In 1967 when I was stationed in South Korea, they were still using Steam Locomotives to move most of their trains [easy to hitch a cab ride]. They had recieved quite a number of new Diesel Electrics from the USAid program. These were mostly parked by factories suppling the electricity for operations since local power generation could not meet the need. I would guess that sometime later they were returned to train service.
HEP is three phase 480V - no reason why a HEP equipped locomotive couldn't supply power within the range of its capabilities. The F40's could do 500 or 800KW, depending on when they were built.
Considering that the average home can run just fine with a 10KW backup generator for power outages, that means a locomotive could potentially power 50 to 80 homes from its HEP apparatus.
The prime mover generates over 2 megawatts, but not in a form suitable for feeding the grid.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Back in the 80's I believe, ComEd had a power outage at its Humboldt Park substation that blacked out a significant section of the West side of Chicago including the Metra Western Ave interlocking tower for multiple days. Metra used one of their FP40's on a very short spur at the tower to provide temporary feed to the tower. More power than they needed but it did the job.
So locomotives will be able to run on a whole new source of power?
Without digging out my old issues of Trains, I recall in an article within the last few years, that Montana Rail Link was selling electricity from idle locos in their Missoula yard.
There is a concurrently running Thread here..."Batteries a Possible Future Blow to Coal"
Apparently, Battery Technology, may have too many problems at present to provide a reliable power resource (?) To power very large mobile or stationary applications(?) The Thread mentioned above has moved on beyoned the OP's original topic(?) Victrola1's Post is as follows:
FTT:You can track what they are doing at the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E). There are plans for hydrogen bromide, or zinc-air batteries, or storage in molten glass, or next-generation flywheels, many claiming "drastic improvements" that can slash storage costs by 80pc to 90pc and reach the magical figure of $100 per kilowatt hour in relatively short order. “Storage is a huge deal,” says Ernest Moniz, the US Energy Secretary and himself a nuclear physicist. He is now confident that the US grid and power system will be completely "decarbonised" by the middle of the century.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/08/10/holy-grail-of-energy-policy-in-sight-as-battery-technology-smash/ It looks like electric storage technology may be another reason not to burn coal..." The new storage battery technology may very well be close to being useable, but there seem to be a number of problems yet to be conquored to get them to the point of common everyday use. The exotic materials being used for batteries, seem to be at the root of problems... Some may not be transported in passenger aircraft; others require haz-mat handling, when they are shipped to end users. The Thread by Paul North mentioned the number of stored locomotives UPR has in Arizona(292), and one can imagine that BNSF may have similar numbers 'in storage'. Visualize each locomotive, as a potential emergency power resource. Even as we speak the water from localized rain and the attendent flooding is crippling the Gulf Coast. Further, Paul North mentioned: [snipped] "...So those locomotives could be ~1.5 coal plants or <~1 nuclear power plants. More than I would have thought !
And, their start-to-full power time - "dispatch time" or response time - is nearly instantaneous, probably faster than any other source except hydro.
This has been done from time to time - one I recall is the ice storm in upper New York and eastern Canada in the late 1990s... and he included the following linked Forum Thread @ http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/194245.aspx
That Forum Thread lead to the following :"Trains archives: Diesel-electric loco connected to electric power grid for emergency power?" Including a photo of a CN unit, derailed to provide power to a Canadian Community hit by an ice and snow emergency.
And then there was another Thread linked referecing the topic of the ability of Diesel Locomotives and their potential for emergency power.
@ http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/99035.aspx?PageIndex=1&page=1
its topic :"Locomotives as emergency portable generators?" It contains a lot of technical information that may be pertinent to the conversation about the potential of railroad locomotives to generate power for use in emergencies...
I am not a technical person, but it seems that the technology to provide high output from storage batteries is not something that will happen in the next couple of years...Political types tend to overexaggerate, and over-sell the potential for their pet projects [ for any number of personal reasons,IMHO]. The reality is much farther off than they want the publuic to know.
The Lead-acid battery is on its way out, exotic batteries, will happen, but it is going to take a lot more research and time to get them to the point of uses outside the purely scientific world. The world will most likely have BaltACD's Perpetual Motion Machines first.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.