Stadler Flirt Hydrogen MUs for Amtrak California

[SubwayNut]

It's looking like Stadler may be providing Flirt Hydrogen Multiple (HMU?) Unit trainsets for Amtrak California powered by Hydrogen Fuel a Memorandum of Understanding Signed to purchase up to 25 units to operate statewide based on their FLIRT trainsets. a press release (picked up by trains magazine). These will be 4 car long trainsets based on a 2 car Hydrogen Powered Fuel set that was just manufactured for the Arrow Commuter Rail in San Bernardino County (its other trainsets will be diesel).

Anyone know how many trainsets the 3 Amtrak California routes need today? These Flirt's feel like too short trains for the Surfliner?

 

[GDRRiley]

this is enough for San Joaquin and maybe ACE+ theres a new shuttle proposed near King to porterville and lemoore.

CC and Surfliner both need ~20-25 sets which would need to be far bigger. a 6-8 car FLIRT maybe big enough for the CC while the surlfiner would probably need 10 cars. Both of them should just be put under wire

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

Read the trains story this is a test set order with options. “The first four new ZEMUs will be used in the Central Valley between Merced and Sacramento(.)”

 

[danasgoodstuff]

Hydrogen, what could go wrong? Hopefully, the've got this figured out. But I couldn't resist.

 

[GDRRiley]

Read the trains story this is a test set order with options. “The first four new ZEMUs will be used in the Central Valley between Merced and Sacramento(.)”

the test one is already produced and will begin testing soon. Arrow (metrolink) has one

 

[Tlcooper44]

Boy America will do just about anything to avoid electrification.

 

[GDRRiley]

Boy America will do just about anything to avoid electrification.

of the ~100 that California are likely to order in the next few years I'd expect about 2/3 to be battery+OCS hybrids with the rest being hydrogen.

 

[Tlcooper44]

of the ~100 that California are likely to order in the next few years I'd expect about 2/3 to be battery+OCS hybrids with the rest being hydrogen.

I suppose I meant overhead electrification.

 

[GDRRiley]

I suppose I meant overhead electrification.

while this order isn't most of the other ones should support electrification with batteries for certain stretches

 

[Tlcooper44]

while this order isn't most of the other ones should support electrification with batteries for certain stretches

In my opinion, electrification with batteries is a short-sighted undertaking at best.

The pros for battery rail tech are penny wise and pound foolish.

 

[GDRRiley]

In my opinion, electrification with batteries is a short-sighted undertaking at best.

The pros for battery rail tech are penny wise and pound foolish.

I'll use the SLO plan because its a decent example, the coast sub will likely get bi hourly service from surfliner and a coast daylight in this section with SLO being the start/termination for both.
it would share ~30 miles of mainline track with them before going off onto a shortline for the final 9 miles. With every 30 min peak and hourly off peak its easy enough to justify running wires on the mainline however the spur is a lower value.

 

[jis]

More on this Stadler FLIRT. Actual order placed for 4 units with options for 25 additional sets...

https://dot.ca.gov/news-releases/news-release-2023-034

 

[GDRRiley]

More on this Stadler FLIRT. Actual order placed for 4 units with options for 25 additional sets...

https://dot.ca.gov/news-releases/news-release-2023-034

I just hope the hydrogen sucks and so in a few years when CalSTA and Caltrans grow a brain we can just remove the hydrogen power car and make them EMUs.

 

[user 14106]

I just hope the hydrogen sucks and so in a few years when CalSTA and Caltrans grow a brain we can just remove the hydrogen power car and make them EMUs.

I think it’s important to briefly take off one’s railroading hat and look beyond the point of view of what’s better from a train operations perspective to understand the thinking of this move. If the real idea and motivation is to decarbonize hydrogen is ultimately a more meaningful step than EMUs - it may not perform like EMUs from a train perspective but if the real goal here is to decarbonize it its more meaningful for sure. Moving from diesel power to electric just offloads everything on to the grid. Then one has to figure out decarbonizing the grid. Hydrogen is zero carbon and also doesn’t add load to the grid that has to be covered by some other energy source. So from that perspective I can see it. Now obviously one has to factor in the railroading side of things to determine if it’s worth it - will it work out? That’s another question.

 

[daybeers]

Isn't the issue with hydrogen that it takes more energy to produce than it is able to output? I don't see how that's better than a true electric power source.

 

[jis]

I think it’s important to briefly take off one’s railroading hat and look beyond the point of view of what’s better from a train operations perspective to understand the thinking of this move. If the real idea and motivation is to decarbonize hydrogen is ultimately a more meaningful step than EMUs - it may not perform like EMUs from a train perspective but if the real goal here is to decarbonize it its more meaningful for sure. Moving from diesel power to electric just offloads everything on to the grid. Then one has to figure out decarbonizing the grid. Hydrogen is zero carbon and also doesn’t add load to the grid that has to be covered by some other energy source.

We need to look at the full energy cycle for each energy mode, not just the consumption part. In the process of producing Hydrogen you have to burn more energy than you can get stored in Hydrogen unit for unit. Hydrogen is actually a terrible fuel, but is fashionable for sure. Whether you waste energy producing Hydrogen or not, we have to decarbonize the grid anyway if we wish to have any significant effect on overall decarbonization. I think electrification is in general better than trying to use Hydrogen, even for just decarbonization

 

[user 14106]

We need to look at the full energy cycle for eac energy mode, not just the consumption part. In the process of producing Hydrogen you have to burn more energy than you can get stored in Hydrogen unit for unit. Hydrogen is actually a terrible fuel, but is fashionable for sure. Whether you waste enrgy [producing Hydrogen or not, we have to decarbonize the grid anyway if we wish to have any significant effect on overall decarbonization. I think electrification is in general better than trying to use Hydrogen, even for just decarbonization

That’s a good point. I didn’t realize the production costs associated and admittedly was only looking it from the consumption POV. I guess I’ll have to concede that I didn’t know what I was talking about on this one.

I can definitely see the issue if it costs more energy wise than it produces - and that energy consumed to make that hydrogen has the same problem as the electricity on an EMU - it doesn’t necessarily come from low carbon sources.

 

[Alexandria Nick]

View attachment 29712
Hydrogen, what could go wrong? Hopefully, the've got this figured out. But I couldn't resist.

Also, for comparison, the Hindenburg was carrying enough hydrogen to fuel the entire 25 set FLIRT fleet 24 times, so results may vary.

 

[GDRRiley]

I think it’s important to briefly take off one’s railroading hat and look beyond the point of view of what’s better from a train operations perspective to understand the thinking of this move. If the real idea and motivation is to decarbonize hydrogen is ultimately a more meaningful step than EMUs - it may not perform like EMUs from a train perspective but if the real goal here is to decarbonize it its more meaningful for sure. Moving from diesel power to electric just offloads everything on to the grid. Then one has to figure out decarbonizing the grid. Hydrogen is zero carbon and also doesn’t add load to the grid that has to be covered by some other energy source. So from that perspective I can see it. Now obviously one has to factor in the railroading side of things to determine if it’s worth it - will it work out? That’s another question.

decarbonizing should not be our focus, it is far better to mode shift to diesel rail than to focus on making what service we run zero emissions.
Most hydrogen is not zero carbon and is made from natural gas, the stuff that is made from water eats up 3x the amount of electricity as wires alone would.

 

[user 14106]

decarbonizing should not be our focus, it is far better to mode shift to diesel rail than to focus on making what service we run zero emissions.
Most hydrogen is not zero carbon and is made from natural gas, the stuff that is made from water eats up 3x the amount of electricity as wires alone would.

Maybe so. I wasn’t really arguing that it should be the focus, more just trying to play devil’s advocate and look beyond it from a railroading perspective to try to make sense of their thinking if decarbonizing is California’s focus) and pointing out the limitations of simply electrifying. But I concede I wasn’t aware of the energy consumption and other issues involved with producing hydrogen (I was aware it was expensive to produce) and have actually been reading up more on the production process since - so my point is basically moot.

 

[frequentflyer]

Aren’t these trains meant to connect with CAHSR in Merced?

 

[Willbridge]

The tourist railroad that runs on the north shore of the St. Lawrence in Quebec is using one of these sets (hydrogen Flirt). They also have a couple of diesel Flirts.

It's often the case that California announces a first that is second. I've seen some things that portrayed the SF<>SJ line as being the first electric commuter rail line in the West, while the Denver trains trundle back and forth under high-voltage AC unnoticed.

 

[GDRRiley]

Aren’t these trains meant to connect with CAHSR in Merced?

No these will bee tested state wide, calsta and caltrans really want it to work so they don't have to wire up

 

[EchoSierra]

The tourist railroad that runs on the north shore of the St. Lawrence in Quebec is using one of these sets (hydrogen Flirt). They also have a couple of diesel Flirts.

Which tourist railroad is this? The only one I was able to find was the Train de Charlevoix and they're running a pair of German DB Class 628.1 DMUs with an Alstom Coradia on the way.

 

[jiml]

Which tourist railroad is this? The only one I was able to find was the Train de Charlevoix and they're running a pair of German DB Class 628.1 DMUs with an Alstom Coradia on the way.

My mistake - it is the Alstom Coradia hydrogen model. It is in service now and the news item failed to mention the manufacturer - just the technology - and the video looked like a Flirt. Here's a review: