Wednesday morning rail news:
— The California High Speed Rail Authority has reached agreement with LA Metro on a preliminary funding plan for the Link Union Station project, which will make the landmark facility a through station for passenger trains rather than the current stub-end terminal. The memorandum of understanding reached on Tuesday to secure $423 million in funding from state Proposition 1A includes four key points: an agreement to build the project in a manner that will accommodate all present and future operators; an outline of a funding agreement for the first phase of the project, including $18.7 million for design and environmental review; an agreement to work toward shared use of Metrolink right-of-way in Palmdale, portions of the Valley and River subdivision, and at Union Station; and a provision to attempt to acquire additional funding to complete the project prior to the 2028 Olympics. A video on the project is available here.
— Wisconsin’s Office of the Commissioner of Railroads has turned down a request by the town of Richmond for a 120-day stay on a planned hearing on Canadian National’s combined autoport and intermodal facility in New Richmond, scheduled to open later this year. RiverTowns.com reports that the Richmond wanted moretime to review new information relating to addition of intermodal service to the site, and that townships remain concerned about mitigation of safety, financial, and logistical concerns related to the project. A hearing is scheduled for June 9.
— Two stations on NJ Transit’s Hudson-Bergen Light Rail line will reopen Saturday after lengthy closures for utility work related to the Route 440 extension project, NJ.com reports. The MLK Drive and Garfield Avenue stations have been closed since last June. A third station, West Side Avenue, continues to be servied by shuttle buses.
Charles, At least in Southern California, the option for renewals does not exist.
But there is lots of sun here, and lots of homes here are on solar. And new houses seem to be being built with it included.
I have solar. My bill runs $5 – $10 per month, with a small refund at the end of a year, so net is about zero.
So an incentive for using renewable isn’t necessary.
ANNA – In my previous post (yesterday) I started to type an answer to your question, but deferred answering it because I don’t know. The best answer I have is that the preponderance of intercity high-speeds is a power car at each end and trailer cars in the middle.
To further the confusion I’m not sure if CalHSR has selected a proposal yet. There’s no hurry as my best guess is that the Central Valley (Fresno, etc.) segment mow being built will be run with Amtrak diesels for the foreseeable future.
ANNA – A week or so back Gerald McFarlane posted that CalHSR is required to run on renewable power. I replied that any customer takes power off the grid in proportion to what goes into the grid.
Whether that’s wind, solar, coal, nuke, or hydro, in any combination or any proportion, no one customer can say where his kwh is coming from. I might add that in some states some customers have the option to pay more for “renewable” power. Which means they’re paying more than their neighbor for the exact same electricity. I can’t say if California is one of those states. This isn’t quite as bad a ripoff as it seems. The higher price per kwh is supposedly used to underwrite the more expensive renewables, in effect using your monthly electric bill as a checkoff for a charitable contribution for a cleaner environment.
Whether or not “renewable” power is actually better for the environment is a different discussion than this one, beyond the scope of my current post.
Mister Landey: You evade the question, good Sir. If the trains are electric (as I was expecting) this means they will pick up power from either catenary or third rail. But the electricity has to get into the wire somehow, and to do this you have to have a prime mover, e.g., a generating station. It is that generating station I am looking for.
I realise there are people in this world who think all you have to do to get ‘lectric is to plug into the wall. These people refuse to admit that someone, somewhere, has to ensure that the ‘lectric gets into the wall in the first place.
The above comments are generic in nature and do not form the basis for an attorney/client relationship. They do not constitute legal advice. I ain’t nobody’s attorney no more. I’s retarded.
Charles:
So what do they intend to use for a prime mover, and where do they propose to site it? You gotta have one, there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.
The above comments are generic in nature and do not form the basis for an attorney/client relationship. They do not constitute legal advice. I ain’t nobody’s attorney no more. I’s retarded.
Yes, George. A copy of the picture is on the wall in Phillipee’s train room. The resturant is located about two short blocks north of Union Station on Alameda St. I believe the incident occured in the late ’40’s when the tracks were longer. In the early ’70’s Caltrains and/or Metro’s predecessor, RTD, built the end of the express bus way shortening all of the tracks by 10 to 15 feet.
ANNA – All elelctric.
Is CHSR intended to be an electric line, or will they be using diesels? And if it is electric, what is the prime mover (and where do they intend to locate it)?
The above comments are generic in nature and do not form the basis for an attorney/client relationship. They do not constitute legal advice. I ain’t nobody’s attorney no more. I’s retarded.
Isn’t there a well-known photo of a Santa Fe unit that went through the stub end of LAUPT and hung over the street below?