The Anonymous Widower

Financing Secured To ‘Enable Rapid Development’ Of Norway’s First Lithium Battery Cell Gigafactory

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Energy Storage News.

The article says that the gigafactory’s biggest competitor will be in Sweden.

With companies in the UK, like Hyperdrive Innovation, Gore Street Energy Fund and others developing massive demand for batteries, perhaps we should build our own gigafactory?

This article on Energy Storage News is entitled More Money For Lithium Exploration In Cornwall.

This is the introductory paragraph.

Cornish Lithium has successfully raised over £826,000 from shareholders to continue exploration for lithium in Cornwall, in both geothermal waters and in hard rock, and will build on the successful drilling programmes that concluded earlier this year.

I wrote about Cornish Lithium in How To Go Mining In A Museum.

Could an unusual tale becoming to a successful conclusion?

Conclusion

I think we can trust the Cornish, Norwegians and Swedes to ensure, we have enough lithium-ion batteries.

July 9, 2020 Posted by | Energy Storage, Finance | , , , | Leave a comment

Japan A ‘Very Interesting Market’ For Gore Street As It Becomes An ‘Enabler’ Of JXTG’s Transition

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the Solar Power Portal.

This is the introductory paragraph.

London Stock Exchange-listed energy storage fund Gore Street has outlined how it sees Japan as a “very interesting market” following its investment from JXTG Nippon Oil & Energy Corporation.

I like Gore Street’s philosophy and its execution.

I am not an investor and probably never will be, but they seem to be based on sound principles and do their modelling well. I’ve built enough large financial models to know a good one from its results.

Gore Street is normally investing in lithium-ion batteries.

  • These batteries now have a predictable reliability profile and I suspect cash-flow from owning a battery is fairly predictable.
  • The control and monitoring software will get better as time goes by and these batteries will probably update themselves automatically.
  • They probably aren’t that affected by COVID-19, as lockdown still needs energy to be balanced and these batteries are probably performing as normal.
  • The heat of the last few weeks probably caused more grief than COVID-19.
  • If a site visit is necessary, they can probably be done with one man in a van with a key to the security system. So maintenance is probably easy to do, whilst maintaining social distance.

I also liked this paragraph from the article.

, Gore Street Capital CEO, Alex O’Cinneide, said that the fact that the deregulation of the Japanese market over the next few years makes it of interest to the company, alongside it having the same characteristics of the UK in terms of the decommissioning of coal, nuclear and gas and increasing levels of renewables.

Could Gore Street Energy Fund, be a safe investment for today’s difficult times?

 

July 2, 2020 Posted by | Energy, Energy Storage, Finance, Health | , , , | Leave a comment

Do We Need A UK Lithium-Ion Battery Factory?

My post, Gore Street Acquires 50MW Ferrymuir Battery Project, Eyes More In Scotland and the article on the Energyst with the same name, got me thinking.

It was this statement about Gore Street Energy Fund, that really started the thought.

The fund said the addition takes its portfolio built or under development to 293MW and added that is has options for a further 900MW.

Gore Street obviously have the money to build all of this energy storage.

  • I have also looked at some of their projects on Google Maps and there are still plenty of sites on green- or brown-field land close to electricity sub-stations, where energy storage would be easy to connect.
  • I suspect, they have some good engineers or electricity marketing specialists available.
  • My worry, would be, with many countries going the energy storage route, is there enough capacity to build all the batteries we need.

We have three routes, we could easily take in this country.

  • Convert suplus energy to hydrogen using electrolysers from ITM Power in Rotherham.
  • Develop some BALDIES (Build Anywhere Long Duration Intermittent Energy Storage). British technology is available as the CRYObatteryfrom Highview Power, who signed to build their first full-size plant in the UK, last week.
  • Build a lithium-ion battery factory. Preferably of the next generation, so that battery vehicles will go further on a charge.

It is my view, that we should do all three!

Will Gore Street, add a BALDIES to their portfolio of lithium-ion energy storage.

I think the decision makers at Gore Street would sleep comfortably in their beds if they bought a CRYObattery for a location, that needed a larger battery.

Conclusion

As to the answer to my question, the answer is yes, as mobile application will need more and better batteries and on balance, we should have our own supply.

 

 

June 24, 2020 Posted by | Energy Storage | , , , | 2 Comments

NEC Pulls The Plug On Storage Integration Business

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on GreenTechMedia.

It doesn’t appear that building grid-scale lithium-ion battery storage is a licence to print money!

And NEC bought the business from a bankrupt company!

June 13, 2020 Posted by | Business, Energy Storage | | Leave a comment

Lithium Battery Cell Prices To Almost Halve By 2029

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Energy Storage News.

This is the introductory paragraph.

Lithium-ion cell prices will fall by around 46% between now and 2029, according to new analysis from Guidehouse Insights, reaching US$66.6 per kWh by that time.

The rest of the article contains a lot more useful predictions.

I will add a prediction of my own.

The drop in prices of lithium-ion batteries will surely result in a lot more applications, in the following areas.

  • Battery-electric vehicles
  • Battery-electric vans and buses and light-trucks.
  • Battery-electric trams and trains
  • Battery-electric aircraft.
  • Battery-electric ships.
  • Battery-electric tractors
  • Battety-electric construction plant

Lithium-ion batteries will also be used in hydrogen-powered versions of any of the above.

The cost of lithium-ion batteries, will also lead to more applications in the following areas.

  • Grid energy storage or as it sometimes called; front-of-the-meter storage.
  • Heavy trucks
  • Double-deck buses
  • Railway locomotives

These could use a very large number of lithium-ion cells.

Conclusion

Because as yet, there is no alternative to lithium-ion cells for mobile applications, I think we’ll see grid-energy storage going to one of the alternatives like Gravitricity, Highview Power or Zinc8.

 

 

June 9, 2020 Posted by | Energy Storage, Transport | , , , | 2 Comments

Could Some of Hitachi’s Existing Trains In The UK Be Converted To Battery-Electric Trains?

The last five fleets of AT-300 trains ordered for the UK have been.

Each fleet seems to be tailored to the needs of the individual operator, which is surely as it should be.

I can make some observations.

Fast Electric Trains

Both electric fleets on the list, will run on routes, where speed will be important.

  • The Avanti West Coast fleet on the West Coast Main Line, will have to be able to keep up keep with the Class 390 trains, that have the advantage of tilt for more speed.
  • The East Coast Trains fleet on the East Coast Main Line, will have to work hard to maintain a demanding schedule, as I outlined in Thoughts On East Coast Trains.

Any reduction in weight will improve the acceleration.

  • The seven tonne MTU 12V 1600 R80L diesel engines can be removed to reduce the weight.
  • As a five-car Class 800 train with three diesel engine weighs 243 tonnes, this could save nearly 9 % of the train’s weight.
  • East Coast Trains feel they need an appropriately-sized battery for emergency hotel power. Could this be because the catenary is not as good on the East Coast Main Line as on the West?
  • Perhaps, Avanti West Coast feel a battery is not needed, but they could obviously fit one later. Especially, if there was already a ready-wired position underneath the train.

The extra acceleration given by 100% electric operation, must make all the difference in obtaining the required performance for the two routes.

Why Four Diesel Engines In A Class 810 Train?

The Class 810 trains are an update of the current Class 800/Class 802 trains. Wikipedia described the differences like this.

The Class 810 is an evolution of the Class 802s with a revised nose profile and facelifted end headlight clusters, giving the units a slightly different appearance. Additionally, there will be four diesel engines per five-carriage train (versus three on the 800s and 802s), and the carriages will be 2 metres (6.6 ft) shorter due to platform length constraints at London St Pancras.

Additionally, in this article in the October 2019 Edition of Modern Railways, which is entitled EMR Kicks Off New Era, this is said.

The EMR bi-modes will be able to run at 125 mph in diesel mode, matching Meridian performance in a step-up from the capabilities of the existing Class 80x units in service with other franchises.

The four diesel engines would appear to be for more power, so that these trains will be able to run at 125 mph on diesel.

In How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 mph?, I calculated that a Class 801 train, which is all-electric, consumes 3.42 kWh per vehicle mile.

  • At 125 mph a train will in an hour travel 125 miles.
  • In that hour the train will need 125 x 5 x 3.42 = 2137.5 kWh
  • This means that the total power of the four diesel engines must be 2137.5,
  • Divide 2137.5 by four and each diesel must be rated at 534.4 kW to provide the power needed.

The MTU 12V 1600 R80L diesel engine is described in this datasheet on the MTU web site.

Note on the datasheet, there is a smaller variant of the same engine called a 12V 1600 R70, which has a power output of 565 kW, as compared to the 700 kW of the 12V 1600 R80L.

The mass of the engines are probably at the limits of the range given on the datasheet.

  • Dry – 4500-6500 Kg
  • Wet – 4700-6750 Kg

It would appear that the less-powerful 12V 100 R70 is about two tonnes lighter.

So where will four engines be placed in a Class 810 train?

  • The five-car Class 800 and Class 802 trains have diesel-engines in cars 2, 3 and 4.
  • The nine-car Class 800 and Class 802 trains have diesel-engines in cars 2,3, 5, 7 and 8.
  • It appears that diesel-engines aren’t placed under the driver cars.
  • Five-car AT-300 trains generally have a formation of DPTS+MS+MS+MC+DPTF.
  • The car length in the Class 810 trains are two metres shorter than those in other trains.

Could it be that the intermediate cars on Class 810 trains will be an MC car, which has both First and Standard Class seating and two identical MS cars both with two smaller diesel engines?

  • The two smaller diesel engines will be about 2.6 tonnes heavier, than a single larger engine.
  • Only one fuel tank and other gubbins will be needed.
  • The shorter car will be lighter in weight.
  • MTU may have designed a special diesel engine to power the train.

I would suspect that a twin-engined MS car is possible.

Could The Battery And The Diesel Engine Be Plug-Compatible?

I found this document on the Hitachi Rail web site, which is entitled Development of Class 800/801 High-Speed Rolling Stock For UK Intercity Express Programme.

The document may date from 2014, but it gives a deep insight into the design of Hitachi’s trains.

I will take a detailed look at the traction system as described in the document.

This schematic of the traction system is shown.

Note BC is described as battery charger.

This is said in the text, where GU is an abbreviation for generator unit.

The system can select the appropriate power source from either the main transformer or the GUs. Also, the size and weight of the system were minimized by designing the power supply converter to be able to work with both power sources. To ensure that the Class 800 and 801 are able to adapt to future changes in operating practices, they both have the same traction system and the rolling stock can be operated as either class by simply adding or removing GUs. On the Class 800, which is intended to run on both electrified and non-electrified track, each traction system has its own GU. On the other hand, the Class 801 is designed only for electrified lines and has one or two GUs depending on the length of the trainset (one GU for trainsets of five to nine cars, two GUs for trainsets of 10 to 12 cars). These GUs supply emergency traction power and auxiliary power in the event of a power outage on the catenary, and as an auxiliary power supply on non-electrified lines where the Class 801 is in service and pulled by a locomotive. This allows the Class 801 to operate on lines it would otherwise not be able to use and provides a backup in the event of a catenary power outage or other problem on the ground systems as well as non-electrified routes in loco-hauled mode.

This is all very comprehensive.

Note that the extract says, that both the Class 800 trains and Class 801 trains have the same traction control system. A section called Operation in the Wikipedia entry for the Class 802 train, outlines the differences between a Class 802 train and a Class 800 train.

The Class 802s are broadly identical to the Class 800 bi-mode trains used in the Intercity Express Programme, and are used in a similar way; they run as electric trains where possible, and are equipped with the same diesel generator engines as the Class 800. However, they utilise higher engine operating power – 700 kW (940 hp) per engine as opposed to 560 kW (750 hp) – and are fitted with larger fuel tanks to cope with the gradients and extended running in diesel mode expected on the long unelectrified stretches they will operate on.

I would assume that the differences are small enough, so that a Class 802 train, can use the same traction control system, as the other two train classes.

The Hitachi document also describes the Train Management and Control System (TCMS), the function of which is described as.

Assists the work of the train crew; a data communication function that aids maintenance work; and a traction drive system that is powered by the overhead lines (catenaries) and GUs.

Several trains have been described as computers on wheels. That could certainly be said about these trains.

There would appear to be a powerful Automatic Train Identification Function.

To simplify the rearrangement and management of train configurations, functions are provided for identifying the train (Class 800/801), for automatically determining the cars in the trainset and its total length, and for coupling and uncoupling up to 12 cars in normal and 24 cars in rescue or emergency mode.

Now that would be a site – One nine-car train rescuing another!

I would assume that this Automatic Train Identification Function has already been updated to add the Class 802 trains and it would appear to me, as a very experienced computer programmer, that in future it could be further updated to cater for the following.

  • New classes of trains like the future Class 803 and Class 810 trains.
  • The fitting of batteries instead of diesel engines.

Could the Function even be future-proofed for hydrogen power?

There are two main ways for trains to operate when the diesel engine in a car has been replaced by a battery.

  1. A plug-compatible battery module is designed, that in terms of function looks exactly like a diesel engine to the TCMS and through that the train crew.
  2. The car with a battery becomes a new type of car and the TCMS is updated to control it, in an appropriate manner.

Both methods are equally valid.

I would favour the first method, as I have come across numerous instances in computer programming, engineering and automation, where the method has been used successfully.

The method used would be Hitachi’s choice.

What Size Of Battery Could Be Fitted In Place Of The Diesel Engine?

Consider.

  • The wet mass of an MTU 16V 1600 R80L diesel engine commonly fitted to AT-300 trains of different types is 6750 Kg or nearly seven tonnes.
  • My engineering knowledge would suggest, that it would be possible to replace the diesel engine with an inert lump of the same mass and not affect the dynamics of the train.

So could it be that a plug-compatible battery module can be fitted, so long as it doesn’t exceed the mass of the diesel engine it replaces?

For an existing Class 800 or Class 802 train, that limit could be seven tonnes.

But for East Coast Train’s Class 803 train, that size would probably be decided by the required train performance.

How much power would a one tonne battery hold?

This page on the Clean Energy institute at the University of Washington is entitled Lithium-Ion Battery.

This is a sentence from the page.

Compared to the other high-quality rechargeable battery technologies (nickel-cadmium or nickel-metal-hydride), Li-ion batteries have a number of advantages. They have one of the highest energy densities of any battery technology today (100-265 Wh/kg or 250-670 Wh/L).

Using these figures, a one-tonne battery would be between 100 and 265 kWh in capacity, depending on the energy density.

This table can be calculated of battery weight, low capacity and high capacity.

  • 1 tonne – 100 kWh – 265 kWh
  • 2 tonne – 200 kWh – 530 kWh
  • 3 tonne – 300 kWh – 895 kWh
  • 4 tonne – 400 kWh – 1060 kWh
  • 5 tonne – 500 kWh – 1325 kWh
  • 6 tonne – 600 kWh – 1590 kWh
  • 7 tonne – 700 kWh – 1855 kWh

As energy densities are only going to improve, the high capacity figures are only going to get larger.

If you look at the design of the Class 810 trains, which could have three positions for diesel engines or batteries, the designers of the train and East Coast Trains can choose the battery size as appropriate for the following.

  • Maximum performance.
  • Power needs when halted in stations.
  • Power needs for emergency power, when the wires come tumbling down.

I suspect, they will fit only one battery, that is as small as possible to minimise mass and increase acceleration, but large enough to provide sufficient power, when needed.

Conversion Of A Five-Car Class 800/Class 802 Train To Battery-Electric Operation

If Hitachi get their design right, this could be as simple as the following.

  • Any of the three MTU 12V 1600 R80L diesel engines is removed, from the train.
  • Will the other diesel related gubbins, like the fuel tank be removed? They might be left in place, in case the reverse conversion should be needed.
  • The new battery-module is put in the diesel engine’s slot.
  • The train’s computer system are updated.
  • The train is tested.

It should be no more difficult than attaching a new device to your personal computer. Except that it’s a lot heavier.

As there are three diesel engines, one, two or three could be replaced with batteries.

Trains would probably be able to have a mixture of diesel engines and battery modules.

A Class 802 train with one diesel engine and two five-tonne batteries would have the following power sources.

  • 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
  • A 700 kW diesel engine.
  • Two five-tonne batteries of between 500 kWh and 1325 kWh.

With intelligent software controlling the various power sources, this train could have a useful range, away from the electrification.

Conversion Of A Five-Car Class 810 Train To Battery-Electric Operation

The process would be similar to that of a Class 800/Class 802 Train, except there would be more possibilities with four engines.

It would also need to have sufficient range to bridge the gaps in the electrification.

Perhaps each train would have the following power sources.

  • 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
  • Two 565 kW diesel engines.
  • Two four-tonne batteries of between 400 kWh and 1060 kWh.
  • Batteries might also be placed under the third intermediate car.

I estimate that with 400 kWh batteries, a train like this would have a battery range of sixty-five miles.

Conclusion

The permutations and combinations would allow trains to be tailored to the best compromise for a train operating company.

June 8, 2020 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

UK’s Largest Solar Park Cleve Hill Granted Development Consent

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Solar Power Portal.

These are the two introductory paragraphs.

Cleve Hill Solar Park, set to be the largest in the UK, has been granted development consent by the energy secretary.

The colossal 350MW project will include 880,000 panels along with battery storage, and sit just one mile northeast of Faversham, in Kent, situated close to the village of Graveney.

Other points from the article.

  • Cleeve Hill Solar Park is a £450million project.
  • It is the first solar project to be considered a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project.
  • It is being developed as a joint venture between Hive Energy and Wirsol.
  • It is due to be operational by 2022.
  • To complete the project 700 MWh of energy storage will be added later.

The article also contains this quote from Solar Trade Associations chief executive Chris Hewett.

Solar has a significant role to play in boosting the economy in the wake of the coronavirus crisis. With the right policies we can expect to see an 8GW pipeline of solar projects unlocked and rapidly deployed, swiftly creating a wealth of skilled jobs and setting us on the path towards a green recovery.

8 GW of intermittent energy will need a lot of storage.

As Cleeve Hill’s developers are planning to provide 700 MWh of storage for 700 MW of solar panels, it would appear that 8 GW of solar panels could need up to 16 GWh of energy storage.

As our largest energy storage system is the pumped storage Electric Mountain in Snowdonia with a capacity of 9.1 GWh and most of the large solar developments are towards the South of England, the UK needs to develop a lot more energy storage, where the solar is generated and much of the energy is used.

I can see the following environmentally-friendly developments prospering.

  • Highview Power‘s CRYOBattery, which uses liquid air to store energy. Systems have a small footprint and up to a GWh could be possible.
  • Electrothermal energy storage like this system from Siemens.
  • Using electrolysers from companies like ITM Power to convert excess energy into hydrogen for transport, steelmaking and injecting into the gas main.
  • Zinc8‘s zinc-air battery could be the outsider, that comes from nowhere.

Developers could opt for conservative decision of lithium-ion batteries, but I don’t like the environmental profile and these batteries should be reserved for portable and mobile applications.

Floatovoltaics

One concept, I came across whilst writing was floatovoltaics.

The best article about the subject was this one on Renewable Energy World, which is entitled Running Out of Precious Land? Floating Solar PV Systems May Be a Solution.

A French company call Ciel et Terre International seem to be leading the development.

Their web site has this video.

Perhaps, some floatovoltaics, should be installed on the large reservoirs in the South of England.

  • The Renewable Energy World article says that panels over water can be more efficient due to the cooling effect of the water.
  • Would they cut evaporative losses by acting as sunshades?
  • As the French are great pecheurs, I suspect that they have the answers if anglers should object.

This Google Map shows the reservoirs to the West of Heathrow.

Note.

  1. Wraysbury Reservoir has an area of two square kilometres.
  2. King George VI Reservoir has an area of one-and-a-half square kilometres.
  3. Using the size and capacity of Owl’s Hatch Solar Farm, it appears that around 65 MW of solar panels can be assembled in a square kilometre.
  4. All these reservoirs are Sites of Special Scientific Interest because of all the bird life.
  5. Heathrow is not an airport, that is immune to bird-strikes.

Could floatovoltaics be used to guide birds away from the flightpaths?

Incidentally, I remember a report from Tomorrow’s World, probably from the 1960s, about a porous concrete that had been invented.

  • One of the uses would have been to fill reservoirs.
  • The capacity of the reservoir would only have been marginally reduced, as the water would be in the voids in the concrete like water in a sponge.
  • Soil would be placed at the surface and the land used for growing crops.

I wonder what happened to that idea from fifty years ago!

June 5, 2020 Posted by | Energy Storage | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Thoughts On East Coast Trains

According to an article and a picture, the second new Class 803 train for Open Access Operator; East Coast Trains, has arrived in the UK to be fitted out at Newton Aycliffe.

These are my thoughts on the service.

The Trains

The Class 803 trains are similar to the other Hitachi A-trains running in the UK, but with two big differences.

  • They will have a one class interior and they will be fitted with a battery, instead of a diesel engine.
  • The battery is not for traction and is to provide hotel power in stations and in the event of a dewiring. The latter has been surprisingly common on the East Coast Main Line in recent years.

Normally, these five-car trains are fitted with a single MTU 12V 1600 R80L diesel engine, which is described in this datasheet on the MTU web site.

The mass of the engine is given as 6750 Kg, when it is ready to run.

It would seem logical to replace the diesel engine with a battery of the same weight. I’ll use seven tonnes, as the fuel tank won’t be needed either.

This page on the Clean Energy institute at the University of Washington is entitled Lithium-Ion Battery.

This is a sentence from the page.

Compared to the other high-quality rechargeable battery technologies (nickel-cadmium or nickel-metal-hydride), Li-ion batteries have a number of advantages. They have one of the highest energy densities of any battery technology today (100-265 Wh/kg or 250-670 Wh/L).

Using these figures, a seven-tonne battery would be between 700 and 1855 kWh in capacity.

Incidentally, the power output of an MTU 12V 1600 R80L is 700 kW.

In Sparking A Revolution I gave Hitachi’s possible specification of a battery-electric train.

  • Range – 55-65 miles
  • Performance – 90-100 mph
  • Recharge – 10 minutes when static
  • Routes – Suburban near electrified lines
  • Battery Life – 8-10 years

These figures are credited to Hitachi.

Doing a quick calculation, it would appear that.

  • A 700 kWh battery could supply the same power as the diesel engine for an hour.
  • A 1855 kWh battery could supply the same power as the diesel engine for two hours and thirty-nine minutes.

I am drawn to the conclusion, that although Hitachi say the battery is not for traction purposes in a Class 803 train, that a battery the same weight as the current diesel engine, would be a very adequate replacement.

If say, you put a 300-500 kWh battery in a Class 803 train, it would probable give enough hotel power until the train was able to move again. but it would also reduce the weight of the train and thus improve the acceleration in normal running.

A Battery Module

I wouldn’t be surprised if Hitachi are developing a battery module, that can replace the MTU 12V 1600 R80L diesel engine.

  • The module would be used for both traction and hotel services on the train.
  • It would be charged from the electrification or by regenerative braking.
  • It would act as emergency power.
  • To the driver and the train’s computer, it would have similar performance to the diesel engine.

The diesel engine and the battery module would be plug-compatible and could be exchanged as required.

I can do a quick calculation for a 1000 kWh battery, which would weigh under four tonnes.

  • A 1000 kWh battery would provide 700 kW for 86 minutes.
  • At 90 mph, the train would travel for 129 miles.
  • At 100 mph, the train would travel for 143 miles.

That would be a very handy extended range.

As East Coast Trains will only run on a fully-electrified route, they have no need for the traction capability.

  • But it would fit well with the routes of Avanti West Coast, East Midlands Railway, Great Western Railway, Hull Trains, LNER and TransPennine Express.
  • All except East Midlands Railway and LNER, share part or full ownership with East Coast Trains.

It does look to me, that Hitachi is using East Coast Trains and their fully electrified route to give the battery module for the trains, a thorough work-out, on a route, where it will not normally be needed.

The Proposed Service

From various sources we know the following.

  • There will be five trains per day in both directions between London Kings Cross and Edinburgh. – See Wikipedia
  • East Coast Trains have ordered five trains. – See Wikipedia.
  • There will be stops at Stevenage, Durham, Newcastle and Morpeth. – See Wikipedia
  • The first Northbound service will arrive in Edinburgh before 10:00. – See Rail Advent.
  • Fares will be low-cost at around £25 – See Wikipedia.

It is also likely that East Coast Trains will want a journey time of under four hours, which is being planned for the route anyway under the L2E4  project.

As the record time between London and Edinburgh was set in 1991 by an InterCity 225 train at a minute under three-and-a-half hours, could a time of around three hours and forty-five minutes be possible, including the turnaround of the train?

10:00 Arrival In Edinburgh

This is obviously a good idea, but with a four hour journey time, it would mean leaving London before six.

  • Perhaps to make the most of clear tracks in the morning the train would leave early.
  • Currently, the first two trains from Kings Cross are the 06:15 to Edinburgh, which arrives at 11:08 and the 06:33 to Leeds.
  • How early could the train leave?

I suspect that the first train to Edinburgh would leave Kings Cross around 05:30 and arrive in Edinburgh and be ready to return before 10:00.

10:00 Arrival In London

If arriving in Edinburgh before ten is a good idea, then surely arriving in London by the same time is worthwhile.

  • Currently, the first train from Edinburgh to London is the 05:48, which arrives at 10:40.

As with the Northbound service, I suspect the first train to Kings Cross would leave Edinburgh around 05:30 and arrive in Kings Cross and be ready to return before 10:00.

Five Services Per Day

If the first Edinburgh and  Kings Cross services left at 05:30 and after unloading and loading, were ready to return before 10:00, that would be the first service.

The simplest way to handle the rest of the day would be to split the time into four and run the trains continuously.

Suppose, the last train got to its destination at one in the morning, that would mean that fifteen hours were available for four trains or three hours and forty-five minutes for each trip between London and Edinburgh and the turnaround.

The train starting from Kings Cross would run the following services.

  • Kings Cross to Edinburgh – Leaves 05:30 – Arrives before 10:00
  • Edinburgh to Kings Cross – Leaves 10:00
  • Kings Cross to Edinburgh – Leaves 13:45
  • Edinburgh to Kings Cross- Leaves 17:30
  • Kings Cross to Edinburgh – Leaves 21:15 – Arrives 01:00 on the next day.

The train starting from Edinburgh would run the following services.

  • Edinburgh to Kings Cross – Leaves 05:30 – Arrives before 10:00
  • Kings Cross to Edinburgh – Leaves 10:00
  • Edinburgh to Kings Cross – Leaves 13:45
  • Kings Cross to Edinburgh – Leaves 17:30
  • Edinburgh to Kings Cross – Leaves 21:15 – Arrives 01:00 on the next day.

There would be two very tired trains at the end of every day, that would be looking forward to some well-deserved tender loving care.

This has been my best guess at what the timetable will be! But!

  • Travellers can catch an early train, do a full days work in the other capital and return at the end of the day.
  • There are three services during the day; one each in the morning, the afternoon and the early evening, for those who want affordable, slightly less frenetic travelling.
  • I suspect the intermediate stops have been chosen with care.
  • Improvements at Stevenage station could make the station, the preferred interchange for many between East Coast, LNER and local services for Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire and North London. Car parking is probably easier than Kings Cross!
  • Is Durham station an alternative station on the other side of the Tyne from Newcastle, with better parking?
  • Could Durham City Centre be the terminal of a Leamside Line extension of the Tyne and Wear Metro?
  • Newcastle station is very well-connected to all over the North East.
  • Morpeth station could attract a large number of travellers from over the Border. It also looks to have space to expand the parking!

It looks a well-designed route and timetable.

How Many Trains Would Be Needed?

Consider.

  • Each train could be two five-car trains working together as a ten-car train.
  • This would maximise the use of paths on the East Coast Main Line.
  • Four trains would be needed for the full five trains per day ten-car service.

As there is going to be a fleet of five trains, the fifth train would either be in maintenance or waiting to enter the action as a substitute.

Improving Efficiency

It looks to me, that the efficiency of this service could be improved by good old-fashioned time and motion study.

  • Will  drivers use stepping-up to speed the reverse of trains?
  • Would cleaning teams board at Morpeth and Stevenage stations and clean the train on the last leg?
  • Will the buffet be designed for fast replenishment?
  • Will drivers be given all possible aids to go faster?

Every little will help!

Conclusion

I like this system and the competition will keep LNER on its toes!

Would a similar system work on the West Coast Main Line?

  • Grand Union have proposed a service between Euston and Stirling stations.
  • There will be stops at Milton Keynes Central, Nuneaton, Crewe, Preston, Carlisle, Lockerbie, Motherwell, Whifflet, Greenfaulds and Larbert.
  • Trains will be InterCity 225s.

The service could start in 2021.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

June 3, 2020 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , | 1 Comment

New Zinc-Air Battery Outperforms Lithium-Ion Battery On All Levels

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Interesting Engineering.

This is the introductory paragraph.

There’s a new battery in town and it’s a game-changer. The novel battery, is cheaper, safer and significantly longer laster-lasting, than lithium-ion batteries reports Recharge.

It does seem that Zinc8 is getting noticed.

I wonder, if the web-site gets read in Cambridge, where I was once told that use of the word Interesting, is very much to be discouraged.

May 26, 2020 Posted by | Energy Storage | , , | Leave a comment

New Zinc-Air Battery Is ‘Cheaper, Safer And Far Longer-Lasting Than Lithium-Ion’

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Recharge.

These are the first two paragraphs.

A new type of battery is coming onto the market that can store multiple days’ worth of energy, that doesn’t degrade, can’t possibly explode and is up to five times cheaper than lithium-ion, claimed its developer as it prepares to pilot the technology in New York state.

The zinc-air hybrid flow battery developed by Canadian company Zinc8 has the potential to disrupt the entire energy-storage market — making wind and solar farms baseload and even replacing the need for transmission grid upgrades in many places.

The article then gives an in depth review of Zinc8, its technology and its future prospects.

  • The Chief Executive is a former Canadian MP. Political connections help!
  • The company has $100million of funding.
  • Zinc8 energy storage systems are made larger by fitting and bigger storage tank and adding more electrolyte.
  • The capital cost of an eight-hour Zinc8 storage system is about $250/KWh, but this falls to $100/KWh for a 32-hour system and $60/KWh for a hundred-hour system.
  • Lithium-ion systems ttpically cost $300/KWh for any duration over eight hours.
  • The cost of Zinc8 systems is expected to fall as manufacturing increases.

The article finishes with a detailed description of how the technology works.

It also details the company’s growth strategy.

Conclusion

This technology looks like it will give lithiujm-ion batteries a good run for its money in grid storage applications and it could be one of those technologies that help the world to embrace renewable energy, like wind, solar and wave power.

It has various advantages.

  • Lower cost of installation.
  • Falling manufacturing cost.
  • Easily scalable.
  • No exotic or hazardous materials, just zinc, water and air, which are recycled.

My only worry, is that Zinc8, sounds too good to be true! But having met researchers at ICI, who were concerned in the birth of polythene, this could be a normal cynical reaction.

 

 

 

May 22, 2020 Posted by | Energy Storage | , , | 2 Comments