Western Railroad Discussion > California works to eliminate diesel locomotives

Found this on the California Air Resource Boards site. Wonder how much this will cost the Railroads? I think PTC cost about 8 billion dollars to implement. Wonder if they'll cut the diesels locomotives off at state lines and add battery locomotives to enter the state.

Valleyman

 Public Hearing to Consider Proposed In-Use Locomotive RegulationThis broadcast announces the availability of the proposed In-Use Locomotive Regulation and Draft Environmental Analysis. The public comment period begins September 23, 2022. The California Air Resources Board (CARB or Board) will conduct a public hearing at the date and time noted below to consider the proposed regulation.Date:                November 17, 2022
Time:                9:00 a.m.

In-Person
Location:           [color=#e4af0a]California Environmental Protection Agency[/color]
                          California Air Resources Board | Byron Sher Auditorium
                          1001 I Street Sacramento, California 95814Remote 
Option:               ZoomThis public meeting may continue at 8:30 a.m., on November 18, 2022. Please consult the public agenda, which will be posted ten days before November 17, 2022, for important details, including, but not limited to, the day in which this item will be considered and how the public can participate via Zoom. BackgroundIn the absence of federal action to address harmful emissions from locomotives, CARB is proposing the In-Use Locomotive Regulation to reduce criteria pollutants, toxic air contaminants, and greenhouse gas emissions for locomotives in-use. The statewide Proposed Regulation provides an opportunity for California railroads to better address regional pollution and long-standing environmental justice concerns with communities near railyards and other areas where locomotives operate. The goal of the Proposed Regulation is to accelerate immediate adoption of advanced cleaner technologies for all locomotive operations throughout the state. In 2020, the Governor highlighted the importance of transitioning to zero-emission transportation technology in [color=#e4af0a]Executive Order N-79-20,[/color] which calls for 100 percent of off-road vehicles and equipment operations to be zero-emission by 2035. Additionally, the 2022 State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan Strategy relies on the reduction of criteria pollutant emissions from locomotives operating in California to attain the federal ambient ozone standards by 2037 in the South Coast and San Joaquin Air Basins.   Notice of Public HearingThe Notice, ISOR, and all subsequent regulatory documents are available on CARB's [color=#e4af0a]Rulemaking webpage.[/color] Written Comment Period & Comment SubmittalIn accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, interested members of the public may present comments orally or in writing during the hearing and may provide comments by postal mail or by electronic submittal before the hearing. The public comment period for this regulatory action will begin on September 23, 2022. Written comments not submitted during the hearing must be submitted on or after September 23, 2022, and received no later than November 7, 2022.Comments submitted outside that comment period are considered untimely. CARB may, but is not required to, respond to untimely comments, including those raising significant environmental issues. The Board also encourages members of the public to bring to the attention of staff in advance of the hearing any suggestions for modification of the proposed regulatory action. Comments submitted in advance of the hearing must be addressed to one of the following:Clerk of the Board, California Air Resources Board
1001 I Street, Sacramento, California 95814Electronic SubmittalPlease note that under the California Public Records Act (Government Code section 6250 et seq.), your written and oral comments, attachments, and associated contact information (e.g., your address Clearing California Skies for Over 50 YearsCARB is the lead agency for California’s fight against climate change, 
and oversees all air pollution control efforts in the state to attain and 
maintain health-based air quality standards.More Information 

It would be cheaper to run the locomotives on natural gas and convert them which would be run on LNG they have tested the technology and it works.

The CARB has lots of hearings, very little actually becomes law or a regulation. And this proposal won't fly because a practical alternative to diesel engines in railroad locomotives does not exist. Electric locomotives being about the only exception and then only if the infrastructure is there...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/22 21:32 by PHall.

Here's and idea. Don't serve California. Let them truck stuff in or use 20 mule teams.

CARB is a bunch of crazies , who apparently have a sole mission in life of saving the world from fossil fuels, at any cost.

Im a democrat, and in favor of reducing CO2 in thje atmosphere, but im not crazy, and  in favor of their "at any cost" approach, without any backing of science for their policies. 

I wouldnt confuse "california" with the CARB.    The best thing they could eliminate, is themselves



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/22 21:35 by pdt.

In associated doings they decided to eliminate diesel trucks by 2040, what's next?

Out 

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The CARB has lots of hearings, very little
> actually becomes law or a regulation. And this
> proposal won't fly because a practical alternative
> to diesel engines in railroad locomotives does not
> exist. Electric locomotives being about the only
> exception and then only if the infrastructure is
> there...

You are so wrong. These people are scary and think they are right and their way is the only way. I've been unlucky enough to have ro deal with them for the last 10 years. Their public invitations for public comment is a formality to tell you what they have already decided. They have way to much power and they are tied into Sacramento do do whatever they want including Gov Nuisance.
UP and BNsf will probably put up a good fight but everyone else is screwed. Notice Caltrans and the Hydrogen thing and bay area corridor. Im all for screw Ca and pile eveything up in Oregon and Nevada and let them come get it.

The only positive thing I can say, is that some of these ppl on the CARB, just have the idea to say these sorts of things just to get ppl thinking in that direction.  By 2030, all the ppl on the CARB will be somewhere else, if not retired or dead.   Making these kinds of statements about something well into  the future, is just wishful thinking.  I wouldnt take any of it too seriously. 

As ive said before, I was at a Local LOSSAN meeting last year, and they talked about commuter service from Santa Maria to Paso Robles.  It was truely laughable at thios point and time.  So when I asked them about it, they said....Oh yea, we know its way out there, but we just want to get ppl thinking about more RR service around here.    As it is, even the short term realistic stuff (3rd SLO LAUS RT, and a SLO-SFO commuter RT) will take 5 to 10 years

 

Those Board members at CARB do not have Science backgrounds.  University of California has some of the best scientists in the world but these environmental ESG types are doing more damage than good with wishful thinking.   How about the damage done by using MTBE as an oxygenate in gasoline?   Running California into the ground.  Where will the electricity come from to power everything?  One look at the power generation graphs at caiso.com tells you all you need to know.   Newsom sure did a quick 180 on Diablo...  The California diaspora continues. 

sphogger 

TomG Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> PHall Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The CARB has lots of hearings, very little
> > actually becomes law or a regulation. And this
> > proposal won't fly because a practical
> alternative
> > to diesel engines in railroad locomotives does
> not
> > exist. Electric locomotives being about the
> only
> > exception and then only if the infrastructure
> is
> > there...
>
> You are so wrong. These people are scary and think
> they are right and their way is the only way. I've
> been unlucky enough to have ro deal with them for
> the last 10 years. Their public invitations for
> public comment is a formality to tell you what
> they have already decided. They have way to much
> power and they are tied into Sacramento do do
> whatever they want including Gov Nuisance.
> UP and BNsf will probably put up a good fight but
> everyone else is screwed. Notice Caltrans and the
> Hydrogen thing and bay area corridor. Im all for
> screw Ca and pile eveything up in Oregon and
> Nevada and let them come get it.

I think the rest of the country not having access to exports from CA would be an equally big issue.

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CARB is a bunch of crazies , who apparently have a
> sole mission in life of saving the world from
> fossil fuels, at any cost.
>
> Im a democrat, and in favor of reducing CO2 in
> thje atmosphere, but im not crazy, and  in favor
> of their "at any cost" approach, without any
> backing of science for their policies. 
>
> I wouldnt confuse "california" with the
> CARB.    The best thing they could eliminate,
> is themselves

I 100% agree that CARB needs to be reeled in, but we would be remissed to ignore how much they've helped the state. The air is cleaner and the water is clearer than it's been in decades. That wouldn't have happened without them.

What is a CA  doing today that will enhance their ability to feed electric railways with renewable energy tomorrow? If they don't do something now, how is their dependence on government edicts going to enhance living in the state?

dragoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What is a CA  doing today that will enhance their
> ability to feed electric railways with renewable
> energy tomorrow? If they don't do something now,
> how is their dependence on government edicts going
> to enhance living in the state?

It won't and that's why I'm planning on moving to Nevada.

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CARB is a bunch of crazies , who apparently have a
> sole mission in life of saving the world from
> fossil fuels, at any cost.
>
> Im a democrat, and in favor of reducing CO2 in
> thje atmosphere, but im not crazy, and  in favor
> of their "at any cost" approach, without any
> backing of science for their policies. 
>
> I wouldnt confuse "california" with the
> CARB.    The best thing they could eliminate,
> is themselves

And if we did nothing starting right now it seems that the increase in that would be next to nothing several places to the right of a decimal point. But over the top green people don't care or get the actual cost to American life. Electric cars sound great for one but anyone who thinks that in just a few years they can be a viable way to live using them is nuts.  What is required to have charging stations available where needed is going to cost the taxpayers, oh forgot, its just another gift from the government, billions to put and could be trillions easy. The battery powered semi trucks are still way off from being main stream use.  Look at the transit coaches that are electric, oh except for that diesel engine that powers the AC hearer system on them,. Those require huge amounts of electricity to recharge and in some cities where they don't have the ability to do so have diesel gen sets doing it. This would be the same for electric train engines as there battery recharge would be many times more than semi trucks.  Too bad that people don't think about the cost to our economy such as vacations with electric cars for one. Just got back from a 3700mi trip that had legs of a minimum of 350mi and two with 650mi a day.  Think about that and how it would work with an electric car. 

engrbob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here's and idea. Don't serve California. Let them
> truck stuff in or use 20 mule teams.
Can't use mules! They give off greenhouse gasses from flatulence. And animals have rights, you'd be subjecting them to slavery!
 

portlander Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the rest of the country not having access
> to exports from CA would be an equally big issue.

I'm sure that ports in Mexico would gladly upgrade to serve the container ships that now port in California.  And, fancy that, American railroads just happen to hold big stakes in the Mexican railroads that would serve those ports.  California makes the same mistake that most egotistical,  illogical, stupid, power-hungry clowns always do eventually: they assume that they are indispensable and irreplaceable.  And, as is almost always the case they ARE dispensable and replaceable.

I'm not sure Portlander was just referring to marine imports and exports moving through California ports. There is an agriculture industry here that sends produce to a lot of places. There is still plenty of other industry here too, along with the largest population of any US State. Also keep in mind that California's GDP is the largest in the US, at around 14.8% of total US GDP in 2021. It's the reason car makers tend to conform to California emissions standards. Like it or not, it's an economy that's too big to pass up.

There are a lot of folks that get very reactionary about renewable energy, electric vehicles, etc. While there are challenging problems to solve and infrastructure to be built, there are many people interested in surmounting these obstacles versus sticking their heads in the sand. The livability of humans on this planet, our ability to produce food, etc., etc., might well depend on it.

Yah well a large portion of California's renewable energy projects are in other states, talk about Nimbyism!!!

Out

The State's Economic growth has been built on an abundance of energy.

It's been California State Policy to reduce pollution by moving to electric powered railroads for quite some time. They also have policies to reduce and restrict Freeway travel and to close the State's Refineries for quite a while. There has been huge improvements in clean energy and a cleaner environment since the bad old days of the Post War norms.

Since the Federal Government and the State of California began restricting energy the country has moved into a significant Recession. Europe is having to contend with a Politically restricted Energy source and is not doing too well either. There's a number of countries that are not reducing their sources of pollution. It appears we are sacrificing our Economy, our modern way of life and general well being for very little Environmental gain.

Real GDP (inflation adjusted) in California has grown every year for the past 20 years (since the dot com bust and 9/11) with the exception of 2009 (financial crisis) and 2020 (year one of the global pandemic.) I don't expect that 2022 is going to look all that rosy given the inflation we're experiencing, but California has been transitioning to renewable energy, promoting rooftop solar, etc., all while its economy was growing over two decades. Yes, low cost natural gas and oil were a part of that, but perhaps we've not seen the true costs yet of all that "cheap energy." What restrictions, specifically, are you referring to that the State of California and Federal Government made to induce a recession? As far as I was aware, there are plenty of current energy leases as well as addiitional sales that are being left undeveloped or not bid on, respectively. I'm struggling to pin the blame for the current economic situation on "green" energy, given the lingering impacts of a global pandemic and the price spike of fossil fuels driven largely by the largest military conflict in Europe since WW2. (Furthermore, Germany and other European nations should have been weary about becoming so dependent on someone like Putin.)

I get that change is hard. As a Gen X individual, my wife and I often discuss our quality of life compared to our parents' generation. (Silent Generation) But here's the situation as we tend to see it. The party is over, and we get to deal with the hangover and clean up along with the Millennials, Gen Z (my children), etc. Don't take this as me bagging on the Greatest Generation, Silent Generation, and Boomers, but this is the reality we are looking at having to deal with going forward. We're going to pay for the cheap energy of generations past and the actions taken during our lifetimes. We're also going to continue dealing with the geopolitical consequences of the past. Business as usual isn't going to cut it going forward, so we need individuals to lead and pitch in to solve these challenges. Let's just hope California doesn't turn into the distopian world of Octavia Butler's Parable of the Sower.

Sean

TCnR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The State's Economic growth has been built on an
> abundance of energy.
>
> It's been California State Policy to reduce
> pollution by moving to electric powered railroads
> for quite some time. They also have policies to
> reduce and restrict Freeway travel and to close
> the State's Refineries for quite a while. There
> has been huge improvements in clean energy and a
> cleaner environment since the bad old days of the
> Post War norms.
>
> Since the Federal Government and the State of
> California began restricting energy the country
> has moved into a significant Recession. Europe is
> having to contend with a Politically restricted
> Energy source and is not doing too well either.
> There's a number of countries that are not
> reducing their sources of pollution. It appears we
> are sacrificing our Economy, our modern way of
> life and general well being for very little
> Environmental gain.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/22 15:58 by broken_link.