The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Plus, it not only has superior energy efficiency, but its mature, existing technology - it can be rolled out in parallel nationwide. That is part of how it is compatible with the heavily Federalist policy approach. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
But going with the grain would suggest biomethane for heat and renewable electric power for traction.
True, and renewables are the aim, but I'm interested in the transition, and making best use of the carbon we have.
Now, I'm not an engineer, but I am interested in the "well to wheel" calculation, where we see gas being burnt (with no CHP) and then distributed to run ultra heavy trams around, which need expensive and unsightly cabling and (eg the horrors in Edinburgh at the moment), massively expensive and time consuming work to implement. I have no idea how that stacks up, particularly in climates where ther's no use for the heat.
I must say I'm attracted by the idea of a generation of ULR powered by (say) CNG to begin with, and biomethane to follow. They can run on both conventional tracks and tram tracks as well, so it's not a case of either/or.
It just seems - to a layman - a pretty painless way to roll out a simple but effective transitional solution.
For third world countries, particularly energy wasters like Iran and Nigeria, it's literally a no-brainer, I would have thought?
And it's not particularly high tech, either, so developing countries could probably build them, with a bit of licensed design IP and quality control. "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
Regular city buses are a more natural target for a fuel such a biomethane, since they do not require the establishment of a filling station network, but can be fueled from a central depot, and their role is to complement the dedicated transport corridor network. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
But I guess my key question is does it make more 'energy sense' to:
(a)burn carbon, generating heat and electricity (when maybe there is no use for heat) to produce electricity and distribute it to trams; or
(b)power a ULR tram look-alike directly with carbon? "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
The benefit of running the tram on electricity is that opportunity to pool multiple renewable sources of electricity.
However, even in the burn carbon for electricity case, if there is an opportunity to build from the ground up for energy efficiency, it will normally make more energy sense to generate electricity and distribute it to the trams than to burn it on the tram and convert it to electricity there. It will be the same electric motors in any event, since they are more energy efficient than internal combustion engines, and the fixed central generator can be made more efficient, since for one, not being part of the load carried by the tram it does not have a weight/efficiency trade-off, and for two, being at a fixed site makes it far simpler to re-use the exhaust heat.
If its a cold weather climate, the heat can be used for district heating, and if its a tropical country, the exhaust heat can be used as an input into a production process that consumes heat, such as production of ethanol. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
I'm looking at carbon only in terms of making best use of it while we've got it...... "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
by DoDo - May 20 35 comments
by Nomad - May 10 14 comments
by JakeS - May 15 7 comments
by Metatone - May 14 85 comments
by ARGeezer - May 16 15 comments
by gmoke - May 17 2 comments
by DoDo - May 12 11 comments
by Migeru - May 6 100 comments
by DoDo - May 2035 comments
by gmoke - May 172 comments
by ARGeezer - May 1615 comments
by JakeS - May 157 comments
by Metatone - May 1485 comments
by DoDo - May 1211 comments
by Nomad - May 1014 comments
by Migeru - May 78 comments
by marco - May 782 comments
by Migeru - May 6100 comments
by Ted Welch - May 35 comments
by afew - May 340 comments
by ceebs - May 26 comments
by gmoke - Apr 301 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 3067 comments
by joelado - Apr 2954 comments
by Metatone - Apr 2854 comments
by ATinNM - Apr 275 comments
by ceebs - Apr 265 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 2686 comments