News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

dziogo said:
Unless I am missing something this is step backwards as hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels... I know train itself emits only water but the fuel itself is not "green"?
Click to expand...
Plus, it renders the whole electrification study and TPAP useless. And despite them saying it will not affect timelines - I have a hard time believing that as they will need a whole new TPAP.
 
dziogo said:
Unless I am missing something this is step backwards as hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels... I know train itself emits only water but the fuel itself is not "green"?
Click to expand...

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
 
I thought they were still running diesel trains alongside electric ones since electrification doesn't extend to the entire system.

Perhaps this affects those trains.
 
jje1000 said:
I thought they were still running diesel trains alongside electric ones since electrification doesn't extend to the entire system.

Perhaps this affects those trains.
Click to expand...
Great idea, but what will they do with all the existing stock?
 
dziogo said:
Unless I am missing something this is step backwards as hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels... I know train itself emits only water but the fuel itself is not "green"?
Click to expand...

And so is our electricity....your point?

Hydrogen is normally produced with natural gas Just like our electricity in. They can co-produce electricity and steam (which is used to produce hydrogen). And if the gov't wants to they can capture and sequester almost all of the CO2 emissions. It is less efficient use than electricity but allows for lower capital costs.

Make sure you read who has sponsored the various studies you read. The battery lobby (Tesla) is very powerful and has sponsored various reports that skew in favour of their product. Yes hydrogen is not as efficient. But both use limited supply commodities (natural gas for hydrogen, natural gas and metals for batteries) and batteries will not work over longer distances whereas you can refill hydrogen with the right infrastructure.
 
dziogo said:
Unless I am missing something this is step backwards as hydrogen is produced from fossil fuels... I know train itself emits only water but the fuel itself is not "green"?
Click to expand...

Hydrogen is not "produced" by anything as it is a chemical element. You can't produce hydrogen. You can however remove it from other substances, like fossil fuels.

However you can also remove hydrogen from water, using a method called electrolysis. You pass electrons through water and it separates the water into hydrogen and oxygen.

It does use massive amounts of energy to do this but since you can use electricity you can use renewables like wind, solar, hydro or very efficient and greenhouse friendly energies like nuclear to do it.

Plus, since the waste is oxygen you are putting more oxygen in the atmosphere which helps lower c02 levels.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
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
Click to expand...
It is, I guess, the dilemma that gov't playing catch up on neglected infrastructure faces.......put in stuff that other jurisdictions have been using for ages and face the wrath of people saying things like "why are we just now deploying 20th century tech in the 21st century....other country "X" is already moving to "Z" new stuff" (I think we saw a lot of that during Presto install) or look into cutting edge stuff and face the obvious (and logical) question that you pose.
 
TOareaFan said:
It is, I guess, the dilemma that gov't playing catch up on neglected infrastructure faces.......put in stuff that other jurisdictions have been using for ages and face the wrath of people saying things like "why are we just now deploying 20th century tech in the 21st century....other country "X" is already moving to "Z" new stuff" (I think we saw a lot of that during Presto install) or look into cutting edge stuff and face the obvious (and logical) question that you pose.
Click to expand...

Yes and no - there is quite a difference between deploying a smartcard system vs. electrification - which while not new isn't exactly at risk of being demoted to the category of old tech.

muller877 said:
And so is our electricity....your point?

Make sure you read who has sponsored the various studies you read. The battery lobby (Tesla) is very powerful and has sponsored various reports that skew in favour of their product. Yes hydrogen is not as efficient. But both use limited supply commodities (natural gas for hydrogen, natural gas and metals for batteries) and batteries will not work over longer distances whereas you can refill hydrogen with the right infrastructure.
Click to expand...

Not really, fossil fuel accounts for only 28% of output in Ontaro, and maybe even lower in Southern Ontario given the baseload of nukes. I am not sure how Tesla got mentioned either - their (i.e. Elon's) preferred mode is solar to battery, not hydrogen.

AoD
 
Last edited:
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
 
News Release

Ontario Taking Major Step Forward to Electrify the GO Rail Network
June 15, 2017

Electrification Will Support Faster and More Frequent Service for Commuters and Families
Ontario is transforming how people get around in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area and taking a major step forward to electrify the GO rail network, which will support faster and more frequent service for commuters and families across the region.

Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca visited the GO Transit Willowbrook Facility today to provide an update on Ontario's work to implement GO Regional Express Rail (RER) and announce that the province has commenced the GO Rail Network Electrification Transit Project Assessment Process. The process builds on public consultations held last year and will assess the environmental impacts of converting core segments of the GO rail network, including the UP Express, from diesel to electric. It is a critical step towards enabling the province to begin the procurement process to select a vendor to electrify the system.

In tandem with the assessment process, Ontario is also undertaking a feasibility study on the use of hydrogen fuel cells as an alternative technology for electrifying GO rail service and the UP Express. Recent advances in the use of hydrogen fuel cells to power electric trains in other jurisdictions makes it important that Ontario consider this clean electric technology as an alternative to conventional overhead wires. As part of the study, this fall the province will bring together industry leaders in fuel cell technology for a symposium to explore the potential application of hydrogen fuel cell technology to electrify the GO rail network.

Ontario is undertaking a $21.3 billion transformation of the GO network, which is the largest commuter rail project in Canada. The investment will deliver faster and more frequent service, create thousands of jobs and improve people's quality of life. Ontario is on track to electrify and expand the rail network, and bring more two-way, all-day service to commuters and families by increasing the number of weekly trips from about 1,500 to nearly 6,000 by 2025.

Making transit faster, more convenient and more sustainable is part of our plan to create jobs, grow our economy and help people in their everyday lives.


QUICK FACTS
  • The province has committed $13.5 billion to implement GO RER as part of a $21.3 billion transformation of the GO network from commuter transit to a regional rapid transit system. GO RER involves more than 500 separate projects across 40 municipalities.
  • Improvements to over 30 GO stations are currently in procurement and planning work is underway with municipal partners on 12 new GO RER stations across the network.
  • Portions of the work also support the integration of City of Toronto’s SmartTrack program with the broader GO RER program.
  • Critical environmental assessment processes are also underway to expand corridors which will allow for improved service on the Lakeshore East line, Barrie line and at Union Station.
  • Infrastructure improvements to support GO RER are supporting increased service levels across the GO rail network, such as the introduction of weekend service on the Barrie line and all-day service on the Stouffville line.
  • The Notice of Commencement and Public Meetings for the GO Rail Network Electrification Transit Project Assessment Process was issued June 14, 2017.
 
Brilliant. While the province will be going ahead with the electrification TPAP, they will also hold a "fuel cell technology symposium" that will not only distract from the GO RER project, it will give credence to NIMBYs opposing electrification - be it the construction of gantries and overhead wires, or those worried about the effects of electromagnetism.

As hydrogen-powered trains are still in early testing, we don't know if they have the reliability, speed, or acceleration that we know electric trains, especially EMUs, can deliver. They might be an effective alternative to diesel, but an effective alternative to electrification?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top