WP3: Rail Passenger Transport - TOSCA Project

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3.3 Technology descriptions The potential for reducing energy use or GHG emissions is presented in percent per unit load (passenger-km), assuming the same average speed, in comparison with the reference system of 2009. Change of speed is taken into consideration in Sections 3.4 and 3.5. In most technology descriptions below (except FH, FI. FJ) energy savings is the immediate target, but these savings directly translate into GHG reductions proportionally. At this stage technologies are mainly described independently of cost effectiveness. In Sections 4 and 5 economic, social and user considerations are also taken into account. PA. Low-drag train Technologies are basically available for reducing air drag by 15–30 %, compared with the reference trains in Table 2-1. Some of them will need further maturity and acceptance (UIC, 2010) (Diedrichs, 2010). Low air drag is most important for high-speed long-distance trains, but has a significant impact also on fast regional trains and local trains as the two latter trains have today usually a modest aerodynamic performance. The low-drag train is estimated to have a long-term energy-savings potential of around 15 % – with an intermediate step at about 10 % – compared with the reference ‘High-speed’ as well as for the ‘Intercity and regional’ segment. PB. Low-mass train Lower mass will reduce energy consumption and related GHG emissions per pkm, in particular on stopping trains (local trains and metros), although re-generation of braking energy in electric operations to some extent will reduce the positive impact of low mass. Technologies are today not available for a major reduction of train mass (around 20 %), but may become available as a result of massive R&D. New materials and/or designs are needed and likely also economic incentives. The potential of energy savings is estimated to 10 % in local or metro trains - ‘City trains’- less in other train types, all compared with reference trains in Table 2-1. PC. Energy recovery Today’s modern electric passenger trains use the (electric) motors as generators when braking, thus feeding back electric energy to other trains on the line, or (sometimes) to the public electric grid. Alternatively, electric energy can be stored onboard in batteries or supercapacitors, for storage of braking energy until the next acceleration; the latter is of special interest for non-electric trains (diesel fuel and similar) with no external electric connection. All this is called energy recovery or regeneration. Energy recovery braking will also reduce the maintenance of the mechanical brakes. This technology is partly introduced already today. The feed-back ability is however usually smaller than optimum due to the limited power (in kW) of the propulsion equipment of the train and/or by the limited number of powered axles, as well as of the limited recovery capacity of the electric supply chain. With the rapid development of electric power equipment it is increasingly technically and economically feasible to install more power in trains and in the supply network, and also to improve possibilities of feeding electricity back to the general grid. Energy recovery has been subject to extensive simulations in this study and is estimated to be able to save energy use and related GHG emissions by up to 20 % over the long-term, in relation to today’s ‘Local city trains’. This potential is smaller in high-speed operations with only few stops, although also downhill gradients contribute to energy recovery. In some cases the electric supply system must be modified or rebuilt. A continuous improvement of regeneration and energy recovery is anticipated over the years. Energy recovery interacts with other technologies, such as ‘Eco driving’, ‘Low drag’ and ‘Low mass’. To fully understand and evaluate the impact of Energy recovery combination scenarios are needed; see further Section 3.5. Deliverable D4 – WP3 passenger 8
PD. Space-efficient train According to (RSSB, 2007) and author’s estimations European long-distance high-speed trains have an average of about 2.2 seats per metre of train length, while most Japanese high-speed long-distance trains (Shinkansen) have an average of 3.3. About half of this effect is due to the use of wide carbodies in Japan but also due to less space for catering facilities and a more space-efficient interior layout in general. In Europe double-decker trains are used to a certain extent to improve space utilization, while wide-bodied trains (exterior width > 3.2 m) are only possible on a small number of rail networks, because of space restrictions by the rail infrastructure. Double-decker trains currently accommodate 2.5–2.7 seats per metre of train in the high-speed versions; sometimes more on regional trains. With a consequent use of spaceefficient train interiors - including intelligent seat design - some 10–15 % of energy and GHG emissions (per seat-km) could be saved (Kottenhoff et al, 2009) compared with reference trains. Note however, that the reference high-speed train in Table 2-1 is a double-decker which already has a comparatively high amount of seats per unit length of train. In local ‘City trains’, and many regional trains, there is already a high degree of space utilization, including sometimes also standing passengers, so in these cases no further improvement is anticipated. A particular mean of improved space utilization is the exchange of locomotive-hauled trains for so-called multiple unit trains (EMU=Electrical, DMU=diesel), having their propulsion equipment installed in the passenger cars. Usually train performance can also be enhanced (acceleration, speed, regenerative braking, etc) and the train mass per seat can be reduced. PE. Modular short train Today many trains have a length of 5–16 cars (or equivalent if shorter carbodies than normal) due to the required capacity during peak hours. A large proportion of these trains is running in the same formation all the time, without shortening the train length during off-peak hours. This is due either to the fixed long train configuration, which does not allow any decoupling (in selfpropelled multiple units), or to the cost and time needed for decoupling cars in a loco-hauled train. If trains are made in shorter self-propelled modules (3–6 cars) these modules can quite easily be de-coupled, and the train length is halved when the full size is not needed. A halfsize-train would save some 40 % of energy compared with a full-size one. To some extent these principles are already applied in today’s operations, but they could be extended to further areas. With an assumed 20 % (more than today) of the trains running at half-size some 6–8 % of energy should be saved. However, it is at this stage uncertain to what extent these principles can be effectively used within Europe. In some EU member states safety regulations presently require some 5–10 m of empty (i.e. no passenger) space at each end of the train, which would neutralize the benefits of shorter trains. PF. Eco-driving - driving advice or automatic operation Optimization of driving style means, for example, coasting before braking and downhill approach, use of regenerative brakes as the ordinary brake, running slowly when time allows, etc. Such optimization is estimated to have a saving potential in the order of 10–15 % in its first generation, compared with the average manual driving of 2009 which is the reference in Table 2-1 (Railenergy, 2009) (Lindemann, 2010) (Luijt, 2010). Driving can be optimized by training for skilled driving, by on-line computerized support and advice to drivers or by automatic train operation. The latter may be used on metros and dedicated commuter railways. To a small extent this technology is already commercially introduced, but is estimated to be improved and fully implemented in modern trains within the next 10 years. These improvements are relatively inexpensive to introduce and are applicable to most types of trains. Deliverable D4 – WP3 passenger 9
Page 1 and 2: Technology Opportunities and Strate
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND
Page 5 and 6: ABSTRACT In Stage 1 of the EU/FP7-f
Page 7 and 8: 1 INTRODUCTION Rail passenger trans
Page 9 and 10: Table 2-1 Reference characteristics
Page 11: improvements of the rail infrastruc
Page 15 and 16: PJ. Low-GHG electric power Electric
Page 17 and 18: speeds in the range of 220-250 km/h
Page 19 and 20: It should be noted that it is not f
Page 21 and 22: The second issue that may be troubl
Page 23 and 24: 5.2 Energy and GHG characteristics
Page 25 and 26: In most cases it is assumed that th
Page 27 and 28: 2050 2025 2009 reference Low drag 1
Page 29 and 30: Table 5-4a Cost characteristics, ag
Page 31 and 32: Table 5-4b Cost characteristics for
Page 33 and 34: Summary and comments - Some of the
Page 35 and 36: 5.5 Social acceptability Table 5-6
Page 37 and 38: Comment - Most technologies and mea
Page 39 and 40: PF Eco-driving With an estimated av
Page 41 and 42: Combination of measures The combina
Page 43: REFERENCES Andersson E, Lukaszewicz

WP3: Rail Passenger Transport - TOSCA Project

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?