California to move forward with its ‘zero-emissions’ locomotives regulations


The EPA is on board. Forget that the grid in California is already stretched with brownouts. The weight of a choo choo train….and a battery is going to run this thing? Just when it can’t get more crazy. If mandated in California, one could assume it will effect most locomotives across the Nation. Are the old trains simply going to stop at the California border and turn around?

A comment made: Zero emissions locomotives, zero emissions trucks, zero emissions ships so just close all the California seaports — and airports too.
With zero emissions cars and light trucks too, California has seceded.
Nothing in, nothing out — except illegals in and refugees out.
Turn off the lights, most Californians will be starving to death in the dark.

This was a year ago when we were given a hint -(27 Apr 2023)

The California Air Resources Board has approved new rules to cut emissions and air pollution from diesel-powered trains. The railroad industry opposes the rules and questions whether California’s authorities to regulate trains.

What the heck, let’s get rid of all of them. Here’s what Nick Pope at the Daily Caller News Foundation reported yesterday:

The Biden administration could allow California to implement a rule designed to push green locomotives, but a growing list of stakeholders are warning that the regulation would severely impact the state’s economy and the national rail industry.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could soon determine whether it will allow the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to move forward with a state regulation that would ban the use of locomotives that are more than 23 years past their manufacturing date unless they run using zero-emissions technology, according to Progressive Railroading.

According to the EPA’s notice in the Federal Register, the regulation’s “in-use locomotive operational requirement” allows only locomotives with an original engine build date that’s less than 23 years old to operate in California, excepting locomotives that meet the current cleanest EPA emission standards (currently Tier 4) for a locomotive of its type that are operated in a zero-emission configuration while in California, or that satisfy other specified conditions. The requirement goes into effect Jan. 1, 2030.

The rule also includes “spending account” provision that requires railroads and other locomotive operators to deposit funds into a restricted spending account to help pay for the zero-emissions locomotives.

The American Thinker continues the tale:

Now, as far as I can tell, “zero-emissions” locomotives are battery-powered trains; here’s this from a report by Alex Luvishis and published by a locomotive outlet last year:

Today, four types of zero- or low-emission locomotives are being developed. These are self-contained battery-electric, electric-battery (operating off overhead catenary or internal batteries), hydrogen fuel cell (HFC), and units with upgraded diesel engines using low-carbon renewable diesel or biodiesel, hydrogen/diesel blends, and even an ammonia/hydrogen blend.

Now, according to Union Pacific, diesel-powered locomotive engines pull “heavy axle rail cars…can handle up to 286,000 lbs. or 315,000 lbs. gross weight,” which is seemingly a ludicrous amount of weight, especially when you consider the limits of battery-powered vehicles.

Have you ever ridden an electric scooter or bike, relying exclusively on the battery of the vehicle to zoom around? I have, and after about 10–15 minutes of treating what was supposed to be a pedal-assist bicycle like a little moped and cruising at the top speed (30-ish mph), the battery-power was all used up—and I’m not a very heavy person. What will these trains transport? A couple of crates of apples? A few sacks of flour?

I mean, California already has electric semi-trucks, which as you can expect has been a total “cluster,” which would be laughable were it not so impactful; read about that here.

California’s electric semi mandate takes effect, leaving an expensive mess for the truckers and taxpayers

…A truck was also recently out of commission for an entire month, because Volvo recalled the battery (due to a “fire risk”) for replacement.

One of the drivers says that in his diesel-powered semi he could do six loads each day; with the battery-operated Volvo semi, he can do two per day, but he has to work overtime to achieve that goal. Even though he gets paid overtime, he makes $400 less per month because his commissions are lower.

..

Now think of what that does to inflation if that is done throughout the economy. Think of the supply chain disruptions and costs if drivers can only do one-third the number of loads, with loads that are far smaller. Think of how much more space would be needed for charging stations if all trucks and cars were electric.

Think of how much the power grid would have to be increased to support the green agenda. It is not financially feasible and there is no way alternative energy sources could handle this.

And the cost of electric semis dwarfs ($300k–$500k) the cost of diesel-powered ones ($70k–$150k); clearly, small companies will not be able to compete. The insurance, loans, leases, and depreciation costs will also jack up freight rates, which will affect all consumers.

Read more American Thinker

Looks like the end soon of “Thomas and his Friends”

The best of the swamp

41 Responses to “California to move forward with its ‘zero-emissions’ locomotives regulations”

  1. Joe Says:

    Nobody on the CARB is elected. They are selected by the the Governor, Senate and Assembly. Notice there are NO industry representatives. Californistan is a one party government so we have no say in this B.S.. I have family commitments or I would be out of this shithole tomorrow.

    The California Air Resources Board consists of 16 members. 12 are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the state Senate. The 12 members include six who serve on local air districts, four experts in fields that shape air quality rules, two public members and one, the Chair, who serves as the only full-time member. The Governor can choose any of the board members to serve as the Chair.

    The other four include two who represent environmental justice communities (one appointed by the Senate and the other by the Assembly) and two nonvoting members appointed for Legislative oversight, one each from the Senate and Assembly.

    In July 2018, the Board established staggered six-year terms for voting members pursuant to AB 197.

    Liked by 2 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      Thanks for your info regarding this group. It figures is all I can say. In the 70s the State was a wonderful place and I live with fond memories. What in the world and how in the world could all of this happen.

      Like

    • Mustang Says:

      Interesting, Joe … and thanks for the information. When you say, “four experts in fields that shape air quality rules,” do you mean people with a vested interest in their careers?”  Just kidding – I know the answer.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Baysider Says:

    I think I see a boomtown on our eastern border. East Blythe, Arizona, where the locomotive switch station is built.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Baysider Says:

    This is sooo painful. My once fabulous state. Sob. 😢

    My local town – nicknamed the People’s Republic for a good reason – is seriously talking about requiring ALL power be transitioned to electricity, not just on new construction. No one is talking about how they will magically handle a doubling of the demand for residential use. I think Bill is on the right track. 

    Like

  4. Bill Heffner Says:

    Actually, electric trains powered by pickup from overhead lines are very cost effective and efficient. Diesel engines are electric in reality, as the diesel engines merely provide electric power to drive traction motors on the axles. Those same motors are also used for braking when they are turned into generators in braking mode, providing resistance as they generate power which is dissipated by resistor banks on top of the locomotive.

    Using power from overhead lines eliminates the cost of maintenance and repair of the diesel engines, and the power is generated far more efficiently by huge power stations than it is by small (relatively speaking) engines in the locomotive. Transmission costs of the electricity require an investment, but it’s not all that huge, and operating cost of transmission is negligible. Trains would not have to “turn back” at the border, they would merely have to change locomotives, which they do pretty routinely for various reasons anyway.

    I don’t think, however, that California is talking about overhead wire systems, I think they are thinking about the insane idea of using battery powered locomotives.

    Liked by 1 person

    • bunkerville Says:

      My understanding we are not talking about overhead… in fact in my memory is that one city early in the 1900’s had extensive overheads and were removed by the automakers.

      By 1900, in the United States, 38% of US automobiles, 33,842 cars, were powered by electricity (40% were powered by steam, and 22% by gasoline). This information might sound like some crackpot Internet hoax, but if you look at the sources, you can easily see they are credible. The US Dept. of Energy’s page on the history of the electric car states, “By 1900, electric cars were at their heyday, accounting for around a third of all vehicles on the road. During the next 10 years, they continued to show strong sales.” By 1912, there were 38,843 on US roads.

      https://community.vinfastauto.us/industry-news/38-of-american-cars-were-electric-in-1900-what-about-in-the-future/#:~:text=The%20US%20Dept.,all%20vehicles%20on%20the%20road.

      Like

    • Baysider Says:

      Interesting, Bill. I do have overhead lines 200 feet from my house, though.

      Like

  5. Ed Bonderenka Says:

    I’ll bet they won’t for nuclear reactor driven trains.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Mustang Says:

    Electric trains have been around for a while.  I emphasize “electric,” which relies very heavily on power generation from something other than electricity.  If those old electric street cars were so efficient, why did we do away with them?

    I have to say that I do not believe we Americans can get much dumber than this nonsensical demand that we save the Earth.  George Carlin had a good retort for such mindlessness.  Also, please note how efficient our education system has been since 1980 to poison the minds of our young people.

    Mission accomplished, eh?

    Here’s a progressive idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conestoga_wagon#/media/File:Prairie_schooner_(PSF).png

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Bill Heffner Says:

    Since California has increased its “zero emissions” regulations, the city of San Diego has come to share a status with Baghdad; power stoppages. There were rare outages in years past, caused by equipment failures in other states mostly, but in the past two years headlines like, “Thousands of San Diegans left without power” have become an almost daily event. The outages typically last 8 to 24 hours, and reasons are never stated. The rate at which the outages occur is increasing rapidly.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mustang Says:

      Among Progressives, every day is Opposite Day.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Baysider Says:

      There is one other common cause of power outages in California – rain drops. Maybe not so much now, but when I was growing up we had one outage after another with a very little bit of rain fell. My mom, who moved here from Oregon, would say “what is wrong with California? If Oregon’s power went out at every rain they’d never have electricity for 9 months out of the year.

      Liked by 1 person

      • bunkerville Says:

        No one takes care of the lines now with this nonsense that here in PA you can pick your provider…and who is left to fix the lines? The same with the phone land lines… I had trees on my lines hanging very close to being dangerous..just waiting for a bad storm and they would do nothing.

        Like

  8. peter3nj Says:

    While this crap is reaching critical mass it would appear Californians will just suck it up and keep on choogling. What’s next banning footwear?

    Liked by 2 people

  9. markone1blog Says:

    Since we are reading articles from the American Thinker, did you see what Joe did to cause an American base to end up in Russian hands? Did you hear of what he has recently done to enrich Iran with yellow cake uranium and money?

    Liked by 1 person

    • bunkerville Says:

      The military base. Actually it was reported that 1000 soldiers of ours had been considered kidnapped…story has been going on in the foreign press and we look like an A** with the base.

      Liked by 1 person

    • markone1blog Says:

      My 24 April post quoted both the American Thinker article on the base being handed over and the losss of a source of yellowcake uranium for the U.S. (and a gain of such for Iran). It also quoted Iran International regarding the most recent lowering of sanctions by Biden in March 2024.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. markone1blog Says:

    So California has even driven its legal pot industry into insolvency. Are they trying to prevent all shipments from reaching California so that they can starve any recalcitrant Democrats or oddly remaining Republicans into submission?

    Liked by 1 person

    • markone1blog Says:

      You can’t get a $5 hamburger in California unless you froze the meat, hunted it yourself, or carried it over the border.

      From what I read this morning, they have taxed their pot industry so heavily that it is in Chapter 11 in 17 counties. What in God’s green earth will they screw up next?

      Liked by 2 people

      • bunkerville Says:

        I had read that….tax em until they leave and I read they want to tax anyone to get permission to leave the state. You need a permit.

        Liked by 1 person

      • markone1blog Says:

        Well, if they are going to allow illegals in from Mexico, they are going to have to live with (or at least accept the fact of) those who illegally escape from their totalitarian grip. While I am nearing 68 and have never gotten a tattoo, I do believe that (were I so unfortunate as to live in the People’s Republic of California), I would get a tattoo showing Gavin where he could plant his lips before I would ever surrender an exit tax.

        Liked by 1 person

    • peter3nj Says:

      In NYC there are around 1200 legal and 8-10,000 illegal pot shops. The landlords are being fined ha ha. It should be safe to assume the tenants reimburse the landlords and go on with their uber lucrative business till the next summons.

      Like

      • Mustang Says:

        Taxing the pot store owners only adds to the cost of the pot. BTW, Peter, this isn’t something you should do while driving, even if it does make traffic accidents seem comical. 

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ed Bonderenka Says:

        I’m sure the illegal pot shops are paying taxes on sales.
        I never did 🙂

        Like

      • peter3nj Says:

        Hey fellow former pot smokers from the last century here’s the rest of NYC’s pot shop debacle

        First in line to receive licenses and be put in business by the city were those having done time for marijuana related crimes. So then no business experience or training is of no consequence. Of course those pot shops are failing or already failed but those illegal pot shops are doing a booming busy. Go figure. 🌱

        Like


Leave a comment