BBC reporting that heritage railways will run out of coal in 2021

[Titfield]

I suspect the real threat towards heritage railways if they do not reduce emissions, will be that the various grant giving bodies will either be compelled or feel unable to give grants to organisations which do not reduce emissions. What % of heritage railways rely on some form of grant to keep going? Quite high I suspect.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With regard to domestic coal and wood fires, this is a specific issue that has come to the fore again in recent years as having a traditional fire has become a popular experience thing, not as a primary means of heating, and one that because domestic chimneys are in residential areas and quite low down does cause localised high particulates, which is quite nasty if you're asthmatic, for example. So those are much more of an issue than steam locomotives on preserved railways which tend pretty much by definition to be very rural, and also blast the smoke high in the air when running.

Similarly Scout campsites tend to be in the middle of nowhere.

It's important to remember that burning dead dinosaurs/trees causes 2 main issues - carbon and particulates. Most of the action with regard to wood burners and coal fires is about the latter. In essence it's the creation of wider "smokeless zones" where you couldn't burn wet wood or coal in the 80s when everyone had a fire or stove, and solving a problem again that had gone away when everyone got central heating and bricked up their fireplaces, but has come back now it has become popular again as an experience rather than a means of heating your house.

 

[trebor79]

Think the CCGT figure might be 60 - 64%.

You are quite right, I had muddled in my head with the figure for some industrial installations where the exhaust steam is used for process heating. In most power station applications it's simply piped to a dump condenser.

 

[dgl]

Naturally people like to claim that their wood burner is "green" because it uses a renewable energy source, completely forgetting about the pollution they create. If you're out in the middle of nowhere where your heating options are limited or you have something like a canal boat then it can be the best option but in a built up area where there are better sources of heat not so.
Apparently it's a big problem in the French Alps and causes a lot of smog.

 

[trebor79]

Naturally people like to claim that their wood burner is "green" because it uses a renewable energy source, completely forgetting about the pollution they create. If you're out in the middle of nowhere where your heating options are limited or you have something like a canal boat then it can be the best option but in a built up area where there are better sources of heat not so.
Apparently it's a big problem in the French Alps and causes a lot of smog.

Common misconception with burning wood. From a carbon POV there's no difference between burning fossil carbon and carbon that was in a living plant 5 minutes ago. In fact, there's an argument that says it would be better to leave the trees growing to soak up carbon from burning coal.
Of course if you're burning plantation wood or biomass that would otherwise rot and release CO2 anyway it's a different matter. But the arguments are certainly more nuanced than fossil fuels being a worse choice than biomass.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Common misconception with burning wood. From a carbon POV there's no difference between burning fossil carbon and carbon that was in a living plant 5 minutes ago.

That's not true. Carbon in fossil fuels is "locked in" below the ground - if you dig it up and burn it, that carbon is released. Whereas if you plant a tree now then cut it down in 10 years' time and burn it, it's taken in all the carbon you burn from the atmosphere. That's why biomass is carbon neutral and coal isn't.

In fact, there's an argument that says it would be better to leave the trees growing to soak up carbon from burning coal.

There is no shortage of land to plant trees on, so "plant more" is the answer to that.

Of course if you're burning plantation wood or biomass that would otherwise rot and release CO2 anyway it's a different matter. But the arguments are certainly more nuanced than fossil fuels being a worse choice than biomass.

The only real nuance is that burning anything releases other pollutants - NOx, particulates etc. And the main issue with the fireplace in your living room is particulates, which accentuate all manner of respiratory problems, and just stink so are also a nuisance.

That does create a bit of a conflict - the bloke opposite has a wood burner, it stinks and accentuates my asthma. But my gas boiler (burning gas from dead dinosaurs) isn't carbon neutral, whereas his wood burner is.

 

[Titfield]

That does create a bit of a conflict - the bloke opposite has a wood burner, it stinks and accentuates my asthma. But my gas boiler (burning gas from dead dinosaurs) isn't carbon neutral, whereas his wood burner is.

Which is why burning gas for household heating will eventually be something else that will have to be changed.

 

[py_megapixel]

My hope is that gas boilers will ultimately be superseded by heat pumps supplemented where needed by electric heat, all powered from wind/solar/hydroelectric generation.

 

[Greybeard33]

It's important to remember that burning dead dinosaurs/trees causes 2 main issues - carbon and particulates. Most of the action with regard to wood burners and coal fires is about the latter. In essence it's the creation of wider "smokeless zones" where you couldn't burn wet wood or coal in the 80s when everyone had a fire or stove, and solving a problem again that had gone away when everyone got central heating and bricked up their fireplaces, but has come back now it has become popular again as an experience rather than a means of heating your house.

I am old enough to remember the introduction of smokeless zones in Nottingham 60 years ago, under the Clean Air Act 1956, to help mitigate the "pea soup" smogs we used to get. Back then domestic heating was mostly by house coal in open fires, and everyone had to have their grates replaced by ones that provided enough draught to burn coke or other "smokeless" fuel.

It amazes me that domestic burning of house coal is still permitted today. Filthy stuff - I can remember my face covering being black with soot after walking 3 miles home from school (the smog halted all road transport, because visibility was little more than a metre).

 

[paul1609]

Giving out more grants for heatpumps, insulation and investment in public transport will make significantly more difference. But this involves significantly more effort on the part of a governing authority instead of simply "banning" things.

Theres a significant issue with air source heat pumps that's not really being factored in to the equation at the moment, that is that the main heating units are like fridges and will have a normal lifespan of 7 to 10 years. When the compressor fails which it will, its most likely not going to be economic to replace it because of the age of the other components in the unit. This is compared to 15 years plus as the expected age of a natural gas combination boiler. I can currently buy most combo boilers trade for under £1000, a 7kw LG heat pump unit is just under £5000, larger houses need 2 of those. I think its going to be a bit of a sting in the tail for some house owners and councils just after their grants have run out.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Theres a significant issue with air source heat pumps that's not really being factored in to the equation at the moment, that is that the main heating units are like fridges and will have a normal lifespan of 7 to 10 years. When the compressor fails which it will, its most likely not going to be economic to replace it because of the age of the other components in the unit. This is compared to 15 years plus as the expected age of a natural gas combination boiler. I can currently buy most combo boilers trade for under £1000, a 7kw LG heat pump unit is just under £5000, larger houses need 2 of those. I think its going to be a bit of a sting in the tail for some house owners and councils just after their grants have run out.

There's also a noise pollution issue. Countries where everyone has aircon will be used to it, but in the UK we're used to it being silent at night.

 

[paul1609]

I am old enough to remember the introduction of smokeless zones in Nottingham 60 years ago, under the Clean Air Act 1956, to help mitigate the "pea soup" smogs we used to get. Back then domestic heating was mostly by house coal in open fires, and everyone had to have their grates replaced by ones that provided enough draught to burn coke or other "smokeless" fuel.

It amazes me that domestic burning of house coal is still permitted today. Filthy stuff - I can remember my face covering being black with soot after walking 3 miles home from school (the smog halted all road transport, because visibility was little more than a metre).

Ive still got solid fuel heating in my house in my case a combination of wood and smokeless fuel. My coal merchant reckons that the amount of coal that he sells now is tiny and he doesn't really expect to lose anything by the new regulations because most people will buy more expensive smokeless fuel from him. We don't live in a smokeless control zone. He reckons that the banning of the sale of wet wood is likely to be a much more significant reduction in pollution because of people with gas central heating and a pretty log burner in their house who buy their limited supply of wood in the local garden centre or garage most of which hasn't been dried properly.

 

[birchesgreen]

How easy is it to convert steam locos to oil burning?

 

[trebor79]

There's also a noise pollution issue. Countries where everyone has aircon will be used to it, but in the UK we're used to it being silent at night.

My neighbor put one in and I was a bit concerned about noise as it's pretty close to the boundary. But only ever notice it when I'm getting in or out of the car. Can't hear it in the house or garden.
I'm not convinced he did the right thing. He has underfloor heating off the air course heat pump downstairs, and digital electric radiators upstairs, and his hot water is electrically heated. Reckons his electric bill is £400 per month!

 

[Bletchleyite]

My neighbor put one in and I was a bit concerned about noise as it's pretty close to the boundary. But only ever notice it when I'm getting in or out of the car. Can't hear it in the house or garden.

I suppose it depends where it is sited. I've watched a few "demo videos" by manufacturers who were crowing about how quiet they were, and found them all loud. Not as disruptive as living by a motorway, but certainly disruptive.

I guess he's gone undercapacity if he's not heating the water with it. Keeping a large, well-insulated tank topped up to temperature (generally an unvented cylinder so you can have mains pressure hot water like a combi for a decent shower) is one of the main use-cases for one.

 

[trebor79]

I suppose it depends where it is sited. I've watched a few "demo videos" by manufacturers who were crowing about how quiet they were, and found them all loud. Not as disruptive as living by a motorway, but certainly disruptive.

I guess he's gone undercapacity if he's not heating the water with it. Keeping a large, well-insulated tank topped up to temperature (generally an unvented cylinder so you can have mains pressure hot water like a combi for a decent shower) is one of the main use-cases for one.

It only produces 45 degrees in the hot circuit, hence why he has electric radiators upstairs. It's ideal for underfloor heating but useless for hot water or radiator applications.

 

[randyrippley]

Ive still got solid fuel heating in my house in my case a combination of wood and smokeless fuel. My coal merchant reckons that the amount of coal that he sells now is tiny and he doesn't really expect to lose anything by the new regulations because most people will buy more expensive smokeless fuel from him. We don't live in a smokeless control zone. He reckons that the banning of the sale of wet wood is likely to be a much more significant reduction in pollution because of people with gas central heating and a pretty log burner in their house who buy their limited supply of wood in the local garden centre or garage most of which hasn't been dried properly.

To do it properly...
new tender with oil tank
new firebox with oil jets
fuel injection system with preheater
redesigned boiler
probably redesigned smokebox due to the different draughting needs
possibly redesigned chimney and blastipes......

how much of the original are you prepared to lose?

 

[Greybeard33]

Ive still got solid fuel heating in my house in my case a combination of wood and smokeless fuel. My coal merchant reckons that the amount of coal that he sells now is tiny and he doesn't really expect to lose anything by the new regulations because most people will buy more expensive smokeless fuel from him. We don't live in a smokeless control zone. He reckons that the banning of the sale of wet wood is likely to be a much more significant reduction in pollution because of people with gas central heating and a pretty log burner in their house who buy their limited supply of wood in the local garden centre or garage most of which hasn't been dried properly.

Nevertheless, from the links upthread the amount of house coal burnt in domestic grates is still about five times the amount used by steam locomotives. So pretty important to the economics of importing it.

 

[paul1609]

Nevertheless, from the links upthread the amount of house coal burnt in domestic grates is still about five times the amount used by steam locomotives. So pretty important to the economics of importing it.

Unfortunately Steam Coal as used by heritage railways isn't the same as house coal and isn't normally sourced from the same site. The Calorific value of steam coal is generally about 20% higher than house and about the same as many of the smokeless fuels available.
In a "social event" of firemen at my house we experimented with the use of yard coal in my domestic back boiler and it burnt like paper it certainly wouldn't have been a practical fuel and that's in a domestic boiler thanks designer to be multi fuel. I dare say that in the day steam coal was burnt in ticket office and waiting room fires but they are pretty low tech and the fuel would have been much cheaper then.

 

[Greybeard33]

Unfortunately Steam Coal as used by heritage railways isn't the same as house coal and isn't normally sourced from the same site. The Calorific value of steam coal is generally about 20% higher than house and about the same as many of the smokeless fuels available.
In a "social event" of firemen at my house we experimented with the use of yard coal in my domestic back boiler and it burnt like paper it certainly wouldn't have been a practical fuel and that's in a domestic boiler thanks designer to be multi fuel. I dare say that in the day steam coal was burnt in ticket office and waiting room fires but they are pretty low tech and the fuel would have been much cheaper then.

I guess it depends what you mean by "steam coal" and "house coal". AIUI steam coal is the stuff used in power stations, with pieces that are far to small to be used in a locomotive, whereas house coal or lump coal is bituminous coal in much larger pieces.

Your domestic back boiler is no doubt designed to use smokeless fuel, which needs lots of draught. Lump coal would tend to burn too fiercely in it, as you describe.

I was referring back to this post upthread:

Read my old post of a year ago that I linked to above, and the reports it quotes.

Basically the steam railways in the UK survive by piggybacking their needs onto the demand for imported house coal. If the use of coal for home heating is stopped, then importing coal for railway use becomes impractical. The economics would make it impractical.

 

[trebor79]

The reality is that steam railways will burn whatever coal they can get their hands on. It doesn't really matter *that* much when you're pootling around at 25mph. Mainline operation is a different matter of course.
In my own experience, we got very variable coal when I volunteered on a line. Sometimes very good, sometimes absolutely awful. Only once did we get some really difficult stuff (it was a funny grey colour and looked a bit like lumps of slate and made loads of clinker) to the point we insisted a load of 'proper' coal was blended with it. But it always worked.
This was industrial tank engines hauling 3 coaches up a 1 in 40 bank, so they were worked reasonably hard. In my experience, it was the loco and crew that made the biggest difference.

Alternative fuels might not be quite as good as coal, but for most heritage operations they will be adequate.

 

[paul1609]

I'm afraid I dont think you know what you're talking about. Some of the preserved railways are using their engines flat out. Poor quality fuel and you will run out of steam. I passed my firing test 30 years ago!

 

[Titfield]

From a supply point of view the question surely is what will the price of a ton of suitable coal imported from e.g. Russia be?

Is that cost manageable from a heritage railway point of view?

 

[paul1609]

Ive no idea of current prices and I suspect they will anyway be distorted because of the pandemic. However I know that in the recent past the majority of the Southeast railways have imported coal from both Germany and Poland. In recent times ours has mostly been from Ayrshire.
Garzweiler (the German Coal Mine) is about 350 miles from Tenterden by Road (by car around 7 hours via the tunnel). This is about 150 miles closer than Ayrshire.

 

[Titfield]

Before the pandemic the price was between £200 and £240 a ton.

 

[paul1609]

Our last purchase in Sept 2020 was £185 a ton.

 

[Shimbleshanks]

Coal mining doesn't have to be a large-scale operation. There are one- and two-man bands running private mines in South Wales and also people like the freeminers in the Forest of Dean. Assuming one or more of them had access to a seam of suitable steam coal, heritage transport could be an ideal market for some of these guys. One of the Michael Portillo programmes visited a Forest of Dean miner; the whole thing seemed to be run by a couple of blokes, including their cable-hauled underground railway.

 

[Titfield]

Swanage uses C800 tons a year.

 

[Shimbleshanks]

Swanage uses C800 tons a year.

An ideal market for a small mine - a couple of tons a day.

 

[eldomtom2]

Coal mining doesn't have to be a large-scale operation. There are one- and two-man bands running private mines in South Wales and also people like the freeminers in the Forest of Dean. Assuming one or more of them had access to a seam of suitable steam coal, heritage transport could be an ideal market for some of these guys. One of the Michael Portillo programmes visited a Forest of Dean miner; the whole thing seemed to be run by a couple of blokes, including their cable-hauled underground railway.

Forest of Dean mining will be a problem absent future legislation as very few people are actually born in the Hundred of St Braivels nowadays.