*New vessel 'smoke' fuel laws looming*

The above mentioned rules are having an impact on the Str. BADGER. Rumors abound about her fate, but one thing is for sure, she will probably need some sort of coal smoke
scrubbers to operate, and her ashes will no longer be allowed to be placed in the lake. Maybe Congress in their infinite wisdom will grant her an exemption from the new regs. Unfortunately, as we all know, that is certainly not a "life time guarantee."

Frank X. Prudent;25094 wrote: The above mentioned rules are having an impact on the Str. BADGER. Rumors abound about her fate, but one thing is for sure, she will probably need some sort of coal smoke
scrubbers to operate, and her ashes will no longer be allowed to be placed in the lake. Maybe Congress in their infinite wisdom will grant her an exemption from the new regs. Unfortunately, as we all know, that is certainly not a "life time guarantee."

This has been talked about for a number of years on the Badger. I heard many a rumor, but nothing concrete as of yet. The solution is repowering...which may or may not occur??? Pure speculation on my part.

One would think, of course, that there should be an exemption for historic vessels, whose contribution to pollution would be infinitessimal, no matter how much soot they puked out. This is also something that would have a bunch of steam railroads worried. Would they be next? Next question: Is this really a problem???

*RE: 'New vessel 'smoke'/fuel laws*
Dear Steamboating colleagues:
Good question in your above and I don't know at this point. The report I read here brief in analysis. I will in time pull up on Internet the full proposal initiative in text. The statement, "The EPA has disregarded the economic impact on cruise [i.e. boats/ships] operators" needs clarification. Frank Prudent mentioned the BADGER on Lake Michigan and you the potential for steam railroads. I can only think the legislation is far-reaching and inclusive of all. Who knows? The passenger ships I've been on in recent years produced little to no 'smoke' I was aware of. This a far cry from the liners on the Atlantic I sailed seeing multiple funnels belching out. I also wonder what impact this may have on our navy vessels?

Mention again of possible "exemptions" another good question and we've been down that road before. Companies and related interests are very concerned. These guys also looking furtively around when exemption comes up. Their conusultants/lawers/lobby powers sure to retort, "We want the same consideration...what's good for the goose is good for the gander." No doubt our U.S. Congress in both houses will in time respond to debate and clear the air [No pun intended]. Foreign flagged ship/boat operators in the cruise and heavy cargo areas will also have to comply. To respond to a shy 'lurker' who E=Mailed me in a snit. I ONLY posted what I read and received with no support of this initiative. Read people! Read! Well, what do I know? Cheers!

R. Dale Flick
Coal Haven Landing, Ohio River, Cincinnati

This isn't anything new, it's been in the works for years. Our country, and the rest of the world needs to step up to the plate on the problem of air pollution.

One of my professors, sits on the board thats reforming IMO regulations, and Annex VI. Look at the Arctic, and that it's now open for travel, the soot that leaves all those stacks of ships leaves a thin black film on the ice/snow which absorbs heat and melts, adding to the holes in the ozone layer.

The 14 largest ships in the world put out more air pollution than all the automobiles and trucks in North America combined, for far too long the rules have been way too lax, and although this pollution might not affect your lifetime, it most certainly will impact the younger generations, myself included. The technology is out there, it may cost more at first (so, but it's time to fight normalcy and realize we have a major issue occurring and need to support these type of environmental reforms, they are long overdue.

This is just the beginning of whats coming down the pole right now, for the past three semesters a majority of my courses have been on environmental policy and law in the Maritime Industry. I'm personally more worried about how the law and governments have criminalized if you are a pilot, captain, or officer, on a vessel, companies (mainly American) look at officers now as nothing other than a license on a rack, and the minute something happens they place 100% of the blame on them, never mind the burden of work, delays to fix equipment, etc. Off on a tangent I know, but really, honestly I'd rather be able to breath in the future as you do now, even if it meant one or two vessels had to be shut down.

Hear, hear...I applaud you, Mat, for your altruism. The new regs will undoubtedly effect the CHAUTAUQUA BELLE, but you are rising above that for the greater good!

Why not convert to CNG or

We could see about alcohol that burns hot and clean. Alcohol would be cost efffective if donr right as we could take it from anything that ferments. I see the Delta Queen running on natural gas and you never see any smoke only heat rising out of her stack. I know this is too cost prohibitive but it would be better for the enviroment.

A lot of it comes down to the BTU per gallon, yes ethanol is a "cleaner" solution, but it only has 76,100 BTU/gal compared to something like #2 fuel oil which has around 129,500 BTU/gal, and then you have the industry favorite bunker oil (No. 5 light & heavy) which can range from 146,800 to 155,900 BTU/gal. So you can see why companies love to use the heavy oil, unfortunately its all the metholfloraldeath in bunkers thats puts the pollution into the environment. Especially if the bunkers are coming from 2nd/3rd world countries which aren't environmentally concerned, which are known for mixing in anything they want to get rid of thats toxic, old thinner, biohazardous waste, chemical waste, literally anything and everything to add "weight" to the fuel and to get it out of the country. Which is then shipped around the world and burned, as easily in the United States as anywhere else.

As far as the Chautauqua Belle goes, we use diesel #2, we have used biodiesel as well to cut the fuel (the boiler also supports natural gas, but natural gas is not something one normally wants on a vessel). Our boiler runs around 88% efficiency with how we have it leaned out and other tricks, which is above most modern boiler efficiencies. The price for a ticket aboard the Belle has been the same for over a decade, and as a company we have always looked to increase efficiency rather than passing on our inefficiency bill to our patrons.

Mat is right to point out that this is part of an on-going process. IMO emissions regulation has been in place since 2000. US EPA Tier 1 went into effect in 2004, with Tier 2 fully phased in by 2007. Tier 3 commences in 2012 for large marine engines (read EMD and larger).

*Smoke 'laws'/Territorial Waters*
Steamboating colleagues:
Mat, Ed, Keith B. and others make good points on this thread and much appreciated. I posted taking a neutral point not knowing how the discussion would progress. Food for thought where emissions are concerned. I apologize for taking the 'Pollyanna' stance I do. Again, I'm sure others on this web currently involed in active matters on the rivers like Ted Davission, Bob Reynolds etc. know more. Just this morning I drove to central Cincinnati seeing several working diesel tows with barges. I stopped, parked by St. Rose Church on Eastern Ave. to watch. I didn't see any offending diesel smoke belching out but what do my observations mean?

The new '200 mile coastal territorial limit' along with bays, harbors, estuaries, rivers, Great Lakes got me to digging in the clarification of these territorial limits. 'Nations Subscribing to the Law of the Sea' held to the 12 mile [22 km] limit from shore. 'Rights' include airspace above and the seabed below relating to navigation, fish, mineral resources on said bottom. In 1983 the 'Law of the Sea Convention' propsed the new "200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone over and under to the seabed" This problematical for European nations closer within 400 miles of each other. By 1988, and a following Convention, 104 nations ratified the 12 mile limit with the U.S. voting against. The length, complexity of the wording can be sniffed out with some plodding through the legal talk with numbered clauses. Interesting reading.

A number of us on this web more than old enough to recall the days when steamboats, trains, homes, mills, factories, generating plants ran exclusively on coal--anthracite or bituminous. Living near Coal Haven Landing on the river and the huge rail yards witnessed plenty of black smoke, ashes around the house. Diesel replaced steam as I recall in the 1950s with the usual flim on cars, windows with 'spring housecleaning' taken seriously. At our house such cleaning was spring, summer, autum and winter. I recall well in the late 1940s the last of the great dust storms that blew in from out west. Something to see and pretty frightening to kids. All the mothers on our block closed doors, windows with wet cloth on the sills for a tight fit. That was a L-O-N-G time ago. When was the last time those on this web smelled pungent coal smoke from a steamboat? Well, what do I know? Cheers! to you all.

R. Dale Flick
Coal Haven Landing, Ohio River, Cincinnati.

Are those 14 ships VLCC's? How does that break down per ton mile? Are these ships steam or diesel? Do some of them burn coal? As Dale mentioned, we've come a long way from really not that many decades ago when buildings, lungs, everything, was black from coal soot. You would think economics would come into the picture. It has been years since towboats began using more efficient engines, which I would presume, pollute less.

*RE: 'Smoke' law/Economics*
Hi, Lexie & Steamboating colleagues:
Good questions RE: VLCC's and "economics." As the schematic initial buisness E=Mail I received stated big ship/boat operators say, "It will change our world...more important than rising fuel costs." As one who is still in school for 101 power mower repair and paint brush, I don't know the technicals as others do on this web. Initiatives and legislation often leave it up to the companies to muse over hitting the keys on their office calculators. I can smell a big political initiative a mile away. 'Bean counters' aren't always wrong or the bad guys. Would/could such an initiative come with possible IRS tax breaks similar to others for capital investment, depreciation, upgrading, modernization to be in compliance?

Suffice to say one source indicates the costs in all of this--even with present up-to-date--diesel engines could run them a hefty $700,000. No doubt much of this will be debated, agitated, alamagated before the dust settles. This also in tandem with the previous plan for the U.S. Corps of Engineers to reduce dredging of channels on the Mississippi or even coastal harbors. Has the WATERWAYS JOUNRAL featured any news from those of you who subscribe? Well, what do I know?

R. Dale Flick
Coal Haven Landing, Ohio River, Cincinnati.

It is certainly no surprise to see a push for cleaner emissions from marine engines. The Belle's crew has certainly looked for ways to gain efficiency in her propulsion and electrical usage in my time aboard. I believe we need to use our resources more efficiently in many ways and these older vessels will need to make inroads towards this efficiency to survive. I think marine steam systems have the ability to adapt to different fuel sources as we've seen in the past, but we'll have to do the work to find new sources that will work.

Maybe you guys have been looking at something different than I have, but as far as I know these new regs apply to Marine DIESEL engines, and have no applicability to STEAM powered vessels. There are virtually no steamships remaining in the cruise ship system, at least those that call in or around the US. And, probably very few cargo SS either.

In regard to railroads, from what I can see, the standards apply to new or rebuilt DIESEL engines. Again, no impact on STEAM. And, I think the new/rebuilt stipulation goes for towboats, etc. too ("non-road" diesels).

The only impact that I can see on steamboats would be on the fuel used in auxiliary diesel equipment, like thrusters and electrical gen sets.

Certainly, from a "green" and PR standpoint, the cleaner the fuel you use, the better. Note that a few years ago, the Grand Canyon Railway stopped running their steam locomotives (oil fuel) and switched to diesels, saying that this was a "greener" way to go. This year they are running about six days of steam, using, I think, recycled cooking oil as fuel. But this is more on their own initiative, not mandatory.

Green vs. steam

Oh, ho! I'll bet they took some flak over that decision. Apparently they realized the error in their ways and sent "green" packing. Is there really that much recycled cooking oil in the universe?

I have been retired for over ten years. Back then I was in weekly and sometimes daily contact with EPA people. One of the EPA's big problems was that they run pretty much of a 'revolving door' agency in that, back then, pay for an equivalent job was MUCH less than in industry. Sometimes half! On the other hand there were "lifers" who worked there and believed in what they were doing and knew what they were doing...they were all too few. Often after a few year's experience at EPA the average EPA employee went to work for industry because of the money on their part...their contacts in the EPA on the part of industry. Mathew put his finger on it when he said that we, and the world need to step up to solve these problems. Much of the rest of the world has less than no interest in this and we have less than no leverage to require them to do it. Meanwhile we have to compete with them head to head in many cases in the cost of production. Pollution in China alone is now said to be terrible and guess what it is in India and other emerging countries. Some of the biggest polluters here are you and me with our wood stoves, power mowers, farm tractors, power boats, and yes, my little steam launch. Consider that we squeal loudly when our water, sewer and electric rates go up but that is the only way that our antique infastructure can get fixed...it is the old by-pass sewer systems that really pollute the streams and rivers...EPA jumped on industry long ago and pretty much got them in line. The sewage treatment plants are something else...there are more voters who contrubute to the sewer system than there are folks who work for industry. My dad was a fly fisherman who died in 1963. If you told him that bass-fishing contests would be held in the Ohio River he'd have thought you the biggest lier ever. Well, we've had them there now for years thanks to the Clean Water Act. We are ruled by a bi-cameral system of law-makers who can sometimes be and as we have seen on this board, often have, been bought by big-business, organized labor (another big business), foreign interests, home builders and other organized groups. That having been said, all I can say is that I feel our system is 100% better than anything in second place!! It is only by working together and understanding the problem/s that we can get it done. Cap'n Walnut.

Yes Lexie, there probably is. That is, if my wife's hash browns are any indication!

Who's Recycling Oil?

Trouble is, though... there is generally no way for the non-commercial user of cooking oil to recycle their spent oil. How many recycling centers can anyone name that takes used cooking oil in small amounts? Large commercial producers of used cooking oils have containers outside their kitchen doors with regular pickups, and woe be he thinks he can horn-in on the commercial grease and oil recyclers.

Eleven years of my life were spent pioneering recycling Used Beverage Containers (UBC's), or aluminum cans. After 11 years I sold out and returned to the river, but at 9 AM, tomorrow, Cincinnati time, my former business will be opening its doors one week shy of 31 years. If I was still in the business, I would be buying used household cooking and motor oils, and looking carefully at tire recycling. There are three gallons of oil in every average automobile tire. The Federal Government has stated: "the richest people ever on the face of the earth will be those who find a way to economically recycle automobile tires." What little tire recycling being done now is but a token gesture.

They have tried using recycled tires as pavement to quieten road noise. Don't know if it is wide spread, but it works. I have been on one of these roads in Phoenix. Most of the noise on roads is where the rubber meets it.

Would like to know how many days your average catfish restaurant, where everything is deep fried, would have to operate in order to propel a train to the Grand Canyon.

The city dump where I lived in Texas has a place for non-commercial used oil. It probably goes to a recycler.

You really were a recycling pioneer.

Always Aluminum Cans

Some years ago, the government tried some sample recovery of oil and gas from used tires and at a certain temperature recovered oil and at twice that temperature recovered a flammable gas similar to natural gas. There is also Tire Derived Fuel (TDF) made from recycled tires. When used as an alternative energy source, TDF produces more energy than coal – generating up to 16,000 BTUs per pound – with lower moisture, sulfur, nitrogen and ash. TDF could provide clean energy for a steamboat of the future.

That's exciting to hear that there are resources for non-commercial recovery of used oils. And as exciting, is news, tonight, that aluminum cans will be fetching Seventy Cents a Pound in Aurora, Indiana, and the same should be true just about everywhere else in the country. That just under, by thirty cents, a buck a pound. A person could get rich picking up cans at that price.

Steamboats and Recycling -- those are my trades. As I say, "There's always aluminum cans."

You wouldn't believe how much used cooking oil there is. Look at all the MacDonalds, etc. Quite a bit of recycling of cooking oil is going on here on the left coast. It goes into "biodiesel," which is 20% vegetable oil and 80% diesel.

The May issue of TRAINS magazine has an article about the future of railroad museums. The author talks about Grand Canyon Railway, which is owned by Xanterra Parks & Resorts, the concessionaire for the South Rim hotels, etc. They have installed low flow shower heard, switched to fluorescent light bulbs, etc, in the hotels, and are using waste vegetable oil (100%) as fuel in the the steam locomotive.

He says that waste vegetable oil is "carbon negative" meaning that more carbon dioxide is absorbed by growing the soybeans than is released by burning the oil. And, with a 50 cent/gallon tax rebate they get, the oils costs $1.00/gallon. Also, it has less sulfur than ever ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel. Wish I could get diesel that cheap for my pick up ($4.43/gal in my neighborhood today). What's bunker C go for these days?

The same magazine has an article about the Mt. Washington Cog Railway in New Hampshire. They have replaced their coal-burning steam engines with diesels powered by biodiesel.

I'm more familiar with locomotive boilers than steamboat boilers, but it certainly is no big deal to change from fuel oil to vegetable oil in a locomotive. Easier to handle than bunker c, since it doesn't have to be heated to flow. (The locomotive I fired used #5 furnace oil, because we didn't have the facilities to handle bunker c). Off hand, I don't know how big a deal it would be on a steamboat.

No, I don't know of too many places that accept used residential cooking oil, but there are at least two here in the San Diego area. Some restaurants also accept it. However, I'm sure it will be a very long time before all uses of petroleum oil will be replaced by used cooking oil. We'll all weigh 400lbs, and all arable land will have to be converted to growing oil seeds!

But, if, in fact, these upcoming fuel laws apply to steamboats, vegetable oil certainly looks like a viable solution. (I am assuming that all the operating/potentially operating steamboats around use oil, not coal).

The Napa Valley Scenic Railroad switched to Compressed Natural Gas a few years back with amazing success. Would CNG be a good alternative for Steamboats?

Waste Oil Already Available

The point missed here: "all arable land will have to be converted to growing oil seeds" for sufficient used cooking oil to be available for reuse is not the case. Hotels and restaurants, alone, without considering home use in the United States, generates 3 billion gallons of waste cooking oil per year. This amount could fill tanker trucks arranged bumper-to-bumper from San Francisco to Washington D.C. and back! The answer is recovery. My estimate is that only a small percentage of the 3 billion gallons of waste oil is being recovered, processed, and reused.

Currently, some restaurants are required to collect the grease in traps and pay to have it hauled off by a renderer. Some of the grease is used to supplement feed for farms; however, a lot ends up in landfills. Where grease traps are not required, restaurants and cafes may dump their used cooking oil down the drain where it often causes build-ups and blockages in municipal sewer pipes... and what happens to the home-generated oil? It ultimately ends up in sewers, creeks, and rivers for lack of better disposal.

Americans who change their motor oil throw away 180 million gallons of recoverable (recyclable) motor oil every year, while only 20 million gallons are recycled. Over 60 percent of the used oil disposed of by "do-it-yourself" auto mechanics is disposed of improperly. Most of this motor oil ends up in our waterways.This translates into 11 million gallons every two and a half weeks, or approximately the amount of oil spilled by the Exxon Valdez supertanker in Alaska!

There is already more available waste vegetable and petroleum being improperly disposed of that, if recycled, would make a sufficient difference in not only the fuel supply, but also on the cleanliness of the nation's environment.

That's enough fuel for all the steamboats and steam locomotives in existence, now, and for a long time in the future.

With all these green innitiatives, you would thing that something would have been done about that a long time ago. On the flip side, it is evident that with the continued onerous use of cooking oil, our doctors and pharmaceuticals will always have plenty of business.