Western Railroad Discussion > Germany to test Catenary over the Autobahn

Germany is going to test electrifying a section of the Autobahn in a move to cut emissions next spring. Scania will supply 15 trucks for the trial using electrical equipment supplied by Siemens. The trucks will feature pantographs just like electric powered trains.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/scania-to-supply-15-trucks-for-german-e-highways-300761145.html



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/18 09:28 by SOO6617.

Ooh, a Porsche GT2 with a pantograph at about 300 kph, now that's entertainment!!

Out

Wasn't there a scheme to do something like this over the 710 Freeway between the harbor and East LA a couple of years ago?

But what is the power source?  They burn a lot of coal and got rid of nukes I thought.  Much like the US wanting electric cars but lacking a viable power source as solar and wind are not relable enough.

BAB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But what is the power source?  They burn a lot of
> coal and got rid of nukes I thought.  Much like
> the US wanting electric cars but lacking a viable
> power source as solar and wind are not relable
> enough.

While it doesn't hurt to think too far ahead, power source would be the least of their worries when they test this idea. This is only a test. System-wide implementation won't happen if there are design/cost issues, and until then, I wouldn't worry about power generation, which sounds Chicken-Little-ish.

Off topic, but no one on TO has mentioned the benefits to emissions when energy is centralized at a power plant, instead of on individual vehicles per internal combustion. Either that, or I missed the comment. The article implies this is a reaction (or overreaction) to CO2 emissions. It is much easier to control CO2 emissions at the power plant (centralized), since electric vehicles don't emit much CO2... so there's no need to worry about catalytic converters and other expensive components/modifications required on millions and millions of individual vehicles.

However, this is a futile attempt at fighting CO2 emissions. Economies of developed world (and not-so-developed) relies on increased consumption and population increase. Until there's fundamental and potentially painful changes to that model, there will be more CO2 generated REGARDLESS of "innovations" like these. 

I wish them luck, anyway.

No offense, but the word is spelled "catenary" as in cat.

BAB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But what is the power source?  They burn a lot of
> coal and got rid of nukes I thought.  Much like
> the US wanting electric cars but lacking a viable
> power source as solar and wind are not relable
> enough.

Rough numbers from Wikipedia in 2016:

Nuclear: 80 TWh (14.8%)
Brown coal: 134.9 TWh (24.9%)
Hard coal: 99.4 TWh (18.3%)
Natural gas: 46.4 TWh (8.6%)
Wind: 77.8 TWh (14.4%)
Solar: 37.5 TWh (6.9%)
Biomass: 47 TWh (8.7%)
Hydro: 19.1 TWh (3.5%)
 

cchan006 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> While it doesn't hurt to think too far ahead,
> power source would be the least of their worries
> when they test this idea. This is only a test.
> System-wide implementation won't happen if there
> are design/cost issues, and until then, I wouldn't
> worry about power generation, which sounds
> Chicken-Little-ish.
>
> Off topic, but no one on TO has mentioned the
> benefits to emissions when energy is centralized
> at a power plant, instead of on individual
> vehicles per internal combustion. Either that, or
> I missed the comment. The article implies this is
> a reaction (or overreaction) to CO2 emissions. It
> is much easier to control CO2 emissions at the
> power plant (centralized), since electric vehicles
> don't emit much CO2... so there's no need to worry
> about catalytic converters and other expensive
> components/modifications required on millions and
> millions of individual vehicles.
>
> However, this is a futile attempt at fighting CO2
> emissions. Economies of developed world (and
> not-so-developed) relies on increased consumption
> and population increase. Until there's fundamental
> and potentially painful changes to that model,
> there will be more CO2 generated REGARDLESS of
> "innovations" like these. 
>
> I wish them luck, anyway.

I agree with you on this - the current economic models that rule our world rely on constant growth. This isn't sustainable. So what comes next..?

California is apparently planning to require all new single family houses to have solar panels, etc.

(Here in FL, many homes have solar hot water heating for homes and pools.  The payback is very short, in the 2-3 year period.  Solar for electricity is much less common, but rates are very cheap.)

Finally! A way to keep trucks in the right lane:)

Posted from iPhone

exhaustED Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> cchan006 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > While it doesn't hurt to think too far ahead,
> > power source would be the least of their
> worries
> > when they test this idea. This is only a test.
> > System-wide implementation won't happen if
> there
> > are design/cost issues, and until then, I
> wouldn't
> > worry about power generation, which sounds
> > Chicken-Little-ish.
> >
> > Off topic, but no one on TO has mentioned the
> > benefits to emissions when energy is
> centralized
> > at a power plant, instead of on individual
> > vehicles per internal combustion. Either that,
> or
> > I missed the comment. The article implies this
> is
> > a reaction (or overreaction) to CO2 emissions.
> It
> > is much easier to control CO2 emissions at the
> > power plant (centralized), since electric
> vehicles
> > don't emit much CO2... so there's no need to
> worry
> > about catalytic converters and other expensive
> > components/modifications required on millions
> and
> > millions of individual vehicles.
> >
> > However, this is a futile attempt at fighting
> CO2
> > emissions. Economies of developed world (and
> > not-so-developed) relies on increased
> consumption
> > and population increase. Until there's
> fundamental
> > and potentially painful changes to that model,
> > there will be more CO2 generated REGARDLESS of
> > "innovations" like these. 
> >
> > I wish them luck, anyway.
>
> I agree with you on this - the current economic
> models that rule our world rely on constant
> growth. This isn't sustainable. So what comes
> next..?


So perfectly true and so much bigger then Train Orders or Humankinds ability to solve I think. Although the issue will certainly resolve it self one way or another.

Nothing new about that...Boston has had pantograph-fitted busses running out to Watertown for eons....

Bob

navarch2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nothing new about that...Boston has had
> pantograph-fitted busses running out to Watertown
> for eons....
>
> Bob

You mean the Silver Line buses? (I visited Boston in October)

MBTA buses use trolley style poles, not pantograph. They don't share the road on a highway like the Autobahn. While the concept might not be new, the implementation of the idea is different, in my opinion.

PHall Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wasn't there a scheme to do something like this
> over the 710 Freeway between the harbor and East
> LA a couple of years ago?


https://energized.edison.com/stories/first-electric-highway-in-u-s-unveiled-near-ports-of-l-a-and-long-beach
 

cchan006 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> navarch2 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Nothing new about that...Boston has had pantograph-fitted busses running out to Watertown
> > for eons....
> >
> > Bob
>
> You mean the Silver Line buses? (I visited Boston  in October)
>
> MBTA buses use trolley style poles, not pantograph. They don't share the road on a highway
> like the Autobahn. While the concept might not be new, the implementation of the idea is different,
> in my opinion.

Yup.  One other difference in this implementation is that the power is being used to recharge batteries in the trucks, not directly powering the electric motors, kinda like a plug in hybrid concept.

Brian