The Cost Savings of Steam Today.

[NW Mailing List]

Yes, we need to see the calculations. Remember that coal has NOT gone up 
in price
as fast as petroleum!
Tom Cosgrove

NW Mailing List wrote:

> Ed,

> Why don't we take a look at the man's work before we pick it apart?  

> The diesel-electric locomotive is a very efficient machine but so is a 

> steam turbine.  It's about the best steady-state machine out there.  

> Granted there are lots of questions to be answered, especially 

> emissions and fuel processing but let's hear the plan. 

> Rick Huddle

>

>     ----- Original Message -----

>     *From:* NW Mailing List <mailto:nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

>     *To:* NW Mailing List <mailto:nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

>     *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2008 8:32 PM

>     *Subject:* Re: The Cost Savings of Steam Today.

>

>     I don't think so.  "The dollar value of coal that would accomplish

>     the same amount of "work" is only $3.0 billion, according to

>     calculations."  Whose calculations, based on what thermal

>     efficiency?  Is the assumption to be that today's steam locomotive

>     would have a thermal efficiency equal to that of an equal dbhp of

>     diesel power?

>      

>     That's a lot of assuming, and I don't think it'd fly.

>      

>     EdKing

>

>         ----- Original Message -----

>         *From:* NW Mailing List <mailto:nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

>         *To:* NW Mailing List <mailto:nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>

>         *Sent:* Thursday, January 10, 2008 7:11 PM

>         *Subject:* RE: The Cost Savings of Steam Today.

>

>         John - good for you and I would also like to see the paper. 

>          

>         How do you address the emissions issue?  When we look at those

>         old photos of J's and A's and Y-6B's there is a whole lot of

>         smoke that was certainly OK in the 50's but today would

>         possibly be looked at more critically by some.

>          

>         Anything that reduces our dependance on foreign oil would be a

>         big plus in my book.

>          

>         Thanks very much for your email!

>          

>         Ed Svitil

>

>

>             ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>             Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:49:33 -0500

>             To: nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org

>             Subject: The Cost Savings of Steam Today.

>             From: nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org

>

>             Group:

>

>             I have just finished a 2+ year project comparing the

>             economics of the diesel locomotive and the modern steam

>             locomotive.  The following is an excerpt from my paper:

>

>             "A coal-fueled locomotive could achieve a 64.2% average

>             cost savings over the

>             current petroleum diesel-fueled locomotive. This

>             comparison is based on ton-miles per

>             dollar of fuel consumed in calendar year 2006. US Class I

>             railroads burned 4.2 billion

>             gallons of diesel fuel in 2006, costing $8.1 billion. The

>             dollar value of coal that would

>             accomplish the same amount of "work" is only $3.0 billion,

>             according to calculations.

>             This is a cost savings of $5.1 billion in the single year

>             of 2006. That is an incredible

>             cost savings over the use of diesel fuel, which is largely

>             imported, compared to coal,

>             which is mined locally in the US. Those 4.2 billion

>             gallons of diesel fuel comprise 6.6%

>             of the nation's diesel fuel use. That quantity of diesel

>             fuel could be replaced by 72.3

>             million tons of coal, equivalent to only 6.2% of the 1.16

>             billion ton yearly production

>             of coal."

>

>             This modern steam locomotive would be powered by coal and

>             be environmentally responsible, low maintenance and

>             conform to the needs of railroads today.

>

>             If anyone is interested in reading the paper (it is a 100+

>             page PDF).  I can ask the moderator to post it for the group.

>

>             I hope you find this interesting,

>

>             John Rhodes

>

>         ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>         ________________________________________

>         NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org

>         To change your subscription go to

>         http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list

>         Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at

>         http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/

>

>     ________________________________________

>     NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org

>     To change your subscription go to

>     http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list

>     Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at

>     http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> ________________________________________

> NW-Mailing-List at nwhs.org

> To change your subscription go to

> http://list.nwhs.org/mailman/options/nw-mailing-list

> Browse the NW-Mailing-List archives at

> http://list.nwhs.org/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/



-- 
Tom Cosgrove
N2VFK
NREMT-B
SKYWARN Spotter LME002

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20080110/cabb5832/attachment.htm>