Aggies rethinking truck freight with electric train

Artist's rendering of the Universal Freight System loading a standard shipping container on to a train.

(Credit: Texas Transportation Institute)

A group of Texas researchers would like to resurrect the train as chief freight mover in the U.S.

The Universal Freight Shuttle is the brainchild of Stephen Roop, assistant director Texas Transportation Institute (TTI), a branch of Texas A&M University's system chain.

The automated train, which is designed to accommodate standard shipping containers and trailers, would move forward along a track by linear induction motors powered with electricity.

Roop and others at TTI have been working on the concept and design for eight years, keeping in mind not just the technology, but how such an infrastructure would impact federal and state transportation departments, freight companies, shippers, and border security.

In addition to providing a cleaner option for shipping freight, the UFS includes a conveyor-like system to screen standard shipping containers at ports and borders while they're in motion, and automatically divert suspect containers to an area for further human inspection.

"It's moving into a commercial phase with prototyping and proposals for application in both Texas and California. This system is designed to offer an alternative to over-the-road trucking for heavily congested corridors. It is of course an electric, zero-emission solution," Roop said in an e-mail.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Container loading would not be done at a dock or pier, but at a reload point nearby. From ship to local truck to reload point. Maglev tracks are not something you can build a railroad grade / surface crossing for effectively. The costs of elevated transport would be far higher than standard rail. <br /> <br />Really- heavy rail is the most energy and cost efficient means of travel available for distances longer than 50 miles.

[Grumpypaul]

While I applaud the idea I've been around too long to believe it will ever come to fruition. Not a conspiracy theorist by any means, but I can see this taking off at all. At best a very localized dock to distribution point then to trucks but to create an entirely new system? No way. Maybe, just maybe, building spurs to standard rail systems is conceivable, but with commuter rails taking up most of the rail time, at least around here (Long Island, NY) finding a clear rail to actually move the goods will be an accomplishment in itself.<br /><br />All that negativity said, I would love to see it done!

[Mike+1]

this idea did not work before and it will not work now, probably never will work.

[Mgradyc]

Just because it is electric doesn't make it zero emissions, it just means the emissions are most likely being generated somewhere besides southern California. Most of California's electricity comes from coal, as does most of the entire country's. It's just being burnt in neighboring states. I don't think we've come up with a way to do that with zero emissions.

[bobcatt67]

Think outside the box, return the inner city rail lines to the city for mass transportation in a quick time. And build out a new freight system based on the fastest and best available today to make a difference now. We can do this if we think about reducing our footprint.

[light_rock]

I don't at all understand the point of this. Is this supposed to be an entire electric train national infrastructure including automated docks ? Or is this just fancy new tech at docks ? The modern diesel-electric train is already ridiculously fuel efficient, orders of magnitude beyond freeway freight traffic. Simply beef 'em up, give 'em a boost, and put in some express ways for perishables.

[TS2912]

They forgot a minor point... the COST of a linear induction motor track. Building one between Texas and California would make our health care budget problems look trivial (the construction cost is about $100 million per mile).<br />A simple electric line (with overhead cables) would not look 'cool' but would STILL be 'of course an electric, zero-emission solution' (as the article says)<br />AND would literally cost a few percent of their proposed 'solution' (in search of a problem)