Electrification is not just about electrification

GRALISTAIR · 17 Oct 2016

Electrification is not just about electrification.
OK I know I am probably preaching to the choir here but electrification is more than just about electrification. In the USA they let all their infrastructure decay. In the UK there is a more enlightened attitude and infrastructure does get maintained and renewed.

1. Electrification usually results in quite a lot of infrastructure being maintained and renewed which is getting close to end of life anyway. Re-boring and renewing the Farnworth tunnel is one excellent example. Some will point to this as a reason for high costs but if the infrastructure needs maintaining/renewing anyway it is not really so.
2. Electrification results in faster acceleration, journey time improvements along with capacity improvements
3. Electrification results in lower maintenance cost with less wear and tear on the track etc.
4. Electrification allows us to go to a lower carbon strategy/economy and thus more “green”.
5. Electrification weans us off crude oil which means we are less dependent on world trouble spots such as the Middle East.
6. Electrification totally of certain areas such as Birmingham New Street (all services) will get rid of diesel particulates which have been shown to be troublesome.
7. It will create jobs and the subsequent (albeit reduced) maintenance will help those jobs.
8. It helps the economy to not be too reliant on service industry jobs, but on engineering etc. which is good. This was touted over the years to be a reason the German economy is so strong.
9. It reduces noise pollution. (Onboard too)

Am I being too simplistic? Am I missing any?

RailUK Forums

edwin_m · 17 Oct 2016

Much less noise and vibration on-board and for people outside, especially compared with a large-engine DMU.

Master29 · 17 Oct 2016

I don`t really think we have an enlightened attitude to railways at all considering most of the UK network is over 100 years old. Hardly enlightenment is it

GRALISTAIR · 17 Oct 2016

J-2739 · 17 Oct 2016

It would be a good idea if you made the list of electrification threads its own thread, and called it to be stuck, then people can refer to that.

GRALISTAIR · 17 Oct 2016

J-2739 said:
It would be a good idea if you made the list of electrification threads its own thread, and called it to be stuck, then people can refer to that.

Thanks - I will alert a mod.

Harbornite · 17 Oct 2016

GRALISTAIR said:
Electrification is not just about electrification.
OK I know I am probably preaching to the choir here but electrification is more than just about electrification. In the USA they let all their infrastructure decay.

Evidence for this? Not all US Railroads are as badly maintained as the old Maumee and Western used to be...

http://www.railroadfan.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=21502

The busier trunk routes may not be as well maintained as British mainlines but does this picture suggest decay?

http://picssr.com/tags/bnsfchillicothesub/page6

Over there, the priority is for freight and not passenger trains (apart from the Northeast corridor.)

route:oxford · 17 Oct 2016

GRALISTAIR said:
In the USA they let all their infrastructure decay. In the UK there is a more enlightened attitude and infrastructure does get maintained and renewed.

Am I being too simplistic?

Yes

From what I've seen of US infrastructure, it tends to be built on a grander and more industrial scale than here in the UK.

I'm not sure if "decay" is the correct word, they are happier to leave it in situ unused until such time as it is needed again then will renew and rebuild as appropriate. Much of the country is very dry too - so what would rust away in 2-3 years here would still be fine in 20 years there.

QueensCurve · 17 Oct 2016

GRALISTAIR said:
Electrification is not just about electrification.
OK I know I am probably preaching to the choir here but electrification is more than just about electrification. In the USA they let all their infrastructure decay. In the UK there is a more enlightened attitude and infrastructure does get maintained and renewed.

1. Electrification usually results in quite a lot of infrastructure being maintained and renewed which is getting close to end of life anyway. Re-boring and renewing the Farnworth tunnel is one excellent example. Some will point to this as a reason for high costs but if the infrastructure needs maintaining/renewing anyway it is not really so.
2. Electrification results in faster acceleration, journey time improvements along with capacity improvements
3. Electrification results in lower maintenance cost with less wear and tear on the track etc.
4. Electrification allows us to go to a lower carbon strategy/economy and thus more green.
5. Electrification weans us off crude oil which means we are less dependent on world trouble spots such as the Middle East.
6. Electrification totally of certain areas such as Birmingham New Street (all services) will get rid of diesel particulates which have been shown to be troublesome.
7. It will create jobs and the subsequent (albeit reduced) maintenance will help those jobs.
8. It helps the economy to not be too reliant on service industry jobs, but on engineering etc. which is good. This was touted over the years to be a reason the German economy is so strong.

Am I being too simplistic? Am I missing any?

To paraphrase Theresa May "Electrification means electrification".

I have a bad feeling about the autumn financial statement. That said "falling oil prices" may now longer be an excuse.

Harbornite · 17 Oct 2016

GRALISTAIR said:
Did not want to start a separate thread but mods can always adjust as necessary. I have taken the liberty of putting summary links to the electrification threads I can find - here.

Do we not have a thread on Chase Line electrification to add to that list?

47802 · 17 Oct 2016

I'm not sure we are that enlightened we are now electrifying routes which should have been done a least 20 years ago, looking at building a high speed line which should have been done at least 20 years ago, and now we have an electrification program which is so far behind schedule its an embarrassment.

There has also been far too much diesel running under the wires in recent years, it has improved a bit recently and the introduction of 2 types of Bi-mode trains in the next few years should improve it further.

coppercapped · 17 Oct 2016

GRALISTAIR said:
Electrification is not just about electrification.
<Lots of snipping>
5. Electrification weans us off crude oil which means we are less dependent on world trouble spots such as the Middle East.

<More snipping!>

8. It helps the economy to not be too reliant on service industry jobs, but on engineering etc. which is good. This was touted over the years to be a reason the German economy is so strong.

Am I being too simplistic? Am I missing any?

The Queen Elizabeth class of battleships (Queen Elizabeth, Valiant, Barham, Warspite and Malaya) were designed around 1910 to use oil instead of coal as this would enable them to be faster and have a smaller crew. These ships were one of the reasons for Britain's greater involvement in the Middle East - which was the source of the oil for these ships - and the growth of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company.

In the 100 years since then there has never been a prolonged interruption in the supply of oil from that area - even during times of war. Admittedly prices have changed and sometimes production has been artificially limited - but the supply has continued.

Your point 5 is not a justification for electrification.

Point 8 is debatable. Why is engineering 'good' and by implication service industries less so? What do you mean by 'engineering'? Does 'software engineering' count? In which case there are quite a lot of software companies in Germany, starting with SAP.

The German economy is strong because from the end of the Second World War it permitted a market economy to develop with no attempt at central control such as that which bedevilled the British economy at the same time. Ludwig Erhard, the Economics Minister, should be beatified! The Allies also insisted on decentralisation to avoid political power becoming centralised again and unwittingly greatly benefitted the German recovery.

Another reason is the Euro, which because it is lower valued than would be the case if Germany had kept its independent currency means that German exports are now cheaper than they otherwise would have been.

And another reason is that German industry, in the main, makes what people want and the consumer demands quality - not just cheapness.

GRALISTAIR · 18 Oct 2016

Harbornite said:
Do we not have a thread on Chase Line electrification to add to that list?

Agreed - post edited - thanks

Harbornite · 18 Oct 2016

coppercapped said:
The German economy is strong because from the end of the Second World War it permitted a market economy to develop with no attempt at central control such as that which bedevilled the British economy at the same time. Ludwig Erhard, the Economics Minister, should be beatified! The Allies also insisted on decentralisation to avoid political power becoming centralised again and unwittingly greatly benefitted the German recovery.

Another reason is the Euro, which because it is lower valued than would be the case if Germany had kept its independent currency means that German exports are now cheaper than they otherwise would have been.

And another reason is that German industry, in the main, makes what people want and the consumer demands quality - not just cheapness.

The automotive industries of the UK and the BRD form an interesting comparison. After the war, many of the British car companies had outdated, out-of-touch managements who generally had a complacent attitude (after all, we had won the war and the colonies would lap up any crap that was churned out). Labour relations were also poor as there was an "us and them" mentality with the management and workforce, so strikes were more prevalent and productivity was lower. In contrast, the Germans didn't suffer from this mentality to the same degree because there wasn't as much of a class system and labour relations were generally better.

I know this is all off topic but I'll finish off with this point which is one example of arguably poor management: Lord Rootes, head of the Rootes Group, could have had the Beetle design but refused to take it on. Just reflect on how VW are doing compared to Hillman...

edwin_m · 18 Oct 2016

coppercapped said:
In the 100 years since then there has never been a prolonged interruption in the supply of oil from that area - even during times of war. Admittedly prices have changed and sometimes production has been artificially limited - but the supply has continued.

But in 1974 those changes and limitations were enough to knock the economies of the West severely off course. And perhaps if we weren't reliant on oil from the Middle East we would be less prone to military intervention there, which has probably made things worse in the long run both for the region and for the West.

I think the broader point here is that electricity can be generated at a reasonable cost from any of the sources of energy that are likely to be available. So electrifying the railways future-proofs them against whatever our energy mix is in 10, 50 or 100 years. Leaving them diesel powered means we either have to obtain oil from somewhere or synthesise it using other power sources, which is likely to be difficult and costly.

quantinghome · 18 Oct 2016

coppercapped said:
The German economy is strong because from the end of the Second World War it permitted a market economy to develop with no attempt at central control such as that which bedevilled the British economy at the same time. Ludwig Erhard, the Economics Minister, should be beatified! The Allies also insisted on decentralisation to avoid political power becoming centralised again and unwittingly greatly benefitted the German recovery.

Another reason is the Euro, which because it is lower valued than would be the case if Germany had kept its independent currency means that German exports are now cheaper than they otherwise would have been.

And another reason is that German industry, in the main, makes what people want and the consumer demands quality - not just cheapness.

I would add two other points:

1. A commitment by the German state/federal government to technical education and industrial training. This is the reason why it has been outcompeting British industry since the latter part of the 19th century.

2. A longer term view by German shareholders. Compare the fate of BASF and ICI.

These points go some way to explain why, despite removal of 'central control' of industrial strategy, the UK has not seen a revival in manufacturing.

Joseph_Locke · 18 Oct 2016

Just to be provocative, Electrification means "putting up/in traction current supply equipment, clearing the route for the electric trains and replacing all the incompatible (typically signalling and civils) infrastructure in order to actually be able to turn the traction current supply equipment on."

The actual traction current supply equipment part of a scheme is (currently) a minor fraction of the total cost.

Deepgreen · 18 Oct 2016

Master29 said:
I don`t really think we have an enlightened attitude to railways at all considering most of the UK network is over 100 years old. Hardly enlightenment is it

The age of the network does not bear any relationship to being "enlightened".

To say that the UK network is more than 100 years old assumes that the railway has not been renewed many times over. The routes used may be original in many cases but the equipment has almost always been replaced.
The joke about the careful road sweeper and his broom springs to mind - "I've had this broom for 40 years and it's still going strong. I've only had to replace the handle eight times and the head ten times."

There are numerous other factors at work, not least that the size of the UK compared to, say, the USA, means that passenger traffic has been very important in the UK, alongside freight, whereas in the US, the huge distances across remote land has meant that it has been more efficient to carry the power supply with the train rather than electrify, and trans-continental passenger traffic (which is a fraction in percentage terms of the comparable trans-UK traffic in any case) has largely gone to the airlines. Many US routes are also over 100 years old, by the way.

GRALISTAIR · 18 Oct 2016

Deepgreen said:
To say that the UK network is more than 100 years old assumes that the railway has not been renewed many times over. The routes used may be original in many cases but the equipment has almost always been replaced.

I agree to a certain extent (rails, signals, signal boxes etc) . But - electrification almost always results in the other infrastructure - Bridges being raised and renewed and this is nearly always the original structure - and as cited in my opening post - Farnworth Tunnel got re-bored on a new alignment and brought up to modern standards.

QueensCurve · 18 Oct 2016

GRALISTAIR said:
Did not want to start a separate thread but mods can always adjust as necessary. I have taken the liberty of putting summary links to the electrification threads I can find - here.

Bromsgrove electrification etc
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=107512

Chase Line Electrification
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=135006&highlight=Chase+Line+electrification

Waterloo- Exeter Electrification
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=122585&highlight=Chase+Line+electrification

Could I trouble you to check the links. I have been trying to find the thread about Chase Line Electrification bu keep getting Chiltern or Exeter.

GRALISTAIR · 18 Oct 2016

QueensCurve said:
Chase Line Electrification

Could I trouble you to check the links. I have been trying to find the thread about Chase Line Electrification bu keep getting Chiltern or Exeter.

It should be good now - double checked it from another computer. Thanks for pointing out - I will try and keep up to date - especially if the mods do make it a sticky.

RichmondCommu · 19 Oct 2016

coppercapped said:
Point 8 is debatable. Why is engineering 'good' and by implication service industries less so? What do you mean by 'engineering'? Does 'software engineering' count? In which case there are quite a lot of software companies in Germany, starting with SAP.

A strong manufacturing base supports so many more jobs than a service industry could ever do through its supply chain. For example the German steel industry is far stronger than ours because the domestic market for steel is much stronger.

And given that of course this is a railway forum not only do the Germans still operate busy marshalling yards but indeed they are in the process of building a brand new one! Given the problems that DBS are currently having in the UK I feel this is particularly apt.

coppercapped · 19 Oct 2016

RichmondCommu said:
A strong manufacturing base supports so many more jobs than a service industry could ever do through its supply chain. For example the German steel industry is far stronger than ours because the domestic market for steel is much stronger.

And given that of course this is a railway forum not only do the Germans still operate busy marshalling yards but indeed they are in the process of building a brand new one! Given the problems that DBS are currently having in the UK I feel this is particularly apt.

It depends entirely on what is being manufactured. Many modern products are small, high value items, such as personal electronic equipment - assuming GB plc would make them in any numbers - also have considerable supply chains behind them. But the products are small and light - therefore not needing much in the way of raw materials - and are distributed over a wide area. Unless the railways get back into parcels this sort of business is not suitable for rail.

If you go back a step and look at the chips that go into such products they are even smaller and lighter. Although the plants that make the chips are large - and very expensive, you won't get much change out of a £billion - the only raw materials going in are specialised chemicals.

Railways seem to be best at supporting the manufacture of reasonably large and heavy things...unless of course freight train speeds really could compete with lorries.

Germany is slightly different - and one of the differences is that HGVs - with an exception for those carrying perishable foodstuffs - are not allowed on the Autobahnen on Sundays. In spite of this the Autobahnen are still mostly wall-to-wall lorries.

RichmondCommu · 20 Oct 2016

coppercapped said:
It depends entirely on what is being manufactured. Many modern products are small, high value items, such as personal electronic equipment - assuming GB plc would make them in any numbers - also have considerable supply chains behind them. But the products are small and light - therefore not needing much in the way of raw materials - and are distributed over a wide area. Unless the railways get back into parcels this sort of business is not suitable for rail.

In all fairness SE Asia have pretty much cornered the market and are not going to let go of it. You are not going to see mass market mobile phones made here in the UK at any point in the future given that it's much cheaper to make them elsewhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

coppercapped said:
Railways seem to be best at supporting the manufacture of reasonably large and heavy things...unless of course freight train speeds really could compete with lorries.

Germany is slightly different - and one of the differences is that HGVs - with an exception for those carrying perishable foodstuffs - are not allowed on the Autobahnen on Sundays. In spite of this the Autobahnen are still mostly wall-to-wall lorries.

I would argue that Germany is in fact vastly different in that it's manufacturing huge amounts of reasonably large and heavy things, much of which is transported by rail. Take a look round your house and count how many things were manufactured in Germany; in our case it's the cooker, the dishwasher and the washing machine. And all of those things will have been transported to Hamburg by rail.

coppercapped · 21 Oct 2016

RichmondCommu said:
In all fairness SE Asia have pretty much cornered the market and are not going to let go of it. You are not going to see mass market mobile phones made here in the UK at any point in the future given that it's much cheaper to make them elsewhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would argue that Germany is in fact vastly different in that it's manufacturing huge amounts of reasonably large and heavy things, much of which is transported by rail. Take a look round your house and count how many things were manufactured in Germany; in our case it's the cooker, the dishwasher and the washing machine. And all of those things will have been transported to Hamburg by rail.

I am not convinced.

Hamburg serves mostly the deep sea trades using containers - the direct ro-ro ferry to Harwich ceased as long ago as 2002.

I would suggest that most consumer products which are 'Made in Germany' and exported to the UK come by HGV and then use the ferry crossings from Hook van Holland, Dunkerque or Calais or Eurotunnel's freight shuttles to reach the UK. For such short journeys lifting a container twice, plus the inherent time wasting that is continental freight transport, would seem uneconomic compared to driving an HGV through in one go.

If your reference to a new marshalling yard that is being built in Germany refers to the one at Halle, it should be noted that this will replace the one at Engelsdorf near Leipzig which will be closed so this will not be an additional yard.

GRALISTAIR · 24 Oct 2016

Post 4 updated with the latest thread on electrification clearances. With us all getting depressed (well I am ) I thought I would remind myself that it is about renewing infrastructure etc, etc, etc, etc

14xxDave · 25 Oct 2016

Point 8 is debatable. Why is engineering 'good' and by implication service industries less so? What do you mean by 'engineering'? Does 'software engineering' count? In which case there are quite a lot of software companies in Germany, starting with SAP.

Hmm SAP, yes well.....maybe not a good example.

Wavertreelad · 25 Oct 2016

coppercapped said:
I am not convinced.

Hamburg serves mostly the deep sea trades using containers - the direct ro-ro ferry to Harwich ceased as long ago as 2002.

I would suggest that most consumer products which are 'Made in Germany' and exported to the UK come by HGV and then use the ferry crossings from Hook van Holland, Dunkerque or Calais or Eurotunnel's freight shuttles to reach the UK. For such short journeys lifting a container twice, plus the inherent time wasting that is continental freight transport, would seem uneconomic compared to driving an HGV through in one go.

If your reference to a new marshalling yard that is being built in Germany refers to the one at Halle, it should be noted that this will replace the one at Engelsdorf near Leipzig which will be closed so this will not be an additional yard.

Absolutely, most intra European movements are by road because of the flexibility and speed that HGV's offer. It is perhaps surprising in this day and age that there are still many manufacturers who are unable to load or unload containers and rely on product being collected or delivered to them on curtain sided vehicles.

TheKnightWho · 25 Oct 2016

RichmondCommu said:
A strong manufacturing base supports so many more jobs than a service industry could ever do through its supply chain. For example the German steel industry is far stronger than ours because the domestic market for steel is much stronger.

And given that of course this is a railway forum not only do the Germans still operate busy marshalling yards but indeed they are in the process of building a brand new one! Given the problems that DBS are currently having in the UK I feel this is particularly apt.

Only within other engineering industries.

AnonymousUser1 · 25 Oct 2016

Wavertreelad said:
Absolutely, most intra European movements are by road because of the flexibility and speed that HGV's offer. It is perhaps surprising in this day and age that there are still many manufacturers who are unable to load or unload containers and rely on product being collected or delivered to them on curtain sided vehicles.

if you can load or unload custainsiders you can load or unload containers ...

it's just rather easier if a fully compliant docking solution is too expensive / space limited to rely on unloading by counterbalance flt in open space ...

and of course loose loads regardless of what they are loaded into have to be unloaded manually / semi automated

Electrification is not just about electrification

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member