Could electrically-heated steam locos be a solution for preserved railways?

[CaramellDansen]

Moderator note: Split from

Heritage railways running cost

I was reading about coal prices for heritage railways , i think there we be a lot fewer steam locos running on them soon, i had better get some visits in this year

www.railforums.co.uk

I wouldn't go as far as mobile electric kettles though!

In all fairness, Switzerland had electrically-heated steam locos! I'm sure there's some way of doing that if this supposed Great Coal Apocalypse arrives! I wonder if it would be cheaper...

Upon a minor amount of Googling:
It would probably not be cheaper unless coal prices skyrocket.

 

[Dent]

In all fairness, Switzerland had electrically-heated steam locos! I'm sure there's some way of doing that if this supposed Great Coal Apocalypse arrives! I wonder if it would be cheaper...

Upon a minor amount of Googling:
It would probably not be cheaper unless coal prices skyrocket.

As already mentioned, these were powered by overhead lines so not suitable for a non-electrified heritage line.

 

[MarkyT]

In all fairness, Switzerland had electrically-heated steam locos! I'm sure there's some way of doing that if this supposed Great Coal Apocalypse arrives! I wonder if it would be cheaper...

They had pantographs so needed OHLE, but it didn't have to be continuous. Once they had a full head of steam, these shunting locos could trundle off along a spur to an unwired factory siding using the energy already in the boiler like a fireless engine, but I don't know what range or time off wire could be achieved. An approach taken by DLM for their modern steam rack locos is to connect an electric preheating unit that can get a loco from cold up to working pressure , even unmanned by remote control or timer if someone remembers to fill the kettle and plug it in the night before (the incentive is a lie in I suppose!). These one-person-operated locos are then fueled with light heating oil in service and they have extremely well-insulated boilers. Extending the electric heating and fireless paradigm, perhaps a loco could park over a short conductor arrangement like the GWR fast battery charging station on the Greenford line, and a high current could be delivered to quickly heat the boiler via a built-in element and produce sufficient steam to take the loco firelessly to the next stop where the cycle is repeated. Effectively using the boiler as a steam battery. The charging stations would need some form of accumulator to store energy from a moderate grid supply to be able to periodically provide short bursts of very high current, similar to the duty cycle of a fast electrochemical battery charger. There would be interlocks on the charger to only connect the heating current when a suitable locomotive was present. The heating/charging stations could also be used by battery electric vehicles. There would be strict safety rules surrounding the use of this tech. No taking water or blowing down while connected. No leaning in between the frames to quickly oil valve gear bearings etc.
Here are some details of the DLM preheating device: https://dlm-ag.ch/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Vorheiz-und-Vorwärmgeräte_d_e_2020-04-20.pdf

Electric pre-heating device for steam locomotives
The electric pre-heating device considerably improves the operational readiness of steam locomotives. It offers the following advantages:
 Unattended and gentle electric heating of a steam locomotive up
to a boiler pressure of 16 bar.
 Compensation of radiation losses to keep the engine in steam
without attendance.
 Environmentally friendly heating up without smoke and soot.
 Saving of man-hours
 Extended boiler life

I'm starting to think maybe electric steam isn't such a crazy idea...

 

[CaramellDansen]

As already mentioned, these were powered by overhead lines so not suitable for a non-electrified heritage line.

I'm sure it wouldn't be impossible to fit a tender or van behind the loco with batteries in!
Regardless, it's probably not going to be viable cost-wise for some time.

I'm starting to think maybe electric steam isn't such a crazy idea...

It's worth considering!! Heritage railways aren't exactly flush with cash as is, and coal's prices can only rise!

 

[Dent]

I'm sure it wouldn't be impossible to fit a tender or van behind the loco with batteries in!

Already suggested, and the issue there is that the energy density of even the best batteries available is far lower than coal or any similar solid fuel.

 

[CaramellDansen]

Already suggested, and the issue there is that the energy density of even the best batteries available is far lower than coal or any similar solid fuel.

That's not in doubt. We're not trying to reinvent the wheel... or the coal, in this case. We're thinking about a future where coal isn't available or economically viable!
Sure, electric steam isn't ideal; but when push comes to shove, "not ideal" might be all we have. Steamers running electrically is better than them not running at all, no?

 

[Dent]

That's not in doubt. We're not trying to reinvent the wheel... or the coal, in this case. We're thinking about a future where coal isn't available or economically viable!
Sure, electric steam isn't ideal; but when push comes to shove, "not ideal" might be all we have. Steamers running electrically is better than them not running at all, no?

The question is, is running steam trains on batteries technically feasible given how low the energy density of batteries is? If it's not technically achievable then whether it is "better than not running at all" is irrelevant.

There will always be better options than batteries available, such as wood, oil or gas firing, all of which have far better energy density.

 

[CaramellDansen]

There will always be better options than batteries available, such as wood, oil or gas firing, all of which have far better energy density.

I provided an example of it working. I'm not sure why you're making a big deal out of it.
If you think they're so much better, go find me examples. xoxo

 

[nferguso]

This thread is a fool's errand. The reengineering and recertification costs, combined with the infrastructure costs would make fitting ERMTS to the whole preserved fleet look like small change.

 

[Dent]

I provided an example of it working. I'm not sure why you're making a big deal out of it.
If you think they're so much better, go find me examples. xoxo

What example did you provide of a steam engine successfully working from battery power?

Also I'm not sure how mentioning why other options are better that what you suggested constitutes "making a big deal out of it" or is a bad thing to contribute to a discussion

What examples of steam engines working from combustible fuel do you need? That concept is already widely known to exist and has been for around two centuries, if you go to any steam railway you will see plenty of examples.

 

[trebor79]

That's not in doubt. We're not trying to reinvent the wheel... or the coal, in this case. We're thinking about a future where coal isn't available or economically viable!
Sure, electric steam isn't ideal; but when push comes to shove, "not ideal" might be all we have. Steamers running electrically is better than them not running at all, no?

Look, a steam locomotive is about 6% efficient at best. OK that would improve a bit when you aren't losing hot combustion gases to the atmosphere but it's hardly likely to be about 15%.
A small 060 is going to use a couple of tonnes of coal in a day. That about 16MWh of energy. Let's say an electrically fired steam loco has twice the efficiency of a coal fired one. You need 8MWh of battery storage. At todays prices the cells would cost approx £640,000 - that's before the cost of building them into bespoke pack(s) and the power electronics, boiler conversion etc etc etc. A battery of that size would weigh around 50te. This is way beyond the realms of "Just put a big battery in the tender" - let alone in the ex-coal bunker of an 060 tank engine.
So you're looking at £1,000,000+ and a dedicated large waggon containing the battery for even the smallest of locos. Cloud. Cuckoo. Land.

If there's no fuel to run steam locomotive, they won't run, simple as that. They certainly aren't going to be converted to battery power

The question is, is running steam trains on batteries technically feasible given how low the energy density of batteries is? If it's not technically achievable then whether it is "better than not running at all" is irrelevant.

There will always be better options than batteries available, such as wood, oil or gas firing, all of which have far better energy density.

Yep, indeed.

 

[MarkyT]

Look, a steam locomotive is about 6% efficient at best. OK that would improve a bit when you aren't losing hot combustion gases to the atmosphere but it's hardly likely to be about 15%.
A small 060 is going to use a couple of tonnes of coal in a day. That about 16MWh of energy. Let's say an electrically fired steam loco has twice the efficiency of a coal fired one. You need 8MWh of battery storage. At todays prices the cells would cost approx £640,000 - that's before the cost of building them into bespoke pack(s) and the power electronics, boiler conversion etc etc etc. A battery of that size would weigh around 50te. This is way beyond the realms of "Just put a big battery in the tender" - let alone in the ex-coal bunker of an 060 tank engine.
So you're looking at £1,000,000+ and a dedicated large waggon containing the battery for even the smallest of locos. Cloud. Cuckoo. Land.

Thanks for doing the calculations. I agree the figures look crazy for battery, which is why I suggested intermittent intense heating of the boiler at 'fast charge' stations en route, with the boiler itself being at least part of the storage solution. In such a system, a much smaller battery might suffice for back-up if the boiler steam was getting low on a particular leg and could plausibly be used for superheating wet steam selectively en route when extra power was required. With several fast charge points along the route, the total storage capacity onboard might be reduced dramatically, needing sufficient only to get to the next charging station rather than having to carry a full day's supply around from the start of duty. Boilers would no doubt have to be radically redesigned and there would be a need for excellent insulation to avoid as much wastage as possible. Major redesign may be necessary anyway for efficiently burning alternative fuels such as wood-based pellets. Such a radical boiler rethink is the key idea being developed by a small company in New Zealand called Mackwell:

Mackwell Technology – Mackwell & Co.

An alternative to diesel that’s cleaner burning, cheaper and more resilient

mackwell.co.nz

Mackwell Boilers
Mackwell has rediscovered the steam locomotive and reinvented its boiler, creating an invaluable tool for a world moving beyond fossil fuel.
Our innovative technology is designed to utilise biomass directly with minimum processing, thus preserving the high Energy-ROI of the biomass fuel source.

Biomass generally has a lower energy density compared to fossil fuels. Mackwell compensates for this low energy density with innovative designs resulting in a three-fold increase in thermal efficiency. Long term, we expect that a six-fold increase over conventional steam locomotive efficiency is possible.

The steam locomotive’s boiler was its Achilles heel and we have re-invented the locomotive boiler specifically for use with biomass.

They claim to be able to replace boilers on heritage steam locos using their water tube biomass boiler systems that only take 30 minutes to get up to working pressure.
https://mackwell.co.nz/replacement-boilers/

Replacement Locomotive Boilers
The Mackwell Boiler Technology was developed as a direct result of our founder’s experience maintaining, firing and driving historic steam locomotives. As a result, we are dedicated to supporting the operation of steam locomotives around the world.

 

[Dent]

Thanks for doing the calculations. I agree the figures look crazy for battery, which is why I suggested intermittent intense heating of the boiler at 'fast charge' stations en route, with the boiler itself being at least part of the storage solution. In such a system, a much smaller battery might suffice for back-up if the boiler steam was getting low on a particular leg and could plausibly be used for superheating wet steam selectively en route when extra power was required. With several fast charge points along the route, the total storage capacity onboard might be reduced dramatically, needing sufficient only to get to the next charging station rather than having to carry a full day's supply around from the start of duty.

That all sounds like a solution in search of a problem, and with so many practical barriers it sounds doubtful it could be cost effective or even technically feasible.

 

[MarkyT]

That all sounds like a solution in search of a problem, and with so many practical barriers it sounds doubtful it could be cost effective or even technically feasible.

It's just wild speculation. Neither you nor I know whether any of it is practical. There is a need for solutions to the coal problem however. Just saying heritage use is totally marginal in global CO2 terms so we can continue to use the traditional fuel will not wash for many reasons; the local nuisance of dirty smoke, the difficulty finding volunteers for the dirty jobs, the increasing difficulty obtaining coal in a world where it is being phased out of most if not all other uses. Earlier in the thread I also considered electric steam totally impractical, then I had a think about the concerns applying to it. Stating the thoughts around an idea does not constitute support of the idea. I like the Mackwell ideas too. It doesn't mean I'm going to invest my life savings in the company!

 

[trebor79]

Thanks for doing the calculations. I agree the figures look crazy for battery, which is why I suggested intermittent intense heating of the boiler at 'fast charge' stations en route, with the boiler itself being at least part of the storage solution. In such a system, a much smaller battery might suffice for back-up if the boiler steam was getting low on a particular leg and could plausibly be used for superheating wet steam selectively en route when extra power was required. With several fast charge points along the route, the total storage capacity onboard might be reduced dramatically, needing sufficient only to get to the next charging station rather than having to carry a full day's supply around from the start of duty. Boilers would no doubt have to be radically redesigned and there would be a need for excellent insulation to avoid as much wastage as possible. Major redesign may be necessary anyway for efficiently burning alternative fuels such as wood-based pellets. Such a radical boiler rethink is the key idea being developed by a small company in New Zealand called Mackwell:

Mackwell Technology – Mackwell & Co.

An alternative to diesel that’s cleaner burning, cheaper and more resilient

mackwell.co.nz

They claim to be able to replace boilers on heritage steam locos using their water tube biomass boiler systems that only take 30 minutes to get up to working pressure.
https://mackwell.co.nz/replacement-boilers/

Well, then you're talking about a fireless locomotive really with some sort of immersion heater backup. I can't see that being practical for much the same reasons as I gave above - cost and practicality. The recharge station for a fireless loco it going to be a stationary boiler which can dump a charge of pressurise hot water into the boiler, as any immersion heater capable of doing that it going to be multi-megawatt output.
The boiler is just one of the Achilles heels of a steam locomotive, others are the thermodynamic inefficiency of the cylinder being alternately hot and then (relatively) cold as the expanded steam is exhausted, the fact that the latent heat of vaporisation is lost (as bad things happen if you condense steam in the cylinder) etc.
The Mackwell thing is interesting, but they're only making the boiler more efficient (maybe), and that's never going to triple or more the overall efficiency of the locomotive.

Conversion of a coal grate to other fuels such as wood or oil is not complicated and has been done many times throughout the history of the steam locomotive. Steam locomotives will either continue to operate by burning stuff, or they simply won't operate.

 

[Dent]

It's just wild speculation. Neither you nor I know whether any of it is practical.

If you think through the issues, it is fairly obvious that it far less operationally practical, and further removed from what heritage railways are actually trying to preserve, than any combustible fuel.

 

[mike57]

Conversion of a coal grate to other fuels such as wood or oil is not complicated and has been done many times throughout the history of the steam locomotive. Steam locomotives will either continue to operate by burning stuff, or they simply won't operate.

Oil has been used in the past in the UK and wood burning was common in some other countries. Would a typical heritage (for the sake of discussion consider something small like an 0-6-0T and a larger loco like a 4-6-0 5MT) steam loco be able to operate on wood as fuel with minor modifications? Would you be able to maintain sufficent boiler pressure in use? What about sparks and ash, wood ash is much finer and flies around. Wood is readily available and is renewable. Bear in mind we are doing 25mph and at most 20 odd miles, and in a lot of cases less.

 

[Lost property]

I could have sworn the topic of this thread was how to control costs, not, how to increase them with some impractical and expensive modifications.

Being an almost normal is very advantageous as it allows those of us who are to look at the issues objectively, not, subjectively plus we aren't encumbered with the "Bert and Fred, 96 years on BR between them, know every inch of some long gone industrial branch line " ideologies, or, spotters who are clueless about reality, but know every head code there is.

Trading on peoples emotions with begging letters, pleas, etc is more desperation than anything, but, also reflects the poor standards of financial discipline, and understanding of management requirements, already in place.

One contributor summed matters up perfectly on another thread some time ago. If you want to know the real status of a heritage line...read the annual accounts.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Oil has been used in the past in the UK and wood burning was common in some other countries. Would a typical heritage (for the sake of discussion consider something small like an 0-6-0T and a larger loco like a 4-6-0 5MT) steam loco be able to operate on wood as fuel with minor modifications? Would you be able to maintain sufficent boiler pressure in use? What about sparks and ash, wood ash is much finer and flies around. Wood is readily available and is renewable. Bear in mind we are doing 25mph and at most 20 odd miles, and in a lot of cases less.

A project in the US is exploring the use of a fuel called torrefied biomass (essentially a partial conversion of wood or other biomass to a fuel more similar to coal) in steam locomotives.
Read more below: https://csrail.org/torrefied-biomass

 

[HSTEd]

Specialised fuel supply is going to be increasingly expensive for preserved railways.

Fairly soon they will be the only significant user of coal in the country, prices will skyrocket when they can no longer piggy back on other supply chains.
This leaves us with oil firing, wood and electricity as available options.

 

[eldomtom2]

A project in the US is exploring the use of a fuel called torrefied biomass (essentially a partial conversion of wood or other biomass to a fuel more similar to coal) in steam locomotives.
Read more below: https://csrail.org/torrefied-biomass

IIRC similar trials have taken place in the UK as well.

 

[AlastairFraser]

IIRC similar trials have taken place in the UK as well.

Interesting - have you got any further information so I can read into it? Important project since climate impact of high energy density fuels in specialist applications is a big issue, I used to know someone working at Wood (ex Foster Wheeler) that was working on replacing metallurgical coal with a greener fuel of similar energy density.

This leaves us with oil firing, wood and electricity as available options.

Waste vegetable oil may be a viable option - the Grand Canyon Railway in Arizona managed to convert steam locos to use it.

Steam locomotives would return to the Grand Canyon Railway on September 19, 2009. Xanterra converted the steam locomotives to operate using waste vegetable oil collected from restaurants across Northern Arizona and installed a rainwater collection system on the maintenance building to fill boilers when available.

Taken from here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Canyon_Railway

 

[Zamracene749]

Power the trains by battery via electric motors, fitted in the tender. Then fit a massive piece of sandpaper on a spring, scraped by cam attached to an axle to make the chuff chuff sound, as was used on my 1970s Hornby B12. Add smoke bombs to simulate steam.
A more sensible proposition than some of the above?

 

[MarkyT]

Power the trains by battery via electric motors, fitted in the tender. Then fit a massive piece of sandpaper on a spring, scraped by cam attached to an axle to make the chuff chuff sound, as was used on my 1970s Hornby B12. Add smoke bombs to simulate steam.

Surely you need to drip fairly large quantities of that Seuthe smoke oil substance into the chimney periodically, where it'd be heated by a big element and puffed out by a piston contraption. That would be an evocative scent from childhood.

 

[eldomtom2]

Interesting - have you got any further information so I can read into it? Important project since climate impact of high energy density fuels in specialist applications is a big issue, I used to know someone working at Wood (ex Foster Wheeler) that was working on replacing metallurgical coal with a greener fuel of similar energy density.

There were at the very least trials on the KWVR in 2022:

First ever bio-coal trial on full size steam locomotive takes place at the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway

The first ever bio-coal trial to be undertaken on a standard gauge steam locomotive has been completed on the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway.

www.railadvent.co.uk

The first ever bio-coal trial to be undertaken on a standard gauge steam locomotive has been completed on the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway.

On Monday 14th February, the 2-6-0 was fired using a batch of Homefire Ecoal. Hauling five carriages, as it would have done with traditional coal, the Standard 2MT hauled its trains up the steeply graded, five mile long, heritage line in West Yorkshire.

 

[Zamracene749]

Surely you need to drip fairly large quantities of that Seuthe smoke oil substance into the chimney periodically, where it'd be heated by a big element and puffed out by a piston contraption. That would be an evocative scent from childhood.

I sometimes wonder if it's possible to cannibalise an old vape and recreate that

 

[43096]

That's not in doubt. We're not trying to reinvent the wheel... or the coal, in this case. We're thinking about a future where coal isn't available or economically viable!
Sure, electric steam isn't ideal; but when push comes to shove, "not ideal" might be all we have. Steamers running electrically is better than them not running at all, no?

So who's paying for all these batteries, conversion costs, certification etc.?

Because it is utterly, utterly unaffordable.

 

[Meerkat]

Can’t you attach the mains to the rails to get the electricity to the loco - no batteries required

 

[AlastairFraser]

There were at the very least trials on the KWVR in 2022:

First ever bio-coal trial on full size steam locomotive takes place at the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway

The first ever bio-coal trial to be undertaken on a standard gauge steam locomotive has been completed on the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway.

www.railadvent.co.uk

Hmm. We'll see how that pans out, but that seems to still be rather high coal content fuel.

 

[Dent]

Fairly soon they will be the only significant user of coal in the country, prices will skyrocket when they can no longer piggy back on other supply chains.
This leaves us with oil firing, wood and electricity as available options.

There are other options such as bio-coal, but even out of those options batteries are by far the least practical, and the furthest removed from what heritage railways are actually trying to preserve.