Railway electrification system
This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)(Learn how and when to remove this template message)
A railway electrification system supplies electric power to railway trains and trams without an on-board prime mover or local fuel supply. Electrification has many advantages but requires significant capital expenditure. Selection of an electrification system is based on economics of energy supply, maintenance, and capital cost compared to the revenue obtained for freight and passenger traffic. Different systems are used for urban and intercity areas; some electric locomotives can switch to different supply voltages to allow flexibility in operation.
- 1 Characteristics of railway electrification
- 2 Classification
- 3 Direct current
- 4 Alternating current
- 5 World electrification
- 6 Comparing electrification systems (including future proposals)
- 7 Advantages and disadvantages as compared to diesel traction
- 8 Non-contact systems
- 9 See also
- 10 References
- 11 Sources
- 12 External links
Characteristics of railway electrification
|This section needs additional citations for verification. (September 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)|
Electric railways use electric locomotives to haul passengers or freight in separate cars or electric multiple units, passenger cars with their own motors. Electricity is typically[weasel words] generated in large and relatively[weasel words] efficient generating stations, transmitted to the railway network and distributed to the trains. Some[which?] electric railways have their own dedicated generating stations and transmission lines but most[which?] purchase power from an electric utility. The railway usually[weasel words] provides its own distribution lines, switches and transformers.
Power is supplied to moving trains with a (nearly) continuous conductor running along the track that usually[weasel words] takes one of two forms.
- The first is an overhead line or catenary wire suspended from poles or towers along the track or from structure or tunnel ceilings. Locomotives or multiple units pick up power from the contact wire with pantographs on their roofs that press a conductive strip against it with a spring or air pressure. Examples[which?] are described later in this article.[where?]
- The second is a third rail mounted at track level and contacted by a sliding "pickup shoe". Both overhead wire and third-rail systems usually use the running rails as the return conductor but some systems use a separate fourth rail for this purpose.
In comparison to the principal alternative, the diesel engine, electric railways offer substantially better energy efficiency, lower emissions and lower operating costs. Electric locomotives are usually quieter, more powerful, and more responsive and reliable than diesels. They have no local emissions, an important advantage in tunnels and urban areas. Some electric traction systems provide regenerative braking that turns the train's kinetic energy back into electricity and returns it to the supply system to be used by other trains or the general utility grid. While diesel locomotives burn petroleum, electricity is generated from diverse sources including many that do not produce carbon dioxide such as nuclear power and renewable forms including hydroelectric, geothermal, wind and solar.
Disadvantages of electric traction include high capital costs that may be uneconomic on lightly trafficked routes; a relative lack of flexibility since electric trains need electrified tracks or onboard supercapacitors and charging infrastructure at stations; and a vulnerability to power interruptions. Different regions may use different supply voltages and frequencies, complicating through service and requiring greater complexity of locomotive power. The limited clearances available under catenaries may preclude efficient double-stack container service. Possible lethal electric current due to risk of contact with high-voltage contact wires and third rails is a safety hazard to track workers, passengers and trespassers. Overhead wires are safer than third rails,[how?] but they are often considered[by whom?] unsightly.
Electrification systems are classified by three main parameters:
- Contact system
Six of the most commonly used voltages have been selected for European and international standardisation. These are independent of the contact system used, so that, for example, 750 V DC may be used with either third rail or overhead lines (the latter normally by trams).
There are many other voltage systems used for railway electrification systems around the world, and the list of current systems for electric rail traction covers both standard voltage and non-standard voltage systems.
The permissible range of voltages allowed for the standardised voltages is as stated in standards BS EN 50163 and IEC 60850. These take into account the number of trains drawing current and their distance from the substation.
|Min. non-permanent||Min. permanent||Nominal||Max. permanent||Max. non-permanent|
|600 V DC||400 V||400 V||600 V||720 V||800 V|
|750 V DC||500 V||500 V||750 V||900 V||1,000 V|
|1,500 V DC||1,000 V||1,000 V||1,500 V||1,800 V||1,950 V|
|3 kV DC||2 kV||2 kV||3 kV||3.6 kV||3.9 kV|
|15 kV AC, 16.7 Hz||11 kV||12 kV||15 kV||17.25 kV||18 kV|
|25 kV AC, 50 Hz (EN 50163)
and 60 Hz (IEC 60850)
|17.5 kV||19 kV||25 kV||27.5 kV||29 kV|
Railways must operate at variable speeds. Until the mid 1980s this was only practical with the brush-type DC motor, although such DC can be supplied from an AC catenary via on-board electric power conversion. Since such conversion was not well developed in the late 19th century and early 20th century, most early electrified railways used DC and many still do, particularly rapid transit (subways) and trams. Speed was controlled by connecting the traction motors in various series-parallel combinations, by varying the traction motors' fields, and by inserting and removing starting resistances to limit motor current.
Motors have very little room for electrical insulation so they generally have low voltage ratings. Because transformers (prior to the development of power electronics) cannot step down DC voltages, trains were supplied with a relatively low DC voltage that the motors can use directly. The most common DC voltages are listed in the previous section. Third (and fourth) rail systems almost always use voltages below 1 kV for safety reasons while overhead wires usually use higher voltages for efficiency. ("Low" voltage is relative; even 600 V can be instantly lethal when touched.)
Since utilities supply high-voltage AC, DC railways use converter stations to produce relatively low-voltage DC (usually 3000 volts or less). Originally they used rotary converters, a few of which are even still in operation, but most were supplanted first by mercury arc rectifiers and then by semiconductor rectifiers.
Because electrical power is equal to voltage times current, the relatively low voltages in existing DC systems imply relatively high currents. If the DC power in the contact wire is to be supplied directly to the DC traction motors, minimizing resistive losses requires thick, short supply cables/wires and closely spaced converter stations.
The distance between feeder stations on a 750 V third-rail system is about 2.5 km (1.6 mi). The distance between feeder stations at 3 kV is about 7.5 km (4.7 mi).
Because of these problems, modern high-speed rail projects have generally used high-voltage AC once the technology became available. Some DC routes have been converted to AC.
There has, however, been interest among railroad operators in returning to DC use at higher voltages than previously used. At the same voltage, DC often has less loss than AC, and for this reason high-voltage direct current is already used on some bulk power transmission lines. DC avoids the electromagnetic radiation inherent with AC, and on a railway this also reduces interference with signalling and communications and mitigates hypothetical EMF risks. DC also avoids the power factor problems of AC. Of particular interest to railroading is that DC can supply constant power with a single ungrounded wire. Constant power with AC requires three-phase transmission with at least two ungrounded wires. Another important consideration is that mains-frequency 3-phase AC must be carefully planned to avoid unbalanced phase loads. Parts of the system are supplied from different phases on the assumption that the total loads of the 3 phases will even out. At the phase break points between regions supplied from different phases, long insulated supply breaks are required to avoid them being shorted by rolling stock using more than one pantograph at a time. A few railroads have tried 3-phase but its substantial complexity has made single-phase standard practice despite the interruption in power flow that occurs twice every cycle. An experimental 6 kV DC railway was built in the Soviet Union.
The increasing availability of high-voltage semiconductors may allow the use of higher and more efficient DC voltages that heretofore have only been practical with AC.
Some DC locomotives used motor-generator sets as "stepdown transformers" to produce more convenient voltages for auxiliary loads such as lighting, fans and compressors but they are inefficient, noisy and unreliable. Solid-state converters have replaced them. State-of-the-art locomotives (diesel-electric as well as electric) have even replaced the traditional universal-type traction motor with a 3-phase AC induction motor driven by a special-purpose AC inverter, a variable frequency drive.
1,500 V DC is used in the Netherlands, Japan, Republic Of Indonesia, Hong Kong (parts), Republic of Ireland, Australia (parts), India (around the Mumbai area alone, has been converted to 25 kV AC like the rest of India), France (also using 25 kV 50 Hz AC), New Zealand (Wellington) and the United States (Chicago area on the Metra Electric district and the South Shore Line interurban line). In Slovakia, there are two narrow-gauge lines in the High Tatras (one a cog railway). In Portugal, it is used in the Cascais Line and in Denmark on the suburban S-train system.
In the United Kingdom, 1,500 V DC was used in 1954 for the Woodhead trans-Pennine route (now closed); the system used regenerative braking, allowing for transfer of energy between climbing and descending trains on the steep approaches to the tunnel. The system was also used for suburban electrification in East London and Manchester, now converted to 25 kV AC. It is now only used for the Tyne and Wear Metro.
3 kV DC is used in Belgium, Italy, Spain, Poland, the northern Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Chile, and former Soviet Union countries (also using 25 kV 50 Hz AC). It was formerly used by the Milwaukee Road from Harlowton, Montana to Seattle-Tacoma, across the Continental Divide and including extensive branch and loop lines in Montana, and by the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad (now New Jersey Transit, converted to 25 kV AC) in the United States, and the Kolkata suburban railway (Bardhaman Main Line) in India, before it was converted to 25 kV 50 Hz AC.
Most electrification systems use overhead wires, but third rail is an option up to 1,200 V, as is the case with BART. Third rail systems exclusively use DC distribution. The use of AC is not feasible because the dimensions of a third rail are physically very large compared with the skin depth that the alternating current penetrates to (0.3 millimetres or 0.012 inches) in a steel rail). This effect makes the resistance per unit length unacceptably high compared with the use of DC. Third rail is more compact than overhead wires and can be used in smaller-diameter tunnels, an important factor for subway systems.
Third-rail systems can be designed to use top contact, side contact, or bottom contact. Top contact is less safe, as the live rail is exposed to people treading on the rail unless an insulating hood is provided. Side- and bottom-contact third rail can easily have safety shields incorporated, carried by the rail itself. Uncovered top-contact third rails are vulnerable to disruption caused by ice, snow and fallen leaves.
DC systems (especially third-rail systems) are limited to relatively low voltages and this can limit the size and speed of trains and cannot use low-level platform and also limit the amount of air-conditioning that the trains can provide. This may be a factor favouring overhead wires and high-voltage AC, even for urban usage. In practice, the top speed of trains on third-rail systems is limited to 100 mph (160 km/h) because above that speed reliable contact between the shoe and the rail cannot be maintained.
Some street trams (streetcars) used conduit third-rail current collection. The third rail was below street level. The tram picked up the current through a plough (U.S. "plow") accessed through a narrow slot in the road. In the United States, much (though not all) of the former streetcar system in Washington, D.C. (discontinued in 1962) was operated in this manner to avoid the unsightly wires and poles associated with electric traction. The same was true with Manhattan's former streetcar system. The evidence of this mode of running can still be seen on the track down the slope on the northern access to the abandoned Kingsway Tramway Subway in central London, United Kingdom, where the slot between the running rails is clearly visible, and on P and Q Streets west of Wisconsin Avenue in the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington DC, where the abandoned tracks have not been paved over. The slot can easily be confused with the similar looking slot for cable trams/cars (in some cases, the conduit slot was originally a cable slot). The disadvantage of conduit collection included much higher initial installation costs, higher maintenance costs, and problems with leaves and snow getting in the slot. For this reason, in Washington, D.C. cars on some lines converted to overhead wire on leaving the city center, a worker in a "plough pit" disconnecting the plough while another raised the trolley pole (hitherto hooked down to the roof) to the overhead wire. In New York City for the same reasons of cost and operating efficiency outside of Manhattan overhead wire was used. A similar system of changeover from conduit to overhead wire was also used on the London tramways, notably on the southern side; a typical changeover point was at Norwood, where the conduit snaked sideways from between the running rails, to provide a park for detached shoes or ploughs.
A new approach to avoiding overhead wires is taken by the "second generation" tram/streetcar system in Bordeaux, France (entry into service of the first line in December 2003; original system discontinued in 1958) with its APS (alimentation par sol – ground current feed). This involves a third rail which is flush with the surface like the tops of the running rails. The circuit is divided into segments with each segment energized in turn by sensors from the car as it passes over it, the remainder of the third rail remaining "dead". Since each energized segment is completely covered by the lengthy articulated cars, and goes dead before being "uncovered" by the passage of the vehicle, there is no danger to pedestrians. This system has also been adopted in some sections of the new tram systems in Reims, France (opened 2011) and Angers, France (also opened 2011). Proposals are in place for a number of other new services including Dubai, UAE; Barcelona, Spain; Florence, Italy; Marseille, France; Gold Coast, Australia; Washington, D.C., U.S.A.; Brasília, Brazil and Tours, France.
The London Underground in England is one of the few networks that uses a four-rail system. The additional rail carries the electrical return that, on third rail and overhead networks, is provided by the running rails. On the London Underground, a top-contact third rail is beside the track, energized at DC, and a top-contact fourth rail is located centrally between the running rails at +420 V DC, which combine to provide a traction voltage of −210 V DC. The same system was used for 630 VMilan's earliest underground line, Milan Metro's line 1, whose more recent lines use an overhead catenary or a third rail.
The key advantage of the four-rail system is that neither running rail carries any current. This scheme was introduced because of the problems of return currents, intended to be carried by the earthed (grounded) running rail, flowing through the iron tunnel linings instead. This can cause electrolytic damage and even arcing if the tunnel segments are not electrically bonded together. The problem was exacerbated because the return current also had a tendency to flow through nearby iron pipes forming the water and gas mains. Some of these, particularly Victorian mains that predated London's underground railways, were not constructed to carry currents and had no adequate electrical bonding between pipe segments. The four-rail system solves the problem. Although the supply has an artificially created earth point, this connection is derived by using resistors which ensures that stray earth currents are kept to manageable levels. Power-only rails can be mounted on strongly insulating ceramic chairs to minimise current leak, but this is not possible for running rails which have to be seated on stronger metal chairs to carry the weight of trains. However, elastomeric rubber pads placed between the rails and chairs can now solve part of the problem by insulating the running rails from the current return should there be a leakage through the running rails.
On tracks that London Underground share with National Rail third-rail stock (the Bakerloo and District lines both have such sections), the centre rail is connected to the running rails, allowing both types of train to operate, at a compromise voltage of 660 V. Underground trains pass from one section to the other at speed; lineside electrical connections and resistances separate the two types of supply. These routes were originally solely electrified on the four-rail system by the LNWR before National Rail trains were rewired to their standard three-rail system to simplify rolling stock use.
Fourth-rail trains occasionally operate on the National third-rail system. To do so, the centre-rail shoes are bonded to the wheels. This bonding must be removed before operating again on fourth-rail tracks, to avoid creating a short-circuit.
Rubber tyred systems
A few lines of the Paris Métro in France operate on a four-rail power scheme. The trains move on rubber tyres which roll on a pair of narrow roll ways made of steel and, in some places, of concrete. Since the tyres do not conduct the return current, the two guide bars provided outside the running 'roll ways' become, in a sense, a third and fourth rail which each provide 750 V DC, so at least electrically it is a four-rail scheme. Each wheel set of a powered truck carries one traction motor. A side sliding (side running) contact shoe picks up the current from the vertical face of each guide bar. The return of each traction motor, as well as each wagon, is effected by one contact shoe each that slide on top of each one of the running rails. This and all other rubber-tyred metros that have a 1,435 mm (4 ft 8 1⁄2 in) standard gauge track between the roll ways operate in the same manner. 
Railways and electrical utilities use AC for the same reason: to use transformers, which require AC, to produce higher voltages. Power is voltage times current, so the higher the voltage, the lower the current for the same power. Lower current means lower line loss and/or the ability to use lighter and less expensive conductors.
Because in electric railroading the use of AC implies very high voltages, it is only used on overhead wires, never on third rails. Inside the locomotive, another transformer steps the voltage down for use by the traction motors and auxiliary loads.
An early advantage of AC is that the power-wasting resistors used in DC locomotives for speed control were not needed in an AC locomotive: multiple taps on the transformer can supply a range of voltages. Separate low-voltage transformer windings supply lighting and the motors driving auxiliary machinery. More recently, the development of very high power semiconductors has caused the classic "universal" AC/DC motor to be largely replaced with the three-phase induction motor fed by a variable frequency drive, a special inverter that varies both frequency and voltage to control motor speed. These drives can run equally well on DC or AC of any frequency, and many modern electric locomotives are designed to handle different supply voltages and frequencies to simplify cross-border operation.
Low-frequency alternating current
DC commutating electric motors, if fitted with laminated pole pieces, become universal motors because they can also operate on AC; reversing the current in both stator and rotor does not reverse the motor. But the now-standard AC distribution frequencies of 50 and 60 Hz caused difficulties with inductive reactance and eddy current losses. Many railways chose low AC frequencies to overcome these problems. They must be converted from utility power by motor-generators or static inverters at the feeding substations or generated at dedicated traction powerstations.
These low frequencies were later made completely unnecessary by high power locomotive rectifiers that can convert any AC frequency to DC: first the mercury-arc rectifier and then the semiconductor rectifier. Some AC railways have been converted to standard grid frequencies but low frequencies are still widely used due to large sunken equipment costs.
Five European countries, namely, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Norway and Sweden, standardized on 15 kV 16 2⁄3 Hz (the 50 Hz mains frequency divided by three) single-phase AC. On 16 October 1995, Germany, Austria and Switzerland changed from 16 2⁄3 Hz to 16.7 Hz which is no longer exactly 1/3 of the grid frequency. This solved overheating problems with the rotary converters used to generate some of this power from the grid supply.
High-voltage AC overhead systems are not only for standard gauge national networks. The meter gauge Rhaetian Railway (RhB) and the neighbouring Matterhorn Gotthard Bahn (MGB) operate on 11 kV at 16.7 Hz frequency. Practice has proven that both Swiss and German 15 kV trains can operate under these lower voltages. The RhB started trials of the 11 kV system in 1913 on the Engadin line (St. Moritz-Scuol/Tarasp). The MGB constituents Furka-Oberalp-Bahn (FO) and Brig-Visp-Zermatt Bahn (BVZ) introduced their electric services in 1941 and 1929 respectively, adopting the already proven RhB system.
In the United States, 25 Hz, a once-common industrial power frequency, is used on Amtrak's 25 Hz traction power system at 12 kV on the Northeast Corridor between Washington, D.C. and New York City and on the Keystone Corridor between Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and Philadelphia. SEPTA's 25 Hz traction power system uses the same 12 kV voltage on the catenary in Northeast Philadelphia. This allows for the trains to operate on both the Amtrak and SEPTA power systems. Apart from having an identical catenary voltage, the power distribution systems of Amtrak and SEPTA are very different. The Amtrak power distribution system has a 138 kV transmission network that provides power to substations which then transform the voltage to 12 kV to feed the catenary system. The SEPTA power distribution system uses a 2:1 ratio autotransformer system, with the catenary fed at 12 kV and a return feeder wire fed at 24 kV. The New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad used an 11 kV system between New York City and New Haven, Connecticut which was converted to 12.5 kV 60 Hz in 1987.
In the UK, the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway pioneered overhead electrification of its suburban lines in London, London Bridge to Victoria being opened to traffic on 1 December 1909. Victoria to Crystal Palace via Balham and West Norwood opened in May 1911. Peckham Rye to West Norwood opened in June 1912. Further extensions were not made owing to the First World War. Two lines opened in 1925 under the Southern Railway serving Coulsdon North and Sutton railway station. The lines were electrified at 6.7 kV 25 Hz. It was announced in 1926 that all lines were to be converted to DC third rail and the last overhead electric service ran in September 1929.
Polyphase alternating current systems
Three-phase AC railway electrification was used in Italy, Switzerland and the United States in the early twentieth century. Italy was the major user, for lines in the mountainous regions of northern Italy from 1901 until 1976. The first lines were the Burgdorf-Thun line in Switzerland (1899), and the lines of the Ferrovia Alta Valtellina from Colico to Chiavenna and Tirano in Italy, which were electrified in 1901 and 1902. Other lines where the three-phase system were used were the Simplon Tunnel in Switzerland from 1906 to 1930, and the Cascade Tunnel of the Great Northern Railway in the United States from 1909 to 1927.
The early systems used a low frequency ( 16 2⁄3 Hz), and a relatively low voltage (3,000 or 3,600 volts) compared with later AC systems. The system provides regenerative braking with the power fed back to the system, so it is particularly suitable for mountain railways provided the supply grid or another locomotive on the line can accept the power.
Three-phase systems have the serious disadvantage of requiring at least two separate overhead conductors plus rail return. Locomotives operate at one, two or four constant speeds. Most modern locomotives with variable frequency drives can also do regenerative braking on both AC and DC systems and are not limited to constant speeds.
The system is still used on four mountain railways, using 725 to 3000 V at 50 or 60 Hz: the Corcovado Rack Railway in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Jungfraubahn and Gornergratbahn in Switzerland, and the Petit train de la Rhune in France.
Standard frequency alternating current
Only in the 1950s after development in France (20 kV; later 25 kV) and former Soviet Railways countries (25 kV) did the standard-frequency single-phase alternating current system become widespread, despite the simplification of a distribution system which could use the existing power supply network.
The first attempts to use standard-frequency single-phase AC were made in Hungary as far back as 1923, by the Hungarian Kálmán Kandó on the line between Budapest-Nyugati and Alag, using 16 kV at 50 Hz. The locomotives carried a four-pole rotating phase converter feeding a single traction motor of the polyphase induction type at 600 to 1,100 V. The number of poles on the 2,500 hp motor could be changed using slip rings to run at one of four synchronous speeds. The tests were a success so, from 1932 until the 1960s, trains on the Budapest-Hegyeshalom line (towards Vienna) regularly used the same system. A few decades after the Second World War, the 16 kV was changed to the Russian and later French 25 kV system.
Today, some locomotives in this system use a transformer and rectifier to provide low-voltage pulsating direct current to motors. Speed is controlled by switching winding taps on the transformer. More sophisticated locomotives use thyristor or IGBT circuitry to generate chopped or even variable-frequency alternating current (AC) that is then supplied to the AC induction traction motors.
This system is quite economical but it has its drawbacks: the phases of the external power system are loaded unequally and there is significant electromagnetic interference generated as well as significant acoustic noise.
A list of the countries using the 25 kV AC 50 Hz single-phase system can be found in the list of current systems for electric rail traction. There are also a few lines listed with 50 kV (60 Hz) electrification, mainly long isolated lines hauling coal or ore in the United States and Canada. The first line (1973) using 50 kV was the Black Mesa and Lake Powell Railroad. In South Africa the Sishen–Saldanha railway line hauling iron ore uses 50 kV (50 Hz).
The United States commonly uses 12.5 and 25 kV at 25 Hz or 60 Hz. 25 kV, 60 Hz AC is the preferred system for new high-speed and long-distance railways, even if the railway uses a different system for existing trains.
To prevent the risk of out-of-phase supplies mixing, sections of line fed from different feeder stations must be kept strictly isolated. This is achieved by Neutral Sections (also known as Phase Breaks), usually provided at feeder stations and midway between them although, typically, only half are in use at any time, the others being provided to allow a feeder station to be shut down and power provided from adjacent feeder stations. Neutral Sections usually consist of an earthed section of wire which is separated from the live wires on either side by insulating material, typically ceramic beads, designed so that the pantograph will smoothly run from one section to the other. The earthed section prevents an arc being drawn from one live section to the other, as the voltage difference may be higher than the normal system voltage if the live sections are on different phases and the protective circuit breakers may not be able to safely interrupt the considerable current that would flow. To prevent the risk of an arc being drawn across from one section of wire to earth, when passing through the neutral section, the train must be coasting and the circuit breakers must be open. In many cases, this is done manually by the drivers. To help them, a warning board is provided just before both the neutral section and an advance warning some distance before. A further board is then provided after the neutral section to tell drivers to re-close the circuit breaker, although drivers must not do this until the rear pantograph has passed this board. In the UK, a system known as Automatic Power Control (APC) automatically opens and closes the circuit breaker, this being achieved by using sets of permanent magnets alongside the track communicating with a detector on the train. The only action needed by the driver is to shut off power and coast and therefore warning boards are still provided at and on the approach to neutral sections.
In Japanese Shinkansen lines, there are ground-operated switched sections installed instead of neutral sections. The sections detect trains running within the section and automatically switch the power supply in 0.3 s, which eliminates the need to shut off power at any time.
In 2006, 240,000 km (150,000 mi) (25% by length) of the world rail network was electrified and 50% of all rail transport was carried by electric traction.
In 2012 for electrified kilometers, China surpassed Russia making it first place in the world with over 48,000 km (30,000 mi) electrified. Trailing behind China were Russia 43,300 km (26,900 mi), India 26,200 km (16,300 mi), Germany 21,000 km (13,000 mi), Japan 17,000 km (11,000 mi), and France 15,200 km (9,400 mi).
Comparing electrification systems (including future proposals)
Energy-efficiency, AC vs DC for mainlines
Modern electrification systems take AC energy from a power grid which is delivered to a locomotive and converted to a DC voltage to be used by traction motors. These motors may either be DC motors which directly use the DC or they may be 3-phase AC motors which require further conversion of the DC to 3-phase AC (using power electronics). Thus both systems are faced with the same task: converting and transporting high-voltage AC from the power grid to low-voltage DC in the locomotive. Where should this conversion take place and at what voltage and current (AC or DC) should the power flow to the locomotive? And how does all this relate to energy-efficiency? Both the transmission and conversion of electric energy involve losses: ohmic losses in wires and power electronics, magnetic field losses in transformers and smoothing reactors (inductors). Power conversion for a DC system takes place mainly in a railway substation where large, heavy, and more efficient hardware can be used as compared to an AC system where conversion takes place aboard the locomotive where space is limited and losses are significantly higher. Also, the energy used to blow air to cool transformers, power electronics (including rectifiers), and other conversion hardware must be accounted for.
In the Soviet Union, in the 1970s, a comparison was made between systems electrified at 3 kV DC and 25 kV AC (50 Hz). The results showed that percentage losses in the overhead wires (catenary and contact wires) was over 3 times greater for 3 kV DC than for 25 kV AC. But when the conversion losses were all taken into account and added to overhead wire losses (including cooling blower energy) the 25 kV AC lost a somewhat higher percent of energy than for 3 kV DC. Thus in spite of the much higher losses in the catenary, the 3 kV DC was a little more energy efficient than AC in providing energy from the USSR power grid to the terminals of the traction motors (all DC at that time). While both systems use energy in converting higher voltage AC from the USSR's power grid to lower voltage DC, the conversions for the DC system all took place (at higher efficiency) in the railway substation, while most of the conversion for the AC system took place inside the locomotive (at lower efficiency). Consider also that it takes energy to constantly move this mobile conversion hardware over the rails while the stationary hardware in the railway substation doesn't incur this energy cost. For more details see: Wiki: Soviet Union DC vs. AC.
Advantages and disadvantages as compared to diesel traction
||This article contains a pro and con list, which is sometimes inappropriate. (June 2014)|
- lower cost of building, running and maintaining locomotives and multiple units
- higher power-to-weight ratio (no onboard fuel tanks), resulting in
- fewer locomotives
- faster acceleration
- higher practical limit of power
- higher limit of speed
- less noise pollution (quieter operation)
- faster acceleration clears lines more quickly to run more trains on the track in urban rail uses
- reduced power loss at higher altitudes (for power loss see Diesel engine)
- independence of running costs from fluctuating fuel prices
- service to underground stations where diesel trains cannot operate for safety reasons
- reduced environmental pollution, especially in highly populated urban areas, even if electricity is produced by fossil fuels
- easily accommodates kinetic energy brake reclaim using supercapacitors
- more comfortable ride on multiple units as trains have no underfloor diesel engines
- somewhat higher energy efficiency  in part due to regenerative braking and less power lost when "idling"
- can use coal, nuclear, water or wind as the primary energy source instead of oil (historically mattered for e.g. South Africa)
Newly electrified lines often show a "sparks effect", whereby electrification in passenger rail systems leads to significant jumps in patronage / revenue. The reasons may include electric trains being seen as more modern and attractive to ride, faster and smoother service, and the fact that electrification often goes hand in hand with a general infrastructure and rolling stock overhaul / replacement, which leads to better service quality (in a way that theoretically could also be achieved by doing similar upgrades yet without electrification). Whatever the causes of the sparks effect, it is well established for numerous routes that have electrified over decades.
- Electrification cost: electrification requires an entire new infrastructure to be built around the existing tracks at a significant cost. Costs are especially high when tunnels, bridges and other obstructions have to be altered for clearance. Another aspect that can raise the cost of electrification are the alterations or upgrades to railway signalling needed for new traffic characteristics, and to protect signalling circuitry and track circuits from interference by traction current. Electrification may require line closures while the new equipment is being installed.
- Electrical grid load: adding a major new consumer of electricity can have adverse effects on the electrical grid and may necessitate an increase in the grid's power output. However, a railway can be electrified in such manner, that it has a closed and independent electrical network of its own and backup power available if the national or state electrical grid suffers from downtime.
- Appearance: the overhead line structures and cabling can have a significant landscape impact compared with a non-electrified or third rail electrified line that has only occasional signalling equipment above ground level.
- Fragility and vulnerability: overhead electrification systems can suffer severe disruption due to minor mechanical faults or the effects of high winds causing the pantograph of a moving train to become entangled with the catenary, ripping the wires from their supports. The damage is often not limited to the supply to one track, but extends to those for adjacent tracks as well, causing the entire route to be blocked for a considerable time. Third-rail systems can suffer disruption in cold weather due to ice forming on the conductor rail.
- Theft: the high scrap value of copper and the unguarded, remote installations make overhead cables an attractive target for scrap metal thieves. Attempts at theft of live 25 kV cables may end in the thief's death from electrocution. In the UK, cable theft is claimed to be one of the biggest sources of delay and disruption to train services.
- People may climb onto standing train cars, and some are seriously hurt or killed when they come too close to the overhead contact line.
- Birds may perch on parts with different charges, and animals may also touch the electrification system. Animals fallen to the ground are fetched by foxes or other predators.
- In most of the world's railway networks, the height clearance of overhead electrical lines is not sufficient for a double-stack container car.
Maintenance costs of the lines may be increased, but many systems claim lower costs due to reduced wear-and-tear from lighter rolling stock. There are some additional maintenance costs associated with the electrical equipment around the track, such as power sub-stations and the catenary wire itself, but, if there is sufficient traffic, the reduced track and especially the lower engine maintenance and running costs exceed the costs of this maintenance significantly.
Network effects are a large factor with electrification. When converting lines to electric, the connections with other lines must be considered. Some electrifications have subsequently been removed because of the through traffic to non-electrified lines. If through traffic is to have any benefit, time consuming engine switches must occur to make such connections or expensive dual mode engines must be used. This is mostly an issue for long distance trips, but many lines come to be dominated by through traffic from long-haul freight trains (usually running coal, ore, or containers to or from ports). In theory, these trains could enjoy dramatic savings through electrification, but it can be too costly to extend electrification to isolated areas, and unless an entire network is electrified, companies often find that they need to continue use of diesel trains even if sections are electrified. The increasing demand for container traffic which is more efficient when utilizing the double-stack car also has network effect issues with existing electrifications due to insufficient clearance of overhead electrical lines for these trains, but electrification can be built or modified to have sufficient clearance, at additional cost.
Additionally, there are issues of connections between different electrical services, particularly connecting intercity lines with sections electrified for commuter traffic, but also between commuter lines built to different standards. This can cause electrification of certain connections to be very expensive simply because of the implications on the sections it is connecting. Many lines have come to be overlaid with multiple electrification standards for different trains to avoid having to replace the existing rolling stock on those lines. Obviously, this requires that the economics of a particular connection must be more compelling and this has prevented complete electrification of many lines. In a few cases, there are diesel trains running along completely electrified routes and this can be due to incompatibility of electrification standards along the route.
Summary of advantages and disadvantages:
- Lines with low frequency of traffic may not be feasible for electrification (especially using regenerative braking), because lower running cost of trains may be outweighed by the high cost of the electrification infrastructure. Therefore, most long-distance lines in developing or sparsely populated countries are not electrified due to relatively low frequency of trains.
- Electric locomotives may easily be constructed with greater power output than most diesel locomotives. For passenger operation it is possible to provide enough power with diesel engines (see e.g. 'ICE TD') but, at higher speeds, this proves costly and impractical. Therefore, almost all high speed trains are electric.
- The high power of electric locomotives gives them the ability to pull freight at higher speed over gradients; in mixed traffic conditions this increases capacity when the time between trains can be decreased. The higher power of electric locomotives and an electrification can also be a cheaper alternative to a new and less steep railway if trains weights are to be increased on a system.
Electric trains need not carry the weight of prime movers, transmission and fuel. This is partly offset by the weight of electrical equipment.
Regenerative braking returns power to the electrification system so that it may be used elsewhere, by other trains on the same system or returned to the general power grid. This is especially useful in mountainous areas where heavily loaded trains must descend long grades.
Central station electricity can often be generated with higher efficiency than a mobile engine/generator. While the efficiency of power plant generation and diesel locomotive generation are roughly the same in the nominal regime, diesel motors decrease in efficiency in non-nominal regimes at low power  while if an electric power plant needs to generate less power it will shut down its least efficient generators, thereby increasing efficiency. The electric train can save energy (as compared to diesel) by regenerative braking and by not needing to consume energy by idling as diesel locomotives do when stopped or coasting. However, electric rolling stock may run cooling blowers when stopped or coasting, thus consuming energy.
Energy sources unsuitable for mobile power plants, such as nuclear power, renewable hydroelectricity, or wind power can be used. According to widely accepted global energy reserve statistics, the reserves of liquid fuel are much less than gas and coal (at 42, 167 and 416 years respectively). Most countries with large rail networks do not have significant oil reserves and those that did, like the United States and Britain, have exhausted much of their reserves and have suffered declining oil output for decades. Therefore, there is also a strong economic incentive to substitute other fuels for oil. Rail electrification is often considered an important route towards consumption pattern reform. However, there are no reliable, peer-reviewed studies available to assist in rational public debate on this critical issue, although there are untranslated Soviet studies from the 1980s.
Energy efficiency in the Soviet Union
In the former Soviet Union, electric traction eventually became somewhat more energy-efficient than diesel. Partly due to inefficient generation of electricity in the USSR (only 20.8% thermal efficiency in 1950 vs. 36.2% in 1975), in 1950 diesel traction was about twice as energy efficient as electric traction (in terms of net tonne-km of freight per kg of fuel). But as efficiency of electricity generation (and thus of electric traction) improved, by about 1965 electric railways became more efficient than diesel. After the mid 1970s electrics used about 25% less fuel per ton-km. However diesels were mainly used on single track lines with a fair amount of traffic  so that the lower fuel consumption of electrics may be in part due to better operating conditions on electrified lines (such as double tracking) rather than inherent energy efficiency. Nevertheless, the cost of diesel fuel was about 1.5 times more (per unit of heat energy content) than that of the fuel used in electric power plants (that generated electricity), thus making electric railways even more energy-cost effective.
Besides increased efficiency of power plants, there was an increase in efficiency (between 1950 and 1973) of the railway utilization of this electricity with energy-intensity dropping from 218 to 124 kwh/10,000 gross tonne-km (of both passenger and freight trains) or a 43% drop. Since energy-intensity is the inverse of energy-efficiency it drops as efficiency goes up. But most of this 43% decrease in energy-intensity also benefited diesel traction. The conversion of wheel bearings from plain to roller, increase of train weight, converting single track lines to double track (or partially double track), and the elimination of obsolete 2-axle freight cars increased the energy-efficiency of all types of traction: electric, diesel, and steam. However, there remained a 12–15% reduction of energy-intensity that only benefited electric traction (and not diesel). This was due to improvements in locomotives, more widespread use of regenerative braking (which in 1989 recycled 2.65% of the electric energy used for traction,) remote control of substations, better handling of the locomotive by the locomotive crew, and improvements in automation. Thus the overall efficiency of electric traction as compared to diesel more than doubled between 1950 and the mid-1970s in the Soviet Union. But after 1974 (thru 1980) there was no improvement in energy-intensity (wh/tonne-km) in part due to increasing speeds of passenger and freight trains.
Electric vehicles, especially locomotives, lose power when traversing gaps in the supply, such as phase change gaps in overhead systems, and gaps over points in third rail systems. These become a nuisance, if the locomotive stops with its collector on a dead gap, in which case there is no power to restart. Power gaps can be overcome by on-board batteries or motor-flywheel-generator systems.
It is possible to supply power to an electric train by inductive coupling. This allows the use of a high-voltage, insulated, conductor rail. Such a system was patented in 1894 by Nikola Tesla, US Patent 514972. It requires the use of high-frequency alternating current. Tesla did not specify a frequency but George Trinkaus suggests that around 1,000 Hz would be likely.
Inductive coupling is widely used in low-power applications, such as re-chargeable electric toothbrushes. The contactless technology for rail vehicles is currently being marketed by Bombardier as PRIMOVE.
- 15 kV AC railway electrification
- 25 kV AC railway electrification
- Amtrak's 25 Hz traction power system
- Amtrak's 60 Hz Traction Power System
- Baltimore Belt Line
- Battery electric multiple unit
- Battery locomotive
- Conduit current collection
- Contact shoe
- Current collector
- Electric power supply system of railways in Sweden
- Electric locomotive
- Ground-level power supply
- High-speed rail
- Linear motor
- List of current systems for electric rail traction
- List of installations for 15 kV AC railway electrification in Germany, Austria and Switzerland
- List of railway electrification systems in Japan
- Maglev train
- Overhead conductor rails
- Railway electrification in Great Britain
- Railway electrification in India
- Railway electrification in Iran
- Railway electrification in the Soviet Union (Includes economic analysis vs. diesel)
- Railway electrification in the United States
- Stud contact system
- Traction battery
- Traction current pylon
- Traction powerstation
- Traction substation
- Urban rail transit
- "Guangzhou supercapacitor tram unveiled". 2014-06-13.
- EN 50163: Railway applications. Supply voltages of traction systems (2007)
- IEC 60850: Railway applications – Supply voltages of traction systems, 3rd edition (2007)
- P. Leandes and S. Ostlund. "A concept for an HVDC traction system" in "International conference on main line railway electrification", Hessington, England, September 1989 (Suggests 30 kV). Glomez-Exposito A., Mauricio J.M., Maza-Ortega J.M. "VSC-based MVDC Railway Electrification System" IEEE transactions on power delivery, v.29, no.1, Feb.2014. (suggests 24 kV).
- "[IRFCA] Indian Railways FAQ: Electric Traction - I". Irfca.org. Retrieved 2016-02-04.
- "[IRFCA] Mumbai Area Electrification". Irfca.org. Retrieved 2016-02-04.
- Donald G. Fink, H. Wayne Beatty Standard Handbook for Electrical Engineers 11th Edition, McGraw Hill, 1978 table 18-21. See also Gomez-Exposito p.424, Fig.3
- De la centrale électrique au rail de traction
- TRUCK (bogie)
- Linder, C. (Munich 2002). Umstellung der Sollfrequenz im zentralen Bahnstromnetz von 16 2/3 Hz auf 16,70 Hz [Switching the frequency in train electric power supply network from 16 2/3 Hz to 16,70 Hz]. Elektrische Bahnen (in German). Oldenbourg-Industrieverlag. ISSN 0013-5437. Check date values in:
- Southern Electric
- History of Southern Electrification Part 1
- History of Southern Electrification Part 2
- Railway Technical Research Institute. "Concurrent-feeding power switching system for Shinkansen switching sections" (PDF) (in Japanese). Retrieved 21 May 2011.
- See "Peoples Daily Online" (in English, newspaper) 5 December 2012 China's electric railway mileage exceeds 48,000 km
- See "Official Indian Railways Electrification Report 2015"
- See Винокуров p.95+ Ch. 4: Потери и коэффициент полизного действия; нагреванние и охлаждение электрических машин и трансформаторов" ( Losses and efficiency; heating and cooling of electrical machinery and transformers) magnetic losses pp.96-7, ohmic losses pp.97-9
- Сидоров 1988 pp. 103-4, Сидоров 1980 pp. 122-3
- Перцовский p. 39+
- Per Railway electrification in the Soviet Union#Energy-Efficiency it was claimed that after the mid 1970s electrics used about 25% less fuel per ton-km than diesels. However, part of this savings may be due to less stopping of electrics to let opposing trains pass since diesels operated predominately on single-track lines, often with moderately heavy traffic.
- "Start Slow With Bullet Trains". Miller-McCune. 2 May 2011. Retrieved 27 February 2012.
- "Cumbernauld may be on track for railway line electrification". Cumbernauld News. 14 January 2009. Retrieved 27 February 2012.
- "Electric Idea". Bromsgrove Advertiser. 8 January 2008. Retrieved 27 February 2012.
- "Committee Meeting - Royal Meteorological Society - Spring 2009" (PDF). Royal Meteorological Society (rmets.org). Retrieved 15 September 2012.
- "Network Rail - Cable Theft". Network Rail (www.networkrail.co.uk). Retrieved 15 September 2012.
- "Police probe cable theft death link". ITV News. 27 June 2012. Retrieved 15 September 2012.
- Sarah Saunders (28 June 2012). "Body discovery linked to rail cables theft". ITV News. Retrieved 7 May 2014.
- http://dozenten.alp.dillingen.de/2.8/images/PDF/Bahn/gefahren_durch_bahnstrom.pdf Gefahren durch Bahnstrom, German police, 2013. Retrieved 20 July 2016. – (German) 6 fatalities in 2012 in Bayern.
- http://safetydb.uic.org/IMG/pdf/SDB_Report_2013_Public.pdf UIC: Public Report: Significant Accidents 2012 Public Report. Retrieved 20 July 2016.
- https://www.nabu.de/tiere-und-pflanzen/voegel/gefaehrdungen/stromtod/ NABU (Naturschutzbund): Die tödliche Gefahr, Berlin, Germany, retrieved 20. July 2016. – (German)
- "UK Network Rail electrification strategy report" Table 3.3, page 31. Retrieved on 4 May 2010
- It turns out that the efficiency of electricity generation by a modern diesel locomotive is roughly the same as the typical U.S. fossil-fuel power plant. The heat rate of central power plants in 2012 was about 9.5k BTU/kwh per the Monthly Energy Review of the U.S. Energy Information Administration which corresponds to an efficiency of 36%. Diesel motors for locomotives have an efficiency of about 40% (see Brake specific fuel consumption, Дробинский p. 65 and Иванова p.20.). But there are reductions needed in both efficiencies needed to make a comparison. First, one must degrade the efficiency of central power plants by the transmission losses to get the electricity to the locomotive. Another correction is due to the fact that efficiency for the Russian diesel is based on the lower heat of combustion of fuel while power plants in the U.S. use the higher heat of combustion (see Heat of combustion. Still another correction is that the diesel's reported efficiency neglects the fan energy used for engine cooling radiators. See Дробинский p. 65 and Иванова p.20 (who estimates the on-board electricity generator as 96.5% efficient). The result of all the above is that modern diesel engines and central power plants are both about 33% efficient at generating electricity (in the nominal regime).
- Хомич А.З. Тупицын О.И., Симсон А.Э. "Экономия топлива и теплотехническая модернизация тепловозов" (Fuel economy and the thermodynamic modernization of diesel locomotives) - Москва: Транспорт, 1975 - 264 pp. See Brake specific fuel consumption curves on p. 202 and charts of times spent in non-nominal regimes on pp. 10-12
- Wang, Ucilia (2011-05-25). "Gigaom GE to Crank Up Gas Power Plants Like Jet Engines". Gigaom.com. Retrieved 2016-02-04.
-  Archived 24 August 2012 at the Wayback Machine.
- "Worldometers – real time world statistics". Worldometers. Retrieved 27 January 2011.
- "Supplication". Sahar English TV. Retrieved 27 January 2011.
- "Year of revision to pattern of consumption". The Office of the Supreme Leader, Sayyid Ali Khamenei. 20 March 2009. Retrieved 27 January 2011.
- Планкс Fig. 1.2, p.6. Дмитриев, Table 1, p.20
- Хомич p.8
- Плакс, p.6
- Перцовский p.39
- Higher weight may decrease specific train resistance due to economies of scale in Rolling resistance and Aerodynamic Drag
- Калинин p. 4
- Мирошниченко pp.4,7(Fig.1.2б)
- Railway Gazette International Oct 2014.
- "Patent US514972 - Nikola tesla - Google Patents". Google.com. Retrieved 2016-02-04.
- Trinkaus, George, Tesla, the lost inventions, pp 28–29, High Voltage Press, Portland, OR, 1988
- "ECO4 Technologies - Sustainable Transport Solutions". Bombardier. Retrieved 2016-02-04.
- Винокуров В.А., Попов Д.А. "Электрические машины железно-доровного транспорта" (Electrical machinery of railroad transportation), Москва, Транспорт, 1986, . ISBN 5-88998-425-X, 520 pp.
- Дмитриев, В.А., "Народнохозяйственная эффективность электрификации железных дорог и примениния тепловозной тяги" (National economic effectiveness of railway electrification and application of diesel traction), Москва, Транспорт 1976.
- Дробинский В.А., Егунов П.М. "Как устроен и паботает тенловоз" (How the diesel locomotive works) 3rd ed. Moscow, Транспорт, 1980.
- Иванова В.Н. (ed.) "Конструкция и динамика тепловозов" (Construction and dynamics of the diesel locomotive). Москва, Транспорт, 1968 (textbook).
- Калинин, В.К. "Электровозы и электроноезда" (Electric locomotives and electric train sets) Москва, Транспорт, 1991 ISBN 978-5-277-01046-4
- Мирошниченко, Р.И., "Режимы работы электрифицированных участков" (Regimes of operation of electrified sections [of railways]), Москва, Транспорт, 1982.
- Перцовский, Л. М.; "Энргетическая эффективность электрической тяги" (Energy efficiency of electric traction), Железнодорожный транспорт (magazine), #12, 1974 p. 39+
- Плакс, А.В. & Пупынин, В. Н., "Электрические железные дороги" (Electric Railways), Москва "Транспорт" 1993.
- Сидоров Н.И., Сидорожа Н.Н. "Как устроен и работает эелктровоз" (How the electric locomotive works) Москва, Транспорт, 1988 (5th ed.) - 233 pp, ISBN 978-5-277-00191-2. 1980 (4th ed.).
- Хомич А.З. Тупицын О.И., Симсон А.Э. "Экономия топлива и теплотехническая модернизация тепловозов" (Fuel economy and the thermodynamic modernization of diesel locomotives) - Москва: Транспорт, 1975 - 264 pp.
- Moody, G T (1960). "Part One". Southern Electric (3rd ed.). London: Ian Allan Ltd.
- Gomez-Exposito A., Mauricio J.M., Maza-Ortega J.M. "VSC-based MVDC Railway Electrification System" IEEE transactions on power delivery, v.29, no.1, Feb.2014 pp. 422–431. (suggests 24 kV DC)
- (Jane's) Urban Transit Systems