steveintoronto
Superstar
Apologies if I took a mistaken slant to your post. The denominator for catenary is of course, there's no reason for it to be obtrusive, any more than light standards are, and they remain the electrifcation of choice in almost all cases where possible.There are good arguments (sometimes including simple geography) for locating certain industries at a distance from population density but, to hear many, nothing that is risky, noisy, icky, ugly, smelly, anon - including the corresponding wires, roads, pipelines, etc. belongs in the City.
Some posters just can't seem to accept that there's still no workable alternative to it in many cases. Those 'posters' however do have certain governments in two nations (Canada and the UK) who will look for any excuse not to build the catenary necessary.
I'd quoted from this UK Engineers' Society report a month ago, it's time to quote parts again: (HGV = Heavy Goods Vehicles ~ 'Tractor Trailer Trucks' )
https://www.railway-technology.com/features/hydrogen-trains-uk/16 APRIL 2019
ANALYSIS
Does hydrail work in the UK? The view from the Institution of Mechanical Engineers
By Adele Berti
Dr Jenifer Baxter, head of engineering at the institution, explains when hydrogen should and should not be used and how it can help the UK Government achieve its target of phasing out all diesel trains by 2040.
[...]
AB: Where would they work specifically?
JB: When considering using hydrogen trains, you need to make sure that you will only use them in areas where it’s completely impossible either to electrify a line or it is economically unviable.
[This would be the case of] train lines that have good connections to industrial clusters where you can create more hydrogen, and that hydrogen can be used not just for the transport sector and trains, but also for vessels and HGVs, so you have an industrial hub for refuelling for a number of large types of vehicles.
So, there may be areas where running an electrification would be a real challenge and expensive and it wouldn’t be really worth it because you would only be running few trains up and down that line.
For example, the DfT has been looking at regions like Cumbria and Northumbria, where there are train lines that don’t run a lot of trains on them. In those sorts of areas, there is a big possibility that you could run hydrogen trains, particularly as they’ve got connections into the larger cities like Liverpool, Manchester and Middlesbrough.
AB: What benefits does electrifying the network bring compared to introducing hydrogen trains?
JB: Electricity generation is much more direct. So, if you are able to generate a lot of electricity using renewable sources or nuclear power, low-carbon electricity, that electricity goes straight into the fixed electric network of the rail and trains can use it directly.
On the other hand, hydrogen in itself doesn’t exist as a fuel, so you have to extract it from something and you need a large amount of electricity to do so.
The electricity network is also really well established, whereas, with hydrogen, we would have to develop that network and make sure that there is a refuelling system in the critical places where trains will need it.
Another important thing is that an electric train is easy to understand; we know how the technology works and how an electric train will behave on different parts of the rail network. With hydrogen trains we don’t know what happens if, for example, they have an accident inside a tunnel.
[...]