Sounds a good idea, hopefully the challenges can be overcome.
A direct train service is far preferable to a connecting service, simpler/less to go wrong/go on strike.
Throughout mainland Europe there is a renewed interest in sleeper trains instead of short haul air travel.

I support electrification, but remain of the view that all new electric trains should have a battery or a diesel engine to run basic on board services or proceed at much reduced performance when the wires come down.
Having incurred the cost and weight penalty, then this battery or engine could be used to a very limited extent in passenger service.
Electrification should be cheaper and simpler with the odd short gap in problematic locations such as inadequate clearances under bridges.
In most cases trains could coast through such gaps, but a secondary power source seems prudent. Also valuable for diversions, to Waterloo for example, or excursions to heritage railways.

As regards pumped storage, a new and very large pumped storage power station has recently been approved at Coire Glas

https://www.coireglas.com/

I very largely agree with the above, regarding hydrogen, with one exception. We do not need the carcon dioxide that is a by product of producing hydrogen from natural gas.
Until recently most UK^▸ (United Kingdom) carbon dioxide was produced by Distillers PLC, a company noted for the production of distilled spirits, this only ceased when carbon dioxide from natural gas was found to be a bit cheaper.

We could easily revert to carbon dioxide from the distiling industry (both potable spirits and industrial alcohol)

Carbon dioxide from natural gas adds to global warming.
Carbon dioxide from the distiling inudustry is green because it is only returning to the atmosphere that carbon captured by growth of the barley or other plant matter that is fermented.
If the barley was not used thus it would rot, be eaten by wildlife, or destroyed by fire and the carbon still returned to the atmosphere.

If fewer passengers fly then the airlines will operate fewer flights or use smaller aircraft, they wont carry on operating near empty aircraft for long.
No freight shipping firm is going to cancel sailings due to fewer passengers, the ships sail primarliy for freight and still run if no passengers are on board.
The extra fuel used is minute, and is due to the extra weight of the passenger, luggage, and any extra consumables carried.

Use of toilet facilities and the carbon footprint thereof is a red herring.
Rather than travelling to Australia, they could have stayed at home, toilets still used.

Passenger travel on cargo ships is still possible and has much to commend it. Such ships burn a lot of polluting heavy oil but the EXtra fuel consumed by caryying a passenger is negligable.
The accomadation is generally a lot more spacious than that on a cruise ship.
No more than 12 passengers may be carried on most freight ships.

A friend has made several return voyages to the USA thus, and one to Australia. One voyage was alarming due to extreme weather, the others more routine.
Food included, alcohol extra, but at duty free prices NOT at cruise ship bar prices.

I expect to be at home, alone, on Christmas day.
Various visits are planned on the other days of the holidays, but not on christmas day.

Christmas eve, visiting Ukrainian refugees, and taking some presents, and hopefuly enjoying a meal of roast goose.
Boxing day, visiting other neighbours for food and drinks. Beef Wellington is promised. I will takr some port as a contribution to the festivities.

Use of hydrogen for domestic and similar heating and cooking is rather pointless under PRESENT circumstances for reasons already given.
No harm though in tests, trials, and experiments in case this changes.

A large potential use for green hydrogen is the manufacture of ammonia fertiliser, this uses a great deal of hydrogen, almost always obtained from natural gas. The present high price of natural gas has resulted in fertiliser shortages and substantial price increases, and also in carbon dioxide shortages as this is a by product of producing hydrogen from natural gas.
Green hydrogen could be used instead, the fertiliser production process is well understood and does not "know" if the hydrogen feedstock is from natural gas or from electrolysis of water.
A possible interim step would be to use green hydrogen produced renewably when available, and natural gas derived hydrogen at other times. The eventual aim being to move to 100% green hydrogen.

The only drawback of green hydrogen for fertiliser manufacture is that no carbon dioxide is produced as a by product. There are other economical sources of carbon dioxide, which is much used in the food and beverage industries

Later reports on lunchtime TV news suggest that the accident was caused by the extreme cold weather affecting the region, down to about minus 40  degrees.

No fatalities reported, but hundreds injured, and about 100 detained in hospital.
Images show a train divided, and reports refer to a collision, it is not clear whether the collision led to the train becoming divided, or vice versa.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-67724238

Under PRESENT circumstances, hydrogen is rather pointless.
A great deal of electricity is used to make hydrogen, and it would in most circumstances make more sense  to feed this electricity into the grid, and thereby displace some of the natural gas otherwise burnt for electricity production.
Natural gas is still burnt 24/7 for electricity production.

However the position may change in future, and any future surplus of renewably generated electricity could usefully be used for hydrogen production.
Better get building a lot more wind turbines, and installing a lot more PV modules.

A new and very large pumped storage power station has recently been approved, and if actually built will reduce the need for hydrogen production, since surplus electricity can be stored in this power station.

Agree that electrical and communications infrastructure is very vulnerable, road vehicles should be ok as they are not connected to any long conductors.
A severe solar storm induces undesired  current on long conductors such as railway lines, electrical infrastructure, pipelines, and even long wire fences.

Current rail signalling is safe under all ordinary circumstances, it has a good track record.
During a severe solar storm it is potentially unsafe, due to currents induced in long conductors such as rail lines, and signalling wiring.
Only a very limited train service could be safely run under such circumstances. Branches could be operated with only one engine in steam. Longer routes reverting to manual time interval working.

Probably no electric trains as not likely to be any electricity.
Diesel trains very limited by the amount of fuel already in stock at depots, I doubt that re-supply would be available.
Steam is a possibility, but coal and water supply would be the limiting factor.

Rail transport would likely be restricted to food, fuel, and other essentials, maybe one passenger train a day on selected routes.

There might be a days warning of a severe solar storm, but this is reliant on a single satellite that is already past its design life.
Even given a little warning I have little faith in HMG doing anything effective to prepare.

Despite the thread title, we had diverged somewhat onto more general climate protests. Any future large scale protests could result in fuel shortage, or other dislocation.
Therefore this thread seemed a proper place to quote the government advice.
 

Whilst I am glad to hear of the conviction, I feel that the sentence is inadequate.
A suspended prison term, which means not actually being locked up, is not in my view sufficient.