train efficiency
- Thread starter Ben1337
- Start date
johnwhelan
Well-known member
Depends what sort of fuel you have available and how and what you measure. For example if you want to move a single small truck to a different siding a short distance away and you have a horse available then a horse may well be the most efficient.
Trains like the TGV, And trains that get power from overhead wires - Have to get power from somewhere right?
"The Power Plant"
They use tons of coal in the first place, Plus the trains that get it there, Gp-35, Gp-40, EMD's, Use Oil, Gas, And everything under the sun.
Steam trains use use coal, And sometimes oil.
See?
"The Power Plant"
They use tons of coal in the first place, Plus the trains that get it there, Gp-35, Gp-40, EMD's, Use Oil, Gas, And everything under the sun.
Steam trains use use coal, And sometimes oil.
See?
Michael_Evans
thread killer
What about solar, wind, and water power plants???
Well the solar, wind and hydro power plants are or not efficient depending on the whether.
So are electrics the least efficient locos depending on the type of fuel used and the conditions (if renewable) at the plants?
I am wondering if I should introduce new categories like "how much carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere?" and change the question to "What is the best loco type to use?" because it isn't changing the subject completely.
I think that you had forgot one type of fuel that steam trains burns and thats wood.
So are electrics the least efficient locos depending on the type of fuel used and the conditions (if renewable) at the plants?
I am wondering if I should introduce new categories like "how much carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere?" and change the question to "What is the best loco type to use?" because it isn't changing the subject completely.
Last edited:
Michael_Evans
thread killer
If you're talking about pollution just from the locomotive then steam would be the most polluted, then diesel, then electric. Someone should ask a railroad what the average mpg is.
Umm...
err...
yeah...
Where do I start here?
A steam locomotive is among the least efficient types of locomotives imaginable. It uses massive amounts of water and coal every trip. Plus maintenance costs are staggering, with all those exposed moving parts. Over the course of a year, a steam loco has so many parts replaced that it's essentially a new locomotive save the boiler and a few other key parts.
Ben1337 said:
Can anyone say nuclear power? And we ain't talking about pollution here, we're talking about efficiency.
I'd personally say the electric locomotive is the most efficient locomotive imaginable. Why? Regenerative braking, that's why. Regenerative braking turns the traction motors into generators, slowing the train and feeding the kinetic energy back into the power lines. This is an extremely effective system. For example, the Milwaukee Road electrified its line over the Rockies. The first train sent over used regenerative braking. When the Milwaukee road received the electric bill for that particular trip, it was found that the electric company owed it $1.64.
I think that this explains why where talking about pollution and nuclear power is a bit too dangerous.
And to do with the title:Train efficiency: Regenerative braking That is a sweet idea about the power company owing the train company some money.
Two major accidents in 65 years? I don't call that dangerous. Plus, modern reactors are physically incapable of melting down through simple mishandling of equipment (as in Chernobyl) and can use fuel until it is entirely spent and a=safe to be out in the open.
Hahahaha
Electrics are most efficent and least poluting. The reason for this is two fold. Firstly the polution from powerplants can be easily checked and reduced, becase it is concentrated (unlike Diesel-Electrics); Also whoever said electrics polute most - did you think powerplants are built specificly to supply power to trains ONLY?
Secondly they are very efficent thanks to stuff like regeneretive breaking where breaking of the train is used to feed energy back into power lines, giving some power to other locomotives.
Electrics are most efficent and least poluting. The reason for this is two fold. Firstly the polution from powerplants can be easily checked and reduced, becase it is concentrated (unlike Diesel-Electrics); Also whoever said electrics polute most - did you think powerplants are built specificly to supply power to trains ONLY?
Secondly they are very efficent thanks to stuff like regeneretive breaking where breaking of the train is used to feed energy back into power lines, giving some power to other locomotives.Wood is an un-reliable source of fuel.
Coal was much more effecient, because it can burn much hotter than any wood. Thats why you only see old 4-4-0 Americans Burning wood, in a larger locomotive, like a 4-8-4 for example, the wood wouldnt be reliable enough to burn in the fire-box because of its actual burning temperateure. it burns alot lower than Coal does, so it wouldnt heat the water evenly, causing a major loss to steam pressure, and speed, so its very uneconomical.
Also, Burning wood releases alot of sparks, where as coal does not release as many sparks, so, wood was also the cause of the large prairey fires caused by early wood burning locomotives.
On an earlier case, the most effecient locomotive cannot be told because there really is the most effecient locomotive, each locomotive requires something that can do some amout of enviromental damage.
--Sean
they do make some sort of environmental damage but what counts is how much environmental damage the train makes per mile or something. like in this post
Hahahaha
Electrics are most efficent and least poluting. The reason for this is two fold. Firstly the polution from powerplants can be easily checked and reduced, becase it is concentrated (unlike Diesel-Electrics); Also whoever said electrics polute most - did you think powerplants are built specificly to supply power to trains ONLY?
That's not efficiency- that's environmental friendliness. You could have a locomotive that makes no pollution whatsoever, but uses 2000 tons of fuel x every mile. That would be an extremely inefficient loco. On the other hand, you could have a locomotive gets 30 mpg (!), but was made by Alco, and hence produces more smoke than a pile of tires on fire. That's an extremely efficient loco, but trees wither and die in it's wake.
Admittedly, efficient locomotives tend to be more environmentally friendly, but what the railroads really go for is efficiency.
Michael_Evans
thread killer
Does this have anything to do with efficiency?
http://www.uprr.com/customers/surcharge/fsc_table.shtml
http://www.uprr.com/customers/surcharge/fsc_table.shtml
The following is a quote from http://exotic.railfan.net/dieselfaq.htm
"11. Exactly why did the diesel-electric locomotive replace the steam locomotive?
A. Thermal efficiency of a diesel is about 30%, compared to 6-7% for a steam locomotive. The diesel is therefore much more fuel efficient.
B. Diesels develop maximum horsepower and efficiency over a wide range of speeds. Steamers have a very narrow speed range in which they reach full efficiency.
C. Diesels can be operated in multiple units(MU) under only one set of controls. This means that 1 unit can control many other units. This allows once crew per train and greatly reduces labor costs.
D. Dynamic Braking allows good speed control on downgrades and reduces brake repairs. Longer trains are also allowed with better speed control.
E. Maintenance costs are very low in comparison to steamer. Diesel locomotives have an availability of 90% or better, compared to 30-40% for the average steamer. Standardized and modular design played a major role in the diesel's advantage over steam. A diesel could replace about 10 steam locomotives.
F. Fewer fuel and water stops.A diesel requires little water. Diesels allowed the retirement of $50,000,000 worth of equipment to supply water to very thirsty steamers.
G. A low center of gravity enables higher train speeds on curves.
H. Unlike steam locomotives, diesels do not stress the track with the pounding force of reciprocating components. Track maintenance is reduced as a result."
Bob
"11. Exactly why did the diesel-electric locomotive replace the steam locomotive?
A. Thermal efficiency of a diesel is about 30%, compared to 6-7% for a steam locomotive. The diesel is therefore much more fuel efficient.
B. Diesels develop maximum horsepower and efficiency over a wide range of speeds. Steamers have a very narrow speed range in which they reach full efficiency.
C. Diesels can be operated in multiple units(MU) under only one set of controls. This means that 1 unit can control many other units. This allows once crew per train and greatly reduces labor costs.
D. Dynamic Braking allows good speed control on downgrades and reduces brake repairs. Longer trains are also allowed with better speed control.
E. Maintenance costs are very low in comparison to steamer. Diesel locomotives have an availability of 90% or better, compared to 30-40% for the average steamer. Standardized and modular design played a major role in the diesel's advantage over steam. A diesel could replace about 10 steam locomotives.
F. Fewer fuel and water stops.A diesel requires little water. Diesels allowed the retirement of $50,000,000 worth of equipment to supply water to very thirsty steamers.
G. A low center of gravity enables higher train speeds on curves.
H. Unlike steam locomotives, diesels do not stress the track with the pounding force of reciprocating components. Track maintenance is reduced as a result."
Bob
Harry_James_Potter
General Thrash
Diesel electric. 99% of the power generated for traction purposes reaches the wheels. diesel engines convert a good 30 to 40% of the chemical energy in the fuel into electrical energy.
And no Omber... electric traction is not as clean nor efficient as people like to put it across especially in the Uk where King Coal is still the majority supplier of power. Coal-fired power stations are still only 20 to 30% efficient. Even nuclear stations need a thermal power of 4500MW thermal to make sure that 1500MWe make it to the grid...
A reciprocating motion is a motion that goes back and forth...
like the rods and valve gear on a kettle.
regards
Harry