1

Proposition To Increase Passenger Train Travel

forState/Local Representatives of Oregon and Passenger Rail Car

Manufacturers

byThe Valley Railway Corp.

Mitchell KeysEfficiency

Adam PassmoreInfrastructure

Alexerae JeanbartEconomics

Jake PhelpsEcosystems

David ThompsonEconomics

Drew HaleyEcosystems

2

Table of Contents

Abstract Summary/Introduction.........................................................3Data Section.......................................................................................4

• Economics..................................................................................4• Social Savings....................................................................................................5

• State/Government Savings.................................................................................6

• Ecosystems.................................................................................7◦ Oregon Wildlife and Noise Pollution.........................................................7

◦ Animal Deaths Train Related Compared to Automobile............................8

• Efficiency....................................................................................9◦ Various Factors and Methods of Train Travel Efficiency..........................9

• Infrastructure.............................................................................11◦ Financial and Physical Layout of Infrastructure.....................................11◦ Portland-Eugene Rail...............................................................................12

References.........................................................................................15

3

Abstract Summary

Mass Public Transportation

Railway expansion in Oregon as future AlternativeAlthough automobiles have been the contemporary medium for transportation and commuting for the last 100 years. The cost of road repairs, damage to the environment, and expense of fossil fuels, is likely to keep rising at an uncontrollable rate that is unmanageable in the years to come.The most cost effective, least expensive, and lucrative approach to this problem, before it becomes a burden to Oregon's economic and environmental infrastructure is to Support and Fund an expansion of the currently used Amtrak railways, privatization and competitiveness for the use and ownership of these tracks by rail-car manufacturers and stock holders, all day, every day, and the public's support and awareness of this opportunity to travel in a more social and commutative environment, that is economically and environmentally feasibly detailed in this report.

We also came to this conclusion of expanding the railways by examining the alternatives of bus and plane, as well as doing research into countries with established railways dedicated to mass transportation and commuting functioning as an integrated way of travel already.

With your support, funding, and promotional push in the public eye, we can build a future mass transportation medium by railway that enriches Oregon in the areas that matter to the people, while benefiting from the prospects and revenue of supplying a demanded necessity for Oregon's growth everywhere and to the majority of the populace.

4

Economics of Train Travel

Saving Time, Money, and Energy for Social Benefits

IntroAs more people ride trains, the economic and environmental benefits of high speed rail increase. In 2007, it was estimated that a freight train could move 436 tons of freight on more than a gallon of fuel, with trains doing even better today. Unlike with auto travel, trains are able to add passengers with virtually no additional energy use, making them energy efficient as well. Trains are also able to move three times more freight than by doing so via highway, and have lower gas emissions. Not only are trains fuel efficient, but they are also profitable in several ways.

NetworkingTrains have the potential to be the solution to rising gas prices. High speed rail from a gross standpoint, has notable economic benefits. Because weather is no factor in its operation and congestion is never an issue, it is very reliable and predictably timely. High speed rail also enables cities to link together to form a larger region making them a stronger economy. By doing this, cities also have a larger network for business and markets to pull from. With a widespread use and bigger economy, a larger development plan is necessary. Expanding the use of high speed rail would generate new jobs throughout the nation, stimulating the economy, and reduce money wasted on inefficient auto travel.According to the us hsr,

“This is one important issue that Republicans and Democrats see the value in: The national high speed rail network will create millions of good jobs, stimulate the economy, create entirely new industries, be the catalyst for the next real estate boom, save businesses money, increase mobility, reduce dependence on oil, reduce our annual $700 billion trade deficit (purchasing foreign oil), and significantly increase national security.”

EnvironmentWith the endangerment of our environment today, high speed rail offers a sustainable transportation that reduces cost effects as well as preserves our earth ecologically. Investing in the development of more high speed rail means greater good for our environment and economy. It is predicted that investment in rail is to increase in congested countries outside the US within the next few years.

Numbers speak for themselves from an economically standpoint and trains do just that.According to bombardier, the evolution of economy, in the US alone, congestion translated into costs of $78 billion in delays and fuel in 2005, external costs associated with passenger car travel on average are three times more than an equivalent trip by rail, and for every $1 billion in federal investment in public transportation, 47,500 jobs are created. This is a significant amount of prospective into the economics of trains. With our population continuing to skyrocket, traveling by rail is well suited and is

5

at a less expense to our wallets and environment. Traveling by rail reduces our economic footprint allowing the preservation of resources for future generations to come.

Time and Money Savings for State/GovernmentIntroElaborating further on the benefits of doubling and expanding the current railway systemin the valleys of Oregon specifically for passenger cars, there are big savings and conveniences totake into account financially, politically, and fiscally. Not only is this expansion progressive for thecitizens of Oregon, but it entails profitable opportunities, and cost reductions for the local, state,and business economy as well in the long run. One of the major reliefs to state and localgovernment would be an easing up of worry for funding the cost of fixing the roads. Anotherbenefit associated with repair resources being less stretched, is the management of valuable timeunobstructed for road workers and surveyors, who are overburdened with the plethora of damagedareas of the roadways. Furthermore, as passenger railway car manufacturer, representative, or evenan interested entrepreneur, there is a lucrative business opportunity and taxation proponent openedup by the expansion of the current railway system to take advantage of. By investing and fundingthis mass public transportation project, you are entitled to the advantages ranging from tax breaksto a negotiable percentage of revenue generated from tickets to stocks. Finally, from a politicalperspective, funding this project opens the ability to gasconade your public standing. Byelaborating the important role you played in helping tackle Oregon's transportation issuesmonetarily, we all flourish by owning a negotiated stock and interest in the tracks and trains, whichwill be the main necessity to a mass public transportation medium and its riders.

Road SavingsWith the successful implementation of railway becoming a mass transportation medium, adrastic reduction in the cost to road repairs would not be seen, this is because all DOT's, includingOregon's, have a bad reputation for spending the same amount of money on new roads as they doon road repairs for roads already created. An Article on smartgrowthamerica.org called RepairPriorities 2014: Transportation spending strategies to save taxpayer dollars and improve roadshas it laid out perfectly, stating “State departments of transportation (DOTs) are spending moremoney building new roads than maintaining the ones they have—despite the fact that roads arecrumbling, financial liabilities are mounting and conditions are not improving for America’sdrivers. Between 2009 and 2011, the latest year with available data, states collectively spent $20.4billion annually to build new roadways and add lanes to existing roads. America’s stateownedroad network grew by 8,822 lanemiles of road during that time, accounting for less than 1 percentof the total in 2011. During that same time, states spent just $16.5 billion annually repairing andpreserving the other 99 percent of the system, even while roads across the country weredeteriorating. On a scale of good, fair or poor, 21 percent of America’s roads were in poorcondition in 2011. Just 37 percent of roads were in good condition that year—down from 41percent in 2008.”. On top of this, Oregon is in even worse straights because, regardless of us

6

having an average amount of fair street conditions in comparison to other states, we spend far lessof our annual budget percentage wise on repairing existing roads, and still too much building newroads when compared to other states. The cost for building a second set of tracks would cost that ofa yearly budget of (50 billion) for road repairs, and although a large amount upfront, the trackswould be paid off in the first 10 years of use or less depending on volume of travelers. This isstable even when considering repairs of tracks being at the greatest amount 10 billion annually.Just as relevant, government representatives and ODOT would have a much more efficient way oftracking the repair costs of a set of rails for pedestrian use, giving them the freedom to focusattention and efforts on the unfathomably damaged bridges and roads, that are overused byautomobile. Finally, damage from traffic accidents and wear and tear from weather wouldstatistically fall to a much more manageable number, while also boosting revenue through anagreed upon and adjusted ticket price and tax in response to the convenience of commuting by rail.

Government SavingsInvesting in this expansion monetarily may not seem to be lucrative endeavor in the shortterm, and that's because perhaps it is not, with the exception of tax breaks for transportationalternatives. Passenger cars are going to cost (based off of many sites and resource averages)anywhere from $8,000,000$15,000,000 dollars each in manufacturing costs. On top of this, therewould have to be a big push for the privatization of the ownership of railway and passenger cars totake place. Amtrak has an annual revenue of roughly 2.4 billion, which is a drop in the bucket withwhat should be expected. The two main reasons the income is so low compared to expectedrevenue of our projects prospects has to do with the ownership of stocks tied to the FederalGovernment, and the amount of passengers using Amtrak as a contemporary means oftransportation for everyday travel. Legislation and regulation have handicapped private companiesfrom investing and capitalizing off of a market in which is not allowed to be competitive. Theproblem of low amounts of passengers using train is also linked to this government ownership.This is because the Federal Government has little interest in risking money for a system they haveno competitors in. Privatization will not only lower the cost of manufacturing the railway and traincars, which is good for the majority of citizens, but in doing so manufacturers will be able topromote and gain exposure through media, competition, and social means in relation to the freemarket they are based in. This will open up avenues of competitive hiring and an intent of offeringthe best service to the customer. More over, these decisions also reflect what ticket prices we canexpect to see. Reasonably, and understandably the front end of this deal looks costly and it is, andthe end result looks uncertain but hopeful. The reality of the situation is that consumer andpassenger alike will be the largest determining factor of the success and gain of this project, just aswith most public projects. With your help, as a politician, manufacturer, and/or entrepreneur it isbelieved that we can make this railway come to fruition and all will benefit in the respective ways.

7

Ecologic Savings By Rail

Oregon Wildlife and Noise PollutionIntroAnimals suffer much more noticeably than plants from the effects of over dependence on carsmoving through the Oregon countryside. Nearly 1,300 crashes involved animals in Oregon in2013, putting human lives in danger and causing economic harm(Oregonlive, crashes). From2007 to 2013 42,094 animal deaths were recorded by the Oregon Department ofTransportation (Oregonlive, mapping). The alarming figures only account for state highways.In a state as wild as Oregon it is safe to assume actual fatality figures are much higher, howfar off is the question. Regardless of the actual number, projected and recorded animaldeaths are unacceptable.

Oregon WildlifeWorst of all is the suffering many of these animals go through. Deer, and elk, are inmany instances wounded or maimed instead of outright killed when struck by a vehicle. Theycan suffer debilitating lifelong injuries or bleed out as they wander across the woods. Allowingsuch suffering in as ecofriendly a state as Oregon is cruel and increasingly unconscionable.For this reason the proposal is submitted today to expand Oregon’s mass transit via trains.

Noise PollutionAnother benefit to the fauna of Oregon is a reduction in noise pollution withdecreased traffic. A report by the Federal Highway Administration concluded that heavy trafficassociated with highways has a detrimental effect on a multitude of animals (fhwa). Mostheavily affected are birds, which were observed to decrease in proportion to the increase ofnoise caused by traffic. The report went on to note "passing vehicles were perceived as athreat. Interestingly, the goats did not seem to be disturbed by the noise from trains" (fhwa).Researchers in the project observed firsthand wildlife actively avoiding potential habitat due tonoise pollution. Trains as a means of mass transit would substantially cut down on noise pollution.Highway traffic is estimated at 70 to 90 decibels in volume (chem.Purdue). That is roughly asloud as modern trains, though covering a far larger area (BBC). Because cars and truckstransport much more inefficiently more vehicles are required to move the same amount of materials and people. Consequently, vehicle transport over rail travel disproportionately increases noise pollution over swaths of land.

8

Animal Deaths Train Related Compared to AutomobileIntroHow railroads affect wildlife and their habitats isn't all that dissimilar from that of roads. Loss of said habitat, (rail) road kill, the barrier effect1, and reduction in the quality of the habitats are the main impacts of habitat fragmentation2 by railroads. This can reduce population viability and threaten the survival of a species. Trains can also affect wildlife habitats by introducing foreign plants through the medium of seeds, emission of toxic contaminants such as heavy metals, or managers- sorry, management (herbicides and the like).

Birds and ReptilesWildlife deaths due to trains can be significant. Mammals and Birds seem to be fare far worse than reptiles, as can be seen on the railroad Madrid-Sevilla. Along this stretch of track, the annual kill per km rate was 36.5. Around 57% were birds, 40% were mammal, and 3% were reptiles. According to both European and North American studies, Mammalian victims range from small rodents to large ungulates (whose members include dolphins and whales. Take a moment to picture this) and carnivores. The size of the bird victims varied, but Owls and other birds of prey were particularly vulnerable.

Rail Line DangersHigh mortality rates are mainly found at intersections of railroads with important wildlife habitats and migration routes. The behavior of the animals, snow depth, temperature, railroad characteristics, and train speed all are factors that affect kills. Animals are also killed because they are attracted to rail beds. Carnivores and ungulates use rail beds as travel corridors during winter. Railroad kills also attract carrion eaters. In Canada, most collisions with Wolves and Coyotes took place near train-killed ungulates. Birds are affected in a similar way.Railroads are also barriers that can decrease survival probability of wildlife populations when animals cannot or will not cross them.

9

Efficiency of Train Travel

Various Factors and Methods of Train Travel EfficiencyIntroI would start this off explaining the units of measure measurement that is used to record this data. Rather than the usual “Mpg”(miles per gallon), trains use RTM/gal; this means per one gallon of fuel that is used, it carries a metric ton of material a number of miles. From this, the popular freight train company CSX claims that its trains gain around 500 RTM/gal, which from its average calculations holds up to be true. I believe that passenger trains will gain a greater efficiency due to its faster coasting speeds, and overall structural design. For people who say trucks and buses are the way of the future, from CSX it claims that heavy trucks gain about 134 RTM/gal, which is way less than trains.

One thing that is the same about both trucks/cars/trains is the engine efficiency. On average, most combustion engines get about a 30% energy use out of their fuel, meaning 65% of the gas goes to waste; this isn't much different trains though, they get around 35%. Thing is with cars, most of the energy is lost in the transmission, changing from gear to gear; in trains it is lost during the electrical conversion of heat to mechanical. With automobiles, its purely physics and physical mechanics that is to blame for this, which means we can’t really innovate from this. In trains though, its mainly on the current technology that makes it efficient, so with further innovations and improvements engineers can increase the maximum output of the engine.

Energy/EnginesThese are various forms of engines/energies used in transportation such as in trains, cars, and planes.

Internal Combustion

• The average engine now days for any type of transportation vehicle would be an internal combustion engine. This utilizes a liquid fuel source such as gasoline or diesel, and converts the energy into heat, which in the reaction process moves a piston and converts that into kinetic energy. During this process, around 65% of the energy goes to waste due to the heat leaking out, the sound of the engine, starting, and stopping. There are two situations when this engine will run at 0% efficiency, first when the vehicle is stopped and the engine is idling, and second when it is coasting and it is still running. In cars this is a major problem, with traffic scenarios of the vehicles motion constantly stopping, starting, and coasting. This is why there is two MPG ratings for any car, a highway with a constant motion gaining maximum efficiency, and city with the add-ons of the change in motion. With modern trains, the engine is constantly on and working towards the power of the electric drive engine, not the motion it's self; this adds to their overall efficiency.

Mechanical

• Mechanical energy applications deals with with using kinetic, rotational, and potential energy to alter the overall output of the end motion. For example, a cars transmission uses this to covert

10

the constant, high power, slow circular motion of an engines crankshaft to different ratios of power/speed to move the vehicle. Because of the different gear ratios, friction, sound, and constraints on design, much of the starting KE gets lost causing another reduction in energy efficiency. In trains, there is no power-drive transmission, all of the KE from the engine goes straight to the generator cutting out the risk of energy loss.

Electrical

• An electric engine works by creating an electromagnetic field that attracts itself to stationary magnets, so it is similar to when one holds two magnets near each other they pull towards each other. Due to technological upgrades and lack of a mechanical system, electric systems are extremely efficient reaching levels up to %75 energy usage. And because the voltage and ampage of the supplying electricity can effect the speed and power all on its own, there is no need for a power-drive transmission; thus another way to totally cut out another factor that could contribute to energy loss.

Diesel ElectricThe diesel electric train is currently the most popular propulsion device in trains today, it works by using a V-(12, 16, or 20) diesel internal combustion engine to provide KE for a DC electrical generator/alternator to produce the current needed for propulsion. From here, the electricity goes trough an AC converter/regulator so it both stabilizes and gives the desired amount of electricity to the electric motors. All six motors are mounted to each of the six axles of a regular train power unit(The Locomotive), from here the motors directly turn the wheels moving the train. Going back to the mechanical section, it is important that the KE does go through many stages to get to its end result. All of the steps to convert the chemical energy(diesel) into motion is necessary to obtain heavy carrying loads and high speeds, all while saving as much energy as possible.

ElectricSome trains in urban areas run purely off of electrical energy, totally cutting out the need for an on board power source. Most of these units gain access to this energy via overhead wires or a third rail between the regular two support rails. Working similar to diesel electric units, there is a motor for each axle acting directing from the crankshaft. The difference being is the unit only has the DC inverters and regulators, it also had its own transformer so it can solely run off the standard power grid. Due to the lack of an engine and generator, it lightens the weight of the unit causing a higher efficiency rating.

11

System Infrastructure For New Passenger Rail

Financial and Physical Layout of InfrastructureIntroPassenger train availability must be increased to meet the growing needs of our futuregenerations. The greatest concentrations of people in the state of Oregon reside in the Willamette valley, between Portland and Eugene. Amtrak currently provides passenger train transportation between these two cities, but only in limited capacity due to lack of infrastructure. We must take action now to secure the necessary resources, ensuring Amtrak will have the ability to keep up with the demand for a readily available and highly economical means of transportation.

Portland-Eugene RailCurrently between Portland and Eugene, Amtrak operates on a rail line owned by Union Pacific Railroad. This track also provides service to destinations in route consisting of Oregon City, Salem, and Albany. The single track shown in Figure 1, which is also shared by freight trains, allows for only 2 roundtrip passenger trains daily (Brinkerhoff, 2010). This rail line is 1 of 10 in the country federally designated as a high-speed corridor which allows for speeds of 110+ mph if the infrastructure is suitable to support those rates of speed. However, current top speeds of Amtrak’s passenger trains in the area are 79 mph because of aging and unsuitable infrastructure (Legislative Committee Services, 2012). To increase passenger train service and allow for freight service to maintain current levels and also allow for increase in the future, the current track must be improved to allow for greater speeds and an addition rail line must be built.

12

Figure 1 Location of New/Existing Rail Line

13

The additional track proposed by Parsons Brinckerhoff would be built parallel to the current line owned by Union Pacific. The cost for this project is estimated to be 2.2 billion dollars (Brinkerhoff, 2010). These funds would accomplish the goal of building the new line and would bring speeds possible on both lines to 110 mph, not only greatly increasing capacity but also decreasing the time in which it takes to travel dramatically. This project will allow up to 6 daily roundtrip passenger trains, increasing trains on track by 200%. The increase in speed from 79 mph to 110 mph will reduce travel time by 30%. Below in Figure 2, you will see an itemized break down of all cost necessary to see the project through to completion.

14

Figure 2 Itemized Cost of New Rail Project

15

References

"Fuel-Efficiency – CSX." Fuel-Efficiency - CSX. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

"Rail Versus Trucking: Who's The Greenest Freight Carrier?"\TreeHugger. Rocky Mountain Institute. Web. 12 Nov. 2014.

Brinckerhoff, Parsons. "Oregon Rail Study." Oregon Department of Transportation – Rail Division (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

Pfeiffer, Dale Allen. Eating Fossil Fuels: Oil, Food and the Coming Crisis in Agriculture. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society, 2006. Print.

Droege, Peter. Urban Energy Transition: From Fossil Fuels to Renewable Power. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2008. Print.

Ahmed, Nafeez, Dr. "The Inevitable Demise of the Fossil Fuel Empire." The Guardian. N.p., 10 June 2014. Web. 12 Nov. 2014.

Rowell, Andy. "The $88 Billion Fossil Fuel Bailout - Oil Change International."Oil ChangeInternational. N.p., 11 Nov. 2014. Web. 12 Nov. 2014. .

"High-Speed Rail for America." High Speed Rail Works. Web. 29 Nov. 2014.

"US HIGH SPEED RAIL ASSOCIATION." Economic Benefits of High Speed Rail. Web. 29 Nov. 2014.

"Economy & Rail." Economy & Rail. Web. 29 Nov. 2014.

"Train Travel." The Economist. The Economist Newspaper. Web. 29 Nov. 2014.

Legislative Committee Services. 2012, September Background Brief on Freight and Passenger Rail.

Degroat, Bernie. "Planes, Trains and Automobiles: Traveling by Car Uses Most Energy." Planes, Trains and Automobiles: Traveling by Car Uses Most Energy. 10 Jan. 2014. Web. 2 Dec. 2014.

16

"Repair Priorities." Smart Growth America. 1 June 2011. Web. 2 Dec. 2014.

Haulk, Jake. "Shipping Comparisons." For Business Industry RSS. Web. 2 Dec. 2014.

"2013 Report Card for America's Infrastructure | Oregon Overview." 2013 Report Card for Americas Infrastructure. 1 Jan. 2014. Web. 2 Dec. 2014.

"Short Line Tax Credit Extension." Short Line Tax Credit Extension. 1 Jan. 2014. Web. 2 Dec. 2014. "Oregon State Rail Plan." Oregon.gov. 31 Mar. 2014. Web. 2 Dec. 2014.

"2010 Oregon Rail Study." Oregon.gov/ODOT. 1 Aug. 2010. Web. 2 Dec. 2014.

"Privatizing Amtrak." Downsizing the Federal Government. 1 June 2010. Web. 2 Dec. 2014.

Graves, Mark. “Oregon Roadkill: Mapping over 42,00 Wind Animal Deaths in 7 Years (interactive graphic).” Oregonlive.com. Advanced Digital, 16 Nov. 2014. Web. 24 Nov.2014

“How Loud Will the New High-speed train Be?” BBC News. BBC, 28 Feb. 2011. Web. 26 Nov. 2014

Kaseloo, Paul. “Noise Effect on Wildlife.” Fhwa.dot.gov. Federal Highway Administration, 14 Sept. 2004. Web. 3 Dec. 2014

Rose, Joseph. “Why Have Oregon Card versus a Wildlife Crashes Increased Dramatically in Recent Years? (interactive graphic).” OregonLive.com. Advance Digital, 22 Oct. 2014. Web. 24 Nov. 2014

Chem.Purdue.edu. Temple University of Civil/Environmental Engineering, 2 feb. 2000. Web. 3 Dec. 2014