# Boston MBTA: Why not EMUs or at least electric locomotives?



## beautifulplanet (Feb 2, 2014)

Hello everyone,

being aware of the standard answers that electrification requires an investment, and that even in case the Providence line was supposed to use electric equipment still a mile of new wire to the maintenance yard north of Providence was needed, and that electrification of the Worcester line might be a challenge because of lower bridge clearances and double-stacked freight, still:

- electrification would most likely provide substancial savings on operation costs, even factoring in having to retrain or hire a new maintenance crew for electric service

- electrification would most likely result in faster service, as electric trains and especially EMUs accelerate much faster compared to diesel traction

- electrification would provide a more comfortable ride for the passengers, smoother and quieter

- electrification would result in big environmental benefits, not only on a global level of CO2 emissions, and also on a local level for the human beings around the train lines and in the stations (f.e. Back Bay with the dangerous air quality)

There was the argument that MBTA doesn't wanna do the obvious by starting electric service on the Providence line at least, and keep diesels on the rest of the network, because then it would have to support two propulsion systems. Aside from lots of different rail companies around the world doing exactly that, even in the States in Denver there are new commuter rail lines that will go into service soon, and some of them (the East Corridor to the airport, Gold Line, North Metro Corridor) will be electric, and a different one (Northwest Rail) will be diesel-powered. So why doesn't RTD have any problem supporting two different propulsion systems (at least until Northwest Rail in a very distant future some day could be converted to electric), but MBTA has a problem with that?

On the web, it seems like at least some people are discussion electric traction on MBTA, like here:

https://twitter.com/Boston_to_a_T/status/342456034348130304

and here:

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=153367&start=45

Still it also heard that there are supposed to be some "program funds" to evaluate the idea of electric locomotives or EMUs on the MBTA. What exactly is meant by that?

How are the chances it is ever going to happen, at least on the Providence line, where Amtrak already uses electric locomotives and trainsets for their service?

I really appreciate replies about this, in case somebody here is well informed regarding this topic.


----------



## Fan Railer (Feb 2, 2014)

I'm sure you also are aware that a lot of this has to do with political will as well. You have to sell the idea to politicians before any sort of funding will spring up to finance such a project. Also it is hard to change something that already works, if it happens to work pretty well. There is nothing wrong per se with the way the system is operating right now. Adding in electric stock would require more training for employees (or contract out to Amtrak for maintenance), you might as well fully electrify, and we all know how difficult that would be in terms of finding funding for the electrification of the entire system. I just don't think there is the will power to go through all of those political jumps at this moment.


----------



## the_traveler (Feb 2, 2014)

With the exception of the South Station - Providence - Wickford Junction line, every other MBTA line is not electrified. Thus diesels are needed. Most of these lines (including a portion of the above line that go to Foxboro during Patriots games) are in (semi) remote areas that probably will never be electrified.

I doubt the elected officials and taxpayers would want to pay for electric locomotives and other costs just for 1 line.


----------



## MattW (Feb 2, 2014)

Apparently, the new Southcoast Rail project has received funding, and is likely to be electrified which was a requirement of the Army Corps of Engineers. If that happens, it may be possible to see them buy enough equipment to cover the Providence line as well.


----------



## beautifulplanet (Feb 2, 2014)

MattW said:


> Apparently, the new Southcoast Rail project has received funding, and is likely to be electrified which was a requirement of the Army Corps of Engineers. If that happens, it may be possible to see them buy enough equipment to cover the Providence line as well.


Wow! That sounds promising. Thank you so much for that info. 

Why did the Army Corps of Engineers require that?

Any ideas on when all of that might happen?

Any chance MBTA will also convert more lines to electric, maybe the most heavily frequented ones, like the Worcester line, or others?


----------



## beautifulplanet (Feb 2, 2014)

the_traveler said:


> With the exception of the South Station - Providence - Wickford Junction line, every other MBTA line is not electrified. Thus diesels are needed. Most of these lines (including a portion of the above line that go to Foxboro during Patriots games) are in (semi) remote areas that probably will never be electrified.


Of course, right now except for the Providence line, all other lines are not electrified in the Greater Boston CSA of almost 8 million people which to many doesn't seem to be very remote, so now still diesels are needed. Which does not mean that it would have to stay like that forever, it is up to the MBTA, or the political representatives making decisions about the future of the MBTA, or the citizens (not taxpayers) who elect those representatives, to change that if they would like to.



the_traveler said:


> I doubt the elected officials and taxpayers would want to pay for electric locomotives and other costs just for 1 line.


Of course it can be doubted that they would want to. But one could also doubt that there would not be good reasons why they should want to, even for 1 line.

If initial investment is necessary, it can still be cheaper in the long run because of lower operating costs in itself. Still a more attractive service (faster acceleration, so shorter trip times, newer nicer trainsets, quieter, smoother, more comfortable) could entice more riders, which would again be positive financially in the form of more ticket sales and revenue for the MBTA.

Just as important though are the externalities: Electric instead of diesel means less pollution of different kinds. That it is allowed to pollute for free is nothing but a indirect cost as the costs that pollution creates don't have to be paid by the people that cause the pollution, by instead by other members of society or the society as a whole. So those are additional financial reasons, still there are also externalities that are not to be measured financially, which doesn't mean they are not as important. Those are also things the citizens, or a municipality, a county, a state or the federal level might look at.


----------



## AG1 (Feb 2, 2014)

MattW said:


> Apparently, the new Southcoast Rail project has received funding, and is likely to be electrified which was a requirement of the Army Corps of Engineers. If that happens, it may be possible to see them buy enough equipment to cover the Providence line as well.


Not true as far as the necessary funding is concerned ! Millions here and there for studies over the last twelve years and purchase of the right aways but no appropriation for the build out by the last four governors who expressed support for political reasons. The studies have to be repeated every three years of course. The Army Corps of Engineers approved the "plan".


----------



## MattW (Feb 2, 2014)

RRRick said:


> MattW said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently, the new Southcoast Rail project has received funding, and is likely to be electrified which was a requirement of the Army Corps of Engineers. If that happens, it may be possible to see them buy enough equipment to cover the Providence line as well.
> ...


I thought the state just passed a bill authorizing $2.2 Billion for Southcoast Rail and that they hadn't been able to make the ACE budge on the electrification requirement?


----------



## AG1 (Feb 2, 2014)

MattW said:


> RRRick said:
> 
> 
> > MattW said:
> ...


Source ? Sorry, just a Mass DOT Long-Range Transportation "Plan" (wish list) but no bill has passed with appropriations to pay for actual construction. Studies galore.


----------



## MattW (Feb 2, 2014)

This is what I read: http://www.metro.us/boston/news/2014/01/30/new-transpo-borrowing-bill-would-rename-south-station-the-mike-dukakis-transportation-center-at-south-station/

Though it looks like it hasn't been passed by the Mass. Senate yet, just the House.


----------



## acelafan (Feb 2, 2014)

I like electric trains too & wish we had more here in the US. But I'm not sure they are the answer to solving the CO2 emissions problems. The power plants that generate the electricity still produce undesirable waste & emissions, especially coal & nuclear. They might produce fewer emissions per unit energy when compared to a diesel engine, though.


----------



## the_traveler (Feb 3, 2014)

MattW said:


> Apparently, the new Southcoast Rail project has received funding, and is likely to be electrified which was a requirement of the Army Corps of Engineers. If that happens, it may be possible to see them buy enough equipment to cover the Providence line as well.


I live in the area, and it may or may not have received funding but it's still years off. I'm not even sure if it was approved, since it's been talked about for the past 15 years I've been coming to this area or lived here. The area it goes thru to Fall River and New Bedford is also swampy.


----------



## afigg (Feb 3, 2014)

RRRick said:


> Source ? Sorry, just a Mass DOT Long-Range Transportation "Plan" (wish list) but no bill has passed with appropriations to pay for actual construction. Studies galore.


The 5 year FY14-FY18 MBTA Capital Improvement Plan has $254 million for South Coast Rail. Checking the news, the MA House passed a $12.7 billion bond bill that provides funding for a wide range of road and transit projects. The final amounts may still be tweaked by back and forth actions between the State Senate, House, and Governor, but there will be a substantial injection of new transportation funding for MBTA projects. The $254 million is obviously just the start-up funds for South Coast Rail, but it is a project that is moving beyond the endless study phase.

As for electrification of the commuter rail lines, starting with electrification of the southern "half" of the system would provide benefits in the long run, but it presents a substantial upfront investment cost to build. There are a bunch of other big ticket MBTA projects that are being undertaken: $1.3 billion for the Green Line extension, $835 million in the next 5 years for new cars and track work for the Red and Orange lines, $200 million in state funding plus other sources to expand South Station, and also $252 million to start implementation of DMU service. There is also bond funding for commuter service on the Knowledge Corridor, Cape Cod service track projects, and the Inland Route.

The MBTA has a full plate of expansion and equipment expansion projects. It is taking these projects on while under a heavy debt load in the aftermath of the Big Dig. I think electrification of most or all of the commuter rail system will happen someday (after oil prices force the issue), but there is a long list of transit improvement projects that are ahead of it in the priority list.


----------



## Nathanael (Feb 3, 2014)

acelafan said:


> The power plants that generate the electricity still produce undesirable waste & emissions, especially coal & nuclear. They might produce fewer emissions per unit energy when compared to a diesel engine, though.


They do. Large thermal power plants ("thermal" == "fuel burning") are more efficient than small thermal power plants. An electric generating station is much bigger than a locomotive engine, and much more efficient.

Also, you don't have to carry around the diesel fuel or the engine, which saves weight -- although you do have to carry a transformer, which adds some weight.

On top of this, regenerative braking is possible with electric power, and not with classical diesel locomotives (though it is possible with recent designs with large batteries).

Furthermore, in the long run -- solar solar solar solar solar.


----------



## Nathanael (Feb 3, 2014)

afigg said:


> The MBTA has a full plate of expansion and equipment expansion projects. It is taking these projects on while under a heavy debt load in the aftermath of the Big Dig. I think electrification of most or all of the commuter rail system will happen someday (after oil prices force the issue), but there is a long list of transit improvement projects that are ahead of it in the priority list.


You're right about the existing priorities, but some of these priorities are way off. The "expansion" of South Station is inappropriate; it will be wasted when the N-S Rail Link is built, as it should be eventually. Electrification, unlike several of these projects, should actually reduce operating costs while increasing ridership, and as such ought to be a higher priority than most expansions.

(Some of the projects are high priority. Green Line extension is extremely overdue, and by replacing buses it will also reduce operating costs while increasing ridership, so it is high priority. And of course the old railcars have to be replaced, no choice there.)


----------



## afigg (Feb 3, 2014)

Nathanael said:


> You're right about the existing priorities, but some of these priorities are way off. The "expansion" of South Station is inappropriate; it will be wasted when the N-S Rail Link is built, as it should be eventually. Electrification, unlike several of these projects, should actually reduce operating costs while increasing ridership, and as such ought to be a higher priority than most expansions.
> 
> (Some of the projects are high priority. Green Line extension is extremely overdue, and by replacing buses it will also reduce operating costs while increasing ridership, so it is high priority. And of course the old railcars have to be replaced, no choice there.)


The N-S rail link proposal is probably going nowhere for at least another generation until the memories of the cost overruns on the Big Dig fade and the bonds on the Big Dig are paid off. Any proposals that involve major tunneling for transportation projects (road or rail) under Boston are going to encounter a public outcry and attack as the next Big Dig. If you are a transportation planner at MassDOT or MBTA, there is likely little upside careerwise to proposing new tunnel projects, so why push for a N-S rail link?

As for South Station expansion, according to the studies and reports, the station tracks are reaching capacity for the peak rush hour commuter trains. So they are looking to expand South Station with new tracks and platforms and improved access, which is essentially just restoring tracks that were taken out decades ago as rail ridership declined.

The expansion plans that Mass DOT and MBTA are proposing for the next 10 years for the 2024 T transit system are fairly ambituous given their financial constraints: Green Line Extension, Silver Line extension (although that is cheap), New Indigo Lines with DMUs. Found a direct link to their proposed 2024 Vision MBTA map which is worth a look although some parts such as DMU service over the Grand Junction will encounter serious resistance:


----------



## Nathanael (Feb 3, 2014)

afigg said:


> So they are looking to expand South Station with new tracks and platforms and improved access, which is essentially just restoring tracks that were taken out decades ago as rail ridership declined.


Really? It looked to me like all of the old tracks were back in place, and the current "expansion" plan involved purchasing very expensive land and demolishing very expensive buildings in order to add more tracks and platforms.

Which is the point at which it's worth listening to Michael Dukakis ( http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2014/01/michael_dukakis_decries_terminal_honor ) and building the N-S Rail Link. Through-running the Providence line with some of the North Side lines would relieve most of the capacity constraints. (North Station *also* has capacity constraints, remember, due to short platforms and a lack of waiting space.)


----------



## Eric S (Feb 3, 2014)

I believe current planning for South Station expansion is to knock down the USPS facility east of the current platforms and add something like 7 tracks in that space. Not sure where things stand with regard to USPS moving elsewhere.

ETA: The tracks/platforms would occupy the space between Atlantic Ave and Dorchester Ave, but would not involve taking down the office building at the corner of Summer St and Dorchester Ave.


----------



## afigg (Feb 3, 2014)

Nathanael said:


> Really? It looked to me like all of the old tracks were back in place, and the current "expansion" plan involved purchasing very expensive land and demolishing very expensive buildings in order to add more tracks and platforms.
> 
> Which is the point at which it's worth listening to Michael Dukakis ( http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2014/01/michael_dukakis_decries_terminal_honor ) and building the N-S Rail Link. Through-running the Providence line with some of the North Side lines would relieve most of the capacity constraints. (North Station *also* has capacity constraints, remember, due to short platforms and a lack of waiting space.)


South Station used to have 28 tracks. In the mid-1906s, 18 tracks were removed to make space for the USPS facility with South Station itself facing demolition in the 1970s before the state brought it. The renovation in 1980s increased to 11 tracks and then 13 tracks in 1992. This is from the December 2013 Fact Sheet for the south Station expansion project. South Station went through a down sizing process not unlike WAS or NYP (with NYP losing the station, not tracks).

The primary plan is to reverse much of what was done in the 1960s, remove the USPS facility and add 7 tracks and 4 platforms for a total of 20 tracks.


----------



## beautifulplanet (Feb 4, 2014)

Thank you everyone for your replies. 

For everyone wishing for the MBTA to operate electric commuter service, this is really exciting, that the MBTA might actually get electric commuter service because of the South Coast Rail project in all likeliness being built with electric propulsion infrastructure. And who knows - once MBTA got both diesel and electric service, maybe at least they will expand the electric traction towards the Providence-bound service as well. It seems so stupid to run diesels underneath a wire.  (Though in all fairness, that still happens in more areas of the world, not just in the Boston metro area...)



MattW said:


> Apparently, the new Southcoast Rail project has received funding, and is likely to be electrified which was a requirement of the Army Corps of Engineers. If that happens, it may be possible to see them buy enough equipment to cover the Providence line as well.


I wasn't aware of this. Here is the quote about the "requirement" out of the December 2013 Fact Sheet on Southcoastrail.com:

"The FEIS/FEIR summarized alternatives for restoring train service to the South Coast. It outlined the Corps’ conclusion that there is no practicable alternative to the Stoughton Electric Alternative with less environmental impact."

Link: http://www.southcoastrail.com/downloads/SCR_FactSheet_DEC2013.pdf

Of course it seems like nothing is set in stone, but with the 2$ billion approved by the House with no single vote against it already seemed like a pretty good sign. Now it needs to go through the Senate, but still... And in another news article it seems like every single Democratic candidate for governor supports South Coast Rail. That sounds promising, that even when the current govenor reaches the end of his term, the new governor hopefully continues to support and follow through final planning, construction and hopefully opening of the line.

Now I wonder: What improvements in travel time can be expected?

For example, currently, for the 18 miles from Stoughton to South Station, the timetable shows something between 44 minutes of travel time for all-stop service, and 28 minutes of travel time for nearly non-stop service.

These numbers should be going down, especially with the trains stopping often, once EMUs are used. They can accelerate so much faster, if only the track, also in the station areas, would not have to have speed limits that are low.

For example Siemens Desiro EMUs, normally have 1,1m/s in acceleration, the Stadler Kiss in the BLS/MUTZ version even has 1,3m/s, resulting in only 22 seconds needed to reach 62mph. How many minutes would it take to Boston with one of those, for example, or with similar EMUs?


----------



## beautifulplanet (Feb 4, 2014)

The North-South Rail Link could seem like a little off-topic, as the thread was about electric service, but the topics actually are also connected as I read - don't know how much truth there would be to it - that for obvious and practical reasons, the tunnels would not be equipped to handle diesels.



Nathanael said:


> Which is the point at which it's worth listening to Michael Dukakis ( http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2014/01/michael_dukakis_decries_terminal_honor ) and building the N-S Rail Link. Through-running the Providence line with some of the North Side lines would relieve most of the capacity constraints. (North Station *also* has capacity constraints, remember, due to short platforms and a lack of waiting space.)


Thank you for sharing that link, quite interesting to read. 



afigg said:


> The N-S rail link proposal is probably going nowhere for at least another generation until the memories of the cost overruns on the Big Dig fade and the bonds on the Big Dig are paid off. Any proposals that involve major tunneling for transportation projects (road or rail) under Boston are going to encounter a public outcry and attack as the next Big Dig. If you are a transportation planner at MassDOT or MBTA, there is likely little upside careerwise to proposing new tunnel projects, so why push for a N-S rail link?


All of these conclusions about tunnel projects in Boston seem to be somewhat realistic. Still the North-South Rail Link seems to make sense to many, and maybe in case it actually would be considered by the organizations in charge should just be refered to as the "small dig".  It wouldn't be multi-directional, and would not be as wide as the highway tunnels, just one single north-south tunnel, and Philadelphia was able to build one that is just as long (1.8mi) for just 380$ million (probably in year 1984 dollars  ). It's understandable if other investments have the immediate priority, still generally it seems like the Rail Link could enhance connectivity for the whole state, and possibly even for several parts of New England as it could also enhance connections of people coming in or travelling to neighboring states, as well as of travellers coming from Logan airport, as the North South Rail Link probably would have one stop close to the Blue Line Aquarium station, so airport travellers wouldn't be left with either multiple transfers for rail connections into the region anymore or with having to use the subpar Silver Line connection to South Station in case they're heading south.


----------



## MattW (Feb 4, 2014)

I wouldn't assume that electrification means EMUs. I believe MBTA just bought a number of new coaches, and it is easier just to stick a new locomotive on existing coaches than to redo an entire fleet. Per wikipedia, they have 90 locomotives and 410 coaches for their entire system. I don't know how many locomotives the Providence Line requires for their full schedules, but I wouldn't imagine more than 15. It's cheaper to order 15 locomotives than a hundred EMUs. Now of course there are issues such as availability, EMUs are more produced in this country than electric locomotives so there may be some other issues at play here, but it is likely that MBTA will order electric locomotives over EMUs.


----------



## beautifulplanet (Feb 5, 2014)

Sure, electrification does not necessarily mean EMUs. It could also mean electric locomotives. Still at least for the South Coast Line Service, MBTA would need to purchase new additional cars anyway, so then it seems like EMUs would seem the logical choice. Of course, when electrifying Providence service, maybe MBTA might be putting electric locomotives in front of the existing cars.

Then again, it still seems quite a lot of years away, until any electrification is finished. On Wikipedia it says, that "As of January 2013 the MBTA operated 410 coaches, with 75 new coaches on order." So even with these 75 new coaches replacing the 75 oldest existing ones, still 39 Pullman cars from 1978/1979 would still be in the fleet. So it probably would indeed make sense, once any decision for electrification for both South Coast and Providence Line is definitely made, to order EMUs not only for the new line, but also to replace the oldest existing cars with EMUs for use on the Providence line.

And the fact that f.e. in Denver the RTD for its new electric lines did not choose electric locomotives, but EMUs, seems like a good sign that agencies realize the potential of EMUs. Maybe MBTA would then as well.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Nov 7, 2019)

I might as well update this thread. Electrification of the entire rail system is approved...though unfunded.

https://www.rtands.com/railroad-news/21129/

MBTA approves massive electrification project that will improve regional rail system



> The feelings were electric. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority’s (MBTA) Fiscal and Management Control Board used one unanimous vote to clear the way for the electrification of the state’s commuter rail system. The move will create better service to many communities in the state.
> 
> In a second unanimous vote the board decided the Newburyport/Rockport line is best suited for the change and will be worked on first. The Newburyport/Rockport line connects Lynn, Revere, Chelsea and Everett to the city of Boston. The Fairmont line in Boston and the Providence/Stoughton line also will be top priorities.


----------



## Palmetto (Nov 8, 2019)

Good luck with the whole project. MassDot and the MBTA seem to bungle a lot of things, and the other thing is that nobody is quite sure where some of the money goes. Remember: Mayor Curley ran the city from jail back when.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Nov 8, 2019)

Palmetto said:


> Good luck with the whole project. MassDot and the MBTA seem to bungle a lot of things, and the other thing is that nobody is quite sure where some of the money goes. Remember: Mayor Curley ran the city from jail back when.


And was elected to Congress while in Jail!!!


----------



## jis (Nov 8, 2019)

Diverting attention away from negative political commentary for a moment....

Well, moving the South side to electric traction would be the easier of the two exercises, with the Providence Line being a matter of setting up maintenance facility for electric trains and getting electric trains,

The whole thing would be achievable in ten years given adequate funding, at least if this were India.

This article has some more details:

https://www.wbur.org/bostonomix/2019/11/04/mbta-regional-rail-electric-trains



> The improvements will start on three lines. One resolution the board adopted instructs T officials to prepare immediately to launch electrified pilot programs on the Providence/Stoughton Line, the Fairmount Line, and a section of the Newburyport/Rockport Line connecting Boston to Lynn, Revere, Chelsea and Everett, sometimes referred to as the "environmental justice line."



They are basically talking of doing the whole thing in 15-20 years.

Here is the study on which all this is based:

https://www.mbta.com/projects/rail-vision#alternatives

The Commission appears to support something between Alternative 5 and Alternative 6, starting with the South side as I surmised above. They do throw in a Northern segment too, but that will involve more effort than the South side part.

My suspicion is as a starter they ought to work towards Alternative 3 and upgrade from there towards Alternative 6 opportunistically. They will probably get the electrification profile of Alternative 5 out of it all that when the dust settles in 10-15 years.

Now back to the normal gripes...


----------



## neroden (Nov 11, 2019)

The MBTA news is super good -- having electrification + North-South-Rail-Link as the *target* is the correct thing to do, and we're going to see quite a lot of stuff happen.

I fully expect to see full electrification of lines for essentially the same reasons why SEPTA discontinued its diesel services; maintaining two fleets on one line is just a pain. Electrification isn't that expensive and definitely reduces operating costs substantially in the long run.


----------



## west point (Nov 11, 2019)

let us hope that MBTA will build the CAT with heavy ice and snow a possibility. Suspect that CAT overhead poles and hangers will need to be somewhat closer. As well provision for ice breakers on either electric motors or some kid of lead unit such as Amtrak's F-40 cabbages with ice breakers.


----------



## Palmetto (Nov 12, 2019)

Probably not any closer than what's already in place on the South Side. They apparently have chosen the Rockport/Newburyport Line as the first to be electrified on the North Side, which some view as a step-child to the South Side. That way, North Station gets wired up, and will be ready to go when the N-S Rail Link is built. I'm not sure I see the logic in that. The new North Station stop in the link will be underground, IINM.


----------



## neroden (Nov 12, 2019)

The line priorities make sense. Electrification gives the biggest benefits with closely spaced stops, where the accel/decel profile can improve trip time. Newburyport/Rock port probably benefits more than other North Side lines.


----------



## Palmetto (Nov 12, 2019)

neroden said:


> The line priorities make sense. Electrification gives the biggest benefits with closely spaced stops, where the accel/decel profile can improve trip time. Newburyport/Rock port probably benefits more than other North Side lines.



Having grown up there, the Reading/Haverhill Line has much closer stops at least until Reading. There are three in Melrose alone.


----------



## neroden (Nov 18, 2019)

True regarding the near portion of the line.


----------



## mainemanman (Nov 18, 2019)

Palmetto said:


> Having grown up there, the Reading/Haverhill Line has much closer stops at least until Reading. There are three in Melrose alone.



Fitchburg line has potential, considering the amount of park and rides on it. Lowell line does too. Lowell line needs some new stops on Salem St or Montvale Ave and in Somerville (maybe across from a new green line stop). Shawsheen could use one too, but that's north of Anderson.


----------



## CTANut (Nov 22, 2019)

If they wanted to connect North and South Station via a tunnel, they would have to electrify all the lines.


----------



## jis (Nov 23, 2019)

CTANut said:


> If they wanted to connect North and South Station via a tunnel, they would have to electrify all the lines.


Not necessarily. Electrifying some lines, the heaviest traffic and most frequent stop ones and using dual mode for the others may be a less expensive alternative when imputed environmental costs are not fully taken into account, as is often the case. But then even that is better than all diesel as is the case now.


----------

