The hike in electricity costs for the freight operators that has seen Freightliner significantly reduce Class 90 usage in favour of diesels is the likely answer. A pair of 88s on diesel is more than enough for a lightweight flask train, freeing the diesels with more horsepower for the heavy haulage jobs.
It's been variously reported that due to the high spot price for traction current FOCs are switching electric services to diesel. Hopefully this will be a short-term thing.
A single 88 running on diesel is fine for a flask (slighly more useful than a 20 that used to do it)
Further to najaB's reply above, there was a discussion elsewhere in this subsection:
www.railforums.co.uk
That's basically the nub of it!
Only because there are so many surplus diesels about. Otherwise they would need temporary intervention (from on high) in the electricity market which would smooth things out. Presumably this will be happening across Europe in some form? Always disappointing when there always seems to be a fly in the ointment for electric freight - sluggish or non-existent in-fill development, reliability and now burning oil is cheaper than using wind power!
I thought wind power, when subsidy is included, is always more expensive to use than modern diesel. But happy to be corrected if necessary.
If you're going to do whole-cost (e.g. including subsidies) then how about pricing the cost of carbon emissions for diesel as well?
Though don't Flask trains still need two locos in order to avoid stranding?
Doesn't that depend on what is in the flask?
There's certainly a lot of diesel traction available in the type4/type5 bracket,most of it heritage admittedly.
Well, it’s not a thermos flask full of coffee!
I was under the understanding that only shipments of fuel *have* to have two locos, waste could run with one. But that they always run with two in order to be ambiguous.Well, it’s not a thermos flask full of coffee!
As I understand it, the contract DRS have for the nuclear flasks says services are to be run with two locos. Obviously the empty workings will then have to have two locos in consequence.
Don't they have security personnel riding in the other one?
I was of the belief that the need for two locos is to stop an potential stranding of said cargo, which of course would potentially cause an inherent risk of terrorist related activity.
I believe new fuel travels by road. Only returning spent fuel moves by rail as the extra shielding this requires makes the flasks overweight on roads. (I know some moves are made by road where rail is not available but that is avoided where possible).
There is NO LONGER a rail connection at Salwick ( there used to be one )
Correct. There is no rail connection at Salwick although there used to be one years ago. I struggle to remember if there was an active connection in 1964 when I started work on the railway in that area.
Indeed. Damned tragic tbh. I have photos back in England somewhere in my collection.
I guess that as Tesco make a big thing about the environmental benefits of using trains they'll have considered this a cost worth taking for PR reasons (even though their trains hauled by 68s would be vastly more efficient/less emissions compared to the equivalent convoy of trucks)
