Got any citations for that? Remember that DC transmission has enormous line losses, and onboard inverters also have substantial losses. Individual electric cars get recharged from existing AC transmission facilities, typically at low-load times of day.

It is a fairly similar argument, but I happen to agree with it in this case. One of the biggest factors that make electric propulsion more efficient is regenerative braking (the main reason why non-plugin hybrid cars are much more fuel efficient than an otherwise similar ICE car). We can see this in the difference between the city and highway fuel economy numbers since the hybrid model has little if any advantage on the highway. This is important because in urban and suburban environments, cars stop... a lot. Red lights, stop signs, cross walks, congestion, etc. But with trains, they usually only stop to let passengers on and off. And with a suburban service, the stops tend to be much more spread out than with urban services. Interestingly there are a couple locomotive makers who have developed a hybrid locomotive which might be able to reduce emissions on suburban routes even further using regenerative braking.

There are other advantages such as noise and operating performance, if looking strictly at emissions there are going to be more effective ways to spend the money at this point. Although if making major service improvements could divert large numbers of cars from the road, that's also something to factor in.

If working from home does turn out to be a long term trend, that would definitely warrant a shift away from a peak-surge focus toward a constant, all-the-time model. The main users of the service would then be people who can't work remotely and are probably less likely to work standard 9-5 type schedules and instead work various times and at jobs better distributed across the urban area rather than focused in the CBD. There would also be a greater percentage of demand for non-work trips.

I don't necessarily think that a continued work-from-home trend is a death knell for transit. Not only is it more efficient to have service levels spread more evenly rather than surge focused (lower maximum volume needed, easier to schedule, etc.) but I think is may actually discourage car ownership. There are many people who own and operate cars because they feel that's the most practical way to get to work, and needing a reliable transportation option on a daily basis justifies the huge cost of car ownership and usage. But if a person or family isn't using one very often anymore they may need no (or fewer) cars. For those people, transit may be a decent alternative on the occasions when they're making longer trips.

I've heard people make the argument that the downtown condo booms in some cities may be in peril due to WFH, but I'm waiting to see how it actually plays out. The idea is that many people living downtown are doing so primarily for the convenience afforded by a close proximity to work, but I wonder if there are some people who don't mind living out in an uninteresting suburban area that they return to after going into town every week day who may not like being out there all the time. The term "bedroom community" itself implies a place people return to for sleep rather than the setting of a complete life. I wonder if the prospect of spending so much more time at home will make people consider the location of their home to be even more important? I think it could go either way and different people may have different reactions. Overall I would probably just give people more freedom, and people use freedom in different ways.

It's eminently possible to run double-stacks under catenary. India has done this at scale. Granted, the taller wires might give NIMBYs more fodder to oppose electrification. Overpasses might be an issue also but it's possible to provide the loco or EMUs with a small battery to allow gaps in the wiring.

Chicago has the advantage of public ownership over half the Metra system and multiple redundant routes. Metra could absolutely electrify the Rock Island and Milwaukee District and the freight railroads can't say boo... they are free to purchase trackage rights from a different railroad to move double-stacks through Chicagoland. BNSF and UP-W will probably never electrify sadly, but UP-N and UP-NW are low usage and could likely be purchased by Metra if they were so inclined. HC/NCS probably also out of the question, but SWS could probably be electrified if Metra cuts a deal with NS.

Amtrak owns the traction infrastructure and will not allow MBTA to access that power except at astronomical cost. I assume when it was electrified in the 1990s, it was value-engineered with capacity for only a few Amtrak trains an hour (I've seen the costs for this electrification and it's always seemed suspiciously low). Adding the MBTA Providence trains might overload the system, but that's just my speculation.

Who said anything about DC? Metra Electric's 1500vDC system is probably not what would be used for any future electrification in the Chicago area. Any through-routed equipment to/from ME would need to either be AC-native with an inverter or DC-native with a rectifier. But most of the hypothetical network would be running on 25kV AC; Chicagoland is not chock-a-block with low tunnels and low bridges that might force a different technology. In the long run battery technology should allow Metra Electric to convert to 25kv AC as well; the low bridges would just be gaps in the line where the battery power takes over.

Maximum thermal efficiency of an ICE is what 40%. Electric motors are about 90%. Even factoring in transmission losses (which in our case would be low) engines can't close that gap.

Who says we can't use regenerative breaking on EMUs? We certainly can if we put some batteries on them which Alstom and Stadler have done.


Building out a new DC system would be like ordering a 787 with radial piston engines. Yes, we don't even have to string wire over every foot of rail line. Just enough places to recharge onboard batteries and suck up power from an overhead 25kV AC system.

Most of them do have it. That's why i said regen is the main advantage for electric propulsion. My point was just that regen doesn't offer as big an advantage because suburban trains don't stop as often as cars in traffic or even urban trains with short station spacing.

I'd probably disagree with that at least somewhat. Also another huge benefit is increased reliability with electric propulsion compared to diesels along with much less required maintenance.

I realise there are other benefits which I mentioned when i said "There are other advantages such as noise and operating performance, if looking strictly at emissions there are going to be more effective ways to spend the money at this point." I was including reliability in operating performance, along with the acceleration and lower NVH (noise, vibration, harshness) levels.

Thermal efficiency of the generating plant, though, is only around 50%. So it's a pretty small gap, and one that gets even closer when you add the transmission or inverter losses. Unless you have nearly free hydroelectricity, what justifies the incredible capital costs of stringing catenary?

Well, to be fair I think boosting transit usage overall is better for the environment than electrifying the transit system in the short term. If we can move people from cars into buses/trains at a large scale, that alone reduces carbon output per capita even if the buses/trains continue to burn diesel. This is why I think the hype over battery buses is somewhat overplayed. It's not that it's bad technology, but I'd prefer to see limited resources put into increased service.

On the other hand, the traditional role of the Federal government is to fund capital improvements. Covid has upended the normal rules but chances are, the Feds won't pay for CTA, Pace, or Metra to run more service once the pandemic ends. However, they will pay for electrification, as demonstrated by Caltrain or the Denver lines. And a separate lane could be created for decarbonization projects so they don't compete with actual expansions.

Also, if the car fleet is on track to electrify faster than transit systems, then we could reach a point one day where it's cleaner for someone to drive than to ride the bus or train. Of course, the auto-oriented lifestyle is still far more wasteful of all kinds of resources... but it will be very easy for transit systems to lose momentum if they are perceived as dirty and polluting. And electric cars will tend to absolve enviro-conscious people of the many other wasteful aspects in their lifestyle.

RTA is getting $1.5 billion from the new COVID relief bill, final House vote is Tuesday. The funds are intended to cover CTA, Metra, and Pace until 2023.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/columni...rs-cta-chicago

Do I think the F40s are running 40% efficiency? Probably not. Also the grid is on regardless of if trains are running or not and the incremental increase in power required to run an electric rr is negligable especially considering NE IL's nuclear heavy generation mix. Also the overall emissions profile of grid power is always going to be superior to internal combustion engines on a unit of energy basis, especially as coal is pushed off the grid in the next decade.

I don't really expect Metra to go whole hog electrified anytime soon. Most likely if they get a lot of funds they'd buy more Chargers. They could potentially however experiment with something like the Stadler Flirt Akku on the Rock Island which would require limited catenary installs for recharging en route and at terminals/yards

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...ervice-chicago

March 10, 2021 04:21 PM |



Amtrak to restore service from Chicago



The COVID relief bill passage means the national rail service has the money to restart daily long-distance service on several key lines and recall more than 1,000 furloughed workers.

Greg Hinz  


...

New Metra railcar update here.

Damen CTA station to start construction in 2021:

https://chicagoyimby.com/2021/03/dam...west-side.html

Yep. Still no explanation of the delay beyond "something something Covid" but I'm glad they're finally bidding it.

The drawing set is posted publicly for bid. Over 1000 sheets of drawings. You'd think CDOT was building an aircraft carrier. It really should not be this hard to build some platforms, stairs, and elevators.

Officials are starting to line up which projects they'd like to see funded from Biden's infrastructure proposal. A lot of interesting stuff in this article

Red Line ‘L’ extension? New Lake Shore Drive? Biden’s jobs plan has Illinois and Chicago officials pushing infrastructure wish lists.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/polit...dg4-story.html

I was just going to post this. Its a long article.

Lets finish CREATE

https://www.createprogram.org/

Yes, fully fund all remaining CREATE projects. This is the chance.

^ Much as I hate to say it, I think CREATE might need to go back to the drawing board in some respects with CP's purchase of KCS. Now instead of being on the fringes of CP's freight network, Chicago will be the linchpin of that network. Planners should study how train traffic is likely to shift and what improvements need to be made. CP's routes through the Chicago area include both Milwaukee District Metra lines, which also host the Hiawatha/Empire Builder and the proposed Rockford service on the Amtrak side.

Also, they need to dust off the South-of-the-Lake project to build a dedicated passenger corridor between Englewood and Porter, IN through the tangle of railroads on the South Side and in NW Indiana. Huge upside for all Amtrak service to the east. Unfortunately Michigan led the charge 8 years ago under Gov and noted railfan Rick Snyder, I dunno if Gretchen "Fix the Damn Roads" Whitmer is quite so supportive of rail.

Arguments for a CREATE Phase 2 I think. There are a lot of projects from the first plan just still waiting for money.