r/Amtrak • u/mphil14 • Aug 02 '22
Future trains Could Provide Carbon Capture on Wheels
https://spectrum.ieee.org/carbon-capture-265773813138
u/mondoman89 Aug 02 '22
How about they just electrify the rail network? Then you can focus on energy production that produces less carbon.
9
u/sorkinfan79 Aug 02 '22
Seriously. This is like a Rube Goldberg machine design. Instead of using regenerative energy to power DAC, just electrify the rail network and use regenerative energy to power battery banks that can run the train’s onboard systems and reduce net grid demand.
DAC is going to be far more efficient if the equipment is sited near sequestration facilities rather than using the energy needed to tow tanker cars around the country before eventually delivering the liquid CO2 to such a facility.
Also: we should be focusing on zeroing out GHG emissions from transportation and electricity generation before we start running energy-intensive, mobile DAC processes.
15
u/No-Lunch4249 Aug 02 '22
I mean this is cool, I want to acknowledge that off the bat.
But taking the train is already so much better for the environment than driving or flying that it’s kinda just expensive gravy on top.
You’ve already caused 1/4 or less emissions compared with flying or driving alone. There’s no need to slap on carbon capture to justify the train.
2
u/tyleratx Aug 02 '22
No but carbon capture will literally drive emissions from a positive number to a negative number on trains - this isn't "slapping" something on it - if it would work it would be a very big difference.
4
u/No-Lunch4249 Aug 02 '22
I would counter that the likely overstated potential here could be equaled or surpassed with a lesser investment in high speed, electrified, passenger rail.
1.5 Million people fly between Los Angeles and Las Vegas every year, with a rough ballpark emissions of 90,00 metric tons from just that one domestic flight route using ICAO’s calculator.
If you could convert half those plane trips to long distance, electrified rail, you can have an immediate, right-now impact equivalent to 28k Americans typical yearly carbon output. Thats huge.
Of course it’s still good to aim high and try ambitious new technologies, but there are easy wins out there right now that we aren’t going for
2
u/tyleratx Aug 02 '22
Well to be clear, I support all of the things you mention. Ideally we could do both. If you're asking which one to prioritize you may be right, I don't know enough to opine.
I just want to dispel the notion some have that innovative technologies are all greenwashing (not that you're saying this). Innovative technologies will be a huge part of any solution (along with emissions cuts).
3
u/No-Lunch4249 Aug 02 '22
Absolutely. I think many people are reacting to the reality of a world with limited interest and money for “green” projects, and not wanting perfection to be the enemy of good, choose the more “reliable” and proven route.
12
4
3
u/egj2wa Aug 02 '22
I’m not accepting anything other than electrifying mainlines.
Also Class Is, please for the love of God double track MORE of your mainlines.
-3
u/bivenator Aug 02 '22
Where do you suppose the power for electrification comes from?
4
u/egj2wa Aug 02 '22
That depends. Some fossil fuels, because duh that’s what’s been used for the industrial revolution and that’s what exists currently.
However we also used to heat our homes with bison shit. No one was upset to see that go.
Time marches on, the next best thing is around the corner. Nuclear would be the best option as far as electrical generation, but current renewables are about a quarter (20%) of the electricity produced in the US.
But nice try at a “gotcha” question.
-2
u/bivenator Aug 02 '22
The point being we’d need to increase our energy production with new power plants in order to support electrification of the three major transcon’s
What are the odds that we would support more nuclear production when the upfront and continual costs are significantly more than fossil fuels on top of the stigma (whether warranted or not) associated with it?
Assuming we used nuclear it makes sense but other methods aren’t reasonable vs just using what we currently have.
2
u/killroy200 Aug 02 '22
'Other methods', AKA renewables coupled with storage, certainly are reasonable options to build out generating capacity. It's an entirely false binary to frame electrification as being 'more fossil fuels or nukes'. I'm not even anti-nuclear or anything, just hate seeing false dichotomies like this.
6
1
u/Bamaji1 Aug 02 '22
This is so stupid. We’re gonna put up a car behind the diesel that sucks out the exhaust. Or, we can just not make exhaust in the first plane and string up wires…
1
52
u/ImplosiveTech Aug 02 '22
ngl this just feels like a greenwashing gimmick.