Hydrogen powered trains ?

[Dai Corner]

But then, as with hydrogen, you're back to having to construct a national distribution network (are LNG pipelines even possible?) or accept a big increase in road deliveries. I agree diesel is usually delivered to destination by road, but it probably does most of its land journey by pipeline.

I suppose you could always move it by rail?

 

[Class 170101]

I would think it would be safer and more efficient to 'burn' hydrogen in a power station and transmit it as electricity via the OLE system than to carry it around as a fuel source. As someone mentioned above it is more dangerous than carrying diesel around. But that no withstanding what about the weight? Diesel trains are less reliable and higher on track wear than electric trains so surely the same applies for Hydrogen trains?

 

[snowball]

But that no withstanding what about the weight? Diesel trains are less reliable and higher on track wear than electric trains so surely the same applies for Hydrogen trains?

I would have thought fuel cells would be lighter than internal combustion engines with alternators? But what about the weight of the tanks to contain high-pressure hydrogen?

 

[Dai Corner]

Of course, there's the question of how the Hydrogen is produced. Let's look at the chemistry

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_production

There are four main sources for the commercial production of hydrogen: natural gas, oil, coal, and electrolysis; which account for 48%, 30% 18% and 4% of the world’s hydrogen production respectively.[5] Fossil fuels are the dominant source of industrial hydrogen.[6] Carbon dioxide can be separated from natural gas with a 60-70% efficiency for hydrogen production and from other hydrocarbons to varying degrees of efficiency.[7]Specifically, bulk hydrogen is usually produced by the steam reforming of methane or natural gas.[8] The production of hydrogen from natural gas is the cheapest source of hydrogen currently. This process consists of heating the gas in the presence of steam and a nickel catalyst. The resulting endothermic reaction breaks up the methane molecules and forms carbon monoxide CO and hydrogen H2. The carbon monoxide gas can then be passed with steam over iron oxide or other oxides and undergo a water gas shift reaction. This last reaction produces even more H2. The downside to this process is that its major byproducts are CO, CO2 and other greenhouse gases.[5] Depending on the quality of the feedstock (natural gas, rich gases, naphtha, etc.), one ton of hydrogen produced will also produce 9 to 12 tons of CO2.[9]

For this process at high temperatures (700–1100 °C), steam (H2O) reacts with methane (CH4) in an endothermic reaction to yield syngas.[10]

CH4 + H2O → CO + 3 H2
In a second stage, additional hydrogen is generated through the lower-temperature, exothermic, water gas shift reaction, performed at about 360 °C:

CO + H2O → CO2 + H2
Essentially, the oxygen (O) atom is stripped from the additional water (steam) to oxidize CO to CO2. This oxidation also provides energy to maintain the reaction. Additional heat required to drive the process is generally supplied by burning some portion of the methane.

So you end up using hydrocarbons and producing waste carbon dioxide.

 

[edwin_m]

I would think it would be safer and more efficient to 'burn' hydrogen in a power station and transmit it as electricity via the OLE system than to carry it around as a fuel source.

Hydrogen isn't a source of energy - there is no significant reserve of hydrogen waiting to be extracted as there is with natural gas. It is a means of storing energy and has to be created, generally from hydrocarbons or electrolysis as mentioned in another post. So the only reason to generate electricity from hydrogen would be if you were generating the hydrogen from surplus nuclear/renewable electricity at times when it couldn't be better used, and storing it to turn back into electricity when demand was higher. As far as I can tell there are several other ways of storing electricity that appear more viable than hydrogen.

 

[xotGD]

Of course, there's the question of how the Hydrogen is produced. Let's look at the chemistry

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_production



So you end up using hydrocarbons and producing waste carbon dioxide.

But you produce the CO2 at a central location where it is easy to implement carbon capture and storage. Unlike if the CO2 is being vented from the exhaust of every car, bus, lorry and train (and indeed central heating boiler).

 

[edwin_m]

The same is true of any large fossil fuel plant or power station, but despite having this advantage I don't believe a single one has implemented a viable CCS system.

 

[InTheEastMids]

The same is true of any large fossil fuel plant or power station, but despite having this advantage I don't believe a single one has implemented a viable CCS system.

There are 1 or 2 active CCS demonstrators globally associated with power generation. However, the main reason for doing CCS is to use the CO2 is for enhanced oil recovery. The CO2 price isn't high enough to make a business case out of CO2 reduction, and the projects to date are not at the scale that would capture the bulk of CO2 emissions from a CEGB-era coal-fired power plant.

 

[The Ham]

I wouldn't be surprised if we ended up seeing some relaxation, much in the same way as we're likely to see with the current 2020 deadline for rail vehicles needing to be compliant with the accessibility regulations.

The good news should be that electrification should be of higher priority, especially if battery powered trains are going to be used. Of course if batteries are fitted to trains, especially if they are widely fitted so that a train could limp a mile or two if the wires go down, then some electrification projects could be a lot cheaper to do as you could just skip any bridge and probably most tunnel works and the trains could still run without the risk of getting stuck. By only having a relatively small battery pack it wouldn't add much to the cost of the trains.

It would be interesting to see if anything is said about more electrification projects, or an annual budget for electrification is provided.

To that end I've started a petition asking for "More investment for electrification after the statement about diesel trains."

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/212757/sponsors/new?token=Od1nHG2PaYwdzxAfvMTd

Of course for many they're going to be happy at the thought of no more Voyagers! (Of course they were likely to be life expired or nearly life expired by 2040 anyway).

The petition link above doesn't take you to the first page, given that the petition has now been published (i.e. you can search for it) , so here's the updated link:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/212757

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

Looks like the WAG are considering possibly using Hydrogen trains on the north/ south Wales metro s in the future.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-44495836

The new Wales and Borders rail franchise could be an opportunity to introduce "clean" hydrogen-powered trains, a Plaid Cymru AM has said.

Simon Thomas made the call off the back of research he commissioned on the potential to developing hydrogen infrastructure for transport in Wales.

Hydrogen-fuelled trains emit only steam and condensed water. They are currently being trialled in Germany.

The Welsh Government said it supported hydrogen technology.

Hydrogen-fuelled cars emit no carbon dioxide - although the production of hydrogen itself can, unless it is produced from renewable energy

A report by Guto Owen, a consultant on developing renewable energy and low-carbon technology projects, said the Welsh Government has a "track-record" in awareness of hydrogen for transport.

It suggested that a planned automotive innovation park in Ebbw Vale, Blaenau Gwent, could nurture and develop ongoing support for the development of hydrogen vehicles.

It also put forward the idea that water in the Elan Valley reservoir system in Powys could be used for the production of hydrogen.

Mr Owen said the new railway franchise, and proposed metros in south and north Wales, "may present opportunities to fund hydrogen transport".

"This could result in overall cost savings when compared to conventional rail electrification and by establishing hydrogen hubs for multiple transport users to reach economies of scale", the report said.

It called for funding for hydrogen transport schemes, and for opportunities to support the local production and supply of hydrogen to be considered.

One firm, based in Llandrindod Wells, has been developing a Welsh hydrogen-fuelled car with £2m in Welsh Government funding.

The Welsh Government has awarded KeolisAmey the Wales and Borders franchise, promising new trains and services.

Parts of the Valley Lines network is planned to be served by "tram-train" electric vehicles, while tri-mode trains combining diesel, battery and 25kV electric power have been promised elsewhere.

Mr Thomas said: "Wales can once again be a place of innovators by establishing a dedicated team from our universities and councils to secure the funding for the local production and supply of hydrogen.

"The Welsh Government could use the opportunities provided by the new rail franchise and proposed Metros for the introduction of hydrogen trains and buses in Wales to ensure the air we breathe is non-polluting and fresh."

Report author Guto Owen added: "Wales, with its abundant natural resources, has an opportunity to join the early movers by fast-tracking hydrogen for environmental, health and economic benefits."

The Welsh Government said it had been proactive in supporting hydrogen technology in Wales.

"Our £5bn investment in a new rail service for Wales includes a major commitment to decarbonisation, electric traction, and rolling stock replacement, and the use of electricity sourced from 100% renewable sources," a spokesman said.

"We explored fully the option of hydrogen technology with bidders during the procurement process and will continue to look for innovation on the network into the future."

 

[ComUtoR]

https://www.globalrailnews.com/2018...el-cell-trains-enter-service-in-lower-saxony/

Alstom’s first Coradia iLints have today entered service in Lower Saxony, Germany.

Built nearby in Salzgitter, the trains are equipped with fuel cells which convert hydrogen and oxygen into electricity, eliminating pollutant emissions related to propulsion.

From today, two of these hydrogen fuel-cell trains will enter commercial service on a 100km stretch of operator Eisenbahnen und Verkehrsbetriebe Elbe-Weser’s (EVB) rail network between Cuxhaven, Bremerhaven, Bremervörde and Buxtehude, replacing its diesel fleet in the process.

Alstom CEO Henri Poupart-Lafarge described the hydrogen fuel-cell train as “a revolution for Alstom and for the future of mobility.”

The future is now

 

[richieb1971]

Maybe 5 years time the UK will join the bandwagon. We are struggling with conventional.

 

[GusB]

UK hydrogen train demonstrator to be tested in 2019

https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...-train-demonstrator-to-be-tested-in-2019.html

UK: A memorandum of understanding for the development of a hydrogen fuel cell demonstrator train was signed by leasing company Porterbrook and the University of Birmingham’s Centre for Railway Research & Education at InnoTrans on September 19.

Porterbrook is to provide an ex-Thameslink Class 319 25 kV 50 Hz/750 V DC third rail electric multiple-unit for the Hydro Flex project. The partners expect it to be equipped with a fuel cell system and ready for demonstration runs in mid-2019. It would retain the ability to use electrical power.

Porterbrook CEO Mary Grant told Railway Gazette that the company was aiming to innovate and look ahead to what what the railway industry will need 30 years in the future.

While electrification is likely to remain the optimal approach for busy inter-city routes, cost and practicality mean that there will be a need for self-powered trains long into the future, believes Helen Simpson, Engineering Supplier Development Manager at Porterbrook, and this is likely to require a mix of traction types.

Much of the interest in hydrogen power is because of its potential as a means of energy storage, Simpson explained. It could help to smooth national demand for electrical power by enabling power generated off peak to be used to produce hydrogen for later use.

This means that early applications of hydrogen trains could be in areas where there is hydrogen production infrastructure in place for other purposes.

There are currently no acceptance procedures in place for approving hydrogen trains for use in the UK, Simpson said, but this is not expected to be a problem for the project as there is industry-wide interest in developing hydrogen technology.

BCRRE has already undertaken research into the potential use of fuel cells in rail operations, and has worked with a number of global rail businesses to identify potential opportunities.

A team from BCRRE recently demonstrated a narrow-gauge locomotive powered by a fuel cell.

‘Hydrogen powered trains offer a cleaner alternative to current diesel trains and this project demonstrates the opportunities and value of innovation in the rail industry’, said Dr Stuart Hillmansen, Senior Lecturer in Railway Systems.

Another project for the 319 - somehow I think 2019 is being a bit optimistic, though

 

[Andy25]

UK hydrogen train demonstrator to be tested in 2019

https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...-train-demonstrator-to-be-tested-in-2019.html



Another project for the 319 - somehow I think 2019 is being a bit optimistic, though

Alstom have been looking at doing the same for class 321. The lead times for hydrogen fuel cells are 9 months alone so unless they've done alot of pre work it does sound very optimistic! Plus testing on top of that.

 

[darloscott]

A new article based on the possibility of hydrogen train trials on the Tees Valley line which links Bishop Auckland, Darlington, Middlesbrough and Saltburn. Alstom get a mention and a quick search suggests Alstom 321s have been mentioned for this previously.

Being in the region myself I've been following the mayor's progress and he does talk a lot of sense and has a good business brain and seems to know how to get things done. I think this is one to watch in the future, certainly an alternative to electrifying the lines here.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/u...ees-valley-hydrogen-trains-are-getting-norths

Mayor of the Tees Valley: Hydrogen Trains are getting the North’s Low-Carbon economy on track

Written by: Ben Houchen Posted On: 21st November 2018

Ben Houchen, Conservative Mayor of the Tees Valley writes about the potential of hydrogen powered trains which he says can help our railways become cleaner, greener and more reliable.

Ben Houchen, Conservative Mayor of the Tees Valley Ben Houchen, Conservative Mayor of the Tees ValleyCredit: Mayor of the Tees Valley
If you were asked what the biggest change you expect to see in our rail network over the coming years, you might suggest HS2 or even Northern Powerhouse Rail. My answer would be hydrogen powered trains. They’re not only able to solve a number of technical issues facing the rail network, as well as reducing pollution, but they’re already in operation in Germany so they can be deployed much sooner than other major upgrades.

Today diesel trains carry the burden in our rail network where electrification has to date been impossible or uneconomical. Hydrogen trains can address both of these issues, while simultaneously tackling health and environmental concerns around diesel trains.

The North of England needs an immediate and positive step change in our rail network. Northern Powerhouse Rail, formerly called HS3, will go a long way towards delivering this. It is, however, only part of the overall solution. Cutting journey times across the Pennines is important for communities on both sides, but better connectivity within regions and on other routes between them is vital.

So far this all sounds fantastic, but hydrogen powered trains won’t save the environment all by themselves. Hydrogen rail will be most effective as part of a wider, national decarbonisation agenda. Given the Tees Valley already produces half of the UK’s commercially available hydrogen and are progressing a serious proposal to build the National Hydrogen Centre in our region, we are ideally situated to lead this.

In my region and many others, the industries that have sustained us for decades need to significantly reduce their CO2 output if they are to meet the environmental targets of the coming decades. The scale of the challenge we face in this area may seem daunting, but when seen in the context of the global opportunity of decarbonisation, the skills that will allow us to deliver one will let us benefit from the other.

Hydrogen trains offer the same benefits to the wider UK that decarbonisation does in the Tees Valley. As our railways become cleaner, greener and more reliable, our railway industry in towns like Newton Aycliffe can survive and grow as the hydrogen rail industry grows worldwide.

The Government’s Industrial Strategy very rightly makes clean growth one of its Grand Challenges. Embracing hydrogen rail, as well as hydrogen cars, busses and public service vehicles can directly add an important string to the bow of this strategy by changing UK industry for the better, as well as meeting it’s more general requirements for good, high-productivity jobs.

Discussions are ongoing on the potential for hydrogen trials by Northern in the Tees Valley, possibly in the next three to four years. This, in addition to the work we’re doing on other areas of our future Hydrogen Economy and the innovations made by companies like Alstom, show the progress we are making in the UK and worldwide. With the right support from Government, we can deliver real benefits for business and industry, but also in terms of our environmental impact and people’s quality of life.

 

[Bornin1980s]

Might this put the Tees Valley on the map again?

 

[Charlie Smythe]

At the moment it's possible to get an energy generation density from hydrogen fuel cells of better than 3Kw per litre. So, a 100kW fuel cell will take up about 33 litres. 2 of those will take up the size of a large rucksack and provide up to 200 kW, or over 260hp.
A rough rule of thumb is a basic MU needs power of 250hp per carriage so allowing for a bit of engineering redunancy, you're probably looking at a fuel cell volume that's a bit bigger but broadly similar to a convential deisel engine. Of course, the fuel cell just outputs electrical power so there'd be no need for alternators and such. Just hook it up to the traction motors through some suitable control method and you're good to go...

Whilst the robustness is going to be an issue, I can't see that providing a decent power to weight and power to space ratio is going to be a problem. In fact, I could see a bi-mode electric and hydrofgen fuel cell power unit being quite attractive.

Hydrogen storage isn't quite as straightforward as pouring diesel into a tank admittedly.
But new technologies are coming in and there are high capacity technolgies out there and being developed that can help solve this challenge. Maybe such as:
http://www.moftechnologies.com/applications/gas-storage/
I think the iLINT has the hydrogen clyinders on the roof. Whilst the UK loading gauge would make this a bit harder, I don't see it as an impossible issue - one section of a carriage could have a slightly lowered roof as some do already for the pantograph recess.

Will hydrogen powered trains work out? I don't know but I think the probabilites are higher than many may think...
Cheers,
Mr Toad

On the subject of storing hyrogen, couldnt you just have huge tanks of hydrogen above or below ground at TMD's and other refuelling points? Or is it more complicated and am i missing somthing.

 

[Charlie Smythe]

I think the issue will be the transport and storage before it gets to the train. Hydrogen is highly flammable and has one of the lowest ignition energies at 0.02mJ. This means that an almost invisible spark will ignite a mixture of Hydrogen in air (i.e. a leak). Read this for some more background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_safety.

Taken as proportion of total diesel fuel consumption in the UK what proportion do rail based diesel engines use, I suspect it is small so is it really worth setting a whole new infrastructure up to support hydrogen powered trains, I suspect the money would be much used in other ways. Its one thing to have a few 'research' trains quite another to change the whole infrastructure over.

You say its really flammable, if say there was even the tiniest leak and a refilling point and the driver was a little two throttle happy, wheels slipped and there was some small sparks, could this be enough to ignite the hydrogen.

 

[gingertom]

You say its really flammable, if say there was even the tiniest leak and a refilling point and the driver was a little two throttle happy, wheels slipped and there was some small sparks, could this be enough to ignite the hydrogen.

you'd think so, plus a unit with DC motors will have an arc at the commutator capable of igniting hydrogen. Hydrogen is very light and rises, therefore carrying it up and hopefully away from these ignition sources. There's still a tiny risk though which might be too much for the ORR.

 

[Andy25]

you'd think so, plus a unit with DC motors will have an arc at the commutator capable of igniting hydrogen. Hydrogen is very light and rises, therefore carrying it up and hopefully away from these ignition sources. There's still a tiny risk though which might be too much for the ORR.

But you would never retraction with hydrogen and keep the old DC motors, you'd put in new AC motors and they'd be well away from the tanks on the roof.

 

[gingertom]

But you would never retraction with hydrogen and keep the old DC motors, you'd put in new AC motors and they'd be well away from the tanks on the roof.

agreed. Porterbrook's dabble in hydrogen technology is to be a 321, hopefully they will have been retractioned with AC motors? What about auxiliaries such as compressors, door openers and windscreen wipers won't have DC motors with commutators either?

 

[broadgage]

On the subject of storing hyrogen, couldnt you just have huge tanks of hydrogen above or below ground at TMD's and other refuelling points? Or is it more complicated and am i missing something.

It is a bit more complicated because hydrogen at atmospheric pressure is far too bulky to use as a portable energy store.
It must be compressed to a great pressure to keep the bulk down. Pumping this ultra high pressure and highly flammable gas into a rail vehicle would be more involved than filling with diesel fuel which only needs a hose and a pump.
Also, any bulk storage would need a multitude of relatively small high pressure tanks, large tanks are impossible at the high pressures needed.

Liquified hydrogen can be stored at modest pressures but is even more complex due to the extreme low temperatures required. Any store of liquified hydrogen will be continually boiling away if not used, this represents both a financial loss and a fire/explosion risk.

 

[broadgage]

agreed. Porterbrook's dabble in hydrogen technology is to be a 321, hopefully they will have been retractioned with AC motors? What about auxiliaries such as compressors, door openers and windscreen wipers won't have DC motors with commutators either?

You cant realistically avoid all electric sparks on a modern train. EVERY light switch, light fitting, warning lamp, relay and contactor would have to be "intrinsically safe" and approved for use in explosive atmospheres.
And of course every passenger would have to be strip searched for matches, lighters, cellphones, laptop PCs, flashlights and other potential ignition sources.

Cant be done, the emphasis would have to be on avoiding hydrogen leaks.

 

[gingertom]

You cant realistically avoid all electric sparks on a modern train. EVERY light switch, light fitting, warning lamp, relay and contactor would have to be "intrinsically safe" and approved for use in explosive atmospheres.
And of course every passenger would have to be strip searched for matches, lighters, cellphones, laptop PCs, flashlights and other potential ignition sources.

Cant be done, the emphasis would have to be on avoiding hydrogen leaks.

absolutely. Also rule out any form of catering that involves heating anything up.

 

[broadgage]

absolutely. Also rule out any form of catering that involves heating anything up.

I suppose that self heating tins would be allowed, I have seen a demonstration in which petrol was splashed over a self heating can of food, so as to demonstrate the safety thereof.

 

[Andy25]

It is a bit more complicated because hydrogen at atmospheric pressure is far too bulky to use as a portable energy store.
It must be compressed to a great pressure to keep the bulk down. Pumping this ultra high pressure and highly flammable gas into a rail vehicle would be more involved than filling with diesel fuel which only needs a hose and a pump.
Also, any bulk storage would need a multitude of relatively small high pressure tanks, large tanks are impossible at the high pressures needed.

Liquified hydrogen can be stored at modest pressures but is even more complex due to the extreme low temperatures required. Any store of liquified hydrogen will be continually boiling away if not used, this represents both a financial loss and a fire/explosion risk.

Liquid Hydrogen only needs to be chilled where the pressure is high enough that the friction generated in the pipes would heat the hydrogen up enough to ignite if it weren't chilled.

Hydrogen trains will use a lower pressure which means chilling isn't necessary. This simplifies the processes and reduces some of the risks.

 

[Andy25]

agreed. Porterbrook's dabble in hydrogen technology is to be a 321, hopefully they will have been retractioned with AC motors? What about auxiliaries such as compressors, door openers and windscreen wipers won't have DC motors with commutators either?

321 is owned by Eversholt.

The tanks will be above floor level, likely the roof. This is well away from most equipment and as hydrogen is so light if it did escape it would vent upwards in the air.

But the tanks used are small diamater in groups. So escaping gas would be limited, very unlikely more than one would leak. And they are kevlar lined and designed to survive impacts etc. They even have valves to vent the hydrogen is temperature or pressure moves outside of the norm.

 

[gingertom]

321 is owned by Eversholt.

yes they are, my bad.

The tanks will be above floor level, likely the roof. This is well away from most equipment and as hydrogen is so light if it did escape it would vent upwards in the air.

But the tanks used are small diamater in groups. So escaping gas would be limited, very unlikely more than one would leak. And they are kevlar lined and designed to survive impacts etc. They even have valves to vent the hydrogen is temperature or pressure moves outside of the norm.

all very well if the vent to open air when out in the country but worst case it could vent into an enclosed space like a tunnel and all it would take is a spark from a passing electric train's pantograph to ignite. Agreed it is very unlikely but still possible and therefore a real risk.

 

[HSTEd]

Even cryogenic hydrogen has an energy density of only about ~8GJ/cubic metre. (It has a very high energy per unit mass, but a specific gravity of only 0.08)

That is about 2.2MWh/cubic metre.
Which is about three times what a lithium ion battery can be made to achieve.
But then we have to include the fuel cell, all the associated equipment and numerous other bits and peices.

I'm not seeing the attraction over a battery charged with a high performance off-board DC charger.

 

[Andy25]

Even cryogenic hydrogen has an energy density of only about ~8GJ/cubic metre. (It has a very high energy per unit mass, but a specific gravity of only 0.08)

That is about 2.2MWh/cubic metre.
Which is about three times what a lithium ion battery can be made to achieve.
But then we have to include the fuel cell, all the associated equipment and numerous other bits and peices.

I'm not seeing the attraction over a battery charged with a high performance off-board DC charger.

The highest range I've seen on battery train is 80-100km. Bombardier did a trial and with 50km range needed almost 15tonnes of battery.

Hydrogen has a range of nearer 1000km and would be lighter than an equivalent demu because a fuel cell weighs considerably less than a diesel engine even when you consider the hydrogen tanks vs diesel tanks.