The Future of Diesel Engines

Research Programme
Engineering
The future of the diesel engine
THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE
AUTHOR DATE
: IAN SILVER : 1 JUNE 2007
Copyright 2007 Rail Safety and Standards Board Ltd. This publication may be reproduced free of charge for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced and referenced accurately and not being used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as the copyright of Rail Safety and Standards Board and the title of the publication specified accordingly. For any other use of the material please apply to RSSB's Head of Research and Development for permission. Any additional queries can be directed to research@rssb.co.uk. This publication can be accessed via the RSSB website www.rssb.co.uk
Page No. 1 of 121
CONTENTS 1 2 3 4 5
PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................... 7 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 11 ABBREVIATIONS USED ................................................................... 11 USEFUL DEFINITIONS ...................................................................... 13 UIC RESEARCH INTO LOCAL AIR POLLUTION .............................. 15
5.1 5.2 5.3 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 15 METHODOLOGY OF UIC WP3 REVIEW ................................................................. 15 REVIEW OF RESULTS FROM WP3 ........................................................................... 16 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 18 EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE 2004/26/EC .................................................................... 18 UIC GUIDELINES ................................................................................................ 21 EURO LIMITS ...................................................................................................... 23 US EPA REGULATIONS........................................................................................ 23 LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE OF UK TRACTION FLEET ..................................................... 24 UK LEGISLATION ................................................................................................ 24 FUTURE POLICY .................................................................................................. 25 SUMMARY OF LIKELY FUTURE GOVERNMENT DIRECTION .......................................... 26 NOTIFICATION TO TRAIN OPERATORS ................................................................... 26 ENGINE MANUFACTURER EMISSIONS STATEMENTS .................................................. 27 ENGINE TECHNOLOGY FOR EMISSIONS ABATEMENT GENERAL .............................. 27 NOX REDUCTION TECHNIQUES ............................................................................ 28 PM REDUCTION TECHNIQUES .............................................................................. 30 CO2 REDUCTION TECHNIQUES ............................................................................ 31 RE-ENGINING .................................................................................................... 31 MULTIPLE ENGINES ............................................................................................. 33 FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS....................................................................................... 33 NRMM DIRECTIVE ............................................................................................. 35 EU DIRECTIVE 2003/17/EC ............................................................................... 35 EU DIRECTIVE 2003/30/EC ............................................................................... 36 EU DIRECTIVE 96/62/EC ................................................................................... 37 RENEWABLE TRANSPORT FUEL OBLIGATION ............................................................ 37
CURRENT EXHAUST EMISSIONS STANDARDS ............................... 18

6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6
CURRENT GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY................... 24

7.1 7.2 7.3
CURRENT INDUSTRIES POLICIES AND ACTIONS ........................... 26

8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9
LEGISLATIVE DEVELOPMENTS ....................................................... 35

9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5
Page No. 3 of 121
10
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN OTHER SECTORS ................... 37

10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 GENERAL .......................................................................................................... 37 FUEL AVAILABILITY ............................................................................................. 37 FUEL MANUFACTURING COST .............................................................................. 38 FUEL DUTY ......................................................................................................... 39 ALTERNATIVE POWER SOURCES ............................................................................ 40 GAS OIL AND DIESEL FUEL .................................................................................. 41 BIOFUELS........................................................................................................... 41 WATER DIESEL EMULSION .................................................................................... 43 NATURAL GAS ................................................................................................... 44 BIOGAS ............................................................................................................ 45 FUEL ADDITIVES.................................................................................................. 45 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................. 47 ENGINE TESTING PROGRAMME ............................................................................ 48 IN-SERVICE TRIALS.............................................................................................. 51 CONCLUSIONS FROM PROJECT............................................................................ 51 DIESEL OXIDATION CATALYSTS ............................................................................ 52 DIESEL PARTICULATE FILTERS ................................................................................ 52 CONTINUOUSLY REGENERATING TRAP .................................................................. 53 SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION ....................................................................... 56 COMBINED (SCR + DPF) OR (SCR + CRT). ........................................................ 56 NOX ADSORBERS .............................................................................................. 57 SUMMARY OF SYSTEM EFFECTS............................................................................. 57 RAIL OPERATING EXPERIENCE .............................................................................. 58 INSTALLATION DIFFICULTIES.................................................................................. 59 FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS....................................................................................... 59 BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION........................................................................ 60 OPERATING EXPERIENCE ..................................................................................... 62 FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS....................................................................................... 64 APPLICABILITY FOR UK OPERATION ...................................................................... 65 LEASING COMPANY INVESTMENT ......................................................................... 66 GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT ................................................................................. 67
11
FUEL DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................... 41

11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.5 11.6
12
REDUCED SULPHUR FUEL PROJECT ............................................... 47

12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4
13
EXHAUST AFTER TREATMENT OPTIONS.......................................... 52

13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6 13.7 13.8 13.9 13.10
14
DIESEL ELECTRIC HYBIRDS ............................................................. 60

14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4
15
INVESTMENT PROGRAMME........................................................... 66
15.1 15.2
Page No. 4 of 121
16
KNOWLEDGE GAPS ....................................................................... 67

16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.6 16.7 GENERAL .......................................................................................................... 67 FUEL CELLS DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 67 FUEL CELL RAILWAY PROJECTS............................................................................. 68 SUMMARY OF FUEL CELL ISSUES FOR RAIL APPLICATIONS ........................................ 70 SUPERCAPACITORS............................................................................................. 70 VEHICLE IMPORTS GM LOCOMOTIVES ............................................................... 71 VEHICLE IMPORTS CHINESE DMUS .................................................................... 71 SURVEY OF CURRENT UK DIESEL FLEET................................................................... 72 ENGINE DUTY AND USAGE FACTORS .................................................................... 75 OPTIONS FOR RETROFITTING OF TECHNOLOGY ....................................................... 76 POTENTIAL SAVINGS FROM NEW ENGINES OR ASSOCIATED TECHNOLOGY................ 77 OPPORTUNITIES FOR REDUCED ENGINE IDLING ....................................................... 80 OVERVIEW OF FUTURE TRENDS ............................................................................. 86 FUEL CONSUMPTION TRENDS ............................................................................... 89 QUICK AND EASY SOLUTIONS ............................................................................ 92 GENERAL .......................................................................................................... 93 CATEGORY 1 .................................................................................................... 93 CATEGORY 2 .................................................................................................... 94 CATEGORY 3 .................................................................................................... 95 GENERAL .......................................................................................................... 95 CATEGORY 1 .................................................................................................... 95 CATEGORY 2 .................................................................................................... 96 CATEGORY 3 .................................................................................................... 97
17
POTENTIAL FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING FLEET................... 72

17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.7 17.8
18
AREAS FOR POLICY ACTION ........................................................ 93

18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4
19
AREAS FOR INVESTMENT ACTION ................................................ 95

19.1 19.2 19.3 19.4
20 21 22
CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................. 97 REFERENCES................................................................................. 102 APPENDICES ................................................................................ 105
Page No. 5 of 121
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
With significant work having been carried out recently by the rail industry into exhaust emissions and alternative fuels, RSSB has commissioned a wider investigation into the current position and future of diesel traction. Specifically, the objectives of this work are: Identify the current position regarding rail emissions and the likely future sustainable development path. Review rails contribution to local air quality issues. Identify areas where the economic and/or environmental performance of rail can be improved by simple solutions. Consider the future use of the diesel engine in rail traction, against the background of a more stringent environmental approach and the development of alternative power technologies. This information would feed into the industrys rail strategy work and provide appropriate briefing material. As background, descriptions have been provided of the principal diesel pollutants, namely oxides of nitrogen (NOx), hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2) and particulate matter (PM), their causes and effects. The UIC rail diesel study into local air quality concluded that engine idling was a principal generator of nitrogen dioxide and PM emissions, particularly around terminal stations. However, this was a modelling approach and emissions measurements around a terminal station are now recommended to better map the local air quality. A review has been carried out of the current EU, UIC, Euro and US EPA rail diesel emissions standards, with comparisons made between these where practicable. For the current UK traction fleet, some engines are complaint with UIC II, but none comply with Stage IIIA levels of the EU Non-Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) Directive. The Government has enacted the NRMM into national legislation, and via its Climate Change Programme, has stated its intention to encourage the rail industry to pursue measures to reduce emissions. Approaches to engine manufacturers for their formal statement on emissions compliance of their rail engines and technologies under development met with very limited success (only one direct response). However, a review has been carried out of the principal engine technologies for emissions abatement. In general terms, mechanisms to reduce NOx often increase PM, and vice-versa. Principal available technologies for NOx reduction are retarded injection timing, charge air cooling and exhaust gas recirculation. Integration of air/fuel control can control combustion and reduce peak temperatures to control NOx formation. Principal available technologies for PM reduction are centred on increased injection pressures (common rail), injector system and combustion chamber
Page No. 7 of 121
design, variable valve timing, increases in compression ratio and oil consumption control. Single-bank idling for vee-engines is also an option. Future developments for emissions reductions will concentrate on combustion modelling and shaping methods, such as Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI), oxygen enrichment and low temperature combustion. These technologies are all at an early development stage. Compliance with the NRMM Stage IIIB emissions limits planned for 2011-12 will require the use of exhaust after-treatment devices, of which a survey of available types has been carried out. The principal designs are: Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOC) (for CO/HC/PM) Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) (for PM) Continuously Regenerating Trap (CRT) (for CO/HC/PM) Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) (for NOx) NOx adsorber Testing of a CRT on two different engine types has shown reductions of between 83 and 98.5% in HC, CO and PM. The optimum emissions reductions are achieved by a combination of technologies; the limited rail experience within Europe to date has generally been with DPF/CRT systems. There are significant issues of weight, size and cost for the installation of aftertreatment equipment in new rail vehicles, and even more so for retro-fit installations (although emissions legislation is not currently retrospective). Future developments will eventually make after-treatment systems lighter, smaller and more efficient. Despite international pressure on reducing greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide is currently unregulated by any of the standards reviewed. It is often noted as an increased by-product of exhaust after-treatment. Conventional crude oil reserves are expected to last for well over 30 years, although costs may increase as the diminishing of the higher quality North Sea stocks requires additional refining of lower quality oil stocks from other areas. The industry change from the current gas oil to sulphur-free diesel (SFD) is expected to result in a manufacturing cost increase of 2 to 2.5 pence per litre. The exact specification of the low sulphur fuel (gas oil or diesel) is being examined by the industrys fuel strategy development group. The Governments Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO) requires increasing percentages of transport fuels to be from renewable sources starting in 2008, with a figure of 5% by 2010. A 5% level of biodiesel can already be included in standard diesel fuels without identification, and the RTFO is likely to expedite its inclusion. The production of biodiesel creates minimal CO2 emissions and also reduces other pollutants (except NOx) during its combustion. Its use as a blend with either gas oil or SFD will increase, once testing has established what mix ratios are acceptable with minimal impact on engine performance and reliability, and once fuel duty issues relating to this blending have been resolved.
Page No. 8 of 121
Engine testing as part of the ATOC/RSSB-sponsored low sulphur fuel project showed that some engines exhibited both power reductions and fuel consumption increases, as a result of the fuels lower energy content. Allowing for longer periods at lower power output, it is anticipated that an overall fuel consumption increase of up to 3% could be experienced across the fleet. Generally, NOx reductions of up to 10% and PM reductions of more than 10% were noted from the test results. Fleet trials with ULSD/SFD are have been completed. No significant adverse performance or reliability effects have been noted. Overall fuel consumption effects have been difficult to quantify precisely due to gaps and discrepancies in the returned data, but no significant detrimental effects in service have been identified. Diesel-electric hybrid systems are particularly suited to shunting and similar duties, and international experience with new or converted locomotives is growing. A diesel-hybrid railcar has also been produced for evaluation, and one of the Network Rail HST power cars has also been adapted for hybrid operation. This represents a growth area for the UK for suitable applications. Supercapacitors could substitute for the battery power pack required in the future, or could be used in an all-electric installation. Fuel cell development is not yet at a stage where its power output, size and weight make it suitable for rail application. However, various international rail projects are in progress and their progress should be monitored, with further feasibility work carried out at an appropriate point. A review of the likely investment into the railways has not identified any major projects within the next few years, notwithstanding current and future reengining programmes. The DfTs Rail group has produced a strategy document, parts of whose remit is to consider developing technologies for potential adoption by UK railways. A full survey of the current UK diesel fleet has been carried out, categorising stock by size, power output, age, quantity and estimated remaining life, establishing a useful database. Whereas there are few DMUs older than 22 years, nearly 25% of the locomotive fleet is over 40 years old. An efficiency profile of the fleet has also been constructed, based on relative fuel consumption. Eight utilisation categories for the fleet have been established, each of which defines a particular no load/full load duty cycle, and estimated hours/miles. Although simplistic, this can indicate under-utilised vehicles, and should serve as a basis for further discussion. Limited options are considered to be available for easy retro-fitting of suitable technology to existing engines, except for some consideration of single-bank idling for vee or twin-bank locomotive engines. However, opportunities exist for effective re-engining of appropriate vehicles, which can produce significant fuel and emissions savings, as well as other benefits.
Page No. 9 of 121
Operational measures have been identified that can reduce fuel consumption and emissions without disproportionate effort. Various mechanisms could be employed ro reduce the amount of time spent with the engine idling, such as enforced shutdowns, shore supplies, auxiliary power units and selective control of individual engines. Energy-efficient driving techniques have been shown to be effective by other overseas operators, and could be implemented by straightforward driver training or using a range of increasingly sophisticated aids. The effect of any altered driving profile on timetabling needs to be seriously considered. An attempt has been made to summarise much of the detail of this study in order to predict a possible development path for the rail traction fleet up to 2030. It should be emphasised that this is one view only, and should be considered as the basis for further discussion and development. Areas for policy action have been suggested as follows: Category 1 fuel additives and energy-efficient driving techniques. Category 2 reduction of engine idling, re-engining of rolling stock before NRMM Stage IIIA and review of new rolling stock requirements. Category 3 retrofit of exhaust after-treatment equipment and biodiesel evaluation. Areas for investment action have been suggested as follows: Category 1 evaluation of fuel additives Category 2 auxiliary power units, re-engining of rolling stock and hybrid development. Category 3 biodiesel testing and fuel cell prototyping. The reasoning for each of these proposals is identified. This study has covered a complex and wide-ranging subject. There are many areas of discussion where opinions may differ or new facts emerge that affect previous comments. In addition, recipients may require particular areas examined in more detail. The author therefore requests feedback on any aspect of this work, so that it is tailored to suit expectations and can be considered as being as representative as it is possible to be.
Page No. 10 of 121
INTRODUCTION
There has been a significant body of work carried out by the UK rail industry recently into the subject of exhaust emissions and the use of alternative fuels, much of it having been sponsored by the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB). RSSB now wishes to extend this area into a wider remit, investigating the short-term issues on emissions compliance and the longer-term development of diesel engines, fuels and exhaust after-treatment. The principal objectives of this work have been established as: Definition of the current position of the UK rail network regarding emissions and the likely sustainable development path, for use as industry briefing material. Identification of the relative contribution of rail to local air quality issues. Identification of any areas where simple fixes (quick wins) can be implemented to improve the economic and/or environmental performance of rail. Consideration of the future of the diesel engine, to be referenced against continuing developments in electrification and alternative energy sources. This information would feed into the industrys rail strategy work.
The methodology employed for this investigation has been to consider specific areas of relevance, generally identified as section headings within this report. Particularly for technical descriptions, it has not been the intention to detail excessively methods of construction, operation or the range of options available; rather an overall summary is provided to put the subject into context as part of the principal remit of this investigation. The intention has been to enable conclusions to be drawn on areas where policy and investment action can be planned and taken to improve the environmental performance and image of the rail network in a feasible and cost-effective manner.
ABBREVIATIONS USED
ADMS APU CARB CCP CH4 CNG CO CO2 CRT DDHS DfT DOC DPF EAC EGR ELR Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling System Auxiliary power unit California Air Resources Board Climate Change Programme Methane Compressed Natural Gas Carbon monoxide Carbon dioxide Continuously Regenerating Trap Diesel Driven Heating System Department for Transport Diesel Oxidation Catalyst Diesel Particulate Filter Environmental Audit Committee Exhaust Gas Recirculation European Load Response Page No. 11 of 121
EMA ESC ETC ETS Euromot fie GPS HCCI H2SO4 ICE IEA LNG (NH2)2CO NH3 NMHC NMT NO NOx NO2 N2O nPAH NRMM OEM ORR PAH PEM PM PM10 PM0.1 ppm RTFO SCR SCRT SFC SFD SID SOF SOFC SOL SO2 SO3 SO4 SULEV THC UIC UKPIA ULEL ULSD
Engine Manufacturers Association European Stationary Cycle European Transient Cycle Electric Train Supply European Association of Internal Combustion Engine Manufacturers Fuel Injection Equipment Global Positioning System Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition Sulphuric acid Internal Combustion Engine International Energy Agency Liquefied Natural Gas Urea Ammonia Non-methane hydrocarbons New Measurement Train Nitric oxide Nitrogen oxide Nitrogen dioxide Nitrous Oxide Nitrated Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Non-Road Mobile Machinery Original Equipment Manufacturer Office of the Rail Regulator Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons Proton Exchange Membrane Particulate Matter Particulate Matter with a size of less than 10 micrometres Particulate Matter with a size of less than 0.1 micrometres (ultra fine particles) Parts per million Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation Selective Catalytic Reduction Selective Catalytic Reduction with Continuously Regenerating Trap Specific Fuel Consumption Sulphur Free Diesel Split Injection Device Solid Organic Fraction (of PM) Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Solid Fraction (of PM) Sulphur dioxide Sulphur trioxide Sulphate Particulates Super Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle Total hydrocarbons (or HC) Union Internationale de Chemins de Fer (International Union of Railways) United Kingdom Petroleum Industry Association Ultra Low Emission Locomotive Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel Page No. 12 of 121
ULSGO UNIFE VOF
Ultra Low Sulphur Gas Oil Association of European Railway Industries Volatile organic fraction (of PM)
USEFUL DEFINITIONS
Exhaust emissions are an inherent part of this report, and it is therefore considered appropriate to include for reference definitions of the various emissions parameters. These are not intended to be comprehensive descriptions, rather a useful overview. Carbon Monoxide Carbon monoxide (CO) is an odourless, colourless and highly toxic gas, with a similar density to air. It results from incomplete combustion within the engine cylinder. Emissions from diesel engines are relatively low, around 10 to 500 ppm. Carbon Dioxide At elevated cylinder temperatures, CO can be oxidised to form carbon dioxide (CO2), and is characteristic of more complete combustion. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, meaning that it absorbs heat reflected from the Earths surface, rather than permitting the heat to radiate back out into space. This causes atmospheric warming, creating the greenhouse effect. Hydrocarbons Hydrocarbons consist of many hydrocarbon species derived from diesel fuel and lubricating oil. In engine emissions standards, hydrocarbons are regulated as either total hydrocarbon (THC) or non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC). The latter categorisation excludes the simplest hydrocarbon methane (CH4), due to its different atmospheric reactivity. CH4 accounts for only around 2% of THC. Most hydrocarbons are toxic and/or carcinogenic. In the atmosphere, hydrocarbons undergo photochemical reactions with NOx to form smog and ground level ozone. CH4 does not react, which is why it is sometimes excluded from assessments. Typical levels of THC in diesel exhaust are between 20 and 300 ppm. Nitrogen Oxides Oxides of nitrogen (NOx) as defined in emissions regulations include nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). NO is a colourless, odourless gas and is formed within the combustion chamber from nitrogen and oxygen under high temperature and pressure. When discharged into the atmosphere, NO can be easily oxidised into NO2 at ambient conditions. NOx gases are toxic, cause acid rain and contribute to smog formation. Methods to reduce NOx formation tend to concentrate on reducing the peak flame temperature and/or reducing the oxygen concentration. This often leads to increased PM levels, with mechanisms to reduce PM leading to increased NOx. In general terms, considering the split of NO and NO2 in diesel exhaust, older technology engines would be approximately 95% NO and 5% NO2, whereas more recent engine designs would be approximately 85% NO and 15% NO2.
Page No. 13 of 121
Nitrous oxide (N2O) is an unregulated pollutant, mainly due to its very low emissions level, typically 0.03 g/kWh (or 3 ppm). It is however a strong greenhouse gas and attacks stratospheric ozone. Although it remains unregulated, there is a general consensus within the engine industry that emission control technologies should not increase the amount of N2O present by any means. Typical levels of NOx in diesel exhaust are between 50 and 1000 ppm. Sulphur Dioxide Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is an unregulated pollutant, originating principally from the sulphur content of the fuel. It is a colourless gas with a distinctive, generally unpleasant odour. During combustion, SO2 can be oxidised to form sulphur trioxide (SO3) (approximately 2-4% of SO2), which can lead to the formation of sulphuric acid (H2SO4). With reducing fuel sulphur levels, the dominant SO2 emission will become from lubricating oil, which contains sulphur as part of anti-wear and detergent additives. Particulate Matter Particulate matter (PM) represents all small particles (solid and liquid material) within the exhaust including carbon. Despite considerable research, neither the formation of PM in the engine cylinder, nor its physical and chemical properties or human health effects are fully understood. It is responsible for visible black smoke. PM is generally divided into three main fractions: Solid fraction (SOL) (carbon, metallic ash). As newer engines produce less carbon from combustion, the relative importance of metallic ash increases, to around 10% or more. Soluble Organic Fraction (SOF) (organic material from fuel or lubricating oil). This is sometimes referred to as the Volatile Organic Fraction (VOF). PM with low SOF is referred to as dry (10% or less of total PM), high SOF as wet (50% or more of total PM). SOF is strongly dependent upon operating conditions, and is highest at light engine loads. Sulphate Particulates (SO4) (sulphuric acid, water). This requires an interaction between H2SO4 and H2O, and depends principally upon the fuel sulphur level.
PM10 is airborne particulate matter with a size of less than 10 micrometres. This includes most airborne particles in the UK atmosphere, and most particles capable of penetrating into and depositing within the human respiratory system. PM0.1 (ultra fine particles) can also be a hazard. Most diesel particulates are in this size. Methods of diesel engine combustion control to reduce PM often tend to increase NOx levels, and vice-versa.
Page No. 14 of 121
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) constitute part of the SOF fraction of PM. The aromatics content of the fuel defines the number of fuel molecules that contain at least one benzene ring (a closed chain of six carbon atoms with hydrogen atoms attached, from which benzene compounds are formed by replacement of the hydrogen atoms). These beneficially affect combustion, but form PAHs. They are of interest due to their mutagenic and, in some cases, carcinogenic nature, but are not separately regulated.
5
5.1
UIC RESEARCH INTO LOCAL AIR POLLUTION

BACKGROUND In October 2003, the Union Internationale de Chemins de Fer (UIC) initiated their Diesel Action Plan, advocating pro-active measures to reduce diesel engine exhaust emissions. Part of this plan was the Rail Diesel Study 1, which was carried out by UIC, the Association of European Railway Industries (UNIFE), the European Association of Internal Combustion Engine Manufacturers (Euromot) and AEA Technology to assess possible measures by which nitrogen oxides (NOx) and Particulate Matter (PM) from the European rail diesel fleet could be reduced. The Rail Diesel Study was published in March 2006, and comprised four work packages (WP), as follows: WP1 Status and future development of the diesel fleet. WP2 Technical and operational measures to improve the emissions performance of rail diesel. WP3 The contribution of rail diesel exhaust emissions to local air quality. WP4 Possible emission reduction strategies that could be applied to diesel traction units across the EU Railway 27. WPs 1, 2 and 4 are not reviewed specifically in this section, but are referenced where appropriate in other parts of this report. WP3 examined the impact of emissions from the rail sector in terms of their significance to local air quality, and the location of hotspots. The findings from this work package are reviewed here.
5.2
METHODOLOGY OF UIC WP3 REVIEW EU Framework Directive 96/62/EC 2 revised air quality standards for pollutants previously covered by legislation and also introduced new standards for previously unregulated pollutants. The UIC approach has been to consider nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and PM10 emissions principally, since these are the pollutants of most concern from the rail sector. The requirements for these particular pollutants are covered by a daughter Directive to 96/62/EC, namely 99/30/EC 3. The study was concerned with identifying air quality problems on the EU Railway 27 (defined as being the 15 EU countries, plus the 8 new member states, plus Norway, Switzerland, Bulgaria and Romania). A questionnaire was therefore sent to the UIC members in the 27 countries, plus environment ministries and other organisations responsible for reporting data on air pollution
Page No. 15 of 121
(a total of 100 organisations referenced), requesting information on complaints received and identification where possible of emissions hotspots. In addition to the questionnaire, a dispersion modelling technique (Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling System, or ADMS) was employed to assess the impact of railway emissions on the different pollutant concentrations, for a busy line section, a shunting yard (three sites considered) and an idling train. The first two of these were modelled using base data from a Deutsche Bahn (DB) study, whereas the idling study utilised UK data. The line section results were compared with NOx and PM10 emissions from both a major motorway and a minor road, and to predicted UK background concentrations from WP1 for a locomotive, for metropolitan, urban and rural areas. For shunting yards, the NO2 and PM10 concentrations were plotted for 200 metres in each direction, and comparisons made with predicted UK background concentrations from WP1 for a shunting locomotive, again for metropolitan, urban and rural areas. For the idling condition, it was concluded that modelling of a covered and enclosed terminal station area would be extremely complex, so the assumption was made of an open station area. The modelling also assumed a 12-platform station with inter-city trains left idling for approximately 40% of the day. Pollutant concentrations were plotted over a 220 by 140 metre area, centred on the station platforms. This analysis was then repeated using two idling trains, rather than 12. 5.3 REVIEW OF RESULTS FROM WP3 Based on the interpretation that the 100 organisations listed were all contacted, the percentage level of responses overall was not identified. However, responses were received from 22 of the EU railway 27 countries. Of these 22 countries, 10 reported receiving complaints from the public concerning poor air quality, with an average of between one and ten complaints per annum. The maximum number of complaints received over one year was 20. Engine idling and shunting yards were suggested as the principal causes for complaint. Some comment was made concerning stations with restricted air exchange also being a susceptible area. The study therefore concluded that air quality complaints overall are not a major issue within European railways. An important point noted by the study was the percentage of gross tkm (tonne-kilometre) hauled (passenger and freight) attributed to diesel operation by country; for reference, the UK figure was 43%. The validity of these results seems reasonable. With regard to the methodology, Interfleet has been involved with previous surveys to obtain information from a wide range of organisations within Europe, and it is always difficult to motivate the recipients to provide prompt and useful information, or indeed any response at all. Under these circumstances, the UIC survey has achieved a good response, obviously assisted by the good standing of the organisation.
Page No. 16 of 121
Although the number of complaints received will always only represent the formal complaints registered, the survey established the principal locations where complaints could be expected. Dispersion modelling of busy line sections clearly showed that NO2 and PM10 concentrations from rail would be minor compared with defined background concentrations. Given the relative numbers determined from this analysis, this conclusion cannot readily be disputed. The modelling of three shunting yards of differing size and utilisation concluded that even the worst case combination of the maximum number of shunting movements using the shunting locomotive with the highest emissions factor would not lead to an exceedance of the defined NO2 air quality limit values. Similarly, PM10 levels do not contribute significantly to ambient concentrations. This conclusion seems slightly at odds with the reported complaints from shunting yard locations, but complaints do tend to be more subjective. Engine idling was determined to be the worst situation for emissions hotspots, with the conclusion that engine idling at terminal stations could significantly affect concentrations in these locations. The main analysis with 12 idling trains was based on a UK terminal station (Paddington), which was concluded to not be representative of other European mainline stations this point is made within the report and was also re-iterated by a UIC representative at the presentation of the rail study in Paris. However, this project is primarily concerned with the UK situation, so the maximum number of idling trains becomes of greater relevance. The recommendation is made that measurements should be taken of emissions at terminal stations, and that use of this data should supersede the modelling data once available. This is clearly a sensible and pragmatic approach, and enables mapping of these measurements to establish any pollution concentrations around a terminal station area, which will have potentially significant variations between different locations within the station boundaries. The author is familiar with the layout of Paddington station and the historic practices of engines at the country end of the platforms being left on train supply operation. Initially, this would indicate that the emissions from these engines would be away from the more densely populated areas of the station, although the effects on adjacent premises and open spaces need to be considered. The level of emissions at the city end of the station when the train arrives and before the leading engine is shut down needs to be assessed, and equally importantly when the engine is restarted prior to departure, with a significant burst of black smoke as the engine fires. For information, the recent re-engining of the HST power car with the MTU engine (discussed later in this report) has shown some significant visible improvements in emitted smoke levels. A programme of measurements could readily be compiled for a location such as Paddington station, which must represent the densest diesel traction population for a UK station. Accepting that the London termini will incur the most train movements, the only other all-diesel operation is the Midland Mainline fleet at St Pancras station, which does not approach Paddingtons THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 17 of 121
service levels (only one operator using electric traction on two dedicated platforms). This review has focused on exhaust emissions, but the issue of noise levels should not be overlooked. Although much of this is generated from other activities such as tannoy announcements and train dispatch whistles, noise from diesel engines and their associated equipment can be a significant contributor, particularly from the older and larger engine types. This can also be a driver towards environmental action.
6
6.1
CURRENT EXHAUST EMISSIONS STANDARDS

BACKGROUND In contrast to the road industry, European diesel rail traction has not had any legislative requirements to reduce exhaust emissions until the advent of EU Directive 2004/26/EC (see section 6.2). The UIC has been active in publishing guidelines for its members (see section 6.3), but these have not been binding (although the UIC would have expected its members to comply). With the inclusion of rail traction into the emissions legislation, continuing pressure will be applied in future years to further reduce exhaust emissions. Ultimately, this may apply retrospectively to existing rolling stock, although this would have major cost implications for compliance (discussed later in this report). The UIC has initiated formal investigations into potential retrospective modifications in its Rail Diesel Study 1.
6.2
EUROPEAN DIRECTIVE 2004/26/EC EU Directive 97/68/EC issued in December 1997 established limits for gaseous and particulate emissions from internal combustion engines installed in nonroad mobile machinery. This original Directive specifically excluded railway locomotives or railcars (DMUs). In line with the general tightening of emissions limits worldwide, the Directive has been reviewed and was reissued as Directive 2004/26/EC 4 in April 2004. Rail traction engines are now included, with separate categories for railcars and locomotives. The Directive is commonly referred to as the NRMM Directive. The legislated pollutants are NOx, THC, CO and PM, with CO2 excluded. Weighted emissions values are determined according to ISO 8178-4 Test Cycle F defined for a rail traction duty cycle. The Directive has introduced two staged sets of limit values, Stage IIIA (effective over the period 2005 to 2009) and Stage IIIB (effective over the period 2011 to 2012). The first set of limit values is expected to be able to be achieved using on-engine technology, whereas Stage IIIB limits will require the use of exhaust after-treatment devices in order to comply. Stage IIIA sub-divides the locomotive limits into power-dependent categories. Table 1 details the various categories and limits. For each category, there is a Type Approval date and a Placing on the Market date. The Type Approval date is the date by which the engine manufacturer must have certified that his engine is compliant, with UK
Page No. 18 of 121
legislation (see section 7) based on this Directive requiring certification to be carried out by the Department of Trade and Industry. The Placing on the Market date is generally one year later (with one exception for category RC A, which is six months). A review date of 31st December 2007 is identified within the Directive for the Stage IIIB limits to be reviewed. This is intended to review the available technology necessary to satisfy these limits, and to determine whether there is a need for additional flexibilities, exemptions or later introduction dates for certain engines. It also identifies the possibility of further reductions for locomotive engines in view of the application of NOx after-treatment technology.
Page No. 19 of 121
Stag e IIIA
RC A RL A RH A RH A
IIIB
RC B
Propulsion by: P>130 kW Railcar 130 kW < P < 560 Locomotive kW P > 560 kW Locomotive P > 2000 kW & Locomotive SV > 5 l/cylinder P > 130 kW Railcar P > 130 kW Locomotiv
Category
Type Approval from: 01/07/2005 01/01/2006 01/01/2008 01/01/2008 01/01/2011 01/01/2011
Placing on the CO g/kWh Market from: 01/01/2006 3.5 01/01/2007 3.5 01/01/2009 01/01/2009 01/01/2012 01/01/2012 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
HC g/kWh 4.0 4.0 0.5 0.4 0.19 4.0
NOx g/kWh
PM g/kWh 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.025 0.025
6.0 7.4 2.0
Key P = Power Output SV = Swept Volume (of engine cylinder) CO = Carbon Monoxide HC = Hydrocarbons NOx = Nitrogen Oxides PM = Particulate Matter Table 1 EU Directive 2004/26/EC Emissions Limits
Page No. 20 of 121
There are a number of areas of the Directive that require some additional emphasis or clarification, as follows. The Directive applies solely to engines, not vehicles. Therefore, re-engining of a locomotive or DMU is the same as supplying a new engine for a new locomotive or DMU for the emissions requirement. The Directive does not apply to overhauled engines, which can continue to be repaired indefinitely, replacing individual components as necessary. This can include such core engine components as the crankcase. Placing on the market means when an engine has completed assembly and is available for use, even if it remains within the manufacturers stock. In other words, older design engines for existing rolling stock will be subject to the Directives requirements if they are assembled after the implementation date, potentially affecting spares holdings. Where a contract has been entered into to purchase engines before the date of entry into force of the Directive, there is an exemption that permits the engine to be placed on the market up to two years after the relevant implementation date without having to comply with the Directives requirements. Although the principal areas of interest for the rail industry are for propulsion engines, further categories within the Directive cover other engine types and duties, for example auxiliary constant speed generating sets of relatively low power output.
6.3
UIC GUIDELINES Prior to the introduction of the NRMM Directive, the UIC had produced its own set of emissions guidelines. The most recent of these are the UIC III limits, which have been aligned with the Stage IIIA limits of EU Directive 2004/26/EC. Since some of the compliance dates are in the future, UIC II limits are still current. All UIC limits are summarised in table 2. Again, values are weighted according to ISO 8178-4 Cycle F. Two UIC leaflets define the process of testing and authorising engines to the UIC limits. UIC leaflet 623 5 6 7 (in three parts) defines the requirements for an acceptance test for rail traction diesel engines, with UIC leaflet 624 8 specifying the limit values for exhaust gas emissions and how an emissions test is organised and reported. Leaflet 624 also refers to an online reference for approved engines (see section 6.6). UIC leaflet 345 Environmental specifications for new rolling stock has also recently been published, which includes reference to diesel exhaust emissions amongst its tender assessment criteria.
Page No. 21 of 121
Stage UIC I UIC II
Category
Propulsion by:
Effective from:
UIC IIIA
P< 560 kW P> 560 kW n< 1000 rpm P > 560 kW n> 1000 rpm P> 130 kW
01/01/2003 01/01/2003 01/01/2003 Railcar 01/02006 01/01/2007 01/01/2009 01/01/2009
CO g/kWh 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
HC g/kWh 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.8 4.0 4.0 0.5 0.4
NOx g/kWh 12 6.0 9.9 9.5
PM g/kWh - a) 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.2 0.2
Comments
130 kW < P < 560 Locomotive kW P > 560 kW Locomotive P > 2000 kW & SV > 5 l/cylinder Key
6.0 7.4
0.2 0.2
Locomotiv e
As NRMM IIIA RC A As NRMM IIIA RL A As NRMM IIIA RH A As NRMM IIIA RH A
Stage Stage Stage Stage
a) PM not included in UIC I. Exhaust smoke level range of 1.6 - 2.5 Bosch defined, dependent upon mass air flow rate. P = Power Output SV = Swept Volume (of engine cylinder) CO = Carbon Monoxide HC = Hydrocarbons NOx = Nitrogen Oxides PM = Particulate Matter Table 2 UIC II and IIIA Emissions Limits.
Page No. 22 of 121
6.4
EURO LIMITS For the road industry, the first emissions standards were effective from 1992, with separate categories for cars/light trucks and heavy duty truck/bus engines. Although these standards are not applicable to rail, some manufacturers of DMU engines often refer to them since this engine size is also compatible with truck applications. The previous Euro II and III levels, plus the current Euro IV and future Euro V are therefore included in table 3 for reference purposes. Date Euro II Euro III Euro IV Euro V 10/1998 10/2000 10/2005 10/2008 CO g/kWh 4.0 2.1 1.5 1.5 HC g/kWh 1.1 0.66 0.46 0.46 NOx g/kWh 7.0 5.0 3.5 2.0 PM g/kWh 0.15 0.1 0.02 0.02 Smoke (m-1) 0.8 0.5 0.5
Table 3 Euro II to IV Emissions Limits for Heavy-duty Road Diesel Engines The above limits are based upon a defined European Stationary Cycle (ESC), with smoke opacity being measured during a European Load Response test (ELR). In addition, Euro III limits and above have required approval under the European Transient Cycle (ETC) test these limits are not detailed here, as they do not make a sensible comparison with the rail stationary cycle limits. 6.5 US EPA REGULATIONS The USA has a wider range of emissions categories for diesel engine applications than Europe, including some specific to the state of California. Part of the reasoning behind the NRMM Directive was to harmonise emissions legislation between the US and Europe, so it is considered appropriate to include the relevant limits here. Harmonisation has not quite been achieved, since there are a number of important differences between the US locomotive legislation and the NRMM, as follows. US regulations sub-divide rail vehicles into line haul (main line) and switch (shunter), rather than locomotives and railcars. Locomotive regulations only apply to engines with power outputs greater than 750 kW, with vehicles below this level having to comply with the offroad regulations, which is again sub-divided into power bands. A 10-mode locomotive test cycle is used, rather than the 3-mode European cycle. For reference, the US EPA Tier 1 and 2 Locomotive standards are reproduced in table 4 below, converted from the original quoted g/bhp-hr to g/kWh to facilitate comparison with EU limits. It is understood that a current EPA review is considering the introduction of rail traction legislation comparable to the NRMM IIIB limits, but with significantly lower NOx levels, although this had not been announced by the end of May 2007.
Page No. 23 of 121
Category Tier 1 Tier 2 Line haul Switch Line haul Switch
Manufacturing date 2002 - 2004 From 2005
CO g/kWh 2.9 3.3 2.0 3.2
HC g/kWh 0.74 1.61 0.4 0.8
NOx g/kWh 9.9 14.7 7.4 10.9
PM g/kWh 0.6 0.72 0.27 0.32
Table 4 US EPA Locomotive Emissions Standards 6.6 LEVEL OF COMPLIANCE OF UK TRACTION FLEET When considering the likely level of compliance of the existing UK diesel traction fleet with the NRMM and UIC levels in particular, it should be remembered that the bulk of the current engine design ages predate the requirement for compliance with the standards of either body. General comments are provided below, with additional specific comments provided by the OEMs included within section 8. Considering first the UIC requirements which, although not mandatory, have been established since the late-90s. Generally, most of the existing DMU engines would be compliant (just) with UIC I levels, whereas only one is known to satisfy UIC II (the Cummins QSK19 engine). Certain engines, such as variants of the NT855, would comply with some of the UIC II pollutant levels, but not all. For locomotives, none of the older design engines would be expected to comply with UIC I, with the MAN VP185 complying with this limit, but not UIC II. Of the other current production engines, both the MTU 16V4000 series, and the low emissions version of the EMD 12N-710G3B engine now being fitted to Class 66 locomotives comply with UIC II. It is understood that EMD has now received type approval for Stage IIIA compliance of this engine. For the NRMM Stage IIIA legislation, only the RC A limits are currently in force, covering railcar (DMU) engines, with power outputs greater than 130 kW. The principal current production DMU engine, the QSK19, would not meet these limits. None of the Stage IIIA locomotive requirements are yet in force, and it can reasonably be concluded that none of the current engines in service would comply in their current form.
7
7.1
CURRENT GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

UK LEGISLATION The provisions of the NRMM Directive have been enacted into UK legislation by Statutory Instrument 2006 No. 29 9, effective from 17th February 2006. A regulatory impact assessment carried out before this transposition estimated that the total benefit per annum would amount to 27 - 31 ktonnes reduction in annual NOx emissions and 2.3 - 4.4 ktonnes annual reduction in PM emissions 10.
Page No. 24 of 121
In addition to the NRMM legislation, the Clean Air Act has been in place for a number of years, with the most recent update in 1993 11. This deals with smoke, dust and fume emissions generally, but has a specific clause (clause 43) for railway engines, which requires the owner of any locomotive engine to use any practicable means there may be for minimising the emission of smoke from the chimney of the engine. This is with particular reference to adjacent buildings, and it is believed that the act has been referenced in the past relating to smoke emission from stationary idling locomotive engines. 7.2 FUTURE POLICY The UK NRMM Directive now takes into account the progressive tightening of the regulated pollutants, namely CO, HC, NOx and PM, and it is reasonable to presume that future developments in this area by the EU will be subsequently incorporated into UK legislation. CO2 greenhouse gas emissions remain unlegislated, although a key feature of recent international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol. The Government issued its 2006 Climate Change Programme (CCP) 12 in March 2006. This followed on from the previous CCP in 2000 and outlined in general terms the actions necessary to achieve the declared emissions reduction targets. The greater part of the transport section of the programme concerned road transport, but a statement was included that the Government will consider how new technologies can improve energy efficiency and reduce fuel consumption to get even more environmental benefits from rail. No other significant reference to rail was incorporated, save for the general requirement under the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO) for 5% of all UK fuel sales to come from renewable sources by 2010-11 (see section 9.5). A statement issued by DfT in April 2006 13 outlined their view of rails contribution to the energy review, identifying their intention to encourage the industry to pursue a range of operational and technical measures to ensure that trains are operated as efficiently as possible. Longer term developments in hybrid and fuel cell technology were also referenced. A recent report by the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) 14 considered carbon emissions from transport further, as part of its continuing remit to examine climate change, but also to respond specifically to the CCP 2006. Whilst much of the document is again concerned with road developments, relevant conclusions from this work were: The DfT should accelerate its efforts to reduce carbon emissions from transport, which is the only sector in the UK economy in which carbon emissions are increasing. The committee supported the construction of new high speed rail links, to encourage a modal shift from air to rail and to free up capacity on the existing network. Local rail services are vital in reducing demand for car journeys. The rail industry could make a significant contribution to expanding renewable energy generation, and the Government should act to enable it to do so. Page No. 25 of 121
Transport is the most technically and politically difficult sector in which to reduce carbon emissions, requiring widespread behavioural change.
UK Government estimates are for conventional crude oil reserves to last until 2030 14, with the possibility of improved technology and unconventional reserves extending this by a further 30 years. 7.3 SUMMARY OF LIKELY FUTURE GOVERNMENT DIRECTION An approach was made to the Cleaner Fuels and Vehicles Division of the DfT for further comment on potential future Government intentions for rail transport in particular, but no response had been received by the completion date of this report. From the above, it is clear that the UK Government will encourage technical and operational measures to reduce diesel exhaust emissions and improve the environmental performance of the railways. One approach to this objective will no doubt be continued pressure from legislation, particularly in the area of renewable fuels. In this context, as with emissions generally, the Government is following the lead of the EU decision making. Assuming that no major change in the structure of UK railways is effected (for example, renationalisation), it is difficult to determine whether there would be any financial support in future years, in the form of emissions credits, reduced fuel duty or similar measures. This may be required to significantly affect the rate of improvement in environmental performance.
8
8.1
CURRENT INDUSTRIES POLICIES AND ACTIONS

NOTIFICATION TO TRAIN OPERATORS The original intention as part of this work was to advise all diesel train operators of the project, and to request them to participate by contributing information on any relevant initiatives that they may have either in progress or planned. This was to be achieved via a letter from RSSB sent to the Engineering Director or equivalent position of each operator. The letter would also have advised recipients that they would be informed of the investigations outcome and conclusions. As the project progressed, further consideration by RSSB resulted in this letter not being sent, with the intention being to raise awareness of the project at a Fuel Strategy Workshop to be facilitated by RSSB during October 2006. Some useful feedback from this forum on the industrys views and strategy on future fuels was obtained, which has been incorporated into the relevant part of this review. Similarly, under advice from RSSB, the author has refrained from making direct formal contact with train operators. As such, additional relevant and useful information that may have been forthcoming is not available, and commentary in this area is therefore limited.
Page No. 26 of 121
8.2
ENGINE MANUFACTURER EMISSIONS STATEMENTS Each OEM with engine types in service with UK fleets was contacted to ascertain the official position of the company regarding emissions compliance of these engines, together with their projected technological developments in this area. Minimal feedback was obtained, despite recontacting all companies (this is often the case with this type of enquiry). Only limited comment is therefore included here regarding stated compliance levels. MTU was the only engine manufacturer to respond directly to this enquiry. From their response, and from previous discussions with the company, the following are the stated compliance levels for their engines. 6R183 (Class 170) Euro II 6H1800 (one example now fitted in a Class170) Euro III / UIC II 16V4000 R41 (Class 43) UIC II MTU has also made the comment that all its Euro III rail derivative horizontal engines (principally the 6H1800) will migrate to NRMM Stage IIIA compliance. When fitted with a particulate filter in place of a silencer, MTU claim that the 6H1800 will be Stage IIIB-compliant. The 16V4000 R43 engine was announced in September 2006 which will comply with the NRMM Stage IIIA limits. Perkins is now under the ownership of Caterpillar, and in September 2006, Caterpillar announced a new range of low-emission, horizontal engines, the C18 ACERT (see section 8.4 for a description of the ACERT system). The engine is claimed to have a competitive power density (mass per kilowatt), with a power output close (>90%) to that of the Cummins QSK19, and to be compliant with NRMM Stage IIIA.
8.3
ENGINE TECHNOLOGY FOR EMISSIONS ABATEMENT GENERAL With the moves to reduce emissions since the fuel crises of the mid-1970s, the initial focus has been on engine modifications and developments to reduce the generation of emissions at their source. This section reviews the principal areas that have been or are being considered by engine manufacturers. In general terms, design modifications to reduce emissions form part of the design of a new engine; where it is possible to apply such technology retrospectively to existing engines, this is discussed further in section 17. Only on-engine or in-engine technology is covered in this section. Exhaust aftertreatment is considered in more detail in section 13. As noted in section 4, combustion modifications to reduce NOx usually result in an increase in PM emissions. With emissions of HC and CO from diesel engines at relatively low levels by comparison, the challenge has been to reduce the formation of NOx and PM. Mechanisms for reducing each of these pollutants are outlined below. With many of these techniques, the addition of more complexity into the design and operation of the engine could have a negative impact on the vehicles overall reliability.
Page No. 27 of 121
8.4
NOX REDUCTION TECHNIQUES Retarded Fuel Injection Timing One of the most basic measures to reduce NOx formation has been to retard the injection timing of the fuel, which reduces the peak cylinder pressure and peak flame temperature, and hence restricts NOx formation. The precise effect will vary dependent upon engine type and design, but typically a 2 degree retard of the injection timing would reduce NOx levels by approximately 10%. Unfortunately, this retard increases HC and PM levels, as well as having an adverse effect on fuel consumption, which limits the degree of retard practically achievable. The fuel penalty can be mitigated to a degree by other engine adjustments (see below). Charge Air Cooling Reducing the temperature of the intake air has a similar effect to retarding the injection timing, by reducing peak temperature and cylinder pressure, albeit at a reduced level. In general terms, a 100C reduction in charge air temperature can be expected to reduce NOx emissions by approximately 5-6%. The two modifications can be combined to maximise the effect figure 1 below illustrates the effects of varying both parameters, based upon engine test work carried out in the USA 15.
ASME Figure 1 Effect on NOx emissions of varying injection timing and charge air temperature. Both of these techniques increase fuel consumption, which can be offset by increased injection pressure. This is commonly applied to diesel engines, either by increased rate cam profiles or more recently by unit injectors. This can also reduce PM and smoke levels see section 8.5. Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) If a controlled level of exhaust gas is re-admitted to the combustion chamber via the air inlet manifold, this dilutes the oxygen available to mix with nitrogen to form NOx. If this recirculated exhaust gas is cooled, then the peak combustion temperature is also reduced, further reducing NOx emissions. This process is a very effective NOx reduction strategy. However, in addition to increased HC, CO and PM emissions, there are potential engine wear and durability issues. Operation of the system is usually via an electronically-controlled valve operating on the exhaust back pressure, or via a waste gate fitted to the THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 28 of 121
turbocharger, permitting exhaust gas to be admitted to the intake manifold. Combined EGR and particulate filter systems are commonly fitted to heavy duty road vehicles. For a fixed mix ratio of exhaust gas to air, the magnitude of the NOx reduction will depend upon the engine load. Typically, at full load, there will be a linear relationship between NOx reduction and mix ratio. A small fuel consumption penalty is likely, of perhaps 2-3%. PM emissions may also increase, which can be moderated by combustion system optimisation, for example high pressure fuel injection (see section 8.5). The temperature within the air/exhaust delivery system needs to be controlled such that there is no condensation of sulphuric acid within it. This becomes more of a problem with fuels having higher sulphur content. One advantage of using cooled EGR rather than an exhaust after-treatment device (see section 13) is that it does not significantly increase the space required for the system. Pilot Injection If a small pilot quantity of fuel (typically a few per cent of the main injection volume) is injected at a relatively low rate ahead of the primary injection, this will ignite first and reduce the ignition delay of the main injection. This considerably reduces the volume of lean, oxygen-rich fuel mixture, leading to potentially significant (around 30%) NOx reduction. Such mechanisms are often referred to as split-injection devices (SID). Water Injection Water injection through the fuel spray nozzle reduces the peak cycle temperature as a result of water evaporation. The water may be emulsified before pumping to the engine, directly injected at the injector, or injected into the air manifold. Water addition systems using emulsified fuels have also shown PM reductions. Maintenance of the fuel-water emulsion consistency and potential system corrosion are obvious issues. Water injection is considered here separately from water-diesel emulsion, which is discussed under Fuel Development in section 11.3. ACERTTM Technology To reduce NOx emissions, Caterpillar has introduced its ACERTTM Technology to its latest engines. This is essentially a systems integration approach for combustion control. The electronic control system regulates both the volume of charge air required at various speeds and loads, and the fuel injection quantity and timing. It is claimed that this not only improves emissions, but also provides improved engine response and better performance. A final part of the ACERTTM Technology is a diesel oxidation catalyst (see section 13.1), which reduces the particulate matter.
Page No. 29 of 121
8.5
PM REDUCTION TECHNIQUES Increased Fuel Injection Pressure Diesel engine development has seen gradually increasing injection pressures, which has the effect of improved atomisation of the fuel to optimise fuel-air mixing. This also results in improved fuel economy and smoke levels. Increasing the injection pressure has a further effect on combustion beyond just the improved atomisation. Other parameters such as the injection rate, duration and spray penetration are also affected. As high speed direct injection engines have developed, more of the energy for fuel-air mixing comes from the momentum of the injected fuel, rather than the engine design features for air mixing. This has required high pressure injection systems, with the current optimum system for delivering this high pressure being a Common Rail System. This utilises a common fuel manifold (accumulator or rail) maintained at high pressure (for example, 1400 bar) from an enginedriven pump, but with the rail pressure being independent of engine speed. Each injector feeds from this rail, with injection timing and duration being controlled electronically. The system provides good spray penetration and subsequent mixing for PM reductions, and can also incorporate further electronic control for pilot injections to reduce NOx. One disadvantage of the Common Rail system is the potential for fuel leaks, given that the injector connections to the rail are permanently at high pressure. To counteract this, fuel leakage detection can be incorporated, either as a straight forward flow limiting device for each cylinder, or as a more complex incylinder knock detector linked to the electronic controller. Injector Design Features Features of the injector design can affect combustion and PM formation. Specifically, the number and diameter of the spray holes, the included spray angle and the spray hole length can all affect the resultant fuel spray and ignition. Spray angle in particular must be matched to the profile of the piston bowl to ensure that good fuel-air mixing is achieved. Reduced Injector Sac Volume The sac on the end of the injector nozzle contains the volume of fuel which is injected into the cylinder via the injector spray holes. A smaller sac volume will reduce the amount of fuel drawn out of the injector late in the cycle by air motion, and can reduce both PM and HC emissions. Increased Compression Ratio Increasing the compression ratio reduces particulate formation and improves fuel consumption, but generates increased NOx, due to the higher pressures and temperatures. The ability of the engine components (particularly the piston) to withstand the increased firing pressure needs to be considered. Combustion Chamber Design Efficient combustion is achieved by ensuring that there is sufficient air motion within the cylinder (swirl) to promote good fuel-air mixing. Re-entrant piston bowls with a profiled central recess can assist this process. Inlet port profiling
Page No. 30 of 121
can also ensure that the charge air enters the cylinder at the right angle for efficient mixing. Oil Consumption Control Lubricating oil within the combustion chamber contributes to PM emissions, therefore a reduction in oil consumption will reduce particulates. This can be achieved by changes to the sealing mechanism between the oil supply and the combustion chamber, i.e. the liner and piston rings. Liner surface finish definition is intricate, with the honed surface defined by a variety of topographical parameters of the peaks and troughs profile. Piston ring design is even more complex, with engine testing still an essential part of the development of any new design, even with current computer modelling techniques. Although the piston/ring interface is the primary source of oil entry, other sources can also be addressed, for example, leakage past the valve guides, carry-over of oil from the turbocharger and blow-back from the exhaust. Single-bank Idling Engine idling is an inherent part of the rail traction duty cycle. Under idling conditions, the fuel injected into all cylinders of the engine does not combust efficiently or effectively, resulting in unburnt fuel contaminating the lubricating oil. For a V-engine, a mechanical/electrical control system can be incorporated to cut out one complete bank of cylinders when idling, resulting in improved combustion efficiency of the operational bank. The control system can be arranged so that either the same bank of cylinders is always isolated, or the active bank is changed after a set time to the opposite set of cylinders. Variable valve timing (VVT) By controlling the timing and rate of the engine inlet and/or exhaust valves, improvements in fuel economy and emissions can be obtained, as well as benefits in low speed torque and transient performance. Valve timing variations can be achieved in several ways, for example by switching from one set of cam lobes to another at a set engine speed. 8.6 CO2 REDUCTION TECHNIQUES Since the formation of CO2 is representative of more complete combustion as a result of higher cylinder temperatures, mechanisms to reduce CO2 can be considered to be complementary to those for reducing NOx. Therefore, at the expense of combustion efficiency, many of the techniques outlined in section 8.4 above apply. 8.7 RE-ENGINING Whilst not strictly an engine modification, one of the most effective ways technically to reduce emissions from older engines is to re-engine the vehicle with an engine to a more modern design. This can not only reduce the specific emissions levels, but also reduce the total pollutant output by virtue of superior fuel consumption. Replacing a 20 or 30-year old engine with a current design can readily reduce the overall fuel consumption by around 8-12%, with reductions in all exhaust emissions. It can also facilitate compliance with known future emissions legislation, assuming that suitable engines are available. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 31 of 121
For the UK rail traction fleet, two successful examples of re-engining over the past ten years or so have been with the Class 43 HST power car and the Class 47 locomotive. For the HST, replacing the existing Paxman Valenta with the Paxman (now MAN) VP185 engine was proven to give an equivalent 8% overall fuel consumption reduction when measured in service over the typical rail traction duty cycle. Emissions reductions between the Valenta and VP185 engines are shown in table 5 below. Pollutant / Fuel consumption NOx CO HC PM SFC (full load) Valenta 12 3.3 1.3 0.5 222 VP185 11.2 1 1.4 No data 202
Table 5 Comparison of Valenta and VP185 Exhaust Emissions (All data in g/kWh) Note that the NOx reductions are not significant, since this version of the engine was the low fuel consumption specification. Later engine modifications to reduce NOx further erode the fuel benefit defined above (see comments in section 17.4). A recent DMU re-engining exercise has been the replacement of the existing MTU 6R183 engine with the current MTU 6H1800 engine, with one example having been fitted for evaluation on a Class 170 Turbostar. Note that the NRMM Stage IIIA limits for railcars are now in place, so that any DMU re-engining will have to be with compliant engines (which the 6H1800 is). Re-engining should also have the benefit of improving maintenance, reliability and time between overhauls. For the VP185, the overhaul period extended initially to four years, with a further subsequent gradual increase to five years (approximately 24,000 hours) as operating experience was gained, from the preceding 18/36-month periodicity of the Valenta engine. The HST power car has been re-engined a total of three times. The very first of these, with the Mirrlees-Blackstone MB190 engine in the late-80s, also offered an increase in power output of around 8-10%. In 2005, two First Great Western power cars were re-engined with the MTU 16V4000 engine, with further vehicles now being similarly re-engined. The second example of re-engining has seen the installation of remanufactured EMD 645-12E3C engines into the Class 47 locomotive, replacing the ageing Sulzer 12LDA28C engine. This has formed the basis of the Thunderbird rescue locomotives operated by Virgin Trains. Table 6 below compares emissions levels of the original and replacement engines. In this particular instance, there is no major improvement in emissions, since the design age of the replacement engine is not the latest available, although assessment of visible smoke tends to substantiate a likely improvement in PM levels. Fuel consumption improves by over 6% at full load, for an increased power output of the EMD engine of 2050 kW compared with 1924 kW for the Sulzer. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 32 of 121
Pollutant NOx CO HC PM SFC (full load)
Sulzer 14.4 4.7 0.92 No data 228
EMD 13.02 5.81 0.5 0.61 214
Table 6 Comparison of Sulzer and EMD Exhaust Emissions (All data in g/kWh) 8.8 MULTIPLE ENGINES A variation on traditional re-engining is the possibility of replacing a single large engine with two or more smaller units, with a suitable control system arranged to operate one or more units as appropriate to the load demand. This concept has been promoted recently by Cummins, with a number of installations worldwide. Alternatively, one unit could be dedicated for auxiliary loads, effectively an auxiliary power unit (APU) see section 17.5 for more comments in this area. By definition, this concept is best applied to a locomotive, rather than a DMU, at least if the engine output is being used for traction power. Additional space would be required for such installations and weight may also be an issue. Individual engine overhaul costs would not be reduced pro-rata in line with the number of engines. 8.9 FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI) In petrol engines, the fuel and air for combustion is premixed before entering the combustion chamber, creating a homogenous, or uniform, mixture, which is then ignited by an electric spark. Diesel engines inject fuel into the cylinder to mix with compressed air already present, with combustion initiated by the increased heat from the pressure of the piston compression stroke. Although the diesel cycle is inherently more efficient than spark ignition, the characteristics of this process are that combustion starts at the fuel boundary and propagates through the fuel-air mixture, i.e. it is not homogenous. HCCI combines characteristics from both processes, with a pre-mixed homogenous fuel-air mixture ignited by compression. This creates cleaner nearsimultaneous combustion throughout the mixture, with no flame propagation. Peak temperatures are lower, resulting in very low NOx emissions. PM emissions are also reduced as a result of the more complete combustion. The HCCI process remains under development due to difficulties in controlling the start of combustion. Both spark ignition and compression ignition engines have defined parameters that can control the point at which combustion is initiated, whereas for HCCI combustion, this occurs whenever the appropriate conditions are reached within the cylinder, making variable load operation particularly difficult. Control technologies will have to consider variable compression ratio, intake temperature, valve timing or EGR. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 33 of 121
Additionally, although peak temperatures are low, cylinder pressures are high, requiring sufficient strength of cylinder components. High HC and CO emissions are also produced, due to incomplete burning at the boundaries of the chamber. Despite the disadvantages, HCCI is likely to be incorporated in future diesel engine designs once practical control mechanisms have been evolved, probably within the next 5-10 years. Premixed Controlled Compression Ignition (PCCI) can be considered to be a variation of HCCI, where the fuel-air mixture may be partially stratified at the moment of injection. This stratification may be used for lengthening the burn duration, allowing the engine to operate at higher specific power. Oxygen Enrichment By increasing the amount of oxygen-rich air in the cylinder, the fuel burns more completely, reducing PM emissions and increasing available power. However, the resultant higher combustion temperature creates an increase in NOx emissions. This can be mitigated by adjustments to fuel injection timing and flow rates. A permeable membrane inserted into the air flow to the engine separates out the ambient air into oxygen-rich and nitrogen-rich segments, with the former being fed into the engine at ratios of up to 25% by volume. Current development work is concentrating on reducing the size and power requirement of the membrane to acceptable levels. Low temperature combustion Research work by the US Department of Energy 16 with very high levels of EGR in combination with fuel timing and flow rate changes has created a lower temperature combustion regime where emissions of NOx and PM were both reduced, by around 90% and 45% respectively, with no reduction in fuel efficiency. This situation with significant percentage reductions of both these pollutants from a single technology is unusual. Toyota has also been examining this system as a means to enrich the exhaust gas stream to facilitate the regeneration of a NOx adsorber (see section 13.6). Plasma-assisted Combustion The Los Alamos National Laboratory in the USA has been developing plasmaassisted combustion, whereby an electrical voltage is applied to the atomised fuel stream from an existing fuel injector. This generates a plasma in the fuel, which breaks down the long chain hydrocarbon molecules into smaller constituents, creating more complete combustion. Ricardo Developments Ricardo is a major UK independent engine development and consultancy company. In August 2006, a press release 17 was issued stating that Ricardo are collaborating with a global manufacturer to develop advanced diesel technology capable of achieving the US Super Ultra-Low Emission Vehicle (SULEV) and Tier 2 Bin 2 requirements (these limits have not been stated in section 6.4 due to their not being directly relevant to rail applications, however, the quoted NOx level for the Tier 2 Bin 2 requirements is 12.4 mg/km, compared THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 34 of 121
with the 250 mg/km limit of the current Euro 4 legislation for cars and light vehicles). A combination of technologies will be required for this objective, which are unsurprisingly not identified in any detail, but will include advanced air handling systems, two-stage turbocharging, advanced EGR and closed-loop cylinder pressure-based engine controls. Ricardo has also been active in the area of hybrid technology (section 14.2).
9
9.1
LEGISLATIVE DEVELOPMENTS
NRMM DIRECTIVE European Directive 2004/26/EC (see section 6.2) defines Stage IIIB emissions limits to be introduced from 2011 onwards. Inherent within the Directive is the requirement for a technical review by the end of 2007 to establish whether the defined emissions limits will be achievable. Contact with a representative of the UKs Department for Transport established that the UK Government was not expecting to be actively involved with the review of this Directive. The UK rail industry is represented by two of the rolling stock leasing companies. Other bodies represented in the review include Euromot, UNIFE, UIC and EMA, plus vehicle and engine builders. The review process is currently collecting data on engine duty cycles and operation within Europe.
9.2
EU DIRECTIVE 2003/17/EC European Directive 2003/17/EC relates to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels, amending previous Directive 98/70/EC. With particular reference to the sulphur content of diesel fuels, Directive 2003/17/EC comments on both road diesel and gas oil (as currently used by the railway industry). Existing road diesel supplies are required to satisfy BS EN 590:2004, for which a maximum sulphur content of 50 ppm is defined. The Directive requires that from 1st January 2005, fuel with a maximum sulphur content of 10 ppm should be marketed on an appropriately balanced geographical basis, and that by 1st January 2009, all diesel fuel shall be no greater than this limit. Existing gas oil supplies are required to satisfy BS 2869:2006 Class A2, for which a maximum sulphur content of 2000 ppm is defined (in reality, the sulphur levels of a typical gas oil used on the railways will usually be in the range 1000-1500 ppm sulphur). The Directive requires that by 1st January 2008 at the latest, this level shall be reduced to 1000 ppm. In January 2007, amendments to Directive 2003/17/EC proposed a further reduction in the maximum sulphur content of gas oil to 10 ppm from the end of 2009. This is currently under consideration the implications of reducing fuel sulphur content are discussed in detail in a separate RSSB report 18.
Page No. 35 of 121
With the need to satisfy the NRMM Stage IIIB limits requiring the use of exhaust after-treatment devices, the rail industry will have to move to low sulphur fuels before the Stage IIIB implementation dates. Thus, it is likely that a complete change from gas oil to SFD (or sulphur-free gas oil) will occur before 2010, subject to resolution of fuel duty issues (see section 10.4). 9.3 EU DIRECTIVE 2003/30/EC European Directive 2003/30/EC 19 covers the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels for transport. The Directive came into force on 8th May 2003, with the requirement for member states to enact its provisions into national legislation by 31st December 2004. The main requirements of the Directive were as follows: Reference value of 2% biofuel use (petrol and diesel) for transport purposes on the basis of energy content by 31st December 2005. Reference value of 5.75% biofuel use (petrol and diesel) for transport purposes on the basis of energy content by 31st December 2010. Member States to set national indicative targets for their share of biofuels. These were to be defined in 2004 (for 2005) and 2007 (for 2010). Monitoring of the effects on the use of biodiesel blends greater than 5% by non-adapted vehicles. Annual report by Member States to the Commission detailing the progress made on the Directive objectives. Detailed evaluation report by the Commission by 31st December 2006, and every two years thereafter.
Between April and July 2006, a public consultation exercise was carried out, inviting comments from both industry and private individuals, as part of a review process of this Directive scheduled for completion by the end of 2006. With biofuels able to be made from a variety of sources, it has been important to establish an accepted fuel specification. For biodiesel, the required fuel standard is BS EN 14214: 2003. EU Directive 2003/87/EC 20 introduced the concept of the GHG Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), whereby companies are allocated an allowance of total CO2 emissions per annum. If this allowance is exceeded, companies have to buy further allocations; conversely, if the allowance is not used, it can be sold. The Directive was amended by Linking Directive 2004/101/EC 20 which enabled operators to use emissions credits to comply with their obligations under the scheme. The system commenced at the start of 2005, initially for a 3-year period. Reports on the operation of the scheme are expected during 2006. The UK Government is complying with Directive 2003/30/EC, and has issued the required progress reports for the last three years. The 2006 report introduced the RTFO (see section 9.5) as a primary means of advancing the use of renewable fuels.
Page No. 36 of 121
9.4
EU DIRECTIVE 96/62/EC European Directive 96/62/EC 2 is the air quality framework directive, which is concerned with air quality assessment and management. Together with subsequent daughter Directives, it has introduced limits on atmospheric pollutants that had not previously been regulated, for example SO2 and various respirable dusts, as well as NOx and PM. The requirements of this Directive led to the UIC air quality study reported in section 5. Although the main focus on rail will continue to be legislation such as the NRMM for the next five or more years, air quality issues can be expected to generate more attention and will create additional pressure on the railways environmental obligations.
9.5
RENEWABLE TRANSPORT FUEL OBLIGATION The Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) was announced in November 2005. This places a legal requirement on transport fuel suppliers to ensure that a specified percentage of their overall fuel sales are from a renewable source. The 2006 budget set the following UK target levels: % by volume % by energy content (estimated) - 2008/09: 2.5 2 - 2009/10: 3.75 2.8 - 2010/11: 5 3.5 Note that existing EU gas oil specifications already permit a 5% level of biodiesel to be incorporated without identification. Thus, a process is already in place for introducing this requirement into the market. The implications for the rail industry are probably minimal. There is general agreement within the engine manufacturing industry that a 5% biodiesel mix with standard gas oil will not noticeably affect engine performance or reliability. Based upon other work within the railway industry, it is likely that specific engine testing and trials using biodiesel will increase confidence on this point. However, it is not currently known how a 5% mix ratio will be treated for duty purposes (see section 10.4).
10
10.1
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN OTHER SECTORS

GENERAL This area considers the commercial aspects of future diesel operation, in terms of the availability and price of fuels, with a brief reference to the commercial aspect of alternative power sources.
10.2
FUEL AVAILABILITY A UKPIA report issued in May 2006 22 considered the future of UK oil refining, from which the following comments have been summarised. The report concludes that the demand growth for oil will remain strong through 2030 and beyond, both in the UK and internationally. Specifically, the International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts a 15% rise in oil demand for Europe and 50% globally by this date.
Page No. 37 of 121
Transport fuels are expected to account for approximately two-thirds of this increase. Conventional crude oil resources are not expected to be in imminent danger of running out, with UKPIA stating that there are sufficient global reserves for at least another 40 to 100 years (this compares with the stated Government view of reserves lasting until 2030 see section 7.2). This estimate does take into account continuing technology development to expand the recovery of existing reserves, as well as the likelihood of additional reserves not yet discovered or exploited. The role of alternative fuels will increase, but will remain small by comparison. With relatively limited UK production capacity for biofuels, a significant proportion of the biofuels used will be imported. Hydrogen as a fuel is not expected to be in widespread use before 2030. Currently, the UKs overall oil requirements are broadly in balance with domestic production, although there is a surplus of petrol and a shortfall of diesel and jet fuel production. This latter aspect is covered by imports from Russia and the Middle East. With the expected rise in demand, this overall balance may change, necessitating increased imports. In recent years, UK refineries have used North Sea oil, which has the benefit of lower inherent sulphur levels, making it easier to desulphurise for the reduced sulphur fuels now required. However, this source is now starting to decline, which has the double problem of requiring alternative sources of potentially inferior oil (particularly with regard to sulphur content), and resulting in a higher price for the available North Sea stocks. Changing from North Sea to Middle East oil stocks will adversely affect the yield ratio. Typically, North Sea oils produce around 12% of unwanted fuel oil, which will increase to 20-30% using Middle East crude oil. The definition of unwanted fuel oil, and whether this could in the future be reclaimed in any way, is not detailed within the report. It is assumed that this includes heavy residual oil products. 10.3 FUEL MANUFACTURING COST Again with reference to the UKPIA report 22, it is claimed that financial returns from oil refining over the past three decades has been very poor, with a return from capital employed of only 4.8%. This has made it unattractive to invest in new processing plant, which could reduce the level of diesel imports required, or to upgrade existing plant to process different crude oils. Specific case studies are given within the report covering recent refinery developments. For example, the building of a new distillate hydrocracker in France by Total to produce more diesel fuel cost 300 million, with a production capacity of diesel of some 1.3 million tonnes (plus other products). Refinery modifications to desulphurise Middle East crude stocks will similarly come at a cost the industry spent around 600 million in order to reduce the sulphur content of both petrol and diesel from 50 ppm maximum to 10 ppm maximum.
Page No. 38 of 121
In summary, whether new or modified refineries are brought on stream, or whether additional imports result, there will unsurprisingly be increased associated costs to the refining industry and to the end user. Anticipated price increases are not detailed (and cannot be without policy decisions), but the UKPIA calls for a bilateral refining task force with the UK government in order to define the appropriate direction and ensure continued competitiveness of their industry. The above statements reflect the general situation in terms of fuel costs. With the transition from gas oil to ULSD, or more likely SFD, there will be an increase in manufacturing cost. Industry contacts have established that ULSD will typically cost 1.5 to 2 pence per litre more, with SFD costing a further 0.5 pence per litre. Whilst the overall price obviously cannot be predicted, these differentials were not expected to reduce. Rail industry discussion has included reference to Ultra Low Sulphur Gas Oil (ULSGO). This can have two definitions; the more usual interpretation (adopted within this report) would be gas oil to BS 2869 A2 standard, but with the sulphur reduced from the current 2000 ppm maximum down to 50 ppm. Such a product does not exist in bulk, and until recently there has been no incentive to produce it, since the other major use is for heating oil which (currently) has no requirement for lower sulphur levels. As noted in section 9.2, the EU is now proposing that sulphur levels in gas oil are reduced to less than 10 ppm by 2010. Once this has been introduced, a similar price differential to that for road fuels would be expected. The alternative definition of ULSGO is simply rebated ULSD, and this definition is used in some sections of the fuel supply industry. 10.4 FUEL DUTY The current UK government duty rates on fuels 23 are as follows: Fuel Type Dyed gas oil (as currently used) ULSD for road use ULSD for non-road use SFD Heavy oil which is not ULSD or SFD Biodiesel (B100) Biodiesel for non-road use (B100) Duty (pence per litre) 6.44 47.10 6.44 47.10 53.27 27.10 3.13
Table 7 Current UK Fuel Duty Rates Note that, although ULSD does have a rebated duty for non-road use, SFD (which will supersede ULSD) does not. This situation is expected to change, as SFD becomes the sole available reduced sulphur fuel, but a timescale for this is not yet known. Once this situation is achieved, then there would be no financial disadvantage in transferring from dyed gas oil to SFD. The biodiesel rate for non-road use applies to the pure fuel (referred to as B100). For biodiesel blends (referred to by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) as bioblends), until recently the position was confusing and illogical. In HMRC THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 39 of 121
Reference Notice 179E 24, the response to its question 4.5 querying the excise duty on bioblend states that the excise duty on the blend must be pro-rated between the two grades of fuel. In other words, biodiesel duty of 27.1 pence per litre applies on the biodiesel portion of fuel (for example, 5%), with ULSD duty (assuming this to have been used) of 47.1 pence per litre on the remainder of the fuel mix. This applies if the fuel is blended before the duty point. In contrast, under section 5, Biodiesel for non-road use, if biodiesel is mixed with rebated heavy oil after the duty point (e.g. at a depot), then duty on the mixed fuel applies at the full heavy oil rate of 53.27 pence per litre. If neat biodiesel (B100) is supplied for non-road applications, to be used in place of Red Diesel (dyed fuel), the full biodiesel duty rate of 27.1 pence per litre is paid at the duty point, and the end user can then claim a rebate for the difference between this and the lower non-road duty rate of 3.13 pence per litre. This does not apply to bioblends. Thus, should a move to biofuels be considered in due course, under current rules, there is a clear financial advantage in using B100 biodiesel, although the rebate mechanism could create cash flow issues. For the railway industry, there is a major financial disadvantage in blending biodiesel with diesel fuel, either before or after the duty point. Part of the reason for the above situation is that there is a compatibility problem between biodiesel and dyed fuel, with the biodiesel inhibiting the ability to detect the dye marker in a roadside test (but not in a laboratory). Thus, HMRC cannot readily identify the fuel in use. There is no operational problem from this effect, which is generally evident at the higher biodiesel blends (for example, >20%). The onus would appear to be on HMRC to ultimately resolve this issue. Given the requirement of the RTFO (section 9.5) for up to 5% of diesel fuel supplies to be from renewable sources by 2010, it is not clear how soon the above situation will therefore be addressed. In October 2006, clarification was sought from HMRC on this issue, who advised that the issue of rebated fuels and biodiesel, and fiscal markers had not yet been finalised from a policy perspective, and that when it had, information would be made available on the HMRC website. Their response restated that there is currently no facility to mark bioblend, and no means to deliver at a rebated rate (or make a drawback claim) for off-road use. The situation described above was alleviated at least temporarily in February 2007 by the introduction of UK Government Statutory Instrument 1234, which equalised the duty payable on biodiesel blends to that of rebated gas oil, for the explicit purpose of enabling biodiesel service trials on the UK rail network. This arrangement is currently in place until the end of August 2008. 10.5 ALTERNATIVE POWER SOURCES The potential new technologies for consideration as alternative power sources for rail application such as fuel cells, hybrids, etc, are not yet at a suitable stage for widespread adoption, but development continues. At their present level, whilst costs remain high, the principal barrier to their adoption is technical, particularly on fuel cells. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 40 of 121
The major available alternative power source is electrification. Caution has to be exercised in comparing emissions from electric traction with diesel power, since although electric vehicles are clean at the point of use, the fuel mix used in generating that electricity must be considered. Commercially however, electrification schemes are expensive and would generally require a level of Government funding, even in todays privatised railway. The price disadvantage of any major electrification scheme will remain in the future. It is understood that RSSB have work in progress relating to the future of electrification.
11
11.1
FUEL DEVELOPMENT
GAS OIL AND DIESEL FUEL The present and planned fuel specifications for gas oil and diesel fuel are referenced in section 9.2. For road diesel, this would seem to set the standard for the foreseeable future, until a requirement becomes evident to further clean up the fuel in some way as yet undetermined. It would not be expected that this would occur within the next five to ten years. For gas oil, as noted, the sulphur level will reduce to 1000 ppm maximum by the beginning of 2008, and as already noted, a further sulphur level reduction is proposed, leading to the availability of ULSGO. There is interest within the rail industry in adopting ULSGO, so pressure on the fuel supply industry here may advance its availability. Alternatively, there may be an industry decision to use road diesel SFD. Notwithstanding which fuel will be used, up to 5% biodiesel content may be added to the fuel as a standard feature over the next 2-3 years, as a fuel supply industry response to the RTFO. It is understood that fuel strategy is being developed by an industry group led by RSSB as a separate investigation.
11.2
BIOFUELS This report has already covered exhaust emissions legislation (section 9), and the potential mechanisms by which emissions can be reduced. However, the increased emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 has generated much concern in recent years, with international agreements (the Kyoto Protocol) requiring individual countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to defined target levels. On an individual engine basis, CO2 is not a regulated emission parameter, and the principal mechanism to reduce its generation in diesel engines has been to improve the combustion efficiency. One mechanism to reduce CO2 emissions and hence the impact of global warming is the use of biofuels. Biodiesel can be produced from a variety of vegetable oils and animal fats, with rapeseed and sunflower being two of the most used feedstocks. Its production can be considered to be CO2 neutral (or close thereto various different studies have come to slightly differing conclusions). Energy usage during manufacture can also be reduced. Additionally, other benefits include: -
Page No. 41 of 121
Renewable nature of the raw resource Zero sulphur content Higher cetane number Improved lubricity Higher density and viscosity Improved conductivity Higher flash point Biodegradable and non-toxic
As noted in sections 9.3 and 9.5, UK targets require an increasing percentage of transport fuel to come from renewable resources, starting in 2008. As a general statement, biodiesel cannot be readily used in its neat form (100% biodiesel, or B100) without specific engine modifications, since there are real or potential problems in such areas as: Reduced energy content Increased fuel consumption Incompatibility with rubber seals Poor low temperature operation Water absorption Poor oxidation stability More rapid lubricating oil degradation. Due to the anticipated engine problems, most engine manufacturers do not recommend or warrant biofuel mixes greater than 5%. At higher blend ratios, engine modifications may be necessary. Particular problems identified by the manufacturers are poor cold starting (with some manufacturers recommending starting on diesel fuel), reduced power output, and reduced oil change intervals as a result of more severe fuel contamination, causing not just dilution, but also because of potential chemical reactions between the fuel components and the oil causing sludging. Some manufacturers recommend that oil change intervals be reduced to as little as 30% of their original duration. Starting from a 5% mix of biodiesel (B5) with gas oil or diesel fuel, at which point little adverse effect is expected on engines, increasing the biodiesel percentage of the mix will provide improved emissions at the point of use (except for NOx) and significantly reduced CO2 emissions during manufacture compared with fossil fuels, at the expense of increasing adverse factors as defined above. To quantify these further, B100 fuel could be expected to reduce CO, HC and PM emissions by between 50 and 70%. CO2 levels will be largely neutral, or may even increase slightly different studies have again produced differing results. NOx would increase by around 10%, with the fuel consumption penalty being in the order of 8%. Wider acceptance of biodiesel will be achieved by a combination of engine modifications, improved production and quality of fuels, and general gaining of experience. There is little doubt that the market penetration of these fuels will increase in the coming years, and 15-20% biofuel mixes will become more common, including a likelihood of this happening within the railway industry on suitable engine types. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 42 of 121
Biodiesel duty is an issue, particularly for blends this is discussed in section 10.4. Concerns are being raised over land availability for biofuel production, with the declared EU target of 5.75% biofuel use by energy content for transport fuels by 2010 not expected to be able to be met within the EU, even with set-aside land. This will therefore lead to additional imports, leading to further concerns over loss of biodiversity from deforestation in countries such as Brazil. Biofuels cannot supercede fossil fuels entirely, although production is currently growing at around 30% per annum. In 2005, worldwide biofuel production represented approximately 1% of the global transport fuel market, and its eventual market penetration is expected to be between 5 and 10%. Some rail experience with biodiesel is being gained, for example in India and Germany (where Angel Trains has a DMU fleet operating on B100 fuel). SNCF is also implementing two trials, using B30 and B100 fuels. Although no trains in the UK have yet run on biodiesel, Virgin Trains has announced its intention to undertake a trial during 2007, possibly using 20% (B20) biodiesel mix. A comprehensive report on biodiesel fuel and its implications for the rail industry has been produced for RSSB 25. Following on from this review, an engine test and evaluation programme was initiated by RSSB/ATOC in early-2007 to ascertain the effects of varying biodiesel blends on engine performance and reliability, the project being operated on similar principles to the preceding reduced sulphur fuels evaluation project. Early results are already indicating that a B20 ratio represents a sensible maximum blend before engine performance starts to deteriorate significantly this situation can be aggravated by the programmed control software of later electronicallycontrolled engines not permitting sustained operation if the boost pressure reduces below preset levels. 11.3 WATER DIESEL EMULSION As a mechanism to reduce NOx levels, water-diesel emulsion can be considered as a potentially viable fuel. There are two methods to achieve this. The first is as an unstabilised emulsion, in which water and diesel fuel are held in separate tanks, and are pumped and mixed in an emulsifier before being injected into the engine. The homogeneity of the mixture depends upon the density difference of the two fluids, making this method of emulsifying more suitable when used with the heavier marine fuels, rather than the lighter distillate fuels used in road/rail transport applications. The second method of mixing the water and fuel remote from the engine, together with additives (emulsifiers and stabilisers) creates a stabilised emulsion, which should be able to be stored without separation for at least several days. Water percentages can vary from 10 to 40% (but more typically between 10 and 20%). To maintain the same power output, additional fluid must be injected, with the resultant extended injection period, which may be beyond the capability of any given engines injection system. It is often necessary therefore to either derate the engine, or reduce the water: fuel ratio, which in turn reduces the available NOx benefit.
Page No. 43 of 121
On a comparable power basis, the water content is typically on a 2: 1 ratio with the NOx reduction, i.e. a 20% water percentage would produce a 10% NOx reduction. PM reductions may also be achievable, but test results on different engines have produced widely differing results. A major limitation of water-diesel emulsions is the boiling point of water. If the temperature within the injection system exceeds 1000 C, evaporation of water droplets can destroy the emulsion. Generally, a stable emulsion could be maintained within the traditional pump-line-injector system, but may not be sustainable with modern common rail systems, in which fuel temperatures can be significantly higher than 1000 C. Notwithstanding its limitations, water-diesel emulsion can be a practical fuel. Lubrizol market their Purinox system 26, which is designed for use in direct injection, heavy duty engines. The emulsion, containing Lubrizols own additive package, has good stability and can be stored for up to three months without separation. However, a power loss of up to 15% is likely, together with the need for a bulky blending unit. Water-diesel emulsions have been evaluated by a few European rail operators. Some improvement in NOx and PM emissions was obtained, but also reductions in power output consistent with the water content. Overall, whilst water-diesel emulsion would be suitable for a smaller selfcontained fleet, it would currently appear impractical for application in the rail network. Development of emulsions can be expected to continue, but it is considered unlikely that it will become a viable solution for the rail industry in the foreseeable future. 11.4 NATURAL GAS Natural gas consists mostly of methane (typically around 88-90%), with the balance being made up of other hydrocarbons, hydrogen sulphide (H2S), carbon dioxide, water vapour and trace gases. Processing the gas for end use involves removing the water vapour and H2S to prevent corrosion, and the heavier hydrocarbons to prevent condensation in pipelines. After processing, apart from the methane component, the remainder is primarily ethane, inert gases such as nitrogen and CO2, propane and the higher hydrocarbons. It is used as either Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) or Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). It is not a natural fuel for a diesel engine, principally due to its low cetane number, and requires an external ignition source. This can take the form of a small pilot injection quantity of diesel fuel, or by a glow plug, making it more akin to a spark ignition engine. A dual fuel engine is one in which the compressed gas is pre-mixed with air in the inlet manifold, with conventional diesel fuel injection used as the ignition source. NOx and PM emissions are both lower with CNG, being up to half of the diesel value. HC and CO emissions are likely to increase, as is the fuel consumption. This is an interesting area for the development of a relatively low emissions engine, but it represents a significant change in fuelling infrastructure, as well as requiring involvement and acceptance from engine manufacturers, so is THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 44 of 121
considered unlikely to be adopted for the rail industry (except perhaps for any small self-contained operator see section 11.5). 11.5 BIOGAS Biogas is similar to natural gas and is produced as a by-product from the biological breakdown of organic material. The raw material, for example plant material or manure, is fed into a digester (an airtight tank), fitted with heating coils. As the temperature increases, bacteria multiply and feed on the organic material. This produces the biogas as a by-product, consisting of 60-80% methane, 20-40% CO2, and trace amounts of other compounds, such as ammonia, water vapour and H2S. To use the gas as an engine fuel, the CO2 is removed to increase the percentage of methane up to around 97%. Sweden has introduced a biogas train 27, by replacing the existing diesel engines of a DMU with Volvo GH10B engines operating on sewage gas. All emissions are significantly reduced, in the case of CO and PM to virtually zero. The emissions of the train are claimed to satisfy Euro V limits, which will not be introduced until 2008. 11.6 FUEL ADDITIVES All fuels include additives, for example dewaxing additives, flow improvers, lubricity additives and pour point depressants to aid transportation. The package of additives included in the original specification fuel is defined by the producer and that information is not always readily available outside the industry. It would be reasonable to conclude that the fuels supplied are optimised for their intended purpose, particularly with regard to efficient combustion and low fuel consumption. However, this impression has not prevented the appearance over many years of independent additive suppliers, all of whom invariably claim that their product can improve combustion efficiency and reduce both emissions and fuel usage. For the reasons stated above, there is a natural tendency to disbelieve these claims, particularly where a supplier or manufacturer is reluctant to divulge details of how their particular product operates or is formulated. In general, fuel additives tend to fall into three categories (although any one product may be formulated to achieve benefits in all of these areas): Engine cleaners Combustion improvers Metal-based additives A brief description of each of these areas is given below. Engine cleaners These are usually petroleum-based products containing solvents and/or detergents. They are intended to soften the hard carbon deposits on the combustion chamber components (valves/piston/cylinder heads), and to prevent varnishing or lacquer build-up. This restores (to a degree) the optimum surface between piston rings and liners, improving sealing and reducing blowby, and around valve seats, again improving sealing.
Page No. 45 of 121
Combustion improvers These claim to improve combustion by affecting the rate of combustion within the cylinder. They might take the form of a cetane improver (cetane being a measure of the fuels ability to burn readily), or they may extend the combustion phase to provide a more complete fuel burn. This might also include a catalyser that releases additional oxygen and nitrogen from the fuel during combustion (oxygen agitators). Metal-based additives These additives are claimed to deposit a layer of metal ions onto the surface of combustion chamber components, such that carbon deposition on these surfaces is inhibited. The railway industry (specifically ATOC and RSSB) has taken a recent initiative to evaluate two particular products in this area; a fuel catalyst and a fuel additive. Testing has been carried out under controlled conditions on a test bed, using engines originally allocated for the SFD project (section 12). The engine tested was the Cummins NTA855R3 engine. Testing comprised initial performance and emissions data, followed by a 40-50 hour conditioning run, with post-run performance/emissions testing to finish. The Fitch fuel catalyst consists of a polymetallic alloy, which is installed into the engine fuel line. It is claimed to reverse the effects of oxidation via chemical reactions at molecular level, resulting in increased available energy and improved combustion. Improvements in the cetane rating of the fuel are also claimed. Test results showed a power increase over the conditioning run of between 2% and 5%. If the power level was reset, then an approximate 4% fuel saving could be realised. Gaseous emissions increased in line with the power increase, indicating a largely neutral effect. Particulate matter remained constant. A full report on the fuel catalyst testing on the NTA855R3 testing has been produced 28. The Diesolift fuel additive is claimed to be based upon surfactant chemistry, whereby the chemical compounds of the additive are attracted to particular regions of the fuel structure. The result of this dual affinity is that the fuel-additive mix exhibits differing characteristics in the areas of lubricity, co-solvency, detergency and surface tension, leading to improvements in combustion and combustion chamber cleanliness. The additive is applied to the fuel in the ratio of 1: 600. On the first test engine, results showed a gradual power reduction over the conditioning run, although the level of boost pressure remained constant. A significant fuel consumption improvement was evident of between 6.6% and 10.4%, in excess of the observed power reduction. Whereas gaseous emissions either remained unchanged or reduced slightly, particulate matter reduced by 95%. A full report on the fuel additive testing on the NTA855R3 testing has been produced 29. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 46 of 121
The Diesolift additive was retested on a second NTA855R3 engine, supplied as part of the subsequent biodiesel evaluation programme. This engine was a younger unit and was overall in a superior mechanical condition to the first engine. A similar test procedure was followed, albeit with 90% load factors and a constant torque datum, rather than constant power, in order to more precisely identify subsequent variations in power and fuel consumption from the additive use. A clear 2% power increase and a much flatter fuel consumption characteristic was noted across the load range. At the maximum recorded power, a 6% fuel consumption reduction was evident, although due to the flattening of the fuel consumption curve, some intermediate loads did show an increase. Allowing for a typical rail traction duty cycle, however, an overall fuel saving of perhaps 4-5% was still anticipated (in addition to the observed power increase). This modelling could be developed further to more accurately represent the true duty cycle of any individual engine type or operator. A full report on this second fuel additive test has been produced 30. Other fuel additives are also available, including one recommended by an engine manufacturer (Cummins). Certain of these products may be similarly evaluated, given the availability of a suitable engine within a sensible timeframe. Many of these products have with apparently justifiable claims and accurate results, in one case via the US military.
12
12.1
REDUCED SULPHUR FUEL PROJECT

BACKGROUND The need to introduce low sulphur diesel fuel as an enabling technology to comply with Stage IIIB of the NRMM and to satisfy the relevant EU fuels directive has been covered in earlier sections. The potential effect of these fuels on the performance and reliability of engines has not been detailed. With the rail industry lagging several years behind the automotive industry in respect of adopting reduced sulphur fuels, there has been an opportunity to identify in what areas technical difficulties might be experienced. A review was carried out for RSSB 31 in 2004, which established that performance and reliability problems might be experienced in the following areas: Loss of power, nominally 2% Increase in fuel consumption, of a similar magnitude to the power loss.
Both of the above factors would be due to the lower energy density of the reduced sulphur fuel. Fuel leakage from seals in the fuel system, both vehicle and engine. This is due to the fact that rubber seals (particularly nitrile rubber) swell as they absorb fuel when first fitted, but latterly age and become brittle. Changing to a new fuel specification then prevents the seal from being able to absorb it, creating leakage. This situation can be resolved by simply renewing the seals at the time of fuel changeover, retaining the original THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 47 of 121
specification which can swell and absorb fuel as normal. Viton rubber seals, fitted to many engines in recent years, are unaffected. Seizure of fuel injection equipment (fie). The process of removing the sulphur from the fuel also removes some of the fuels natural lubricity agents. Since diesel fuel pumps and injectors use fuel for lubrication, when introduced into the road industry, this led to fuel pump seizures, particularly on older rotary-type pumps. Since that time, lubricity agents have been added to reduced sulphur fuels, and there is a lubricity requirement contained within the relevant specification (BS EN590:2004). Hence, the risk for the rail industry should have been much reduced. Valve seat wear. With the potential reduced lubrication properties, valve seat wear may be a problem, particularly on older engines not fitted with renewable valve seat inserts.
Against this background of potential problems, the rail industry, led by RSSB and ATOC, initiated a project to investigate the implications of the introduction of reduced sulphur fuels in a practical way by conducting dedicated engine testing and in-service field trials. 12.2 ENGINE TESTING PROGRAMME A series of engine tests was set up using a fully instrumented test bed at mi Technology, Preston (formerly Leyland Technical Centre), measuring a full range of performance and emissions data on a series of DMU engines. A total of four engines were evaluated: Perkins 2006 TW-H (Class 165/166) Cummins LT10 (Class 142/143/144) Cummins NTA855R3 (Class 159) Cummins QSK19 (Class 220/221/222)
In the first three instances, an engine due for overhaul was removed from the vehicle early to facilitate the testing, with the cooperation of First Great Western Link (FGWL), Arriva Trains Wales (ATW) and South West Trains (SWT). The QSK19 engine was a rail-specification unit due for overhaul, supplied by Cummins from their spares stock. Figure 2 shows a Cummins NTA855R3 engine on the test bed at mi Technology, Leyland.
Page No. 48 of 121
Figure 2 NTA855 R3 engine on test In addition, a single version of a locomotive engine was tested, a Midland Mainline (MML) Paxman Valenta, tested at MAN (Paxman)s premises in Colchester, Essex. Recognition was also taken of separate testing of a lower rated version of the Cummins NT855 engine (R5 version) that had been carried out at Preston in 2003 for a different project, but which had included performance and emissions testing on ULSD. Apart from this previous work, all testing was carried out using SFD. A full report was produced for RSSB 32, which is currently being revised and updated to include the recently-completed QSK19 engine testing. Although certain engines appeared to be less sensitive to power changes than others (the Cummins LT10 and NTA855R3), there was a clear trend of power reduction and fuel consumption increase of the expected magnitudes. Emissions data was more variable, exacerbated by the fact that the engines were at the end of their scheduled working life and hence combustion was no longer likely to be optimised. However, this had been one reason for selecting engines of this age, to ensure that results were representative of real life conditions. Generally, NOx reductions of 3 to 10% were seen, with more scatter on PM results, but still an indication of reductions of 10% or more. CO and HC levels were less affected, with CO2 increasing on some engines and reducing on others. Given that CO2 levels reflect combustion efficiency, this parameter in particular represented the variable state of tune of the engines tested. A summary table of the results is reproduced in table 8.
Page No. 49 of 121
Emission parameter (g/kWh)
NOx Gas Oil 11.5 11.5 10.47 16.03 7.93 21.19
Level SFD 10.56 10.46 9.65 15.46 7.67 22.39
THC Level Gas Oil 0.55 5.07 0.65 0.5 0.25 0.14 SFD 0.41 4.94 0.71 0.34 0.22 0.18
CO Level Gas Oil 4.45 2.32 1.23 9.91 0.96 0.84 SFD 3.3 2.38 1.25 8.91 0.86 0.86
CO2 Level
(2)
O2 Level
(2)
PM Level Gas Oil 0.456 0.485 0.824 1.33 0.189 0.110 SFD 0.400 0.660 0.624 0.18 0.142 0.117
Engine Type
Perkins 2006 TW-H Cummins LT10 Cummins NTA855R3 MAN Valenta Cummins QSK19 Cummins
(1)
Gas Oil 941.6 819.7 656.1 381.1 916.3 651.3
SFD 1092.3 751.8 744.2 372 762 791.1
Gas Oil 1648.4 1838.3 1072.2 539.2 1014.4 1281.9
SFD 1561.6 1622.5 1100.9 545 985.2 1561.2
NT855R5
Notes: (1) Data taken from previous engine test, ULSD fuel used. (2) Small variance from CO2 and O2 data contained within LTC/mi reports, due to subsequently identified correction factor to be applied. Legend: SFC = NOx = THC = CO = CO2 = O2 = PM = Specific Fuel Consumption Nitrogen Oxides Total Hydrocarbons Carbon Monoxide Carbon Dioxide Oxygen Particulate Matter Table 8 Measured exhaust emissions levels with SFD (mean values)
Page No. 50 of 121
12.3
IN-SERVICE TRIALS Having established the performance effects of using SFD, a series of in-service trials were initiated. These would have the double objective of determining whether the power/fuel consumption effects would be evident in service, given the variable duty cycle of a rail traction application, and whether fuel seal leaks, lubricity or any other unforeseen problems would be experienced. The trials utilised the same engine types as tested to provide a correlation between the two parts of the assessment. The trails were carried out on FGWL (Perkins 2006 TW-H), SWT (Cummins NTA855R3) and ATW (Cummins LT10). A fourth trial had been intended for MML, but was cancelled due to cost and logistical difficulties. A trial was not set up for any QSK19 operators. Dedicated fuelling infrastructure was provided to the relevant depots. Custom dispensers and vehicle adaptors were designed to ensure that only low sulphur diesel fuel would be applied to the nominated trial vehicles. Fuel consumption monitoring and vehicle inspection arrangements were set up for each trial. The service trials were concluded in March 2007. Results have indicated that power loss does not appear to be a problem, with no adverse driver reports or timekeeping problems. Fuel consumption records suffered from gaps and discrepancies, but overall the data indicated no significant effect in service operation. A summary table of the trials is provided below. Operator FGWL SWT ATW Vehicle Class 165/166 159 143 No of vehicles 4 3 4 Start date of trial 12/12/05 6/4/06 5/9/06 Engine age at start (months) 17/25/21/0 7/6/6 23/21/32/32
Table 9 Summary of SFD Trials 12.4 CONCLUSIONS FROM PROJECT Both the engine tests and service trials have now been completed. The investigation has provided confidence in the operation of ULSD/SFD, such that there should be no major unforeseen consequences from its introduction. Any such project has to be a compromise and arguably the engines most at risk are the older, larger locomotive engines, of which a number remain in active service. However, given the relatively small number and limited remaining life, resources could clearly not be justified in assessing these units. Overall, cooperation between the different industry partners has been very good, and the project itself has provided valuable experience in how different initiatives can be effectively evaluated to the benefit of all parties. It is considered highly likely that similar arrangements will be made for other work, for example biofuels, and a framework has clearly been established to permit effective coordination of wider-ranging assessments in the future.
Page No. 51 of 121
13
13.1
EXHAUST AFTER TREATMENT OPTIONS

DIESEL OXIDATION CATALYSTS Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOC) reduce exhaust emissions by facilitating an oxidation reaction between specific pollutants and the oxygen present within the exhaust gas stream. The two common catalyst materials are platinum and palladium, with the former being the most active for operation with diesel engines, although other formulations are increasingly being used. The principal emissions parameters affected by an oxidation catalyst are CO and HC; CO combines with oxygen to produce CO2, with HC creating CO2 plus water vapour. Catalysts are also effective in reducing several non-regulated pollutants such as aldehydes or PAHs, and the soluble organic fraction (SOF) of particulate matter. For the catalytic reaction to occur, the temperature of the exhaust gas needs to be above the light up temperature of the catalyst, typically 2500 C for the CO reaction and 3250 C for the HC reaction for full conversion efficiency. Above this temperature, the conversion rate remains effectively constant for a given catalyst size. Conversion efficiency is typically between 75 and 90%, but can be increased towards 100% by increasing the size of the catalyst. Oxidation catalysts do not reduce overall NOx concentrations. However, chemical changes do occur to the NOx gases, with NO being oxidised to NO2. Whilst this is generally undesirable, the creation of more NO2 can facilitate regeneration of a particulate filter (see section 13.2). This conversion occurs at exhaust temperatures above approximately 2500 C, peaking at typically 3750 C. The magnitude of any PM reduction will depend upon the SOF content of the overall particulate material. High SOF content (wet particulates) tends to dominate at lower loads, reducing to just a few per cent at high load factors. The catalyst will also convert the sulphur dioxide (SO2) in the exhaust gas into sulphates (SO3), hence the post-catalyst level of particulates will be dependent upon the sulphur content of the fuel.
13.2
DIESEL PARTICULATE FILTERS As their name indicates, Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) are effective only on PM emissions. They consist of a cylindrical ceramic structure with many small parallel channels running in the axial direction. The most common design is a closed channel type, consisting of a wall flow monolith, whereby adjacent tubes are plugged at opposite ends, forcing the exhaust gas to pass through the porous walls, which act as a filter medium see figure 3.
Figure 3 Closed & Open Channel DPF Types
Page No. 52 of 121
This filter medium captures the carbon within the exhaust gas, and will eventually become clogged, restricting the gas flow. The filter must therefore have a reliable regeneration system to release the accumulated carbon. This is normally achieved by oxidation of the carbon particulates at a high exhaust gas temperature, typically at 500 to 5500 C (passive regeneration). For a rail traction application therefore, regeneration would only occur during part of a typical duty cycle at high engine loads. The carbon portion of PM can be reduced from filtration by 95 - 100% using a DPF. The organic fraction is reduced primarily by oxidation, by up to 50 90%, with sulphate particulates potentially increasing by virtue of the oxidation from SO2 to SO3, causing negative efficiency when high sulphur fuel is used. Where an engine duty results in significant periods of time at lower exhaust temperatures such that passive regeneration does not occur with sufficient regularity to clear the filter, active regeneration can be employed. This usually consists of diesel fuel injected into the exhaust system, which is then either combusted in a fuel burner or passed over an oxidation catalyst in order to raise the exhaust temperature. The fuel burner is the more flexible option as it can be set to operate at any desired condition, and can be controlled either manually ( a regeneration button) or electronically. The operation of the catalyst again depends upon a minimum exhaust gas temperature level. Fuel burner DPFs have been applied as retro-fit installations for various applications within Europe, including rail traction, with catalytic systems being more suited for OEM applications. Electric heating elements for regeneration are also possible. Open channel systems, or flow-through, similarly consist of a collection of small parallel channels, but with no plugged ends. The exhaust gas flows through these channels, and is directed through a series of vents into a sintered metal fleece. PM material is collected on this fleece, which is continuously regenerated through the oxidation of carbon with NO2. Although this system results in a less restrictive design for the overall exhaust system, PM conversion efficiencies can be less than half of that achieved with the closed channel design. There is a range of potential filter materials, including silicon carbide, codierite and sintered metal particulates. The selection of any one material will depend upon such factors as surface-to-volume ratio, precipitation level and thermal stability, as well as installation and operation issues such as packaging into the DPF design, cost and required service interval. 13.3 CONTINUOUSLY REGENERATING TRAP The Continuously Regenerating Trap (CRT) consists of two active components in series, an oxidation catalyst and a diesel particulate filter. As described in 13.1 above, the catalyst creates two reactions on the exhaust gas constituents: (i) NO is oxidised to produce NO2. (ii) HC and CO are oxidised to produce CO2 and water vapour. The NO2 produced from the oxidation catalyst regenerates the particulate filter, enabling regeneration at relatively low exhaust gas temperatures compared to oxygen, in the order of 250 2750 C. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 53 of 121
Although the NO of the exhaust gas is oxidised, since this is converted to NO2, the overall NOx concentration is little affected. To quantify the effect on emissions, a series of RSSB/ATOC-sponsored tests have been carried out using engines run on a dedicated test bed. The CRT units were enclosed in stainless steel cylindrical canisters, installed in parallel into the exhaust system see figure 4. Three units were used for the Cummins NTA855R3 test engine and six for the Cummins QSK19 engine.
Figure 4 Bank of six CRT units for QSK19 test Under controlled comparative test conditions, the following results were obtained: -
Page No. 54 of 121
Emissions Factor
SFD Fuel
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) Hydrocarbons (HC) Carbon Monoxide (CO) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Oxygen (O2) Particulate Matter (PM) Exhaust Smoke
7.66 0.22 0.86 762 984.2 0.142 1.03
QSK19 Engine With CRT Fitte d 6.78 0.02 0.1 880.7 841.3 0.023 0.04
% Difference
SFD Fuel
NTA855R3 Engine With CRT Fitted
% Difference
-11.5 -90.9 -88.4 +15.6 -14.5 -83.8 -96.1
9.7 0.7 1.26 745.8 1100.3 0.624 1.79
9.37 0.03 0.14 604.8 1003.8 0.0093 0.03
-3.4 -95.6 -89.2 -18.9 -8.8 -98.5 -98.5
Table 10 Effect of CRT on test engines
Page No. 55 of 121
Note that an 18.9% decrease in CO2 resulted from the NTA855 test, which was unexpected, as theory indicated that an increase would be expected. No obvious explanation was apparent (instrument calibration was rechecked), with the expected increase evident from the QSK19 engine tests. Cold start/idle and hot idle tests were also included in the evaluation, in order to establish whether exhaust gas temperatures remained above the regeneration temperature. After 10-15 minutes at idle, gas temperatures had settled out at 140-1500C, resulting in a low level of conversion. A full report detailing the NTA855R3 results has been produced report for the QSK19 testing in progress at the date of this report. 13.4 SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION Neither the oxidation catalyst nor the particulate filter is effective in reducing NOx levels. One system to achieve this is Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR), in which injected ammonia (NH3) (or alternative reducing agent) reacts with the NOx of the exhaust gas under the action of a catalyst. A number of chemical reactions occur, all of which reduce NOx to elemental nitrogen, together with oxygen and water. Control of the ammonia injection rate is critical, since partial oxidation of ammonia can result in N2O emissions. Due to the toxicity and handling problems with ammonia, a more convenient SCR reductant is an aqueous urea solution, which decomposes to ammonia and CO2 either in the exhaust gas stream or on the surface of the catalyst, following which the reactions described above occur. Urea (chemical symbol (NH2)2CO) is non-toxic and commercially available, and has become the reductant of choice for mobile SCR applications. However, a dedicated storage tank has to be provided, and an additional cost incurred in provisioning regular urea supplies. Catalyst materials can be platinum (unsuitable for NOx reduction above approximately 2500 C), vanadium (suitable for temperatures up to 4500 C) or zeolite (for applications above 4500 C). SCR systems are relatively insensitive to the sulphur content of the fuel. Generally, NOx conversion efficiencies in the range 60 to 90% can be expected, dependent upon the engine type and application. The effect on other emissions parameters can vary. Increased CO and CO2 levels may result, due to the reaction of urea with water, whereas HC and PM emissions could be expected to reduce slightly, the latter as a result of the removal of the SOF portion of PM through the catalytic reaction. It is understood that Cummins have carried out some testing with an SCR system applied to their QSK19 engine (as used on several UK DMU classes). No further information is currently available. 13.5 COMBINED (SCR + DPF) OR (SCR + CRT). The separate systems described above can be combined to optimise reductions of regulated emissions. Whilst the inclusion of a DPF with SCR will add PM reductions to the NOx reductions, incorporation of a CRT unit will enable THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 56 of 121
33,
with the
reductions in all parameters. A combined (SCR + CRT) is generally referred to as SCRT. In the case of SCR and DPF, the individual components can be positioned either side of each other; with CRT positioned upstream of the SCR, the increased NO2 levels can enhance the performance of the SCR, although the high temperatures achieved during the filter regeneration (particularly if an active system is used) can cause SCR durability problems. An SCR positioned upstream of the DPF/CRT would permit higher NOx reductions during cold starts, with the unit warming up more quickly in this position, enhancing NOx reduction performance. In practice, a complete SCRT system is complex, and could comprise (in sequence) an oxidation catalyst, a particulate filter (these first two being the CRT unit), the SCR catalyst and a further oxidation catalyst. 13.6 NOX ADSORBERS A NOx adsorber works on the principle of the NOx in the exhaust gas being adsorbed and stored by a catalyst under lean engine operation, and released during periods of fuel-rich operation. This released NOx is then catalytically converted to nitrogen (N2) and CO2. In detail, the NO of the exhaust gas (typically 90-95% constituent) reacts with oxygen over a platinum catalyst, to form NO2. This NO2 is then adsorbed by the storage material as an inorganic nitrate. When the engine runs under excessive fuel conditions or at high gas temperatures, the stored nitrate becomes thermodynamically unstable and decomposes, releasing NO or NO2. This is then reduced by CO, H2 and HC to N2 over the reduction catalyst. The system is sensitive to the sulphur content of the fuel, with sulphur preferentially adsorbed onto the catalyst, forming stable compounds with the NOx present. This leads to fewer available sites on the catalyst for the desired NOx reaction, with the catalyst eventually becoming deactivated. Even ultralow sulphur fuels will eventually poison a NOx adsorber. The system can be desulphurised, but some permanent damage will have been done. High conversion efficiencies in excess of 80-90% can be achieved. HC and CO reductions are also achieved, but there is no effect on PM emissions. There is also a fuel consumption penalty. 13.7 SUMMARY OF SYSTEM EFFECTS Table 11 below summarises the pollutant reductions for each system described, together with identification of whether reduced sulphur fuel is required. Although it is more of an on-engine modification, EGR (section 8.5) is also included in this comparison.
Page No. 57 of 121
Pollutant/ System DOC DPF CRT SCR SCR + DPF SCR + CRT NOx Adsorber EGR
CO X X X X
HC X X X X
NOx X X X
PM X X X
Low sulphur fuel required? Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y
Table 11 Comparison of Different Emissions Control Systems 13.8 RAIL OPERATING EXPERIENCE Generally, in-service operating experience with exhaust after-treatment systems is limited, or in the case of the UK virtually non-existent. DPF systems are the most widely fitted systems in Europe, and have been evaluated in Denmark, France and Romania, with Swiss operator BLS having gone one stage further with DPFs fitted to some maintenance and shunting vehicles 1. Coradia Lint DMUs fitted with the Euro III-compliant MTU 6H1800 engine are also now being introduced with DPF systems. It is understood that at least in some applications, the residual load on the engine when traction power is cut off, is sufficient to maintain the exhaust gas temperature above the regeneration temperature, thereby negating the need for any ancillary regeneration system. Significant CRT operating experience has been gained in Sweden, with eight IC3 Flexliner Y2 multiple units of Swedish Railways being fitted with CRT systems for either the Cummins NTAA855R7 or Deutz BF8L513C engines 34. These were installed from new in 1996-97, and had completed over 10 million kilometres without any CRT system failures. There is a routine maintenance requirement, with cleaning of the CRT every 300,000 km (approximately 10 hours work per train), and renewal of the CRT unit at 1.2 million km.
Figure 5 CRT installation for IC3 Flexliner (2 engines) Eminox An examination of one CRT system after 600,000 km operation (approximately three years) showed no deterioration in its performance, with over 90% of PM, HC and CO still being removed. As noted in section 13.2 above, combined exhaust fuel burner and DPF systems have been used in rail traction applications. One example of this is the Vossloh G2000 locomotive fitted with the MTU 20V4000 series engine and rated at 2700 THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 58 of 121
kW, where the burner/DPF replaces the conventional exhaust silencer. Vossloh and MTU appear to be two manufacturers particularly active in this area. In July 2006, Iveco Motors of Italy announced that they were supplying their Cursor 8 engine for installation into German Regio Shuttles complete with an SCR system and a catalytic filter, making the whole installation NRMM Stage IIIBcompliant. 13.9 INSTALLATION DIFFICULTIES There are obvious difficulties involved in installing any form of exhaust aftertreatment device into rail traction vehicles, especially if considered retrospectively. Although installation of oxidation catalysts onto rail vehicles may not represent a significant space problem, bulkier systems such as DPFs or their combined derivatives do create potentially significant issues. As is evident from all of the preceding discussions and illustrations, most devices are of a considerable size, potentially requiring space that could be otherwise employed, for example as passenger seating on a DMU. Weight could also be such that maximum axle weights are approached or even exceeded. In a locomotive, the standard exhaust system is usually part of the roof structure of the vehicle, presenting additional loading to be considered if an exhaust aftertreatment device was incorporated. It is not unreasonable to expect both size and weight requirements of after-treatment equipment to double that of a DMU-size engine. There may well be space issues in the future for DMU installations, given that all rolling stock (new and existing) must comply with the requirements of the 1998 Rail Vehicle Accessibility Requirements by 2020. As an example of the equipment cost, it is estimated that a DPF for a nominal UK DMU (for example, Class 15x) would cost in the order of 8,000 to purchase, with associated integration/installation costs of around a further 2,000. More powerful DMU engines such as the QSK19 would require significantly larger units, nominally twice the size and hence cost, based upon the CRT tests carried out. In addition to these considerations, filter installations in particular must be such that an excessive exhaust back pressure is not applied to the engine, as a result of short connecting pipe work and tight bends. SCR systems are very bulky, with the SCR catalyst potentially comparable in size to the engine (for DMU installations) to which they are attached. To this must be added the urea tank and associated fittings. 13.10 FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS From discussions with both Johnson Matthey and Eminox, the view for aftertreatment in the railway environment is that DPF/CRT systems will be the main focus over the next few years. This is because PM reduction is the priority in most areas, and these PM control systems do not need to be integrated directly with the engine. In addition, active control systems are generally not required.
Page No. 59 of 121
With PM control the main strategy, there is also likely to be follow-on use of SCR devices for NOx control. This is the way it developed in the road industry, and it would seem probable that rail will follow a similar path. Beyond the systems available today, and developments of these systems, it is difficult to predict how after-treatment will evolve. Ultimately, both on-engine and after-treatment technology is driven by legislation. Regulation of CO2 emissions appears overdue, and if this is incorporated at some stage, then this will clearly affect firstly engine technology, and subsequently the optimum match of after-treatment to this new technology. As with most areas of technology, it is reasonable to assume that exhaust aftertreatment development will lead to future equipment being smaller, lighter and/or more effective, although costs will remain an issue.
14
14.1
DIESEL ELECTRIC HYBIRDS

BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION For a traditional diesel powered vehicle, whether for road or rail, a significant part of the engines operation is at idling or low load. At these conditions, the diesel engine is inefficient and prolonged operation can cause injector fouling and general combustion deterioration, as well as increased overall emissions. One potential solution to this has been the diesel-electric hybrid. This design retains the prime diesel engine for higher load operation (primarily propulsion), but adds battery-powered electric motors for low load operation. The batteries can be recharged either by a generator coupled to the diesel engine or by regenerative braking, or a combination of both. Experiments with hybrid operation were made on petrol-engined cars in the early years of the 20th century, but more significant research was not carried out until the 1970s. However, it was in the 1990s that hybrid development accelerated, as part of the search for alternative energy sources and emissions reductions. Inevitably, the road transport industry has been further advanced in terms of practical application of the concept than other transport sources. There are two principal configurations; series operation and parallel operation. In series operation (figure 6), the diesel (or petrol) engine drives an electrical generator, which either operates electric motors to drive the vehicles wheels, or charges the energy storage system (batteries), which then drives the wheels. The former configuration is comparable to a diesel-electric locomotive installation, where the generator output (or rectified alternator output) is used to drive DC traction motors. The main difference with a series hybrid is that excess power is used to charge batteries, which can then be used to deliver extra power under peak demand, thereby enabling a lower rated diesel engine to be employed than would otherwise be necessary.
Page No. 60 of 121
Figure 6 Series Hybrid System A parallel hybrid system has the output from the diesel engine and the electric generator connected in parallel to the traction motors of the vehicle. The relative use of each power source can vary, with the electric motor either simply boosting the output of the diesel engine when required, or being an independent system able to be operated separately. A battery charging arrangement from the diesel engine is still required, although as already noted regenerative braking can also be employed. Parallel hybrid systems are currently the most common configurations.
Figure 7 Parallel Hybrid System A full hybrid is a system that can operate on either the engine alone, the batteries/electric motor alone, or a combination of both. Such a system inevitably introduces some complexity to the design. There are other design variations on the basic hybrid concepts, not detailed here. Any hybrid system has the advantages of reduced first engine cost, reductions in size and weight, and the ability to select the engine for a constant average power output, rather than a peak demand, resulting in sustained operation at a more efficient operating condition. Electric motors are inherently suited to delivering power at variable speeds and can provide improved torque at low speeds, when compared with a diesel engine. In other words, a hybrid system combines the best features of each operating drive system. Other benefits can include increased vehicle range and reduced noise output due to reduced engine running generally at lower engine ratings. The ability of hybrid control systems to regularly stop the diesel engine when low power only is required which could be obtained from battery operation needs to be considered carefully. Frequent stop/start cycles will increase wear and tear on the engine, since maximum wear occurs within the first few minutes of engine starting.
Page No. 61 of 121
Although this section considers only diesel-electric hybrids, alternatively fuelled engines can be used, as discussed in section 11. 14.2 OPERATING EXPERIENCE Road transport Over approximately the last decade, applications of hybrid systems for road transport have increased significantly. For the private motorist, one of the major, and most popular, developments has been the Toyota Prius, an example of a full hybrid that can run on either or a combination of both drive systems. Claims are made of 80 to 90% gains in fuel economy when compared with conventional saloon cars of a similar size and weight. Reliability has been good, particularly considering the electrical system and battery pack. Other car manufacturers such as Honda, Mazda and Renault are now producing hybrid vehicles, with Ford also recently entering the market. Peugeot Citroen has entered into a partnership with Ricardo and Qinetiq to develop a diesel hybrid car based upon the Peugeot 307/Citroen C4 35, in a response to the DfTs Ultra Low Carbon Car Challenge, launched in 2003. A demonstrator has been produced, and the partners are currently working on cost savings to reduce the additional cost of 3,000 per vehicle. Hybrid truck and bus operation is also expanding, particularly in major cities. In March 2006, London introduced six diesel-electric hybrid buses into service 36, using a parallel hybrid system with regenerative braking. A 1.9 litre diesel engine is fitted, compared with a typical 9 litre bus engine, with resultant claims for lower noise levels and emissions reductions. Amongst other data, a 40% improvement in fuel economy is claimed, together with 89% NOx reduction. However, this comparison is with a previous bus engine certificated to an earlier set of exhaust standards, so care must be taken with the emissions comparisons at least. Noise emissions are also reduced when the vehicle is running on electric power with the diesel engine shut down. Rail transport To date, the major development in hybrid operation for rail has been in North America. Since 2002, Railpower Technologies Corporation of Vancouver, Canada, has been converting standard diesel-electric switchers (shunters) to hybrid operation 37 (the Green Goat figure 8), replacing the original engine of anything from 600 kW upwards with a small diesel generator of 90 200 kW output, solely dedicated to charging a bank of lead-acid batteries. Engine operation is therefore at a constant speed and load, and a nominal 40 60% fuel saving is claimed, with 70 90% reduction in NOx/PM emissions, 20 60% reduction in greenhouse gases, and significant operating/maintenance cost savings. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has approved the Green Goat as an Ultra Low Emission Locomotive (ULEL). Between 90 and 100 hybrid locomotives, both Green Goat conversions and new vehicles, are reported as being planned for 2006. Railpower has now
Page No. 62 of 121
signed a Memorandum of Understanding to market the Green Goat in Australia and south-east Asia. Costs of conversion would be likely to be greater than a standard rebuild, but significantly cheaper than a new locomotive. Some problems have been experienced with defective battery components, leading to two reported fires. Battery life issues have also been identified.
Figure 8 Railpower Green Goat Locomotive
Figure 9 Diesel Generator All photos Railpower Technologies.
Figure 10 Bank of Batteries
GE Transportation is designing a hybrid locomotive for main line use 38. Since this is still under development, limited information is currently available from their website, although up to 15% savings in fuel consumption and emissions is claimed. In Japan, the East Japan Railway Company (JR East) has been evaluating a prototype diesel-electric series hybrid railcar since 2003 (designated the New Energy Train, or NE). The single vehicle is being developed jointly by JR East, Hitachi Rail and the Tokyu Car Corporation. It was intended to introduce the developed version into service in summer 2007, however, plans are now being THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 63 of 121
developed to convert the railcar into a fuel cell-hybrid vehicle (see section 16.3) - the power train had originally been designed with the intention of such a conversion.
Figure 11 JR East Hybrid Railcar JR East Details of this work were given at a presentation by Hitachi Rail at an IMechE seminar in March 2006 39. Twin 95 kW motors are fitted, driven from a 180 kW generator, although the installed engine remains at a typical multiple-unit power output of 330 kW. Lithium-ion batteries are fitted with a high output density and 15kWh capacity, able to be used with a charge range of 20 to 60%. Mode of operation is initially by electric motors from standstill, with the diesel engine cutting in at around 30 kph, providing both traction power and charging the batteries. Regenerative braking is also employed. The engine shuts down automatically upon return to idle. Fuel consumption is claimed to be reduced by 20%, with NOx, HC and PM reductions of around 50%. Battery performance improvements during the trial period enabled the size and weight to be reduced by 20%, the power capacity to be increased by 20% and the battery life extended from 2 years to over 8 years. Battery life in rail traction is generally an arduous duty, so if this is substantiated, it represents a significant benefit. In October 2006, Hitachi announced 40 that it was entering into a partnership with Porterbrook Leasing, Brush Traction and Network Rail to develop a dieselelectric hybrid system for trial operation in an HST power car. The vehicle will be one of the power cars of Network Rails New Measurement Train (NMT), with the equipment being housed in both the power car and the adjacent trailer car. Trial running commenced in April 2007. This is a good application for hybrid technology, since the Valenta engines in the NMT spend a great deal of their life idling, with consequent detrimental effects on oil quality as a result of dilution by unburnt fuel. Alstom have also recently announced a hybrid shunter 41, which was scheduled to begin testing in April 2007. 14.3 FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS The diesel-electric hybrid is now finding its market, and further developments and refinements can be expected over the next few years. For road transport, use of the petrol or diesel engine is likely to remain for the foreseeable future, with changes in battery type and efficiency considered to be the major THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 64 of 121
development areas. Alternative fuels are likely to be introduced eventually, such as biofuels or even hydrogen, as the demand and infrastructure for such fuels grows to a suitable level. Similarly, for rail traction, battery development will be a prime focus, although size/weight restrictions are less of an issue than for road vehicles, at least as far as locomotives are concerned. The principal requirements for the electrical system will be: Increased energy density Reduced battery size/weight Longer life cycle For rail vehicles, opportunities exist to consider alternative prime movers to the diesel engine in a shorter timescale. As already noted, fuel cells could be substituted, the development of which is now creating practical-sized units for multiple unit operation (see section 16). Super or ultra-capacitors could also be employed in place of conventional battery storage this subject area is covered in section 16.5. 14.4 APPLICABILITY FOR UK OPERATION With a dedicated switcher platform in the USA/Canada, a standard already exists from which Railpower Technologies has created a design which can be applied to the traction equipment of a number of train operators. Given the success of the imported GM Class 66 locomotives, it would seem feasible that a UK operator will eventually opt for a Green Goat (or the smaller Green Kid) shunter, probably within the next two to three years. In theory, a comparable situation exists in the UK with the Class 08 shunter. Shunting operations with their long periods of idling and low power operation are ideally suited for the application of hybrid technology. In practice, whilst an essential vehicle, the major disadvantage with the Class 08 shunter is its very low asset value, making any cost justification difficult. In addition, although the type is widespread, usage is often limited, and the number of vehicles owned or operated by any one organisation is also small, further restricting any cost-benefit analyses. With a high initial design cost, the only way that this could be overcome would be for a collaborative effort to share costs, with a minimum number of conversions to be undertaken. This is extremely unlikely to occur. The only foreseeable facilitator for this approach would be persistent local complaints concerning local depot air quality, and/or appropriate emissions legislation. Details of hybrid conversions were given at a joint presentation by Railpower and Brush Traction at an IMechE seminar in March 2006 39, which recognised the above shortcomings. An alternative approach presented at the seminar was for a modular design concept based upon the Class 86 locomotive, which could become a hybrid shunter. Given that a complete new diesel engine package would need to be installed, the fact that the Class 86 is an electric locomotive may not be as big a disadvantage as would first be thought, although the vehicle would have some restrictions due to track curve radius.
Page No. 65 of 121
A suggested alternative donor vehicle presented at this seminar was the Class 20, although this was not detailed at all. It is understood that a total of fourteen Class 20 locomotives remain in service, operated by just two companies, Direct Rail Services (DRS) and Harry Needle Railway Company (HNRC) (see section 17.1 and appendix 2). A further twenty are believed to be stored and potentially recoverable for service. Whereas individual operators such as DRC or HNRC are unlikely to be willing to fund the development of a hybrid vehicle, it is worthwhile considering a high level cost-benefit analysis to determine whether there is any justification for a cross-industry approach for any particular vehicle.
15
15.1
INVESTMENT PROGRAMME
LEASING COMPANY INVESTMENT With regard to approaches to the operators concerning actual and potential environmental initiatives, limited information was obtained directly within the timescale for this report. However, the potential fuel specification and supply changes described in the previous sections can certainly be considered to be positive environmental actions, even though a nil (or minimal) level of cost increase would be expected by the operators. Approaches were made to the three principal rolling stock leasing companies (ROSCOs), Angel Trains, HSBC and Porterbrook, for their comments on future investment in the railways, specifically related to diesel traction or its viable alternatives. A verbal response from HSBC considered that the climate was not conducive to ROSCO investment, certainly not for the next two years, due to the current investigation into leasing charges being carried out by the Office of the Rail Regulator (ORR). The purpose and methodology of the review is not covered within this report, but ORR is expecting to publish its provisional findings in November 2006. According to the technical press, one outcome may be referral of the ROSCOs to the Competition Commission for full scrutiny, which could take eighteen months to two years. The HSBC representatives view was that funding for such initiatives would be more likely to come from other sources, for example Network Rail or the train operators themselves. The leasing companies had originally been liable for enforcing mandatory changes relating to emissions, but train operators are now taking this on. The effect of fuel savings might have an effect on vehicle lease costs. Notwithstanding all of the above comments, his view was that there were some possibilities for re-engining. New vehicles would include HST2 and ultimately new DMUs. Discussion with a representative of Angel Trains revealed no knowledge of any specific plans for significant investment from the company in the immediate future, with the major exception of its current 75 million HST re-engining programme. The short-term future DMU market was viewed as uncertain, with new Desiro units being introduced and the expectation of subsequent movement of other DMUs between operators.
Page No. 66 of 121
The Porterbrook representative referred to the fact that HST2 was now no longer the ROSCOs responsibility, having effectively been transferred to DfT. Whilst there were no firm plans for new DMUs or re-engining of existing DMUs, it was recognised that Class 14x and 15x vehicles would need to be replaced in around 10 years time. This would place any new engine supply firmly under the NRMM Stage IIIB emissions requirements. Any re-engining of existing DMUs, such as Class 158 or 170, which were expected to last for another 20 and 30 years respectively, might also be impacted by these regulations. New vehicles complying with Stage IIIB would need to have additional space requirements for exhaust after-treatment equipment, potentially occupying passenger space, against the background of future disability legislation requiring additional interior space. The representative was concerned that these regulations could go so far as to spell the end of the traditional underfloorengined DMU. 15.2 GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT The Department for Transports Rail Group, created in June 2005, has produced a strategy document 42, which seeks to develop an industry owned technical strategy and a vision for the railways over the next 30 years. Part of the groups role will be to consider developing technologies for potential adoption by UK railways. To a degree, therefore, this tends to discourage any wide-ranging and proactive investment programme from the major leasing companies. None of the above discussion has considered further electrification. The framework of todays railways does not lend itself to the level of investment required for electrification projects, and to the authors knowledge there are no major plans for such schemes, at least over the next 5-10 years.
16
16.1
KNOWLEDGE GAPS
GENERAL This section of the report considers those technologies and other factors that have not already been considered within this report, and which may have an influence on the continued future use of the diesel engine.
16.2
FUEL CELLS DESCRIPTION A fuel cell is an electrochemical device that converts hydrogen and oxygen into electricity and water. The only significant effect on the environment therefore is the method of production of the hydrogen, with no pollution at the point of use. The operating principle of fuel cells was discovered in 1839, but it was 1932 before the first practical device was created. Fuel cells received a development boost from the US manned space programme, being used extensively in the Gemini and Apollo missions of the 1960s and early-1970s (and continue in use to this day on the Space Shuttle). More rapid development has been evident since around 1990 as the size and capacity of devices has enabled their consideration in practical applications, including transport.
Page No. 67 of 121
The most developed version of fuel cell is the Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM). In this design, hydrogen is applied to the anode of a membraneelectrode assembly. This is then catalytically split (for example using platinum) into protons and electrodes. The protons permeate through the membrane to the cathode of the device, whereas the electrodes reach the cathode by means of an external circuit, creating the electrical output of the fuel cell. Oxygen delivered to the cathode initiates a reaction with the protons and electrons to form water molecules. With its membrane construction, a major advantage of the PEM is its compactness. It also operates at a relatively low temperature compared to other fuel cell types of only 80-900C. Both of these factors make the PEM fuel cell most suitable for mobile applications. Membranes are applied in stacks in order to increase the output of the device. Of the other fuel cell types, the Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC) can generate up to 2 MW output, but operate at very high temperatures, typically greater than 6000C, and are mainly used in stationary applications. Despite these high temperatures, SOFC may be developed in due course for rail traction or auxiliary power. The latter is perhaps more suitable, as it can use diesel fuel processed through an on-board reformer to extract the hydrogen from the fuel. A major inhibitor to widespread fuel cell use is the negative energy balance of hydrogen generation, leading to a lack of the necessary hydrogen infrastructure. Due to its much lower energy density compared with diesel fuel (only 0.03% at normal temperature and pressure), hydrogen needs to be compressed, leading to potential safety issues associated with refuelling and storage. Suitable power output, size and weight also remain obstacles for mobile applications. An extensive research project into the use of hydrogen as a fuel was carried out for RSSB by AEA Technology 43 44, however it is not intended to repeat the detail of this investigation in this report. A summary of AEAs conclusions from the study regarding fuel cells is given in section 16.4, and an update of current railway projects is given in section 16.3. 16.3 FUEL CELL RAILWAY PROJECTS The first rail application for fuel cells was a mining locomotive in Canada 45.
Figure 12 - Fuel cell mining locomotive Fuelcell Propulsion Institute THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 68 of 121
Hydrogen is stored in a metal-hydride system at room temperature, and a PEM fuel cell is used generating 17 kW output (gross). Operating time is 8 hours, with a recharge time of 1 hour maximum. The vehicle is some 30% lighter than the original battery-powered locomotive, and requires ballast to be added to bring it up to specification for hauling mine trains. The locomotive has operated successfully at the Campbell mine in Ontario since October 2002. The US Army is developing a fuel cell-powered locomotive of some 1.2 MW to be derived from an existing diesel-electric locomotive design 46, which will be the largest fuel cell transport application to date (figure 13).
Figure 13 - Basis for US Army fuel cell locomotive Fuelcell Propulsion Institute This was originally a five-year project, commencing in May 2003, at an estimated cost of US$12 million. Three different fuel cell types are being considered, comprising PEM, SOFC and phosphoric acid fuel cells. Recent updates on this project have been difficult to find, so its current status is unknown. An enquiry has been sent to the project spokesperson, but at the time of writing, no response had been received. The JR East diesel-hybrid railcar discussed in section 14.2 is now to be converted to fuel cell operation 47, with the fuel cell directly replacing the diesel engine. This was always the intention of the project once the diesel-hybrid concept had been proven. Two 65 kW solid polymer fuel cells are used, with hydrogen stored at 35 MPa pressure (350 bar). Performance checks and safety of operation testing was due to commence in July 2006, with service testing by April 2007. Also in Japan, the Railway Technical Research Institute (RTRI) has announced test running of a fuel cell powered rail vehicle.
48
In Europe, a consortium is investigating the introduction of Europes first hydrogen-powered train by 2010. The train will be fuel cell-powered and operate in Denmark. A feasibility study into the project has just been published 49.
Page No. 69 of 121
16.4
SUMMARY OF FUEL CELL ISSUES FOR RAIL APPLICATIONS From the AEA/RSSB study 43, the following main conclusions were derived relating to potential fuel cell use for rail traction power. The study also included the use of hydrogen as a direct fuel for an internal combustion engine. More work needs to be done to reduce costs, and increase power density and operating life of fuel cells. Compared with fuel cells being developed for automotive applications, rail needs between three and eight times the life expectancy (dependent upon application). Heat dissipation is likely to be an issue, since all generated heat will need to be dissipated by radiators, unlike existing internal combustion engines where a percentage of heat is dissipated via the exhaust gases. On-vehicle hydrogen storage is not likely to create significant safety issues, with the preferred choice likely to be compressed gas or possibly metal hydride storage. Hydrogen fuel technology is unlikely to become a mainstream part of the transport energy mix before 2020, and then will be led by road developments, with rail potentially being some way behind. Hydrogen fuel and fuel cell technology costs are likely to decrease by 2020, whilst performance criteria are likely to improve significantly. Business case analysis shows that fuel cells come second to electric traction. Hydrogen ICE has a negative impact on overall CO2 emissions compared with diesel traction. The use of SOFC fuel cells as auxiliary power units (APUs) on existing diesel traction stock could offer significant local air quality and environmental benefits if used to reduce the amount of engine idling at terminal stations. This is recommended as a trial project over the 2005-2008 timeframe. In addition to the main report, the separate development report 44 concluded the following likely timescales for fuel cell developments: 2005-2010: Maintain a watching brief. 2010-2015: Conduct desk top feasibility study for potential fleet replacement. 2015-2020: Develop and test prototype fuel cell rail vehicle. 2020-2030: Production of fuel cell rail vehicle. This seems a general and extensive timescale. Developments overseas are already ahead of this schedule and should be closely followed.
16.5
SUPERCAPACITORS Capacitor technology has increased significantly over the last decade, with the energy storage capacity of double-layer capacitors having more than tripled since 1998. This has led to further examination of supercapacitors as a means to absorb braking energy, for later use when vehicle acceleration is required. This system can be used on a purely electric vehicle, or could be part of a diesel-hybrid system. Supercapacitors consist of carbon nanotubes (extremely small tubes made from carbon molecules), the tiny spaces of which contain a polymer acting as the dielectric of the capacitor, creating a large surface area. Carbon aerogel can also be used, consisting of carbon fibre electrodes coated with an aerogel (a low density solid state material derived from gel, in which the liquid
Page No. 70 of 121
component of the gel has been replaced by gas). This provides a very high surface density of 400 1000 m2/g. For this latter application, a recent modelling exercise by Bombardier reported in the trade press 50 considered a DMU with two 315 kW diesel powerpacks and a roof-mounted ultra-capacitor unit capable of storing 4.4 kWh and able to deliver a 50% increase in output. By fully utilising the ultra-capacitors for acceleration, a 35% fuel/emissions saving was determined from the model. Alternatively, a compromise of increased acceleration (i.e. faster journey times) and a reduced fuel/emissions saving could be considered, in whatever ratio was deemed appropriate for particular applications. Another study 51 has shown for a diesel-hybrid system, a bank of 8200 supercapacitors, with a volume of 3.5 m3 and a weight of 4.3 tonnes, could replace one of two 385 kW diesel engines, with a resultant fuel saving of some 44%. 16.6 VEHICLE IMPORTS GM LOCOMOTIVES The last few years have seen the size of the GM/EMD-engined Class 66 fleet increase, both in the UK and the rest of Europe. This situation is expected to continue in future years, particularly with the latest versions of the locomotive now having been developed to comply with UIC II and NRMM Stage IIIA emissions limits. However, the level of continued penetration is unclear. With the major UK freight operators already having largely re-equipped with this locomotive, and the uncertain status and future development of the freight business for these organisations, there may be limited further introductions. 16.7 VEHICLE IMPORTS CHINESE DMUS It is anticipated that the current Class 143 and some 15x units will require replacement in the timeframe 2017 to 2019. Life extension including re-engining may be an option, but new vehicles may also be considered. Some interest has been generated in low-cost DMUs from China. These would use European power units and other specialist equipment, but would be manufactured in China, with an approximate ratio of 30% imported, 10% locally manufactured under licence and 60% locally designed and manufactured 52. This has the obvious advantage of having a low manufacturing cost basis, compared with Europe. The magnitude of cost reduction is not known, although a company promoting this idea states that it can buy five times as many spare bogies than in Western Europe for the same price. The likely development of the Chinese manufacturing capability and the market opportunity within the UK is difficult to estimate at the present time. As far as is known, there are no current definite expressions of interest from UK operators. The involvement of a company experienced with UK vehicle acceptance issues and knowledge of UK/EU relevant legislation would be necessary, should this go ahead for the UK market.
Page No. 71 of 121
17
17.1
POTENTIAL FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING FLEET

SURVEY OF CURRENT UK DIESEL FLEET Appendices 1 to 4 detail the makeup of the current UK diesel fleet, initially separated into four categories: diesel multiple units, diesel locomotives, Civil Engineers vehicles and departmental vehicles. Each listing is categorised by vehicle class (and sub-class), description, age, number of vehicles in service, engine details, estimated remaining life and utilisation category (see section 17.2). Whilst this list is considered comprehensive in terms of the classes and subclasses in active service, it does not include all heritage and preserved locomotive, nor does it include an extensive listing of all infrastructure vehicles. Data is taken from available resources, together with knowledge from the author and colleagues. The estimated remaining life is based upon a nominal 30-year vehicle life (this can be considered to be the minimum expectation), together with some knowledge of likely plans within the industry. Discussion on which engines might be scrapped as a result of vehicle disposal or re-engining is covered further in section 17.6. The list is considered current as at 16th October 2006. Figures 14 and 15 show the age profiles of the DMU fleet and locomotive fleet respectively, with data taken from the above tables. Where a range of ages is given for a particular vehicle class in the table, the oldest age is used for the chart. Comparable graphs for the departmental vehicles and Civil Engineers stock have not been incorporated.
AGE PROFILE OF EXISTING DMU FLEET AS AT OCTOBER 2006
400
350
300
Number of units
250
200
150
100
50
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Age (years)
Figure 14 Age Profile of DMU Fleet The profile for the DMU fleet shows two distinct clusters, with no operational vehicles in the 10 to 13 year age range (based upon the definitions used). For the newer vehicles, note that some of the latest Class 185 units will be less than the minimum of three years shown. The chart excludes four first generation DMUs in the table at 46-49 years of age. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 72 of 121
Presenting this data in another format, table 12 details DMU age by 5-year spans, with the number and percentage of the total fleet identified in each case. For convenience, the most recent category covers six years up to the current year. Again, the very oldest DMUs are excluded. Age range 2000 - date 1995 - 1999 1990 - 1994 1985 - 1989 1980 - 1984 Total: No. vehicles 776 376 420 1143 0 2715 of % of total fleet 29 14 15 42 0 100
Table 12 Age range of DMU fleet

AGE PROFILE OF EXISTING LOCOMOTIVE FLEET AS AT OCTOBER 2006
220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 Age (years)
Number of units
Figure 15 Age Profile of Locomotive Fleet The profile for the locomotive fleet shows three principal groupings. The vehicles up to 9 years of age are exclusively the EMD-engined Class 66 and 67 locomotives and its various sub-classes. The central peak at 30 years of age represents the HST fleet, whereas there are a significant number of aging freight locomotives and shunters in the 40 to 50 year age group. The following table presents this data in age ranges, as for the DMUs above. This shows that nearly a quarter of the locomotive fleet is over 40 years old.
Page No. 73 of 121
Age range 2000 - date 1995 - 1999 1990 - 1994 1985 - 1989 1980 - 1984 1975 - 1979 1970 - 1974 1965 - 1969 1960 - 1964 1955 - 1959 Total:
No. vehicles 57 230 15 62 10 204 0 19 131 198 926
of % of total fleet 6.2 24.8 1.6 6.7 1.1 22 0 2.1 14.1 24.1 100
Table 13 Age range of locomotive fleet An engines fuel usage is normally represented by its specific fuel consumption (sfc), measured in g/kWh, which provides a means by which the efficiency of dissimilar engines can be accurately compared. As engine technology has improved, so the sfc has reduced. Figure 16 shows an analysis of the full load sfc values, which can to a degree also be considered as an age profile of the fleet. The data was taken from a combination of OEM data/test sheets or BRpublished curves (for the older vehicles), and in a few cases, estimated by the author.
FUEL CONSUMPTION PROFILE OF CURRENT DIESEL FLEET
1200
1000
800 Number of Units

Cummins N14/QSK19, GM 645/710, 8MB275 Cummins LT10, Paxman Valenta, Ruston RK
600
400
Cummins NT855
0 195-200 200-205 205-210 210-215 215-220 220-225 225-230 230-235 Specific Fuel Consumption Range (g/kWh)
Figure 16 Sfc profile of diesel traction fleet Sfc values above 225 g/kWh represent the 40+ year old locomotives, whereas the 215 to 225 g/kWh range includes the 15-22 year old vehicles, plus the 30+ year old Valenta engine. Predominant in the 210 to 215 g/kWh range are the GM engines, but also the current QSK19 engine. This fuel range is high for this modern engine type, and this could be considered the principal exception to the age rule. With this graph having been constructed from the full load fuel consumption values, the QSK19 engine has the minimum point on its sfc curve THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 74 of 121
EE 8SVT
200
MTU 16V4000
Perkins 2006, MTU 6R183
MAN VP185
Sulzer LDA28C, EE 4/6KT/12SVT
at a lower speed/load rating. Had this minimum value of around 207 g/kWh been used, the engine would be more representative of age in the next lowest sfc range. In the 200 to 205 g/kWh range is the NT855 series of engines, which also have a relatively low consumption for the engine design age. The sfc value of the most modern engines would be expected to be in the range 200 to 205 g/kWh (VP185), or even possibly in the next lower category of 195-200 g/kWh (16V4000). The graph clearly shows the lack of engines in this category (the only ones being the two current HST replacement engines), and hence reinforces the age profile of the engine population. As engine and after-treatment technology is applied, the potential for reduced emissions at the expense of increased fuel consumption becomes more evident. Although the introduction of new engines will shift the distribution shown to the left, there is unlikely to be much growth in the sub-200 g/kWh category. 17.2 ENGINE DUTY AND USAGE FACTORS Estimates were then made of an engines typical duty cycle in service. It had been hoped that information on vehicle usage would be available from the train operators. Initial approaches were made to obtain this data, but agreement to pursue these enquiries was not available. Interfleet therefore carried out its own analysis to define engine duty and utilisation, using various sources, including TRUST operating data. This could not realistically be carried out for every engine or vehicle type, and so representative groupings were considered for eight different applications. These are detailed in appendix 5. For simplicity and to avoid introducing excessive assumptions into the assumed duty cycle, this is divided solely into the percentage time spent on no load and on load, with no further sub-division into different load factors. Comment is made here on each of the defined utilisation categories and duty cycles. Category 1 is a shunter duty, with a very high percentage of idle operation (95%), and time on high loads being of short duration. Whilst engine hours can be high, annual mileage is very low, reflecting generally low utilisation. However, when required for duty, the shunters role is often essential. Category 2 is the HST passenger service, which combines the highest hours and miles of all these categories. The HST duty cycle has probably received more analysis in the past than any other vehicle class, and includes a significant portion of time with the engine idling whilst at full line speed, given the momentum of the set to maintain speed without power. Category 3 represents loco-hauled passenger traffic, with a similar duty cycle to that of the HST. Hours and miles are significantly lower however, with this application being a diminishing part of the national passenger operation. Category 4 is high speed DMU operation, principal examples of which are the Voyagers and Meridians. Again, a comparable duty cycle to the preceding passenger applications is defined. The high utilisation of these units means that miles and hours are only slightly behind those of the HST. THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 75 of 121
Category 5 is a suburban DMU application. The 75/25 no load/full load split might at first seem to be inappropriate, but the duty will consist of a succession of shorter bursts of power and idling due to its more frequent station stops, making it more of a microcosm of the higher speed passenger services. By its very nature, engine hours might be comparable to higher speed stock, but with the frequent stops, mileage is taken as around half that value. The next two categories represent dedicated freight operation. Category 6 is heavy haul freight, with a major part of the duty cycle on power due to the train loads involved. Moderately heavy usage and mileage is defined. Category 7 covers light freight traffic, with a complete reversal of the duty cycle for heavy haul freight, comprising much more significant time spent at idle. Engine hours are comparable to loco-hauled passenger duty, but with a reduced mileage to reflect the longer acceleration times and/or lower overall speeds. This category can also cover high speed track machines (for example, NMT). The final category, category 8, covers a mixture of hire traffic, standby duties and Civil Engineers vehicles. By definition, idling time will be high, with very low running hours and low vehicle mileage. Summarising this information provides an indication of the most heavily and lightly-used engines/vehicles. At the extremes, shunting is a very inefficient use of the installed engine, whereas high speed passenger operation demands a high utilisation throughout the year. From the above data, those engine types (or vehicle classes) that either undertook light duty cycles, or low utilisation (or a combination of both) could be identified through the reasonable assumptions employed on the analysis. This provides an insight into where savings could be made in the fleet, and potentially which vehicles could be replaced with more suitable and costefficient machines. However, at this stage, such interpretations have not been detailed, since significant operator comment and input should be required here. 17.3 OPTIONS FOR RETROFITTING OF TECHNOLOGY The requirement here is to identify which new technologies could be economically retro-fitted to existing engines, and how quickly these could be implemented. By definition, this is a very limited area. It is unlikely in any case that there would be sufficient incentive to update the older locomotives of the fleet. Operational issues may be a different matter (see section 17.5), but there would appear to be limited scope for implementing technical modifications to reduce fuel consumption and emissions on a cost-effective basis. Retrofit options are certainly available, such as charge air cooling and exhaust gas recirculation, but these are not cheap, easy or quick to install. Nonetheless, some comment is provided here on possibilities. This section excludes any comment on re-engining, considered in other sections.
Page No. 76 of 121
For the larger vee engines, single-bank running (section 8.5) when idling has been trialled with some success on the Paxman Valenta engine (although not without some issues). This could be considered for wider adoption, for example on the EMD 645/710 engines, but this would require some significant discussion with EMD, and presumably would require them to develop such a system, which they may not be prepared to do. Even if they were willing, this development would be likely to take some time. The widespread use of this locomotive by several different operators may also introduce complications. Some of the older freight locomotives could probably be adapted, without undue concern as to the OEMs attitude, but it would seem not to be costeffective to consider these, with withdrawal dates not too far in the future. Clearly, the suitability of any engine/vehicle to be subject to any modifications will depend upon such factors as the engines future service life, number in service, etc. Where these queries could be answered in a positive light, it would be worth initiating discussions with the relevant OEM (or overhauler) to establish whether there are any upgrades to engine systems that could be applied. Specifically, this might include fuel injection equipment, as it is in this area that engine development work has been successful in improving combustion, thereby reducing fuel consumption and emissions. Other possibilities here are camshafts with retarded timing (section 8.4) or alternative piston ring packs for improved compression and leakage control. However, such modifications would have to realise a commercial benefit in terms of fuel saved, and not just an environmental one in terms of emissions reduced. There may be scope for retro-fitting after-treatment equipment, specifically particulate filters, but as noted previously, there are a wide range of issues surrounding retro-fits in this area. Also, little cost benefit would be obtained from this move. 17.4 POTENTIAL SAVINGS FROM NEW ENGINES OR ASSOCIATED TECHNOLOGY General Features New engines, whether as part of a re-engining project or new vehicles, can offer savings in a number of areas, summarised below: reduced fuel consumption reduced lubricating oil consumption reduced emissions increased power output (if required) reduced maintenance extended periods between overhauls reduced overhaul costs improved reliability Comment was made on the emissions and fuel benefits from re-engining in section 8.7. Against these advantages are the following adverse features, particularly related to any re-engining: high capital cost installation difficulty for both engine and any associated after-treatment equipment THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 77 of 121
potential requirement for greater cooling capacity as a result of engine specifications to reduce emissions It may also be the case that although an extended overhaul periodicity is readily achievable with the new engine type, this new period does not readily fit into existing or proposed vehicle servicing schedules. This can similarly apply to the engine maintenance activities and has been found to be the case with recent re-engining examples, whereby the OEMs recommended maintenance intervals are at odds with the vehicle schedule. In particular, due to the extended period to overhaul, a new engine may require half-life attention, potentially requiring reasonably significant work such as overhaul of turbochargers or cylinder heads. This becomes more acceptable with the larger, higher value locomotive engines, where the work may be able to be carried out in-situ, or with the engine removed and a spare unit fitted, if this is a preferred approach for the operator. For multiple units, there is little interest in scheduling such work, and so the requirement is often simply for the longest period to overhaul consistent with vehicle schedules. New engines for locomotives An example is included here of the HST re-engining, which in recent years has included both the MAN VP185 and the MTU 16V4000 engines. The operational analysis can be considered to be equally valid for a new vehicle, where this was directly replacing previous traction equipment. Since this is reviewing a real case study, and since both the leasing companies and train operators involved will have conducted far more rigorous cost-benefit studies, the approach taken here is more of an overview. The capital cost of either engine would be in the order of 300k, plus perhaps 20-25k per vehicle for conversion, and it would be reasonable to conclude that overall payback of this figure would be expected within no more than five years, given the potential savings on overhaul costs due to the longer scheduling and in this case the predicted remaining life of the vehicle. For the purposes of this discussion, it is assumed that the costs in this area are borne by the leasing company; only the fuel savings attributable to the train operator are outlined below. From the authors practical involvement with the first of these re-engining projects, the 10% fuel consumption improvement at full load, proven on the test bed (see table 5 in section 8.7), translated readily into an overall 8% fuel saving in service across the defined duty cycle (utilisation category 2 from appendix 5). Thus, based upon an estimated annual fuel usage of 642,000 litres per power car (from previous measured data), at a fuel cost of 34 pence per litre and an 85% availability, the saving would be 17,460 per vehicle per annum. These figures are probably conservative, given that the MTU engine on the current re-engining programme is claimed to have a fuel consumption improvement of greater than 10% (no exact figures available to the author). It is also reasonable to conclude that either new engine will maintain close to its optimum fuel consumption over much, if not all, of its operational life, given the unit fuel injector (16V4000/VP185) and common rail injection (16V4000) design features with their much improved injection characteristics. Previous THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 78 of 121
measurements have shown that the Valenta engine fuel consumption deteriorates with increasing age, by up to 2% over a 30-month period. In this particular example, improvements in lubricating oil consumption should also be validated, since the Valenta engine has long had a high oil consumption rate. Both new engine types will have much tighter oil control, due to the requirement for reduced particulate emissions and the general advances in piston ring/liner design. The VP185 engine uses very little oil, to the extent that oil changes now have to be scheduled due to the fuel contamination from excessive idling (see discussion in section 17.5). In this respect, the 16V4000 engine is expected to have greatly reduced fuel dilution, due to its electronic engine control of the firing cylinders at this condition, and the understanding by the author that a no excessive idling policy is stipulated by the OEM (not validated). The above analysis considers the situation that currently prevails, where neither of the two referenced engines are compliant with either Stage IIIA or Stage IIIB of the NRMM (although both engines will have to comply with Stage IIIA by 2009, with MTU recently having announced a version of the 16V4000 engine that does so see section 8.2). As a generalisation, engine technology applied to achieve IIIA can potentially have an adverse effect on fuel consumption this has already been seen with the VP185 whereby alterations to the fuel injection rate to reduce NOx have also reduced the fuel saving from 10% at full load down to 7% (with the consequent effect on the 8% in service figure see section 8.7). New engines for DMUs As noted in section 17.1, a current design of DMU engine can readily have a specific fuel consumption improvement at full load of up to 10 g/kWh compared with many of the DMU engines currently in service. This equates to a nominal 5%, around half of that discussed in the preceding section for the locomotive-sized engine with DMu engines generally being of a later design age than the Valenta engine, the magnitude of savings will obviously be less. The HST example above quantified fuel savings based largely upon measured data, since previous project work meant that this data was more readily available than other vehicles. For this DMU analysis, the estimated current fuel usage and potential savings are derived from the data contained in appendix 5. The current example used is the Class 165/6, fitted with the Perkins 2006 TW-H engine, using the following data: Full load fuel consumption is 220 g/kWh (source: Perkins data sheet) No load fuel consumption is 0.3 kg/h (source: SFD test results) No load/full load split of 75/25 (source: utilisation category 4 or 5, appendix 5) Hours run per year are 5,000 (source: appendix 5) Fuel cost is 34 pence per litre (latest advised price) This equates to a fuel usage of 84,450 litres per annum. Therefore, if a replacement engine was able to achieve a 5% overall fuel reduction, then this would equate to a saving of 1,435 per vehicle per annum.
Page No. 79 of 121
These figures are again believed to be conservative. For example, the SFD test work indicated a higher full load fuel consumption figure than that quoted, presumably as a result of general combustion deterioration during that engines working life. Similar comments apply to those made in the previous analysis concerning the effect on fuel consumption of emissions-compliant engines.
New engines for freight locomotives A freight locomotive example has been carried out using a similar analysis as for the DMU above. The selected example is the Class 47 to 57 conversion, where a full load specific fuel consumption improvement of 14 g/kWh is seen (see table 6 in section 8.7), or around 6%. The following assumptions are made, where not already referenced: No load fuel consumption of Sulzer engine is 15 kg/h (based upon data from comparable sized engines) No load/full load split is 80/20 (source: utilisation category 7 of appendix 5) Hours run per year are 2,600 (source: appendix 5) This equates to a fuel usage of 390,580 litres per annum. Therefore if the replacement engine is able to achieve a 6% overall fuel reduction, then this would equate to a saving of 7,970 per vehicle per annum. Summary of analysis All of the above have to be considered as general cases only (although the HST example could be considered more robust, being based at least in part on measured data). A number of assumptions have been made, all of which are reasonable individually, but collectively serve to devalue the end result. More accurate analyses could be carried out using data from the train operators, but this has not been available for this study. The most important issue here is that new engines, whether as part of an existing vehicle re-engining, or as part of new traction stock, can be seen to provide significant fuel savings, especially when considered as part of a larger fleet. Vehicles to be re-engined or replaced, the replacement engine specification and the timescales over which this might be achieved all have to be considered in order to present a practical and worthwhile case. However, it is evident that there is potential for realistic fuel savings. 17.5 OPPORTUNITIES FOR REDUCED ENGINE IDLING Engines idle throughout their service life for many reasons. Some of this time is for genuine reasons such as the provision of electric train supply (ETS) or hotel services, and for the protection against frost damage. The amount of idling undertaken is highly dependant upon the vehicle, its utilisation and duty cycle. Unnecessary engine idling is undesirable technically, financially and also environmentally. Technically, excessive idling leads to poor combustion and unburnt fuel washing the cylinder bore, removing the lubrication film and diluting the lubricating oil in the crankcase. Some engine types are also prone to fouling of the piston, rings and valve gear.
Page No. 80 of 121
Financially, excessive idling is a significant cause of wasted energy with fuel being burnt for no added value to the business. Environmentally, excessive idling contributes to the pollution of the atmosphere with no actual benefit. For these reasons, it is desirable to reduce the amount of idling to the absolute minimum. Examples of where idling occurs are: Engines are left running at stations to supply hotel services and auxiliaries. Engines are run overnight to supply hotel services. This is for keeping coaches warm for cleaning and servicing, and in preparation for the next duty. Engines are left running overnight to protect equipment against frost damage and to avoid coolant leakage as the pipes and joints contract. Engines are idled for long periods when vehicles undertake shunting duties. Engines are often left idling during refuelling and overnight servicing. Where shut down, engines are started typically at least one hour prior to the start of work to preheat the trains. During a typical passenger diagram duty an engine can idle or operate on ETS load, with the train stationary, for up to 8 hours a day (cumulative). During a typical passenger or freight diagram duty, an engine can idle or operate on ETS load whilst running between destinations for up to 75% of the time. Engines are left running as there is a long standing concern that when engines are shut down there is a risk that they may not be reliably restarted when required.
Whilst accepting that, for practical reasons, engine idling cannot be completely eradicated, any opportunity taken to reduce excessive engine idling can only lead to benefits technically, financially and environmentally. This is particularly true in todays energy and environment conscious society. For discussion here, the opportunities for reducing diesel engine idling can be grouped into two main areas, at depots and in service. Opportunities at depots, during fuelling and overnight stabling It was not uncommon, at one time, to see a line of locomotives awaiting entry to a depot or fuel point at the end of the working day, all idling. One major freight company has since implemented a 'No Idling' policy for its locomotives whereby drivers are encouraged to shut down the engine if stabled for more than a given time period. From a recent study, a single HST power car may spend an average of 3.8 hours idling overnight after completion of its diagram workings. This includes fuelling, servicing and stabling plus winter frost precautions. Some of this is ETS. Assuming all the time is idling only, then this equates to an estimated average of 63 litres of fuel per day per power car. Similarly, a single Class 22X units engine may spend 5.2 hours idling equating to an estimated average of 35 litres of fuel per day. Some options to consider in reducing idling/low load times are: As noted above, engines are run overnight to supply hotel services. This area may be tackled in the following ways: Page No. 81 of 121
During the summer time, it may be possible to reduce the engine startup time prior to diagram working to 30 minutes from the accepted 1 hour minimum. This assumes that the coach or train internal temperature needs to be raised to 210 C. Assuming an average 140 C ambient summer night-time temperature, a 70 C increase is required prior to service. Typically at least 1 hour of preheating is reported to be used to raise the coach temperature to the desired level. It is estimated that this could be reduced to 30 minutes during British summer time. Once fuelled, serviced and stabled, intelligent software could be considered to identify when engine restarts are necessary and the duration of running (based on ambient external and coach internal temperatures). Once fuelled, serviced and stabled, all overnight train supply and battery charging could be provided by shore supplies. Comments on comparative cost are made later under in-service options. Overnight servicing by cleaning staff could be carried out immediately on completion of fuelling and maintenance servicing prior to the majority of the heat being lost.
Many traction units still use a water-based coolant. As a result, these units are started and idled for 1hour in every four during the winter months (November to March inclusive) to ensure damage to frost and freezing does not occur. Many other vehicles are also idled overnight in winter and the cooler months even when an antifreeze solution is used in the cooling system. This is largely because of coolant leaks from hoses, joints and clips that contract as they cool. These areas may be tackled in the following ways: o Transfer all units to an antifreeze solution. It would be necessary to check the compatibility of materials prior to converting. o A campaign of attention to hose, joint and clip condition and fit to tackle any leaks. This has been done successfully before. o Install an auxiliary system to maintain the working temperatures of an engine's oil and coolant, maintain air system pressures and charge the vehicle batteries whilst the locomotives is not in use. Such a diesel driven heating system (DDHS) system is being trialled on EMD locomotives in Toronto and Vancouver, Canada, and also in Texas, USA. This system incorporates a 'smartstart' system enabling the DDHS to automatically start and stop as required. o Intelligent software could be considered to identify when engine restarts are necessary and the duration of running (based on ambient external and coolant/oil temperatures). This system could help reduce the cycling between temperature extremes and reduce the idling undertaken. Whilst passenger services are generally timed onto the fuel point at the end of the diagram to avoid a queue, this cannot always be avoided, particularly with freight locomotives. Engines will idle waiting for fuel and servicing and then during fuelling. This area may be tackled in the following ways: o When locomotives or units are brought onto the fuel point they should be shut down immediately after any running checks required for
Page No. 82 of 121
maintenance are completed, for example taking oil samples. All future movements could be made by a pilot or shunting locomotive. Where multiple units and HST power cars are concerned, only one engine may be required to move the train to a stabling point at low speed if no pilot is available. Independent engine control would need to be established. For groups of freight locomotives where no pilot was available then one locomotive could act as the pilot.
Opportunities in service, during transit and at stations At one time it was a common sight to see traction units stood at stations idling only to then pull away in a cloud of dark smoke as the oil and unburnt fuel collected during the stop was ejected via the exhaust. Over recent years, steps have been taken by many operators to reduce this (taking HST power cars as an example) by shutting down one engine at terminal stations that sits beneath the station canopy. Recent experience however, suggests that this is not rigorously adhered to, with engines observed running adjacent to the buffers at London terminal stations, suggesting that plenty of opportunities still exist. Even where an accepted engine start-up time before departure exists (it is understood that one London terminal station has an agreed maximum of 15 minutes before departure), this may be an unnecessarily long period, particularly if the turnaround time is fairly short. From a recent study, a single HST power car may spend 12% of its working day stationary, potentially with the engines providing ETS. This equates to an estimated average of 213 litres of fuel per day per power car. Similarly, a single Class 22X units engine may spend 38% its working day stationary with the engines providing ETS. This equates to an estimated average of 64.5 litres of fuel per engine per day. Some options to consider in reducing idling/low load times in service are: Engines are generally idled/run at low load at all stations to provide hotel services. From a study carried out of HST and class 22x services, the time that the train spends stationary at such locations can be as much as 8 hours each day. Of this eight hours, there can be as many as five occasions where the standing time is over 25 minutes. This area may be tackled in the following ways:o During the time spent in excess of, say 25 minutes, at a terminal station, the hotel services and battery charging could be provided by shore supplies. Shore supply could also be provided at day-time stabling points. During this time all engine could be shut down. Using HST power cars and class 22X vehicles as examples and based on a diesel fuel cost of 0.34 per litre, it is estimated that the cost of power per kWh to supply ETS is 0.11/kWh per power car, 0.09/kWh per Class 22x engine and 0.06/kWh for shore supply. To put this into context, at a London terminal station comparing the reported duty whereby one HST power of a 2+7 set would shut down and the other provides ETS against a nine car Class 22x with all engines idling constantly and shore supply:-
Page No. 83 of 121
Train HST 22X Shore
Cost per train per kWh () 0.11 0.99 0.06
Table 14 Comparison of electricity costs The above excludes the capital investment costs for the installation of any shore supply. o An auxiliary power unit (APU) in addition to the main traction engine could be fitted to some traction units and new units to provide hotel services. This would permit the main traction engine to be shut down when the train is waiting at stations or stabled, whilst the auxiliaries can be retained by running the smaller auxiliary generating set, which would run at a nominal 75-85% of its rated load. Interfleet has experience of this principle as successfully used in Toronto, Canada on the EMD built F59PH locomotives hauling bi-level coaches, and on the new Class 3000 DMUs recently delivered to Northern Ireland. The French State Railways (SNCF) use separate engine/generator sets in modern multiple units exclusively to supply energy for the air-conditioning systems. These were as-built and not retrofitted. In Australia, the Xplorer/Endeavour DMUs and the new Hunter Rail Cars are built with a separate integrated diesel generator to power all the train auxiliaries. As an alternative to a secondary auxiliary diesel engine, this use also presents the opportunity to consider the use of fuel cells in this role (see section 16).
Due to the requirements and penalties associated with some types of freight services, small light trains of less than 100 tonnes are often moved over relatively short journeys, of say 200 miles, using two mainline locomotives to guarantee the timely arrival of the train at its destination. This area may be tackled in the following ways:o It is considered feasible to consider a review of this diagram type and consider the use of strategic stand-by locomotives associated with revised timings to allow for train recovery rather than two locomotives providing traction. However, the stand-by locomotive should not be left idling itself. o Longer term investment plans could be considered for eventual replacement with more reliable traction. From a study of passenger diagrams for one particular operator, as many as five lengthy station stops at an average of 30 minutes per diagram were noted during which most units idled constantly. This area may be tackled in the following ways:o Consider the re-scheduling of diagrams to avoid long layovers, e.g. use slower journey times to arrive ready for the next scheduled departure time. o Slower journey times may also present advantages in driving technique permitting less energy to be used to reach line speed.
Page No. 84 of 121
Cleaning services normally carried out at a terminal stations may be carried out en-route with re-stocking and staff meeting the service at dedicated points en-route.
The correct shutting down of traction units has historically been related to potential failure to restart, for example either due to the incomplete removal of standing battery loads, poor battery condition, or unreliable starter motors. Clearly if any number of options are taken up whereby engines are frequently shut down and then restarted then the systems that permit this must be robust, i.e. control circuits, fluid pumps, motors, batteries and battery chargers. The author is aware of reports that some classes such as 22X may be overly complex and can cause problems if used incorrectly. Carried out incompletely, this may leave standing loads on the batteries with subsequent restarting problems. Different classes will have different characteristics in this area and so need different approaches. This area may be tackled in the following ways:o Investigate each vehicle type in turn, beginning with those likely to realise the greater saving, to determine the weaknesses and potential problems that may occur from continual shut-down and re-starting of traction engines. o This may require simple modifications to install timer switches to drop off standing loads, as installed on many classes, or the use of intelligent software to monitor sensitive systems and provide alarms or engine restarts , if say battery voltage fell too low, and provide peace-of-mind to remove the historical fear of being unable to restart after shut down. The author has experience of engine monitoring systems, previously fitted to locomotives and power cars, which have enabled the identification of standing electrical loads (lights left on) after poor locomotive disposal, resulting in a call to turn the lights off. Many modern distributed power DMUs incorporate traction redundancy. Procurement specifications often contain the requirement that the nominated timetable requirements can be achieved with one or more engines out of service. This leaves the potential to reduce power consumption by the selectively shutting down of some engines whilst the train is in traffic. Clearly this becomes a complex issue, although with up to 75% of the time travelling between destinations spent on no or low load this provides a significant opportunity to reduce idling. This is only possible where the train or set contains multiple traction power supplies, although most modern multiple units are now fitted with a traction engine per car as standard. The control of this selective shut-down feature is very important whereby engines would need to be shut down and re-started based upon train utilisation, i.e. long periods of coasting, down hill travel, standing at signals or in stations. Options to tackle this area are: o Control the shut-down and re-starting of selected engines through the use of intelligent software. This software would be programmed to identify periods of low demand and manage the supply of power according to the demand by starting and shutting down engines. The demand may be recognised by the software through train speed and driver power demand, or via route data already fed into the software. Important considerations are battery life and to ensure that the engines
Page No. 85 of 121
that are shut down are rotated to ensure an even and controlled progression through the maintenance cycle for all engines. Comprehensive driver training/re-training could be considered, providing him/her with the facility to manually control the shutting down of traction units. This option is, however, fraught with difficulties in the attitude and skill of individual drivers and technique. Driver technique is also important in that a poor driving method would negate most benefits gained in this area. For example a go-no go digital driving technique would be likely to overcome any software limits, demanding full power when not necessary. Intelligent software is already in service abroad that advises the driver on the optimum speed profile to reduce energy consumption while maintaining his/her schedule, for efficient usage of fuel, and maintaining the timetable. These are often on-board advice systems running on a PC inside the lead-locomotive driving cab. The system advises where and when to throttle and brake for a particular route, taking advantage of the known terrain and local characteristics of the route, as well as the mass of the train to give the optimal train handling. One such example is the FreightMiser system, created by a collaborative Rail CRC research team at University of South Australia and TMG International. Quoting from their web-site 53, it is reported to provide long-haul train drivers with an in-cab advice system to assist them stay on time and minimise fuel consumption. Testing on industry trains showcased fuel savings of between five and 20 per cent, without increases in journey times.
It is not possible to accurately quantify the potential benefit in each area without undertaking a much more detailed analysis for different rolling stock and operators as each case will be substantially different. Layover times, operating practices, duty cycles and rolling stock efficiencies are very different from one application to another. However, the potential benefits are significant. 17.6 OVERVIEW OF FUTURE TRENDS Based upon the discussions within the report so far, this section reviews all of this data and summarises what the direction of future diesel traction use may be, and in particular how its sustainability will improve. As an obvious statement, the further ahead that is considered, then the more difficult and inaccurate any predictions become. An attempt has been made to consider the period up to the year 2030, and a summary of the major features is given below. Firstly, over this period there are unlikely to be any significant problems in supplying diesel fuel of a suitable quality and quantity for continued use of diesel traction on UK railways. This statement is concerned with fossil fuel availability, and does not take into account political events that may affect such supply. The base fuel price may rise as a result of having to source and refine lower quality stocks from the Middle East and SE Asia, notwithstanding general market fluctuations. The fuel specification may change (for example, the current discussions concerning ULSD/SFD or ULSGO), but over time the situation would stabilise based upon the agreed overall market requirements. Biodiesel will become increasingly important, and it is expected that there will be use of this fuel by an increasing number of operators with increasing levels of THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 86 of 121
biodiesel in the bio-gas oil (or SFD) fuel mix. Additional legislative requirements on fuel sustainability will evolve, perhaps leading to more widespread use of blend ratios of up to 50% within, say 8-10 years. Assuming that the current review does not significantly amend the NRMM Stage IIIB requirements, further emissions legislation will appear. However, for new rolling stock, these will have to keep pace with available technological developments for engines and treatment equipment, on which basis further EU requirements would not be expected to be mandated before 2015 at the earliest. Legislation may continue not to be retrospective due to the major cost implications of such a move, but it would be reasonable to expect financial incentives to become available from the Government/EU to encourage modifications to existing vehicles. For the existing traction fleet, opportunities exist to re-engine or replace a number of vehicle classes, in order to achieve more fuel efficient and environment friendly equipment. Selection of which vehicles are suitable will depend upon the usual factors of capital equipment cost, remaining life and other cost-benefit issues, with an additional factor being timescales with respect to emissions legislation. DMUs will probably see the major activity here, but some older locomotives (principally freight) will eventually require decisions on how long to continue operating them and what to replace them with. Diesel-electric hybrids show great promise for the right markets, initially shunters and track/infrastructure equipment, but ultimately DMUs (or diesel-electric hybrid multiple units). With the worldwide rail experience of hybrids increasing, this is seen as a potentially accelerating area of investment and application, and the UK will inevitably react similarly over, say the next ten years. It is unlikely (but not impossible) that hybrids will make a significant impact on high-speed passenger operation in the foreseeable future. Fuel cell power continues to show promise, and power/size/weight/cost developments will clearly continue. However, trialling of fuel cell rail vehicles in the UK is not expected within, say the next ten years. Against the background of these major developments, more immediate operational measures to reduce fuel usage and improve energy efficiency are already of significant importance to operators and others. There are a number of ways in which this will be enacted over the next few years, some requiring a level of investment input, but others simply requiring better organisation and management. Better and more efficient operation will continue to be a requirement almost indefinitely. Having reviewed all of the above, it was considered useful to construct an overview of these potential developments over a suitable future timescale. This plan is presented as appendix 6. This does not attempt to take into account every possibility for modifications or new technology introduction that have been discussed within this report, but highlights the developments that would have the most impact on the overall fleet. The practicality and further details of some of these options are discussed more fully in sections 18 and 19, which consider appropriate areas for action.
Page No. 87 of 121
It is stressed that all of the data represents one particular assessment of how the UK diesel fleet will evolve, and should not be taken as being an accurate prediction. Considering each of the categories in turn: Vehicle withdrawal dates DMU/locomotives For all of the major vehicle classes, the plan shows a period over which the vehicles are expected to be life-expired. The dates are based upon the estimated remaining lives in appendices 1 and 2, with some tolerance applied where any particular class has a range of different life expiry dates as a result of a longer period of introduction of the various sub-classes. A long life is still predicted for the Class 43, given the current level of investment in a re-engining programme. For the older locomotives, particularly those over 40 years of age, these fleets will continue to diminish over a period of time, with the dates here representing the final withdrawals of the class. Emissions standards NRMM Stage IIIA and IIIB introduction dates are given, together with the next phase of European heavy-duty truck legislation, Euro V. Potential new rolling stock Generally, this analysis assumes a constant size of the diesel fleet. Based upon the oldest current rolling stock, estimated dates at which new vehicles will be required are given. For DMUs, this is the Class 14x, 150-6, 158-9 and 165-6 fleets; for locomotives, only the Class 43 replacement (HST2) is given. It is assumed that no freight locomotives to a brand new design will be required, and that any new locomotives will continue to be the Class 66 or 67 design, at least until the NRMM Stage IIIB emissions limits come into force in 2012. Beyond this, freight replacements are unclear, although suitable locomotives may be available from mainland Europe (e.g. Vossloh). If the suggested dates are accurate, or reasonably so, then all new rolling stock identified here will have to comply with the NRMM Stage IIIB emissions requirements, since no replacements are identified before 2015. As identified in previous sections of this report, IIIB will generally require the engine installation to be considered as a complete system including after-treatment, rather than relying solely on a complaint engine. Potential re-engining Business plans or new cost-benefit analyses in the future may determine additional candidate vehicles for re-engining to those identified here. In addition to the current Class 43 re-engining programme, the Class 158 and Class 170 are the other options selected, on the basis that these vehicles will have sufficient remaining life to justify such a programme. This remains one view only, since it is known that previous industry discussions have considered Class 165/6 re-engining. Both DMU classes are of such an age that re-engining could be initiated prior to the introduction of the NRMM Stage IIIB regulations if so desired. This would avoid the need to provide after-treatment as part of the engine system after 2012, assuming that a stand alone IIIB-compliant engine is not available by then.
Page No. 88 of 121
Fuel specification As discussed earlier in this report, the introduction of sulphur-free diesel fuels will be necessary to enable the use of exhaust after-treatment technology. The date at which this will occur is currently unknown; an assumption has been made that SFD will be introduced across the rail network over a two-year period commencing in 2009 (the year at which SFD is mandated for road use). For the purposes of this plan, the reduced sulphur fuel is simply referred to as SFD; there is no distinction made as to whether this might actually be low sulphur gas oil. Unlike SFD, there is no guarantee that biodiesel will be introduced at all, and if so on what scale and timing. This plan assumes some initial trial evaluation, perhaps with one or two operators only, over an 18-month period commencing early-2007. Wider use is expected from early-2008 going into 2010, but not on a national basis. Beyond this, it is difficult to even suggest a likely strategy, and so any further introduction on whatever basis (and to whatever blend ratio) is placed over a five-year period between 2010 and 2015. Diesel-electric hybrids The first entry here refers to the recently-announced NMT hybrid trial, covering the initial period to late-2007, and suggesting a full conversion of this train during the following year. Beyond this project, other hybrid use on the UK network remains speculative. It is suggested that the first hybrid shunters might appear towards the end of 2007 (most likely replacing Class 08 shunters), with additional vehicles over the subsequent two-year period. Hybrid DMU trials and introduction are further away, perhaps 2009-2011 or later. Any such evaluation would of necessity take longer than a shunter or the NMT due to the passenger capability and more restricted space. Conceivably, wider DMU introduction could be part of any new stock referenced above. Fuel cells Since there is no evidence available to contradict it, the entries here have come directly from the timescale suggested in the AEA report 38. 17.7 FUEL CONSUMPTION TRENDS One requirement of this investigation was to investigate fuel consumption trends for the future, identifying the likely worst and best scenarios. This is shown in figure 17, which covers the period up to 2030. Variation in fuel consumed against a base 2006 level of 100% is used, with no comment on fuel costs. The reasoning behind the curves selected is discussed below. This very simplistic analysis assumes a constant fleet size of diesel rail traction. Specifically, any scrapping of existing rolling stock is balanced by the introduction of new vehicles. Irrespective of how consumption trends develop in the future, unless a radical shift on fuels is evident, SFD will be introduced within the next few years. Data from engine tests suggests that reductions in engine power and increases in fuel consumption can be expected, but this will depend upon the age and design of the engine. Assuming a consumption increase of up to 2%, plus an allowance for the additional fuel burnt as a direct result of the lower power, the THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 89 of 121
overall fuel consumption could increase by up to 3%, and this is shown as the first major change in consumption trends. The scheduling of this and other activities is based upon that evolved for the future trends analysis in section 17.6. The worst case for increasing fuel consumption is simply stated: SFD introduced in 2008-10 Fleet changeover to B100 biodiesel in 2011-12. Clearly, this is unlikely, however using neat biodiesel would result in increased fuel usage of up to 8%. Following this change, no other activity is defined, as other options would be expected to produce an overall fuel decrease. The most optimistic case takes the other extreme view. Implementation of idling reductions and energy-efficient driving techniques during 2007 effects an overall reduction of 2% fuel usage across the fleet (possibly a conservative estimate). Following the inevitable SFD introduction, a complete renewal of the diesel fleet with Stage IIIB-compliant engines could produce a reduction in fuel usage of up to 10%, even though some of the potential fuel savings from a new engine design would potentially be compromised by exhaust emission compliance measures, either on-engine or as separate equipment. Following this change, no other activity is defined on the main solid trend line. The dotted line shows the potential effect of alternative technologies on the fuel usage, specifically diesel-electric hybrids and fuel cells. The former is suggested to produce a 10% decrease over a five-year period, with the latter the same rate, but over a longer period of 20 years. Neither of the above extremes is going to be followed in the future. These trends have been chosen purely to represent the boundaries of the fuel envelope over the next 25 years. There remain a host of options and decisions to be made that will have an effect on the trends to a greater or lesser degree. This chart is intended to serve as a discussion point for further development. In an attempt to establish a more representative future fuel consumption trend, the following scenario is suggested: Introduction of measures to reduce idling (2% reduction). Introduction of SFD starting in 2008 (3% increase). This may or may not include any biodiesel content, between 2.75 and 5%, but at these levels, this will not affect the fuel consumption. Increase in biodiesel content to 15-20% across at least part of the fleet by 2012. Estimate increase in consumption as part of overall fleet fuel usage of 2%. Re-equipment of specific vehicles/classes with Stage IIIB compliant engines, either as re-engined or replacement vehicles, and most likely with exhaust after-treatment, as suggested in section 17.6. Estimate effect on consumption of -4%.
Page No. 90 of 121
POSSIBLE FUEL CONSUMPTION TRENDS

120 SFD intro over 2 yrs 110 +8% Fuel Consumption (2006 = 100%) 100 +3% -2% 90 Idling reductions over 1 yr 80 More hybrids over 5 yrs Fuel cell vehicles over 10 yrs 60 -20% -10% -10% Fleet renewal with IIIB engines over 3 yrs Worst case Best case 1 Best case 2 B100 biodiesel over 2 yrs
70
50
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Figure 17 Overview of Fuel Consumption Trends
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Year End
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
Page No. 91 of 121
2029
2030
17.8
QUICK AND EASY SOLUTIONS From all of the preceding discussion, there would appear to be no technical quick wins which could be applied relatively rapidly to the engine itself, or with new ancillary equipment, that would yield a financial/environmental return. However, there are some operational issues to consider that could be introduced without too much disruption. Reduced idling The opportunities here have been fully explored in section 17.5. It is clear that serious consideration could be given to optimising the idling/low load operation of virtually all diesel traction equipment, albeit with different analyses and solutions required for different classes and operators. This could range from simple staff instructions, for example only starting up an engine at the town end of a London terminal station five minutes before departure, to additional control equipment to permit individual DMU engines to be shut down, either when stationary or when in service. The wider implications for each individual vehicle/operator assessment (as discussed in section 17.5) would have to be satisfactorily resolved (and the effects of these should not be minimised), but it is felt that this area represents a useful area to study in more detail on a specific basis. Energy-efficient driving techniques This aspect was also referenced in section 17.5. As a general statement, when leaving a station, drivers will accelerate at full power until the maximum line speed is reached, then maintain this line speed until the latest possible point at which to brake for the next station stop (it is recognised that this is a generalisation, however it serves as a useful reference point from which to develop). This profile is not necessarily the most energy-efficient, and several alternative approaches could be considered: Slower acceleration towards the maximum line speed Additional coasting when at maximum line speed, with no load on the engine Running at a speed lower than the maximum line speed More gradual deceleration towards the next stop All of the above modifications to driving technique will have a negative impact on the train schedule. Changes would therefore become very route and operator-specific, and require a very detailed appraisal and calculation of the impact. Implementation could vary from simple driver briefing of what is required for a particular route, to more sophisticated devices that are either pre-programmed with the route in question, or even linked to a GPS system to determine the optimum profile in real time. This is an area that is receiving a great deal of attention with operators across Europe. In a Deutsche Bahn study, it was found that fuel savings could be between 5 and 10%. Fuel additives The background to fuel additives was discussed in section 11.6. Increasingly, there are apparently genuine beneficial results being obtained with fuel additives from reputable bodies, and encouraging results have been obtained
Page No. 92 of 121
from ATOC/RSSBs own tests. Evaluation of these products remains at an early stage, but this would seem to be an area worth pursuing further, given the relative ease with which it could be introduced and effective fuel and emissions savings generated. The price of one additive (Diesolift) has been previously advised as equivalent to 1.74 pence per litre of fuel treated. With a current fuel price of 34 pence per litre, a fuel saving of 5.1% would have to be demonstrated before cost savings would be accrued. This level was being indicated during the ATOC/RSSB test, but it is unfortunate that the test engine was experiencing a power loss at that time, for whatever reason. Further controlled testing of this, or other additives, would quantify any potential benefits. There are some difficulties here. Dependent upon the mechanism claimed for the additive, one requirement is often for a conditioning run on an engine of some duration before the full benefit is achieved, by virtue of the products cleansing effect on the combustion chamber. This can be done on a test bed, subject to funding agreement and risk of engine problems during the run. A 50hour run is arguably the maximum that could sensibly be considered. Once or if a products claims are justified by test bed evaluations, there is also the problem of accurate and repeatable dosing of the fuel with the additive in service. This could be achieved either by dosing the depot tank or facilitating a mechanism on the vehicle. Given sufficient thought and co-operation, this should all be achievable, although there is an additional cost in providing any suitable dosing equipment.
18
18.1
AREAS FOR POLICY ACTION

GENERAL The remit for this part of the study was to consider areas for both policy and investment action, on the basis of three categorisations. For reference, the definition of these categories as supplied by RSSB is included as appendix 7. It has been assumed that categorisation in this way references general industry actions, rather than specifically on any individual organisation. This section considers those areas that require decisions on matters of policy, rather than funding, covered in section 19. What is believed to be the important developments have been categorised into the most appropriate categories. Since this may not accord precisely with previous practice, the author invites feedback from RSSB in this area for further evolution and modification as necessary. The following comments effectively form the recommendations of this report.
18.2
CATEGORY 1 Introduction of fuel additives as discussed in preceding sections, fuel additives are perceived as an area where potentially realistic fuel savings could be made. The use of additives could also be introduced individually by any one operator without recourse to any other party. However, before that could be achieved, it will be necessary to undertake further testing of selected products
Page No. 93 of 121
to firmly and unequivocally establish the benefits to be gained. This is therefore registered as an investment category 1 requirement in section 19. Energy-efficient driving techniques as discussed in preceding sections. Although there needs to be detailed research into how best to optimise any amended driving profile over whichever route/s were selected, this is essentially an initiative that can be introduced by the operator without significant recourse to any other body. A rider to this is the situation that if such introduction had a detrimental effect on the timetable (which it almost certainly would to a greater or lesser degree), then external discussion would be required. 18.3 CATEGORY 2 Reduction of idling as discussed in preceding sections. The implementation of idling reductions would require initially a detailed appraisal by the individual operator to ascertain the optimum solution for his particular situation. These discussions will have to include those parties that would be directly affected, for example relevant depots, Network Rail. Once an agreement was reached on implementation, the operator could action the implementation individually. This policy action could also include a review of traction equipment for which it might be applicable to consider incorporation of an APU, where direct or sufficient idling reductions could not be achieved. Re-engining of rolling stock before NRMM Stage IIIB implementation given the age of certain DMU classes, the opportunity exists to consider some re-engining of these within the next few years, and before the Stage IIIB implementation date of 2012. As a direct policy, this situation should be reviewed with all parties (operators, leasing companies, engine/vehicle builders), with the objective of deciding in good time whether this would be an agreed action and if so, which classes of DMU would be most suitable (and of course how this might be funded). This is a simple statement covering a potentially difficult and timeconsuming process, but it is believed that this is a worthwhile policy to pursue. It is the authors view that limited new locomotive re-engining opportunities exist. However, it would be sensible to review this aspect in these discussions. It should not be considered that the above is a mechanism by which the railway industry is avoiding its environmental responsibilities, rather a practical business assessment of the most cost-effective way forward in this area. Review of new rolling stock requirement in a similar context to the re-engining review above, the likely requirement for new diesel traction equipment should be considered by a cross-industry group. This should not be limited to opportunities before Stage IIIB implementation. Identification of post-IIIB requirements, and specifically vehicle types and numbers, would create an awareness of the imminent challenges facing the industry in designing and procuring these vehicles.
Page No. 94 of 121
18.4
CATEGORY 3 Retrofit of exhaust after-treatment equipment as discussed in detail within this report, clear emissions benefits can be obtained by the retro-fitting of aftertreatment equipment to existing rolling stock. However, quite apart from the issues of size and weight, there is no financial incentive to do so. This is referenced in appendix 7 as a case study for category 3, and suggests that government funding might be appropriate. Policy should therefore be to promote this approach initially, prior to any review or decisions on funding. Whilst there is no doubt concerning the practical difficulties in achieving a retrofit, it is expected that there will be pressure to do so in future years, particularly given the gradually increasing fitment of DPFs around Europe. Biodiesel evaluation although there is not yet any clear specification of a biodiesel blend for widespread introduction, and hence no associated timescale, it is evident that biofuels is an area that will grow significantly over the next 5-10 years. It is therefore important that the industry is aware of the implications of likely developments, even more so than was necessary for SFD. The policy should be for the industry to consider implementing a project that will investigate the effects of differing biodiesel-gas oil and biodiesel-SFD blends on engine performance and reliability, initially by undertaking test bed evaluation, as was successfully achieved for the SFD project. Upon completion of that work, then an informed review will be possible to understand what the next technical and business steps might be. The test bed work should enable better identification of the optimum biodiesel blend to use for specific fleet trials, which should be the next stage of evaluation.
19
19.1
AREAS FOR INVESTMENT ACTION

GENERAL This section follows a similar approach to that of section 18, although the emphasis here is on issues that require decisions on investment. This review does not attempt to identify from which area or party this funding should be derived.
19.2
CATEGORY 1 Evaluation of fuel additives as noted in section 18.2, prior to any implementation of fuel additives by operators, further evaluation is required in order to definitively establish if there are genuine benefits to be obtained, and if so by using which product or products. Whilst suppliers of these products often claim that the benefits are only realised after a period in service, it is unrealistic to expect any operator or other industry body to consider their use without first having had an assessment carried out under controlled conditions. Only in that way can improvements in fuel consumption and emissions be quantified. Testing of these products will require some investment. Previously, opportunities have been available to evaluate certain products on engines that had been installed on the test bed for the SFD project (discussed in section 11.6), and such an opportunity may be available again in the future. Alternatively, there may be a requirement for an engine to be installed specifically for this work. Under these circumstances, it is not known how easy it would be to obtain a test engine (engine type not identified at this stage), but it is assumed that the
Page No. 95 of 121
precedent set for the SFD project of shopping an engine due for overhaul early will be able to be followed, and that there will be no specific cost in so doing. Assuming an engine available on a test bed, and further assuming no more than a 50-hour conditioning run (as discussed in section 11.6), then overall costs for the setting up, testing and reporting of one additive evaluation would be in the order of 16-18,000. These costs could be reduced by appropriate contributions from the supplier of the additive under test. The only constraints on timescales are those of obtaining an engine and ensuring the availability of a test bed. 19.3 CATEGORY 2 Auxiliary power units the opportunities for idling reductions discussed in section 17.5 referenced the use of APUs. As noted, these have been successfully applied on suitable rolling stock, both locomotives and DMUs. If a policy review (section 18.2) established opportunities for their installation and effective use, then this should be considered as an investment action. Re-engining of rolling stock following on from the policy review of re-engining DMUs outlined in section 18.2, dependent upon the outcome of this review, there may be a decision to proceed with re-engining a certain number of vehicles before 2012. This will require investment in design work, engine procurement, vehicle conversion/installation work and project management costs. The precedents of previous re-engining show that these costs lie within the rail industry i.e. are not borne by OEMs or vehicle manufacturers. Costs for this work are difficult to predict with any degree of certainty, since it will depend upon such factors as engine power output, ease or difficulty of reengining, what level of ancillary equipment is also renewed (specifically, will a complete new power pack be required). However, a first approximation would be up to 30-35k for the engine (dependent upon size/power), plus design costs of up to 10k (able to be amortised over the number of vehicles being reengined). With a recent example of re-engining of a single Class 170 vehicle with the MTU 6H1800 engine, advice should be sought from those parties associated with the funding of that exercise. No comment is made here concerning investment for new rolling stock, since this is assumed to be the continuation of the normal procurement process by which such stock is obtained, with the responsibility for the design being with the vehicle manufacturer (including the provision of Stage IIIB engine if necessary, together with all necessary treatment equipment). The review carried out in section 18.2 will be likely to identify any significant issues that might impact in this area. Hybrid development the first hybrid development on UK railways will be the NMT conversion (section 14.2), which is being funded largely by the manufacturing industry (although Network Rail are of course involved). Since shunting seems to be an ideal application for a hybrid installation, as evidenced by the Railpower Green Goat, there is an argument for supporting such a development and encouraging the introduction of at least one example into the UK. The first priorities would be identification of the most
Page No. 96 of 121
suitable donor vehicle and appropriate industry partners. An alternative would be to consider the purchase of a Green Goat locomotive from Railpower. These are ambitious and costly plans, and may simply not be affordable under any realistic circumstances. However, hybrid development is seen as having much potential for rail application, and consideration should certainly be given to advancing its support in some practical way. 19.4 CATEGORY 3 Biodiesel testing following on from the policy review of section 18.3, investment would then be necessary for biodiesel test work. The success of the SFD project provides a framework for similar work to evaluate biodiesel. Costs for direct engine testing can be considered to be comparable to those for the SFD project, in the order of 30k per engine. However, this will depend upon the cost of the fuel as outlined in section 10.4, there may be duty issues, dependent upon how the fuel is purchased pre-mixed or mixed on site. Additional project costs would need to cover the setting-up, managing and reporting of such tests, estimated at around 6-8K per engine. Fuel cell prototyping at this still comparatively early stage in fuel cell development for transport applications, there is no immediate investment action to consider. However, fuel cell rail vehicles are now beginning to appear and the industry may want to take a lead in this technology at the appropriate time. The suggested approach is therefore to follow the approach in the recent RSSB report, which calls for a feasibility study to be considered not before 2010. However, developments in the field should be monitored closely prior to that date.
20
20.1
CONCLUSIONS
The modelling work carried out by UIC into air quality around a main terminal station and a shunting yard determined that engine idling was a principal factor in generating significant NO2 and PM10 concentrations, and that emissions measurements should be carried out at terminal stations. This is considered to be an appropriate approach to enable air quality mapping of the locations to be determined. The current EU, UIC, Euro and US EPA exhaust emissions standards have been reviewed and compared where practicable. For the current UK traction fleet, some engines are compliant with UIC II, but none with NRMM Stage IIIA limits. The UK Government has enacted the EU Non Road Mobile Machinery Directive into UK legislation. Its Climate Change Programme 2006 and other statements reflect the Governments intention to encourage the rail industry to pursue operational and technical measures to reduce emissions. Approaches were made to engine manufacturers having examples of their equipment on UK rail vehicles to elicit statements from them concerning the level of compliance of these engines, and any intended development work to
20.2
20.3
20.4
Page No. 97 of 121
achieve compliance with future legislation. Only a minimal response was obtained from the industry. 20.5 Principal available engine technologies for NOx reduction are retarded injection timing, charge air cooling and exhaust gas recirculation. Caterpillar has an integrated control system for combustion, which optimises both the air management and fuel injection parameters. Principal available engine technologies for PM reduction are increased injection pressures (common rail), increased compression ratio, oil consumption control and variable valve timing. Single-bank idling for vee-engines is also an option. Re-engining with a more modern engine design can also contribute to significant emissions reductions, particularly for PM emissions. This has been demonstrated by previous locomotive and DMU re-engining projects. Future developments for emissions reductions include Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition, oxygen enrichment, low temperature combustion and plasma-assisted combustion. These technologies are all at an early stage. Under the UK Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation, increasing percentages of fuels for the transport sector are required to be from renewable sources, up to 5% by 2010. This requirement may well expedite the inclusion of 5% biodiesel into standard diesel fuels which is already permissible by law without identification.
20.6
20.7
20.8
20.9
20.10 Conventional crude oil reserves are not expected to run out for at least another 30 years, although costs may increase as a result of the need to source oil from other parts of the world when North Sea oil is no longer available. The change from gas oil to SFD fuel is expected to result in an increase in manufacturing costs of between 2 and 2.5 pence per litre. 20.11 At this stage, it is not clear whether the rail industry will move to ULSD/SFD or ULSGO, as the changeover to reduced sulphur fuels occurs, nor is any precise timescale known. This area is being actively pursued by the rail industry Fuel Strategy Workshop. 20.12 Biodiesel has the advantage of minimal (or near zero) CO2 emissions, when considered on a well-to-wheels basis, plus reduced emissions (except NOx) from its direct use. It is likely that this will be used increasingly in the future, but current issues concern engine reliability with increasing percentages of biodiesel in a biodiesel-gas oil (or SFD) blend. There is also a duty issue, whereby inclusion of biodiesel in this blend inhibits detection of the necessary marker dye for rebated fuel, although this has been alleviated at least temporarily by Government action for the purpose of conducting rail service trials. 20.13 Alternative fuels such as water-diesel emulsion and biogas are considered unlikely to have a large-scale future for rail traction. There are a range of fuel additives on the market, and recent ATOC/RSSB-sponsored tests did indicate that there may be realistic beneficial effects on engine performance and THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 98 of 121
emissions. It is therefore considered that there is value in evaluating one or more of these products. 20.14 Engine testing as part of the ATOC/RSSB-sponsored low sulphur fuel project showed that some engines exhibited both power reductions and fuel consumption increases as a result of the lower energy content of the fuel. Allowing for potentially longer time on a reduced load, it is suggested that an overall fuel consumption increase across the fleet of 3% may result from the introduction of sulphur-free diesel. Generally, NOx reductions of up to 10% and PM reductions of 10% or more (effects vary between engine types) were noted from the test results. 20.15 Fleet trials with SFD have now been concluded. No relevant or significant adverse effects on reliability have been noted from the use of the fuel. Overall fuel consumption effects have been difficult to quantify precisely due to gaps and discrepancies in the returned data, but no significant detrimental effects in service have been identified. 20.16 A variety of exhaust after-treatment equipment is available, with the principle devices being Diesel Oxidation Catalysts (DOC) (for CO/HC/PM), Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF) (for PM) and Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) (for NOx). From ATOC/RSSB-sponsored tests, a combined DOC/DPF, the continuously regenerating trap (CRT) has shown reductions of between 83 and 98.5% in HC, CO and PM. Rail experience with after-treatment equipment to date within Europe has been predominantly with DPF/CRTs. 20.17 The NRMM Stage IIIB limits will require the use of exhaust after-treatment to achieve compliance. Even for new rolling stock, there are significant issues of weight, space and cost to consider in their installation. Although there are no current mandatory requirements for retro-fitting such equipment, these issues become even more critical under these circumstances. Future developments will eventually make after-treatment equipment lighter, smaller and more efficient. 20.18 Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are not regulated by any of the current emissions standards, despite increasing international pressure to reduce its contribution to global warming. Increased CO2 generation is noted as a byproduct of some after-treatment processes. 20.19 Experience with diesel-electric hybrids in rail traction service is growing, with shunting and certain infrastructure vehicles having particularly suitable duty cycles. With trials also having been carried out with hybrid DMUs, opportunities should be taken to study hybrid applications for the UK rail industry. 20.20 A review of the likely investment into the railways has not identified any major projects within the next few years, notwithstanding existing and future reengining programmes. It is noted that DfTs Rail group has produced a strategy document, parts of whose remit is to consider developing technologies for potential adoption by UK railways. 20.21 Fuel cell technology may have a role to play in the future, but current technology is such that power capacity, weight and size are not yet at a level THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE Page No. 99 of 121
suitable for rail installation. Two current rail projects will advance experience over the next 2-5 years, but a separate RSSB study has concluded that hydrogen fuel technology is unlikely to become a mainstream part of the transport energy mix before 2020. However, industry development should be monitored and consideration given to a feasibility study and prototype vehicle at the appropriate time. 20.22 Supercapacitors show promise for the future, either as part of a diesel hybrid system or a completely electric power system, potentially delivering 35-45% fuel savings when replacing diesel operation. 20.23 A survey of the current UK diesel traction fleet has by size, power output, age, quantity in service and estimated life has established a useful database on the fleet. An age profile for the locomotive fleet shows a wide scatter, but with nearly 25% of the fleet over 40 years old. The profile for the DMU fleet is better distributed, with no vehicles over 22 years of age. An efficiency profile of both DMU and locomotive fleets, by virtue of specific fuel consumption, shows that there is some scope for better fuel efficiency with more modern rolling stock. 20.24 The diesel traction fleet has been grouped into a series of eight utilisation categories, each of which defines a typical no load/full load duty cycle and estimated hours/miles. Whilst inevitably relatively simplistic, this provides an insight into under-utilised vehicles and hence where vehicles could be replaced with more suitable and cost-efficient machines. This survey is intended to serve as a basis for further discussion. 20.25 Options for economically retro-fitting technology to existing engines and vehicles is limited, save for a few potential considerations for single-bank idling of locomotives equipped with vee or twin-bank engines. Diesel particulate filters could be considered, but there is no current financial incentive to do so. 20.26 Re-engining of any diesel-equipped rail vehicle offers a wide range of benefits, notwithstanding the relatively high capital cost. In particular, significant fuel savings should result (and hence emissions reductions) through the use of a more efficient engine, improved engine control, reduced idling and other relevant control features. 20.27 Historically, rail traction engines spend significant parts of their operational life idling, which wastes fuel, creates emissions and accelerates engine wear. There are opportunities to reduce the amount of idling through various measures, such as enforced shutdowns, shore supplies, auxiliary power units and selective control of individual engines (on a DMU). At least some of these measures could be implemented with little investment or time delay, and could result in worthwhile fuel/emissions savings. 20.28 Experience in other railway operators is showing that useful fuel savings can be obtained by energy-efficient driving techniques. This could be implemented either by straightforward driver training or by sophisticated real time location and advice systems (and options in between). Provided that consequent journey delays were understood, this is another area where improvements could be gained without disproportionate effort.
Page No. 100 of 121
20.29 Based on all of the discussion within this document, coupled with the authors own judgement, an attempt has been made to predict how diesel-related issues will manifest themselves over a period up to 2030. Extremes of fuel consumption trends have also been derived simplistically. Neither of these should be interpreted literally, but used as a basis for further discussion. 20.30 Areas suggested for policy action are as follows: Category 1 - Fuel additives. Commitment to additional evaluation required to quantify benefits before committing to in-service use. Energy-efficient driving techniques. More detailed research into options available and how these might best be introduced. Category 2 - Reduction of idling. Discussions need to be held with other parties to consider mechanisms of implementation. Re-engining of rolling stock before NRMM Stage IIIB. Options are available for re-engining suitable vehicle classes within this timescale, and this should be reviewed with all relevant parties. Review of new rolling stock requirement. As for re-engining above. Category 3 - Retrofit of exhaust after-treatment equipment. Given no obvious financial incentive or return, a policy review would establish whether this is going to be pursued, over whatever timescale. Biodiesel evaluation. Consideration of whether to implement a project to evaluate the implications of biodiesel introduction, given its current optional introduction (beyond 5%) with no guaranteed financial return. 20.31 Areas suggested for investment action: Category 1 - Evaluation of fuel additives. With the necessary agreement on policy, commit to undertaking a formal evaluation of selected product/s. Category 2 - Auxiliary power units. The review and discussion on idling reduction may highlight areas where APU use is applicable. Re-engining of rolling stock. The policy review conducted may need to commit investment for selected donor vehicles for reengining, costs historically committed by the railway industry. Hybrid development. Consideration to a feasibility study or further commitment at an appropriate time to facilitate suitable dieselelectric hybrid development. Category 3 - Biodiesel testing. If decided following the policy review, initiate a biodiesel evaluation, using dedicated test engines initially, comparable to the approach taken for the SFD project. Fuel cell prototyping. Feasibility study and possible prototype vehicle, but not before 2010.
This study has covered a complex and wide-ranging subject. There are many areas of discussion where opinions may differ or new facts emerge that affect previous comments. In addition, recipients may require particular areas examined in more detail. The author therefore requests feedback on any aspect of this work, so that it is tailored to suit expectations and can be considered as being as representative as it is possible to be.
Page No. 101 of 121
21
1. 2. 3.
REFERENCES
Reducing Rail Diesel Exhaust Emission, Presentation and Discussion of the International Rail Diesel Study, UIC, March 2006. http://www.uic.asso.fr/environnement/Rail-Diesel-Study-Workshop.html Council Directive 96/62/EC of 27th September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and management. http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/consleg/1996/L/01996L0062-20031120-en.pdf Council Directive 99/30/EC of 22nd April 1999 relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air. http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31999L0030:EN:HTML Directive 2004/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004, amending Directive 97/68/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to measures against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in nonroad mobile machinery. http://europa.eu.int/eurlex/pri/en/oj/dat/2004/l_225/l_22520040625en00030107.pdf#search=%222004% 2F26%2Fec%22 Approval procedures for diesel engines of motive power units, UIC leaflet 6231, 4th edition, August 2006. Approval tests for diesel engines of motive power units, UIC leaflet 623-2, 4th edition, August 2006. Series test and acceptance conditions for diesel engines of motive power units, UIC leaflet 623-3, 3rd edition, December 2003. Exhaust emission tests for diesel traction engines, UIC leaflet 624, 3rd edition, February 2006. Statutory Instrument 2006 No. 29, Environmental Protection, The Non-Road Mobile Machinery (Emission of Gaseous and Particulate Pollutants) (Amendment) Regulations 2006. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/uksi_20060029_en.pdf Regulatory Impact Assessment, New Emissions Standards for Non-road Mobile Machinery (EU Directive 2004/26/EC), 2005. http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/page/dft_roads_ 612090.hcsp Clean Air Act 1993 (c.11). http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1993/Ukpga_19930011_en_1.htm Climate Change, the UK Programme 2006, HM Government, March 2006. http://www.defra.gov.uk/ENVIRONMENT/climatechange/uk/ukccp/pdf/ukcc p06-all.pdf Rail contribution to the energy review, Mark Gaynor, Rail Strategy, Department for Transport, April 2006. http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_foi/documents/page/dft_foi_61202 7.pdf Reducing Carbon Emissions from Transport, Ninth Report of Session 2005-06, House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee, 19th July 2006. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmenvaud/9 81/981-i.pdf "Progress in Diesel Engine Emissions Control", M. K. Khair. ASME Paper 92-ICE-14, January 1992.
4.
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10.
11. 12. 13.
14.
15.
Page No. 102 of 121
16.
17. 18. 19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32.
US Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. http://www.ntrc.gov/pdfs/transportation2002/Low-TemperatureEmissionDieseCombustion.pdf#search=%22%22low%20temperature%20combu stion%22%22 Ricardo Press Release, 17th August 2006. http://www.ricardo.com/media/pressreleases/pressrelease.aspx?page=51 Investigation into the Use of Sulphur-Free Diesel Fuel on UK Railways Final Project Report, Interfleet Technology Report ITLR-T18278-001, 24th May 2006. Directive 2003/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 May 2003 on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels for transport. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/res/legislation/doc/biofuels/en_final.pdf Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC. http://europa.eu/eurlex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_275/l_27520031025en00320046.pdf Directive 2004/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 October 2004 amending Directive 2003/87/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, in respect of the Kyoto Protocols project mechanisms. http://europa.eu.int/eurlex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_275/l_27520031025en00320046.pdf Meeting our energy needs: The Future of UK Oil Refining, Malcolm Watson and Nick Vandervell, UKPIA, 23rd May 2006. http://www.ukpia.com/Portals/0/Repository/Documents/FINISHED%20VERSION .pdf HM Revenue and Customs website, Current Hydrocarbon Oil duty rates. http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp. portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageExcise_RatesCodesTools&propertyType =document&id=HMCE_PROD1_024961 HM Revenue and Customs Reference Notice 179E, October 2005. http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp. portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageExcise_ShowContent&id=HMCE_CL_000 205&propertyType=document An Examination of Biodiesel Fuel and the Implications of its Potential Use on UK Railways, Interfleet Technology Report ITLR-T18618-001, 19th September 2006. Lubrizol website. http://www.lubrizol.com/purinox/purinoxcd/ Svensk Biogas AB Press Release. http://www.svenskbiogas.se/sb/docs/english/Biogastrain_produktblad_2005.p df Testing of Fitch Fuel Catalyst on Cummins NTA855R3 Diesel Engine, Interfleet Technology Report ITLR-T18076-001, 20th April 2006. Testing of Diesolift Fuel Additive on Cummins NTA855R3 Diesel Engine, Interfleet Technology Report ITLR-T18176-001, 3rd July 2006. Diesolift Fuel Additive Testing on Cummins NTA855R3 Engine, Interfleet Technology Report ITLR-T19162-001, 2nd May 2007. Ultra-Low Sulphur Diesel Fuel for UK Railways, Interfleet Technology Report ITLR-T15260-001, 9th September 2004. Engine Testing using Sulphur-Free Diesel Fuel, Interfleet Technology Report ITLR-T15260-003, 25th April 2006. Page No. 103 of 121
33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42.
43.
44.
45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53.
Testing of Eminox Continuously Regenerating Trap (CRT), Interfleet Technology Report ITLR-T17579-001, 27th March 2006. Eminox Case Study on CRT Systems fitted to Swedish Railways. http://www.eminox.com/news/rail-exhaust-systems.shtml Ricardo Press Release, 2nd June 2006. http://www.ricardo.com/media/pressreleases/pressrelease.aspx?page=40 Hybrid buses in London, Transport for London website. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/buses/environmental/hybrid.asp Railpower website, How It Works. http://www.railpower.com/products_gg_howitworks.html GE Transportation website, Hybrid Locomotive. https://www.getransportation.com/general/locomotives/hybrid/hybrid_defau lt.asp Newer, Cleaner, Cheaper Energy for Todays Rail System, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Railway Division Seminar, 9th March 2006. Hitachi Europe Ltd. Press release, 12th October 2006. International Railway Journal, November 2006, p. 10. The Rail Group, Evidence and Research Strategy 2006, prepared by Technical and Professional Directorate. http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_railways/documents/page/dft_rail ways_612332.pdf#search=%22orr%20market%20study%20rosco%20investment %22 Feasibility Study into the use of Hydrogen Fuel Final Report, Rail Safety and Standards Board Project T531, 2005. http://www.rssb.co.uk/pdf/reports/research/t531%20feasibility%20study%20int o%20the%20use%20of%20hydrogen%20fuel%20final%20report.pdf Feasibility Study into the use of Hydrogen Fuel Development Report, Rail Safety and Standards Board Project T531, 2005. http://www.rssb.co.uk/pdf/reports/research/t531%20feasibility%20study%20int o%20the%20use%20of%20hydrogen%20fuel%20development%20report.pdf Fuel Cell Underground Locomotive, Fuel Cell Today article, October 2002. http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/FuelCellToday/FCTFiles/FCTArticleFiles/Article_5 24_Locomotive1002.pdf Fuel Cell Propulsion Institute Press Release, 1st August 2003. http://www.fuelcellpropulsion.org/army_loco_1aug2003.htm Development of the World's First Fuel Cell Hybrid Railcar, East Japan Railway Company press release, 11th April 2006. http://www.jreast.co.jp/e/press/20060401/index.html Running Test of a Fuelcell Railway Vehicle, PR Newswire, 18th October 2006. http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/release?id=181857 The Hydrogen Train, Feasibility Study Main Report, July 2005 August 2006. http://www.hydrogentrain.dk/hydrogentrain/publicationsreports/reportspaper s/Main_Report_FINAL_WEB.pdf UltraCaps win out in energy storage, Railway Gazette International, July 2006. Hybrid vehicle in railway applications: supercapacitive energy storage for diesel-electric locomotive, Phillippe Barrade, Blaize Destraz, Alfred Rufer, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Low-cost Chinese trains for Europe, David Shipley, CSRE. Modern Railways article, September 2006. Rail CRC website, http://www.railcrc.cqu.edu.au/innovation/technologies/freightmiser.html Page No. 104 of 121
22
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Diesel Multiple Unit Fleet Details Appendix 2 Diesel-engined Locomotive Fleet Details Appendix 3 Diesel Civil Engineers Vehicle Details Appendix 4 Diesel Departmental Vehicle Details Appendix 5 Vehicle Utilisation and Duty Cycle Details Appendix 6 Overview of Future Trends Appendix 7 Policy/Investment Categories
Page No. 105 of 121
Appendix 1 Diesel Multiple Unit Fleet Details Class Vehicle Description Vehicle Quantity age in in years service In 2006 Capacit y (litres) 11 litre Engine Details Estimated Remainin g Life Manufacturer and type Leyland 680/1595 Cummins LTA10R and one off Perkins 2006-TWH Cummins LTA10R Cummins LTA10R (YEARS) Utilisation Category (see appendix 5)
Power(kW)
121
142
143 144 150/0 150/1 150/2 153 155 156 Class
First generation DMBS (Driving Motor Brake Standard), used on Chiltern Railways BREL/Leyland built Pacer, DMS (Driving motor Standard) and DMSL (Driving motor Standard Lavatory) Alexander/Barclay built Pacer, DMS and DMSL Alexander/BREL built Pacer, DMS, DMSL and MS (Motor Standard) BREL built Prototype Sprinter, DMS, DMSL and MS BREL built Sprinter, DMS and DMSL BREL built Sprinter, DMS and DMSL Leyland built Super Sprinter, DMSL. Single car units Leyland built Super Sprinter, DMSL, DMS. Metro-Cammell built Super Sprinter Vehicle Description
46
112 (150hp) 172 (230hp) 172 (230hp) 172 (230hp) 213 (285hp) 213 (285hp) 213 (285hp) 213 (285hp) 213 (285hp) 213(285hp)
6 to 8
19 to 21
188
10 litre
10
20 to 21 18 to 20 20 to 21 20 to 21 19 to 20 18 to 19 18 17 to 19 Vehicle
50 56 6 116 150 70 14 228 Quantity
10 litre 10 litre 14 litre 14 litre 14 litre 14 litre 14 litre 14 litre
10 10 10 10 10 10 12 13 + Estimated
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Utilisation
Cummins NT855R4 Cummins NT855R5 Cummins NT855R5 Cummins NT855R5 Cummins NT855R5 Cummins NT855R5 Engine Details
Page No. 106 of 121
age in years in 2006
in service
Remainin g Life Capacity Power (litres) (kW) 14 litre 260 (350hp) 14 litre 298 (400hp) 13 litre 260 (350hp) 14 litre 298 * (400hp) 14 litre 298 * (400hp) 13 litre 260 (350hp) 13 litre 260 (350hp) 13 litre 260 (350hp) 12 litre 315 (422hp) 12 litre 315 (422hp) 12 litre 315 (422hp) Manufacturer and type Cummins NTA855R1 Cummins NTA855R3 Perkins 2006-TWH Cummins* NTA855R3 Cummins* NTA855R3 Perkins 2006-TWH Perkins 2006-TWH Perkins 2006-TWH MTU 6R183TD13H MTU 6R183TD13H MTU 6R183TD13H
Category (see appendix 5)
158/0 158/0 158/0 158/9 159 165/0 165/1 166 168/0 168/1 168/2
BREL built DMSL, DMCL (Driving motor Composite Lavatory) and MSL. BREL built DMSL, DMCL (Driving motor Composite Lavatory) and MSL. BREL built DMSL, DMCL (Driving motor Composite Lavatory) and MSL. BREL built DMSL and DMS (Driving motor Composite Lavatory) and MSL. BREL built DMSL, MSL and DMSL. BREL built Network Turbo DMSL, DMS and MS (motor Standard) BREL built Network Turbo DMCL, DMS and MS ABB built Network Express Turbo DMCL and MS Adtranz/Bombardier built Clubman DMSL, MSL and MS. Adtranz/Bombardier built Clubman DMSL, MSL and MS. Adtranz/Bombardier built Clubman DMSL, MSL and MS.
14 to 17 4 to 17 14 14 to 16 13 to 14 14 to 15 14 13 to 14 8 to 9 4 to 6 2 to 3
245 20 94 20 66 89 88 63 19 24 18
15 + 15 + 15 + 15 + 16 + 16 + 16 + 16 + 20 + 25 + 25 +
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Class
Vehicle Description
Vehicle Quantity age in in years in service 2006
Engine Details
Estimated Remainin g Life
Utilisation Category (see appendix
Page No. 107 of 121
5) Capacit y (litres) 12 litre Power (kW) 315 (422hp) 315 (422hp) Manufacturer and type MTU 6R183TD13H 25 + 4
170/1
170/2
170/3 170/4 170/5 170/6 171/7 171/8 175/0 175/1 180 185 Class
Adtranz/Bombardier built Turbostar DMCL and MCRMB (Motor Composite Miniature Buffet). Adtranz/Bombardier built Turbostar DMCL and MSLRB (Motor Standard Lavatory Buffet). Adtranz/Bombardier built Turbostar DMCL, MSLRB, MC and DMSL. Adtranz/Bombardier built Turbostar DMCL, DMSL and MS. Adtranz/Bombardier built Turbostar, DMSL Adtranz/Bombardier built Turbostar, DMSL and MS Bombardier built Turbostar, DMCL and DMSL Bombardier built Turbostar, DMCL and MS Alstom built Coradia 1000, DMSL Alstom built Coradia 1000, DMSL and MSL. Alstom built Adelante, DMSL, MFL (Motor First Lavatory), MSL, MSLRB and DMSL. Siemens built Desiro UK, DMCL, MSL and DMS Vehicle Description
5 to 8
44
4 to 7
32
12 litre
MTU 6R183TD13H
25 +
2 to 6 5 to 7 6 to 7 6 1 to 3 1 to 3 6 to 7 5 to 7 5 to 6 2 to 3
38 65 46 30 18 24 22 48 56 73
Vehicle Quantity age in in years in service 2006
315 422hp) 12 litre 315 (422hp) 12 litre 315 (422hp) 12 litre 315 (422hp) 12 litre 315 (422hp) 12 litre 315 (422hp) 14 litre 336 (450hp) 14 litre 336 (450hp) 19 litre 559 (750hp) 19 litre 559 (750hp) Engine Details
12 litre
MTU 6R183TD13H MTU 6R183TD13H MTU 6R183TD13H MTU 6R183TD13H MTU 6R183TD13H MTU 6R183TD13H Cummins N14 Cummins N14 Cummins QSK19 Cummins QSK19
28 + 25 + 25 + 25 + 30 30 25 + 25 + 25 + 28 Estimated Remainin g Life
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Utilisation Category (see appendix
Page No. 108 of 121
5) Capacit y (litres) 62 litre 19 litre 19 litre 19 litre Power (kW) 447(600hp) 559 (750hp) 559 (750hp) 559 (750hp) Manufacturer and type English Electric 4SRKT Cummins QSK19 Cummins QSK19 Cummins QSK19 5+ 25 + 25 + 30 4 4 4 4
201 220 221 222
Hastings unit Bombardier built Voyager, DMS, MSRMB, MS and DMF (Driving Motor First) Bombardier built Super Voyager, DMS, MSRMB, MS and DMF Bombardier built Meridian and Pioneers, DMRFO (Driving Motor Buffet First Open), MFO (Motor First Open), MSO (Motor Second Open), MSORMB (Motor Standard Open Buffet) and DMSO (Driving Motor Standard Open).
49 5 to 6 4 to 5 1 to 3
3 136 216 143
* denotes engine assumed but unconfirmed. No account is taken of preserved multiple units.
Page No. 109 of 121
Appendix 2 Diesel-engined Locomotive Fleet Details Class Vehicle Description Vehicle Quantity age in in years in service 2006 Engine Details Estimated Remainin g life Manufacturer and type English Electric 6KT English Electric 6KT English Electric 8SVT English Electric 12SVT English Electric 12SVT English Electric 12SVT Sulzer 8LDA28 Sulzer 8LDA28 Sulzer 8LDA28 English Electric 12SVT (years) 10 + 10 + 10 + 6 to 8 6 to 8 6 to 8 10 + 6 to 8 10 + 10 + 1 1 7 and 8 7 and 8 7 and 8 7 and 8 7 and 8 7 and 8 7 and 8 7 and 8 Utilisation Category (see appendix 5)
08 09 20 31/1 31/4 31/6 33/0 33/1 33/2 37/0
BREL built Shunting locomotive, Maximum speed 20 mph. BREL built Maximum speed 27.5 mph, Shunting locomotive. English Electric (EE) Type 1 locomotive, single cab Brush built, Type 2, Brush built, Type 2, ETS fitted Brush built, Type 2, ETS fitted Birmingham Railway Carriage Wagon Co. built (BRCW) Type 3 BRCW Type 3, Push-Pull fitted BRCW Type 3, Narrow bodied EE built Type 3, as built.
44 to 51 44 to 47 38 to 49 44 to 48 44 to 48 44 to 48
136 22 14 10 14 2 5 1 2 16
Capacity (litres) 93 litres 93 litres 123 litre 185 litre 185 litre 185 litre 177 litre 177 litre 177 litre 185 litre
& 44 to 46 44 to 46 44 to 46 41 to 46
Power (kW) 298 (400hp) 298 (400hp) 746 (1000hp) 1096 (1470hp) 1096 (1470hp) 1096 (1470hp) 1156 (1550hp) 1156 (1550hp) 1156 (1550hp) 1305 (1750hp)
Class
Vehicle Description
Vehicle Quantity age in in years in service
Engine Details
Estimated Remainin g
Utilisation Category (see
Page No. 110 of 121
2006 Capacity (litres) 185 litre 185 litre Power (kW) 1305 (1750hp) 1305 (1750hp) 1305 (1750hp) 1678 (2250hp) 1678 (2250hp) 1678 (2250hp) 1924 (2580hp) 1924 (2580hp) 1924 (2580hp) 1924 (2580hp) 2424 (3250hp) Manufacturer and type English Electric 12SVT English Electric 12SVT English Electric 12SVT MTU 16V4000 MAN B&W 12RP200L MAN B&W VP185 Sulzer 12LDA28C Sulzer 12LDA28C Sulzer 12LDA28C Sulzer 12LDA28C Ruston 16RKT3CT
life (years) 10 + 10 +
appendix 5)
37/4 37/5
37/6 43 43 43 47/2 47/3 47/4
EE Type 3 DE, Refurbished, alternator 41 to 46 fitted, re-geared CP7 bogies, ETS fitted EE Type 3, Refurbished alternator 41 to 46 fitted, re-geared CP7 bogies, twin fuel tanks EE Type 3, Refurbished for Eurostar 41 to 46 BREL built High Speed Train Power 24 to 40 Cars, re-engined with MTU BREL built High Speed Train Power Cars 24 to 40 BREL built High Speed Train Power Cars, re-engined with Paxman VP185 BR Crewe/Brush Type 4, isolated vacuum brake. BR Crewe/Brush Type 4, slow speed capable. BR Crewe/Brush Type 4, ETS equipped, some renumbered 477xx and 478xx, most now with long range fuel tanks. BR Crewe/Brush Type 4, ETS, push-pull fitted and long range fuel tanks. BREL/Brush built Type 5, most working for SNCF Vehicle Description 24 to 40 39 to 43 39 to 43 39 to 43
5 3
7 and 8 7 and 8
12 8 161 25 19 1 29
185 litre 64 litre 79 litre 63 litre 266 litre 266 litre 266 litre
10 + 20 + 8 10 + 10 + 10 + 10 +
7 and 8 2 2 2 3, 7 and 8 3, 7 and 8 3
47/7 56
39 to 43 22 to 30
9 20
266 litre 247 litre
10 + 10 +
3 6
Class
Vehicle age in years in 2006
Quantit Engine Details y in service
Estimated Remainin g life
Utilisation Category (see appendix 5)
Page No. 111 of 121
57
Type 4 rebuilt Freightliner
1997,
working
for
(39 to 43) (39 to 43) (39 to 43) 20 to 22 17 to 21 16 11 to 12 13 to 17 6 to 8 0 to 3 1 to 7
10
Capacity (litres) 127 litre
Power (kW) 1827 (2450hp) 2051 (2750hp) 2051 (2750hp) 2461 (3300hp) 2461 (3300hp) 2461 (3300hp) 2461 (3300hp) 2312 (3100hp) 2386 (3200hp) 2386 (3200hp) 2386 (3200hp)
Manufacturer and type EMD 12V645E3
(years) 10 6
57/3
Brush Type 4, rebuilt 2002, working for Virgin Brush Type 4 rebuilt from 2001, working for First Great Western BREL built Type 5, Working in Spain, France and Holland GM Type 5 DE, GM 3300 hp for Foster Yeomans GM Type 5 DE, GM 3300 hp, for ARC GM Type 5 DE, GM 3300 hp for EWS Brush Type 5 DE, Mirrlees 3100 hp EMD Type 5 working for EWS EMD Type 5 working for DRS EMD Type 5 working for Freightliner
13
127 litre
EMD 12V645E3B
10 +
57/6
127 litre
EMD 12V645E3B
10 +
58 59/0 59/1 59/2 60 66/0 66/4 66/5
10 5 4 6 45 125 13 80 127 litre 127 litre 127 litre 145 litre 140 litre 140 litre 140 litre
Ruston 12RKT3ACT EMD 12V645E3C EMD 12V645E3C EMD 12V645E3C Mirrlees 8MB275T EMD 12N710G3BEC EMD 12N710G3BEC EMD 12N710G3BEC
5+ 15 + 15 + 15 + 10 + 25 + 25 + 25 +
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Class
Vehicle Description
Quantit Engine Details y in service
Estimated Remainin g life
Page No. 112 of 121
66/6 66/7 67 73/1 73/2 Mak DE1004
EMD Type 5 working for Freightliner with modified gear ratios EMD Type 5 working for GB Railfreight Alstom built EMD design Type 5 EE built Electro-Diesel (1600 hp electric) EE built Electro-Diesel (1600 hp electric) ex Gatwick Express Mak built Eurotunnel locomotives, BoBo. Hunslet/Schoma built 0-4-0 locomotives
1 to 6 0 to 5 6 to 7 39 to 41 39 to 41 13 to 14 16 to 17
22 22 25 6 13 5 12
Capacity (litres) 140 litre 140 litre 140 litre 62 litre 62 litre
Power (kW) 2386 (3200hp) 2386 (3200hp) 2386 (3200hp) 447 (600hp) 447 (600hp) 1178 (1580hp) 149 (200hp)
Manufacturer (years) and type EMD 25 + 12N710G3BEC EMD 30 + 12N710G3BEC EMD 25 + 12N710G3BEC English Electric 6 to 8 4SRKT English Electric 6 to 8 4SRKT MTU 12V396 15 + Deutz 15 +
6 6 3 and 7 8 8 7 1
Please note that no account has been taken of preserved locomotives.
Page No. 113 of 121
Appendix 3 Diesel Civil Engineers Vehicle Details Vehicle type collective Descriptions Vehicle age Engine Details in years in 2006 (estimated) Capacity Power (litres) (kW) Tampers, rail mounted (185 in service) 1 to 19 Manufacturer and type Known engines service 7 1 10 46 2 1 14 1 16 1 16 1 2 1 1 15 7 Estimated Remainin g life (years) in 10 + to 30 10 + to 30 10 + to 30 10 + to 30 10 + to 30 10 + to 30 12 + 5 to 30 5 to 30 6 to 27 8 + to 30 8 + to 30 8 + to 30 8 + to 30 5 5 to 30 15 + 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Utilisation Category (see appendix 5)
Deutz BFL12513C Deutz BFL413FW Detroit diesel GM-8V71 Rolls Royce C6TFL Perkins C265R Rolls Royce Eagle Deutz BF12L513C Perkins C6TFL Deutz BFL12L413F Deutz BFL12513 Rolls Royce C6TFL Perkins C265R Deutz BFL12413 Rolls Royce Eagle Lister ST2 Dorman 8JT Dorman 8JT
224 (300hp) 403 (540hp)
Dynamic Track Stabiliser (14 in service) Ballast Cleaners (27 in service) TRAMM (30), TUM and TASC (6) Ballast Regulators (40 in service)
18 1 to 40 3 to 24 1 to 32
403 (540hp)
Scissor Lift Cranes (68 in service) Track Layers (59 in service) THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE 2 to 47 15 to 42
15 (20hp)
Page No. 114 of 121
Vehicle type collective Descriptions Vehicle age Engine Details in years in 2006 (estimated) Capacity Power (litres) (kW) Other Tampers, Ballast Cleaners, TRAMM, TUM, TASC, MPV, Ballast Packers, Ballast Regulators, Perma Clippers, Track Gapher, Sleeper Changer, Cranes, Track Layers, Grinders and Gantry. Loram C2101 Rail Grinder Imported to UK in 2001. Loram C2102 and C2103 Rail Grinders Harsco Rail switch and crossing Grinder (10 units, 5 trains) 1 to 47 Manufacturer and type Known engines service 70
Estimated Remainin g life (years) in 30 +
Unknown types
11 3 to 4 3
27 litre 30 litre 12.5 litre
635 (852hp) 725 (972hp) 373 (500hp)
Four off Caterpillar 3412 Four off Cummins QST30 John Deere 6125*. Also Honda Aux Generator, type unknown. Two off Deutz BF8N1015CP and Three off Duetz BF6N1013C
4 8 10 3
20 + 30 30
7 7 7
Matisa Track Renewal Train
440 (590hp) 127 (170hp)
2 3
30
The data above is the results of a general survey of the civil engineering fleet undertaken in May 2005. No account is taken of preserved vehicles. * engine type assumed from kW output
Page No. 115 of 121
Appendix 4 Diesel Departmental Vehicle Details Class Vehicle Description Vehicle age in years in 2006 Quantit Engine Details y in service Capacity (litres) 9.6 litre Power (kW) 141 (192hp) 60 (80hp) 141 (192hp) Manufacturer and type Mercedes V6 OM401 Perkins 4 cylinder T4.236 Mercedes V6 OM401 Estimated Remainin g life (years) 15 + 8 Utilisation Category (see appendix 5)
SGT
Mentor SGDGC
TC6 TC2 UTU3
Structure Gauging Driving Trailer, diesel engined generator, 975081. Operated by SERCO. Diesel engined generator,975091. Operated by SERCO. Structure Gauging Dorm and Generator coach, diesel engined generator, 975280. Operated by SERCO. Test Car 6, diesel engined generator, 975290. Operated by SERCO. Test Car 2, diesel engined generator, 975397. Operated by SERCO. Ultrasonic Test Unit, ex class 101 unit, 977391 and 977392. Two road engines plus, one diesel engined generator. Operated by SERCO.
19
34 Not known
1 1
3.9 litre 9.6 litre
15 + 15 +
8 8
Not known Not known 47 & 50
1 1 2
3.9 litre 2.5 litre 11 litre
60 (80hp) 25 (33hp) 112 (150hp)
Perkins 4 cylinder T4.236 Perkins 3 cylinder D3.152 Two off Leyland 680/1595 (road engine) & Perkins 6 cylinder T6.354.4
15 + 15 + 15 +
8 8 8
Page No. 116 of 121
Class
Vehicle Description
Quantit Engine Details y in service Capacity (litres) 5.8 litre Power (kW) 107 (143hp) 112 (150hp) Unknown
Estimated Remainin g life Manufacturer (years) and type 15 + Perkins 6 cylinder T6.354.4 15 + Two off Leyland 680/1595 (road engine) & Perkins generator engine Perkins 15 + generator engine T6.354.4 15 + Volvo generator engine Perkins 3 15 + cylinder D3.152 Cummins 15 + NT855RT5 (road engine) & Mercedes V6 OM401 15 + Perkins 4 cylinder 1004GNFE Two off Leyland 15 + 680/1595 (road
UTU3
Pandora
Ultrasonic Test Unit, ex class 432 unit, 999602. One diesel engined generator. Operated by SERCO. Route learning Video Survey unit, ex class 121, DMB,977859. Two road engines plus, one diesel engined generator. Operated by SERCO.
32
46
11 litre Unknown
NMT
NMT
TIC TRU
NMT (new measurement Train) Trailer Cars 977984, 977995 NMT (new measurement Train) Trailer Cars 975984 Track recording Coach, 999508. Operated by SERCO. Track Assessment Unit, ex class 150, 999600 and 999602 One road engine plus, one diesel engined generator. Operated by SERCO.
30
Unknown
Unknown
30
Unknown
Unknown
Not known 19
1 2
2.5 litre 14 litre 9.6 litre
25 (33hp) 213 (285hp) 141 (192hp) 75* (100hp) 112 (150hp)
8 8
UTU4
Ultrasonic Test Unit, 999606. Two diesel engined generators. Operated by SERCO. Other ex Service vehicles converted from class 101 101 DM units, 977693 and 977694. Two THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE
35
4 litre*
48 to 49
11 litre
Page No. 117 of 121
road engines. Class Vehicle Description Vehicle age in years in 2006 Quantit Engine Details y in service Capacity (litres) 11 litre Power (kW) 112 (150hp)
engine) Estimated Remainin g life Manufacturer (years) and type Two off Leyland 15 + 680/1595 (road engine) Two off Leyland 680/1595 (road engine) Two off Leyland 680/1595 (road engine) English Electric 4SRKT 15 + Utilisation Category (see appendix 5)
Other ex Service vehicles converted from class 117 117 DMB and IMV (Intermediate Motor Vehicles) units, 977987, 977988 and 977992. Two road engines. Other ex Service vehicles converted from class 121 121 DMB units, 977723, 977858, 977860, 977866, 977873, 977968, 977975 and 977976. Two road engines. Other ex Service vehicles converted from class 122 122 DMB unit, 975042. Two road engines. Other ex Service vehicles converted from class 205 205 DMB unit, 977939 and 977940. One traction engine. * estimated from 1004-TG model.
46
46
11 litre
112 (150hp)
48
11 litre
112 (150hp) 447 (600hp)
15 +
44
62 litre
15 +
Please note that no account has been made of preserved vehicles or the many smaller diesel engine powered machines operated by the Infrastructure companies.
Page No. 118 of 121
Appendix 5 Vehicle Utilisation and Duty Cycle Details Utilisation Category Vehicle grouping Example classes5 Miles per vehicle per year4 Hours per vehicle per year4 Typical miles per hour 0.5 406 356 426 22 Typical duty cycle High/Low load2 Working day (hours)3 15 186 86 156 15 Typical time spent on no load %/load % when running in train 95/5 75/25 75/25 75/25 75/25 20/80 80/20
1 2 3 4 5 6
Shunters HST passenger Loco passenger High speed DMU passenger Suburban DMU
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Freight heavy haul 100,0006 4,0006 256 H 126 e.g. Intermodal 7 Freight light & 77,0006 2,6006 296 L 86 mixed traffic & high speed track machines. 20, 31, 33, 25,000 to 900 to 1,8006 8 Short term hire for 276 L 86 50,0006 mixed traffic, stand 37, 47, 67 by duties and civil engineers vehicles. Data extracted from the railway forum document 2004. Low load is taken as short trains, short journeys, low train weight and moderately low speed combinations up to 60 mph. taken as long trains, heavy laden and any speed combination. Working days is taken as from the first activity of the day to the last, excluding fuelling, servicing and maintenance. A working year is taken as 330 days. This accounts for 21 days lost on scheduled (A to E exams) maintenance, Christmas days lost due to failures and repairs. These classes are examples and not exclusive. Values estimated from available train running data.
08, 09 43 47, 57, 67 180, 185, 220,222 142, 150, 156 56, 59, 60, 66 20, 31, 33, 37, 47, 67
2,5001 242,0006 91,0006 211,0006 112,0001
5000 6,0006 2,6006 5,0006 5,000
L H H H H
75/25
High load is day and 10
Page No. 119 of 121
Appendix 6 Overview of Future Trends
Page No. 120 of 121
Appendix 7 Policy/Investment Categories Category 1 Sustainable development initiatives that can be undertaken by one business on a business case basis (i.e. where investment yields a commercial return) and that require little or limited coordination with other parts of the industry. This is the type of action being undertaken by many businesses across the industry. Category 2 Sustainable development initiatives that can be undertaken on a business case basis (i.e. where investment yields a commercial return) but where the business case requires coordination between different parts of the industry (e.g. where capital investment in one area essentially yields benefits to another part of the industry). The way in which the industry and contracts were designed at privatisation has in some cases hampered companies from taking action. A prime example of this is regenerative braking. Many trains are now capable of regenerative braking but few operate it. A key barrier is that the majority of the cost of enabling the system falls to NR and power companies whilst the savings would accrue to TOCs in a way which does not directly reflect use. If regenerative braking were enabled across the majority of the network it could achieve up to a 20% reduction in electricity purchased. This would reduce an increasingly volatile operational cost and make a significant contribution to the UKs greenhouse gas emissions targets. Many of these cross industry issues are being addressed by Systems Interface Committees (SICs). SICs are set up to assist the railway industry to manage all aspects of identified system interfaces in the most cost efficient and effective way. Some issues falling into category 2 are areas where third party involvement, for example from the ORR, in allocating costs and responsibility could facilitate action. Category 3 Sustainable development initiatives that are either bought at high cost but with no direct benefit to the rail industry and/or require significant capital funding that may at the earliest stages be beyond the industrys capacity, but meet wider policy objectives. An example of this is retrofitting exhaust treatment to the existing diesel fleet to reduce pollutant emissions. New EC standards have addressed the emissions from new diesel engines but this will take many years to have a significant impact on air quality because of the low turnover of rail vehicles. It may be technically possible to retrofit existing engines with exhaust treatment but there is no payback for operators. An initiative similar to those already in place for heavy goods road vehicles, where the Government funds retrofitting, could achieve air quality improvements far earlier than will otherwise be achieved. The need for the development and implementation of technological improvements to achieve step changes in the industrys performance cuts across all of these categories. Indeed the Royal Academy of Engineering recently published a design guide Engineering for Sustainable Development: Guiding Principles in response to demand for information in this area.
Page No. 121 of 121
Rail Safety and Standards Board Evergreen House 160 Euston Road London NW1 2DX Reception Telephone +44 (0)20 7904 7777 Facsimile +44 (0)20 7904 7791 www.rssb.co.uk
Rail Safety & Standards Board Registered Office: Evergreen House 160 Euston Road London NW1 2DX. Registered in England and Wales No. 04655675. Rail Safety & Standards Board is a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee.

The Future of Diesel Engines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Future of Diesel Engines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Programme

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

: IAN SILVER : 1 JUNE 2007

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 1 of 121

CURRENT EXHAUST EMISSIONS STANDARDS ............................... 18

CURRENT GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY................... 24

CURRENT INDUSTRIES POLICIES AND ACTIONS ........................... 26

LEGISLATIVE DEVELOPMENTS ....................................................... 35

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 3 of 121

COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS IN OTHER SECTORS ................... 37

FUEL DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................... 41

REDUCED SULPHUR FUEL PROJECT ............................................... 47

EXHAUST AFTER TREATMENT OPTIONS.......................................... 52

DIESEL ELECTRIC HYBIRDS ............................................................. 60

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 4 of 121

KNOWLEDGE GAPS ....................................................................... 67

POTENTIAL FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING FLEET................... 72

AREAS FOR POLICY ACTION ........................................................ 93

AREAS FOR INVESTMENT ACTION ................................................ 95

CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................. 97 REFERENCES................................................................................. 102 APPENDICES ................................................................................ 105

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 5 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 7 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 8 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 9 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 10 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

ULSGO UNIFE VOF

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 13 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 14 of 121

UIC RESEARCH INTO LOCAL AIR POLLUTION

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 15 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 16 of 121

CURRENT EXHAUST EMISSIONS STANDARDS

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 18 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 19 of 121

Type Approval from: 01/07/2005 01/01/2006 01/01/2008 01/01/2008 01/01/2011 01/01/2011

HC g/kWh 4.0 4.0 0.5 0.4 0.19 4.0

PM g/kWh 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.025 0.025

6.0 7.4 2.0

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 20 of 121

THE FUTURE OF THE DIESEL ENGINE

Page No. 21 of 121

Stage UIC I UIC II

01/01/2003 01/01/2003 01/01/2003 Railcar 01/02006 01/01/2007 01/01/2009 01/01/2009

CO g/kWh 3.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5

HC g/kWh 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.8 4.0 4.0 0.5 0.4

NOx g/kWh 12 6.0 9.9 9.5