
Germany launches world's first hydrogen-powered train - ksourav
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/17/germany-launches-worlds-first-hydrogen-powered-train
======
jillesvangurp
In related news, Bombardier is deploying a battery powered train in Berlin:
[https://montrealgazette.com/business/local-
business/bombardi...](https://montrealgazette.com/business/local-
business/bombardier-debuts-battery-train-in-berlin-in-challenge-to-diesel)

Most of the rail system in Germany is electrified anyway. With batteries to
power the non electrified bits, why bother with hydrogen?

~~~
jnty
Overhead power lines require maintenance too, and getting 100% coverage often
involves disproportionate spend on short sections that are expensive to cover
and maintain. Getting rid of masts on those sections - or even whole lines -
could be a massive cost saving.

Additionally, Germany is a big train tech exporter, and there's lots of
unelectrified route miles in Europe and the world, many of which would be
totally uneconomical to electrify.

~~~
frabert
The batteries are supposed to eliminate the need for 100% coverage, though,
isn't it?

~~~
ed_balls
you don't want to remove 100% since you want to charge the batteries
somewhere. Also it maybe more economical to keep 1km of power lines after the
station when the train is accelerating - main power consumption.

~~~
aembleton
That's a great idea. You could just put the overhead charging infrastructure
at a few stations on the line. Just enough to top the batteries up. Most of
the energy could probably be recovered through regenerative braking, but of
course some will be lost through mechanical and air resistance.

This would be so much simpler than electrifying the whole line and much easier
to maintain.

This infrastructure is often already at key stations, and so it might require
no extra work to implement them. Just more money for the battery powered
trains.

~~~
cevn
Gotta put little spinny generator fans and solar panels on the train too.
Perpetual motion!

edit: also I don't think your idea will 100% work because it would take some
time to charge the trains at the stations.

------
heisenbergs
This is obviously great new tech, though one shouldn't see this as a solution
to global warming. Until we find a cheaper scale-able way of producing
hydrogen that doesn't come from hydrocarbons, this isn't really a solution.
Might as well burn the the hydrocarbons directly...

~~~
semi-extrinsic
You can say the exact same thing about electric cars.

Hydrogen is not a primary energy source, it is an energy storage and
distribution tech, just like batteries.

~~~
heisenbergs
Not if the hydrogen comes from hydrocarbons, which right now is all hydrogen.
In this case, it's just an inefficient proxy for fossil fuels...

~~~
exhilaration
_hydrogen comes from hydrocarbons, which right now is all hydrogen_

It's not! the Scandinavians are investing in "green" hydrogen, you should look
at the photos of the giant electrolysers in this PDF:
[http://hydrogenvalley.dk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/FCB-
CPH1...](http://hydrogenvalley.dk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/FCB-
CPH17_NELImplementing-green-hydrogen-supply-for-fuel-cell-buses-in-the-Nordic-
countries.pdf)

~~~
saagarjha
Ok, replace the energy source with a solar panel. The only thing this is doing
is acting like a battery.

~~~
larkeith
Exactly! If we can improve the methods of generating hydrogen, fuel cells have
the potential to act as versatile, phenomenally efficient, dirt-cheap
batteries, without all the issues of limited metals and dirty production -
Being a better battery is a _huge_ deal.

~~~
njarboe
The reason that fuel cells are so expensive is because of limited metals. The
best fuel cells are made with a lot of platinum. If fuel cells were cheap and
did not need the use of limited metals, then they would be a huge deal. Until
then, how you produce the hydrogen is a minor detail. (Maybe there have been
amazing advancements in fuel cell tech since I last looked into it. Any
links?)

~~~
bobthepanda
Batteries don't do that great with the limited metals problem either.

The bigger issue for railroads is range; current battery operated trains have
a range of about 40km, whereas this hydrogen train has a range of 1000km. You
could have charging stations at every station, but then you run into issues if
the distance between stations is more than 40km, or if the charging equipment
at a station becomes broken.

------
Animats
There are locomotives in the US powered by liquefied natural gas. The Florida
East Coast railroad's 24 locomotives are all LNG. BNSF is looking into it.
It's cost driven; natural gas is cheap right now.

~~~
bobthepanda
LNG was also considered for the French TGVs and the American rail system in
the '60s, but then the oil crisis happened.

Fossil fuel prices are extremely volatile, so alternate power sources are
actually more financially secure for railroads.

~~~
lloeki
The interesting thing about electricity is that it's a great _decoupling
interface_ to the power source: you can change the power source and basically
leave the remainder of the device/infrastructure as is (not that it's not
challenging per se to move say from coal to nuclear to renewable, but hey, if
TGV were LNG-based we'd be in a tough bind to move away from it)

------
CaliforniaKarl
I've seen at least two comments so far saying that this is only a stopgap in
the face of electrification. I do not think this is true, because
electrification has very high upfront capital costs, which would not be
justified on lesser-used lines.

To back up this statement, I can use some numbers from the Caltrain
(California, US) electrification project, where the existing commuter-heavy
Peninsula corridor is being converted from diesel-electric to 25 kV overhead
electric.

Caltrain quotes the cost of electrifying the line at USD 697 million. See
[http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Progra...](http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Documents/PCEP+Cost+and+Funding.pdf)

Caltrain quotes the length of electrified track as "51+ miles", which I'm
going to treat as "51 miles". See
[http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Progra...](http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/Caltrain+Modernization+Program/Presentations/Cost+Schedule+Update+Nov2014.pdf)
pages 4 and 7. The length runs from San Francisco's station at 4th & King
streets, down to San Jose Diridon station.

Those two numbers above give us a cost of USD 13 2/3 million dollars per mile.
But, that's not fully accurate.

Most of Caltrain's right-of-way is double-track. There are three areas with
four tracks (for fast trains to pass slow trains), one area with three tracks
(near the Millbrae station), and three areas with more than four tracks (one
is Caltrain's yard and shops, the second is the many platforms at San Jose,
and the third is the many platforms & yard at San Francisco). See an old
Caltrain timetable at
[https://web.archive.org/web/20110513180702/http://acm.jhu.ed...](https://web.archive.org/web/20110513180702/http://acm.jhu.edu/~sthurmovik/Railpics/Signal/CalTrain-
ETT-No-2.pdf)

Let's say that San Francisco is about one mile of eleven tracks (so, 11 track-
miles), each of the three passing points is two miles of four tracks (so, 24
track-miles), Millbrae has a mile of three tracks (3 track-miles), and San
Jose has around one mile of twelve tracks (so, 12 track-miles). That leaves
around 46 miles left of the 51 original, which would be double-track, giving
us 92 track-miles. So, that's 142 track-miles, giving us a cost of USD 4.91
million per track-mile.

Of course, costs may certainly be higher in the US, where electrification
(especially for mainline heavy rail) does not happen much (if at all), but
still, electrification of an existing line is not cheap. For Caltrain, it
makes sense, because this is a heavily-trafficed line in an area with many
polluting vehicles (automobiles) that also wants to have a 'green'
sensibility, as well as wanting the reduced noise profile.

When you consider freight, there are other issues. For example, in the US,
heavy freight traffic lines use gondolas that can support two containers,
stacked one on top of the other. That means wires would have to be higher than
they would otherwise, and I wonder how how well those extra-extended
pantographs would work at higher speed.

~~~
frgewut
There are also "partly electrified" possibility e.g. only 10% of track
electrified (stations for example). Trains can recharge batteries or
supercapacitators there from wire. There already are such existing light rail
lines.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_multiple_unit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_multiple_unit)

~~~
jakecopp
Sydney is doing this for a new light rail line to eliminate overhead wires
from the CBD.

------
solarkraft
The problem left is that it's likely still somewhat (or much?) inferior to a
lithium battery EV - or if there a good comparison? Energy efficiency is
definitely much reduced.

~~~
skgoa
Energy efficiency is a red herring. Theey are using surplus hydrogen for this
project, i.e. they are getting useful work out of a waste product.

~~~
bobthepanda
Gasoline was originally a waste product.

If hydrogen takes a life of its own that may not be a great thing.

------
_Codemonkeyism
French Alstom rolled out a hydrogen-powerded train in Germany.

~~~
kuschku
Considering how closely interconnected the EU tech industry is — half the
train will be German parts anyway — I don't think it makes sense to try to
attribute it to a specific EU country.

~~~
JAlexoid
Counterpositioning Germany and France never lead to anything good, on a global
scale.

------
agumonkey
I hope the news get to other countries where fuel trains are numerous (I think
India network relies on that)

------
pat77u
how can it be zero emission?

~~~
ridewinter
If they use excess electricity during peak renewable energy hours to produce
the hydrogen it would be zero emissions. That’s an exciting prospect.

------
agitator
But why tho?

------
aaron695
I wondered why they didn't just electrify the line but then I saw the picture
and it is so much more beautiful than overhead lines.

But I guess the question is, can you create a third rail that's ~100% safe?
Walking along tracks is fun, and I think an important part of rural society.

Then I'd be interested in the cost benefit.

~~~
blattimwind
> But I guess the question is, can you create a third rail that's ~100% safe?

Regular trains in Germany use 25 kV. Third rail => third system, but what for?

> Walking along tracks is fun, and I think an important part of rural society.

Walking around in the trackbed is not a recommendable activity in Germany.

------
eip
RIP Stan Meyer

------
thomasfedb
I'm not sure you're meant to launch a train — launching is for rockets and
cream pies.

------
TillE
This seems like a very niche solution, as surely in the longer term 100% of
railways will be electrified, like in Switzerland.

~~~
greglindahl
Stringing wires does not make sense for 100% of rail lines due to low volumes
of trains -- does anyone make batteries for such occasions, or do you expect
some rural lines to be abandoned?

~~~
bobthepanda
SEPTA in Philadelphia actually abandoned many miles of commuter rail because
it built a tunnel that could not handle diesel trains.

------
jopsen
Why not throw a few Tesla power walls on cargo carriage, call it a battery car
and swap it for a charged one at stations along the way as necessary..

You just need rails to be able to quickly attach/detach a car, that's much
less infrastructure than full electrification.

~~~
hobofan
> You just need rails to be able to quickly attach/detach a car

A single attaching maneuver takes 5-10 minutes (from personal experience). Add
to that the detaching and driving the carriage off the rail to free it up, and
you are quickly at 15-20 minutes, which is unfeasible for most long-distance
train rides. Might work with short distances where you already have such a
long pause planed in at the ends, but otherwise not so much. It also puts more
strain/traffic on the track switch infrastructure at stations, which is
already a bottleneck AFAIK.

~~~
_Codemonkeyism
Switching a standard container might be much faster, but you'd need more
infrastructure than - crane could be on the rail car though.

~~~
jayalpha
This problem is solved.

[https://www.cargobeamer.eu/](https://www.cargobeamer.eu/)

