Passenger Trains > Fuel (Gallons) per mile

On commuter and Amtrak regional trains where stations are frequent and run 8 is the watchword; what is fuel consumption per train mile?

Generally zero for the Regionals, as they use electrics as do most of the NEC commuters, don't know off the NEC.
Cheers,
Nick

Posted from iPhone

I know Amtrak has reported fuel statistics in its annual reports, but those numbers represented the system in its entirety. The best way to figure out a number based on route and locomotive type is to look at the digital fuel display on the side (if they're correct) at the start and end of a trip. It may come down to a half-mile per gallon, but accounting for how many cars and passengers it pulled will show how efficient it truly is.

P42 averages about 1.75gpm

Say in Hiawatha service, burn is about 150 gallons over 86 miles CHI-MKE with three stops and 1-2 other accelerations from low speed, prolly an average trip. With 300 peeps on a rush-hour train that's only 1/2gal per pax-trip. With 150 say on an off-peak train , 1gal per pax-trip. Figures on an LDT would be similar in equation.

How about Bolt/Greyhound?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/14 16:46 by PumpkinHogger.

mp208 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On commuter and Amtrak regional trains where
> stations are frequent and run 8 is the watchword;
> what is fuel consumption per train mile?


A little off of the subject. Back when the SD-45's were running on most of theRR's in the USA... The SD-45 book said that in run 8 the engines burned around 160 gallons a hour.. idle around 15 gallons

The Cunard liner QE2--now retired--got about 50 feet PER GALLON of fuel. It was an official measurement.

On a trip up and back on the Springfield Line, which is 124 miles round trip, the P42's use 200-250 gallons. A few will guzzle upto 500.

SanJoaquinEngr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> mp208 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > On commuter and Amtrak regional trains where
> > stations are frequent and run 8 is the
> watchword;
> > what is fuel consumption per train mile?
>
>
> A little off of the subject. Back when the
> SD-45's were running on most of theRR's in the
> USA... The SD-45 book said that in run 8 the
> engines burned around 160 gallons a hour.. idle
> around 15 gallons

Nope, more like 210 gallons/hour.

PumpkinHogger Wrote:

> How about Bolt/Greyhound?


I drive a MCI 102D3 with a Detroit 12.4L Series 60 and I average 6.4 miles per gallon consistantly. Greyhound uses DLs, but the milage will be the same.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/01/14 21:00 by TomG.

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Cunard liner QE2--now retired--got about 50
> feet PER GALLON of fuel. It was an official
> measurement.
.
And that was probably downhill.

PumpkinHogger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P42 averages about 1.75gpm
>
> Say in Hiawatha service, burn is about 150 gallons
> over 86 miles CHI-MKE with three stops and 1-2
> other accelerations from low speed, prolly an
> average trip. With 300 peeps on a rush-hour train
> that's only 1/2gal per pax-trip. With 150 say on
> an off-peak train , 1gal per pax-trip. Figures on
> an LDT would be similar in equation.

Most LDTs have two locomotives and the tare weight per seat is higher than for corridor services, so an LDT should have a higher consumption per seat-mile or passenger-mile if load factors are similar.

> How about Bolt/Greyhound?

Greyhound claims 184 passenger-miles per gallon of fuel based on actual results:

https://www.greyhound.com/en/about/factsandfigures.aspx

I think MegaBus claims about twice that, but it is probably operating at a much higher load factor than Greyhound.

On our fully loaded example, I calculate 172 passenger-miles per gallon, but average load factors would reduce that by about half.

Recently we discussed the overall BTU/passenger mile figure given by the Department of Energy in its annual Transportation Energy Data book. If my calculations are correct, the figure of 2214 BTU/passenger-mile for intercity rail (Amtrak) in the year 2011 converts to 58 passenger-miles per gallon overall for Amtrak. That supports the view that conventional corridor trains are more energy efficient per passenger than the LDTs.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/14 01:11 by ts1457.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Recently we discussed the overall BTU/passenger
> mile figure given by the Department of Energy in
> its annual Transportation Energy Data book. If my
> calculations are correct, the figure of 2214
> BTU/passenger-mile for intercity rail (Amtrak) in
> the year 2011 converts to 58 passenger-miles per
> gallon overall for Amtrak. That supports the view
> that conventional corridor trains are more energy
> efficient per passenger than the LDTs.

Specially when an 8000HP electric is pulling 700 people.

Even more so on commuter lines when a 7000HP unit is pulling 1000 people. The rolled up number spanning all shows more the effect of the mix of types of services than the inherent efficiency of a mode. In the US beyond talking about energy efficiency, I have not observed anyone doing anything specific in terms of changing operating procedures to actually try to deliver on the promise proactively. If it incidentally works out well while everyone goes about their own ways so be it. If not well, whatever. :)

Keep in mind the fuel consumption varies greatly depending on HEP load. Here are some P42 fuel consumption numbers expressed in gallons per hour.


P42DC NOT providing HEP (4250 max horsepower, 1050rpm in N8)
Notch 8- 201
Notch 7- 160
Notch 6- 130 
Notch 5- 102 
Notch 4- 72 
Notch 3- 51 
Notch 2- 23
Notch 1- 12
Idle- 4 

P42DC in HEP mode with 0kW HEP load (900rpm in all notches, 3650 max horsepower)
Notch 8- 172 
Notch 7- 168
Notch 6- 137
Notch 5-109
Notch 4- 78 
Notch 3- 57
Notch 2- 33
Notch 1- 22 
Idle-16

P42DC providing 400kW HEP load (900rpm all notches, HEP load is using 537 horsepower, 3113 horsepower left for traction.)
Notch 8- 172 
Notch 7- 172 
Notch 6- 159 
Notch 5-130 
Notch 4- 102 
Notch 3- 82 
Notch 2- 58 
Notch 1- 47 
Idle-37

Posted from Android



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/14 07:02 by MetraUPWest.

Jishnu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ts1457 Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
> > Recently we discussed the overall BTU/passenger
> > mile figure given by the Department of Energy in
> > its annual Transportation Energy Data book. If my
> > calculations are correct, the figure of 2214
> > BTU/passenger-mile for intercity rail (Amtrak) in
> > the year 2011 converts to 58 passenger-miles per
> > gallon overall for Amtrak. That supports the view
> > that conventional corridor trains are more energy
> > efficient per passenger than the LDTs.
>
> Specially when an 8000HP electric is pulling 700
> people.
>
> Even more so on commuter lines when a 7000HP unit
> is pulling 1000 people. The rolled up number
> spanning all shows more the effect of the mix of
> types of services than the inherent efficiency of
> a mode. In the US beyond talking about energy
> efficiency, I have not observed anyone doing
> anything specific in terms of changing operating
> procedures to actually try to deliver on the
> promise proactively. If it incidentally works out
> well while everyone goes about their own ways so
> be it. If not well, whatever. :)

When I was adding to the post late last night, I did not go into the comparative energy usage between electric and diesel. In the past when I broke out the differences between the two in the overall figure, electric came out worse. I think at least part of the difference is accounted for by the energy used to get higher speeds on the NEC. As things stand now, I think you are safe in saying that the per passenger energy consumption is higher for Acela and other NEC regional than for diesel powered corridors. I don't know how NEC and diesel powered LDTs would compare.

Good point about overall energy efficiency. You can't just say blindly that one way is better than another. For example, if a single person is making point A to point B business trip where a train is feasible, the person's energy usage is less on the train than driving an SUV. However put a couple and three kids in the SUV on a vacation and the vehicle will be much more energy efficient per passenger than taking an LDT.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/14 07:33 by ts1457.

Very interesting post MetraUPwest....thanks. I'm curious why a unit in HEP mode doesn't run at maximum RPM...it would seem that having more horsepower available for traction would be desirable.

Anyone know what combined fuel consumption is for an F59PHI's prime mover and HEP generator?

Dave

Labiche Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SanJoaquinEngr Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > mp208 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > On commuter and Amtrak regional trains where
> > > stations are frequent and run 8 is the
> > watchword;
> > > what is fuel consumption per train mile?
> >
> >
> > A little off of the subject. Back when the
> > SD-45's were running on most of theRR's in the
> > USA... The SD-45 book said that in run 8 the
> > engines burned around 160 gallons a hour..
> idle
> > around 15 gallons
>
> Nope, more like 210 gallons/hour.

The idle number is high, too. Figure 3-4 gallons per hour for that 20-645E3.

Years ago, I happened to be sitting and chewing the fat with an old GE hand. He told me that the GE turbines burned about 15 gallons per minute of fuel (Bunker C) at full load, but 10 gallons per minute at idle. That's a major strike against turbines in rail service. The AAR medium duty cycle, on which fuel figures are usually quoted, is 17% full load, but 46% idle. The EPA line haul cycle is not much lighter, at 16.2% full load and 38% idle. Most real duty cycles, though, are closer to 10% full load and 60% idle. The turn-down ratio of a diesel, 200 gallons/hour at full load, 3 at idle, just kills turbines in rail service.

To maintain the 60Hz frequency needed for the HEP, the P42's HEP alternator needs to be spun at 900rpm, so that's the speed the engine providing HEP will run. Any others in the consist are free to rev to full rpm and produce full horsepower.

The F40s made max horsepower at 900rpm, so they did make max horsepower while providing HEP. The P42 at 900rpm still makes more power than the F40 did, though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/14 10:16 by MetraUPWest.

Usage for two units on say a ten-car LDT would be double the single use rate minus roughly 10%

coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Cunard liner QE2--now retired--got about 50
> feet PER GALLON of fuel. It was an official
> measurement.

before or after it was converted from steam to diesel-electric?

Alvin Bishop
Costa Mesa, CA
California Zephyr Railcar Charters

I believe Amtrak's reports show its trains averaging 2.25 gallons per mile across all diesel powered trains (1, 2 or 3 engines).