LaTrobe Valley Coal to Hydrogen exported from Hastings

 
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

A pilot plant near Loy Yang planned to convert brown coal to Hydrogen is given the go-ahead:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-14/latrobe-valley-coal-to-hydrogen-project-approved/10812464

If it's commercialised, it's planned to be shipped in large quantities from Hastings.  Could it be railed from Traralgon to Hastings?  Could this be impetus for a rail link from Dandenong to the port?

Sponsored advertisement

  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

I’d love to see it, but this government hasn’t exactly been proactive on freight rail, so I don’t like your chances.


EDIT: @bevans, that's disgraceful, editing my comment not to enforce site rules but to change the substance of what I said.

Anyone else who sees this be warned that your comments may be edited at bevans' whim to no longer make sense.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
I’d love to see it, but this government hasn’t exactly been proactive on freight rail, so I don’t like your chances.
potatoinmymouth

We can't have 100's of trucks on the road to the Port of Hastings the roads will not take it and the volume is too dangerous.  Rail is the only answer or a pipeline.
  gippslander Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Gippsland, Vic
I’d love to see it, but this government hasn’t exactly been proactive on freight rail, so I don’t like your chances.

We can't have 100's of trucks on the road to the Port of Hastings the roads will not take it and the volume is too dangerous.  Rail is the only answer or a pipeline.
bevans
The current project is only a pilot, with very small production.
There is no rail connection to Loy Yang - nearest gateway would be Australian Paper at Maryvale or the Morwell GIFT siding.
Then we face the issue of no direct connectivity to Hastings at Caulfield.
As hydrogen is classified as dangerous goods, I think it would not be transported by land transport but by pipeline from point to point. In any case, full scale production is several years away.
  Nightfire Minister for Railways

Location: Gippsland
I’d love to see it, but this government hasn’t exactly been proactive on freight rail, so I don’t like your chances.

We can't have 100's of trucks on the road to the Port of Hastings the roads will not take it and the volume is too dangerous.  Rail is the only answer or a pipeline.
The current project is only a pilot, with very small production.
There is no rail connection to Loy Yang - nearest gateway would be Australian Paper at Maryvale or the Morwell GIFT siding.
Then we face the issue of no direct connectivity to Hastings at Caulfield.
As hydrogen is classified as dangerous goods, I think it would not be transported by land transport but by pipeline from point to point. In any case, full scale production is several years away.
gippslander
I do agree that a pipeline would be the only viable option (on safety grounds)

That's If any project development gets off the ground, and doesn't get sunk by the green cult movement.
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
Could the train run around at Caulfield with a consist of say 20 wagons?

The siding at Loy Yang could be installed.
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
Could the train run around at Caulfield with a consist of say 20 wagons?

The siding at Loy Yang could be installed.
bevans
you decide, It's probably possible if you split it. Though I would be thrilled to see some new BG traffic, I doubt it.

http://vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Caulfield
  Valvegear Dr Beeching

Location: Norda Fittazroy
Now for a little pedantry. Brown coal is not converted into hydrogen.  Brown coal (Lignite) is a sedimentary rock form of hydrocarbon i.e. a compound of hydrogen and carbon. The hydrogen will be extracted from brown coal.
  lkernan Assistant Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
It will use 160 tonnes of brown coal from Loy Yang's mine to create three tonnes of hydrogen which will be shipped to Japan at a loading terminal in the Port of Hastings via a specially-designed boat.
ABC Article

Well that's efficient isn't it?  
160 tonnes of coal for 3 tonnes of hydrogen.  That then has to be shipped across the world.

And they think solar and wind aren't viable.
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
Hydrogen on road is simply not viable due to risk and it will never get up for a route to the port.  Pipeline and rail are the only viable alternates.  The pipeline will be huge cost and land works and rail less so.  I think rail is the way to go to test the way forward and with less capital costs.
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

It will use 160 tonnes of brown coal from Loy Yang's mine to create three tonnes of hydrogen which will be shipped to Japan at a loading terminal in the Port of Hastings via a specially-designed boat.

Well that's efficient isn't it?  
160 tonnes of coal for 3 tonnes of hydrogen.  That then has to be shipped across the world.

And they think solar and wind aren't viable.
lkernan
That's why I reckon Hydrogen Fuel Cell tech will be limited to a very niche market.  Batteries charged either locally or from-the-grid by renewable electricity makes much more sense for most transport applications IMO.
  wobert Chief Commissioner

Location: Half way between Propodolla and Kinimakatka
It will use 160 tonnes of brown coal from Loy Yang's mine to create three tonnes of hydrogen which will be shipped to Japan at a loading terminal in the Port of Hastings via a specially-designed boat.

Well that's efficient isn't it?  
160 tonnes of coal for 3 tonnes of hydrogen.  That then has to be shipped across the world.

And they think solar and wind aren't viable.
lkernan
What do they do with the hundred or so ton of the ssh1t that's left over?
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

It will use 160 tonnes of brown coal from Loy Yang's mine to create three tonnes of hydrogen which will be shipped to Japan at a loading terminal in the Port of Hastings via a specially-designed boat.

Well that's efficient isn't it?  
160 tonnes of coal for 3 tonnes of hydrogen.  That then has to be shipped across the world.

And they think solar and wind aren't viable.
What do they do with the hundred or so ton of the ssh1t that's left over?
wobert
Well there are several very big holes in the ground in the Valley...
  wobert Chief Commissioner

Location: Half way between Propodolla and Kinimakatka
That'd  be to simple.
  RustyRick Chief Commissioner

Location: South West Vic
A better way to convert coal to gas...
  potatoinmymouth Chief Commissioner

Hydrogen on road is simply not viable due to risk and it will never get up for a route to the port.
x31

Oh yeah of course, because things that go kaboom are never transported by road. What planet are you living on?
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
There is not a government with regard to residents who would use road for such a dangerous product.
  duttonbay Minister for Railways

It will use 160 tonnes of brown coal from Loy Yang's mine to create three tonnes of hydrogen which will be shipped to Japan at a loading terminal in the Port of Hastings via a specially-designed boat.

Well that's efficient isn't it?  
160 tonnes of coal for 3 tonnes of hydrogen.  That then has to be shipped across the world.

And they think solar and wind aren't viable.
lkernan
I wonder how much potential energy is in the 3 tonnes of hydrogen compared to the 160 tonnes of lignite?
  trainbrain Deputy Commissioner

It will use 160 tonnes of brown coal from Loy Yang's mine to create three tonnes of hydrogen which will be shipped to Japan at a loading terminal in the Port of Hastings via a specially-designed boat.

Well that's efficient isn't it?  
160 tonnes of coal for 3 tonnes of hydrogen.  That then has to be shipped across the world.

And they think solar and wind aren't viable.
I wonder how much potential energy is in the 3 tonnes of hydrogen compared to the 160 tonnes of lignite?
duttonbay
About as much potential that come from the mouths of politicians. NONE.
  speedemon08 Mary

Location: I think by now you should have figured it out
Could the train run around at Caulfield with a consist of say 20 wagons?

The siding at Loy Yang could be installed.
you decide, It's probably possible if you split it. Though I would be thrilled to see some new BG traffic, I doubt it.

http://vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Caulfield
Dangersdan707
No chance in hell. You'd effectively knock out a half a station, even if there was the gap *to* run around a train.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/turnbulls-brown-coal-hydrogen-horror-show-500m-for-3-tonnes-70932/

“The hydrogen gas will then be transported via truck to a liquefaction and loading terminal at the Port of Hastings. The hydrogen gas will be liquefied then shipped to Kobe in Japan by a ship carrier specifically developed for the task.”
Somebody
  Dangersdan707 Chief Commissioner

Location: On a Thing with Internet
Could the train run around at Caulfield with a consist of say 20 wagons?

The siding at Loy Yang could be installed.
you decide, It's probably possible if you split it. Though I would be thrilled to see some new BG traffic, I doubt it.

http://vicsig.net/infrastructure/location/Caulfield
No chance in hell. You'd effectively knock out a half a station, even if there was the gap *to* run around a train.

https://reneweconomy.com.au/turnbulls-brown-coal-hydrogen-horror-show-500m-for-3-tonnes-70932/

“The hydrogen gas will then be transported via truck to a liquefaction and loading terminal at the Port of Hastings. The hydrogen gas will be liquefied then shipped to Kobe in Japan by a ship carrier specifically developed for the task.”
speedemon08
finally some sanity
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

It sounds like a crazy stupid expensive idea, with a dangerous way of getting it from A to B.
  skitz Chief Commissioner

Hydrogen on road is simply not viable due to risk and it will never get up for a route to the port.  Pipeline and rail are the only viable alternates.  The pipeline will be huge cost and land works and rail less so.  I think rail is the way to go to test the way forward and with less capital costs.
x31
..........and yet you drive past equivalent bombs of LPG and petrol every day if one wants to discuss current accepted risk.

Hydrogen is also transported to the Valley now, in relative small quantities for generator cooling medium.  So the difference is the volume, not that it does not already happen.  Most would not even be aware.

A current issue in the Valley is transport of asbestos by truck, the carry on of the public is equivalent to as if it were nuclear waste.  Asbestos transport is very much at the small end of the scale when it comes to risk to people.  Yet highly emotive through ignorance more than anything.

Then there are other substance that travel by truck - caustic, oxygen, acetylene, acid  etc. All kinds of wonderfull nasty substances every day.  Most are blisfully unaware.
  mikesyd Chief Commissioner

Location: Lurking
There is not a government with regard to residents who would use road for such a dangerous product.
x31
Yet you want it put on rail, with all the risks of a derailment during a run-around in Caulfield or somewhere, imagine the furore then.

Look at your favourite news articles for all the derailments in the USA and Canada where chemicals have been spilt, or half a town obliterated when an Oil train derailed and exploded.

There are plenty of nasties moving about every day on the roads that we don't know about, not to mention what skitz said, all the old unroadworthy cars with a bomb in the form of a fuel tank slung under them.
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
The councils involved on the route would also need to approve the movement of dangerous goods.  

Any idea how far the rail siding would need to run to connect to the plant output?

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: