BiMode Hydrogen power?

[Flying Phil]

As BiModes are going to be used on the MML instead of more electrification, Mr Grayling has been saying that they are a good option and, in the future, will be even better using Hydrogen power - which he expects to start taking place possibly within 10 -12 years. How realistic is this and what technology is being used?

 

[Domh245]

As I understand it, the only current hydrogen powered train undergoing development uses a fuel cell - indeed I think that this is the type of technology that is most commonly used at the moment. I would expect that a future hydrogen train would probably use either those or potentially whatever else is the leading proven technology at the time.

 

[hwl]

As I understand it, the only current hydrogen powered train undergoing development uses a fuel cell - indeed I think that this is the type of technology that is most commonly used at the moment. I would expect that a future hydrogen train would probably use either those or potentially whatever else is the leading proven technology at the time.

Sounds like Grayling has been taken in by Alstom Marketing.
It will be fuel cell to generate electricity on the trains the main questions relate to the technology for the creation of the Hydrogen, its storage and delivery to the train.

 

[hwl]

As BiModes are going to be used on the MML instead of more electrification, Mr Grayling has been saying that they are a good option and, in the future, will be even better using Hydrogen power - which he expects to start taking place possibly within 10 -12 years. How realistic is this and what technology is being used?

About the same as porcine airways flight 101 taking off from runway 4 at Heathrow. The technology and economics of creating the Hydrogen in an environmental friendly way, transporting it to the train and storing it on the train will make GW electrification look like a bargain.

To generate the Hydrogen efficiently in an environmentally friendly way you realistically need a 4th generation Helium cooled nuclear reactor with Brayton cycle turbine in the primary cooling circuit to generate electricity by day then use the heat (far hotter than PWR/BWR/AGR) at night to create Hydrogen from water using the Sulphur-Iodine process (cycle) at 850C+ (ideally 1000C).

 

[Chris125]

You may be interested in this: Hydrail comes of age

Replacing 3,000 DMUs?

Of Europe’s 15,000 DMU vehicles, 3,000 operate in Britain. Although the UK loading gauge presents problems, Alstom does not consider that this would prevent hydrogen units operating in Britain and advised Rail Engineer: “We are in dialogue with a number of city regions, government and rolling stock operating companies. We are excited about the potential to bring a hydrogen train to the UK.”

In another development, a consortium of Hitachi Rail Europe, the University of Birmingham and Fuel Cell Systems Ltd recently undertook a modelling exercise to assess how fuel cells could be used to either re-power existing diesel multiple units in the UK or produce a hydrogen-powered Hitachi AT200 unit. The model showed potential for a reduction in energy consumption of up to 52 per cent on the Norwich to Sheringham line.

 

[route:oxford]

To generate the Hydrogen efficiently in an environmentally friendly way you realistically need a 4th generation Helium cooled nuclear reactor with Brayton cycle turbine in the primary cooling circuit to generate electricity by day then use the heat (far hotter than PWR/BWR/AGR) at night to create Hydrogen from water using the Sulphur-Iodine process (cycle) at 850C+ (ideally 1000C).

I don't have an issue with nuclear...

But given that around the world (and even in Scotland) Aluminium is smelted at 960C using plain old hydro-electricity - why would you bother building a nuclear power plant?

 

[Class172]

But given that around the world (and even in Scotland) Aluminium is smelted at 960C using plain old hydro-electricity - why would you bother building a nuclear power plant?

I think the point that hwl is getting at is that the most commonly used processes used to produce hydrogen, such as the electrolysis of water, are not exactly frugal in their energy requirements. If I recall correctly, I think you can produce hydrogen by 'cracking' hydrocarbons or reacting steam at pressure/ high temperature with methane (correct me if I'm wrong), but clearly this has the additional caveat of requiring a fossil fuel derivative in the reaction itself.

 

[hwl]

I think the point that hwl is getting at is that the most commonly used processes used to produce hydrogen, such as the electrolysis of water, are not exactly frugal in their energy requirements. If I recall correctly, I think you can produce hydrogen by 'cracking' hydrocarbons or reacting steam at pressure/ high temperature with methane (correct me if I'm wrong), but clearly this has the additional caveat of requiring a fossil fuel derivative in the reaction itself.

Spot on. Electrolysis uses about twice as much energy as the hydrocarbon routes for Hydrogen production. "Green" Hydrogen is not exactly efficient or cheap at the moment. Assessment of electrification vs "green" Hydrogen in a few years time will be entertaining. I suspect Grayling et al have been mis-sold some innovation cost curves for example see DECC assuming they could use solar cell innovation cost curve for the whole cost of solar schemes and whereas the inverter cost element was never going to come down in the same way as panel costs.

 

[Chester1]

Hydrogen is produced as a bi product in some industrial processes. The need for energy for electrolysis only happens when huge quantities are needed which likely wont required for rail use. The Alstom trains have a low speed limit, I think about 70-80mph. Cost probably rules out most rural use and speed intercity use. The middle ground would be something comparable with 158s - 90mph 2-3 coach units. Windermere branch would be suitable for a trial (after a battery train trial lasting a year or two)!

 

[Domh245]

I suspect Grayling et al have been mis-sold some innovation cost curves

TBH, I think that the real reason that he's banging the hydrogen drum is because (a) He can't go for electric trains and so has to try and sell the idea of bi-mode or IPMUs (b) Hydrogen is "zero emission" which is obviously better than dirty diesels.

 

[Flying Phil]

Thanks for those insights. Given that several major car companies have spent up to 20 years and Lots of money on Hydrogen fuel cells...with very little to show actually on the road, is he being over optimistic for rail use? How much hydrogen fuel would actually need to be stored on board - presumeably under high pressure?

 

[hwl]

Thanks for those insights. Given that several major car companies have spent up to 20 years and Lots of money on Hydrogen fuel cells...with very little to show actually on the road, is he being over optimistic for rail use? How much hydrogen fuel would actually need to be stored on board - presumeably under high pressure?

Given they haven't found any takers commercially for car van coach bus or HGV, the fuel cell manufacturers last hope is rail...

 

[hwl]

TBH, I think that the real reason that he's banging the hydrogen drum is because (a) He can't go for electric trains and so has to try and sell the idea of bi-mode or IPMUs (b) Hydrogen is "zero emission" which is obviously better than dirty diesels.

He just needs to distract for long enough till it is someone else's problem as SoS.

 

[Llanigraham]

Given they haven't found any takers commercially for car van coach bus or HGV, the fuel cell manufacturers last hope is rail...

And yet several caar manufacturers now have hydrogen fuel cell cars being driven on the roads, here and in the USA, and there is one manufacturer here in Mid Wales with a car on the road, perhaps you need to reconsider that statement.

 

[Billy A]

Thanks for those insights. Given that several major car companies have spent up to 20 years and Lots of money on Hydrogen fuel cells...with very little to show actually on the road, is he being over optimistic for rail use? How much hydrogen fuel would actually need to be stored on board - presumably under high pressure?

Not much in terms of mass. The Toyota Mirai fuel cell car stores just 5kg of H2 to power a 150 bhp motor and provide a range of 500 km. One catch is that the enormous pressure needed to produce a sufficient mass of H2 means that the tanks need to be very heavy, but it should still be doable. The other catch is an unexpected one - the energy needed to compress the gas is a substantial proportion of the energy content thereof - I believe it's in the region of 20%.

I can't imagine hydrogen ever catching on as battery technology continues to evolve.

 

[hwl]

Not much in terms of mass. The Toyota Mirai fuel cell car stores just 5kg of H2 to power a 150 bhp motor and provide a range of 500 km. One catch is that the enormous pressure needed to produce a sufficient mass of H2 means that the tanks need to be very heavy, but it should still be doable. The other catch is an unexpected one - the energy needed to compress the gas is a substantial proportion of the energy content thereof - I believe it's in the region of 20%.

I can't imagine hydrogen ever catching on as battery technology continues to evolve.

Not particularly surprising the most theoretically efficient compression to 350bar is about 13-14% of the energy stored in the hydrogen so real efficiencies will be worse. Hydrogen has a fantastic energy density per kg, the problem is getting the energy density per litre which is what uses up lots of energy.

 

[Clip]

Given they haven't found any takers commercially for car van coach bus or HGV, the fuel cell manufacturers last hope is rail...

I have no idea how any of this works but there seems to be a few buses now in London powered by Hydrogen so I don't believe rail is their last hope is it?

 

[hwl]

I have no idea how any of this works but there seems to be a few buses now in London powered by Hydrogen so I don't believe rail is their last hope is it?

A single trial route RV1 (Research Vehicle 1) has been running for about a decade (buses replaced a few years ago) and TfL are going down the battery route instead now...
The IMechE report last week (DerekC started a thread on it) basically quoted the HGV manufacturers as struggling to keep a straight face when Hydrogen was mentioned.

 

[Flying Phil]

And yet several caar manufacturers now have hydrogen fuel cell cars being driven on the roads, here and in the USA, and there is one manufacturer here in Mid Wales with a car on the road, perhaps you need to reconsider that statement.

I think the key point is "commercially", yes, there are a very small number of hydrogen fuelled cars and buses on the road but nearly all are experimental or else "environmentally subsidsed" rather than commercial.
Also, if the car needs 5Kg then a train would need, what 1500Kg? which would mean a much larger/heavier pressure vessel and in the event of an accident, the forces involved on railways are much greater - due to mass and speed..... the potential consequences are horrific.

 

[mallard]

Pretty sure that when a politician says "in 10-12 years" they mean "never, but I'll be long gone by the time that's obvious".

 

[edwin_m]

Hydrogen is arguably safer than LPG in that in the event of a leak it would dissipate upwards into the air (with some questions about what happens in a tunnel). LPG is heavier than air so tends to collect at ground level. Even a burst tank of diesel collects in one place so is arguably more dangerous, although it would probably burn rather than exploding and being a liquid people can see it is there.

 

[DarloRich]

Pretty sure that when a politician says "in 10-12 years" they mean "never, but I'll be long gone by the time that's obvious".

Such cynicism. Such accuracy. I always think of that great phrase: In the fullness of time when considering these sort of pronouncements from a government minister!

 

[hwl]

The basic gist is that 25kV OHLE (ideally with Autotransformer) is way more efficient in terms of energy use that Hydrogen as a transmission vector (and cheaper too) and then OHLE has also the advantage of regenerative braking without tonnes of batteries on the train (and still probably better due to limitations on battery charge rate).
The question then becomes how much does OHLE installation cost, how much does the Hydrogen infrastructure cost and how long does it take for OHLE installation and use to have become cheaper overall than Hydrogen.
Hydrogen is about twice as expensive as Red Diesel currently on an energy released basis so the OHLE vs Diesel savings in BCR like the 2009? MML one will only increase.

 

[edwin_m]

I guess it's possible that hydrogen could act as a store of renewable energy produced at times when there isn't enough demand to use it. But with the energy supply mix as it is in the UK currently, we're a long way from seeing that situation often enough to make it worthwhile.

 

[hwl]

I guess it's possible that hydrogen could act as a store of renewable energy produced at times when there isn't enough demand to use it. But with the energy supply mix as it is in the UK currently, we're a long way from seeing that situation often enough to make it worthwhile.

Precisely - the Alstom trial in Germany is in an area where they have a large surplus of Wind Energy at times and are looking for something useful to do with it...

 

[edwin_m]

Precisely - the Alstom Trail in Germany is in an area where they have a large surplus of Wind Energy at times and are looking for something useful to do with it...

I read they also have chemical industry in the region which produces hydrogen as a waste product.

 

[mushroomchow]

By the time Hydrogen is a viable fuel source for an intercity train, the "bi-mode" units currently mooted will be due for replacement - and the service and timetable will have suffered from their underpowered diesel engines for 20-odd years prior to that point!

Also worth noting that, by that point, HS2 Phase 2b will be coming online and, with the demands from the East Midlands for classic compatibility at Toton, electrification will be the only possible way for that to be delivered. Ergo, the 80X series will be obsolete in that sense by 2030.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Hydrogen is too problematic for it to be a universal replacement for fossil fuels. At best it's going to have a niche future for situations where batteries aren't yet feasible.

On the railways it makes sense for relatively closed systems which would require significant effort to electrify, and batteries won't yet work. Being a relatively closed system is crucial for the cost of the hydrogen fuelling infrastructure to be low. Running hydrogen CrossCountry services would require hydrogen filling stations up and down the entire GB rail network at significant cost. I think the most promising environment for hydrogen on the British rail network is the Chiltern line/EWR, as you only need a small number of filling stations. The primary justification could be removing diesel emissions from Marylebone, while the total lack of 25kV AC electrification makes batteries hard to charge in service.

 

[Hophead]

10 years ago the Department for Transport produced a report which claimed that there would be no need for any more electrification, as trains of the future would be powered by magic beans (or "bionic duckweed" if you're Roger Ford). This was widely derided and an electrification programme of sorts was started. Subsequently, nearly every one of those projects which have completed was late; some have been abandoned (and some of those should never have been considered) and a few have gone wildly over budget.

All of a sudden, magic beans seem like a more attractive proposition when it comes to powering the railway, particularly to a politician who has no inclination to appear before the Select Committee explaining why another project has not completed on time. Neither does the Secretary of State fancy getting an earful from members in the Commons Tea Room complaining on behalf of their constituents and their continual weekend bus replacements.

What's needed is a more sensible investment routine which doesn't promise the earth in five-yearly instalments. So far as electrification is concerned, I'd be saying "we've got this much resource; what can we do with it every year?"; in other words can we commit to, say, electrifying 200 track-kilometres per year and, given that, what schemes give the best return?

 

[mushroomchow]

From personal experience, running a fleet on beans will vastly increase emissions.