Web Site
Developers

Why Pick on Jeffrey Immelt and GE?

Short Answer:

Being a bit snide: primarily because they deserve it (c.f. see quotes and examples in the next to last section). However, I will admit that one of the three articles dealing with energy efficiency and generation has no historic connection to GE. Moreover, they might be a poor candidate to try to lead the implementation of the core idea. However, don't fret over my obvious bias or shed too many tears about the grievous treatment I afford them. GE has the cash for noise machines that can reduce these words to a whisper, at best, or drown them completely out. Nonetheless, I suggest your reading my complaints before discounting my ideas.

Article List

1.) Energy Recovering, Hybrid Railway Locomotive
2.) Speed Implementation of Electrically Controlled Air Braking Systems in Freight Cars
3.) Build a Commercial Line of Very Small Gas Turbine Electric Generators

An Overview

The first article will deal with the delay of the GE announced implementation of hybrid railway locomotive that recovers a fraction of its energy loses. This was first announced in the Spring of 2005 and to date no sight has been seen of this locomotive type from GE. The core problem is that currently the railway companies are in a very conservative mind set. The railway companies are opting for the known and seemingly safe diesel¹ technology they know over a already running electric hybrid². That includes the Union Pacific that was known to experiment on their own with risky technology, e.g. a coal gas turbine (a failure) and gas turbines (they had two separate fleets) until the fuel costs³ over overwhelmed their other advantages.

A real, operational prototype locomotive has to be out there now showing proving its durability as well as its mostly theoretical fuel consumption advantages. Even if the hoped for fuel savings are there, railways are loath to trust untested technology that might break down too often. A few of these failure incidents on limited capacity routes would sour railway managers' views on this type of locomotive years into the future. The major western roads are furiously trying to build capacity on their over stressed routes, anything that adds to congestion is their enemy.

The second topic is already undergoing limited testing on two railroad systems. The description that is included in the citation alludes to hoped for increases in train speed, control, safety and capacity utilization. Those are the expected returns, however, it is seen as nearly and all or nothing deal. That is, one unequipped car makes all the others behind it unresponsive, or worse a danger⁴. Hence, the hesitation re-enforced further by the fear of bearing a high level of capital expenditure.

Lets deal with the historical aspects first. One of the big historical player is effectively absent. Westinghouse Electric bears the name of the inventor of the railway air brake, that was supposedly fail safe⁵. The two parts of this company that I know are still in existence are: CBS (Columbia Broadcast System) in the U.S. is an entertainment entity and one, I believe the one using the old name, is part of a German based builder of atomic fission electricity generation plants. One other entity not related to the others is New York Air Brake, which is already working offers an electrically controlled air brake system. New York Air Brake (that now too is German owned) has a long history is the field. So why GE? Besides the sarcastic "why not?", the real answer is that more than the historic players may be needed to take a fresh look to get to the agreed goal sooner. That outside player need not and probably will not be GE, but at this juncture I am unsure what entity to address. GE, however, has an established reputation as a major railway equipment supplier, hence, their being part of a team could be extremely helpful.

The final item in this series, will go far beyond anything GE might attempt. This is the beginning of another series where I will show it is necessary to fight conventional wisdom for a myriad of reasons. Following the patterns set by Roman engineering is neither appropriate nor sufficient to handle the problems of citizen services in a crowded, overstressed world.

Why the Scorn for GE's Efforts?

The answer is relatively simple: GE is perceived by many as a corporate leader in addressing legitimate environmental concerns, whereas they really are simple realists trying to cut the best deal possible against a tide of opinion that will soon sweep over the recalcitrant. However, if you examine their actions it is not such a pretty picture, others that are more discreet show they are more ready to meet the challenges without the self aggrandizement. Note the announced locomotive that has not yet made a photo op., look what they say when the EPA proposes a more stringent set of standards on diesel locomotive exhausts⁶. Hint: they, GE, are against it, whereas from the just cited article their competitor, Elector-Motive Diesel says: "... we're definitely intending to meet all of the [EPA] rules and requirements". Remember this: GE's competitor is the smaller entity, now no longer being part of General Motors Corp., hence, most likely it has lesser resources to commit, yet it is confident it can be done. There is at least another instance, where GE's business interests trumps its supposed environmental commitment fear of compact light bulbs being suggested as a replacement for the energy wasting incandescent bulb. Now GE says: "... has been campaigning against elimination of incandescent bulbs, and promising instead to bring out new model that is twice as efficient as its current bulbs", but where were they before the proposals were to mandate the elimination of incandescent bulbs?

Finally I have a selection quotes, from Jeffrey R. Immelt in Forbes that should make clear my reasons for a disgusted view of GE's lack of sincerity. Here are some,

  [Forbes]... GE is green? For a long stretch GE has been near the 
  top of environmentalists' most-hated lists. ... 
  Ecomagination talk there is showmanship but also some reality. GE's new philosophy ... 
  [from] Jeffrey R. Immelt... "If you can't beat the environmentalists, join them" 
  [Forbes]  ... So is Ecomagination just a sales pitch?
  "It's primarily that," confesses Immelt. "In its essence it's a way to sell 
  more products and services."

If that has no impact, there is nothing more to say.

Why Was This Necessary?

I simply found the need to put in contrary thoughts about motivations was too distracting. Now I can concentrate on the technoligical and forget the PR and politics. Time to move on to real discussions.

Corrections, questions or comments TxtEdMacs, if the mailto does not work for you email to TxtEdMacs [-At-] BST-SoftWareDevs.com.

Return to Home or E & E Page

* Originally published on the Open Source Today site June 12, 2007. Content may have been altered prior to being moved onto Web Site Developers.

________________________________________________________________

  1. National Railway Equipment of Mt. Vernon, Ill. has received
  orders for a significant number of genset locomotives that use
  three off-road sized diesel with its own generator as a set that  
  rotate use in standby mode and start others only as needed.
  2. Canadian Pacific returned three diesel/electric/(lead acid
  battery hybrids from RailPower Technologies. [Gensets are 
  supposed to 35% less fuel use, however, not sure same units are
  compared with the lesser number for the hybrid.]
  3. Gas turbines consumed as much fuel at rest as at full power,
  hence, despite many other favorable characters were set aside.
  4. Same problem as all air - part of the train is stopped but being
  hit by the later portions that have not received the order to set 
  their brakes.
  5. This may have been true when it was invented when trains were
  lighter, shorter and slower.  An air line break dumped the air and
  set the brakes in an emergency stop.  Now the similar break will 
  result, more likely, scattering train cars across the landscape.
  6. Wall Street Journal, A2 February 13, 2007.  "GE Fights EPA's 
  Tougher Smog Proposals".