Under the wires?

[NSEFAN]

There is a lot of talk about the problem of "diesels under the wires". Whilst this is obviously a waste of perfectly good infrastructure, is it a real problem with regards to wasted energy?

For example, if (theoretically) an HST and 225 had identical energy requirements, then it wouldn't matter if either worked London-Edinburgh journey (purely from an energy usage point of view!) Having electrification in place merely changes how energy is delivered to the trains; more trains using the wires in place doesn't directly imply less energy usage.

As modern EMUs tend to have regenerative braking, is this why running diesels under the wires is more of a problem now? This issue has bugged me for a while, so could someone please show me where I'm falling down?

 

[MCR247]

But also, you have the emissions out of the HST don't you?

 

[Julia]

For example, if (theoretically) an HST and 225 had identical energy requirements...

In terms of total energy usage by the train, the only flaw in the argument is the (theoretically) - in practice they don't. The HST has to haul the weight of its own fuel about and has an inefficient generator to power, while the 225 suffers from inefficiencies in the ohle.

Holistically, though, you ought also to consider the relative efficiencies of local vs. large-scale electricity generation from fossil fuel, and the fact it's far easier to control emissions from the latter, the HST can't use other less carbon-intensive energy sources such as nuclear, the relative reliability of the two modes, the cost and expected lifespan of new trains, and so on in order to say running diesel under the wires is a Bad Thing.

 

[142094]

Energy-efficiency is easier to do on a large scale, which is why we have only a few large power stations around the country rather than a power station in every town.

 

[sprinterguy]

Energy-efficiency is easier to do on a large scale, which is why we have only a few large power stations around the country rather than a power station in every town.

Every town seems to have used to have had one: I only recently discovered that Sunderland had its' own power station at Deptford into the seventies and that the Star City entertainment complex in Birmingham is built on the site of one as well. And of course Newcastle had Stella, and there was one by the river to the north of Carlisle. I can only presume that consolidating power generation at the larger, newer Yorkshire power stations allowed these to be done away with.

There's greater efficiencies to be had by generating power at a single large facility than a number of smaller ones, which applies to the diesel versus electric argument as well.

 

[DarloRich]

Every town seems to have used to have had one: I only recently discovered that Sunderland had its' own power station at Deptford into the seventies and that the Star City entertainment complex in Birmingham is built on the site of one as well. And of course Newcastle had Stella, and there was one by the river to the north of Carlisle. I can only presume that consolidating power generation at the larger, newer Yorkshire power stations allowed these to be done away with.

There's greater efficiencies to be had by generating power at a single large facility than a number of smaller ones, which applies to the diesel versus electric argument as well.

Darlington had one just north of the station which closed in 75 or 76:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Darlington_Bank_Top_station_geograph-2259696-by-Ben-Brooksbank.jpg

http://ww2.durham.gov.uk/dre/pgDre.aspx?&SEARCH=By+Keyword&TERM=Power+stations&ID=DRE6973&PIC=Y


It does seem wasteful to run diesels under wires, however i would prefer an HST run from Edinburgh to London rather than a hybrid Voyager clone!

I do have an issue with the bi mode calculations when you start to think about carting the engines and fuel about. Are they going to turn the diesels off when running on the wires? It just seems silly to cart the stuff about for a short journey at the end. When does runnig bi mode cost more in terms of both cash energy and green credits that running a diesel train?

 

[142094]

Every town seems to have used to have had one: I only recently discovered that Sunderland had its' own power station at Deptford into the seventies and that the Star City entertainment complex in Birmingham is built on the site of one as well. And of course Newcastle had Stella, and there was one by the river to the north of Carlisle. I can only presume that consolidating power generation at the larger, newer Yorkshire power stations allowed these to be done away with.

There's greater efficiencies to be had by generating power at a single large facility than a number of smaller ones, which applies to the diesel versus electric argument as well.

Thinking about Stella (and Blyth as well), this was mainly due to the industry in the area at the time, which of course has rapidly diminished over the past 30-40 years. Also, closing the collieries did away with the nearby fuel source, which of course would have to be transported in.

Same happened in the Leeds area, there were are few power stations in Leeds and Wakefield which also went the same way.

 

[NSEFAN]

Thankyou for all the replies. I understand the reasons much better now.

 

[pablo]

Energy efficiency is only part of the equation. Having invested in the transmission network and knitting, you don't want to be duplicating the overhead (no pun!) in diesels as well.
In fact, economically speaking, you want to spread the capital cost across as many services as possible. The balance depends on relative operating costs and diesels would have to be very much cheaper to operate, to overturn the balance and, effectively, subsidise the under-utilisation of the wires.

 

[OuterDistant]

The HST would also be burning off hundreds of litres of precious oil*, in a situation that could easily be avoided - unless the 225 is supplied by an oil-fired power station I suppose!

*Not that I'm happy that we're addicted to it, but we might as well eke out the remaining supplies while we can

 

[mallard]

*Not that I'm happy that we're addicted to it, but we might as well eke out the remaining supplies while we can

As someone who used to work (in a very junior capacity!) in the oil industry, I think the assumption there is a little flawed. The price of oil is going up not because the earth is actually running out of the stuff, but because the easy-to-get-to reserves are running out. As the price rises, it becomes economically viable to go after harder-to-get-to reserves, prolonging the supply. Prices won't come down again, but we won't "run out" any time soon.

The price pressure will gradually force us to use alternative energy sources and generally become more energy efficient.

One of the ways we can do that is by electrifying (and using the electrification of) our railways.

 

[142094]

As someone who used to work (in a very junior capacity!) in the oil industry, I think the assumption there is a little flawed. The price of oil is going up not because the earth is actually running out of the stuff, but because the easy-to-get-to reserves are running out. As the price rises, it becomes economically viable to go after harder-to-get-to reserves, prolonging the supply. Prices won't come down again, but we won't "run out" any time soon.

Quite right - which is why places such as the Canadian tar sands are now being worked - would have just been left in the ground before now.

Quite surprised that we haven't seen an increase in the price of coal, which also would mean that a lot of the former collieries/coal fields in the UK could be reopened and exploited again.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

Quite right - which is why places such as the Canadian tar sands are now being worked - would have just been left in the ground before now.

Quite surprised that we haven't seen an increase in the price of coal, which also would mean that a lot of the former collieries/coal fields in the UK could be reopened and exploited again.

. . .and then we could re-open a lot of rail lines leading to the collieries as well. Electrified of course.

 

[142094]

. . .and then we could re-open a lot of rail lines leading to the collieries as well. Electrified of course.

Exactly. This in part is already being done at the Weardale railway - passenger service which is in effect subsidised by the transport of coal from Wolsingham by Colas.

Quite strange to think that South Shields once had a colliery railway which was electrified. In North Tyneside we have had railways go from steam, to third rail, to diesel (and in some cases then to OHL electrified). Even Shildon in County Durham was electrified for a time!