News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

Any answers about my question as to whether ML will begin an overall electrification of RER or will focus on one major route at a time to get at least one route electrified much quicker?

As far as overall electrification, as long as the RER & UPX are electrified by 2026, I don't really see the problem.
that aint happening. service increases will come first, which means that their priorities are the new tracks, switches and train control systems.

the electrification of a single line methinks is coming earliest 2028
 
At most stations that would simply mean using the existing low platform, but it would mean a complete rebuild of Pearson station and either not using the UP Express station at Union or completely rebuilding that one as well. I would hazard a guess that the cost of rebuilding the two stations would be more expensive than buying off the shelf EMUs. Any bi-level option using the cars currently in North America have accessibility issues and this route has many people rolling their luggage so a second deck would be useless for many.
It doesn't need to be a "complete" rebuild. Just raise the tracks and move the doors. As others mentioned Mlinx already has said it wants to move the services at Union, even if our lack of foresight is incredibly annoying
 

Attachments

  • 1653607889314.png
    1653607889314.png
    214.2 KB · Views: 93
I think you will see the rate of electrification infrastructure and rolling stock happen much quicker than was previously planned.

When this contract was sent out and the winner basically picked, the cost of diesel was half what it is now and there is no reason to think it will co me down anytime soon including after the Ukraine war is over. This means that operational costs have soared and with ever increasing frequency of service, those costs will be significantly higher than originally forecast.

This could cause ML & QP to accelerate electrification and focus on certain lines to get some portions electrified faster so they can begin to see operational costs deckine faster than working at all lines and basically opening at the same time.
 
Last edited:
When this contract was sent out and the winner basically picked, the cost of diesel was half what it is now and there is no reason to think it will co me down anytime soon including after the Ukraine war is over.
Interesting - for some reason I’d never put two and two together re: cost of operating GO. Unfortunately, doing all the legwork for electrification has also become more expensive at the same time, and, given the recent news of Windsor losing an LG Chem plant because of lack of generating capacity, I’m really curious how much capacity we need/have to power the trains.
 
The timeline itself may not change but I think you will see ML focusing on one particular line {ie Lakeshore} to get it up and running and realizing those operational savings faster than if they did all the lines at once. Fuel takes up nearly 50% of GO's operational costs and the faster they can get some lines electrified, the more savings they will see.
 
Interesting - for some reason I’d never put two and two together re: cost of operating GO. Unfortunately, doing all the legwork for electrification has also become more expensive at the same time, and, given the recent news of Windsor losing an LG Chem plant because of lack of generating capacity, I’m really curious how much capacity we need/have to power the trains.
Isn't the reason why the whole conversation around Hydrogen occurred in the first place because we had such a power surplus that it wasn't a big deal to lose power during the electrolysis process?
 
Interesting - for some reason I’d never put two and two together re: cost of operating GO. Unfortunately, doing all the legwork for electrification has also become more expensive at the same time, and, given the recent news of Windsor losing an LG Chem plant because of lack of generating capacity, I’m really curious how much capacity we need/have to power the trains.

4-5 years ago I stumbled upon data for Melbourne's network (16 lines of varying length [998km total track length of which 95% is electrified], a fleet of ~220 trains) and the peak demand was around 180MW (literally in the morning peak too - 7:30-8:30am).

If we're only operating in pub-test world, GO's electrification, I'd hazard a guess, would probably only require about 1/3 to 1/2 of the demand here.
 
Isn't the reason why the whole conversation around Hydrogen occurred in the first place because we had such a power surplus that it wasn't a big deal to lose power during the electrolysis process?
I don’t know. I never understood the push for an unproven technology for (what should have been) a risk-averse transit project.
The timeline itself may not change but I think you will see ML focusing on one particular line {ie Lakeshore} to get it up and running and realizing those operational savings faster than if they did all the lines at once. Fuel takes up nearly 50% of GO's operational costs and the faster they can get some lines electrified, the more savings they will see.
That would make sense. I think incrementalism makes sense in this context.
 
Isn't the reason why the whole conversation around Hydrogen occurred in the first place because we had such a power surplus that it wasn't a big deal to lose power during the electrolysis process?

Ontario consistently has a power surplus at certain times of day, and a deficit at certain times of day (especially hotter days).
 
Last edited:
Fuel takes up nearly 50% of GO's operational costs and [...]
[Citation Needed]

BTW I think you're right: the best strategy is to get something up and running as soon as possible, so they can start the process of rolling stock attrition. Lakeshore (Burlington-Oshawa) is definitely plausible because it has a lot of vehicle-km, and it has the only existing electric yard (Whitby).
 
^The critical path is through the power supply and switchgear.

I suspect that nothing has been done to procure it. Some of that stuff may have long lead times to deliver.
And Hydro One may have preferences as to where they start the installation.

- Paul
 

Back
Top