Network Rail Recommends 80% of the network should be electrified by 2050

[Jorge Da Silva]

According to Railway Magazine Network Rail is recommending to the government that 80% of the network should be electrified by 2050 but wants to start work as soon as possible.

that’s double the current 40%

Apparently it’s a 11,000 miles of further single track kilometres. NR says CP7 is too late to start and long distance routes and areas with heavy freight will be priority including those serving container ports at Felixstowe and Southampton and it’s inland terminals, South Wales and it’s major quarries. The sections of MML, Chiltern Main Line, GWR Route, LNER and Avanti West Coast networks still relying on diesel fractions are proposed for electrification.

The Railway Magazine June 2020 p.7

 

[D365]

All I can say (my first reaction) is:

As it should be.

 

[nlogax]

This is Good News.

Naturally there's a massive elephant sitting on the sofa. How will this be funded and will it actually happen?

 

[py_megapixel]

All I can say (my first reaction) is:

As it should be.

Yes. Although given the DfT's attitude to electrification over the past years I'm not optimistic that it will happen.

 

[Dunfanaghy Rd]

A couple of thoughts:
Can the wind farms and solar farms keep up? (Yes, I know there are other sources, but ... ... ... )
While Class 88 or a derivative can handle most of the routes, Southampton services will require something else, such as the mythical Class 93. Getting the freight operators on board will have to be a priority.
Pat

 

[Dr Hoo]

Isn't this the same story as in the Speculative Ideas forum? See What will be in the NR/DfT document about decarbonization

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Isn't this the same story as in the Speculative Ideas forum? See What will be in the NR/DfT document about decarbonization

Yes

 

[edwin_m]

A couple of thoughts:
Can the wind farms and solar farms keep up? (Yes, I know there are other sources, but ... ... ... )
While Class 88 or a derivative can handle most of the routes, Southampton services will require something else, such as the mythical Class 93. Getting the freight operators on board will have to be a priority.
Pat

Rail only accounts for a few percent of electricity useage and it'll be three or four years from go-ahead on any scheme until it needs power. If necessary NR could sign up to buy power at an agreed price in the future and the security of that contract would allow the provider to borrow money to fund more generation capacity.

 

[Dunfanaghy Rd]

I was thinking in terms of the capacity of the Grid and Power generators. If we keep adding demand for juice (Trains, Cars &c.) we will need more generation (and not in 20 years or whatever it takes to build a nuclear plant.)
Pat

 

[Mollman]

A couple of thoughts:
Can the wind farms and solar farms keep up? (Yes, I know there are other sources, but ... ... ... )
While Class 88 or a derivative can handle most of the routes, Southampton services will require something else, such as the mythical Class 93. Getting the freight operators on board will have to be a priority.
Pat

Roger Ford argues that by having a clear rolling program freight operators are more likely to invest in new electric capably locos. The lack of DB 92s in the UK does mean a new duel-voltage loco type will need to be built, this shortage has resulted in DB using 66s on Chunnel freight which used to be 92 hauled.

 

[Bald Rick]

I was thinking in terms of the capacity of the Grid and Power generators. If we keep adding demand for juice (Trains, Cars &c.) we will need more generation (and not in 20 years or whatever it takes to build a nuclear plant.)
Pat

Rail accounts for only 1% of electricity usage in this country (c3.2TWh pa, of approx 300TWh pa). Something like 60% of vehicle miles are electrically hauled; getting to 80% of the Network electrified will, at a guess, result in around a further 30% of vehicle miles electrically hauled. This implies an additional c1.5Twh electricity consumption a year. To put that in context, that is roughly the amount of power provided by half a large offshore wind farm (of the type there are several of in the North Sea in service and under construction), or 5% of Hinckley Point.

Electric road vehicles are a much larger challenge.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Rail accounts for only 1% of electricity usage in this country (c3.2TWh pa, of approx 300TWh pa). Something like 60% of vehicle miles are electrically hauled; getting to 80% of the Network electrified will, at a guess, result in around a further 30% of vehicle miles electrically hauled. This implies an additional c1.5Twh electricity consumption a year. To put that in context, that is roughly the amount of power provided by half a large offshore wind farm (of the type there are several of in the North Sea in service and under construction), or 5% of Hinckley Point.

Electric road vehicles are a much larger challenge.

Indeed. Don't want to go too far off topic but solar can not run at night. Wind could if there is wind. Charging electric road vehicles or battery trains at night on depot or wherever seems like a logical step therefore some nukes are what is needed.

 

[mister-sparky]

They can recommend what they like, doesn’t mean the government will fund it

 

[Surreyman]

In the post Furlough era, the government may have to fund large "new Deal" infrastructure projects to try and cope with future high levels of unemployment, it has hinted already about forthcoming 'Infrastructure spending plans'.
I seem to recall that in the very recent past, they were having to bring in experienced workers from Europe to carry out electrification work because there were too few people trained up in UK, would this still be the case?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In the post Furlough era, the government may have to fund large "new Deal" infrastructure projects to try and cope with future high levels of unemployment, it has hinted already about forthcoming 'Infrastructure spending plans'.
I seem to recall that in the very recent past, they were having to bring in experienced workers from Europe to carry out electrification work because there were too few people trained up in UK, would this still be the case?

The electrification contracting firms are usually joint venture consortia with at least some EU content, even if the prime contractor is "British".
SPL (Austria) is one prominent one and Inabensa (Spain) is another, the former working on MML electrification and the latter on GW.
SPL took over many of the contracts left unfinished by Carillion.
Inabensa is a subsidiary of UK-based Amey which itself is owned by Ferrovial of Spain (who majority own Heathrow Airport).
These firms are also involved with major electrification projects in Europe.
Much of the hardware is also designed in the EU/EEA.
So it's hard to separate out a "British" contractor, but Costain and Balfour Beatty are usually key players.
These are also the consortia likely to bid for HS2 electrification.
Another reason for having consortia is to combine track, signalling and electrification skills, and the leaders there are Siemens and Alstom, who have electrification partners (electrification often being preceded by resignalling and track remodelling, like the TP project).

 

[Ploughman]

Indeed. Don't want to go too far off topic but solar can not run at night. Wind could if there is wind. Charging electric road vehicles or battery trains at night on depot or wherever seems like a logical step therefore some nukes are what is needed.

Maybe scope for more tidal schemes?

 

[swt_passenger]

Isn't this the same story as in the Speculative Ideas forum? See What will be in the NR/DfT document about decarbonization

Yes. Discussion triggered by Noel Dolphin on Twitter. Then it was all in the last Modern Railways as well. I expect someone will start another thread each time another rail mag gets round to the story...

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Maybe scope for more tidal schemes?

The advantage of tidal power is that they (tides) are predictable. Would the barrages etc that would be necessary interfere with the environment too much though?

 

[thecraftybee]

I was thinking in terms of the capacity of the Grid and Power generators. If we keep adding demand for juice (Trains, Cars &c.) we will need more generation (and not in 20 years or whatever it takes to build a nuclear plant.)
Pat

The U.K. consumes 15-20% less electricity now than it did in 2005 due to massive increases in efficiencies across homes and industry. There is a new nuclear plant coming online around 2025/2027 (years behind schedule and massively over budget) and there are massive investments in new, more powerful, higher capacity renewable electricity generators coming throughout the next decade that will increase our supply. There are plans in place to link our electricity markets up with Iceland, Norway and Denmark so we can rely on their powerful hydro batteries whenever the wind isn’t blowing strongly enough. Technology for storage via battery or hydrogen of excess renewables is also growing by leaps and bounds.

 

[MotorcycleAlan]

Technology for storage via battery or hydrogen of excess renewables is also growing by leaps and bounds.

If it leaps too much, battery might be the excuse not to electrify 80%.

 

[Brissle Girl]

Yes. Although given the DfT's attitude to electrification over the past years I'm not optimistic that it will happen.

If DfT wasn’t broadly on side then it wouldn’t have been published, given Network Rail is answerable to it.

 

[Bald Rick]

The U.K. consumes 15-20% less electricity now than it did in 2005 due to massive increases in efficiencies across homes and industry. There is a new nuclear plant coming online around 2025/2027 (years behind schedule and massively over budget) and there are massive investments in new, more powerful, higher capacity renewable electricity generators coming throughout the next decade that will increase our supply. There are plans in place to link our electricity markets up with Iceland, Norway and Denmark so we can rely on their powerful hydro batteries whenever the wind isn’t blowing strongly enough. Technology for storage via battery or hydrogen of excess renewables is also growing by leaps and bounds.

Re the interconnectors.

In addition to the five already in service (1 to each of France, Belgium, the
Netherlands, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland), there’s three under construction now:

1GW to France (IFA2) - completes next year
1.4GW to Norway (North Sea Link) - completes next year
1.4GW to Denmark (Viking Link) - completes 2023

The Iceland link is unlikely.

More likely are further links to France - another is a long way through the development process: Aquind, 2GW.

Norway doesn’t have much (any?) in the way of pumped storage ‘hydro batteries’. Denmark doesn’t have any significant hydro at all, but does have a lot of installed wind power (although not as much as the U.K.), and also a lot of fossil fuelled plants. France has loads of nuclear, as well as a fair bit of wind, hydro and pumped storage.

The purpose of the interconnectors is so that we can export our excess wind energy to these countries such that they don’t need to use so much of their hydro and fossil fuelled plants. Then when it’s not windy here, we will make use of their hydro / nuclear / wind etc.

There have been several times this spring where it has been sufficiently windy and sunny that wind farms have been paid to not generate electricity and the whole sale price of electricity has gone negative. Indeed the average wholesale price of U.K. electricity for the last three months has been £25/MWh, which is astonishingly low, and less than half the average price for the year 2018. Some of this has been because oil and gas prices have collapsed due to the virus, but much is also because it has been sunny and windy in that period.

The new interconnectors are important because there is another 4GW of wind capacity under construction which will be in service in the next couple of years, and a further 10GW consented but yet to start construction. It’s reasonable to assume at least half of this will be generating by 2026; on windy and sunny days by then we will have something like 10GW of excess electricity to export, assuming electric cars aren’t sucking all that up (which is quite possible).

 

[adrock1976]

A quick question:

When British Rail published their report in 1980 of the routes and order for them to be electrified, was it intended to have 80-85% of the network electrified by the year 2000?

 

[Belperpete]

In the post Furlough era, the government may have to fund large "new Deal" infrastructure projects to try and cope with future high levels of unemployment, it has hinted already about forthcoming 'Infrastructure spending plans'.

They will be looking for projects that can be rolled out fairly quickly. Railway electrification (and the associated signalling immunisation works) take years to plan before work can start on the ground.

 

[anthony263]

Certainly though couldn't continue existing schemes which were cut back such as Cardiff-Maesteg/Swansea and Midland Midland mainline as well as to Oxford

 

[edwin_m]

They will be looking for projects that can be rolled out fairly quickly. Railway electrification (and the associated signalling immunisation works) take years to plan before work can start on the ground.

The work should be somewhat less for routes that have been re-signaled relatively recently. Modern track circuits or axle counters and other equipment tend to be immune against traction return currents as standard.

Certainly though couldn't continue existing schemes which were cut back such as Cardiff-Maesteg/Swansea and Midland Midland mainline as well as to Oxford

True for Oxford and MML - they were seen as high priority last time this was comprehensively looked at, and should remain so in relative terms even if the costs for all schemes have increased. Swansea was always more political and has potential downsides if people from further west going towards Cardiff have to change onto an EMU there.

 

[Bald Rick]

A quick question:

When British Rail published their report in 1980 of the routes and order for them to be electrified, was it intended to have 80-85% of the network electrified by the year 2000?

I’d have to check, but I don’t think the proportion was that high.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

I’d have to check, but I don’t think the proportion was that high.

It was the late Sir Peter Parker being bullish - with the success of the Great Northern Electrics , he angled for a continuation on the ECML , and later on much of Anglia.

There may have been some maps lurking in the BR Policy Team , - but a lot of what was achieved was done in incremental stages which were quietly added on (Hazel Grove , North London AC lines etc)

Remember ,at this time , corporate BR was under huge financial pressure (recession , coal and steel disputes , de-industrialisation , struggling urban areas including London which was depopulating) - and the DfT had never really given up on taking an axe to the regional railway.

 

[Belperpete]

True for Oxford and MML - they were seen as high priority last time this was comprehensively looked at, and should remain so in relative terms even if the costs for all schemes have increased. Swansea was always more political and has potential downsides if people from further west going towards Cardiff have to change onto an EMU there.

Oxford should be a relatively quick hit. I suspect that MML would be too long a timescale for the kind of quick-hit projects they will be looking at to kick-start the economy. However, as a longer-term environmental project, then MML should be a good front-runner.

 

[Brissle Girl]

The problem at the moment is that each investment decision is painfully slow, with several steps. A good example is that even now, there hasn't been formal approval for the knitting to extend as far as Market Harborough - that decision will be taken once the detailed design work is completed, and there even had to be a decision to let NR go ahead with the detailed design work. How can you plan an efficient use of resources on that basis?

What's needed is for the govt to say to NR "OK, we accept that there is going to need to be a steady flow of projects over the next couple of decades. Go away, set up two or three electrification project teams which can produce a steady flow of individual projects, delivering say, approx. 30 miles each year per team on average. Provided the costs remain reasonable and you don't suggest anything off the wall, we'll commit to funding these projects." Three such teams would deliver around 1000 route miles each decade. North, Central and South would appear to be a logical split.

There would clearly need to be some involvement with govt to ensure that the schemes selected were appropriate, particularly in the context of rolling stock requirements for the routes in question.