When Xanterra suggested that steam locomotives were not environmentally friendly, I don’t think they were referring to the cost of fuel consumption. If anything, they were referring to emissions. But when they talk about wanting to be green, it seems to me that it moves into a more subjective area that is at least half fashion and symbolism, and is about a lot more than emissions. It is not that sustainability cannot be measured; it’s just that I doubt is often measured accurately.

The steam locomotive is an icon of the industrial age, which is the very antithesis of the fashion part of green. To that fashion, the industrial age represents a time when man rode roughshod over the environment before becoming enlightened to green living and sustainability. Without even needing to measure one particle of emission, any green advocate will take one look at a steam locomotive with its often flagrant visible smoke plume and classify it as arrogantly non-green.

It is true that the central mission of GCRY is transportation and not the preservation of steam. So it is easy to see why a green minded company would be willing to shed steam if steam were not its central mission. If steam were the central mission, I doubt that a green minded company would purchase such a business in the first place. It raises questions about the D&SNRRR, which has a central mission that is split between the twin attractions of steam and mountain scenery. I have no doubt that if a green-minded company such as Xanterra were to purchase the D&S, they would end steam for the same reason as with the GCRY.

Keep in mind that green advocates are often willing to pay extra money in order to be green. So contrary to the popular belief that Xanterra has ended steam to save money, it is quite possible that ending steam will cost them money, and that they realize that. However, they may be willing to pay the price. They may even believe that the price will be offset by attracting more customers because they are green.

If you believe that Xanterra’s green reason for ending steam is just a flimsy excuse, go to this website and read what they say about their environmental vision. It runs twelve pages.

http://www.xanterra.com/Environmental-Action-364.html

Interesting is their mention of their plans to bring the GCRY up to their environmental standards:

“In 2007, the company grew significantly with the addition of Rocky Mountain National Park and the Grand Canyon Railway. I am confident that we will advance these operations – which currently have no environmental programs, no environmental management systems, and no energy or waste management initiatives – to our standard of more environmentally
sustainable operations.”

They say their goal is to act as a “beacon to sustainability.”

Ages ago (I'm thinking late 1980s), Robert Le Massena wrote an essay for Trains that basically made the argument, in scientific terms, that steam loco exhaust was "better" for the environment than diesel exhaust. I showed the essay to physicists and biologists at the time, and they agree that, if the claims about the content of typical loco exhaust made by Le Massena were accurate, he was right--but, of course, the physicists, both railfans, had to point out relative efficiencies, inefficiencies, the costs of fuel processing/digging, etc.

Given the current hot topic of "global warming" as opposed to pollution or the "hole in the ozone layer", I'd be interested in revisiting the relative environmental impacts of Strasburg 90 or the rebuilt CB&Q 4960 versus Alco FPA4's or an SW8.

It would be very interesting to see a study of the emissions of steam locomotives that included information on the chemical components of the exhaust, the mass flows involved, the effect of duty cycle, the auxiliary losses, the heat losses to the environment, and related the fuel consumption to the power produced. Of course there are the external factors like how much additional pollution is generated in obtaining, processing and transporting the type of fuel that is being used, and in the case of coal you have the additional issue of the pollution produced by rain water runoff from the fuel during transportation and storage. Back in the 1950s a typical comparison of the energy required to transport coal and oil fuel of equivalent heat value was that it took 9 to 11 hopper car loads of coal to equal the heat output of one tank car load of oil fuel.

PC

It's BS about the railroad being concerned with the emissions of their locomotives. If such were the case, said owners would be working closely with the NPS to eliminate ALL vehicular traffic into the park and buying up some of the new low emission diesels to power trains 20 cars or more long (all coach class), in multiple hourly departures, 16 hours a day. (gotta give them some sort of break)

It's green in the pocket, that fortunately will be in their favor. Just not the railfan's.

First of all I hope every one finds work. From the little I have been told the steam operation is scaled down not finshed.

This all is so disapointing knowing just how much has been done to make the steamers more eficent and greener compered with afew years ago. It makes me wonder just what I have to do to make steam survive?


Nigel

Waste biomass fired units which are both efficient and simple and robust. Condensing / recycling boiler water would be a bonus. Sealed bearings that don't lose oil. Minimal dynamic augment.

dave

Nigel Anthony Hewer Day, "It makes me wonder just what I have to do to make steam survive?"

I do not think you can truly make a steam locomotive economically viable in many cases. I often find the big tourist RR use other things to make money. The locomotive or the train is the hook. The gift shop and restaurant and other sales make money.

For the steam locomotive to have a niche in the economic world we need to change its uses. I proposed years ago a tour of the states Arizona and New Mexico for phelps dodge with SP 3420. 3420 is not a mainline locomotive by any of today's standards. We deliberately tried to choose routes where we limited our mainline time. We even discussed deliberate short hops to minimize delay times. Phoenix was the real hard push and with the traffic today it would be impossible unless the locomotive was shipped there itself. Corporate work is one possible way for steam to survive.

Other options are public service work. we had the idea of using 3420 for Toys for Tots campaign and even using it as a roving toy distribution center. Imagine Santa arriving on the train and delivering toys in a oppressed neighborhood on street trackage or near by industrial track. Operation Lifesaver messages and even officer in the train could have a positive visual impact on the message being sent.

But this means you have to play to politically correct for both corporate message and other public perceptions.

A program that I have heard little on but I do have a great interest in is the education program that the 3751 group does and its impact on the organization. While she may not be flying down the RR she is getting good public exposure and developing good public will.

I believe that one need to change their economic model if steam is to survive.

Robby

My spies tell me that 4960 is now stuffed and mounted near the Williams Depot as of Tuesday night.

Damn that was fast.

Sounds like they want to do everything in their power to make certain those locomotives never run again for themselves or anybody else...what a shame. I remember riding in the cab of the 18 and having the fortune to be able to fire her on a trip a few years ago....what an enjoyable experience and one I will not forget.

Well there is some good news: The 18 was sold by the GCRy a couple of years ago and is now running on the Rio Grande Scenic Railroad out of Alamosa, Colorado. I rode the cab this past Wednesday.

And as I recall, 18 was "stuffed and mounted" in probably the same spot a few years back, so unless someone sees the likes of a pile of cut flues, superheater units, or a dismembered throttle outside the 4960, don't despair just yet.

Absolutely! Those locomotives are worth a considerable amount of money as operational motive power. A CB&Q Mikado is a cash asset to the Grand Canyon, and unless something is vitally removed or damaged, I think the funeral is a bit early. Besides, nothing official has been said about killing steam forever. There is a huge investment in machinery, materials, and parts. Sit back and watch, listen, and learn.

Since they have gotten rid of everyone who works on them,that seems to have killed steam there..good to have the locomotives,but with no one there to put them back in service,they are as good as dead there. I'm sure the folks who were so unceremoniously let go would not come back,nor I'm quite sure would they be asked. Sure they could go and get other steam qualified peolpe to work on them,but you would be re inventing the wheel...and who would want to go there under those conditions?

For those who haven't seen it over on that other forum, here's a more satirical response to the situation written by a good friend that some of you might enjoy: http://ngdiscussion.net/phorum/read.php?1,116261