[Vision2020] Megaloads Could Skip U.S. on Rail-Truck Canada Route

[lfalen]

I am all for rail. They vary well may use rail when that is available, which it isn't now. 
That is a business decision for them to make when the time comes.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: "Tom Hansen" thansen at moscow.com
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 08:41:40 -0700
To: "Moscow Vision 2020" vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] Megaloads Could Skip U.S. on Rail-Truck Canada Route

> Courtesy of today's (May 26, 2011) Spokesman-Review.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Megaloads could skip U.S. on rail-truck Canada route
> Betsy Z. Russell
> 
> BOISE – What if giant loads of oil field equipment didn’t have to enter
> the United States to get from Asia to the Alberta oil sands project in
> Canada, and what if avoiding the U.S. actually cost less?
> 
> That’s the prospect being floated by a railroad company that owns a
> Canadian seaport. It’s adding a new wrinkle to the debate over equipment
> transports to the third-largest proven crude oil reserve in the world,
> where dozens of companies are rushing to develop an oil resource that’s
> eclipsed only by those of Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.
> 
> A court ruling is pending in Montana and an administrative ruling pending
> in Idaho on the 200-plus megaload transports proposed by Imperial
> Oil/ExxonMobil, which would take giant modules fabricated in Korea up the
> Columbia and Snake rivers by barge to Lewiston, then truck them across
> scenic U.S. Highway 12 in north-central Idaho to Montana and Canada. The
> loads are so big they’ll block both lanes of the twisting, two-lane
> highway, creating a rolling roadblock; but they’re too tall to travel on
> most other routes, including interstate highways.
> 
> Delays in getting permits for the transports are worrying Imperial/Exxon,
> which has 33 loads sitting in Lewiston. Company spokesman Pius Rolheiser
> said, “We’re at the point now where the permitting delays that we’ve
> already experienced have put pressure on our project execution plans.”
> 
> The new alternative: Instead of coming to Idaho, megaloads could be
> shipped from Korea through the Panama Canal, up around the United States
> to Hudson Bay on the east coast of Canada, and from there west by rail,
> with a final segment by truck.
> 
> “There are supposedly thousands of these modules that need to move, over
> and above the ones that are stuck in Lewiston,” said Gary Long, president
> and CEO of OmniTRAX, a Denver-based firm and one of North America’s
> largest private railroad and transportation management companies. “Rail is
> always cheaper than truck transportation, always. 
 You can move a ton of
> freight 480 miles on one gallon of fuel.”
> 
> Imperial/Exxon says Highway 12 remains its “preferred option.” It’s also
> cutting down the loads that are currently in Lewiston so they’re short
> enough to travel on interstate highways, and it has shipped 45 smaller
> loads on interstate highways from the Port of Vancouver, Wash., to Canada.
> 
> But there could be many more companies looking to bring big equipment to
> the oil sands, and that’s where OmniTRAX is focused.
> 
> “There are a myriad of companies that are operating in the oil sands,”
> Long said. “We’ve had some discussions with several of the oil companies –
> they’re interested.”
> 
> In 1997, OmniTRAX bought the Port of Churchill on Hudson Bay, the only
> deep-water Arctic seaport in North America, and the Hudson Bay Railway,
> which runs from the Port of Churchill into the interior of Canada.
> 
> Hundreds of tons of grain are shipped from the port each year to
> destinations in Europe, the Mediterranean, North Africa and Central
> America. Said Ian White, president and CEO of the Canadian Wheat Board,
> “They provide a good service and it is a northern port that is fairly
> unique in terms of its position.”
> 
> One catch to the port: Due to ice, its season is short, generally
> stretching from early July to the end of October. But Long says there’s
> plenty of room at the port to bring in hundreds of megaloads during the
> shipping season, store them there, and stage them for transport by rail to
> the oil sands whenever the oil companies need them.
> 
> “We operate the railroad that serves the port 24/7, 12 months a year,” he
> said.
> 
> The over-land trip, his company estimates, would be 300 miles shorter than
> the trip from Lewiston through Idaho and Montana to the oil sands. It’d be
> much farther from Korea to the Port of Churchill by water than to the Port
> of Vancouver, but experts say that’s really not an issue.
> 
> “Ocean-borne transport costs are very low, and are really low as a
> function of distance,” said James Harrington, a professor of geography who
> teaches international trade at the University of Washington. “Because once
> you get something loaded, you go through all the steps and you get the
> ship under way, then it’s a matter of just keeping it gliding through the
> water.”
> 
> Harrington said the pending expansion of the Panama Canal has seaports
> around the Northwest worried that they’ll lose lucrative shipments bound
> for the interior of the United States or Canada once bigger ships can use
> the canal to take those directly to the East Coast.
> 
> Completion of a major enlargement of the canal is scheduled for 2014,
> according to the Panama Canal Authority.
> 
> Long said his company’s rail line already can accommodate loads 30 feet
> wide, though seven bridges will need upgrades to handle either the height
> or width of the megaloads. “We’ve already done that analysis, already had
> discussions with the government of Manitoba regarding that,” Long said.
> “We could do it as quickly as 12 months – we could probably do it sooner.”
> 
> The bridge upgrades would be “in the millions of dollars,” but Long said,
> “It is a drop in the bucket, I think – it’s a very small amount compared
> to what would be the total opportunity cost for the oil companies to put
> those things through.”
> 
> He estimated that megaloads could travel by rail from the Port of
> Churchill to the end of the Hudson Bay Railway at Flin Flon, Manitoba, in
> two to three days. The final leg of the trip, which would be done by
> truck, likely would take another two to three days, he said.
> 
> OmniTRAX has identified a potential truck route on all-season roads that
> runs through Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, and then up to Fort McMurray,
> Alberta, that’s about 750 miles. Long, however, said there is a shorter
> route, but “We’d have to work with the governments of Saskatchewan and
> Alberta.”
> 
> Long said an all-Canada route to the Canadian oil sands project might
> raise less opposition than U.S. transport routes. The rail portion, in
> particular, “does not disrupt the communities at all.”
> 
> Imperial/Exxon has sent only one test megaload over the Idaho route so
> far; it was pronounced a success by both the company and the state
> Transportation Department, though it knocked out power to two Idaho towns
> for five hours and closed Highway 12 for an hour. State rules call for
> megaload transports to not impede traffic for more than 15 minutes at a
> time in Idaho, and 10 minutes at a time in Montana.
> 
> Rolheiser said his company didn’t consider the Port of Churchill for its
> current project because “we kind of had to look at the routes and
> infrastructure that currently exist.”
> 
> Harrington, the UW professor, said with rail travel cheaper than truck,
> and ocean travel cheaper than rail, the alternative route could be viable.
> “It is very conceivable to me,” he said.
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Seeya round town, Moscow.
> 
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
> 
> PS - Don't forget about . . .
> 
> "The Third Annual Intolerista Wingding"
> http://www.moscowcares.com/wingding2011
> 
> "The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
> and the Realist adjusts his sails."
> 
> - Author Unknown
> 
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>