Could Steam Locomotives Actually Make a Comeback?

A 1920 steam locomotive in Florida is hauling tourists on recycled vegetable oil, so could steam actually come back? We answer the flat question honestly, starting with where steam loses badly: roughly 6 percent thermal efficiency against 36 to 40 percent for a modern diesel-electric, plus the hidden killers of firing up, ash pans, water stops, boiler washouts, FRA inspections and two-crew double heading. Then we meet the engineers who tried to save it. Livio Dante Porta and his Gas Producer Combustion System on the Rio Turbio coal railway in Patagonia, David Wardale and the South African Red Devil 3450, Ross Rowland's ACE 3000 and the C&O 614-T coal train tests of 1985, the 5AT project, and the Coalition for Sustainable Rail's biocoal plan for Santa Fe Hudson 3463. Every one proved something real, and every one ran out of money or customers. Finally, where steam could plausibly win: Swiss modern steam rack locomotives on the Brienz Rothorn, Grand Canyon Railway 4960 burning waste vegetable oil, U.S. Sugar 148 on the Sugar Express, and Steamology's hydrogen steam turbine conversion of a Class 60. We also tackle China and India's late steam, the carbon neutral biomass argument, and the "just use hydrogen" crowd. Corrections built into this video, because they matter: the "FEC 148" running on vegetable oil is really U.S. Sugar 148, a 1920 ALCO Pacific that did start life on the Florida East Coast but has belonged to U.S. Sugar since 1952 (reacquired in 2016), and U.S. Sugar says recycled vegetable oil without naming its source. The 1946 New York Central Niagara versus diesel test was much closer than the efficiency gap suggests. Porta's 21 percent third generation steam was a design target, never a proven result. If you enjoy honest deep dives into locomotive history and railroad engineering, consider subscribing to Train Curious.