I’m not here to argue global warming, but rather to take it as a given. Based upon core ice samples today’s C02 levels are hundreds of times higher than they have ever been in the last 640,000 years. Eventually, we already at a point where we can no longer stick our heads in the mud–but we still do.
So given that, I know we have research projects that are creating green vehicles to replace our SUV’s. And I know that railroads, like the trucker’s union will cry economic distress and delay the transformation.
But my question is, Is there a technology path being worked on to transform the rails or are we looking at a big Do-do bird?
Actually, Chip, there’s good news all around. UP and BNSF are buying hybrid switchers (over 100), a technology that seems to be working out well. As battery effeciency increases, hybrid technology ought to be able to fit is a road loco in the next few years.
Also, every diesel on the rails today can run on biodiesel without any modification (at a lower fuel efficiency, of course). The bonus on biodiesel is that the carbon dioxide released was already in the carbon cycle (either plant or animal fat, which means it came from the atmsophere and not underground).
Railroads are remarkably fuel efficient, given the tonnage they move. Far, far more so than our beloved truck. In that respect, since the fall of the steam engine, save for some smokin’ Alcos, railroads have become much greener, even if by accident.
This is the reason for the GEVO and SD70ACE, the railroads are required to comply with new EPA standards. GE is doing some slick marketing, because railroads are notoriously conservative when it comes to equipment, and the GEVO is a completely new powerplant whereas the SD70ACE uses an updated 710-series prime mover.
But GE also runs nice commercials on various cable channels. The locomotive one features a re-enactment of the transconitinental railroad golden spike ceremony only instead of everyone getting soot-covered fromt he steam locos, they stay nice and clean when a GEVO rolls up.
The problem is not with BNSF an UP who can afford the transition to the newer more environmentally friendly locomotives, but with the smaller regional and industrial roads who buy older motive power because they cannot afford the cost of the new technology. The greatest leap in locomotive environmental impact was the conversion from 2 cycle to 4 cycle diesels. It will take time to have the 4 cycle power to filter through the recycling/end of life process. Perhaps there can be some tax break incentives to hasten the up grade process or American ingenuity to improve the fuel efficiency and reduce the emissions of currently operating power. I think that the White House’s putting the Polar Bear on the endangered species list may be a step toward removing “our” heads from the muck at last. The push toward BioDiesel and Ethanol had the draw back the amount of energy used to produce it, but I had not concidered the CO2 cycle for recapturing greenhouse gases naturally as part of the equation before this. Another small step toward the goal is the “new” practice of shutting down engines rather than having them sit idleing for hours or days to prevent them from freezing in cold climates, what a little antifreeze and sealing up leaking cooling systems may add some help in addressing a major problem for us and future generations.[soapbox]
Well, if you are willing to accept the “Global Warming” theory, then I have a number of bridges I’d like you to consider buying. Despite all the onstant rhetoric and bloviating by TV talking heads, the fact is that not a single dedicated Climatoloigist has signed onto the theory yet. Every single person who champions the “Global warming” mantra has an economic stake in the theaory. From grants to “Green Products” each has money to lose and, as such, are all vying to be the loudest to proclaim the sky is falling.
Now, does this mean we shouldn’t are about atmospheric pollution? Absolutely not. Reducuing pollution of all types, as well as increasing efficiency and weaning ourselves from petroleum-based energy is good business sense, as well as common sense.
I applaud the railroads, and all industries for taking steps to reduce their environmental and energy-use impacts. However, to base it upon a fallacious and primarily politically-driven theory about “Global warming” is not only stupid, but criminally stupid, as it plays us all into the hands of tinfoil-hat wearing scientists and political hacks.
I think it is not an economic stake that is the issue, it is political. No political party is willing to be the one to pull the plug on on the petrol-economy and risk the inevitable fall out.
But, that is not the discussion.
While I think that green-technologies such as the hybrid engine are better that what we are using by 100% (They double gas mileage basically.) They are still contributors to the problem in the long run. That includes renewable fuels. They still emit CO2.
“not a single dedicated Climatoloigist has signed onto the theory yet”… Maybe not in “The World/USA”.
Trouble with upgrading 1st World locos is will they scrap the old locos… or sell them to China, India and anyone else that wants to catch up in the ecomonic world?
Whatever the rights or wrongs of global warming “we” have been pumping soot into the atmosphere since before the industrial revolution… we’ve just done it a bit faster recently… we’re not trying to play catch-up on the garbage truck not coming round last week because of the holiday… we’re “playing” talk-about-it for the laast 150 years or more.
The planet will sort itself out… whether humans survive and, if so, in what sort of conditions remains to be seen.
To add more ( had to double cheak my facts first ), the earth is aprox 4.6 billion years old and we are 10 degrees c below the earth temp during the late permian era, we are accually just coming out of a cool period.
In the USA we have already in effect killed the alternative - nuclear. Other countries are building power plants to lessen the dependency on fossil fuels but not here. In an ecosystem based on carbon, the carbon dioxide will always be a by-product. An engine running on fossil fuel will behave just like an organism breathing out (exhausing) CO2.
It doesn’t matter if the fuel is burned in a central location and routed to the vehicles with wires, there is still the same waste produced. From a central location the waste can be more easily treated.
Fixed guidway systems (ie railroads) are the most efficient way to move cargo, reguardless of how it it powered. It is the distribution to local destinations that is the problem.
Wow this is sure a troll like thread. ‘I don’t want to start an arguement, but here are the facts and you are sticking your heads in the mud’?
You are wrong about CO2 levels to start with so the entire premise here is bogus.
Railroads are fine. Going nowhere. Neither are cars or oil use any time soon (as in our lifetimes).
If you are worried about global warming why are you using a computer which is a huge user of electricity and shipped around the world to get into your house from polluting factories hence even more damaging???
To put things in perspective, and I must admit up front that I don’t have accurate figures,…just bear with me for argument’s sake…your typical commercial aircraft burns more fuel in one hour than four prime movers do, and guess which one yields the much, much, higher payload.
We are a society that keeps convincing itself that it can afford the luxury of buying time while doing it in accelerated energy usage. The train is so much slower, but it is so much more economical in terms of tonnage over distance/unit cost. Trains, even ones poorly running, are way ahead of city buses, taxis, privately owned motor vehicles, jets…but not ships.
Are you always so charming in all your responses to posts here on the forum? The ones I’ve read continually come across as either confrontational or that you have an axe to grind for some reason. (At least that’s how they seem to me.)
Perhaps that’s just how you deal with everybody. Even so, a little diplomacy sure goes a lonnnnnng way…
I really don’t care. Global warming is just another in a long line a fear mongering that has been going on as long as I’ve been around. Thirty years ago to this day, the eastern United States was gripped by a deep freeze, with temperatures far below normal for many months and the same egghead community that is today wringing their hands about global warming was theorizing we might be at the dawn of a new ice age. Before that, the big scare was mass starvation due to overpopulation with the leading proponent being Dr. Paul Ehrlich who today is one of Al Gore’s gurus.
Yes the world has been getting warmer for over a century. Before that, it had been through a 500 year period with temperatures well below normal, whatever normal means. It has been called a mini ice age. As long as the world has been revolving around the sun, it has gone through periods of warming and cooling. At no time has the temperature of the earth stabilized for any length of time. That trend will continue no matter what we do. The face of the globe will be changed, which is also normal. Species that adapt will survive and those that can’t won’t survive. That is also the natural order of things. I am not going to fret it. If it gets too hot for me, I
It’s funny he mentions “troll like thread”, it takes an expert to say that![(-D][(-D][(-D]
As for the topic, I’ve been a weatherman for about 25 years. I won’t bother to share my ideas on global warming as statistics can be used anyt way the speaker wishes. However, any step in the right direction to burn less fuel either to promote fuel economy or reduce pollution is a good thing. We must worry about what is within our control, not what’s out of our control (like other countries or pace of progress). The journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step. The Green Goats along with the new GEs and EMDs are a step in that right direction.
I really don’t care. Global warming is just another in a long line a fear mongering that has been going on as long as I’ve been around. Thirty years ago to this day, the eastern United States was gripped by a deep freeze, with temperatures far below normal for many months and the same egghead community that is today wringing their hands about global warming was theorizing we might be at the dawn of a new ice age. Before that, the big scare was mass starvation due to overpopulation with the leading proponent being Dr. Paul Ehrlich who today is one of Al Gore’s gurus.
Yes the world has been getting warmer for over a century. Before that, it had been through a 500 year period with temperatures well below normal, whatever normal means. It has been called a mini ice age. As long as the world has been revolving around the sun, it has gone through periods of warming and cooling. At no time has the temperature of the earth stabilized for any length of time. That trend will continue no matter what we do. The face of the globe will be changed, which is also normal. Species that adapt will survive and those that can’t won’t survive. That is also the natural order of things. I am not going to fret it. If it g
Seriously, it’s not only about the environment, but our dependence on oil from the Middle East. As you can see a LOT of the world’s problems (political as well as environmental) stem from that. Imagine if we didn’t need that stuff!!!
In the first half of the 20th century, didn’t every city have electric streetcars? Weren’t more mainline railroads electrified? What happened to THAT? Why does Europe and Japan have so much more electric railway infrastructure? If you think the USA is so great, then why are we slaves to Arab oil? We don’t need that stuff.
Most European countries and Japan are confined by their smaller boundaries and other geographic obstacles. There are only so many roads. And you can only squeeze so many cars on those so many roads.
Petrol in Europe is expensive and having a car is a luxury. Mass transit is one of the most economical methods of travel. (Besides a bike or motor bike.) Believe it or not, gas is still cheaper here in the US than it is in most other places.
With the post-WWII economy boon, America discovered the automobile and airplane travel. They discovered that they could travel just about anywhere, anytime - not just what was defined by two parallel rails and according to someone else’s schedule. Americans also found (in the case of the airlines) that they could travel between Point A and Point B much faster, thereby have more time for their vacationing and travel. Eventually RRs couldn’t economically compete against the two. Once Americans got a taste of travel, there was no going back.
Tom
A while back in Trains, there was an article on the Milwaukee Road. IIRC the Milwaukee had plans to expand its electrification in the northwest but it was shot down by shareholders because they didn’t want to invest the money. The electrified portion of the RR was mainly powered by hydroelectric plants thoughout the northwest. Unfortunately, the oil crisis his soon after the decision and that helped seal the fate of the Milwaukee. Imagine where they might be now if they could run econmical electric locos, especially as that technology has developed.