"Star of India," absolutely right, and doesn't she still sail?
IIRC, she gets taken out a few times a year for a cruise around San Diego Bay. She's definitely the pride of the Maritime Museum.
Cool! Then I suppose we can can say that Star of India at 153 years old is the champ, still afloat and still earning her keep.
She's a museum ship though and hasn't been in commercial service since 1923.
While her longevity is no less impressive and she's still doing a job by giving pleasure and educating recent generations on maritime history, it's a bit of a different situation.
She's like someone that's retired but keeps very busy volunteering. They're still working, but they're still considered to be retired even if they're busier than they ever were when they were drawing a paycheck.
OK then, "Truelove" still has the record.
They have been dumping the coal ash into the lake for years and getting away with it.
woody9 They have been dumping the coal ash into the lake for years and getting away with it.
And was there a point to that?
Can't save the lake from everything, a little coal ash along with some coal smoke, what's better on warm summer evening. Just like old times.
There's probably enough crud and unspeakables up to and including Jimmy Hoffa on the bottom of that lake than any of us can possibly imagine.
A little coal ash now and then ain't gonna hurt it.
If you don't think coal ash hurts the Great Lakes, think again. Here is the fish consumption guide for the area of Michigan around the Badger's home port. A safe amount of ash in the lakes was passed long ago, and its going to take a long time for them to clean themselves up.
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdch/MDCH_EAT_SAFE_FISH_GUIDE_-_NORTHWEST_MI_WEB_455357_7.pdf
OK Mike, we went 'round and 'round on this subject a while ago on another "Badger" thread, you, me, and quite a few other people.
We're not going to change each other's minds.
We'll just have to agree to disagee.
Right on fire lock, or just make the human race go away. Because regardless of what we do, we are going to harm the environment. The coal power fired steamer is an endangered species, let's try to save one.
I must say that I'm surprised that the Badger got such passionate criticism when far higher levels of mercury pollution happen around the Great Lakes with the EPA's consent, in concentrated areas, and with no public outcry.
And I'm not talking about coal fired power plants that even back in 2005 before the war on coal, accounted for less than 60% of mercury pollution going into the lakes from man-made sources. I'm talking direct dumping from industrial activities into the Great Lake's watershed, with the EPA's consent, despite controls in place meant to prevent that (I posted a report that went into some detail on this, earlier in this or the other Badger thread from a few years ago).
Or the mercury fallout from China that is far worse on the Great Lakes, I bet, than when the numbers of Great Lakes coal fired steamers were easily counted in the hundreds (That I've never read one report on the mercury problem on the lakes that ever pointed a finger towards them when discussing the historical foundation that led us to the problem that exists today).
I said this before, but hopefully these groups band together to try to really combat the problem someday, and hopefully in a more productive fashion for the best interests of everyone. Simply scuttling the offender being targeted isn't how to best do it.
The goal shouldn't be just to stop or mitigate the problem, but to do so in such a way as to also preserve jobs, our economy, and our abilty to meet the needs of today's society. Have to have factories and such for that and simply outsourcing tasks deemed undesirable to 3rd world areas like China isn't the solution even if we don't care about their own conditions or the strength of our own economy, since the mess still finds its way to our shores.
Have to lead by example and simply offshoring our problem to somewhere else with next to no environmental controls isn't how to do it.
Firelock76We'll just have to agree to disagee.
That's my feelings, too.
The merits of the Badger or the value in the objections towards her have been debated to death by now and with everyone's viewpoints well established on what happily has been resolved to most everyone's satisfaction (Other than that of a particular competitor to the Badger).
Firelock76 OK Mike, we went 'round and 'round on this subject a while ago on another "Badger" thread, you, me, and quite a few other people. We're not going to change each other's minds. We'll just have to agree to disagee.
I thought the issue was settled when the Badger owner installed the ash collection system, however, after you and the other two posters brought the subject up again, I felt the need to answer.
MidlandMike Firelock76 OK Mike, we went 'round and 'round on this subject a while ago on another "Badger" thread, you, me, and quite a few other people. We're not going to change each other's minds. We'll just have to agree to disagee. I thought the issue was settled when the Badger owner installed the ash collection system, however, after you and the other two posters brought the subject up again, I felt the need to answer.
Exactkt. The issue will never end as long as polluters continue. And using the excuse that "others are polluting" is as lame as it is when a teen tries that one on his parents in regard to other "substances."
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
So you're actually saying that since there is still pollution from her, that the problem hasn't been taken care of yet?
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Beautiful drone piloting, beautiful camera work, beautiful ship ... and all I keep thinking about is "why can't they do something about that awful lack of good combustion?"
schlimm Exactkt. The issue will never end as long as polluters continue. And using the excuse that "others are polluting" is as lame as it is when a teen tries that one on his parents in regard to other "substances."
With respect to the lameness of excuses and the non-lameness of arguments against excuses, I believe that whatever the laws on recreational drugs, an regardless as to whether they are legal such as alcohol in most places and marijuana starting in some states, parents should have the authority to proscribe their use by their minor children.
I also believe that a municipality should have the right to ban coal-burning locomotives or ships or boats if they enact such laws, or even ban windmills or cellphone towers if that is what their residents want to do.
But the analogy between coal smoke from the SS Badger or from a restored steam locomotive and the use of recreational drugs by teens is a weak one. Is a person drawing a moral equivalence from some persons deriving recreation from a steam locomotive excursion and minor child seeking recreation from drugs or alcohol that are either illegal or illegal for that child?
Do we want or even need a zero-tolerance policy for the emission of pollutants such as coal smoke? Are we going to extend that policy to backyard cooking, wood fireplaces, bonfires, and two-stroke engines in chainsaws, string trimmers, and motor scooters, all of which give off polluting smoke?
And who are these "polluters"? The word has an air of scapegoating as in "gangs", "Wall Street", "slum lords", "monied interests", "immigrants", "international banking" or other dog-whistle terms for whoever both the Far Right and the Far Left want to blame our difficulties upon.
The polluters are you, me, and you over there, and hey, you too. To the extent that we all drive cars (and ride trains, too) and eat farmed food, transport and refrigerate that food, and heat or cool our houses or even have houses to live in instead of sod huts, we all benefit from commercial activities that include combustion of fuels, smelting of metals, synthesis of chemicals, and the disposal of wastes.
Many of us conduct our lives without partaking of recreational drugs or in some cases, without consuming more than trace amounts of alcohol. But I doubt that any of us could live without placing some waste burden in the environment. That handling our natural biological waste has become a major industrial activity in the form of sewers and treatment plants is what distinguishes a "first world" society with much lower infectious disease rates and much longer life expentancy. And that industrial activity with its own pollution problems comes into play everytime you flush.
I guess if as a society we want to ban coal-burning steam excursions and ban the SS Badger, that is a choice we can make through our representative government. And maybe breathing the coal smoke is an anachronism that we can do away with, much like I doubt the historical recreation Colonial Williamsburg doesn't require its visitors to use Colonial Period rest room facilities.
If protecting the environment is a religion, I guess we can have a Religious Police chasing down sinners such as persons enjoying a campfire or a coal-burning steam locomotive excursion. If protecting the environment, on the other hand, is a balancing act between allowing some pollution, emission, or waste discharge of minimal impact while prohibiting, restricting, or regulating more serious sources of pollution, taking into account both the quantity of the pollution as well as the benefit people derive from conducting the activity, I believe there is a place to allow the SS Badger to continue to operate.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
OvermodBeautiful drone piloting, beautiful camera work, beautiful ship ... and all I keep thinking about is "why can't they do something about that awful lack of good combustion?"
Since this is an official SS Badger video, the smoke may be for effect, such as the massive plumes created in railfan photo run-bys.
Wonderful work, though.
Great video, although I personally think that the coal smoke from her stack looks pretty clean and don't understand why that's even coming up. Any good RS3 would put her to shame in the smoke department.
It goes back to what I said earlier. People like Schlimm that happily pollute themselves left and right but take offense elsewhere for their cause to stop others, aren't going to stay away from the SS Badger for long or ever admit the environmental benefits that she does provide (All the mileage saved by trucks, for instance, from driving the long way around the lake).
She's not dumping coal ash any more, but they'll be dusting off their pitchforks soon enough in the name of their varying causes. Enjoy her while you still can since she might not survive the next round in a few years time as the same old groups and individuals like the corrupt Dick Durbin reorganize for the next assault.
Meanwhile I await Schlimm making public his plans on how to mitigate his own emissions, if he indeed has the zero tolerance policy he proclaimed towards pollution of any sort from any source.
NorthWest Overmod Since this is an official SS Badger video, the smoke may be for effect, such as the massive plumes created in railfan photo run-bys.
Overmod
Guys -- it's a technical point, not a call for social responsibility or an opening for anti-coal propaganda. It's nothing that better firing or heated overfire air wouldn't solve.
Almost every shot of the Badger I have seen has involved stringy plumes of black smoke. My argument is that there should no more be black smoke from a ship operating at steady-state design horsepower than there should be from big steam running consistently at its most efficient speed.
Now, I do have to agree that I don't like gratuitous pollution, be it kids 'rolling coal' or wasteful schlock for photo runbys. But you won't hear me arguing they should be banned -- just discouraged. And there is certainly no argument that the small amount of smoke from Badger represents an infinitesimal amount of additional air-quality reduction (except perhaps when the smoke blows down across the decks -- and it turns out that some of the passengers don't like that soft-coal bouquet) just as the nominal environmental 'gain' from holding the line on NOx in the Tier 4 final spec over relaxing it to what EMD could comfortably achieve cost-effectively is out of any rational proportion to the additional expense now needed to meet that spec.
But I repeat, surely there is a way to combust the particles in that smoke and not have to watch them disperse...
Overmod But I repeat, surely there is a way to combust the particles in that smoke and not have to watch them disperse...
I certainly endorse that position.
SS Badger provides commercial lake transportation, yes, but it is as much an exhibition of historical technology as is a coal-burning steam locomotive operated in excursion service. I regard such examples of coal-fired steam power not simply as historical reenactment of how it was done back in the day but as ongoing work in that technology.
As such, I endorse the view that coal-fired steam should be operated as efficiently, effectively, and cleanly as possible. With the Skinner Uniflow engine, the Badger represents as much a pinnacle of steam technology as the Pennsy T-1. As the Badger represented the best of its kind in its heyday, I support that it be operated according to best practices by today's technology.
OvermodBut I repeat, surely there is a way to combust the particles in that smoke and not have to watch them disperse...
Perhaps, but that coal smoke from that one vessel is so insignificant it hardly matters, the same as with all the operating steam engines. You need to look at this in the greater context of things, such as the world at large, and not be so narrow minded as some of these munincipalities and regional organizations are, and I have major objections to our own Bay Area(SF, CA) Air Quality Management Districts proposal to ban wood fireplaces in ALL homes, including those already existing and insisting they be replaced with either gas(gee, lets change from wood to gas, that helps) or fake electric wood fires, just because of a few particles from the burning wood...let's not take into account the expense you'll bring upon people that MUST convert if they ever want to sell there homes(and that is exactly what the proposal would do, if it stays in it's current form, as opposed to just scrapping the idea).
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Overmod Perhaps, but that coal smoke from that one vessel is so insignificant it hardly matters, the same as with all the operating steam engines. You need to look at this in the greater context of things, such as the world at large, and not be so narrow minded as some of these munincipalities and regional organizations are, and I have major objections to our own Bay Area(SF, CA) Air Quality Management Districts proposal to ban wood fireplaces in ALL homes, including those already existing and insisting they be replaced with either gas(gee, lets change from wood to gas, that helps) or fake electric wood fires, just because of a few particles from the burning wood...let's not take into account the expense you'll bring upon people that MUST convert if they ever want to sell there homes(and that is exactly what the proposal would do, if it stays in it's current form, as opposed to just scrapping the idea).
Considering the current 'tinder nature' of a lot of California - sparks from a fireplace......
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR ... I have major objections to our own Bay Area(SF, CA) Air Quality Management Districts proposal to ban wood fireplaces in ALL homes, including those already existing and insisting they be replaced with either gas(gee, lets change from wood to gas, that helps) or fake electric wood fires, just because of a few particles from the burning wood...
You must not have spent any time in Boulder or Denver, to get an idea of what happens when widespread use of 'cheap' woodburning stoves -- even highly efficient European versions -- comes to be adopted.
The problem, as with photochemical smog from motor vehicles, isn't that 'just one more' added source causes tipover into trouble; it's that if it's legal or encouraged for one person then it has to be for everyone... and it doesn't take long before acrid, nasty woodsmoke starts to pose problems.
As a dedicated lover of wood-log fires in the fireplace -- I am singularly proud of getting one going in the taproom at the University Cottage Club, which has a roughly 12" x 12" flue 140 feet tall -- I strongly sympathize with any effort to keep Goliath from outlawing any form of wood fireplace. There is the usual Californian reliance on "fairness" that we see so often with respect to gun control, with about as much practical result vs. more well-targeted solutions. Unfortunately you'll have to have a revolution in the SF area before that would occur -- speed the day! but I don't think that's likely soon.
schlimmFrom checking online it looks like top speed of both the Nimitz and brand new Gerald Ford classes is 30-35+ mph. Maybe the true speed is classified and is a bit higher, but far from 60. The first nuclear carrier, Enterprise was almost 39 mph. By contrast, the conventional Forrestal class top speed was 39 mph; Kitty Hawks were ~37 mph.
Calculate it relative to waterline length and correct for the hydrodynamic improvements below the waterline; the additional speed above 'formula' then comes out of all proportion to the amount of shp required.
Remember that all the required horsepower has to go through the propellers with acceptable levels of cavitation; even with fancy blade shaping, bubbling and chemicals there's a limit to what you can do there. That will give you all the necessary understanding to calculate both the 'dash' speed and permissible recovery speed.
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR Overmod But I repeat, surely there is a way to combust the particles in that smoke and not have to watch them disperse... GERALD L MCFARLANE JR: Perhaps, but that coal smoke from that one vessel is so insignificant it hardly matters, the same as with all the operating steam engines.
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR: Perhaps, but that coal smoke from that one vessel is so insignificant it hardly matters, the same as with all the operating steam engines.
Perhaps the Badger should be considered an operating museum, much like restored and operating steam locomotives? The for-profit status might need some fine tuning, but it seems like an exception can be made on that basis.
I think you have a good point. From a global stand point, the badger contributes an almost incalculable amount of pollution. She is, a living breathing window into the past. An exception needs to be made. When it comes to global pollution their are much bigger fish to fry.
IIRC the SS Badger has been designated a national historical landmark. Like tourist steam engines they seem to have an exemption on their smoke stack emissions. However, the Badgers previous problem (which they have corrected) was that they were slucing their ash pans directly into Lake Michigan. It was a difficult problem to handle on a ship, but they solved the problem. I don't think anyone would have tolerated a RR steam engine facility dumping their ashes into a river.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.