Future of Diesel traction in the future and will unelectrified lines have another fuel type?

[LOL The Irony]

Excellent idea? It takes 4x the energy to create hydrogen than it does to charge a battery!

The battery that has had most of it's contents dug out of the ground and transported all over the world on massive, sulphur emitting cargo ships.

 

[HSTEd]

Even better for absolutely everything shower-wise is a combi boiler. Mains pressure at a good temperature, what's not to like?

That it gives an insufficient flow rate to actually give a nice shower?

 

[edwin_m]

I think you will find mobile turbines are of roughly equal efficiency to that of diesel, but only if they can be run at their best output, hence speculation over their use in tri-mode where the batteries act as demand buffers. There are plenty of smaller gas turbines available such as in helicopters and the auxiliary power generators in the tails of aircraft.

More broadly I think that the railways should aspire towards such advanced aircraft technology rather than the cruder products more appropriate to the motor trade such as your diesel power packs. Nothing wrong with technology drawn from the streets of course, it works very well in its intended application, but upcycling to rail use is not always successful as we have seen in the pacer.

Interesting thoughts.

The experimental APT and the TGV prototype in France both used gas turbines in the early 1970s, and turbine-powered trains ran in fleet service in France and North America. The main reason they weren't used more widely was said at the time to be their high fuel consumption making them uneconomic when the oil crisis increased prices - but of course nobody really worried about pollution in the 1970s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That it gives an insufficient flow rate to actually give a nice shower?

Get a better one then Mine gives a superb large-head rain shower.

 

[ed1971]

To get back on topic, an Eminox catalytic converter is being fitted as a trial to a SWR Class 159.The aim is to reduce NOx (nitrous oxide) emissions by over 80 per cent and CO (carbon monoxide) and hydrocarbons by over 90 per cent from current levels. If successful, these could be fitted to hundreds of DMUs as well as buses and lorries.

"www.railengineer.co.uk/2019/03/06/porterbrook-works-with-eminox-and-south-western-railway-to-reduce-diesel-emissions/"

Whilst in Manilla a different strategy to combat harmful pollution fumes is paint:

"www.gotecotech.com/air-pollution-absorbing-paint/"

 

[HSTEd]

Get a better one then Mine gives a superb large-head rain shower.

I simply prefer my traditional system that can drop 200L of rather hot water on me

 

[najaB]

I simply prefer my traditional system that can drop 200L of rather hot water on me

So that's 200L of water heated to (and maintained at) +30° above ambient, of which you use maybe 20L at any one time? Very efficient.

 

[coppercapped]

Interesting thoughts.

The experimental APT and the TGV prototype in France both used gas turbines in the early 1970s, and turbine-powered trains ran in fleet service in France and North America. The main reason they weren't used more widely was said at the time to be their high fuel consumption making them uneconomic when the oil crisis increased prices - but of course nobody really worried about pollution in the 1970s.

Oh but they did...
The first environmental protection group was founded in 1892 in San Francisco, look up the Sierra Club.
The UK's Clean Air Act was passed in 1956.
Remind me when exhaust gas treatment and catalysers were first used in cars...

 

[HSTEd]

So that's 200L of water heated to (and maintained at) +30° above ambient, of which you use maybe 20L at any one time? Very efficient.

20L? In the bath or shower I have been known to expend the entire supply of hot water available........
And remember in terms of the energy system, it can be efficient, because if you have a sufficiently large buffer store, I can use whatever electricity is convenient for the grid operator. We could use low speed power line signalling and thyristor control to keep the grid entirely in balance at all times without using peaking plant at all.

Also modern insulation is really high performance, and heat lost from a hot water cylinder is not really a loss over a significant portion of the year, as it substitutes for heating power.

 

[reddragon]

20L? In the bath or shower I have been known to expend the entire supply of hot water available........
And remember in terms of the energy system, it can be efficient, because if you have a sufficiently large buffer store, I can use whatever electricity is convenient for the grid operator. We could use low speed power line signalling and thyristor control to keep the grid entirely in balance at all times without using peaking plant at all.

Also modern insulation is really high performance, and heat lost from a hot water cylinder is not really a loss over a significant portion of the year, as it substitutes for heating power.

I have a 400l heat store, heated by solar hot water panels (30% demand), solar PV when spare and biomass. In the summer I can shower with no end all day for free!

 

[AM9]

I think you will find mobile turbines are of roughly equal efficiency to that of diesel, but only if they can be run at their best output, hence speculation over their use in tri-mode where the batteries act as demand buffers. There are plenty of smaller gas turbines available such as in helicopters and the auxiliary power generators in the tails of aircraft.

More broadly I think that the railways should aspire towards such advanced aircraft technology rather than the cruder products more appropriate to the motor trade such as your diesel power packs. Nothing wrong with technology drawn from the streets of course, it works very well in its intended application, but upcycling to rail use is not always successful as we have seen in the pacer.

I don't thonk that anyone on these forums would claim that Pacers are without faults, but their engines certainly aren't any worse than the power units in most other DMUs of similar age. They are smoother than the boat engines in 15x units and seem quite well suited to the load of a Pacer.

 

[InTheEastMids]

Interesting thoughts.

The experimental APT and the TGV prototype in France both used gas turbines in the early 1970s, and turbine-powered trains ran in fleet service in France and North America.

I don't think anybody is seriously looking at GTs for rail applications? This seems to be despite batteries providing at least some potential to keep the engine in its sweet spot (I recall that Bladon jets were looking at a hybrid car prototype years ago, so presumably a non-starter?). To get the efficiency above a diesel engine, you ideally need a secondary steam turbine, which seems like a lot of stuff to carry around. I am personally sceptical that GTs have a role to play in the rail industry.

The jet engine is actually quite crude, and far more polluting than a modern internal combustion engine. It's used in aircraft because it's simple, light for the power it offers and incredibly reliable. Just because it has wings and contains some highly precision engineering doesn't make it advanced.

I had a bit of a problem with this statement, to the point where I was wondering what your definition of "advanced" is...
I feel you're conflating concept - i.e. a more science-based view (i.e. simple mode of operation vs complex operation) with engineering (i.e. commodity vs advanced/specialised). I agree with your view on concept, but in terms of engineering execution, they are very advanced across multiple technologies including materials engineering, air/fluid dynamics, predictive analytics and so on. The main reason IC engines have cleaned up is because of regulation that has effectively mandated a number of abatement technologies. If there was the same regulatory pressure on aviation emissions, then they would be cleaner too.

 

[Moodster020]

You will have absolutely lousy end to end efficiency doing this however.

Commercially available electrolysers are only about 80% efficiency, and a diesel engine's thermal efficiency will be 50% or less.

So we are only getting 40% efficiency even without losses in the conversion reactor, which will be significant because the reactions are exothermic and ahve to be done at relatively low temperatuers where energy recovery will be impractical.

This makes the >80% efficiency of third rail look positively incredible.

The crux of the problem isnt really the overall efficiency though, more the calorific storage capability of it & the ease of use & existing infrastructure. I don't see battery or electric taking off on a total scale, as there isnt the Lithium to go around, nor the generating capacity to do so. You would need 20 x Drax power stations to replace & power the 30~40 million vehicles in the UK, and then the power station efficiency is practically the same as the combustion engine.

 

[reddragon]

The crux of the problem isnt really the overall efficiency though, more the calorific storage capability of it & the ease of use & existing infrastructure. I don't see battery or electric taking off on a total scale, as there isnt the Lithium to go around, nor the generating capacity to do so. You would need 20 x Drax power stations to replace & power the 30~40 million vehicles in the UK, and then the power station efficiency is practically the same as the combustion engine.

The demand if all trains went electric (75% are now) would go up from 1% to 1.5%, hardly an issue!

 

[Moodster020]

The demand if all trains went electric (75% are now) would go up from 1% to 1.5%, hardly an issue!

Could be. The problem though is the multibillions£££ to set it all up as electric.

 

[reddragon]

In the beginning, electric trains required continuous OLE or 3rd rail to operate. They draw high currents to start off and this has increased as train power & onboard services have increased. Substantial power supplies are needed and need upgrading for new trains

Today, hybridisation has started. Trains that return current to the grid and have diesel hybrid options - Class 800,802,769,230 etc

In the future full electric only hybridisation will become normal. Trains will collect power from OLE, 3rd rail or static power pads. Peak power will be balanced by on board stored power in batteries, capacitors & by other means to limit the power supply costs.

There will be gaps in the power supply and trains will be power by direct or stored supplies over their journey. The train will be programmed to use what is available for its intended diagram and have storage capacity to match need. Like class 800 v 802 different power / fuel capacities.

On longer remote routes power pads with energy stored on site will dump power via a capacitor to the train in seconds.

Time moves on

 

[najaB]

You would need 20 x Drax power stations to replace & power the 30~40 million vehicles in the UK, and then the power station efficiency is practically the same as the combustion engine.

They haven't (yet) invented the nuclear fission powered internal combustion engine. Nor one powered by a tidal barrage. Etc...

 

[HSTEd]

You would need 20 x Drax power stations to replace & power the 30~40 million vehicles in the UK, and then the power station efficiency is practically the same as the combustion engine.

I can generate electricity in ways you can't put in a car though.
For example I can make it by fissioning uranium.

 

[najaB]

I can generate electricity in ways you can't put in a car though.
For example I can make it by fissioning uranium.

Fusion on the other hand...

 

[edwin_m]

Oh but they did...
The first environmental protection group was founded in 1892 in San Francisco, look up the Sierra Club.
The UK's Clean Air Act was passed in 1956.
Remind me when exhaust gas treatment and catalysers were first used in cars...

Catalytic converters didn't arrive in the UK until well into the 80s (they were around earlier than that in America).

I don't think the Clean Air Act had anything to say about diesel pollution or pollution in any form from trains.

I was being slightly flippant when I said nobody cared about pollution in the 70s - the environmental movement was starting to emerge but wasn't really taken seriously by people in positions of power. There was still lead in petrol! (catalytic converters being one reason to get rid of it). Diesel fumes didn't really become a general public concern until the Volkswagen cheating scandal two or three years back.

 

[coppercapped]

Catalytic converters didn't arrive in the UK until well into the 80s (they were around earlier than that in America).

I don't think the Clean Air Act had anything to say about diesel pollution or pollution in any form from trains.

I was being slightly flippant when I said nobody cared about pollution in the 70s - the environmental movement was starting to emerge but wasn't really taken seriously by people in positions of power. There was still lead in petrol! (catalytic converters being one reason to get rid of it). Diesel fumes didn't really become a general public concern until the Volkswagen cheating scandal two or three years back.

I parsed your throw-away line as meaning that there were no general, as distinct from railway, concerns about pollution in the 1970s so I tried to quote some earlier examples of actions undertaken to reduce pollution.
My point is serious though - the first moves to reduce road vehicle emissions were taken in 1968 in California because a combination of a massive increase in the number of cars, the saucer shape of the Central Valley, little wind, clear skies and bright sunlight created a photo-chemical smog that was dangerous to those living in Los Angeles. Europe followed in setting emission limits in 1971 so people in power were listening and taking action. Catalytic converters were used in production cars in Europe from 1985 as you said. However before 'cats' were introduced other techniques were tried but in the early days all had a bad effect on fuel consumption.
I think were are agreeing!

 

[andrewgsavage]

I don't think anybody is seriously looking at GTs for rail applications? This seems to be despite batteries providing at least some potential to keep the engine in its sweet spot (I recall that Bladon jets were looking at a hybrid car prototype years ago, so presumably a non-starter?). To get the efficiency above a diesel engine, you ideally need a secondary steam turbine, which seems like a lot of stuff to carry around. I am personally sceptical that GTs have a role to play in the rail industry.

Not heard of any recent GTs for rail, but there are some GT buses around. (reading buses) I'd like to understand why they've gone for GTs but am struggling to find resources with describe efficiency/cost/weight etc

 

[Dave1987]

In the beginning, electric trains required continuous OLE or 3rd rail to operate. They draw high currents to start off and this has increased as train power & onboard services have increased. Substantial power supplies are needed and need upgrading for new trains

Today, hybridisation has started. Trains that return current to the grid and have diesel hybrid options - Class 800,802,769,230 etc

In the future full electric only hybridisation will become normal. Trains will collect power from OLE, 3rd rail or static power pads. Peak power will be balanced by on board stored power in batteries, capacitors & by other means to limit the power supply costs.

There will be gaps in the power supply and trains will be power by direct or stored supplies over their journey. The train will be programmed to use what is available for its intended diagram and have storage capacity to match need. Like class 800 v 802 different power / fuel capacities.

On longer remote routes power pads with energy stored on site will dump power via a capacitor to the train in seconds.

Time moves on

I admire your optimism. Sadly the physics does not back up you vision, not even close yet.

 

[Jozhua]

Maybe it would be better to clean up the diesel engines used on current trains. Personally I'd like to see an overhaul of the 15X fleets engines with something more modern. Newer engines could accelerate faster, be quieter, more fuel efficient and meet the latest emissions standards. Been as many of these vehicles move people through major cities and passengers often share enclosed areas such as stations and tunnels with them, just the emissions improvements would definitely make an impact on people's exposure to particulates, etc.

 

[AndrewE]

Why retrofit 20 or 30 year old 15xs when we need to get rid of internal combustion engines? Much better to put the money into electrifying and then re-use EMUs currently off-lease.
How many DMUs do regenerative braking?

 

[Charlie Smythe]

I admire your optimism. Sadly the physics does not back up you vision, not even close yet.

Not possible, you can't just dump that much power in seconds.

 

[Jozhua]

Why retrofit 20 or 30 year old 15xs when we need to get rid of internal combustion engines? Much better to put the money into electrifying and then re-use EMUs currently off-lease.
How many DMUs do regenerative braking?

Completely agree, we would be better putting the money into electrifying.

However, this is a strange world where Grayling is in charge and long term investments aren't his style. Guess we'll just have to get some masking tape and keep those HSTs and 15X's rolling along!

(Masking tape may be a bit ambitious, own brand cellotape will now be used.)

 

[reddragon]

I admire your optimism. Sadly the physics does not back up you vision, not even close yet.

They are already doing it in China with buses, simply dumping the power needed. You just need a high enough voltage. Note how much smaller a 25kV cable is compared with a 750v DC 3rd rail.

We would only be adding enough power to top up the capacitor, that can discharge to the train or battery to top it up.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

Ripping into the DfT because you don't like Grayling is fine but have you lot done the sums and run the numbers like the DfT have? As backwards and disorganised as the DfT may seem, they are not stupid.

 

[reddragon]

Its impossible, no one can do it

Oh, that's cheating, it doesn't count, I am going to stomp my feet now!