Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Batteries Included: Electric Locomotives?
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">[quote user="Overmod"]</span>[quote user="Bucyrus"]<span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">When we consider the cost/benefit of battery powered locomotives, it would seem that part of the benefit is the elimination of CO2. If that objective is mandated through regulations, that objective has to be met regardless of the cost. So it would seem that battery locomotives would be cost effective no matter what they cost if they are the cheapest way to eliminate CO2 emissions. So I must conclude that the value that one should place on the objective of eliminating CO2 emissions is whatever it costs to accomplish that goal.</span>[/quote]It is trivial to set up an extreme example with a set of hypothetical assumptions and then draw conclusions from that. Of course there would be implications from an autocratic imposition of CO2-abatement legislation that would technically favor BEVs -- or mandate a pure-electric technology if the use of liquid carbon-containing fuel were arbitrarily banned. Long before that point, the use of synthesized 'carrier' fuel from technically renewable sources would become 'cost-effective', and there are other technologies that would become pervasive -- notably more widespread acceptance of railroad electrification, since the contribution of road locomotives to CO2 emissions greatly exceeds switching.</p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">[/quote]</span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">I am setting up a hypothetical case because I think it is highly probable. We were told that this case was the justification for the NS #999 battery locomotive. Eliminating CO2 does indeed seem to be the elephant in the living room. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">But the point I am making about this objective is that it affects the cost/benefit ratio of new non-emission locomotive concepts in a direction that makes previously non-cost-effective solutions suddenly become cost-effective. In other words, based on free market economics, nobody is going to buy locomotives that cost more to own and operate than conventional locomotives. But if a performance regulation adds cost to a locomotive, it will be accepted. And if the regulation requires a locomotive power concept that was previously uneconomical, it might suddenly become economical. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:small;">I did observe that it would seem that battery locomotives would be cost effective no matter what they cost <i>if they are the cheapest way</i> to eliminate CO2 emissions. So, yes if a cheaper way were found, that would be used in place of battery locomotives. I am just using battery locomotives as an example of technology that is not cost effective, but might become so overnight with new regulations. I am certainly not advocating battery locomotives. </span></p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy