[pman]

This time it’s different.

 

[aquateam]

From my understanding, fuel cells that are powered with hydrogen produced via electrolysis are very inefficient compared to an electric motor hooked onto the grid. You would use significantly more electricity to power hydrail than traditional electric trains. On top of that, you will need a large infrastructure to carry and supply the hydrogen to the trains which will also be energy intensive.

That's true. What's overlooked is that hydrogen is really just a method of energy *storage*, the energy still needs to be generated and then converted into a usable form. Hydrogen just adds a middle-man (with accompanying efficiency losses) in order to avoid the up-front capital costs of electrification.

Knowing that much of the marginal supply of electricity to the North American (and Ontario indirectly) grids comes from fossil fuel, I don't think that hydrail is such a green alternative. I must say that at least it doesn't produce local emissions in the city.

Fossil fuels are normally used for peaking power, though. The idea behind using hydrogen is that whenever we are generating surplus power (for instance, wind power output is greater at night) we would be generating hydrogen instead of selling the power at a loss to the US. Electrifying GO would worsen the load factor of the grid and potentially require more peaking generation capacity, whereas hydrifying it would even out demand.

From page 110 of the report:

Adding together these three factors, the Ontario grid experiences very substantial surpluses of green
electricity every day. The cost of this unwanted electricity is recovered by the Global Adjustment (GA).
The cost of electricity for either Hydrail or track electrification is crucially important to the choice
between the two technologies. The entire premise of Hydrail is that hydrogen will be generated by
accessing this unwanted electricity. In storing electricity as hydrogen, it will time-shift energy demand
by tapping into the unwanted surplus. Consequently, it is our understanding that electricity for Hydrail
would not be subject to the GA.
In contrast, the power required for the Overhead Contact System (OCS) does not alleviate the supplydemand
imbalance and would, therefore, likely be subject to GA.

 

[BMO]

Here's my take on it: I'd be fine with Hydrail for some of the exurban lines, but I think the core GO network should be electrified. Run electrified RER on West Harbour-Oshawa, Mt Pleasant-Unionville, and Aurora-Union, but implement Hydrail on routes like Niagara Falls-West Harbour, Kitchener-Union (express after Mt Pleasant), and Barrie (express after Aurora).

This would not only provide a good rolling stock delineation between the "core" RER network and the longer-haul routes, but it would also save money on not having to electrify through largely rural areas.

I imagine the bulk of the capital costs associated with Hydrail are related to the production and transport of the fuel plus the facilities for storing said fuel. If you have a system that has both electrical and hydrail, I imagine you're basically paying more overall because you need to setup the most expensive parts of each which are the actual sub-stations and power supply.

 

[Allandale25]

Column here on the topic.

The Liberals think hydrogen trains are the future — but what if they're wrong?
ANALYSIS: Metrolinx has ordered hydrogen-powered trains for GO Transit. But even the companies eager to sell them can’t promise they’ll actually work, writes John Michael McGrath

 

[ssiguy2]

Hasn't the province been down this road before, with unproven, one-off technology not used elsewhere?

I wonder how that turned out...

I can only assume that you are talking about the SRT. Well ART was NOT unproven technology as it had been used before using it's linear technology. The only difference is that it was already bring used by Metros and not more LRT size trains. Linear induction {ie SkyTrain} has proven itself in Vancouver and Kuala Lumpur to be safe, fast, reliable, comfortable, and cost effective. Just because Toronto screwed up it's SRT doesn't mean other cities have.

The reason ART never really caught on is because, unlike Hydrail, there was no real advantage in using it over standard Metro. Outside of having tighter curve capacity, the difference in cost was negligible. Why bother using a new technology with very few potential suppliers as opposed to using standard Metro when there is no real advantage in doing so? This is NOT the case with Hydrail as it has many advantages over catenary as I stated earlier such as it's flexibility of service, being able to run on non-electrified lines, faster and cheaper to implement, and none of the visual pollution of catenary. This also a system that is now up and running in Germany and China with many other countries interested in employing it. It will also have off-the-shelf suppliers of the 3 largest rail manufacturers in the world.

If there was no advantage of using catenary over Hydrail then they should abandon the whole idea. Unlike Skytrain as opposed to standard Metro, there is no real advantage of choosing SkyTrain while Hydrail has many clear technical and operation advantages over catenary which is why it is being studied intensely in Toronto and many other countries. Metrolinx and many other cities and countries in the world are not looking at Hydrail as an alternative to catenary because they have nothing else to do but because they see it as potentially being a superior choice.

 

[Adjei]

Column here on the topic.

“It’s precisely why we’re moving forward right now with this kind of contract. We are asking our industry to do so in a conceptual way to see if it’s really feasible to use hydrogen-fuel-cell-powered trains,” McGarry said. “There are other jurisdictions that are moving in this direction in other parts of the world, and I want Ontario to be a leader here.”

This is one of the most idiotic things I've ever heard. Why is there a need to be a leader in this and what even gives Ontario the right to be a leader. Why didn't Ontario seek to be world leader when we have been running diesel trains for trains while other jurisdictions have been running electric trains. This has Del Duca's fingerprints all over this. A year ago nobody was talking about this and now all of a sudden Ontario is about to become a world leader in hydrogen trains. Frankly we don't need to be guinea pigs for any unproven technology. We are no world leaders in anything aealing with transportation. We should let others who have experience with this like Netherlands who have been running electric trains for years test this out before we even attempt to use. A place where you can take electric trains and high speed trains from the airport or central station in Amsterdam to all over the country and other parts of Europe. They are the ones who should be leading this and not a transit backwater like Ontario.

 

[Adjei]

I can only assume that you are talking about the SRT. Well ART was NOT unproven technology as it had been used before using it's linear technology. The only difference is that it was already bring used by Metros and not more LRT size trains. Linear induction {ie SkyTrain} has proven itself in Vancouver and Kuala Lumpur to be safe, fast, reliable, comfortable, and cost effective. Just because Toronto screwed up it's SRT doesn't mean other cities have.

The reason ART never really caught on is because, unlike Hydrail, there was no real advantage in using it over standard Metro. Outside of having tighter curve capacity, the difference in cost was negligible. Why bother using a new technology with very few potential suppliers as opposed to using standard Metro when there is no real advantage in doing so? This is NOT the case with Hydrail as it has many advantages over catenary as I stated earlier such as it's flexibility of service, being able to run on non-electrified lines, faster and cheaper to implement, and none of the visual pollution of catenary. This also a system that is now up and running in Germany and China with many other countries interested in employing it. It will also have off-the-shelf suppliers of the 3 largest rail manufacturers in the world.

If there was no advantage of using catenary over Hydrail then they should abandon the whole idea. Unlike Skytrain as opposed to standard Metro, there is no real advantage of choosing SkyTrain while Hydrail has many clear technical and operation advantages over catenary which is why it is being studied intensely in Toronto and many other countries. Metrolinx and many other cities and countries in the world are not looking at Hydrail as an alternative to catenary because they have nothing else to do but because they see it as potentially being a superior choice.

Don't make me laugh. A year ago nobody was talking about Hyrail or whatever the hell you call it at Metrolinx. This looks like something Del Duca is pushing and now everyone is running around all giddy about it. This looks like a "boondoggle" waiting to happen. We don't need to be guinea pigs for any unproven technology.

 

[wopchop]

Can people stop acting like RER is going to be hydrail? It's up to the bidders and I seriously doubt they'd take the risk.

But why not? Risk just means $s, and all $s will get bundled into the overall price tag to the government.

The timeline above gives them 7 years (2025) to start Hydrail rollout on all lines ... which could take, who knows? Months? Years? It appears to be without a clear answer at the moment.

However, I believe the RER Electrification timeline was to begin TWAD service by 2024 on Lakeshore West (Aldershot to Union), Lakeshore East (Oshawa to Union), Barrie (Aurora to Union), Stouffville (Unionville to Union), and Kitchener (Bramalea to Union). There is certainly plenty of risk in pulling that off as well.

 

[crs1026]

The more I think about it, VIA (HFR willing)is likely to need catenary through Union Staion anyways, and likely down the Oakville Sub to the TMC. Maybe they will only need it to the east as far as Cherry Street.
The bridges through Dufferin- Jameson are going to have to be rebuilt anyways. Hydrail will not meet the needs of a GO “express” service to Kitchener and beyond - that’s one more generation of technology from a start-stop hybrid style hydrogen rail vehicle. So, the Weston Sub will need catenary.
With that investment as a given, the additional investment to add OCS to LSE/LSW may be preferable to bidders over hydrail.
Watch ML try to saddle VIA with the cost of electrifying Union. And watch potential vendors build in cost/risk protection around the complexities of working with VIA around their electrification needs on the same corridor. Any hydrail bids will not be much cheaper than catenary, if at all.

- Paul

 

[ssiguy2]

Don't make me laugh. A year ago nobody was talking about Hyrail or whatever the hell you call it at Metrolinx. This looks like something Del Duca is pushing and now everyone is running around all giddy about it. This looks like a "boondoggle" waiting to happen. We don't need to be guinea pigs for any unproven technology.

I for one am not "giddy" about it and I don't think Metrolinx is either. By studying Hydrail they are not doing the "wild thing" but quite the contrary, doing the prudent thing. This is a newish technology that shows a lot of promise as shown by the billions being spent on research and development by 3 of the big 4 world rail manufacturers......CRRC, Alstom, and Siemens. When just one manufacturing is proceeding full steam with a technology you have the right to be dubious but these 3 are, you know they are very confident in not only the technology but also it's applicability.

With what is increasingly looking like a viable and affordable option to catenary it would be very short sighted and irresponsible for Metrolinx not to study the technology and to see if it would be a superior choice for RER. RER/GO is a huge $13.5 billion project and one that will transform the way Torontonians get around for the next century. It is essential that they do it right and that requires an informed decision. Metrolinx shouldn't go gangbusters over Hydrail and get swept up in the idea of using a new technology like some think they should but nor should they take your myopic view or being blind to new technology.

Get a loaner of the current trains and use it as a semi-DRL from Weston to Kennedy and see how it works. Find out it's strong points and shortcomings, cost-effectiveness, reliability, and equally important the riders viewpoint. Toronto would have nothing to lose and work with Alstom so they are in charge of operations. By doing this you would be offering some relief of B&Y and crucially will be able to study the technology and it's application first hand so that any informed and reasoned decision can be made. When dealing with such a huge project, hyperbole from either side of the argument serves no one and often result in decisions made on emotions and not logical...........Toronto of all cities should know the danger of that.

 

[mdrejhon]

For those interested, Link to the Prototype Locomotive Design Services Project RFP

For those interested, here is the documents list and document requestor list.

Personally, I think hydrail is only good for a trial on a feeder line.
Bolton shuttle, Niagara-Hamilron shuttle, etc.

 

[crs1026]

Get a loaner of the current trains and use it as a semi-DRL from Weston to Kennedy and see how it works. Find out it's strong points and shortcomings, cost-effectiveness, reliability, and equally important the riders viewpoint. Toronto would have nothing to lose and work with Alstom so they are in charge of operations. By doing this you would be offering some relief of B&Y and crucially will be able to study the technology and it's application first hand so that any informed and reasoned decision can be made. When dealing with such a huge project, hyperbole from either side of the argument serves no one and often result in decisions made on emotions and not logical...........Toronto of all cities should know the danger of that.

A test application is the prudent path forward, I think we all agree on that. This is promising technology and one day we may all own hydrogen vehicles (and automated, at that!).

The issue is this: if we are to meet the goal of opening RER in 2024, we need to procure the motive power and rolling stock today.
Even a short period of “wait and see” will push that 2024 date further away.

So there are two choices: one is to begin electrifying with proven technology (OCS), the other is to go with hydrail on the presumption that the technology can be made workable by about 2022, when the products will begin rolling off the assembly line for RER.

I’m enthusiastic about hydrail, but it’s just not prudent to take that leap of faith. It’s irrelevant how good hydrail may be in 2028..... we need RER by 2024.

Perhaps we can defer a couple of the lesser travelled corridors, with 30-minuteish 2WAD conventional trains being good enough for another decade. And, not all GO routes will ever be electrified (Hamilton, Niagara, Milton,Richmond Hill, Bowmanville) so it certainly makes sense to look to hydrail for these. But the core investment in the core electrification system needs to proceed - quickly. Putting that reality in the hands of the bidding process is just evading accountability for making that decision and looking the taxpayer in the eye about what that will cost.

I don’t see any hyperbole in accusing the Wynne government of losing their courage now that the design studies are done and we are at the point of spending serious dollars to procure and build. What a bunch of lying weasels.... all they wanted was a couple years of talking a good line about the concept of RER. Now they have picked up hydrail and will talk that concept up for two years, until that bill comes due. Sadly, this whole debate has little to do with advancing new technology.

As to the technology, consider this. Fuel cells and battery powered automobiles have been in the game for about the same lenght of time. It’s not dumb luck that we have a growing network of auto charging installations, but not a network of hydrogen stations. It took a pretty broad scientific and business consensus to advance the one and not the other. Mr. Musk could have put his energy into building hydrogen powered cars instead of Teslas. Perhaps H2 is the tortoise and batteries are the hare, and H2’s day will come. But Tesla is a good example of how even good ideas can’t be rushed.

Timing is everything. Our roads are full, and RER is needed immediately. ML needs to buy what is on the shelf today.

- Paul

 

[ssiguy2]

I agree with electrification should begin immediately on Lakeshore East/West and on the Stoufille and Brampton lines but not on Barrie. Conversely I don't think Hydrail should be tested on a low ridership and low frequency route. If they want to test Hydrail it should be on a route that will offer some relief to Y&B and run very frequently. They have to know how the system will run in the real world every 5 minutes with high passenger levels. If it is potentially an alternative to catenary then it must be proven in a corridor that will be just as busy and frequent to see how it copes.

Electrified RER will not be running every couple hours picking up a few passengers along the way so neither should a potential alternative.

 

[dowlingm]

The Austrians are doing this - but not on their mainlines into Vienna and Salzburg, but a narrow gauge tourist train in the mountains where concerns about visual clutter have merit
https://twitter.com/karlgrn/status/959496954630852608

 

[yrt+viva=1system]

For those interested, here is the documents list and document requestor list.
View attachment 135367 View attachment 135368

Personally, I think hydrail is only good for a trial on a feeder line.
Bolton shuttle, Niagara-Hamilron shuttle, etc.

I'm happy to see that Stadler is interested in this project. Or perhaps they have been in secretive talks with Metrolinx before in regards to potential future orders of double deck EMUs.