No. No, it doesn't.

What if your loco is not one of those "23", and you think it could or should be?

And it said "could". NOT "would" or "will."

We're back to "the government" reserving unto itself the power to grant a privilege of its choosing for whatever reason, not allowing you to exercise a right (debatable as your liberty to that right may be).

If railroads, which operate locomotives required for essential freight operations, are mandated to be zero-emission, then why would non-essential "hobbyist" tourist railroad or museum locomotives be allowed to operate? Not understanding the double-standard here. Since many of you are in support of government action to help control climate change, take one for the team and go green with your motive power too, please.

Those of us that have dealt with CARB on a professional level call them the ultimate double speaking Aholes in the regulatory world. They 15 years ago that they would NEVER restrict OTR trucks that were a decade old. Less than 1 year later they said NOPE unless your truck is less than a decade old it legally can not RUN INTO OR OUT OF CALIFORNIA even in Interstate Commerce. Then ramped it up further by refusing to even allow them to be registered in their state at all. Then they started going after moblie reefer units aka the units mounted on the noses of trailers that haul food. They decreed that those needed to have DPF and SCR on them also. Even the EPA smacked them down on that one. Their last one however was the last straw for many in the OTR industry. They declared that APU's have to be tied into the main exhaust EGR system and DPF system unless they are electric and diesel catalyst aka Esbar heaters are no longer legal in California. That was when the ATA and OOIDA both large groups of truckers decided to take CARB to court. So far CARB has lost at every level including at the 9th freaking Circus level and they still want to appeal.

One word--scale.

To illustrate this, if we're talking about greenhouse gases and other pollutants from burning coal, you can compare the Strasburg Rail Road with a power plant that was, and perhaps still is, in its general area. From a thread here in the past, the Strasburg at the time burned about 800 tons of coal per year (and it's probably about the same today). That single power plant at the time was burning 1,000 tons in about four hours.

One thousand tons in four hours, one-sixth of one day, 200 more tons in those four hours than the Strasburg for 365 days. One power station vs. five locomotives, all but one of which are over 100 years old (and that one engine will be over a century in a year or two).

This doesn't mean there aren't or shouldn't be worries about what the California people may require later. It means you need different fuels and perhaps renewable fuels in the future.

Let's hope the Coalition for Sustainable Rail and its biocoal work actually pans out.

J3a-614: I understand your logic but pollution is pollution. In California, a citizen's personal diesel truck is just one truck in a sea of hundreds of thousands, if you consider scale. But, they add up. There should be hopefully no exemptions for this mandate. Whether we cause pollution by running an Alco PA once a year or everyday of the week, it all contributes. Whether I toss one piece of garbage into the ditch or a full bag, it's littering - and my fine will be the same. The greater number of the populous voted to start the green initiative, let's stop whining that we may have to shut down our hobbies to help with the greater good of humanity here.

But -- by the same token -- periodically running a locomotive producing enormous amounts of CO2 and particulates for a few hours does virtually nothing to reduce local pollution, let alone global climate. And everyone doesn't have a 4-8-4 to say 'me too' so it adds up.

The EPA famously refised to either amend or grant a waiver to the arbitrarily-set tier 4 final NOx regulation when EMD missed the target by a few tenths of a percent over about 2.5% of the test duty cycle. The number of lb. that would have been 'saved' could be measured in the tens of pounds per year of actual running -- instead everyone who would have bought new and economical locomotives went to relatively dirty rebuilds instead. The opportunity cost alone from that decision would run 4-8-4 excursions for well over a decade... and the amusing part of it is that NO/NO2 emissions require HC in the atmosphere to produce photochemical smog, and those are themselves greatly reduced in modern locomotive operation...

Likewise, firing up one engine of a Krauss-Maffei on occasion to see and hear it run Just Doesn't Matter. I can understand being proactive about seeing if an engine can be modified to run on B100, or a correct additive package or processing treatment developed, to make heritage diesel operation "zero-net-carbon" -- and in fact I'd sympathize with engine modifications to reduce actual emission of <2.5nm PM. But until you get the last clapped-out cars and trucks blowing blue smoke as they go down the road... don't go after preserved locomotives just 'because you can' (and museums don't vote).

Let's not pretend that a museum is an inanimate property full of artifacts. It's made up of people and governed by people. Those people vote and have a voice.

For what it’s worth, CARB’s fact sheet states that there are between 500 and 600 “switchers” owned by Class 1s in California as well as 11,000 to 12,000 line haul locos visiting annually in CA. How many line haul locos are in CA at any given time isn’t known to me but it’s likely a lot more than than museums and tourist roads. This is where scale does count. The impact of a comparatively few historic locos on the state, country or globe is pretty insignificant so I think an allowance can be made.

CARB’s fact sheet: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/carb-fact-sheet-class-i-locomotive-operators

You guys know that Mount Washington Cog has been running on biodiesel for the last 15 years, right?

Which isn't zero emissions. Switching to that when there's a zero-emission mandate isn't going to help.

The Mount Washington Cog Railway was a pioneer in facing a government edict over emissions. In the early 1970's, the New Hampshire Air Pollution Control Commission ordered them to stop burning coal. Took the stage legislature stepping in during early 1973, exempting steam locomotives that operate within the state from having to meet pollution standards.

Sadly, I'm not confident we'll see the California legislature saving the day for museum and tourist operations that tell their story by operating historic motive power.

There is quite a lot of speculation here, and yet California has many operators of steam locomotives, commercial and non-profit. Has anyone actually contacted the authority to clarify the status of steam locomotives?

Are you really deluded enough to think even the most popular, best-run rail museums and locomotives have enough supporters to outnumber entire generations of voters that have been/are being indoctrinated in schools to sincerely believe that they "only have five years left to save the planet"?

This is emotion (sentimentality, history, etc.) at war with emotion ("WE ARE DOOMED unless we eradicate it all to save the planet!!!!!"). And their "church" has become FAR bigger than ours.

There sure are some big feelings out there.

As an actual Californian, I’m pretty confident we’ll get it sorted, thanks.

It is guaranteed that California will ban all forms of everything that do not appease left wing climate hysteria, every time I brought up the fact that so long as these groups hold power operating rail preservation is doomed in the long term; I was was told this will never happen and my comments removed now looky here they are banning diesel engines and potentially steam by a non democratic un-elected board.
Enjoy live steam modeling in the state; importing coal, propane & diesel purchases will be regulated and or banned. Your carbon output will be taxed and limited. None of this is conspiracy. Their Eco think tanks have been publishing these goals for years.
Please be aware this is the current published standards, the Un-elected board can ban anything you own or need at any point they want. The current rules are just barely lubed enough for the dimwitted to swallow. They will make them more restrictive and severe, They always do.
You Will Own Nothing and be Happy or else...

California literally banned any OTR truck that is over 10 years old from running on their FEDERALLY FUNDED highways. It does not matter if it is needed for movie use farm use or anything you literally can not register it with their DMV even with an out of state plate. The CARB board is also getting ready to go after Farm equipment meaning tractors of all types logging equipment heck they have already banned small gasoline engines in the state. What is next for this wack job state banning Jet powered planes I wonder how well the airlines would like to have to fly battery powered planes into CA.