diesel traction....the end is nigh

[37401]

they are a load of cheese.

they are not, Voyagers and Pendolinos are a load of Egg and ham Rolls

 

[Waverley125]

diesel traction won't die, as there are some lines that will never be electrified. Inverness-Thurso/Kyle, S&C & hope valley being just 3 of them.

However, i do think think we'll see a lot more PPM technology as they become quieter, more comfortable, and have greater capacity. The Cornish branch lines, Penistone line & many putative rural reopenings would be much more economical using PPMs than conventional trains.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

The major issue that will be facing diesel fleets in the coming years is actually blindingly obvious. They run on a fossil fuel which is becoming scarcer and therefore progressively more expensive. . . .

True, but electrification doesn't help much. Or perhaps I should say that electrification by itself doesn't help much.
Consider how we power electric trains: Most of the UK's currently productive electricity power stations burn coal or gas. Both are fossil fuels which are also becoming scarce.
The coal is largely imported. Carried for hundreds of miles by diesel burning ships to UK ports where its lifted into waggons. (the lifting burns more fuel, and then the ships return with ballast burning more diesel). The waggons are hauled for hundreds of miles by diesel burning locos where its lifted into the power stations. (and then the waggons are hauled back again - by diesel)
Sure, electric rail is more efficient in respect of the weight that has to be carried - no piston engines and no fuel tanks. And easier to maintain if the power plants that convert the fuel to electricity are land-based rather than on-board. But others argue that the electrical transmission losses in electric rail are so great that most of these benefits are lost!

My point is that electric traction doesn't change the link between our consumption and our ever-depleting natural resources.
It makes a slight difference to WHERE the diesel exhaust is released.
Maybe much more nuclear power would be more help.
Maybe a radical increase in costs to motorists would help (but it hasn't so far and look how those costs have risen over the decades).
I doubt that wind and tidal power can make an appreciable difference in our lifetimes.
So we'll be burning pretty much the same amount of diesel in the future as we do now.

 

[O L Leigh]

All that said, an electrified railway can easily be switched to other energy sources without the need to completely re-equip. The power for the network does not have to come from fossil fuels but could come from nuclear power or renewable sources. None of this affects the railways in any significant way as the rolling stock can continue as before. It's a bigger problem for the diesel fleet, though. What do you use when the pumps run dry?

I don't believe that this is the reason behind the original question. Though it is an interesting aside.

O L Leigh

 

[BlythPower]

As regards DMU replacements, it could be some combination of:
Battery electric railcars - there used to be large numbers of these in Germany. The battery technology must be massively improved now;
Hybrid drive as found in some cars now;
Fly wheels - as per the Parry People Mover;
Rapid charge capacitors - as in some of the ‘wireless’ trams being developed by a number of manufacturers.

As regards generating electricity, the technology for renewable sources is moving on apace. Also, cleaner coal fired power stations are being developed. We’ve still got a hell of a lot of coal buried underneath Britain. It’ll gradually become cheaper in relation to imported coal. Transport costs and increasing wage costs in the developing countries we import from should help with that.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

All that said, an electrified railway can easily be switched to other energy sources without the need to completely re-equip. The power for the network does not have to come from fossil fuels but could come from nuclear power or renewable sources. None of this affects the railways in any significant way . . .

Yes! And my guess is that, with hindsight, this benefit will probably prove to the real justification for electrification when considered in 20 years time - its ability to adapt to the unforseen in the fuel markets.
(its not often we get to gamble on future outcomes and win because we chose to invest on a theoretical flexibility rather than commit ourselves to what might actually happen!)

As regards DMU replacements, it could be some combination of:
Battery electric railcars - there used to be large numbers of these in Germany. The battery technology must be massively improved now;
Hybrid drive as found in some cars now;
Fly wheels - as per the Parry People Mover;
Rapid charge capacitors - as in some of the ‘wireless’ trams being developed by a number of manufacturers.

I agree here too, partly - but 3 and a half of these 4 options still require fuel to be burnt somewhere - fossil fuel or uranium/plutonium - and to be transported somewhere - the power station, to generate the electricity - so no real reduction in fuel consumption, just a slight reduction in its transporation at the last stage of the transmission chain, and (as above), moving the source of the exhaust/pollution away from the consumer.
(We shouldn't confuse the issues of natural resources with environmental issues as the "green lobby did in the 80's)

As regards generating electricity, the technology for renewable sources is moving on apace. Also, cleaner coal fired power stations are being developed. We’ve still got a hell of a lot of coal buried underneath Britain. It’ll gradually become cheaper in relation to imported coal. Transport costs and increasing wage costs in the developing countries we import from should help with that.

Now this is very much more relevant to our current supplies, in terms of cost, availability and emissions.
I hope we can reduce coal costs & emmissions in this way.
But I'm more concerned about our fragile dependency on gas; and even more on our sustained underinvestment in nuclear power. (I realise that many will disagree, but I wish we had sustained our our investment in nuclear generation).
Good practice in fuel choices and in a flexibility towards fuel types will make our power supplies robust in terms of supply, availaility and cost. Only then will a committment to convert our railways to electricity be a wise choice.

All good posts!

 

[O L Leigh]

I have to agree with the nuclear option. The technology for generating electricity from nuclear fission is now adequately developed for it to be safe. The only real problem is all the nasty by-products. With enough investment and the right science, I'm sure a safe and secure disposal technique can be found. It really should be a more important part of our energy portfolio.

O L Leigh

 

[jopsuk]

I have to agree with the nuclear option. The technology for generating electricity from nuclear fission is now adequately developed for it to be safe. The only real problem is all the nasty by-products. With enough investment and the right science, I'm sure a safe and secure disposal technique can be found. It really should be a more important part of our energy portfolio.

O L Leigh

One of the things about new nuclear power stations is that they're now designed from the outset to minimise radioactive waste- we shouldn't EVER end up with another Dounray or Sellafield, and with the safety features, no Three Mile Island or Chernobyl.

The real pity is that properly working, commercial scale, fusion power is still so far away.

 

[43021HST]

I reckon the existing diesels and DMUs at the moment will be here for quite a while. The old SR system still has diesels and DMUs on it.