Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[stuving]

There are about 10,000 route miles of railway of which 3,300 (one third) are electrified. (That's 20,000 miles of track in total).  If you switch on another 100 route miles per year, you'll be up to 75% by 2063.  To a person looking in from the outside, it would seem sensible to staff and supply-chain up for a rolling program at this sort of rate, preparing the way ahead of time with design and planning, and perhaps with a buffer of "shovel-ready" jobs in between design and implementation case (shock, horror, miracle) electricfication got so routine that some installations were finished early and the staff could move on to the next job.

We have no evidence that the government don't intend and expect to run a rolling programme.

Somewhere in the big forest that this thread has become (and it's already been truncated), I'm sure I said that the government's halt on major projects was quite rational. NR^» (Network Rail - home page) had shown themselves (and their suppliers) incapable of delivering projects anywhere close to the estimated cost. So DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) told them that had made major projects impossible to approve. First they had to finish what was in hand and near completion, then a few smaller projects would be allowed as a trial. Once the ability to deliver to estimate (and estimate realistically) had been demonstrated, then the whole subject of large-scale electrification could be picked up again.

So, have we got there yet? From that point of view, one of the main points made in that RIA report is this:

Since the GW^» (Great Western - used as an abbreviation for the area / lines under the Great Western franchise, as opposed to FGW which includes "First", the company operating them too. For tickets - about) electrification, more recent electrification programmes have been delivered to cost and budget. Furthermore section 5.5 shows that there is significant potential to reduce the cost of future schemes from innovations that avoid the significant costs associated with bridge reconstructions and provide a more cost-effective electrical supply.

I don't think the report makes enough of that, section 5.5 included.

[Celestial]

The other wirings (three perhaps on TP) have sneaked in without fanfare and it's not really clear how far they are going; they're just part of bigger infrastructure schemes, it seems.

Three maybe on TP? I mentioned Stalybridge and Colton Junction. Which have I missed?

[stuving]

The RIA report alluded to above includes a map (Figure 4, p 41) said to be from "CILT rail freight forum Electrification for Freight study showing how 500 miles of electrification would enable 66-75% of rail freight to be electrically hauled." That's the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (which I see lives in Corby, oddly enough), and I can find that forum's page but nothing from that study.

The map shows these freight routes for electrification in priority order - and it's not really what I'd have predicted:
1. London Gateway and 2. Birmingham Lawley St. - presumably just depot and access to do
3. Basinsgstoke-Milton Keynes - the old electric spine, but leaving south to Southampton as it is
4. Newbury-Merehead and Whatley - quarries
5. Felixstowe-Peterborough and onward towards Leicester
6. Leeds Stourton FLT - another depot plus short link
7. Mountsorrel and 8. Birch Coppice - more quarry/depot and access alone

There's a load of presentations given within that forum you can look at, and this one is interesting (by a man from Ricardo, which is kind of appropriate) on how to replace diesel in rail and in road freight transport.

[TonyK]

There are about 10,000 route miles of railway of which 3,300 (one third) are electrified. (That's 20,000 miles of track in total).  If you switch on another 100 route miles per year, you'll be up to 75% by 2063. 

That is a rather depressing calculation, but it should be used to spur government on. The HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) were built as a 25-year stop-gap to allow for electrification of the major routes. They are retiring after 40+ of those 25 years. The wiring wasn't done on the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway), so the IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train - replacement for HSTs (manufactured by Hitachi in Kobe, Japan)) replacements had diesel engines fitted, and despite stuving's guarded optimism, I have seen nothing to suggest that the next generation of intercity trains won't be at least partly another fossil fuelled stop-gap. It seemed at the time that the introduction of the HSTs caused HMG to take its foot off the pedal, and allow the expertise we had built up in OHLE^▸ (Over-Head Line Equipment (electrification via catenary)) to largely disappear.

There will have to be a rolling programme, but it will have to be a much bigger one than we have now. There is also the slightly inconvenient matter of where all the electricity will come from to replace the diesel, given that as I type this, gas is providing over half of our present needs, and even coal making up some of the slack. It's all very well telling us we can't have petrol cars and gas boilers, but the state of the nation on the railways doesn't give the impression of a government that really wants to do the hard work in the decarbonisation of the country's energy needs.

[onthecushions]

Three maybe on TP? I mentioned Stalybridge and Colton Junction. Which have I missed?

The third (less advanced one) is Leeds - Huddersfield. This is in two parts, really. The first is the major work between Huddersfield and Dewsbury to give four tracks and high speed access and egress to the L&Y main line, the second is the completion to Leeds. Both are part of the TP upgrade and seem firmly in hand.

While this is a bit of a patchwork, Chapps has said complete TP electrification is the aim. The problems of Mossley, Standedge Tunnel and the Eastern approach to Leeds remain to be solved.

The freight options listed above would locally give us wires to Oxford and Bedwyn, completing Paddington's suburban electrification (except Greenford).

Silver lining?

OTC

[Celestial]

The third (less advanced one) is Leeds - Huddersfield. This is in two parts, really. The first is the major work between Huddersfield and Dewsbury to give four tracks and high speed access and egress to the L&Y main line, the second is the completion to Leeds. Both are part of the TP upgrade and seem firmly in hand.

Ah OK - I thought you meant one where work on the ground has or is about to start. The major work between Huddersfield and Dewsbury is currently subject to a TWA^▸ (Transport and Works Act 1992) application (hope it goes better than the one for the Castlefield corridor), and so work won't start for several years, assuming it is approved.  I've not seen any reference to work on the line into Leeds though?

[broadgage]

There are about 10,000 route miles of railway of which 3,300 (one third) are electrified. (That's 20,000 miles of track in total).  If you switch on another 100 route miles per year, you'll be up to 75% by 2063. 

That is a rather depressing calculation, but it should be used to spur government on. The HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) were built as a 25-year stop-gap to allow for electrification of the major routes. They are retiring after 40+ of those 25 years. The wiring wasn't done on the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway), so the IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train - replacement for HSTs (manufactured by Hitachi in Kobe, Japan)) replacements had diesel engines fitted, and despite stuving's guarded optimism, I have seen nothing to suggest that the next generation of intercity trains won't be at least partly another fossil fuelled stop-gap. It seemed at the time that the introduction of the HSTs caused HMG to take its foot off the pedal, and allow the expertise we had built up in OHLE^▸ (Over-Head Line Equipment (electrification via catenary)) to largely disappear.

There will have to be a rolling programme, but it will have to be a much bigger one than we have now. There is also the slightly inconvenient matter of where all the electricity will come from to replace the diesel, given that as I type this, gas is providing over half of our present needs, and even coal making up some of the slack. It's all very well telling us we can't have petrol cars and gas boilers, but the state of the nation on the railways doesn't give the impression of a government that really wants to do the hard work in the decarbonisation of the country's energy needs.

I agree, though even the electrification of 100 route miles a year will still help a lot, presuming that busy routes are prioritised, followed by lightly used branches from a now electrified main line.
Despite my well known dislike of IETs, I remain in favour of the PRINCIPLE of bimode operation. There will for the foreseeable future be non electrified lines and bimodes permit of through services.
The GWR route via Taunton will eventually be electrified, but the Minehead branch perhaps not. Bimodes London or Bristol to Minehead could be useful.

As you say there is is also the question of electricity supply. Since you posted the above, solar input has increased but so has the load, and natural gas is still at about 50%.
If we are serious about a low carbon future, we need to at least DOUBLE both solar and wind power. As I write this, wind power is contributing about 2.5%, doubling the wind capacity would give about 5%. Solar is contributing about 15% so doubling the solar capacity would give about 30%.
Hydro electric power should also be expanded, though I doubt that it CAN be doubled as the best sites are already in use.

A doubling of wind and solar capacity would eliminate fossil fuel generation of electricity under favourable conditions, and significantly reduce fossil fuel use under less favourable conditions such as those prevailing right now.

[onthecushions]

Ah OK - I thought you meant one where work on the ground has or is about to start. The major work between Huddersfield and Dewsbury is currently subject to a TWA^▸ (Transport and Works Act 1992) application (hope it goes better than the one for the Castlefield corridor), and so work won't start for several years, assuming it is approved.  I've not seen any reference to work on the line into Leeds though?

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/railway-upgrade-plan/key-projects/transpennine-route-upgrade/huddersfield-to-westtown-dewsbury/

Note in proposals, "and right through to Leeds."

softly, softly...

OTC

_{[Edit - Fixed quotes - Red Squirrel]}

[onthecushions]

Line 399 of Treasury document allocates funds for (quote)

"Completion of significant scheme to electrify the Great Western railway, begun in CP5^▸ (Control Period 5 - the five year period between 2014 and 2019)"

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1016758/National_Infrastructure_and_Construction_Pipeline_2021.xlsx

OTC

PS (edit) Also line 418 "Reading Independent Feeder"

[Electric train]

Line 399 of Treasury document allocates funds for (quote)

"Completion of significant scheme to electrify the Great Western railway, begun in CP5^▸ (Control Period 5 - the five year period between 2014 and 2019)"

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1016758/National_Infrastructure_and_Construction_Pipeline_2021.xlsx

OTC

This should see Didcot - Oxford complete and the Swindon - Bristol

PS (edit) Also line 418 "Reading Independent Feeder"

This is the feed from Bramley Nation Grid.  It was identified that the normal N-2 for railway electrification power distribution there was risk in the event a double outage from / between the 2 existing Grid feeds, Kensal Green and Didcot; this could mean Reading Depot and local services left with out traction power.

[stuving]

Line 399 of Treasury document allocates funds for (quote)

I wonder what that does mean. The Infrastructure and Projects Authority does have one foot in the Treasury, but it's really about project planning and management, and this is a snapshot if its database of projects to look at. Supposedly it is published annually, but there was only a very abbreviated one last year and none that I can find for the year before. But note the latest one is for the financial year ended last April.

Here is a little excerpt from the last two:

Year	Project or Programme	Scheme Status	Start of Works /	Date in Service	Total Capex Cost
			Construction (Projected)	(Projected)	All Funding (£m)
2018/9	Great Western Capacity Programme and Electrification	Active Programme	2014	Various	3025
2018/9	Western Rail Link to Heathrow	Scoping	2017	TBC	31
2020/21	Great Western Electrification	In Construction	2010	2024	2714
2020/21	Western Rail Link to Heathrow	Scoping	2013	2029	1166
2020/21	Reading Independent Feeder	Planning and Consents	2020	2023	88

You'll notice some of the dates don't make a lot of sense. And what I do not see a column for is the funding status - if it's still in planning, is moving to construction a done deal yet? And I suspect the GW^» (Great Western - used as an abbreviation for the area / lines under the Great Western franchise, as opposed to FGW which includes "First", the company operating them too. For tickets - about) electrification project was "in construction" when it was redefined to drop the finished elements (except from the total cost), but in suspended animation.

Has anyone seen an RNEP lately?

[eightonedee]

Meanwhile, in this morning's news, it looks like the Government is getting desperate in its attempts to find an excuse not to pay for rail electrification - https://uk.newschant.com/uk-news/hydrogen-powered-driverless-green-submarines-could-be-future-of-uk-freight/   

_{Edit: Removed leading dash from uri to make it clickable - Red Squirrel}

[onthecushions]

Love it.

Departures every 15 min from Osney Bridge calling at Salter's Wharf, Caversham for Little Venice Basin off Praed Street, Paddington. 40', 9'6" hign containers welcome.

Siebe Gorman DSEA escape apparatus carried for all passengers.

OTC

[Red Squirrel]

Took me a moment to work out what 'inexperienced hydrogen' was... I think native English speakers might refer to this as 'green hydrogen'!

[stuving]

Took me a moment to work out what 'inexperienced hydrogen' was... I think native English speakers might refer to this as 'green hydrogen'!

I know that site is Indian, but what language might the text have been computer translated into and - badly - back out of? And what does the oddity of language resulting tell you about the range of things you can deduce the original article could have said?