Successfully reported this slideshow.

Final ppt ite presentation


Published on

Published in: Engineering, Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

Final ppt ite presentation

  1. 1. Presenter: Manzi Roger Dusabimana Advisor: Dr. Julian Mills-Beale Manzi Roger Dusabimana • B.Sc. Civil Engineering, CBU, May 2014 • NASA Langley Research Center, Virginia • Carnegie Mellon University, 2015. This is How I imagine the 405, and LAX in 2040
  2. 2. O Up to 800 Mile of Rail Lines O Construction : 2012-2020 O Trains up to 1000 each O Speeds up to 220 mph O Stations up to 24 O Headway: as low as 5 min in Picks O Fares: $100 Plus….S.F to L.A. O Ridership Estimate: environ 100 Million a year CHSR • Sacramento CHSR • San Francisco CHSR • Central Valley CHSR • Los Angeles CHSR • Los Angeles CHSR • Inland Empire CHSR • Orange County CHSR • San Diego What would aliens conclude when looking from outer space at the California high-speed rail system? Any Cheaper Alternatives? • High Frequency Bus Network • New/Wider High-ways • New Airports/expansions • Hyper-loop None of them is as Environment Friendly as the CHSR However…the CHSR is not a 100 % Environmental Friendly.
  3. 3. How Will the High Speed Rail Impact the Environment? The CHSR and Green Gas House Emissions The CHSR and The farmlands The CHSR and Energy Efficiency
  4. 4. Engineering Design - Surveying –Geotechnical – Seismic - Environmental Studies - Alignment and Track design - Structures, Viaducts, Tunnels, Bridge Design - Traction Power Design - Stations, Maintenance facilities - Utility relocations, trackside Access Design - Right of Way Acquisition
  5. 5. The California High Speed Rail Threatening the Irreplaceable Farmland in California The Central Valley: • One of the world's most productive agricultural regions • More than 230 crops are grown there • The Central Valley produces 8 percent of the nation's agricultural output • 17 billion USD • About one-sixth of the irrigated land in the U.S. is in the Central Valley o Thousands of acres of prime farmland at stake (in the central valley): o Cut in half by train tracks o Rendered un-farmable, inaccessible o Irrigation system to be reconfigured o Possible urban sprawl  Hundreds of millions dollars will be lost
  6. 6. The CHSR Authority should consider the following but not limited to, in order to minimize the impact on the farms: o Make up for the loss of farmland for the railroad right of way.  Purchasing agricultural conservation easements on property of similar quality elsewhere in the region.  Those easements would permanently preserve the farmland from future development for anything other than agriculture. o Offer to buy any leftover parcels acres that are created when the rail line divides an owner's property. o Create an "agricultural land mitigation fund" to purchase additional conservation easements, beyond those already required to make up for farmland directly affected by the rail line. o Consider alternative right of way far from the farmlands wherever possible. How do we save the Farms in the Right of way and build the high speed rail?
  7. 7. The California High Speed Rail System and Energy Efficiency ( … Possible pollution from energy production) The CHSR project is undeniably expected to reduce the energy consumption and the related air pollution in California by diverting the growing travel demand from auto and air modes. But… What is the untold environmental impact of the CHSR system far beyond where the travel will occur? o Examples:  Manufacturing, propelling a train requires electricity the fossil fuels burned to generate that electricity produce sulfur dioxide emissions that can harm human health outside the regions where people drive the cars or ride the trains.  particulate matter emitted from a hot-mix asphalt plant harms people near the plant, rather than where travel occurs o Studies have shown longer periods for energy payback than previously stated by the CHSR authorities, once the pollution outside the tracks is considered:  8 years for high ridership scenarios  30 years for mid-level ridership
  8. 8. The CHSR Authority should consider the following but not limited to, in order to increase the energy efficiency of the project: O Addresses several key factors that must be comprehensively considered to ensure the system environmentally outperforms existing modes over a long period of time, under various ridership scenarios.  Use of more frequent, smaller trains coupled with station placement that incorporates long- term regional planning and existing transit integration to promote high ridership  Electricity for trains and infrastructure sshould be generated from clean sources  For infrastructure construction, the environmental negative impacts of certain materials, like concrete and steel, should be minimized o Strategies already embedded in the design:  Traction power system that will rely on two by twenty-five kilovolt alternating current  Autotransformer Feed Systems for the main-line operation at each of the substations, located at 30-mile increments along the alignment  This system will also capture the energy from the braking and deceleration of the train( braking…)
  9. 9. The California High Speed Rail System and Green House Gas (GHG) (GHG: a gas in an atmosphere that absorbs and emits radiation within the thermal infrared range: CO2, CH4, NO, O3) The CHSR main benefit is its capacity to reduce the GHG emissions in California
  10. 10. The CHSR Authority has deployed the following strategies in order to increase the capacity of the CHSR in reducing the GHG emissions: O All companies are required to recycle all steel and concrete O Diversion of 75 percent of construction waste from landfills through reuse and recycling O Use of new, low-emission construction equipment; and replacement of inefficient truck engines and irrigation pumps O The Authority is also working with partners to implement an urban forestry program to offset greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with construction • Cumulatively, by 2030, the high speed rail system will divert between 4.3 million and 8.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent • That would be as if an entire 500-mile long lane of auto traffic were removed from California’s freeways. • By 2050, the system will divert at least 27 million and possibly as much as 44.4 million metric tons of CO2. • The documented performance of international high-speed rail systems, such as France and Spain, has shown that these numbers are reasonable (Matute, 2014) • The life cycle analysis done in the study by Dr. Arpad Horvath, the greenhouse gas emissions the payback period for rail is six years for high ridership, 17 years for mid- level ridership, and never for low ridership. What are the benefits of the CHSR in reducing the Green House Gas emissions?
  11. 11. References O Horvath, Arpad. "Fall 2010 ACCESS #37."University of California Transportation Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 May 2014. < O Frank, Richard. "Rail Transportation and Energy Efficiency." Stanford Energy Club. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 May 2014. <>. O Chang, BrendA. "Life cycle greenhouse gas assessment of infrastructure construction for California’s high-speed rail system." Science Print 16.6 (2011): 429– 434. Web. 8 May 2014. O Matute, Juan . " emissions-california-high-speed-rail-urban-transportation- projects/." emissions-california-high-speed-rail-urban-transportation-projects/ 142 (2014): n. Web. 8 May 2014. O Kosinski, Andrew, Lee Schipper and Elizabeth Deakin, Analysis of High-Speed Rail’s Potential to Reduce CO2 Emissions from Transportation in the United States, Working Paper, Global Metropolitan Studies Program, University of California, Berkeley, November 2010 O Deakin, Elizabeth, M. Shirgaokar, N. Duduta et al. Transit Oriented Development for High Speed Rail (HSR) in the Central Valley, California: Design Concepts for Stockton and Merced, Report to the California High Speed Rail Authority. Spring 2009
  12. 12. Thank You For Your Attention! Any Questions?