Fleet of hydrogen passenger trains begins service in Germany

Hi folks,
as a German I am looking forward to use a hydrogen or battery powered passenger trains on non-electrified or partially-electrified lines. Local residents next to the lines used to complain about diesel powered trains with their fumes and noise. Now these trains are quieter.
Mabye even some older shut down train lines will be soon reopened for public transport.
 
I wonder how they do carry their H2. Is that in a tank mounted on a carriage the old way coal was tracted by steam locomotives? 1000km of range would suggest quite a volume for the power needed (I didn't do the calculation).
Anyway, that's plain cool. Congrats to all involved.
 
TomcatViP said:
I wonder how they do carry their H2. Is that in a tank mounted on a carriage the old way coal was tracted by steam locomotives? 1000km of range would suggest quite a volume for the power needed (I didn't do the calculation).
Anyway, that's plain cool. Congrats to all involved.
Click to expand...
Hydrogen tanks on the train car roofs. These are fairly compact passenger trains -- every picture I see suggests 2-car units.

1661372926571.png

www.alstom.com

Alstom Coradia iLint – the world's 1st hydrogen powered passenger train

The Coradia iLint is the world’s first passenger train powered by a hydrogen fuel cell, which produces electrical power for traction. This zero-emission train emits low levels of noise, with exhaust being only steam and condensed water.
www.alstom.com www.alstom.com

Edit: Here we go. One tank on each car, with 24 pressure vessels in each tank, for a total of 94 kg of hydrogen per tank/car.

Fuel Cell Coradia iLint On Test

On 14 March 2017, having completed its initial static tests, Alstom’s second fuel cell Coradia iLint multiple unit, 654 102, made its first test runs on the test track within Salzgitter works, progressively being worked up to a speed of 80 km/h.
www.railvolution.net www.railvolution.net
 
Last edited:
@TomS : Thanks for the links.
In the last, the author seems to be carried away by his own opinion forgetting that non-electrified residual networks exist because of structural constraints. Mainly cost of infrastructure versus the imperatives to deliver railway services to local population. Hence, you can't clear away those realities just by saying that electrification is the only key. (who would pay for that? Who would maintain the lines? Pay for the extra workers needed when this ha snot been deemed economically feasible for decades?...).
However, those trains generally cross more classic electrified lines when they cross-path another railway line or enter a connecting station. I am a little bit dubious with the roof mounted tanks and the risk of H2 venting close to high power lines. I hope those tanks are immerged inside a neutralizing solution (ionized water?) or anything that would shield from any pemeating hydrogen.
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
@TomS : Thanks for the links.
In the last, the author seems to be carried away by his own opinion forgetting that non-electrified residual networks exist because of structural constraints. Mainly cost of infrastructure versus the imperatives to deliver railway services to local population. Hence, you can't clear away those realities just by saying that electrification is the only key. (who would pay for that? Who would maintain the lines? Pay for the extra workers needed when this ha snot been deemed economically feasible for decades?...).
However, those trains generally cross more classic electrified lines when they cross-path another railway line or enter a connecting station. I am a little bit dubious with the roof mounted tanks and the risk of H2 venting close to high power lines. I hope those tanks are immerged inside a neutralizing solution (ionized water?) or anything that would shield from any pemeating hydrogen.
Click to expand...
I suspect quite a lot of hydrogen is shipped by rail already, and the amount on the new hydrogen-fueled locomotives would not markedly increase the amount of hydrogen vented near power lines
 
TomcatViP said:
. I am a little bit dubious with the roof mounted tanks and the risk of H2 venting close to high power lines.
Click to expand...

I think that's a very remote risk. For starters, it's hard to get hydrogen to ignite in very low concentration when mixed with air, which is what you'd expect for tanks venting without confinement. Plus, you would need an actual spark from those high power lines, which is unlikely since these trains don't even have a pantograph. And even if it did burn, it would just burn upward, away from the train and passengers.
 
Meanwhile, these trains turned out to be extremly troublesome. They do often fail and consume much more hydrogen than originally stated.

Of course, such problems are nothing unusual for a new technology.
 
Hydrogen is an evil genie that always manages to escape from the bottle, always.
 

Attachments

  • zeppelin hindenburg.jpg
    zeppelin hindenburg.jpg
    140.6 KB · Views: 3
  • sddefault.jpg
    sddefault.jpg
    61.5 KB · Views: 1
  • 060306_475116.jpg
    060306_475116.jpg
    133.3 KB · Views: 4
  • 20150813-1040x_comparacion_bombas-atomicas.jpg
    20150813-1040x_comparacion_bombas-atomicas.jpg
    32.3 KB · Views: 4
  • supernova1.sp.jpg
    supernova1.sp.jpg
    244.1 KB · Views: 5
GTX said:
Justo Miranda said:
Hydrogen is an evil genie that always manages to escape from the bottle, always.
Click to expand...
Grossly misleading post
Click to expand...


This is not my personal opinion, it is an absolute physical truth: the hydrogen atom is smaller than those of any other element. It will always escape from any container, and when it does... KABOUM!!
 
The hydrogen molecule, to be precise. As it is the lightest molecule around, safety can be assured in many cases if a vertical conduit to the atmosphere is kept open at all times - escaping molecules will then rise out of harm's way. Trouble occurs when hydrogen starts collecting in enclosed spaces.
 
The Issue with hydrogen it expensive !

It Production and Storage cost more and consume more energy like for Methan.
it reacts happy with other materials, it seep into them make them brittle like tanks or pipelines
and ones it escape... KABOUM!!!

For moment the Politicians jumping on this bandwagon as solution for everything,
but after some years of high cost, issues with infrastructure maintenance and disasters, they abandon it...
 
I totally agree with that, producing hydrogene can be very cheap in some parts of the world, but liquidation cost a lot of energy and needs expensive machinery. The transport per ship is not feasible due to its low density (even as LH2), the tanks are expensive, there are losses by evaporation, the fuell cells are expensive (H2 combustion engines are not).

A combination of DAC and Fischer Tropsch can archieve 60 % efficiency which makes Synfuels + Diesel almost as efficient as H2 and fuel cells, with a fraction of the cost.
 
Justo Miranda said:
GTX said:
Justo Miranda said:
Hydrogen is an evil genie that always manages to escape from the bottle, always.
Click to expand...
Grossly misleading post
Click to expand...


This is not my personal opinion, it is an absolute physical truth: the hydrogen atom is smaller than those of any other element. It will always escape from any container, and when it does... KABOUM!!
Click to expand...
The misleading aspect is to post images of the Hindenburg or nuclear explosions in a post talking about Hydrogen powered buses. There is no way one is going to see anything even mildly like that.
 
Justo Miranda said:
Hydrogen is an evil genie that always manages to escape from the bottle, always.
Click to expand...
Is this a joke?
Hydrogen has very real safety issues, but those have nothing to do with Hydrogen bombs or a supernova. The safety issue with hydrogen is combustion, not fission or fusion.
If you dont see my point i have the perfect argument to convince you of hydrogens safety /s
 

Attachments

  • water_glass-34517516.jpg
    water_glass-34517516.jpg
    614.3 KB · Views: 1
Michel Van said:
The Issue with hydrogen it expensive !

It Production and Storage cost more and consume more energy like for Methan.
it reacts happy with other materials, it seep into them make them brittle like tanks or pipelines
and ones it escape... KABOUM!!!

For moment the Politicians jumping on this bandwagon as solution for everything,
but after some years of high cost, issues with infrastructure maintenance and disasters, they abandon it...
Click to expand...
Politicians follow the same cycle in their annual speeches since the early seventies: alternative fuels, social issues, travel to Mars, peace in the world, alternative fuels...

:p
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom