OMES
Volume III-F
Special Study Repo
Energy Transportation/Distribution
in the Ohio River Basin
Michael Rieber
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
May 15, 1977
PHASE I
OHIO RIVER DASIN EKERGY STUDY
-------
OHIO RIVER BASIN ENERGY STUDY
Volume III-F
SPECIAL STUDY REPORT
ENERGY TRANSPORTATION/DISTRIBUTION IN
THE OHIO RIVER BASIN
Michael Rieber
University of Illinois at Urbana-Chaitipaign
May 15, 1977
Prepared for
Office of Energy, Minerals,
and Industry
Office of Research and
Development
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Washington, D.C.
Grant Number R804816-01-0
-------
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION I1I-F-1
2. BARGE .lii-F-3
2.1 INTRODUCTION. ...... .lll-F-3
2.2 BARGE TRAtFIC (COAL) JLII-F-3
2.3 ORBES REGION RIVER DESCRIPTIONS .II1-F-20
2.3.1 ILLINOIS VMATERwAY. III-F-20
2.3.2 OHIO RIVER. III-F-23
2.3.3 GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS III-F-26
2.3.4 KANAWHA RIVER III-F-26
2.3.5 KCNCWGAHEIA RIVER .III-F-26
2.3.6 ALLEGHENY RIVER III-F-3fe)
2.3.7 TENNESSEE RIVER .III-F-30
2.4 COAL BARGE OPERATION III-F-32
2.5 BARGE LINE-HAUL COSTS . III-F-34
2.6 BARGE ORIGIN-DESTINATION COSTS III-F-43
3. UNIT TRAINS-COAL SLURRY PIPELINES III-F-51
3.1 UNIT TRAINS III-F-51
3.1.1 INTRODUCTION .III-F-51
3.1.2 UNIT TRAIN COSTS III-F-52
3.2 COAL SLURRY PIPELINES .II1-F-60
3.2.1 INTRODUCTION III-F-60
3.2.2 COST ESTIMATE III-F-61
4. UNIT TRAIN-COAL SLURR1' PIPELINE
COS!1 COMPARISONS III-F-69
5. EXIRA HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION. III-F-73
5.1 INTRODUCTION .III-F-73
5.2 EHV COS1S III-F-73
III-F-i
-------
6. COAL GATttERINGAilSTRIBUTION - TRUCKS
AND CONVEYOR BELTS III-F-79
6.1 INTRObUCTlON. III-F-79
6.2 COST ANALYSES .III-F-80
6.2.1 CONVEYOR BELTS III-F-80
6.2.2 TRUCK TRANSPORT. . .III-F-84
111-F-ii
-------
TABLES
IIl-t-1. OR6ES REGION RIVER TRAFFIC: PERCENTAGE
OF lOi'AL TRAFFIC. . .'. . ... . III-F-4
1II-F-2. ILLINOIS WATERWAY LOCKS AND DAMS'. ...... .1II-F-22
II1-F-3. OHIO RIVER LuCKS AND DAMS. . .. ... . . . . .III-F-24
IIl-Fr4. GREEN AND BARREN RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS. . . . .III-F-27
II1-F-5. KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS AND DM'jS .III-F-28
I1I-F-6. MONONGAHELA RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS. III-F-29
III-F-7. ALLEGHENY RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS .III-F-31
III-F-8. TENNESSEE RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS. III-F-33
II1-F-9. HOURLY OWNERSHIP AND OPERATING COSTS,
TOWBOATS AND BARGES BY SIZE
AND WATERWAY .1II-F-36
III-F-10. ORIGIN-DESTINATION PAIRS-BARGE TRANSPORT. . . .III-F-44
III-F-11. RAIL/BARGE MIXED MODE COSTS,
SELECTED O.D. PAIRS. . . . . . . . ... . . .III-F-47
in-F-12. GENERALIZED uRBES RIVER COSTS . . . . . . . . .m-F-48
I1I-F-13. ESTIMATED RIVER CHARGES
FOR LOCKS AND DAMS. III-F-49
III-F-14. MODEL COST ASSUMPTIONS. .III-F-54
III-F-15. ITEMIZED CAPITAL COSTS OF BLACK MESA AND
WYOMING-ARKANSAS COAL SLURRY PIPELINES. . . .III-F-62
III-F-16. COAL TRANSPORT-IMPORT COSTS-ORIGIN-
DESTINATION PAIRS-UNIT COSTS, RAIL
AND COAL SLURRY III-F-70
III-F-17. EHV ROUTE SPECIFIC COSTS III-F-75
II1-F-18. COAL TRANSPORT COSTS,
TRUCKS Aid CONVEYOR BELTS III-F-81
III-F-19. 2k~i FACTORIAL DESIGN III-F-83
III-F-20. FUEL PRICE RELATIVES. ... . . .III-F-86
III-F-iii
-------
FIGURES
III-F-1. 1975 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC. . . . .... . .III-F-5
III-F-2. 1980 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC. . . . ... . . .III-F-8
III-F-3. 1990 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC . .II1-F-10
II1-F-4. GREEN RIVER COAL TRAFFIC. III-F-12
III-F-5. KANAWHA RIVER COAL TRAFFIC II1-F-13
I1I-F-6. ALLEGHENY RIVER COAL TRAFFIC. . .III-F-14
III-F-7. MONONGAHELA RIVER COAL TRAFFIC .III-F-15
III-F-8. ILLINOIS WATERWAY COAL TRAFFIC. . . ... . . .III-F-17
III-F-9. COS1S (S/TON), 750 MILES, AT VARYING
TONNAGES, TRAIN SPEEDS AND BOTTLENECKS. .. . .III-F-55
I1I-F-10. COST1 EFFECT OF BOTTLENECKS ($/TON) ,
25 MMTY, AT VARYING DISTANCES ....... .III-F-56
III-F-11. COST' EFFECT' OF A 10 PERCENT BOTTLENECK
($/TON) AT VARYING MILEAGES ....... . .III-F-57
III-F-12. BOTTLENECK EFFECTS ON $/TON AT VARYING
OPERATING CONDITIONS, 25MMTY, 250 MILES. . . III-F-58
III-F-13. BO1TLENECK EFFECTS GN $/'iON AT VARYING
OPERATING CONDITIONS, 25MMTY, 500 MILES. . . III-F-59
III-F-14. UNIT COST-COAL SLURRY PIPELINES
(jZf/T/MILE) . . . . .III-F-65
III-F-15. UNIT COSr-COAL SLURRY PIPELINES ($/'ION) . . . .III-F-66
III-F-16. ESTIMATED UNIT COST OF EHV TRANSMISSION . . . .III-F-77
III-F-iv
-------
1. mTRQDDCTICK
This study is based on, and is an extension of, previous research
contracted at the Center for Advanced Computation of the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [see references 1-9] . Transportation costs are
developed for the movement of fuels to and within the Ohio River Basin Energy
Study (ORBES) region. Primary emphasis is placed on the movement of coal as
the major fuel indigenous to the region. Similarly, major emphasis has been
placed on barge transport, both because the region was originally described in
terms of the Ohio River watershed, and because the early siting areas tended
to counties along the waterway. As in all of our previous work, engineering
and technological data form the bases for the costing and economic analyses.
The cost basis includes all necessary processing, loading and unloading
facilities needed for transport by each mode. Cost optimality and the ability
to increase capacity are emphasized.
Given the renewed emphasis on coal utilization, both in national energy
policy and in the ORBES region, comparative transport costs play a key role.
Mis-statement of these costs, and transport prices far in excess of costs,
yield results which not only imply a social loss, but help determine that coal
may be produced in the wrong location and moved by a cost inefficient mode.
Because of relative distance to the major markets, western coal, in spite of
its lower cost of production, did not become a major market factor until the
mandates of air pollution control became effective. Western coals tend to
have a higher ash and moisture content as well as a lower Btu and sulfur
content than eastern coals [10,11,12,13,14]. Because of the Btu content,
however, much of the western reserves may not meet EPA new source standards
Air pollution control regulations are essentially based on sulfur content
per million Btu's. Coal buyers are concerned not only with sulfur emissions
but with Btu's per ton, moisture content (which tends to derate facilities),
and with ash content (which results in removal costs). In terms of
transportation, both moisture and ash content represent unuseable tonnages.
Thus, the advantages of western coal are sulfur content and relative mining
costs. The disadvantages are ash, moisture, Btu content and relative
transport costs in terms of both cost per ton mile and cost per million Btu
(MMBtu) . If the advantages are not sufficiently great, washing, flue gas
aesulfurization and other, more remote, means of utilizing eastern coals such
as liquefaction, and fluidized bed combustion will reduce the market for
western coals. At a given level of energy demand, more of it will be supplied
from local eastern sources.
Transportation prices are a major component in determining the east-west
coal interface. The higher these prices, the less will be the advantage of
western coals. Indeed, for any given coal production costs, the higher are
transport costs the lower will be the demand for coal from any source. If the
costs are high relative to other fuels, the share of coal in total energy
demand will decline. If all fuel costs rise, the demand for coal and other
energy fuels will either fall or rise more slowly than the rate prior to the
cost increase.
III-F-1
-------
This analysis is cost based. The estimates presented are not existing
tariffs, rates or prices. Rather than start with prices to determine or
justify costs, in the manner of a rate hearing, an engineering and facility
basis is used to determine costs of operation to the supplier of the service.
There is a significant difference between costs and prices. To the recipient,
all that goes into the coal before purchase is a part of the price that must
be paid. These prices contain not only the costs of producing the service but
profits and elements of monopoly. Costs do not determine price. They do,
however, determine the level below which long run prices cannot go. For
evaluation purposes the advantages of using costs rather than prices are
threefold: (1) the treatment is consistent with the principles of resource
allocation, (2) where prices (tariffs) are significantly in excess of costs,
it is fair to ask why and, perhaps, to seek some form of correction and (3)
they represent a de minimus consistent basis on which to compare alternative
modes of transport. In competitive terms, for a given origin-destination (O-
D) pair, if one transport mode is less costly than its rival, the tariff or
price charged for the service will probably be similar for both modes. The
less costly mode need set a price only slightly below that of its higher cost
competitor. At the limit, however, the lower cost mode can, in the event of a
rate competition, set a price which its competitor cannot meet over the long-
run without absorbing unacceptable losses. Again, it is costs, rather than
prices, which are the determining factor.
III-F-2
-------
BARGE
2.1 INTRODUCTION"
This section is an adaptation and continuation of work previously
performed at the Center for Advanced Computation[1]. The previous analysis
has been extended to include representative Ohio River basin ports, and barge
transportation costs for coal in the ORBES region. The analysis is in terms
of costs, than prices.
2.2 BARGE TRAFFIC (COAL)
The distribution of waterway traffic in the ORBES region for 1974 is
found in Table 2.1. With the exception of the Illinois River, coal is by far
the largest single commodity transported. Other energy products, except on
the Green River, account for roughly an additional 8.5-15 percent of total
commodities transported. Some care must be used with Table 2.1; the row
totals are not additive, significant amounts of traffic on the tributary
rivers come from or flow to the Ohio River.
Energy fuels tend to be carried in dedicated and/or integrated tows,
sometimes because of the specialized nature of the barge, sometimes because of
the volumes and inherent cost savings. In terms of both costs and river
capacity, integrated full sized tows are low cost. Therefore, the size of the
"other commodities" traffic is significant. To the extent that this both
increases at the same rate as energy and/or traffic and continues to use
smaller than maximum size tows, river capacities will be reached sooner and
bottlenecks at locks and dams will occur earlier than would otherwise be the
case.
Current and expected coal traffic on the rivers of the ORBES region may
be found in Figures 2.1 through 2.8. These were derived from computer
printouts supplied by the Army Corps of Engineers and cover the period from
1975 through 1990 [16]. At least visually, shipments from tributary rivers
may be integrated into coal movements on the Ohio River with respect to both
tonnage and direction. Similarly, barge related imports and exports of coal
with respect to the ORBES region can be seen. Again, some care must be used
in an examination of the figures. Clearly the Corps used a generalized
expansion factor to determine future expectations. This need not be
consistent with future ORBES scenarios. Developments in coal technology,
shifts in the exogenous variables affecting coal utilization may alter the
shape of river traffic patterns. The patterns do, however, indicate possible
bottleneck areas for the future. As the figures are in terms of commodity
flow, it must be kept in mind that the returning, empty, tows are not
indicated.
III-F-3
-------
TABLE III-F-1. ORBES Region River Traffic: Percentaqe of Total Traffic
COAL & LIGNITE
GASOLINE
OTHER FUEL OIL1
SAND & GRAVEL
CRUDE PETROLEUM &
RESIDUAL OIL
CRUDE TAR OIL &
GAS PRODUCTS
CORN & SOYBEANS
OTHER COMMODITIES
TOTAL COMMODITIES
OHIO
48.3
7.3
3.7
12.35
2.9
0.87
1.6
22.98
139,258,864
ILLINOIS GREEN
71.1 98.3
4.1
3.1
5.6
6.7
0.68
23.9 0.45
38.82 1.25
40,978,987 15,639,721
KANAVvHA
45.6
4.8
5.2
12.8
1.7
0.08
-
29.82
12,781,026
ALLEGHENY2
47.6
2.8
3.1
29.5
2.5
-
-
14.5
5,532,052
KONONGAHELA
78.0
2.6
2.8
4.1
2.4
0.63
-
9.47
38,265,899
(in Tons 1974)
Other fuel oil consists of (1) jet fuel, (2) kerosene, and (3) distillate fuel oil.
2
Pittsburgh to East Brady
Source: U.S. Array, Corps of Engineers, viaterborne Commerce ot the United
States, Calendar Year 1974.
III-f-4
-------
FIGURE III-F-1
TONS (MILLION)
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
-
-
| 1 < SHIPMENT DIRECTION
I
- H
- J
-
-
950 900 850 800
i i i i
CARC152-152-, KI 4o I'l GREEN
bl 50 U RIVER
L-,
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
r~
MILES
750 700 650 6OO 550 5OO 450
i i i i i ii
ii it
N C MC MA CINCINNATI
LOUISVILLE
U
-
SHIPMENT DIRECTION
1975 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
III-F-5
-------
FIGURE III-F-1 (Continued)
TONS (MILLION)
^ J
-
« SHIPMENT DIRECTION
MILES
400 350 30O 250 2OO 150
E GR
G R B W H
KANAWHA
RIVER
HUNTINGTON
1
1 1
L
-,
L
100
r-J"1
50
1
-
~
-
-
-
0
P NC M °"^
ALQUIPPA* PlITT
^
r-T~^
1
-
-
SHIPMENT DIRECTION »>
-
-
-
-
_
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
1975 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
III-F-6
-------
FIGURE III-F-1 (Continued)
Ohio River Locks and Darns
Lock and Dam Name Abbreviation
53 53
52 52
51 51
50 50
Uniontown U
wewburgh tsi
Cannelton C
Me Alpine MC
Markland MA
Meldahl ME
Green up GR
Gallipolis G
Racine R
Belleville B
Willow Island W
Hannibal H
Pike Island P
New Cumberland NC
Montgomery M
DashieIds D
Emsworth E
III-F-7
-------
FIGURE III-F-2
TONS
II
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
II
12
13
14
-
-
m
(MILLION)
95O
~l_
9OO
i
'53 '52 '51
CAIRO <
.
-
-
-
-
-
4 SHIPMENT DIRECTION
r
85O 800
i i
50 ,',
PADUCAH GR
RP
U
1
I
MILES
75O 700 650 60O 550 500 450
i i i i i i i
"N ' ' '
EEN C "^LOUISVILLE CINCINNATI
(-
u
^LiiomirdiT rvir^^^»Ti/Mii *.
1980 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
III-F-8
-------
FIGURE III-F-2 (Continued)
TONS (MILLIC
-« SHIPMENT DIRECTION
n
I
n
pT
MILES
40O 35O 30O 25O 20O ISO
i i i t i i
i i
E GR
t ID I i ui
G K B W M 14
KANAWHA
RIVER
HUNTINGTON
1
100 5O
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
13 'P NC M °' '5
ALQUIPPA
PITT *
-
SHIPMENT DIRECTION »
-
-
1980 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
-
-
_
N)
II
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
III-F-9
-------
FIGURE III-F-3
TONS
14
13
12
II
10
9
e
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
e
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
;
-
-
(MILLION)
| 1
950 9OO
1 1
63
CAIRO
-
-
-
^
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
52 '51
PADUCA
< SHIPMENT DIRECTION
850 8OO
1 f
5°49U c
H F
u
r
i
MILES
750 TOO 650 600 550 500 45O
i i i i i i i
jREEN6- ^ M'C M'A ' CINCINNATI
IIVER LOUISVILLE
SHIPMENT DIRECTION »
u
1990 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
III-F-10
-------
FIGURE III-F-3 (Continued)
TONS (MILLION)
-
* SHIPMENT DIRECTION
n
400 35O 300
E GR
HUNT
G1
MILES
250 200 150
1 1 1
L,
100
J
r
50
-
KANAWHA'B w H'i4 13 P NC M13'*1
RIVER PITT
ALQUIPPA
1
\
n
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
SHIPMENT DIRECTION *
-
-
1990 OHIO RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
-
-
..
14
13
12
II
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
III-F-11
-------
TONS (MILLION)
13
12
II
10
9
8
H
V
t 6
10 5
4
3
2
1
0
-
-
0
20 40
4 SHIPMENT 01
MILES
60 80 100 120 140 160 0
RECTION
20 40
* 1
1 - NO. 1 L. 8 D.
II - NO. II L. a 0.
Ill- NO. Ill L. a D.
IV - NO. IV L. a 0.
1 - NO. 1 L.a 0., BAR
MILES
60 80 100 120 140 160 0
REN RIVER
20 49
-
'
'
'
MILES
60 80 iqo 20 40
FIGURE III-!
I
160
1 II III IV 1 1 II III IV 1 1 II III IV 1
,qqO (BARREN
-------
Ul
TONS (MiLLION)
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
H 4.0
7
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
1990
I960
SHIPMENT DIRECTION
W - WINFIELD L. 8 0.
M- MARMET L. 8 0.
L - LONDON L..8 D.
1975
0 10 20 W 40 50 60 M 80L 90.6 0 10 20 W 40 50 60 M 80L 90.6 0 10 20 W 40 50 60 M 80 L 906
MILES MILES MILES MILES MILES MILES
H
H
H
H
Ul
KANAWHA RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
-------
TONS (MILLION)
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
H 04
H
1
? 0.2
i i
*" 00
\s.\s
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1 0
1 .V
1.2
- -
.
.
-
0
10
2
MILES
20 30 40 50 60 70
3456 78 9
1990
0
« SHIPMENT DIRECTION
2-L.aO. 2
3 - L. 8 D. 3
4 - L. a D. 4
5 - L. a D. 5
6 - L.a 0. 6
10
2
7-L. 80. 7
8- L.a D. 8
9 - L.a 0.9
MILES
20 30 40 50 60 70
1 1 II 1 ' "
3456789
1980
0
.
' ' '
10
I
2
SHIPMENT DIRECTION »
MILES
20 30 40 50 60 70
345678 9
.
1975
-
-
"
-
. 3
cj
H
H
H
H
79 ' 1
f £ I
ALLEGHENY RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
-------
FIGURE III-F-7
MONONGAHELA RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
TONS (MILLION) 7 - NO. '
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
II
IO
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
PITT 0
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
8 - NO.
i 15 - NO.
H
CL/E - CLA
*
MILES 1
0 20 40 60 8O 1001 I2O
i i i i ill
1 i ' ' i A
2 3 '4 5 I
CL/E M/
I9£
6 7 8 M H 0 15
\
10
0 - OPEKISKA L. a D.
H - HILDEBRAND L. ft D.
M - MORGANTOWN L. ft D.
MA - MAXWELL L. 8 D.
2 - NO. 2 L. 6 D.
3 - NO. 3 L. a D.
4 - NO. 4 L. a D.
5 - NO. 5 L. 8 D.
6 - NO. 6 L. 8 D.
a D.
SHIPMENT DIRECTION
MILES
0 2O 4O . 60 80
120
PITT
5 | 6 78MHOI5
MA
1975
SHIPMENT DIRECTION
III-F-15
-------
FIGURE III-F-7 (Continued)
I99O MONONGAHELA RIVER COAL TRAFFIC
TONS (MILLION)
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
II
IO
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
PITT 0
-
-
'
-
-
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
_2
* SHIPMENT DIRECTION
I L
MILES
20 40 60 80
ipjj 120
[-5 J4 '5J 6 78 MHO 15
CL/E
SHIPMENT DIRECTION
III-F-16
-------
FIGURE III-F-8
TONS (MILLION)
3.2
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
C
SA
(
LG - LA GRANGE L. a 0.
P - PEORIA L. 8 0.
SR - STARVED ROCK L. a D.
M - MARSEILLES L. S 0.
D -DRESDEN ISLAND L. 8 D.
8 - BRANDEN RD. L. 8 D.
L - LOCKPORT L. 8 D.
O'B - T.J. 08RIEN L. 8 0.
.
-
-
-
1
^ 3M
iriYltN 1 UINC.I*I1UN
O'B L, ,8 D M SR P L
NCSHIP '3°° 2°° '0°
:ANAL
G
GRAFTON
SHIPMENT DIRECTION
ILLINOIS WATERWAY 1975 COAL TRAFFIC
III-F-17
-------
FIGURE III-F-8 (Continued)
TONS (MILLION)
3.6
3.4
3.2
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.4
22
2.O
1:8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
O.6
O.4
0.2
00
S
* SHIPMENT DIRECTION
.
-
-
-
-
;
-
.
1
O'B L, ,B D M SR P LG
CHICAGO '30O 200
AN. SHIP
CANAL
100
O GRAFTON
SHIPMENT DIRECTION
ILLINOIS WATERWAY 1980 COAL TRAFFIC
III-F-18
-------
FIGURE III-F-8 (Continued)
TONS (MILLION)
4.4
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.6
34
3.2
3.0
28
2.6
2.4
2.2
20
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
(
S
« SHIPMENT DIRECTION
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
1
O'B L, ,8 0 M SR P L6
:HICAGO 300 200 100
AN. SHIP
CANAL
0GRAFTON
SHIPMENT DIRECTION
ILLINOIS WATERWAY 1990 COAL TRAFFIC
III-F-19
-------
River capacity has been estimated for the Ohio River in terms of coal
traffic alone 11]. The limiting assumption was made that all other traffic
remains constant. Given the existing locks and dams, increasing the number of
maximum sized tows capable of transiting the entire river using only double
lockages (15 barges) so that up to 70 million tons per year (MMTY) may be
carried (120 additional tows) is feasible. An increase of river traffic from
current levels to 120MMTY, involving 2343 additional tows is not possible.
When all of the proposed locks and dams are completed the maximum tow size
(with double lockages) will be 30 barges. Increasing river coal traffic to
70MMTY will require only 60 more tows; to 120MMTY, 1171 more tows will be
involved. The latter is possible. However> to the extent that other river
traffic increases, and/or uses small sized tows, the feasibility of greatly
increased river traffic is suitably diminished. It would appear that rail or
other transport modes for the movement of coal will be a major factor in the
region served by the Ohio River.
2.3 ORBES REGION RIVER DESCRIPTIONS
Costing of barge transportation depends heavily on the characteristics of
the river. Therefore a brief set of river descriptions has been developed.
Those for the Ohio, Illinois and Tennessee Rivers are taken from reference
[1], the remainder have been developed for this study.
2.3.1 ILLINOIS WATERVvAY
The Illinois River is formed by the confluence of the Kankakee and
Des Plaines Rivers. It flows southwesterly and enters the Mississippi River
at Grafton, Illinois, about 38 miles above St. Louis. The Illinois Waterway
comprises the Illinois River from its mouth at Graf ton 273 miles to the
confluence of the Kankakee and Des Plaines Rivers; 18.1 miles on the Des
Plaines River to Lockport and 34.5 miles on the Chicago Sanitary and Ship
Canal and the South Branch of the Chicago River to Lake Street, Chicago.
From a point 12.4 miles above Lockport, the waterway also comprises 23.8 miles
of the Calumet-Sag Channel and Little Calumet and Calumet Rivers to turning
basin 5, near the entrance to Lake Calumet; and the Grand Calumet River from
the junction, 9 miles to 141st Street and .4.2 miles to Clark Street, Gary,
Indiana. The total mileage of the entire waterway is approximately 353.6
miles [17,p.30-6].
Channel Dimension:
Channel depth is maintained at a minimum of 9 feet at all times.
From Lockport to Chicago Harbor the minimum depth is approximately 17 feet.
The channel is 300' wide from Grafton to Lockport; 160' wide from Lockport to
Chicago Harbor and 60' wide from Lockport to Calumet Harbor [17,p.30-6].
III-F-20
-------
oiavigation Season:
The navigation season can be regarded as year round although
traffic can experience some delays in January and February when parts of the
river nay ice up especially during extremely cold weather.
Locks:
Table 2.2 shows the existing locks on the Illinois Waterway
together with their estimated original cost [17,p.30-37].
Navigation Constraints:
Navigation on the waterway is limited by the size of the existing
locks which limit the size of tows to 15 barges for a tow that requires double
lockage. The 1962 Authorization Bill which provided for the construction of
auxiliary locks at LaGrange, Peoria, Starved Rock, Marseilles, Dresden Island,
Brandon Road and Lockport, and which would have reduced congestion to a large
degree, has not yet been implemented. Construction has not begun on any of
these locks. The new locks were to have cost $629.8 million in 1973 dollars
[18,p.1-12]. However, detailed engineering costs estimated by the Corps of
Engineers, suggest that the first two alone will cost almost one-half of the
amount quoted for all seven [18,p.6-2fa]. Inflating the 1973 figures to 1976
levels and adjusting on the basis of the two detailed studies suggests that
projected costs may be as much as $1.2 billion [17,p.30-6]. Another limiting
factor is the many bridges on the waterway. In 1973, limiting horizontal
clearances were as follows: 118 feet at a bridge in the reach from Grafton to
Utica, Illinois; 110 feet at bridges between Utica and Lockport and the Sag
Junction; 80 feet at mile 293.1 between Lockport and the Sag Junction; 80 feet
at a bridge between the Sag Junction and Lake Michigan via the Chicago
Sanitary Canal and Chicago River; and 67.0 feet at a bridge between the Sag
Junction and turning basin 5 in the Calumet River [17,p.30-6]. The narrow
channel upstream of Lockport is a major capacity constraint for shipments to
and from Chicago.
On the average, towboats are of the 2,600 horsepower class and
tows average about eight barges. They average four in the Chicago area due to
congestion and horizontal restrictions [19,p.IV-15]. Maximum tow size is 15
barges. According to the Corps of Engineers, the average tow speed is about
4.1 mph loaded, 4.8 mph empty and 4.0 mph at all times in the Chicago area.
II1-F-21
-------
TABLE III-F-2. Illinois Waterway Locks and Dams
Miles
Lock
LaGrange
Aux.
Peoria
Aux.
Starved .Rock
Aux.
Marseilles
Aux.
Dresden Is.
Aux.
Brandon Rd.
Aux.
Lockport
Aux.
Above
Mouth
80.2
80.2
157.7
157.7
231.0
231.0
244.6
244.6
271.5
271.5
286.6
286.0
291.1
291.1
Width of
Chamber
(ft)
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
116
110
110
110
110
110
Chamber
Length
(ft)
600
1200
600
1200
600
1200
600
1200
600
1200
600
1200
600
1200
Year
Completed
1939
1939
1933
1933
1933
1933
1933
Estimated
Federal Cost
2,774,592
55,328,000
3,381,030
55,882,000
885,315
57,569,000
57,569,000
1,853,725
2,503,376
46,056,000
2,031,683
53,634,000
133,608
83,759,000
T.J. O'Brien 326.5
110
1000
6,954,700
Source: [17,p.30-37]
Note: Construction on none of the auxiliary locks has been started.
III-F-22
-------
2.3.2 OHIO RIVER
The Ohio River is formed by the junction of the Allegheny and
wonogahela Rivers at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and flows generally
southwesterly for 981 miles to join the Mississippi River near Cairo, Illinois
117,p. 22-1].
Channel depth is maintained at 9 feet for the entire length.
Channel width varies from 100 feet to 600 feet [17,p.22-1].
Navigation Season:
Navigation is possible year-round.
Locks:
Ihe 1909 Act provided for a lock with usable dimensions of 110' by
600' at each of the dams located on the river with an auxiliary lock Sb' by
360' at the Emsworth, Dashields, Montgomery, and McAlpine locks and dams and
with a 110' by 360' auxiliary lock at Galipolis. Modifications to the 1909
Act provided for fixed dams with movable crests and with two locks (110' by
1,200' and 110' by 600') at New Cumberland, Pike Island, Hannibal, Willow
Island, Belleville, Racine, Greenup, Meldahl, Markland, Cannelton, Newburgh,
uniontown, and Mound City; two locks 110' by 1200' at Smithland; 100' by 1200'
temporary locks in addition to the existing locks at locks and dams 52 and 53;
and reconstruction to provide a 110' by 1200' lock in addition to existing
locks [17, p.22-1]. Table 2.3 is a listing of the locks and their status at
the end of 1976 [17,p.22-8,9, as adjusted]. Navigation Constraints:
On stretches where the 110' by 1200' locks exist, tow size is
limited to the size that can double lock (i.e., thirty 195' by 35' barges).
In the lower reaches of the Ohio between 776 miles below Pittsburgh to Cairo,
where construction of 110' by 1200' locks intended to replace smaller locks
has been delayed, tow size is still limited to the size that can double lock a
110' by 600' lock, that is, fifteen 195' by 35' barges. According the Corps
of Engineers, average tow speed on the river is 4.8 mph loaded and 6.2 mph
empty. Low water occasionally delays tows or causes them to be loaded to less
than full capacity. Anticipated future industrial and other developments in
the Ohio River drainage basin may put pressure of water use for navigation.
Recycling water for lockages, by pumping, has been suggested, but it is
costly.
III-F-23
-------
TftBLE III-F-3. Ohio River Locks and Dams
Lock
Emsworth
Dashields
Montgomery
New Cumberland
Pike Island
Hannibal
Mo. 15
No. 16
toil low Island
No. 17
Belleville
Racine
Gallipolis
Green up
Meldahl
Markland
Miles
Below
Pittsburgh
6.2
13.3
31.7
54.4
84.3
126.4
129.1
146.5
161.7
167.5
203.9
237.5
279.2
341.0
436.2
531.5
Vvidth of
Chambers
(ft)
110
56
110
56
110
56
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
Length
(ft)
600
360
600
360
600
360
1200
600
1200
600
1200
600
600
600
1200
600
600
1200
600
1200
600
600
360
1200
600
1200
600
1200
600
Year
Completed
1921
1929
1936
1959
1963
1976
1916
1917
-
-------
TABLE III-F-3.
Ohio River Locks ana Dams
(Continued)
Lock
McAlpine
Cannelton
LNO. 46
iSiewburgh
NO. 47
MO. 46
wo. 49
Uniontown
wo. 50
No. 51
Smith land
NO. 52
No. 53
Mound City
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Miles
Below
Width Of
Pittsburqh Chambers
(it)
604.4
720.7
757.3
776.1
111.1
809.6
845.0
846.0
876.8
903.1
918.5
938. y
962.6
974.2
94% completed in
96% completed in
96% completed in
94% completed in
57% completed in
construction not
Source: [17, p. 2 2-8 ,9] and
Note: Lock No. 53; the teir
110
110
56
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
1976
1976
1976
1976
1976
yet started in 1973.
Length
(it)
12130
600
360
1200
600
600
1200
600
600
600
600
1200
600
600
600
1200
600
600
1200
600
1200
600
Year
Completed
1%1
- (2)
1928
- (3)
1928
1922
1928
- (4)
1928
1929
- (5)
1928
1969
1929
- (6)
Estimated
Federal Cost
(S)
45,602,951
97,300,000
3,129,026
104,500,000
4,415,526
3,062,710
3,325,964
98,100,000
3,751,762
4,370,566
238,000,000
4,461,747
10,197,518
5,410,668
1,539,470
adjusted by later data.
porary 110' x 1200*
lock was
48% complete
in 1976. It
due for completion in early 1978 at an estimated
As the named locks are completed, the preceeding
federal cost of $37.1 million.
numbered locks are eliminated.
III-F-25
-------
2.3.3 GIEEW AND BARREN RIVERS
The Green River flows northwesterly for 370 miles from Casey
County, Kentucky to the Ohio River, at a point about b miles above Evansville,
Indiana. The Barren River empties into the Green River one-half mile above
Lock 4 (149.5 miles above the mouth of the Green River). There are six locks
and dams en the Green River and one on the Barren River. These provide a
navigable depth of 9' and a width of 200" from the Ohio River to mile 103 on
the Green River and a navigable depth of 5.5' from there to mile 197.8 on the
Green River and from the mouth of Barren River to Bowling Green, Kentucky
(mile 30.1 on the Barren River). The navigation season is year-round [17].
The locks on the Green and Barren Rivers are shown in Table 2.4.
Navigation Constraints:
Commercial barge traffic is limited to the 103 miles from the
mouth of the Green River to about 3.2 miles upstream of Paradise, Kentucky.
Above this point, the 5.5' depth and the small lock size eliminates any
possibility of major commercial traffic. According to the Corps of Engineers
the maximum tow size is limited to four 195' barges, although locks 1 and 2
both allow double lockages of 12 195' barges [17].
2.3.4 KANAWHA RIVER
The river is formed by the junction of the New and Gauley Rivers,
a short distance above Kanawha Falls, West Virginia. It flows northwesterly
for 97 miles and enpties into the Ohio River at Point Pleasant, West Virginia.
The three dams on the Kanawha River have twin locks with dimensions of 56' by
360*. These, together with the Gallipolis locks and dams, provide a 91
navigable depth from the mouth to a point 90.57 miles upstream [17]. The
locks on the Kanawha River are shown in Table 2.5.
Navigation Constraints:
With a channel width of 300' to 450' and a depth of 9 feet, tow
sizes are limited by the locks. According to the Corps of Engineers, maximum
tow size is 9 195' barges. Currently, according to a study by the Electric
Power Research Institute, tows are experiencing a delay of six hours or more
at Winfield Lock [21].
2.3.5 MONCNGAHELA RIVER
one mile south of Fairmont, West Virginia, and flows northerly for
12b.7 miles to join the Allegheny River at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. From
Pittsburgh to Lock and Dam 4, the navigable depth is 9' with a channel width
of 4fc«0'. Between Lock and Dam 4 and Opekiska Lock and Dam, the navigable
depth is 9' with a channel width of 250'. Navigation is year-round [21]. The
locks on the Monogahela River are shown in Table 2.6.
III-F-26
-------
TABLE III-F-4. Green and Barren River Locks and Dams
Lock Miles
ana from
Dam Mouth of River
Vvidth
(feet)
Length
(feet)
Completed
GREEN RIVER
Cost
(§)
1
2
3
4
5
b
9.1
63.1
108.5
149.0
168.1
181.7
84.0
84.0
35.8
35.8
56.0
36.0
600.0
600.0
137 . 5
136.0
360.0
145.0
1956
1956
1936
1939
1934
1905
5,101,978
4,799,271
121 , 377
125,718
1,020,868
168,415
15.0
56.0
BARREN RIVER
360.0 1934
871,565
Source: [17]
III-F-27
-------
TABLE III-F-5. Kanawha River Locks and Dams
Lock Mies
and from
Dam Mouth of River foidth Length
(feet) (feet)
Svinfield 31.7 56 360
56 366
Marmet 72.5 56 360
56 36k)
London 83.3 56 366
56 360
Source: [17]
III-F-28
-------
TABLE III-F-6. Moncngahela River Locks and Dams
Lock
and
Dam
. 2
3
4
Maxwell
7
8
Morgan town
Hildebrand
Opekiska
Mies
t. rom
Mouth of River
11.2
23.8
41.5
61.2
85.0
90.8
102.0
108.0
115.4
Vvidth
(ft)
56
110
56
56
84
56
56
84
84
84
Length
(ft)
360
720
360
720
360
720
720
360
360
600
600
600
Year
Completed
1953
1907
1932
1964
1925
1925
1950
1959
1964
Cost
($)
17,872,212
1,681,538
17,373,767
30,110,889
2,639,804
36,908,495
8,778,000
12,506,829
25,179,622
Source: [17]
III-F-29
-------
Navigation Constraints:
The tow size is limited by both the size of the locks and the
width of the river. According to the Corps of Engineers, between Pittsburgh
and Lock and Dam 4, tow size is limited to 15 195' barges. Between Lock and
Dam 4 and the Opekiska Lock and Dam, tow size is limited to .four 195' barges.
Currently, according to a study by the Electric Power Research Institute, tows
are experiencing delays of six hours or more at Lock and Dam 3 [21].
2.3.6 ALLEGHENY RIVER
The river flows for about 325 miles from northern Pennsylvania to
Pittsburgh, where it joins the Monongahela River to form the Ohio River. The
river is navigable for 72 miles from Pittsburgh to East Brady, Pennsylvania,
with a depth of 9" and a channel width of about 300'. Navigation is possible
year-round [17]. The locks on the Allegheny River are shown in Table 2.7.
Navigation Constraints:
The capacity of this river is limited by the capacity of the
locks. These limit tow size to four 195' barges. Between Pittsburgh and Lock
2, tows of up to 12 195' barges can be operated [17].
2.3.7 TENNESSEE RIVER
The river extends from its navigation head at Knoxville,
Tennessee, for 650 miles to its mouth on the Ohio River near Paducah,
Kentucky. The river is made navigable by a series of nine locks and one on
the tributary Clinch River. With the exception of the lock at Wheeler dam and
the Wilson locks and dams, all the other locks and dams were constructed by
the Tennessee Valley Authority [17,p.23-4], Channel Dimensions:
The entire length of the river is maintained at a channel depth of
9 feet and a width of 300 feet [20,p.10].
Navigation Season:
The entire length is open for navigation year-round.
Locks:
i
There are nine locks and dams on the river and one, Melton Hill,
on the tributary Clinch River near Knoxville, Tennessee. All of the locks
except one are 110' by 600' or smaller. Table 2.8 is a list of the locks.
III-F-30
-------
TABLE III-F-7. Allegheny River Locks and Dams
iock
and
Dam
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Miles
from
Mouth of River
6.7
14.5
24.2
30.4
36.3
45.7
52.6
62.2
V-idth
(ft)
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
Length
(ft)
360
360
36fc
360
360
360
360
360
Year
Coirpleted
1934
1934
1927
1927
1928
1930
. 1931
1938
Cost
(*)
1,763,485
1,875,665
1,707,690
1,940,537
1,523,959
1,460,008
2,848,920
2,510,373
Source: [17]
III-F-31
-------
TABLE III-F-8. Tennessee River Locks and Dams
Lock
Kentucky
Pickwick
Landing
Wilson
Wheeler
Guntersville
Nickajack
Chickamauga
Watts Bar
Fort Loudon
Melton Hill
Miles
Above
Mouth
22.4
206.7
259.4
274.9
349.0
424.7
471.0
529.9
602.3
23.1
Width of
Chamber
(ft)
110
110
60
110
60
110
60
110
110
110
60
60
60
75
Chamber
Length
(ft)
600
600
292
300
600
400
600
360
600
600
800
360
360
360
400
Year
Completed
1942
1937
1927
1959
1934
1963
1937
1965
1967
1939
1941
1943
1963
(Clinch River)
Source: [17,p.23-15]
III-F-32
-------
Navigation Constraints:
The major constraint on this river is the size of the locks. From
Chattanooga to Paducah, all of the locks are 110' by 600' with the exception
of the main lock at Nickajack which is 110' by 800'. As a result, the maximum
tow size is limited to fifteen 195' barges for double lockage. Between
Chattanooga and Knoxville, the locks are 60' by 360' which limits tow size to
two 195' barges or seven 175' barges for double lockage. Because of the
limitation on the size of the tows, it is not economic to use towboats
exceeding 2000 horsepower beyond Chattanooga. According to the Corps of
Engineers, the average tow speed on this river is 5.6 inph loaded and 7.0 mph
empty.
2.4 COAL BARGE OPERATION
, Open hopper barges are commonly used for the transportation of coal.
There has been very little standardization of size but, because of the
restrictions imposed: by the dimensions of existing lock facilities and channel
conditions on various waterways, some uniformity in barge design has been
established. The capacity of a barge is limited by the channel depth of the
individual waterway. For example a 35' by 195' barge has an empty draft of
1 1/2 feet and requires an additional foot of draft for each 200 net tons of
cargo carried.
The push-towing method is used for all line-haul operations on the inland
waterway system. A towboat may push one barge or any multiple of barges
ranging upwards of 45 barges when the tow is operating in open water on the
lower Mississippi. For passage through locks, barges are grouped four wide
and three long or three wide and three or four long, depending on the size of
the barges and the size of the locks to be transited. For maximum efficiency,
tows are arranged as much as possible as dedicated tows.
In order to obtain greater towing performance, barges are now designed to
be assembled into integrated tows having an underwater shape equivalent to a
single vessel. Integrated tows are generally more efficient for the carriage
of large tonnages, on a continuing basis, over a long distance to a single
destination. The fully integrated tow concept has the disadvantage that it is
of little value unless it is in dedicated service where the barge position
never changes.
In a dedicated tow, the towboat remains with the barges during loading,
unloading, and round trip transit. The towboat is generally owned by the
shipper or contracted for exclusive use over a stipulated period of time. The
advantages of this form of service are the ability to utilize an integrated
towing operation, fast turn around time, insurance; and reduced leasing cost
or ownership cost of the barges per ton of shipment handled.
III-F-33
-------
The size and shape of a tow, the size of the towboat, the cargo capacity
of a barge, and the capacity of a waterway are largely determined by the
physical dimensions of the waterway as well as by the locks located on them.
For exanple a 110' by 600' lock allows a group of nine 35' by 195' barges to
pass through in one lockage operation and a tow of 15 barges and a towboat to
pass through using a double lockage operation. Lock chambers of adequate size
to accommodate different types of tows are important to the economics of barge
transportation for two reasons. First, the size of the locks determines the
capacity of a particular section of a waterway. Second, smaller lock chambers
require the breakup of large tows. This breakup and reassembly of tows
requires additional time which imposes an additional cost on barge
transportation.
2.5 BARGE LINE-HAUL COSTS
Based on the analysis developed in reference [1], line haul costs for the
rivers of the ORBES region have been estimated. These are based on hourly
ownership and operating costs for tows by horsepower and barges by size which
are specific for each waterway. In turn, these were based on annual costs for
towboats of various classes and open hopper barges of various sizes. The
annual costs also serve as a facility description [l^Tables 4.13-4.14].
Because of the concern with large volume coal transportation, and large
capacity coal conversion facilities, only open hopper barges and integrated-
dedicated tows were considered. To obtain hourly operating and ownership
costs for towboats and barges operating on the various rivers, the yearly
costs were divided by the length of the navigation season for each waterway.
Where the navigation season is year-round, towboats and barges are assumed to
operate for 355 days allowing 10 days for maintenance and repairs. All craft
are assumed to operate on a 24 hour basis. The only towboats considered for
each waterway were those that could operate on that waterway. Table 2.9 shows
the hourly ownership and operating costs of towboats and barges for each
waterway examined in this study.
Line-haul costs can be determined based on the following equations:
Total barge cost per net ton delivered = (hourly ownership-operating cost of
barge) x (Total number of hours used per trip)/(Total net tons delivered
per barge trip)
Total towboat cost per net ton delivered = (Hourly ownership-operating cost
of towboat) x (Total number of hours per trip)/(Total net tons delivered
per towboat trip)
The sum of these two equations is the estimated line-haul cost for a tow
between two specific points. Because dedicated integrated towing was assumed
in all cases for the movement of coal, the back haul to the point of origin
was assumed to be enpty.
III-F-34
-------
TABLE III-F-9. Hourly Ownership and Operating Costs,
Towboars and Barges by Size and Waterway
1) Illinois Waterway
Navigation Season: approximately 325 days taking into account
delays tows encountered in January and February.
Approximately 7800 hours
Ownership and operating cost for towboats ($/hour)'
800 hp.
$51.28
2000 hp.
$100
1200 hp.
$68.82
2200 hp.
$105.76
1400 hp.
$74.64
2400 hp.
$111.53
1600 hp.
$84.40
3200 hp.
$142.55
1800 hp.
$90.38
4800 hp.
$191.53
Ownership and operating cost for open hopper barges ($/hour)
1000 NT 1500 NT 3000 NT
$1.87 $2.81 $5.62
II1-F-35
-------
TABLE III-F-9. Hourly Ownership and Operating Costs,
Towboats and Barges by Size 'and Waterway
(Continued)
2) Ohio River
Navigation Season: 355 days or 8520 hours
Ownership and operating costs for towboats ($/hour):
800 hp. 1200 hp. 1400 hp. 1600 hp. 1800 hp.
$46.94 $63 $68.33 $77.26 $82.74
2000 hp. 2200 hp. 2400 hp. 3200 hp. 4800 hp.
$91.54 $96.83 $102.1 $130.51 $175.34
5600 hp. 6000 hp. 6500 hp.
$194.4 $206.86 $218.63
Ownership and operating costs for open hopper barges ($/hour):
1000 NT 1500 NT 3000 NT
$1.71 $2.57 $5.15
III-F-36
-------
TABLE III-F-9. Hourly Ownership and Operating Costs,
Towboats and Barges by Size and Waterway
(Continued)
3) Alleghaney, Barren, Green, Kanawha and Moncngahela Rivers
Navigation Season: 355 days or 8520 hours
Ownership and operating costs for towboats ($/hour):
800 hp.
$46.94
1600 hp.
$77.26
2200 hp.
$96.83
1200 hp.
$63
1800 hp.
$82.74
2400 hp.
$102.1
1400 hp.
$68.33
2000 hp.
$91.54
3200 hp.
$130.51
Ownership and operating costs for open hopper barges ($/hour)
1000 NT 1500 NT
$1.71 $2.57
III-F-37
-------
The time considered in determining the total number of hours used per
trip includes the amount of time needed to cover a specific distance between
two points which is determined by distance and average tow speed including
average lock delay. It also includes terminal time. Total net tons per barge
trip depends on the constraints imposed by each river. From this we obtain an
estimate of the line-haul cost for the movement of a coal floatilla from point
A to point B within the waterway system examined.
Because barges do not normally operate directly from the mine to the
consumer, transloading facilities must be included in the barge movement.
Based on the previous analysis [1], the sum of the loading and unloading costs
is assessed at 48.7 cents/ton. Because barge traffic does not pay right-of-
way costs or for the operation and maintenance of the waterways, a rough
estimate of these costs has been made. These estimates have been segregated
from the ownership and operating costs. Finally, it must be kept in mind that
barge transport almost never starts at, or close to, a mine. Therefore,
gathering costs by truck, rail, or some other mode, must be added. If the
coal consuming facility is not en the river, distribution costs must be added
as well.
Waterway costs include navigational aids, channel maintenance and
improvements, and operation and maintenance costs associated with locks and
dams. The cost analysis does not include the remaining depreciable value of
locks and dams or other capital improvements on facilities already in
existence. The river system has been taken as is; only current operation and
maintenance costs have been included. This is consistent with the view that
sunk costs are dead costs. However, it is consistent with this view that
future locks and dams, those currently under construction, replacements,
extensions, and improvements should be considered on the basis of their
remaining depreciable value. User charges for the Ohio River were estimated
at 0.01 cents/tcn/mile [1]. This compared with determinations of 0.041
cents/ton/mile made by the Association of American Railroads based on 1970-74
data and the Department of Transportation based on 1968 data. For the
Illinois River, user charges were estimated at 0.052 cents/ton/mile compared
with 0.057 and 0.06 cents/ton/mile by the two agencies, respectively.
The costing of a coal tow does not depend upon recondite knowledge
although little is available on the subject. To show the methodology, two
origin-destination pairs have been chosen, (1) Parkersberg to Paducah and (2)
Charleston to Paducah. Both entail a one way trip of 717 miles. The cost
differences lie in the complexity of the trips.
Both Parkersberg and Paducah are located on the Ohio River. Based on the
river data, the average speed of a loaded barge tow is 4.8 mph; for an
unloaded tow it is 6.2 mph. Tows are made up .of 15 barges with a total
capacity of 22,500 net tons.
The time required for the 15 barge (1951) tow to cover 717 miles is then:
III-F-38
-------
loaded 717/4.8 = 149.4 hrs.
unloaded 717/6.2 = 115.6 hrs.
The ownership and operating costs for the 4,800 hp towboat are estimated at:
loaded (full fuel rate) = $175.34/hr
unloaded (half fuel rate) = $156.74/hr
terminal (no fuel rate) = $138.14/hr
The ownership and operating costs per 195' barge are $2.57/hr. Therefore,
ownership and operating costs for a 15 barge tow is expressed by:
loaded = {$175.34(149.4 hrs) + (15 x $2.57(149.4 hrs))}/22,500 tons
unloaded = $31,955.20/22500 tons = $1.42/ton
empty = {$156.74 (115.6 hrs) + (15 x $2.57(115.6 hrs))J/22500 tons
empty = $22,575.50/22500 tons = $1.00/ton
The loading rate is assumed to be 4,000 tons/hr. The unloading rate is
estimated at 2,000 tons/hr. The time required to make up (assemble) and break
up (disassemble) a tow is expressed by, respectively:
Therefore, total terminal time is loading + unloading + T + T . This is
found by:
terminal time = (22500/4000) + (22500/2000)
+ {0.21 + 0.44(15)} hrs
+ {0.34 + 0.2(15)} hrs
terminal time = 5.625 hrs + 11.25 hrs + 6.81 hrs
+ 3.34 hrs = 27.025 hrs.
The ownership and operating costs for the tow while in terminal (at zero fuel
consumption) is:
cost = {$138.14(27.025 hrs)
+(15 x 2.57(27.025 hrs))1/22500 tons
cost = $4,775/05/22,500 tons = $0.21/ton
III-F-39
-------
Therefore, the total ownership and operating costs for an integrated-dedicated
15 barge tow carrying 22,500 tons of ooal from Parkersberg to Paducah with an
empty return is:
cost = ($1.42 + $1.00 + $0.21)/ton = $2.63/ton
To this may be added terminal costs of 48 cents/ton and an estimate of river
use charges of 13 cents/ton.
Charleston is located on the Kanawha river. Because tow sizes on that
river are limited to four 195' barges per tow, it is necessary to use three 4
barge tows and one 3 barge tow in order to move 22,500 tons of coal from
Charleston to Gallipolis where a 15 barge non-integrated tow can be made up.
Because the tows are nan-integrated, on estimated 10 percent loss in
performance efficiency is assessed compared to the fully integrated tow. The
form of the costing analyses is similar to that used above.
Charleston to Gallipolis is 60 miles. The capacity of the 4 barge tow is
6,000 tons, that of the 3 barge tow is 4,500 tons. Average speeds, including
the performance penal ity are upbound 3.15 mph and downbound 3.6 mph.
Therefore, the loaded time for the 60 miles is 60/3.15 or 19.05 hours, while
the return is 60/3.6 or 16.7 hours. '
Ownership and operating costs for each 1200 hp towboat are:
loaded = $58.04/hr
empty = $53.24/hr
terminal = $.48.44/hr
The ownership and operating costs for each 195' barge is $2.23/hr. Therefore,
the loaded costs for each 4 barge tow is:
($58.04(19.05 hrs) + 4($2.23)(19.05 hrs))/6,000 tons
= $0.21/ton
The empty costs are:
($53.24(16.7 hrs) + 4(2.23)(16.7 hrs))/6,000 tons = $0.17/ton
Using the loading, unloading make up and break up times determined above, but
for a 4 barge tow, results in a total terminal time of 7.61 hours. The
ownership and operating costs while in terminal are therefore:
III-F-40
-------
($48.44(7.61 hrs)+4($2.23)(7.61 hrs))/6,000 = $0.07/ton
Total ownership and operating costs for each 4 barge dedicated - nonintegrated
tow from Charleston to Gallipolis is:
($0.21+$0.17+$0.07)ton = $0.45/ton
The three barge tow between Charleston and Gallipolis is treated
similarly. Total capacity is 4,500 tons. The ownership and operating costs
while in transit are expressed by:
loaded = ($58.04(19.05 hrs) + 3($2.23)(19.05 hrs))/4500 tons
loaded = $1233.10/4500 tons = $0.27/ton
enpty = ($53.24(16.7 hrs) + 3($2.23)(16.7 hrs))/4500 tons
empty = $0.22/ton
Ownership and operating costs while in terminal depend on time and costs.
These are determined as:
terminal time = (4500 tons/4000 t/hr)
+ (4500 tons/2000 t/hr)
+ (0.34 + 0.2(3))
+ (0.21 + 0.44(3))
terminal time = 5.845 hrs
terminal costs = ($48.44(5.845 hrs)
+ 3($2.23)(5.845 hrs))/4500 tons
terminal costs = $322.20/4500 tons = $0.07/ton
Therefore, the total ownership and operating costs for the three barge tow are
the sum of the costs listed above, or $0.56/ton.
The make-up of the 15 barge tow at Gallipolis requires the three 4 barge
tows plus the three barge tow. Total costs are the sum of the above or:
3($0.45)+$0.56=$1.9I/ton
III-F-41
-------
To this may be added an estimate of river use costs on the Kanawha river of
?0.076/ton to yield a total of $2.21/ton.
From Gallipolis to Paducah is 657 river miles. The capacity of the 15
barge dedicated non-integrated tow is 22,500 tons. A 10 percent performance
penalty is assessed because the tow is not integrated so that the average
speed loaded is (4.8 mph) (.9) or 4.32 mph while the unloaded speed is (6.2
mph)(.9) or 5.58 mph. Travel time for the 657 miles is, therefore, 152.1
hours loaded and 117.74 hours empty.
The ownership and operating costs for the tow (4800 hp) is $173.34/hr
loaded, $156.74/hr empty, and $138.14/hr while in terminal. For each barge
the cost is $2.57/hr. Therefore, operating and ownership costs while in
transit are:
loaded = ($173.34(152.1 hrs)
+ 15($2.57)(152.1 hrs))/22,500 tons
loaded = $1.45/ton
empty = ($156.74(117.74 hrs)
+ 15($2.57)(117.74 hrs))/22,500 tons
empty = $1.02/ton
Terminal costs, excluding those accounted for on the Kanawha River, and based
on the formula, are 6.81 hours for make-up and 3.34 hours for break-up or a
total of 10.15 hours. Therefore, terminal costs are:
($138.14(10.15 hrs) + 15($2.57)(10.15 hrs))/22,500 tons = $0.08/ton
To this may be added river use charges for the Ohio River of $0.13/ton.
Total trip costs from Charleston to Paducah are the sum of the above or
$1.91 + $2.55 = $4.46/tcn. If river use costs are added, the total cost
becomes:
$4.46/tcn + $0.13/tcn + 4($0.076/ton) = $4.89/ton
To either total should be added the transloading cost of $0.48/ton.
III-F-42
-------
2.6 BARGE ORIGIN - DESTINATION COSTS
Because the ORBES study is not site specific with respect to energy
conversion facilities, a unique analysis of origin-destination pair costs is
not possible. Instead, a number of 0-D pairs have been costed representing
both coal imports into the region and barge movements within the area.
Intermediate points may be estimated by interpolation. To the barge movements
must be added the gathering costs or the costs, by rail or other, from the
primary point of origin to the barge terminal. Distribution costs, if any, to
the facility must also be added. A set of O-D pairs are presented in Table
2.10. The points of origin are possible rail-barge transloading points. It
should be noted that the difference between the ownership and operating costs
and the total cost is accounted for by the inclusion of river use charges.
Table 2.11 indicates some cost ranges for rail-barge mixed mode coal transport
assuming unit trains to the transloading facility and point of primary origin
in the northern great plains. A more generalized analysis of the ORBES river
costs can be found in Table 2.12. Table 2.13 provides the data base for an
estimate of possible river use charges attributable to coal barge traffic [1].
III-F-43
-------
TABLE III-F-10. Origin-Destination Pairs - Barge Transport
Destination
A. From Minneapolis - St. Paul
Load 25MMTY 70MMTY Cost Cost/Tow (?)
(Tons) # of # of Ownership Total
Tows Tows & Cost
Operating
Cost
Route
Miles
Paducah
Cincinnati
Louisville
Pittsburgh
22500
22500
22500
22500
1111
1111
1111
1111
3111
3111
3111
3111
4.90
7.37
6.48
9.30
5.31
7.78
6.89
9.71
898
1365
1234
1834
Integrated dedicated tows - 15 195' barges.
B. From Dubuque, Iowa
Destination
Load
(Tons)
22500
22500
22500
22500
25MMTY
# of
Tows
1111
1111
nil
mi
70MMTY
1 of
Tows
3111
3111
3111
3111
Cost Cost/Tow ($) Route
Ownership Total
& Cost
Operating
Cost
3.66 4.07
5.98 6.39
5.33 5.74
8.33 8.74
Miles
624
1091
960
1560
Paducah
Cincinnati
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Fifteen 195' barges dedicated integrated tow.
Destination
C. From St. Louis, Missouri
Load 25MMTY 70MMTY Cost Cost/Tow (?) Route
(Ions) # of # of Ownership Total Miles
Tows Tows & Cost
Operating
Cost
Paducah
Cincinnati
Louisville
Pittsburgh
45000
22500
22500
22500
556
1111
1111
.1111
1556
3111
3111
3111
1.89
3.67
3.11
5.71
2.30
4.08
3.52
6.12
225
692
561
1161
III-F-44
-------
TABLE III-F-10.
urigin-Destination Pairs - Barge Transport
(Continued)
D. From Pittsburgh, Pa.
Destination
Paducah
Cincinnati
Louisville
Chicago
Destination
Paducah
Louisville
Cincinnati
Chicago
Load
(Tons)
22500
22500
22500
22500
Load
(Tons)
22500
22500
22500
22500
25MMTY
# Of
Tows
1111
1111
1111
1111
70MMTY
# Of
Tows
3111
3111,
3111
3111
Cost Cost/Tow ($)
Ownership Total
& Cost
Operating
Cost
3.85 3.98
2.29 2.41
2.73 2.86
6.21 6.52
Route
Miles
936
469
600
1526
E. From Gallipolis, Ohio
25MMTY
# Of
Tows
1111
1111
1111
1111
70MMTY
# of
Tows
3111
3111
3111
3111
Cost Cost/Tow ($)
Ownership Total
& Cost
Operating
Cost
2.91 ' 3.04
2.26 2.39
1.20 1.33
5.27 5.58
Route
Miles
657
321
190
1247
All tows start at west end of Gallipolis.
Gallipolis L&D not yet replaced.
Destination
Paducah
Cincinnati
Louisville
Chicago
Load
(Tons)
22500
45000
45000
22500
F. From Markland, Indiana
25MMTY
# of
Tows
1111
556
556
1111
70MMTY
# Of
Tows
3111
1556
1556
3111
Cost Cost/Tow ($)
Ownership Total
& Cost
Operating
Cost
2.06 2.19
0.91 1.04
0.92 1.05
4.42 4.73
Route
Miles
404.5
62.5
68.5
994
III-F-45
-------
TABLE III-F-10. Origin-Destination Pairs - Barge Transport
(Continued)
Destination
Pittsburg ,
Gallipolis^
Cincinnati
G. From Parkersburg, West Virginia
Load 25MMTY 70MMTY Cost Cost/Tow ($} Route
(Tons) # of # of Ownership Total Miles
Tows Tows & Cost
Operating
Cost
45000 556 1556 $0.79/ton $0.92/ton
45000 556 1556 $0.42/ton $0.55/ton
22500 1111 3111 $0.85/tcn $1.60/ton
219
60
250
30 barges tow possible to east end of Gallipolis Lock.
Presence of Gallipolis Lock requires the use of 15 barge tow.
III-F-46
-------
TABLE III-F-11. Rail/Barge Mixed Mode Costs, Selected O.D Paris
Origin Gillette and Colstrip
To
Paducah
Cincinnati
Louisville
Pittsburgh
Transload
at
Minn - St. Paul
Dubuque
St. Louis
Minn - St. Paul
Dubuque
St. Louis
Minn - St. Paul
Dubuque
St. Louis
Minn - St. Paul
Dubuque
St. Louis
Total Cost
($/Ton)
10.81-10.64
10.46-11.83
10.16-12.54
13.28-13.11
12.78-14.15
11.94-14.32
12.39-12.22
12.13-13.50
11.38-13.76
15.21-15.04
15.13-16.50
13.98-16.36
III-F-47
-------
TKBLE III-F-11. Generalized ORBES RIVER COSTS
River
GREEN
KANAWHA
MONOGAHELA
ALLEGHENY
OHIO1
Mileage
103
90.57
129
72
981
Capacity of
Tow
(Tons)
22,500
6,000
6,000
6,000
22,500
Ownership
& Operating
(Cents/t on/mile)
0.49
0.66
0.53
0.55
0.20^)
River Use
Charge
0.063
0.0863
0.053
0.243
0.156
OHIO"
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
981
45,000
0 14
0.097
(3)
0.156
(5)
Tow size restricted by non-completion of the 1200' locks on
the lower Ohio. Fifteen barge tow with maximum load of 22,500 net
tons. Excludes loading and unloading time costs, 21 cents/ton.
All locks 1200V, 30 barge tow with maximum load of 45,000 net
tons. Excludes loading and unloading time costs, 29 cents/ton.
Loaded, add 21 cents for loading and unloading time.
Empty, add 29 cents for loading and unloading time.
Depreciation of new locks is excluded. If included, the cost
would be higher.
Transloading facility costs of 48 cents/ton should be added
to all estimates.
No coal traffic on Kentucky River.
III-F-48
-------
TABLE III-F-13. Sstimated River on Charges for Locks and Dams
GREEN
KANAWHA
MONOGAHELA
ALLEGHENY
0 & M
1970-74
Average
(S)
852,000
1,294,000
2,271,000
990,000
1976
Basis
($)
971,280
971.280
2,588,940
971,280
Coal
Traffic
98.3
15,377,705
(ton coal)
45.6
(5,833,136
tons)
78
(29,853,158
tons)
74.6
(2,634,269)
0 & M
Cost
Attributed
to Coal
($)
954,768
442,904
2,019,373
462,329
0 & M
CostUJ
(jzf/t on/mile)
0.06
0.084
0.05
0.24
(1)
To this may be added 0.0026 cents/ton/mile for navigational
aid (Coast Guard) based on the average for all freight on all
inland waterways.
III-F-49
-------
3. UNIT TRAINS-GOAL SLURRY PIPELINES
Unit trains and coal slurry pipelines have been considered together
because they are almost directly competitive. Congressional and legislative
actions concerning eminent domain and water rights have already taken place
with more decisions expected before the end of 1977. The issues have been
clouded by numerous irrelevant discussions. The material presented here is
related only to costs. In Section 3, unit train and coal slurry pipeline
costs and cost structures are described. In Section 4, an interrelated cost
comparison is made of these two modes. Background material for these Sections
was developed previously [1,4].
3.1 UNIT TRAINS
3.1.1 INTRODUCTION
A unit train is a single purpose dedicated, integrated train for
hauling one commodity, in this case coal. It is composed of special purpose
cars which haul continuously from mine to consumer. Unit train success has
almost always been dependant upon close cooperation between a mining company,
a railroad, and an electric utility. Typically, long term contracts,
sometimes of ten years or more, are made so that large capital investments for
equipment can be justified. This includes the unit train itself as well as
coal handling facilities at both ends of the haul. The long term contracts,
however, do not extend to unit train rates; these must be set annually. Unit
train ownership may lie with the railroad or the electric utility. Mining
companies have been more hesitant to assume ownership. However, train crews
and most maintenance has been provided by the railroads.
The long term contracts associated with unit train use provide a
scheduled outlet for a coal mine which may lower costs. The lower transport
cost may be sufficient to encourage increased coal usage, for the railroads,
unit trains provide better equipment and and plant utilization than do other
rail modes. Coal carrying costs are significantly lower than those incurred
in multiple car movements attached to general freight even if the total volume
is the same over time. For the coal burning utilities, they lower fuel
expenditures and establish a stable fuel supply. Scheduled receipts also
lower inventory costs. Lowering transport costs, by increasing the net-back
at the mine, increases economically recoverable coal reserves; mines may go
deeper, recovery percentages may increase and the time before mine closure may
be effectively prolonged.
According to the Association of American Railroads 14J, based on a
sample of 191 unit coal trains operating on July 1, 1975, about 60 percent of
these trains operated under contracts of 10 years or longer. A minimum annual
tonnage requirement was specified for 80 percent of the trains. These trains
carried about 168Mi-iT₯ of coal or about 73 billion ton miles. The average load
was 877,000 T/Y/train; the highest about 5.bMMTY. Average yearly train
mileage was estimated at 90,000 miles/year with 235,000 the maximum. The
III-f-51
-------
average round trip distance was estimated at 1226 miles with a maximum of 2944
miles. An average of 86 cars made up a train with a maximum of .131. Most of
the cars were designed for 100 ton capacity. The average train payload was
estimated to be 8502 tons with a maximum of .13,100 tons. Excluding an unknown
number of spare cars to provide maintenance time, the 191 trains required
16,392 cars. Of these, 68 percent were open top hopper cars while 32 percent
were high side gondolas. Hopper cars were 68 percent railroad and 32 percent
owned or leased by others. The gondola cars were 39 percent railroad and 61
percent owned or leased by others. The railroad owned hopper and gondola cars
were, respectively, 93 and .100 percent in dedicated service; all of the other
leased and owned cars were in dedicated service. Only 19 percent of the
trains had dedicated power. Maximum operating speeds ranged from .25-60 mph
empty and 10-60 mph loaded.
.Cost reductions due to unit trains depend upon the concentrated
efficient use of equipment. This depends upon the use of high rate loading
and unloading facilities, provision for coal storage facilities, and a high
level of right-of-way readiness and maintenance due to the increased loads and
speeds. These are factored into the costs. The offset of load factor and
efficiency are due to reduced idle time, rate of travel (fewer trains), the
lack of intermediate stops and the elimination of both yard and train make-up
time and crews. Efficiency increases may be seen in train mileages of about
800 miles per day rather than the 60 miles per day estimate common for general
freight. The development of self-clearing rapid discharge open hopper cars
and the rotary dumping of flat bottom gondola cars has reduced unloading times
by an order of magnitude.
Given the 30 mph loaded 60 mph empty rate of travel, a number of
single track with spaced siding configurations exist which allow inter-train
unit train spacing of down to one hour. This amounts to 240,000 T/D loaded in
one direction (65.76MMT/274 day year) per line. The figure is reduced
depending on the involvement of other freight. Double tracking, especially
with crossovers, eliminates tonnage restrictions within the orders of
magnitude considered for the OJRBES region. Given multiple routes and routing
alternatives, there is no question of the ability of the rails to handle both
anticipated coal and general freight traffic.
As anticipated traffic increases, track and equipment upgrading
and acquisition can proceed in an optimal manner [1,4]. while the
requirements for steels and equipment are high, given a forecast of needs to
1985 and beyond, there appears to be no shortage of industrial capacity, here
and abroad, to meet requirements.
3.1.2 .UNIT IKAIiSI -COSTS
Specific cost parameters and estimating procedures have been
previously detailed [1-9]. Capital costs include rerouting to by-pass
population centers, additional bridges and trestles and protected road
crossings. An average of .15 percent of new railroad (track and roadbed) is
used on each route to cover this. The new trackage includes provision tor a
-------
toot right-ot-way. The rerouting reduces tratfic hazards and noise
pollution, western points of origin have included a .100 mile upgraded
extension ot existing roads into the mining area. As unit trains operate from
the mine to the consumer, distributional costs are eliminated. Provision is
made tor mine site gathering systems, however. The connection between rail
and barge mixed mode transport was made in the previous section.
The upgrading of track and roadbed has been costed on the
assumption of high density, nign speed (30 mpn loaded, 60 mph empty), unit
train operation. The benefits ot the upgrading are shared by all rail traffic
but the costs have been assessed against the unit train operation. As a
result, the cost estimates are biased upward. It is anticipated that these
costs, particularly land values and rehabilitation, are higher in the ORBES
region than in western locations.
operating costs have been specified earlier [1,4]. For purposes
of this analysis a 10 percent bottleneck condition has been assessed. This is
equivalent to a 10 mph speed over 10 percent of the route mileage. It results
in the use of more trains and higher costs than a zero bottleneck condition.
Model cost assumptions are presented in Table 3.1. Fuel costs for unit train
movements have been based on industry train simulators.
In the following figures, it is assumed that the trackage is 85
percent up-graded, train speeds are 30 or 50 mph loaded and 60 mph empty, coal
tratfic is 25MMTY unless otherwise noted, and 15 percent addition of new track
is included for rerouting around cities and towns. The bottleneck assumption
is based on the percentage ot route distance traveled at 10 mph. Finally,
capacity is expressed in terms ot 274 day operation equalling 100 percent
capacity. Over-capacity involves increasing the number ot days and/or
increasing, by leasing, more equipment at a premium [1]. The graphs can be
used tor estimating unit train costs in the ORbES region. As specific mine to
coal conversion facility o-L> pairs have not yet been specified, the regional
costing must be general.
.1II-F-53
-------
TABLE III-F-14. Model Cost Assumptions
Gathering at Mines
Right of way
New Road
Upgrading
Locomotive Cost
Car Cost
Loading & Maintenance
Facilities
Average Rate Base
Debt Retirement
federal Tax
Depreciation
Fuel Costs
Fuel Costs
Labor Costs
Supply Costs
Locomotive Horsepower
Steel required
Employment
Related Industries
Ties
New Road
$ 663,400/MMTY (125 ten trucks)
$ :38,900/mile
$2,000,00kJ/mile
$ 288,900/mile
$ . 500,000/locomotive
$ ,30,000/car
15% of locomotive & car cost
50% total capital costs
12.4% average rate base
28% debt retirement
1/30 total capital costs
+ 1/90 locomotive and car costs
#2 diesel -fuel: 32£/gallon, $12.60/bbl
30-60 mph
$40,000/mile
$1.775/train-mile
$.5287/train-mile
3500
1) Cars
2) Locomotives
3) Rail
$16.,000/man-yr
$l,397,000/man-yr
1) Concrete 900 tons/mile $50/tie
(includes fasteners and hardware)
2) wood 54,400 ft/mile $24/tie (includes hardware)
3) Continuous Roadbed (Concrete) $2 to 3x10 /mile
50-60 mph
$76,000/mile
$2.178/train-mile
$.4280/train-mile
31.5 tons/car
159.6 tons/locomotive
465 tons/mile (double track)
a) Ballast
(includes labor)
b) Ties
c) Rails
d) Labor
e) Signaling
$1,500,000/mile
("5000 ten/mile)
$ 153,600/mile (6400 ties/mile, $24/tie)
$ 162,600/mile (132 Ib rail,
.465 tons/mile, §350/tcn)
$ .178,800/mile
$ 5,000/mile
III-F-54
-------
FIGURE III-F-9. .Costs ($/'l'°n),'75lo'Miles, at varying Tonnages,
Train Speeds and Bottlenecks
o
o
o
cv
o
ci
O
in
O
IT
CV
O
- 50-60 mph
30-60 mph
20% Bottleneck
10% Bottleneck
0% Bottleneck
4-
-4-
-4-
Cb.O iX!,0 40.0 6CJ.O
TONNflGE- MMTY (750 MI)
ao.c
m-t-55
-------
FIGURE III-F-10. Cost Etfect of Bottlenecks
Varying Distances
, .25MMT*, at
50-60 mph
30-60 mph
20% Bottleneck
10% Bottleneck
0% Bottleneck
GISTftNCEi-MILES (2SMMTYJ. (XIC2 ]
15.0
III-F-56
-------
FIGURE III-F-11. Cost Effect ot a :lki Percent Bottleneck (VTon)
at Varying Mileages and Tonnage
5 MMTY
10 MMTY
25 MMTY
70 MMTY
LlJSTQNCF.-MiLEIS (7OX B.-NECK) (X102 )
1S.O
-------
FIOJRE III-F-12. Bottleneck Effects en $/Ton at Varying Operating
Conditions, .25iyMTY, .250 Miles
8
to
ro
vn
vq-
V)
D
in
o
CJ
50-60 mph
30-60 mph
fcl<6.0 60.Q ^0.0 l6o7c
X CflPfiCITY ( 250 MI, 25 MMTT)
20% Bottleneck
10% Bottleneck
0% Bottleneck
I1I-F-58
-------
FIGURE III-F-13. bottleneck Effects on $/Ton at Varying Operating
Conditions, 25MMT*, 5laid Miles
o
o>
o
CO
o
ru
50-60 mph
30-60 mph
20% Bottleneck
10% Bottleneck
0% Bottleneck
. , 1 1
ilO. C 60.0 30.0 100.0 12U.O
'/. CECITY ( SOD MJ, as MMTYI
-------
3.2 .COAL 3DJRRY
3.2.1 INTROOJCTIUM
The analysis of coal slurry pipelines is Dased on references
[1,4,5 and 8]. In a coal slurry pipeline operation, the coal is mined and
then sent by truck or conveyor to the slurrification plant. There, the coal
is screened to remove oversize chunks. Subsequently, it is sent to a bin
where it is crushed to a fine powder of sufficiently small particle size
(about .200 mesh) so that it can be suspended in water. The powdered coal is
blown into a mixer where it is combined with a quantity of water until a
desired consistency is obtained. The slurry is then stored in tanks or
delivered directly to an electric power plant by pipeline. On arrival, the
coal slurry goes through a centrifuge. There, the coal particles are
separated from most of the water leaving 25 to 28 percent total moisture.
Further dewatering by thermal drying (using very high temperatures), more
filtration, and direct evaporation in open air storage tanks may be necessary.
Slurry pipelines are not particularly route specific. Terrain is
relatively unimportant in terms of pumping distance, but the terrain affects
the cost of construction, the pipeline operating pressure, and the pumping
power required; greater distance may be tolerated to avoid extremes in the
other parameters. For a .25MMTY ETSI type pipeline, the often quoted water
requirement of 15,000 acre feet/year includes only the steady state operation.
Flushing the entire pipeline would require a short term increase in the
pumping rate to 28,800 acre feet/year. ,If the pipelines do not return the
water to the origin after dewatering at the receiving end, the availability
and the cost of water can be a problem, western water costs may be as high as
§3.50/1000 gallons. Evaporation of the slurry water at the receiving end via
power plant use can release as much as 1.7 tons/day of ooal fines to the
atmosphere for a shipment of .25MMTY. As yet, there is no solution to this
problem. Returning the water by pumping it back to the mine area after adding
the make-up water means a significant added cost of pipeing and pumping but
solves the problem of water availability.
The lack of flexibility in economic shipping capacity is an
important feature of the slurry pipeline. A line designed for 3.5 mph flow
velocity cannot be safely operated at a velocity below 3 mph without plugging.
Operation at 5 mph requires a design providing for double the horsepower, peak
pressure, and wear. Even if operating economy is sacrificed, operating
flexibility remains in a narrow range. The lower limit of approximately 65
percent load capacity would contain 38 percent coal in the slurry.
For long distance shipments, comparable to those , which might be
used to import western coal into the ORBES region, individual pipeline
capacity would be in the range of .2kH25MMTY. Cost economies can be achieved
by even larger pipelines but, given any reliability problems and the lack of
consumers of sufficient size to consume the throughput, larger lines do not
appear likely. Even a 26MMTY pipeline would supply 4-5 very large power
plants. If they are not located in, say, a power park, pipeline branching or
II1-F-60
-------
mixed mode distribution is necessary.
It is unlikely that barge or rail can be successfully used tor
distributing slurry line tnroughput even witn some intermediate dewatering.
It tne particle sized slurry is too dry, dusting will occur. ,It it is wet, a
weight penalty is incurred which, when added to the necessary surge storage
ana transloading cost, would make the operation uneconomic.
Branching a slurry pipeline was originally suggested tor the
proposed Houston Natural Gas slurry pipeline. This solution is, however,
limited by the need to avoid line burst pressures on the one hand, and
suboperational throughput rates en the other. Analysis has shown [1J that tor
any single branch the throughput rate, for an ETSI type line designed for
branching, cannot exceed -14 percent or +23 percent of design flow rate.
Additional branches create multiple problems, while the difficulties decrease
as the branch size decreases, as each terminus must have its own dewatering
facility, system transport costs may rise unacceptably. Tapping into a line
(i.e., one not designed for branching) is even more difficult unless the tap
is very small.
f'or relatively short distances, as in the uKctS region, pipelines
of the Black Mesa size (SiWTif) may be useful. These would be consistent with
a given O-D pair. It, however, larger pipelines are anticipated, in addition
to tne orancning problem at the distribution end, the problem exists at the
gathering end. The througnput flexibility is in the same range as that tor
distributional brancning. The difficulty arises because of the relatively
smaller mine sizes in the east. .In some locations, even bMM:f₯ from a single
mine may be difficult to achieve. Additional gathering costs may have to be
added to the pipeline system costs. The ability to tap into an existing
pipeline tor gathering purposes is practically nil 13] .
3.2.2 CUbT t£.TlMA'f£
Table 3.2 provides a facility description for costing coal slurry
pipelines. Figures 3.6 and 3.7 may be used tor estimating pipeline costs to
and within the ORBES region. The lower water cost estimate may be used for
pipelines within the region, the higher estimate for western imports.
tilectric costs for pipeline pumping can be purchased locally or transmitted
from the power plant using the slurry. A power cost of less than 1.5
cents/kwh cannot be expected; 2.5 cents /kwh is a more likely cost under
current conditions.
For a 25Mi»iTx shipment, each station would have to nave a lined
holding pond tor dumping and a water pump and water reservoir for flushing.
Tnese are safeguards against paver failures, accidents and plugging. A review
of tne literature and the problems may be found in reference [4] . t'or dumping
the hold-up in each l&u mile segment, a holding pond of one acre should have a
depth of .1140 feet. Recovery by dredging is possible, but reinjecting into the
pipeline is not simple and the cost is not included. The minimum land area
for a pumping station is 4 acres. The ETSI estimate of 3.66MM ft tor a
-------
TARTJ3 III-F-15.
Itemized Capital Costs of Black Mesa and
wyoming-ArKansas Coal Slurry Pipelines
Black Mesa Vvyoming-Arkansas
273 miles 1,040.miles
:Prejparatj.cn 5 x 10_ tons/y_r 25 x^ Ifc^ tons/yr
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
a.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26 (a)
27.
28 (a)
Truck hopper
Initial crushing and cleaning
Stocking conveyor
Raw storage
Active storage
Dozers and scrapers
Conveyor transfer tower
Conveyor to bunkers
Bunkers and feeders
Operating plant
Vibrator
Rod mill
Vibrator
Slurry holding tank
Slurry test loop
Vvells and water pumps
water working storage
hater reservoir and pipe
water pipeing and rust
inhibitor injectors
1OTAL : Preparation
Mainline
Collecting and branch lines
Coal in pipeline
0.05
1.0
0.2
..1.0...
0.68
1.0
0.6
0.2
..0.3...
0.15
0.15
1.0
0.2
..0.5...
1.5
0.15
0.6
0.05
..0.05..
1.25
0.35
0.3
0.1
..5.0...
.17.88..
45.6
.45.83.,
0.25
5.0
1.0
5.0
3.4
5.0
3.0
1.0
1.5
0.75
0.75
5.0
1.0
, 2.5
7.5
0.75
.3.0
0,25
, .0.25
6.25
1.75
1.5
0.5
25.0
26 (b) 700
190
OQA A
»** \jJt *
III-F-62
-------
TABLE III-F-15.
Itemized Capital Costs of Black Mesa and
Wyoming-Arkansas Coal Slurry Pipelines
(Continued)
Black Mesa Wyoming-Arkansas
273 miles 1,040 miles
Separation 5_ x_ 10_ tons/yr 25_ :s 1&_ tons/yr
29(a) . Permanent storage 4.8 29(b) 13.0
30. Holding tanks 2.1 Ik).5
31. Dewatering centrifuges 4.0 .Id
32. Pulverizers to.y . 4.5
33. Flocculating tanks 0.7 3.5
34. Pipeing fa.15 0.75
TOTAL: Separation 12.65 50.25
TOTAL CAPITAL COST 76.36 1034.0
1. Five 125-ton trucks for transport from the mine @ $30,000 each.
2. Truck hopper @ $50,000.
3. Two 28 ft by 14 ft diameter rotary breakers, $>l,000/ton/hr x 660 ton/hr
x 1.5 [4a].
4. Movable stacking conveyor, $800/ft x 250 ft [4b].
5. 200,000 tons coal @ $5/ton inactive storage.
6. 35,000 tons coal $ $5/ton raw storage + feeder and site development @
$500,000 [4c,5].
7. 38,000 tons coal @ $5/tcn active storage + rotary plow, structure above,
and site development @ $810,000 [4c,5].
8. Four bulldozers or scrapers @ $150,000.
9. 400 ft by 30 in. conveyor, $250/ft equipment x 400 ft x 1.28 labor and
material/material x 1.6 [4d,6a].
10. Transfer tower with 300 ton bin; coal sampled and weighed @ $300,000.
11. 300 ft x 30 in. conveyor, $250/ft equipment x 300 ft x 1.28 labor and
material/materials x 1.6 [4d,6a].
12. Three 590 ton bunkers with feeders @ $50,000.
13. Operating plant $ $1,000,000.
14. Three 6 ft x 10 ft twindeck vibrators, 3 x $l,100/ft2 x f>0°'^ ft^ x
1.32 installation x 2.4 stainless stell x 1.5 [6a].
III-F-63
-------
TABLE II-F-15.
Itemized Capital Costs of Black Mesa and
Wyoming-Arkansas Coal Slurry Pipelines
(Continued)
15. Three impactors, 290 tons/hr, 3 x $85/ton/hr x 290 tons/hr x 1.57
installation x 1.5 [ba].
16. Three 18 ft x 13 ft I.D. rod mills, 1,500 hp, 150 tons of rods, 3(150
tons x 2,000 Ib x $l/lb + $20,000/motor x 8.5 installation) [7,8]. 2
17. Three 3.5 ft x 4 ft wedge wire screen vibrator, 3 x $900/ft x
14B*5vft x 1.32 installation x 2.4 stainless steel x 3 wedge wire x
1.5 [6a].
18. Four 650,000 gallon tanks with 10 ft 125 hp agitator, 4($60,000/tank x
1.75 inflation + $350/hp x 125w'b hp x 1.62 installation x 1.5
inflaction) + $100,000 slurry tower.
19. 206 ft test loop, 4,200 pgm @ $50,000.
20. 100 acres @ $500/acre.
21. Five 3,400 ft wells and pumps @ $250,000 [9],
22. 150 ft diameter x 48 ft high, 6.3 x 10° gal water storage tank, $200,000
x 1.75 [6b].
23. 3 x 10 gal plastic lined tank and 14 in., two-mile pipe, $150,000 x
1.75 + $40,000 pipe [6b].
24. Pipeing and rust inhibitor injectors @ $100,000.
25. Three 1,750 hp, 330 tons/hr coal equivalent slurry pumps, 1,000 psi
discharge, 3 x $1,33k),00k) + $1,000,000 accessories [6c].
2ba. $7,120,000 pumping x 5 x 10 tons/9 x 10b tons x 1.65 inflation +
$37,590,000 mainline x 273 miles/344 miles x 5 x 10b/9 x 10b tens x 2.1
inflation - $5,000,000 first pumping station §10].
26b. ($13,000,000 +$3,400,000) x 5 pipeline valuation in Niobrara and Goshen
Counties, Wyoming, x 1,040 miles/106 miles x 0.91 deflation -
$25,000,000, first pumping station [9].
27. ($20,800,000 + 3,600,000) x 5 collecting pipeline valuation in Campbell
and Converse Counties, Wyoming, x 2 destination supply lines as well as
collecting lines x 0.91 deflation [9J.
28a. 46,000 tons coal in pipe @ $5/ton.
28b. 875,000 tons coal in pipe @ $5/ton.
29a. Two 36 x 10 gal storage tanks in a ground plastic.-!ined, 90 tons coal
each, 2($200,000 for 6 x 10 gal tank item 22 x 6 size factor x 1.75
inflation + 90,000 tons coal x $10/ton) [6b,8].
29b. 1 x 10° tons coal hauled by train and stored dry @ $10/ton +$3,000,000
for facilities.
30. Three 6 x 10 gal holding tanks, 15,500 tons of coal, 3($200,000/tank x
1.75 inflation + $200,000 agitator and accessories + 15,500 tons x
$10/ton) [6b,8].
31. Twenty centrifuges, 20 x $35,000/centrifuge x 3.1 process plant cost
ratio x 1.9 [8,lib].
32. Ten pulverizers, $520/lb x (660 tons/hr x 2,000 lb/ton)0.35 x 1.59
installation x 1.8 [6a].
33. Two 200 ft I.D. tanks @ $350,000 [6bJ.
34. Pipeing @ $150,000.
III-F-64
-------
FIGURE III-F-14
1.8 -
1.7 -
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.3
UJ
1.2
£>'
UJ
o
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
RETURN
WATER
$2.68/1000 gal.
$ I.07/I000gal.
250 500
750 1000
MILES
1250 1500 1750
UNIT COST - COAL SLURRY PIPELINES
III-F-65
-------
7
20
18
16
14
12
10
RETURN
WATER
$2.68/1000 gal.
$1.0771000 gal.
*
H
U1
200300400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
MILES
UNIT COST - COAL SLURRY PIPELINES
-------
dumping pond at each station is correct, but a holding pond of ten times
this capacity might be needed at the delivery point. Flushing water
amounting to 27.4MM gallons is needed. rience, the water reservoir
should be 3.bbMM ft . Considerable storage capacity is needed at the
terminal site for containment of the underflow for storage of the
dewatered cake, and for hold up to insure against reliability problems.
Surge storage capacity will also be needed to contain the continuous
slurry flow during such times that the power plant is not operating.
The purchase or lease of the right of way for buried lines, except
at stations, is similar to oil and gas pipelines. Major towns must be
bypassed, river crossings, ravines and gorges may require the use of
cable suspended pipe. Cold weather can pose a problem on the exposed
portion of the pipe. No existing slurry pipeline passes through a hard
freeze area.
Hl-F-b?
-------
III-F-68
-------
4. UNIT TRAIN - GOAL SLURRY PIPELINE COST COMPARISONS
Table 4.1 shows the import costs of coal from the northern great
plains to selected points in the ORBES region.
The pipeline costs are based upon a fully utilized, 38" pipeline,
25MMTY operation, with water costs estimated at over $2.50/1,000
gallons. If the utilization rate decreases by 13 percent (from a 3.5
mph to the minimum permissible 3.0 mph throughput rate) costs increase
about 15 percent. The cost range estimate includes both returning the
water to the point of origin (the high) and no water return. Distances
are the linear mileages between the O-D pairs. No cost estimate is made
of river crossings or specific rerouting requirements. An exception to
the route linearity assumption was made for points along the Great Lakes
if the linearity suggests crossing the lake. Here the shortest
practicable land route was used.
Unit train costs are also based on a movement of 25MMTY. The route
distances reflect the shortest track mileage between O-D pairs. In
addition, track mileage for a spur into the mining area and for
rerouting around cities and towns (15 percent) was assessed. The
utilization rate of 100 percent reflects a 274 day/year operation. An
80 percent utilization rate reflects a shorter work year with equipment
leased out at less than the annual cost rate while 120 percent capacity
reflects a longer work year and equipment leasing at a premium.
Finally, it was assumed that, even with upgrading, a 10 percent
bottleneck restriction applied (10 percent of route distance at 10 mph).
The route cost compariscns in Table 4.1 must be viewed subject to
the following caveats. In general, unit train costs have been
overstated while the coal slurry pipeline costs have been understated.
With respect to unit trains, the entire cost of track and roadbed
upgrading has been assigned to the unit train movement. Clearly, the
upgrading yields benefits to the movement of other freight. The
assignable benefits are, however, dependant on the route specific ratio
of coal traffic to total rail traffic. As upgrading is a significant
portion of unit train costs, for specific routes these costs should be
reduced. Similarly, no credit is given to the railroads for either
route or freight flexibility. Unlike pipelines, multiple use of
facilities is practised and, in the event of a blockage rerouting, at a
cost, is feasible. With or without the advent of a national emergency,
this flexibility is desirable if only on a standby basis. The value,
though difficult to assess, is non-zero. Finally, the possibility
exists for at least some lines of a cost sharing back-haul. This has
been discussed in terms of garbage or sewage for land fill [1].
III-F-69
-------
TO
H
H
St. Louis
Chicago
Detroit
Cleveland
Pittsburgh
Paducah
Louisville
Cincinati
TABLE III-F-16.
Coal Transport - Import Costs - Origin
Unit Costs, Rail and Coal Slurry
- Destination Pairs -
From
Gillette
Colstrip
Gillette
Colstrip
Gillette
Colstrip
Gillette
Colstrip
Gillette
Colstrip
Gillette
Colstrip
Gillette
Colstrip
Gillette
Colstrip
Slurry
Distance
(Miles)
935
1050
975
1050
1225
1325
. 1300
1400
1403
1500
1080
1200 .
1170
1270
1220
1300
Cost
($/Ton)
7.95-11.34
8.65-12.53
8.21-11.75
8.69-12.53
9.82-14.35
10.47-15.38
10.31-15.12
10.95-16.16
10.95-16.16
11.60-17.20
8.89-12.84
9.66-14.09
9.47-13.78
10.12-14.81
9.79-14.29
10.31-15.12
Distance
(Miles)
1060
1300
1100
1160
1350
1470
1400
1550
1500
1600
1175
1400
1280
1400
1350
1470
Unit Train
Cost
($/Ton)
(80%) (100%) (120%)
9.19
11.80
9.62
10.26
12.38
13.78
12.97
14.76
14.13
15.40
10.42
12.97
11.57
12.97
12.38
13.78
8.27
10.65
8.66
9.24
11.19
12.45
11.72
13.37
12.79
13.95
9.36
11,72
10.44
11.72
11.19
12.47
7.79
10.12
8.17
8.74
10.65
11.91
11.17
12.80
12.22
13.37
8.89.
11.17
9.91
11.17
10.65
11.91
-------
The understatement of slurry line costs starts with the mileage
linearity estimate. This was necessary as, except for the ETSI line,
slurry pipeline routes are still prospective. It is probable that a 10
percent mileage addition should be considered to avoid difficult terrain
and avoid cities and towns. The water cost for the pipeline has been
estimated at over $2.50/1,000 gallons. A probable cost may be closer to
$3.50/1,000 gallons [1], especially if several pipelines are to corns
from a drought prone area. Because the ETSI, Black Mesa, and Houston
Natural Gas cost estimates formed the basis for the cost elements, no
provision was made for reihjection equipment at pumping stations that
would be needed if slurry were dumped. Additionally, as no solution to
the problem of the disposal of fines has been suggested, the cost
element implicit in the solution has been omitted. For the same reason,
there has been no assessment of restart costs due to line breakage,
plugging, or power failure. Line costs assume full capacity optimal
flow operation (compared to the limiting assumptions made for rail)
although there is a rapid increase in cost due to less than capacity
operation. This is approximately the inverse fraction of full load; an
80 percent load factor implies an increase in unit cost of about 25
percent. The lack of pipeline flexibility has been described above. It
is inherent because a coal slurry operation, due to the deposition or
settling propertities of the suspension, is not similar to a crude oil
or gas pipeline operation. Routes, differential coal qualities going to
different receivers, flow rate, and pipeline branching are all
relatively or totally inflexible. While a pipeline, compared to a unit
train, does not necessarily carry ash and sulfur, due to grinding and
possible separation prior to slurrification, that water take up by the
coal which is not removed by dewatering, must be removed by heating (at
a cost) or the cost must be assessed by derating the power plant.
Inflation is an important factor in both unit train and coal slurry
costing. The principal elements are labor, steel, pipeline and
trackage, equipment, and power. Increasing wage rates affect unit train
operations more than they do coal slurry pipelines. However, the labor
component of a unit train operation may be easily overstated. Because
they are in continuous origin-destination operation, the trains do not
need the usual yard and other labor associated with freight and
passenger movements. Only a part of track and roadbed maintenance labor
should be ascribed to the coal train. Loading and unloading facilities
are not significantly more labor intensive than those of a slurry
pipeline. The differences due to this factor, over time, are probably
not great. This is particularly true when divided by large tonnages.
Differences due to power cost increases are also not great. There is no
evidence that electric power rates for the slurry line will rise more
slowly than will diesel fuel oil prices. If electric utilities are
forced to alter their rate making practices to, say, only a levelized
rate structure, slurry lines will experience a one time large increase
in their power costs. Steel requirements for an ETSI sized line are
about one million tons. For the upgrading of a competing railroad,
including rolling stock, they are about half as much. For the railroad,
some salvage value (increasing with inflation) may be expected. The
III-F-71
-------
ability to optimize purchases of trackage and equipment on a cash flow
anticipated demand basis may offset the price increase due to delay.
Pipelines also have a salvage value but the cost of digging them up (an
apparently little used requirement at the end of their useful life) is
likely to be greater than the value of the metal. In the near future,
as steel prices increase, the effects on pipelines are relatively more
severe. Increases in both rail and pipeline equipment costs have been
included in this and the previous study [1].
The cost comparisons in Table 4.1 are 1976 based. While coal
slurry pipeline costs have been inflated based on crude oil pipeline
factors [1,23], they may have been increased on an inadequate base.
Data for unit train costing comes from many sources. Data for coal
slurry pipelines is very limited. The Black Mesa line is a private
pipeline. Capital costs for the pipeline may have been absorbed by the
companies at either end [4], The.ETSI and HNG pipelines are, as yet,
only prospective. Their promoters are unlikely to have overstated the
costs.
III-F-72
-------
5. EXTRA HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Coal, as electrical energy in large blocks, can be transported from mine
mouth generating plants to distant load centers. Both DC and AC transmission
have been investigated over routes to Chicago from Beulah, North Dakota, from
Gillette, Wyoming, and from Colstrip, Montana [4]. EHV transmission can be
viewed as a method of importing coal to the ORBES region. If the primary
power plant input is liqnite or a low Btu subbituminous coal, EHV may be the
only cost effective means of long distance transport.
AC transmission is being challenged by DC because transmission voltages
have reached levels which are so high that reactive compensation is too costly
and line losses are high, dictating a switch to DC transmission. Currently,
there are eleven major HVDC lines in operation with more in the final planning
stage. HVDC systems have a much higher power density within a given right of
way than an AC system, providing economic and environmental advantages.
Furthermore, in transmitting the same amount of power, over the same size
conductor, at the same peak load gradient, for the same distance line, losses
are smaller with direct current. AC line losses are about 33 percent greater
than those for DC. The chief drawback to the use of DC for electric power
transmission is the high cost of HVDC terminal equipment. Environmental
issues concerning extra high voltage transmission lines center around line
leakage, physiological effects due to proximity, noise, odor, radio and
television and other communication interference and aesthetics.
5.2 EHV COSTS
The cost results are based on a prior analysis [4]. The cost comparisons
are based on point to point lines, with complete terminal facilities at each
end, for a range of loads and distances. AC - DC systems are non-comparable
if either one has more intermediate line terminals or line taps than the
other.
A cost model for extra-high voltage transmission was formulated to
evaluate the economics of an EHV transmission line for source to load long
distance electrical energy transfer. It was also used to formulate and
demonstrate the economic comparison between EHV-AC and EHV-DC transmission.
Thus, the analysis can be used to estimate electric transmission costs from
the west into the ORBES region, and for EHV transmission over relatively long
distances within the region. It should be noted that the cost of generating
the electricity is not included. Distribution costs are also excluded.
III-F-73
-------
The results of the analysis are presented in Table 5.1 and Figure 5.1.
In Table 5.1, the points of origin are Beulah, North Dakota, Colstrip,
Montana, and Gillette, Kiyoming. The table may serve as a generalized facility
descriptor. Figure 5.1, provides a means for estimating EHV transmission
costs both within and into the ORBES region.
III-F-74
-------
TABLE III-F-17. EHV Route Specific Costs
Estimated Transmission Length (Mi)
Heating Value of Coal (Btu/lb)
Coal Consumption (MTon/Year)
Transmission Voltage (kv)
Transmission Loading (MW)
Delivered Power (MVv)
Transmission Efficiency (%)
CAPITAL COSTS;
Sending Substation
Transmission Facilities
.Deceiving Substation
Line Compensation
Right of way Cost
Total Capital Costs
ANNUAL FIXED .COSTS;
Sending Substation ^
Transmission Facilities
Receiving Substation
Line Compensation
Total Annual Fixed Costs
ANNUAL OPERATION COSTS;'*'
Sending Substation
Transmission Facilities
Receiving Substation
Line Compensation
Electrical Energy Losses
Total Annual Operation Costs
North Dakota
to
Chicago
858
7500
15.0.
+600 765
DC AC
3000 3000
2736
91.
123.
,202.
120.
0
27.
472.
17.
27.
16.
0
61.
2.
2.
3.
0
23.
2675
2
0
5
3
0
9
1
34
73
16
88
63
13
13
89.
:35.
:303.
41.
128.
34.
543.
4.
40.
5.
17.
69.
0.
3.
1.
1.
28.
2
65
5
30
6
75
8
96
97
74
87
54
83
95
07
67
47
Wyoming
to
Chicago
990
11700
9.6
+600 765
DC AC
3000 3000
2700
90.
123.
233.
:118.
0
31.
506.
17.
31.
16.
0
65.
2.
3.
3.
0
26.
2628
0
0
6
8
2
7
1
54
52
16
88
04
09
28
87
,35
,350
41
152
40
619
4
47
5
21
79
0
4
1
1
32
.6
.65
.1
.30
.2
.1
.4
.96
.27
.74
.16
.12
.83
.55
.07
.98
.95
Montana
to
Chicago
1089
8700
12.9
+600 765
DC AC
3000 3000
2676
89.
;123.
-257.
117.
0
34.
532
17.
34.
17.
0
68.
2.
3.
3.
0
.29.
2595
2
0
0
7
3
1
70
36
15
88
34
06
96
86
,35
,385
41
170
44
676
4
52
5
23
86
0
5
1
2
35
.5
.65
,2
.30
.0
.1
.2
.96
.0
.74
.62
.31
.83
.00
.07
.21
.48
31.77 :35.99 ,35.29 41.02 ,39,24 44.59
III-F-75
-------
TABLE III-F-17. EHV Route Specific Costs
(Continued)
Estimated Transmission Length (Mi)
Heating Value of Coal (Btu/lb)
Coal Consumption (MTon/Year)
Transmission Voltage (kv)
TOTAL ANNUAL COST:
North Dakota
to
Chicago
858
7500
15.0
+600 765
DC AC
Wyoming
to
Chicago
990
11700
9.6
+600 765
DC. AC
Montana
to
Chicago
1089
8700
12.9
+600 765
DC AC
92.93 105.53 100.45 120.14 107.39 130.90
UNIT COSTS;
Mills/Ton-Mile
(equivalent coal)
Mills/kw
(as received)
7.92 9.19 11.74 14.43
3.88 4.50 4.25 5.22
8.57 10.7
4.58 5.76
Land Requirement for
Transmission Lines
(Acres)
18018 23166 20790 26730 22870 29403
+ Excluding right of way, $1500/acre.
++ Includes administrative and general expenses @ 30% of operating costs.
* Based on FPC P-38 Annual Fixed Charges Rate.
** Consistent with "as mined" HV data.
III-F-76
-------
Estimated Unit Cost of EHV Transmission of 3000 Mw (1975$)
hn
I"
"8 *
O
0>
(A
I
-! 2
200
I
1
400 600 800
Transmission Distance (Miles)
1000
H
H
I
1200
-------
III-F-78
-------
6. COAL GATHERING/DISTRIBUTION - TRUCKS AND CONVEYOR BELTS
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Trucks and conveyor belts are the principle modes used for short haul
coal transportation. Their use has recently extended to distances of over 100
miles for trucks, but this is relatively rare in the ORBES region. Their
potential for high volume transport is considerably less than that of the
modes described above.
Conveyor belts are an established means for the movement of coal and
ores. Except for excessive grades, in terms of the angle of repose of the
material carried, belt systems are not geographically limited. Belt routes
are not circuitous. However once in place, they lack flexibility of both
location and capacity. Because they operate above ground, their use involves
the purchase of a right of way and land alienation. They are relatively noisy
and, unless covered, produce dusting if the material, like coal, is friable.
Covering the system also protects the coal against freezing in winter.
However the system operates relatively poorly in extremely cold weather.
Because operations are continuous and construction costs front-ended,
high, continuous capacity operation is desirable. This is particularly
evident for distances of more than a few miles. This study concentrates on
belt distances of 3.5-100 miles. The latter is, perhaps, too long although it
can be achieved by several modular flights. In-house conveyor belt systems
are not considered here. :
A belt system may be viewed as a loading adjunct to a mining operation,
as from a pit head to a rail or barge facility. It may also be viewed as an
extension of a barge facility to an inland consumption point.
Like conveyor belts, coal movement by truck is not limited
geographically, but only by road access. Typically, their route is more
circuitous than that for belts for given origin destination pairs. The
environmental impacts include road deterioration, spillage, dusting, noise,
exhaust fumes, and a contribution to traffic congestion. As a system, trucks
are relatively energy inefficient compared to other transport modes.
The advantage of this form of transport lies in its incremental nature,
the ability to add or subtract from a fleet at the appropriate time based on
forseen service demands. For the same reason, costs are not front-ended. A
trucking system can be added to optimally over time, while unit and labor
costs may be high, no right of way costs are imposed (other than fuel taxes).
Thus, a private advantage lies with this form of transport compared to the
social cost. While high capacity utilization has become more important,
trucking is still a principal choice of transport for small mines. Because of
the lower fuel efficiency, increases in diesel costs weigh significantly on
truck transport and are relatively more important than the effect of increased
power costs on conveyor belts.
III-F-79
-------
6.2 COST ANALYSES
The analysis of costs contained in this section is an extension of
results previously obtained [1]. In that study, the basic costing data for
both modes were collected and heuristic models and computer programs developed
to ascertain total costs per ton-mile for a range of tonnages and distances.
Because the models were based on an optimization design, the costs developed
may be low. In the present analysis, the data bases and computer programs
were used to develop total cost estimating equations which not only replace
the computer program, but provide a measure of both sensitivity and the direct
impact on total costs of single or multiple changes in the input variables.
As the equations developed are generalized, it is not necessary to provide a
new computer run for each change in the input variables.
I*
The methodology employed is a 2 fractional factorial design [22].
Because the variables can be considered separately, the results are applicable
not only to a specific region, but to individual routes or particular
situations. The results of the analysis agree closely with those of the prior
study.
The analysis of transport costs is presented in Table 6.1. The input
variable values, model structure, and programs are found in [1, Sections 5 and
6]. A single change has been made in the data. In the prior study, road
maintenance and construction costs associated with coal haulage by truck were
based on national averages. This has been altered, from the same source, to
provide these costs on a basis more nearly consistent with the ORBES region.
Because the analysis is based on the original data set, both the truck
and belt analyses contained here are specific to the movement of coal. They
cannot be used out of context.
6.2.1 CONVEYOR BELTS
From the model equations developed in reference [1], the variables
and their interactions with respect to cost were isolated. These were
analyzed separately by a series of computer runs both as a check on the former
analysis and to provide the operative variables and the limits of their range.
For a coal carrying conveyor belt system these are:
Variable Specification Units Range Limit
Xj: belt capacity MMTY 5.00-0.5
^2' overall length miles 100-3.5
x-ji max. coal lump size inches 6-10
x4: belt incline degrees 0-12
x,-: hp cost increase over
1977 levels (times) 1-2.5
Y: total transport cost $/tcn
III-F-80
-------
TABLE III-F-18.
Coal Transport Costs, Trucks and Conveyor Belts
(^/ton/mile)
Distance Tons/₯r.
(Miles)
Belt
(8" Max. Coal)
Truck
3 axle 5 axle
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
792,000
594,000
250,000
100,000
1,000,000
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
50.0
50.0
100.0
100.0
7,000,000
5,000,000
1,000,000
250,000
100,000
1,000,000
250,000
5,000,000
1,000,000
38.0
8.0
157.0
390.0
4.9
6.7
31.0
128.0
284.0
5.9-12.0
5.8-6.4
5.8-6.4
5.8-6.4
3.6-4.0
3.4-5.9
3.4-3.9
3.4-3.. 9
5.9
28.0
Source: [1J
Note: For truck transport, for each pair of costs, the lower
excludes apportioned road maintenance and construction
costs.
III-F-81
-------
Using the maximum and minimum of the variable range, Table 6.2 is developed.
In the table, a positive sign represents a maximum value for each x , a
negative sign a minimum value. The Y column is developed by assigning the
appropriate maxima and minima values to each variable in each row and
providing a computer run to obtain the solution. The table was extended to a
15 by 16 size to account for the cost effect of interaction among variables.
The coefficients for the estimating equation are obtained by a weighted
averaging of each column. For example, the coefficient of column x, is
obtained by:
(+75.74 + 69.08 + 53.92 + 51.70 - 12.24 )/16
The resulting estimating equation is:
S = 19.659 + 14.778x*
T J.1 . / /OA-,
*
16.084x2 +
*
+ 0.608x5 H
*
+ 1.01X24 H
*
2.694x3 + 1
*
h 12.091x12
*
- 0.498x25 +
*
.232x4
*
+ 2.61x13
*
2.29x45
*
* 2.205x23
The cost results of this equation agree, within a two percent margin of
overall error, with the analysis in reference [1] . The coefficients of the
variables indicate the relative importance of the terms. For example, a unit
change in x, , produces a $14.78 increase per ton in total costs. It should be
noted that those interactive terms for which the coefficients are very small
have been omitted. These interactive terms are obtained by row multiplication
in Table 6.2. (eq, for row one, x,2 = xixo or + times + equals +) and then
proceeding with the column averaging as described above. At the price of
increasing the error of the estimate, individual terms may be dropped if only
a rough estimate is desired.
*
The x variables are multiples of the natural units. To transform
the equation into these units, the following transforms are employed:
x = (l/x-L - l.D/0.9
x* = (x2 - 55) /45
x* = (10.9 - 4.55x3 + &.375(x3)2)/2.9
*
x = (Sin x4 - 0.104)/0.104
x* = (x5 - 0.048D/0.0206
III-F-82
-------
TABLE III-F-19. 2k~1 Factorial Design
+ + 75.74
69.08
+ - 53.92
- + 51.70
+ - 12.24
+ - 10.03
+ 7.71
+ - 7.18
+ 6.96
+ + 5.79
5.51
5.12
+ + 1.39
+ - 0.83
0.73
+ 0.61
Note: + indicates the maximum of the variable range
- indicates the minimum of the variable range
The values in the Y column are derived from
the computer runs in reference [1].
III-F-83
-------
These are developed from the range maxima and minima for each variable.
Substituting the appropriate statement for each x and multiplying by the
a.
respective coefficients provides the costing statement in natural terms:
= -6.656
0.1652x2 - 0.4135
5.0114x
- 51.353 Sin
- 111.24x
0.
2985x2/x;L
0.375(x3)2/x1 - 4.55x3/x1 + 0.00634x2(x3) 2
- 0.07688 X2x
+ 1069.36 Sin
0.216x2 Sin
In this expanded form the effect of a variable change may be read directly.
For example, for each mile of increased belt length (x2) , within the relevant
range, total cost per ton increases by 16.5 cents. in this second form,
however, individual terms may not be dropped. Omitting a term from the first
form of the estimating equation alters the second form. The overall error of
estimation of the equation above is 10 percent based on the computer model.
6.2.2 TRUCK TRANSPORT
Using the methodology outlined above, the principal variables associated
with the transportation of coal by truck are:
Variable Specification
Xj: origin-destination distance
x~: speed on positive grades
x..: assessed road maintenance
and construction
x.: bottlenecks
x,-: fuel cost relative to
1977 fuel costs
x^: tonnage moved
Y: transport cost
Units
miles
mph
percent
percent
of distance
Range Limit
10-50
10-45
0-30
0-30
(see table) 1.864-6.99
MMTY 0.1-1.0
$/ton
III-P-84
-------
x, subsumes the empty return cost although the distance is properly stated as
the delivery mileage. For x^, level and down hill speeds are assumed to be 55
mph. x-, can be dropped from the analysis if only private costs are desired.
It is included here in order to estimate the impact of the coal movement on
roads. Bottlenecks, x , are defined as sections of the route requiring 10 mph
operation due to road or other adverse conditions.
The estimating equation, derived as above, is: :
Y = 3.361 + 2.27x* + 0.0032x* + 0.01x* + 2.2934x*
+ 1.549x*x* + 0.022x*
* * *
where x7 = xyx,. All terms of minor importance have been dropped. The
equation agrees, overall, within two percent of the computer analysis in
reference [1]. It should be noted that assigned road costs and mileage are
the most important factors in determining truck haulage costs. If the social
cost of road deterioration were charged, coal haulage by truck would increase
substantially. Alternatively^ if these costs are not to be considered, all
terms including the variable x7 can be dropped.
To obtain the estimating equation in its natural unit form, substitution
of the following statements is necessary.
x* = (x1 - 30)/20
x* = (x2 - 27.5)/17.5
x* = (x4 - 0.15)/0.15
x* = (X3/X6> = (X3/X6 ~ l-5)/1.5
From this we obtain:
2 = - 0.1384 + 0.036x1 + 0.000183x2 + £i.067x4
+ 0.047x5 - 0.021x3/x6 + 0.052x1x3/x6
Again, the results are straight-forward. For example, increasing the origin-
destination distance by one mile increases the total cost by 3.6 cents/ten.
II1-F-85
-------
TABLE III-F-20. Fuel Price Relatives
Current Fuel Cost Fuel Cost Factor (xj
1977 Fuel Cost
0.8 1.864
0.9. 2.097
1.0 2.33
1.1 2.563
1.2 2.796
1.3 3.029
1.4 3.262
1.5 3.495
2.0 4.66
2.5 5.825
3.0 6.99
III-F-86
-------
REFERENCES
1. Rieber, M., S. L. Soo, et al, Comparative Coal Transportation Costs; An
Economic Analysis of Truck , Belt, Rail, Barge and Coal Slurry and
Pneumatic Pipelines, Draft Final Report, CAC Document No. 223, June 1977.
2. Leung, S. Y. T., A Study and Cost Evaluation of 'pneumatic Coal Transport
Pipe! ines , (1977) M.S. Thesis, University of Ilfinoli at Urbana-
Champaign.
3. tou, J. B., Comparative Coal Transportation Capabilities and Costs,
(1977) , M.S. Thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign .
4. Rieber, M., and S. L. Soo, Route Specific Cost Comparisons: Unit Trains,
Coal Slurry Pipelines and Extra High Voltage Transmission, CAC "Document
No. 190, May 1976.
5. Ballard, L. R., Coal Transportation Costs; Unit Train vs. Slurry
Pipeline, (1976) , M.S. Thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign.
6. kieber, M., S. L. Soo, and J. Stukel, The Coal Future: Ejgpnqmic and
Technological Analysis of Initiatives" and Innovations to Secure Fuel
Supply Independence, CAC Document No. 163, May 1975. Report to NSF (NTIS
PB 24 7-67S/ AS) .
7. Ferguson, J. A., Unit Train Transpor tat ion of Coal, (1975) , M.S. Thesis,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (NTIS PB 248-652/AS) , Appendix
E to Reference 3.
8. Soo, S. L., et al., Coal Tr an spor tat i on ; Unit Trains - Slurry and
Pneumatic Pigel^nes, Appendix F to Reference 3.
9. Rieber, M., and S. L. Soo, The Feasibility of Coal nine Cooperatives ; A
Preliminary Report and Analysis, CAC Document No. 157P, April 1975,
prepared for the Office of Coal, Federal Energy Administration, Contract
P-05-75-6678-0.
10. Rieber, M., Low Sulfur Coal; A Revision o_f Reserve and Supply Estimates,
CAC Document No. 88, November 1973, Appendix C of "Reference 3.
11. U. S. Department of the Interior, Sulfur Reduction 'Potential of the Coals
of the United States, Bureau of Mines, RI 8118 (1976) .
12. U.S. Department of the Interior, The Reserve Base ot^ Coal tor Underground
Mining in the western United States, Bureau of Mines, 1C 8678 (1975).
13. U.S. Department of the Interior, The Reserve Base of Bituminous and
Anthracite tor Underground Mining _in tne Eastern United States ,~ Bureau of
Mines, IC~8655 (1974) .
Ill-F-87
-------
14. U.S. Department of the interior, The Reserve Base of U.S. Coals by Sulfur
Content
1. The Eastern States
(Bureau of Mines 1C 8680/1975)
2. The Western States
(Bureau of Mines 1C 8693/1975).
15. U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Waterbofne Commerce of the United States,
Calendar Year 1974.
Ib. U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, "Summary of PE-'Pt; Commodity Flow, 1972
VvCSC Data Projection to 1975, 1980, 1990," Computer printout, (mimeo).
17. U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, 1973 Annual Report ot_ the Chief ot
Engineers on Civil works Activities, 1975.
18. U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Chicago District, "Duplicate Locks GDM
Phase I," Draft Environmental Statement, December 1974.
19. Illinois Central Railroad, Market Research Department, Inland Waterways
Transportation, Vol. 2, 1972.
20. U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Inland Navigation System Analysis -
Waterway Analysis, 1976.
21. Electric Power Research Institute, Coal Transportation^ Cagabilit^ of the
Existing Rail and Barge Network, 1985 and Beyond, Final Report, September
1976.
22. Box, G.E.P., and J. S. Hunter, "2k Fractional Factorial Design,"
Technometrics, Vol. 4, No. 3, August 1961, p. 311 ft.
23. Oil and Gas Journal, 23 August 1976, p. 84.
.III-F-88
------- |