MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W755876515

Economics of Electrifying North American Railways

2013· article· en· W755876515 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ellen Morrison, Gord Lovegrove

Notice bibliographique

RevueTransportation Research Board 92nd Annual MeetingTransportation Research Board · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueTransport and Economic Policies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEngineeringCatenaryAutomotive engineeringDiesel fuelTransport engineeringCarbon footprint
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

As fuel costs increase, transportation modes are looking to railways as a cheaper, more efficient and environmentally friendly alternative. Because of railway transportation’s immense advantages over road and air transportation, its use is expected to increase two-fold or more over the next 10 years in the US and Canada, and likely all of North America (NA). However, NA railways are still dependent on diesel-electric locomotives, while other countries in Europe and Asia have long ago switched to more efficient electric locomotive technology. Electric locomotives have significant benefits over diesel-electrics, such as increased efficiency and traction, a lower probability of failure, reduced noise and vibrations, potential for brake regeneration, and an overall reduced carbon footprint. Despite these advantages, electric locomotives can cost significantly more than diesel-electrics and require expensive infrastructure, such as catenary lines and electric substations. In 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency implemented new regulations on diesel-electric locomotives to reduce emission toxins such as particulate matter and NOX. These new regulations create immense health benefits, but come at a cost to railway organizations for more stringent manufacturing and remanufacturing requirements. This paper explored the potential costs associated with electrifying the railway network in NA rather than focusing on improving diesel-electrics. A Monte Carlo Simulation was conducted to compare these costs with converting current railway lines to catenary, or partial catenary with on-board storage systems. Factors such as research costs, noise reduction benefits, health benefits, fuel usage, and productivity were taken into consideration to determine the most suitable alternative for the future of NA’s railway organizations, environment, and society. Results suggest that implementing ultracapacitor or battery hybrid locomotive technology would create significant positive net present worth between 2012 and 2040, estimated at $411 Billion for passenger rail and $15.7 Trillion for freight rail, due mainly to less overhead catenary infrastructure and energy costs required, while still gaining the social benefits of reduced noise and improved health. They would also be the quickest electrification technology options to implement in terms of manageable construction and business disruption logistics, which were not considered in this analysis and should be research if and when business case development occurs in pursuit of electrifying railways. Moreover, over 80% of this significant NPW would accrue to railway organizations, suggesting that business case development and investment planning should proceed post haste to electrify, and to phase out diesel electric locomotives at the end of their economic life. Regardless of which route is taken, electrification would have immense benefits to both railway organizations and society. Increased productivity, reduced energy requirements, decreased noise and improved health would all significantly contribute to cost savings and an improved quality of life for residents of North America. As such, there appears to be a strong business case for research into development of hybrid electric locomotives that can operate on- and off-grid.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,025
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0000,003
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,048
Tête enseignante GPT0,308
Écart entre enseignants0,261 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueTransportation Research Board 92nd Annual MeetingTransportation Research BoardMême sujetTransport and Economic PoliciesTravaux en français237 207