1. Economics of Steam Traction for the Transportation of Coal by Rail
Chris Newman Beijing, China

2. Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Name: Chris Newman
Professional Engineer specializing in materials handling and transportation
21 years in Australian grain handling industry and 15 years in China, including10 years as technical consultant on $1 billion World Bank grain storage and rail transportation project;
A leading member of “5AT Project” that aims to build a hew high speed locomotive as a “modern steam” demonstrator;
Since 2004 has undertaken several studies on the economics of steam traction for coal haulage and has written and presented papers on the subject.

3. Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Synopsis
Steam traction was never fully developed before its eclipse by diesel power in the mid 20th century;
The development of steam traction was continued through the second half of the 20th century by the late L.D. Porta and several of his disciples, with a doubling of the thermal efficiency of “classic” steam traction.
The economics of steam traction for coal haulage from mines to port or to point of use, appear much better than diesel or electric traction in developing countries.
The economics of “modern steam” traction appear especially promising over the longer term.
Future development of steam traction could see efficiency levels approaching those of diesel traction.

4. Presentation Summary Preliminaries – 4 pages
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Presentation Summary
Preliminaries – 4 pages
Introduction to Steam Traction – 3 pages
“Modern Steam” Advancements – 9 pages
Loco Performance Comparisons – 10 pages
Railway Operation – 15 pages
Rolling Stock Requirements – 15 pages
Cost Comparisons – 23 pages
Environmental Considerations – 12 pages
Local Community Benefits – 1 page
Conclusions – 5 pages
TOTAL – 97 pages

5. Introduction to Steam Traction
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Part 1
Introduction to Steam Traction
Technology dates from 1803 during the time of the Industrial Revolution in Britain;
Technology developed empirically over 150 years with inadequate understanding of scientific principles;
1950s-designed steam locomotives were slower, less efficient, less reliable and more polluting than they need have been;
Steam’s ability to operate without adequate maintenance meant that it did operate with inadequate maintenance;
Steam’s old fashioned image plus “good enough” engineering standards made the diesel option appear modern and attractive

6. Introduction to Steam Traction
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Introduction to Steam Traction
Inside a Locomotive
Fuel burned in firebox creates high pressure steam in boiler.
Superheated steam drives pistons (on both sides of loco) backwards and forwards.
Connecting rods transmit piston forces to cranks that cause the driving wheels to rotate

7. Introduction to Steam Traction
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Introduction to Steam Traction
Steam’s Image
Whilst steam’s image declined in post-war years, it successfully powered the world’s railways for 125 years:
Steam locos hauled prodigious loads in the USA.
When replaced with diesels, two or three locos had to be substituted for one steamer.

8. Part 2 - “Modern Steam” Advancements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Part 2 - “Modern Steam” Advancements
Thermodynamic theories first put to use by French engineer André Chapelon in the 1930s.
Chapelon’s designs achieved Power / weight ratios of >23 kW/tonne and outperformed contemporary electric traction.
All developments were done on locomotive rebuilds.

9. Took over steam development when Chapelon retired;
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
“Modern Steam” Advancements L.D. Porta – Argentinean Engineer ( )
Took over steam development when Chapelon retired;
At age 24, rebuilt a locomotive that equalled Chapelon’s best power/weight ratio;
Director of Argentine’s National Technology Institute from 1960 to 1982;
Pioneered several important advancements in steam traction.

10. “Modern Steam” Advancements Porta’s Advancements include:
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
“Modern Steam” Advancements Porta’s Advancements include:
Improved coal combustion (reducing fuel consumption and emissions);
Improved exhaust system;
Increased steam temperature;
Improved lubrication;
Improved water treatment;
Reduced steam leakage;
Improved insulation;
Improved adhesion;
Reduced maintenance costs.

11. “Modern Steam” Advancements Porta’s Achievements: Rio Turbio Railway
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
“Modern Steam” Advancements Porta’s Achievements: Rio Turbio Railway
255km coal railway from mine to port;
Narrow gauge (750mm)
Poor track quality – light rail, no ballast;
Max grade 0.3%;
Tight curvature;
Low grade coal for locomotives.
18 tonne wagons with high rolling resistance.

12. “Modern Steam” Advancements Porta’s Achievements: Rio Turbio Railway
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
“Modern Steam” Advancements Porta’s Achievements: Rio Turbio Railway
48 tonne locos built by Mitsubishi in 1956 and 1963
Power Output increased from 520 kW to 900 kW by Porta modifications;
Ash clinkering problems overcome;
1700 tonne trains routinely hauled (tested to 3000 tonnes);
Very high mileages between overhauls.

13. “Modern Steam” Advancements Porta’s Legacy
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
“Modern Steam” Advancements Porta’s Legacy
Porta’s theories have been adopted in:
…. South Africa by David Wardale;
…. Argentina by Shaun McMahon;
…. Australia and Russia by Phil Girdlestone;
…. Argentina, Paraguay and Cuba by Porta himself.
Wardale’s “Red Devil” rebuild of SAR 1950s Krupp-designed Class Achieved 60% increase in power, 40% reduction in specific coal consumption.

14. Porta’s Legacy (continued) The 5AT – “Second Generation Steam”
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Conceived by David Wardale;
First new steam loco design to adopt Porta’s developments;
Designed for high speed operation - 200kph max, 180 kph continuous;
Target – tour and cruise trains in UK and Europe;
Fundamental Design Calculations completed;
Currently in final planning stage;
2008 launch planned to seek investment funding;
Design is readily adapted for freight haulage (using smaller wheels).

15. “Modern Steam” Advancements The 8AT
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
“Modern Steam” Advancements The 8AT
Uses same boiler, cylinders, cab, tender and motion as 5AT;
1.325 m dia. driving wheels give 192 kN drawbar tractive force;
Max power kW at drawbar at 120 km/h; 1800 kW at 80 km/h;
Starting tractive force – 192 kN at the drawbar;
21 tonne axle load (including ballast) to control slipping;
Able to haul 3200 tonne coal trains at >80 km/h on level track.

16. Steam Traction Haulage Capacity
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Steam Traction Haulage Capacity
American locomotive (c.1912) of similar size and “tractive effort” to the 8AT, but with no superheat, low boiler pressure and journal bearing, hauling 6,500 tonnes (net?)

17. Part 3 – Haulage Capabilities
Coal Transportation in Indonesia The Steam Option _______________________________________________
Part 3 – Haulage Capabilities
Alternative Traction Types
used in Cost Comparisons
Chinese SS kW Electric Loco Chinese DF4-D 2940 kW Diesel Loco
Chinese QJ 2600 kW Steam Loco 8AT 2100 kW Modern Steam Loco

18. Principal Data for Alternative Traction Types
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Principal Data for Alternative Traction Types
Loco Type
QJ Steam
8AT Steam
Diesel DF4-D
Electric SS-3
Wheel Arrangement
2-10-2
2-8-0
Co-Co
Max Power Output kW (wheel rim)
2600
2100
2940
4320
Max Speed (km/h) 80
100
Loco Weight excluding tender (tonnes)
134 96
138
Axle Loading (tonnes)
20.5 21 23
Adhesive Weight (tonnes)
100.5 84
Starting Wheel Rim Tractive Effort (kN)
287
206
480
490
Continuous Wheel Rim TE at 20km/h
244
130
385
Required Starting Friction Coefficient
0.29
0.25
0.36

19. Performance Data for Alternative Traction Types (3)
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Performance Data for Alternative Traction Types (3)
SS-3 and DF4-D Performance Graphs
Tractive Force vs. Speed
Line R1 shows max speed with 3000t train up 0.9% grade
Line R2 shows max speed with 3000t train up 0.6% grade
Line R3 shows max speed with 3000t train up 0.3% grade
Line R4 shows max speed with 3000t train on level grade
The results agree closely with figures derived by calculation method described below

20. Performance Data for Alternative Traction Types (1)
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Performance Data for Alternative Traction Types (1)
QJ Performance Graphs
Tractive Force vs. Speed
over a range of cut-offs and steaming rates
This is the official CNR performance chart for QJ locomotives. Max power of 2600 kW can only be delivered for short periods at 95 kg/m2/h steaming rate.
Normal rated power output of 2200 kW is delivered at 75 kg/m2/h steaming rate.

21. Performance Data for Alternative Traction Types (2)
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Performance Data for Alternative Traction Types (2)
8AT Performance Graphs
Maximum Tractive Force and Power vs. Speed
8AT Performance curves are adapted from the 5AT fundamental design calculations.
These are represent maximum power and TE curves. These values are progressively reduced for train haulage estimates (see next slide)

22. Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Summary of Speed vs. Drawbar TE Characteristics for Traction Options Drawbar Tractive Effort values in kN, Power values in kW
QJ1
8AT2
DF4-D
SS-33
Speed TE
Power
271
192
474
481 10
267
741
180
500
1318
417
1158 20
244
1353
163
906
401
2228
387
2149 30
216
1804
139
1161
277
2308
371
3094 40
176
1954
117
1301
209
2319
360
4002 50
146
2021
100
1389
165
2297
291
4047 60
121 91
1515
136
2266
243
4051 70
102
1980 84
1626
114
2223
207
4017 80 85
1886 77
1711 99
2192
178
3964
Note 1: For QJ locomotives, the TE and Power values are estimated from the Speed-TE curves supplied by China National Railways at steaming rate of 75 kg/hr/m2.
Note 2: In order to base the 8AT’s performance on the same assumption as the Chinese locos, its calculated maximum drawbar tractive effort values have been reduced in the same proportion as those of the QJ resulting from the adoption of a 75 kg/h/m2 steaming rate instead of its maximum of 95 kg/hr/m2. Thus the 8AT’s estimated TE and power values have been reduced progressively from zero at low speeds up to 20% at 80 km/h.
Note 3: SS-3 figures in italics have been reduced (by estimate) to keep its wheel-rim power below its rated power.
TE and Power values are derived from the performance curves shown in previous slides.
QJ performance is based on steaming rate of 75 kg/h/sqm (compared to max steaming rate of 95 kg/h/sqm)
8AT TE values progressively reduced from 0% (at slow speed) to 20% of maximum value at 80 km/h to be consistent with QJ curves.
NOTE – the difference between the drawbar power of the diesel and its rated value of 2940 kW!!

23. Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Comparison of Formulae for Determining Specific Rolling Resistance of Freight Stock
Little difference between the majority of resistance values up to 80 km/h. Mauve curve is for passenger carriages which have much lower axle load (hence higher specific resistance). Top two curves below that are SNCF curves.
Chinese formulae (for both full and empty wagons) have been adopted for the purpose of this exercise.

24. Chinese Formulae for Specific Rolling Resistance of Wagons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Chinese Formulae for Specific Rolling Resistance of Wagons
Loaded Wagons: RR = V V2 N/tonne;)
) where V is speed in km/h.
Empty Wagons : RR = V V2 N/tonne;)
Gradients: RG = 10 x G N/tonne where G is the gradient in %;
Curvature: RC = (600/r) x LC/LT when LC < LT or RC = (600/r) when LC>LT,
where r = the curve radius in metres, LC = the curve length and LT = the train length.
Based on these formulae and the speed/traction force values already derived, it is easy to calculate the steepest gradient that a locomotive will be able to climb at constant speed with any given load using the formula:
Where TEDB is the drawbar tractive effort of the locomotive.

25. Specific Train Resist'ce
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Max Gradient at Constant Speed over range of Train Loads for QJ class locomotive operating at 75 kg/m2/hr steaming rate.
Speed Km/h
dbTE
on level track
Specific Train Resist'ce
Gross Train Weight
tonne
Tonne
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4100
5000
6000
7000 kN
N/tonne
Climbable Gradient at Given Load and Speed - % 5
275
9.3
2.26
1.57
1.19
0.95
0.79
0.67
0.58
0.56
0.45
0.36
0.30 10
267
9.6
2.19
1.51
1.15
0.92
0.76
0.64
0.55
0.43
0.34
0.28 15
255
10.0
2.08
1.44
1.09
0.87
0.72
0.61
0.52
0.51
0.40
0.32
0.26 20
244
10.5
1.98
1.37
1.03
0.82
0.68
0.57
0.49
0.48
0.38
0.24 25
228
11.0
1.84
1.27
0.62
0.27
0.21 30
212
11.5
1.70
1.17
0.88
0.69
0.47
0.39
0.23
0.19 35
194
12.2
1.54
1.05
0.78
0.50
0.42
0.35
0.20
0.15 40
177
12.9
1.39
0.94
0.70
0.54
0.44
0.29
0.22
0.16
0.12 45
160
13.6
1.25
0.84
0.31
0.25
0.18
0.13
0.09 50
146
14.4
1.11
0.74
0.41
0.33
0.14
0.10
0.06 55
134
15.3
1.00
0.66
0.17
0.11
0.07
0.04 60
122
16.3
0.90
0.59
0.08
0.01 65
113
17.3
0.81
0.05
-0.01 70
103
18.3
0.02
-0.04 75 93
19.5
0.63
0.03
-0.06 80 85
20.6
0.00
-0.08
This is a typical chart showing the maximum gradient that a QJ (steaming at 75 kg/m2/hr) can climb at any constant speed and load.
Similar tables can be drawn for the other locomotives. All the numbers are derived on a spreadsheet.

26. Train Haulage Estimates for Steam, Diesel an Electric Traction
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Train Haulage Estimates for Steam, Diesel an Electric Traction
Old Steam
Mod St
Diesel
Electric
Loco Type QJ
8AT
DF4-D
SS-3
Loco Weight (including tender)
200
170
138
Power Rating kW (wheel rim)
2200*
1700*
2940
4320
Max Design Speed (km/h) 85
100
Max Continuous Speed with 3,000 t train
Max Continuous Speed with 3,500 t train 80
Max Continuous Speed with 4,000 t train 70 95
Max Continuous Speed with 5,000 t train 60 75
Max Continuous Speed with 6,000 t train 65
(55)
Max Continuous Speed with 7,000 t train -
Max Continuous Speed with 8,000 t train 90
Max Continuous Speed with 9,000 t train 55 78
Max train weight for 80km/h on level track1
4,100
3,200+
4,700
8,700
Stalling (5 km/h) Grade for Max Train Size
0.56%
0.48%
0.91%
0.41%
Sustainable Speed on 0.5% grade (km/h) 17 27
Train (inc loco weight) / Loco Weight Ratio
21.5
19.8
36.5
66.2
Train Weight / Loco Power Ratio (inc loco)
1.96
1.98
2.07
2.12
Max train wt for 20km/h on 1.0% grade (t)
2000
1300
3600
3400
Estimated Max start-able gross train wt (t)
7800
5500
>10000
* Note: The QJ delivers 2600 kW at full boiler output; the 8AT should produce 2100 kW at the drawbar at full power
The figures are derived from tables like the one just presented for QJs. The selected maximum load limit for each locomotive (shown in red) is the load that it can haul at a constant speed of 80 km/h on straight level track.

27. Speed-Power Comparison between Traction Types
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Speed-Power Comparison between Traction Types
It is noticeable that the diesel’s power peaks at a slower speed than steam’s.
I can’t explain why the electric’s TE and power is lower than the diesel’s at low speed. They derive from the Chinese performance graphs.

28. Acceleration/Speed/Time Comparison between Traction Types
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Acceleration/Speed/Time Comparison between Traction Types
Acceleration is calculated from the difference between the loco’s TE and the train’s resistance, and dividing it by the combined mass of loco and train.
From that, the Time/Speed and Time/Distance curves can be derived.
These curves show the different acceleration rates that can be expected from each locomotive at the “design load” for the railway. The final speed (80km/h) is the same in all cases so the differences relate to acceleration rates.
The bottom plots show the time taken to go 50 km on straight level track – I can only assume that the QJ does so well because it is hauling “only” 91% of its rated load, compared to the diesel’s and 8AT’s 99%.

29. Part 4 Railway Operation Basic Premises
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Part 4
Railway Operation
Basic Premises
Single purpose, single route railway only for transporting coal from a mine site to an export terminal;
No connecting routes; no non-coal traffic;
Simple 24 hour per day “merry-go-round” train rotation;
Single line operation with passing loops;
Trains loaded and unloaded as soon as they arrive at the loading and unloading stations;
Locomotives remain attached to their trains including during routine servicing.

30. Basic Premises for Idealized Synchronized System
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Basic Premises for Idealized Synchronized System
Passing loops are equidistant from one another;
Trains all travel at the same speed (50km/h average);
Full trains will arrive at passing loop at the same time as an empty train coming the other way;
Trains depart from the loading and unloading stations immediately after the arrival of the arrival train coming from opposite direction;
Time interval between trains remains constant = twice the time taken to travel between passing loops.

31. Typical Train Movement Diagram Average Travel Speed 50 km/h
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Typical Train Movement Diagram
Average Travel Speed 50 km/h

32. Loading System Schematic Diagram
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Loading System Schematic Diagram
Empty trains travel round the loop to minimise flange and rail wear.
Trains move down a slight grade during filling
Full trains leave along the straight track to minimize drag.
A later slide describes coaling and watering facility

33. Unloading System Schematic Diagram
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Unloading System Schematic Diagram
Full trains approach unloading point along straight track.
Empty trains run round loop to minimise rail and flange wear.
Wagon pushers may not be needed with bottom dump wagons (loco can haul them through)
Full train moves down slight incline during unloading to facilitate controlled movement
Loco servicing and repair facilities are located at the Unloading Station because trains are likely to be held up longer there (as described later)
Description of servicing facility

34. Passing Loop Schematic Diagram
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Passing Loop Schematic Diagram

35. Basic Premises for Idealized Synchronized System
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Basic Premises for Idealized Synchronized System
Time interval between trains remains constant = twice the time it takes to travel between passing loops, or ti = 2 x dL÷ V (where ti = time interval, dL distance between loops and V is the average train speed)
Minimum load in each train = target hourly throughput (t/h) x time interval between trains, or Wt = Th x ti (where Wt is train weight and Th is the target hourly throughput).
Thus the minimum train capacity Wt = Th x 2 x dL ÷ V. In other words, it is determined by the train speed and the distance between passing loops.

36. Basic Premises for Idealized Synchronized System
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Basic Premises for Idealized Synchronized System
Basic principle is:
more passing loops allow the operation of smaller trains;
thus
Smaller locomotives (hauling smaller trains) require more passing loops to deliver the same quantity of coal.
large trains hauled by electric traction will require fewer passing loops than shorter trains hauled by 8ATs.

37. Estimating Ideal Train Capacities
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Estimating Ideal Train Capacities
We have minimum train capacity Wt = Th x 2 x dL ÷ V.
If target annual throughput = 20 million tonnes per year, this equates to 62,500 tonnes per day over a 320 day year.
Assume the railway operation is only 75% efficient, then target daily throughput = 83,333 tonnes per day or Th = 3472 t/h x 24 hours.
Thus if the railway length is 100 km, V = 50 km/h and there are 4 passing loops, the distance between loops, dL = 20 km from which can be calculated the minimum train capacity Wt = 3472 x 2 x 20 / 50 = 2778 tonnes.
If we assume the use of Chinese C70 wagons with a gross weight of 93 tonnes and tare weight of 23 tonnes, we can deduct that the train needs 40 wagons with a gross weight of 3720 tonnes and net weight of 2800 tonnes.
We can thus use the maximum train loads for each locomotive type to determine the number of passing loops required for each type (see next slide).

38. Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Estimating Optimum Train Sizes to deliver 83,333 tonnes per day in Chinese C70 wagons (93 tonnes gross, 23 tonnes tare)
Item
units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Max Haulage Capacity from Slide 26
Tonne
4,100
3,200*
4,700
8,700
Equiv net capacity with 70t net 23t tare wagons
tonne
3,086
2,409
3,538
6,548
Minimum required trains per day
No. 27
34.6
23.6
12.7
Max distance between trains at 50km/h Km
44.4
34.7
50.9
94.3
Max distance between passing loops
22.2
17.3
25.5
47.1
Theoretical number of passing loops in 100 km
3.50
4.77
2.93
1.12
Actual minimum number of passing loops 4 5 3 2
Minimum number of trains in transit 6
Distance between passing loops
20.0
16.7
25.0
33.3
Train Arrival Frequency
mins 48 40 60 80
Required net tonnes per train
2,778
2,315
3,472
4,630
Minimum number of 70 t wagons 34 50 67
Actual train load (net)
2,800
2,380
3,500
4,690
Actual train weight (gross)
3,720
3,162
4,650
6,231
Percentage of loco capacity required %
91%
99%*
99%
72%
Note: Calculated 8AT haulage capacity is 3700 t. Hence a 3162 t load may be no more than 85% of its capacity.

39. Train Movement Diagram SS-3 Electric Traction with two passing loops
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Train Movement Diagram
SS-3 Electric Traction with two passing loops
Note: 2 passing loops require 3 trains in transit plus extra trains at loading and unloading station

40. Train Movement Diagram DF4-D Diesel Traction with three passing loops
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Train Movement Diagram
DF4-D Diesel Traction with three passing loops
Note: 3 passing loops require 4 trains in transit plus extra trains at loading and unloading station

41. Train Movement Diagram QJ Steam Traction with four passing loops
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Train Movement Diagram
QJ Steam Traction with four passing loops
Note: 4 passing loops require 5 trains in transit plus extra trains at loading and unloading station

42. Train Movement Diagram 8AT Steam Traction with five passing loops
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Train Movement Diagram
8AT Steam Traction with five passing loops
Note: 5 passing loops require 6 trains in transit plus extra trains at loading and unloading station

43. Train Control (Signalling)
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Railway Operation
Train Control (Signalling)
Make use of the constant train frequency to create a regular system of train operation that requires rescheduling only in emergencies;
Use standard safety systems such as track circuiting interlocked with passing loop crossings fitted with run-away sidings (or catch-points) to prevent trains meeting in opposite directions.
Fit each locomotive with GPS system to allow a Central Train Control (CTC) to monitor each train position and send radio instructions to each train operator to adjust speed for coordinating passing operations and for maintaining schedules.
GPS positioning system to be linked to the track-circuit interlocking system.
On-board “cab signalling” with no line-side signals.

44. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
PART 5
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Process:
The train movement diagrams (above) demonstrate that the minimum number of trains (and locomotives) in transit = the number of passing loops plus 1.
Further trains and locos need to be added to take account of:
loading and unloading operations;
Locomotive servicing;
Locomotive and wagon maintenance;
Breakdowns and emergencies.

45. Estimating Target Loading and Unloading Rates
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Estimating Target Loading and Unloading Rates
Requires a time-study taking into account:
Transit time from main line to loading/unloading point;
Time for administrative and safety checks;
Time for refuelling, watering and servicing locomotives;
Other non-productive time requirements.
Deducting the sum total of these times from the train arrival/departure frequency allows target loading/unloading rates to be calculated:

46. Estimating Target Train Loading Rates
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Estimating Target Train Loading Rates
Activity
units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Net Train Capacity
tonne
2,800
2,380
3,500
4,690
Train Arrival Frequency
mins 48 40 60 80
Arrival checks and documentation 3
Travel round 1.6 km balloon 20km/h 5
Position train under loading chute 1
Time to move train clear of loading chute
mins 
Refill tender water tank 8 6 -
Dispatch checks and documentation
inc
Time available for train filling 30 24 47 67
Required Coal Loading Rate
t/h
5,600
6,000
4,450
4,200

47. Loco Coaling and Watering Facility
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Loco Coaling and Watering Facility
Locos will require coaling and watering at least once each 200km round trip.
Loco coal should be the best quality available from mine to guarantee best performance.
Main coaling facility should be located at (but separate from) Coal Loading Station.

48. “Scaled” schematic diagram of Train Loading Station
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
“Scaled” schematic diagram of Train Loading Station
One train should be ready to leave immediately after one arrives from the opposite direction.

49. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Unloading Station
More complex than loading system because of the need to take account of the unloading method (rotary or bottom dump) and also locomotive servicing requirements.
Steam traction will require ash removal, lubrication, sand refilling etc. at least once per 200 km round trip, and may need refuelling, rewatering and ash removal at each end of the line.
Diesels will need refuelling and servicing every 2 or 3 round trips.
Time available for unloading wagons may thus be very short, requiring high unloading rates that may be unachievable with a rotary unloader (limited to ~7,000 t/h max).
Thus it may be necessary to have two (or more) trains at the unloading station at any time – see next slide.

50. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Unloading Sequence
Max loco servicing time available – 38 mins
Blue train finishes unloading at the same time as the yellow train arrives;
Purple train departs immediately after yellow train arrives;
Blue train moves to servicing facility to await arrival of next train while the yellow train unloads.
Thus blue locomotive has 38 minutes for servicing. Thus also 2 locos and 2 trains are required at the unload station at all times.

51. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Loco Servicing
For unload sequence shown in previous slide, loco is serviced while still connected to its train. This will require specially designed servicing facility incorporating the following components:

52. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
If servicing time > 38 minutes, then it is better for locos to be serviced in workshop;
This requires detaching locos from trains, and recoupling them after servicing;
Reconnected trains need to be brake-tested before departure, which can take 30 to 60 minutes.
Following sequence illustrates how this might be done.

53. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Unloading Sequence with locos serviced in workshop
As before: Blue train finishes unloading at the same time as the yellow train arrives;
Purple train departs immediately after yellow train arrives;
Blue train moves to brake-test siding to await arrival of next train while the yellow train unloads.
Before yellow train unloads, the yellow loco detaches and runs back to loco shed
At 30 minutes (half way through unloading) green loco comes off shed and moves forward to couple onto yellow train
Yellow loco has 48 minutes to complete servicing.
Thus also 3 locos and 2 trains are required at the unload station at all times.
If 48 minutes is not long enough for servicing, then an extra loco needs to be added into the servicing sequence (to give 96 minutes servicing time per loco).

54. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
From similar sequence diagrams drawn for each traction type, the following deductions can be made:
Minimum Number of Locos and Trains Required to Operate Railway
Item
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Required number of passing loops in 100 km
unit 4 5 3 2
Minimum number of trains in transit 6
Required train capacity (net)
tonne
2,800
2,380
3,500
4,690
Required train capacity (gross)
3,720
3,162
4,650
6,231
Minimum number of locos/trains at loading station 1
Minimum train loading rate
t/h
5,600
6,000
4,450
4,200
Loco detached for servicing at unload station no No
Required rotary unloader capacity
1x5000
1x7000
Number of trains at unloading station
Number of locos at unloading station
Available time for loco servicing
mins 43 35 50 25

55. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Additional locomotive requirements to cover maintenance can be estimated from maintenance frequency, maintenance downtime, and annual mileage of locomotives.
Annual mileage is calculated as follows:
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Number of wagons per train
Unit 40 1
Loco standing time at loading station
Mins 48 60 80
Number of locos at unloading station
unit 2
Loco standing time at unloading station 96
Travel time on line (both ways)
120
Total turnaround time for each loco
hours
6.4
6.0
6.5
7.1
Number of round trips per day per loco
3.8
4.0
3.7
3.4
Distance travelled by each loco per day km
750
800
738
675
Annual mileage for each locomotive
240,000
256,000
236,000
216,000

56. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Servicing requirements are as follows (from Chinese manufacturers):
Annual mileage for each locomotive km
240,000
256,000
236,000
216,000
Major overhaul period
250,000
500,000
700,000
1,200,000
Time to complete major overhaul
days* 15
Intermediate overhaul period
83,333
125,000
233,333
400,000 6
Scheduled maintenance period
22,500
24,000
30,000
40,000
Time to complete scheduled maintenance 2
Number of major overhauls per year
unit
0.96
0.51
0.34
0.18
Time under major overhauls per year
14.4
7.9
4.4
2.7
Intermediate overhauls per year
1.92
1.54
0.68
0.36
Time under intermediate overhauls
11.5
9.2
3.5
2.2
Scheduled maintenances per year
10.67
6.86
4.86
Time under scheduled maintenance
21.3
11.9
9.7
Total time under maintenance per year
47.3
38.2
19.8
14.6
Percentage of time under maintenance %
15%
12% 6% 5%
Percentage of loco fleet under maintenance
Number of locos to cover maintenance
theory
1.18
1.08
0.43
0.23
actual 1
* The estimated times for overhauls and scheduled maintenance are based on 24 hour per day operation, and have been increased above Chinese time estimates. These times will increase if working days are shorter.

57. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Summary of Loco Requirements
Minimum number of trains in transit
unit 5 6 4 3
Minimum number of locos/trains at loading station 1
Number of locos at unloading station 2
Number of locos to cover maintenance
actual
Stand-by locos to cover breakdown etc§
est’d
Total Loco Fleet Required 13 14 10 7
§ The number of standby locomotives is based on subjective judgement, taking into account the difference between the actual number of locos provided to cover maintenance and the theoretical number that are required.

58. Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Estimating Rolling Stock Requirements
Summary of Wagon Requirements
Note:- Longer trains require more wagons. This is because individual wagons spend more time idle waiting for their (longer) trains to unload.
At $75,000 per wagon, the cost difference between the cost of the wagon fleets for diesel and 8AT steam traction is around $4.5 million - a “hidden” saving for steam.
Other hidden savings from smaller (steam hauled) trains include lower drawgear loads and lower rail and flange wear on curves.
Number of trains in transit
unit 5 6 4 3
Number of trains at loading station 1
Number of trains at unloading station 2
Number of trains to cover maintenance
est’d
Total number of trains required 9 10 8
Number of wagons per train 40 34 50 67
Total Wagon Fleet Required
360
340
400
402
Point out the savings from using shorter trains.

59. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
PART 6
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimate capital cost (including locomotive infrastructure requirements), and amortization period;
Estimate annual maintenance costs;
Estimate labour costs associated with loco operation & servicing;
Estimate water costs for steam locos, including treatment;
Estimate fuel consumption and compare with recorded data;
Estimate fuel costs.

60. Locomotive Cost Comparisons Estimating Capital Costs
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Capital Costs
Steam loco fuelling and servicing facilities – estimated price $4 million;
Diesel loco fuelling and servicing facilities – estimated price $2 million;
Electric loco servicing facilities – estimated price $1 million;
Electrical infrastructure - $530,000 per km (from Chinese data)
QJ cost including reconditioning and shipping ~ $0.4 million (quoted)
DF4-D and SS-3 cost including shipping ~ $1.25 million (quoted)
8AT steam loco (built in China or similar) ~ $2.5 million (estimated)
Note: Estimate unit cost of 8AT locomotives includes a margin to cover the cost of design, building and testing of a prototype loco.

61. Estimating Capital Costs
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Capital Costs
Capital Cost and Depreciation Estimates
units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Electrical infrastructure cost $m
61.3
Servicing infrastructure cost
4.0
2.0
1.0
Number of locomotives required
unit 13 14 10 7
Cost per locomotive
0.40
2.5
1.25
Cost of locomotive fleet
5.20
35.0
12.0
8.40
Depreciation period for infrastructure
years 25
Depreciation period for locos
Years
Amortized cost of infrastructure
$m/year
0.160
0.080
2.493
Amortized cost of locomotives
0.520
1.400
0.480
0.360
Total Amortization Cost of Traction
0.680
1.560
0.560
2.829

62. Estimating Loco Maintenance Costs
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Loco Maintenance Costs
Maintenance Schedules for Chinese Locomotives
Item
QJ Steam
DF4 Diesel
SS3 Electric
Major Overhaul Period
250,000 km or 3 yrs
700,000 km or 6 yrs
1,200,000 km or 10 yrs
Major Overhaul Cost
$45,000 (2006)
$200,000 (1997)
$250,000 (1997)
Intermediate Overhaul Period
83,000 km or 1 yr
250,000 km or 2 yrs
400,000 km or 3 yrs
Intermediate Overhaul Cost
$25,000 (2006)
$50,000 (1997)
$65,000 (1997)
Regular Maintenance Period
22,500 km (assumed)
30,000 km or 3 mths
40,000 km or 6 mths
Regular Maintenance Cost
$5000 (assumed)
$10,000 (1997)
$12,000 (1997)

63. Estimating Loco Maintenance Costs
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Loco Maintenance Costs
8AT maintenance frequencies are based on the mileages achieved by the Porta-modified RFIRT locomotives operating in Argentina (see next slide).
Costs are based on quoted maintenance costs for Chinese steam locos.
Proposed Maintenance Schedules for 8AT Locos
Major Overhaul Period
500,000 km or 3 yrs
Major Overhaul Cost
$50,000
Intermediate Overhaul Period
125,000 km or 1 yr
Intermediate Overhaul Cost
$25,000
Regular Maintenance Period
24,000 km
Regular Maintenance Cost
$5,000

64. Reliability Record from Rio Turbio Railway’s Locos that incorporated some (minor) Porta improvements
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
480,000 km before main (white metal) bearings needed replacing = 180 million revolutions of the 850mm dia driving wheels;
70,000 km between tyre profiling = 26 million revolutions;
No superheater replacements in 500,000 km despite high steam temperatures (>400oC);
No boiler tube replacement in 400,000 km (apart from tubes damaged during installation);
No boiler repairs in 400,000 km of service;
Piston rod packings lasted 400,000 km (150 million revolutions);
Max steam leakage 1.7% of max evaporation after 70,000 km.

65. Locomotive Cost Comparisons Estimating Loco Maintenance Costs
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Loco Maintenance Costs
units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Major overhaul frequency km
250,000
500,000
700,000
1.2m
Major overhaul cost $
45,000
50,000
230,000
287,500
Intermediate overhaul frequency
83,000
125,000
233,000
400,000
Intermediate overhaul cost
25,000
57,500
74,750
Regular maintenance frequency
22,500
24,000
30,000
40,000
Regular maintenance cost
5,000
11,500
13,800
Average loco km per year
111,000
123,000
115,200
123,400
Major maintenance cost / loco / year
19,900
12,300
37,800
29,600
Interm’t maintenance cost / loco / year
16,600
16,500
14,200
Regular maintenance cost / loco/ year
24,600
25,700
44,100
42,600
Total maintenance cost / loco / year
61,100
54,500
96,200
83,700
Number of locos in fleet
unit 13 14 10 7
Total cost of maintenance per year $m
0.795
0.763
0.962
0.586

66. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Labour Costs (associated with locomotive operation and servicing)
Each operating steam loco will require 2 operators or “enginemen”;
Each operating diesel and electric loco will require 1 operator;
“Old steam” traction will require 8 people for locomotive servicing duties;
“Modern steam” traction will require 4 people for locomotive servicing duties;
Diesel traction will require only 2 servicemen at the servicing depot;
Electric traction will require 6 servicemen, including 2 at the servicing depot and one linesman in each section of track between passing loops;
No allowance is made for maintenance personnel whose costs are included maintenance cost estimates.
Operating and servicing personnel will cost $5,000 per annum.

67. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Labour Costs (associated with locomotive operation and servicing)
Note: $5000 p.a. wage rate is generous for developing countries
units QJ JS SY
8AT
DF4
SS3
Labour shifts per day 3
Crew members per loco 2 1
Number of locos in operation 8 9 16 7 5
Total loco crew 48 54 96 21 15
Servicing crew per shift 4 6
Total servicing crew 24 12 18
Total labour requirement 72 78
120 66 27 33
Unit labour cost per annum $
5,000
Labour cost per annum $m
0.360
0.390
0.600
0.330
0.135
0.165

68. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Water Costs (steam locos only)
Assumed water cost - $0.30 per tonne;
Assumed water treatment cost - $1.00 per tonne (based on UK costs)
QJ performance curves used to estimate water consumption based on the steaming rate required to maintain the horsepower outputs derived fr coal consumption estimates.
8AT consumption figures are conservatively estimated to be 80% those of an equivalent size Chinese loco (JS type) hauling the same load.

69. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Water Consumption For Loaded Journey
Item
Units QJ JS
8AT
Gross train weight
tonne
3,720
3,162
Wheel rim TE at 50 km/h (see note) kN
119
101 -
Wheel rim power at 50 km/h kW
1,653
1,403
Steam consumption per hour per m2 kg 59 66
Heating surface area (excluding superheater) m2
255.3
213
Steam production
kg/hr
15,063
14,058
Journey time over 100 km railway h
2.0
Steam consumption 30 28 22
Note: The wheel rim TE values include a 100% load factor applied to train rolling resistance values on straight level track to account for grades and curvatures.

70. Locomotive Cost Comparisons Estimating Water Consumption
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons Estimating Water Consumption
For Empty Journey
Item
Units QJ JS
8AT
Empty train weight
tonne
920
782
Wheel rim TE at 50 km/h (see note) kN 85 73 -
Wheel rim power at 50 km/h kW
1,181
1,014
Steam consumption per hour per m2 kg 43 46
Heating surface area (excluding superheater) M2
255.3
213
Steam production
kg/hr
10,978
9,798
Journey time over 100 km railway h
2.0
Steam consumption 22 20 16
Note: The wheel rim TE values include a 100% load factor applied to train rolling resistance values on straight level track to account for grades and curvatures.

71. Locomotive Cost Comparisons Estimating Annual Water Costs
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons Estimating Annual Water Costs
Item
Units QJ JS
8AT
Steam consumption Loaded Journey
tonne 30 28 22
Steam consumption 20 16
Total water consumption per round trip 52 48 38
Number of round trips per year
unit
7,143
8.403
8,403
Total Water Consumed
371,863
400,941
320,753
Water cost including treatment
$/t
1.30
Total Water Cost including treatment $m
0.483
0.521
0.417

72. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating cost per kWh of energy output for each traction type
Assumptions:
Coal used is the NAR value for Lumut BA70 coal with NAR calorific value of 6500 kg/kcal.
Calorific value for diesel is an industry average of 10,200 kg/kcal;
Representative drawbar thermal efficiencies used for each traction type;
“Fuel consumption” of electric loco = kWh consumed ÷ kWh supplied;
Electrical losses from the point of supply to the loco drawbar = 20%;
Unit cost for electric power $0.08 per kWh and $700 per tonne for gas oil;
Ex-mine coal price = $20 per tonne.
Note: Export coal price is not used because it includes costs of loading, transportation, storage, blending, loading onto ship, plus profit, which do not apply to coal used for locomotive fuel.

73. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating cost per kWh of energy output for each traction type
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Energy Conversion Factor
kcal/kW-h
860 -
Max Drawbar Thermal Efficiency % 8%
15%
30%
Assumed Drawbar Thermal Efficiency 6%
10%
25%
80%
Fuel Calorific Value
Kcal/kg
6,500
10,200
Fuel Consumption
Kg/kWh
2.205
1.323
0.337
1.250
Fuel Cost per tonne
$/t
$20
$700
$0.08
Cost of Fuel per kW-h of loco’s output
US cents
4.41
2.65
23.61
10.00
Draw attention to very large differences in cost of energy delivered by each loco type.

74. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Fuel Consumption for each traction type
Assumptions:
Train rolling resistance calculated using Chinese formulae - viz:
RRF = V V2 N/tonne for full wagons and
RRE = V V2 N/tonne for empty wagons .
At average train speed = 50 km/h, RRF = 15 kN/t and RRE = 42.6 kN/t;
Arbitrary 100% “Load Factor” added to allow for trains stopping, starting, climbing hills, braking when descending, and negotiating curves.

75. Estimating Fuel Consumption for Loaded Journeys
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Fuel Consumption for Loaded Journeys
Note: Fuel consumption figures per 106 t-km are consistent with Chinese statistical data – see next slide.
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Gross train weight
Tonne
3,720
3,162
4,650
6,231
Specific rolling resistance full train
N/t 15
Rolling resistance (level track) kN
55.8
47.5
69.8
93.5
Load factor for curves and grades %
100
Rolling resistance (curved track)
111.7
94.9
139.6
187.1
Power consumed overcoming resistance
kN-km/h
5,584
4,746
6,980
9,353 kW
1,511
1,319
1,939
2,599
Specific fuel consumption
Kg/kWh or kW/kWh
2.205
1.323
0.337
1.250
Fuel consumption rate for loaded journey
kg/h or kWh/h
3,421
1,745
654
3,248
Fuel consumption for loaded journey
kg/km or kWh/km
68.4
39.4
13.1
65.0
Fuel consumed on loaded journey
t or kWh
6.84
3.94
1.31
5,500
Fuel consumption per million tonne-km
tonne/106 t-km
18.39
11.04
2.81
10,426

76. Comparative figures - Steam vs. Diesel from China National Railways
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Comparative figures - Steam vs. Diesel from China National Railways
Year
Available locos per day
Train Gross mT-km
(106 t-km)
Loco Failures per 106 t-km
Av. Fuel Consumption per 106 t-km (tonne)
Unit Price of Fuel
($US/tonne)*
Fuel Cost of Traction
$US/106 t-km
Steam
Diesel
1987
5,317
3,282
770,009
750,090
3.0
11.0
11.09
2.59 24
367
267
951
1995
3,061
6,224
268,998
1,435,365
3.4
16.8
13.74
2.43
331
893
1999
1,013
7,825
32,475
1,682,046
13.1
20.66
2.62
497
962
2003 -
8,585
1,384,996
7.0
2.54
993
Note - Fuel consumption figures would have applied to loaded trains because Chinese trains never ran empty in those days (and seldom run empty today).
Notes: These figures are taken from official statistics of the Operating Department of China’s National Railway, as published by State authorities in March 2004.
* “Unit Price of Fuel” figures do not include contemporary fuel costs; costs are used for comparative purposes (converted at RMB 8.3 per USD).

77. Estimating Fuel Consumption for Empty Journeys
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Fuel Consumption for Empty Journeys
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Tare weight of empty train T
920
782
1,150
1,541
Specific rolling resistance empty train
N/t
42.6
Load factor for curves and grades %
100
Rolling resistance (curved track) kN
78.4
66.7
98.1
131.4
Power consumed overcoming resistance kW
1,090
926
1,362
1,825
Fuel consumption for empty journey
kg/km or kWh/km
48.1
24.5
9.2
45.6
Fuel consumed on empty journey
t or kWh
4.81
2.45
0.92
4,560
Fuel consumption per million tonne-km
tonne/106 t-km
52.24
31.34
7.99
29,614

78. Locomotive Cost Comparisons Estimating Fuel Costs per Annum
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Estimating Fuel Costs per Annum
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Annual Tonnage Throughput
m.t 20
Distance hauled km
100
Total net million tonne-km per year
m.t-m/y
2,000
Gross wagon weight t 93
Net wagon weight 70
Ratio gross to net tonnes -
1.33
Total million tonne-km per year (full)
m.t-km/y
2,657
Fuel consumption per million tonne-km
t or kWh
18.39
11.04
2.81
10,426
Total fuel consumed hauling full trains
48,871
29,322
7,474
27.7m
Total million tonne-km per year (empty)
657
52.24
31.34
7.99
29,614
Total fuel consumed hauling empty trains
34,330
20,598
5,250
19.5m
Total fuel consumed - full and empty trains
83,201
49,921
12,725
47.2m
Cost of Fuel per tonne or kWh $
700
0.08
Cost of Fuel per year of operation $m
1.664
0.998
8.907
3.773
Draw attention to large differences in fuel costs

79. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Comparison of Overall Costs per Annum
Notes: 1: Electrical costs exclude maintenance of electrical infrastructure;
2: Extra capital cost of 8AT vs. diesel will be recovered within 3½ years.
3: 8AT costs are likely to be lower than those assumed in this study
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Amortized Cost of Locos and servicing infrastructure: $m
0.680
1.560
0.560
2.829
Total cost of maintenance per year
0.795
0.763
0.962
0.586
Labour cost per year
0.360
0.330
0.135
0.165
Total water cost including treatment
0.483
0.417
nil
Total fuel cost per year
1.664
0.998
8.907
3.773
Total Operating Cost per Year
3.983
4.069
10.564
7.353
Cost per tonne of freight hauled
$/t
0.20
0.53
0.37
Cost per million-net-tonne-km
$/mt-km
1,991
2,034
5,282
3,676
Cost ratio compared to QJ option %
100%
102%
265%
185%
Cost difference compared to QJ -
0.085
6.581
3.370
8AT costs are likely to be lower than shown – for instance, its maintenance costs should be much lower than the QJ (not so here); capital cost should not be twice the cost of a Chinese diesel or electric loco (as assumed here). Water costs should probably be lower than shown.

80. Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Locomotive Cost Comparisons
Sensitivity of Cost Assumptions on Cost Comparisons
Annual costs in $ million, taken from spreadsheet analysis
Notes: 1: Even with $25 per tonne “carbon tax”, the 8AT would remain cheaper than other options (see later slide).
2: Diesel costs very sensitive to fuel prices, because they are largest component. Diesel traction costs are likely to escalate much more rapidly than steam’s. QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Calculated Operating Cost per Year from Table 21
3.983
4.069
10.564
7.353
Doubling of labour costs to $10,000 p.a.
4.343
4.398
10.699
7.518
Doubling of water cost to $2.60 per tonne
4.466
4.486
Doubling steam locomotive maintenance costs
4.777
4.831
Doubling steam loco and infrastructure capital cost
4.662
5.682
Doubling steam locomotive fuel cost (to $40 per t)
5.646
5.067
50% increase in price of diesel (to $1050 per t)
15.018
Note – even if labour costs are increased to £100,000 per year (developed country wages), the QJ is still 20% cheaper than diesel and the 8AT still cheaper than both electric and diesel. If coal costs were also higher, this would have a negative effect on steam’s economics.

81. Environmental Considerations
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Part 7
Environmental Considerations
CO2 emissions
Smoke emissions
Other considerations
Positive considerations

82. Environmental Considerations Carbon Emissions
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Carbon Emissions
Coal-burning steam locos will inevitably generate more CO2 than diesels, because of coal’s higher carbon content and steam’s lower thermal efficiency;
Coal-burning “modern steam” traction cannot compete with diesel in terms of carbon emissions;
A recent study by Brian McCammon has produced estimates of “carbon dioxide equivalent” footprints for different traction types – see next slide:

83. Environmental Considerations
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Comparison of CO2-e Emission between Traction Types
when hauling a 2800 tonne train at 45 km/h over 100 km, taken from report by Brian McCammon
Item
Units
Old Steam
Mod Steam
Electric
Diesel
Fuel
Sub-bituminous Coal
Fuel Oil
Drawbar efficiency (assumed) % 6 10 23 25
Average drawbar power (estimated) kW
932
Drawbar energy output
kW-h
2071
Energy input
34,518
20,711
9,005
8,282 GJ
124.3
74.6
29.8
32.4
Fuel net calorific value
MJ/kg
20.9
42.7
Mass of fuel burned
Tonne
5.6
3.4
1.5
0.6
Direct Emissions Factor
kg CO2-e/GJ
92.8
82.6
Fugitive Emissions Factor
1.9
11.8
Total Emissions Factor
94.7
94.4
Total Emissions
tonnes of CO2-e
7.1
3.1
2.8
Total Emissions per tonne of fuel burned
t-CO2-e/t fuel
2.11
4.33
Total Emissions per tonne-km of haulage
gm - CO2-e
42.0
25.2
11.0
10.1
Total Emissions per unit of energy output
kg(CO2)/db-kWh
5.70
3.42
1.37
1.19
Notes: 1: “CO2-e” = “CO2 equivalent”. Includes equivalent weight of CO2 of other greenhouse gases such as nitrous oxide and methane that are released in the mining, processing, transportation and burning of the fuels;
2: Efficiency of electric traction includes power station and transmission losses as well as the railway’s local losses in the power distribution system and locomotive. 83

84. Environmental Considerations
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Effects of a $25 CO2 Emissions Charge on Traction Costs
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Fuel Consumption
Kg/kWh
2.205
1.323
0.337
1.250
Assumed cost of fuel
$/t or $/kWh 20
700
0.08
CO2-e per tonne of fuel
t-CO2-e/t
2.11
4.33
CO2-e per tonne tax rate
$/t CO2-e 25
Carbon tax charge
$/t of fuel 53
108
Effective fuel cost (including tax)
$ per t or $ per kWh 73
808
0.10
Cost of energy input (including tax)
cents per kWh
16.04
27.26
13.01 84

85. Environmental Considerations
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Note: 1: the 8AT is still clearly cheaper than all other traction options.
2: By the time a $25 per tonne carbon tax is applied to developing countries, the cost of oil is likely to have risen substantially.
Effects of a $25 CO2 Emissions Charge on Traction Costs
Units QJ
8AT
DF4
SS3
Total fuel used per round trip (from Table 20)
t or kWh
83,201
49,921
12,725
47.2m
Cost of Fuel per tonne or kWh (from Tbl 24a) $ 73
808
0.10
Cost of Fuel per year of operation $m
6.053
3.632
10.284
4.908
From previous cost table:
Total Amortization Cost of Locos and infrastructure:
0.680
1.560
0.560
2.829
Total cost of maintenance per year
0.795
0.763
0.962
0.586
Labour cost per year
0.360
0.330
0.135
0.165
Total water cost including treatment
0.483
0.417
nil
Total Operating Cost per Year
8.371
6.701
11.941
8.488
Cost per tonne of freight hauled
$/t
0.42
0.34
0.60
Cost per million-net-tonne-km
$/mt-km
4,186
3,351
5,971
4,244
Cost ratio compared to QJ option % - 80
143
101
Cost difference compared to QJ
-1.669
3.570
0.116 85

86. Environmental Considerations
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Comparison of CO2-e Emission between Traction Types
when hauling a 2800 tonne train at 45 km/h over 100 km, taken from report by Brian McCammon
Item
Units
Old Steam
Mod Steam
Electric
Diesel
Fuel
Sub-bituminous Coal
Gas Oil
Drawbar efficiency (assumed) % 6 10 23 25
Average drawbar power (estimated) kW
932
Drawbar energy output
kW-h
2071
Energy input
34,518
20,711
9,005
8,282 GJ
124.3
74.6
29.8
32.4
Fuel net calorific value
MJ/kg
20.9
42.7
Mass of fuel burned
Tonne
5.6
3.4
1.5
0.6
Direct Emissions Factor
kg CO2-e/GJ
92.8
82.6
Fugitive Emissions Factor
1.9
11.8
Total Emissions Factor
94.7
94.4
Total Emissions
tonnes of CO2-e
7.1
3.1
2.8
Total Emissions per tonne of fuel burned
t-CO2-e/t fuel
2.11
4.33
Total Emissions per tonne-km of haulage
gm - CO2-e
42.0
25.2
11.0
10.1
Total Emissions per unit of energy output
kg(CO2)/db-kWh
5.70
3.42
1.37
1.19
Notes: 1: “CO2-e” = “CO2 equivalent”. Includes equivalent weight of CO2 of other greenhouse gases such as nitrous oxide and methane that are released in the mining, processing, transportation and burning of the fuels;
2: Efficiency of electric traction includes power station and transmission losses as well as the railway’s local losses in the power distribution system and locomotive. 86

87. Environmental Considerations Smoke Emissions
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Smoke Emissions
Steam locos in good condition do not normally emit large quantities of “nuisance” smoke when operating;
Modern steam locos with GPCS fireboxes should emit less smoke because of more complete combustion;
Smoke nuisance is normally limited to large locomotive storage sheds when located near residential areas. Not likely to be a problem for a railway with only 12 locos operating 24 hours a day (i.e. not put into storage at night). 87

88. Environmental Considerations Smoke Emissions
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Smoke Emissions
Chinese locos are renown for smoke-free operation.
Diesels are not smoke-free 88

89. Environmental Considerations Other Considerations
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Other Considerations
Ash disposal;
Treatment of high pH water disposal after boiler washes;
Disposal of waste lubricant disposal before overhauls;
Controlling coal dust during refuelling operations;
Controlling coal smoke inside workshop buildings. 89

90. Environmental Considerations Positive Considerations
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Environmental Considerations
Positive Considerations
Steam engines can generate carbon-neutral power through combustion of any form of bio-fuel (solid or liquid). Steam engines (stationary or mobile) have commonly burned carbon-neutral fuels including wood and agricultural waste products like bagasse and rice husks;
McCammon’s research shows that a coal-fired 8AT will produce only 2½ times more CO2 than diesel or electric traction. Further development will see its carbon footprint reduced much further;
Improvements can only be achieved through investment in research and development. Re-establishment of steam traction for coal haulage may provide an incentive for further development of the technology. 90

91. Potential Development Path for Modern Steam Traction
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Potential Development Path for Modern Steam Traction
Further development opportunities include:
Pulverized coal for improved combustion and automated firing;
Steam Condensing;
Steam Turbine Generator with Electric Drive;
Regenerative Braking.
Benefits will include:
Lower manning levels (competitive with diesel traction)
Thermal Efficiencies >20% (competitive with diesel traction)
Lower carbon emissions (competitive with diesel traction). 91

92. Potential Development Path for Modern Steam Traction
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Potential Development Path for Modern Steam Traction
“Garratt” formation with central boiler, twin engine units and end-cabs

93. Benefits of adopting Steam Traction to Local Communities
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Part 8
Benefits of adopting Steam Traction to Local Communities
Tourism Opportunities: Steam locos attract tourists;
Employment Opportunities: Steam employs more people both for operating and servicing;
Business Opportunities: Steam parts can be made by local manufacturers. So too can locomotives, offering a export possibilities to other coal producing countries . 93

94. Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Part 9
Conclusions
Steam traction is a technically viable option for freight haulage, especially where gradients are not steep;
Steam traction is (by a substantial margin) the most cost-competitive option for haulage of coal where coal and labour costs are low;
Steam’s cost advantage is insensitive to large changes in cost assumptions;
Diesel’s costs are highly sensitive to increases in fuel costs which are likely to occur in the future;
Modern steam offers the lowest operating costs, and its cost advantage will increase as fuel and labour costs rise.
Steam’s cost advantage is enhanced by the smaller wagon fleet that is needed, and by haulage of shorter trains;
Further study is needed in some areas to more clearly define the design requirements for a steam-driven railway system (see next slide). 94

95. Recommendations for Further Study
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Conclusions
Recommendations for Further Study
Railway’s Efficiency: If the assumed efficiency (75%) is too high, it will affect train sizes, loops siding spacing, and rolling stock requirements (but not enough to affects steam’s cost supremacy);
Fuel and Water Consumption need more detailed analysis based on the actual grades and curvature of the railway. If locos have to be refuelled at both ends of the line, then the project design needs to allow for transportation of loco fuel to the unloading station.
Flow Properties of Export Coal must be undertaken if any consideration is given to use of bottom-dump wagons. The type of wagon and unloading system affects the turn-around time of trains and therefore the locomotive (and wagon) fleet requirements.
Locomotive Servicing needs more detailed analysis to determine servicing times that can be reliably achieved. Servicing time affects the turn-around time of trains and therefore the loco fleet numbers. 95

96. Supplementary Recommendations
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Conclusions
Supplementary Recommendations
Ruling Gradient of Railway: It is strongly recommended that where economically practical, the ruling gradient of any steam operated railway should not exceed 0.5% (1 in 200). Because of their limited adhesion, steam locomotives do not climb well.
Coal Quality: The calculations in this study imply that locomotive fuel consumption is directly related to the CV of the fuel. Whilst this is true in theory, in practice fuel consumption increases exponentially as coal quality declines. It is of utmost importance that the best available coal (high CV; low ash; high volatiles; low moisture; lump coal with few fines) be reserved for locomotive fuel. 96

97. Conclusions New Steam Locos can be built in 21st Century
Economics of Modern Steam Traction in Transportation of Coal by Rail
Conclusions New Steam Locos can be built in 21st Century
Switzerland
UK South Africa

98. End Sincere thanks to: Malcolm Cluett (Australia)
Brian McCammon (New Zealand)
Alan Fozard and John Hind (UK)
Hugh Odom (USA)
Feb 2008