Scania electric trucks running on catenary grid power

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

Looks like Scania is getting into the building of electric trucks.  But instead of the Tesla approach of some gigantic battery, Scania has an overhead pantagraph that connects to wires over the truck lane on the highway, and uses a small battery for "last-mile" running.  There is also a diesel engine in there in case that battery dies!   Scania is a serious engineering company; look to it for serious solutions.   The idea of an overhead pantagraph makes a lot of sense.  And if the road is blocked and you need to detour, why, drop the pantagraph, run off the batery, and when all else fails, start up that diesel!  Here's the story:

--------------------------------------------------------

Bode Spedition is the first company to participate in the test programme to operate trucks with an overhead wire in northern Germany

Bode Spedition is the first company to participate in the test programme to operate trucks with an overhead wire in northern Germany. It will operate them on a 5 km long stretch of the motorway connecting Reinfeld and Lübeck.

 

The project to operate hybrid trucks using grid power for the main haul and batteries for "last mile" distribution is backed by the German federal government. In all Scania is supplying 15 R450 hybrid trucks for the three German projects.

 

As in the first such test route in Sweden, the electrical infrastructure has been installed by Siemens Mobility and the operating concept is very similar.

Bode will operate five Scania R450 trucks in the Lübeck trial

The trucks are equipped with pantographic power collectors, developed by Siemens, mounted on the frame behind the cab for charging while in motion. The trucks are operated by haulage companies in real transport operations, not empty runs.

 

While the truck is connected to the overhead catenary, its electric motor, equivalent to a 450 hp diesel engine, is powered off the grid and at the same time the batteries are recharged, to provide electric autonomy on conventional roads, with the diesel engine being the third source of power that would be used for the "last mile" if and when the batteries are run down.

 

Separately, Bode is part of a multimodal transport chain linking Germany (DUSS Duisburg) and Sweden (Hallsberg) over the ports of Lübeck (Travemünde) and Trelleborg. The new connection is a partnership of Bode, DB Cargo Scandinavia, Kombiverkehr and TT Linie.

 

The new service, which caters for trailers, swap bodies and shipping containers, is due to commence on 17^th February. Transit time is touted as 36 hours.

[frankfurter + 562]

In principle, nothing new.  I know I would not like to live in a city having massive overhead cables forming a huge, high voltage, grid.  Would any energy savings ensue overall?  If the power plant is coal fired, what of the pollution?  If nuclear fired, what of the waste? etc. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

10 hours ago, frankfurter said:

I know I would not like to live in a city having massive overhead cables forming a huge, high voltage, grid.

I think you are missing the point.  There are no cables in the city, such as there were with say trolley cars.  There is ONE cable strung over ONE lane of the highway, and the truck has this pantagraph that goes up and contacts while driving underneath, then it pulls power from that cable while on that highway.  When it gets to the exit, then the pantagraph comes down and the smallish battery takes over for the "last mile."  All in all, a neat solution!  

As for power source, recall this is by Scania, and in Sweden the bulk of power is hydro.  As for Germany, you will find that the power will come from new Thorium reactors, which will burn old nuclear waste and leave nothing.   Technology resolves these issues. 

[Rob Plant + 2,616]

10 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

As for Germany, you will find that the power will come from new Thorium reactors, which will burn old nuclear waste and leave nothing.   Technology resolves these issues. 

I would find that very surprising if Germany did start building Thorium reactors. As a country they are exiting nuclear altogether by 2022.

https://phys.org/news/2011-05-germany-scrap-nuclear-power.html

There is zero political will to go down the nuclear route and that includes Thorium reactors.

1 Thorium reactor would cost €1b and thats even if it worked (there is only 1 currently in operation globally) . If it did it would be at an extremely high cost to current electricity generation in Germany.

They do not run off nuclear waste they are run off nuclear fission of the isotope uranium 233 produced from the element Thorium.

They are also NOT waste free however they do produce 80% less nuclear waste than conventional nuclear stations.

Overall its clear that these trucks will not be powered by Thorium reactors.

https://energytransition.org/2016/11/thorium-a-future-option-for-nuclear/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jun/23/thorium-nuclear-uranium

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

4 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

There is zero political will to go down the nuclear route and that includes Thorium reactors.

1 Thorium reactor would cost €1b and thats even if it worked (there is only 1 currently in operation globally) . If it did it would be at an extremely high cost to current electricity generation in Germany.

Rob, I know that you have this bee in your bonnet about reactors and how wind machines will take over the world.  The problem is that, world-wide, without nuclear power there is just not going to be enough to go around.  Going back to nukes is inevitable.  Now even the Canadians, with their massive investments in wind machines and lots of hydro, recognize this and are hard at work developing new molten-salt machines, apparently intended to be run on thorium.  The impression I am left with is that they can and will be fuelled with both low-level and high-level current nuclear waste.  OK, it has been a while since I studied this, but I recall the numbers work quite well once you get away from catering to the hysterical. the big cost factor in nukes is not the reactor; it is all the add-ons that the hysterical so cynically pile on there.  If you dispense with the add-ons then nuke power gets down below one cent a Kwh.   Now, admittedly hydro-power has a costing basis of less than $0.0025  per Kwh,  which is what Nalco Energy gets from Hydro-Quebec for the power it generates at Churchill Falls, Labrador, and that is likely not plausible to beat, but still, nuke numbers will not be far behind.  

So to say that German nuke power will be insanely expensive is not accurate.  It becomes insanely expensive when the hysterical persuade the politicians to order the Regulators to order the plant builders to install multiple levels of add-ons,  superficially to provide some mythical protection against non-existent threats, but in actuality to prevent the construction of the machines in the first place.   It is all very cynical.  Nothing that happens in the nuke field, outside of what the Canadians are up to, is based on actual engineering requirements.  It is all politics. 

I grasp that you disagree, and that's fine.  I invite you to look deeper into how nukes evolved and the cynical admissions of past "greenies" in their efforts to destroy the nascent industry.  Just cynical, what they did.   I have zero respect for the "greenies."   Then again, I am a more practical, numbers man.  I would be perfectly happy to have a nice Estate right next to an unshielded, unprotected molten-salt plant; at least the land would be cheap to buy!

[Rob Plant + 2,616]

26 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Rob, I know that you have this bee in your bonnet about reactors and how wind machines will take over the world.  The problem is that, world-wide, without nuclear power there is just not going to be enough to go around.  Going back to nukes is inevitable.  Now even the Canadians, with their massive investments in wind machines and lots of hydro, recognize this and are hard at work developing new molten-salt machines, apparently intended to be run on thorium.  The impression I am left with is that they can and will be fuelled with both low-level and high-level current nuclear waste.  OK, it has been a while since I studied this, but I recall the numbers work quite well once you get away from catering to the hysterical. the big cost factor in nukes is not the reactor; it is all the add-ons that the hysterical so cynically pile on there.  If you dispense with the add-ons then nuke power gets down below one cent a Kwh.   Now, admittedly hydro-power has a costing basis of less than $0.0025  per Kwh,  which is what Nalco Energy gets from Hydro-Quebec for the power it generates at Churchill Falls, Labrador, and that is likely not plausible to beat, but still, nuke numbers will not be far behind.  

So to say that German nuke power will be insanely expensive is not accurate.  It becomes insanely expensive when the hysterical persuade the politicians to order the Regulators to order the plant builders to install multiple levels of add-ons,  superficially to provide some mythical protection against non-existent threats, but in actuality to prevent the construction of the machines in the first place.   It is all very cynical.  Nothing that happens in the nuke field, outside of what the Canadians are up to, is based on actual engineering requirements.  It is all politics. 

I grasp that you disagree, and that's fine.  I invite you to look deeper into how nukes evolved and the cynical admissions of past "greenies" in their efforts to destroy the nascent industry.  Just cynical, what they did.   I have zero respect for the "greenies."   Then again, I am a more practical, numbers man.  I would be perfectly happy to have a nice Estate right next to an unshielded, unprotected molten-salt plant; at least the land would be cheap to buy!

Jan you’re wrong very wrong.

I actually dislike wind power and most renewables and totally agree that nuclear is the way forward with some gas fired stations to assist. I fully understand how nukes have evolved, it’s patronising to suggest I don’t. My company supply to all of the nuke stations in the UK so trust me I am a big fan!

however your comments regarding Germany going nuclear in the form of using Thorium reactors is way off the mark. They won’t do this politically, economically and technologically. Those are the facts today and there is absolutely nothing suggesting this will change. 
there is a reason that there is only 1 Thorium station in the world and that is cost. The only reason that exists in India is because they are trying to be nuclear independent from Russia.

i would ask you to research Thorium more before just glibly saying what you believe should happen in Germany.

i have given 3 references in my initial reply to back up my view of why it will not happen for at least a decade, if ever.

nuclear fusion of course is the real holy grail and the best minds in physics are working night and day to solve this conundrum. Once solved it’s game over for every other form of power generation.

we have also supplied parts on the project below

https://www.iter.org/

Edited January 20, 2020 by Rob Plant

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

Jan you’re wrong very wrong.

OK, I have an excuse.  Chalk it up to the infirmities of old age!   (Gives you something to look forward to...)

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

your comments regarding Germany going nuclear in the form of using Thorium reactors is way off the mark. They won’t do this politically, economically and technologically. Those are the facts today and there is absolutely nothing suggesting this will change. 

What will cause a change of heart, with stunning speed, is the hit to the wallet for the power, plus extended blackouts.  Nothing like going without your morning brewed coffee and nice hot shower to change a voter's mind extra quick......

[Rob Plant + 2,616]

I agree, Germany’s knee jerk reaction post Fukushima was ridiculous and jeopardises their future power supply as a nation.

They still have half a dozen nukes generating until 2022, when they close god help them!

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

14 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

i would ask you to research Thorium more before just glibly saying what you believe should happen in Germany.

This is a company I have been looking at investing into https://www.seaborg.co/

I understand they are looking at developing a small thorium reactor that can be installed in old coal fired power-plants. My understanding is that they are 7 - 10 years away from having them commercially produced. 

[Rob Plant + 2,616]

9 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

This is a company I have been looking at investing into https://www.seaborg.co/

I understand they are looking at developing a small thorium reactor that can be installed in old coal fired power-plants. My understanding is that they are 7 - 10 years away from having them commercially produced. 

Yes that is the timescale I was thinking, and that depends on them overcoming many technical issues.

I'm not convinced this is the way forward at all, in 5 years time Iter should have produced its first plasma, if that works then this technology is redundant before its got off the ground.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

7 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

I'm not convinced this is the way forward at all, in 5 years time Iter should have produced its first plasma, if that works then this technology is redundant before its got off the ground.

What I liked is that it is easily integrated / retro-fitted into current infrastructure. That makes me believe it is realistic. 

thoughts? 

[Rob Plant + 2,616]

5 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

What I liked is that it is easily integrated / retro-fitted into current infrastructure. That makes me believe it is realistic. 

thoughts? 

Its definitely an advantage and relatively safe is a big plus too.

However fusion would be totally safe, produce 4X the energy fission produces, abundant fuel for eternity, and there is no nuclear waste.

Its what the whole world is asking for currently and that's why billions if not trillions is being spent on various projects around the globe.

Whoever cracks this will probably end up being the richest guy(s) on the planet.

Rasmus you should love ITER its a massive collaboration of all the best scientists and numerous countries around the globe. They are all working together for the betterment of mankind, so its right up your street! In fact it should be right up everyone's street (unless you are a conventional power gen utility of course).

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

7 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Rasmus you should love ITER its a massive collaboration of all the best scientists and numerous countries around the globe. They are all working together for the betterment of mankind, so its right up your street! In fact it should be right up everyone's street (unless you are a conventional power gen utility of course).

I love this sort of thing. however, I am also a realist when it comes to implementation times, building up supplychains etc.