RAIL - Back On Track Forum

Electrifying the Rosewood to Toowoomba leg of the railway will not only provide significant environmental and social benefits but also long-term economic benefits. It is a viable option that can be accomplished within budgetary and cost concerns.

Firstly, electrification can improve the economic viability of the railway system by reducing operating costs. While the initial capital cost of electrification may be higher than that of diesel, the ongoing costs of fuel and maintenance are significantly lower. This means that over the long term, electrification will result in cost savings that can be reinvested in improving the transportation infrastructure, creating more jobs, and stimulating economic growth.

Secondly, electrification can provide significant long-term economic benefits by improving the transportation system's efficiency and reliability. This is important because it can facilitate the movement of people and goods, making it easier for businesses to access markets and improve their supply chains. This will lead to increased economic activity, job creation, and improved standards of living.

Thirdly, electrification can provide significant savings over the long term by reducing emissions and the associated environmental and health costs. This is important because it can reduce the long-term costs associated with climate change, such as damage to infrastructure, higher insurance premiums, and increased healthcare costs.

Finally, electrification can attract investment to the region by making it more attractive to businesses and individuals looking for sustainable and efficient transportation options. This can lead to increased economic activity and job creation, which will further stimulate the local economy.

Electrifying the Rosewood to Toowoomba leg of the railway is not only a socially and environmentally responsible option but also a viable and economically sound decision. It can provide significant long-term economic benefits, improve the efficiency and reliability of the transportation system, and reduce emissions and associated costs. Therefore, it is an investment in the region's future and a necessary step towards creating a sustainable and prosperous community

QuoteElectrifying the Rosewood to Toowoomba leg of the railway will not only provide significant environmental and social benefits but also long-term economic benefits. It is a viable option that can be accomplished within budgetary and cost concerns.

Hi Verbatim9.

I would suggest that there is general support on this thread for bi-mode trains. I think most members are happy to run with that. NSW is getting them. 

In terms of electrification benefits, the study that TMR are doing will look into that. The main thing is to confirm that there are net benefits. At this point that has not been demonstrated, it is something to be determined by investigation.

I acknowledge that there does seem to be some suggestion of a sparks effect where patronage is concerned. But it might not be enough. The overall patronage is rather low, and a sparks premium would be a fraction % over that small base figure.

A reasonable annual patronage for a Toowoomba line would be 1-3 million per year, depending of a number of factors, primarily speed, overall door-to-door journey times and P&R access.

It is important to remember that into the future environmental benefits are likely to be lower for PT projects as cars become electric. The largest benefit is still likely to be time savings (from persons and congestion avoidance), avoided accidents etc.

Did you have some examples of per-km electrification costs, or operational costs per propulsion mode you would perhaps like to share?

Line Electrification

There is a nice thread here that goes into electrification pro and con. https://melbpt.wordpress.com/electrification-economics/

I hate to wheel it out again, but this looks like a 'Point X' type of problem.

Electrics are cheaper to operate, but only above Point X. Below Point X they are not.

So the answer will turn on the question of 'How much' service is going to be provided.

I don't have enough information (or expertise) to analyse this, but I would imagine an hourly train for most of the day would be below Point X. Hopefully, the TMR study might touch on this point.



Conceptual image showing the X point where the diesel vs electric operating costs cross at Point X.

Source: https://melbpt.wordpress.com/electrification-economics/

I hope this has been helpful.

^^The study is isolated on one perspective not over several perspectives re health, environmental factors such as noise and emissions, and the long term economical benefits as well as location.

**We are talking about intercity here, not village to village nor suburb to suburb

Ballpark Estimate

95 km path (not a straight line, approximate) x 12 million/km (estimate) = $1.140 billion ballpark.

(I can also add some uncertainty here, let's say the true value is within the range - 500 million to 1.5 billion)

Update: I will also provide a data point to anchor the estimate.

Sunbury Electrification Project
https://ancr.com.au/sunbury_electrification_project.pdf

This project cost $270 million (around year 2012) for 15 km of electrification. This is a regional line in Melbourne that was used for running V/Line services and then added to the METRO Trains Melbourne network.

The per-km cost (unadjusted) is about 18 million/km.

Even if there are economies of scale (50% discount) and we use a value of 9 million/km, 95 km of electrification from Rosewood to Toowoomba would cost around around $855 million.

Based on this I won't rule out electrification but the train patronage and base train frequency would have to grow quite a bit to justify that outlay from Day 1.

The Sunbury as well as other extensions in NSW and Vic can cost considerably more due to the fact of being 1.5 KV systems, as opposed to the cheaper option of 2.5 KV systems which is standard in SA, WA, and Qld.

Based on the information Metro has provided, we can estimate the total cost of electrifying the train line from Rosewood to Toowoomba with the additional infrastructure of new stations and bikeways as follows:

Assuming the total length of the train line is 125 kilometers (based on Google Maps distance), the cost of electrification at $18 million per kilometer would be:

125 km x $18 million/km = $2.25 billion

The cost of building two new stations at Gatton and Helidon would be:

2 x $450 million = $900 million (this is likely to include an inline bus interchange as well as new park n rides).

The cost of building an underground station in Toowoomba with a new access tunnel would be:

$1 billion

The cost of building new segregated active travel bikeways en route is an estimate.

Therefore, the estimated total cost of electrifying the train line from Rosewood to Toowoomba with new stations and an underground station, assuming the cost of new tunnels is $1 billion, would be approximately:

$2.25 billion (electrification) + $900 million (new stations) + $1 billion (new tunnels) = $4.15 billion

Please note that this is only an estimate, and the actual cost could vary depending on various factors and circumstances.

Although the total length is 80 km from Rosewood, I included an extra 45 km for amplification between Darra and Redbank plus other improvements enroute along the existing track between Brisbane and Rosewood.

The costs include building to specs inline with ETCS 2/3

Let's try and refine this a bit...

Tunnel into Toowoomba
I'm happy to do different scenarios, the tunnel into Toowoomba isn't essential for Day 1 operations. So it can be dropped.

Stations
I think stations will be much cheaper, can't really see $450 million being spent per station. Southland station in Melbourne (opened 2017) was an infill station and that cost $21 million (~ 2014 costings).

Gold Coast infill stations are budgeted around ~ $40 million each. I would probably go with this value.

Electrification

QuoteThe Sunbury as well as other extensions in NSW and Vic can cost considerably more due to the fact of being 1.5 KV systems, as opposed to the cheaper option of 2.5 KV systems which is standard in SA, WA, and Qld.

Any idea of how much cheaper? 50%?




References

Napthine Government vows to build $21 million Southland Station by 2016
https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/napthine-government-vows-to-build-21-million-southland-station-by-2016/news-story/c4a2a4a1c20b5bf413372f42697ef209

Labor all aboard for three new rail stations but Cross River Rail comes first
https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland-election-2017/labor-all-aboard-for-three-new-rail-stations-but-cross-river-rail-comes-first-20171117-p4yx29.html

Any extra $$$ over you can use towards new access roads, the bridge structure over the flood plains, as well as the extension to Wellcamp. You may also need to compensate some existing land owners due to new straight alignments.

Wellcamp extension isn't required for Day 1 operations so should be excluded IMHO.

Also, if ARTC has not included it in its freight plans perhaps the existing arrangements are sufficient for now.

Hey guys,

AC traction system requires less number of substations for a given track distance.

This is a considerable saving.

#youarewelcome

Why would the new stations cost $450m each?

The new infill stations on the Gold coast are costing nowhere near that.

Are you sure you didn't mean to write $45m

PS Gawler electrification was $35m per km
But it sounds like other upgrades happen at the same time as well.

https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/commuter-rail/south-australias-troubled-gawler-line-electrification-project-finally-completed/

Quote from: verbatim9 on April 15, 2023, 16:44:25 PMThe Sunbury as well as other extensions in NSW and Vic can cost considerably more due to the fact of being 1.5 KV systems, as opposed to the cheaper option of 2.5 KV systems which is standard in SA, WA, and Qld.

Qld (and WA) use 25 kV, not 2.5 kV, and it is AC rather than DC traction, which is the main reason behind the cost savings.

Adelaide is the most recent, they have 25 kV 50 Hz AC railway electrification.

Hard to believe that their network only got sparks ~ 10 years ago.

I would suggest Adelaide is a good place to go digging for that info.

The first attempt at electrification of the Brisbane rail network was commenced in the 1950s. It was to be a 1.5 kV DC system as for Vic.

Interesting history > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_electrification_in_Queensland

The SX cars were going to be used for this.

In the end the 1.5 kV DC system was not proceeded with.

1970s they moved on with the 25 kV AC system, which is better.

Traditional electric trains powered with wired and rigid catenary compared to developing technologies such as hydrogen trains are far superior. Some of these reasons include:

1. Cheaper to run: Electric trains are generally cheaper to run compared to hydrogen trains. This is because the cost of electricity is typically lower than the cost of hydrogen fuel. Additionally, electric trains require less maintenance compared to hydrogen trains.

2. Better acceleration: Electric trains have better acceleration compared to hydrogen trains. This means they can reach their top speed faster and can provide quicker services.

3. Established infrastructure: Traditional electric trains have an established infrastructure that is already in place. This means that the cost of importing parts is lower and the overall cost of infrastructure is cheaper compared to developing hydrogen infrastructure over an 80 km stretch.

4. Can cater for events and peak periods: Electric trains are longer compared to hydrogen trains, which means they can cater for larger numbers of passengers during events and peak periods.

5. Tested and proven technology: Electric trains have been used for many years and their technology is well-established. On the other hand, hydrogen trains are a relatively new technology that is still being tested and refined.

6. Better performance on steep inclines: Electric trains can perform well on steep inclines, as demonstrated by the Toowoomba range. It is not yet clear whether hydrogen trains can perform at the same speed on such inclines.

7. Lower maintenance costs: Electric trains require less maintenance compared to hydrogen trains. This is because they have fewer moving parts and are less complex

In addition to the advantages mentioned above, traditional electric trains with a catenary system also offer better network integration compared to hydrogen trains. This is because electric trains, which are well-established and have been used for many years, can be used on most routes throughout the SEQ (South East Queensland) network easily. This saves on costs, improves network reliability, and enhances overall transport efficiency.

Furthermore, electric trains are more environmentally friendly compared to hydrogen/diesel trains. They produce zero emissions during operations, which makes them a more sustainable and eco-friendly choice. This is especially important in today's world, where environmental concerns are paramount.

Another benefit of electric trains is that they offer a quieter ride compared to diesel or hydrogen trains. This is because electric trains produce less noise and vibration during operation, making them more comfortable for passengers.

Additionally, electric trains are more flexible compared to hydrogen trains. They can operate on both AC and DC power, which means they can be used on a wider range of tracks and routes. This enhances their overall versatility and usefulness.

Overall, while developing technologies such as hydrogen trains have some benefits, traditional electric trains with a catenary system still offer several advantages in terms of cost, infrastructure, performance, and reliability.

In conclusion, traditional electric trains with a catenary system offer numerous advantages over developing technologies such as hydrogen trains. These benefits include better network integration, lower costs, improved network reliability, environmental sustainability, quiet operation, and flexibility. Therefore, it makes sense to continue investing in electric train technology and infrastructure, especially in regions like SEQ where the network is already established.

You mentioned about the noise of hydrogen versus electric trains.

How many decibels does an electric train make versus a hydrogen train?

While hydrogen trains may produce less noise than Dmus they would be more expensive to run because of the overall fuel infrastructure, thus adding to signicant costs to the the operator. Hydrogen trains have significant more vibration compared to their electric counterparts.

Furthermore, electric trains would be better in regards to overall efficiency and network integration in SE Queensland. This is because electric trains have a number of advantages over other types of trains, such as:

* They are more efficient at low speeds, as well as accelleration which is ideal for most urban and interurban  rail networks.
* They have a lower cost of energy/fuel use, which can save money on operating costs.
* They are more widely available, as there are more electric train manufacturers and suppliers than there are hydrogen train manufacturers and suppliers.
* They are more environmentally friendly, as they produce zero emissions.

In addition, electric trains are already well-integrated into the existing rail network in SE Queensland. This means that there would be no need to build new infrastructure, such as hydrogen refueling stations, which can be expensive.

Furthermore, you would have more specialised tankers on the road carting hydrogen fuel to the refueling stations, adding to our heavily congested road and freeway network, which can add to the probability of a higher accident risk.

Overall, electric trains are the best option for improving the overall efficiency and network integration of the rail network in SE Queensland.

verbatim9 have you started using ChatGPT to write your comments? No shame if you are but it feels like your posting style has changed recently...

It's not a chat bot, it's my own writing and research.

I am just highlighting the benefits against senseless dribble.

Speaking of dribble. Any services let alone electrics are still sadly a fantasy idea or very long down the track. What tracks are the electrics running on? Current alignment or inland rail alignment?

Current alignment rules out electrics. You can claim technological advances with ohle but that's not the issue. The issue is pantos just simply do not fit in the tunnels. The tunnels have already been dropped over the 100+ years and they are already at their limit without a new tunnel or substantial tunnel foundation/modification works required. It's too costly to modify infrastructure to run them. That means either some type of battery system is required which has its own hurdles and requirements or another type of rollingstock be it DMUs or hybrids which still requires additional expenditures. Either way dedicated rollingstock would be required so while the average joe and yourself might see it as another electric train from an operational aspect they wouldn't be as simple as that. No different than CRR operations - why can't they run EMU's in the CRR tunnels as they are both electric trains which also impacts network operations in terms of rollingstock positioning, crew positioning, network recovery (we have already seen issues with the NGRs when it comes to recoveries), how trains are run etc etc.

Inland rail is unlikely to be anywhere on the cards any time soon. So if you are holding out for electrics on an inland rail alignment you could be waiting a very long time.

I thought the only reason the state was doing the study was because inland rail was on the table?

Quote from: Gazza on April 30, 2023, 08:06:46 AMI thought the only reason the state was doing the study was because inland rail was on the table?

One option Gazza, there are others ...

Viz.

Toowoomba to Brisbane Passenger Rail Strategic Business Case

https://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/projects/toowoomba-to-brisbane-passenger-rail-strategic-business-case

QuoteThe strategic business case, comprises a Strategic Assessment of Service Requirement and a Preliminary Evaluation of options, which will:

. evaluate current and anticipated future capacity and demand for public transport services between Toowoomba and Brisbane

. investigate options for introducing new passenger rail services using existing and protected rail corridors

. consider the opportunity for integrating passenger rail services with future freight operations on the new Inland Rail infrastructure between Gowrie and Calvert

. identify preferred option(s) for future passenger services between Toowoomba and Brisbane

. identify staging and delivery options to suit the short, medium and long term demand and capacity of the existing transport network

. consider costs and benefits of the project. ...

I don't see much coming out of it. Would probably say something along the lines of viability with inland rail. There were other studies performed by QT into passenger services in the early 2000's which also spawned future freight studies all across the south west which inland rail is piggy backing off/using. I believe there is also another side study that was done as part of the Westlander/inlander/Sunlander/Soto rollingstock phase out/replacement program. It reeks more of hey look we are doing something without actually doing something.

What part of a hydrogen train causes vibration?

PS HTG I don't think you have to stress about them electrifying the current alignment.
There is precisely zero chance that the Queensland government would introduce an electric service that takes 3 hours to get from Toowoomba to Brisbane

I know. I was just pointing out to v9 about the realities of getting passenger services out there if he keeps pushing the electrification narrative. Any electrification on inland rail would still be up to ARTC. And then that falls on TMR to secure rollingstock that can run on the QR network and ARTC network. Double stack panto heights do not work on the standard heights that the existing rollingstock uses so once again dedicated rollingstock is required for dual pantos.

State government aren't going to drop a motza doing electrification let alone tunnel mods on a line that they know will potentially be closed once inland rail is operational. Inland rail has no funding and the feds aren't going to rush doing Toowoomba-Rosewood work knowing that there is no Sydney connection via Toowoomba nor a connection to AR/Port. That leaves rollingstock. DMU. Battery. Hybrids. Or it's wait another 25 years for passenger heavy rail. As I keep saying it's a fantasy idea.

DMUs nor Hybrid will not happen on that line, as the environmental, economical and logistical factors don't stack up. Stage 1 Rosewood to Helidon track build and electrification  could likely start before 2032.

Being a brand new line it's likely to be built to automation specs (ETCS  3), keeping the overall operations costs to a minimum.

Electrification is only worthwhile above a certain point.

I am not convinced that with a potential passenger estimate of between 1 - 3 million pax p.a. that it is worth the trouble of electrification at this or the early stages.

Services to and from Toowoomba initially would be only every 60, 90, or 120 minutes during the off peak.

I think the main thing is to get the alignment in and also the logistics/engineering of how a train will get up and down the range.

I think the Toowoomba Rail Investigation will probably bear these points out.

Sorry V9 but your expectations for this infrastructure to be delivered before 2032 is bullsh%t. It is unlikely to be built for automation spec. And I'll say it again. If Inland rail isn't on the cards for another 2+ decades what other services will Toowoomba get or is any passenger service purely dependent on a freight line - a freight line that has already been in the scope since 2009 with alignments dating back to 2000. ARTC has already ruled out delivering the project for passenger services with the main focus on delivering a freight line first. That means the Kagaru link needs to be built first. Without that link inland rail will not proceed in Northern NSW and Southern Queensland.

Without a doubt TMR will palm any upgrades off saying that any new infrastructure would be dependent on ARTC/Feds funding inland rail.

Current Toowoomba Regional Council's Fast Rail Campaign

QuoteIt successfully delivered the Toowoomba Bypass after decades in limbo — now Mayor Paul Antonio wants to use the same campaign to connect the Garden City via fast rail.

Foam foam foam foam foam. Retired Eurostar with panto but no ohle, double decker bullet train despite an alignment that would be 100-140kph max (ARTC have publicly stated that they would not use QT's 200kph passenger train alignment and have ruled out using a faster higher speed alignment due to it being mostly a freight line where freight rollingstock don't require higher speeds. They have also acknowledged that freight operations could potentially slow down passenger operations) and a Alstrom DMU. 40 minutes is not possible Brisbane-Wellcamp and the biggest bs brown foam is the 2032 timeline.  But please post more foam or vague bs comments such as vibration. Vibration problems are easily overcome by designing the train correctly and not being a tightass. HS220's had vibration issues but when reverted back the problems were suddenly gone. NGR's have vibration issues too. Oh the shock and horror. All the panels rattle and foam inserts installed to dampen the sound. Have a look at the hand rails or overhead panels near the cabs. I'm curious. Can you elaborate on these vibration issues? What exactly is causing vibration issues because electric fleets are full of vibration issues to varying degrees be it from braking systems causing flat spots, track quality or all the way to cheap internal fit outs. What exactly is vibrating so much that we can't run them on our network?

Hydrogen powered trains and electric trains are both promising technologies that offer environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional diesel-powered locomotives. However, there are distinct advantages that hydrogen powered trains have over electric trains that make them an attractive option for the future of rail transportation.

Firstly, one of the biggest advantages of hydrogen powered trains is that they have longer ranges than electric trains. While electric trains rely on overhead power lines or third rails to power their engines, hydrogen powered trains generate electricity through a fuel cell that converts hydrogen and oxygen into water, producing electricity in the process. This means that hydrogen powered trains can operate independently from a fixed power source and can travel longer distances than electric trains, which are limited by the availability of power lines and charging infrastructure.

Another advantage of hydrogen powered trains is that they produce zero emissions, making them a more environmentally friendly option than electric trains, which rely on electricity generated from a mix of energy sources. While electric trains themselves produce zero emissions, the electricity used to power them may come from non-renewable sources such as coal or natural gas, which can be a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. On the other hand, hydrogen powered trains produce only water vapor as a byproduct, making them a truly zero-emissions option.

Furthermore, hydrogen powered trains offer faster refueling times than electric trains. Refueling a hydrogen-powered train takes just a few minutes, similar to filling up a diesel-powered train, while charging an electric train can take several hours. This means that hydrogen powered trains can operate with less downtime, allowing for more efficient use of rail infrastructure and reduced travel times.

Lastly, hydrogen powered trains may be more cost-effective in certain circumstances. While the initial cost of hydrogen powered trains may be higher than electric trains, the cost of building and maintaining the required infrastructure for electric trains, such as overhead power lines and charging stations, can be significant. In areas with limited infrastructure or where retrofitting existing infrastructure may be expensive or impractical, hydrogen powered trains may be a more cost-effective option.

In conclusion, while both hydrogen powered trains and electric trains offer environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional diesel-powered locomotives, hydrogen powered trains have distinct advantages that make them an attractive option in certain circumstances. With longer ranges, zero emissions, faster refueling times, and potential cost savings, hydrogen powered trains may be the preferred choice in areas with limited infrastructure or where longer distances need to be traveled. As such, hydrogen powered trains have the potential to play an important role in the future of rail transportation.

Quote from: Gazza on May 01, 2023, 15:23:40 PMHydrogen powered trains and electric trains are both promising technologies that offer environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional diesel-powered locomotives. However, there are distinct advantages that hydrogen powered trains have over electric trains that make them an attractive option for the future of rail transportation.

Firstly, one of the biggest advantages of hydrogen powered trains is that they have longer ranges than electric trains. While electric trains rely on overhead power lines or third rails to power their engines, hydrogen powered trains generate electricity through a fuel cell that converts hydrogen and oxygen into water, producing electricity in the process. This means that hydrogen powered trains can operate independently from a fixed power source and can travel longer distances than electric trains, which are limited by the availability of power lines and charging infrastructure.

Another advantage of hydrogen powered trains is that they produce zero emissions, making them a more environmentally friendly option than electric trains, which rely on electricity generated from a mix of energy sources. While electric trains themselves produce zero emissions, the electricity used to power them may come from non-renewable sources such as coal or natural gas, which can be a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. On the other hand, hydrogen powered trains produce only water vapor as a byproduct, making them a truly zero-emissions option.

Furthermore, hydrogen powered trains offer faster refueling times than electric trains. Refueling a hydrogen-powered train takes just a few minutes, similar to filling up a diesel-powered train, while charging an electric train can take several hours. This means that hydrogen powered trains can operate with less downtime, allowing for more efficient use of rail infrastructure and reduced travel times.

Lastly, hydrogen powered trains may be more cost-effective in certain circumstances. While the initial cost of hydrogen powered trains may be higher than electric trains, the cost of building and maintaining the required infrastructure for electric trains, such as overhead power lines and charging stations, can be significant. In areas with limited infrastructure or where retrofitting existing infrastructure may be expensive or impractical, hydrogen powered trains may be a more cost-effective option.

In conclusion, while both hydrogen powered trains and electric trains offer environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional diesel-powered locomotives, hydrogen powered trains have distinct advantages that make them an attractive option in certain circumstances. With longer ranges, zero emissions, faster refueling times, and potential cost savings, hydrogen powered trains may be the preferred choice in areas with limited infrastructure or where longer distances need to be traveled. As such, hydrogen powered trains have the potential to play an important role in the future of rail transportation.

Thats a ChatGPT response if I ever saw one

^^Whatever!

Council News---> https://www.councilnews.com.au/2022/09/20020916-fast-track-fast-rail

QuoteDetails Last Updated: Thursday, 08 September 2022 12:10 Published: Thursday, 08 September 2022 12:10
Motorists travelling to and from Toowoomba may have noticed new signage at the top of the Range this week.

As part of Toowoomba Regional Council's (TRC) aspiration for a fast passenger rail service from Toowoomba to Brisbane, Mayor Paul Antonio said signs has been installed to further advocate for the service.

"Earlier this year I raised the matter as a Mayoral Minute during an Ordinary Meeting of Council so I'm pleased to see the signage now in place," Mayor Antonio said

7 News-->https://fb.watch/kffU-y_5-L/?mibextid=ufaulR

I so glad that the Toowoomba Regional Council is advocating for a fast electric train service to and from Brisbane. Unlike the anti public transport lobbyists within this forum.

V9, have you actually ridden a hydrogen powered train, out of curiosity? I'm hoping to soon, personally. But a lot of the things you're saying are readily disputed/disproven.

Emissions of a hydrogen train? Water vapour.

Sound? By what i've heard on youtube, very similar to an electric train.

Cost? How much will is cost to build and maintain electric overhead between Rosewood and Toowoomba vs a hydrogen refuellong station at one depot, especially for a low frequency service?

Infrastructure cost: There is no electric infrastructure between Rosewood and Toowoomba, so there would be a significant cost to adding it. Hydrogen infrastructure literally requires a refuelling point at a depot, Toowoomba would be a good point to allow future regional service expansion out of there.

Train length: Yes, the current in-service hydrogen MUs are only 2 cars long. However, they can be coupled together where need be, and there is also nothing stopping them being made in 3car or longer units in the future as the need arises.

Performance on steep inclines, maintenance costs: Have you got any sources to back these claims up? And, by the way, unsure if you've noticed, but there are no electric trains running on the Toowoomba Range...

Fuel costs: Currently, sure, it is likely hydrogen costs more than electricity on a pure fuel cost basis, but that may change in the future, especially when factoring in the related infrastructure costs for each vs frequency/patronage in the earlier stages.

Network reliability: Really? How does slinging up overhead lines improve network reliability?


Hydrogen MUs are more than capable of running under the overhead wires inbound of Rosewood. And by the time something actually comes of a passenger rail service to Toowoomba, dual mode electric/hydrogen trains would likely be very doable.

While they are still an emerging tech, it's certainly something to keep an eye on and may be a very valid method of providing lower frequency/patronage services in the future. Nothing saying we can't start with hydrogen MUs, then as frequencies and patronage warrants it, electrify and move the hydrogen MUs to other areas that warrant the services in regional areas etc., or to provide regional Toowoomba services to Dalby, Roma, Warwick and so forth in the future!

To simply dismiss it completely out of hand is ignorant IMO.

Also, I very highly doubt anyone on here is against passenger rail services to Toowoomba. However, most of us are grounded closer to reality where we realise that, in the current reality we live, it's definitely nowhere near certain that fast rail to Toowoomba will start construction before 2032 unfortunately.

Toowoomba Council advocating for it is one thing, and is admirable, but they're also not paying for it. How many other rail projects have been advocated by councils for decades with no results? Nothing to say this will result in anything more, unfortunately.

QuoteEmissions of a hydrogen train? Water vapour.

Just to clarify it's not the emissions from the train, it's the intensive energy that is required to make hydrogen. In Europe they have the advantage of making hydrogen from nuclear power sources. We would need to have specific renewable energy sources just for that, as well as existing coal and gas, hence the emissions.

QuoteDalby, Roma, Warwick and so forth in the future

I am not against dual mode hybrid trains to these locations in the future as demand grows, just not Toowoomba. We are talking about intercity here not inter-village.

It's a shame you not are not backing electric intercity trains to Toowoomba. Unfortunately, it goes against community sentiment as well as the bi partisan approach of both political parties.

QuoteToowoomba Council advocating for it is one thing

I doubt that Toowoomba Council would advocate, unless it had the backing from the community.