Decades ago, almost every bus company had a rule against carrying "accumulators".
For the benefit of our younger members these were glass cased lead acid cells of 2 volts, used to provide the "low tension" supply to ones valve wireless.
They had to be taken, usually weekly, to the radio shop or sometimes the bicycle shop or motor car workshop to be recharged.
It was reasonable to prohibit carriage by bus, 2 volts, or the less common 4 volts, was harmless from a strictly electrical point of view. The risk was the tipping over of the battery and spilling the acid, or dropping it and the glass breaking.
Shopping baskets were made with a special compartment to conceal ones accumulator  carry cleaning products separated from food stuffs/protect eggs from breakage.

Such rules probably still exist, and someone may have over interpreted them as prohibiting battery powered cycles. A bit pointless as they allow cordless power tools and laptop PCs.
There is a culture amongst some bus companies and among some bus drivers that likes rules for their own sake.

Which word ? I avoided calling them DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit), out of deference to those who state that they are not REALLY DMUs despite being powered by underfloor engines.
Neither did I mention buffets, as the lack thereof is not really Hitachi's fault.
Did not even mention the failed trolley service which IS PARTLY Hitachi's fault, since they designed the sloping floors, and they made the "greatly improved" trolleys. The steeply sloping floors, and "wonky wheels" on the trolleys were frequently given as reasons for no trolley/static trolley/hidden trolley. Such factors do not help, but I feel that GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) are not serious about trolley provision, and regard this as a temporary or interim measure between a proper buffet and the longer term aim of nothing.(as on SWT^▸ (South West Trains), and others)
Did not even criticise the hard seats or lack of gangways.

If this was an isolated problem,  I would be at least somewhat forgiving.
However taken together with all the other faults and failures, these are starting to look pretty rubbish.

Failure to couple and uncouple reliably, despite this being an "essential requirement"
Failure to cope with the waves at Dawlish, also an "essential requirement"
Overheating in hot weather.
Poor ride.
Unreliable toilets.
Unreliable reservations.
Poor quality trim and fittings.

And a general failure to meet the required levels of availability that resulted in frequent short formations, forgotten about  with the reduced passenger numbers in the pandemic. But no doubt to return.

The poor standards of passenger comfort and facilities are arguably due to the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) policy of "what downgrades can we get away with" and not Hitachi's fault, but still gives a poor impression.

Agree, and whilst an electric car should be still greener, the economics would be very doubtful if fossil fuel only needs filling a few times a year.

My sympathies are with network rail.
"The railway" is widely ridiculed when extensive delays result in the leaf fall season, with calls for "something to be done" And no that network rail are doing something, look at the fuss.

Simple observation of the gridwatch site shows that there is no surplus of renewable electricity at present, nor is any such surplus expected in the near future.


A FUTURE surplus is a reasonable expectation as renewable generating capacity continues to grow.

BTW^▸ (by the way), there WAS once a regional surplus in Scotland, for two or three nights, but that was under freak conditions that are most unlikely ever to be repeated.

The suggested 3 GWh is not to "keep the whole country going for six minutes" it is to provide about 3 GW^▸ (Great Western) for about an hour in the evening peak. Quicker acting than gas turbine plant and very useful for short term peaks. Similar in purpose to the existing pumped storage capacity, and more efficient than OCGT^▸ (Open Cycle Gas Turbine) that would otherwise be used for peak demands.

The batteries would be charged at off peak hours, or when there is a surplus of renewable energy.

I am well aware that there is NO SURPLUS of renewable energy AT PRESENT. As renewable generating capacity continues to grow, a surplus is possible in the future, during windy weather or bright sun.

Whilst I am pleased to hear of the planned return of Pullman services, I don't really trust GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)  about catering.
I can hear the weasel words already.

"A phased return" that never progresses beyond the first phase.
"We are exploring alternative dining formats" such as reheated airline tray meals.
"A more accessible service" I.E. not a proper restaurant.
"Unfortunately the relaunch was not successful" we tried it on three trains without telling anyone, a bit like the famous hot food from the trolley.

Previous events do not fill me with confidence.

Carrying out a survey that showed buffets were no longer wanted, AFTER the new DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) were specified without a buffet. No doubt then as to what answer was required from the survey.

All the promises made about the wonderful new trolley service, NONE  of which were achieved.

And even the downgraded and very basic trolley service was so often in the other unit, closed for stocktaking, hiding in first class, or completely absent, that a general view was that "the new trains dont have catering" is in practice justified.

I doubt that anyone is seriously proposing to to meet a significant proportion of UK^▸ (United Kingdom) electricity demand from batteries for days at a time.
What is entirely possible is battery storage of say 4 GWh. about 75% of this capacity could supply say 3 GW^▸ (Great Western) for an hour in the high peak of early evening.
Keep the rest of the battery capacity in reserve for emergencies. The national grid are required to plan for "the single worst reasonably foreseeable loss of generating/or import capacity".

The most likely loss is 1 GW when the french interconnector breaks. Having available say 2 GW for half an hour would be very helpful in avoiding blackouts whilst awaiting the starting of alternative capacity.

I would like to see both wind and solar capacity roughly doubled, this would significantly reduce UK carbon emissions from electricity generation.
Some fossil fuel would still be required for calm weather such as at present.

If we are serious about actually physically reducing carbon emissions by 78% then most of the remaining 22% will be needed for higher priority uses than flying.

O/T but Bicester North, was AFAIK^▸ (as far as I know) the scene of the last ever slip coach working on BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)).
A coach at the rear of an express train that was detached at line speed, and coasted into the station where it was stopped by the guard. Splendid ! would never be allowed today.
Sometimes the slip coach terminated at the station where it was detached, in other cases it was coupled to a branch line service.
Some trains conveyed several slip coaches.

Her Majesty's Government (HMG) have announced that by 2035 that UK^▸ (United Kingdom) carbon emissions are to be reduced by 78%

Hard to see how this is to be achieved without drastic reductions in air travel. If the remaining 22% is to be used for heating of existing housing, and for limited electricity* production, and other high priority uses, then there might well be NOTHING left for aviation.

Or perhaps they propose not to reduce actual fuel used but simply to purchase indulgences, er sorry trade and offset.

*We should be able to produce MOST of our electricity from renewables, but significant natural gas will still be required when wind power is lacking, as has happened recently.


Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

Meanwhile in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom), rail travel becomes ever more expensive whilst air transport is encouraged by various grants, subsidies, and tax breaks.

Retrofitting different lights is a relatively minor mater.

Our government have announced plans reduce carbon emissions by 78% by 2035, considerably faster than the original date of 2050.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56807520

I suspect that most people have no idea of the scale of changes needed to achieve this.
It is probably achievable in the case of electricity supply, but what about transport, and domestic heating.
Most politicians and voters probably don't know the difference between "total energy" and "electricity"

Indeed, heat pumps are in my view more applicable to existing buildings with a relatively large heating demand.
The use of say 3Kw of electricity to produce perhaps 10 Kw of heat can be attractive, but remember that heat pumps are complex and less reliable than one might hope for.

For new homes, the way forward is in my view extreme insulation, such that only a few of Kw of heating is needed. Simple direct acting electric heating then makes sense.

I know of a modern and very large house that only needs about 8Kw of heating in severe weather. 9 bedrooms, 5 adults and a herd of children. No heating whatsoever in moderatly cool weather.