4 ms·

Trains are, by their nature, very suitable for electrification. As with renewable energy the expense is almost all capital, it's cheaper to run electric trains

Trains are, by their nature, very suitable for electrification. As with renewable energy the expense is almost all capital, it's cheaper to run electric trains it's just expensive to build electric railway lines they run on. Planes are not well suited to electrification. Trainers can reasonably be made electric, as might certain commercial purpose aircraft, but if there will be electric New York to LA passenger flights it won't happen any time soon. Although the fuel in a Cessna would be AvGas which is basically leaded gasoline, essentially anything you'd pay to fly on has turbine engines running on JetA which is basically kerosene instead. Small local planes, especially in Europe might look like just the Cessna only bigger, but the propellers are spun by a jet turbine, they don't have internal combustion engines.

AshleyGrant 3y ago
A jet turbine is an internal combustion engine. It isn't a "reciprocating" engine, though.
- cherryteastain 3y ago
  Well, unless it has an afterburner like Concorde's engines
  - dredmorbius 3y ago
    That's still considered "internal" combustion, as the combustion is occurring within the context of the engine itself. The traditional contrast to the I.C.E. is the external combustion of a steam engine, where the combustion occurs in a boiler, which then directs steam to the actual reciprocating engine (in a traditional steam engine). Steam turbines actually could be a case of an external-combustion turbine, as these are powered by steam which is heated externally to the turbine itself (e.g., there is no internal combustion chamber). Not all steam turbines are combustion engines, however. A nuclear power plant's steam turbines are fed by steam created from nuclear fission rather than chemical combustion. Some solar thermal power systems runs steam turbines based on solar power, and I believe that most geothermal power involves steam and turbines. Functionally, the steam turbine bits of these systems are identical to a coal-fired steam turbine, but the heat cycle differs.
- tialaramex 3y ago
  Oops, thanks

AshleyGrant 3y ago

A jet turbine is an internal combustion engine. It isn't a "reciprocating" engine, though.

cherryteastain 3y ago
Well, unless it has an afterburner like Concorde's engines
- dredmorbius 3y ago
  That's still considered "internal" combustion, as the combustion is occurring within the context of the engine itself. The traditional contrast to the I.C.E. is the external combustion of a steam engine, where the combustion occurs in a boiler, which then directs steam to the actual reciprocating engine (in a traditional steam engine). Steam turbines actually could be a case of an external-combustion turbine, as these are powered by steam which is heated externally to the turbine itself (e.g., there is no internal combustion chamber). Not all steam turbines are combustion engines, however. A nuclear power plant's steam turbines are fed by steam created from nuclear fission rather than chemical combustion. Some solar thermal power systems runs steam turbines based on solar power, and I believe that most geothermal power involves steam and turbines. Functionally, the steam turbine bits of these systems are identical to a coal-fired steam turbine, but the heat cycle differs.
tialaramex 3y ago
Oops, thanks