Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rail will do well in the coming years generally speaking in this country.
World oil production is peaking or has peaked already as the world has been using more oil on a daily basis than it's been finding for almost 30 years now. While it is somewhat true that the government in the US has locked up the remaining drilling areas (the coastal shelves, ANWR in AK), it's also true that the US has more oil and gas wells drilled into its territory than the rest of the world combined. Then too, production in most of the rest of the world's producing countries is stagnant to falling as well. (Mexico is a major supplier to the US and production in their major oil field, Cantarell, is falling something like 8% year over year. Mexico is also growing its own internal appetite for oil products as well. For all intensive purposes, Mexico will cease to be an oil exporting nation at all within 8 years, and they are the US' number two supplier I think (behind Canada.) Speaking of Canada, while the tar sands are increasing production a bit, their total output is so puny compared to world oil demand (the latter is about 85M bbls/day) that it will never "save" either Canada or the US.
Yeah, we have electric cars coming onto the market now, and even at $40K each, I suppose somebody will buy a few of them. But they only go about 50 to 70 miles before they switch on their gas engines (Chevy Volt).
Then too, roads are basically paved with a rock/oil mixture, roads that need regular resurfacing at least every decade or so. Concrete roads don't last in Maine at all and even if they did, the cement used requires lots of natural gas for the cement kilns along with diesel to haul and spread the concrete. Meanwhile natural gas is about to be loved to death as an oil replacement and it remains to be seen just how long these new hydraulic fracturing techniques recently developed to find new natural gas withstand the test of time. These new nat. gas wells are causing an uproar because they take out people's drinking wells in rural America (Penn. and NYS especially.)
Government never really has solved any of these problems nor will it ever because, well, it's the government.
Two steel rails, on the other hand, are durable enough to last decades with only the ties and ballast needing maintenance, and the ties are renewable. There is a reason that private industry built the rails and that is that private industry tends to find the more efficient way of doing things while the roads, especially the highways, had to be built at government expense and that worked when the main input into cars and roads - oil - was cheap. But now we're headed back to the days of pre-oil.
Even though the State of Maine recently bought a dilapidated railroad in Aroostook, I don't think the future of rail lies with state ownership. Indeed, one of America's most savy investors, Warren Buffet, has been buying RRs himself. Most of the US rail network is once again hugely profitable and growing. Whether that means that the RR network in Maine will turn around too, I don't know. But I do know that highway operating and rebuild costs are about to go up and eventually WAY up. We're probably talking a 5 to 10 X increase in costs eventually, and there's no way even the government will afford that.
I think what we're headed to is a strange mix of the old and new when it comes to transport. We'll have some gas/electric cars for more local trips on a somewhat shrunk local road network. By shrunk I mean some roads will lose lanes. Towns will let many side roads go back to gravel (indeed, some towns are already doing this.) The interstates and major highways will lose lanes. Places that have multiple, redundant highway service such as Houlton (I-95, Rt 2, Rt 2a) will lose one or more roads as the state focuses maint. on the remaining roads (and the lower level of intercity truck and cars won't require as many highways anyway.) Rejuvenated rail, some owned by the state, but mostly not, will pick up the slack. Nationwide, the large freight RRs will start to host rail passenger cars on their tracks again, perhaps operated by a contractor such as the tourist RRs or a Pullman type company rising Phoenix-like. High speed rail, on the other hand, with its multi-billion dollar price tag and engineering issues, will be confined to running between a few major cities, IF THAT. While government spins its wheels trying to get high speed rail going, private enterprise will restart conventional passenger rail. As the highways lose their pavement and bridges to impossible oil, pavement, and construction costs in the face of declining fuel taxes, conventional, 70 mph rail on a sleeper car, with an electric car rental place at the destination end, will start looking pretty good.
Meanwhile, air travel for the masses, in the days of $8 to $12 jet fuel, will be but a distant memory. (And no, jatropha or other veggie oil is NOT going to power the world's airline fleet.) Government will abandon many airports. Indeed, many smaller airports have already lost scheduled airliner service and are fighting off closing even now. Rich people with their planes, will find themselves like the rich with their private railroad cars 70 years ago - they'll be losing airports to travel to analogous to when all the RR stations and station sidings started closing back when.
I just hope the State doesn't lose a bazillion $$ on all this before it stops fighting reality.
For fun, check out this old timetable of one of the Bangor & Aroostook Railroad's old trains: The Potatoland Special - July, 1954 - Streamliner Schedules (As a person who just recently bought a house in Littleton, Maine, this particular train schedule fascinates me.)
Further in the future, keeping in mind that newer trains can climb steeper grades than years ago, it is possible that new rail lines may be built along some of the interstate highway alignments. We may also see a call to return trains to the right of ways now used by snowmobile and ATV trails - the ones that used to run trains.
In the interim, we may see intercity bus patronage climb higher, utilizing the highway system, until the latter starts deteriorating too badly.
Four and a half hours from Bangor to Houlton... hope the scenary was nice.
Anyone else been to Phair and remember the train station there? It was there maybe... 35 years ago, but I went back about 4 years ago and it was completely gone! I couldn't even tell where it was.
Rail will do well in the coming years generally speaking in this country.
World oil production is peaking or has peaked already as the world has been using more oil on a daily basis than it's been finding for almost 30 years now. While it is somewhat true that the government in the US has locked up the remaining drilling areas (the coastal shelves, ANWR in AK), it's also true that the US has more oil and gas wells drilled into its territory than the rest of the world combined. Then too, production in most of the rest of the world's producing countries is stagnant to falling as well. (Mexico is a major supplier to the US and production in their major oil field, Cantarell, is falling something like 8% year over year. Mexico is also growing its own internal appetite for oil products as well. For all intensive purposes, Mexico will cease to be an oil exporting nation at all within 8 years, and they are the US' number two supplier I think (behind Canada.) Speaking of Canada, while the tar sands are increasing production a bit, their total output is so puny compared to world oil demand (the latter is about 85M bbls/day) that it will never "save" either Canada or the US.
Yeah, we have electric cars coming onto the market now, and even at $40K each, I suppose somebody will buy a few of them. But they only go about 50 to 70 miles before they switch on their gas engines (Chevy Volt).
Then too, roads are basically paved with a rock/oil mixture, roads that need regular resurfacing at least every decade or so. Concrete roads don't last in Maine at all and even if they did, the cement used requires lots of natural gas for the cement kilns along with diesel to haul and spread the concrete. Meanwhile natural gas is about to be loved to death as an oil replacement and it remains to be seen just how long these new hydraulic fracturing techniques recently developed to find new natural gas withstand the test of time. These new nat. gas wells are causing an uproar because they take out people's drinking wells in rural America (Penn. and NYS especially.)
Government never really has solved any of these problems nor will it ever because, well, it's the government.
Two steel rails, on the other hand, are durable enough to last decades with only the ties and ballast needing maintenance, and the ties are renewable. There is a reason that private industry built the rails and that is that private industry tends to find the more efficient way of doing things while the roads, especially the highways, had to be built at government expense and that worked when the main input into cars and roads - oil - was cheap. But now we're headed back to the days of pre-oil.
Even though the State of Maine recently bought a dilapidated railroad in Aroostook, I don't think the future of rail lies with state ownership. Indeed, one of America's most savy investors, Warren Buffet, has been buying RRs himself. Most of the US rail network is once again hugely profitable and growing. Whether that means that the RR network in Maine will turn around too, I don't know. But I do know that highway operating and rebuild costs are about to go up and eventually WAY up. We're probably talking a 5 to 10 X increase in costs eventually, and there's no way even the government will afford that.
I think what we're headed to is a strange mix of the old and new when it comes to transport. We'll have some gas/electric cars for more local trips on a somewhat shrunk local road network. By shrunk I mean some roads will lose lanes. Towns will let many side roads go back to gravel (indeed, some towns are already doing this.) The interstates and major highways will lose lanes. Places that have multiple, redundant highway service such as Houlton (I-95, Rt 2, Rt 2a) will lose one or more roads as the state focuses maint. on the remaining roads (and the lower level of intercity truck and cars won't require as many highways anyway.) Rejuvenated rail, some owned by the state, but mostly not, will pick up the slack. Nationwide, the large freight RRs will start to host rail passenger cars on their tracks again, perhaps operated by a contractor such as the tourist RRs or a Pullman type company rising Phoenix-like. High speed rail, on the other hand, with its multi-billion dollar price tag and engineering issues, will be confined to running between a few major cities, IF THAT. While government spins its wheels trying to get high speed rail going, private enterprise will restart conventional passenger rail. As the highways lose their pavement and bridges to impossible oil, pavement, and construction costs in the face of declining fuel taxes, conventional, 70 mph rail on a sleeper car, with an electric car rental place at the destination end, will start looking pretty good.
Meanwhile, air travel for the masses, in the days of $8 to $12 jet fuel, will be but a distant memory. (And no, jatropha or other veggie oil is NOT going to power the world's airline fleet.) Government will abandon many airports. Indeed, many smaller airports have already lost scheduled airliner service and are fighting off closing even now. Rich people with their planes, will find themselves like the rich with their private railroad cars 70 years ago - they'll be losing airports to travel to analogous to when all the RR stations and station sidings started closing back when.
I just hope the State doesn't lose a bazillion $$ on all this before it stops fighting reality.
Further in the future, keeping in mind that newer trains can climb steeper grades than years ago, it is possible that new rail lines may be built along some of the interstate highway alignments. We may also see a call to return trains to the right of ways now used by snowmobile and ATV trails - the ones that used to run trains.
In the interim, we may see intercity bus patronage climb higher, utilizing the highway system, until the latter starts deteriorating too badly.
Speaking of Buffett, this link (IMHO) shows why government holds a vested interest in *all things oil* and probably contributes to the lack of railroad investments (maybe it's just me).
Quote:
"The oil and gas industry ranks number four in the Congressional investment chain. There is always talk of moving off of our dependence on foreign oil but this never occurs. Exxon, Shell, BP, Conoco Phillips, and Chevron account for 44% of all Congressional oil and gas investments.
With so much money pouring in from lobbyists and investments in the sectors that they regulate; it can be difficult for a politician to vote in the best interest of their constituents and not in the interest of their pocketbook."
Four and a half hours from Bangor to Houlton... hope the scenary was nice.
Anyone else been to Phair and remember the train station there? It was there maybe... 35 years ago, but I went back about 4 years ago and it was completely gone! I couldn't even tell where it was.
Yes, this train made a lot of stops. The Bangor and Aroostook only had 2 passenger trains a day from what I've read on other boards. There was this overnight Potatoland Special, and another mainly day train called The Aroostook Flyer, although since there each train ran in both directions, there actually were four total passenger trains on the BAR mainline.
Anyhow, they had to make all the stops to cover the territory. Visiting family in Boston, If this Potatoland Special still ran, I'd be in a sleeper anyhow and the time passes faster that way.
BTW, the southbound time table was faster....Houlton to Bangor was only a couple of minutes over 4 hours that way.
Cyr Bus Lines runs a bus Bangor to Fort Kent that provides decent service via 95 that connects with Greyhound and Concord Coach Lines to Boston and beyond, but it's a day schedule. The great thing about the BAR Potatoland Special is that it was an overnight train to the south, so one wouldn't miss or waste a whole day traveling.
I wonder how fast Bangor to Houlton will be after half of I95 is closed for bridge repairs that never get completed or for a road surface pock-marked with potholes? I give us 25 or so years to get there.
In general, however, I'd say Maine is going to do better than the average US state in a lower energy society. If nothing else, we have more water, especially water that doesn't have to be pumped out of a 900 foot well. What cropland we have needs less irrigation, if any, and we have more trees. When the government highways start failing, we'll be better off up here than a lot of places will be, trains or no trains.
I'm getting my Masters in urban planning right now and transit is a large part of that, obviously. I also lived in Maine for just over 4 years and have been following the conversation in this thread with some interest. Nexis4newjersey is a cheerleader for rail (not a bad thing) and the vast majority of the visions he maps (which are fun to look at) will never come to fruition. That includes most of the proposals outside of Maine too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beltrams
Most of the US rail network is once again hugely profitable and growing. Whether that means that the RR network in Maine will turn around too, I don't know.
What's this based on? Every rail line in the United States is HEAVILY subsidized. There is not one single passenger rail line (I'm not talking about dinner trains and tourist attractions but rather functioning mass transit lines) in the country that is profitable. Not one. Even Amtrak's most successful routes are subsidized by the government and fares on lines like Acela are through the roof (much higher than air travel on the same routes). Outside of Japan and some select routes in Europe, rail travel is not profitable from a fares standpoint.
What is true is that rail travel is becoming more popular. Amtrak has seen large increases in ridership nationwide. Local rail network (like Boston's MBTA, New York's Metro North and Long Island Railroads, etc) have seen an increase in ridership as well.
Of course, if you look at it in such black and white terms, rail seems to be a waste of money (anti-rail people tend to forget that roadways are very heavily subsidized as well).
Rail is worth it because of economic growth created. It's an investment. Rail does a far better job at sparking growth than buses or roadways as rail runs of fixed tracks and has fixed stations so there's a steady flow of concentrated traffic moving through a certain area. It's consistent. Trains are prone to being on-time more consistently, they're roomier and more comfortable than cars, buses or planes, and they aren't as impacted by weather as those other forms of transit. In many cases (particularly on metro rail lines like Boston's MBTA), a new rail project can be directly linked to economic growth that's more than quadruple the cost of construction and maintenance of the rail line's upkeep. For example, a rail line that costs $100 Million to build and maintain will often create $400+Million in development within the first few years. A line under construction in MA where I grew up has already drawn in new businesses and created over 1,000 jobs (not related to the construction itself) and we're 6 years from the first train rolling down those tracks.
The issue is that rail needs to connect relatively highly populated areas in order to really be worthwhile. It is also only effective over certain distances (obviously, high speed rail can be effective over longer distances than standard rail). Maine doesn't have the highly populated areas to support much more than what it already has in terms of rail. The flashy maps that Nexis posted are nice, but they don't tell the real story.
Southern Maine (York, Cumberland and Sagadahoc County) covers a land area that is more than DOUBLE the square mileage of the entire state of Rhode Island. The combined population for those counties is 516,000 people (Rhode Island has 1.2 Million people in half the area of Southern Maine) which leaves you with population density of right around 180people per square mile. That's a very low population density. Maybe not by the standards of those living in Northern Maine, but on a national level, it's low. There's no way such a large geographic area with such a small population can support the network that our friend Nexis is proposing.
Keep in mind, Maine very nearly lost the Downeaster a year ago. In an 11th hour deal, they found the money to keep subsidizing the service. The Downeaster is a tourist train. On average, 20% of Downeaster riders are "regular commuters" (that number is around 80% on Amtrak's Northeast Regional trains from BOS- Wash). The problem is that it's too long of a ride (2.5-3 hours from Bos- Portland) for it to be a viable commuter option. It's good for a Boston daytrip, a Red Sox game and for the occasional Bostonian to head up to Maine for a day and little else (buses are far better for airport transit). There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make a case for the massive expansion Nexis is calling for.
High Speed lines could shorten the Boston- Portland leg, but is it worth it to invest billions (and it would be billions) to upgrade the route to support high speed trains? I don't think so. Not unless you plan on running the route all the way to Montreal or Quebec City and have Portland/ Southern Maine as a stop along the way. I don't think it's worth the investment to serve a such a small metro area (188,000 in Portland's urbanized area which includes suburbs like South Portland, Biddeford, Saco, Westbrook, Scarborough, Cape Elizabeth, Yarmouth, etc).
Finally, I think the opposition to a high-speed Boston-Portland line would be surprisingly high. When I lived in Portland, one of the things that locals prided themselves on was that Portland was NOT Boston. One of the reasons Portland is as unique as it is is that it's such a tiny city but it's still independent. Just about all of the small cities in MA, RI and CT (even Manchester, NH) are part of a larger Metropolitan area (like Boston, Providence or NYC). Portland isn't. Portland is part of the Portland area and that's what makes it so attractive. Having trains that could get you from Portland to Boston in an hour (and a moderate high speed train can do that easily) makes Portland part of Boston's metro area. As others have said, Portland is NOT part of the Bos-Wash megalopolis and it has a long way to go before it's even close to being part of that. A high speed Bos-Portland connection expedites that process and turns Portland into a satellite city which goes against the culture of the city as it is now. I'm not even getting into the debate you'd have in the rural areas where trains would be whizzing by at nearly 200mph (hint: people wouldn't care for it). I think many (if not most) in Southern Maine would be dead set against doing that.
I actually beg to differ and i took those proposals form the state plans. I ran them by a bunch of engineers in New England and they said its doable. They just need to use Smaller DMU trains so it will become a profitable line. Keep in mind we are planning several longer rural / suburban lines down here that will connect other states .....The facts are the Bos-Wash has started to grow outside its current limits and is spreading up towards Portland is predicted to go all the way up to Bangor by 2050 , so while current those lines aren't needed in the future they will be. My plans or the states plans tend to be long term not this decade.......The only thing that should be built this decade is the Brunswick line. The state should build anything after that intill its confident it had a population to support it. You may have a masters in Urban Planning but seem to know little about trains and the systems / costs.....
I love to see a train service up to Bar Harbor from Boston, or perhaps a train up to Bangor and then a connecting bus? Dunno if it'd cost-effective but the drive is painfully long and it's easy to get around Acadia National Park using the bus system and /or bicycling, so it should get decent tourist usage. Right now, there's not even a bus from Boston to Bar Harbor.
Most of the US rail network is once again hugely profitable and growing. Whether that means that the RR network in Maine will turn around too, I don't know.
What's this based on? Every rail line in the United States is HEAVILY subsidized. There is not one single passenger rail line (I'm not talking about dinner trains and tourist attractions but rather functioning mass transit lines) in the country that is profitable.
Irfox, My mistake. I was talking about *freight* railroads there, not passenger rail, but was using the resurgence of freight to suggest that passenger operations may, at some point, also enjoy improved economics. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on the distinction.
I actually beg to differ and i took those proposals form the state plans. I ran them by a bunch of engineers in New England and they said its doable. They just need to use Smaller DMU trains so it will become a profitable line. Keep in mind we are planning several longer rural / suburban lines down here that will connect other states .....The facts are the Bos-Wash has started to grow outside its current limits and is spreading up towards Portland is predicted to go all the way up to Bangor by 2050 , so while current those lines aren't needed in the future they will be. My plans or the states plans tend to be long term not this decade.......The only thing that should be built this decade is the Brunswick line. The state should build anything after that intill its confident it had a population to support it. You may have a masters in Urban Planning but seem to know little about trains and the systems / costs.....
Look. Proposals, whether they are municipal, county, state or federal plans are just that. Proposals. The ones you've posted are visions. The VAST majority of visions all over the country don't make it past the proposal stage. One or two of them may be "doable" in the next 40 years, but most will still be little more than drawings lost in digital archives by that time.
I fully understand how areas "grow." Do you know how metropolitan areas are measured? The only reason Portland may be thrown under the umbrella term "Bos-Wash megalopolis" is because of how it's measured. The Census Bureau uses a county based system to determine metro areas. In New England (and much of the Northeast) this measurement irrelevant. Portland's "Metro" area abuts the Boston metro area because according to the Census, Metro Portland includes all of York, Cumberland and Sagadahoc counties. This measurement is erroneous, of course, and the government knows and compensates for that (by using Urbanized area and New England City and Town Area for more accurate measurments).
Anyone familiar with Maine would laugh at the notion that Bridgeton, Eliot, Berwick, etc are "suburbs" of Portland (many of these towns are incredibly rural and upwards of an hour from Portland by car); but they are technically included because of the Census Bureau's basis for measurements of a metro. York County borders Portsmouth, New Hampshire which is, of course, one of the furthest reaches of what is technically Boston's metropolitan area. This is why Portland may TECHNICALLY be thrown under the umbrella of the Boston-Washington Megalopolis.
However, anyone remotely familiar with this area can tell you that there are huge expanses of very rural land in between Boston and Portland. They're not going to magically fill in with suburban sprawl over the next 40 years simply because the Census Bureau's arbitrary boundaries in Maine happen to neighbor their arbitrary boundaries of another metro area. I can call draw lines on a map that say Portland, Maine is part metropolitan Chicago, but it doesn't mean anything if the growth isn't there to support it. Portland may have a fancy new title as part of the Boston-Washington Megalopolis because of some lines on a map, but the reality is that the Portland area (and Southern Maine) isn't going to grow much bigger (in terms of population) than what it is now as the current growth rate is incredibly low (declining in most of Maine, actually). There are 516,000 people in the three counties that make up Southern Maine (York, Cumberland and Sagadahoc). If the current growth rate continues, That number will still be well under 600,000 in 40 years while the rest of Maine will have lost population (including the city of Portland). THOSE are the facts.
That's exactly the problem. The growth isn't there to support what you're saying. Not in Maine anyway. Maine as a whole is losing population. Portland's population is DECREASING, a trend that's continued for a few decades now. There are a few communities near Portland that are showing some growth (Scarborough, mostly) but it's still at a very slow rate and hardly enough justify billions of dollars in investment. Finally, the area between Boston and Portland is largely rural, not to mention expansive (I already mentioned that Southern Maine is two times the size of the state of Rhode Island with 1/2 the population of RI). It's not going to simply blow up over the next 40 years and become a sprawling suburb.
I applaud your enthusiasm, but I think you're completely clueless as to what Maine is like. I also think you're views are approaching fantasy when it comes to what will happen for rail in Maine. Maine may have a "doable" proposal or two, but so does just about every other state in the nation. I know you're talking about 40 years, but there are simply FAR too many "doable" proposals in much larger, much more lucrative markets to justify even 1/3 of what you suggest in Maine. It's a nice thought, but it's never going to happen. If you think I "know little" about trains and costs, enjoy the next 40 years. It's going to be one heck of a reality check.
By the way, I'm involved with a $1.4 billion ($1.9 if we can electrify it like we hope to) rail project in MA as we speak. It's partially funded and partially under construction. I know more details about the snags, holdups, financing, environmental approvals, NIMBYism, municipal greed and every little bit of minutia that goes into these things than I would ever care to know. This project has been in the works for 30 years and is only NOW really moving forward. It's only 50 miles too. Every project, everywhere goes through the same process. So again, have fun with the maps. When it gets down to making them happen (hopefully you get involved) it won't be nearly as easy as you seem to think it will be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beltrams
Irfox, My mistake. I was talking about *freight* railroads there, not passenger rail, but was using the resurgence of freight to suggest that passenger operations may, at some point, also enjoy improved economics. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear on the distinction.
I had a sneaking suspicion that's what you meant. Yes, freight rail is becoming more and more popular again. It's expanding everywhere. With rising fuel costs, even diesel locomotives move much more cargo more efficiently than trucks. Short Sea shipping is another area that's growing and will benefit smaller port cities like Portland and Portsmouth.
I agree, I think passenger rail will see improvement eventually in terms of profitability. We're getting there with Acela from BOS- NY (I'm not sure on the NYC-DC segment) but still have a ways to go. Improve efficiency of the trains by seriously upgrading infrastructure (to allow trains to achieve top cruising speeds) and you'll see potentially profitable routes (like they have between some major cities in Europe and much of Japan) especially in highly populated corridors (Bos-Wash, San Francisco- San Diego, Houston- Dallas, and possibly even parts of the Midwest). Short and mid range routes will be the cash cows.
For the record, I think it's feasible (if done properly, of course) to eventually (as in 30-40 years) run a passenger rail line up to Bangor from Boston via Portland. With the proper equipment (smaller trains, hopefully electrified catanary), it could be very helpful for economic development in Maine. Anything beyond that is a REAL stretch.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
