Hydrogen powered 071

[Noel]

On 21/10/2023 at 4:06 PM, murphaph said:

Yep, says so in the youtube description:

 

Cheers so no combustion, no cylinders therefore no noise, just a near silent generator. Might sound a bit like the dart. Few mechanical moving parts in power plant so less maintenance cycle costs and better reliability.

Edited October 22, 2023 by Noel

[Robert Shrives]

I can see all the arguments and benefits of all these alternatives but one not mentioned is slowing down. I guess we have become such a global village it is not possible to for anywhere to be even vaguely self sufficient. The rise of the 15 minute limitation society for movement adds to the arguments about traction for mobility. 

A local friend in Wales now with some 20mph limitations has considered the family horse as a potential for the commute. It is self recharging on company grass! But garaging and running costs currently make it like a luxury car!  I guess vet bills worse than the daylight robbery of just plugging in a lap top to reset a car that is too clever for its tyres.

Robert         

[DJ Dangerous]

49 minutes ago, Robert Shrives said:

I can see all the arguments and benefits of all these alternatives but one not mentioned is slowing down. I guess we have become such a global village it is not possible to for anywhere to be even vaguely self sufficient. The rise of the 15 minute limitation society for movement adds to the arguments about traction for mobility. 

A local friend in Wales now with some 20mph limitations has considered the family horse as a potential for the commute. It is self recharging on company grass! But garaging and running costs currently make it like a luxury car!  I guess vet bills worse than the daylight robbery of just plugging in a lap top to reset a car that is too clever for its tyres.

Robert         

 

Ahem!

 

On 22/9/2023 at 11:59 AM, DJ Dangerous said:

One other issue is increase in velocity vs. reduced autonomy. Autonomy for our van was calculated at 65kph in optimum conditions. I've tried driving faster to see what happens, and it drastically reduces the autonomy.

Apply the same logic to a battery electric freight loco and it's very easy to guess that it may not be viable.

 

 

 

[irishrailways52]

 

 

looks like they already have a 201 modifyed

[iarnrod]

218 is converted to run on HVO and looks well with all the new decals applied to the bodysides. Would make a good candidate for any future Murphy Models releases of 201's.

Edited November 3, 2023 by iarnrod

[Colin_McLeod]

On 15/9/2023 at 12:36 AM, jhb171achill said:

So, while I prefer 141/121s, B101s, and (better still) steam; 071s appeared in my late teens, so I still see them as “new” engines…….

Where do the 201, 22000 and CAF fit into this scheme?

[jhb171achill]

2 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

Where do the 201, 22000 and CAF fit into this scheme?

VERY new!

[Georgeconna]

Interesting, Was taking to a Revenue officer that looks after the imports of HVO and mentioned that the Chinese HVO imports are being scrutinised by the EU.....Because it contains so not so special ingredients. Wonder is the IR stuff from China.

300 Trees?, Surely that should be Saplings, These won't properly offset for many a year but delighted some are planted rather than them being continually cut down all over the countryside.

 

 

Edited February 12, 2024 by Georgeconna

[irishrailways52]

9 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

Where do the 201, 22000 and CAF fit into this scheme?

a 201 has already been modified. 

[Branchline121]

085 is now being converted, but it's components are going to be kept as intact as possible incase the hydrogen thing doesn't work out. Apparently there's only a range of ~50 km so if they go into proper service they'll require a hydrogen tender!

[leslie10646]

HYDROGEN? Someone send Inchicore a picture of the Hindenburg.

Non-continuous electrification is about as crazy an idea as I'll swallow for a new method of propulsion for now. If Paddy is backing it - it'll work!

[Mol_PMB]

Hydrogen is challenging as a transport fuel because it leaks through materials that we would normally think of as solid, and all the joints in pipework have to be to a very high standard. Railway locos are notoriously a high-vibration environment, which can tend to make pipe joints leaky...

Also, its energy density is low compared to diesel, so you need more space to store it in - hence the tender. Which is going to be connected to the loco how? Bearing in mind the leaks issue and the need for flexible hoses. It would probably need to be semi-permanently coupled, and the tender would therefore also need a driving cab, and some interesting discussion with the unions about the safety of sitting on a hydrogen tank.

Finally, did you know that hydrogen burns with an invisible flame? If you have a leak and it ignites, you can't see it. First thing you know is when something else passes through the flame and it catches fire. That something else could be you!

It's not impossible, but for the rail traction application there are far more proven, reliable, safer alternatives.

Hydrogen is a means for governments to spend relatively small amounts of money on research and claim they're doing something, while kicking the more expensive infrastructure spend into the future and someone else's problem.

 

Cynical? Moi?

[irishrailways52]

44 minutes ago, Branchline121 said:

085 is now being converted, but it's components are going to be kept as intact as possible incase the hydrogen thing doesn't work out. Apparently there's only a range of ~50 km so if they go into proper service they'll require a hydrogen tender!

i find the idea of the 071s running with a hydrogen tender very funny

[skinner75]

Be better off filling a wagon with battery packs & connect that up to the loco instead. Have a fresh charged battery wagon at the other end of the run

[Mol_PMB]

The tender could be lettered (experi)MENTAL HYDROGEN BURNING LOCOMOTIVE.

 

 

3 minutes ago, skinner75 said:

Be better off filling a wagon with battery packs & connect that up to the loco instead. Have a fresh charged battery wagon at the other end of the run

That is a good idea, though again the energy density of batteries isn't great for hauling a heavy train long distances. There are some interesting applications of this where the batteries are built into ISO containers so they can be swapped quite easily with existing infrastructure.

It's much better if you can use the traction motors for braking and regenerate the energy into the batteries, which is what modern electric vehicles do, but very difficult to retro-fit to 1970s technlogy. By the time you've replaced all the traction motors, alternator, power control systems etc, and the basis of the loco is still 50 years old, you would be better off buying something new.

Edited January 15 by Mol_PMB
photo link added

[leslie10646]

Actually, THAT loco might not have needed too much modification to burn Hydrogen.

Think how famous Bulleid would have been!

[Horsetan]

18 minutes ago, Mol_PMB said:

Hydrogen is challenging as a transport fuel because it leaks through materials that we would normally think of as solid, and all the joints in pipework have to be to a very high standard. Railway locos are notoriously a high-vibration environment, which can tend to make pipe joints leaky...

Also, its energy density is low compared to diesel, so you need more space to store it in - hence the tender. Which is going to be connected to the loco how? Bearing in mind the leaks issue and the need for flexible hoses. It would probably need to be semi-permanently coupled, and the tender would therefore also need a driving cab, and some interesting discussion with the unions about the safety of sitting on a hydrogen tank.

Finally, did you know that hydrogen burns with an invisible flame? If you have a leak and it ignites, you can't see it. First thing you know is when something else passes through the flame and it catches fire. That something else could be you!

It's not impossible, but for the rail traction application there are far more proven, reliable, safer alternatives...

I wonder how serious they are about hydrogen fuel cell propulsion. Certainly a few car makers are trying to make it work, especially Toyota.

[Mol_PMB]

Just now, Horsetan said:

I wonder how serious they are about hydrogen fuel cell propulsion. Certainly a few car makers are trying to make it work, especially Toyota.

Some car makers have certainly backed the Hydrogen horse. Some of the same risks are there, but cars generally have a less severe vibration environment, and of course the volume of storage needed is much less for a 1-ton car than a 1500-ton train, which scales down a lot of the risks.

Another challenge with hydrogen that I didn't mention before is that many common materials (including steel fabrications) become brittle in the presence of hydrogen, as it affects their microstructure. Making tanks and pipework to store and transfer hydrogen (which either has to be at extremely high pressure or very cold) is quite a challenge.

[Horsetan]

2 minutes ago, Mol_PMB said:

.... Making tanks and pipework to store and transfer hydrogen (which either has to be at extremely high pressure or very cold) is quite a challenge.

I wonder what the required pressures are? When Citroën was making cars with oleopneumatic suspension / brakes / steering, the LHM fluid was pumped through the pipes at something in the order of 2200 psi and above.

[Mol_PMB]

1 minute ago, Horsetan said:

I wonder what the required pressures are? When Citroën was making cars with oleopneumatic suspension / brakes / steering, the LHM fluid was pumped through the pipes at something in the order of 2200 psi and above.

I think typically 5000 to 10000 psi for hydrogen gas storage.

[Horsetan]

1 hour ago, Mol_PMB said:

... did you know that hydrogen burns with an invisible flame? If you have a leak and it ignites, you can't see it. First thing you know is when something else passes through the flame and it catches fire. That something else could be you!...

I'm guessing this is about as desirable as having "Me hole" as temporary Taoiseach again 

[Noel]

On 18/9/2023 at 3:19 PM, murphaph said:

I would agree that conversion of large and expensive ICEs to hydrogen will make sense in many cases, including in the case of diesel electric locomotives. I would be extremely surprised if the same was true for the internal combustion engines fitted to cars and light commercials. Even now very many such engines can be fitted for LPG which is cleaner and cheaper, but how many people actually have that conversion done? Not very many. But I will be pleasantly surprised if it is viable as any alternative to fossil fuels is a good one.

Yes there are so many options pushing H which for now with grey hydrogen is fossil fuels by the back door until grids have transitioned 100% to non-fossil. JCB have released their combustion H engines for heavy construction, there is still the inefficiency of H which requires storage, distribution using fossil fuels, distribution and pump storage, etc. It just doesn't stack up well2wheel for efficiency compared to BEV for cars which can use the electricity grid for the most efficient energy transfer to wheels. HFC hydrogen fuel cell seems the way to go for rail as locos can safely be high pressure refuelled at depots, same for HGVs where HFCEV has a role (ie depot refuelling). The problem for cars aside from high costs is there are zero H pumps in Ireland, but every home has a 3pin socket. Only time will tell. A mix of solutions probably with BEV being the standard for cars, HFCEV for HGVs, buses, heavy agri, construction, rail, etc. Airbus are in proof on concept stage for H powered jet engines. Low cost air travel is gong to get carbon taxed out of the skies sooner or later, so a solution needed for aviation urgently. Toyota seem on a hiding to nothing pushing H for cars while they continued to sell so called 'self charging hybrids'. :) 

[Branchline121]

Looks like this sort of thing has been done before:

https://www.railjournal.com/regions/north-america/cpkc-trials-use-of-hydrogen-tender/

Edited January 15 by Branchline121
Corrected link.

[Colin_McLeod]

On 15/9/2023 at 12:36 AM, jhb171achill said:

 interests me somewhat (ok, a lot) less than a 1979 washing machine which doesn’t work…..

 

To stimulate your interest.

On Ebay right now. 

 

[jhb171achill]

5 hours ago, Horsetan said:

I'm guessing this is about as desirable as having "Me hole" as temporary Taoiseach again 

Next time it will be Mary Loo Healy Rae.

[Horsetan]

10 hours ago, jhb171achill said:

Next time it will be Mary Loo Healy Rae.

God help us all

[Newtoncork]

Funny story, I was walking down by the Atlantic Pond in Cork a few years ago, there was a really heavy shower and I had to shelter under a tree - with Micheal, who was walking his dog. Couple of Traveller children passed us on a sulky, going hell for leather. Micheal just threw his eyes up to heaven and did a big sigh! He headed off into the rain with the poor dog.

[hurricanemk1c]

17 hours ago, Branchline121 said:

085 is now being converted, but it's components are going to be kept as intact as possible incase the hydrogen thing doesn't work out. Apparently there's only a range of ~50 km so if they go into proper service they'll require a hydrogen tender!

About the fifth loco I've heard to be converted!

Ultimately new locos should be bought rather than messing around like this

[Niles]

Interesting to note JCB had a hydrogen combustion engine licenced this week, so there is potential in this to be developed further but I suspect the 071 will be a proof of concept at best. 

[DoctorPan]

50 minutes ago, hurricanemk1c said:

About the fifth loco I've heard to be converted!

Ultimately new locos should be bought rather than messing around like this

Is there anything to be said about doing another scheme to prevent the question of electrification of the rail freight corridors?

[Mol_PMB]

26 minutes ago, DoctorPan said:

Is there anything to be said about doing another scheme to prevent the question of electrification of the rail freight corridors?

Yep!

18 hours ago, Mol_PMB said:

Hydrogen is a means for governments to spend relatively small amounts of money on research and claim they're doing something, while kicking the more expensive infrastructure spend into the future and someone else's problem.

 

[Darrman]

The Strategic Rail Review has the most hypothetical electrification, and that doesn't get any further than Athlone, and that's well short of Ballina. The Navan branch is just greyed out here, but if Taras ever restart that hypothetical could just use the direct route. Of course, the electrification this mentions focuses on the major passenger routes, not freight.

Of course, we all know how long it takes to build anything in this country. Beyond Dublin, electrification doesn't exist, and Dart+ isn't exactly moving at a breakneck pace. (Hopefully they figure out a new depot sooner or later.)

As for the 071 modifications, they're getting on in years. If converting them to hydrogen power lets them work better and for longer, then great. If not, then we'll know for the future.

[Mol_PMB]

Electrification doesn't just cost money, it also 'costs' carbon. There's a lot of steel, concrete, copper and other carbon-intensive materials required, along with the emissions from the equipment used to transport and install it. One might also include the embedded carbon in the new fleet of electric trains. So there's a payback period - how many years does the electric railway need to operate for, before its installation carbon footprint is offset by the emissions reductions of the electric trains?

For an intensively-used railway the carbon payback period can be quite good, because once the electrification is in use the savings on fuel burnt by each train add up quickly (actually the benefits are more than just the exhaust emissions - electric trains are usually lighter, require less maintenance, etc.) Potentially the benefits can be greater than that if a faster, better train service leads to significant modal shift from road to rail.

When electrifying a sparsely-served rural branch line, it may take decades for emissions reductions to offset the installation footprint. In some cases, it might never be worth doing, especially if the rural nature of the line would actually require more infrastructure such as power grid feeds to be installed. The presence of freight traffic, and the prospect of more modal shift to rail, can help make the electrification case look more favourable.

As well as the global climate, there's also consideration of the local polluting emissions. For busy railways in urban areas, air quality can be a serious issue and helps to justify a move to 'zero emission at point of use' traction such as electricity or hydrogen. But in the rural parts of Ireland this really isn't a concern at all. That doesn't help the case for electrification.

One might almost argue that for rural railways with sparse traffic, a better solution is to stay with diesel and plant some trees to offset the emissions.

 

[jhb171achill]

I think we’ll all be back on the backs of donkeys before all this gets sorted…..!

[Broithe]

24 minutes ago, jhb171achill said:

I think we’ll all be back on the backs of donkeys before all this gets sorted…..!

As long as your donkey passes the methane emission test...