“Some major railroad operators view the potential of LNG-fueled trains as similar to the switch from steam propulsion to diesel in the 1940s and 1950s, a revolution in freight rail known as dieselization.”
While I’m a plenty big fan of the general uptake of NG and LNG, I just don’t see the feasibility of the “L” part of LNG. To convert NG into a liquified state requires several thousand pounds of pressure and cryogenic processing. It’s absolutely not like propane (like a BBQ) which liquifies at ~~125 psi and “room” temperature.
So to convert a fleet of locos to LNG would require fairly massive facilities sprinkled about the country, and of course, that LNG could be used for a hundred other fuel-consuming things and thus that cost would be shared. Additionally, some amount of the NG has to be allowed to boil off and vent during transport. (Certain to drive the global warming nerds batty) The interim challenges to providing such an infrastrucure are non-trivial. Likewise....providing pipelines all over the place to transport diesel is/was non-trivial. But all these projects have to start here and end there and they are projects typically measured in maybe a decade. That’s if the underlying industry gets serious about it. We’ve been screwing around with several goofball forms of so-called “energy policy” for FIFTY YEARS now.
I keep looking around for more & more info about this, so thanks for the article. Color me skeptical but entirely supportive.
No pressure added. It "only" requires cooling down to -260°F.
LNG is normally stored at near atmospheric pressure.
It’s absolutely not like propane (like a BBQ) which liquifies at ~~125 psi and “room” temperature.
It also is not like propane in that it is significantly cheaper.
Additionally, some amount of the NG has to be allowed to boil off and vent during transport.
Typically, the boil off is used as fuel. Just like an ocean-traveling LNG tanker.