Coal slurry pipelines were determined to be potentially more economical and environmentally acceptable; more suitable than rail in rugged terrain, relatively inflation resistant (capital intensive), large consumers of water, low in environmental pollution (electric power, underground system), and with a proven technology (Black Mesa Pipeline) although not fully developed. Pneumatic pipelines were determined to be not technically proven for long distance, effective for short distance coal haulage (about 10 miles), i. e. potentially effective for transporting coal to central locations for shipment by other means. Rail transport of coal was determined to be most economical in areas where system exists, dependent on petroleum now, able to convert to electric power, susceptible to inflation (labor intensive), polluting (diesel exhaust, noise, dust), more hazardous to the general public (rail-roadway crossings), and able to increase efficiency through available technology (lightweight coal cars, more efficient locomotives, advanced design roadbed). Both rail and slurry pipelines will require large capital investments to increase capacity equal to future coal production. The relative merit of each system changes in relation to terrain and existing systems. To fully meet projected coal transportation needs, both systems will be needed. By 1985 coal slurry pipelines could carry 10% of western coal. Introduction of pipeline coal transport will not pose a threat to the survival of the western railroads. (ERA citation 03:027773)


    Access

    Access via TIB

    Check availability in my library


    Export, share and cite



    Title :

    Survey of Cost of Rail Versus New Technology for Long Distance Coal Transportation. Final Report


    Publication date :

    1976


    Size :

    69 pages


    Type of media :

    Report


    Type of material :

    No indication


    Language :

    English