GO Transit Electrification | Metrolinx

[steveintoronto]

Correct, but then again you can call it green in the context of localized emissions. The more problematical thing is why are we trying to adopt technologies that have no track record of reliability or success so far?

AoD

There's a lot more discussion both directions to be had on this, and a very real danger of the public getting muddled between H internal combustion engines, and H fuel-cell electric locomotives.

The Green Agenda hasn't helped by overstating the practicability at this time, let alone carbon offset, and that will be discussed further, but the bottom line to Alvin's point is:

*We've been here before!* I don't have time to Google, will later, but this is revisiting the 'Nuclear surplus electricity being used for hydrolysis to power GO's locomotive fleet' from what, twenty, thirty years back?

H storage is a minefield (with the full intent of the word) in itself. Yes, the newest developments *must* be studied....but this was an announcement purely for the sake of political gain...real or otherwise.

 

[robmausser]

Hydrogen is normally produced with natural gas

Hydrogen cannot be produced, its an element. It can be removed from chemical bonds.

 

[steveintoronto]

I see my use of the term "minefield" is proving itself in the comments. I replied to Alvin's comment above too soon! Will continue reading later, but have to answer this:

Plus, since the waste is oxygen you are putting more oxygen in the atmosphere which helps lower c02 levels.

You're missing the obvious. Where does the energy come from? There's no free lunch.

Either internal combustion or fuel-cell, it's the *oxidation* (by whatever means) that releases energy. (Edit: To make it clear, many reactions produce energy, not just oxidation)

Good explanation here:
http://www.hydrogenics.com/technology-resources/hydrogen-technology/fuel-cells/

 

[steveintoronto]

Hydrogen cannot be produced, its an element. It can be removed from chemical bonds.

Let's agree on the term "rendered".

 

[44 North]

"...important that Ontario consider this clean electric technology as an alternative to conventional overhead wires"

Sounds to me like a delay tactic to prolong the promised roll out of electrification. Which isn't a surprise if true, nor an issue specific to any particular government. Promise the world, bite off more than can be chewed, then scale back. Like every grand plan that preceded it. What's next, study clean coal trains adorned with wind turbines? Just build the proper infrastructure for electrification or don't.

 

[M636RF]

Hydrogen technology on trains is really a recent and unproven development. Besides, the only Hydrogen powered passenger train that I know of is the Alstom Coradia iLint, which is relatively small and lightweight. Could current fuel cell technology really propell a larger and longer Bi-level train set?

 

[Allandale25]

Whatever happened to the tier iv loco, 647? Wynne promised Weston that the KW line would be made tier iv compliant asap. That was years ago.
- Paul

There was an update someowhere on the MP54ACs. I'll try to find it.

Found it. The update was posted in the other forum here.

 

[Allandale25]

Does the GO RER BCA cover things like future travel times (IE Bramalea to Union) and acceleration? Would that offer any clues to how hydrogen would differ? (IE offer slightly longer travel times and less acceleration?) I assume they wouldn't change their frequency promise (15-min two-way at peak on the plan announced).

 

[steveintoronto]

Hydrogen technology on trains is really a recent and unproven development. Besides, the only Hydrogen powered passenger train that I know of is the Alstom Coradia iLint, which is relatively small and lightweight. Could current fuel cell technology really propell a larger and longer Bi-level train set?

Google "Green Goat locomotive". CN was also involved in testing some. (May even have been some 636s!) The problem isn't so much the efficiency of conversion, which can be quite high, and engine life (if designed to be injected lubricant)(with diesel, many surfaces are self-lubricating, so injected lube unnecessary) can be exemplary, but the problem is *carrying and storing* the fuel, let alone doing it in a way which renders it less prone to explosion.

 

[steveintoronto]

Does the GO RER BCA cover things like future travel times (IE Bramalea to Union) and acceleration? Would that offer any clues to how hydrogen would differ?

There's no way around it. Thrust per weight of an electric only loco is unmatchable. The "source impedance" of the electric supply can be an issue (when it's not adequately fed to allow the demand to be fully satiated) but in Ontario's case, and the proximity of major xmssn networks, and the relatively light loading of the trains, this won't be a problem.

As to the politics of the "Hydrogen" bomb...it's Obfuscation, not Altruism.

 

[cplchanb]

good god why is this province have such a hard on for "studies"?! Theyve studied it before and now they want to study it again. Why cant they just accept the fact that advances in tech doesnt stop, and they need
to make a decision now. Just build the damn thing already!

 

[jje1000]

Great idea, but what will they do with all the existing stock?

Nevermind, I re-read the article and they said they were potentially looking at replacing electric trains with electric-hydrogen ones.

The Liberals should stop faffing around and just focus on getting as much electrification done before they get kicked out of office next year.

Anyways, with Montreal's RER finally getting Federal funding today, what are the chances we might be seeing some funding coming to GO Transit soon?

 

[Allandale25]

good god why is this province have such a hard on for "studies"?! Theyve studied it before and now they want to study it again. Why cant they just accept the fact that advances in tech doesnt stop, and they need to make a decision now. Just build the damn thing already!

By studying "it" before, I assume you mean hydrogen technology? The only reference I've seen to previous "studies" on hydrogen is a reference in this article from 2007 which Oliver Moore tweeted out again today as a reminder. Is that what you're referring to?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Because I am sure electrification isn't sufficiently clean to some agitators. You need clean and chaste trains.

AoD

 

[cplchanb]

By studying "it" before, I assume you mean hydrogen technology? The only reference I've seen to previous "studies" on hydrogen is a reference in this article from 2007 which Oliver Moore tweeted out again today as a reminder. Is that what you're referring to?

I was also referring to studying in general. HSR has been studied 3 times, SSE has been studied X times, DRL has been studied X times. Still no construction after decades of studies