all 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 5 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

There's probably examples with much less of a time difference too - there were (and as far as I am aware, still are) fueled steam locomotives in use at several facilities in china as recently as 3 4 2? years ago.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    The last ones withdrawn in 2022

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

    Dear god, is it truly 2026 already?

    (That was regular service lines yeah - there's still sporadic service for fueled steam locomotives, and some industrial campuses like iron foundries are still using them as yard engines)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    2022 was the end of industrial use. Main line use ended in 2005.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago*

    JS-class steam locomotives were used in active service at a rural coal mine in western China until 15 January 2024. Railfan & Railroad stated in 2022 that "the only places on earth to see steam locomotives in revenue freight service are small switching operations in China, North Korea and Bosnia," but that these were "sporadic at best."

    (via wikipedia)

    As far as I am aware they are still in sporadic use; while I have seen no journalistic reporting that gives confirmation either way, I have seen numerous videos from rail fans in recent years happily sperging about their use.

  • source
  • parent
  • 49 comments in c/trains@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 23 points 5 months ago

    Damn that's quite an upgrade in such a short period of time.

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 5 months ago (17 children)

    What irks me so much about electric cars is that, while their energy density is much better than that of ICE cars, and they have the potential to increase it further as battery technology advances, when you compare them to even the most modest form of public transport, public transport wins by such a landslide that it's laughable.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 5 months ago

    Electric cars are only existing right now because the car industry wants to continue to sell very expensive individual vehicles, not for efficiency nor the environment. Electric cars are, in a way, greenwashing. They are certainly better than cars with ICE but there's still so many issues with cars and their infrastructure that them being electric will not change that much.

    But buy buy buy, they're "good" for the environment. Buy!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 5 months ago* (4 children)

    while their energy density is much better than that of ICE cars

    Ummmm, no? Battery energy density is much worse than the energy density of gas. Electric is better for the environment but what you said is factually incorrect.

    Gas has a Energy density (MJ/L) of 34.2 while lithium ion maxes out at ~4.2.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

    Sorry, to be more exact I should have said efficiency.

    I was taking into account energy lost due to conversion at the engine where an ICE is between 20 and 25% efficient, or wheel to wheel efficiency if you will, I thought that would have been self-explanatory.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Even accounting for that pretty sure it’s still wrong, that’s why ICE vehicles usually have better range despite not stuffing gas tanks into every available space.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (9 children)

    Public transport is excellent in towns and cities, where there's a high enough density of destinations people are trying to get to, and stops where they can get on and off the public transport, but little use anywhere more spread out. I live a few miles from the nearest town, and there aren't many other houses around here; we have a bus service, but it's infrequent, and it wouldn't really make much sense to make it more frequent as there aren't enough potential passengers. Cars make much more sense around here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago* (4 children)

    Public transport is excellent in towns and cities,

    A.K.A. where everybody but a negligible minority lives. Good for you for being a member of the rural exception, but it is way past time for us to stop paying inordinate attention and catering to you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    To be clear, I am absolutely in favour of public transport in towns, cities, suburban area and everywhere around them that it can be reasonably spread to, and on routes between them. As you say, that'll cover the significant majority of the population, but we still need roads for things like last mile freight, and those of us who need to get places not served.

    I lived in a major city for 20 years, and only bothered to get a car in the last few, when I had more need to travel to places outside the city, that weren't served.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    we still need roads

    strawman argument. No one has proposed removing all roads.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    The comment I was replying to suggested stopping catering to rural populations. I was trying to respond to that, as having roads is one of the main ways of catering for them. I suppose they could be talking about this like subsidies to fossil fuels, but that doesn't really address the earlier assertion that EVs are a stop gap.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Hot take: Cars don't make sense for people who live a rural lifestyle in a low-density area miles from town, because they don't really need to go anywhere that often.

    If they do need to go other places often, like commuting to a job in the city, or frequent trips to stores, then that's not a rural lifestyle. It's an urban lifestyle transposed into a rural area, and massively subsidized by building the roads that allow them to do it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Living outside a conurbation doesn't mean you don't still need access to the amenities there. You still need groceries, to get kids to school, to visit the doctor, or even maybe visit friends, either in the city, or somewhere else outside it.

    Roads are going to be part of the transport mix for the forseeable future, both within towns and cities, but also linking them. We need them for transporting goods and people long distances where public transport diesn't have a reasonable route, and we need them for the "last mile", from a transport hub, to where we actually need to be. The more people who use public transport the better for everyone, including those who can't use it for a particular journey. For that to happen though, there needs to be frequent local service, linking to the wider scale network, and it needs to go where people actually want.

    An hourly bus service to go the few miles to the nearest villiage to buy some eggs or milk isn't really practical as the whole process of getting there and back will take far longer than just driving.

    So yes, living outside town is more awkward than living in one, but you'd have to actually imprison me to get me to do that again, it almost destroyed my mental health last time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Living outside a conurbation doesn’t mean you don’t still need access to the amenities there. You still need groceries, to get kids to school, to visit the doctor, or even maybe visit friends, either in the city, or somewhere else outside it.

    That's an urban lifestyle.

    Not that I blame people who live out in the sticks and commute into the city. The roads were there first, after all, and they're taking advantage of conditions. It's just a net-loss for society, and as is becoming clear, isn't sustainable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago

    Are you suggesting that the only way to have a "rural" lifestyle is to grow all of your own food, act as your own doctor, and educate your children entirelt by yourself? Bear in mind that, to do even a fraction of this, you'd need lots of land, which would mean you're a significant distance from any neighbours who might help, which would mean you'd probably need a car, or similar, anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 22 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

    I wish the "old" picture didn't look like it was from the 1940s instead of literally the year 2000.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    Funny thing: tech in China was actually behind by 10+ years compared to western standards. Look at an episode from the 1985 edition of Journey to the West, the special effects look like a Doctor Who episode from the Tom Baker Era.

    I still remember getting our first color TV in 2002, and that involved moving our old BW TV to the Master Bedroom. Dial-up Internet was also being used in 2007. Both of these examples were in metro Shanghai, which was the hub of development during these times.

    A picture from 1940s would most likely be BW (as is the case with 60s era pictures of my great grandparents). While what you see is considered "90s-2000s" era for China.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    The train doesn't go choo choo anymore 😔

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    I actually got to ride one of the steam locomotives in a heritage railway in Connecticut. The Essex Steam Train uses a China Railways SY class 2-8-2. There's another one in New Jersey as well. The stuff made by Tangshan Locomotive and Rolling Stock Works is interesting because it produced the last steam trains in the world that were built for non-tourist purposes. Hopefully China sees the historic value in preserving them and keeps some in a functional state for the long term. They apparently have one heritage railway, the Tiefa Coal Mine System, with a couple of the steam trains still running for tourists.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 57 points 5 months ago* (9 children)

    It's absolutely hilarious to me how people in the west are genuinely surprised that people in China overwhelmingly support their system and government. Just imagine what it must be like to live in a country where you see this sort of progress happening all around you in a single generation. You see a clear and tangible demonstration of the government working to improve your life everywhere you look.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    It's also quite amusing to see the cognitive dissonance when you point out that the Chinese system (classified as communist by many here in the U.S.) was the one that has pulled off the greatest improvement in living conditions in human history, pulling hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in basically a generation.

    "But muh capitalism!" (Don't worry, capitalism is proceeding to do the opposite.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    A lot of people don't understand the historical context of the US having sat out WW2. The whole myth of capitalism being a superior system was built on the fact that the US got to develop its industries while the rest of the world burned. So, naturally, the NATO bloc that it formed was far ahead economically. And the west has been riding that advantage ever since.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Oh, I believe it. I got a degree in environmental sciences, and in the course of my studies, learned the historical context that goes way back earlier than WW2, even: The United States initially became an economic superpower, and built its industries, on the sheer bounty of natural resources that it extracted from North America and the Caribbean. Nothing much to do with the economic system, except to concentrate the gains to a lucky, elite few.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 27 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    China’s railway infrastructure improvement is so sick.

    I wish it would spark similar in the US 🥲

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I first read; "Same train, 26 years apart." I bubbled; "You be lyin'." And then my eyes was like; "Oh they be talkin' about the driver."

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    How come he was able to grow so much taller as an adult??!??!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    It's a shame china is still so full of cars and massive roads, and they don't seem to be placing too much of a priority on avoiding cars and creating walk-able cities.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    Not to excuse them, but they do have an absolutely fucking absurd population and population density, so it should be noted that they're doing hilariously better than much of the world, proportionately.

    I'd say they're a lot like japan: Very good in some ways, still quite amazingly shitty in other ways, and they've ended up like that because they're fairly non-corrupt (at least on a local level, in the case of china) and actually prioritize genuine economic growth (as in: having industry) rather than making people happy or jerking off the friends of politicians.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    There's room for critique.

    When I was visiting China, I asked what's up with the prevalence of consumer vehicles getting larger like SUVs (similar to US but I didn't mention that).

    The common answer I received was, "I feel safer driving in them."

    I think they have a long way to go wean off that sentiment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    oh for sure, the most obvious piece of critique is that cars become exponentially more obviously moronic the more people/density you have, which makes the existence of cars at all in most of asia completely insane.

  • source
  • parent
  • 8 comments in c/fuck_cars@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 23 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child)

    Were they still rocking steam engine trains in the 90s?

    The top image literally only exists in this context combined with the bottom image lol

    https://tineye.com/search/7777615014d53bcce72888927f25c51729e67149?sort=score&order=desc&page=1

    Ah google finds some more stuff:

    https://xcancel.com/globaltimesnews/status/1069894122373296129
    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:SY1721_at_Tangshan_Works.jpg
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Railways_SY

    Definitely a chinese locomotive and it was built up until 1999

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    This reminds me of my trip to northern Honshu in Japan. I took the Shinkansen (bullet train) which was so smooth and quiet you literally had to look out the window to even realize you were moving. But then we switched to an old clunker that was shaking around and belching smoke and working so hard just to pull out of the station.

    And the on-board experience was a huge contrast as well. The Shinkansen was full of people in suits minding their own business and it was clean and space-age-looking. The other train had a lived-in look and was full of chatty country folk who started asking me all sorts of questions and laughing because we could barely understand each other. My Japanese is a little iffy and they had this country drawl that wasn't helping. But I enjoyed both trains for different reasons.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Ah, is the above picture misinformation?

    I was kinda thinking the top photo looks like it's from the 1800s, not 26 years ago. Am I on the right track? (Pun intended)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    What a glow up

  • source
  • 3 comments in c/trains@midwest.social view that post
    [–] 9 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    While it's documented that China ended steam locomotive operations by 2024, and thus making it possible for a train driver to have worked steam and then later a modern high-speed electric train set, I cannot find any separate references for SY-2425 (pictured) being worked by the driver in question.

    That doesn't mean it isn't him, but simply that this specific photo is uncited and undated. The timeline could still make sense -- if perhaps incredible that steam made it into the 21 Century -- but I have to always be weary of photo comparisons that seem to show up more on Facebook than they do in news articles.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment