2006-10-29 10:45:08 · 4 answers · asked by Abu B 1 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Other - Cars & Transportation
i'm not sure, but trains would most likely be too heavy, plus they have to haul lots of cargo, That would be a pretty big fuel cell.
2006-10-29 10:48:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
not the best use of $$$$$$$$. trains are pretty fuel efficient compared to anything else. Fuel cells are very expensive toys today, and probably will remain that way. Hydrogen would be great fuel, but the only practical way to make it is with nuclear powered electricity. and we don't want that because the arab oil compamnies paid people to tell us nuclear is bad.
2006-10-29 18:59:17 · answer #2 · answered by jekin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
The electrical consumption of the traction motors is astronomical.
Consider six traction motors, each using 1,000 amperes (or more) across a 600 volt field, and you have the power consumption of a single locomotive.
This is why prime movers in the 3,000 to 6,000 horsepower range are needed to generate this amount of electricity, which is the same amount needed to power a neighborhood or small town. This is why fuel cells aren't powering our communities right now.
2006-11-01 14:57:30 · answer #3 · answered by Samurai Hoghead 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely perfect combination. Electric engines have enormous torque capacity (for pulling) and lots of room for the fuel cell(s). They could even be stored in separate cars.
2006-10-29 18:53:02 · answer #4 · answered by Tall Guy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋