Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[Bmblbzzz]

Hydrogen powered fuel cells, perhaps.

[Electric train]

The sad aspect of this decision, and the much more serious decision about Bristol is that if Network Rail had a 25 year commitment to electrify the whole network, then the costs would be manageable and affordable.
 

You may be right, but I think that your statement puts more faith in NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s ability than recent evidence supports. 

Network Rail has a vision and strategy for 25 years, as asked for by the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) ................. however politicians only have a vision and strategy for 2.5 years that is two and half years after a General Election their only vision and strategy is the next election

[ellendune]

Hydrogen powered fuel cells, perhaps.

Hydrogen remains a possibility in theory but is unlikely to be viable for reasons given above.
Expensive, bulky, awkward to handle, and somewhat dangerous.

Fuel cells do not affect the hazard from the stored hydrogen or the other issues mentioned.

[Western Pathfinder]

Having driven a Hydrogen-Fueled Car (HFC^▸ (Hydrogen-Fuelled Car)) powered car on a number of occasions both at home and in the USA I find them to be the most usable alternative to the internal combustion engine.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

[broadgage]

Hydrogen remains a possibility...

Hydrogen is a certainty, inasmuch as that it definitely exists. I don't think it has much of a future as a vehicle fuel though.

Yes, to be strictly accurate I should have said that hydrogen powered trains remain a possibility.
I agree that it probably has little future as a fuel for rail or indeed other vehicles. Not impossible of course but a bit unlikely.

[broadgage]

Hydrogen powered fuel cells, perhaps.

Hydrogen remains a possibility in theory but is unlikely to be viable for reasons given above.
Expensive, bulky, awkward to handle, and somewhat dangerous.

Fuel cells do not affect the hazard from the stored hydrogen or the other issues mentioned.

No, but in total after taking account of all the above, hydrogen seems an unlikely fuel for rail vehicles.

1) It is expensive, due to the amount of electricity used in production and the cost and complexity of the equipment needed. The hydrogen also needs to be liquefied or compressed, requiring yet more expensive plant that also consumes energy.
2) It is bulky, several times the bulk of diesel fuel for the same energy content. The ultra high pressure tanks, or super insulated tanks are costly items and cant realistically be made in the odd shapes that often make best use of space.
3) It is awkward to handle either as an ultra high pressure gas or as a super cold liquid, not like diesel that simply requires a hose and a pump.
4) It is arguably a greater fire and explosion risk than diesel fuel.
5) fuel cells in the sizes needed to power trains are very bulky and very expensive if compared to a diesel engine, cooling is also more complex.

[grahame]

And one of the other campaigners suggested that things/systems that have been around for 100 years need to be replaced with something newer. His suggestion's to scrap all buses and trains, and replace them with things like guided systems - automated or semiautomated, such as you'll see at Heathrow and in parts of Cambridgeshire.  "Nothing that's been around over 100 years should still be in use" was his view;

There's not much in transport that hasn't been around for more than 100 years, except space travel. Even electric cars were around in the late 19th century.

I totally agree with you.  Almost every modern society object / item / facility has routes and development that can be traced back in part for a hundred or more years - and indeed it would be very rare for an invention to be able to be described as "invented on 14th July 1927" ...

I found great comfort and great distress from my discussion with Barry.  Comfort that I'm already doing a bit better than he does at my campaigning, and that he had given me an opportunity to test my own reasoning and advocacy. Distress in that there are campaigners and members of the public around who lack reasoning, lack logic, and refuse to even acknowledge the elephants in the room that need to be addressed to make their solutions have any chance.

[Rhydgaled]

The sad aspect of this decision, and the much more serious decision about Bristol is that if Network Rail had a 25 year commitment to electrify the whole network, then the costs would be manageable and affordable.
 

You may be right, but I think that your statement puts more faith in NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s ability than recent evidence supports. 

Network Rail has a vision and strategy for 25 years, as asked for by the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) ................. however politicians only have a vision and strategy for 2.5 years that is two and half years after a General Election their only vision and strategy is the next election

Does said 25yr Network Rail strategy include an ongoing rollout of electrification, and if so how detailed is it (ie. does it say which routes they would wire in which order, not necessarily by when)?

[Red Squirrel]

Almost every modern society object / item / facility has routes and development that can be traced back in part for a hundred or more years...

Yes, and things continue to evolve. Roads have been around since animals first started scampering around leaving tracks, but only really became a viable long-distance transport system in the latter half of the twentieth century. Rail - one of the newer transport systems - is a specialised branch of the road concept which until quite recently looked like it had had its day; now it is growing again, but that may not last. Who knows what effect shared autonomous vehicles will have? Will people still use trains or buses when they can summon a vehicle to their door, at a time of their choosing, which will whisk them to their destination in comfort?

[ellendune]

Almost every modern society object / item / facility has routes and development that can be traced back in part for a hundred or more years...

Yes, and things continue to evolve. Roads have been around since animals first started scampering around leaving tracks, but only really became a viable long-distance transport system in the latter half of the twentieth century. Rail - one of the newer transport systems - is a specialised branch of the road concept which until quite recently looked like it had had its day; now it is growing again, but that may not last. Who knows what effect shared autonomous vehicles will have? Will people still use trains or buses when they can summon a vehicle to their door, at a time of their choosing, which will whisk them to their destination in comfort?

You assume that the autonomous self driving vehicles would release enough extra capacity on the road network to take away the traffic jams!  If they did would it simply fill up with more such vehicles to all traffic came to a halt again?

[Bmblbzzz]

I think it's likely that Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV^▸ (Autonomous (self driving) Vehicle))s will increase the demand for car travel, because it will become so much easier. You'll be able to work, sleep, eat, watch TV^▸ (Thames Valley),... at least once they're functioning reliably! And the costs, particularly if these vehicles are electric powered rather than internal combustion, will be much lower. But at the same time the total number of car-type vehicles might be reduced, because they will be able to circulate or park somewhere till summoned. They will, or will have the potential to be, more like "taxis" than "cars". Though this will only happen if we're able to break the link between vehicle use and ownership, which is as much emotional as practical. The increasing popularity in some urban areas of car clubs and car sharing schemes shows some possibility for this, but it's far from obvious that it will go mainstream.

Probably the largest impact of Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV)s in the long run will be on freight; lorry drivers and van drivers will be a thing of the past, costs of road haulage will fall due to no longer paying drivers' wages, maintenance costs and associated downtime and insurance premiums are likely to fall, there will be no drivers' hours regs to adhere to, and "platooning" lorries on motorways will make big fuel savings. So railfreight is going to suffer.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

[ellendune]

I think it's likely that Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV^▸ (Autonomous (self driving) Vehicle))s will increase the demand for car travel, because it will become so much easier. You'll be able to work, sleep, eat, watch TV^▸ (Thames Valley),... at least once they're functioning reliably! And the costs, particularly if these vehicles are electric powered rather than internal combustion, will be much lower. But at the same time the total number of car-type vehicles might be reduced, because they will be able to circulate or park somewhere till summoned. They will, or will have the potential to be, more like "taxis" than "cars". Though this will only happen if we're able to break the link between vehicle use and ownership, which is as much emotional as practical. The increasing popularity in some urban areas of car clubs and car sharing schemes shows some possibility for this, but it's far from obvious that it will go mainstream.

Probably the largest impact of Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV)s in the long run will be on freight; lorry drivers and van drivers will be a thing of the past, costs of road haulage will fall due to no longer paying drivers' wages, maintenance costs and associated downtime and insurance premiums are likely to fall, there will be no drivers' hours regs to adhere to, and "platooning" lorries on motorways will make big fuel savings. So railfreight is going to suffer.

There are some sweeping assumptions here:

1) You say that "the costs, particularly if these vehicles are electric powered rather than internal combustion, will be much lower. " I see no evidence for this.  Yes the cost of fuelling electric cars is currently less, but battery costs are very high.  Sound like the same wishful thinking that have plagued a number of such ideas in the past - like the electrification train!

2) "Probably the largest impact of Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV)s in the long run will be on freight; lorry drivers and van drivers will be a thing of the past" I think the idea of a driverless lorry on a mixed traffic road is fantasy! 

3) You also assume that there will be enough road space for all these vehicles. 

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

[Bmblbzzz]

That was meant to be speculation not prediction. As for costs, I was thinking that costs would be lower not only due to electric traction but mainly due to Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV^▸ (Autonomous (self driving) Vehicle))s not being privately owned. So the costs of maintenance, insurance, tax and so on would be born by many people for each vehicle, in a similar way to a car club. Costs per mile might be higher but overall cost of usage would be lower because you'd only be paying for the vehicle while actually using it, which obviously is a tiny minority of its life. Of course this depends on breaking the personal ownership habit, which might not happen.

Autonomous Heavgy Good's Vehicle's (HGV)s have already been tested on public roads in the USA and I think in Sweden. There are problems to be overcome before they can use urban roads particularly – the steering was found to be crude on tight corners – but they've functioned well on the relatively empty highways there. It's only a matter of time before they can be used everywhere. It might take 20 years but I expect that when the technology is ready, they will take off fast and have an enormous impact on everything from employment to shopping.

As for space for more vehicles, I'm certainly not assuming that. It's possible, as I said, that Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV)s will break the link between driving and owning, which could lead to fewer vehicles with more usage. If that doesn't happen, I don't see anything yet to suggest we'll change the course which has proved so successful* the world over, ie building more roads, bigger junctions, larger car parks, bypasses around ring roads, etc.

*Just in case it's not clear, this is ironic. But Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV)s are on the way, sometime not terribly far in the future, to a road near you. Impacts awaited.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

[Red Squirrel]

Having driven a HFC^▸ (Hydrogen-Fuelled Car) powered car on a number of occasions both at home and in the USA I find them to be the most usable alternative to the internal combustion engine.

Out of interest, have you tried a pure Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV^▸ (Battery electric vehicle))?

Almost every modern society object / item / facility has routes and development that can be traced back in part for a hundred or more years...

Yes, and things continue to evolve. Roads have been around since animals first started scampering around leaving tracks, but only really became a viable long-distance transport system in the latter half of the twentieth century. Rail - one of the newer transport systems - is a specialised branch of the road concept which until quite recently looked like it had had its day; now it is growing again, but that may not last. Who knows what effect shared autonomous vehicles will have? Will people still use trains or buses when they can summon a vehicle to their door, at a time of their choosing, which will whisk them to their destination in comfort?

You assume that the autonomous self driving vehicles would release enough extra capacity on the road network to take away the traffic jams!  If they did would it simply fill up with more such vehicles to all traffic came to a halt again?

I made no such assumption; I asked a question.

I do, as it happens, think it is fair to assume that CAVs will free up some of the resources tied up by private non-autonomous vehicles, because they will most likely be stored and recharged away from the places where they are used. But evidence suggests that, as you say, any capacity released will soon be filled by hitherto unfulfilled demand.

That was meant to be speculation not prediction. As for costs, I was thinking that costs would be lower not only due to electric traction but mainly due to AVs^▸ (Autonomous (self driving) Vehicle) not being privately owned. So the costs of maintenance, insurance, tax and so on would be born by many people for each vehicle, in a similar way to a car club. Costs per mile might be higher but overall cost of usage would be lower because you'd only be paying for the vehicle while actually using it, which obviously is a tiny minority of its life. Of course this depends on breaking the personal ownership habit, which might not happen.

Autonomous Heavy Goods Vehicle's (HGV)s have already been tested on public roads in the USA and I think in Sweden. There are problems to be overcome before they can use urban roads particularly – the steering was found to be crude on tight corners – but they've functioned well on the relatively empty highways there. It's only a matter of time before they can be used everywhere. It might take 20 years but I expect that when the technology is ready, they will take off fast and have an enormous impact on everything from employment to shopping.

As for space for more vehicles, I'm certainly not assuming that. It's possible, as I said, that AVs will break the link between driving and owning, which could lead to fewer vehicles with more usage. If that doesn't happen, I don't see anything yet to suggest we'll change the course which has proved so successful* the world over, ie building more roads, bigger junctions, larger car parks, bypasses around ring roads, etc.

*Just in case it's not clear, this is ironic. But Autonomous self driving Vehicles  (AV)s are on the way, sometime not terribly far in the future, to a road near you. Impacts awaited.

The full impact of Level 5 CAVs is, like all disruptive technology, hard to assess - what becomes of driving jobs? The insurance industry? Will humans be allowed to drive when machines can do it much more safely?

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronyms

[ellendune]

That was meant to be speculation not prediction. As for costs, I was thinking that costs would be lower not only due to electric traction but mainly due to Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV^▸ (Autonomous (self driving) Vehicle))s not being privately owned. So the costs of maintenance, insurance, tax and so on would be born by many people for each vehicle, in a similar way to a car club. Costs per mile might be higher but overall cost of usage would be lower because you'd only be paying for the vehicle while actually using it, which obviously is a tiny minority of its life. Of course this depends on breaking the personal ownership habit, which might not happen.

So you are assuming car clubs will suddenly become more popular.  That is a major cultural change. 

Autonomous Heavy Goods Vehicle's (HGV)s have already been tested on public roads in the USA and I think in Sweden. There are problems to be overcome before they can use urban roads particularly – the steering was found to be crude on tight corners – but they've functioned well on the relatively empty highways there. It's only a matter of time before they can be used everywhere. It might take 20 years but I expect that when the technology is ready, they will take off fast and have an enormous impact on everything from employment to shopping.

Yes but there is a big difference between an Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV) with someone who could take control if it all went badly and an Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV) with no on in it.  Again you are assuming a major cultural change.  I would not want to be anywhere near an Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV) without a real person in it.

As for space for more vehicles, I'm certainly not assuming that. It's possible, as I said, that Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV)s will break the link between driving and owning, which could lead to fewer vehicles with more usage. If that doesn't happen, I don't see anything yet to suggest we'll change the course which has proved so successful* the world over, ie building more roads, bigger junctions, larger car parks, bypasses around ring roads, etc.

*Just in case it's not clear, this is ironic. But Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV)s are on the way, sometime not terribly far in the future, to a road near you. Impacts awaited.

You may be ironic but I saw an article the other day from some nutter who said that HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) would be unnecessary because of Autonomous self driving Vehicles (AV)s and that it should be replaced with a new motorway was would take up far less space because it would only need two lanes!  (He needs to go and look at Yeadon Way in Blackpool to see what road you can build on the line of a two-track railway!

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronyms