Fuel efficient hybrid locomotive manufacturer has trouble meeting demand.

[NNadir]

Technologies, makers of systems for hybrid locomotives and switch engines and derivative markets, recently announced that it does not expect to meet its unit production target of 90 to 100 locomotives for 2006 and its gross margin target of 30% by the end of the fourth quarter. (Earlier post.)

The Company has reviewed its production capabilities and has revised its unit production target to between 50 and 65 units for 2006.

Railpower expects increased expenditures in the third and fourth quarters of 2006 as a result of increased inventory purchases necessary to increase production. Fixed costs will also temporarily increase as design and procurement activities accelerate to meet production demands...


...Railpower’s RP-Series road switchers can provide fuel savings of up to 35% and reduce NOx and particulate emissions by approximately 80% percent. With this order, Railpower’s order backlog currently stands at 152 units, of which 105 are RP-series locomotives.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/07/railpower_scale.html#more

[dcfirefighter]

1. It's nice to hear that there's demand for fuel efficient switch engines

It's a shame they can't get their manufacturing in order. It's also a shame that, since the technology is likely patented, no one else can step in to take advantage of the demand.

[NNadir]

2. It seems that they are determined to get their act in order.

Like Toyota and the Prius, they are probably pleasantly surprised by the demand.

[drm604]

3. If it's patented and they can't meet the demand

can't they subcontract or license other manufacturers?

[NNadir]

4. There's no evidence that other manufacturers can scale up either.

They say they are working on it, and I say "good for them."

The developers of technologies need to be able to reap rewards. Personally, I am glad there's this much demand.

[Boomer]

5. Warning sign for optimists

This production shortfall reveals the inherent problems in shifting technologies to meet climate change and/or Peak Oil. Even when the technology exists to solve problems, the production capabilities to provide that technology take time to develop.

I consistently see posts on DU that underestimate this aspect of the upcoming "transition" to replacements for current energy sources. It's not that it can't be done, it's that it's going to take a long time to rebuild our infrastructure and production methods, and during that time a LOT of people are going to suffer.

What I find most disturbing about this attitude is that it leaves people emotionally unprepared for the turmoil and hardship ahead. Anyone who thinks we can move away from our luxury-laden oil-based civilization without pain is going to be shell-shocked when we crash. Even a period of a few decades (a relatively short time for major change) is going to seem like an eternity to a generation accustomed to a high standard of living.

[NNadir]

6. Um, they are building locomotives.

They are not building as many as ordered, but they are building a significant number.

The problem with the hysterical attitude about oil is that its proponents seem not to have much of a sense of history. The oil isn't turning off tomorrow. It's not going to be here one day and completely gone by next Tuesday. In fact one of the driving forces for the start up of the oil industry was shortages of whale oil. The shift from coal to oil took about 20 historical years and it was not undertaken with any sense of urgency.

It is increasingly urgent that we phase fossil fuels out yet, but it's not time for us all to start committing suicide.

Technology can play a bridging role is ameliorating the situation. It cannot substitute for a solution to the primary problem which is the human population of earth being beyond its carrying capacity. How painful the outcome is depends on the attitude of the people who are addressing the problem.

Personally I find the Kunstler position in this hysteric and next to useless. There will be pain for sure. We are experiencing it, in fact, right now.

However we also live in the golden age of chemistry. These devices, the locomotives, are efficient and versatile and they are currently undergoing industrial scale up. There are many, many, many similar strategies going on all over the world.

It will only be as bad as we insist on it being.

[Boomer]

7. Depends on which "we" you're referencing

>> It will only be as bad as we insist on it being.

Well, yes... and no.

I'm well aware that oil will not suddenly disappear, but I'm speaking from the perspective of what I see in my own neighborhood, a mixed blue-collar section of town. Some of the residents -- like myself -- make a comfortable enough income that we can absorb increased utilities and gas prices. We may have to cut out luxuries one by one, but we won't starve.

I wish the same could be said for the other residents -- the elderly on fixed incomes whose houses are slowly disintegrating, the families who are barely scraping by from month to month, the veterans living on handouts from the local food pantry. Donations to the latter are down even as the numbers of desperate families are rising.

All around me there are people who are only a few dollars away from financial disaster, so even a "modest" jump in gasoline prices and utilities bills is catastrophic for them. It doesn't matter if there's still oil in the ground, or an alternative energy source in construction, if they can't afford the bills they're getting NOW.

I'm not sure where the "committing suicide" comment came from -- I'll assume you're referencing other rather more melodramatic posts than mine -- but there's going to bev more pain and suffering among the poor and working classes than we've seen in decades. Just how bad it gets depends on how well this country implements a comprehensive transition for those who can't afford it, not just those who can.

Given our track record of political, corporate and social greed over the past few decades, I have little faith that any such "common good" appraoch will be developed. So I think the level of pain for our most vulnerable citizens will be very deep indeed.