1 of 96

2 of 96

3 of 96

PLEASE begin by watching this short introductory video (3:41)�(source: https://www.solutionaryrail.org/video)�

Look for link to PDF of book & coupon code

4WRD2GTHR for free download

4 of 96

US GHG EMISSION SOURCES

Approximately 30% each from energy & transportation

5 of 96

TRANSPORTATION EMISSION SOURCES

Mode shift of long haul freight from roads to rails is therefore an important component of our transportation decarbonization strategy.

Rail GHG emissions currently represent a relatively small portion
Heavy-duty vehicles are a far more significant GHG emitter, and far more difficult to electrify.

6 of 96

ADVANTAGES OF TRAINS

Trains use 1/3 the energy required by cars and trucks
Steel on steel (trains) is more efficient than rubber on concrete (trucks)
Freight moved from roads to rail:�

Reduces wear and tear on � roads and bridges�
Reduces motorist-truck accidents�
Improves water quality �
Improves air quality and public health�
Reduces CO2/GHG emissions

Narrative:

Even without electrification, trains use just one-third of the energy highway transportation uses.

And if you are thinking that electric trucks and electric cars could be the answer, consider that an all-electric fleet of cars would produce a problem of material extraction for battery production and of hazardous waste disposal, given that 2/3 of the battery cannot be recycled. The electricity required to power an all-electric fleet of cars in Washington state alone would require the equivalent of an additional 2 Grand Coulee dams, or 5 nuclear power plants, or 6,900 wind turbines, or 181 sq miles of solar panels. The electricity that an electrified rail system would require would be much less than this – and benefit freight as well as passengers.

Our major highways are in terrible shape. The American Society of Civil Engineers has given them a grade of D. The ASCE has calculated that by 2028 the annual cost of keeping major highways in what they describe as 75% of a “good repair” condition, would be about $171 billion-with-a-b. Unfortunately, governments at all levels are only spending $91 billion on capital investments

including road repair.

A freight train can carry the equivalent of 300 semi-trailers. Shifting freight from heavy trucks to rail will reduce wear and tear on highways, and hence will help to

diminish the highway funding shortfall.

7 of 96

The Freight Analysis Framework (FAF4) indicates that annually

the US moves �OVER 1 TRILLION ton miles�(approximately 40%)

of long haul freight �traveling distances greater than 500 miles on trucks instead of trains!

�

Narrative:

Even without electrification, trains use just one-third of the energy highway transportation uses.

And if you are thinking that electric trucks and electric cars could be the answer, consider that an all-electric fleet of cars would produce a problem of material extraction for battery production and of hazardous waste disposal, given that 2/3 of the battery cannot be recycled. The electricity required to power an all-electric fleet of cars in Washington state alone would require the equivalent of an additional 2 Grand Coulee dams, or 5 nuclear power plants, or 6,900 wind turbines, or 181 sq miles of solar panels. The electricity that an electrified rail system would require would be much less than this – and benefit freight as well as passengers.

Our major highways are in terrible shape. The American Society of Civil Engineers has given them a grade of D. The ASCE has calculated that by 2028 the annual cost of keeping major highways in what they describe as 75% of a “good repair” condition, would be about $171 billion-with-a-b. Unfortunately, governments at all levels are only spending $91 billion on capital investments

including road repair.

A freight train can carry the equivalent of 300 semi-trailers. Shifting freight from heavy trucks to rail will reduce wear and tear on highways, and hence will help to

diminish the highway funding shortfall.

8 of 96

Hundreds of $billion$ of gallons of diesel
Tens of $billion$ in wear & tear on US roads and bridges
Millions of metric tons of GHG/CO2
Tens of thousands of premature deaths from �diesel pollution
Thousands of freeway deaths
Tens of $billion$ in the costs of congestion

THAT’S NUTS!

1 TRILLION ton miles annually amounts to +/-

What’s also nuts is that the US doesn’t actually have a single tool for assessing these impacts accurately.

Narrative:

Even without electrification, trains use just one-third of the energy highway transportation uses.

And if you are thinking that electric trucks and electric cars could be the answer, consider that an all-electric fleet of cars would produce a problem of material extraction for battery production and of hazardous waste disposal, given that 2/3 of the battery cannot be recycled. The electricity required to power an all-electric fleet of cars in Washington state alone would require the equivalent of an additional 2 Grand Coulee dams, or 5 nuclear power plants, or 6,900 wind turbines, or 181 sq miles of solar panels. The electricity that an electrified rail system would require would be much less than this – and benefit freight as well as passengers.

Our major highways are in terrible shape. The American Society of Civil Engineers has given them a grade of D. The ASCE has calculated that by 2028 the annual cost of keeping major highways in what they describe as 75% of a “good repair” condition, would be about $171 billion-with-a-b. Unfortunately, governments at all levels are only spending $91 billion on capital investments

including road repair.

A freight train can carry the equivalent of 300 semi-trailers. Shifting freight from heavy trucks to rail will reduce wear and tear on highways, and hence will help to

diminish the highway funding shortfall.

9 of 96

CHARACTERIZING

The US needs to

of the current state of

DO A BETTER JOB

the TRUE COST

FREIGHT.

10 of 96

The EU is investing in characterizing external costs of freight and prioritizing a Shift2Rail �

From EU’s 2019 External Costs of Transport Handbook

11 of 96

From EU’s 2019 External Costs of Transport Handbook

The EU is investing in characterizing external costs of freight and prioritizing a Shift2Rail �

12 of 96

Connecting the dots on the true cost

of transportation (especially freight) �is an opportunity for

immediate interagency collaboration.

PROPOSED

13 of 96

Solutionary Rail would like to work with USDOT and other agencies to develop a True Cost Calculator. �The next slides show our PRE-BETA, earliest version�

See the BETA prototype at SolutionaryRail.org/truecost

PROPOSED

14 of 96

https://solutionaryrail.shinyapps.io/external_cost_faf/

15 of 96

https://solutionaryrail.shinyapps.io/external_cost_faf/

16 of 96

https://solutionaryrail.shinyapps.io/external_cost_faf/

17 of 96

https://solutionaryrail.shinyapps.io/external_cost_faf/

18 of 96

the mode shift of freight - especially long haul freight traveling >500 miles - from trucks to trains

is a public policy priority.�

IT QUICKLY BECOMES OBVIOUS THAT

19 of 96

MODE SHIFT�Leveraging the efficiency of rail �for decarbonizing freight transport

That’s why Solutionary Rail starts with...

20 of 96

In 2020, it became clear that too few were promoting mode shift at a scale commensurate with the crises we face. �So, we proposed a…��

MOONSHOT MODESHIFT

21 of 96

Available at: SolutionaryRail.org/msms

22 of 96

Mode shifting freight from trucks to trains (both value & volume) requires a freight rail business model with improved service, accessibility, reliability and speed.

Shifting the business model for freight rail is essential for decarbonizing rail and truck transport.

A key element of Solutionary Rail is moving a significant portion of freight from trucks to rail. Trucks would still play a role in transporting goods: we would need them for “the last mile” in getting freight to markets, and because the trucking distances would be shorter, electric motors become more possible. But the current business model has given truck transport the lion’s share of freight business, in terms of tons, ton-miles, and commodity value. Reflected in these numbers is that although US railroads carry only 11% of tons, they carry them longer distances (more ton miles). Because trains have been left only the heavy, lower-value bulk goods to transport (principally grains, coal, and oil), their share in the whole pie of commodity value is just 3.5%.

[Optional:

How did we come to rely so heavily on truck transportation, despite its lack of energy efficiency?

The public extensively subsidized railroads in the nineteenth century with grants of land and money. Rail was the king of freight. But by the twentieth century, railroads were on their own. The industry had to maintain its own rails and roadbed, and pay property taxes on those assets. Meanwhile, with public financing shifting in the 20^th century to the building and maintaining of roads and a vast interstate highway system, the playing field tilted sharply in favor of trucking.

So railroads have been forced to surrender a number of higher-value and time-sensitive freight transport – like refrigerated produce and ____________________ -- to semi-trucks making heavily subsidized trips on the Interstates. Rail has the competitive edge only in heavy, bulk freight like oil and grain.

Meanwhile, several factors have led to some downturn in the advantages once realized for trucking. In addition, railways privately invested $40 billion (with-a-b) during the past five years in new infrastructure, and rail has gradually been taking market share from trucks since 1999.

Despite heavily subsidized competition, the natural advantages of rail have allowed it to begin to rebuild its place in the U.S. transportation network. Strategic reinvestment to increase rail speed and reliability will help recapture the market for rapid delivery of high-value mixed freight.

23 of 96

IN THE MOONSHOT MODESHIFT BRIEF, WE PROPOSED BOLD TARGETS FOR 2030:��50% of freight traveling 100-249 miles

75% of freight traveling 250-499 miles�and �100% of freight traveling over 500 miles

24 of 96

25 of 96

26 of 96

Mode shifting 100% of freight

traveling over 500 miles from roads to rails by 2030 is a reasonable, worthy & achievable goal.

27 of 96

MODE SHIFT EXAMPLES:

On dock rail
Roll-On, Roll-Off (“RoRo”)
Protecting short line railroad �access to mainlines
Connectivity & Access

28 of 96

ON DOCK RAIL FOR INTERMODAL:

29 of 96

ROLL ON/ROLL OFF ’S MULTIPLE FORMS:

30 of 96

SUPPORT THE 605 SHORT LINE & REGIONAL RAILROADS�

Unlike Class 1 railroads that are chasing away the less profitable business to maximize profits, short line railroads continue to pursue a growth model.
Short line railroads provide essential “first and last mile” service to and from, and between Class 1 RRs
Shippers complain to the STB about Class 1 practices, but it is more difficult for vulnerable short line railroads to complain. As one short line executive said confidentially, “We know who brought us to the dance.”
Minimum carloads (52) and requiring heavier (286k lb) grain cars for unit trains puts a burden on shippers, short line railroads, grain elevators, and track capacity. This forces many farmers and manufacturers to ship by truck.
The Kansas DOT Short Line program and the Washington State Grain Train programs are examples of addressing some of these burdens.
Failures to protect short lines and innovative shipping projects like the Cold Train using BNSF and UP’s Cold Connect harms local and regional economies.

Interview & links re. Kansas DOT Short LineRail Program at: SolutionaryRail.org/kansas

31 of 96

State Rail Plans should be actual plans.

Require State Rail Plans to include serious study of public interest goals such as mode shift, electrification, and regional connectivity, as done in the recent Nevada State Rail Plan. In service of modal shift, rail plans should map industrial areas to catalog access to, past and potential future utilization of rail sidings, and incentivize mode shift wherever feasible.

Interview & links re. NV Rail Plan at: SolutionaryRail.org/nvrp

32 of 96

ELECTRIFICATION��Essential for Workers, �Communities, & Climate

33 of 96

ADVANTAGES OF ELECTRIC TRAINS

Electricity can come from renewable sources
Electricity costs less than diesel fuel
Electric locomotives are �cheaper to maintain
Regenerative braking reduces power consumption
Electric locomotives add �capacity through more rapid �acceleration and deceleration

34 of 96

35 of 96

Mode shift will expand rail GHG and other emission impacts unless electrified. Workers & trackside communities deserve decarbonization now.

36 of 96

The Moving Forward Network is an environmental justice coalition of primarily community-based organizations working to end the negative impacts from diesel emissions from freight. �See MovingForwardNetwork.com

37 of 96

Source: California Air Resource Board – the Press Enterprise

38 of 96

Ports & Drayage
Rail yards
Mainlines

WHERE TO START WITH ELECTRIFICATION?

39 of 96

40 of 96

41 of 96

�

Of 140,000 miles of US track, the DoD designates 38,800 miles as the Strategic Rail Corridor Network (STRACNET). �Consider electrifying that first.�

42 of 96

Or prioritize the most densely utilized

interstate freight corridors - the Northern and Southern Transcon

(Side-note just to introduce the map overall: This map shows freight transport volume by thickness of lines. This could help us see potential and set priorities.)

Narrative: the Northern Transcon is our initial choice for a variety of reasons besides freight volume. Some of those same reasons are also true for the BNSF Southern Transcon: Density of tribal lands, renewable energy generation potential, need for transmission of renewable energy, and the potential to displace fossil fuel transport – these are likely significant on both lines.

Along the Southern Transcon, the community activism of East Bay Environmental Justice and others has created momentum for Zero Emissions Ports. Justice for fenceline communities begins at the ports, but decarbonizing every stage has significant public health impacts.

43 of 96

44 of 96

TRANSMISSION��Connecting regions to increase energy supply �& stabilize the variability of renewable energy

45 of 96

UNLOCKING STRANDED SOLAR

46 of 96

UNLOCKING STRANDED SOLAR

47 of 96

REQUIRES EFFICIENT TRANSMISSION�

Access to transmission is a prerequisite for the development of renewable energy resources.
One of the largest obstacles to energy transition is the lack of a national HVDC transmission infrastructure.
A National SuperGrid would provide that critical component to a just transition off fossil fuels.
A NOAA study published in 2016 did the modeling for such an HVDC system and a pathway to 80% renewables by 2030.
HVDC (High Voltage Direct Current) transmission is dramatically more efficient than HVAC (High Voltage Alternating Current)
Improvements in HVDC transmission technology has made buried HVDC more feasible
Voltage Source Converters (VSCs) to exchange power between the HVDC lines and the regional high-voltage alternating current (HVAC) systems already in place are becoming more efficient, compact and cost competitive
The largest obstacle to building a National HVDC SuperGrid is finding the Rights-of-Way.

48 of 96

NOAA modeling for such an HVDC system and a pathway to 80% renewables by 2030

49 of 96

Compare density of transmission grid from NOAA model to a mainline rail map

Interstate (Class 1) railroads have the perfect rights-of-way for a National SuperGrid

50 of 96

RECENT 2-STATE ALTERNATIVE TRANSMISSION MODEL

The US could put interstate rail rights-of-way to use for a National SuperGrid

51 of 96

52 of 96

Other considerations for rural economic vitality, passenger service, and opportunities for energy export to urban centers…

Chronic rural depopulation

Rural Electric Co-ops

Expanded Passenger Service

53 of 96

Opportunities for Tribal leadership & ownership, energy sovereignty & export and Right-of-Way Justice

CLASS 1 RAILROADS & FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED TRIBES

54 of 96

Opportunities to address the national security threat of climate change by hardening transmission and building resilient domestic supply chains.

55 of 96

Seems like a Win-Win-Win!�

RIGHT? ��

56 of 96

So, we initially imagined PPPs through �Steel Interstate Development Authorities (SIDA)

SIDA = Not-for-profit corporation chartered with the authority to raise funds for infrastructure investment on both publicly and privately owned rights-of-way that would:

Issue tax-exempt bonds to sell at low-interest rates
Oversee funding, construction, and management of electrification infrastructure
Self-finance through user fees paid by railroads
Negotiate with right-of-way owners of site infrastructure
Make direct investments in track improvements
Seek financing in the form of TIFIA loans

Narrative:

How would improvements to the privately owned and publicly owned rights of way be capitalized

The Solutionary Rail team proposes a new, state-based institution to capitalize rail electrification and modernization - the Steel Interstate Development Authority (SIDA).

The SIDA would be a not-for-profit corporation operating under a board appointed by participating states – for example, in the case of the northern trans-con owned by Warren Buffet/BNSF, the seven states through which the Seattle-Chicago line passes.

The SIDA would be charged with the authority to raise funds for infrastructure investment on both publicly and privately owned rights of way.

The SIDA would issue tax-free bonds to sell at low interest rates, oversee funding and construction of electrification infrastructure, make direct investments in track improvements, and seek TIFIA (Federal) loans.

The SIDA would not be a giveaway to railroads, or an extra cost to states. Funds would be raised from private markets and federal loan funds [ – and possibly include public banks like the Bank of North Dakota or the Washington Infrastructure Trust public bank that has been proposed for Washington state].

As a study from the Pierce County Labor Council states, “An accord is necessary between the parties in a partnership to overcome the prejudice that profitable corporations 'should not receive public contributions.' The crux of this issue is not how do we help a for-profit corporation, but how do we gain a valuable public benefit not otherwise affordable by a private railroad, even a profitable one.

57 of 96

��Who could say “No” to that?

58 of 96

��Who could say “No” to that?

��

ANSWER = CLASS 1 RAILROADS

59 of 96

Class 1 interstate railroads are too busy lowering operating ratios for short term profits to invest in long term vitality.

60 of 96

��It is paying off - for shareholders, but NOT for shippers, short line railroads, nor the public. Whose interests are served by the long term vitality of the interstate railroad infrastructure

61 of 96