4 ms·

> Locomotive engine must be disabled per a state grant funding agreement. What a dumb requirement. It's like the cash-for-clunkers program requiring the engine

> Locomotive engine must be disabled per a state grant funding agreement. What a dumb requirement. It's like the cash-for-clunkers program requiring the engines to be destroyed. The service life of a locomotive is effectively infinite - even after their useful freight days are done, they usually get refitted and sent to the developing world, or converted into a fixed power generator.

mikewarot 2y ago
>What a dumb requirement. It's like the cash-for-clunkers program requiring the engines to be destroyed. The whole point of the "cash-for-clunkers" program was to remove as many older, more polluting, and unsafe, cars from the market as possible, to force an upgrade of the fleet, and simultaneously provide incentives to buy new cars. It wasn't dumb in the larger scheme, but yes... on the individual level, it made it almost impossible to get an affordable good used car for a few years. The locomotive is now only good for scrap metal, if the engine is similarly disabled.
- happyopossum 2y ago
  > It wasn't dumb in the larger scheme, It was an insanely regressive cash redistribution program that punished poor people for many years after it was over. You can call that 'not dumb' but I won't.
- Zak 2y ago
  I wonder how many years a car eligible for that program would need to be driven to equal the environmental impact of building a new car and driving it for the same number of years. I lack the expertise to offer a useful estimate, but I'm guessing that number is not small.
  - buildsjets 2y ago
    That’s totally beside the point. Breathing smog is disgusting, regardless of the economic balance. It removed an incredible number of local point-source polluters from high population density areas. Cash 4 Clunkers was so successful that Seattle completed eliminated emissions testing, because not enough crapboxes were failing the test after they weeded out the vast majority of the clunkers.
    - bluGill 2y ago
      Most clunkers were not eliminated. It only covered if you bougt a more fuel efficien vehicle so small cars didn't get covered and people who couldn't afford new cars were not covered. emmisions were already improving and tests rarely found anything so this was used as an excuse to eliminate waste
    - Zak 2y ago
      I did not say anything about economics; I wrote only about environmental impact. It's hard to compare different kinds of environmental impact, but building a new car involves several, often with effects far away from the place where the car is used.
m463 2y ago
> What a dumb requirement. Wonder how "disabled" it has to be? Or maybe it could be transferred to another organization that might meet the requirements of the state? Maybe something like roaring camp railroad, or niles canyon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roaring_Camp_%26_Big_Trees_Narrow_Gauge_Railroad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roaring_Camp_%26_Big_Trees_Nar... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niles_Canyon_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niles_Canyon_Railway
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  "Currently, sales and shipping only available in state of CA." So they don't want it to be used in CA, but are only selling it in CA. Hence the engine must be disabled.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    Buy it, take out the glow plugs and sell it out of state. new buyer just needs to sorce glow plugs which are consumable and cheap. i don't know if this engine has glow plugs but there is likely a similear cheap part that if removed disables the engine.
    - anticensor 2y ago
      Uniflow diesels such as EMD engines don't have glow plugs, they instead have pre-pump fuel heaters.
gosub100 2y ago
They're extremely efficient too! I forgot the marketing line but they can move one ton of freight something like 500mi on a gallon of fuel IIRC. Who knows, maybe even could be run on biodiesel?
- AnotherGoodName 2y ago
  Yep, plenty of the freight world runs on 1940s and 50s era diesels. These were built in 85. They are some of the most efficient engines out there. Hell if you’re worried about efficient send this to Amtrak to replace their 1941 built sw1’s and you’re ahead. There’s freight companies running even older locos too. This requirement was clearly made by someone who doesn’t know the freight rail industry at all. Freight trains are so efficient that the fuel costs are low no matter what. The biggest problem is upgrading the 1940s and 50s equipment out there to newer models since there’s little incentive. Here’s a perfect upgrade for those trains rendered useless by politicians.

mikewarot 2y ago

>What a dumb requirement. It's like the cash-for-clunkers program requiring the engines to be destroyed. The whole point of the "cash-for-clunkers" program was to remove as many older, more polluting, and unsafe, cars from the market as possible, to force an upgrade of the fleet, and simultaneously provide incentives to buy new cars. It wasn't dumb in the larger scheme, but yes... on the individual level, it made it almost impossible to get an affordable good used car for a few years. The locomotive is now only good for scrap metal, if the engine is similarly disabled.

happyopossum 2y ago
> It wasn't dumb in the larger scheme, It was an insanely regressive cash redistribution program that punished poor people for many years after it was over. You can call that 'not dumb' but I won't.
Zak 2y ago
I wonder how many years a car eligible for that program would need to be driven to equal the environmental impact of building a new car and driving it for the same number of years. I lack the expertise to offer a useful estimate, but I'm guessing that number is not small.
- buildsjets 2y ago
  That’s totally beside the point. Breathing smog is disgusting, regardless of the economic balance. It removed an incredible number of local point-source polluters from high population density areas. Cash 4 Clunkers was so successful that Seattle completed eliminated emissions testing, because not enough crapboxes were failing the test after they weeded out the vast majority of the clunkers.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    Most clunkers were not eliminated. It only covered if you bougt a more fuel efficien vehicle so small cars didn't get covered and people who couldn't afford new cars were not covered. emmisions were already improving and tests rarely found anything so this was used as an excuse to eliminate waste
  - Zak 2y ago
    I did not say anything about economics; I wrote only about environmental impact. It's hard to compare different kinds of environmental impact, but building a new car involves several, often with effects far away from the place where the car is used.

m463 2y ago

> What a dumb requirement. Wonder how "disabled" it has to be? Or maybe it could be transferred to another organization that might meet the requirements of the state? Maybe something like roaring camp railroad, or niles canyon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roaring_Camp_%26_Big_Trees_Narrow_Gauge_Railroad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roaring_Camp_%26_Big_Trees_Nar... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niles_Canyon_Railway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niles_Canyon_Railway

SoftTalker 2y ago
"Currently, sales and shipping only available in state of CA." So they don't want it to be used in CA, but are only selling it in CA. Hence the engine must be disabled.
- bluGill 2y ago
  Buy it, take out the glow plugs and sell it out of state. new buyer just needs to sorce glow plugs which are consumable and cheap. i don't know if this engine has glow plugs but there is likely a similear cheap part that if removed disables the engine.
  - anticensor 2y ago
    Uniflow diesels such as EMD engines don't have glow plugs, they instead have pre-pump fuel heaters.

gosub100 2y ago

They're extremely efficient too! I forgot the marketing line but they can move one ton of freight something like 500mi on a gallon of fuel IIRC. Who knows, maybe even could be run on biodiesel?

AnotherGoodName 2y ago
Yep, plenty of the freight world runs on 1940s and 50s era diesels. These were built in 85. They are some of the most efficient engines out there. Hell if you’re worried about efficient send this to Amtrak to replace their 1941 built sw1’s and you’re ahead. There’s freight companies running even older locos too. This requirement was clearly made by someone who doesn’t know the freight rail industry at all. Freight trains are so efficient that the fuel costs are low no matter what. The biggest problem is upgrading the 1940s and 50s equipment out there to newer models since there’s little incentive. Here’s a perfect upgrade for those trains rendered useless by politicians.