Alternative fuels for railways

[PatB]

The one place I see biofuels having a place as a real solution is in aviation. It's the one transport field where there is no realistic short to medium (maybe even long) term alternative to burning carbon molecules stored and transported in liquid form. Whilst it's not an area where I'd even consider myself a well-informed layman, I'd have thought that if someone was working on a realistically practical solar-powered airship, for example, we'd have heard about it via reputable sources.

 

All other transport modes have a fairly clear route to practical alternative technologies. Rail electrification has been a mature technology for longer than most people have been alive; problems in the UK are principally those of management and/or cost, not limitations of available tech.  It is entirely possible, technically, to build a rail system that is not dependent on more than a tiny fraction of liquid carbon fuels at point of use.

 

Universal clean (at point of use) road transport is still a way off but is  entirely forseeable over the next couple of decades given the technology we either currently have or can be realistically expected to develop from current research. Again, the question is no longer if, but when and how much. Biofuels might have a place as a temporary stopgap for those applications where electrics are still not quite there yet, such as heavy vehicles operating over long distances, but shouldn't be seen as a long-term solution, because they (probably) won't need to be.

 

There is, of course, the unpalateable possibility that there simply isn't enough easily harvested energy around, from any source, renewable or not, to allow the levels of consumption we in the OECD now take for granted, and more and more of the developing world aspire to, without causing significant damage to the planet's ability to support 7 billion large predators.

[Classsix T]

I don't necessarily believe over population is the root cause, more it's the wastefulness of the current inhabitants.

 

The USA for instance throws out 40% of the food it produces, and it's said if the rest of the globe was as consumptive as the USA, we'd need two and a half planet Earths to cater for the resources needed.

 

C6T.

[PatB]

I don't necessarily believe over population is the root cause, more it's the wastefulness of the current inhabitants.

 

The USA for instance throws out 40% of the food it produces, and it's said if the rest of the globe was as consumptive as the USA, we'd need two and a half planet Earths to cater for the resources needed.

 

C6T.

 

True, and I abhor waste. II believe much more could be done to use the resources we have more wisely.  Nonetheless, providing the global population, or even a substantial proportion of it with near effortless, on-demand mobility, for example, would take an awful lot of energy, however efficiently it might be done. Maybe there simply isn't enough.

[Nearholmer]

Depending on where you live, the answer to the below question is often "yes", because hyper-mobility has led to particular patterns of life. quite a bit of adjustment needed to our lives!

[Classsix T]

In context that poster asked a pertinent question of the time though Kev.

 

In peacetime, Mr & Mrs Well-to-do are actually model consumption aware citizens, leaving the Bentley in the garage to mix it with the plebs on the railway, at least up until they settle into their first-class compo, natch.

 

C6T.

Edited May 3, 2018 by Classsix T

[Derekl]

Politicians don't need to be technical experts, that function is supposedly provided by the civil service and Network Rail. Politicians in almost all cases are generalists and few are technical experts. Their role is to make higher level policy decisions and to be able to receive advice from those who do have the technical knowledge. The problem appears to be that DafT lacks the technical expertise to undertake the roles that have been given to that department and that there have been some major issues at NR in relation to the GWML electrification at least.

 

Quite a lot of the problem is that politicians (of all flavours) often prefer their own pet dogmas to the sound technical advice they are given.

[jjb1970]

Suppressing use is one way to reduce emissions. That could be via carrot, stick or a combination of both. The problem is that as with most things many can agree to carrot and stick measures to reduce emissions provided they get the carrot and somebody else gets hit with the stick.

 

I think one of the problems with the whole decarbonising debate is that people view future possibilities through the prism of the past. Industry and society will adapt to new technologies rather than new technologies replicating what we have today. And with change comes opportunity, one of my complaints about some green NGOs is that they place political ideology to the fore and won't accept that the way to accelerate cleaning up the world is to persuade the world that there's loot to be made and work with industry.

[Edwin_m]

Carrots and sticks could be a feedstock for biofuel. 

[Classsix T]

You're absolutely right of course jjb, but I have to assume you mean this in terms of the UK or western economic sphere.

 

The driving force behind mankind's development is aspiration. Better weapons to protect or provide 10k years ago has turned into the acquisition of wealth to provide a nicer home, better education for the nippers, healthcare and provision for old age. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

 

But once you bring carrots and sticks into today's have/have not socio-economic theatre, you're on shaky ground.

The have nots are gonna accuse you of retardation if they're given the stick. Give them the carrot and the haves will complain about uneven playing grounds, "I worked for my money!" carpet trust fund tit George Osborne stated.

 

On the other hand, beat the 10 persenters with the stick and you can guarantee, bills will be passed worldwide to hide their assets and income even deeper. Sharpish.

 

I fear nothing is as black and white as we'd like to think.

 

C6T.

[jjb1970]

The "diesel" engine is pretty much developed as far as it'll go. There are a multitude of thermodynamic cycles used as the basis for engines nowadays, such as the Miller cycle, fuel injection control has reached a very high level of control, allowing for ultra high pressure pulsing injection to optimise the combustion process, engine timing is controlled in real time, very high pressure turbo-charging, lightweight engine construction etc and various emission control techniques. There are all sorts of energy recovery measures to reduce heat rejection, including things like organic rankine cycle systems. Materials science has been used to push the envelope with regards durability and operating parameters. Yes engines can still be developed but I think the diesel engine is at the stage of the classic Stephenson steam locomotive in the 1930's, yes there is a lot of potential to make improvements and get engine anoraks (like me) excited but in reality we're playing at the margins. I think gas turbines are at the same level of evolutionary development, the WR21 engine used intercooling and recuperation, things like sequential combustors are widely used, advanced heat recovery etc. Running them on bio-fuels doesn't alter local emissions that much and the carbon credentials are questionable, natural gas is better for local emissions but isn't that much of a GHG reduction. So then you look at alternatives like methanol, ammonia and hydrogen and then you start questioning whether you might not be better switching to things like fuel cells. Certainly in the case of hydrogen gas then you're far better off feeding it to a fuel cell I think. And then there are batteries, either as straight battery power systems or battery  hybrid arrangements which I think have huge potential.

[Nearholmer]

I’m surprised that capacitors haven’t had a mention, because they have a quite useful place in transport, as a short term, high-input, high-output energy store, which fits quite nicely with braking and acceleration cycles. They are already used in this mode on trains and trams, sometimes in combination with battery or fuel cells, neither of which is ideal for that part of the load cycle.

 

On the broader front, I’m trying to think of another large-scale example of scarcity-driven innovation, where the scarcity has been deliberately created or accelerated by public policy, rather than by something simply running out, forcing prices up, and bringing forward alternative solutions.

 

Lead-free paints and solders? A small example by comparison with what’s happening in fossil fuels, so not much to go on. The abolition of sanctioned slavery? But in that case the scarcity of abusively cheap labour was dealt with in the short term by adjustments that continued the supply of cheap labour, while ameliorating only some of the abuse, rather than by rapid technical innovation. CFCs? Still small by comparison. Can anyone else think of a truly transferable example?

[jjb1970]

In my industry I can think of two similar transitions, although both were driven by economic and operational considerations rather than regulatory ones. The first was the transition from sail to coal fuelled steam, the second was the transition from coal to oil fuel.

[Nearholmer]

As you say, those transitions were ‘technology driven’. Nobody banned the use of the wind, and it certainly didn’t run out.

[jjb1970]

I can't think of anything on this scale. There have been plenty of forced transitions for chemicals, biocides etc, for regulatory reasons but they've tended to be on a relatively smaller scale. Phasing out asbestos was quite a big thing. Although coal was never banned, the clean air acts promoted quite a lot of change in energy.

[Andy Hayter]

On the broader front, I’m trying to think of another large-scale example of scarcity-driven innovation, where the scarcity has been deliberately created or accelerated by public policy, rather than by something simply running out, forcing prices up, and bringing forward alternative solutions.

 

 

LED developments post the partial and then final banning of filament light bulbs.

E cigarettes following the banning of smoking in public places.  In this case the scarcity is one of places to indulge.

[Corbs]

This might be of interest - when I was in Sweden I went through a section of motorway where the inside lane has catenary. The idea is that lorries with batteries on board and pantographs on the roof use these motorways all the time, so run on battery power when in the town and on the wires/recharge their batteries on the move).

 

More here:

https://www.scania.com/group/en/worlds-first-electric-road-opens-in-sweden/

 

[APOLLO]

What happens when the driver swerves to avoid an Elk ?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moose_test

 

Brit15

Edited May 4, 2018 by APOLLO

[david.hill64]

What happens when the driver swerves to avoid an Elk ?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moose_test

 

Brit15

The dewirement brings down the overhead, electrocutes the elk, and the driver gets some ready cooked steaks....................

[Nearholmer]

Siemens are going back to their roots with this, having invented what became the trolley bus in about 1883.

 

https://www.siemens.com/innovation/en/home/pictures-of-the-future/mobility-and-motors/electromobility-ehighway-sweden.html

 

It all begins to make a point that we sometimes miss, which is that the prime advantages of a railway over a road are: low rolling resistance; and, self-guidance.

 

With a very high-quality road surface, rock-hard tyres, and software-mediated guidance, a road gets very close to being a railway; the advantages of rail are eroded.

 

The other thing that characterises rail is 'signalling', which is primarily a means to prevent (or at least reduce to vanishingly low probability) conflicting movements between vehicles. And, of course, software-mediated systems bring that in reach for road vehicles too.

 

And, automated vehicle operation, and automated traffic management can be applied to either mode.

 

All gets very interesting.

[Classsix T]

This might be of interest - when I was in Sweden I went through a section of motorway where the inside lane has catenary. The idea is that lorries with batteries on board and pantographs on the roof use these motorways all the time, so run on battery power when in the town and on the wires/recharge their batteries on the move).

Screen Shot 2018-05-04 at 09.36.28.png

 

More here:

https://www.scania.com/group/en/worlds-first-electric-road-opens-in-sweden/

 

So it's a Trolley Lorry? If you'd not posted images, I'd never have believed it!

 

C6T.

[Classsix T]

It all begins to make a point that we sometimes miss, which is that the prime advantages of a railway over a road are: low rolling resistance; and, self-guidance.

 

With a very high-quality road surface, rock-hard tyres, and software-mediated guidance, a road gets very close to being a railway; the advantages of rail are eroded.

 

I'd be interested to see any road vehicle attempt to shift any quarter of a mile long, between 1500-4400 tonnes, trailing load consist at up to 300kph without any fuss or bother Kevin!

 

C6T.

[Reorte]

Siemens are going back to their roots with this, having invented what became the trolley bus in about 1883.

 

https://www.siemens.com/innovation/en/home/pictures-of-the-future/mobility-and-motors/electromobility-ehighway-sweden.html

 

It all begins to make a point that we sometimes miss, which is that the prime advantages of a railway over a road are: low rolling resistance; and, self-guidance.

 

With a very high-quality road surface, rock-hard tyres, and software-mediated guidance, a road gets very close to being a railway; the advantages of rail are eroded.

 

The other thing that characterises rail is 'signalling', which is primarily a means to prevent (or at least reduce to vanishingly low probability) conflicting movements between vehicles. And, of course, software-mediated systems bring that in reach for road vehicles too.

 

And, automated vehicle operation, and automated traffic management can be applied to either mode.

 

All gets very interesting.

Very low rolling resistance is the one big thing, stuff like computer control and management is really just tinkering to save a bit of money by kicking people out. With low enough rolling resistance comes two problems, the inability to change direction and the inability to stop in a hurry. Dealing with both of those brings you back to a railway - the rails do the change of direction for you, and create the more controlled environment compared to the road necessary to handle traffic that can't stop or change direction at will.

[Nearholmer]

“.... computer control and management is really just tinkering to save a bit of money by kicking people out.....”

 

It’s more than that. It allows you to achieve capacity within a given infrastructure that simply can’t be achieved with people in the loop, which is why metros are the spearhead for railway automation.

 

The same would apply to a road with all the vehicles driven by robots. It’s human variability that causes most of the snarl-ups on the M25, for instance.

 

And, it allows energy consumption to be optimised for, say, a given journey duration.

Edited May 4, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Classsix T]

It’s human variability that causes most of the snarl-ups on the M25, for instance

Undoubtedly, but impossible to prove or quantify without similar models that ai would do any better. Besides, do you add lanes to the M25 for ai control or ban humans from using those in existence in favour of ai vehicles?

 

C6T.

[Nearholmer]

“Dead easy” to prove, or disprove, using mathematical simulation, which is precisely how it is done for railways.

 

There’s already quite a lot of mathematical analysis been done of the behaviour of motorway traffic, and the difference between erratic and non-erratic driving, and it’s affect on capacity, is well understood and is part of what lies behind dynamic control of speed limits on very busy stretches these days.

 

Service optimisation software spends ages ‘playing’ in a virtual environment, before it get deployed in the real world. And, just for clarity, I’m talking here about the service optimisation functions, not the safety vital functions, which are subject to very rigorous techniques, well beyond ‘trying it and tweaking it’.

 

As to how to progressively automate driving on motorways, my guess would be that “cruise” would be the simplest to automate, so start by making what is now the ‘fast’ lane the auto-cruise lane, with the middle lane for ‘boarding and alighting’ the cruise, and the inner lane manual, then progressively migrate auto across lanes as more vehicles become fitted, and the software more able to deal with complexities. But, that’s only a quick stab; I’m sure people are being paid good money to devise well-thought-out answers. If what I postulate is the way it goes, expect to see the ‘fast’ lane filled with a steady procession of lorries, because big lorry fleet operators have most to gain by optimising energy use.