P & W Coal Contract

Did the power plant in NY that P &W was hauling coal with the zig-zag delivery route for Providence to Binghamton decide if they wanted to continue that delivery? I have seen no other postings about this unit train since it stopped. The question was asked on the P & W Yahoo group, but no one answered. I thought that the route selected was a great example of how to use under utilized rail lines in an efficient way.

Thanks

I've heard that the power plant used this move to force NS to lower their prices. Sorry, but we probably won't see this train again....

-Tom

Au contraire! We see loaded coal-hoppers headed north almost daily, including four today.

Alan Marsh

Isn't that coal from China?

Have things really got that bad where we have to import coal from China?

Alan those are for the Bow power plant. P&W tacks them to gardner for inter change with Guildford.

Cougar, as with most things, it's not quite so simple to say that things are that bad.

There have been a variety of articles in the recent past detailing how the railroads taking care of power river coal have been unable to deliver the amount that the contracts dictate, and some eastern coal isn't suitable due to its content. Or so I've read.

It may sound bad, but it's likely not as bad as you think right off the bat.

Dave Becker

A lot of low-sulfur coal burned in America comes from Venezuela and Indonesia, too. Just like the salt in your local salt spreader, which may have come from Egypt or Mexico.

I remember reading about the China Coal in the news paper a couple of years ago. Wondering if it's still true.

I don't know for sure, but I heard the P&W's contract for the 7 trip experiment moving coal to New York was not successful. The coal did not burn as hoped it would and thus, no more trains are echeduled.

So, I guess that rules out any more test coal trains to New York, unless another source is found.

Again, I just heard this second hand. Anyone hear about this?

Paul

The way I heard it, once the P&W expressed their ambition in making it happen, the power company used it all to their full advantage, getting NS to lower rates. (NS provides all the coal for that plant). I had heard the opposite in regards to the test burn, but of course, who knows what the truth is.
The participating carriers didnt complain about the traffic, but wanted P&W to foot the bill for everything. (I believe CP even sent them a bill for refueling their power at E. Binghamton-at market price, not wholesale!!) The power plant got what they wanted.

superwarp1 wrote:I remember reading about the China Coal in the news paper a couple of years ago. Wondering if it's still true.

Yes. Environmental permits for generators operating in the northeast and midAtlantic regions generally require low sulphur coal not available in the USA, and/or not available due to US mining and rail transportation issues.

From what I have read, all of the coal coming out of the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and being shipped to US powerplants WAS low sulphur coal. Mines outside of the PRB ahe high sulphur coal, and thay is why UP and BNSF ship millions of tos of PRB coal for interchange with connecting railroads for delivery.

Coal for Mt Tom power plant in Holyoke, MA and Bow, NH is shipped over the D&H to Guilford and CSX for drop-off. The powerplant in Somerset, MA (near Fall River) has it's coal barged in, as they are right on the water.