Posted on 10/09/2013 7:18:36 AM PDT by thackney
In summary, this rule sets out engine standards and emission test procedures (including not-to-exceed requirements) for new nonroad diesel engines, and sulfur control requirements for diesel fuel used in land-based nonroad, locomotive, and marine engines (NRLM fuel).
Beginning in 2008, the new Tier 4 engine standards for five power categories for engines from under 25 horsepower (hp) to above 750 horsepower will be phased in. New engine emissions test procedures will be phased in along with these new standards to better ensure emissions control over real-world engine operation and to help provide for effective compliance determination. The sulfur reductions to land-based nonroad diesel fuel will be accomplished in two steps, with an interim step from currently uncontrolled levels to a 500 ppm cap starting in June, 2007 and the final step to 15 ppm in June, 2010. This change in fuel quality will directly lead to important health and welfare benefits associated with the reduced generation of sulfate PM and SOX. Even more important, introduction of 15 ppm sulfur nonroad diesel fuel facilitates the introduction of advanced aftertreatment devices for nonroad engines.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2004-06-29/html/04-11293.htm
Yes, CNG, not LNG, that’s what I meant.
I do not believe it would.
Yes it is.
LOL!
The Kenai, AK fertilizer plant has been generating their own electricity with diesel locomotives converted to NG for 40+- years.
Poorly described in the article.
Locomotives don’t actually run on diesel engines, or at least not in the way we think of cars and trucks being drive by engines. The diesel (or NG) engines are generators, which produce electricity which is what drives the wheels.
LNG has less energy per unit of volume, so requires a tender to carry fuel to get adequate range whereas the diesel locomotives can carry all the fuel they’re likely to need on board.
They should just mount windmills on top of all the cars; that would generate power to run the locomotive.
I got asked that question when I was taking a power and energy class. Windmills are not efficient, generators are seldom over 80% efficient, motors are inefficient also. You would have to be traveling with hurricane winds to run the windmills to overcome the energy losses at each stage.
Shell LNG as Today’s Marine Fuel
http://www.gastechnology.org/Training/Documents/LNG17-proceedings/Transport-05-Eddie-Green-Presentation.pdf
And that did away with railroad diesel.
You could do better with sail over windmills on a car.
Railroads have been studying this for a while, and the results were quite promising thought they did have some issues with being able to refuel them to full and sometimes they ran out of gas unexpectedly. UPS, I believe it was in 2002 tried out CNG (which is much easier to use) for delivery trucks in Saint Louis and had success with them.
For whatever use, the infrastructure is the largest expense. Thought railroads probably could do this in stages the easiest, as they could assign LNG locomotives to divisions that have a refueling station. A Similar strategy to how the Pennsylvania and Milwaukee Road used their electric locomotives.
For the longest time the price of natural gas has been tied to the price of oil and never varies from it by more than a certain range. So for those looking to use natural gas they could expect high prices when oil prices were high and the overall savings were generally not viewed as enough to justify the investment in infrastructure. Fracking may have changed that and separated the price of natural gas from oil so that even as oil prices climb the price of natural gas may not. So now seems to be the time to pursue the idea.
It certainly makes more sense than Ethanol, switch grass, and the other nonsense.
I guess my experience is a bit dated. When I was a kid I lived near a railroad and it seemed that the fuel the trains used was like tar to me. These days must be long gone.
Some large diesel engines can be converted to natural gas only fuel by changing heads and adding spark plugs. some use small charges of diesel to ignite the fuel. Stationary engines are great for natural gas.
You could do better with sail over windmills on a car.
There were some “Prairie Schooners” in the old west that replaced the horses with sail on a wagon. You were limited to going with the wind though.
A meat packing customer I called on used a D-379 Cat diesel engine running on natural gas to run their chilling equipment. The buyer said the lube oil would last “nearly forever” since the fuel was so clean.
I was thinking in terms of it being a terrific terorist target. No problem - just forcibly evacuate everyone that lives within two miles of any railroad track in order to create the “safe zone”.
Please I wish someone develop a LNG system for home heating. PROPANE is TOO EXPENSIVE.
The reason for writing it that way is that LNG is refueling station limited, right now. So with a tender, LNG has workable range.
I think LNG is better than diesel on a couple of fronts - cost per gallon equivalent, and we produce Natgas in the US. No more exporting our $$ and jobs for a more costly fuel
That's how it worked in the steam era, not sure how much has changed so feel free to correct me if any railroad buffs are lurking out there. Either way it seems railroads or even trucking companies, where they could use them for delivery routes, and convert one terminal at a time to LNG could build a fleet over time, instead of having to make a massive investment upfront. Similar to the way diesels replaced steam locomotives on the railroads.
Just stop on a hill.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.