Rode a Hydro Electrict Fuel Cell bus in Canton OH. Clean Quiet like a trolley bus but no need for wires
https://www.sartaonline.com/hydrogen-fuel-cell
https://www.railengineer.uk/2016/11/04/and-now-hydrogen-power-alstoms-new-fuel-cell-powered-train/
BNSF tried this on switcher in 2008 but no word what happened to the project-
https://www.railengineer.uk/2016/11/04/and-now-hydrogen-power-alstoms-new-fuel-cell-powered-train/
All you examples have low prime mover power. The bus one fuel-cell of 150 kW, the Alstom iLINT two fuel-cells with together 400 kW and the BNSF HH20B #1205 two fuel-cells of together.
The BNSF is more a battery locomotive with a fuel-cell loader.
Fuel-cell EMUs cost about 75% more than their DMU counterparts. So there is the higher purchase price. The difference was paid for by German government in the iLINT purchase.
You need to build an H2-infrastructure and first of all produce enough H2. As long as H2 isn’t produced with solar or wind energie or other renewables it is almost as dirty as diesel.
I don’t know how operating costs (diesel fuel, H2-fuel, different fuel consumption, and system efficiencies etc.) play out.
Here is some information about the BNSF HH20B.
BNSF got a patent in 2012: U.S. Patent Number 8117969: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8117969
The locomotive was repainted in 2014. It is still in Trains magazine’s BNSF roster.
Regards, Volker
Just learned that Canton Ohio Bus gets there Hydrogen trucked in from Sarnia ON by the truckload. So the carbon footprint by the Diesal Truck bringing in the Hydro from 250 miles away probaly exceeds what they are saving.
GO Transit in Toronto is seriously looking into Hydrogen power. They have already commissioned Alstom/Siemens to prepare a bilevel fuel cell electric multiple unit concept design. They are also considering commissioning a fuel cell locomotive prototype. However, their documents state that a single Hydrogen locomotive would only be able to pull six cars (compared to the twelve pulled by MPI Diesels).
a recent interview with BNSF CEO Matt Rose indicated that BNSF was no longer interested in fuel cell technology and was now more interested in battery power
I wish Volker had put much more emphasis on this point, which is one of the most significant in the iLINT planning.
Germany eschewed development or operation of French-style nuclear baseline power in favor of renewable technologies, notably wind. These now produce substantial excess (but somewhat variable) power during parts of an average 24-hour day, which can easily be used for ‘clean footprint’ hydrogen generation.
The iLINT storage, distribution, and railcar fueling arrangements are all outsourced to a company specializing in this (Linde, I think). This was reminiscent of Tom Blasingame’s arranging for all fueling and ash removal for modern steam-turbine electric locomotives to be outsourced at fixed cost by experienced vendors or ventures. Arguments have been made that the price to provide this is ‘higher’ in Germany because government agencies are willing to support a higher factor price for hydrogen (in part because of its carbon-reduction action, in part for pollution reduction) but I think the importance of guaranteed outsourced fueling of esoteric fuels can’t be overemphasized even in fully for-profit applications.
Won’t they they have to bring back tenders? Energy density means it will take a significant volume to have any range as railroads like to define it.
For freight, yes, probably. But that’s true for CNG and LNG alternatives as well. The battery-hybrid design that works so well for fuel-cell DMU derivatives will not scale to American freight-consist size and required hourly power ratings well – it’s basically replacing the small pony genset in something like a Green Goat with a more efficient electron pump, and we all know how successful small engines in road power have been. There will have to be much more effective political ‘setasides’ and subsidies for something like carbon cap and trade before locomotives with very large high-power-density battery strings and high-amperage fuel cell stacks become cost-effective in North America. And then we can take up the renewable-energy-supplied hydrogen infrastructure development needed to support them…
My definition of “here” would be in mass transit service daily in a major city for a period of over 3 years. Currently the United States only has 300 electric buses operating in the entire country. They have not been proven viable in regular service.
Maybe only 300 battery-powered buses, there are certainly a lot more trolley buses in daily operation.
We’ve had Hydrogen Fuel Cell buses operating here in Santa Clara County under the VTA for a minimum of 3 years now at least. They’re easy to spot and run every single day, but there are also people here that own hydrogen powered personal vehicles and I know of at least one service station that has a hydrogen pump(just like a regular gas pump). Electric buses and Hydrogen Fuel Cell buses are two entirely different concepts, but maybe you didn’t realize that and just lumped them all together in the same category.
Heh, I think you have a misconception in more than one area…
First, it is an Electric Bus because all the Fuel Cell does is generate power for the electric motors that actually move the bus. Electricity drives the bus not the Hydrogen, hydogen just provides the fuel to generate the electricity. Unlike a fossil fuel bus there is no mechanical connection to the drive train so it can’t be claimed the fuel source drives the bus. This is why Diesel locomotives were originally referred to as Diesel Electrics…same concept. Remove the Hydrogen Fuel Source and you have an Electric Bus.
Second this is a demonstration project and it is not a large major city as I specified. It is by no means commercial use of the buses and I have my doubts they have been released for sale beyond the demonstration project. So no, it does not qualify yet. Has to be in commerical use at least three years in my book to prove itself. Government funded experiments do not count.
I can’t see Locomotive Builders releasing a new model for commercial sale prior to the Feds approving it and/or a certification process that the method is reliable in various environments or uses.
Yes, I meant where the vehicle carrys the fuel source with it.
Here is a link to a powerpoint that I made for a summer camp about clean transportation methods.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1vY4MREv7zdU4l9NA4PDN6zNuJzISbUeU
It’s a little unprofessional, but if any of you are really interested, I can post my research charts, too.
The first two Alstom Coradia iLint are in revenue service in the German state of Lower-Saxony since September 17, 2018.
You made an interesting presentation!
I don’t know what the price of $6.4 million for a Hydrogen Fuel Cell unit is based on. If it is the Alstom Coradia iLint I think it is too low. The 14 units for Lower-Saxony cost about 90 million Euro, 6.4 Euro per unit or $7.5 million.
The costs for an electric locomotive with $6.0 million seems too high to me.
The Siemens ACS-64 multi-system locomotive with only 70+ locomotives cost about $6.7 million a piece, a Siemens Vectron (the base for the ACS-64) as multi-system about 4 million Euro ($4.7 million). If the number of locomotives gets high enough the price will be around $5 million, especially if no multi-system capability is needed.
Regards, Volker
Hydrogen power is clean in itself, but note that most commercially available hydrogen is produced from coal and other fossil fuels. This is a catalytic process that involves reacting natural gas or other light hydrocarbons with steam to produce a mixture of hydrogen and carbon dioxide. The mixture is then separated to produce high-purity hydrogen…Significant amounts of CO2 are produced.
Chicago has a number of “all electric” buses. But the charging uses grid energy, which in Illinois is about 45% coal and 45% nuclear.
BTW, I thought I would throw something into this conversation that nobody has mentioned before in this thread. It has been shown in both TxDOT and WisDOT rail studies that there is not a 100% passenger tranferrance between rail and bus. If you ask transit riders if they prefer a rubber tired vehicle over a rail vehicle the rail vehicle always wins the personal choice. I forget what the actual passenger transferrence rate is between rail and bus but one of you I am sure can find it. Relying on memory I think it was less than 75% somewhere.
I saw them on the news while I was in Germany recently. They stated they are more expensive than conventional power, but the carbon footprint is neglible sinse the use solar or wind for making the H2 and the plant is near.
The Coradia iLint costs about 75% more than its diesel-electric counterpart.
Use of renewable, CO2 free energies in the Hydrogen production is essential for carbon-less running. Otherwise it would be almost as dirty as diesel-electric. You would only move the emissions to a power plant.
A video from the first day of service: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvnEvJ3M5sE&vl=de
Regards, Volker