Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
This proposal is about wedding a special fuel with an ultra-modern steam locomotive.  In a way, I would postulate that this is far more ambitious than the ACE-3000 project was.  That locomotive was intended to burn coal.  The SRI locomotive will burn a highly specialized manufactured fuel pellet that might be described as ultra dense charcoal.   <o:p></o:p> The first question these pellets raise is this:  Using the most efficient biomass feedstock possible, how many acres would it take to produce enough on a sustainable basis to power all rail transport in the U.S.?  Or to ask it in another way, what percentage of the U.S. land mass would be required to produce the trees, switch grass, or whatever biomass was the most productive?  Would 1/3 of the U.S. land mass be enough?  Surely these developers have calculated the answer to this question.   <o:p></o:p> I am sure there will be enough trees and logging waste to produce enough pellets to demonstrate the SRI prototype locomotive, but the prototype is intended to usher in widespread use of this torrefied wood pellet technology.  So, it raises the question of how to produce the feedstock.  There are many ways to make synthetic fuel, and you always hear claims such as the ability to power our cars on algae for example.  But how much algae, and how much cost to produce it?  <o:p></o:p> So, I believe the issue of producing the torrefied pellets has not been resolved to a practical level.  The developers of the process speak of a crudely made, prototype boiler for burning the pellets.  Crudely made?  A crudely made prototype suggests that the focus is on the theory, and not on the practical execution.  Will the prototype SRI locomotive be crudely made as well?  If not, it will surely require an enormous amount of engineering and design.   <o:p></o:p> This locomotive will have a lot of new technology including a new exhaust nozzle system, a gas producer firebox, and superinsulated piping.  Will it have a high pressure, watertube boiler, or will they stay with a firetube boiler?  Will it have fluidized bed combustion, or is that not combinable with a gas producer firebox?  How much computer technology will go into the control systems?  I am guessing that a lot will.  <o:p></o:p> A proper engineering and design phase for this project might cost as much or more than the machine shop work, materials, and assembly.  I would think that if you had ten engineers and cad designers working on the development, it might take them at least five years.  So the free locomotive that they have acquired as a basic foundation is just a token in the total scope of work and cost of the project.   <o:p></o:p> The real key to convincing me whether this is serious will be to watch what they do next.  They should carefully measure and cad model the entire ATSF locomotive as a starting basis for their design.  Then they should begin the long process of engineering and development for the new locomotive.  When that development work is complete, they would finally begin disassembly of the ATSF locomotive, begin the fabrication of the new parts, and the modification of existing parts.  That is the proper, professional course of action.   <o:p></o:p> But I wonder if they will instead immediately begin tearing down the ATSF locomotive and start making modifications on the fly without any logical sequence, doing some design work concomitantly.  I will be watching to see if that is their approach.  That is the amateur way of product development.  It is often referred to as “Cut and try.”
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