Just saw this article
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Just as an fyi, the article is behind a paywall, so most people can't read it
OK, must admit that I have no experience with battery railroad locomotives, having only read about that Wabtec "experimental" freight unit, but I have a few questions concerning such a battery powered unit in commuter service:
1) How will the 480 volt, three phase AC HEP for train heating/air conditioning/lighting be supplied?
2) What with all the fast acceleration and quick stopping using blended dynamic-air braking, how long will the batteries hold their charge?
3) How often would the batteries need to be recharged, and how long would it take?
Here's a link you don't have to pay for
The LIRR just scrapped a pilot program testing battery powered M-7 cars. They cited lack of reliability, and difficulty in retro-fitting existing cars.
https://www.trains.com/trn/new...-electric-equipment/
Putting the batteries under diesel bodies would allow for more room to work. Still to be seen if the technology will be marketable.
Battery-powered locomotives? I’ll believe it when I see it. Why not just electrify the commuter lines, like the Acela?
@Yellowstone Special posted:Battery-powered locomotives? I’ll believe it when I see it. Why not just electrify the commuter lines, like the Acela?
Where would the rest of the METRA system obtain THAT much electrical power, plus who would pay for the installation of all that overhead electrical infrastructure?
@Yellowstone Special posted:Battery-powered locomotives? I’ll believe it when I see it. Why not just electrify the commuter lines, like the Acela?
And you still have to generate the power to run them
@Hot Water posted:Where would the rest of the METRA system obtain THAT much electrical power, plus who would pay for the installation of all that overhead electrical infrastructure?
$34.6 million to convert only 6 locomotives over 3 & 1/2 years isn’t exactly cheap, either.
@Yellowstone Special posted:$34.6 million to convert only 6 locomotives over 3 & 1/2 years isn’t exactly cheap, either.
Still a WHOLE LOT cheaper than the hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars required to install 12,500 or 25,000 volt AC overhead catenary, including all the modifications to the signal systems and necessary filtering circuitry required to prevent electrical noise interference to the surrounding communities.
@Yellowstone Special posted:Battery-powered locomotives? I’ll believe it when I see it. Why not just electrify the commuter lines, like the Acela?
The LIRR/ MTA estimates electrification to cost $18 M/ per mile, for 3rd rail, not overhead cant. That number doesn't include utility costs for building substations and transmission lines, power plant capacity, etc.
OK, so converting a few locomotives to battery power would be cheaper than electrifying a line. But it’s still unproven technology. Again, I’ll believe it when I see it.
Thanks EscapeRocks for the free link!
This is interesting.
However, the energy density of lithium ion batteries is 0.26-0.27 kwh/kg. That is fine for cars, obviously. , A heavy haul locomotive requires much more energy than a car. Diesel fuel has an energy density of 11.6 kwh/kg; that is 43 times the energy density of lithium ion batteries.
Let us say that a Metra locomotive has a 2000 gallon fuel tank. At 3.2245 kg per gallon, that would be just about 6,500 kg of diesel fuel. The energy equivalent in lithium ion batteries would be about 280,000 kg worth of lithium ion batteries. Given that a mass of 1 kg exerts a force of 2.2 pounds here on earth, that would be 610,000 pounds of lithium ion batteries. Compare that to an ES44AC which weighs around 420,000 pounds. How does this work?
Energy Density of some Fuels in kwh/kg
Lead Acid 0.05
NiCd 0.08
NiMH 0.12
Li Ion 0.27
Coal 8.0
Diesel 11.6
Gasoline 12.7
Nat Gas 13.6
Hydrogen 33.6
It seems that if one wants a clean fuel without CO2 emissions one would want to use green hydrogen (hydrogen from renewable energy source) or pink hydrogen (hydrogen made using nuclear power) to power a locomotive or other heavy haul vehicle as hydrogen has the energy density. Obviously there are logistics that need to be worked out. Hydrogen-air fuel cells are around 30% efficient currently and getting better every day.
Blue hydrogen and gray hydrogen would not be clean as they use natural gas as the hydrogen source and CO2 is made in the process. Gray hydrogen does not sequester the CO2 whereas blue hydrogen does.
The same conversations were happening when those upstart diesel electrics started appearing on railroads. I still believe in the ability of US ingenuity to resolve what are still evolving technologies. Lithium batteries are just a gateway to next next generation of power storage mediums that are starting to emerge.
@GG1 4877 posted:The same conversations were happening when those upstart diesel electrics started appearing on railroads.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that it was quite apparent from the get go that diesel electric locomotives were more efficient and required less maintenance than steam locomotives. Back then new infrastructure needed to be built to adapt the new energy source and the same is true today as new infrastructure will need to be built to the new energy source. Ingenuity to resolve what are still evolving technologies will be accomplished by someone in the world if not the US.
This is a proof of concept, it is why they are saying testing it. Heating and AC can cause significant power draw, would love to know what kind of batteries they are using with this. There is the HP required to accelerate, the HP to maintain steady speed which is less (which can easily be translated into kw of pw), plus the power draw of heat and ac and I guess dybamic braking , which is not insignificant as HW said.
And yes, there is the charging time involved as well, if this is a commuter train, a typical run is likely let's say 60 miles each way, or 120 round trip, so they would need to recharge likely after the return run. With a high power charging system (talking like 600kw), with batteries today you can get relatively fast charges , in cars they can get 80% charge in 20 min or so. If you can get a similar thing with train batteries (that would dwarf what is in a typical EV), then that might be practical. They said in the article they would have chargers at the end of runs, which makes it more practical. if a run is 60 miles, engine has a range of 150, even with heavy AC or heating use (lighting being LED will significantly cut that load) they could recharge at end of run in 20 mins and would likely work.
The one thing they could do is use regenerative braking to increase range, it helps slow the train down and it helps charge the batteries. Given the nature of commuter runs, with a lot of stops, it could help extend the range as well.
Will this work with current battery technology? Not sure, it is why they are testing it. Thing is, tests like this are valuable because you see what works and what doesn't, as they say failed experiments are ften worth more than successes. Eventually it will work, there are batteries on the horizon that could allow this to work, that are different materials, recharge more easily.
Generally things like this don't work well, converting an existing unit, it usually works ,if it does at all, if it is done from scratch.
Yes it is the regenerative braking that recharges the batteries that make battery power more attractive than electrification of commuter rail lines. They won't have the efficiency that these mining locos have though. They sure look like converted SD units to me too.
These Electric Trains Never Need Recharging Thanks to Regenerative Braking
They create so much electricity traveling downhill fully loaded, they can go back to the top of the hill empty with power to spare.
Good old gravity. It’s always there for us, keeping us grounded — and now, charging our electric trains indefinitely. A mining company in Australia recently explained that four of its electric trains create so much electricity through regenerative braking going downhill, they can power themselves back to the top of the hill, and have a little extra battery power left over. Science!
So, of course, there’s a tiny catch: It’s the added weight of the cargo going downhill that helps to create so much energy through braking. When the vehicle goes back uphill, it’s significantly lighter, because it’s empty. There’s no such thing as free energy, and the laws of physics are unbending. Still, the net result is an electric vehicle that basically powers itself throughout its duty cycle. Neat!
@franktrain posted:Just saw this article
Wow? Is it April 1st again already? I must have slept through the end of the year.
I have to point out to the mediots at the Tribune that unless the electricity is generated 100% by nuclear, hydro, wind or solar, they are not "zero emissions" locomotives. The emissions have just been moved to someone else's back yard. FYI, wind and solar usually have backup systems that burn carbon based FUELS because, strangely enough, the Sun isn't always shining and the wind doesn't always blow when the gub'mint types demand that they do.
Sounds like they're trying to appease some numbskull politicos, who are demanding a technology that is not ready for prime time.
Also, 6 testbed locomotives does not amount to "Metra Converting To Battery Power".
