Richard Gilbert and Anthony Perl have a book out called “Transport Revolutions: Moving People and Freight Without Oil.” I haven’t read the book, but I heard an interview with Perl on this week’s Smart City radio show. It sounds like he and his co-author have an interesting prescription for our transportation systems.

There are lots of different energy forms out there: gasoline, ethanol (corn-based, switchgrass-based, etc.), hydrogen, solar, nuclear, wind, hydroelectric, coal, natural gas, etc. Many of these forms of energy simply aren’t feasible for vehicles (e.g., solar, wind). The ones that are feasible for vehicles would require engines to be modified or changed completely. For instance, if the country wanted to take advantage of hydrogen power, a whole new line of cars would have to be produced that could take that kind of fuel, and fueling stations would have to be built throughout the country. It’s a very expensive proposition.

Perl and Gilbert think the answer is electric motors. They point out that electricity is not a source of energy, but a carrier of energy. By going to electric motors, you move energy production to centralized power plants, which can make use of several different sources of energy. Electricity can be generated at the plant by coal, wind, hydroelectric, nuclear power, solar, etc., or a combination of methods – the point being, it could all be generated domestically, without having to import oil. And it could adapt quickly to new sources of energy – more quickly than changing everyone’s car in America over to some alternative fuel.

Electricity could be delivered to cars through batteries. It could be delivered to trains and even buses through catenary. But whenever the source of fuel changes, it wouldn’t result in having to change vehicles and delivery systems, etc., because they would all run on electricity, so it would be a seamless transition.

Perl and Gilbert had quite a bit to say about trains in particular. Trains are already a very efficient way to transport people and freight. By running the nation’s trains on electricity, Perl & Gilbert believe they can be even more efficient, and serve a larger purpose as well – electricity delivery. If the rail corridors were electrified, they could not only provide power to trains, the excess power could also be distributed throughout the nation for other purposes as well. Rail corridors crisscross the nation, setting up a pretty efficient grid that could be utilized to distribute power between cities and even states.

Hence, the authors think Obama’s infrastructure stimulus should go toward improving and electrifying the nation’s rail system rather than building more highways or airport runways.

What’s funny about this whole discussion is that many cities including Peoria used to have electric trains serving them about a century ago. Peoria had electric streetcars up until the 1940s. And there used to be interurban electric trains that would serve central Illinois called the Illinois Traction System. All those systems have long been dismantled, and it would take a lot of money to recreate them.

This is why I hate seeing infrastructure — for instance, the Kellar Branch rail line — destroyed for no good reason. That corridor could be used for more efficient movement of people and freight through the heart of the city, and such a system will undoubtedly be needed in the future. Pulling it out for a walking path (especially when a walking path and rail corridor can coexist peacefully) is a waste of resources.

On the positive side, work is continuing on a feasibility study of returning Amtrak service to the area. Hopefully we’ll hear the results early in 2009.