3 ms·

There is no justification for BEMUs in this case because you can simply use direct electrification. The rails are already electrified except for short sections.

by _hypx 3y ago

There is no justification for BEMUs in this case because you can simply use direct electrification. The rails are already electrified except for short sections. It's actually a pretty rare scenario to ever need battery powered trains. In reality, this is one of the silliest stories of the year. I'm guessing this is probably some kind of subsidy harvesting scam.

danhor 3y ago
More than 40% of the german railway network isn't electrified, which supports around around 10% of of traffic. Simply looking at https://openrailwaymap.org/ https://openrailwaymap.org/ shows you just how many small branch lines and less significant lines don't have overhead power for dozens of kilometers. This means that for large parts of the network there is some traffic, but far from enough to justify electrification which costs around 1M€/km (and, with some tunnels, might even mean expanding the tunnel diameter). There is a reason DMUs are widely used for these lines, and expectations are that BEMUs might be even cheaper to run. More lines should be electrified, but expecting it to cover everything is not realistic nor economically justifiable. See https://vm.baden-wuerttemberg.de/fileadmin/redaktion/m-mvi/intern/Dateien/PDF/PM_Anhang/Schlussbericht_SteFanS-Studie_NVBW_18012023.pdf https://vm.baden-wuerttemberg.de/fileadmin/redaktion/m-mvi/i... for a study on how to run non-electrified lines in Baden-Württemberg which comes to result that BEMUs are cheaper for around half of the lines that full electrification. I'm not aware of BEMUs getting some special subsidy (meanwhile electrification is heavily subsidised, IMHO for good reasons), looking from the perspective of the ones financing and specifying the operations.
- _hypx 3y ago
  For those totally unelectrified sections, you need something like hydrogen trains. This allows you to go hundreds of miles without power. But battery trains require catenaries at both ends for charging anyways. And the limited range of battery trains implies that the unpowered sections must be very short, and could easily be electrified instead. Which is why this decision is nonsensical and seems like some kind of subsidy related scam. Whatever the motivation, it cannot be based in rational thought.

by _hypx 3y ago

danhor 3y ago

More than 40% of the german railway network isn't electrified, which supports around around 10% of of traffic. Simply looking at https://openrailwaymap.org/ https://openrailwaymap.org/ shows you just how many small branch lines and less significant lines don't have overhead power for dozens of kilometers. This means that for large parts of the network there is some traffic, but far from enough to justify electrification which costs around 1M€/km (and, with some tunnels, might even mean expanding the tunnel diameter). There is a reason DMUs are widely used for these lines, and expectations are that BEMUs might be even cheaper to run. More lines should be electrified, but expecting it to cover everything is not realistic nor economically justifiable. See https://vm.baden-wuerttemberg.de/fileadmin/redaktion/m-mvi/intern/Dateien/PDF/PM_Anhang/Schlussbericht_SteFanS-Studie_NVBW_18012023.pdf https://vm.baden-wuerttemberg.de/fileadmin/redaktion/m-mvi/i... for a study on how to run non-electrified lines in Baden-Württemberg which comes to result that BEMUs are cheaper for around half of the lines that full electrification. I'm not aware of BEMUs getting some special subsidy (meanwhile electrification is heavily subsidised, IMHO for good reasons), looking from the perspective of the ones financing and specifying the operations.

_hypx 3y ago
For those totally unelectrified sections, you need something like hydrogen trains. This allows you to go hundreds of miles without power. But battery trains require catenaries at both ends for charging anyways. And the limited range of battery trains implies that the unpowered sections must be very short, and could easily be electrified instead. Which is why this decision is nonsensical and seems like some kind of subsidy related scam. Whatever the motivation, it cannot be based in rational thought.