Class 60 diesel locomotive set to be powered by steam in new trial

[6892 Oakhill Grange]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

I keep worrying about the whole thing furring-up, all twenty kettles clogged with limescale, but that’s probably because we have very hard water locally.

It only has to do 2 trips up a test track before the Government grant is claimed and everyone can go back to burning diesel.  I feel very cynical about this situation.

[Hroth]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

I keep worrying about the whole thing furring-up, all twenty kettles clogged with limescale, but that’s probably because we have very hard water locally.

 

Just think about all those water softening plants, water tanks and water cranes that BR ripped out after steam was abolished.  If this takes off, NR will have to reinstate some!

 

47 minutes ago, 6892 Oakhill Grange said:

It only has to do 2 trips up a test track before the Government grant is claimed and everyone can go back to burning diesel.  I feel very cynical about this situation.

 

Its a trial, proof of concept, whatever you will. Better to try a full scale testbed in an existing loco and suss out the problems, rather than spend even more money on a completely new vehicle. And its better than building a fleet of the things and then finding it won't work.

 

However, even a failure will be an interesting failure!

 

[jjb1970]

On internal combustion engines, they can combust hydrogen, along with various other alternative fuels such as ammonia and methanol. The term 'diesel engine' is a misnomer as used in general conversation and actually refers to a range of engine types. Spark ignition gas engines, including those drived from Diesel engines are generally Otto engines or Miller engines. This also applies to oil burning engines which can be modelled on various engine cycles.

 

Fuel cells are excellent if you can match the duty cycle to the attributes of a particular fuel cell type, which may be done using a battery hybrid set up. They share something in common with internal combustion engines in that fuel cell refers to a group of technologies which are very different, high temperature types are very different from the sort of PEM hydrogen cells which tend to be thought of.

 

On hydrogen safety, I wouldn't call it any less safe than all sorts of other potential fuels if properly risk managed. Large electrical machines (large generators of several hundred MW) have used hydrogen gas as a coolant for many decades.

 

For railways the best emissions solution is electrification, but there are likely to be lines which will never justify wiring and which will need an alternative to diesel oil. Personally I am not sure this makes much sense as that alternative, but we'll see.

[reddragon]

On 12/06/2024 at 08:20, Ramblin Rich said:

What's wrong with Hydrogen fuel cells? Surely more efficient as they generate electricity directly.

Say no more. 

 

Electric 95% efficient

Battery 73%

H2 - 22%

 

 

Once the oil & gas industry hype & financial support has gone, reality strikes. 57 studies now say that H2 doesn't work for heating & most transport, rail included.

[phil-b259]

20 hours ago, DY444 said:

 

In the case of this 60 and other assorted excursions into obscure technical dead ends such as hydrogen units etc someone ends up paying.  That someone passes on their costs one way or the other ultimately either to the taxpayer or the travelling public or, in the case of freight, the consumer.  

 

 

 

However unlike electrification, if you are fuelling a loco with hydrogen then you can take advantage of the fact you have multiple fuel providers rather than be held hostage to Network Rail (who, as per HM Treasury rules are not allowed to subside* the cost of traction power and must charge full market rates for it).

 

THAT is one of the big financial advantages which has pushed FOCs away from electric haulage over the past few years - using 'hedging' and other financial tools has meant even in spite of the hike in fuel prices caused by world events FOCs have been able to secure lowish prices for diesel while NRs electricity charge has skyrocketed.

 

So, from a FOCs point of view the ability to simply fill up their locos with Hydrogen in much the same way they do today with diesel is a HUGE advantage - and one which makes lots of sense, particularly as there will always be parts of the UK rail network where electrification remains unviable so ideas like this are actually not quite as wacky as they seem.

 

* For regular 'franchised' TOCs the increased cost of electricity will see increases in direct subsidy to that TOC)

Edited June 14 by phil-b259

[Covkid]

1 hour ago, reddragon said:

Say no more. 

 

Electric 95% efficient

Battery 73%

H2 - 22%

 

 

Once the oil & gas industry hype & financial support has gone, reality strikes. 57 studies now say that H2 doesn't work for heating & most transport, rail included.

 

"Doesn't work" might not be totally accurate.  Perhaps not fiscally viable ?

We have had gas piped to our house for the last thirty years and that is what fuels our boiler for heat and hot water.  But there is also the availability of electricity to heat our home and provide hot water.  I am assuming new build housing no longer has the option of domestic gas, which leaves electricity as the only currently domestic fuel apart from maybe calor etc or traditional fireplaces and backboilers.

 

Sooner or later things are going to change, and what has hitherto not been viable may well be acceptable.  Never say never.     

[jjb1970]

Something to keep in mind is that fuel cells do not need hydrogen, they can utilise hydrogen carriers. A lot of the high temperature fuel cells use fuels like methanol as the hydrogen carrier. However, for rail application I'm guessing a simple PEM type with compressed hydrogen will be the default.

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, reddragon said:

Say no more. 

 

Electric 95% efficient

Battery 73%

H2 - 22%

 

 

Once the oil & gas industry hype & financial support has gone, reality strikes. 57 studies now say that H2 doesn't work for heating & most transport, rail included.

But what is the efficiency for burning hydrogen in an internal combustion engine?  The fuel cell approach is in effect a two stage process as it is used to generate electricity which then powers an electric motor - so there is bound to be greater inefficiency simply because there are two stages.     Hydrogen as a fuel for an i/.c engine doesn't involve that.

 

Then we need to consider material and equipment life cycles.  Batteries - of every type so far invented - have a measurable life cycle and for modern vehicles battery life is much less than maximum potential vehicle life - and battery renewal is expensive.  In addition - witness our roads - motor vehicle batteries (so far) are heavy and increase road damage and tyre wear - ask anyone who does lot of mileage in a Tesla how long the tyres last.

 

Don't forget also that at the moment battery powered vehicles seem to be the great green hope of politicians.  I can remember - not very long back - when diesel powered cars were seen as the great green hope of British politicians and we were encouraged to go diesel.  To be honest if something is being pushed by a politician as the technical way ahead the last thing I am going to do is buy it.  Hopefully without getting political looking at the six candidates standing in our constituency in the forthcoming election only one has any sort of technological background - and that is in IT.  Most of them are just another bunch of 'issues merchants' - just like those pushing electric cars.  There's a lot more hype about that the stuff coming from the oil and gas lot and some of it seems very ill-founded.

[MarkC]

On 12/06/2024 at 19:16, GrumpyPenguin said:

A number of HGV fleets trialled CNG for a while (some may even be continuing). Because they still used a percentage of diesel (IIRC around 10%)  there was enough "bang" from the injected diesel  to ignite the gas.

 

Personally, I don't see any issue with trying anything that may reduce our forthcoming reliance on grid based electricty.

 

(edited too remove typo to save the pendants making pointless posts).

Diesel engines running on LNG are now quite popular with shipowners, for both propulsion and electricity generation. You either use small injections of diesel to start the combustion cycle, as per your example (albeit on a bigger scale!), or, less common, they have a spark plug to start the "bang"

 

Mark

[Pacific231G]

On 13/06/2024 at 23:14, jjb1970 said:

On hydrogen safety, I wouldn't call it any less safe than all sorts of other potential fuels if properly risk managed. Large electrical machines (large generators of several hundred MW) have used hydrogen gas as a coolant for many decades.

 

For railways the best emissions solution is electrification, but there are likely to be lines which will never justify wiring and which will need an alternative to diesel oil. Personally I am not sure this makes much sense as that alternative, but we'll see.

Most of the coal gas once piped into our homes was hydrogen (in the 19th Century town  gas was frequently used as a lifting gas for balloons). Unfortunately it also contained a proportion of carbon monoxide which is toxic but I don't think the risk of gas explosions was any greater than the domestic hydrocarbon gas we now use so, yes, hydrogen is perfectly capable of being used safely. For transport use the problem is that it can only be stored as a gas at very high pressure or as a liquid at very low temperatures though there is work on storing by absortion into or on the surface of other materials.