Hydrogen and Ba eries for Propulsion of Freight Trains in Norway Federico Zenith Steffen Møller-Holst Magnus Thomassen Birmingham, July 4–5, 2016 Outline
Non-Electrified Railways in Norway
Alterna ves for Electrifica on
Techno-Economical Analysis
1 Outline
Non-Electrified Railways in Norway
Alterna ves for Electrifica on
Techno-Economical Analysis
2 Norwegian Railway Network Focus on non-electrified lines (in red)
• Røros and Solør lines (381 km, 94 km) – Catenary officially proposed – “Backup” for Dovre line • Rauma line (111 km) – Scenic line for tourists – Catenary not desirable • Nordland line, 731 km – To be partly electrified (130 km) – Up to 19 ‰ slope • Poli cians: “Please electrify everything” • Railway authority asked SINTEF
3 Freight on Nordland line
Alterna ves for Railway Electrifica on in Norway As considered in SINTEF’s study
• Alterna ves considered: – Biofuels – Natural gas – Hydrogen – Ba eries – Diesel – Catenary – Hybrids • Evalua on criteria – Environment – Technology readiness – Regulatory framework – Economy – Flexibility & robustness
4 Alterna ves for Railway Electrifica on in Norway As considered in SINTEF’s study
• Alterna ves considered: – Biofuels – Natural gas – Hydrogen – Ba eries – Diesel – Catenary – Hybrids • Evalua on criteria – Environment – Technology readiness – Regulatory framework – Economy – Flexibility & robustness Freight on Nordland line
4 • Crosses polar circle • Strong winds (few or no trees) • Ice forma on on infrastructure
10-hour cab rides on Youtube (“Nordlandsbanen minu for minu ”)
The Nordland Line
• Single-track line • Passing loops: 600 m • Vossloh Euro 4000 locomo ves – Diesel-electric – 400 kN, 3.15 MW • 19 ‰ slope at Sal jellet – Freight trains at 40 km/h
Freight train at Trondheim
5 10-hour cab rides on Youtube (“Nordlandsbanen minu for minu ”)
The Nordland Line
• Single-track line • Passing loops: 600 m • Vossloh Euro 4000 locomo ves – Diesel-electric – 400 kN, 3.15 MW • 19 ‰ slope at Sal jellet – Freight trains at 40 km/h • Crosses polar circle • Strong winds (few or no trees) Freight train at Sal jellet • Ice forma on on infrastructure
5 The Nordland Line
• Single-track line • Passing loops: 600 m • Vossloh Euro 4000 locomo ves – Diesel-electric – 400 kN, 3.15 MW • 19 ‰ slope at Sal jellet – Freight trains at 40 km/h • Crosses polar circle • Strong winds (few or no trees) Freight train at Sal jellet • Ice forma on on infrastructure
10-hour cab rides on Youtube (“Nordlandsbanen minu for minu ”)
5 Outline
Non-Electrified Railways in Norway
Alterna ves for Electrifica on
Techno-Economical Analysis
6 Characteris cs of Nordland line
Current Op ons Diesel and Catenary
Diesel Catenary Extra infrastructure None Large Energy cost High Low Pollu on Local & Global None Direct Trac ve effort High Low Power Low High Appropriate traffic volume Low High Appropriate popula on Sparse Dense Appropriate inclina on High Low Appropriate speed Low High
7 Current Op ons Diesel and Catenary
Characteris cs of Nordland line Diesel Catenary Extra infrastructure None Large Energy cost High Low Pollu on Local & Global None Direct Trac ve effort High Low Power Low High Appropriate traffic volume Low High Appropriate popula on Sparse Dense Appropriate inclina on High Low Appropriate speed Low High
7 • Hydrogen
– 1 “H2 wagon”: 182 MWh – Require hydrogen refuelling – Fuel cells: 15 t for 5.6 MW • Ba eries – Hybridisa on with ba eries – Heavy and cumbersome – 1 ba ery wagon: 5.7 MWh – 3 wagons for Nordland line – Op on to charge midway » At sta on » With short catenary
Alterna ves Biodiesel, Hydrogen, Ba eries
• Biodiesel – “Quick fix” – Less global, same local pollu on
8 • Hydrogen
– 1 “H2 wagon”: 182 MWh – Require hydrogen refuelling – Fuel cells: 15 t for 5.6 MW – Hybridisa on with ba eries
Alterna ves Biodiesel, Hydrogen, Ba eries
• Biodiesel – “Quick fix” – Less global, same local pollu on • Ba eries – Heavy and cumbersome – 1 ba ery wagon: 5.7 MWh – 3 wagons for Nordland line – Op on to charge midway » At sta on » With short catenary
8 Alterna ves Biodiesel, Hydrogen, Ba eries
• Biodiesel • Hydrogen
– “Quick fix” – 1 “H2 wagon”: 182 MWh – Less global, same local – Require hydrogen refuelling pollu on – Fuel cells: 15 t for 5.6 MW • Ba eries – Hybridisa on with ba eries – Heavy and cumbersome – 1 ba ery wagon: 5.7 MWh – 3 wagons for Nordland line – Op on to charge midway » At sta on » With short catenary
8 Outline
Non-Electrified Railways in Norway
Alterna ves for Electrifica on
Techno-Economical Analysis
9 Example • CAPEX I: 1 million € • Life me n: 20 years • Interest rate r: 4 % • Annualised CAPEX A: 73 582 € • OPEX 15 000 € • Equivalent annual cost: 88 582 €
Equivalent Annual Cost Comparison Criterion
• Very different life mes – Ba eries: 2–3 years – Catenary: 75 years • Use Equivalent Annual Cost A, equivalent to Net Present Value
∑n − I ≡ NPV = A (1 + r) i i=1 ! Disregards opportunity costs
10 Equivalent Annual Cost Comparison Criterion
• Very different life mes Example – Ba eries: 2–3 years • CAPEX I: 1 million € – Catenary: 75 years • Life me n: 20 years • Use Equivalent Annual Cost A, equivalent to Net Present Value • Interest rate r: 4 % • Annualised CAPEX A: 73 582 € ∑n − I ≡ NPV = A (1 + r) i • OPEX 15 000 € i=1 • Equivalent annual cost: 88 582 € ! Disregards opportunity costs
10 Selec on of Input Data Costs, Life mes and Traffic
• US DoE state of art / near targets • Norwegian Railway Authority – Ba eries: 500 $/kWh, – Catenary: 1.5 M€/km 1500 cycles – Power price: 33 €/MWh – Fuel cells: 300 $/kW • Diesel: 1.4 €/L » Dynamic opera on: 12 000 h • Traffic on Nordland line » Sta c opera on: – 6 locomo ves 50 000 h (hybrid) – 3000 train movements a year – Hydrogen storage: 12 $/kWh – Hydrogen sta on: 4400 $/kg d, 10 years
11 Results – At a Glance
Hydrogen Hybrid CAPEX, Infrastructure CAPEX, Locomotives Hydrogen CAPEX, New Technologies OPEX, Energy • Hydrogen is cheapest Battery, mid-charge OPEX, Infrastructure OPEX, Rolling Stock • Ba ery very close second Battery w/ catenary • Mid-charging not Battery a rac ve Catenary • Catenary most expensive Biodiesel Diesel
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 Equivalent Annual Cost / M year−
12 Results – Diesel Current Technology
Hydrogen Hybrid CAPEX, Infrastructure CAPEX, Locomotives • Domina ng energy costs Hydrogen CAPEX, New Technologies OPEX, Energy
– High diesel cost Battery, mid-charge OPEX, Infrastructure – Lower efficiency OPEX, Rolling Stock Battery w/ catenary – Excise taxes (Europe) Battery • High other OPEX Catenary – High maintenance – Lower for biodiesel Biodiesel Diesel (CO2 taxes) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 Equivalent Annual Cost / M year−
13 Results – Catenary Tradi onal Alterna ve
Hydrogen Hybrid CAPEX, Infrastructure CAPEX, Locomotives Hydrogen CAPEX, New Technologies • Domina ng OPEX, Energy Battery, mid-charge OPEX, Infrastructure infrastructure costs OPEX, Rolling Stock – Investment 1 billion € Battery w/ catenary Battery • Long-term commitment: Catenary 75 years Biodiesel • Lowest energy costs Diesel
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 Equivalent Annual Cost / M year−
14 Results – Ba eries
Hydrogen Hybrid CAPEX, Infrastructure CAPEX, Locomotives • Domina ng ba ery costs Hydrogen CAPEX, New Technologies OPEX, Energy
– High CAPEX Battery, mid-charge OPEX, Infrastructure – Low life me OPEX, Rolling Stock Battery w/ catenary
• Lowest energy costs Battery
• Midway charging not Catenary a rac ve Biodiesel – Same ba ery costs Diesel – More infrastructure 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 Equivalent Annual Cost / M year−
15 Results – Hydrogen
Hydrogen Hybrid CAPEX, Infrastructure • Low energy costs CAPEX, Locomotives Hydrogen CAPEX, New Technologies • CAPEX/OPEX for OPEX, Energy Battery, mid-charge OPEX, Infrastructure refuelling sta on OPEX, Rolling Stock Battery w/ catenary • Fuel cells cheaper than ba eries Battery • Hybrid layout Catenary – 1.5 MWh ba eries Biodiesel – Regenera ve braking Diesel 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 – Sta onary fuel cells Equivalent Annual Cost / M year−
16 Results towards 2050
Year 2015 Year 2021 Diesel Biodiesel Catenary Battery Battery w/ catenary Battery, mid-charge Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid
Year 2027 Year 2050 Diesel Biodiesel Catenary Battery Battery w/ catenary Battery, mid-charge Hydrogen Hydrogen Hybrid 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 1 Equivalent Annual Cost / M year− Equivalent Annual Cost / M year− CAPEX, Infrastructure OPEX, Energy CAPEX, Locomotives OPEX, Infrastructure CAPEX, New Technologies OPEX, Rolling Stock
17 Extended Analysis for Norwegian Railway Authority Development towards 2050
Short term Natural gas and par al catenary are easiest to implement Medium term Ba ery electrifica on and biodiesel increase readiness Long term Hydrogen and ba eries dominate
Full report (A27534) available online at sintef.no.
18 Conclusions
• Hydrogen and ba eries have strong poten al for powering trains… – … but catenary will be always cheaper with enough traffic • Advantages: – Lower energy costs (like catenary) – Li le or no infrastructure (like diesel) • Disadvantages: – Ba eries: high ba ery CAPEX – Hydrogen: low technology readiness, missing regula ons • Relevant environments beyond Norway: – USA (over 200 000 km, almost none electrified) – Canada (almost 50 000 km, almost none electrified)
19 Acknowledgements
Research performed with the support of Jernbaneverket, the Norwegian Railway Authority.
Thank you for your a en on!
20 Technology for a be er society