What is the carbon footprint for Greyhound/Valley Transit?

I take a bus to the Corpus Christi area.  No Amtrak there.  Also, downtown to downtown quicker than using air.

Er, the train in the post looks like a STEAM engine.  Engergy wise, a diesel uses less energy per horse power than steam.  This includes the first diesels built in the 1940's!  But I did use the LRT to see Union Pacific's heritage steam train when it came to Houston for the Super Bowl.

I was wondering what the carbon footprint would be for the Utopian tram.

*********

I wanted to compare the METRORail reports for FY2004, FY2005, and FY2006 sent to the NTD, for the energy losses associated with urban rail.

In the first nine months of operation (FY2004), the heavily taxpayer subsidized tram consumed 5,092,200 kWhr of electricity at a cost of $410,915.00 (about 8-cents/kWhr).

In the first full 12 months of operation (FY2005), the heavily taxpayer subsidized tram consumed 6,989,200 kWhr of electricity at a cost of $586,477.00 (about 8.4 cents/kWhr), an INCREASE of 4%.

In the second full 12 months of operation (FY2006), the heavily taxpayer subsidized tram consumed 7,583,200 kWhr of electricity at a cost of $741,027.00 (about 9.77 cents/kWhr), an INCREASE of about 16.5%!

++++++++++

Due to losses in electrical

transmission, the proper conversion factor is 1 kilowatt hour equals

11,765 BTUs.

Reference: Page B-5 (physical page 263) of Edition 25, National

Transportation Energy Data Book,

http://cta.ornl.gov/data/tedb25/Edition25_Full_Doc.pdf. It mentions

the 1 kwhr = 3,412, but adds, "This figure does not take into account

the fact that electricity generation and distribution efficiency is

approximately 29%. If generation and distribution efficiency are

taken into account, 1 kWhr = 11,765 Btu."

++++++++++++

METRO estimated there were 13,757,568 Passenger Miles (PM) in the first 9 months of tram operation (FY2004). That level of consumption calculates to 4,355 BTU's/PM.

METRO estimated there were 25,565,990 Passenger Miles (PM) in the first full 12 months of tram operation (FY2005). That level of consumption calculates to 3,216 BTU's/PM.

METRO estimated there were 27,517,634 Passenger Miles (PM) in the second full 12 months of tram operation (FY2006). That level of consumption calculates to 3,242 BTU's/PM.

********

The BTUs per passenger mile for the average car is about 3,500. So the tram beats cars, but barely.

If you put 2 people in your car, you are probably doing better than METRORail (average auto occupancy is 1.6).

"For those of us in Houston, we'd have to increase our carbon footprint a bit by first driving to San Antonio to catch the nearest train that goes west to Los Angeles."

No, you don't. According to the Amtrak website, the train goes directly from Houston to San Antonio for $45, one way. It takes about 5 hours, though.

Sheesh, Royko has made a full-time job out of spewing vitriol at the very full-time blog that he so despises! Irony!

It sure would be nice to get some regional rail installed. I'm hoping that any future commuter rail that HGAC and Metro are currently looking at will be designed with regional travel in mind. I'd definitely consider taking a quick, clean train to Galveston, Austin, San Antonio, or Dallas.

Amtrak currently can't cut it. They're embarassingly underfunded and therefore have to share the same rail with higher-priority freight. Hopefully our leaders will one day soon recognize that a little (or a lot) more funding might help Amtrak purchase its own right-of-way and perhaps begin to compete with our massively-subsidized juggernaut of a highway system.

The 290 Passenger Rail Coalition envisions rail from Downtown Houston to Bryan / College Station.

Badly needed, IMHO.

http://www.290prc.com/290_prc.html

Pwang,

Why stop at Bryan/College station?

It's only taxpayer money, there's plenty more.  Take the example from the Sports Authority, just float more bonds.

Ian,

In the name of diversity, and intellectual honesty, is it not fair to hear an opposing argument, no matter how biased the forum?

I kind of understand the demand for commuter rail on 290, but I'd rather see it heading to Sugar Land, Pearland, or Clear Lake.

I once checked to see if I could take a train from Houston to Austin, and the only way to do it involved stopping overnight in San Antonio! Fortunately, I had Greyhound to fall back on.

Rokyo,

     You asked Ian this:

"Ian,

In the name of diversity, and intellectual honesty, is it not fair to hear an opposing argument, no matter how biased the forum?"

What I can say about this is that it maybe fair to hear what you say but I can 100% say that it's getting too old.  I can turn 50 and I'll still see this kind of stuff.  Catch my drift?  Instead of putting METRO down just because you can't have your way with what they want to do with your "precious" money, you can probably help METRO by telling them what needs to be done to satisfy riders like me.  Until then, what I see doesn't help in any case.  Thanks, Mr. Royko.