[Graeme]

Electrification of transportation as a response to peaking of world oil production

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he imminent peaking of global oil production and its potential impact is triggering concern at the highest levels of many countries, including the United States. Policymakers and the public in general are searching for timely and appropriate responses to "Peak Oil", and this paper highlights an under-appreciated option.

The bottom line is this: The potential for electrification in transportation appears to be far more immediate, well-proven, and readily available than non-transportation experts such as Robert Hirsch seem to acknowledge. Of all the policy responses noted in his report, electrification of transportation appears to have the potential for the quickest, the most permanent, and the most profound impact with the best ancillary benefits for human health, land use, pollution, and Global Warming.

[Starvid]

Electrification of transportation will as far as I am concerned be one of the major mitigations to peak oil.

Great link!

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ecessity may require that all alternatives to conventional petroleum are pursued, but the most beneficial alternative – electrification of transportation – should be pursued most aggressively. Existing urban rail plans could be built out within a few years with appropriate federal and local funding. New urban rail lines beyond those currently planned could be planned and built within a decade. Heavily used city bus lines could be converted to trolley buses within a few years.

The technology to electrify the major freight rail lines is quite well-known and only requires the decision to devote the capital to electrifying and less than a decade for widespread implementation. The creation of a network of semi-highspeed rail lines will take longer, but well within the time frame for alternative liquid fuels to be developed in large quantity.

On the whole, it seems clear that electrification of transportation ought to be the leading economic and policy response to the advent of "Peak Oil".

[coyote]

And where does the electricity come from? Enough to replace the absolutely incredible amount of energy that petroleum currently pours into the transportation sector, and offset declining natural gas supplies at the same time? Starvid, I know you're a fan of nuclear and wind power, and I agree with you in principle; but I just don't see it happening if Peak Oil hits anytime soon. For significant mitigation, energy and transportation infrastructures should have been launched decades ago and pushed hard ever since. Hasn't happened.

I'm not sure if many get just how much energy petroleum represents. We've all heard the statement: 'When Saudi Arabia peaks, the world peaks.' I believe this is also true: When world petroleum production peaks, then world energy production peaks. And we're going to be struggling like holy hell to bring it back online. Maybe it'll happen -- eventually.

Yes, I have read the Hirsch Report.

[gnm]

I am pro nuke power but arent all of those high speed rail systems diesel powered?

-G

[Starvid]

The amount of electricity used by electric vehicles other than huge numbers of electric cars is really small. Even if the number of trains and trams increase ten times over it won't even be noticed in the power generation statistics.

-------------------------

Another detail. In 1970 Swedish per capita power consumption was roughly the same as the average American power consumption in 2006. Between 1970 and 1985 Swedish power generation and power consumption doubled and has remained constant ever since, that is, roughly about twice as high as the US 2006 per capita power consumption. Enough said.

Or if you didn't get it: building power plants is easy and relatively quick, if you have the political will.

8 GW of new baseload power in 15 years. In a country of 8 million. And that was at the same time as we had a massive debate if we really should build all those (nuclear) power plants. Without that debate it would have gone even faster.

This translates into 300 GW new baseload power for the US in 15 years. If you have the political will. The current US average generation capacity use is 500 GW.

Building power plants is easy. Switching to more fuel efficient cars is hard. Go for trams and trains (and fuel efficent cars, of course).


gnm: All high speed trains are electric. TGV, ICE, Shinkansen, the one in Taiwan, the one in China, the proposed one in Florida (opposed by Jeb Bush) and the proposed one in California (opposed by Ahnuuld), they are all electric.

Electrification of transportation kicks ass.

[Wildwell]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gnm', 'I') am pro nuke power but arent all of those high speed rail systems diesel powered?

-G

[Frank]

I suspect that the US could free-up a fair amount of electricity for transportation just by improving efficiency and effectiveness of use. Electricity is still dirt-cheap even in the most expensive parts of the country and IMO most industries and households don't pay much attention to it.

[pigleg]

I've heard peak oil described as a transportation fuels crisis; the effect is obviously more wide ranging than that, but currently oil is most vital to transportation. Trains are hands down the most efficient mode of transport, so you'd want to encourage that over electric cars, since the fall-off in oil will put pressure on energy supply in general. Even a major move to more use of diesel-electric trains would be a good start.

[coyote]

Starvid: your points are well taken. Especially the dig about political will, that's dead on. Deisel trains are already very efficient, and the diesel-electric trains Pigleg mentioned (Green Goats) might help things more. I certainly hope that we start pushing in that direction as soon as possible; we're going to need to. But we really needed to do it many years ago. We're just too near the Peak now to have a smooth transition. Hirsch Report:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hirsch Report', 'A') larger number of train routes could be outfitted for electric trains, but such a transition would likely be slow, because of the need to build additional electric power plants, transmission lines, and electric train cars.

[ubercynicmeister]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gnm', 'I') am pro nuke power but arent all of those high speed rail systems diesel powered?

-G

[ubercynicmeister]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coyote', 'S')tarvid: your points are well taken. Especially the dig about political will, that's dead on. Deisel trains are already very efficient, and the diesel-electric trains Pigleg mentioned (Green Goats) might help things more.

[Frank]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ubercynicmeister', 'P')roblem: Where are we gunna get such stuff once Peak oil hits?

[peaker_2005]

Living a city where every form of transport is in meltdown (Sydney), where:

- Gridlock has taken hold;
- Buses are held up in said gridlock;
- The train system is struggling to keep up;
- The ferries are having endless problems;

It doesn't seem to look very positive. At least the rail system is entirely ELECTRIFIED within Sydney already.

Outside of metropolitan areas, steam-era corridors still dominate (may be a good thing too - we have loads of coal).

And even within Sydney, the routes themselves haven't changed all that much.

I can see a LOT of freight being moved over to the railways rather quickly.

Steam powered trains never got as efficient as they could be - but there's still enough know-how around (just) to nut it out.

At the very least, Sydney has some very good plans for rail expansions sitting in the archives - some of them relatively recent also (an unreleased report by the NSW state Govvie detailed a very solid plan for future railways.

Said plan also predicted we'd be in dire straits right about now. Unfortunately the Government didn't listen...

Sydney's problems are coming home to roost now. There's a state election next year (cannot wait to vote these buggers out).

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ubercynicmeister', '
')Peak Oil also equates to Peak Complex Electronics.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ubercynicmeister', '
')Think I'm kidding? Ask yourself: where are the common-to-hand replacements for the high-quality Thyristors and inverters that can handle switching currents under 9,000 to 12,000 amp loads?

YUP, that's what the average diesel's alternator will happily pump out and do so for hours. Because of their highly specialised nature (read: expensive), these components tend to be made in a very few places, and the manufacture depends mightily (although somewhat indirectly) on masses of Oil being available.

[aahala]

In the US it's not plausible to move a large portion of the current oil
for transportation to direct or indirect electrical useage. The numbers
don't work. To replace volume of energy consumed from oil would require
such large increases in coal or NG or nuclear, it's a joke.

[Starvid]

It's not a joke at all. Trains use almost no power at all (a TGV train is 8 MW and there are 400 TGV trainsets in France) and trams use almost nothing.

It's only when you start converting fossil cars to electric cars you need a lot more power (converting all oil powered transport in the US including cars, trucks, trains, airplanes and ships would require about 50 % more electricity than today).

Only converting all cars and trucks would mean roughly 25-35 % more power. A lot of new power, but not at all impossible.

A 20 % power increase could for example be obtained by doubling the US nuclear sector, from 100 plants to 200.

This would require construction of one new 1000 MW reactor for every three million Americans. Between 1970 and 1985 Sweden built not 1000 MW nuclear capacity for every three million people, but 3000 MW for every three million people.

With only a third of the intensity of the Swedish nuclear program the US could increase power generation 20 % in 15 years. With the same intensity as we had you could increase power generation 60 % in that time.

The only thing required is political will.

[Frank]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Starvid', 'A') 20 % power increase could for example be obtained by doubling the US nuclear sector, from 100 plants to 200.
...

The only thing required is political will.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Frank', '
')we could push efficiency programs. That's the cheapest/easiest/fastest way to gain 20%.

[Starvid]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Frank', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Starvid', 'A') 20 % power increase could for example be obtained by doubling the US nuclear sector, from 100 plants to 200.
...

The only thing required is political will.