You got something against sweaters?

I can hear the Teamsters shrieking now. Maybe they can all join the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen and continue working.

Not that I'm against the idea, but the Teamsters and the trucking companies will lobby mightily.

Well there isn't going to be any major breakthrough in battery technology. They are already using lithium, the third lightest element. Unfortunately lithium is expensive and always has been. Any breakthroughs will have to come in lifetime costs of manufacturing and maintenance.

Another breakthrough that would help would be a battery which doesn't produce heat (chemical reaction heat) when recharging. The heat has to be dissipated, lengthening the time to recharge.

An even better long-term idea is to use a fuel cell to strip electrons from a liquid/gaseous fuel. Use electricity/sunlight to produce hydrogen or methanol.

Production of a synthetic room-temperature liquid fuel will be critical for ship/train/jet transportation. The only logical choice is a hydro-carbon based fuel manufactured from CO2, H2O and sunlight. The same process could be used to remove carbon from the atmosphere. Hydrocarbons are extremely space/weight efficient as electron storage/release containers.

Linkmeister -- the Teamsters would be fine. Lobby for some training to teach their drivers to be trainmen, they'll be fine. I'm sure many horse buggymen lost jobs when cars came about, but that's no reason to stop progress.

I think this rail idea, in combination with this major solar field idea (from the Department of Energy, no less, would be great. If you don't want to follow the link, they basically say that a parabolic trough system of solar panels that is 100 miles by 100 miles could provide enough electricity for the whole country.

While it would be good to improve rails along I-95... CSX has a history of lobbying Congress to write laws that give it crazy benefits: like if CSX is at fault for a train wreck, Amtrak will pay for it. There was a case in which the SCOTUS agreed (and every court down the line) that CSX owed some families $50 million for deaths due to CSX' negligence, but because of the law Congress passed, we taxpayers paid for the deaths, not CSX.
(see Free Lunch by David Cay Johnston)

Let's be really careful about legislation involving CSX.

Won't happen until increased gasoline taxes--and perhaps toll roads--make Americans pay realistic world prices for their travel.

I was amused/surprised a number of years ago when I traveled to Nagasaki from Tokyo by plane. When time came to take my return flight to Tokyo, I took the bus from Nagasaki to the suburban airport and on the way we passed the entrance to the auto expressway, with prices listed for tolls to various destinations. The road tolls alone needed to get to Tokyo were about the same as my air fare. --And the fare by bullet train was about the same, too. Meaning, you could take your pick, but you weren't going to get to Tokyo much cheaper by one means than another. (Needless to say, if you travel by car you have to pay Japanese prices for the gasoline as well, meaning you'd better have a damn good reason for wanting to drive.) Only by discouraging driving in that way was Japan able to bring its public transportation rail system to the level it has.

Since writing the above, I decided to do a quick online check for current costs for the Tokyo-Nagasaki run. Here's what I found (prices will obviously vary somewhat):

Via air: 28,420 yen

Via bullet+local train: 24,880 yen

Via all-night bus+train: about 15,000 yen--this is probably the one exception in pricing; all-nighters are frequently used by students and other young people with short statures and good back muscles. NOT pleasant.

Via private automobile (expressway tolls + gasoline): 32,700 yen.

(The auto journey is listed as being 1245 km, so assuming you have an economical auto that gets 15 km/l (=35 mpg), you would need about 83 liters of fuel. Price of gas has dropped to about 100 yen/liter at present.)

Not that I have anything against battery technology; I just think it's best to fight our dependence on fossil fuel on as many fronts as possible...

And removing bottlenecks from our freight rail system uses existing technology, and doesn't require any lifestyle changes.

Whenever the subject of global warming comes up, I keep on saying that we can make up a lot of ground simply by doing the stuff we're already doing, but using less electricity or petroleum to do it. This is a classic for-instance.

The mention of the rail's owner brings up the main problem of the rail system in the US: it's not a public asset, but private property. Rail lines are seen as integral with the stock that rolls on it.

The USA really ought to consider taking over the actual tracks and the switching yards, making the patchwork of rail lines into a national network where the freight lines can equally travel. Rail yards could then be managed at a lower level, owned by the cities and counties much like harbours and airports. Oh, the rails would raise bloody hell with all sorts of arguments, but that's because right now they enjoy a nice monopoly and are making a fat profit off of their current bottlenecks.

Net neutrality really isn't about the internet. It's about all sorts of nets, from the data network to roads and rails.

Since the deregulation orgy beginning with Reagan, most truckers are "independant contractors" and therefore not members of the Teamsters or any Union. They are the exploited workers fighting for better conditions in LA/Long Beach ports fex.

I read the entire article, it is very persuasive, except the part about wind power. We are going to have to build nukes and the sooner we start the better. Wind power advocates either haven't done the math or they have and are keeping quiet hoping Americans will be willing to drastically change their lifestyles. We are going to need lots of electricity and if we don't build nukes we are going to burn coal instead.

If we did wind up helping finance rail improvements for the likes of CSX, here's a part of the bargain I'd like to see: Get CSX to be friendlier to passenger rail. Here in Nashville efforts to develop commuter rail have been stymied by the fact that CSX controls most rail lines leading into the city, including the most important potential commuter corridors--but CSX refuses to play ball. Given freight congestion problems, that's understandable; but if public money is used to relieve that congestion, it would be nice to also get some relief from interstate congestion as well.

Interesting posting about Japan - Understand sales of Japanese autos are dropping in Japan, due to the young foregoing buying any cars.

However, in upgrading infrastructure, do not forget the I-5 corridor in Washington State. Heavy rains and mudslides have brought, once again, both rail and freeway traffic to a halt. Tremendous loss in shipping. In the Centralia-Chelalis area, the Bush administration spoke of a major overhaul of the systems, but, never followed through with funding. The rail lines are owned by the BNSF RR. They treat Amtrak as a step-child - Reminds me of a line from "The Loved Ones", where Jonathan Winters' character said "Get these stiffs off my property". High speed rail will never come to the US, unless road beds are drastically improved and our government forces private rail to allow Amtrak to operate as seen in France and Japan. Government has been so protective of RR ownership, as in '64 when they helped force "fireboys" out of cabs. Time to stand up to the Snows of the industry.

I doubt that there would be all that many unemployed drivers--they'd just be driving shorter routes, staying closer to their home port or base.

Or, maybe they could contemplate going into the postal service? The article mentioned the old RPOs, in which genuine human mail clerks sorted mail being carried from city to city across the country. Speedy letter and parcel delivery, made so by the development of a cadre of highly skilled, literate mail sorters. Hauling the mails subsidized passenger passenger service; haukling people by themselves was never profitable for the RRs but hauling people + the mail worked. Could again, too.

I have no argument with the general thrust of this proposal, but the claim that this would reduce GHG emissions by 38% is incorrect:
- Transportation accounts for about 33% of the fossil-energy GHG emissions in the US.
- Of this 33%, long-haul freight accounts for about 40%.

My guess is that "38%" refers to the reduction in transportation-related GHG emissions.

I-95 is the worst in any state. In New York and Connecticut 95 often goes from 4 to 2 lanes for no apparent reason. Highways that filter into I-95 often go from 3 to 1 lanes when merging.

A few years ago while driving I-95 S, I was shot at from the side of the highway at 2 a.m. in South Carolina. I had a nice bullet hole in my front passenger side fender, I'm sure they were aiming for the tire.

I-95 needs more than one project, it needs a complete overhaul, especially everything north of Virginia.

The teamsters may complain about it, but the long distance freight companies won't. They'll take advantage of the cheaper cost to move stuff hub to hub, and increase their bottom line. If the trains don't offer competitive rates, they'll carry on haulin' without a change.

A bit off topic, but regarding truly clean energy, I wish there was more coverage of the Solar Updraft Towers

I saw an estimate somewhere (teevee?) that 100 of these in the US would supply all of our electrical energy needs. Like a nuke, the start-up costs are expensive, but the long-term costs are cheap, and there is zero waste and zero carbon.

Long time commenter at www.theoildrum.com (the best peak oil/energy site I know of) Alan_from_Big_Easy was one of the authors of this report. He is an engineer who writes very persuasively (and technically)of the advantages of electrified rail

The loss of employment by long haul carriers is something to consider, but I would bet that quite a few of them would rather be short haul carriers and spend the nights at home. As was mentioned above, there are a lot of independent contractors on the road now who don't belong to the Teamsters, and judging from all the signs on the backs of the trucks for some of the big carriers advertising for drivers, there won't be that much of an adjustment.

Having read the same book, I'm with Redbeard. The negligence involved has to do with CSX undermanning their maintenance crews and slashing maintenance/repair expenses and then passing the cost of "externalities" on to the American taxpayer. If they aren't taking care of the rail lines they have in order to pay their executives and shareholders more, there is nothing fair about giving them more government welfare. I think nationalizing the rail system is the way to go.