[SGVLUG] [OT]Hybrids and trains (was fuel prices and the dollar)

[Mike Rubel]

> I've seen high claims and they are only true for ideal situations: a
> train running on level ground with no stops, starts, or slowing down
> for curves, all seats occupied, moderate speed, etc.  This
> "hypothetical" train is a few times more energy-efficient than the typical
> actual train.

I've found actual numbers, so let's get down to brass tacks.  :)

>From Amtrak's March 2008 Monthly Performance Report (the most recent
report online):

Number of train miles (in thousands): 3189
Passenger miles (in thousands): 503825

It follows that Amtrak trains carried, on average, 158 people.  (The load
factor was 52%, so the average number of seats per train was a little over
300.)

Meanwhile, the average Amtrak train consumed 2.3 gal/mi, or, put another
way, achieved about 0.43 mi/gal fuel economy, including all stops, starts,
and idling.

Thus the actual March 2008 fuel economy, under real conditions and with
actual passenger loading, was... 68.7 mi/gal per passenger.

Increasing the load factor, by making Amtrak more appealing (for example,
by being on time occasionally) would reasonably improve this figure above
100 mi/gal per passenger.

And this factors in lots of older and less-utilized trains and empty
seats.  I'm sure the figure for Northeast Corridor trains, or the Pacific
Surfliner that I take, would be much higher, even though they include an
extra mostly-empty cars for baggage and half a car for snacks and dining.
I'd also bet commuter trains like Metrolink, which are relatively light
and forgo luxuries like dining/snack and baggage cars, are better still. 
But Metrolink doesn't provide fuel economy data.

-Mike