Rolls-Royce signs MoU With Exelon For Compact Nuclear Power Stations
The title of this post, is the same as that of this press release on the Rolls-Royce web site.
These are the first two paragraphs.
Rolls-Royce and Exelon Generation have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to pursue the potential for Exelon Generation to operate compact nuclear power stations both in the UK and internationally. Exelon Generation will be using their operational experience to assist Rolls Royce in the development and deployment of the UKSMR.
Rolls-Royce is leading a consortium that is designing a low-cost factory built nuclear power station, known as a small modular reactor (SMR). Its standardised, factory-made components and advanced manufacturing processes push costs down, while the rapid assembly of the modules and components inside a weatherproof canopy on the power station site itself avoid costly schedule disruptions.
This is the first paragraph of the Wikipedia entry of Exelon.
Exelon Corporation is an American Fortune 100 energy company headquartered in Chicago, Illinois and incorporated in Pennsylvania. It generates revenues of approximately $33.5 billion and employs approximately 33,400 people. Exelon is the largest electric parent company in the United States by revenue, the largest regulated electric utility in the United States with approximately 10 million customers, and also the largest operator of nuclear power plants in the United States and the largest non-governmental operator of nuclear power plants in the world.
These two paragraphs from the press release flesh out more details.
The consortium is working with its partners and UK Government to secure a commitment for a fleet of factory built nuclear power stations, each providing 440MW of electricity, to be operational within a decade, helping the UK meet its net zero obligations. A fleet deployment in the UK will lead to the creation of new factories that will make the components and modules which will help the economy recover from the Covid-19 pandemic and pave the way for significant export opportunities as well.
The consortium members feature the best of nuclear engineering, construction and infrastructure expertise in Assystem, Atkins, BAM Nuttall, Jacobs, Laing O’Rourke, National Nuclear Laboratory, Nuclear Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre, Rolls-Royce and TWI. Exelon will add valuable operational experience to the team.
This is not what you call a small deal.
This is the last section of the press release.
By 2050 a full UK programme of a fleet of factory built nuclear power stations in the UK could create:
- Up to 40,000 jobs
- £52BN of value to the UK economy
- £250BN of exports
The current phase of the programme has been jointly funded by all consortium members and UK Research and Innovation.
But that is not all, as there is also a second press release, which is entitled Rolls-Royce Signs MoU With CEZ For Compact Nuclear Power Stations.
These are the first two paragraphs.
Rolls-Royce and CEZ have signed a Memorandum of Understanding to explore the potential for compact nuclear power stations, known as small modular reactors (SMR), to be built in the Czech Republic.
Rolls-Royce is leading the UK SMR Consortium that is designing this type of low-cost nuclear power station. Its standardised, factory-made components and advanced manufacturing processes push down costs; and the rapid assembly of the modules inside a weatherproof canopy at the power station site itself speeds up schedules.
These are my thoughts.
What Is A Small Modular Reactor or SMR?
This is the first paragraph of the Wikipedia entry for Small Nuclear Reactor.
Small modular reactors (SMRs) are a type of nuclear fission reactor which are smaller than conventional reactors. This allows them to be manufactured at a plant and brought to a site to be assembled. Modular reactors allow for less on-site construction, increased containment efficiency, and enhanced safety due to passive nuclear safety features. SMRs have been proposed as a way to bypass financial and safety barriers that have plagued conventional nuclear reactors.
This section on Wikipedia gives more details of the Rolls-Royce SMR.
Rolls-Royce is preparing a close-coupled three-loop PWR design, sometimes called the UK SMR.] The power output is planned to be 440 MWe, which is above the usual range considered to be a SMR. The design targets a 500 day construction time, on a 10 acres (4 ha) site. The target cost is £1.8 billion for the fifth unit built.
The consortium developing the design is seeking UK government finance to support further development. In 2017 the UK government provided funding of up to £56 million over three years to support SMR research and development. In 2019 the government committed a further £18 million to the development from its Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund.
The construction time, site size and cost make for one of the big advantages of SMRs.
Say you need to create a 3260 MW nuclear power station like Hinckley Point C.
- This would need a fleet of eight 440 MW SMRs.
- These would cost £14.4 billion
- Wikipedia lists Hinkley Point C as costing between £21.5 billion and £ 22.5 billion.
- I suspect there will be an adjustment for the connection to the National Grid, which is probably included in the Hinckley Point C figures.
- Eight SMRs will occupy 80 acres.
- Hinckley Point C will occupy 430 acres.
- Hinckley Point C was planned to be built in seven years.
- Eight SMRs built one after the other would take 11 years. But, they would probably be planned to be built in an optimal way, where reactors came on-line, when their power was needed.
The biggest advantage though, is that as each of the eight SMRs is commissioned, they can start supplying power to the grid and earning money. This means that financing is much easier and the first reactor helps to pay for its siblings.
Could An SMR Replace A Fossil Fuel Power Station?
Suppose you have a coal-fired power station of perhaps 800 MW.
The power station will have a connection to the grid, which will be able to handle 800 MW.
If the power station is closed, there is no reason, why it can’t be replaced by an appropriately-sized fleet of SMRs, provided the site is suitable.
Who Are TWI?
I would assume that TWI is The Welding Institute, who are described like this in their Wikipedia entry.
The Welding Institute (TWI) is a research and technology organisation, with a specialty in welding. With headquarters six miles south of Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, England, since 1946, and with facilities across the UK and around the world. TWI works across all industry sectors and in all aspects of manufacturing, fabrication and whole-life integrity management technologies.
It strikes me, this organisation could be a very important part of the consortium.
The Met Line’s Croxley Rail Link May Be Resurrected
tThe title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Ian Visits.
I wrote Is The Croxley Rail Link To Be Given Lower Priority? in December 2016, where I said this.
I think that it is time to take a short time of reflection to look at this project and see, if other developments in the future, can improve rail links to Watford sufficiently.
After reviewing projects that will happen in the area, I asked set out two sections with my ideas for improvement, which I will now repeat.
Could A Lower-Cost Link Be Built?
I ask this question, specifically because of the report that TfL had said no, because the project is over-budget.
Ideally, the link would be built as a double track line from Watford High Street station, to where it joins the double-track branch to the current Watford station.
I have flown my helicopter over the route and there would appear to be a fair bit of space for a double -track line.
But there might be a couple of problems.
This picture, which I took going South, shows the bridge, where the Croxley Rail Link will join the Watford DC Line.
It looks fairly sound, but is it large enough for two tracks? I could see the next bridge and that was a modern structure with a lot more space.
Note too, the evidence of clearing up decades of tree growth.
But look at this Google Map of where the Croxley Rail Link will connect to the branch to Watford station.
Note the branch to Watford station at the top left of the map and the remains of the old railway in the bottom-right, which can also be seen in the map of Cassiobridge station.
It could be difficult to thread a double-track viaduct through the area.
This visualisation from the Watford Observer shows current thinking.
So would money be saved and perhaps a better design be possible?
- Could the viaduct be built with only a single-track between its junction with the branch to Watford station and the proposed Cassiobridge station? The route could revert to double track just to the East of Cassiobridge station.
- A single-track design of Cassiobridge station could also save money, but it would probably rule out too many future options.
As most of the route will be double-track, I doubt that a few hundred metres of single-track would have much impact on the operation of the link. It’s not as if, the Croxley Rail Link will be handling 24 tph.
I suspect that engineers and architects are working hard both to cut costs and make the link better.
A Watford Junction To Amersham Service
I think that if there is a good service between Watford Junction and Amersham, this might offer an alternative solution.
It would connect to London trains as follows.
- Watford Junction – Bakerloo, London Midland, Southern, Watford DC and possible West Coast Main Line services.
- Watford High Street – Cross-platform connection to Watford DC services.
- Croxley – Same platform connection to Metropolitan services to the existing Watford station.
- Rickmansworth – Chiltern for both London and all stations to Milton Keynes.
I believe that a train like London Overground’s new Class 710 train, which will be running on the Watford DC Line might be able to run the service without any new electrification, if it were to use onboard energy storage between say Watford High Street and Croxley stations.
Conclusion
I believe that Watford will get a better train service, whether the Croxley Rail Link is built or not.
Politics will decide the priority of the Croxley Rail Link, with the left-leaning South Londoner Sadiq Khan on one side and right-leaning Bucks-raised Chris Grayling on the other. In some ways, Watford is a piggy-in-the-middle.
My feeling is that on a Londonwide basis, that the Bakerloo Line Extension to Watford, solves or enables the solution of a lot of wider problems and the Croxley Rail Link is much more a local solution.
I think it could turn out to be.
- A mainly double-track route from Watford Junction to Amersham, but with portions of single track.
- No new electrification.
- Stations at Watford High Street, Watford Vicarage Road, Cassiobridge, Croxley and then all stations to Amersham.
- Four Class 710 trains per hour (tph), running on existing electrification and batteries between Watford Junction and Amersham.
- A redeveloped Watford station keeps its four tph to London.
It might even be simpler.
Conclusion – 10th November 2020
This is a new conclusion.
I feel something is possible, but it probably needs some of difficult negotiation, with some of the politicians excluded.
Tram-Train Operation To Continue In Sheffield As New Systems Proposed
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Rail Magazine.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Tram-trains will continue running in South Yorkshire beyond the end of the two-year trial period, with the Government believing it could act as an inspiration for similar schemes elsewhere.
The article also suggests that more than ten transport authorities want their own tram-train systems in cities including Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow.
Hydroflex Takes To The Main Line
The title of this post is the same as that of an article in the November 2020 Edition of Modern Railways.
This is the opening paragraph.
Hydroflex, the UK;s first full-size hydrogen train, made its debut on the main line on 21 September, travelling from Long Marston to Evesham and back.
This looks like a good start.
I am not surprised that the conversion was designed and built by Birmingham University.
Look at this picture of myself in front of a detector in the Large Haldron Collidor at CERN in Geneva.
Much of the detector was built in the workshops at Liverpool University.
The quality of engineering in most universities is very high, which is surely a good omen for the future.
Work in Birmingham on Hydroflex seems to be proceeding apace, with the following objectives.
- More automation.
- Moving the hydrogen drive train components to rafts under the driving cars.
- Improving operating speed from the current 50 mph.
There is also this significant paragraph that quotes Helen Simpson of Porterbrook.
‘At Porterbrook we want to present a fleet of hydrogen trains as a commercial offering to operators’ Ms. Simpson adds, noting that moving equipment out of passenger saloons is an important element of this. Porterbrook will apply learning from its Class 769 electric/diesel bi-mode units, which have placed diesel engines beneath the driving vehicles. Ms. Simpson does not rule out retro-fitment on other classes of train, but notes a lot of work has been undertaken on converting 319s’.
The big difference between the Hydroflex and the Alstom Coradia iLint, is that the Hydroflex retains the capability to use overhead electrification, so the hydrogen power can be used as a range extender.
Good Omens For Mr. Biden
This extract is from today’s diary in The Times.
The election of Joe Biden, despite the twitterhoea tantrums of the toddler in the Oval Office, continues a correlation noted four years ago by the writer Brydon Coverdale between American presidents and the sequence of Mr Men books. Donald Trump is the 45th president and the 45th Mr Man is Mr Rude, an easy fit. No 44 was Mr Cool (Barack Obama) and No 43 Mr Cheerful (George W Bush). Going back further, the all-action Teddy Roosevelt has the same number as Mr Strong and Ronald Reagan shares his with Mr Brave. Grover Cleveland, the only president to return to office after being voted out, has Mr Bounce. Now at No 46 comes Mr Good — and the correlation may continue. Coverdale writes: “I wonder if the 47th being Mr Nobody means the next president won’t be a Mr.”
I like the correlation and also the new word; twitterhoea.
It will be interesting to return to this post for the US Presidential Election in 2024.
The Bell Tolls For Covid-19
I have just watched Sir John Bell; the Regius Professor of Medicine at the University of Oxford talking about the Pfizer vaccine and his emotional response to it, where he shouted “Yes, yes yes!” and threw his arms in the air on BBC Radio 4. Sir John and another Oxford academic; Melinda Mills are talking about multiple vaccines.
They certainly felt that we’re on our way back to normality.
The End Of The Beginning
At 16:08 on the 9th of November 2020, I sent this text message to the BBC.
Churchill would have dubbed Pfizer’s news the End of the Beginning in the War against the Covids!
Then at 17:00 Boris used the same phrase in his Press Conference.
Wikipedia says this about Churchill’s use of the phrase.
A quotation from a 1942 speech by Winston Churchill concerning the Second Battle of El Alamein.
The Second Battle of El Alamein was fought between the 23rd of October and the 11th of November 1942. So exactly, seventy-eight years ago, the battle was coming to a close.
As a biographer of Churchill, did Boris spot the historical link?
Let’s hope Boris, Macron, Biden, Merkel, Trudeau et al, get the chance to paraphrase another of Churchill’s quotes about the very different battle.
It may almost be said, “Before Alamein we never had a victory. After Alamein we never had a defeat”
Let’s hope Pfizer’s vaccine is our generation’s Alamein and marks the turning point in the War against the Covids.
Certainly, the news has been well-received by experts, including Jeremy Farrar of the Welcome Trust, who was being interviewed by the BBC, when the news broke.
I am 73 and my parents told me how Alamein and other news like it, stiffened the sinews and summoned up the blood in the dark days of World War II!
A Trip To Grantham Station – 4th November 2020
I hadn’t intended to go to Grantham station, but that’s what I did on the last day before lockdown.
Over the last couple of weeks, I’ve been talking to a guy in Lincolnshire, who read Energy In North-East Lincolnshire, on this blog.
Last week, we both realised that we’d worked together in the 1970s, when he worked at a bank in the City, and I did some data analysis for the section, where he worked.
He is unwell with cancer at the moment and suggested I come down and see him in Skegness, where he now lives with his wife.
So I arrived at Grantham and found that the connecting train was running nearly an hour late and even then it was terminating at Boston.
After a quick exchange of texts, I told him the bad news and he gave me the good news, that his condition had improved and would be able to see me after Christmas and/or lockdown.
Luckily, I was able to change my ticket and took the next train back to London, after taking these pictures of the station.
I just had time to have a last drink of Aspall cyder before lockdown, in the station bar.
These are some thoughts.
Platform Layout At Grantham
The Wikipedia entry for Grantham station says this about the platforms.
It is composed of four platforms; platforms 1 and 2 are on the East Coast Main Line and are responsible for express services between London and Scotland. Platform 1 serves exclusively London King’s Cross via Peterborough and Stevenage; Platform 2 serves cities of northern England and Edinburgh. Platform 2, 3 and 4 are formed from a large island platform structure. Platform 3 is a bay platform at the northern end of the station that is used to allow local trains to reverse, while Platform 4 is a two-way platform that is used by East Midlands Railway. Only Platform 1 has amenities, including toilets, refreshments and a buffet.
This Google Map shows the station.
Note.
- Platforms are numbered 1 to 4 from East to West.
- Platforms 1 and 2 are long enough to take two five-car Class 800 trains working as a pair.
- Platform 4 may be long enough for these pairs of trains or could be made so.
- All trains to and from Nottingham call in Platform 4.
- Trains from Nottingham to Peterborough call in Platform 4 before crossing over to the down lines.
- There would appear to be no easy way for a Southbound train on the East Coast Main Line to access Platform 4.
- Platform 3 didn’t get much use on the day I visited.
There is also an avoiding line to allow freight and other passing trains to avoid going through the platforms.
Services Through Grantham Station
Services stopping at Grantham are as follows.
- LNER – One tp2h – London Kings Cross and Harrogate via Stevenage, Grantham, Doncaster, Wakefield Westgate, Leeds
- LNER – One tp2h – London Kings Cross and Bradford Forster Square via Stevenage, Grantham, Doncaster, Wakefield Westgate, Leeds
- LNER – One tp2h – London Kings Cross and Lincoln via Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham and Newark North Gate
- LNER – One tp2h – London Kings Cross and York via Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark North Gate, Retford and Doncaster.
- Hull Trains – Five tpd – London Kings Cross and Hull via Stevenage, Grantham, Retford, Doncaster, Selby, Howden and Brough
- Hull Trains – Two tpd – London Kings Cross and Beverley via Stevenage, Grantham, Retford, Doncaster, Selby, Howden, Brough, Hull and Cottingham.
- East Midlands Railway – One tph – Liverpool Lime Street and Horwich via Peterborough and Nottingham
- East Midlands Railway – One tph – Nottingham and Skegness
Note.
- tph is trains per hour
- tp2h is trains per two hours.
- tpd is trains per day.
Adding the services together, there is a frequent service between Stevenage, Peterborough, Grantham and Newark North Gate.
Train Timings Between London Kings Cross and Grantham
The fastest trains take 67 minutes between London Kings Cross and Grantham.
- The distance is 105.5 miles
- This would be an average speed of 94.5 mph.
- The East Coast Main Line is being upgraded with in-cab digital ERTMS signalling, which will allow 140 mph running.
- The works at Kings Cross station will have increased the station’s capacity.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a time between London Kings Cross and Grantham, of under an hour, time-tabled in the near future.
Could There Be A London Kings Cross and Nottingham Service Via Grantham?
On this page on UK Rail Forums, this was posted in 2010.
According to today’s East Midlands news on BBC1, Network Rail is considering inviting tenders to run a faster service from Nottingham to London King’s Cross via Grantham, from 2014. The present service of around 1hr 45m is considered too slow by passengers.
How would this new service be reconciled with the much-publicised capacity constraints at Welwyn and at King’s Cross itself? Will the proposed possible service be diesel-powered under the wires from Grantham, or will the Grantham-Nottingham stretch be electrified? Interesting times.
Technology has changed since 2010 and the East Coast Main Line has improved.
- King;s Cross station is being sorted.
- Digital ERMTS signalling is coming to the East Coast Main Line
- Hatachi’s new Class 800 trains have arrived and could go between Grantham and Nottingham on diesel power.
- Grantham and Nottingham takes 35 minutes on a service with three stops, that’s timed for a Class 153 train.
- Grantham and Nottingham is just over twenty miles.
As I said earlier, that I believe Grantham and London could be inside an hour, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a Nottingham and London Kings Cross service in under an-hour-and-a-half.
But it could be better than that?
Hitachi’s Regional Battery Train
This is the train that could unlock the potential of a London Kings Cross and Nottingham service.
This Hitachi infographic gives details of the train.
Note that the train has a range of 90 kilometres or 56 miles, at speeds of up to 100 mph.
The trains would be ideal for a London Kings Cross and Nottingham service.
- They would charge the batteries, whilst using the electrification on the East Coast Main Line.
- The battery range is such, that it would not need any charging between leaving Grantham and returning there from Nottingham.
- They could travel at speeds of up to 140 mph on the East Coast Main Line, once the digital ERTMS signalling is installed.
- Stops could be at Stevenage, Peterborough and Grantham.
LNER’s five-car Class 800 trains, which are branded Azumas can be turned into Regional Battery Trains, by replacing the three diesel engines with battery packs.
I would suspect that times of around eighty minutes, between London Kings Cross and Nottingham, could be in order.
A Park-And-Ride For Nottingham And London
Nottingham has several Park-and-Ride sites, that are served by the trams. of the Nottingham Express Transit, which already calls at Nottingham station.
Would another site on the rail line between Grantham and Nottingham be useful?
This map shows. where the rail line crosses the A46, near its junction with the A52.
Note the Grantham and Nottingham line running across the top of the map and the big junction between the A52 and the A46.
It looks to be a good place for a Park-and-Ride station, if it was decided one needed to be built.
There might also be sites further in towards Nottingham, close to the racecourse or the Holme Pierpoint National Watersports Centre.
A Combined Nottinghamshire And Lincolnshire Service
I originally called this section a Combined Nottingham And Lincoln Service, but I don’t see why it can’t serve most of both counties.
Consider.
- Birmingham, Brighton, Cambridge, Oxford and Southend get two services from the capital by different routes.
- Hitachi’s Class 800 trains can Split/Join in around two minutes.
- Running five-car Class 800 trains all the way between London Kings Cross and Lincoln is not a good use of a valuable train path on the East Coast Main Line.
- Lincoln is just 16.5 miles and 24 minutes from the East Coast Main Line.
- Nottingham is 22 miles and could be 20 minutes from the East Coast Main Line.
- Both Lincoln and Nottingham would be in battery range for a return trip from the East Coast Main Line.
- Platforms 1, 2 and 4, at Grantham are long enough to handle two Class 800 trains, running as a pair and regularly pairs call in Platforms 1 and 2.
I believe it would be possible for a pair of Regional Battery Trains to do the following.
- Leave London Kings Cross and run to Grantham in an hour, stopping at Stevenage and Peterborough.
- Stop in Platform 4 at Grantham station, where the trains would split.
- One train would continue on the East Coast Main Line to Newark North Gate station, where it would leave the East Coast Main Line and go to Lincoln.
- The other train would continue to Nottingham.
Note.
- Coming back, the process would be reversed with trains joining in Platform 1 or Platform 4 at Grantham.
- There may need to be some track and signalling modifications, but nothing too serious or challenging.
Connections to other parts of Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire would be as follows.
- Nottingham and Nottinghamshire would be connected using the Nottingham Express Transit and the Robin Hood and Maid Marian Lines from Nottingham station.
- All stations between Grantham and Nottingham would be reached from either Grantham or Nottingham.
- All stations to Boston and Skegness would be reached from Grantham.
- All stations between Newark and Lincoln would be reached from either Lincoln or Newark.
- All stations between Doncaster and Lincoln would be reached from either Doncaster or Lincoln.
- All stations between Peterborough and Lincoln would be reached from either Lincoln or Peterborough.
- All stations to Market Rasen, Grimsby Town and Cleethorpes would be reached from Lincoln.
Note.
- I feel that some Lincoln services could be extended to Cleethorpes via Market Rasen and Grimsby Town.
- Hopefully, a timetable could be developed, so that no connection was overly long.
Most of the distances are not unduly long and I would hope that most secondary services could be battery electric trains, which would be charged in the larger stations like Boston, Cleethorpes, Doncaster, Grantham, Lincoln, Mansfield, Nottingham, Peterborough, Sleaford, Spalding and Worksop.
Doncaster, Grantham and Peterborough already have 25 KVAC overhead electrification and this could be used to charge the trains, with possibly some small extensions.
The other stations will need a number of systems to charge the trains, as they pass through.
Some stations will be suitable for the installation of the standard 25 KVAC overhead electrification, but others will need specialised charging systems.
It appears that Adrian Shooter of Vivarail has just announced a One-Size-Fits-All Fast Charge system, that has been given interim approval by Network Rail.
I discuss this charger in Vivarail’s Plans For Zero-Emission Trains, which is based on a video on the Modern Railways web site.
There is more about Vivarail’s plans in the November 2020 Print Edition of the magazine, where this is said on page 69.
‘Network Rail has granted interim approval for the fast charge system and wants it to be the UK’s standard battery charging system’ says Mr. Shooter. ‘We believe it could have worldwide implications.’
Vivarail’s Fast Charge system must surely be a front-runner for installation.
What frequency of the Combined Nottinghamshire And Lincolnshire service would be needed and could be run?
Consider.
- Currently, Lincoln is served with one tp2h with a five-car Class 800 train running the service.
- The Lincoln service alternates with a one tp2h service to York, which also calls at Retford and Doncaster.
- Work is progressing on increasing the number of high speed paths on the East Coast Main Line.
Obviously, an hourly service to both Nottingham and Lincoln would be ideal and would give most of the two counties an hourly service to and from London Kings Cross with a single change at either Doncaster, Grantham. Lincoln, Newark, Nottingham or Peterborough.
- An hourly service might be difficult to timetable because of the York service.
- But I don’t believe it would be impossible to setup.
Especially if after, the Eastern leg of High Speed Two opens, East Coast Main Line services from London Kings Cross to North of York are replaced in part, by High Speed Two services.
The Effect Of High Speed Two
High Speed Two will build a new station at Toton called East Midlands Hub station.
- The station will be situated about halfway between Nottingham and Derby, with frequent connections to both cities.
- There will be frequent services to Birmingham, Leeds, London, Newcastle and Sheffield.
- I wouldn’t be surprised to see a direct service to Edinburgh and Glasgow from the station.
- There will be a lot of economic growth around the station.
I very much feel, that a lot of passengers were travel to East Midlands Hub station for both long distance trains and to access the Derby-Nottingham area.
A Cambridge And Birmingham Service
In How Many Trains Are Needed To Run A Full Service On High Speed Two?, I proposed a Cambridge and Birmingham Curzon Street service.
This is what I said.
The obvious one is surely Cambridge and Birmingham
- It would run via Peterborough, Grantham, Nottingham and East Midlands Hub.
- It would connect the three big science, engineering and medical centres in the Midlands and the East.
- It would use High Speed Two between Birmingham Curzon Street and East Midlands Hub.
- It could be run by High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains.
It might even be a replacement for CrossCountry’s Stansted Airport and Birmingham service.
Timings for the various legs could be.
- Cambridge and Peterborough – CrossCountry – 49 minutes
- Peterborough and Grantham – LNER – 19 minutes
- Grantham and Nottingham -Best Estimate – 20 minutes
- Nottingham and Birmingham Curzon Street – Midlands Rail Engine – 33 minutes
Note.
- This totals to two hours and one minute.
- The current service takes two hours and forty-four minutes.
- The Ely and Peterborough and Grantham and Nottingham legs are not electrified.
If the route were to be fully electrified or the trains were to be fitted with batteries, the time via High Speed Two, would surely be several minutes under two hours.
Conclusion
These objectives are possible.
- An hourly service between London Kings Cross and Grantham, Lincoln, Newark and Nottingham.
- A very much more comprehensive train service for Nottingham and Lincolnshire.
- A two hour service between Cambridge and Birmingham.
Most of the services would be zero carbon.
No major infrastructure would be needed, except possibly completing the electrification between Nottingham and Ely, some of which is probably needed for freight trains anyway.
Alternatively, the High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains could be fitted with batteries.
Highview Power Breaks Ground on 250MWh CRYOBattery Long Duration Energy Storage Facility
The title of this post, is the same as that of this News page on the Highview web site.
The page shows this picture of diggers doing, what they do.
Note the two towers in the background of the image on the right. They look like the towers of Carrington power station, which are shown on this page on the FK Group web site, who built the 884 MW CCGT power station.
This Google Map shows the site of the power station.
On a larger scale map, you can pick out the towers from their shadows and it looks to me, that Highview’s 250MWh CRYOBattery is being built on the vacant site to the South of the power station.
Consider.
- The vacant site looks large.
- I’ve read somewhere that Highview’s CRYOBatteries are expandable by adding more tanks.
- They certainly have space to add lots of extra tanks and a 884 MW power station on the doorstep to fill them.
- All the heavy equipment and components to build Carrington power station were brought in by barge using the River Mersey and the Manchester Ship Canal. Will this method be used again?
This seems to be a site that would be ideal for a very large battery.
Liquid Hydrogen Tested As An Auto Fuel
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on the Lethbridge Herald.
I find it strange that I have only picked up this story from a local newspaper in Alberta.
Lethbridge is a city, with a population of a bit over 100,000. It doesn’t seem to have much to do with Alberta’s oil industry, which might see hydrogen as a threat.
This is the introductory paragraph.
A recent demonstration project was evaluated for a hydrogen-fuelled vehicle by the U.S. Department of Energy Division. This demonstration will be applicable to other means of transportation such as trucks and trains.
This paragraph describes the conversion.
They used a 1979 Buick Century four-door sedan with 3.8-litre displacement, turbocharged V-6 engine. This vehicle provided a good compromise on trunk space for installation of the DFVLR tank, passenger accessibility for demonstration, engine compartment space for versatility in selection of substitute engines, available engine sizes, efficiency and suitability for modification of hydrogen operation.
I am left with the impression, after reading the article, that it might be possible for large American style cars to be converted to hydrogen.
The Anonymous Widower 