GRA said:Oils4AsphaultOnly said:GRA said:There's enough statistical data now to prove that HV battery packs are significantly safer than any of the combustion fuels. You're simply deflecting when citing battery fires as a false equivalence to H2 issues.
Sure, they're proving statistically safer, but we accept the risk of gasoline and have done so for over a century. Yet EVs aren't absolutely safe, any more than the others are. We accept some level of risk with all of them to get the benefits. We simply don't have enough data yet to say what the accident risk of widely-deployed FC or ICE EVs using liquid or gaseous H2 will be compared to fossil fuels, only small scale tests plus lab work (much of which has previously been posted way up-topic) which indicate that it will likely be less than gasoline, and we accept a couple of hundred thousand fires and many injuries and deaths from gas-powered vehicles every year in the U.S.
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:Going back to my question. Burning H2 is actually polluting (produces NOx, which causes lung disease from long-term exposure). The only difference in emissions between burning H2 vs gasoline is CO2 and SOx. Once you factor in all the costs (storage/production/delivery/safety/density), it would actually be better to continue burning gasoline instead of burning H2. Who cares if it costs the manufacturers less to develop combustion H2 tech if that tech shouldn't even be used! If you want fuel cells to succeed, then stop diverting money to useless side-projects.
I'm not diverting money to H2 ICEs, companies with far more skin in the game than either of us are, often in combination with FCs, presumably based on far more knowledge of their industry and what their customers want than either of us are privy to. Since resource constraints are likely to hinder FC scale-up as much as they are batteries, I'm in favor of using multiple approaches, as my sig indicates. Since we'll need to scale up green H2 production either way, if this helps us get there sooner while also reducing GHGs, I can accept that even if it's not my first choice. Governments can and will decide whether or not it meets their goals for emissions reductions. But it's not either of our calls.
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:GRA said:I'm not diverting money to H2 ICEs, companies with far more skin in the game than either of us are, often in combination with FCs, presumably based on far more knowledge of their industry and what their customers want than either of us are privy to. Since resource constraints are likely to hinder FC scale-up as much as they are batteries, I'm in favor of using multiple approaches, as my sig indicates. Since we'll need to scale up green H2 production either way, if this helps us get there sooner while also reducing GHGs, I can accept that even if it's not my first choice. Governments can and will decide whether or not it meets their goals for emissions reductions. But it's not either of our calls.
So far everything you've posted have shown that manufacturers are being subsidized by government dollars for their R&D. Those dollars came from tax payers like myself, others on this forum, and maybe even you (not sure if you've paid any taxes lately). So I say we have as much skin in this game as the manufacturers do, since some of that money came directly from our pockets.
GRA said:Oils4AsphaultOnly said:GRA said:I'm not diverting money to H2 ICEs, companies with far more skin in the game than either of us are, often in combination with FCs, presumably based on far more knowledge of their industry and what their customers want than either of us are privy to. Since resource constraints are likely to hinder FC scale-up as much as they are batteries, I'm in favor of using multiple approaches, as my sig indicates. Since we'll need to scale up green H2 production either way, if this helps us get there sooner while also reducing GHGs, I can accept that even if it's not my first choice. Governments can and will decide whether or not it meets their goals for emissions reductions. But it's not either of our calls.
So far everything you've posted have shown that manufacturers are being subsidized by government dollars for their R&D. Those dollars came from tax payers like myself, others on this forum, and maybe even you (not sure if you've paid any taxes lately). So I say we have as much skin in this game as the manufacturers do, since some of that money came directly from our pockets.
AFAIR Cummins and some or maybe all of the others aren't getting government money for their H2 ICE work, although there is certainly government money going into some of the FCEV development efforts. But if that bothers you, you should be directing your complaints to the respective government agencies and their political masters, who can do something about it. Personally, I'm far more concerned about direct-to-consumer subsidies of expensive (better yet all) EVs and SO HOV lane access, both of which I'd like to see ended, than I am over government money being used for RDT&E. I'm (generally) in favor of the latter.
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2023/07/20230728-cpkc.htmlCPKC orders 3.6MW of Ballard fuel cells for expansion of hydrogen locomotive program
Ballard Power Systems received an order for additional fuel cell engines from Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC). These eighteen, 200 kW fuel cell engines (3.6 MW total) are planned for delivery in 2023 and will support the expansion of CPKC’s Hydrogen Locomotive Program.
Over the past two years, Ballard has supplied CPKC with 20 fuel cell engines for use in three different types of locomotives, with combined fuel cell power of 4MW. These locomotives have been undergoing field testing in 2022 and early 2023 with successful tests, proving the capabilities of Ballard’s hydrogen fuel cell technology in locomotive applications.
Further development on range across temperature variations, heavy hauling, fine tuning auxiliary load to avoid waste, increased number of hours on current and additional units will support continued technological evolution. The success of these trials, combined with the need to achieve CPKC’s emissions goals, has resulted in the significant expansion of the original hydrogen locomotive program. . . .
In June, CPKC and CSX Corporation announced their intent to enter into a joint venture for the building and deployment of hydrogen locomotive conversion kits for diesel electric locomotives.
As an initial step in the collaboration, CSX plans to convert one of its diesel locomotives using a hydrogen conversion kit developed by CPKC. The conversion work will be done at CSX’s Huntington, West Virginia locomotive shop.
In December 2020, Canadian Pacific (CP) announced plans to develop North America’s first line-haul hydrogen-powered locomotive by retrofitting a diesel freight locomotive with hydrogen fuel cells and battery technology to drive the locomotive's electric traction motors. The prototype, designed and built by in-house CP engineers, made its first movement under its own power in late 2021. By the end of 2022, the locomotive had made its first revenue moves and now has accumulated more than 1,000 miles of testing in revenue service.
CPKC has deployed a second hydrogen locomotive for testing in terminal operations, a program expansion supported by funding awarded by Emissions Reduction Alberta and the Government of Canada Low Carbon Economy Fund. The second hydrogen locomotive is expected to enter service later in 2023.
Stadler wins contracts for up to 120 battery-powered trains, 25 hydrogen trains
Austrian Federal Railways (ÖBB) has awarded Stadler a framework agreement for up to 120 battery-powered trains. The FLIRT Akku vehicles are designed to replace the current diesel fleet and will enable sustainable operation on lines that are only partially electrified. The signing of the framework agreement and the initial order for 16 FLIRT battery is expected to take place in autumn 2023.
Separately, Italian railway operators Azienda Regionale Sarda Trasporti (ARST) and Ferrovie della Calabria (FdC) awarded Stadler two framework agreements for the supply and maintenance of 10 hydrogen trains for ARST in Sardinia and 15 similar vehicles for FdC in Calabria. This will make Stadler the first train manufacturer in the world to supply narrow-gauge trains with hydrogen propulsion. . . .
The FLIRT Akku vehicles are the battery-powered version of Stadler’s best-selling FLIRT model, which has already sold over 2,500 units worldwide. They are intended for use in the eastern region in Austria, where they will replace the current diesel fleet. The FLIRT Akku model allows sustainable rail operation on non-electrified line sections by charging the traction batteries while travelling under an overhead contact line.
The vehicle has an operating range of around 100 kilometers. This means that the regional train can be battery operated on almost all of the non-electrified routes in Austria, for example. After successfully covering 224 kilometers in battery-only mode, the FLIRT Akku holds the world record for the longest journey travelled by a regional train in battery-only mode without additional charging.
As well as delivering new trains for ÖBB, Stadler is also supplying 55 FLIRT Akku vehicles for the Schleswig-Holstein local transport network, 44 trains for the Palatinate network and 14 trains for Deutsche Bahn’s H-Netz. The vehicles for Schleswig-Holstein are currently undergoing approval tests and will start passenger service later this year. In addition, Stadler is also manufacturing six FLIRT Akku for the Lithuanian rail operator LTG Link.
In addition to battery-powered trains, Stadler is also pushing ahead with the development of rail vehicles that run on hydrogen. These allow low-emission rail operation, especially on lines without an overhead contact line. Stadler designed and built the first multiple unit with hydrogen propulsion for SBCTA in California. After a successful test phase this spring, the vehicle is due to start operating in 2024.
Following two public tenders launched in June, Italian railway operators ARST in Sardinia and FdC in Calabria have each awarded Stadler a framework agreement for the design, production, delivery and maintenance of 10 and 15 trains respectively. The vehicles will be equipped with hydrogen fuel-cell propulsion and be dedicated to regional and suburban services for the narrow-gauge (950-mm) network in the two Italian regions. Both projects are being financed with EU funds from the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR). . . .
GRA said:Given the population density in Germany I'm surprised that they opted for H2 in the first place - it would be like using H2 instead of electrified rail along the Northeast Corridor. OTOH, Canada, the Great Plains/Rockies and similar areas of low population density and limited electric infrastructure would be a very different matter economically*. Even if built, maintaining the necessary electrical infrastructure would be very expensive given the climate, as the CMSTP&P aka the Milwaukee Road found out last century. They had the greatest extent of electrified rail line in the country, almost 650 miles in two sections between Harlowton, MT and Tacoma, WA, but once diesels were commercialized they found they couldn't compete with them, especially as the price of labor increased.
*Case in point:https://www.greencarcongress.com/2023/07/20230728-cpkc.htmlCPKC orders 3.6MW of Ballard fuel cells for expansion of hydrogen locomotive program
Ballard Power Systems received an order for additional fuel cell engines from Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC). These eighteen, 200 kW fuel cell engines (3.6 MW total) are planned for delivery in 2023 and will support the expansion of CPKC’s Hydrogen Locomotive Program.
Over the past two years, Ballard has supplied CPKC with 20 fuel cell engines for use in three different types of locomotives, with combined fuel cell power of 4MW. These locomotives have been undergoing field testing in 2022 and early 2023 with successful tests, proving the capabilities of Ballard’s hydrogen fuel cell technology in locomotive applications.
Further development on range across temperature variations, heavy hauling, fine tuning auxiliary load to avoid waste, increased number of hours on current and additional units will support continued technological evolution. The success of these trials, combined with the need to achieve CPKC’s emissions goals, has resulted in the significant expansion of the original hydrogen locomotive program. . . .
In June, CPKC and CSX Corporation announced their intent to enter into a joint venture for the building and deployment of hydrogen locomotive conversion kits for diesel electric locomotives.
As an initial step in the collaboration, CSX plans to convert one of its diesel locomotives using a hydrogen conversion kit developed by CPKC. The conversion work will be done at CSX’s Huntington, West Virginia locomotive shop.
In December 2020, Canadian Pacific (CP) announced plans to develop North America’s first line-haul hydrogen-powered locomotive by retrofitting a diesel freight locomotive with hydrogen fuel cells and battery technology to drive the locomotive's electric traction motors. The prototype, designed and built by in-house CP engineers, made its first movement under its own power in late 2021. By the end of 2022, the locomotive had made its first revenue moves and now has accumulated more than 1,000 miles of testing in revenue service.
CPKC has deployed a second hydrogen locomotive for testing in terminal operations, a program expansion supported by funding awarded by Emissions Reduction Alberta and the Government of Canada Low Carbon Economy Fund. The second hydrogen locomotive is expected to enter service later in 2023.
Terminal ops strike me as harder to justify for H2, although given a high duty cycle requirement I could see them being a better fit than batteries, and I'd think that stringing catenary lines all over a marshalling yard wouldn't be an option. But rail line-haul, as with line- and long-haul trucking, is an obvious use for H2 w/wo fuel cells to replace diesels, as current BEVs can't meet the requirements for that usage.
Here's another example of choosing the right tool for different jobs:
Stadler wins contracts for up to 120 battery-powered trains, 25 hydrogen trains
Austrian Federal Railways (ÖBB) has awarded Stadler a framework agreement for up to 120 battery-powered trains. The FLIRT Akku vehicles are designed to replace the current diesel fleet and will enable sustainable operation on lines that are only partially electrified. The signing of the framework agreement and the initial order for 16 FLIRT battery is expected to take place in autumn 2023.
Separately, Italian railway operators Azienda Regionale Sarda Trasporti (ARST) and Ferrovie della Calabria (FdC) awarded Stadler two framework agreements for the supply and maintenance of 10 hydrogen trains for ARST in Sardinia and 15 similar vehicles for FdC in Calabria. This will make Stadler the first train manufacturer in the world to supply narrow-gauge trains with hydrogen propulsion. . . .
The FLIRT Akku vehicles are the battery-powered version of Stadler’s best-selling FLIRT model, which has already sold over 2,500 units worldwide. They are intended for use in the eastern region in Austria, where they will replace the current diesel fleet. The FLIRT Akku model allows sustainable rail operation on non-electrified line sections by charging the traction batteries while travelling under an overhead contact line.
The vehicle has an operating range of around 100 kilometers. This means that the regional train can be battery operated on almost all of the non-electrified routes in Austria, for example. After successfully covering 224 kilometers in battery-only mode, the FLIRT Akku holds the world record for the longest journey travelled by a regional train in battery-only mode without additional charging.
As well as delivering new trains for ÖBB, Stadler is also supplying 55 FLIRT Akku vehicles for the Schleswig-Holstein local transport network, 44 trains for the Palatinate network and 14 trains for Deutsche Bahn’s H-Netz. The vehicles for Schleswig-Holstein are currently undergoing approval tests and will start passenger service later this year. In addition, Stadler is also manufacturing six FLIRT Akku for the Lithuanian rail operator LTG Link.
In addition to battery-powered trains, Stadler is also pushing ahead with the development of rail vehicles that run on hydrogen. These allow low-emission rail operation, especially on lines without an overhead contact line. Stadler designed and built the first multiple unit with hydrogen propulsion for SBCTA in California. After a successful test phase this spring, the vehicle is due to start operating in 2024.
Following two public tenders launched in June, Italian railway operators ARST in Sardinia and FdC in Calabria have each awarded Stadler a framework agreement for the design, production, delivery and maintenance of 10 and 15 trains respectively. The vehicles will be equipped with hydrogen fuel-cell propulsion and be dedicated to regional and suburban services for the narrow-gauge (950-mm) network in the two Italian regions. Both projects are being financed with EU funds from the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR). . . .
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2023/07/20230725-stadler.html
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:<Snip>
The Italian purchase of hydrogen trains doesn't strike me as a case of "right tool for the job". If the Austrian tests showed that a battery-only train can cover a 224km route (effectively half way across the entire spanish country), then what could ARST possibly need a hydrogen train for other than to test it out? Remember that Germany realized that costs of the fuel (not lack of infrastructure, since they had a dedicated depot) made hydrogen a dead-end. Please don't respond with the predicted "future price" of renewable hydrogen - that isn't going to happen anytime soon.
MOL makes strategic investment in Ascension Clean Energy; hydrogen-ammonia production facility
MOL Clean Energy, US, LLC (MCE), a 100% subsidiary of Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. (MOL), and Clean Hydrogen Works, LLC (CHW) announced MCE as a Joint Venture shareholder in Ascension Clean Energy (ACE), a proposed $7.5-billion, clean hydrogen-ammonia production and export facility in Ascension Parish, Louisiana. (Earlier post.)
Other shareholders are CHW, Denbury Carbon Solutions., a carbon solutions provider with more than two decades of successfully managing carbon dioxide (CO2), and Hafnia, one of the world’s leading oil product tanker owners and operators.
Expected to produce 7.2 million metric tons of clean hydrogen-ammonia annually, ACE will help meet the rapidly emerging demand for affordable, secure, and low-carbon fuels and feedstock around the world. This clean energy will help decarbonize hard-to-abate sectors including power generation, bunker fuel, heavy transportation, steel processing and industrial applications.
As one of the world's largest shipping companies, MOL is well-positioned to help develop safe, sustainable, and efficient solutions to ship ACE’s clean hydrogen-ammonia to emerging clean energy markets across the globe. . . .
LeftieBiker said:I don't understand why my old (high school) dream of electric locomotives and PV panels on the roofs of the cars wouldn't work. You'd have a dedicated "battery car" as well.
GRA said:Oils4AsphaultOnly said:<Snip>
The Italian purchase of hydrogen trains doesn't strike me as a case of "right tool for the job". If the Austrian tests showed that a battery-only train can cover a 224km route (effectively half way across the entire spanish country), then what could ARST possibly need a hydrogen train for other than to test it out? Remember that Germany realized that costs of the fuel (not lack of infrastructure, since they had a dedicated depot) made hydrogen a dead-end. Please don't respond with the predicted "future price" of renewable hydrogen - that isn't going to happen anytime soon.
Although the article doesn't say, I suspect the 224km was test without load or needing to meet timetables, year-round. You'll note that they only credit it with an operating range of 100km. Not being familliar with conditions in either locale, except that Sardinia is certainly mountainous and has cold winters, I can't say what led them to the choice, but I'm not the one spending the money.
As to the cost of renewable H2, that will, like every other industrial process (including batteries), reduce through economies of scale as well as continuing R&D. There's already plans and investments to generate it in areas with low-cost renewables and move it (via ammonia, pipeline or what have you) to other areas for use, along with lots of research/dem-val to reduce the cost at any particular production site. Naturally, most of the latter will never get past the lab stage, any more than most battery research will.
Here's one example:MOL makes strategic investment in Ascension Clean Energy; hydrogen-ammonia production facility
MOL Clean Energy, US, LLC (MCE), a 100% subsidiary of Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd. (MOL), and Clean Hydrogen Works, LLC (CHW) announced MCE as a Joint Venture shareholder in Ascension Clean Energy (ACE), a proposed $7.5-billion, clean hydrogen-ammonia production and export facility in Ascension Parish, Louisiana. (Earlier post.)
Other shareholders are CHW, Denbury Carbon Solutions., a carbon solutions provider with more than two decades of successfully managing carbon dioxide (CO2), and Hafnia, one of the world’s leading oil product tanker owners and operators.
Expected to produce 7.2 million metric tons of clean hydrogen-ammonia annually, ACE will help meet the rapidly emerging demand for affordable, secure, and low-carbon fuels and feedstock around the world. This clean energy will help decarbonize hard-to-abate sectors including power generation, bunker fuel, heavy transportation, steel processing and industrial applications.
As one of the world's largest shipping companies, MOL is well-positioned to help develop safe, sustainable, and efficient solutions to ship ACE’s clean hydrogen-ammonia to emerging clean energy markets across the globe. . . .
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2023/06/20230618-mol.html
Trans-oceanic ZEV shipping is obviously an area where batteries aren't an option anytime soon, as is also the case with aviation other than very short range air-taxi/puddle-jumping.
You can find other examples of major investments in H2 production infrastructure as well as H2 production R&D at https://www.greencarcongress.com/hydrogen_production/
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:LeftieBiker said:I don't understand why my old (high school) dream of electric locomotives and PV panels on the roofs of the cars wouldn't work. You'd have a dedicated "battery car" as well.
power density. The solar panels takes all day to trickle charge enough energy into the batteries for a 15 minute drive. The nice thing is that 15 mins was absolutely FREE!
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:GRA said:Oils4AsphaultOnly said:<Snip>
The Italian purchase of hydrogen trains doesn't strike me as a case of "right tool for the job". If the Austrian tests showed that a battery-only train can cover a 224km route (effectively half way across the entire spanish country), then what could ARST possibly need a hydrogen train for other than to test it out? Remember that Germany realized that costs of the fuel (not lack of infrastructure, since they had a dedicated depot) made hydrogen a dead-end. Please don't respond with the predicted "future price" of renewable hydrogen - that isn't going to happen anytime soon.
Although the article doesn't say, I suspect the 224km was test without load or needing to meet timetables, year-round. You'll note that they only credit it with an operating range of 100km. Not being familliar with conditions in either locale, except that Sardinia is certainly mountainous and has cold winters, I can't say what led them to the choice, but I'm not the one spending the money.
<Snip>
I disagree with your speculation (train tracks have very gradual incline/declines through mountainous areas and batteries function fine in the winter as long as they're pre-heated during charging), but won't add anymore, since I'm not part of the decisions makers either.
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2023/08/20230812-dac.htmlDOE to award up to $1.2B to two direct air capture (DAC) demonstrations
The US Department of Energy (DOE) will award up to $1.2 billion to advance the development of two commercial-scale direct air capture facilities in Texas and Louisiana. These projects—the first of this scale in the United States—represent the initial selections from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law-funded Regional Direct Air Capture (DAC) Hubs program, which aims to kickstart a nationwide network of large-scale carbon removal sites to address legacy carbon dioxide pollution and complement rapid emissions reductions.
Together, these projects are expected to remove more than 2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year from the atmosphere—an amount equivalent to the annual emissions from roughly 445,000 gasoline-powered cars.
The investment—the largest in engineered carbon removal yet—will eventually remove more than 250 times more carbon dioxide than the largest DAC facility currently operating.
The US Department of Energy (DOE) will award up to $1.2 billion to advance the development of two commercial-scale direct air capture facilities in Texas and Louisiana. These projects—the first of this scale in the United States—represent the initial selections from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law-funded Regional Direct Air Capture (DAC) Hubs program, which aims to kickstart a nationwide network of large-scale carbon removal sites to address legacy carbon dioxide pollution and complement rapid emissions reductions.
Together, these projects are expected to remove more than 2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year from the atmosphere—an amount equivalent to the annual emissions from roughly 445,000 gasoline-powered cars.
The investment—the largest in engineered carbon removal yet—will eventually remove more than 250 times more carbon dioxide than the largest DAC facility currently operating. . . .
https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/tra...rail-transport-train-manufacturer/2-1-1504868Hydrogen will ‘almost always’ lose out to battery-electric in German rail transport: train manufacturer
. . . Hydrogen trains are more complex to maintain than their battery-electric equivalents and are likely to lose out in the German market, where battery-powered trains will be suitable on almost every railway line, according to the Swiss manufacturer of both H2 and battery-powered locomotives.
Steffan Obst, the head of German sales at Bussnang-based trainmaker Stadler, said that battery-electric models usually emerge victorious in technology-neutral tenders put out by German railway operators looking for low-carbon trains.
In fact, the only time hydrogen trains usually win tenders in Germany is when H2 models are specifically requested, he said — which is why Stadler still offers its hydrogen train in the German market.
“If the tenders are open to all technologies and the only condition is a potentially CO2-free drive, we have observed that the battery almost always prevails over hydrogen,” he told German business weekly magazine Wirschaftwoche in an interview.
The primary reason for this is that railways in Central Europe are rarely less than 80km from a station with an overhead charging line, which can be used to charge the battery with 15,000 volts — 15 minutes of which is enough to power the train for a further 50-150km.
This effectively eliminates one of the main advantages of hydrogen trains, which can take on enough fuel in quarter of an hour to travel 500-600km, several times the length of most of the German branch-lines currently in need of decarbonisation.
“On most of the approximately 500 routes in Germany that are currently served with diesel, [batteries are] the more efficient and cheaper solution,” Obst observed. “These are usually between 40 and 80km long, which you can easily travel with a battery train.”
In addition, hydrogen fuel cells require significantly more maintenance than a batteries alone, requiring replacement within three years on average.
“Because of this and the hydrogen tank on board, the maintenance effort is of course more complex compared to battery trains,” Obst explained, adding that hydrogen trains also require a battery for back-up power. . . .
Nevertheless, Stadler recently signed two framework agreements with Italian railway operators Azienda Regionale Sarda Trasporti (ARST) and Ferrovie della Calabria (FdC) to supply the world’s first hydrogen-powered narrow-gauge trains. Under the agreements, Stadler has promised to supply ten locomotives for ARST in Sardinia and 15 for FdC in Calabria.
And the company is marketing its H2 locomotives in the US, where Obst believes the distances covered gives hydrogen-powered rail transport a significant advantage over battery-electric equivalents.
“Think of the US,” he said. “There we sometimes have routes of several hundred kilometres. You can't do that with today's battery. Building battery trains with a range of more than 200km would not be economical at the moment. . . .”
https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/tra...-world-s-biggest-h2-rail-operator/2-1-1399643Indian Railways will spend $335m on 35 new hydrogen trains — making it the world’s biggest H2 rail operator
State railway firm to spend $9.7m per train across narrow-gauge ‘heritage’ routes — giving it more than twice as many hydrogen locomotives as the next largest operator in Germany
. . . IR, India’s state rail operator, will pay up to 800 million rupees ($9.7m) per train — dubbed the Vande Metro — with the roll-out scheduled to begin at the end of this year, railways minister Ashiwini Vaishnaw has said.
The minister has previously said that all Vande Metro trains will be designed and built in India.
The trains will operate across some or all of India’s seven “heritage” routes, located in hilly, remote areas of the country, as part of a so-called “Hydrogen for Heritage” programme.
Each route hosting a hydrogen train will also need ground infrastructure upgrades — Vaishnaw did not elaborate on what this might entail — which will cost an additional 700 million rupees ($8.5m) for each converted route. . . .
The country has targeted full electrification of its broad-gauge railways, achieving 83% electrification of that network as of December 2022.
But the narrow-gauge heritage routes could prove difficult to electrify, due to their remote locations, limited space and/or mountainous terrain.
India’s government has also signed off on a $13.2m project to retrofit an H2 fuel cell to multiple diesel-electric multiple units (DEMUs) for a portion of the Northern Railway, between Jind and Sonipat, just outside New Delhi.
DEMU trains require no locomotive as the engine is incorporated into the carriages. . . .
Given the much longer lifetimes being achieved by fuel cells in buses, I'm surprised at the statement that they need to be replaced every three years. I'd be curious to see how the duty cycles differ, and I also wonder if something got garbled in translation.
LeftieBiker said:Given the much longer lifetimes being achieved by fuel cells in buses, I'm surprised at the statement that they need to be replaced every three years. I'd be curious to see how the duty cycles differ, and I also wonder if something got garbled in translation.
I expect that it's the difference in load. It takes an order of magnitude more power to drive a train than to drive a bus, and I doubt that they use proportionately more fuel cells to accomplish this.
Hydrogen Cars Are Dead As Projects Are Scrapped and Refueling Prices Go Through the Roof
Those who see hydrogen as the fuel of the future are betting on a dead horse. Amid canceled hydrogen projects and skyrocketing hydrogen prices, people who bought an FCEV vehicle like a Hyundai Nexo or Toyota Mirai are in for a rude awakening.
Although battery-electric vehicles have proved they are the best to replace ICE vehicles, many people still expect a miracle fuel to save the combustion engine. For many, this miracle fuel is hydrogen, a gas that promises to burn with zero carbon emissions. Hydrogen is also the most abundant element on Earth, so it looked like the perfect solution for decarbonization. Well, things didn't pan out the way hydrogen proponents have imagined.
Hydrogen vehicles are still an exotic appearance due to their sky-high prices, whereas hydrogen proved a nightmare to produce, transport, and store. This is why hydrogen refueling stations are confined to small areas, like California in the US, and clean fuel prices are too high to make sense economically. Still, this didn't prevent car companies like Toyota from pouring billions into hydrogen vehicle development. Today, most hydrogen FCEV vehicles in California are Toyota Mirai, which is owed chiefly to Toyota heavily subsidizing the hydrogen refueling costs.
Shell, the biggest oil company in the world and one significant supplier of hydrogen fuel for both heavy-duty and passenger vehicles, started a year ago to close its car-focused hydrogen filling stations across the globe. The move culminated in August when Shell announced closing all its car-focused filling stations in California while only keeping three heavy-duty stations. These stations were located in San Francisco (two), Sacramento, Berkeley, and Citrus Heights.
Enter your email address to join:
