Hydrogen trains for Whitby ?!

[yorksrob]

I note from Modern Railways that the Whitby line is to be included in the North East's new Hydrogen hub. The service is to be provided by class 600 units rebuilt from shortened 3 carriage 321 units.

Whilst I approve of de-carbonisation of the network, this proposal does set some alarm bells ringing. Suburban 2/3rd doors will undoubtedly be a come down from a 156 or 158 (currently serving the route) although this isn't the core of my concern - having seen the excellent job Wessex trains did on their 150's, it's possible to have a good quality interior on such trains.

My primary concern is capacity. According to MR, the seating capacity of a 3 carriage 600 unit will be similar to a 2 car 156 or 158. This is a major concern.

A 2 carriage 158 or 156 unit on the Whitby line is often full and standing. We're repeating the mistake of not accompanying renewals with capacity enhancements.

Also, certain services on the line are actually four carriages mercifully. Will there be any provision to double up these 600 iunits on the line, will infrastructure enhancements be required ?

If this leads to a reduction in capacity it will be an abysmal reduction in service.

 

[DanNCL]

A 6 car 321/600 would be 120m long, shorter than the 155m limit for Battersby, 162m for Middlesbrough and 172m for Whitby. Local door operation can be used anywhere else on the route should the train be longer than the platform, although Nunthorpe turnbacks would be prevented, as they are for 156/158 4 car formations.

 

[yorksrob]

A 6 car 321/600 would be 120m long, shorter than the 155m limit for Battersby, 162m for Middlesbrough and 172m for Whitby. Local door operation can be used anywhere else on the route should the train be longer than the platform, although Nunthorpe turnbacks would be prevented, as they are for 156/158 4 car formations.

Thanks, so that might work in that case.

They need to have enough units so that two can work th line coupled. More if infrastructure improvements on the route enable more trains !

 

[YorksLad12]

As it's a conversion for a test, if it goes forward to a 'squadron' of class 600 units could they be re-formed into four or more cars?

 

[Roast Veg]

Where is the hydrogen for this scheme coming from?

 

[NorthOxonian]

It certainly seems like a decent shout for conversion to hydrogen. There's no way the Esk Valley line will ever be electrified, so it's probably going to have to be powered by either batteries or hydrogen if the aim is to reduce emissions on the network to zero (or close).

Though I'm not sure how this will work with through workings - many trains on the Whitby line (and all of the Battersby shorts iirc) start at Newcastle. It's not as if the line is self contained!

 

[Fincra5]

It certainly seems like a decent shout for conversion to hydrogen. There's no way the Esk Valley line will ever be electrified, so it's probably going to have to be powered by either batteries or hydrogen if the aim is to reduce emissions on the network to zero (or close).

Though I'm not sure how this will work with through workings - many trains on the Whitby line (and all of the Battersby shorts iirc) start at Newcastle. It's not as if the line is self contained!

Timetables and Diagrams can change

 

[willgreen]

Though I'm not sure how this will work with through workings - many trains on the Whitby line (and all of the Battersby shorts iirc) start at Newcastle. It's not as if the line is self contained!

Isn't that partly to do with stock movements? Or am I imagining that?

 

[Carlisle]

I note from Modern Railways that the Whitby line is to be included in the North East's new Hydrogen hub. The service is to be provided by class 600 units rebuilt from shortened 3 carriage 321 units.

Sounds like the green agendas just a means to dump 30 year old units onto lesser used northern routes, that previously wasn’t seen as acceptable practice

 

[yorksrob]

Sounds like the green agendas just a means to dump 30 year old units onto lesser used northern routes, that previously wasn’t seen as acceptable practice

They just need to understand the capacity of the route and its requirements. I suspect they won't even have been to Whitby.

 

[DanNCL]

Though I'm not sure how this will work with through workings - many trains on the Whitby line (and all of the Battersby shorts iirc) start at Newcastle. It's not as if the line is self contained!

Isn't that partly to do with stock movements? Or am I imagining that?

Through working between the Whitby branch and other lines is planned to end at the May 2022 timetable change. Nunthorpe shorts will be interworked with Middlesbrough - Whitby services and will only run Middlesbrough - Nunthorpe. Presumably the timing of these will be so that outbound and return Whitby services pass at Nunthorpe, eliminating the need for any Battersby terminators whilst still maintaining the hourly service between Middlesbrough - Nunthorpe, and would have the added benefit of slightly reducing headways between Whitby services.

The Whitby branch was operated as a self contained one unit operation in the Serco-Abellio Northern era - the unit stabled at Middlesbrough overnight so swapping the unit out for maintenance was a simple task, as Durham Coast diagrams also start and end in Middlesbrough.

 

[ainsworth74]

The original plan was for a new dedicated depot to be established at Lackenby (on the site of the old Basic Oxygen Steel plant which is already rail connected and has plenty of room for redevelopment) where the Tees Valley Mayor keeps banging on about Teesside being a "hydrogen hub" as part of the Tees Works project to regenerate the steelworks site. This would look after any hydrogen trains deployed in the Tees Valley rather than Heaton.

I believe Northern (in Arriva days) got so far as seeking the opinion of the local authority planning department on perspective planing application (certainly documents appeared on the councils planning site!).

However it went very quiet on that front so I'm not sure if that remains the plan.

 

[ainsworth74]

Aha here we go! I've attached the three documents that came from the application. They include the Council's decision that an Environmental Impact Study would not be required. An indicative site plan and Northern's application for a screening opinion which is a fairly interesting document with some details about the proposed scheme. This all dates from April 2019 and I'm not aware of any further development since. Certainly no shovels hit the ground in January 2020 like the document suggested would happen!

I've quoted the introduction below but there's more bits and pieces in the document itself:

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Tees Valley Hydrogen Trains Project

In response to Government proposals to remove all diesel-only trains from service by 2040, Arriva Rail North (ARN) has developed a proposal for the introduction of Hydrogen Multiple Unit trains (HMUs) to serve the Tees Valley.

Whilst battery-powered trains offer a possible solution in the case of short non-electrified branches within a largely electrified local network, they lack the range needed for replacement of diesel traction in nonelectrified areas, such as the Tees Valley.

Use of hydrogen as a fuel source offers the required range, whilst offering the same benefits as battery technology of zero emissions at point of use and the potential for zero-carbon operation if ‘green’ energy sources are utilised in its production.

The project goes beyond previous trials in seeking to develop a fleet for long-term revenue operation, whilst also developing the supporting systems and industry structures which will be necessary in order to establish hydrogen as a source of railway traction energy in the future.

This project is therefore not considered to be trial; rather a first fleet deployment of hydrogen trains and will enable the proving of hydrogen technology in revenue service, providing a complete solution with potential applications elsewhere on the Northern and wider National Rail networks.

In the longer term, it is anticipated that this project will not only provide a solution for the Tees Valley, but that the learning from this project will have potential applications both across other ARN operations and the UK rail industry as a whole.

The project has the support of the Tees Valley Combined Authority and its Mayor, since it fits well with its plans for local regeneration and its aspirations for Teesside to become a centre of a national hydrogen economy.

And for those that need some help orienting themselves as to where is being referred to in the above document and in particular the site plan this is the location in question. Neatly I'm fairly certainly that it was also the depot for the shunters that were used on the internal rail network of the steelworks site.

 

[daodao]

Though I'm not sure how this will work with through workings - many trains on the Whitby line (and all of the Battersby shorts iirc) start at Newcastle. It's not as if the line is self contained!

Hydrogen trains would in theory be useful on the Newcastle-Sunderland-Middlesbrough line as well, given that 25 kV AC electrification is not possible northwards from Sunderland as the line is already electrified with 1,500 V DC overhead lines for the Tyne and Wear Metro.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Hydrogen trains would in theory be useful on the Newcastle-Sunderland-Middlesbrough line as well, given that 25 kV AC electrification is not possible northwards from Sunderland as the line is already electrified with 1,500 V DC overhead lines for the Tyne and Wear Metro.

The new Tyne and Wear Metro stock is going to be dual voltage so future conversion of the line from Sunderland to 25kV AC shouldn't be a problem.

 

[DanNCL]

The new Tyne and Wear Metro stock is going to be dual voltage so future conversion of the line from Sunderland to 25kV AC shouldn't be a problem.

The new Metro fleet won't be dual voltage, dual voltage capability was dropped from the specification after manufacturers fed back to Nexus that it would increase the axle load of the trains. They will however have battery capability.

 

[Class 170101]

The new Metro fleet won't be dual voltage, dual voltage capability was dropped from the specification after manufacturers fed back to Nexus that it would increase the axle load of the trains. They will however have battery capability.

Why not just make the network 25kv instead of 1500 DC?

It certainly seems like a decent shout for conversion to hydrogen. There's no way the Esk Valley line will ever be electrified, so it's probably going to have to be powered by either batteries or hydrogen if the aim is to reduce emissions on the network to zero (or close).

Though I'm not sure how this will work with through workings - many trains on the Whitby line (and all of the Battersby shorts iirc) start at Newcastle. It's not as if the line is self contained!

Timetables and Diagrams can change

Aren't the trains bi-mode, Hydrogen and 25kv overhead?

 

[DanNCL]

Why not just make the network 25kv instead of 1500 DC?

Metro was originally envisaged to have sections of street running, where 25kV would not have been permitted, which was why 1500v DC was used instead, though of course the on street extensions never happened. Converting the network to AC now would require a full system closure for a considerable period of time, causing more disruption during the works than benefit afterwards. Nexus did investigate the possibility of converting the network to 25kV a few years ago.

The DC overhead on the Network Rail owned section will be due for renewal around 2030. As the old Metro fleet will be gone by then, and the new fleet will be battery capable, it's possible that the shared section with Network Rail could be converted to 25kV at that point.

Aren't the trains bi-mode, Hydrogen and 25kv overhead?

Hydrogen only. The pantograph vehicle is the one being removed to reduce it to a 3 car set if I recall correctly.

 

[gallafent]

The pantograph vehicle is the one being removed to reduce it to a 3 car set if I recall correctly.

Surely not, since that vehicle also has the traction motors!

 

[Wyrleybart]

Dan - as Gallafent has just said, the 321 unit layout is the same as the class 319.
Driving trailer
Intermediate trailer
Pan / tran motor car
Driving trailer

 

[DanNCL]

Surely not, since that vehicle also has the traction motors!

Dan - as Gallafent has just said, the 321 unit layout is the same as the class 319.
Driving trailer
Intermediate trailer
Pan / tran motor car
Driving trailer

I did think it was odd when I read it! I guess it would be possible to put motors on the driving carriages and completely re-equip them but no doubt that'd be a lot more expensive.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Somehow, I suspect that electrification of the coast line via Sunderland (for heavy rail, so 25kvAC) won't happen anytime soon, in which case it's all rather academic.

 

[willgreen]

Long term Nexus intend to convert the Sunderland section to 25kv, but it's not a particular priority (and there's only 1tph heavy rail along there anyway - there are bigger priorities in the north-east, Carlisle for a start).

 

[alf]

Long term Nexus intend to convert the Sunderland section to 25kv, but it's not a particular priority (and there's only 1tph heavy rail along there anyway - there are bigger priorities in the north-east, Carlisle for a start).

Carlisle in the north east?

 

[AverageTD]

If Whitby is to become self contained, then could a simpler, more frequent timetable be implemented? I think Battersby is just shy of an hour from Whitby, and if the turn around space for 2 600s next to each other is under the limit, could it be used as a reversing/passing place?

 

[willgreen]

Carlisle in the north east?

In railway terms the Tyne Valley line is in the northeast (even if culturally Carlisle is not).

 

[The Ham]

There's been a report published stating that Blue Hydrogen is worse than Gas in terms of emissions:

Climate change: Blue hydrogen 20% worse for environment than burning natural gas, researchers say

A significant amount of the carbon dioxide and methane emissions won't be caught even in the best case scenario scale up of carbon capture and storage technology, researchers said.

news.sky.com

Blue hydrogen – which could form a key part of the government's plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – may be up to 20% worse for the environment than burning natural gas, researchers have claimed.

Scientists at Cornell and Stanford Universities found blue hydrogen causes more pollution than burning coal because it requires huge amounts of natural gas to produce.

Extracted from natural gas, blue hydrogen captures the CO2 emissions for placement underground but a "significant amount" of the CO2 and methane emissions won't be caught even in the best-case scenario scale-up of this technology, researchers warned.

The authors of the study concluded: "There really is no role for blue hydrogen in a carbon-free future.

"We suggest that blue hydrogen is best viewed as a distraction, something that may delay needed action to truly decarbonize the global energy economy."

It would be interesting to see the comparison for Diesel, it may just edge it, however there's some suggesting that site to its poor efficiency that even green hydrogen is best suited to bring used to create electricity (effectively being a battery), rather than being used to directly power vehicles (maybe with the exception of where there's short distances between production and use).

 

[xotGD]

There's been a report published stating that Blue Hydrogen is worse than Gas in terms of emissions:

Climate change: Blue hydrogen 20% worse for environment than burning natural gas, researchers say

A significant amount of the carbon dioxide and methane emissions won't be caught even in the best case scenario scale up of carbon capture and storage technology, researchers said.

news.sky.com

It would be interesting to see the comparison for Diesel, it may just edge it, however there's some suggesting that site to its poor efficiency that even green hydrogen is best suited to bring used to create electricity (effectively being a battery), rather than being used to directly power vehicles (maybe with the exception of where there's short distances between production and use).

I would like to see the calculations behind the claims. I find it very difficult to believe that Blue Hydrogen with 95% carbon capture (which is typical for the technology) results in greater greenhouse gas contribution than unabated natural gas (or diesel) combustion.

I for one am looking forward to seeing fleets of hydrogen fuel cell powered units out on the network.

 

[30907]

If Whitby is to become self contained, then could a simpler, more frequent timetable be implemented? I think Battersby is just shy of an hour from Whitby, and if the turn around space for 2 600s next to each other is under the limit, could it be used as a reversing/passing place?

It is on average 59.5 minutes (without the proposed Grosmont token point) which is decidedly awkward, and Glaisdale is 50min from Nunthorpe
With 2 units and interval times you can have hourly to Nunthorpe and 3-4- hourly (allowing for the school trains) to Whitby which is much as now.

 

[tbtc]

My primary concern is capacity. According to MR, the seating capacity of a 3 carriage 600 unit will be similar to a 2 car 156 or 158. This is a major concern.

A 2 carriage 158 or 156 unit on the Whitby line is often full and standing

Looking at the last five years (for which data is available on Wikipedia), the average number of passengers at Whitby each year is around 135,000 (131,000 to 138,000 - but it seems to go up one year and down the next year - but 135,000 seems an average - i.e. I'm not taking one extreme figure)

So, 135,000pa is 67,500 departing passengers per annum, so 1,298 departing passengers per week, so 185 departing passengers per day, which is thirty one departing passengers per service (assuming six services a day, which I think was the pre-Covid frequency?)

I don't know if these figures include the North Yorkshire Moors journeys and I don't know if they include the school services (I know that there is a significant school flow - since that's what kept the line open - one school child would obviously be responsible for over a hundred single journeys a year if they were included in that 135,000)

But 185 passengers is roughly the number of people I'd expect to see on one two coach 156/158 DMU that was "full and standing"

So if you are "often" seeing Whitby DMUs that are "full and standing" then that suggests that either you're incredibly unlucky or that there area lot of the six services a day that must have passenger numbers in single figures (or that there's maybe a degree of exaggeration going on here?) - maybe one Saturday morning journey from Middlesbrough during the six weeks of school holidays (and teatime return from Whitby) need strengthening - which is an improvement I could justify - some journeys are obviously four coaches already - maybe there's a case for more on certain services (mainly to suit tourist/leisure market at the weekend?)

(there's obviously other stations on the line but none of the intermediate ones east of Nunthorpe get passenger numbers worth writing home about - and the passenger demand will be split between journeys for Whitby and Middlesbrough)