Is Hydrogen dead as a power source for trains?

[stuu]

Standing for 5 minutes at somewhere like Newtown (which although there are two platforms isn't where trains are normally booked to pass') would probably screw up the single-line occupation so that an hourly service is no longer possible without more double track. Longer islands, such as Machynlleth to Newtown, would make more sense to me.

Looking at OpenInfraMap, there's a high voltage line to the wind farms around Plynlimon which crosses near Carno - electrifying Caersws to Machynlleth could be done, there's no tunnels and only a few overbridges, and it's the biggest hill on the route so would seem logical. On the coast the supergrid crosses the line near Penrhyndaudreath so perhaps a segment on the coast could be wired too?

 

[AlastairFraser]

Standing for 5 minutes at somewhere like Newtown (which although there are two platforms isn't where trains are normally booked to pass') would probably screw up the single-line occupation so that an hourly service is no longer possible without more double track. Longer islands, such as Machynlleth to Newtown, would make more sense to me.

I think this depends on the level of innovation in charging systems by the time a scheme like this is trialled, it could be one or two mins using the existing dwell time.

While a new DMU fleet is intended to be deployed on the route, I would argue that it was not designed for the Cambrian. The class 197 looks like it was designed for the Castlefield corridor in a crazy world where the Government refuses to invest in electrification for the next 30 years. As such, it would be no big loss if the class 197s were diverted elsewhere (I suggest back to the CAF works near Newport, along with the 195s and possibly 196s, for convertion to battery-fitted class 331s (keeping the gangwayed fitted cabs on the 197/196 though) to keep the workforce there employed once assembly of the 197s is complete).

It all depends on money available and the 197s are decent units, even if a poor fit for the services they operate on. I wouldn't want to end up with some old junk.

The tri-mode 756s are for the South (East) Wales Metro - NOT South Wales regional. As such - they (the class 756s) have more doors than the Greater Anglia FLIRTs (which are closer to being regional trains). Also, unit end gangways are rather important for the Cambrian services, since many westbound trains split at Machynlleth with portions for Aberystwyth and Pwllheli

I understand what they're meant for, this is in the hypothetical scenario of the total ban on pure diesel units in English conurbations described above.

 

[snowball]

James Wemyss, in a comment on this blog about the Levenmouth project, says

The Fife Decarbonisation has been put back by at least five years and the idea of BEMU trains looks like it has been hit on the head.

though I'm made a bit suspicious by the fact that immediately after that he says

Engine manufacturers now seem to be focusing on developing Hydrogen technologies instead of battery ones

which suggests the opposite direction of movement to that implied by a great number of other things I've read.

Mr Wemyss's pevious comments on that blog, about flood risk etc at Leven station, have been discussed on here in the past in the Levenmouth thread.

 

[The Puddock]

James Wemyss, in a comment on this blog about the Levenmouth project, says



though I'm made a bit suspicious by the fact that immediately after that he says



which suggests the opposite direction of movement to that implied by a great number of other things I've read.

Mr Wemyss's pevious comments on that blog, about flood risk etc at Leven station, have been discussed on here in the past in the Levenmouth thread.

My previous experience of a poster with the same username on another rail related forum was that he was prone to just inventing things and writing about his verious flights of fancy as if they were fact, presumably in an attempt to look like he had more information than anyone else posting. I’m not saying that’s the case here but…

 

[AndrewE]

James Wemyss, in a comment on this blog about the Levenmouth project, says
[BEMUs are not going to be pushed]

though I'm made a bit suspicious by the fact that immediately after that he says

[Hydrogen is the future]
which suggests the opposite direction of movement to that implied by a great number of other things I've read.

quite. Hydrogen really isn't a goer. It's just that JCB is pushing it because they have a lot of money tied up in their internal combustion engine plant (and have the ear of government.)

 

[92002]

quite. Hydrogen really isn't a goer. It's just that JCB is pushing it because they have a lot of money tied up in their internal combustion engine plant (and have the ear of government.)

Seems to work quite well in Europe. The UK Problem is there's not much of it available. Although plans are in place for a production facility in Ayshire. Hydrogen trains also successfully to in use in Europe.

 

[John R]

Seems to work quite well in Europe. The UK Problem is there's not much of it available. Although plans are in place for a production facility in Ayshire. Hydrogen trains also successfully to in use in Europe.

Are you sure? I thought the trial in Germany was so underwhelming that they have made a decision not to proceed with any further roll-out.

 

[InOban]

Agreed the Germans have tried it but aren't taking it any further. The disadvantage is the lack of energy saving through regenerative braking.
It does suit farmers who get generate on site from wind and solar and the JCB business in general. Also for boats.
There are lots of plans for H production but it is difficult to transport , so best used where it's made.

 

[92002]

Are you sure? I thought the trial in Germany was so underwhelming that they have made a decision not to proceed with any further roll-out.

Same current problem as it is here

No sustainable supply of hydrogen

 

[AndrewE]

Same current problem as it is here No sustainable supply of hydrogen

and horrendously difficut to manage outside of a COMAH industrial site. See https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/tra...e-make-that-leaked-in-netherlands/2-1-1490669 and https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/fire-destroys-first-hydrogen-bus-of-arriva-nl.224087/

 

[92002]

and horrendously difficut to manage outside of a COMAH industrial site. See https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/tra...e-make-that-leaked-in-netherlands/2-1-1490669 and https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/fire-destroys-first-hydrogen-bus-of-arriva-nl.224087/

Don't know so much about that. Buses run about with full tanks of hydrogen.

 

[AndrewE]

Don't know so much about that. Buses run about with full tanks of hydrogen.

and burst into flames. As I said, any rational assessment would restrict the use of H2 to COMAH sites. That's apart from it not being a green fuel as it is so wasteful to prioduce. And most of the ways of using it have emissions that batteries don't.

 

[snowball]

There have been discussions of the pros and cons of battery versus hydrogen trains in several other threads. I'm not a mod but I hope this thread won't get taken over by such a discussion.

 

[92002]

and burst into flames. As I said, any rational assessment would restrict the use of H2 to COMAH sites. That's apart from it not being a green fuel as it is so wasteful to prioduce. And most of the ways of using it have emissions that batteries don't.

The moral of the story is don't stable them all in the one place they may catch fire.

and burst into flames. As I said, any rational assessment would restrict the use of H2 to COMAH sites. That's apart from it not being a green fuel as it is so wasteful to prioduce. And most of the ways of using it have emissions that batteries don't.

There have been discussions of the pros and cons of battery versus hydrogen trains in several other threads. I'm not a mod but I hope this thread won't get taken over by such a discussion.

There is no problem using hydrogen. The emissions from the product is water.

The planned production site is Ayrshire will be powered by wind energy.

Hydrogen has been used for many years in other countries. The problem is getting a suitable supply amount for use.

 

[AndrewE]

There is no problem using hydrogen. The emissions from the product is water.

maybe

The planned production site is Ayrshire will be powered by wind energy.

but at a shockingly wasteful round-trip inefficiency

Hydrogen has been used for many years in other countries

not really.

The problem is getting a suitable supply amount for use.

and the price: https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/tra...rejecting-battery-electric-models/2-1-1438416 says

battery-electric buses, which are generally considered to be cheaper to run than hydrogen fuel-cell equivalents, were considered but ultimately rejected.

“Because of the longer range and shorter refuelling time, we decided to go to hydrogen,” he said, adding that electric buses can only cover up to 130km on a single charge, but Rebus vehicles need to travel an average of 200km a day. Fuel-cell buses can drive up to 400km on a single tank of hydrogen.

so maybe it is horses for courses. It also says that 80% of their investment cost was covered by the national government.

 

[najaB]

but at a shockingly wasteful round-trip inefficiency

Yeah. But the additional input cost is effectively zero pence per kw/h so if you waste 40% of zero...

 

[AndrewE]

Yeah. But the additional input cost is effectively zero pence per kw/h so if you waste 40% of zero...

but that is still 40% of the electricity available wasted. Plus the depreciation/wear on the turbines.
Much better to put in grid-connected battery storage and have your battery buses with a through-the-day recharge point like the Harrogate ones.

 

[Energy]

It does suit farmers who get generate on site from wind and solar and the JCB business in general. Also for boats.

JCB made the valid case that hydrogen fuel cells can't deal with the dust and that the charging time for battery electric is impractical for many sites.

Hydrogen works great in some cases, but not for rail.

 

[AndrewE]

Fossil fuel just won't die, this is not a vote for hydrogen:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/oct/25/shell-boss-set-to-cut-jobs-from-low-carbon-division says

Shell’s new chief executive is poised to cut hundreds of jobs from the oil giant’s low-carbon division as part a plan to boost the company’s profits.
Wael Sawan plans to shrink the number of staff working on low-carbon solutions by around 200 next year, after vowing to shift Shell’s focus towards high-profit oil projects and expanding its gas business when he became chief executive in January.
Shell managers reportedly told staff in the division last week that they will also consider culling a further 130 roles from the business unit, which in total would represent a 25% cut from the low carbon solutions team.
The low-carbon team is focused on the transport and heavy industry sectors, but it does not include staff working within Shell’s renewable power business.
The job cuts are expected to target those developing solutions for hydrogen-powered light vehicles. Shell was an early adopter of the technology, which has fallen from favour as the popularity of electric vehicles has grown

 

[HSTEd]

Until total decarbonisation is achieved, FIRES (essentially giant industrial storage heaters) and other such technologies place a floor on the instantaneous price of electricity.
This price will be equal to the heat cost from the dominant fossil fuel system in use, which is likely natural gas.