DEGREE PROJECT IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2020
An Analysis of Fossil-free Alternatives for Swedish Railway
MARTINA KOMUHENDO
YUANJIAN ZHAI
KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
TRITA ABE-MBT-20394
An Analysis of Fossil-free Alternatives for Swedish Railway
Master’s thesis
Martina Komuhendo & Yuanjian Zhai
School of Architecture and the Built Environment
KTH Royal Institute of Technology
Stockholm, Sweden
June 2020
ii
iii
Acknowledgements
Our thanks go to our families, friends and classmates who through their support, the journey to complete the thesis was made possible. We would like to appreciate all the individuals who availed themselves to provide us with their time to clarify and provide insight during our research: “Magnus Forsen (Bombardier)”, “Andreas Frixen (Alstom)”, “Christer Löfving (Trafikverket Strategic Development)” and “Mats Berg ( KTH Rail Vehicle Division)”. The data, advice and perspective provided was greatly appreciated.
We would most of all like to thank our supervisors Anders Lindahl (KTH), Ingrid Johansson (KTH) and Patrik Dimberg (Alstom) for the assistance and guidance they provided during this process especially during the regular meetings, positive criticism, feedback, help getting in touch with various individuals for interviews and ideas when we faced challenges.
Gratitude goes to Alstom Sweden for providing the topic and allowing us to divulge into this topic.
Martina Komuhendo & Yuanjian Zhai, Stockholm, June 2020
iv
Abstract
The transport sector is a major contributor to the rise in global temperatures and emissions. The use of fossil fuel being one of the main drivers, most modes of transport are looking at alternatives to the limited and environmentally unsustainable fuels. Despite the railway sector being considered the more ‘green’ alternative mode of transport as compared to other modes like air, there exist more work that is required to make the railway sector as efficient and green as possible especially the significant percentage of the railway networks that are still non-electrified. These lines tend to be short, isolated and in some instances with seasonal traffic, hence there not being an urgent need to electrify.
The cost of electrification is usually costly especially in terms of initial infrastructure development and alternatives are needed where the cost of electrification is not viable. The main objective of this report is to analyze the current fossil-free alternatives that are available or soon to be available on the market and determine which alternative is suitable for a specific non-electrified line considering factors such as cost, impact to the environment and the long-term strategy. As this is a complex analysis, the authors of this report will utilize the analytical hierarchical process (AHP) model to determine the most suitable choice for each line. The AHP model is one of the multicriteria methods developed to deconstruct complex situations into simple levels with the first level containing the goal: determining the viability of a fossil-free alternative that may be suitable for a particular railway line using the various criteria and sub-criteria.
The results differed along the various railway lines with Fryksdalsbanan, Tjustbanan, Hällnäs- Lycksele, Kinnekullebanan and Vaggerydsbanan having battery-operated trains as the optimal choice while the Mellerud-Bengtsfors, Stångådalsbanan, both Inlandsbanan (North and South), Halmstad- Nässjö, Bockabanan and Nässjö-Vetlanda favoring the hydrogen-fueled trains.
In conclusion, both the battery-operated and hydrogen-fueled trains are viable options on the short, low-demand railway lines while the electric trains and diesel-fueled trains are expensive and environmentally unsuitable, respectively.
Keywords: fossil-free alternatives, railway, costs, environmental impact, AHP, Sweden.
v
Sammanfattning
Transportsektorn är en stor bidragande orsak för den ökande globala temperaturen och koldioxidutsläpp. Då fossila bränslen är en av de främsta anledningarna till ökningen så letar transportsektorn efter ett alternativ till de ändliga och miljöfarliga bränsleslagen. Även då järnvägen generellt räknats som det mer ”gröna” sättet att resa på om man jämför med andra sätt som till exempel att flyga, så finns det fortfarande mycket inom järnvägen som behöver förbättras och effektiviseras för att få järnvägssektorn att bli så grön och miljövänlig som möjligt. Då syftar vi speciellt på den andel av järnvägen som ännu inte är elektrifierad. Dessa järnvägslinjer tenderar att vara korta, isolerade delsträckor och i vissa fall endast erbjuda säsongstrafik och har på grund av detta inte ansetts behöva vara elektrifierade.
Kostnaden för att elektrifiera järnvägssträckor är vanligtvis hög. Speciellt vid uppgradering av redan existerande infrastruktur. Man kommer även vara tvungen att hitta andra lösningar där uppgraderingen till elektrifierade järnvägslinjer skulle kosta så mycket att det inte skulle anses rimligt. Huvuduppgiften för den här rapporten är att analysera de nuvarande fossilfria alternativ som finns tillgängliga (nu eller som snart kommer finnas tillgängliga), för att fastställa vilket alternativ som bäst lämpar sig till en specifik linje som ej är eldriven med hänsyn till kostnad, miljöpåverkan och långtidsstrategi. Då detta är en komplicerad analys så kommer författarna av denna rapport använda sig av den analytiska hierarkiska processmodellen (AHP) för att avgöra de lämpligaste alternativen för varje enskild järnvägslinje. AHP- modellen är en av metoderna för problem med flera kriterier som utvecklats för att dela upp komplicerade situationer till enkla steg där det slutliga steget når målet: Att avgöra huruvida ett fossilfritt alternativ kan vara lämpligt för en specifik järnvägslinje genom att tillgodose alla kriterier och delkriterier.
Resultaten skilde sig åt mellan olika järnvägslinjer med Fryksdalsbanan, Tjustbanan, Hällnäs-Lycksele, Kinnekullebanan och Vaggerydsbanan var batteridrivna tåg som det bästa valet medan vätgasdrivna tåg var bättre för Mellerud-Bengtsfors, Stångådalsbanan, båda Inlandsbanan (Nord and Söder), Halmstad-Nässjö, Bockabanan och Nässjö-Vetlanda.
Sammanfattningsvis är både batteridrivna och vätgasdrivna tåg livskraftiga alternativ på de korta järnvägslinjerna med låg trafik medan EMU är dyra och för dieseldrivna tåg är dåligt för miljö
Keywords: fossilfritt alternativ, järnväg, kostar, påverkan på miljön, AHP, Sverige.
vi
Definitions and Acronyms
OECD: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. GDP: Gross Domestic Product. GHG: Green House Gases. NOx: Nitrogen oxides. PM: Particulate Matter. Mtoe: million tons of energy. AHP model: analytical hierarchy process model. MCA: Multicriteria Analysis. NE: New Energy train in Japan. BEMU: Battery Electric Multiple Unit. EMU: Electric Multiple Unit. IPEMU: Independently Powered Electric Multiple Unit RTRI: Japanese Railway Technical Research Institute. JR: Japan Railway company. CO2: carbon dioxide. GWP: global warming potential. BOP: balance of plant, a component of the fuel cell vehicle system. PEM: proton electrolyte membrane, a component of the fuel cell. LCA: life cycle analysis. LCC: Life cycle cost. GREET: Greenhouse gases, regulated emissions and energy use in transport. LiB: Lithium-ion Batteries.
vii
Contents
Acknowledgements ...... iv
Abstract ...... v
Sammanfattning ...... vi
Definitions and Acronyms ...... vii
Figures...... x
Tables ...... xii
1. Introduction ...... 14
1.1 Background ...... 14
1.2 Objectives ...... 18
1.3 Scope ...... 19
1.4 Thesis structure ...... 20
2. Literature review ...... 22
2.1 Definition ...... 22
2.2 Alternatives ...... 23
2.3 Methodology ...... 25
3. Methodology ...... 28
3.1 Overview of AHP method ...... 28
3.2 Implementation of AHP method ...... 29
4. Overview of non-electrified railway in Sweden ...... 34
5. Fossil-free alternatives ...... 37
5.1 Battery trains ...... 38
5.2 Hydrogen trains ...... 44
5.3 Electric trains ...... 48
5.4 Diesel trains ...... 48
5.5 Selection of trains for the study ...... 49
6. Costs ...... 50 viii
6.1 Train costs ...... 50
6.2 Infrastructure costs ...... 51
6.3 Fuel costs ...... 54
6.4 Maintenance costs ...... 61
6.5 Track access charges ...... 64
6.6 Overview of Costs ...... 67
7. Long-term strategy ...... 68
7.1 Traffic demand ...... 68
7.2 Capital expenditure estimation ...... 69
7.3 Operating cost estimation ...... 70
7.4 Overall cost estimation ...... 71
7.5 Suitability of different alternatives ...... 74
7.6 Potentiality of different alternatives ...... 75
8. Environmental impact ...... 78
8.1 Life cycle analysis ...... 78
8.2 Overall Environmental impact ...... 98
9. Evaluation of alternatives ...... 101
9.1 Establishment of an evaluation system ...... 101
9.2 Evaluation of rail transport alternatives ...... 103
9.3 Results of the evaluation ...... 106
10. Conclusion and discussion ...... 113
10.1 Conclusion ...... 113
10.2 Discussion ...... 114
10.3 Further research ...... 115
REFERENCES ...... 116
ix
Figures
Figure 1: The amount of emissions per sector (Chapman, 2007)...... 15 Figure 2: The relationship of the greenhouse emissions to the GDP of a country (Statistics Sweden, n.d.)...... 16 Figure 3: The current Swedish railway network showing the electrified and non-electrified sections ...... 17 Figure 4: The workflow of the thesis work ...... 20 Figure 5; The standard AHP model structure ...... 29 Figure 6: The non-electrified lines with passenger traffic ...... 3 4 Figure 7: The percentage of electrified railway lines in Sweden out of the lines currently in use (UIC Synopsis, 2020) ...... 37 Figure 8: The general structure of the Battery electric multiple units (Yoshida & In, 2012) ...... 38 Figure 9: A simplification how battery electric trains operate (Molyneux et al., 2010)...... 41 Figure 10: Results of the battery performance of the train during winter and summer along the Karasuyama line (Yoshida & In, 2012) ...... 42 Figure 11: The battery performance as the elevation varies (Yoshida & In, 2012) ...... 42 Figure 12: The image shows the Alstom Coradia continental (BEMU) (Alstom, 2020)...... 43 Figure 13: IPEMU-Essex railcar (Bombardier, 2015)...... 44 Figure 14: UK Hydroflex train (Thorne et al., 2019) ...... 4 4 Figure 15: The technology of the Alstom Coradia iLint (Alstom, 2020)...... 47 Figure 16: A sketch showing the location of the transformer and main converter on an AC EMU (Hata, 1998)...... 48 Figure 17: Alstom Coradia Lint 54 DMU (Alstom, 2019) ...... 49 Figure 18: The charging system when in operation and stationery (Yoshida & In, 2012)...... 52 Figure 19: Basic configuration of a hydrogen refueling station (Parker, 2007)...... 53 Figure 20: Costs for Frysksdalsbanan (left) and for Mellerud-Bengtsfors (right) ...... 72 Figure 21: Costs for Tjustbanan (left) and Stångådalsbanan (right) ...... 72 Figure 22: Costs for the Inlandsbanan-North (left) and Inlandsbanan-South (right) ...... 72 Figure 23: Costs for Hällnäs-Lycksele (left) and Kinnekullebanan (right) ...... 73 Figure 24: Costs for Nässjö-Halmstad (left) and Vaggerydsbanan (right) ...... 73 Figure 25: Costs for the Bockabanan (left) and the Nässjö-Vetlanda (right) ...... 73 Figure 26: Suitability of each alternative under different situations ...... 74 Figure 27: Share of each type of cost for running battery trains ...... 75
x
Figure 28: Share of each type of cost for running hydrogen trains ...... 76 Figure 29: Share of each type of cost for running electric trains ...... 76 Figure 30: Share of each type of cost for running diesel trains ...... 77 Figure 31: The standard life cycle analysis phases according to ISO 14040 ...... 80 Figure 32: The main components of a lithium-ion battery ...... 82 Figure 33: A schematic illustration of a Lithium cell adopted from Romare & Dahllöf (2017) ...... 83 Figure 34: The relationship between the increase in battery capacity to the amount of CO2 emissions (Ambrose & Kendall, 2016)...... 86 Figure 35: The amount of emissions produced during recycling (Romare & Dahllöf, 2017)...... 87 Figure 36: The total average emissions per life cycle stage ...... 89 Figure 37: The fuel cell schematic typically used in a hydrogen train (Föger, 2008)...... 90 Figure 38: Weight distribution within the fuel cell using a baseline scenario of a hydrogen vehicle (Evangelisti et al., 2017) ...... 91 Figure 39: The various different results on the global warming potential of the fuel cell at the manufacturing stage (Evangelisti et al., 2017) ...... 91 Figure 40: The average amount of emissions due to the various components of the fuel cell stack during their life cycle (Berger, 2017) ...... 92 Figure 41: GWP of the various stages of the life cycle of a typical ICE diesel engine unit (Li et al., 2013) and (MacLean & Lave, 2003) ...... 94 Figure 42: GWP comparison between the diesel engines of the Lint 54 and WD615.87 with considering the raw materials...... 95 Figure 43: The overall environmental impact of the different train alternatives along the unelectrified lines for thirty years (expected life span of the train vehicle) ...... 99 Figure 44: The environment impact of each alternative in terms of % to the other options ...... 100 Figure 45: The evaluation system regarding rail vehicle alternatives ...... 103
xi
Tables
Table 1: Relative importance scale used for criteria and description ...... 30 Table 2: Relative performance scale of alternatives and description ...... 32 Table 3: The non-electrified lines with passenger traffic ...... 3 5 Table 4: Specifications of rail vehicles along the identified non-electrified lines ...... 36 Table 5: Battery electric multiple units currently in operation and the prototypes globally ...... 39 Table 6: The summary of the existing hydrogen trains (Thorne et al., 2019) ...... 46 Table 7: The features of the battery train ...... 57 Table 8: Energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost for battery train ...... 57 Table 9: The features of hydrogen train ...... 58 Table 10: Energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost for hydrogen train ...... 58 Table 11: The features of electric train ...... 59 Table 12: Energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost for electric train ...... 60 Table 13: The features of diesel train ...... 60 Table 14: Energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost for the diesel train ...... 61 Table 15: Maintenance costs of battery trains after completing a single trip on lines ...... 62 Table 16: Maintenance costs of hydrogen trains after completing a single trip on lines ...... 62 Table 17: Maintenance costs of electric trains after completing a single trip on lines ...... 63 Table 18: Maintenance costs of diesel trains after completing a single trip on lines ...... 63 Table 19: Track access charges for battery trains on lines ...... 64 Table 20: Track access charges for hydrogen trains on lines ...... 65 Table 21: Track access charges for electric trains on lines ...... 6 6 Table 22: Track access charges for diesel trains on lines ...... 6 6 Table 23: The annual number of trips per each line section in the 1st year and 30th year ...... 68 Table 24: Minimum number of trains and the quantity of rail infrastructure for each line section ..... 70 Table 25: The amount of emissions produced per different LCA method used ...... 84 Table 26: The average sum of the GHG according to Romare & Dahllöf (2017) from the various components of the battery ...... 85 Table 27: Life cycle impact of each battery component (Romare & Dahllöf, 2017)...... 88 Table 28: The estimated global warming potential of the train over its life ...... 92 Table 29: The calculated emissions produced during operation on the various non-electrified lines . 96 Table 30: The amount of emissions produced by the ICE diesel engine of its life cycle ...... 97 Table 31: Pairwise comparison matrix of criteria ...... 106
xii
Table 32: Pairwise comparison matrix of sub-criterion (costs) ...... 107 Table 33: Pairwise comparison matrix of sub-criterion (long-term strategy) ...... 107 Table 34: Pairwise comparison matrix of all criteria and sub-criteria ...... 108 Table 35: Pairwise comparison matrix of alternatives in terms of each criterion ...... 109 Table 36: Total weight of each alternative ...... 110 Table 37: Results of all non-electrified lines ...... 112
xiii
1. Introduction 1.1 Background The growth of population coupled with technological advancement has played a significant impact on people and the environment (Doyle & Muneer, 2017). The various human activities carried out in pursuit of economic development have created great advancements for mankind as whole however, the far-reaching adverse effects of these activities include most importantly climate change. Energy is an important aspect of daily human life; the various human activities have shown a global growth in energy consumption and resource depletion. The term climate change is most notably measured by the increase in temperatures of the earth which in turn leads to changes in the various eco-systems (Button, 2008). According to various studies, the change can be readily attached to the emissions released as a result of the various anthropogenic activities being carried out that exhaust the limited natural resources such as fossil fuels (van Essen, 2008).
The Figure 1 below shows the amount of emissions per sector with the transport sector contributing 26% of the global carbon dioxide emissions, the second highest among the sectors (Chapman, 2007). The different fuels are consumed by the transport sector with fossil fuels accounting for nearly 97%, natural gas 2%, electricity 1% and the renewables <0.5% in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries (OECD) of which Sweden is a member.
The fossil fuels such as oil and its by-products are the dominant cause for the transport sector having such high emissions (Chapman, 2007). It was estimated in 2016 that the transport sector alone consumed approximately 2748 million tons of oil equivalent (Mtoe) energy which made up 29% of the total world’s entire energy consumption in that year (Dai et al., 2019).
14
Figure 1: The amount of emissions per sector (Chapman, 2007).
1.1.1 Environmental issues With a population of more than 10 million and a high national GDP, Sweden is regarded as one of the most affluent countries in Scandinavia. With the population expanding and country developing, Sweden is now facing some environmental issues that could potentially harm people, change the climate, and even obstruct the further development of each industry (Air Pollution & Climate Secretariat, n.d.). These include environmental issues such as global warming, air pollution, natural catastrophes and extinction of species due to human activities that require special focus.
Nowadays, the Swedish population is at risk of air pollution (Statistics Sweden, n.d.). Even though Sweden has one of Europe’s lowest levels of air pollution, there are still many people and their health influenced by worse air quality. Around 7600 people die prematurely due to exposure to some pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter. According to some relevant studies, the high levels of nitrogen dioxide are mainly caused by transport emissions with an increased proportion of diesel vehicles exacerbating the problem. Because each death corresponds to a loss of roughly 11 years of life, the annual cost to the society is estimated to the amount of at least SEK 56 billion in 2015.
15
The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are keeping increasing continuously in Sweden. GHG emissions increased by 1.1% in the second quarter of 2019 compared with the same time period in 2018 as shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2: The relationship of the greenhouse emissions to the GDP of a country (Statistics Sweden, n.d.).
Besides, global energy consumption is increasing, and facing the problem of a shortage of fossil fuels in the coming decades with the demand for fossil fuels peaking and estimated in the next 50 years to be exhausted (Solar impulse foundation, 2020). Therefore, human will need to change their behaviors to avoid or at least minimize the bleak future, making the world better.
1.1.2 Swedish fossil-free vision Based on the decision by the parliament, Sweden aims to be one of the world’s first fossil-free nations by 2045( Axelsson, 2018). Fossil-free Sweden was initiated by the Swedish government ahead of the COP21 climate change conference in Paris in 2015.In the beginning it was more like a vision, but with the ongoing public climate movement and activists such as Greta Thunberg, the vision has become a goal. All enterprises, municipalities, associations, and other types of actors must follow this goal to carry out the work to be responsible for reducing GHG emissions and the environmental impact. There is no doubt that some new policies and new technological solutions will be implemented and developed in decades. As one of the most significant parts of the world, transport sector; which is responsible for approximately 29% of the total energy demand that is the leading cause for almost three-quarters of the carbon emissions, 16
requires to implement the change to achieve fossil-free transport modes (Fragiacomo & Piraino, 2019).
1.1.3 Current status of rail lines and rail technology In the 1930s, Sweden undertook a major project of electrifying its railway network concentrating mainly on the main lines (Sweden - Energy Union and innovation | Mobility and Transport, n.d.). As a result of this initiative, today approximately 75% of the Swedish railway lines are electrified while around 3300 km in total of railway lines are non-electrified, where diesel trains are mainly operating. The Figure 3 below shows the authors’ own drawing to display the current location of the various electrified and non-electrified lines in Sweden with the water areas included. On the map, red lines represent electrified lines while the blue lines represent non-electrified lines.
Figure 3: The current Swedish railway network showing the electrified and non-electrified sections
17
It can be inferred that current old diesel trains will soon need to be replaced with fossil- free trains due to the end of life cycle of trains and the goal of fossil-free nation. When it comes to fossil-free trains, apart from electrified trains that are mostly used now, other types of trains such as hydrogen trains, biofuel and battery trains are also possible alternatives that are developed by some companies as substitutes for the fossil fueled trains. Due to the costs incurred to implement electrification, only the tracks with high passenger and freight demand are electric to justify the initial cost of the electrical infrastructure as a result, many smaller lesser used lines remain non-electrified and using diesel (Niggemann & Betreuender, 2009). Diesel trains affect the local communities and ecosystem due the pollutants released. These pollutants include diesel exhaust, nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM), volatile organic compounds, Sulphur oxides and many other compounds considered harmful to the air quality.
Therefore, it is necessary and urgent to study and analyze all practical fossil-free alternatives in Sweden to figure out the optimal alternatives that can be applied to railway sector under the background above and how Swedish railway especially the part of non-electrified railway is going to develop well in the future.
1.2 Objectives The objective of this project is to explore and study the potentiality and feasibility of using some different fossil-free alternatives for Swedish railway to replace conventional diesel trains running on non-electrified railway lines from technological, operational, cost-benefit and environmental perspectives. Under the overall objective, there are some small phased objectives as follows:
(1) Identify the non-electrified sections of railway and find out the propulsion of the vehicles currently used and the reasons why it is used including both the infrastructural and operational perspective. This includes factors such as geographical features, capacity utilization and the general public opinion to the existing train vehicles.
(2) Analyze the characteristics of some different fossil-free alternatives such as electrified trains, hydrogen trains and battery trains from different aspects and the external impact of different alternatives from a long-term perspective.
18
(3) Apply the AHP model to identify the most suitable alternative for identified non- electrified railway tracks. Then figure out the competitiveness of each alternative to give clients options.
1.3 Scope The project plans to concentrate on only the non-electrified railway lines operating with passenger traffic in Sweden and different fossil-free alternatives: electrified trains, hydrogen trains, battery trains. This scope is defined by the overall objective that study the feasibility of applying fossil-free alternatives to non-electrified railway lines in Sweden. In addition, this project only considers passenger traffic due to some limitations of current technology of fossil-free alternatives, the alternatives that are going to be studied are mainly about multiple unit trains mostly used in passenger traffic rather than conventional trains with locomotives.
The project is considered from two aspects: demand side and supply side. The purpose of the demand is to know the status of non-electrified railway lines and their operation to understand what and why rail transport looks like, and what is needed for operation. That is the demand of non-electrified railways for passenger traffic. As a result of the project background, new different fossil-free alternatives must be applied replacing old diesel trains running on non-electrified railway lines. In this case, the supply side is introduced into the project. Through securing and understanding the characteristics of each fossil-free alternatives as well as different attitudes from the authority side, it can be analyzed if new options could meet the demand after comparisons. As for different fossil-free options, it can also be known which fossil-free option is the most suitable or the optimal choice that can be applied to non-electrified railway lines to achieve the fossil-free vision, making rail transport more environmental-friendly. Therefore, the whole working process can be summarized as a flow chart shown in Figure 4.
19
Figure 4: The workflow of the thesis work
1.4 Thesis structure In chapter 1, a brief description of the current status quo of the railway network and the actual problem of emissions is described in conjunction with its effects and the cost both human and economical. Chapter 2 provides the various forms of literature used to generate the basis of this report and explores the where the authors generated the methodology and why. Chapter 3 further elaborates on the methodology to be used with a description of what the AHP model is and how the authors will apply it in this scenario. The chapter also includes the ways the data, both qualitative and qualitative was retrieved to be used in the model and achieve the various objectives.
Chapter 4 provides an overview what is the current status of the non-electrified lines, their locations including a map, the specifications of the various lines and the common features shared that would assist the authors during the analysis of possible alternatives suitable for each line. This chapter incudes the vehicles that currently operate on the line, the specifications as these was considered the main area of interest as most of the alternative railcars, the main difference is the propulsion system and how it would operate in place of the diesel car; an understanding of the diesel railcar operations was needed and summarized in chapter 4. Chapter 5 elaborates further on the mentioned three alternatives of battery, hydrogen and electric trains. This involved understanding
20
the evolution of the traction systems and current examples that exist globally. The operation, infrastructure and test that have been done so far to prove how efficient the vehicles would perform are included.
Chapter 6, 7 and 8 consider the three main factors the authors considered that maybe important to influence the decision during the AHP process of selection of the various alternatives on the different non-electrified lines. The factors during this study and in relation to the AHP model, were named criteria and included: cost, impact to environment and the long-term strategy. The effect of the criteria was determined by the various sub-criteria that each alternative displayed. Similar equations were used to use for all the alternatives to provide a means of comparison. Chapter 9 provides the establishment of the evaluation system based on AHP then takes one railway line as a case to show the results of the overall evaluation. Chapter 10 summarizes and concludes the entire study with the further analysis generated from the research and includes the recommendations.
21
2. Literature review 2.1 Definition Fossil fuels refers to the decomposed plants and organisms that have been buried under the earth’s crust for millennia making them carbon-rich (Nunez, 2019). These resources are non-renewable and responsible for approximately 80% of the world’s energy. They include coal, oil, and natural gas, all fossil-fuels which when burnt contribute to global warming (Denchak, 2018). The need for these fuels and production of them is expected to increase and with the associated CO emissions (Mohr et al., 2015). Around 70% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions often in form of CO are as a direct result of combustion of fossil fuels (Johnsson et al., 2019). In their report Johnsson et al. (2019) compared the share of renewables to the non-renewables but with the share of fossil- fuels taking 80% to the 20% of the fossil-free alternatives globally but they concluded by suggesting more investment into alternatives to the fossil-fuel in all sectors is urgently needed to fulfill the Paris agreement.
Transportation alone produced 14% of global greenhouse gas emissions in 2015 (Khalili et al., 2019). The fossil-fuel dependency is a major factor that needs to be tackled to reduce transport emissions and replace the existing transport modes with those with low climate impact (Åkerman, 2011). It is estimated that about 95% of the vehicle fleet in Europe is diesel or gasoline driven (Poulikidou et al., 2019). There is a need to develop alternative emission-free fuels to drive the transport sector and improve the ecological efficiency to solve the major issues facing our world that include climate change, environmental pollution, and scarcity of resources, especially fossil fuels; Axelsson (2018), Johnsson et al. (2019) and Poulikidou et al. (2019) all in their papers clearly showed a switch to fossil-free has a significant difference of 85% on reduction of emissions.
In railway, the electric trains have higher efficiency than the ICE train (Khalili et al., 2019), the renewable sources of energy such as electricity and hydrogen provide a higher level of sustainability both for freight and passenger. The global share of rail freight and passenger based on liquid-fuel is 61% and 55% respectively (Sven et al., 2015), a significant percentage that requires a need for change. A change agreed by all
22
the stakeholders as noted by Jo Johnson (government official) in his speech to the rail bosses, ‘All diesel trains should be scrapped by 2040’ (Parker, 2007).
2.2 Alternatives Globally, of the 1.3 million km of railway lines, approximately a quarter is electrified (Verkehr et al., 2018). There is a variation from continent to continent with Europe having approximately 57% of the world’s electrified railway lines. In Europe, Luxembourg, Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, and Austria are some countries having a significant number of electrified lines (UIC Synopsis, 2020). However, due to the high costs of electrification, it is often the main lines that account for 80% of the traffic that are electrified leaving the shorter lines with less passenger traffic using ICE trains (Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong, 2017). Meynerts et al. (2018) in their research determined that ecologically, the use of the hybrid technology on the railway line is a viable option to the conventional diesel trains. With the development of a new battery (Cusenza et al., 2019) and fuel cell technology (Thounthong et al., 2009), there is hope for new ‘greener’ alternatives being tested on the railway lines (Correa et al., 2017).
The alternatives that have garnered popularity include electric trains, battery-operated, and hydrogen-fueled trains. The bio-fuel are more predominant in the automotive sector than rail, the results from one of the studies is positive dependent on the heat generation and electricity mix (Shanmugam et al., 2018).
In their studies Simons & Bauer (2015) and Yang et al. (2020) discuss the possibility of the fuel cell and battery vehicles to be used as alternatives to the conventional cars. The results vary depending on the electric mix of the country and the distance covered. Hwang et al. (2013b) carried out a life cycle assessment of the fuel cell and battery vehicles; it was concluded that depending on the hydrogen production, determined how well fuel cell vehicles performed in comparison to battery vehicles environmentally. The manufacture and production stage of the Lithium-ion battery is one of the main obstacles to reducing the global warming potential of the battery vehicles in the overall life cycle (Yang et al., 2018) but results from Nordelöf et al. (2019) show that the use of the battery is better alternative to diesel in public transport.
23
In Japan, the NE (New Energy train) was upgraded to have a pantograph and battery along the Karasuyama line in 2012 (Yoshida, 2012). The main objective was to operate trains by electric power along the non-electrified line and charged by primary circuit batteries while allowing quick charging at the end stations, via regenerative breaking and other specified locations. The paper analyzed the performance of the battery- operated multiple units (BEMU) in varying conditions, charging while running and while stopped (Alfieri et al., 2019), these tests have proven positive results on the automotive side (Gerssen-Gondelach & Faaij, 2012). The battery-operated train has been considered as a viable alternative in short, idle with low demand railway line sections in countries such as Tanzania as concluded by Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong (2017). These line sections are often uneconomical to invest in the electrification infrastructure, but the BEMUs provide an economical and environmentally viable option for diesel trains (Nagaura et al., 2017). The comparison analysis was carried out by considering the train dynamics, existing demand, fuel cost, and carbon dioxide emission rate of the alternatives to carry out simulations to determine how viable it is replacing the existing diesel railcars with the BEMUs along the various railway lines in different countries by Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong (2017) in Tanzania and Thorne et al. (2019) in Norway. The methods used in this report considered the research done by Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong (2017) and Thorne et al. (2019) as a basis to determine the weight of some criteria like cost where the Davis equations were used to determine the approximate fuel consumption.
Hydrogen operated rail cars are considered as alternatives as well wherein Britain along the Birmingham route, a simulation was done to determine the efficiency of a conceptual railcar to replace the diesel (Hoffrichter et al., 2016a). Considering the hydrogen source is from natural gas, the trains are designed to reach the benchmark journey of 94 minutes without there needing to refuel. The hydrogen hybrid was reported to have achieved about 79.0% and 66.4% reduction in energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions res in comparison to the original diesel railcar (Hwang et al., 2013). The Ontario research paper carried out a sensitivity analysis over a range of the costs and the return if the hydrogen passenger railcars were implemented and provided a comparison with electrification, the ideal alternative but due to initial investment uneconomical to implement (Marin et al., 2010b). The paper analyzed the installation and operation costs per train-km. All these various studies aim to increase 24
the share of renewable means of propulsion in the transport sector, (Gustafsson & Johansson, 2015) in their master thesis attempted to make a comparison which alternative would perform better using the ecological and cost as factors for consideration for an automotive vehicle. Using the same basis but with four alternatives, three factors instead of the two (cost, environment and long-term) for twelve different lines and the AHP model to analyse the possible options applicable to phase out the diesel trains currently used in Sweden.
Shift2Rail Organization is a body of the European Union, exploring focused research and market-driven solutions to accelerate the development of new and advanced technologies for rail transport in Europe. This organization has done a study on hydrogen trains. Through the analysis regarding market potential of applying hydrogen rail technology as well as the results of hydrogen trains testing on a few railway lines in several European countries, it concluded that the operating hydrogen trains will make a positive contribution to environment and the costs of running hydrogen trains will definitely decrease. Hydrogen trains make more economic sense on long non-electrified lines than current diesel trains (Ruf et al., 2019).
CH2M HILL Canada Limited, a construction engineering company did a feasibility study on Regional Express Rail Program with applying hydrogen trains in Canada. The study analyzed the technical and financial requirements for operating hydrogen trains for a rail network, and the aspects regarding the laws, policy and public acceptance were discussed to make the whole evaluation more holistic. It concluded operating hydrogen trains was technically feasible, and the lifetime costs in total would be equivalent to operating a conventional rail network with catenary system (CH2M HILL Canada Limited et al., 2018).
2.3 Methodology In all the research papers reviewed during the course of this project, all the various studies have carried out the comparison analysis using LCA or a variant form as the methodology to determine between two alternatives for example: hydrogen vs. diesel (Marin et al., 2010b) or diesel vs. battery (Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong, 2017) or hydrogen vs. battery (Hwang et al., 2013) or among three alternatives (Meynerts et al., 2018) for a specific line or route with the major factors considered being ecological 25
and economic (Nordelöf et al.,2019; Evangelisti et al.,2017a; Meynerts et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2016; Ahmadi et al., 2015) to mention a little bit. While the studies are comprehensive, these studies are often case study specific with bias affecting the result.
In addition, some studies on environmental impact and costs for rail transport in general have been done. According to Stripple & Uppenberg (2010), the life cycle assessment method can be used to calculate and forecast the environmental impact of constructing a railway line and running rail traffic on it. Take Bothnia line as a case, although constructing the line has negative impact on environment, the total environmental impact will be compensated by the transport of passengers and goods. This study proved the possibility of applying life cycle assessment method to analyze the environmental impact of rail transport by modularizing rail components.
Life cycle analysis of fuel cell technology was conducted by Dhanushkodi et al. (2008), the study investigated the environmental contributions of different components and raw materials during the production stage of hydrogen fuel. The reduction of emission was studied in comparison with other energy technologies such as internal combustion engines, wind, and solar energy. It proved the reliability of LCA applied to fuel cells since it can examine various environmental issues and deals with uncertainty in the future.
A systematic process for measuring the overall cost for rail transport was proposed by Gattuso & Restuccia (2014). The total cost was divided into investment cost and operating cost, where investment cost consisted of costs of infrastructure, rolling stock as well as other fixed facilities while other costs were belonging to operating cost. When the number of trains, the amount of infrastructure and equipment, and the running distance of trains were known, the overall cost could be estimated. Although this method did not include details as a feasibility study did, this process allowed policy planners and decision makers to consider and analyze the project in a comprehensive way, which would be prior to detailed studies of this project.
The AHP (analytical hierarchical process) model is a form of multicriteria analysis that incorporates the technique for checking the consistency of the decision maker’s evaluation while reducing bias in the decision-making process (Saaty, 1980). The AHP 26
model has been used to perform various complex scenarios such conflict resolution as done by Oluwabukola et al. (2013), who applied AHP to solve the Boko Haram crisis in Nigeria or using qualitative data in the medical field to determine patient preference (Danner et al., 2017). In their study, Danner et al. (2017) compared the discrete choice and the AHP; the results were similar with exception of the level based interpretation which is dependent or independent on the attribute importance on level ranges in either method. An advantage that AHP has to decision-makers is that it that it offers a structured flow when dealing with often difficult problems and highlights inconsistencies at an early stage and attempts to minimize them through redundancy (Politis et al., 2010). It is widely used in a variety of sectors like environmental engineering (Jing et al., 2013), suitability analysis (Mwambeleko et al., 2019) and transport (Chou, 2010).
A research studied an application of analytic hierarchy process in selection the most appropriate way of transportation for a logistics company (Kumru & Kumru, 2014). The study proved the feasibility of the method in transport decision making process, different transport modes can be evaluated holistically based on consideration of several aspects. Under known situations, this method can be used to help decision makers find the optimal transport mode for logistics.
27
3. Methodology
The primary method to carry out the analysis will with the use of the AHP model. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is an analytical method that implements qualitative and quantitative analysis of influential critical factors related to a problem then makes decisions based on the analysis results (Panagiotis et al., 2018). The model is a type of multicriteria analysis (MCA) method that aims to solve a complicated situation similar to the one presented in this thesis; breaking it down into simple, manageable steps or level (Saaty, 2002). AHP is widely used in group decision making in many industries. Instead of prescribing a correct decision, the AHP helps decision makers find one that best suits their goal and enhances their understanding of the problem. It provides a comprehensive and rational framework for structuring a decision problem, for representing and quantifying its elements, for relating those elements to overall goals, and for evaluating alternative solutions. In this project, the AHP model will be used to analyze which alternatives are more suitable for decision-makers.
3.1 Overview of AHP method This method is a hierarchical weighted analytical method mostly used for decision making process, which was proposed and developed by American operational researcher Thomas L. Saaty in the 1980s (Atanasova -Pachemska et al., 2015). AHP method is a quite simple, flexible, and practical multi-criteria decision-making method for quantitative analysis when solving qualitative problems. It is characterized by dividing various factors in complex problems into ordered and interconnected levels, making them well-organized. Then according to the results of subjective judgment and objective measurement, establish a matrix including all pairwise comparisons. Afterwards, a mathematical method is used to calculate the weights that reflect the relative importance of each element from each level, and the relative weights of all elements are calculated and sorted by the total ordering among all levels (Zeng et al., 2017). Due to the feature of combining qualitative data and quantitative data with the consideration of multiple criteria, it is convenient and flexible to be implemented in practical work when making decisions. Now it is widely applied in many areas such as industry, urban planning, business and education.
28
Initially, the AHP model has a three-level structure shown below. Level 1 represents the goal of a problem; more specifically, the goal is to find out the optimal choice from all available alternatives in a decision-making process. Level 2 includes all criteria that are taken into consideration to achieve the goal by analyzing and evaluating influential factors of other options. Level 3 is composed of all available alternatives that could be probably considered in decision making. All criteria are applicable to each option.
Figure 5; The standard AHP model structure
There are some advantages when implementing AHP method. AHP method can be able to take relative priorities of influential factors as well as relative performance of all alternatives in terms of each factor into consideration (Oguztimur, 2020). AHP could provide an effective way to make decisions with a clear structure when facing many factors simultaneously. Also, either qualitative aspects or quantitative aspects, or subjective judgements or objective judgements could be included during the decision- making process.
3.2 Implementation of AHP method For any decision-making problem, the first thing is to draft an AHP structure as shown above. It is necessary to determine the goal of a problem, the influential factors that could affect the judgement as well as available options. Once the structure is figured out, the decision-making problem can be solved by the following consecutive steps.
Step 1: Forming a comparison matrix of influential factors and computing criteria weights.
29
AHP starts with creating a comparison matrix A consisting of relative importance between any two factors. (Chou, 2010) The matrix A is a 𝑚 𝑚 dimensional square matrix, where 𝑚 is the number of criteria that are considered in decision-making process. The comparison matrix A is shown below. 𝑎 𝑎 …𝑎 ⎡ ⎤ 𝑎 𝑎 …𝑎 ⎢ . .⎥ 𝐴 ⎢ ⎥ 3 1 ⎢ . .⎥ ⎢ . .⎥ ⎣𝑎 𝑎 …𝑎 ⎦
Each component 𝑎 (𝑖 𝑚,𝑗 𝑚) of this matrix A represents the importance of the
𝑖th criterion relative to the 𝑗th criterion. If 𝑎 1, the 𝑖th criterion is more important than 𝑗th criterion; while if 𝑎 1, the 𝑖th criterion is less important than 𝑗th criterion.
If 𝑎 1, the 𝑖th criterion and 𝑗th criterion are believed to be equally importantly.
For all components on the diagonal of matrix A, 𝑎 is the relative importance of each
diagonal component to itself, which means the value of 𝑎 for all 𝑖 is equal to 1.
The values of relative importance 𝑎 between any two criteria of all criteria are measured on a numerical scale as shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Relative importance scale used for criteria and description
Scale of 𝑎 Description 1/8, 1/6, 1/4, 1/2 needed for average estimation 1/9 criterion 𝑖 is extremely less important than criterion 𝑗 1/7 criterion 𝑖 is strongly less important than criterion 𝑗 1/5 criterion 𝑖 is moderately less important than criterion 𝑗 1/3 criterion 𝑖 is weakly less important than criterion 𝑗 1 criterion 𝑖 and criterion 𝑗 are equally important 3 criterion 𝑖 is weakly more important than criterion 𝑗 5 criterion 𝑖 is moderately more important than criterion 𝑗 7 criterion 𝑖 is strongly more important than criterion 𝑗 9 criterion 𝑖 is extremely more important than criterion 𝑗 2, 4, 6, 8 needed for average estimation
30
Since 𝑎 is the reciprocal for 𝑎 , values of components below 1-valued diagonal can be easily got as long as the values of components above 1-valued diagonal are known, and vice versa. Normally it is enough to only know the values of components above 1- valued diagonal in the beginning, then the values of components below 1-valued diagonal can be calculated by using the formula below. 1 𝑎 3 2 𝑎
Afterwards, the comparison matrix A should be normalized by making the sum of relative importance on each column equal to 1. After that, any newly normalized
component 𝑎 could be calculated as 𝑎 𝑎 3 3 ∑ 𝑎
Eventually, the weight 𝑤 of the 𝑖th criterion is computed as ∑ 𝑎 𝑤 3 4 𝑚
The criteria weight vector 𝑤 is an m-dimensional column vector, which is shown below 𝑤 ⎡ ⎤ 𝑤 ⎢ . ⎥ 𝑤 ⎢ ⎥ 3 5 ⎢ . ⎥ ⎢ . ⎥ ⎣𝑤 ⎦
Step 2: Forming a comparison matrix of all alternatives in terms of the performance on criteria.
In this step, a comparison matrix S of alternatives in terms of alternatives’ performance on criteria is supposed to be built. S is a 𝑛 𝑚 dimensional matrix where each
component 𝑠 (𝑝 𝑛,𝑖 𝑚) represents the score of the 𝑝th alternative with respect to 𝑖th criterion.
31
Firstly, a comparison matrix 𝐵 (𝑖 𝑚) is needed to be created for each criterion.
The matrix 𝐵 is a 𝑛 𝑛 dimensional square matrix where 𝑛 is the number of
available alternatives for a decision-making process and each component 𝑏 (𝑥
𝑛, 𝑦 𝑛) of matrix 𝐵 represents the relative performance of the 𝑥 th alternative
compared to the 𝑦th alternative with respect to the 𝑖th criterion. If 𝑏 1, the 𝑥th alternative has a better performance than the 𝑦th alternative; while if 𝑏 1, the
𝑥th alternative has a worse performance than the 𝑦th alternative. If 𝑏 1, it is believed that 𝑥th alternative and the 𝑦th alternative have almost the same performance.
For all components on the diagonal of matrix 𝐵 , 𝑏 is the relative performance of
each diagonal component to itself, which means the value of 𝑏 for all 𝑥 is equal to 1.
Table 2: Relative performance scale of alternatives and description
Scale of 𝑏 Description 1/8, 1/6, 1/4, 1/2 needed for average estimation 1/9 alternative 𝑥 is extremely worse than alternative 𝑦 1/7 alternative 𝑥 is strongly worse than alternative 𝑦 1/5 alternative 𝑥 is moderately worse than alternative 𝑦 1/3 alternative 𝑥 is weakly worse than alternative 𝑦 1 alternative 𝑥 and alternative 𝑦 have the same performance 3 alternative 𝑥 is weakly better than alternative 𝑦 5 alternative 𝑥 is moderately better than alternative 𝑦 7 alternative 𝑥 is strongly better than alternative 𝑦 9 alternative 𝑥 is extremely better than alternative 𝑦 2, 4, 6, 8 needed for average estimation
Since 𝑏 is the reciprocal for 𝑏 , values of components below 1-valued diagonal can be easily got as long as the values of components above 1-valued diagonal are known, and vice versa. Normally it is enough to only know the values of components above 1-valued diagonal in the beginning, then the values of components below 1-valued diagonal can be calculated by using the formula below. 1 𝑏 3 6 𝑏
32
Afterwards, the same two-step normalization process is applied here to obtain the
performance vectors 𝑠 . Each n-dimensional column vector 𝑠 consists of the performance of all alternatives with respect to the 𝑖th criterion. After repeating the above procedure 𝑚 1 times more, finally the comparison matrix S is acquired as
𝑆 𝑠 𝑠 𝑠 …𝑠 3 7
S is a 𝑛 𝑚 dimensional matrix including the performance of 𝑛 alternatives with respect to 𝑚 criteria.
Step 3: Computing the total scores of alternatives.
After finishing computing criteria weight vector 𝑤 and comparison matrix S of alternatives, the total scores of each alternative can be calculated as 𝐶 𝑆∙𝑤 3 8
Matrix C is an n-dimensional column vector shown below, where 𝑐 represents the final score of the 𝑝th alternative 𝑐 ⎡ ⎤ 𝑐 ⎢ . ⎥ 𝐶 ⎢ ⎥ 3 9 ⎢𝑐 ⎥ ⎢ . ⎥ ⎣𝑐 ⎦
From the result of matrix C, it will be quite clear that which alternative is the best choice. The Cost-benefit analysis which will be included will involve a process of evaluating the final value of a project through comparing the costs and benefits from internal and external perspectives. (Ambrasaite et al., 2011) The project is evaluated before the start to analyze if it is worthy to do, which helps decision makers determine the feasibility from a long-term perspective. In this project, such a method will be used to analyze different alternatives using the criteria.
33
4. Overview of non-electrified railway in Sweden Sweden has approximately 61 passenger traffic railway lines (Järnvägsdata, 2020). Out of the entire network, twenty-two are non-electrified line sections with thirteen are in Götaland, three in Svealand and six in Norrland. Of the twenty-two, twelve-line sections have passenger traffic as shown in the map Figure 6. Of the twelve shown in Table 3, the Mellerud-Bengtsfors, and Inlandsbanan have seasonal passenger traffic during the summer or both summer and winter. The other lines have passenger traffic all year round. According to the Local.se article of 28th May 2018, the Kinnekullebanan was considered one of the ‘most scenic train journeys’ (Löfgren, 2018) and the Inlandsbanan crosses through very scenic routes as well. All these sections are single- track lines with the same track gauge of 1435mm. As displayed in Table 3, only the Tjustbanan and the Stångådalsbanan have some form of remote blocking.
Figure 6: The non-electrified lines with passenger traffic
34
The Inlandsbanan is of interest as there have been earlier studies done to determine the possibility of making the line fossil-free, the pre-study done by (Iversen, 2017) indicates that by replacing the current propulsion systems with one of the alternatives considered in the report (hydrogen) would aid the IBAB (Inlandsbanan AB) achieve the reduction of greenhouse gases by approximately 90%. Inlandsbanan is divided into two main sections since Inlandsbanan shares a stretch with Mittbanan between Brunflo and Östersund, and Mittbanan has already finished electrification. The Hällnäs- Lycksele is another line under consideration to change from the fossil driven train to a more fossil-free alternative (electric), the study being proposed by Trafikverket on behalf of the Västerbotten region would aim to analyse the expected cost to implement the change (Höök, 2020).
Table 3: The non-electrified lines with passenger traffic
Speed Length Max.Gradient Remote No. Line Region Line category Track operator restriction Remarks (km) ( ‰) blocking (km/h) Kil-Sunne-Torsby B_5,6 Strax 1 Svealand Trafikverket 82 50-90 16.7 no (Fryksdalsbanan) 18.0t Stvm 2 Mellerud-Bengtsfors Götaland5.6t/m Trafikverket 44 80 20 no Bjärka Säby-Västervik 3 Götaland Trafikverket 96 110 18.5 radioblock (Tjustbanan) C2 Strax radioblock 20.0t Stvm Linköping-Hultsfred-Kalmar on the 4 Götaland6.4t/m Trafikverket 235 140 19 (Stångådalsbanan) Linköping- Rimforsa Östersund-Storuman-Gällivare operate in 5 Norrland Inlandsbanan AB 746 140 17 no (Inlandsbanan) summer operate in summer Mora-Sveg-Brunflo 6 Norrland Inlandsbanan AB 285 140 17 no and winter (Inlandsbanan) sports D2 Strax season 7 Hällnäs-Lycksele Norrland22.5t Stvm Trafikverket 65 90 22 no Gårdsjö-Lidköping-Håkantorp 6.4t/m 8 Götaland Trafikverket 121 100 15.2 no (Kinnekullebanan) 9 Halmstad-Värnamo-Nässjö Götaland Trafikverket 196 120 17.8 no 10 Jönköping-Vaggeryd Götaland Trafikverket 38 100 17 no (Jönköping)-Nässjö-Eksjö 11 Götaland Trafikverket 22 100 16.7 no (Bockabanan) 12 Nässjö-Vetlanda Götaland Trafikverket 37 100 15 no
Table 4 shows that due to the low demand in the area through the lines pass have train formation of 1-3 with speed not exceeding 200 km/h (conventional train speed unlike the high speed that run at 200 km/h). The absence of high-speed possibility maybe due to the absence of remote blocking in all but two lines as described in Table 3. All the vehicles in table 4, use diesel as a form of propulsion with the Y1 and Y31 being the most common railcar.
35
Table 4: Specifications of rail vehicles along the identified non-electrified lines
Vehicle Formation Number Train Max. speed Accelation Gross weight Engine Power No. Line Train operator ATC type (No. cars) of seats length (m) (km/h) (m/s2) (tons) type output (kW) 1 Mellerud-Bengtsfors Y1 no Östersund-Storuman-Gä 2 Tågab Y1/YF1 no llivare (Inlandsbanan) Y1 1 68 24.4 130 unknown 47 diesel 420 Mora-Sveg-Brunflo 3 Tågab Y1/YF1 no (Inlandsbanan) Linköping-Hultsfred-Kalmar Transdev Sweden 4 Y2/Y31 Yes (Stångådalsbanan) AB Gårdsjö-Lidköping-Håkantorp 5 SJ Götaland Y31/Y32 no (Kinnekullebanan) Transdev Sweden 6 Halmstad-Värnamo-Nässjö Y31/Y32 Yes AB Kil-Sunne-Torsby 7 Tågab Y31/Y32 no (Fryksdalsbanan) 8 Hällnäs-Lycksele Norrtåg Y31/Y32 no Y31 2 86 39.2 140 1.0 79 diesel 960 Bjärka Säby-Västervik Transdev Sweden 9 Y31/Y32 Yes (Tjustbanan) AB Jönköping-Vaggeryd Transdev Sweden 10 Y31/Y32 Yes (Vaggerydsbanan) AB (Jönköping)-Nässjö-Eksjö 11 krösatågen Y31/Y32 no (Bockabanan) 12 Nässjö-Vetlanda DSB Småland Y31/Y32 no
The Y1 is still used in Sweden (järnväg.net, 2007) as shown in the Table 4. Built in the 1980s by the Fiat/Kalmar Verkstads AB. During the height of its popularity, the Swedish railway authority (SJ) ordered new types with space for cargo for their northern lines. Other than the northern lines, most of the operators changed out the Y1 to the Y31 or Y32.
The Y31 or if it has three cars instead of two it is known as Y32 is the current popular diesel railcar in use in Sweden (järnväg.net, 2007). Manufactured by Bombardier in 2002, approximately 11 Y31 railcars and 6 Y32 railcars have been built or delivered to the various unelectrified lines in Sweden. In June of 2003 was when the first Y31 was used in traffic in Småland, the train is popularly known as Krösatågen. Depending on the area, it has other names such as the Kinnekulletåget.
36
5. Fossil-free alternatives
The rail sector like all other forms of transport is heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Around the world approximately only 30% of the railway network is electrified. (Marin et al., 2010) In Europe, approximately 60% of railway lines are powered by electricity as shown in the Figure 7 below and the electric trains are fairly efficient, being able to transfer more than 85% of the electric energy into mechanical energy has made electricity a favorable choice to expand passenger transport, address greenhouse gas emissions and noise; however, the cost of investment especially the infrastructure approximately around several million Euros per kilometer in terms of generation, transformers and the issues associated with catenary wires installation and repair has made it cost effective to electrify only the major lines with high demand while leaving the low demand, idle railway lines to operate old diesel trains (Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong, 2017).
Figure 7: The percentage of electrified railway lines in Sweden out of the lines currently in use (UIC Synopsis,
2020)
The capital cost, the need to achieve interoperability and address the demand for energy source alternatives has increased the popularity of the fossil free alternatives such as hydrogen and battery trains which will be considered as the solution for the low-density lines in this report. These alternatives are a mixture of hybrids and single technology railcars. A hybrid train combines at least two types of technologies of energy storage (for example battery) and conversion (electric motor) component that can work together or as a stand-alone basis represent a feasible alternative for the railcar currently powered by fossil fuels (Meynertsa et al., 2017). The hybrid railcars can cover long distances
37
and are able to be emission free during operation with the possibility of replacing the diesel railcars to reduce the fuel consumption and emissions.
5.1 Battery trains 5.1.1 Introduction
Figure 8: The general structure of the Battery electric multiple units (Yoshida & In, 2012)
Battery trains as displayed in Figure 8 above or as they are commonly known as Battery electric multiple units (BEMUs) utilize the energy stored in the batteries to run along the non-electrified segments of the railway line and generally the new generation of the popular electric multiple unit train (EMU) to minimize the cost of railway line electrification (Ghaviha, 2016). The BEMUs replace the diesel generator with a rechargeable battery most often Lithium ion, due their robustness and life cycle (Thorne et al., 2019). With increase in battery capacity, power density and cost, this alternative is more viable especially for shorter routes (Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong, 2017).
5.1.2 Development The first known BEMUs were started in 1890 in Belgium, France, Germany and Italy. In 1911, the USA used the nickel-iron batteries giving the vehicles the name Edison Beach types. The battery Edison car was popular in New Zealand between the 1926- 1934. (Thorne et al., 2019) Ireland tested the use of the drum nickel-zinc battery between 1932-1946 and Britain tried the lead-acid battery in 1958. In all the earlier examples, the BEMUs failed due the cost of production of the battery and its maintenance not including the capability needed to produce a commercially viable mileage.
38
In present time, the batteries are mostly used in trams in cities where the speed is not higher than 80 km/h and there are no catenary wires as they are either expensive or unwanted. They include the Citadis APS, Citardis Ecopack a light railcar by Alstom with a supercapacitor (Alstom, 2019). CAF Urban 3 tramways in Serville in 2011, siemens has tramcars for the education city in Doha; these trams have a battery and supercapacitor charge via the overhead rail. In Portugal, Sitras HES system in 2008 ran 2500 m with catenary wires. In 2016, China has had the Huaia tram line 20.3 km that uses batteries made by CRRC Zhu Zhou, these batteries recharge at stops. The most recent BEMU development has mainly been in passenger traffic which is of interest for the scope of this report, Table 5 displays the BEMUs currently available both commercially and the prototypes. Provides a summary of the characteristics of the battery electric multiple units and their battery types.
Table 5: Battery electric multiple units currently in operation and the prototypes globally
Battery Development Range Year producer operator Series/model size stage (km) (KWH)
zinc-acid 1837 Davidson prototype - batteries
1879 Siemens prototype
Nickel-iron 1911 Edison railcar prototype batteries
1932- Drum prototype 1946 nickel-zinc
Electrostar
2015 Bombardier modified class prototype 500 50
379
Commercial 2014 J-TREC JR-east EV-E301 190 20.4 operation
JR- Commercial 2016 BEC819 360 10.8 Kyushu operation
39
Commercial 2017 J-TREC JR-east EV-E801 500 50 operation
2018 Stadler Flirt Akku prototype 150
Class230 D-train 2018 Vivarail prototype 424 64 30002 variant
2018 Bombardier Talent 3 prototype 300 40(100)
Siemens 2018 ÖBB Desiro ML cityjet prototype 528 mobility
JR- Shinkansen 2019 prototype central N7005
Coradia Lithium 20? Alstom continental Theoretical 120 ion BEMU
5.1.3 Technology Battery trains replace diesel with the rechargeable battery as the source of energy storage. According to Molyneux et al. (2010), batteries with high energy density and high-power delivery could be used to drive a train a range of 80 km or more. The average energy density of a diesel system is around 3500 Wh/kg, this is around 30% of the actual capability of the system while in comparison the battery system has a higher efficiency. The battery supplies energy during acceleration and regains between 55-65% energy back due to regenerative braking on the non-electrified sections of the rail (Fragiacomo & Piraino, 2019). However, new technology has been developed to allow the battery trains to have catenary wire system whereby the train runs as ordinary electric multiple unit on the electrified section while charging the battery (Yoshida, 2012). A battery electric multiple unit consists mainly of a battery pack which the energy storage system, bi-directional DC-DC converter that lowers the DC voltage from the overhead contact line to DC battery voltage, DC-AC converter, a power transformer is incorporated with the Variable Voltage Variable Frequency (VVVF) inverter. The VVVF inverter controls the traction motors using battery voltage as the input and the VVVF is cooled by the wind blowing when the train runs. A pantograph to connect to the charging unit at the selected terminals or to connect to the electrical distribution system while running on the electrified section. Figure 9 below attempts to
40
explain visually how the BEMU would operate between the electrified and non- electrified sections of the railway.
Figure 9: A simplification how battery electric trains operate (Molyneux et al., 2010).
On the electrified sections, the AC power from the overhead line is converted to DC power by the traction controller, charging the batteries (Nagaura et al., 2017). During the energy flow on the un-electrified during travel; the power is discharged from the batteries is converted to AC power by the traction controller driving the motor. The energy flow on the un-electrified lines as the train regenerates power during braking.
The success of the BEMUs has always been affected by the battery; the cost, size, capability and robustness has influenced the success of the BEMUs throughout time. The most popular include nickel-cadmium, nickel-metal hydride and Lithium ion. These batteries have high energy density, high efficiency and lower self-discharge levels, long life cycle and chemical stability (Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong, 2017). However, the battery performance varies in different conditions due to usage as the BEMUs transverse different elevations, temperature conditions of the area where they operate and others. In Japan, where several tests were performed between the Jichiidai and Ishibashi on the Tohoku line (Yoshida, 2012). The tests showed no significant variation due to temperature conditions as shown in the Figure 10 and the only significant change was when the train was going uphill or downhill due to the elevation changes displayed in Figure 11 below.
41
Figure 10: Results of the battery performance of the train during winter and summer along the Karasuyama line
(Yoshida & In, 2012)
Figure 11: The battery performance as the elevation varies (Yoshida & In, 2012)
42
In Europe, as displayed in Table 5, all the BEMUs are still prototypes according to the knowledge of this author only the battery operated train to actually carry passengers be the IPEMU run by network rail together with Bombardier in Derby-Leicestershire (Railway technology, 2020). Alstom has the Coradia Continental, the first of its battery trains to cover the regional traffic on the Leipzig-Chemnitz, Germany (Alstom, 2020).
5.1.4 Coradia Continental and IPEMU (a) Coradia Continental
Figure 12: The image shows the Alstom Coradia continental (BEMU) (Alstom, 2020).
As summarized in Table 5 and shown in the Figure 12 above, there have been several batteries train most prototypes with the most recent being the anticipated Coradia continental. A battery train (BEMU) coming from the Coradia group that is expected to provide a mileage of 100-120 km running on battery traction alone without need to recharge (Alstom, 2020). The 11 Bimodal trains are expected to offer emission free advanced battery traction will be expected to enter service 2023. The railcars are expected to be a conglomeration of the previous vehicles in Coradia group such as the prima H3 locomotive (a hybrid shunting biodiesel locomotive), Coradia iLint (the hydrogen train that will be discussed later in the report sub-section 5.2.4) and the Citadis tram (a catenary bimodal tram that runs on battery within the city and on catenary wire where it exists).This bimodal (battery and catenary) railcar is yet to be in service.
43
(b) IPEMU (Independently Powered Electric Multiple Unit) One of the BEMUs tested on the British railway networks. It entered into trial service in January 2015 and carried passengers while running several tests similar to those carried out on the Karasuyama-Hoshakuji line in Japan where the EV-E301 is commercially running; they include extreme high-speed test, range test and extreme temperature test (Bombardier, 2015). Like the Japanese BEMUs, the IPEMU was modified from the class 379 Electrostar EMU using electricity drawn from 25kV, 50Hz.
Figure 13: IPEMU-Essex railcar (Bombardier, 2015).
The IPEMU has a lithium ion battery with each battery raft having a battery box, batteries, battery monitoring system, isolation switch, power distribution control panel and battery charging inverter fitted into a rig (NetworkRail, 2015).
5.2 Hydrogen trains 5.2.1 Introduction
Figure 14: UK Hydroflex train (Thorne et al., 2019)
44
Hydrogen trains are generally described as a new type of trains using renewable hydrogen fuel as a primary source of energy to power the traction systems and other auxiliary systems (Thorne et al., 2019). The chemical energy of hydrogen fuel is converted into mechanical energy eventually for propulsion. Apart from the difference in energy source between hydrogen trains and other types of trains, hydrogen trains are quite like other trains such as electric trains and diesel trains in terms of train components and characteristics. Utilizing hydrogen fuel could be an effective way to tackle some problems regarding the environment and energy sources, so hydrogen trains are believed as a feasible fossil-free alternative that could be applied in the rail transport sector and make rail transport more sustainable.
5.2.2 Development At the beginning of the 21st century, the hydrogen-powered technology was studied, afterwards hydrogen-powered rail vehicles for different purposes were planning to be developed (Railway gazette international, 2012). Since then many relevant projects have been launched and some prototypes of hydrogen-powered rail vehicles have been come up with and designed. Some were designed for freight transportation while some were studied for passenger transportation; some trains were powered by hydrogen fuel cells while others used hydrogen in internal combustion engines.
In 2002, the first hydrogen-powered freight locomotive around the world was demonstrated in Quebec, Canada. This project aimed to develop a hydrogen-powered rail vehicle that would be used for mining work and served for a Canadian mining company.
In the first half of 2006, the world’s first rail vehicle powered by hydrogen for passenger transportation was developed by East Japan Railway Company (JR) (East Japan Railway company, 2006). That same year, some tests were conducted by Japanese Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI) on an intercity train that was powered by hydrogen fuel cells (Fuel Cells Bulletin, 2006). Afterwards, RTRI has been exploring to develop hydrogen-powered trains with the greater power of hydrogen fuel cells and the larger capacity of energy storage system, making hydrogen trains run with a better performance (Adamson, 2007).
45
In 2010, a 357-kilometer new high-speed rail line exclusively used for hydrogen- powered trains was proposed in Indonesia (Caedz corporation, n.d.), different from the projects launched before in other countries, Indonesia was planning to construct a hydrogen-powered, high-speed system rather than a conventional railway system.
In 2012, a hydrogen train project in Denmark was proposed aiming to develop and build the first hydrogen-powered train in Europe (DW, 2019). An internal combustion engine would be used, generating mechanical energy by combustion of hydrogen fuel.
Between 2012 and 2019, some universities and manufacturers in many countries such as the UK, (Hoffrichter et al., 2016) France, Switzerland, (Railway technology news, n.d.) China, (Peng et al., 2014) Japan, (East Japan Railway company, 2006) Malaysia, (Marin et al., 2010) South Africa (Railway gazette international, 2012) were studying, designing, building different types of hydrogen rail vehicles. So far, only two models of hydrogen rail vehicles have been rolled out and tested. CRRC has developed the first commercial hybrid tram powered by hydrogen fuel cells in the world and finished some operation tests in China (Peng et al., 2014). Alstom has developed the world’s first commercial passenger train powered by hydrogen fuel cells and related tests of this train have been completed in Germany. By 2025, around 60 Alstom hydrogen trains are expected to be used in a small railway network with the total length of 1,100 kilometers in Germany (Arcola Energy, 2019).
Table 6: The summary of the existing hydrogen trains (Thorne et al., 2019)
46
5.2.3 Technology There are three means generating hydrogen fuel. Currently hydrogen is mainly extracted from industrial process as a by-product or generated from steam reforming process. But these two methods are not environmental-friendly since CO2 and some pollutants are emitted. The third method is to produce hydrogen by electrolysis process, which is regarded as the best approach without emissions, however it consumes too much electricity.
For trains, there are two means to convert the chemical energy of hydrogen fuel into mechanical energy for propulsion. The fuel cells are mostly used to generate electricity by the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen in the cells, then electrical energy is converted into mechanical energy by electric motors. The second way for trains to utilize hydrogen fuel is burning of hydrogen occurs with air in combustion engine, generating thermal energy. Then thermal energy is converted into mechanical energy for train propulsion.
5.2.4 Alstom Coradia iLint
Figure 15: The technology of the Alstom Coradia iLint (Alstom, 2020).
47
Alstom Coradia iLint is the world’s first commercial passenger train powered by hydrogen fuel cells (Alstom, 2018). It adopts the first way to convert chemical energy of hydrogen fuel into electrical energy, then the electrical energy is utilized to generate mechanical energy for traction. This train only emits steam and condensed water as well as low levels of noise, which is quite environmental-friendly. Coradia iLint is very special for its combination of different innovative elements such as clean energy conversion, flexible energy storage in batteries, smart management of traction power and available energy. This model is specifically designed for the operation of passenger traffic on non-electrified lines, which enables sustainable train operation while ensuring high levels of performance.
5.3 Electric trains The most used electric train is the electric multiple unit train. It is the more advanced version of a traditional locomotive; the main difference is the EMU have self-propelled carriages that use electricity as the propulsion power (Nisit & Prasanta, 2006). The electric traction motors are built-in with the various carriages to enable proper utilization of space and reduce the extra equipment. The EMUs have several advantages that range from their performance to accelerate rapidly to operate pollution-free, unlike the diesel counterparts.
Figure 16: A sketch showing the location of the transformer and main converter on an AC EMU (Hata, 1998).
5.4 Diesel trains The diesel electric multiple unit train (DMU) is similar to an EMU but with an internal combustion engine (ICE) for propulsion instead of an electric power train. (Railway Technical, 2019) It shares similarities with the old locomotive trains but differs by having bogies and passengers’ seating in every carriage. The most common currently used is those with diesel electric transmission type; the diesel engine drives the
48
electrical generator or alternator which produces electric energy that is fed to the electric traction motors on the wheels and bogies. Examples include the Stadler flirt 3 and lint DMU group by Alstom like LINT 27, LINT 41,54 and 80. The modern DMU often have the engine mounted underneath the frame of the railcar to efficiently utilize space like for the Coradia Lint 54 which has 390kW ICE driving axles powered by a cardan shaft weighing almost 100 tons (Parker, 2007). Often the DMU is sold in sets of 2-4 car sets often used for regional travel on short idle routes such as those being analyzed in this report and having a seating capacity of around 150. Figure 17 below shows Alstom Coradia Lint 54 diesel regional trains that are going to be delivered to German railway.
Figure 17: Alstom Coradia Lint 54 DMU (Alstom, 2019)
5.5 Selection of trains for the study In this section, many trains with different models were introduced and analyzed. To make quantitative analyses of the study objective, precise, and reliable, one model was picked from each train type as referenced models. These selected models should be at the same class, which means they are designed for the same purpose and they have similar characteristics. After comparing them, specific train models were determined: Alstom Coradia Continental represents battery trains, Alstom Coradia iLint represents Hydrogen trains, Stadler Flirt represents electric trains and Alstom Coradia Lint 54 represents diesel trains. The four picked trains have been designed for regional passenger traffic, and they have nearly same passenger capacity including the seating capacity of around 150. Therefore, the measurements, calculations and results from the rest of project will be based on these four trains.
49
6. Costs
For purpose of this feasibility study, the first stage of analysis was to calculate and compare the costs of implementing each fossil-free alternative on the various railway non-electrified lines. The diesel option is also included and used for comparisons as it is the status quo. In this study, the total costs are divided into five main parts: train costs, infrastructure costs, fuel costs, maintenance costs and track access charges. The reason why only these five types of costs are taken into consideration is that these five types of costs are main sources resulting in the differences of alternatives on total costs. No matter which alternative is implemented, the administration costs, salaries to staff, costs of advertisements, taxes and so on will remain almost the same, making no significant difference on total costs of implementing alternatives. Costs of purchasing trains and constructing relevant infrastructure are fixed costs, while others are dynamic costs that might be changing during the actual operation.
6.1 Train costs Train costs are the costs of purchasing trains, which is part of fixed costs. For train operators, the train costs are equivalent to the prices of trains. The total train costs can be calculated based on the equation below.
𝐶 𝑐 𝑁 6 1
Where 𝐶 is the total train costs, 𝑐 is unit price of a train and N is the number of trains.
6.1.1 Battery trains According the previous contracts signed by Alstom including the most viable to this report being signed on the 5th of February 2020, the company will manufacture, deliver and maintain the 11 ordered Alstom Coradia Continental BEMUs on behalf of the train authorities along the aforementioned Leipzig-Chemnitz (NetworkRail, 2015). The contract is expected to be worth approximately €100 million including delivering 11 battery trains and providing maintenance services for these trains (Alstom, 2020). The share of eleven trains is around €72 million, so the estimated price of one train is €6.5 million. Considering the currency conversion rate of €1=SEK 10.8, the estimated price of one battery train is SEK 70.2 million.
50
6.1.2 Hydrogen trains According to the study on “Development of Business Cases for Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Applications for Regions and Cities” (Navas, 2018), the approximate unit cost of Alstom iLint is €5.5 million. The estimated price of one hydrogen train is SEK 59.4 million.
6.1.3 Electric trains One of the latest contracts of Stadler electric trains was signed in 2018 by Transdev and Stadler. Transdev ordered 64 Stadler Flirt electric trains from Stadler to operate on Hanover S-Bahn network in Germany. According to the contract, this order was worth around €320 million (Sapién, 2018). The approximate price of one electric train is €5 million, which is equivalent to SEK 54 million.
6.1.4 Diesel trains According to the orders Alstom received in 2018, a total of 25 Coradia Lint 54 trains would be delivered, where 20 trains were delivered to DB Regio Bayern and 5 trains were delivered to Hohenzollerische Landesbahn AG. The shares of two orders were $114 million and $28 million respectively, (Metro Magazine, 2018) the prices of one train from two orders were $5.7 million and $5.6 million. Considering the currency conversion rate of $1=€0.92, the approximate price of one diesel train is SEK 56.2 million.
6.2 Infrastructure costs Most rail infrastructure such as land, structures, buildings, and relevant equipment is existing along non-electrified lines, so additional infrastructure expected to be constructed to support fossil-free alternatives is only the component providing energy for train operation. In general, the total infrastructure costs can be calculated by the following equation.
𝐶 𝑐 𝑄 6 2
Where 𝐶 is the total infrastructure costs, 𝑐 is unit cost of infrastructure and Q is the quantity (or capacity) of infrastructure.
51
6.2.1 Battery trains For battery trains, the major infrastructure is the charging system as majority of the equipment is onboard the railcar. As mentioned before, there are two common types of infrastructure for battery trains to get charged including the charging station and catenary system. At terminals and stations, battery charging stations can be constructed making sure trains can be charged when they stop for a long time. When trains are running in the sections, they could get charged via catenary system along the rail sections. Figure 18 shows how battery trains are charged in main line sections and at stations.
Figure 18: The charging system when in operation and stationery (Yoshida & In, 2012).
As displayed in Figure 18 above, the pantograph rises in the electrified sections and the railcar moves via pantograph as the battery charges. In the non-electrified parts, the pantograph lowers, and the railcar runs using the batteries until the next charging facility where the train stops, the pantograph rises, and power is collected with a large current (Yoshida, 2012). The contact stripes are reinforced and the overhead rigid wires at the wayside facilities to encourage quick charging. The traction circuit storage boxes are in structures optimal for reduction of battery temperature rise while charging/discharging and lowering of the temperature difference between batteries in one box while stopping.
52
If charging stations are expected to be built, the scale and capacity of charging facilities can be determined based on the number of battery packs installed onboard. Referring the technology of Supercharger charging station developed by Tesla, the cost for one charger to charge one battery pack would be $90 000 (Forster & Alto, 2017), which is equivalent to SEK 894 240. Normally, it is believed that the minimum capacity should be fulfilling the requirement that all trains could be charged simultaneously, therefore the capacity of a charging station can be measured by the following equation. 𝑄 𝑁 𝑛 2 6 3
Where n is the number of wagons per each train, 2 means each wagon has two battery packs.
If catenary system is needed as infrastructure instead, the non-continuous overhead lines will be built. The average cost of constructing overhead lines is €0.7 million per kilometer, (Gattuso & Restuccia, 2014) which is equivalent to SEK 7.56 million per kilometer. The quantity of infrastructure is the length of non-continuous overhead lines.
6.2.2 Hydrogen trains For hydrogen trains, the only infrastructure is the hydrogen refueling station. Figure 19 shows the basic configuration of a hydrogen refueling station.
Figure 19: Basic configuration of a hydrogen refueling station (Parker, 2007).
53
Technically, the capacity of a hydrogen refueling station is determined by the maximum amount of hydrogen fuel consumption per day. It is enough once the amount of hydrogen fuel stored in a refueling station can supply to trains in a whole day since the needed hydrogen fuel for the next day’s operation can be transported from production places to refueling stations quickly by the next day’s train operation, which avoids too much investment on building a quite large hydrogen refueling station.
According to a study on cost estimation of hydrogen refueling stations conducted by the national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, the average unit cost of building a hydrogen refueling station is $3 370 per kg/day (Melaina & Penev, 2015) equivalent to SEK 33 484 per kg/day.
6.2.3 Electric trains For electric trains, the infrastructure is the catenary system. Same as the infrastructure cost of overhead lines for battery trains in sub-section 6.2.1, the electrification cost of a whole non-electrified rail line to ensure the regular operation of electric trains is €0.7 million per kilometer, (Gattuso & Restuccia, 2014) which is equivalent to SEK 7.56 million per kilometer. The quantity of infrastructure is the total length of a rail line since the catenary system should cover the whole line, unlike the battery where it is discontinuous.
6.2.4 Diesel trains For diesel trains, the diesel refueling station should be the rail infrastructure. But diesel refueling stations have been existing near non-electrified lines since diesel trains have been running on these lines. If diesel trains continue to be running on non-electrified lines rather than being replaced by battery trains, hydrogen trains and electric trains, no additional diesel refueling stations are needed. In other words, the infrastructure costs for diesel trains in this study are assumed to be zero.
6.3 Fuel costs Fuel costs are the costs that occur when trains consume energy or fuel during the operation. For battery trains and electric trains, the fuel cost is the price of electricity; for hydrogen trains, the fuel cost is the price of hydrogen; for diesel trains, the fuel cost
54
is the price of diesel. The total fuel costs for trains running on lines can be determined by average fuel cost per single trip and the number of single trips. The equation is:
𝐶 𝑐 𝑇 6 4
Where 𝐶 is the total fuel costs, 𝑐 is fuel cost per single trip and T is the number of single trips.
First of all, the amount of energy needed for train propulsion on lines is supposed to be measured. Then equivalent amount of fuel consumption can be estimated by considering energy density and efficiency of powertrain systems onboard. Finally, the fuel cost per single trip can be calculated based on the fuel consumption and the price of fuel.
The needed mechanical energy for a train running a station to the next station can be calculated (Mwambeleko & Kulworawanichpong, 2017). Considering the total mass including the weight of passengers is unknow n and dynamic, and the total effect of line gradients could be eliminated since the saved energy in downhill sections could counterbalance the extra consumed energy in uphill sections when a train runs back and forth. For any line section between two stations, the total change in kinetic energy of a train is zero since the start speed and end speed are both zero. Therefore, the total mechanical energy is the amount of energy needed for a train to overcome any types of resistance along the line. The most important part is to figure out how much resistance when a train is running.
Due to the similarity of Nordic railway in terms of geographical features, climates, types of rail vehicles and so on, the method of calculating mechanical energy used in Norwegian railway could also be applied to Swedish railway (Thorne et al., 2019; Zenith et al., 2017).
The following Davis equations are used to calculate the different types of resistance considering the train’s movement are governed by the Newton’s laws of motion. Rolling resistance is the resistance to motion of the rotating parts and mathematically expressed as follows: 𝐴 343 195 4 𝑛 𝑁 6 5 55
𝑠 𝐵 15.14 1.62 𝐿 𝑁 ∙ 6 6 𝑚
𝑅 𝐴 𝐵𝑣 6 7
Where n is the number of wagons, L is the length of a train and v is the speed of a train. Air resistance: 𝑐 𝐴 8.67 11.10 ∙ 10 𝐿 6 8
𝜌 𝑅 𝑐 𝐴 𝑣 6 9 2
Where 𝜌 is the air density. The annual average temperature in Sweden is 6 ℃ (SWEDEN CLIMATE, 2020), the corresponding air density is approximately 1.269 kg/m3.
For any process of acceleration, cruise and deceleration, the mechanical energy needed is:
∆𝐸 𝑅 𝑅 ∆𝑥 6 10
Total mechanical energy for a single trip is:
𝐸 𝑥 ∆𝐸 6 11
Where x is the number of process of acceleration, cruise, and deceleration.
6.3.1 Battery trains For battery trains, nearly 85% of the energy is used for train traction, and 15% is used for auxiliary systems onboard (Choi et al., 2012). During deceleration, around 60% of mechanical energy can be recuperated back to batteries. Conversion efficiencies of the electric motor and electric generator are 90% and 95% respectively (Martinez, Ebenhack, & Wagner, 2016). The total amount of electricity for a single trip can be estimated by combing the mechanical energy and efficiencies of energy usage in
56
different parts. According to the research conducted by Andersson (2020) and the Swedish railway network statement (Trafikverket, 2020). The estimated price of electricity for the Swedish railway was determined to be approximately SEK 0.607 per kWh.
Table 7 shows the features of battery trains used to calculate energy consumption for each line.
Table 7: The features of the battery train
Battery train features No. wagons 3 Train length (m) 56 Weight (t) 112
Table 8 shows energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost of a single trip for each line applying all the equations described in section 6.3 of the report.
Table 8: Energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost for battery train
traction energy energy recuperation electricity estimated fuel cost Line (kwh) (kwh) (kwh) (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 246.9 53.0 269.8 163.6 Mellerud- 109.6 63.0 80.2 48.6 Bengtsfors Tjustbanan 362.5 125.6 348.2 211.2 Stångådalsbanan 1304.5 187.8 1517.4 920.3 Inlandsbanan 1997.4 121.9 2489.1 1509.7 (North) Inlandsbanan 855.4 79.9 1038.2 629.7 (South) Hällnäs-Lycksele 198.6 15.9 243.7 147.8 Kinnekullebanan 410.0 136.8 399.2 242.1 Halmstad-Nässjö 869.7 139.4 997.5 605.0 Vaggerydsbanan 131.9 39.1 133.3 80.9 Bockabanan 74.9 19.5 78.4 47.6 Nässjö-Vetlanda 127.4 26.1 140.5 85.2
57
6.3.2 Hydrogen trains For hydrogen trains, nearly 85% of the energy is used for train traction, and 15% is used for auxiliary systems onboard (Choi et al., 2012). During deceleration, around 30% of mechanical energy can be recuperated back to batteries. The efficiency of fuel cells of hydrogen trains is 52% (Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 2019). Conversion efficiencies of the electric motor and electric generator are 90% and 95% respectively (Martinez, Ebenhack, & Wagner, 2016). When the mechanical energy and efficiencies of energy usage in different parts are combined, the total amount of hydrogen fuel for a single trip can be estimated. According to a study on fuel cell hydrogen trains, the average price of hydrogen fuel is €5 per kg (Navas, 2018), which is equivalent to SEK 54 per kg.
Table 9 shows the features of hydrogen trains used to calculate energy consumption for each line.
Table 9: The features of hydrogen train
Hydrogen train features No. wagons 2 Train length (m) 54.3 Mass (t) 107
Table 10 shows energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost of a single trip for each line applying all the equations described in section 6.3 of the report.
Table 10: Energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost for hydrogen train
traction energy energy recuperation hydrogen fuel estimated fuel Line (kwh) (kwh) (kg) cost (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 226.0 25.4 15.6 841.3 Mellerud- 98.7 30.3 5.7 307.8 Bengtsfors Tjustbanan 336.9 60.3 21.9 1184.2 Stångådalsbanan 1235.8 90.1 88.0 4752.0 Inlandsbanan 1811.1 58.5 133.2 7193.0 (North) Inlandsbanan 775.2 38.4 56.3 3037.6 (South)
58
Hällnäs-Lycksele 182.1 7.6 13.3 717.7 Kinnekullebanan 378.5 65.7 24.8 1336.8 Halmstad-Nässjö 815.6 66.9 57.7 3113.1 Vaggerydsbanan 121.8 18.8 8.1 437.3 Bockabanan 69.2 9.4 4.7 252.5 Nässjö-Vetlanda 117.7 12.5 8.2 440.4
6.3.3 Electric trains For electric trains, nearly 85% of the energy is used for train traction, and 15% is used for auxiliary systems onboard (ENERGY TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS ANALYSIS PERFORMANCE, 2011). During deceleration, around 12.5% of mechanical energy can be recuperated back to batteries (CTCN, 2009). Conversion efficiencies of the electric motor and electric generator are 90% and 95% respectively (Martinez, Ebenhack, & Wagner, 2016). The total amount of electricity for a single trip can be estimated through the combination of the mechanical energy and efficiencies of energy usage in different parts. The estimated price of electricity for the Swedish railway was determined to be approximately SEK 0.607 per kWh (Andersson, 2020).
Table 11 shows the features of electric trains used to calculate energy consumption for each line.
Table 11: The features of electric train
Electric train features No. wagons 3 Train length (m) 70.7 Mass (t) 132.8
Table 12 shows energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost of a single trip for each line.
59
Table 12: Energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost for electric train
traction energy energy recuperation electricity estimated fuel cost Line (kwh) (kwh) (kwh) (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 274.0 13.2 345.1 209.3 Mellerud- 121.1 15.7 142.6 86.5 Bengtsfors Tjustbanan 403.6 31.2 496.4 301.1 Stångådalsbanan 1457.9 46.7 1859.1 1127.6 Inlandsbanan 2316.4 72.5 2955.5 1792.6 (North) Inlandsbanan 945.3 47.5 1188.1 720.6 (South) Hällnäs-Lycksele 220.5 3.9 284.3 172.4 Kinnekullebanan 451.4 34.0 556.2 337.3 Halmstad-Nässjö 970.4 34.6 1233.8 748.4 Vaggerydsbanan 146.7 9.7 182.0 110.4 Bockabanan 83.3 4.9 104.1 63.1 Nässjö-Vetlanda 141.7 6.5 178.8 108.4
6.3.4 Diesel trains For diesel trains, nearly 85% of the energy is used for train traction, and 15% is used for auxiliary systems onboard (ENERGY TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS ANALYSIS PERFORMANCE, 2011). The conversion efficiency of the diesel engine is 30% (Suppes & Storvick, 2016). Energy transmission efficiency is 78%. The mechanical energy and capabilities of energy usage in different parts, the total amount of diesel fuel for a single trip can be estimated. The estimated price of diesel is approximately €1.35 per liter (Pocard, 2019), which is equivalent to SEK 14.58 per liter.
Table 13 shows the features of diesel trains used to calculate energy consumption for each line.
Table 13: The features of diesel train
Diesel train features No. wagons 2 Train length (m) 54.3 Mass (t) 98
60
Table 14 shows energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost of a single trip for each line.
Table 14: Energy consumption, fuel consumption and fuel cost for the diesel train
Line traction energy (kwh) diesel fuel (kg) estimated fuel cost (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 226.0 114.0 1661.3 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 98.7 49.8 725.7 Tjustbanan 336.9 169.8 2476.2 Stångådalsbanan 1235.8 623.0 9082.9 Inlandsbanan (North) 1811.1 912.9 13310.7 Inlandsbanan (South) 775.2 390.8 5697.7 Hällnäs-Lycksele 182.1 91.8 1338.2 Kinnekullebanan 378.5 190.8 2781.9 Halmstad-Nässjö 815.6 411.2 5994.7 Vaggerydsbanan 121.8 61.4 894.8 Bockabanan 69.2 34.9 508.5 Nässjö-Vetlanda 117.7 59.3 865.2
6.4 Maintenance costs The unit cost of maintaining a diesel train is €0.79 per km while the maintenance cost of other trains is €0.72 per km (Navas, 2018). Converting the currency from €to SEK, the maintenance costs of a diesel train and other trains are SEK 8.532 per km and SEK 7.776 per km, respectively. Normally, the longer distance a train runs the higher cost of maintaining the train is generated.
The total maintenance costs of trains running on the lines can be determined by the maintenance costs of trains completing one single trip and the number of single trips. The equation is:
𝐶 𝑐 𝑇 6 12
Where 𝐶 is the total maintenance costs, 𝑐 is the unit costs of maintenance per single trip, T is the number of single trips.
6.4.1 Battery trains For battery trains completing a single trip, the unit costs of maintenance for different lines are shown in Table 15.
61
Table 15: Maintenance costs of battery trains after completing a single trip on lines
Line maintenance costs (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 637.6 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 340.6 Tjustbanan 746.5 Stångådalsbanan 1827.4 Inlandsbanan (North) 5800.9 Inlandsbanan (South) 2496.1 Hällnäs-Lycksele 501.6 Kinnekullebanan 940.9 Halmstad-Nässjö 1524.1 Vaggerydsbanan 303.3 Bockabanan 171.1 Nässjö-Vetlanda 287.7
6.4.2 Hydrogen trains For hydrogen trains completing a single trip, the unit costs of maintenance for different lines are shown in Table 16.
Table 16: Maintenance costs of hydrogen trains after completing a single trip on lines
Line maintenance costs (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 637.6 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 340.6 Tjustbanan 746.5 Stångådalsbanan 1827.4 Inlandsbanan (North) 5800.9 Inlandsbanan (South) 2496.1 Hällnäs-Lycksele 501.6 Kinnekullebanan 940.9 Halmstad-Nässjö 1524.1 Vaggerydsbanan 303.3
62
Bockabanan 171.1 Nässjö-Vetlanda 287.7
6.4.3 Electric trains For electric trains completing a single trip, the unit costs of maintenance for different lines are shown in Table 17.
Table 17: Maintenance costs of electric trains after completing a single trip on lines
Line maintenance costs (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 637.6 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 340.6 Tjustbanan 746.5 Stångådalsbanan 1827.4 Inlandsbanan (North) 5800.9 Inlandsbanan (South) 2496.1 Hällnäs-Lycksele 501.6 Kinnekullebanan 940.9 Halmstad-Nässjö 1524.1 Vaggerydsbanan 303.3 Bockabanan 171.1 Nässjö-Vetlanda 287.7
6.4.4 Diesel trains For diesel trains completing a single trip, the unit costs of maintenance for different lines are shown in Table 18.
Table 18: Maintenance costs of diesel trains after completing a single trip on lines
Line maintenance costs (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 699.6 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 373.7 Tjustbanan 819.1 Stångådalsbanan 2005.0
63
Inlandsbanan (North) 6364.9 Inlandsbanan (South) 2738.8 Hällnäs-Lycksele 550.3 Kinnekullebanan 1032.4 Halmstad-Nässjö 1672.3 Vaggerydsbanan 332.7 Bockabanan 187.7 Nässjö-Vetlanda 315.7
6.5 Track access charges Track access is a mechanism whereby the manager of the railway infrastructure permits a railway operator to run passenger or freight trains on its railway tracks (WORLD BANK GROUP, 2017). The train operators get charged when they operate trains on rail lines. The track access charge for trains running on Inlandsbanan is SEK 0.008 per ton-km (Westling & Söderholm, 2019). The track access charge for trains running on other rail tracks owned by Trafikverket is SEK 0.014 per ton-km (Trafikverket, 2017).
The total track access charges for trains running on a line is the product of track access charge for a train completing a single trip and the number of individual trips, which can be expressed as the following equation.
𝐶 𝑐 𝑇 6 13
Where 𝐶 is the total track access charges, 𝑐 is the track access charge for a single trip. T is the number of single journeys.
6.5.1 Battery trains For battery trains, the track access charges for a single trip on different lines are calculated and shown in Table 19.
Table 19: Track access charges for battery trains on lines
Line track access charges (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 128.6 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 68.7 64
Tjustbanan 150.5 Stångådalsbanan 368.5 Inlandsbanan (North) 668.4 Inlandsbanan (South) 287.6 Hällnäs-Lycksele 101.1 Kinnekullebanan 189.7 Halmstad-Nässjö 307.3 Vaggerydsbanan 61.2 Bockabanan 34.5 Nässjö-Vetlanda 58.0
6.5.2 Hydrogen trains For hydrogen trains, the track access charges for a single trip on different lines are calculated and shown in Table 20.
Table 20: Track access charges for hydrogen trains on lines
Line track access charges (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 122.8 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 65.6 Tjustbanan 143.8 Stångådalsbanan 352.0 Inlandsbanan (North) 638.6 Inlandsbanan (South) 274.8 Hällnäs-Lycksele 96.6 Kinnekullebanan 181.3 Halmstad-Nässjö 293.6 Vaggerydsbanan 58.4 Bockabanan 33.0 Nässjö-Vetlanda 55.4
6.5.3 Electric trains For electric trains, the track access charges for a single trip on different lines are calculated and shown in Table 21. 65
Table 21: Track access charges for electric trains on lines
Line track access charges (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 152.5 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 81.4 Tjustbanan 178.5 Stångådalsbanan 436.9 Inlandsbanan (North) 792.6 Inlandsbanan (South) 341.0 Hällnäs-Lycksele 119.9 Kinnekullebanan 225.0 Halmstad-Nässjö 364.4 Vaggerydsbanan 72.5 Bockabanan 40.9 Nässjö-Vetlanda 68.8
6.5.4 Diesel trains For diesel trains, the track access charges for a single trip on different lines are calculated and shown in Table 22.
Table 22: Track access charges for diesel trains on lines
Line track access charges (SEK) Fryksdalsbanan 112.5 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 60.1 Tjustbanan 131.7 Stångådalsbanan 322.4 Inlandsbanan (North) 584.9 Inlandsbanan (South) 251.7 Hällnäs-Lycksele 88.5 Kinnekullebanan 166.0 Halmstad-Nässjö 268.9 Vaggerydsbanan 53.5
66
Bockabanan 30.2 Nässjö-Vetlanda 50.8
6.6 Overview of Costs Generally, the cost of the train of the different alternatives varies with EMU being the cheapest followed by DMU, hydrogen and BEMU respectively considering the data from section 6.1, the reason for the higher cost of both BEMU and hydrogen is due to the new propulsion system which is all aboard the train. The charge of the Lithium-Ion battery is a significant factor contributing to the overall cost of the vehicle. The same is valid to a certain extent for the fuel cells. The material components needed to produce these power units are rare with occurring in low concentrations of 0.01% in the Earth’s crust, not forgetting that both BEMUs and Hydrogen trains are a new technology (Notter et al., 2010). Infrastructure wise, the DMU (old or new), the cost would be approximately the same while the EMU would be the most expensive, followed by BEMU and hydrogen train, respectively.
In terms of operation, the maintenance and track charge would vary slightly, the fuel cost for the diesel-fueled trains would be the highest for all the lines while BEMU and EMU have almost the same lowest price and hydrogen in the middle though this applies most to Sweden where the cost of electricity is inexpensive.
67
7. Long-term strategy
In this section, the cost of implementing different alternatives from a long-term perspective is going to be taken into consideration. Since the average lifespan of the different types of trains mentioned before is 30 years, the period of 30 years is regarded as the time scale. All calculations, analyses, and discussions in this section regarding different alternatives are only available within 30 years after starting operation.
7.1 Traffic demand Traffic volume is a significant factor resulting in the variation of train operating cost. Usually, the more trips trains must run, the higher the train operating cost including fuel cost, maintenance cost and track access charges are. According to rail transport statistics from Statista (Mazareanu, 2020), the passenger volume by rail transport has been increasing during the past ten years, indicating a positive trend of growth in the future. In addition, Swedish national train operator SJ pointed out there would be an annual growth rate of 1% in passenger traffic in an investment programme (Barrow, 2018). Therefore, the annual growth rate of 1% is going to be used to calculate and predict the long-term cost of operating different types of trains on non-electrified rail lines.
The present timetable per each line section can be found through such official websites of Tagtidtabeller, DVVJ (De Vackra Vyernas Järnväg), Inlandsbanan, Jönköpings länstrafik and so on. Then the annual number of rail trips per each line section could be counted respectively and shown in Table 23. Assuming the annual growth rate of 1% in passenger volume is close to the increasing yearly rate of rail trips in order to maintain the current load factor of and comfort level of a train, the expected annual number of rail trips per each line section in the 30th year is calculated and shown in Table 23.
Table 23: The annual number of trips per each line section in the 1st year and 30th year
Annual number of train trips Line 1st year 30th year Fryksdalsbanan 9464 12587 Mellerud-Bengtsfors 260 346 Tjustbanan 5512 7331 68
Stångådalsbanan 6032 8023 Inlandsbanan (North) 140 186 Inlandsbanan (South) 380 505 Hällnäs-Lycksele 4576 6086 Kinnekullebanan 9464 12587 Halmstad-Nässjö 3848 5118 Vaggerydsbanan 2704 3596 Bockabanan 6188 8230 Nässjö-Vetlanda 1612 2144
The annual number of single train trips will be increasing year by year, and the annual number of trips is expected to increase by 33% in around 30 years.
Of all non-electrified lines, both Fryksdalsbanan and Kinnekullebanan are the busiest lines with too much passenger traffic, each of them has 26 single trips per day on average at present. Only the line Mellerud-Bengtsfors, Inlandsbanan (North) and Inlandsbanan (South) have seasonal passenger traffic, other non-electrified lines have all-year-round passenger traffic.
7.2 Capital expenditure estimation Capital expenditure generally refers to the investment of funds or fixed assets, intangible assets, and deferred assets. This type of asset will last for multiple billing periods during using process. It needs to be capitalized during using process and converted into costs in installations. In this project, capital expenditure consists of cost of buying trains and cost of constructing relevant rail infrastructure.
Firstly, the minimum number and quantity of trains and rail infrastructure that are needed to ensure the present and future traffic demand can be met could be estimated. Considering the current train timetables, the non-electrified lines are operating 16 hours per day on average. Assuming total average running time of each train within a day is equal to operating hours of a line, the minimum number of trains for each line can be inferred by total time needed for completing all trips in a day divided by the total average running time of one train in a day. The time for completing trips incudes time from origin to destination, layover time and charging time.
69
According to descriptions regarding rail infrastructure of fossil-free alternatives in section 6.2.1, section 6.2.2, section 6.2.3, the minimum quantity of relevant infrastructure can be roughly determined when the length of a railway, the number of trains and the amount of hydrogen fuel consumed per day are known.
The results of the estimation are shown in Table 24.
Table 24: Minimum number of trains and the quantity of rail infrastructure for each line section
Min. Min. quantity of rail infrastructure Line number BEMU (# of battery Hydrogen (fuel EMU (overhead of trains packs) in kg/day) lines in km) Fryksdalsbanan 5 30 630 82 Mellerud- 2 12 30 43.8 Bengtsfors Tjustbanan 3 18 470 96 (47 km overhead Stångådalsbanan 6 2110 235 lines) Inlandsbanan 72 / (56.4 km 2 360 746 (North) overhead lines) Inlandsbanan 36 / (16.5 km 2 150 321 (South) overhead lines) Hällnäs-Lycksele 2 12 250 64.5 (8.6 km overhead Kinnekullebanan 4 990 121 lines) (24.5 km overhead Halmstad-Nässjö 5 1490 196 lines) Vaggerydsbanan 2 12 290 39 Bockabanan 2 12 120 22 Nässjö-Vetlanda 2 12 110 37
The capital expenditure for each line can be estimated by combining the results in the Table 24 with the unit costs discussed in section 6.1 and section 6.2.
7.3 Operating cost estimation The operating costs mainly consist of fuel costs, maintenance costs and track access charges, which is reflected in equation 7-1.
𝐶 𝐶 𝐶 𝐶 7 1
70
The annual costs of fuel, maintenance and track access for each year can be calculated based on the following equations.