I work for the railroad servicing and repairing locomotives. At the rail yard that I work at, we burn through 3 million gallons of distillate, a month.
The railroad is very seriously looking into running LNG in their locomotives, with its low cost, and with the cryogenic tankcars and onboard fuel tanks that I have seen lately, along with the greatly reduced engine maintenance from burning natural gas, not to mention meeting tier 4 emissions without any post-exhaust treatment, I think that the days of the diesel locomotive are numbered.
Extremely less. Production rates would be falling not climbing.
Even then, if the oil industry can't get the price below $2.00 a gallon for either gasoline, fuel oil or diesel, or LPG, then I'll throw my money into the consumer side, and promote efficiency gains and the use of natural gas.
Nothing wrong with that. The fuel is cheaper. So far there are still nearly offsetting cost in engine, fuel system and lack of distribution, but it is getting better.
The railroad is very seriously looking into running LNG in their locomotives, with its low cost, and with the cryogenic tankcars and onboard fuel tanks that I have seen lately, along with the greatly reduced engine maintenance from burning natural gas, not to mention meeting tier 4 emissions without any post-exhaust treatment, I think that the days of the diesel locomotive are numbered.
I tend to agree. LNG requires more volume for the same energy as diesel, but it is less mass. The very limited locations required for fueling seem to make this a good fit.
LNG per gallon contains only 58% of the joules (BTUs) of a gallon of diesel. And it warms up and loses density just sitting in an insulated tank.
No free lunches. Oil is superior because it is superior. Not because of conspiracy or economics.