GAUGE THE ISSUE: The Burning Matter (with guest speaker Tom Bright, 'Steam Railway' magazine)

DISCLAIMER:
Any views or opinions expressed in this video are those of Chris Eden-Green. These are made without intention of offending anyone.
Heritage Railway Association: www.hra.uk.com
Banks Group Website: www.banksgroup.co.uk
All Party Parliament Group For Heritage Rail Coal Report 2019: static1.squarespace.com/stati...
Steam Railway Magazine: www.steamrailway.co.uk
Coalition For Sustainable Rail: csrail.org
Digest of UK Energy Statistics: www.gov.uk/government/collect...
Order your copy of 'Steam Locos In Profile" on DVD & Digital Download HERE:
www.e-gmedia.co.uk/shop
Click here to support 'Steam Locos In Profile' on Patreon:
/ steamlocosinprofile
Click here to Like 'Steam Locos In Profile' on Facebook:
/ slipsegmedia
This is a video critique. All images and footage are referenced under Section 107 "fair use" guidelines.
Police Squad is copyright of ABC
The First Great Train Robbery is copyright of MGM Studios.
The Train Now Departing is copyright of the BBC.
Thanks to Banks Group for their latest figures and graphs.
All material is referenced under the US Copyright Act within Section 107's "fair use" guidelines.
Most of the images are from Wikipedia and licensed under Creative Commons 2.0 and 3.0, OR are in the Public Domain. All Third Party content is referenced under the US Copyright Act within Section 107's "fair use" guidelines.

[@SteveDentonClassics]

The same issue is being faced in the classic car world. Although classic cars will be exempt from emissions, the petrol the fuels them may cease to exists, and we may end up with ethanol petrol, more power, but wrecks all rubbers in fuel lines. It's a sad fact that's happening across the board the heritage world as a whole

[@benattwood8786]

As a young enthusiast, I have been concerned about the situation for a while now, especially since ER started gaining influence. This was an excellent editorial and really couldn't have summarised the situation better. Well done to you Chris :)

[@owenmeschter9888]

That whole “making smoke darker for good photos” deal really does need to come to a close. People are just too sensitive these days and will find a reason to get upset at something, so like you said, lets try and put those days behind us. Great video, glad this topic was discussed in great detail!

[@VT29steamtrain]

Yes, that happens when an oil burner has sand put in the firebox for example, which is done by the Grand Canyon, with their vegetable oil burning locos. This does happen elsewhere as well with other types of oil.

[@spdaylight1]

But why should overly sensitive millenials be considered? I may be a mellenial but I can think for myself. Ignorant people should be informed and have at least half a clue of the facts before beginning this type of thing. Also as long as its not done every day thiers no harm in making black smoke, its our form of enjoyment and should be respected.

[@SFgaming007]

@@spdaylight1 I think we all agree with you that there is no rational reason why this should stop as it has no real negative effect except to an uninformed idiot. Sadly however, we live in the real world which is populated with idiots, and idiots don't understand rational reasoning. As frustrating as it may be, sometimes we have to indulge idiot's delusions to stop them coming after us, because a mob of idiots is a very dangerous thing indeed

[@thomasoates3003]

The government's lack of joined up thinking on the coal issue really reflects their attitude of not caring about an industry that puts £250 million into the economy every year.

[@ChristheXelent]

According to the HRA, that's getting on for £400m. But yes, that's overlooked

[@thomasoates3003]

@@ChristheXelent Even more of a reason to protect it. A lot of environmentalists mean well, but are sadly targeting the wrong things. Diesel cars pollute far more than steam engines do. It's been a while since I last heard anybody point that out.

[@benattwood8786]

@@thomasoates3003 The real issue is the planetary population, at 7.5bn and climbing it just cannot sustain. I wish half of the activists would see that issue too.

[@thomasoates3003]

@@benattwood8786 Good point. It's why I'm not having children.

[@benattwood8786]

@@thomasoates3003 Nor me!!!

[@TheNightmareRider]

I appreciate that this is a one off thing and that Tom doesn't necessarily have good audio equipment, but I'm hard of hearing and the call quality with him makes it really difficult for me to understand what he's saying. I think I got the gist of it, but it's difficult. Could you possibly add more direct subtitles/closed captions beyond youtube's auto generated ones? It'd help occasions like this where a guest's call audio quality is low.

[@callumthornelow2936]

A issue that will keep being talked about for a long while.

[@Stubwood_on_YT]

Agreed

[@isaDARKNESS]

I feel like heritage railways as we know them are, inevitably, going to have a shelf life, and for them to survive beyond that there’s going to need to be some changes If in 50 years I can still visit a welsh narrow gauge steam railway, I don’t care if the locos are operating in a historically accurate fashion, I don’t care if they’re brand new designs that use electric heating or whatever it takes, as this is preferable to them not existing at all

[@justahillbilly7777]

This comment wraps up my view on the whole originality V.S. functionality argument beautifully. First, make sure your engine is completely and totally functional to a 21st century standard, and *THEN* do what you can to make it look and sound as original as possible.

[@Jiskpirate]

@@justahillbilly7777 Reverse that, and it's perfect. Make it historically functional, as it was back in the day and if it complies with relative 21st century standards. THEN add 21st century techniques in order to make it more practical. Otherwise you can drop authenticity and monumental historical value straight away.

[@thestarlightalchemist7333]

Ayyy, I was gonna mention the ERR's 11! Also, another alternative, though expensive, is vegetable oil, like on the Grand Canyon. The problem is, converting locos to oil is difficult, and expensive. Because of that, it might be improbable.

[@kiwitrainguy]

Converting coal-burning steam locos to burn oil is only difficult and expensive if you are a heritage railway (perhaps that's what you meant). I belong to a steam loco preservation group here in New Zealand that has converted most of its coal burners to oil because they have a ready supply of oil (from cars that get their oil changed). The New Zealand Railways converted 72 of its coal-burning steam locos to oil in the late 1940s so it can be done. The main problem I see with using vegetable oil is the cost. Vegetable oil can be used as a substitute for diesel fuel but it is about double the price. Using vegetable oil to fire a steam loco would be even more prohibitive.

[@ryderlx]

Hello from Topeka, Kansas! I volunteer with the Coaliton for Sustainable Rail (CSR) on their locomotive project Santa Fe #3463, so it was nice to hear about the Coalition and their studies on Biocoal, interesting video, and very insightful. 3463 was originally purchased to burn specifically their “Torrified Biomass”, it would have been interesting if they decided to stay that direction but now the Coalition wants to just rebuild 3463 as a liquid oil burner whilst they continue their studies with other partner railroads and railways.

[@alfiewhittaker3763]

the Japanese make a coal esq product thats like a charcoal that behaves like coal it made from carbonised sewage and is sold to power stations

[@kiwitrainguy]

OK, but how do they carbonise the sewage? Does that process create greenhouse gases as well? Being Japanese they probably had that all sorted out before they started.

[@Redshirt214]

For burning anthracite coal, wide “Wooten” fireboxes are required, since to burn anthracite coal you need a wide grate area. This is why America invented the Camelback locomotive, the firebox got too wide to see around so the cab had to be mounted in the middle of the locomotive. I think that requirement went away though as locomotives got larger, it’s a sort of proportional thing I reckon.

[@rushs11]

Redshirt214 Camelback construction was also outlawed for safety reasons. 1.) The crew were separated and had little means of communication while on the engine, especially if there was a problem near the firebox doors. 2.) If the con rods broke, the engineer was going to get killed as they destroyed the cab. Even with those issues, they did not ban the use of camelback engines and some lasted until the end of steam in the US.

[@PowerTrain611]

It's always a proportional thing. The bigger the boiler, the bigger the firebox needed to heat it properly.

[@chrisbruce5711]

@@rushs11 To farther the whole Communication problem, Camelback where know to blow up due to not getting enough water due to the Engineers not being able to talk to one another

[@russellgxy2905]

There is a slight possibility of casual steam engines burning anthracite. Most of the "hard-coal" engines, like the Camelbacks, were actually designed to burn waste anthracite, or culm. Regular anthracite burns hotter, cleaner, and is generally shaped closer to "passenger coal," but it still burns slower. Another problem is the scarcity of anthracite now, since it was basically the oil of the coal era. I think heritage railroads could benefit from using combined coal, like the Reading did. Economically, it was likely due to the rising cost and dying demand for anthracite, but in theory using both types could work. Bituminous burns a bit quicker to get a fire going, while the Anthracite keeps it burning longer and hotter

[@totalal4601]

Clearly we need a working heritage coal mine!

[@InventorZahran]

Then our preserved goods engines would finally have a source of real heavy loads!

[@HoggRyan]

Thanks for raising the profile of the issue, I do hope that steam continues for many years to come running on coal but I do also understand the environmental impacts cannot be ignored from even a minor source.

[@richard1342]

I suspect when the Gov tell everyone that they are not allowed to burn logs and coal on their burners in 6 months time/in a year's time/etc, they will get a reaction that may put plans back for a while.

[@tramlink8544]

especially from rural home owners

[@henrybn14ar]

There could be a silver lining in this. SLM (now DLM) of Winterthur developed a system for oil burning and fitted it the system to 20 new rack locomotives for Austrian and Swiss mountain railways and to a class 52 Kriegslok, thereby increasing power by about one-third ie a Class 5 would be the equal of a Royal Scot or almost a Duchess. DLM also developed a pre-heater system which means that the locomotive is ready to use when the staff arrive in the morning and requires no cleaning out afterwards. Oil burning also reduces the damage to the boiler and cylinders caused by ash and grit. With volunteers less willing to do dirty work, it could be the way forward for steam, and not just on heritage railways but also on lightly used routes on the national system; the Swiss mountain railways found that in service, the steam locomotives were more efficient than their older diesels on the same duties. Emissions are better than current standards for diesels as no NOx, CO or particulates are produced. Oil fired steamboats, converted from coal firing, are used in regular service during the summer in the Stockholm Skärgård services. kzbin.info/www/bejne/nXrcmoB_rdl_hK8 kzbin.info/www/bejne/gp7PpXaZZpp5Zrc Contact Roger Waller of DLM will help out anyone who is interested in oil firing and other alternative fuels. www.dlm-ag.ch

[@Jakob_DK]

Henry Law Maintenance is an important aspect and start up in the morning (heating) also.

[@henrybn14ar]

@@Jakob_DK There is an electric pre-heat and standby system which can be timed or turned on remotely, using off peak electricity..

[@VT29steamtrain]

They also converted 14a, my profile picture, into oil burning, specifically, diesel fuel

[@VT29steamtrain]

@Aussie Pom yep although my comment is a bit dated as my profile picture has changed lol

[@suprememeowmix9613]

And we all laughed at the group that wanted to run the Santa Fe Hudson on some form of biomass. Who was right in the end?

[@justahillbilly7777]

Funny you mention them, Chris or whomever was in charge of making the description for this video put the link to their website in the description. I recall reading one of their pdf's about the Norfolk & Western J's, and I was captivated with it. If they could make themselves more of a household name in the both the heritage sector, and the rail industry as a whole, they could very well do some wonderful things.

[@rushs11]

Have UK railways looked into the use of ‘liquid fuels’? The Grand Canyon Railway in Arizona has ran their steam locomotives using processed used food oil and grease for a number of years with success. It also utilizes a similar oil burn system many western US railroads started using starting in the 1920’s-30’s.

[@harryrobinson2901]

rushs11 it’s very difficult to convert coal firing boilers into liquid burning boilers. The fire tube arrangement has to be changed, and firing them needs a completely different set of skills. It would be too expensive to replace all the coal burning boilers.

[@chrisbruce5711]

@@harryrobinson2901 The u.s has lot of steam engines that have been converted from coal. Using oil is cheaper around here. I don't think you need to redo the boiler for it.

[@iainyoung6878]

@@chrisbruce5711 using oil is super expensive over here. New build tornado was considered for oil butt in event went with coal. Ffestiniog,Welsh Highland,vale of rhiedol have converted all locos back from oil to coal.

[@KPen3750]

Whats interesting to me is that most UK coal is in large chunks, while in the US, we use Bituminous coal in small walnut like pellets for our locomotives.

[@Philc854]

An excellent GTI, Chris. Highly topical and pertinent to our subject. And all the correct issues aired and references and links given in the description. I will certainly follow up on these. More on this topic (when there is news) and others like it. This is what makes your videos, SLIP, Sole Slips and GTI issue, really relevant to us enthusiasts. Well done!

[@caelumvaldovinos5318]

Great article Chris! The American heritage roads are facing a similar problem with what to burn when the GND is passed. Personally, I'm in favor of having the locos burn veggie oil. It's already produced in large batches thanks household demand + the restaurant industry as a whole. The conversion costs are expensive, but the ability to burn both new and used fryer oil makes for a pretty versatile solution

[@ironmatic1]

"when the GND is passed" you mean "when this country is permanently fucked". Don't vote for the leftists and you don't get that problem. Also serious question--where do these railroads get straight vegetable oil in large enough quantities to run locomotives? Most museums, (including us) use regular off-road low sulfur diesel in their steam engines.

[@caelumvaldovinos5318]

@@ironmatic1, to answer the fuel sourcing issue: you buy the veggie oil by the truckload. Literally, there is more than enough vegetable oil (both new and used) that you could run the entire US and Canadian steam fleet on it and never run out. As for the GND screwing us over, the only people who stand to lose are the CEO's of oil and ICE companies. You, as an ordinary citizen, stands to gain a lot from this package if you actually read it instead of listening to Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson

[@dariusneal9495]

I have a crazy idea and its certainly open to any and all suggestion (please refrain from vulgarity). What if with the closure of lump coal mines the government relinquish control to the heritage community as the mines will stay open to them. The mines will not need to stress but for only one market run by that market. #coalmineforcoalusers

[@Hendeesh]

Yes this was my thinking. The obvious solution is to run a heritage mine as a tourist attraction / museum that has special dispensation to extract a small amount of British coal for use by heritage societies. Problem solved 👍

[@paulhorn2665]

@@Hendeesh Yes that could be a way. But I dont know about the paperwork to get a permit for that...

[@modelrailpreservation]

Sounds like something the Beamish Museum could do.

[@MrToradragon]

Normal mine would be impossible to operate that way, perhaps. But it there would be chance to have open pit mine, that would be different story.

[@InventorZahran]

It would be really cool to see steam engines working the mine and delivering coal to all the heritage railways!

[@Dallen9]

looks like the investigation into recreating the Swiss electric steam engines might need to be looked into soon than later.

[@adamburnes3655]

In the USA a lot of our steam locomotives burn oil, including the largest operating steam locomotive in the world, Union Pacific big boy 4014, as well as 4-8-4 northern type UP 844. There are also many smaller locomotives burning oil. There’s even a 2-8-2 locomotive on the Grand Canyon Railway that burns recycled vegetable oil if I remember correctly.

[@tramlink8544]

we run an oil burner 141 mikado here in Switzerland. Unlike in the US, its much more difficult to obtain the bunker oil that the locos require. to put it in perspective. none of our big neighnours, Germany, France or Italy have HFO that our mikado requires thats easy to get in the US. we have to import from a seller in Holland!

[@garysmith2450]

@@tramlink8544 Locos never burn crude oil. They will use something called Gasoil. This is slightly less refined than DERV but more refined than HFO; the stuff that ships use. Our locos couldn’t really burn HFO as it needs to be heated before it can be pumped. At least with gasoil, when steaming up, it will flow into the firebox by gravity and then when steam is available, a small pump would be needed for running at speed. I know oil burns hotter than coal so it’s not a simple conversion but as the original poster says, the USA have converted many locos from coal to oil. It will be easier on the poor fireman too!

[@tramlink8544]

@@garysmith2450 yeah, Bunker oil is what i meant, couldnt think of the english name at the time :)

[@tramlink8544]

@@garysmith2450 we solved the issue with HFO by purchasing a heater wagon (Wagons attached to passenger trains in the winter which had a small boiler to heat the Steam heating within the passenger wagons) we couple the heater wagon to the tender lines and heat the oil up to around 90 degrees Celsius at which point it flows nicely and we can begin lighting the Mikado. once shes hot herself, the problem resolves itself. However without the wagon we have to heat up a smaller shunting engine and use its steam to heat up the oil which is a pain

[@rainbowthehedgehog1]

There is an alternative idea I came up with years ago to keep historical steam engines running while keeping environmentalists off the backs of whoever owns them, that being to install electric heating elements in the boiler and store batteries in the tenders but have the batteries hidden by a coal facade, we know that it's possible for a steam engine to have an electric boiler because it was done in world war 2 with a steam engines getting a lot to see from pantographs, although I would only consider using electric boilers for new builds and replicas. There is another group that can be have we affected by this ban that being blacksmiths who we still use coal burning forges.

[@invisibleman4827]

I'd like to add my two cents to this. To be honest Chris, the heritage railways have always been using foreign coal. I remember back in 1999 in Didcot standing on the footplate of 6024 and the blokes said that it was using Columbian coal. Foreign coal is largely better than British coal because the latter has nasty deposits that rot the pipes. Siberian and Columbian coal is much better to this degree. The price is a concern, but it's not as if it's never been used. As to the environmental impact of imports, well, it's probably the best option at the moment. I know you may disagree but the impact of heritage steam really is negligible. I see what you said regarding imports, but it may be a sensible stop gap at least (and bear in mind it's coal that's burning anyway - any environmentalists start picketing steam railways should just get real. I've met extinction rebellion people, they have no issue with steam locomotives). It's too early to call at the moment, but I think that there is one glaring solution, for someone to set up a business or industry that supplies the heritage industry exclusively. The glaring issue is that the heritage industry relies on coal aimed at other markets and if we lose those other markets, we're in trouble. For this to work I think that there are two potential viable options. One, to create a suitable alternative with biocoal or briquettes. This may take a bit of development, to create a fuel that burns like coal with the same draughting, heat output, etc but it's doable. Something like briquettes developed probably from a mix of different types of components since coal is 90% carbon, it would probably be best to find a way to develop this component of a potential coal alternative. For example a biofuel could be developed from charcoal - not charcoal specifically - but developed from it. Charcoal is renewable if done in the right way, as it relies on trees, which would need to be grown to sustain it continuously. Two, a second, somewhat simpler (and I think more practical) option could be to get the coal from elsewhere by opening a coal mine or a coal pit that exclusively supplies the heritage industry. We have a few heritage coal mines in northern England and South Wales (e.g Rhondda) and it's not impossible for their operations to restart on a very small scale, which would potentially get around the issue of inviting a load of nimbyists descending on a brand new operation somewhere in the north, and perhaps demonstrate how coal was originally dug up. Sure some claim that such a mine wouldn't be economically feasible, but since the heritage industry only relies on a small scale operation of burning coal, then such a mine or pit would be on a similarly small scale too, and too negligible for any environmentalist with any brains to concern themselves with (I profoundly disagree with the PR for environmentalists, like I said, the ones I met have no issue, because what do you expect? It's a steam locomotive). Think about it. These are issues to consider, but the steam railway industry has developed by leaps and bounds over the last 50 years. Workshops have developed, new buildings, new build engines, new volunteers. If they stayed with just what they had in the late 1960s they'd get nowhere, but this issue will be solved if we work together to find an answer. There's more than one way to skin a cat, and every problem has a solution, no matter how obscure.

[@lukeslocomotives]

Was that on a DVD? I have a DVD that says the exact same uses columbian coal that's all

[@invisibleman4827]

@@lukeslocomotives Probably was, but I remember the bloke there telling me so. I also remember reading a long time ago that coal for the SVR comes in via Liverpool and is sent down by road. RANT COMING: Truth is, it may have more of a carbon footprint transporting it from overseas, and maybe if a small scale colliery opened to exclusively cater to the steam industry (it'd be a damn sight smaller than modern collieries) that'd lessen it. The other option I can think of is a material that looks like, and burns like, coal, but isn't coal, but that hasn't been developed yet, not with the time and efforts to do so (which is why I reckon the above option is the better one for the UK steam lines). Sure, Chris cites the issues with other solutions such as offsetting (which I think is not a bad idea either), but sadly no solution is perfect, and sometimes you gotta make the best of it. Really, as a volunteer myself, I recognize that the steam trains - in Britain certainly - largely burn coal, that coal is needed for that level of firebox heat (otherwise it's a bastard to get going), and everyone else has to recognize it too. To do that away would be likely, not just inauthentic, but more pertinent, prohibitively expensive. In the end you all - and I do mean all - gotta ask yourselves. Do you want to see steam trains running or not? Because, like it or not, the reality is that carbon neutral steam trains are just not an option. At all. Personally, I know which I'd choose. I work my arse off in the steam industry, end every day dirty and tired, and I don't want to see my efforts squandered because of this. RANT OVER OK, that's done, but I hope nobody holds this against me. Especially Chris E.G, even if you disagree with me. Chris, I still love your work and look forward to more of your videos. In fact, perhaps you should video a day as a volunteer in various capacities? Show your viewers what it's like at the sharp end?

[@iron1349]

in Six Flags St. Louis, they run their steam locomotive on propane, and the Union Pacific burns oil in their surviving steam engines.

[@craigspicer4296]

Chris this was very interesting and love watching your channel. Keeping these beautiful machines on the track is going to be a challenge but hopefully this may blow over and all the pollies have a good rethink on climate change and zero emissions.

[@Stubwood_on_YT]

Great video Chris!

[@barryosullivan5255]

If I may for a moment, I think biocoal actually has one factor that you guys sort of neglected (though the whole video is incredibly well done and relevant). In it, you said that the demand for biocoal by the UK isn't sufficient for them to operate however, two factors to consider that may make the price go down and demand go up. One is that it is produced in America and two is that it wouldn't be just the UK who want to get their hands on it. I would theorize that with the global demand for this stuff across all steam engines, traction engines and work houses that it may be enough to increase the demand and overcome the price. Though naturally, all just a theory and would need more thinking. Sidenote: What loco is Tom shown to be on? I'm just curious as I don't know it

[@owenmeschter9888]

Barry O'Sullivan it’s not english, I can tell you that. Maybe French or Belgian?

[@TF2004-official]

The engine is Charwelton on the Kent and East Sussex railway

[@MachRacer4]

As far as anthracite coal in a standard gauge steam engine, I can tell you it would work as the Pennsylvania Railroad used exclusively anthracite coal in their engines as it was what was available in their area.

[@suprememeowmix9613]

They didn’t, but ok. The schuylkill division was the only segment of the system to burn anthracite regularly.

[@CW56]

I’m all for helping the environment and I don’t want global warming to happen, but I still wanna see steam engines run cause they’re so amazing.

[@killerbees177]

Henry needs that special Welsh coal

[@spyone4828]

Decades ago, McDonald's decided to stop using styrofoam packaging. They had not been the world's largest user of styrofoam, nor even the largest in the USA, but they were the largest RECYCLER of styrofoam, and with them gone there was not enough styrofoam being recycled for the industry to survive. Sometimes, what looks like the best choice really isn't because of side-effects that aren't very obvious.

[@InventorZahran]

And I've been told my whole life that styrofoam is impossible to recycle and we should all just stop using it.

[@superjoeyman1]

Have any of you actually spoken to an environmental activist? Hi, I helped organise the September 20 strike in Australia. We aren't coming for heritage coal use. We're focused on the big stuff, like the coal fired power plants who burn orders of magnitude more fuel. Take the issue up with your respective government bodies, the teens aren't after you.

[@ChristheXelent]

Glad to hear from you. Unfortunately, some heritage lines in the UK have been targeted by misinformed members of Extinction Rebellion recently. That being said, I wouldn't say all activists are the same as some have genuine concerns directed at the most pollutive contributors. Hence getting all wound up with Greta Thunburg isn't the way to go about resolving the problem. Thank you for coming forward and doing what you do.

[@superjoeyman1]

@@ChristheXelent, honestly, I'm really not a fan of XR, for this reason and others. In a sense the activist and railway scenes have a lot in common, given they're both volunteer movements with a focus on the public good. It's a shame to see XR alienating any potential allies.

[@jaysecure]

Irrespective of who you are "after", the problem remains that if you succeeded in stopping major coal users from using coal, then the mines would close as they will quickly lose profitability. Heritage railways alone will not be sufficient enough business to keep more than say one mine open at best. I'm not saying larger coal users should not be changing. I'm just siggesting that the battle you are fighting has further reaching implications than you may imagine. Now is definitely the time for Heritage outfits around the world to be looking hard at alternatives. Here in Nz we have a number of locos that were converted to oil. Both before Heritage groups and since. Obviously a tender doesn't look as good with a rather boring looking oil bunker in place of a good size coal load, but it works. The other huge misconception that many people fail to realize is, with a good driver and a hot fire, there is often little pollution coming from the stack. Steam is not a pollutant.

[@superjoeyman1]

@@jaysecure, the heritage rail scene doesn't need large suppliers. It needs to do to fuel what it's done to every other component of steam traction; that is to say, transition to a large network of small suppliers. Just as heritage rail doesn't require industrial supplies of spare parts, it doesn't require industrial supplies of coal.

[@OriginalBongoliath]

Yea that's what all you nanny staters say but it's never enough. You always come for more it never, ever stops. Stop lying!! Imagine being so blind and ignorant that you think the slippery slope is a fallacy. Nothing stays static and you lot always demand more never, ever being satisfied!

[@eliotreader8220]

i can understand what you have said in this latest episode of Gauge the issue i read steam railway and old Glory Mags and i can see that in order to keep the steam presavatiom movement we are going to face some problems

[@mattsmocs3281]

Lehigh Anthracite and Reading Anthracite are both about to get some new customers for there locally made product. Its organic ;) but in all seriousness the idea of banning coal and wood is truly a outrageous move and goes quite far. That means private steam will be heavily effected

[@kiwitrainguy]

I don't understand why they would ban the burning of wood as it is, after all, a bio-fuel. Perhaps it is because of the smoke but that has come about in the last 40 years because of dampers installed on domestic fireplaces. People close the damper to "keep the heat in" and as a result more smoke is produced. My solution is to remove all the dampers off those fireplaces.

[@barry5787]

Tom Bright makes the point that I have always maintained and that is the visual impact of a train being fired poorly, whether by poor coal or poor firing is stark and oil is no better. American oil fired engines can look like they're burning old tyres.

[@tramlink8544]

only if too much oil is added to the burner. if you have a fireman who knows what hes doing theres little to no smoke at speed

[@barry5787]

@@tramlink8544 Totally agree, little and often, keep the public on side.

[@Spud607]

I couldnt understand a word Tom Bright said? Can anybody give me a bit of a summary of what he said?

[@aifrench14]

copy and paste reference made me laugh, good work bro ;)

[@teddill4893]

Very well done.

[@HeavyTanker-vx4oq]

TBH, Oil Burners are a bit more environmentally friendly. Like what UP has done with 844, 4014, and Challenger. But they still cause a problem, granted they can burn used oil. They don't produced as much CO2, but the amount of Nitrogen they produce is astronomical, and that causes problems too.

[@tobyytlai]

6:05 I don't think you should add up the 2 figures. Each tonne of coal only travels via one of the routes, not both. You should take the average using the percentage of choice of route instead. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[@tridentmusic5570]

Easy targets. I just wish Car exhausts and even more so AIRCRAFT exhausts were VISIBLE. and WELL DONE for raising the issue of the carbon footprint of imports...Ah ! gauge this issue: - It's all about CO2 and 2.5uM particulates.. No one gives a damn about Nitrogen compound pollutants or more damaging micro particles, but hey! We can't SEE them, so there's no problem. As to Defra-cation, I understand their (Female) Spokesperson was heard to say "Why should the Government CARE ?" (!) ..No change there then. And give a thought for the poor old narrowboat "live-aboards" after this absurd ban comes in..They're going to be VERY cool over winter without fuel for their stoves. Bio coal ? and kiln dried wood? no one has said how much planet warming energy is needed to produce either ! Ah ! SO MUCH "JOINED UP THINKING" NOT.

[@joshuamccarthy9728]

tridentmusic love how u mention cars and “AIRCRAFT” hahahaha but u forgot about agriculture 🤔🤦‍♂️ strange since its like the biggest polluter but u know 🤷‍♂️

[@chalichaligha3234]

Actually, the biocoal is pretty good. In theory the operation can be run completely carbon neutral, as the energy required to run it can come from the biomass itself, however that's not completely possible until they transport the wood using biocoal fuelled lorries! (I hope they do!)

[@xylicable]

@tridentmusic There are important issues at stake regards this issue. However, I got distracted by your comment and would welcome greater explanation as to what the significance of the gender of the spokesperson you mention being "female" has to do with it?

[@stephendavies6949]

Hello Chris, I'm new to your work and am enjoying watching some of your back catalogue. This issue is key to the future use of steam engines on heritage lines. IMO, both the declining market for steam coal and the potential growing interest in heritage railways of the environmental lobby could well see the current fleet of working steam engines become museum pieces within a decade. Whilst changes in the demand & supply dynamics of the coal market can be overcome (possibly by heritage railways & mainline operators of steam engines forming a cooperative to secure supplies), the impact of environmentalists focusing on trying to ban steam traction is far more problematic: how many families would be prepared to barge their way through shouty, placard-waving activists blocking access to heritage lines and stations? Also, I'm sure we will soon experience residents - supported by enthusiastic local councils - claiming that heritage steam engines chugging past their homes are contravening their right to clean air.

[@highpath4776]

The obvious way is to double output of coal in the last year of drax and stockpile it there, enough for 365 years of heritage use. I suppose converting some tenders to electric motors would be interesting.

[@ironmatic1]

Go ahead and write the check

[@wilsonlaidlaw]

My memory of steam from my youth, is of steam wagons and traction engines (only appeared at harvest/threshing time) being run on coke not coal. Certainly the large Babcock and Wilcox 10,000 lbs/hour steam boiler at the family textile mill was run on coke, which was delivered from our local gasworks by a coke burning Sentinel S6 steam truck, which I used to get to ride in. The B&W boiler had a continuous chain stoker system. I accept that alterations may be required to locomotive fireboxes to burn coke well but surely better than not being able to use the locomotive at all. Like the poster below, I also found that I was only picking up the odd word of Tom's comments due to the very "echo-y" sound quality.

[@kiwitrainguy]

Nice idea about the coke but there are a couple of problems: There are not the gas works around these days (if indeed they still exist at all) to produce the coke. Also coke is much more expensive than coal, even back when all gas came from coal. It amazes me that coal can be split in to three (what used to be) useful products: Coal Gas, Coal Tar and Coke and yet the coke is still more expensive than the coal it came from. I suppose that says something about how much it cost to run a gas works.

[@Spaceman33393]

Be glad they haven't taken the root that California did, over here we can't run a locomotive unless it's oil burning. And converting is expensive and doesn't always work as intended, not to mention some locomotives never did it so historical accuracy has to go out the window. The only good thing is that a lot of American engines were converted to oil burners in the last few years of steam so there are plenty to choose from.

[@DTGee64]

I think what a lot of people don't understand is that climate change is an economic issue as well as an environmental issue. Doing something that reduces carbon emissions by only a tiny percent would be good if there was only the environmental issue, but because there's also the economic issue, it would only be good if it doesn't greatly damage the economy.

[@paulhorn2665]

I work as a voluntar deckhand on a steam tug in hamburg. Since a few years after germany closed down nearly all its coalmines, we have to use coal wich is imported from south america, what a rubbish, this braslian coal was mined in enviromentally/workplace safety questunable mines and is shipped through the seas to hamburg. But I have a feeling , as this coal is still needed for the next decades the little steam tug will get its coal. We neeed twice a year some 5-6 tonnes coal for the little steamer...

[@Percyfan1998]

Well, you do preach a bit (kidding!) xD. But in all seriousness, a very interesting topic to bring up on GTI. I can certainly see the massive problem this presents, and of course the concerns over PR given the fact that steam engines burn coal, not helped by the rhetoric over ending the usage of that fuel. I'll certainly keep an eye for the developments on this issue because it does look to be an interesting time for new ideas on how to keep the lines going on a new source.

[@richardjayroe8922]

Lambards point in the US allows coal mixtures to said choosing (not to mention its the largest coal port in the US)

[@Gordons1888]

Britain only contributes 1% of the world's CO2 we cant do anything at this point. Why is nobody protesting China? The largest contributor

[@Gordons1888]

@Matthew Tymczyszyn yeah I appreciate its not what hes saying, I'm just saying that us stopping burning coal is ridiculous and achieves nothing except the loss of many jobs

[@SkyFire2112]

It’s simple. China is a massive market and to protest them as a government would upset all of world commerce. China has the world by the balls

[@connerrolofson1585]

@@SkyFire2112 Because China *is* a *communist* country. People in Hong Kong are protesting against this country because that state could potentially control everything in the city. They controlled so many things within the land, too, including businesses. And this is the biggest thing that makes the People’s Republic of China (PRC) problematic. This country’s government hates the freedom of speech. They are trying to silence the citizens for having their own opinions and saying whatever they want against this communist government, which, to them, would be terrifying. Essentially, it’s like the Soviet Union, which is now Russia, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), also known as North Korea, only worse. They control the citizens through propaganda and that this government has security cameras everywhere, and it’s all in place because of fear. They don’t want citizens that are capable of critical thinking and they don’t want eductated people that are capable of critical thinking. That is against the interests of this communist country and it’s government. They don’t want the citizens to know that the Tiananmen Square protests from May and June 1989 happened, because it exposed this country’s hateful behavior towards the citizens with the military and the police. And hear me out. China is quietly expanding territory and is going to take over the world, inspiring every country be like it, silencing citizens including you and your friends and parents. Taiwan is *officially* the *Republic of China* , but the government in this island country doesn’t want anybody to know that. Let’s call the country in the Chinese mainland the *People’s Communist Republic of China.* (PCRC)

[@bskorupk]

In the Event of widespread Mine Closure, would Freemining of a sort found in The Forest of Dean be of any use?

[@agw100100]

Meanwhile the German (for example) power generation system is 40% coal fired with more than half that burning lignite which is not much better than peat.

[@kingkaza]

You mention rail fan shows like trainspotter live Was wondering if you would make videos about them and why the dislike for them for people who never seen the shows

[@mastersofpuppets92]

I volunteer with road steam and I'm prototyping a compressed charcoal briquette in my shed. I've been looking at the CSR biocoal experiments but, like Chris, I'm sceptical. The main thing is how few updates we get from them but there's also the energy efficiency and cost of the process.

[@chalichaligha3234]

I'm actually a member of the Advanced Steam Traction Trust and during our meeting last October had the pleasure of listening to a presentation by Wolf Fengler of the CSR on biocoal. It seems the product has superior qualities to coal, but when I asked about the process efficiency, Wolf said he would get back to me. I'll try to follow that up. Doing a rough calculation: Energy density of willow coppice = 18.4 MJ/kg - www.crops4energy.co.uk/ Coal weight x ratio of energy densities of coal and willow = Willow weight of equivalent energy 35 000*25/18.4 = 47554 tons of willow Dry willow yield per hectare per annum = 10 tons - www.forestresearch.gov.uk/ Weight of willow per annum / willow yield per hectare per annum = Area of willow woodland required to be coppiced 47554/10 = 4755.4 hectares = 47.6 sq km Assuming ~ 50% efficiency (optimistic), that's about 100 sq km or 40 sq miles, a bit smaller than the Forest of Dean. Difficult, but reasonable I think, considering this would be spread out all over the country.

[@chalichaligha3234]

I'm actually a member of the Advanced Steam Traction Trust and during our meeting last October had the pleasure of listening to a presentation by Wolf Fengler of the CSR on biocoal. It seems the product has superior qualities to coal, but when I asked about the process efficiency, Wolf said he would get back to me. I'll try to follow that up. Doing a rough calculation: Energy density of willow coppice = 18.4 MJ/kg - www.crops4energy.co.uk/ Coal weight x ratio of energy densities of coal and willow = Willow weight of equivalent energy 35 000*25/18.4 = 47554 tons of willow Dry willow yield per hectare per annum = 10 tons - www.forestresearch.gov.uk/ Weight of willow per annum / willow yield per hectare per annum = Area of willow woodland required to be coppiced 47554/10 = 4755.4 hectares = 47.6 sq km Assuming ~ 50% efficiency (optimistic), that's about 100 sq km or 40 sq miles, a bit smaller than the Forest of Dean. Difficult, but reasonable I think, considering this would be spread out all over the country.

[@mastersofpuppets92]

@@chalichaligha3234 very interesting, thanks for that. Just looked up the waste wood produced in the UK per year and apparently its 5 million tonnes! I'm sure some of this would be suitable feedstock.

[@chalichaligha3234]

@@mastersofpuppets92 , Perfect!

[@modelrailpreservation]

Wait. Old VHS tapes in the firebox? That really happened? Sand works so much better and helps clean the boiler tubes besides. During WWII, it wasn't uncommon to throw sand in here and there to keep scale from building up, particularly in areas like the Southwest (I am American and talking America here) where water quality often wasn't great.

[@ironmatic1]

Sand in the firebox is an American oil burning phenomenon. Not sure why you mentioned water, they didn't pour sand into the water...

[@HamStrains]

Y'know a volunteer railway is just as much a concept that works as a volunteer coal mine could be. Preserve the mine. Duh. As to any cost increase this may put on that causes certain railways to shut, probably good, the market is very saturated and could probably do with some consolidation and realism put into what actually can or should be saved and how many of these entities need exist. Maybe time to stop the "never shoulda been shut so lets reopen it" attitude to every single branchline ever and focus on making the best future proof and viable entities that don't go begging with their hat every year just to survive. Appreciate the past, but live in the present, rather than trying to put the past back in place and forgetting the realities of the present. 🙄 unfortunately railways do attract dreamers and the foolish a bit much.

[@mattsmocs3281]

Second comment but this is where i specialize in Anthracite. The issue with it for british steam is the same for non of certain classes of steam. The Northeast region had special fireboxes designed for the burning of Anthracite due to the high heat content. With only 1 Standard Gauge running hard coal burner running at a 60 Anthracite 40 bituminous mix it is a decent example but it has the firebox the size of Tanfield’s enterprise. However the best example of almost standard is a 42” steamer in Ashland PA. That thing has almost zero emission (other than noise) and it is the equivalent of most small standard british locomotives. But yet we should not forget that too we live in a time where Climate protestors shut down sections of the Canadian National and attempted to derail trains in the US and Canada.

[@Madnessofmusic]

Just a suggestion, isn’t an easy solution to this conversion to either oil firing/anthracite? I imagine converting to anthracite would just be raising the fire grates to just under the boiler tubes. Where oil firing seems to already be a success given the U.S scene.

[@spdaylight1]

I'm going to drag my soap box out. I personally don't support any Environmental protection plan as they got the last hometown railroad in my state bought out (DM&IR) and I don't think I have to mention what happened to muscle and ever other car in the late 70s and early 80s.

[@karlosbricks2413]

Your figure claimed for CO2 emissions for Russian coal looks wrong. The graph shows if the coal is imported via Murmansk, then it's 70k gCO2e/tonne, you've added the two together, even though they represent separate possibilities in the importation process.

[@ChristheXelent]

The graph also shows that it doesn't all come from the same side of the country. Therefore it's not necessarily two possibilities and justifiable to add both figures together.

[@karlosbricks2413]

@@ChristheXelent Murmansk is an ice free port city, whereas St.Petersburg is an inland city which would likely export via rail or truck rather than boat. It would therefore figure for Murmansk figures to be based off shipping via Oil burning ships, while St.Petersburg figures based off rail, which presumably are all hauled electrically to a port further west, which would reduce the route mileage at sea and reduce the carbon footprint. I agree there may be additional emissions getting the coal to these major rail yards, but combining to the two is misleading as the coal is not traveling twice. Any additions to the figures presented should be properly reasoned. You cannot as a researcher bundle together figures from two different modes to account for unclear uncalculated variables, even if they are obviously missing. All that said, it's not the end of the world, and your content is usually of a very high quality, not trying to start an argument here.

[@henrybn14ar]

Doesn't coal come from Riga any more? It used to go to Tilbury.

[@brpannier6828]

So, it costs too much to keep the steam heritage scene running after the coal ban? If railways cant run steam, they will run diesel, people wont want to ride diesel, steam railways shut. Lets look at the ffestiniogg railway. They have an annual turn over of over £1 million.... 1) this part of the local economy goes. 2) the local industries around the railway then lose tourists because of the railway's closure. 3) This then results in these other industries closing down. THIS WILL REDUCE THE TOURIST INDUSTRY IN THIS COUNTRY!

[@henrybn14ar]

They could just burn the diesel fuel in the steam locomotives instead of coal. It is cleaner and more efficient than using diesel fuel in a diesel locomotive, as the Swiss discovered, much to their own surprise.

[@mattsmocs3281]

BR Pannier 68 not only thar but would kill the UK economy. Look at the Reading and Northern Versus the borough of Jim Thorpe deboggle. Due to the borough attempting to illegally tax the railroad the line pulled there operation. Thus almost destroying the economy because without the Gorge railway the town would be desolate. Rockhill Furnace had the same issue when the East Broad Top closed. Sure people came for the trolley museum but not the levels as for the steam railway. Thus resulting in most of the city boarding up.

[@brpannier6828]

@@henrybn14ar It will be expensive to convert the engines to diesel firing though. Plus, it isnt the same as coal. Different fuels produce different amounts of heat. I dont know whether diesel is hot enough, however, if not, it is better to go to oil firing.

[@ironmatic1]

@@henrybn14ar I'm sorry, but it is literally impossible for any external combustion engine to burn its fuel more efficiently than an internal combustion engine. There's a reason they aren't used anymore.

[@kiwitrainguy]

@@ironmatic1 The way I've heard it is that burning diesel fuel in an open fire like on a steam loco produces less pollutants than a diesel engine because in a cylinder it can only burn fuel with what is in the cylinder at the moment of combustion whereas on an open fire there is a supply of oxygen from the surrounding air that has no limits to it (for all intents and purposes).

[@Mr.RailYard-LJLRailYard]

Pretty cool video.

[@eliotreader8220]

apart from the tests using smaller engines has anyone tried to see how bio coal burns in a coal burning fire place in the uk? I understand some people have used peat brickettes in the past?

[@nathanchan4653]

If Britain will run out of coal my advice/suggestion is to convert some British steam locomotives from coal to oil burning…..yes I know it have been done before but it works in both America and Australia. So if coal does run out in England, oil fired British steam locomotives will be the answer to the coal crisis

[@nickbarber2080]

There are two sides to this...the legislative side,which must be dealt with by effective lobbying,but also the supply side. Russian coal is now off the table since this film was made,and the market is volatile and unpredictable. It seems to me that the HRA along with the traction engine bods and all other interested parties should come up with a joint bulk agreement with one of the surviving S Wales pits to take a certain tonnage per year which is then distibuted amongst the participating organisations. In the short term this may be a little more expensive but having a long-term assurance of supply...

[@davidwhiting1761]

Burning VHS tapes to make black smoke for photographers? That just sounds dumb from the get-go. It's bad enough that a steam locomotive produces smoke at all, but intentionally burning plastic and film? That's even worse. Hopefully all the plastic and film gets incinerated or the crews will have quite a mess to clean up afterwards. And I don't mean to sound like an armchair because I'm about to say something technical about steam locomotives without actually being an engineman (trust me, I hate armchairs as much as the next real enthusiast), but black smoke is usually an indication of coal not burning properly due to too much fuel and not enough air which means some of the volatiles in the coal will not ignite which drops the heat of the fire and only serves to produce more ash, further hampering heat and steam production. It's wasteful and not only makes the railways look bad but it also makes life harder for the footplate crew who have to keep driving and firing an engine with impeded heat production with only more ash and clinker to clean out of the firebox, fire tubes, and smokebox after the run as a result. So-called enthusiasts requesting black smoke for photographs should never have been an issue nor should the notion ever have been entertained by the crews. Rather, railway-ignorant photographers should have either been educated as to what black smoke is, what it implies, and why it's best practice to avoid black smoke or they should have done their own research. Why would any educated railway enthusiast request black smoke or even think that black smoke makes a good picture? It should be appalling to a true enthusiast! On that same note, why would the operators of a heritage line, the people who know what they're doing and work hard to keep what steamers are left running, give in to photographers ignorant enough to complain about there not being enough black smoke for their precious photographs and produce black smoke, even by throwing in old VHS tapes instead of wasting coal? Why imitate what is at its core a display of waste and poor firing, and why celebrate said imitation by promoting photographs that feature said imitation? I'm not an alcoholic. Am I going to go around imitating the actions of a drunkard by stumbling around like an uncoordinated moron with impaired mental capacity and drinking beverages that look like alcohol, even if my so-called "buddies" say it's for the lols or it'd make a great pic for social media? Of course not! I'm also not a smoker. Would I go around with something hanging out of my mouth that looks like a cigarette or do something that resembles smoking like vaping? Out of the question! I have standards and my own dignity. So why imitate something like poor firing? I'd say the blame for a steam railways' negative image lays both on railway-ignorant fans who for some heaven-only-knows reason actually want to see wasteful black smoke and the railways which catered to that demand by either intentionally throwing on more coal than necessary on photo runbys or tossing in a VHS tape to simulate the look. Both sides have their own selves to blame for the steam locomotive's negative dirty smoke-belching image.

[@bramdeheus718]

whats the name of the engine were tom bricht is on

[@TheTrainMaster15]

Honestly I don’t have high hopes for steam traction in the future. Which is a shame since I would love to go to the UK and see engines up there at least once in my lifetime.

[@thedanishtrain2004]

how long do you think steam raliway persevation will be goning

[@PowerTrain611]

I'm highly doubt that the coal ban will affect heritage railways, and I only say that because the tourism revenue steam engines draw is just too great. The steamers still do what they were built to do - drive the economy! The only issue is where to get it that it is economical for the supplier... hmmm...

[@floridasteamer]

Here's my question: Why not turn to oil burning? It's worked for the U.S (there may be more but that's the only Country I can think of that uses Oil-burning Locos) It can work for the Brits.

[@johnd8892]

There may be an alternative to no steam running. The Disneyland steam locomotives, as I understand, have used diesel oil as fuel since opening day in 1955. No visible smoke I have ever seen. Likely that the issue of smoke getting in the way of Walt Disney's ambitious model railway scenery (12 in to the foot or so scale) was an issue considered by the Disney team even before 1955. Use of Bio diesel may be needed if a crunch comes. Likely these locomotives have had more travelers behind them than any others in the world for the last 65 years due to the 365 day per year continuous operation. Although just today a closure of Disneyland due to Corona virus concerns. 4014 Big Boy was converted to oil, partly as I understand it, due to recent California bans on coal burning. More expensive but not outrageous costs.

[@henrybn14ar]

It is cleaner to burn diesel oil in a steam locomotive than in a diesel. The steam locomotives also use less fuel.

[@zaklex3165]

Conversion of 4014 to oil had nothing to do with California's "ban" on burning coal, which you should research before commenting on...tourist and heritage(as they're called in the U.K.) as well as other historical uses for coal are exempt from said ban. Also, coronavirus is one word all lower case, not two, it's not a virus from Corona beer.

[@jsma9999]

WOW, How Much is Diesel Loco CO2 Typed From 1950's (Eg an Class 40 or Class 55) Vers Coal Only 36,000 tons an year Used in Steam Historical Scene, Thank you Tom Bright for info.

[@Jakob_DK]

james m But we want to ban both.

[@jsma9999]

@@Jakob_DK that the Point of Question. How much is Smoke is Steam and Vrs Diesel Which 100 of Black smoke

[@Jakob_DK]

james m Germany is going zero emissions with passenger trains. All of them. Electric, hydrogen or battery. There will be no diesel to compare to. And mass of particulate matter in the black smoke from a locomotive is high compared to a EURO6 truck (i know it does not apply in UK but still )

[@Shipwright1918]

I wonder, would it be possible to reopen some of the old mines that used to supply steam coal on a smaller scale just to meet the needs of the heritage circuit? In my own experience as a live steamer in miniature, I can say getting coal of the right kind to put into my locomotives is practically impossible where I live, so all my engines burn butane, alcohol, or even wood, as those fuels are all readily available and affordable.

[@churroman183]

If it was for the specific purpose of serving the heritage line, it might not work. All the health and safety regulations required and it could be difficult finding people to work in it on such a small scale. Not to mention the age of the mine might not be adequate for usage.

[@ironmatic1]

Doesn't work. Economies of scale. If all heritage railways only burn 30,000 long tons of coal a year, that's 3 American trains of coal *per year* (or I suppose 6 British trains?). A 1000 MWe power plant will burn a 10,000 ton trainload of coal in a single day.

[@Paul-ul7dz]

Could some of the locomotives not be converted to burn waste oil I know it's still a fossil fuel but cleaner than coal some trains in different countries have steam trains that have been converted to burn oil it would be alot easier to get a hold of

[@matthewbollinger9205]

Hey Chris, I don’t want to sound controversial, but what if they converted coal, wood, or oil fired locomotives to use battery powered electric heaters to boil the water? They could use the type of battery used in the Stafford battery electric locomotive. it would be much cleaner, and the tender or coal bunker could hold the battery and the water tank. And each station could have a charging station. Greetings from America! 🙂

[@Sohave]

This is sort of a black pill.

[@craigpalmer9196]

o2 is plant food

[@Jakob_DK]

craig palmer O2 is needed both for plants and animals:-)

[@ChargerusPrime]

I'm an American and I know how a lot of rail enthusiasts on that side of the pond absolutely love your coal burning steam locomotives. But I will say, I think in the next 10 to 20 years, most of the steam locomotives operational in the UK and the States will switch to burning oil of some form or another. And I firmly suggest the use of of recycled cooking oil like from fast food joints and whatnot just like the Grand Canyon Railway does in their steam locomotives. Granted, this is just my opinion, but I do think its a phenomenal idea as vegetable and cooking oils produce 0 harmful emissions.

[@TheOnlyTYRE]

The problem with that is, many locos simply cannot convert to oil, owing to the fact that they are such an old design and or are simply unable to undergo conversion as it would be so contrary to their design and originality. It's easy to say for US locos because they have huge tenders which can hold almost any combustible material in them, but for something like an LBSCR Terrier, I think you can see how that's impossible.

[@ChargerusPrime]

@@TheOnlyTYRE you're right, that would be impossible to do to a terrier. But perhaps a 9f or maybe an austerity 2-8-0 or maybe even an 8f. Still though, the dilemma is the UK designs are much smaller than what we have here. Put a 9f next to a 4-8-4 and it looks tiny in comparison.

[@Jimboliah3985]

5:21 Aaahhh, my hometown and the best city in the world. ;) Also, maybe the Brits should start looking into burning oil in their steam engines, and NOT heavy fuel oil at that.

[@Matty_98]

The problem with converting to oil is that every steam powered machine in the country would require extensive modification. That's something that would cost a fortune and not every railway, group or private owner could afford, not to mention not everyone would be to thrilled about ruining the look and feel of steam machines to convert them to oil firing. Then there's the problem of having to train all loco crew members on how to fire an oil burning machine. That in itself would take a very long time.

[@VT29steamtrain]

@@Matty_98 Not to mention the state where i come from in Australia, does not allow Oil Burning locomotives, due to high bushfire risks. This also applied to the Paddle Steamers as well.

[@kallumproductions3498]

It will be a problem to us who own live steam coal fired boilers

[@HWRR12]

So is vegetable oil (like on the grand canyon railway in America) not a choice. Like I get that oil burning locos is not really a thing in the uk but maybe one railway can give it a go. And it doesn't have to be vegetable oil it can be like recycled car/motor oil like the black hill central(1880s train). I've lived in England and America and I will say while I love the smell of a coal fired loco I don't really care if a locomotive is running on coal, oil, or anything else I just want to see that steam locomotive running TLDR I don't really care I just LOVE a good old steam loco

[@tancoplays3502]

Why don't they just convert them to burn oil like a lot of American engines

[@Ensign_Redshirt]

Interesting perspective, unfortunately I don’t think we will like the populist answer to this. Diesel will go the same way. The only way I can see railways sustaining will by modern fuel sources on modern locos. Steam and diesel traction will become museum pieces.

[@Jakob_DK]

Les Lawrance In this case they are museum pieces:-)

[@matthewpeter]

anthracite doesn't work in all miniatures. My engine flat refuses to burn it.

[@emilioi.valdez6680]

Why don't people just convert coal burning locomotives to systems similar to those of oil burners and have them run on alcohol/ethanol.

[@erikgustafson9319]

What about what they do in the states convert our steam engines to use vegetable scraps

[@TheSudrianStoryteller]

Well we know that oil conversion may not be the “always” good idea to them, that’s for sure. Given how expensive it can be to convert them into oil burners without having to mess up on the tubings of which is which for the engine(s). Despite some Railways and heritage groups managing to convert certain steam locomotives to run on oil, including Australia recently who converted a steam engine in New South Wales to an oil burner and a standard gauge as well, it wouldn’t naturally be the same for enthusiasts and newer generations of rail-fans who want to know the main source of what helps power the steam engines. Especially witness how they looked like in old railway photos, such as the ones you would see, yet no longer will see, in China. It’s such a shame that certain places are banning the use of coal and want to keep the environment safe and clean, which is very understandable and that we should all be doing by the ending of this new decade to take seriously about - as a separate subject alone. But can we rely on the use of oil forever to keep steam engines not only environment friendly and hazard free, but their history alive? The simple answer is: no... There had been some reports that oil doesn’t frequent do as much as coal does for steam engines. Given how and what the arguments behind them is and what the situations are, it won’t help anyone’s case of what is better and what should be use. With the new development of bio coal still in production and how the results of the experiments on them work out, and other alternative proposals given to have them continue running, I think it might be a long time before any steam heritage group start using a new fuel source that isn’t fossil fuel related in anyway to keep the wheels of history turning or at float. I suppose will just have to wait while continuing to put up with banters by rabbid rail-fans that aren’t sensible enough to understand the situation behind the curtains.

[@Jakob_DK]

Thomas In Lionel Productions The dirty smoke is the good reason not to go on a steam train too often with the kids. There really is no reason for the smoke if you just want a nice day out with the family.

[@pilotbug6100]

you know i am late but: we should have a coal mine serviced by a steam railway

[@valtersludvigs2298]

I now a miniature traction engine that uses 4t of coal in a year.

[@ashleyelgin9808]

I am going to say something very contraversial here.... we should consider refitting to burn fuel oil/kerosene ect.

[@tramlink8544]

we run an oil burner Mikado in Switzerland and its hard enough to find the crude grade required for oil fired locos, as an example, Germany, France and Italy cant supply us any, we have to do a yearly run to Amsterdam in Holland to get the type of oil our SNCF Mikado requires. Oil is not the solution. Sticking it to the government is the solution

[@wondermenel2811]

Where is the polish steam engine?

[@gamerfan8445]

What will happen to the P2

[@CW56]

It’s still going ahead, regardless.

[@gamerfan8445]

Reny Rex true. But I mean that a big express engine like the P2 to run.

[@CW56]

Is 60009 on static display yet?

[@lukeslocomotives]

No she may work on heritage lines until the end of the year

[@adamdrummer1991]

Luke Hill woohoo. Love that locomotive

[@charlo90952]

Pellets could be bought in bulk.

[@artybuttonusa9974]

I think i have an idea to solve some of the problem here in the us some steam trains run on oil and the practice has been use in wold war 2 hell even ocean liner switch over from coal to oil the only problem is it cost a little bit more up front to overhaul the engine. This is just my outside view from the US i don't know ur regulations.

[@dorsetsteamer8221]

If the enviroment is the issue then why not just ban people having bonfires? So and also people with log burners burn mainly logs or other types of wood such as old pallets etc.

[@paxvictori2385]

Why not convert some locomotives to burn oil? Alot of American engines already burn oil, if a Big Boy can do it why can't a King Class?