|
Post by Dane on Mar 11, 2012 21:40:42 GMT -8
That would be pretty illogical to add a couple thousand miles by train to save 500 by ship... the cost per mile of shipping by RR is a lot higher than by freighter. I don't have numbers available, maybe someone with more time can figure it out.
This really just seems like a function of Port development, or lack there of. Unless they really do care about speed?
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 11, 2012 21:52:27 GMT -8
Dane is right. The additional rail shipping costs far outstrip any savings on the ocean shipping costs. Apparently there is quite a strong 'environmental objection' to building a coal port somewhere on Puget Sound. I am not sure if the issue is a perception of excessive coal dust, or something else. I am sure that Roberts Bank would be the preferred terminal at present, if the capacity existed. Ridley Terminals (Prince Rupert) does currently have excess capacity.
It is kind of neat to see BNSF power on trains 'up here' in NW BC where all we ever usually see is CN!
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Mar 11, 2012 22:10:23 GMT -8
It is kind of neat to see BNSF power on trains 'up here' in NW BC where all we ever usually see is CN! I saw a couple of old Illinois Central switchers in Edmonton last time I was up there, still in their old IC livery. That was neat too
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Mar 12, 2012 8:22:51 GMT -8
Generally the reason that coal is shipped through Prince Rupert is due to the shorter over-sea shipping distance. Prince Rupert is 400 miles closer to Shanghai than Vancouver, 500 miles closer to Shanghai than Seattle, and over 1200 miles closer to Shanghai than Los Angeles, which is the location of the US's main coal terminals. That 500 miles difference does in fact equate to lower prices and faster shipping time through Rupert rather than the alternatives, and this is why the seemingly large 'detour' up North is made. Prince Rupert also doesn't suffer from the same contentious relationship that Vancouver has with the long shoremen. So it gives a second port that can be used for relief. The port and long shorement in Prince Rupert know they are trying to attract new business so everyone seems more cooperative and consiliatory. The bottleneck that is the Port of Vancouver adds a lot of time on to shipping beyond just sailing time.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Mar 12, 2012 20:54:51 GMT -8
I saw a couple of old Illinois Central switchers in Edmonton last time I was up there, still in their old IC livery. That was neat too CN now owns the Illinois Central (IC), just like they own BC Rail. Just as ex-BC Rail power can be seen literally anywhere in CN's continent wide system, so too is the case with IC power. I saw an IC unit on a Rupert bound train a few months ago. Prince Rupert also doesn't suffer from the same contentious relationship that Vancouver has with the long shoremen. So it gives a second port that can be used for relief. The port and long shorement in Prince Rupert know they are trying to attract new business so everyone seems more cooperative and consiliatory. The bottleneck that is the Port of Vancouver adds a lot of time on to shipping beyond just sailing time. The reason that Montana coal is being shipped to Rupert is as I have said above: 1 - There are apparently no coal handling port facilities in the US Pacific North West. 2 - Roberts Bank south of Vancouver would be logical, but its capacity is pretty much maxed out. 3 - The coal terminal at Rupert has a fair bit of unused capacity. It really does not make a lot of sense to ship coal by rail 3 times further than needed, just to get it to an ocean port.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Mar 12, 2012 22:03:32 GMT -8
I saw a couple of old Illinois Central switchers in Edmonton last time I was up there, still in their old IC livery. That was neat too CN now owns the Illinois Central (IC), just like they own BC Rail. Just as ex-BC Rail power can be seen literally anywhere in CN's continent wide system, so to is the case with IC power. I saw an IC unit on a Rupert bound train a few months ago. Prince Rupert also doesn't suffer from the same contentious relationship that Vancouver has with the long shoremen. So it gives a second port that can be used for relief. The port and long shorement in Prince Rupert know they are trying to attract new business so everyone seems more cooperative and consiliatory. The bottleneck that is the Port of Vancouver adds a lot of time on to shipping beyond just sailing time. The reason that Montana coal is being shipped to Rupert is as I have said above: 1 - There are apparently no coal handling port facilities in the US Pacific North West. 2 - Roberts Bank south of Vancouver would be logical, but its capacity is pretty much maxed out. 3 - The coal terminal at Rupert has a fair bit of unused capacity. It really does not make a lot of sense to ship coal by rail 3 times further than needed, just to get it to an ocean port. I just asked my mother (the CN worker) what she knows about it, and she said she isn't exactly sure of the reason, but it's became a regular thing with CN, shipping coal from Montana to Rupert. Apparently about two coal trains per week run up that way from Yankeeland.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Apr 23, 2012 9:43:04 GMT -8
The Roundhouse Museum at the base of the CN Tower is facing a big challenge. Apparently Toronto Hydro has the rights to below the museum in the old roundhouse and is installing a new transformer to help support the massive building projects underway in the city. Now they have decided that they need more space and want to take over the space that the museum has been restoring to use to house some of their collection and museum space. There are 148 highrise buildings under construction in the Toronto area and with a signficant number near downtown the pressure for more hydro capacity is huge.
Already one part of the roundhouse has a downtown version of Leons. Another part has the Steamwhistle brewery. All help preserving the historic structure but the Roundhouse Museum would be a great addition. An aquarium run by Jimmy Patterson's company is also well into construction close by. So the area would be perfectly suited for another museum.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Apr 28, 2012 18:50:40 GMT -8
From a 1969 publication by the Vancouver Real Estate Board, “Through Lions Gate.” General photographs credit in the book is to Ted Czolowski. I purchased the book for $3 at a local Rotary Club book sale, just for the interesting “back in the day” photos. What caught my eye in these 2 photos is the rail bridge across False Creek, between the Burrard St and Granville St bridges.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Apr 29, 2012 12:05:12 GMT -8
That was the "Kitsilano Rail Trestle". It was part of the old "Arbutus Line" that began in Marpole (approximately where the existing North Arm rail bridge next to the Oak Street Bridge is upstream from the Arthur Laing Bridge to YVR). ----------- I remember that book. I got one as a present when it first came out, but lost it. Thanks for that info; much appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by Northern Exploration on Jul 23, 2012 11:00:32 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Sept 28, 2012 10:49:29 GMT -8
The last run of the Ontario Northland Railway's Northlander in both directions was today. Much like BC Rail's Cariboo Prospector, the Northlander was an essential service for many small communities (especially in winter when the nearby roads are closed by bad weather), some of which have no other connection to the outside world. It will be replaced by a bus service.
|
|
|
Post by dofd on Jul 29, 2013 23:53:05 GMT -8
link
Well now we have the coal dust; and after the video it is a problem. Even if it once in a while, it is not good.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jul 30, 2013 4:31:35 GMT -8
link
Well now we have the coal dust; and after the video it is a problem. Even if it once in a while, it is not good. It looks like you've linked to a Facebook page which is set for private viewing. So we can't see it.
|
|
|
Post by SS San Mateo on Jul 30, 2013 9:52:15 GMT -8
It should work now (there was a 'http\\' in the link which was screwing things up).
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jul 30, 2013 10:45:53 GMT -8
I have watched a lot of loaded (& empty) coal trains pass by over the years & I have never seen significant amounts of coal dust blowing off them. I believe that the sealant that is applied to the surface of the coal generally works very well. I have also noted that railway right-of-ways that have a lot of coal trains going through daily are not 'covered in dust'; on the contrary the right-of-ways are fairly clean. The train shown in the video on the CBC website is NOT the norm; it is very much an exception. See this photo of the sealant being applied to a CP train near Salmon Arm, BC.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Jul 30, 2013 11:35:20 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Dane on Aug 19, 2013 20:57:04 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 2, 2013 9:48:57 GMT -8
Rail fan guidelines sheet, from "Operation LifeSaver." linkMost of this is common sense, but good reminders.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Sept 18, 2013 9:37:05 GMT -8
Have you ever seen any coal dust come out of the coal cars? Here in the Emerald City, (Seattle) there's been a big debate about building more coal cars. People are concerned about coal dust and many other environmental impacts that these trains might have, but I have never seen any dust come out of the coal cars and have never understood why people are raising a big stink over coal trains.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Sept 18, 2013 9:53:30 GMT -8
Have you ever seen any coal dust come out of the coal cars? Here in the Emerald City, (Seattle) there's been a big debate about building more coal cars. People are concerned about coal dust and many other environmental impacts that these trains might have, but I have never seen any dust come out of the coal cars and have never understood why people are raising a big stink over coal trains. Coal trains have a coating applied to them (not sure what it is exactly) prior to departure, and in some cases, points during the trip. There is a video floating around, featuring a coal train billowing coal dust in Aggasiz, BC. In this specialized case, the coating was obviously not applied properly. However, one certainly does not want those toxins released into their neighbourhood, and I can understand resident concern. It's become a hot topic in Metro Vancouver as well, with the region taking an official stand against increased coal train traffic, going head to head with Vancouver's port authority, Port Vancouver. Speaking from personal experience, I live within about 2 km of the rail line linking Deltaport, so coal trains are very frequent. I've never personally seen coal dust or experienced negative perceptions related to coal trains. Rail is by far the most efficient and effective way to transport coal, and "coal trucks" would be an atrocity. So what is the right answer? I don't know. But the consensus seems content with the status quo with no increase in traffic, so I suspect that's going to be the final answer. Follow-up edit: Here is the video - this is actually filmed here in Delta. Skip to 0:59 in the video for maximum coal dust entertainment.
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,947
|
Post by FNS on Sept 18, 2013 10:30:12 GMT -8
Have you ever seen any coal dust come out of the coal cars? Here in the Emerald City, (Seattle) there's been a big debate about building more coal cars. People are concerned about coal dust and many other environmental impacts that these trains might have, but I have never seen any dust come out of the coal cars and have never understood why people are raising a big stink over coal trains. Coal trains have a coating applied to them (not sure what it is exactly) prior to departure, and in some cases, points during the trip. There is a video floating around, featuring a coal train billowing coal dust in Aggasiz, BC. In this specialized case, the coating was obviously not applied properly. However, one certainly does not want those toxins released into their neighbourhood, and I can understand resident concern. It's become a hot topic in Metro Vancouver as well, with the region taking an official stand against increased coal train traffic, going head to head with Vancouver's port authority, Port Vancouver. Speaking from personal experience, I live within about 2 km of the rail line linking Deltaport, so coal trains are very frequent. I've never personally seen coal dust or experienced negative perceptions related to coal trains. Rail is by far the most efficient and effective way to transport coal, and "coal trucks" would be an atrocity. So what is the right answer? I don't know. But the consensus seems content with the status quo with no increase in traffic, so I suspect that's going to be the final answer. I think there should be a way to redesign coal rail cars to include some form of covers on top of them. Sort of what you see on "Oscar The Grouch"'s favorite trains that pass through Seattle on their way to the land fill. I've stood near them at crossings several times and you have to hold your noses a bit as they pass by. I'll let "Oscar" tell you how sweet they smell according to his tastes. As you know, he lives in a trash can. Anyway, there should be some sort of covers on coal rail cars. Here's a video one of "Oscar"'s trains showing covering over most of the open top containers:
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Sept 18, 2013 21:33:40 GMT -8
Back in July I wrote the following about dust from coal trains. The video is either a fake, or of a train that somehow missed having the latex coating properly applied. I have never seen any appreciable amount of dust coming off a coal or other train for that matter. I have watched a lot of loaded (& empty) coal trains pass by over the years & I have never seen significant amounts of coal dust blowing off them. I believe that the sealant that is applied to the surface of the coal generally works very well. I have also noted that railway right-of-ways that have a lot of coal trains going through daily are not 'covered in dust'; on the contrary the right-of-ways are fairly clean. The train shown in the video on the CBC website is NOT the norm; it is very much an exception. See this photo of the sealant being applied to a CP train near Salmon Arm, BC.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Oct 6, 2013 19:29:54 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 9, 2013 18:37:59 GMT -8
A catch-all thread for discussion not covered elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Oct 15, 2013 18:52:34 GMT -8
I have watched a lot of loaded (& empty) coal trains pass by over the years & I have never seen significant amounts of coal dust blowing off them. I believe that the sealant that is applied to the surface of the coal generally works very well. I have also noted that railway right-of-ways that have a lot of coal trains going through daily are not 'covered in dust'; on the contrary the right-of-ways are fairly clean. The train shown in the video on the CBC website is NOT the norm; it is very much an exception. See this photo of the sealant being applied to a CP train near Salmon Arm, BC. If you want to see this sealant application site on the CP line, you can easily find it on Google Maps, street-view. - Carlin Road, Tappen BC is what you type into the search bar. - find the railway tracks (easy to spot). The eastbound tracks are road-level as a double track. The sealant station is on the Westbound track, which crosses Under Carlin Rd. It's interesting to look at, from street-view.
|
|