Decarbonising Scotland’s Railways

[Bald Rick]

Battery trains for example aren't going to be capable of making it from Ayr to Stranraer and back because of the gradients.

Gradients are simply not an issue for battery trains; I don’t know why this myth keeps being perpetuated.

 

[snowball]

Presumably on the downhill journey they can put back in the battery a reasonable proportion of what they took out on the way up. Ayr, Girvan and Stranraer are all near sea level, obviously.

 

[Starmill]

Gradients are simply not an issue for battery trains; I don’t know why this myth keeps being perpetuated.

Whoever did the technical work for Transport Scotland made it clear that the gradients would be a problem and that's why they ended up putting hydrogen for Girvan-Stranraer in the Rail Services Decarbonisation Action Plan.

Clearly the engineers were of the view that a battery solution capable of making it from Ayr to Stranraer and back wasn't going to be on the table by 2035. Perhaps someone was captured by the hydrogen industry lobby?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Aug 2022 ==

Presumably on the downhill journey they can put back in the battery a reasonable proportion of what they took out on the way up. Ayr, Girvan and Stranraer are all near sea level, obviously.

I think it's just down to the fact that they're assuming that an average range of 80 miles is an upper limit. Said average will obviously go down the more gradients are climbed and then descended, but probably only by a small proportion. I have no idea how much. A round trip from Ayr to Stranraer without a charging facility would need a range of a minimum of 130 miles taking the steeper gradient into account, so it might be 150 - 170 miles on average. The work done so far clearly assumes that no such train will exist by 2035. Hopefully there will be one...

For reference, the trial from 2015 using a converted class 379 estimated the range of that unit at 60 miles. Stadler have since claimed more than 100 is already achievable.

 

[Bald Rick]

Whoever did the technical work for Transport Scotland made it clear that the gradients would be a problem and that's why they ended up putting hydrogen for Girvan-Stranraer in the Rail Services Decarbonisation Action Plan.

Gradients aren’t a problem.

Range is.

The answer is to fit a bigger battery, although there is of course a weight penalty.

However, Stadler’s FLIRT Akku, which has a nominal battery range of 80km, has achieved a range of 224km in freezing conditions, which is almost 140 miles.

 

[Starmill]

Gradients aren’t a problem.

Range is.

The answer is to fit a bigger battery, although there is of course a weight penalty.

However, Stadler’s FLIRT Akku, which has a nominal battery range of 80km, has achieved a range of 224km in freezing conditions, which is almost 140 miles.

I don't think anyone has actually been claiming that a battery or hydrogen fuel cell powered train will be somehow any less capable of ascending a gradient than a diesel train though. The point has always been that the industry is too risk averse to tolerate a low margin for transmission losses from discharging the battery going up the hill and then recharging it coming back down.

 

[Bald Rick]

The point has always been that the industry is too risk averse to tolerate a low margin for transmission losses from discharging the battery going up the hill and then recharging it coming back down.

in which case it is battery capacity that is the problem, not gradients.

 

[Starmill]

in which case it is battery capacity that is the problem, not gradients.

Surely this is a philosophical distinction? I could reply that battery capacity isn't a problem because large enough capacity batteries for these sort of power needs have existed for many years now. Doesn't mean someone's built a train which we can use that will fit them inside it. However, the gradients, demand from auxiliaries such as air conditioning, and the attitudes towards power supply and changeover in the safety context mean that we don't currently have a battery techical solution in sight for this line. However, for other lines of 60 miles each way, we may do.

Others have suggested that the route will just continue to be worked by class 170s post 2035, which is certainly rather simpler.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Gradients aren’t a problem.

Surely current draw must be higher on steeper gradients? So again, I suppose you could say it is a battery capacity issue.

 

[paul1609]

Gradients aren’t a problem.

Range is.

The answer is to fit a bigger battery, although there is of course a weight penalty.

However, Stadler’s FLIRT Akku, which has a nominal battery range of 80km, has achieved a range of 224km in freezing conditions, which is almost 140 miles.

It was 224km at 50kmh on a flat electrified main line out of Berlin non stop with no adverse signals and the heating off for a Guiness Book of Records attempt.

 

[Bald Rick]

Surely current draw must be higher on steeper gradients? So again, I suppose you could say it is a battery capacity issue.

no higher than the max current draw on level track of course. It won’t accelerate as quickly of course…

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Aug 2022 ==

It was 224km at 50kmh on a flat electrified main line out of Berlin non stop with no adverse signals and the heating off for a Guiness Book of Records attempt.

Nevertheless, it still did it!

 

[XAM2175]

Surely this is a philosophical distinction? I could reply that battery capacity isn't a problem because large enough capacity batteries for these sort of power needs have existed for many years now. Doesn't mean someone's built a train which we can use that will fit them inside it. However, the gradients, demand from auxiliaries such as air conditioning, and the attitudes towards power supply and changeover in the safety context mean that we don't currently have a battery techical solution in sight for this line. However, for other lines of 60 miles each way, we may do.

I can see a valid differentiation in that saying "gradients are a problem for battery trains" can give the impression that gradients will always be a problem for battery trains because of some attribute of the gradients themselves. Stating that gradients are a challenge for acceleration and range with today's battery capacities makes it more clear that a route deemed unsuitable for battery operation in the near future could well be brought into feasibility in the longer term by advances in battery technology.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

There are more pressing issues. Battery trains for example aren't going to be capable of making it from Ayr to Stranraer and back because of the gradients. Hydrogen was the proposed solution but that is going to be such an astonishingly expensive way to operate a train.

With rapid charging points it perfectly feasible but granted at the expense of extended journey times and at the cost of battery life.

Hydrogen is the more logically way to go currently as it can match endurance range to diesel but it will be expensive.

The reality is zero emissions aint going to come cheap and we can't get away from that fact but thats the price we have to pay as a society.

Surely current draw must be higher on steeper gradients? So again, I suppose you could say it is a battery capacity issue.

Current draw will always be limited by the traction motor rating the gradient makes no difference. What is different is the amount of energy expended climbing the gradient vs level running and thus the drain on the battery or any energy source. The advantage a battery has is it can recuperate energy when its travelling down the hill and when braking at far better level than regen can unless you optimise it like they did on the Woodhead route. The balance is how battery weight is optimal to cart around.

 

[adrock1976]

Thinking about battery operation for Ayr/Girvan - Stranraer, has it been looked into as to whether tram wire (e.g. Wolverhampton - Oxley Depot) would be feasible either for traction supply or for recharging batteries?

Also, although unlikely the present Scottish Government would consider this, has it ever been looked into whether the Girvan - Stranraer section could be mothballed, but served by bus that is integrated into the ticketing system (e.g. Peterborough - Kings Lynn)? The bus would connect more communities to the railway network as the only intermediate station is Barrhill (which is a hike from the main road).

 

[najaB]

Also, although unlikely the present Scottish Government would consider this, has it ever been looked into whether the Girvan - Stranraer section could be mothballed, but served by bus that is integrated into the ticketing system (e.g. Peterborough - Kings Lynn)? The bus would connect more communities to the railway network as the only intermediate station is Barrhill (which is a hike from the main road).

No doubt it has been looked into, but the SG is committed to moving people to rail and opening lines, rather than closing them.

 

[HSTEd]

No doubt it has been looked into, but the SG is committed to moving people to rail and opening lines, rather than closing them.

But the line is so slow as to be almost worthless.

Without major reconstruction its not going to be a serious transport system ever again.

 

[najaB]

But the line is so slow as to be almost worthless.

Without major reconstruction its not going to be a serious transport system ever again.

I agree, but closing lines goes against their stated aims. Keeping it as is and chucking some BEMUs at it doesn't cost that much in the grand scheme of things.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Speaking of cost, I'd really like to see what the projections are for hydrogen costs now. Hydrogen has long been touted as a fossil fuel replacement, but the majority of world supply has been closely tied to fossil fuel production in the first place. Even when electrolysis can be done, it requires a lot of electricity. Batteries are the most efficient way of getting renewable electricity to power a train without full electrification.

 

[Starmill]

The reality is zero emissions aint going to come cheap and we can't get away from that fact but thats the price we have to pay as a society.

I think it depends how you look at it. A decrabonised bus service between Girvan and Stranraer which is double the frequency of the train service could be delivered within a few weeks, and it would cost significantly less than the current diesel train service while serving rather more people. Journey times would be about the same but generalised journey times would improve. A similar calculation applies to Tain - Wick. The costs aren't arising from the imperative to decarbonise.

 

[najaB]

Speaking of cost, I'd really like to see what the projections are for hydrogen costs now. Hydrogen has long been touted as a fossil fuel replacement, but the majority of world supply has been closely tied to fossil fuel production in the first place. Even when electrolysis can be done, it requires a lot of electricity.

I'd like to think that the new generation of nuclear plants would be constructed to allow for hydrogen production during the off-peaks, but who knows?

I think it depends how you look at it. A decrabonised bus service between Girvan and Stranraer which is double the frequency of the train service could be delivered within a few weeks, and it would cost significantly less than the current diesel train service while serving rather more people. Journey times would be about the same but generalised journey times would improve. A similar calculation applies to Tain - Wick.

Except that the railway to Wick (well Georgemas) is going to stay open for at least the next thirty to forty years, so providing a passenger service is basically fuel and staff, plus wear and tear on the units.

 

[XAM2175]

The various merits of replacing Stranraer (and potentially even the Far North) with an integrated bus service have been done over numerous time in the Speculative Discussion subforum. Suffice it to say here that the current Scottish Government strategy is settled on all current lines remaining open.

 

[snowball]

Speaking of cost, I'd really like to see what the projections are for hydrogen costs now. Hydrogen has long been touted as a fossil fuel replacement, but the majority of world supply has been closely tied to fossil fuel production in the first place. Even when electrolysis can be done, it requires a lot of electricity. Batteries are the most efficient way of getting renewable electricity to power a train without full electrification.

This project should come up with some empirical figures.

ScottishPower vision for green hydrogen fuels hub at port of Felixstowe

ScottishPower explores green hydrogen at Port of Felixstowe to help decarbonise the UK’s busiest port.

www.scottishpower.com

• ScottishPower explores green hydrogen at Port of Felixstowe to help decarbonise the UK’s busiest port.
• The project could help kick-start the low carbon transformation of the UK’s heavy transport sector.
• 100MW facility could deliver up to 40 tonnes of green hydrogen per day - enough to power 1300 hydrogen trucks.
• International export also being explored.

ScottishPower, with Hutchison Ports, is exploring the opportunity to develop, build and operate a multi-hundred MW green hydrogen production facility at the Port of Felixstowe – with the potential to decarbonise industry and transportation in the region.
Both companies have set out their vision to help create a greener port, which could provide clean fuel for customers at Britain’s busiest container port.

Plans are being developed to use green hydrogen for onshore purposes, such as road, rail and industrial use, with the potential to create liquid forms, such as green ammonia or e-methanol. This could, in turn, provide clean fuels for shipping and aviation, and create opportunities for cost-effective export to international markets. The project aims to continue engineering and site development works to align with customer demand from 2025 onwards.

Being ‘homemade’, green hydrogen has clear benefits for the security of UK energy supply and is a safe, long-term energy solution that could be vital for those who cannot decarbonise their operations through renewable electricity alone.

As well as accelerating the potential for cleaner industrial processes at the port, green hydrogen is poised to transform the heavy transport sector, which is a significant emitter of the UK’s current carbon emissions.

Barry Carruthers, Hydrogen Director at ScottishPower said: “This strategically important project could potentially create a clean fuels hub that could unlock nationally significant decarbonisation for the region, as well as playing a role in international markets. It’s perfectly located not far from our existing and future offshore windfarms in the East Anglia region, and demonstrates how renewable electricity and green hydrogen can now start to help to decarbonise road, rail, shipping and industry.”

Dr Therese Coffey MP, local MP for Suffolk Coastal, said: “I warmly welcome Hutchison Ports’ and Scottish Power’s joint plans to explore opportunities for a large-scale hydrogen hub at the Port of Felixstowe, providing green fuel at the UK’s largest container port. It’s schemes like this - and investment from industry as well as government - which is crucial for us to reach net zero by 2050.”

 

[clc]

It’s interesting to see how much subsidy each route requires: https://www.scotrail.co.uk/sites/de...rail_route_by_route_key_metric_assessment.pdf

The rural routes are basket cases. East Kilbride, with a subsidy is £1.53 per passenger, is financially the best performing Glasgow suburban route even with the old diesels. Makes you wonder if it could break even with EMUs operating the route.

 

[Trainbike46]

It isn't a problem in reality and secondly Scotland have relaxed from the 2035 target to 2040 so Ayr - Girvan can be done fairly late so there is no need for a transition solution.

any news or policy sources for this? I would be interested to read why they did that

 

[snowball]

any news or policy sources for this? I would be interested to read why they did that

I've already asked in #90 but nobody has replied yet. Presumably it's because they've realised that the original target is not practically achievable, or only at excessive cost. I'd been expecting slippage and I'm sure I'm not alone in that. The important thing is that they stick to the principle.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Presumably it's because they've realised that the original target is not practically achievable, or only at excessive cost.

This makes most sense.

I'd been expecting slippage and I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

No, you are not. I have been too.

The important thing is that they stick to the principle.

Ab-so-lute-ly

 

[Macwomble]

I think it depends how you look at it. A decrabonised bus service between Girvan and Stranraer which is double the frequency of the train service could be delivered within a few weeks, and it would cost significantly less than the current diesel train service while serving rather more people. Journey times would be about the same but generalised journey times would improve. A similar calculation applies to Tain - Wick. The costs aren't arising from the imperative to decarbonise.

As there is bound to be a lay over time at Stranraer why not have a (very) short section of overhead there then you can have charging of the BEMUs at either end of the shuttle.

 

[Trainbike46]

As there is bound to be a lay over time at Stranraer why not have a (very) short section of overhead there then you can have charging of the BEMUs at either end of the shuttle.

if you run with BEMUs you wouldn't have to run it as a shuttle though, and could run it through to Glasgow. It might make the service more attractive as well!

 

[Starmill]

if you run with BEMUs you wouldn't have to run it as a shuttle though, and could run it through to Glasgow. It might make the service more attractive as well!

It would make the service significantly more attractive if the faster Ayr service ran on to Girvan or Stranraer certainly.

 

[gingertom]

As there is bound to be a lay over time at Stranraer why not have a (very) short section of overhead there then you can have charging of the BEMUs at either end of the shuttle.

As such a length of OLE would only ever be charging batteries and operating one train it wouldn't need to be a 132kv/440kv grid fed 40MW-capable "proper" feeder station. A small SFC off the local DNO would be adequate, very much cheaper, and quicker to provide than a full-spec/capacity grid connection.

The only issue I can see is what if such a power feed goes offline? Will a train be able to get back north without picking up power?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

A small SFC off the local DNO would be adequate, very much cheaper, and quicker to provide than a full-spec/capacity grid connection.

Exactly what I was thinking.