RMweb Gold Trofimow Posted June 11 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 11 No it's not April 1st... https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2024/06/class-60-diesel-locomotive-set-to-be-powered-by-steam-in-new-trial.html 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hroth Posted June 11 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 11 Quote 20 steam generators, four steam turbines Should have an interesting sound too! I'm imagining that a large number of "small modular steam generators" suggests that they're similar to the flash boiler in an early 20thC steam car. Looking forward to seeing the prototype when its being trialled. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted June 11 Share Posted June 11 Looking at their website I assume here they are just replacing the diesel plant with the steam turbine to turn the generators and create power for the traction motors. It's not a return to the LMS Turbomotive. https://www.steamology.co.uk/ 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hroth Posted June 11 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 11 (edited) Yes. It looks like the idea is to develop drop-in power packages. I'd have thought a 66 would be a better platform as there are so many roaming the UK rails, but given the limited capacity of a UK locomotive body, I suppose one size would fit many! The 60 only has one alternator so the four steam turbines would have to be either in line or geared together to connect to it. An interesting problem. If they are flash boilers, when at rest then no steam would be being produced so it would be a very quiet fuel-efficient loco. The hiss and whine of it at full pelt however.... One turbine might be used to drive an auxiliary generator to provide ETH and lighting for a train, should there be a need for such capability. Otherwise the usual battery charging could be driven off the main alternator. Another thought, there would need to be a degree of water recovery from the turbine exhaust to reduce water consumption, otherwise that might be a limiting factor. According to the website, the combustion process also produces water, though recovering that might be difficult in a locomotive context. Interesting stuff. I'd not been aware that the railways had to "decarbonise" within the next 15 years! Edited June 11 by Hroth tidy up 1 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DY444 Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 Just smacks to me of the latest in a long line of ever more desperate attempts to avoid electrification at any cost. It obviously makes perfect sense not to deploy a proven system that's been around for decades and which literally the whole world uses when you can do stuff like this instead. 3 14 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted June 12 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 12 14 minutes ago, DY444 said: Just smacks to me of the latest in a long line of ever more desperate attempts to avoid electrification at any cost. It obviously makes perfect sense not to deploy a proven system that's been around for decades and which literally the whole world uses when you can do stuff like this instead. Its more about avoiding the need for Government spend. Electrification not only requires Government money to do, it also means NR has to employ more people and stock more spares to look after / maintain the system in the long term. Self powered locos (be they diesel or some other fuel source) are not only funded by the private sector they impose no extra maintenance burdens on Network Rail. Thus if you are a Bean counter in Whitehall obsessing about keeping taxes low then funding electrification is the last thing you want to be doing - with the added bonus that companies doing 'out of the box' or wacky solutions can be praised as examples of 'world leading technician innovation'.... 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Ramblin Rich Posted June 12 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 12 What's wrong with Hydrogen fuel cells? Surely more efficient as they generate electricity directly. 6 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcredfer Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 28 minutes ago, DY444 said: Just smacks to me of the latest in a long line of ever more desperate attempts to avoid electrification at any cost. It obviously makes perfect sense not to deploy a proven system that's been around for decades and which literally the whole world uses when you can do stuff like this instead. Wind driven commercial ships would have attracted a similar response, a while back. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Izzy Posted June 12 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 12 24 minutes ago, DY444 said: Just smacks to me of the latest in a long line of ever more desperate attempts to avoid electrification at any cost. It obviously makes perfect sense not to deploy a proven system that's been around for decades and which literally the whole world uses when you can do stuff like this instead. But apart from the cost implication for the investment in infrastructure needed there is that elephant in the room no one wants to talk about. This drive to use electricity to power everything that moves as well as all else without the generating capacity to cope with the resulting demand. This all your eggs in one basket scenario is never a good idea even though it’s being pushed on mankind from all directions at the present wherever you turn. Bob 1 3 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium phil-b259 Posted June 12 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 12 Just now, Ramblin Rich said: What's wrong with Hydrogen fuel cells? Surely more efficient as they generate electricity directly. Nothing per say, but Hydrogen needs to be created somehow*! There is also the fact that with hydrogen being touted as the replacement for everything from domestic heating boilers to HGVs, ships, aircraft etc it is rather foolish to use it in rail locomotives when for decades there has been a perfectly good technology to 'decarbonise' the railways around for decades (i.e. electrification) * Although Hydrogen can be created from water by electrolysis it requires a huge amount of electricity to do - and unless you massively expand green electricity generation to make it then its actually worse for the environment than fossil fuels due to the production process. 2 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Harlequin Posted June 12 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 12 It's only a trial - an experiment. It might prove to be impractical because of some of the issues raised above or it might find a niche where it's really useful. But don't condemn them for testing the idea! 8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 26 minutes ago, phil-b259 said: Nothing per say, but Hydrogen needs to be created somehow*! There is also the fact that with hydrogen being touted as the replacement for everything from domestic heating boilers to HGVs, ships, aircraft etc it is rather foolish to use it in rail locomotives when for decades there has been a perfectly good technology to 'decarbonise' the railways around for decades (i.e. electrification) * Although Hydrogen can be created from water by electrolysis it requires a huge amount of electricity to do - and unless you massively expand green electricity generation to make it then its actually worse for the environment than fossil fuels due to the production process. From the company's own diagrams they anticipate that the power to generate the Hydrogen would be renewable - solar, wind etc. I guess this is the nirvana of enough renewable that it can also create energy stores like Hydrogen for use in dips in renewable energy. 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcredfer Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 The Sahara and other similar places, seem to have quite a lot of sunshine and even we have immense amounts of, as yet unused, Tidal power available around our headlands..... 2 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom s Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 (edited) - Edited June 13 by tom s stuff was incorrect 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium pete_mcfarlane Posted June 12 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 12 I wonder how the efficiency stacks up compared to just burning the hydrogen in an internal combustion engine. 3 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted June 12 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 12 54 minutes ago, jcredfer said: The Sahara and other similar places, seem to have quite a lot of sunshine and even we have immense amounts of, as yet unused, Tidal power available around our headlands..... And Britain's only (I think) 'wave hub' experimental site that was even connected to the grid and offered an area for testing experimental wave powered generators was never used for its intended purpose due to lack of interest. For some weird (to me) reason our island home surrounded by immense amounts of natural wave and tidal energy has never shown much inclination to use such a free source of naturally generated power. 2 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom s Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 25 minutes ago, pete_mcfarlane said: I wonder how the efficiency stacks up compared to just burning the hydrogen in an internal combustion engine. Can't say to the efficiency of using 20 small units compared to one of the available large gas engines, but probably not good, but expected in a demonstrator unit. From the website, one thing they are doing is using bottled oxygen in addition to hydrogen, (more storage and electrolysis needed,) however that is the only way to achieve a totally clean exhaust. Burning hydrogen in air in a conventional ICE will produce NOx the same as any fossil fuel burning ICE, which is bad for the environment. Being zero-carbon is half the battle. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold adb968008 Posted June 12 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 12 (edited) I see a HM Government logo attached to the case studies. https://www.steamology.co.uk/case-studies immediately makes me think tax payers money being spaffed. Which brings me back to why that money couldnt be used for existing solutions like wires, which are very efficient and proven. Greenford is another.. take a tube train, convert it to battery, run it on a short branch to a tube station. But then to recharge it you need third rail charging at each end anyway. Why they didnt just turn it over to tfl as a joint use tube line is beyond me. Edited June 12 by adb968008 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crisis Rail Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 2 hours ago, DY444 said: Just smacks to me of the latest in a long line of ever more desperate attempts to avoid electrification at any cost. It obviously makes perfect sense not to deploy a proven system that's been around for decades and which literally the whole world uses when you can do stuff like this instead. Im all for less electrification. Knitting has ruined photography 2 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold adb968008 Posted June 12 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 12 4 minutes ago, Crisis Rail said: Im all for less electrification. Knitting has ruined photography Maybe if the masts had sponsorship, and all kinds of garish paint schemes with advertising boards wedged in between them… 😀 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Hroth Posted June 12 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 12 10 minutes ago, adb968008 said: Which brings me back to why that money couldnt be used for existing solutions like wires, which are very efficient and proven. Efficient and proven but lots of infrastructure work needed, such as rebuilding bridges for clearance and the installation of power feeds at remote locations away from the National Grid, etc, etc. Costs go up, its a natural law! 8 minutes ago, adb968008 said: Greenford is another.. take a tube train, convert it to battery, run it on a short branch to a tube station. But then to recharge it you need third rail charging at each end anyway. Why they didnt just turn it over to tfl as a joint use tube line is beyond me. There's a lack of support for new unguarded 3rd rail in the open. 3rd rail at a terminus for recharging, like a robot cleaner docking station, is likely to be less of a problem. Anyhow, its a prototype for evaluation purposes. The only problem is if there's a panic "Modernisation Scheme*" in 2030 and a whole lot of untried technology is ordered off the drawing board**! * We've been THERE before! ** Or the CAD screen, as it were.... 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 18 hours ago, Hroth said: I'd not been aware that the railways had to "decarbonise" within the next 15 years! Poses huge questions about how the hydrogen is to be produced. 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nearholmer Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 2 hours ago, Izzy said: This all your eggs in one basket scenario is never a good idea even though it’s being pushed on mankind from all directions at the present wherever you turn. Except of course that is isn’t an “all eggs in one basket” solution at all. Electricity is simply a very convenient medium for moving energy from one place to another, it can be generated by any one of a multitude of different “eggs”, and used in a multitude of ways. The idea that electricity is an “energy source” totally false, and decrying it on that basis is to confuse yourself out of all measure. 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Nova Scotian Posted June 12 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 12 57 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said: And Britain's only (I think) 'wave hub' experimental site that was even connected to the grid and offered an area for testing experimental wave powered generators was never used for its intended purpose due to lack of interest. For some weird (to me) reason our island home surrounded by immense amounts of natural wave and tidal energy has never shown much inclination to use such a free source of naturally generated power. Not sure where you're talking about. EMEC has seen a number of wave and tidal solutions tested Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium MJI Posted June 12 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 12 Why not just use sewage waste water, full of nutrients, to grow algae, and use the algae to create a fuel compatible with Diesel engines. Those existing straight 8s are VERY high efficiency. 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now