1. 1
Proposition To Increase Passenger Train
Travel
for
State/Local Representatives of Oregon and Passenger Rail Car
Manufacturers
by
The Valley Railway Corp.
Mitchell Keys
Efficiency
Adam Passmore
Infrastructure
Alexerae Jeanbart
Economics
Jake Phelps
Ecosystems
David Thompson
Economics
Drew Haley
Ecosystems
2. 2
Table of Contents
Abstract Summary/Introduction.........................................................3
Data Section.......................................................................................4
• Economics..................................................................................4
• Social Savings....................................................................................................5
• State/Government Savings.................................................................................6
• Ecosystems.................................................................................7
◦ Oregon Wildlife and Noise Pollution.........................................................7
◦ Animal Deaths Train Related Compared to Automobile............................8
• Efficiency....................................................................................9
◦ Various Factors and Methods of Train Travel Efficiency..........................9
• Infrastructure.............................................................................11
◦ Financial and Physical Layout of Infrastructure.....................................11
◦ Portland-Eugene Rail...............................................................................12
References.........................................................................................15
3. 3
Abstract Summary
Mass Public Transportation
Railway expansion in Oregon as future Alternative
Although automobiles have been the contemporary medium for transportation and commuting for the
last 100 years. The cost of road repairs, damage to the environment, and expense of fossil fuels, is
likely to keep rising at an uncontrollable rate that is unmanageable in the years to come.
The most cost effective, least expensive, and lucrative approach to this problem, before it becomes a
burden to Oregon's economic and environmental infrastructure is to Support and Fund an expansion of
the currently used Amtrak railways, privatization and competitiveness for the use and ownership of
these tracks by rail-car manufacturers and stock holders, all day, every day, and the public's support and
awareness of this opportunity to travel in a more social and commutative environment, that is
economically and environmentally feasibly detailed in this report.
We also came to this conclusion of expanding the railways by examining the alternatives of bus and
plane, as well as doing research into countries with established railways dedicated to mass
transportation and commuting functioning as an integrated way of travel already.
With your support, funding, and promotional push in the public eye, we can build a future mass
transportation medium by railway that enriches Oregon in the areas that matter to the people, while
benefiting from the prospects and revenue of supplying a demanded necessity for Oregon's growth
everywhere and to the majority of the populace.
4. 4
Economics of Train Travel
Saving Time, Money, and Energy for Social Benefits
Intro
As more people ride trains, the economic and environmental benefits of high speed rail increase. In
2007, it was estimated that a freight train could move 436 tons of freight on more than a gallon of fuel,
with trains doing even better today. Unlike with auto travel, trains are able to add passengers with
virtually no additional energy use, making them energy efficient as well. Trains are also able to move
three times more freight than by doing so via highway, and have lower gas emissions. Not only are
trains fuel efficient, but they are also profitable in several ways.
Networking
Trains have the potential to be the solution to rising gas prices. High speed rail from a gross standpoint,
has notable economic benefits. Because weather is no factor in its operation and congestion is never an
issue, it is very reliable and predictably timely. High speed rail also enables cities to link together to
form a larger region making them a stronger economy. By doing this, cities also have a larger network
for business and markets to pull from. With a widespread use and bigger economy, a larger
development plan is necessary.
Expanding the use of high speed rail would generate new jobs throughout the nation, stimulating the
economy, and reduce money wasted on inefficient auto travel.
According to the us hsr,
“This is one important issue that Republicans and Democrats see the value in: The
national high speed rail network will create millions of good jobs, stimulate the economy, create
entirely new industries, be the catalyst for the next real estate boom, save businesses money,
increase mobility, reduce dependence on oil, reduce our annual $700 billion trade deficit
(purchasing foreign oil), and significantly increase national security.”
Environment
With the endangerment of our environment today, high speed rail offers a sustainable transportation
that reduces cost effects as well as preserves our earth ecologically. Investing in the development of
more high speed rail means greater good for our environment and economy. It is predicted that
investment in rail is to increase in congested countries outside the US within the next few years.
Numbers speak for themselves from an economically standpoint and trains do just that.
According to bombardier, the evolution of economy, in the US alone, congestion translated into costs
of $78 billion in delays and fuel in 2005, external costs associated with passenger car travel on average
are three times more than an equivalent trip by rail, and for every $1 billion in federal investment in
public transportation, 47,500 jobs are created. This is a significant amount of prospective into the
economics of trains. With our population continuing to skyrocket, traveling by rail is well suited and is
5. 5
at a less expense to our wallets and environment. Traveling by rail reduces our economic footprint
allowing the preservation of resources for future generations to come.
Time and Money Savings for State/Government
Intro
Elaborating further on the benefits of doubling and expanding the current railway system
in the valleys of Oregon specifically for passenger cars, there are big savings and conveniences to
take into account financially, politically, and fiscally. Not only is this expansion progressive for the
citizens of Oregon, but it entails profitable opportunities, and cost reductions for the local, state,
and business economy as well in the long run. One of the major reliefs to state and local
government would be an easing up of worry for funding the cost of fixing the roads. Another
benefit associated with repair resources being less stretched, is the management of valuable time
unobstructed for road workers and surveyors, who are overburdened with the plethora of damaged
areas of the roadways. Furthermore, as passenger railway car manufacturer, representative, or even
an interested entrepreneur, there is a lucrative business opportunity and taxation proponent opened
up by the expansion of the current railway system to take advantage of. By investing and funding
this mass public transportation project, you are entitled to the advantages ranging from tax breaks
to a negotiable percentage of revenue generated from tickets to stocks. Finally, from a political
perspective, funding this project opens the ability to gasconade your public standing. By
elaborating the important role you played in helping tackle Oregon's transportation issues
monetarily, we all flourish by owning a negotiated stock and interest in the tracks and trains, which
will be the main necessity to a mass public transportation medium and its riders.
Road Savings
With the successful implementation of railway becoming a mass transportation medium, a
drastic reduction in the cost to road repairs would not be seen, this is because all DOT's, including
Oregon's, have a bad reputation for spending the same amount of money on new roads as they do
on road repairs for roads already created. An Article on smartgrowthamerica.org called Repair
Priorities 2014: Transportation spending strategies to save taxpayer dollars and improve roads
has it laid out perfectly, stating “State departments of transportation (DOTs) are spending more
money building new roads than maintaining the ones they have—despite the fact that roads are
crumbling, financial liabilities are mounting and conditions are not improving for America’s
drivers. Between 2009 and 2011, the latest year with available data, states collectively spent $20.4
billion annually to build new roadways and add lanes to existing roads. America’s stateowned
road network grew by 8,822 lanemiles of road during that time, accounting for less than 1 percent
of the total in 2011. During that same time, states spent just $16.5 billion annually repairing and
preserving the other 99 percent of the system, even while roads across the country were
deteriorating. On a scale of good, fair or poor, 21 percent of America’s roads were in poor
condition in 2011. Just 37 percent of roads were in good condition that year—down from 41
percent in 2008.”. On top of this, Oregon is in even worse straights because, regardless of us
6. 6
having an average amount of fair street conditions in comparison to other states, we spend far less
of our annual budget percentage wise on repairing existing roads, and still too much building new
roads when compared to other states. The cost for building a second set of tracks would cost that of
a yearly budget of (50 billion) for road repairs, and although a large amount upfront, the tracks
would be paid off in the first 10 years of use or less depending on volume of travelers. This is
stable even when considering repairs of tracks being at the greatest amount 10 billion annually.
Just as relevant, government representatives and ODOT would have a much more efficient way of
tracking the repair costs of a set of rails for pedestrian use, giving them the freedom to focus
attention and efforts on the unfathomably damaged bridges and roads, that are overused by
automobile. Finally, damage from traffic accidents and wear and tear from weather would
statistically fall to a much more manageable number, while also boosting revenue through an
agreed upon and adjusted ticket price and tax in response to the convenience of commuting by rail.
Government Savings
Investing in this expansion monetarily may not seem to be lucrative endeavor in the short
term, and that's because perhaps it is not, with the exception of tax breaks for transportation
alternatives. Passenger cars are going to cost (based off of many sites and resource averages)
anywhere from $8,000,000$15,000,000 dollars each in manufacturing costs. On top of this, there
would have to be a big push for the privatization of the ownership of railway and passenger cars to
take place. Amtrak has an annual revenue of roughly 2.4 billion, which is a drop in the bucket with
what should be expected. The two main reasons the income is so low compared to expected
revenue of our projects prospects has to do with the ownership of stocks tied to the Federal
Government, and the amount of passengers using Amtrak as a contemporary means of
transportation for everyday travel. Legislation and regulation have handicapped private companies
from investing and capitalizing off of a market in which is not allowed to be competitive. The
problem of low amounts of passengers using train is also linked to this government ownership.
This is because the Federal Government has little interest in risking money for a system they have
no competitors in. Privatization will not only lower the cost of manufacturing the railway and train
cars, which is good for the majority of citizens, but in doing so manufacturers will be able to
promote and gain exposure through media, competition, and social means in relation to the free
market they are based in. This will open up avenues of competitive hiring and an intent of offering
the best service to the customer. More over, these decisions also reflect what ticket prices we can
expect to see. Reasonably, and understandably the front end of this deal looks costly and it is, and
the end result looks uncertain but hopeful. The reality of the situation is that consumer and
passenger alike will be the largest determining factor of the success and gain of this project, just as
with most public projects. With your help, as a politician, manufacturer, and/or entrepreneur it is
believed that we can make this railway come to fruition and all will benefit in the respective ways.
7. 7
Ecologic Savings By Rail
Oregon Wildlife and Noise Pollution
Intro
Animals suffer much more noticeably than plants from the effects of over dependence on cars
moving through the Oregon countryside. Nearly 1,300 crashes involved animals in Oregon in
2013, putting human lives in danger and causing economic harm(Oregonlive, crashes). From
2007 to 2013 42,094 animal deaths were recorded by the Oregon Department of
Transportation (Oregonlive, mapping). The alarming figures only account for state highways.
In a state as wild as Oregon it is safe to assume actual fatality figures are much higher, how
far off is the question. Regardless of the actual number, projected and recorded animal
deaths are unacceptable.
Oregon Wildlife
Worst of all is the suffering many of these animals go through. Deer, and elk, are in
many instances wounded or maimed instead of outright killed when struck by a vehicle. They
can suffer debilitating lifelong injuries or bleed out as they wander across the woods. Allowing
such suffering in as ecofriendly a state as Oregon is cruel and increasingly unconscionable.
For this reason the proposal is submitted today to expand Oregon’s mass transit via trains.
Noise Pollution
Another benefit to the fauna of Oregon is a reduction in noise pollution with
decreased traffic. A report by the Federal Highway Administration concluded that heavy traffic
associated with highways has a detrimental effect on a multitude of animals (fhwa). Most
heavily affected are birds, which were observed to decrease in proportion to the increase of
noise caused by traffic. The report went on to note "passing vehicles were perceived as a
threat. Interestingly, the goats did not seem to be disturbed by the noise from trains" (fhwa).
Researchers in the project observed firsthand wildlife actively avoiding potential habitat due to
noise pollution. Trains as a means of mass transit would substantially cut down on noise pollution.
Highway traffic is estimated at 70 to 90 decibels in volume (chem.Purdue). That is roughly as
loud as modern trains, though covering a far larger area (BBC). Because cars and trucks
transport much more inefficiently more vehicles are required to move the same amount of materials and
people. Consequently, vehicle transport over rail travel disproportionately increases noise pollution
over swaths of land.
8. 8
Animal Deaths Train Related Compared to Automobile
Intro
How railroads affect wildlife and their habitats isn't all that dissimilar from that of
roads. Loss of said habitat, (rail) road kill, the barrier effect1, and reduction in the
quality of the habitats are the main impacts of habitat fragmentation2 by railroads.
This can reduce population viability and threaten the survival of a species. Trains
can also affect wildlife habitats by introducing foreign plants through the medium
of seeds, emission of toxic contaminants such as heavy metals, or managers- sorry,
management (herbicides and the like).
Birds and Reptiles
Wildlife deaths due to trains can be significant. Mammals and Birds seem to be
fare far worse than reptiles, as can be seen on the railroad Madrid-Sevilla. Along
this stretch of track, the annual kill per km rate was 36.5. Around 57% were birds,
40% were mammal, and 3% were reptiles. According to both European and North
American studies, Mammalian victims range from small rodents to large ungulates
(whose members include dolphins and whales. Take a moment to picture this) and
carnivores. The size of the bird victims varied, but Owls and other birds of prey
were particularly vulnerable.
Rail Line Dangers
High mortality rates are mainly found at intersections of railroads with important
wildlife habitats and migration routes. The behavior of the animals, snow depth,
temperature, railroad characteristics, and train speed all are factors that affect kills.
Animals are also killed because they are attracted to rail beds. Carnivores and
ungulates use rail beds as travel corridors during winter. Railroad kills also attract
carrion eaters. In Canada, most collisions with Wolves and Coyotes took place
near train-killed ungulates. Birds are affected in a similar way.
Railroads are also barriers that can decrease survival probability of wildlife
populations when animals cannot or will not cross them.
9. 9
Efficiency of Train Travel
Various Factors and Methods of Train Travel Efficiency
Intro
I would start this off explaining the units of measure measurement that is used to record this data.
Rather than the usual “Mpg”(miles per gallon), trains use RTM/gal; this means per one gallon of fuel
that is used, it carries a metric ton of material a number of miles. From this, the popular freight train
company CSX claims that its trains gain around 500 RTM/gal, which from its average calculations
holds up to be true. I believe that passenger trains will gain a greater efficiency due to its faster coasting
speeds, and overall structural design. For people who say trucks and buses are the way of the future,
from CSX it claims that heavy trucks gain about 134 RTM/gal, which is way less than trains.
One thing that is the same about both trucks/cars/trains is the engine efficiency. On average, most
combustion engines get about a 30% energy use out of their fuel, meaning 65% of the gas goes to
waste; this isn't much different trains though, they get around 35%. Thing is with cars, most of the
energy is lost in the transmission, changing from gear to gear; in trains it is lost during the electrical
conversion of heat to mechanical. With automobiles, its purely physics and physical mechanics that is
to blame for this, which means we can’t really innovate from this. In trains though, its mainly on the
current technology that makes it efficient, so with further innovations and improvements engineers can
increase the maximum output of the engine.
Energy/Engines
These are various forms of engines/energies used in transportation such as in trains, cars, and planes.
Internal Combustion
• The average engine now days for any type of transportation vehicle would be an internal
combustion engine. This utilizes a liquid fuel source such as gasoline or diesel, and converts the
energy into heat, which in the reaction process moves a piston and converts that into kinetic
energy. During this process, around 65% of the energy goes to waste due to the heat leaking out,
the sound of the engine, starting, and stopping. There are two situations when this engine will
run at 0% efficiency, first when the vehicle is stopped and the engine is idling, and second when
it is coasting and it is still running. In cars this is a major problem, with traffic scenarios of the
vehicles motion constantly stopping, starting, and coasting. This is why there is two MPG
ratings for any car, a highway with a constant motion gaining maximum efficiency, and city
with the add-ons of the change in motion. With modern trains, the engine is constantly on and
working towards the power of the electric drive engine, not the motion it's self; this adds to their
overall efficiency.
Mechanical
• Mechanical energy applications deals with with using kinetic, rotational, and potential energy to
alter the overall output of the end motion. For example, a cars transmission uses this to covert
10. 10
the constant, high power, slow circular motion of an engines crankshaft to different ratios of
power/speed to move the vehicle. Because of the different gear ratios, friction, sound, and
constraints on design, much of the starting KE gets lost causing another reduction in energy
efficiency. In trains, there is no power-drive transmission, all of the KE from the engine goes
straight to the generator cutting out the risk of energy loss.
Electrical
• An electric engine works by creating an electromagnetic field that attracts itself to stationary
magnets, so it is similar to when one holds two magnets near each other they pull towards each
other. Due to technological upgrades and lack of a mechanical system, electric systems are
extremely efficient reaching levels up to %75 energy usage. And because the voltage and
ampage of the supplying electricity can effect the speed and power all on its own, there is no
need for a power-drive transmission; thus another way to totally cut out another factor that
could contribute to energy loss.
Diesel Electric
The diesel electric train is currently the most popular propulsion device in trains today, it works by
using a V-(12, 16, or 20) diesel internal combustion engine to provide KE for a DC electrical
generator/alternator to produce the current needed for propulsion. From here, the electricity goes trough
an AC converter/regulator so it both stabilizes and gives the desired amount of electricity to the electric
motors. All six motors are mounted to each of the six axles of a regular train power unit(The
Locomotive), from here the motors directly turn the wheels moving the train. Going back to the
mechanical section, it is important that the KE does go through many stages to get to its end result. All
of the steps to convert the chemical energy(diesel) into motion is necessary to obtain heavy carrying
loads and high speeds, all while saving as much energy as possible.
Electric
Some trains in urban areas run purely off of electrical energy, totally cutting out the need for an on
board power source. Most of these units gain access to this energy via overhead wires or a third rail
between the regular two support rails. Working similar to diesel electric units, there is a motor for each
axle acting directing from the crankshaft. The difference being is the unit only has the DC inverters and
regulators, it also had its own transformer so it can solely run off the standard power grid. Due to the
lack of an engine and generator, it lightens the weight of the unit causing a higher efficiency rating.
11. 11
System Infrastructure For New Passenger Rail
Financial and Physical Layout of Infrastructure
Intro
Passenger train availability must be increased to meet the growing needs of our future
generations. The greatest concentrations of people in the state of Oregon reside in the
Willamette valley, between Portland and Eugene. Amtrak currently provides passenger train
transportation between these two cities, but only in limited capacity due to lack of infrastructure.
We must take action now to secure the necessary resources, ensuring Amtrak will have the
ability to keep up with the demand for a readily available and highly economical means of
transportation.
Portland-Eugene Rail
Currently between Portland and Eugene, Amtrak operates on a rail line owned by Union
Pacific Railroad. This track also provides service to destinations in route consisting of Oregon
City, Salem, and Albany. The single track shown in Figure 1, which is also shared by freight
trains, allows for only 2 roundtrip passenger trains daily (Brinkerhoff, 2010). This rail line is 1
of 10 in the country federally designated as a high-speed corridor which allows for speeds of
110+ mph if the infrastructure is suitable to support those rates of speed. However, current top
speeds of Amtrak’s passenger trains in the area are 79 mph because of aging and unsuitable
infrastructure (Legislative Committee Services, 2012). To increase passenger train service and
allow for freight service to maintain current levels and also allow for increase in the future, the
current track must be improved to allow for greater speeds and an addition rail line must be built.
13. 13
The additional track proposed by Parsons Brinckerhoff would be built parallel to the
current line owned by Union Pacific. The cost for this project is estimated to be 2.2 billion
dollars (Brinkerhoff, 2010). These funds would accomplish the goal of building the new line and
would bring speeds possible on both lines to 110 mph, not only greatly increasing capacity but
also decreasing the time in which it takes to travel dramatically. This project will allow up to 6
daily roundtrip passenger trains, increasing trains on track by 200%. The increase in speed from
79 mph to 110 mph will reduce travel time by 30%. Below in Figure 2, you will see an itemized
break down of all cost necessary to see the project through to completion.
