London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #91   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 09:04 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Apr 2021
Posts: 1
Default LO lines to be named

On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:42:42 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
power
is going to come from to power them all in the first place because right now
the generating capacity simply isn't there and short termist politicians
don't seem to be interested in providing it, merely exchanging like for like
with coal and gas gen replaced by wind farms so they can polish their green
halos.


That’s true. Maybe they’re thinking ahead to a time when we might have to
accept a change in lifestyle rather than trying to find “sustainable” ways
to maintain our current ones.


Even full lockdowns only led to a 7% reduction in CO2 so the sustainability
part is little to do with personal transport and a lot to do with home power
and manufacturing it would seem.


  #92   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 09:15 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,704
Default LO lines to be named

On 11/04/2021 09:53, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:17:30 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 19:36:52 on Sat, 10 Apr
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:32:14 on Sat, 10 Apr
2021, remarked:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:16:50 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
H2 has over batteries is recharge time, other than that its hopeless.

That’s a not inconsiderable advantage!

It is, but otoh once - one hopes - street recharging via some sort of
infrastructure built into street lights or similar for those who
don't have
driveways becomes the norm in a decade or 2, that advantage will become
redundant except for the very few people who need to do ultra long
journeys
without much in the way of stopping.

The main issue with EVs isn't the battery vs H2 argument , its where
the power
is going to come from to power them all in the first place because
right now
the generating capacity simply isn't there

And nor of course is there much more than 13A ring main linking up the
streetlights in any one street.

Streets and pavements are dug up often enough for other reasons, that doing
it again to upgrade the wiring/install a parallel circuit, isn't the end of
the world.

I think you underestimate the scale of the project.

The various cable TV/internet companies, now all(?) under the Virgin
umbrella, laid new cable along the pavement of a decent proportion of the
country in the 1990s(?).


Just under the surface (and in many cases very poorly finished), power
cables have to be much deeper - 18" is typical.

This time, for a start, only roads which people actually park along will
need to be covered. That rules out a good proportion of residential roads
which are sufficiently provided with off-street parking.


You'd probably have to do all the ones which currently attract cars
parked on them. Which in a lot of places is pretty much all of them.


Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable supplying
every house be used?


Not enough capacity and doesn't necessarily go where you think it would.



--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

  #93   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 09:19 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,704
Default LO lines to be named

On 11/04/2021 09:49, Marland wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 19:36:52 on Sat, 10 Apr
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:32:14 on Sat, 10 Apr
2021, remarked:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:16:50 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
H2 has over batteries is recharge time, other than that its hopeless.

That’s a not inconsiderable advantage!

It is, but otoh once - one hopes - street recharging via some sort of
infrastructure built into street lights or similar for those who don't have
driveways becomes the norm in a decade or 2, that advantage will become
redundant except for the very few people who need to do ultra long journeys
without much in the way of stopping.

The main issue with EVs isn't the battery vs H2 argument , its where
the power
is going to come from to power them all in the first place because right now
the generating capacity simply isn't there

And nor of course is there much more than 13A ring main linking up the
streetlights in any one street.

Streets and pavements are dug up often enough for other reasons, that doing
it again to upgrade the wiring/install a parallel circuit, isn't the end of
the world.


I think you underestimate the scale of the project.


To a large extent an ole is an ole, ok it may need to be bit larger for a
power cable of the size required
but when the area I was then living in got cabled for TV by NYNEX the most
memorable part of the disruption they caused was the bloody mess their
marker paints caused before hand, we thought there had been a major
graffiti attack till we twigged what the various pink etc blobs were for.
That was for what was basically an entertainment provider who felt the
investment would be worth while even though many properties to which they
ran the ducts did not take up the system.
Those ducts ISTR were about 25-30mm diameter so a power cable would not be
vastly different if it was direct burial though I accept it may need a more
prepared surround.
One sod who did not take up the system prised the cap off the duct that
terminated inside his fence
and disposed of his motor oil down it which was a bit mean.

If digging up the streets was done fairly effortlessly so that Punters can
watch re runs of “I Love Lucy” and the cultural delights of East Enders
shouting at each other then doing it again for arguably less frivolous
purposes should not be the obstacle you make it out to be.

Meanwhile the utility industry is quietly getting on with replacing old
Iron gas pipes with plastic as leaks as well as being hazardous also
contribute to green house gases even if unburnt.
There is a lot of experience out there in digging the ground.


Digging the holes isn't the problem, it is supplying the electrons to go
down the cables and some method of getting the electrons from the hole
in the ground to the vehicle without causing a trip hazard and legal
bonanza.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

  #94   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 10:04 AM posted to uk.transport.london,uk.railway
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 879
Default LO lines to be named

wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:41:53 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
That matters for long distance lorries and buses for whom suitable batteries
would be a ridiculous size, but for cars its not even an issue right now,
never mind as technology advances. Yes, they're maybe half a ton heavier
than an equivalent ICE car at most, but the vehicle size is the same, if
not a bit smaller.


Which is why H2 is mainly being considered for larger, heavier vehicles:
trains, trucks, long distance buses, large SUVs, perhaps even short range
airliners. It's not needed nor viable for ordinary cars.


Hummer have already built 2 large battery SUVs.


By 'built', you mean announced. They're 2023 models, with lots of details
as yet unknown.

And H2 trains makes no
bloody sense whatsoever - just electric the damn lines and if its too
expensive for overhead then they should recind that moronic rule about
no more 3rd rail and lay that instead.


https://www.railtech.com/rolling-stock/2020/05/20/future-of-mobility-what-is-known-about-hydrogen-trains-in-germany/



  #95   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 10:41 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2018
Posts: 217
Default LO lines to be named

Graeme Wall wrote:


If digging up the streets was done fairly effortlessly so that Punters can
watch re runs of “I Love Lucy” and the cultural delights of East Enders
shouting at each other then doing it again for arguably less frivolous
purposes should not be the obstacle you make it out to be.

Meanwhile the utility industry is quietly getting on with replacing old
Iron gas pipes with plastic as leaks as well as being hazardous also
contribute to green house gases even if unburnt.
There is a lot of experience out there in digging the ground.


Digging the holes isn't the problem, it is supplying the electrons to go
down the cables and some method of getting the electrons from the hole
in the ground to the vehicle without causing a trip hazard and legal
bonanza.



The power supply problem I grant you is yet to be solved but it will be, at
least to keep those who are affluent enough to run personal transport the
size of a car doing so , ie make it expensive.
The rest may just end up in the situation we once had up the 1960’s when
car ownership was a dream for many and they had to use other means of
getting around.
To some extent a future non car owner will be better off than their
grandparents and have the choice of using an electric scooter or an
electrically assisted bicycle for many journeys whose power demand on the
grid will be far less and buy in transport for when they need a bigger
vehicle or make a longer journey wether that is a hire car or a taxi like
operation.

Even turning many 2 car households into a one car plus scooters and bikes
will make quite a distance.
Many younger people were already going this way anyway, car ownership is no
longer seen as a status point reached in life like it was for our
generation and assaulted by high accommodation costs plus the need if
sensible to start saving for a pension leaves little to run a car ,not
having one is no longer something to feel ashamed about ,the status symbol
object is the latest smartphone they can order an Uber on.

As for they trip hazard problem the most basic solution would be conduits
like slot drains that been used since victorian times to take water from
building downpipes to the gutter, theirs were cast Iron and many are still
in place but modern versions in other materials are available.
You then lay your cable in that .

This is one of the old style ones in Truro from the closed Hotel to the
gutter, there are thousands still in use around the country and people cope
with them.


Now you won’t what any old joe digging up the pavement as standards would
have to be maintained
so like dropped pavements for drives are now the local authorities would
either do the work or have an approved contractor the resident has to pay
for.

GH


  #96   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 10:44 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,122
Default LO lines to be named

In message , at 08:53:02 on Sun, 11 Apr 2021,
Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:17:30 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 19:36:52 on Sat, 10 Apr
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:32:14 on Sat, 10 Apr
2021, remarked:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:16:50 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
H2 has over batteries is recharge time, other than that its hopeless.

That’s a not inconsiderable advantage!

It is, but otoh once - one hopes - street recharging via some sort of
infrastructure built into street lights or similar for those who
don't have
driveways becomes the norm in a decade or 2, that advantage will become
redundant except for the very few people who need to do ultra long
journeys
without much in the way of stopping.

The main issue with EVs isn't the battery vs H2 argument , its where
the power
is going to come from to power them all in the first place because
right now
the generating capacity simply isn't there

And nor of course is there much more than 13A ring main linking up the
streetlights in any one street.

Streets and pavements are dug up often enough for other reasons,
that doing
it again to upgrade the wiring/install a parallel circuit, isn't
the end of
the world.

I think you underestimate the scale of the project.

The various cable TV/internet companies, now all(?) under the Virgin
umbrella, laid new cable along the pavement of a decent proportion of the
country in the 1990s(?).


Just under the surface (and in many cases very poorly finished), power
cables have to be much deeper - 18" is typical.

This time, for a start, only roads which people actually park along will
need to be covered. That rules out a good proportion of residential roads
which are sufficiently provided with off-street parking.


You'd probably have to do all the ones which currently attract cars
parked on them. Which in a lot of places is pretty much all of them.


Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable supplying
every house be used?


That's even deeper, and is typically about as thick as your arm and a
real pig to make connections to.

There's also the matter that it's likely to be sized for the number of
houses connected, and given than an EV on average doubles the household
consumption (that's long term average not instantaneous, so diversity
doesn't help here) it'll still overheat. [Of course, the same
consideration applies to "too many" households connecting to that cable
via their domestic supply and a fast charger for their off-street
parking]

National Grid has done serious studies into all of this and are quite
pessimistic about the capability to support more than 30% EV penetration
by 2030.
--
Roland Perry
  #97   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 10:46 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,122
Default LO lines to be named

In message , at 10:15:18 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Graeme Wall remarked:

Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable
supplying every house be used?


Not enough capacity and doesn't necessarily go where you think it
would.


I've lived in two village now where about half the houses are [still]
supplied by 240v wiring on poles, which looks a bit like phone cables,
unless you know better.
--
Roland Perry
  #98   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 10:48 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,122
Default LO lines to be named

In message , at 08:49:15 on Sun, 11
Apr 2021, Marland remarked:

Meanwhile the utility industry is quietly getting on with replacing old
Iron gas pipes with plastic as leaks as well as being hazardous also
contribute to green house gases even if unburnt.
There is a lot of experience out there in digging the ground.


And having lived in an Edwardian suburb where they re-newed the gas
pipes, the effort required and disruption caused was extraordinary!
--
Roland Perry
  #99   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 10:56 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jan 2015
Posts: 349
Default LO lines to be named

wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:41:53 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
That matters for long distance lorries and buses for whom suitable batteries
would be a ridiculous size, but for cars its not even an issue right now,
never mind as technology advances. Yes, they're maybe half a ton heavier
than an equivalent ICE car at most, but the vehicle size is the same, if
not a bit smaller.


Which is why H2 is mainly being considered for larger, heavier vehicles:
trains, trucks, long distance buses, large SUVs, perhaps even short range
airliners. It's not needed nor viable for ordinary cars.


Hummer have already built 2 large battery SUVs. And H2 trains makes no
bloody sense whatsoever - just electric the damn lines and if its too
expensive for overhead then they should recind that moronic rule about
no more 3rd rail and lay that instead.



Health and Safety at Work Act, isn't it?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

  #100   Report Post  
Old April 11th 21, 10:56 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jan 2015
Posts: 349
Default LO lines to be named

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/04/2021 09:49, Marland wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 19:36:52 on Sat, 10 Apr
2021, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:32:14 on Sat, 10 Apr
2021, remarked:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:16:50 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson wrote:
wrote:
H2 has over batteries is recharge time, other than that its hopeless.

That’s a not inconsiderable advantage!

It is, but otoh once - one hopes - street recharging via some sort of
infrastructure built into street lights or similar for those who don't have
driveways becomes the norm in a decade or 2, that advantage will become
redundant except for the very few people who need to do ultra long journeys
without much in the way of stopping.

The main issue with EVs isn't the battery vs H2 argument , its where
the power
is going to come from to power them all in the first place because right now
the generating capacity simply isn't there

And nor of course is there much more than 13A ring main linking up the
streetlights in any one street.

Streets and pavements are dug up often enough for other reasons, that doing
it again to upgrade the wiring/install a parallel circuit, isn't the end of
the world.

I think you underestimate the scale of the project.


To a large extent an ole is an ole, ok it may need to be bit larger for a
power cable of the size required
but when the area I was then living in got cabled for TV by NYNEX the most
memorable part of the disruption they caused was the bloody mess their
marker paints caused before hand, we thought there had been a major
graffiti attack till we twigged what the various pink etc blobs were for.
That was for what was basically an entertainment provider who felt the
investment would be worth while even though many properties to which they
ran the ducts did not take up the system.
Those ducts ISTR were about 25-30mm diameter so a power cable would not be
vastly different if it was direct burial though I accept it may need a more
prepared surround.
One sod who did not take up the system prised the cap off the duct that
terminated inside his fence
and disposed of his motor oil down it which was a bit mean.

If digging up the streets was done fairly effortlessly so that Punters can
watch re runs of “I Love Lucy” and the cultural delights of East Enders
shouting at each other then doing it again for arguably less frivolous
purposes should not be the obstacle you make it out to be.

Meanwhile the utility industry is quietly getting on with replacing old
Iron gas pipes with plastic as leaks as well as being hazardous also
contribute to green house gases even if unburnt.
There is a lot of experience out there in digging the ground.


Digging the holes isn't the problem, it is supplying the electrons to go
down the cables and some method of getting the electrons from the hole
in the ground to the vehicle without causing a trip hazard and legal
bonanza.



Marked spaces and a kerbside supply post.


Anna Noyd-Dryver



Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stations named after commercial entities [email protected] London Transport 62 August 11th 09 06:44 PM
Stations named after commercial entities Recliner[_2_] London Transport 6 August 11th 09 07:36 AM
Harrow and Wealdstone named London rail station of the year JWBA68 London Transport 9 April 21st 04 01:45 PM
Kings Cross fire (1987) : final victim named John Rowland London Transport 6 January 22nd 04 06:26 PM
1987 King's Cross fire victim named Nick Cooper 625 London Transport 1 January 21st 04 12:03 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017