01 March 2017 - 05:22 PM

With all of this said, I put no small part of the blame on the former administration for not getting the contracting worked out on the way out the door.  It's not like we haven't seen a version of this show before (WI, OH, and FL, oh my!) and the idea that what's-his-face from Southern California (the Congresscritter spearheading attempts to kill CAHSR) would try to lead a charge like this should not be considered the world's greatest shock.

 

One word answer to this- Atherton.

 

That little pain-in-the-posterior town of whiny millionaires has thrown lawsuit after lawsuit against Caltrain to stop electrification or any improvements from happening in their special snowflake quaint town in the middle of a metro area of 7 million people. The last lawsuit was thrown out by court on Sep 28, 2016. That did not leave much time for the previous administration to jump in and provide the funding.



#35 John Bredin

John Bredin

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 582 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:suburban Chicago (Des Plaines)

Posted 01 March 2017 - 05:22 PM

It is sad that this affects 60,000 daily commuters yet there are a measly 9,000 signatures supporting it. We, as rail lovers and transit advocates, should all do our little part in supporting this at least.

If the local who use it don't support it, or even the locals who believe in it but are not in a position or location to use it, why should outside train lovers do so? I'd rather the money be spent in my area.

I don't think that the depth or breadth of support for Caltrain electrification should be measured solely by people's willingness to sign a whitehouse.gov petition. Some may presume such an act pointless or even counterproductive, as jis points out humorously.

 

I signed the petition but now receive White House emails, including four reminders in the last couple of days to watch the King's Speech Presidential address to Congress. The last one bore the vaguely ominous heading "Watch NOW".  :rolleyes:



#36 Texan Eagle

Texan Eagle

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts

Posted 01 March 2017 - 06:22 PM

 

It is sad that this affects 60,000 daily commuters yet there are a measly 9,000 signatures supporting it. We, as rail lovers and transit advocates, should all do our little part in supporting this at least.

If the local who use it don't support it, or even the locals who believe in it but are not in a position or location to use it, why should outside train lovers do so? I'd rather the money be spent in my area.

I don't think that the depth or breadth of support for Caltrain electrification should be measured solely by people's willingness to sign a whitehouse.gov petition. Some may presume such an act pointless or even counterproductive, as jis points out humorously.

 

I signed the petition but now receive White House emails, including four reminders in the last couple of days to watch the King's Speech Presidential address to Congress. The last one bore the vaguely ominous heading "Watch NOW".  :rolleyes:

 

 

Before you submit your signature to the petition, there is an option to uncheck "receive emails from White House" that you conveniently missed. Even then, it is not too late. Each of the 4 emails you got will have an Unsubscribe button at the bottom. It takes one click to stop the spam from ever coming again.



#37 John Bredin

John Bredin

    Conductor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 582 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:suburban Chicago (Des Plaines)

Posted 01 March 2017 - 07:04 PM

 

 

It is sad that this affects 60,000 daily commuters yet there are a measly 9,000 signatures supporting it. We, as rail lovers and transit advocates, should all do our little part in supporting this at least.

If the local who use it don't support it, or even the locals who believe in it but are not in a position or location to use it, why should outside train lovers do so? I'd rather the money be spent in my area.

I don't think that the depth or breadth of support for Caltrain electrification should be measured solely by people's willingness to sign a whitehouse.gov petition. Some may presume such an act pointless or even counterproductive, as jis points out humorously.

 

I signed the petition but now receive White House emails, including four reminders in the last couple of days to watch the King's Speech Presidential address to Congress. The last one bore the vaguely ominous heading "Watch NOW".  :rolleyes:

 

Before you submit your signature to the petition, there is an option to uncheck "receive emails from White House" that you conveniently missed. Even then, it is not too late. Each of the 4 emails you got will have an Unsubscribe button at the bottom. It takes one click to stop the spam from ever coming again.

Thanks!



#38 PRR 60

PRR 60

    Engineer

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,447 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 March 2017 - 12:13 PM

When the state tied the Caltrain electrification project to the high speed rail project, they created a situation where questioning the future of the high speed rail project dragged the Caltrain work into the discussion.  Essentially, the grant for Caltrain became a grant for high speed rail. As the future of the high speed rail project has become questionable, Caltrain has tried to uncouple itself from the high speed project, but to some extent that is easier said than done.
 
As long as it is thought that the Caltrain electrification project is in furtherance of the high speed rail project, and that stopping the Caltrain work would effectively stop the high speed project, then this job has a problem. Perhaps the best way for the state to help move the Caltrain project forward would be to announce the suspension of the high speed rail project, and the reallocation of cap and trade revenue to other projects.  Then, the Caltrain work could be assessed without carrying the baggage of the high speed rail project.
 
Then, there is this.  On January 18 - two days before the change in the administration - Carolyn Flowers, then acting head of the Federal Transit Administration, announced approval of a $647 million FTA grant for the Caltrain electrification.  She left that position two days later when the new administration and DOT secretary took office.  Fortunately, she found a new job remarkably fast. On January 31 - 13 days after approving the grant - she was hired by Aecom, a large engineering firm, as head of its North American transit operation.  Among the projects within that area: the Caltrain electrification project.  She approves the federal grant for the project (later rescinded), then gets a high level job working on that very project within two weeks.  Smells a little off.
 
From the LA Times:

A top Obama administration executive at the U.S. Department of Transportation approved a $647-million grant for a California rail project in mid-January and less than two weeks later went to work for a Los Angeles-based contractor involved in the project, The Times has learned.


The full article is HERE.



#39 seat38a

seat38a

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,283 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County California
  • Interests:Trains, Planes, And Web App Development

Posted 02 March 2017 - 01:23 PM

When the state tied the Caltrain electrification project to the high speed rail project, they created a situation where questioning the future of the high speed rail project dragged the Caltrain work into the discussion.  Essentially, the grant for Caltrain became a grant for high speed rail. As the future of the high speed rail project has become questionable, Caltrain has tried to uncouple itself from the high speed project, but to some extent that is easier said than done.
 
As long as it is thought that the Caltrain electrification project is in furtherance of the high speed rail project, and that stopping the Caltrain work would effectively stop the high speed project, then this job has a problem. Perhaps the best way for the state to help move the Caltrain project forward would be to announce the suspension of the high speed rail project, and the reallocation of cap and trade revenue to other projects.  Then, the Caltrain work could be assessed without carrying the baggage of the high speed rail project.
 
Then, there is this.  On January 18 - two days before the change in the administration - Carolyn Flowers, then acting head of the Federal Transit Administration, announced approval of a $647 million FTA grant for the Caltrain electrification.  She left that position two days later when the new administration and DOT secretary took office.  Fortunately, she found a new job remarkably fast. On January 31 - 13 days after approving the grant - she was hired by Aecom, a large engineering firm, as head of its North American transit operation.  Among the projects within that area: the Caltrain electrification project.  She approves the federal grant for the project (later rescinded), then gets a high level job working on that very project within two weeks.  Smells a little off.
 
From the LA Times:

A top Obama administration executive at the U.S. Department of Transportation approved a $647-million grant for a California rail project in mid-January and less than two weeks later went to work for a Los Angeles-based contractor involved in the project, The Times has learned.


The full article is HERE.

Yup, I saw that article as well and fumed. I'm pro CAHSR but seriously, at this point, I wish the CAGOP would get their Shi$ together and put up some meaningful opposition in Sacramento. We can't get one thing built or done that the State touches and gets screwed up.



#40 Texan Eagle

Texan Eagle

    Engineer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,645 posts

Posted 02 March 2017 - 03:13 PM

Perhaps the best way for the state to help move the Caltrain project forward would be to announce the suspension of the high speed rail project, and the reallocation of cap and trade revenue to other projects.  Then, the Caltrain work could be assessed without carrying the baggage of the high speed rail project.


And what happens to all the construction for CAHSR that has already happened? CAHSR is not an on-paper project anymore, there are viaducts built in Central Valley already. Do we just abandon all of that to become a ghost town and eat up the cost?

 

This exists, and this is not alternative facts-

 

fresno_river_viaduct_xl.jpg

 

dsc_0121_xl.jpg






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users