VIA Rail

[micheal_can]

In the past they didn't have the batteries they do today. That was the original point. That it might be possible to run turbines at an optimal rpm continuously with batteries to even out the load. Given how much turbines and batteries have improved over the last two decades I wouldn't rule it out. That said, it might just be more reliable and lower total cost to just field hydrogen or battery electric train in a decade.

I would bet more on a battery electric train over a turbine battery system. However, why use a battery if you can just electrify the line? I see that as the most likely next step.

 

[micheal_can]

Thats actually not technically correct The Nippon Sharyo DMUs for the UPX use a 6 speed mechanical gearbox. They are essentially big rail buses.

However they are not diesel-electric, yes.

What shifts it? The answer is the same as your automatic transmission - hydraulics. There is no mechanical connection between the engine and the wheels.

 

[Darwinkgo]

I would bet more on a battery electric train over a turbine battery system. However, why use a battery if you can just electrify the line? I see that as the most likely next step.

Building the infrastructure to electrify is expensive. Battery cost is dropping and recharge times are too. The math on these decisions is changing so fast it is hard to keep up in a ‘rule of thumb’ way. This will be a decade of massive changes to rules of thumb that have ruled our world since gasoline and diesel came out on top 100 years ago for private vehicles.

 

[Urban Sky]

I don’t see how the current discussion relates with the topic at hand and my wish for the new year would be for us to find more appropriate threads for these tangential discussions.

Anyways, happy new year everyone!

 

[kEiThZ]

Building the infrastructure to electrify is expensive. Battery cost is dropping and recharge times are too. The math on these decisions is changing so fast it is hard to keep up in a ‘rule of thumb’ way. This will be a decade of massive changes to rules of thumb that have ruled our world since gasoline and diesel came out on top 100 years ago for private vehicles.

Batteries are indeed changing quickly. Catenary will always be cheaper though, where traffic levels justify it. The real value comes in service extension beyond the electrified corridor. For example, if GO electrifies the Kitchener line till Kitchener, that might be sufficient for VIA to use BEMUs to reach London.

We're already at the point that you could take two Tesla Model S battery packs and stick them on each coach to make BEMUs capable of traveling hundreds of miles. It's the charging speeds on those batteries that are the issue. But newer battery tech and super capacitors will change all this. I suspect BEMUs will be capable of the same range and speed as DEMUs at minimum, by the end of the decade. All that will be need is to build overhead catenary in the vicinity of the larger cities and their suburbs.

 

[micheal_can]

Batteries are indeed changing quickly. Catenary will always be cheaper though, where traffic levels justify it. The real value comes in service extension beyond the electrified corridor. For example, if GO electrifies the Kitchener line till Kitchener, that might be sufficient for VIA to use BEMUs to reach London.

We're already at the point that you could take two Tesla Model S battery packs and stick them on each coach to make BEMUs capable of traveling hundreds of miles. It's the charging speeds on those batteries that are the issue. But newer battery tech and super capacitors will change all this. I suspect BEMUs will be capable of the same range and speed as DEMUs at minimum, by the end of the decade. All that will be need is to build overhead catenary in the vicinity of the larger cities and their suburbs.

This is where the issue is, Battery technology and charging technology is not where it needs to be to be worth the extra step to it. Via has no real push for electric. I can see HFR route being built and using DMUs, not EMUs. I could see electrification happening over time there, but it wouldn't be turned on till it is complete. I also see this all happening after GO makes the transition. In the mean time, DMUs are it.

 

[kEiThZ]

This is where the issue is, Battery technology and charging technology is not where it needs to be to be worth the extra step to it. Via has no real push for electric. I can see HFR route being built and using DMUs, not EMUs. I could see electrification happening over time there, but it wouldn't be turned on till it is complete. I also see this all happening after GO makes the transition. In the mean time, DMUs are it.

Why would they use DMUs? They have options for Siemens Charger locomotive and Venture carriages. They can simply exercise those.

I would argue that electrification makes no sense for VIA right now. Batteries and hydrogen fuel cells are really evolving quickly and will be where passenger rail operators need them to be in a decade. In the meantime, let GO and Exo build whatever overhead catenary is needed. VIA can take advantage of it later.

 

[micheal_can]

Why would they use DMUs? They have options for Siemens Charger locomotive and Venture carriages. They can simply exercise those.

I would argue that electrification makes no sense for VIA right now. Batteries and hydrogen fuel cells are really evolving quickly and will be where passenger rail operators need them to be in a decade. In the meantime, let GO and Exo build whatever overhead catenary is needed. VIA can take advantage of it later.

With the new purchase, why would they then in a decade swap them out? That is the issue. Via does not regularly replace their equipment. If they did then your thinking would make sense, as one day, they just switch over. Chances are, the next order after the Charger will be in at least 20 years, and by then GO likely will have most of the lines Via runs on converted to overhead wire.. At that point, we could see EMUs ordered for Via and the HFR be converted to overhead wires.

Battery MUs make sense in places that are not electrifying their lines, but are switching to electric.

 

[kEiThZ]

With the new purchase, why would they then in a decade swap them out?

Never said they would. Said the technology would mature to the point that it might be competitive technologically and economically. I expect the Chargers to do at least 15 years. Probably 20-25 years.

That is the issue. Via does not regularly replace their equipment. If they did then your thinking would make sense, as one day, they just switch over

Keep in mind that the VIA of 10 years down the road will not be the VIA of today. HFR is supposed to double the size of VIA within 5 years after launch. And that might actually be conservative, if the transit investments in cities along the Corridor continue and if the carbon tax makes driving a lot more expensive ($170/tonne by 2030 as proposed by the Liberals a few weeks back). A larger VIA will have better access to both government and private capital. And will probably get more political support too. Hard to ignore a service which gets 10 million riders in the most vote rich region in the country.

A larger VIA would also have more opportunities to redeploy the fleet elsewhere. If capital becomes available through grants or some loan mechanism (like the CIB), they could use it to invest in new markets and then redeploy the Charger fleet. For example, if we get to 2030 and money is available for new corridors like Calgary-Edmonton and Moncton-Halifax, VIA could choose to redeploy the Charger/Venture sets there, while they move to BEMUs in the Corridor.

At that point, we could see EMUs ordered for Via and the HFR be converted to overhead wires.

Battery MUs make sense in places that are not electrifying their lines, but are switching to electric.

At the pace at which batteries, super capacitors and hydrogen fuel cells are improving, I don't think there will ever be a business case for end-to-end electrification. The most likely outcome, in my opinion, is that we'll see something like Kitchener-Toronto-Peterborough, Smiths Falls-Ottawa and Montreal-Quebec City electrified. Good portions of all those corridors relying on electrification by the commuter rail operators in those regions. And then all VIA needs are BEMUs capable of cover 200 km battery range at 200 kph, which should be available and affordable after 2030. Gaps where it's only VIA operating will be where the BEMUs go on to their batteries/fuel cells.

 

[micheal_can]

Keep in mind that the VIA of 10 years down the road will not be the VIA of today. HFR is supposed to double the size of VIA within 5 years after launch. And that might actually be conservative, if the transit investments in cities along the Corridor continue and if the carbon tax makes driving a lot more expensive ($170/tonne by 2030 as proposed by the Liberals a few weeks back). A larger VIA will have better access to both government and private capital. And will probably get more political support too. Hard to ignore a service which gets 10 million riders in the most vote rich region in the country.

A larger VIA would also have more opportunities to redeploy the fleet elsewhere. If capital becomes available through grants or some loan mechanism (like the CIB), they could use it to invest in new markets and then redeploy the Charger fleet. For example, if we get to 2030 and money is available for new corridors like Calgary-Edmonton and Moncton-Halifax, VIA could choose to redeploy the Charger/Venture sets there, while they move to BEMUs in the Corridor.

I see your thinking. I now see where it might make sense. There are a lot of "Ifs". If all of that happens, then it is reasonable that BEMUs could come to the Corridor. However, I doubt that will happen that quick.

At the pace at which batteries, super capacitors and hydrogen fuel cells are improving, I don't think there will ever be a business case for end-to-end electrification. The most likely outcome, in my opinion, is that we'll see something like Kitchener-Toronto-Peterborough, Smiths Falls-Ottawa and Montreal-Quebec City electrified. Good portions of all those corridors relying on electrification by the commuter rail operators in those regions. And then all VIA needs are BEMUs capable of cover 200 km battery range at 200 kph, which should be available and affordable after 2030. Gaps where it's only VIA operating will be where the BEMUs go on to their batteries/fuel cells.

The issue is whether the section of electrification are long enough to charge the batteries.

 

[kEiThZ]

There are a lot of "Ifs". If all of that happens, then it is reasonable that BEMUs could come to the Corridor. However, I doubt that will happen that quick.

If the "ifs" don't pan out, it's fine, they can stick to the Siemens Chargers. If the growth doesn't pan out, they won't have much of a case for electrification either.

The issue is whether the section of electrification are long enough to charge the batteries.

They should be fine. Stretches like Kitchener-Union-Peterborough (> 200 km) will be long enough, with some of the longer station stops at these locations. Ditto for Smith Falls-Ottawa (~80 km). The train will be spending longer under wires than the spaces in between. They can simply make the stops at major centres a few minutes longer if necessary.

I don't think it'll be a huge concern. We have EV battery packs capable of 350 kW charging (Porsche Taycan). And research on batteries and supercapacitors are still ramping up. I can only imagine what will be possible in a decade.

 

[micheal_can]

If the "ifs" don't pan out, it's fine, they can stick to the Siemens Chargers. If the growth doesn't pan out, they won't have much of a case for electrification either.



They should be fine. Stretches like Kitchener-Union-Peterborough (> 200 km) will be long enough, with some of the longer station stops at these locations. Ditto for Smith Falls-Ottawa (~80 km). The train will be spending longer under wires than the spaces in between. They can simply make the stops at major centres a few minutes longer if necessary.

I don't think it'll be a huge concern. We have EV battery packs capable of 350 kW charging (Porsche Taycan). And research on batteries and supercapacitors are still ramping up. I can only imagine what will be possible in a decade.

Fast charging batteries actually degrades them. So, now we are going to have a fleet that gets fast charged? That sounds like a recipe for disaster. Fast charging a car is much different than a train. Typically, a car spends most of it's time stopped, and can therefore be on a long, slow charge. for most of the time. A battery train doesn't sit much, which means it doesn't have the chance to recover from the fast charges.. If there is only a gap of 200-300 km, then it makes more financial sense to install wires.

 

[kEiThZ]

Fast charging batteries actually degrades them.

You need to look up recent battery developments. This is the entire point of something like Tesla's million mile battery. Allows for more rapid and deep charging cycles than the life of the car. This won't be any issue in 5 years, let alone 10.

Also, battery packs are modular. Simply replace them if the state of charge is too low. Won't be all that expensive. Fraction of buying a new locomotive. The periodic replacement cost just becomes part of the business case.

 

[micheal_can]

You need to look up recent battery developments. This is the entire point of something like Tesla's million mile battery. Allows for more rapid and deep charging cycles than the life of the car. This won't be any issue in 5 years, let alone 10.

Also, battery packs are modular. Simply replace them if the state of charge is too low. Won't be all that expensive. Fraction of buying a new locomotive. The periodic replacement cost just becomes part of the business case.

Or, we forgo that cost and just use a wire to give it electricity.

 

[kEiThZ]

Or, we forgo that cost and just use a wire to give it electricity.

Putting up that wire cost $2B. That buys a lot of battery packs and track. I'd rather see them put the money towards building a better line than electrification of a corridor that won't see more than 15-20 trains per day for a decade or two. The $2B it would cost to electrify Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal, is enough to get them to London, after RER. What would you rather have? HFR service to London by 2030, or an electrified Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal?