[neocone]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 712796.stm

Personally I think it is awesome... except for the 1930s retro implications.

With a neo New Deal on the works as we experience a neo Great Depression I just hope we won't also have a rise of neo National Socialism to boot.

[mos6507]

Since we'll run out of coal after oil, makes sense to go back to steam trains.

[Plantagenet]

It would make more sense to move from diesel to modern, high speed electric trains rather then returning to old-fashioned coal-fired steam trains.

[vtsnowedin]

If memory serves the old steam /coal locomotives had only about a five percent efficency rating vs. about 34 percent for a recent diesel-electric model. I have to wonder what can be achieved if state of the art technology is applied to the problem.
Of course 34% efficency with a fuel you have none of is of little use so we may have to make do with whatever we can get with steam from burning some renewable fuel regardless of the return rate but we should see how much we can wring out of mbtu of fuel.

[neocone]

It is reliable means to go from A to B. India uses them as well as China and even parts of Siberia.

Low tech/rugged will trample anything of high maintenance need.

We will be happy to get anywhere in a few days as opposed to not at all. And even low grade coal can do the trick... if not coal made out of wood.

Trains have 10-50 X the efficiency of trucks and buses to transport a payload from A to B too, so in the end rail will always dominate.

And horses...

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'I')t would make more sense to move from diesel to modern, high speed electric trains rather then returning to old-fashioned coal-fired steam trains.

[CarlosFerreira]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', ':')wink: If memory serves the old steam /coal locomotives had only about a five percent efficency rating vs. about 34 percent for a recent diesel-electric model. I have to wonder what can be achieved if state of the art technology is applied to the problem.
Of course 34% efficency with a fuel you have none of is of little use so we may have to make do with whatever we can get with steam from burning some renewable fuel regardless of the return rate but we should see how much we can wring out of mbtu of fuel.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CarlosFerreira', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', ':')wink: If memory serves the old steam /coal locomotives had only about a five percent efficency rating vs. about 34 percent for a recent diesel-electric model. I have to wonder what can be achieved if state of the art technology is applied to the problem.
Of course 34% efficency with a fuel you have none of is of little use so we may have to make do with whatever we can get with steam from burning some renewable fuel regardless of the return rate but we should see how much we can wring out of mbtu of fuel.

[CarlosFerreira]

I see what you mean. My point is that both for the environmental and for EROEI purposes, using that coal in electricity generation is probably more efficient; I'm not sure, haven't seen any numbers on it, so it's speculation. Maybe just building more coal-fired electricity plants will be easier that build all new locos to substitute the ones we have?

Anyway, it's open for debate.

[Bytesmiths]

Steam is inefficient partly because it includes an extra transfer of energy, from thermo-chemical combustion, to heating water. The Second Law of Thermodynamics says you always lose something when you do that. Why pour a bunch of research into heating water via external combustion, when you could spend that research on diversifying feedstock for direct, internal combustion?

Steam is also inefficient because of the low temperature differential. The higher the temperature, the better the theoretical Carnot efficiency, and the easier it is to get high efficiency numbers. Diesels are efficient (in part) because of higher combustion temperatures. Large diesels approach 50% Carnot efficiency -- ten times what the same energy source would produce in a steam engine!

To get ~1,000 degree temperatures from external combustion requires extensive high-pressure systems, which can be dangerous if not properly maintained, unlike the relative ease of getting and controlling ~1,000 degree temperatures inside a huge hunk of cast iron.

The main advantage of steam power is that it can be produced with less technology. There is no advantage to applying more technology to systems whose main advantage is low technology!

If we want to re-direct energy conversion research, I'd say let's put 1/10th of the money that has been poured into hybrids into what I call "versatile-fuel diesel" research. With very small amounts invested, one could produce engines for agriculture and commerce that could be directly fueled with vegetable oil. (I'm not talking about heated-tank systems here, I'm talking about improved injection pumps and filtration systems. Rudolph Diesel did it over 100 years ago; why can't we do it now?)

[CarlosFerreira]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bytesmiths', 'S')team is inefficient partly because it includes an extra transfer of energy, from thermo-chemical combustion, to heating water. The Second Law of Thermodynamics says you always lose something when you do that. Why pour a bunch of research into heating water via external combustion, when you could spend that research on diversifying feedstock for direct, internal combustion?

Steam is also inefficient because of the low temperature differential. The higher the temperature, the better the theoretical Carnot efficiency, and the easier it is to get high efficiency numbers. Diesels are efficient (in part) because of higher combustion temperatures. Large diesels approach 50% Carnot efficiency -- ten times what the same energy source would produce in a steam engine!

To get ~1,000 degree temperatures from external combustion requires extensive high-pressure systems, which can be dangerous if not properly maintained, unlike the relative ease of getting and controlling ~1,000 degree temperatures inside a huge hunk of cast iron.

The main advantage of steam power is that it can be produced with less technology. There is no advantage to applying more technology to systems whose main advantage is low technology!

If we want to re-direct energy conversion research, I'd say let's put 1/10th of the money that has been poured into hybrids into what I call "versatile-fuel diesel" research. With very small amounts invested, one could produce engines for agriculture and commerce that could be directly fueled with vegetable oil. (I'm not talking about heated-tank systems here, I'm talking about improved injection pumps and filtration systems. Rudolph Diesel did it over 100 years ago; why can't we do it now?)

[Bytesmiths]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('CarlosFerreira', 'I') suppose your take on coal usage is to keep it to electricity generation, right? Do you have any idea of the efficiency of modern, coal-fired stations?

[TamilFarmer]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('neocone', 'I')t is reliable means to go from A to B. India uses them as well as China and even parts of Siberia.

[cephalotus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bytesmiths', '
')
Large coal-fired electricity generation attains about 35% to 40% Carnot efficiency, at the plant. Transmission losses can be 10%.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bodhinagami', '
')Trees are getting tired of humanity, and most want to go to another planet to live there; in their next rebirths.... far away from one of the most ignorant and arrogant species that have appeared in this planet.

[Bytesmiths]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cephalotus', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Bytesmiths', 'L')arge coal-fired electricity generation attains about 35% to 40% Carnot efficiency, at the plant. Transmission losses can be 10%.

[Gerben]

New coal power plants can use gasification technology. That allows the use of a combined cycle like with natural gas fired power plants. This makes power plants more flexible and increases their efficiency to approach that of gas fired combined cycle plants. The cost however are still too high, mainly because the technology is still experimental. And coal is still too cheap.

[Revi]

I love steam engines, but I agree that a hybrid electric engine seems to be the best way to move a train. We went on a run from Brunswick, Maine to Rockland a couple of weeks ago. What a great day. The best was when we could get to the back of the train and watch the tracks recede in the distance.

They are talking about extending passenger rail to Augusta, Maine. That would be great.

There used to be lots of narrow gauges. Some are still around.

We took a ride on the Wiscasset, Waterville and Farmington Railway. It's the best little railway in Maine.

http://www.wwfry.org/

We used to be able to take the train to the Commonground Fair, but they aren't in business any more. It really added to the car traffic at the fair this year.

I hope Obama pushes rail service. If he gets one thing done that would be the thing to do.

[Bytesmiths]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'I') agree that a hybrid electric engine seems to be the best way to move a train. We went on a run from Brunswick, Maine to Rockland a couple of week..

[JudgieReloaded]

I believe even China since it's huge growth-spurt, has had it's steam loco's moth-balled for at least a decade now.