Fwd: The Cost Savings of Steam Today.

[NW Mailing List]

Well, I have seen and heard various points of view, but the one viewpoint that has not seem to have been discussed is not the engine, but the labor needed to run such an engine. Anyone have an educated point of view?

Frank Jefferson



-----Original Message-----
From: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
To: NW Mailing List <nw-mailing-list at nwhs.org>
Sent: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:16 am
Subject: Re: The Cost Savings of Steam Today.


On Jan 10, 2008 11:27 PM, Ed King wrote:



Now, turbines are very efficient as you note, but you have to understand that the fuel savings aren't going to be enough.? You have to pay for the development of your new locomotive and you have to sink a whole lot of dollars into the capital cost of producing the locomotive and adapting servicing facilities, etc. for handling it.? As you note, the turbine is about the best steady-state machine out there, but therein lies one of its faults;?it's always going to be at its most efficient at or near full-throttle operation, and railroading ain't that kind of a game.? It's been proven that the good old positive-displacement diesel engine can develop power economically over a wide range of power outputs which is most suitable for rail operations.



?
Yes, but both the N&W and Virginian showed the best way to use those full-throttle turbines -- the electrification program that used overhead power lines to run the traction motors instead of the diesel-engine-run generator carried in each unit.? It would seem that using coal in a stationary boiler/turbine to generate electricity would be a more efficient way to use coal to power a railroad. Granted, there would also be high capital costs building the support structure (catenary structure vs. coaling/water facilities), but electric traction is already a known quantity in the railroad world. It would be easier (ignoring for now the NIMBYs) to manage the pollution from a fixed plant than try to mange the output from a moving plant. 

I wonder what Norfolk Southern's bottom line would look like today had it added to the electrification in place after the VGN merger instead of dismantling it. Would there be enough difference between the cost of diesel fuel and coal-produced power to bump up the dividend each quarter? 

Bruce in Blacksburg






________________________________________
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/


________________________________________________________________________
More new features than ever.  Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/nw-mailing-list/attachments/20080111/825ad1bc/attachment.htm>