Hydrogen powered train

[sirenwerks]

I have a friend out on one of the islands in Puget Sound who runs his home on hydrogen. He has a shed-based hydrogen generator that is powered by a small solar array. The scant solar power he can cook up in that rainy environment generates enough hydrogen to power the house year round, day and night at the same capacity any of us draw from the grid. The most expensive part of the project was the install of the tanks, which had to be buried well underground to mitigate the explosion potential (building inspectors had never had to deal with a home hydrogen installation, so they were interpreting the code on the safe side). The only carbon footprint is manufacture of the generator, solar array, and tanks and transport of these items, the cost and environmental impact lifespan of which easily beats fossil fuel grid draw. Scaled down, the tech has great promise though it would be challenging to place in urban settings unless the storage tanks are roof-mounted on buildings and bullet proof.

[Spades]

I have a friend out on one of the islands in Puget Sound who runs his home on hydrogen. He has a shed-based hydrogen generator that is powered by a small solar array. The scant solar power he can cook up in that rainy environment generates enough hydrogen to power the house year round, day and night at the same capacity any of us draw from the grid. The most expensive part of the project was the install of the tanks, which had to be buried well underground to mitigate the explosion potential (building inspectors had never had to deal with a home hydrogen installation, so they were interpreting the code on the safe side). The only carbon footprint is manufacture of the generator, solar array, and tanks and transport of these items, the cost and environmental impact lifespan of which easily beats fossil fuel grid draw. Scaled down, the tech has great promise though it would be challenging to place in urban settings unless the storage tanks are roof-mounted on buildings and bullet proof.

What is stock of the hydrogen ? Tap water?

[sirenwerks]

I know it's water, pretty sure it's tap. Of course, the islands surrounded by water so...

[Mark5]

Better make sure there's no chlorine in that water!

[sirenwerks]

Better make sure there's no chlorine in that water!

I'll have to ask, but all likelihood says it's well water. It is on a friggin' island.

[peteski]

I'll have to ask, but all likelihood says it's well water. It is on a friggin' island.

Sounds then like ocean water would be even more plentiful than well water. 

[Maletrain]

There has been a technological breakthrough on producing hydrogen from water using solar power.  It basically works with a catalyst that directly uses light energy to separate hydrogen from oxygen in water vapor.  So, sunlight and humid air are all that it needs to work.  Of course, there is also some need for photovoltaic solar panels to provide the electricity to compress the hydrogen (and maybe the oxygen, if that is to be saved, too).  NASA is interested in this because it would allow for easy production of rocket fuel on far away places like Mars, or maybe even the moon, if enough water can be found in those places.  Here on earth, it MIGHT be a way for homes to become electrically self-sufficient, although more explosive.

Hydrogen flammability is a real issue.  It leaks very easily, and it burns with an invisible (to the human eye) flame, so it is easy for somebody to get injured by a hydrogen fire that they do not see and walk into until they feel it.  (A similar hazard exists for race cares that use methanlol for fuel).

The idea of using such a system on a railroad locomotive seems a bit far fetched.  It would take a lot of hydrogen to haul a modern train the distances that modern trains currently travel.  Putting that hydrogen in tank cars (think like auxilliary tenders) makes them susceptible to the crashes that modern freight trains tend to have.  And, then, there is "terrorism" to consider: how vulnerable would these trains be to attack, compared to diesel-fueled trains?

[learmoia]

If it creates electricity.. they'll try to put it on rails...


~Ian

[nkalanaga]

Maletrain:  Hydrogen has also been suggested as a way of storing energy from wind turbines. 

I've heard of that atomic locomotive.  It never got off the drawing board because railroads didn't want anything to do with it.  They prefer locomotives that, even if they explode, don't render the entire area uninhabitable!  Besides, it couldn't do anything that a multi-unit diesel couldn't, and it's unlikely that all units of the diesel would fail at once.  If one did fail, the rest could still get the train into the terminal.

[John]

http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energy-news/?page_id=927

[thomasjmdavis]

The idea of using such a system on a railroad locomotive seems a bit far fetched.  It would take a lot of hydrogen to haul a modern train the distances that modern trains currently travel.  Putting that hydrogen in tank cars (think like auxiliary tenders) makes them susceptible to the crashes that modern freight trains tend to have.  And, then, there is "terrorism" to consider: how vulnerable would these trains be to attack, compared to diesel-fueled trains?

Not that far fetched really.  Huge locomotive, multiple fuel tenders, experimental prime mover... Given any chance at all, inside of 10 years this thing will be traveling through Utah painted yellow with a gray roof and red lettering.  And available shortly thereafter in N scale.

[jagged ben]

Again, I'm curious why battery tenders don't make more sense.  I believe the energy density of batteries is better.  It's better by volume and I think when you include the weight of a railcar and storage tanks it will be similar for weight as well.

[nkalanaga]

The big advantage of hydrogen over batteries is recharge/refuel time.  On the other hand, a battery system is MUCH less complicated, because you don't need an engine/generator or fuel cell.

In terms of energy density, most liquid hydrocarbons still beat either one, and they don't have to be made from fossil fuels.

For yard service the batteries would be a good idea.  There, you're always close to the charger, and it could be handled like a lot of industrial machinery.  When the battery gets low, replace it!  So the battery weighs 20 tons, big deal, that's what cranes are for, and the weight is needed for traction anyway.

[jagged ben]

The other thing about batteries is they could be charged from dynamic braking.

[nkalanaga]

True, although whether that would help much on a switcher I don't know.  It would work on a mainline loco.

Would a battery-powered train puller be a "locomotive", as in steam or diesel, or a "motor", as many roads called their electrics?  It's self-powered, like a locomotive, but it doesn't have an actual power source, and can't produce its own energy, similar to a traditional electric.

Then there was the tri-power locomotive, from the 1930s(?), that had an internal combustion engine/generator, batteries, and third rail shoes. 

And my favorite, the Swiss electric-powered steam loco.  That was a weird one, but it worked very well as a switcher.