Let’s get this out of the Political Debate that’s rolling well under the carbon heading and continue on about “Green” locomotives in preservation.

Let’s visit the comment about reengineering an older locomotive not being “preservation.” Let’s say you have an old F unit sitting dead in the back lot. The board decides it’s a liability and wants to dispose of it.
Option 1 would be scrap it. Definitely not preservation.

Option 2
To meet the truest form of preservation we would need to find all of the ORIGINAL parts to the locomotive restore/repair them. This includes items such as a B block, cloth wiring or at best Hapolon, all the old relays that were rendered obsolete decades ago etc etc. To be true to form we would have to find and use lead based paint as well! This goes back to all the historic fabric, grandpa’s axe conversations.

Is this preservation by the definition rendered in the other post? If so all the locomotives that are saved as hulks with no machinery inside are not preserved. Doyle is not preserving a P.A. unit and what about the GP-38-2 in F bodies at I.R.M.? None of these examples are preserved? What are they then?

In the example I am referring to the outside visible changes required (if any) would be minor at best. Definitely nothing the general public would notice and that is where the money comes from not rivet counters. Riding a coach back in the train no difference would be noticed.

The cost of such conversions was brought up as being at least $250,000.00. Depending on how much contract labor you used it could be done for around that number. As far as fuel savings taking decades to repay the project there is a possible way around that as well. If you qualify for Diesel Emission reductions grants the government may pay for up to 80% of the cost.

You may want to leave Biodiesel for railroads that burn all of the fuel in there tanks on a regular basis. It has been our experience that it does not have the stabilizers needed to let it sit stagnant for extended periods of time such as found in Museum units. I’m not sure on this point but does just changing to Bio make you tier compliant? Plus bio does not reduce the fuel needed for operation. I also wonder how bio reduces blow by.

In closing I’m not recommending taking a good running, sound unit and rip everything out to go “green” but it does offer a good alternative for hulks or units that are in bad enough shape that this could be a more cost effective way to bring them back to life pulling trains the way they were intended to do.
Jack

If you don't bend, you're going to break.

Most organizations use a lot of leeway when defining "preservation". No, that steel mill switcher did not pull de-motored MUs in its lifetime. If that F-unit never got above 10mph, the railroad would have had no reason for it and would have scrapped it. No, that steam engine did more than pull 2 cars, and it sure wasn't that clean...

Are we preserving the equipment or the experience? Sure, some of the general public may care that there's a new gevo engine in that sw1200, but I bet 98% + don't. So what are the options? Call the scrappers. Get what you can out of the property and sell the land to developers.

The railroads are adapting all the time. We have gp50s that have turned into gp38s. We have old gp40s retrofitted with autostarts and APUs (auxilalry power units).

If the rail preservation community is so worried about having to drop cummins in their alco switcher, maybe they better get together, get organized and become proactive? Take some lessons from the *gasp* rail-trail groups?