NS is experimenting with a battery powered electric locomotive…this may be a much better alternative to conventional electric with catenary. The article I read didn’t go into the range of the locomotive or cost…but did state that the unit was performing well and to expectations.
Here’s an idea: Why not retrofit a GP40 and hook it up with a"tender" containing a large battery. When the battery runs low the tender is simply replaced with another one at designated points along the route.
For something successful with increased range, they ought to go talk to Tesla Motors’ design engineers. Tesla even has a version of regenerative braking, which puts current back into the batteries.
I’m glad to see that the test bed is working so well for NS, but…
If you put this kind of locomotive in long-haul service all across North America and build service tracks, and “charging stations” along the line. It will run up a huge bill. Correct me if I’m wrong, but these kind of locomotives would be better for low speed heavy haul short distance switching activities. It could replace some of the older power like the GP40’s, GP38-2’s, SD40-2’s etc. which are in switching service now.
Justin
You may be right…it would be interesting to see a cost comparison between battery power and supporting recharging infrastructure and conventional electrification using catenary.
I saw something very similar, though on a much smaller scale and much lighter service, in Japan in 1960. The surface hauling (mostly waste rock) of a large coal mine was handled by the same battery motors that were probably used for underground work. Any time they stopped for more than a few seconds the motorman would uncoil a heavy cable from the loco and plug it into a lineside box. Since they only had to move (at about 10 kph) for 20 minutes or so every hour, there was plenty of charging time available.
OTOH, imagine a battery-powered train climbing the Blue Ridge - three units, fifty battery tenders and fifty carloads of coal (just about enough to fuel the plant to recharge the train for the return trip.)
Present-day battery technology is barely sufficient to cut the fuel consumption of a rubber-wheeler. It lacks a LOT of being a practical choice for line-haul railroad power.
Chuck
Didn’t they try this already with the “Green Goat” presumably with more suitable batteries but they had a problem with fires. Never heard if they solved the problem, never sold another one.
Brookeville Equipment - which helped build NS 999 - specializes in similar underground mining equipment, so your comparison is right on point.
Brookeville apparently provided the regenerative braking equipment and controls.
There are already something like 3 other threads on theis Forum that discuss 999 and its strengths and weaknesses in more detail. If I have some time over the weekend I’ll try to cross-reference them, but if not or in the meantime you can search for them yourself.
I would think that just going plain electric would cost less in the long run even though the initial startup costs are overwhelming. For a recharging station, you would need a full staff working round the clock for whenever a train comes in.
Also, the fail ratio would also be a scary thing to look at. What if you are running say three battery powered units with a long 35,000 ton train going up a 2% grade at 10mph. If the other 2 units, or just one for that fact go down. It would drain the battery power pretty quickly on the one remaining unit. With diesel, or electric locomotives that fail ratio goes down a bit. I think for an economical rechargeable battery powered locomotive to work, we need to design a better battery first.
Justin
Better yet, put locomotive trucks under that tender and wire them up so they generate electricity for the locomotive when the train is being pulled.
Now there’s an idea!
Just like when the engineer puts the locomotives into dynamic breaking it would term the traction motors into generators. Instead of taking that stored electricity and sending it through a rectifier and venting it off as heat, you charge the batteries with it. That sounds like a good plan.
The only downside of that I could think of is when your pulling up a grade it would be like having the dynamic breaks on.
Justin
Based on current battery technology a battery dominant plug in hybrid locomotive for long distance heavy haul service is just not feasible right now. GE’s hybrid Evolution series locomotive is an engine dominant design. Maybe as things like ultracapacitators and flywheel energy storage systems develop that idea would be viable…
Justin you dont understand the railroad or maybe NS. they dont need a manned charging station they have the engineer do it all. It be no differant than what they do now heck we start are own engines service them the only thing i dont do is fuel them and i could do that to.
Justin, there were a few “battery slugs” built for yard service by Railpower industries that worked the way described above. Like any other slug unit the electrical system is controlled from the cab of the “mother”(i.e powered) locomotive and therefore the traction motors under the slug can be cut out or put into dynamic braking mode as needed (in other words the engineer does not have to leave the dynamic brakes on like you were asking about)…
Justin,
Let’s try some numbers here…
Start off with a C-C locomotive averaging 125,000 lbf tractive effort, this would consume 1,000 hp-hrs every three miles. With AC traction motor technology, we’re looking at around 800 KWHr to produce 1,000 hp-hrs. The batteries being developed by GE for hybrid locomotive use are good for about 100 WHr per kg (IIRC), which is 90 KWHr per ton. 9 tons of batteries would be required to store that 800 KWHr, so this battery locomotive would be good for 30 miles of hauling, which at a 2.2% grade would get you almost 3500 feet change in elevation.
Lithium-ion and sodium sulfur batteries are good for 200 WHrs/kg, which should be good for 7,000 foot change in elevation (Donner Summit).
Battery powered helpers are technically feasible but not yet economically feasible. The cool thing is that the helpers could be used to help brake trains going downhill and recover a significant amount of energy in the process.
Just because you’re on battery doesn’t mean you need to be exclusively battery.
You know the sections of track. The ones where, every train that has ever traversed that track, has put the throttle to the wall. Usually we’re talking about a mountain grade. Well, these sections are not a surprise. And that’s where you hang catenary.
The Western Railway Museum has a pit locomotive, Kennecott Copper 700, which is dual-mode. It runs on trolley wire, but also contains about 10 tons of batteries. It can work much of a workday on battery. Boone & Scenic Valley has two others of that model, KC #702 and 703.