California passes regulations mandating zero-emission locos

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 11:32 am

https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews ... comotives/

Quote:

California has passed regulations requiring dramatic measures to reduce diesel locomotive emissions within the state — including all new locomotives to offer zero-emission operation by 2035 — although the rail industry says the rules exceed the technology needed to meet them.

In a move last week, the California Air Resources Board passed new rules that:

— Requires passenger, industrial, and switching locomotives built in 2030 or after to be able to operate in a zero-emission configuration while in the state. For line-haul freight locomotives, the deadline is 2035.

— Will only allow use of locomotive less than 23 years old as of 2030.

— Beginning in 2024, will not allow locomotives with automatic shutoff devices to idle longer than 30 minutes, except for reasons such as maintaining crew heating or air conditioning, or to maintain air brake pressure.

— Also beginning in 2024, will require locomotive operators in the state to create a trust fund to purchase, lease, or rent lower- or zero-emission locomotives. The more emissions a current locomotive creates, the more money must go into that fund.

— Set gradually increasing requirements for percentages of locomotive fleets in the state that must be Tier 4 or zero emission, with target dates in 2030, 2035, 2042 and 2047. By the last date, all equipment must be zero-emission.

Although at first reading there is language exempting "Historic Locomotives" and their operators, it also appears to limit their use severely. An operation like Arizona's Grand Canyon Railway, which now only uses steam about 12 times/trips a year, would probably break those limits after only six round trips, never mind that they burn waste vegetable oil. Then look at something like Niles Canyon, Napa Valley Wine Train, SP 2472, ATSF 3751, Roaring Camp, or Sierra.

The original text of the bill is in a 38-page PDF download at:

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/fi ... 2/appa.pdf

Kelly Anderson · **Joined:** Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am **Posts:** 2477

QJdriver · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 2:03 pm

I won't claim to be the sharpest nail in the keg, but if we keep a clean stack and don't spill any fuel, aren't we doing the world a favor by disposing of dirty oil ??

We could do as the Swiss do, and put a pantograph on the cab roof and a heating element in the firebox. Or, how about filling the coal space or oil tank with storage batteries, and setting up a charging station in the enginehouse, maybe even at longer station stops ??

Crescent-Zephyr · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 1:15 pm **Posts:** 1720

I wonder what this means for the Disneyland Railroad and Knott's Berry Farm. While I would usually think they would count as Amusement Park attractions it's pretty clear that it says "any locomotive."

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 2:48 pm

QJdriver wrote:

I won't claim to be the sharpest nail in the keg, but if we keep a clean stack and don't spill any fuel, aren't we doing the world a favor by disposing of dirty oil ??

I once had a graduate-level physicist professor and railfan explain "Coal and oil are far too valuable in a petrochemical reserve sense to ever set a match to, but until we manage to go safely nuclear or reduce the human population about 90%, we're stuck with it for the time being........

Quote:

We could do as the Swiss do, and put a pantograph on the cab roof and a heating element in the firebox.

That was done ONCE, as an experiment of wartime-era desperation. Woefully inefficient even against already-inefficient conventional steam. And unless you bulk up the grid with nuclear and "renewables," al you do is shift the smokestack across a state line in Nevada or Arizona...... "Out of sight, out of mind" seems to be the California mantra.

Bobharbison · **Joined:** Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:42 pm **Posts:** 2953

Two things keep getting overlooked.
"Zero Emissions" almost never is.
Unless the power is generated totally emission free, it simply means "remote emissions".
The systems needed to do this create their own emissions. Power plants, transmission lines, overhead catenary, batteries. All of that has ecological impacts.
Have to wonder if a clean burning hybrid style would be a better solution in some cases.

QJdriver · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 2:59 pm

Traction motors in the tender trucks ??

choodude · **Joined:** Wed Jun 29, 2016 11:58 am **Posts:** 318

QJdriver wrote:

Traction motors in the tender trucks ??

I've wondered if that would be a way to get dynamic braking. Add a battery and get regenerative braking.

Brian

softwerkslex · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 6:48 pm

This does not apply to steam locomotives, and if there is any doubt, those affected should make their voice heard.

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/reducing-rail-emissions-california/about

QJdriver · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 7:01 pm

Thanks for your post, Dr Harrod. This does indeed sounds encouraging.

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 7:48 pm

With all due respect, simply saying "that doesn't apply to us" is a foolhardy approach. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."

THIS is the pertinent page on that website:

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-s ... -operators

Quote:

Some provisions in the Proposed Regulation would apply to all operators, regardless of approved exemption; those provisions are:

Starting in 2024: Idling Limit

Locomotives with automatic shutoff: locomotive would be required to shut off no more than 30 minutes after the locomotive becomes stationary. A locomotive would be permitted to exceed 30 minutes of idling for only for an exempt reason, the Proposed Regulation would list reasons for exemption.

Starting in 2024: Registration and Reporting

Locomotives operating in the California would be required to register with CARB.
Locomotive activity, emission levels, and idling data would be required to be reported annually.

The tone of this implies that an operator of a vintage loco must seek permission, not ask forgiveness.

I foresee plenty of opportunities for potential confusion or mis-applied enforcement here. Can the Sierra RR operate commercial freight with "historic diesels"? Does the Napa Valley Wine Train need to bring back its MLW FPA4's?

softwerkslex · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 8:15 pm

The authority specifically names "23 historic locomotives". Anyone want to attempt to specify the list?

QJdriver · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 8:45 pm

Admittedly, operators of vintage diesels, which I consider historic, have something new to worry about. However, the link that Dr Harrod provided contains this: "A typical freight and passenger locomotive in the United States is powered by a diesel engine that drives an electrical generator or alternator." I interpret that to exclude operators of steam power from the regulation in question, but we already have plenty of hoops to jump through...

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 8:55 pm

QJdriver wrote:

Admittedly, operators of vintage diesels, which I consider historic, have something new to worry about. However, the link that Dr Harrod provided contains this: "A typical freight and passenger locomotive in the United States is powered by a diesel engine that drives an electrical generator or alternator." I interpret that to exclude operators of steam power from the regulation in question, but we already have plenty of hoops to jump through...

That's a statement of fact, not a statement of regulation.

In theory, if you apply that rationale that "it only covers diesel-electrics," Union Pacific could propose to reintroduce gas-turbine-electrics or diesel-hydraulics as an "end run" around that regulation..........

QJdriver · **Posted:** Wed May 03, 2023 10:06 pm

UP has plenty of new power and plenty of money, I should think they are in a much better place than the little guys with old motive power.

California passes regulations mandating zero-emission locos

Who is online