Be careful what you throw away 2

Two weeks ago, I looked at a few examples of the gross negligence of throwing away architectural and engineering achievements to favor new technology and architecture that may be no better, or may be worse, than what is thrown away. I was in the middle of talking about Chicago’s electric streetcar system, a victim of the rush to substitute internal combustion for what everyone then thought was an outdated technology. (Hearty laughter.)

First, though, I’d like to mention New Mexico Rail Runner Express.

I had already written the previous blog when the Albuquerque Journal (Motto: Only the news that we can fit on the paper we can afford today.) carried a feature on Rail Runner, noting that, as I’ve reported here many times, ridership is dropping, and costs will be going nowhere but up. They presented two schools of thought for solutions.

The first: Stay the course, and improve public awareness and advertising to increase ridership. Ridiculous because nobody who lives in the areas served could possibly be unaware of the trains. The second: Sell the whole operation and recoup as much money as possible. Also ridiculous because of the huge loans outstanding on the project and the limited equity and fully-owned assets that could be sold.

The latter solution comes under our title heading. Be careful. In this case, nobody has taken the time to consider what a compromise solution might be. Now, I don’t know how the debt on locomotives and passenger cars is structured, but I can imagine that rolling stock has a relatively high value compared to track, right of way, and station infrastructure. Remember that New Mexico purchased the entire railroad from Belen to Raton from BNSF Railway, then reneged on the deal when it was found to be too costly for maintenance. At this time, it is unclear how much, if any, of the BNSF line (former Santa Fe) is actually owned by the state, if any.

The Journal articles have started lots of talk, mostly leaning to the following solution: Dump the train and pay off the debt from the state's permanent funds. Lots of money there. Then move on.

But that's not automatically the best solution. Why wouldn’t Rail Runner consider selling the rolling stock to retire that part of the debt and buying lightweight, self-propelled units that could be operated one at a time or in tandem to meet demand? Running smaller trains, lighter trains, costing less for energy, seems like just the ticket. With more, lighter, and more flexible trains possible, experimentation with faster, tighter, and more frequent scheduling might surprise everyone. Just a thought.

Back to Chicago’s streetcar system.

I grew up in Berwyn, a close in suburb of Chicago only about 9 miles from the Chicago Loop. I am not quite old enough to remember streetcar service in Berwyn. West Towns discontinued streetcar service on Ridgeland and 26th Street, the closest line to my family home at 27th & Harvey, about when I was born, and its other lines fell by the end of 1948. I do recall, however, taking a West Towns bus to its terminal on Cermak Road north of the giant Western Electric plant. There, we boarded red streetcars, now adorned with the relatively new Chicago Transit Authority logo, on the Cermak line, which took us to Central Park Boulevard. A short walk got us to our destination just south of there, but the point is that no automobile transportation was required, and clean electricity ran better than two thirds of the trip—not stinky, smoky, butane buses that could be smelled coming and going for at least a city block.

I realize that there were other factors. In those days, coal-fired power plants produced one hundred percent of the electricity. A strike had crippled coal deliveries, and the buses seemed to the regulators in Illinois a quick, though dirty, solution to the extra draw on power plants that the streetcars made.

Not so today, when that a hundred percent of the power could be made without any coal whatsoever.

Next week Pullman and Be Careful 3.

©2017 – C. A. Turek – mistertrains@gmail.com

(Charles A. Turek is a writer and novelist based in Albuquerque, NM. After four decades working in areas of the insurance industry related to transportation, he now writes on all aspects of American railroading. Charles is a political conservative but believes in public funding of passenger rail as a part of the federal government’s constitutionally conservative obligation to provide for defense and public infrastructure so that private enterprise may flourish.)