 |
Re: Will the Silverton line have to convert to oil burning?
Author: Historical...
Date: 06-17-2018 - 13:39
Depends on historical status - are they "registered" with somebody? If so, historical integrity might require using the fuel they did while in regular service. OTOH, it's a business, Jim, and if burning oil (probably diesel in the present day) or even some kind of gas (propane or CNG?) is necessary and allows the business to run and make money the historical considerations pretty much go out the window.
BTW, oil burners release sparks & cinders from the stack too, just not the same kind or as much as coal or especially wood. Even diesels emit enough sparks that in sensitive areas they need spark arrestors on the exhausts - and then there are the flaming GEs of Youtube fame. And brakes can emit sparks or other hot bits that are not good in the wrong place/moment. Bottom line: Silverton is kind of screwed until the fire situation gets under better control. Unfortunately, there are business side effects that have shut down Mt. Rainier as well.
SP had oil burning n.g. steam locomotives in the Owens Valley. Technologically, it's a solved problem, but the conversion does cost money and take time.
BTW, oil burners release sparks & cinders from the stack too, just not the same kind or as much as coal or especially wood. Even diesels emit enough sparks that in sensitive areas they need spark arrestors on the exhausts - and then there are the flaming GEs of Youtube fame. And brakes can emit sparks or other hot bits that are not good in the wrong place/moment. Bottom line: Silverton is kind of screwed until the fire situation gets under better control. Unfortunately, there are business side effects that have shut down Mt. Rainier as well.
SP had oil burning n.g. steam locomotives in the Owens Valley. Technologically, it's a solved problem, but the conversion does cost money and take time.
