Rail Related Development in Northern New England

Cowford wrote:Interesting that the bond issue includes $2 million for "material handling equipment" at Mack Point (to be matched with private investment... praise the Lord! Still a BS subsidy, but at least they are actually getting user skin in the game). I'm thinking this is the torrefied wood potential (?)

I would guess that you are correct in re: equipment for Mack Point, but if would be just that, a guess. Could the equipment at Eastport be used for this project?

Cowford wrote:If it is let's hope it doesn't go the way of Maine's other wood energy-related logistics investments: $5 million for the Mountain Sub. No pellet mill, no freight, no nothing; $7 million for Eastport expansion. No wood chips flowing, no freight, no nothing.

Note that the bond issuance would provide $1.5 million to the port of Eastport for a warehouse. For...?

I'm wondering if that might be related to cattle but perhaps not. Would $1.5M for a warehouse be of any significance to any wood product of any kind? Would it build anything useful?

Is there no pulp being shipped out of Eastport anymore?

gokeefe wrote:Ironically they didn't manage to get the wood chips flowing the way they wanted to but now all of a sudden they are the primary export point on the East Coast for live cattle. Too bad that isn't something that's handled by rail anymore (not that this would work all that well anyways with the Calais Branch being gone).

When is the last time stockyard received cattle by rail? Does this even occur anymore? I'm assuming it doesn't.

How in the world did Eastport become an export point for live cattle? Where are the cattle coming from? It's been a long time since I was up that way-- 20+ years-- but I don't remember the country along the Air Line Highway between Bangor and Calais being exactly thick with dairy farms or feed lot operations.

I'm guessing that the last rail movement of livestock occured sometime in the early 1960's-- possibly on the DRG&W narrow gauge in Colo.

Did a quick search: UP was hauling livestock (at least on a sporadic basis) into the mid-80s. (Trains had an article on the dwindling business in Aug 1987).

I read an article saying that Maine is free of a particular bovine disease ("blue tongue" or somesuch malady), so the port was granted authority by the feds for such activity. The cattle comes from all over New England and as far away as Wisconsin. pretty cool niche market!

GO'K, I'd imagine that loading equipment in Eastport could be used for torrefied wood, but of course, that precludes a rail move and I'd estimate trucking cost to Eastport (vs a Searsport option) at 40-50% higher.

Cowford wrote:Did a quick search: UP was hauling livestock (at least on a sporadic basis) into the mid-80s. (Trains had an article on the dwindling business in Aug 1987).

I read an article saying that Maine is free of a particular bovine disease ("blue tongue" or somesuch malady), so the port was granted authority by the feds for such activity. The cattle comes from all over New England and as far away as Wisconsin. pretty cool niche market!

GO'K, I'd imagine that loading equipment in Eastport could be used for torrefied wood, but of course, that precludes a rail move and I'd estimate trucking cost to Eastport (vs a Searsport option) at 40-50% higher.

What about with a "short move" from the rail head, perhaps in Woodland?

The Eastport dock is still very active with export pulp from the Woodland Mill. 50 truckload a day to Eastport.

Cowford wrote:I read an article saying that Maine is free of a particular bovine disease ("blue tongue" or somesuch malady), so the port was granted authority by the feds for such activity. The cattle comes from all over New England and as far away as Wisconsin. pretty cool niche market!

No kidding! Very cool. Never realized the US even exported live cattle. What exactly do they travel in? Are there special ships outfitted for the transport of animals? You can't really containerize a Holstein.

gokeefe wrote:What about with a "short move" from the rail head, perhaps in Woodland?

For torrefied wood or for cattle?

Ridgefielder wrote:

Cowford wrote:I read an article saying that Maine is free of a particular bovine disease ("blue tongue" or somesuch malady), so the port was granted authority by the feds for such activity. The cattle comes from all over New England and as far away as Wisconsin. pretty cool niche market!

No kidding! Very cool. Never realized the US even exported live cattle. What exactly do they travel in? Are there special ships outfitted for the transport of animals? You can't really containerize a Holstein.

Around the time that reports were coming out talking about cattle exports through Eastport I noticed an unusual pattern of cattle cars on the highway and found that I was seeing them regularly and they were almost always loaded and headed north. As memory serves this was outside of the normal fair season when one could reasonably expect to see some "prize" animals on the road.

Ridgefielder wrote:

gokeefe wrote:What about with a "short move" from the rail head, perhaps in Woodland?

For torrefied wood or for cattle?

Torrefied wood. If the volume were heavy enough it just might make sense.

"Torrefied wood. If the volume were heavy enough it just might make sense."

I can't imagine how the economics would work. The truck direct route is only 125 miles. The rail move would be complicated and is a circuitous ~180-mile route... then you have the transloading cost and final 35-mile truck haul to the port.

Google "livestock vessels" images. Those ships are ungainly looking beasts. I understand it is udderly impossible to get any accomodations on board other than steerage.

Cowford wrote:
Google "livestock vessels" images. Those ships are ungainly looking beasts. I understand it is udderly impossible to get any accomodations on board other than steerage.

DOUBLE facepalm!!

ridgefielder- live cattle are air-freighted from los angeles to tokyo in containers. texas beef is the basis for kobe beef.i think there's 15-20 head per container. no feed or water since the transit is 14 hours. the pilots say it gets pretty 'stinky' during the flight. ken patrick

Cowford wrote:

gokeefe wrote:Torrefied wood. If the volume were heavy enough it just might make sense.

I can't imagine how the economics would work. The truck direct route is only 125 miles. The rail move would be complicated and is a circuitous ~180-mile route... then you have the transloading cost and final 35-mile truck haul to the port.

All very true. I was thinking this might be "worth it" if they got into volumes where they were running 100 or more cars per train. Just maybe that would be so much that they might think about it.

"Leave it to Cowford...."

Hahahahaha! That was great! Best pun I've herd in ages!

This thread is really on the moooooove!