FW: [BATN] Group: HSR, electrified Caltrain threaten Peninsula
freight rail
|
Ellen Fletcher
|
Aug 14, 2009 20:56 PDT
|
| | ------ Forwarded Message
From: 8/14 SJ Mercury <ba-@yahoogroups.com>
Reply-To: <BATN--@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 00:54:07 -0000
To: "BA-@yahoogroups.com" <BA-@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [BATN] Group: HSR, electrified Caltrain threaten Peninsula freight
rail
|
| | Published Friday, August 14, 2009, by the San Jose Mercury News
High-speed rail, electrified Caltrain may prove disastrous for freight rail
By Mike Rosenberg
mike.ro-@bayareanewsgrooup.com
<mailto:mike.rosenberg%40bayareanewsgrooup.com>
Caltrain's plans to electrify its trains with the inception of high-speed rail
would devastate the region's freight business, drive up consumer costs and
force trucks onto crowded Bay Area freeways, according to industry leaders.
Electrification of the Caltrain corridor from San Francisco to San Jose in the
early part of the next decade is expected to help the agency expand its
commuter service and save on operating costs. The electric rail will also
accommodate state high-speed rail trains as they zip from San Francisco on
their way to Los Angeles.
But it would also close the window in which freight trains can operate on the
corridor from 15 hours to 5 hours, between midnight and 5 a.m., under current
proposals.
Electrification would also prevent 40 percent of freight car trains from using
the railroad because of proposed height restrictions from overheard wires.
Additionally, several thousand feet of freight track at the pivotal South San
Francisco rail yard would be torn up.
Fighting for freight rights is the newly-formed Peninsula Freight Rail Users
Group. The group represents 24 freight shippers between San Francisco and San
Jose, the maritime industrial users of the ports of Redwood City and San
Francisco and the local International Longshore and Warehouse Union.
The companies that would be imperiled include mostly manufacturers such as
lumber and building material distributors. They typically serve suppliers
throughout the Bay Area and beyond, and use Union Pacific Railroad service
along the Caltrain corridor.
The group says the restrictions will force Peninsula freight shippers to send
more cargo via truck, which would further clog Bay Area freeways and spew more
carbon emissions into the air.
The trucks are also costlier to operate, which will drive up prices for
companies and, in turn, consumers, they said. For example, to ship one ton of
cargo using one gallon of fuel, a freight train can chug along for 436 miles
while a truck can travel just 80 miles, they said.
The group estimates they move about 2 million tons of cargo per year on
freight rail, which would translate into an additional 100,000 truck trips.
Ironically, the advantages of freight rail -- economics, the environment,
consumer costs, ease of movement -- were the same justifications for approving
high-speed rail and electrified Caltrain.
"It's essentially transit for goods," said Greg Greenway, the Seaport
Industrial Association <http://seaportindustrial.com> executive director who
is heading the group.
Port of Redwood City <http://www.redwoodcityport.com> Operations Manager Don
Snaman said the restrictions are so choking they may force some freight
companies to cease operations.
Marty Monfredini, vice president of South San Francisco-based Pacific
Agri-Products, which has been shipping freight rail along the Peninsula for
more than 20 years, said the company may be forced to move out of the Bay
Area. He said that would leave an uncertain future for the food shipping
company's 30 blue-collar workers.
"If passenger rail is expanded along the Peninsula at the expense of freight
rail, it will be taking one step forward and two steps backward for the future
of the economy and the environment of our region," the freight rail users
group said in a recent letter to Caltrain.
Caltrain CEO Mike Scanlon acknowledged their concerns in a letter last week
and said agency officials plan to meet with freight rail leaders.
Scanlon said Caltrain and the California High Speed Rail Authority will heed
the freight contingency's concerns during the agencies' extensive outreach
process, which is already underway and should last for some time. High-speed
rail and electrification construction is scheduled to begin in three years,
although that may be optimistic given the difficulty the two groups have had
in securing funds for their projects.
Caltrain spokeswoman Christine Dunn said policy makers are still vetting the
proposals and none of the project's specifics are set in stone. Officials
recently halted the electrification planning process after completing about
one-third of the project's environmental review because they ran out of money.
The freight group says they need at least nine hours to operate on the
weekdays, from 8 p.m. to 5 a.m., plus more time on the weekends, to keep
freight rail viable. They also want height restrictions raised from the
proposed 17 feet to at least 22.5 feet.
[BATN: See also:
Citing UP track rights, Atherton NIMBY sues to block Peninsula HSR
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/42224
Litigious Menlo-Atherton NIMBYs hope lawsuit spurs UP to block HSR
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/42192
Caltrain HSR Blog: Heavy freight should be banished from the Peninsula
http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2009/08/effect-of-heavy-freight.html ]
|
------ End of Forwarded Message
|
|
 |
|
