How California’s Railroads are Going Zero-Emissions by the 2060s

[@procrastinatingpuma]

By electrification, right? By electrification… right?

[@adventuresofamtrakcascades301]

That's the key of zero emission power source

[@jnrfalcon]

At least UP and BNSF claim part of the problem is they can't run double stack intermodal and trash transport trains with overhead catenaries. And they love the capacity boost with double stacks. That's why we have to strike down PSR, hire more engineers run more lighter shorter trains that can actually speed up in between curves. With PSR, US rail system is doomed

[@daniellewis1789]

​@@jnrfalconThey can run double stack under properly designed overhead electrification - India manages substantially taller freight loads than any US clearance plate.

[@jnrfalcon]

@@daniellewis1789 it's mostly fine except in tunnels built 100 years ago. There's not enough clearance in those tunnels

[@daniellewis1789]

@@jnrfalcon That's easily fixable. You have a couple different options - mandate a couple minutes of battery/capacitor storage on your electric locomotives. Dig the tunnel out a bit deeper. Run a multiple voltage setup with 1500v DC in the tunnel for less clearance. Use third rail in the tunnels. There's so many options, and they don't want to announce "yep, we're gonna have ten years where we have less stock buybacks than our competitors and after that we'll be ahead."

[@crgkevin6542]

Battery electric locomotives have got to be the worst option for zero emission locomotives. Just install electrification FFS!

[@ncard00]

But it’s the realistic solution, and removes vibrations, noise, air pollution, and the smell of diesel for passengers, that’s all I care about, the local environment, not the global environment, cause 1200 metric tons of co2 are emitted every single second globally, that will never reach zero.

[@harutosunaa3881]

Knowing Burgerland though, it costs way more than it should.

[@gamerfan8445]

@@ncard00you are singing a different story after one caught fire.

[@uncipaws7643]

FFS, Ferrovie federali svizzere, is a good point: Switzerland is fully electrified since long!

[@gamerfan8445]

@@astrobrady2396 you realize battery locomotives cost as much as overhead lines.

[@johnclark8227]

I think that Electrification would be the best solution. Combined with some Dual-Mode locomotives for smaller branch lines. And the railroads could even keep their older locomotive fleets. After all diesel electric locomotives are just electric locomotives with an additional engine and fuel tank. If I remember correctly there is an example for that in India, where they are rebuilding older EMD diesels into electric locomotives, I think the new locomotive class is called WAG-11, if I'm not mistaken :) So that would possibly reduce the costs for electrification slightly.

[@TheWolfHowling]

Amtrak & Siemens are doing something like this with the ALC-42E variant of the Charger. These locomotives will have an extra car, referred to as a "Auxiliary Power Vehicle", with a pantograph & the transformers and equipment to take power from the OHC and convert it into the correct phase & voltage that can be feed to the locomotive's traction motor system, as well as additional motors in the APV.

[@IamTheHolypumpkin]

The California Legislature should’ve included strong incentives to do proper overhead electrification (maybe only an main-lines). All round I do approve the spirit of the legislation.

[@SalmanMentos]

I think California would be better with 3rd Rail because the general public wont even notice it and some people thinks overhead electrification is цglу

[@LiteGamer52]

@@SalmanMentos You can build less visual polluting catenary wires.

[@SalmanMentos]

@@LiteGamer52 yeah but it costs more money and SOME people still thinks its an eyesore

[@railfandepotproductions]

*on

[@CSXIV]

One thing at a time. Also-overhead wires. We have a lot of rail lines that date back to the Central Pacific. You cannot properly grade separate every single rail line, especially every rail line that needs to be crossed to get to a beach. If the choice is "third rail and having to build a way to get to the beach" or "overhead wire and can still cross into the beach" overhead wire wins.

[@AmtrakFan6905]

CalTrain has done the best job so far. That’s what high quality public transportation should be like. Props to CalTrain

[@StocktonSubber]

Honestly, hearing that historical engines won’t be affected by this is a breath of fresh air (despite the fact that Napa Valley’s FPA’s and other engines don’t fall under that apparently). I’d rather have a state that has some diesel history preserved and running rather than have said diesels somehow being under that and can’t run because of it. Now I’m interested to see how further we’ll go with this whole emissions thing.

[@chasemartin4450]

Nuclear and renewable-powered electrified rail *must* become the backbone of California's transportation system if we want to improve sustainability!

[@uncipaws7643]

Now it would be good if the state supported widespread electrification of its mainlines. In countries with state-owned rail infrastructure it's often the government taking such decisions, but private owners of tracks can get state funding as well, provided they will after that allow other operators to use their electric infrastructure as well. (Payment can be handled easily, put a power counter on the locomotive.)

[@henrythef1guy768]

Except there are no mixed traffic main lines that are owned solely by railways operating exclusively in Cali. Either the freight railway itself or a nationalised network would have to install power lines across the nation. Which the other solution to the passenger rail problem would be to change “freight goes first” to “whichever train is first to the junction goes first” just like it is in the UK (I believe)

[@gdrriley420]

Pushing for zero emissions over pushing modal shift is classic CARB. Modal shift is what we really need but old school environmentalists and most regulators hate the idea. The hydrogen FLIRTs are for testing state wide.

[@stickynorth]

Hydrogen, good. Battery, better. Overhead electric? Best!

[@gearandalthefirst7027]

Battery bad, hydrogen worse. Overhead electric: should've been installed 50 years ago. Diesel? Beyond archaic.

[@memeingrailfan3553]

Yes

[@illiiilli24601]

​@@gearandalthefirst7027 The best time to plant a tree was 50 years ago, the second best time is now

[@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis]

Hydrogen is necessary for long-range locomotives on low-traffic density lines if zero emissions are desired.

[@illiiilli24601]

@@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis Trans-Siberian Railway:

[@TheAustinSubRailfan]

Anybody know when CalTrain's F40's are going to be retired? I wanna try and see some more of them before they're gone.

[@SkysTrains]

probably around september, as thats when they will most likely start phasing in the new trains

[@jackchen7003]

They will be gone in September 2024, effective immediately

[@CSXIV]

Possibly this year. The new Stadler KISS EMU's are scheduled to go into revenue service in September. They've already started to remove the gallery cars to make room for the new EMU's and once the first order is complete, they'll me moving the F40's out. I think the latest draft for the new schedule has the f59's running from Gilroy to San Jose-and that's it. There's a timed transfer for further north. Although CalTrain hasn't mentioned what to do with the Gilroy extension, but I suspect that will be thier next big project. It isn't as easy as "just electrify it" because the UP owns those rails, or "wait for CHSR to build thier line" because we don't know when that's happening and that will have different stops (also you want CHSR to have as few blended rail sections as possible).

[@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis]

I would not be surprised if Metra in Chicagoland end up with most of them.

[@LJRailfan-Gamer_07.]

Now with California nearing its zero emissions goal, I have to head to the rails to catch the older generation locomotives on their last few miles. Amtrak: GE P42DC. Built between 1993 and 2001, with the ALC-42 already debuted on the Empire Builder, Capitol Limited, Coast Starlight, California Zephyr, and Texas Eagle, the Southwest Chief is the last long distance train to have the Genesis units leading. Soon, they might be evicted from California and work on the northeast for their final years. BNSF: GE Dash 9. Built between 1994 and 2003, these will be the last of the dash series to be slated for retirement after the Dash 7 and Dash 8. Metrolink: EMD F59PH and MPI MP36PH-3C. The F59 was built in 1992 and the MP36 was built from 2008 to 2009. 856, 868, and 873 are the last three F59’s operating. Hope I will film them before they and the MP36’s gets sidelined in the 2030’s

[@Pensyfan19]

Very well made video! You hit every point on the head, as although I personally prefer hydrogen over lithium ion, it would be best for the state to heavily encourage the construction of overhead electrification, and to actively divert funding away from high carbon emitters such as cars, trucks and planes.

[@SteveGettingAroundPhilly]

One other thing to keep an eye on in the near term is a bill going that passed the California state assembly that allows rail projects using overhead line electrification to be exempt from environmental review under CEQA, the state's notoriously strict environmental laws, thus enabling agencies and railroads to implement electrification projects quicker and cheaper. Really should help the LA Metro, Amtrak and the freight railroads get nudged in the right direction. A small step perhaps, but one better than most.

[@LiteGamer52]

Also, Metrolink

[@MikeBrady-js5rq]

Making electrification eligible for a CEQA CE will help, but CE determinations can be challenged if there's evidence presented of potentially significant impacts (including to views). So it's helpful, but not a panacea. They're still expensive even without the environmental process, and so far I don't see the freight railroads allowing it on their tracks. That's why Caltrain's wires end at Tamien not Gilroy - it's UP ownership south of Tamien. Electrification south of there will have to wait until HSR actually arrives someday with separate tracks (and grade crossings according to the most recent plans!).

[@jeffreyrule8143]

Thank you. A very informative video. Happy rails.

[@darkpokemon0426]

Washington state is already following California in establishing the cap-and-trade carbon market, I wonder if there's any chance the state could be pressured into adopting CARB standards for locomotives here too...

[@solarflare623]

If you ask me the railroads will electrify EVENTUALLY. They’ll likely eventually realize just how impractical batteries are and finally suck it up and electrify

[@dylanryall]

But not after trying and failing to use the inefficiencies of battery engines in a bid to go back to diesel. If we get a long enough period if strong congressional support of emissions reduction this might push Congress to regulate some sanity into freight railroad operations and get them off of making profit primarily by cutting costs rather than actually providing a fast and efficient delivery process.

[@solarflare623]

@@dylanryall I’ll be completely honest the government should just nationalize the entire rail network. The benefits DRASTICALLY outweigh the drawbacks.

[@lioneljones6484]

​@@solarflare623ok so where is the Government going to get the around 5 trillion dollars to pay off all the stock holders at ns, csx, and up, then but outright bnsf who owns the most valuable rail route in the country, then you have to deal with 2 non american railroads in cn and cp, and on what grounds would the government be able to nationalize you need to have a reason to do it, and the fake climate emergency isn't a reason that would ever be able to stand up in the courts

[@lioneljones6484]

Nope because there aren't any electric locomotives that can generate the pulling power to pull a hundred car stack train, at 60mph, they just don't exist

[@solarflare623]

@@lioneljones6484 what about more than 1 electric locomotive on the same train? They already do that with the diesels

[@Huey-UH-1]

H² EMUs run in Germany in regular service with normal reliability problems for new rollingstock but with very littel issus with the drivetrein, like issus with the software . So i am an big supporter for H² Locos and EMUs over Battery EMUs. H²locos can be as powerful as Electriclocos and have the same range as Diesellocos. Maybe buliding lighter loco is an option because up to 196t for an 4400hp loco is not efficient. But an good Video thumbs up!

[@drdewott9154]

But in most cases the hydrogen train plans are already being phased out. The main reason bring the excessively high operating cost which is upwards of 4 times that of battery or overhead electric trains

[@Huey-UH-1]

@@drdewott9154 I just talking for Germany here is that not the case. German Rail operators are very positiv over H² for longer Dieselroutes 90km and more.

[@SpheroJr3289]

We build heavy for higher tractive effort actually, thats why US Locos tend to be much heavier.

[@StefanWithTrains]

​​@@Huey-UH-1 We are just going to ignore the fact that Lower Saxony cancelled their H² plan because of reliability problems. They are now going to electrifying and use battery trains on their routes. There are 10's of H² programs falling out of the sky because of not being feasible. It just doesn't work.

[@Henry5623]

@@StefanWithTrains Lets also not forget the mid 2000's when hydrogen fuel cell cars tried to become the next big thing in california as well...just to have that entire idea implode faster than the Titan sub. All that glitters is not gold...

[@osmanhossain676]

I always love California High-Speed Rail in California.😮

[@richardjayroe8922]

Part of this is smart and reasonable, but on the other hand, how many trucks are on the highway rolling coal? And I could see a small battery powered industrial switcher

[@MikeBrady-js5rq]

One of the major switching lines in LA (LAJ? PHL?) is using some Progress Rail (Joule) battery locomotives - not small, based on standard diesel platforms. Haven't heard much about that operation in the railfan literature.

[@IntaminFanboy]

Getting beyond the Class I “can’t run double-stack below catenary” argument is critical if we don’t want to be stuck with battery locos forever… but it’ll take money and political bravery on the part of Amtrak, states, and transit agencies that actually want to do it.

[@ethancampbell6076]

Since you mentioned SF to SJ Peninsula corridor they can’t extend all the way to Gilroy. They can go far as Tamien for the electrical route.

[@CSXIV]

I was just thinking about this. This is likely Caltrain's next project. The main options are working with the UP or seeing what CHSR intends to do, and both aren't getting it done anytime soon. I'm still waiting for a rail extension further south, that would connect with Santa Cruz County's light rail project (likely 5-10 years away from actual physical work). That would turn my commute from "driving over mountains" to "sleep on train." Caltrain was connected to this in the late 90's before dropping out and Capitol Corridor was looking into it.

[@RTSRafnex2]

They can, because they have ordered battery electric EMUs.

[@MikeBrady-js5rq]

@@RTSRafnex2 Exactly. It's a low-volume (commute-only) line using UP-owned tracks south of Tamien. Battery-electric hybrid is the favored technology because it can run and charge from the wires north of Tamien, and still get to/from Gilroy on the commute runs.

[@adventuresofamtrakcascades301]

11:40 California's car infrastructure is indeed pretty bad. Because it goes back and forth way too many times between the design of a "road" compared to a "street". For example, where i am right now, this WHOLE space would be designed as a "STROAD" that tries to be a thoroughfare AND a destination at the same time. That simply does not work that way. The same applies to California's insane highways

[@csxnspittsburghdivision8580]

Why does amtrack on the Northeast Corridor have freight trains that need to have electric trains on the northeast corridor

[@edwinsinclair9853]

Amtrak does not operate freight trains. Any freight traffic on the Northeast Corridor (and it's damned little if any)_uses diesel power. Anyone who thinks that Union Pacific and BNSF (the only two mainline railroads in California) are going to spend billions of dollars to electrify their thousands of miles of trackage and motive power just for California, is living in a naive dream world. Electric locomotives are great for passenger service, but for almost two mile long freight trains very impractical in today's technology. Don't forget that power has to be generated somewhere.

[@gamerfan8445]

@@edwinsinclair9853say that to the Virginia Railroad.

[@LiteGamer52]

It's easy for the freight trains that run on that corridor to use overhead wire electric locomotives.

[@gamerfan8445]

@@LiteGamer52 actually they should do tests to see for there self

[@railfandepotproductions]

​@@edwinsinclair9853you forgot about the Milwaukee road and the PRR

[@moartrainz4242]

This is a great breakdown! However, if you could in the future, integrate a few static shots with the most important bullet points, it would really help me internalize the information better. I’m more of a visual learner and sometimes seeing info written out enhances a voice over tenfold. Just a suggestion, longtime sub, love your work!

[@ClintonStClair]

One time on X or Facebook I saw a post about a CA bill to eliminate EIR’s for sidings and electrification. But I can’t find any news on it. So I don’t know how true it was.

[@SleepTrain456]

As a Californian railfan, I found this quite an informative summary of CARB's ambitious-sounding plan. Thanks for the video!

[@lioneljones6484]

That carb plan will go right out the windows if either up or bnsf threatens to build massive tofc yards in Arizona or Nevada and stop running trains into the state, and bnsf has already said they would do it, at that point the feds would come in and tell carb to back off,

[@Henry5623]

@@lioneljones6484 BINGO! Legislation only works until you throw enough corporate money into the equation. Or rather, until you threaten to take it out! California lawmakers DON'T want to loose the staggering amount of money UP and BNSF pump into the states economy. UP won't think twice to take an initial financial hit to rebuild intermodal facilities and related infrastructure somewhere else in the southwest or simply move them to Texas, if it means long-term, pre-established, standardized operations can continue with minimal disruptions or alterations. BNSF won't hesitate either. Add in a shortage of truckers as well as local businesses suddenly having their entire inventory/distribution operations thrown into complete chaos, and CARB's "wishful thinking" plans will meet reality REAL fast. -approaching 24 years working for UP.

[@darthmaul216]

@@lioneljones6484they won’t. California is a huge market that they wouldn’t want to give up. Also what would stop other railroad companies or even the state from buying up those rails?

[@ClearSignalJDMan]

Hey nice video, That BNSF 8061 is a ES44C4. Also that would be ashame to see the BNSF ES44DCS to retire in 2035. Imo its honestly a bad idea to do this to make everything zero emissions.

[@zakiyo6109]

How were catenary not even brought up?

[@MartinHoeckerMartinez]

You missed the Hydrogen fuel cell multiple unit train that's going into use on Merolink's Arrow service

[@IronHorsefan1869]

Unfortunately he misses alot of things

[@railfandepotproductions]

​@@IronHorsefan1869*alot

[@adventuresofamtrakcascades301]

12:19 um have you ever seen another KZbinr called “Not Just Bikes”? He talks about something very similar to that

[@SPRailfan4449]

So sale diesel locomotives will be banned? So is railroad preservation still going to exist in the future?

[@darthmaul216]

Yes. Museums are education, and aren’t applicable to the new laws

[@SPRailfan4449]

@@darthmaul216 Thanks for the explanation!

[@trainzandplanes522]

Its going to be interesting to see if MetroLink is going to be doing the same concept as Caltrain in the aspect of buying Stadler KISS trains that are longer, as well as double tracking and electrification. (either that or battery KISS trains, could be good ideas for them, but I'd prefer electrification)

[@MikeBrady-js5rq]

Metrolink so far has been reluctant to talk about electrification. Probably has to do with their relatively low-frequency operation (even hourly trains outside of commute are hard to find) and use of freight railroad lines in critical parts of all their routes. They're trying out an H2 EMU on the Arrow operation in SBD-Redlands, and I'd say they're more likely to stick with locomotive-hauled trains long-term possibly with H2 fueling replacing diesel. Note that most commercial H2 is produced by reforming natural gas ... yes, it's possible to do it more cleanly, but it's expensive to do that and so far hasn't scaled well.

[@TysonIke]

I fear that this could stop their from being development into new services. For example a system like SMART that opened in 2017 would probably not get built if they had waited 10 years due to the additional cost of equipment

[@mrxman581]

Good to see the progress away from fossil fuels in California. Los Angeles continues to expand it Metro network attracting more riders with every expansion. You can now see significant TOD near many stations. This will continue to grow as well.

[@massmike11]

When it comes to electrification the locomotives would be the cheep part, the overhead wires is going to be the expensive part.

[@alexisdespland4939]

how a iscalafornia going to deal with low bridges and tunnels that can not yet fix the increased high needed to fix the wires.

[@darthmaul216]

Same way that clearances were raised for double stacks

[@Ghfvhvfg]

Top mounted 3 rail exist can be called solid catinary needs very litle space

[@True_NOON]

Imma just say *_Finally_* Also battery is rly only for the building phase fr

[@jackthegiantkiller388]

how much would it cost to build electric?

[@NorthBay43]

Your back again

[@transitcaptain]

Electrify mostly with only a FEW fast charging battery trains on semi-rural branch lines installed by a competent train manufacturer

[@weitkemperoliver]

If you’re willing to put electricity into locomotives passively, then why not do it actively

[@gloryannbatista6211]

ATTENTION EVERYONE IN THIS CHAT Norfolk southern DASH 9 (One of the rebuilds) was leading back first and helping Capital Limited 30 TO DC at the gaithersburg MARC station

[@gloryannbatista6211]

Hey Sam CSX number 1852 was recently repainted into western Maryland colors

[@jdubbs3422]

This is reckless and shortsighted. Your focus should be on connecting neighborhoods with viable transit. The cars on the highways are your biggest problem, not the railroads. This is ridiculous and not celebratory at all.

[@alexisdespland4939]

how dose the law deal with dead heading engines across calaforinias system from one neibouring state to another wherethey are legal. ;

[@darthmaul216]

As long as the engine doesn’t turn on its fine

[@bukasb]

that’s funny cause the state literally told Napa Valley to “destroy” their MLWs, a scenic railroad with vintage equipment, California is so confusing 😭

[@HIDLad001]

Did anything happen to them?

[@johnwondolowski179]

The problem in that case was that Napa Valley had to do that because they applied for a grant to get new locomotives. That was a condition of the grant. That, and I'm guessing they are considered more a commercial operation than a museum operation. Deal with the Devil and it's going to burn you.

[@alexrobison19]

The state didn’t tell them to destroy the locomotive just the prime mover. The NVR took money from the state to buy the KLWs. One of the requirements to get the funds was to destroy the original prime mover they’re replacing. They can keep the MLWs by rebuilding them to tier 4 emission standards but it’s not likely that they’ll go that route.

[@LiteGamer52]

Does this mean more overhead wires? If so, then it's going to be great!

[@Ghfvhvfg]

So WE could see an oversized vectron powerd by 25 Kv AC(posibly even with a diesel mode like some in europe ) in California

[@oliverherzog7702]

There are tree operations and the cheapest ist electrification of the lines. Classical dual modes exist and are not rocket science. Install overhead lines on the 6000km of california lines costs only about 5bn$. And with this stretch electrified the dual mode would become the regular type which could caues a windfall to get more lines electrified. Problem solved without hydrogen and batteries.

[@coreyhipps7483]

CA likely needs to be involved in building out electric infrastructure. Most models where mass electrification is successful the infrastructure, i.e. rails, catenary, signaling, and rail bed are owned and financed as state infrastructure. The rial operators then pay for usage and operating rights. I don't think there's a good capitalist solution to get there by tax and regulation because it is not in the railroad's interest to pay the infrastructure cost.

[@Ghfvhvfg]

Wh has amtrack not enfoced a eliectric locomtives owly rule in the electfrifued portion of the northeast coridor exeption for amtack maintinance wioks and soecial reqests a steam train for example swiss try to minimise use of diesel on rails

[@jackthegiantkiller388]

what railroads will stop operating in california ?:

[@darthmaul216]

None

[@steve87thpsap]

So let me get this straight, CA doesn’t have enough electricity to power the state, but wants to put everything on electric. Where is the electricity coming from? Oh that’s right, the plugs in the wall. Where is the money for new electrical producing plants? Does the railroad have to make the plants? Oh yeah don’t forget Electrical companies shut down overhead lines because of fire issues, how is that going to work?

[@dncarac]

This is the state that has periodic planned blackouts??

[@aaronmiller5012]

Well I think the freight locomotives from UP and BNSF should be rebuilt to Tier 4 in order to keep their diesel engines going and extend their life plus use a more sustainable diesel fuel like renewable diesel fuel made from plants, used cooking oil, etc.

[@YveDahl]

wish they would look into overhead electrification even though its expensive. though the benefits outweigh the costs

[@MikeBrady-js5rq]

Most smaller railroads in California will meet the zero emission requirement by simply shutting down. The Class 1s and multi-state regionals will file suit (if they haven't already) against California and EPA, and with the current Supreme Court the regulations almost certainly will not survive in their current form, if at all. Note that the Caltrain electrification only happened because a big chunk of CAHSR money was thrown at it - Caltrain updates of course are necessary to get the HSR trains (someday) from San Jose to SF - but it does serve as an example of "main line" electrification that's compatible with freight operations. The battery units like Flxdrive were originally intended for "hybrid diesel" locomotive consists to save fuel. They charge via regen, and are designed to be primarily used that way in diesel consists with only rare charging at terminals to top things up. The BNSF (funded by CARB and SJV air pollution control district) ran a prototype Flxdrive unit between Stockton and Barstow, and afaik only Stockton had a charger. The unit (with about 1/2 the battery capacity of regular production) reduced fuel consumption on that run by a bit over 10%, which really isn't bad at all since it included crossing Tehachapi. They were not and are not intended for stand-alone general service. The only Flxdrives sold commercially so far have been some for Australian and Brazilian miners with special operating conditions. Pacific Harbor Line in the LA area does have a Joule battery locomotive (subsidized by air district funding) that can be used stand-alone for switching, and in consist with diesels. When used with diesels, most modern battery units use the builders' "cruise control" systems with embedded electronic maps of the systems to determine when to charge by regen, based on power demand indicated by standard MU connections, so they're mostly transparent to normal train operations. That said, of course, since they can't be used for long stand-alone, they aren't going to help much with meeting the CARB regulations. Battery-overhead hybrids are something you didn't mention, but that have been suggested elsewhere for things like commuter operations that are partially electrified. They would work much like the dual-mode diesels, recharging from the wires when operated in straight-electric modes. Rumor has it that Caltrain is looking at such trains to use south of San Jose, where adding wires is a non-starter at present (UP tracks, limited service...). Battery-electric hybrids would also be appropriate for freight operations on electrified lines, allowing use on spurs and short branches off electrified main lines without having to extend wires everywhere. Wonder if there's a market for battery/overhead-electric conversions of GP38 platforms?

[@darthmaul216]

A similar law was implemented in NYC in 1908. So its definitely not unconstitutional

[@MikeBrady-js5rq]

@@darthmaul216 California is fighting with railroads and other to keep and extend its waivers under the Clean Air Act allowing stronger mobile source emission standards than federal. Those waivers have become a political football, and when (not if) the right lawsuit reaches the Supreme Court as it's currently constituted they will be in jeopardy. The feds long ago asserted their preemption of air quality standards otherwise.

[@darthmaul216]

@@MikeBrady-js5rqI thought you were all about states rights. But ig that only applies to things that you like Is that 100 year old law in New York unconstitutional? Yes or no

[@osmanhossain676]

No hyperloop.😢

[@CSXfan618]

ET44AHs would be retired before 2045.

[@djpetesake]

And then the port of Long Beach relocates to Mexico?

[@TranscontinentalRailfan]

Wow!

[@videomaker133]

"Historic locomotives are unaffected." Well guess who decides what's historic?

[@darthmaul216]

Museums are unaffected.

[@videomaker133]

@@darthmaul216 My comment is in reference to any locomotives in the present or future which may be worthy of adding to the collection of a museum but not done so (at least operationally) due to this law.

[@darthmaul216]

@@videomaker133locomotives ment for educational purposes (museums) are exempt

[@videomaker133]

@@darthmaul216 the state is still ultimately who decides whether something gets saved, whether it is or isn't historic, educational, or in a museum.

[@darthmaul216]

⁠@@videomaker133no. The museums decide. Privately owned museums are a thing. The state decides which buildings are historic

[@TheRailwayDrone]

This country should have electrified our railways a long time ago. Other developed countries have done this. I don't know why we're always behind in a lot of things (actually, I do know why).

[@SalmanMentos]

I think battery power is pretty dцмb because 1. Companies underpays the miners in some random 3rd world countries for like lithium and stuff 2. It looks hideous, it has that wierd akward bulge like its trying to be a cowl unit 3. They need recharging, if a tesla car takes like an hour to charge. these locomotives probably spend days recharging 4. What if your locomotives suddently shut down because of low battery precentage? Yes i think there would be a warning for low batteries but me personally i always skip the low battery warning on my phone

[@christopherwarsh]

Everyone saying “electrification is the only way” ignores the complexity of a cantanary system in very remote areas.

[@IronHorsefan1869]

Tell that to Russia's Trans Siberian Railway

[@christopherwarsh]

@@IronHorsefan1869 when money is no object, it's definitely easy.

[@IronHorsefan1869]

@@christopherwarsh Freight Railroads have more money than Any passenger services in America!

[@Ghfvhvfg]

RhB all ectric infrasurce is dual use after all if you have on cable lets lay interntet.... in the same path less resistace from karens

[@stickynorth]

Hybrid engines are needlessly complicated and wasteful.

[@ergotot45]

overhead electrification infrastructure totally ruins railroad photography opportunities.....

[@darthmaul216]

Source?

[@IronHorsefan1869]

I love Electrification Lines in my shots!

[@gb9727]

give Metrolink, coaster, ACE and surfliner ACS 64s

[@bjturon]

End of the Century?

[@Sevenfeet0]

An interesting video....some of your points were good and others fell short. I know you are generally cold to battery electric locomotives, but you make the assumption that current BE Loco technology will be the same five years from now or more importantly 20 years from now. There is a lot of work going on with battery chemistry and it's certainly possible that battery tech for cars will diverge from trains or other applications for a number of reasons. I'd check out the "Undecided" KZbin channel which has spent a lot of time investigating newer battery tech than is currently on the market today, be it solid state, aluminum or other forms. Energy density, chemical stability, difficulty in manufacturing are all variables on the table that may be different that car needs or semi trucks. It's like going back to 1928 and thinking that the brand new diesel electric locomotives that were so anemic that they were only good for yard duty would be the be all end all of diesel tech. 32 years later, steam power had vanished from American rail networks because diesel got better. Also, its pretty much established that BEV cars have fewer maintenance issues versus like ICE cars due to lack of complexity of moving parts. A similar hypothesis can be made for BE locomotives when you don't need a prime mover to maintain. I agree that catenary power delivery is ideal in most cases, but you have massive infrastructure construction issues when you get out to the western states. In many places, there just isn't the electrical infrastructure to do catenary properly without significant investment. Is it possible? Sure. Will cantenary have its own maintenance challenges? Absolutely (but its well understood). Hydrogen fuel cell locomotives are an interesting wild card. Personally I'm happy to see all these possibilities tested in the real world. It may be the future...or a technological dead end. We won't know until we try it.

[@c.d.porter9366]

It's all a cynical slight of hand that because the ecological damage is hidden or moved to other areas.

[@petitkruger2175]

LA has oil pumps in the middile of parking lots. California is so bizzare

[@TohaBgood2]

They’ve been removing them gradually literally for decades now. Less than 1% are still there and that’s only because they can’t legally recover them. It’s funny how you all just watch two-three youtubers and borrow their opinions, no matter how silly or poorly researched. Have a brain of your own.

[@CSXfan618]

Wabtec and Progress Rail are working on zero-emission locomotive designs.

[@jackthegiantkiller388]

who will pay out there

[@Alfius_]

We all shall go zero emissions with steam! Because that’s just clouds not „pollution”.

[@darthmaul216]

Depends on what heats the steam

[@warreninc.9485]

Good luck

[@jwrailve3615]

Diesel and coal powered should be the only option. 😂 Cali is a trash state before you know it they’ll only allow one rail car be pulled at a time for “conservation”

[@darthmaul216]

Why?

[@ZorenManray]

Really this plan continues to be another of what you would expect from uninformed lawmakers and regulators that just want to do what "feels good" for their PR. The goal should be "efficiency" not purely emissions and as stated the most efficient locomotives are pantograph/3rd rail electric, Dual Mode, and then traditional diesel electric. But what is the likely outcome everyone knows is coming from this? yep Battery electric locomotives that due to the extra weight are just terrible in efficiency. Also the other concern is infrastructure, and yet California is doing little to NOTHING to reign in PG$E and $CE the two companies that provide the electricity to most of the state at double the cost of most other utilities.. but oh well got to shovel money their way to make our "green electric future"

[@darthmaul216]

Electric trains are more efficient then diesel

[@FSTM4003]

maby California should just ban cars in general, just give electric cars to Law inforcemnt, EMS, and fire departments, and use electric or Biofuel busses.problem solved

[@michaelcoldwater7147]

They will not be zero emissions as you see nothing is zero emissions

[@shurikadze]

The title of the video is a puzzle to a lot of us, Californians. We are yet to see a 100% electrification with Nuclear power in California. So far we buy 75% of all electricity out of state with more than half of it produced with coal. Go California!

[@ArchsStanton]

UP and BNSF are just going to apply for - AND RECEIVE - extension exemptions for years and years and years and years and.......

[@Ghfvhvfg]

Bether idea the State could buy all tracks and operate there own railroad with a european ownership structure if UP and BBSF dont compy

[@ArchsStanton]

@@Ghfvhvfg What? *So the "state" IS GOING TO TAKE OVER UP AND BNSF FREIGHT HAULING?????*

[@earlfreeman93]

This is where the state and the federal governments need to take over the mainline corridor to electrify them as well as to realign them for safer and higher speed running ; since the private railroad companies will never be able to afford electrification of the mainline network on their own.

[@HitPoint110]

Boo diesels are so much better than shitty 0 emissions

[@darthmaul216]

By what metric? Electric trains are lighter, more powerful, and cheaper to run

[@IronHorsefan1869]

0 emissions is NOT Shitty! At it reduces smog! You just want outdated equipment for your own benefit rather than the benefits of clean air! It's Not all about you!

[@hitpointrc]

@@IronHorsefan1869uh no they are most definitely shit they literally use coal to power the electricity not including mining lithium for the batteries. you environmental freaks need to get the facts straight

[@jamesbradley7306]

Ah, those Californians. Flog the Railroads. Really?

[@Mentor_Ohio_Railfanning]

boo🥱 stupid designs keep emissions

[@T128Productions]

Yeah, low emissions are still better than none. I mean, who would want to listen to an artificial engine sound (like a V8) instead of a REAL engine? It won’t be the same! As a Californian, I don’t like where this is going.

[@darthmaul216]

Oh no. Less pollution

[@Mentor_Ohio_Railfanning]

@@darthmaul216 i say more pollution

[@Mentor_Ohio_Railfanning]

@@darthmaul216 not like eco friendly is making a big change to the earth anyways it’s already polluted enough

[@darthmaul216]

⁠@@Mentor_Ohio_Railfanningless pollution increases intelligence, decreases lung problems, decreases Parkinson’s, decreases dementia, and decreases crime. And that’s just the local benefits, not even including the global benefits like less war because of the decreased importance of oil

[@ConnecticutFoamer]

Bro was really beefing about the Cybertruck.

[@kevinfranck6520]

Clearly the guy who owns this channel and pimps the alternative energy as successful is clueless as to the environmental damage these technologies have already caused, nor the inefficiency with which they operate. Profit does not result from output generated, profit comes from government taxpayer subsidies. Incredible, this world just keeps going further and further down deep into a cesspit. The leadership who impose these rules also are cluless as to how the railroad industry works and how energy efficient and ecological they already are in how they have the potential to removed 1000s of polluting diesel trucks off long distance hauls. Local trucks are necessary, but more and more rail dependence is far cleaner in the loong run, even locally if marketed right.

[@darthmaul216]

Did you watch the video at all?

[@TealGuy]

I really hope this doesn't happen and they just keep their old fleet.

[@jimlove8144]

They don’t have enough power in California to do this. They’re not making any more power plants in California, they better get busy.

[@richardhunn4298]

No problem, just send your electric trucks to pick up your freight at the Arizona border

[@IronHorsefan1869]

NO!! I'd absolutely Hate That!

[@jlgrizzly7972]

Who pays for all these wonderful ideas, oh that would be the tax payer. When it cost more to ship everything goes up in price. Cali has the highest electric rates in the country, you must build out all the new power plants to push the kilowatts thru the lines to power the all electric locomotives crossing the country and climbing over the mountains. Think about the amount of cable you will need to string from coast to coast for all the miles of track. Who pays, we do in the prices of our goods rising to pay for Cali's mandates.

[@darthmaul216]

Electricity is cheaper then diesel so this would bring costs down. The reason why private companies haven’t switched yet is because it takes longer then one quarter to break even.

[@jlgrizzly7972]

@@darthmaul216 Do you even know how vast the United States is, if it was easier to have the European overhead power pickup electric locomotive to cross the Rockies and the Sierra Nevada mountain, they would have gone to them a long time ago. They are much cheaper in cost and in maintenance but just getting around those pesky mountains and what heavy ice and snow can do to power lines.

[@darthmaul216]

@@jlgrizzly7972do you know how vast the Soviet Union was? And yet the trans-Siberian railway was completely electric, the cold wasn’t an issue for them but ig the Soviets are more robust or whatever then Americans The federal department of transportation did a study back in the 70s outlining what routes would be profitable to electrify

[@jlgrizzly7972]

@@darthmaul216 So your OK with the CO admitting power plants to push the electricity through those power lines. The power has to come from somewhere, if it is not from Diesel generators on the locomotives it must come from power plants that suffers line loss per mile of cable. The Russians used coal fired steam locomotives up until the 1950's. When they were rebuilding their nation after world war they started adopting the Euro style electric locomotive powered by coal fired power plants.

[@darthmaul216]

@@jlgrizzly7972electricity can come from many places. For instance a diesel generator at a substation. Which would still be more efficient because now the locomotives don’t need to carry an engine or fuel. The Soviets used nuclear to generate most of their electricity. And a nat gas power plant (using nat gas because coal is on the way out and definitely won’t be in use at all in 30 years) emits less pollution per kilowatt than a small diesel generator.

[@MichaelfromtheGraves]

Just put up wires

[@T128Productions]

And then what, having a double stacked freight train ramming into the wires?

[@StefanWithTrains]

​@T128Productions You must have a brick in front of your eyes. Who would design a system that isn't compatible with your trains. In the US, there are already double stack trains running under wires in Pennsylvania. It works, don't ignore that.

[@darthmaul216]

@@T128Productionsno, you have the wires be above the double stacks. Duh

[@beckiverson1531]

BOOOOO HYDROGEN BOOOOOO

[@Elliottblancher]

Enjoy Losing businesses Calistinkfornia

[@T128Productions]

More like Bankruptifornia.

[@darthmaul216]

California is the biggest market in the country.

[@versedbridge4007]

Skip the nonsense just put up the f*ing wires.

[@maas1208]

The Freight Companies won't allow it

[@T128Productions]

@@maas1208 Yeah, considering the fact that their double stacked freight trains would hit the overhead wires.

[@StefanWithTrains]

​@@T128Productions...

[@darthmaul216]

@@T128Productionssource? Oh right you made it up

[@badkittynomilktonight3334]

Just go to overhead electric. It works all over the world.

[@stevem7508]

Trump will change things