• So... is there something happening to battery locomotive?

  • General discussion about locomotives, rolling stock, and equipment
General discussion about locomotives, rolling stock, and equipment

Moderator: John_Perkowski

  by lipued
 
I have heard that NS 999, the first and the only battery electric locomotive in the US, is on sale now.(Some websites said it is the first in the world, but I do not believe it to be true because of maintenance locomotive in London Underground.)

I guess the reason is the vehicle is providing no more technology to NS, and NS thinks it has no more usage, due to its low power of 1500hp, which is barely appropriate for switchers.

However, I wonder why NS or other US rail companies(both public and private) are showing no more interest in more advanced battery locomotive technology. I understand the lack of interest from class 1 freight train owners and Amtrak. but I still think commuter rail operators, who have shorter routes, can have some benefits from more advanced battery locomotives.
  by STrRedWolf
 
Not really. Look at the requirements for LIRR, Metro-North, MARC even. 1500hp from battery power is more apt for hotel power to the cabs than motive power, which is greater than 4000hp (if not more).
  by D40LF
 
Well last week BNSF chairman Matt Rose said BNSF is more interested in battery locos than Natural Gas units (which BNSF has been testing for quite some time). California has been saying that it wants zero emissions locomotives, or at least a Tier 5 standard for a while now. In Europe, battery-hybrid shunting locomotives are now being built by several manufacturers like Alstom, Vossloh, and CAF. If they do bring anything like that here, hopefully it will be better than those "Green Goat" lemons from a while back.

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/20 ... sfs-future" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
  by DutchRailnut
 
When I suggested a battery a battery powered switcher for GCT, charging of third rail, plus a small diesel for non powered tracks, it was nixed in about 4 minutes.
between Safety and a VP of MofE the answer was are you nuts , you know how explosive battery gasses are ?? and in this terminal, no way.
  by mackdave
 
Doesn't anyone know any history?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by mackdave on Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
  by Ken W2KB
 
DutchRailnut wrote:When I suggested a battery a battery powered switcher for GCT, charging of third rail, plus a small diesel for non powered tracks, it was nixed in about 4 minutes.
between Safety and a VP of MofE the answer was are you nuts , you know how explosive battery gasses are ?? and in this terminal, no way.
Old technology lead acid batteries produced explosive gas. New technology for large high capacity storage batteries utilize sealed lithium ion and similar materials that do not produce explosive gases. The electric utility industry and its suppliers have developed these batteries to work with intermittent power resources such as solar and wind.
  by DutchRailnut
 
Lithium-Ion batteries have their problems too, fires with small once and big once on planes.
  by lipued
 
D40LF wrote:Well last week BNSF chairman Matt Rose said BNSF is more interested in battery locos than Natural Gas units (which BNSF has been testing for quite some time). California has been saying that it wants zero emissions locomotives, or at least a Tier 5 standard for a while now. In Europe, battery-hybrid shunting locomotives are now being built by several manufacturers like Alstom, Vossloh, and CAF. If they do bring anything like that here, hopefully it will be better than those "Green Goat" lemons from a while back.

http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/20 ... sfs-future" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
BNSF? Oh, I did not expect that. I expect the first usage will be switchers for them if they got some.

mackdave wrote:Doesn't anyone know any history?
Sorry but I do not know what it is.
  by STrRedWolf
 
Lithium-Ion batteries that are poorly made are the problem, as shown by the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphone. Compare with Tesla's battery factories, which goes into their cars and don't explode, period. Even safer tech can be made by adding a plastic membrane to increase density and safety at the same time (PBS NOVA).

That said, I dug into a bit of googling and got 288 hp out of a 1000 lbs lithium ion battery, spec'ed for 56 kWh 375 V, on a Tesla Roadster 2011.

Scaling to 4400 hp (that of a Siemens Charger SC-44) you would need about 15,278 lbs of battery, or nearly 7.7 US tons of battery. In comparison, the SC-44 weighs 264,556 lbs (or 132.3 US tons) and an AEM-7 is 102 US Tons.

Hmmm... interesting. I wonder how much weight is diesel engine and conversion. Because if you can tune it to 600 V DC, then invert it what the prime movers need... hey, it may be worth a lighter engine. We just got to work on how to *charge* them.
  by Ryand-Smith
 
STrRedWolf wrote:Lithium-Ion batteries that are poorly made are the problem, as shown by the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphone. Compare with Tesla's battery factories, which goes into their cars and don't explode, period. Even safer tech can be made by adding a plastic membrane to increase density and safety at the same time (PBS NOVA).

That said, I dug into a bit of googling and got 288 hp out of a 1000 lbs lithium ion battery, spec'ed for 56 kWh 375 V, on a Tesla Roadster 2011.

Scaling to 4400 hp (that of a Siemens Charger SC-44) you would need about 15,278 lbs of battery, or nearly 7.7 US tons of battery. In comparison, the SC-44 weighs 264,556 lbs (or 132.3 US tons) and an AEM-7 is 102 US Tons.

Hmmm... interesting. I wonder how much weight is diesel engine and conversion. Because if you can tune it to 600 V DC, then invert it what the prime movers need... hey, it may be worth a lighter engine. We just got to work on how to *charge* them.
IF these numbers are right it might be worth it to just build a battery train for the NYC market instead of a shoe
  by FarmallBob
 
STrRedWolf wrote:That said, I dug into a bit of googling and got 288 hp out of a 1000 lbs lithium ion battery, spec'ed for 56 kWh 375 V, on a Tesla Roadster 2011.

Scaling to 4400 hp (that of a Siemens Charger SC-44) you would need about 15,278 lbs of battery, or nearly 7.7 US tons of battery. In comparison, the SC-44 weighs 264,556 lbs (or 132.3 US tons) and an AEM-7 is 102 US Tons.
Your calculation (288 HP from a battery weighing 1,000 lb) is OK as far as it goes. However it neglects one key parameter: For HOW LONG can this battery produce 288 HP?
Let’s do some calculations:

Assuming Tesla's published battery energy storage capacity of 56 kw-hr for a 1,000 lb battery is valid, then

56 kw-hr/.746 hp per kw = 75.1 hp-hr.
75.1 hp-hr/288 hp = 0.26 hours.

In other words the Tesla battery can deliver 288 hp for only about 15 minutes until it is fully discharged. (In reality duration will be somewhat less on account of internal battery heating, etc)

Now let’s take your Tesla battery example and scale it up for a 4,400 hp locomotive. For sake of argument I’ll assume the battery-electric locomotive must have endurance equivalent to an SC-44 Siemens diesel-electric with a full fuel tank (1,800 gal).

1 gal diesel = 40.7 kw-hr (US Dept of Energy data)

1,800 gal diesel x 40.7 kw-hr/gal = 73,250 kw-hr.

Assuming an overall energy conversion efficiency of diesel to electrical of 40% (best, state of the art diesel engine). Then the actual kw-hr available for traction from a full tank becomes

73,250 x 40% = 39,300 kw-hr

So we need a battery that can store 39,300 kw-hr in order to match the performance and endurance of the SC-44 diesel. Using your 56 kw-hr per 1,000 lb of battery as basis, the weight of this hypothetical battery becomes:

39,300 kw-hr / 56 kw-hr per ton = 702,000 lb.

That’s 351 tons of battery(!)

Imagine the tender necessary to carry 351 tons of battery…..figure (4) 125 gross ton cars. Or the additional locomotive power required just to lug the battery tender cars along in the train.

So much for the weight. Now let’s examine battery cost…

From Tesla’s web page we learn Li-ion batteries currently run about $190 per kw-hr of storage. So the price for a battery pack for our hypothetical locomotive:

39,300 kw-hr x $190/kw-hr = $7,467,000

To this you must add the cost of several “tender” cars required to carry 351 tons batteries – perhaps another $½ million?

Bottom line: Using state of the art Li-ion batteries, our hypothetical battery powered locomotive is going to need 351 tons of batteries priced in excess of $7 million PLUS a 4 or 5 car tender - in order to offer performance competitive to a modern diesel locomotive.

Will we be seeing a battery locomotive in commuter service anytime soon? I submit not likely....
  by dowlingm
 
This could be an interesting technology to follow for a diesel-battery hybrid scenario; given the demands of a marine environment are quite high RR must have quite a lot of faith in the robustness of the solution components.
https://www.rolls-royce.com/products-an ... ystem.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The key would be how small can this technology be made; for example, could you swap out a F40's 16-645 and replace it with something like QSK60 plus this system in the remaining space (assuming similar mods to how VIA got a HEP generator into their F40s.