Attachment C2 

Comments Received During Public 

Comment Period 

C2B - Begins with individual comment I-125 

This file contains images of the comments received. The comments are 

included as searchable text in Appendix C, Attachment C1, Comment and 

Response Matrix.
APPENDIX C 

Oregon Passenger Rail Project Tier 1 Final Environmental Impact Statement 

APRIL 2021
Appendix C -Agenc and Public Comments 

Appendix C: Agency and Public Comments 
Individual Comments 

Appendix C: Agency and Public Comments 
From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 

Hello, 

f?atrick Ardmn-Hydsoo 

info@oreaonoasseoaerrail ora 

Draft Environmental Impact Sttement comment 

Saturday, Octbr 20, 2018 5: 37: 37 AM 

Comment 1-125 

I am writing to support the fastest option for rail transport between Portland and Eugene. Having lived 

in both places, fast rail is essential for our region's future. Having traveled more throughout the US and 

Europe, efficient rail is needed to secure a future that is economical rich and ecological sound. 

Sincerely, 

Dr. Patrick Ardron -Hudson 
This information helps·uslrnprove our·outr��c;h in·t�Elfutμre. 

• Please· provide the f9Jl,9V,ng infqnr�tion: 

First Name: _:...(j_����f,1, ___z,ff:E·=t, ·€.)zhu:v2<bk··

· .

.

. A�,<L·

· 

.

. ZLL'=:�;.._· _______ ...2_ _______ ...J_ 

Last Name: R cu/·· ------------............ --..... ;;;o------- ) 

Zip Code: ------'-------------------1--• ..•·. ----<---7....,;;;.' �___,,d=---.· . •

.

. .......,;£�· · .

.

. 

·

. _______________________ ............_� 

Email: ............ __________________________________________________ _ 

• How did you hear about tis Oen house 

□ E:mail from the project team 

t<�'\·· .

... }:;-·

:,:f':··-i� .�

-

- ;� <f',--.::� 

·

< -

-

� 

□ My employet 

Uo:;�;�:�th �foiedt rl,;11er · 

□ 

□ Other (please specify): 

Thank you fr your comm 

Please leave this form wittfa staff petsoh or mail to: 

Oregon. Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public lhvolverrlent 

1110 §Ej\ld�rst, Suit� 301 

Portla,nd, Oregon 97214 
... Oregon Passenger Rail 

... ::::�:::.,__, Portland 

DEIS Comment Form 

Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in 

the DEIS? 

(See reverse) 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#27 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 1:17:23 PM 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 1:26:15 PM 

00:08:51 

216.115.11.34 

Q1 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-127 

Please provide reliable service between Springfield and Portland to help alleviate traffic impacts of drivers and freight traffic on 1-5. 

Current passenger rail to Portland is not reliable enough to meet current needs, and will have to provide greater reliability in order to 

generate the demand and regular users. 

Alternative 2, providing a separated track would show: 

- vision for future Oregonians, 

- enhance the State's ability to serve a growing population/economy, 

- develop an alternative for single-occupancy trips (reduce VMT), and 

- establish Oregon as a partner to the CalTrans high-speed corridor. 

Q2 First Name 

Madeline 

Q3 Last Name 

Phillips 

Q4 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97405 

QS How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Q6 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) 

Community 

newsleter 

Yes 

Female 

50 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

QB What is your age? 

33 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

White 

English 

51 / 119 

Survey Monkey 
• Oregon Passenger Rail 

. ----·-- Porl 

CHOOSIG A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form 

Do you have any comments on the Altern 

in the DEIS? 

Comment 1-128 

0DNNt:b:11Vtf!1 ttJ . df.2._CoOtv C_g) LS 

1A() , \ W1l cL kJ� � :-J:Kl 141 f.J 

�f, � c-0vrut-W <g.ij12Lfftl{_ 

£&...:V'<, a,�� 00,1 f}l>Rt;J!_ll 

tS O "-JW4 Lo� � 1T" M 

Si?1⁄2 1?- C o..ce_'\[W:.il� (!(l) I\J(\.f(lJ2_f1 ViJj 

st! LJ_ ? IZcf,L@-\ I 

(See reverse) 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following infrmation: 

First Name: 

Last Name: ------------------

Email: ------__j-+----( ljS..,...,_b_. VJ __ �_· ( _'(c� ____ _ 

• How d yu hear about this oen house & public hearing? 

� Email from the project team 

D My employer 

D News article 

D Word of mouth 

D Project mailer 

□ Community Newsletter 

D Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St, Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#63 

COMPLETE 

Collector: Online Open House (Web Link) 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

Tuesday, December 18, 2018 9:59:57 AM 

Tuesday, December 18, 2018 10:05:44 AM 

00:05:47 

IP Address: 50.39.96.68 

Page 1 

Q1 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

I see benefits in both routes. I would like to see investment in passenger rail service. 

Q2 First Name 

Julia 

Q3 Last Name 

Pommert 

Q4 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97229 

Q5 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Q6 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

66 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Community 

newsleter 

Yes 

Female 

White 

118/ 119 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-129 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

119 / 119 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS comment 

Jessica Pickul 

Monday, December 10, 2018 10:58 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #582 (Sharon Posner) 

From: OPR Website [mai1to:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2018 10: 11 AM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #582 (Sharon Posner) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 582 

FirstN rune Sharon 

LastName Posner 

Comment 1-130 

Comment 

I would like to encourage the renewal of the 9 am Cascades train to Portland which originated in 

Eugene. That time is just perfect for a meeting in Salem or a day in Portland and definitely beats 

catching the 5:30 am train. I think you would see a major uptick in passenger travel. 

Email 

Options 

Email 

Response Requested 

smposner@comcast.net 

Last 2018-12-08 12: 10 PM modified 

IP Address 73.96.74.199 

Submission made: 2018-12-08 12: 10 PM 

1 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#3 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Wednesday, November 28, 2018 1:30:23 PM 

Wednesday, November 28, 2018 1:35:00 PM 

00:04:36 

71.238 .20.238 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-131 

Usually I am in favor of more ambitious public projects. In this case, Alternative 2 makes no sense. Alternative 1 is best due to lower 

cost, less environmental impact, and more service to city cores. Also: please include Corvallis in your planning, including highlydependable bus shuttle service from Corvallis to Albany Station, coordinated with exact arrivals and departures of trains -- including 

allowing for delays, with notification to Corvallis residents, perhaps via app or online. 

02 First Name 

Robert 

03 Last Name 

Poulsen 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97330 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Email from the project team 

No 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

3 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

4 / 119 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS 

-----Origi na I Message-----

Jessica Pickul 

Wednesday, December 19, 2018 8:48 AM Commentl-132 

Hannah Mills 

FW: comments on Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

From: Doug Quirke (mailto:jdguirke@gmail.com1 

Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 11:52 PM 

To: info@oregonpassengerrail.org 

Subject: comments on Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

Section 2.2.3 ("Transportation Modes and Train Technologies") lists five locomotive technologies at the top of page 2-9; 

the more detailed discussion of technologies (under 2.2.3.2 ("Technologies") about halfway down page 2-9) discusses 

only four of the five technologies--electric is not discussed for some reason. Electric technology is then dismissed from 

further consideration on page 2-16 via the the following statement: 

"Electric propulsion technology would not be compatible with service provided or planned in Washington State." The 

basis for this statement is not clear--is Washington truly locked into non-electric technology going forward, especially in 

light of what appears to be near-daily reports revealing the increasingly dire nature of climate change (for example, last 

Thursday's report from the Oregon Global Warming Commission, which concludes that "Oregon's GHG goals are not 

likely to be met with existing and currently planned actions"). The Rail Division of the Oregon Department of 

Transportation issued a report in June of 

2009 entitled "Passenger Rail Solar Electrification: A Primer." 

According to this document, "Green house gas (CO2) emissions from six diesel roundtrips per day would equal 8,851 

tons per year. If 109 miles of the 120-mile corridor was electrified with solar power, greenhouse gas emissions would be 

reduced to 767 tons per year, a 91 percent reduction." Additionally, "If service grows to six roundtrips per day, 1 million 

gallons of diesel and $3 million in fuel costs will be saved each year." Given advances in solar in the nine years since this 

document was produced, I'd think that solar electrification is even more promising now than it was at that time. The 

DEIS appears to ignore the 

2009 document, and appears to dismiss dual mode technology without addressing the significant reduction in GHG 

emissions discussed in the 

2009 document. The DEIS also fails to do an updated analysis of possible G HG reductions associated with electric or dual 

mode technology in light of technological advances that have taken place since 2009. 

Thank you, 

Douglas Quirke 

Eugene, OR 

541-686-3027 

jdguirke@gmail.com 

1 
I Comment-13 

• Oregon Passenger Rail 

.. .A..4YLJ-..-... J!. Porland 

CHOOSIG A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form 

Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented 

in the DEIS? 

(See reverse) 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing infrmation: 

First Name: 

Zip Code: __ q_Jr __ Lf_.______() ____ f ________ _ 

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

�mail from the project team 

0 My employer 

0 News article 

0 Word of mouth �roject mailer 

0 Community Newsletter 

0 Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
I Commentl-134 

• Oregon Passenger Rail 

Po 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form 

Do you have any comments on the Alteratives presented 

in the DEIS? 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing information: 

First Name: fh01

11⁄4l1 

Last Name: ------------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & publ hearing? 

0 Email from the project team 

0 My employer 

� News article 

0 Word of mouth 

0 Project mailer 

0 Community Newsletter 

0 Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Cmment 1-135 

comments on Draf Environmental Impact Statement 

Oregon Passenger Rai l: Eugene - Portland 

by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - PeakChoice.org -

SustainEugene.org - December 1 8, 201 8 

Revised Purpose and Need 

"New Circumstances" will require a Supplemental Draft EIS 

Peak energy, limits to growth, depletion 

5 

5 

7 

Alaska Pipeline has declined three-fourths, nearing low flow shutdown. It powers 

Cascadia's motors including food delivery trucks 7 

update: November 30, 201 8 - pipeline narrowly escapes earthquake, so oil continues to power 

West Coast motors 9 

"Cold oil a hot topic during winter" 11 

When will the Alaska pipeline turn into an 800-mile-long Popsicle? 11 

Alaska and Energy by Richard Hein berg 15 

New drilling for northwest and northeast Alaska to extend the pipeline's life 16 

Peak Conventional Oil is past - US and global 17 

OPEC quota war 17 

Saudi Arabia/ Ghawar 18 

Indonesia flipped to importer 18 

Global Petroleum Plateau: temporary 18 

Fracking and Tar Sands Delayed Rationing 19 

oil !racking 19 

gas !racking 19 

Electric Cars are nice but can't bridge the gap 19 

1 00% clean energy will be less than current consumption (pun intended) 20 

1-5 new build option was not realistic 17 

79 miles per hour limit for Ta Igo trains capable of 1 20 18 

Double tracking 18 

Salem section 19 

Junction City - Willamette River - Harrisburg section 19 

Some other sections not considered for double tracks? 19 

Corvallis options need reconsideration 20 

Peak Traffic: Vehicle Miles Traveled 22 

Peak Oil Plateau: Growth is Over 26 

Alternative fuels and plug-in hybrids won't reverse Peak Traffic 27 

train service connected to the study area 37 

Coast Starlight 37 

Oakridge stop for Coast Starl ight 37 

Empire Builder 38 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 
Passenger trains to the coast and short line routes might not be practical, but we 

could use better intercity buses 38 

Coos Bay line 38 

Corval lis line 38 

Bus service in the valley 

Pioneer Train 

Decline of train service over the decades 

Potemkin Party by James Howard Kunstler 

High Speed Rail 

38 

39 

46 

49 

51 

The Big Picture: By Richard Heinberg, originally published by Resilience.erg December 

1 7, 201 8 58 

US Shale Gas Won't Last Ten Years: Bill Powers 68 

Los Angeles Times, May 20 2014: US Department of Energy admit Post Carbon Institute is 

right about exaggerated estimates of frackable oil reserves in California, downsizes estimate 

for Monterrey Shale by 96% 69 

Earth, energy and money 74 

Connected Dots: Earth • energy • money by Mark Robinowitz • PeakChoice.org 75 

M. King Hubbert on energy and money 77 

David Holmgren, permaculture co-originator 80 

Questionable Renewable Energy Dreams: Where Do We Go from Here by Jan 

Lundberg 84 

Andrew Nikiforuk's latest book, The Energy of Slaves 1 02 

greens.erg: A Critique of Jacobson and Delucchi's Proposals for a World Renewable 

Energy Supply 1 03 

greens.erg: Renewable Energy Cannot Sustain a Consumer Society 1 03 

Sustainable Solutions? 1 05 

Scientific American's Path to Sustainability: Let's Think about the Details 1 09 

Climate After Growth: Why Environmentalists Must Embrace Post-Growth Economics 

and Community Resilience 116 

The Oil Price Crash of 2014, Richard Heinberg, December 1 9, 201 4 119 

Our Renewable Future, Richard Heinberg 1 24 

The Purposely Confusing World of Energy Politics, by Richard Heinberg 1 41 

SEARCHING FOR A MIRACLE: Net Energy Limits and the Fate of Industrial Society, by 

Richard Heinberg 1 47 

Gas Bubble Leaking, About to Burst, by Richard Heinberg, Post Carbon Institute, 

October 22, 201 2 1 47 

Post Carbon Institute: Will Natural Gas Fuel America in the 21st Century? 1 49 

"Snake Oil: how fracking's false promise of plenty imperils our future" by Richard Heinberg 1 50 

Gas Bubble Leaking, About to Burst 1 53 

Fracking Fracas: The Trouble with Optimistic Shale Gas Projections by the U.S. 

Department of Energy, David Hughes 1 55 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 2 
The Shocking Data Behind Shale Oil, Chris Martenson, David Hughes, December 1 6, 

201 4 1 56 

Interview with Art Berman - Part 1 - July 1 9, 201 0 1 70 

Commentary: Interview with Art Berman-Part 2 1 73 

Sixty Lame Minutes by James Howard Kunstler 1 78 

Epic Disappointment by James Howard Kunstler 1 81 

Shale Gas: Panacea or Chimera? 1 84 

Bloomberg: U.S. Cuts Estimate for Marcellus Shale Gas Reserves by 66% 1 85 

Why we aren't mining methane hydrates now. Or ever. Peak Energy & Resources, 

Climate Change, and the Preservation of Knowledge by Alice Friedemann 1 86 

BBC: "The Day the Earth Nearly Died" about Permian mass extinction 252 million years 

ago caused by methane 1 92 

Peak Afordable Oil 1 93 

Why The Promise Of American LNG Exports Is Gassy Hype by Wolf Richter • May 29, 

201 4 1 99 

Peak Coal and Peak Oil: decl ining prospects 201 

Coal Export through Oregon and Washington? coal peaked in USA in 1 999, in Pennsylvania in 

1 920 201 

PDF Appendices: 

• Peak Traffic and Transportation Triage 

• Oregon Highway Plans 

• Peaked Energy and Climate Chaos 

• Fracking Postponed Rationing - 1 00% renewable won't be 1 00% of "current" use 

• Peak Money: a permanent change 

• Peak Electricity was 2007 in the USA 

• oil trains and the end of the Alaska Pipeline 

• Fractal Permaculture: local, bioregional, global 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 3 
In the Untted States, we have a ra lroad 

system that the Bugaranswould be 

9sh9rred of. We de&pel'Qtey9rego ng 

to need rai l

road transport for moving 

peope around, for moving goods 

around -\'le donl have that. What \'le 

do have is a. truck rg system that s 

go ro to become Increas ngly 

dysfunctiona , especially as the 

expense m:::,untsof ma. nta n rg the 

tremendous nterstate hg hway system. 

It costs so much m::>reyeveryyea.r to 

ma nta n what the englneere aill a h gh 

evel of seivte -whch means that the 

trucks that are de I we rng th ngs f10m 

the central valley of Cal i

forna to 

Toronto donl break the r axles while 

they',e brnging those Cae,;ar ,;aad& to 

Toronto. On::e you have a certain 

number of trucks that are breakng their 

axles n that 3,000 mi l

e journey, that's 

the end of transconti rental truckng -

whch also lmp e& that thlo & the end 

of certan economt relationsh ps that 

we have gotten used to. 

- -Jarres Howard Kunster, from an 

NO EXIT © Andy Singer 

TRANSPORTATION POLICV .. '.·.ir, 

, , ,,, / 

.. � .. 

inteiview n the f

i lm "The Endo! Suburl::ia: Oil Cepetbn and the End of the American Dream" 

2004 

https/ren.wikpeda.org/wikVPac lio_l\brth\'lest_Corrdor 

... By 1940, the SP [Southem Pooifio Raihoocl] operated six daily round tripe bei-en 

Portlendand Eugene: five ong-dslance t19ln& -the 8e9ver, CQsc9de, Klamath, Oregon Qn, 

and West Coast -that cont nued to Oakand via 1he Shasta Route, and the Rogue Rwer bcal 

seiv ce that ia.n to Ashand, Oregon on the oder Sskyou Line. [BJ Seiv ce gradua ly v.as 

decreased; 

between 

after Ser:tember 1 Q56, the Cascade was the ony rerrain ng SP seiv ce runn ng 

Portand and Eugene. It v.as reduced to tr-eky seiv ce in 1970, but asted unt l the 

start of Amtl'Qk.[g

[ In 19TT, the Oregon D,portrrent of Transporbltion(ODOl) studied the po88ibility of 100-

m le-per-tour(160 krrlh) a,rvioe bei-en Portland and Eugere. 

Draft E S: Oregon Passenger Ra l -comments by Mark Rob nowilz -PeakT19ff c.o,g -i:,age 4 
After many years of delay, ODOT has finally released a long overdue Draft EIS on better train 

service between Eugene and Portland. The proposal would increase Amtrak Cascades 

frequency to six round trips a day by 2035, which would bring service back to 1 940 levels (when 

there were also six round trips daily). 

Six trains a day nearly two decades from now would not be noteworthy in most of the 

industrialized world, but in Oregon this is an unprecedented initiative. 

It would be nice to have choices of departure times from Eugene to Portland beyond 5:30 am, 

lunch time (when the Coast Starlight is approximately on time) or late afternoon. I have friends 

who have lived in Eugene and worked at the State Capitol and Salem who regretted they were 

unable to use Amtrak to commute despite living and working walking distance from each train 

station. 

As every Amtrak frequent rider know, the train schedule can be unreliable due to freight 

congestion and the lack of double tracked sections that force trains to wait in sidings. The DEIS 

would address some of this, but does not detail why some single track sections would be added 

to and others would not be. Some of the train lines through towns would require substantial 

community disruption for double tracking, but other segments that would remain single track are 

in rural locations that would not bulldoze homes or wetlands with endangered species. 

There does not seem to be any money appropriated beyond funding this study. Contractors 

who create NEPA documents are spendy, but laying down rail, buying train sets, installing new 

crossing gates, rail bridges over waterways, grade separating roads over rail lines are much 

more expensive. 

Meanwhile, the region, the country, global civilization is facing the start of intensifying climate 

change and the end of the fossil fuel boom due to depletion. Both of these interconnected 

problems need consideration for future transportation and economic planning. 

Revised Purpose and Need 

The next stage of the NEPA process needs to consider physically possible scenarios for 

transportation demand and funding of maintenance and construction. Primary among 

considerations would be the expected availability of finite concentrated fossil carbon, since 

expensive oil and/or rationing would make existing projections moot. 

"New Circumstances" will require a Supplemental Draft EIS 

If a final EIS is prepared and published without consideration of energy descent, an SDEIS 

would be needed to address the "new circumstances" of energy shift that will change the 

assumptions in the study. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 5 
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires a revision to the Environmental Impact 

Statement to address the new information about Peak Oil and climate change. 

40 CFR 1 502.9: Draft, final and supplemental statements. 

(c) Agencies 

(1 ) Shall prepare supplements to either draft or final environmental impact statements if: 

(i) The agency makes substantial changes in the proposed action that are relevant to 

environmental concerns; or 

(ii) There are significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns 

and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts.23 CFR § 771 .130 Supplemental environmental 

impact statements. 

(a) A draft EIS, final EIS, or supplemental EIS may be supplemented at any time. An EIS shall be 

supplemented whenever the Administration determines that: 

(1 ) Changes to the proposed action would result in significant environmental impacts that were 

not evaluated in the EIS; or 

(2) New information or circumstances relevant to environmental concerns and bearings on the 

proposed action or its impacts would result in significant environmental impacts not evaluated in the 

EIS. 

The Peak of global petroleum extraction is a "new circumstance" that impacts the purpose and 

need for any federally funded transportation project. 

The global peak of conventional oil is now past, and this reality needs to be a primary 

consideration for any study of economics, energy, travel demand, financial futures, resource 

availability and related concerns over the next two decades (the timeline of this study). 

Energy limits is not something "outide the scope" of this study, but fundamental to any 

consideration of energy in 2035. Obviously a precise guess of what will happen on the energy 

downslope is impossible to quantify, but assuming that it will continue as usual is likely the most 

erroneous prediction. Availability of concentrated energy is at the core of any transportation 

demand projection so the SDEIS needs to anticipate how Oregonians will continue to travel as 

oil becomes scarcer. 

The Obama / Biden administration gave more support to Amtrak than any previous 

administrations. Senator Biden was a frequent Amtrak rider between Delaware and Capitol Hill. 

The main reason is probably because that administration understood Peak Oil even if they dare 

not admit it in public. Rebuilding the rails would be required to mitigate Peak Oil's transportation 

impact. But the soundbite of "High Speed Rail" distracts from some inconvenient truths - the 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 6 
appropriation of eight billion dollars will only pay for modest fixes to a few lines. Higher speed 

rail for all of the initial corridors would require hundreds of billions, and a national network of 

actual high speed rail would be even more expensive -- that would require redirecting funds for 

more freeways and converting military contractors to build trains. It creates more jobs per dollar 

to make trains instead of missiles. On the downslope of Peak Energy we need "Transportation 

Triage" to prioritize systems more likely to be useful during the permanent oil shock, not new 

highways built on the assumption traffic levels will go up forever. 

The money the United States spent to destroy Iraq could have been used for renewable energy 

systems to power a real national rail network. It would take a lot of fossil fuel input to make 

these systems. Steel and concrete need a lot of energy to produce. It would be wise to prioritize 

the remaining fossil and mineral resources to anticipate the lower energy future that lies ahead. 

Peak energy, limits to growh, depletion 

Alaska Pipel ine has declined three-fourths, nearing low flow 

shutdown. It powers Cascadia's motors including food delivery 

trucks 

During the DEIS comment period the Trans Alaska pipeline narrowly escaped disruption or 

destruction due to a Magnitude 7 earthquake on November 30, 201 8. But even without seismic 

shocks, the pipeline continues to dwindle toward the inevitable low flow shutdown. Cascadia is 

totally dependent on this source of concentrated energy to run our motors, including cars, trains, 

planes, container ships and food delivery trucks. It is hard to predict the point when this system 

will close down, but the potential exists for systemic impacts within the twenty year planning 

horizon assumed in this NEPA process, even if new drilling is started in northwest or northeast 

Alaska. 

I have had transportation planners from different levels of government quietly admit that this is a 

real concern and ask me how I think it could be considered. Perhaps a range of alternatives 

reflecting different scenarios makes sense. There could be the pollyanna "100% renewable 

green growth" future where techno-fixes save the day at the end of the oil era. I have personally 

used solar PV since 1 990 and enjoy it, although not so much in the wintertime. (I have 

concluded living on our solar budget might be able to power enough things to stave off the worst 

case scenarios, but won't power ever increasing exponential growth and therefore our way of 

life won't be solar powered.) There could also be an "oil rationing" scenario which includes 

substantially less VMT, a permanent economic recession or depression, and more demand for 

trains and buses to facilitate travel (but less ability to pay for those services or rail construction 

to add service). A collapse scenario could also be examined, but in that circumstance railroads 

might be moot as a consideration. 

In 2005, the US Department of Energy (Bush administration) commissioned a study to examine 

the economic impact of peak energy. Robert Hirsch was the lead author and the report is 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 7 
populary known as the Hirsh report He concluded that we would need two deades of 

preparations to react to the impacts of Peak O l, or risk severe eonomc shoks. I heard Mr. 

Hirsh speak at the Assoiation for the Study of Peak O l conferences (ASPO-USA) and asked 

him i he was subtly suggesting that we blew t when our soiety ignored Pres dent Carter's 

warnings to pay attention to the energy crises. He just smiled in response ... 

Since the Hirsh report, the US has engaged in a massve expanson of unconventional ol and 

gas to avert the shoks of peaked energy. Frack ng has been a steep boom for both fuel 

sources and has enab ed much of the soiety to go back to sleep - a snooze button. However, 

tracked wels deline tar faster than conventional wels and the early tracked fields have mosty 

peaked and started ther declines. When the track ng boom tips over into bust, the energy 

crises are likey to return like the passage of the eye of a Category Fve hurr cane, a senario 

we are totaly unprepared for ether logst cal y or psychoogcal l

y. 

Here is some relevant background on this limting, 

fundamental factor tor any eonomc and 

transportation panning in Ore- s-gone. 

www. peakchoce. orgpeak-al 

aska·pipei ne. html 

ALASKA PIPELINE: PEAK & DECLINE 

low flow shutdown threshold for Arctic winter estimated to be between 

300 and 500 thousand barrels / day (109 million to 182 million / year) 

.. 

ra 800 GI 

700 

GI 

D. 600 

Ill - 500 

.. 400 

ra 

300 

C 

0 200 

·---·- 100 E 

PEAK YEAR: 1988 

total: 744,107,855 b.rrels 

per !ay: 2,032,928 barrels 

2017 total: 192,472,797 barrels, ___ _. lowftow 

2017 per day: 527,323 barrels shutdown 

1977 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2017 

chart: www.PeakChoice.org/peak-alaska-pipeline.html 

data: www.alyeska-pipe.com/TAPS/Pipeline0perations/Throughput 

Alaska o l extraction peaked in 1988 at over two mil ion barrels a day. Now, in 2018, t is about a 

haf mil ion barrels a day. The ppe ine has a m nimum flow level required to keep the contents 

above freezing so they can be pumped from one sde of Alaska to the other in the Arctic winter. 

Draft EIS: Oreg:in Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinow tz - PeakTraff c.org - page 8 
Estimates vary but around three hundred thousand barrels a day is a good guess for the low 

flow shutdown threshold. The last barrels on the North Slope will not be extracted - some of the 

remaining reserve will be left in the ground, inaccessible. 

The Alaska Pipeline requires a tremendous energy input to pump the oil from Prudhoe Bay (in 

north Alaska) to the harbor terminal at Valdez. While the energy input into the system is dwarfed 

by the energy density of the transported oil, it is a factor to consider as the oil fields dwindle 

further. The pipeline has heaters along the route to keep the contents above freezing, which 

lowers the "Energy Return on Energy Invested" (EROEI). 

The pipeline consortium maintains a web page that discusses some of the energy required to 

keep the pipeline functioning at www .alyeska-pipe.com/Pipelinefacts/PumpStations.html Drilling 

for oil in Arctic conditions requires much more energy than oil drilling in warmer climates, 

especially if the oil is closer to the surface and under higher pressures (ie. most of the Middle 

East fields). 

[ w.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist)LeafHandler.ashx?n = pet&s = mcrfpak:2&f = m 

Alaska Field Production of Crude Oil 

Tousand Barrels per Day 

2 500 

2,000 

1 500 

1 000 

500 

O 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 

- Alaska Field Production of Crude Oil 

� source: u s Energy Informtion Administration 

1995 2000 2005 2010 

update: November 30, 201 8 - pipeline narrowly escapes earthquake, so oil 

continues to power West Coast motors 

2015 

On November 30, 2018 the Anchorage area experienced a magnitude 7 earthquake that 

destroyed buildings, roads and bridges. Fortunately there were no fatalities or serious injuries, 

but the region's critical infrastructure suffered damage that will take money, labor, fossil fuels, 

and minerals to repair. 

The pipeline's terminal was not in the maximum shaking zone. 

A magnitude 9 earthquake shook that region in 1 964, causing far worse damage including a 

tsunami that wrecked Valdez, where the pipeline terminus is today. This tsunami also killed a 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 9 
few people in Crescent City, California - there was no tunami warning system then and it 

arrived there at night, making warning and evacuation impossible. 

A rarely reported upcoming problem with the pipeline is low flow shutdown. It flow peaked in 

1 988 and is now three fourths less, and barely pumps enough to keep the content liquid in the 

Arctic winter. When it's over, there will be major energy disruptions on the west coast that we 

are totally unprepared for either logistically or psychologically. I assume the Trumpsters will 

loudly proclaim the shortages are the fault of the "stop drilling" crowd and will have a lot of 

people believing that. Practical approaches - system wide "Transition Town" and permaculture, 

cooperatives, etc. would be needed to mitigate this impact. Protests don't get us there. 

Prudhoe Bay has pumped over 17 billion barrels since the pipeline opened. The National 

Petroleum Reserve - Alaska in northwest Alaska, opened to drilling exploration by the Clinton 

Gore administration in 1 998, was originally thought to have ten billion barrels. Current estimates 

are under a billion. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge might have a billion barrels, some 

estimates are higher but could be boosterism. 

It's not a secret that the pipeline is declining toward low flow shutdown, but there has been little 

media coverage and there's almost no public awareness. 

Rebuilding roads, power lines and other critical infrastructure in the aftermath of today's quake 

will require fossil fuels and minerals. It's hard to make steel and concrete and asphalt without 

these inputs. Same with fighting forest fires or rebuilding damaged communities. If we were 

smarter as a society we would require the rebuilding to be hyper efficient, passive solar 

designed, and other practices more appropriate for the lower energy flow future we are entering 

due to depletion. I've been talking about this for nearly two decades in Ore-is-gone and have not 

found politicians, newpapers, civic organizations, environmental groups, anyone who is already 

informed (with the exception of a few insiders with specialized technical knowledge). A native 

friend who used to live in Anchorage told me a few years ago that it's not a topic he has ever 

seen discussed there. I hope everyone will accept that there was only so much oil put in the 

ground by geological processes, Jesus, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster (depending on 

one's belief systems) and that it was a once time gift of Nature, squandered quickly. Otherwise, 

we are likely to see scapegoating and anger that would likely make a rational, cooperative 

response to the downslope impossible to realize. 

Damned if we drill. Damned if we stop. 

http://ww. npr. org/201 7 /06/24/533798430/alaskas-40-years-of-oil-riches-almost-never -was 

Now, Alaska's long dependence on oil may be coming to an end. 

"You have a state where oil had paid for almost everthing and suddenly the oil revenue - most of 

it - has evaporated," said economist Gunnar Knapp, former director of Institute of Social and 

Economic Research at University of Alaska Anchorage. 

After four decades of production, it's getting harder to pump oil out of Prudhoe Bay The field has 

been in steady decline since the mid-1 990s. The amount of oil flowing through the 800-mile transAlaska pipeline each day is now about a quarter of what it carried at its peak in the 1 980s. That, 

coupled with a crash in oil prices, means the state faces an uncertain future. Today, Alaska state 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 10 
lawmakers are battling over what to do next, and narrowly averted a government shutdown this 

month. 

Alaska's 40 Years Of Oil Riches Almost Never Was 

June 24, 201 7 7:00 AM ET 

Heard on Weekend Edition Sunday 

ELIZABETH HARBALL 

alyeska-pipe.com/NewsCenter/HeadlineStories 

"Cold oil a hot topic during winter" 

As oil throughput declines, TAPS faces new and complicated challenges. One of the most 

complex is maintaining crude oil temperature in the pipeline at around 40 degrees during the winter. 

This provides a safe operating buffer above 31 degrees, at which point trace amounts of water in the 

oil can begin to freeze. Heat input along TAPS is critical during cold weather; the hotter the oil, the 

lesser the chance of ice formation during extreme cold weather events or unplanned pipeline 

shutdowns. Ice in the pipeline can pose risks to mainline check valves, instruments, mainline pumps 

and maintenance pigs. 

Each winter between October and March, Alyeska's Operations Engineering and the Operations 

Control Center constantly analyze temperatures along the pipeline and look at weather forecasts to 

optimize heat input 

"The effort requires a mix of science and intuition to maintain the target temperatures for the 

pipeline system," explained M ike Malvick, Flow Assurance Advisor with the Flow Assurance Team. 

"And it's a system that has a lot of thermal mass and a transit time that exceeds two weeks." 

TAPS oil temperature is a function of pipeline throughput and the time the oil spends in the 

pipeline. At its peak in 1 988, TAPS throughput was more than 2 million barrels a day. At that rate, oil 

traveled from Pump Station 1 to Valdez in 4.5 days and was as hot as 1 20 degrees. Freezing water 

and wax accumulation weren't concerns. 

Oil now leaves Pump Station 1 at approximately 110 degrees and experiences a significant drop 

in temperature almost immediately upon departing, then continues cooling as it travels to Valdez. 

Today's throughput is around 530,000 barrels a day, taking 18 days to travel to Valdez. On Monday, 

Januar 26, oil departed Pump Station 1 at 1 06 degrees with an ambient temperature of 17 below 

zero. By the time the oil traveled 1 00 miles south to Pump Station 3, the environment had drawn 51 

degrees from its natural temperature. Near the Yukon River, temperatures were around 50 below 

zero. In Fairbanks, temperatures hovered around 40 below Without heating assistance, the oil would 

eventually cool below 31 degrees before reaching Valdez. 

When will the Alaska pipeline turn into an 800-mile-long Popsicle? 

Posted on August 1 5, 201 5 by energyskeptic 

http:/ /e ne rgyske ptic. co m/201 5/hen-wi II-the-alaska-pipe I ine-turn-i nto-a n-800-mi le-long-popsicle/ 

[Below are excerpts on the Alaskan pipeline from Rust: The Longest Wr by Jonathan 

Wldman. This is a great book, yet leaves so many possible rust stories uncovered, that I 

hope Wldman writes Rust II (or any other topic - will certainly read his next book whatever 

it is). Alice Friedemann w.energyskeptic.com ] 

Officially, Neogi is the pipeline's integrity manager. He is responsible for keeping the pipeline 

intact, whole. Most pipeline operators employ integrity managers, but most pipelines are not like the 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 11 
Trans-Alaska Pipeline System. From Prudhoe Bay to Prince William Sound, TAPS stretches eight 

hundred miles, which leaves Neogi accountable for one of the heaviest metal things in the Western 

Hemisphere, through which the vast majority of Alaska's economy flows. Dai ly, the four-foot steel tube 

spits out $50 million of oil. 

Four technicians from Baker Hughes, the pig's manufacturer, wrapped up a third day of checking 

and double checking and triple checking its componentr. Among other things, in the front segment of 

the pig, between two yellow urethane cups, they checked 112 magnetic sensors mounted in between 

112 pairs of magnetized brushes. These sensors would detect the magnetic field induced in the pipe 

as the pig, propelled by the flow of oil, traveled through it. Given any kind of anomaly in the half-inch 

steel-a pit, a ding, a thin spot- the field would change, and the sensors would capture this and 

record it on a hard drive. Inch by inch, the sensors would capture this information; Neogi hoped they 

would capture all seven billion square inches of the pipe. That's 1,200 acres. Using all that data, 

Neogi would determine the most vulnerable spots on the pipeline, dig them up, and repair them 

before they became leaks. 

No matter how extensively the technicians double checked, even the most advanced pig can't 

perform its inspection if the wall of the pipe is covered in wax. Wax, a natural component of crude oil, 

keeps the magnetic brushes and sensors off the steel wall. The consistency of lip balm or mousse, it 

plugs up caliper arms that measure the shape of the pipe, and snags odometer wheels. Wax renders 

smart pigs senseless, leaving them blind, dumb, and amnesiac. Nor can a pig surive a violent 

voyage. Too fast, and sensor heads melt or crack. Too rough, and the magnetizing brushes wear 

down. Too jarring, and the universal joint between the pig's two segments comes apart, wires snap, 

and power to the magnetic flux sensors is cut off. Poof goes the data, months of work, and millions of 

dollars-leaving engineers with a pipeline in indeterminate condition, regulators unhappy, and the 

public at risk. Wax accumulates when the oil cools below 75 degrees, and long, slack sections, where 

the pig can barrel down mountain passes at high speed, manifest themselves when there's not much 

oil flowing through the pipe. Neogi was well aware that it was winter, and that the flow of oil through 

TAPS was as low as it had been. It was not the best of times to pig. 

On account of wax and low flow rates, in the last dozen years, half the smart pig runs have failed. 

More recently, a pig was sucked into a relief line at a pump station midway down the line. That 

the relief line was only sixteen inches in diameter, and guarded with pig bars, was not a sufficient 

deterrent to the forty-eight-inch pig. This has happened at least a half dozen times. When it happened 

in 1 986, and the pipeline was shut down while the pig was extracted, that meant more than a quarter 

of the nation's oil wasn't moving toward California. Pigs have made it all the way to Valdez, Alaska, 

only to be ingested in relief lines there. other pigs have damaged the pipeline, or gotten stuck in it 

and been destroyed during their extraction. 

They planned to launch the tool at seven in the morning, exactly twelve hours behind a red 

urethane pig of lesser intelligence. That pig, like a giant squeegee, was scraping the line clean. It was 

the last of nine such scraper pigs that, by Neogi's design, had been shoved down the pipeline in the 

previous six weeks. Neogi had kept track of how much wax these pigs had pushed out in Valdez, and 

graphed it. From 1,200 pounds, the mass had dropped to 400. The line was as clean as it was going 

to get, primed for inspection. It was ready for the smart 

For two decades, the Prudhoe Bay oil fields-Sadlerochit, Northstar, Kuparuk, Endicott, Lisburne 

-have been declining steadily. Yearly, immutably, they produce 5 percent less oil. The result is that 

TAPS now carries one quarter of the oil it was designed to carr. It comes out of the ground colder 

than ever and flows more slowly toward Valdez. Crude used to make it to Valdez in four days, as if 

running seven-minute miles. Now it walks. Enroute, it cools off even more and, as it does so, deposits 

more wax on the pipeline. A doctor would call the pipeline arteriosclerotic. While a pipeline waxes, its 

diameter wanes. Declining throughput makes things difficult for Neogi, but it makes them even more 

difficult for agencies estimating the pipeline's lifespan. 

The pipeline was designed to surive as long as the oil fields. Lest it clog, it must stay warm, 

which means that it must remain full of flowing oil. In a pererse symbiosis, the pipeline needs the oil 

as much as the oil needs the pipeline. As a result, while the consortium of agencies that oversees the 

pipeline has written that it "can be sustained for an unlimited duration," Alyeska figures that it'll surive 

until 2043, and the state of Alaska figures that it'll expire a bit sooner. Private consultants, hired to 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 12 
estimate the life of TAPS, mention only "the future" and write of "diligent upkeep" in passive 

sentences. The estimates all couch what nobody wants to say: the pipeline, once the largest privately 

funded project in America, and one of its greatest engineering achievements, is now an elderly patient 

in intensive care. 

The companies that built the pipeline foresaw such a future and tried to avoid it. In the immediate 

aftermath of their 1 968 oil discover, they considered ever alternative to a pipeline. They considered 

extending the Alaska Railroad to the North Slope, until they realized that it'd take sixty-three trains, 

each one hundred cars long, ever day, to ship their oil. They considered trucks, calculating that 

they'd need nearly the entire American fleet in addition to an eight-lane highway. They looked into 

jumbo jets supplied by Boeing and Lockheed, turning away when it became apparent that their air 

traffic would exceed the combined air traffic of all the freight in the rest of the country by more than an 

order of magnitude. They looked into blimps. They commissioned the world's largest icebreaking 

cargo ship, and after it got stuck in the Northwest Passage, they seriously considered using a fleet of 

nuclear submarines to ship the oil, under Arctic ice, to a port in Greenland. Reluctantly, out of 

alternatives, they settled on a pipeline. 

On most other pipelines, "events" or "incidents" or "product releases"- what the rest of us call 

leaks or spills-are most often caused by third-party damage. By this, the industr means accidents. 

Heavy equipment is usually to blame; pipeline ruptures are most often caused by collisions with 

bulldozers and backhoes. On TAPS, since there's so little construction across the vastness of Alaska, 

the risk of accidental third-party damage is low Natural hazards, on the other hand, present threats in 

abundance. Earthquakes, avalanches, floods, and ice floes all threaten TAPS. But what really keeps 

Alyeskans up is corrosion. It's the number one threat to the integrity of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. On 

account of that threat, the pipeline was outfitted with the greatest corrosion-protection features of the 

era. Its principal protection was its coating: paint. As a backup, a zinc strap the size of a wrist (a giant 

anode) was buried under the pipe. Though TAPS was, boldly, called rustproof, the defense proved 

insufficient. Like all coatings, the one on TAPS proved vulnerable-but Alyeska didn't learn quite how 

vulnerable for a dozen years. When it did, the company beefed up the pipeline's corrosion protection 

with 1 0,000 twenty-five-pound bags of buried magnesium anodes and a cathodic protection system 

consisting of a hundred-odd rectifiers spitting a low voltage into the pipe. 

Because rocks resist current, the cathodic protection system doesn't work well in rocky areas, 

leaving corrosion engineers to their final tool: coupons. On the pipeline, a coupon is a one-inch 

square of steel, connected to it and buried along it, serving as a surrogate. Alyeska has about eight 

hundred of them. But coupons don't prevent corrosion; they just help engineers monitor it. 

In a way, monitoring is Alyeska's second line of defense, and Alyeska does a lot of it. Like all 

major pipelines, TAPS is monitored by leak-detection software, which compares the flow of oil going 

into the pipeline with the flow coming out the other end, and also scans for sudden pressure drops. 

But unlike other pipelines, it is also monitored regularly by pilots using infrared cameras to hunt for 

signals that the hot oil has escaped into the cold Alaskan earth, as well as by "line walkers" who hunt 

for dark puddles and squishy tundra along the pipeline, and by controllers watching an array of 

hydrocarbon-detecting and liquid-detecting and noise-detecting sensors shoved into the ground 

alongside it. And then there are the dozen state and federal agencies looking over the shoulders of 

the thousand people operating the pipeline, making it the most regulated pipeline in the world. 

But because a smart pig is the only way for Alyeska to determine if its pipeline is about to spring a 

leak before it has actually done so, and because Alyeska operates under more regulator scrutiny 

than any other operator, it sends smart pigs down the line nearly twice as often as any other pipeline 

operator. It employs a smart pig once ever three years, and has been doing so since long before 

federal pipeline laws stipulated it. Thanks largely to smart pigs, TAPS hasn't suffered a corrosioninduced leak since it began operating in 1 977.2 Over its first thirty years, Alyeska reviewed nearly 350 

potential threats to the pipeline, including dents, wrinkle bends, weld misalignments, ovalities, 

gouges, and corrosion pits. The majority of these problems were found with smart pigs. 

Keeping the pipe clean has become a priority nearly as great as keeping it whole, because the 

latter depends on the former. To keep it clean, Alyeska sends cleaning pigs south weekly. The 

company keeps a fleet of a dozen such pigs at a maintenance yard in Valdez, and in a perpetual 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 13 
relay, these pigs go back and forth: up the haul road, down the line. The managerial pigs- the smart 

ones wait patiently while these janitorial pigs stay busy. 

Before the last smart pig run, Alyeska sent a janitorial pig south ever four days for a month. 

When these pigs pop out in Valdez, they usually push out ten or twenty barrels of wax. In the pig 

mobile, they go straight to the pig wash. The wax, a hazardous material, is collected in barrels and 

shipped out of state. Once, not many years ago, after the pipeline wasn't pigged for six weeks, a pig 

pushed out forty-seven barrels of wax. Beneath all that wax, on account of corrosion, the one-billionpound pipeline loses in the vicinity of ten pounds of steel a year: the same as an old Ford. Most of 

that metal loss is on the outside of the pipe, where it's buried. The inside is, well, nicely oiled. The 

exception is inside pump stations, where the pipe branches through valves and turbines. In deadlegs 

-hydraulic culs-de-sac, where oil sits stagnant-microbial-influenced corrosion is a threat If 

corrosion struck uniformly, such that the pipeline lost metal evenly and consistently, maintaining it 

would be vastly easier. After a thousand years, 99.999 percent of the pipe would still be there, sans 

weak spots. But rust doesn't work like that It concentrates in relatively few places, begetting more 

rust Alyeska responds only to those places that present severe integrity threats. It looks at spots 

where 35 percent or more of the pipe's wall thickness is gone, and where metal loss leaves the pipe 

at risk of bursting, which it determines from a formula developed by the American Society of 

Mechanical Engineers. 

To the pipeline, though, ravens pose a greater threat Ravens pick at the pipe's insulation, and 

then water gets in. Alyeska spent millions installing bands around the seams of the insulation, and the 

ravens persisted, outsmarting engineers. 

the flow of oil through TAPS decreases, pigging will become drastically more difficult. Below 

400,000 barrels per day, it will become impossible to tightline Atigun Pass, because there's only so 

much oil a controller can store in the tanks at Pump 1 before he runs out of emergency wiggle room. 

By then, the slack section on Atigun Pass will be over three miles long. Below 350,000 barrels per 

day, the "slippage factor" of a cleaning pig will prevent it from scraping the line effectively. With the 

bypass necessar to keep the wax ahead of it in a slurr, there won't be enough force to push the pig 

forward. Alyeska will also need to run them more frequently-as frequently as during this run's 

cleaning regimen-and this makes controllers nerous. Meanwhile, by 201 5, the small percentage of 

water entrained in the oil will drop out and begin flowing in a separate layer on the bottom of the line. 

Collecting at a dozen low spots, it could freeze. In so doing, it could disable check valves or halt pigs. 

At a flow rate of 400,000 barrels per day (expected by 2020), a pig arriving in Valdez could be 

pushing a slug of water one third of a mile long. Alyeska may need a new type of pig to push out the 

water, because water will also corrode the pipeline. Compounding matters, lower throughput will 

make it harder for controllers to detect leaks. 

It was the closest that TAPS had ever been to becoming an eight-hundred-mile-long Popsicle. 

This is Alyeska's great fear, its "worst-case event" Declining throughput may necessitate frequent 

cleaning pigs, complex operating procedures, smarter and tougher pigs, and increased maintenance 

-but these are nothing compared with the seizure of the pipeline. North Slope crude gels at 15 

degrees. It gets so thick that pumps can't push it It becomes thixotropic, like quicksand. For whatever 

reason-a power outage, say-if the oil sits in the line too long, at the wrong time of year, the threat 

of the big Popsicle looms. In Januar 2011, the oil cooled to 25 degrees. The threat is critical. 

Alyeska's former president told Congress that at the flow rate expected in 201 5, nine winter days 

of shutdown could spell the ultimate end of the pipeline. If the oil gels, there will be no recovering from 

it The threat makes explosions and even leaks seem trivial. It's a game ender. It's because of this 

conundrum that drilling in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas is of such importance to Alaska, Alyeska, 

and Alaskans. Those rigs will tie into the Alaska pipeline, feed it their oil. Sure, residents will get 

annual dividends, and Alaska will receive billions in royalties and taxes that fund pretty much 

everthing in the state. But it's the long-term future of the state on the table. 

The sooner that someone turns around the two-decade saga of declining throughput, keeping the 

pipeline from turning into a giant Popsicle, the easier those concerned with the integrity of the pipe 

will sleep. In the meantime, if TAPS leaks for some reason, and the public withholds forgiveness, the 

resultant delay in offshore drilling could portend the end of the line. That's what Neogi was implying 

when he mentioned the impact on future drilling. A big spill could delay offshore drilling in the Beaufort 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 14 
or Chukchi Seas for two decades, and this could spell the end of the line. End of the line would be the 

end of the state of Alaska, and not exactly beneficial to the economy of the other forty-nine states in 

the union. Precarious is the future of the pipeline, and high are the stakes in which Neogi and the 

integrity management crew operate. 

www.postcarbon.org/blog-post/1 65463-alaska-and-energy 

Alaska and Energy by Richard Heinberg 

Posted Oct 26, 2010 

During my recent visit to Anchorage, Alaska to speak at that city's Bioneers satellite conference, 

the friendly locals seemed eager to educate me about their local energy issues. Some of what I 

learned struck me as important to share with a wider audience. 

Alaska is, of course, a huge energy exporter. Crude from the North Slope saved America's energy 

bacon back in the '80s, helping to lower world oil prices and bankrupt the evil Soviet empire. 

Production there has declined from a peak of over two million barrels per day to only 600,000 or so 

today. Once the flow drops below 500,000 barrels, there will be problems with icing in the TransAlaska Pipeline system. Not good. 

The state's economy is based almost entirely on resource extraction. Everyone gets a check 

annually from the Alaska Permanent Fund, set up in 1 976 primarily by the efforts of then Governor 

Jay Hammond. High oil prices mean big dividends: in 2008-2009 extra-large payouts made Governor 

Palin look good to her constituents, though she was in no way responsible. 

Alaska has enormous opportunities for renewables-wind, microhydro, geothermal, tidal, even 

solar. But these are far from being adequately developed, and progress in that direction will take time 

and lots of investment-a dramatically higher pace of investment than is currently evident. 

Anchorage (by far the largest city in the state) faces a particular challenge with natural gas: 

currently nearly all houses are heated with gas, but supplies from Cook Inlet will run low in two years, 

even sooner with an abnormally cold winter. Most options to replace current sources (more drilling, 

LNG, alternative energy) will take longer than two years to develop.There is no serious planning for 

what to do about this. 

Then there is the situation of the native vil lages. On one hand, the indigenous peoples of the 

north might seem well placed to weather the changes ahead as industrial society succumbs to peak 

oil, peak coal, and peak gas: they have cultural traditions of self-sufficiency, small populations relative 

to land area, and access to lots of wild protein on the hoof (moose, caribou). However, as James van 

Lanen of Alaska Department of Fish and Game wrote to me in an email just the other day: 

"Alaska Native vil lages are in a very precarious situation. These remote villages are only 

accessible by motorized travel via air or watercraft. They are entirely dependent upon fossil-fuel 

systems for goods and serices: food, heat, health care. They have no contact with the outside world 

without fossil fuels. 

"Some villages obtain more of their food resources from wild sources than others. It would be 

safe to say that on average 80% of the protein consumption in a village is from wild sources. Berries 

and Plants supplement some part of the overall diet but this is small. The two important things to 

consider are (1) much of the food consumed comes from industrial sources and is shipped in via 

small aircraft and (2) wild food harests are currently almost entirely fossil-fuel dependent (there is a 

well-embedded 'machine culture' in native villages; I believe that there is no extant ability to obtain 

significant amounts of wild foods without the use of machines) ... " 

"Peak Energy will hit Alaska villages sooner and more intensely than many other places. Fuel is 

already up to $9 per gallon in some places. As it becomes uneconomical for current supply operations 

to continue the industrial resources these villages rely on will fizzle out." 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 15 
"Most village peo pie a re aware of their comp I ete dependence upon foss l fuels. Many e Ide rs 

fore see a future collapse due to increasing costs and modern dependence. However, the re is no 

gen era I awareness of the phenomenon of Peak Energy in these co mmun �ies. Th ere is no awareness 

that the entire system may break down . .Alaska villages desperately need to become educated in 

what we a re facing." 

I came away from my too-brief so ourn in Anchorage wth both a deep appreciation for this land of 

great natural beauty, contrasts, and extremes, and an equally deep concern for how Aaskans will 

deal wth their enormous energy cha lie nges. So me of those cha lie nges are going to present 

themse ves forcibly in the very near future. 

New drilling tor northwest and northeast Ala ska to extend the pipeline's lite 

NPRA 

D Federal Lands 

• Petroleum 

accumulation 

A retie Ocean 

.

. 

••••••••••• 

Tr.ans-A .ask� t 

Plptlitrio 

System 

Prudhoe 

Bay 

-✓ 

�.,, ... 

• 

Mackenz e 

Dena 

Area 

Several 

administratons have sought to open northeast Aaskas Arct c Natonal Wld lfe Refuge 

(ANWR) to dr lling. So far, env ronmental 

groups have successfully prevented this deveopment, 

us ng the argum ant that "refuges" shou d be protected from industrial 

d eve o pm ant and c ting 

the crt cal 

ecoog cal 

role this area has for car bou and other species. The Trump administraton 

has pushed agan for this, perhaps they wil I succeed, perhaps not. 

Less known is the fact that C inton Gore opened northwest Alaska to exporaton in 1998. This 

was originally thought to have about ten bi 

Ilon barrels, but more recent estimates pro ect 

perhaps 800 mill ion barre s (a downgrade of ova r 90%). The opening of this area had barey a 

peep of protest from the envronmental 

groups, snce the policy was pushed by Democrats and 

the area isn t call ed a "refuge" even though t has the same ecoogy as ANWR. 

Draft El 

S: Ore!Jl n Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rab nowtz - PeakTraff c.org - page f 6 
Neither advocates for more drilling regions nor opponents mention the reason additional areas 

are sought Prudhoe Bay is in terminal decline and new sources would extend the usability of 

the pipeline. 

There have also been efforts promoting offshore drilling in the Arctic ocean. However, an early 

test well called "Mukluk" built a gravel island and was an expensive dry hole. Even if climate 

change reduces the amount of sea ice, it is likely there will still be some winter ice cover that 

would make permanent offhore oil wells impossible to maintain (hence the reason Mukluk was 

on an artificial island). Geologist Colin Campbell estimates there may be more natural gas than 

oil under the Arctic ocean, but without pipeline capacity or Liquid Natural Gas terminals on the 

north slope this gas is unlikely to be sent to distant users. 

http://nixonisinhell .wordpress.com/2007 /08/09/an-inconvenient-truth/ 

In 1 999, Clinton-Gore opened the National Petroleum ReseNe - Alaska, (NPR-A), to oil drilling -

24 million acres adjacent to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, (ANWR). The NPR-A is an 

environmentally sensitive area. It contains Teshekpuk Lake, an important nesting ground for many 

species of migratory bird, including shorebirds and waterfowl. The NPR-A also supports more than 

half-a million caribou of the Western Arctic and Teshekpuk Caribou Herds. It contains the highest 

concentration of grizzly bears in Alaska's arctic, as well as wolverines and wolves that prey on the 

caribou. NPR-A contains the headwaters and much of the Colville River, Alaska's largest river north of 

the Arctic Circle. 

www.aspo-usa.org 

Peak Oil Review 

Association for the Study of Peak Oil - USA 

Vol. 2, No. 41 

October 8, 2007 

The North Slope accounts for about 14 percent of US domestic oil production. Its 740,000 b/d is 

declining about 6 percent a year. One concern of producers is managing the decline of conventional 

oil production so that there is enough light oil to mix with increasing volumes of heavy oil suitable for 

shipping through the pipeline. 

BP will begin a heavy oil production test on the North Slope next summer. They will use a 

technology called cold heavy oil production with sand, or CHOPS, that is being adapted from 

techniques used with similar heavy oil deposits in Canada. Heavy oil could provide an additional 2 

billion barrels from the North Slope. 

1-5 new build option was not realistic 

The alternative to build a brand new, higher speed rail line mostly parallel to 1-5 was not a 

reasonable consideration. It would be much more expensive than upgrading the existing route, 

even if that included an option to extend service to Corvallis. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 17 
Technically, building a Shinkansen style rail line next to 1-5 would require major reconstruction 

of the interstate, if it was routed close enough to the road to require rebuilding the interchanges. 

As ODOT know, the most expensive component of highway widening is redoing interchanges 

to accommodate extra lanes, which is underway on selected overcrossings and interchanges 

south of Eugene (anticipating future lane additions). 

It took ODOT many years to find funds to perform this EIS. ODOT also had to scramble several 

years ago to buy two trains when Washington State decided to reserve their Cascades trains for 

the Portland-Seattle route (and not extended further south into Oregon). 

Studying spending four billion on a new line next to 1-5 that would bypass existing stations and 

then a huge tunnel through Portland seems to have been a distraction. 

hold your breath in the tunnel 

The longest train tunnel I have gone through on Amtrak is Moffat tunnel in Colorado, west of 

Denver. On the California Zephyr, the conductor announces that during passage in the six mile 

long tunnel passengers are not allowed to go from car to car. These seemed odd at first, since 

the outide darkness is not a problem for the inside of the train. Lighting is not the reason -

breathing is the reason. The narrow, single track tunnel does not permit easy flushing of the 

diesel exhaust. If the doors to the cars are opened, the fumes would flow into the cabins. An 

Amtrak employee told me that the engineers (for Amtrak and freight trains) are given gas masks 

in case the train breaks down in this section. Therefore, studying even longer tunnels under 

Portland for diesel powered trains seemed a waste of funds given to the study's contractors. 

If a new route, or segments of a new route legitimately required bypassing existing stations, 

perhaps that might be acceptable. But given the paltry investment in Oregon passenger rail, 

the proposal to spend four billion instead of one billion for six round trip trains per day seems 

ridiculous. 

79 mi les per hour limit for Talgo trains capable of 1 20 

Taiga trains are capable of going about 1 20 mph (200 kph). It would be nice for any build option 

to consider ways that our locomotives could travel closer to their capacity. This would require 

upgrades to safety gates at crossings plus rebuilt track, perhaps other things. 

Double tracking 

A major problem with Amtrak service almost everywhere outide the Northeast corridor is the 

reliance on single track. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 18 
In Apple's map program (similar to Google Maps), the satellite image of the rail lines of Oregon 

currently show the Coast Starlight headed south of Albany on a single track and an Amtrak 

Cascades train waiting on a siding for the Starlight to pass. 

Salem section 

The track through downtown Salem would be difficult to convert to double track without 

narrowing the parallel road. Fortunately this segment is relatively short and trains are traveling 

slow there. 

It is good that the State Capitol is a short walk from a train station. 

Junction City - Willamette River - Harrisburg section 

The maps showing where the line would be double tracked do not show any track additions for 

the Junction City to Harrisburg section. Perhaps the two towns are too landlocked for additional 

rails (and a bypass would have it own costs and property acquisition problems). However, the 

route between those towns would be much easier to add capacity, since the route is rural 

without immediately adjacent homes. 

The crossing of the Willamette River south of Harrisburg was on an old wooden bridge. I don't 

know the age of the structure, but it did not look like it was designed with seismic 

considerations. Amtrak slowed down to maybe 30 mph (50 kph) when crossing, the opposite of 

what the train should be doing (going faster between the cities and slowing down when going 

through town). 

Some other sections not considered tor double tracks? 

• north of Halsey - no improvement/ extra track needed? 

• to south of Tangent 

• Jefferson 

• south of Salem to Turner (south of 1-5 undercrossing) 

• Brooks to Woodburn 

• north of Woodburn to Aurora / Canby 

• Canby needs 

• then to Oregon city 

• Portland / Vancouver apparently is slated for a separate project for upgrading this track but it 

is not detailed in the DEIS. A faster connection could help Vancouver to Portland commute, 

and provide extra capacity for Portland - Seattle trains, freight trains and the Empire Builder. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 19 
Corvallis options need reconsideration 

I request reconsideration of Corvallis options between Eugene and Albany. 

Oregon State University has many student, faculty, staff, visitors who would be potential riders. 

Informally, my friends in Corvallis were all excited when they heard this was being considered. 

As the DEIS notes, there is a publicly owned rail right of way between Monroe and Corvallis that 

could easily be used for Cascades service. 

Unfortunately, the old right of way between Monroe and Junction City is no longer in railroad 

ownership and would be much more difficult to acquire (or a similar route that might have less 

damage to homes and farms). 

However, that would still be less disruptive than some of the Rube Goldberg routes proposed for 

a new alignment bullet train from 1-5 to downtown Portland. 

Currently, there is no public transit between Corvallis and Eugene -- only a couple Greyhound 

buses per day. Service from Corvallis to Portland is also infrequent. Frequent service that is 

reliable increases ridership. 

Perhaps approving the potential of Eugene - Corvallis - Albany train service could be done in 

the Record of Decision and if funds ever become available then it could be implemented. I have 

no idea what the Monroe to Junction City segment would cost but it would likely be much less 

than any of the 1-5 parallel options. 

The DEIS noted that the existing tracks from Corvallis to Albany bypass the existing Albany train 

station. One option considered to include the station was a new alignment Highway 34 route. 

However, this would have considerable private property displacement, probably a reason it was 

rejected. 

So the two options for Corvallis Albany train service either bypass the existing station or tear up 

properties along Highway 34. While it would not be good to discontinue using the Albany 

station, adding a new station along the existing route in north Albany would probably be much 

cheaper than the 34 option. I looked at the satellite maps and found it would be difficult to 

squeeze in a new station north of the existing station, any option would probably require some 

private property purchases and perhaps some road work to connect buses and cars to the 

station's parking lot. 

It's all moot until Congress, or Phil Knight, or someone finds a lot of money for the simpler 

upgrades to the existing service route. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 20 
Meanwhile, the City of Corvallis has free public bus service, a model to emulate everywhere. 

Funds are paid for through business taxes and I believe through a local gasoline tax. 

At the December 6 public meeting, one of the consultants suggested this option was also 

inappropriate due to potential 4(f) impact on Finley National Wildlife Refuge. As project 

manager Jim Cox may remember, I am extremely familiar with Section 4(f), perhaps the 

strongest environmental law we have. 4(f) states that federal transportation projects (not only 

roads) may not go through public parks if there are practicable alternatives. In contrast, NEPA 

merely requires disclosure of the damage that federal project may have, not avoidance or even 

mitigation. 

I reminded ODOT during their failed West Eugene Parkway effort that 4(f) needed to be 

considered, and ultimately ODOT and Federal Highway Administration agreed when they 

selected "No Build" in 2007. Details about 4(f) are at www.PeakTraffic.org/4f.html 

I have not examined detailed property maps of the Corvallis - Monroe rail alignment, but my 

understanding is the former railroad did not go through the Finley preserve, so it would have 

little if any 4(f) impact. Plus, Congress amended 4(f) a decade ago to remove consideration of 

minor impacts of 4(f) -- such as if a project clipped the outer edge of a park subject to 4(f) 

restrictions. 

Finley was at one time the only known habitat of Fender's blue butterfly, now a Federally listed 

endangered species. Several other locations were subsequently documented, including the 

BLM's West Eugene Wetlands nature park. Fender's was one of the legal obstacles that 

blocked the WEP from receiving a lasting approval (a Record of Decision signed in 1 990 was 

withdrawn after a notice to file suit against it in 1 996, leading to a Supplemental DEIS in 1 997 

and then a decade of other obstacles that led to No Build). 

Corallis residents seek passenger rail serice 

By The Associated Press 

PUBLISHED: 11 40 A M., OCT 22, 201 3 

CORVALLIS - Although many say it's a longshot, Corvallis residents say their city should be a 

stop when passenger rail serice is improved between Portland and Eugene 

The Corallis Gazette-Times reports that 1,800 people signed a petition, and testimony at a 

hearing Monday was in favor of the idea. Residents said passenger serice would be good for 

students, business and the environment. 

The Oregon Department of Transportation is studying options for improved serice between the 

Columbia River and the Eugene-Springfield area, a 1 25-mile segment. 

But current passenger service bypasses Corvallis, and only one of the four alternatives being 

considered would come through the town. 

The schedule calls for selecting a route in 2015. 

A Monroe segment would not have any freight train traffic to cope with, so single track with 

occasional sidings might be sufficient. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 21 
Alternative routes 

The DEIS looked at two options for using the parallel existing tracks between Harrisburg and 

Albany, and also north of Salem. Each of these lines has minimal current traffic and might be 

reconsidered to include passenger trains, with some modifications. 

The Harrisburg to Albany parallel track seems like it might be a relatively easy option, but 

perhaps there are technical considerations that preclude it as a simple solution. The segment is 

relatively straight, does not go through Halsey and Shedd, and might be a part of the route 

where the Taiga train could go faster than it does now. 

(A-3) 

North of Salem, this line also parallels the Union Pacific line, but does not directly connect back 

to UP. The DEIS examined an alternate alignment to connect this option to the UP line through 

"new terrain." Perhaps there are ways to facilitate that without substantial private property 

acquisition. Perhaps there are not. Meanwhile, ODOT has just built part of the Newberg 

Dundee Bypass through private property including homes and farms without any discernable 

public objection. (There was an upset homeowner at the DEIS hearing, but in terms of public 

controversy it was seemingly non-existent. For the record, I spoke at that hearing in support of 

No Build, one of five speakers, a small number for a major bypass project!) 

Also, at the December 6 public meeting, another citizen asked one of the DEIS preparers who 

would own the upgraded rails, signals, etc. if public funds were used to upgrade the UP line. He 

did not have an answer and I request a fuller discussion in the next phase of the NEPA process. 

For a billion dollars of public money the public should own at least part of the route. 

If anything more substantial than upgrading the existing UP line is approved in the final EIS and 

Record of Decision, it is worth remembering that future funds need to be documented (where 

they would come from) and also that ODOT and other agencies approved the $4 billion 

Columbia River Crossing without detailing how they expected to pay for the full project. 

Peak Traffic: Vehicle Mi les Traveled 

The DEIS does not even hint that VMT levels peaked in Oregon as oil prices increased in the 

2000s. Since then, the tracking bubble and tar sands have raised oil availability across the 

country and some locations have had VMT levels slightly above the early - mid 2000s peak. But 

this new peak of VMT is entirely dependent on how long the tracking bubble last. Meanwhile, 

Amtrak ridership in Oregon has continued to increase and if/ when oil prices increase 

substantially and / or oil availability declines it is likely there will be increased demand for trains. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 22 
During the 2008 economic shock, which happened around the time of global peak conventional 

oil, public transit demand increased across the US. However, transit systems had not 

anticipated buying fuel at increased prices, so many decreased services and raised fares, which 

was unfair. LTD and Tri-met both did this. The economic shock also decreased economic 

activity that lowered business taxes that contribute toward mass transit operations. 

The then director of LTD told me that he agreed about the impact of Peak Oil, but he was 

nearing retirement so it would be someone else's problem to worry about. 

www.eugeneweekly.com/201 4021 3/guest-viewpoint/grading-curve 

Grading on a Curve 

Enviro 'champs' ignoring the biggest issues 

ARTICLE I FEBRUARY 13, 2014 - 1 2:00AM I BY MARK ROBINOWITZ 

On Nov 27, EW's Slant profiled the "Environmental Scorecard" of the Oregon League of 

Conservation Voters. EW drew attention to "the relatively high scores racked up by state reps and 

senators in our part of the valley." Unfortunately, OLCV was grading on a curve to make Democrats in 

Salem look better than they are. 

One of the most important votes of the 201 3 session, not included in OLCV's scorecard, was to 

appropriate $450 million toward the Columbia River Crossing (CRC), a $3 billion to $4 billion dollar 

boondoggle that would widen 1-5 to 16 lanes north of the bridge. The Oregon House voted 45-11 in 

favor and the Senate voted 1 8-11 in favor. Only two Democrats in the House and one in the Senate 

voted "no." 

EW highlighted Rep. John Lively's 94 percent OLCV rating, but did not mention his vote for the 

CRC nor his previous promotion of bigger roads while working for ODOT 

OLCV's website cites 10 state reps as environmental champions, but only one of those 10 voted 

against the CRC. Designating highway expansion supporters as "environmental leaders" suggests 

political partisanship has become more important than environmental protection. 

The only legislator representing Lane County who was against CRC was Rep. Bruce Hanna of 

Roseburg, a Republican. Some Republicans expressed dislike of the token transit component. 

Republicans were freer than Democrats to oppose Gov Kitzhaber's campaign for CRC. 

CRC is now bogged down in financial chaos since Washington state legislators did not 

appropriate anything for it However, the project is legally approved and an Obama administration 

priority. 

In November 2008, Gov Kulongoski's Transportation Vision Committee released a report that 

called for $18 billion in new and expanded state highways, including over $1 billion in Eugene and 

Springfield 1 000 Friends of Oregon, Oregon Environmental Council and Environment Oregon were 

part of this committee, but they were window dressing to show that all points of view were supposedly 

considered. If these groups had a minority report to dissent from the highway promotion, they kept it 

very quiet 

In 2013, ODOT started building two new highways: the Newberg Dundee Bypass (through 

farmland) and the Sunrise Freeway in Clackamas County. Both projects only have part of their 

funding, so ODOT is building segments and hoping for the rest of the money in the future. I attended 

public hearings for both of these bypasses and did not see any environmental groups at either event 

Also in 201 3, ODOT approved a new freeway in Medford, the Route 62 bypass. I didn't attend the 

hearing. The only environmental group that sent comments was Rogue Valley Audubon Society, 

which complained construction would harm birds. 

Federal aid highways such as CRC have to plan for traffic two decades in the future, not current 

congestion. Our transportation plans ignore the fact that traffic levels peaked in Oregon in 2003 and 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 23 
Oregon's main fuel source, the Alaska Pipeline, peaked in 1988 and has dropped three quarers since 

then. It's anyone's guess how much energy will be available for traffic in the 2030s, but it w ll be much 

less than the current f ow, especially if the Alaska Pipeline closes due to "low flow." Current levels are 

just above the minimum threshold needed for the pipeline to operate in the Arctic winter. 

Here in Eugene from 1999 through 2007, I was the "road scholar" for a proposed lawsuit that 

prevented the West Eugene Porkway, a bypass of West 11th th rough the West Eugene Wetlands. 

WETLANDS vs. Federal Highway Administrat on was not filed because the feds wthdrew the proect 

and selected "no build." Details are at Su stain Eugene orq 

The lawsu t focused on legal precedents, including Section 4 

(f), which prohibits federal aid highways through parks But it also 

wou Id have tr ed to have set a new precedent combining the facts 

of peak oil and peak traffic as reasons the 20-year planning rule no 

I on ge r justfies highway expansions 

Since th en, I have looked for other freeway fights around the 

country that could use this legal strategy to create a precedent A 

state-by-state list of plans for $1 tr llion of highway expansions 

across the country is at PeakTraffic orq 

The most energet c environ mental efforts against new roads 

are often in places where liberal Democrats are surrounded by 

conservatve Republicans (Bloomington, Ind , and Louisville, Ky , 

are examples) The profession al environmentalists in these places 

know the state government is not their al y (nor their funder) 

While trains and transit could play important roles for postpeak transportation, recognizing we're passing the limits to growth 

and relocal zing food product on are probaby the most important 

responses to peaked traff c and peaked energy 

About the Author 

Mark Robinowtz of Eugene is author of "Peak Traff c and 

Transporation Triage a Legal Strategy to Cancel Tr llion Dollar 

Highway Plans and Prepare for Post Peak Travel," at 

PeakTraffic orq 

• 1 Comment 

peakchoicedotorg • 17 minutes ago 

In a 

democraey 

t�blic 

com�ent period 

Feaver en s 

Sent to me from "a long time environmental activist and former OLCV board member" - I sent him 

this op-ed and th is was his reply 

I hope they pr nt it 

OLCV cont nues to disappoint me. I wrote them after the special session in which local control 

over genetic engineer ng was thrown under the bus and told th em they sh o u Id target on a Democrat 

architect of that compromise for defeat in the primary, just to show that environ mentalists mean 

business. I received no reply That they left off the CRC from their list of counted votes doesn't 

surprise me in the slightest They are an arm of the Democratic party and deathly afraid of organized 

labor. 

"These fory million [poor] people are invisible because Amer ca is so aff uent, so r ch; because 

our expressways carry us away from the ghetto, we don t see the poor" 

- - Mart n Luther King, "Remaining Awake Th rough a Great Revolution," March 31, 1968 (five days 

before his assassinat on) 

Drat EIS: Oegon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 24 
"It's really hard to come to terms with the number of corporations, government agencies, 

consultancies, civil serice departments and politicians who seem incapable of comprehending a 

trend break or trend reversal. Col lectively they would have been incapable of working out that the 

wheel may change transport." 

-- Euan Mearns, June 11, 2008 

http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/41 30#comment-359871 

www.peaktraffic.org/peakoi I .html 

2008 Columbia River Crossing Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing 

Energy Technical Report 

Affected Environment 

4-2 May 2008 

Historical ly, world oil prices have varied considerably and are expected to continue to exhibit high 

fluctuations as a result of political instabil ity, access restrictions, and a reassessment of OPEC 

producers' ability to influence prices during periods of volatil ity. As a result, the 2030 national supply 

of petroleum could var substantially depending on world oil prices. Due to global political and 

economic uncertainties, the USDOE Annual Energy Outlook world oil prices in 2030 were forecasted 

for three scenarios: "High Price," "Reference Price," and "Low Price" with the cost of oil at 1 00, 59, 

and 36 dollars per barrel, respectively (in 2005 dollars). In November 2006 the price of crude oil was 

about 60 dollars per barrel. One year later it had risen to between 90 and 1 00 dollars per barrel (2007 

dollars). Depending on the world oil prices, the 2030 projections for petroleum imports ranged from 

13.4 million barrels per day for the High Price scenario, 17.7 million barrels per day for the Reference 

Price, and 20.8 million barrels per day for the Low Price scenario. 

The 100 dollar a barrel price was reached four months before the publication of the DEIS, not in 

the year 2030. Therefore, the traffic analysis for the CRC needs to be redone to factor in 

geological and financial reality - the end of cheap oil is here (regardless of the precise timing of 

Peak Oil). 

The CRC Draft EIS is probably the first to acknowledge the reality of Peak Oil, but unfortunately, 

the writers of this section failed to describe it accurately. The DEIS suggest that there is a 

maximum scenario for the year 2030 of $100 a barrel for oil, yet this figure was reached on the 

first trading day of 2008, four months before the publication of the DEIS. It is astounding that 

there is no mention in the DEIS of the substantial rise in oil prices during preparation of this 

report. 

One bright spot in the DEIS is the mention of the Department of Energy's Hirsch Report (2005), 

although the DEIS failed to mention the conclusions of this analysis. The Hirsch Report stated 

that we would need twenty years to mitigate the impact of Peak Oil, even if we were using toxic 

technologies such as coal-to-liquids and tar sands. While the Hirsch Report did not specify an 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 25 
opinion on when the Peak would be, oil production worldwide has been essentially flat since 

2005 as new oil fields have had a difficult time making up for declining oil fields in the North 

Sea, Alaska, the Persian Gulf and other areas. 

"fossil fuels are not in short supply at this time, and the use of these resources would not have an 

adverse effect on their continued availabil ity." 

-- Newberg Dundee Bypass, Oregon, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, (2008), p. 4-3 

EN: Energy 

One commenter provided comments regarding peak oil, climate change, and the relationship 

between the cost of fuel and the demand for driving. The FHWA has been actively engaged in 

preparing for transportation changes that may result from larger-scale issues such as peak oil, 

climate change, and other externally caused actions. Although formal policies are still emerging for 

many of these issues, planning for such changes is occurring. This planning takes many forms 

including alternative fuels, new modes of travel (mass transit, bicycle/pedestrian), sustainable design, 

and other measures. Many new infrastructure projects are allowing for increased use of transit 

(buses, light rail, trains) and bicycle/pedestrian travel to reduce oil and gas consumption while 

maintaining the public's mobility. Peak oil is not identified as an issue in which analysis can provide 

meaningful information to the public or decision makers regarding which alternative to select for the 

Sunrise Project. Government agencies are considering future conditions in planning for public 

infrastructure projects. It is also important to note that, while fuel types and supplies may change, 

transportation agencies are still planning to provide needed infrastructure and improvements to 

ensure continued movement of goods and people in the future. The Sunrise Project contributes to 

these efforts. 

-- Sunrise Project, 1-205 to Rock Creek Junction, Final Environmental Impact Statement, 

December 2010, Chapter 5 - Comments and Responses, pp. 350-351 

Peak Oil Plateau: Growh is Over 

Peak Oil does not mean that civilization is about to run out of oil. Instead, we are near (or at) the 

point where continued growth of petroleum combustion no longer can be maintained, which will 

have profound consequences for the global economy that is dependent on exponential growth 

of nearly everything (especially of money supplies). Energy creates the economy, a physical 

limitation rarely acknowledged by economists. Peak Oil is also the point where the maximum 

amount of economic "growth" is reached -- and ideally a turning point where we can decide to 

use the remaining half of the oil as a bridge toward a more sustainable way of living. It would 

require enormous energy, money and people power to reorient away from NAFTA 

Superhighways toward investing in bullet trains, away from dirty fossil fuel technologies toward 

efficiency and renewable energy systems, away from resource wars and toward global 

cooperative effort to reduce our collective impact on the planetary biosphere. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 26 
Alternative fuels and plug-in hybrids won't reverse Peak Traffic 

Renewable energy systems are largely 

focused on generating electricity. 

Transportation systems are almost entirely 

based on burning liquid fuels, which are 

not generated by solar PV power or wind 

turbines. 

A bigger problem is that in the coming 

decades natural gas supplies in the US are 

likely to have dropped so low that they will no 

longer be able to be used to 

generate electricity -- the remaining gas will 

be needed to heat buildings, especially in the 

colder climates where the gas is extracted 

from. Whatever renewable energy systems are installed between now and then will need to 

replace the substantial input that natural gas has for the electric power grid at the same time 

that there is less available energy to manufacture solar panels and wind turbines. 

All of the major car companies have developed much more efficient vehicles (Greenpeace, "The 

Environmental Impact of the Car," 1 992), with many models around 100 mpg. VW even has a 

small model that is highway rated that get about 250 mpg -- the VW CEO drove it to their 

annual stockholder meeting a few years ago. While technological shift may help mitigate the 

energy crisis after Peak Oil, it cannot eliminate the problem. There are few factories to make 

these vehicles. There are few capital investments to fund the conversion of existing factories to 

make hyper-efficient cars. The existing fleet of vehicles are not going to be instantly eliminated 

in favor of efficient cars, as the owners have invested heavily in their current models -- someone 

who bought a $50,000 SUV is not easily going to be able to absorb the loss by purchasing a 

new car that is more efficient. At best, the investment in more efficient vehicles may slow the 

decline of VMTs on the Peak Oil downslope -- but it cannot prevent that decline. There is also 

the problem of substantial use of oil and mineral ores to manufacture new cars, even efficient 

ones. Carpooling would be a far faster, cheaper solution but that is a social shift, not a 

technological change. 

Electric cars, even if a hundred million were instantly produced and distributed (in factories that 

don't exist), could not substitute for food del ivery trucks, tractors, freight trains, most Amtrak 

trains, container ships that bring us cheap crap from Chinese slave labor factories, passenger 

planes, cargo planes, war planes, petrochemicals for non-transport purposes, fossil fuels used 

to heat homes and run factories, depleting natural gas used to power part of the electric power 

grid, oil use at mines and many other uses that show we are not addicted to oil -- we are 

extremely dependent upon it and the "alternatives" are less concentrated and therefore unable 

to substitute completely. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 27 
Comment 1-135 

www.registerguard.com/news/2005/1 2/1 4/ed.letters.121 4.p1 .php?section=opinion 

Don't underestimate peak oil 

The profi le of the new Oregon Transportation Plan, "Road map: How to get there from 

here," (Register-Guard, Dec. 5) mentions the concept of "peak oil" as a transportation planning issue, 

but then downplays its significance, claiming that the peak of production might happen in the next two 

decades. 

In April, Oregon Secretary of State Bill Bradbur told an audience in Eugene that we are at peak 

oil. Most petroleum geologists agree that the peak is either here or will be here soon, and that the 

megafields discovered more than four decades ago are showing signs of depletion. A good scientific 

introduction to these issues can be found on the Web site of the Association for the Study of Peak 

Oil, www.ieakoil.net 

Peak oil will require us to consere energy and to live more local ly. The promise of hydrogenpowered cars is a distraction from practical solutions to reduce consumption, since hydrogen is a 

means to store energy, not an energy source (you still need energy to make it). The Oregon 

Transportation Plan should recommend improved train serice in the Willamette Valley and 

coordinate with economic planners to relocalize production of goods to reduce demand for del ivery 

trucks. 

At 7 p.m on Jan. 10 [2006], the Eugene Permaculture Guild is sponsoring a lecture by Richard 

Heinberg at the Eugene Hilton. Heinberg is author of "The Party's Over" and "Powerdown: Options 

and Actions for a Post Carbon World," which describe how communities can cooperate to mitigate the 

impacts of energy decline. 

MARK ROBINOWITZ 

Eugene 

www.kunstler.com/mags diary16.html 

James Howard Kunstler 

February 6, 2006 

By now, President Bush's wildly irresponsible remarks on energy in his state of the union speech 

may have already vanished down the memor hole, but the damage will linger on. "America is 

addicted to oil," Mr. Bush began, failing to mention that underlying this addiction was a living 

arrangement that required people to drive their cars incessantly. A clueless public will continue to 

believe that "the best way to break this addiction is through technology ... " and that ''e must also 

change how we power our automobiles." 

Mr. Bush recommended ethanol. As one wag put it after the speech: "America's heroin is oil, and 

ethanol will be our methadone." The expectation will still be that everybody must drive incessantly. 

It is hard to believe that Mr. Bush does not know the truth of the situation, or that some of the 

clever people around him who run his brain do not know it, namely that ethanol and all other bio-fuels 

are net energy losers, that they require more energy to grow and process them than they produce in 

the end, and that the energy "inputs" required to do this are none other than oil and natural gas, the 

same fuels we already run engines on. 

The president also said that "breakthroughs on this and other new technologies will help us reach 

another great goal, to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East by 2025." 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 28 
In point of fact, our oil imports from anywhere on the planet will be reduced by more than 75 

percent because by that time worldwide oil depletion will be advanced to its terminal stage, and 

nobody will have any oil left to export -- assuming that the industrial nations have not ravaged each 

other by then in a war to control the diminishing supply of oil. 

The key to the stupidity evinced by Mr. Bush's speech is the assumption that we ought to keep 

living the way we do in America, that we can keep running the interstate highway system, Wal Mart, 

and Walt Disney World on some other basis besides fossil fuels. The public probably wishes that this 

were so, but it isn't a service to pander to their wishes instead of addressing the mandates of real ity. 

And reality is telling us something very different. Real ity is saying that the life of incessant motoring is 

a suicidal fiasco, and if we don't learn to inhabit the terrain of North America differently, a lot of us are 

going die, either in war, or by staration when oil-and-gas-based farming craps out, or in civil violence 

proceeding from failed economic expectations. 

I hate to keep harping on this, but Mr. Bush could have announced a major effort to restore 

the American railroad system. It would have been a major political coup. It would have a huge 

impact on our oil use. The public would benefit from it tremendously. And it would have put 

thousands of people to work on something really meaningful. Unlike trips to Mars and 

experiments in cold fusion, railroads are something we already know how to do, and the 

tracks are lying out there waiting to be fixed. But the reigning delusions of Hollywood and Las 

Vegas prevent us from thinking realistically about these things. We're only into wishing for grand 

slam home runs and five-hundred-million-dollar lotter jackpots. Anything less than that makes us feel 

like losers. 

Meanwhile, the official Democratic Party response to Mr. Bush's nonsense was the stupendous 

fatuousness of newly-elected Virginia Governor Tim Kaine's rebuttal, a saccharine gruel of platitudes 

and panderings . 

History will look back in wonder and nausea at the twitterings of these idiots as the world they 

pretended to run lurched into darkness. 

"In conjunction with the Oregon Department of Energy, Metro will develop a contingency plan for 

dealing with short term gasoline shortages. Initial ly, this will involve adoption of a framework plan 

which will establish the need for refinement of the key elements." 

- Metro Regional Transportation Plan (Portland), updated October 6, 1 983 

[Metro in Portland has still not done this preparation work on a serious level.] 

www.peakoil.net/News1etter/NL39/News1etter39.htm1 [Association for the Study of Peak 

Oil] 

334. New roads and a tunnel in Switzerland (March 2004 issue) 

Switzerland operates a devolved form of government seeking to involve its citizens in major 

issues rather than impose decisions by parliamentarians under the iron grip of party machines, as 

practised in many so-called democracies. The decision now facing the Swiss people is whether or not 

to modernise the highway system and build a new tunnel under the Alps. Linear extrapolation of past 

trends of traffic and goods transport has no doubt been used to justify the mammoth undertaking, but 

it is meeting strong opposition, partly built on recognition of oil depletion. A cartoon has appeared 

depicting a future scene of a cyclist and an old man looking down on an empty highway with trees 

growing through the cracks. The old man comments "In my day we believed in all that" to which the 

cyclist replies "You still had petrol" 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 29 
The Swiss Federal Office of Energy is holding a Workshop on oil and gas resources on Februar 

27th which will be open to the public. ASPO will be represented by Campbell and Bauquis in a 

discussion with representatives of the IEA, IHS, Schlumberger and Chevron-Texaco. It remains to be 

seen if it will have any positive outcome, as the accompanying report commissioned by the Federal 

Office simply contrasts the views of so called "optimists" and "pessimists" to reach a neutral position, 

absolving the government from the need to take any firm action. The likely outcome is that the 

investments in roads and tunnels will be neither approved nor rejected but simply delayed - it might 

indeed be a good political response, given that impact of peak oil will soon be self-evident 

Published on 4 Apr 2005 by New Zealand Herald. www.energybulletin.net/51 1 2. html 

New Zealand: No easy solutions in sight to keep oil prices in check 

by Cameron Pitches 

... New Zealand's transport agencies need a contingency plan for the rising price of oil. At US$70 

a barrel, the Auckland Regional Transport Authority should be looking to secure options on electric 

rolling stock for our rail network. 

At US$100, the Government should be suspending all new roading projects At US$200, 

Auckland International Airport's proposals for a second runway should be shelved in favour of a 

container wharf for shipping. 

Reliance on emerging new energy technologies such as hydrogen won't help us in the short term, 

either. The so-called hydrogen economy is a net energy-loss proposition - more energy is put in to the 

extraction, compression and storage of hydrogen than comes out of it 

In addition, more than 90 per cent of hydrogen is obtained from fossil fuels, which defeats the 

purpose of an alternative fuel. 

www.sevenoaksmag.com/commentary/63 comm2.html 

A bridge too far: Big men and their little toys 

May 24, 2005 

Am Johal 

Building our way out of congestion through highway expansion seems incredibly short-sighted, 

especially in the context of oil reaching $100 a barrel by 2010 and a public transportation sadly in 

need of a billion dollar overhaul. 

www.fcnp.com/51 1/story3.htm 

The Peak Oil Crisis: Part 4, A Sudden Shortage 

Tom Whipple May 19 - 25, 2005 

A few weeks ago, the International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris released a study called "Saving 

Oil in a Hurr" in which they examined what the oil importing countries could do should there be an 

interruption in supply. This 1 65-page document looks at previous oil shortages - the two in the 

1 970's and some recent ones in Europe - to develop recommendations as to what governments 

should do when there is more demand at the pumps than there is gasoline available. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 30 
They conclude that the overriding concern during a government intervention is to hurt the 

economy as little as possible. The study emphasizes that there are important differences between 

measures sirply restricting travel, such as a Sunday driving ban, and those that assist or encourage 

motorists to cut fuel use such as car-pooling or the concept, unknown here in America, of 

"ecodriving" (light foot on gas). 

The rajor cost associated with fuel storage is lost mobility and the reduced economic activity that 

results. 

After ruch thought, the IEA care up with seven general approaches that would produce savings 

of energy (in a hurry): 

• Increases in public transit usage. 

• Increases in car-pooling 

• Telecorruting (working fror hore) 

• Changes in work schedules 

• Driving bans and restrictions 

• Speed lirit reductions. 

• "Ecodriving" 

There can, of course, be endless details to these general approaches to saving transportation 

energy and the savings garnered by each of these approaches will depend on how they are 

irplerented. There is a big difference between a car-pool publicity campaign and expansion of 

strictly enforced HOV to all lanes of all rajor arteries and the denial of parking to single occupant 

vehicles. 

The publication of internationally agreed set of approaches to saving transportation energy at 

least gives us a basis for discussion on the day when the real shortage arrives. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - corrents by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 31 
Percent red uction in total fuel use by 

I EA reg ion , selected measures 

7% �------------------------� 

Imperial College 

London 

6% -

5% 

4% 

3% 

2% 

www .bloomingtonalte rnative .com 

Confronting the new transporation paradigm 

May 2, 2004 

by David Coyte 

□Japan IK 

■ Europe 

DUS Canada 

□AusNZ 

While Indiana's Gubernatorial candidates are jockeying for positions on the 1-69 proposal and 

Citizens' group are working up lawsuits on the project, events are transpiring in Indiana and around 

the world which will render this debate obsolete. 

In spite of the recent gas tax increase, Indiana's Department of Transporation has some serious 

fiscal problems. Rather than scale back new construction projects, INDOT has changed its revenue 

projection methods to make them look affordable. The new revenue projection formula uses the 

historical trends of the 1 990's to predict revenues for 2002 - 2011. 

The significant trend during that period was an incredible increase in miles driven. With the higher 

gas tax and assuming the same growth in travel INDOT expects an increase in revenue for road 

"preservation" and new construction of about $100 million per year - most of which will go to new 

construction. This is a 1 5% increase in annual funding for these areas as opposed to the traditional 

2%. 

There are problems with these numbers both in their likely accuracy and in how they are slated to 

be spent. Most of the assumed $100 million in additional annual revenues are targeted towards new 

construction leaving an approximate $25 million increase per year for maintaining our existing roads. 

Since the cost of maintaining a mile of interstate during the late 1 990's was rising at over 25% a year, 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 32 
this formula sacrifices our existing road system for new construction -which then becomes an 

additional maintenance burden. The assumption in these forecasts that the driving trends of the 

1990's will continue is highly suspect. Road funds dropped by well over 100 million between 2001 and 

2002 -primarily because of the economic downturn which is still with us. This situation, coupled with 

rising fuel prices, makes the likelihood of continuing 1990's travel growth most unlikely. INDOT's Long 

Range Plan Fiscal Forecast ends with this warning: "Again, it is important to note that the fiscal 

forecast assumes additional funding from some source will occur in the future. The time and amount 

of the additional funds are not forecasted." This statement should trouble economic planners. 

The Global picture is even more troubling. There is substantial evidence that world petroleum 

prices will begin rising sharply within the next 10 years. While there is plenty of oil resources left on 

the planet, the cheap and easy "conventional oil" resources are about gone. What's left will be much 

more costly and slower to produce creating "real", as opposed to the "political" shortages we 

experienced in 1973. 

Some experts believe that the current fuel price increases represent the beginning of this 

situation, and events are occurring which support that belief. In February it was announced that 

refineries are beginning to ration supplies to independent retailers. OPEC has announced it will cut 

production in April. This could be due to the reduced ability to produce rather, than as claimed, an 

effort to support prices which are already well above price targets. 

Oil is to our economy what water is to agriculture. Because of this you would expect the planning 

agencies and the business community to be sensitive to its availability. This is not the case. Much of 

the blame lies with the Energy Information Administration (EIA), a division of the Dept. of Energy. The 

EIA is dominated by economists who believe that petroleum will be "created by demand" over the 

protests of the petroleum geologists who are responsible for finding and producing it. Furthermore, 

the EIA has accepted huge increases in the oil resere estimates that came out of the Middle East in 

1988 and ,89 - which most geologist find highly suspect. In 1999 the EIA predicted that oil prices 

would stay under $23 per barrel through 2020 (1997 dollars)*. In Januar of 2004 the EIA predicted 

that the price of oil would stay below $29.00 a barrel in the high price forecast. Today oil is over $36 

per barrel -yet current EIA predictions are just as optimistic. Presidents from both parties, despite the 

scientific evidence, have supported the EIA fantasies. No president wants to anger the powerful 

highway and trucking lobbies, or suggest to us citizens that we may have to curb our energy 

consumption. 

If, as events suggest, oil prices continue to rise, then INDOT's revenue projections are more than 

just optimistic -they are a destructive delusion which will delay us in addressing the ver serious 

issue of developing and maintaining affordable and effective transportation alternatives. As fuel prices 

rise, miles traveled (read highway revenues) will drop as people consere, carpool, and use transit. 

The need for additional highway capacity will disappear. The need for alternate urban and inter-city 

transportation serices will grow 

There are reasonable responses to this situation: First, stop all new road construction -the cheap 

gas world has come to an end and we will be lucky to maintain our existing road system. Second, 

take the money slated for new road construction and put it into rail-based transportation. Two big 

reasons for this: Freight rail uses 1/1oth as much energy as trucks, and maintaining rail lines costs 

about 1 /5oth as much as maintaining an equal capacity highway. Because of those efficiencies freight 

has been moving onto rail over the last decade and we are now facing a shortage in rail capacity. 

On the passenger side the solution lies with implementing the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative, of 

which Indiana is a member. This nine-state plan proposes a high-speed (100 MPH) passenger rail 

system throughout the Midwest. Indiana's cost to implement this plan would be less than the 7 mile 

long upgrade of 1-65 in southeast Indiana. The US Department of Transportation studies have shown 

that this system will require no public subsidy after the initial few years of implementation. This 

regional system, coupled with rail based transit systems for our metropolitan areas, will address the 

transportation needs and energy realities of this centur. 

Creating additional rail capacity is the investment strategy that makes sense. A bonus for moving 

freight onto rail is greatly reduced highway maintenance costs. A bonus for investing in rail transit is 

better access for our growing elderly and working poor populations. Both efforts improve our air 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 33 
quaity and positively m p actthe ssues of sp rawl and loss of f arm and. Reg onal f arm and becomes 

ever m ore prec ous as distant f ood sources become m ore expens ive to access. 

More of us will become transit dependent as oil pr ces rever berate throug h our econom y

 To 

rema n econom c aly and soc ally v a b e w e need to f ocus on the new trans portat on p ar ad gm w hi l

e 

w e have the t me and resources to imp ement it

 That p ar ad gm demands that we m a nta n the ro ads 

w e have whi le aggress vely nvesti ng in f re ght rail a nd p ass enger ra

il 

nfr astructure .. t wll t-'<e 

poit c a

l guts to conf rontthis sb.Jat on We best find some soon

There are excellent books and art c es on the sub ect of oil res ource dep et on: H ubberrs Peak: 

the m pend ng Word Oil 

S hortage, by Kenneth Deffeyes. Pr nceton University Press, 2001; Out of 

Gas: End of the A ge of Oil, by D avd Goodste n. WW Norton and Co, NY, 2003; and the The 

Hydrogen Econom y

: Cre ati on of the Wor d-Wde En ergy We b and the R edst1 but on of Power on 

Earth, by J erem y R1kn. These are all respected sc entists. S earch ng "H ubberfs Pe-'<" will brng up 

numerous art c es on the We b. 

"A nnua l Energy Out ook 1"'9, Ta b e A12, p age 129, EIA, Decem ber 1993 

D av d C oyte is President of CART

 the Coa

l i

t on f or the Advancement of Reg onal Trans portat on, 

w h ch is he adquarte red n Louisvlle and has been working on tr ans portation p ann ng issues f or over 

a decade. Coyte has contr buted art c es to p ann ng mag az nes. ne1A.1Sp a pers. and non- profit 

ne1A.1Sletters. A vers on of this p ece will ap pear in Lousvlles Business First M ag az ne in May

 

3,100 

VMT 

3,000 

2,900 

2,800 

2,700 

2,500 

2,500 

U.S. Vehicle Miles Travelled 

<(billions VMT) 

$2/gal ---

VMTpateau 

Gasoline Priee 

(eents per gallon) -�

1 

0 

0 

' 

-?5 

Data: US Federal Hig hway Admin & EIA 

Graph: Post Carbon Institute 

,..; 

0 

• 

C: 

-" 

N 

0 

' C: 

" -

M 

0 

' 

-

15 

"' 

0 6 t.n 

C 

• 

C: 

-

" 

t.n 

0 

"' 

0 

00 

C 

' 

C: 

" -

350 

c/gal 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

so 

0 

Draft EIS: Oregon Paasenger Pai l. commen13 by Muk Rob now tz:. PeakTraff c 

org. pige 34 
Oregon State Highways VMT 1948 to 2017 

data source: www .oregon.gov/ODOT/Data/Pages/raf ic-Cou nti ng.aspx 

chart: Mark Robinowitz - Peak Choice.org - PeakTrafic.org - SustainEugene.org 

-1/J 

.2 

.c 

"O 

.9! 

Q) 

1/J 

.9! 

:IE 

.9! 

-� 

Q) 

> 

22 

20 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

2014 to 2017: 

1-- ----L---- --------------1 oil price down, VMT up 

1-----�: -------12001: USA Peak Energ use 

�f���--------�2007: USA Peak Electricity 

1948 1971 1994 2017 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - canment by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafc.og - page 3 
Portland Metro VMT - Oregon State Highways 

data source: www .oregon.gov/0 DOT/Data/Pages!Trafic-Counting.aspx 

chart: Mark Robinowitz - PeakChoice.org - PeakTrafic.org - SustainEugene.org 

'? 1500 

� 

·- 3000 E 

"tJ 2500 

G1 

� 2000 

I I 500 

Ill 

G1 

i: 1000 

500 

'"'" 

0 

1991 

- Multnomah O Washington - Clackamas 

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -...! I I 

.,,,,,, Ill""" I I I I I I I I I 

Peak VMT Multnomah County: 2002 

Peak VMT Washington County: 2002 

I l I -

___. � I I I I I I 

Peak 

I 

VMT 

I I 

Clackamas 

I I I I 

County -

fracking 

during 

fueled 

conventional 

second peak

oil: 2006 

: 2017 I--

I I I 

-

2004 2017 

Marion County VMT - Oregon State Highways 

data source: www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Data/Pages/Trafic-Counting.aspx 

chart: Mark Robinowitz - PeakChoice.org - PeakTrafic.org - SustainEugene.org 

'? 2000 

.2 -- 1800 

·e 1600 

"tJ 1400 

� 1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

-

199 I 

-� 

----

L 

� ..... 

� .... 

Peak VMT Marion County I--

during conventional oil: 2007 

fracking fueled second peak: 20 17 -

2004 2017 

Draft EIS: Oregrn Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rooinowtz - PeakTraffic.org - page 36 
Ill 

C: 2,000 

.2 - 1,800 

·-

E 1,600 

i::, 1,400 

.9! 

a, 1,200 

1,000 

Ill 800 

a, 

·- 600 

t: 400 

·- 200 

a, 

> 0 

Lane County VMT- Oregon State Highways 

data source: www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Datages/Trafic�Counting.aspx 

chart: Mark Robinowitz • PeakChoice.org • PeakTraffic.org • SustainEugene.org 

i Peak VMT 2003 - rising oil prices lowered VMT i 

� � 

I- I- I- I- I- I- - I- I-

� � � � � � � � 

I- I- I- I- I- I- - I- II- I- I- I- I- I- - I- I- � 

� � � � � � � � 

� � � � � � � � I I - � - - - I- I- � - - - I- I- � - - - I- I- - I- I- � -

- � - - - ... ... � - - -... ... � - - -... ... -... ... � -

1991 2004 2017 

rain service connected to the study area 

If ODOT really antcipates $ billion being available for expanded passenger rail service, it could 

consider increased service on connected routes in additon to the Eugene• Albany• Salem • 

Oregon City• Pordand route. 

Coast Starlight 

Perhaps most importnt long distnce train is Coast Strlight. It requires substntal 

improvement to on-tme reliability to be more functional as a transportton system. The trains 

are also several decades old and often show their age. In the short term, having more than one 

train a day seems unrealistc, but ifwe will ever have a substntve train netork this would be a 

minimal requirement. Whatever upgrades to the Pordand Eugene line are done should consider 

how to include expanded Strlight service. 

Oakridge stop for Coast Starlight 

Drat EIS: Qeon Pasger Rail• cmments by Mark RobinOtz • PekTraffic.org • page 37 
Downtown Oakridge is the main city between Eugene and Chemault, and is a larger community 

than Chemault. (Bend has a bus connection, but Bend is not that close to the stop.) Oakridge 

could make a logical location for a flag stop for the Starlight 

Empire Builder 

Empire Builder is similar to the Starlight, daily service to distant locations. It too, would benefit 

from consideration of more than daily service. 

Passenger trains to the coast and short line routes might not be 

practical, but we could use better intercity buses 

Occasionally there have been public request for intercity train service to the Oregon coast, 

sometimes via letters to the editor. 

Coos Bay line 

The freight line from Eugene to Coos Bay was built to haul lumber for timber companies. Much 

of the route is very twisting, steep and slow. It would be far slower than intercity buses. 

Perhaps most limiting is the fact it goes near Florence, not to it. I have heard this route has 

been used a few times for an entertainment oriented train but it would be a poor service for a 

transportation oriented train. Perhaps if we suffer an economic depression people will be 

grateful for whatever service remains, but in that circumstance keeping the valley train service 

functional might b enough of a challenge. 

Better bus service between the valley and coastal communities is probably a more realistic goal. 

Corvallis line 

There is also a train line from Corvallis to the Newport area, but this route is almost as curvy 

and steep as the Coos Bay route. Perhaps as gasoline becomes less affordable and less 

available this service will gain in popularity, at least until the Cascadia Subduction Zone 

earthquake. 

Bus service in the valley 

Currently, bus service between Eugene and Portland is faster than Amtrak Cascades. This is 

the case for Amtrak's contracted buses as well as Bolt Bus/ Greyhound. The goal of the ODOT 

train study will be met if the rail system facilitates Eugene to Portland train travel faster than 

driving the speed limit on 1-5. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 38 
Pioneer Train 

The discontinued Pioneer Train is also mostly outside the study area but it included a 

Portland stop. Efforts to revive this deserve a token mention in the Final EIS or SDEIS. 

This route was canceled by the Clinton Gore administration in 1997. 

It served a lower population region but was also a critical connection to the outside 

world, especially in winter. As oil declines renewed train service could become even 

more important to those communities. 

Advocates for Pioneer restoration note that every city along the route has endorsed its 

revival, even those that would only have trains stop at inconvenient limes in the middle 

of the night. 

Amtrak Pioneer 1977 map 

-- - �� -Roc:>Sp,!1190 

� EV�U'lilW) 

S.tt L.al<•Cityl' lJT 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail ·comments by Mark Rob nowitz • PeakTrafic.org • page 39 
- .. fcilic lnternation� 

-- Route of the Pioneer --Wa .:-:--- s,ungton ;--- ___ - - -

I 

Tacoma 

North Coasr Hiawarna 

! Montana - - - -- - -- ---- -

I East Olympia Emp,re B�ijdrJ - -'1 

1

, Centralia I \ 

1Kelso-Longview / \) .',Vancouver / I Portland/ --- -�'l-- ___ � I 

Hood Th O 11 � Pendleton I 

River e a es , I ( La Grande\ I --._ 

Coast Starlight - I \ 

Baker I f ,, ,_ ,r-----------

Onlario 1'. / __ , J <1atio j ,, Nampa I '� J / � So,oc 

-

/ \ Mountain Home J 

------ Oregon I '---� I 

Ca/ifo,n;; -r - - --- j Shoshone Poc�lello 

/ Nevada ----- -r---__ I 

I i

s, h c· -1 / 1 

rog am ,ty 

I San Francisco Zeph_r �-_�ong;��e:n:Wyoming 

I I UtahColorado - - -

! 1 Sall Lake City I 

I I I 

', I I 

' 

hllps:/pioerain.cg 

Easern Oregon Passenger Rail Summ t 

La Grande. Oregon 

March 16. 2019 

Working to br ng the same see ne to Porland, Baise and i nte rme di ate points! 

The Eastern Oregon Rai I Summit wl I be held in La Gran de. Oreg on on Saturday, March 16, 201 9 

in the David E. G ii ber Center in Ackerman Hal I at Ea sern Oregon Un versity from 1 DO O AM to 2 DO 

PM. Discussed will be rail transporation in the Pac fic Norhwes, wth a focus on returning rail 

passenger service between Port and and Boise via Hood R ver, The Dalles. Hermiston. Pendleton, La 

Grande, Baker City, Ontar o, and Nampa. A II a re welcome to p ari 

c

i 

pate. The exact t

i me of the summ t 

wi 

II be ann ou need later. 

HISTORY 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Ra l· comments b Mark Rabinowitz • PeakTralic.org • page 40 
Pioneer al Rnwena. OR 1991. Copyright Joe 8/ac/ove/L Used by pennission. 

The P oneer was not pa rt of the o r g na

l Amtr-'< system

 wh ch rep a ced the nati on·s private 

passenger r a

i l

roa ds on May 1, 1971. In the ate 196:ls, pr opo sa ls to e

l imnate o ne of the Wo t ra ns 

on the Un on Pa cif c s Pa cif c Norttwest ma nl i

ne through southern Idaho met strong reg ona

l 

resistance. but when Amtrak was fo rmed a ll o f the Un on P ac 1ic passenger serv ce in the Pa cif c 

Norttwest was a bruptly discontinued. 

D1aft ES: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 41 
CH CAGO· OMAHA· DENVER ·OGO£N 

OAKLANO(SAN FRANCISCO 

, ___ ..,_.,. ___ ..,. _.. N� .. Ol; 

-!),oo �- -·· r The San Francisco Zephyr � . ..,_.,; 

NlW SrRVJCff 

Vo Southern klallo 

and 12'111 C!l11mlu RWM' Roll t 

S�T LAKE C TY--oGDEN-80SE ­

PORTUNO SEATTL£ 

--... ________ _ ._,,.._ -· 

The 

_ .. 

Pioneer 

Ill _J' _ 

"•-•• ----4 

.. ... +--7 ,.;,;1,..,. � 

"•• • ..,..,.,,...u111,.,._\_-""" ••• 

u•• • • -• ,., wo,

1 

• ., -••• •••• 

,,., l" �� "'' !«AlWAI• 1-.: ••• UIO A .,. llti ... J•o 

..... , ... -· t•• 

, ... .,, - -- ..... 

�··· - - -- .�"·• 

• ••• • .. _,. ....... ill" .,,.. • • e o "' 4o -.... >11' U ilh :; ••• • ., 

--• - m.c •••• -,. ...... . _ .. !� -.i;: • :3 ..... 'I lloi •";:!••· 

II'..... .. -· , ... I II J IIOI I'll ... ,, .. -- fllU 

... ·- .. ..._ ,11,. , .. •' --- .... ... -,., 

... .. .. ,.( ••• , .. 11(11> 

... "" ... 

l l)f . : .. 

, .. , --- , .. , .... "" 

, .. , ... .. , � 

----·· 

--· 

t unu ..... 

·­"" • .._. 

,. , . 

' .. 

(II 1$ • 

I! •• 

.... 

••• 

••• 

' .. 

••• 

... 

IIUVtlltf IIOl'U rOII ••Gts H-4$ 

•-=:.:.�---·-·-­

� =-·-==':':i.:':t:-t:-=..- •••• ....... 11 .. ...., __ ..._,.�. 

The fir.;/ Pioneer lime/able. ,'vfay 1977. Courtesy The ,'vfuseum of Railway Timetables. 

b!lp·//www lime/ables orgl 

The absence of Amtrak serv ce runn ng east fro m Port a nd n eastern Oreg on and southern daho 

motivated state and federa

l 

offic a s to push for a t ra n to brdge that g ap. The r efforts rea ched fru it on 

on June 7, 1977, when the P oneer wa s born a s a Salt L-'<e C ity-Seatlle tra n. 

Atthat time, Amtr-'<s San Francisco Zephyr tra n ran fro m Ch cag o across southern Wyom ng on 

the Un on Pa cif c ma nl i

ne to Ogden, Utah, fro m wh ch t cont nued on to C a

l iforn a. t crossed 

the P o neer's path n Ogden. g vng the ntfAI tr a n a connect on w th Ch cag o a nd the East On 

October 28

 1979 another tra n, the DesertW nd

 began o perating between Los Ange es a nd Ogden; 

between Ogde n a nd Ch cag o t o per ated as a section of the San Franc sco Zephyr. The Denver a nd 

R o Grande Western R a

i l

road meanwhi le cont nued to run its R o Grande Zephyr a remnant o f 

Amer c a's once- pro ud f eet of private tr a ns. on the r out>? fro m Denver through the spectacu ar canyon 

o f the upper Co ora do River. to Uta h and Sa ll L-'<e. 

Th ngs wou d soon change. n the s pr ng of 1983, the R o Grande Zephyr ceased operat ons and 

the San Francisco Zephyr - rena med the Ca iforn a Zephyr-sh fted south. t-'<ing over ser v ce on 

the R o Grande Zephyr's route beWee n Denver a nd Sa ll Uke. Fr om there tturned north to Ogden

D1aft ES: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 42 
then west towa rds Ca

liforn a. The Desert Wnd's no rth ern termnus s multaneously moved ro Sa lt 

L�e. That city's R o Grande Station thus became the unction po nt for a ll three tra ns, wh ch 

excha ng ed through- cars there as a coord nate d serv ce . On October 'Zl, 1985, the Ca iforn a 

Ze phyr sto ppe d ca lling at Ogden, hea d ng west d r ectly from Sa lt L�e nste ad, a nd e

l imnat ng the 

o ver ap betlueen its ro ute and theP oneer's beWeen the M.lo Ut ah cit es. 

Chlo 

7 ◄---- -

·U • , . • 

• ,. 

• • 

�""'· >;--

='� ·11t.,. _,. 

-,.�,.... ,,_ l"!O --- .... ""I.,., 

,,:; � �-"'fir 

,....... fir 

,w,,., --- ·-� -

• 

••• 111 

. t 

•• 

•w a • .,.,er:!-} !::; ,.,.l t.::t:-2' .,._, 

�r ... = �� 

"........ --... . � .. 

.... """ 

-

• • 

• 

• 

• " 

I 1, 

• 

� 

2S -

Pioneer 

Chc •• Donvc, • • Soattlo 

AmlrakPioneerlimelable. April 1991. Courtesy The Museum of Railway Timetables. 

bllp·Uwww lime/ables org/ 

That situati on preva

i l

e d until June , 1991, whenAmtr � sh fte d the P oneer's rout ng n o rder b:I 

restore ser v ce t o Wyom ng. New th e tr a n ran as a sect on of the C a

l iforn a Zephyr o nly beWeen 

Ch ca go a nd Denver. The,e the westbound tra n sp it off from the Zephyr as its own tra n a nd 

procee de d north to Wyomng

 then westt o Ogden, then a o ng its e stab ished route north a nd west to 

Portlan d a nd Seatt e. The DesertW nd cont nue d to ply the Sa lt L�e-Los Ange es route. 

D1aft ES: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 43 
Pi(ll'leera/ Cascade u:,cl<s, OR. 1993

 Copyright Richard Sugg Used l7y pem1ission. 

As pa rt o f an att empt to re duce cos1s,Amtr-'< re duce d serv ce on a ll three routes n the autumn of 

1993 r educ ng the P oneer to a thr ce-weEk yse rv ce at a ll po nts west of Denver. Amtr-'< suppose d 

that tr ave li e rs woud s mply concentrat e the r t rave

l 

on the days when the P oneer st ll ran but su ch 

was notto be the case n eastern Oregon towns. the reduct on of serv ce by 417, or 57%, led to a 

58% dr op n r de rsh p compared with the at»? 198ls. Efforts were made to cont nue fund ng for the 

tra n. but the long, thre atene d end came on M ay 10, 1997

 when the last P oneer pull e d out o f Sea tt e 

for the r eturn to Ch cago. The DesertWnd disa ppeared a ong w th its s sb-?r tra n to the north, a nd 

today Amtr-'<'s se rv ce through the hea rt of the West consists of but one tra n the Ca iforn a Ze phyr . 

In the a b-? 199ls, the .Asso c ation of Or egon Ra

il 

and Tra ns tAdvocates spearhea de d a dr ve to 

restore the P oneer as a tra n that wou d carry ma il a nd expr ess- expe dite d fre ght-as we ll as 

passengers, snce Amtrak at that t me was ncor porating expre ss into many of its other tra ns. Al the 

same t me R on Wyden, Democrati c sen ator from Or egon, an d M ke Cra po Re publ i

can senator from 

Idaho. aunche d a b partisan effort to nit ati-? a tr a n on pa rt o f th e P oneer routi-?. beWeen Portland 

a nd Bo ise. As a b-? as 2004

 Amtr-'<'s st rati-?g c p an made a passing reference to the Port a nd-Boise 

route as be ng "under discuss o n

" but. giv en the Bush Adm n strat o n's skept c sm towa rds Amtrak, 

the ment on meant itt e. To many o n ookers, the P oneer was h story. 

D1aft ES: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 44 
" ONTS OJ INH .. UT 

--ltf'ltrJ'(QIAI;-­

. --· , ..... 

u

·-· 

Ml"« 

-

-­

. "'"--........ . ---- .. _..,.. . -·-·-·"" 

...... 

. '----w­

""''IY'A'II/Cl'>,- • ... •JM.,..-;.- • •• ,, .,1 'tw 

(IU.'dlJl'"""ffl'M'-.i.,·-

• ,_,,,._,_, __ .....i.- lf'IIINit(IJI 

·-­

/;V\"'1-MI� 

. --"'_ ... ...,, .... _� ...,_,._....,.,.. .. 

IVl◄'W� -·-• 

........ 

AM·-� __ ..,....,..., __ _ i\�'4,1:M'- JUl'IU• W � -. 1'11111'.1U�'\tV 

.... -­

/,t.t-,;nmr 

l(N,t"l'r(A'-Wo_�_,. • C,.,.\, 

... ,...... .. flM-_),;,l'J'o...,/_fa-__.....,.. ........, .U,,--t..--.� 

,.,.._,.._-.)-

scone HIOHUONH 

,..,,..---'-"'-

...,,..,,,..,.....,_� 

�• ..... i� 

"'""'__°""'""" 

---

�•*"'-·� 

,........,idwr�� ..

--­

. .. . �.-.... -•--..

. _, __ �-... ·---,-------� ,..__,_ 

"' ,,.. .. 

... .,., __ _ 

IUJI

COMMUnR OAll AIIIO 

IO raatnlT CONNIC'TIONI 

m 

The las/ Pioneer lime/able. November 1996. Courtesy The 1\Juseum of Raibvay 

Timetables. hltp ·/2\vww timetables orgl 

Wyd en and Cr apo d dn't give u p the fight. hwue ver. In e gs at on a me d at prov d ng new 

congress ona

l 

a utho rization for Amir •·s o perat o n. they nserted a nguage requr ng Amtrak t o study 

the poss b e resto rat on o f the P oneer from the Pa cif c Nortl'fJuest across Idaho and on to Ch ca go. 

Idaho con gr essman Mke Smpson a nd Or egon congressmen Gr eg Wa den and Ea r

l 

Bumenauer 

o ned th e effort

 and the provis on entere d the a.Al as pa rt of the Passenger Ra il lmprovementAcl n 

October. 2003. Amt r• then be gan the fea sbi lity study pro cess. To day

 that statute and the r ecent 

e conom c stimuus e g s at on are prov d ng bo th po

l i

tica

l impe tus a nd fund ng poss bili

ties that m• e 

the ret urn of the P oneer more 

l i

kely th an it has e ver been since t was termnate d n 1997. The 

P oneer R esto rat on Organizati on ha s come t ogether t o br ng loca l communit es beh nd the nit ative

a nd before too o ng eager passengers ma y o nce aga n see that tr an com ng round the be nd ... 

D1aft ES: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 45 
Decline of train servic over the decades 

National rail map from National Assocation of Rail Passengers 

INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL NETORK 

Januar 1, 1962 

-------- LC;H•th.on d.oJy •ervce 

--- At east daly servce 

--- Servce at east three tmes dally 

--- Servce al lo.Ht Sll timOI daiy 

So!.Jfce,.-N8!i!>tlsl Ass.xiatiOn Of Rftv"Cad P8SSl'ngeJS 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Ra l - comments by Mark Rob now tz - PeakTraff c.org - page 46 
Fran.e se 

Less..chan da ty service 

At least dai y service 

semce at east three times dally 

St,vk:,e .at teut 1• tjffiN dai l

y 

Le ss-than daily serv ce 

At east da ty service 

Servce at least three t mes daily 

Serv ce at i,east six t mes da ty 

INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL NETWORK 

July 31, 197 

INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL NETWORK 

December 31, 197 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Ra l -comments b Mark Rob nowitz - PeakTralic.org - page 47 
AMTRAK PASSENGER RAIL SYSTEM 

, 

Ps11 ,:m 

4 E\l°""tt 

•, 

, 

, 

, 

80511 

0 

i �Kiamllth F.ar. �

oo#lolto 

06i lling11 

/ R� ...... 

, .. �

k

2 .......... <>09(1on RawUM 

Mnot 

Wlll st:on 

e&tl'larek 

0 

•, ,h .. .,,., "•••-•·•..O .... a s.anu1:ocr,<\, '._ l ctie1,..,nt s,m"""'* '• � 

. . 

........... ,,,o .... 

Gkenwood ·--�""'' 

Sp,"98 t.11 """te, 

Less-than daly service 

At least daiy s.ervce 

Service at east three dmes daiy 

Service at east s x times daily 

Hutohlnr.(n 

Okahom. C;y 

UtlleRoc� 

May 1, 1971 

l.ciou,11 ll• 

bond t Gr 

Ma&lvill• ,

,.

• 

Memphs Ctlat

l 

81rml'!J ... "'°�-... 

_, 

Mertcll11n JMiks.on 

,

f' 

/Mobi.. !-!k: TllllllhMW-0 �Hew(l,

oc.!!!",cs � o 

e11r1:-'"11

c• 

Non•Amtrak serv ce 

AMTRAK PASSENGER RAIL SYSTEM 

........ t1.1 dlty Nco 

Al Htt dAly Htc Sie at lHt th t ditty 

Slt at Int sx Um• day 

Scuca,.Ns!.il.'INI AsstX:iad0n ot � PasstJr't9i!l!J 

January 8, 1978 

Draft El S: Oregon Passenger Rail -comments b Mark Rob now tz - PeakTrali c.org - page 48 
Oekh1nd 

l.OU•th;m doi l

y Hrv� 

--- At t3$1 d3ily $Cl'ViCe 

AMTRAK PASSENGER RAIL SYSTEM 

March 1, 205 

. . 

, ............ 

--- Servce at east three times dafly 

--- Servce at least s x t.mes daUy 

Potemkin Party by James Howard Kunstler 

kunstlerrm/cluster uck-nation /otemkin -pry/ 

July 27, 2015 

How many of you brooding on the dreadful prospet of Hillary have chanced I 

survey what remains of Democratc Pary (cough cough) ledership in the 

background of Her Royal Inevirbleness? Nothing is the answer. Zip. Nobdy. A 

vacuum. There is no Democratc Pary anymore. There are no figures of gravitas 

anywhere to b found, no ideas relly suitd I the American prospet, nothing with 

the will to oppse the lumbring parasitic rrporatocracy that is doing litle more 

than clutering up this moment in hislry while it sucks the last dres of value from 

our society. 

I sy this as a lifelong registred Democrat but a rmpletely disaffectd one - who 

regards the Republican oppositon as the mere errand by of the above-named 

lumbring parasitic rrporatocracy. Readers are surely chafng to insr that the 

Democras have ben no less errand bys (and girls) for the sme disustng 

zeiteist, and they are surely correct in the cas of Hillary, and indeed of the 

current President. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail -comments by Mark Rob now tz - PeakTratic.org - page 49 
Readers are surely also chafing to i nsert that there is Bernie Sanders, climbing in 

the opinion pol ls, d isdaining Wall Street money, denouncing the current d isposition 

of things with the old union hall surliness we've g rown to know and love . I'm 

g rateful that Bernie is in the race, that he's framing an a rg ument against Ms. It's 

My Tu rn. I just don't happen to think that Bernie gets what the country -

indeed what all of techno-industrial society - is really up against, namely 

a long emergency of economic contraction and collapse. 

These circumstances require a very different agenda than just an I 

Dreamed I Saw Joe H ill redistributionist scheme. Lively as Bernie is, I don't 

think he offers much beyond that, as if cadging a little more tax money out 

of WalMart, General M ills, and Exon-Mobil will fix what is ailing this sadass polity. The heart of the matter is that our way of life has shot its wad 

and now we have to live very differently. Almost nobody wants to even try 

to think about this. 

I hugely resent the fact that the Democratic Party puts its time and energy 

into the stupid sexual politics of the day when it should be working on 

issues such as re-localizing commercial economies ( rebuilding Main 

Streets), reforming agriculture to avoid the total collapse of corporateindustrial farming, and fixing the passenger rail system so people will have 

some way to get around the country when happy Motoring dies (along with 

commercial aviation) . 

The "to do" list for rearranging the basic systems of daily life in America is long and 

loaded with opportunity. Every system that is retooled contains jobs and social roles 

for people who have been shut out of the economy for two generations. If we do 

everything we can to promote smaller-scaled local farming, there will be plenty of 

work for lesser-skilled people to do and get paid for. Saying goodbye to the tyranny 

of Big Box commerce would open up vast vocational opportunities in reconstructed 

local and regional networks of commerce, especially for young people interested in 

running their own business. We need to prepare for local ized clinic-style medicine 

(in opposition to the continuing amalgamation and gigantization of hospitals, with 

its handmaidens of Big Pharma and the insura nce rackets). The train system has 

got to be reborn as a true public utility. J ust about every other civilized 

country is already demonstrating how that is done - it's not that difficult 

and it would employ a lot of people at every level. That is what the agenda of 

a truly progressive political party should be at this moment in history. 

That Democrats even tolerate the existence of evil entities like WalMart is an 

argument for ideological bankruptcy of the pa rty. Democratic Presidents from Carter 

to Clinton to Obama could have used the Department of J ustice and the existing 

anti-trust statutes to at least d iscourage the pernicious monopolization of 

commerce that Big Boxes represented. By the same token, President Obama could 

have used existing federal law to break up the banking oligarchy starting in 2009, 

not to mention backing legislation to more crisply define alleged corporate 

"personhood" in the wake of the ruinous "Citizens United" Supreme Court decision 

of 2010. They don't even talk a bout it because Wall Street owns them. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 50 
So, you fellow disaffected Democrats - those of you who can't go over to the other 

side, but feel you have no place in your country's politics - look around and tell me 

who you see casting a shadow on the Democratic landscape. Nobody. Just tired, 

corrupt, devious old Hillary and her nemesis Bernie the Union Ha II Champion out of 

a Pete Seeger marching song. 

I've been saying for a while that this period of history resembles the 1850s in 

America in two big ways: 1) our society faces a crisis, and 2) the existing 

political parties are not up to the task of comprehending what society 

faces. In the 1850s it was the Whigs that dried up and blew away (virtually 

overnight), while the old Democratic party just entered a 75-year wilderness of 

irrelevancy. God help us if Trump-o-ma nia turns out to be the only alternative. 

Oh, by the way, notice that the lead editorial in Monday's New York Times is a plea 

for transgender bathrooms in schools. What could be more important? For 

Transgender Americans. Legal Battles Over Restrooms 

High Speed Rail 

Japanese bullet train passing by Mt. Fuji. 

Draft EIS: Oregrn Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rooinowtz - PeakTraffic.org - page 51 
Amtrak Acela - the fastest train in the US. It can reach top speed of 150 

mph / 250 kph -- on short sections of track in Rhode Island and 

Massachusetts. Most of the route has track and overhead wires designed for 

slower speeds. 

http: //prorevnews. blogspot.com/2010/12/morning-line-why-infatuationw jth-b igb html 

December 29, 2010 

Morning line: Why the infatuation with high speed rail? 

Sam Smith, The Progressive Review 

For some fim e I \e been try ng to f gure out why the Obama admnistrfion has placed so much 

emphasis on h gh speed ra l and so lte on the ord nary knd, which would serve a fr brader and 

less wea thy segmen o the counry. Was t jus another example of class theft? Was t the compan es 

beh nd the contrcts? 

Such factos p ay a rle, but t has receny occured to me that the real reason may no have 

anying to do wth passenger serv ce at a l. It may be that Obama wantd to appear to be doing 

someth ng grnd in the trnspotat on f eld wh le at the same tme doing nothing that wou d oend the 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - oomments by Mark Rob row tz - PeakTraffc.org - page 52 
truck ng lobby. High speed rail would be perect as t minimizes any advantage to convent onal and 

bad y needed freight rail service. 

Th ere is ab so lute y no tra nsp oratio n or e nvi 

ran men ta I reason not to imp rove convent on al fr

i 

eg ht 

and ra ii service but f you can find an a ternatve th at makes the yuppies and the tru eke rs happy at the 

same t me, why bother? 

http: //prorevnews. biogs pot. com/2011/02/h ig h-speed-ra il-for-h ighincomes. htm I 

FEBRUARY 10, 2011 

High speed rail for high incomes 

Sam Smith 

The on y ser ous ana ysis of high speed ra ii we \e seen in the archaic media has co me from 

economist Rober Sa mue Isa n. Vy so I tt e? Be ca use basically, high speed rai I is basical y an 

earmark for the business class, for reporers whose travel is reimbursed and for other upscale r ders. 

Looked at from an economic perspec ve, t is the class eq uiva lent of ethnic se g reg atio n: the el te 

get to go high speed rail, the rest s t in the back of the bus. There's billions in funding for the former 

and litt e for the latter or for convent onal rail. 

� 

� lillill 

ffillIIIIillj]] ���� omiffil:l 1:1-2 tt;+j i [ I ITt1 • 

�Comdor l,b,. Lf1lt 

High speed rail proposal made during the George W. Bush administration. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger R a l - comments by Mark Rabinoitz - Peak Trafi c. org - page 53 
0 High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rall Program 

National Summary of Selected Projects 

WEST 

22 :,pplkations I S2,943 M 

-Legend CorridorD�o,PrOam 

--Long-Term \soo for High spoo P,moo;er RaU � Pl ;mning St1d M {y ��u�: 

MIDWEST 

I 24 applicatiom I :\2,617 M NORTHEAST 

22 applications I :\4S5 J\.t 

·-· 

l!uhilo --

� �'II 

r-- l't( � ;:=:i..� 8 �"'°"' ., .,., ( llaf1"""1Urrld<w) "\.. $1 U M 

SOUTHEAST 

11 appOCations I Sl,876 �'1 

Subsequent high speed rail proposal by the Obama administration. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 54 
110-mph Ril Lines 

T 

:z.u·J t) 

2!)2!) 

Non-governmental proposal for national high speed rail network. The "2015" 

deadline wasn't met anywhere with super high speed rail -- or even modest 

upgrades to existing Amtrak intercity service. Meanwhile, construction of 

new fighter planes and aircraft carriers continue to soak up hundreds of 

billions of dollars. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark RooinONitz - PeakTralfic.org - page 55 
laltatlauo 

te Forid High Sped Ao Aoor 

�o hil sd rl 

kg h ,m Vt Pan ca fo a 

$$:0M to 

reu tc. o.tioo 3 p 

aerrve to t t" ng pubc. 

The ayl5m woud d pllo1 

eming hway- an cone Fda 

cm.f0.CQand 

a thout ra mj�on 

ol te :n, Th:. mop s hoW �ibl 

routc thro ke clC In F. 

� ---� 

c.t�MAllkb 

0 : H'• �lo•ld" c " c.� l• 

o .1o... � 

□ •$o_.,.....,,. .... 

-:f)�flH 

�Wt .. """' S.ac:h 

' Nop,._��--:==� Fori 

Laudwdl• 

F orida h gh speed ra l concept rejeced by the Repubican conrol 

led state 

government due to parsan pol it cs. Oil dep et on poses r sks to the infux o 

tour sts who vi st For da ( and use transporaton systems), so perhaps a 

modern tra n network wi 

II no be needed in the Sunsh ne stat. F or da is 

famous for having los of e der y peop e, many o whom no I anger dr ve, but 

most o the stat has lite or no pubic transporton. 

It is like y climate change caused sea I evel 

rise wi II inerere wth coastal cites before F or da h gh speed rail is bui I

t. 

D1ft E S: Oregon Paaserer Rai • cmment b Mk FDna i • PakTraffb.or • pe 5 
t 

Our Vision 

. 

. 

.. 

Minnepls·S1 �wf 2:4 '.= 

•• • •• • · · ·' • '· · ·-• • • •., \'flllin 2 ho<.in of Cl'ico� 

-· " _ •• -·· , ..... ;,y 

··-••• ___ _ 

....

.. 

,, 

. . 

. 

I 

. . . . 

. ' 

' 

. 

. . ' 

' 

/' ��� '· 

. ' 

. . . 

. 

. 

' 

'· 

\,�tuca 

' 

. . . . . . . . 

. . 

. 

\, . ,, 

. . . . . . 

. 

I 

. 

� / ' .. ,, / -fMt:1:or.s 

� ...... , .... _ , ...... ,,' -�f/QM 

.... ,.,.. ., .. 

....

..

... 

.. ..

.. 

'":i-.. • ........ --.. ·-------�--

---�----·-· 

..- -c-S:tdm 

Midwest high speed and higher speed train network proposed by Midwet 

High Sped Ra ii Association . Chicago is the scond largest ra ii hub in the US, 

after New York City. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail -comments by Mark Rob now tz - PeakTratic.org - page 57 
https://www.reilience.org/storie/2018-12-17 /the-big-picture/ 

Humanity has a lot of problems these <lays. Oimate change, increasing economic inequality, crashing 

biodiversity, political polarization, and a global debt bubble are just a few of our worries. None of these 

trends can continue indefinitely without leading to a serious failure of our civilization's ability to maintain 

itself. Token together, these metastasizing problems suggest we are headed toward some kind of historic 

discontinuity. 

Serious discontinuities tend to disrupt the timelines of all complex societies (another name for 

civilizations-that is, societies with cities, writing, money, and full-time division oflabor). The ancient 

Roman, Egyptian, and Mayan civilizations all collapsed. Archaeologists, historians, and systems thinkers 

have spent decades seeking an explanation for this pattern of failure-a general unified theory of 

civilizational collapse, if you will. One of the most promising concepts that could serve as the basis for 

such a theory comes from resilience science, a branch of ecology (the study of the relationship between 

organisms and their environments). 

Drat EIS: Oegon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 58 
a (Re)organlzatlon 

r 

A time of Innovation, 

restructuring, and greatest 

uncertainty, but with high 

resilience. 

Characterized by: rapid 

accumulation of resources, 

competition, seizing of 

opportun ties, rising levels of 

divers ty and connections, and 

high but decreasing res lience. 

Growth/ Eploitation 

sourui: Holfmg. Guncters.on and t.u<lwit, lfl Quest ot a Th(!Ofyof AditpUYe Ctwio&e, 2002 

The Adaptive Cycle 

Why Civili?.ations Collapse: The Adaptive Cycle 

Conservation 

Growth slows down a, 

resources are stored and use, 

largely for systen 

maintenance. Characterize, 

by: stability, certainty, reducer 

Oexibility, with low resilience 

Characterized by chaoti, 

collapse and release o 

accumulated capital. This Is, 

time of uncertainty whe1 

resilience is low bu 

increasing 

Collapse/Release 

Ecosystems have been obseived almost universally to repeatedly pass through four phases of the 

adaptive cycle: exploitation, conseivation, release, and reorganization. Imagine, for example, a Ponderosa 

pine forest. Following a disturbance such as a fire (in which stored carbon is released into the 

environment), hardy and adaptable "pioneer" species of plants and small animals fill in open niches and 

reproduce rapidly. 

This reorganization phase of the cycle soon transitions to an exploitation phase, in which those 

species that can take advantage of relationships with other species start to dominate. These relationships 

make the system more stable, but at the expense of diversity. 

During the conservation phase, resources like nutrients, water, and sunlight are so taken up by the 

dominant species that the system as a whole eventually loses its flexibility to deal with changing 

conditions. These trends lead to a point where the system is susceptible to a crash-a release phase. Many 

trees die, dispersing their nutrients, opening the forest canopy to let more light in, and providing habitat 

for shrubs and small animals. The cycle starts over. 

Civilizations do roughly the same thing. In their early days, complex societies are populated with 

generalist pioneers (people who do lots of things reasonably well) living in an environment with abundant 

resources ready to be exploited. These people develop tools to enable them to exploit their resources more 

effectively. Division of labor and trade with increasingly distant regions also aids in more thorough 

resource exploitation. Trading and administrative centers, i.e., cities, appear and grow. Money is 

increasingly used to facilitate trade, while debt enables a transfer of consumption from the future to the 

present. Specialists in violence, armed with improved weaponry, conquer surrounding peoples. 

Complexity (more kinds of tools, more social classes, more specialization) solves problems and 

enables accumulation of weal th, leading to a conseivation phase during which an empire is built and great 

achievements are made in the arts and sciences. However, as time goes on, the costs of complexity 

accumulate and the resilience of the society declines. Tax burdens become unbearable, natural resources 

become depleted, environments become polluted, and conquered peoples become restless. At its height, 

each civilization appears stable and invincible. Yet it is just at this moment of triumph that it is vulnerable 

to external enemies and internal discord. Debt can no longer be repaid. Conquered peoples revolt A 

natural disaster breaks open the faqade of stability and control. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 59 
Collapse often comes swiftly, leaving ruin in its wake. But at least some of the components that made 

the civilization great (including tools and elements of practical knowledge) persist, and the natural 

environment has opportunity to regenerate and recover, eventually enabling reorganization and a new 

exploitation phase-that is, the rise of yet another civilization. 

Energy Is Everything 

Global industrial civilization shows significant signs of being in its conservation phase. Our 

accomplishments are mind-boggling, but our systems are overstretched, and problems (including climate 

change, inequality, and political dysfunction) are accumulating and worsening. However, our civilization 

is different from any of its predecessors. Unlike the ancient Romans, Greeks, Fgyptians, Shang Dynasty 

Chinese, Incas, Aztecs, and Mayans, we have built a civilization that is global in scope. We have invented 

modes of transportation and communication previously unimaginable. Thanks to advances in public 

health and agriculture, the total human population has grown to many times its size when Roman armies 

marched across North Africa, Europe, and Britain. Have we perhaps outgrown the adaptive cycle and 

escaped natural checks to perpetual expansion? 

6 

5 

2 

1 

0 

100CE 

Global Population Each Century t Since the Height of the Roman Empire / Current Population: 7.5 BIiiion 

■ Fossil Fuel Era 

■ Pre Industrial Revolution 

Time to grow from 100 million to 1 billion people: 1,700 years 

Time to grow from 6 billion to 7 billion people: 12 years 

300CE SOOCE 700CE 900CE 1100 CE 1300CE 1500CE 170CICE 1900CE 

In order to answer the question, we must first inquire why modem civilization has been so successful. 

The rise of technology, including advances in metallurgy and engineering, certainly played a part. These 

provided better ways of obtaining and harnessing energy. But it's the rapid shift in qualities and quantities 

of energy available to us that really made the difference. 

Previously, people derived their energy from annual plant growth (food and firewood), and 

manipulated their environment using human and animal muscle power. These energy sources were 

inherently limited. But, starting in the 19th century, new technologies enabled us to access and harness the 

energy of fossil fuels. And fossil fuels-coal, oil, and natural gas-were able to provide energy in 

amounts far surpassing previous energy sources. 

Energy is everything. All terrestrial ecosystems and all human societies are essentially machines for 

using (and dissipating) solar energy that has been collected and concentrated through photosynthesis. We 

like to think that money makes the world go 'round, but itis actually energy that enables us to do 

anything at all-from merely getting up in the morning to launching a space station. And having lots of 

energy available cheaply can enable us to do a great deal. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 60 
Fossil fuels represent tens of millions of years' worth of stored ancient sunlight. They are eneigydense, portable, and storable sources of power. Accessing them changed nearly everything about human 

existence. They were uniquely transformative in that they enabled higher rates of haivesting and using all 

other resources- via tractors, bulldozers, powered mining equipment, chainsaws, motorized fishing 

trawlers, and more. 

Take just one example. In all previous agrarian civilizations, roughly three-quarters of the population 

had to farm in order to supply a food surplus to support the other 25 percent-who lived as aristocrats, 

traders, soldiers, artisans, and so on. Fossil fuels enabled the industrialization and automation of 

agriculture, �s well as longer-distance distribution chains. 

Harvesting com by kan.d (left) versus harvesting by machine ( right). Image sources: The Harvest 

Cradle by John. Linn.en Public Domain. {left). Deer Harvester by Wesley Hetrick. Creative Commons 

Non-Commercial 2. 0 Generic License (right). 

Today only one or two percent of the U.S. population need to farm full-time in order to supply 

everyone else with food. The industrialization of food systems has freed up nearly all of the former 

peasant class to move to cities and take up jobs in manufacturing, marketing, finance, advertising, 

management, sales, and so on. Thus urbanization and the dramatic expansion of the middle class during 

the 20th century were almost entirely attributable to fossil fuels. 

But fossil fuels have been a baigain with the devil: these are depleting, non-renewable resources, and 

burning them produces carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, changing the climate and the 

chemistry of the world's oceans. These are not small problems. Oimate change by itself is far and away 

the most serious pollution dilemma any human society has ever faced, and could lead to crashing 

ecosystems, failing food systems, and widespread forced human migration. 

Replacing fossil fuels with other energy sources is possible in principle, but doing so fully would 

require massive investment, not just for building solar panels, wind turbines, or nuclear reactors ( there are 

some other serious problems with this latter option), but also for the retooling of manufacturing, 

transportation, buildings, and food systems to run on electricity instead of solid, liquid, or gaseous fuels. 

An eneigy transition is needed, but it's not happening at even nearly the pace that would be required in 

order to forestall catastrophic climate change or to prevent economic decline resulting from the depletion 

of the world's highest quality oil, coal, and gas resources. Industrial society's failure to make this energy 

transition is no doubt due not just to well-funded opposition by the fossil fuel industry, but also to the 

enormous technical challenge posed, and to the failure of policy makers to champion and implement the 

carbon taxes and alternative energy subsidies that would be needed. 

And so we accelerate toward ecological and economic ruin. 

Why It's So Hard to See thet We're Heeded for the Biggest Cresh Ever 

This is fairly typical of what happens toward the end of the conservation phase of every civilization's 

adaptive cycle. Each problem that arises, taken by itself, is usually solvable-at least in principle. But, as 

Drat EIS: Oegon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 61 
problems accumulate, leaders who are accustomed to (and benefit from) the status quo grow increasingly 

reluctant to undertake the changes to systems and procedures that would be required in order to address 

worrisome trends. And as those trends are ignored, the level of effort and discomfort needed to reverse 

them soars. Once solving problems requires too much perceived sacrifice, the only realistic ways to deal 

with them are to deny their existence or to blame others for them. Blame has the advantages of enabling 

leaders to look as though they're actually doing something, and of winning loyalty from their followers. 

But it does nothing to actually stave off snowballing crises. 

It's easy enough to see how elites could lose touch with realit and miss signals of impending 

collapse. But why would everyone else follow suit? Recent discoveries in neuroscience help explain why 

it's hard for most ofus to grasp that we're on an unsustainable path. 

We humans have an understandable innate tendency, when making decisions, to give more weight to 

present threats and opportunities than to future ones. This is called discounting the future- and it makes it 

hard to sacrifice now to overcome an enormous future risk such as climate change. The immediate reward 

of vacationing in another country, for example, is likely to overwhelm our concer about the greenhouse 

gas footprint of our airline flight. Multiply that future-discounting tendency in one instance by the billions 

of individual decisions with climate repercussions and you can see why it's difficult to actually reduce our 

total greenhouse gas emissions. 

We humans are also wired to respond to novelty-to notice anything in our environment that is out of 

place or unexpected and that might signal a potential threat or reward. Most types of reward increase the 

level of the neurotransmitter dopamine within the brain. Experiments have found that if an animal's 

dopamine receptor genes are removed, it explores less and takes fewer risks-and without some 

exploration and risk taking, individuals have reduced chances of survival. But the human brain's 

dopamine reward system, which evolved to serve this practical ftmction, can be hijacked by addictive 

substances and behaviors. This is especially problematic in a culture full of novel stimuli specifically 

designed to attract our interest-such as the hundreds of advertising messages the average child sees each 

day. We have become addicted to stimuli that our culture has multiplied and refined specifically for the 

purpose of grabbing our attention (for fun and profit) to such a degree that we barely notice long-term 

trends that are as threatening as a charging rhino. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 62 
Why addictive pleasure isn't the same as true happiness 

• Addictive 

Dopamine 

Pleasure 

� 

/ """'"

The neurotansmitter �,) .. fuels 

desire and mot,vllon 

• Short term, 

like enjoying a piece of cake 

· Visceral-it's felt in the body 

Inspires taking, like cashing In your chips 

at the casino 

• Typicaly experienced alone (eating, shopping 

drinking, binging) 

Makes the brain say, "This feels good, 

I want more." 

• Too much leads to addiction 

Not addictive 

Serotonin 

Happiness 

J Spreads happiness :2,s 

out across the bra n, touching 

at least 14 different recptors 

Long term, like contentment 

Etheral- ts felt above the neck 

Inspires giving, like volunteerng at a 

soup k tchen 

Generally shared (spending t me with friends 

fami y, colleagues, a congregation, etc.) 

Makes the brain say, "This feels good, 

and it's enough." 

Too little leads to depression 

BUSINESS INSIO 

The power holders in society incentivize smart people below them in rank and wealth to normalize 

the unsustainable, deny impending consequences, and distract one and all from worsening contradictions. 

Economists who claim that economic growth can continue forever on a finite planet win Nobel Prizes. 

Politicians who argue that climate change is a hoax attract big campaign contributions. Pundits and 

entrepreneurs advance along their career paths by asserting that society can grow its way out of climate 

change and resource depletion traps through "decoupling" (service economies, it is claimed, can expand 

in perpetuity without requiring additional energy or physical resources). Technology mavens win fame 

and glory by informing us that artificial intelligence, 3D printing, or Blockchain will usher in the 

"singularity," at which point no one will have to work and all human needs and desires can be satisfied by 

self-reproducing machines. 

Denial comes in shades, some of them quite benign. Many thoughtful and informed people 

acknowledge the threats of climate change, species extinctions, soil depletion, and so on, and insist that 

we can overcome these threats if we just try harder. They are often on the right track when they propose 

changes. Elect different, more responsible politicians. Donate to environmental nonprofit organizations. 

Drive an electric car. Put solar panels on our roofs. Start solar co-ops or regional non-profit utility 

Drat EIS: Cegon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 63 
companies that aim to source all electricit from renewable sources. Eat orgaic food. Shop at local 

farmers markets. These are all actions that move society in the right direction (that is, away from the brink 

of failure)-but in small increments. Perhaps people can be motivated to undertake such efforts through 

the belief that a smooth transition and a happy future are possible, and that renewable energy will create 

plentiful jobs and lead to a perpetually growing green economy. There is no point in discouraging such 

beliefs and their related actions; quite the contrary: they should, if anything, be encouraged. Such 

practical efforts, however motivated or rationalized, could help moderate collapse, even if they can't 

prevent it (a point we'll retur to below). But an element of denial persists nonetheless-denial, that is, of 

the reality that the overall trajectory of modem industrial society is beyond our control, and that it leads 

inexorably toward overshoot and collapse. 

What to Do? 

All of the above may help us better understand why the world seems to be running off the rails. But 

the implications are horrific. If all this is true, then we now face more-or-less inevitable economic, social, 

political, and ecological calamit. And since industrial civilization is now global, and human population 

levels are multiples higher than in any previous century, this calamity could occur on a scale never seen 

before. Although no one can possibly predict at this point just how complete and awful collapse might 

actually be, even human extinction is conceivable (though no one can say with any confidence that it is 

likely, much less inevitable). 

This is more than a fragile human psyche can bear. One's own mortality is hard enough to 

contemplate. A school of psychology ("terror management theor") proposes that many of our cultural 

institutions and practices (religion, values of national identity) exist at least in part to help us deal with the 

intolerable knowledge of our inevitable personal demise. How much harder must it be to acknowledge 

signs of the imminent passing of one's entire way of life, and the extreme disruption of familiar 

ecosystems? It is therefore no wonder that so many of us opt for denial and distraction. 

There's no question that collapse is a scary word. When we hear it, we tend to think immediately of 

images from movies like Mad Max and The Road. We assume collapse means a sudden and complete 

dissolution of everything meaningful. Our reasoning shuts down. But this is just when we need it most. 

In reality, there are degrees of collapse, and history shows that the process has usually taken decades 

and sometimes centuries to unfold, often in stair-steps punctuated by periods of partial recovery. Further, 

it may be possible to intervene in collapse to improve outcomes-for ourselves, our communities, our 

species, and thousands of other species. After the collapse of the Roman Empire, medieval Irish monks 

may have "saved civilization" by memorizing and transcribing ancient texts. Could we, with planing and 

motivation, do as much and more? 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 64 
"Desolation" by Tlwmas Cole (1836), the fourth of a five-part series called The Course of Empire. 

Public Domain. 

Many of the things we could do toward this end are already being done in order to avert climate 

change and other conveiging crises. Again, people who voluntarily reduce energy usage, eat locally 

grown oiganic food, make the effort to get to !mow their neighbors, get off the consumer treadmill, reduce 

their debt, help protect local biodiversity by planting species that feed or shelter native pollinators, use 

biochar in their gardens, support political candidates who prioritize addressing the sustainability crisis, 

and contribute to environmental, population, and human rights oiganizations are all helping moderate the 

impending collapse and ensure that there will be more survivors. We could do more. Acting together, we 

could start to re-green the planet; begin to incorporate captured carbon not only in soils, but in nearly 

everything we make, including concrete, paper, and plastics; and design a new economic system based on 

mutual aid rather than competition, debt, and perpetual growth. All of these efforts make sense with or 

without the lmowledge that civilization is nearing its sell-by dare. How we describe the goals of these 

efforts-whether as ways of improving people's lives, as ways to save the planet, as fulfilling the 

evolutionary potential of our species, as contributing to a general spiritual awakening, or as ways of 

moderating an inevitable civilizational crash-is relatively unimportant. 

However, the Big Picture ( an understanding of the adaptive cycle, the role of energy, and our 

overshoot predicament) adds both a sense of urgency, and also a new set of priorities that are currently 

being neglected. For example, when civilizations collapse, culturally significant lmowledge is typically 

lost. It's probably inevitable that we will lose a great deal of our shared lmowledge during the coming 

centuries. Much of this information is trivial anyway (will our distant descendants really suffer from not 

having the ability to watch archived episodes of Let's Make a Deal or Storage Wars?). Yet people across 

the globe now use fragile storage media-computer and server hard drives-to store everything from 

music to books to instruction manuals. In the event that the world's electricity grids could no longer be 

maintained, we would miss more than comfort and convenience; we could lose science, higher 

mathematics, and history. 

Drat EIS: Oegon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 65 
It's not only the dominant industrial culture that is vulnerable to information loss. Indigenous cultures 

that have survived for millennia are being rapidly eroded by the forces of globalization, resulting in the 

extinction of region-specific knowledge that could help future humans live sustainably. 

Upon whom does the responsibilit fall to curate, safeguard, and reproduce all this knowledge, if not 

those who understand its peril? 

Act Where You Are: Community Resilience 

We at Post Carbon Institute (PCI) have been aware of the Big Picture since the founding of the 

organization 15 years ago. We've been privileged to meet, and draw upon the insights of, some of the 

pioneering ecologists of the 1960s, '70s, and '80s who laid the basis of our current understanding of 

resilience science, systems thinking, climate change, resource depletion, and much more. And we've 

strived to convey that understanding to a younger generation of thinkers and activists. 

Throughout this time, we have continually grappled with the question, "What plan for action makes 

the most sense in the context of the Big Picture, given our meager organizational resources?" 

After protracted discussion, we've hit upon a four-fold strategy. 

Encourage resilience builcin� at the community level. 

Resilience is the capacit of a system to encounter disruption and still maintain its basic structure and 

functions. When it is in its conservation phase, a system's resilience is typically at its lowest level 

throughout the entire adaptive cycle. If it is possible at this point to build resilience into the human social 

system, and ecological systems, then the approaching release phase of the cycle may be more moderate 

and less intense. 

Why undertake resilience building in communities, rather than attempting to do so at the national or 

interational level? It's because the community is the most available and effective level of scale at which 

to intervene in human systems. National action is difficult these days, and not only in the United States: 

discussions about nearly everything quickly become politicized, polarized, and contested. It's at the 

community level where we most directly interact with the people and institutions that make up our 

societ. It's where we' re most affected by the decisions societ makes: what jobs are available to us, what 

infrastructure is available for our use, and what policies exist that limit or empower us. And critically, it's 

where the majorit of us who do not wield major political or economic power can most directly affect 

societ, as voters, neighbors, entrepreneurs, volunteers, shoppers, activists, and elected officials. 

PCI has supported Transition Initiatives since its inception as one useful, locally replicable, and 

adaptable model for community resilience building. 

Leave good ideas lying around. 

Naomi Klein, in her book The Shock Doctrine, quotes economist Milton Friedman, who wrote: 

"Only a crisis-actual or perceived-produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that 

are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop 

alteratives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes 

the politically inevitable." 

Friedman and other neoliberal economists have used this "shock doctrine" for decades to undermine 

regional economies, national goverments, and indigenous cultures in order to further the project of 

corporate-led economic globalization. Klein's point is that the key to taking advantage of crises is having 

effective system-changing plans waiting in the wings for the ripe moment. And that's a strategy that 

makes sense as society as a whole teeters on the brink of an immensely disruptive shift. 

What ideas and skills need to be lying around as industrial civilization crumbles? One collection of 

ideas and skills that's already handily packaged and awaiting adoption is permaculture-a set of design 

tools for living created by ecologists back in the 1970s who understood that industrial civilization would 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 66 
eventually reach its limits. Another set consists of consensus group decision-making skills. The list could 

go on at some length. 

Target innovators and early adopters. 

Back in the 1960s, Everett Rogers, a professor of communications, contributed the theory of the 

Diffusion of Innovations, which describes how, why, and at what rate new ideas, social innovations, and 

technology spread throughout culture. The key to the theory is his identification of different tpes of 

individuals in the population, in terms of how they relate to the development and adoption of something 

new: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. 

Innovators are important, but the success of their efforts depends on diffusion of the innovation 

among early adopters, who tend to be few in number but exceptionally influential in the general 

population. 

At PCI, we have decided to focus our communications on early adopters. 

Help people grasp the Big Picture. 

Discussions about the vulnerability of civilization to collapse are not for everyone. Some of us are too 

psychologically fragile. All of us need a break occasionally, and time to feel and process the emotions that 

contemplating the Big Picture inevitably evokes. But for those able to take in the information and still 

function, the Big Picture offers helpful perspective. It confirms what many of us already intuitively know. 

And it provides a context for strategic action. 

Pro-Social, Nonpartisan 

I'm frequently asked if I have hope for the future. My usual reply is along these lines: hope is not just 

an expectation of better times ahead; it is an active attitude, a determination to achieve the best possible 

outcome regardless of the challenges one is facing. PCI Fellow David Orr summed this up best when he 

wrote, "Hope is a verb with its sleeves rolled up." 

However, if that's as far as the discussion goes, merely redefining "hope" may seem facile and 

unsatisfying. The questioner wants and needs reasonable grounds for believing that an outcome is 

possible that is something other than horrific. There is indeed evidence along these lines, and it should not 

be ignored. 

Steven Pinker, in his book The Better Angels of Our Nature, argues that we humans are becoming 

more peaceful and cooperative. Now, it could be argued that any decline in violence during the past few 

decades can be seen as yet another indication that civilization is in a conservation phase of the adaptive 

cycle: we have attained a balance of power, facilitated by the wealth flowing ultimately from fossil fuels; 

perhaps violence is simply being held in abeyance until the dam breaks and we head into the release phase 

of the cycle. Nevertheless, evolution is real, and for humans it occurs more rapidly via culture than 

through genes. It is entirely possible, therefore, that we humans are rapidly evolving to live more 

peacefully in larger groups. 

Earlier I explained how the findings of neuroscience help us understand why so many of us tum to 

denial and distraction in the face of terrible threats to civilization's survival. Neuroscience also offers 

good news: it teaches us that cooperative impulses are rooted deep in our evolutionary past, just like 

competitive ones. Self-restraint and empathy for others are paly leaed behaviors, acquired and 

developed in the same way as our capacit for language. We inherit both selfishness and the capacit for 

altruism, but culture generally nudges us more in the direction of the latter, as parents are traditionally 

encouraged to teach their children to share and not to be wasteful or arrogant. 

Disaster research informs us that, in the early phases of crisis, people tpically respond with 

extraordina degrees of cooperation and self-sacrifice (I witnessed this in the immediate aftermath of 

wildfires in my community of Santa Rosa, Califora). But if privation persists, they may tum toward 

blame and competition for scarce resources. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 67 
All of this suggests that the one thing that is most likely to influence how our communities get 

through the coming meta-crisis is the qualit of relationships among members. A great deal depends on 

whether we exhibit pro-social attitudes and responses, while discouraging blame and panic. Those of us 

working to build communit resilience need to avoid partisan frames and loaded words, and appeal to 

shared values. Everyone must understand that we're all in this together. The Big Picture can help here, if 

it aids people in grasping that the collapse of civilization is not any one group's fault. It is only by pulling 

together that we can hope to salvage and protect what is most intrinsically valuable about our world, and 

perhaps even improve lives over the long term. 

Hard times are in store. But that doesn't mean there's nothing we can do. Each day of relative 

normalcy that remains is an occasion for thankfulness and an opportunity for action. 

http://w. theenergyreport. com/pub/na/14 705 

US Shale Gas Won•t Last Ten Years: Bill Powers 

Source: Peter Byrne of The Energy Report 

Nov 8. 201 2 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 68 
Los Angeles Times, May 20 201 4: US Department of Energy 

admits Post Carbon Institute is right about exaggerated 

estimates of frackable oil reserves in Cal ifornia, downsizes 

estimate for Monterrey Shale by 96% 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 69 
( r- Drilling California: A Reality ... ey Shale Post Carbon Institute 

GGGITT rwl rciil 

181 '# D 11 i• 0.. OONATE 

post carbon institute 

Books + Reports 

Home > Books + Reports > Dr lling Cal ifornia: A Real ity Check on 

the Monterey Shae 

DRILLING 

CALIFORNIA 

A REAUTYCHECI ON THEt,tONTUEYSHALE 

:ft 

J. OVO H�E 

- - PSE 

Drilling California: A Reality Check on the Monterey 

Shale 

Dav d Hughes 

December 2, 2013 

◄ -------------------�•& 

Draf EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comment by Mark Robinowit - PeakTrafc.org - page 70 
n () n Drilling California: A Reality ... rey Shale Post Carbon Institute 

I ◄ I ► I @J � @J >> 

Drilling California: A Reality Check on the Monterey 

Shale 

David Hughes 

December 2, 2013 

Wrtten by PCI Felow J. Dav d Hughes and publ i

shed n partnershp 

by Post Carbon Insttute and Physcians, Scent sts & Engineers for 

Heathy Energy. th s report provides the f rst publ i

cy avai l

abe 

empr cal 

anays s of actual oi

l 

producton data from the Monterey 

Formaton, inc udng from w@ll s that hav@ und@rgon@ hydraulic 

fracturing and acid zaton. It lays ou1 some of the pays fundamental 

character st cs compared to other t ght oil pays, including geoog cal 

properes, current producton, producton potental, and associated 

env ronmental i

ssues. 

Unlike previous stud es ooking at potental 

producton and 

economc impacts, th s repor is based on anays s of real 

producton data (compled in the most comprehensve ol and ,gas 

producton database publ i

cy avalabe) and shou d therefore hep 

ensure that publ i

c pol icy dec s ons on the deveopment of the 

Monterey are grounded in data, not assumptons. 

Visit montereyoil.org for more resources, including key maps and 

figures. 

◄ �------ ---------- ------- ► #, 

Qr.,ft E S: Oregon Passenger Ral -comments by Mark Rob nov.mz -PeakTraffi::.o,g -page 71 
!Ios ,;\ngclcs trin1cs Julyu.�04 

U.S. officials cut estimate of recoverable 

Monterey Shale oil by 96% 

o'r' toc.ns w11,c: lfN 

.tf;!$!OO.OO,1.�'0r.lp.ill. 

�•�icNJ cl'X't{lY 1111tlorti("$ �' e du.1,:J by 947' t1e cst !fl:att-d 

1.mOu.nt of r«o,.�rnb c oil 

buried in Ca.!io�·,, ,-a.n Mnnlff1!Y 

SbtJc �lt.$, deflad� u l)(>l'"-11�&1 i.11 a USttlotlil! "ba<k go!(! 

mine'" of�rolcwn. 

Jus,. 6oo mUtlosi �rd�of <ill l.ll.!' beQ.1.��,d wd, (:.,Mlll.ii. 

1Khnol�. f11TIM:ow the �:)..?bill.ion b.umsoixc thought 

rt-«:,,t�Me from the j11.\lihtc.l a�n of 1ubtNTSM.a.•1 ;-ode 

1pre11d a.:rou mud\ of Ct,.nu·-a.l Californ.a, he U.S. Energy 

!Jifioo'l'OWOI) A<lolli:ib��U()u a}d, 

fOK n, � n.eCOw.J:,: 

M011ltrq> Sh..aJt� » the Mny ,, S«t.ioDA, 11u:utlde-.boll 

!tcktal 

(:.ntq;,y �tbor'ltln �IM!i 

,115 by 96" II•, �t!Jlla ed 

•.mow.il of �r11bleoil 

DCtJl!orci-11'• MOl'll.C:N/Y Sb.ale 

del)Otiud�bed tho rod<, forM�doo• n 75<>--,�ilo;,;11, 11,e 

MoutereySba.lt- is1117,S(Hlfl/INJ-J1Uearc11, 

A..-r:..,•wl'6M�Ultb Calw),omtb 

ooaM-�1taalnc,-sijdtl.-.

�-,a..�Xffl!Olefte,,l.u-• 

nM• 

...,.of lltlM!Ybl'cii-olC• po1rr111.t.l 1w 

..... -,:.(llu,.lli)itl"'"7�� 

Rel.nt«I C'.onlcnl 

()J&fdg,ukaJMl)'ttllfflll..tA-M'luaudlo(Jo2-

'9 c.aitoctu, ttr,,on r-=dl 

111c De'fofftinuie,expc:cft«I to be rdeued publdy next month, in bow to he N-ion's oil fu1ureand 0 

vrol«\ioos lha.t .,, <>I booir, wO\lld br! \& o, ma11y u-:t.8 :11UBou oe,.-jooe 10 Ca!fot'ZUa -.:"100<lst u 

tll\�mle by.$ :::,i..6 bilJiol'I aMUll!y. 

'11,e M-Oll1C"ri:)' $:'.1.1i c!otm-!ll on«>1 1

l$l nta.\llX.l two--1ht,J# oflbc \Sll onubalt: <>JI 

rc�·cs. I

i blld bt;;os-.�o 

&1 an �normou. bo1U11Vll, rffiucing the n.ntioi:t·s nffd !or &,Neign oil imports through the use of the: la1"'t n 

��t"Jo(.l t('(:br,ijq, ,es;, Qth,dlt1g¥"i<l t�t,1.1e1u.liot\to(.lt$1 drilll.AS, Md �1tts, 

Ute c!X'fgy ag_eixy Ald the c11riiff cuim11te of r«O\'ffflb?c oi l, ig:u,ed n 2()11 by an ir.dtP"'.ndcnt firm ur.dcr 

o>.nlttd whh ll• �wcnrt'ltJl1, 1,roitJly $$5wncd lhlt <Jtp,o(iu o dMJ MOl)l�ey S!llllti formail<,o wt'tC -, 

-nr r«O\�table u hosc found in slu!c f'omul:ion. ehe,,,he� 

The i:&t�u:. tO";itbt-J off 11 4'#-'•t}()i, 000� a., )(lng: -0!1 ooml)l.:dn, 1'bc flew fiOOl � ketti °'11$to to 

d!lmpe:n t�l wthmium. 

Kct!l (;ml.1)'.y t1 !ll(U'U(.'Wu � $«'11 o 6,my of oil 11(1.M y tbl('e -::o 11, whb tooSt of tbc ell wdt. <ltilleJ: by 

iixlepenot:nt cxp1otalo')'comp,,1n<tS. M�jot oil rom.pulics lui\-e exptcucdd0".1b'ls fot )>utJa.bc,ut ttan�ring 

,.,w::h of the o!l, 

111c probem 1iel ..,;h tbe�ogy oftbe �lonterey Slulc, 11 1.;5<>,mie !orm11to1:1 runci�d�'ll I.Moee.1cr 

ofCaJforoia rout.h >· frol.fl S,a,cra,i)r.ntO 0 tbc ..osA.ngt'lc,,bM1n,�nd !.ochdJ�301 •lCI <O»llll rta;ioos. 

Unlike be:1\ily &nd:tdslu!e depo,ii:i n North MO!u.nd TelWI, which II:.'! rel.a1freye,,� and -,�edlike 

• cake,

, Mo11.1:tt:1 SbtJe 1w b«:,

, fod(...) a;,dshan�eJ by M:ti'.lltac-tl\'ity, wid, 

tbeo!J 6ou.ud a1 detptt 

Ar,l.lL 

(;wol#t,$ ha\;,: o� lux,wtt h3t the rlch<lcl)(l,U:WM�l b-;,l they">t:rt Mt tho�'il t«l)\�t*blc wt!) t� 

prioe o! oil ro,e t.nd th!! induJ't ry IM:\'tiopcd adduton, whch ea, 11w�y mcb, a.nd fracki1:1g. tlle proocss af 

fo e<.1.� 11\Jll!oos of (y.Jh>O$ of wtt�: ktJ: "4th SSlod ar.,d d,cmt1lli dttp wll.ktt;:row->d 10 tf/1¢),c $Ji.ti.le 

form11tioed. 

·nie Cit"· &n.<t�t,, froui t1,e �®' lllfotr1'13ti(li, Aditlnbt:\jt (ln "'• "'-..-d. iD P/11'1. (In a revi�· of t1,e o-;iti>ul 

Jr-r,,., w,•llc ,...h,,,....,1h,,_........u.-bn 11,_ w,,..,_.,_.i 

... 

--

Draft EIS: Oiegon Paso, rge r Rail -comments by Mark Rob rov.itz - PeakTraffi::.org -page 72 

L 
,'.(IO)(>v•>I 

S1p 11 

...... 

!Ios ,;\ngclcs trin1cs July 11, �04 

from tbe1dormnl10l'l'-'e<.,; bNl.n nblc to p.her "'�:::.� oot $tt.ll 1:1\1dc1Xe uu'.1 oJ cxtnietion 0 till, II�,_ 

�ty pro(hxti-11 ,isli,a «h».1�YN ikfl frtl<'k.kg.· �d .Jolw $!•tib.• Pttt<1 ('1 1"1 c,!)lor:itlo,am.l �(1J()u a.na)':ll who «I tbet!llert.)' ._ncfs r-tdl. 

·0w-011 

prod\J� ou c�.l'l'lllh8 «nnbh,._-J "'ith • de:11"11, of k;!0"'1(.� •bo-111 l)t�� d fl't-tt.icu 11mo113 d,c 

oil 5cck ltd o .:nont"Om �ktoeis and C$'1imntcs: Sallb lll'ld. 

Cot11J)ln .. -J"'ith on prodtldon frott1 the ).uk(":, $loe h, Xord, Oakot/J o.,x1 tbe :-1311; forJ,SbJe l" Tcu.t. 

•the �lontcrey formntonk stAgAWt; Staub Aid. He added that the poentW for fco:>\"Cri� tihe oil rould 

H$I! if oew «J-..ii<>lo$Y 1$ den: lopecl 

A JpOl:cm\oln !io r he' oil ir.d111try �� optmism Nit � HchniqUCI will e,,�tlW)' op,w up the 

Mouh·rey fo"113lloo. 

"\\'c ��• 101 ofam5denoe. n he intc!ligwcxiand skilJ of O'llr C'.!tgillffN 1100 gtoli,gi,;u to find.,...,.)., to 

tid,1>1.: Aid 1\,Piltt 1iW .111)(1kn'"M fot the W�ter.:i $t1tt3 f'1;trot'Uro Auu. •,\$, We t1 .. -clu,ool9,<" cluu� 

the production ntCI' <Ot1d aM> dung.t dr11m11ticall

y. • 

tod<. ileru�.n, ditt-f (!)C(-t�t.h<c: of hc t�le $t'OU,> O.U&.irnl.a .i«,'ocDdtA1 >¢'11Vkw 1 A6:so., wb! ffi rq)t('8WU 

nuny .ndepcodcr.! cw:ploruion o:om��, 11bo ,cmndt.'11 hopefu. 

� oil i.1 lhtTc" 7.fomu.n aid. •11tz1 thb U II tottgb blUi.Ul'S.$." 

l::vvl rOilr:'IC�.-1 ->fl,'ll\lta.lo18 wdoort1ed hl.• Qe'O<>'l 110 u,mlllg ix,hl l ii wba1 

1�d OC-tiu ru:sb (I (111(.Jc 6or oil 

n he Mor:teto:)' fonn,uion. 

,be na.-r11ti--c of frtddog in he �101)1.("r(!y $ha!� u «0:$$Slly for cixr(ly ! udit1ocMeoct ])Ii.I had ab� ho-fo 

bown in it; .,,.d Seth a Shoukoff, cxcmth'C direc1or oflbe txi�ro5t Pb)'SidJM Scieoturla & F.:ngi.neers for 

Ht.(llt},yl:ncrJ;;.Y, 

J. D.a,id Hughe.. ag,c,50cntist 11nd .spokunu.n for be nocyrofit 1'0111. Qiri,ou lmti tnte, w.id he Monu-tty 

fo.tn'lntlon •wQS alW$)'li11)1hr<8l ,oolbtr ode� 1-1> by tJu.: oll 1¥hi:slty - t ot\t (!l(°l$ted." 

l(ugbcswro1eiaa report Jut )w.t tlut •Qiliforni� :,:bou!dconl.ider i::1 eoooomk 11Dd eoergy future .n the 

•�of &D &ll ,ro..t.,dJou booi,1 {r(lo,, tbc,\lt;Htert)' Shale,• 

11ll' 20u estinu.e"� doDC br tbe Virginiae,nginecrii:,g f

i

rm le1di: lr.ie. 

Oirl�opher l'lea.ii, .eulor ..oclatt Ill IMdc, sa.ld \ieht.foy lhat ht fir111•t..,-oi1⁄4 �..,.., vcty bt<1$cl.g:Mt,3 the 

!'t.-dcmll go\emmen

l 

lll fi rii1 sbot at 111'.1 a:tinue o! ft'OO\'t!t1.be oil n tbe Monterey Slwe. 'l'he)• got more 

�tll (W("t t': m,o -.ill.I rdiotd the e$llin,•(": 

For C.al!orni11, tbe&:llll)·.ri, thro't'>., ood water oneeonmuk proj«toll'I built upon lr..1ek', projo.'diom. 

j: Wl.3• li'SC a!W)'lU, fwidnl ti, !),\rt by lh c WescrnSt11te, �ro,lew,1 AS31!L.. pr«laeJ tb.(lt tlk: Mont(-rey 

Slu!e !omwion o:ould. b)' :w>�o. boo,:i;t Cali§ornbts g:NUS do�tk product by 1'1", add $24.6 billion pe:r 

�.u In tQJC rt"�n• 41J ge,e:-.e {1:,8 mUlk>u n«'I" Joo,. 

1ouis�latb-.o:om 

c-o �ffflll� Cos Angrl( timrs 

C ,w,,.. • ..,,Tl,,,IJoo Y-a� 

hi•,()'� 11(1o�(',oli�•.9t

._w"'""St,-

�-l'OQ 

l(UI' 

... 

-• -

Draft EIS: Oiegon Paso, rge r Rail -comments by Mark Rob rov.itz - PeakTraffi::.org -page 73 

t.. 
Earth, energy and money 

Whether you focus on Peak Energy, Climate Chaos or what is euphemistically called 

the "Great Recession," each of these are aspects of reaching the limits to growth on a 

round, finite planet. The transition from cheap, abundant fuels to expensive, hard to 

get fuels is reducing the amount that people drive and damaging the economic system 

that requires endless growth to function. Peak Energy is starting to reduce the physical 

abil ity to grow traffic levels, regardless of economic circumstances. Burning fossil fuels 

pollutes the thin film of the atmosphere, with health consequences and environmental 

impacts, including global warming. Ecology, energy and money are interconnected 

and inseparable, and each require a holistic integration with the others to address 

any of them. 

Energy depletion is not only about personal transportation or carbon footprints. 

Driving less will be uncomfortable, but eating less would be far more difficult. Most food 

eaten in the US crosses time zones, some travels across international borders. As 

fossil fuels decline we need to grow food where it is eaten. Relocalizing food 

production, growing food in cities, community gardens, suburban "food not lawn" efforts, 

and protection of farmland from asphalt and concrete are all needed to cope with oil 

depletion. 

It's anyone's guess what energy levels will be in the 2030s, but under any physically 

possible scenario the flow rates of fossil fuels will be considerably less than they are 

today, since conventional fossil fuels have peaked globally. There will still be oil 

extraction in the 2030s but at levels less than cu rrent rates, and the future fuels will be 

the dirtier, more expensive, difficult to extract "bottom of the barrel" supplies. Hyper 

efficient cars, public transit, car sharing, relocal izing production of food and other goods 

could mitigate these impacts but not prevent them. Transportation planning needs to 

focus on maintaining the enormous road networks already built, not expanding them 

further for travel demand that will not materialize on the energy downslope. 

The category of investment euphemistically called "modernization" should be dedicated 

toward quality train service, not super wide superhighways. 

The reason we use fossil fuels is not that Dick Cheney is evil or the oil companies 

are greedy but that fossil fuels are more energy dense than living on our solar budget. 

Fossil fuels enabled us to zoom from under a billion to over seven billion today, and 

climbing down gracefully from peak energy will be more challenging than descending an 

icy Cascadian peak during a blizzard. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 74 
Connected Dots: Earh • energy • money 

by Mark Rabinowitz • PeakChoice.org 

first printed in Heartbeat, heartwood.org, Spring 201 4 

We are not addicted to fossil fuels, it's 

much worse than that. Oil, coal, unnatural 

gas, mineral ores and using "renewable" 

resources faster than they regenerate 

fueled our population growth from under a 

billion (before fossil fuels) to seven billion 

today. Our industrial agriculture system is 

totally dependent on massive energy 

consumption to grow and distribute food. 

We are in a paradox: burning these 

fuels is wrecking the biosphere, but if we 

stopped burning them our society would 

crash, which could accelerate ecological 

damage. There are many worthy efforts to 

relocalize food production and prepare for 

living with less fossil energy, but at the 

rate they are being implemented the fossil 

fuels will be gone before we are prepared 

to live without them. 

Many environmental groups say we 

need to reduce our use of fossil fuels in 

the coming decades to mitigate climate 

chaos. However, energy use has peaked 

due to physical constraints, and on the 

energy downslope our use will continue to 

decline whether we plan for it or not. 

In the United States, energy use from 

all sources peaked in 2007 at about 101 

quads. A quad is a quadrillion BTUs. One 

BTU is roughly the energy released by a 

match. In 201 2, energy use had dropped 

to about 95 quads. 

2007 was also the year of Peak 

Electricity in the US. Since then, electricity 

usage has dropped about ten percent. 

Traffic also peaked in the US in 2007, 

in terms of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). 

The rising cost of gasoline and economic 

"recession" ended the increase of car 

traffic. Roads are still busy, but most are 

not getting any more congested. 

Federal transportation law requires 

highway expansion plans to consider 

traffic levels two decades in the future. It's 

anyone's guess how much fossil energy 

will be available in the 2030s, but it's clear 

it will be considerably less than today's 

flow. This negates the "pu rpose and need" 

for new bypasses and highway widenings, 

but Peak Traffic has not yet been included 

in any official transportation plan 

anywhere in the country. 

Domestic aviation also peaked in 

2007, again due to rising oil prices that 

raised the cost of tickets. The leveling off 

of aviation growth is a bigger shift than the 

reduction after 9/1 1. 

US oil production peaked in 1 970 at 

about ten mil lion barrels a day. In the past 

couple years, there has been a 

propaganda campaign to persuade the 

public that tracking is going to lead to 

energy independence. However, while 

tracking has received lots of scrutiny due 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 75 
to the toxic impacts on aquifers, the fact 

that tracking is a very short term activity is 

not as well known. Fracked wells deplete 

far faster than conventional wel Is, and the 

production data shows tracking cannot 

bring US oil extraction back to the 1 970 

peak, even if environmental and public 

health problems were ignored. Fracking 

and tar sands are "scraping the bottom of 

the barrel" and have delayed the onset of 

gasoline rationing. 

Coal production peaked in the US in 

1 999, in terms of energy content. The 

tonnage of coal mining continues to 

increase, but the industry is going after 

lower quality coal, part of the motive for 

mountaintop removal. In Pennsylvania, 

where coal mining began, extraction 

peaked in 1 920. 

Peak Natural Gas in the US was in 

1 973. The recent boom in gas extraction 

is from tracking, but that is staring to 

peak, just as tracking for oil is peaking. 

When the tracking bubble bursts, we will 

have to choose whether to use the 

remaining natural gas to heat cities in the 

winter or to burn it for electricity. 

Nuclear power has also peaked. Peak 

uranium mining in the US was 1 980. The 

number of operating power reactors has 

peaked. Old, worn out reactors are being 

shut down faster than replacement plans 

for new nukes. 

We are also using "renewable" 

resources faster than they regenerate. 

Forests, fish, soil, and fresh water are 

being depleted everywhere. Part of the 

needed response to our civilization's 

"going out of business sale" would be to 

implement permaculture strategies 

everywhere. It would be nice to see 

environmental initiatives focus more on 

"Transition Towns" than lobbying 

politicians. The more we can create 

practical responses, the more likely we 

will see broader adoption of ecological 

policies on the energy downslope. 

Using solar energy for twenty years 

(and wind power for ten) taught me that 

renewable energy could only run a 

smaller, steady state economy. Our 

exponential growth economy requires 

ever increasing consumption of 

concentrated resources (fossil fuels are 

more energy dense than renewables). A 

solar energy society would require moving 

beyond growth-and-debt based money. 

After fossil fuel we will only have solar 

power, but that wont replace what we use 

now. Living on our current solar budget 

could not be a seamless substitute for 

digging up a hundred million years of 

sunlight. We need to abandon the myth of 

endless growth on a round, and therefore, 

finite planet to have a planet on which to 

live. Will we use the remaining fossil fuels 

to make lots of solar panels and relocalize 

food production instead of waging Peak 

Oil Wars? 

ro�!�t�nHo? !�1�ps� 

An Uncensored Guide: Earth • Energy • Money 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 76 
June 27th, 2012 

www.peakchoice.org/peak-blame.html 

316: Peak Blame 

KMO welcomes Mark Robinowitz of OilEmpire.us back to the C-Realm Podcast 

to discuss why both the mainstream political left as well as the right in the United 

States cannot address the demands of Peak Oil in a realistic way. Republicans 

have rebuked Navy Secretary Ray Mabus for attempting to ween the Navy off of 

fossil fuels because they see finding alternatives to petroleum as a Democratic 

partisan issue. Established environmental and social justice organizations are 

sti ll holding onto unrealistic Green Technology and Green Capitalism paradigms 

and have yet to come to terms with the fact that the project of the 21st Century 

will be figuring out how to equitably distribute a shrinking pie. One thing unl ikely 

to be in short supply as the realities of diminishing fossil fuel reserves make 

themselves unmistakable: blame. Mark hopes that we can achieve Peak Blame 

sooner rather than later and get on with the grown-up work of figuring out how 

best to deploy our remaining energy resou rces. 

M. King Hubber on energy and money 

excerpt from Richard Heinberg, "The Party's Over," (New Society Books: 2003) 

pp. 91-92, discussing M. King Hubbert, the geologist who first figu red out the math 

behind Peak Oil. Hubbert predicted in 1 956 that the USA would peak around 1 970, he 

was pilloried for this but the USA did peak in 1 970. Hubbert later predicted that the 

world would peak in the mid 1 990s, but then cautioned this might get pushed back a 

decade due to the oil shock of 1 973, which is what happened. Hubbert initially thought 

nuclear power would be the post-fossil fuel solution but changed his mind and said solar 

energy was the answer, but this would require giving up exponential growth and 

learning to live within natural limits on a finite planet. 

-- Mark 

Hubbert immediately grasped the vast economic and social implications of this 

information [ Peak Oil]. He understood the role of fossil fuels in the creation of the 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 77 
modern industrial world, and thus foresaw the wrenching transition that would likely 

occur following the peak in global extraction rates . ... 

The world's present industrial civilization is handicapped by the coexistence of two 

universal, overlapping, and incompatible intellectual systems: the accumulated 

knowledge of the last four centuries of the properties and interrelationships of matter 

and energy; and the associated monetary culture which has evolved from folkways 

of prehistoric origin. 

The first of these two systems has been responsible for the spectacular rise, 

principally during the last two centuries, of the present industrial system and is 

essentially for its continuance. The second, an inheritance from the prescientific 

past, operates by rules of its own having little in common with those of the matterenergy system. Nevertheless, the monetary system, by means of a loose coupling, 

exercises a general control over the matter-energy system upon which it is 

superimposed. 

Despite their inherent incompatibilities, these two systems during the last two 

centuries have had one fundamental characteristic in common, namely exponential 

growth, which has made a reasonably stable coexistence possible. But, for various 

reasons, it is impossible for the matter-energy system to sustain exponential growh 

for more than a few tens of doublings, and this phase is by now almost over. The 

monetary system has no such constraints, and, according to one of its most 

fundamental rules, it must continue to grow by compound interest. 

Hubbert thus believed that society, if it is to avoid chaos during the energy decline, must 

give up its antiquated, debt-and-interest-based monetary system and adopt a system of 

accounts based on matter-energy -- an inherently ecological system that would 

acknowledge the finite nature of essential resources. 

Hubbert was quoted as saying we are in a "crisis in the evolution of human society. It's 

unique to both human and geologic history. It has never happened before and it can't 

possibly happen again. You can only use oil once. You can only use metals once. Soon 

all the oil is going to be burned and all the metals mined and scattered." 

Statements like this one gave Hubbert the popular image of a doomsayer. Yet he was 

not a pessimist, indeed, on occasion he could assume the role of utopian seer. We 

have, he believed, the necessary know-how, all we need do is overhaul our culture and 

find an alternative to money. If society were to develop solar-energy technologies, 

reduce its population and its demands on resources, and develop a steady-state 

economy to replace the present one based on unending growth, our species' future 

could be rosy indeed. "We are not starting from zero," he emphasized. "We have an 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 78 
enormous amount of existing technical knowledge. It's just a matter of putting it all 

together. We still have great flexibility but our maneuverability will diminish with time." 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 79 
David Holmgren, permaculture co-originator 

"Awareness of Climate Change by the media 

and general public is obviously running well 

ahead of wareness about Peak Oil , but there 

are interestng differencs in this general pattern 

when we lok more dosely at those invoved in 

the money and energy industries. Many of thoe 

involved in money and market hve begun to 

rally around Climate Change as an urgent 

prblem that can be bJrned into another 

opporbJnity for econanic growth ( of a green 

ecany). These same people have tended to 

resist even using the term Peak Oil, let alone 

acncmledging it imminent crrrenc. 

Perhaps this denial ces fran an inbJitve 

understanding that once market understand 

that future grcmth is not posible, then it's game 

over for our fat system of debt-based money." 

-- David Homgren, co-originator of permar lbIre, " 

Money vs. Fosil energy: the battle to control the world," 

htt://www.homgren.cm.au/DLFiles/PDFs/Money_ vs Fossil_Energy.pdf 

����-,,,,,----===i7�-/"�-----�r,r�,mrr,�p"'jj'J3j;rn;m 

� 

Drat EIS: 0egon Pasenger Rail - comments b Mak Robinowitz - PeakTrai.org - pae 0 
David Holmgren, the co-orginator of permaculture, 

is author of Future Scenarios: How Communities 

can adapt to Peak Oi l and Climate Change. 

"Economic recession is the only proven mechanism 

for a rapid reduction of greenhouse gas emissions 

... most of the proposals for mitigation from Kyoto to 

the feverish efforts to construct post Kyoto solutions 

have been framed in ignorance of Peak Oil. As 

Richard Heinberg has argued recently, proposals to 

cap carbon emissions annually, and allowing them 

to be traded, rely on the rights to pollute being 

scarce relative to the availability of the fuel. Actual 

scarcity of fuel may make such schemes irrelevant." 

-- www.futurescenarios.org 

"The dip in global emissions created by the 2008 

global financial crisis was ignored by the climate 

activist community as an inconven ient truth." 

"Crash on Demand: Welcome to the Brown Tech 

Future," by David Holmgren (co-originator of 

permaculture) 

http://holmgren.com. au/p-conte nt/u ploads/ 

201 4/01 /Crash-on-demand. pdf 

How Communities 

Can Adapt to Peak Oil 

and Climate Change 

D A Vlll M Ll'tlGBEN 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 81 
podcast February 1 2, 2014 

http://c-realm.com/podcasts/creal m/401 -psycho-socia I-debt-jubi lee/ 

401: Psycho-social Debt Jubilee 

Podcast: Play in new window I Download 

KMO welcomes permaculture co-originator David Holmgren to the C-Realm Podcast to discuss 

two of his essays: Money Vs Fossil Energy: the Battle for Control of the World and Crash on 

Demand: Welcome to the Brown Tech Future. David has been tracking the onset of climate 

change and peak oil for many years, but he says that in recent years, largely due to the work of 

Steve Keen and Nicole Foss, he has come to see financial systems as the fastest moving and 

most volatile element in emerging global crisis. He describes why he considers the Bush 

administration to have been guided by a certain energy realism lacking in too many social and 

climate activists. Finally, he describes why he thinks that multiple generations of mass affluence 

has left us saddled with a psycho-social debt that will be very difficult for us to discharge. 

World Crude Oil Production and Gross Domestic Product are interrelated 

('.) 

C 0 

0 ._ 

:;::::; ('.) 

() 

::::; () 

l:J E 0 ._ 0 

C 

0 

6 () 

tJ tJ 

0 0 

s s 

' f 

: ;: ' ' 

- ' ' 

' ' 

' ' 

� : : 

11 : 

' 

1 950 1 971 2006 

,.., ' ' 

SOURCE: ASPO. 200- 

Boom 

Recession 

--- Depression 

◄ Collapse 

World Oil 

Production 

Sou re e: crude-o il-alerts.blo gsp ot.co m 

Oil Production and Economic Growth are directly related. 

"I realized that one of the best use of the US Energy Policy History work may be to convince 

environmentalists and others that think peak oil is a scare tactic or financial manipulation, that it 

is in fact a real problem - not something that just popped up, it has been recognized as a 

problem for decades, and that access to the energy resources of other countries is the main 

reason that we have been able to ignore it for so long. The intention would be of course to 

connect the movements so that all can see the elephant for what it is." 

-- David Room, Local Clean Energy Alliance 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 82 
from Extraenvironmentalist.com 

interview conducted at Northwest Permaculture gathering, October 2012 

permaculture design, steady state economics, peak money, solar energy, limits to 

growth 

www.peakchoice.org/audio/interview-mark-robinowitz.mp3 

15 minutes, 33 megabytes 

www.transitionvoice.com/2011/01/global-warming-worst-advocacy-campaign-ever/ 

Interesting essay that suggests the environmental movement's myopia about energy limits is 

part of the reason public support for climate change / global warming / greenhouse effect is in 

decline. 

This is a good discussion of interconnections: 

www.darkoptimism.org/2008/06/14/ocus-on-climate-change-and-ignore-peak-oil-not-good-enough/ 

It is a deep pleasure for me to be again in Stockholm and to gratefully accept the Right Livelihood 

Award for 1986 on behalf of myself and those who have worked with me at the International Institute of 

Concern for Public Health. Sweden is gaining an international reputation for its extraordinary efforts on 

behalf of global justice and peace, and for its yearly search of the global community for creative and 

concerned persons and organizations which could use some encouragement and financial assistance. This 

is a much valued service to the forming global village. In the long run it will, I think, be more humanly 

productive than increased airport security, military exercises, nuclear threats, and development of crowdcontrol technology. This contrast between a system of encouragement and cooperation, on the one hand, 

and a system of threats and forceable control, on the other, lies at the centre of the global crisis. It poses a 

clear choice for the future, on which will depend the survival or disintegration of civilization. 

-- Rosalie Beitell, THE RIGHT LIVELIHOOD AWARDS 1986 

Acceptance Speech by Rosalie Bertell 

December 8th, 1986 

www.rightlivelihood.org/bertell _ speech.html 

"alternative Nobel Prize" 

Most people do not enjoy having their entire worldview discredited; it sets them uncomfortably adrift. 

Scientists are no exception. A paradigm tends to be so greatly cherished that, as new knowledge or 

evidence turns up that contradicts it or calls it into question, the paradigm is embroidered with 

qualifications and exceptions, along with labored pseudo-explanations--anything, no matter how 

intellectually disreputable or craven, to av oid losing the paradigm. If a paradigm is truly obsolete, it must 

finally give way, discredited by the testing of the real world. But outworn paradigms ordinarily stand 

staunchly until somebody within the field makes a leap of insight, imagination, and courage sufficient to 

dislodge the obsolete paradigm and replace it. 

-- Jane Jacobs, "Dark Age Ahead" 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 83 
htt • ------- // It h • • I I t ti · /9 26/ 1 / 

Questionable Renewable Energy Dreams: Where Do 

We Go from Here b Jan Lundber 

24 November 2014 

A Tale of Three Stdies • Oil Grows in Instability and 

Danger As It Goes Away Geologically • Cars Are 

Renewable? 

It was the summer that Al Gore had NASA's James Hansen testify in the Senate that 

human-caused global warming had begun: in August 1988 I founded Fossil Fuels Policy 

Action, a nonprofit institute, in Washington. We would be a clearing house for energy 

data & policy, with an eye to replacing fossil energy with renewable energy. Two allconsuming questions became our focus: why is the U.S. not conserving energy, and 

what can make it happen? This immediately morphed us from more passive 

"assessment" to more active advocacy, within our basic mission. 

In a matter of months our solution became our raison-'etre: a Conservation 

Revolution. Our conclusion about the dire state of the world was seemingly affirmed by 

Worldwatch's 1992 initiative which followed our public announcement and publications 

with their very similar Environmental Revolution. It all seemed like a very big deal then, 

for activists and dreamers can get a bit carried away. Funding and competition for funds 

can come into play as well. None of us would have anticipated that nearly a quarter of a 

century later, now with grey hair and somewhat tired voices, we are still fighting for such 

a revolution or at least some meaningful, trend-altering reforms. 

Prior to forming Fossil Fuels Policy Action, I had scoured the inside-the-beltway 

environmental establishment for a job, to put my well-known oil industry analytical skills 

to use for Mother Earth. It was early 1988. The only job I got was a temporary post at 

Renew America, formerly the Solar Lobby. What I learned from the many greenies I met 

around town was that they were positioning themselves for green business, in both 

senses of the word. Their intentions were good, but I felt somewhat repulsed by a mere 

industry shift. The greener establishment I glimpsed would not bring about much of a 

change in the nation's overall direction. Yet, I was happy enough to form a group that fit 

in with them, because I found some reforms exciting, and I had to create my own job 

under a new banner in order to participate. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 84 
- -

Prt ou1sTutRi Bra -Fl 

, 

, 

My m sWings abu the va ue ard proms of a green irdustr al c ass sprang rost y 

from my nnate, rad cal nture bvirg. Sn aftr start ng Foss l Fue s Pol i

cy Act o n, 

I 

bame aVre that r or environmenal groups wre t k ng dont ons from the natural 

gas bbb/, the Arercan GsAsscatbn. I had know the AG<, s I pd a vis t and 

wnt out for dr nks w th my key contcts from my days at Lundtr Suiey where I had 

pub shed atrnatwe fuls prce reprts for gas ut t es. I eft the tr knovng that Fossl 

Fue s Pol i

cy Acton vs now n lire for a conven en donat on: t trumPt natural 

gas as 

a "br ce fue " for a renewle erery future. I wntd that fuure and Vswrk ng for ii, 

bu I tgan to suspct it Vl.QS pure y utpian if tl rnevabe enery wre mg ned t 

b on a sa e t subtiue forfoss l fue s. I had ust ten sn the bk Beyond OU: The 

Thre2I lo Food and Fuel In the Cmf' Dec2desto rev ew, s I earred atutthe neterery issos w th alernat ve enery. 

Insad of t k rg the AGA's money, I dc dd it ws more fun t re;act the donat on 

pub by by pu�ish ng a rewsetter on tte com�iin btv.n natural gas and het ng 

o , eis ng the err.,ironmentl group' tk rg foss l fuel mney. My cor�rat ferd 

Nesn Hy of the AG< caled me up aftr se ng our newsetter, ard blo'ld, "Are 

you on ac d, Jan?!" And a ,om rent D.C. environrena ist ch dd me in a etter that 

sd only, "It's al d rty moneyanYy" 

Rene\be enery shou d b the rel del, and not smath ng t justfydeprderce 

on s

l i

ghly cearer foss l fue s. Today, the qust on 1e. s tcore, 

"HoNcan renev.te 

erery sysms t sen for 'Mat tlyare ard are not?"Where c ·we go from her, 

wtn the consumer economyw�h ts chep-l bu lt infrastructure has 

l i

tte fuure after 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 8S 
corwentional o l extraction peaked gbbally in 2005? One c ue is that Foss l Fue s Po cy 

Act on eventually became Cu ture Clunge. 

A Tale of Three Studies: Bursting Rene'vable Energys 

Ilental Bubble 

Green 

� s 

The Dirty Secrets of Cean Energy an the 

Fure of Environmenta

li

sm I Ozie Zehne1 

Renev..able energy is great, r ght? But wt-e.t a it is most y m sused, ard appears 

ircreas ngly to t:e a fa se prom se for p-event ng more o l sp lls like BP's in the Gulf of 

NexCo and for sav ng the Earth's unravelling c mate? After a ttoro1.gh and 

dspassionate bok, at the end of th s sect on""' nail the "cbut:le Achilles Heel"of argescale renewat:le erergy: storage of erergydur ng interm ttency, and ow net-erergy 

return on energy investecJ. 

Just as some of usquestbn the wonders of "cean" natural gas -- ncreas ng y 

der ved from tox c frack rg -- sorre go further, beyond emtracirg rene\'labe energy, to 

promote and p-actice erergy�onsumP:bn curta hrent as the best form of conservat on. 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 86 
But this usually falls on deaf ears. One reason is that there is no sexy, high-tech, startup, dollar-signs-in-the-eyes attraction to cutting back on energy use in general. Rather, 

"clean tech," which is often not about cutting energy consumption, is the hot buzz word 

for investors and careerists -- even though curtailing energy use is the fastest way to 

reduce greenhouse gas emissions, mercury, smog, acid rain, and nuke-energy risks. 

A near spate of exposes on "renewable" energy appeared recently. We first put out 

the word on two of them via Facebook and emails: What's Wrong with Renewable 

Energy? by Kim Hill, drawn partly from Ozzie Zehner's book Green Illusions, 

and Abundant Clean Renewables? Think Again!in Truthout.org, November 16, 2014, 

by Almuth Ernsting of Biofuelwatch. 

In these studies, as in many an article on Resilience.erg (formerly 

EnergyBulletin.net) and CultureChange.org, the widely ignored but fatal issues involving 

the renewable energy technofix for peak oil and overpopulation are presented in 

disturbing, documented detail. The discussion is not about decentralized, small-scale 

energy systems for a home or farm. Passive solar and mills for grinding grain, powered 

with the wind or flowing water, are especially benign. Rather, the issue is large-scale 

systems designed to be part of the electric grid. 

Ernsting asks, "Can we really put our hopes for stabilizing the climate into trying to 

simply replace the energy sources in a growth-focused economic and social model that 

was built on fossil fuels? Or do we need a far more fundamental transition towards a 

low-energy economy and society?" She sees the rise of wind power and solar power as 

serving the corporate agenda rather than human needs. She examines Germany's real 

energy mix, which puts solar and wind in perspective. Most "renewable" energy in 

Germany is from biofuels, biogas and wood pellets, none of which are innocent of 

causing serious environmental impacts. These three prime renewable energy supplies, 

and dependency on them, means that the "24,000 wind turbines and 1.4 million solar 

panels have scarcely made a dent in Germany's fossil fuel burning and carbon 

emissions." 

Same for Denmark, Ernsting reports: "wind energy in Denmark accounted for just 

3.8 percent of Denmark's total energy use in 201 O" because electricity generation is 

only one aspect of energy. Again, in Denmark it is bioenergy generating far more 

energy than wind. Norway is a similar situation, except hydroelectric dams are the 

favored alternative energy. This means a set of problems for Norway that Norwegian 

companies are exporting, to the detriment of foreign lands. 

What if the windy UK put wind turbines all over its coasts? Fifteen offshore wind 

turbines installed on every kilometer of the UK coastline would supply just 13 percent of 

the country's average daily energy use. "Generating that 13 percent of UK energy ... 

would require wind turbines made of 20 million tons of steel and concrete - more than all 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 87 
the steel that went nto U.S. sh pbui l

d ng durrg World War II. Steel rranufactur ng is 

heavily dependent on coa , not just asa fuel for tl-e furnaces b.Jt because it s ree<Ed to 

enr ch the raw ma.ter a , 

iron ore, w th carton to make it stab e. And corcrete is hard y 

carbon neutra ' e ther -cerrent (a key component) accounts for 5 percent of g bbal 

carton dbx c:2 em ssions" 

Alnuth En,stirg 

Then theres so ar PV �nels. They are upto four times as energy -and carbonintens ve to pro::iuce as YIAnd turbnes: 

"Alum num - used to rrount and constru:t so ar 

i:a,ne s -isal:outascarOOn and energy ntens ve as steel. S lCon needs to be srrelted 

at 2,000 CEgrees Ces us ard rrater a s used to replace silicon ha.ve an even hQher 

erwironrrental foo1p- nt. Then tteresan array of hQhly toxC and corros ve chemCals 

use:I dur ng rranufactur rg. Yet with reJards to p,llut on, b.Jik:Jirg wrd and mar ne 

turb nes is l ke y worse ti-an ma.k ng solar parels, because effC ent ard ast rg turb re 

magnets re y on rare earth m n ng and ref n ng. One 5-msgawatt turb re requ res a ton 

of rare earths, the m n ng and ref n ng of wh ch wll eave beh nd 75 cube meters of tox c 

acd c waste \t\8.ter and one ton of ra dbact ve s udge " (Ernst rg, Truthout) 

Zehrer g ves environmenta ists 10 reasons to questbn "renewa.tle"energy: 

(1) Soar �nelsand wnd turb nes aren't rrade out of rothirg. They are made out of 

rretas, plast cs, chem ca s. These products I-ave been m red out of the groun:t, 

transp:irted, processed, manufactured . Each stage eaves tehird a tra l of devastatbn ... 

(2) The rrapr ty of e ectr cHy that is generated bJ renev..ablas is used in 

ma.nufacturrg, m nirg, and other ndustries ttat are destroy rg the p anet. Even if the 

generation of e ectrCity Vi.ere harm ess, tl-e consumpt on certa n y isn't. 

(3) The am of corwert ng from corwent onal p:,Vver generation to renewatles is to 

rra ntain the very system that is kill ing the virg world, k ll ng us all, at a rate of aio 

speces per day. Tak ng carton emss ons out of the equat on doesn't rrake it 

sustanatle. T hs system reeds to not te susta ned, but stopped. 

(4) Humans, and all I Wing t:eirg s, get our energy from Pants and animas. There is 

no 

l i

virg creature that needs eectr city for survval. On y the irdustr al system needs 

e2ctr city to surv ve, and focx:J and habitat for everyone are be ng sacr ficed to feed it. 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna., ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 88 
(5) Wind turbines and solar panels generate little, if any, net energy (energy returned 

on energy invested). The amount of energy used in the mining, manufacturing, research 

and development, transport, installation, maintenance and disposal of these 

technologies is almost as much-or in some cases more than-they ever produce. 

(6) Renewable energy subsidies take taxpayer money and give it directly to 

corporations. Investing in renewables is highly profitable. General Electric, BP, 

Samsung, and Mitsubishi all profit from renewables, and invest these profits in their 

other business activities. 

(7) More renewables doesn't mean less conventional power, or less carbon 

emissions. The amount of energy being generated by renewables has been increasing, 

but so has the amount of energy generated by fossil fuels. No coal or gas plants have 

been taken off line as a result of renewables. 

(8) Only 20% of energy used globally is in the form of electricity. 

(9) Solar panels and wind turbines last around 20-30 years, then need to be 

replaced. The production process, of extracting, polluting, and exploiting, is not 

something that happens once, but is continuous and expanding. 

(10) The emissions reductions that renewables intend to achieve could be easily 

accomplished by improving the efficiency of existing coal plants, at a much lower cost. 

This shows that the whole renewables industry is nothing but an exercise in profiteering 

with no benefits for anyone other than the investors. 

Ernsting's and Zehner's articles are hard-hitting, short pieces and easy to read. They 

throw ice water on professional technofixers in the environmental movement (i.e., 

almost anyone getting significant funding), and dash the hopes of "progressive 

consumers" looking for greener ways to maintain their First World, privileged lifestyles -­

if they will pay attention. 

My own brief "elevator speech" on the renewable-energy technofix is that 

• renewable energy systems depend on the larger fossil fuels infrastructure 

• they have much lower net-energy yield than cheaply produced oil always had 

• they offer electrical power only (save biofuels) and not any chemicals or materials 

that fossil fuels give 

• renewable energy systems for replacing fossil fuels are not scalable to meet the 

alleged needs for energy consumption now or projected 

• large renewable energy systems eat up agricultural land -- as does the soildepleting, heavily subsidized, energy-inefficient biofuels industry. Hydroelectric power 

poses problems too, concerning ecologically damaging dams with their siltation that 

shortens the lifetime of the dams' water supply for power as well as irrigation. 

These concerns have been voiced by the few for many years. The facts are 

obscured and suppressed, as a deluded nation and entire civilization jumped on the 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 89 
runaway oil train to economic collapse, following the peak of cheaply extracted oil in 

2005. The virtuous belief in renewable energy for a greener future justified the delusion. 

Collapse-denial is perhaps more pervasive than denial of anthropogenic global 

warming, in part because the environmental establishment and mainstream media 

shrink from open discussion on the shortcomings of renewable energy as a viable 

substitute for the volume of oil and its many products in the consumer economy. 

Hence, collapse and the eventual adjusting of the population size to ecological 

carrying capacity -- over-shot several decades ago -- also belong off the typical enviro 

group's table and off the reporter's beat. Politicians refuse to touch any of this. The 

almost palpable silver bullet for technological avoidance of resource-limits keeps most 

of us going as relatively comfortable or willing players in the struggling consumer 

economy. 

When one questions "renewable" energy, it can appear he or she is singing the 

praises of the petroleum industries. No; deep-green environmentalists and proponents 

of simple living are not shills for the oil, gas or coal industries. Yes; it is unfair that 

subsidies for fossil fuels are so huge, and it is a tragedy for the climate. But this does 

not mean that subsidies for centralized renewable-energy systems will solve the energy 

crisis or prevent climate collapse. 

In 2005 the U.S. Department of Energy commissioned a report on peak oil. Known 

informally as the Hirsch Report, it found that two decades' infrastructure-transformation 

completion are needed before peak oil hits, to avoid major disruption to the nation. The 

report found, "the economic, social, and political costs will be unprecedented." 

Maximized renewable energy efforts cannot change this, and would have had to come 

on like gangbusters by 1985 along with other major shifts. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 90 
World Population Growth 

8 

70 

C 

0 6 

:E 5 

C 

C 4 

0 

.,, 3 

20 0 ... 

10 

0 

-12000 -10000 ·8000 ·6000 -4000 ·2000 

basedonU.S.BureauofCersus data 

• 

I 

• 

0 2000 4000 

Nla.ke ro m stake, ren€Mlat:le erergy systems have amost entrely teen p.Jt nto 

place to perpetuate erdess groVvth on a finte Paret. 

Also \'\Orthwh

i l

e read ng for understandng the true ard limited potential of 

"renevvat:le" energ y techno ogy systems on a 9.rge scae is Eia ht Pitfall& in &aluatiw 

Green Eneruy Sohrtjons by Gail Tverterg. She gets into her subjact v.ith: 

"Does the recentclima.te accord tel1⁄4een US and Ch na mean that ma.n ycountrieswill 

now forge at-ead VIAth renevvatlesard other green solutbns? I th nk that there are more 

pltfallsthan many realize." She conch.ded, 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 91 
Tverberg Estimate of Future Energy Producon 

14 

� 12 

� .. 

a. 

10 

Iii Renewables 

.. 

0 8 Nuc ear 

.., 6 

C Gas 

l 

� 

0 

4 UO l 

(; 2 ■Coal 

0 

"' 0 .,, 0 "' 0 .,, 0 .,, 0 "' 0 "' 0 "' 

,.._ ,.._ 00 00 � � 8 8 � .... N N "' 

"' "' "' 0 0 0 0 0 0 

.... .... .... .... .... .... N N N N N N N N 

Hrrc bd on BP :1st ReofWordEr, I EA goup 

"Expectat ons for v.ind and solar PV reed tote reduced. Soar PV and offshore wind 

are t:oth like y net energy s nks because of storage and ba arcing reeds, if they are 

ad::Jed to the electr c gr d n rrore than very small am:,unts. Onshore wrd is ess bad, 

but it needs tote eva uated cbsely n each partCu ar bcation. The reed for arge 

subs des shou d tea r flag that costs are like y tote h gh, both short and ong term. 

A not I-er consderatbn is that wrd is like y to ha.ve a short lifespan if oil suppli

es are 

interrupted, because of its frequent reed for repla.cerrent pirts from around the V1.0r d " 

Tverterg's e ght pltfallsare: 

(1) Green so utions tend to push us from ore set of resources tha.t are a pro�em 

today (fossil f cels) to other resources that are l ke y to te prob ems in the bnger term. 

(2) Green so utions ti-at use rare mrera s are like y not very sca ab e because of 

quintity limitsard ow recyclirg rates. 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 92 
Gil Tvertr, photo from ExtraEnv ronmentl st .com 

(3) Hih-ost enery sures are the oisle of the "gat that keeps on gi,ing." 

Insad, they oftn repesn the "subdy that keeps on tk ng." 

(4) Green tchnobgy (rdud ng renevbls) can only l add-ons t the foss l fuel 

sysm. 

(5) We can' exrct o l pri:es to kep r s ng baus of affordabliy issus. 

(6) It is oftn daf cu t t get the finances for an elctr cal sysm that uss intrmitn 

renewb es t v.rk out \tll. 

() Add ng ntrm ttnt renevllles t the eetrC gr d makes the oprat on of the gr d 

more compe and more d ffCult to rnage. We run the r sk of more lfackousard 

eventual fai lure of the grd. 

(8) A prsn nees to l very careful n ook ng at stud es that c am to stw 

favorab e rrfonren:e for ntrm ttent rene,;tes. 

Ser and wnd pwr stre a tw n Achlls Hee : storae of enery dur ng 

inerm ttency, and ov11 net-rery return on enery invested In Th Ctcb22 of 

Enry Sjrge by John llran of the Enery Colet we, h s resarh found 

Sveral recent anafssof the npus t ourerery systems ndbat that, against 

exrctt ons, erery srage canoot sve the protem of intrmiten:y of w nd or sQr 

pov11r. Not for resns of tchn cal rrforrarce, cost, or storage carc ty, bt for 

sreth ng more intractte: there is not erough surp us enery ett over aftr 

constru:tin of the gereratrs ard tte storage sysm to rv11r our presnt cf11ilizat on. 

The prob em s analysd in an imprtant rpr b/ We 8bich et a/in trms of enery 

returned on enery nvesd, or EROEI -the ratb of the enery prcuce over the lae 

ofa p\'r p ant t the enery that ws require to bui l

d I. It takes enery to make a 

sr pbnt-to manufacture is com�nents, m re the fue, and s on. The povver plant 

neds t make at east this much enery t brek even. A beak-even p\<'rPan has 

an EA El of 1. But such a pant wu d p nt ess, as there is no enery surp us t do the 

usfu

l 

th ngs v us erery for. 

Omft E S: Oregon Paaserger Ra

i l

• comments by tls.rk Rot.no,.• itz • PeakTraffb.org • pl98 Q3 
There s a m nimum EA:) El, greater than 1, that is requred for an energy source to 

t:e ab e to run sccety. An energy system must produce a surp us arge enough to 

sustan t hngs 

l i

ke food p-odu:tbn, hosPtals, and un versities to tra n the engineers to 

bui l

d the Pant, transport, construct on, and all tl-e e ements of the c v

il

izatbn in 'wh ch it 

is embeddad ... 

Although renev.able energy doesnl li,e off sun a one -- It needs metals, 

sembonductors, ceram csard rrore n Res lience org stardby Ugo Bard i '

s recent 

irwest gatbn inReoeMlx energy; does it need critically mm meteriela? dd not f nd 

a rra,Pr protlem wtth rare-metas supply for sola.r or other rerevuab e energy systems. 

By now a rrore a ert consumer of energy ne'w'S can keep reneVuab e energy 

deve oprrents in a t:ig-pcture perspect ve. We hear h::>w Gerrrany can t:e a so ar 

success, so why can\ the U.S ; we hear Denmark has b.Jitt more v,,indm lls, and that 

rereVuab e energy s gett ng cheai:er and rrore eff c ent. These claims bypiss or hde so 

much of the whoe story that we m ss the fact that we are w tness ng a bubble created 

for tte purp:,se of stok ng nvestment ard rrore subs d es. 

An examp e of trumi::,etng soar p,Vi.ers sbw tr umP, over petro eum --desp te the 

dsparate knds of energy invo ved, ard tota

l 

abserce of dscussion on the reed to 

imm:date y s ash energy use in genera

l 

-- s Bbomt:erg s Oct. 29, 2'14 report W bile 

You Were Getting Worked IJp Over Oil Price a, Th a ,hurt HeRJened to Solat by 

Tom Randall: 

After years of struggl ng against cheap natural gas prCes and var atle subs dies, 

sola.r e e:trbity s on track tote as cl-eap or cteaper tts.n average eectr city-b ll prCes 

in 47 U.S. states -- n 2016, accord ng to a Deutsche Bank report publ ished ths v,,eek. 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDnc., ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 94 
That's assuming the U.S. maintains its 30 percent tax credit on system costs, which is 

set to expire that same year ... 

Yet, the report reveals the amazing expectations of major analysts: "Solar will be the 

world's biggest single source of electricity by 2050, according to a recent estimate by 

the International Energy Agency. Currently, it's responsible forjust a fraction of one 

percent." [emphasis added.] It's as if petroleum's role in solar panels and the grid is 

negligible, or that solar panels can magically supply farm chemicals to grow the food 

that petroleum has been doing. 

Oil Grows in Instability and Danger As It Goes Away Geologically 

Falling oil prices of late, to four-year lows, are not only bad news: these are 

deceptively low prices. Because of direct and hidden subsidies, the real cost of oil to 

consumers is a few times the nominal price, i.e., a few hundred dollars per barrel. This 

true high price has for several years pinched off growth of the economy, and made 

people struggle when buying not just oil products but anything with a significant 

imbedded-energy cost such as food and manufactured products. Still, low oil prices are 

bad news for the environment, such as enabling more transport-sector pollution. If it 

mattered more, low oil prices that hurt renewable energy investment would be tragic. 

This report with its Tale of Three Studies, and further information below, puts the matter 

into perspective. 

It is precisely because the most desirable crude oil fields are rapidly depleting and 

new discoveries have trended downward for decades, it is alarming that oil dependence 

is at its height. More accurately it is at a brief plateau, from a long-range historical 

perspective. Renewable energy systems and conservation have not emancipated 

modern society from oil, and are not on track to do so except in conditional scenarios 

that ignore far too much, such as population size. The dwindling supply of oil with no 

equivalent energy-substitution means that the rising vulnerability to oil shock and the 

end of plentiful supplies extends to a breaking point on the relatively near horizon. 

There are "Things to Know As Collapse Becomes Hip" 2 

Exuberance for continued profligate energy consumption flows not only from kneejerk faith in technology for "renewable" energy. Claims that the U.S. has regained the 

role of top producer of oil worldwide obscure energy reality for the unsuspecting public, 

even though the U.S. is not a significant petroleum exporter and is still a gross importer 

of oil. To help discredit the hoopla, Matt Mushalik recently showed in Crude Oil Peak 

and Resilience.org that US Oil Dependency on Middle East has Hardly Changed 

Since 2007. Obviously, renewable energy did not manage to enable a different trend. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 95 
Although unconventional forms of petroleum in the Americas do not offer a ride up 

Consumerland Peak, they are extremely dangerous. The chart here on Fossil Fuels 

Emissions shows the relative potential for tar sands emissions, described as 

conservative by the makers of the chart. 

A new Huffington Post article republished on Resilence.org is myth-busting: 

in Challenging (Crude) Convention, three researchers found that "US shale-oil 

production is likely to peak in 2017-18." The article warns, "It is imperative, then, that 

American policy makers and people recognize that the tracking-enabled spike in US 

crude oil production most likely represents only a temporary reprieve from the declining 

production levels experienced from 1970 to 2005." 

The authors' findings and warnings about the very capital-intensive, short-lived U.S. 

oil bonanza lead us to a cautionary pronouncement on "renewable" energy as well: 

without the continuously greased oil infrastructure for the entire corporate global 

economy, "renewable" energy for the grid is similarly constrained, for the reasons 

explained above, as it fails to deliver the wide-eyed dreams held by many 

environmentalists and investors. 

The article's authors Daniel Davis, David Hughes, and Mark Lewis seemed to miss 

that point, mentioning that "The quality and efficiency of solar power and wind turbines 

continues to improve and we should encourage further development." Primarily for 

climate concerns, the authors support those technologies to get industrial society 

beyond the internal combustion engine. The authors invoke the Paris UN climate 

conference in 2015 for the "need to accelerate investment and research into alternative 

means of energy creation." 

This stance made the most sense decades ago when inefficiency reinged, but 

without the older stance of curtailing energy use for simple living, climate protection and 

resilience for modern society are extremely doubtful. The authors say, "it would be 

prudent to begin more aggressively investing in creative new means of powering the 

economy." But, considering what we know about energy-alternatives, would it not be 

more responsible (and cheaper) to anticipate oil-related collapse and pursue rapid 

curtailment of energy consumption? To set sails, ride more bicycles, go car-free, 

depave, grow food locally, and share appliances between families? Shower with a friend 

to save water? 

The large renewable energy systems cannot be a realistic centerpiece of climate 

protection. Nor do they offer a way out of petrocollapse. People are happy to embrace a 

silver bullet to solve the energy and climate dilemmas, but changing their lifestyles is too 

inconvenient and psychologically threatening. What would fellow yuppie colleagues at 

the office say if one showed up on a bicycle and had downsized the home? This poses 

no social-acceptance problem in most of the world, but for the U.S. -- land of Happy 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 96 
Nbtrng ard tl Arercan Dream of the Mio-ar garage -- consurerscl ng t 

tchroc cal progress to further nsuet them from Ibther Nature ard her trrfy ng 

an re. s and storms. 

1\loanwhi le n b ke-frendy northern Europ, 1he Crs s" (ist aOB medown) is, 

wih I-ope-for abk eadersh pard non-ausrty compsson, suis to abt. It is 

ferenly 'Mshe for, s that mdde c ass consurer eua ity -- cars, et vacatons, 

resurant bl i

ss and the l ke -- can get bck on track. But een wthout the ptroeumrch Russan Bears eng upt oer Ukra ne, and een wihout wrs in the Mde East, 

growth aswe know t s hsry. Sabllyasw know ii is als hsry. It des not hep 

that smpl l v ng --c osr t nature and one's ocal 

ecooomy, tought a tut by enery 

curai lren -- is s equtd wih "dom and g oom " 

Cars Are Renewable? 

outySmes irt' fr De� 

A key artc e reatd t adressng the notin of •·cean, renewbe" enery's svirg 

the consurer I f est ye is tl recen Tsl, I ef: lJr1en at An Spd? by Ozz e 

Zehner, author of Gren Illuons. Zehner ws a car buf, an eectrc one at that, but he 

has found that " cean cars" ard tlrefore cars n gereral I-ave no bng-term future. 

The tt e harkens bk t Ra ph Nder's smnal consumer st study �bl ishe n 

1 95: Unsfe at Any Sped: Th De�neln Dangers of the Amrin AvtobHe. 

The tw cars Nader ga ne fame for atlckng wre the Volkswon 8� and Gneral 

1btrs' Cora rcompt. The bok \'\GS shockng at the tme. The Vrd had ony bgun 

t suspt the ist-Worl War II corprate wrd of majr fraud, thanks t the erl er 

bk in 190 byVane Packrd, The Wse Ma/rswhch inroduced us t 

manufacturers' hden stratgy of plnred obesence for products. 

The 'Tesa, Leaf" stcys author, Ozze Zehner, defkcts car bvers'emotonal wrath 

against h s non -tchnofx psiton b opn ng wih "I wsorce an eectrC car 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail - commenta by Muk FbDnc., ilZ - PeakTraffb.org - page 'Jl 
enhusast. I even buil

t one! But n my rew IEEE coer feature, I ask, Are eectrc 

arong the cenest transμraton optons, orarorg the dirtest?' Urd ean at Ar 

Spd consders the ent re lie cyce of eectrc cars, espally the r mnuatur ng 

impicts ... " (ehner isa UnWerstyof Cliorn a at Berkeey visi ng shoar) 

Additon1 intsw freqtnty mke t carenhusastswho th nkeetrC or sre 

non-petroeum -opuson wil sve the day: 

• The appro rat one m lion anim s a day saughered on U.S. roads have no 

reasn t cheer The anms are forottn conssnt y. 

• In the U.S. the human eath tll from crashes is25,00 a year. Inures are much 

hgher, as is the deth & n ury tll from the senary 

l i

festye of drvirg. 

• A car compny exmp les tl opPst of ocal economc sK re ance baus 

arost al the rorey for a rew car purhas eaves the cormunity. 

• Why conrbut t urtn spraw, as cars reu re spce needd for growng foo 

ard eaving sre room for w tlle? Paverent, trrac ard asphat roftops add t the 

urbn het s ard effet 

• Pads fragmentwllae habHat ard drve awy tp preatrs. Roads a lbw access 

for c ear-utters of forests, and conrbut t iP.atin g ro-wth through mg raton. 

Rods caus much eroson result rg in s tatin of slron-sμvirg strems. 

• Utimatly the car s an entroP hea. Toxc, unsghtywste, s ghty recycebl. 

by Anc Snger 

• The atul spd oftha Amercan motr st is appoxmatey 5 (fie) mi l

es ir hour, 

wln all tl t me assciatd wih the veh c2s p.rhas cost and upkep is consdered. 

(sure: van ll chs tok Eefl}y:d EquHy, 

194, prt of h s sres on aternatves t 

irdustral scety) 

• Th nk als of the bl bnsoft resand tns of pestc from Bg O l Ard are brake 

dust, t re dust what children and animsdesre to teathe? 

• Gt your exris on a bcyc e and don� threaten others wih a kl ng mchne. 

Conclusion 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page Q3 
Ne Wes -lsas09 fiJ r Com/ 

,.,,_.,, 

...... 

..... 

-

LaurchoftreSail TransportNetv,ork, rep:,red byouror;i,,nizationin ro:io 

Apart from �ssWe so ar nstallations --e g., tlack painte::J water tanks on roofs for 

warm ng v..ater -- and aail power for tru y c ean transp:,rt on the v,,ater, renewab e 

erergy systems on an ndustrial scae for the gr d have delWered reither the quanttty of 

erergy nor done so n a tru y c ean-source fash on to s gnif cantl y cut fossil 

ft.el 

consumpt on. Instead, reneV\ab2 energy output has, in effect, been used to st-ore up 

groMh of the cor�rate g ot:al economy's precar ous petro eum infrastructure. 

Renev.ab2 energy systems I-ave gotten a rrost nowhere wttl-out rrass ve mted:Jed 

D1aft E S: Oregon Paaserger Rail• commenta by Muk FbDna..o ilZ • PeakTraffb.org • page 9al 
energy from the petroleum industry. Given the actual carbon footprint of renewable 

energy systems, it is not surprising there has been no decrease in overall carbon 

emissions with the advent of solar panels, wind turbines, and other "renewables." 

Alternatives to industrial society have been in the making from Day One, when 

Luddites destroyed factory machines over two centuries ago in England, to protect their 

village way of life for their survival. The 1960s saw a rejection of Plastic Society, the 

War Machine, and a move to go Back to the Land. The "Appropriate Tech" movement of 

the 1970s followed, exemplified by The Farm in Tennessee that was the nation's 

biggest commune. Today there are remnants of the Back to the Land movement, along 

with a sail transport movement back to the sea. 

Appropriate Tech has gone out of style, as renewable energy was forced to "grow 

up," cut the long hair, put on a suit and tie, and try to power the global corporate 

economy. When Appropriate Tech was twisted and betrayed to "mature" into largescale "renewable" energy systems, it was a lot like organic food gardens and 

homesteads giving way to agribusiness "organic" large-scale farms that deplete topsoil 

and ship product very long distances with oil. But as long as there is ample oil -­

subsidized so as to look affordable, during the peak-oil plateau -- little will change in the 

corporate global economy. This is despite renewable energy systems which have 

become part of business-as-usual for the totally unsustainable consumer economy. 

* * * * * 

<="" b=""> 

1. Peak oil study by Robert Hirsch, et al, for the U.S. Dept. of Energy: Peaking of 

World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation and Risk Management, early 2005. 

2. Things to Know as Collapse Becomes Hip August 24, 2013, by Jan Lundberg, 

Truthout.org Op-Ed 

In "Six Myths About Climate Change that Liberals Rarely Question," Erik Lindberg 

looks at renewable energy's hopeless but hoped-for role for saving the climate and the 

consumer economy. Scroll down to Myth #3: Renewable Energy Can Replace Fossil 

Fuels. Nov. 26, 2014 

Peak Frack, Hydraulic fracturing of petroleum, in a nutshell. 

Why Wind Farms Can Be Relied On For Almost Zero Power, The Energy 

Collective, November 17, 2014: "In every country aggregate wind farm output often 

goes close to zero ... [so] Wind farms can reliably supply less than 1 % of installed 

capacity" 

Beyond Oil: The Threat to Food and Fuel in the Coming Decades, a 1986 book 

and econometric model about peak oil, reviewed by Jan Lundberg in 1988 originally 

for Population and Environment quarterly journal. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 00 
Culture Change operated the Alliance for a Paving Moratorium against new road 

construction from 1990-2001, publishing the Auto-Free Times magazine and Road 

Fighters' Alerts. 

A conference on energy- and resource-consumption curtailment and simple living 

was held November 7-9, 2014, by Communit Solutions Yellow Springs, Ohio. 

Publisher's note: 

Although I have publicly switched my work emphasis to sail transport, I have practical 

reason for continuing to concern myself with industrial/consumer renewable energy 

systems. Apart from an abiding interest in helping people understand the workings of oil 

industry supply dynamics, and understand how the entire energy sector is affected, I 

need to be current on the realities of both "the technofix" for oil dependence and the 

ballyhooed oil bonanza in the U.S. oil patch, because: 

When my colleagues and I are promoting sail transport as truly renewable, clean 

energy, this almost unique advantage is not enough for some. This is because the 

consumer economy gets more patience and assumed longevity with every new 

"optimistic" news report on petroleum or renewables. Oil-intensive consuming will 

thereby confidently chug along, supposedly, with no end of oil-guzzling conventional 

shipping. Either oil is mistakenly seen as plentiful for the foreseeable future, or 

renewable energy is "certainly" stepping in to allow for sustainable consuming and 

polluting. Yet, some of us see the inevitability of local economics and ocean protection 

becoming the norm, sooner than many think likely, enabled by a growing global sailing 

fleet for essential travel and exchange of goods. - Jan Lundberg, independent oil 

industr analyst and founder, Sail Transport Network 

Acknowledgment: the green plug graphic is courtesy greenretaildecisions.com in 

its coverage of "EPA Launches Green Power Resource Library," or 41ibert.eu. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 01 
ndrew Nikiforuk's latest book, The Ener of Slaves 

bttp/Awwv dmpbooks com/tnokltbe�oergy-of-�aves 

Excerp: 

Ancent c vi

li

zations routnely re

li

ed on shacked hurran musc e. It took the erergy of 

s aves to pant crops, c othe emr,erors, and bui l

d cities. In the early n neteenth century, 

the s ave trade be:arre ore of the rrost profitab e enterpr ses on tte p anet, and 

s aveho ders vewed rel{! ous cr t cs as host Bly as oil 

compan es nOVII regard 

errlfironmentali

sts. Yet when tl-e aOO it on movement f nallytr ump'led n the 18!:0s, it 

had an irrlfis tle ally: 

coal ard oil. As the Vll'Or�'s m::>st portab e and versat le workers, 

foss l fue s drama.tCalty rep enished s averys ranks w th comb.Jst on eng nes and other 

atour-savirg tools. S nce then, ol has transforrred poitics, econom cs, scence, 

agr culture, gendar, and even our corcept of happ ness. But as Ardrew N k foruk 

argues in th s p-ovocattve new took, we still tehave like s aveho ders n tha way we 

use energy, ard tl'et urgently reeds to change. 

Many l'-brth Arrer cans and Europeans today en oy 

l i

festyes as extravagant as toose of 

Car bt:ean Pantatbn O\tvners. Like sb.vel-o03rs, Vi.e fee

l 

enttled to surp us energy and 

rat ona

li

ze irequality, even tart:e.r ty, to get it. Bute ndessgrowth s an illus on, and naw 

that half of tte \tiJOrl:i's ol has teen turned, our energy s aves are becom ng more 

exP3nsWe by tte day. What Vi.e nee,j, Nk foruk argues, 

is a rad Cal new errarcipatbn 

rroverrent. 

Oiaft EIS: Orsg:,n Peaaerger Pel• comments ty Wsric Rotioo-.• itz • PaekTm.ff�.019 • P'l99 102 
www.mbendi .eo.za/indy/oilg/p0070.htm 

geologist Colin Campbell on peak of oil production (2000) 

Peak oil is a turning point for Mankind. The economic prosperity of the 2oth Century 

was driven by cheap, oil-based energy. Everyone had the equivalent of several unpaid 

and unfed slaves to do his work for him, but now these slaves are getting old and won't 

work much longer. We have an urgent need to find how to live without them. 

It is stressed that we are not facing a re-run of the Oil Shocks of the 1 970s. They 

were like the tremors before an earthquake, although serious enough, tipping the World 

into recession. Now, we face the earthquake itself. This shock is very different. It is 

driven by resource constraints, not politics - although of course politics do enter into it. It 

is not a temporary interruption but the onset of a permanent new condition. 

http:/www.greens.org/s-r/60/60-09.html 

- ·-,- - . . .. - . 

greens.erg: A Critique of Jacobson and Delucchi's 

Proposals for a World Renewable Energy Supply 

by Ted Trainer 

Mark Jacobson and Mark Delucchi published a claim that all the world's energy needs 

in 2030, allowing for projected economic growth, can be met with wind, water and solar 

power. They assume that energy efficiency can reduce demand for energy by 5-1 5% by 

2030. -Editors 

Advocates of renewable energy technologies frequently refer to the many available and 

potential ways of reducing the effect of variability of renew able energy. However they 

usually do not show that these could be combined to enable constant energy delivery to 

the grid despite the magnitude of the shortfalls that typically occur in supply from 

renewable sou rces. Jacobson and Delucchi (201 1 a, 2011 b) list possible strategies but 

do not show that these can provide the necessary quantities of energy to plug gaps in 

supply. 

htt • • • --- // ---I I 48/ 48 11 ht I 

greens.erg: Renewable Energy Cannot Sustain a 

Consumer Society 

by Ted Trainer 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 03 
Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 04 
Sustainable Solutions? 

... a problem calls for a solution; the only question is whether a solution can be found 

and made to work and, once this is done, the problem is solved. 

A predicament, by contrast, has no solution. Faced with a predicament, people come up 

with responses. Those responses may succeed, they may fail, or they may fall 

somewhere in between, but none of them "solves" the predicament, in the sense that 

none of them makes it go away. 

-- John Michael Greer, "The Long Descent" thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com 

http://www.postcarbon.org/why-should-we-even-bother/ 

Why should we even bother? 

Asher Miller 

December 29, 2014 

Let's be honest, if you're aware - at any meaningful level - of the full nature of the 

human (un)sustainability crisis, you've probably asked: 

Why bother? After all, the problems are so big and intractable-a climate march, 

Keystone XL Pipeline blockade, or Transition Town can't possibly do much. And Post 

Carbon Institute wants me to not only take action, but also donate money?!?! 

Yes. I want you take action. We all need to take action. And, yes, donate money 

(even if you don't believe in the US dollar!). Because it's not hopeless. 

Trust me, I get it. Given the long odds - exacerbated by the human propensity to 

optimism and discounting the future in favor of the present, the power and reach of 

entrenched interests, and the sheer inertia behind the consumer- and growth-dependent 

economy - it's hard to believe in solutions. 

I'm going to give it to you straight: there are no solutions, at least not ones that will 

allow the society we've created to continue on its "business as usual" trajectory. (No, 

not even with a massive deployment of renewable energy.) 

But that doesn't mean it's hopeless, that we (and you) shouldn't even bother to try. 

Here's our best thinking for why and how to intervene in the system - and why your 

role is absolutely critical. 

If you're reading this, we count you among the small but growing number of 

innovators and early adopters who play an absolutely critical role in developing 

alternatives to existing policies and practices, to keep them alive and available for the 

moment they're needed. Here's why. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 05 
Change Strategy 

In our view, the nature of the predicament we face is such that proactive efforts at 

mitigating its impacts - while still highly valuable - are insufficient to prevent severe 

crises. In fact, it will be unfolding crises in our economic, energy, ecological, and sociopolitical systems that create the greatest opportunity for change. 

Therefore, the question before us is this: How can we anticipate these crises, build 

resilience to withstand them, and begin efforts that create change so that society can be 

ready to take decisive and appropriate action when they arise? 

Our strategy responds to this question in three ways: 

Support communities as they build resilience to withstand existing and coming 

challenges; 

Help prevent the worst kinds of shocks or changes-those to which we simply 

cannot adapt; and 

Transform cultural norms and economic, energy, food, built environment, population, 

and socio-political systems to help to steer humanity down a truly sustainable path. 

In this effort we are guided by two theories-summarized as "Crisis = Opportunity" 

and "The Diffusion of Innovation." 

Crisis = Opportunity 

In The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, Naomi Klein detailed how 

"free market" advocates and corporations have taken advantage of crises to further their 

aims. The following quote from Milton Friedman, the guru of free market economics, 

best outlines their strategy: 

Only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change. When the crisis 

occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around. That, I 

believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them 

alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable. 

Although the philosophical views and values of the neoclassicists are in many ways 

antithetical to our own, this framework is very applicable to our mission. What this 

means in tactical terms is a change strategy focused on two main levers: 

Building awareness of the true nature of the predicament at hand. Although key 

decision makers and society at large may not adopt the right policies and behavioral 

changes in advance of crises, communication and education strategies are vital in 

ensuring that the right ideas and models are "picked up" when the right moments arise. 

Developing, replicating, and scaling the right ideas and models. Although these 

alternative ideas and models (which can include everything from alternative indicators of 

progress to replicable local food enterprises) may exist initially at the margins, current 

events and coming crises will present opportunities for them to be broadly adopted and 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 06 
quickly built out. Therefore, ii is vital to use the time and resources available now to 

experiment and create best practices-to build alternatives that have the greatest 

chance of bcth being "picked up" and succeeding. 

Diffusion of Innovations 

The Dttfusion ct lnno.,ations theory describes hew, why, and at v.tlat rate new ideas, 

social inno.,ations, and techndogy spread throughout our culture. Key to the theory is 

the identification of dttferent types ct individuals in the population, in terms of hew they 

relate to the develq)ment and adoption ct a new innovation: innovators, early adopters, 

early majority, late majority, and laggards. 

I I 

Innov;tors I Early Adopters1 

2.s% I 13.5% I 

I I 

I I 

I I 

"Th, Ch�m� I 

ar1 

The Innovation Adoption Lifecyde 

Early Majority 

34% 

Late MiJOrity 

34% 

Lagards 

16% 

Although they make up only a small percentage of the total population, innovators 

and ear1y adq)lers build the foundation upon v.tlich all social innovations take place. 

The role ct inno.,ators is obvious. The equally critical rde of ear1y adq)lers is to 

embrace a new innovation when it is not easy to do so, and in turn spread that 

innovation to the early majority. Studies ct hundreds of innovations (both succeS'Slul and 

those that failed to catch on) have shONTI lhe critical rde both groups play and v.tlat 

happens v.tlen innovations don't cross '1he chasm" by failing to attract enough early 

adopters. 

In the context ct PC l's v,,ork, innovators are those develq)ing new insights, 

messages, or models (e.g., a local food system enterprise) that raise understanding ct 

one or more specific sustainability crisis and/or build resilience in response. Like.Nise, 

early adopters are those people most likely to embrace our message of limits and 

resilience, help spread that awareness, and take action. They may already be engaged 

wth one specific sustainability issue (e.g., dimate) or are amongst a group \Ne call '1he 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Ral - comments by Mark Robinow tz - PeakTraffic.org - page 107 
walking worried"-those who feel that things are amiss, but don't know what or why 

(and thus initiate their own process of exploration, or are exposed through their 

networks to innovators or early adopters). 

Diffusion + Crisis 

We see the greatest opportunity for significant change where diffusion and crises 

meet. Knowing that many crises cannot be solved or averted, Post Carbon Institute 

aims to develop and spread the right understanding, ideas, and responses (by 

supporting innovators). We also work to increase the odds that these are then 

embraced when these crisis hit (by increasing the number of early adopters). 

We Need You. Seriously. 

The focus on supporting innovators and early adopters, along with the spreading of 

a systemic understanding of the sustainability crisis, is why we at PCI have been so 

focused on building energy literacy and community resilience. Over the next year, we 

aim to expand these efforts by: 

Exploring what kinds of societal and behavioral changes a -100% renewable energy 

future will require. 

Continuing to bust the hype that shale gas and oil will solve our energy woes. 

Investigating with geoscientists how climate change and peak oil interact. 

Developing a whole suite of new community resilience programs that provide a 

systemic framework for building resilience, educate and support young people for the 

world they've inherited, and connect and inspire thousands of community resilience 

groups and innovators. 

This is where you come in. As a follower of PCI, we count among the small but 

growing number of innovators and early adopters who play an absolutely critical role in 

" developing alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the 

politically impossible becomes politically inevitable." It's you who PCI works so tirelessly 

to support. We need you. 

When we are honest with ourselves, it seems clear that climate, energy, 

environmental, economic, and political crises are inevitable. What form they take we 

can't rightly predict. But in those moments of crisis new possibilities will emerge. On our 

shoulders - those of us who understand the predicament and what is required for true 

sustainability - lies the responsibility and privilege of ensuring that the right ideas are 

picked up. We sincerely believe there's tremendous potential for the "right" 

understanding and models to scale non-linearly, if we make the "right" efforts now. 

So, we hope you'll continue to roll up your shirt sleeves by spreading knowledge and 

developing alternatives. And, yes, we ask that you also support PCI directly. Thank you. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 08 
htt • // th ·1d / d /5939 

Scientific American's Path to Sustainabil ity: Let's 

Think about the Details 

Posted by Gail the Actuary on November 9, 2009 - 10: 1 0am 

Topic: Alternative energy 

Tags: hydroelectric, scientific american, solar photovoltaic, solar 

power, sustainability, wind [list all tags] 

Scientific American presents "A Path to Sustainable Energy by 2030" in its 

November issue. In many ways, it sounds good. But let's think about the details: What 

would the end result look like? Would it really be sustainable? What would the costs 

really be? Is there any way we could afford to do what is proposed? 

The authors of the article, Mark Jacobson and Mark Delucchi, propose substituting 

wind, water, and solar (WWS) energy for all other forms of energy by 2030, not for just 

the US, but for the world. The types of energy sources that would be eliminated include 

the following: 

• Petroleum (including gasoline, diesel, propane, heating oil, etc.) 

• Natural gas 

• Coal 

• Liquid biofuels, such as ethanol 

• Wood and other biomass 

• Nuclear 

All that would remain would be wind, wave power, tidal energy, hydroelectric, 

geothermal, and solar. Because of the ambitious timeframe, the only techniques that 

can be used are ones that work at large scale today, or are very close to working. 

What would we end up with? 

Essentially, we would need to change all of the world's infrastructure to use either 

electricity or solar or water power directly--by 2030. What might this mean? 

• Airplanes. The authors propose that airplanes be powered by hydrogen 

powered fuel cells (with the hydrogen be made by hydrolysis using WWS energy 

sources). I understand that hydrogen is three times as bulky as gasoline, explodes 

easily, and escapes fairly quickly from its holding tanks, making it difficult to store for 

very long. It seems like airplanes and helicopters would need to look more like blimps, 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 09 
to hold the necessary fuel. Unless the explosion issue is solved, the popularity of 

hydrogen fuel cells would likely be pretty low. 

• Ships. The authors don't tell us how ships would be powered. Clearly 

sailing ships would meet the criteria, but would be quite slow. Because of their slow time 

for passage, we would need a lot more sailing ships than the types of ships we use 

now, because so many would be in transit at a given time. Barges could float down 

rivers, and if the current isn't too strong, could perhaps be towed back in some way 

(boat with fuel cell?). Ships powered by hydrogen fuel cells might also work, but they 

would have the same issues as for airplanes. Because of their long trips, leakage would 

be more of an issue than on airplanes. 

• Automobiles and Trucks. According to the authors, these would be 

powered by batteries or hydrogen powered fuel cells. There are several issues--the 

technology is only barely there for automobiles and trucks--for example, I don't know of 

anyone working on battery-powered technology for long distance trucking. Fuel cell 

technology is very expensive. David Strahan in The Last Oil Shock says that the current 

cost is about $1 million dollars per car. He quotes the chief engineer at Honda as saying 

it would take 10 years to get the cost down to $1 00,000 a car. 

Minerals shortages are also likely to be a problem for converting autos and trucks to 

batteries or to hydrogen fuel cells. The Scientific American article mentions following 

materials as being in short supply: rare-earth metals for electric motors, lithium for 

lithium-ion batteries and platinum for fuel cells. The article mentions recycling as a 

partial solution . Analyses published at The Oil Drum, such as this one, indicate that we 

would likely run out of rare materials fairly quickly, even with recycling. 

• Farm equipment; bul ldozers; cement mixers; and other heavy 

equipment. Would need to be converted to electric. It is not clear that the technology (or 

rare materials needed for the technology) exist to do so. 

• Heating of buildings; heating for cooking and baking; hot water heating; 

commercial heating; heating of grains to remove excess moisture. Would need to be 

converted to electric, or in some cases solar. This would be true, even where heating is 

now done over wood or charcoal fires, such as in Africa or China. 

• Mining and manufacturing. Would need to be converted to all electric. 

Presumably oil and natural gas extraction would continue, but at possibly lower rates, 

because of their uses for non-energy uses, such as textiles, asphalt, plastics and 

lubrication . Drilling for oil and gas would be converted to electric as well. 

What steps would be needed to build all of these things? 

It seems like we would first need to figure out what the end point would look like, and 

then work backwards. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 110 
We are told that the authors of the Scientific American article think we would need 

the following: 

• 3.8 million large wind turbines 

• 90,000 solar electricity generating plants 

• "Numerous geothermal, tidal, and rooftop photovoltaic installations" 

Besides these, we would need to build all of the new airplanes, ships, cars, trucks, 

heavy equipment, and new appliances that would be needed under the new regime. 

Individual homeowners would need to get their homes rewired for the larger amount of 

electricity they would use--especially if they are converting to electric home heating. 

One thing we need to plan for is a greatly expanded and improved electrical grid. 

The Scientific American article indicates that the variability in generation would be 

mostly smoothed out by combining electrical transmission of many different types--wind, 

hydroelectric, solar, geothermal, and wave--over a wide geographical area. To do this 

will require considerable long distance transmission, often between different countries-­

including some that may not be friendly with each other. The grid will also need to be 

upgraded to be "smart," so automobiles can draw electric power at the times of day 

when it is not needed elsewhere. 

Once we have figured out what the new system will look like, we will need to figure 

out what kind of factories are needed to build all of the devices for the new system, and 

what raw materials the factories will need. Some of the raw materials can perhaps be 

obtained by recycling, and some factories can perhaps be obtained by converting other 

factories, but this won't always be the case. It is likely that new factories will need to be 

built, and new mines opened, especially for the rare minerals. 

By the time we start seeing many finished good produced, it is likely that we will be 

at least half way through the 20 year period. In part, this is because we are still working 

out technology details (for example, how to efficiently build a hydrogen fuel cell powered 

airplane). Also, once we get those details worked out, we need to build mines for raw 

materials and build the factories to make the new devices. It is only when we get those 

steps taken care of that we can build what we really want--the airplanes, the new ships, 

the wind turbines, the solar PV, and all of the rest. 

When sizing the factories, we will need to size them not for "normal" production 

levels, but for converting the economy quickly to use the new power sources. For 

example, under normal circumstances, if earth-moving equipment is expected to last for 

40 years, we would expect to need factories to make 1/40 of the world's needed earthmoving equipment in a given year. But if we need to ramp up to replacement in 10 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 111 
years, we will need 4 times as many factories. (What do we do with the excess factories 

at the end?) 

How much would this all cost? 

The authors tell us that they expect the cost of the new WWS energy generation 

equipment would be $100 trillion over 20 years. But that doesn't include the cost of all 

the new infrastructure to go with it--the new airplanes and ships and cars and trucks, or 

the electrical transmission lines. In total, the cost will be far higher than $100 trillion--lets 

guess $200 trillion--to be paid for over the next 20 years. 

The Scientific American article gives the impression that the costs will be low, 

because it looks only at the cost the new electricity generation, and assumes that cost 

of generation will go down with volume and with additional research. It also implicitly 

assumes that debt financing over a long period, such as 40 years, will be used, so we 

don't have to pay for the cost of the new system before we start using it. But how 

realistic is that? 

The cars, trucks, boats, airplanes, coal fired power plants, etc. we are currently 

using won't have much trade-in value once power is generated by WWS, and the new 

equipment will likely be fairly expensive. So we will be faced with buying new high 

priced equipment, with little trade-in value from what we used previously. In many 

cases, businesses would not normally be replacing equipment this soon. The debt that 

was taken on to pay for all of our current equipment won't magically go away either--it 

will still need to be paid. 

So how will we pay for all of the new equipment? The governments of the world are 

pretty much maxed out for borrowing. Companies are not going to be able to take on a 

project of this magnitude either, especially since they already have debt to service. It 

seems to me that the only way a program such as the program of WWS fuels replacing 

other fuels can be financed is through increased taxes that would cover each 

year's expenditures, as they are made. 

So let's think about how much this would cost. $200 trillion over 20 years amounts to 

$10 trillion a year, spread over world economies. The US share of this would be 

something around 21%, based on the ratio of US GDP to world GDP. So let's say that 

the US would need to fund $2.1 trillion a year. Let's compare this to current taxes. In 

2008, US Federal, State, and Local taxes combined amounted to $4.1 trillion according 

to the US Bureau of Economic Analysis. In order to collect $2.1 trillion more, a tax 

increase equal to slightly more than 50% of all taxes currently paid would be required. If 

the additional tax were collected as a percentage of "personal income" (which includes 

wages, social security income, rents, dividends, etc.), it would amount to 17% of 

personal income. It seems unlikely that a tax of this magnitude, or even half of this 

magnitude, would be agreed to by tax payers. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 112 
If such a tax were passed, after a few years there would be benefits that would start 

offsetting its cost, and might lead to a lower tax, and after 2030, perhaps lower costs 

overall, because it is no longer necessary to purchase fossil fuels. The benefits that 

would start offsetting costs would be sales of electricity and other energy, and sales or 

leasing of vehicles and other goods produced. Many of the sales of goods would be 

going to replace automobiles that had worn out, factories beyond their useful life, and 

ships that no longer had value to the owners. 

But there is a remaining issue. There will be a lot of assets which would still have 

considerable value in 2030, if it weren't for the new law. For example, a new car with an 

internal combustion engine that was manufactured in 2028 will still have considerable 

value, and a gas fired stove a homeowner owns will still have value, even though he 

needs to replace it with an electric one. A coal fired power plant built in 1 980 is likely to 

still have value, apart from this law, and so will all of the tankers used for international 

transport of oil, and all of the natural gas pipelines. Should the owners of these assets 

be compensated for value of their otherwise-useful assets? There is nothing built into 

the tax to do so. 

It would seem to me that these owners should be compensated, even if it takes a 

higher tax to do so. In part, this compensation could come in the form of "trade in" 

value, if a new automobile or electric stove or other item is purchased. But suppose the 

assets that lose value belong to businesses, and aren't easily traded in for 

corresponding asset--such as a coal fired power plant, or natural gas pipelines. I would 

argue that compensation for the remaining value of these is really needed as well. 

The assets that will lose value because of the new law are typically owned by a 

company. The stocks and bonds of these companies will generally have a wide variety 

of owners--very often pension plans, insurance companies, endowment funds, and 

individuals saving for their retirements. If the otherwise-useful assets of these 

companies are taken without compensation, the companies are likely to default on their 

bonds, and the stocks of these companies will lose value. This will mean that some 

pension funds will not be able to pay their promised payments, and some life insurance 

policies will not pay as promised. If there is no compensation to these companies by a 

tax or some sort, the loss will flow through the system and hit others--with retirees likely 

hit the hardest. So there will be a loss to the system, one way or another. 

How sustainable would this system be? 

There are a number of weak areas in this system: 

• There are not likely to be enough rare minerals (and even not-so-rare 

minerals), to make all of the desired high-tech end products. Recycling will help, but it is 

likely that the system will run into a bottleneck in not very many years. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 113 
• The system will use a huge number of electrical transmission lines. These 

transmission lines are subject to all kinds of disturbances--hurricane or other windstorm 

destruction, forest fires, land or snow slide, malicious destruction by those not happy for 

some reason (perhaps those unhappy by wealth disparities). Fixing lines that need 

repair will be challenging. We currently use helicopters and specialized 

equipment. These would need to be adequately adapted to a system without fossil 

fuels. 

• If electricity is out in an area, pretty much all activity in an area will stop 

(except that powered by local PV), and there will be no back-up generators. Residents 

will not be able to recharge vehicles, so they will quickly become useless. Even vehicles 

coming into an area may get stranded for lack of recharge capability. Food del iveries 

and water may be a problem. The current system at least offers some options--backup generators, and cars and trucks powered by petroleum that one can drive away. 

• Operating the system will require a huge amount of international cooperation, because the transmission system will cross country lines. If one country 

becomes unable to pay its share, or fails to make repairs, it could be a problem. 

• All of the high tech manufacturing will require considerable international 

co-operation and trade. This could be interrupted by debt defaults by major players, or 

by countries hoarding raw materials, or by difficulty in producing enough ships and 

airplanes to handle international trade. 

• The system clearly can't continue forever. It could be stopped by a lack of 

rare minerals, or international disputes, or lack of adequate international trade. The 

system doesn't provide any natural transition to a truly sustainable future. For example, 

food production is likely to still be done using industrial agriculture, with the food that is 

produced shipped to consumers a long distance away. It will be difficult to transition to 

a system which is truly sustainable at the point the system stops working. 

What would a reasonable timeframe for transition be? 

It seems to me that a reasonable timeframe for a transition such as that discussed in 

the Scientific American article would be 50 years, rather than 20 years suggested in the 

Scientific American article. With such a timeframe, there will be a little more time to fine 

tune technology, so as to find cost-efficient solutions that scale well. We also have more 

time to use the factories that are built, so that we don't have to overbuild, just to meet a 

deadline. Costs are likely to much easier to handle, since there will not be as much of 

an overlap issue. In addition, there will be much less problem of having to dispose of 

other-wise useful assets. 

The problem is that we really don't have 50 years to make a transition. We already 

are on the downslope. We should have started back in the 1 960s with a project like this. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 114 
It seems to me that all we can do s a very much reduced verson of an approach 

such as theonedescribed n the Scentf c Amercan artc e. G ven the tim ng, we may 

not even want to do an approach such as descr bed in the art c e. The approach 

descr bed assumes a high level 

of internat onal trade continuing bngterm. This is a 

fairy opt mist c assumpton, gven the diflicu lty of air and ship Ira nsportat on 

wthout fossil fue s. 

Instead of the high tech approach advocated by Scentfc Amercan, we may want to 

fnd solutons that can be done ocally, wth ocal materals. For examp e, we may want 

to encourage bcal agrculture. For ndustry, we may want to ook at solut ons that have 

worked in the past, such as w nd powered factor es, as discussed n this recent post. 

These were built wth ocal materals, and were used to power factor es direct y, wthout 

converson to eectrcity. With such solut ons, a trans t on to a tru y sustainab e future w ll 

be much more of a possib ltty. 

Draft E S: Oregon Pasoenger Ral -comments by Mark Robnowitz -PeakTia.ffc.o,g -page 115 
bttoL&,.Mw po stca ctx>o o rg/p,1 bli

cation s,k; Ii o:ate:e fter:0 row bl 

CLIMATE 

AFTER 

G ROWTH 

ASHER MILLER & ROB HOPKINS 

Climate Afer Growth: Why Environmntalists Must 

En1brac Post-Growth Econon1ics and Con1n1unity 

Resilienc 

Rob Hqpkins, A sher Miller 

Sepember 30, 2013 

In th s provocative pa.per, PCI Executve D rector Asher Miller a rd Transton Nbverrent 

Fourder (ard PCI Fello,-.j Rob Hopkns rreke a conv ncirg case for v.hythe 

D1aft EIS: Oreg:,n Puserger Pal• com rm nm tr Muk FbDoow itz • PeakTraffC.org • �9'3 116 
environmental community must embrace post-growth economics and community 

resi lience in their efforts to address the climate crisis. 

Executive Summary 

The nearly ubiquitous belief of our elected officials is that addressing the climate 

crisis must come second to ensuring economic growth. This is wrongheaded-both 

because it underestimates the severity of the climate crisis, and because it presupposes 

that the old economic "normal" of robust growth can be revived. It can't. 

In fact, we have entered an era of "new normals"-not only in our economy, but in 

our energy and climate systems, as well. The implications are profound: 

The New Energy Normal. The era of cheap and easy fossil fuels is over, leading 

the industry to resort to extreme fossil fuel resources (tar sands, mountaintop removal 

coal mining, shale gas, tight oil, and deepwater oil) to meet demand. Unfortunately, 

these resources come with enormous environmental and economic costs, and in most 

instances provide far less net energy to the rest of society. They also require much 

higher prices to make production worthwhile, creating a drag effect on the economy. As 

a result, high energy prices and economic contraction are likely to continue a back-andforth dance in the coming years. 

The New Climate Normal. Climate stability is now a thing of the past. As extreme 

weather events grow in severity, communities are increasingly adopting strategies that 

build resilience against the effect of these and other climate shocks. At the same time, 

we must take dramatic steps if we hope to avoid raising global temperatu res more than 

2

°c above pre-industrial levels. According to Kevin Anderson of the Tyndall Centre, this 

would require a 1 0% reduction in CO2 emissions per year, starting now-a rate so 

significant that it can only be achieved through dramatic reductions in energy use. 

The New Economic Normal. We've reached the end of economic growth as we've 

known it in the US. Despite unprecedented interventions on the part of central banks 

and governments, the so-called economic recovery in the US and Europe has been 

anemic and has failed to benefit the majority of citizens. The debate between stimulus 

and austerity is a distraction, as neither can fully address the factors that spell the end 

of economic growth-the end of the age of cheap oil, the vast mountains of debt that we 

have incurred, the diminishing economic impacts of new technologies, and the 

snowballing costs of climate change impacts. 

These fundamental changes in our energy, climate, and economic systems require 

unprecedented (and previously politically untenable) strategies. Yet this new reality is 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 117 
still largely unrecognized. As long as our leaders' predominant focus remains on getting 

back to the days of robust economic growth , no national or international climate policies 

will be enacted to do what is required: cut fossil fuel use dramatically. 

Instead of focusing on achieving climate policy within the economic growth 

paradigm, the US environmental community must embrace strategies that are 

appropriate to these "new normals." 

Responding to each of these new energy, climate, and economic "normals" will 

require one common strategy: building community resilience. Efforts that build 

community resilience enhance our ability to navigate the energy, climate, and economic 

crises of the 21st century. Done right, they can also serve as the foundation of a whole 

new economy-an economy comprised of people and communities that thrive within the 

real limits of our beautiful but finite planet. 

Thankfully, innovations that build community resilience are cropping up everywhere, 

and in many forms: community-owned, distributed, renewable energy production; 

sustainable local food systems; new cooperative business models; sharing economies, 

re-skilling, and more. While relatively small and inherently local , these projects are 

spreading rapidly and creating tangible impacts. 

Growing the community resilience movement to the national and global scale that's 

needed will require the full support and participation of the US environmental 

community. Specifically we need to: 

build the capacity of groups-large and small-who are leading these efforts; 

support the growth of a global learning network; and 

enable local investments to flow into community resilience enterprises. 

By making community resilience a top priority, environmental ists can offer an 

alternative to the "growth at all costs" story, one in which taking control of our basic 

needs locally has multiple benefits. Community resilience-building can create new 

enterprises and meaningful work, and increase well-being even as GDP inevitably 

falters. It can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and dependence on fossil fuels, while 

addressing social and economic inequities. And it can strengthen the social cohesion 

necessary to withstand periods of crisis. 

On their own, community resi lience projects can't overcome all the environmental, 

energy, economic, and social equity challenges facing us. That will require coordinated 

global, national, regional, community, business, neighborhood, household and individual 

efforts. But the community resilience movement can help create the conditions in which 

what is now "politically impossible becomes politically inevitable." 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 118 
How the environmental community responds to the risks and opportunities of the 

new energy, climate, and economic "normals" will make an enormous difference in its 

success, and in the fate of humankind. 

Oil prices have fallen by half since late June. This is a significant development for 

the oil industry and for the global economy, though no one knows exactly how either the 

industry or the economy will respond in the long run. Since it's almost the end of the 

year, perhaps this is a good time to stop and ask: (1) Why is this happening? (2) Who 

wins and who loses over the short term?, and (3) What will be the impacts on oil 

production in 2015? 

1. Why is this happening? 

Euan Mearns does a good job of explaining the oil price crash he.re. Briefly, demand 

for oil is softening (notably in China, Japan, and Europe) because economic growth is 

faltering. Meanwhile, the US is importing less petroleum because domestic supplies are 

increasing-almost entirely due to the frantic pace of drilling in "tight" oil fields in North 

Dakota and Texas, using hydrofracturing and horizontal drilling technologies-while 

demand has leveled off. 

Usually when there is a mismatch between supply and demand in the global crude 

market, it is up to Saudi Arabia-the world's top exporter-to ramp production up or 

down in order to stabilize prices. But this time the Saudis have refused to cut back on 

production and have instead unilaterally cut prices to customers in Asia, evidently 

because the Arabian royals want prices low. There is speculation that the Saudis wish 

to punish Russia and Iran for their involvement in Syria and Iraq. Low prices have the 

added benefit (to Riyadh) of shaking at least some high-cost tight oil, deepwater, and tar 

sands producers in North America out of the market, thus enhancing Saudi market 

share. 

The media frame this situation as an oil "glut," but it's important to recall the bigger 

picture: world production of conventional oil (excluding natural gas liquids, tar sands, 

deepwater, and tight oil) stopped growing in 2005, and has actually declined a bit since 

then. Nearly all supply growth has come from more costly (and more environmentally 

ruinous) resources such as tight oil and tar sands. Consequently, oil prices have been 

very high during this period (with the exception of the deepest, darkest months of the 

Great Recession). Even at their current depressed level of $55 to $60, petroleum prices 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 119 
are still above the International Energy Agency's high-price scenario for this period 

contained in forecasts issued a decade ago. 

Part of the reason has to do with the fact that costs of exploration and production 

within the industry have risen dramatically (early this year Steve Kopits of the energy 

market analytic firm Douglas-Westwood estimated that costs were rising at nearly 11 

percent annually). 

In short, during this past decade the oil industry has entered a new regime of 

steeper production costs, slower supply growth, declining resource quality, and higher 

prices. That all-important context is largely absent from most news stories about the 

price plunge, but without it recent events are unintelligible. If the current oil market can 

be characterized as being in a state of "glut," that simply means that at this moment, 

and at this price, there are more willing sellers than buyers; it shouldn't be taken as a 

fundamental or long-term indication of resource abundance. 

2. Who wins and loses, short-term? 

Gail Tverberg does a great job of teasing apart the likely consequences of the oil 

price slump here. For the US, there will be some tangible benefits from falling gasoline 

prices: motorists now have more money in their pockets to spend on Christmas gifts. 

However, there are also perils to the price plunge, and the longer prices remain low, the 

higher the risk. For the past five years, tight oil and shale gas have been significant 

drivers of growth in the American economy, adding $300 to 400 billion annually to GDP. 

States with active shale plays have seen a significant increase of jobs while the rest of 

the nation has merely sputtered along. 

The shale boom seems to have resulted from a combination of high petroleum 

prices and easy financing: with the Fed keeping interest rates near zero, scores of small 

oil and gas companies were able to take on enormous amounts of debt so as to pay for 

the purchase of drilling leases, the rental of rigs, and the expensive process of tracking. 

This was a tenuous business even in good times, with many companies subsisting on 

re-sale of leases and creative financing, while failing to show a clear profit on sales of 

product. Now, if prices remain low, most of these companies will cut back on drilling and 

some will disappear altogether. 

The price rout is hitting Russia quicker and harder than perhaps any other nation. 

That country is (in most months) the world's biggest producer, and oil and gas provide 

its main sources of income. As a result of the price crash and US-imposed economic 

sanctions, the ruble has cratered. Over the short term, Russia's oil and gas companies 

are somewhat cushioned from impact: they earn high-value US dollars from sales of 

their products while paying their expenses in rubles that have lost roughly half their 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 20 
value (compared to the dollar) in the past five months. But for the average Russian and 

for the national government, these are tough times. 

There is at least a possibility that the oil price crash has important geopolitical 

significance. The US and Russia are engaged in what can only be called low-level 

warfare over Ukraine: Moscow resents what it sees as efforts to wrest that country from 

its orbit and to surround Russia with NATO bases; Washington, meanwhile, would like 

to alienate Europe from Russia, thereby heading off long-term economic integration 

across Eurasia (which, if it were to transpire, would undermine America's "sole 

superpower" status; see discussion here); Washington also sees Russia's annexation of 

Crimea as violating international accords. Some argue that the oil price rout resulted 

from Washington talking Saudi Arabia into flooding the market so as to hammer 

Russia's economy, thereby neutralizing Moscow's resistance to NATO encirclement 

(albeit at the price of short-term losses for the US tight oil industry). Russia has recently 

cemented closer energy and economic ties with China, perhaps partly in response; in 

view of this latter development, the Saudis' decision to sell oil to China at a discount 

could be explained as yet another attempt by Washington (via its OPEC proxy) to avert 

Eurasian economic integration. 

Other oil exporting nations with a high-price break-even point-notably Venezuela 

and Iran, also on Washington's enemies list-are likewise experiencing the price crash 

as economic catastrophe. But the pain is widely spread: Nigeria has had to redraw its 

government budget for next year, and North Sea oil production is nearing a point of 

collapse. 

Events are unfolding very quickly, and economic and geopolitical pressures are 

building. Historically, circumstances like these have sometimes led to major open 

conflicts, though all-out war between the US and Russia remains unthinkable due to the 

nuclear deterrents that both nations possess. 

If there are indeed elements of US-led geopolitical intrigue at work here (and 

admittedly this is largely speculation), they carry a serious risk of economic blowback: 

the oil price plunge appears to be bursting the bubble in high-yield, energy-related junk 

bonds that, along with rising oil production, helped fuel the American economic 

"recovery," and it could result not just in layoffs throughout the energy industry but a 

contagion of fear in the banking sector. Thus the ultimate consequences of the price 

crash could include a global financial panic (John Michael Greer makes that case 

persuasively and, as always, quite entertainingly), though it is too soon to consider this 

as anything more than a possibility. 

3. What will be the impacts for oil production? 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 21 
There's actually some good news for the oil industry in all of this: costs of production 

will almost certainly decline during the next few months. Companies will cut expenses 

wherever they can (watch out, middle-level managers!). As drilling rigs are idled, rental 

costs for rigs will fall. Since the price of oil is an ingredient in the price of just about 

everything else, cheaper oil will reduce the costs of logistics and oil transport by rail and 

tanker. Producers will defer investments. Companies will focus only on the most 

productive, lowest-cost drilling locations, and this will again lower averaged industry 

costs. In short order, the industry will be advertising itself to investors as newly lean and 

mean. But the main underlying reason production costs were rising during the past 

decade-declining resource quality as older conventional oil reservoirs dry up-hasn't 

gone away. And those most productive, lowest-cost drilling locations (also known as 

"sweet spots") are limited in size and number. 

The industry is putting on a brave face, and for good reason. Companies in the shale 

patch need to look profitable in order to keep the value of their bonds from evaporating. 

Major oil companies largely stayed clear of involvement in the tight oil boom; 

nevertheless, low prices will force them to cut back on upstream investment as well. 

Drilling will not cease; it will merely contract (the number of new US oil and gas well 

permits issued in November fell by 40 percent from the previous month). Many 

companies have no choice but to continue pursuing projects to which they are already 

financially committed, so we won't see substantial production declines for several 

months. Production from Canada's tar sands will probably continue at its current pace, 

but will not expand since new projects will require an oil price at or higher than the 

current level in order to break even. 

As analysis by David Hughes of Post Carbon Institute shows, even without the price 

crash production in the Bakken and Eagle Ford plays would have been expected to 

peak and begin a sharp decline within the next two or three years. The price crash can 

only hasten that inevitable inflection point. 

How much and how fast will world oil production fall? Euan Mearns offers three 

scenarios; in the most likely of these (in his opinion) world production capacity will 

contract by about two million barrels per day over the next two years as a result of the 

price collapse. 

We may be witnessing one of history's little ironies: the historic commencement of 

an inevitable, overall, persistent decline of world liquid fuels production may be ushered 

in not by skyrocketing oil prices such as we saw in the 1970s or in 2008, but by a price 

crash that at least some pundits are spinning as the death of "peak oil." Meanwhile, the 

economic and geopolitical perils of the unfolding oil price rout make expectations of 

business-as-usual for 2015 ring rather hollow. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 22 
Strange Planet • 22 days ago 

Isn't this the roller-coaster ride that some people predicted would characterise the 

peak of oil production? With the remaining oil supplies in the hands of the " market" 

instead of controlled by government as a bridge to a sustainable society, then I 

suppose we can expect dramatic rises and falls in price and supply right up until we 

drop off the resource cliff. I have never expected that there would be a steady decline 

without government intervention. 

Bazz12 Strange Planet • 10 days ago 

Spot on Strange Planet. 

This exactly what Kenneth Deffreyes predicted in his book Beyond Oil. He predicted 

very volatile prices going in a number of cycles, before finally sagging into collapse. 

This is the second cycle. 

How many cycles is the real trick, but those of a mathematical bent who can calculate 

integral proportional and derivative functions, if they can get the data, might be able to 

enlighten us all. Any control systems engineers here ? 

It is all there, in the figures if your maths is good enough. 

peakchoicedotorg Strange Planet 11 days ago 

The 2005 " Hirsch Report" from US Department of Energy made this prediction. 

(Increasing volatility of prices at Peak Oil.) 

I think Colin Campbell made similar predictions in the 1990s. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 23 
January 21, 2015 

Or, What I've Learned in 12 Years Writing about Energy 

(7000 words, about 25 minutes reading time) 

Folks who pay attention to energy and climate issues are regularly treated to two 

competing depictions of society's energy options.:'.'._On one hand, the fossil fuel industry 

claims that its products deliver unique economic benefits, and that giving up coal, oil, 

and natural gas in favor of renewable energy sources like solar and wind will entail 

sacrifice and suffering (this gives a flavor of their argument). Saving the climate may not 

be worth the trouble, they say, unless we can find affordable ways to capture and 

sequester carbon as we continue burning fossil fuels. 

On the other hand, at least some renewable energy proponents tell us there is plenty 

of wind and sun, the fuel is free, and the only thing standing between us and a climateprotected world of plentiful, sustainable, "green" energy, jobs, and economic growth is 

the political clout of the coal, oil, and gas industries (here is a taste of that line of 

thought). 

Which message is right? Will our energy future be fueled by fossils (with or without 

carbon capture technology), or powered by abundant, renewable wind and sunlight? 

Does the truth lie somewhere between these extremes-that is, does an "all of the 

above" energy future await us? Or is our energy destiny located in a Terra lncognita that 

neither fossil fuel promoters nor renewable energy advocates talk much about? As 

maddening as it may be, the latter conclusion may be the one best supported by the 

facts. 

If that uncharted land had a motto, it might be, "How we use energy is as important 

as how we get it." 

1. Unburnable Fossils and Intermittent Electricity 

Let's start with the claim that giving up coal, oil, and gas will hurl us back to the Stone Age. 

It's true that fossil fuels have ofered extraordinary economic benefts. The cheap, concentrated, 

and p01table energ stored in these remarkable substances opened the way, during the past 

couple of centuries, for industrial expansion on a scale previously inconceivable. Why not just 

continue burning fossil fuels, then? Over the long term that is simply not an option, for two 

decisive reasons. 

First, burning fossil fuels is changing the climate to such a degree, and at such a pace, that 

economic as well as ecological ruin may ensue within the lifetimes of today's schoolchildren. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 24 
The science is in: either we go cold turkey on our coal, oil, and gas addictions, or we risk raising 

the planet's temperature to a level incompatible with the continued existence of civilization. 

Second, these are depleting, non-renewable sources of energy. We have ha1vested them using 

the low hanging fruit principle, which means that further increments of extraction will entail 

rising costs (for example, the oil industry's costs for exploration and production have recently 

been soaring at nearly 11 percent per year) as well as worsening environmental risks. This 

problem has been sneaking up on us over the last ten years, as sputtering conventional oil and 

natural gas production set the stage for the Great Recession and the expensive (and 

environmentally destmctive) practices of "fracking" and tar sands mining. Despite the recent 

plunge in oil prices the fossil fuel party is indeed over. Sooner or later the stark reality of 

declining fossil energy availability will rivet everyone's attention: we are overwhelmingly 

dependent on these fuels for nearly everything we eat, consume, use, and trade, and-as 

Americans started to team in the 1970s as a result of a couple nasty oil shocks- the withdrawal 

symptoms are killer. 

So while fossil fuel promoters are right in saying that coal, oil, and gas are essential to our 

current economy, what they omit mentioning is actually more crucial if we care how our world 

will look more than a few years into the future. 

Well then, are the most enthusiastic of the solar and wind boosters correct in claiming that 

renewable energy sources are ready to substitute for coal, oil, and gas quickly enough and in 

sufficient quantity to keep the global economy growing? There's a hitch here, which critics are 

only too quick to point out. We've designed our energy consumption patterns to take advantage 

of controllable inputs. Need more power? If you're relying on coal for energy, just shovel more 

fuel into the boiler. But solar and wind are different: they are available on Nature's terms, not 

ours. Sometimes the sun is shining or the wind is blowing, sometimes not. Energy geeks have a 

vocabulary to desciibe this-they say solar and wind power are intermittent, variable, stochastic, 

or chaotic. 

Actual production wind 

MW 

20,000 

15,000 

10,000 

5,000 

d spayed vear 2012 

Variability of wind generation in Germany for 2012 ( source: European Energy Exchange) 

There are ways of buffering this variability: we can store energy from renewable sources 

with batteries or flywheels, or pump water uphill so as to recapture its potential energy later 

when it flows back downstream; or we can build a massive super grid with robustly redundant 

generating capacity so that, when sun and wind aren't available in one region, another region can 

cover demand throughout the entire interconnected system. But these strategies cost money and 

energy, and add layers of complexity and vulnerability to what is already the largest machine 

ever built (i.e., the power grid). 

Draf EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - canment by Mark Rainowit - PeakTrafc.org - page 125 
Crucially, a recent study by Weissbach et al. compared the full-lifecycle energy economics of 

various types of power plants and found that once the intermittency of solar and wind energ is 

buffered by storage technologies, these sources become far less efcient than coal, natural gas, or 

nuclear plants; indeed, once storage is added, solar and wind fall "below the economical 

threshold" of long-term viability, regardless of the falling dollar price of panels and turbines 

themselves. The problem lies in the fact that the amount of energ embodied in the full 

generation-storage system cannot be repaid, with a substantial energ proft, by that system over 

its lifetime. Recent operational studies of solar PV systems in Spain and Australia have come to 

similar conclusions. 

Another way to deal with variability is demand management, which can take a variety of 

forms (I'll be discussing some of those later in a fair amount of detail). These all, by defnition, 

mean changing the ways we use energ. But for the moment let's stay with the subject of energy 

supply. 

Early increments of solar and wind power are easy and cheap to integrate into the existing 

electricity distribution system because power from gas-fred peaking plants can quickly (literally, 

by the minute) be ramped up or down to accommodate these new, small, variable inputs while 

also matching changing overall demand levels. In this case, the price of wind and solar energy 

gets counted as just the immediate cost of building, installing, and maintaining turbines and 

panels. And, as the New York Times recently noted, the price of electricity from renewables 

(counted this way) is now often competitive with electricity from fossil fuels. On this basis, solar 

and wind are disruptive technologies: they're getting cheaper while fossil fuels can only grow 

costlier. This one clear economic advantage of renewable energy-free ''fuel" in the forms of 

sunlight and wind-is decisive, as Germany is now seeing with falling wholesale electricity 

prices (though retail prices are rising due to feed-in tariffs that require the utility industry to pay 

above-market prices for renewable electricity). 

But as electricity from variable renewables makes up a larger and larger proportion of all 

power generated, the requirements for energy storage technologies, capacity redundancy, and 

grid upgrades will inevitably climb; indeed, beyond a certain point, the scale of needed 

investment is likely to explode. Grid managers tend to say that the infection point arrives when 

solar and wind power provide about 30 percent of total electricity demand, though one computer 

model suggests it could be put off until 80 percent market penetration is achieved. (For two 

contrasting views on the question of how expensive and diffcult intermittency makes the 

renewables transition-from renewable energ optimists Jacobson and Delucchi on one hand, 

and from "The Simpler Way" advocate Ted Trainer on the other-see a highly informative peerreviewed exchange here, here, and here.) The looming need for investment in storage and grid 

upgrades is part of the reason some electric utility companies are starting to wage war against 

renewables (another part is that net metering puts utilities at a disadvantage relative to solar 

homeowners; still another is simply that fossil fuel interests hate competition from solar and 

wind on general principle). As solar panels get cheaper, more homes and businesses install them; 

this imposes intermittency-smoothing costs on utility companies, which then raise retail prices to 

ratepayers. The latter then have even more of an incentive to install self-contained, batterybacked solar and abandon the grid altogether, leading to a utility "death spiral." 

Yet renewable energy technologies currently require fossil fuels for their construction and 

deployment, so in effect they are functioning as a parasite on the back of the older energ 

infrastructure. The question is, can they survive the death of their host? 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 26 
2. The Liquid Fuels Substitution Quandary 

So far, we've talked only about electricity. The power generation sector arguably represents 

the easiest phase of the overall energy transition (since alternative technologies do exist, even if 

they're problematic)-but only about 22 percent of global energ is consumed in the form of 

electrical power; in the US the fgure is 33 percent. Our biggest single energy source is oil, which 

fuels nearly all transportation. Transport is central to trade, which in turn is the beating heart of 

the global market economy. Oil also fuels the agricultural sector, and eating is fairly important to 

most of us. Of the three main fossil fuels, oil is showing the most immediate signs of depletion, 

and renewable options for replacing it are fairly dismal. 

It is possible to electrify much of our transportation, and electric cars are now decorating 

showrooms. But they have a minuscule market share and, at the current growth rate, will take 

many decades to oust conventional gasoline-fueled automobiles (some analysts believe that 

growth rate will soon increase dramatically). In any case, batteries do not do well in large, heavy 

vehicles. The reason has to do with energ density: an electric battery typically is able to store 

and deliver only about 0.1 to 0.5 megajoules of energ per kilogram; thus, compared to gasoline 

or diesel (at 4 to 4 MJ/kg), it is very heavy in relation to its energy output. Some 

breakthroughs in battery storage density and price appear to be on the horizon, but even with 

these improvements the problem remains: the theoretical maximum energ storage for batteries 

(about 5 MJ/kg) is still far below the energy density of oil. Neither long-haul trucking nor 

container shipping is ever likely to be electrifed on any signifcant scale, and electric airliners 

are simply a non-starter. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 27 
...I --, 

� 

Energy Density for Selected Materials 

0 

'<t -

0 -

0 

N -

0 - .... 

0 -

• Diesel 

Biodiesel • Gasoline •• 

Jet Fuel 

• 

Ethanol Data frm Wikipeda 

Plot by Pascal Mickelson 

Prius 

Battery 

• 

Natural 

Gas 

• Hydrogen Gas • 

I I I 

0 50 100 150 

MJ/kg 

Energy storage densty b weght (horizontal 

axs) and vo ume (vertical 

ax s) for 

seleted med a. A hypothetcal 

ideal energy storage medum would appear in the upper 

right·handcorner of the graph. (Source: Pasal 

M cke son) 

The promise of biofuels as a direct substitute for petroleum was widely louted a decade ago, 

bu l we hear much less on that score these days. It turns out that enormous subsidies are needed 

because the processes for producing these fuels are highly energy intensive. This goes for 

second-generation oellulosic ethanol and biodiesel from algae as well. Research into synthetic 

biology pathways lo biofuel production remains in its infancy. 

Hydrogen offers a medium for storing energy in a way that can be used lo power vehicles 

(among other things), and Toyota is about to release its first commercial hydrogen-powered car. 

But if we produce hydrogen with renewable energy, that means making H2 from water using 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Ra l• comments by Mark Rol::inowtz - PeakTraff c.org -page 128 
solar or wind-based electricity; unfortunately, this is an expensive way to go about it (most 

commercially produced hydrogen is currently made from natural gas, because the gas-reforming 

process is inherently more effcient and therefore almost always cheaper than electrolysis, 

regardless of the electricity source). 

These problems lead some energ analysts to propose a cheaper alternative to oil: why not 

transition the transport feet to burn compressed natural gas, which government and industry tell 

us is abundant and climate-friendly? Unfortunately this is no solution at all over the long term. 

Globally, natural gas may be available in quantity for several more decades, but optimistic 

forecasts of "100 years" of abundant US domestic gas supplies are proving to be unfounded, and 

methane leakage from production and transmission infrastructure may end up making gas even 

worse for the climate than oil. 

3. How much energy will we have? 

The question is inescapable: will our renewable future off er less mobility? If so, this in itself 

would have enormous implications for the economy and for daily life. Another question arising 

from all of the above: will the quantity of energ available in our renewable-energy future match 

energ demand forecasts based on consumption trends in recent decades? There are too many 

variables to permit a remotely accurate estimate of how much less energ we might have to work 

with (we simply don't know how quickly renewable energ technology will evolve, or how 

much capital investment will materialize). However, it's good to keep in mind the fact that the 

energ transition of the 19th and 20th centuries was additive: we just kept piling new energy 

sources on top of existing ones (we started with frewood, then added coal, oil, hydropower, 

natural gas, and nuclear); further, it was driven by economic opportunity. In contrast, the energy 

transition of the 21st century will entail the replacement of our existing primary energ sources, 

and it may largely be driven either by government policy or by crisis (fuel scarcity, climateinduced weather disasters, or economic decline). 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 29 
1.8 

C: 

0 1.6 

VI a.. 

cu 

o. 1.4 

a.. 

cu 

0 1.2 -C: 

cu 

� 

> 

1 

·: 0.8 

C 

= 0.6 

0 

� 0.4 

C: 

C: 

� 0.2 

0 

1850 

World Per Capita Annual Primary Energy 

Consumption by Fuel 1850-2013 

■Nuclear 

□Gas 

■Oil 

□Coal 

■ Hydro/Renew ables e--- ----------------r 

□Wood 

WOOD 

1870 1890 1910 1930 

Year 

COAL 

1950 1970 1990 2010 

0:, 

0:, 

� 

z 

0 

: 

: 

(I) 

: 

(I) 

C 

i 

© Hughes GSR Inc, 2014 

(datafromArnulfGrubler, 1998; 

BP statistical Review of World Energy, 2014; EIA, 2014) 

The additive history of energy sources (source: David Hughes) 

Even supply forecasts from renewable energy optimists who tell us that intermittency is 

affordably solvable typically assume we will have less available electrical energy, once the shift 

away from fossil fuels is complete, than the International Energy Agency estimates that we 

would otherwise want (for example, analysis by Lund and Mathieson projects energy 

consumption levels in 2030 in Denmark to be only 11 percent higher than 2004 demand, with no 

further increase between 2030 and 2050, whereas IEA forecasts assume continued demand 

growth through mid-century). However, if (as the Weissbach study suggests) intermittency is in 

fact a serious economic burden for solar and wind power over the long term, then we need to 

entertain the likelihood that energy supplies available at the end of the century may be smallermaybe considerably smaller-than they are now. 

At the same time, the qualities of our energy supply will differ from what we are used to. As 

explained earlier, solar and wind are intermittent, unlike fossil energy supplies. Further, while 

planet Earth is blessed with lots of wind and sunlight, these are diffuse energy sources that need 

collecting and concentrating if they' re to operate heavy machinery. During the coming energy 

transition, we will be shifting from energy sources with a small geographic footprint (e.g. , a 

natural gas well) toward ones with larger footp1ints (wind and solar farms collecting ambient 

sources of energy). Trne, we can cut the effective footprint of solar by using existing rooftops, 

and wind turbines can share space with food crops. Nevertheless, there will be unavoidable costs, 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 13 
ineffciencies, and environmental impacts resulting from the increasing geographical extent of 

energ collection activities. 

The potency of fossil fuels derives from the fact that Nature did all the prior work of taking 

energ from sunlight, storing it in chemical bonds within plants, then gathering those ancient 

plants and transforming and concentrating their chemical energy, using enormous heat and 

pressure, over millions of years. Renewable energy technologies represent attempts to gather and 

concentrate ambient energy in present time, substituting built capital for Nature's free gifts. 

Moreover, while electrical power is easily transported via the grid, this doesn't change the 

fact that sunlight, hydropower, biomass, and wind are more available in some places than others. 

Long-distance electricity transmission entails infrastructure costs and energy losses, while 

transporting biomass more than a hundred miles or so typically erases the crucial energy 

proftability of its use. 

4. A Possible Outcome of Current Energy Trends 

The price of renewable energy is falling while the cost of producing fossil fuels is rising. The 

crossover point, where fossil fuels cease to be cost competitive, could come soon-perhaps in 

the next decade. 

What happens then? As batteries get cheaper, electric cars could become the industry 

standard; reduced gasoline demand would likely force the price of oil below its marginal 

production cost. If falling demand periodically outpaced declining supply (and vice versa), the 

result would be increasingly volatile petroleum prices, which would be bad for everyone. 

Meanwhile as more businesses and homes installed cost-competitive solar-and-battery systems, 

conventional utilities could go bankrupt. 

The result: we would have green energy technology, but not the energy means to maintain 

and reproduce it over the long run (since every aspect of the renewable energy deployment 

process currently relies on fossil fuels -particularly oil- because of their unique energy density 

characteristics). 

During the transition, what proportion of the world's people would be able to afford the upfront investment required for entry into the renewable energy club? It's likely that many 

(including poor people in rich countries) would not, especially given current trends toward 

increasing economic inequality; for these folks, conventional fossil-based grid power would 

likewise become unaffordable, or simply unavailable. 

What if renewable energy optimists are right in saying that solar and wind are disruptive 

technologies against which fossil fuels cannot ultimately compete, but renewables critics are 

correct in arguing that solar and wind are inherently incapable of powering industrial societies as 

currently confgured, absent a support infrastructure (mines, smelters, forges, ships, trucks, and 

so on) running on fossil fuels? 

5. Googling Questions 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 31 
The combined quantity and quality issues of our renewable energy future are sufficiently 

daunting that Google engineers who, in 2007, embarked on an ambitious, well funded project to 

solve the world's climate and energy problems, effectively gave up. It seems that money, 

brainpower, and a willingness to think outside the box weren't enough. 'We felt that with steady 

improvements to today's renewable energy technologies, our society could stave off catastrophic 

climate change," write Ross Koningstein and David Fork, key members of the RE<C project 

team. 'We now know that to be a false hope." 

The Google team defined "success" as identifying a renewable energy system that could 

compete economically with coal and could also be deployed fast enough to stave off the worst 

climate change impacts. The team concluded that renewable energy isn't up to that job. In their 

article, Koningstein and Fork put on a brave face, hoping that some currently unknown energy 

souICe will appear at the last minute to save the day. But putting one's faith in a currently nonexistent energy source seems less realistic than working for dramatic improvements to solar and 

wind technologies. A completely new source would require decades for development, testing, 

and deployment. Realistically, our choice of replacements for fossil fuels is limited to energy 

souICes that can be harnessed with current technology, even if they can't keep the industrial 

growth engine humming. 

In inquiring whether renewable energy can solve the climate crisis at essentially no· net 

economic cost, Koningstein and Fork may have been posing the wrong question. They were, in 

effect, asking whether renewables can support our current growth-based industrial economy 

while saving the environment. They might more profitably have inquired what kind of economy 

renewable energy am support. We humans got by on renewable sources of energy for millennia, 

achieving high levels of civilization and culture using wind, sun, water, wood, and animal power 

alone (though earlier civilizations often faced depletion dilemmas with regard to resources other 

than fossil fuels). The depletion/climate drawbacks of fossil fuels ensure that, as the century 

progresses, we will indeed return to a renewables-based economy of some sort, running on 

hydropower, solar, wind, and a suite of other, more marginal renewable sources including 

biomass, geothermal, wave, microhydro, and tidal power. 

We always adapt our energy sources, as much as we can, to suit the ways we want to use 

energy. It is therefore understandable that most people would like somehow to make solar and 

wind act just like fossil fuels, which have shaped our current consumption patterns. But that 

leads us back to the problems of energy storage, capacity redundancy, grid redesign, transport 

electrification, and so on. Weissbach's study suggests that the costs of enabling solar and wind to 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowtz - PeakTraflic.org - page 132 
act like fossil fuels are so great as to virtually cancel out these renewables' very real benefts. 

Reluctantly but increasingly, we may have to adapt the ways we use energy to suit the quantities 

and inherent qualities of the energy available to us. 

Fossil fuels shaped our current infrastructure of mines, smelters, forges, factories, pipelines, 

grids, farms, highways, airports, pumps, shopping malls, suburbs, warehouses, furnaces, offce 

buildings, houses, and more. We built the modern world with the assumption that we would 

always have more energ with similar characteristics to maintain, operate, and replace this 

staggering and still-growing array of machines, structures, and support systems. Where it is 

absolutely essential to maintain these systems in their current form, we will certainly make every 

effort to adapt our new energy sources to the job (using batteries, for example); where systems 

can themselves be adapted to using less energ or energy that is intermittently available, we will 

adapt those systems. But in many instances it may be unaffordable to adapt either the energy 

source or the usage system; in those cases, we will simply do without services we had become 

accustomed to. 

This may be the renewable future that awaits us. To prepare for that likelihood, we need to 

build large numbers of solar panels and wind turbines while also beginning a process of 

industrial-economic triage. 

Reconfguring civilization to operate on less energ and on energy with different 

characteristics is a big job-one that, paradoxically, may itself require a substantial amount of 

energ. If the necessity of expending energ on a civilization rebuild coincides with a reduction 

in available energ, that would again mean that our renewable future will not be an extension of 

the expansive economic thrust of the 20th century. We may be headed into lean times. 

Granted, there is a lot of uncertainty here. Some countries are better placed to harvest 

ambient natural energy sources than others. Some academic studies paint an over-optimistic 

picture of renewables, because they focus only on electricity and ignore or understate the costs of 

variability mitigation; other studies arrive at unfairly pessimistic assessments of renewables 

because they use obsolete price data. It's hard to portray our renewable future in a way that one 

analyst or another will not dispute, at least in terms of detail. Nevertheless, most energy experts 

would probably agree with the general outline of renewable energ's potential that I've traced 

here. 

I consider myself a renewable energy advocate: after all, I work for an organization called 

Post Carbon Institute. I have no interest in discouraging the energ transition-quite the contrary. 

But I've concluded that many of us, like Koningstein and Fork, have been asking the wrong 

questions of renewables. We've been demanding that they continue to power a growth-based 

consumer economy that is inherently unsustainable for a variety of reasons (the most obvious 

one being that we live on a small planet with fnite resources). The fact that renewables can't do 

that shouldn't actually be surprising. 

What are the right questions? The frst, already noted, is: What kind of society can up-to-date 

renewable energy sources power? The second, which is just as important: How do we go about 

becoming that sort of society? 

As we'll see, once we begin to frame the picture this way, it turns out to be anything but 

bleak. 

6. A Couple of Key Concepts 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 133 
Our degree of success in this all-encompassing transition will partly depend on our ability to 

master a couple of simple energy concepts. The first is energy returned on energy invested 

(EROI or EROEI). It takes energy to get energy: for example, energy is needed to drill an oil 

well or build a solar panel. The historic economic bonanza resulting from society's use of fossil 

fuels partly ensued from the fact that, in the 20th century, only trivial amounts of energy were 

required for drilling or mining as compared to the gush of energy yielded. High EROEI ratios (in 

the range of 20: 1 to 50: 1 or more) for society's energy-obtaining efforts meant that relatively 

little capital and labor were needed in order to supply all the energy that society could use. As a 

result, many people could be freed up from basic energy-producing activities (like farming), their 

labor being substituted by fuel-fed machines. Channeled into manufacturing and managerial 

jobs, these people found ways to use abundant, cheap energy to produce more goods and 

services. The middle class mushroomed, as did cities and suburbs. In the process, we discovered 

an unintended consequence of having an abundance of cheap "energy slaves" in the forms of 

tons of coal, barrels of oil, and cubic feet of natural gas: as manufacturing and other sectors of 

the economy became mechanized, many pre-industrial professions disappeared. 

The EROEI ratios for fossil fuels are declining because the best quality resources are being 

used up; meanwhile, the energy return figures of most renewable energy sources are relatively 

low compared to fossil fuels in their heyday (and this is especially true when buffering 

technologies-such as storage equipment, redundant capacity, and grid expansions-are 

accounted for). 

0 

. . . . . 

. . . 

.. . .. 

. . 

UNKNOWI\ 

10:1 

I 

I 

Net Energy Ratio 

20:1 30:1 

CHARACTERISTICS OF ENERGY RESOURCES 

40:1 

�00:I 

_., 80:) 

An energ resource is unhelpful if it requires nearly a much energ to prouce as it provids to 

society The net energy ratio give us an approximate indication of this relalinship. Similarly an 

eaerg resource is worthless if we can't use it the way we need it. The world's infrastructure f 

transprtation and commrce was builr for oil and coal power in large part because these reourcs are 

relatively easy to store and transport, and can be used at will. Mot renewables Jack thse attributes. 

The environmetal impact of a resource-Including but not limited to its carb intensity-is key to 

its long-term utility and the main argument aainst coal as a baeload power source. "" o ML'lPHv 

1

,e -�e�' �;,> 

1',e s'-c� 1� ,�'-" c\� ,;;f. -�'I ,� �� rr,e:I �e� <"' �o' � �\� 

• • MEO 

• • MEO 

• • MED 

• • MEO 

• • HIGH 

• • MED 

• • MEO 

• • MEO 

• • 

• 

• 

• • • MED 

• • 

• ! 

• ! • • MED 

Characteristics of energy resources (source: David Murphy). "Net Energy Ratio" in this 

chart is essentially the same as EROEI. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 134 
The practical result of declining overall societal EROEI will be the need to devote 

proportionally more capital and labor to energy production processes. This is likely to translate, 

for example, to the requirement for more farm labor, and to fewer opportunities in professions 

not centered on directly productive activities: we'll need more people making or growing things, 

and fewer people marketing, advertising, fnancing, regulating, and litigating them. For folks 

who think we have way too much marketing, advertising, fnancialization, regulation, and 

litigation in our current society, this may not seem like such a bad thing; prospects are likewise 

favorable for those who desire more control over their time, labor, and sources of sustenance 

(food and energ). 

A second essential energy concept has to do with the difference between embodied and 

operational energy. When we contemplate the energy required by an automobile, for example, we 

are likely to think only of the gasoline in its tank. However, a substantial amount of energy was 

expended in the car's construction, in the mining of ores from which its metal components were 

made, in the making of the mining equipment, and so on. Further, enormous amounts of energ 

were spent in building the infrastructure that enables us to use the car-the systems of roads and 

highways, the networks of service stations, refneries, pipelines, and oil wells. The car's gasoline 

supplies operational energ, but much more energy is embodied in the car itself and its support 

systems. This latter energ expenditure is easily overlooked. 

The energy glut of the 20th century enabled us to embody energy in a mind-numbing array of 

buildings, infrastructure, machines, gadgets, and packaging. Middle-class families got used to 

buying and discarding enormous quantities of manufactured goods representing generous 

portions of previously expended energ. If we have less energy available to us in our renewable 

future, this will impact more than the operation of our machines and the lighting and heating of 

our buildings. It will also translate to a shrinking fow of manufactured goods that embody past 

energ expenditure, and a reduced ability to construct high energy-input structures. We might 

fnd we need to purchase fewer items of clothing and furniture, and fewer electronic devices, and 

inhabit smaller spaces. We might also use old goods longer, and re-use and re-purpose whatever 

can be repaired. We might need to get used to buying more basic foods again, rather than highly 

processed and excessively packaged food products. Exactly how far these trends might proceed 

is impossible to say: we are almost surely headed toward a simpler society, but no one knows 

ultimately how simple. Nevertheless, it's fair to assume that this overall shift would constitute 

the end of consumerism (i.e. , our current economic model that depends on ever-increasing 

consumption of consumer goods and services). Here again, there are more than a few people 

who believe that advanced industrial nations consume excessively, and that some simplifcation 

of rich- and middle-class lifestyles would be a good thing. 

7. Transitioning Nine Sectors 

When we start applying these energy principles to the systems that surround us and support 

our daily existence, the implications really start to get interesting. Let's take a quick tour: 

Food: Fossil fuels are currently used at ever stage of growing, transporting, processing, 

packaging, preparing, and storing food. As those inputs are removed from food systems, it will 

be necessary to bring growers and consumers closer together, and to replace petrochemical-based 

fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides with agro-ecological farming methods that rely on crop 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 135 
rotation, intercropping, companion planting, mulching, composting, benefcial insects, and 

promotion of microbial activity in soils. As mentioned earlier, we will need many more farmers, 

especially ones with extensive practical, local ecological knowledge. 

Water: Enormous amounts of energy are used in extracting, moving, and treating water; 

conversely, water is used in most energy production processes. We face converging water crises 

arising from aging infrastructure and climate change-related droughts and foods. All this 

suggests we must become far more water thrifty, fnd ways to reduce the energy used in water 

management, use intermittent energy sources for pumping water, and use water reservoirs for 

storing energ. 

Resource extraction (mining,forestry,fishing): Currently, extractive industries rely almost 

entirely on petroleum-based fuels. Since, as we have seen, there are no good and comprehensive 

substitutes for these fuels, we will have to reduce resource extraction rates, reuse and recycle 

materials wherever possible, and employ more muscle power where possible in those extractive 

processes that must continue (such as forestry). 

Building construction: Cement, iron, and road-building materials embody substantial 

amounts of energy, while large construction equipment (cranes, booms, bulldozers) requires 

concentrated energy for its operation. We must shift to using natural, locally available building 

materials, and more labor-intensive construction methods, while dramatically reducing the rate of 

new construction. The amount of enclosed space per person (home, work, shopping) will shrink. 

Building operations: We've gotten used to actively heating, cooling, ventilating, and lighting 

our buildings with cheap, on-demand energy. We will need to maximize our passive capture of 

ambient, variable, solar energy using south-facing glazing, superinsulation, and thermal mass. 

Whatever active energ use is still required will employ effcient heat pumps and low-energ 

LED lighting, powered mostly by solar cells and wind turbines with minimal storage and 

redundancy (so as to maximize EROEI). 

Manufacturing: Our current system is globalized (relying on oil-based transport systems); 

consumes natural gas, electricity, and oil in manufacturing processes; and uses materials that 

embody large amounts of energy and that are often made from fossil fuels (i.e., plastics). Lots of 

energ is used also in dealing with substantial fows of waste in the forms of packaging and 

discarded products. The economy has been fne-tuned to maximize consumption. We must shift 

to shortened supply chains, more localized manufacture of goods (shipping information, not 

products), materials with low embodied energ, and minimal packaging, while increasing our 

products' reuse and repair potential. This will be, in effect, an economy fne-tuned to minimize 

consumption. 

Health care: The high dollar cost of modern health care is a rough indication of its energ 

intensity. As the energ transition gains momentum, it will be necessary to identify low-energ 

sanitation and care options, and prioritize prevention and local disaster response preparedness. 

Eventually, high-energy diagnostics and extreme end-of-life interventions may simply become 

unaffordable. Treatment of chronic conditions may rely increasingly on herbs and other 

traditional therapies (in instances where their effcacy can be verifed) as the pharmaceutical 

industry gradually loses its capability to mobilize billions of dollars to develop new, targeted 

drugs. 

Transportation: The energy transition will require us to prioritize transport modes according 

to operational and embodied energ effciency: whereas automobile and truck traffc have been 

richly subsidized through road building in the last seven decades, governments should instead 

devote funds toward electrifed rail networks for both freight and passenger travel. We must also 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 136 
design economic and w-ban systems ro as to reduce the need for motorized transportation-for 

example. by planning communities ro that most esrential services are within walking distance. 

The Carbon Intensity of Travel: g C02e/pkm 

Large Car (15 MPG) 

Long Flight (business) 

Medium Car (25 MPG) 

Local Bus (US) 

Motorbike (SO MPG) 

Long Flight (economy) 

Small Car (35 MPG) 

Electric Car (US grid) 

Short Flight (economy) 

Heavy Rail (US) 

Hybrid Car (45 MPG) 

Scooter (80 MPG) 

Coach (US) 

Metro (NYC) 

Electric Car (Solar) so 

School Bus (US) 

Eurostar Rail (France) 20 

Cycling 17 

0 

139 

138 

123 

120 

116 

116 

96 

85 

100 

182 

200 

301 

296 

300 

■ Manufacturing ■ Direct fuel Indirect fuel 

Source: Shrinkthatfootprintcom (data from DEFRA, El A, EPA, Che sre r & fiorvath) 

Finance: It would appear that comparatively little enetgy is needed to run financial systems, 

as a few taps ona computer keyboard can create millions of dolla1s instantly and move them 

around the globe. Nevertheless. the energy transition has enormous implications for finance: 

Dr.,lt EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail -comrrents b/ 1\11,rk Robnowttz -PeakTraff c.org -p,ge 137 
heightened debt levels imply an increased ability to consume now with the requirement to pay 

later. In effect, a high-fnance society stimulates consumption, whereas we need to reduce 

consumption. Transition strategies should therefore include goals such as the cancelation of 

much existing debt and reduction of the size and role of the fnancial system. Increasingly, we 

must direct investment capital toward projects that will tangibly beneft communities, rather than 

leaving capital investment primarily in the hands of proft-seeking individuals and corporations. 

You may have noticed that suggestions in each of these categories are far from new. 

Organized efforts to reduce both operational and embodied energ consumption throughout 

society started in the 1970s, at the time of the frst oil price shocks. Today there are many NGOs 

and university programs devoted to research on energy effciency, and to life cycle analysis 

(which seeks to identify and quantify energy consumption and environmental impacts of 

products and industrial processes, from "cradle to grave"). Industrial ecology, biomimicry, 

"cradle-to-cradle" manufacturing, local food, voluntary simplicity, permaculture, and green 

building are just a few of the strategies have emerged in the last few decades to guide us toward a 

more energ-thrifty future. Most major cities now have bicycle advocacy groups, farmers 

markets, and energy effciency programs. These all represent steps in the right direction. 

Yet what is being done so far barely scratches the surface of what's needed. There could be 

only one meaningful indication of success in all these efforts, and that would be a decline in 

society's overall energ use. So far, we have seen energy declines primarily in times of severe 

economic recession-hardly ever purely as a result effciency programs. What we need is not just 

to trim energy use here and there so as to save money, but to reconfgure entire systems to 

dramatically slash consumption while making much of the remaining energy consumption 

amenable to intermittent inputs. 

Another insight that comes from scanning energy reduction strategies in various societal 

sectors is that efforts already underway along these lines often have side benefts. There are 

tangible psychological, social, and cultural payoffs associated with local food and voluntary 

simplicity programs, and health improvements can follow from natural, energ-effcient 

dwellings, walking, bicycling, and gardening. A successful energy transition will require that we 

fnd ways to maximize and celebrate these benefts, while honestly acknowledging the full 

human and environmental costs of our decades-long, fossil-fueled joyride. 

In the march toward our energy future, the PR war between the fossil fuel industry and 

renewables advocates gets much of the attention. But it will be our effectiveness in the hard work 

of dramatically reducing and reconfguring energy consumption-sector by sector, farm by farm, 

building by building, household by household, community by community-that will largely 

determine our overall success in what is likely to be history's most diffcult and crucially 

important economic shift. 

8. Neither Utopia Nor Extinction 

This is all politically charged. Some renewable energy advocates (particularly in the US) 

soft-pedal the "use less" message because we still inhabit an economy in which jobs and profts 

depend on stoking consumption, not cutting it. "Less" also implies "fewer": if the amount of 

energ available contracts but human population continues growing, that will translate to an even 

sharper per capita hit. This suggests we need to start reducing population, and doing so quickly 

-but economists hate population decline because it compromises GDP and results in smaller 

generational cohorts of young workers supporting larger cohorts of retirees. Here is yet another 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 138 
message that just doesn't sell. A contraction of energ, population, and the economy has only two 

things going for it: necessity and inevitability. 

From a political standpoint, some solar and wind advocates apparently believe it makes good 

strategic sense to claim that a renewable future will deliver comf 01t, convenience, jobs, and 

growth-an extension of the oil-fueled 20th century, but now energized by wind and solar 

electrons. Regardless of whether it's true, it is a message that appeals to a broad swath of the 

public. Yet most serious renewable energy scientists and analysts acknowledge that the energ 

transition will require changes throughout society. This latter attitude is especially prevalent in 

Europe, which now has practical experience integrating larger percentages of solar and wind 

power into electricity markets. Here in the US, though, it is common to fnd passionate but 

poorly informed climate activists who loudly proclaim that the transition can be easily and fully 

accomplished at no net cost. Again, this may be an effective message for rallying troops, but it 

ends up denying oxygen to energy conservation efforts, which are just as important. 

I have good friends in the renewable energy industry who say that emphasizing the 

intermittency challenges of solar and wind amounts to giving more ammunition to the fossil fuel 

lobby. Barry Goldwater famously proclaimed that "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no 

vice"; in a similar spirit, some solar and wind boosters might say that a little exaggeration of 

renewable energy's potential, uttered in defense of the Earth, is no sin. After all, fossil fuel 

interests are not bound by the need for strict veracity: they continually make absurd claims that 

the world has centuries' worth of coal and gas, and decades of oil. It's not a fair or equal fght: 

the size and resources of the fossil fuel industry vastly outweigh those of the renewables camp. 

And there could hardly be more at stake: this is war for the survival of our current civilizationsupporting climate regime. Nevertheless, we will ultimately have to deal with the reality of what 

solar and wind can actually provide, and we will do so far more successfully if we plan and 

prepare ahead of time. 

There are a lot of smart, dedicated people working hard to solve the problems with 

renewables-that is, to make it cheaper and easier for these energy sources to mimic the 24/7 

reliability of fossil fuels through improvements in energ storage and related technologies. None 

of what I have said in this essay is meant to discourage them from that important work. The more 

progress they make, the better for all of us. But they'll have more chance of success in the long 

run if society starts investing signifcant effort into adapting its energy usage to lower 

consumption levels, more variable sources, and more localized, distributed inputs. 

The problem is, the gap between our current way of life and one that can be sustained with 

future energ supplies is likely to be signifcant. If energ declines, so will economic activity, 

and that will create severe political and geopolitical strains; arguably some of those are already 

becoming apparent. We may be headed into a crucial bottleneck; if so, our decisions now will 

have enormous repercussions. We therefore need an honest view of the constraints and 

opportunities ahead. 

At this point I must address a few words to "collapsitarians" or "doomers," who say that only 

utter ruin, perhaps extinction, awaits us, and that renewables won't work at all. They may be 

correct in thinking that the trajectory of society this century will be comparable to the collapse of 

historic civilizations. However, even if that is the case, there is still a wide range of possible 

futures. The prospects for humanity, and the fates of many other species, hang on our actions. 

What's needed now is neither fatalism nor utopianism, but a suite of practical pathways for 

families and communities that lead to a real and sustainable renewable future-parachutes that 

will get us from a 17,000-watt society to a 2.000-watt society. We need public messages that 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 139 
emphasize the personal and community benefts of energ conservation, and visions of an 

attractive future where human needs are met with a fraction of the operational and embodied 

energ that industrial nations currently use. We need detailed transition plans for each major 

sector of the economy. We need inspiring examples, engaging stories, and opportunities for 

learning in depth. The transition to our real renewable future deserves a prominent, persistent 

place at the center of public conversation. 

The Transition Network, The Arthur Morgan Institute for Community Solutions, The 

Simplicity Institute, and many other organizations have already begun pioneering this work, and 

deserve support and attention. However, more framing and analysis of the issues, along the lines 

of this essay but in much greater depth, could also help. My organization, Post Carbon Institute, 

is embarking on a collaborative project to provide this. If you don't hear much from me for a 

while, it's because I'm working on it. Stay tuned. 

*For the sake of simplicity, I have omitted discussion of nuclear power from this essay. There 

are those who say that nuclear power will, or should, play a prominent role in our energy future. I 

disagree with this view. Globally, nuclear power-unlike solar and wind-is contracting, not 

growing (China provides one of only a few exceptions to this observation). Nations are turning 

away from nuclear power due to the high levels of required investment-which, in virtually 

every case, must be underwritten by government. They are doing so also because of the high 

perceived risk of accidents-especially since the commencement of the ongoing catastrophe at 

the Fukushima nuclear facility in Japan. Nuclear boosters advocate new fuels (thorium) or 

technologies (fast breeder reactors) to address these concerns. But many years of trials will be 

needed before these alternatives are ready to be deployed at scale; and it is unclear, even then, 

whether they will live up to claims and expectations. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 140 
Energy experts expose export error 

• • • • • • • t b /th f Id f IT / 

The Purposely Confusing World of Energy Politics, by 

Richard Heinberg 

Posted Feb 11, 2014 

Life often presents us with paradoxes, but seldom so blatant or consequential as the 

following. Read this sentence slowly: Today it is especially diffcult for most people to 

understand our perilous global energy situation, precisely because it has never been more 

important to do so. Got that? No? Okay, let me explain. I must begin by briefy retracing 

developments in a seemingly unrelated feld-climate science. 

Once upon a time, the idea that Earth's climate could be changing due to human-caused 

carbon dioxide emissions was just a lonely, unpopular scientifc hypothesis. Through years that 

stretched to decades, researchers patiently gathered troves of evidence to test that hypothesis. 

The great majority of evidence collected tended to confrm the notion that rising atmospheric 

carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gas) levels raise average global temperatures and provoke 

an increase in extreme weather events. Nearly all climate scientists were gradually persuaded of 

the correctness of the global warming hypothesis. 

But a funny thing happened along the way. Clearly, if the climate is changing rapidly and 

dramatically as a result of human action, and if climate change ( of the scale and speed that's 

anticipated) is likely to undermine ecosystems and economies, then it stands to reason that 

humans should stop emitting so much CO2. In practical effect, this would mean dramatically 

reducing our burning of fossil fuels-the main drivers of economic growth since the beginning 

of the Industrial Revolution. 

Some business-friendly folks with political connections soon became alarmed at both the 

policy implications of -and the likely short-term economic fallout from-the way climate 

science was developing, and decided to do everything they could to question, denigrate, and 

deny the climate change hypothesis. Their effort succeeded: belief in climate change now aligns 

fairly closely with political afliation. Most Democratic elected offcials agree that the issue is 

real and important, and most of their Republican counterparts are skeptical. Lacking bipartisan 

support, legislative climate policy languished. 

From a policy standpoint, climate change is effectively an energy issue, since reducing 

carbon emissions will require a nearly complete revamping of our energy systems. Energ is, by 

defnition, humanity's most basic source of power, and since politics is a contest over power 

(albeit social power), it should not be surprising that energy is politically contested. A politician's 

most basic tools are power and persuasion, and the ability to frame issues. And the tactics of 

political argument inevitably range well beyond logic and critical thinking. Therefore politicians 

can and often do make it harder for people to understand energy issues than would be the case if 

accurate, unbiased information were freely available. 

So here is the reason for the paradox stated in the frst paragraph: As energy issues become 

more critically important to society's economic and ecological survival, they become more 

politically contested; and as a result, they tend to become obscured by a fog of exaggeration, 

half-truth, omission, and outright prevarication. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 141 
How does one cut through this fog to gain a more accurate view of what's happening in our 

society's vital energy supply-and-support systems? It's helpful to start by understanding the 

positions and motives of the political actors. For the sake of argument, I will caricature two 

political positions. Let's personify them as Politician A and Politician B. 

Politician A has for many years sided with big business, and specifcally with the fossil fuel 

industry in all energy disputes. She sees coal, oil, and natural gas as gifts of nature to be used by 

humanity to produce as much wealth as possible, as quickly as possible. She asserts there are 

suffcient supplies of these fuels to meet the needs of future generations, even if we use them at 

rapidly increasing rates. When coal, oil, and gas do eventually start to run out, Politician A says 

we can always turn to nuclear energy. In her view, the harvesting and burning of fossil fuels can 

be accomplished with few incidental environmental problems, and fossil fuel companies can be 

trusted to use the safest methods available. And if Earth's climate is indeed changing, she says, 

this is not due to the burning of fossil fuels; therefore, policies meant to cut fossil fuel 

consumption are unnecessary and economically damaging. Finally, she says renewable energ 

sources should not be subsidized by government, but should stand or fall according to their own 

economic merits. 

Politician B regards oil, coal, and natural gas as polluting substances, and society's addiction 

to them is shameful. He thinks oil prices are high because petroleum companies gouge their 

customers; nuclear energy is too dangerous to contemplate; and renewable energ sources are 

benign (with supplies of sunlight and wind vastly exceeding our energ needs). To hear him tell 

it, the only reason solar and wind still supply such a small percentage of our total energy is that 

fossil fuel companies are politically powerful, benefting from generous, often hidden, 

government subsidies. Government should cut those subsidies and support renewable energ 

instead. He believes climate change is a serious problem, and to mitigate it we should put a price 

on carbon emissions. If we do, Politician B says, renewable energy industries will grow rapidly, 

creating jobs and boosting the economy. 

Who is right? Well, this should be easy to determine. Just ignore the foaming rhetoric and 

focus on research fndings. But in reality that's not easy at all, because research is itself often 

politicized. Studies can be designed from the outset to give results that are friendly to the 

preconceptions and prejudices of one partisan group or another. 

For example, there are studies that appear to show that the oil and natural gas production 

technique known as hydrofracturing (or "fracking") is safe for the environment. With research in 

hand, industry representatives calmly inform us that there have been no confrmed instances of 

fracking fuids contaminating water tables. The implication: environmentalists who complain 

about the dangers of fracking simply don't know what they're talking about. However, there are 

indeed many documented instances of water pollution associated with fracking. though 

technically most of these have resulted from the improper disposal of wastewater produced once 

fracking per se is fnished, rather than from the hydrofracturing process itself. Further, industryfunded studies of fracking typically focus on sites where best practices are in place and 

equipment is working as designed-the ideal scenario. In the messy real world, well casings 

sometimes fail, operators cut corners, and equipment occasionally malfunctions. 

For their part, environmentalists point to peer-reviewed studies showing air, water, and 

human health problems associated with actual (far from ideal) fracking operations. 

So, depending on your prior beliefs, you can often choose research fndings to support them 

-even if the studies you are citing are actually highly misleading. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 142 
Renewable energy is just as contentious. Mark Jacobson, professor of environmental 

engineering at Stanford University, has co-authored a series of reports and scientifc papers 

arguing that solar, wind, and hydropower could provide 100 percent of world energy by 2030. 

Clearly, Jacobson's work supports Politician B's political narrative by showing that the climate 

problem can be solved with little or no economic sacrifce. If Jacobson is right, then it is only the 

fossil fuel companies and their supp01ters that stand in the way of a solution to our 

environmental (and economic) problems. The Sierra Club and prominent Hollywood stars have 

latched onto Jacobson's work and promote it enthusiastically. 

However, Jacobson's publications have provoked thoughtful criticism, some of it from 

supporters of renewable energy, who argue that his "100 percent renewables by 2030" scenario 

ignores hidden costs, land use and environmental problems, and grid limits (see here, here, and 

h@fs. Jacobson has replied to his critics, well, energetically (here and here). 

At the other end of the opinion spectrum on renewable energ is Gail Tverberg, an actuary by 

training and profession (and no shill for the fossil fuel industry), whose analysis suggests that the 

more solar and wind generating capacity we build, the worse off we are from an economic point 

of view. Her conclusion fatly contradicts that of this report, which aims to show that the more 

renewables we build, the more money we'll save. Ecologist Charles Hall has determined that the 

ratio of energy returned to energy invested in capturing solar energ with photovoltaic (PV) 

panels is too low to support an industrial economy. Meanwhile the solar industry claims that PV 

can provide all of society's power needs. Global wind capacity may have been seriously overestimated. But then again, maybe not. 

In sum, if you're looking for quick and simple answers to questions about how much 

renewables can do for us, at what price, and over what time frame, forget it! These questions are 

far from being settled. 

There's a saying: For every Ph.D., there is an equal and opposite Ph.D. Does this mean 

science is useless, and objective reality is whatever you want it to be? Of course not. However, 

politics and cultural bias can and do muddy the process and results of scientifc research. 

All of this is inevitable; it's human nature. We'll sort through the confusion, given time and 

the hard knocks that inevitably come when preconceptions veer too far from the facts. However, 

if the more worrisome implications of climate science are right, we may not have a lot of time 

for sorting, and our knocks may be very hard indeed. 

* * * 

Here's a corollary to my thesis: Political prejudices tend to blind us to facts that fail to fit any 

conventional political agendas. All political narratives need a villain and a (potential) happy 

ending. While Politicians B and A might point to different villains ( oil companies on one hand, 

government bureaucrats and regulators on the other), they both envision the same happy ending: 

economic growth, though it is to be achieved by contrasting means. If a fact doesn't ft one of 

these two narratives, the offended politician tends to ignore it (or attempt to deny it). If it doesn't 

ft either narrative, nearly everyone ignores it. 

Here's a fact that apparently fails to comfortably ft into either political narrative: The energy 

and financial returns on fossil fuel extraction are declining-fast. The top fve oil majors 

(ExxonMobil, BP, Shell, Chevron, and Total) have seen their aggregate production fall by over 

25 percent over the past 12 years-but it's not for lack of effort. Drilling rates have doubled. 

Rates of capital investment in exploration and production have likewise doubled. Oil prices have 

quadrupled. Yet actual global rates of production for regular crude oil have fattened, and all new 

production has come from expensive unconventional sources such as tar sands, tight oil, and 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 143 
deepwater oil. The fossil fuel industry hates to admit to facts that investors find scaryespecially now, as the industry needs investors to pony up ever-larger bets to pay for ever-moreextreme production projects. 

Costly Quest 

Exxon, Shell and Chevron have been spending at record levels as they seek to boost their oil and gas output. It has yet to pay off. 

Below, change in production and capital expenditures since 2009. 

Exxon Mobil Royal Dutch Shell Chevron 

80%···············-······················································ 

60 ··········----·· ......... , ............. Capital expenditures 

�-- 51% 

Production 

6% 

89% 

-20, ·· 

2009 

··············,·········· ·····•··· ..... ······1 ........• ········1 ·················r

··· ············f ········· ·····1 

10 '11 '12 13 2009 10 '11 '12 '13 2009 10 '11 '12 13 

Noto: Spoooing in 2013 r.flectscompany est mates; for She l it s net of asset sales; production rate in 2013 is through the first n ne months. Source: 

tt,e companies The Wall Street Journal 

In the past few years, high oil prices have provided the incentive for small, highly leveraged, 

and risk friendly companies to go after some of the last, worst oil and gas production prospects 

in NorthAmerica-fonnations known to geologists as "source rocks," which require operators to 

u<;e horizontal drilling and fracking technology to free up trapped hydrocarbons. The energy 

returned on energy invested in producing shale gas and tight oil from these formations is 

minimal. While US oil and gas production rates have temporarily spiked, all signs indicate that 

this will be a brief boom that will not change the overall situation significantly: society is 

reaching the point of diminishing returns with regard to the economic benefits of fossil fuel 

extraction. 

And what about our imagina1y politicians? Politician A wouldn't want to talk about any of 

this for fairly obvious reasons. But, strangely, Politician B likely would avoid the subject too: 

while he might portray the petroleum industry as an ogre, his narrative requires it to be a 

powerful one. Also, he probably doesn't like to think that gasoline prices might be high due to oil 

depletion rather than simply the greed of the petroleum barons. Motives can be complicated; 

perhaps both feel the patriotic urge to cheer domestic energy production, regardless of its source 

and in spite of evidence of declining returns on investment. Perhaps both understand that 

declining energy returns imply really bad news for the economy, regardless which party is in 

power. In any case, mum's the word 

Some facts seem to fit one narrative or the other but, when combined, point to a reality that 

undennines both narratives. What if climate change is an even worse problem than most of us 

assume, and there is no realistic way to deal seriously with it and still have economic growth? 

In the real world of US politics, many Democrats would agree with the first part of the 

sentence, many Republicans with the second Yet both parties would flee from endorsing the 

statement as a whole. Nevertheless, this seems to be where the data are driving us. Actual climate 

impacts have consistently outpaced the worst-case forecasts that the UN' s International Panel on 

Climate Change (IPCC) has issued during the past two decades. That means curbing carbon 

emissions is even more urgent than almost anyone previously thought. The math has changed. At 

this point, the rate of reduction in fossil fuel consumption required in order to avert catastrophic 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comment by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 144 
climate change may be higher, possibly much higher, than the realistically possible rate of 

replacement with energ from alternative sources. Climatologist Kevin Anderson of the UKbased Tyndall Centre fgures that industrial nations need to cut carbon emissions by up to 10 

percent per year to avert catastrophe, and that such a rapid reduction would be "incompatible 

with economic growth." What if Anderson is right? 

The problem of transitioning quickly away from fossil fuels while maintaining economic 

growth is exacerbated by the unique characteristics of different energy sources. 

Here's just one example of the diffculty of replacing oil while maintaining economic growth. 

Oil just happens to be the perfect transport fuel: it stores a lot of energ per unit of weight and 

volume. Electric batteries can't match its performance. Plug-in cars exist, of course (less than 

one percent of new cars sold this year in the US will be plug-in electrics), but batteries cannot 

propel airliners or long-haul, 18-wheel truck rigs. Yet the trucking and airline industries just 

happen to be signifcant components of our economy; can we abandon or signifcantly downsize 

them and grow the economy as we do so? 

What about non-transport replacements for fossil fuels? Well, both nuclear power stations 

and renewable energy systems have high up-front investment costs. If you factor in all the 

fnancial and energy costs (something the solar, wind, and nuclear industries are reluctant to do), 

their payback time is often measured in decades. Thus there seems to be no realistic way to 

bootstrap the energy transition (for example, by using the power from solar panels to build more 

solar panels) while continuing to provide enough energ to keep the rest of the economy 

expanding. In effect, to maintain growth, the energ transition would have to be subsidized by 

fossil fuels-which would largely defeat the purpose of the exercise. 

Business-friendly politicians seem to intuitively get much of this, and this knowledge helps 

fuel their continued infatuation with oil, coal, and natural gas-despite the increasing economic 

problems (even if we disregard the environmental problems) with these fuels. But these folks' 

way of dealing with this conundrum is simply to deny that climate change is a real issue. That 

strategy may work for their supporters in the fossil fuel industries, but it does nothing to avert the 

worsening real-world crises of extreme temperature events, droughts, foods, and storms-and 

their knock-on impacts on agriculture, economies, and governments. 

So those on the left may be correct in saying that climate change is the equivalent of a 

civilization-killing asteroid, while those on the right may be correct in thinking that policies 

designed to shrink carbon emissions will shrink the economy as well. Everybody gets to be 

correct-but nobody gets a happy ending (at least as currently envisioned). 

That's because nearly every politician wants growth, or at least recognizes the need to clamor 

for growth in order to be electable. Because growth, after all, is how we currently defne our 

collective, national happy ending. So whenever facts lead toward the conclusion that more 

growth may not be possible even if our party gets its way, those facts quickly get swept under the 

nearest carpet. 

Masking reality with political rhetoric leads to delays in doing what is necessary- making the 

best of the choices actually available to us. We and our political "leaders" continue to deny and 

pretend, walking blindly toward environmental and economic peril. 

* * * 

We humans are political animals-always have been, always will be. Our interests inevitably 

diverge in countless ways. Further, much of the emotional drive fueling politics comes from 

ethical impulses: perhaps for genetic reasons, different people assign different ethical principles a 

higher priority. Thus one politician's concern for fairness and another's passion for national 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 145 
loyalty can glide right past each other without ever shaking hands. Religion can also play a role 

in partisanship, along with the legacies of economic and social exclusion, historic rivalries, 

disputes, and atrocities. None of this can be dispelled with the wave of a magic wand. 

Moreover, political engagement often leads to welcome outcomes. When people organize 

themselves to effect change, the result can be expansions of civil rights, women's suffrage, and 

environmental protection. On the other hand, when people fail to speak up, social power tends to 

become monopolized by a small minority-and that never ends well. So, let's not withdraw from 

politics. 

But how to work efectively in a politically polarized environment? Hyper-partisanship is a 

problem in approving judicial appointees and passing budgets, and failure to do these things can 

have serious consequences. But when it comes to energy and climate, the scale of what is at stake 

runs straight off the charts. The decisions that need to be made, and soon (ideally 20 years ago!), 

on energy and climate may well determine whether civilization survives. The absence of decisive 

action will imperil literally everything we care about. 

Energy is complicated, and there can be legitimate disagreements about our options and how 

vigorously to pursue them. But the status quo is not working. 

I've struggled to fnd a hopeful takeaway message with which to end this essay. 

Should I appeal to colleagues who write about energ, pleading with them to frame 

discussions in ways that aren't merely feeding red meat to their already far too polarized 

audiences, encouraging them to tell readers uncomfortable truths that don't ft partisan 

narratives? I could, but how many energ writers will actually read this essay, and how many of 

those are willing to examine their preconceptions? 

Perhaps the best I can do is point out the existence of a small but enthusiastic subculture that 

actually understands these issues. This subculture is exemplifed by Transition Initiatives 

promoting "small-scale local responses to the global challenges of climate change, economic 

hardship, and shrinking supplies of cheap energ" and the premise that life can be better without 

fossil fuels. For better or worse, this subculture is practically invisible to political elites and the 

mainstream media (except perhaps in parts of the UK). 

Perhaps it's ftting that this essay leaves both author and readers unsettled and uncomfortable. 

Discomfort can sometimes be conducive to creativity and action. There may be no solutions to 

the political problems I've outlined. But even in the absence of solutions there can still be better 

adaptive behaviors, and judo-like strategies that achieve desired outcomes-ones that could 

conceivably turn the tide on intractable global problems such as climate change-without 

directly confronting existing societal power structures. These behaviors and strategies can be 

undertaken even at the household scale, but we 're likely to achieve much more if we collaborate, 

doing what we can locally while using global communications to compare notes and share our 

successes and challenges. 

Originally published as Richard Heinberg 's February 2014 Museletter. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 146 
www.postcarbon.org/new-site-files/Reports/Searching_for_a_Miracle_web1 0nov09.pdf 

SEARCHING FOR A MIRACLE: Net Energy Limits and 

the Fate of Industrial Society, by Richard Heinberg 

Foreword by Jerry Mander 

A Joint Project of the International Forum on Globalization and the Post Carbon Institute. [ False 

Solution Series #4 ] 

September 2009 

For the past three or four years media sou rces in the U.S. trumpeted the "gamechanging" new stream of natural gas coming from tight shale deposits produced with the 

technologies of horizontal drilling and hydrofracturing. So much gas surged from wells in 

Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Pennsylvania that the U.S. Department of 

Energy, presidential candidates, and the companies working in these plays all agreed: 

America can look forward to a hundred years of cheap, abundant gas! 

Some environmental organizations declared this means utilities can now stop using 

polluting coal-and indeed coal consumption has plummeted as power plants switch to 

cheaper gas. Energy pundits even promised that Americans will soon be running their 

cars and trucks on natural gas, and the U.S. will be exporting the fuel to Europe via 

LNG tankers. 

Early on in the tracking boom, oil and gas geologist Art Berman began sounding an 

alarm (see example). Soon geologist David Hughes joined him, authoring an extensive 

critical report for Post Carbon Institute ("Will Natural Gas Fuel America in the 21st 

Centu ry?"), whose Foreword I was happy to contribute. 

Here, one more time, is the contrarian story Berman and Hughes have been telling: 

The glut of recent gas production was initially driven not by new technologies or 

discoveries, but by high prices. In the years from 2005 through 2008, as conventional 

gas supplies dried up due to depletion, prices for natural gas soared to $1 3 per mil lion 

BTU (prices had been in $2 range during the 1 990s). It was these high prices that 

provided an incentive for using expensive technology to drill problematic reservoirs. 

Companies flocked to the Haynesville shale formation in Texas, bought up mineral 

rights, and drilled thousands of wells in short order. High per-well decline rates and high 

production costs were hidden behind a torrent of production-and hype. With new 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 147 
supplies coming on line quickly, gas prices fell below $3 MBTU, less than the actual 

cost of production in most cases. From this point on, gas producers had to attract ever 

more investment capital in order to maintain their cash flow. It was, in effect, a Ponzi 

scheme. 

In those early days almost no one wanted to hear about problems with the shale gas 

boom-the need for enormous amounts of water for tracking, the high climate impacts 

from fugitive methane, the threats to groundwater from bad well casings or leaking 

containment ponds, as well as the un realistic supply and price forecasts being issued by 

the industry. I recall attempting to describe the situation at the 2010 Aspen Environment 

Forum, in a session on the future of natural gas. I might as well have been claiming that 

Martians speak to me via my tooth fillings. After all, the Authorities were all in 

agreement: The game has changed! Natural gas will be cheap and abundant from now 

on! Gas is better than coal! End of story! 

These truisms were echoed in numberless press articles-none more emblematic 

than Cl ifford Krauss's New York Times piece, "There Will Be Fuel ," published November 

1 6, 2010. 

Now Krauss and the Times are singing a somewhat different tune. "After the Boom 

in Natural Gas," co-authored with Eric Lipton and published October 21 , notes that " . . . 

the gas rush has ... been a money loser so far for many of the gas exploration 

companies and their tens of thousands of investors." Krauss and Lipton go on to quote 

Rex Tillerson , CEO of ExxonMobil : "We are all losing our shirts today .... We're making 

no money. It's all in the red." It seems gas producers drilled too many wells too quickly, 

causing gas prices to fall below the actual cost of production. Sound familiar? 

The obvious implication is that one way or another the market will balance itself out. 

Drilling and production will decline (drilling rates have already started doing so) and 

prices will rise until production is once again profitable. So we will have less gas than 

we currently do, and gas will be more expensive. Gosh, whoda thunk? 

The current Times article doesn't drill very far into the data that make Berman and 

Hughes pessimistic about future unconventional gas production prospects-the high 

per-well decline rates, and the tendency of the drillers to go after "sweet spots" first so 

that future production will come from ever-lower quality sites. For recent analysis that 

does look beyond the cash flow problems of Chesapeake and the other trackers, see 

"Gas Boom Goes Bust" by Jonathan Callahan, and Gail Tverberg's latest essay, "Why 

Natural Gas isn't Likely to be the World's Energy Savior". 

David Hughes is working on a follow-up report, due to be published in January 2013, 

which looks at unconventional oil and gas of all types in North America. As part of this 

effort, he has undertaken an exhaustive analysis of 30 different shale gas plays and 21 

shale/tight oil plays-over 65,000 wells altogether. It appears that the pattern of rapid 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 148 
declines and the over-stated ability of shale to radically grow production is true across 

the U.S., for both gas and oil. In the effort to maintain and grow oil and gas supply, 

Americans will effectively be chained to drilling rigs to offset production declines and 

meet demand growth, and will have to endure collateral environmental impacts of 

escalating drilling and tracking. 

No, shale gas won't entirely go away anytime soon . But expectations of continuing 

low prices (which drive business plans in the power generation industry and climate 

strategies in mainstream environmental organizations) are about to be dashed. And 

notions that the U.S. will become a major gas exporter, or that we will convert millions of 

cars and trucks to run on gas, now ring hollow. 

One matter remains unclear: what's the energy return on the energy invested 

(EROEI) in producing "tracked" shale gas? There's still no reliable study. If the figure 

turns out to be anything like that of tight "tracked" oil from the North Dakota Bakken (6: 1 

or less, according to one estimate), then shale gas production will continue only as long 

as it can be subsidized by higher-EROEI conventional gas and oil. 

In any case, it's already plain that the "resource pessimists" have once again gotten 

the big picture just about right. And once again we suffer the curse of Cassandrathough we're correct, no one listens. I keep hoping that if we're right often enough the 

curse will lift. We'll see. 

www. postca rbon. org/person/36208-dav id-hug hes 

www.postcarbon.org/reports/PCl-report-nat-gas-future.pdf 

. . ... . . . ,_- .. 1 -f I- m ... 

Post Carbon Institute: Will Natural Gas Fuel America 

in the 21 st Century? 

David Hughes 

Published May 29, 2011 

In this groundbreaking report, David Hughes shatters the myth (advanced by industry, 

government, and many environmental organizations) that domestic natural gas can be a 

"bridge fuel" from high-carbon sou rces of energy like coal and oil to a renewable energy 

future. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 149 
"Snake Oil : how fracking's false promise of plenty imperils 

our future" by Richard Heinberg 

Snake Oil: how fracking's false prom se of plem:y imperi s our future - Reviews - The Eco ogist 

+ 0 www.theeco ogist.org/revi-ws/2 315910/snake_oi _how_frackings_false_promise_ot e (q .

. Goog e 

' ' . . 

CUMA'fE CHANGE i FOOD+ fARMlNG I ENERGY i HEALTH i POLmC + ECNOMICS I SCIENCE + TECHNOLOGY NATURAL WORLD I SOCI 

NEWS GREEN UN CMPAIGNNG BLG 8 COMMENS INTERVIEWS MGAZNE VJDEO ARCHE EXTRAS DRECTORY 

Home I Reviews 

Snake Oil: how fracking's false 

promise of plenty imperils our 

future 

Paul Mobbs 

2(th Marh 2014 

8+1 4 

Fracking is just another step on the fossil 

fuel treadmill, according to 'Snake Oil' by 

Richard Heinberg. High costs, diminishing 

returns and growing pollution will ultimately 

nail its future. Paul Mobbs urges readers • 

give a copy to your MP before it's too late! 

" For those who 

thought the 

1

fracking1 issue was 

just about water 

pollution and 

earthquakes, Richard 

Heinberg's Snake Oil 

might be a little 

perplexing. 

Twenty years from now we'

I b loking at a dried up industry 

that blew away, lcaing hal a milin n.cw hls in tOOground, 

ruined aquiers, and we'l wo1der if i was al worth i. Imge· 

Post Carbn Instiute 

Mre arJ abut 

I fos� fuels I UK! US I tracking I 

Rolt Aicl 

• NORTH: spe l binding folk with a groon m ss on 

■ Ftvo stars! Scentsts dramat c c lmato change act 

s a winner 

Unllke the 

USA, where 

the damage 

to states 

such as 

Texas and 

Pennsylvania 

Is largely 

done, we In 

the UKstUI 

have the time 

to stop this 

mad pollcy 

befOre It's 

too late. 

You don't get to the 

parts about ■ Why Isn t c lmato change spark ng c imate act on? 

■ lboga N ghts: 'last chance sa oon' for dosp.rato 

add cts 

environmental 

pollution until about 

'' two thirds of the way • Tho BumlngAnsworto ouronergy ncods 

through the book. 

But it's for that very same reason that those 

who are unaware of these larger dimensions to the shale gas issue will get the greatest 

benefit from reading the book. 

Like myself, Richard Heinberg began to look at the issue of energy and the environment in 

the early 2000s, and in particular the growing geophysical restrictions on conventional oil 

and gas supplies. 

As 'conventional' resources reach their physical limits of production - the point known as 

'peak oil' and 'peak gas' - the energy industry has looked to other 'unconventional' energy 

sources to keep their business models working. 

The many faces of a single problem 

In Canada that's been tar sands; in Australia it's coal seam gas; in Russian that's drilling 

in the Arctic Circle; in the USA, and perhaps soon Britain, that's shale gas and oil. 

The first two thirds of 'Snake Oil' described the history of how this transition has taken 

place: 

• how Western oil companies and their home economies have become challenged by high 

energy prices; 

• how energy agencies and companies have selectively quoted and managed the 

statistics on energy supply to downplay any talk of a crisis; 

• and as a result, how shale gas was promoted as an energy solution when in fact it was, 

in that greatest of American traditions, a 'Snake Oil' remedy - a toxic cocktail that 

tricks the unsuspecting consumer into buying it, and which often makes the underlying 

problems worse. 

The book outlines how interest groups have used partial data to talk-up the promise of 

shale gas in order to gain political support and financial investment: and then how they 

used that political and financial capital to relax environmental contrJls and buy publicity 

for their technoloy. 

-----,-. /2 

. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 150 
Snake Oil: how fracklng's false promise of plenty imperils our future - Reviews - The Ecologist 

+ 0wwiv.theecologist.org/rev ews/2315910/snake_oi _how_frackings false promise_of p C {O.• Google 

It's just another treadmill 

It reveals how the drilling boom sparked by this large-scale investment has been used to 

promote the economic benefits of shale gas - whilst at the same time hiding the fact that 

it's the poor production and fast depletion rates of shale gas well which force this 

continuous 'treadmill' of drilling. 

And it uses the oil and gas industry's own proprietary data sources to demonstrate how, 

like the resource booms of American history, the current boom of US shale gas is likely to 

go bust very soon - as investment dries up and the available sites are quickly worked out. 

And yes, there's a chapter on pollution too! 

'Snake Oil' is an American book, largely based on American data. However, from that 

wealth of experience we can draw parallels with how the industry has been manipulating 

public opinion in Britain and Europe, to buy political influence and talk-up their false 

solution. 

In advance of the widespread damage seen in the USA, we can hopefully learn the lessons 

and stop that same corrupt process happening over here. 

Stop this mad policy while we still can! 

And unlike the USA, where the damage to states such as Texas and Pennsylvania is 

largely done, we in the UK still have the time to stop this mad policy before it's too late. 

'Snake Oil' shouldn't just be a book for anti-fracking activists. It has value to the general 

public, and I would hope that many journalists and policy-makers would read it too. 

To that end we should all consider buying a copy and sending it to our pro-fracking 

Members of Parliament and Council leaders - and demanding that they respond to the 

information the book contains in order to justify their support to develop this technology 

in Britain. 

The book: Snake Oil: How Fracking's False Promise of Penty Imperils Our Future is 

written by Richard Heinberg and published by Clairview Books, February 2014. ISBN 9781 

9055 7072 0. £10.99. 

Paul Mobbs is an independent environmental consultant, researer and author. 

He is also the cator and editor of the Free Range Activism Website. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 151 

r 
( , Snake Oil: How Fracking's False Promise of Plenty Imperils Our Future Post Carbon Insti

tute 

post carbon institute PROGRAMS PRODUCTS FELLOWS PRESS EVENTS ABOUT US 

Books + Reports 

Home > Books + Reports > Snake Oil: How 

Frack ngs Fase Promse of Penty Imper ls 

Our Future 

+---'Hf)W-H• RACIONQ'-S 

FALSE PROMISE 

O:F' PL.E'.N""r-YlMPEBJLS DOR F1lTlffiE -------+ 

'J:{iduvt,d, Uein� 

Snake Oil: How Fracking's 

False Promise of Plenty 

Imperils Our Future 

Richard Heinberg 

Juy 25, 2013 

The rapid spread of hydraulc 

fracturng ("fracking") has 

temporar

i l

y boosted us natural 

gas and ol producton ... and 

sparked a massive 

env ronmental 

back ash in 

communtes across the country. 

The fossil f1el industr s trying 

to sel tracking as the bggest 

energy deveopment of the 

century. with sl ck promses of 

American energy independence 

and benefts to ocal 

economies. 

Snake Oil casts a crt cal eye on the oi-industr hype that has h acked Amer ca's 

energy conversation. Ths is the f rst book to ook at tracking from both economc and 

environmental perspectves, nformed by the most thorough analyss of shale gas 

and ol dr lling data ever underaken. Is trackng the mrac e cure-al to our energy i ls, 

or a costy dstracton from the necessary work of reduc ng our fossil fuel 

dependence? 

Published by Post Carbon Insttute. Distr buted by Chelsea Green Publi shing. 2013. 162 pages. ISBN 

9780976751090. 

read the seralzation 01 resilience.org 

BUY NOW 

Paperback I Kindle I ePub (most tablets) 

FOREIGN EDITIONS 

Stay Informed 

Email address: 

I Your e1a1 address 

From the Blog 

TO FEED 0110 � D0CT ON 

OIL C ► ,NIES 

PLAN TO DR LLNG 

FRACKING AMERICA: 

Visualizing the Virus (Is 

it Worth It?) 

In the past decade, we've 

!racked 80,0DD+ wels in the 

United States. WE AIN'T 

SEEN NOTHING YET. 

Learn a LOT more at 

shaebubbe.org 

DISCLIMER: Wel ocations 

and numbers are 

approximatons based on 

best availabe data. 

FMHHIA 

Resilience.org 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passnger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowit - PeakTratfc.org - pge 152 
by Richard Heinberg. originally published by Post Carbon Institute I OCT 22, 2012 

For the past three or four years media sources in the U.S. trumpeted the "game-changing" 

new stream of natural gas coming from tight shale deposits produced with the technologies of 

horizontal drilling and hydrofracturing. So much gas surged from wells in Texas, Oklahoma, 

Louisiana, Arkansas, and Pennsylvania that the U.S. Department of Energy, presidential 

candidates, and the companies working in these plays all agreed: America can look forward to a 

hundred years of cheap, abundant gas! 

Some environmental organizations declared this means utilities can now stop using polluting 

coal- and indeed coal consumption has plummeted as power plants switch to cheaper gas. 

Energy pundits even promised that Americans will soon be running their cars and trucks on 

natural gas, and the U.S. will be exporting the fuel to Europe via LNG tankers. 

Early on in the fracking boom, oil and gas geologist Art Berman began sounding an alarm 

(see example). Soon geologist David Hughes joined him, authoring an extensive critical report 

for Post Carbon Institute ("Will Natural Gas Fuel America in the 21 st Century?"), whose 

Foreword I was happy to contribute. 

Here, one more time, is the contrarian story Berman and Hughes have been telling: The glut 

of recent gas production was initially driven not by new technologies or discoveries, but by high 

prices. In the years from 2005 through 2008, as conventional gas supplies dried up due to 

depletion, prices for natural gas soared to $13 per million BTU (prices had been in $2 range 

during the 1990s). It was these high prices that provided an incentive for using expensive 

technology to drill problematic reservoirs. Companies flocked to the Haynesville shale formation 

in Texas, bought up mineral rights, and drilled thousands of wells in short order. High per-well 

decline rates and high production costs were hidden behind a torrent of production- and hype. 

With new supplies coming on line quickly, gas prices fell below $3 MBTU, less than the actual 

cost of production in most cases. From this point on, gas producers had to attract ever more 

investment capital in order to maintain their cash flow. It was, in effect, a Ponzi scheme. 

In those early days almost no one wanted to hear about problems with the shale gas boomthe need for enormous amounts of water for fracking, the high climate impacts from fugitive 

methane, the threats to groundwater from bad well casings or leaking containment ponds, as well 

as the unrealistic supply and price forecasts being issued by the industry. I recall attempting to 

describe the situation at the 2010 Aspen Environment Forum, in a session on the future of natural 

gas. I might as well have been claiming that Martians speak to me via my tooth fillings. After all, 

the Authorities were all in agreement: The game has changed! Natural gas will be cheap and 

abundant from now on! Gas is better than coal! End of story! 

These truisms were echoed in numberless press articles- none more emblematic than 

Clifford Krauss's New York Times piece, "There Will Be Fuel," published November 16, 20 10. 

Now Krauss and the Times are singing a somewhat different tune. "After the Boom in 

Natural Gas," co-authored with Eric Lipton and published October 21, notes that " ... the gas 

rush has ... been a money loser so far for many of the gas exploration companies and their tens 

of thousands of investors." Krauss and Lipton go on to quote Rex Tillerson, CEO of 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 153 
ExxonMobil: "We are all losing our shirts today .... We're making no money. It's all in the red." 

It seems gas producers drilled too many wells too quickly, causing gas prices to fall below the 

actual cost of production. Sound familiar? 

The obvious implication is that one way or another the market will balance itself out. Drilling 

and production will decline ( drilling rates have already started doing so) and prices will rise until 

production is once again profitable. So we will have less gas than we currently do, and gas will 

be more expensive. Gosh, whoda thunk? 

The current Times article doesn't drill very far into the data that make Berman and Hughes 

pessimistic about future unconventional gas production prospects-the high per-well decline 

rates, and the tendency of the drillers to go after "sweet spots" first so that future production will 

come from ever-lower quality sites. For recent analysis that does look beyond the cash flow 

problems of Chesapeake and the other frackers, see "Gas Boom Goes Bust" by Jonathan 

Callahan, and Gail Tverberg's latest essay, "Why Natural Gas isn't Likely to be the World's 

Energy Savior". 

David Hughes is working on a follow-up report, due to be published in January 2013, which 

looks at unconventional oil and gas of all types in North America. As part of this effort, he has 

undertaken an exhaustive analysis of 30 different shale gas plays and 21 shale/tight oil playsover 65,000 wells altogether. It appears that the pattern of rapid declines and the over-stated 

ability of shale to radically grow production is true across the U.S., for both gas and oil. In the 

effort to maintain and grow oil and gas supply, Americans will effectively be chained to drilling 

rigs to offset production declines and meet demand growth, and will have to endure collateral 

environmental impacts of escalating drilling and fracking. 

No, shale gas won't entirely go away anytime soon. But expectations of continuing low 

prices (which drive business plans in the power generation industry and climate strategies in 

mainstream environmental organizations) are about to be dashed. And notions that the U.S. will 

become a major gas exporter, or that we will convert millions of cars and trucks to run on gas, 

now ring hollow. 

One matter remains unclear: what's the energy return on the energy invested (EROEI) in 

producing "fracked" shale gas? There's still no reliable study. If the figure turns out to be 

anything like that of tight "fracked" oil from the North Dakota Bakken (6: 1 or less, according to 

one estimate), then shale gas production will continue only as long as it can be subsidized by 

higher-EROEI conventional gas and oil. 

In any case, it's already plain that the "resource pessimists" have once again gotten the big 

picture just about right. And once again we suffer the curse of Cassandra-though we're correct, 

no one listens. I keep hoping that if we're right often enough the curse will lift. We'll see. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 154 
www.resilience.org/stories/201 4-12-24/fracking-fracas-the-trouble-with-optimistic-shalegas-projections-by-the-u-s-department-of-energy 

Fracking Fracas: The Trouble with Optimistic Shale 

Gas Projections by the U.S. Department of Energy, 

David Hughes 

December 23, 2014 

On December 3, 2014, Nature published "Natural Gas: The Fracking Fallacy", which 

suggested that the forecasts of the Energy Information Administration (EIA) for four 

major U.S. shale gas plays were wildly optimistic, based on a comparison to forecasts 

for the same plays by the University of Texas Bureau of Economic Geology (UT/BEG). 

This was followed by a formal denunciation of the article both by the EIA and UT/BEG, 

despite the fact that the substance of the article was correct. Arthur Berman provided an 

excellent overview of the merits-or in this case the lack thereof-of the attack by both 

of these agencies on what is essentially the reality behind the shale revolution. 

The Nature piece steered clear of any discussion of my recent Drilling Deeper report 

(published by Post Carbon Institute), which looked at twelve major shale gas and tight 

oil plays accounting for most of U.S. shale production, and which also came to the 

conclusion that the EIA's projections were extremely optimistic. Nature focused instead 

on the four plays described in two published and two unpublished studies by UT/BEG. 

The Nature article sparked a lot of media attention, which prompted the EIA and UT/ 

BEG to issue rebuttals. 

The argument of the EIA and UT/BEG that their projections of shale gas production 

from the plays mentioned in the Nature article are fundamentally similar is untrue, given 

the publ icly available data. The implications of the EIA being wrong on its projections of 

cheap and abundant gas for decades are considerable, given that investment decisions 

are now being made based on these projections- including construction of 

infrastructure for LNG exports, gas-fired generation and even crude oil exports. Hence it 

is worthwhile to examine the EIA's optimistic projections in more detail in light of the 

projections available from UT/BEG and the Drilling Deeper report (DD). 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 155 
www.postcarbon.org/the-shocking-data-behind-shale-oil/ 

The Shocking Data Behind Shale Oil, Chris Martenson, 

David Hughes, December 1 6, 201 4 

Hooray, oil is suddenly much cheaper than it used to be. That's great news, right? 

Not so fast. For certain it's not good news for those counting on a continued rise in US oil 

production from the "shale miracle". Many drillers were challenged to operate proftably when 

oil was above $70 per barrel. Very few will remain solvent with oil in the $50s (as it is as of this 

writing). 

So, expect US oil production to suffer from these lower prices if they persist. But even if oil 

prices rise and rise soon, there's new data that indicates the total amount of extractable oil from 

America's shale plays is less -much less - than what we're being told (or better put, "sold"). 

On today's podcast, Chris Martenson talks with oil analyst David Hughes, who has analyzed 

the major shale plays utilizing a massive database of well production results from America's 

shale basins. The data show that declines tend to be hyperbolic in all shale felds. The average 

frst-year decline is 70%; down to 85% by year three. And we're drilling the best parts of these 

plays frst: meaning that future wells will yield less even under the best results. 

We're pinning our hopes of "oil independence" on faulty assumptions. Worse, we're using it 

to dismiss the Peak Oil theme at exactly the time we should be using this extra oil to construct 

the infrastructure for our next energy age (whatever that may look like), while we still have the 

net energ available to us: 

Let 's just take a play like the Bakken.: 45 % annual field decline, sweet spots are getting to be 

drilled out. We know that they need to drill 1,500 wells a year just to keep production flat. 

But as you go into lower quality rock, the well quality in most of the play' s extent is only 

about half of what it is in the sweet spot. If you have to rely on the lower quality part of the 

play you need 3,000 wells per year instead of 1,500 to offset the field decline. But the wells 

aren't any cheaper. They cost the same amount to drill. To be profitable for producers, it 's 

going to take a lot higher prices in order to make that happen. And you can go through play 

after play and see the same thing. We are drilling the best parts of the plays now and it is just 

going to get worse down the road. We are going to need higher and higher prices. 

The EIA has not only made what I consider really optimistic estimates on production, they 

have also made optimistic estimates on price. A lot of the infrastructure that is being built 

today is based on the assumption of cheap prices for the foreseeable future. That is not in the 

cards. With these recent cheap prices we are going to see production go down a lot faster 

than my estimates. My estimates are best case: I assume that the capital will always be there 

to drill the wells and that there will be no environmental concerns that restrict access to 

drilling locations. So in that way I am the best case. But even if you take my best case, the 

medium and long-term supply picture from shale is disturbing. 

Sadly, corporations tend to think about the next couple of quarters. Politicians may think 

about the next election, but an energy sustainability plan has to have a vision of decades we 

certainly don't see that in all the hype read every day. If you look at the mainstream media, I 

don't think there is a lot of original research that is done there. I think people tend to repeat 

what other people said and it kind of takes on a momentum of its own, which is why I was so 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 156 
interested in trying to lay out as much of the basic data on these shale plays as I could. It 's 

dangerous. 

I mean, if you look at the infrastructure going forward in an era of declining oil and gas the 

number one way to promote energy sustainability in my view is figuring out ways to use less. 

And some of the infrastructure that needs to be built in order to give people an alternative to 

high energy throughput lifestyles takes a lot of oil and gas to build. And you know, this short 

term bounty that we are looking at should in fact be used to do that not to maintain business 

as usual to the bitter end and then face the consequences. 

TRANSCRIPT 

Chris Martenson: Welcome to this Peak Prosperity podcast. I am your host Chris Martenson. 

Today there really is no more important story than what is happening to the price of oil. Now just 

like in 2008 oil has been plummeting catching everyone including this analyst by surprise. West 

Texas intermediate crude, the WTIC blend I am looking at right now at $58 and a few pennies 

here. Right here on the 12th of December. And the airwaves are packed with commentary. And 

the print media are churning out copy to explain all of this to us. Mostly with the spin that the 

price plunge is due to US shale oil fooding the world markets. And most are going out of their 

way to even fnd Wall Street analysts who make the claim that shale oil is proftable at $70, no 

$60, no $50. In fact, I even read last week one analyst claim that $25 a barrel was proftable in 

the shale plays. 

Now why does all of this matter so much? Isn't lower oil prices, aren't those good for consumers 

and should we see all of this maybe as a gift? Well, yes for now. But unfortunately not in the 

sense that in the near term a lot of shale oil and shale gas companies are going to go out of 

business because they were not proftable when oil was 40% higher. And they are therefore even 

more unproftable today. And over the longer term we see oil projects getting pulled left and right 

today. Deep water plans have been shelved. Capital cut backs have happened in the oil sands and 

this means that future production will be lower than if oil prices had remained elevated. So a 

little consumer happiness today potentially followed by damaging oil shortfalls in the future. 

The shale story, however, is weighing on this and it is not a simple story as the media likes to 

portray. It is more than plucky American can-do ingenuity turning straw into gold. To really 

understand the shale oil future we need to understand that not all shale plays are created equally. 

And that within each play some regions are sweet spots and others are relative duds. We need to 

know that these wells deplete horribly quickly. And that the very process of drilling these wells 

creates all sorts of above ground troubles, including road and bridge damage and airborne 

fracking aerosols that drift about harming humans and animals alike. 

Now possibly, worst of all, is that the nation if not the world has latched onto the shale story 

as if it were some permanent savior from the unpleasant task of facing up to the idea that oil is a 

fnite substance. To help us understand all of this we could not have a better guess today than 

David Hughes, a geo-scientist who has studied the energy resources of Canada for nearly four 

decades including 32 years with The Geological Survey of Canada as a scientist and research 

manager. Now it is his work with The Post Carbon Institute that has really caught my eye. That 

includes "Drill Baby Drill," a 2013 report. Probably the most comprehensive, publicly available 

analysis to date of the prospects for shale gas and tight oil, as shale oil is usually called in the 

United States. "Drilling California, " which was the frst, frst publicly available empirical 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 157 
analysis of actual oil production data from California's much promoted Monterey formation and 

the subject of today's discussion, "Drilling Deeper," which is a reality check on the Department 

of Energy's expectation of long-term domestic oil and natural gas abundance. Welcome, David. 

David Hughes: My pleasure, Chris. 

Chris Martenson: Well, David I want to - really, I am very excited to have this conversation 

with you. And I want to help our listeners understand what is truly possibly in the shale plays. 

Obviously there is oil there. There is gas there. We are getting both out of the ground, that's true. 

But I need to cut through the marketing copy and even outright industry propaganda that has 

muddied the waters so that our listeners can make some informed decisions. Now let's focus on 

"Drilling Deeper," your most recent study. Tell us about this study. I want to know what it 

included, how it was conducted and for example, what sorts of data did you use to perform the 

analysis? What can you tell us about how you put this report together? 

David Hughes: Well, we had access for the frst time really to the EIA's play by play 

forecast which was published in the "Annual Energy Outlook 2014. " And what I wanted to do is 

look at those forecasts and basically do a reality check on them. So what we did is we looked at 

the top 12 shale plays that basically account for 88% of shale gas production. In the EIA's 

forecast 82% of tight oil production. We went through that play by play. The data source was 

Drilling Info, which is a commercial database out of Austin, Texas, that is used by the EIA and it 

is also used by most multinationals. And it contains basically all of the well production data on a 

play by play basis. So one can take it apart at the play level and one can also take it apart at the 

county level within plays. So I was interested in looking at the - as you ref erred to, all plays are 

not created equal. And even within plays all counties are not created equal. So we wanted to do 

things like you know, characterize well quality, what is the average productivity by county, by 

play. What are the decline rates? Both well decline rates which are very steep if you look at a 

tight oil play like the Bakken for example. The average three year decline is about 85% in 

production. The average frst year decline is about 70%. Declines tend to be hyperbolic in all 

shale felds. The frst year is the greatest, the second year is a bit less. Third year a bit less. So if 

you look at the decline of the feld, which is really a combination of new wells declining quickly 

and older wells declining slowly, you can compute a feld decline. 

And so for a feld like the Bakken the decline is about 45% per year, which means that 45% 

of production has to be replaced by more drilling in order to keep production fat. So if you know 

the average rate of production for the frst year of wells in a play it is quite easy to calculate the 

number of wells you need to drill in order to keep production fat. And for a play like the Bakken 

that is about 1500 wells per year are needed just to keep production fat. So in round numbers at 

$10 million a well you need to put in about $15 billion a year to keep production fat on the 

Bakken. Production is growing in the Bakken and that is because they are drilling 2,000 wells a 

year. They are 500 wells to the good in terms of growing production. However, the higher 

production grows the larger the chunk that 45% drill decline takes. So you need more and more 

wells in order to offset decline. So basically, what we did for each of those plays is put all of that 

information into a spreadsheet. So we know what the well quality is in the sweet spots and we 

know what the well quality is in all the rest of the play. And typically sweet spots may be 15 to 

maybe 20% at the outside of the total play area. 

So we know that fundamental law of oil and gas companies is they drill their best locations 

frst. So the wells are going into the sweet spots today, but as drilling locations are used up in 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 158 
sweet spots they are going to have to go more and more into lower quality rocks. We can put all 

of that into a spreadsheet and come up with production forecasts going forward. 

Chris Martenson: So this spreadsheet then, this is at the individual well level? So like well 

has a code that is associated, some alpha numeric code and says this is well XJ55 or whatever 

and you had each of those in a spreadsheet so they were so1ted I guess by time so that you would 

have - I mean there are thousands and thousands of wells drilled in the Bakken and some of 

them get sta1ted to be drilled in what 2007? And then there is a vintage in 2008, 9, 10 so did you 

have all that data available? 

David Hughes: Yes. So for a play like the Bakken we had all of the producing wells up 

until about July of 2014. "Drilling Deeper" was published in late October. We tried to keep it 

current to mid 2014. So we had every well that was drilled from year O in all of those different 

plays. 

In terms of making the forecast, basically we used the average production over the frst year 

which allowed us to determine the number of wells that you need to offset that 45% decline. And 

you know, in the spreadsheet you start off assuming-in the case of the Bakken you know, 

engineering companies are telling us that well technology is getting better and we are making 

those wells more productive. I actually was doing a check on that for every play I looked at the 

average productivity by year from 2009 until 2013. So you can see if in fact, it is going up or if it 

is not going up. 

Chris Martenson: This is per well productivity, right? So that is what we really care about is 

productivity of the wells and just at this point I need to interject. I think that the EIA has muddied 

the water to turning to what they call "per rig" productivity and saying people have thrown this at 

me a lot lately "oh 300% productivity improvement. " No, no, no that is a process improvement 

because what they have done is they managed to fgure out ways to drill multiple wells off a 

single pad. And they have these things called walking rigs which allows each rig to spend less 

time in transit and more time drilling. So we are drilling more wells, but what you are talking 

about is the per well productivity, which is what we really should care about, right? Because if 

we are getting more oil out of each well then yes, there is more oil coming out of the play. But if 

we are drilling more wells faster that is not the same thing. So you are talking about per well 

productivity, right? 

David Hughes: Absolutely 

Chris Martenson: So what do you see there? 

David Hughes: You know, the other thing is how many wells could you drill in a play? That 

was another fundamental parameter that we looked at for every play. If you look at investor's 

presentations there is a lot of talk about down spacing. How close can you space these wells 

before you get interference. There is a - what I thought was a really good paper published by an 

engineer at Drilling Info who looked at the Bakken in terms of down spacing. In essence if you 

drill two wells 300 feet apart, initially the productivity will likely be very high. It would likely be 

comparable between the two wells. But if you look at it over 12 months or 24 months you can 

start to measure the interference so one well is cannibalizing another well's oil. And the drilling 

info paper basically said below about 2,000 feet spacing you are starting to see interference if 

you look at a 12 to 24 month timeframe. 

We made assumptions about how many wells you can drill in a play For a play like the 

Bakken we assumed when the play is said and done you can drill about 32,000 wells. There is 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 159 
8,500 producing wells right now. We felt you could drill four times as many wells as are there 

right now. That is a key fundamental parameter in making the forecast. So if rigs are more 

productive, sure you can drill those locations out quicker, but you don't necessarily get any more 

oil at the end of the day. It is per well productivity that counts at the end of the day. 

Chris Martenson: Let me talk about that per well productivity then. This is a central part to 

the story that is out there. So I want to make sure we get this right. So a typical Bakken well they 

drill down whatever 10,000 feet, slant it sideways. And then they go sideways in this big 

horizontal stage and I guess how much we get out of a well is going to be a function of a number 

of things. One, the underlying geology that is just true for that rock Two, how long of that lateral 

we drilled? Is it 5,000 feet? Is it 10,000 feet? That makes a big difference in the collection area. 

Then I guess are we doing a fve stage frack or a 30 stage frack? So how much we shatter that 

rock up. All of that sort of plays in and I assume that are playing with all of those parameters 

over time. But you have got data that showed these wells by year. And if we really were - I 

don't know how you would factor out the longer drilling and the more fracking, but how much 

additional oil are we seeing coming out of the wells because we have made improvements to the 

drilling techniques and the fracking techniques? How much is that? 

David Hughes: Well, it depends on the play. And it depends on the region within the play. 

So if you look at the Bakken the average well that was drilled in the Bakken went up about 7% 

from 2011 to 2013. That is a combination of better technology, as you say longer horizontal 

laterals, more frack stages, higher water volumes, more propping and it is also a function of 

people drilling in the sweet spots. It is hard to differentiate the two. I think it is a combination of 

both; better technolog and drilling in the sweet spots. 

So for a play like the Bakken we say okay, we are looking at a slight improvement in well 

productivity. So I'm going to assume that is going to continue for another year or two before 

people start to have to drill in lower quality parts of the reservoir. And from peak well 

productivity, well productivity will decline as you go into the lower quality rock The technology 

is never going to make up for bad reservoir rock The Bakken is still quite a young play. As I 

said, they have only drilled about 25% of the total potential locations. So there are still locations 

in the sweet spots. Well, those are running out fairly quickly. 

If you look at an older play like the Barnett which is a shale gas play in Texas and that is 

where fracking really got its sta1. Well quality peaked in 2011. So they drilled about 20,000 

wells in the Barnett now. 4,000 of those are no longer productive. Well quality peaked in 2011 

and it is now down 17% from peak. So if you look at the top counties in the Barnett they are 

fnished .There is already eight wells per square mile and drilling has to move into lower quality 

rock Production of the Barnett is now down 18%. In a mature play like the Barnett you are 

really seeing the fact that geology wins out every time against technolog, despite what 

Halliburton and some of these companies will tell you. 

Chris Martenson: Now one quick thing on the Barnett. Somebody said to me once, "well 

that's because natural gas prices are at say $3 to $4.00 per NCF But if natural gas prices went 

back up to $10 or $12.00 from its current $3 to $4 that people would start punching more holes 

into the Barnett. " That is the slow down in the drill program accounts for that decline, but they 

could ramp it back up again if prices were higher. We know price is always a function in this 

story that is lurking out there. How much do you think the Barnett would be sensitive to 

additional price improvements and people drilling more, and how much do you think it is past its 

prime, it is already done? 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 160 
David Hughes: Well, I looked at that. And that is true to a certain extent - the drilling rate 

in the Barnett is down. It is only about 400 wells per year right now. So in every play drilling rate 

is the key parameter. How fast you drill determines what the production profle looks like. So in 

every play I get at least three and sometimes four different scenarios of drilling rate. And the 

Barnett I - my low scenario is we just keep drilling 400 wells per year. What does that look like 

in terms of future production? My most likely scenario is the price of gas is going to go up a bit 

and drilling will be bumped from 400 to 600 wells per year. And then it will gradually decline to 

500 wells per year to move into the lower quality parts of the play, which they are already 

moving into. 

But I also did another study, another projection that said okay what if quintuple drilling rates 

in the Barnett? If we go from 400 to 2, 000, which is what it was at its max back in about 2008. 

And if you do that you can certainly stop the decline and reverse it to a new peak. That new peak 

would happen in about 2016. You know, if we instantaneously increased the drilling rate by fve 

times. However, when you look at the total production out to 2040, it doesn't change the 

cumulative production that much. All you do, if you drill faster, you get it quicker. So if you look 

out through say 2020-2025 in that quintuple drilling rate scenario, all of a sudden production 

falls below what you would have got if you follow my most likely scenario. So there is no free 

lunch. You can drill fast and get it quick and then suffer the consequences later. Or you can drill 

at what I consider the most likely rate. 

I went through that scenario for all the plays and then stacked them all up and compared my 

most likely scenario to what the EIA projected. 

Chris Martenson: Okay. I am going to assume given the current prices that we are going to 

fall below your most likely scenario for a while just because prices aren't supportive of a real 

robust drilling program right now. 

To get back to drilling deeper-among the major conclusions of your report were that shale 

oil would peak in output before 2020. I think the EIA is roughly in agreement with that. But 

where you disagree with the Energy Information Agency, the EIA, is that you feel they have 

overstated the amount of oil that the US would produce by 2040 by a really very wide margin. I 

want to understand those conclusions. So let's break them down. 

First, talk about the peak in shale oil happening before 2020. How did you arrive at that 

conclusion? I understand that you've modeled this. You have ran a variety of scenarios. When I 

say "shale oil peaks before 2020," I assume that is under your most likely scenario. Let's talk 

about that scenario and what the implications of that are. So do you still see a peak before 2020? 

David Hughes: Yeah. The actual peak before 2020 was for the two top plays, which are the 

Bakken and the Eagle Ford. The Bakken and Eagle Ford make up 62% of current tight oil 

production. So those are really the two biggies. I also went through Permian Basin plays. But the 

Permian Basin is unlike the Bakken and Eagle Ford; the Permian Basin is really a very old place. 

They have been around for 40 to 60 years. Other plays like the Niobrara and the Austin Chalk 

would fall into that category too. So these are really old plays that we have known about for a 

long time and they are redeveloping them with better technology. With fracking. 

The Bakken and Eagle Ford are unique in that they kind of rose from nothing. They're true 

tight oil shale oil plays. I was able to do forecasts for those two for tight oil and for the Permian 

basically I just looked at all of the historical data. I didn't actually make projections. But if you 

look at the Bakken and Eagle Ford, the two most important tight oil plays in the US, I went 

through those and did the same scenario based on drilling rate and looked at the most likely 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 161 
scenario. So for example, for the Bakken, not withstanding the current low oil prices, I assume 

that the drilling will continue at 2, 000 wells per year and then gradually fall to 1, 000 wells per 

year as they move into the outlying, low quality parts of the play. 

And if you do that, Bakken production rises to about 1.2 barrels a day. In or around 2015, 

2016 you get a peak followed by a long decline. Same thing for the Eagle Ford. The Eagle Ford 

is actually the number one tight oil play in the US right now. They are plowing 3,500 wells per 

year into Eagle Ford. Yeah, its just incredible, it's 10 wells per day. And I assumed that drilling 

was going to continue at that rate and gradually decline to about 2,000 wells per year as they 

move into the outlying parts of the play. If you do that, it peaks considerably higher. I am just 

trying to think right off hand . . . I think my most likely scenario was around 1 .4 to 1. 5 million 

barrels a day and that will happen around 2016, 2017. If they ramped up drilling in Eagle Ford 

they could go much higher. They can probably top out at 1.8 million barrels a day. Also the Eagle 

Ford produces a lot of associated gas. So there is a lot of value in those wells. You look at the 

trajectory, peaking in 2016, 2017 and declining. When you add up the production in 2040 in the 

Bakken and the Eagle Ford compared to the EIA forecast for the Bakken and Eagle Ford, mine 

are less than a tenth of the production in 2040. 

Chris Martenson: Less than a tenth. 

David Hughes: Less than a tenth. The other interesting thing is the EIA seems to have 

underestimated short term production. So my projections are actually for higher production early 

on and a higher peak than the EIA. But you know, much worse scenario down the road. Much 

lower productivity by the time you get to 2040. 

Chris Martenson: This is interesting. I assume you have read or heard of the University of 

Texas at Austin study on shale gas that concluded that US government estimates of the amount of 

natural gas that can be extracted by fracking are far too optimistic and that shale gas production 

will peak in 2020, I think they put it, and decline rapidly. As I understood it what they did is they 

didn't look at county level resolution. They broke down all the plays into square mile resolution, 

which some counties are thousands of square miles. So this resolution is much higher and that 

helps them identify sweet spots or not sweet spots more accurately, I assume. So I am 

wondering, did you read that? And how did their study conclusions difer from yours or do your 

conclusions match? Then given your answer to that, what is the EIA doing wrong, or what 

should they consider amending in their approach to be more realistic. So frst on the study - did 

you see it and how do your conclusions match? 

David Hughes: Oh yeah, I've got a detailed comparison in "Drilling Deeper" between my 

work and UT's work and they are very comparable. You know, if you look at the section by a 

square mile by square mile resolution, you can do that but in fact the critical parameters - one 

of the key parameters you get for every well is IP right? That is the highest one month 

production or the highest six month production of every well, which I mapped, which gives you 

a pretty good idea of where the sweet spots are. There is a lot of other parameters you can look at 

for shale gas, thermal maturity, organic matter content, porosity, natural fracture density, things 

like that, but those parameters are not measured at a square mile resolution. They are measured 

generally at a much broader scale. So I think that you can do a pretty good job at the county 

level, which is the level that I took it - and parts of counties. When I looked at the total play 

area, I looked at the boundaries between productive wells and non productive wells so we could 

put a limit. I only used that portion of the county that was productive in determining the 

productive play area. When I did the comparison I talked to Scott Tinker at UT. Basically their 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 162 
base case and my most likely case are very close. There are only two studies that they published 

so far - the Barnet and the Fayetteville - so I did a detailed comparison. In fact, they may be a 

little more pessimistic than me in some cases. But you know, we are in broad agreement that the 

EIA is wildly optimistic. 

Chris Martenson: What would the EIA need to do to become more realistic? Where are they -

we know that the - so I mean we know the EIA in the case of the Monterey shale they turned to a 

private frm and just did some back of the envelope calculations and then had to downgrade the 

Monterey estimates of what that reserve was going to be at by 96%. Something that you had 

come to a conclusion a long time before. Obviously the EIA had some methodological issues or 

they relied on the wrong parties in the case of the Monterey. But more generally, what is the EIA 

doing that is giving them these infated estimates do you think? 

David Hughes: I scratch my head about that. If you go through "Drilling Deeper, " - it's a 

free download for your guests or audience - I've done a comparison. The Barnett, my most 

likely case, compared to the EIA; it is really kind of bizarre. The EIA agrees that the Barnett 

peaked in 2012 and it is going to decline but then they have a ramp up to nearly the equivalent of 

the 2012 peak in 2040. So it doesn't ft with the fundamentals of the play. The only thing I can 

think of is they have a phenomenal faith in technology. That somehow someone is going to pull a 

technological rabbit out of his hat. Same thing if you go through play by play I have done the 

comparison. One of them I think the Bone Spring in the Permian I think the EIA is too 

conservative, but every other one they are way too optimistic. 

Chris Martenson: Well this is really important because as I look at it I see chemical 

companies and power utilities, all of them investing tens, hundreds of billions of dollars in new 

property, plant, and equipment. Investments with 40, 50 year life cycle horizons. Because they 

are taking advantage of, I am quoting here, " 100 years of cheap, natural gas," mostly from the 

shale plays. If you were going to advise these companies, what would you - would you tell them 

that you think the EIA's assessments are not the ones they should be using? 

David Hughes: Absolutely. And that is one of the reasons I was so interested in doing 

"Drilling Deeper." And I have laid out, if you go through it, there is 20 pages a play and a lot of 

the basic fundamental data that has never been available is there in charts and graphs. Let's just 

take a play like the Bakken. 45% feld decline, sweet spots are getting to be drilled out. We know 

that they need to drill 1,500 wells a year just to keep production fat. But as you go into lower 

quality rock and the well quality in most of the plays is only about half of what it is in the sweet 

spot. If you have to rely on the lower quality price of the play you need 3,000 wells per year 

instead of 1,500 to offset the feld decline. But the wells aren't any cheaper. They cost the same 

amount to drill. Obviously you need a lot higher prices in order to make that happen. And you 

can go through play after play and see the same thing. We are drilling the best parts of the plays 

now and it is just going to get worse down the road. We are going to need higher and higher 

pnces. 

The EIA has not only made what I consider really optimistic estimates on production, they 

have also made optimistic estimates on price. A lot of the infrastructure that is being built as you 

say is based on the assumption of cheap prices for the foreseeable future. That is not in the cards. 

With cheap prices, we are going to see production go down a lot faster than my estimates. My 

estimates are best case, so I assume that the capital will always be there to drill the wells and that 

there will be no environmental concerns that restrict access to drilling locations. So in that way I 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 163 
am best case. Even if you look at my best case, that will be rather disturbing to me if I was a 

petro chemical company or somebody that was investing a lot in gas fred generation. 

Chris Martenson: Alright. Let me test one of the assumptions then. There are a couple of key 

assumptions that are really driving the overall scenario then. First is going to be the decline rates 

of each wells and that leads you to say here is why we need to replace 1,500 wells. Let's sta1t 

there with that decline rate. I was reading this Bloomberg article yesterday and I am quoting 

here, "Shale production will keep growing because the rate of decline from wells has been 

overstated, Ed Morris, head of commodities research at Citigroup said." So I am already reading 

things where they are tossing out that decline rates have been over estimated, but when I read 

your report what I saw is that you didn't estimate these decline rates; you measured them, right? 

So what is the difference between these? Did you estimate them? It looked to me like a 

measurement. Like you just said "let's sum up all of these wells by vintage and see how fast they 

decline. " That's not an estimate. That is more of a measurement. What do you think the 

disagreement here is? 

David Hughes: Well, if you want an optimist, Ed Morris makes the EIA look like the most 

conservative organization on the planet. He has always been wildly optimistic. If you look at his 

latest forecast for tight oil, we're going up to 7 million barrels a day and it is just going to stay 

there forever. I am not sure what Ed uses to make those kind of statements, but what I used is 

every well. My decline curve for the play in every play is all the wells in the play. I looked at the 

most current fve years worth of drilling. I also looked at well decline curves in every county. 

You know, all of the top counties at any rate in every place. That is data. It is just nothing 

imaginary about that. 

Chris Martenson: Alright. So you feel like the well decline rate is something we have a 

handle on, we can model that. We have enough data out of the big plays, the Bametts, the 

Fayettevilles, the Eagle Fords, Permian, Bakken - we've got enough. Maybe even Marsalis. We 

have enough data now to say, "Hey this is kind of how this plays out. " Is this a fair statement? 

David Hughes: That is a very fair statement. 

Chris Martenson: Cool alright. So second big piece - the second big factor I have some 

confusion around is how much oil is ultimately going to fow from a well, which goes by the 

acronym EUR, the ultimate recoverable amount of oil. I've got to tell you David, the typical 

EURs that I am still reading in the newspapers from the Bakken wells, they just toss around this 

500,000 barrel amount; it is a lot of oil. And looking in "Drilling Deeper" I found a table you had 

your EURs that averaged 378, 000 barrels a well. That is a big discrepancy. How do you explain 

that one? 

David Hughes: I think if you look at - was it the Bakken you are looking at? 

Chris Martenson: Yeah. 

David Hughes: I think if you look at counties like Montrail and McKenzie they are higher 

than that. And if you look at the outlying counties like Divide and Richland they are much lower 

than that. I can't recall - I think the Montrail and the McKenzie are about 400 and the Richland 

and Divide and some of those are down sort of in the low 200s. So overall they may average 378 

like you say. 

Chris Martenson: Yeah. That was your total. So how did you derive your EURs? Was that by 

taking the decline rates and extrapolating them out and coming up with some idea of how long 

these wells will persist? 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 164 
David Hughes: Yeah. The bottom line is nobody knows how much oil is going to come out 

of those wells until the last barrel gets pumped. So it is an assumption, right? You ft a curve -

most companies ft a hyperbolic curve or some combination of hyperbolic/exponential. What I 

did is I used the actual data for the frst four years. So the decline curve for the frst four years in 

a play like the Bakken is pretty solid, you know, it is not much doubt about that. So I took the 

data for the frst four years - how much oil is that cumulatively? And then I ft a 13% 

exponential decline after that, assuming the well would live to be 30 years old, which is a totally 

unproven assumption. But for the sake of comparison so I could at least compare the EUR 

between counties. I used a 13% exponential decline. That number is certainly arguable. If you 

look at the decline in year four in the Bakken it is probably about 20%. So using 13% as a 

terminal decline is maybe optimistic. The other thing that if you look at those EUR diagrams in 

"Drilling Deeper, " you will see I have denoted the amount of oil that is produced in the frst four 

years versus the next 26 years, and typically 50 to 60% or more of a well's total oil will be 

produced in the frst four years. So you know, if you are in a sweet spot you can make your 

money back pretty quickly That is one of the beauties for oil companies about shale wells. The 

downer is we don't know if it will only last for 12 years, and that assumption of total EUR is just 

that, an assumption. I looked at the Barnet and 4,000 wells are no longer producing and their 

maximum life is only about 10 years. Their average life is something like four years. So you 

know, anybody that tells you a well is going to produce this much oil is really kidding you. It is 

only an assumption at this point in time. 

Chris Martenson: The Barnett is mostly, it is all gas right? So maybe the gas plays will be 

different, but this is astonishing to me, David, the astonishing thing is that the Barnett really 

started getting drilled hard in what, 2007-ish maybe, 2008? 

David Hughes: Or the Bakken, you meant? 

Chris Martenson: No, I was thinking of the Barnet. When did that start getting drilled? 

David Hughes: Oh okay. It really got started in the late '90s for the Barnet. I mean it really 

ramped up after about 2003, 2004. 

Chris Martenson: Right, but that's just like 10 years ago that is when the ramp up started and 

the peak happened on that gas play within a 10 year window, let's just say, and so obviously the 

Bakken is going to be different because there is still what 24,000 well sites that can be drilled. 

That will just take time. At 2, 000 wells a year we still got 12 years of drilling. So it is going to 

take some time for that to really - there is plenty of room to continue that drill program, but it is 

not forever. And so this is the part I really want to get to is this idea that somewhere before or 

around 2020 even these shale plays now are in decline from a total production standpoint. And as 

far as I'm concerned, because I am 52 now, that is like tomorrow. Time seems to go faster as I 

get older. So this is really soon as far as I am concerned and my concern in trying to publicize all 

this is we got the data, you have done this incredible work, there it is. There is really nothing to 

argue about with decline rates. We can quibble a little about the EURs. We can talk about how 

close the wells might be spaced, but really we are sort of wiggling a little. We are not going to 

get 100 years of gas. We are not going to get 100 years of increasing oil production out of this 

whole thing, Ed Morris' weird graphs not withstanding. So my concern is that this is really, really 

important because so many decisions are being built in this country around this idea that we have 

solved this energ crisis and it is now in the rear view mirror, but it is really not is it? 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 165 
David Hughes: Absolutely not. I have been on that same theme there Chris for many years. 

Corporations tend to think about the next couple of quarters. Politicians may think about the next 

election, but this is an energ plan, an energy sustainability plan has to have a vision of decades 

and we certainly don't see that in all the hype we read every day 

Chris Martenson: If I had my magic policy wand I would say "great, we can pretty much add 

up how many trillions of cubic feet of gas we think we are very likely to get at a certain price and 

here is how many billions of barrels of oil are left and these are two fnite numbers." And then 

we would take those and we would go "where would we like to be when those fnally run out" -

or nothing every fully runs out, but we are going to have a blob of energy that we get to use over 

this next period of time, let's call it 10 or 20 years, and then it is largely gone at that point in 

time. Dregs remaining. That is what I would love to have a conversation. \here do we want to 

be in 10 or 20 years? Because business as usual will get us to a place where we have a lot of 

infrastructure that can't be supported any longer because we don't have the goods for it. This is 

the part where I get in arguments all the time, people go "oh but we are so swamped with natural 

gas that look it drove prices down. It just proves that technology will always fnd a way " My 

response to that is: "Did you know that we still in the United States are a net importer of natural 

gas?" And most people don't know that part because they hear we are making LNG terminal 

decisions because we have so much that we better just export it. It is just astonishing to me that 

the data that you have and the public perception it is still pretty far apart. 

David Hughes: Yeah, it is. You know, I think that if you look at the mainstream media, I 

don't think there is a lot of original research that is done there. I think people tend to repeat what 

other people have said and it kind of takes on a momentum of its own. Which is why I was so 

interested in trying to lay out as much of that data as I could. It is dangerous. I mean if you look 

at the infrastructure going forward in an era of declining oil and gas, the number one way to 

promote energy sustainability in my view is fguring out ways to use less. And some of the 

infrastructure that needs to be built in order to give people an alternative to high energy 

throughput lifestyles takes a lot of oil and gas to build. And you know, this short term bounty that 

we are looking at should in fact be used to do that, not to maintain business as usual to the bitter 

end and then face the consequences. 

Chris Martenson: I agree. I agree. Final question - and thank you for your time, so generous. 

Final question is: What is the reception to the report? Has the EIA reached out? Have any 

government people talked to you? Is industry wanting to know more? Tell me about how it has 

been received so far. 

David Hughes: Well, I sent a copy of the report the day it was published to John Staub at 

the EIA who is the head of the oil and gas team and I didn't hear anything back. I sent it to Scott 

Tinker at UT and he was pretty enthused and sent it around to his team. So they are certainly 

looking at it. In terms of the mainstream media, they really didn't have a lot of major coverage of 

it unfortunately In terms of the industry, if you look at the industry lobby group, Energy in 

Depth is a lobby arm of the Independent Petroleum Association of America. They took special 

pains to write an attack a1ticle on it. They didn't really criticize any of the data in it. They sort of 

had to resort to ad homonym adjectives that apply to me, which wasn't appreciated. I think if you 

look at the second tier of media, we did get an awful lot of coverage and none of it really 

negative that I can see. I think the data that is in Drilling Info is data that is not available 

anywhere else. This is data that industry uses, but it has not been widely made available. I am 

hoping that "Drilling Deeper" will have a long shelf life and people will be able to refer back to it 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 166 
again and again. Hopefully it will promote a bit of saner thinking in terms of our energy future 

going forward. 

Chris Martenson: At a minimum I would hope that the good people who are running the state 

of North Dakota would take a look and plot a strategy based on the likely arc of their industry 

because it is completely calculable. As long as they have a long-term view of that and understand 

where they are going I think that would be great. Listen, thank you so much for your excellent 

and data driven work and for your time today. I will note that we will have a link to "Drilling 

Deeper" at the bottom of this podcast. People if you look at the bottom of this page you will see 

it right there and that will take you over to the Post Carbon website and a download. And you 

should read it. You should check it out. If you like your data and you love it done well and 

analyzed well and with good writing around it, this is an absolutely essential report because 

everything depends on the energy story as we go forward and boy the disinformation out there is 

just magnifcent right now and "Drilling Deeper" and other work by David Hughes is state of the 

art. It is great stuff. So please everybody take a look at that and David thank you so much for 

your time today. 

David Hughes: It's been my pleasure, Chris. 

Links 

Drilling Deeper report 

Drilling California report 

This interview was originally published at Peak Prosperity.org 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 167 
( ( , Driling Deeper Post Carbon Institute 

G:El � w!ciil 

Drilling Deeper 

David Hughes 

October 27, 2014 

Abstract 

Drllng Deeper revews the tweve shae pays that account for 82% 

of the eght ol producton and 88% of the shae gas producton in the 

u .s. Department of Energy's Energy Informaton Admnstraton (EIA) 

reference case forecasts through 2040. It ut

ili

zes all avai l

abe 

production data for the plays anayzed, and assesses histor cal 

producton, well- and fed-decline rates, avalabe drill ing locatons, 

and well-qualty trends for each pay, as well as countes with n pays. 

Proections of future producton rates are then made based on 

forecast drlling races (and, by implication, capital expendtures). Tight 

ol (shae oi l

) and shae gas producton s found co be unsustainabe in 

the medum- and longer-term at the races forecast by the EIA, wh ch 

are extremey optimist c. 

This report fnds that eght ol producton from major pays wll peak 

before 2020. Barrng major new dscoveres on the scae of the 

Bakken or Eag e Ford, production w ll be far below the EIA's forecast 

by 2040. Tight ol producton from the two top pays, the Bakken and 

Eage Ford, wll underpertorm the EIAs reference case o l recovery 

by 28% from 2013 to 2040, and more of th s producton wll be frontoaded than the EIA estimates. By 2040, producton races from the 

Bakken and Eage Ford wll be ess than a tenth of that projected by 

the EIA. Tght ol producton forecast by the EIA from plays other than 

the Bakken and Eag e Ford s in most cases h ghy optimst c and 

unli

key co be real i

zed at the medum- and ong-term rates proected. 

Shae gas producton from the cop seven pays will aso l key peak 

before 2020. Barring major new dscoveres on the scae of the 

Marcellus, producton will be far below the EIAs forecast by 2040. 

Shale gas producton from the cop seven pays will underpertorm the 

EIA's reference case forecast by 3�% from 2014 to 2040, and more 

of th s producton wll be front- oaded than the EIA estmates. By 

2040, producton rates from these plays wll be about one-th rd that of 

the EIA forecast. Producton from shae gas pays other than the top 

seven wll need to be four tmes that estimated by the EIA in order to 

meet its reference case forecast. 

Over the short term, U.S. production of both shae gas and tght oi

l i

s 

projected to be robust-but a thorough review of producton data from 

the major pays indicates that ths w ll not be sustanabe in the long 

term. These find ngs have c ear mpt catons for medium and ong 

term suppy, and hence current domest c and foregn policy 

d scuss ons, which generally assume decades of U.S. ol and gas 

abundance. 

• 

-» 

• 

• 

◄ �---------------------- -- ► #, 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 168 
( ( � 

� 

Drill, Baby, Drill: Can Unconventional Fuels Usher in a New Era of Energy Abundance? Post Cabon Institute 

� (1±fl [ciil [ + •http://,•Mw postcarbon org/publ cations/dr ll-bab dr ll/ m!D C] (Q.• Google ) � 07 rol fsl 

0 " D 1 'W' Q DNAT 

post carbon institute PROGRAMS PRODUCTS FELLOWS PRESS EVENTS ABOUT US 

Books + Repors 

Home > Books + Reports > Drll. Baby, Drll: Can 

Unconventonal 

Fuels Usher 1n a New Era of 

Energy Abundance? 

DRILL, BABY, DRILL 

CANUNCON'VENTIOHALFUEU 

USHER/NJ, NfW ERA OF-ENERGY ABUNDANCE! 

BY J. OA\110 HUGHES 

------iU!!.!e:01--------

"revolution." 

Drill, Baby, Drill: Can 

Unconventional Fuels Usher in 

a New Era of Energy 

Abundance? 

Davd Hughes 

Februar 19, 2013 

In this andmark report, PCI Fossil 

Fuel Fellow Davi Hughes takes a 

far-rangng and panstakingy 

researched look at the prospects for 

varous unconventional fuels to 

provide energy abundance for the 

United States in the 21st Centur. 

While the repor examnes a range of 

energy sources, the centerpece of 

"Drll, Baby, Drll" s a crt cal analysis 

of shale gas and shae oi (tght oi l) 

and the potential of a shae 

V1s1t shalebubble.org 

Abstract 

It's now assumed that recent advances n fossi

l 

fuel production - parcuarly for shale gas 

and shae oil -herald a new age of energy abundance, even "energy independence," for 

the United States. Neverheless, the most thorough pubic analyss to date of the 

production history and the economic, environmenta, and geologcal constraints of these 

resources in Norh Amer ca shows that they will inevitabl fall shor of such expectatons, 

for two man reasons: First, shae gas and shae oil wel s have proven to deplete quickly, 

the best felds have aready been tapped, and no maor new field discoveres are 

expected; thus with average per-wel productiity dec inng and ever-more wells (and 

fields) required simply to mantan producton, an "exporation treadmil " 

l imts the long-term 

potential 

of shae resources. Second, athough tar sands, deepwater oil, oi

l 

shaes, 

coalbed methane, and other non-conventional 

fossil fuel resources exist in vast deposts, 

ther explotation contnues to requre such enormous expenditures of resources and 

logstical effor that rapid scaling up of production to markel-lransformng evels is al but 

impossibe; the big "tanks" of these resources are inherenty constrained by smal "taps." 

Stay Informed 

Email address: 

I Your emal address 

From the Blog 

-

TO FEED 01 m "DD CTION 

O L C ► ,NIES 

• 

PAN TO DRJLL N( 

FRACKING AMERICA: 

Visualizing the Virus (Is it 

Worth It?) 

In the past decade, weve 

tracked 80,000+ wels in the 

Unted States. WE AIN'T 

SEEN NOTHING YET. Learn 

a LOT more ai shaebubbe.org 

DISCLAIMER: Wel locat ons 

and numbers are 

approx mations based on best 

availabe data. 

+mw;;.;;w 

Resilience.org 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mrk Rabinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 16 
Art Berman is a geological consultant whose specialties are subsurface petroleum 

geology, seismic interpretation, and database design and management. He is currently 

consulting with a wide range of industry clients such as PetroChina, Total, and 

Schlumberger. Mr. Berman has an MS in geology from the Colorado School of Mines 

and is active with the American Assoc. of Petroleum Geologists. Art spoke with us last 

Thursday after a presentation in Canada at the CIBC Technical Conference. 

POR: Can you give us your latest updated perspective on the shale gas story?Art 

Berman is a geological consultant whose specialties are subsu rface petroleum geology, 

seismic interpretation, and database design and management. He is cu rrently 

consulting with a wide range of industry clients such as PetroChina, Total, and 

Schlumberger. Mr. Berman has an MS in geology from the Colorado School of Mines 

and is active with the American Assoc. of Petroleum Geologists. Art spoke with us last 

Thursday after a presentation in Canada at the CIBC Technical Conference. 

Art Berman: You have to acknowledge that shale gas is a relatively new and 

significant contribution to North American supply. But I don't believe it's anywhere near 

the magnitude that is commonly discussed and cited in the press. There are a couple of 

key points here. First the reserves have been substantially overstated. In fact I think the 

resource number has been overstated. 

If you investigate the origin of this supposed 1 00-year supply of natural gas ... where 

does this come from? If you go back to the Potential Gas Committee's [PGC] report, 

which is where I believe it comes from, and if you look at the magnitude of the 

technically recoverable resou rce they describe and you divide it by annual US 

consumption , you come up with 90 years, not 1 00. Some would say that's splitting hairs, 

yet 1 0% is 1 0%. But if you go on and you actually read the report, they say that the 

probable number-I think they call it the P-2 number-is closer to 450 Tcf as opposed to 

roughly 1 800 Tcf. What they're saying is that if you pin this thing down where there have 

actually been some wells drilled that have actually produced some gas, the technically 

recoverable resou rce is closer to 450. And if you divide that by three, which is the 

component that is shale gas, you get about 1 50 Tcf and that's about 7 year's worth of 

US supply from shale. I happen to think that that's a pretty darn realistic estimate. And 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 170 
remember that that's a resource number, not a reserve number; it has nothing to do with 

commercial extractabil ity. So the gross resource from shale is probably about 7 years 

worth of supply. 

For a project that a colleague and I did for a client, I actually went in and looked at all 

the shale plays and assigned some kind of a resource number to them. I also used 

some work that was done by Wendell Medlock at Rice University's Baker Institute. He 

did an absolutely brilliant job of independently determining what the size of the resource 

plays in Canada and the US might be. 

The resource hasn't been misrepresented but the probable component has not been 

properly explained as a much smaller component of the total resource; I guess they just 

didn't read the PGC's report carefully enough. If you take the proved reserves plus the 

report's probable technically recoverable number, we have something like 25 years of 

natural gas supply in North America, which is quite a bit. It's a lot. I don't say any of this 

to give shale gas a bad name. 

The other interesting thing about the PGC's report that nobody seems to pay 

attention is this: they said there is something like 650 Tcf of potential shale gas. Well, 

there's 1 000 Tcf of something else. What's the something else? It's conventional 

reservoirs plus non-shale/non-coalbed-methane unconventional reservoirs. So there's 

70 percent more resource in better qual ity rocks than shale. It just astonishes me that 

nobody has paid any attention to that. 

So that's the simple view. And then the other thing that we see empirically is that if 

you look at any of these individual shale-gas plays-whether it's the Haynesville or the 

Barnett or the Fayetteville-they all contract to a core area that has the potential to be 

commercial that is on the order of 10 to 20 percent of the geographic area that was 

originally represented as all being the same. So if you take the resou rce size that's 

advertized-say for the Haynesville shale, something like 250 Tcf-and you look at the 

area that's emerging as the core area, it's less than 10 percent of the total. So is 25 Tcf 

a reasonable number for the Haynesville shale? Yeah, it probably is. And it's a huge 

number. But the number sure is not 250 Tcf, and that's the way all of these plays seem 

to be going. They remain significant. It hasn't been proved to me yet that any of it is 

commercial, but they're drilling it like mad, there's no doubt about it. 

Those are sort of the basic conclusions. And when you look at it probabilistically, 

which I think is the only intelligent way to look at anything which you have any 

uncertainty about, what you realize is that the numbers that are being represented by all 

of these companies as "truth" are probably like the P-5 case, having a 5 percent 

probabil ity of being true. So they say, "well, our average well in the Haynesville is going 

to be 7 Bcf," and I say there will certainly will be wells that make 7 Bcf but there's no 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 171 
way that the average is that high. My take is that there will probably be 5 percent of 

wells that will make 7 Bet. 

I just think everybody is caught up in this. I have a slide where I say, you guys need 

to get over the love affair and get on with the relationship. You keep talking about how 

big it is and how great it is, but at some point you have to live together and that's hard 

work. You have to be honest with yourself and with each other and you have to do 

some work. I just don't think we've moved past the love affair. 

One other important thing is the Barnett shale. We keep coming back to it because 

it's the only play that has much more than 24 months worth of history. I recently 

grouped all the Barnett wells by their year of first production. Then I asked, of all the 

wells that were drilled in each one of those years, how many of them are already at or 

below their economic limit? It was a stunning exercise because what it showed is that 

25-35% of wells drilled during 2004-2006-wells drilled during the early rush and that are 

on average 5 years old-are already sub-commercial. So if you take the position that 

we're going to get all these great reserves because these wells are going to last 40-plus 

years, then you need to explain why one-third of wells drilled 4 and 5 and 6 years ago 

are already dead. 

POR: When you say one-third of the wells are already sub-commercial , do you 

mean they have been shut in, or that they are part of a large pool where no one has 

sharpened the pencil? 

Berman : Some of them never produced to begin with. No one talks about dry holes 

in shale plays, but there are bona fide dry holes-maybe 5 or 6 or 7 percent that are 

operational failures for some reason. So that's included. There are wells that, let's just 

call them inactive; they produced, and now they're inactive, which means they are no 

longer producing to sales. They are effectively either shut-in or plugged. Combined, 

that's probably less than 10 percent of the total wells. But then there are all the wells 

that are producing a preposterously low amount of gas; my cut-off is 1 mi llion cubic feet 

a month, which is only 30,000 cubic feet per day. Yet those volumes, at today's gas 

prices, don't even cover your lease/operating expenses. I say that from personal 

experience. I work in a little tiny company that has nowhere near the overhead of 

Chesapeake Energy or a Devon Energy. I do all the geology and all the geophysics and 

there's four or five other people, and if we've got a well that's making a million a month, 

we're going to plug it because we're losing money; it's costing us more to run it than 

we're getting in revenue. 

So why do they keep producing these things? Well , that's part of the whole 

syndrome. It's all about production numbers. They call these things asset plays or 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 172 
resource plays; that reflects where many are coming from, because they're not profit 

plays. The interest is more in how big are the reserves, how much are we growing 

production, and that's what the market rewards. If you're growing production, that's 

good-the market likes that. The fact that you're growing production and creating a 

monstrous surplus that's causing the price of gas to go through the floor, which makes 

everybody effectively lose money .... apparently the market doesn't care about that. So 

that's the goal: to show that they have this huge level of production, and that production 

is growing. 

But are you making any money? The answer to that is ... no. Most of these 

companies are operating at 200 to 300 to 400 percent of cash flow; capital expenditures 

are significantly higher than their cash flows. So they're not making money. Why the 

market supports those kinds of activities ... we can have all sorts of philosophical 

discussions about it but we know that's the way it works sometimes. And if you look at 

the shareholder value in some of these companies, there is either very little, none, or 

negative. If you take the companies' asset values and you subtract their huge debts, 

many companies have negative shareholder value. So that's the bottom line on my 

story. I'm not wishing that shale plays go away, I'm not against them, I'm not disputing 

their importance. I'm just saying that they haven't demonstrated any sustainable value 

yet. 

Commentary: Interview with Ar Berman-Part 2 

By the Peak Oil Review team 

(Note: Commentaries do not necessarily represent the ASPO-USA position.) 

Art Berman is a geological consultant whose specialties are subsurface petroleum 

geology, seismic interpretation, and database design and management. He is currently 

consulting with a wide range of industry clients such as PetroChina, Total, and 

Schlumberger. Mr. Berman has an MS in geology from the Colorado School of Mines 

and is active with the American Assoc. of Petroleum Geologists. He spoke with us about 

10 days ago, after a presentation in Canada at the CIBC Technical Conference. (Part 1 

appeared last week, in the July 1 9th issue of the POR.) 

POR: How have analysts and investors responded to your studies and your 

viewpoints? 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 173 
Berman : My biggest clients, for this kind of talk and work, are investment bankers 

and investment advisory companies. I gave two talks in Calgary over the last weekone to CIBC and the other to Middlefield Capital. I've given multiple talks to energy 

investment companies. They're the peoplewho are really paying attention to this. The 

answer is that a significant portion of the investment banking sector takes what I 'm 

saying quite seriously, but what they do with that I can't tell you. 

POR: How has the gas-producing industry responded to your studies and views? 

Berman : The U.S. companies have pretty much chosen to ignore me. Or they've 

made public statements that I'm a kook or I don't understand or I'm hopelessly wrong. 

Some them-especially the Canadian companies for some reason-want me to advise 

them even though my message is not a message that they prefer. 

It's a fascinating process. My sense of it is that the level of interest, and whatever 

notoriety I have, has only increased. I credit the ASPO 2009 peak oil conference in 

Denver with really kicking that off. That presentation was a tipping point in awareness 

about the truth of shale gas reserves and economics. After my presentation, I had 

almost five hours of discussions with analysts that had attended the talk. Associated 

Press reporter Judith Kohler published an article - Analyst: Gas shale may be next 

bubble to bu rst that was distributed to hundreds of outlets in the national press and that 

brought this topic into the mainstream. U.S. E&P executives responded with a series of 

ad hominem opinion editorials and earnings meeting statements that minimized the factbased positions that were presented at the ASPO 2009 meeting. 

Before that, I spent months making presentations to professional societies of 

geologists, geophysicists and engineers throughout the Gulf Coast. These are 

colleagues who do the work of the petroleum industry that gave me what amounted to a 

peer review. I know that there were silent people in those audiences who disagreed with 

me, but the overall response was supportive and enthusiastic. I also got hundreds of emails responding to my World Oil articles that included testimonials about companies' 

experience with shale gas wells in the real world. 

E&P executives don't have any such base, nor do they know about this experience. 

In all of my presentations, I acknowledge people that include some of the most 

respected E&P CEOs, opinion leaders, and experts on oil and gas price formation, 

reservoir engineering, economic evaluation and risk analysis. In addition, there are also 

many industry analysts in research companies, financial advisory and fund 

management firms, and reporters in the energy press that consult and publish opinions 

about my position on shale gas. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 174 
The point is that I am not alone. I have a large community of supporters with 

impeccable credentials. I am a cautious and somewhat conservative person in my 

professional work because I advise clients on high-risk and very large bets on wells and 

investments. My reputation and future income depends on the credibility of my 

evaluations and the quality of my research. I do not believe that the same can be said 

for the CEOs of the U.S. public companies that dispute my findings. 

I'm a fairly busy guy, and a lot of people want to hear the story; I talk to Bloomberg 

and Platts and others all the time. If anything, I feel as if I'm sort of slipping into the 

mainstream, in a weird way. It's a scary thought. I'm now asked to participate in august 

panel discussions, albeit representing the radical fringe; but a year ago nobody even 

wanted to talk to me. 

I don't know where it's going. It seems inevitable to me that it is sort of a bubble 

phenomenon; but bubbles can go on for 25 years or so, even though everyone knows 

that's what's happening. As long a capital markets continue to fund these things it's 

going to keep on going. I'm not saying that's even a bad thing, though I wouldn't put any 

money in it, that's for darned sure. 

POR: Back in the 1 960's the phrase "too cheap to meter" was introduced, by some 

promoters, as being the future of nuclear energy. Over time, the reality obviously didn't 

match the hype. It feels to us that there could be a parallel with the recent 1 00-yearsupply statement. .. 

Art Berman: It could be a big denial issue .... 

POR: Like that early era for atomic power, the shale gas story still seems so new 

that there are a lot of uncertainties about the shale gas bucking bronco, if you will. How 

will the industry respond to the uncertainties? How are they responding to the current 

tough price signals? 

Berman : Not at all right now. I had a whole series of talks that I gave last spring 

called, -North American Natural Gas: Acknowledging the Uncertainty. I I That's all I 

want people to do. Not that they shouldn't drill for it or that I'm right; all I 'm saying is 

acknowledge the uncertainty. 

POR: How do you think the Macondo well fiasco will impact US gas and oil 

production? We're particularly thinking in the mid- to long-term scenarios. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 175 
Berman : Just what's happened already has had a pretty negative effect on the US 

economy. The moratorium has caused some rigs to move to other countries. So it 

seems to me that the inevitable outcome, at some point, is that we'll have even more 

dependence on imported crude oil. I just don't see any other way around it. The 

intangible piece of that really is how it will affect the planning of companies that want to 

continue exploring in the Gulf of Mexico. Do they immediately de- emphasize all of that 

because we just don't know what the government is going to do to them? And I think the 

answer to that, despite what they say, is -yah, sure. 

The deepwater Gulf of Mexico is really it. That's the only substantial sou rce of new 

reserves of crude oil that the United States has. For now, the whole area has a big 

question mark on it. 

POR: How about the impact on offshore oil and gas production elsewhere in the 

world? There is already talk of modifying standards and rules in some other offshore 

basins. 

Berman : That's another unknown. It can't be good for the energy industry. There are 

some countries that's couldn't care less; they're just happy to have the rigs come into 

their waters. But there are certainly countries-like Canada and the UK and Norwaythat will certainly put more regulations on it. It will likely have the net effect of slowing 

offshore operations down and making things cost more. I'm not here to say that that's 

wrong. 

I personally think the current administration is milking this thing for all the political 

capital they can . Nobody who's handling this for them really knows much about the oil 

and gas business. You have a theoretical physicist running the Department of Energy 

and I'm sure he's a very intelligent and high- integrity guy but he didn't really know 

anything about drilling or petroleum and I don't think Salazar is particularly schooled in 

it. President Obama doesn't know anything about it. So you have a bunch of amateurs 

dealing with something that needs a bunch of professionals. Even on the networks and 

cable news shows, I haven't seen anybody they've brought on who knows anything 

about it. A lot of interesting people get in front of the cameras and talk: college 

professors and oceanographers and image analysis specialists and the director of a 

center for biodiversity-he seems like a real smart guy-but they don't know anything 

about drilling operations or petroleum. I don't say that hyper- critically; it's just a fact. 

POR: Switching over to oil ... A number of oil industry CEOs-Christophe de 

Margerie, James Mulva, etc.-have said world oil production is likely to top out in the 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 176 
90-95 million barrels/day level , probably during this decade. Where do you see world oil 

production going in the future? 

Berman : That's not an area where I 've done a lot of current research . I'm really just 

answering from the standpoint of what I've read others say. I agree with the comments 

of the CEOs that you named. It just seems like such a stretch to me that we could ever 

get to the kinds of levels of production that some groups like CERA [Cambridge Energy 

Research Associates] say we can. It just makes huge sense to me that the big oil 

exporting countries will continue using more and more of their own petroleum for their 

own internal uses. How does anybody think that they are going to actually increase the 

amount of exported oil to get to 95 mil lion or 1 00 million barrels a day or whatever the 

forecast number is? From what I read, it looks like the odds are stacked against getting 

production much higher than it is right now. And we're in kind of a good place now 

because demand is way down . US demand has been down nearly 2 million barrels a 

day below what it was in 2008; that's huge. How long will that last? We don't know, but 

assuming we're in a recovery- and it kind of looks that way from a natural gas 

consumption perspective-if and when oil demand ramps up I think we're going to know 

the answer very quickly. And the answer's going to be, we'll struggle to maintain ... that's 

my belief. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 177 
on November 1 5, 2010 9:13 AM 

So, last night CBS hauled Aubrey McClendon , CEO of Chesapeake Energy, on 

board their flagship Sunday infotainment vehicle, 60 Minutes, to blow a mighty wind up 

America's ass (as they say in professional PR circles). America is lately addicted to 

lying to itself, and 60 Minutes has become the "go-to" patsy for funneling disinformation 

into an already hopelessly confused, wishful , delusional, US public. 

McClendon told the credulous Leslie Stahl and the huge viewing audience that 

America "has two Saudi Arabia's of gas." Now, you know immediately that at least half 

the viewers misconstrued this statement to mean that we have two Saudi Arabia's of 

gasol ine. Translation: don't worry none about driving anywhere you like, or having to get 

some tiny little pansy-ass hybrid whatchamacallit car to do it in, and especially don't pay 

no attention to them "green" sumbitches on the sidelines trying to sell you some kind of 

peak oil story .... It also prepared the public to support whatever Mr. McClendon's 

company wants to do, because he says his company will free America from its slavery 

to OPEC. By the way, CBS never clarified these parts of the story by the end of the 

show. 

First of all, they are talking about methane gas, not liquid gasoline or oil. There are 

large deposits of methane gas locked into shale deposits roughly following the 

Appalachian mountain chain from New York State through Pennsylvania, West Virginia, 

into Ohio, but also hot spots out west. It's hard to get at. You have to basically blow up 

the shale rock deep underground with high pressure water that is loaded up with 

chemicals and sand particles to keep the rock fragments separated once they are blown 

apart. Chesapeake Energy specializes in this rock fracturing (or "tracking") method for 

drilling. You can get gas out of the ground this way. The question is how much, over 

what time period, at what cost. 

At the present time, with America anxious about any kind of future energy, shale gas 

sounds like a dream-come-true. Mostly what the public saw on 60 Minutes last night 

was a sell-job for Chesapeake Energy to boost its stock price. Here are some facts: 

Over a 50 year period ahead, all the shale gas drilling of the Marcellus fields in New 

York State will produce the equivalent of three years US consumption at 2008 levels. 

A price of $8 per unit is required to make shale gas tracking economically viable in 

theory even for a short time. Gas is currently around $4. Expect to pay at least twice as 

much for gas. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 178 
Even at higher costs, shale gas tracking is arguably uneconomical. It requires huge 

numbers of rigs, generally 8 wells per "pad," meaning very high capital investments. 

The wells produce nicely for a year, average, and then deplete very steeply - meaning 

you get a lot of money up front and very soon all that capital investment is a wash . 

Translation: Chesapeake can make a lot quick money over the next few years of 

intense drilling and they don't care what happens after that. 

Chesapeake itself estimates that 5.5 million gallons of fresh water are needed per 

well, often del ivered in trucks, which require fuel. 

It takes th ree years, average to prepare a drilling "pad" and the up to 12 wells on it, 

working 24/7 in rural areas with significant noise and electric lighting 

The tracking fluid is a secret proprietary cocktail formula amounting to 5 percent of 

the liquid injected into the earth. It's composed of: sand; a jelling agent to suspend the 

sand because water is not "thick" enough; biocides to kill bacteria that thrive in jelling 

agent; "breakers" to thin out jell-thickened water after tracking to get the fluid out of the 

way of released gas and improve "flowback;" fluid-loss additives to decrease "leak-off" 

of tracking fluid into rock; anti-corrosives to protect metal in wells; and friction reducers 

to promote high pressures and high flow rates. Of the 5.5 mi llion gallons of fluid injected 

into each well, 27,500 gallons is the chemical cocktail. 

Mr. McClendon said on 60 Minutes that it couldn't possibly harm the public's water 

supply because they were drilling so far below the 1 000-foot-deep maximum of most 

water wells. He left out the fact that they have to drill through those drinking water layers 

to get down to the shale gas, and pump the tracking fluid through it, and then get the 

gas up through it. He also left out the fact that the concrete casings of drill holes 

sometimes crack and leak at any depth. 

The tracking fluid cannot be re-used. You have to mix new cocktail fluid for each 

injection. 

"Flowback" fluid inevitably comes back up with the gas, sometimes spilling over the 

ground. In any case, the stuff that does come back up is stored on the su rface in 

lagoons. Often it contains heavy metals, salts, and radioactive material from drilling 

through strata of radon-bearing granite and other layers. Liners of flowback fluid 

lagoons have been known to fai l. 

Gas well failures in Pennsylvania, where production was ramped up quickest in 

recent years, have ended up polluting well water to the degree that residents can no 

longer use their wells. 

Little is known about the migration of tracking fluids underground. 

It seems to me that the chief mass delusion associated with this touted "bonanza" is 

that Americans would supposedly be able to shift to driving cars that run on natural gas. 

I believe they will be hugely disappointed. Between the cost of tracking production (and 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 179 
its poor economics), gearing up the manufacture of a new type universal car engine, 

and instal ling the infrastructure for methane gas fill-ups - not to mention the supply 

operation by either new pipelines or trucks carrying liquefied methane gas, we will 

discover that a.) America lacks the capital , and b.) that households will be too broke to 

change out the entire US car fleet. 

What this disgusting episode really shows is how eager the USA is to mount a 

campaign to sustain the unsustainable at all costs, including massive collective selfdeception . The lying starts at the very top, not just in Aubrey McClendon's office at 

Chespeake, but in every executive suite throughout the land - including the Oval Office -

where any lie is automatically swallowed and then upchucked for public consumption in 

the interest of keeping a nation based on addictive rackets stumbling on without having 

to change our behavior. 

note from Mark: CBS is the most honest television network, if you want to "see BS" 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 180 
November 1 9, 201 2 

Those inhabiting the economic wish-space got a case of the vapors last week when 

the Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) published an annual report stating 

that the USA would overtake Saudi Arabia as the world's leading oil producer and reach 

the long-touted nirvana of "energy independence." The news was greeted in this 

country with jubilation . Thus, peak credulity meets peak bullshit. 

It's been clear for a while that authorities in many realms of endeavor - politics, 

economics, business, media - are very eager to sustain the illusion that we can keep 

our way of life chugging along. But under the management of these elites, the divorce 

between truth and reality is nearly complete. The financial system now runs entirely on 

accounting fraud. Government runs on the fumes of statistical fraud. The business of oil 

and gas runs on public relations fraud. And the media runs on the understandable wish 

of the masses to believe that all the foregoing illusions still work to maintain the familiar 

comforts of modern life (minus Hostess Ho-Hos and Twinkies, alas). 

And so the story has developed that the shale oil plays of North Dakota and Texas, 

which started ramping up around 2005 - the same year the world hit the wall of peak 

conventional oil - and the shale gas plays in Texas, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, New York, 

and Ohio would enable American "consumers" to drive to WalMart effectively forever. 

Now, it happens that the particulars of oil and gas production are so abstruse that 

the editors of The New York Times, The Bloomberg News Service, CNN, and a score of 

other mass media giants swallowed the IEA report whole, with fanfares and fireworks, 

and a nation afflicted with doubt about its future swooned into the first week of the 

holidays in celebration mode - we're soon to be number 1 again, and the future is 

secure! Have a nice Thanksgiving and Ch ristmas and prepare to sober up in 201 3. 

When the truth finally emerges from this morass of dissimulation , the disappointment 

will be epic. 

Here's why the shale oil story is not the "game changer" that the wishful claim it is: 

the price required to get it out of the ground (between $80-90 a barrel) will crush the US 

economy. Since prices are already in that range, the economy is already being crushed. 

The result is an economy in more-or-less permanent contraction. As demand for oil falls 

with declining economic activity the price of oil falls - below the level that makes it 

worthwhile to conduct expensive shale oil drilling and tracking operations. 

Meanwhile, in the background, as economies contract and economic "growth" of the 

type our system requires no longer happens, the problems in finance and banking get a 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 181 
lot worse. This is largely because interest on borrowed money can no longer be paid 

back. Loans are defaulted on. As this happens, banks become insolvent. Governments 

play games with public money - including "money" they "create" out of thin air - to prop 

up the banks. None of it alters the sad fact that there is not enough real money in the 

system. The result of all these desperate monkeyshines is the impairment of capital 

formation . That is, the fai lure to accumulate new wealth. The lack of new wealth, along 

with declining prospects for the repayment of loans, leads to a shortage of credit, 

especially to businesses that require large supplies of it to keep gigantic complex 

operations like shale oil and gas going 

Shale oil (and shale gas) share some problematical properties. The cost of drilling 

each well is a big number, $6-8 million. The wells deplete very rapidly, over 40 percent 

after one year in the Bakken formation of North Dakota. The oil is not distributed equally 

over the whole play but exists in "sweet spots." The sweetest sweet spots were drilled 

the earliest and the qual ity of the remaining potential drill sites is already in decline. The 

current trend shows declining first-year productivity in new wells drilled since 2010 

running at 25 percent. 

There are over 4300 shale oil wells in the Bakken formation of North Dakota 

producing about 610,000 barrels a day. In order to keep production up, the number of 

wells will have to continue increasing at a faster rate than previously. This is referred to 

as "the Red Queen syndrome" which alludes to the character in Alice in Wonderland 

who famously declared that she had to run faster and faster just to stay where she is. 

The catch to all this is that the impairments of capital formation are working insidiously 

in the background to guarantee that the money will not be there to set up the necessary 

wells to keep production at current levels. In other words, shale oil (and shale gas) are 

Ponzi schemes. The story in the Eagle Ford play in Texas is very similar. 

I haven't even mentioned the concerns about tracking and its effect on ground water, 

and won't go into it here, except to acknowledge that it presents an additional range of 

concerns. 

The current price situation in shale gas is different than shale oil. The drilling frenzy 

in shale gas produced a glut, which drove down prices from a $13 a unit (thousand 

cubic feet or mcf) to around $2 at its low point earlier this year. That's way below the 

price that is economically rational to drill and frack for it. The price collapse has played 

havoc among the companies engaged in shale gas, though it has been a boon to 

customers. A lot of the drilling equipment has moved to the North Dakota oil fields. 

There will be less shale gas in the period ahead and the price will go up. It has got to go 

above about $8 a unit or there will be no reason for any company to be in the shale gas 

business. But as is always the case in such a correction , the price will surely overshoot 

$8, at which point it will become unaffordable to its customers. The volatility alone will 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 182 
make the business of shale gas drilling impossible to maintain. Forget about the USA 

becoming a major gas exporter. 

You probably get the point by now, so I will only add a couple of out-of-the-box 

considerations vis-a-vis the prospect of the USA becoming energy independent. 

-- Production is getting so low in the Prudhoe Bay fields of Alaska that the famous 

pipeline may not be able to operate. If the flow of oil reaches a certain low volume, it 

takes longer to make the long journey. The oil cools down and gets sludgy and some of 

the water that travels with it will freeze. This could destroy the pipeline. The capital is 

not there to retrofit the pipeline for a depleting oil field in a region that is difficult and 

expensive to work in. 

-- Exporting countries (the ones that send us oil) are depleting their reserves and 

using more of their own oil, resulting in annually declining export rates. China, India, and 

other still-modernizing nations compete for a growing share of that declining export flow. 

-- I have barely hinted at the geopolitical forces roiling behind the sheer business 

dynamics. But here's an interesting one: the time will come when the US will invoke the 

Monroe Doctrine to prevent Canada from sending its oil and tar-sand byproducts to 

nations other than ourselves. Just wait. 

Finally, I have one flat-out prediction, one I have made before but deserves 

repeating: Japan will be the first society to consciously opt out of being an advanced 

industrial economy. They have no other apparent choice really, having next-to-zero oil, 

gas, or coal reserves of their own, and having lost faith in nuclear power. They will be 

the first country to enter a world made by hand. They were very good at it before about 

1850 and had a pre-industrial culture of high artistry and grace - though, granted, all the 

defects of human psychology. 

I don't think the US can make that transition in an orderly way. We're too stricken 

with techno-narcissism and grandiosity. What troubles me is how we will greet the epic 

disappointment that waits for us when we discover that the journey to Wal Mart is over. 

My guess is that being predisposed to superstition and religious fanaticism, the 

American public will violently reject science and rationality and retreat into a world of 

shadows. We're already well on our way. The IEA report will just accelerate things. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 183 
from ASPO USA's Peak Oil Review, January 3, 2010 

Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas - USA 

www.aspo-usa.org 

Shale Gas: Panacea or Chimera? 

The hype surrounding shale gas continued to build during 2010 with many saying 

that the gas will prove to be so plentiful that it will be the solution to our energy problems 

for many decades ahead. It has become conventional wisdom in many circles that the 

US has 100 years' worth of shale gas ready for exploitation. The hysteria reached its 

zenith in March at the Cambridge Energy Research Associates annual conference 

where speaker after speaker spoke ecstatically about the prospects for the natural-gas 

industry. In Pennsylvania over 1000 shale gas wells have now been drilled. Even India, 

China, the French and Shell have started investing in the US shale gas bonanza as 

have the major US oil companies. 

During the past year the prices for natural gas fell from $6 per million cubic feet to 

less than $4 as the quantity of gas in storage continued to build. Outside analysts 

continue to say that at these prices the industry is losing money and that it will require at 

least $6 or $7 gas to pay for the drilling and hydraulic fracturing of the expensive 

horizontal wells. 

Concerns over contamination of groundwater by the tracking process continue to 

grow. Over strident industry objections, the state of New York has put a temporary hold 

on new shale-gas drilling permits until the EPA can investigate the dangers to 

groundwater supplies more carefully. 

As was the case last year, skeptics point out that while shale-gas wells can initially 

be very productive they quickly fall to below economic levels. The 100 years' worth 

figure comes from the most optimistic possible reading of the Potential Gas Committee 

report; in reality the amount of gas available at modest prices may ultimately be only a 

fraction of the touted amount. When one factors in the talk about moving a substantial 

portion of US electricity generation to natural gas or perhaps replacing the diesels in 

long-haul trucking with natural gas engines, exponential growth kicks in so that natural 

gas reserves would be drawn-down much more quickly than imagined. 

While large quantities of shale gas are likely to be produced over the next few 

decades, behind-the- scenes evidence that the resource is not a long-term solution to 

our energy problems and certainly not to our liquid-fuels problem continues to mount. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 184 
getting a little closer to the truth ... but still says gas exports will increase into the 2020s 

www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-23/u-s-reduces-marcellus-shale-gas-reserve-

- t .html 

by Christine Buurma - Jan 23, 2012 9:04 AM PT 

The U.S. Energy Department cut its estimate for natural gas reserves in the 

Marcellus shale formation by 66 percent, citing improved data on drilling and production. 

About 141 trillion cubic feet of gas can be recovered from the Marcellus shale using 

current technology, down from the previous estimate of 410 trillion, the department said 

today in its Annual Energy Outlook. About 482 trillion cubic feet can be produced from 

shale basins across the U.S., down 42 percent from 827 trillion in last year's outlook. 

"Drilling in the Marcellus accelerated rapidly in 2010 and 201 1, so that there is far 

more information available today than a year ago," the department said. The estimates 

represent unproved technically recoverable gas. The daily rate of Marcellus production 

doubled during 2011. 

The estimated Marcellus reserves would meet U.S. gas demand for about six years, 

using 2010 consumption data, according to the Energy Department, down from 17 

years in the previous outlook. 

The Marcellus Shale is a rock formation stretching across the U.S. Northeast, 

including Pennsylvania and New York. Shale producers use a technique known as 

hydraulic fracturing, which involves pumping water, sand and chemicals underground to 

extract gas embedded in the rock. 

Geological Data 

The U.S. Geological Survey said in August that it would reduce its estimate of 

undiscovered Marcellus Shale natural gas by as much as 80 percent after an updated 

assessment by government geologists. 

Shale gas will probably account for 49 percent of total U.S. dry gas production in 

2035, up from 23 percent in 2010, the Energy Department said today. 

Gas's share of electric power generation will increase to 27 percent in 2035 from 24 

percent in 2010, the report showed. 

The department also said the U.S. may become a net exporter of liquefied natural 

gas in 2016 and a net exporter of natural gas in 202 1. U.S. LNG exports may start with 

a capacity of 1. 1 billion cubic feet a day in 2016 and increase by an additional 1. 1 billion 

cubic feet per day in 2019, the department said. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 185 
, - -, -, . ,, - . - .. - . ... ···-

Why we aren't mining methane hydrates now. Or ever. 

Peak Energy & Resources, Climate Change, and the 

Preservation of Knowledge by Alice Friedemann 

Methane hydrates are methane gas and water that exist where pressures are high or 

temperatures low enough. 

The United States Geological Survey estimates the total energ content of natural gas 

in methane hydrates is greater than all of the known oil, coal, and gas deposits in the 

world. 

But that's a wild ass guess since we can't measure this resource, for reasons such as 

coring equipment that can't handle the expansion of the gas hydrate as it's brought to 

the surface. And if you do work around this problem, there's tremendous variability 

within the same area (Riedel). Since less than 1% of is potentially extractable, there's no 

point in throwing around large numbers and getting the energ illiterate excited. 

According to petroleum engineer Jean Laherrere, no way do methane hydrates 

dwarf fossil fuels. "Most hydrates are located in the frst 600 meters of recent oceanic 

sediments at an average water depth of 500 meters or more, which represents just a fw 

million years. Fossil fuel sediments were formed over a billion years and are much 

thicker - typically over 6,000 meters (Laherrere). 

So here it is 2014, with no commercially produced gas hydrate, despite 30 years of 

research at hundreds of universities, government agencies, and energ companies in the 

United States, Japan, Brazil, Canada, Germany, India, Norway, South Korea, China, and 

Russia. 

Japan alone has spent about $700 million on methane-hydrate R&D over the past 

decade (Mann) and gotten $16,000 worth of natural gas out of it (Nelder). I think this 

refects the likely EROI of methane hydrates - .0000228 (16000/700,000,ooo, and 

yes, I know money and EROI aren't the same). But EROI doesn't capture the insanity as 

understandably as money does. Basically, for every $43,750 you spend, you get $1 

back ($700,000,000 / $16,000). 

Of course, it's all theoretical. Maybe you get $500 or $5,000 back. Who knows? 

There is no commercial production now or in the foreseeable future. And we've tried all 

kinds of thermal techniques to unleash it - hot brine injection, steam injection, cyclic 

steam, fire fooding, and electromagnetic heating - all of them too ineffcient and 

expensive to scale up to a commercial project (DOE 2009). 

1) Gas hydrates are cotton candy crystals mainly found in dispersed, deeply 

buried impermeable marine shale. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 186 
Figure 1. methane hydrate crystals frm from dodecahedral clusters of water which 

create a cage around a single methane molecule. Source: Ken Jordan. 2005. Water 

Water Everywhere. Projects in Scientifc computing. 

In Figure 2 below, methane hydrates (yellow) in porous sands are the only resource with 

any chance of being exploited - a ver small fraction of the overall methane hydrate 

resource. Most methane hydrates are locked up in marine shales (gay) where they'll 

probably remain forever because: 

• The average concentrations are extremely low, about .9 to 1.5% by volume, even 

in the less than 1% of highly porous sediments where there's any chance of 

extracing them 

• Marine shales are impermeable, ver deep, widely dispersed, with ver low 

concentrations of methane hydrate (Moridis et al., 2008). 

• Clathrates are far from oil and gas infrastrucure, which you must use to get the 

methane hydrates stored and delivered 

• The infrastrucure, technolog, and equipment to extract gas hydrates hasn't 

been invented yet 

• The ener required to get the methane hydrate out has negative Ener 

Retured on Energ Invested (EROEI). It takes too much ener to heat them in 

order to release them plus break the bonds beneen the hydrates' water 

molecules. 

• Inhibitor injecion requires sigificant quantities of fairly expensive chemicals 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowtz - PeakTraflic.org - page 187 
1.7x 1017 f13 

Sx101

$m

l 

l.6x 101 Gt( 

(per Milkov, 2 004) 

D Po<e•fiYng 

n s.,l)(is 

h.10 17 ft 1 

2x 1016ml 

1 <101 GtC 

fperKvenvdden 1988 

MacOonald, 1990) 

Estimated Potent al 

Techn cal Recoverab lity 

TRRlil:c y 

TRR PQss bl� 

4.,2:x l(Y8 (tl 

l.2xl011m1 

6Ax 1o•GtC 

TRR Very ow 

D P<xt•fi11ing 

nmv4s (per IOauda and Sandler, 2005) 

Source: BosWBII, Ray, et aL 14 Sep 2010. Current perspectives on gas hydralB resources. 

Energy Environ. Sci., 2011,4, 1206-1215 

2) Methane Hydrates are Explosive Cotton Candy 

Because as IBtnperature rises or pressure goes down when you bring these ice cubes to 

the surface, the gas hydrates expand to 164 times their original size. Though most are 

the size of sugar grains mixed in with other sediments. 

l\'Iethane hydrates bubbling up to the surface 

3) How do you store and get these giant gas bubbles to nl.8l'ket? 

If you could keep the gas hydrates small, crystalline, and pacified, there would still be 

that niggling worry you might offend them into their 164-fold fury. So it's best to let that 

happen - but now where are you going to store all this gas and how will you deliver it? 

You'd have to use oil and gas infrastructure in the Arctic and other questionable places 

where ownership isn't settled and potentially crealB geopolitic al tensions. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail -comments by Mark Rob nowitz -PeakTraffi::.org - page 188 
And imagine how Exon will feel about that! Their oil rigs are already dodging 

icebergs. Oil companies avoid drilling through methane hydrates because they can 

fracture and disrupt bottom sediments, wrecking the well bore, pipelines, rig supports, 

and potentially take out a billion dollar offshore platform as well as other oil and gas 

production equipment and undersea communication cables. 

4) The Mining of Gas Hydrates can cause Landslides ... 

Eastman states that normally, the pressure of hundreds of meters of water above keeps 

the frozen methane stable. But heat fowing from oil drilling and pipelines has the 

potential to slowly destabilize it, with possibly disastrous results: melting hydrate might 

trigger underwater landslides as it decomposes and the substrate becomes lubricated ... 

5) Which can Trigger Tsunamis 

Landslides can create tsunamis that migh result in fatalities, long term health effects, 

and destruction of property and infrastructure. 

6) Methane Hydrates are a greenhouse gas 23 times more potent than 

carbon dioxide 

Climate scientists like James E. Hansen worry that methane hydrates in permafrost 

may be released due to global warming, unleashing powerful feedback loops that could 

cause uncontrollable runaway climate chan ge. 

Scientists believe that sudden, massive releases of methane hydrates may have led to 

mass extinction events in the past. 

Considering that the amount of methane onshore and offshore could be 3,000 times as 

much as in the atmosphere, it ought to be studied a bit more before proceeding, don't 

you think? (Whiteman 2013, Kvenvolden 1999). 

7) Ecological Destruction 

They're dispersed across vast areas at considerable depths, which makes them very 

ecologically destructive to mine, since you have to sift through millions of cubic yards of 

silt to get a few chunks of hydrate. 

8) Toxic Waste 

The current state of technolog uses existing oil drilling techniques, which generate 

wastes including produced formation water (PFW), drilling fuid chemicals, oil and 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 189 
water-based drilling muds and cuttings, crude oil from extraction processes and fuel/ 

diesel from ships and equipment (Holdway 2002). 

9) EROI 

There are only two studies on EROI, both by Callarotti, and he looks only at the heat 

energ used to free the clathrates up, and it's published in a journal called Sustainability 

that would better be named Gullibility when it comes to the topic of energ which is not 

their specialty. He comes up with an EROI of 4/3 to 5/3 using just that one parameter. 

Callarotti knows this is a dishonest fgure because he says "If one were to consider the 

energ required for the construction of the heaters, the pipes, and the pipe and the 

installation process, the total EROI would be even less." 

Is he kidding? What about the energ used to mine and crush the ore to get the 

metals to build the pipelines, drilling, dredging and sifing through the sediment 

equipment, methane hydrate processing plant, the vessel and the diesel burned to get to 

the remote (arctic) location, and so on. 

Conclusion 

You don't have to be a scientist to see how difficult the problem is: 

• Somehow you've got to capture the energ in thousands of square miles of 

exploding grains of sugar that erupt into a gas 164 times their size. 

• There are huge deposits of natural gas that are easier to get at and far more 

valuable that aren't being exploited because they're stranded (not near pipeline 

infrastructure), so who's going to invest in a resource of much lower quality at the 

bottom of the pyramid with such dismal prospects? 

• We can't even drill fr oil in most of the Arctic (Patzek) which is where a lot of the 

methane hydrates are, and that infrastructure has to be there to even think of 

trying to get at the methane hydrates. 

• Most of the hydrates are in a thin flm on the deep ocean foor. Are you going to 

build a thousand square mile blanket to trap the bubbles like a school of fish? Or 

use expensive fracking & coalbed methane techniques? 

• Permafrost gas hydrate is so shallow there's not enough pressure to get it to fow 

fast enough to be worth mining 

Despite all the happy talk that says we can meet these challenges by 2025 if only there 

were more funding, we're out of time. 

It's highly unlikely that Methane Hydrates will ever fuel the diesel engines that do the 

actual work of civilization, all of them screaming "Feed Me!" as oil declines in the future. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 190 
References 

Arango, S. 0. May 7, 2013. Canada drops out of race to tap methane hydrates Funding 

ended for research into how to exploit world's largest fossil energy resource. CBC News 

Benton, Michael J. 2003. When Life Neary Died: The Greatest Mass Extinction of Al 

Time. Thames & Hudson. 

BBC. 5 December 2002. The Dav The Earth Neary Died. Permian-Trassic Extinction 

Event 

Callarotti, R. C. 2011. Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI) for the Electrical 

Heating of Methane Hydrate Reservoirs. sustainability 2011, 3. 

Collett T. S. April 19-23, 2002. "Detailed analysis of gas hydrate induced drilling and 

production hazards," Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Gas 

Hydrates, Yokohama, Japan. 

Carrington, Damian. 23 Nov 1999. Fossi fuel revolution begins. 

DOE 2009. U.S. Department of Energy. 2009. International Energy Outlook 2009 

Eastman, Q. 2004. Energy Saviour? Or Impending Disaster? Science Notes. 

Holdway, D. A. 2002. The acute and chronic effects of wastes associated with offshore 

oil and gas production on temperate and tropical marine ecological processes. Marine 

Pollution Bulletin, Vol 44: 185-203. 

Jayasinghe, A.G. 2007. Gas hydrate dissociation under undrained unloading conditions. 

P. 61 in Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences. Vol. IGCP-511. 

UNESCO. 

Kaneshiro-Pineiro, M. et al. Dec 4, 2009. Report on the Science, Issues, Policy, and 

Law of Gas Hydrates as an Alternative Energy Source. East Carolina University. Coastal 

Resources Management Program. 

Kvenvolden, K.A. 1999. Potential efects of gas hydrate on human welfare. 

Proceedings in the National Academy of Science. USA. 96: 3420 - 3426. 

Laherrere, Jean. July 17, 2009. Update on us Gulf of Mexjco· Methane Hydrates. 

theoildrum europe. 

Mann, C. C. May 2013. What If We Never Run Out of Oil? New technology and a littleknown energy source suggest that fossil fuels may not be finite. This would be a miracle 

-and a nightmare. The Atlantic. 

Moridis, George. 2006. "Geomechanical implications of thermal stresses on hydratebearing sediments," Fire in the Ice, Methane Hydrate R&D Program Newsletter. 

Moridis, G.J., et al. 2008. Toward production from gas hydrates: Current status, 

assessment of resources, and simulation-based evaluation of technology and potential. 

Paper SPE 114163.Presented at the SPE Unconventional Reservoirs Conference, 

Keystone, Colo., February 10-12, 2008. 

Nelder, c. 2013. Are Methane Hydrtes Realy Going to Change Geopoltics? The 

Atlantic. Ofice of Naval Research. 5 Nov 2002. Fier Ice From The Sea: A New Word 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 191 
Energy source? 

NAS 2009. America's Energy Future: Technology and Transformation. 2009. National 

Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, National Academy of Engineering. 

Patzek, Tad. 29 Dec 2012. Oil in the Arctic. Lifeltself blog. 

Riedel M and the Expedition 311 Scientists. 2006. Proceedings of the IODP, 311: 

Washington, DC (Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Management International, Inc). 

Whiteman, G. et al. 25 July 2013. Vast costs of Arctic change. Nature, 499, 401-3. 

a link to the BBC documentary referenced above: 

• . . - . . e I I 

BBC: "The Day the Earth Nearly Died" 

about Permian mass extinction 252 million years ago 

caused by methane 

These EIS comments have stressed Peak Energy more than Climate, mostly 

because energy limits impact the potential for an "export" terminal far more than 

concerns about pollution. However, I think the popular focus on climate is actually 

understated, the crisis is not only worse than official predictions from the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it is worse than the environmental groups 

suggest. 

The Permian mass extinction is a way to consider the risk that is posed to all life. 

This extinction is thought to be the worst of the five big mass extinction in Earth's 

history, worse than the impact that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. It is 

thought that volcanism warmed the world and then this warming caused the melting of 

frozen methane in the oceans to further heat the planet. 

Some who warn about climate suggest that we've used most of our "carbon budget" 

for keeping the Earth's temperature increase below 2 degrees C, and only could use a 

little more before reaching these limits, and therefore most of what remains has to be 

left in the ground. However, if current theories about the Permian extinction are correct, 

then we would have to leave ALL of the remaining fossil fuels in the ground, since the 

warming we have already set in motion could accelerate thawing of permafrost and 

frozen methane in the sea floor. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 192 
www.crudeoilpeak.info/peak-affordable-oil 

Peak Affordable Oil 

BY MAT - FEBRUARY 2, 2015 

POSTED IN: CRUDE OIL ANALYSIS, GLOBAL 

It is quite obvious that high oil prices in the last 3-4 years 

[J wwweia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=RWTC&f=W 

Weekly Cushing, OK WTI Spot Price FOB 

2015-Jan 01 02 53.44 01 09 4$.77 01,16 4 7.07 01 23 46.46 

Dollars per Barrel 

150 

100 

50 

1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 20]0 2002 2004 

- Weekly Cushing, OK WTI Spot Price FOB 

2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 

Fig 1: WI spot prices to 23/1/2015 

http://www.eia.gov/dnav /pet/ hist LeafHandler.ashx?n= pet&s=rwtc&f=w 

have reduced demand for oil, as shown in this IEA graph for OECD countries: 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rabinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 193 
l https //w. ea.org/oilmarketreport/omrpublic/charts/ 

�

D_e_m_a___ _nd �II• Time Ser es 

Demand - 12 Mth moving average demand vs Y /Y growth 

46,600 

46,400 

46,200 

46,000 

45,800 

45,600 

-, OECD Total 

11111111111 

• 12 Mth Moving Average -v -v Growth 

Fig 2: Oil demand in OECD countries Oct 2011 - Sep 2014 

https://www.iea.org/oi lmarketreporom rpublic/charts/ 

0.5 

0 

-0.5 

-1 

-1.5 

-2 

1G OECD !EA 20 I• 

So which oil is affordable? Let's use a graph of the Monetary Policy Report (January 

2015) of the Bank of Canada (which would be favourable to Canadian tar sands) 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rainowit - PeakTraffc.org - page 194 
, D wwbankofcanada.ca/wp content/uploads/2014/07 /mpr-2015-01 -21.pdf 

Chart 4: Roughly one-third of current oil production could be uneconomical 

if prices stay around US$60 per barrel 

Average of full-cycle costs less dividends and interest payments 

US$/barrel 

Canadian oil sands---. 80 

·- ro 

-o ·-

:::J _o ro [:' 

(/) <t.. 

.... 0 OJw £n. 

00 

Norway ---- 

Kazakhstan 

.. 

U.S. shale - 

Brazil 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 

Global oil production (millions of barrels per day) 

Source: Energy Aspects 

Fig 3: Oil production by area and fu ll-cycle costs 

40 

20 

0 

The Bank of Canada report reads: "Based on recent estimates of production costs, 

roughly one-third of current production could be uneconomical if prices stay around US 

$60, notably high-cost production in the United States, Canada, Brazil and Mexico 

(Chart 4). More than two-thirds of the expected increase in the world oil supply would 

similarly be uneconomical. A decline in private and public investment in high-cost 

projects could significantly reduce future growth in the oil supply, and the members of 

the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) would have limited 

spare capacity to replace a significant decrease in the non-OPEC supply." 

http://www.bankofcanada.ca/wp-content/upoads/201 4/07 /mpr-201 5-01 -21 . pdf 

Let's put these costs into oi l production graphs: 

( 1) Total Oil Supply 

Fig 3 refers to 90 mb/d (x-axis) which was the world's total oil supply for 201 3, 

according to EIA's stats avai lable here: http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/ 

IEDlndex3.cfm?tid=5&pid=53&aid=1 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 1 95 
mb/d World total oil supply by 2014 economic cos� of oil 

100 � -----------------

60 

so 

40 

30 

20 

10 

$ 50 

$ 45 

$ 42 

$ 25 

0 -1-,-,-.,-,.�,...,.�,-,.....,-,-,.-.,-,..-,-.-,--,-,-,.-.,...,.-,-....,...,...,,..,...,...,.-,-.,.... 

Data: EIA, Bank of Canada 

$ 80 

-Canada tar sands 

-US shale 

$ 7o-Brazil 

-Mexico 

-Other Non-OPEC 

$ 60 

-China 

$ so 

-Norway 

Kazakhstan 

US excl. shale 

Russia 

Other OPEC 

Saudi Arabia 

-$SO oil price 

- - $60 oil price 

Fig 4: Oil supply by country/area and economic cost of oil 

In Fig 4, oil supplies are stcked by 2014 economic cost of oil , strtng with Saudi 

Arabia ($5/barrel, green) and going up to Canadian tr sands ($80/barrel, dark red). 

The colors have been ex tended over the whole period to 1980 so Ia t the producton 

history can be seen. Lines in various styles show 4 different cost levels, whereby their 

lengths are indicatve only to show corresponding producton levels for the last years. 

It seems that oil supplies up to around $75 have peaked (all countries up to Brazil). 

In <ther words, if the world is willing ( or able) to pay only $75 a barrel, corresponding oil 

producton declined since 2012 - at around 1 .6% over 2 years. $50 oil was up and 

down, but at only 56 mb/d or 60% of current demand. What is importnt here is that 

affordable oil does not appear to increase in volume. That has serious implicatons for 

economic and transport planning 

In Fig 4, oil supply includes: crude oil, natral gas plant liquids, refinery processing 

gains and other liquids (including bio fuels). The EIA definitons are here: 

ht://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/docs/lPMNotes.html#p1 

Draft El S: Oregon Passenger Ra l• comments by Mark Robnowitz • PeakTrall c.org • page 196 
Lat's check how that graph would look like if we used just crude oil and condensate. 

(2) Crude oil and condensate 

mb/d World crude oil supply by 2014 economic cost of oil 

80 � -------------------

50 

$ 50 

40 

$ 45 

30 

20 $ 42 

$ 80 

-Canada tar sands 

$ 70 

-us shale 

-Brazil 

-Mexico 

$ 60 

-Other Non-OPEC 

$ SO-China 

-Norway 

Kazakhstan 

US excl shale 

Russia 

Other OPEC 

Saudi Arabia 

10 - -World 

$ 25 -$50 oil price 

0 �...-.-,-,-,....-....., - - $60 oil price 

� � � !or::, to"' � to'<> !oq, @><::, 1»"' @>l). @>'o @>q, £)<::, £)'\, t)l). t)(o t)q, �<::, :Y' � .,,o � � � .,o � � "I,� "I,� "I,� "I,� � "I,<::, "I,<::, 

'

r" • • • • • • $70 oil price 

Data: EIA, Bank of Canada =$80 oil price 

Fig 5: Same as Fig 4, but for crude oil only 

All crude oil up to $75 is basically flat since 2005. Expansive unconventional oil has 

covered up this indisputable trend. 

(3) Canadian tar sand costs 

So how did the Bank of Canada arrive at $90 for tar sands? The following tabla is 

from a July 2014 report of the Canadian Energy Research Insttute (http:/cari .ca/) 

CANADIAN OIL SANDS SUPPLY COSTS AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 

(201 4-2048) 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Rooinowlz - PeakTraffic.org - page 197 
C ceri.ca/images/stories/2014 07 -17 _ CER_Study _141_ Oil_Sands_Supply_ Cost_Update_2014-2048.pdf 

Table 3.4: Supply Costs Summary 

Project SC at Field Gate WTI Equivalent SC 

{C$2013/bbl) {US$2013/bbl) 

SAGO 50.89 84.99 

Stand-Alone Mine 71.81 105.54 

Integrated Mining and Upgrading 107.57 109.50 

Standalone Upgrader 40.82 44.13 

Source: CERI 

F ig 6: Cost of Canadian tar sands 

SAGO stands for steam assisted gravity drainage for in-situ tar sand projects as 

described here: http://ww.connacheroil.com/index.php?page=great divide oil sands 

So the Bank of Canada has taken $9 as a WTI equivalent average. The above 

prices assume a light/heavy differential of $18 a barrel between West Texas 

Intermediate and West Canadian Select, even after the reversal of the Seaway pipeline 

and the construction of the southern leg of the Keystone XL in 2013 to connect Cushing 

to the Gulf of Mexico. This increased WTI , thereby narrowing the differential to Brent, 

but not to historical levels of $2-5/barrel "potentially indicating two things: either the two 

markets are no longer correlated and prices are representative of regional markets only 

or the market to market connectivity is not sufficient to increase WTI prices to Brent 

levels (sans transportation costs) or a combination of both . . ... Over time as more 

blended bitumen and SCO (syncrude oil) continue to penetrate the existing markets as 

well as new markets, such as the US Gulf Coast and markets outside of North America, 

the light heavy differential might narrow in the future." 

http://ceri.ca/images/stories/ 

2014-07-1 7 GERI Study 1 41 Oil Sands Supply Cost Update 2014-2048.pdf 

Conclusion: 

Using the assessment of the Bank of Canada, production of affordable oil at price 

levels up to $75 has peaked or is at peak since the turning point of 2005. This means 

that the global economy cannot grow "normally" again. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mar Rabinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 198 
• - - • I • I • -,. -. - - - , - .. ·- I• 

Why The Promise Of American LNG Exports Is Gassy 

Hype by Wolf Richter • May 29, 201 4 

Natural gas production has been on a tear in the US. The fracking boom caused coal use to go 

into remission, broadsided the solar-panel industry, and motivated energy-intensive industries or 

those that use natural gas as feedstock to build new plants in the US. It has changed the energ 

equation. It created tens of thousands of good jobs. It created a whole industry of lobbyists and 

activists, battling each other and greasing politicians along the way. 

And it caused earthquakes, not just in Oklahoma, but also in the minds of speculators, hype 

artists, and Wall Street hope mongers, funded by a tsunami of nearly free money that was drilled 

into the ground for years while the price of natural gas remained stubbornly below the cost of 

production. 

That money is gone for good. And the price? After some tumultuous gyrations earlier this 

year, it's up 140% from the April 2012 low. But it's still below the cost of production, and the 

industry has shown no eagerness whatsoever to drill for dry natural gas. Wells that also produce 

enough oil and natural gas liquids, which fetch a much higher price, are better deals. 

So production last year rose a scant 1 % to a new record of 24.3 trillion cubic feet, not nearly 

enough to meet demand. In 2013, gas in underground storage was drawn down by 700 billion 

cubic feet and ended the year 20% below where it had started the year. After some additional 

nasty winter weather, natural gas in storage is now at 1,266 Bcf. That's 786 Bcf, or 38%, below 

where it had been at this time last year, and last year's storage levels were already running below 

average, which caused the price gyrations this winter. 

And current levels are 1,478 Bcf, or 5%, below those of the same period in 2012. In other 

words, demand has exceeded supply for two years in a row by over 700 Bcf each. But now there 

isn't enough gas in storage to keep the system operational if a similar drawdown occurs again. 

Questions are percolating if the US is going to have enough natural gas in storage by end of 

October to last through the winter. People are crunching all sorts of numbers to get a handle on it. 

But the Energy Department's EIA remains sanguine. Its predictions concerning natural gas are 

almost always far off target, and its predictions of a super-low price over the last two years have 

become - with hindsight - a silly joke. 

Much depends on the weather. A cool summer and a warm winter will get us through it. But 

if a long heat spell hits densely populated areas and AC units are maxed out for weeks at a time, 

and if major cold waves roll over the land in the winter, the US would have to import Liquefed 

Natural Gas from the international markets, in competition with Korea and Japan which pay 

nearly four times the current price at the Henry Hub. It's going to be mayhem. 

While all these questions are being kicked around and visions of shortages hover over every 

calculation, billions of dollars are thrown at LNG export terminals and deals are made to ship US 

LNG to other parts of the world. The idea is to take this dirt-cheap natural gas that would be 

produced in the US in maniacal bouts of over-drilling and arbitrage the price differential. And 

when Russia annexed the Crimea, voices clamored for the US to start selling LNG to Europe to 

lessen Europe's dependence on Gazprom and save it from Russia. 

But where the heck is all this natural gas supposed to come from? 

The US is a net importer of natural gas. OK, exports via pipeline to Mexico and Canada have 

steadily risen over the last ten years, except in 2013 when they edged down 1 % as the US was 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 199 
running a little short. And imports, which ballooned from the mid-I 980s to max out when the 

fracking boom kicked off in earnest in 2007, have since dropped every year. last year, imports -

mostly by pipeline from Canada and some LNG - were down 8%. The difference -net imports -

dropped to 1,311 Bcf, the lowest since 1989. 

If these trends were to continue, the US could possibly reach natural-gas independence over 

the next four or five years and might become a net exporter after that. But consumption has 

exceeded production over the last 24 months -largely due to the damage the persistent low price 

has done to the drilling industry. Demand has been met by drawing storage levels down 54%! 

But that rerource has now been used up. 

For the US to perform the super-feat of becoming a major net-exporter of natural gas, a new 

mega-drilling boom for dry gas would have to burst on the 98ene, like right now, and rerources, 

equipment, and people =uld have to be moved from drilling for oil to drilling for dry natural 

gas. But thatisn 't going to happen with high oil prices and still dirt-cheap natural gas prices. 

Production goes where the profits are -and they aren't in natural gas. Not yet. Not at the current 

price. 

And ro the promise that American LNG could relieve Japan's thirst for natural gas and lower 

its dependence on the price gougers in the Middle East, and that the "' ry same LNG could also 

calm Europe's angst about Russia's reliability as a supplier, the promise that easy billions could 

be made exporting that LNG has turned out to be ju st gassy hype. 

The US has its hands full dealing with its own demand - a ti east until a dizzying increase in 

the price of natural gas triggers another drilling boom. Then all bets are off. But wait ... once the 

price spikes enough to trigger that drilling boom, the promise of big profits from exporting cheap 

natural gas as high-priced LNG would turn in to even more gassy hype. 

US Natural Gas Imports, Exports, and Net Imports 

1980 - 2013 

ful 

T r lon cub c feet 

4 

3 

- net imports 

2 

0 

1980 

Source: 

EA 

a imports 

a exports 

' ,/ 

_

/ v 

-

1990 

,_ V 

/ i--

/ 

/ 

---

• I I I 

-1 •• 

,,. " I-' Year : 2013 

/ net imports 1,311.0 Bel - --- imports 2,883.4 Bel 

exports 1,572.4 Bel 

\ 

-- - --

\ 

-- - --- - - -

I -� 

2000 2010 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Ra l - comments by 1\11,rk Rot:inowtz - PeakTraff c.org -page 200 

,_ 

-

- . 
Peak Coal and Peak Oil: declining prospects 

Coal Export through Oregon and Washington? 

coal peaked in USA in 1 999, in Pennsylvania in 1 920 

www .peakchoice.org/peak-coal .htm I 

link and comment courtesy of RiceFarmer.blogspot.com 

www.platts.com/latest-news/coal/washington/power-river-basin-producers-finding-itmore-costly-2 1402408 

Powder River Basin producers finding it more costly to get to coal reserves 

"'There's very little low ratio coal out there anymore,' said Al Elser, BLM's assistant 

district manager for solid minerals in Casper, Wyoming." 

Powder River Basin coal is some of the cheapest in the world. But as this article shows, 

the "easy coal" is pretty much gone. That of course means rising prices, and declining 

net energy. As with oil, coal is not going to literally "run out," but price increases will 

create an increasing drag on the economy. It's all downhill from here. 

www.cleanenergyaction.org 

COAL: Cheap and Abundant: Or Is It? 

Version 1. 1. Released February 2009 

Comments and Questions to Leslie Glustrom lglustrom at gmail.com 

ABSTRACT 

Coal-fired power plants provide approximately 50% of the electricity in the United 

States. It has often been stated that coal is "cheap and abundant" and it is assumed 

that it will stay that way for at least the next century. A careful analysis of existing 

information on coal supplies suggests that United States coal supplies are much more 

constrained than is widely understood. Indeed, it appears that with existing mines 

playing out over the next 10-20 years and future mine expansions highly uncertain, the 

planning horizon for building alternative power production infrastructure is likely to be 

much shorter than previously thought. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 201 
A careful review of existing information on U.S. coal supplies demonstrates that: 

1) The U.S. Energy Information Administration has repeatedly published data on coal 

"reserves" as though they include an assessment of economic recoverability when in 

actuality they did not. As a result, the often touted "200 year supply of U.S. coal" is not 

based on a realistic assessment of how much coal will actually be accessible. 

2) The United States Geological Su rvey has developed a tool for assessing economic 

recoverability and published a series of reports showing that the amount of 

economically recoverable coal is a small fraction (e.g. less than 20%) of the original 

resource. The most recent USGS assessment of coal in the Gillette coal field of the 

Powder River Basin of Wyoming, the sou rce of about 40% of U.S. coal, found that only 

6% of the coal was economically accessible under the economic conditions at the time. 

Between 2002 and 2008, while coal costs were rising dramatically, the USGS reduced 

the amount of economically accessible coal in the Gillette coal field of the Powder River 

Basin from 23 billion tons to 10 billion tons. 

3) The major mines in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming (e.g. the "Fort Knox" of U .S. 

coal) have less than a 20 year life span, and coal mines in other parts of the United 

States are also likely to be playing out in the next 20 years. Future coal mine 

expansions are highly uncertain as these expansions will face very serious geologic, 

economic, legal and transportation constraints. Importantly, the federal government 

owns essentially all of the coal in the western United States, and future coal 

mineexpansions in western states will have to comply with a host of federal laws. 

IN CONCLUSION, 

It appears that rather than having a "200 year supply of coal ," the United States has a 

much shorter planning horizon for moving beyond coalfired power plants. Depending on 

the resolution of geologic, economic, legal and transportation constraints facing future 

coal mine expansion, the planning horizon for moving beyond coal could be as short as 

20-30 years. 

http://cleanenergyaction.files.wordpress.com/201 1/1 0/ 

coal_supply_constraints_cea_021 2091.pdf 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 202 
"We can't print coal the way we've been printing money so we need to take a very sober 

look at long-term coal supplies and begin to plan accordingly." 

-- "Coal Supply Constraints: Long-Term American Coal Supplies Questioned," Leslie 

Glustrom, Boulder, CO, February 12, 2009 

www.cleanenergyaction.org/documents/press/our%20news/ 

coal_supply_constraints_021209.html 

"Geology and Markets, not EPA, Waging War on Coal" 

http:/ /cleanene rgyaction .o rg/2014/06/04/geology-and-ma rkets-not-epa-wagi ng-war-oncoal/ 

Clean Energy Action shows that it's the peaking of coal production, not Obama policies, 

causing coal's decline by driving up the cost of extracting coal (June 2014) 

The EPA is not waging a war on coal. This isn't to say that a war on coal would be a 

bad idea, but rather that it's mostly unnecessary. Coal in the US is dying off on its own, 

and at most what we're doing is equivalent to taking it off life support. Our task is to 

manage the graceful transition to a much lower carbon energy system. 

The proposed EPA carbon regulations are just the first baby steps we need to take 

down the path of avoiding catastrophic warming. The EPA, the state legislatures and 

regulatory bodies, and (someday) the US Congress are all going to have do do a whole 

lot more work in the years to come, working together to transform our energy system 

much faster and much more profoundly than these regulations alone can. 

Because there's so much more work to do, it is important that we do not allow the EPA 

and the Obama administration to be made into scapegoats for the decline of the coal 

industry. We must not allow this kind of work to remain politically poisonous, or we'll 

never build the kind of momentum we need to finish the job. 

"Warning: Faulty Reporting on U.S. Coal Reserves" 

http://cleanenergyaction.org/research-reports/faulty-reporting-us-coal-reserves/ 

2013 Clean Energy Action report on peaking of coal reserves 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 203 
www.scitizen.com/future-energies/global-coal-supplies-it-might-be-worse-than-anyonethinks_a-14-3558.html 

Global Coal Supplies: It Might Be Worse Than Anyone Thinks 

by Kurt Cobb 

10 Aug, 2010 

A new study on global coal supplies suggests a worldwide peak in production from 

existing fields in 2011. 

Claims that the world has 200 to 400 years of coal left at current rates of consumption 

have blinded policymakers and the public. The claims are based on two questionable 

notions: 1) That official coal reserve estimates are accurate and 2) that the world will 

experience no growth in the rate of consumption of coal over the period cited. 

In a new study published in the international journal Energy researchers Tadeusz W. 

Patzek and Gregory D. Croft suggest that actual historical coal production is a better 

indicator of the future trend of worldwide coal output than stated reserves which are 

notoriously unreliable. They note, for example, that the state of Illinois, despite its rank 

as second in reserves in the United States, has seen its production decline by half over 

the last 20 years. In the meantime Illinois' estimated recoverable reserves have actually 

increased from 32 billion tons to 34 billion tons between 1987 and 2006. 

They mention the work of David Rutledge at the California Institute of Technology who 

has detailed the sharp downward revisions in the official reserve estimates in recent 

decades and who believes ultimate production will fall far short of the current reserve 

estimates. The trajectory for reserves, Rutledge shows, has largely been down as 

planners include constraints both technical and practical such as coal in seams too thin 

to mine economically or the presence of a large city over a shallow coalfield. Rutledge 

also applies Hubbert Linearization to the production data to obtain a truly startling 

picture of ultimate future recoveries: 50 percent less than current forecasts. 

As for the second assumption, the idea that coal demand would stay the same even as 

the population and the world economy presumably grow is an absurd notion without any 

historical basis. So even if stated reserves are correct, exponentially rising rates of 

production would quickly whittle the supply down to perhaps 75 years with a peak 

coming much sooner than that. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 204 
But the authors believe such a path of growth is out of the question because of the near 

term production peak they expect in coal and oil as well. They calculate a peak in 

worldwide coal production from existing coalfields in 2011. They argue that nearly all of 

the world's major coalfields have been known for a long time, and that only one major 

field has been discovered in the last 50 years. They recognize major untapped sources 

in Alaska and Siberia, but believe that the difficulties and long lead times involved in 

developing them will mean that the date of peak production will not be affected. Rather 

these areas might lessen somewhat the pace of decline. Perhaps the most shocking 

projection in the report is that coal production from existing coalfields is expected to fall 

by 50 percent over the next 40 years. 

www.george-orwell.org/Down_ The_Mine/0.html 

George Orwell 

Down The Mine 

Our civilization, pace Chesterton, is founded on coal, more completely than one realizes 

until one stops to think about it. The machines that keep us alive, and the machines that 

make machines, are all directly or indirectly dependent upon coal. In the metabolism of 

the Western world the coal-miner is second in importance only to the man who ploughs 

the soil. He is a sort of caryatid upon whose shoulders nearly everything that is not 

grimy is supported. For this reason the actual process by which coal is extracted is well 

worth watching, if you get the chance and are willing to take the trouble . .... 

But-most of the time, of course, we should prefer to forget that they were doing it. It is 

so with all types of manual work; it keeps us alive, and we are oblivious of its existence. 

More than anyone else, perhaps, the miner can stand as the type of the manual worker, 

not only because his work is so exaggeratedly awful, but also because it is so vitally 

necessary and yet so remote from our experience, so invisible, as it were, that we are 

capable of forgetting it as we forget the blood in our veins. In a way it is even humiliating 

to watch coal-miners working. It raises in you a momentary doubt about your own status 

as an 'intellectual' and a superior person generally. For it is brought home to you, at 

least while you are watching, that it is only because miners sweat their guts out that 

superior persons can remain superior. You and I and the editor of the Times Lit. Supp., 

and the poets and the Archbishop of Canterbury and Comrade X, author of Marxism for 

lnfants--all of us really owe the comparative decency of our lives to poor drudges 

underground, blackened to the eyes, with their throats full of coal dust, driving their 

shovels forward with arms and belly muscles of steel. 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTraffic.org - page 205 
UPPSAL 

UNIVERSITET 

Pennsylvania Anthracite 

Pennsyvania Anhracite fitted aginst logisic & Hubbert curves 

100 

.. 

!_ 70 

! 60 

t �-

., __ 

... ., _ ______ __,,., _ ______ .,. _ ___ _ 

,. 

w.-

� � ✓ , � � � ✓ � , � 

• Hilob ProlKti -lolStlC ft -Hubt ft -! 'eM mn .CSe 

Kjell Aleldett 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 206 
Coal, Climate Change, and Peak Oil 

David Rutledge, Caltech 

ASPO USA 2010 confrence 

• • • •• 

1913 peak on the - eve of World War I 

300 

iE 

J86S William Stanley Jevons 

book The Cool QueHion 

200 

-

� 

� "U 

0 \ 100 � 

c 

1820 1870 1920 

• Mt= millions of metric tons 

1970 

0 

2020 

• Production is now 16 times less than the peak - the last time 

the production was this low, Napoleon was alive 

• In 1913, Britain exported 31% of its production, now it imports 

74% of the coal it burns 

C 

ct 

Draft EIS: Oregon Passenger Rail - comments by Mark Robinowitz - PeakTrafic.org - page 207 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS 

Jessica Pickul 

Wednesday, December 1 9, 2018 8:46 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR DEIS Online Open House Comment 

From: Robert Rose [mailto:rbrosepdx@gmail.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2018 6:36 PM 

To: info@oreqonpassenqerrail .orq 

Subject: OPR DEIS Online Open House Comment 

Comment 1-136 

ODOT's designation of Alternative 1 (Al) over Alternative 2 (A2) as the preferred alternative is disappointing. 

Al does not represent the innovation and problem-solving spirit that is needed to address the challenges that 

face our region, and the nation, in the coming decades. We are beset with a climate-change outlook that requires 

drastic cuts to carbon emissions in the decades ahead. Some Improved service on the the existing alignment, the 

Al solution, will be an improvement for current users of the service; it will do very little to encourage potential 

new users to leave their cars at home and take the train. 

I question the use of the slightly higher ridership snapshot projection associated with Al over A2 in 2035 as a 

justification for Al as the preferred alternative. While likely accurate, does it represent the trend for the years 

and decades beyond 2035? And does it respond to where the expected 27% population growth is likely to 

occur? I'm skeptical. 

A2 represents a material improvement in Willamette Valley rail transportation. Al represents more of a tweak 

that is analogous to a bandaid. In addition to a shorter trip and a right-of-way that is by and large free of 

conflicts with freight traffic, A2 provides stations that are closer to where people live, or are likely to live. 

Densely populated areas of the Portland Metro region have good transit options to the centrally located stations, 

e.g., Union Station. This is not the case for outlying locations. Close proximity to stations in these areas is what 

is needed to entice people to use the train. People will bike, drive, or take transit for a short distance to a station 

near their homes, but would not likely use a service that requires them to drive to the current centrally located 

stations of Al. If forced to do the latter, they would likely just stay in their cars for the entire trip. 

Finally, in spite of its much lower cost, Al is more vulnerable to the vagaries of political will and opportunistic 

critique. The fact that it could be built incrementally, as long as politicians in power remain favorably disposed 

to a solution, means that its completion could be easily curtailed. Portions of an incremental solution are much 

more subject to delay and cancellation than is a bold undertaking that is responsive to present and future 

needs. Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

Robert B. Rose 

Lake Oswego 

1 
Hannah Mills 

From: Jessica Pickul 

Sent: 

To: 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 1 :27 PM 

Hannah Mills 

Subject: FW: OPR Comment #564 (Mark Ross) 

DEIS Comment 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2018 1:20 PM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #564 (Mark Ross) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 564 

FirstN rune Mark 

LastName Ross 

Comment More trains, fewer cars. 

Last modified2018-12-04 3:19 PM 

IP Address 63. 1 55.37.217 

Submission made: 2018-12-04 3: 19 PM 

1 

Comment 1-137 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS 

Jessica Pickul 

Monday, December 1 7, 2018 10:17 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #592 (Rob Roy) 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2018 3:23 PM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #592 (Rob Roy) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 592 

FirstN rune Rob 

LastN ame Roy 

Organization none 

Comment 1-138 

I encourage the Oregon Department of Transportation to continue to serve bicyclists as it 

improves inter-city passenger rail service between Eugene-Springfield and Portland. I live in 

Eugene and have traveled often on the train with my bike. 

Comment 

Email 

Options 

Email 

Last 

modified 

IP Address 

• I have traveled often to Portland on the Amtrak Cascades for the day with my bike, returning to 

Eugene. 

• I have visited my brother in Davis, California, several times with my bicycle and have taken the 

Coast Starlight. 

• One year, I and three friends took the Amtrak Cascades from Eugene, OR to Seattle, WA for 

week of cycling in the San Juan Islands. We boarded the south-bound Amtrak Cascades train in 

Mount Vernon, WA with four bikes, and rode back to Eugene. 

Response Requested 

robmacroy@gmail.com 

2018-12-16 5:22 PM 

71.236.144. 109 

Submission made: 20 18-12-16 5:22 PM 

1 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS comment 

Jessica Pickul 

Thursday, December 1 3, 2018 1 0:31 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #590 (ROBERT ROY 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 6:00 PM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #590 (ROBERT ROY) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 590 

FirstName ROBERT 

LastName ROY 

I encourage Amtrak to accommodate passengers with bicycles. 

I've ridden on the Amtrak Cascades with my bike many times: 

Comment 1-139 

Comment • I ride on the Amtrak Cascades often from Eugene, OR to Portland, OR, with a bicycle. 

Email 

Options 

Email 

Last 

modified 

• Once, I rode Amtrak Cascades with three friends and our four bikes to Seattle WA., returning to 

Eugene, OR from Mt. Vernon, WA. 

• I have ridden Amtrak several times with a bicycle to Davis, CA. 

Response Requested 

robmacroy@gmail.com 

2018-12-12 7:59 PM 

IP Address 71.236.144. 109 

Submission made: 20 18-12-12 7:59 PM 

1 

Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing information: 

Email: 

• How did you hear about this open house & publc hearing? 

□ Email from the project team 

□ My employer 

□ News article 

Word of mouth 

□ Project mailer 

� Community Newsletter 

□ Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

111 0 SE Alder St. , Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
PUBLIC COMMENT 

Amtrak Open House and Public Hearing 

Hosts: The Oregon Department of Transportation 

December 6, 201 8 

Eugene Public Library 

Comment 1-141 

TOPIC: Long Term Plans for increasing service between Portland and Eugene. 

Good Day. My name is Paul Sachet. I reside at 2 1 91 Westwood Ln , Eugene, Oregon. Train 

travel for me pre-dates my earliest memory. My father received various soldier assignments in 

the U.S., which led to steam powered trips for my mother and I to training bases. However, for 

this Beaver State, for the "webs between my toes" and for my acquisition of Duck wings I do 

have also many miles of experience across, and up-and-down, this fine State. In fact, I do 

remember only having 99E and 99W for north and south travels and how lightly traveled 1-5 

was while attending my early childhood education here in the Willamette Valley. Contrasting 

negotiating 1-5 today with the 1 950's leaves one shaking over the volume and stress level of 

differences. And, my travels have continued to include train services. 

I have lived in and traveled widely by train in various European countries and, as wel l, am an 

occasional user of Amtrak service between Eugene and Seattle. European service is by-andlarge "First World" for me. Amtrak service is "Second World," at best. The leading problem 

here, while acknowledging progress, is the insufferable sharing of tracks with freight service. 

Then , it is also the road bed conditions that impair fast and efficient service. Now I do not 

need to belabor matters over today's service with my own examples. The larger issues have 

been laid-out before us. One, to make current roadway better and somehow faster. Or, Two, 

to build an new, fast roadway, such as along the 1-5 corridor. I am not sure that a bifurcation of 

such leads to what I would envision . 

Briefly, my thoughts are as follows: 

Build for the present and future. Plan for these Objectives: 1. Relieve 1-5 congestion. 2. 

Increase travel safety. 3. Reduce our carbon foot print. 4. Envision routing that best serviceE the 

population concentrations. And, 5. Plan and fund for service efficiency. 

Each of these Objectives should fol low with discussion , however in the interest of time I will be 

g lad submit such to the respective officials in writing. The gist of my discussion before you 

today is that I do not see the current Eugene - Portland route as adequately addressing the 

population concentrations. It should run from Portland west of 1-5 to Salem. It should continue 

to serve Albany. It should be routed such that it serves Corvallis. From there it should 

continue to serve Junction City and then reconnect to Eugene. Furthermore, service should 

n ot only be more frequent between Eugene and Portland, but it should also include frequent 

intra-regional services with 1 -2-3 car "commuter" like serves between two or three cities. 

Added to such connections should be connections for regional and international airports. 

In my lifetime Oregon 's population has grown tremendously and this too will not abate. 

Passenger rai l service can be ever more vital, and popular. I believe that a time for planning 

and establishing fast and efficient service is best establ ished today and while there is less 

pressure for where to place roadways. 

Thank you for your interest and making this opportunity available. 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following information: 

First Name� a_L ( 

Last Name: 

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ Email from the project team 

D � employer 

� News article 

D Word of mouth 

D Project mailer 

D Community Newsletter 

□ Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staf person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public I nvolvement 

111 0 SE Alder St. , Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#23 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 8:01 :40 AM 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 8:03:23 AM 

00:01:43 

24.20. 18. 130 

Q1 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Alternative 1 provides a healthy growth for this vital transportation resource. 

Q2 First Name 

Eric 

Q3 Last Name 

Sandoval 

Q4 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97330 

Q5 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Q6 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

58 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Email from the project team 

Yes 

Male 

His panic/Latino 

42 / 119 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-142 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

43 I 119 
' .. :-·:_ -_-- -

:-_ _ _ -_ : _: _ _ -

- - -:- __ . . . · . . 

DEISilOmment Fofr 

Do .you. have .any comrnentstin .the Alteroa 1ves .presen 

in the DEIS? 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing infrmation: 

First Name: fv\ (cf<cd ,::\h 

Last Name: r<i:.\ �e 

Zip Code: °{{ 30 ':J 

• Hw did you hear about tis open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

� 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other {please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

111 0 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
&\!� Oregon Passenger Rail 

Eugene - Portland 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form 

Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented 

in the DEIS? 

Comment 1-144 

1h e d , s f I "'-� .s 91 o �"'- ) P':� .s <c tj-j-; c " 

\ t c r< \/ "1:\j he. I p-f-u I , "., fY ov, ..\ 1� 

a, ) :0 DX <I:! yo, \ '-' n d f(_: V sf Os.\'\ J. n5 -i ha__{) 

-SoY< � ( "- Ab \ Q 5"-ui-u ye_ oJ- ""I,' <::t,ep�c.,J'<.. 

}fs. p o±e "f, ,"' ( 4cT oc._J,,,� ,+� <>M 

(See reverse) 

I I 
This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing infrmation: 

First Name: 

Last Name: ____ S-=--c_D_·;it __ ·------------

Zip Code: _9_7 ___ 3_D_/j_-_6_J_o-] _______ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ Email from the project team 

□ My employer 

� News article 

□ Word of mouth 

□ Project mailer 

li:l. Community Newsletter 

□ Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

111 0 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS comment 

Jessica Pickul 

Tuesday, December 11, 2018 9:14 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #588 (Brenda Scotton) 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 9:10 AM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #588 (Brenda Scotton) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 

FirstNrune 

LastName 

Title 

588 

Brenda 

Scotton 

Amtrak Rider 

Organization Private citizen 

Comment 1-145 

Currently Amtrak passenger service is unreliable due to shared time with freight traffic using the 

same time. Would Alternative 1 address this conflict? It would be great to increase existing 2 

trips daily to 6 trips daily if the reliability of the service became a reality. If Alternative 1 doesn't 

result in schedule efficiency, then Alternative 2 with a new track is preferred. 

Comment I have a problem with Portland Union Station. It is in someways ideally located next to 

Greyhound and accessible to regional buses forming a commuter hub. Security at that location is 

needed within a 4-6 block radius so elderly, handicapped or other vulnerable 

commuters can safely travel between Amtrak/Greyhound/regional bus hub to Trimet. 

Summary: I want a reliable and safe rail commute. 

Email 4scotton@gmail.com 

Last 

modified 

IP Address 

2018- 12-11 11:10 AM 

107.77.92.79 

Submission made: 2018-12-11 11:10 AM 

1 
r��()

fl-·�'aS�' 

Eμg�.n.e .. - Po 

Do yoμ haye any conimepts on. th� Altematives presented .. in 

the.DEIS? 

f tft1' f>tE.1 /�J> 1Sa.• .

. ·•11>oiJ f Co1Vl�u.:1t1 flu.f .uJ-kfJT .

.. ,,,--------------------,.--...,-,'((JtE-,di-�=:---=A��������-AAS' 

.. ro. 

·

·

·•·•

·

·

·

.

•

·

·

·

·• •·

·

•·•

·

·

·

·

.· .

.

.

...

. ·

·

·

·

•.•·

· · .

. ·•

.

• ··•

·

·•

·

·

· .

. ·

.

·

.

·

·.

·

•

·

·

·

• . ..·•

·

·

·

•

·

·

·· •

·

•.·•·

·

•.

·

·:n+•

·

·e·

·

·

·

•

·

·•··

· 

.

. 

• .

. ••

·

·

·

·

• 

l.l ◊.'� / /4_s· ···/:r: VU��·.t)At:-;c..J:_: .. •• tL � •• � �.s: �·� .. ·•:r:?�>@5��{(?

·•( ·rn:-.( 8-

�!()Jl,l.P/z,.• .f'.(Vl�<D:1 f:�c..1;.• •···•. (1 . N?t 1_9:�i,.�� l'J'f.

•··•'!1z•

.

•1Je-:- .

·

•

·

·l ·

.

· 

.

. •��y��f\J 

� ��pY ,<f'."!A IA)e>'1f-t?•··· o� .. · ... !t:> ..

.

.

. < 

tti\Y-.'ftl .

.

. . ny:�···· f¢-�<}M.

ES(>).Tfl<-:'(.;·C1Y>.� � rt:�.J;.Jo/'C-tf. t'"•• Pyet!:fli•• ··

.· ·l!f_••�·d'ttn° 

( \ JJ1⁄4j__.(fu) . ... 1-)� < /1�Jf.¥,l.(,r I� ffjf-.fllN� 

f2-.J.J NJ.lfNtr ?fD.•.�"1 · {:r()rrv �-yt) 

��th'J'.ANP. �.

0M �1�J'Je'.. .. � lf t(\J 

◊f}.lf. . .

.• �.Ji:f.•

·

• •·! <tr}i-P�lf?_• 3A�.�· ••

·

·••J1:AE.•••f:l.b� ·. t� •. VJ()�t'P\ �N���o/� � ::ni 

(/JfE.. ·

·

·

.•·.��E .

.

.

.

. 

·

.

•

· 

.:;It>·.

· .•. ·

· 

· ·. •���(? .

. P/:t

.

Tt!·• ·•· ·t\? 

lc_c'{��c·

· > .. . \. A.�• •i·•· (� 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following i nformation: 

First Name: l.LA IN E SC. D '- AC. K 

Last Name: 5 E P LA C I<._ 

Zip Code: C/7 lfo S 

Email: es,Llkc(c� S lo ct} lo h'/l_../ , nc.-t 

• How d you hear about this oen house & public hearing? 

□ Email from the project team 

□ My employer 

� News article 

□ Word of mouth 

□ Project mailer 

0 Community Newsletter 

□ Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

111 0 SE Alder St. , Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Jessica Pickul 

Monday, December 03, 2018 1 2:24 PM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #557 (Roberta Sesso) 

DEIS comment Comment 1-147 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Monday, December 03, 2018 10:49 AM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #557 (Roberta Sesso) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 557 

FirstN rune Roberta 

LastName 

Comment 

Email 

Options 

Email 

Sesso 

I have lived in Wilsonville for 5 years. I don't drive & find public transit very limited & difficult to 

access. Wilsonville is a "transportation desert", providing, along with Tri-Met, a very limited 

access geographically. I have to travel by 2 buses into Portland to get to Amtrak, or two buses to 

Salem to get to Amtrak, which I use frequently. 

I could get on the Cascades in Canby- right across the river from Wilsonville; but it doesn't stop 

there. I watched the Cascades go through Canby twice in one day! 

Route 1 would require me to keep on doing this, or take 3 buses to Oregon City, then a 4th bus to 

the Amtrak stop! 

Therefore, I favor Route 2- this opens up many alternative transportation connections, which do not 

exist now or are too timely & arduous. This applies to many people in this "transportation desert", 

both in & around Wilsonville- Tualatin north to PDX, east to West Linn, south to Canby, Aurora, 

etc. 

This is a large resource of potential passengers, yet has been overlooked for many years by 

transportation planners in this area. 

Route 2 gets my vote : ) 

Response Requested 

robbiesesso@frontier.com 

Last 

modified 2018-12-03 12:49 PM 

IP Address 71. 193 .232.13 5 

Submission made: 2018-12-03 12:49 PM 

1 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#4 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Wednesday, November 28, 2018 1 :36:44 PM 

Wednesday, November 28, 2018 1 :43:03 PM 

00:06:19 

97.1 15.1 14.214 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment l-14a 

Favor existing route with improvements. Any chance of adding more stations is always welcome, but I know it changes travel time & 

interferes with schedules. Thank you for more efficient passenger options for travel besides driving & flying. 

02 First Name 

Elise 

03 Last Name 

Shearer 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97223 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Email from the project team, 

Other (please 

specify): 

ODOT websites 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) Respondent skipped this question 

QB What is your age? Respondent skipped this question 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

5 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

6 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#5 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Wednesday, November 28, 2018 1 :57:10 PM 

Wednesday, November 28, 2018 1 :59:23 PM 

00:02:12 

97.1 15.1 14.214 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment l-14b 

Please keep the Wilsonville station if possible. It serves alot of businesses & a growing population base in South Metro area. 

02 First Name 

Elise 

03 Last Name 

Shearer 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97223 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Email from the project team, 

Other (please 

specify): 

ODOT websites 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, No 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) Respondent skipped this question 

QB What is your age? Respondent skipped this question 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

7 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

8 I 119 
Corment 1-149 

�-�, iQ�eg§Il iJ:>U�S�Og��}�il 

· , ... · < .. • < < .

·

· .·

·

·••••

··

•.·

• . .• • i ) .

.

. < .

.

. ·

.

·•

·

·•. Eugene. - R91!a.n.d 

Clo .

. ypuhave J:lny .. comm�nts .

.

. on .. the.f\ltemaUves.presented Jn 

the DEIS? 

�.�����lf4�5,Je�1�{�:

u� 

D'V!9<6i-&14-cf( .·.(A) qol - Ce,'W\ 

Qk.,p.�K�t�•�•· ··•• ·· ·f;� .. · · •n->1··0��.:it("':fti=�T 

:::tr> 1CY?cre?�se· •

.

• d):£ R·.�.�se-�;t<

\r"(

/

�. 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing information: 

First Name: ------------------

Last Name: ------------------

Zip Code: _________________ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public I nvolvement 

111 0 SE Alder St. , Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 281 38-3 

OREGON PAS SENGER RAIL 

OPEN HOUSE 

HELD ON 

TUESDAY , DECEJxlBER 4, 2018 

5:0 0 P . M. 

Comment 1-150 

MR. SIDDALL : I ' m going to recap or maybe 

8 even repe at many of the things we ' ve di s cus s ed . 

9 

10 

MS . SNIDER : Okay . 

MR. SIDDALL : Bicycles and t rain s for the 

11 mo st part , but also pedest rians going f rom one town 

12 to anothe r, what do we look for . 

13 MS . SNIDER : Okay . So here I j ust want to 

14 let you know, we al so have s omebody in here from the 

15 Federal Rai l road Admini stration . 

16 

17 

18 

19 you . 

20 

21 gent l eman . 

22 

MS . KACHADOORIAN: Hi . 

MR. SIDDALL : Mark S iddal l. 

MS . KACHADOORIAN: I ' m Lydi a, nice to meet 

MS . SNIDER : I ' ve been tal king to this 

MR. SIDDALL : Mark S iddall is the name , S23 I-D-D-A-L-L . I l ive in Alban y . 

24 MS . SNIDER : Him and I were tal king about 

25 him taking the bike , and why it 's important to him, 

N A E G E L I (' {!j!,,_''1,0 ') (so o) s 2 s - 3 3 3 s 

DEPO SITI ON AND TRIAL ,,,,,f;:i,; NAEG ELI USA.COM 

Page 2 
Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-3 

1 what alternative there is. And I told him a little 

2 bit about the project and the different alternatives 

3 and showed him the comparison charts. 

4 So Mark, why don't you tell us a little 

5 bit about the comments that you would like to make 

6 about why this project is important to you. 

7 :MR. SIDDALL: Basically it's because I'm a 

8 consumer of rail passenger service. Stacy and I 

9 were discussing things which actually turned out to 

10 be quite parallel to what -- from her position as an 

11 ODOT, Oregon Department of Transportation person, 

12 what services can rail perform that's economical and 

13 safe and appropriate for people like myself, who are 

14 consumers of the service. 

15 And more specifically, how does our my 

16 consumer's point of view align with the point of 

17 view of national, state, and local -- did I get that 

18 right? 

19 

20 

MS. SNIDER: Yeah. 

:MR. SIDDALL: -- services align. And it's 

21 surprising -- it is surprising to me, anyway, that 

22 there's a great deal of correspondence of interest. 

23 It's got to be fast -- I mean, from the time I'd 

24 like to go to when I'm there is important, 

25 particularly in competition with airline and 

N A E G E L I � �'\, � (so o) s 2 s - 3 3 3 s 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL (,,.�) NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 3 
Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-3 

1 automobile. And safe, particularly with respect to 

2 automobile safety and pleasant. 

3 So I've used rail service a number of 

4 places in Europe and here, and I do so quite often. 

5 Now that I'm fully retired, I use rail services a 

6 lot more even. In the past when I was on vacation 

7 time, I used rail services in Europe a lot. And as 

8 a bicyclist, which is the other factor, I look for 

9 both speed and safety and convenience as a factor 

10 too. That's not just vacation. 

11 I was describing when my late wife was 

12 requiring medical at OHSU in Portland, I was 

13 identical to the many other commuters I found on the 

14 Cascades from here to Portland. So it was important 

15 to me that I was able to get to the hospital in time 

16 for their opening at 8:00, and that I was able to 

17 find a train home. And that when I got on the 

18 train, it was important that I could find something 

19 to eat, and to be in safe surroundings and be in a 

20 pleasant place. You know, read and do other work I 

21 had to do, which includes Internet connectivity and 

22 the like. It needed to be affordable. It's no big 

23 deal, but it matters. 

24 So with regard to tonight's meeting 

25 decision it occurred to me that it would be less 

N A E G E L I (

' {!j!,,_''1,0 ') (so o) s 2 s - 3 3 3 s 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL ,,,,,f;:i,; NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 4 
Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-3 

1 desirable for me to have to go to a high-speed rail 

2 terminal than to utilize one that's already there, 

3 but with more frequent service. But it doesn't 

4 necessarily have to be fast, because from the point 

5 of view of the user, it's not how fast you go. We 

6 were talking about the Channel Tunnel, my present 

7 wife, she decided to take a nap and woke up in 

8 France 20 minutes later. It's not necessarily 

9 scenic because you can't even see the scenery above 

10 200 hundred miles an hour. It's kind of like two 

11 trains, you pass another train and it's a blur. The 

12 scenery was a blur out to about a quarter mile or 

13 half mile so it's not scenic. 

14 What actually mattered is could I get up 

15 in the morning, you know, I had to be there 6:10 or 

16 6:11 on the early train. And her ICU closed at 8 :00 

17 and I couldn't sleep on the -- I was, for a while, 

18 in her room sleeping and I didn't need the train. 

19 But in the last month, I had to have someplace to 

20 sleep. Well -- or taxi or keep a car and go down to 

21 a motel. But what I found was if I take the 

22 cynicular (ph) down from OHSU, take the streetcar 

23 over to Portland Union Station and jump on the, what 

24 was it, 5 or 6:00 train, I guess. Oh, no, it was 

25 closer to the 8: 00 train. 

N A E G E L I � �'\, � (so o) s 2 s - 3 3 3 s 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL (,,.�) NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 5 
1 

Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-3 

MS. SNIDER: Right. Back then we had two 

2 trains south. 

3 MR. SIDDALL: Yeah. It was aligned 

4 perfectly for me then. Nowadays it's not quite as 

5 good. Anyway, then I was able to go right straight 

6 to the bistro car and get dinner. I'd go to sleep 

7 and I'd wake up early enough to get the 6:10, and I 

8 did that for several months. 

9 away. 

She eventually passed 

10 Well, I did notice that I wasn't alone. 

11 There are a lot of people who commuted. That was 

12 their lifestyle. And it's kind of an important one 

13 if you have to commute. It's a much better one, in 

14 my opinion. I have commuted to Portland from here, 

15 and it's -- when you can only drive, you can't sit 

16 and catch up on email or whatever. 

1 7 to have Internet connectivity. 

So do you have 

18 I know this is not all new to you, but the 

19 only thing I'm pointing out is in my opinion, it 

20 would be less convenient for me to have out-of-town, 

21 high-speed interface. I've used them. And in 

22 Europe particularly, there are -- just last week I 

23 mentioned we went up to Everett from Albany for 

24 Thanksgiving. Well, it worked out perfectly because 

25 we were able to get the 6:10 and avoid rush hour 

NAEGELI ('�,, , :,�::') ,.M {800)528-3 3 35 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL "0 ,. 0>' NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 6 
Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-3 

1 through Portland and Seattle and go right up to 

2 Everett. They were booked up so they had to give us 

3 a taxi, well, nothing's perfect. And my daughter4 in-law picked us up. And same story second verse 

5 coming home, beautiful, much easier than commuting 

6 by car, much more pleasant. 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

important 

was from 

more than 

MS. KACHADOORIAN: So the schedules are 

to you? 

:MR. SIDDALL: Yeah. 

MS. KACHADOORIAN: The frequency --

:MR. SIDDALL: Yeah, the frequency. That 

the user's point of view, it's frequency 

velocity. 

MS. KACHADOORIAN: Right. Sure. 

MS. SNIDER: I explained to him the 

16 difference between Alternative 1 and Alternative 2, 

17 and that Alternative 2, you get there a little bit 

18 faster. 

19 :MR. SIDDALL: But the user experience is 

2 0 not necessarily better. 

21 

22 

MS. KACHADOORIAN: Right. 

:MR. SIDDALL: Let me describe the trip 

23 from -- we were up in northern England in the Lake 

24 District and my grandson was attending Prep school, 

25 college I guess you call it. And then we went down 

N A E G E L I (

' {!j!,,_''1,0 ') (so o) s 2 s - 3 3 3 s 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL ,,,,,f;:i,; NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 7 
Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-3 

1 to Paris. So Sir William Branson has a fast train 

2 that goes through Manchester down to the Midland 

3 Station, I think it is. And you get there quick, 

4 but you really don't see anything. So if I were a 

5 sightseer, it really wouldn't be of any interest. 

6 But I had to tailor everything else to 

7 match that bullet train. Now they do travel more 

8 frequently than here, but the point I was making is 

9 it was really more important to a have frequency of 

10 starting times than the maximum velocity while 

11 traveling. So the experience for me, the user, 

12 maybe looks similar, but it's really different from 

13 that point of view of maximizing velocity. And to 

14 maximize velocity, you've got to have some open 

15 space. I realize that but it's better to have 

16 localized, centralized mass transit available places 

17 to depart -- arrive and depart from than it is to 

18 maximize the velocity through a linear straight 

19 line, point-to-point destination. 

20 So that's all I wanted to say is just 

21 simply keep the old station here and to do your best 

22 to straighten up the line just a few pinch points 

23 around here. You know, when you come down past 

24 from the south, you may need to put in some 

25 overpasses or some traffic detours or a little 

N A E G E L I (

' {!j!,,_''1,0 ') (so o) s 2 s - 3 3 3 s 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL ,,,,,f;:i,; NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 8 
Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-3 

1 something. If I describe European travel, it's like 

2 that. They've got corridors that keep oxcarts from 

3 coming 

4 MS. SNIDER: I think they are called 

5 above-grade crossings. 

6 MS. SIDDALL: Yeah, exactly so. Off 

7 grade. 

8 MS. SNIDER: And then, Lydia, to let you 

9 know, the Albany station here -- you might know this 

10 

11 MS. KACHADOORIAN: I've taken the train 

12 from Albany. Yes. 

13 MS. SNIDER: They have actually made --

14 there's a transit center right here now so it's -- I 

15 don't know if they've done that since you've moved. 

16 It's a mass transit center now, here in Albany. 

17 MR. SIDDALL: Back in the day when I did 

18 run that part of the Albany bike commission, and we 

19 worked with Peter DeFazio at the time. And we were 

20 able -- we had a grand title for our station -- Mass 

21 Transit anyway. It is that, effectively. Taxis, 

22 buses from other communities, each of which would 

23 like a high-speed station but which don't happen to 

24 be geographically located. We decided the best 

25 thing was to simply maximize the connectivity at the 

N A E G E L I � �'\, � (so o) s 2 s - 3 3 3 s 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL (,,.�) NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 9 
Oregon Passenger Rail Hearing December 4, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-3 

1 interface. So Albany station is a hub. We used to 

2 call this town a hub city when rail travel was 

3 predominant. 

4 MS. SNIDER: I appreciate you giving us 

5 your time and your comments. And I was explaining 

6 to you earlier that if you have any other comments 

7 you want to give us, we have them online at that 

8 website and then -- you can do it by December 18th. 

9 

10 

:MR. SIDDALL: Yeah. Thanks. 

MS. SNIDER: It's an online way of being 

11 able to do it. We know that not everybody gets out 

12 in the evening sometimes. 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

THE REPORTER: Thank you. 

(Conclusion of public comment. ) 

NAEGELI ('�,, , :,�::') ,.M {800)528-3 3 35 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL "0 ,. 0>' NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 10 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#36 

COMPLETE 

Collector: Online Open House (Web Link) 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 2:04:32 PM 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 2:05:34 PM 

00:01 :02 

IP Address: 162.119.11.113 

Page 1 

Q1 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Alternative 2 is the best. More ambitious and faster. 

Q2 First Name 

Robert 

Q3 Last Name 

Siegwarth 

Q4 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97232 

Q5 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Word of 

mouth 

Other (please 

specify): 

YIMBY community in Portland 

Q6 Will you answer some questions about your gender, No 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

Comment 1-151 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) Respondent skipped this question 

QB What is your age? Respondent skipped this question 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

64 / 119 

Survey Monkey 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

65 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#41 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Friday, December 07, 2018 3:40:58 PM 

Friday, December 07, 2018 3:45:32 PM 

00:04:33 

63.155.97.196 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-152 

I strongly support alternative 1, and I would think businesses in all affected cities, would, too. I would take many more trips to Portland if 

we had this, and Portland businesses should help in the funding. 

02 First Name 

Lin 

03 Last Name 

Sime 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97405 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Email from the project team, 

News 

aricle 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

73 

Female 

74 / 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) White 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

75 I 119 

Tell us about yourself 

This infrmation helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following·information: 

Zip Code: _t?/

_7_�

_1/ __ - ______ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ Email from the project team 

□ My employer 

D News article 

D Word of mouth 

D Project mailer 

Jiif:-Community Newsletter 

□ Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Comment 1 °154 

�.·.··9r�gq!}ra�ij

eJ:1ger �it , .. · \ .•·

·• .

. ·

.· i> i•·

··<•

.

·•··•··· .\ Eμg�l)e.- l?gct}<lnd 

,, 11⁄4-1?� 5�:Jtq 1,e �i��e

;f-;�/f/T �� ff;:$•·••··�0(:J � ;q? (,1::{!I[���;•�. f§�Kv'���� 11lfff! �·�. <i� \.�f1r<C�4•-'f ���-!t�K .

c: 

Jf,;if)f,f..?�c·.:Pf ll7.<: �:�51!-f37f';.0� </�wr:tI�6 

............. l:hf;··�AJ,<;'ii:( f '1'.·.,40, � �4.�1'i?l::!'5 

c5(�518f £-1[9·> 6),:4�(�

1 -'(" . �{J!{trft 

ZR q@f�1⁄4 c,¥c/0£/2 "1/!/r"'5rr���,, 

�<7••>z£�·•··.<•·

···•·

·•·•

•·

·

··•··· ··•·< ><·•.··•t •··•o;•> 3- c<Ef:71 •f?!!f'frYf'?J. ze<fE.fi5· /l �2lz«.

1M

,&ri!! 

7;,'ih

<��<YltJA:l<�·<�CG��;t· 

,_._-.·-, . . - - - .. - ·- - .. -, �r:1·.15;·• ¥0?}t�-fff"f :��� 

£ kV�.-&r :c?t/a& RiJ/J/J&«d<:/2� $v/�� 

,pv;z tV/ r% I i �f '. ?-i-¥gikh1P� ,r 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following information: 

First Name: v/9/116 ;5 

Last Name: S:(Y I� 

Zip Code: ['?Yt1 � 

Email: d5/J// J'r/ <Jo Gl.9 /@ �Pl/fl� ... Ct9/'f 

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

;a 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
OR Passenger Rail Meeting November 28, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-2 

1 is now. Comment 1-155 

2 Thank you very much. Brevity is the soul 

3 of wit. 

4 THE REPORTER: State your name is spell it 

5 for me, please. 

6 DR. SMITH: It's Randall Smith, R-A-N-D-A7 L-L, Smith. It's Dr. Smith, PhD. 

8 So I am affiliated with Portland State 

9 University Department of Geology but my testimony is 

10 not related to Portland State University or the 

11 Department of Geology. 

12 I had a concern that the limited scope of 

13 the DEIS and I know it's related to the 

14 alternative plans, but there are several adjacent 

15 freight lines which could, say in an emergency, be 

16 used as either alternative lines or areas of growth 

1 7 for the rail system. So at present everything is 

18 sort of aligned on the high speed rail, the standard 

19 line with improvements and stuff, but there's very 

20 little said about relations with adjacent freight 

21 and other rail. And I think that's a general 

22 weakness to the plan because the gap in rail traffic 

23 is so large. People are just unfamiliar with using 

24 rails, you know, in a routine way, and so it limits 

25 the ability to grow. 

NAEGELI ('�,, , :,�::') ,.M {800)528-3 3 35 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL "0 ,. 0>' NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 4 
OR Passenger Rail Meeting November 28, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-2 

1 So if you had spur line, let's say to 

2 Corvallis, maybe alternative trains going to Albany, 

3 Corvallis even to Lebanon where an existing freight 

4 line occurs. And even I think it goes to Mill City. 

5 So there are other things that could be in the 

6 future plan to expand rail service, not just to the 

7 central corridor but other lines. 

8 I think that's all I need to say because 

9 that's yeah, that part is really not discussed. 

10 And it appears that it wasn't discussed very much in 

11 the beginning. Everything really has narrowed very 

12 quickly to the alternative plans without looking at 

13 expansion of railroad to spur areas, like Corvallis, 

14 and even beyond Eugene up to -- what's the city 

15 beyond Eugene? 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

MS. DOBBS: Oakridge. 

DR. SMITH: Oakridge. Like you go up 

Oakridge as a recreational site. Nor does it 

address future connections to the coast, say to 

Florence, Coos Bay from -- maybe beginning from 

Eugene and so forth. Okay. That's all I have. 

THE REPORTER: 

spelling your name for 

:MR. GIFFORD: 

Gifford, G-I-F-F-O-R-D. 

NAEGELI 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL 

Start by stating and 

me, please. 

William, 

(�,,�0) 

,

1,-lf; ,'v #s,,.,, B\J..,,,:-

W-I-L-L-I-A-M, 

{800)528-3 3 35 

NAEGELI USA.COM 

to 

Page 5 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#11 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Friday, November 30, 2018 2:47:38 PM 

Friday, November 30, 2018 2:50:15 PM 

00:02:36 

167.131.0.195 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1�156 

While it would be great for passenger rail to not compete with freight rail and for it to be more dependable, the cost is out of reach. I 

would think ridership would be higher if Amtrak could figure out how to be on time AND if riders didn't have to take a bus to return home. 

02 First Name 

Kayla 

03 Last Name 

Smith 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97302 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

44 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

My 

employer 

Yes 

Female 

White 

18/ 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

19 / 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#57 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Sunday, December 16, 2018 9:36:44 PM 

Sunday, December 16, 2018 9:50:41 PM 

00:13:57 

71.236.139.16 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-157 

Strongly favor the Preferred Alternative. If Alternative 2 had been selected I wou Id oppose it due to its conversion of Willamalane Park 

and Recreation District parkland just east of 1-5, using an example from my local area. Federal regulations make taking parkland for 

transportation purposes difficult and invite litigation. Further, the necessity of building two additional bridges over the Willamette River 

immediately east of the 1-5 Whilamut Passage Bridge would degrade the view shed along the Willamette River corridor. If such a 

monumentally expensive project was chosen I would favor tunneling under the Willamette and Willamalane's parkland (part of the 

Whilamut Natural Area of Alton Baker Park, shared by Springfield and Eugene). The price tag of Alternative 2 is simply prohibitive as it 

has been outlined. It is therefore encouraging that ODOT favors enhancing the existing rail corridor and serving so many communities 

historically linked to rail transportation 

02 First Name 

David 

03 Last Name 

Sonnichsen 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97403 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

Email from the project team 

Respondent skipped this question 

Male 

106 / 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

QB What is your age? 

72 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

White 

English 

107 / 119 

Survey Monkey 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS comment 

Jessica Pickul 

Monday, December 1 0, 2018 1 0:43 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #574 (Pamela Spettel) 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2018 4: 10 PM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #574 (Pamela Spettel) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 574 

FirstN rune Pamela 

LastName Spettel 

Title Citizen 

Comment 1-158 

Comment 

Email 

Options 

Email 

Last 

I heartily support this transportation infrastructure investment. The opportunities for business 

expansion and general day travel would be ready for what is to come. 

Response Requested 

pdspettel@hotmail.com 

modified 2018-12-06 6:09 PM 

IP Address 66. 178.145.181 

Submission made: 2018-12-06 6:09 PM 

1 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

OR Passenger Rail Meeting November 28, 2018 NOT Assgn # 28138-1 

OREGON PASSENGER RAIL 

PUBLIC CO:MMENT :MEETING 

WEDNESDAY , NOVEJxlBER 28 , 2018 

5: 00 P.M. 

Comment 1-159 

MR. SPILLERS: The Alternative 2, now 

7 that's the one that's going to require more 

8 construction of new track, correct? 

9 

10 

MS. HEIDT: Yes. 

MR. SPILLERS: Okay. I'm in favor of that 

11 because, you know, you always hear about, you know, 

12 infrastructure, oh, it needs to be replaced. It's 

13 falling apart. Which, Alternative 1 was basically 

14 older track; is that correct? 

15 MS. HEIDT: Correct. Existing plus some 

16 improvement to the existing. 

17 MR. SPILLERS: Okay. Whereas, Alternative 

18 2 being newer track. So I think in the long run for 

19 maintenance issues, that's the way to go. 

20 

21 

22 

MR. SPILLERS: That's my comment. 

THE REPORTER: And your name is? 

MR. SPILLERS: Jessie, J-E-S-S-I-E, 

23 Spillers, S as in Sam, P as in Paul, I-L-L-E-R-S. 

24 

25 

THE REPORTER: Thank you. 

(Conclusion of public comment. ) 

N A E G E L I (

' {!j!,,_''1,0 ') (so o) s 2 s - 3 3 3 s 

DEPOSITION AND TRIAL ,,,,,f;:i,; NAEGELI USA.COM 

Page 2 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#1 8 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Monday, December 03, 2018 5:52:17 PM 

Monday, December 03, 2018 5:58:15 PM 

00:05:57 

63.155.134.42 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

I like alternative 1 and will definetly take advantage of it. 

Any chance we could get rail service to La Grande after the Eugene to Portland 

Project is completed? 

02 First Name 

Tina 

03 Last Name 

Springer 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97321 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Email from the project team, 

Community 

newsleter 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

08 What is your age? 

60 

Female 

32 / 119 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-160 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) White 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

33 / 119 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Deis question 

Jessica Pickul 

Monday, November 26, 2018 1 :49 PM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: Project funding 

From: STALLSWORTH Adam O [mailto:Adam.O.STALLSWORTH@odot.state.or.us] 

Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 11:38 AM 

To: 'info@oregonpassengerrail.org' 

Subject: Project funding 

Is this funding being gathered through state wide taxes or through local levies? 

Adam O Stallsworth 

District Operations Coordinator 

1 00 Antelope Road 

White City, Oregon. 97503 

1 

Comment 1-161 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#1 3 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Friday, November 30, 2018 9:21:39 PM 

Friday, November 30, 2018 9:33:54 PM 

00:12:15 

73.140.127.220 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-162 

Alternative 2 would be better, due to its increased speed and reliability. However, a combination of the two alignments would be 

preferred, such that the existing urban stations are used (which are located centrally in urban areas with public transit connections). But 

the route should be entirely new and dedicated to electrified high-speed rail for trains to travel above at least 100 mph. The route can 

follow 1-5 for direct routes and cost reductions, but most Oregonians live in the medium-sized towns away from the freeway. 

The study of Portland-Eugene rail comes at an auspicious time when ODOT, WSDOT, and British Columbia are working together in a 

study to bring high-speed rail to the Cascadia megaregion. lf forward-thinking is prioritized, the route built between Portland and 

Eugene can reliably serve accelerated rail travel between Portland and Eugene after Portland-Seattle-Vancouver high-speed rail is 

complete. 

Disclaimer: I live in the Seattle area, but I travel to Portland occasionally and would likely use this Portland-Eugene rail to visit friends in 

Corvallis once annually. 

02 First Name 

Andrew 

03 Last Name 

Stephenson 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

98028 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Other (please 

specify): 

Facebook 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

22 / 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

Page 2 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

25 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Male 

White 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

23 I 119 

Survey Monkey 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#62 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:51 :06 AM 

Tuesday, December 18, 2018 8:58:53 AM 

00:07:46 

50.206.140.226 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-163 

If Oregon is going to be serious about high speed passenger rail for the future, we need an alternative that takes the passenger trains 

off of the freight rail tracks. That is alternative 2. I am a transit planner with Cherriots, the local transit system for Salem-Keizer and 

Marion and Polk Counties. I know that ridership depends on three main things, especially if you are trying to compete with the 

automobile: frequency, reliability, and speed. Alternative 1 is less costly, but there is more and more interest in high speed rail in 

congested corridors such as the Willamette Valley, and this is a much better scenario than running trains on the existing UP tracks 

through cities like Salem, which have many at-grade crossings. Reliability of the existing Cascades Amtrak trains is very low compared 

to the buses we run on 1-5 between Salem and Wilsonville (Route 1X express). Therefore, the state of Oregon needs to request more 

federal funds to build it right the first time. People want a reliable schedule and frequent service, and that isn't possible if the system 

relies on the freight rail network. 

02 First Name 

Ted 

03 Last Name 

Stonecliffe 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97301 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

Email from the project team 

No 

Respondent skipped this question 

116 / 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

QB What is your age? Respondent skipped this question 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) Respondent skipped this question 

11 7 / 119 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS comment 

Jessica Pickul 

Monday, November 26, 2018 9:49 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #549 (Shawna Stovall) 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 12: 11 AM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #549 (Shawna Stovall) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 

FirstNrune 

LastName 

Title 

549 

Shawna 

Stovall 

Ms. 

Organization independant 

Comment 1-164 

I used to ride between Seattle and Portland. My only concern is that this project may be a wasted 

effort towards antiquated system upgrades. 

Comment Leon musk is building a high speed rail system in a tunnel, currently being tested. Maybe you 

should network with that dude. The point being, improving old technology, or new technology? It 

is such a conundrum. 

Email energizer639@gmail.com 

Last 

modified 

IP Address 

2018-11-26 2:10 AM 

47.33.160.207 

Submission made: 20 18-11-26 2:10 AM 

1 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#52 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Saturday, December 15, 2018 4:46:44 AM 

Saturday, December 15, 2018 5:05:52 AM 

00:19:07 

63.229.128.168 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-165 

1) I don't know if this is still possible or not, but it strikes me that a selective combination of the two Alternatives may serve the traveling 

public the best for the Cascades routing (less so for the Coast Starlight)--e.g., Altern.#1 Eugene to north of Hubbard (Hito area), then 

new alignment switching over to the PNWR to travel Altern#2 with its new stations at Wilsonville and/or Tualatin, etc. This would allow 

an easy transfer to/from existing WES service at Wilsonville and the potential of some shuttle transfer to any new Tri Met Light Rail 

terminal at Bridgeport, both of which would fan out the rail service access quite nicely for anyone from the Willamette Valley. 

2) As anyone who has tried to travel 1-5 during game days at Eugene and Corvallis can tell you, there would be reason to try to capture 

Corvallis in the travel route, although I feel hesitant to go with Altern#2 there because it feels like it gives up a significant stretch of 

higher speed potential routing. 

3) With the beauty and significant work put into the Salem station area, unless the route capacity constraints are too restrictive, stick 

with the current station. Same with Albany. 

4) Perhaps there is reason to consider slight divergence of routings for the Cascade trains compared to the Coast Starlight, since the 

focus of each set is different... 

02 First Name 

David 

03 Last Name 

Strubhar 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97032 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Email from the project team, 

News 

article 

Project 

mailer 

96 / 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS SurveyMonkey 

Q6 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

53 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

Male 

White 

English 

97 / 119 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Thank you ! 

-----Original Message-----

Jessica Pickul 

Thursday, December 1 3, 2018 1 0:29 AM 

SELLERS Jennifer; Jessica Bull 

Hannah Mills 

RE: OPR DEIS Online Open House Comment 

From: SELLERS Jennifer [ma ilto:Jennifer.SE LLERS@odot.state.or.us j 

Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 2:18 PM 

To: Jessica Pickul; Jessica Bull 

Subject: FW: OPR DEIS Online Open House Comment 

Another comment! 

Jennifer Sellers 

Passenger Rail Program Manager 

ODOT Rail and Pu blic Transit Division 

(503) 480-5556 

Jennife r.sel lers@odot.state .or. us 

-----Original Message-----

From: Brenda [mailto:bjstvin@comcast.net1 

Sent: Friday, December 07, 2018 10:12 AM 

To: SELLERS Jennifer 

Subject: QPR DEIS Online Open House Comment 

Comment 1-166 

Alternative 2 looks like the best option. Hits more cities that are apt to use it. I like this idea. Very positive outcome. 

Brenda StVincent 

1 
Comment l-167a 

suffusion The Fixer 8 points · 8 months ago 

If the proposal includes getting off of the Union Pacific tracks, I'm on board. I hate airl ine 

travel a nd find the train much more comforta ble, but with slowdowns and d elays taking the 

train takes longer than driving. Not the way it works in the Northeast Corridor. 

Give Award Share Report Save 

Comment l-167b 

+ suffosi on The Fixer 1 point • 9 months ao 

♦ If you read the on line open hose (linked in another comment), Alternative 1 (continue with existing 

infrastructure) has been recommended as the ·preferred· alternative. I'll show up to the open house 

and let tem know how ridiculous that is, but 1 don't expect to get anywhere. 

Gi1e Award Share Reprt Save 
Comment 1-168 

+ swarmingblackcats 8 points · 8 months ago 

+ Reading the proposal, it looks like that is what is being suggested here. There is one alternative that 

follows the existing route and one alternative that deviates slightly. 

Regardless of which is selected, this seems like a no brain er to me. Our existing rail service is a joke. 

Give Award Share Report Save 
suffusion The Fixer 8 points · 8 months ago 

If the proposal includes getting off of the Union Pacific tracks, I'm on board. I hate airline 

travel and find the train much more comfortable, but with slowdowns and delays taking the 

train takes longer than driving. Not the way it works in the Northeast Corridor. 

Give Award Share Report Save 

Comment 1-53 

+ swarmingblackcats 8 points · 8 months ago 

+ Reading the proposal, it looks like that is what is being suggested here. There is one 

alternative that follows the existing route and one alternative that deviates slig htly. 

Regardless of which is selected, this seems like a no brainer to me. Our existing rail service 

is a joke. 

Give Award Share Report Save 

+ Flyer770 6 points · 8 months ago 

+ The Alternate Two route is the old Oregon Electric, now operated by the Portland and 

Western. They don't have nearly the traffic levels that the Union Pacific has and would 

appreciate the upgrades to their line. They also have an agreement with Trimet to al low 

commute rail service into Portland, so it would n't be much of a stretch for them. The UP 

would also like to get Amtrak off their lines as well. 

Give Award Share Report Save 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#40 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Friday, December 07, 2018 12:06:40 PM 

Friday, December 07, 2018 12:11 :40 PM 

00:04:59 

75.164.220.58 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-169 

I would want Alternative One, along the existing route with improvements to track and signals. Alternative Two, even though it seems to 

promise a faster time, does not promise to reach the central cities and leaves a larger environmental mark and that is what I do not like 

about Alternative Two, which would build an entirely new route along part of the plan. 

02 First Name 

Emily 

03 Last Name 

Taussig 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97301 

QS How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

46 

Project 

mailer 

Yes 

Female 

72 / 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) White 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

73 I 119 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Jessica Pickul 

Wednesday, December 05, 2018 10:10 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #567 (Blake Thompson) 

DEIS comment (that I'm having a hard time figuring out the connection though) 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2018 11: 19 PM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #567 (Blake Thompson) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 

FirstNrune 

LastName 

Title 

567 

Blake 

Thompson 

Notification 

Organization NA 

Comment 1-170 

I am happy to tell you that Ridesource was chosen for the 2018 Eugene Awards in the category 

of City & Regional Planners. The Eugene Award was created to acknowledge the best businesses 

in our community. 

Comment 

Email 

Options 

Email 

Last 

modified 

IP Address 

For additional information please visit us at: 

https://eugene.city-recognition.com/MDKM3-UBAZ-MOJJ 

If needed for reference - your code is: DKM3-UBAZ-MQJJ 

Congratulations, 

Blake Thompson 

Eugene Awards 

Response Requested 

bthompson@city-recognition.com 

2018-12-05 1:18 AM 

18.216.106.73 

Submission made: 2018-12-05 1:18 AM 

1 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#25 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 10:21:35 AM 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 10:37:08 AM 

00:15:32 

140.211.82.4 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-171 

The most important improvement is to stop sharing rails with freight trains. The arbitrary delays caused by freight train precedence has 

soured tons of people off taking Amtrak. 

It seems like you could add the Springfield Station as an option to Alternative 1. 

Will this increase the speed of the trains? It still looks like your travel times are slower than car travel times (on a good traffic day), which 

of course means you will be missing out on most of your potential riders. 

Would it be possible to add safe bike parking near the Oregon stations? right now I either get a cab or a ride, or take my bike on the train 

because there is no way my bike would still be on the bike rack after a long weekend's train trip. Quite honestly, this has led to me 

deciding to just drive my car on several occasions. 

Finally, it sure would be nice to have a station around Woodburn or so to make it easy to link transportation modes to all of those small 

communities around there. It would be great to get one in Harrisburg too, but I imagine that's too small of a community for you. 

02 First Name 

Tom 

03 Last Name 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97405 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Respondent skipped this question 

My 

employer 

Other (please 

specify): 

Facebook 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

46 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) 

Q8 What is your age? 

51 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

Male 

White 

English 

47 / 119 

Survey Monkey 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS comment 

-----Origi na I Message-----

Jessica Pickul 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 9:18 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: rail project 

From: Greg Tompkins (mailto:greg@gregtompkins.com1 

Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2018 3:44 PM 

To: info@oregonpassengerrail.org 

Subject: rail project 

Comment 1�172 

Well are you going to actually do anything about the passenger rail or just waste an outlandish amount of taxpayer 

money for 30 years and do absolutely nothing? Shameful how bad our transportation system is in Oregon all you guys 

ever do is piss away outrageous amounts of money on studies like you did the bridge to Vancouver and the bridge to 

Salem whatever came about with that? and then do you do NOTHING. What do you have to show for any of the money 

wasted ? 

Sent from my iPhone 

1 
From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 

PPB Website 

Oreaon Passenaer Bail 

QPR Comment #526 (Randal Toth) 

Sunday, Otober 21, 2018 11:20:56 AM 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 526 

FirstName Randal 

LastName Toth 

OrganizationOnly me 

Comment 1-173 

I travel the Portland to Eugene route numerous times per year and 

really prefer taking the train over driving or busing along 1-5 leaving 

behind unnecessary pollution. The existing train schedule is terrible. 

Comment Many times I can not use the train option so anything you can do to 

improve schedules would be appreciated. After reading large portions 

of the draft EIS, I agree that Alternative 1 is the most reasonable 

approach. Spend lots more money to shorten the trip by 10-20 

Email 

Last 

modified 

IP Address 

minutes is crazy. 

rtoth3@nycap.rr.com 

2018-10-21 1:20 PM 

72.228.4.35 

Submission made: 2018-10-21 1:20 PM 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#38 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 2:42:50 PM 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 2:44:07 PM 

00:01:17 

142.157.51.86 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-174 

Please institute Alternative 1 to keep stations near central city--my generation (millennial) is moving away from car use, etc. and we 

need to be able to access stations on bike, walking and via public transit. 

02 First Name 

Matthew 

03 Last Name 

Trecha 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

98109 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

30 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

News 

aricle 

Yes 

Male 

White 

68 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

69 / 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#34 

Comment 1-175 

Collector: Online Open House (Web Link) 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 12:59:38 PM 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 1:03:05 PM 

00:03:26 

IP Address: 208.83.197.12 

Page 1 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives 

presented in the DEIS? 

02 First Name 

William 

03 Last Name 

Van Vliet 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97401 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

010 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

Respondent skipped this question 

Email from the project team 

Yes 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

62 / 119 

Survey Monkey 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#22 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Monday, December 03, 2018 11 :21 :05 PM 

Monday, December 03, 2018 11 :25:01 PM 

00:03:56 

24.20.167.89 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-176 

It seems clear that simply improving and upgrading our current line (alternative 1) has the most benefits (same amount of ridership, only 

15 minutes extra, saves much more money, less environmental impacts, meets needs of more cities.). HOWEVER - it won't work if we 

can't have more frequent routes with better, more user-friendly times. 5:30am Eugene departures for weekdays? That's not a regular 

feasible option for people. I would LOVE to be able to hop on a train to portland around 7:30 or 8:00am in the morning and catch a train 

back either at 6 or at 8pm or so. 

02 First Name 

Karrie 

03 Last Name 

Walters 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97404 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Word of 

mouth 

Community 

newsleter 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) Female 

40 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

QB What is your age? 

45 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) White 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

41 / 119 

Survey Monkey 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#61 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Tuesday, December 18, 2018 3:07:09 AM 

Tuesday, December 18, 2018 3:10:13 AM 

00:03:04 

73.180.19.161 

Q1 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

I support using Alternative 1 in the Oregon Passenger Rail project. 

Q2 First Name 

Sharon 

Q3 Last Name 

Way 

Q4 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97317 

Q5 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Other (please 

specify): 

Oregon Environmental Council 

Q6 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

57 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Female 

White 

114/119 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1~177 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

115/ 119 
• Oregon Passenger Rail 

.. \,,L�,.,A. ... ....., Portland 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form Comment 1-178 

Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presente 

in the DEIS? 

t<.£ YS Ae.£ FRG;G:?� c:y OF �"tl. \Ji (:_t A,..)p 

OI·T;r€-r€�fC se£l" lS 

,� UllREL(ACILf17 Wf4lCH f�f:x:..:t 

J 

lt1PLlcAT§3' l>PAc,r-tc K�� <7HA,_) 

11-{� � *LL Iv� IT2;> G'E: ADO, ;:t':l�A'-­

,.::1::;;;5 • 

�t�r,<C w,U- �vi� f'°A:s:� 

1]?),-1t0S: .. S��'T.,,... ?,w�G::OIA.'1t:; 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following information: 

First Name: 

Last Name: We-1,..}1:e>TT 

Zip Code: _9 _______________ _ 

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS Comment 

Jessica Pickul 

Wednesday, December 05, 2018 10:14 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #568 (Darise Weller) 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2018 1:38 AM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #568 (Darise Weller) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 

FirstNrune 

LastName 

Title 

568 

Darise 

Weller 

Ms. 

Comment 1-179 

Comment 

why not a line from Astoria to Eugene,From Vancouver, Wash to Hillsboro ( connection in 

Linnton) 

Email 

Last 

modified 

IP Address 

Could cicle 

dweller972@comcast.net 

2018-12-05 3:37 AM 

174.224.13.35 

Submission made: 2018-12-05 3:37 AM 

1 
Hannah Mills 

From: Jessica Pickul 

Sent: 

To: 

Wednesday, December 05, 2018 10:14 AM 

Hannah Mills 

Subject: FW: OPR Comment #569 (Darise Weller) 

DEIS comment 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2018 1:40 AM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #569 (Darise Weller) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 

FirstNrune 

LastNa me 

Title 

Co m ment 

569 

Darise 

Weller 

Ms. 

could circle the west side of Portland, 

connecting to WES 

E mail dwe11er972@comcast.net 

Last modified 2018-12-05 3:40 AM 

IP Address 174.224.13.35 

Submission made: 2018-12-05 3:40 AM 

1 
I Comment k80 

C?r ..e .

.

·. 

•·g. i �n . .

·

.

·

.

·.

••· ...{P ... iM��iiger),

1B.j!l 

Eug�n.e .

.

. ·� .... I>ortlt1nf} 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

D.EIS .

.

. ColTIITl.

ent iForlTI 

Dpyqu pay� apy comm�nt$ on ttl.e .l\lternativ�.s presented in 

the DEIS? 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing infrmation: 

Zip Code: ____ 1_2..__�_· _, ______ _ 

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ Email from the project team 

D My employer 

D News article 

□ Word of mouth 

D Project mailer 

a Community Newsletter 

D Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#29 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 3:47:32 PM 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 3:50:23 PM 

00:02:51 

66.178.132.82 

Q1 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-181 

I agree with officials that alternative 1 is the best option with upgrades but maintaining same route. I ride the train 2-3 times a month 

from Eugene to Portland and am very familiar with its travel. Keeping the same route but adding improvements will reduce 

environmental impacts associated with making a whole new line, and keep costs lower while improving service time mildly. I look 

forward to seeing how this project continues and how I can voice my support further for Oregon rail transport. 

Q2 First Name 

Gabriel 

Q3 Last Name 

Wihtol 

Q4 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97405 

Q5 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

News 

aricle 

Other (please 

specify): 

Bi kePortland. org 

Q6 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

Q7 Gender (Check one.) Male 

53 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

QB What is your age? 

23 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

White 

English 

54 I 119 

Survey Monkey 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS comment 

Jessica Pickul 

Wednesday, December 05, 2018 10:24 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #570 (Telly Wirth) 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2018 9:48 AM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #570 (Telly Wirth) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 570 

FirstName Telly 

LastN ame Wirth 

Title owner/operator-community member 

Organization Wirth Farms Inc 

Comment 1-182 

Alternative 1 definitely seems to make more sense. Since it incorporates existing infrastructure 

its impacts to the environment and community would be dramatically less. Also the cost savings 

Comment 

Email 

Options 

Email 

Last 

modified 

IP Address 

would be great, potentially allowing future money to be used for other types of improvement. 

The obvious concern is how to have no adverse affect on freight rail. The freight rail is a vital 

part of the industries that support the region. As long as this concern can be adequately addressed 

alternative 1 is the obvious choice. 

Response Requested 

tawfarms@peak.org 

2018-12-05 11:48 AM 

207.55.22.154 

Submission made: 2018-12-05 11:48 AM 

1 
Comment 1-183 

• Oregon Passenger a1 

.. Portland 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form 

Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented 

in the DEIS? 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following information: 

First Name: 

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearg? 

� 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

leave this form with a ff person or mail to: 

Ir .. ,,,.r-; 1 Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Hannah Mills 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

DEIS comment 

Jessica Pickul 

Monday, December 10, 2018 10:43 AM 

Hannah Mills 

FW: OPR Comment #573 (David Wortman) 

From: OPR Website [mailto:info@oregonpassengerrail.org1 

Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2018 3:56 PM 

To: Oregon Passenger Rail 

Subject: OPR Comment #573 (David Wortman) 

There has been a submission made through the OPR Comment Form 2: 

ID 573 

FirstN rune David 

LastN ame Wortman 

Title Sustainability Officer, State of Oregon 

Organization Commenting on own behalf, not for the state of Oregon 

Comment 1-184 

Comment 

I have briefly reviewed the project documents, though admittedly I have not delved into them in 

detail. However, I support Alternative 2. While I do not have a hard reference, I have heard that 

up to 30% of state employees in Salem live in the Portland area. For at least the Portland to 

Salem runs, having the train run through the growing population centers of Wilsonville and 

Tualatin makes a lot of sense. Plus, connections can be made to both the future MAX line coming 

to Bridgeport Village, as well as the WES terminus in Wilsonville. If we really want a more 

seamless and connected public transit system that serves the Willamette Valley and greater 

Portland area, this alignment makes a lot more sense, in my opinion. 

Email daewortman@gmail.com 

Last 

modified 

IP Address 

2018-12-06 5:55 PM 

73.25.9 5.81 

Submission made: 2018-12-06 5:55 PM 

1 
• Oregon Passenger Rail 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form I Commentl-185 

Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented 

in the DEIS? 

p� Oo,Se,S I 

\ V\ 5 p :c=-eJ. 

vc}, \At ,ce. ... 0 c&,/ , Y'.\:fv:t,\ ..s±Yuc�::J " 

J:- ..b..1,.-,.cc, :1\o.L- !Mo.Sf S'] VI r 6....., 

I -r... yuw<-o,.,, ....... 1:s -n f .. ss 't!f-C V:"'- ' l 

(See reverse) 

� �J f-u 

) II\ �C:: J 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following infrmation: 

First Name: 

Last Name: ------------------

Zip Code: __________________ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How d yu hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 

Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing information: 

First Name: ------------------

Last Name: ------------------

Zip Code: _________________ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Comment 1-187 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

Eugene - Portland 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form 

tL ' -____._,_; (A..J • 

{err f ttS'i_PjClr_'} 

(See reverse) 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing information: 

First Name: 

Last Name: ------------------

Zip Code: __________________ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this oen house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
• Oregon Passenger Rail 

.. Eugene - Portland 

DEIS Comment F::

IGr

A

uo::::: 

Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented 

in the DEIS? 

tHtt! j.,J � !I I� -::1!2. ftupw.uLr/2).g 5{£7/lU2--I' 

z; /4 � 

. - . . � : d&1�/z4el' 

� 

(See reverse) 

I I 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing information: 

First Name: 

Last Name: ------------------

Zip Code: __________________ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Comment 1-189 

• Oregon Passenger ai 

.. Eugene - rtland 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

DEIS Comment Form 

Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented 

in the DEIS? 

(See reverse) 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the following information: 

First Name: 

Last Name: ------------------

Zip Code: _________________ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
,....-.._---.

�

-----..· Qr-�g�u::ea.���uger Jla.U · 

.. .

\ 

<

·

·

·

•·

.

·

• •· · .

. ·.

·

.

·

·

·

•·

. <

·

•· ·· •

· 

< 

Eμg�ne .. \J?oitla.:Ad 

CHOOSING A PATH FORWARD 

t.�•.�. �.9�'�Prf �r'·' \"li • ·

·

·•i�i�;:nf,-i90 

po .you have any comments on the Alternatives ��sented in 

the DEIS? 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing information: 

First Name: ------------------

Last Name: _________________ _ 

Zip Code: _________________ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

D 

D 

D 

D 

D 

D 

D 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

111 0 SE Alder St. , Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Comrheht l

0 191 

_ Qf �gp� �a��eggef �11 

..

.

..

. .. >·

·

·

.

·

•·i<i

· /

· i •· i> · ·

·

· 

.

. . ·.

. . i i \ ..Eμgen�•··•- PortJijncl 

CHOOSING A PATII FORWARD 

DEIS>Colllrrie11t Form 

Oo yqu hav� any cqmments oo the 1-\lt�rnaUv�spre�ented in 

the DEIS? 

ff $1⁄4/42.o/S·>ttlfri'tlCJfr•� one 

ml1'<'Q 4n8·· U•·� · ·· N;a� 
Tell us about yourself 

This information helps us improve our outreach in the future. 

• Please provide the fllowing infrmation: 

First Name: ------------------

Last Name: ------------------

Zip Code: __________________ _ 

Email: --------------------

• How did you hear about this open house & public hearing? 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

□ 

Email from the project team 

My employer 

News article 

Word of mouth 

Project mailer 

Community Newsletter 

Other (please specify): 

Thank you for your comments! 

Please leave this form with a staff person or mail to: 

Oregon Passenger Rail 

c/o JLA Public Involvement 

1110 SE Alder St., Suite 301 

Portland, Oregon 97214 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#35 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 1:51:35 PM 

Thursday, December 06, 2018 1:53:15 PM 

00:01 :40 

158.165.47 .184 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-192 

While a shorter trip between Eugene and Portland would be nice, Alternative 1 seems to make more sense due to the lower cost, 

increased ridership and decreased environmental impact. 

02 First Name 

03 Last Name 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

010 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

63 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#33 

COMPLETE 

Collector: Online Open House (Web Link) 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

Wednesday, December 05, 2018 10:28:23 PM 

Wednesday, December 05, 2018 10:30:43 PM 

00:02:20 

IP Address: 24.20.17.160 

Page 1 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Prefer alternative 1 (continue service at existing stations in Albany and Oregon City), but improved 

02 First Name 

03 Last Name 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97333 

QS How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

39 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Other (please 

specify): 

Newspaper ad 

Respondent skipped this question 

Male 

Unknown/Do not wish to 

disclose 

60 I 119 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-193 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

61/119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#31 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Wednesday, December 05, 2018 2:43:45 PM 

Wednesday, December 05, 2018 2:44:56 PM 

00:01:10 

167.131.0.195 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-194 

Why is Eastern Oregon left out of this? Is there something stopping expanding passenger rail service to Bend? 

02 First Name 

03 Last Name 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97701 

QS How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

010 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Other (please 

specify): 

ODOT newletter 

Respondent skipped this question 

Prefer not to 

specify 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

57 I 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#28 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Started: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 3:42:38 PM 

Tuesday, December 04, 2018 3:43:49 PM 

00:01:10 

73.67.149.28 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Prefer alternative 2 

02 First Name 

03 Last Name 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97401 

QS How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

38 

09 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) 

010 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) 

Respondent skipped this question 

Respondent skipped this question 

Word of 

mouth 

Yes 

Female 

White 

English 

52 / 119 

Survey Monkey 

Comment 1-195 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS 

#60 

COMPLETE 

Collector: 

Stared: 

Last Modified: 

Time Spent: 

IP Address: 

Page 1 

Online Open House (Web Link) 

Monday, December 17, 2018 5:49:45 PM 

Monday, December 17, 2018 5:59:16 PM 

00:09:30 

174.212.7.221 

01 Do you have any comments on the Alternatives presented in the DEIS? 

Survey Monkey 

Cmmnt 1·19 

If ridership projections hold a replacement station in Salem would be necessary; the 12th street station could not handle the increase in 

vehicle traffic. I like the added stations in both alternatives and could support either A 1 or A2 going forward. 

02 First Name 

Philip 

03 Last Name 

Constant 

04 Zip Code (Primary Residence) 

97304 

05 How did you hear about this online open house? 

(Check all that apply.) 

Other (please 

specify): 

Tweet from Oregon Environmental Council 

06 Will you answer some questions about your gender, Yes 

age, and ethnicity? 

Page 2 

07 Gender (Check one.) 

QB What is your age? 

68 

Male 

112/ 119 
Oregon Passenger Rail DEIS Survey Monkey 

Q9 Your Race/Ethnicity (Check all that apply.) White 

Q10 Languages spoken at home (Check all that apply.) English 

113/ 119