You must log in or register to comment.
It also reduces brake wear on the trains, so they’ll need new brakes less often, and it improves air quality in the stations. Most of that black dust you see is brake dust. And you’re breathing it in, too.
Why can’t they use the excess energy to make the train go again?
They do… 1/3rd of it is used that way.
Are they generating more power than they are spending by making the train go? Has Barcelona mastered perpetual motion??
It’s good thing, sure, but it’s no savior. The blurb makes it sound like it’s a net gain of energy, and that’s impossible. It’s not free energy. It’s just upcycled waste.
Regenerative braking on commuter trains is nothing new, it’s been around for decades.
And even in some prototype bus, the Gyrobus, in the 50’s that used an electrically charged flywheel that was also (to some degree) regeneratively recharged when breaking:
Rather than carrying an internal combustion engine or batteries, or connecting to overhead powerlines, a gyrobus carries a large flywheel that is spun at up to 3,000 RPM by a “squirrel cage” motor.[1] Power for charging the flywheel was sourced by means of three booms mounted on the vehicle’s roof, which contacted charging points located as required or where appropriate (at passenger stops en route, or at terminals, for instance). To obtain tractive power, capacitors would excite the flywheel’s charging motor so that it became a generator, in this way transforming the energy stored in the flywheel back into electricity. Vehicle braking was electric, and some of the energy was recycled back into the flywheel, thereby extending its range.
Source: Wikipedia: Gyrobus
Nice, it’s probably the ancestor of the TOSA which is the same thing without the flywheel, and also from Switzerland.
That’s incredible.
Agreed, but here it is done highly effective. The 1.8 degree temperature difference is a huge plus too - they can now also save serious amounts of power on ventilation.
TfL, you listening?
