Class 321's to be converted to hydrogen power

[jjb1970]

That would be true, as regards the green credentials of hydrogen extraction, if that was the intention.

 

But AFAIK, it is not. Germany (or Alstom initially) are developing hydrogen extraction plants powered by wind turbines, and Alstom in the UK appears to be developing a relationship with a petro-chemical company who produce chlorine gas in the North West and also Teeside, a by-product of which is hydrogen, currently going to waste. Whilst the production of chlorine itself is not necessarily a green process (I have no idea) the fact that it is being done anyway and that the waste product can become a useful fuel, is certainly carbon neutral. Meanwhile Alstom have their own hydrogen production facility near their works, also in the North West. I understand, from Rail Europe, that Germany are seeking similar arrangements in the longer term.

 

Also in favour of hydrogen is that re-fuelling (of the iLent anyway) takes only 15 minutes, giving a range of some 800Km for that 2 car Coradia - not sure what is being claimed exactly for the 4 car 321 conversion, but I think 450 miles was mentioned somewhere? The range and refuelling time is somewhat superior to current Tesla technology (which appears to have hit a bit of a brick wall on further efficiency at the moment, after the Australian solar farm experiment demonstrating enhanced charge retention). In the short term therefore, pending further step changes in battery power technology and useability, the H has it, IMHO.

Everything hinges on the means of producing hydrogen. There are green hydrogen streams but we need a monumental increase if transport does convert to hydrogen (either as gaseous hydrogen or via hydrogen carriers).

[pete_mcfarlane]

According to the video. the hydrogen is stored on the train at 350 Bar - That's 5076 PSI. Hydrogen is an extremely flammable gas, and being lighter than air any leak will mix with surrounding air and rise. A mixture of Hydrogen and air at a range of between 4% and 75% is an explosive mixture. just add a source of ignition and - well I think you can guess the result. Here are the figures for Hydrogen & Methane (Natural Gas) - note the flammability range differences.

Presumably it has to be stored at high pressures due to its low density. I suppose the questions to ask are around the crash worthiness of the storage tanks, but they are probably quite robust to start with if they can hold 350 bar of pressure.  Mounting them inside the body is also worth nothing, which makes them less prone to damage if the train derails. 

 

Given how H&S conscious the UK now is, I suspect these issues will be covered off. 

[jjb1970]

A lot of the tanks are composite to save weight, with a metal layer wrapped in carbon fibre. They're pretty robust, we were approving some for marine use and I was very impressed by the tests they were subjected to.

[APOLLO]

Like I wrote it's the pipes and connections etc that need to be as bulletproof as the tanks.

 

I like the way the guy in the video said "the population is turning against diesel" - are we really ?, or is it just the politicos and greens telling us to do so ?. Very few petrol cars in our street - plenty of nearly new diesels. (not me though).

 

Brit15

[pete_mcfarlane]

A quick search suggests that the industry approach to leaks is to use sensors to detect them, and possibly adding chemicals to give the gas an odour (as is done with methane). This is fairly mature technology, despite being new to the rail industry. 

 

This is worth a read as well: http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=482

[APOLLO]

Quintinshill, Charfield, Ais Gill - all terrible railway accidents where loss of life was incurred by ignition of leaking gas (train lighting back then) after train accidents.

 

No sensors / odourised gas would help in the case of hydrogen escaping from ruptured pipes / tanks after an accident.

 

Brit15

[Christopher125]

I like the way the guy in the video said "the population is turning against diesel" - are we really ?, or is it just the politicos and greens telling us to do so ?. Very few petrol cars in our street - plenty of nearly new diesels. (not me though).

 

Yes, and rightly so. "The market share for diesels...has shrunk from 45% in 2017 to 30% in 2018 so far"

 

Regarding Hydrogen and leaks, I guess that's why it's stored on the roof? Rather awkward for our loading gauge but I guess the air-con modules in the Renatus 321s shows shows that stuff can be put up there.

Edited May 16, 2018 by Christopher125

[MarshLane]

Within the UK rail industry, we seem to be great at saying there’s a problem, here’s an answer now how do fix it. The Flex 319 project is one example, this is another. For a Government Minister (I believe) to turn around and state as he did recently that a hydrogen train was being tested in the Lake District was ridiculous!

 

New power sources should be investigated, some will work, some won’t. But we don’t learn. The modernisation plan worked on prototypes and several production runs were ordered before the tests finished (or started in some cases). We are in danger of repeating the same mistakes in my view. Porterbrook said oh we can convert 319s to bi-mode and we will have them with Northern by Spring 2018 - it hasn’t happened, testing may not be far off and there are hopes of a December psssenger launch, but the info I have from inside sources says there are still problems which have not been resolved. Yet ATW and GWR have committed to an unproven concept.

 

The Government has set out an aspiration to get diesel trains off the network by 2040, then they go to the industry and say how do we do it! Bi-mode whether battery, diesel, hydrogen or whatever is great for low weight passenger services, but nobody has talked about the freight industry yet. Battery or bimode doesn’t work for long distance heavy freights, and electrification is obviously off the agenda. The Alstom lint experiment is interesting and has potential, but to say it’s anything more than an experimental status at present or one or two units is just daft.

[Edwin_m]

New power sources should be investigated, some will work, some won’t. But we don’t learn.

 

...

 

The Alstom lint experiment is interesting and has potential, but to say it’s anything more than an experimental status at present or one or two units is just daft.

They have a complete unit to production standards and letters of intent for a fleet of 60 (though that may depend on successful trials of the first one), so the Lint is a bit more than an experiment. 

 

http://www.alstom.com/press-centre/2017/03/alstoms-hydrogen-train-coradia-ilint-first-successful-run-at-80-kmh/

 

I can't imagine more than one or two 321s will be re-built for hydrogen power unless they have someone willing to sign a lease for them.  So in this case at least, we are being a lot more cautious than the Germans. 

[david.hill64]

Whilst at college I used to use a home-made furnace for annealing some nickel alloys in a hydrogen atmosphere at 1200 degrees C. My recollection was that the diffusion of hydrogen through steel was such that the canisters that were used to supply the gas would be empty quite quickly even if the canister were not being used. I wonder how they will keep it stored these days, especially under high pressure.

 

As an aside, the furnace I used had an arrangement for flushing the hydrogen with nitrogen after the annealing process. This worked well until one day I was distracted and got it into my mind that the flushing process was complete when I had in fact only just started it. The resultant 'pop' as hydrogen at 1000 degrees encountered a roomful of oxygen was quite entertaining. I didn't need to shave the next day and a fellow student fled from the room..........

[Mike Storey]

Quintinshill, Charfield, Ais Gill - all terrible railway accidents where loss of life was incurred by ignition of leaking gas (train lighting back then) after train accidents.

 

No sensors / odourised gas would help in the case of hydrogen escaping from ruptured pipes / tanks after an accident.

 

Brit15

 

Acknowledging your obvious professional expertise, there must be concerns. But there are now 10 hydrogen powered buses in London, with more planned, and many other cities are trialling or using them across the world. I suspect the key issues of concern have been mitigated, but are still there of course.

 

This particular article may be of interest (partly for the Hindenburgh explanation, much of I which I had not seen before). https://www.computerworld.com/article/2852323/heres-why-hydrogen-fueled-cars-arent-little-hindenburgs.html

[APOLLO]

When on first call gas escape duties many years ago we carried a PPM GasTec meter (parts per million) to detect the faintest traces of natural gas (in fact it detected any flammable gas or vapour). It had a small (approx 10" x 3" dia) tank of Hydrogen, at high pressure (few hundred PSI). I had to get dispensation from my car's insurers to carry this. Refilling even this small tank had to be done by trained personnel in a controlled environment (not by me). The unit had a precision engineered valve and connecting mechanism. We never had a problem with it and were well trained on it's use. Also we were always very careful using, storing, recharging the unit (electrically) and changing the small hydrogen bottle.

 

Anyway, I agree time and technology has moved on at pace, but I personally would be very cautious and ultra careful where high pressure hydrogen is around.

 

Brit15

[Phatbob]

So will this mean the 'Dusty Bins' will have to be called 'Bindenburgs'?

Or maybe "Zepbins"?

 

Hat, coat, gone...................................

[The Stationmaster]

Several questions come to my mind especially considering the intention thus far announced to put the tanks of the roof of Class 321 conversions (which might just be press talk of course) -

 

1. How much hydrogen needs to be stored on a set to power it through an average (or maximum) daily diagram plus a reserve margin?

 

2. Is there space to accommodate such tank capacity between the roof and loading gauge ( a depth of approx 500mm on a Class 321)?

 

3. Would the tankage require any sort of weather protection from either high or extremely low ambient temperatures - and is there sufficient room for that in the 500mm?

 

4. I note the link Mike Storey provided although the point about the Hindenburg is probably rather misleading in the light of the most research research regarding the propagation and spread of the fire as what burned initially and right through to the nose was hydrogen gas and it ignited other things as it burned.  Presumably the repowered Class 321s will get the latest in DfT spec seating to minimise the risk of fire spreading?j

 

5. The mention of having to fire two bullets in succession to still not puncture a Honda  (I think it was) hydrogen tank doesn't really stand up to what Tom Rolt many years ascribed to the force of a 60mph railway collision which he likened to the impact of a 16 inch naval shell on its target.  Maybe he was or wasn't mathematically correct but the forces involved in railway collisions tend to be far greater than in road vehicles as they normally involve not only speed but far greater mass although we can but presume that this factor will be taken into account.

[Joseph_Pestell]

While waiting at the doctor's this afternoon, I was reading a car mag about various electric cars. Given the performance, both in terms of power and range, it seems to me that powering a train with battery should be very easy.

 

Edit to add: Jaguar i-Pace for instance. More than two tonnes. 0-60 in 4.5 seconds and a range of 300 miles+.

Edited May 16, 2018 by Joseph_Pestell

[Mike Storey]

Several questions come to my mind especially considering the intention thus far announced to put the tanks of the roof of Class 321 conversions (which might just be press talk of course) -

 

1. How much hydrogen needs to be stored on a set to power it through an average (or maximum) daily diagram plus a reserve margin?

 

2. Is there space to accommodate such tank capacity between the roof and loading gauge ( a depth of approx 500mm on a Class 321)?

 

3. Would the tankage require any sort of weather protection from either high or extremely low ambient temperatures - and is there sufficient room for that in the 500mm?

 

4. I note the link Mike Storey provided although the point about the Hindenburg is probably rather misleading in the light of the most research research regarding the propagation and spread of the fire as what burned initially and right through to the nose was hydrogen gas and it ignited other things as it burned.  Presumably the repowered Class 321s will get the latest in DfT spec seating to minimise the risk of fire spreading?j

 

5. The mention of having to fire two bullets in succession to still not puncture a Honda  (I think it was) hydrogen tank doesn't really stand up to what Tom Rolt many years ascribed to the force of a 60mph railway collision which he likened to the impact of a 16 inch naval shell on its target.  Maybe he was or wasn't mathematically correct but the forces involved in railway collisions tend to be far greater than in road vehicles as they normally involve not only speed but far greater mass although we can but presume that this factor will be taken into account.

 

Suggest you have a quick squint at the Alstom Coradia iLint spec to get an approximate answer to most of that, Mike.

[APOLLO]

Edit to add: Jaguar i-Pace for instance. More than two tonnes. 0-60 in 4.5 seconds and a range of 300 miles+.

 

Use that  figure of acceleration a few times and the range will drop like a stone. 100 miles if your lucky.

 

Brit15

[Mike Storey]

While waiting at the doctor's this afternoon, I was reading a car mag about various electric cars. Given the performance, both in terms of power and range, it seems to me that powering a train with battery should be very easy.

 

Edit to add: Jaguar i-Pace for instance. More than two tonnes. 0-60 in 4.5 seconds and a range of 300 miles+.

 

It must surely be a contender, but I don't see the breakthrough yet in battery weights, storage durability and charging times, let alone costs. But it must come one day, let's hope.

 

For now, for example, with the Jag, on a domestic charger, it takes an hour just to get a 7 mile range. Buy their domestic wall box for 7kW charging, and you get just 22 miles range per hour. So well over 15 hours (the charge seems to slow the longer it goes on) to get the full range. Even using a commercial, full whack 50kW charger, it takes two hours to get the 300 miles out of it. So, maybe it might work ok for short distance commuting, but anything further will need a lot of lengthy comfort breaks...

 

So assuming a four car MU, you would need to be pumping 200kWhr on each track at a depot or station overnight, or whenever. Possibly outside the Nat Grid's capability right now if you repeated that across much of the UK (unless you de-wired the OLE!!).

 

Compare that to 15 minutes for a H-gas charging time on an entire train.

[Joseph_Pestell]

It must surely be a contender, but I don't see the breakthrough yet in battery weights, storage durability and charging times, let alone costs. But it must come one day, let's hope.

 

For now, for example, with the Jag, on a domestic charger, it takes an hour just to get a 7 mile range. Buy their domestic wall box for 7kW charging, and you get just 22 miles range per hour. So well over 15 hours (the charge seems to slow the longer it goes on) to get the full range. Even using a commercial, full whack 50kW charger, it takes two hours to get the 300 miles out of it. So, maybe it might work ok for short distance commuting, but anything further will need a lot of lengthy comfort breaks...

 

So assuming a four car MU, you would need to be pumping 200kWhr on each track at a depot or station overnight, or whenever. Possibly outside the Nat Grid's capability right now if you repeated that across much of the UK (unless you de-wired the OLE!!).

 

Compare that to 15 minutes for a H-gas charging time on an entire train.

 

The figures quoted in the article were somewhat better than that.

 

But given more suitable gearing for the train (4.5 seconds to 60 not good for the standing passengers), etc. I think that your figures look rather pessimistic.

 

Local supplies might be an issue at some depots, but, in general, the National Grid would love this as it would be taking energy at off-peak.

[APOLLO]

In the not too distant future night time will become the new peak when everyone is recharging there batteries !!

 

Brit15

[ian]

In the not too distant future night time will become the new peak when everyone is recharging there batteries !!

 

Brit15

...and the solar panels aren't putting power in...

[Mike Storey]

The figures quoted in the article were somewhat better than that.

 

But given more suitable gearing for the train (4.5 seconds to 60 not good for the standing passengers), etc. I think that your figures look rather pessimistic.

 

Local supplies might be an issue at some depots, but, in general, the National Grid would love this as it would be taking energy at off-peak.

 

Ok. I was quoting merely from Jaguar's own website.......

[jjb1970]

On the safety aspect, while I share the concerns that hydrogen needs careful risk management I also think we should keep in mind that traditional forms of powering trains aren't risk free. Steam plant is highly hazardous and pressure vessel explosions were a common occurrence in the 19th century and still happen today to a much lesser extent. And contact with steam or very hot water isn't a pleasant experience. Diesel oil is flammable and has a very high calorific value (the reason carbon and hydro-carbon fuels are so attractive is their very high energy density), when diesel ignites it burns very violently and at very high temperature and despite a rather complacent attitude to diesel it's not that hard to ignite. Especially on engines where you have high pressure fuel lines and exhaust arrangements, not to mention the risk of crankcase explosions, bottom end failures etc. Internal combustion engines are subject to all sorts of failure modes that can result in fire and/or explosion. And electricity isn't safe if you decide to offer yourself as an earth. None of which is to say the alternatives are unsafe per se, rather to highlight that they also require careful risk management just as use of hydrogen will.

[Zomboid]

I don't understand the risks of hydrogen well enough to comment, but if Alstom are prepared to attach their name to it, I would assume that they think they can manage them.

 

The observation I'd make would be that the notion of using most of a carriage as a fuel tank is essentially building a hydrogen fuel cell locomotive. If you need one 'locomotive' for 3 passenger vehicles then I don't see it as being scalable beyond branch line power, provided the platforms are up to the job. Roof mounting all the tanks like on the prototype unit might work on a new build if it'll fit in our smaller loading gauge. You certainly wouldn't want hydrogen lines between vehicles...

[Edwin_m]

I presume the intention is to have the hydrogen tanks in the roofs of some or all of the cars (which might result in a low ceiling like there is today under the pantograph) and fuel cells in those cars with electrical cables linking to the existing motors in the powered car.  There will probably be some batteries or supercapacitors somewhere as well, as fuel cells aren't too good at providing bursts of high power as needed by a train accelerating.  Those would probably be under the floor to keep the centre of gravity down, as there is no particular safety issue with putting them there and plenty of space avaialible.