GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx

[MrGoose]

Or,

Why not produce hydrogen next to the power plants, and just burn it using the tried and true technology of steam turbines to meet peak demand?

 

[tayser]

Instead of unsightly wires all over the damn place

this line/type of argument still gives me the giggles.

This is literally hot off the press, posted on the LX removal authority's facebook page the other day.... what new DC overhead looks like on a new elevated section of track on the Upfield line here in Melbourne

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

 

[ssiguy2]

Well seeing that catenary seems to be the only option according to some of you than I guess we should close this thread because there is nothing else to talk about. ML won't declare the winning bid for at least a year, there are no train orders, no a single catenary wire or pole has been erected and probably won't be for at least a couple years, and the only thing electric about GO's entire network right now is the light bulbs.

I guess it is my fault because I never equated battery & hydrogen technology with the Tooth Fairy & Easter Bunny........................my mistake.

 

[smallspy]

Though I am pretty sure we won't see diesel multiple-unit trains on any of our GO lines, save for UP Express. They had to go with DMUs for UP Express because they needed something more agile then diesel locos and they wanted to get it running quickly. But there would be no point buying more DMUs if a transition out of diesel is contemplated within the next 10 years or less.

Therefore, electrification (catenarization / hydrogenization / batterization) is a practical requirement for having more frequent GO stops, even though it is not a technical requirement.

Again - electrification would allow for many benefits, yes.

And considering that the EAs have been done for the electrification of several of the lines in the Toronto area, it is a fait-accompli that we will see some sort of electrically powered equipment on the GO system.

But the point is that one shouldn't equate electrification with substantial performance improvements to the system. There are other factors that will have a bigger bearing on it.

Btw, most of today's diesel locos are diesel-electric. Their diesel engine powers the electric generator, which gives electric power to the electric motor, and the latter moves the loco and the train.

So, in a way the GO trains are already "electrified", but the goal is to get away from the use of diesel fuel.

That's a bit of a lazy take, as a GO locomotive is not capable of moving itself without the diesel engine operating.

And frankly, it doesn't change any of the points in my previous post.

Dan

 

[sche]

Or,

Why not produce hydrogen next to the power plants, and just burn it using the tried and true technology of steam turbines to meet peak demand?

What you're basically suggesting is energy storage. Doing it this way is frankly a really terrible way of doing it, there's no reason to use hydrogen in this situation and there would be a ton of energy loss. Batteries and pumped storage is far better.

 

[MrGoose]

What you're basically suggesting is energy storage. Doing it this way is frankly a really terrible way of doing it, there's no reason to use hydrogen in this situation and there would be a ton of energy loss. Batteries and pumped storage is far better.

Pumped storage is not as energy dense as pure hydrogen. And next to nuclear power plants we don’t have enough space to do pumped storage. The costs of creating enough volume to do pumped storage next to our nuclear plants would be very expensive.

Also I don't like the idea of grid level batteries because of the amount of rare earth metals needed and the specialized manufacturing of them.

Industrial hydrolysis can be about 65% efficient, this is expected to improve to 80%+. And steam turbines are about 80% efficient already. In my scenario, you'd probably have to liquify the oxygen and hydrogen produced so knock 20% off of the total efficiency.

Overall this system is about 50% efficient. For peak production, imo this isn't that bad if we want to avoid batteries.


Also the government is already experimenting with hydrogen storage to meet peak demand schemes.

Anyways this is getting off topic and we should create a hydrogen thread instead of clogging up this one.

 

[mdrejhon]

Also I don't like the idea of grid level batteries because of the amount of rare earth metals needed and the specialized manufacturing of them.

Fact Check: The good news is that in a few years, the lithium economy will be less damaging than a hydrogen economy. There are now new lithium batteries with almost no rare earth materials (ZERO COBALT) and simply requires nickel-manufacturing ramp up.

Plus, lithium is stupendously common and highly recyclable. Just only the lithium mines of the deserts in merely the state of Nevada has enough lithium alone to convert the entire North America auto fleet Into BEVs, plus a lot of grid Scale battery manufacture. Analysis of the environment-damage of the entire hydrogen lifecycle and the entire lithium lifecycle, shows that lithium is becoming better and better than expected.

Early pilot lithium battery recycling plants show excess of >90% element recovery success that helps to close the lithium cycle — very cheaply thanks to sheer large sizes of battery packs, and number of standardized lithium battery sizes now found in gridscale farms and BEVs. (18650s, 2170s and now 4680s) which massively helps to automate more recycling. So ignore the hydrogen lobbyists.

Yes, hydrogen definitely has its place. But certainly no need for battery bashing. They will coexist but battery will simply be more popular. Even after we stop burning carbon to generate electricity, the gridscale batteries will stablize grids that also powers hydrogen manufacture, so there’s also a bit fo irony there too.

For Hydrogen infrastructure (non-train-specific), please post here:
Hydrogen Economy General

For batteries, please post here:
160 kph Battery Train Technology in GTHA as Electrification Last Mile Solution for Kitchener Line / Hamilton / etc

Do nit forget that the Eglinton Crosstown is lithium battery powered in a blackout. Metrolinx built a massive gridscale battery farm as its uninterruptible power supply (UPS).

 

[mdrejhon]

Also I don't like the idea of grid level batteries because of the amount of rare earth metals needed and the specialized manufacturing of them.

I did not have time to write the stronger rebuttal I wanted to properly write; but I have now.

For readers about electrification, I have done some more research today and put a citations-filled post about how lithium battery manufacture is getting faster, cleaner, more-closed-loop, cobalt-free, continuous manufacturing line similiar to manufacture of soda bottles, etc:
The Rapid & Clean (Cradle-to-Grave) Commodification Of The Lithium Battery
(contains several citations/links)

This should help to dispel the myth that lithium battery manufacture is perpetually dirty -- some shocking strides were made in the last 3-4 years.

Apparently, some researchers now project that some well-designed utility-scale battery farms, with this future manufacturing, is predicted to have less overall impact to the environment (cradle-to-grave environmental impacts, emissions and other disruptions including all suppliers and side effects, direct and indirect) than even pumped hydro. Though that's not the case (yet) today, it underlies that scientists/researchers are grudingly realizing that lithium lifecycles is rapidly becoming cleaner. Such sheer rapidity means all bets are now off...

The textbook is being rewritten; what professors taught three years ago is now invalid in the respect of lithium battery manufacture;

 

[ssiguy2]

From what I have been accused of {despite being a stronger proponent of batteries over hydrogen} this is all just academic. Don't you realise that you are simply having a lucid dream? Anyone who doesn't support 100% catenary is akin to someone who considers putting their chipped teeth under their pillow as sound financial planning. Battery power?..................dear God, I hope you have your therapist on speed dial.

 

[mdrejhon]

From what I have been accused of {despite being a stronger proponent of batteries over hydrogen} this is all just academic. Don't you realise that you are simply having a lucid dream? Anyone who doesn't support 100% catenary is akin to someone who considers putting their chipped teeth under their pillow as sound financial planning. Battery power?..................dear God, I hope you have your therapist on speed dial.

I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not, but....
Before you make such obviously incorrect allegations, please see the mathematics. I got A+ in my math classes. Also, your claim borders on a name-call, doesn't it?

While I make strong claims, I have not alluded to crossing such a name-calling boundary that you did.

I support 100% catenary, but the freight catenary problem exists. Hamilton, Brampton, etc. Lithium batteries are falling in cost rapidly enough that sufficient battery can be added to an EMU for less than $100K per coach, while still having safety margin enough to heat a train during a stall in the middle of Brampton. By the end of 2030, the target price is $62 per kilowatt-hour, and by the end of 2040, the target price is $30 per kilowatt-hour. Have you seen the new YouTube video of lithium batteries being manufactured continuously like soda bottles, for example?

Even I mention only a few percent of Metrolinx's train fleet will possibly be battery+cat trains by 2041 -- just enough to cover routes that needs to go beyond catenary (such as Brampton or Hamilton). Even if Freight Bypass is built to enable catenary on Kitchener, not all other sections will gain the ability -- such as Hamilton.

Battery and catenary are a mutually beneficial pairing (to continue operating non-battery EMUs, and to recharge battery EMUs) since we're going 100% cat for the first phase, but may need battery during the 2nd phase (e.g. whatever is planned for 2041 or beyond) to hop the freight sections if catenary is not possible on those. Those will require unconventional solutions such as batteries.

Before replying, ssiguy2, please first read two posts, Post #1, and Post #2. Look at how small the battery pack assembly now is, and only one pack per coach is needed for the "all-except-freight" 80% catenary Metrolinx use case. And only some trains need it (trains that need to serve catless sections). So only a small bit of the GO rail fleet.

You'll recognize the generous timelines; battery trains will be already mature for about 25 years before the earliest time Metrolinx needs them for extension to Hamilton, for example. The planning (Metrolinx 2041 RTP) is more than 20 years away for Hamilton 15-minute service (which is long after the first phase of GO Electrification). You'll see legitimate points being made in the two links above -- even if you disagree with them. It's all fine to disagree, but you're dismissing the progress that is going on by choosing to write that reply.

 

[MrGoose]

From what I have been accused of {despite being a stronger proponent of batteries over hydrogen} this is all just academic. Don't you realise that you are simply having a lucid dream? Anyone who doesn't support 100% catenary is akin to someone who considers putting their chipped teeth under their pillow as sound financial planning. Battery power?..................dear God, I hope you have your therapist on speed dial.

Look scale is always an issue. Batteries or Hydrogen might be better than catenary where catenary is too expensive to justify. I.e. not in densely populated urban areas.

For a use case like a short jump across CN owned track its fine for battery. Or even for our normally cantenary trains to take trips to Niagara Falls.

However, you never start off testing new technology across your entire system. As you may have noticed, or not, the TTC is testing new busses with a combination of 3 different manufacturers. It isn't placing a tender to systematically replace every bus with a battery operated version.

Same thing here, GO will be operating catenary trains because it is a proven technology that is reliable, long lasting and provides the high power and acceleration to make GO RER work.

 

[Rainforest]

Before you make such obviously incorrect allegations, please see the mathematics. I got A+ in my math classes. Also, your claim borders on a name-call, doesn't it?

While I make strong claims, I have not alluded to crossing such a name-calling boundary that you did.

Little misunderstanding here: ssiguy2 isn't attacking you at all, rather he is being sarcastic about other posters going against his own pro-hydrogen posts. So, "you" in his latest post does not apply to you, but to himself, as an expression of sarcastic bitterness.

By the way: your research on the latest trends in the battery development is really great!

 

[rbt]

Same thing here, GO will be operating catenary trains because it is a proven technology that is reliable, long lasting and provides the high power and acceleration to make GO RER work.

Worth noting, most modern trains with regenerative breaking store the energy onboard in batteries. These battery packs scale up from that small use to enable creeping into a station during a power failure, or full operations for some time period. Simply put, batteries for propulsion on trains aren't new in Toronto; this would be a larger number per train. Yes, electric locomotive batteries and LRV batteries are the same part (for most manufacturers) as are numerous other parts.


If vendors think they can avoid $1B in bridge rebuilds, grounding, and other modifications by adding enough battery to trains for 200m (Union Station) then they probably will; but the average person won't know as they'll still string non-electrified catenary (or overhead rail) under the obstacle to guide the pantograph.

My only point is that batteries on trains for propulsion are common; what's new is large or multiple battery banks instead of small battery banks. EMU, LRT, and electrified commuter rail cars share a large number of components at a single manufacturer; electrical is typically one of them.

 

[interchange42]

To those who reported a post upthread tonight… and then responded to it — you're not giving moderators a chance to make much of a difference if you're going to continue that conversation. So, the post will stay, but @ssiguy2, drop the needless attack when disagreeing please, or it will be time out time.

42

 

[afransen]

I've stopped replying to the hydrogen discussion. Wondering if all these posts can be moved to the hydrogen thread that was recently started.