• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Alstom Aventra Hydrogen

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LOL The Irony

On Moderation
Joined
29 Jul 2017
Messages
5,335
Location
Chinatown, New York
Won't refuelling the depots be the key issue with Hydrogen powered trains, thus they need to be operated near a source of the fuel, hence talk about routes in areas like Teeside, rather than quiet branch lines in the southeast
So exactly like diesel trains then. Perhaps the ranges will be different but the concept is still the same.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
So exactly like diesel trains then. Perhaps the ranges will be different but the concept is still the same.

The key difference is that the infrastructure to deliver Diesel to refuelling points is well established, relatively safe, and relatively space efficient.

Hydrogen fuelling infrastructure is not well established, and (if you're doing it with HGVs, rather than pipelines) not very space efficient at all
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
1,623
Location
South Staffordshire
Not necessarily. The gold plated answer to "how do we power trains" is electrification but even if we started tomorrow we are unlikely to get close to electrifying the whole of the UK within the next 40 years. By that time all the current new DMUs/bi-modes will be life expired and with some lines never making the case to be electrified we have to power trains some other way. Add in the Government's reluctance at buying anymore DMUs/DEMUs (unless there are guarantees for conversion later in life), solutions are required sooner rather than later. Battery definitely has its place (branch lines in Devon/Cornwall, Thames valley, etc) but for the longer medium speed lines they are not the answer. Hydrogen provides a clean alternative solution to power those trains on the longer medium-speed lines which are either towards the back of the queue for electrification or realistically where its never going to happen. It is by no means the perfect solution for this but its what we have with the current technology with plenty of room for improvement.

Surely these should be built with a pantograph well, and the fittings for a pan, if not the pan itself. It is safe to say that 25kV overhead is the standard system in the UK, so any rail vehicle with electric traction motors should be compatible with or convertible to 25kV - which needs a pantograph. as the roof is an integral part of a vehicle it needs to be "designed in" from the start.

IMHO the published image is based on an MoU so not a complete design at all and really an artists impression. Can't wait too see the electro battery version of the train which is the one to get the orders in.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
Surely these should be built with a pantograph well, and the fittings for a pan, if not the pan itself. It is safe to say that 25kV overhead is the standard system in the UK, so any rail vehicle with electric traction motors should be compatible with or convertible to 25kV - which needs a pantograph. as the roof is an integral part of a vehicle it needs to be "designed in" from the start.

IMHO the published image is based on an MoU so not a complete design at all and really an artists impression. Can't wait too see the electro battery version of the train which is the one to get the orders in.
Agreed everything should have panto well and 3rd rail retrofitment options as well (some what easier).

The problem for BEMU roll out at the moment is two fold:
a) limited number of routes where charging under existing OHLE (or 3rd rail) can happen without any changes e.g. Northern 2Nxx Leeds - Wakefield Westgate - Sheffield, Southeast Manchester local services, Bolton - Wigan electrification will also be useful for battery west of Wigan.
b) the locations in a) are very spread out so unit diagramming will tend to be less efficient than today (bigger impact on residual diesel diagramming with increasing diesel ECS)

There is demand to "battery" some routes that don't the a) criteria and tend to have very short turnaround times criteria e.g. Windemere and Greenford branch.
Some trial schemes (e.g. Vivarail) then try to concentrate on fast charging at stations as a solution to a) but the problems is that fast charge rate batteries are much more expensive and will be for a good few years (minimum 5) and battery capacity is effectively sacrificed to obtain high charge rate which cuts the range.
The Nth approach to Windermere appears to be rotating units off the branch to charge as required and going for high capacity with conventional (cheaper) battery tech

Scottish electrification (discontinuous in the short term) and other scheme such as TRU (e.g. for Northern's Hudderfield - Wakefield if that service ever returns) then offer a good number of addition BEMU rollout options in the medium term medium term roll out options.

With Battery the thinking needs to be what will the electrification look like in X years time and focusing on a net replacement of regional DMUs at end of life but not necessarily on the same routes e.g. TS/Scotrail with the 156 end of life and then cascade the remaining DMUs as needed (e.g. 158/170 to WHL)
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,064
The key difference is that the infrastructure to deliver Diesel to refuelling points is well established, relatively safe, and relatively space efficient.

Hydrogen fuelling infrastructure is not well established, and (if you're doing it with HGVs, rather than pipelines) not very space efficient at all
You also have the option of producing green hydrogen on-site at the depot via electrolysis. You just need power and water (and space).

Long term, hydrogen trains are not cheap.
Long term, they will get cheaper. Same as electric vehicles, wind turbines, photo voltaic cells, etc.
 

supervc-10

Member
Joined
4 Mar 2012
Messages
702
You also have the option of producing green hydrogen on-site at the depot via electrolysis. You just need power and water (and space).
This is where I feel hydrogen has issues- using a waste product that would otherwise just be burnt off of course is great, but fundamentally what's being done here is to use it as a battery, just instead of an electrolyte you're using hydrogen. And I'm not sure that's either a) cheaper or b) more efficient. The advantage it has is quick 'fueling', which of course is not to be sniffed at, but would the cost of hydrogen be less than just having more batteries?

Especially as @xotGD says- things will get cheaper, and the pressure downwards on battery cells is huge given the automotive sector.
 

snookertam

Member
Joined
22 Sep 2018
Messages
774
Don’t think there’s any plans for hydrogen units in Scotland, so can’t see these appear up here unless they’re on a trial/exhibition run.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
You also have the option of producing green hydrogen on-site at the depot via electrolysis. You just need power and water (and space).


Long term, they will get cheaper. Same as electric vehicles, wind turbines, photo voltaic cells, etc.
But the operating cost as seen by the TOC will always be higher than electric, battery, diesel and bi-mode, both now and in the longer term hence it is the power mode of last resort.

The cost reduction expectations over time for Hydrogen are much lower than Battery as a good chunk of the cost is plenty of good old fashioned high pressure plumbing which is a mature technology.
(In a similar way the cost of solar panels has fallen dramatically but the cost of inverters hasn't fallen to anywhere near the same extent as IGBT power electronics is also relatively mature tech.)



Don’t think there’s any plans for hydrogen units in Scotland, so can’t see these appear up here unless they’re on a trial/exhibition run.
Up for exhibition purposes.

The future power mode TBC in Transport Scotland planning = Hydrogen or battery, choice to be made around 2030 e.g. WHL routes, Stranraer, north of Tain and Kyle lines.

Realistically Stranraer will be doable with battery (with not much improvement in technology) but some of the the rest are heading for Hydrogen unless there is a big improvement in battery tech or major operation changes.
Thurso/Wick: 110/117 miles beyond the proposed end of wires - Which is Hydrogen territory unless three is decent recharging infrastructure and long layovers at Georgemas / Wick / Thurso but 44 miles under the wires.
Kyle: 63 miles beyond the proposed end of wires but 18 miles under the wires so should be doable with battery with some technology improvement and recharging in Kyle but if you also have far north as Hydrogen it may be easier to do the same every where.
WHL: Oban / Fort William 77/100 miles beyond the proposed end of wires (23miles under the wires) so similar to Thurso/Wick, then there is the Mallaig Branch at 40miles

hence wait and see in a decades' time... and worry about getting on with wiring other bits in the mean time.
 
Last edited:

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,064
Regarding cost reduction for hydrogen production: The largest electrolysis plants at the moment are around 10MWe capacity. Soon we will have 500MWe+ capacity plants in operation. ITM in Sheffield are ramping up their production capacity dramatically. Plenty of room for cost reduction from economies of scale, learning by doing, performance improvement, etc.

That's before we get into locating the electrolysers on floating wind farms...
 

LOL The Irony

On Moderation
Joined
29 Jul 2017
Messages
5,335
Location
Chinatown, New York
The key difference is that the infrastructure to deliver Diesel to refuelling points is well established, relatively safe, and relatively space efficient.
That's true, although it's been perfected over the years to make it as safe as possible and I'm sure Hydrogen will see similar effort to streamline it.
Hydrogen fuelling infrastructure is not well established, and (if you're doing it with HGVs, rather than pipelines) not very space efficient at all
You missed a 3rd option, which is on site production, which I think is how Shell do it over here. Of course this would probably take up more space than the diesel but you work that in and it solves the supply issue.
 

tetudo boy

Member
Joined
5 Apr 2018
Messages
382
Location
Near Liverpool
Alstom and Eversholt have signed an agreement aimed at delivering the first brand-new hydrogen multiple units (HMU) in the UK.
Based on the Aventra platform, the initial contract covers the manufacture and delivery of 10 3-car units.

View attachment 105404

A quote from the press release linked above:
Unpopular opinion, but those will be good with South Western Railway's West of England line services. 2/3 doors would do good for the busy route, and I know they may be recently refurbished, but it's about time the 159/158's get replaced by something newer.
 

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,750
The Hydrogen 321s are related to these Aventras. Given the little evident progress on the Hydrogen 321s, one does have to wonder if that's either been quietly ditched or now planned only as a testbed (much like the converted 314).
It would be a complete waste if it is. Getting tired of trains not even close to being life expired being wasted and ditched because new trains make projects look good
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
11,397
It would be a complete waste if it is. Getting tired of trains not even close to being life expired being wasted and ditched because new trains make projects look good
Given the fact that none of the Class 799s are actually being powered by hydrogen yet, I’d say that starting from scratch is more than reasonable.
 

RealTrains07

Established Member
Joined
28 Feb 2019
Messages
1,750
Given the fact that none of the Class 799s are actually being powered by hydrogen yet, I’d say that starting from scratch is more than reasonable
Bare in mind that the 799s are porterbrooks project. Not Eversholts. there project is the class 600 breeze
 

Pete_uk

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2017
Messages
1,251
Location
Stroud, Glos
Would there be any benefit to having a class 755 style engine unit (or hydrogen tanks) as although it would make the unit a little longer, it could provide space for more hydrogen?
 

Wyrleybart

Established Member
Joined
29 Mar 2020
Messages
1,623
Location
South Staffordshire
Would there be any benefit to having a class 755 style engine unit (or hydrogen tanks) as although it would make the unit a little longer, it could provide space for more hydrogen?

Probably depends how much passenger accommodation the DfT feel they need in the Breeze / Flex. It is probably easier to modify two thirds of an existing vehicle for gas storage than to purpose build new vehicles to add to the existing sets. Don't forget that the "power wagons" in the Flirts are articulated to the passenger vehicles in a dynamic way that 319s couldn't economically emulate.
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
That's true, although it's been perfected over the years to make it as safe as possible and I'm sure Hydrogen will see similar effort to streamline it.

You missed a 3rd option, which is on site production, which I think is how Shell do it over here. Of course this would probably take up more space than the diesel but you work that in and it solves the supply issue.
My experience of hydrogen use in industry was that the hydrogen was delivered in banks of cylinders built onto an artic trailer which arrived on site and was then coupled into the site system in a concrete blast bay (3metre high concrete walls with no roof). Where the hydrogen was used in the building was designed with large ventilation louvres and ‘blow-out panels’ in the walls in case of an explosion. If I remember correctly, the roof over those rooms was designed differently with a weak section so that it would blow-off without compromising the rest of the building. This was in a process which used the gas in a chemical reaction rather than burning it so similar to a hydrogen fuel-cell. Hydrogen is extremely searching and joints in pipe work systems are very difficult to seal so in that respect is nothing like diesel. Production on site would be possible but would require a lot of associated plant such as compressors and heat exchangers and of course suitable storage facilities. I would expect that road delivery would be the safest and most cost effective option for railway usage.
All of the above means that hydrogen installations are not straightforward to build, operate and maintain especially when regular insurance inspections are taken into account. To my mind, hydrogen’s more trouble than it’s worth and a better solution would be to run hybrid trains or possibly a derogation to continue with diesel for the limited use that would be required.
 

option

Member
Joined
1 Aug 2017
Messages
636
Long term, they will get cheaper. Same as electric vehicles, wind turbines, photo voltaic cells, etc.

Even if/when the hydrogen fuel-cells get cheaper, they still need fuel.
Hydrogen as a fuel is only cheap where it's available as a waste product, otherwise it's expensive to make. It's also then expensive to transport.*
Manufactured hydrogen is going to be more expensive than electricity.

Solar-pv doesn't need a fuel. Cover a depot roof in panels, charge batteries on-site during the day, then use those batteries to re-charge the trains overnight.
It may not provide all the power needed, but it's much much cheaper than making hydrogen on-site.



*you can't just move hydrogen in the existing gas network. You can blend up to ~15%. Beyond that & the pipes themselves are affected, & new compressors are needed. Also, everything connected to the network needs to work with hydrogen.
Using 'spare' renewable energy to make it is being looked at, but that would most likely be at the substations where the large wind farms connect to the grid, & then be used in fuel-cells to generate electricity when there is a surge in demand. Zero transport costs then.
 

hwl

Established Member
Joined
5 Feb 2012
Messages
7,355
That's true, although it's been perfected over the years to make it as safe as possible and I'm sure Hydrogen will see similar effort to streamline it.

You missed a 3rd option, which is on site production, which I think is how Shell do it over here. Of course this would probably take up more space than the diesel but you work that in and it solves the supply issue.
It doesn't solve the need for a very large compressor, the economics (Capex or Opex) of which won't improve.
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,064
Even if/when the hydrogen fuel-cells get cheaper, they still need fuel.
Hydrogen as a fuel is only cheap where it's available as a waste product, otherwise it's expensive to make. It's also then expensive to transport.*
Manufactured hydrogen is going to be more expensive than electricity.

Solar-pv doesn't need a fuel. Cover a depot roof in panels, charge batteries on-site during the day, then use those batteries to re-charge the trains overnight.
It may not provide all the power needed, but it's much much cheaper than making hydrogen on-site.



*you can't just move hydrogen in the existing gas network. You can blend up to ~15%. Beyond that & the pipes themselves are affected, & new compressors are needed. Also, everything connected to the network needs to work with hydrogen.
Using 'spare' renewable energy to make it is being looked at, but that would most likely be at the substations where the large wind farms connect to the grid, & then be used in fuel-cells to generate electricity when there is a surge in demand. Zero transport costs then.
In 15 or 20 years time there won't be a natural gas network. Just a hydrogen network.

It's the future. Zero carbon at the point of use.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,555
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
In 15 or 20 years time there won't be a natural gas network. Just a hydrogen network.

It's the future. Zero carbon at the point of use.

CO2 doesnt matter at the point of use, it matters overall. Particulates and NOx matter at the point of use, and natural gas emits very low levels of either. So hydrogen replacing natural gas only makes sense if it is produced in a low carbon manner.
 

themiller

Member
Joined
4 Dec 2011
Messages
1,056
Location
Cumbria, UK
In 15 or 20 years time there won't be a natural gas network. Just a hydrogen network.

It's the future. Zero carbon at the point of use.
That’s a big leap! The current gas network isn’t suitable for hydrogen so a new one would be required. Who would have the spare cash to fund it?
 

BayPaul

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2019
Messages
1,219
In 15 or 20 years time there won't be a natural gas network. Just a hydrogen network.

It's the future. Zero carbon at the point of use.
As @Bletchleyite said, what matters is the source of the hydrogen. 'grey' hydrogen, which is much, much cheaper than 'green' hydrogen has a carbon impact several times that of fossil fuels (mainly because it's made using fossil fuel, and is a nightmare to transport)

I don't see any future for a network of piped fuel into homes in the future. Gas doesn't provide anything that can't be provided by electricity - induction hobs are virtually as good as gas, and hear pumps are much more efficient (though admittedly noisier and more expensive) than gas boilers.
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,064
CO2 doesnt matter at the point of use, it matters overall. Particulates and NOx matter at the point of use, and natural gas emits very low levels of either. So hydrogen replacing natural gas only makes sense if it is produced in a low carbon manner.
It will be low carbon. Either blue or green.

That’s a big leap! The current gas network isn’t suitable for hydrogen so a new one would be required. Who would have the spare cash to fund it?
The distribution network, once fully converted to plastic, will be fine for hydrogen. Replacement of iron with plastic is happening anyway.

Some of the higher pressure transmission lines are made of grades of steel where hydrogen embrittlement could be a problem, but certainly not all. National Grid are performing research to investigate the suitability for conversion.
 

BayPaul

Established Member
Joined
11 Jul 2019
Messages
1,219
It will be low carbon. Either blue or green.


The distribution network, once fully converted to plastic, will be fine for hydrogen. Replacement of iron with plastic is happening anyway.

Some of the higher pressure transmission lines are made of grades of steel where hydrogen embrittlement could be a problem, but certainly not all. National Grid are performing research to investigate the suitability for conversion.
I still don't see how you'd change it over. Presumably if one day you switched off the gas, and switched on the hydrogen, everyone's cookers and boilers would blow up. So presumably everyone would need to buy duel fuel appliances before hand, so why not just buy electric. Even green hydrogen isn't as good as electric, because its so inefficient to produce
 
Joined
2 Jan 2009
Messages
516
If they're coming to Scotland, isn't Aberdeen the obvious destination? We're a hydrogen hub and already power buses with Hydrogen. 3 car units perfect for Inverness and the Inverurie - Montrose service...
 

xotGD

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2017
Messages
6,064
I still don't see how you'd change it over. Presumably if one day you switched off the gas, and switched on the hydrogen, everyone's cookers and boilers would blow up. So presumably everyone would need to buy duel fuel appliances before hand, so why not just buy electric. Even green hydrogen isn't as good as electric, because its so inefficient to produce
You convert area by area. Just as we did when switching from Towns Gas to natural gas back in the day. Turn off the gas, convert the appliances, turn on the hydrogen.

Air source heat pumps do not provide a like for like alternative to gas boilers. For most households, the entire central heating system would have to be ripped out and replaced due to the lower operating temperature of a heat pump based system. Plus of course on a peak demand day in January with no wind and no sunshine, where do you get the power from to run millions of heat pumps?

Hydrogen, like natural gas, can be stored to balance out supply and demand. So we can stay warm in winter.

If they're coming to Scotland, isn't Aberdeen the obvious destination? We're a hydrogen hub and already power buses with Hydrogen. 3 car units perfect for Inverness and the Inverurie - Montrose service...
However the Scottish carbon capture cluster, with its associated hydrogen production, is only on the reserve list.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top