Reading Steve Gregory’s weather diary this morning over on Daily Kos, an idea struck me. It’s beautiful in its simplicity, it’s simply beautiful, it’ll help alleviate our dependency on oil, it’ll put Americans back to work, it will go a long way toward solving our impending transportation crisis, and it will never be implemented.
Follow me below the fold to see what I came up with.
My brilliant idea comes from a number of factors. I’m composing at the keyboard, as it were, so I hope this is coherent and, most of all, correct.
First off, the United States of America is to coal what the Middle East is to oil, only more so. We have enough coal in the ground to keep us running for several hundred years at predicted consumption levels. This plan might raise those consumption levels somewhat, but if the coal lasts for three hundred years instead of four, we still have three hundred years to come up with better alternatives.
Second, we have a pool of displaced Americans who are going to need jobs. In some ways this project is a make-work project, but it’s a make-work project with a tremendous payoff.
Third, we have a physical infrastructure to support this plan. True, it’s been sadly neglected and is in need of repair, but that is easily fixed through hiring Americans to work on repairing it.
And fourth, this solution has been used before and worked admirably for a very long time.
The solution, as you may have guessed by now, is to declare an Apollo-style initiative to rebuild the nation’s rail infrastructure by 2010 and move as much of our nation’s transportation — both goods and people — over to rail as humanly possible.
The rails ran on coal for many, many years. Coal has a dual purpose in this scheme: it can be used to generate electricity, and it can be used to generate steam to power locomotives. We can put engineers to work in much the same way we solved problems of spaceflight to design fuel-efficient, low-pollution locomotives capable of moving stuff from point A to point B easily and efficiently.
We already have a rail infrastructure. In the places where it has been neglected, we can put Americans to work rebuilding it. Americans can be employed building the locomotives and rolling stock for the trains, in running the trains, and getting goods and people to and from the trains once they are to the transportation hubs.
The plan is not without its problems, of course. Trucking companies and airlines, for two, will howl that business is being taken away from them. Let them howl. Whatever happened to working for the common good? Let them join in the new program if they can, or move out of the way if they can’t. Perhaps Boeing can start a ground transportation division.
I’m not ordinarily a big fan of burning coal, but I’m not convinced that coal would release more particulates into the air than our current transportation system does. Plus, the coal industry is working on ways to burn cleaner. The government could provide tax incentives to speed up the process.
And the best part is, this could be done without having to import oil at a higher price and faster pace. American can start itself on the road to recovery from our long national nightmare, and finally start weaning itself from the gas pump.
Well, wait. That’s the real problem, isn’t it?
This solution provides nothing for Big Oil, other than the use of legacy diesel stock and perhaps the purchase of lubricants and other ancillary fluids.
This plan makes too much sense.
It’s too good.
But for a few minutes there, it was a wonderful dream, wasn’t it?
I love trains. I want to see trains come back, and come back big and bad and beautiful.
So this diary was hardly unbiased. Big surprise.
I’d like to see your opinions. I know the current administration will no more go for this than they will tell the truth about global warming or any other subject that cuts into their pocketbooks, but is such a thing possible? Would the numbers make sense? Would a more rational administration do something like this?
Or is the status quo an immovable object?
Halliburton and Big Oil won’t allow for alternatives. My Uncle Tim worked in R&D for the Long Island Lighting CO. He had an electric car 25 years ago. It was fully funtional. The technology was buried because the corporations like the status quo. I want to see things change but it won’t happen.
It needs to be a national pride/national survival kind of thing, headed up by someone like Lyndon Johnson who knows how to twist arms one minute and gladhand you the next and get things done whether you wanted them to be done or not.
But yeah, realistically, Big Oil would probably kill anyting like this if there’s nothing in it for them.
This is from a few weeks back:
Montana’s governor eyes coal to solve U.S. fuel costs
We have the technology, but the folks with the money and the infrastructure to make it happen like things just the way they are, thankyouverymuch.
Still, it’s a lovely dream.
He has one of my major qualifications I look for in a President: He doesn’t seem to particularly want the job.
Thanks for pointing the article out. I remember seeing it a while back and thinking the technology sounded cool and promising.
No idea about coal… but… what a great opportunity to build anew with environmental and safety awareness.
Solar rail?? š
Greengineering š
Of course the ideal would be a completely environmently-friendly rail system. I have no idea how that would be accomplished in practical terms. All-electric seems to be a given until we can build Tokamak reactors small enough to fit inside your average locomotive or whatever the whiz-bang technology of the day ends up being. Whether that energy comes from wind, or solar, or hydro, seems immaterial as long as it was done up right.
I think for the time being, though, you’d probably have to settle for a combination of direct coal-fired steam and coal-generated electric (assuming of course a rail program ever got off the ground, so to speak).
Would be a great way to create jobs in the area.
I’m tickled pink by the notion of “Greengineering) š
I think the coal part of your idea is bad, because it’s not needed. Wind or nuclear generation of electricity would be better.
As for improving trains, that’s simple. Individuals make personal decisions about daily lifestyle choices, like transportation, based on very local economic considerations. Basically, whatever is cheaper and gets the job done is the way you do it.
There are plenty of train tracks and abandoned roadbeds, and it’s not really all that hard to build a new railroad. (Faster and cheaper than a highway.) So all you need to do is get the cost of driving up high enough, and the demand for trains and busses and motor scooters and bicycles will all skyrocket.
It’s easy: Just raise the tax on gasoline. Those pinkos over in Europe have high gas taxes, why can’t we?
Now, where’s the brave politician who will run on that platform???
as it is that the coal is plentiful, and we have it NOW instead of a few years from now. The ideal would be to electrify the system and use solar, wind, tidal, geothermal and similar technologies to generate the electricity, but we do not have the capacity at the moment to do that, nor do I think we will have it by 2010.
I do realize that there would be a temptation to continue using coal for exactly that reason, but in the best of all possible worlds (which is the only place this plan will ever see the light of day) coal would just be an interim measure while we ramp up the renewable electrical grid. Once the electricity is online and there’s enough to keep the trains running, I’d be glad to drop coal like yesterday’s designer jeans.