Research Problem Statements,
Committee on Intermodal Freight
Transport
(AT045)
In May 2001, Tina Casgar, Chair of TRB’s Section A1B00 on
Multimodal Freight Transportation, proposed that 12 committees and task forces
comprising Section A1B00 develop research problem statements for a Cooperative
Freight Research Program. Below are the
problem statements that were developed for the Intermodal Freight Transport
Committee. The full list for all TRB
freight committees and task forces can be reviewed in TRB Electronic Circular
E-C048, “Freight Transportation Research Needs Statements.”
Please note that Problem Statement #6 below, “Policy,
Planning, and Programming for Goods Movement and Freight in Small and Mid-Sized
Metropolitan Areas,” is underway as “Guidebook for Policy, Planning, and
Programming in Small- and Medium-sized Metropolitan Areas, NCHRP Project
8-47. For more information, see: http://www4.trb.org/trb/crp.nsf/All+Projects/NCHRP+8-47.
Additionally, Problem Statement #7 below, “National
Intermodal Connectors Conference,” was undertaken as “Workshop in Issues in
Intermodal Connectors,” Task 30 for NCHRP
Project 8-36, “Research for the AASHTO
Standing Committee on Planning.” The
final report for this task is available at:
http://freight.transportation.org/doc/8-36(30)connectors.pdf
#1 Title:
Cross-Border Rail Freight Transportation: Barriers and Incentives
The challenges associated with the movement of goods by
truck between the NAFTA partner countries have been well documented. Traffic at land border crossings is
particularly heavy along the border between
One possible alternative to truck traffic and relief of
border congestion problems is the expanded use of rail (1 rail car corresponds
to 3.5 semi trailers). Potential
barriers to and incentives for use of rail for cross-border freight movement
may be affected by economic, operational, and political factors. The use of a
rail link between truck-based segments of international freight moves between
the
Previous TRB research has categorized economic and operational factors affecting transportation modal decision-making into four groups: commodity characteristics, transport system characteristics, shipper issues, and market factors. Examples of economic and operational factors include commodity type, technology investments, vehicle allocation and availability and market stability and consistency. Political and policy issues such as public infrastructure investment or customs and immigration operations also impact the efficiency and attractiveness of not only rail operations but also other transport modes.
A modest amount of research into trans-border rail freight
was conducted in the early-to-mid 1990’s.
Much of this research focused on traffic levels across the border. The fact that the majority of US-Mexico rail
freight movement occurs on the Texas-Mexico border is well documented. Since that time, railroads in the
The objectives of this project are to provide a comprehensive and detailed examination of the barriers to and incentives for use of rail for cross-border freight movement, and to develop recommendations regarding use of cross-border rail freight transportation. Examples of rail issues to be considered include market potential, trackage ownership and rights, physical and information infrastructure adequacy and needs, modal safety and security issues, public/private partnerships, or any other issues that might be pertinent to cross-border rail freight movement barriers and incentives. In addition to specifically addressing freight movement by rail, modal transfer (particular for truck-rail movements) issues should be considered, for example whether existing truck-rail transfer facilities on both sides of the border are sufficient to handle increased traffic levels, optimal location of additional facilities that might be needed, facility financing and ownership, and operating rights.
Intermodal, Mode-Shift,
Safety, Trade, NAFTA, Corridors and Routes, Freight Service.
Following are examples of most recent trade journal and research literature on U.S.-Mexico cross-border freight rail transportation:
a) Roop,
S.S., J.E. Warner, F. Zambrano, R. Ismailova and D.H. Kang, The Impact of
Mexican Rail Privatization on the Texas Transportation System, Report 2128-2,
Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University, February 2001. Provides information on current and future
infrastructure and operational plans conducted by the
b) Kaufman,
L.H., “
c) Weissman,
A.J. and R. Harrison, “On The Origins, Destinations, and Gateways of
U.S.-Mexico
d) Roop,
S.S., R.W. Dickinson, F. Saad, R. T. Bartoskewitz, Intermodal Freight Movement
in
e) Weissman,
A.J., Texas-Mexico Multimodal Transportation and Socioeconomic Indicators,
Center For Transportation Research,
Significant continued growth of U.S.-Mexico trade traffic is anticipated in the future. Given congestion of major highway corridors that have the predominant role in cross-border freight transport, the potential rail-freight to play a role in this arena will likely become increasingly important. With impending reauthorization of federal transportation programs, a comprehensive examination of barriers to and incentives for cross-border rail freight transportation is key to effective policy development.
$250,000-$300,000
The user community would
include a broad range of public and private transportation system users and
policy makers at the local, state, regional, and federal levels. Examples of these users include railroads,
local planning groups, state transportation departments, the U.S. Department of
Transportation (Federal Highway Administration and Federal Railroad
Administration), U.S. Department of Treasury (Customs) and state and federal
legislators.
The recommendations regarding use of rail for trans-border freight transportation, along with the identified barriers and incentives might be used in several areas, such as development of legislation, policy, financing mechanisms, public/private partnerships, or international agreements.
Implementation of study recommendations, particularly when integrated with federal and state transportation programs, might have a range of societal implications, including expenditure of public transportation funds, roadway congestion, safety, or air quality. Effectiveness could be measured in several ways following implementation, such as comparison of modal traffic levels of themselves or relative to funding efforts, congestion indices on major corridors, or changes in air quality indices around transportation corridors.
#2 Title: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Multi-state
and Multi-regional Freight Planning
Intermodal freight
shipments, particularly international shipments, commonly cross more than one
state line while moving from shipper to receiver. Individual states are facing increasingly
complex planning and investment decisions for freight and freight capacity, as
freight improvement projects must compete side-by-side with other proposed
transportation improvements for scarce federal, state, and local funding. As intermodal freight movements become
increasingly regional, national, and global in scope, there is a need for
multi-state and multi-regional planning coordination in order to achieve
necessary synergies.
The most difficult
freight planning projects to program and fund are the often ones which
accommodate freight which merely passes through the state. In
ISTEA, TEA-21, and the
National Highway Designation Act of 1995 provided positive first-steps in
recognizing the importance of regional freight corridors through the
designation of 43 essential corridors, which
span 163,000 miles. In response to this legislation, regional
coalitions such as the I-95 Corridor Coalition, the Latin American Trade and
Transportation Study, and the CANAMEX Corridor are playing an important role in
identifying projects of regional significance.
Despite increased policy and planning activity, state and regions often
do not collaborate effectively and lack methods to fund and implement regional
priorities. Moreover, improvements that are implemented sometimes stop at state
lines due to regional and state differences in funding priorities and other
considerations. Without the authority to
propose, plan, fund, and implement freight improvement projects at multi-state
and multi-regional level, investment synergies may never be realized.
The objective of this
research is to a) evaluate the current state of multi-state and multi-regional
freight planning, how the process is evolving, what works, what doesn’t, and b)
provide examples of success and failure. The benefit of this investigation is
to provide states with “best practice” tools to launch collaborative freight
management programs, corridor planning groups, and regional councils to help
address the issues of interstate freight movements, including movements through
intermodal terminals. Case studies will be used to illustrate examples of an
evolving process.
Freight, intermodal,
multi-state, multi-regional, corridor, planning
Armstrong, C.S., “MPO-State-Local Government Partnership Results in a Statewide Plan
that Works.” In the Spotlight: MPO Best Practices, Association of Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (1995).
Bragdon, C.R., “Intermodal Transportation Planning for the 21st Century. A New Paradigm:
An
Urgent Call for Action.” TRB 74th Annual Meeting,
and
New Opportunities,” Technical Assistance Report,
Council in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation (September 1994).
Capelle, R.B. Jr., Planning and Managing Intermodal Transportation Systems: A Guide to
ISTEA Requirements.
Dittmar, H. and Bender, C., “Transportation Partnerships.” TR News, Number 175, (Nov.-Dec., 1994), pp. 2-5.
TEA 21 and other federal legislation recognize
the importance of multi-state corridor planning. The proposed research would identify
successes and challenges and provide useful input to future federal and state
policy and funding legislation.
$250,000
AASHTO, APTA, FHWA,
NHTSA,
This work would contribute to groups working to secure funding for projects of regional and national significance. Heavily traveled corridors could be planned and engineered to withstand heavier shipments. Corridors could be designed and designated to handle long combination vehicles and tri-axle trailers.
Society would benefit by a more coordinated approach to freight planning, congestion could be reduced, and interstate freight corridors could potentially be separated from local traffic, improving community lifestyles. Measures of success would include reduced congestion and air quality improvements. Freight capacity investments would be more effective.
#3 Title:
Shared Intermodal Terminals
The Chicago Area
Transportation Study (CATS - MPO for the
International intermodal
shipments are often more coordinated than domestic intermodal shipments. Since
steamship carriers often operate proprietary facilities, they are able to more
easily obtain a chassis, dispatch a relay to the port to pick up the box,
deliver the goods to a railroad terminal or a customer, and repeat the process
until the box and the chassis are separated again and the empty chassis is
returned to the terminal. A typical domestic intermodal movement is more
fragmented. In the domestic freight
scenario, an inbound load might come in loaded in a green box and the outbound
shipment may need to be loaded in a yellow box. The boxes are nearly identical
except for the color and the leaseholder of the equipment. This means the green
box must return empty to the rail terminal and a yellow box must be positioned
in its place. Each box goes to and from a different terminal and further
inefficiencies result. These additional drayage movements often result in
additional traffic on local roadways, and decrease the number of “turns” a drayage operator can perform in a
day, increasing transportation costs. The efficiency of domestic intermodal
movements, particularly to and from major metropolitan areas such as
In
The project should
explore examples of metropolitan areas, such as
The benefit of this
project is to compile the lessons learned from the steamship companies’ depot
operations and apply them to the railroad terminal ownership and planning,
thereby providing planners with a toolkit for developing public-private
dialogue about shared-use facilities. The results of the three case studies
should be useful for land use justification of terminals and joint ventures.
Intermodal, railroad,
common use, shared use, public private partnership.
Neomodal facility in
Ohio; MIRTS project in Minnesota; Detroit Intermodal project; Port of
Jacksonville and Port Authority of NY/NJ work on drayage triangulation using
shared facilities and information; FHWA Chicago area study; Freight movement
studies in Tampa and Orlando, FL; Examples in the maritime industry.
As congestion builds, more motorists are looking at freight and insisting on new freight management programs. Metropolitan areas are also struggling with the traffic, air quality and economic development impacts of freight terminals located in urban areas. Freight is going to receive a higher priority in the future; this baseline approach should be helpful for other metropolitan areas considering industrial development and public-private partnerships for freight terminals and ports.
$300,000
AASHTO, APTA, FHWA,
NHTSA, IANA,
The quantitative results
of the modeling effort should be helpful in bringing carriers and planners to
the table to discuss the efficiencies, which could be possible in a shared-use
environment. Identification of carriers, customers, suppliers and planners
objections should be helpful in developing strategies necessary to meet and
eliminate user concerns.
Better land use by concentrating fragmented terminals, improved terminal efficiency, less congestion and noise, lower crime, better security, increased truck productivity and fewer intercity trips to position equipment. Measurements of effectiveness would include improved air quality, fewer bright lights, lower intermodal costs.
#4 Title:
Public Benefits of Intermodal Freight Transportation Improvements
Intermodal projects that
specifically address freight movement are often not given due consideration by
states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) for several reasons. First, these organizations have traditionally
focused on planning and completing highway improvements, and have only recently
begun to consider intermodal freight projects during their transportation
planning processes. Second, the fixed
jurisdictional boundaries of states and MPOs make it difficult to consider
freight movements, which are increasingly regional, national, and global,
rather than local. Finally, many states and MPOs have trouble quantifying the
benefits of dedicated freight corridors or other freight-specific improvement projects. As a result, these benefits may be
underestimated, making it more difficult for states and MPOs to program
projects that specifically benefit freight movements.
There is a need to
reexamine the methodology for identifying and computing the benefits offered by
freight-specific improvement projects.
By better understanding and quantifying the potential benefits of
intermodal freight projects, transportation planners, decision-makers, and the
general public may be more willing to invest in projects that specifically
benefit freight movements.
To quantify the real
and/or potential benefits to the public of representative intermodal freight
transportation improvement investments, including:
·
reduction in
congestion and pollution caused by trucks;
·
enhanced
mobility and safety for people and goods; and
·
increased
attraction of business investment and tax revenue.
Intermodal, freight,
planning, public sector, benefits, investment
For many years the focus
of transportation planning in the public sector has been on planning and
completing highway improvements. These improvements have allowed commuters and
shippers unprecedented mobility. However, the realization is now dawning that
there is a limit to how many roads can be built. ISTEA and TEA-21 helped focus
attention away from capacity improvements and toward the efficient movement of
people and goods One possible solution that may improve the movement of both
passenger and freight is to completely
separate goods shipment from passenger movement by planning, approving,
funding, and constructing freight-specific projects.
The Alameda Corridor
from the Ports of Los Angeles and
$250,000 – 350,000
NCHRP
Planners would use the
findings in making the case for funding freight improvements.
This research would allow a better evaluation of the balance between passenger and freight-specific needs and would allow innovative intermodal projects to be considered for funding.
#5 Title:
Increasing Capacity in Rail Corridors
Railroad transportation has not historically been part of the transportation planning process. There are two reasons for this. First, railroad corridors are generally owned by private corporations, and serve exclusively as routes for trains run by those private corporations. Second, transportation-planning organizations have not often paid much attention to goods movement. Only since the passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) in 1992 has the government required that Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) explicitly consider freight as well as passenger traffic in the planning process. If freight is included, railroads (as movers of large quantities of freight) must be included as well.
Railroads can, of course, carry passengers as well as
freight. Passenger trains are operated
exclusively by public agencies (Amtrak and commuter railroads). Passenger and freight trains can, and often
do, share facilities. However, the
differing objectives of the public and private sectors can produce
conflicts. At the same time, the freight
railroad industry is entering an era of new constraints on its financial
performance. The
In the past, railroad capital spending plans had to stand alone as pure private investments. Today there are a few examples of public/private partnerships, but there is a need for more. After a generation of shedding excess capacity, railroads now find themselves capital-constrained, but without the financial resources to add capacity. At the same time, public agencies face the same situation: highways are over capacity, and financial resources are limited. It may be less expensive (as well as less environmentally disruptive) to add rail capacity than highway capacity for both freight and passenger transportation. However, this will require a change in the way things are done. Shared or open access often creates a polarized debate. Carriers fear losing control of their property, while gaining unwelcome competition for freight traffic. Shippers lobby heavily for open access. Public agencies seek to use freight rights-of-way for commuter or high-speed passenger trains.
The
The primary objective of
this project is to quantify the costs and benefits of an open access system
that treats railroad rights of way more like public highways. To do this, it will be necessary to:
Intermodal, railroad,
railways as highways, public private partnerships, cost analysis, rail freight
capacity; railway train capacity, open access, competitive access.
I-95
corridor between New York and the Carolinas involving CSX, NS, Amtrak, and the
States of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina.
A1B10: Committee on Local and Regional Rail Freight
Transport
Chairman: Mark S. Bennett, CSX Transportation, Inc.
DAVID B. CLARKE,
(October 1984), PP. 27-28.
In the current environment with private ownership of most
rail right-of-way, public investment in rail freight projects is difficult to
justify. Yet, highway congestion is mounting. As the global economy grows,
capacity demand to move both people and freight is ever increasing. Could
shared or open access projects along railways allow the
This project should be
approximately in the $250,000 to $400,000 range
The results
of this study would help freight planners (logisticians), commuter planners,
high-speed passenger train authorities, and railroad freight carriers define
key elements for structuring public private partnerships. Cost sharing strategies would be developed to
illustrate examples of how both freight and passenger transportation would
benefit from new capacity created though a shared access environment.
Societal impacts might include reduced highway congestion, streamlined freight networks, more competitive rail freight service, and increased passenger movement by rail. Reduced rail infrastructure costs might result in economic decisions to shift modes, and therefore a more efficient transportation network.
#6 Title:
Policy, Planning, and Programming for Goods Movement and Freight in
Small and Mid-Sized Metropolitan Areas *
The Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and the Transportation Equity Act for the
21st Century (TEA 21) emphasized the need for state and metropolitan
multimodal and intermodal transportation policy, planning, and programming
activities, including those for goods movement.
During the 1990s, a number of large Metropolitan Planning Organizations
(MPOs) developed new, or strengthened existing, goods movement and freight
programs. Despite federal requirements
and guidelines, concerns remain about the effectiveness of MPO planning efforts
for freight, as illustrated in a recent Traffic World article (January 22,
2001) on “Call Your MPO.”
Results of goods
movement and freight programs in some of the nation’s large metropolitan areas
have been presented at meetings and in publications of federal agencies, the
Transportation Research Board, and other organizations. Information is sketchy, however, about goods
movement and freight policy, planning, and programming activities in small
(less than 500,000 population) and mid-sized (500,000-1 million population)
metropolitan areas.
This research would
systematically collect information about goods movement and freight programs
for small and mid-sized MPOs. The scope
would include goods movement on intermodal connector roads and through
intermodal facilities and terminals. The
research is needed to help identify and evaluate how MPOs are implementing
federal provisions for goods movement and freight policy, planning, and
programming. Research results could
suggest better ways to accomplish goods movement and freight objectives in
small and mid-sized MPOs.
To collect, evaluate,
and summarize information about goods movement and freight policy, planning,
and programming activities in small and mid-sized metropolitan areas, and to
develop a “best-practices” manual.
Intermodal, legislation,
best practices, legislation, Unified Planning Work Programs.
Several recently
published documents describe goods movement or freight programs in large
metropolitan areas. Examples include the
following respectively for a)
a) Plumeau, Peter and
Jocelyn Jones, “Incorporating Freight Issues into
b) Zavaterro, David, F. Gerald Rawling, and Daniel Rice, “Mainstreaming
Intermodal Freight into the Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process,”
Transportation Research Record, Number 1613 (1998): 1-11.
c) Transmanagement,
Inc., Matthew Coogan, and Michael Meyer, “Case Study C: Freight Planning in the
Puget Sound,” in Innovative Practices for Multimodal Transportation Planning
for Freight and Passengers, National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Report 404, Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 1998, pp. 26-28.
d) Gorys, Julius, and
Imants Hausmanis, “A Strategic Overview of Goods Movement in the Greater
With a few exceptions
such as the following for Albany, New York, relatively little documentation has
occurred for goods movement and freight programs in small and mid-sized
metropolitan areas:
Poorman, John, and
Kristina Younger, “Integrating Freight Concerns into Metropolitan Planning
Processes at Medium-Sized MPO,” in National Conference on Intermodalism: Making
the Case, Making It Happen, Conference Proceedings 11, Washington, D.C.,
National Academy Press, 1996.
The proposed work would
help federal, state, and metropolitan policy makers better understand how small
and mid-sized MPOs are implementing goods movement and freight provisions of
TEA 21, other federal initiatives, and state and regional planning and
programming requirements and guidelines.
The work is especially relevant given upcoming efforts to shape
legislation to reauthorize federal transportation funding programs. Understanding how small and mid-sized MPOs
are currently addressing goods movement and freight considerations would help
policy makers improve the process and results.
$250,000
The primary user
community would be small and mid-sized metropolitan planning
organizations. Other users would include
the Federal Highway Administration, state transportation agencies, local
jurisdictions, legislators, and contractors.
This research would be
implemented through a survey of small and mid-sized MPOs to identify which have
established ongoing goods movement or freight programs. If feasible, recent Unified Planning Work
Programs (UPWPs) in small and mid-sized MPOs would be reviewed to identify
specific freight-related (including intermodal) policy, planning, and
programming activities. The end product would be a document
a)
summarizing
results of MPO surveys and UPWP reviews,
b)
evaluating
how small and mid-sized MPOs are conducting goods movement or freight policy,
planning, and programming according to TEA 21 and other federal requirements
and guidelines,
c)
recommending
ways, including federal incentives and programs, to improve goods movement of
freight policy, planning, and programming activities in small and mid-sized
MPOs, and
d)
reporting
best practices and/or other procedures that small and mid-sized MPOs could use
to bolster their freight programs.
This research would, for
the first time, provide comprehensive information on the extent to which small
and mid-sized MPOs are incorporating goods movement and freight considerations
into overall multimodal policy, planning, and programming activities. Federal and state policy makers could use
this information to develop outreach, training, funding, and other programs to
help small and mid-sized MPOs more effectively incorporate goods movement and
freight considerations into planning and programming activities and meet the intent
of TEA 21 and other federal transportation requirements and initiatives. Effectiveness could in part be measured by
comparing and evaluating goods movement and freight activities documented in
Unified Planning Work Programs before and after outreach, training, funding,
and other efforts that would be implemented following the completion of this
research.
The purpose of this conference would be for transportation practitioners to share knowledge, experiences, challenges, and opportunities pertaining to financing and making improvements to intermodal connectors, including those on the National Highway System.
The National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 required the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to submit to Congress proposed intermodal connector routes as modifications in the National Highway System (NHS). The Federal Highway Administration worked with state transportation agencies, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), and other groups to identify connectors to major intermodal facilities per FHWA guidelines.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century required the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to submit an Intermodal Freight Connectors Study to Congress within two years after passage of the Act. The study was to 1) review improvements made to NHS connectors since designation of the National Highway System, and 2) identify impediments to improving NHS connectors serving intermodal facilities.
In December 2000, the Secretary of Transportation sent the NHS Intermodal Freight Connectors report to Congress. Among the report’s conclusions were:
a) intermodal connectors that primarily serve freight terminals have significant mileage with pavement deficiencies and generally exhibit inferior physical and operational performance than other similar NHS facilities,
b) an analysis of investment practices shows a general lack of awareness and coordination for freight improvements within the MPO planning and programming process; and
c) given the pressing needs for passenger-related related projects, there is little incentive for investing in freight projects that appear to primarily benefit only a small freight constituency.
The proposed conference would bring together intermodal
connector professionals from federal and state agencies, MPOs, the private
sector, and other organizations from across the
The conference would include information about investment strategies and would build upon National Cooperative Highway Research Program project 08-39: “Financing and Improving Land Access to U.S. Cargo Hubs.” Results of the conference could serve as useful input for drafters of transportation funding legislation.
$50,000
The conference would be two or three days in length. Planning for the conference would require up to one year.
#8 Title:
Underground Freight Transport by Pipeline: Planning and Design Issues
Recent advancement in
pipeline technology has made it possible to transport freight (solids in bulk,
packaged and pallet forms) by large diameter underground pipelines over long
distances. The pertinent technology is pneumatic capsule pipeline (PCP) which
uses wheeled vehicles (capsules) rolling through pipe propelled by the air in
the pipe.
The PCP technology is applicable to pipelines of any size,
cross-sectional geometry, and length. It can be used for future intercity and
interstate freight transport, especially along major corridors having high
freight volumes. Use of such a new technology has far-reaching implications to
the nation, as it can significantly reduce the number of trucks on highways and
streets, thereby alleviating the safety and environmental problems caused by
the overuse of trucks. Furthermore, PCP
technology can enhance transportation security because it is far more difficult
for terrorists to attack an underground freight pipeline and do severe damage
to it than damaging above-ground structures, or to hijack a pipeline for use as
a weapon.
However, before the PCP technology can be used successfully for such large-scale operation, research is needed to address all the major issues associated with the planning and design of such pipelines, such as whether circular or rectangular pipe should be used, whether PCP can use part of the right-of-way of existing highways and railroads, especially abandoned railroads, how to cross existing roadways from underneath, how to construct such pipelines along highway easement without interrupting traffic on the highway, how to plan and design the terminals of such pipelines so that trucks can easily pick up the freight from the pipeline for short-distance door-to-door delivery, and how to bring cargoes back to the pipeline terminals for long-distance shipment. Other intermodal transfer facilities also need to be considered.
The research should
address all the pertinent issues that may be encountered in the future planning
and design of PCPs for intercity and interstate freight transport in the
freight, freight pipeline, intermodal freight transport, pipeline, PCP, pneumatic capsule pipeline, underground freight transport
In 1976, the U.S.
Department of Transportation sponsored a comprehensive study of freight
pipeline at the
In 1991, the U.S.
Congress passed the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA).
Section 6020 of the act is entitled "Underground Pipelines." It
states: "The Secretary of the
Department of Transportation shall conduct a study to evaluate the feasibility,
costs, and benefits of constructing and operating pneumatic capsule pipelines
for underground movement of commodities other than hazardous liquids and
gas."
As a response to
Section 6020, the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center conducted a
study and issued a report in 1994 entitled "Tube
Transportation." The report reaffirmed the technical and economic
feasibility, and confirmed environmental and safety benefits of PCP. Dr. Larry Vance at the
In 1996, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) held a national workshop on Pipeline Research Needs. Needed PCP research was documented in the workshop report published by ASCE. In 1998, the ASCE Task Committee on Freight Pipelines published a state-of-the-art review report entitled: "Freight Pipelines: Current Status and Anticipated Future Use." It was published in the Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 124, No. 4, pp. 300-310. The report highlighted the potential of PCP for future intercity/interstate freight transport. It constitutes the most authoritative recent review of the freight pipeline technology and its potential.
Since 1991, the
Capsule Pipeline Research Center (CPRC) at the University of Missouri-Columbia
(MU) has conducted extensive R&D in various types of capsule pipelines
including coal log pipeline (CLP), hydraulic capsule pipeline (HCP), and
pneumatic capsule pipeline (PCP). In the PCP area, the research has been
focused on predicting the behavior of and testing a PCP system powered by
linear induction motors (LIMs). At about the same time, the Minnesota
Department of Transportation sponsored a study at the
In 1998, the U.S.
Congress passed the Transportation Equity Act (TEA-21). The act authorized
$1.125 million to the Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) to conduct a
feasibility study of using freight pipelines in
This research could help facilitate freight movement and contribute to solutions for traffic congestion and accident problems on highways and streets.
$250,000 (approximate).
FHWA, DOT's
Research and Special Programs Administration,
The research findings could potentially be used by the U.S. DOT and state DOTs in planning new highway corridors and renovation (expansion) of existing highways.
This research is
needed before any major PCP freight pipeline can be built and used in the
Ø Streamline freight transport in congested areas and reduce roadway congestion,
Ø Conserve energy (especially imported oil),
Ø Reduce accidents, fatalities and injuries, associated with other freight modes.
Ø Reduce air and noise pollution,
Ø Reduce highway damage and highway maintenance costs,
Ø Provide another option for reliable and speedy delivery of freight, and
Ø Promote national prosperity and security.
The effectiveness of this research could be measured by the frequency with which various transportation planners and state transportation agencies use the report in the future planning of highway and other systems.