Rolls-Royce To Expand Battery Production Capacity To Meet Demand For Microgrids
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Mucrogrid Knowledge.
It does appear, that they are taking the fight to their problems.
Vivarail Targets Overseas Markets
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Rail Magazine.
This is an extract from the article.
Shooter told RAIL: “We are at the moment putting together a bid for an operator – not in this country – where the routes would be up to 500 miles long, to be provided totally with battery trains using this device.
“This bid we are putting together contemplates trains that are running for several hours – 60 to 70 miles between charging stations, but possibly going twice that far in emergency if the charging station should go down.”
By this device I suspect they mean their Fast Charge device, which is described in this press release from Vivarail.
This extract describes how it works.
The concept is simple – at the terminus 4 short sections of 3rd and 4th rail are installed and connected to the electronic control unit and the battery bank. Whilst the train is in service the battery bank trickle charges itself from the national grid – the benefit of this is that there is a continuous low-level draw such as an EMU would use rather than a one-off huge demand for power.
The train pulls into the station as normal and the shoegear connects with the sections of charging rail. The driver need do nothing other than stop in the correct place as per normal and the rail is not live until the train is in place.
That’s it!
That sounds simple to me.
Where Would This Possible Order Be From?
I have ridden in a Vivarail battery train, as I wrote in Battery Class 230 Train Demonstration At Bo’ness And Kinneil Railway.
I have also ridden the diesel variant, as I wrote in A First Ride In A Revenue-Earning Class 230 Train.
I very much feel, I can list a few of the good qualities of the trains.
Big Windows
The big windows give a good view, so I wonder if the trains would work well on a railway noted for its scenery.
Quietness
I have ridden in two battery trains.
The other was Bombardier’s Class 379 BEMU, that I wrote about in Is The Battery Electric Multiple Unit (BEMU) A Big Innovation In Train Design?.
Both were extremely quiet.
No Infrastructure Required
Except for the charging stations, no infrastructure is required.
Sturdy Engineering
Although the trains were only originally built for the London Underground, they are sturdily-built trains, as they used to share tracks with full-size trains.
I suspect, they are certified to share tracks with freight trains, as they do on the Marston Vale Line.
A Range Of Interiors And Customer Facilities
Although the trains tend to use the old London Underground seat frames, they have a range of interiors, which seem to be well-designed and comfortable.
I have been on Class 230 trains, with tables, a single toilet, onboard Wi-Fi, and electrical charging points.
Zero-Carbon
The trains are probably as near to zero-carbon, as any! Especially, if all the Fast Charge stations are powered by renewable electricity.
Remote Servicing
The trains have been designed for remote servicing.
Conclusion
All of these qualities lead me to think, that an ideal line in the UK could be the Far North Line, between Inverness and Wick and Thurso.
Although the train ticks a lot of boxes, it could well be too slow, It is also only a 160 mile route and not five-hundred
But there must be quite a few long, scenic lines in countries, where a passenger service needs to be added to a freight line, that perhaps serves a remote mining town.
Sweden and Norway are surely possibilities, but Finland is ruled out because it is Russian gauge.
Could the trains end up in parts of Africa, Canada and the United States?
Who knows?
Flywheel-Lithium Battery Hybrid Energy Storage System Joining Dutch Grid Services Markets
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Energy Storage News.
This is the introductory paragraph.
A hybrid energy storage system combining lithium-ion batteries with mechanical energy storage in the form of flywheels has gone into operation in the Netherlands, from technology providers Leclanché and S4 Energy.
These are some points from the article.
- The system contains 8.8MW / 7.12MWh of lithium-ion batteries.
- Six flywheels add up to 3MW of power.
- The 5,000kg KINEXT flywheel operates at 92% efficiency.
- The flywheels do not suffer from long-term degradation.
The article finishes with a discussion about the pros and cons of flywheel storage.
In the 1960s, when I worked at Enfield Rolling Mills, I heard stories of their 97-tonne flywheel on their main rolling mill for reducing copper wirebars to coils of wire for drawing into electrical wire for use in its myriad applications.
- Copper wirebars, were bars of refined copper about a metre long and perhaps ten centimetres square, which arrived at Enfield by barge from the London docks up the River Lea.
- The main rolling mill had arrived in Enfield, as reparations after the First World War. It had the Krupp trademark of three interlocked railway tyres all over it. It was probably built just after the start of the Twentieth Century.
- The flywheel was spun by an electric motor and the rolling mill itself, where wirebars snaked through a series of rollers of diminishing size, was driven from the flywheel.
- The arrangement meant that continuous power was supplied by the motor rather than intermittent power.
It was a fascinating process to watch, as the wire snaked through and was turned at each mill by an operator called a catcher, with a large pair of tongs. That was not a job for weaklings. The section I worked for, were always dreaming of automating the catching process. But I don’t think they ever did!
The flywheel was the source of legendary stories, many of which which have probably been exaggerated over the years.
One concerned its installation, where it was realised that there was no crane big enough to lift it from where it was delivered to the mill.
So the chief engineer, an Austrian Jew called Schimmatovich, devised a plan where men were used to roll it in to place. Like with the pyramids or in a concentration camp, where Shimmy had been incarcerated, as he said at the time.
It was successfully done on a Sunday morning, and after it was successfully secured, the Managing Director, who was called something like Freddy Pluety, suggested everybody join him in the Sports and Social Club for a drink.
So Freddy led a crocodile of perhaps a hundred across the road and walked into the Club, where the steward was just shutting up. Freddy ordered the drinks, but was told No! So Freddy picked him up and sat him on the bar. Freddy then noticed there were two very large and thirsty men on either side, so he said to them, “Are you going to hit him first or am I?”
They all got their drinks.
There must be many legendary industrial stories like this, that have been forgotten.
Gresham House Energy Storage Fund Has Staying Power
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article in the Tempus column of The Times.
It is a good explanation of how energy storage funds like Gresham House work.
I believe they are very much the future.
Some of the new forms of energy storage, that I talk about on this blog tick all of the boxes and may even satisfy an extreme supporter of Extinction Rebellion.
- Extremely environmentally friendly.
- Higher energy-density than lithium-ion
- Lower cost per GWh, than lithium-ion
- Much longer life than lithium-ion.
- Safe to install in built up areas.
- GWh-scale storage in a football pitch space or smaller.
The UK’s largest battery is the 9.1 GWh Electric Mountain pumped storage system in Snowdonia and there is talk about over 100 GW of offshore wind turbines in UK waters. There will be masses of energy storage built in the UK in the next forty years to support these wind turbines.
Conclusion
Companies like Gresham House Energy Fund seem to have developed a model, that could provide the necessary energy storage and a safe reliable home for the billions of pounds in the UK, that is invested in pension funds.
Lithium-ion batteries will be reserved for mobile applications.
Work Underway On Gravitricity Storage Demo
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on renews.biz.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Winch specialists Huisman have begun on the fabrication of Gravitricity’s €1.1m energy storage demonstrator, which is due for trial in Edinburgh early next year.
The article also gives a few details of the system.
- It uses a 16 metre lattice tower.
- Two twenty-five tonne weights are raised and lowered.
- An output of 250 kW is quoted.
Unless they are using a deep hole to increase the height, Omni’s Potential Energy Calculator says that the stored energy is only 2.18 kWh.
So it will only supply 250 kW for about half a minute.
But as it’s a demo, that is probably enough to validate the concept.
Coal mines with shafts around a thousand metres deep are not unknown in the UK and a system with two twenty-five tonne weights would be able to store a very useful 136 kWh.
But that is still very small compared to Highview Power‘s liquid air battery being build in Manchester, that I wrote about in Climate Emission Killer: Construction Begins On World’s Biggest Liquid Air Battery. That battery has these characteristics.
- The size of the battery is 250 MWh.
- It can delivery up to 50 MW of power. which translates to five hours at full power, if the battery is full.
- If it was already working, it would be the ninth biggest battery of all types, except for pumped storage, in the world.
- It will be double the size of the largest chemical battery, which was built by Tesla in South Australia.
Both Gravitricity and Highview Power technologies are being backed by the UK government.
Conclusion
I don’t believe that the two battery systems will compete directly.
In terms of size in Explaining Gravitricity, I state that in the UK, 2.2 MWh of storage might be possible for Gravitricity. This is very small compared with Highview Power’s 250 MWh in Manchester.
I suspect though, that capital and running costs may well be in Gravitricity’s favour and the system will be ideal for some applications, where space is limited.
Gravitricity’s systems may also be an innovative way of capping dangerous mine shafts.
Long-Duration Energy Storage Makes Progress But Regulation Lags Technology
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on pv Magazine.
It is a detailed summary of around twenty long-term energy storage systems.
It gives a paragraph or a mention to the following.
- Pintail Power – California, US
- Highview Power – UK
- Malta – US
- Brayton Energy – US
- Echogen – US
- Azwlio – Sweden
- 1414 Degrees – Australia
- Alumina – US
- Antora Energy – US
- Primus – US
- Invinity – US/UK
- Sumitomo – Japan
- UET – US
- ESS
- ViZn – US
- Form Energy – US
- Range Energy – US
- Mitsuibishi Power Systems – Japan
- Gravity Power – US
- Ares Power – US
- Energy Vault -US (?)
- Quidnet Energy – US
The article links to many of the company web sites.
There are some others, that the author has missed including the Gravitricity, which is Scottish, Siemens Ganesa ETES, which is German and Zinc8, which is Canadian.
There are a large number of competitors, lining up to compete in a large market.
The article finishes with some notes on the role of regulators, saying this.
Storage and long-duration storage technologies are here today – but regulators and utility commissions at the federal and state level are still adjusting.
William Conlon, president of thermal storage startup, Pintail Power is quoted with an example.
Long-duration storage technology in California is locked out because of the nature of California’s resource adequacy (RA) requirements. “Four hours is what California wants for RA. If you provide eight hours you only get paid for four hours. We’re at four hours today because that’s what you get paid for.
Regulators must get it right.
Conclusion
Is UK regulation up to scratch, as we certainly have masses of renewable energy.
Innovative Battery Delivered To Portsmouth International Port
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Renewable Energy Magazine.
This is the introductory paragraph.
A 20-foot container sized battery that can charge four electric cars simultaneously has been safely delivered to Portsmouth International Port in the UK this week as part of the Port Energy Systems Optimization project.
It looks like another case of battery-to-battery transfer to fast-charge one or more battery-powered vehicles or trains.
New Energy Storage “Water Battery” Breakthrough: Look Ma, No Underground Powerhouse
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on CleenTechnoca.
Pumped hydro storage as used at Dinorwig power station or Electric Mountain in the UK is a good way to store electricity.
But it is expensive to build and one of the major costs is building a large underground powerhouse. This is Wikipedia’s description of the construction of the powerhouse at Dinorwig.
Twelve million tonnes (12,000,000 long tons; 13,000,000 short tons) of rock had to be moved from inside the mountain, creating tunnels wide enough for two lorries to pass comfortably and an enormous cavern 51 metres (167 ft) tall, 180 metres (590 ft) long, and 23 metres (75 ft) wide[10] known as “the concert hall”. The power station comprises 16 kilometres (9.9 mi) of tunnels, one million tons of concrete, 200,000 tons of cement and 4,500 tons of steel.
That is big, but on the other hand, it reportedly paid for itself in two years.
According to the article, a company called Obermeyer Hydro Inc has come up with a new design of pumped storage turbine., which eliminated the need for an underground powerhouse.
- Cost savings of 45 % are claimed.
- Reading the full article, I get the impression, that a radical redesign of the reversible turbine will be a game-changer.
- I suspect, it could be of benefit in small countries like the UK, where pumped storage is expensive and faces strong opposition in certain areas.
It is also significant, that this appears to be successful innovation in an area, where it was thought we had reached the ultimate design.
Beeching Reversal – Increased Services To Nottingham And Leicester, via Syston And Loughborough From Melton Mowbray
This is one of the Beeching Reversal projects that the Government and Network Rail are proposing to reverse some of the Beeching cuts.
It is one of a pair of submissions from the local MP; Alicia Kearns. The other is More Stopping Services At Radcliffe-on-Trent And Bottesford Stations On The Poacher Line Between Grantham And Nottingham.
When I heard of the MP’s submissions, I wrote MP Campaigns To Extend Train Services For Melton Borough and the following uses that post as a starting point.
Wikipedia says this about services at Melton Mowbray station.
- There is an hourly off-peak service in both directions between Stansted Airport and Birmingham, that calls at Cambridge, Peterborough, Oakham and Leicester.
- East Midlands Railway and their predescessor have added services to London via Corby and to Derby and East Midlands Parkway.
When you consider, that both Bottesford and Melton Mowbray are the same Council and Parliamentary constituency, it does seem that a more direct train service is needed between Bottesford and Melton Mowbray stations.
It does seem to me that some innovative thinking is needed.
If the current plans to fulfil British Rail’s ambition of an Ivanhoe Line running from Lincoln to Burton-on-Trent via Nottingham, East Midlands Parkway, Loughborough and Leicester, are carried out, that will give important towns to the West of Leicester much better rail connections.
Given that High Speed Two is coming to East Midlands Hub station at Toton and there will be a Bedford and Leeds service run by Midlands Connect using High Speed Two classic-compatible trains, that I wrote about in Classic-Compatible High Speed Two Trains At East Midlands Hub Station, I wonder if in the interim, there should be more trains between Derby and Melton.
- Intermediate stations would be Syston, Sileby, Barrow-upon-Soar, Loughborough, East Midlands Parkway Long Eaton and Spondon.
- An hourly frequency would double the service frequency at smaller stations like Sileby and Barrow-upon-Soar.
- The Southern terminal could be Melton station, but I feel Corby or Peterborough stations would be better, as this would improve services at Oakham station. We should not forget Rutland!
- As Corby will be an electrified two-platform station with a two trains per hour (tph) service to London, this could work quite well as a Southern terminus.
- Peterborough would have advantages and give a good connection to Cambridge, London and Scotland, but improvements to the current Birmingham and Stansted Airport service would have similar effects.
This route would be just as valuable after High Speed Two opens through the East Midlands Hub station, as it will give fast ongoing connections to Birmingham, Leeds, Newcastle and York.
Electrification Of The Midland Main Line
I feel strongly, that full electrification of the Midland Main Line could be a step to far.
- Electrification, through Leicester station will mean a complete closure of the station for a couple of years.
- Electrification of the route North of Derby, through the Derwent Valley Mills, which is a World Heritage Site, will be opposed by the Heritage Taliban with all their might.
But.
- Electrification of the route between Clay Cross North Junction and Sheffield via Chesterfield will take place in conjunction with High Speed Two
- Electrification to Market Harborough, which is sixteen miles South of Leicester will happen.
- East Midlands Railway’s new Class 810 trains could be fitted with a battery option giving a range of between 55 and 65 miles.
- Pantographs on these trains can go up and down with all the alacrity of a whore’s drawers.
If the easier section of electrification between Leicester and Derby stations, were to be installed, this would enable the following routes to be run using battery-equipped Class 810 trains.
- London and Derby, where battery power would be used through Leicester.
- London and Nottingham, where battery power would be used through Leicester and between East Midlands Parkway and Nottingham.
- London and Sheffield, where battery power would be used through Leicester and between Derby and Clay Cross Junction.
- Lincoln and Burton-on-Trent, where battery power would be used South of Leicester and North of East Midlands Parkway.
- Derby and Corby, where battery power would be used between Syston and Corby.
There would also be the service between Derby and Norwich, which might be able to be run by a similar train.
Conclusion
I think the ideal way to achieve the MP’s objective would be to extend a proportion of London St. Pancras and Corby services to the Midland Main Line.
But the problem with this, is that the Corby trains will be Class 360 trains, which are electric, so the thirty-six mile route between Corby and the Midland Main Line would need to be electrified.
On the other hand, a shuttle train could be used between Corby and Leicester.
They would call at Oakham, Melton Mowbray and Syston stations.
If the Midland Main Line to the North of Leicester were to be electrified, Battery electric trains could be used on the route, with charging at Leicester and Corby.
A New Design For Flow Batteries
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article in phys.org, which documents a development from the Mendeleev University in Russia.
The Russians are claiming they have developed a novel architecture.
The Anonymous Widower 