Mainline electrification - Practical in the USA outside the NE Corridor?

Question

I know there is a lot of money involved to lay the catenary, but is this the "environmental" thing to do now. Also, don't juice jacks have higher hp then most diesel/electrics?

Answer 1

Indeed, motors have considerable more power than diesels, and even have the unique advantage of working ever-harder for the more tonnage they are pulling, so they are extremely efficient (i.e., meaning they produce greater horsepower).

Probably the greatest main line example of electrification was the Milwaukee Road's Pacific Extension, which stretched over 650 main line miles from Harlowton, Montana to Seattle/Tacoma and down Pudget Sound.  Unfortunately Milwaukee shut it down in 1974 and abandoned its main line west of Terry, MT in 1980 (a costly mistake but another story for another time) but it lasted long enough to see more current freight electrics in operation and their advantages (the PRR's E44s are another good example).

While extremely efficient and practical, and arguably even viable, I have my doubts that any of the private Class Is will electrify any signficant portions of their main lines any time in the near future.  Probably the leading hindrance is simply initial cost/captial, it is just too darned expensive to be economical.  Electrification is extremely expensive; not only do you have to string catenary but also build and maintain many substations all along the line, and, of course, purchase electricity.  

In any event, I think electrification would be a last resort for Class Is even as current fuel prices skyrocket.  For example, currently they are looking into liquid coal as a alternative fuel to diesel.  Having said that, probably the greatest possibility (although probably unlikely as well) is a Class I building short stretches where the efficiencies gained outweight the costs, such as across mountainous lines with high grades.

Answer 2

Well, your Chairmanship, electrification existed in the west at one time.  The Great Northern ran them through the State of Washington, primarily due to the 71/2 mile long Cascade Tunnel near Berne, Washington.

Though expensive, I would argue they are viable, both economically and environmentally.

Mention electric traction to most who follow railroading in all its many facets, and the image of a Pennsy GG-1 pops into the brain.  With the development of technology over the years, new ideas applied to an old concept would probably be a winning ticket.  Any new production models would doubtfully resemble a Sharknose in any way.

For one, today's dynamic braking systems could feed power back into the grid when descending grade, which will reduce power production necessary for a train moving anywhere under power anywhere on the grid.  The main drawback to electricity as fuel, is that it is nearly impossible to store it for any length of time in any meaningful quantities.

It may be time to rethink the technological advancements that have been made that might again make steam an attractive alternative as well, perhaps using gassified, low sulfur coal as a fuel to power turbine electric locos.  The drawback there has always been the noise pollution, but here again, new technology has been able to put a damper on some of the noise emissions as well.