Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 10:55 29 Mar 2024
* Attempted murder charge after man stabbed on train
- Easter getaway begins with flood alerts in place
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
29th Mar (1913)
Foundation of National Union or Railwaymen (*)

Train RunningCancelled
09:30 Weymouth to Gloucester
10:55 Bedwyn to Newbury
11:05 Swindon to Westbury
11:29 Newbury to Bedwyn
11:57 Bedwyn to Newbury
12:17 Westbury to Swindon
12:52 Bedwyn to Newbury
13:15 Swindon to Westbury
14:19 Westbury to Swindon
15:14 Swindon to Westbury
16:23 Westbury to Swindon
17:36 Swindon to Westbury
18:37 Westbury to Swindon
20:13 Swindon to Westbury
21:16 Westbury to Swindon
22:30 Swindon to Westbury
Short Run
06:37 Plymouth to London Paddington
08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington
09:37 London Paddington to Paignton
10:35 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
13:10 Gloucester to Weymouth
Delayed
06:05 Penzance to London Paddington
07:10 Penzance to London Paddington
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance
08:15 Penzance to London Paddington
09:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
10:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
10:04 London Paddington to Penzance
11:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 29, 2024, 11:07:48 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[132] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[56] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[52] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[51] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
[46] Return of the BRUTE?
[32] 2024 - Service update and amendment log, Swindon <-> Westbury...
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
  Print  
Author Topic: Is rail electrification the future, or the past  (Read 23541 times)
simonw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 589


View Profile Email
« on: October 29, 2017, 13:03:42 »

I recently heard Chris Grayling questioning the need for electrification for Cardiff-Swansea and London Midland line. Whilst initially fuming, firmly believing we should electrify the whole network over 20-30 years, he then commented on new technologies including battery trains and hydrogen power.

At this point, my firm belief in electrification evaporated, why should we spend billions of pounds when stopping services can be powered by battery, and log distance services can powered by hydrogen? Both offer clean power, electrical tractiona n and performance.

Is C Grayling, and obviously his DfT» (Department for Transport - about) team, right? or should we still be installing overhead power system, upgrading tunnels, etc?
Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: October 29, 2017, 13:11:18 »

If they delay much longer, other alternatives will be developed, there's no doubt.

There is doubt as to whether the UK (United Kingdom)'s electricity generation could actually cope if all lines were electrified quickly anyway. Whichever, doing nothing except bi-mode will only work for one stock rotation, and so he's just kicking the decision into the long grass, similar to what they've done/doing with airport capacity....
Logged
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4452


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: October 29, 2017, 13:42:11 »

To my mind there needs to be a long term (initially undated) plan  of which lines are priorities for with authorisation to NR» (Network Rail - home page) to fund the basic planning of the work on each line. This would be followed by detailed planning of other works that will be required on these lines so that this can be carried out in advance, or passive provision made in the electrification.  So the whole work would be planned at least up to GRIP (Guide to Railway Investment Projects) 4 (single option development). 

The plan would then be prioritised and the early stages at least would be programmed. 

Advance works to provide the clearances required and any signalling works would then be authorised in a phased programme (so the whole area is not disrupted at once by the inevitable road closures) before actual electrification work started. 

I assume all new overbridges provide electrification clearances?  Equally all new signalling work should assume electrification. 
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5190


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: October 29, 2017, 13:45:14 »

Hydrogen should be considered as a way of storing energy, not as a fuel. There are no hydrogen wells.

Making hydrogen is a good way of soaking up surplus energy (for example that which is generated by wind turbines when there is no other demand for it) but hydrogen fuel cells are not particularly efficient - they convert about 20% of the stored energy into power, which is about the same as internal combustion engines.

Long-distance rail systems are very well suited to receiving their power efficiently via OHLE. Branch lines may be suited to battery power (which is 80% efficient). Hydrogen will without doubt play a part in a future energy distribution and storage system, but its use in transport systems is likely to be limited.

And Grayling? He's just looking for excuses for not spending the money.
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
simonw
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 589


View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: October 29, 2017, 13:55:50 »

If I was looking for a way to store excess green power (overnight wind turbine, etc) it would not be Hydrogen storage, but methane.

CO2 + H2O => CH4 + 02

As a bonus, we already have large storage systems for methane, so it would be very easy to do.
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5398



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: October 29, 2017, 14:08:07 »

IMO (in my opinion), rail electrification is still the future, despite network rails inability to deliver it within budget or on time.
I do not expect hydrogen to be used on a significant scale, for the reasons given by others.
Diesel fuel is acceptable in the short term but will fall out of favour as supplies deplete and concerns over pollution grow.

That leaves electric power, from overhead equipment as the only likely technology for fast long distance trains.
Battery technology has improved substantially and may well be used for branch lines, especially in scenic areas where OHLE is objected to.
I doubt that we will see battery trains travelling hundreds of miles at high speeds, remember that significant power is needed for internal heating and cooling as well as for traction.
Battery power may well be used for short sections of otherwise electrified main lines where erecting OHLE is problematic. The sea wall route at Dawlish comes to mind, as do tunnels and bridges with limited clearances.

Steam may have a limited part to play, but I can not foresee any general or large scale return to steam.

The future is electric, despite recent setbacks.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5190


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: October 29, 2017, 14:26:20 »

If I was looking for a way to store excess green power (overnight wind turbine, etc) it would not be Hydrogen storage, but methane.

CO2 + H2O => CH4 + 02

As a bonus, we already have large storage systems for methane, so it would be very easy to do.

The trouble is at the other end, when you reverse that equation and produce our old friend CO2. Producing hydrogen from wind power by splitting water is carbon neutral.
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4452


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: October 29, 2017, 14:53:36 »

The trouble is at the other end, when you reverse that equation and produce our old friend CO2. Producing hydrogen from wind power by splitting water is carbon neutral.


But if you do both ends then it is CO2 Neutral.  The bigger problem is if you get a leak Methane is 23 time more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5190


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: October 29, 2017, 15:16:26 »

The trouble is at the other end, when you reverse that equation and produce our old friend CO2. Producing hydrogen from wind power by splitting water is carbon neutral.


But if you do both ends then it is CO2 Neutral.  The bigger problem is if you get a leak Methane is 23 time more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2

Good point. D'oh.
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
bradshaw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1450



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: October 29, 2017, 15:44:24 »

Currently most of the hydrogen is produced by reforming methane, thus releasing CO2 and aging to greenhouse gases. While the fuel cell has potential for it to be realised a better, greener way of sourcing hydrogen has to be developed.

The use of battery/electric bimodes, as trialled a few years ago, has more potential in the immediate future and would allow through services on short branches, like Windemere

The current vogue of the electro-diesel bimode, pioneered on the Southern Region in the 60s, does allow for the development of a rolling, affordable electrification programme. Provided common sense prevails on the safe distance needed for 25kV clearances and the adoption of the new NR» (Network Rail - home page) standards for OHLE structures.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: October 29, 2017, 16:17:42 »

Battery power is a form of electrification, so if it is capable of appropriate speeds and distances for a particular line, I'd consider it perfectly acceptable. Battery technology is continually developing so there's hope in that direction yet. Nevertheless, for the foreseeable future, OHL (Over-Head Line) is far superior on power and distance.

It's clear that diesel remains the power source of the present, in the same way that coal was the power source of the present in the 1960s.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
JayMac
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 18895



View Profile
« Reply #11 on: October 29, 2017, 16:32:14 »

Stick with the electricity. With more new build nuclear, and increased wind/solar, to generate it.
Logged

"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

- Sir Terry Pratchett.
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5190


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: October 29, 2017, 16:32:58 »

Currently most of the hydrogen is produced by reforming methane

I'll forgive your current pun, given the context; yes most hydrogen is produced from steam reforming of, as you say, methane. But these are exciting times.
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6435


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: October 29, 2017, 18:30:59 »

If I was looking for a way to store excess green power (overnight wind turbine, etc) it would not be Hydrogen storage, but methane.

CO2 + H2O => CH4 + 02

As a bonus, we already have large storage systems for methane, so it would be very easy to do.

All that is missing is the very large amount of energy needed to reverse the reaction that provided the CO2 and H2O in the first place. No such thing as a free lunch.
Logged

Now, please!
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: October 29, 2017, 18:54:36 »

...as it happens: http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/hydrogen-fuel-cell-multiple-units-ordered.html

...and this from the Railway Gazette of 2008

Quote
Energy choice

The level of traffic is a key factor when comparing the cost of electrifying an existing railway with the cost of alternatives.

One can calculate or estimate the number of vehicle-km per kilometre of electrified track. Along with the electrification costs per track-km this number can be used to calculate the average costs per vehicle-km. This resulting number should be the critical factor in deciding between conventional electrification and the adoption of alternative traction.

Converting a railway for hydrogen trains will not require major investment in infrastructure, only in new rolling stock and the fuel supply. At present a hydrogen train would be considerably more expensive than its diesel powered equivalent, but this is certain to change over the next 10 to 15 years.

A recent study undertaken by the UK (United Kingdom)'s Rail Safety & Standards Board estimated that if the general cost targets for fuel cell technology are reached by 2020, a hydrogen train would be only 5% to 15% more expensive than an ordinary DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit), and hydrogen power will be more cost effective than electrification on railways with low to medium traffic densities.

But the application of general cost estimates to specific applications such as trains is not entirely without problems.

Energy efficiency

With diesel traction, only around a third of the energy in the fuel is converted to kinetic energy. With electric traction, almost 90% of the energy from the grid can be transferred to the wheels. Of course the losses in the power station and during transmission need to be added, and when the electricity is produced by fossil fuels the overall efficiency 'from well to wheel' is not quite so impressive. But if the electricity comes from renewable sources the overall efficiency remains high.

Hydrogen fuel cells have a lower energy efficiency then conventional electrification, due to the conversion losses in hydrogen production (electrolysis has an 80% efficiency), hydrogen storage (90%), the fuel cell (45%) and electric motor (90%). But hydrogen fuel produced using renewable energy will still have an overall energy efficiency comparable to diesel traction at roughly 30%, and that is before we take into account the considerable gains that can be achieved through the use of regenerative braking.

Hydrogen for railway use can be produced by electrolysis of water, with the environmental benefits dependent on the method of electricity generation, which can include renewable sources such as wind turbines. Surplus industrial hydrogen is a shorter-term source of fuel, and both options are currently available at the project site.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2017, 19:01:06 by SandTEngineer » Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page