Gas Prices and Amtrak

[MrFSS]

Here is an interesting Amtrak Table Cover from 1979, when the first gas price problems were starting.

Maybe they need to re-use this idea in their advertising.

 

[WhoozOn1st]

Great graphic, MrFSS. Thanks!

But '79 wasn't the first problem with gas prices. There was the OPEC embargo in the wake of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war.

Now it seems like the good old days, but people back then were panicked at the prospect of a buck a gallon.

I agree that Amtrak should jump all over fuel prices as a marketing tool. The potential rub is whether Amtrak is prepared and able to handle the surge in ridership that I believe is surely coming. After all, fuel prices aren't gonna decline, except for minor fluctuations. Only gonna go up from here on in. A dwindling resource and growing global demand make higher prices a virtual certainty, and the political pandering of proposals for a "gas tax holiday" does nothing to alter the basic facts. A cheap sop for votes.

In my not-so-humble opinion, gas SHOULD be expensive. People will think twice before hopping into the Hummer to drive around the block for a quart of milk, and the potential benefits of reduced consumption are too numerous to list here.

One of those benefits - germane to this forum - could be that there will be increasing pressure to fund Amtrak in a manner that will allow it to meet increased demand.

Sorry for the rant, folks.

 

[had8ley]

Great graphic, MrFSS. Thanks!
But '79 wasn't the first problem with gas prices. There was the OPEC embargo in the wake of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war.

Now it seems like the good old days, but people back then were panicked at the prospect of a buck a gallon.

I agree that Amtrak should jump all over fuel prices as a marketing tool. The potential rub is whether Amtrak is prepared and able to handle the surge in ridership that I believe is surely coming. After all, fuel prices aren't gonna decline, except for minor fluctuations. Only gonna go up from here on in. A dwindling resource and growing global demand make higher prices a virtual certainty, and the political pandering of proposals for a "gas tax holiday" does nothing to alter the basic facts. A cheap sop for votes.

In my not-so-humble opinion, gas SHOULD be expensive. People will think twice before hopping into the Hummer to drive around the block for a quart of milk, and the potential benefits of reduced consumption are too numerous to list here.

One of those benefits - germane to this forum - could be that there will be increasing pressure to fund Amtrak in a manner that will allow it to meet increased demand.

Sorry for the rant, folks.

Rant on Patrick. You're making perfect sense to me. Now we have to get Congress to buy into a dose of reality. If you can't afford $5 a gallon gas for your car you start hunting real quick for cheaper alternatives. As you stated I just hope that Amtrak can handle the masses because they're almost at the gate.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

In my not-so-humble opinion, gas SHOULD be expensive. People will think twice before hopping into the Hummer to drive around the block for a quart of milk, and the potential benefits of reduced consumption are too numerous to list here.

I gather that Hummer owners generally fall into one of two categories:

1) Those who could easily afford to buy $10/gallon diesel fuel for their hypothetical trips around the block for a quart of milk.

2) Those who have a habit of buying things they can't actually afford.

I'm not sure either group will be deterred by high fuel costs.

I also think that lots and lots of wind power needs to go with lots and lots of trains in addressing oil consumption.

 

[abqdave]

Off the subject for a second, I personally like the style of the locomotive in that advertisement better than the more modern ones...I like the predecessors to it even better, the more rounded ones with the big headlamp in the middle (like in MrFSS picture)...

Back to the issue of gas prices, I feel like I live in 2 worlds at once. I consider myself a 'green' person...I pay extra for 90% wind power to my house, I recycle, use compact fluorescent lighting, and will use public transportation only on my vacation next week. However, I also own a full-size muscle car (a Dodge Charger). I purchased it a year ago fully realizing that gas prices were sure to go up, that it would use far more of our limited oil supplies than a hybrid, for example, has a worse impact on global climate change...but I justify it by limiting my use of it. I carpool to work in the morning and take public transportation home in the afternoon. As of June 30 I will have owned it one year, and right now I have 6,200 miles on it. So, for me anyway, I own a vehicle that uses twice a much fuel per mile as a hybrid, but I drive it half as much as the average driver, therefore I use the same amount of gas per year.

So when you see someone driving a gas hog down the road, they may have a similar story.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

The batteries in the hybrids also have a limited lifespan and aren't cheap to replace. Given the extra envrionmental costs in manufacturing the hybrid cars, they probably are really only beneficial for people who absolutely positively must have long commutes and who can't move closer to their jobs.

The current high price of real estate probably doesn't help with this, though.

 

[WhoozOn1st]

Rant on Patrick.

And another thing... :lol:

It's good to see people discussing these issues, but shame on abqdave for the Dodge Charger. Can I take it for a spin?

 

[RTOlson]

The batteries in the hybrids also have a limited lifespan and aren't cheap to replace. Given the extra envrionmental costs in manufacturing the hybrid cars, they probably are really only beneficial for people who absolutely positively must have long commutes and who can't move closer to their jobs.

A long commute would likely mitigate the main environmental benefits of the hybrid.

Hybrid owners see the huge gains in gas performance when they're using the battery more. IIRC, the battery is used to help the vehicle accelerate from stops. The battery is charged when the vehicle brakes.

If you're on a long commute, you're likely on a freeway. Unless it's rush hour, you're maintaining a level rate of speed without stopping or starting. So, no battery = no big gains in gas economy.

My friend drives her Prius on a long commute in the Bay Area. Her gas mileage is all right, but not great. She also likes to speed which hurts gas economy.

Here's my far-out idea of the day -- what if they somehow utilized hybrid technology on commuter rail lines? It might be far-fetched, but stopping vehicles that big would surely generate a decent amount of energy that could be used somehow.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

There are two kinds of brakes on modern trains: the air brakes, which provide braking in every car, and dynamic braking, which in its most traditional form uses the traction motors on the locomotive to generate electricity which is then used to heat the air above the locomotive. Some of the electric locomotives Amtrak (and New Jersey Transit, I think) uses can put the energy from the traction motors back into the overhead power lines instead. There was also a dual mode diesel-electric locomotive that would use power from the traction motors when slowing down to power the lights, air conditioning, etc in the coaches.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

The end of this topic mentions some specific models of locomotive that do regenerative braking.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

The price of gas is certainly having an effect on lifestyles. I see Hummers parked for extensive periods of time - much more than in the past. My real hope is that Congress will develop some backbone and mandate MUCH higher fuel efficiency standards for all vehicles in this country. Not just the lukewarm increases they have so far managed to get past the oil and U.S. vehicle manufacturer's lobbyists.

Another option would be to have an encoded RFID card, hopefully tamperproof (if you tamper with it the vehicle won't run), in each vehicle manufactured, which has the fuel efficiency of the vehicle encoded in it, and have the per-gallon price of the gas pumped into it be multiplied by a factor which would be inversely proportional to the efficiency of the vehicle. The more wasteful the vehicle, the higher the cost per gallon of the fuel for it, except that, for legitimate business vehicles only (vehicles that must be big and heavy because of what they are used for), the weight of the vehicle would be taken into account in pricing the fuel so as not to put the business OUT of business, but there would have to be a large increase in efficiency of even those vehicles over time.

Something on the order of what I have outlined really does need to be done in order to reward those of us who drive efficient vehicles and penalize those who do not, because it is the combined total of fuel use that causes the price to be so high. If the "fleet average" fuel efficiency were to double, then with the same average miles driven per vehicle, vehicle fuel use would be cut in half. One person driving a Hummer, one person driving a Ford Excursion or one person driving some huge inefficient pickup truck, all need to be penalized for doing so, because it is the cumulative effect of all of those wasteful folks that are at least partly responsible for the high fuel usage nationwide, which in turn increases the high fuel prices that we ALL pay.

 

[the_traveler]

Rant on Patrick.

And another thing... :lol:

It's good to see people discussing these issues, but shame on abqdave for the Dodge Charger. Can I take it for a spin?

Only if you first take the SWC to get there! :lol:

 

[Guest]

The tax code actually encouraged the purchase of some of these monstrous vehicles. The threshold number, 6000+ lbs, comes to mind but look it up in the IRC (or an IRS.gov pub on Depreciation) if that interests you.

People forget that the tax regulations serve several purposes. One, of course, if the collection of revenue to run the country and these stinking wars (says the disillusioned military spouse writing this whose spouse was eating crab legs, lobster, shrimp and steak every Wednesday night at Camp Arifjan-really) and ,two, to achieve societal goals. For example, exactly what purpose is achieved by the tax deductibility of home mortgage interest. Real estate interests aside, at some point it was decided that home ownership was good for the country. Likewise, investment tax credits encourage the purchase of qualifying items and provide a stimulus to both the businesses that need them and the companies that produce the items.

And Patrick, do you also remember the backlogs of orders for about the smallest car available in 1973, the Honda Civic (at least in my neck of the woods)? It's probably an easy jump to say that the 1973 oil embargo gave Japanese cars their first really solid foothold in the US.

 

[Guest_Gingee_*]

I know we have rethought trips this summer. We will make two trips this summer from Peoria to Chicago. One to visit our son in Chicago area and the other to take a train from Chicago. Our gas in Peoria, Illinois is now $3.92.

As far as gas efficient cars, if you have a car like us (Impala and Bonneville 2004), it is not a Honda Civic in mileage but I don't want to trade our cars in now.

As far as public transportation, our bus system stinks in our town.

So why are our gas prices going up besides greed?

 

[WhoozOn1st]

And Patrick, do you also remember the backlogs of orders for about the smallest car available in 1973, the Honda Civic?

While I don't recall the backlog situation, I did test-drive a Civic around that time. I was driving a Mercury Marquis wagon. Talk about a tank! And a guzzler. You could punch it and watch the fuel needle go down. But the Civic was a rinky-dink little box at the time, and unacceptable. Bought a VW Bug instead. Soon all my friends had Bugs, and we would work on them together, then go driving on the freeway in formation. Total FUN!

I think the actual smallest car available was the Subaru 360. So slow it got in its own way, kinda like the later Yugo.

Sorry everybody. I know this isn't CarTalk, but I was asked.

 

[PRR 60]

...I pay extra for 90% wind power to my house,

You pay extra to help fund wind power projects. The power to your house is the same power as that to your neighbor's house and has the same energy source mix. There is no way to direct some electrons here and others there. The suggestion made by "green power" initiatives that buyer's somehow get different power is misleading.

 

[Amtrak Watcher]

For a summary of the hate Amtrak holds in the eys of many who consider this subject...

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/122384.html

 

[Guest]

The price of gas is certainly having an effect on lifestyles. I see Hummers parked for extensive periods of time - much more than in the past. My real hope is that Congress will develop some backbone and mandate MUCH higher fuel efficiency standards for all vehicles in this country. Not just the lukewarm increases they have so far managed to get past the oil and U.S. vehicle manufacturer's lobbyists.

All Congress really has to do is divert some of the billions spent for highway widening to rail improvements.

More cars and straighter tracks could be ready in less time than adding lanes to our freeways.

People will leave the cars at home once trains are convenient and fast. They did that 50-60 years ago,

when roads were bad and trains were reliable.

But Congress won't do that, because that would only be in the public interest.

And as we all know "the public" doesn't wine and dine Congresspersons, nor does it send them on all-expenses-paid

"fact finding" tours of Bermuda golf clubs, etc.

 

[PRR 60]

The price of gas is certainly having an effect on lifestyles. I see Hummers parked for extensive periods of time - much more than in the past. My real hope is that Congress will develop some backbone and mandate MUCH higher fuel efficiency standards for all vehicles in this country. Not just the lukewarm increases they have so far managed to get past the oil and U.S. vehicle manufacturer's lobbyists.

All Congress really has to do is divert some of the billions spent for highway widening to rail improvements.

More cars and straighter tracks could be ready in less time than adding lanes to our freeways.

People will leave the cars at home once trains are convenient and fast. They did that 50-60 years ago,

when roads were bad and trains were reliable.

But Congress won't do that, because that would only be in the public interest.

And as we all know "the public" doesn't wine and dine Congresspersons, nor does it send them on all-expenses-paid

"fact finding" tours of Bermuda golf clubs, etc.

While more could be done, the suggestion that no money earmarked for highway projects is diverted to rail is not correct. $7.8 billion of the Highway Trust Fund (Federal gas tax) is allocated to transit projects, including rail, in FY 2008. Amtrak is not included in Transit funding, but NEC improvements are included through funding supplied to Amtrak by NJ Transit, SEPTA, and other transit agencies that use the Corridor. The transit funding of the Corridor is substantial. For example, Amtrak's cost to operate, maintain, and improve the New Jersey portion of the NEC is 67% paid by NJ Transit. Amtrak only pays 1/3 of the cost for the NEC in New Jersey.

Of the 18 cent per gallon Federal gasoline tax that funds the Highway Trust Fund, mass transit projects receive about 3 cents.

 

[Guest]

For a summary of the hate Amtrak holds in the eys of many who consider this subject...
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/122384.html

Interesting. I think it all boils down to this: People hate people.

If they MUST be where they can see, hear or smell other humans, they want

it to be for the shortest time possible, and if those 'undesirables' must be allowed

aboard, they should at least be tied into their seats for the duration.

That means private cars or airplanes.

Having seen, heard and smelled some of those humans, I can see why

people feel this way.

Maybe if Amtrak had "first class" and "steerage" tickets ?

 

[the_traveler]

The service has never been out of the red since its start in 1971, meaning it must rely on government handouts year after year.

But of course, highways (either Interstates or "Main Street" or "____ Road") or airlines (including airports, ATC and the FAA) require NO government funding at all!

 

[JxGx78]

The service has never been out of the red since its start in 1971, meaning it must rely on government handouts year after year.

But of course, highways (either Interstates or "Main Street" or "____ Road") or airlines (including airports, ATC and the FAA) require NO government funding at all!

Reason has been very vocal about the need to end subsidies (or at least reform the process) to highways (warning they do make another swipe at Amtrak). Personally, I believe that if highways and airline subsidies were reformed Amtrak could become self-sufficient. Since such reforms are unlikely, I think it makes sense to fund Amtrak and invest to improve its service. As a libertarian I'm always bothered when other libertarians only address one part of a perceived market failure, but fail to address the deeper underlying causes. Such as Amtrak can't compete, but fail to address the hand outs and intervention in the inter-city transportation market that prevents it from competing successfully.

 

[jis]

The batteries in the hybrids also have a limited lifespan and aren't cheap to replace. Given the extra envrionmental costs in manufacturing the hybrid cars, they probably are really only beneficial for people who absolutely positively must have long commutes and who can't move closer to their jobs.

A long commute would likely mitigate the main environmental benefits of the hybrid.

Hybrid owners see the huge gains in gas performance when they're using the battery more. IIRC, the battery is used to help the vehicle accelerate from stops. The battery is charged when the vehicle brakes.

This is indeed very true. The biggest gains in full hybrids like Prius is when you operate it for medium trips at medium speeds with lot of start and stop, i.e. local driving.

As for battery life issues, I hear this from a lot of people who don't seem to have any real life experience with hybrid cars. I know several owners of first generation hybrids in Japan (the current Prius in the US is third generation), and even with their older technology batteries, none of them have had to deal with any battery failures yet, and some of their cars are over 10 years old. Typically I replace my car much before it is 10 years old, so I don't expect to have to deal with battery issues in my Prius.

If you're on a long commute, you're likely on a freeway. Unless it's rush hour, you're maintaining a level rate of speed without stopping or starting. So, no battery = no big gains in gas economy.

That's true, although if the freeway is stop and go traffic jam kind of traffic then there is big gain due to the battery.

Here's my far-out idea of the day -- what if they somehow utilized hybrid technology on commuter rail lines? It might be far-fetched, but stopping vehicles that big would surely generate a decent amount of energy that could be used somehow.

The easiest way to achieve that is to electrify the line and use equipment with regenerative braking capability. Storing those enormous amounts of energy on board for reuse is a bit of a hassle and adds a lot of weight.

 

[Guest]

Patrick,

You're easy to razz. We need an update on your family next go around.

"I was driving a Mercury Marquis wagon. Talk about a tank! And a guzzler."

A car of this size made it easier to do what the eccentric people did during this time (1973). My family carried 5 gallon Army surplus gas cans in the trunk of T'birds refilling them at every possibility (I learned to drive in an '65 baby blue Thunderbird, one of several which you could hear approaching from a distance because Dad didn't like mufflers- my Dad and Uncle Buck would have made good friends-digressing). These were then emptied into the 55 (?) gallon barrels in the back yard to ensure an available supply of fuel. News of a station with gas ensured long lines and the last in line may have left gasless.

This is what life looked like during a gas shortage and it's not a good place to be. My neighborhood was filled with eccentric NASA engineers and rocket scientists or physicists (really) and Army Ballistic Missile Defense employed people, so all manner of self-built solar panels sprouted up at the same time (and at least one nuclear bomb underground shelter).

The country seems to be in a similar place that it was in 1973. Hopefully, leadership will recognize that a repetition of the same pattern (first increasing mpg requirements and then loosening them, while lowering the speed limit to 55mph and subsequently increasing it, looking at alternative energy sources and then deserting them) does not lead to a different outcome.

This is one of many reasons why Amtrak needs to be well-funded and expanded. It's just time for people to change their habits, permanently, and recognize that even if peak oil is not a reality that the emerging economies of India,Russia & China and elsewhere have placed increased demand on energy supplies. The fact (?) of global warming combined with peak oil suggests that the current transportation pattern of one person to one gas-burning engine cannot continue.

 

[WhoozOn1st]

Patrick, You're easy to razz.

I'm well aware that I'm highly razzable. This is not to be confused with irascible, but I can be that too, so watch it.