North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

I'd suggest that the real risk of taxation coming will depend on whether it comes to be seen as a potential alternative to diesel (or diesel-like mixes) for road or domestic heating use. I don't think use as fuel just for steam locomotives is likely to provoke a response!

 

As I expect you'd worked out, unless a government is particularly clueless, they will realise that it takes work to set up a new taxing regime - work which unlikely to be paid back, if there's very little of the thing being taxed. Of course, there are a lot of clueless governments.

Noel

 

Never mind that, HMRC will need to identify the usage, then work on "closing the loophole" and get government to legislate (or pass a Statutory Instrument) to make the change.

 

The standard rebated fuel duty would add £ 2,945 cost to the full fuel tank, a relatively low addition to the cost of the fuel.

 

Is it that a reasonable increase? Assuming the tender holds 5 tons of coal at £400/ton that would be £2000 in coal - and what you are suggesting is a 150% more. If my car's fuel bill rose by 150% I'd be a bit unhappy!

 

Tender contains rather more than the equivalent 5 tons of coal !

 

Which tender are you talking about, and what is the fuel capacity?

In any case, all such discussion is a bit moot unless you know the respective fuel consumptions. For example, if a steam loco manages 70lb coal / mile (a reasonable total figure I think) and coal is £400 per ton, then the cost is £12.50 / mile. What are the equivalent figures for oil?

Tom

 

No idea on what 2253 burns.
But an article in one of the mags about the VOR said it cost twice as much for a return trip with the one converted to oil, as a coal powered trip. The cost being "offset" by the reduced fire risk.

 

It might be able to take more than 5 tons of coal an equally an equivalent amount of oil - but does it always carry the full amount? Realistic specific examples are hard to come by - and the quoted increase of £2495 in duty doesn't seem to be based on a quoted number. That's why I used the word "assuming"!